Insight 2017

Michaelmas 2017 2
Q U E E N ’ S B E F O R E Q U E E N ’ S : T H E
ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE NEW LIBRARY AND
OXFORD’S ‘EASTERN EXTENSION’
John Blair, The Queen’s College
he new underground library extends deep into the gravel
T subsoil, and its creation involved the removal of all
human deposits. An archaeological excavation – the largest
ever conducted in modern times in the eastern part of the
walled city of Oxford – was therefore required. The layout
and development of this area between the late Anglo-Saxon
period and the twelfth century have been almost completely
obscure, so the exercise promised a glimpse into the unknown.
That promise was fulfilled: what was uncovered was in one
way predictable, in another very surprising.
The excavation was carried out during 2015 by Oxford
Archaeology under the direction of Richard Brown, and is
described in a preliminary report. 1 Post-excavation work
remains to be completed for the final publication, and some
conclusions will probably be modified, but meanwhile Mr
Brown and O.A. have kindly allowed me to set their findings
in context for the benefit of members of Queen’s. Everything
said here is, however, subject to revision in the light of the
final conclusions.
It is generally agreed that Oxford began as a rectilinear
earthwork fort defending an important Thames crossing, and
also enclosing the minster of St Frideswide (now the
Cathedral) established there around the year 700. 2 The placename
first appears on pennies of King Alfred, minted at
Ohsnaforda in the 890s, but it remains unclear whether the first
fort was built by Alfred, by his immediate successors, or even
conceivably by one of his predecessors. The basic topography
of the core area and its rectilinear defences, enclosing a main
crossroads centred on Carfax, is reasonably clear.
There has been considerable debate, however, about the
eastern half of the walled area between Radcliffe Square and
the East Gate, including the site of Queen’s. The northwards
kink in the line of the late medieval city wall between Broad
Street and Holywell has long encouraged the hypothesis that
the eastern zone was an extension, probably added in the late
tenth or eleventh century. That idea appeared to be confirmed
by an excavation between the Old Bodleian and the Clarendon
Building in 1899, which found a sharp southwards curve in the
revetment of the Anglo-Saxon bank: it is difficult to
understand this except as the north-east corner of the primary
fort. 3
On the other hand, a trench against the inner face of the New
College section of the wall in 1993 disclosed an earlier clay
bank, seemingly identical to the primary northern bank that
had been recognised in 1985 behind St Michael’s Street. 4 That
encouraged some re-thinking: could the whole circuit have
been of a single, Alfredian, build after all? 5 In any case, there
were already enough finds and small-scale observations from
the eastern zone to show that late Anglo-Saxon settlement of
some kind existed there, whether intramural or suburban. 6
There were also the more recent excavations within Queen’s
itself, in the Back Quad (2008) and the Nun’s Garden (2010),
each of which had encountered fragmentary late Anglo-Saxon
pits, including in one case a cut halfpenny of Æthelred II
circulating during 997-1003. 7 It was therefore anticipated that
at least some activity from around the year 1000 would be
identified in the Provost’s Garden.
That proved indeed to be the case (Figure 1). The earliest
occupation (Phase 1) comprised three cellars, measuring
respectively 4 x 2.5 m., 2.5 x 2.5 m., and 1.75 x 1 m. To their
south-west were remains of a metalled lane surfaced with
pebbles, marked by wheel-ruts, and a row of post-holes
suggesting some frontage structure between the largest cellar
and the lane. South and west of the cellars were scattered
rubbish-pits, as usual on such sites. Pottery from the pits and
cellars indicated a late Anglo-Saxon date (though the fill of one
of the cellars contained two sherds of Kennet Valley Ware,
introduced c.1050), and there was another Æthelred II coin, of
c.1009-16.
Subsequent developments (Phase 2a), up to the foundation of
Queen’s in 1342, are at present only dated very broadly. A
system of rectilinear boundary ditches cut some of the Phase 1
features, but is also broadly compatible with the settlement
layout of that date, and may have respected the lane. The
abandonment of the lane is indicated by a rubbish-pit cut
through its surface, containing pottery in the range c.1075-
1150. There are apparently no grounds for thinking that the
topographical configuration represented by the cellars and lane
survived beyond the early to mid twelfth century.
Phase 1 is exactly what we would expect of urban or suburban
activity in the range c.980-1050. Cellars (probably contained
within ground-level timber buildings) are the classic buildingform
found in such contexts. Those from the Provost’s
Garden are at the smaller end of the Oxford range, 8
resembling more closely some examples from proto-towns and
monastic centres like Stafford, Northampton and – more
locally – Bampton. 9 To that extent this looks a less `urban’
environment than, for instance, the frontages of Cornmarket
or Queen Street.
The impression that the late Anglo-Saxon activity was
suburban rather than urban in character is strongly reinforced
by the unexpected alignment of the features. Although the lane
survived in a fragmentary state, it unmistakably ran from westnorth-west
to east-south-east; the wheel-ruts in its surface
show that it was a through-route rather than a purely local
feature. The cellars, and the line of stakes on the frontage,
were broadly aligned on the lane. While one should be cautious
about extrapolating from small observations, it is hard to resist
the obvious conclusion that this lane ran from somewhere in
the region of the Clarendon Building and Hertford College
towards the later medieval East Gate on the High Street
(Figure 2).
This looks like a non-urban settlement layout, which at some
stage was scrapped and overlain by the conventionally
rectilinear topography of the eastern walled area. It does not
tell us when the wall around that area was built, but it does