As the days grow shorter and the Sun is lower in the sky the shadows grow longer and archaeological features become easier to see. The above photograph was taken from Shady Lane Clayton-le-Woods over looking
Sunday, November 12, 2006
Ridge And Furrows
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Ambrye Meadow Field Stones
As you drive along the Leyland By - Pass heading South towards Eccleston, you pass a field bisected by a row of stone fence post. The following is the research I undertook to discover the background of this unique feature in the Lancashire landscape.
BACKGROUND
Ambrye Meadow Grid ref. (SD525-213) lies on the south-west side of Leyland Lancashire in the small township of Earnshaw Bridge which is known locally as ‘Seven Stars’ due to the Seven Stars Public house which has stood on the site since 1686.
Today the remains of 38 stone fence posts can be seen running roughly north-west south-east in 2 rows standing in an old water meadow known locally as Ambrye Meadow. An access lane called Emnie Lane links the field to Leyland Lane, the main southern route into Leyland.
The field is surrounded on 3 sides by water, the River Lostock to the north-west, the remains of Wade brook to the south-east and Mill brook to the north-east.
In the early 1980's the area was bisected when the Leyland By-Pass was constructed. This resulted in straightening of the river Lostock, re-routing Mill brook 120metres to the south and redefining the route of Wade brook. All this re-engineering resulted in the near complete loss of northern row of fence posts (only one now remains standing and the base of another is just visible)
The stone fence posts appear to be made of sandstone, possibly originating from the old quarry known as Eccleston Delf on Banister Green, Eccleston. This lies approximately 3 miles south of Ambrye meadow. The quarry has been a source of local building stone for hundreds of years and similar stone can be seen in many of the older building in the area.
ETYMOLOGY OF FIELD NAMES
To try to ascertain the possible origin and definition of the field name, I contacted the English Place Name society. In their reply Mr. John Field details the origin of both the names of Ambrye and Emnie.
AMBRYE
This may have been derived from the Middle English almerie for a storehouse or aumonerie, an almonary, a place where alms are distributed.
EMNIE
From the Latin word elemosynaria which later became aumonerie and then almonry.
In further research, I also found a reference to
AUMBRY
A small recess in chancel wall, sometimes with a door, where the vessels used to celebrate Mass were kept. i.e. a storage cupboard or box.
Taken from the ‘Parish Churches of Britain’ by Richard Foster page 114.
The similarity of the forms of the names and the close connection of the meanings may have led to the convergence of the two terms, and their running together may possibly point to the fact that both activities of storage and distribution may have been conducted in the same place in the past.
It is possible that these ‘storage and distribution’ references point to a possible site of a Tithe Barn, where a payment of 1/10 of all produce was given to church. Evidence on the 1953 Aerial photographs (No1) shows the possible outline of a large building in an adjacent field to Ambrye meadow. Today, Tithe barn Lane still lies half a mile to the east of Ambrye meadow.
HISTORICAL DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Ambrye meadow is referred to in several historical documents. The first reference I found was in the book 'The Surviving Past' published in the 1980’s by John Hallam the then Central Lancashire Development Corporation 's consultant archaeologist. It was suggested that the stone fence posts may have been erected in 1785 to divide the field into 3 equal areas which would provide a permanent field system.... ' more fitting the new agricultural methods'. The reference also states that a Robert Welch was the landowner and that Ambrye meadow was mentioned in an estate plan.
In a visit to Lancashire record Office I tried to verify these references and the search produced 2 documents relating to Ambrye meadow.
The first document was an Enclosure Award and Agreement (Ref – LRO: DDF 1991-1992) dated January 19th 1723. Several people are quoted who sign and seal the document; these include George Farington, Nicholas Rigby, R. Crook, John Wright, William Greene, William Woodcock, Elizabeth Woodcock, Hugh Charnock, Edward Atherton and Robert Weltch (Welch). The document then goes on to refer to the ownership of the lands in Leyland.
'' The whole ancient lands in the township of Leyland that has not been enclosed from any commings is 961 acres out of which quantity their belongs to George Farington Lord of the Manor 897 Acres 3 Roods being the estate hereafter named. And where of there is now enclosed 54 Acres of commings which gives every acre of land (g.fall of perchy)[sic] only wanting (g.fall)[sic] which George Farington Esq is to have allowed him above his share in the next enclosure so that the share belongs to…”
Robert Welch, the above mentioned landowner, is documented as having 2 parcels of land. The first was rented from George Farington’s main estate and containing an area of 18 perches. The second parcel of 2 acres was owned by Robert Welch and was part of the lands of the township of Leyland outside the control of George Farington’s estate.
The second document was also an Enclosure Awards and Agreements (Ref – LRO:PR 2908/5/2) dated 2nd October 1785. This details exclusively the management and ownership of Ambrye meadow. The lands in the area around Ambrye meadow was owned by George Farington and contained 4 Acres, - 3 Roods - 16 ¾ Perches. The meadow was sold to 3 parties, Thomas Baldwin (the vicar of Andrews church, the Parish church of Leyland) and Thomas Baldwin Junior (his son) who acquired an area of 1 Acre - 3 Roods - 18 ¾ Perch for a sum of 10/-. John Woodcock also paid the same amount of 10/- and acquired 1 Acre - 3 Roods - 16 ¼ Perch. Robert Welch and John Nixon paid 5/- each and acquired 1 Acre - 2 Roods - 18 ½ Perch from George Farington. It is also stated that the fields were to be known as Ambrye Meadow. The document also states that Robert Welch and John Nixon were tasked to survey the entire area of land and re-divide the 3 parcels of land equally and as fairly as possible between the 3 parties.
“3 equal shares as same in value as might be and then each lot for the same which the allotment share of the said meadow lying and the Southe End therof containing 4 Acres, 3 Roods and 16 ¾ Perches and now divided and enclosed from the other parts of the said meadow by large stones set erect with rails through the same fell to the lot…”
After the re-division of the meadow, the Baldwins acquired 1 Acre - 2 Roods and - 18 ¾ Perches. John Woodcock acquired 1 Acre - 2 Roods - 19 ½ Perches. Robert Welch and John Nixon acquired 1 Acre 2 Roods - 18 ½ Perches. Robert Welch and John Nixon were also tasked to erect the stone posts and wooden rails to divide the meadow in accordance with their calculations. Once the meadow was divided and fenced the whole area was then leased to a Thomas Croft for a payment of 10/- per field.
A third document was brought to light by a visit to South Ribble Museum. This was the Leyland Tithe Map of 1838 and this showed that the meadow then existed as a 3 field group numbered 1008, 1009 and 960. (reading from south to north)
CONCLUSION
In 1738 Mr. Nixon and Mr. Welch along with 3 other parties, purchased a portion of water meadow lying to south west of Leyland Township from George Farrington the Lord of the manor. This meadow was surrounded on all sides by water in the form of rivers and brooks, on the eastern side by Wade brook, to the north by Mill brook and to the west by the river Lostock. George Farrington was the Lord of the manor and he owned a large proportion of the land around Leyland and it appears at this time he was disposing of some of his lands to local landowners by sale. Within the documentation relating to the sale of the land under investigation, it was also mentioned that the area would be called Ambrye meadow in future. This may have been a new name for the area of land, or it could represent the reuse of a much older name relating to a previous use of the meadow and the surrounding area as tithe land, or a site on which the tithes were collected or stored. However this would not seem very practical as the surrounding wet environment would not give an ideal location for the storage of grain.
Nixon and Welch were tasked with the job of surveying the field equally and dividing it equally between all the parties concerned. Once surveyed the internal field division boundaries where marked using stone fence posts erected approximately 8.5ft apart in 2 lines. These posts had 2 holes cut into them approximately 19 and 40 inches above ground level, designed to hold wooden rails. Looking at the heights of these rails it is evident that these fields were probably used for the penning of large stock or for arable farming rather than smaller stock animals.
Over the next hundred years the three fields were still in use and are mentioned on the Leyland Tithe Map of 1838. As we approach the present time aerial photographs covering the period from 1957 up to 1972 show that little has changed in the surrounding landscape apart from the movement of the River Lostock and the formation of an ox-bow lake on the western bank of the river Lostock.
During the early part of the 1980's the new Leyland by pass was commissioned and work began on its construction. This new road had a major affect on Ambrye meadow, causing the near total loss of all the posts in row 'B'. Major engineering work was also carried out to alter the routes of both Mill Brook and Wade Brook. The re routing of Mill brook has meant that the old confluence with the river Lostock has now been dammed up. Close inspection of this area reveals that many of the stone posts possibly from row 'B' have been broken up and have been used as ballast in the damming work.
BACKGROUND
Ambrye Meadow Grid ref. (SD525-213) lies on the south-west side of Leyland Lancashire in the small township of Earnshaw Bridge which is known locally as ‘Seven Stars’ due to the Seven Stars Public house which has stood on the site since 1686.
Today the remains of 38 stone fence posts can be seen running roughly north-west south-east in 2 rows standing in an old water meadow known locally as Ambrye Meadow. An access lane called Emnie Lane links the field to Leyland Lane, the main southern route into Leyland.
The field is surrounded on 3 sides by water, the River Lostock to the north-west, the remains of Wade brook to the south-east and Mill brook to the north-east.
In the early 1980's the area was bisected when the Leyland By-Pass was constructed. This resulted in straightening of the river Lostock, re-routing Mill brook 120metres to the south and redefining the route of Wade brook. All this re-engineering resulted in the near complete loss of northern row of fence posts (only one now remains standing and the base of another is just visible)
The stone fence posts appear to be made of sandstone, possibly originating from the old quarry known as Eccleston Delf on Banister Green, Eccleston. This lies approximately 3 miles south of Ambrye meadow. The quarry has been a source of local building stone for hundreds of years and similar stone can be seen in many of the older building in the area.
ETYMOLOGY OF FIELD NAMES
To try to ascertain the possible origin and definition of the field name, I contacted the English Place Name society. In their reply Mr. John Field details the origin of both the names of Ambrye and Emnie.
AMBRYE
This may have been derived from the Middle English almerie for a storehouse or aumonerie, an almonary, a place where alms are distributed.
EMNIE
From the Latin word elemosynaria which later became aumonerie and then almonry.
In further research, I also found a reference to
AUMBRY
A small recess in chancel wall, sometimes with a door, where the vessels used to celebrate Mass were kept. i.e. a storage cupboard or box.
Taken from the ‘Parish Churches of Britain’ by Richard Foster page 114.
The similarity of the forms of the names and the close connection of the meanings may have led to the convergence of the two terms, and their running together may possibly point to the fact that both activities of storage and distribution may have been conducted in the same place in the past.
It is possible that these ‘storage and distribution’ references point to a possible site of a Tithe Barn, where a payment of 1/10 of all produce was given to church. Evidence on the 1953 Aerial photographs (No1) shows the possible outline of a large building in an adjacent field to Ambrye meadow. Today, Tithe barn Lane still lies half a mile to the east of Ambrye meadow.
HISTORICAL DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Ambrye meadow is referred to in several historical documents. The first reference I found was in the book 'The Surviving Past' published in the 1980’s by John Hallam the then Central Lancashire Development Corporation 's consultant archaeologist. It was suggested that the stone fence posts may have been erected in 1785 to divide the field into 3 equal areas which would provide a permanent field system.... ' more fitting the new agricultural methods'. The reference also states that a Robert Welch was the landowner and that Ambrye meadow was mentioned in an estate plan.
In a visit to Lancashire record Office I tried to verify these references and the search produced 2 documents relating to Ambrye meadow.
The first document was an Enclosure Award and Agreement (Ref – LRO: DDF 1991-1992) dated January 19th 1723. Several people are quoted who sign and seal the document; these include George Farington, Nicholas Rigby, R. Crook, John Wright, William Greene, William Woodcock, Elizabeth Woodcock, Hugh Charnock, Edward Atherton and Robert Weltch (Welch). The document then goes on to refer to the ownership of the lands in Leyland.
'' The whole ancient lands in the township of Leyland that has not been enclosed from any commings is 961 acres out of which quantity their belongs to George Farington Lord of the Manor 897 Acres 3 Roods being the estate hereafter named. And where of there is now enclosed 54 Acres of commings which gives every acre of land (g.fall of perchy)[sic] only wanting (g.fall)[sic] which George Farington Esq is to have allowed him above his share in the next enclosure so that the share belongs to…”
Robert Welch, the above mentioned landowner, is documented as having 2 parcels of land. The first was rented from George Farington’s main estate and containing an area of 18 perches. The second parcel of 2 acres was owned by Robert Welch and was part of the lands of the township of Leyland outside the control of George Farington’s estate.
The second document was also an Enclosure Awards and Agreements (Ref – LRO:PR 2908/5/2) dated 2nd October 1785. This details exclusively the management and ownership of Ambrye meadow. The lands in the area around Ambrye meadow was owned by George Farington and contained 4 Acres, - 3 Roods - 16 ¾ Perches. The meadow was sold to 3 parties, Thomas Baldwin (the vicar of Andrews church, the Parish church of Leyland) and Thomas Baldwin Junior (his son) who acquired an area of 1 Acre - 3 Roods - 18 ¾ Perch for a sum of 10/-. John Woodcock also paid the same amount of 10/- and acquired 1 Acre - 3 Roods - 16 ¼ Perch. Robert Welch and John Nixon paid 5/- each and acquired 1 Acre - 2 Roods - 18 ½ Perch from George Farington. It is also stated that the fields were to be known as Ambrye Meadow. The document also states that Robert Welch and John Nixon were tasked to survey the entire area of land and re-divide the 3 parcels of land equally and as fairly as possible between the 3 parties.
“3 equal shares as same in value as might be and then each lot for the same which the allotment share of the said meadow lying and the Southe End therof containing 4 Acres, 3 Roods and 16 ¾ Perches and now divided and enclosed from the other parts of the said meadow by large stones set erect with rails through the same fell to the lot…”
After the re-division of the meadow, the Baldwins acquired 1 Acre - 2 Roods and - 18 ¾ Perches. John Woodcock acquired 1 Acre - 2 Roods - 19 ½ Perches. Robert Welch and John Nixon acquired 1 Acre 2 Roods - 18 ½ Perches. Robert Welch and John Nixon were also tasked to erect the stone posts and wooden rails to divide the meadow in accordance with their calculations. Once the meadow was divided and fenced the whole area was then leased to a Thomas Croft for a payment of 10/- per field.
A third document was brought to light by a visit to South Ribble Museum. This was the Leyland Tithe Map of 1838 and this showed that the meadow then existed as a 3 field group numbered 1008, 1009 and 960. (reading from south to north)
CONCLUSION
In 1738 Mr. Nixon and Mr. Welch along with 3 other parties, purchased a portion of water meadow lying to south west of Leyland Township from George Farrington the Lord of the manor. This meadow was surrounded on all sides by water in the form of rivers and brooks, on the eastern side by Wade brook, to the north by Mill brook and to the west by the river Lostock. George Farrington was the Lord of the manor and he owned a large proportion of the land around Leyland and it appears at this time he was disposing of some of his lands to local landowners by sale. Within the documentation relating to the sale of the land under investigation, it was also mentioned that the area would be called Ambrye meadow in future. This may have been a new name for the area of land, or it could represent the reuse of a much older name relating to a previous use of the meadow and the surrounding area as tithe land, or a site on which the tithes were collected or stored. However this would not seem very practical as the surrounding wet environment would not give an ideal location for the storage of grain.
Nixon and Welch were tasked with the job of surveying the field equally and dividing it equally between all the parties concerned. Once surveyed the internal field division boundaries where marked using stone fence posts erected approximately 8.5ft apart in 2 lines. These posts had 2 holes cut into them approximately 19 and 40 inches above ground level, designed to hold wooden rails. Looking at the heights of these rails it is evident that these fields were probably used for the penning of large stock or for arable farming rather than smaller stock animals.
Over the next hundred years the three fields were still in use and are mentioned on the Leyland Tithe Map of 1838. As we approach the present time aerial photographs covering the period from 1957 up to 1972 show that little has changed in the surrounding landscape apart from the movement of the River Lostock and the formation of an ox-bow lake on the western bank of the river Lostock.
During the early part of the 1980's the new Leyland by pass was commissioned and work began on its construction. This new road had a major affect on Ambrye meadow, causing the near total loss of all the posts in row 'B'. Major engineering work was also carried out to alter the routes of both Mill Brook and Wade Brook. The re routing of Mill brook has meant that the old confluence with the river Lostock has now been dammed up. Close inspection of this area reveals that many of the stone posts possibly from row 'B' have been broken up and have been used as ballast in the damming work.
REFERENCES
ORGANISATIONS
• English Place Name Society – Mr. John Fields
• Leyland Historical Society – Mr. Graham Thomas
• South Ribble Museum – Mr. David Hunt
• South Ribble Borough Council – Miss. Jane Hudd
DOCUMENTATION
• Enclosure award and Agreement – (LRO: DDF 1991 – 1992)
• Enclosure award and Agreement – (LRO: PR 2908/5/2)
• Leyland Tithe Map of 1838.
BOOKS
• Parish Churches of Britain – Richard Foster (Basingstoke, 1988)
• The Surviving Past – John Hallam (Chorley, Not Dated)
• A Companion to Local History – John Campbell Kease (1989)
• The Oxford Dictionary of English Placenames – A.D. Mills (Oxford, 1991)
• The History of Leyland And District – David Hunt (Preston, 1990)
• Reading the Landscape – Richard Muir. (1981)
Sunday, November 05, 2006
Medieval Road = Roman Roads ?
It can be seen from evidence found today that the majority of the roadways used during the medieval period were based on the legacy of a road network designed and constructed during the period of Roman occupation. The Romans invested time, money and materials in providing a major road network which both strategically divided up the British Isles, and allowed the armies easy access to garrison towns and the administrative centres throughout the country if required.
During the early part of the Saxon period many Roman roads were still in a good enough state of repair for daily use. In fact the major routes throughout the country were still suitable to allow the movement of massive armies and their accompanying baggage trains to cover 200 miles in a week and arrive at the battlefield in good condition. To be able to achieve this type of movement suggests that a major route was available.
It has been estimated that when the Domesday survey was taking place a minimum of 10,000 miles of usable Roman roads were still in existence in one form or another. However, due to a lack of maintenance many bridges and river crossings had become too dangerous to use, eventually causing the roads to deviate from their original routes and for travellers to find other crossing points. New roadways would also have been needed to allow travel to and from the new major medieval towns such as Oxford, Coventry and Plymouth. These new routes would have developed naturally as and when required, they would not have been metalled and would no longer be straight, and direct like the Roman roads but winding to suit the landscape demanded. A multitude of villages also appeared throughout the country which did not lie on the existing road infrastructure. To cater for their requirements new routes would be needed, these would have developed naturally between the villages.
In 1923 C. T. Flower wrote
“Any new roads (in the medieval period) which grew from habitual lines of travel made and ‘maintained’ themselves”
Unlike the metalled Roman roads, these new tracks were not ‘constructed’. The more frequently that these tracks were used the greater impression on the physical landscape they left due to erosion. Hollow way’s and wheelruts would form and become deeper over a period of time. If they became blocked by, say, a large tree falling across their line or they became impassable in wet weather, the travellers had the right to divert from the route and create a new one, even if that meant thay had to trample crops in adjacent fields. Multiple routes also developed where they had to climb a hill or a steep bank, these changing periodically depending on the seasons and weather conditions.
Due to their ‘organic’ nature, little now remains of these medieval routes. The main physical evidence available to us today is from the metalled sections of Roman roads. Today, air photography can be used to illustrate the existence of classic alignment of the straightness of Roman roads still in the landscape and cropmarks can be used in providing more detailed information. A negative cropmark occurs where the hard surface of the metalled roadway remains below the surface and positive cropmarks show the line of the ditches that ran parallel to each side of the road. This information can later be confirmed by map work and field walking.
The lack of physical evidence, means that documents must be used to compare known locations of major town from the Roman era with those from the medieval period and so to find any common routes. This evidence can be found in such documents as maps, place names and travellers records or itineraries
Due to the fragility of maps produced during this period it is not surprising that few examples have survived. Of the one’s that have, the most noted include the following.
• A map found in Robert of Gloucester chronicles (1200–1259) that shows a rough drawing of the outline of Britain divided by the 4 main Roman routes of Watling street, Fosse Way, Icknield street and Ermine Street.
• A map of Britain produced in 1250 by Matthew Paris which was based on an itinerary from Dover to Newcastle passing through various towns. This roughly followed the old Roman Watling Street and shows the towns that would have been encountered on the route.
• The most famous map from the mediaeval period is the Gough map. This map of Britain was produced in C1360 and is thought to have been an official map for government use, possibly by a Royal courier, royal officer or judiciary. The distances shown are thought to be the distances following former Roman roads between the towns that where still in use during the mediaeval period. The total of the distances shown approximate to 3,000 miles, and 40% of which lie along the routes of known Roman roads.
The definitive gazetteer of the whole Roman road system in Britain was published by I. D. Margary in a 2-volume work ‘Roman Roads in Britain’ between 1955 to 1957. He surveyed and devised a system of road numbering, single numbers for important roads, double figures for secondary roads and triple figures for minor roads. By superimposing his findings onto the surviving medieval maps, a fair indication of which Roman roads were still in use during the medieval period can be made.
During the medieval period, the strategic advantage of the principle Roman routes of Watling street, Fosse Way, Icknield street and Ermine Street was soon recognised by the ruling kings. These roads were regarded as being under the king’s special protection and became known as the Kings Highways. Numerous Royal statutes were passed during the next two hundred years which specified their upkeep.
• In 1140 king Stephen ordered that the lord of each manor had to ensure that all the highways passing through their estates had to be kept open at all times.
• In 1278 Roger Mortimer was charged by Edward I to widen all the roads and passes entering Wales to assist with the king’s campaign against the Welsh.
• In 1285 King Edward I ‘Trench Act’ was passed to ensure that any road passing through a wooded area should be kept clear of undergrowth for a distance of at least a 60 foot on each side.
• King Edward I also passed laws ensuring that the principal Roman routes were to be kept clear from sea to sea.
• In 1293 Statute of Winchester ensured that all highways passing from one market town to another had to be cleared of dykes and undergrowth to a minimum of 200 feet on either side of the road (the distance that a crossbow bolt could cover).
The routes taken by the Royal and noble households of the medieval period can be pieced together from clues found in letters and charters that they granted and details found in household accounts at which they stopped. Many of these journeys covered long distances and were mostly connected with administration or judicial work. It has been shown that the majority of these journeys took place in the southern end of Britain, and only ventured to the northern parts as and when required. This split followed roughly the Roman division of ‘Britain Superior’ and ‘Britain Inferior’ were the greater concentration of roads could be found to the south of a line drawn from the Severn to the Wash.
Place name evidence can also give clues to the routes of older roads still in use in the medieval period. Unlike the Roman roads on the continent, there is no evidence that the Romans named their roads in Britain. The first recorded evidence is from Anglo Saxon times were they referred to the primary routes as stræts e.g. Watling street, and Ermine Street. This came from the Latin strata – paved/Roman road. Villages and towns developing adjacent to these roads would have the prefix of stræts in their name such as Streatham, Streatley, Stratton and other variation of stræts. Other common place names include Cold Harbour and Coldecot. These place names are thought to describe shelters placed at the side of the roads similar to present day bus shelters where travellers could shelter from bad weather.
It can be seen from the above that even though there is little physical evidence still surviving in the British landscape to show that Roman roads formed the basic infrastructure for the medieval road pattern. However documentary evidence such as maps, place names and travellers records or itineraries would seem to support the statement that ‘Roman roads formed the basis of the major medieval road system’.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
· Belsey, V. – The Green Lanes of England – (Dartington, 1998)
· Cameron, K. – English Place Names – (London, 1996)
· Collingwood, R. G. – The Archaeology Of Roman Britain – (London, 1996)
· Hindle, P.– Medieval Roads and Tracks – (Risborough, 1998)
· Hinde, T.– The Domesday Book England Heritage Then And Now. – (Godalming, 1997)
· Margary, I. D. – Roman Roads in Britain – (London, 1957)
· Mills, A. D. – Oxford Dictionary Of English Place names – (Oxford, 1991)
· Patterson, E. J. – The Map Of Great Britain AD 1360 Also Known As The Gough Map – (Oxford, 1996 edition)
· Riley, D. N. – Aerial Archaeology – (Risborough, 1996)
During the early part of the Saxon period many Roman roads were still in a good enough state of repair for daily use. In fact the major routes throughout the country were still suitable to allow the movement of massive armies and their accompanying baggage trains to cover 200 miles in a week and arrive at the battlefield in good condition. To be able to achieve this type of movement suggests that a major route was available.
It has been estimated that when the Domesday survey was taking place a minimum of 10,000 miles of usable Roman roads were still in existence in one form or another. However, due to a lack of maintenance many bridges and river crossings had become too dangerous to use, eventually causing the roads to deviate from their original routes and for travellers to find other crossing points. New roadways would also have been needed to allow travel to and from the new major medieval towns such as Oxford, Coventry and Plymouth. These new routes would have developed naturally as and when required, they would not have been metalled and would no longer be straight, and direct like the Roman roads but winding to suit the landscape demanded. A multitude of villages also appeared throughout the country which did not lie on the existing road infrastructure. To cater for their requirements new routes would be needed, these would have developed naturally between the villages.
In 1923 C. T. Flower wrote
“Any new roads (in the medieval period) which grew from habitual lines of travel made and ‘maintained’ themselves”
Unlike the metalled Roman roads, these new tracks were not ‘constructed’. The more frequently that these tracks were used the greater impression on the physical landscape they left due to erosion. Hollow way’s and wheelruts would form and become deeper over a period of time. If they became blocked by, say, a large tree falling across their line or they became impassable in wet weather, the travellers had the right to divert from the route and create a new one, even if that meant thay had to trample crops in adjacent fields. Multiple routes also developed where they had to climb a hill or a steep bank, these changing periodically depending on the seasons and weather conditions.
Due to their ‘organic’ nature, little now remains of these medieval routes. The main physical evidence available to us today is from the metalled sections of Roman roads. Today, air photography can be used to illustrate the existence of classic alignment of the straightness of Roman roads still in the landscape and cropmarks can be used in providing more detailed information. A negative cropmark occurs where the hard surface of the metalled roadway remains below the surface and positive cropmarks show the line of the ditches that ran parallel to each side of the road. This information can later be confirmed by map work and field walking.
The lack of physical evidence, means that documents must be used to compare known locations of major town from the Roman era with those from the medieval period and so to find any common routes. This evidence can be found in such documents as maps, place names and travellers records or itineraries
Due to the fragility of maps produced during this period it is not surprising that few examples have survived. Of the one’s that have, the most noted include the following.
• A map found in Robert of Gloucester chronicles (1200–1259) that shows a rough drawing of the outline of Britain divided by the 4 main Roman routes of Watling street, Fosse Way, Icknield street and Ermine Street.
• A map of Britain produced in 1250 by Matthew Paris which was based on an itinerary from Dover to Newcastle passing through various towns. This roughly followed the old Roman Watling Street and shows the towns that would have been encountered on the route.
• The most famous map from the mediaeval period is the Gough map. This map of Britain was produced in C1360 and is thought to have been an official map for government use, possibly by a Royal courier, royal officer or judiciary. The distances shown are thought to be the distances following former Roman roads between the towns that where still in use during the mediaeval period. The total of the distances shown approximate to 3,000 miles, and 40% of which lie along the routes of known Roman roads.
The definitive gazetteer of the whole Roman road system in Britain was published by I. D. Margary in a 2-volume work ‘Roman Roads in Britain’ between 1955 to 1957. He surveyed and devised a system of road numbering, single numbers for important roads, double figures for secondary roads and triple figures for minor roads. By superimposing his findings onto the surviving medieval maps, a fair indication of which Roman roads were still in use during the medieval period can be made.
During the medieval period, the strategic advantage of the principle Roman routes of Watling street, Fosse Way, Icknield street and Ermine Street was soon recognised by the ruling kings. These roads were regarded as being under the king’s special protection and became known as the Kings Highways. Numerous Royal statutes were passed during the next two hundred years which specified their upkeep.
• In 1140 king Stephen ordered that the lord of each manor had to ensure that all the highways passing through their estates had to be kept open at all times.
• In 1278 Roger Mortimer was charged by Edward I to widen all the roads and passes entering Wales to assist with the king’s campaign against the Welsh.
• In 1285 King Edward I ‘Trench Act’ was passed to ensure that any road passing through a wooded area should be kept clear of undergrowth for a distance of at least a 60 foot on each side.
• King Edward I also passed laws ensuring that the principal Roman routes were to be kept clear from sea to sea.
• In 1293 Statute of Winchester ensured that all highways passing from one market town to another had to be cleared of dykes and undergrowth to a minimum of 200 feet on either side of the road (the distance that a crossbow bolt could cover).
The routes taken by the Royal and noble households of the medieval period can be pieced together from clues found in letters and charters that they granted and details found in household accounts at which they stopped. Many of these journeys covered long distances and were mostly connected with administration or judicial work. It has been shown that the majority of these journeys took place in the southern end of Britain, and only ventured to the northern parts as and when required. This split followed roughly the Roman division of ‘Britain Superior’ and ‘Britain Inferior’ were the greater concentration of roads could be found to the south of a line drawn from the Severn to the Wash.
Place name evidence can also give clues to the routes of older roads still in use in the medieval period. Unlike the Roman roads on the continent, there is no evidence that the Romans named their roads in Britain. The first recorded evidence is from Anglo Saxon times were they referred to the primary routes as stræts e.g. Watling street, and Ermine Street. This came from the Latin strata – paved/Roman road. Villages and towns developing adjacent to these roads would have the prefix of stræts in their name such as Streatham, Streatley, Stratton and other variation of stræts. Other common place names include Cold Harbour and Coldecot. These place names are thought to describe shelters placed at the side of the roads similar to present day bus shelters where travellers could shelter from bad weather.
It can be seen from the above that even though there is little physical evidence still surviving in the British landscape to show that Roman roads formed the basic infrastructure for the medieval road pattern. However documentary evidence such as maps, place names and travellers records or itineraries would seem to support the statement that ‘Roman roads formed the basis of the major medieval road system’.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
· Belsey, V. – The Green Lanes of England – (Dartington, 1998)
· Cameron, K. – English Place Names – (London, 1996)
· Collingwood, R. G. – The Archaeology Of Roman Britain – (London, 1996)
· Hindle, P.– Medieval Roads and Tracks – (Risborough, 1998)
· Hinde, T.– The Domesday Book England Heritage Then And Now. – (Godalming, 1997)
· Margary, I. D. – Roman Roads in Britain – (London, 1957)
· Mills, A. D. – Oxford Dictionary Of English Place names – (Oxford, 1991)
· Patterson, E. J. – The Map Of Great Britain AD 1360 Also Known As The Gough Map – (Oxford, 1996 edition)
· Riley, D. N. – Aerial Archaeology – (Risborough, 1996)
Church Paths, Coffin Paths and Corpse Ways
During the Mediæval period, Britain was divided into large administrative parishes who’s religious wellbeing was administered by the main church body known as the Mother Church. This was backed up by various subsidiary churches known as Daughter Churches, which were themselves, assisted by still smaller chapels of ease. Due to an ancient ruling only the Mother Church had the right to inter any of the dead from within its parish. As the population increased so more remote settlement developed, which meant that parishioners where forced to bring their dead, sometime up to tens of miles to reach their Mother church. It was these ‘processional routes of the dead’ known as Church Paths, Coffin Paths, Corpse Ways, and Lyches that have come to be known under the collective term of corpse ways.
The deceased from the centre of the parish, (close to the Mother Church) would probably have used the ordinary, well used routes, but funeral parties from outlying farms or hamlets would have had to travel for at least part of the way over moorland and fields along these corpse roads. Such routes would be regarded as special and would never be ploughed over, standing out clearly in the landscape. Even when the construction of new roads would have made the mourners' burden easier, they were ignored and the old tracks continued to be used. In Bertram Puckle’s book. Funeral Custom: their origin and development, he states ‘that it was considered very unlucky to use any other route and even sacrilege to conduct the dead by any other way than that by which their ancestors had gone before them'
The corpse paths needed to be wide enough to allow the body to be supported by four men, one at each corner carrying it undertaker style with a relief team of four walking behind. At designated points along the routes the first set of men could rest allowing the second set to take over. These points were usually marked by a stone often lozenge-shaped on which the body was rested. Stones known as lych stones also fixed the spot where the family bearers handed the body over to the formal bearers who took it to the church usually at the churchyard entrance, Later these lych stones were replaced by the church lychgate.
As well as stops for resting, these stones were used to make halts for prayers; a custom still practised long afterwards. In his book “The history of Myddle” written by Richard Gough in the 18th century, he comments on a corpse way from Newton on the Hill to Myddle, stating that there was a crossroads called the Setts 'because the people when they went that way with a corpse to be buried, they did there set down the corpse, and kneeling round about it did mumble over some prayers, either for the soul of the deceased, or for themselves'.
Occasionally the corpse way diverted from the direct course to take in a number of crossroads, where the bearers halted, perhaps possibly at wayside crosses and either sang hymns or prayed for the dead. This respect shown for crossroads was why funerals tended to avoid the shortest route to the church, making towards road junctions and other landmarks instead. In Lancashire, this old rite was not lost. The corpse way from Newchurch in Pendle to Whalley was marked by crosses (originally, perhaps, one every mile) where people would pause for prayers. When the crosses had been toppled, leaving only a stump full of rainwater, this was treated as holy water by those in the funeral party and used for crossing themselves. Wayside crosses had been intended for such uses from an early date. In Ewell, Surrey in the 1450’s part of the vicar's duties was to wait at Provest Cross to meet funerals coming along the corpse way from Kingswood, and then conduct them to the church. The cross was named after a local landowner, who may have paid for the cross in the hope that his soul would also be mentioned in the prayers offered there. Similar commemorations took place at the Eleanor Crosses set up by Edward I after the death of his queen in 1290. Twelve crosses were set up between Lincoln and Charing; marking the site that the queen's body lay each night near some large church or abbey where prayers might be said for her soul.
The funeral parties using the Corpse Road were exempt from the ordinary law of property and in parts of Yorkshire no trespass is committed even in passing through a private estate, if in so doing they are taking the coffin by the most direct route to the burial place. This created difficulties for landowners, especially when coupled with the belief that a passing funeral could create a permanent public right of way. To prevent this in Llanddewi Brefi in Cardiganshire, the landlords deliberately ran the corpse way through a piece of marshy ground instead of taking the dry road around it. Jonathan Davies stated in his 1911 book: Folk-Lore of West and Mid Wales 'Those who bore the bier through the bog proceeded with much difficulty and often sank in the mud' The Welsh also believed that a water crossing was supposed to gave remission to the soul of the dead.
Throughout the mediaeval period these archaic rituals had become so ridiculous that many people had begun to rebel against the old practice. Examples of the hardship caused by their use throughout England have been well documented and are detailed below.
• The Lych Way in Devon forced the mourners to toil with the body across the treacherous Dartmoor struggling through moss and mire. As time went by, they took a kind of pride in their grim journey. When the dead were finally carried down the last straight of the old track towards the mother church, it was as if they were coming home.
• The corpse road from Wasdale Head to Eskdale runs over five miles of some of the roughest country in the Lake District. The terrain was so wild that the Cumbrians had to strap the bodies of their dead onto a packhorse for safe transport.
• Villagers from Hindon in Wiltshire refused to take the two miles road to the church at Enford because it was long and ran through woods infested with robbers. By 1405 they had taken things into their own hands and founded a chapel, with land set aside for a cemetery.
• By 1427 people at Highweek in Devon were already conducting the requiem mass at their own chapel, and could not see why they had to follow it with a long and dangerous journey to the parish church.
• The inhabitants of Laneast in Cornwall also complained of the long journey, over hills, and using wet and muddy road to reach their mother church.
• In Revelstoke also in Cornwall the fishermen and labourers proposed to abandon funerals altogether, because of the economic hardship of a forced absence from work as they journeyed along the corpse way
• At Sherborne in Wessex during the 1430’s a compromise to protect the rights of the mother church was agreed. The outlying chapels were given the right to bury slaves of the manor on which that church is founded, who were so poor that their relatives could not afford to have them carried to the Mother church at Christchurch.
Due to the severe landscape and harsh living conditions that the Cumbrian population had to endure it is not surprising that this region has several Corpse roads. Jim Taylor-Page, an expert on the Lake District has researched old routes in and around Cumbria and to date has come up with three possible Corpse Roads.
• Greystoke (NY 434308). The Corpse path possibly follows the footpath north from the church and may have joined at one time to the road now leading to the village of Johnby (NY 432330).
• A rediscovered route between Grasmere (NY 336074) passing over White Moss continuing round to Hunting Stile (NY 334063) were once the Coffin Stone or Resting Stone could be found. From here the route probably linked to Chaplestyle (NY 332055).
• A 25 mile route leading between Ulverston (SD 275785) and St Andrews Church at Coniston (NY 303978) which is on the site of chapel, dating from 1596).
In short, Corpse ways, are not legacies from an ancient time, but came into being during the mediaeval period. They were an unexpected side effect of an old canon law on rights of their parishioners. These principles frequently lead to disputes between the Mother/daughter churches and the parishioners when the rule of central burial was imposed on all communities, regardless of the human cost. In fact the policy of the mother churches was ‘once a parishioner, always a parishioner’ even after death! These routes have all but vanished in the landscape, but by careful searching on old maps and in the field evidence of this ritual can still be found.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
• Brown, A. – Popular Piety in Late Mediæval England: the Diocese of Salisbury 1250-1550 – (1995)
• Davies, J. – FolkLore of West and Mid Wales – (Aberystwyth, 1911)
• Deedes, C. – Register or Memorial of Ewell Surrey – (London, 1913)
• Dunstan, G. R. – The Register of Edmund Lacy Bishop of Exeter, 1420-1455 – (Canterbury & York Society, 1963-71)
• Hase, P. H. –The mother churches of Hampshire – (1988)
• Palmer, R.– The folklore of Gloucestershire – (1994)
• Puckle, B. – Funeral Custom: their origin and development – (London, 1926)
• Reeder, P.– The corpse way from Sebden Valley to Whally parish church – (1993)
• Richardson, R.– Death’s Door: thresholds and boundaries in British funeral customs – (Stroud, 1993)
• Rowling, M. –The Folklore of the Lake District – (1976)
• Simpson, J. – The folklore of the Welsh Border – (1976
The deceased from the centre of the parish, (close to the Mother Church) would probably have used the ordinary, well used routes, but funeral parties from outlying farms or hamlets would have had to travel for at least part of the way over moorland and fields along these corpse roads. Such routes would be regarded as special and would never be ploughed over, standing out clearly in the landscape. Even when the construction of new roads would have made the mourners' burden easier, they were ignored and the old tracks continued to be used. In Bertram Puckle’s book. Funeral Custom: their origin and development, he states ‘that it was considered very unlucky to use any other route and even sacrilege to conduct the dead by any other way than that by which their ancestors had gone before them'
The corpse paths needed to be wide enough to allow the body to be supported by four men, one at each corner carrying it undertaker style with a relief team of four walking behind. At designated points along the routes the first set of men could rest allowing the second set to take over. These points were usually marked by a stone often lozenge-shaped on which the body was rested. Stones known as lych stones also fixed the spot where the family bearers handed the body over to the formal bearers who took it to the church usually at the churchyard entrance, Later these lych stones were replaced by the church lychgate.
As well as stops for resting, these stones were used to make halts for prayers; a custom still practised long afterwards. In his book “The history of Myddle” written by Richard Gough in the 18th century, he comments on a corpse way from Newton on the Hill to Myddle, stating that there was a crossroads called the Setts 'because the people when they went that way with a corpse to be buried, they did there set down the corpse, and kneeling round about it did mumble over some prayers, either for the soul of the deceased, or for themselves'.
Occasionally the corpse way diverted from the direct course to take in a number of crossroads, where the bearers halted, perhaps possibly at wayside crosses and either sang hymns or prayed for the dead. This respect shown for crossroads was why funerals tended to avoid the shortest route to the church, making towards road junctions and other landmarks instead. In Lancashire, this old rite was not lost. The corpse way from Newchurch in Pendle to Whalley was marked by crosses (originally, perhaps, one every mile) where people would pause for prayers. When the crosses had been toppled, leaving only a stump full of rainwater, this was treated as holy water by those in the funeral party and used for crossing themselves. Wayside crosses had been intended for such uses from an early date. In Ewell, Surrey in the 1450’s part of the vicar's duties was to wait at Provest Cross to meet funerals coming along the corpse way from Kingswood, and then conduct them to the church. The cross was named after a local landowner, who may have paid for the cross in the hope that his soul would also be mentioned in the prayers offered there. Similar commemorations took place at the Eleanor Crosses set up by Edward I after the death of his queen in 1290. Twelve crosses were set up between Lincoln and Charing; marking the site that the queen's body lay each night near some large church or abbey where prayers might be said for her soul.
The funeral parties using the Corpse Road were exempt from the ordinary law of property and in parts of Yorkshire no trespass is committed even in passing through a private estate, if in so doing they are taking the coffin by the most direct route to the burial place. This created difficulties for landowners, especially when coupled with the belief that a passing funeral could create a permanent public right of way. To prevent this in Llanddewi Brefi in Cardiganshire, the landlords deliberately ran the corpse way through a piece of marshy ground instead of taking the dry road around it. Jonathan Davies stated in his 1911 book: Folk-Lore of West and Mid Wales 'Those who bore the bier through the bog proceeded with much difficulty and often sank in the mud' The Welsh also believed that a water crossing was supposed to gave remission to the soul of the dead.
Throughout the mediaeval period these archaic rituals had become so ridiculous that many people had begun to rebel against the old practice. Examples of the hardship caused by their use throughout England have been well documented and are detailed below.
• The Lych Way in Devon forced the mourners to toil with the body across the treacherous Dartmoor struggling through moss and mire. As time went by, they took a kind of pride in their grim journey. When the dead were finally carried down the last straight of the old track towards the mother church, it was as if they were coming home.
• The corpse road from Wasdale Head to Eskdale runs over five miles of some of the roughest country in the Lake District. The terrain was so wild that the Cumbrians had to strap the bodies of their dead onto a packhorse for safe transport.
• Villagers from Hindon in Wiltshire refused to take the two miles road to the church at Enford because it was long and ran through woods infested with robbers. By 1405 they had taken things into their own hands and founded a chapel, with land set aside for a cemetery.
• By 1427 people at Highweek in Devon were already conducting the requiem mass at their own chapel, and could not see why they had to follow it with a long and dangerous journey to the parish church.
• The inhabitants of Laneast in Cornwall also complained of the long journey, over hills, and using wet and muddy road to reach their mother church.
• In Revelstoke also in Cornwall the fishermen and labourers proposed to abandon funerals altogether, because of the economic hardship of a forced absence from work as they journeyed along the corpse way
• At Sherborne in Wessex during the 1430’s a compromise to protect the rights of the mother church was agreed. The outlying chapels were given the right to bury slaves of the manor on which that church is founded, who were so poor that their relatives could not afford to have them carried to the Mother church at Christchurch.
Due to the severe landscape and harsh living conditions that the Cumbrian population had to endure it is not surprising that this region has several Corpse roads. Jim Taylor-Page, an expert on the Lake District has researched old routes in and around Cumbria and to date has come up with three possible Corpse Roads.
• Greystoke (NY 434308). The Corpse path possibly follows the footpath north from the church and may have joined at one time to the road now leading to the village of Johnby (NY 432330).
• A rediscovered route between Grasmere (NY 336074) passing over White Moss continuing round to Hunting Stile (NY 334063) were once the Coffin Stone or Resting Stone could be found. From here the route probably linked to Chaplestyle (NY 332055).
• A 25 mile route leading between Ulverston (SD 275785) and St Andrews Church at Coniston (NY 303978) which is on the site of chapel, dating from 1596).
In short, Corpse ways, are not legacies from an ancient time, but came into being during the mediaeval period. They were an unexpected side effect of an old canon law on rights of their parishioners. These principles frequently lead to disputes between the Mother/daughter churches and the parishioners when the rule of central burial was imposed on all communities, regardless of the human cost. In fact the policy of the mother churches was ‘once a parishioner, always a parishioner’ even after death! These routes have all but vanished in the landscape, but by careful searching on old maps and in the field evidence of this ritual can still be found.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
• Brown, A. – Popular Piety in Late Mediæval England: the Diocese of Salisbury 1250-1550 – (1995)
• Davies, J. – FolkLore of West and Mid Wales – (Aberystwyth, 1911)
• Deedes, C. – Register or Memorial of Ewell Surrey – (London, 1913)
• Dunstan, G. R. – The Register of Edmund Lacy Bishop of Exeter, 1420-1455 – (Canterbury & York Society, 1963-71)
• Hase, P. H. –The mother churches of Hampshire – (1988)
• Palmer, R.– The folklore of Gloucestershire – (1994)
• Puckle, B. – Funeral Custom: their origin and development – (London, 1926)
• Reeder, P.– The corpse way from Sebden Valley to Whally parish church – (1993)
• Richardson, R.– Death’s Door: thresholds and boundaries in British funeral customs – (Stroud, 1993)
• Rowling, M. –The Folklore of the Lake District – (1976)
• Simpson, J. – The folklore of the Welsh Border – (1976
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
