Roman Temple Complex in Greenwich Park? Part 1 Becky Wallower When a Workman Rammed an Iron Bar Into a Park

Roman temple complex in Greenwich Park? Part 1 Becky Wallower When a workman rammed an iron bar into a Park. Lying direcLly on a line projected from mound in Greenwich Park in February 1902. he known remains ofthe Roman road (Fig. 1), it hit unexpected treasure in the prosaic ronn of offered almost virgin territory in the search for the tesserae and mortar -- "undoubtedly a Roman lost course ofthe road towards SouLhwark. In villa"l proclaimed the local press. His supervisor, 1902 Park Superintendent A D Webster led a AD Webster, arranged for extensive excavations. work group out into the Park, hoping to verify his Evidence for a high slatus Roman building was theories on Watling Street.) One site probed by revealed in 1902, but, even after further means of iron bars was a prominent mound, excavations in the 19205 and 19705, its sometimes known as Queen Elizabeth's Bower, identification, first as a villa, later as a Romano topped by a circle oftrees. Recognising as Roman Celtic temple, remained tentative. Excavations in the material unearthed there by a labourer, 1999 by the Museum orLondon and Birkbcck Webster involved a local antiquarian, Herbert College with Channel4's Time Team, have Jones FSA, who had previously excavated at exposed new structural evidence on the mound as Silchestcr. A trial trench, apparently 18ft by just well as the remains ofa further, ifclusivc, 1.5ft wide, produced further building material and complex of features to the east, both ofwhich pottcry.4 Jones seems to have guided the appear to substantiate the temple hypothesis. New excavation ofa further trench over the mound, a finds on this exceptional site include not only a series oftrenches on the southern flank, and rare inscription, bringing the site total to five, but eventually the wholesale stripping ofthe mound also more than 100 coins, and fragments of surface.s procuratorial stamped tile. This interim report on Tne Roman "villa" attracted both press attention the 1999 fieldwork also outlines the excavation and visitors over the summer months.6 Railings history, and considers possible interpretations of were erected to protect the excavations, which the archaeological and finds evidence collecLcd were left exposed through the winter. In 1903, over thc 20th century. after further minor excavations, the trenches were filled in, apparently leaving a small patch of Excavation history tesserae enclosed in railings for posterity (at TQ Enclosed by Humphrey Duke ofGloucester in the 3929 7742, approximately 44m above OD). 1Sth century, adopted as a favourite Tudor royal Jones and Webster's efforts produced remains of resoJ1 in the 16th century, and landscaped under three floors, one tesselated and lying three feet Charles II in the 17th, Greenwich Park has largely higher than the other two (at least one ofwhich escaped major intrusions. A few buildings, such as was surfaced with opus signinum), and a six foot Duke Humphrey's defensive tower and the six stretch ofragstone walling. Their finds were Greenwich Royal Observatory on the same site, prodigious and overwhclmingly Roman: over 350 plus leisure and wartime installations, occasionally coins ranging from Mark Antony to Honorius, dotted the parkland. Gravel extraction, the four inscriptions on marble and sandstone, the reservoirs and a network ofunderground water right ann ofa fine limestone statue, fragments of conduits have also left their mark. Apart from the two rare carved ivory pieces, quantities ofpottery, 1784 incursions into the large Anglo Saxon burial stone and ceramic building material, painted wall group in the west (Fig. t), however, the Park plaster, a key, a fine chain, a hipposandal and avoided the worst excesses ofthe antiquaries.2 various other metal artefacts.' It is likely that most Around the tum ofthe 20th century, the question ofthese would have come from ditches, pits and ofthe route ofWatling Street from the Kent coast robber trenches, which were largely unidentified to London focused new interest on Greenwich as such at the time. 46 London Archaeologist Autumn 2002 N ... , ...- ~ ce -'L_" ",\ (\ ~ ," j ~ ... \ I ~ r- L ( ~ -, -- -- - ... .... -- .. ~ ~:.:.- -- .... -~ -p", { - \ , KEY: - Potential route of 'Natling Street Known Eirthworxs Fig 1: site location plan (Peter Hart-Allison, MoLAS) Two less fortunate products ofthe 1902/3 these sources and a notebook (now apparently excavations were inadequate records and lost) in Jones's hand listing the finds, II no other inconclusive data.' Webster's accoum describes notes, stratigraphical records, drawings or details the site in ambiguous terms and catalogues the appear to have survived. The finds assemblage is finds to some extent. Jones, in two articles and his now also much diminished. 12 address to the'Archaeological.!nstitute' (a nOle of The inconclusive and incomplete nalure ofthe which was published in 1902)', describes record seems to have prompted further excavation something ofthe techniques employed and in 1924/5 and 1927.0 This work entailed lrenches provides the only plan, with an orientation map on the east and north Oanks ofthe mound, but that relates only vaguely to the site,lO Apart from seemingly produced no results, and again left london Archaeologist Autumn 2002 47 almost no records. Other archaeological activity in to the south ofthe mound, in the area where it was the Park, notably in 1906 (focusing mainly on the thought the floors unearthed in the carlier area around Vanbrugh gate, and directed by excavations would lie, near the patch oftesserae Jones) and 1911, may also have involved the which was presumed to have remained in siru mound area, but here too, records are poor. I~ since 1903 (Fig. 2). Nevertheless, it seems clear from the evidence Amongst severe disturbance by tree planting! presented in 1902+3 that a significant, high status removal, root action. animal burrows. erosion, and building (or buildings) stood on the mound, with late pits and trenches, significant new evidence occupation extending throughout the Roman was found. Two phases ofbuilding were noted, period. Webster imaginatively conjectured that the and, south ofthem, a metalled surface, several large number ofcoins might point to "a pay place gullies and a deep natural channel. Based on the for soldiers, a canteen, or the residence ofan backfill evidence and stratigraphical relationships, officcr connected with the Mint" ,l!l but the site the excavators posited that the Phase I structure was generally referred to as a villa for some years. was oftimber and clay on flint footings (Fig. 2, In 1928, Wheeler postulated, on the basis of finds X), and that it dated to around the end ofthe 1st and epigraphic evidence, that the building could century. This structure had been replaced, in the be a shrine. Iii This theory was adopted by Lewis in 3rd century or later, by a slightly larger square or 1966, who listed finds such as the almost 400 rectangular building with a raised tesselated floor. coins, the inscriptions and the statue, in The robbed-out wall ofthis Phase 2 building was nominaling the site as a temple ofuncertain traced running east-west for about 10m (Fig. 2, l fonn. ? Othcr writers, notably Professor Y), returning to the north from the south-west l'laverfield, have used the evidence ofthe mound comer for c. 2m. remains as corroboration oftheories that a major settlement, namely the 'lost' posting station of Sheldon and Yule concluded that the latcr Noviomagus listed in the Antonine Itinerary, structure and the railed-in palch oftcsscrae were existed in the area.II This now seems very part ofthe same structure. They argued on the doubtful: Noviomagus is listcd in Iter II at some basis oflhe setting, finds and raised rectangular five miles farther from London than Greenwich, architecture that the most likely fonn ofbuilding and other evidence for Roman activity in the was that ofa Romano-Celtic temple, with its immediate vicinity ofGreenwich Park is limited entrance to the east. The newly discovered wall to some cremation burials on Blackhcath, a few and floor were suggested as the south side ofthe isolated finds ofcoins, building material and ambulatory, the 1902 tesscrac patch as flooring of pottery, a bronze lamp from the Thames and a the cella and two ofthe gullies as possibly bronze bowl from the Park. 19 belonging to a temenos boundary. No trace ofthe previously uncovered floors or walls was 197819 excavations revealed, but it was thought thal some gullies and In the I960s and '70s, age and Dutch Elm Disease disturbance could have been evidence ofearlier claimed the large trees sunnounting the mound excavations. (apparently planted mid-17th century). The Southwark and Lambeth Archacological 1999 excavations Excavation Committee was asked by the Channel4's Time Team came to Greenwich in Department ofthe Environment in 1978 to 1999 with the aim ofestablishing the location, investigate whether it would be possible to replant function, extenl, and the date and duration ofuse trees, by deternlining what Roman levels had of the structures discovered in 1902. 21 The dig survived the free planting and removal, and (site code GMA99) was undertaken in the relating these, ifpossible, to earlier discoveries.20 customary three days, and organised jointly with As the excavation (site code GP78), led by Hedley Swain, Museum orLondon, and Harvey Harvey Sheldon and Brian Yule, was exploratory Sheldon, Birkbeck College; archaeologists from in nature, any structures exposed were to be left MoLAS and students from Birkbeck College

Load more