Archaeology, Arable Landscapes and Drainage in the Fenland of Eastern England

Appendix Jiv Archaeology, arable landscapes and drainage in the Fenland of Eastern England

John Honnor and Tom Lane

Oxford Archaeology May 2002 (revised December 2002) ARCHAEOLOGY, ARABLE LANDSCAPES AND DRAINAGE IN THE FENLAND OF EASTERN ENGLAND

Work Undertaken For Oxford Archaeology

Report Compiled by John Honnor and Tom Lane

February 2002

A.P.S. Report No: 27/02 CONTENTS

List of Figures

List of Plates

Summary...... 1

Introduction...... 1

Geology, Topography and Soils...... 2

Aims ...... 2

Methods...... 3

Brief Archaeological background...... 3

Brief History of the Drainage...... 5

Survey of the Landowners...... 6

Results ...... 9

The Wider Perspective...... 9

The Future ...... 16

Conclusion...... 17

Bibliography...... 18

Appendices

1 Questionnaire List of Figures

Figure 1 Location of main surface soil types

Figure 2 Location of holdings

Figure 3 Morton Fen, Lincs, with contours and sites of Roman and Iron age date

Figure 4 Deeping Fen as surveyed and divided in 1670

Figure 5 Ditched boundaries of the medieval landscape

Figure 6 Grassland on the silts of Holland, Lincs, 1931

Figure 7 Arable land on the fens of Kesteven and Holland, Lincs, 1931

Figure 8 Iron Age and Roman sites on the fens north of Bourne

List of Plates

Plate 1 Morton Fen, Lincs. Roman canal extending through peat onto silt

Plate 2 Plough damage to Middle Saxon settlement on silt in Gosberton Fen

Plate 3 Hacconby Fen, north of Bourne as earthworks and soilmarks

Plate 4 Roman earthwork and cropmarks at Horbling Fen, Lincolnshire

Plate 5 Roman saltern and settlement in Pinchbeck South Fen

Plate 6 Land drainage on Crowland Common

Plate 7 A’Fen Blow’ on Crowland Common Archaeology, Arable landscapes and Drainage in the Fenland of Eastern England by John Honnor and Tom Lane

Summary Concern has been expressed by archaeologists over a long period regarding the effects of intensive agriculture on archaeology of the Fenland. Acknowledging those concerns English Heritage funded a large-scale survey and excavation project, the Fenland Project, the results of which emphasised the extent of the archaeological resource and its vulnerability.

Using the results of the Fenland Project as a framework this paper set out to examine the recent agricultural histories of farms on three different fen soils - silts, clays and peats. Results of discussions with the farmers indicate that use of the fenland for arable purposes has a longer history than sometimes stated. Intensification of arable agriculture in the second half of the last century and associated drainage works have served to cause irreparable damage to near surface sites. For the future the farmers see no reduction in the intensive use of the land, although there is a move now to minimal cultivation of the fenland fields and stabilisation, rather than continual lowering of groundwater levels,

In addition to the agricultural histories rates of peat wastage, where recorded, are discussed in terms of archaeological loss. Additionally, some of the lesser publicised threats to Fenland archaeology, such as deep rooting crops and loss of land (and archaeological sites) to drainage features are considered.

Introduction The Fenland of Eastern England is one of the most distinctive landscapes in Britain. Covering c.400,000ha it is the country's largest area of former coastal wetland, extending some 120km from Lincoln in the north to Cambridge in the south and 50km from Peterborough to the modern coast. Characteristically low lying, with little of the land surface exceeding 3.5m OD, it is a basin through which flows the rivers draining the greater part of central England.

The twin threats to the archaeological resource of arable agriculture and drainage are nowhere more pronounced than in the Fenland. Despite an earlier reputation as the richest pasture land in the country, the region underwent extensive drainage schemes, particularly in the 18th and 19th centuries, and is now one of the Europe's most intensively cultivated arable landscapes, with the surface silts, clays and peats all generating high crop yields.

Despite (or because of) its former wetland character, the Fenland has yielded some of the most densely distributed and best preserved archaeological sites in Britain. In recognition of the archaeological potential of the region and the perceived threat from intensive arable agriculture and continued drainage, English Heritage selected the Fenland for investigation by means of extensive field surveys, limited excavations and, where appropriate, the implementation of management policies. In addition to the published volumes detailing the results of this 20 year programme, the survey has been summarised by Hall and Coles (1994) and the excavations by Crowson et al (2000).

1 Because of the high archaeological potential of the predominantly arable landscapes of the Fenland Oxford Archaeology commissioned the following report as part of the Management of Archaeological Sites in Arable Landscapes Project. The report sets out examine recent historical data from a small area of the Fenland and combine it with information supplied by local farmers and Drainage Authorities in an effort to determine recent impacts on the rich archaeological resource within this working landscape and to assess how archaeology fits into or conflicts with the continued agri-industrial usage of the Fenland.

Geology, Topography and Soils

The geological history of the Fenland has been summarised most recently by Waller (1994, 7). While itself fascinating, the older, pre-holocene geological detail is not vital to this paper. What is more relevant is the development of the region over the last 10,000 years. At its simplest level this has seen gradual increases in sea-level with the resultant deposition of silts and clays. In turn, this has affected the draining of the major rivers through the Fenland, causing increased groundwater levels and ponding back of the freshwaters. The resultant development of peats on the landward side of 'marine' sediments is reflected in the modern map of surface soils (Fig. 1). In truth, the development of the Fenland deposits has been infinitely more complex than that stated above. Sea level rise has not been at a constant rate, but has fluctuated, resulting in separate periods of transgression and regression. Increased bed loads in the rivers, following de- forestation and initial cultivation of middle England brought sediments to the Fenland at the same time as sea levels were rising. In addition, erosion of the coastline to the north of the Wash has also served to increase sedimentary deposition around seaward side of the Fenland. There has always been a battle between the freshwaters running off the surrounding high ground on three sides of the Fens and the sea on the fourth.

These events are reflected in the vertical stratigraphy of the Fenland deposits. Initial peat growth on the floor of the Fenland was overwhelmed by extensive 'marine' beds of clays and silts before renewed peat growth took place above the clays and silts. While this, the classic Fenland vertical sequence, is accurate for part of the region, in particular the southern Fens, Waller (1994,14 and Plate III) has emphasised the complexities of the sequence and the variations occurring elsewhere in the Fenland.

While the three main Fenland surface soil types of peat, clay and silt each have their own characteristics, overall they share one crucial element - they are all extremely fertile, all Grade 1 and 2 land. Therefore, all have been and continue to be heavily exploited for arable agriculture.

Aims The enormity and complexity of the Fenland region (400,000ha) prevents a detailed study of the agricultural issues in archaeology for the whole area in the short time available. Instead a small area (1200ha) has been chosen, in south Lincolnshire, which encompasses the three major soil types, silt, clay and peat, along with a length of fen edge gravel (Fig. 2). This area has been selected for a study which will serve as an example of how farming in the Fenland currently impacts upon the archaeological resource.

At the outset the major aims stated were to gather data to assist in determining the current, and predicting the future, rates of erosion of archaeological sites in the different Fenland regions. These included

2 * Examining the recent agricultural and drainage histories of major holdings which, in some cases, span the change from stock-based to arable agriculture

* Examining what farming practices apart from standard ploughing may have impacted on buried archaeology (eg ridging for bulbs)

* Examining how agricultural histories vary on the different soil/sediment zones

* Relating the farming histories and practises from the different areas to the results of the wide- ranging field and aerial surveys (and occasional excavations) conducted in the area.

Methods In order to standardise the data where possible a set of questions was devised (Appendix 1). Four landowners and tenants with holdings covering the different sediment types were selected on the basis of factors including:- * size of holding * location of holding * length of time in ownership of the holding (therefore first hand knowledge of changing agricultural practices) * the holding having been walked as part of the Fenland Survey and therefore baseline information on archaeological and broad palaeoenvironmental results are known * interest and availability of the landowner or tenant.

The locations of the holdings appear on Figure 2. In addition, two local Internal Drainage Boards were consulted, the Black Sluice and Welland and Deepings.

Brief Archaeological Background The surface archaeology and soil pattern of this part of the Fenland was recorded during the Fenland Survey (Hayes and Lane 1992) and forms a framework for the results of this study. Lane and Hayes (1993) have also examined site distributions and boundaries on the fen edge north of Bourne in detail and separately discussed the Iron Age (Lane 1988) and Saxon (Hayes 1988) periods in the immediate area. Palaeoenvironmental investigations have been conducted in Morton Fen, notably by Shennan (1994) who also made a study of Morton using remote sensing (Donaghue and Shennan 1987))

Together these earlier investigations have provided a detailed view of the patterns of archaeology in relation to soils. In Morton Fen each of the surface soil types has characteristic archaeological evidence. In the west, is the narrow gravel margin which has attracted settlement of most periods including Bronze Age and particularly Roman. These latter sites are east of the Car Dyke, a man-made watercourse which skirts the fen edge from Lincoln to Peterborough. No definite function has been agreed universally for this monument, although drainage, transport and boundary of Imperial Estate have all been championed at various times (summarised in Simmons and Cope-Faulkner 1997).

In the southwest of Morton Fen is thin peat, part of a once more extensive tract which also covered the marine sediments in Deeping Fen and a 4-5km wide band along the western fen edge (discussed in more detail below). There has been little or no settlement on the peats. In Morton Fen the peats were at one time more widespread, extending for some 3km to the east.

3 Drainage has lowered and wasted all but the last vestiges of this organic mantle over the central part of Morton Fen (Fig. 3) and revealed the underlying patterns of former saltmarsh creeks (locally termed roddons) which date from the Bronze Age and into the Iron Age (Hayes and Lane 1992, figs. 72 and 73). These sinuous, silty, infilled creeks, which once drained the waters running off the adjacent highland, extend through a silty 'marine' clay, laid down during inundation in the second millennium BC. One effect of the peat wastage in Morton Fen is the obliteration of much of the central part of the Bourne-Morton canal (Fig. 3; Plate 1). Of Roman construction, this watercouse extended for 6.5km linking the upland fen edge settlement of Bourne with salterns and settlements on the seaward silty clays, where it's channel survives to a depth of 2.6m below the current land surface. Midway along its course, in the peats of Dyke Fen, only the 0.4m deep basal silt deposits survive, indicating a loss of approximately two metres of peat since the Roman period (Lane 2000a).

At the eastern end of Morton Fen is a probable small 'estuary' which flooded sometime after the 2nd century AD depositing silt which partly sealed a saltmaking complex of 1st/2nd century AD date (Trimble 2001). At the junction of the silt and former peat are the remains of turbaries of probable Iron Age or Roman date. North of the silt spread are a number of Roman settlements on the silty clay with roddon area, while along the north end of the parish are Roman salterns fed by the tail-end of a creek system draining northeast.

With its varied ancient environments, Morton Fen is almost a microcosm of the Fenland as a whole. Though larger, Deeping Fen is probably less complex in terms of its ancient environments. Its formerly extensive peat cover is now much reduced to little more than an organic topsoil, again exposing underlying silty clays with roddons. Hardly any settlement took place on the peats and it is on the eastern and western margins of Deeping Fen, on the Fen edge and clay with roddon zones, where archaeology is known. However, there remain traces of one major monument crossing Deeping Fen - a Roman road known as the Baston Outgang. Extending from a small promontory on the western fen edge the road took the shortest route across the fen to a major roddon, from where its continuation towards Spalding is recorded on air photographs as parallel ditches. Its route through the Fen is marked only by a narrow linear band of gravel, almost certainly the former capping of a now completely rotted wooden trackway.

In not wanting to compromise their chances of having land purchased for mineral extraction, a number of landowners on the edge of Deeping Fen declined access to the Fenland Survey. Therefore, field surface information is lacking for the area. However, from archaeological works conducted as part of planning conditions imposed in advance of mineral extraction, along with the results of air photo plotting, it is clear there is a strong prehistoric and Roman presence on the gravels bordering Deeping Fen. Excavation in advance of an irrigation pond in 1996 on the immediate fen edge in Baston revealed the last remnants of a once more extensive peat cover sealing vestiges of a palaeosol in which Bronze Age pottery and features were recorded. Had it not been excavated this friable pottery would almost certainly have been brought up into the plough level by now as the peat gradually decays. The farmer knows from observation that the remnant peat is still wasting on the fen edge but not the shrinkage rate (N. Watts, pers comm).

Farther south, along the edge of Deeping Fen, indications of the pre-peat archaeological landscape appear in the form of round barrows protruding from the surrounding blackland which once covered it. One such barrow, excavated in 1991, revealed a central child burial and a series of later inhumations and cremations (French 1994). Because of the earlier construction of

4 an adjacent quarry, the palaeoenvironmental record at this site was of poorer quality than expected. Both Watts' excavation and the barrow site indicate a diminishing archaeological potential for physical and palaeoenvironmental remains on the edge of Deeping Fen.

Silty clay with roddon soils are predominant on the east of Deeping Fen. Salterns of both Iron Age and Roman date are plentiful, along with Roman settlements. A similar pattern occurs in Pinchbeck South Fen, where a thin surface silt cover probably derived from the same episode of flooding as the 'estuary' in Morton.

Brief history of the Drainage of Deeping, Pinchbeck South and Morton Fens In order to give context to the changes in land use over the past 3-4 hundred years in these areas it is necessary to summarise the of the drainage schemes which enabled this change.

Deeping Fen The first Drainage Act for Deeping Fen was in 1603 and gave ‘Adventurers’ power to carry out drainage works and raise taxes. Further Acts and works by Vermuyden and Venatti, the Earl of Bedford and others resulted in Deeping Fen being declared ‘Drained’ in 1637. All the first scheme did was to extend the summer grazing and allow the growing of fodder crops. Most of the Fen was still inundated in winter.

Failure of the first scheme was due to the lowering of the peat surface and the tumult of the Civil War. From 1664 new ‘Adventurers’ with new Acts tried again, this time with the assistance of wind engines which, within their limited capabilities, overcame the continued lowering of the landsurface (Fig. 4). By tradition, the rate of shrinkage was ‘the height of a man in the life of a man’.

The struggle to drain continued throughout the 18th century with continual improvements needed just to maintain the status quo. A major scheme on the river Welland in the 1770s attempted to overcome the problem of siltation of the tidal outfalls. In 1801 came the Enclosure Act for ‘draining and dividing and allotting’ Deeping Fen, all of which, except for the Adventurers land was Common. In all this amounted to almost 14,000ha, including Pinchbeck South Fen. There followed major drainage schemes incorporating steam engines at Pode Hole in 1826. Since then pumps have been replaced, enlarged and lowered, followed each time by drain improvements. Today’s pumps were commissioned in 1957 (electric) and 1964 (diesel), followed by a comprehensive enlargement of almost all arterial drains. This is considered now to provide optimum drainage and flood defence, allowing water level management to fine tolerances.

Pinchbeck South Fen This Fen lies adjacent to Deeping Fen but was hydrologically separate. Its drainage history follows closely that of Deeping Fen and it had its own Drainage Trustee until the formation of the Internal Drainage Boards in 1935, when it became Deeping Fen 4th District. In 1830 it was proposed to connect the catchment to the new steam engine at Pode Hole, but the apportionment of costs could not be agreed and therefore Pinchbeck built its own steam engine in 1832. The system was finally connected to Pode Hole basin in 1991.

Morton Fen In 1635 the Earl of Lindsey with his associates agreed with the Commisioners of Sewers to drain the district stretching from Bourne to Kyme, including Morton Fen. This are was known as the Lindsey Level until renamed the Black Sluice Level in the 18th century. Various cuts were made

5 including the South Forty Foot Drain from Boston to Bourne, a distance of 39km. By 1639, However, ‘commoners and fenmen’ made a vain attempt to dispossess the Adventurers by petition to Parliament. Failing with this they then broke down the newly erected banks in a ‘riotous and unlawful manner’. This was not surprising as the draining deprived the locals of their livelihoods and food sources.

During the Civil War and subsequently the lands remained unreclaimed until the middle of the 18th century. The Black Sluice commissioners were constituted in 1765 and undertook a comprehensive drainage scheme including further works on the construction of the South Forty Foot Drain and a new sluice at Boston. Another major scheme was undertaken in 1846. The steam engine erected in Morton Fen shortly afterwards was finally replaced by a gas oil engine in 1932.

Following serious flooding in the 1960s the problem of containing the waters flowing off the adjacent high lands was finally addressed and 28 new pumping stations were built. The Morton Fen system was redirected south to Dyke Fen where a new pump was installed to counteract the further lowering of the peat surface.

Surveys of the Landowners Based on responses to the questionnaires a summary follows of issues relating directly to the integrity of the archaeological resource. Details of the farmers consulted appear below:-

6 Landowner Age Size of Location of Date Sediment holding holding family type (ha) first farmed Reg Dobbs 80 47 Pinchbeck 1930 silt and clay (RD) South Fen John 66 502 Morton Fen 1921 Fen edge, Richardson peat, clay, (JR) silt John 70 108 Deeping Fen unknown Organic Woodhead topsoil, (JW) former peat Nicholas 58 556 Deeping Fen unknown organic Watts topsoil - (NW) former peat

Table 1 Details of Farmers Consulted and Holdings

Cultivation Following drainage Deeping Fen has been cultivated since the early 19th century. Initially, this was mixed arable and grass, but with the grass being seeded following the removal of the original fen species. Most of the farms were worked by horses prior to the 1930s when kerosene tractors were introduced. Horse ploughing was approximately 20-23cm deep in both Deeping and Pinchbeck South Fens but 15-18cm in Morton Fen. The first tractors are thought to have ploughed little deeper in Pinchbeck and Deeping Fens, but at Morton these tractors ploughed up to 38cm deep for potatoes. Subsequent to the second world war larger tractors became available and prompted ploughing up to 35cm deep in Deeping Fen (NW). This mixed the underlying clay with the organic topsoil. In Pinchbeck, a steam powered 'Gyroytiller' was said to have 'stirred' the land up to 60cm depth for a period around 1935, but was never widely adopted. Nevertheless, the physical damage caused by this machine to archaeological deposits would have been permanent.

Between 1930 and 1950 deep ploughing to 38cm and subsoiling to 46cm was undertaken regularly in Morton. Excavations at the Bourne-Morton canal and the Roman saltern recorded archaeology directly beneath a topsoil of 35cm and 40-45cm respectively. Where it occurs today, ploughing in Morton is 30cm deep with 45cm deep subsoiling. In Deeping Fen, NW ploughs 23-25cm with a pan-busting attachment which penetrates an additional 10cm. While the current trend is for as little cultivation as possible (see below) it is clear from the above figures that the majority of near-surface sites on arable land in the Fenland have been subjected to disruption and truncation by ploughing (eg Plate 2).

Drainage Drainage has had a dual detrimental effect on the archaeology of the Fenland. The cutting of networks of ditches, dykes and drains, along with the laying of underground ceramic drainage

7 pipes (under-draining), all affect the integrity of sub-surface archaeological sites and landscapes. Moreover, where the these dykes are deep, a low groundwater level can be maintained, causing the drying of any organic deposits sealed in archaeological contexts.

Water levels are now regarded as at an 'optimum' level in Morton Fen (JR) at 120-150cm below the lowest landsurface. While this water level, which, like all levels in the Fenland is strictly controlled by the local Internal Drainage Boards (IDBs), leaves the lowest deposits of the Bourne-Morton canal waterlogged (Lane 2000a), the level is well below the basal deposits of all the features excavated at the Morton Saltern (Trimble 2001). In Pinchbeck Fen the ground water table varies between one and two metres below the surface, depending on the time of year, recent rainfall and the IDB retention levels. These depths are insufficient to enable irrigation there (RD), although it is possible in Deeping Fen where the aim is to maintain the water table at least 1.2m below the land surface.

Under-draining of the Fenland has continued over a long period. Pinchbeck South Fen is believed to have been under-drained since the '18th-19th century' (RD). The whole system at Pinchbeck was renewed over a 20 year period with the insertion of clay pipes at 20m intervals. Depths were calculated to enable 0.9m cover of the pipes (ie 0.9m below the lowest land). In Deeping Fen, on the peat, the Watts farm was under-drained at 20m centres in the 1940s and renewed between 1970 and 1980 some 60cm lower. Again, 0.9m of cover was the required depth, the same as at Morton. During the regular replacement of under-drains at Morton earlier drains were encountered, indicating repeated cutting of new trenches and therefore further risk of damage to underlying archaeology.

Farm dykes were in regular need of maintenance, a regular winter job for the farm hands. Again, these dykes are of various widths and depths, the latter generally 1.2m on the arable land in Pinchbeck. In Deeping Fen, farm dykes were enlarged from 0.9-1.2m deep to 1.5-1.8m in 1969-75. In order to ensure effective maintenance deepening also means widening. While individual dykes may be little more than 3m wide the larger main drains such as the Forty Foot can now be anything up to 25m wide. As an example of how much land this encompasses the Black Sluice Internal Drainage Board maintain some 779km of watercourse over their area of 45527ha. At a modest average of say 6m wide, this has seen the extraction of 467ha of land in an area where archaeological sites are numerous as anywhere in the country. In Morton Fen the site density recorded on the Fenland Survey is approximately one site every 16ha. Add to the 779km of watercourses maintained by Black Sluice, the many kilometres of farm and field dykes, which are not the responsibility of the IDBs (for example, see Silvester's plan of the medieval siltland in the Norfolk Fens [Fig. 5; Hall and Coles 1994, fig.92]) and it is possible to imagine the loss of intact archaeology on a grand scale.

If there is a positive side to dyke cutting it is that their construction and maintenance has enabled the discovery of previously buried sites, albeit sites now damaged. Usually the method is by fieldwalking along recently cleaned or deepened dykes. Examples of sites found during this process include a Bronze Age site sealed by marine alluvium in Rippingale, Lincolnshire (Hayes and Lane 1992, 76) and a number of Roman salterns in Marshland, Norfolk (Lane and Morris 2001). Recognition of the possibilities of examining and recording newly cut or cleaned dykes for archaeological features resulted in initiation of programmes of dyke survey in Lincolnshire (Chowne 1980) and Cambridgeshire (French and Pryor 1993). Perhaps the best known site found under such circumstances is the timber platform and associated trackway at Flag Fen, near Peterborough (Pryor 1991).

8 Crops Wheat, potatoes, sugar beet and rape are the chief crops on the Fenland farms noted above. Some speciality crops occur, notably the growing of daffodils on the light siltland. Although not widely regarded as a threat to underlying sites some root crops will penetrate up to a metre down while the roots of wheat crops can descend some 1.8m in search of water in drought years (RD). Potatoes and, on the silts, tulips and daffodils, require ridging, but this is done to a depth of 15cm in the ground and 15cm out.

Root penetration can have a twofold effect in the Fenland, disturbing the integrity of buried features and introducing contaminants into either the deposits within features or, in areas of deeper overlying sediments, into the buried prehistoric soils. Similarly, while appearing to seal and protect archaeology, some overlying sediment types, in particular the alluvial deposits near rivers on the Fen edge, allow contaminants to access the underlying archaeology through cracks in the soil structure during dry periods. Alluvium overlying a Late Bronze Age/Early Iron Age site at Welland Bank Quarry on the edge of Deeping Fen was severely cracked (Pryor1998a;1998b) and samples taken on a grid basis on the underlying buried soils contained many modern seeds. A similar situation was recorded on the northern fen edge at Dogdyke where 0.8m of alluvium from the river Witham sealed a palaeosol on which lay early Bronze Age pottery (Lane 2000b). Samples again contained unmistakably modern seeds.

Grass may be regarded as a Fenland crop though little now survives. In 1930, Reg Dobbs' farm in Pinchbeck South Fen was approximately 20% permanent pasture and 80% arable. Usually, the grassland was sited next to the farm for ease of feeding the livestock. Factors contributing to the ploughing of permanent grassland at Pinchbeck South Fen were cited as:-

* Directives from the War Agricultural Executive (War Ag) to bring all grassland (except that reserved for livestock) into cultivation to grow potatoes and wheat.

* Ploughing of 'horse pastures' following the increased use of tractors at the expense of horses (although horses were still used there for carting and harrowing until 1955)

* The reduction of dairy and breeding herds which were previously kept to use up the straw and produce manure

* The increased use of artificial fertilizer in place of animal manure

* Arable farming (so-called cash crops) becoming more profitable than livestock farming

Underpinning all of these factors was the fact that, after the second world war, drainage improvements continued apace and reduced, if not prevented, the catastrophic winter flooding that had previously been a regular feature of Fenland life. These improvements lessened considerably the risks of losing arable crops to winter flooding

Results Results of the questionnaire and the associated research go some way to contradicted the often- cited belief that much of the Fenland had remained in pasture well into the last century and that the large-scale conversion of pasture to arable was only undertaken during the Second World War. Instead, the landowners indicate that there was cultivation in Deeping Fen from the early

9 19th century and in Pinchbeck South Fen it was estimated that 80% was arable by 1930 (although it is not known when the initial ploughing took place). Only in Morton was it confirmed that pasture did predominate into the 20th century but soon much of that underwent cultivation. However, only a small part of the Fenland is being examined here. On the southwest Fen edge in Norfolk, for instance, many fields around Feltwell were only brought into cultivation in the 1960s following the construction of a major cut-off channel (Healy 1988, 23).

Certainly some sites, including the multi-period barrow cemetery and settlement on the fen edge at Dowsby, were ploughed under the instructions of the 'War Ag' (Lane 2000c). Elsewhere, during the Fenland Survey, the second author had been told by farmworkers of first ploughings of what are now merely artefact scatters in arable. Huge sherds of Roman vessels were described from the times that earthwork sites had been levelled in Gosberton Fen. A complete greyware vessel bore testimony to the first ploughings in the 1950s of a site in Thurlby Fen, while at Cowbit, also in the 1950s, the 'large areas of red soils' exposed during initial cultivation equated to extensive Iron Age and Roman salterns (Lane and Morris 2001). The same decade also saw the initial ploughing of a Roman earthwork site in Hacconby Fen (Hallam 1970, Plate XI) (Plate 3). These sites have now undergone half a century of intensive cultivation.

It is likely that the size and scale of the earthworks of the Roman Fenland sites and, therefore, the extra efforts needed to convert them to arable, had resulted in many of those sites being retained as pasture when all around them had long been ploughed. Occasionally, such sites still remain surrounded by expanses of arable and are visible as both earthworks and adjacent cropmarks, as at Horbling (Plate 4). However, the earthworks at Horbling are an extremely rare survival.

Apart from Horbling some other earthwork sites survived intact even later than the 1950s and one field in Morton Fen was not ploughed until 1970. It contained several Roman salterns and 'ploughed out hearths' were noted on the Fenland Survey fieldwalking record sheets from the visit in 1985. Large pieces of of briquetage were noted at the time although the mean piece size of the material collected was little different from the material on other sites which had been ploughed earlier.

The approximate date that saltern sites were ploughed for the first time in Cowbit Wash is known. As embanked washland (areas on to which the rivers were allowed to flood in winter to prevent the flooding of the arable land), the area remained pasture until the early 1950s, when drainage improvements at Spalding reduced the risk of winter inundation from the adjacent river Welland. It is difficult to assess the extent of the damage to the sites from the mean piece size (mps) of the briquetage (ceramic debris from the saltmaking sites). The mps of the Roman briquetage from Cowbit (ploughed 1950s) was 4.4g compared to 3.9g from the more recently (1970) ploughed site in Morton. In Pinchbeck South Fen, briquetage from the site ploughed c. 1920 (Plate 5) has a mps of 8.1. Not all of the briquetage was collected for each site though and the policy of retrieving only a representative sample of the different types of briquetage could have skewed the results. However, all of the Roman pottery was collected and these sherds provided a mps of 13.9g from the Pinchbeck site (c.1920), 13.1g from Morton (1970) and 8.9g from the Cowbit Wash site (1950s). Only a small quantity of sherds was present on the Cowbit site. Other, non-saltern, Roman sites in Cowbit Wash provided an average mps of 15.4g while outside the Wash the equivalent Roman sites, which had been ploughed at an earlier but unknown date, gave an average mps 9.1g.

Many factors affect the size of sherds collected from the field surface. Not least among these is

10 the possibility that fresh, large sherds are brought up from previously undisturbed archaeological deposits over the years, thereby ‘renewing’ the quantities of larger, unabraded sherds in the topsoil. Moreover, there appears to be a higher than usual percentage of shelly wares among the Roman vessels of the Fenland. These may not survive ploughing as well as, for instance, the greywares. The lack of surface ceramic finds of Iron Age date, in particular, was noted on the Fenland Survey (Hayes and Lane 1992, 233) and also on sites where excavations demonstrated an Iron Age presence undetected in earlier fieldwalking (eg, at Billingborough [Chowne et al 2001] and Dowsby [Lane, 2000c]). Where found, the Iron Age pottery was invariably in a shelly fabric, but little survived on the surface.

Overall, on reasonably robust material, there seems to be little obvious correlation between mean piece size of ceramics and the number of years the land has been in cultivation. However, with the fragile prehistoric wares exposed by peat wastage on the Norfolk fen edge the story is different (see below).

The Wider perspective Because of the limited data sample of farmers it is pertinent to examine a few wider sources to determine the effects of agricultural activities on archaeological sites in the Fenland through time. Because of the differences in land use potential and exploitation, each of the three main soil-types will be examined in turn.

Silts Although the roddons within the claylands are silt-filled this section concentrates only on the extensive arc of surface silts bordering the Wash coast. Given the lack of Roman pottery on the field surfaces but the presence of Late- and sometimes Middle-Saxon pottery it is reasonable to assume that the silts were laid down in late- or immediately post-Roman times. It is unlikely that the silts are the result of a single inundation but there are difficulties in determining the phases of silting, particularly from the surface deposits. However, it is not crucial to this study to know the depositional history of the silts - just to know broadly when they became available for settlement and how they were used through time.

These silt lands are now almost entirely in arable use and the district has some of the most fertile and valuable land in Britain. It is renowned for the production of high quality potatoes, field vegetables and horticultural produce (Robson 1990,1). Such is the fertility of the soil that 'double cropping' (three crops in two years) is possible in some areas (Robson 1987, 70).

At 3-4m OD the silts are higher than the peat and clay zones further inland and of sufficient elevation to have enabled settlement from the 7th century AD onwards in Lincolnshire (Hallam 1965; Hayes 1988). Distribution of Late Saxon pottery on the fields in Quadring (Hayes and Lane 1992, fig. 19) suggests manuring of fields by that time, almost certainly for arable use. Scattered pottery suggests that arable use has continued on the silts and expanded on to areas reclaimed from sea and fen. Excavation has indicated that arable crops were being grown in the Middle Saxon period on the silts of Lincolnshire and Norfolk (Murphy 1993), though the ditches on these sites contain evidence for brackish/marine deposits. By 1189, the 'Men of Holland', on the silts south of Spalding, had reclaimed land from the sea and fen and, in a famous encounter with the abbots of Crowland, 'strongly desired to have common of the marsh of Crowland....for since their own marshes have dried up they have converted them into good and fertile ploughland' (Hallam 1965, 166). Darby (1970, 55) remarked on 'considerable cultivation in the villages of the south Lincolnshire silt lands between 1257 and

11 1321' and concluded that 'during the Middle Ages, this silt zone, between sea and peat fen, seems to have been amongst the most prosperous parts of England' (ibid 130). This wealth, reflected in the splendour of the siltland churches, was by no means confined to the Lincolnshire silts, with Norfolk (Silvester 1985, 114) and Cambridgeshire included to make the Wash silts overall 'the richest area of England in 1334' (Williams 1982, 89).

Land-use on the silts in the second half of the 13th century was calculated by Hallam (1965, 195) to be 69% arable, 11% meadow and 20% pasture. Thirsk's (1965) assessment of the area in the 17th century sees a much more even split between arable and pasture with clearly a considerable reversion to pasture, partly because of the high quality of grassland on the silts (Grigg 1966, 68). This is reflected in the quality of the livestock and in 1724. Daniel Defoe described the countryside around Boston as supporting 'prodigious numbers of large sheep, and also oxen of the greatest size...' (quoted in Darby 1940, 138).

Arable farming is therefore not a recent innovation on the siltlands. While the medieval ploughing in the arable silt lands would not have been as deep as that of the last century the siltland had its own variation of the upland ridge and furrow. Termed ‘Dylings’, the Fenland strips were not formed in the same manner as those on the upland, with ditches being hand dug to provide spoil to elevate the intervening lands. Hallam (1965, 152) suggested that these ditches may have been some 0.6-0.9m deep and up to 1.8-2.7m across. They would, therefore, have impacted on near- surface archaeology. Moreover, the creation of dylings was not confined to land for arable use. In fact Hallam (ibid) suggests that some had no traces of cultivation and may have been dyked meadows.

Following drainage and enclosure from the 17th century onwards the land has again become almost exclusively arable. Changes in the percentages of pasture to arable continued through the 20th century with the 1913 records for the Holland District of Lincolnshire (90% of which is siltland) showing 73.3% arable and 26.7% pasture. By 1933 arable had increased to 79.8% with pasture down to 20.2% (Smith 1937, 76) (Figs. 6 and 7). In 1973 the arable in Holland had risen to 92.5% with only 5% permanent grassland and 2.5% other land use. These are the last figures available for Holland.

Roman sites of the siltlands remain buried, with only occasional glimpses during construction works, for example at Spalding where Roman sites have been revealed recently at 0.8m and 2m below ground level. Sites of a later date, which lie on post-Roman silting, have been subjected to up to a millennium of cultivation, the most recent of an unparalleled intensive nature. While it would be foolish to write off sites in this landscape completely, there is every likelihood that many of the near-surface sites have already sustained serious damage (eg Plate 2). However, there are many indications that the Roman landscape continues beneath the later silts.

Clays (with roddons) Very little has been written specifically about the clay lands, partly because much of the area has been peat-covered in the past. However, south of Sleaford through into Cambridgeshire the clay with roddon zone has one of the highest known densities of Roman sites in Britain (Hallam 1970; Hayes and Lane 1992; Hall 1996).

For example, between Billingborough and Bourne (Fig. 8), in the Fen edge and clay with roddon zones, some 241 site locations of Iron Age and/or Roman date were recorded during the Fenland Survey. This equates to a site every 34ha.

12 Such a density is in striking contrast to the peat areas. There was little or no settlement actually on the peatlands until after the post medieval drainage. Deeping Fen is a good example. The Fenland Survey map of the Deeping Fen indicates that Iron Age and Roman sites were confined to the clay with roddon zone on the eastern part of the parish, leaving several kilometres of blank peat fen (Hayes and Lane 1992, fig. 102). The threats to the peat areas continues to be to the prehistoric sites beneath the peat. Similarly, the site densities are different on the silts. The Roman landscape on the clay with roddon zone shelves beneath the silts and is therefore protected, but also inaccessible to archaeologists. More of the siltland has been walked in Norfolk than in Lincolnshire and therefore the Norfolk results offer a better comparison. Silvester’s (1988) maps of the Marshland area of Norfolk indicate Early/Middle Saxon, Late Saxon and Medieval silt sites, the latter unsurprisingly the most numerous. However, as with the Lincolnshire siltland, some Roman sites are known from beneath the silts, particularly when exposed during dyke cutting (Silvester 1988, 154).

The surface sediment in the clay with roddon zone is a silty clay, dissected by a dendritic network of creek channels of the former saltmarsh now infilled with silt and fine sand (eg Dunsby Fen, Hayes and Lane 1992, fig. 51). During their active stage the creeks overflowed at high tide depositing fine sand, silt and clay, the smallest particles being deposited furthest from the bank. Levees or banks of silty deposits eventually built up and it is here that settlements were created, particularly in the Roman period when the density of Roman sites in this landscape was remarkably high. Moreover, the roddons served as transport arteries, for boats when the channels were active and, later, as high ground on the levees connecting settlements, for overland traffic. Occasionally there is evidence to suggest that the larger roddons were used as ploughland in the Roman period. One example, in the northeast of Deeping Fen, has a sparse (manuring?) scatter of Roman sherds associated with a series of ditched fields or enclosures visible on air photographs (Palmer 1995, fig. 3). Overall, though, there are few scattered sherds and pottery is usually found on the roddons and in the Fenland generally only in 'site' clusters, suggesting a predominance of pastoral rather than arable agriculture. Benefiting from the natural elevation of the levees, almost all early settlement in the Fenland was restricted to these roddons. These sinuous micro-topographical features are up to a metre above the surrounding land, though many are much lower. In places this height variation has been emphasised by shrinkage of adjacent peat. In a few places the roddons have been bulldozed level, the machinery destroying the site features, although leaving a general artefact scatter. On Reg Dobbs’ farm ‘the creek beds have over time been deep ploughed and vigorously cultivated until now you can hardly tell the difference or where they are’. Most though remain in danger from ploughing, the machinery digging in to the lighter textured higher ground. Some sites, particularly the Middle Saxon sites in Gosberton, are themselves slightly mounded. Again, this presents an additional threat from ploughing. At Chopdyke Drove, Gosberton, traces of a rectangular structure on the east side of a slight mound just survived, three sides as shallow negative (cill-beam) features but the forth and lowest side, at the base of the low mound, as no more than a stain in the silts (Crowson et al 2000, fig. 37).

Peats 'Peat is the accumulated remains of plant materials formed under waterlogged conditions where the organisms responsible for the decay of plant material are suppressed' (Burton and Hodgson 1987, 3). Much of the southern Fenland still retains surface organic deposits, along with isolated tracts in Bourne and Thurlby Fens (between Deeping and Morton Fens), in East Fen, north of Boston and in the Witham valley south of Lincoln. There are a few conflicts about the definitions

13 of what are peat lands. In Figure 1 the area of peat is taken from the Soil Survey map of Eastern England (Hodge et al 1984). This is 'blackland', where the surface soils remain organic. However, the map accompanying the Soil Survey's Lowland Peat Survey indicates a much more restricted area (Burton and Hodgson 1987).

As with the silts, the peats formed diachronically, with dates of their formation dependant on a range of possibilities such as proximity to rivers, height of the underlying fen floor and contemporary height of sea-level. As with the silts, the various dates of peat formation are not critical within this paper (for summaries of dates of peat throughout the Fenland see Waller 1994).

What is crucial here is that the loss of freshwater peats continues to be the greatest threat to the archaeology of the Fenland (Plates 6 and 7). 'Shrinkage' of these organic deposits, due largely to drainage and arable agriculture, has both a vertical and horizontal dimension. While comparatively little settlement has occurred on the peats in the past, the underlying pre-peat prehistoric landscape beneath the peat was in places densely settled.

The effect of peat shrinkage on underlying archaeology has been demonstrated graphically on the eastern fen edge in Norfolk. Following improved drainage and the conversion of permanent grassland to arable a local artefact collector, Frank Curtis, began retrieving finds. He noted the event which started his excavating career as follows: 'Greens [three fields] ploughed up. Old pottery, Beaker, Rusticated. Bones, bone needles, awls, stone amulets, scrapers, axe, adze, bracer, one nearly complete pot unidentified' (Healy 1988, 23; 1996, 11). This rich catalogue gives some indication of the artefact density and quality on the newly broken up sandy fen edge hummocks. The more the peat shrank the more was revealed and the older the sites were, reflecting the earlier advance of the peat. During the Fenland Survey Silvester (1991, 80) observed that 'When Frank Curtis was working in the 1960s artefacts and sites of the Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age predominated. Now many of the more prolific sites have a strong Early Neolithic component'

Numerous records exist of peat shrinkage following drainage in the Fenland. Of these, perhaps the most dramatic and well known is at Holme Fen, Cambridgeshire. Prior to the draining of Whittlesey Mere in 1851 a solid iron post was driven into the underlying Jurassic clay less than a kilometre from the Mere. The top of the post was left level with surface of the fen. After the first twelve years following drainage the top of the post protruded by 1.45m and more recently in the region of 4.27m of the post has become visible. Skertchly (1877, 156) records various peat losses following drainage in the Fenland, including at Wood Fen where the 'compression' was recorded as 0.94m in 8 years, at East Fen (0.61m in 60 years) and Whittlesey Mere (1.85m in 18 years).

At Bourne South Fen, between Deeping and Morton Fens, land levels and shrinkage rates have been calculated more recently at 30cm in 10 years (Miles 1976, 24). Nearby, Skertchly (1877, 135) had recorded 'turf of sufficient thickness to afford fuel' in Bourne, Morton and Dunsby Fens. This band of peat along the fen edge north of Bourne had been described earlier by Young (1813, 218) 'From Sempringham down to Deeping a line two or three miles broad of rich grazing land made in a long course of time..'. The extent of peat surveyed in the later part of the 19th century and depicted on Skertchly's map of this region appears on Figure 8 along with the sites recorded during the Fenland Survey. The loss of this peat since the 1870s has exposed to the plough some 77 known archaeological sites chiefly of Roman date and including settlements,

14 salterns and two canals.

The rate of peat loss in the area was considerable at the time of Skertchly's survey. Three times between 1847 and 1904 the scoop wheels of the steam drainage pumps in Deeping Fen were lowered to account for the shrinkage. Skertchly (1877, 134) realized that the loss was set to continue, observing that 'within the last 20 years it [peat] has vanished from considerable tracts in the neighbourhood of Bourne, Spalding and Croyland and there is little doubt that 20 years hence the peat boundaries drawn by me will include areas over which scarcely a trace of peat will be found'. What Skertchly was unable to do was calculate a fixed rate of peat loss. Subsequently, some estimates have been made. During soil survey, Seale (1975) calculated that 55% of the Ely District had organic soils with a thickness greater than 0.3m but, at a wastage rate of c.18mm per year, he suggested that only c.20% of these soils will remain by c.2000-2010. Whether this is proving an accurate estimate is not known. Robson and Hodge nd, 5) quoted reported wastage of 1.8cm per year. Their colleague on the Soil Survey, A. Herbert, recorded wastage of 0.75cm per year on shallow (<90cm) cultivated peat and 2.1cm per year on deeper (>90cm) cultivated peat at undisclosed locations in the Fenland. During dyke survey in Borough Fen, south of Deeping Fen, French (1993, 12; 2000,5) noted that the thickness of peat recorded in the British Geological Survey's earlier borehole logs had declined from 50-60cm to 20-30cm, providing an average of c.20-30mm per year for wastage. A number of Bronze Age barrows are now protruding through the thinning peat in Borough Fen (e.g. Hall 1987, plate II) and losing their once preserved physical shape, in addition to likely reductions in their palaeoenvironmental record. Presumably, somewhere beneath this wasting peat and still protected at present, are the occupation, ritual and industrial sites that accompany the barrows.

During their survey of Lowland Peat for the Soil Survey, Burton and Hodgson (1987, 91) suggested that in AD1630 there existed in the Fenland some 1480km2 of peat which, in 1985, had reduced by a remarkable 84% to only 240km2. If wastage of cultivated peats continues at the current average rate (as calculated by Richardson and Smith 1977) it is estimated that, by the year AD2050, the area of remaining peat will be reduced by a further 66%. The map of the peatland in 1985 (Burton and Hodgson 1985, fig. 7) demonstrates that much of the remaining deeper peat, rather than organic remnants (see French 2000, 5) lies in embayments at the periphery of the Fenland rather than on the 'marine' clays in the more central area. Therefore, as it wastes, more of the once-populated prehistoric landsurface will be revealed and fragile sites destroyed.

The Future The Farmer's View The farmers consulted were agreed on a number of trends for the future. In particular the move towards minimum cultivation is recognised (on the grounds that 'cultivation costs money'), particularly for autumn sown crops. Wheat and rape were cited as 'no-till' crops for which direct drilling was employed. Winter cereals already occupy some 70% of the land. The lack of cultivation for weeds, however, is at the expense of more spraying, a procedure which is likely to increase in the quest for quality and appearance of crops.

Ploughing will still be required for spring-sown crops and sub-soiling will remain a part of the overall ploughing process. An increased use was forecast for power harrows, which impact vigorously the top few centimetres, where fragile artefacts may lie.

15 A consensus among the farmers saw the size of land holdings increasing, with local farming removed from the community. Following the record price of Fenland farm land in 1980 of c.£3000 per acre the price dropped to £1200 pa by 1990. Prices have now recovered to in the region of £2000 per acre, again reflecting renewed interest. One consultee saw Grade 1 land being farmed more intensively with Grades 3-4 becoming more extensively used. However, another thought it not possible to be more intensive, with the land being 'pushed hard' already.

Government/European support and subsidy directives are thought likely to influence the crops grown with the exchange rate of sterling a major factor in farming in the next decade. The driving force will remain livelihood and profit and one consultee felt that the next decade will see the next generation of farmers having less regard for conservation, wildlife and archaeology. It was agreed that old buildings, yards, cottages, piggeries and 'paddy huts' (the dormitories which formerly housed the itinerant, chiefly Irish, potato pickers) are disappearing fast and will soon be gone.

The Internal Drainage Board's View Little change is anticipated by the IDBs in respect of their policies and preferences for water retention levels. Some farmers would like a little more water in the drains during the summer, providing it can be removed quickly when necessary, but overall there is no major change perceived. This means a continuation of low levels and a necessity to reduce OD heights of water in the remaining peat areas in line with shrinkage.

The Archaeologist's View Archaeology and arable agriculture are uneasy bedfellows and it is impossible to reconcile the needs of both parties. Individual monuments can be preserved and protected in a number of ways, from the relatively inexpensive permanent cessation of cultivation on sites with little palaeoenvironmental potential, to the costly bunding and introduction of an artificially high local water levels on sites with good organic preservation. However, there is less that can be realistically achieved for whole archaeological landscapes. Recent initiatives for managing the heritage of wetlands are welcome (eg Coles 1995; Coles and Olivier 2001) but, for much of the Fenland, wetland initiatives come too late. In the words of Charles French (2000, 5) 'The sponge cannot be rewetted'.

The Fenland has always been a dynamic landscape. As it was in the past when the freshwater environments and concomitant peat expanded across the land so it is now, but in reverse. Where once these peats enveloped the Bronze Age sites so now they are exposing them.

The Fenland Project has indicated the broad extent of archaeological development of the region through time. However, some of that initial walking of the peat fen edge in Cambridgeshire was undertaken by David Hall as long ago as 1978. Just as Skertchly had foretold in 1877 that 'there is little doubt that 20 years hence the peat boundaries drawn by me will include areas over which scarcely a trace of peat will be found' then Hall's boundaries must surely be different now and in need of re-assessment. And what of the peatlands that were not surveyed at all in the Fenland Survey, such as the Witham valley in Lincolnshire? The recent finds there at Fiskerton of more of the Iron Age timber causeway first identified by Naomi Field (1986), along with associated log boats and metalwork indicates that many high quality finds are still present in the peatland.

The future threats to wetlands listed by Coles (1995, 12) include changing climate, changing sea- level, acid rain, water abstraction, water pollution and drainage. All are also potential threats to

16 the great extinct wetland of the Fenland. However, the greatest threat to the archaeology on all areas of the Fenland remains arable agriculture, and all that goes with it.

Conclusion Interviews with farmers, which were to provide the framework for this paper, have been useful and indeed form a backdrop, but the need to examine other sources was soon apparent in order to attempt to determine rates of erosion. Few of these sources examined related to work that had been undertaken originally for archaeological purposes and the results of peat wastage in particular was the work of geologists, soil scientists and drainage engineers. Initial exposure and gradual destruction of prehistoric sites once sealed beneath peats on the fen edge is and continues to be the most dramatic loss to the archaeological record. To predict the precise rate of loss of these sites would be difficult and would require a series of programmes measuring peat loss over periods of time at locations around the fen edge and the islands in the fen (during which time more sites would be exposed and damaged). A quick fix would be to re-walk some of the fen and island edge areas surveyed during the Fenland Survey to re-plot the peat boundaries and record the number of new sites exposed. This would give a baseline calculation of peat loss and new sites exposed since the original fieldwalking, enabling new predictive models to be created. However, knowing what is about to be destroyed is one thing, stopping the destruction is another.

While recent farming trends favour minimal cultivation and therefore minimal impact on near- surface sites, the intensification of crop production in the latter half of the 20th century caused irredeemable damage to many sites on the fen itself. Moreover, the realisation that arable cultivation in the Fenland has a long history, highlights the length of time that the damage has been occurring. While it is easy to be pessimistic about the future of the sites, particularly given the ‘divergence between the expectation and realisations of the [excavated Fenland] sites’ (Hall and Coles 2000, 241) and the farmers’ conclusion (above) that the next generation of farmers may be less archaeology-friendly, at least some comfort must be taken from the proposed reduction in ploughing and cultivation generally. Moreover, the post-Roman silts blanket and preserve physically a large, but unquantifiable, number of Roman sites and landscapes. Much of this Roman landscape is beyond the reach of the plough and is visible only in some deep drains and occasionally during construction works, chiefly on the western edge of the silts.

The problem with the Fenland is that it has always been resource-rich and that is the reason that it has been so heavily settled. Where once the main attraction was, salt or peat or fish, fowl, reeds or rich grazing it is now high grade arable land and it is being exploited with the same vigour as were the earlier resources. Maximising the present day agricultural resource while managing the archaeological resource would seem at odds. Satisfying all parties will be a challenge.

17 Bibliography

Burton, R.G.O. and Hodgson, J.M., 1987, Lowland Peat in England and Wales (Harpenden, Soil Survey)

Chowne, P., 1980, ‘Bronze Age Settlements in South Lincolnshire’, in Barrett, J. and Bradley, R., (eds), The British Later Bronze Age, British Archaeological Reports British Series 83, 295- 305 (Oxford)

Chowne, P, Cleal, R.M.J. and Fitzpatrick, A.P., 2001, Excavations at Billingborough, Lincolnshire, 1975-8: a Bronze-Iron Age Settlement and Salt-working Site. East Anglian Archaeology 94

Coles, B., 1995, Wetland Management: A Survey for English Heritage. WARP Occasional Paper 9

Coles, B. and Olivier, A., 2001, The Heritage Management of Wetlands in Europe. EAC Occasional Paper No 1

Crowson, A., Lane, T. and Reeve, J., 2000, Fenland Management Project Excavations 1991-1995. Lincolnshire Archaeology and Heritage Reports Series No 3

Darby, H.C., 1940, The Medieval Fenland (1974 re-print. Newton Abbot, David and Charles)

Darvill, T., 1987, Ancient Monuments in the Countryside: an archaeological management review. English Heritage Archaeological Report No 5

Donoghue, D.N.M. and Shennan, I., 1987, ‘Remote Sensing in Morton Fen, Lincolnshire: A Summary of Recent Research’. Fenland Research 4, 46-52

Dudley Stamp, L., 1942, The Land of Britain. The Report of the Land Utilization Survey of Britain. Parts 76-77, Lincolnshire (Parts of Lindsey and Kesteven). (London, Survey of Geographical Publications)

Dudley Stamp, L., 1962, The Land of Britain – its use and misuse (London, Longman’s)

Field, N., 1986, ‘An Iron Age Timber Causeway at Fiskerton’. Fenland Research 3, 49-53

French, C.A.I., 1994, Excavation of the Deeping St Nicholas Barrow Complex, South Lincolnshire. Lincolnshire Archaeology and Heritage Reports Series No 1

French, C., 2000 ‘Dewatering, Desiccation and Erosion: An Appraisal of Water and Peat Fen in the Fenlands’ in Crowson, A., Lane, T. and Reeve, J (eds), Fenland Management Project Excavations 1991-1995. Lincolnshire Archaeology and Heritage Reports Series No 3

French, C and Pryor, F., 1993, The South-West Fen Dyke Survey Project 1982-86. East Anglian Archaeology 59

Grigg, D., 1966, The Agricultural Revolution in South Lincolnshire (Cambridge University

18 Press)

Hall, D., 1987, The Fenland Project, Number 2: Fenland Landscapes and Settlement between Peterborough and March. East Anglian Archaeology 35

Hall, D., 1996, The Fenland Project, Number 10: Cambridgeshire Survey, Isle of Ely and Wisbech, East Anglian Archaeology 79

Hall, D. and Coles, J., 1994, Fenland Survey: An Essay in Landscape and Persistence. English Heritage Archaeological Report 1

Hallam, H.E., 1965, Settlement and Society: A Study of the Early Agrarian History of South Lincolnshire (Cambridge University Press)

Hallam, S.J., 1970, ‘Settlement Around the Wash’, in Phillips, C.W. (ed), The Fenland in Roman Times. R.G.S. Research Series No 5, 22-113 Hayes, P. P., 1988, ‘Roman to Saxon in the south Lincolnshire Fens’ Antiquity, 62, 321-6

Hayes, P.P. and Lane, T.W., 1992, The Fenland Project Number 5: Lincolnshire Survey, The South-West Fens. East Anglian Archaeology 55

Healy, F., 1988, ‘Fieldwork in the Norfolk Fens 1959-60: A glimpse of what might have been’. Fenland Research 5, 23-7

Healy, F., 1996, The Fenland Project Number 11: The Wissey Embayment: Evidence for Pre-Iron Age Occupation Accumulated prior to the Fenland Survey. East Anglian Archaeology 78

Lane, T., 1988, ‘The pre-Roman origins for settlement on the fens of south Lincolnshire’. Antiquity, 62, 314-21

Lane, T., 2000a , ‘Cross Drove, Morton’ in Crowson, A., Lane, T. and Reeve, J., Fenland Management Project Excavations 1991-1995. Lincolnshire Archaeology and Heritage Reports Series No 3, 129-34

Lane, T., 2000b , ‘Ferry Farm, Dogdyke’ in Crowson, A., Lane, T. and Reeve, J., Fenland Management Project Excavations 1991-1995. Lincolnshire Archaeology and Heritage Reports Series No 3, 95-9

Lane, T., 2000c , ‘Hoe Hills, Dowsby’ in Crowson, A., Lane, T. and Reeve, J., Fenland Management Project Excavations 1991-1995. Lincolnshire Archaeology and Heritage Reports Series No 3, 99-107

Lane, T. and Hayes, P., 1993, ‘Moving Boundaries in the Fens of South Lincolnshire’, in Gardiner, J. (ed), Flatlands and Wetlands: Current Themes in East Anglian Archaeology, East Anglian Archaeology 50, 58-70

Lane, T. and Morris, E.L., 2001, A Millennium of Saltmaking: Prehistoric and Romano- British Salt Production in the Fenland. Lincolnshire Archaeology and Heritage Reports Series

19 No 4

Miles, W.D., 1976, A History of the Drainage of Bourne South Fen and Thurlby Fen (Boston, Ingelow)

Murphy, P., 1993, ‘Anglo-Saxon Arable Farming on the Silt Fens – preliminary results’, Fenland Research 8, 75-8

Palmer, R., 1995, ‘Integration of Air Photo Interpretation and Field Survey Projects’, Archaeological Prospection, Vol. 2, 167-176

Pryor, F., 1991, Flag Fen. Fenland Prehistoric Centre (London, Batsford)

Pryor, F., 1998a, Farmers in Prehistoric Britain (Stroud, Tempus)

Pryor, F., 1998b, Welland Bank Quarry, South Lincolnshire. Current Archaeology 160, 139-45

Richardson, S.J. and Smith, J., 1977, ‘Peat Wastage in the East Anglian Fens’, Journal of Soil Science, 28, 485-489

Robson J.D., 1990, Soils of the Boston and Spalding District. Mem. Soil Surv. (Harpenden)

Robson, J.D., 1985, Soils in Lincolnshire IV, Sheet TF 45 (Friskney), Soil Survey Record No 88 (Harpenden)

Robson, J.D. and George, H., nd, Peat Soils of the Witham Fen. Unpublished paper

Seale, R.S., 1975, Soils of the Ely District, Mem. Soil Survey England and Wales (Harpenden)

Shennan, I., 1994, ‘Morton Fen’, in Waller, M., The Fenland Project, Number 9: Flandrian Environmental Change in Fenland. East Anglian Archaeology 70, 272-7

Silvester, R.J., 1985, ‘West Walton: The Development of a Siltland Parish’, Norfolk Archaeology 39 (part 2), 101-116

Silvester , R.J., 1988, The Fenland Project Number 3: Norfolk Survey, Marshland and Nar Valley. East Anglian Archaeology 45

Silvester, R.J., 1991, The Fenland Project Number 4: The Wissey Embayment and the Fen Causeway, Norfolk. East Anglian Archaeology 52

Simmons, B.B. and Cope-Faulkner, P., 1997, The Lincolnshire Car Dyke. Past Work, Management Options and Future Possibilities. Unpublished Document, Archaeological Project Services

Smith, G.I., 1937, The Land of Britain. The Report of the Land Utilization Survey of Britain. Part 69 – Lincolnshire (Parts of Holland). (London, Survey of Geographical Publications)

Thirsk, J., 1957, English Peasant Farming (London, Routledge and Keegan Paul)

20 Thirsk, J., 1965, ‘Fenland Farming in the sixteenth century’. Leicester University Press Occasional Papers 3

Trimble, D., 2001, ‘Excavations of an Early Roman Saltern in Morton Fen, Lincolnshire’, in Lane, T. and Morris, E.L., A Millennium of Saltmaking: Prehistoric and Romano-British Salt Production in the Fenland. Lincolnshire Archaeology and Heritage Reports Series No 4, 99-161

Waller, M., 1994, The Fenland Project, Number 9: Flandrian Environmental Change in Fenland. East Anglian Archaeology 70

Williams, M, 1982, ‘Marshland and Waste’, in Cantor, L., (ed), The English Medieval Landscape (London and Canberra, Croom Helm)

Young, A., 1813, General View of the Agriculture of Lincolnshire (1970 Reprint, Newton Abbot, David and Charles)

21 Appendix 1

Questionnaire

When did the field/block of land first come into arable use?

To your knowledge had it been arable at any time before?

If not, how was the change from pasture to arable undertaken? (eg bulldozed first? etc)

What was the impetus for the change from pasture to arable?

To what depth was the land first ploughed?

To what depths has it been ploughed subsequently?

What is the history of deep ploughing/moling?

When was it first underdrained?

How many times has it subsequently been underdrained?

What depth was the watertable when first ploughed?

How has the watertable changed subsequently?

What depth were the fieldside drains when the land was first converted to arable?

How as that changed?

What crops were first sown/planted?

What crops have been grown subsequently?

In particular, has there been any deep rooting crops such as sugar beet (if so how regularly and how far is it estimated that they penetrate)

What is regarded as a normal cycle of cultivation per season (eg ploughing-harrowing-rolling- spraying)

Is that different from when it was first brought into cultivation?