REVISED VERSION - 13/4/99

MOA99 - 19-31 Moorgate, City of London

Ceramic Building Materials

by S Garside-Neville, Brick and Tile Services

Introduction

A small sample of brick, tile, daub and mortar was submitted for identification. The fragments were examined by eye, and measured where appropriate.

Roman material

Roman material is present in the form of tegula (Roman roof tile) and fragments of brick, some of which are undiagnostic regarding use. The fragments from 4/009 that are assigned as brick are probably from some sort of bonding brick used in walls or hypocausts. Some of the fragments show signs of reuse, possibly during the Roman period judging by the mortar. The tegula is lightly burnt.

Medieval Material

Medieval material comprises peg tile, and plain tile (which are undiagnostic fragments of roof tile). The peg tile takes the typical London form with two circular, diamond or irregular pegholes made at the top end of a slab of clay. The breadth measurement is 6¹/₁₀ inches across, which falls a little under the breadth of 6¹/₄ inches stipulated in the Act of 1477 that regulated roof tile sizes.

Post medieval material

Post medieval material is represented by brick, which shows a range of fabrics and sizes.

Daub and mortar

There are three fragments of daub or mudbrick with a white deposit on a flattish face from context 1/017. The white deposit may be a lime wash. Two fragments with a similar fabric, but no deposit, come from context 4/004. This material is difficult to assign to a date, though the presence of tegula and brick could point to it being Roman.

There is a piece of mortar with flint inclusions from 4/009, which is probably Roman in date, though it is not opus signinum.

Conclusion

The presence of Roman tile points to some Roman activity on the site, though most of the pieces are quite abraded, except for those from 4/009. The material from this site should be kept for further study so that it can contribute to the study of ceramic building materials in the City of London. Study of the fabrics, comparing them with the Museum of London fabric series, would help tie down a closer date for both the Roman and medieval forms.

Context Listing

Key

B=Breadth, followed by measurements in millimetres, and where appropriate in inches

T=Thickness, followed by measurements in millimetres, and where appropriate in inches

Context	Form	Comment	Date Range	Spot Date
1/006	Brick	reused; B1002T58; B4T21/4; dull red; ?slop moulded	16-18th	16-18th
1/016	Roman brick	T35	Roman	Roman
1/017	Daub	3 frags; lime wash?; flooring or walling	?Roman	?Roman
2/010	Brick	L239B106T66; L91/2B41/8T25/8; slightly mis-shaped; London stock like fabric	18-19th	18-19th
2/019	Peg	diamond peghole	Med	Med
	Peg	2 x circular pegholes 15mm across; B155T14	Med
	Peg	rough peghole; triangular punch	Med
	Plain	c5 frags between T12-T16	Med
	Plain	tally mark	Med
3/005	Brick	London stock; ?worn	19th+	20th
	Brick		20th
	Brick	B113T66; B41/2T25/8; mortar; hard purple fabric	19th
4/003	Brick	slop moulded	Med-Post med	Post med
	Brick	reused	Med-Post med
	Brick	mortar, sandy red fabric	Med-Post med
	Roman brick	T18	Roman
4/004	Daub	similar fabric to context 1/017; 2 frags	?Roman	Med
	Mortar		?
	Plain	T11	Med
4/005	Roman brick	T20	Roman	Roman
4/006	Roman brick	2 small frags	Roman	Roman
	Tegula	lower cutaway; burnt	Roman
4/009	Daub	2 frags	?Roman	Roman
	Mortar	Flint inclusions; marks on back - ?combed box flue impressions	?
	Roman brick	T46; light brown fabric - ?Eccles-type	Roman
	Roman brick	T41	Roman
	Tegula?	T28; reused	Roman

sgn