Nelson Evening Mail FRIDAY, DECEMBER, 2, 1927 ROMAN LONDON

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXI, 2 December 1927, Page 4

Nelson Evening Mail FRIDAY, DECEMBER, 2, 1927 ROMAN LONDON

TITE recent discovery of Roman funeral urns in Shoe Lane, in London, is of - interest to archaeologists and historians, because, it raises again the question’ winch lias often been asked, but never has been answered satisfactorily. That question is, What actually was the fate of Roman London? The actual site of the Roman city has been accurately defined by the numerous relics, of it and by the very foundations of its outer walls; its size and consequent importance can be accurately measured; the duration of its prosperity and greatness can bo roughly gaugpd in like manner; but of the actual fate which befell Roman London there is no record, either in Roman or AngloSaxon history.

The city of Augusta, for such was the honourable name which the Romans gave their chief port in Britain, stretched from Ludgato Hill to Tower Hill, cast and west, and for about a, mile northwards from the river Thames. It

was completely walled, and possessed many gates through which ran roads, to various parts of Britain. It stood on two low hills, the one between the Fleet stream and Walbrook, and the other between Walbrnnk and the marshes which lay eastward of Tower Hill. To the north was much marshy country, and the vast impenetrable Middlesex forest, f nrough which the diverging roads wore laid down with absolute straightness. To the south flowed the, Thames, a broader river than now, whose waters were prone to inundate tue marshes vest, north, and east of the city, when they were backed up by tbe high tide; so that Augusta was situated on what was very much like an island. The origin of tbe city is wrapped in almost as much obscurity, as its ending. It is known that the first Roman settlement at London was destroyed by tho Brit-

ish queen, Boadicoa, nrul that subsequently, when Britain was again subjugated to tho Roman yoke, the city was founded again, and endured till sometime after tho withdrawal of the last of tho Legions in 407 A.D. But no one knows when Augusta was forsaken by the Romans, or how it was they were driven out of the city, or what was tho manner of tlieir going. The famous “Anglo-Saxon Chronicle,” which has preserved all the chief e.vents of the Anglo-Saxon invasion of Britain, does not, so much as mention Augusta. It tells how, first, Kent and Surrey fell into tho invader's hands; next, Sussex; then Hampshire and Dorsetshire; then, Essex and the country north of the Middlesex forest; then the kingdom of Mercia, and so on; it tells of tho capture of the city of Andorida, or Pevensey, of Aquae Solis, or Bath, of Gloucester-, Chester and many other towns which had been founded by the Romans, and the merciless massacring of tlieir Brito-Roman inhabitants; but of Augusta, or London, it makes no mention, It seems, therefore, that that city was neither besieged, nor were its inhabitants massacred, since tho “Chronicle” would certainly have preserved events so important. For some reason, which lias never been explained, tho invading hordes of Angles and Saxons left Augusta alone. It has been Surmised by some authorities that the city was ,too inaccessible because of its almost, insular position, but. at least four paved roads connected it with the country to the north-east, inorth, north-west, and west, While the river, gave access to the invaders’ Ships which l plied the narrow seas between Britain and' the mainland of Europe. ‘What happened seems to have been this: The Anglo-Saxon invasion began in 455 A.D'., when Hengist and Ilorsa fought against Vortigern, king of Kent. The struggle continued till 607 .A.D., when at the battle of Chester innumerable Welshmen were slain, and tho Anglo-Saxon arms may be said to have triumphed finally. Sometime between those two dates, probably about; the year 500 A.D., . Augusta was deserted by her Brito-Roman inhabitants, but whether they went away in ships to Gaul, or whether they went up the river Thames with a view to joining their compatriots in the west of England or in Wales, or whether they forced their way along some one of the old Roman roads which have been mentioned, or what became of them, is wrapped in oblivion. All that is known is that Augusta was loft desolate, and remained desolate for many years. It was not destroyed as other Rohian towns and cities were destroyed by the invaders; it was simply left uninhabited, desolate, till it fell into decay, and was well-nigh forgotten. Then when England , was Christianised by Augustine, and dioceses were formed, we find that Mellitus was appointed the first BishO'p of London, in the year 604 A.D., which shows clearly enough that, whatever the fate of Augusta, a new city had arisen on its site. The new city was probably built by the men of Essex, who are known to have taken possession of the deserted Augusta, but of that ancient city scarcely a vestige remained above ground. The new London owed nothing to the Londinium Augusta of the Romans. Augusta had disappeared; tho new London had been born, but not the daughter of Augusta. Augusta was childless, and the manner of her end, and how she came to be so completely wiped off the surface of the earth, no man knows.