| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
MartynK
Invertebrate
South Africa
116 Posts |
 Posted - 27 June 2006 : 07:53:52 AM
|
Most writers assume that the Romans founded Londinium, although there may have been some sort of previous settlement there, but I've read accounts of workmen finding the remains of massive stone foundations (probably for a fortified gate) below the Roman layer when they were excavating for the tube. Has anyone else come across this?
There's also quite a lot of controversy about what happened to London after the Romans withdrew. Did the city remain intact behind it's wall, possibly continuing to trade with the Continent for a long time? Was it conquered and/or abandoned? Did the saxons take it over, or were they superstitious about it?
Does anyone know when the last Roman buildings were visible in London, above ground and in some recognisable state? I've read that it could have been as late as the C17th, but can't validate this.
|
|
|
John Prigent
Homosapien
United Kingdom
8414 Posts |
Posted - 27 June 2006 : 08:41:25 AM
|
If the site was the best crossing place it's likely that there was a pre-Roman settlement, though I haven't heard of anything being found. The common assumption is that the area was deserted by the Saxon period, though it's hard to see why anyone would leave a defensible city and the Saxons certaily took over some other Roman walled towns. As for visible remains of Roman work, try the Roman city wall which is still visible above ground in several places. After the Blitz quite a few Roman walls were exposed (and still preserved now, stanidng quite a long way above 21st century ground level). Apparently they'd been used and re-used by successive centuries of builders so may not have been visible from outside.
Cheers
John |
 |
|
|
Big Dave
Dinosaur
United Kingdom
234 Posts |
Posted - 27 June 2006 : 10:57:33 AM
|
Don't forget that in Roman times Colchester was the capital and London was a trading port, so the chances are that was a trading port before the Romans arrived.
-----------------------
Chuck Norris likes to knit sweaters in his free time. And by "knit", I mean "kick", and by "sweaters", I mean "babies". |
|
|
|
MartynK
Invertebrate
South Africa
116 Posts |
Posted - 27 June 2006 : 11:20:14 AM
|
Thanks John. I know about the Roman wall, but I was thinking about actual buildings which were still recognisable as such. They would have been scavenged for materials over the centuries, but I'm just wondering if any of them were still standing by the High Middle Ages or even the early modern period. It's not such a great length of time, around 500 - 1000 years. There are plenty of Roman structures still standing on the Continent, and the Tower of London - the White tower anyway - is nearly a 1000 years old.
Just as a metter of interest, does anyone know what are the oldest man made structures which can still be seen in Britain today. Again, I'm interested in structures which are reasonably intact, and not just fragments. Would it be the stone cirles and megaliths, or possibly the slab bridges over rivers which I believe go back to prehistoric times? |
|
|
|
Jill
Invertebrate
United Kingdom
133 Posts |
Posted - 27 June 2006 : 1:14:07 PM
|
I'd have to check my books when I get home this evening, but my favourite for oldest would be Skara Brae Neolithic village on the Orkneys. Stone built houses, interconnected by passageways, with recognisable hearths, room divisions, cubby holes for storage, and separate outside toilet area. Don't know the age offhand, but it is deffinately neolithic. Other than that, it would have to be the early-middle Neolithic long barrow tombs, like West Kennet near Avebury.
I could be wrong, but I'm fairly sure that the stone circles were Early Bronze Age/late Neolithic, although they frequently re-used existing henge earthworks from earlier in the Neolithic.
I can be more specific age-wise this evening when I get home.
You've got me all enthusiastic now - Neolithic and Bronze Age Britain is my favourite archaeological period. |
|
|
|
MartynK
Invertebrate
South Africa
116 Posts |
Posted - 27 June 2006 : 1:28:47 PM
|
Hi Jill. I'd forgotten about Skara Brae. The generally accepted dates of occupation are around 2500 - 3000 BCE, which makes it roughly contemporaneous with the Stonehenge earthworks, and a few hundred years earlier than the stone megaliths, as you pointed out. The early part of Avebury is probably a bit older.
Looking forward to reading your post later. |
|
|
|
Ankhsy
Homosapien
United Kingdom
7087 Posts |
Posted - 27 June 2006 : 2:52:54 PM
|
The stone village of Knap of Howar on Papa Westray predate Skara Brae by 1000, years (circa 3500 BC).
"It's hard to work in a group when you're omniscient."
|
|
|
|
mjv
Invertebrate
122 Posts |
Posted - 27 June 2006 : 3:58:51 PM
|
Read a book by Adrian Gilbert et al, The Holy Kingdom, it's about King Arthur, "proving" he exists and was obviously welsh! The later chapters have a potted history of Britain if you believe it, as it should be, and according to the authors as was considered true until the evil Saxe-Coburgs re-wrote our history. It goes into how Britain was founded if I remember by exiles from Troy, but it claims London was a thriving city before the Romans. It's an interesting read and have to say appealed to the romantic in me, but in the cold light of day, the man has written several strange books on lining up the pyramids with traffic cones in Sutton Colfield to construct some sort of cosmic sat nav! And obviously he's written the obligatory "it was the masons wot done it book" They burnt down London & rebuilt it after the Great Fire of London as a copy of something important apparently! Anyway the Holy Kingdom isn't a bad read an who knows if it's true or not. Link to Adrian Gilbert's site http://www.adriangilbert.co.uk/docus/books/holyking.html
Mark |
|
|
|
mjv
Invertebrate
122 Posts |
Posted - 27 June 2006 : 4:04:36 PM
|
| £2.49 on Amazon bargain! And it's not me selling it! |
|
|
|
Jill
Invertebrate
United Kingdom
133 Posts |
Posted - 27 June 2006 : 10:34:42 PM
|
Hi again Martyn
I got home, started research, and then got viciously hijacked and dragged to the pub by my friends, so this took slightly longer than I was intending. But here we go:
First off, what do you mean by 'structures'? If you mean buildings or standing monuments then the answer to 'oldest' is one thing, if you include earthworks then it's something else.
Oldest earthworks are probably the Causewayed Enclosures, dated to the early/middle Neolithic. These generally ccomprised of series of short ditch segements, sometimes, but not always, with associated banks, used to enclose a large area, often on a hilltop. Examples include Windmill Hill in the Avebury area, dated to around 3500 - 3400 BC, and Crickly Hill, Gloucestershire, dated to around 3800 - 3700 BC. These don't generally have built structures associated with them, although some evidence of timber walls and revetments on the banks have been found. But your criteria was 'still surviving structures', so it depends whether you want to include the ditch and bank earthworks or not.
The Orkney villages are variously dated around a similar time to the Causewayed Enclosures. As has been said, Skara Brae is dated to around 3100 - 2500 BC, and Knap of Howar to around 3800 BC (apparently the oldest known North European dweling, according to one website). Barnhouse is also older than Skara Brea, but not much of that survives, so again it doesn't fit your 'surviving' criteria.
The early/middle Neolithic Long Barrows date to a similar time again, one of the best examples being West Kennet which is around 3800 - 3700 BC, and at 100 metres long it is one of the longest of these types of monument in Britain. I think the Portal Dolmen type burial monuments might have been marginally earlier than the long barrows, but at short notice I couldn't seem to find much about them or their dates.
Most of the really huge and impressive monuments came later, such as Maes Howe in Orkney at around 3000 - 2800 BC, and Silbury Hill with a carbon date of the earliest phase for around 2660 BC. I believe this later period of around 2500 BC is when the henge monuments really start to take off as well.
So, depending on what you want to classify as a 'structure', take your pick from several options really.
Hope this has been useful (and not too long and involved). I think I may have got a bit carried away, but as I said, I enjoy this period of British archaeology, so it was 'carried away' in a good sense.
|
|
|
|
MartynK
Invertebrate
South Africa
116 Posts |
Posted - 28 June 2006 : 07:37:39 AM
|
Hi Jill
No, of course your post wasn't too long. I'm grateful to you for taking so much trouble. Just about forgotten what it was like to "go to the pub". We don't have many pubs in the British sense, and our towns/cities are laid out differently. Going out means taking the car, which poses it's own problems, because we don't have reliable public transport either. We do have "taxis" but most of these are unroadworthy/overloaded combis (minbuses?)driven by homicidial maniacs with fraudulent licences. No, I'm not exaggerating. Anyway, enough of this.
I realise I wasn't too specific about "structures", but this thread grew out of my original interest in how long Roman buildings survived in the UK, in a recognisable state. I'd completely forgotten about the Neolithic earthworks and other structures, but this has provided an opportunity for some further exploration.
I had some difficulty in deciding between history and archeology at university (Edinburgh), but finally chose history. Unfortunately, the timetable precluded taking any of the archeology courses. Came across a degree course on the web recently, offering a combination of history, archeology and science which looks fascinating. Good starting point, I should think. I do wish this had been available 30 years ago!
Thanks again. |
|
|
|
Ankhsy
Homosapien
United Kingdom
7087 Posts |
Posted - 28 June 2006 : 09:52:10 AM
|
Thanks for that, Jill, it brought back memories. I only did British and European archaeology at my first year in University as I went on to specialise in Egyptian and Mesopotamian archaeology.
"It's hard to work in a group when you're omniscient."
|
|
|
|
Jill
Invertebrate
United Kingdom
133 Posts |
Posted - 28 June 2006 : 1:19:17 PM
|
Brought back a few memories for me as well.
I did the straight archaeology course at university, but did all my subsidury modules in the classics department, so by the time I'd finished I had almost done enough classics to qualify for a joint honours! I only did one module on Roman archaeology, and that was the compulsory first year introduction, after that I specialised into prehistoric Britain and Europe, specifically the Neolithic and Bronze Ages, and a bit of the Iron Age just to fill up the timetable.
The original question about whether London was occupied before the Romans has got me thinking, and I really don't know. I always assumed that it was, simply because it's a fertile river valley, and so an obvious place for settlement, but I don't actually know if anything has been found. Problem is, with so much later building piled on top, any excavations in the city now would surely be hard pressed to find anything that early. Although I'd like to be proved wrong on that point. |
|
|
|
Snowdragon
Single Cell Organism
United Kingdom
49 Posts |
Posted - 28 June 2006 : 3:55:28 PM
|
According to the Museum of London, no settlements existed in what was to become London before the Romans built the city. Britons inhabited the city after the Romans had left then it became part of the Saxon Kingdom and had what appears to be extensive trade relations with Frisia and Viking areas of Scandinavia. It went into decline after the Danish attacks until Alfred's reconquest of Saxon England.
Cry God for Harry, England and St George |
|
|
|
Parmenion
Homosapien
United Kingdom
13892 Posts |
Posted - 28 June 2006 : 4:02:56 PM
|
ah but them museum types do not like to challange accepted doctrine!!
they dont like to admit when they might have been wrong!
LASCIATE OGNE SPERANZA, VOI CH'INTRATE
|
|
|
|
mjv
Invertebrate
122 Posts |
Posted - 28 June 2006 : 6:55:45 PM
|
| You been reading Adrian Gilbert Parm? |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
