These three plans accompanied T. G. Godfrey-Faussett’s 1875 paper Canterbury Till Domesday. Because they share an orientation and graphic language, they can be read as a sequence: institutions, walls, roads, and fortifications change while the mound at the Dungeon remains a fixed point.
They are nineteenth-century scholarly reconstructions, not modern archaeological survey plans. Their value lies both in the evidence Godfrey-Faussett assembled and in showing how Victorian antiquaries understood Canterbury’s development.
First to early fifth centuries
Godfrey-Faussett's 1875 reconstruction of the Roman city. The Dungeon mound is marked A near the south-east wall. The plan is historical evidence about nineteenth-century interpretation, not a modern archaeological survey.
Look for: The wall bends around the mound—the spatial observation at the centre of Godfrey-Faussett's argument that it predated the Roman circuit.
Open the archival recordFifth to eleventh centuries
The second plan retains the Roman ground plan and adds the extended northern city, royal and ecclesiastical sites, gates, churches, and St Augustine's Abbey.
Look for: The mound remains fixed near the southern wall while Canterbury's political and ecclesiastical centre expands north and east.
Open the archival record1066 to the early twelfth century
The third plan adds the Norman castle, westward wall extension, Lanfranc's palace, and new institutions. The ancient mound was briefly adapted as a timber fortification before the stone castle superseded it.
Look for: Read the three plans as a sequence: the city changes around a topographical feature that persists.
Open the archival recordCharles Cotton reproduced a separate plan of Durovernum in 1929. It is useful for comparison but does not share the dimensions of Godfrey-Faussett’s sequence, so it is presented separately in the archive as the Plan of Durovernum.