Excavations in and around Dover’s Market Square, 2021–2022: Remains of the seventeenth-century Guildhall and other discoveries
During 2021 and 2022 major improvement works were undertaken in Dover’s Market Square and adjacent King Street. The entire area is recognised as having very high archaeological potential. Accordingly, Canterbury Archaeological Trust was commissioned by Dover District Council to carry out a preliminary implications survey (Parfitt 2020), followed by a programme of field investigation (Parfitt 2021; 2022; 2023; Bates with Parfitt 2022), as an integral part of the construction project. Some significant discoveries and observations were made, amplifying the known history of the area.
The present-day Market Square (NGR TR 3195 4142, centred; Figs 1 & 2), is approximately trapezoidal in shape (Fig. 9) with maximum dimensions of about 60m (N–S) by 54m (E–W). It is fronted by buildings on all sides, the bulk of which date to the second half of the twentieth century. Just four earlier structures survived the devastation of the Second World War and post-War redevelopment. Oldest of these is the Market Hall built in 1848 but only its façade now remains, fronting the rebuilt town museum.
[fg]jpg|Fig. 1 General location maps showing investigated area.|Image[/fg]
[fg]jpg|Fig. 2 Outline map of medieval Dover showing position of the Market Square in relation to churches, town wall and Dover Castle (based on Parfitt et al 2006, fig. 3).|Image[/fg]
Three principal streets give access to the square: King Street, entering at the south-east corner; Cannon Street at the north-west corner and Castle Street at the north-east corner. Church Street, now realigned, also originally entered at the north-east corner, whilst at the south-western corner, the entrance to Old Tavenor’s Lane has been realigned and partially built over. On the south side, Goal Lane continues as a footpath. With the exception of nineteenth-century Castle Street, all these thoroughfares are likely to be of medieval origin and most can be recognised on sixteenth- and seventeenth century maps (Figs 3 & 4).
[fg]jpg|Fig. 3 Extract from a map of Dover probably by Thomas Digges, 1595 (Cott. Aug. I.I.46) showing St Peter’s church (on right), the ruined east end of St Martin’s church and the market cross.|Image[/fg]
[fg]jpg|Fig. 4 Extract from William Eldred’s town map dated 1641 (ref. WAT/L/45), showing St Martin’s church yard, the Market house and St Mary’s church (St Peter’s church now demolished).|Image[/fg]
Archaeological and historical background
Located in the middle of the medieval walled town, between the foot of the Western Heights and the River Dour (Fig. 2), the Market Square occupies an almost level piece of ground standing at an elevation of around 5.60m above Ordnance Datum. The course of the modern river lies about 50m to the east, with the present seashore some 300 metres to the south-east. This general area has constituted the centre of historic settlement at Dover since the late Roman period, although a formal market place did not develop here until later medieval times.[pg23][pg24]
Roman
During the later Roman period the site of the present Market Square fell within the area of the third century Shore Fort, built c. AD 250–260 (Philp 2012, 154). Constructed across earlier civilian buildings, partially on Roman reclaimed ground behind the waterfront, this fort replaced an earlier one occupied by the Imperial fleet (Classis Britannica; Philp 1981). The third century fort probably covered about 1.6 hectares (4 acres), although the line of its north and east walls have never been closely defined. The east wall is believed to run along the western side of King Street and across the eastern margin of the Market Square. The Notitia Dignitatum records its garrison as the Milites Tungrecani. Archaeological evidence suggests that the fort was abandoned before the end of the fourth century AD (Philp 2012, 105).
Anglo-Saxon
Excavation has shown that Anglo-Saxon colonists settled within the walls of the abandoned Roman Shore fort at the start of the sixth century (Philp 2003, 123), if not slightly earlier. During the seventh century Dover apparently became a monastic centre, although the historical evidence is somewhat confused and difficult to understand (Rigold 1977). Extensive work by the Kent Archaeological Rescue Unit west of the Market Square during the 1970s and 1980s located significant evidence for Anglo-Saxon occupation within the area of the old Roman fort. Of particular interest were the remains of a complex timber building of at least five phases, located immediately to the west of the Market Square. Datable finds were scarce but pottery and glass recovered suggested a period of use between the seventh- and tenth century (Philp 2003, 58, 126). This major structure was interpreted by the excavator as an Anglo-Saxon church, predecessor to the later Norman church of St Martin-le-Grand which was subsequently built close-by (see below). More recently, it has been suggested that the structure could be a high-status secular building, constructed on a sufficiently grand scale to have served as a royal residence (Welch 2007, 203).
Other historical and archaeological evidence combines to indicate that Dover had developed into an important settlement by the later Anglo-Saxon period. A named mint, Doferi, first appears during the reign of King Aethelstan (AD 924– 939), whilst a guildhall recorded in the Domesday Book of 1086 is most likely to have been of pre-Conquest origin. During the Norman Conquest in 1066, the settlement at Dover was destroyed by a major fire, started by Duke William’s men. Although excavations have revealed evidence for several fires in the area of the former Anglo-Saxon town, none are dated as late as 1066 (Philp 2003, 132).
Medieval
By the end of the eleventh century Dover would seem to have recovered from the fire and been largely rebuilt. The town began to expand beyond the walls of the old Roman fort, overlooked from the eastern heights by the great Royal castle, started in 1066 but rebuilt in stone on a massive scale from the 1180s.[pg25][pg26]
Around the river mouth a port of very considerable importance developed, with the town soon becoming a key member of the powerful Cinque Ports confederation (Murray 1935). In the vicinity of the later market square two substantial Norman stone churches were constructed: St Martin-le-Grand and St Peter’s, both now demolished (Figs 2 & 3). There are possible suggestions that both might have had an Anglo-Saxon predecessor.
St Martin-le-Grand Church
This massive Norman church was constructed on the rising ground west of the future site of the Market Square. It was cruciform in plan, with a central tower and three apsidal chapels projecting from its east end (Plumptre 1861; Scott Robertson 1893; HER ref. TR 34 SW 36; Figs 2 & 3). It had an overall length of around 60 metres and would have dominated the entire area. Originally begun for secular canons in the 1070s, major building work on the church was halted during the earlier twelfth century when it was superseded by the new St Martin’s Priory, founded outside the town in 1130 for the use of Benedictine monks (Haines 1930).
The old building was eventually completed to form a large parochial church. During the fourteenth- and fifteenth century this building, unusually, combined three separate parish churches under one roof. Leland writing in the 1530s noted that ‘the town is divided into six parishes, but three of them are served under one roof by St Martin’s in the centre of the town.’ Soon after, the church was closed under the General Dissolution of Henry VIII and demolished piecemeal over following centuries (Figs 3 & 5). The nave of the church was excavated during the 1970s and is now on public display.
The church was associated with a large graveyard, parts of which continued in use into the nineteenth century. The overall limits of this cemetery are not certain but it originally included some of the area that is now the Market Square (see below).
St Peter’s Church
St Peter’s church formerly stood on a site north of the future Market Square (Figs 2 & 3), only about 30m from St Martin’s (HER ref. TR 34 SW 14). It was probably erected towards the end of the eleventh century, soon after St Martin’s had been completed. This was once an important church with many leading townsfolk buried here. From 1367 until 1581 the church was also the place where Members of Parliament and the Mayors of Dover were elected, and from its western tower the curfew bell was rung. By the late sixteenth century, however, the church was ruined and in 1590 Elizabeth I gave authority for its sale to raise money for harbour repairs. All trace of the building seems to have disappeared by the seventeenth century (Fig. 4). Various construction projects undertaken during the nineteenth- and early twentieth century, notably Lloyds Bank in 1905–6, revealed traces of its foundations and associated burials.
A decorated Anglo-Saxon grave slab (HER ref. TR 34 SW 146) was discovered during alterations to the Antwerp Inn in 1832, close to the site of the lost church. Now displayed in Dover Museum, the stone bears a runic name inscription, [pg27]Gisilheard, and is probably of tenth century date. It may be derived from an Anglo-Saxon grave associated with a pre-Norman church in this area.
Human burials
The close proximity of two important medieval churches, each with their associated burial grounds, has led to human remains often being turned up during various excavations undertaken in and around the Market Square. According to Mary Horsley (c. 1902, 3):
‘Human remains have been found in all parts of the Market-Place, for St Peter’s Church and churchyard occupied the space now covered with houses on the north side of the Market-Place, and the churchyard of St Martin’s reached to the Fountain Inn on the south.’
Further human remains have been unearthed in more recent times (Victor 1989, 130; HER ref. TR 34 SW 1770) and additional material was discovered during the present fieldwork.
Post-medieval
The present-day Market Square was not a feature of the early medieval town. Its origins seem to lie in the annual fair of St Martin, thought to have originally been held within the open grounds of the churchyard of St Martin-le-Grand (see above) [pg28]on the Saint’s feast day, 11 November. Traditionally, this fair included a three- day market (Hasted 1800, 516; Horsley c. 1902). From this beginning, Dover’s market place apparently became more formalised in 1480 when a new market cross was erected in the cemetery area to the east of St Martin’s church. The town council decreed that in future, markets for local produce and livestock, as well as St Martin’s Fair, should be held in this vicinity (Bavington Jones 1907).
Market cross
Sixteenth-century maps indicate that the market cross consisted of a small square building with a roof surmounted by a cross (Fig. 3). This structure became a focal point where townsfolk regularly met. Records indicate that money for repair work was made available during the 1560s (Dixon MS, 169). Also, during the sixteenth century, old St Martin’s church passed into the control of Dover Corporation and in 1546 its altars were removed so that the east end could be let out for use as shops and tenements fronting onto the Market Square (Scott Robertson 1893, 303).
Guildhall
During 1605–1606 the town council constructed a grand new court hall close to the site of the old market cross, at a total cost of more than £330 (Dixon MS, 173). This building replaced an earlier, medieval court hall that stood somewhere close-by. The new structure was completed by 1607 and occupied the southern side of the Market Square until its demolition in 1861 (Figs 4 & 6). In written accounts it is variously described as the Court Hall, the Market Hall or the Guildhall (generally used in this report). For a time during the early nineteenth century the building housed Dover’s museum. William Batcheller in his New Dover Guide of 1845 provides a useful general description:
‘The Museum – This edifice is erected on pillars over the butter market. It was the Town-hall till the year 1835; when a new hall, sessions-house, and gaol were constructed in a part of the Maison Dieu church. The present building was erected on the site of a more ancient one, called the cross, which in an old plan of the town, has the appearance of a mean edifice, with a cross on it. The grotesque figures on the pillars that support the superstructure, bespeak the high antiquity even of the present building; but the sides are now covered with mathematical tiles, and adorned with large venetian windows, which give it a modern appearance. It was given by the corporation for the purpose of forming a museum and is now fitted up under the management of a committee. The collection is already become very respectable.’ (Batcheller 1845, 159).
Originally, the main building consisted of a large room on the upper floor, used for council meetings and as a court room, raised on wooden pillars which provided space for a covered market at street level, where meat, butter and vegetable markets could be held. Stone required for the new building was taken from the abandoned church of St Martin-le-Grand nearby (Dixon MS, 173) but ‘it was built chiefly of wood…. the Hall was raised on pillars and corbels of wood which were curiously carved by a Dover man named Weeks.’ (Horsley c.1902, 12). One of these carvings is preserved in Dover Museum (Fig. 6).
[fg]jpg|Fig. 5 Drawing of Dover Market Place and the Guildhall from the Gentleman’s Magazine dated 1788 (note standing ruins of St Martin’s church behind buildings on the right).|Image[/fg]
[fg]jpg|Fig. 6 Carved wooden figure salvaged from the seventeenth- century Guildhall prior to demolition in 1861, now in Dover Museum.|Image[/fg]
[pg29][pg30]
Alterations and additions were regularly made to the Guildhall. Its general development can be traced through a series of early town maps and drawings (Figs 3-5 & 7). It was originally fifty feet long and ‘of convenyant bredth’ suggesting a rectangular shape. Subsequently, in 1620–1621, an extension was added by mayor John Benger (Dixon MS, 30) and a room was further added for the court of admiralty in 1639. During the mid-eighteenth century the building was clad with mathematical tiles (frequently employed to give the impression that a timber building was constructed of more fashionable brick). Also, during this period additional pillars to support the building were inserted (Horsley c.1902, 12).
The earliest depiction of the building is that shown on Eldred’s map of 1641, where it is labelled as ‘the Market Hous’ (Fig. 4). This shows the raised hall standing on a series of columns accessed by an external flight of steps on the south side. Foucquet’s town map of 1737 shows an L-shaped building with the same flight of steps on the south side. By the time John Rennie’s map was prepared in 1805 a sizable extension had been added at the south-east corner of the building. a further, eastern extension to the structure was made subsequently. This was provided with a bowed (east) front (Fig. 7) and is marked on the First Edition Ordnance Survey map of 1861 as the Fish Market adjoining the Guildhall. approval for this Fish Market/Shambles extension had been given in 1825 (Jon Iveson pers comm) and the structure would appear to have extended across the site of earlier buildings (Fig. 5) that previously stood at the entrance to King Street.
The Guildhall was regularly used by the town council until 1836, after which the town Museum was established on the upper floor (see above). The museum remained there until 1848 when it moved to its present location nearby, above [pg31]the new covered market (Fig. 7; see below). The seventeenth-century guildhall building was eventually demolished in 1861, to allow expansion of the market place.
The 1605–1606 building was the latest in a series of three or four previous court halls/guildhalls recorded at Dover, although little is known about any of these. The earliest, noted in Domesday Book, is the Gilhalla of the burgesses. This was most probably of Anglo-Saxon origin (see above) but its location and form are completely unknown. During the 1360s a structure referred to as the ‘Common House’ in the Dover Chamberlain’s records (Statham 1902, 81, endnotes 20 and 22), with a cellar below, was fairly certainly a replacement building erected on or near the site of the earlier guildhall. A ‘Court Hall’ noted several times during the sixteenth century (Dixon MS) was perhaps a subsequent rebuild of the fourteenth- century structure. Rent records for a shop under this court hall survive for the period 1546 to 1620 and a cellar is mentioned in 1566. This old court hall building continued to be leased out by the council for a number of years after the new one [pg32]in the Market Square had come into service, before being sold to an individual from London in 1628 for £47 (Dixon MS, 53). Historical speculation places this old court hall somewhere in the general area of present-day King Street or Bench Street.
[fg]jpg|Fig. 7 Extract from the Borough of Dover Board of Health map dated 1851, showing the old Market/Court Hall and the new Market and Museum (source, Dover Museum).|Image[/fg]
Town pump
According to the Dover Board of Health map dated 1851, the Market Square pump, delivering fresh water to townsfolk, was located at the north-eastern corner of the seventeenth-century guildhall (Fig. 7). This apparently drew water from a nearby well. The pump was replaced with a drinking fountain on the same site in 1859. Although outlasting the guildhall building itself, the fountain did not continue for long because in 1866 its water was found to be unfit for drinking, which led to its immediate closure.
New Market Hall and Museum
In 1848–9, on the southern side of the market place, a new covered market building was erected across the former site of an eighteenth-century prison building. Somewhat curiously, a new town museum was provided on its upper floor as an integral part of the design (Fig. 7) The market building was demolished during the 1980s to make way for an enlarged museum, although the original façade has been preserved.[pg33]
King Street
Historic King Street is a short thoroughfare entering the south-east corner of the Market Square (Figs 1 & 2). It connects with Bench Street which originally led to the Boldware Gate through the town wall and the medieval shoreline beyond. Both William Batcheller (1845) and Mary Horsley (c. 1902) note that King Street had been widened in 1728 and 1820, significantly increasing the originally narrow medieval roadway. Batcheller (1845, 43–4) records that:
‘The old houses on the western side of the street were taken down, and the present elegant structures built on the space behind them, presenting a spacious opening to the Market-place. In making these alterations the remains of an ancient stone building were discovered, pent up between the houses, and forming the partition walls between some of them; and beneath it was an undercroft, curiously arched with stone. Two elegant Gothic arches, the points of which were twenty feet above the present surface, faced towards the north, and were situated nearly opposite the Flying-horse Inn, forming nearly a right angle with the front of it. Some of the fragments of the old building evidently formed a part of the materials in this front, which is now covered with a coat of cement. The ancient edifice extended from the western extremity of Bench-street towards the Market place, and the foundations of it are under the present carriage road. It appeared to have been an ancient church or public building, the origin or existence of which were alike unknown.’
Miss Horsley (c. 1902, 11) further suggests that this ancient stone building might have represented part of the old medieval court Hall that preceeded the Guildhall building in the Market Square (see above).
Results of archaeological investigations, 2021–2022
As a first phase of fieldwork, in 2021, two geoarchaeological boreholes were drilled in the central part of the Market Square to provide window samples though the accumulated sediments below, especially the lowest fluvial/estuarine levels known to underlie Roman infilling (Bates with Parfitt 2022; Fig. 9, BH 1 & BH 2). Formal excavation of the higher archaeological levels followed during the summer of 2021 (Figs 8 & 9, Areas 1 and 2) and these succeeded in locating the damaged foundations of the seventeenth-century Guildhall together with preceding medieval market place metallings (Parfitt 2022). A subsequent intermittent watching brief, maintained during the main construction works between August 2021 and February 2022 (Fig. 9, trenches E–T), revealed further traces of the Guildhall and market place metallings, together with a quantity of human bone and other features associated with the medieval graveyard of St Martin’s church (Parfitt 2023).
[fg]jpg|Fig. 8 General view of Area 1 excavation looking south-east showing exposed foundations of Guildhall, August 2021.|Image[/fg]
No trace of the lost eastern wall of the late Roman Shore fort was seen. Observations in adjacent King Street revealed some significant medieval and post-medieval building remains together with stratified deposits that predated the eighteenth- and nineteenth-century road widenings. In all, the fieldwork generated an archive which consists of over two hundred recorded contexts, seven measured plans, eighteen sections, and about 680 digital photographs, supplemented by various written notes [pg34]and sketches. Apart from a significant amount of human bone collected during the watching brief, the quantity of finds recovered was relatively small.
Early valley bottom sediments by Martin Bates
The two boreholes drilled in 2021 (Fig. 9, BH 1 and BH2) lay about 11.50m apart and were each taken to a depth of around 5.00m below pavement level, where natural flint river gravels were encountered. About 0.40m of water-laid silts overlay the gravels and these were sampled and assessed (Bates with Parfitt 2022) for what contribution they could make to ongoing research concerning the infilling of the valley of the ancient River Dour (Bates et al. 2011a).
Directly over the gravels, both boreholes located a thin deposit of brown water-laid clay-silt with a blocky texture. In BH 2, the lowest sample examined (from +0.86m OD), like that in BH 1, produced a dirty residue that is brown in appearance and contains much plant debris, insect remains, seeds and charcoal. This suggests that the silt layer dried out and stabilised to form a land surface. Based upon the presence of charcoal, this may have been subject to some human activity. The deposit is likely to span the Mesolithic and Neolithic periods and into the earlier part of the Bronze Age.[pg35]
Subsequently, further freshwater sedimentation took place. Ostracods recovered from BH 1 appear to suggest natural sediments were accumulating here in a shallow freshwater pool with tufa springs and a calcareous substrate. At the base of the sequence the sediments contained insect remains, eggs of freshwater crustaceans (cladocera) and small pieces of charcoal which may indicate disturbance and/or human interference. The longer sequence examined in BH 2 exhibits a relatively restricted freshwater assemblage of ostracods that are again evidence of shallow freshwater pools fed by tufa springs with a calcareous substrate. At +1.26m OD these were accompanied by some mid/high saltmarsh agglutinating foraminifera, which confirms the presence of fringing saltmarsh in the vicinity.
The 2021 work followed on from sampling previously undertaken on the south side of the Square in 2009 (Fig. 9; Parfitt and Bates 2009; Bates et al. 2011b). This had suggested that similar freshwater-lain sediments overlay the gravels and began accumulating during the fourth millennium BP and probably ceased accumulating in the late third or early second millennium BP. These deposits represent environments of deposition associated with freshwater pools and ponds just above the limits of high tides, where the pools were fed by freshwater draining from the higher ground to the west. The results from the 2021 work appear to confirm this previous interpretation. In BH3 of the 2009 investigation brackish species foraminifera were intermittently present in the recorded samples (Bates et al. 2011b).
Combined, the evidence from these two phases of sampling in the Market Square suggests that waterlogging and the accumulation of freshwater-laid sediments may be related, at least in part, to sea level rise. It is known from work around the site of the Dover Bronze Age boat, located some 165m to the south, that estuarine conditions only commenced there in the Middle Bronze age. At the Market Square, inland of the boat, freshwater conditions begin at a broadly similar time. It is possible therefore that this is a function of backing-up of water courses and impeded drainage associated with marine flooding in the lower reaches of the Dour during the Middle or Late Bronze Age. When the Romans began to in-fill along the western margin of the old river channel, early in the second century (see above), the Market Square area most probably consisted of reasonably dry, freshwater marsh.
Roman activity and the lost east wall of the shore Fort
Nowhere were the excavations undertaken deep enough to expose the full sequence of archaeological deposits present and no definite Roman layers were reached. Nothing of the lost eastern wall of the late Roman Shore fort was revealed and if its line does fall in the area of the present Market Square, it must remain buried under deposits untouched by any of the present works. A few pieces of Roman tile and pottery were recovered as residual material in later deposits but there is nothing of special note.
The church of St Martin-le-Grand and its burial ground
Traces of human skeletal remains were first located during excavations in the summer of 2021 (area 1) but lying below the general formation level of the new [pg36][pg37]construction works, these were left in situ. Subsequently, during the building work, rather more human bone was disturbed and hastily salvaged on the western side of the central Market Square, beyond area 1 and closer to the site of St Martin-le-Grand church (Fig. 9; trenches e & J). No bone was found in trenches L, M and N, dug just south of the site of St Peter’s church, and it would seem that all the human remains discovered were connected with St Martin’s church.
[fg]jpg|Fig. 9 overall plan showing location of boreholes, inspected trenches and recorded structures (Based on Ordnance Survey mapping with the permission of the Controller of His Majesty’s Stationery Office, ©Crown Copyright License No. AL100021009).|Image[/fg]
Remains in Trench J
Excavations for the base of a new plant room occurred on the western side of the Market Square during December 2021 (Figs 9 & 10, Trench J). These were carefully observed since they lay beyond the two areas previously excavated under archaeological control. Adjoining Trench E, Trench J was roughly rectangular in shape (Figs 9 & 10), measuring around 4.00m (E–W) by up to 6.75m (N–S). The excavation was about 1.25m deep and revealed some significant archaeological remains in an area where previous damage by modern services had been shallower and less severe than elsewhere.
Although it was not possible to undertake any detailed investigations, some useful information was obtained. A sizeable sample of human bone was recovered and a probable medieval tomb revealed, together with a chalk block wall, also probably of medieval date. No early market place metallings overlying the deposits containing human bone were noted.
Human bone deposit, 512 (Figs 9 & 10; table 1)
Excavation of trench J revealed a quantity of human bone contained within a layer of mixed soil (Fig. 10, context 512; Table 1). This deposit was traced northwards into Trench E before being cut away a modern pipe. Much of the bone collected had been previously disturbed by modern services but some semi-articulated and a few articulated skeletons were revealed in the base of the excavation, starting at a depth of about 0.80m below present ground level. Where possible, these burials were left undisturbed, but a considerable amount of loose bone was salvaged from the machine bucket. At one point, it could be seen that earlier burials had been cut through by what appeared to be a later stone-lined tomb (context 510, see below). Human remains had been previously recovered from this same area in 1994 (Parfitt 2020; Kent HER ref. TR34 SW1770).
Probable medieval tomb, 510 (Figs 10 & 11)
The damaged remains of what appeared to be a medieval tomb cutting through several earlier graves were revealed buried at a depth of about 1.10m below modern pavement level in the central part of Trench J (Figs 10 & 11). Although previously disturbed, part of the structure’s chalk block capping still survived. The exposed structure had to be very rapidly investigated and recorded but fortunately, as the top of the tomb lay just about at the finished level of the construction works, it was possible to carefully cover it over, leaving the structure preserved for more detailed investigation sometime in the future.[pg38][pg39]
[fg]jpg|Fig. 10 Plan of Trenches E, J & H showing location of medieval tomb (510) and boundary wall (508) in relation to projected east end of St Martin-le-Grand church.|Image[/fg]
[fg]jpg|Fig. 11 Detail plan and section of medieval tomb (510).|Image[/fg]
Aligned roughly east-west, the structure was initially thought to represent part of a stone-lined drain leading away from the east end of St Martin’s Church. It was rectangular in shape, defined by mortared stone walls along the north and south sides, with the remains of flat chalk block capping stones surviving at the eastern end. Neither end wall of the tomb seemed to survive, apparently having been either removed by subsequent grave cuts or later services (Fig. 11). Limited investigation of the interior showed that in situ leg human bones lay on the base, indicating that this was a tomb, rather than an early drain. No attempt to excavate this burial was made.
If the identification as a tomb is correct, the location seems significant because it falls on the line of the projected central axis of St Martin’s church, positioned around 8m outside its central eastern apse (Fig. 10). This positioning, together with the masonry construction, suggests that this was the burial place of an individual of some status, whose tomb was constructed in an area already occupied by graves.
Medieval wall, 508 (Fig. 10)
Located towards the southern side of Trench J was an east–west aligned medieval wall (508). This was traced for a minimum distance of 3.50m across the trench, continuing beyond the excavation limits in both directions (Fig. 10). Its top lay at a depth of about 0.80m below present pavement level but it appeared to have suffered a certain amount of truncation in recent times. As surviving, the wall was about 0.56m in width and at least 0.45m high. It was constructed from four courses [pg40]of squared chalk blocks with occasional flint and greensand lumps set in cream sandy mortar of medieval style.
On either side, the wall was abutted by a layer of chalk rubble, mostly squared blocks similar to those used in the wall itself (Context 507; Fig. 10). This layer was up to 0.60m thick and there can be little doubt that it represents demolition material from the wall. If so, reduction of the associated wall must have taken place at a relatively early date because in the south-west corner of the excavation a grave appeared to cut this rubble deposit.
Market place metallings
The available historical evidence indicates that Dover’s medieval market place was developed from part of the former graveyard associated with St Martin church (see above). Sequences of metalling recorded across the area investigated, without doubt, represent successive surfaces of this documented market place. Most recent were the coloured brick paviours laid across the entire Market Square in 1988. Below this, layers of tarmac and asphalt dated to the late nineteenth- and twentieth century when most of the Square was used by traffic. Lower down, were earlier market place sequences incorporating well-defined walking surfaces interspersed with make-up and levelling layers.[pg41][pg42]
Early market place deposits were recorded in Areas 1 and 2, Trenches L, K, M, N, P and R (Fig. 9) but were apparently absent on the western side of the Market Square, in Trenches E and J, raising the question as to how near to the east end of St Martin’s church, early market place metallings originally extended.
Observations in Area 1
Controlled archaeological excavation of Area 1 in 2021 allowed a detailed examination of the earliest metalling layers in the central part of the Market Square (Figs 8 & 12) and clearly demonstrated that in this area these surfaces rested directly on soil deposits containing human remains. Two sondages dug below the earliest metallings revealed dark soil layers containing fragments of human bone buried at depths of between 1.10 and 1.40m below present ground level. In the central part of the excavation Context 157, containing some human bone was found to have been cut by a definite east–west aligned grave (F. 124). This burial was not fully exposed but could be seen to have been subsequently cut by pier base 146 of the Guildhall (Fig. 17, Section 10; see below).
[fg]jpg|Fig. 12 View of Area 1 looking south-west showing Guildhall foundations and earlier market place metallings.|Image[/fg]
The located burial and bone layers generally lay below the construction level of the new works, so they were left unexcavated. The overlying metalling and levelling deposits were investigated in more detail. These deposits were generally composed of varying mixtures of dark soil, sand and beach shingle. Although extensively cut about by numerous modern service trenches, in places they totalled around one metre in overall thickness. The earliest surfaces were buried at depths of 1.00 – 1.50m below modern pavement level, at ODs of between 4.30 and 4.90m (Fig. 13).
[fg]jpg|Fig. 13 Plan of Area 1 showing extent of early market place metallings.|Image[/fg]
Surfaces 102 and 156 appeared to be the primary metalling layers in the exposed sequence here (Fig. 13; Fig. 17, Section 10). Surface 102 was sealed by two later ones (Contexts 143 & 100). Nearby, surface 173 also seemed early but whether it was a primary metalling layer was not ascertained. Importantly, a soil makeup layer resting over it (Fig. 17, Section 11, Context 172), produced twenty-two sherds of pottery dated c. AD 1250−1350, suggesting that the underlying surface was laid during the late thirteenth- or the early fourteenth century.
Above surface 173, later metalling 163 (Fig. 13) was partially covered by a thin layer of sandy loam, perhaps representing a general levelling deposit (Fig. 17, section 11, context 166). This incorporated some occupation material and building debris, including animal bone, marine shell, fragments of roofing slate, peg-tile, a piece of glazed floor tile and a single medieval potsherd of somewhat indeterminate date.
As originally laid, these early metallings seem to have mostly comprised localised patches of material rather than continuous deposits (Fig. 13). The overall impression gained on site was that many of these surfaces dipped gently down to the east, following the natural fall of the ground towards the river but it was difficult to equate the various patches of surfacing revealed across the area. Datable finds were scarce and a general absence of domestic rubbish within the metalled layers seems to imply that the area had been regularly cleared of such debris.
Substantial masonry foundations cutting through the earliest metallings may be identified as being those of the Guildhall, built in 1605−6 (Figs 12-14). These foundations provide a useful fixed reference point in the recorded sequence of [pg43]metallings here, with various surfaces being assignable to either pre- or post- Guildhall construction. At least six successive surfaces could be demonstrated to pre-date the Guildhall foundations. Flint cobble surface 138 appeared to be the latest of these (Fig. 14; Fig. 17, Section 8). Its make-up produced a small of collection of finds, including fragments of peg-tile, red brick, animal bone and a sherd of residual Roman pottery.
Remains of the Guildhall
Portions of substantial masonry located in Area 1 were readily identifiable as being parts of the Guildhall building erected in 1605−6 (Figs 8, 12-16). The exposed remains appeared to constitute the north-eastern corner of a larger structure extending away to the south and west (Fig. 12). At least two successive main phases of work were represented (Phases 1 & 2, see below), together with at least one subsequent minor addition (Phase 3).
Phase 1
Assigned to Phase 1 are three large pier bases (Fig. 14, Piers 142, 152 & 146; Fig. 15), each of which probably originally supported a timber column along the northern side of the building. The more substantial Pier 146 seemed to represent the base for the north-east corner of the structure, but the piers do not hold neatly together as a single group of contemporary structures. Varying mortar types could suggest different dates and some bases may represent replacements to earlier ones. Horsley (c.1902) notes that additional pillars had been inserted during the eighteenth century (see above). Thus, such additions might be reflected in the variations of pier construction noted.
Pier base 142: this was partially exposed at the extreme western end of Area 1, cut through by a modern foundation (Fig. 14). The full dimensions could not be determined but seemed to be about 1.32m (E–W) by at least 0.80m (N–S). Set into a square construction pit at least 0.33m deep and cut through earlier metalling deposits, a central pad-stone of dressed hard grey shelly sandstone/limestone, about 0.88m across and 0.13m thick was surrounded by an outer band of large, mortared flint nodules, flint cobbles and greensand lumps, all set in a pale grey lime mortar. Two small fragments of Roman brick/tile had also been incorporated. No doubt the central block originally served as the main pad-stone for the timber column above.
[fg]jpg|Fig. 14 Plan of area 1 showing pier bases relating to the Guildhall (Phase 1) and cobbled surface 138.|Image[/fg]
Pier base 152: the truncated base of this pier survived below the bottom of a modern pipe trench, about 2.00m east of pier 101/142 (Figs 14 & 15). Set directly into a sub- rectangular construction pit, the base measured about 1.17 (N–S) by 1.06m (E–W) and as surviving, was at least 0.15m deep. It comprised a central greensand base slab about 0.45m across, surrounded by two courses (minimum) of large, rounded flint nodules and greensand lumps, all set in a soft pale grey mortar containing moderate quantities of chalk/lime grit and occasional charcoal specks. As with pier 142, the central slab most probably served as the pad-stone for the timber column above but its surface lay about 0.30m lower than that of 142 (Fig. 15).
[fg]jpg|Fig. 15 Pier base 152, looking south. Scale 50cm.|Image[/fg]
Pier base 146: this lay some 1.50m east of pier 152, and apparently marked the [pg44][pg45]north-eastern corner of the Guildhall, as more clearly defined by Phase 2 wall foundations 115 and 116 (Figs 14 & 16; Fig. 17, Sections 8 & 10). Seemingly cut in from the top of cobble metalling layer 138 (Fig. 17, Section 8; see above), the full dimensions of this pier base were only established after the two subsequent walls (115 and 116) were removed. Once cleared, it became apparent that the pier was slightly larger and deeper than bases 101/142 and 152. It was rectangular in plan with overall dimensions of about 1.56m (e–W) by 1.12m (N–S), built directly into a construction pit (F. 159) of the same size. The base was at least 0.75m thick, constructed from roughly coursed layers of rounded flint nodules (70%), greensand lumps, occasional chalk blocks and tufa blocks, all set in a loose cream- white gritty mortar somewhat different in character to that used in the other two piers. It seems possible that this corner pier originally stood higher than the other two. Although probably truncated, the surviving top of pier 146 stood slightly above than the others, with no central padstone apparent.
Phase 2
Two continuous wall foundations joining at a right-angle (Figs 12, 16; Walls 115 and 116) ran across the top of Phase 1 pier base 146. These were clearly of a later date and apparently related to a significant alteration to the Guildhall’s structure.
East wall, 115: aligned roughly north–south, the east wall foundation was traced [pg46][pg47]for a distance of about 3.75m from the north-east corner, continuing beyond the excavation limit to the south (Fig. 16). The walling within the excavation had been severely damaged by two modern pipe trenches, of which F. 114 had been tunneled through the structure (Fig. 17, Section 10).
[fg]jpg|Fig. 16 Plan of area 1 showing Walls 115 and 116 relating to the Guildhall (Phase 2) and added structures 151 and 119 in relation to Phase 1 pier bases.|Image[/fg]
The full thickness of the wall was preserved at only two points, where it was between 0.90m and 1.11m across, including a low-level offset 0.10 – 0.23m wide. The wall survived to a height of between 0.30 and 0.85m (min.) and in the south face of the excavation reached to within 0.50m of the modern pavement. The deepest part of the foundation was also seen in the southern face of the excavation. Further north, it rose up, over the top of earlier pier base 146.
The surviving wall was constructed from ten to eleven courses of greensand lumps, flint nodules and flint cobbles, with occasional chalk lumps and tufa lumps, all set in a pale grey-white lime mortar containing frequent quantities of chalk/lime grits, and occasional small, rounded brown flint grits. In the deeper southern section, the lowest courses were only poorly mortared and seemed to constitute a sub-foundation. North Wall, 116: aligned roughly east–west, the north foundation of the Guildhall was traced for about 2.75m from the north-east corner (Figs 12 & 16), after which it had been completely destroyed by subsequent service trenches (Fs 111 & 114). Nor did the full width survive and it was apparent that most of the south face and core had been removed by some ill-defined cut, seemingly additional to pipe trenches Fs 111 and 114. the junction with Wall 115 had been further damaged by another pipe trench, F. 145 (Fig. 17, Section 8).
The full thickness of the wall was preserved only at its junction with Wall 115, where it was 1.28m across. It was of very similar construction to Wall 115, composed of three courses of greensand lumps, flint nodules and flint cobbles, with occasional chalk lumps and tufa lumps, all set in a pale grey-white lime mortar. A few small fragments of peg-tile had also been incorporated but of more interest were two pieces of round wood (at least 30mm dia.) found encased within the mortar. These were quite well preserved, being impregnated with the lime from the mortar and perhaps represented original builders’ marker or levelling pegs.
The wall survived to height of between 0.25 and 0.50m and at the eastern end ran over the top of earlier pier base, 146 to connect with Wall 115 (Fig. 17, Sections 8 & 10). There was no clear distinction between wall and foundation and no associated foundation trench could be identified. The wall appeared to have been built directly off the surface of cobble metalling layer 138. Externally, at one point along the base on the northern side a mortar fillet, some 0.12m thick (Fig. 16, Context 150) seemed to represent builders’ mortar droppings associated with the original construction of the wall. This mortar deposit also lay on the surface of metalling 138 further indicating that this cobbling was exposed when the wall was built.
[fg]jpg|Fig. 17 Sections across contexts recorded in Area 1 (Sections 8, 10 & 11).|Image[/fg]
[fg]jpg|Fig. 18 Area 1. View looking south showing nineteenth-century brick base 119 abutting Guildhall wall 115, with brick culvert 108 nearby. Scales, 50cm and 1m.|Image[/fg]
Phase 3
At some later date, possibly, during the eighteenth century, a small rectangular brick structure (151) perhaps representing an external reinforcing buttress, had been butted onto the north face of Phase 2 Wall 116 (Fig. 16). As surviving, this consisted of five courses of broken, unfrogged, red brick fragments set in a soft cream-white sandy mortar.[pg48][pg49]
Later, a small, localized dump of broken, pale yellow mathematical tile (Context 104) about 0.12m thick was deposited against the northern face of this brick structure. This must relate to the demolition of the Guildhall, which is recorded to have been clad with such tiles (see above). A copper nail recovered from the same deposit was quite possibly originally used for fixing the tiles.
Unphased
Some 5m south-west of Area 1, Trench I subsequently revealed two separate fragments of mortared wall foundation (Fig. 9, Walls 505 and 506) that also probably formed part of the Guildhall foundations, although they cannot be assigned to any specific phase. Of uncertain axis, fragment 505 measured at least 0.80m by 0.50m. It was a minimum of 0.50m deep and consisted of four to five courses of flint cobbles, rounded flints, and water-rolled greensand lumps, all set in a hard, grey lime mortar, similar to that use in the pier bases further north.
Wall 506 lay about one metre to the south of Wall 505 and did not appear to be directly connected with it. Again, it was a mere fragment, cut away on at least three sides by modern services, so that no original edges could be identified and leaving the axis uncertain. The minimum dimensions were about 1.00m by 0.75m. It was at least 0.55m deep and consisted of three courses of squared chalk blocks, with one sizeable horizontal piece of Roman brick/tile incorporated, all set in a coarse cream mortar rather different to that used in Wall 505 but not dissimilar to that used in corner pier 146.
Discussion of Guildhall phasing
Oversailing the top of corner pier base 146 assigned to Phase 1 (see above), wall foundations 115 and 116 are clearly indicative of some major change later made to this part of the Guildhall structure. Joining at a right-angle, they appear to be contemporary, whilst their substantial stone construction indicates that they extended for some distance above the ground surface and that they were intended to support a considerable load. The implication would seem to be that the originally open north and east sides of the building, supported on wooden columns, had subsequently been enclosed with masonry walls at the north-eastern corner. Such a conclusion would seem to be confirmed by a mid-nineteenth century picture of the town pump (Dover Museum ref. d02040; see below) which shows this part of the building as being composed of solid masonry walling, pierced by a single, round- headed archway. Four of the original five columns along the north wall beyond may be seen through this archway.
Earlier images of the Guildhall dated 1788 (Fig. 5), 1822 and 1835, however, all show the north elevation of the building as having an entirely open side at ground level with the upper hall supported by five evenly spaced columns. This might suggest that the excavated walls date from no earlier than the mid-nineteenth century, but the mortar and general style of their construction is not entirely consistent with such a late date.[pg50]
Possible remains of the town pump
Excavations in Area 1 revealed a substantial stepped brick base (Figs 16 & 18, Context 119) located immediately east of the north-east corner of the Guildhall foundation. Butted against the Guildhall footing and set in a broad construction pit, this base was largely intact but had been clipped by a later pipe trench along the southern side (F. 114). The base was rectangular in shape and measured a minimum of 0.64m (N–S) by 0.54m (E–W). It was 0.23m in height and supported two smaller piers set on the north and south sides. These were about 0.14m apart but were apparently truncated in height. The base and piers above were all of the same build, constructed of frogged yellow stock bricks set in a hard light grey sandy mortar clearly of nineteenth century date.
A short distance further south was a section of brick-lined drainage culvert (Figs 16 & 18, context 108). Only a short length survived; where undamaged, this consisted of a vertical sided channel with a rounded base, capped over by large stone slabs. Internally, the culvert measured 0.26m wide and 0.25m high. It was built from frogged yellow stock bricks (with occasional reds) set in a grey gritty mortar. The general construction suggests that the culvert was broadly contemporary with base 119.[pg51]
The 1851 Board of Health map (Fig. 7) clearly marks a water pump at precisely the spot occupied by brick base 119 and on this evidence, it seems highly likely that the base, with its two piers, either represents the foundation to this once important local amenity, or the drinking fountain that briefly replaced it (see above). There was no evidence of any well directly below to supply the water, as originally anticipated. Instead, the base rested upon undisturbed stratified deposits without any evidence of an intake pipe at the levels surviving. The adjacent culvert, 108 could be interpreted as an overflow channel taking wastewater away from the pump. Unfortunately, the relationship between these two structures had been destroyed by the later pipe trench F. 114.
Observations in King Street (Figs 9, 19 & 20)
The documentary and cartographic evidence (see above) make it clear that although the general line of King Street is of some considerable antiquity, the original width of the road has been substantially increased over the years. Early buildings fronting onto the old street were demolished to make way for these road widenings. This was confirmed by field observations made between August 2021 and February 2022 (Trenches Q, T and S), when walls and infilled cellar deposits were discovered well forward of the present western building frontage. These clearly represented the upper part of a thick, complex sequence of building remains and stratified deposits, all predating the widening of the road during the eighteenth- and nineteenth century.
In January 2022, a sizeable area on the western side of King Street was cleared to depth of 1.00–1.20m to create a tree planter pit (Fig. 19, Trench T). The area was found to be very heavily cut-about by modern services, but significant traces of medieval and post-medieval walling, infilled cellars and stratified deposits were noted. Trench T covering a roughly rectangular area measuring almost 30.00m (north–south) by 3.00–3.70m (east–west), was excavated in front of Nos 3, 4 and 5 King Street (Fig. 19). Most of the early, medieval, walls identified lay in the southern half of this cleared area (Walls 601–605), with another (Wall 607) at the northern end. Of necessity, the extent of archaeological observation was limited and only a basic record could be produced.
[fg]jpg|Fig. 19 Detail plan of early walls recorded in King Street (Trenches Q, S & T).|Image[/fg]
The highest surviving archaeological deposits noted came to within 0.50m of the present road surface and it was clear that a significant thickness of stratified archaeology still survived across this area. The full depth of this sequence was not revealed by the excavations, but it may be suspected that between 1 and 2m of undisturbed stratified deposits remained below the base of the 2022 excavations.
Medieval building remains (Walls 601, 602, 610, 611 & 612)
A fragmentary series of substantial medieval walls (Fig. 19, Walls 601, 602, 611 & 612) located at the southern end of Trench T and adjacent Trench Q, outside nos 3, and 4 King Street, apparently related to a sizeable, cellared medieval building complex. The lowest courses of chalk block roof vaulting still survived in three places. It seems very likely that the recorded remains formed part of the early structure previously noted in this area by Batcheller and Horsley (see above). In [pg52][pg53]the 1980s, the writer had also noted buried medieval walls in this same area. As yet, too little has been seen to obtain any meaningful ground plan. More than one phase of work is probably represented.
Wall 601, Trench T (Fig. 19): this was a substantial mortared wall aligned east–west. It was traced for a distance of just over 2 metres and was about 1.00m thick and at least 0.50m high, continuing below the base of the excavation. The wall was constructed of squared chalk blocks with some rounded flints set in a medieval- style cream sandy mortar. Of particular note were two cut chalk voussoirs set into the south side of this wall. These clearly related to the missing roof of an (infilled) vaulted chamber, extending away to the south.
Wall 602, Trench T (Fig. 19): this L-shaped wall lay a short distance north of Wall 601. It was between 0.70 and 0.80m wide and was of very similar construction to 601, bonded in typical medieval cream-white sandy mortar. The two walls probably belonged to the same structure but their precise relationship had been destroyed by subsequent service trenches. Traces of cut chalk block voussoirs along the eastern side of Wall 602 indicated that a vaulted roof had once extended from the wall in that direction. The soil layers east of the wall had the appearance of being mixed deposits in-filling a chamber, rather than undisturbed stratified soils. The excavation of a water pipe (Trench Q) to the east subsequently confirmed this (see below).
Wall 611, Trench Q (Figs 19 & 20): the west face of this wall was located in the eastern side of Trench Q, partially opposite wall 602 in Trench T, located about 4 metres to the west. Wall 611 was aligned north–south and was traced for a distance of about 1.80m from its south end, continuing beyond the excavation edge to the north (Fig. 20). The wall was at least 0.20m wide and survived to a minimum height of 0.40m, continuing below the base of the excavation. It was constructed of two courses of squared chalk blocks set in a cream-white friable sandy mortar of medieval style. A single piece of West Country slate had been used as packing between the blocks at one point. The wall top supported the start of a roof vault extending to the west. This consisted of carefully shaped chalk blocks set in a mortar similar to that of the wall. The vaulting reached to within 0.70m of the modern road surface before being broken away (Fig. 20). Most probably, the roof vaulting springing from Walls 602 and 611 originally joined to form a single barrel vault aligned north–south.
[fg]jpg|Fig. 20 Trench Q, section across walls 610 and 611 with roof vaulting (section 19).|Image[/fg]
Wall 610, Trench Q (Figs 19 & 20): this damaged wall ran north–south for a distance of about 1.50m along the western side of Trench Q, partially between Walls 602 and 611. To the north it had been cut away by a modern pipe trench, but the south end appeared to be original. Buried at a depth of 0.50m below road level, the wall was at least 0.30m wide and survived to a minimum height of 1.00m, continuing below the base of the excavation (Fig. 20). It was constructed of six courses (min.) of large chalk blocks and greensand lumps set in a hard greyish-white mortar. A single piece of late medieval yellow brick had also been incorporated. It appeared to represented some sort of pier or internal support wall within a larger cellared area. The general construction of the wall suggests an early post-medieval date. Most probably it was a later insert into the medieval vaulted chamber represented by walls 602 and 611 (see above) and was perhaps intended to strengthen or support a failing arch.[pg54]
Wall 612, Trench Q (Fig. 19): this wall lay 5.30m north of Wall 610 and ran east–west across the width of Trench Q, although no continuation was noted in the adjacent Trench T. Deposits of rubble cellar infill occurred between Walls 610, 611 and 612, implying that they all formed part of the same underground complex. Wall 612, itself was 0.60m wide and stood to a height of at least 0.80m, continuing below the base of the trench. Its top lay about 0.30m below present road level but a large portion of the central sector had been cut away by a previous pipe trench. The wall was constructed of large chalk blocks and very occasional flints set in a loose sandy cream mortar, typical of medieval Dover. Cellar infill deposits abutted the wall on both the north and south sides, although whether these were connected with the same cellar complex as Walls 602 and 611 remains uncertain.
Other walls and stratified deposits
Further walls, foundations and stratified archaeological deposits were rapidly recorded in Trenches Q and T to the north of the southern medieval building complex (Fig. 19, Walls 603, 604, 605, 607, 608, 609, 613, 614; clay patch 606). These could be seen to be of differing axes, construction, and dates but no detailed investigations were possible. Mortars employed in some walls suggested that they were medieval, whilst others were more certainly post-medieval. L-shaped Wall 603 appeared to comprise an earlier medieval footing of mortared flint and greensand supporting a later, post-medieval wall of chalk and flint set in light brown clay. Often, the excavations were not sufficiently deep to determine whether exposed wall/foundation tops related to surface-built structures or cellared buildings. Some certainly represented surface constructed buildings but others were probably connected with cellars.
Towards the northern end of Trench T a small patch of orange clay (context 606), measuring 0.80m (N–S) by 1.20m (E–W) was identified, buried at a depth of just under one metre below modern pavement level (Fig. 19). The clay formed part of a more extensive area of stratified soil and rubble deposits that could not be examined in any detailed. The clay patch itself was at least 0.02m thick and included within its make-up frequent small fragments of burnt orange-red clay. It was unclear whether this represented an area of clay flooring or more specifically, a hearth. Either way, the suggestion seems to be that no infilled cellars existed in this area.
South cellar (Brick floor 615, Wall 616)
About 7m to the south of the end of Trench T, outside No. 1 King Street close to the junction with Queen Street, a small, hand-dug pit was cut by workmen in February 2022 (Fig. 19, Trench S). This was taken to a depth of 1.70m below modern pavement level and revealed a laid red brick cellar floor (Context 615) at the base, overlain by cellar infill deposits, heavily cut-about by subsequent service trenches.
Along the north side, the brick floor abutted a cellar wall. This was constructed from squared chalk blocks and occasional greensand boulders set in cream-brown sandy clay with frequent small chalk grits (Wall 616). This wall was aligned east–[pg55]west and clearly formed part of the northern side of a larger cellar extending away to the west, south and the east. At one point, the top of the wall reached to within 0.50m of modern pavement level but elsewhere it had been largely cut away by modern service trenches.
A break at least 0.20m wide at the western end of the wall marked the site of an original entrance into the cellar from the north, with a jamb of squared chalk blocks surviving on the east side. The brick flooring (615) continued through this door opening.
Spilling through the cellar doorway, over the floor was a dump of occupation debris. This was up to 0.20m thick and consisted of soft dark grey-brown organic loam with occasional of chalk rubble (Context 617). It produced a quantity of animal bone (probably kitchen waste; some with butchery marks), a fragment of thin window glass, a clay tobacco pipe stem, an iron nail and two pieces of chinaware, datable to the late eighteenth- to early nineteenth century. This deposit would seem to have been dumped into the cellar immediately prior to its deliberate [pg56]infilling with demolition rubble, presumably during the road widening of 1820 (see above).
The bonding material used in the cellar wall could suggest a date in either the late medieval or early post-medieval period. It was certainly different to the mortar used in medieval Walls 601, 602 and 611 a little further to the north and most probably belonged to a separate structure.
Finds (not illustrated)
The various investigations undertaken produced a moderate quantity of finds, mostly human bones salvaged from excavations on the western side of the Market Square (Trench J, see above). Limited assemblages of pottery, clay tobacco pipe, roofing tile, mathematical tile, blue-grey roofing slate, animal bone and marine shell were also recovered, together with a small collection of residual Roman finds. Additionally, a piece of metal track relating from Dover’s late nineteenth century tram system was salvaged from King Street. All this material has now been transferred to Dover Museum, together with a set of the field records.
Human bone from Market Square context 512 (table 1) by Adelina Teoaca
The material derives from the eastern cemetery area of the church of St Martin-le-Grand (Fig. 10). A broad date range of c. AD 1100 to 1450/1550 may be suggested for these bones but there is no good dating evidence. A basic study of the 227 human bone fragments recovered was conducted following standard osteological analytical procedures. The results are summarized below, and the full report is archived (Teoaca 2022). Given the lack of definitive dating evidence and the absence of complete skeletons, no further analysis was deemed necessary.
All the bones displayed good preservation. Lower limb bones were predominant, with 57 femur fragments (25%), 29 tibia fragments (13%), and 13 fibula fragments (6%). Skull fragments, including teeth, were also well represented, accounting for 46 elements (20%). The remaining 82 fragments (36%) included bones from the pelvic area (n=25), upper limbs (humerus n=16; ulna n=9; radius n=8), feet (n=10), and miscellaneous elements (vertebra n=1; scapula n=4; metacarpal n=4; proximal hand phalange n=1; rib n=2).
The estimated Minimum Number of Individuals (MNI) was 15, comprising eight adults and seven juveniles. Among the adults, at least three were male, and one was female. The juveniles included individuals from neonates to adolescents. Adult age-at-death estimates were based on pelvic and dental wear assessments, with categories ranging from young adults (18–25 years) to mature adults (over 46 years). Juvenile age was estimated using dental eruption sequences, bone length, and epiphyseal fusion, encompassing individuals from neonates (1–11 months) to adolescents (12–17 years). Adult sex was determined based on pelvic and cranial morphology, suggesting three males and one probable female, while juvenile sex estimation was not conducted.
Pathological examination revealed several conditions among the remains. Non-specific infection, primarily periostitis, was observed on long bones, with some showing active or healing lesions. Severe periostitis on femur, tibia, and fibula [pg57]fragments indicated possible systemic infections, such as brucellosis, sepsis, or tuberculosis, known to have affected medieval populations. Evidence of osteomyelitis, a pyogenic bacterial infection, was observed in femoral, tibial, and fibular midshaft lesions, with differential diagnoses including rheumatoid arthritis, metastatic disease, and septic arthritis. Signs of infection were also noted on a juvenile left humerus, displaying periostitis in a post-neonatal infant.
Joint disease was minimally present, with only one instance of osteoarthritis noted on the lunate surface of an acetabulum. A case of anterior-posterior femoral bowing, likely due to vitamin D deficiency (osteomalacia), was recorded as evidence of metabolic disease. Dental pathology included severe calculus accumulation and pitting on an adult maxilla, indicative of periodontitis and inflammation.
These findings provide a demographic and pathological profile and offer some insights into the health conditions affecting the medieval population in Dover. This study is the first assessment of any Market Square bone assemblage undertaken since Dr F.G. Parsons’ early twentieth-century examination of human remains associated with the nearby church of St Peter (Parsons 1905).
Table 1. Minimum number of individuals (MNI) based on each bone element
[tb][th]Bone|MNI Adult|Age at death adult|Male|Female|Unidentified sex|MNI Juvenile|Age at death juvenile[/th]
[tr]Femur|8|| |||7|X2 12–21 yo, X3 2–10 yo, X1 42 weeks, X1 1–6 months[/tr]
[tr]Tibia|5|| |||2|X2 <21 yo[/tr]
[tr]Fibula|5|| |||1|X1 <18 yo[/tr]
[tr]Pelvis|4|X2 40–44 yo, X2 45–50 yo|2|?1|1|1|X1 3–8 yo[/tr]
[tr]Radius|3|| |||1|X1 <18 yo[/tr]
[tr]Ulna|4|| ||||[/tr]
[tr]Humerus|5|| |||3|X2 <18 yo, X1 7–11 months[/tr]
[tr]Skull|4|X1 35–45 yo (teeth wear)|3|1||1|X1 4 yo ± 9 months (teeth eruption times)[/tr]
[tr]Feet|3|| ||||1|X1 <18 yo[/tr]
[tr]Misc.|1|| ||||1|X1 <18 yo[/tr]
[/tb]
Note abbreviation yo is year old.[pg58]
General conclusions
The various excavations undertaken during 2021 and 2022 in Dover’s Market Square and along King Street have provided some very useful information concerning the extent and character of the archaeology present. Stratified deposits and structural remains of archaeological interest were revealed across the entire area. Although these were heavily cut-about by modern services in many areas, significant stratified deposits and building remains generally survived at a depth of about one metre below present ground level. At certain points, however, these reached to between 0.30 and 0.50m of the surface. Nowhere were the excavations deep enough to expose the full sequence of archaeology present and no definite undisturbed Roman layers or structures, notably the lost east wall of the shore fort, were revealed. It seems likely that from a depth of 2m below present ground level a largely intact sequence of stratified archaeological deposits survive. In places, these deposits could still survive up to 3m thick.
Evolution of St Martin’s churchyard into the Market Square
The development of part of St Martin’s graveyard into Dover’s market place is of considerable interest and significance in understanding the evolution of the town. There are no maps or drawings showing this part of old Dover before the market place existed so the original configuration of the medieval street system and the two churchyards remains uncertain. It may be surmised that at the end of the Anglo-Saxon period, prior to the establishment of any market place, what is today Cannon Street connected directly with King Street following a shallow, S-shaped route leading towards the waterfront. It is possible that the positioning of the (otherwise unknown) north and east gates of the late Roman Shore fort had some influence on this route, proving ready points of access through what was perhaps then still a substantially complete enclosure.
Subsequently, two Norman churches, St Martin-le-Grand and St Peter’s, were established (Fig. 2). Each had an associated graveyard, and presumably early Cannon Street–King Street served to divide these burial areas, with the cemetery of St Peter’s on the north-eastern side and the cemetery of St Martin’s on the south-western side. Extending eastwards from the east end of St Martin’s, medieval Wall 508 recorded in Trench J, may have served as a churchyard boundary before being taken down and its demolition rubble dug into by later graves. Nearby was a probable stone-lined tomb cutting into earlier burials. The density of human bone and the apparent absence of early metalling on the western side of the central Market Square, in Trenches E and J, raises the question as to whether, rather than being entirely metalled over in a single event, the market place encroached westwards into the churchyard by stages. It seems possible that a still functioning burial area existed east of the church for some time into the later medieval period, before the boundary of the evolving market place pushed westwards from the line of original King Street.
In the north-eastern quarter of the Market Square, excavation area 2 and subsequent trenches L, K, M, N, P and R (Fig. 9) revealed sequences of medieval [pg59]and post-medieval metalling and levelling deposits relating to the former market place. Apart from a single narrow wall foundation of uncertain purpose, located in Trench M (Wall 521), no building remains were exposed and nothing of St Peter’s church or its associated cemetery was revealed.
In the central part of the Market Square, excavation Area 1, together with subsequent Trench 1, revealed damaged masonry that must represent the foundations of the demolished seventeenth-century Guildhall. At least two main phases of building work seem to be represented in this. These Guildhall remains sealed part of St Martin’s burial ground, resting upon and surrounded by subsequent metalled surfaces relating to the early market place. The oldest of these surfaces was probably late thirteenth- or the early fourteenth century in date.
King Street
South of the Market Square, in King Street, the archaeology exposed in the excavations along the western side of the road (Fig. 19, Trenches Q, S & T) was rather different to that seen the Market Square. Investigations in this area were largely concerned with walls and infilled cellars relating to buildings that had formerly fronted onto the street when this was much narrower. At the southern end of Trenches Q and T, outside nos. 3 & 4 King Street, substantial walls relating to a medieval cellared building complex were exposed (Fig. 19, Walls 601, 602, 611 & 612). The positioning of Wall 611 indicates that the original medieval frontage stood at least 11m forward of the present (nineteenth century) one.
These medieval walls are likely to have been connected with the major medieval building reported in this area by Batcheller and Horsley (see above). Too little was seen to fully understand the exposed remains, but the axis of the roof vaulting revealed indicates at least two separate vaulted cellar rooms are represented (Fig. 20). The lower portions of these chambers should still survive largely undisturbed below the level of the present excavation works. Other medieval walls recorded nearby are likely to represent separate, adjacent structures, implying that the area was quite densely occupied.
The notion that some of the medieval walls revealed represent part of the documented medieval court hall, replaced the new one erected in the Market Square, remains attractive. Alternative interpretations could include buildings belonging to the canons of the nearby collegiate church of St Martin-le-Grand (Bavington Jones 1907); or parts of undercrofts, warehouses and dwellings associated with rich merchants set along the street leading to Bench street and the medieval water gate (Boldware Gate). Until such times as a substantial area can be fully re-exposed and the building remains accurately mapped and phased the issue must remain unresolved.[pg60]
Bibliography
Batcheller, W., 1845 The New Dover Guide (Dover; sixth edition).
Bates, M.R., Corke, B., Parfitt, K., Parfitt, and Whittaker, J.E., 2011a ‘A geoarchaeological approach to the evolution of the town and port of Dover: Prehistoric to Saxon periods’, Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association 122, 157–176.
Bates, M.R., Jones, S. Walker, M.J.C. and Whittaker, J.E., 2011b Report on the analysis of samples from Market Square, Dover (archive report by University of Wales archaeological services (UWLAS), University of Wales Trinity Saint David, Lampeter (January 2011).
Bates, M., with Parfitt, K., 2022 Market Square, Dover, Kent. Assessment of geoarchaeological sampling, February 2021 (CAT archive report for DDC, March 2022; CAT Report No: 2022/58).
Bavington Jones, J., 1907 Dover: a Perambulation of the Town, Port and Fortress (revised 1979–1981; Dover).
Dixon, M., MS Economy and society in Dover between 1509 and 1640 (manuscript paper held by Dover Museum).
Haines, C.R., 1930 Dover Priory: A History of the Priory of St Mary the Virgin, and St Martin of the New Work. (Cambridge).
Hasted, E., 1800, The History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent, IX (second edition), Canterbury.
Horsley, M., c.1902 Dover Market Place: then and now (Dover).
Murray, K.M.E., 1935 The Constitutional History of the Cinque Ports (Manchester).
Parfitt, K., 2020 Market Square, Dover. Desk-based archaeological assessment in response to new development plans (CAT archive report for DDC, Oct. 2020; CAT Report No: 2020/124).
Parfitt, K., 2021 Market Square, Dover, Kent. Report on evaluation trenching, June 2021 (CAT archive report for DDC, July 2021; CAT Report No: 2021/111).
Parfitt, K., 2022 Market Square, Dover, Kent. Assessment report on archaeological excavations, August–September 2021 (CAT archive report for DDC, August 2022; CAT Report No: 2022/140).
Parfitt, K., 2023 Dover Market Square, 2021–22. Report on watching briefs in and around the Market Square (CAT archive report for DDC, January 2023; CAT Report No: 2023/6).
Parfitt, K., and Bates, M.R., 2009 Dover Market Square Boreholes: Archaeological and Palaeoenvironmental Assessment Report (CAT archive report for KCC, April 2009; CAT Report No: 2009/15).
Parsons, F.G., 1905 ‘Dover 14th century bones interesting deductions from scientific examination’, Dover Express, Friday 13 October, 1905.
Philp, B.J., 1981 The Excavation of the Roman Forts of the Classis Britannica at Dover, 1970-1977 (Dover).
Philp, B.J., 2003 The Discovery and Excavation of Anglo-Saxon Dover (Dover).
Philp B.J., 2012 The Discovery and excavation of the Roman Shore-Fort at Dover (Dover).
Plumptre, F.C., 1861 ‘Some account of the remains of the priory of St Martin’s, and the church of St Martin-le-Grand, at Dover’, Archaeologia Cantiana 4, 1−26.
Rigold, S.E., 1977 ‘Litus Romanum - the Shore Forts as Mission Stations’, in D.E. Johnston (ed.) The Saxon Shore (Council for British Archaeological Research Report. No. 18, 1977), 70–75.
Scott Robertson, W.A., 1893 ‘The old church of St Martin, at Dover’, Archaeologia Cantiana 20, 295–304.
Statham, S.P.H., 1902 ‘Dover Chamberlains’ Accounts, 1365-67, Archaeologia Cantiana 25, 75–87.
[pg61]Teoaca, A., 2022 Dover Market Square, Disarticulated human remains MSQD WB 21 (CAT archive report).
Victor, G., 1989 ‘Destruction in Dover’, Kent Archaeol. Rev. 96, 130−136.
Welch, M., 2007 ‘Anglo-Saxon Kent’, in J. H. Williams (ed.) The Archaeology of Kent to AD 800 (Kent County Council), 187–248.[pg62]