Pub Date : 2021-12-23DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0026
D. Perring
London’s late antique restoration was signalled by the construction of a monumental riverside wall, the renewal of luxurious town houses within town, and the development of new patterns of supply. Recent dendrochronological evidence indicates that the riverside wall was probably built in the late 270s, perhaps under Aurelian and then Probus following the collapse of the Gallic Empire. Contemporary fortifications were built at other sites in southern Britain in this assertion of a new language of imperial control. It is suggested that changed patterns of urban supply reflect on the administrative reforms that supported these defended sites. London’s revival may also have relied on new settlement, and recent studies of cemetery populations around the city indicate that some 20–40 per cent of the buried dead—admittedly from an extremely small sample—had arrived from elsewhere in the Roman Empire.
{"title":"Restoration (c. AD 270–85)","authors":"D. Perring","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0026","url":null,"abstract":"London’s late antique restoration was signalled by the construction of a monumental riverside wall, the renewal of luxurious town houses within town, and the development of new patterns of supply. Recent dendrochronological evidence indicates that the riverside wall was probably built in the late 270s, perhaps under Aurelian and then Probus following the collapse of the Gallic Empire. Contemporary fortifications were built at other sites in southern Britain in this assertion of a new language of imperial control. It is suggested that changed patterns of urban supply reflect on the administrative reforms that supported these defended sites. London’s revival may also have relied on new settlement, and recent studies of cemetery populations around the city indicate that some 20–40 per cent of the buried dead—admittedly from an extremely small sample—had arrived from elsewhere in the Roman Empire.","PeriodicalId":293911,"journal":{"name":"London in the Roman World","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129033337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-23DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0011
D. Perring
This chapter describes London’s later Flavian architectural development, elements of which may have marked and celebrated the political maturity of the city. London’s first forum was probably built around the time of Agricola’s long governorship of Britain. Circumstantial evidence suggests that this building was erected c. AD 79/80. It could have accompanied the grant of formal urban status and the creation of the institutions of local self-government, although this remains uncertain. The contents of a legal judgement inscribed on a writing tablet suggests that London did not hold autonomous status in AD 76. Other public buildings and works included large public baths, one probably built c. AD 84 that has alternatively been identified as part of the governor’s palace. London may have benefitted from the architectural patronage of the emperor Domitian, executed on his behalf by the procurator, intended to grace Britain’s capital city following the completion of the conquest of the British Isles.
{"title":"Britain’s capital? (c. AD 80–90)","authors":"D. Perring","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0011","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter describes London’s later Flavian architectural development, elements of which may have marked and celebrated the political maturity of the city. London’s first forum was probably built around the time of Agricola’s long governorship of Britain. Circumstantial evidence suggests that this building was erected c. AD 79/80. It could have accompanied the grant of formal urban status and the creation of the institutions of local self-government, although this remains uncertain. The contents of a legal judgement inscribed on a writing tablet suggests that London did not hold autonomous status in AD 76. Other public buildings and works included large public baths, one probably built c. AD 84 that has alternatively been identified as part of the governor’s palace. London may have benefitted from the architectural patronage of the emperor Domitian, executed on his behalf by the procurator, intended to grace Britain’s capital city following the completion of the conquest of the British Isles.","PeriodicalId":293911,"journal":{"name":"London in the Roman World","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132323540","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-23DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0010
D. Perring
Roman London was enlarged and enhanced in the years immediately following Vespasian’s accession in ways that corresponded with the known ideological goals of the new Flavian regime. As a consequence the city came to be characterized by an imperial architecture of ‘bread and circuses’. This involved the construction of a new amphitheatre for the conduct of games associated with the imperial cult and as the likely site of public executions. Watermills drawing on the latest engineering technology were installed to allow the large-scale preparation of flour to supply local bakeries. Early Flavian investment also involved the creation of new administrative facilities, perhaps including a mansio in Southwark, and new urban districts allowing military and veteran settlement. Cycles of subsequent investment hint at a correlation between building programmes in London and preparations for new campaigns of advance launched on the arrival of new provincial governors.
{"title":"Bread and circuses (c. AD 70–80)","authors":"D. Perring","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0010","url":null,"abstract":"Roman London was enlarged and enhanced in the years immediately following Vespasian’s accession in ways that corresponded with the known ideological goals of the new Flavian regime. As a consequence the city came to be characterized by an imperial architecture of ‘bread and circuses’. This involved the construction of a new amphitheatre for the conduct of games associated with the imperial cult and as the likely site of public executions. Watermills drawing on the latest engineering technology were installed to allow the large-scale preparation of flour to supply local bakeries. Early Flavian investment also involved the creation of new administrative facilities, perhaps including a mansio in Southwark, and new urban districts allowing military and veteran settlement. Cycles of subsequent investment hint at a correlation between building programmes in London and preparations for new campaigns of advance launched on the arrival of new provincial governors.","PeriodicalId":293911,"journal":{"name":"London in the Roman World","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115911460","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-23DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0029
D. Perring
The evidence for London’s late fourth century decline is put under the microscope. The paucity and problematic interpretation of dating evidence is discussed, but it is concluded that important elements of London’s urban infrastructure were in serious disrepair from as early as the 380s. Some main roads could no longer have carried regular wheeled traffic. Sites of former public buildings on the margins of towns were converted into small cemeteries in the late fourth century, showing that the city was still populated but on a reduced scale and hinting at a closer relationship between communities of the living and communities of the dead. Rich assemblages recovered from within some wells within the town are thought likely to represent termination rituals, as properties were closed and households departed. Abandonment horizons can also be described from the finds left behind over the latest floors of some houses. These acts of closure and departure may also have begun in the 380s, perhaps under Magnus Maximus who had briefly revived London’s mint but also withdrew troops and administrators from Britain. Whilst the city may still have been occupied into the fifth century, this is far from certain, and there is no evidence of repair and refurbishment of urban properties beyond the last years of the fourth century. This evidence of redundancy and retreat seems consistent with the interrupted history of the diocesan administration. London had become marginal city of relatively little importance to Rome.
{"title":"Endings (c. AD 380–400)","authors":"D. Perring","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0029","url":null,"abstract":"The evidence for London’s late fourth century decline is put under the microscope. The paucity and problematic interpretation of dating evidence is discussed, but it is concluded that important elements of London’s urban infrastructure were in serious disrepair from as early as the 380s. Some main roads could no longer have carried regular wheeled traffic. Sites of former public buildings on the margins of towns were converted into small cemeteries in the late fourth century, showing that the city was still populated but on a reduced scale and hinting at a closer relationship between communities of the living and communities of the dead. Rich assemblages recovered from within some wells within the town are thought likely to represent termination rituals, as properties were closed and households departed. Abandonment horizons can also be described from the finds left behind over the latest floors of some houses. These acts of closure and departure may also have begun in the 380s, perhaps under Magnus Maximus who had briefly revived London’s mint but also withdrew troops and administrators from Britain. Whilst the city may still have been occupied into the fifth century, this is far from certain, and there is no evidence of repair and refurbishment of urban properties beyond the last years of the fourth century. This evidence of redundancy and retreat seems consistent with the interrupted history of the diocesan administration. London had become marginal city of relatively little importance to Rome.","PeriodicalId":293911,"journal":{"name":"London in the Roman World","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127185979","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-23DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0009
D. Perring
London was rebuilt after the Boudican revolt, chiefly in the period AD 62–4. Military engineers set a new fort over the ashes of the city destroyed by British rebels, rebuilt the harbour with massive new quays, introduced new hydraulic engineering to supply London’s bathhouses, and established new roads and causeways to speed the movement of people and goods. The presence of detachments of auxiliary soldiers used to garrison the city after the revolt is witnessed by exchanges recorded in wooden writing tablets, and by finds of military and cavalry equipment. High status cemeteries included the tomb of the procurator Julius Classicianus, an exceptional group of exotic cinerary urns including one carved from Egyptian porphyry, and the inhumation of a woman dressed in a way that might identify her as a member of the pre-Roman aristocracy. Irregular and fragmented burials are also described, and it is suggested that these may witness practices of corpse abuse and necrophobic ritual. The mutilated corpses of those denied normal burial may have been dispatched to the underworld by disposal in water, and disturbed corpses besides London Bridge may include the victims of Roman retributive violence following the Boudican revolt.
{"title":"Post-war reconstruction (c. AD 61–70)","authors":"D. Perring","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0009","url":null,"abstract":"London was rebuilt after the Boudican revolt, chiefly in the period AD 62–4. Military engineers set a new fort over the ashes of the city destroyed by British rebels, rebuilt the harbour with massive new quays, introduced new hydraulic engineering to supply London’s bathhouses, and established new roads and causeways to speed the movement of people and goods. The presence of detachments of auxiliary soldiers used to garrison the city after the revolt is witnessed by exchanges recorded in wooden writing tablets, and by finds of military and cavalry equipment. High status cemeteries included the tomb of the procurator Julius Classicianus, an exceptional group of exotic cinerary urns including one carved from Egyptian porphyry, and the inhumation of a woman dressed in a way that might identify her as a member of the pre-Roman aristocracy. Irregular and fragmented burials are also described, and it is suggested that these may witness practices of corpse abuse and necrophobic ritual. The mutilated corpses of those denied normal burial may have been dispatched to the underworld by disposal in water, and disturbed corpses besides London Bridge may include the victims of Roman retributive violence following the Boudican revolt.","PeriodicalId":293911,"journal":{"name":"London in the Roman World","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114162397","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-23DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0004
D. Perring
The idea that London had pre-Roman origins is considered, but dismissed for the want of evidence from both within and around the city. The pre-settlement landscape and topography of the region is described, tracing the course and character of the Thames and London’s other rivers including the lost Walbrook. The pre-history of the London basin is summarized, and London’s place in the emerging political landscape of late Iron Age Britain reviewed. It is concluded that the area where Roman London was established lay on the border of earlier polities and that the Thames constituted a boundary zone and relative backwater. The sites of pre-Roman farmsteads within this landscape are identified and described, including important settlements at Bermondsey and Southwark that may have been occupied at the time of the Roman conquest. It is speculated that London gained its Roman name and identity from these pre-Roman farmsteads on the south bank of the river, making it a place of Kent. The city itself was a Roman creation, made possible by the political unification of southern Britain through the force of conquest.
{"title":"Before London","authors":"D. Perring","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0004","url":null,"abstract":"The idea that London had pre-Roman origins is considered, but dismissed for the want of evidence from both within and around the city. The pre-settlement landscape and topography of the region is described, tracing the course and character of the Thames and London’s other rivers including the lost Walbrook. The pre-history of the London basin is summarized, and London’s place in the emerging political landscape of late Iron Age Britain reviewed. It is concluded that the area where Roman London was established lay on the border of earlier polities and that the Thames constituted a boundary zone and relative backwater. The sites of pre-Roman farmsteads within this landscape are identified and described, including important settlements at Bermondsey and Southwark that may have been occupied at the time of the Roman conquest. It is speculated that London gained its Roman name and identity from these pre-Roman farmsteads on the south bank of the river, making it a place of Kent. The city itself was a Roman creation, made possible by the political unification of southern Britain through the force of conquest.","PeriodicalId":293911,"journal":{"name":"London in the Roman World","volume":"63 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124774474","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-23DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0017
D. Perring
This chapter offers a detailed consideration of London’s labour market, exploring the high degree of seasonality that applied in a reconstruction of London’s Roman working year. The harbour relied on inputs of manual labour and ox-drawn haulage, serving the needs of dozens of vessels docked against the quays or beached on the river foreshore. Demand was intensive during the summer sailing season, but negligible in the winter. London’s construction industry was similarly labour-intensive and seasonal. These demands combined to present high levels of labour demand from spring to autumn, interrupted by slack winters of underemployment. Some needs may have been met by seasonal immigration from the countryside, but a lack of evidence for knowledge exchange between town and country suggests that this was not on a large scale. It is more likely that labour, perhaps including a relatively high proportion of slaves, was redirected into industry and craft production as stock was built up against spring needs. The chapter reviews the evidence for these shops and workshops, and for industrial production in and around Roman London. Particular emphasis is given to the importance of shipbuilding, and the demand this placed on supplies of timber and iron. Other industries to receive attention include potting, tanning and leatherworking, and glassmaking.
{"title":"London at work","authors":"D. Perring","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0017","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter offers a detailed consideration of London’s labour market, exploring the high degree of seasonality that applied in a reconstruction of London’s Roman working year. The harbour relied on inputs of manual labour and ox-drawn haulage, serving the needs of dozens of vessels docked against the quays or beached on the river foreshore. Demand was intensive during the summer sailing season, but negligible in the winter. London’s construction industry was similarly labour-intensive and seasonal. These demands combined to present high levels of labour demand from spring to autumn, interrupted by slack winters of underemployment. Some needs may have been met by seasonal immigration from the countryside, but a lack of evidence for knowledge exchange between town and country suggests that this was not on a large scale. It is more likely that labour, perhaps including a relatively high proportion of slaves, was redirected into industry and craft production as stock was built up against spring needs. The chapter reviews the evidence for these shops and workshops, and for industrial production in and around Roman London. Particular emphasis is given to the importance of shipbuilding, and the demand this placed on supplies of timber and iron. Other industries to receive attention include potting, tanning and leatherworking, and glassmaking.","PeriodicalId":293911,"journal":{"name":"London in the Roman World","volume":"88 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125078128","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-23DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0005
D. Perring
The chapter reviews the current state of understanding over London’s origins. Most recent studies have argued that London was built as a trading settlement c. AD 50, but the unpublished results of excavations in the City reveal the outline of a fortified Claudian enclosure. This may be the lost fort that the Roman historian Cassius Dio describes as having been established on the banks of the Thames at the time of the Roman conquest. This new evidence is used to suggest that London was founded in the summer of AD 43 and was the place where the Roman army waited on the arrival of the emperor Claudius, before marching on Colchester. The origins of London Bridge are also reviewed, and the argument that a ford existed at Westminster is dismissed as improbable. This is the most authoritative contemporary review of the circumstances that lead to the creation of London, and the closest that we have to a definitive statement on the birth of the city.
{"title":"The Roman invasion (c. AD 43)","authors":"D. Perring","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0005","url":null,"abstract":"The chapter reviews the current state of understanding over London’s origins. Most recent studies have argued that London was built as a trading settlement c. AD 50, but the unpublished results of excavations in the City reveal the outline of a fortified Claudian enclosure. This may be the lost fort that the Roman historian Cassius Dio describes as having been established on the banks of the Thames at the time of the Roman conquest. This new evidence is used to suggest that London was founded in the summer of AD 43 and was the place where the Roman army waited on the arrival of the emperor Claudius, before marching on Colchester. The origins of London Bridge are also reviewed, and the argument that a ford existed at Westminster is dismissed as improbable. This is the most authoritative contemporary review of the circumstances that lead to the creation of London, and the closest that we have to a definitive statement on the birth of the city.","PeriodicalId":293911,"journal":{"name":"London in the Roman World","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122112636","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-23DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0027
D. Perring
This chapter explores the archaeological evidence from London for the short-lived ‘British Empire’ of Carausius and his successor Allectus, when the city gained the pretensions of an imperial capital. Allectus commissioned a massive new public building complex along the riverside. This appears to have incorporated two unusually late examples of classical temples, which were perhaps attached to an imperial palace. In addition to summarizing previously published work, the text includes new speculations as to the character and identity of these temples. The suggestion that the boat found at County Hall in 1910 had been built as part of Carausius’ fleet is tentatively revived. The mint established at this time continued in operation after Constantius’s reconquest of Britain and Constantine’s subsequent assumption of power. The archaeological remains of this period are described to show that London remained an important administrative centre, but power was exercised from private houses and compounds. The city was no longer a port of consequence, and several of London’s most important public buildings were made redundant, quarried for buildings materials, and replaced by workshops.
{"title":"City of emperors (c. AD 285–350)","authors":"D. Perring","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198789000.003.0027","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter explores the archaeological evidence from London for the short-lived ‘British Empire’ of Carausius and his successor Allectus, when the city gained the pretensions of an imperial capital. Allectus commissioned a massive new public building complex along the riverside. This appears to have incorporated two unusually late examples of classical temples, which were perhaps attached to an imperial palace. In addition to summarizing previously published work, the text includes new speculations as to the character and identity of these temples. The suggestion that the boat found at County Hall in 1910 had been built as part of Carausius’ fleet is tentatively revived. The mint established at this time continued in operation after Constantius’s reconquest of Britain and Constantine’s subsequent assumption of power. The archaeological remains of this period are described to show that London remained an important administrative centre, but power was exercised from private houses and compounds. The city was no longer a port of consequence, and several of London’s most important public buildings were made redundant, quarried for buildings materials, and replaced by workshops.","PeriodicalId":293911,"journal":{"name":"London in the Roman World","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128100571","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：