Roman occupation. When, however, the Romans called this station
Eboracum, they evidently did not, as in Colonia or Confluentes,
employ a new and altogether Latin name, but as in Mediolanum Isca, or
Durolipons, they Latinised one already in use and of native origin.
Until recently, strange as it may appear, this was the only positive
argument, and it was a strong one, in favour of the pre-Roman existence
of the city. Recently, however, researches into the sepulchres around
the city have discovered undoubted British burials below those of
the English and the Romans; and thus, in the opinion of Mr. Raine,
have established the existence of an early British settlement. This
discovery, probably, stands alone. No earthwork of distinctly British
origin is found within or near the city, nor, indeed, save the ancient
river, is there near at hand any physical feature of the country
bearing a decidedly British name. No part of the great earthworks by
which the city is girt can be attributed to the Brigantes. Though not
all of one date, they all evidently belong to ages more advanced, and
to a class of works very different from those found scattered along
the crests of hills, and usually retaining, even now, their Celtic
appellations. Cæsar tells us, when writing of Verulam, that the British
towns were strong earthworks in a wood, and such we may suppose to
have been the Caer-Evrawc found and taken possession of by the Romans,
and out of the name of which they constructed Eboracum. Much, and
mainly of an unsatisfactory character, has been written upon the
etymology of this, the earliest name of the city. It seems generally
to be thought to be connected with the name Eure, now confined to the
great river of Yorkshire, above Boroughbridge, but which formerly,
it is suggested, may have been borne by the whole stream upon which
Caer-Evrawc was situated. But, however this may be, and whether the
Roman settlement was by foundation or by adoption, the actual site of
York is worthy of a people who proposed to take and hold the country,
and to maintain it under law and in order. Central in position, it
stands upon a river navigable to the sea, and while the country around
was open and admitted of being intersected by roads in every direction,
the city itself was protected on one part by a broad and deep river,
and on another by a stream which, though of less volume, traversed
and saturated a track of marshy and impracticable country. It was
evidently to the confluence and character of these two streams, now
known as the Ouse and the Foss, that York owes its origin. The Roman
station occupied a tolerably level platform, from 25 feet to 30 feet
above the Ouse, and about 100 yards from its left or eastern bank.
Sometimes, as at Leicester, these stations, when near a river, were
extended to its actual edge, and the water became the defence on that
side, but here, the river being navigable, that plan would have been
unsafe, and a space was left between the fortified area or camp and
the river. The precise date of the Roman settlement on the Ouse is
unknown. Of the early generals Cæsar probably penetrated but little
beyond the Thames, or at most to the crest of the Chilterns. Aulus
Plautius, Claudian, Vespasian, and Ostorius Scapula, were engaged
chiefly in subduing the north and west, the last extending into the
midland territory and probably reaching the Humber, where, and in
the country of the Brigantes, Suetonius Paulinus probably made a
settlement. Agricola, who landed in A.D. 78, and retired finally A.D.
85, completed the conquest of North Britain, and probably established
a permanent camp at York. Of course, such a post would be, at first,
a mere slight earthwork, set out in the Roman fashion, and protected
with palisades and by the discipline of the garrison. Of this first
camp nothing is to be distinguished; but it is probable that when it
was superseded by a walled station the new defences were built upon
the old lines, where they are still to be seen or traced. By whom the
Roman walls were originally built is unknown, probably during the
second campaign of Agricola, A.D. 79, after the complete subjugation
of the Brigantes, and in connexion with the great military roads, of
which four radiated from the city, and communicated afterwards with a
whole network of subordinate or cross ways, many of which are still
in use. Between the times of Hadrian, who landed A.D. 120, and built
the Northumbrian wall from sea to sea; of Lollius Urbicus, who twenty
years later connected in a similar manner the Firth of Forth and the
Clyde, and Severus, who, A.D. 207, re-asserted the Roman power, and
reinforced the wall of Hadrian, the country became populous and rich,
many walled stations and connected cities had been founded, and the
remains of Roman houses scattered far and wide over the country attest
its prosperity and internal peace. Ptolemy, writing in the second
century, mentions Eboracum as the head-quarters of the 6th Legion, as
also is shown by many local inscriptions. It became rapidly a large
city, “Altera Roma,” the capital of the North; and from the time of
Severus to that of Constantine, both of whom died at York, it was the
seat of the Government of Britain, and the head-quarters of the great
military power maintained there. It was the chief of the twenty-eight
Romano-British cities, and of the two which alone bore the title of
Municipium.
The fortress, or military part of the Roman city, was confined to the
left bank of the river. The suburbs crossed the Ouse, and were widely
extended to the south-west and north. The walled enclosure measured
469 yards north-west and south-east, or up and down the stream, and
550 yards in the direction at right angles. There were four principal
gates; those to the north-east and south-west in the centre of their
respective sides, those to the north-west and south-east somewhat to
the south of, or nearer to, the river than the centre. But it is to be
remarked that as the former gates, being in the centre, were 234 yards
from each angle, so the latter was also 234 yards from the angles to
the south. This looks as though the original walled area had been a
square of 468 yards, and that afterwards, when the buildings became of
a permanent character, and the lines of the great roads leading up to
the gates were fixed by habitations along them, it was found necessary
to enlarge the area, and that this was done by adding a breadth of 82
yards on the northern side, which would of course throw the north-west
and south-east entrances by that much out of centre. If, moreover, we
suppose the whole area wall to have been rebuilt when this supposed
alteration was made, we shall have an explanation of the modern
character of the extant masonry, which is held by those conversant with
Roman work to be of a late period. If this be so, it is exceedingly
probable that the whole _enceinte_ was then rebuilt, for so important
a city would scarcely have been left unwalled during the earlier
centuries of its prosperity. Considering the magnitude, population,
and wealth of Roman York, and the number of public buildings which
must necessarily have accumulated during the four hundred years which
elapsed from the conquest by Claudian to the end of the Roman rule,
and the presence of some of which is attested by inscriptions and
foundations, it is remarked how very few monuments of the period remain
above ground, or rather how completely the whole, with one or two
exceptions, have disappeared. No doubt, under the 15 feet or 16 feet
of _débris_ which are supposed to cover up the Roman city, and the
equal depth of later soil which seems to have accumulated since the
commencement of the Saxon or English period, must rest covered up many
curious remains of the Roman, as well as of the later periods. Some of
these are, from time to time, laid bare in the formation of sewers, but
the unburied remains of Roman work seem to be confined to one tower
and the adjacent wall, and fragments of the wall in another part of
the city. The Multangular Tower, forming one corner of the Roman area,
is a shell of masonry, 42 feet in exterior diameter, and 20 feet at
the gorge, which is open. It is not placed, as in Norman works, so as
merely to cap the junction of two walls which would have met at a right
angle, but the whole angle is superseded, as in Roman works, by a curve
of 50 feet radius, and the tower stands in the centre of this rounding,
three-quarters of it, presenting nine facets, being disengaged. The
tower and the contiguous walls are 5 feet thick. The Roman part of the
work is about 15 feet high. It is of rubble, faced with ashlar, the
blocks being about 4 inches by 5 inches or 6 inches, very seldom more.
There is one band of five courses of brick that may be traced along
the adjacent wall, though the whole has been much injured and patched.
Upon the Roman work has been placed an ashlar upper story about 3 feet
thick and 12 feet high, pierced by nine cruciform loops, one in each
face, and set in a pointed recess, an addition of early English or
early Decorated date. The wall, extending south-east from the tower
for 53 yards, is of the same date, style, and material. Both formed a
part of the defences of the mediæval city. The opposite wall, running
eastward, has been partially destroyed, and is now only 4 feet high,
and at a short distance becomes buried in the east bank. This part of
the wall was evidently destroyed before the earthwork was thrown up,
for not only is it buried within the bank, but the later wall of the
city is built 4 feet in front of it. It is to be observed that the
Roman tower and wall, where perfect, are entirely unconnected with
any bank of earth, and the ashlar facing, both inside and out, shows
this always to have been the case. The wall stands on the natural
surface of the ground, and is seen of equal height inside and outside.
This feature in the Roman defences is not peculiar to York, but is
seen at Porchester, Silchester, and elsewhere. It is evident that the
earthworks, which form so important a feature in the defences of York,
are all of post-Roman date. Another fragment of the Roman wall is seen
in a private [Mr. Gray’s] garden, where it has been covered up by
about 12 feet of _débris_, and has recently been laid open at a point
not far from the old northern gate. Here, also, the wall underlies
the earth-bank on which the latest wall is built. A third fragment of
this Roman wall is exposed in a court close east of Monk Bar. It is
about 6 feet high, and is ashlar faced, and until lately was covered
up in the earth-bank. Probably there is still much of this wall still
covered up, as it is thought that the level of the Roman city is here
at least 20 feet lower down. Although so little of the Roman wall is
seen above ground, it has been traced at various points, so that it
may be considered as established that it included the whole area; that
there were four angle towers, and four main gates, of which Bootham Bar
represents one, though no trace of Roman work appears in the mediæval
structure, which, indeed, probably stands at a much higher level than
its Roman predecessor. The line of road from this bar is Roman, and led
to Isurium or Aldborough. Of the other three gates, the position has
been ascertained by excavation. That between Monk Bar and Mr. Gray’s
garden was on the road leading to Derventio or Stamford Bridge. Another
was in Low Petergate, close to Christ’s Church, on the road leading to
Prætorium or Brough on the Humber. This road crosses the later way at
Walmgate Bar. A fourth gate was at the bottom of Stonegate, in front of
the Mansion-house, upon a way which traversed the site of the present
Guildhall, crossed the Ouse at that point by a bridge, and, passing
through the site of the later Micklegate Bar, proceeded in a direct
line towards Calcaria or Tadcaster. Besides the fragments of the wall,
various other Roman remains have been discovered below the present
surface, all of which are shown in the admirable antiquarian map of
the city by Mr. Skaif. Beyond the river, and outside the military
post, other remains of Roman buildings have also been found, and more
especially may be mentioned a pavement laid open just within Micklegate
Bar, in the lane leading towards the station. This is particularly
important, because it lay under the earth-bank of the city wall, and
proves that here also this bank is post-Roman. Besides these remains,
situate either within the Roman fortification or within the area of the
later city, there have been found other remains scattered over a wider
area. Of these the most important are the cemeteries which are found at
Clementhorpe, all along the Tadcaster road, and upon the ground between
that road and the Ouse, now being excavated for the proposed railway
station. Also, on the north side of the river, in front of St. Mary’s
and the Almery Garth, are traces of burials, the excavations over
all which area have been carefully watched by Mr. Raine and others;
these discoveries have created and enriched the very valuable Museum
of the Yorkshire Society. What is incontestably shown by all these
discoveries is that the Roman Eboracum far exceeded the bounds of the
military post, and had thrown out suburbs in every available direction
far beyond any military defences, showing that the inhabitants were
numerous and rich, and lived entirely free from any apprehensions of
danger. Although the Foss is most certainly a natural river, and not,
as was once supposed, a Roman cut, it seems probable, from its name,
that the Romans either altered its course or converted it into a large
basin below the city, just above its junction with the Ouse. It is more
than probable that the Romans here received and stored their supplies
of corn, and that much of the commerce of the city in its palmy and
very flourishing period was here carried on. It seems not improbable
that much of the low land on the left bank of the river was then a part
of the basin, though now, since the construction of the castle weir,
silted up and reclaimed.
The Roman armies were officially withdrawn from Britain in A.D.
426–430, and Eboracum, falling into the hands of its but very
imperfectly Romanised British inhabitants, became once more
Caer-Evrawc. Doubtless, up to that period the Roman buildings, public
and private, churches, basilicæ, and domestic dwellings were perfect,
nor is it probable that the Britons, tinctured with Roman blood and
used to Roman customs, would have injured them; but that they were
destroyed, and buried deep in their own ruins before the existing
earthworks were thrown up, is certain. By whom, then, and at what
period, and as a defence against whom, were these earthworks formed?
To answer this question it will be convenient, in the first place,
to describe them. These earthworks are, probably, of at least two
periods; those upon the right and left bank of the Ouse, and those
beyond or upon the Foss, and it is with the former that we have first
to do. A ridge or bank of earth from 15 to 40 feet high and of breadth
proportionate, was carried round most of the area to be defended,
and at its exterior foot was excavated a deep and broad ditch, the
contents of which formed the bank; and this ditch, where not at too
high a level, was supplied with water from the Ouse. This new earthwork
included a space of about three times the area of the Roman station
and probably as large as the latest extension of the Roman city. The
new area, though not, like the Roman enclosure, rigidly rectangular,
was more or less so, and for the most part contained within straight
lines, meeting at right angles or nearly so. As the wall and tower at
the south-west angle were standing, and more or less perfect, they
were accepted as part of the new defence; but, from the wall to the
Ouse, a bank and ditch were carried straight to what is now know as
Lendal Tower. In the opposite direction, as the Roman wall was broken
down, the bank was heaped up over it, and so continued, and probably
still contains it, along the edge of the Dean’s garden as far as the
north-west angle. From thence, the bank, still covering up the remains
of the wall, is continued about 600 yards in the direction of and
beyond Monk Bar. At two points, namely, in Mr. Gray’s garden, and in a
court opening from the bar, the skirt of the bank has been cut away,
and the wall is seen below it. Further on, near the site of St. Helen’s
Church, the wall turned at right angles, and no doubt had an angle
tower. This, however, is gone. Here, therefore, the earthwork leaves
the line of the Roman wall, and is continued alone for 144 yards, when
it turns outwards nearly at a right angle, and ceases at Layerthorpe,
on the banks of the Foss. The earthwork stopped here because it was
no longer necessary. The Foss, then, and long afterwards, was not
only a broad and deep, though sluggish, stream, but it was connected
with a broad tract of marsh, neither land nor water, and in itself an
excellent defence. Hence, therefore, the Foss seems to have been the
boundary and defence of the new area for about 900 yards, when it flows
towards the Ouse, including a long tongue of land, now St. George’s
Field, and then a marsh, which was of course left outside the area.
Probably the bank recommenced at the bend of the Foss, and was carried
across the site of the later castle direct to the Ouse, where about
70 yards of it are still seen, and thus, partly by the Roman wall,
partly by an earth-bank, and partly by the river Foss, were completed
the defences of the city north of the Ouse. South of that river, the
bank again commences near Skeldergate, and reaches to the Bishopsgate
angle, about 244 yards, much of which, however, is occupied by the
later Bayle Hill. From the angle it is continued for about 750 yards
in a nearly straight line, and then, turning at rather above a right
angle, it is continued in two straight portions of 227 yards and 340
yards, to the river opposite to Lendal Tower. Such are the earthworks
north and south of the Ouse, of which there remain nearly 3,000 yards
in length. What is their age, and by whom were they constructed? Not by
the Romans, for they rest upon Roman buildings which had been destroyed
and more or less buried before the earthworks were commenced. Scarcely
by the Picts and Scots, invaders from the north, who came down, from
time to time, in force, to burn and destroy, but never to settle or
to construct. Scarcely by the Saxons or early English, for these
seldom, if ever, employed straight lines in their works of defence,
and certainly never on so large a scale. On the whole, it seems to me
most probable that, after the withdrawal of the Roman legions, and the
occurrence of a few destructive invasions from beyond the northern
border, the Romanised Britons, having still much to defend, made a
great effort to enclose their overgrown city, and, though not equal to
so great a work in masonry, constructed an earthwork which presents,
as was to be expected, many indications of Roman castramentation.
Should this supposition be sound it will account not only for these
works, but for those at Wallingford, Wareham, and Tamworth, which are
laid out in rectangular forms, but which are not upon any great Roman
roads, present no traces of Roman occupation, and the banks and ditches
of which are on a larger scale than was usual with the Romans, whose
temporary works were but slight, and who employed masonry for those of
a more permanent character. The same admixture of British with Roman
blood and customs which produced in Ambrosius Aurelianus a chieftain
of mixed descent, might well have manifested itself in such works as
those of York. Of the interval between the departure of the legions and
the first establishment of Deira as a Saxon kingdom, a period of about
sixty years, but little has been recorded. It was the period during
which the failing energy of the Britons once, and once only, blazed
up, and, under the leading of the Gaulish St. Germain, gained over the
Picts and Saxons the celebrated Hallelujah victory. Probably it was
about this time, during the first quarter of the fifth century, that
these earthworks were executed. How the British rule was carried on,
and what degree of civilisation was retained by the Romanised natives,
is a matter rather of conjecture than of proof. The metropolitan
supremacy of the city was, however, maintained, for it comes to
light about the middle of the sixth century, no longer, indeed, as a
Christian centre, but as the Pagan capital of Deira, under the sway of
the Saxon Elle.
In the seventh century York was still a flourishing city, and once more
was penetrated by the leaven of Christianity. Here Paulinus in 626
baptised the founder of Edinburgh, who here testified his faith by the
construction of a chapel of wood, the humble predecessor of the great
Minster of the North. The earlier churches with the Roman temples and
basilicæ had no doubt long been destroyed. York had its full share
of the calamities which drenched the land with gore during the slow
foundation of the English Commonwealth. It was burned in 738 during the
archbishopric of Egbert, brother to Eadbert, King of Northumbria. In
867 it was taken by Inguar and Ubba, the sons of the Danish Lodbrog,
who severely avenged their father’s death upon the lands watered by
the Ouse, massacred the inhabitants and destroyed the city, which,
though fortified, does not seem to have been vigorously defended, and
no mention is made of the castle. Gudrum, a Danish chief who held the
city during the absence of Inguar and Ubba, is thought still to be
remembered by the association of his name with the principal street
of the city. It is to this period, judging from material evidence,
the only evidence afforded, that may most probably be attributed the
completion of the earthworks as we now see them, upon the south-eastern
front of the city, upon and beyond the Foss.