The upper Walbrook valley cemetery

of Roman London
Excavations at Finsbury Circus, City of London, 19872007
Chiz Harward, Natasha Powers and Sadie Watson

M U S E U M O F LO N D O N A R C H A E O LO G Y M O N O G R A P H 6 9

MOLA

The upper Walbrook

valley cemetery of
Roman London
Excavations at Finsbury Circus,
City of London, 19872007

Chiz Harward, Natasha Powers and Sadie Watson

MOLA MONOGRAPH 69

CONTRIBUTORS

Principal authors

Chiz Harward, Natasha Powers,

Sadie Watson

Geoarchaeology

Graham Spurr

Building material

Ian M Betts

Roman pottery

Amy Thorp

Registered finds

Angela Wardle

Coins

Julian Bowsher

Wooden coffins

Paul Thrale

Plant remains

Anne Davis

Animal bone

James Morris

Invertebrate remains

Alan Pipe

Human bone

Natasha Powers with Don Walker

Graphics

Hannah Faux with Chiz Harward

(finds), Carlos Lemos (plans)

Photography

Andy Chopping, Maggie Cox

Project managers

Julian Hill, Robin Nielsen

Editor

Bruno Barber

CONTENTS

List of figures

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

List of tables

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Summary

Introduction

1.1

The upper Walbrook valley and the cemeteries

Early Roman land use and the origins

of the upper Walbrook valley cemetery,

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.2

Circumstances of the excavations

1.3

Antiquarian work on or near the study sites

1.4

The Walbrook skulls

1.5

Organisation of the report

1.6

Textual and graphical conventions

1.7

Dating and phasing the burials

2 2.1

. . . . . . . . . . . .

1
3

. . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . .

10

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

11

Geology and natural topography

. . . . . . . . . . . .

13

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

14

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15

2.2

Prehistoric land use

3.1

Introduction

3.2

Streams and early attempts at drainage and

c AD 43120 (period 2)

xv
xvi

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

of Roman London

The pre-Roman landscape (period 1)

xiii

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Acknowledgements

consolidation (OA2, S1 and S2)

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

Ditch and ?associated timber structure (S1 and S2)

. .

3.3

Levelling, consolidation and possible early quarrying

3.4

The origins of the upper Walbrook valley cemetery,

16

17

. . . . . . . . .

18

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

18

?late 1st century ADc AD 120 (OA3)

Early inhumation burials

15

. . . .

20

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21

Inhumation burials sealed by the period 3 road

Semi- and disarticulated human remains from
waterlain deposits
3.5

The 2nd-century AD cemetery,

4 4.1

c AD 120200 (period 3)

4.2

Discussion (period 2)
Introduction

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

22

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

24

Drainage, streams and flooding (S5, S6, OA2

and OA8)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

A major eastwest aligned ditch (S5)

. . . . . . . . . .

A fence on the south side of Structure 5 (S6)

. . . . .

24
24
27

Natural stream channels and flood deposits (OA2

and OA8)
4.3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The development and use of the cemetery in the

2nd century AD (OA5, R1, S3 and OA3)
Quarrying (OA5)

. . . . . . .

29

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

29

An eastwest aligned road (R1)

vi

27

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

30

A roadside ditch (S3)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

33

Cemetery use (OA3)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

34

Activity on the south side of Road 1 (S7 and OA9)

The late Roman cemetery and the formation

of the marsh, c AD 200400 (period 4)

. .

52

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

53

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

55

4.4

Discussion (period 3) .

5.1

Introduction

5.2

Drainage, streams and flooding (S5 and OA2)

5.3

Cemetery use in the 3rd and 4th centuries AD

(OA3 and OA5)

. . . . .

55

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

58

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

58

Quarrying (OA5)

Cemetery use (OA3)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Dumping over Road 1 (OA12)

5.4

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Marsh formation (OA4)

Moorfields in the medieval and post-

6 6.1

medieval periods, c 10661900 (periods 56)

Discussion (period 4) .

65

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

67

Medieval Moorfields marsh, c 10661500 (period 5)

. .

69

Introduction

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

69

Marsh (OA4)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

69

Refuse dumps (OA11)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

71

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

72

Post-medieval summary, c 15001900 (period 6)

Introduction

Aspects of the upper Walbrook valley cemetery

. . .

73

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

73

Refuse dumps and marsh reclamation (OA4)

. . . . .

73

Later make-up dumps and soakaways (OA7)

. . . . . .

73

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

75

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

77

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

78

7.1

The environment

7.2

Water management

7.3

The road network

7.4

Management of the cemetery

Cemetery activities

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

80

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

80

Other functions and activities within the cemetery

. .

82

. . . . . . .

83

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

86

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

87

Horses and other animals in the cemetery

7.5

Funerary practice
Cremation

Further evidence for funerary rites and other rituals

7.6

Burial practice

92

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

92

Cremation burial

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

92

Inhumation burial

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

93

Religious beliefs and ritual

7.7

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

105

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

106

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

106

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

106

The cemetery population

Cremated remains
Inhumation burials

7.8

65

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Drainage and pits (OA6)

6.2

65

The formation of the marsh in the 3rd and 4th

centuries AD (OA4)

5.5

. . . . . . . . . . . . .

58

Burial in a wet and unstable landscape

. . . . . . . .

126

vii

Introduction

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The effect of fluvial erosion on the burials

Discussion

Conclusions

8 8.1
8.2

. . . . . .

127

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

133

The upper Walbrook valley cemetery

9 9.1
9.2

Specialist appendices

. . . . . . . .

134

Roman cemetery studies in London: towards a

new approach?

Catalogue of Roman burials

126

Introduction

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

135

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

138

Burial catalogue

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10 10.1 The building material

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

156

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

156

Stone building material

Ceramic building material

Daub

138

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

156

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

157

Wall plaster

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10.2 The Roman pottery

Methodology

157

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

158

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

158

Overall composition of the assemblage

. . . . . . . .

158

Catalogue of selected, possible displaced ceramic

burial vessels

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10.3 The accessioned finds

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

159
159

Catalogue of selected finds from non-burial

contexts

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

159

Possible non-ceramic grave goods from the

. . . . . . . . . . . .

161

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

163

Museum of London collections

10.4 The coins

Introduction

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The Roman coins

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Catalogue of Roman coins

The post-Roman coins

165

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

167

. . . . . . . . . . .

168

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

169

Introduction and methodology

Results

. . . . . . . . . . . .

169

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

174

10.6 The animal bone

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Introduction and methodology

Results

175

. . . . . . . . . . . .

175

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

175

10.7 The invertebrate remains

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The fauna

176

. . . . . . . . . . . .

176

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

176

Introduction and methodology

. . . . . . . . . . .

179

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

180

Ecology and habitat implications

10.8 The human bone

viii

163

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Catalogue of post-Roman coins

10.5 The plant remains

163

Burnt bone and pyre debris

Inhumations

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

180

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

186

10.9 Radiocarbon dating

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

196

French and German summaries

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

197

Bibliography

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

200

Index

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

208

ix

SUMMARY

This monograph draws together the results of six excavations

which were carried out between 1987 and 2007 by MOLA
(Museum of London Archaeology) and its predecessor, the
Department of Urban Archaeology (DUA). It outlines the
archaeological background from antiquarian discoveries of
skulls and the early 20th-century work of Frank Lambert of
the Guildhall Museum to recent excavation and describes the
archaeological sequence from the pre-Holocene environment
and topography through to post-Roman development of the
Moorfields marsh. A series of thematic essays discuss the upper
Walbrook valley cemetery, its development, use and decline,
followed by wider studies of Londons Roman cemeteries.
The excavated sites lay between the northern side of Finsbury
Circus and Eldon Street, City of London, EC2. This area, to the
north of the Walbrook valley, was crossed by a number of
meandering tributary stream channels in the prehistoric period,
which were later altered and replaced by Roman water
management features. Such measures achieved limited success
and the continued erosion of new stream channels, as well as
periodic, possibly seasonal flooding, remained a dominant
feature of the area. Within this landscape a Roman cemetery
was established, a discrete entity to the west of the northern
cemetery (around Bishopsgate). Set within an area of poorly
drained, marginal land, the cemetery provides intriguing insights
into the management of burial space and attitudes to the dead.
At least 125 inhumations and ten cremation burials broadly
date from c AD 43400, with the main period of use being
c AD 120200. The first burials are not closely dated, but
ceramic grave goods indicate that the cemetery was in use from
at least the end of the 1st century AD, if not earlier. Around
AD 120, once drainage was somewhat more controlled, an east
west road was constructed across the study sites. This minor
road had no obvious destination and it may have been little more
than a track providing access to the area. Burials were more
numerous at this time, although there is some evidence for other
activities taking place among the graves, including quarrying,
refuse disposal, and the grazing and disposal of horses. From the
3rd century AD the road was no longer maintained, but
occasional interments may have continued into the 4th century
AD. There is evidence for deteriorating environmental conditions
and for the onset of marsh formation, perhaps in part resulting
from the impact of the construction of the city wall (c AD

190230) on the drainage of the upper Walbrook valley. However,

given that these deposits appear to date from no earlier than the
second half of the 3rd century AD, other factors must also have
been involved, including neglect of the management of
watercourses and drainage.
The majority of the graves are typical of Romano-British
cemeteries in London and elsewhere, with a relatively restricted
range of burial rites and grave goods, and with poor representation
of timber coffins. A unique discovery for London is that of two
individuals buried wearing heavy iron leg rings. What is
particularly unusual about the upper Walbrook valley cemetery
is its location within an area subject to regular flooding, which
resulted in body parts washing out of graves dug beside streams
and drainage channels, and becoming exposed. The cemetery
continued to be used for burial despite this, and subsequent
graves were dug into partially eroded earlier inhumations.
One of the most enduring and colourful discussions in the
study of Roman London has concerned the various theories
expounded to explain the large number of human skulls
recovered from the Walbrook valley as a whole (disproportionate
to the quantity of post-cranial skeletal material), a detailed
study of which is presented in this volume. The evidence from
the study sites indicates that previous interpretations of deliberate
decapitation, pre-Roman dismemberment rituals and defleshing
may not fully explain the presence of disarticulated human
remains in the Walbrook. There is clear evidence of the erosion
of burials and displacement of body parts (including heads) by
flooding, with partially exposed and eroded human remains
evidently being tolerated by the Romano-British population.
The osteological data are comprehensively discussed and
compared with buried populations from across London and
beyond. The authors have used forensic literature to aid
interpretation and provide a new picture of the formation
processes which have contributed to the discovery of the
Walbrook skulls. In particular, this study shows that the
observed pattern of deposition was consistent with the way in
which a body disperses in water, and that crania especially can
travel some considerable distance downstream. The results
undermine previously published notions of a cult of the head
and show that erosion and transportation during flood events or
in migrating watercourses offers the best explanation of the
observed phenomenon.
This cemetery provides a fascinating insight into Roman
burial practices. By its nature it offers tantalising possibilities
for analysis of how the living related to, and managed, the
dead within a marginal landscape and under stress from the
environment. It remains unclear if this location (and the readily
apparent transience of many graves) was considered of particular
importance by those burying here, or if they had little choice in
where to bury their dead.

xv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

MOLA would like to thank Prudential Portfolio Managers

Limited and the City of London for their generous funding of
the archaeological fieldwork and publication of the findings from
1618 Finsbury Circus/1831 Eldon Street and 6 Broad Street
Place respectively. Selected results from three sites previously
excavated by the Museum of Londons Department of Urban
Archaeology (DUA) have been included in this publication and
we are grateful to those who funded those projects: the
Hammerson group (711 Finsbury Circus); MEPC Developments
Ltd (1215 Finsbury Circus); and Norwich Union Pensions
Management Ltd (1517 Eldon Street). The watching brief
carried out by MOLA (then known as MoLAS, ie Museum of
London Archaeology Service) at 14 Eldon Street was funded by
Norwich Union Pensions.
MOLA would also like to thank Kathryn Stubbs, Assistant
Director Historic Environment, Department of the Built
Environment, City of London, for her advice and support
throughout the excavation programme. We are also grateful to
David Whipp of Mills Whipp Partnership who acted as
archaeological consultant for the excavations at both Broad Street
Place and Finsbury Circus/Eldon Street, and who promoted the
concept of a single synthetic publication drawing on the
previous unpublished sites.
The authors express their thanks to John Fuller and John
Mash and their staff at Bovis Lendlease, John Cole and Dave
Hodgkins and their team at John F Hunt, the staff of Kerr and
SES for all their assistance at Finsbury Circus/Eldon Street,
Aubrey Davies and Paul Middleton and their team at Costain,
and all at Keltbray Ltd and Euro Earthworks Ltd at Broad Street
Place.
Thanks must go to the archaeological teams involved with
each site. Chiz Harward would like to express his appreciation
to MOLA staff who worked tirelessly at 6 Broad Street Place:
Kevin Appleton, Ryszard Bartkowiak, Raoul Bull, Peter Cardiff,
Neville Constantine, Gary Evans, Val Griggs, David Harris,
Mark Ingrams, David Jamieson, Nigel Jeffries, Malcolm
McKenzie, Tony Mackinder, Ken Pitt, Simon Stevens, Dan
Swift, Paul Thrale and Mark Wiggins; and also to Rick Archer,
Tony Baxter, Strephon Duckering, Adam Lask, Shane Maher
and Freya Sadarangani of Pre-Construct Archaeology, and
Kirsty Campbell of Birkbeck College, University of London.
Chiz Harward, Paul Thrale and Sadie Watson would like to
thank all the MOLA site staff who worked in often difficult
conditions at Finsbury Circus/Eldon Street and without whose

xvi

patience, hard work and dedication the site could not have been
completed: Bernadette Allen, Howard Burkhill, Peter Cardiff,
Alex Cetera, Vince Cherubini, Helen Dawson, Satsuki Harris,
Mark Ingram, Antonietta Lerz, Hana Lewis, Peter Lovett,
Victoria Markham, Chris Menary, Lawrence Owens, Sasathorn
Pickering, Adele Pimley, Iris Rodenbuesch, Michael Shapland,
Ceri Shipton, Simon Stevens, Riley Thorne, Mark Wiggins and
Nigel Wilson. Additional supervision of watching briefs at
Finsbury Circus/Eldon Street was by Robert Cowie, Ken Pitt
and Dave Sankey. Jim Allen was MOLAs Health and Safety
consultant.
Survey at the MOLA sites was provided by Eamonn
Baldwin, Mark Burch, Neville Constantine, Catherine Drew,
Cordelia Hall, Sarah Jones, Dave Mackie and Joe Severn of the
MOLA Geomatics team. IT support was by Richard May,
while Harry Matthews and Bruce Watson dropped off and
picked up all the equipment, finds and samples. On-site
osteology training and advice was provided by Natasha Powers,
and geoarchaeological sampling and recording was carried out
by Craig Halsey, Will Mills and Graham Spurr with advice
from Jane Corcoran.
The authors would like to thank the original supervisors of
the DUA sites: Portia Askew, Sarah Gibson, Julian Hill, Duncan
Lees and Paul Potter. Portia Askew also provided further
information during the production of this volume.
Julian Bowsher is grateful to Luisa Duarte and Liz Goodman
who cleaned the coins, and to Michael Hammerson for his
initial examination of the coins from 6 Broad Street Place.
Natasha Powers and Don Walker wish to thank Paul Bland and
his colleagues at the School of Health Sciences, City University,
for their help with radiographic imaging of both the human
bone and the iron leg rings, and Jelena Bekvalac and Rebecca
Redfern (Centre for Human Bioarchaeology) for help in
accessing the human remains from previous excavations.
The authors would like to thank numerous colleagues at
MOLA for their comments, advice and input, in particular
David Bowsher, John Giorgi, Julian Hill, Malcolm McKenzie,
Mary Nicholls, Ken Pitt and Dave Sankey. Thanks also go to
John Clark, Jenny Hall and Jackie Keily of the Museum of
London, and Cath Maloney and Steve Tucker of the London
Archaeological Archive and Research Centre (LAARC) for
access to Museum of London material. Jon Butler of PreConstruct Archaeology discussed the project in relation to his
excavations at Moor House. Jane Sidell visited the sites and
provided advice in her role as English Heritage Scientific
Advisor. Hilary Cool of Barbican Research Associates and Kurt
Hunter-Mann of York Archaeological Trust kindly provided
details of Roman shackles from the Roman cemetery at
Driffield Terrace, York, ahead of publication.
Finally, the authors gratefully acknowledge the pioneering
work in the upper Walbrook valley carried out by Frank
Lambert CBE on behalf of the Guildhall Museum.