HISTORY of SUSSEX
Page2 Page3
Page4 Page5
Crawley Priory - section
b
The Excavations
Had there been an early ditch enclosing the town, we should have expected
to find an early bank to associate with it. This was carefully considered
when examining the section (T.3) dug into the bank in the grounds of Cawley
Priory but, although it was composed of several layers of different materials,
they all belonged to one period of construction. The Roman bank appears
to comprise layers 6, 9, 10, 19, 20.
The lower part of the bank (layer 19) was made of yellow clay, evidently
the natural brick earth which forms the subsoil here; deeper quarrying produced
the material of layer 10, which is a yellow clay containing small flints;
finally, the grey sandy material composing layer 9 is probably weathered
coombe rock from the deepest parts of the quarry.
This succession of natural subsoils was found in the southern bank of
the Lavant (shown on the section drawing of T.1) and was also noted by Dr.
Wilson during excavations in Cawley Priory garden some years ago( S.A.C.95,1957,116).
Both the V-ditches outside the wall penetrated the brick earth and the
coombe rock and would have produced a succession of layers just as we found
in this section. Since we do not know the exact size of the original ditches
it is impossible to compute accurately how much material they would produce
for the bank; a rough estimate suggests that it would have been about the
right quantity but one ditch alone would not have produced enough.
Pieces of brick and tile, fragments of bone and of oyster shell and some
scraps of pottery were scattered throughout the bank but much of the pottery
was at the base of layer 19 and had evidently been lying on the surface
of the ground when the bank was thrown up.
A deposit of mediaeval rubbish (layer 8), containing roofing slates and
some pottery, was found at the tail of the Roman bank but could not be investigated
in detail in the restricted area of the trench. The layers above this must
be post-mediaeval in date and the topmost layers are certainly quite modern;
they are much penetrated by tree-roots.
The most interesting feature of the section, and one which was not previously
noted at Chichester, is the cutting back of the clay bank in order to build
the wall.
The material of layer 20 (and layer 6 above it) is very similar to that
of the bank itself, but is rather more dirty; presumably it was dug out
and piled on top of the bank while the wall footing was laid. The wall was
then built up from both the front and the back; it consists of large flints
laid in courses and bound with thick white mortar.
When the wall reached a height of about 3ft., some of the earth was thrown
back into the space behind it to provide a platform for the builders; there
is a spread of mortar droppings at this level and again at a higher level,
some 5ft. above the footing. There is an offset at the back of the wall
at a height of 6ft., but the wall above this appears to have been partly
rebuilt and the parapet above it is certainly modern. No doubt the wall
was much higher in Roman times, probably at least 20ft. high.
Although there have been seven previous excavations into the bank, the
cutting back of the bank to build the wall has not previously been recorded.
The four trial holes behind North Walls( S.A.C. 95,1957,119-122 )
were too restricted to have revealed this
feature but the section by Rae in 1949( S.A.C. 90, 1952, 181, fig. 17
) does show at least one line of mortar droppings (marked on the published
section drawing) as well as the wall footing (marked as flints on the drawing).
It is a reasonable inference that the cut existed here also, although it was
not observed during the excavation.
Hannah's trench dug in 1932 behind the Palace bastion( S.A.C. 75, 1934,
112, fig. 2 ) did not reach the back of the wall, but his Priory Park trench(
op. cit. 116, fig. 3) might, in the light of present knowledge, be re-interpreted
as showing the cut - there is certainly a discontinuity in the layers in
about the right place. A recent section across the remains of the bank close
to the North Gate does clearly show where it was cut back to build the wall.
About 40 miles to the north-west of Chichester lies Silchester, a Roman
town of similar size and plan. Here the wall and bank of the inner defences
were constructed in exactly the same way as that described above for Chichester.
Four cuttings were made into the bank in 1938 and all of them showed the
same features( Archaeologia, 92,1947,123-130 ).
The bank itself had been constructed not earlier than about A.D. 160,
probably somewhat later. Its layers were piled up in the reverse sequence
of the stratification that would exist at the time a ditch was dug. A gap
in the setting-out bank was noted at one site and a gravel pathway had been
constructed here, over which material for building the bank could be brought.
The bank had been cut back in order to build the wall; the wall-trench was
filled in again on completion of the building and coarse pottery and a coin
from the wall-trench showed that the date of construction of the wall was
about A.D. 200 at the earliest.
Mrs. Cotton, in her excavation report, regarded the bank and the wall
as two separate phases, separated by an interval of some 30-40 years; but
recent experience of trying to date a bank by the pottery found under it
and in it has made us cautious about accepting a date too soon after the
latest pottery. Boon. in his book on Silchester,( G. C. Boon, Roman Silchester,
1957 ) regards the bank and wall as two phases of a single plan: the ditch
and bank formed a defensible enceinte at a time of pressing necessity and
the wall was erected at leisure, after the immediate danger had passed,
to provide permanent fortifications.
It looks as though exactly the same story might apply to Roman Chichester
and it would be satisfactory if the dates agreed. Un-fortunately, dating
by means of pottery is not very precise, but enough pottery has been recorded
from the Chichester defences for something to be attempted. The most abundant
evidence comes from one of the trial holes made by Dr. Wilson in 1952, into
the bank behind North Walls.
Hundreds of sherds of pottery were found
and it can be seen from the published section that most of it must have
come from the wall trench rather than from the bank itself
( S.A.C. 95, 1957, 120-22; Pl.l. Section on p.l 18. See also The Archaeology
of Chichester City Walls, 8-9 ) hence the latest pottery found gives a date for the construction of the
wall. The Samian pottery had a date range from 1st cent. to the second half 2nd cent.
The coarse pottery included some Castor ware not likely to have been deposited
before A.D. 200 and a few other types which might belong to the beginning
of the 3rd cent. In the trench dug by Rae in 1949/50, the Samian sherds
labelled d, e, f, evidently came from the wall-trench and two of these belong
to the second half of the 2nd cent.; two sherds of coarse pottery are recorded
as " A.D. 200 or shortly after." None of the finds from the rest
of the bank are assigned a date as late as A.D. 200( S.A.C. 90, 181, fig.
17. Pottery on p. 196 ). Hannah's Priory Park trench, dug in 1933, produced
more than 430 sherds of pottery, which have been re-examined by Miss Pilmer.
Pottery of the late 2nd cent. occurred both in the bank and close to the
wall (where the wall-trench should be) but, significantly, a fragment of
Samian form 45 came almost certainly from the wall-trench; this form cannot
be earlier than A.D. 180 and was probably not deposited in the wall-trench
until quite a few years after that ( The Archaeology of Chichester City
Walls, 5-6 ).
Our trench T.3, in 1959, produced 69 sherds of pottery. The fragments
in and at the base of the bank included two from everted-rim jars and two
from cavetto-rim jars, also a sherd of a poppy-head beaker with barbotine
dot decoration. None of these can be dated as late as A.D. 200. The pottery
from the wall-trench was generally similar but included a piece of a cavetto-rim
jar of a form which could just belong to the early 3rd cent.
All this evidence gives the impression, which falls short of proof, that
the wall was built a few years later than A.D. 200, but the bank was thrown
up some years earlier. There has never been anything found in the bank which
could be dated early 3rd cent. but finds which could be of this date consistently
occur in the wall-trench. In 1951, some trenches were dug into the bank
behind the City wall at Winchester and one of them showed that the Roman
bank had been cut back to build the Roman town wall. The bank itself produced
a piece of Samian pottery which was dated about A.D. 190 ( Information from
Mr. B. Cunliffe ).
Winchester appears to be yet another town
in a group, all of which reacted in exactly the same way to some danger
which threatened them at the end of the second century.
Top of Page main
page: www.yeoldesussexpages.com
History of Chichester
The Defences of Roman Chichester - Page4
By John Holmes, F.S.A.
