DOCSLIB.ORG

The Archaeology of Roman London Volume 3 CBA Research Report 88

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Archaeology of Roman London Volume 3 CBA Research Report 88 The archaeology of Roman London Volume 3 CBA Research Report 88 Public Buildings in the South-West Quarter of Roman London Tim Williams 1993 The archaeology of Roman London, Volume 3: Public Buildings in the South-West Quarter of Roman London by Tim Williams With contributions by: Ian Betts, Barbara Davies, Jennifer Hillam and Peter Marsden Illustrations by Majella Egan 1993 Published by the Museum of London and CBA Research Report 88 the Council for British Archaeology Erratum: The front cover reconstruction painting is by Peter Froste and not by Martin Bentley as stated on page iv. Published 1993 by the Council for British Archaeology 112 Kennington Rd, London SE11 6RE Copyright A 1993 Museum of London and the Council for British Archaeology All rights reserved British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue for this book is available from the British Library ISSN 0589-9036 ISBN 0 906780 98 5 Printed by Derry and Sons Limited, Canal Street, Nottingham The post-excavation analysis, research and writing of this report was financed by English Heritage. The publishers acknowledge with gratitude a grant from English Heritage towards the cost of publication. Front cover: The Period II complex under construction in the late 3rd century; looking northwards, with the Riverside Mall in the foreground. All the main elements in this monumental building project can be clearly seen: the oak foundation piles, the overlying chalk raft, and the massive blocks of the superstructure. (Illustration by Martin Bentley) v Contents List of figures ............................................................................................................................ viii List of plates ............................................................................................................................. ix Acknowledgments ...................................................................................................................... X Summary ................................................................................................................................... Xl Résumé ..................................................................................................................................... xii Zusammenfassung ..................................................................................................................... xiii Drawing conventions ................................................................................................................. xiv Part I: Introduction Previous work in the area .......................................................................................................... 1 Organisation of the report .......................................................................................................... 3 Geological and topographical background .................................................................................. 6 Part II: Discussion 1. The Period I complex (?1st to the 3rd century) 1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 7 1.2 The construction of the complex ...................................................................................... 7 1.3 Layout ............................................................................................................................. 7 1.4 Extent .............................................................................................................................. 8 1.5 Dating ............................................................................................................................... 8 1.6 Discussion ........................................................................................................................ 8 2. The Period II complex (late 3rd century) 2.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 13 2.2 The riverside wall .............................................................................................................. 13 The construction of a riverside wall ................................................................................ 13 Dumping to the north of the riverside wall ..................................................................... 13 2.3 The construction of the complex ....................................................................................... 14 Terracing ....................................................................................................................... 14 The main foundations .................................................................................................... 14 Raising the ground level within the complex ................................................................... 17 The ground to the west of the complex .......................................................................... 19 Drainage ........................................................................................................................ 20 2.4 Construction methods and their parallels ........................................................................... 21 Timber piles supporting a chalk raft ............................................................................... 21 The use of a second chalk raft with horizontal timber framing ........................................ 21 Re-used blocks within the masonry foundations .............................................................. 24 2.5 Layout ............................................................................................................................... 24 2.6 Extent ............................................................................................................................... 26 2.7 Dating ............................................................................................................................... 27 2.8 The intended appearance of the complex ........................................................................... 27 2.9 The function of the Period II complex .............................................................................. 28 Baths and temples .......................................................................................................... 29 Administrative buildings ................................................................................................. 30 Late Roman ‘palaces’ ...................................................................................................... 30 Historical context ........................................................................................................... 31 2.10 The end of the Period II complex and later Roman activity ............................................. 32 3. Discussion: the south-west quarter - development and context 33 vi Part III: the archaeological evidence 4. Peter’s Hill 4.1 The Site .............................................................................................................................. 39 4.2 The Excavation ................................................................................................................... 39 Early activity .................................................................................................................... 39 Construction of a riverside wall and terracing activities to the. north ................................. 39 Consolidation of the western area of the site .................................................................... 40 Timber piling ................................................................................................................... 43 Chalk raft ........................................................................................................................ 43 Timber-framing and a second chalk raft ........................................................................... 44 Masonry foundation ......................................................................................................... 45 Scaffolding, construction debris and weathering ............................................................... 48 Dumping to the east and west of the main foundation, and terracing to the north ........... 48 Late Roman timber building ............................................................................................ 51 Disuse and robbing of the structures ................................................................................ 51 4.3 Dating discussion ................................................................................................................ 52 Early activity .................................................................................................................... 53 Riverside wall and dumping against its northern face ....................................................... 53 Construction of the complex ............................................................................................ 53 The derivation of the Group 2 dumps and variations in the pottery assemblages .............. 54 The late Roman building and the disuse of the Period II complex ................................... 56 Robbing of the Period II foundations ............................................................................... 56 5. Sunlight Wharf 5.1 The Site ...................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway Near P Street, Ca
    ROCK CREEK AND ROCK CREEK'S BRIDGES Dumbarton Bridge William Howard Taft Bridge (8) Duke Ellington Bridge (9) POTOMAC PARKWAY Washington, D.C. The monumental bridges arching over Rock Creek contribute Dumbarton Bridge, at Q Street, is one of the parkway's most The William Howard Taft Bridge, built 1897-1907, is probably The current bridge at Calvert Street replaced a dramatic iron greatly to the parkway's appearance. Partially concealed by the endearing structures. It was designed by the noted architect the most notable span on the parkway. The elegant arched truss bridge built in 1891 to carry streetcars on the Rock Creek surrounding vegetation, they evoke the aqueducts and ruins Glenn Brown and completed in 1915. Its curving form structure carrying Connecticut Avenue over Rock Creek valley Railway line. When the parkway was built, it was determined m&EWAIl2 UN IIA^M1GN¥ found in romantic landscape paintings. In addition to framing compensates for the difference in alignment between the was Washington's first monumental masonry bridge. Its high that the existing bridge was unable to accommodate the rise in vistas and providing striking contrasts to the parkway's natural Washington and Georgetown segments of Q Street. cost and elaborate ornamentation earned it the nickname "The automobile traffic. The utilitarian steel structure was also features, they serve as convenient platforms for viewing the Million Dollar Bridge." In 1931 it was officially named after considered detrimental to the parkway setting. verdant parkway landscape. They also perform the utilitarian The overhanging pedestrian walkways and tall, deep arches former president William Howard Taft, who had lived nearby.
    [Show full text]
  • Seismic Assessment of a Monumental Masonry Construction: the Rocca Albornoziana of Spoleto
    Available online at www.eccomasproceedia.org Eccomas Proceedia COMPDYN (2017) 2239-2252 COMPDYN 2017 6th ECCOMAS Thematic Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering M. Papadrakakis, M. Fragiadakis (eds.) Rhodes Island, Greece, 15–17 June 2017 SEISMIC ASSESSMENT OF A MONUMENTAL MASONRY CONSTRUCTION: THE ROCCA ALBORNOZIANA OF SPOLETO G. Castori1, A. Borri2, M. Corradi2, A. De Maria3 and R. Sisti2 1 Department of Engineering, University of Perugia via Duranti 93, 06125 Perugia, Italy e-mail: [email protected] 2 Department of Engineering, University of Perugia via Duranti 93, 06125 Perugia, Italy [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] 3 Ufficio Vigilanza e Controllo sulle Costruzioni, Region of Umbria Via Palermo 106, 06129 Perugia, Italy [email protected] Keywords: Military constructions, historic masonry, numerical analysis. Abstract. The structural analysis of monumental constructions requires considering safety and conservation objectives, including the possible presence of artistic assets. In order to face these issues, this paper presents the results of a diagnostic analysis carried out on a 14th-century fortress: the Rocca Albornoziana of Spoleto in Umbria. Within this context, particular attention was de-voted to the choice of the most reliable modelling strategy for the application of the displacement approach in the seismic Performance-Based Assessment (PBA) procedure, as a function of different possible seismic behaviors. Seismic vulnerability was evaluated using a pushover method, and the results obtained with the nonlinear numerical model have been com- pared with the simplified schemes of the limit analysis. The capacity of the fortress to withstand lateral loads was evaluated with the expected demands resulting from the seismic action.
    [Show full text]
  • Seismic and Restoration Assessment of Monumental Masonry Structures
    Article Seismic and Restoration Assessment of Monumental Masonry Structures Panagiotis G. Asteris 1,*, Maria G. Douvika 1, Maria Apostolopoulou 2 and Antonia Moropoulou 2 1 Computational Mechanics Laboratory, School of Pedagogical and Technological Education, Heraklion, 14121 Athens, Greece; [email protected] 2 Laboratory of Materials Science and Engineering, School of Chemical Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, 15780 Athens, Greece; [email protected] (M.A.); [email protected] (A.M.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +30-210-2896922 Received: 23 June 2017; Accepted: 20 July 2017; Published: 2 August 2017 Abstract: Masonry structures are complex systems that require detailed knowledge and information regarding their response under seismic excitations. Appropriate modelling of a masonry structure is a prerequisite for a reliable earthquake-resistant design and/or assessment. However, modelling a real structure with a robust quantitative (mathematical) representation is a very difficult, complex and computationally-demanding task. The paper herein presents a new stochastic computational framework for earthquake-resistant design of masonry structural systems. The proposed framework is based on the probabilistic behavior of crucial parameters, such as material strength and seismic characteristics, and utilizes fragility analysis based on different failure criteria for the masonry material. The application of the proposed methodology is illustrated in the case of a historical and monumental masonry structure, namely the assessment of the seismic vulnerability of the Kaisariani Monastery, a byzantine church that was built in Athens, Greece, at the end of the 11th to the beginning of the 12th century. Useful conclusions are drawn regarding the effectiveness of the intervention techniques used for the reduction of the vulnerability of the case-study structure, by means of comparison of the results obtained.
    [Show full text]
  • STONEMASONRY Level 4
    New Zealand Certificate in STONEMASONRY Level 4 Specifications October 2018 v1.2 Welcome to the Specifications that set out the technical content of the New Zealand Certificate in Stonemasonry (Level 4) with strands in Monumental Masonry, Construction Stonemasonry, and Natural Stone Fixtures and Fittings (with optional strands in Banker Masonry, and Conservation and Preservation) [Ref: 2737] These Specifications are, collectively, a prescription for achieving the requirements of the qualification. Together they describe what a person must be capable of to become a qualified trade professional. They are intended to support tertiary education organisations to develop programmes that detail how learning and assessment will occur. Programmes must encompass these Specifications and support the development of the skills, knowledge and attributes that reflect the technical competence, self-management, professionalism and leadership. 2 | Specifications required by the New Zealand Certificate in Stonemasonry (October 2018) v1.2 The individual skill sets included in these Specifications are designed to be read, interpreted and assessed together. This means that information contained in one skill set that is relevant to any other skill sets is stated only once, in the most appropriate place. However, the expectation is that assessment will look for links across skills sets. This avoids duplicating information and allows the candidate to be assessed holistically. Where the skills and knowledge included in one skill set are essential to achieving other
    [Show full text]
  • Cemeteries Policy.PDF
    COUNCIL POLICY CEMETERIES POLICY Policy statement Council will provide cemetery services that are safe, consistent and socially acceptable standards and practices for the benefit of Council workers, funeral industry representatives, clients and members of the general public. It will also ensure the conduct expectations for those working in or entering the cemeteries is in accordance with reasonable and practical standards. Scope This policy applies to Council employees, community members, contractors and the funeral industry. Roles and responsibilities Council is responsible for: • administration and management of plot and niche purchases; • transfer of interment rights; • approvals for monumental works; • issuing licences/permits to work in cemeteries; • maintenance of cemetery grounds; and • interment of ashes into columbarium walls and ashes gardens. Position/team Role Booking officers Record-keeping, cemetery bookings/enquiries Cemetery operational staff Cemetery maintenance, grave burial preparation, ashes placements Open Space and Recreation Team Set policy direction, capital works planning, asset management planning Strategic planners Set strategic direction through masterplans and plans of management Funeral Directors responsibilities may include: • liaising with Council to arrange and conduct a funeral service in a cemetery. • all matters relating to the handling of the human remains for a burial in a cemetery under the care and control of Blue Mountains City Council including but not limited to transporting the body of the deceased to the cemetery and the act of interring the deceased. Definitions Term Definition the Act Local Government Act 1993(NSW) appropriate fee A fee set by Council applicant The person making an application a. to obtain or transfer an interment right; to have the body of a deceased buried or exhumed; or b.
    [Show full text]
  • Traditional and Innovative Approaches in Seismic Design
    Traditional and Books Innovative Approaches in Seismic Design Edited by Linda Giresini and Francesca Taddei Printed Edition of the Special Issue Published in Buildings www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings MDPI Traditional and Innovative Approaches in Seismic Design Special Issue Editors Linda Giresini Books Francesca Taddei MDPI • Basel • Beijing • Wuhan • Barcelona • Belgrade MDPI Special Issue Editors Linda Giresini University of Pisa Italy Francesca Taddei Technical University of Munich Germany Editorial Office MDPI AG St. Alban-Anlage 66 Basel, Switzerland This edition is a reprint of the Special Issue published online in the open access journal Buildings (ISSN 2075-5309) in 2017 (available at: http://www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings/special issues/ seismic design). Books For citation purposes, cite each article independently as indicated on the article page online and as indicated below: Lastname, F.M.; Lastname, F.M. Article title. Journal Name. Year. Article number, page range. First Edition 2018 ISBN 978-3-03842-747-6 (Pbk) ISBN 978-3-03842-748-3 (PDF) Funded by the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) in the framework of the program “Hochschuldialog mit Südeuropa”. Cover photo courtesy of Linda Giresini. Articles in this volume are Open Access and distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license, which allows users to download, copy and build upon published articles even for commercial purposes, as long as the author and publisher are properly credited, which ensures maximum dissemination and a wider impact of our publications. The book taken as a whole is c 2018 MDPI, Basel, Switzerland, distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Cemetery Conservation
    NATIONAL TRUST GUIDELINES FOR CEMETERY CONSERVATION SECOND EDITION 2009 PRODUCED WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF A NSW HERITAGE GRANT • All cemeteries are significant to the community • Some are significant to the nation at large, some to a religious or ethnic group or a region, some mainly to a single family • The conservation of cemeteries means retaining this significance • All management, maintenance and repair in cemeteries should be guided by sound conservation principles so that significance is retained CEMS\Policy Paper Review & model letters\2nd Edition Dec 08.doc i GUIDELINES FOR CEMETERY CONSERVATION PRELUDE STOP! READ THIS HERITAGE CHECKLIST BEFORE YOU BEGIN CEMETERY WORK Cemeteries protected by statutory heritage listings sometimes have special requirements or controls for work. This checklist will help you to identify who may need to "sign-off" on your proposed works. 1) Is the item (or place) on the State Heritage Register? Check on the Heritage Office website at: www.heritage.nsw.gov.au 2) Is the item more than 50 years old? (eg a displaced 1926 headstone). 3) Is the item/place on a Local or Regional heritage list? Find out from the local Council. If the answer is “yes” to any of these questions then you will need advice on how to proceed. The local Council officers and the National Trust can give initial advice. (Also see Part 3, Section 3.2 of these Guidelines.) In all cases after complying with any special requirements, you should then go back to the controlling authority (Church, Council, property owner etc.) and confirm that you have permission to proceed.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hammer-Beam Roof: Tradition, Innovation and the Carpenter’S Art in Late Medieval England
    The Hammer-Beam Roof: Tradition, Innovation and the Carpenter’s Art in Late Medieval England Robert Beech A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Art History, Film and Visual Studies College of Arts and Law University of Birmingham September 2014 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT This thesis is about late medieval carpenters, their techniques and their art, and about the structure that became the fusion of their technical virtuosity and artistic creativity: the hammer-beam roof. The structural nature and origin of the hammer-beam roof is discussed, and it is argued that, although invented in the late thirteenth century, during the fourteenth century the hammer-beam roof became a developmental dead-end. In the early fifteenth century the hammer-beam roof suddenly blossomed into hundreds of structures of great technical proficiency and aesthetic acumen. The thesis assesses the role of the hammer-beam roof of Westminster Hall as the catalyst to such renewed enthusiasm. This structure is analysed and discussed in detail.
    [Show full text]
  • STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING of HISTORIC MASONRY MONUMENTS Saurabh Prabhu Clemson University, [email protected]
    Clemson University TigerPrints All Theses Theses 8-2011 STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING OF HISTORIC MASONRY MONUMENTS Saurabh Prabhu Clemson University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses Part of the Civil Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Prabhu, Saurabh, "STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING OF HISTORIC MASONRY MONUMENTS" (2011). All Theses. 1160. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/all_theses/1160 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Theses by an authorized administrator of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STRUCTURAL HEALTH MONITORING OF HISTORIC MASONRY MONUMENTS A Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of Clemson University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science Civil Engineering by Saurabh Arvind Prabhu August 2011 Accepted by: Dr. Sez Atamturktur, committee chair Dr. Nadarajah Ravichandran Dr. Bryant Nielson Craig M. Bennett Jr. i ABSTRACT Structural Health Monitoring (SHM) is a well-accepted diagnostic technique being used to evaluate modern structures. This method involves monitoring the vibration response of a structure to detect changes in its structural state. The primary intention of this thesis is to address two practical and technical difficulties encountered in deploying SHM on historic masonry monuments: (i) the selection of suitable low dimensional vibration response features that are highly sensitive to the presence and extent of damage, while having low sensitivity to extraneous noise and (ii) the selection of optimal sensor locations for efficient system identification applied to Gothic Cathedrals. Both of the features of this thesis achieve reduction in the size of the raw data to be analyzed leading to reduced computational as well as monetary effort.
    [Show full text]
  • National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form
    NPS Form 10-900-b OMB No. 1024-0018 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form This form is used for documenting property groups relating to one or several historic contexts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin How to Complete the Multiple Property Documentation Form (formerly 16B). Complete each item by entering the requested information. ___X___ New Submission ________ Amended Submission A. Name of Multiple Property Listing Carnegie Libraries of New York City B. Associated Historic Contexts (Name each associated historic context, identifying theme, geographical area, and chronological period for each.) C. Form Prepared by: Christopher D. Brazee Suzanne R. Spellen 174 4th Street 817 River Street Troy NY 12180 Troy NY 12180 [email protected] [email protected] 518-279-6229 518-326-8447 D. Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, I hereby certify that this documentation form meets the National Register documentation standards and sets forth requirements for the listing of related properties consistent with the National Register criteria. This submission meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR 60 and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archeology and Historic Preservation. _______________________________ ______________________ _________________________ Signature of certifying official Title Date _____________________________________ State or Federal Agency or Tribal government I hereby certify that this multiple property documentation form has been approved by the National Register as a basis for evaluating related properties for listing in the National Register. ________________________________ __________________________________ Signature of the Keeper Date of Action NPS Form 10-900-b OMB No.
    [Show full text]
  • Historic Masonry Towers
    ON THE ROLE OF UNCERTAINTIES IN THE SEISMIC RISK ASSESSMENT OF HISTORIC MASONRY TOWERS Dissertation submitted to and approved by the Department of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Environmental Sciences University of Braunschweig – Institute of Technology and the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Florence in candidacy for the degree of a Doktor-Ingenieurin (Dr.-Ing.) / Dottore di Ricerca in Civil and Environmental Engineering*) by Silvia Monchetti born 29/05/1987 from Firenze, Italy Submitted on 20 February, 2018 Oral examination on 08 May, 2018 Professorial advisors Prof. Klaus Thiele Prof. Gianni Bartoli 2018 *) Either the German or the Italian form of the title may be used. To my dear grandfather Angiolo, who always wondered what was the aim of all that study. ON THE ROLE OF UNCERTAINTIES IN THE SESIMC RISK ASSESSMENT OF HISTORIC MASONRY TOWERS “we have not succeeded in answering all of our problems. The answers we have found only serve to raise a whole set of new questions. In some ways we feel we are as confused as ever but we believe we are confused on a higher level and about more important things” Posted outside the mathematics reading room, Tromsø University (Norway) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I could not have accomplished this research without the encouragement, guidance and support of Prof. Gianni Bartoli, Prof. Klaus Thiele, Prof. Michele Betti and Eng. Antonino Maria Marra. Thank you for the confidence. I could not have better mentors. Thanks to Francesco, my soul mate, for the unconditional support and for the unceasing patience. Thanks to my family, mamma Laura and babbo Oliviero in particular, who always believe in me.
    [Show full text]
  • “Seismic Assessment of a Historical Masonry Structure Using ETABS: a Review” Rashmi Sakalle1, Mohanlal Ahirwar2 Asso
    International Journal of Engineering and Techniques - Volume 5 Issue 4, August 2019 “Seismic Assessment of a Historical Masonry Structure using ETABS: A Review” Rashmi Sakalle1, Mohanlal ahirwar2 Asso. Prof.1, P.G. Scholar2 Department of Civil engineering, TrubaInstitute of Engineering and Information Technology Bhopal, M.P. Abstract: It is well known fact that un-reinforced masonrystructures are the most vulnerable during an earthquake. Normally URM buildingsare designed for vertical loads and since masonry has adequate compressivestrength, the structures behave well as long as the loads are vertical. When suchmasonry structure is subjected to lateral inertial loads during an earthquake, thewalls develop shear and flexural stresses. The strength of masonry under theseconditions often depends on the bonding between brick and mortar which is ratherpoor. This bond is also very poor when lime mortars or mud mortars are used. In this paper we are presenting literature survey of authors related to assessment of masonry structure. Keywords: Masonry structure, Assessment, Historical building, rani mahal, analysis, forces, moment. Introduction: Masonry is the oldest building material that still finds wide use in today’s building industries. The most important characteristic of masonry construction is its simplicity. Laying pieces of stone, bricks, or blocks on top of each other, either with or without cohesion via mortar, is a simple, though adequate, technique that has been successfully used ever since remote ages. Naturally, innumerable variations of masonry materials, techniques, and applications occurred during the course of time. The influence factors were mainly the local culture and wealth, the knowledge of materials and tools, the availability of material, and architectural reasons.
    [Show full text]