ROMAN URBAN TOPOGRAPHY in Britain and the western Empire

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Jones: New streets for old: the topography of Roman Lincoln Fig 59 The Lincoln area, showing the topographical situation of the earliest settlements (Scale 1:25,000) 87
Jones: New streets for old: the topography of Roman Lincoln rampart by cookhouses or rampart buildings and followed by its colonia counterpart), and the two major streets, the via principalis and the via praetoria. Others may have run east-west on either side of the principia, which measured 50-70m (164-230ft) east-west and 60-75m (197-246ft) north-south. The baths building found in the north-east quarter of the enclosure probably belonged to the colonia; by analogy with Exeter and Wroxeter there is no reason why it should have occupied the same site as its legionary predecessor. Our knowledge of the fortress layout is at present very limited, but it can be assumed that much of the colonia street plan was of legionary origin, as Crummy’s general survey of British cities based on legionary fortresses makes clear (Crummy 1982; this volume, pp 78-85). With regard to the interior of the new colonia it is salutary to look back at the history of its study. The outline of the upper city has been known since the days of the first serious antiquarians, and the discovery of the Bailgate colonnade more than a century ago led more than one scholar to postulate correctly the position of the two major streets (eg Fox 1892). It was less than 50 years ago, however, that the first plan of the Roman city based on detailed research was drawn (Baker 1938). Apart from isolated standing structures such as the Mint Wall and the Bailgate colonnades, Baker had only recorded finds of tessellated pavements and other structural remains on which to work, and the street pattern which he postulated was based partly on the analogy of contemporary coloniae - Timgad, for example - with no awareness at the time of the legionary origin. In the main he attempted to define insulae of reasonable size and shape by streets avoiding known building remains. With some justification Baker assumed that the sewers which had been noted by early antiquarians lay beneath Roman streets, and this theme was taken up by Richmond in his fundamental 1946 survey: ‘this sewerage system.. appears to offer a unique opportunity in the study of Romano-British town planning’ (Richmond 1946, 36). Sadly, that opportunity has not yet been fully grasped, but there has been some progress. Richmond also noted for the first time, following Webster’s excavations on the north and west defences, the possibility that the fortress lay directly beneath the colonia, and subsequent work by Thompson and Petch bore this out. It was Petch who carried out the first systematic investigation of a major public building, when, in 1956-8, under difficult conditions, he revealed in the north-east quarter much of what is taken to be the public baths. As noted above, there is no reason to believe that this was other than a new colonial foundation, but we still await the full publication of the evidence. 2 To the south of the baths ran an east-west street, which was later narrowed for the construction of a new porticoed range, identified as shops. A narrow north-south lane west of the baths was also later blocked. Beneath the east-west street was a covered drain; it was not a sewer, but was similar to a drain found at East Bight in 1981. Both these streets are close to the watertank inside the north defences. The next map of the city was produced in 1970 by Whitwell, but little could be added to the street system since Richmond’s article apart from those streets adjacent to the baths building (Whitwell 1970, fig 3). With the increased pace of activity from the early 1970s, however, 88 Fig 60 Lincoln: street pattern of the walled city, known, presumed, and conjectural (Scale 1 : 12,500) new information was added, necessitating new attempts to reconstruct the plan. A worthy attempt was made in 1971 by Coppack (1973), when publishing Webster’s Flaxengate excavations; this was the basis of the Lincoln Archaeological Trust’s first attempt in 1973, which in turn was largely followed by Wacher (1975, fig 29). In all these plans there was an underlying assumption that much of the modern street plan represented a devolved version of the Roman. This assumption can no longer be made. Evidence of a late Saxon replanning was discovered at Winchester and elsewhere (Biddle & Hill 1971), and the possibility that some of the assumed Roman streets at Lincoln were of early medieval origin was borne out by excavations in 1975-6 at Flaxengate (Perring 1981). Reduced to its absolute minimum, our knowledge of the Roman street plan consists of a few isolated traces, but several hypotheses can be put forward. It is certain that streets on the line of the legionary via sagularis continued around the whole circuit, and that a major relaying, sometimes involving new drainage, took place in the first half of the 2nd century. The principal north-south street was 25ft (7.62m) wide; the principal east-west street apparently measured only 15ft (4.57m) in places, but was certainly
Page 1 and 2:
No 59 ROMAN URBAN TOPOGRAPHY in Bri
Page 3 and 4:
Copyright © 1985 Authors and Counc
Page 5 and 6:
Illustrations Fig 1 Miletus Fig 2 C
Page 7 and 8:
Introduction: the study of Classica
Page 9 and 10:
Introduction and the land divided i
Page 11 and 12:
Introduction Fig 3 Timgad: the colo
Page 13 and 14:
Introduction Fig 6 Lepcis Magna: th
Page 15 and 16:
Introduction xvi
Page 17 and 18:
Cunliffe: Aspects of urbanization i
Page 19 and 20:
Cunliffe: Aspects of urbanization i
Page 21 and 22:
PART II THE PLANNING AND BUILDING O
Page 23 and 24:
Dilke: Ground survey and measuremen
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
The mechanics of the building trade
Page 31 and 32:
Ling: The mechanics of the building
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Who paid for public buildings in Ro
Page 45 and 46:
Duncan--ones: Who paid for public b
Page 47 and 48:
Duncan-Jones: Who paid for public b
Page 49 and 50:
Civic Pride: a factor in Roman town
Page 51 and 52: Frere: Civic Pride: a factor in Rom
Page 53 and 54: Reece: Roman towns and their plans
Page 55 and 56: Reece: Roman towns and their plans
Page 57 and 58: Wacher: The functions of urban buil
Page 59 and 60: Casey: The Roman housing market leg
Page 61 and 62: Casey: The Roman housing market Evi
Page 63 and 64: Casey: The Roman housing market Rom
Page 65 and 66: Drinkwater: Urbanization in the thr
Page 71 and 72: Forum and Capitolium in the early E
Page 73 and 74: Todd: Forum and Capitolium in the e
Page 75 and 76: The quick and the dead: suburbs, ce
Page 77 and 78: Esmonde Cleary: The quick and the d
Page 87 and 88: Salway: Geography and the growth of
Page 89 and 90: Colchester: the mechanics of laying
Page 91 and 92: Crummy: Colchester: the mechanics o
Page 101: New streets for old : the topograph
Page 105 and 106: Jones: New streets for old: the top
Page 107 and 108: Jones: New streets for old: the top
Page 109 and 110: London in the 1st and early 2nd cen
Page 111 and 112: Perring: London in the 1st and earl
Page 113 and 114: Perring: London in the 1st and earl
Page 115 and 116: Marsden: London in the 3rd and 4th
Page 125 and 126: Barker: Aspects of the topography o
Page 131 and 132: Fig 81 Wroxeter: the area of excava
Page 133 and 134: probably from Viroconium, the robbi
Page 135 and 136: Forum Iuhi (Cividale) (Italy) 61a f
show all

ROMAN URBAN TOPOGRAPHY in Britain and the western Empire

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?