Linking 19th-century archaeological artefacts with 19th-century lives: A genealogical approach for the archaeology of Spitalfields
June 11, 2008 ArchaeologySince I joined the organisation in 1998, much of my work at the Museum of London Archaeology Service has been focussed on analysing and interpreting the vast quantities of 16th-19th century dated artefacts excavated as part of the redevelopment of the area between London’s Bishopsgate and Spitalfields market (just to the north of Liverpool Street station) during 1994-2005 (modern map).
Much of this material was found during the abandonment of backyard features of a dozen or so houses built during the late 17th/early 18th century. These backyard features, related either to the drainage of the kitchen, yard and guttering (soakaway pits) or the disposal of human and household waste (the privy) were often filled with both organic waste (cess, remains of meals) and rubbish (glass, pottery, pipes, hearth sweepings etc). Each individual feature was quickly filled though the dates when this occurred across these properties ranged between 1820-50.
I’ve used some archaeological jargon - in this context, a ‘feature’ is a hole in the ground that represents some human activity. ‘Assemblage’ is another term that has a specific meaning in archaeology - roughly speaking, it’s a group of artefacts found near each other.
These tightly dated finds assemblages, from properties on what was once Spital Square and Fort Street, Duke Street and Steward Street, London - a neighbourhood mostly demolished between 1920-50 - therefore required a different interpretive response and focus. By employing essentially genealogical approaches, I searched the surviving administrative records for these streets for the period (Land Tax assessments, commercial directories, Sun Life Insurance records, Sewer Rate books and census returns) and worked out the addresses of the properties studied. Once achieved, my attention shifted to finding out more about the people whom lived here at the time when these backyard features were abandoned.
This meshing of finds and documentary evidence - focussed on individual households - provided me with an intimate insight into the lives of many of Spitalfields forgotten residents.
Though this household archaeology approach, aided by using online resources such as the Old Bailey online (www.oldbaileyonline.org) and the The Times newspaper, captured much information, I am interested in finding out more about the following people whose possessions are now curated in our archive. I therefore welcome comments from any descendants of the families listed below! The names of the principal heads of household are given by address(along with the dates of occupation) though we often know the names of their children too.
- Joseph Graham, Ann Graham and Mark Graham of 24 Fort Street: 1811-25. Silk manufacturers. Joseph died in 1817/8.
- James Vernell and Elizabeth Ive Vernell of 25 Fort Street: 1813-24. James was a silk manufacturer, his brother John Vernell worked nearby on Steward Street.
- Thomas Walker of 29 Fort Street: 1831-4. Silk manufacturer.
- Barnabas Martin and Mary Martin of 29 Fort Street: 1841. Barnabas was a silk manufacturer.
- William Gilbert of 30 Fort Street: 1830-5. Silk manufacturer. William and his family were long-term residents of Fort Street whom frequently moved between different houses here.
- Judah Woolf and Rose Woolf of 31 Fort Street: 1871-9. Judah was a general dealer. Part of the Jewish community. London born.
- Charles Millingen and Sarah (neé Barnet) Millingen of 5 Spital Square: 1847-57. Charles was employed as a umbrella manufacturer and were Ashkenazi Jews. Charles was London born, Sarah from the Bay of Biscay. More information about this family appears on GenPals Cemetery Project www.genpals.com <http://www.genpals.com/>
- John Reid and Louisa Reid of 21 Spital Square: c1833-45. John was employed as a silk manufacturer. Scottish born.
- William White and Ann White of 17 Crispin Street: 1841. William was employed as a shoe maker.
I look forward to receiving your comments about these 19th-century Londoners.
Small disclaimer: whilst I am happy to field questions about these specific individuals, or about my research on Fort, Duke, and Steward Street and Spital Square for 1800-50, i am an archaeologist not a geneaologist!
Linda Mannix :
Date: September 23, 2008 @ 2:41 pm
Greetings from Canada. I have just started some preliminary research on my grandmother who was born at 14 Duke Street in Spitalfields in 1890. Her name was May Hurlock. I gather that Duke Street no longer exists - I believe that it is now Fort Street. I would be very interested in any information that you would have regarding that location. My son is currently living in London and will visit that location to take pictures etc. Also, if you have any further information about her family I would be very interested in receiving it. Based on the 1890 Census records, her mother was Jane Hurlock - born in 1870 and her mother was Ann Oakes, born in 1852. THey all lived at 14 Duke Street at the time of the census. Thank you very much for any additional information you could provide me about this location and what life was like during this time period in this community.
Linda Mannix
Nigel Jeffries :
Date: October 14, 2008 @ 10:34 am
Dear Linda
Thanks for your response to my blog.
You are right about Duke Street no longer existing: it was renamed Fort Street and renumbered after the 1920s extension of Spitalfields market. It was once part of the Liberty of the Old Artillery Ground (a Liberty was an old administrative unit in London that existed up to the late 19th century), though only a small section of Fort/Duke Street now survives, south of Brushfield Street. As my memory recalls, little or none of the original housing survives here. 95% of Duke/Fort Street was demolished in the later 1940s and 50s, though ironically, the remaining portion of Spitalfields Georgian housing is now protected and part of a conservation area. They now sell for hundreds of thousands of pounds….
So the street that your grandmother once lived on marked the beginnings of what might be considered as the ‘old East End’. Duke/Fort Street was laid out in the 1680s, and by the 1800s, like much of the neighbourhood, had developed into a mixture of stable commercial and domestic residences, with most of the commercial premises occupied by those involved in the silk trade. Throughout the 1810s and certainly up to the 1840s, no.14 Duke Street - the house occupied by your grandmother - was occupied by Delamare and Son, individuals listed as silk manufacturers in the trade directories for this period (available at the Guildhall Library in the City of London: your son should be able to search these for the 1890s too if he wishes). Given there surname the Delemare’s probably represented old Huguenot stock.
Things were nevertheless rather different by the 1890s, though this period was slightly outside my research and im straying slighly outside my comfort zone here. Certainly the character of the area had changed, the silk industry had declined, and many properties in the Liberty had been converted into warehouse space, where empty, or simply had been demolished etc. Those that remained in domestic use had become rather overcramped, and one finds that houses that were once in single occupancy now had up to three to four families living in them. The housing stock for adjoining Steward and Fort Street, however, was characterised by quite large three to four storey properties and so this might not have been as unmanageable as one might think.
One should also beware of taking the blanket, often bleak, contemporary representations of the East End at face value when trying to get some idea of the life that your grandmother led during this period and the streets that she walked. Though times were undoubtedly tough for many occupants of the East End during this period, not everyone wore ragged clothes, was uneducated, and drank too much! This is particularly the case for reputation of Spitalfields, with the section around Commercial Road mired by the Ripper murders.
Im afraid that I don’t have any information about your particular family, but good luck on your research.
Best wishes Nigel Jeffries
jill :
Date: November 22, 2008 @ 12:19 am
my family lived on duke street in 1961 (i presume they lived there before this, but 1961 was the only census i could find them on)
they were
henry wilson born 1823
sarah wilson born 1831
william henry wilson born 1850.
there were 15 of them living in the same building comprising of 6 differnt family names. i was just wondering if this was usual in the area at the time, or if this was some kind of boarding house. anythink you could tell me would be great thanks
jill :
Date: November 22, 2008 @ 12:20 am
sorry i wrote they lived there 1961, i ment 1861
Natalie :
Date: July 28, 2009 @ 6:52 am
Hello
I am doing a friend’s family tree. He is descended from Judah and Rose Woolf through their daughter Emma. Emma Woolf was his Great Grandmother.
I would be very interested to hear of any information you have that I can include in his family history.
Many thanks!
Natalie
Nigel Jeffries :
Date: August 6, 2009 @ 10:19 am
Dear Natalie
Re: Archaeology of the Woolf family of Spitalfields
Thanks for you’re email.
During our excavations at Spitalfields we picked up the backyard privy - see my first post on this blog for explanation - of the end house of Fort Street (no. 31 during the 19th century) as it met Duke Street. The privy was abandoned and filled with rubbish (mostly ceramics and glass) and refuse (food waste, including archaeologically rare quail bones), an event was dated by the artefacts to the last quarter of the 19th century. The most important object among this collection is a copper alloy broach or badge in the form of a cross-crosslet design which represents the arms of Jerusalem. We can therefore be pretty certain that at least some of these things where related to a Jewish family. This material is now stored in our archaeological archive, and the family are more than welcome to come and see them!
My research showed that when the privy was filled, no. 31 Fort Street was occupied by two successive Jewish families - the Harts and the Woolfs - between 1857 and 1879. By 1879, the minutes of the landlord - the Trustees of the Cripplegate School for Girls (a charity which owned most of the properties on Fort Street) - recorded that both nos. 30 and 31 where then leased to the album maker William Reynolds whom extensively remodelled these houses into commercial premises. We have a photo from 1940s which shows the now derelict nos. 30 and 31 as large 4 to 5 storey buildings just prior to demolition.
As noted above, from 1857 until 1879, no. 31 was occupied by two successive Jewish families. The first was headed by the rag merchant Judah Hart, and his wife, four young daughters and two servant women resided here until 1871, before occupation by the Woolf’s until 1879. Judah Woolf (aged 50 in the 1871 census, and born in Whitechapel) and his son Abraham (24) were similarly involved in the rag trade and ran their business from here, with the remainder of the family comprising three young sons (scholars), two daughters (Sarah and Agnes were both dressmakers), and Judah’s niece (also the families servant) also living here. Though Judah is listed as married in the 1871 census, his wife Rose is not recorded in this document. However, Judah’s business does not appear to have run smoothly. The London Gazette newspaper records a number of adverts placed by Josiah Beddow of the London Bankruptcy Court (in Basinghall Street in the City of London) for the creditors of Judah - described here as a rag and metal merchant of no. 31 Fort Street - to prove their debts during the liquidation of Judah’s business in 1873 (Issue 24032) and 1874 (Issue 24055). Whether these matters where resolved before Judah’s death in 1876 is unclear, but this event was not only recorded in national death register (GRO ref IC 191), but also in the minutes of the Trustees of the Cripplegate School (Guildhall Library MS6473/7, 15th November 1876, 269). After Judah’s death, the Trustees kept the remaining Woolfs on as tenants for a few years providing they could quit with just a weeks notice (ibid, 11th December 1877, 346).
Unlike many of the earlier Regency period assemblages from Fort Street, the privy yielded a fairly poorly preserved group artefacts, with ceramics, glass and a wide variety of structural, domestic and personal objects gradually accumulated from successive, incidental, house, yard, and hearth (clinker and coal) clearances. Nevertheless, the dating of the ceramics and window glass demonstrates this happened over a relatively short period of time. In addition, a large quantity of later 19th–century window glass and other significant structural fittings (including a cistern) indicate the privy was filled with materials discarded from a house refurbishment and therefore is likely to have contained material relating to the Woolf’s final tenure (or the things they left behind) prior to the conversion of this property by William Reynolds.
The general character of the area during this period I have summed up in my response to Linda Mannix (above).
Anyway, hope this is all of help and keep in touch.
Best wishes Nigel
Mike :
Date: September 17, 2009 @ 9:48 pm
My GG Grandfather owned an umbrella manufacturing business in Spittalfields. His name was Lecore (sometimes spelt Le Coure etc.
have you come across this family?
regards,
Mike
Nigel Jeffries :
Date: September 29, 2009 @ 10:51 am
Dear Mike
Re: Lecore/Le Coure family of Spitalfields
Thanks for your email.
Sadly evidence of the Lecore/Le Coure family has not been found either through my own documentary research for the excavations we undertook here, which is mostly focused on gathering evidence for Fort, Duke and Steward Street and to a lesser extent Spital Square.
One observation is that umbrella manufacturers do occassionally feature in the trade and commerical directories for these streets, in particular from the
1840s onwards.
I did a quick search on the records of the Old Bailey under ‘Lecore’
and did find some references:
http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/search.jsp?form=_divs&_divs_fulltext=lecore&ref=&_divs_div0Type_div1Type=&submit.x=50&submit.y=2
Good luck, and sorry I could note be of anymore help.
Best wishes,
Nigel
David Burt :
Date: January 2, 2010 @ 7:57 pm
My wife is a Lecore and I have just started researching her family. Have come across several Lecore umbrella makers who are relatives and live in the general area from Leytonstone to Spitalfields. Is there any chance I could be put in touch with mike to share info? Regards. David & Jeanette Burt(Nee Lecore)
Bilkis Mosoddik :
Date: January 4, 2010 @ 3:20 pm
Hi David, I have forwarded your comment to Mike should he wish to contact you.
Keith Rhodes :
Date: January 5, 2010 @ 6:51 pm
I have just come across your site and you may be interested that my wife’s family who were Thomas and Sarah Reynolds lived/worked in Lamb St/Fort St as follows- 1799 and 1818 Lamb St:
1801/1802/1805/1807/1808/1811 and 1820 Fort St:
These dates follow when the children were Christened at Christ Church, Spitalsfield.
Thomas’s occupation was a Cordwainer although for the last 2 children this was clarified to Shoe Maker.
If you or others have any input it will be gratefully received, but I hope this may add to, and aid, your own researches
Dave Walton :
Date: January 10, 2010 @ 7:12 pm
I am currently tracing my wifes family history (name of Gildersleve), and I find that they were silk weavers in the 19th century. Would you know if any records exist of manufacturers and workers as I would like to find out exactly where they worked and what they did.
Nigel Jeffries :
Date: January 11, 2010 @ 9:20 pm
Dear Dave
This is a bit outside of my knowledge and remit i am afraid.
However, the profession of ’silk manufacturer’ (as opposed to the weavers whom they employed on a job by job basis) can be found in the street and commercial directories for London which are microfilmed in the Guildhall Library or the London Metropolitan Archive. How one otherwise establishes the link between weaver and manufacturer is not an area in which I can advise upon.
Apologies and good luck
Nigel
Nigel Jeffries :
Date: January 12, 2010 @ 9:39 am
Dear Keith
Thanks for your email.
I have an entry for Thomas Reynolds among the 1809 Land Tax Assessment documents for the Liberty of the Old Artillery Ground, which Fort Street was part of, a document that is otherwise accessible in the City of London’s Guildhall Library (REF: MS 6005/22A-58). Land Tax assessments are useful administrative records but do not provide house number nor profession.
In the corresponding trade and commerical directories for this year Thomas is listed as a shoe maker at no. 13 Fort Street (these directories are also to be found microfilmed in the Guildhall Library).
However, after 1809, the Land Tax Assessments show no. 13 as being empty until 1818 when it is occupied by Francis Sims. So the Reynolds must have moved on (?).
A William Reynolds crops up in the 1880s and 90s at nos. 30 and 31 Fort Street: is he related to the Thomas and Sarah Reynolds you write about?
Anyway, thats all I have,
Thanks Nigel