MAPPING 17th CENTURY : AND NOTTINGHAMSHIRE

G. Scurfield Statistical data and/or contemporary maps of private estates are available for thousands of acres of land in Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, and many other English counties surveyed in the early 17th century. They can be used as a basis for the construction of original or revised maps of the estates on a uniform scale which may often be conjoined. The sort ofdata available is indicated here, along with an outline of the mapping methods used, and examples of the results .

Introduction and their associated map(s) have sometimes become sepa­ A project to assess how far it might be possible to recon­ rated, the map(s) surviving in one archive and the terrier in struct the early 17th century landscape of various Northern another. The terrier of William Hayward's survey in 1615 and Midland counties in England ( 1600-1660) cartographi­ of Hartington, Derbyshire, for example, is part of the Arun­ cally was begun in 1984. The resulting maps were to del MSS held at Sheffield City Archives Office ( 10), while provide the scenario for a study of the inter-relationship the associated map is at Chats worth House, Derbyshire, part between physical environment and the social conditions of of the Devonshire Collection. The separation may be less people at that time. permanent in the sense that a terrier and its related map may The results of two pilot studies dealing with areas have been catalogued as unrelated items within an archival centred upon Sheffield and Worksop were published in collection. For example, the terrier for the survey of Not­ 1986 (1, 2). The work was extended to cover much of the tingham (Sherwood Forest) made by an anonymous National Park, NE Derbyshire, and NW Not­ surveyor in 1609 is bound up with unrelated documents at tinghamshire between Worksop and Nottingham. the Public Record Oftice, London (11). Its relationship to However, the logistic difficulties created by a necessary two maps unsigned, but also dated 1609 ( 12), went unrec­ transfer of research interest to Victoria, Australia, led to a ognised for some time. large part of this work being placed on ice. In an effort to Comparisons of cartographic style in the case of unfreeze it, and perhaps generate additional warmth maps, or format and calligraphy in the case of terriers, may amongst professional cartographers towards the overall be needed to reunite map with terrier, or terrier with map, project, an indication of the sort of data with which one has previously divorced from one another. William Hayward to cope, and the cartographic methods used in dealing with was surveyor of the the Barony of Gilsland, Cumberland, it, is given here. in 1603 , for example, but maps believed to be part of the survey are not dated or signed ( 13). Comparison of the style 17th Century Surveys of the maps, however, with others undoubtedly his (maps Seventeenth century land surveys were carried out for a ofFulstow and Marshchapel, Lincolnshire, dated 1595 (14) variety of reasons. These included, for example, the and of Hartington , for example) leave no doubt that he was determination of the extent and location of estates subject both surveyor and cartographer of the Barony of Gilsland. to wardship (3) or to inheritance under the terms of wills The problem of uniting map and terrier does not (4); the evaluation or re-evaluation ofland for rent, lease, arise, of course, if they are combined in one document, the exchange, or sale (5) ; the provision of visual evidence of terrier being included as part of the map. One example is ownership in cases of litigation over land boundaries, on­ the map of the Manor of Sudbury, Derbyshire, made by going or anticipated (6); and, less important, the desire for surveyor W. Fowler for George Vemon Esquire in 1659 an emblem of social status or political power (7). (Figure 1) (15). Such surveys, if they have survived intact, consist Intact surveys apart, there are also numerous terri­ of cadastral data ("terriers") and "platts" or "plottes" ers, relicts of surveys of estates for which the maps have (maps) of private estates, ranging in area from a few acres been lost or destroyed; and conversely, numerous maps, in a single parish (8) to large areas, perhaps totalling relicts of surveys for which the terriers have been lost or thousands of acres, located in several counties (9). Terriers destroyed. For example, the terriers for the surveys of the Worksop and Sheffield estates of the Earl of Arundel and Dr. Gordon Scurfield (died 24/9!96) wasfonner research scientist Surrey made by John Harrison in 163617 have survived with CSIRO, Australia., had a continuing interest in the historical (16). The associated maps have not. Conversely, the 67 geography ofland use. Recent work (in collaboration with J. M. maps made by William Senior between 1629 and 1640 of Scurfield) includes The Hoddle Years: Surveying in Victoria, 1836- estates (total area 103111 acres) belonging to Wm. Earl of 1853, published by the Institution of Surveyors, Australia; and Newcastle have survived ( 17), but the terriers have not. Plan of the Township of Hamilton, 1853, published by Bellcourt Books, Hamilton, Victoria. As to the quality and quantity of the historical and 'phone 03 9669 9954 other information they provide, terriers vary widely. Take, fax +61 3 9669 9012. for example, the terrier for the survey of Hartington men­ /~-mail: .IUD/THS@ s/v.vic.Rov.m1 tioned above (loc.cit.). Badly discoloured, fos. 3-18,9-25,

SUC BULLETIN Vol 29 No 2 17 ~!--" ' • '7 I ·--. I :. '.: ....:

' ! : .·..: · . '· ~~[ ' ~ . ·,...... ·,.:.; '~.;: ~ : ': ~ : . · ... I :t - ,_,... _ __ _,.J..:·~;-----,-,-- --,-l ·.!..."' ·-·,.....,...,,.....,...,=- 0 .! ;: ~ ~ - a ' 11 ._ ,o J :. . I m , .I .... • ·. 1: ·! \._I - ...... ~- =- :... ~ ..: (_ -· ..:::: i:i ~ :.. t... ' ;.1 :t ;:~ :;:, ~ "" ..

-:• ;;

~ · ~

i''

- 1. .: _,.

.. •.... ·~ .~- - • ., •• - t" . ~ ·. - '4 ~ - ';, ...... ---=- .. --- ~. ... -~ = ·,~ ~-· - '; -_. :_ :._~ : =: = ~-: ·._; _·: ~--- ~ :__ _: -~ ~ ·· ~ - \. - - ~ - ·.. . ~ :;. ~ ., :1 ::. !: ... .:~ :. ~ ;i :: :; ;s "':.:..,... ~ ;: ~ ';, ~ ·: . ~ t= ~ ..( : ~ - • .... " . .- --. ,.z ., t· ·. ~- ! ~ . . ,_. - .-p '· -: ; ~ .. ~,;;

. - ~ r

Figure 1. Top-left corner of of the map of the Manor of Sudbury in Derbyshire, surveyed by William Fowler in 1659; cadastral data form part of the map.

18 SUC BULLETIN Vol 29 No 2 as demesne, freehold, and copyhold. Each parcel of the '- //I' demesne is registered and sometimes named; its acreage ./f( · '- 0t.'l!!tf• ' frw!t, ~"'''"' 1 li ' or, , ,,,.(,.).,. d,i {,~. 1., / ~ .• ,_..,,. 1/, .• 1 f ~" : 'I 'according to statute' is assigned and mention usually made titm!'"" of its use as arable, pasture, meadow, woodland, or com­ · Jt" :. l L '111/11 ;1!/i,t,/'.,l•f• .. '• ·· -. . "" 'i, . ,,.f,,'.,~. C , ·, ., • . , mon; and its location is given relative to neighbouring I , I ·" I L /i/1/ • ...... ,.,.o(./~,, · , , ol ;:~\. 1.. ,.(,:~. • b...... ,~ .. ~ pieces of land or some topographical feature, such as a hill, ,,,,t...... ftou '·l• Jt•/1!.. •/.,.A,.,,, ,./ft., \.'r ~6t ~ ll n 1.. ,,l.w.,.,,,. :'/r r..IA, .·v/k..:6!,c.,.{,iJ1i (t- 11 1J /I I .! I lane, or stream. In contrast, the register of freehold and 1.,: ~ l '(/1/1 !(c/J ' '/ ~', fw •.,, ~ (,~ · · \ "" ~ ;.,, f,~( l'f,, ,. , r , fu/.t./t.JI~ 11 { copyhold lands gives their location in a way sometimes 1 ,, ~· ·· · ·· ' · '" ·· ·· · '' · · '' · ·"·'" ' " " u. , . ,.,'""~f .•.• ,.l ·• .H• , .-,, .,, .. ,7'\ IA,tt#IJ, , t l :I vague; provides estimates of acreages rather than precise :i •. , .,. I . \ . figures; says little about form of use; and mentions but a .'( L '/!Ill, / o .• l,• .•(t "''"'·"'''':il/., : .,~,_. · • f''~•,,I/A.;f~{., .. 1 •• • / ., ... ·.,' .:!" 'j ;,, ,,,./ f;;, ' " · •·'• • ,{./!.• · '"·• ~~ ' ., , ,(,., ., I, /i.•'/1,/.. (1 , ;,;,\ few field names. A sample page from the survey is shown 1 ~~ - ' I ' in Figure 2. c 11'!11 • . '".' .,, •...... "" ·. , •. .. ··'{. ·.. ,. ''f''' .. ,. r.. ''''·"''''· '! .~ ... . /,,. , .. ;, /h." /1" t~ ••· ·.1, /•"11.#'· I ·~ ,,:). ./;,,, •,,,/,., , , .;, ~.;, .. p.. ,._J . /.. ' J ,'4 < 1'""] I ,,.. ,j,_,,., .,.,,., ,~,. , /, ) > .< •. ,.j · • l

c ~·n . . . \. c /1'-''·'" l//., •. ,, . (.,w1~t-~·' r l #r. • r' ~,.fj ,., • ,• • l"u ' · • ~~v/L l ;· ., , J ,,1 , \ ·: . ,,11 t,, .,,. 1,... •·r >~·/n ... , ' ./. J nJ.,J·,, t/,.b, .. ~,, !~ .. \ ·'" ·'\ ~/' ·:."" 1 lt."'<~' ~ ill l //1. . \.lf Ho~··•'·;, " /11 tl n, ''" . · · . . ,. I .\

Figure 3. Sample page from the Survey of the Manor of Worksop by John Harrison in 1636.

At the other extreme, there are terriers which merely consist of a list of the names of the tenants-at-will on an estate and the acreages of the parcels of land held by each. Others may include somewhat more information, but all are alike in omitting directions which would enable the various parcels of land to be located relative to one another, or to topographical features. The important "Booke of the Figure 2. Page from William Hayward's Survey of the Survey of the forest of Sherwood in the countie of Notting­ manor of Hartington in 1615. ham taken and made in anno domini 1609" is of this type. So too are the" Book of Surveys" of the estates of William, The terriers of John Harrison's surveys of the manors Earl of Devonshire, made by William Senior between of Sheffield and Worksop (loc. cit.) provide similar, but 1609-1627 (9), and the "Surveie Booke of some of the more substantial, information. Harrison gives a general lordships belonging to the right worshipfull Sr. John Harpur description of the manors followed by the manorial ac­ knight", made by him in 1632 and 1633 (18). Sample pages counts for one year. He then enumerates the pieces of land are shown in Figures 4 and 5. held by each tenant-at-will; notes the character of some of Turning to 17th century maps, they are often faded or their tenements and cottages; allocates the names of fields, damaged so that line-work is indistinct or broken; distorted woodlands, moors, commons, and greens, and assessess as a result of non-uniform, two-dimensional shrinkage (see their areas; often specifies form of land use; and, most Figures I for example); or inaccurate to the extent that the important, gives directions for the location of the enumer­ surveyor lacked the skill or means to represent a 3-dimen­ ated items relative to one another or to some feature of sionallandscape. The maps may also be difficult to handle, landscape, such as a river, brook, hill, building, lane, street, being large. For example, the two maps of Hartington, or highway. A sample page from the Worksop terrier is made by William Hayward (loc. cit.) are on joined sheets of shown in Figure 3, paper backed with cloth of irregular shape, their combined

SUC BULLETIN Vol 29 No 2 19 -•.

Figures 4 and 5. Sample pages from the terriers for William Senior's survey of Alstonefield, Staffordshire, in 1633, and the manor of Ashford, Derbyshire, in 1616. length 580 cm and maximum breadth 160 cm. The two Both procedures involve using, as base maps or tem­ maps of the Sherwood Forest survey dated 1609 are even plates, the earliest maps of the estates being considered larger: each measures 419 cm x 221 cm. Apart from all which, by comparison with Ordnance Survey maps, scale this, the cadastral, topographical, and other information 6 in. to 1 mile ( 1: 10560), can be deemed sufficiently accu­ included in such maps varies widely. Nevertheless, such rate for a description of the landscape. The names and information may be all that is extant for substantial estates acreages of the land subdivisions, recorded on the template if the maps are relicts of surveys for which the terriers are map or registered in an accompanying terrier (as is often the missing, The likelihood that this includes all the informa­ case in an enclosure or tithe award, for example) are tion recorded in the lost terriers is not to be anticipated, essential for the success of procedure (i), but can also be of however, judging from a comparison of maps and terriers considerable value in procedure (ii). for intact surveys, Procedure (i) involves adding, subtracting, or chang­ ing, the boundaries in the template map to secure the best Mapping Procedures possible fit with the data in the relict terrier regarding the There are two mapping procedures. Mapping proce­ locations, abutments, areas, and names, of each of its con­ dure (i) aims to recreate maps of 17th century surveys stituent parts, be they fields, woodlands, commons, which have been lost, using as a basis the information in an highways, or waterways, for example. For recreating the associated relict terrier. Procedure (ii) aims to redraw ex­ map of Sheffield manor (55606 acres) in 1637 from the data isting 17th century maps to provide a less distorted, in John Harrison 's terrier, for example, appropriate template hopefully more realistic, representation of the landscape, maps and land registers are to be found in the Frurbank perhaps with the addition of information derived from other Collection, largely the work of Wm. Fairbank in the latter contemporary documents such as rentals. half of the eighteenth century (19), plus a plan of Sheffield

20 SUC BULLETIN Vol29 No 2 itself engraved by Thomas Jeffreys in 1771 (20). In like the best fit with an existing 17th century map of equivalent manner, a combination of an anonymous map dated 1775 scale by overlay comparison with a tracing or photographic (21) and one by William Fairbank dated 1773 (22) provided negative of the latter. The amended template is then re­ the template for recreating a map of Worksop and Priory drawn to provide a "reconditioned" map of the 17th manors best in accord with the data in the relict terrier of century countryside. In the case of the map of the Manor of the survey made by Harrison in 1636 (1,2). Sudbury, (Figure 1), the template was a map ofthe manor Procedure (ii) likewise involves adding to, subtracting made in 1720 by John Billington (Figure 6) (23). The from, changing, or confirming the boundaries in a template "reconditioned" map of the manor in 1659, derived from map, usually reduced in scale, but here the aim is to achieve the amended template, is reproduced in Figure 7.

( ~ 1: ·~~ · J-- , I, ',

I · ·-·- ...... A \ \ . ; .· ·~ \ - r r f ~

Fig.6. Template map by John Billington dated 1720, template for redrawing for the redrawing the original (1659) map of the manor of Sudbury, Derbyshire (Figure 1).

SUC BULLETIN Vol 29 No 2 21 17TH CENTURY DERBYSHIRE-

SUDBURY IN 1659

tO ~ ~Chains 1MIIe f: ~Sa•l•

00

~ rz:l ~ ;:g .,:1 0 0 c.

Cf1 n ~

BICKLEY, Fra. "">-3 BlONDELL. Fra, BOTHOM, John 0 ---.The. BUXTON, John z COTES. Wm. ELLOTT. Tho. GAUNT, James

Fig. 7. The redrawn map.

22 SUC BULLETIN Vol 29 No 2 The next step might be to conjoin redrawn maps of surveyed by William Caldecott in 1608. The map of the adjacent estates, the maps bearing the same date. For neighbouring parish of Melbourne (Figure 8) is unsigned example, the Derbyshire parish of Stanton-by-Bridge was and undated, but stylistically is the same (24). Assuming

-~y.· - ~ · . ( ·· ...' J. -____.__ . ...,_,_,__ . ·.. . /

Fig.9. Original map of the parish of Melbourne, Derbyshire, probably the work of surveyor William Caldecott about 1608.

SUC BULLETIN Vol 29 No 2 23 that it too was drawn in 1608, then it can be conjoined with survey in 1627 of Hope Woodlands (20538 acres), west of that of Stanton-by-Bridge. The resulting composite map the upper Derwent River in the Derbyshire Peak Dis­ shown in Figure 9. trict(25). Adjacent land, east of the Derwent, formed part The question then arises as to how far it is reasonable to of the "Exact & Perfect Survey & View of the Manor of conjoin early 17th maps of adjacent areas, the dates of the Sheffield" surveyed by John Harrison in 1637. maps being close, but not the same. For example, Senior's By conjoining maps of adjacent properties made at maps of the Cavendish estates and the Earl of Newcastle's nearly related times, the continuity of the view of the estates are complementary in so far as many of them are of landscape and richness of its content increases. The date of adjacent properties: Kirkby-in-Ashfield, Nottingham­ the composite map can be regarded as the average of the shire, mapped in 1629, is next to Sutton-in-Ashfield, dates of the individual maps which have been conjoined. mapped in 1610, and Wetton, Staffordshire, mapped in Any conclusions drawn from it must, therefore, be tempered 1617, is next to Grindon, Blore Park, and Cauldron/Water­ with an awareness of this fact. Their validity will obvi­ fall, mapped in 1631. The same situation can arise when ously be related to the length of the time gap between the the mapping of adjacent estates is the work of different component maps, especially in areas where field and other surveyors. Senior, for example, made seven maps of his boundaries were subject to frequent alteration. This, how-

17TH CENT U RY DERBYSHIRE

MELBOURNE & STANTON BY BRIDGE ABOUT 1615

T I C

Figure 9. The maps of Stanton-by-Bridge, surveyed by Wm. Caldecott in 1608, and of Melbourne combined and redrawn.

24 SUC BULLETIN Vol 29 No 2 ever, is not the case in the Derbyshire Peak District, for The result may be judged from the following example, example, where boundaries cunsist of substantial dry stone a reconstruction of the landscape of part of the Peak District walls, more or less permanent in time once built. As to centred upon Ashford, Derbyshire. William Senior sur­ what the acceptable time gap should be, given the fact that veyed Little Longstone and in 161 0; Ashford we are considering a landscape about 350 years gone, a in 1616; Sheldon, , and Gt Longstone in 1617; difference of about 20 years between the maps conjoined Stoke in 1630; and Gt Hucklow and Green low, 1631. Two does not seem untoward. examples of his maps are shown in Figures 10 and 11 (9).

/

Figures 10. One of William Senior's maps of parts of the manor of Ashford, Derbyshire, surveyed in 1616.

SUC BULLETIN Vol29 No 2 25 Figures 11. Another of William Senior's maps of parts of the manor of Ashford, Derbyshire, surveyed in 1616.

An unsigned map of Brushfield dated 1630 also exists (26). procedure (ii) with various maps of later date as templates. Between first and last, therefore, the time span is 21 years. For example, the template for redrawing Ashford was the No early 17th century maps of the parishes of Eyam, map of a survey made by Samuel Brailsford in 1758. Foolow, Stony Middleton, Calver, Hassop, Bubnell, Pilsley, (Figure, 12) (27). Contours were taken from the earliest Bakewell, Litton, and Taddington, have so far come to light. edition of O.S. maps, 6 in to a mile. The composite map All the extant 17th century maps were redrawn using is shown in Figure 13.

26 SUC BULLETIN Vol29 No 2 Figure 12. Map of the manor of Ashford by Samuel Brailsford made in 1758 used as template for redrawing Senior's maps.

SUC BULLETIN Vol 29 No 2 27 CENTURY DERBYSHIRE

THE PEAK DISTR I CT ABOUT 1625

/

.::::. - .. :~ ;.:..; ·, :< • c · ." ' ~S;:if~ ;+~~~- ' :· .~~ / ..~~ · ;:~ · :-[-; _;,· ~:;._~~~< ~ ...... "' w •..••, . ; ;; ,.;·~+..=-::=,-.:~ · .t :

Figure 13. The composite map representing all the data at present known of the early 17 century landscape.

28 SUC BULLETIN Vol29 No 2 However, the fact that a dozen or so maps on this scale 8. Senior, W ( 1621) Parkhall. Map of the estate of covering much of the Peak District National Park, NW Sir Francis Leeke. Salt Public Library, Derbyshire, and NE Nottinghamshire have been con­ Stafford. structed is still a far cry from mapping the whole of the 9. Fowkes, DV & Potter, GR (eds.) (1988) William counties of Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire. Indeed, the Senior's Survey. Derbyshire Record Soc. question of how far it might be possible to achieve continu­ xm. ity in mapping the early 17th century landscape of either of 10. Hayward, W (1614) Survey of the Manor of these counties in toto has yet to be determined. One Hartington. D.99. Arundel Castle MSS., difficulty here, not before mentioned, is that important Sheffield City Record Office. untapped sources of information exist in private archives 11. not at present open for research. Anonymous (1609). A Booke of the Survey of the Forest ofSherwood in the Countie of Conclusion Nottingham. LR 2/201. pp.289-355. Public Record Office, London. There is no doubt that data available for estates surveyed 12. in the early 17th century enable us to reconstruct, with Anonymous (1609). The Soothe part ofthe Plot reasonable and improved accuracy, maps of the landscape, of Sherwood Forest in the Countie of if not of whole counties, then of many thousands of acres Nottingham. Maps MR 1142. Public Record within individual counties. William Senior, for example, Office, Chancery Lane, London. but one of the many surveyors working at that time, sur­ 13. W. Hayward. (1603). Feild-Booke that explaines veyed estates comprising over 285000 acres in Derbyshire, all the Map Booke for Gilsland. Howard of Nottinghamshire, Yorkshire, Northumberland, and anum­ Naworth MS. C 188/1. Univ. of Durham. ber of other counties. By combining individual maps of Transcript by THB Graham (1934) adjacent or nearby estates made by one surveyor, or by a Cumberland and Westmoreland Antiq. and number of surveyors working independently, an enlarged Archaeol. Soc.]. Extra Series XVI. Maps and continuous perspective of considerable areas can be C713/15. Univ. of Durham. achieved. Where the dates of the individual surveys are 14. Hayward, W. (1595) Survey of Fulstowe and separated by a span of years, albeit a relatively short span, Marshchapel.. Revesby Abbey MS. MCD such composite maps become impressions of reality. 748 (map) and 2/B/1 and 2 (survey). Their interpretation calls for knowledge of the climate, Linconshire County Record Office, Lincoln geology, soil, topography, and other environmental factors, in the district selected, and insight into their likely effects 15. Fowler, W (1659) The Mannor of Sudbury in the upon early 17th century landscapes bearing the imprint of County of Derby. The inheritance of George past, and ongoing, human intervention. Vemon Esquire. Sudbury Hall, Derbyshire. 16. Harrison, J ( 1637) Exact and Perfect Survey and Bibliography View of the Manor of Sheffield. Arundel 1. Scurfield, G. (1986a) Seventeenth century Castle MS. S75176; Harrison, J (1636) Exact Sheffield and its environs. Yorks. Archaeol. and Perfect Survey and View of the Manors of Soc.J. 58, 147-171. Workesoppe and the Priory. Arundel Castle MS. W26. Sheffield City Record Office. 2. Scurfield, G. (1986b) Early 17th century Worksop and its environs. Trans. Thoroton 17. Senior, W (1629-40). Maps of the estates of Soc. Nottinghamshire, 90 , 46-56. William, Earl of Newcastle. Pivate collection. 3. Eden, P. (1983) Three Elizabethan estate 18. Senior, W (1632/3). A Surveie Booke of some surveyors: Peter Kempe, Thomas Clerke, and of the lordships belongiong to the right Thomas Langdon. In English Map-making worshipful Sr. John Harpur, knight. D2375M, 1500-1650. S. Tyacke (ed,), British Library, 63/5. Derbys. County Record Office, 1983. Matlock. 4. Scurfield, G & Scurfield, JM ( 1996) To be as 19. Fairbank, W. Maps too numerous to cite by a looking glass to their estates: the early 17th date and number. Part of the Arundel Castle century surveys of William Senior (in press). MSS. Sheffield City Record Office. 5. Hayward, W (1615) Survey of the Manor of 20. Jeffreys, T (1771) Map of Sheffield. Sheffield Hartington. D.99. Arundel Castle MSS. City Record Office, Sheffield City Archives Office. 21. Anonymous, (1775)) Map for Worksop. 6. Bendall, AS. Maps, Land, and Society. Private collection. Cambridge University Press, 1992. 22. Fairbank, W. (1773) Map ofGaitforth and 7. Harley, JB (1983) Meaning and ambiguity in other commons. W.35s. Sheffield City Tudor cartography. In English Map-making Record Office. 1500-1650. S. Tyacke (ed.), British Library, 23. Billington, J ( 1720) A Mapp of the Mannor or 1983. Lordship of Sudbury in the County of Derby,

SUC BULLETIN Vol 29 No 2 29 the estate of George Venables Vemon Esq. Acknowledgements Sudbury Hall, Derbyshire, c/o National Trust. For permission to reproduce Figures 5, 10, and 11, part of 24. Caldecott, W. (1608) The Survey of Stanton in the the Devonshire Collection, the author is grateful to the County of Derby being parcell of the possessions Trustees of the Chatsworth Settlement; for Figures 1 and of the Worsh. Richarde Francis Esquire. D2375 6, to the National Trust, c/o Sudbury Hall, Derbyshire; for M/33. Derbyshire Record Office, Matlock. Figures 4, 8, and 12, to the Principal Archivist, Derbyshire 25. Senior, W (1627) Maps (7) of Woodlands estate. County Record Office, Matlock; and for Figures 2 and 3, Devonshire Collection, Chatsworth, Derbyshire. part of the Arundel Castle MSS, to His Grace, the Duke of Norfolk, and the Principal Archivist, City of Sheffield . 26. Anonymous, (1630). Map ofBrushfield. Devonshire Collection, Chatsworth, Derbyshire. 27. Brailsford, S ( 1752). Ashford Lordship belonging to the most noble Earl William, Duke of Devonshire. D 504. Derbyshire County Record Office, Matlock.

MACREX INDEXING PROGRAM

Software to assist in the compilation of large and small indexes to books, journals, manuals, catalogues, maps and other materials

For details contact:

MACREX Indexing Services, Beech House, Burn Road, Blaydon, NE216JR Phone/fax: 0191-414 2595 e-mail: [email protected]

30 SUC BULLETIN Vol 29 No 2