The A13 Thames Gateway DBFO Roadscheme(Fig. 1.1)The A13 Thames Gateway DBFO (Design, Build,Finance and Operate) Roadscheme refers to a seriesof improvements along a 20km stretch of the A13trunk road through the East London Boroughs ofTower Hamlets, Newham and Barking and Dagen -ham (Fig. 1.1). The £146 million project wasapproved as part of the Accelerated Review of thetrunk road programme in 1997 and provides a vitallink in the east-west transport infrastructure toassist regeneration in East London. The route is ofmajor importance to industry located along the A13and provides heavy goods vehicle links fromDocklands and the Lower Lea Valley to the M25 andTilbury Docks.

The A13 DBFO contract was awarded to RoadManagement Services (A13) plc (RMS) by the

Highways Agency in April 2000. The contract wasnovated from the Highways Agency to Transportfor London (TfL) under the terms of the GreaterLondon Authority (GLA) Act in July 2000. As part ofthe 30 year DBFO contract RMS was required toundertake a series of improvements at key junctionsor route sections. This included carriagewaywidening and an additional flyover at the Iron -bridge to Canning Town section (CT), new under-passes and slip roads at the Prince Regent Lanejunction (PRL), replacement of an existing flyoverand carriageway widening at the Woolwich ManorWay junction (WMW), improvement of the OldRoding Bridge (RB) and a new underpass at theMovers Lane junction (ML). The DBFO contractmade provision for a programme of archaeologicalworks to be undertaken in advance of, and during,construction works.

1

PART 1: INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Chapter 1: Introduction

Fig. 1.1 Site location

The route of the A13 at this location runsparallel to the River Thames, traversing the veryedge of the Thames gravel terraces and alluvialfloodplain. Previous archaeological work hasshown the Thames gravel terraces to be one of themost intensively occupied regions of southernEngland during the prehistoric period andlocations on or adjacent to the terrace edge havehigh potential for preserving waterlogged organicremains, such as timber structures. Three phases of archaeological fieldwork were undertakenbetween 2000 and 2003 to evaluate and mitigatethe impact of the road improvements on potentialarchaeological sites. Evaluation Phases I and IIcomprised a series of boreholes, test pits andtrenches at five locations and Phase III a series oftargeted excavations at three of the five sites,followed by watching briefs during constructionwork (Table 1.1).

Although not prolific in cultural material, thearchaeology recorded covers a wide chronologicalrange representing intermittent activity spanningthe Mesolithic through to the post-Roman period.Regionally important evidence of early Neolithicagriculture was recovered during evaluation of theWoolwich Manor Way site, that was subsequentlypreserved in situ. The greatest concentration ofactivity, however, dates to 2nd millennium BC andincludes several waterlogged timber structures andtrackways with associated wetland edge occupa-tion. Extensive geoarchaeological and palaeoenvi-ronmental sampling carried out during the lifetimeof the project provides an important record oflandscape evolution and periods of major changecan be detected, both natural and anthropogenicallyinduced. As well as providing a context for thearchaeology along the A13, this raises a number ofissues regarding the interaction of local communi-ties with the natural environment; how theyresponded to change and to a certain extentexploited it. Ultimately this is of relevance not onlyto understanding the past, but also to currentconcerns regarding environmental managementalong the Thames estuary today.

Archaeological project historyDue to the long-running and complex nature of theconstruction project, the A13 archaeologicalprogramme saw an unusually complex interactionbetween project sponsor, construction contractor

and the various archaeological consultants andcontractors. The responsibilities of the variousparties are explained below.

The archaeological advisor to the Departments’Agent team (representing the Project Sponsor, TfL)was Oxford Archaeology (OA), who were respon-sible for supervising the tendering process andmonitoring the Principal Contractor for compliancewith the terms of the DBFO contract. OA were repre-sented by George Lambrick during the tender evalu-ation phase, Tim Allen during the PreliminaryDesign, Phase I and Phase II evaluation, and StuartForeman during the Phase III Further Archae -ological Works and post-excavation phases. Externalmonitoring during the fieldwork, on behalf of thelocal authorities, was undertaken by NicholasTruckle of English Heritage Greater London Archae -ological Advisory Service (GLAAS), assisted by DrJane Sidell (English Heritage regional scientificadvisor). Christopher Place, acting on behalf ofChris Blandford Associates, was appointed ProjectArchaeologist by RMG/RMS in July 2000. Heprepared designs for the Phase I and II evaluationsand the watching briefs, with detailed input fromthe main archaeological contractor, Ken Whittaker ofGifford and Partners. Dr Martin Bates, as sub-consultant to Gifford and Partners, providedspecialist geoarchaeological advice in formulatingthe schemewide research strategy. Paul Falcini ofWessex Archaeology took over as Project Archae -ologist in June 2001 and produced the Phase IIIFurther Archaeological Works designs.

All Phase I and Phase II archaeological workswere undertaken by Gifford and Partners (GP),under the direction of Ken Whittaker (latterlyreplaced by Simon Blatherwick). Pre-ConstructArchaeology (PCA) were employed by Gifford andPartners as fieldwork sub-contractor. Phase IIIfurther archaeological works, including preparationof assessment reports, were split between Giffordand Partners and Wessex Archaeology for contrac-tual reasons, the former working on Prince RegentLane and Woolwich Manor Way, the latter onMovers Lane.

For the purpose of this project, the DBFOcontractors’ responsibilities for analysis andreporting were discharged on completion of thepost-excavation assessment phase for theindividual sites. The scheme-wide post-excavationproject design was prepared by Stuart Foreman andElizabeth Stafford of Oxford Archaeology who co-

Landscape and Prehistory of the East London Wetlands

2

Table 1.1 Summary of phased archaeological investigations

Route section Phase I evaluation Phase II evaluation Phase III excavation Phase III WB

CT A13 Ironbridge-Canning Town • •PRL A13/A112 Prince Regent Lane • • • •WMW A13/A117 Woolwich Manor Way • • • •RB A13 Old Roding Bridge •ML A13 Movers Lane • • • •

ordinated post-excavation specialist analyses andpublication, reporting directly on behalf of thefunding body, TfL.

Structure of this volumeThis volume is divided into three parts. Part I(chapters 1 and 2) summarises the history andaims of the project and provides a generalbackground to contextualise the archaeologicaldiscoveries found along the route. It also includesdetail of the strategies and methodologiesemployed during the fieldwork, assessment andspecialist analytical stages. Part II (chapters 3-7)focuses on the key sites. Each site is presented as aseparate chapter and includes a description of thesediment sequences and associated palaeoecolog-ical evidence, followed by a period-based descrip-tion of the cultural evidence. The description of thecultural evidence primarily focuses on the struc-tural remains, both cut features and timber struc-tures, but also integrates the artefactual evidencewhere appropriate. The date ranges of the periodsused in this volume are presented in Table 1.2. PartIII of the volume comprises a series of thematicdiscussions that summarise the routewideevidence within the wider regional context. Fulldetails of the scientific dating programme,

together with detailed specialist reports for bothartefactual and palaeoenvironmental remains areincluded in the appendices.

Geology, topography and recent land-use (Figs 1.2 and 1.3)Greater London lies in the centre of the LondonBasin, an area bounded by the exposed Cretaceouschalk of the Chiltern Hills to the north and north-west, the Berkshire Downs to the west and theNorth Downs to the south-west and south (Fig.1.2). To the east the Thames Basin opens onto theNorth Sea (Sumbler 1996). The chalk extendsbeneath the entire basin and is overlain byPalaeocene and Eocene deposits. The Palaeocenedeposits consist of Thanet Sand and the LambethGroup (Upnor, Reading and Woolwich Formations)laid down around 60 million years ago. The Eocenedeposits consist of London Clay laid down 55million years ago, in places capped by the ClaygateMember and Bagshot Formation (British GeologicalSurvey sheet 257).

Superficial drift deposits occur throughout thecentral part of Greater London along the course ofthe River Thames and its tributaries (Fig. 1.3). Thesedeposits are all Quaternary in origin; predominatelyformed by fluvial or fluvial-glacial action with someperiglacial deposits. Boulder clay or till of glacialorigin is almost absent from the London areaalthough localised deposits of the Lowestoft Tilloccur at Chigwell and Havering to the north-eastand Finchley Common, Belmont and Chase Side tothe west. The most extensive drift deposits arefound in West London where gravels relating to anumber of phases of river downcutting and terraceformation underlie most of Hammersmith toSlough and Egham. Other substantial depositsoccur in the Lea Valley and to the north-east atTower Hamlets to Havering. The terrace gravels arevariably capped by expanses of Langley Silts(‘brickearths’) which are especially extensive anddeep in the areas to the west of London. Theyoungest of the terrace gravels in the valley bottomsare capped by Holocene (c 10,000 years to present)alluvial deposits, which occur along river margins.In Central and East London these deposits areextensive from Westminster downstream, withsignificant deposits in the Thames, Lea, Roding,Darent and Mar Dyke valleys.

The A13 Thames Gateway route begins on thelow-lying floodplain, to the north-east of the Isle ofDogs peninsular, in the London Borough of TowerHamlets. At this point it is in the valley of the RiverLea, a tributary of the Thames. From here the routeextends eastwards across the London Borough ofNewham, running parallel with the edge of thegravel terraces and floodplain. Exceptions to thisare where the route crosses the River Roding intothe London Borough of Barking and Dagenham.Recent landuse along the route predominantlycomprises urban and industrial areas and in places

Chapter 1

3

Table 1.2 Chronology of the archaeological periods referenced in this volume

Period Date Range

Modern AD 1800 - PresentPost-medieval AD 1500 - 1799Medieval AD 1066 - 1499

Late Saxon AD 850 - 1066Mid Saxon AD 650- 850Early Saxon AD 410 - 650

Late Roman AD 250 - 410Mid Roman AD 150 - 250Early Roman AD 43 - 150

Late Iron Age 43 BC- AD 100Middle Iron Age 400 - 100 BCEarly Iron Age 700 - 400 BCLate Bronze Age 1100 - 700 BCMiddle Bronze Age 1500 - 1100 BCEarly Bronze Age 2400 - 1500 BCLater Neolithic 3000 - 2400 BCEarlier Neolithic 4000 - 3000 BCMesolithic 8500 - 4000 BCEarly Post-Glacial 10000 - 8500 BC

Late Glacial (Late Upper Palaeolithic) 12,000 - 10,000 BPUpper Palaeolithic 30,000 - 10,000 BPMiddle Palaeolithic 150,000 - 30,000 BPLower Palaeolithic 500,000 - 150,000 BP

a significant thickness of modern deposits mask theunderlying Holocene alluvial sediments and thenatural topography of the terrace gravels.

Geoarchaeological and environmentalbackground (Fig. 1.4)In order to understand fully the character anddistribution of archaeological sites in the lowerestuary area and the reasons behind major changesin settlement patterns in the past it is necessary tounderstand the changing nature of the estuary. Thegeological history of the Thames is complex. Todaythe estuary is characterised as “tide-dominated”(sensu Dalrymple et al. 1992) in which majorsandbars occur within the outer estuary area, amarine-dominated zone, and tidal meanders in aninner mixed energy zone (Fig. 1.4, Bates andStafford forthcoming; Bates and Whittaker 2004).

The recent geomorphologic development of thearea and the establishment of the modern topog-raphy have resulted from major drainage patternmodifications during the Quaternary. The Pleisto -cene deposits of the Lower Thames have beenextensively studied (Gibbard 1985; Bridgland 1994;1995; Bridgland et al. 1995). Deposition in theThames Valley began in the late Anglian stage (c500,000 BP) and continued intermittently through -out the Pleistocene. Sediments, deposited in coldclimate braided stream systems, exist as wedges ofsand and gravel on the valley sides, subsequentlyeroded by fluvial incision during periods oflowered sea level to create terraces. The most recentepisodes of gravel deposition formed the Shepper -ton Gravels in the valley bottom. Despite extensiveresearch on the Pleistocene deposits however,considerable controversy exists regarding the age ofsome of the older aggradational units and their

Landscape and Prehistory of the East London Wetlands

4

Fig. 1.2 Solid geology and topography of south-east England

correlation with the global oxygen isotope strati -graphy (Gibbard 1994; Bridgland 1994).

The surface of the valley bottom gravels formedthe ‘template’ over which alluvial and estuarinesediments were later deposited, during the Holo -cene. The landscape during this period saw anumber of changes, largely attributed to a rise in sealevel caused by the continued shrinking of the polarice caps and tectonic subsidence. The Holocenesediments form a wedge thickening downstream,from less than 2m at Tower Bridge to a maximumthickness of 35m east of the study area at CanveyIsland (Marsland 1986). Within the inner estuary,Holocene sediments consist of complex sequencesof minerogenic and organic clay, silts, sands andpeats, deposited in a variety of environments repre-senting variously: freshwater alder carr, fen,reedswamp, intertidal saltmarsh and mudflats.

In contrast to the relatively well known sequencesof the Pleistocene, the nature of the Holocenesediments deposited during the last 12,000 years are

not well understood and have, with few exceptions,only been described superficially. Over the years themost commonly adopted stratigraphic sequence forthe Lower Thames has been based on work under-taken by Devoy (Devoy 1977; 1979; 1980 and 1982).Borehole stratigraphies were integrated withbiostratigraphic studies to infer successive phases ofmarine transgressions (Thames I-V) represented byclay/silt units, and regressions (Tilbury I-V) repre-sented by peat units. Devoy constructed two age-altitude curves of relative sea level movement, onefor Tilbury (outer estuary) and one for Crossness,Dartford and Broadness (inner estuary). The modelsuggests transgressions occurred in the Palaeolithicto early Mesolithic periods, the late Mesolithic toearly Neolithic periods, throughout the Bronze Age,the middle Iron Age and at the beginning of the 4thcentury AD.

The ‘Thames-Tilbury’ model is regarded as theseminal work in this area (Haggart 1995) and hasbeen widely applied by researchers outside the

Chapter 1

5

Fig. 1.3 Quaternary geology of East London

original study area. It should be noted, however,that more recent work (Bates 1999; Bates andBarham 1995; Bates and Stafford forthcoming;Haggart 1995; Sidell et al. 2000; Sidell et al. 2002;Sidell and Wilkinson 2004) has highlighted severalproblems, such as the need for two age/altitudecurves, suggesting it cannot always be easilyapplied to the whole of the Thames Estuary, eitherin terms of lithology or age/altitude analysis. Thisreflects the complex nature of the floodplainenvironment during this period, consisting of peatforming communities, migrating channels and sandeyots (Sidell et al. 2000). More recently a simplified(tripartite) model for floodplain development hasbeen presented by Long et al. (2000). A similarmodel was presented by Bates and Whittaker (2004)which examined the likely impact of these changeson human activity (Table 1.3). This latter culturallandscape model has been utilised and developedduring the various stages of work on the A13scheme in order to contextualize the archaeologicalremains discovered and provide a framework ofinvestigation (Table 1.3).

Bates and Whittaker (2004) pointed out that oneof the consequences of the Devoy model for archae-ologists, and the use of pollen analysis to aidvegetation reconstruction and understand sea-levelchanges, has been a focus on the landscape at aregional scale. The nature and archaeologicalcontext of sites vary considerably across thelandscape as a result of environmental as well ascultural factors (for example the location of tribu-

taries, areas of local impeded drainage and thepresence of local topographic features). Con -sequently the scale and focus of palaeoenviron-mental reconstruction may require refinement forarchaeological purposes. Over the last two decadesa number of detailed site-specific investigationshave been undertaken, many in association withdeveloper-funded archaeological work (Fig. 8.2), forexample the Jubilee Line Extension (Sidell et al..2000), High Speed 1, formerly known as theChannel Tunnel Rail Link (Bates and Stafford forth-coming), various sites in Southwark (Sidell et al.2002) and excavations at Silvertown (Wilkinson etal. 2000; Crockett et al. 2002). Many of these investi-gations are located at floodplain-terrace edge andtributary locations and begin to address thecomplex range of factors responsible for sequenceaccumulation.

Archaeological background (Figs 1.5 and 1.6)The low-lying areas of the Inner Thames Estuaryhave been shown to contain a varied archaeologicalresource dating to the prehistoric period. Thisincludes surface middens, lithic concentrationsrepresenting flint procurement, knapping andhunting camps and other features such as woodenstructures. It is only relatively recently, however,that the importance of wetland contexts has beenfully recognised (Bates and Barham 1995; Meddensand Beasley 1990; Merriman 1992; Rackam 1994).This is most probably due to the problems of access

Landscape and Prehistory of the East London Wetlands

6

Fig. 1.4 Sub-division of the Thames Estuary and location of different estuary zones (after Bates and Whittaker 2004)

Chapter 1

7

Table 1.3

Lower T

hames C

ultural landscape model (from

Bates and Whittaker 2004)

Model StageTime fram

eGeological events

Dominant sediment type

Inferred

environm

ents

Associated

archaeology

1a15

-30k

a B.P.

Rew

orki

ng of

the E

ast T

ilbur

y Sa

nds a

nd g

rave

lsCo

ld cl

imate

per

iglac

ial sl

opes

with

Oc

casio

nal a

ctivi

ty as

socia

ted w

ith

Mar

shes

Gra

vel

activ

e sol

ifluc

tion

and

poss

ible

loes

s blo

wch

anne

l mar

gins

and

spor

adic

finds

acro

ss

flood

plain

surfa

ce. M

ost f

inds

rew

orke

dDo

wncutting

Active erosion

1b10

-15k

a B.P.

Depo

sitio

n of

the S

hepp

erto

n Gr

avel

Sand

s and

gra

vels

Braid

ed ch

anne

ls

28-

10ka

B.P.

Land

scap

e stab

ility

So

me s

and

depo

sitio

n in

De

velo

pmen

t of w

oodl

ands

and

Occa

siona

l acti

vity

asso

ciated

with

chan

nel

mea

nder

ing

chan

nels,

m

eand

erin

g ch

anne

ls on

floo

dplai

nm

argi

ns an

d sp

orad

ic fin

ds ac

ross

floo

dplai

n els

ewhe

re w

eath

erin

g of

late

surfa

ce. S

ome r

ewor

ked

finds

Deve

nsian

sedi

men

ts to

form

so

ils

35-

8ka B

.P.Se

a-lev

el ris

e res

ultin

g in

Fi

ne g

rain

ed si

lts, c

lays a

nd

Expa

nded

fres

hwate

r mar

shlan

d sy

stem

s Oc

casio

nal a

ctivi

ty as

socia

ted w

ith ch

anne

l tra

nsgr

essio

n of

mar

ine/

estu

arin

e sa

nds

resu

lting

from

bac

k-up

of lo

wer

reac

hes

mar

gins

and

spor

adic

finds

acro

ss fl

oodp

lain

cond

ition

s fro

m ou

ter es

tuar

y in

to

of ri

ver c

hann

els g

ivin

g w

ay to

estu

arin

e su

rface

. Occ

upati

on b

ecom

ing

focu

sed

on

inne

r estu

ary

and

prog

ress

ive

chan

nels

and

saltm

arsh

syste

ms

drier

gro

und

at m

argi

ns of

floo

dplai

n.

back

ing-

up of

low

er re

ache

s of

Mixe

d in situ

and

rew

orke

d fin

dsfre

shw

ater c

hann

els

43-

5ka B

.P.Ex

pans

ion

of se

mi-t

erre

strial

Pe

ats an

d or

gani

c silt

s with

Al

der c

arr w

etlan

ds w

ith re

plac

emen

t Ex

tensiv

e occ

upati

on of

the d

ry g

roun

d at

wetl

ands

and

mar

shes

giv

ing

way

m

iner

ogen

ic se

dim

entat

ion

brac

kish

mar

shlan

d to

war

ds en

d of

th

e mar

gins

of th

e flo

odpl

ain as

well

as

to co

astal

mar

shlan

ds d

urin

g ph

ase

in ch

anne

lsph

ase

activ

ity on

rem

nant

‘isla

nds’

of sa

nd an

d of

appa

rent

relat

ive s

ea-le

vel f

allgr

avel

with

in th

e flo

odpl

ain. C

onstr

uctio

n of

woo

den

track

way

s at t

he ed

ges o

f the

m

arsh

in p

laces

. In situ

mate

rial p

roba

bly

com

mon

53-

1ka B

.P.Ex

pans

ion

of br

acki

sh w

ater

Fine

gra

ined

silts

, clay

s Es

tuar

ine c

hann

els an

d sa

ltmar

sh

Activ

ity sp

orad

ically

thro

ugho

ut th

e flo

odco

nditi

ons d

ue to

risin

g re

lativ

e an

d sa

nds

syste

ms

plain

with

evid

ence

for r

esou

rce

sea l

evel.

gath

erin

g/hu

ntin

g an

d w

atercr

aft a

nd

infra

struc

ture

. Eve

ntua

l col

onisa

tion

of

flood

plain

with

land

recla

mati

on

61k

a B.P.

+Co

ntin

ued

rise i

n re

lativ

e sea

leve

lN

one

Man

aged

floo

dplai

ns

Drain

age s

ystem

s, lan

d re

clam

ation

, co

nstru

ction

of ti

dal d

efenc

es. W

atersi

destr

uctu

res.

within urban and floodplain areas where thedeposits are often deeply buried in waterloggedconditions

The A13 lies at the foot of the latest terraceformed between 110,000 and 13,000 BP. The fewPalaeolithic stone tools that have been found associ-ated with the gravels are frequently tools that havebeen washed down from higher, earlier, terracedeposits (Wymer 1991; 1999; Merri man 1990;Gibbard 1994). Evidence is largely confined toisolated find spots which in the vicinity of the A13include finds from the basal Mucking gravel atUpton Park, Forest Gate, Manor Park and LittleIlford (Wymer 1999, map 10).

During the Mesolithic period the climate gradu-ally became warmer and as sea level rose Britaineventually became an island separated frommainland Europe. Temporary campsites or huntingsites have been excavated in the London region. Thefavoured locations for such sites are along theThames itself and in tributary valleys such as theColne and the Lea, with a particular emphasis onfloodplain edges, high points within the valleyfloors, and areas adjacent to the main channels (seefor example Lewis with Rackham 2011; Corcoran etal. 2011). The majority of archaeological remainsrecorded in the Greater London Sites and Monu -ments Register (GLSMR) consist of single finds offlint artefacts, although larger assemblages havealso been recorded in low-lying areas to the west ofthe study area , for example Three Ways Wharf,Uxbridge and the B&Q site in Bermondsey. To theeast of the City, Mesolithic finds are notably sparse.A few flint artefacts have been recovered from theLower Lea Valley in Newham, including an assem-blage from Stratford Market Depot, approximately2km to the northeast of the A13/A1011 junction atCanning Town. Several axes and a disturbedknapping site have also been recorded close to theHackney Brook some distance upstream (Lacaille1961; Harding and Gibbard 1983). On the Thamesfloodplain, in Newham, a flint flake was recoveredat Beckton Gasworks, approximately 1km south-west of the A13 junction with Woolwich ManorWay. Further to the east flint artefacts have beenrecovered along the terrace edge at Rainham andWennington, between 7km and 10km east of theMovers Lane Junction.

The Neolithic period saw the beginnings of thespread of agriculture, which eventually led to afundamental change both in the landscape of theLower Thames valley and in the lifestyle of its inhab-itants. Riverside occupation sites such asRunnymede to the west of London or in the east atBrookway, Rainham, have provided the earliestevidence of more permanent settlements with housesand domestic waste deposited in tree-throws, pitsand middens, although the evidence does suggestthat people were still relying very much on gatheringlocal wild fruit, nuts and shellfish. To the west ofCentral London, however, higher areas overlookingthe floodplain have been described as ritual or

monumental landscapes (Merriman 1990, 22).Excavations have revealed surprisingly largenumbers of monuments which include causewayedenclosures which have been interpreted as ritualmeeting places, for example at Staines (Robertson-Mackay 1987), Eton Wick (Ford 1983; 1986) andDorney (Allen et al. forthcoming). A series of cursusmonuments have been located under the westernedge of Heathrow Airport, including the so-calledStanwell cursus, an embanked avenue some 2.5 milesin length (Frame work Archaeology 2006; 2010).

Low-lying late Mesolithic and Neolithic sitespredominantly occur on stable terrestrial surfaces,formed on the top of late Pleistocene deposits or the‘topographic template’. These are typically sandbodies where well-developed palaeosols exist. Theenvironment appears to have been one of closedmixed deciduous woodland on a stable floodplain,although there was variation in terms of speciescomposition associated with changes in local topog-raphy and hydrology (for example at Erith: Seel2000). The surface of the Shepperton gravels was, onthe whole, accessible during the Mesolithic prior toflooding caused by marine transgression whichbegan around 6000-7000 BP. Sea-level fluctuationsand hydrological changes restricted later dry landactivity to increasingly smaller areas of highervalley bottom terrain. In some areas, however, thissurface remained accessible in the valley bottomsuntil the first millennium (Bates and Whittaker2004). Excavations in East London by the NewhamMuseum Service and others (in particular theThames Valley Archaeological Service (TVAS), Pre-Construct Archaeology (PCA) and Museum ofLondon Archaeology (MoLA)) have produced someevidence for Neolithic occupation in this area,although generally sites are still quite rare. In thevicinity of the A13, a mixed flint assemblage associ-ated with soil horizons containing burnt flint andpottery of Neolithic and Bronze Age date wasidentified at Royal Docks Community School,Custom House, approximately 500m to the south ofthe A13 Prince Regent Lane junction on the Thamesfloodplain (Holder 1998) (Fig 1.5, 1). At Fort Street,Silvertown, approximately 1.5km to the south of theA13 in the same area, a wooden trackway overmarshy ground seems to have been constructed,anchored with posts driven vertically into theground (Crockett et al. 2002) (Fig. 1.5, 2). To thenorth, in the Lea Valley finds include an axe hoardfrom Temple Mills, Stratford (Holgate 1988, 285)and single finds of flint axes at Manor Road andStratford Market Depot, between 4.5km and 2km tothe north-east of the A13/A1011 junction atCanning Town (MoLAS 2000). A number of findshave also been located to the east of the route, alongthe edge of the floodplain and gravel terrace atRainham which include pits, flintwork and potteryat Brook Way Allotments and Bridge Road (ibid.).

During the Bronze Age there is firm evidence forthe establishment of field systems that replaced orappeared amongst the earlier, and still relatively

Landscape and Prehistory of the East London Wetlands

8

forested, landscape. Large excavations atHeathrow and further upstream at Eton havefound the remains of ditches which marked thefield boundaries (Framework Archaeology 2006and 2010; Allen et al. forthcoming). More directevidence of arable agriculture has been found atsites in north Southwark and Bermondsey, where adense patchwork of marks in the subsoil have beeninterpreted as ard marks (Sidell et al. 2002, 35-7).There is also evidence of increasing wealth in theBronze Age as the London area became a centre forproduction and consumption of bronze. It seemslikely that society became more hierarchical andpossibly more violent too, as a warrior aristocracyemerged who con trolled land and competed forwealth and prestige. Late Bronze Age defendedsettlements, where metalworking and exchangewere probably carried out, have been identified atCarshalton and at Mayfield Farm, near Heathrowalthough the date of the latter site remains open (J.Cotton pers. comm.). Evidence of religious practice

comes from a few early Bronze Age burial mounds,such as that at Teddington and a number of middleBronze Age cremation cemeteries found in WestLondon (eg Barrett 1973). Few settlement siteshave so far been located in East London. Themajority of the evidence comes from the higherground on the gravel terraces. Isolated pits andartefact assemblages have been found in the LowerLea and Roding Valleys and in a ring ditch atUpton Park (Fig. 1.5, 3). At Rainham, a late BronzeAge ring work associated with buildings, fieldsystems and cremation burials was excavated atScott and Albyn’s Farm, on the terrace overlookingthe Ingrebourne River (Guttmann and Last 2000).Nearby and on lower lying ground on the flood-plain, evidence for animal husbandry was found inthe form of a wattle enclosure fence and evidenceof trampling by cattle in the sediments on the stone causeway (Meddens 1996). Further evidenceof field systems has also been identified further up the Ingrebourne Valley at Hornchurch

Chapter 1

9

Fig. 1.5 Distribution of known archaeological sites in the vicinity of the A13

Landscape and Prehistory of the East London Wetlands

10

Aerodrome and Hacton Lane, Upminster (MoLAS2000; Howell et al. 2011).

A large quantity of late Bronze Age luxury metalwork and some human remains have been foundduring dredging of the Thames: it would seem thatthe river was a focus for religious ritual and possiblycremation and inhumation burial towards the end ofthe Bronze Age (Merriman 1990; Rackham 1994). Ofnote are the finds of two socketed axes on theBarking marshes, some 700m south of the A13/A117Woolwich Manor Way junction, adjacent to the RiverRoding (MoLAS 2000).

Recent work in East London has identified anumber of trackways dating to this period, in whichpiles, brushwood, wattle hurdles and logs wereused to build timber causeways over the wet marsh-land. In the vicinity of the A13 a series of woodentrackways have been located at Beckton Nursery(Fig. 1.5, 4) the Beckton 3D site (Fig. 1.5, 5)(Meddens 1996) and most recently the Golf DrivingRange (Fig. 1.5, 6; Carew et al. 2010) between 350mand 150m south-west of the A13/A117 WoolwichManor Way junction. Trackways have been identi-fied in association with peat deposits at the edge ofthe terrace in the Roding Valley at the Barking Tescoand London Road sites, 0.5km and 1.5m north of theA13/A406 junction (Fig. 1.5, 8 and 9; Meddens1996). Three kilometres to the east of Movers Lane,at the Hayes Storage site in Dagenham, a ‘cause -way’ 4m wide and 0.27m deep constructed frompebbles, sandy silts and burnt flint was traced for23m, sandwiched between peat deposits (Divers1996). At Bridge Road, Rainham, a brushwoodtrackway was located on the bank of the Ingre -bourne River (Meddens 1996). A number of otherwooden structures have also been identified inWestminster and on the south bank of the Thamesin Southwark and Bexley (Meddens and Beasley1990; MoLAS 2000).

The gravel terraces of the Lower Thames areknown to have been intensively settled in the IronAge and Roman periods (Wilkinson 1988) with thedevelopment of London as a major provincialcapital and the subsequent remodelling of thesurrounding economies. The gravel terrace was stillthe focus for occupation and it is possible that thefirst elements of the marshland draining processmay have begun at this time. Significant changes inthis period include the growth of salt-making as animportant activity along the estuarine and coastalmargins (ibid.). Archaeological excavations haveproduced evidence of Iron Age agricultural hamletsand villages at sites such as Heathrow and Dawleyin West London and Rainham in the east. Increasingnumbers of defensive hillforts and settlements werebuilt. Several are known in East London, such asLoughton Camp and Ambresbury Banks in EppingForest and the later very large univallate enclosureat Uphall Camp on the River Roding in Ilford. TheThames during this period continued as an impor-tant transport route and a setting for ritual activities(Merriman 1990; Rackham 1994). Evidence for Iron

Age occupation at the terrace edge and on the flood-plain in east London is currently sparse. However,Iron Age settlement has been recorded at AbbeyRoad, Barking (Fig. 1.5; 10) and across the river atthe Woolwich Arsenal site.

The Roman city of Londinium was founded soonafter the Roman invasion under Emperor Claudiusin AD 43; a wooden drain by the side of the mainRoman road at No. 1 Poultry was dated by dendro -chronology to AD 47 (Hill and Rowsome 2011). Theland east of Londinium is crossed by several roads,including the main Roman road to Colchester(Camulodunum) (Brown 2008). These roads probablycrossed the tributary rivers of the Thames on thehigher gravels to the north of the study area. East ofthe River Lea, the London to Colchester highwayprobably follows the line of the Romford Road inStratford where a section, assumed to be Roman byvirtue of its position directly above natural gravels,was observed in 1963 in front of the PassmoreEdwards Museum. Settlement evidence is associ-ated with roads and river crossings as at Old Fordon the River Lea, 2.5km north of the A13. The areawas probably agricultural land occupied by smallsettlements, farmsteads or villas exploiting thefertile soils of the gravels and managing the timberresource. A Roman farmstead was identifiedapprox imately 400m north-east of the A13/A112Prince Regent Lane junction (Fig. 1.5, 11) and apottery assemblage and building debris was alsorecovered from East Ham churchyard approxi-mately 100m north of A13/A117 Woolwich ManorWay junction (Fig. 1.5, 12). Settlement evidence hasalso been recorded at Westrow Drive, approxi-mately 1.4km north-west of Movers Lane (Fig. 1.5,13) and at a number of other sites on the terraces tothe east (Howell et al. 2011). On the gravel terracesto the east around Rainham numerous Romanperiod settlement sites have been excavated; theseinclude field systems, ditched enclosures andfarmsteads from sites such as Moor Hall Farm,Hunt’s Hill Farm, Whitehall Wood and Manor Farm(ibid.). Roman burial sites have been found atRoman Road, East Ham, approximately 150m northof the A13, between Prince Regent Lane andWoolwich Manor Way (Fig. 1.5, 14) and at RippleRoad, approximately 1km north-east of MoversLane (Fig. 1.5, 15).

As the city of London regained importancetowards the end of the Anglo-Saxon period, therecog nisable pattern and place-names of thesurrounding villages began to form. The origins ofEast Ham and West Ham, Plaistow and Becktonprobably date to this period. Much of the floodplainof East London was by now marshland as a result ofthe continued relative rise of the Thames. Barkingand Dagenham both appear to have developed aslocal centres during the Anglo-Saxon period.Dagenham is first mentioned in AD 690 and anabbey of Benedictine nuns was founded at Barkingin AD 666. The remains of the abbey buildings,scheduled as an ancient monument, are located

approximately 1km north of the A13 on the eastbank of the River Roding (Fig. 1.5, 16). A recentevaluation in Rainham on the lower edge of thegravel terrace overlooking the River Ingrebourne,500m north of the A13/Dovers Corner junction,revealed regionally important late Roman (AD 360-410) and early Saxon (AD 410-550) pottery, fieldditches and a well (MoLAS 2000).

A number of medieval manors are known tohave existed in the area. By the 13th century themarshes, which were prone to frequent flooding,were used for fishing, fowling, grazing, reedgrowing and tanning. There are references tofloods, marshland management and river defencesthroughout the medieval period, although moresystematic reclamation was undertaken from the16th and 17th centuries. By the 18th century the

marshland areas in the vicinity of the Route wereknown as the Plaistow, East Ham and BarkingLevels, as illustrated on Chapman and Andre’smap of 1777 (Fig. 1.6).

As London became an increasingly importantport, the East London area became a zone forindus trial expansion. Former villages wereswallowed up by the expansion of London: quaysand later huge docks were built along the north ofthe River Thames and the marshland of the flood-plain began to be drained for agriculture and settle-ment. The historic character of the marshland overa large part of East London has largely disappearedthrough reclamation and recent development andat the time of the investigations most of the build-ings along the A13 route were 20th century indus-trial or residential.

Chapter 1

11

Fig. 1.6 Chapman and Andre’s map (1777)