The Lost Gem Of Ancient Londinium – The Roman Basilica

What is the first thing that comes to mind when you hear the phrase Caesar in Britain? Most casual people would probably answer the hilarious movies about Asterix and Obelix. History aficionados will likely discuss Caesar’s abortive attacks on the island – one of his few strategic errors during the Gallic campaigns.

However, an unforeseen consequence of his reconnaissance in 55-54 BC (for it hardly merits another title) is the headstrong insistence of local antiquarians to call too many things vaguely related to Roman history “Caesar’s”. Unfortunately, the Iron Age hill fort does not escape this fate. However, archaeology proves it is much older, and Caesar himself told us in De Bello Galico that he ventured nowhere near London.

An Iron Age Fort Overlooking London

The Iron Age hill fort on Wimbledon Common might not be as well-known as some of the UK’s more famous ancient sites, but its significance is undeniable. Situated in southwest London, on a natural ridge that rises to around 57 metres, the fort offers panoramic views that would have made it a strategic location in its heyday. It covers approximately 11 acres, making it one of the larger hill forts in southern Britain, though places like Maiden Castle in Dorset dwarf it.

Archaeologists date the fort to the late Iron Age, around 700-100 BC when these hill forts were built across Britain. Hill forts were often used as defensive positions but also functioned as social, economic, and political centres for the tribes living there. The Wimbledon hill fort would have served a similar purpose for the people who inhabited this region long before the Romans arrived.

Excavations have uncovered traces of ditches and ramparts, as well as the defensive earthworks surrounding the fort, typical of Iron Age fortifications. The remains suggest a double-banked enclosure with a ditch between the two banks. However, the hill fort has suffered from natural erosion and human interference over the centuries, leaving only faint traces visible to the naked eye today. Walkers on Wimbledon Common might pass it by without even noticing they’re treading on ancient ground.

Fragments of pottery and other small artefacts recovered from the site give us a glimpse into the people’s daily lives. These finds indicate trade links with other parts of Britain and possibly even continental Europe, showing that the inhabitants connected more with the broader world than expected from a hilltop settlement.

Caesar’s Camp: The Misleading Name

Despite its genuine ancient origins, the hill fort is often confused with Caesar’s Camp, a name that pops up frequently in local history and folklore. This is where the real historical detective work begins, as the idea that Julius Caesar was somehow involved with this site is pure fantasy. Caesar’s Camp is a misnomer applied to several ancient earthworks across the UK, and the one at Wimbledon is no exception.

Julius Caesar did invade Britain in 55 and 54 BC, but his campaign was brief and did not take him anywhere near Wimbledon. Caesar’s two attempts to subdue Britain were relatively limited in scope, and he never ventured far from the southeastern coast. His first expedition in 55 BC was a reconnaissance mission of sorts, and after landing near modern-day Deal, he spent only a few weeks in the country before heading back to Gaul.

His second invasion in 54 BC was more significant, with a larger force and a more prolonged stay. Yet, even during this second invasion, Caesar remained in the south and southeast, focusing on the tribes in Kent and along the Thames. There is no evidence that he travelled as far as Wimbledon, which was well beyond his sphere of activity. The tribes he encountered, such as the Cantiaci of Kent, differed from those who lived in the area that would later become London.

So why the persistent association with Caesar? The name “Caesar’s Camp” was likely a product of later romanticisation. In the 18th and 19th centuries, antiquarians and local historians often attributed anything vaguely Roman or ancient to Caesar. It was a convenient shorthand for mystery and antiquity but hardly accurate. Naming hill forts after Caesar became a tradition but has confused generations of historians and visitors alike.

Did The Romans Ever Attack Wimbledon Hill Fort?

While Julius Caesar can be ruled out as having any connection to the Wimbledon hill fort, that doesn’t mean the Romans never laid eyes on it. It’s possible that the fort was involved in the Roman conquest of Britain, just not during Caesar’s campaigns. The real Roman threat came nearly a century later, during the invasion under Emperor Claudius in AD 43.

This was the conquest that truly brought Britain into the Roman Empire. Claudius sent four legions to subdue the island, and their progress was much more extensive than Caesar’s earlier attempts. One of these legions, Legio II Augusta, was led by a future emperor — Vespasian. The II Augusta played a crucial role in the conquest, striking west and south as they fought to pacify the British tribes.

Wimbledon’s hill fort may have been in the path of this Roman war machine. Although there is no direct evidence of a Roman attack on the fort, the location places it within the potential theatre of operations. The II Augusta’s march likely took them through areas not far from modern-day London as they advanced towards the west and southwest.

What we know of the Romans’ tactics supports the idea that they may have attacked or at least encountered the hill fort. The Romans were systematic in their approach to conquest, attacking or neutralising any fortified positions that could pose a threat. Hill forts like the one at Wimbledon would have been prime targets for the Romans as they swept through the landscape, subduing local tribes and consolidating their control.

What would a Roman attack on Wimbledon hill fort have looked like? Given the size and construction of the fort, it’s possible that the Romans would have used their famous siege techniques to breach the defences. The fort’s inhabitants, likely members of a local tribe, would have put up a fight. Still, the disciplined Roman legions were known for their efficiency in overcoming even the most formidable defences.

Whether Wimbledon’s hill fort fell to a Roman assault or not, the period of Roman expansion into Britain was a turning point for the region. By the time of Claudius’ conquest, many of the old ways of life that had characterised the Iron Age were coming to an end, replaced by Roman roads, towns, and the inexorable spread of Roman culture.

The Enduring Mystery Of Wimbledon’s Hill Fort

Despite the evidence that Wimbledon’s hill fort was an active part of the region’s pre-Roman history, much remains a mystery. Archaeologists have uncovered tantalising clues, but many questions will remain unanswered without more extensive excavations. Who exactly built the fort? What role did it play in local politics and warfare? And was it indeed attacked by Roman forces during their conquest of Britain?

While we may never know the full story, what is clear is that the hill fort had nothing to do with Julius Caesar. The name Caesar’s Camp is a historical red herring, and attributing the site to Caesar only obscures its true significance. The real story of Wimbledon’s hill fort is one of Iron Age power and the dramatic changes brought by the Roman invasion.

Today, visitors to Wimbledon Common can walk among the ancient earthworks and reflect on when this quiet corner of London was a bustling centre of life and, possibly, a battlefield in the long and complex history of Britain’s Roman conquest. In the shadow of history, the fort stands as a reminder of the deep roots of this landscape, long before Wimbledon became synonymous with tennis.

If you want to rank the legendary burial places in Britain that have provoked the most speculation, Boudica’s grave will easily rank in the top three. One of the most persistent hypotheses is that the legendary queen of the Iceni tribe, who defied the Roman Empire, lies under King’s Cross station. While the story is alluring, it’s likely a blend of historical misinterpretation and modern fascination. Digging into the facts, there are compelling reasons why this theory doesn’t hold much weight. To understand why, we must first look at Boudica’s revolt, its aftermath, and her lasting legacy in British history.

The Spark That Ignited The Flame: Boudica’s Revolt in 60–61 AD

The Roman occupation of Britain began in earnest in 43 AD under Emperor Claudius. While the initial conquest met with success, resentment simmered among local tribes who found themselves under Roman rule. The Iceni tribe, led by King Prasutagus, enjoyed a degree of autonomy as a client state of Rome, but this arrangement was fragile at best. Prasutagus, hoping to secure his kingdom’s future, left his wealth jointly to his daughters and the Roman emperor in his will. However, upon his death, the Romans ignored his wishes. They annexed Iceni lands, flogged Prasutagus’ widow Boudica, and raped their daughters. This egregious act of brutality triggered an uprising of remarkable proportions.

Boudica rallied not just the Iceni but also neighbouring tribes like the Trinovantes. Their shared resentment of Roman taxation, land seizures, and mistreatment fuelled a fiery rebellion. The Roman governor, Gaius Suetonius Paulinus, was preoccupied with military campaigns on the island of Mona (modern-day Anglesey) at the time, leaving southern Britain vulnerable.

Boudica’s army, which was said to number over 100,000, descended first on the Roman settlement of Camulodunum (modern Colchester). The town, home to Roman veterans and a symbol of occupation, was utterly destroyed. With their defensive walls weak and no reinforcements to aid them, the settlement’s population was slaughtered, and the Temple of Claudius, where survivors had taken refuge, was razed to the ground.

From there, Boudica marched on Londinium (modern London), which, although a fledgling town, was a vital centre for trade and governance. Suetonius, recognising the lack of available troops to defend the city, abandoned it to the advancing rebels. The ferocity of Boudica’s forces was unmatched – they torched Londinium and slaughtered its inhabitants without mercy. Archaeological evidence of this destruction can still be found today, with a thick layer of ash marking the devastation wrought by Boudica’s army.

The town of Verulamium (modern St Albans) suffered a similar fate as Boudica’s forces ravaged the province. By the end of her campaign, an estimated 70,000–80,000 Romans and Britons loyal to Rome had been killed. But this brutal success was short-lived.

Suetonius regrouped with a modest force of about 10,000 men and faced Boudica in a decisive battle, likely somewhere along Watling Street in the Midlands. Though vastly outnumbered, the Romans’ military discipline and superior tactics led to a crushing victory. Boudica’s forces, encumbered by their families and wagons, were slaughtered in a massacre that shattered the rebellion.

The Making of a Legend: Boudica as a Symbol of British Resistance

Boudica’s defeat didn’t extinguish her story; instead, it lit the flame of her legend. Her struggle against the Romans, though ultimately unsuccessful, captured the imagination of later generations, especially as the concept of a distinct British identity began to take shape.

Boudica’s transformation into a symbol of British resistance can be attributed to several factors. First, there’s the sheer audacity of her revolt. She led a massive uprising that dealt significant blows to Roman control and resulted in the sacking of some of their most critical settlements. Her leadership, especially in the face of personal and national tragedy, showcased the indomitable spirit of the Britons.

Second, she represented a strong, defiant female figure in a patriarchal society. Her story, passed down through the centuries, was later embraced by the Victorians, who saw her embodying British imperialism’s virtues – courage, resilience, and a refusal to be dominated. Queen Victoria was often likened to Boudica, with sculptures of the warrior queen gracing public spaces, including the famous statue near Westminster Bridge.

Lastly, her story tapped into a broader theme of resistance against oppression. Just as the Britons resisted Roman occupation, later generations would draw parallels to their struggles – whether it was against Norman conquerors, the Spanish Armada, or even Nazi Germany. Boudica became a touchstone for defiance and a symbol of the “underdog” standing up to a much more powerful foe.

Comparing Boudica’s Revolt to Other Roman Rivals

While remarkable, Boudica’s revolt against Rome wasn’t the first or the last time the empire faced defiance from those it sought to conquer. Comparisons to other legendary adversaries, such as Spartacus, Hannibal, Vercingetorix, and Decebalus, provide a broader context for understanding Boudica’s role in the wider historical landscape.

A Thracian gladiator, Spartacus led a slave rebellion against Rome between 73 and 71 BC. His uprising, though focused on freeing slaves rather than resisting foreign occupation, similarly showcased Rome’s vulnerability when faced with an unexpected enemy. Like Boudica, Spartacus initially found success, defeating several Roman legions, but he was eventually crushed. Both figures became symbols of resistance, though Spartacus’ fight represented a struggle against the Roman social order, while Boudica’s was a fight for national sovereignty.

The Carthaginian general Hannibal, remains one of Rome’s most formidable enemies. His bold march across the Alps during the Second Punic War and subsequent victories, including the devastating defeat of Rome at the Battle of Cannae in 216 BC, shook the Roman world. Yet, like Boudica, Hannibal was defeated, though his campaign lasted far longer. While Hannibal’s struggle was part of a broader geopolitical conflict between Rome and Carthage, both he and Boudica represent how Rome, despite its strength, could be challenged by brilliant and determined leaders.

Vercingetorix, the chieftain of the Gauls, led a rebellion against Julius Caesar’s conquest of Gaul in 52 BC. Like Boudica, Vercingetorix united various tribes to repel Roman invaders. His stand at Alesia is one of the most famous last stands in Roman history, but, like Boudica, he was eventually captured and defeated. Vercingetorix’s image, like Boudica’s, was later revived as a symbol of national pride – in his case, for the French.

Decebalus, the king of Dacia, fought against Rome in the Dacian Wars during the late 1st and early 2nd centuries AD. His initial success against Emperor Domitian and his resilience against Trajan’s forces make his story akin to Boudica’s. However, after being defeated, Decebalus took his own life rather than submit to Roman capture, a fate that Roman historian Dio Cassius suggested Boudica also shared.

In each case, these leaders were ultimately unsuccessful in stopping Rome’s expansion, yet they all became legendary figures whose stories lived on as symbols of resistance.

The Case Against Boudica’s Grave at King’s Cross

So where does this leave the rumour that Boudica’s grave is beneath King’s Cross station? The idea, though captivating, falls apart under scrutiny.

Roman historian Dio Cassius described Boudica’s end as a tragic but somewhat anticlimactic affair. Following her defeat at the Battle of Watling Street, Boudica is believed to have either succumbed to illness or taken her own life through poison. Dio’s account mentions that she was given a proper burial, but details are scarce, leaving much to the imagination.

The idea that she was buried near what is now King’s Cross first surfaced in the Victorian era when Boudica’s legend was at its peak. King’s Cross was an important junction of London’s expanding railway network, and the area needed a mythic touch to counterbalance the grime of industrialisation. However, there is no archaeological evidence to support this claim.

Furthermore, the proximity of King’s Cross to Londinium, the very settlement she had razed to the ground, would have made such a burial highly unlikely. The Romans were meticulous about how they treated their enemies. It’s doubtful that they would have allowed a figure as infamous as Boudica to be buried near the very heart of their provincial capital. Such a location could have become a rallying point for local resistance, a dangerous symbol of defiance against Roman rule. The Romans, ever pragmatic, would never have permitted her grave to serve as a shrine for future dissenters.

The Elusive Grave: Why We May Never Find It

Many sites associated with her final battle and death have changed drastically over the centuries. Modern development, agricultural use, and the passage of time have obliterated many clues that might have once pointed to her final resting place. The battle at Watling Street remains a matter of speculation, with historians unable to pinpoint its exact location. Some suggest it occurred near Mancetter in Warwickshire, while others argue for Paulerspury in Northamptonshire. These conflicting theories further complicate efforts to locate Boudica’s grave.

Even if we could precisely determine the battle site, finding Boudica’s burial place would be like searching for a needle in a haystack. By Roman accounts, her body was not marked with grandeur, and she was not interred in a way that would be easy to find centuries later. Unlike Roman dignitaries or wealthy Britons, whose tombs were often lavish and adorned with grave goods, Boudica was likely given a relatively modest burial. Without significant monuments or markers, time and nature would have quickly erased the site.

The tendency to romanticise her grave as lying beneath a well-known modern landmark, such as King’s Cross, reflects more about our desire for her story to resonate today than it does historical fact. Fascinated by the blend of ancient history and modern life, Londoners have long been intrigued by the idea that such a powerful symbol of resistance could be beneath their feet. But this fascination risks overshadowing the broader, more realistic possibility – that Boudica was buried somewhere nondescript, far from Londinium and Roman power.

The Roman Attitude Toward Boudica’s Legacy

The Romans were well aware of the power of symbols, especially in a province as volatile as Britain. Allowing Boudica to be buried near a prominent Roman settlement like Londinium would have been a political risk. As a leader who had humiliated the empire, her grave could have become a focus of anti-Roman sentiment. Shrines or burial sites often became places of pilgrimage, and the Romans, who were masters of control, would not have wanted to provide the Britons with a potential rallying point for future rebellion.

It’s worth considering how the Romans dealt with other famous enemies. After his defeat by Julius Caesar, Vercingetorix was paraded through Rome as a prisoner before being executed and discarded. Spartacus, after his rebellion, was likely never given a formal burial at all, with his body lost among the tens of thousands of slaves crucified along the Appian Way. Hannibal, once one of Rome’s most feared enemies, took his own life rather than be captured, and his burial site is only vaguely recorded in historical texts. The Romans had no qualms about erasing the legacies of their foes, ensuring that their deaths did not inspire further resistance. Though slightly more ambiguous, Boudica’s fate likely followed a similar pattern.

The idea that the Romans would have allowed her burial in such proximity to Londinium – a city she had devastated – seems far-fetched. More likely, her body was buried far from any significant Roman site, in an unmarked location, either by her people or under Roman orders. There is even a possibility that, following her death, the Romans desecrated her body to send a message to other rebellious tribes. This would have further reduced any chance of finding her grave today.

The Legend Lives On

Boudica’s grave may never be found; perhaps it is better that way. The mystery of her final resting place adds to the intrigue of her story, allowing her to remain a figure of myth as much as history. While her revolt against the Romans ultimately failed, her legacy has endured for millennia. Whether she lies beneath King’s Cross or somewhere far more obscure, Boudica will continue to inspire and captivate, her story a testament to the power of resistance and the enduring allure of legend.

In the end, it’s not the exact location of her grave that matters most, but what her story represents: the fierce determination of a people to stand against oppression, even in the face of overwhelming odds. And in that sense, Boudica’s spirit will live on wherever she may rest.

The London Mithraeum stands as one of the most intriguing relics of ancient Londinium, deeply rooted in the mystery cult of Mithras. Found beneath the modern streets of the bustling city, it provides a rare glimpse into the spiritual lives of Roman soldiers and citizens who called Londinium home in the late third and early fourth centuries. What’s particularly fascinating about the Mithraeum is how it reflects not only the religious practices of its time but also the shifting dynamics between competing belief systems, especially Mithraism and Christianity.

Mithras vs Christ: Competing for the Roman Soul

Mithraism, a mystery cult centred around the god Mithras, enjoyed widespread popularity among Roman soldiers. In contrast to Christianity, which was gaining a foothold among civilians, Mithraism was primarily a male-dominated religion steeped in ritual and exclusivity. Its members, often from the military elite, sought salvation and a connection to the divine through complex initiation ceremonies in secret temples like the London Mithraeum.

Mithras was a deity of light, truth, and loyalty—highly valued by the Roman army. This connection to the military made Mithraism a potential rival to Christianity. While Christianity offered universal salvation and was more inclusive of all social classes and genders, Mithraism appealed to the brotherhood and hierarchy cherished by Roman soldiers. The rituals of Mithraism, including the symbolic slaying of a bull by Mithras (a tauroctony), represented the eternal battle between good and evil, life and death, making it deeply resonant with the values of the Roman Empire.

The competition between these two religions intensified in the late Roman Empire around the third and fourth centuries. Had events played out differently, it’s entirely possible that Mithraism could have become the dominant faith. The religion’s strength among the military meant the backbone of Roman power already favoured it. Christianity, however, ultimately gained the upper hand, mainly due to political factors and imperial support, particularly after Constantine the Great’s conversion.

Mithraism in Late-3rd Century Londinium

Londinium, a thriving Roman city by the late third century, was home to many soldiers, traders, and officials. Mithraism likely arrived with the military, and the construction of the London Mithraeum around this period suggests that the cult was well established within the city. Constantine the Great, who would later become Rome’s first Christian emperor, was initially a follower of Mithras, as was likely his father, Constantius Chlorus. The prominence of Mithraism among the ruling elite lent it considerable influence in the imperial court.

Constantine’s early connection to Mithraism, combined with the popularity of the cult among his soldiers, suggests that had he not converted to Christianity, Mithraism might have risen to dominate the religious landscape of the empire. There’s evidence that Mithraic practices endured even after Constantine’s conversion, but Christianity’s embrace by the imperial family gradually marginalised Mithraism.

In Londinium, the Mithraeum would have served as a place where Roman soldiers and officials gathered to perform sacred rituals, cement their brotherhood, and pledge their loyalty to the empire and each other. The temple was built in the traditional style of Mithraic temples, or Mithraea, which were usually constructed underground to symbolise the cave where Mithras was believed to have slain the sacred bull.

The London Mithraeum: A Glimpse Into the Past

Excavations of the London Mithraeum have revealed much about what this temple would have looked like in its heyday. Built around AD 240-250, the temple was located near the Walbrook River, which once ran through Londinium. Like other Mithraea, it was designed to resemble a cave, with a long, narrow central nave flanked by raised benches where initiates would sit during rituals.

The centrepiece of the Mithraeum would have been a statue or relief depicting the tauroctony—Mithras’s slaying of the bull. This scene was central to Mithraic worship, symbolising the triumph of light over darkness, and was likely the focus of the cult’s sacred ceremonies. Other artefacts discovered during the excavation include altars, votive offerings, and inscriptions dedicated to Mithras, all of which provide insight into the religious practices of the time.

Interestingly, the temple underwent a rededication in the early fourth century, when it was converted into a temple of Bacchus. This change reflects the shifting religious landscape of the time, as Mithraism began to lose its foothold to other cults and, eventually, to Christianity. The rededication to Bacchus, the Roman god of wine and revelry, may have responded to the decline of Mithraic worship, as the Roman elite sought new ways to express their devotion to the gods.

The 1954 Excavations: Uncovering Londinium’s Hidden Past

The discovery of the London Mithraeum was an accident. In 1954, during the post-war reconstruction of London, builders stumbled upon the ruins of the ancient temple while digging foundations for a new office building. The discovery caused a sensation, as it was one of the most significant finds of Roman Londinium to date.

The excavation was led by renowned archaeologists W. F. Grimes and Audrey Williams, who meticulously uncovered the remains of the Mithraeum. Their work revealed the temple’s structure and a treasure trove of artefacts, including statues, altars, and inscriptions. The find was hailed as one of Britain’s most important Roman discoveries, shedding light on a relatively obscure aspect of the empire’s religious history.

However, controversy soon arose over the fate of the temple. In 1962, the ruins were relocated from Walbrook Square to a site near Temple Court as an imperfect compromise to preserve them while allowing for the construction of new buildings on the original site. This decision sparked outrage among historians and the public, who felt that the Mithraeum should have stayed in its original location. Critics argued that the relocation disrupted the temple’s historical context and diminished its significance as part of Londinium’s ancient landscape. In 2010, Bloomberg purchased the Walbrook Square plot and announced its decision to relocate the Mitraeum and restore it to its original look.

The London Mithraeum Today: A Journey Back in Time

Despite the controversy surrounding its relocation, the London Mithraeum remains one of the best places to experience Roman history in the heart of London. In 2017, Bloomberg restored the temple to its original site on Walbrook as part of the Bloomberg European Headquarters development. The reconstruction incorporates cutting-edge technology, immersing visitors in Roman Londinium.

The temple has been painstakingly recreated, complete with dramatic lighting and sound installation that evokes the atmosphere of Mithraic rituals. Visitors descend into the Mithraeum and are transported back in time, experiencing the temple as it would have appeared to Roman soldiers nearly two thousand years ago. The remains of the temple, combined with the artefacts on display, offer a fascinating glimpse into the spiritual lives of Roman Londoners.

What makes the London Mithraeum truly special is its ability to connect visitors with a forgotten chapter of history. Unlike many Roman ruins, which are often reduced to little more than fragments, the Mithraeum has been carefully preserved and presented in a way that brings its story to life. The immersive experience, combined with the detailed archaeological record, makes it a must-visit destination for anyone interested in ancient history.

Why the London Mithraeum Matters

The London Mithraeum is more than just an archaeological site. It reminds us of the complexity of the Roman Empire’s religious landscape and the fierce competition between Mithraism and Christianity during a time of great change. It also speaks to the importance of Londinium as a major Roman city, where soldiers, merchants, and officials from all corners of the empire converged, bringing with them their beliefs, traditions, and gods.

As you stand in the Mithraeum today, it’s easy to imagine the soldiers who once worshipped here gathering secretly to perform ancient rites. You can almost feel the weight of their oaths, hopes for salvation, and loyalty to Mithras. The temple may no longer echo with the chants of Roman initiates, but its walls still tell the story of a time when gods and empires vied for dominance—and a small temple on the banks of the Walbrook was at the heart of it all.

For anyone passionate about Roman history or interested in the rich tapestry of London’s past, the London Mithraeum offers an unparalleled glimpse into a world long forgotten but never truly lost.

The discovery of Roman relics beneath modern London has captivated historians for over a century, unveiling the city’s layered history as it once was—a bustling Roman hub known as Londinium. Among the remarkable finds lies the Roman House at Billingsgate, a rare example of Roman domestic life in Britain. This ancient dwelling gives us a glimpse of everyday life in a city dominated by traders, soldiers, and artisans, and it stands out as one of the few Roman sites that reflect the city’s domestic character. Tucked away near the famed Roman Wall and in proximity to sites like the Mitraeum and the Basilica, the Billingsgate Roman House is a piece of the puzzle that sheds light on a mysterious chapter in Londinium’s history.

Discovering the Roman House: A Surprise Unearthed During Victorian Expansion

The story of the Billingsgate House began in 1848 when the City of London was in the throes of a construction boom fuelled by the Industrial Revolution. During the erection of the Coal Exchange building near Billingsgate Market, workers stumbled upon an unexpected and significant discovery. As they dug through layers of London’s past, they uncovered the remains of what appeared to be a substantial Roman building. For the archaeologists who rushed to the site, this was a revelation. Until then, most Roman finds had been accidental, with little done to preserve them, but the Coal Exchange find hinted at something substantial enough to be remembered.

J. B. Brunning, a key figure in local antiquarian circles, recognised the importance of the discovery. Seeing the potential to save this piece of history from obliteration, Brunning advocated for its preservation, making an impassioned case for safeguarding these ancient walls. His efforts were remarkable in an era when the need for modern infrastructure often overshadowed historic preservation. The site was designated for posterity, setting a precedent for future archaeological care in the city.

Expanding the View: The 1960s Excavations

Despite Brunning’s early attempts at preservation, the Roman House at Billingsgate remained largely untouched until the 1960s, when the archaeological community returned to take a closer look. By this time, the field of archaeology had evolved, and a new generation of archaeologists, using more advanced techniques, hoped to uncover the complete layout of the house and reveal its purpose within Londinium’s Roman society.

Excavations in the 1960s confirmed that this was not just any Roman building but a domus, or private townhouse, belonging to a family of significant wealth and influence. Alongside the main house structure, archaeologists unearthed an adjacent bathhouse—an extraordinary feature hinting at both its inhabitants’ social status and daily routines. The excavation exposed intricate floor mosaics, shards of fine pottery, and remnants of painted walls, which offered a vivid picture of life behind closed doors in Roman London. The bathhouse layout became one of the most distinctive features, boasting all three rooms characteristic of a Roman bath: the frigidarium, tepidarium, and caldarium, each representing a step in the ancient bathing ritual.

The Roman Bathhouse at Billingsgate: A Place of Ritual and Relaxation

The bathhouse at Billingsgate was not just a place for cleanliness but a centre for social activity and relaxation. In Roman culture, bathing was a cherished ritual and a highlight of daily life, blending the practical with the pleasurable. The bathhouse’s design included three main sections, each meticulously constructed to meet Roman standards.

The Frigidarium: This was the cold room, where bathers would typically begin or end their routine. The frigidarium had a plunge pool filled with cool water, a refreshing contrast to the warmer rooms. The room was adorned with mosaic tiles, and traces of painted walls hinted at the attempts to bring colour and artistry into even the most functional spaces.

The Tepidarium: Next came the tepidarium, a warm room that served as an intermediary step, allowing bathers to ease into the process. The room would be filled with steam, keeping bathers warm as they adjusted to the temperature increase. For the Romans, the tepidarium wasn’t just a room; it was a space for mingling, discussing business, and socialising.

The Caldarium: The caldarium was the most heated room, where bathers could immerse themselves in a hot pool. Heated by a hypocaust—a Roman invention that circulated warm air under the floor—the caldarium provided an environment for relaxation and comfort. Oil massages often followed in this room, as slaves or attendants would apply scented oils to enhance the bathing experience. The caldarium also emphasised the wealth and status of the Billingsgate house’s owner; only the affluent could afford a fully outfitted private bath.

This combination of rooms showcased the importance Romans placed on cleanliness, relaxation, and social interaction, a key component of their urban lifestyle. Even within the confines of private homes, the culture of public bathing had its place, bridging personal and communal activities.

A Glimpse of Roman Life on the Thames

The Billingsgate House was located near Londinium’s bustling waterfront, offering its residents a prime spot for both commerce and convenience. The River Thames was the lifeline of Roman London, and properties near the water held high value. The proximity to Londinium’s key landmarks—the Basilica, a hub of administration and commerce; the Roman Wall, which marked the city’s boundaries and protected its citizens; and the Mitraeum, a temple devoted to the god Mithras—suggests that the owners were well-integrated into Londinium’s social and economic fabric.

In this waterfront home, the rhythm of Roman life unfolded against a backdrop of luxury and comfort. Meals would have been elaborate, with imported foods, fine wines, and spices brought in through trade networks stretching across the empire. The house’s artefacts suggest exotic goods, which would have been symbols of wealth and status. Fine tableware, decorative figurines, and jewellery fragments all indicate a family with a level of sophistication that matched the Roman Empire’s cosmopolitan centres.

The Billingsgate House After Rome: A Window Into Post-Roman Britain

The most intriguing aspect of the Billingsgate House is that it appears to have been occupied into the late 5th century AD after the Roman administration formally withdrew from Britain in 410 AD. This fact alone makes the house remarkable. For decades after the fall of Roman authority, this house continued to operate, indicating a gradual, rather than abrupt, decline of Roman culture and influence.

The late 5th-century occupation suggests that the inhabitants might have adapted to the changing times. While the building’s original grandeur may have faded, it is possible that those who lived there held on to the Roman way of life as long as they could, clinging to the customs, architecture, and comforts of a rapidly disappearing past. This continuity challenges the narrative of a sudden end to Roman Britain, suggesting instead a period of transformation where Roman and local traditions may have mingled in unexpected ways.

Eventually, the site was abandoned, its walls and rooms lost to history. Yet, even in this state, the Billingsgate House is a testament to Roman customs’ persistence and the resilience of Londinium’s residents, who faced an uncertain future after centuries of imperial rule.

An Enduring Legacy Beneath the Streets of London

The Roman House at Billingsgate is more than just an archaeological site; it is a piece of London’s identity, connecting the city’s modern pulse to its ancient roots. The excavations at Billingsgate have provided invaluable insights into the private lives of Londinium’s elite while also demonstrating the sophistication of Roman urban living.

Today, visitors can view the ruins of the bathhouse and visualise a world where Romans strolled along the Thames, discussed politics in the basilica, and worshipped in temples devoted to distant gods. The Billingsgate House, preserved for generations to study and appreciate, remains a silent witness to Londinium’s transformation and, ultimately, its enduring spirit. For anyone seeking a closer connection to ancient Roman Britain, these remnants offer a rare and intimate portrait of a city on the cusp of change.

If you ever happen to pass along the Gherkin, you surely have noticed the dark grey sarcophagus with the Latin inscription on its side. You might have mistaken it for a monument of sorts, and in a way, it is—a monument to a mystery. One that came to light in the 1990s was a mystery involving a young girl buried in the heart of ancient Londinium a few decades before the end of Roman rule over the Isle.

This is the story of the unknown girl whose final resting place lay undiscovered for centuries, only to be revealed by the chaos of a bombing and the careful work of archaeologists.

A Bomb, A Discovery: The Mystery Uncovered

On 10 April 1992, the IRA detonated a bomb in the heart of London, right in the financial district near the Baltic Exchange. The explosion was devastating, causing extensive damage to buildings and the surrounding area. The site was left in ruins, but amidst the debris of the modern city, the bombing indirectly led to a remarkable discovery.

As the area underwent repairs and reconstruction, archaeologists were called in. Excavations were necessary before new foundations could be laid. Soon enough, they stumbled upon a Roman burial site that had remained undisturbed for over 1,500 years. Among the ancient finds was the body of a young girl, her identity and life an enigma waiting to be unravelled.

The unknown girl lay beneath what is now 30 St Mary Axe, better known as The Gherkin. As you stand in front of this towering glass structure, it’s hard to imagine that once, beneath its gleaming modern exterior, a child’s final resting place stood quietly hidden, marking a different era altogether.

What Do We Know About The Girl?

The remains of the girl believed to be between 13 and 17 years old, offer some clues but no definitive answers. The date of her burial suggests that she lived around 350 to 400 AD, during the latter days of Roman rule in Britain. She was laid to rest in a traditional pose for a late-Roman burial, although this fact signifies neither her ethnicity nor her social standing. But beyond these sparse facts, much about her life remains a mystery.

What’s particularly intriguing is that the girl’s remains were found within the boundaries of what would have been Roman Londinium but outside the city walls. At that time, burials were commonly placed outside city limits due to both Roman customs and laws. The position of her grave implies that her community lived close to, but not necessarily within, the bustling heart of Londinium itself.

Archaeologists also discovered no grave goods buried with her, a feature that might have helped identify her origins or beliefs. This raises tantalising questions: Was she part of a wealthy Roman-British family? Was she an early Christian, laid to rest following new religious customs? We can only speculate based on the little that survives.

Londinium: What Did It Look Like Around 350-400 AD?

At the time of the unknown girl’s burial, Roman Britain was in its twilight. The Roman Empire’s influence was waning, and Londinium, once a thriving hub of trade, military operations, and politics, was beginning to see its own decline. The grand structures that had once dominated the skyline – the basilica, the amphitheatre, and the forum – were either in disrepair or slowly falling out of use.

Yet, Londinium still bustled with life. The city lay on the northern bank of the Thames, and its riverside location made it a critical point for trade routes stretching across the Empire. Warehouses, workshops, and merchants’ stalls lined the streets, but signs of change were already in the air. Invasions by Saxon pirates had made the city’s defensive walls crucial for protection, while many villas and estates began to appear in the surrounding countryside.

By 400 AD, the British economy and urban life were shifting. Londinium was no longer the powerhouse it once was but was far from abandoned. The Roman presence might have weakened, but Roman culture lingered in daily life, and the girl’s burial would have been one of many during this transition period between Roman control and the rise of native British and early Saxon kingdoms.

Burial Practices: The Roman Way of Death

Understanding how the girl was buried helps us place her within Roman customs. Roman burial practices varied over time and location, influenced by social class, local traditions, and religious beliefs. Cremation was the dominant form of burial in the earlier Roman period. Still, by the time the unknown girl lived, inhumation (burial of the body intact) had become far more common.

The switch from cremation to burial was gradual, but by the late 3rd and 4th centuries, it was almost universal in Roman Britain. Grave goods, from personal items like jewellery to offerings of food and drink, were often included to accompany the dead on their journey to the afterlife. However, this young girl’s grave held none of these, potentially reflecting a Christian influence or the simple preferences of her family.

Could She Have Been Christian?

One of the most compelling aspects of this discovery is the question of the girl’s religion. Britain in the 4th century was a land of religious change. Christianity had begun to spread across the Roman Empire after Emperor Constantine’s conversion, and by the time of this girl’s death, Christian communities were present in Londinium.

The absence of grave goods suggests a possible Christian influence. Early Christian burials often followed simpler practices, devoid of the rich offerings typical of pagan Roman burials. However, without any definitive religious symbols (like a cross or religious inscription), it’s difficult to say what faith the girl adhered to.

Historians caution against jumping to conclusions about her being Christian, and some argue that referring to her as “Roman” might also be misleading. While she was buried during Roman rule and within Roman customs, it’s entirely possible that her family was of native British descent, Romanised only through centuries of occupation. To call her a Roman might be to impose an identity on her that we cannot fully substantiate.

Roman Or Romanticised?

We often romanticise figures like this unknown girl, eager to fill in the gaps left by history. In truth, we know very little about her life or identity, yet she sparks our imagination. Was she a Roman citizen? A Briton living under Roman rule? Was she Christian, pagan, or something else entirely? These are questions we may never answer.

However, we can appreciate that her burial and existence connect us directly to Londinium’s ancient past. She lived in a city undergoing dramatic change at a time when empires rose and fell, and she was laid to rest beneath what would one day become one of London’s most recognisable buildings.

Her story reminds us that every piece of ground we walk on carries layers of history, and sometimes, an unexpected event—like a bombing—can reveal those layers and the people who lived and died beneath them.

Today, the unknown girl beneath The Gherkin continues to captivate historians and Londoners alike. We may never know her name, but through the efforts of archaeologists and the fragments of history they uncover, we keep her memory alive, preserving her place in the long, rich story of London’s past.