Between 1983 and 1990 redevelopment along the south bank of the River Thames a short distance upstream of London Bridge, entailed the demolition of 19th-century wharves, warehouses, and a brewery. This occasioned a series of archaeological rescue excavations by the Museum of London's former Department of Greater London Archaeology (DGLA), now incorporated in the Museum of London Archaeology Service (MoLAS). EH funded assessment and analysis of the results of these excavations as part of a programme to assess and publish the accumulated backlog of DGLA work, and several publications are now forthcoming.
The natural topography of the River Thames in the area of Roman London has been mapped in CAD using all available archaeological and other data (ie bore-hole logs), serving as a foundation for further analysis and mapping. When the Roman town was founded in the 1st century AD, the river was much wider than it is today, with at least 2 large islands south of the main channel, in the area of modern north Southwark. These islands were separated from each other, and from the mainland to the south, by channels and creeks, and were fringed by extensive mudflats and saltings, mostly covered at high tide. The principal river crossing was where the river was narrowest, slightly downstream of modern London Bridge, and the forthcoming publications deal with an area to the south west of this, on the more northerly of Roman Southwark's 2 islands.
As Roman occupation intensified in the late-1st century the intertidal zones were progressively reclaimed. On the south bank, at Winchester Palace (named after the site of the London residence of the medieval bishops of Winchester), the waterfront was advanced at least 9m into the main channel of the river. Reclamation of the land behind a timber revetment entailed the dumping of quantities of building debris assisted by the natural accumulation of silts. The debris consisted of building stone, tufa blocks of a kind suitable for a vault, wall flue tiles from a hypocaust, and a large quantity of painted wall plaster. Some of the decorative schemes on the wall plaster could be reconstructed, and were of a richness and quality paralleled at this time only in Italy. The large size and relatively unabraded condition of the plaster fragments indicated that they had not travelled far, suggesting that the original masonry building from which they came stood nearby. Coins and pottery date the process of dumping to c AD 80. The construction before then of such an expensively decorated and substantial building, exceptional for the time and place, may be connected with the early siting of administrative operations in London.
New structures contemporary with this reclamation included a large masonry building with closely spaced, parallel footings, indicating the presence of raised floors, next to a smaller, tile-built and timber-framed building, apparently circular in plan and possibly towered, and clay-and-timber buildings, all straddling a road. The stone and tile buildings may have stored grain or some other commodity, although it is also possible that the under-floor space was for domestic heating. These buildings are dated to AD 80-120 and the use of masonry suggests some importance, although their exact function is difficult to ascertain.
In the early-2nd century these buildings were superseded by others on a completely different and much larger plan. Fragmentary remains discovered suggest that a single range up to 65m long fronted onto the river, and other ranges extended back from it, to the south. Among the latter were the caldarium and plunge bath of a bath-house. A heated suite of rooms provided accommodation of some opulence, to judge from the quality of the wall decoration. A large slab of painted plaster from under the vaulted ceiling of one room was recovered where it had collapsed. From this plaster successive phases of decoration could be reconstructed, including an especially elaborate architectural and floral scheme making much use of cinnabar, an expensive red pigment (this wall painting is now displayed in the Roman Gallery of the Museum of London). These palatial buildings may have had some military association, for a marble inscription listing small groups of men by cohort, dated to the early-3rd century, was found broken in the debris of the bath suite, which was demolished towards the end of that century. Use of these buildings may have continued into the second half of the 4th century, but in a much reduced state, so-called 'dark-earth' forming over some demolished rooms while others were still occupied.
Radical changes in the layout of successive sets of buildings suggest that the area was probably a single property redeveloped as a unit, in contrast with other parts of the town, both south and north of the river, where individual building lines persisted, presumably respecting long-lived property boundaries. To the south west, on the same island of Roman Southwark, a series of excavations on the site of the former Courage's brewery permitted study of the topographical development of the urban and semi-urban landscape in the Roman period, including local roads, buildings, and drainage. Concentrations of hearths surrounded by metal working debris, inside and outside various successive short-lived structures, indicated that intensive iron-smithing and copper-working were practiced here. Dating evidence suggests that this activity began in the mid-1st century and persisted with some fluctuations to the end of the 4th century. Nearer the river, a relatively long and narrow timber building was erected on reclaimed land. Its foundation base plates, floor joists, and floor planks were extremely well preserved. The foundation timbers, dated by their tree rings, were made from trees which were felled in the winter of AD 152 or early spring of 153. The growth patterns indicate that they were derived from locally-coppiced oaks, suggesting careful and productive woodland management near London early in the Roman period. The evidence of this relatively insubstantial structure, quickly and economically built, points to expertise in 'woodmanship' and carpentry, and considerable organisation in the building trade. The purpose of this building, which was semi-sunken in rather damp ground and probably roofed with wooden shingles, is unclear, but it may have served to store perishable foodstuffs.
A study of the pottery from many of these sites has investigated different analytical methods to quantify the data, in order to represent the incidence and variety of the pottery more efficiently and this should help to explain the status and development of Roman Southwark more effectively. Roman urban settlement immediately to the south and east of the river crossing will be the subject of future research and publications, undoubtedly revealing more about the relationship between parts of the Roman town on both sides of the river.
