8/13/2019 Towns 1066

1/4

8/13/2019 Towns 1066

2/4

20 Biddle: Evolution of towns before 1066

inevitably come from archaeology, and the archaeology virgin site. The earliest occupation of a town displaying

of the Anglo-Saxon town is a post-war phenomenon a planned layout may thus be quite unconnected withthat did not gather momentum until the 1960s. the actual date of the imposition of the planned systemArchaeology is, moreover, a relatively slow process of It should also be clear that a planned layout can be

inquiry, relatively expensive by comparison with eroded by gradual changes and even entirely lost, andhistorical research in general. Yet urban archaeology that it could in the course of time be replaced by a later

must be conducted on a scale commensurate with urban planned system laid out on new principles. All thesesettlement, and with a breadth of approach consonant permutations may be relevant in considering the varietywith the complexity of the changing patterns of urban of Anglo-Saxon planned towns. They are listed heredevelopment, if the results obtained are to be of more because it is evident that a failure to define these various

than antiquarian interest. It cannot therefore be sur- possibilities has given rise to considerable confusion inprising that few Anglo-Saxon towns have yet been previous discussions of the subject.examined archaeologically on the appropriate scale In cases where an Anglo-Saxon town emerged on a site(Heighway ed., 1972, paras. 5.50-51).

The first attempt to provide a general account, howeveroccupied during the Roman period, it is essential to defithe extent to which the Roman pattern may have

brief, of the physical character and origins of the influenced the topography of the later settlement. Suchartificially created towns of the pre-Conquest period an influence might derive from continuity of land use.was written just too soon to benefit from the recent It could quite as well result from the way in which majoradvances in urban archaeology (Beresford, 1967, 319-27) It suffered inevitably from the extreme imprecision

structures condition subsequent patterns well after

then current in archaeological discussion of the relation-ceasing to serve their own original function, and evenafter long periods of total abandonment. The role of

ship between Roman and later settlements on the same such relict features (or morphological frames: Conzen,site. The first direct archaeological evidence for the 1969, 127) is admirably demonstrated by the amphi-Anglo-Saxon date of a planned street-system had in factbeen obtained from Winchester some years previously

theatres whose outlines can still be read in the plans ofFrench and Italian cities (Tours, Perigueux, Lucca, Assisi

(Biddle, 1964, 215-17: 1965, 242-3). Between 1963 and Arezzo,s for example), although the actual fabric of the

1967 excavations at Lydford produced evidence for the original structure may now be entirely invisible. Inregular internal arrangement of another and very different England in the early middle ages individual Romanexample of a West Saxon burh (Addyman, 1964-8). In1969 and 1971 important further evidence was obtained

buildings certainly survived to affect the pattern of

for the Winchester street-system (Biddle, 1970, 285-9);later growth. Few Roman buildings stand above ground

1975. 101-4). At Oxford in 1970 the main east-westin this country today, and so we tend to discount theimportance they may once have had as determining

street was shown to have been surfaced on seven factors in the topography of Anglo-Saxon towns. Theoccasions before c. 1100. and the pre-Conquest date of example of Jewry Wall, Leicester, should provide a-one of the side-streets was established for the first time corrective to this view (Taylor and Taylor, 1965. i.(Hassall, 1971, 3-9; 1972. 12-13). By the later 1960sAnglo-Saxon archaeology was at last approaching

384-6), and recent excavations in Colchester and Yorkhave demonstrated the continuing use or re-use of

problems of Anglo-Saxon urban topography using the Roman buildings late into the Anglo-Saxon period andsimple procedures for the sectioning and dating of linearfeatures which had first been applied to the elucidation

even beyond (Crummy, 1974; Ramm, 1972, 244-6).Similar evidence is emerging in other towns, including

of Romano-British defences and street plans over 30 both Exeter and Winchester, but the most strikingyears earlier. The first summaries of the new evidence

have now appeared. Redford has surveyed the informa-

example is provided by the baths basilica at Wroxeter,

part of which stands as the fragment known as thetion available up to 1970 for the defences of the later Old Work, and where the ruined structures provided thepre-Conquest boroughs (Radford, 1970) and the case for framework for an extraordinary and as yet unexplainedplanned street-systems in some of the Wessex burhs hasbeen argued in the light of the evidence from Winchester

recrudesence of Roman-style timber building in the sub-Roman period (Barker, 1973). Although Romano-

(Biddle and Hill, 1971). British buildings may never have exerted on subsequentAt this stage the phrase planned town must be defined. patterns an influence comparable to that of theI take it to mean an urban place which has been laid out colonnaded streets of Roman Syria seen today, forIn a regular pattern at one moment in time with the example, in Damascus in the Street-called-Straightpurpose of dividing and apportioning the ground for (Elisseff, 1970, 170-3), it would be unwise to ignorepermanent settlement. A planned town may or may not the role they may once have played in conditioning thebe defended, or an initially undefended layout may later topography of Anglo-Saxon occupation.be provided with defences. Conversely, a defended Romano-British town and fortress defences exercised,enclosure need not be given any regular internal arrange- by contrast, a pervasive and enduring control over laterment, or such an arrangement may be a later insertion developments on the same site. One has only to considerinto a previously unplanned enclosure. The deliberate places like London, Colchester, Lincoln, Canterbury,organization of space is the critical factor in the definition Winchester, Chichester, and Exeter, where the medievalof a planned town. Defences are to this extent irrelevant, walls followed precisely the course of their Romanalthough they may exercise an important influence on theform of the planned layout and on the function of its

predecessors, or York, Chester, Gloucester, andRochester, where the Roman circuits were partially

individual components. lost only when the medieval towns expanded beyondIt is clear that a planned system may be added to an their former limits, to perceive the dominant roleexisting settlement as an expansion of it, and conversely played by Romano-British defences in conditioningthat unordered settlement may grow up as an extension later patterns. This role was essentially passive. Theof a planned core. It must also be stressed that a planned Roman defencesditch or ditches, wall and earthensystem can be imposed upon an existing settlement and rampartpresented even in decay a massive physicalnot be any the less planned than an initial layout on a barrier. Even if the walls were not maintained, it was

8/13/2019 Towns 1066

3/4

8/13/2019 Towns 1066

4/4

22 Biddle: Evolution of towns before 1066

to the east, traffic has cut a wide hollow into thehillside. The limits of this hollow lie far behind themedieval frontages to north and south of the street, anddemonstrate that the hollow was formed before thesefrontages became fixed in the 10th or 11th centuries.Similarly, the limits of the hollow far exceed theRoman frontages to either side of the Roman street,which here occupies approximately the same positionas High Street. It must be concluded that traffic usingthis route in the post-Roman period was able to ignorethe former limits of the Roman street and has over the

centuries, by constant minor divergences in bad condi-tions, eroded the kind of hollow way which ischaracteristic of unsurfaced medieval routes in hillycountry and which can be seen on all the medievalapproach roads to the city (Biddle and Hill, 1971, 70;Biddle ed., 1975, 278, cf. 260-3). This example suggeststhat the apparent survival of a Roman street in amedieval pattern needs to be closely examined if itstrue significance is to be established. In Winchester thisapparent survival demonstrates in reality the completeabsence of any importance attached to the buildings andproperties lining one of the most important streets ofthe Roman town. Nothing could emphasize more clearlythe breakdown of the urban order of Venta. If there isany evidence for continuity here, it is for the continuedimportance of a through-route from the West Gate to

the East Gate. The position of this route appears to beconditioned entirely by the obstacles and channelsformed by the defences, the gates, and the crossing ofthe river.

This is not to say that there was no settlement withinthe walls of Winchester, or of the other places mentioned,which required the passage of these routes through thewalled areas and ensured their continued importance. Itis simply to emphasize that the apparent survival ofRoman streets is a very uncertain guide to actual con-tinuity of settlement, and no indication at all thatRoman urban conditions, buildings, or propertyboundaries had survived in any recognizable form.Arguments for continuity of settlement, for which thereis now increasing evidence, must normally be based on

other indications, although the case of London discussedbelow might provide an exception. For our presentpurposes, the physical remains of Roman towns havea very real importance as relict features conditioningthe pattern of what later emerged on these sites. Butthey do not suggest that the roots of the Anglo-Saxonplanned town grew more than in this very general sensefrom the Romano-British experience.

The loss of even the major elements of the Roman streetplan is emphasized in those towns where the Romanthrough-routes do not always pass through opposedgates, but are for some reason diverted within the townto pass out of the walled area by a gate or gates notdirectly opposite the point of entry. Canterburyprovides a case in point, where the medieval and moderneast-west streets now run diagonally across the grain of

the Roman pattern (Frere, 1962; 1966, fig. 19; 1970,83, fig. 1). London presents much greater difficulty.Almost the entire Roman street pattern has been lost,but there are some notable exceptions (Biddle andHudson, 1973, paras. 4.31, 36). The survival of theinternal plan of the Cripplegate fort suggests that itsdefences exercised some control over the developmentof this area in the early middle ages and thus that thefort itself survived as a distinct and possibly stilldefensible enclosure into the Saxon period (Grimes,1968, 29, 39, 204n). Elsewhere, lengths of the two

most important streets of the Roman town haveremained in use, while along intervening stretches of same streets the medieval and modern courses havewandered away from the earlier lines. It is remarkablethat the great street markets ofmedieval London,Westcheap (Cheapside) and Eastcheap, both occupyapproximately the lines of Roman streets. There maybe topographical controls here of which we are ignorbut the possibility that some London streets did actusurvive in continuous use together with the propertiesalong them cannot be entirely ignored. They would

provide the exception which emphasizes the generallack of demonstrable continuity of streets as built-uproutes.

The earliest large-scale Anglo-Saxon settlementsrecognizable as towns seem to have been the coastal oriverine trading and industrial centres of the 7th centuand later of which Saxon Southampton, Hamwih,provides the best-known example. It seems possible ththere was at least one of these centres in each of themajor kingdoms, Southampton (Hamwih 8th cent.) foWessex; Fordwich (Fordeuuicum 675), and possiblySandwich (Sondwic 851) and Dover for Kent; London(Lundenwic 673-85(?)) for Kent, Essex, and laterMercia; Ipswich (Gipeswic 993) for East Anglia; andYork (Eoforwicceaster 644 (9th cent.)) for NorthumbLittle is known of the topography of any of these placin the 7th-9th centuries, except York and Southamptoand those with Roman antecedents on the same site(Dover, London and York) are too conditioned by thifact to be of direct relevance here. Of the remainder,only Southampton has been sufficiently investigatedto reveal anything of its layout at this date (Fig. 8).Eight or nine gravelled streets were recorded during19th century brickearth digging, two parallel streetswere found in 1968 and 1971 respectively, and a streeat right-angles to these in 1973. This is enough to hinthat Hamwih for much of its thirty hectares was set oualong streets running back from the shore, with crossstreets at intervals (Addyman, 1973, 221). Three factencourage the view that this was a deliberately plannedsystem and not a random growth: its regularity, its

consistency, and the observation that the roadsexcavated under modern conditions had been there froan early date, although not perhaps from the very startof the settlement. No overall plan is yet available toassess the full regularity of the system, but its consis-tency is supported by the alignment of excavatedstructures, even where these occur on sites where streethemselves have not been found. Addymans model hasproved to have a strong predictive value in this respect;a further pointer to the probability that we are dealingwith a planned system to which subsequent developmewas related. If the streets were in reality an early (if notprimary) feature, the dating evidence for the occupatiomight suggest that they were laid out in the reign of Ine(688-726) and it would seem likely that they were theresult of a royal initiative.

The Southampton evidence is of considerable importanfor the history of planned towns in Wessex, and thus inlate Anglo-Saxon England as a whole, and it must beapproached with caution. Should the reality of a plannelayout of c. 700 be established, there would be no needto look much farther for the source from which theregularly planned street layouts of 8th-9th centuryMercia or Alfredian Wessex were derived. Towns lyingalong a linear topographical feature such as a shore-linemay, however, tend naturally to display a pattern ofcommunication parallel with the shore and at right-angl

Link to Next Section

http://01403002.pdf/http://01403002.pdf/