White Swan Public House, Yabsley Street, Blackwall, London Borough of Tower Hamlets

An Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment

for St James Homes Ltd

 

by Lisa‐Maree Hardy 

Thames Valley Archaeological Services Ltd 

Site Code WSL02/54

June 2002

1

White Swan Public House, Yabsley Street, Blackwall An Archaeological Desk-Based Assessment

by Lisa-Maree Hardy

Report 02/54

Introduction

This desk-based study is an assessment of the archaeological potential of a parcel of land fronting Yabsley

Street, Blackwall, London Borough of Tower Hamlets (TQ 3840 8055) (Fig. 1). The project was commissioned

by Mr Andy Ainsworth of St James Homes (North Thames Region), Marlborough House, 298 Regents Park

Road, Finchley, London N3 2UA and comprises the first stage of a process to determine the presence/absence,

extent, character, quality and date of any archaeological remains which may be affected by redevelopment of the

area.

Site description, location and geology

A site visit was made on 11th June, 2002, in order to determine the current land use on the site. The site

comprises an irregular shaped parcel of land, with frontage to Blackwall Way, Yabsley Street and Preston’s

Road, Blackwall. The site is bounded to the south by Yabsley Street and land currently used as a holding yard

and a car park. To the west of the site is Preston’s Road, a main thoroughfare linking Poplar with the Isle of

Dogs, and to the east, Blackwall Way and a new residential development. The site is bounded to the north by

residences and an air intake shaft to the Blackwall Tunnel.

The western portion of the site is currently occupied by former commercial premises, comprising a large

open structure with a concrete floor. The area of the site fronting Preston’s Road is open space. The commercial

premises are bounded to the east by an alley-way (Warrington Place) which leads to the northern portion of the

site, which is currently open grassland. The eastern portion of the site is occupied by the former White Swan

Public House. The White Swan occupies the corner of Yabsley Street and Blackwall Way. The structure itself is

boarded up, but appears to be occupied by squatters. The area of the White Swan property is fenced. The area

which bounds Warrington Place is concreted and the yard to the immediate north of the building is currently

filled with refuse.

The site is located on the floodplain of the Thames, overlying alluvial sediments (BGS 1981). The site lies

at a height of approximately 5m above Ordnance Datum.

2

Planning background and development proposals

Planning permission is to be sought for the redevelopment of the site, which will comprise the demolition of the

existing buildings, and the construction of residential apartments.

Archaeology and Planning (PPG 16 1990) provides guidance relating to archaeology within the planning

process. It points out that where a desk-based assessment has shown that there is a strong possibility of

significant archaeological deposits in a development area, it is reasonable to provide more detailed information

from a field evaluation so that an appropriate strategy to mitigate the effects of development on archaeology can

be devised:

Paragraph 21 states:

‘Where early discussions with local planning authorities or the developer’s own research indicate that important archaeological remains may exist, it is reasonable for the planning authority to request the prospective developer to arrange for an archaeological field evaluation to be carried out...’

Should the presence of archaeological deposits be confirmed further guidance is provided. Archaeology and

Planning stresses preservation in situ of archaeological deposits as a first consideration as in paragraphs 8 and

18.

Paragraph 8 states:

‘...Where nationally important archaeological remains, whether scheduled or not, and their settings, are affected by proposed development there should be a presumption in favour of their physical preservation...’

Paragraph 18 states:

‘The desirability of preserving an ancient monument and its’ setting is a material consideration in determining planning applications whether that monument is scheduled or unscheduled...’

However, for archaeological deposits that are not of such significance it is appropriate for them to be ‘preserved

by record’ (i.e., fully excavated and recorded by a competent archaeological contractor) prior to their destruction

or damage.

Paragraph 25 states:

‘Where planning authorities decide that the physical preservation in situ of archaeological remains is not justified in the circumstances of the development and that development resulting in the destruction of the archaeological remains should proceed, it would be entirely reasonable for the planning authority to satisfy itself ... that the developer has made appropriate and satisfactory provision for the excavation and recording of remains.’

The Tower Hamlets Draft UDP 1992 also outlines policy regarding the archaeological potential of development sites:

3

Dev 40: Development which adversely affects a Scheduled Ancient Monument will normally be refused. Dev 41: Planning powers will be used to protect and preserve the archaeological heritage including the

industrial archaeological heritage of the Borough. Interpretation and presentation of remains will also be sought.

DEV 42: The permanent preservation of remains in the original location will normally be required. Suitable

design, land use and site management to achieve this will be encouraged. DEV 43: Proposals involving ground works in the areas of archaeological importance or potential, shown on the

proposal map or on individual sites notified to the Council by English Heritage or the Museum of London will be subject to the following conditions:

1. Applicants will need, as part of their submission to demonstrate that the archaeological implications of

the development have been assessed, using the professional advice of an approved archaeology consultant.

2. Appropriate conditions will be attached to planning permissions to ensure that investigation, excavation and recording takes place by an approved archaeological organisation before development commences: and

3. In appropriate cases, planning agreements will be sought to ensure that adequate opportunities are afforded for the archaeological investigation of sites, before, and during demolition and development, and that suitable provisions is made for preserving remains and finds in the original location or for removing them to a safe of safe keeping.

The site lies within an Archaeological Priority Area as defined in the Borough UDP (THUDP 1992). This

inclusion is largely based on the area’s location within the alluvial floodplain of the River Thames, hence having

the potential to contain preserved organic remains and timber structures. The close proximity of the site to the

historic docklands is also of interest.

Methodology

The assessment of the site was carried out by the examination of pre-existing information from a number of

sources recommended by the Institute of Field Archaeologists’ paper Standards in British Archaeology covering

desk-based studies. These sources include historic and modern maps, the Greater London Sites and Monuments

Record, geological maps and any relevant publications or reports held in the Tower Hamlets Local History

Library and Archives. .

Archaeological background

General Archaeological Background

The topographic location of this site, in close proximity to the River Thames, indicates that the presence of

waterfront archaeology needs to be considered. The main consideration of the archaeology of the Isle of Dogs,

on which the site is located, is the relatively low lying position and liability to flooding. For the earlier

4

prehistoric period, the archaeology of the area is intimately linked with fluctuations in sea level height, with

periods of inundation during the formation of peat deposits, particularly in the southern portion of the Isle of

Dogs.

The crucial factor in predicting the likely survival of prehistoric material is the ability to identify areas

where peats and clays meet the edges of former gravel islands, and where buried channels and marshes lie. A

survey of the London Docklands area to determine the depth to the top of the gravel indicates that gravels within

the vicinity of the site to be buried at a depth of between 1m and 4m. Areas in which relatively high gravel

islands existed may provide a focal point for prehistoric and later occupation. In areas in which deep alluvial

deposits exist, the likelihood of post-glacial occupation is almost non-existent (Merriman 1992). Based on this

information, and without site specific borehole information, the possibility of deeply buried deposits existing on

the site cannot be ruled out.

Waterfront archaeology

River and stream channel deposits are characterized by anaerobic conditions that inhibit the decay of organic

material and the timber foundations of structures such as revetments, bridge piers, and buildings such as water

mills often survive (Hawkes and Fasham 1997). Excavations in other areas in conditions and locations similar to

those of the proposal site have revealed evidence of the survival of such medieval works along streams and

rivers.

Elsewhere in London, and in particular the Docklands, archaeological investigations have revealed

remnants of revetments and other structures. Revetment types vary according to chronology and purpose, and

can range from early marking of channel alignments by stakes, to stakes bound by willow wattling, to complex

constructions of posts and planks with back-bracing. On the south-west side of the Isle of Dogs, complex

structures of Bronze Age date have been revealed at Atlas Wharf (MoLAS 2000, 99)

On the Isle of Dogs and much of the northern bank of the Thames into Essex, flood defences were raised

from medieval and possibly late Saxon times onwards. The early maps of the area such as Rocque in 1766 (Fig.

3) show the presence of a ‘Marsh Wall’. On this map the marsh wall on the Isle of Dogs meets the settlement of

Blackwall and continues beyond to the north east. It is possible therefore that the remains of early flood defences

may be present on or close to the site.

Should any waterlogged deposits survive, these would present the possibility of a significant sequence of

organic survival and offer the prospect of detailed palaeoenvironmental reconstruction in addition to

5

archaeological discoveries.

Greater London Sites and Monuments Record

A search for previously recorded archaeological sites was made for an area of 500m surrounding the study area

on the Greater London Sites and Monuments Record (GLSMR) during June 2002. Many of the entries related to

listed buildings in the Poplar and Blackwall area. In order to summarize the entries, only listed buildings in the

immediate vicinity of the site have been included in the following discussion. A total of 34 sites including

several archaeological investigations for the area were revealed. Each record has been allocated a number and

they are summarized in Appendix 1 and locations illustrated on Figure 1.

Prehistoric

Palaeolithic

Evidence from this period comprises environmental evidence. During the construction of the link between the

West India Docks with the Basin, decayed wood, snails and rushes were observed [Fig. 1; 3]. Other accounts of

similar incidents include the observation of fossilized nuts, yew and ivy during the digging of a dock at

Blackwall Yard in 1655, and the excavation of a mammoth tusk during the construction of the Blackwall Tunnel

[23].

Neolithic

At least four axes have been recovered from the River Thames relating to this period in the vicinity of the site.

Descriptions of the axes describe them all as consisting of a black or grey-black material, with one showing

evidence of hafting. The exact details of the location of the finds are not recorded, resulting in a generic grid

reference for the centre of the Thames in the vicinity of Blackwall [25; 30].

Roman

Two records relate to this period, the first of which is a miniature wine vessel recovered to the north of the

proposal site. However there are few details of this unprovenanced find [17]. The second record relates to the

suspected site of a watch tower, based on the strategic position to defend Blackwall Reach [26].

Medieval

Two of the entries relate to the medieval villages which now comprise Blackwall [23] and Poplar [1]. The latter

is recorded as ‘Popler’ in 1327, possibly a reference to the numerous poplar trees known to have grown in the

area. Blackwall is known to have existed in the 14th century, with the earliest reference to the village in 1362,

and is referred to in 1377 as ‘Blakewall’.

6

Records for this period also relate to roads in the area. What is now a part of East Ferry Road is known to

have existed during this period, when it linked the hamlet to the ferry [2]. The Limehouse Causeway, which may

formerly have been the main street of Poplar also dates to this period. By the 15th century the road joined the

highway to provide a dry track to the city for the riverside developments of the time [18]. The road which now

approaches the Blackwall Tunnel from the north is also believed to date to the Medieval period and provided the

main thoroughfare between Bromley and Blackwall [19].

A field evaluation to the north-west of the proposal site, along Poplar High Street revealed medieval pottery

in marsh deposits. This suggests that this area was possibly a medieval marsh wall or causeway. The deposits

revealed that ground raising continued until the post-medieval period (Daykin 1997) [5].

Post-medieval

The majority of the entries in the GLSMR for the area relate to post-medieval structures, particularly relating to

the construction of the docks and the Blackwall Tunnel [4; 7; 8; 14; 15; 16; 20; 22; 24; 28]. Records relate to

listed buildings in the area, many of those in close proximity to the docks were constructed as accommodation

for high ranking figures associated with the docklands [12; 15].

However, other entries include references to structures constructed in preparation for defence against the

Spanish Armada during the late 16th century, including forts, bastions and pontoon barriers [23; 29; 32; 33].

One of these bastions is located at the Blackwall Stairs, to the south of the proposal site [21]. A reference is also

made to the location of late 17th-century almshouses, constructed within the centre of Poplar [6]. Two records

relate to landfill sites from which any archaeology is likely to have been removed [8; 27].

An evaluation to the north of the site revealed plough marks cut into a water lain deposit. The plough marks

were assumed to have been of 18th-century date (Bluer 1993) [9]. An evaluation further north revealed two wells

and a brick-lined pit (Ayre 1997) [10]. An evaluation and watching brief at the Blackwall Stairs, to the south of

the proposal site revealed a 17th century flood deposit and a small coffer dam (Wroe-Brown, 1997) [21].

Further archaeological investigations in the area include an evaluation to the east of the site which revealed

a 17th-century dock and revetment overlying peat deposits (Webber 1992a) [22]; an evaluation and watching

brief to the north east of the site revealed 19th-century artefacts overlying alluvial clays and peats (Webber

1992b).

Undated and Negative evidence

A number of undated entries are contained within the GLSMR, most relate to evaluations and watching briefs

carried out within the study area which did not reveal any information of archaeological interest [11; 12; 13; 34].

7

Documentary and photographic sources

Deeds of 1377 and 1480 name a village in the vicinity of the proposal site as ‘Blakewale’, but is called

‘Blackwall’ on a map produced by Norden in 1592. Other records note the name as ‘Bleakwall’, possibly as a

reference to the bleakness of the marshlands. The name was then applied both to the village and to the

embankment which ran along the eastern side of the Stepney Marsh (now the Isle of Dogs) (Cox 1994; RCHME

1994; Taylor 1991).

The name of the Isle of Dogs is believed to be a corruption of the ‘Isle of Dykes’. In medieval times there

was a manor called Pontefract, which contained 80 acres and a mill in 1230. By the 14th century the area was

crossed by streams, dykes, canals and sea walls. By 1324, 100 acres of the island had been drained and a ferry

service was established to take people to Greenwich. At this time the island flourished, and even had its own ale

master (unlike other hamlets in the area which did not). The Black Prince had a palace at Poplar, an indication of

the status of the area at the time. Other suggestions for the etymology of the name of the area include the isle as

being the location of royal kennels. (Cox 1994; RCHME 1994; Taylor 1991).

In 1588 the East India Yard was established in the Blackwall area. In 1600 a group of London merchants

received a charter from Queen Elizabeth to trade with the Indies. This group soon became the East India

Company. By 1612 the Company had established offices in Blackwall and began to acquire land. In 1614,

William Burrell began construction of the Blackwall Yard. In 1618 Burrell purchased a large strip of land which

ran from Poplar High Street to south of Blackwall in order to create a causeway to connect Poplar to the

Blackwall Stairs. The current Blackwall Way follows the course of this causeway, and the area of the proposal

site was included in this original causeway. In 1622 the East India Company leased this land from Burrell for

£200 (RCHME 1994).

At this time Brunswick Street (now Blackwall Way) was the only direct route from Blackwall to the ferry

landing and departure wharf at Blackwall Stairs. It is possible that some of the inns and public houses in the area

were established at or before this time, because as early as 1553, it was recorded that the Poplar and Blackwall

areas had at least seven alehouses.

The East India Dock Company (not affiliated with the East India Company) opened docks in the area in

1806, raising a need for further development in the area, for both housing and commercial premises. The

majority of the area around Preston’s Road was laid out for residential development in the early 19th century,

and followed the street pattern which is still evident today. However Yabsley Street (formerly Russell Street)

was not included in the street system until the 1840’s. Warrington Place was not formed until 1857 and named in

8

1861. The majority of buildings from this period have been destroyed. The houses constructed in the area were

generally a standard design of two storeys with a basement (RCHME 1994; Taylor 1991).

The area around Brunswick Street (now Blackwall Way) was promoted in 1821 as a good place for

commercial business. The White Swan existed in this time and was one of four beer shops in the area at the time.

Some of these residences were demolished between 1839 and 1840 to make way for the North London and

Midland (later the London, Midland and Scottish) Railway Company’s expansion. By 1890 the majority of the

remainder developments had been destroyed in preparation for the construction of the Blackwall Tunnel.

For nearly two centuries the land to the west of Blackwall Way housed a large ropeground which was

established in the early 17th century following the opening of the East India Company. Rope making continued

into the first decade of the 19th century when the land was handed over by the then-owner John Wells for

building (Taylor 1991; RCHME 1994).

The extensive photographic record of the Tower Hamlets Local Studies Library and Archives was

examined for depictions of the proposal site, but nothing relevant was found.

Cartographic evidence

A range of Ordnance Survey and other historical maps of the area were consulted at the Tower Hamlets Local

Studies Library and Archives in order to ascertain what activity had been taking place throughout the site’s later

history and whether this may have affected any possible archaeological deposits within the proposal area (see

Appendix 2).

The earliest map consulted was a map of Middlesex by Norden, 1573 (Fig. 2). Although at a small scale, it

is possible to discern the vicinity of the site through geographical markers, such as the River Thames, and the

Isle of Dogs. Blackwall is also indicated, but Poplar is not. The map does not show the area in any great

topographical detail.

Ogilby’s map of 1672 shows Blackwall as a substantial settlement along the bank of the River Thames, but

due to the scale of the map, the proposal site is not shown in any detail (not illustrated). Warburton’s map of the

County of Middlesex (1749) shows the location of Blackwall and what is presumably the first dock in the area.

The Blackwall Causeway is also shown, with development along its western side, and a large building on the

eastern side (not illustrated). The first detailed map of the area consulted was Rocque’s map of 1766 (Fig. 3).

This indicates that Blackwall had substantially expanded on either side of the Causeway. Some indication of the

9

docklands is also depicted, but in no detail. The presence of flood defences (the ‘Marsh Wall’ on the Isle of

Dogs) to both the south and north-east of Blackwall should be noted.

Stockdale’s map of 1777 shows The Causeway clearly, again with development of both the Blackwall Yard

and the Blackwall Stairs. The area of the site is discernible from the location in relation to the southern end of the

causeway and the Blackwall Stairs. The site appears to be incorporated within yards, presumably the ropemaking

yards noted in the documentary evidence (Fig. 4).

The first site-specific map consulted was a plan produced of the area in 1809-10 by Laurie and Whittle (Fig.

5) which shows the Causeway clearly, with development on either side. The area of the site is not shown in any

detail.

Walter and Burgess’ map of 1841 shows the area at a larger scale, with little detail. Yabsley Street is named

New Row at this time. The map suggests that the area fronting Brunswick Street (formerly the Causeway) to be

built up, and the site is truncated by at least two pipes (Fig. 6).

The First Edition Ordnance Survey (1867) showed numerous changes within the area. Blackwall Way is

called Brunswick Street. And Yabsley Street is known as Russell Street. Warrington Place is clearly marked also.

The site itself is largely occupied by terraced houses on either side of Warrington Place. The White Swan Public

House is not marked as a public house, and premises along this portion of Russell Street (Yabsley Street) appear

to be larger than the houses, possibly containing commercial businesses. To the north of Warrington Place are

two large structures. The Preston’s Road area is occupied by larger terrace houses and numerous larger structures

along Russell Street. A small portion of the proposal site appears to be occupied by a garden of some description

accessed by the now defunct southern end of Regent Street (Fig.7).

By 1893 additional terraced houses have been constructed fronting Brunswick Street. Russell Street has

been renamed Yabsley Street by this time. The larger structures accessed by Warrington Place have been

replaced by similar structures, in a different configuration. To the west of Warrington Place, the majority of the

structures have been demolished and replaced by what appear to be railway tracks, or possibly pipe lines,

presumably associated with construction of the Blackwall Tunnel ventilation shaft. At least three structures

occupy the south western corner of the site (Fig. 8).

The Ordnance Survey of 1937 (Fig. 9) shows the Stairs and shaft for the Blackwall Tunnel which run

beneath the western portion of the site. This area is occupied by a garage with at least two large structures. The

northern portion of the site is occupied by a glass works. All terraced houses within the site’s bounds have been

10

demolished. The White Swan is noted as being a Public House. The eastern portion of the site fronting what is

now known as Blackwall Way does not appear to contain structures.

By 1970 (Fig. 10) the glass works has been replaced by timber works, which occupy a larger area of the

northern portion of the site. Ancillary buildings have also been constructed to the north of the White Swan. The

large buildings to the west of Warrington Place, which is now an alley-way, have been expanded, and are

labelled as belonging to a depot and a gantry. The path of the Blackwall Tunnel is also projected across this

portion of the site.

By 1991 (Fig. 11) the timber works has been reused as a depot and several of the ancillary buildings within

the site have been removed. The building in the south western corner of the site have been removed, leaving

open space. Little has changed by 1996 (Fig. 12) with the exception of the demolition of a building to the north

of the White Swan, and changes to the property boundaries in the western portion of the site.

Listed buildings

The proposal site does not contain any listed buildings.

Registered Parks and Gardens

The proposal site is not located within a registered park or garden.

Discussion

In considering the archaeological potential of the site, various factors must be taken into account, including

previously recorded archaeological sites, previous land-use and disturbance, the survival of the archaeological

record and future land use, including the proposed development.

An examination of the archaeological, historical and cartographic sources indicate that historically the site

lies within an area of archaeological importance within the Borough, a point which is reflected by the UDP

which recognizes the area as one of archaeological significance. This alone is a significant factor in determining

whether or nor further information is required from a field evaluation. The archaeological potential here has two

main components; the possible presence of deposits representing the early history of the Blackwall area, and the

possible presence of prehistoric deposits buried deeply beneath alluvium and peat.

An examination of the GLSMR revealed numerous entries relating to the construction of the docklands, and

an evaluation to the east of the proposal site revealed a revetment, and other deposits. Other entries relate to the

11

more deeply buried deposits, including Palaeolithic environmental deposits. The presence of revetments in the

area, and the site’s close proximity to the embankment of the Thames suggests reclamation of the land along the

river, a process which tends to preserve buried archaeological deposits.

Cartographic and documentary evidence suggests that the Blackwall area and the Isle of Dogs were

previously marsh land, and required the use of early dykes and canals to drain the southern portion of the Isle.

The site might well lie on the landward side of any flood defence deposits and such information, coupled with

the sites close proximity to the river, suggest a likelihood of deeply buried and waterlogged deposits and possibly

the flood defence structures themselves.

The site appears to lie on the fringes of the historic core of Blackwall, but there is a possibility of the

presence of deposits relating to Medieval occupation of the village.

Previous land use history suggests a varied and constant change in buildings on the site, particularly since

the 19th century. The prior use of the site as a ropemaking yard is not likely to have had any impact on

archaeologically relevant layers. However, it is known that the terraced houses constructed in the area during the

early part of the 19th century contained basements. While in other topographic locations it is likely that

basementing will destroy or remove archaeologically relevant layers, here it is possible that the relevant layers

are more likely to be deeply buried, and thus not have been extensively encroached upon by the basementing of

the area.

Any archaeologically relevant layers, especially from early prehistory, would potentially be of considerable

significance. However, they are likely to be buried at such a depth such that they may not be truncated by the

redevelopment of the site. However, such a determination cannot be confirmed by a study of written sources

alone.

This report has determined that the proposal site has the potential to contain subsurface archaeological

deposits. It has therefore been determined that an archaeological evaluation would be required to assess more

fully the presence/absence and nature of archaeological remains, most easily achieved following demolition of

the current structures. Evaluation trenches should be strategically placed in areas most likely deemed to be

affected by proposed development which may affect archaeologically relevant levels. This work should be

undertaken by a competent archaeological contractor, such as an organization registered with the Institute of

Field Archaeologists, according to a written scheme of investigation approved by the archaeological adviser to

the Local Planning Authority.

12

Until there is further information of the archaeological potential available from field observation, the effects

of construction and the avoidance or minimizing of the impact of this development on archaeological deposits

cannot be addressed in detail. Once the extent of archaeological potential has been determined, an appropriate

scheme can be prepared in consultation with the archaeological adviser to the Local Planning Authority.

References Ayre, J, 1997, ‘An archaeological evaluation of Ashton St, Poplar’, Museum of London Archaeology Service

report ASN97, London BGS, 1981, British Geological Survey, 1:50 000, Sheet 271, Solid and Drift Edition, Keyworth Bluer, R, 1993, ‘An archaeological evaluation of the Isle of Dogs Relief Sewer’, Museum of London

Archaeology Service report IRS93, London Cox, J, 1994, London’s East End: Life and Traditions, London Daykin, A, 1997, ‘An archaeological evaluation at 216-242 Poplar High Street’, Pre-Construct Archaeology

report PPR97, London Hawkes, J and Fasham, P, 1997, Excavations on Reading’s Waterfront Sites 1979-1988, Wessex Archaeology

Report 5, Salisbury Merriman, N, 1992, ‘Predicting the unexpected: prehistoric sites recently discovered under alluvium in central

London’, Alluvial Archaeology in Britain,Oxbow Monogr 27, Oxford MoLAS, 2000, The Archaeology of Greater London, Museum of London Archaeology Service, London PPG 16, 1990, Archaeology and Planning, Department of the Environment Planning Policy Guidance 16,

HMSO RCHME, 1994, Survey of London Vol XLIV: Poplar, Blackwall and the Isle of Dogs, London Taylor, R, 1991, Blackwall, The Brunswick and Whitebait Dinners, London THUDP, 1992, Tower Hamlets Unitary Development Plan, Southgate, London Webber, M, 1992a, ‘An archaeological evaluation at Charringtons Wharf’, Museum of London Archaeology

Service report BCW92, London Webber, M, 1992b, ‘An archaeological evaluation at the Blackwall Tunnel’, Oxford Archaeological Unit report

GBT92, Oxford Wroe-Brown, R, 1997, ‘An archaeological watching brief at Blackwall Stairs, Yabsley St, E14’, Museum of

London Archaeology Service report BLK97, London

13

APPENDIX 1: Sites and Monuments Records within a 500m search radius of the development site No. SMR NGR (TQ) Type Period Comments 1 80964 380 808 Structures Medieval Village of Poplar 2 81073 3805 7820 to 380 807 Structures Medieval East Ferry Road 3 80891 381 801 Environmental Paleolithic Organic matter located during digging

of dock 4 800112 381 804 - 383 803 Structures Post-medieval (19th cent.) Dockyard, wall and accumulator tower 5 84122 3810 8070 Environmental Medieval Evaluated site 6 222693 38145 80790 Structures Post-medieval (17th cent.) Almshouses 7 222746 38160 80250 Structures Post-medieval (19th cent.) Canal basin, listed Grade1 8 222620-2 38265 80370 Structures Post-medieval (19th cent.) Accumulator tower, listed Grade 2 84413 Environmental Post-medieval Evaluated site 222620 Structures Post-medieval (19th cent.) Docks, listed Grade 2 9 83183 3830 8070 Structures Post-medieval 18 Evaluated site

10 84132 3830 8100 Structures Post-medieval Evaluated site 11 83294 3831 7998 Negative Undated Evaluated site 12 83294 3832 8009 Negative Undated Evaluated site

83294 Negative Undated Evaluated site 222595 Structures Post-medieval (19th cent.) Houses, listed Grade 2 83294 Negative Undated Evaluated site

13 83294 3836 7998 Negative Undated Evaluated site 14 222620-1 38367 80280 Structures Post-medieval (19th cent.) Accumulator tower, listed Grade 2 15 222286 38395 80132 Structures Post-medieval (19th cent.) Houses, listed Grade 2

222587-1 Structures Post-medieval (19th cent.) Tunnel portal, listed Grade 2 222285 Structures Post-medieval (19th cent.) Houses, listed Grade 2 222284 Structures Post-medieval (19th cent.) Houses, listed Grade 2

16 222587 38395 80782 - 39070 79435 Structures Post-medieval (19th cent.) Tunnel, listed Grade 2 17 80835 384 805 Find Roman Wine vessel 18 81072 384 808 to 3600 8085 Structures Medieval Limehouse Causeway 19 81594 384 808 to 379 829 Structures Medieval Bromley to Blackwall road 20 222535 38420 80890 - 38570 80815 Structures Post-medieval (19th cent.) Embankment and stairs, listed Grade 2 21 84125 3850 8030 Environmental Post-medieval Evaluated site

71436-2 Structures Post-medieval (16th cent.) Bastion, part of Armada defenses 22 83117 3855 8050 Environmental Undated Evaluated site

83118 Structures Post-medieval (17th cent.) Evaluated site 83118 Structures Post-medieval Evaluated site

23 80890 386 805 Environmental Paleolithic Fossils located during digging of dock 80966 Structures Medieval Blackwall village 80966 Structures Post-medieval (16th cent.) Shipyards 81555 Structures Post-medieval (14th cent.) Potters ferry 81556 Structures Post-medieval (17th cent.) Docks 82246 Structures Post-medieval (16th cent.) Fort, part of Armada defenses 84287 Structures Post-medieval Evaluated site, Stairs 84288 Structures Post-medieval (18th cent.) Evaluated site, dock 80732 Environmental Paleolithic Mammoth tusk located during tunnel

construction 24 222356-3 38615 80810 Structures Post-medieval (19th cent.) Pumping station, listed Grade 2 25 112004-6 387 803 Find Neolithic 3 axes 26 80896 387 807 Structures Roman 3rd or 4th century watch tower 27 84411 387 810 Environmental Post-medieval Evaluated site 28 222214 38700 80640 Structures Post-medieval (18th cent.) Dry dock 29 71436 3875 8035 Structures Post-medieval (16th cent.) pontoon barrier, part of Armada

defenses 30 110037 3875 8040 Find Neolithic Axe 31 71279 3879 8010 Find Post-medieval (19th cent.) Evaluated site 32 71436 3880 8020 Structures Post-medieval (16th cent.) Bastion, part of Armada defenses 33 71008 389 803 Structures Post-medieval (16th cent.) Fort, part of Armada defenses 34 71512 3890 8010 Environmental Undated Evaluated site

14

APPENDIX 2: Historic and modern maps consulted 1573 Norden’s map of the County of Middlesex (Fig. 2) 1672 Ogilby’s map of the County of Middlesex 1749 Warburton’ map of the County of Middlesex 1766 Rocque’s map of the County of Middlesex (Fig. 3) 1777 Stockdale’s map of the City of London and Southwark (Fig. 4) 1809 Laurie and Whittle’s New Plan of London (Fig. 5) 1841 Walter and Burgess’ Plan of Poplar Level (Fig. 6) 1867 First Edition Ordnance Survey Sheet V111.72 (Fig. 7) 1893 Ordnance Survey Sheet V111.72 (Fig. 8) 1937 Ordnance Survey Sheet V111.72 (Fig. 9) 1970 Ordnance Survey Sheet TQ 3880 SW (Fig. 10) 1991 Ordnance Survey Sheet TQ 3880 SW (Fig. 11) 1996 Ordnance Survey Sheet TQ 3880 SW (Fig. 12)