MIDDLE SAXON AND LATER ARCHAEOLOGICAL REMAINS IN WHITEHALL
Paw Jorgensen
With contributions by Jonathan Butler, Kevin Hayward, Chris Jarrett and Kevin Rielly
SUMMARY Guards Road to the west, the Embankment to the east, Parliament Square to the south Archaeological investigations undertaken during the and Great Scotland Yard to the north (Figs streetscape improvements in Whitehall revealed the 2, 2a, 2b). Bordering upon the site are remains of several periods of activity. Middle Saxon governmental offices, mostly dating to the activity most likely associated with that previously late 19th and 20th centuries, many of which found at the Old Treasury Building in the 1960s was are Listed Buildings. In total 78 Listed revealed on Whitehall opposite the west end of Horse Buildings are located immediately adjacent Guards Avenue. Elsewhere masonry associated with to the site; of these, 14 are Grade I listed, York Place, the Archbishop of York’s official residence 17 Grade II* listed, and 47 Grade II listed; in London, and Whitehall Palace was found. Later these include Queen Mary’s Steps, the Ban- remains consisted of buildings which were constructed queting House, the Ministry of Defence in the 18th and 19th century following the destruction Main Building, and the Cabinet Office, Privy of Whitehall Palace in two fires at the end of the 17th Council and Treasury Building, all of which century. to varying degrees have incorporated part of the fabric of Whitehall Palace into the INTRODUCTION current buildings and structures. Furthermore, the entire site lies within the Pre-Construct Archaeology was commiss- Lundenwic and Thorney Island Area of Spec- ioned by Atkins Heritage acting on behalf ial Archaeological Priority and immediately of the City of Westminster to undertake a to the south is the World Heritage Site of watching-brief during streetscape improve- Westminster Palace, Westminster Abbey and ments along Whitehall and the adjoining St Margaret’s Church (WHS number 462). streets (Fig 1). The work was undertaken St James’s Park to the west and Victoria between May 2007 and October 2010. This Embankment Gardens to the east are both report presents the results of the archaeo- Registered Parks and Gardens; the former logical monitoring, which was carried out Grade I and the latter Grade II*. during the excavation of 99 trenches. The site The watching-brief recorded in one of archive will be deposited with the London the deeper trenches, along Whitehall itself, Archaeological Archive and Research Centre a number of pits and a palaeochannel of (LAARC) under site code WQH 07. Middle Saxon date, whilst across the invest- The site was centred at National Grid igation area a number of structural remains Reference TQ 3015 7996 and can best be pertaining to Whitehall Palace as well as defined as the streets lying between Horse fragments of buildings pre- and post-dating
57 58 Paw Jorgensen
N GREATER Waterloo LONDON Trafalgar Charing Cross Bridge Square Station
The Site ST. JAMES
Old War Office RIVER
THAMES Road THE
Guards SITE
The Mall London Horse Eye 529200/179800 520850/179800
HM Treasury
Westminster Bridge Houses of Parliament
Westminster Abbey
0 500m
Fig 1. Site location Figure 1 Site Location the royal residence were observed. Pre- Strand, is postulated to have passed1:12,500 north at A4 of palace structures recorded included part the site somewhere in the vicinity of present of the kitchen and Great Hall of York Place day Trafalgar Square. The road covered the while the post-palace remains are mainly c.7 mile stretch between Ludgate in the east foundations of buildings associated with and Hammersmith in the west (Margary the redevelopment of the area in the 18th 1957, 51). and 19th centuries. However, due to the It has been suggested that a river crossing limited depth of the majority of the trenches lay to the south of the site, near where the vast majority of the deposits excavated Westminster Abbey stands today. While the related to the recent installation of services alignment of Watling Street does suggest and post-medieval levelling of the ground in this location for a crossing point, there is at preparation for the construction of today’s present a lack of physical evidence to support Whitehall (Fig 3). this theory (Sloane et al 1995, 369). Roman finds have been recovered from the vicinity, HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL namely on Thorney Island to the south. BACKGROUND Saxon Roman The study area is situated approximately 1km Little evidence for Roman activity has been south-west of the Middle Saxon (c.ad 650— discovered by previous work within the area 850) settlement of Lundenwic. Even so, many and most of what has been recovered has of the previous archaeological investigations consisted of redeposited material. However, carried out in the vicinity of Westminster the Roman road Akeman Street, which Abbey have recorded residual Middle Saxon approximately followed the alignment of the material and excavations at the Old Treasury Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 59
N 530150/180235
WHITEHALL PLACE
WHITEHALL
Old War Office
Horse Guards HORSE GUARDS Parade AVENUE
Banqueting House
Gwydyr House Ministry of Defence
Main Building ROAD
GUARDS A
HORSE
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
KING CHARLES STREET
VICTORIA EMBANKMENT
STREET HM Treasury PARLIAMENT
Westminster Underground Station
GREAT GEORGE STREET B
0 530150/179670 100m
Fig 2. Whitehall streetscape trench location plan Figure 2 Trench Location 60 Paw Jorgensen
Trench 57 N Trench 63
Trench 61
Trench 62
WHITEHALL PLACE WHITEHALL
Old War Office
Trench 60
Trench 35
Trench 53 Trench 54
Trench 55 HORSE GUARDS Trench 59 AVENUE Trench 44 Trench 58
Trench 35 Trench 99
Trench 18
Banqueting House
Trench 56
Trench 52
Gwydyr House Ministry of Defence Trench 51 Main Building Trench 46 Trench Trench 36 47
Trench 31 Trench 49 Trench 48 Trench 41 Trench 39 Trench 35 Trench 50 Trench 40
Trench 38 Trenches 64-98 Trenches
0 50m Trench 42 N
Fig 2a. Trench location detail (northern section)
Figure 2a Trench Location Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 61
a land grant made in ad 785 by King Offa of Trench 42 N Mercia to St Peter’s of Westminster (Sawyer 1968, no. 124), and on residual archaeological Trench 32 finds (Thomas et al 2006, 41). While the archaeological evidence does suggest that the Trench 25 Trench 37 Trench 43 Trench 36 Trench 45 island was permanently occupied during the Trench 24 Middle Saxon period, to date no structural remains of the conjectured monastery have Trench 33 been found (Cowie 2004, 205). The Middle Saxon buildings recorded dur- ing the excavation at the Old Treasury Build- ing have been interpreted as the remains of a high status, possibly royal, hall and associated Trench 23 ancillary buildings. A number of factors have contributed to the interpretation of the site as high status. These include the position of the site roughly mid-way between Lundenwic Trench 19 and the conjectured Middle Saxon monast- Trench 13/28 Trench 40 ery on Thorney Island; the presence of high Trench 26 status imported pottery; the nature of the Trench 27 Trench 38 faunal assemblage; and the size of the hall uncovered (Cowie & Blackmore 2008, 100). Trench 22 Trench 12 During the mid-9th century the settlement to the north of Thorney Island seems to have Trench 20 been abandoned. It is possible, though not Trench 11 certain, that activity on the island itself also Trench 14 ceased at this time. This may be a result of intensifying Viking raids during the mid- Trench 7 9th century, or it could be due to rising water levels making the area uninhabitable Trench 6 (Thomas et al 2006, 46).
PARLIAMENT STREET Trench 17 Medieval Trench 10 Trench 2 Trench 16 The earliest documentary evidence pertain- ing to the study area comes in the form Trench 3 Trench 9 of a deed dated 1158. It is a grant from Trench 4 Trench 5 Trench 8 Gervase, Abbot of Westminster to Gerin, one Trench 15 of the king’s ministers, for land beside the Enedehithe (terram de Ænedetha) (Mason Trench 35 1988, 261). Enedehithe appears in various 0 50m spellings throughout the medieval period and appears to have been located just north Figure 2b Fig 2b. Trench location detail (southern section) of Thorney Island along the banks of the Trench Location River Thames. Throughout the later part of the 12th century additional land in the area of the Enedehithe, particularly on both sides Building north of Downing Street revealed of what later became known as Endiff or several Middle Saxon buildings (Green & Endive Lane (perhaps originally Enedehithe Cowie 2008, 91—5). Lane), was acquired by members of Henry It has been suggested that Thorney Island II’s administration. The properties here was home to a small Middle Saxon monastery. seem to have been in the occupation of This suggestion is based on the existence of successive Treasurers and Keepers of the a charter of doubtful authenticity recording Wardrobe (Blanchard 2007, 339). 62 Paw Jorgensen
Fig 3. Working view of the trench outside the Banqueting House along Whitehall, view looking south Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 63
The site acquired by Gerin in 1158 was by Inigo Jones and constructed in 1622 after extended by his successors by annexation of the earlier building burnt down in 1619 the adjoining properties. In the early years (Cox & Norman 1930, 116—17, 126). of the 1220s the property passed to Hubert In 1649, Charles I was publically executed de Burgh, first Earl of Kent. By this time on a temporary scaffold set up in front of the property already contained a substantial the Banqueting House. Whitehall Palace residence comprising houses, chapel and was hereafter turned into a vast complex of stables and other structures (Thurley 1999, parliamentary offices (Thurley 1999). After 1). In the 1230s the property passed to Charles II’s restoration to the throne in 1660 Hubert’s trustees, who, by 1241 had sold plans to modernise the ageing palace were it to Walter de Gray, Archbishop of York. drawn up. The idea was to base the new palace Walter later granted the property to the See design around the standing Banqueting of York after which it remained the London House. Although parts of the palace were residence of the Archbishops of York for rebuilt, the plans for a new palace were never nearly three centuries (Cox & Norman 1930, realised (Cox & Norman 1930, 36). A survey 4; Green & Thurley 1987, 64). of the palace was undertaken by Fisher in Under successive archbishops York Place, as 1670 and shows the complex as it stood after the property had become known, continued the Restoration (Fig 5). to evolve and by the time Thomas Wolsey Fire swept through the palace in 1691 (later Cardinal Wolsey) took up residence destroying many of the older buildings. While there in 1515 the complex comprised a the 1691 fire only affected a relatively small number of buildings arranged around a portion of the palace, another fire in 1698 central cloister. These included a great hall, destroyed much of the eastern half of the kitchens, a chapel, stables, a gatehouse, palace leaving only the Banqueting House plus a series of private and public rooms and a few other buildings intact. Following (Thurley 1999, 10—12). Soon after his arrival the 1698 fire many of the state offices were Wolsey instigated a large scale building removed to the west side of present day programme that would transform York Place Whitehall and the eastern part of the palace from an already substantial messuage into a grounds was sold off in plots to noblemen sumptuous palace. of the court and several large houses erected (Cox & Norman 1930, 38, 40). Post-medieval Following the decision to construct West- minster Bridge in 1735 the majority of the Following Wolsey’s fall from grace in 1529 buildings between King Street and the Thames his palace at Whitehall was acquisitioned were demolished and the area redesigned to by Henry VIII who spent the next few years provide a more suitable thoroughfare from acquiring the surrounding parcels of land Charing Cross to the new bridge, which was along both sides of King Street (present completed in 1750. Following the new road day Whitehall). By the end of his reign the layout the island of buildings between King complex had grown into one of the largest Street and Parliament Street was constructed palaces in Europe. It was sprawled out on in the late 1740s to early 1750s (Figs 6—7) both sides of the public road from Charing (Cox 1926, 1). Cross to Westminster, so two gatehouses, During the 19th century the area to the the King Street Gate to the south and the east of Whitehall continued to develop Holbein Gate to the north, were constructed primarily as a residential area, while on the to link the galleries on both sides of the western side of the road larger government street (Fig 4) (Cox & Forrest 1931, 10). buildings started to appear (Fig 8). The A total of three temporary banqueting Victoria Embankment was completed in 1870 houses were erected within the palace providing convenient access from Westminster grounds by Elizabeth I. Although built Bridge to Charing Cross. By the close of the as temporary structures the last of these century clearing of large swathes of land for survived for 25 years until replaced by James the construction of the War Office and other I’s first banqueting house in 1606. The government offices had commenced. present-day Banqueting House was designed Throughout the first half of the 20th 64 Paw Jorgensen
Fig 4. Agas Map c.1562. Two gatehouses are shown straddling King Street, the upper one is the HolbeinFigure Gate 4 and the lower one the King Street Gate "Agas" Map c1562 Not to Scale century the construction of the new govern- completed in 1906 and the Government ment offices that had started in the later Offices on Great George Street were com- part of the preceding century continued. pleted in 1908 and 1917. The site now Construction of The (Old) War Office was occupied by the Ministry of Defence Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 65
3 4 6 2 5
7
1
100m
Fig 1.5. Fisher’sGreat Hall 1670 Plan of Whitehall Palace. (1) Great Hall; (2) Court Gate; (3) Lodgings and Office of the Surveyor; (4) Gun platform; (5) Privy Garden; (6) King Street Gate; (7) Kitchen complex Figure 5 2. Court Gate Fisher 1670 1:2,500 3. Lodgings and Office of the Surveyor Main Building had been selected for the Similar alluvial sands and gravels with a top construction4. Gun Platform of more government offices in height of 1.78mNB: North OD is were facing seen to the overlying Right of the 1920s, but work was not completed until the natural sand in Trench 44, whichthe wouldpage. 1957.5. Privy Garden suggest that the area was subject to periodic flooding. In Trench 32 sandy and gravel 6. King Street Gate PHASE 1: GEOLOGY AND deposits were encountered at a top height of TOPOGRAPHY7. Kitchen Complex 2.85m OD. The site is located in an area where the The local geological drift deposits consist of River Tyburn met the River Thames. The Pleistocene Thames terrace gravels, overlain conjectured Thames riverfront during the by brickearth. Along the floodplains of Middle Saxon period roughly follows the the Thames and the Tyburn alluvium has line of present day Whitehall Court (Cowie & accumulated. Due to the limited depth of Blackmore 2008, fig 93). The southern part the trenches natural deposits were only of the area of investigation was located on a encountered in three of them, Trenches gravel eyot or island known as Thorney Island 31 and 44 lay on the spur of land that which was formed by the bifurcation of the in Saxon times extended into the River Tyburn where it met the Thames (Thomas Tyburn’s northern channel where it met et al 2006, 9). The shape of Thorney Island the River Thames (Fig 2), whilst Trench 32 has changed over time (see Sidell et al 2000, is postulated to lie just on the bank of the 62, fig 28) as erosion by the rivers and marine Tyburn’s northern channel. A brickearth regression have allowed more of the island to type deposit was observed in Trench 31 at become accessible as the water-level receded. 1.90m OD overlain by a layer of fluvial sand By the Middle Saxon period it is likely that which was observed at a similar top height. Thorney Island extended just to the north of 66 Paw Jorgensen
N
3
2
1
0 100m
Fig 6. Rocque’s 1746 London map, showing the Whitehall area. (1) Privy Garden wall; (2) Court Gate; (3) Lodgings and Offices of the Surveyors 1. Privy Garden Wall Figure 6 Rocque 1746 2. The Court Gate Great George Street with the area currently Whitehall lay on a gravel spur that 1:2,000extended occupied by the Treasury and Foreign and into the channel where the Tyburn met the Commonwealth Office within the Tyburn Thames and it was on this gravel spur that the channel which may have extended just to the possible Middle Saxon royal hall lay (Green & north side of Downing Street (Thomas et al Cowie 2008, 90—100, figs 93—94). Throughout 2006, fig 4). Thus most of the southern half the medieval period the site was low lying of the study area would have been within the and prone to flooding, prompting dumping Tyburn channel during the Middle Saxon to raise the ground level and reclamation period. The main area on either side of throughout this and later periods. Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 67
N
2 1 4 3
5
6
0 200m
Fig 7. Horwood 1792—99 London map, showing the Whitehall area. (1) Taylor House; (2) Fife House garden wall; (3) Pelham House; (4) Carrington House; (5) King Street and Parliament Street — north; (6) King Street and Parliament Street — south Figure 7 Horwood 1792-1799 1. Taylor House 1:4,000 2. Fife House Garden Wall 3. Pelham House 4. Carrington House
5. King Street & Parliament Street - North 6. King Street & Parliament Street - South 68 Paw Jorgensen
N
2 1
0 200m
Fig 8.1. FirstNew Edition Lodgings Ordnance and OfficeSurvey Map 1869—1872. (1) New lodgings and office of Surveyor; (2) FigureWhitehall 8 Place of the Surveyor 1st edition Ordnance Survey 1869-1872 1:4,000 2. Whitehall Place Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 69
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SEQUENCE 1746, Horwood’s Map of 1792—9, and the First Edition Ordnance Survey Map of 1868— Introduction 72. However, many of these maps, especially Whilst the archaeological investigations in the earlier ones, are inaccurate and require Whitehall covered a large area many of the manipulation as there are so few buildings observations were very limited in nature. surviving from the early post-medieval period, Most of the trenches were narrow and very with the obvious exception of the Banqueting shallow, often only 0.50m below modern House, to provide precise linkage between pavement level. This meant that often only the historic and modern mapping. Thus the tops of masonry walls were visible and what follows should be considered the most also only seen in a short length across the plausible interpretation of the data. width of the trench. Modern services and later walls also had heavily truncated the PHASE 2: MIDDLE SAXON remains. Therefore, assigning a date and (c.ad 650—850) interpretation to many of the structures has been very difficult. Brick walls have been The only evidence for Saxon activity was assigned to a particular phase based on their seen in one of the deep trenches excavated fabric and the stylistic date of their bricks; in the northern portion of the site, directly however, bricks are notoriously difficult opposite the junction of Horse Guards to date accurately and are often subject to Avenue and Whitehall (Figs 9—10). Here an reuse. The walls have been linked to known east—west-aligned palaeochannel cut into the buildings where possible by overlaying the natural sandy gravels. It had been truncated plans of their remains onto a series of historic towards the west by the construction cut for a maps, most notably the survey of Whitehall later brick culvert and to the east it extended Palace by Fisher in 1670, Rocque’s map of beyond the limits of the trench, leaving only
Fig 9. Middle Saxon pits and palaeochannel in Trench 44, looking north 70 Paw Jorgensen
pits had steeply sloping sides which merged N into concave bases; they were all filled with identical deposits of coarse mid-bluish grey silty sand with occasional gravel pockets. The larger of the two complete pits measured 0.84m in diameter by 0.43m in depth. Trench 44 A single body sherd of Ipswich ware was recovered from one of the pits dating it to ad 730—850, while the fill of another yielded a glass vessel fragment which had a pit [156] marvered, self-coloured reticella trail with white strands (see Jarrett below). These paleochannel had been applied to the vessel as two back to back loops. Two of the pits yielded a total of 200 animal bone fragments, an pit [197] assemblage that was dominated by sheep or pit [167] sheep-sized bones, although pig, cattle and chicken bones were also present (see Rielly below). In addition to this, a few fragments of residual Roman building material were recovered from the fill of the pits. These comprised a piece of opus signinum, a Roman brick fragment and a fragment of
0 4m fine laminated sandstone possibly used for roofing (see Hayward below; Hayward 2011, 170). One of the pits yielded ten human Fig 10. Plan of Saxon features in Trench 44 skull fragments, presumably from a single skull of an adult individual. These fragments comprised part of the left and right parietals a visible segment measuring 2.68m inFigure length. 10 and occipital. Unfortunately, due to a lack Both the northern and southern Saxonedges of diagnostic elements precise ageing and were seen within the excavated area giving1:125 sexing was not possible (Langthorne 2011, the channel a width of 1.54m and a depth 156). Environmental sampling of the Middle of 0.77m. The steeply sloping sides of the Saxon deposits revealed charred remains of channel merged into a slightly concave base, a number of plants including common hazel which sloped eastward towards the river. At (Corylus avellana), hazel/alder (Corylus/Alnus its highest point the channel survived to a sp.), oak (Quercus sp.), and ash (Fraxinus height of 2.15m OD. This level is similar to excelsior) (Hégarat & Allott 2011, 175—6). the Old Treasury Building site where the Middle Saxon deposits were encountered Middle Saxon pottery between 0.4m and 1.7m OD (Cowie & Chris Jarrett Blackmore 2008, 91). In places the sides of the channel appeared to have been stepped, Only three sherds of Middle Saxon pottery although this may simply mark the main were recovered from the site, all from active channel of the palaeostream. The fill of Trench 44. A shoulder sherd of a fluted jar the palaeochannel yielded a single shoulder in a medium sand-tempered, dark greyware sherd of a fluted jar in a medium sand- (SSANB) (LAARC 2007), dated ad 600—850 tempered, dark grey ware, dated ad 600—850, and believed to be from a Surrey source and a small fragment of aquamarine glass (Blackmore 2003, 235), was recovered from with an optically blown rib. a fill of the palaeochannel. This form, some- To the east the palaeochannel had been times described as having ‘melon-ribbing’, is partially truncated by three probable a survival of the Early Saxon potting tradit- rubbish pits, one of which had in turn been ion, surviving into the 8th century. This heavily truncated by a later intrusion. These form has been found in Lundenwic in sand- Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 71 tempered wares, while a chaff-tempered 44. Found in sample <6>, fill [300] of the ware version was found at Drury Lane and palaeochannel [301], was a small fragment thought to be a funerary vessel (Blackmore with an optically blown rib. It is not certain 2003, 235, fig 89,
Conclusions of either Early or Middle Saxon date (Cowie & Blackmore 2008, 115—24). The quantities of bones are possibly too small to warrant a detailed discussion, but none- theless there is some interest concerning the Phase 2: Saxon discussion date of this collection alongside the relative Paw Jorgensen and Jonathan Butler dearth of similarly dated assemblages in this part of London, ie somewhat to the west and Evidence of Saxon activity was seen only south of Lundenwic. A notable assemblage in Trench 44 directly to the west of Horse was found nearby at the Old Treasury Guards Avenue. The reason for the discovery Building (Cowie & Blackmore 2008, 96—9) of Saxon material here can be explained and it is conceivable that these two sites by the fact that this particular trench was offer contemporary evidence associated excavated to a greater depth than the vast with the same settlement. The Treasury majority. Therefore, it is likely that further produced a much larger faunal assemblage Middle Saxon deposits survive on the site with approximately equal proportions of beneath the bases of the other excavated cattle and sheep, less pig and then some trenches. Three sherds of Ipswich ware, equid, deer (fallow and roe), dog and bird. dated ad 730—850/70, and a sherd of North The bird bones were not identified and in French grey ware, dated ad 600—800, were the absence of sieving there is no evidence also found residually in trenches to the concerning the exploitation of fish. A major south. The Middle Saxon pitting and pal- aspect of both the cattle and sheep/goat aeochannel lay c.85m to the north of the components was the notable abundance Middle Saxon remains found at the Old of head and foot parts. This evidence was Treasury Building in the 1960s. It has been interpreted in terms of the possible high suggested that late 8th- or 9th-century status of this site and its likely association with buildings found at the Old Treasury site the redistribution of food rents (Cowie & included a high status or perhaps royal Blackmore 2008, 100). The rather slight but hall. This hall would have occupied a key corroborative information from the street- position midway between Lundenwic and a scape improvement site may help to reinforce Middle Saxon monastery/minster which is this interpretation. Alternatively, however, postulated to lie on Thorney Island to the these deposits may simply represent butchery south (Green & Cowie 2008, 100; Thomas et al waste produced by a local individual. 2006, 41). It is probable that the pitting and There are general similarities concerning residual finds found during the streetscape the collection from this site and those from improvements were part of this settlement; the numerous excavations within Lundenwic, it is also possible that the pitting represents both in terms of species exploited and the the remains of occupation flanking the road recovery of butchers’ waste. This is shown for from Lundenwic to the high status hall. example in the assemblage from the Royal Although the Middle Saxon pottery Opera House (Rielly 2003, 319) and also in assemblage recovered from the site was the synthesis of data from various Lundenwic small consisting of only seven sherds (four sites (Cowie et al 2012, 142—3, 149—52). of which were residual), it is consistent with A large proportion of these excavations late 8th- or 9th-century occupation as seen provided fishbones, generally with a pre- at the Old Treasury Building. The animal dominance of freshwater eel, herring and bone assemblage, which included cattle cyprinids (carp family). Plaice/flounder and bones that were entirely composed of head various gadids form a notable but smaller and foot parts is similar to that of the Old component. Capture of these species would Treasury Building which contained a high have involved rod and line, nets or traps. proportion of waste bones from cattle. It has Of some interest, particularly concerning been suggested that such a bone assemblage the capture of flatfish, is the discovery of a would have been consistent with a site where number of V-shaped tidal fish-traps along the food rents were paid and redistributed – Thames between Isleworth (Kew Gardens) a function of a royal hall (Green & Cowie and Chelsea (Battersea Bridge), apparently 2008, 100). The Old Treasury Building site 74 Paw Jorgensen had previously been postulated to have been N a farm providing carcasses for the Lundenwic settlement (Cowie & Whytehead 1989, 714) and the high proportion of sheep bone from the present site may also be suggestive of a farm, as proposed for other sites with a preponderance of sheep such as the National Trench 44 Portrait Gallery site which lies c.500m to the north (Armitage 2004, 110—11). The two frag- ments of glass, including one with reticella decoration, are suggestive of high status finds and may have came from the possible high status settlement to the south. The area with the Middle Saxon pitting was apparently abandoned in the 9th century ad with no further activity recorded until the 12th pit century. This evidence is consistent with that recorded from the Old Treasury Building and pit the National Gallery Extension, both of which were abandoned during the 9th century and not reoccupied until the 12th century (Green & Cowie 2008, 100; Whytehead & Cowie 1989, 70). This abandonment was most likely in response to the increased frequency of Viking 0 4m raids, but may also have been due to rising river levels which made the area unsuitable for occupation. Fig 11. Plan of medieval features in TrenchFigure 44 11 Medieval PHASE 3: MEDIEVAL (c.1100—1500) 1:125 yellow, coarse, very sandy lime mortar.2 The Middle Saxon channel in Trench 44 was The masonry measured 0.53m in width and truncated to the south by two intercutting extended both east and west beyond the pits (Fig 11). It is possible that the earlier of confines of the trench. On the south side, these was part of the Saxon sequence of pits approximately 0.48m below the top of the as it was similar in size and appearance to the wall, a rectangular offset stepped away from earlier features, but as it was devoid of finds the wall, presumably to form the base of a this suggestion cannot be confirmed. The buttress. This offset was stepped back to the eastern side of this pit was cut by a slightly south by approximately 0.5m and measured larger, sub-rectangular pit, which contained at least 1.05m in length (east—west). a fragment of a coarse London-type ware jug A north—south-aligned brick wall was keyed dated 1080—1200 (see Jarrett below). The fill into the north side of the stone wall. The red of this pit differed from the earlier ones in Tudor bricks used in the construction were both colour and texture. While the earlier quite irregular in shape and varied in size pits contained bluish grey silty sands, the fill from 225 by 102 by 50mm to 210 by 100 by of this pit was composed of a dark brown to 50mm. These were laid in regular courses dark grey silty clay. and bonded with pale yellow moderately In Trench 53, at the junction of Horse coarse sandy lime mortar. The inserted Guards Avenue and Whitehall Court a small brick wall formed the back of a fireplace section of stone wall was uncovered (Figs or oven. Bricks identical to those used in 2, 12—13). This was constructed of rough the construction of the inserted wall were square hewn ragstone blocks laid in regular used to lay the base. These were laid in a courses. On average the blocks measured pattern of concentric half circles radiating 230 by 220 by 112mm although some were towards the corner formed by the two walls. as long as 440mm. These were set in pale Unfortunately the oven/fireplace was only Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 75
N
Kitchen Complex
brick surface brick fireplace
brick wall
stone wall
buttress
Trench 53
0 5m
Fig 12. Plan showing the archaeological remains of the Kitchen complex in Trench 53 Figure 12 Kitchen Complex Fisher 1670 partially exposed as it was located below the To the south of the kitchen was1:100 a block formation level of the trench. Overlying the of buildings containing the privy buttery, brick base was a thin lens of charcoal. pantry and the office and cellar of the Cofferer.3 While it is unknown to what extent Kitchen complex Archbishop Rotherham developed the wider kitchen complex, it can be assumed that he It is likely that this stone wall formed a part was responsible for the block containing of the south wall of the Kitchen complex and these offices as when Wolsey rebuilt the Great it is probable that it was part of York Place Hall its size was restricted by the kitchens to before it was taken over by Whitehall Palace the north. (discussed earlier). The 1670 Fisher survey of Whitehall Palace clearly shows the palace PHASE 4: POST-MEDIEVAL kitchen and associated buildings located (after 1500) at the east end of the great court and just north of the great hall (Fig 5). On this plan The Great Hall the kitchen is shown as roughly square with each side measuring approximately 15m and Two abutting stone foundations, one aligned with large fireplaces set into the east and east—west and the other north—south, were west walls. None of the surviving building uncovered to the north of the north entrance accounts from the death of Archbishop of the Ministry of Defence Main Building Rotherham in 1500 to the survey of 1670 along the south side of Horse Guards Avenue mention the construction of a kitchen, so in Trench 59 (Figs 2a, 14—15). Neither of it is assumed that the kitchen shown on the two walls were fully exposed as they the 1670 survey is that built by Archbishop extended beyond the limits of the trench. Rotherham during his tenure at York Place The exposed portion of the east—west- from 1480—1500 (Thurley 1999, 10). aligned wall measured 1.50m in length and 76 Paw Jorgensen
Fig 13. Masonry wall and brick oven in Trench 53, looking south continued beyond the limits of the trench. had been constructed from predominantly Only the south face of the wall was observed green sandstone blocks around a chalk as the north face lay beyond the northern rubble core. The bonding material consisted limits of the trench. While the total width of soft light brownish-yellow to pale yellow of the wall could not be determined, the coarse sandy lime mortar. exposed portion measured 1.10m in width To the south this masonry was abutted by and was excavated to a depth of 0.30m. It a second, north—south-aligned wall found- Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 77
N
The Vestry
The Great Hall
Trench 59 The Chapel Trench 59 bay windowwall [587]
brick-paved surface wall [586]
wall [532]
wall [519]
0 10m
Fig 14. Plan showing the archaeological remains of the Great Hall found in Trench 59, overlaid on Fisher’s map Figure 14 The Great Hall ation, though this was constructed exclusively earlier). When partially exposedFisher 1670 during of chalk blocks set in a similar, albeit slightly excavations ahead of the construction1:200 of lighter, lime mortar to the east—west-aligned the Ministry of Defence Main Building in foundation. This foundation segment meas- the 1930s, the thickness of the walls of the ured at least 1.10m north—south by 0.80m Great Hall was seen to be approximately 3ft east—west and extended beyond the southern (0.91m). Although not shown on the 1670 and eastern limits of the trench. Towards the plan of the palace, a bay window with internal south it had been truncated on the east side measurements of 6ft 6in (1.98m) east—west by a later brick wall. The upper portion of by 10ft (3.05m) north—south protruded from the west side of the wall had been covered the east wall of the hall towards the chapel with a c.50mm thick coat of lime render. royal. The south wall of this was seen during While these footings cannot with great excavations in 1939 (Thurley 1999, 30). It is certainty be attributed to any particular possible that the two walls uncovered during building, they are located in the vicinity of the current work represent a portion of the east wall of the Great Hall constructed the north and east walls of the bay window. by Wolsey between 1528 and 1529 (discussed Wolsey’s Great Hall appears to at least 78 Paw Jorgensen
Fig 15. Part of the brick wall between the Great Hall and the Chapel Royal with Taylor House foundations in the background in Trench 59, looking east roughly follow the outline of an earlier hall, presumably an entrance. To the north of the although it extended further to the south walls, and also occupying the gap between than its predecessor. them, was an external brick-paved surface The east wall of the bay window was abut- of a slightly later date. At the west end, the ted by a later east—west-aligned brick wall later brick wall had been built partially on (Fig 14). This comprised two segments of top of the eastern wall of the bay window of 16th-century brick wall aligned roughly the Great Hall. It is likely that the later brick east—west and separated by a deliberate gap, wall and the paved surface to the north of Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 79 it represent a division within the courtyard ioned in the buildings accounts for the between the hall and the chapel royal to the years 1531—32 may refer to the Holbein east of it (Fig 14). Gate, on which construction had begun in 1531. The same entry mentions bricklayers The Court Gate hired to construct a brick wall along the highway from the new gatehouse towards At the junction of what is today Whitehall Charing Cross (TNA E 36/252, 529). This and Horse Guards Avenue a gatehouse used could be adjoining the north-west corner of to mark the main landward entrance to York the Holbein Gate and extend north along Place. It is first shown on mid-16th century the western side of Whitehall rather than, maps (Fig 4) and a number of references to as suggested by Cox and Norman (1930, it exist in the historical documents. Evidently 44), from the Court Gate along the east a gatehouse already existed in this location side of the highway (Fig 5). This is perhaps as early as the 15th century, although it is more likely as depictions of the interior of commonly referred to as the ‘new gate’ the Court Gate show the main passage to throughout the 1530s (Cox & Norman 1930, consist of a typical 15th-century ribbed stone 44). It is possible that the gatehouse had vault. It is possible that the gatehouse was a been repaired so extensively during Cardinal product of George Neville’s rebuilding of Wolsey’s tenure that it was effectively seen as York Place during the third quarter of the a new building. However, it is possible that 15th century. The structure was often called the old gatehouse was demolished and a new the Great Gatehouse and by 1560 ‘the Court one built in its place. This new gatehouse Gate’ (Thurley 1999, 10—11). It is depicted may have been constructed on the footings in a painting of c.1760 by Paul Sandby which of the old one. shows the gatehouse and the Banqueting Alternatively the ‘newe gatehouse’ ment- Hall from the east (Fig 16).
Fig 16. View of the Great Court c.1760 by Paul Sandby (Guildhall Library, Corporation of London) Figure 16 View of Great Court, c1760; by Paul Sandby Not to Scale 80 Paw Jorgensen
The façade of the building was further N altered in 1676 and the crenellated battle- ments were removed at the same time. It survived until 1765 when it was finally dem- olished to provide better access to The Court (Thurley 1999, 10—11). However, a new gate was built in its place a few years later. This was sparked by a number of violent robberies Trench 55 The Court Gate plaguing the area. The new gate survived until 1813 (Cox & Norman 1930, 45—6). During the investigation, the remains, albeit very fragmentary, of the gatehouse were exposed in Trenches 55, 58 and 99 along both the south and north sides of Horse Guards Avenue (Figs 2a, 17—18). The earliest masonry was exposed on the north side of the road and comprised a north— south-aligned ragstone wall, which had been partially robbed out. On the south side the 0 10m structure uncovered was constructed of Tudor bricks (described earlier). It is likely Fig 17. Plan showing the archaeological remains of that the partially robbed stone wall was part the north part of Court Gate found in FigureTrench 1755 of the earlier gatehouse, which was later overlaid on Fisher’s map The Court Gate replaced by one constructed of bricks. Fisher 1670 The ragstone footing was constructed 1:400 using randomly laid chunks of masonry set appeared to have been robbed leaving only a in a pale yellow coarse sandy mortar and residual deposit of mortar, silt and small stone the wall closely followed the edges of the fragments. It is likely that this foundation construction cut suggesting that the stones represented the remains of either the Court and mortar had been poured into the Gate or the range of buildings that extended construction trench. To the north the wall north from it.
N
Trench 58
[383] Trench 99
The Court Gate
Banqueting House 0 10m Chapel
Fig 18. Plan showing the archaeological remains of the south part of the Court Gate found in TrenchesFigure 58 18 and 99 overlaid on Rocque’s map The Court Gate Rocque 1746 1:250 Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 81
The lodgings and office of the Surveyor During the archaeological investigations of the King’s Works remains of both the early 17th-century and late 18th-century buildings were identified From the early 17th century the buildings and recorded. Unfortunately the later base- in the north-west corner of Middle Scotland mented building had destroyed much of the Yard were leased to Simon Basil, Surveyor of preceding one. Both buildings had been Works. They remained the lodgings and office constructed of bricks and within the later of successive Surveyors of Works, including building a number of phases of repairs and Basil’s successor Inigo Jones, although it alterations were observed. was not until 1661 that they were officially Of the earlier building only two small referred to as the Lodgings of the Surveyor L-shaped wall segments were exposed to- (Gater & Wheeler 1935, 194) (Fig 5). When wards the western extreme of Trench 62 major repairs were carried out in 1715 the along the north side of Whitehall Place (Figs building was found to be in such a ruinous 2a, 5 & 19). The one wall, aligned east—west, state that it was decided to pull it down and had been truncated by a later cellar just east of rebuild it on the old foundations. Two years the juncture point. The second wall extended later a warrant was issued authorising the north from the first and continued beyond work to be carried out (TNA T 56/18). This the northern limits of the trench. Both were building remained until the site was cleared 0.60m wide, although the top part of the in preparation for the construction of the new east wall had been truncated leaving only a office and lodgings of the Surveyor General in 0.15m wide section. The two walls had been 1795. The new building, which later became constructed of irregular unfrogged red sandy known as 1—2 Whitehall Place, comprised a fabric bricks set in fine grained sandy light four storey brick structure over a basement. greyish white lime mortar with very occasional During the excavation for the new basement charcoal flecks. These bricks were identical to in 1796 two large and ancient sewers were other 17th-century bricks seen across the site encountered; one disused and the other still (eg the brick wall adjoining the bay window on active (Gater & Wheeler 1935, 194—5). the east side of the Great Hall).
N
Lodgings and Office of the Surveyor Trench 62
[559]
[558]
0 10m
Fig 19. Plan showing the archaeological remains of the Lodgings and Office of the Surveyor foundFigure in Trench 19 62 overlaid on Fisher’s map Lodgings and Office of the Surveyor Fisher 1670 1:250 82 Paw Jorgensen
The remains of the late 18th-century build- hall from King Street made for Cosimo de’ ing comprised the footing for the south wall Medici during his visit to London that year of the house itself and the west and south (reproduced in Thurley 1999, 120, fig 125). walls of a basement projecting out from the The platform of guns is also shown on the building towards the street (Figs 8 & 29). All 1670 Fisher survey of the palace (Fig 5). of these walls had been constructed using A number of brick walls possibly repres- a mix of shallow frogged red and yellow enting the remains of the gun platform were bricks laid in regular courses and bonded observed during the investigation (Figs 2a, 5 with indurated mid-brownish grey mortar & 20). Unfortunately these had been heavily containing occasional flint and charcoal truncated by the installation of later services inclusions. and were all directly overlain by modern fill. While the location of the walls corresponds Gun platform to the position of the gun platform, the lack of temporally diagnostic material from A gun platform was constructed sometime the area means that there is a large degree between 1643 and 1660 to defend the of uncertainty in identifying the walls as approach to both the Holbein Gate and the those of the gun structure. However, with Court Gate. It is possible that the guns were the exception of the Van Huls house no brought in along with other ‘great guns’ that buildings other than those associated with were placed in the Great Court and Scotland the gun platform appear in this area in the Yard in the second half of 1659 (Green 1886, cartographic evidence. The grounds of the 95, 103). While the exact construction date Van Huls house correspond to the location is not known, the building accounts for the of the earlier Privy Gallery located to the years 1660—61 mention a new roof being south of the Banqueting House whereas the constructed over the guns at the Banqueting exposed walls were located to the west of the House. In addition to the new roof a mun- Banqueting House (Fig 20). itions depot was also constructed next to the Portions of what were believed to be the guns at this time. The gun platform is shown north and south walls of the gun platform in a number of views of the Banqueting were uncovered in Trench 52 along the east House and the Holbein Gate. Of these the side of Whitehall directly in front of the earliest is probably the 1669 view of White- Banqueting House. The bricks used in the
N Banqueting 1688 Rebuild House
Gun Platform
Trench 52
0 10m
Fig 20. Plan showing the archaeological remains of the gun platform found in Trench 52 overlaid on Fisher’s map Figure 20 Gun Platform Fisher 1670 1:200 Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 83
construction of the walls were similar in both N size and fabric to the handmade earthy sandy red bricks with very small clinker inclusions Palace Buildings identified elsewhere on site as being of 17th- century date. The gun platform was evidently demolished walls some years prior to 1688 in order to facilitate the rebuilding of the Privy Gallery, which it abutted to the south. Upon completion of this work James II ordered a new gun battery to be constructed to replace the one that had Trench 52 been demolished. Work on building the new battery was carried out in 1688. Additional Trench 98 work was carried out in 1689 when the roof was raised and again in 1699 (TNA WORK garden path 5/43). Sundial Archaeological evidence for the new gun Trench 96 battery constructed by James II was recorded Area of to the north of the earlier gun platform and Landscaping consisted of the scanty remains of a north— south wall with an east—west return. Like the earlier building this one was constructed of bricks (Fig 20). This new gun battery, or at least the structure itself, survived until 1723 when it was demolished to ease the flow of traffic. Privy Garden Privy Garden
To the west of Gwydyr House in Trench 52 two parallel east—west-aligned brick walls approximately 1.80m apart were exposed (Figs 2a, 5 & 21). The northern of these was constructed entirely out of brick while the southern contained a mix of bricks and ragstone blocks. Identical bricks and mortar had been used in the construction of both walls. Without exception the bricks used in the construction of these walls consisted of unfrogged handmade bricks of an orange to red fabric. While there was some variation Trench 42 in the size of the bricks the average brick measured 230 by 100 by 70mm. These were set in a very sandy light greyish brown to pale yellow soft lime mortar. brick drain Although no dating evidence was available and path for the walls themselves, they were sealed by deposits containing 15th- to 16th-century 0 20m tile and brick fragments indicating that the walls predate this material. No structures are shown on the 1670 survey of the palace in Fig 21. Plan showing the archaeological remains the immediate vicinity of the walls, though within the Privy Garden walls found within Trenches Figure 21 it can be estimated that they lie within what 42, 52, 96 and 98 overlaid on Fisher’s map Privy Garden Features was at the time the Privy Garden and it is Fisher 1670 1:625 84 Paw Jorgensen possible that they represent small boundary pits were observed. These yielded very few walls (Fig 5). finds and it is likely that they were associated with the removal of the burnt out ruins of 17th-century paths within the Privy Garden the Privy Gallery prior to the construction of the Van Huls house. Towards the southern boundary of the old Before the conflagration of 1698 William Privy Garden an east—west-aligned brick- Van Huls, Clerk of the Queen’s Robes and paved pathway was recorded in Trench 42 Wardrobe, had been granted lodgings over (Figs 2b & 21). This was abutted to the north the Holbein Gate and certain rooms within by a brick-lined drain. Both features were the Privy Gallery to the east of it. In 1712 Van constructed from handmade red or orange Huls requested a lease of the land between sandy fabric bricks, measuring on average the gate and the Banqueting House so that 210 by 108 by 55mm, which were dated he might rebuild and expand his lodgings as 1600—1700. In both the case of the path and the greater part of his rooms to the east of the the drain the bricks were set in white shelly gate had been destroyed in the 1698 fire. The brick mortar. The path consisted of a 0.60m request was granted and Van Huls set about wide section of stretcher bonded brickwork building his new house and offices (Cox & at least two courses thick. To both the east Forest 1931, 18—19). Only seven years later and west it extended beyond the limits of Van Huls’ lodgings were once more at risk of the trench leaving only a 0.96m long section destruction. This time not from fire, but by of the path exposed. The drain abutting it a proposal to widen the road by demolishing to the north comprised two parallel lines of the Holbein Gate and the adjoining house brickwork spaced 0.10m apart and each one and gardens. As has already been stated course wide. These were laid in stretcher bond the gate (and Van Huls’ house) was spared, and survived to a height of at least 60mm. although the easternmost part of his property A series of small, 1m square, trial holes was was requisitioned in 1723 to allow for traffic excavated in a line extending from south to bypass the narrow opening of the gate. Van to north across the lawn to the west of the Huls’ house, along with the Holbein Gate sur- Ministry of Defence Main Building (Fig 21). vived until 1759 (Cox & Forest 1931, 18—19). Towards the north end of the green two of the trial holes encountered east—west-aligned King Street Gate brick surfaces constructed from similar bricks to those of the path discussed above. While Cardinal Wolsey’s York Place was boun- These likely represent the remains of the ded to the west by King Street, Henry VIII ex- series of paths laid out in the 17th century tended its grounds by acquiring the land along to subdivide the Privy Garden into sixteen the west side of the street. The palace now unequal quadrangles – the layout shown on awkwardly straddled the public thoroughfare the 1670 plan of the palace (Fig 5). from Charing Cross to Westminster. In order to facilitate communication between the The Van Huls house two sides without having to interact with the increasingly busy thoroughfare, a gallery was South and west of the Banqueting House built along the northern edge of the orchard part of the ruins of the Van Huls house were (later the Privy Garden) in the early 1530s uncovered (not illus). These comprised linking the eastern and western sides by the three roughly parallel east—west-aligned means of a gatehouse spanning the road. wall segments constructed using a mix of This new gatehouse became known as the red and yellow bricks (dated 1700—1850) Holbein Gate (Thurley 1999, 43) (Fig 4). laid in English bond and set in coarse soft In the 1540s a second gate was constructed pinkish yellow lime mortar. The northern further west across King Street linking the and southernmost walls likely formed part southern part of the palace to the park side. of the north and south side of the building The gate is shown on both the Agas map respectively, while the narrower wall located (Fig 4) and the Fisher survey of the palace between them was likely an interior partition. (Fig 5). In addition to this a view of the gate Immediately south of the house a number of was produced by Vertue shortly before its Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 85
N Privy Garden Wall
THE STREET
King Street Gate Trench 32
STREET KING
0 10m
Figure 23 Fig 23. Plan showing the archaeologicalKing Street remains Gate of the King Street Gate found within TrenchFisher 32 overlaid1670 Fig 22. King Street Gate c.1725 by George Vertue on Fisher’s map Figure 22 1:200 King Street Gate c1725; by George Vertue demolition in the 1720s (Fig 22).Not to Scale ied the majority of the trench. Thus the arch- The King Street Gate was demolished at aeological remains of the gate were mostly the same time as the old privy garden wall seen in the sections of the trench. Both the in order to widen the road and facilitate the footings had been constructed on the natural flow of traffic. Evidently the gate and the gravels. At the top of the easternmost footing narrow street beyond had been causing traffic was a brick offset, presumably meant to sup- congestion for quite some time prior to the port a timber floor between the two walls, but demolition of the gate and widening of the unfortunately the westernmost footing had road. This is evidenced by Samuel Pepys in been truncated to the height of the offset. 1660 when his diary entry for November 27 The bricks used in the construction of the reads: ‘… From thence to Westminster Hall, walls were handmade, of a red fabric, and and in King Street there being a great stop varied in size from 220 by 100 by 50mm to of coaches, there was a falling out between 216 by 110 by 50mm set in a light brown lime a drayman and my Lord Chesterfield’s mortar containing a moderate frequency of coachman, and one of his footmen killed’ small chalk fragments. Considering the size (Pepys 1660, 1, 273). and fabric of the bricks as well as the mortar Possible evidence for the King Street Gate type, it seems likely that the footings date to was encountered in a deep trench located the 16th century. at the north corner of Downing Street and Whitehall. Here two parallel north—south- Realigned Privy Garden wall aligned brick and chalk footings spaced approximately 1.70m apart were revealed in By the early 1720s congestion caused by the Trench 32 (Figs 2b & 23). The remains had bottleneck created by the narrow passage been truncated to the south by a modern through both the Holbein Gate and the King manhole inspection chamber, which occup- Street Gate caused significant inconvenience 86 Paw Jorgensen
to traffic. In 1723 a proposal was made to N demolish the Holbein Gate (TNA WORK 6/7). The proposal was rejected, partially on the grounds that the gate was seen by many to be one of the greatest curiosities in Privy the city. While the Holbein Gate was saved Garden from destruction a warrant was issued for the demolition of the King Street Gate at the south end of the Privy Garden (TNA T 54/28). At the same time another warrant Trench 36 was issued for shifting the west wall of the Privy Garden to the east in order to widen the street between the two gates. The new wall was to be constructed using the stones from the old wall and made good with stones Privy from the deconstructed King Street Gate Garden (TNA WORK 4/2). This new boundary wall is Wall depicted on the Rocque Map of 1746 (Fig 6) and on two views of Whitehall from the south by Canaletto in 1746 and 1749 (reproduced WHITEHALL in Phillips 1964, pl 1, fig 32). While no evidence of the old Privy Garden boundary wall was seen during the arch- aeological investigations various portions of the foundations of the new 1723 Privy Garden wall were encountered in Trench 36 to the west of the Ministry of Defence Main Building (Figs 2a, 2b & 24). The foundations of this wall were constructed from a medley of reused building materials in accordance with the documentary evidence. Although it 0 10m cannot be said for certain that this material was recovered from the old wall and the King Street Gate, it seems likely that this was Fig 24. Plan showing the archaeological remainsFigure of 24 the indeed the case. 18th-century Privy Garden wall foundPrivy Gardenwithin Trench Wall Materials used in the construction of the 36 overlaid on Rocque’s map Rocque 1746 new wall foundation included fragments of 1:400 Purbeck Limestone paving slabs and reused blocks of Kentish ragstone, Taynton stone, not exposed, observed sections of it would Combe Down Oolite, fine yellow micaceous suggest that the foundation plinth must sandstone, Portland stone and Reigate have been at least 0.40m wide while the stone (see Hayward below). This masonry brick superstructure must have been at least was bonded by a soft white-grey mortar 0.30m wide. The style of the bricks and the with moderate clinker inclusions, although type of mortar used date the construction of in a few areas where repairs or alterations the wall to between 1664 and 1850. to the foundation had been carried out the bonding material consisted of shelly Taylor House brick mortar. The wall supported by this foundation was constructed of poorly made In 1718 Robert Darcy, 3rd Earl of Holderness, unfrogged post-Great Fire purple clinker was granted a lease of a plot of wasteland bricks measuring between 220 by 110 by along the river and just south of Whitehall 60mm and 225 by 98 by 70mm, bonded by Stairs (Fig 7). The lease describes the parcel a grey shelly, clinker lime mortar. While the of land as part of the ruins of Whitehall full width of the new Privy Garden wall was Palace and states that it was almost entirely Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 87
N
Trench 54 coach house garden wall
Fife House Garden
Trench 59
0 20m Taylor House
Fig 25. Plan showing the archaeological remains of Taylor House and the Fife House garden wall found within Trenches 54 and 59 overlaid on Horwood’s map Figure 25 Fife House Garden Wall and Taylor House Horwood 1792-1799 covered with heaps of rubbish (Cox & stone blocks. Later alterations and repairs1:500 to Norman 1930, 152). More specifically the this wall had been carried out in brick. While ruins within the land granted to Darcy were the north wall was constructed primarily probably those of the Chapel Royal to the of unfrogged red bricks, blocks of green east of the Great Hall. In 1793 the property Reigate stone, Portland stone and occasional was sold to Michael Angelo Taylor and at that Purbeck marble fragments helped make up time described as being in ‘so decayed a state the core of the wall. These materials were as to be scarcely habitable’ (TNA T 55/25, bonded with pale yellow, coarse, moderately 64). Over the next ten years the property un- soft, sand rich lime mortar. The latest mat- derwent extensive renovation work during erials observed within the exposed wall which the northern wall was entirely rebuilt suggest a construction date during the early in a more substantial manner and the other 18th century. The wall itself was faced with parts were stripped to the walls. The building header bonded unfrogged red bricks. It had remained in existence until at least the early been subject to refacing and the east end 1920s. Just prior to its demolition the building had been rebuilt in the late 18th century was described as comprising a ‘semi-basement and later refaced. The same type of bricks with three stories over, and an attic in a slated had been used in the construction of the mansard roof to the main portion’ (Cox & interior wall, although these were resting on Norman 1930, 153). Photographs taken of an earlier, much wider stone footing. the exterior of the building show portions of earlier stone walls incorporated into the Fife House Gardens fabric of the new brick building. The foundations of parts of the north Following the fire of 1698 Edmund Dunch wall and of an interior wall of Taylor House acquired a plot of land formerly occupied were uncovered in Trench 59 located along by the Queen’s Bakehouse and the southern Horse Guards Avenue outside the north part of the Small Beer Buttery. Later leases entrance to the Ministry of Defence Main included what was described as a plot of Building (Figs 2a & 25). The foundations waste ground to the south of his lodgings and for the north wall had been constructed extending along the river to Whitehall Stairs. almost entirely out of reused materials and The waste ground extended across much of incorporated both fragmented bricks and the kitchen complex, including the former 88 Paw Jorgensen palace kitchens, part of the pastry office, of ashlar walling only one course wide and it parts of the privy buttery, the cofferer’s did not survive to great depth. It is therefore office and cellar, the ewery office, etc (Gater probable that it represents the remains of the & Wheeler 1935, 165). Following Edmund’s garden wall rather than a more substantial death in 1719 his widow, Elizabeth Dunch, structure. However, it is possible that the added to the property the former dwelling of later coach house shown on Horwood’s map the Clerk of the Pastry adjoining the Pastry was a simple lean-to type structure which Yard to the west (TNA E 367/6784). The fact incorporated the south and west walls of the that both the leases granted to Edmund and garden into its construction. later Elizabeth include plots of waste land suggests that much of the kitchen complex Carrington House was destroyed during the 1698 fire, although it does seem that at least parts of the Queen’s Many of the buildings along the north side of Bakehouse and the Small Beer Buttery Whitehall Court (now part of Horse Guards survived. After Elizabeth Dunch’s death in Avenue) appear to have survived the fire of 1761 the property was for a short time owned 1698 relatively unharmed, or were at least by her daughter, who in 1762 sold it to habitable after the conflagration. Throughout Joshua Steel. Joshua started the enclosure of the existence of the palace these buildings the foreshore to extend his garden eastward. had functioned as offices for the various This work was however stopped by the Board administrative departments including the of Works in 1762 as it was believed that his privy seal office, the jewel office etc. During encroachment on the river would reduce the early part of the 18th century private access to Whitehall Stairs (TNA WORK 6/18, leases were gradually granted for these pre- 24). The following year the property was sold mises and the spaces transitioned into res- to the Earl of Fife, who procured permission idential use (Gater & Wheeler 1935, 173). to continue the enclosure of the foreshore One such lease, for properties joining onto (TNA WORK 6/18, 48) (Fig 7). the north-west corner of Whitehall Court, was A portion of the south wall of the Fife granted to Lord Newburgh in 1721. Over the House gardens was uncovered during the next several decades Lord Newburgh, and investigation (Figs 2a & 25). This was located later his son the Hon James Cholmondeley, in Trench 54 along the north side of Horse proceeded to acquire the leases for the sur- Guards Avenue, near its intersection with rounding properties. In 1763 the leases were Whitehall Court. The remains comprised sold on to Earl Gower who consolidated the the lower two courses of a roughly east—west- leases for the individual properties into a aligned wall standing one course wide. It was single lease. In 1765 the property was cleared constructed out of ashlar blocks of Kentish in preparation for the construction of what ragstone. would become known as Carrington House, On John Rocque’s map of 1746 the south- designed by Sir William Chambers (Fig ern portion of Elizabeth Dunch’s property 7). The clearing of the site in preparation was laid out as a garden or orchard enclosed for the construction of Carrington House by a wall (Fig 6). The portion of wall in 1765 also coincides with the date of extending along the southern boundary of demolition of the Court Gate directly to the the property also defined the north side of south. In addition to providing better access the narrow public thoroughfare leading to to the court, it is possible that the purpose Whitehall Stairs. As can be seen from Richard of the demolition of the gate was simply to Horwood’s 1792—99 map, a coach house was make room for Carrington House. Following later built in the south-west corner of this the death of Earl Gower (then Marquess of property (Figs 7 & 25). It is uncertain how this Stratford) in 1803 the property was sold coach house was constructed; whether it was to Lord Carrington. It remained in his built onto the existing wall, or if the garden possession until the expiration of the lease wall was demolished and then rebuilt to in 1850 and he continued to reside there for include the coach house. The remains of the some years after the expiration of the lease. wall uncovered by the current investigation The building was demolished, along with was comprised, as already stated, of a length several others along Whitehall, in 1886 in Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 89
N
Carrington House Trench 55 internal wall stairs external wall
Trench 58 floor internal basement
Pelham House
Banqueting House 0 20m
Fig 26. Plan showing the archaeological remains of Pelham House and Carrington House found withinFigure Trenches 26 55 and 58 overlaid on Horwood’s map Carrington House and Pelham House Horwood 1792-1799 1:500 preparation for the construction of the War the two westernmost walls were the remains Office Building, which now occupies this part of an earlier cobble surface. No dating of the site (Gater & Wheeler 1935, 174—7). evidence was recovered from this surface so Near the west end of Trench 55 excavated it is impossible to accurately date it, though along the north side of Horse Guards it can be said to predate Carrington House as Avenue three parallel north—south-aligned the footing for this building had truncated brick footings were recorded (Figs 2a, 7 the cobble surface. It is probable that the & 26). Their locations overlaid onto Hor- surface represents the remains of the cobble wood’s map of 1792—9 reveal that the middle paving of Whitehall Court (Fig 6). footing coincides with the eastern wall of the Carrington House. A ground plan pro- The New Gallery duced prior to the building’s demolition in 1886 further reveals that the location of From at least the reign of Elizabeth I, a passage the westernmost footing corresponds to the or terrace allowed for communication west wall of the entrance hall and the eastern between the Banqueting House site to the footing to that of the stairs leading to the west and the Privy Lodgings and Council main entrance from the court (now Horse Chamber to the east. Initially this consisted Guards Avenue). of little more than a wooden terrace sep- All of these walls were constructed from arating Pebble Court from the Great Court. unfrogged red bricks measuring 230 by 105 This terrace seems to have remained stand- by 60mm, bonded by hard very light grey ing until 1668 when it was replaced by a lime mortar. Unfortunately not enough of new covered walk built of brick. In either the walls were exposed that coursing could 1619 or 1620 Sir John Finet recorded that be determined. All three footings measured when the Spanish ambassador and his en- between 0.70m and 0.78m in width. Between tourage passed over the dilapidated wooden 90 Paw Jorgensen terrace the floor collapsed, taking with it A large portion of the north wall and the Earl of Arundel, Lord Grey and others. footing of Pelham House was uncovered The ambassador himself would have fallen during the investigation in Trench 58 (Figs through the floor had it not been for his 2a, 7 & 26). This was constructed using servants grabbing hold of him (Cox & predominantly red Tudor bricks with occas- Norman 1930, 61—2). Construction of the ional red and yellow post-Great Fire bricks new brick gallery between the Banqueting used to repair damage to the wall. These House and the King’s Guard Chamber start- later bricks were more frequently used with- ed in July of 1668 and was completed the in a polygonal bay window later inserted to- following year (TNA E 351/3283) (Fig 5). The wards the east end of the wall (Fig 26). The New Gallery evidently survived the fire of bricks were for the most part laid in header 1698 relatively unscathed and was afterwards bond and bonded by moderately hard light taken over by the pages of the Removing grey lime mortar. While the analysis of the Wardrobe and can be seen as two adjoining latest brick fabrics and mortar types suggests narrow rectangular buildings on Rocque’s a date range of 1750—1850, it is likely that map of 1746 (Fig 6). Later the westernmost this reflects repairs and alterations carried of these two galleries was incorporated into out after Lady Pelham acquired the property the northern portion of Pelham House. in 1755. The date range given for the latest brick fabrics is 1664—1900 with a refined date Pelham House based on the mortar of 1750—1850. However, it appears likely that the Tudor bricks in the Lady Pelham, in 1755, leased a plot of land northern wall of Pelham House represent along the south side of The Court and adjacent part of the New Gallery fabric (see above), to the north side of the Banqueting House (Fig which was incorporated into the later house. 7). The plot already contained what was at the Part of the basement of Pelham House was time described as an old building occupied also uncovered during the investigation (Fig by the pages of the Removing Wardrobe and 26). This was set approximately 1.60m south containing at the west end the kitchen to of the north wall of the house and comprised the cofferer. In addition to the original plot, north—south and east—west walls of uncertain which measured 108¾ft in length (east—west) width and a fragment of brick-paved flooring. by 21ft in width (north—south), Lady Pelham Both the walls and the flooring were con- applied for an extension on the Privy Garden structed of frogged red bricks (measuring 234 side so that she might widen the building by 94 by 62mm) bonded with light greyish (Cox & Norman 1930, 140). The dimensions white lime mortar. On stylistic grounds these of the old building correspond to those of bricks date to after 1700. the New Gallery, which had been built in 1669 and appears on the 1670 survey of the King Street palace (Fig 5). It has therefore been sug- gested that the ‘old building’ mentioned in To further alleviate congestion on the nar- Pelham’s lease is that of the New Gallery, row King Street and to improve access to which must ipso facto have survived, at least the newly proposed Westminster Bridge an to some extent, the fire of 1698. amendment to the Westminster Bridge Act There is a good range of paintings and later of 1735 granted the Bridge Commissioners photographs depicting the ‘old building’ and permission to acquire the appropriate prop- later Pelham House. From these it appears erties in order to create new access roads and that with the exception of Pelham’s addition to widen existing ones (Cox 1926, 1). The new and some minor changes to the frontage, layout of the Westminster Bridge approach is the building changed little. This, in addition shown on Horwood’s map (Fig 7). to the fact that the dimensions of the ‘old Several wall segments related to the build- building’ are identical to the dimensions of ings along the west side of the southern part the New Gallery of 1669 suggests that at least of Parliament Street were observed during portions of this part of the palace survived the investigation in Trenches 4, 9, 13, 14, within the fabric of the Pelham House until 20, 23 and 28 (Figs 2b, 7, 27 & 28). The its demolition during the 20th century. archaeological evidence suggests that the Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 91
N N CHARLES STREET Trench 20
KING STREET 6 internal walls
Trench 14
internal walls 7
Trench 23
KING STREET yard wall
well yard wall PARLIAMENT STREET
Trench 13/28
PARLIAMENT STREET
Trench 9
walls 18
Trench 4 CHARLES STREET 0 20m 0 20m
Figure 27 Fig 27. Plan showing the archaeological remains of Fig 28. Plan showing the archaeological remainsFigure of28 buildingsNorth Part along of Kingthe north Street part and of Parliament King Street Street and buildings along the south part of King Street and South Part of King Street and Parliament Street Parliament Street found withinHorwood Trenches13/28 1792-1799 and Parliament Street found within Trenches 4, 9, 14 and 23 overlaid on Horwood’s map 1:500 20 overlaid on Horwood’s map Horwood 1792-1799 1:500 92 Paw Jorgensen terraced buildings of the southern block It is probable that this feature was situated fronting Parliament Street were basemented within the backyard of one of the adjoining and of brick construction (Fig 28). No trace houses. of the buildings comprising the northern block of Parliament Street was recorded, Whitehall Place but on the site of their backyards, segments of east—west-aligned brick walls roughly A plan to build a new terrace of six houses following the projected property boundaries along what is now Whitehall Place was put were recorded (Fig 27). These walls were in place in 1812 (Fig 8). This new terrace constructed of the same type of bricks as was to extend east from the house and the buildings along the southern part of office of the Surveyor erected in 1796. The Parliament Street. By 1875 the buildings two westernmost plots were acquired and between King Street and Parliament Street cleared by John Garden, who then set about and to the north of Charles Street had been erecting two new buildings in keeping with demolished to make way for the new Colonial the style of the Surveyor General’s building Office (Walford 1875, 392—3). to the west. He soon encountered problems This fits in with the archaeological evidence obtaining solid foundations as the two plots as repair work to the basement walls was were evidently situated over a backfilled seen to contain bricks dated to 1850—1900 ancient dock (Gater & Wheeler 1935, 197). at the latest. However, the later fabrics were The ancient dock that Garden encountered observed only within areas of repair. Based may be the one that Henry VIII ordered on analysis of the bricks and mortar, it would built within the grounds known as Scotland appear that the walls had been constructed adjoining unto York Place. If the dimensions some time between 1750 and 1850. There given in the accounts for the dock are correct was little or no difference in the brick then it would have measured 25 rods (roughly fabrics and mortar used in the construction 125m) in length by 24ft (approximately of the buildings along Parliament Street to 7.3m) in width by 9ft (approximately 2.7m) the north and south of Charles Street. This deep (TNA E 36/251—2, 639), long enough to suggests that either these buildings were reach Garden’s properties. Fisher’s 1670 plan constructed in a single phase, or within a of the palace does show a dock to the east short period of time. of the properties; however it is significantly Near the corner of King Charles Street smaller than that mentioned above (Fig 5). and Parliament Street the eastern portion It is certainly unlikely that it would have of a circular brick-lined well or soakaway was been close enough to the properties to have observed in Trench 13/28, with an estimated been visible during the excavation for the external diameter of approximately 1.50m basements. No evidence of Henry’s dock was (Fig 27). The brick lining consisted of poorly observed during the investigation, although made unfrogged red to purple clinker fabric this is not surprising considering the limited bricks measuring on average 220 by 95 by depth of the trenches within this area. 60mm. These were laid one course wide Amongst the buildings constructed by with the headers facing towards the centre Garden was No. 4 Whitehall Place, which of the feature. These bricks probably date to in 1829 became the first headquarters of 1750—1850. For bonding material a friable the newly established Metropolitan Police fine grained sandy clay was used rather than Office. Prior to its removal in 1890 to New actual mortar. Excavation of the backfill of the Scotland Yard the Metropolitan Police construction cut for the well yielded sherds Office occupied Nos 3, 4 and 5 of the terrace of early post-medieval redware (1480—1600) along the north side of Whitehall Place from the London area together with peg (Gater & Wheeler 1935, 200). Portions of tile fragments dated 1600—1800. Taking into the vaulted cellars of these buildings, along consideration the dating evidence recovered with the ones belonging to the neighbouring from the construction cut backfill as well as properties were exposed in Trench 62 the type of bricks, it seems probable that the during the investigation (Figs 2a & 29). This well or soakaway was constructed some time line of protruding cellars continued along during the second half of the 18th century. the entire length of Whitehall Place from Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 93
SCOTLAND PLACE N Trench 63 GREAT SCOTLANDYARD
coal cellars
Trench 62 Trench 57
4
WHITEHALL PLACE 2 1 coal cellars
New Lodgings and Office of 0 40m the Surveyor
Fig 29. Plan showing the archaeological remains of the new Lodgings and Office of the Surveyor as well as the remains of the buildings along Whitehall Place found within Trenches 57, 62 and 63 overlaid on the Figure1st Edition 29 Ordnance Survey map New Lodgings and Office of the Surveyor and Whitehall Place 1st edition Ordnance Survey 1868-72 1:750 Whitehall in the east to Scotland Place in the portion of the site along both the north west, although the eastern part was seen only and south sides of Whitehall Place had been in section. The eastern extent of this terrace cleared in preparation for the construction of was recorded along Scotland Place. These new government offices fronting Whitehall. walls had been constructed using frogged yellow and red bricks bonded by light brown Whitehall to light grey lime mortar. Along the north side of Whitehall Place By 1766 the street outside the palace grounds repairs and alterations were also carried appears to have predominantly consisted of out at Nos 1 and 2 (formerly the lodgings metalled gravel. As shown on a plan dated 30 and offices of the Surveyor) (Figs 8 & 29). May 1766 the majority of the street between This included the infilling of a doorway into the Holbein Gate and the King Street Gate the basement. This was done using frogged was paved with Purbeck stone (TNA WORK yellow bricks bonded by light greyish brown 30/346). Amongst the variety of building lime mortar. materials used in the construction of the new Additional basements were uncovered on Privy Garden wall were fragments of Purbeck the south side of Whitehall Place in Trench limestone paving slabs. This suggests that the 57 (Fig 29). Like the ones on the north side Purbeck slabs were being used to pave the these belonged to the late 18th/early 19th- road in 1723 after it was widened. While none century terrace built along the south side of the trenches within the area supposedly of Whitehall Place. On this side of the road paved with Purbeck slabs revealed earlier the terrace survived until the final years of road surfaces, a number of the trenches to the 19th century when it was demolished to the north of the Holbein Gate did confirm make way for the new War Office building. the presence of a number of successive By the end of the 19th century a large gravel road surfaces (not illus). 94 Paw Jorgensen
SPECIALIST REPORTS earthenware (TGW D) charger. The White- hall Palace map of 1670 shows the location of The post-Roman pottery this pottery group to be in the Privy Garden Chris Jarrett (Fig 5). Introduction Late 17th century In total 116 sherds of medieval and post- There was a varied range of dated pottery medieval pottery representing 107 Minimum types recovered from this phase (19 sherds, Number of Vessels (MNV) were recovered 9 MNVs). From Trench 44 (Fig 2a), the from the site, and although 23 sherds were construction cut for the brick drain [131] unstratified, a large proportion of these was produced 13 sherds of residual medieval assigned to Trench 32/33 and did not contain pottery as a single sherd of EMSS, seven any ceramics of note (Fig 2b). The date sherds from a LCOAR jug, and five sherds range of the pottery covers the 11th century from a cooking pot in sandy shelly ware, through to the 19th century. Museum of with a group of three finger marks found on London pottery type codes are used in the the top of the expanded rim. This group of following text (LAARC 2007). pottery was probably originally derived from a truncated mid- to late 12th-century dated pit Medieval located on the front side of The Horse Guard Yard. From Trench 52 (Fig 2a), another Trench 36 produced in the garden soil [370] sherd of Middle Saxon IPSM was recovered a sherd of early medieval sand and shelly from the garden soil [184]. In the same ware (EMSS) (Fig 2b), dated 1000—1150, trench, dump layer [316] produced sherds of while pit [154] in Trench 44 produced a LCOAR and contemporary between 1580 and single sherd of coarse London-type ware 1700 are sherds of BORDY, PMBL and PMR. (LCOAR) with external glaze splashes, dated This pottery came from an area in front of the 1080—1200 (Fig 11). Banqueting House shown on the 1670 map. Late 16th century 18th century Pottery was found solely in Trench 36 (Fig 29 sherds of fragmentary pottery represent- 2b), and the garden soil [109] and consisted ing 27 MNVs are noted in this phase. Much of local post-medieval redwares as a cauldron of the pottery came from Trench 36. The rim in PMRE and a sooted base sherd in demolition layer [163] has four sherds of PMR. Residual pottery consisted of south pottery as BORDG, PMR and a plain white Hertfordshire greyware and a small, over- tin-glaze (TGW C) plate dating to the late fired sherd of Saxon Ipswich ware (IPSF). 17th to early 18th century. The possible garden soil [378] produced, amongst the 16 Early 17th century sherds recovered from it, late 18th-century Of the six sherds of pottery found in this ceramics in the form of a medium cylindrical phase, a small, flat base sherd of a vessel in jar in painted creamware (CREA PNTD), a miscellaneous Middle Saxon North French Chinese porcelain, London stoneware jars greyware (NFGW) was residual (with a sherd and sherds from two Westerwald stoneware of early post-medieval redware: PMRE) in the (WEST) seltzer bottles. The last reflects the backfill of the construction cut for well [24], fashion for spa culture at this time and the and a sherd of early medieval sandy ware consumption of mineral waters. The deposit (EMS) was noted in dump layer [29], both also produced another sherd of fine Ipswich found in Trench 13 (Fig 2b). Three sherds ware (IPSF). Of note, in the backfill of the of pottery dated to the mid-17th century construction cut of brick wall [389], built for came from Trench 36 and the linear ditch the new Privy Garden, was a handled bowl with [108] and these were as a Surrey-Hampshire a flat-topped rim in Staffordshire mottled border redware (RBOR) dish with a flat rim, glazed ware; drinking forms are usually the a post-medieval redware small rounded jar, main occurrences of this pottery type when and a blue and white decorated tin-glaze found in London. Associated with the latter Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 95 wall, the dump layer [396] produced of note ated to each object.4 The application of a a tea bowl in Chinese porcelain (CHPO 1kg mason’s hammer and sharp chisel to BW) and a TGW C chamber pot handle. In each example ensured that a small fresh Trench 44, the linear cut [159] contained a fabric surface was exposed. The fabric was residual sherd of an Earlswood ware (EARL) examined at x20 magnification using a medieval jug; this Surrey industry made long arm stereomicroscope or hand lens good quality wares which occasionally found (Gowland x10). Comparison was then made their way to London. with the Pre-Construct Archaeology building material reference collection to determine 19th century the fabric type, source and period of use. Much of the pottery (35 sherds or 33 MNVs) Finally, thin-section preparation and analysis appears to be residual in this phase, although was undertaken on one worked stone sample a black basalt teapot (BBAS), very fashionable (KH1) [161] where conventional hand spec- in the Regency period, was noted from the imen discrimination was not successful in garden soil [375] in Trench 36 and a purple determining its source. Photomicrographs geometrical design transfer-printed white- (Leica DFC 320 Digital Camera) were taken ware (TPW 4) plate came from demolition from this section and other petrological debris [41] in Trench 14. A large TPW plate samples compiled from earlier research of poor quality (the late 19th- to early 20th- (Hayward 2009; in prep) on rock types that century geometrical/floral design is badly were also identified in the Precinct Wall in aligned) was noted in Trench 13, from the order to illustrate the diversity of fabric types demolition rubble. (Fig 30).
20th century Medieval roofing and flooring tile Of note was an intact late 19th- to early 20th- There was a dearth of medieval roofing and century Bristol-glazed English stoneware floor tile. Examples are limited to fragments spouted ink bottle, with an illegible, small of peg tile made from the late medieval red maker’s stamp above the base. This was iron oxide fabric 2587 (1240—1450) recov- recovered from a dump layer in Trench 1. ered from a 17th-century demolition layer observed in a trench along the east side of Discussion Whitehall within the former Privy Garden. Also from the same general area as the Privy The post-medieval pottery, perhaps because of Garden is the only example of a medieval its fragmentary nature, recovered as a small glazed floor tile, complete (110 by 110 by sample owing to the excavation methodol- 21mm) and made from the local sandy fabric ogy, surprisingly demonstrates little about the 2320 (1300—1500), in a 17th-century garden status of this area of Westminster, especially soil layer. Stone types that typify medieval con- as it was recovered from an area of Royal struction such as Purbeck marble are absent Palaces and Government administration. or lacking (Kentish ragstone). Indeed, some of the degraded Reigate and Caen stone used The medieval and later ceramic building in the 18th-century Privy Garden wall may material and stonework well in fact be fresh consignments supplied to Kevin Hayward construct the Tudor Palace (see below). This near absence of medieval roofing Introduction and floor tile is the opposite to what one A large and diverse group (476kg) of build- might expect given the proximity of the ing material was examined in order to deter- late 13th-century York Place and the large mine its age, origin and material type. quantity of demolished medieval flooring and roofing associated with rebuilds/repairs Methodology of Westminster Abbey (Hayward in prep).
The ceramic building material and stone The Tudor and Jacobean red brick structures were examined using the London system of classification with a fabric number alloc- The excavations encountered a number of 96 Paw Jorgensen
a) Orange-yellow ashlar Caen stone WQH07 [161] c) Corsham oolite (outcrop sample) KH122
b) Portland Whit Bed (outcrop sample) KH82 d) Coombe Down oolite (outcrop sample) KH98
Fig 30. Photomicrographs of the post-medieval limestone ashlar and mouldings reused in the 18th-century Privy Garden wall, field of view 2.4mm Plane Polarised Light red-brick structures constructed in English and are therefore broadly contemporary with garden wall bond, which is a repeating the adjoining palatial constructions of this sequence of three courses of stretchers period. These include Wolsey’s extension followed by a course of headers with a queen of York Place (1515—1530), the primary closer as the penultimate brick at either end Henrician build of Whitehall Palace (1530— of the header course. This bond was in use 1537) (Thurley 1999), including the Sports between c.1600 and 1800. The structures Complex (Green & Thurley 1987), and with this bond included garden walls, the subsequent Elizabethan and Stuart additions larger external foundation and internal and rebuilds (Thurley 1999), all of which have walls of buildings as well as some brick drains archaeological or documentary evidence for that were concentrated along the west side of the use of these bricks. Whitehall between Richmond Terrace and It is possible to some extent to identify Horse Guards Avenue and especially along and date some of these structures based on the western edge of Banqueting House brick fabric, form and mortar type. First, the and close to the 18th-century Privy Wall earliest, wider, flatter (231 by 205mm—212 by Garden. However, this bond was also used 51mm) Wolsey and Henrician bricks (Type in structures found along the western side A) (Green & Thurley 1987, 127) turn up close to King Street Gate and opposite Horse occasionally in 16th-century walls such as the Guards Avenue. These particular structures eastern of a pair of walls of King Street Gate were constructed of bricks which were made and a plinth that may have formed part of a from the local sandy brickearth clays in range of buildings on the south side of ‘The fabrics 3033 and 3046, dated to 1450—1700, Court’ as seen on the Agas Map of c.1562 (Fig Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 97
4). These are the exceptions, however, and The use of particular types of stone in con- as a rule of thumb it is better to subdivide temporary structures elsewhere in London, the earliest 16th-century structures from the eg Somerset House, may begin to help latest Stuart (1685—1698) and post-Great Fire determine whether this group all belonged (1698—1799) builds by the type of mortar to the Tudor-Jacobean palace, the gatehouses and the presence or absence of post-Great (Holbein; King Street) or whether in fact Fire clinker bricks 3032; 3032nr 3033; 3034 there is a medieval component relating to (1664—1900). The mortar type used in the York Place (Thurley 1999) or the demolition earlier group, which generally consists of a of nearby Westminster Hall. softer sandy-brown lime recipe with angular A feature of the building material assemb- chalk inclusions, is present in the wall of the lage fronting the east side of Whitehall was King Street Gate and foundation walls of the quantity of recycled stone ashlar and the Privy Garden wall, the plinth, the brick mouldings identified in wall segments of wall adjoining the possible bay window of the 18th-century Privy Garden wall. As well the Great Hall, and in the unidentified brick as chalk and flint, hand specimen and thin- structure within the Privy Garden aligned section comparative analysis has been able with and possibly pre-dating the early 17th- to identify seven high quality marbles and century Banqueting House. freestone materials used in its construction. Later Stuart and post-Great Fire construct- (Freestones are fine-even-grained rocks with ions, such as the culvert complex of the an open porous texture that enable the rock Privy Garden path and (along Whitehall) to be worked or carved in any direction.) A the northern wall of a range of buildings variety of origins are suggested. in what is now Horse Guards Avenue, eg Pelham House, and the 18th-century Privy Petrology — Limestones Garden brick and stone wall (see below), use Lithotype 1 a lighter cream mortar with gastropod shells Fine, pale cream-yellow oolitic limestone and occasional flecks of clinker, typical of (oolitic grainstone) (Dunham 1962) this period. Post-Great Fire bricks are also Geological source: Middle Jurassic (Bath- used in the Privy Garden path drain and the onian) Avon-Wiltshire culvert along Whitehall. The most common type of construction material, these even bedded limestones were The petrology and origin of the reused stone in present in two sub-types (a & b) in large (320 the 18th-century Privy Wall Gardens by 230 by 160mm) ashlar blocks and cornices from the 18th-century Privy Garden wall. A large moulded stone assemblage (357kg) was discovered reused in the 18th-century a) Box Groundstone/Combe Down Oolite garden walls (Fig 24). Unfortunately the (shelly variant) Bath-Box region (Fig 30d) breakage of these mouldings, and their b) Monks Park stone/ Corsham stone (ooid- subsequent repointing in thick mortar has rich) Corsham (Fig 30c) succeeded in removing any definable form Unlike other types of Bath-stone such that may have helped determine their as Taynton stone (see below) these are primary function and period of use within rarely found in a medieval context and are Whitehall Palace and its setting. It is for this common (in association with Portland stone, reason that a petrological approach has been Taynton stone and Caen stone) in 16th- and adopted to date the stone. Recent studies 17th-century palatial structures, eg Somerset (Tatton-Brown 1991; Stanier 2000; Hayward House (Hayward pers obs). An early post- 2009; Samuel 2011; Hayward in prep) have medieval origin is suggested. begun to show that the choice of rock-type for construction and embellishment in Roman, Lithotype 2 medieval and post-medieval London changed Very fine, hard pale grey oolitic limestone over time in response to technological ad- (oolitic grainstone) (Dunham 1962) vances, quarry ownership, quarry demise, Geological source: Portland Whit Bed and the type of building, and the contemporary Base Bed Upper Jurassic (Portlandian) economic and socio-political setting. Dorset Coast 98 Paw Jorgensen
Two very large cornice blocks of this dist- obs). They were distinct enough in hand inctive rock (both in excess of 50kg) were specimen to warrant further analysis in thin- recovered from the 18th-century Privy section to verify their character and source. Garden walls and may have been dismantled The coarser, sparry texture of this sub-group from the same structure. Even more definitive (see Fig 30a) is attributable to the presence as a post-medieval freestone material, these of porous echinoid plates that absorb iron open-grained Portland stones (Fig 30b) were after burial and account for the oxidised first quarried and supplied in blocks of this rusty colour. In light of this, it seems probable size to London after the 1620s for buildings that this variant came from either the Tudor including Banqueting House at Whitehall palace or a Stuart addition. (Cox & Norman 1930) and probably the great portico of the pre-Great Fire St Paul’s Lithotype 4 Cathedral (Benham 1902; Campbell 2007, Orange-brown banded shelly oolitic lime- 10). It is feasible that this material could have stone (shelly-oolitic grainstone) (Dunham come from waste relating to the redesign of 1962) the Banqueting House by Jones between 1625 Geological source: Burford/Taynton stone and 1628 (Thurley 1999, 85) but possibly — Middle Jurassic (Bathonian) Taynton, also from the later 17th-century remodelling Burford West Oxfordshire. of the Holbein or King Street Gate or even Present as ashlar from the 18th-century the demolished gun platform (Thurley 1999, Privy Garden wall these coarse oyster rich 135) which was rebuilt in 1668. All of these Bath-stones are distinctive enough to be structures need to be considered as they all assigned a separate source of the South lie close to the Privy Garden wall. Cotswolds to the more even-grained free- stones represented by Lithotype 1. Their Lithotype 3 widespread use in medieval and later post- Fine condensed cream, yellow or yellow- medieval ecclesiastical and palatial buildings brown limestone (packstone) (Dunham in London (Campbell 2007, 91) and Windsor 1962) (Worssam 2010), for example, can be Geological source: Caen stone Middle attributable to the proximity of the outcrop Jurassic (Bathonian) Caen, Département to the navigable Evenlode, a tributary of the Calvados Thames. Present as ashlar from the 18th-century Privy Garden wall these limestones have a varied Glauconitic limestones and sandstones character. Fine-grained lime-green (glauconitic) lime- a) Yellow packstone stone (Reigate-Mertsham stone) b) Orange-yellow sparry packstone (iron- Geological source: Upper Greensand, Upper rich) (Fig 30a) Cretaceous, Reigate-Mertsham (East Surrey). The first sub-type is commonly associated Large (350 by 210 by 190mm) degraded with medieval masonry in ecclesiastical ashlar blocks of this distinctive low density and secular buildings throughout London micaceous limestone from the phase 10 Privy and southern England from the late 11th Garden wall could have either a medieval century and has been identified in a buttress or post-medieval origin. As well as being in the late medieval, 1465—1476, rebuild of the most important ashlar material for the the Great Hall of York Place (Thurley 1999, medieval construction of Westminster Abbey 8). Their use, however, extends into the since 1060 (Hayward pers obs), and other post-medieval period in the 16th-century monasteries (Samuel 2011) and defensive Somerset House (Hayward pers obs) and structures (Tatton-Brown 1991, 363) in Wren’s construction of St Paul’s Cathedral London, window jambs of this material can (Campbell 2007, 91). be found nearby in the late medieval (1465— The latter variant had only been identified 1476) south range of York Place (Thurley before in cornice fragments associated with 1999, 7). It continued to be used into the the embellishment of the initial 1540s bay late 17th century in St Paul’s Cathedral windows of Somerset House (Hayward pers (Campbell 2007, 91). Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 99
Hard, dark grey calcareous sandstone (Kent- carting it away. Another possibility is the ish ragstone) impact that the more devastating palatial fire Geological source: Lower Greensand (Hythe of 1698 had on the superstructure and the Beds) Maidstone, Kent consequential release of thousands of tonnes Another ubiquitous Roman, medieval and of masonry and brick. post-medieval building material, Kentish However, these fires occurred some 30 ragstone is present in ashlar blocks of the years prior to the construction of the new Privy Garden wall and could have come from Privy Garden wall which was moved eastwards any number of structures in the vicinity. in 1723 in response to the widening of Whitehall. Far more probable is that some Marbles or all of these stones derive from the large King Street Gate which was dismantled at this Fine white crystalline metamorphic lime- time as part of the widening scheme. The stone (Carrara marble) Holbein Gate was dismantled later in 1759. Geological source: (Tertiary) Tuscany, Italy A 1723 proposal which deals with the setting The only moulding of note is an unweathered back of the Privy Garden wall states ‘that the microcrystalline marble carved into a small new wall is to be built from material of the ornate cornice from the Privy Garden wall. old and made good with the stones from the It seems more probable, given its fresh demolition of King Street Gate’ (TNA WORK condition and widespread use in nearby 17th- 4/2). century repairs and additions to Whitehall Although built in the 1530s there was Palace such as the late 17th-century (1686— substantial remodelling of the Great (Hol- 1688) stairs at the Banqueting Hall (Thurley bein) Gate and Court Gate including its 1999), that this is post-medieval in origin. embellishment in freestone and brick (Thurley 1999, 119—20) after the restoration Discussion (1660—1685) and it is possible that the King Street Gate was renovated then too. This Including variants, petrological analysis has may account for the presence of the reuse identified nine types of high quality lime- of Portland stone that was being shipped in stone, sandstone and marble in ashlar and from Dorset in enormous quantities at this degraded mouldings that have been re-used time in response to the demands of St Paul’s as foundation material in the later 18th- Cathedral (Campbell 2007, 91). century Privy Garden wall. Although some material types (eg yellow Caen stone; Reigate stone) may be attributable to recycled The clay tobacco pipe types material from medieval structures nearby such as York Place, the majority (orange- Chris Jarrett yellow Caen stone; Corsham stone, Combe Introduction Down oolite; Portland Whit Bed; Carrara marble) have a petrological character that A small sized assemblage of clay tobacco typifies later post-medieval construction (Fig pipes was recovered from the site as 83 30). The most obvious candidates are the fragments: 18 bowls and 65 stems. The bowl Tudor Whitehall Palace and especially the shapes, which date to between c.1610 and later Stuart modifications with the Portland 1910, were classified according to Atkinson stone. and Oswald’s (1969) typology (AO) and With this in mind, two events may account 18th-century examples by that of Oswald for a ready ‘quarry’ of stone, released from (1975). Only the bowls are discussed here its primary context for reuse in these walls. by their types and distribution, while two The 1691 fire that gutted the Stone Gallery, fragmentary bowls could only be broadly may account for the reuse of some of these dated to the 18th—19th centuries. materials. It lay adjacent to the Privy Gardens The earliest bowl recorded is the spurred and there are contemporary accounts by AO8, dated 1610—40; it has full milling of Luttrell (Thurley 1999) of workmen clearing the rim and a fair finish. It was recovered debris into piles in the Privy Garden before from a 17th-century linear cut, [108], in 100 Paw Jorgensen
Trench 36, located in the area of the Privy the basement in Trench 14, has the family Garden (Fig 5). A single, straight sided, name P surviving. Similar bowls have been heeled AO18 bowl, dated 1660—80, with found in Westminster initialled I P and can three quarters rim milling and of a fair finish probably be ascribed to John Powell I, 1746, was noted in Trench 36 and found in the St Margaret’s, Westminster or John Powell II, 19th-century backfill of the basement. Bowl Pye Street, 1749—58 (Heard 2009). types dated 1680—1710 only occur as two Only a single 1820—1860 dated AO28 bowl examples of the straight-sided, heeled AO22 occurs; it is decorated with even sized fluting type. A complete, unstratified example has a below a tassel and drape border around the quarter milling and is of a fair finish, while a rim. Of the family name only L is legible; three damaged bowl was noted in an 18th-century local Westminster pipe makers are known: pit [186] in Trench 52, located in front of William Lee, 22 Blue Anchor Yard, 1851, the Banqueting House (Fig 2). Mary Isabella Longstaff, 4 Old Rochester Row, The 18th-century bowls are of three types, 1841—51, wife of Thomas Longstaff, 1841—51 the earliest being the upright, heeled OS10 (Heard 2009). This style of decorated pipe shape, dated 1700—1740, with six examples. appears to be more common in West London. Three examples came from Trench 14 with The bowl was recovered from the 19th-century a fragmentary example noted in dump possible garden soil, [346], in Trench 36. [41] (Fig 2), while two examples came The latest bowl type recorded is the AO30, from the backfilled basement located in the usually defined as without a heel and dating area of HM Treasury and the site of 18th- from c.1840—1910. Both bowls are not maker century houses. One of the bowls is marked marked. An unstratified example from on the heel with the initials R R; several Trench 32/33 is decorated with ribs (with contemporary pipe makers had these initials point definition) on the front and back of (see Oswald 1975, 144), although a local the bowl. The other bowl is more elaborate pipe maker R Rideout, 1760—66, 79 Peter St, with a rib in the form of a leaf on the back Westminster is documented (Heard 2009). of the bowl and a spear-like emblem on the Trench 52 produced the three other bowl front, and on its base there is a small OS10 bowls. Two were derived from dump rod (creating a stand), while scroll motifs layer [320] and one is marked I I; several continue onto the stem. This bowl was found pipe makers are known with these initials in in the 19th-century possible garden soil London, although John Jarman (1) took his [346], in Trench 36. son with the same name as an apprentice in 1732, and this son is documented between Discussion 1732 and 1749 in the Westminster Polls (Oswald 1975, 139). A third, unmarked, nar- Although only a small assemblage of clay row bowl was found in pit [320]. Trench 52 tobacco pipes was recovered from the site, was located in front of the Banqueting House. the bowls do indicate something of the social The OS12 bowl, similar to that of the OS10, environs of Westminster. The bowls are on but with a narrower stem, occurs as a single the whole of a good quality and so they fit in example in an 18th-century dump layer well with an area that would have residents [356] in Trench 36. This bowl is initialled of a higher socio-economic status, although I W; there were several mid-18th-century the area would also have been frequented by pipe makers in London who could have servants and the general London populace. made it, although so far no documented Even if the sample of clay tobacco pipes is contemporary Westminster pipe makers are small, it is also interesting that of the two known with these initials (Heard 2009). spurred OS23 bowls recovered and found in Late 18th-century spurred bowls are pres- different locations, both have the Hanoverian ent as two examples of the OS23 shape, dated Coat of Arms, which might display their 1760—1800, and both have Hanoverian coats owners’ allegiance to the monarchy. This of arms with a pointed petal tulip on the may have been significant in the 18th century front of the bowl. One unstratified example when the ‘London Mob’ was not averse to from Trench 32/33 has its spur missing and displaying open hostility to the Royal Family the other, from a 19th-century backfill of and the aristocracy. The pipes therefore fit in Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 101 with what might be expected for this area of mallet type, dated to the mid- to late 18th Westminster, where the homes of aristocracy century. or politicians, or where they worked and visited, were located and this social group 20th-century deposits may have been on the whole more inclined The levelling layer [48], in Trench 15, to have been monarchists. However, in areas produced three intact glass bottles, two of of London where low socio-economic groups which are aqua coloured, plain, late type, resided then some groups of pipes also have Hamilton bottles, dated from the last three a high proportion of armorial bowls with decades of the 19th century (Talbot 1974, royal badges, such as those from the Tabard 40). The third bottle is an amber soda glass Square excavations (Jarrett in prep). A good cylindrical bottle, with a rounded blob rim, proportion of the pipes are maker marked, short neck and rounded shoulder with possibly another indicator of a more costly embossed on it ‘SELTZER WATER BOTTLE product, and many of these bowls could have BRIGHTON’ over a possible phoenix and been made by master pipe makers living and ‘trade mark’ within a rectangle. This bottle working in Westminster. undoubtedly refers to a mineral water which, originally manufactured by Struve and Co The post-medieval glass in a ‘German Spa’ located in Queen’s Park, Chris Jarrett Brighton, was by 1899 being manufactured by Hooper & Co of London (Kelly 1899, 60). Introduction The excavation produced a total of 59 CONCLUSION sherds of post-medieval glass, mostly derived from wine bottles. The condition of the The Whitehall streetscape improvements glass ranges from shard material to intact revealed elements of a diverse range of vessels. Only the items of interest have been archaeological deposits and structures of discussed here; a complete archive report is various dates, which, bearing in mind the available (Jarrett 2011). relatively shallow nature of most of these trenches, means that there is a wealth of 18th-century deposits unexplored structures under these streets. Evidence for activity during the Middle The largest quantity of glass from the ex- Saxon period was only seen in one trench. cavation came from Trench 36 and the However, the paucity of evidence for occup- possible garden soil [378] (Figs 2a & 2b), as ation during this phase may be attributed 42 shards. All the material, in mostly black to the limited depth of the majority of the and dark olive green coloured glass, is as trenches rather than being reflective of a lack wine bottles, recognisable almost entirely as of activity during this period. Other sites in the cylindrical form, as some eleven vessels. the vicinity have revealed the presence of a The wire string rim finishes are consistently substantial hall. During the medieval period of a c.1780—90 date (Dumbrell 1983, 38). An the area along Whitehall became increasingly exception was a wine bottle rim with a late more populated as Westminster developed 17th-century string rim finish. as a key administrative centre. It was during this period that the establishment and subse- 19th-century deposits quent expansion of York Place, the London The basement in Trench 14 (Figs 2b & 28) residence of the Archbishops of York, occ- produced in its fill [49] four sherds of early urred. One of the expansion phases of York 18th-century wine bottle glass, one with a Place initiated by Archbishop Rotherham wire string finish datedc .1720—40 (Dumbrell during his tenure from 1480 to 1500 involved 1983, 38), while a mallet bottle with a high, rebuilding the palace’s kitchen complex. rounded kick is dated c.1710 (Dumbrell A small part of this complex was uncovered 1983, 37). Found in the possible garden during the present work. The limited depth soil [375], Trench 36, was the kick base and of the trenches did not in most cases allow inturned wall of a wine bottle, possibly of the for the removal of the entire thickness of 102 Paw Jorgensen the demolition debris and/or post-medieval ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS made ground. As such it is difficult to gauge the level of survival of remains related to York Pre-Construct Archaeology Limited would like Place and subsequently Whitehall Palace as to thank Atkins Heritage for commissioning they, if they survive, would be covered by this project on behalf of the City of Westminster these deposits. However, a number of walls Council who funded the archaeological invest- and footings belonging to the buildings of igation. Additional thanks to Diane Walls, English Whitehall Palace were uncovered during the Heritage GLAAS, for monitoring the works on present work. These included what appeared behalf of the City of Westminster. The author to be the remains of the King Street Gate, a would like to thank the many Pre-Construct bay window of the Great Hall, the Court Gate, Archaeology staff members who worked on the the lodgings and office of the Surveyor, the site between 2007 and 2010. Special thanks to gun platform and the New Gallery. Many of Rebecca Haslam for supervising the first half of these buildings were substantially damaged the project. The author would also like to thank by the fire of 1698. Jennifer Simonson for illustrations, Chris Mayo It also seems that the buildings erected for project management, and Jon Butler for after the 1698 fire roughly respected the post-excavation management and editing of this layout of the palace courtyards, alleys and report. streets. To some extent the post-fire dev- [email protected] elopment seemed to have utilised the earlier footings. This certainly appeared to be the case with Pelham House as seen by NOTES the presence of earlier brickwork within 1 Post 1992 Museum of London Code Expansion the exposed footings and perhaps further Building Material, LAARC 2007 source: www. substantiated by the fact that the dimens- museumoflondon.org.uk./NR/rdonlyres/DBB- ions of the earliest phase of the building COD2D-C459-43 (accessed Dec. 2012) correspond to those of the Gallery occupying 2 In London this type of mortar was in wide- the site of the edifice before the fire. spread usage between c.1200 and 1600. In other cases, such as Taylor House and 3 The Cofferer was a principal officer in the the Privy Garden wall, the footings for the royal household, in charge of other officers, post-fire structures were constructed largely whose wages he paid. out of reused material reclaimed from the 4 Post 1992 Museum of London Code Expansion clearing of the site prior to redevelopment. Building Material, LAARC 2007 source: www. Documentary evidence pertaining to the museumoflondon.org.uk./NR/rdonlyres/DBB- construction of the new Privy Garden wall COD2D-C459-43 (accessed Dec. 2012) specifically stated that the material recovered from taking down the old wall should be BIBLIOGRAPHY used in the construction of the new wall. The later post-medieval development and Primary sources the construction of the various government The National Archives (TNA) offices in the late 19th and 20th centuries Court of the Exchequer saw the destruction of much of the already E 36/251 Treasury of the Receipt: Miscellaneous fragmentary remains of what was once the Books: Works, 1532—3 largest royal palace in Europe. Prior to the E 36/252 Treasury of the Receipt: Miscellaneous construction of some of the later buildings Books: Works, 1533 archaeological investigations were carried E 351/3283 Pipe Office: Declared Accounts, out, although this was not the case for the 1669—70 buildings erected prior to the 1930s. Despite E 367/6784 Pipe Office: Particulars, Warrants this, as has been shown by the current and Transcripts for Crown Leases: London work, remains of the palace and post-palace and Middlesex, 1722 buildings still survive below the present Office of Works streetscape albeit truncated by the many WORK 4/2 Minutes, 1720—4 services crossing the area. WORK 5/43 Accounts: Ordinary and Extraord- inary, 1689—90 Middle Saxon and Later Archaeological Remains in Whitehall 103
WORK 6/7 Miscellanea: Warrants and Corres- Coombe, P C, Grew, F, Hayward, K M J, & Henig, pondence, 1717—23 M, in prep Corpus Signorum Imperii Romani. WORK 6/18 Miscellanea: Memorials, 1762—73 Great Britain 1.10 Roman Sculpture from London WORK 30/346 Public Buildings in England: and the South-East, Oxford Plans and Drawings: Whitehall 1766 Cowie, R, 2004 ‘The evidence for royal sites in Middle Anglo-Saxon London’ Medieval Arch- Treasury aeology 48, 201—9 T 54/28 Entry Books of Warrants concerning Cowie, R, & Blackmore, L, 2008 Early and Middle Appointments, Crown Leases and Other Saxon Rural Settlement in the London Region Matters Not Relating to the Payment of MoLAS Monograph 41, London Money, 1723—4 Cowie, R, & Blackmore, L, with Davis, A, Keily, T 56/18 Various Entry Books of Warrants: Lord J, & Rielly, K, 2012 Lundenwic: Excavations Chamberlain 1715—33 in Middle Saxon London, 1987—2000 MOLA T 55/25 Entry books of Warrants for Crown Monograph 63, London Leases and Other Documents Concerning Cowie, R, & Whytehead, R L, with Blackmore, Crown Lands: London and Middlesex, 1803—5 L, 1988 ‘Two Middle Saxon occupation sites: Unpublished site assessment reports excavations at Jubilee Hall and Maiden Lane’ Trans London Middlesex Archaeol Soc 39, 47—163 Hayward, K M J, 2011 ‘Building material Cowie, R, & Whytehead, R, 1989 ‘Lundenwic: assessment’ in Jorgensen 2011, 157—74 the archaeological evidence for Middle Saxon Hégarat, K, & Allott, L, 2011 ‘Whitehall, Street- London’ Antiquity 63, 706—18 scape, London (WQH 07): environmental Cox, M, (ed.) 1926 Survey of London: St. Margaret, archaeological assessment’ in Jorgensen 2011, Westminster, Part I: Queen Anne’s Gate Area, vol 175—9 10, London Jarrett, C, 2011 ‘Glass assessment’ in Jorgensen Cox, M, & Forest, G, (eds) 1931 Survey of London: 2011, 150—2 St. Margaret, Westminster, Part III: Whitehall II, Jorgensen, P, 2011 Assessment of an Archaeological vol 14, London Watching Brief during the Whitehall Streetscape Cox, M, & Norman, P, (eds) 1930 Survey of Improvement Project, City of Westminster PCA London: St. Margaret, Westminster, Part II: White- Report hall I, vol 13, London Langthorne, J, 2011 ‘Human bone assessment’ Driesch, A von den, 1976 A Guide to the Measure- in Jorgensen 2011, 156 ment of Animal Bones from Archaeological Sites, Peabody Mus Bull 1, Cambridge, MA Secondary sources Driver, J C, 1982 ‘Medullary bone as an indicator Armitage, P, 2004 ‘The animal bones’ in J Leary of sex in bird remains from archaeological with G Brown, J Rackham, C Pickard & R sites’ in Wilson et al 1982, 251—4 Hughes Tatberht’s Lundenwic: Archaeological Ex- Dumbrell, R, 1983 Understanding Antique Wine cavations in Middle Saxon London Pre-Construct Bottles, Woodbridge Archaeology Monograph 2, Lon-don, 105—12 Dunham, R J, 1962 ‘Classification of carbonate Atkinson, D, & Oswald, A, 1969 ‘London clay rocks according to depositional texture’ tobacco pipes’ Journal British Archaeology in W E Ham (ed) Classification of Carbonate Association 32, 171—227 Rocks American Association of Petroleum Benham, W, 1902 Old St Paul’s Cathedral, London Geologists, Memoir 1, Tulsa, 108—21 Blackmore, L, 1988 ‘The pottery’ in Cowie et al Dyson, T, Samuel, M, Steele, A, & Wright, S, 2011 1988, 81—110 The Cluniac Priory & Abbey of St Saviour Bermond- Blackmore, L, 1989 ‘The pottery’ in Whytehead sey, Surrey MOLA Monograph 50, London et al 1989, 71—107 Evison, V I, 1988 ‘The glass’ in Cowie et al 1988, Blackmore, L, 2003 ‘The pottery’ in Malcolm et 119—23 al 2003, 225—41 Evison, V I, 1989 ‘The Saxon glass’ in Whytehead Blackmore, L, 2008a ‘Middle Saxon wares’ in et al 1989, 112—16 Cowie & Blackmore 2008, 181—91 Gater, G, & Wheeler, E, (eds) 1935 Survey of Blackmore, L, 2008b ‘Vessel glass’ in Cowie & London: St. Martin-in-the-Fields I: Charring Cross Blackmore 2008, 199—200 vol 16, London Blanchard, I, 2007 Twelfth Century. A Neglected Grant, A, 1982 ‘The use of toothwear as a guide Epoch of British Social and Economic History, to the age of domestic ungulates’ in Wilson et Newlees al 1982, 91—108 Boon, G C, 1974 Silchester: the Roman Town of Green, H J M, & Cowie, R, 2008 ‘Site U: Whitehall Calleva, Newton Abbott (Middlesex)’ in Cowie & Blackmore 2008, Campbell, J W P, 2007 Building St Paul’s, London 90—100 104 Paw Jorgensen
Green, H J M, & Thurley, S J, 1987 ‘Excavations Oswald, A, 1975 Clay Pipes for the Archaeologist on the west side of Whitehall 1960—2 Part 1: BAR British Series 14, Oxford From the building of the Tudor Palace to the Pepys, S, 1660 in The Diary of Samuel Pepys (vol 1) construction of the Modern Offices of State’ ed H B Wheatley 1928, London Trans London Middlesex Archaeol Soc 38, 59—130 Phillips, H, 1964 Mid-Georgian London: a Topo- Green, M, (ed) 1886 Calendar of State Papers Dom- graphical and Social Survey of Central and Western estic: Interregnum, 1659—60 vol 204, London London about 1750, London Ham, W E, (ed) 1962 Classification of Carbonate Rielly, K, 2003 ‘The animal and fish bone’ in Rocks American Association of Petroleum Malcolm et al 2003, 315—24 Geologists, Memoir 1, Tulsa Samuel, M, 2011 ‘Architectural fragments’ in Hayward, K M J, 2009 Roman Quarrying and Dyson et al 2011, 184—99 Stone Supply on the Periphery — Southern England. Sawyer, P, 1968 Anglo-Saxon Charters: an Annotated A Geological Study of First Century Funerary List and Bibliography, Royal Historic Soc, Monuments and Monumental Architecture BAR London British Series 500, Oxford Schmid, E, 1972 Atlas of Animal Bones for Prehist- Hayward, K M J, in prep ‘Types and sources of orians, Archaeologists and Quaternary Geologists, stone’ in Coombe et al London Hayward, K M J, in prep ‘The ceramic building Sidell, J, Wilkinson, K, Scaife, R, & Cameron, material and stone’ in P Jorgensen ‘Excavation N 2000 The Holocene Evolution of the London at Deans Yard, Westminster Abbey’ Trans Thames: Archaeological Excavations (1991—1998) London Middlesex Archaeol Soc MoLAS Monograph 5, London Heard, K, 2009 London Clay Pipe Studies: The Sloane, B, Swain, H, & Thomas, C, 1995 ‘The Clay Tobacco Pipe Industry in the Parishes of St Roman road and river regime’ London Margaret and St John the Evangelist, Westminster Archaeologist 7:14, 359—70 http://www.kieron.heard.ukonline.co.uk/ Stanier, P, 2001 Stone Quarrying Landscapes, Stroud pipes/westminster/contents.htm Stiff, M, 2003 ‘The glass finds’ in Malcolm et al Jarrett, C, in prep ‘The clay tobacco pipes’ in 2003, 241—50 D Killock & J Shepherd Excavations at Tabard Talbot, O, 1974 ‘The evolution of glass bottles Square: 34—70 Long Lane and 31—47 Tabard for carbonated drinks’ Post-medieval Archaeology Street, SE1 PCA Monograph 8, 29—62 Kelly, 1899 Kelly’s Directory Sussex Tatton-Brown, T, 1991 ‘Medieval building stone LAARC, 2007 Post 1992 Museum of London Code at the Tower of London’ London Archaeologist Expansions Post-Roman Pottery, << http://www. 6:13, 361—6 museumoflondon.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/ Tatton-Brown, T, & Saul, N, (eds) 2010 St George’s F0118AAF-EF24-4228-A07A-39F89E6F092E/0/ Chapel, Windsor: History and Heritage, Dorset post92mol_post_roman.pdf>>. Accessed 21 Thomas, C, Cowie, R, & Sidell, J, 2006 The Royal November 2012. Palace, Abbey and Town of Westminster on Thorney Libois, R M, Hallet-Libois, C, & Roseaux, R, Island MoLAS Monograph 22, London 1988 ‘Éléments pour l’identification des Thurley, S, 1999 Whitehall Palace: An Architectural restes crâniens des poisons dulçaquicoles History of the Royal Apartments, 1240—1690, de Belgique et du Nord de la France, 2, London Cypriniformes’, Fiches d’Ostéologie Animale Walford, E, 1875 Old and New London: A Narrative pour l’Archéologie 4, Centre de Recherches of its History, its People, and its Places Vol 3, Archéologiques — CNRS (France) London Malcolm, G, & Bowsher, D, with Cowie, R, 2003 Whytehead, R L, & Cowie, R, with Blackmore, Middle Saxon London. Excavations at the Royal L, 1989 ‘Excavations at the Peabody Site, Opera House 1989—99 MoLAS Monograph 15, Chandos Place, and the National Gallery’ London Trans London Middlesex Archaeol Soc 40, 35—176 Margary, I D, 1957 Roman Roads in Britain. Wilson, B, Grigson, C, & Payne, S, (eds) 1982 Volume I. South of the Fosse Way — Bristol Channel, Ageing and Sexing Animal Bones from Archaeo- London logical Sites BAR British Series 109, Oxford Mason, E, (ed) 1988 Westminster Abbey Charters Worssam, B, 2010 ‘The building stones of the 1066—c.1241 London Record Society 25 Lower Ward of Windsor Castle’ in Tatton- Newdick, J, 1979 The Complete Freshwater Fishes of Brown & Saul 2010, 15—24 the British Isles, London