WA Heritage
THE NATIONAL TRUST ESTATE AT HINTON AMPNER, HAMPSHIRE
Archaeological and Historical Survey
Volume 1: Historical Text & Appendices
Prepared for The National Trust Thames & Solent Region Stowe Gardens Buckingham MK18 5EH
by WA Heritage Wessex Archaeology Portway House Old Sarum Park SALISBURY Wiltshire SP4 6EB
Report reference: 67660.01
January 2008
© Wessex Archaeology Limited 2008 all rights reserved Wessex Archaeology Limited is a Registered Charity No. 287786
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
THE NATIONAL TRUST ESTATE HINTON AMPNER HAMPSHIRE
Archaeological and Historical Survey
CONTENTS Summary …………..………………………………………………………………...…………iii Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………….….v
1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 1.1 Project Background...... 1 1.2 Survey and Report Standards...... 1
2 STRATEGY...... 2 2.1 Survey methodology ...... 2 2.2 Time expenditure ...... 2 2.3 Limitations to background research ...... 3 2.4 Limitations of the field survey...... 3
3 DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE...... 3 3.1 The Site ...... 3 3.2 Condition of the Site...... 4 3.3 Geology...... 4 3.4 Background History...... 4 3.5 Background Archaeology...... 6
4 RESULTS...... 7 4.1 Summary of Results...... 7 4.2 Prehistoric landscape...... 7 4.3 Romano-British landscape ...... 10 4.4 Saxon and medieval landscape ...... 11 4.5 Post-medieval and modern landscape...... 12 4.6 Hinton Ampner House and Park ...... 14
5 CONCLUSIONS...... 16 5.1 Summary...... 16 5.2 Brief historical review and significance ...... 17
6 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 18 6.1 Introduction...... 18 6.2 Management recommendations: general considerations ...... 18
7 ARCHIVE ...... 21
8 COPYRIGHT ...... 21
9 REFERENCES...... 22 9.1 Original sources in the Hampshire Record Office (hereafter HRO):...... 22 9.2 Original sources in print ...... 22 9.3 Secondary sources ...... 22 9.4 Websites...... 23 9.5 Contact details ...... 24
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey i
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Key to tithe map unit numbers
Appendix 2: Guidelines for the management of archaeological sites on the National Trust Estate at Hinton Ampner: general principles and legislation
Appendix 3: Recommendations for built structures
Appendix 4: Metal detecting on National Trust land
Appendix 5: Glossary of common archaeological terms
ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure 1: Site Location showing Study Area
Figure 2: Archaeological sites within the northern half of the Study Area
Figure 3: Archaeological sites within the southern half of the Study Area
Figure 4: Historic map regression: 1575 Saxton’s Map of Hampshire and 1759 Taylor’s Map of Hampshire
Figure 5: Historic map regression: 1810 Ordnance Survey Old Series 1”: 1 mile
Figure 6: Copy of 1839 Hinton Ampner and 1838 Kilmeston Tithe Map
Figure 7: 1869 (Rev. 1895) Ordnance Survey map 6”: 1 mile
Figure 8: 1869 (Rev. 1895) Ordnance Survey map 6”: 1 mile
Figure 9: 1869 (Rev. 1895) Ordnance Survey map 6”: 1 mile and Modern map of Field Names for manor Farm with the Study Area
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey ii
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
THE NATIONAL TRUST ESTATE HINTON AMPNER HAMPSHIRE
Archaeological and Historical Survey
SUMMARY
The survey of the National Trust estate at Hinton Ampner, Hampshire was proposed by the Thames and Solent Regional Archaeologist for the National Trust (NT) as part of the continuing enhancement of land management on their properties. It is eventually hoped that all National Trust properties will be incorporated on a centralised Sites and Monuments Record computerised database (henceforth SMR) held at the Estates Advisory Office in Swindon. This report has been prepared by WA Heritage, a specialist section of Wessex Archaeology.
This report contains an assessment of the historical and archaeological importance of the estate. It is made up of a landscape history of the estate, taking into account existing information, as well as the observation of previously unrecorded monuments as part of a detailed walkover survey. In addition, an archaeological inventory of all known sites, extant and non-extant, on the estate is presented for incorporation into the NT’s SMR as a separate Gazetteer (see Volume 2).
The aim of the survey was to examine and record existing monuments identified in the Hampshire Archaeological and Historic Buildings Record (HAHBR) as well as to identify any new sites or monuments during a walkover survey of the study area. Within the parkland area, the extent of the existing and new sites was recorded via GPS to accurately represent the extent of the archaeological sites as lines and polygons. This was to assist in future management of the parkland rather than merely creating a basic plot of points on a map. However, due to time constraints, outside of the parkland area existing and new monuments were recorded only as a central point.
Prior to the commencement of the survey, there were 64 historic environment records for the estate. The HAHBR contains 39 records, which comprise of 12 buildings, 11 are listed, 23 sites/ monuments, 3 findspots and 1 documentary source. These range from prehistoric find spots and Bronze Age barrows through to post-medieval garden features and modern houses. In addition, the NT SMR records a further 25 post- medieval to modern buildings within the estate. In addition, a further 99 monuments were observed. In total 164 sites are recorded within the 600 hectare estate. This corresponds to 42 buildings (including 12 Listed Buildings), 117 monuments and 5 findspots.
The survey has shown that the Hinton Ampner estate is of particular importance for the understanding of the landscape history of this part of Hampshire and that the historical and archaeological resource is significant at several levels. The known and potential remains of prehistoric earthworks make the area an important landscape for the Bronze Age period. This is mostly represented by mortuary earthworks in the form of small clusters of round barrows at Hinton Ampner Park, White Hill and Hurst Down.
Of particular significance is the sizable parish boundary which demarcates Hinton Ampner from Kilmiston. The boundary bank is within Hinton Ampner and as such the boundary encloses the parish. This may be attributed to the Saxon period and may
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey iii
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire indicate an early medieval origin for the parish, perhaps developed from a small Saxon landholding.
The main visible feature that can be attributed to the medieval period and traceable within the landscape is the large break of slope which encloses the central area of parkland. This is speculated to represent a possible park pale.
During the post-medieval period the landscape was exploited principally for farming. The emphasis appears to have been on agriculture with 70% of Hinton Ampner parish occupied with arable fields by 1839. The picture is similarly reflected in the present day landscape with mixed farming, with the emphasis on cereal crops, still in evidence today. In addition to farming, the numerous ‘dells’ (former chalk and gravel pits) which are found across the estate and surrounding district bear testament to the local industrial use of natural resources from the 18 th and 19 th centuries.
Within Hinton Ampner Park, the landscape has expanded and developed around the central core of the house. Much of the present day parkland dates from the late 19 th - 20 th century when it was deemed necessary to create suitable grounds for the recently enlarged Victorian mansion. Protected from 20 th century ploughing, many earlier features remain visible within the present landscape including possible evidence of a medieval deer park as well as the remains of defunct field boundaries, the site of former brick kilns and the substantial remains of an earlier formal garden comprising of terraces, ha-ha, drives and tree avenues. The designed landscape reached beyond the proximity of the parkland around the house into the wider landscape with a possible eye-catcher or mount.
These significant historical and archaeological resources, represented in part by the 164 sites inventoried in Volume 2, mean that the estate is a significant landscape of importance to people of many different interests and pursuits. The presence of the historic National Trust house and gardens at Hinton Ampner is the principal draw for visitors to the area, however, in addition to exploring the past, traditional country activities such as walking, fishing, riding, hunting and shooting also attract visitors to this quiet, sparsely populated corner of mid Hampshire.
The richly farmed, and deeply rural rolling chalk downland across the estate is characterised by dry valleys and dotted woodland typical of this part of the East Hampshire Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, where mainly arable farming continues as it has done for generations.
Although not extensive, the wide range of archaeological and historical sites present in and adjacent to the study area makes Hinton Ampner estate an important area which, combined with the aesthetic beauty of the area makes the estate a significant British landscape.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey iv
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
THE NATIONAL TRUST ESTATE HINTON AMPNER HAMPSHIRE
Archaeological and Historical Survey
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The project was commissioned by the National Trust. WA Heritage, Wessex Archaeology would like to thank all those involved with this project. For the National Trust Gary Marshall, Thames and Solent Region Archaeologist supervised the project throughout and provided advice and help. James Taylor, Hinton Ampner Property Manager, provided much useful information as well as access and contacts for the study area. Many thanks are also due to Charlie Flindt of Manor Farm for information on the recent history and land use of the estate farmland as well as for access to his map collection.
Documentary information was obtained from the Hampshire Record Office in Winchester and the Sites and Monuments data was obtained from the Hampshire Archaeology and Historic Buildings Record (AHBR). Thanks are given to the staff of these organisations for their assistance.
The project was managed for WA Heritage by Paul White, MIFA. Matt Rous, AIFA carried out the walkover survey and compiled this report. The database was designed and administered by Jens Neuberger and the illustrations were prepared by Linda Coleman.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey v
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
THE NATIONAL TRUST ESTATE HINTON AMPNER HAMPSHIRE
Archaeological and Historical Survey
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Project Background
1.1.1 This survey was proposed by the Thames and Solent Region of the National Trust as part of the continuing enhancement of their land management for their properties. It is eventually hoped that all National Trust properties will be incorporated on a centralised Sites and Monuments Record computerised database (henceforth SMR) held by the Archaeology Section at the Swindon Head Office. The brief for the survey was drawn up by Gary Marshall, NT Thames and Solent Region Archaeologist.
1.1.2 The report will outline the strategy for fieldwork and documentary research, followed by an interpretative analysis of the landscape history of the estate. This will contain a brief chronological analysis of the estate, beginning in the Palaeolithic period and finishing at the present. This is followed by management recommendation sections. The text will be supported by illustrations, maps and plates where appropriate. Finally, an archaeological inventory of all known sites (extant and non-extant) within the estate boundaries is presented, as a separate volume.
1.1.3 All archaeological data was entered into GIS for efficient data storage and in order to produce detailed maps that can be rendered thematically, spatially and chronologically. This data is supplied on an attached CD.
1.2 Survey and Report Standards
1.2.1 This report has been written based on the format suggested by the Institute of Field Archaeologists' Standard and guidance for archaeological desk-based assessments (Reading 2001) and The National Trust Guidelines for Sites and Monuments Record Creation and Estate Surveys, Archaeology and the Historic Environment: Historic Landscape Survey Guidelines (2000).
1.2.2 The ordering of information follows the guidelines given in these documents, although alterations have been made to fit in with the particular requirements of the survey. All archaeological work undertaken by Wessex Archaeology is carried out in accordance with the Code of Conduct and other By-laws of the Institute of Field Archaeologists.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 1
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
2 STRATEGY
2.1 Survey methodology
2.1.1 The survey included the production of a gazetteer of archaeological and historic landscape remains for the estate. This included all identifiable earthworks, crop or soil marks, findspots, present and destroyed monuments and any other known archaeological remains. The information has been written according to the format recommended by the National Trust. This includes the full incorporation of the Hampshire Archaeology and Historic Buildings Record (HAHBR) and existing data held by the National Trust Sites and Monuments Record (NT SMR).
2.1.2 The field survey included an assessment of the estate, beginning with the sites listed in the HAHBR and NT SMR, and adding other archaeological sites previously not recorded but observed as part of this survey. This was undertaken on a land parcel by land parcel basis wherever possible and each site was recorded using a pro-forma based on the NT SMR guidance note for field recording (National Trust 2000).
2.1.3 Survey data was collected on a handheld device (HP iPAQ Pocket PC) with an attached GPS receiver using differential GPS (EGNOS correction to approximately 1m accuracy). The data was acquired in PocketGIS and captured as ESRI shape files which can be analysed in ArcView GIS.
2.1.4 Full analysis of buildings is not covered by this survey as these have been previously recorded by the NT Vernacular Buildings Survey (VBS). This details a brief description of the historic buildings on the estate, such as farmhouses, cottages, barns etc. For completeness of the survey the results of the VBS are incorporated into the gazetteer ( Volume 2 ).
2.1.5 A digital photographic record was made of the estate and its historic/archaeological features and landscapes, where this was considered appropriate and where physically possible. These images are incorporated into the gazetteer and are held within the project archive.
2.1.6 Management recommendations have been suggested to ensure the sensitive treatment of historic/archaeological features and landscapes within the estate, where this is considered appropriate.
2.1.7 Where possible, maps, at appropriate scales, have been provided to identify archaeological and historical features etc. These indicate major landscape changes of the period.
2.1.8 All archaeological features, extant and non-extant, have been entered into GIS layers using the GIS software Maptitude 4.6. These layers have then been converted into MapInfo layers for use with the NT’s GIS system.
2.2 Time expenditure
2.2.1 The project was carried out between November 2007 and January 2008. The documentary research and field work was carried out during November 2007 with the survey undertaken in December 2007. The writing-up of the report
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 2
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
and preparation of the gazetteer commenced after finishing the survey, with the project being completed by January 2008.
2.3 Limitations to background research
2.3.1 Due to time constraints a limited study of available primary sources relating to the estate were inspected; some more general documents relating to the history of the parish were too large to undertake more than a selected search.
2.3.2 The research included only limited enquiries of oral history, as it was considered that this was unlikely to reveal any substantial amount of data relating to the project brief.
2.3.3 Aerial photographs of the estate housed in the National Monuments Record archives in Swindon were not examined.
2.3.4 Photographic collections of the estate were not examined. These are likely to be found in the HRO and local studies library and amongst other sources.
2.4 Limitations of the field survey
2.4.1 Due to the time constraints, only within the parkland area of the estate (Figure 1 ) were the extents of visible monuments fully recorded. Beyond the parkland within the agricultural and woodland areas, the presence of monuments was recorded as a single central point.
2.4.2 As noted in Section 2.1 buildings were not visited or examined as part of this survey.
3 DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
3.1 The Site
3.1.1 The Hinton Ampner estate is located within central Hampshire, 12.5km east of Winchester within the civil parish of Bramdean and Hinton Ampner ( Figure 1). The site is centred on Ordnance Survey National Grid Reference 460200 126800 and covers an area of 600.2 hectares. The estate is situated in an area of rolling chalk downland with dry valleys and scattered woodland. The village of Hinton Ampner is situated at approximately 110m aOD with dry valleys to the north and south descending to 85m aOD. The southern extent of the estate rises again to approximately 110m aOD with the village of Kilmeston located on the south-west edge of the estate.
3.1.2 The north-west corner of the estate comprises approximately 30 hectares of parkland and gardens situated around the NT property of Hinton Ampner house and outbuildings. Beyond the parkland, the estate principally comprises an agricultural landscape of arable and pasture fields with managed deciduous woodland mainly located in the south and south-eastern extent of the estate. Within the two dry valleys are remains of three Bronze Age barrow groups and throughout the estate the landscape is dotted with post-medieval small-scale quarrying.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 3
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
3.1.3 The entire estate falls within the East Hampshire Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and a small section of the western part of the estate borders the River Itchen Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) (Unit 103). The citation for the SSSI can be read at: http://www.englishnature.org.uk/special/sssi/sssi_details.cfm?sssi_id=200022 7.
3.2 Condition of the Site
3.2.1 The estate has been managed by the National Trust since it was acquired in 1986. This survey represents the first attempt to assess the condition of the historic landscape of the estate.
3.3 Geology
3.3.1 The geology of the area is predominantly Cretaceous Upper Chalk with overlying clay with flints located across the two ridges at the north and south of the estate. Within the dry valleys are narrow bands of river and valley gravel (British Geological Survey 1957, Alresford Sheet 300).
3.4 Background History
Hinton Ampner
3.4.1 Historical sources for Hinton Ampner indicate that the parish existed during the Saxon period. The Saxon origins of the parish are suggested by the presence of Hinton Ampner church which, despite being heavily rebuilt, retains its Saxon plan form as well as some Saxon stonework (Page 1908).
3.4.2 The name Hinton comes from the Old English ‘high farm’ in an oblique case- form (Coates 1989, 93). Hinton Ampner was among the manors confirmed to the Prior and Convent of St. Swithun, Winchester, in 1205, and again in 1285 (Page 1908). The manor was appropriated to the office of almoner of St. Swithun's (hence the name Ampner which is a corruption of almoner); it defrayed the expenses of the almoner's office and the almoner held the manorial courts either in person or by his bailiff ( ibid ). The second part of the name, Ampner , was added in Tudor times.
3.4.3 The parish of Hinton is listed in the Domesday Book of 1086 as follows:
‘The Bishop himself (of Winchester) holds Hentune. It was always the Minster’s. There are 8 hides. In King Edward’s time as now it paid gold for 5 hides. There is land for 8 ploughs. In the demesne are 3 ploughs, and there are 15 villeins and 14 borders with 5 ploughs. There are 6 serfs and 8 acres of meadow. There is woodland worth 10 swine. There is a church worth 40 shillings but it pays 50 shillings. In King Edward’s time as now it is worth 8 pounds. When received it was worth 100 shillings.’ (Morris 1982) .
3.4.4 The manor remained in the possession of the Priory of St. Swithun until the Dissolution (1536-41) when it passed with the other manors belonging to the Priory to the Dean and Chapter of Winchester, by whom it was leased for a term of 21 years to Sir Thomas Stewkeley in 1637. At the sale of the Dean and Chapter's lands in 1650 it was bought by Sir John Hippesley for the sum of £2,587 17s. 5½d ( ibid ).
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 4
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
3.4.5 A description of the manor house survives from a 1649 Parliamentary survey following seizure of the manor and estate during the Civil War. The estate was considerable and comprised the following:
“A rush house, a mill house, a bake house, a nursery, a foulding house, a well house, a drove house, a granary, a stable, all covered with tyle, with the greatest part of brick and stone, the rest of the dwelling house with timber and Flemish wall, also a Malthouse, three stables under one roof, two great barns, and several outhouses … and two gardens, two orchards well planted, a handsome large Court, well walled, a large outyard and a well yard, also a handsome bowling green with a little house thereon” (Dutton 1998, 32).
3.4.6 Hinton Ampner was recovered by the cathedral church of Winchester at the Restoration and was again held by the Stewkeleys. From the Stewkeleys it passed to the Stawells by the marriage in 1719 of Mary, daughter and heiress of Sir Hugh Stewkeley, with Edward, fourth and last Baron Stawell. Lord Stawell left a daughter and heiress Mary, who was created Baroness Stawell in 1759; she married as her first husband the Hon. Henry Bilson - Legge, who became Baron Stawell in right of his wife; and from this time onwards the descent of the manor follows that of Bedhampton. The manor was held by paying a septennial fine, which was enfranchised by the Hon. John Dutton in 1863. The manor passed down eventually to Ralph Dutton who after restoring much of the house and gardens gave the estate to the National Trust on his death in 1986 (Page 1908).
Kilmeston
3.4.7 The neighbouring parish of Kilmeston also appears to have Saxon origins with the name coming from the Old English Cœnhelm’s Farm . This is an apparently ordinary Anglo-Saxon name although there may have been connection with the cult of the boy-saint Kenelm (Coates 1989, 103).
3.4.8 Land at Kilmeston was in the possession of the cathedral church of Winchester as early as the 10 th century; as in 961 King Edgar, under a licence from the Bishop of Winchester, to whom the land belonged, granted 10 manses at Kilmeston to the thegn Athulf for three lives (Page 1908). On the death of the last survivor the land was to return to the church of St. Peter at Winchester ( ibid ).
3.4.9 At the time of the Domesday Book in 1086 the 10 manses were divided equally and formed two manors of 5 hides each, both belonging to the Bishop, one being held by Edred, apparently in right of his wife, and the other by Godwin. These manors became known as Kilmeston Plunkenet and Kilmeston Gymming from the names of the families who subsequently held them ( ibid ).
3.4.10 The Bishop of Winchester granted Kilmeston Plunkenet to the de la Bere family, before finally being descended to the de Plunkenet family in circa 1230. The manor later passed to the Woodlock family, who held it during the 14 th century. By the early 16 th century the manor had been split in two, one part being held by the Skilling family and the other by the Bengers. The Skillings sold their portion in 1605 to William Lacie, who already held the other Manor of Kilmeston known as Kilmeston Gymming. The Benger family held the other part of Kilmeston Plunkenet until the mid-sixteenth century
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 5
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
when it passed by marriage into the White family, who held the Manor of Southwick near Portsmouth ( ibid ).
3.4.11 Kilmeston Gymming was granted to the Gymming family in the thirteenth century, but the manor later passed to the provosts of St. Elizabeth's Chapel, Winchester, with who it remained until the Dissolution (1536 - 1541). In 1544 the manor was granted to Thomas Wriothesley who conveyed it to Anthony Cope: the land was later passed to John Tichbourne and finally to the Lacie family, who held the estate for 160 years. The land was then merged with the other Manor of Kilmeston Plunkenet ( ibid ).
3.5 Background Archaeology
3.5.1 This section deals only with the state of knowledge prior to the commencement of the survey in November 2007. Statistics given here relate to known sites on the Hampshire Archaeology and Historic Buildings Record (HAHBR) and in the National Trust’s SMR. Prior to the commencement of the survey, there were 64 historic environment records for the estate. The HAHBR contains 39 records, which comprise of 12 buildings, 11 are listed, 23 sites/ monuments, 3 findspots and 1 documentary source. These range from prehistoric find spots and Bronze Age barrows through to post-medieval garden features and modern houses. In addition, the NT SMR records a further 25 post-medieval to modern buildings within the estate.
3.5.2 A collection of findspots reveal a background level of prehistoric activity across the study area with Mesolithic finds comprising a flint core ( 157762 ) and Iron Age and Romano-British pottery ( 157780 and 157781 ).
3.5.3 Important prehistoric sites are confined to three small Bronze Age barrow cemeteries which are situated near the valley floor. There are a total of nine known round barrows within the estate.
3.5.4 The barrows are arranged into three cemetery groups including a group of four located at the northern extent of Hinton Ampner Park, a group of three at the northern extent of White Hill and a group of two at the eastern extent of Hurst Down. None of the barrows is Scheduled and all have suffered damage from continued ploughing, vegetation and/or antiquarian investigation.
3.5.5 Transcriptions of cropmarks, undertaken by HAHBR, record a series of linear features that represent former landscape organisation ( 157877 and 157789 ) in the northern half of the estate ( Figure 2 ). A distinct sub-rectangular enclosure ( 157878 ) is also recorded in the southern half of the estate ( Figure 3).
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 6
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
4 RESULTS
4.1 Summary of Results
4.1.1 This section details the results of the survey and is presented in chronological order by period. Not all of the monuments recorded within the gazetteer (Volume 2 ) are described but rather key monuments which either characterise the resource or illustrate the enhanced understanding of the historical development of the estate.
4.1.2 The 27 non-building HAHBR entries for the estate that have not been previously recorded by the National Trust were allocated a NT SMR number. As part of this survey, the location of these points was visited and their condition recorded. In addition, a further 99 monuments were observed. In total 164 sites are recorded within the 600 hectare estate. This corresponds to 42 buildings (including 12 Listed Buildings), 117 monuments and 5 findspots.
4.1.3 Mesolithic and Bronze Age flint was observed as part of the survey within the cultivated fields of the estate. The condition of the various Bronze Age barrows was recorded and an additional mound has been identified. This mound was recorded on early Ordnance Survey maps but was not subsequently recorded until now as part of the field survey. The purpose of this mound is explored in more detail below as to whether it is an outlier to the barrow cemetery within this area of the park, or is part of the wider designed landscape of Hinton Ampner park due to its location and relationship to the parkland and house.
4.1.4 Various banks are recorded across the estate and some remain part of the present day enclosure pattern. The parish boundary of Hinton Ampner, which also demarcates the parkland area around the house, comprises of a large earthwork bank. Earthwork banks within the parkland may represent earlier (medieval) organisation of the landscape, including a park pale. Several terraces and breaks of slope represent the former configuration of the landscape garden associated to the earlier manor house.
4.1.5 From the late post-medieval periods onwards there are a high number of sites. These range from numerous 18 th to 19 th century quarry sites through to a WWII aircraft crash site and modern houses.
4.2 Prehistoric landscape
Palaeolithic (100,000 - 8500BC) - Mesolithic (8500 – 4000BC)
4.2.1 Although Hampshire is relatively rich in Lower and Middle Palaeolithic material, most of the material is from southern Hampshire with only a handful of credible sites represented in the Winchester district (Schandla-Hall 1977) and none are present within the estate.
4.2.2 However, the estate is in close proximity to the Itchen and Meon valleys. During the Palaeolithic period, it is likely that these river valleys would have
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 7
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
provided an access corridor for groups of hunter-gatherers between the coastal zone and the resources of the chalk downs (Draper 1968, 110-119).
4.2.3 During the Mesolithic, the landscape of this part of Hampshire would have been forested with elm, oak and lime. The continued importance of the neighbouring Rivers Meon and Itchen in terms of hunter-gatherer exploitation of river valley resources is suggested by evidence of flint tools retrieved beyond the study area at Droxford, Shedfield, and East Meon (ibid ).
4.2.4 Two findspots are recorded within the estate, comprising a flint core (157762 ), previously recorded in the HAHBR, and a flint blade found during the walkover survey ( 157763 ). The presence of these findspots indicates a background level of activity during the Mesolithic period.
Neolithic (c.4000 - 2,400BC)
4.2.5 There are no Neolithic monuments or findspots recorded within the estate, although a Scheduled 65mx30m Long Barrow (HAHBR no.18102, SM no.12111) is located approximately 530m to the north of Hinton Ampner Park. During excavations of the barrow in 1944 a decorated rim sherd of Neolithic ‘Ebbsfleet ware’ was discovered (now in Winchester City Museum) along with flint flakes and two indeterminate sherds and animal bones (RCHME 1979, 9). The presence of the barrow is likely to suggest that Neolithic settlement activity was present at least in the northern extent of the estate. In addition to fulfilling funerary purposes over many generations, such features also fulfilled a function as a territorial marker within the Neolithic (and later) landscape. The nearest Neolithic activity located to the estate is situated 8km to the south-east in the upper Meon valley with long barrows recorded at Long Barrow House, Droxford (SM no. 12091) and another on Old Winchester Hillfort (SM no. 31159).
Bronze Age (2,400 BC - 700 BC)
4.2.6 Bronze Age activity within the estate is principally represented by three round barrow cemeteries. It is likely that many more barrows originally existed within or adjacent to the estate and of the remaining nine known barrows, five have been severely damaged by ploughing with the remaining four, located within Hinton Ampner Park, damaged to a lesser extent by 19 th and 20 th century tree planting, quarrying and by antiquarian investigation. This mutilation has affected the interpretation of the individual relationships between each of the barrows with ploughing action destroying any evidence for inter-cutting which might suggest the sequence of construction.
4.2.7 The largest group within the estate is a group of four barrows located in the northern area of Hinton Ampner Park. The barrows are positioned as two pairs with 157768 and 157770 located approximately 60m to the north-east of 157771 and 157777 . The group of four, although damaged, survive better than the two other barrow groups as they have not been subject to regular ploughing. However, the Hinton Ampner Park barrows are all topped with mature trees and barrows 157768 and 15770 show signs of antiquarian investigation.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 8
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
4.2.8 Approximately 1km to the south-east of this first cemetery is a small group of three barrows located at the northern end of White Hill field (157764 , 157765 and 157775 ). The cemetery group is aligned north-west to south-east. The relationship between the group is not possible to establish due to continuous ploughing which has severely diminished the monuments. The small size of the group, its distance from the barrow cemetery to the north-west and the close proximity of all three barrows suggests that this may represent a family group and settlement which may have been separate from the larger barrow cemetery located at the northern end of Hinton Ampner Park. An archaeological excavation investigated one of the barrows ( 157764) in 1932 and uncovered cremation and inhumation burials (157767 and 157769) and some worked flint implements. The location of these artefacts have not been determined as part of this project.
4.2.9 Located approximately 2.25km east-south-east of the White Hill Field barrow group, and at the eastern extent of Hurst Down and the estate, are two round barrows ( 157773 and 157778 ) which are aligned north-west to south-east. The relationship between the pair is not possible to establish due to continuous ploughing which has mutilated the monuments. Located 150m to the south-east (and outside of the estate) is a better preserved bowl barrow (HAHBR no. 23901) which appears to have not been subject to recent ploughing activity and can be considered to be part of the cemetery group. The three Hurst Down barrows are likely to represent a separate family group and settlement. An archaeological excavation of barrow 157778 in 1930 found a flint cairn ( 157779 ) piled on top of a pit ( 157776 ) which contained a cremation ( 157772 ) unaccompanied by any surviving grave goods.
4.2.10 As part of this survey, a possible single round barrow ( 157879 ) has been located approximately 400m to the north-west of the White Hill Field group. Although not marked on recent Ordnance Survey maps the monument is marked on the 1810 Old Series OS map ( Figure 5) and is similar in appearance to the ploughed-out barrow group located in White Hill Field. One other possibility for this monument could be an 18 th century prospect mount or folly, which may have incorporated an earlier monument. It is situated in view line from Hinton Ampner house across the formal gardens approximately 450m to the north-north-east.
4.2.11 It is unclear whether the community inhabiting the northern part of the estate during the Bronze Age was a different social group to that found at White Hill Field or at Hurst Down. The difference in the arrangement and number of barrows between the three areas does not necessarily mean they were created by different communities. The presence of at least 10 barrows within a small area may indicate an established and continuous settlement throughout the Bronze Age.
4.2.12 Across much of southern England barrows are often situated on ridges or high points where they can be seen for long distances, however, this does not appear to be the case for the barrows located within the estate which are ,despite their proximity to higher ground, situated on the hillside near to the valley bottoms. The setting of barrows close to the valley bottoms is a recurrent theme in parts of east Hampshire and may reflect the importance of well-watered pasture to the early Bronze Age barrow builders (BAS 2003, 25). This pattern appears to be highly localised as in contrast the long barrow and
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 9
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
round barrow cemetery situated at the top of Old Winchester Hill is located only 8.8km to the south-east of the estate.
4.2.13 In the case of Hinton Ampner, one possible reason for the siting of the barrow groups may be the source of the River Itchen, which is located approximately 550m to the south-west of the Hinton Ampner Park cemetery group. The presence of springs and watercourses is though to have had considerable ritualistic significance during the Bronze Age and throughout prehistory, which may have influenced the siting of settlements and the location of burial grounds to reflect ancestral rights over water sources or grazing.
Iron Age (800 BC - AD 43)
4.2.14 The Iron Age in the Winchester district is characterised by the early development of hillforts, a wide distribution of ‘Celtic’ fields (which in many instances pre-date the Iron Age) and large numbers of circular and sub- circular farm enclosures (Schandla-Hall 1977, 26). However, evidence for Iron Age activity within the estate is limited to only one find spot of pottery (157780 ), found in 1970 during ploughing to the south-east of the village of Kilmeston. Despite the lack of direct settlement evidence within the estate, aerial photography has located the presence of two Iron Age enclosures indicating settlement within the general area.
4.2.15 A circular enclosure with some resemblance to a ‘banjo’ and measuring approximately 60m in diameter has been located approximately 600m to the west of Hinton Ampner Park (also in Cheriton) (Schandla-Hall 1977, 116). Another ‘banjo’ enclosure identified approximately 2km to the north-east of the estate in Bramdean was excavated in 1974 produced late Iron Age and early Romano-British finds (ibid). Approximately 15 similar ‘banjo’ enclosures have been identified elsewhere within the Winchester district (ibid, 27).
4.3 Romano-British landscape
Roman (AD 43 - AD 410)
4.3.1 Evidence for Roman activity within the estate is limited to only one find spot of Romano-British pottery ( 157781 ), discovered at the northern extent of the estate in Hinton Ampner Park in 1936. This pottery is recorded as being destroyed during the 1961 Hinton Ampner House fire.
4.3.2 Despite the lack of evidence within the estate, Romano-British activity is present in the vicinity with a system of square enclosures located approximately 1km to the north-east of Hinton Ampner Park. The enclosures are visible at this location during the summer as parch marks measuring approximately 2.74m wide (HAHBR no. 23926). A single piece of Roman pottery was recovered from the location in 1956.
4.3.3 Of greater significance is the Roman villa at Bramdean (HAHBR no. 23879, SM no. 209) located approximately 2km to the east of Hinton Ampner Park. The villa was first discovered and investigated in the mid-19 th century, revealing a simple structure which was occupied from c.AD 100-250 before being rebuilt, possibly in a courtyard pattern, during the late 3rd century AD. A hypocaust system was located and finds of painted plaster and a pit which
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 10
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
contained animal bones were made. Two of the rooms were found to contain elaborate mosaic floors. One measured 6.1m x 4.9m, the other 4.3m².
4.3.4 Roman villas were high-status houses frequently associated with out buildings and often linked to a rural estate, which is likely to have included land incorporated within the estate. The establishment of the villa at Bramdean shows signs of continuity of settlement due to its close proximity to a late Iron Age ‘banjo’ enclosure. Despite this apparent connection, the Romanisation of the area is likely to have meant numerous and significant changes across the rural landscape of the study area. The establishment of new villa estates would have posed far reaching changes with the adoption of new economic objectives, new farming techniques for achieving those objectives, new organisation of the labour force on the estate and possible change in ownership of the land (Branigan 1982).
4.4 Saxon and medieval landscape
Saxon (AD410-AD1066)
4.4.1 There are currently no archaeological finds that can be attributed to the Saxon period within the estate.
4.4.2 Bede offers the first written information of the general area in the early 8 th century when he notes the presence of a Jutish province within southern Hampshire, and makes reference to a specific group of Jutes living within the neighbouring Meon valley (Stoodley and Steadman 2001, 133). Excavated remains have revealed early to middle period Saxon occupation evidence and an associated burial ground at Shavards Farm, Meonstoke ( ibid , 129-169).
4.4.3 Most of the villages and hamlets in and around the estate appear to have origins during the Saxon period. Hinton Ampner or “Hentune” meaning high farm (Ampner being added during the Tudor period) is mentioned in the Domesday survey of 1086, as is Bramdean or “ Biondene/Brondene” , and Kilmeston or “ Chelmestune” . Cheriton does not feature within the survey. The presence of these 3 villages by the late 11 th century suggests a likelihood of earlier Saxon settlement for which no evidence has yet come to light. One possible reason is that Saxon occupation evidence tends to be limited because their structures were rather ephemeral and because there is a tendency for later occupation to have masked them.
4.4.4 One prominent feature of the estate, likely to be Saxon in date, is the large bank and ditch that exists along much of the present parish boundary between Kilmeston and Hinton Ampner. The bank is particularly well preserved to the south and west of Hinton Ampner Park where it is identified in the Gazetteer in a series of three major sections ( 157862, 157863 and 157782 ). Many similar extensive earthworks defining parish boundaries are known to date from the Saxon period.
Medieval (AD1066-AD1499)
4.4.5 The Domesday Book reveals that much of the area was already in the hands of the Bishop of Winchester by 1086 and it remained in church possession throughout the medieval period until the Reformation. As part of the walkover
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 11
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
survey, some of the observed earthwork monuments could be attributed to the medieval period.
4.4.6 A steep break of slope bank runs on an irregular east-west line through much of the northern Park, to varying states of survival ( 157794, 157864 and 157883 ). This monument is attributed as medieval as it does not follow the geometric post-medieval enclosure system recorded on historical maps and later quarrying and track ways ( 157825 , 157813 and 157885 ) disrupt the course of the monument/break of slope. The monument may represent the outer precinct boundaries of the medieval manor or may represent a section of medieval park pale. This latter interpretation is reinforced by a study of the 1839 Hinton Ampner tithe map and apportionment which records a field to the south of this bank as Deer Park .
4.4.7 Within the Kilmeston parish area of the estate, three hollow ways/sunken roads ( 157784 , 157787 and 157788 ) are indicated as roads or trackways on the 1810 OS map ( Figure 5). One of the hollow ways ( 157784 ) is presently in use as a footpath and green lane, however, (157787 ) and (157788 ) have been abandoned and are becoming blocked with scrub/ vegetation.
4.5 Post-medieval and modern landscape
Post medieval and Modern (AD1500-1799 and 1800-present)
4.5.1 Evidence for the development of the estate landscape during the post- medieval period comes principally from a study of the 1839 Hinton Ampner tithe map and apportionment (HRO: 21M65/F7/117/2) and the 1838 Kilmeston tithe map and apportionment (HRO: 21M65/F7/131/2). Appendix 1 gives details of the ownership, tenant holdings and land use recorded in both tithe maps. This can be used alongside other documentary evidence and the walkover survey evidence compiled in this report to detail land use in the period c.1550 to 1839.
4.5.2 An examination of the Hinton Ampner tithe apportionment shows that the majority of land by the early-mid 19 th century comprised arable fields, with woodland and pasture situated where the topography or soil was unsuitable for agriculture, e.g. clay-capped ridges. The apportionment reveals that most of the area encompassed within the estate was owned by Lord Sherborne and occupied by John Spencer. Approximately 70% of the estate was given over to arable farming, 19% of the estate was occupied by woodland with 10% given over to pasture.
4.5.3 Field names listed in the tithe apportionments are of considerable interest as they can sometimes provide information on activities within, or characteristics of, a particular land division. Typical information can include an indication of the soil type of an area, e.g. Lower Chalk Field , or what buildings or features stood within it, e.g. Barn Field , Dell Close . The prehistoric barrows in the south-eastern corner of the estate gave rise to Burrow Hurst Down. Unsurprisingly, field names sometimes provide a record of activity which had once taken place within the area, e.g. Brick Kiln Park and Deer Park . These names are likely to date back to considerably earlier than the late 1830s, with Deer Park perhaps indicative of possible medieval origins. Many of the names of the fields represented in the Hinton Ampner tithe map are still in use today.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 12
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
These include England’s , White Hill , Hurst Down , Dell Close and Park Close, along with several others ( Figure 9).
4.5.4 Seventeen years before the production of the Hinton Ampner tithe map, the landscape in this part of Hampshire was described by William Cobbett during his ‘Rural Rides’ in the early 1820s. During a trip from Alresford to the village of Exton in the Meon valley in November 1822, Cobbett would have passed by the villages of Cheriton and Kilmeston. His general description of the area paints an interesting but gloomy picture of the area:
“The whole country that I have crossed is loam and flints upon a bottom of chalk….These counties are purely agricultural; they have suffered most cruelly from the accursed Pitt-system. Their hilliness, bleakness, roughness of roads, render them unpleasant to the luxurious, effeminate, tax-eating, crew who never come near them, and who have pared them down to the very bone….The villages are all in a state of decay, the farm buildings dropping down, bit by bit” (Cobbett 2001).
4.5.5 Cobbett appears to have been in happier mood when he visited the area again in the summer of 1823. The nearby Itchen valley was singled-out for particular attention when Cobbett remarked that :
“There are few spots in England more fertile or more pleasant; and none, I believe, more healthy ”.
4.5.6 Cobbett always took an interest in the state of agriculture in the areas through which he passed, commenting on fields which were cultivated for wheat, barley, peas, beans and Swedish turnips (swedes). The potential harvest in the area appeared so abundant during August 1823 that Cobbett recorded:
“In looking at these crops, one wonders whence are to come the hands to clear them off ” ( ibid )
4.5.7 The largest impact on the landscape across the estate during the modern period appears to have been the increase in field size. A study of the 1895 Ordnance Survey 6” map reveals a reduction in the amount of small fields and hedgerows in comparison to the 1838 Kilmeston and 1839 Hinton Ampner tithe maps. As was happening elsewhere across the country, the creation of larger arable fields appears to have continued apace into the 20 th century accelerating particularly during and after WWII with the drive for increased food production. Within the estate, field enlargement and hedgerow removal continued up to the 1980s (C. Flindt pers. comm.). The present day field arrangement is reproduced in Figure 9. These fields are still principally used for cereal crops, however, the introduction of oil seed rape in the 1970s has replaced some of the more ‘traditional’ crops which would have been seen by Cobbett during his rides though the area in the 1820s.
4.5.8 Although arable farming appears to have taken up the majority of the land within the estate, some of the land was always reserved for pasture. Recollections by Harry Forbes, a foreman at Manor Farm during the 1940s and 1950s describes 200 Hampshire Downs sheep and a further 200 crossbreeds on the farm together with about 60 dairy cows. A horse and cart was used around the farm to carry the mangels for the cattle feed.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 13
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
4.5.9 Besides farming, another important rural economic activity which has left traces on the landscape is quarrying. Mapping evidence has revealed that small-scale quarrying was taking place within the estate during the 19 th century and it is likely that this activity was occurring much earlier. During the walkover survey, 23 disused quarry pits of varying sizes were recorded and historic mapping confirms that 12 were in operation during the 19 th century.
4.5.10 In an area with no naturally occurring stone, quarried chalk was occasionally used as a building material in block form and for conversion to quicklime for mortar. However, it was probably more commonly used for liming heavy clay soils. This appears to have happened particularly from the mid 19 th century onwards where, together with improved drainage and composting, chalk (or lime) was used extensively to improve crop yields. The majority of the chalk pits that survive (known today as ‘dells’) are rather small pits suggesting that quarrying was taking place on a relatively local scale. The peak in local chalk quarrying appears to have ended by the mid-late 19 th century, possibly in the face of cheaper competition from large industrial quarries such as that in operation at Portsdown Hill (near Portsmouth). The vast majority of the pits shown in the 1895 Ordnance Survey map are shown as ‘ Old Chalk Pit ’ indicating that they may not have been in operation by this time.
4.5.11 Traces of former settlement and buildings were identified by a large flat platform ( 157796 ) at the eastern end of Hinton Ampner village. Earthworks of a small cottage ( 157807) and associated plock (157806 ) and uncapped well shaft ( 157827 ), recorded on the 1839 Tithe Map and 1869 OS map, were identified on the western edge of the estate. This land parcel is recorded on the Tithe Apportionment as being in the ownership of William Chafy, Gilbert Ainslie, George Archdall, John Wood as Trustees, with these people as occupiers along with Henry Budd.
4.5.12 The vast majority of post-medieval/modern features identified during the walkover survey comprise field boundaries. These are most likely to date from the late post-medieval and early modern period when the many of fields were enclosed. Most of the field boundaries recorded are featured on the Hinton Ampner or Kilmeston tithe maps ( Figure 6 ). Within the parkland the alignment of low earthwork banks (157817 , 157819 , 157822 , 157826 and 157886 ) can be traced on the Tithe map and have been subsequently removed. Cropmarks ( 157789 ) to the south-east of the parkland also appear to be on the alignment of former landscape divisions recorded on the Tithe Map.
4.5.13 One modern record of particular interest is a WWII aircraft crash site ( 157853 ) which is located within Rough Field ( Figure 9) (C. Flindt pers. comm.). The aircraft was a carrier-based Royal Navy Fairey ‘Barracuda’ dive bomber which crashed with a crew of three. Excavations during the 1970s uncovered most of the aircraft which was removed to the RNAS museum at Yeovilton (ibid), although subsequent ploughing of the field has revealed the aircraft’s Merlin engine which is currently stored at Manor Farmhouse.
4.6 Hinton Ampner House and Park
4.6.1 The earliest origins of a house at Hinton Ampner appear to be a building which stood to the west of the church which apparently burned down during the Dissolution (Dutton 1998, 30). It is likely that this probably medieval house and collection of outbuildings would have been property associated with the
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 14
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
almoner of Winchester Cathedral. The Tudor house at Hinton Ampner was constructed by Sir Thomas Stewkeley, who took a lease on the estate in 1597. This Tudor manor house comprised several buildings and outhouses, evidence of which is now mostly concealed below ground after demolition of the house and construction of the later gardens. A Parliamentarian survey of the estate in 1649 described the buildings as being built of brick and stone (ibid , 32).
4.6.2 A study of the 1839 Hinton Ampner Tithe map and apportionment suggests that a field to the west of the House known as ‘Brick Kiln Park’ may have been the site of kilns which were used in the construction of bricks for this house. Irregular earthworks observed within the Park during the walkover survey ( 157798 , 157811 , 157818 and 157820 ) possibly indicate the site of these brick kilns.
4.6.3 The Tudor house survived until 1793 with formal gardens possibly laid out to the south as indicated on Taylor’s 1759 map of Hampshire ( Figure 4 ). This may have comprised of several parterres although the map only shows a fenced or embanked garden with a central avenue of trees leading from the south front of the house. The remains of a lime tree avenue on the same alignment as shown in Taylor’s 1759 map ( 157842 ) survives within Hinton Ampner Park. However, following re-siting and construction of the new house in 1793, the avenue was partially removed as it no longer aligned symmetrically onto the front of the house (as well as being out of fashion by that time). The remaining trees from the earlier avenue now form three separate clumps (Dutton 1998, 105).
4.6.4 The western edge of the garden, as demarcated on Taylor’s map, may be attributed to the 6m wide and 0.6m high bank ( 157793 ) to the southwest of the main house. This boundary does not appear on the 1839 Tithe Map suggesting the abandonment of the earlier garden by this time, although a row of trees (now lost) on the 1869 OS map ( Figure 7 ) may confirm this as the extent of the formal garden. The eastern edge of the garden appears to be preserved as an existing mature boundary on the eastern edge of the parkland and Bottom of Englands field ( Figure 9 ).
4.6.5 At the southern end of the formal garden are two further landscape features which relate to the designed landscape. A shallow break of slope ( 157823 ) appears to define the southern extent of the ‘enclosed/parterre’ garden. Beyond this is a large terrace which has reworked the parish boundary (157783 ). This terrace is monumentally large in comparison to other earthworks observed within the estate and can be specifically attributed to the design of the formal garden at Hinton Ampner. Such earthwork terraces are representative of late 17 th and early 18 th century garden design when formal terraces began to spread out into the middle landscape (Currie 2005). This provided a promenade on the edge of the wilder landscape beyond the confines of the more formal landscape. Also at Hinton Ampner this terrace frames the view back towards the house from beyond the parkland.
4.6.6 The framing of the view to and from the house is of particular interest when the location of the recently discovered mound ( 157879 ) is considered. The mound is located halfway up the opposite slope of the dry valley to the south of Hinton Ampner house. Although the possibility of the monument being a Bronze Age barrow cannot be fully ruled out, this feature does appear to be a
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 15
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
suitable candidate for an eye-catcher or folly within the borrowed landscape beyond the parkland and provides a grand view back towards the house and garden as a prospect or picnic mount.
4.6.7 Nearer to the house a short length of a Ha-ha (157840 ) survives on the western edge of the formal lawn.
4.6.8 The post-Tudor house comprised a plain yellow brick Georgian box, which forms the core of the present Hinton Ampner house (157761 ). In 1867 John Dutton remodelled and enlarged this house in the neo-Tudor style and created a garden of formal parterres below it. The conversion from Georgian house to Victorian mansion meant that the house was considered out of scale with its surroundings. This in turn led to the boundaries of Hinton Ampner Park being expanded to create the present day park. To create this enlarged setting several clumps of trees were planted (Dutton 1998, 127) and field boundaries appear to have gradually disappeared with few remaining within the Park today compared with the 1839 Hinton Ampner tithe map.
4.6.9 Tree planting appears to have increased during the late 1930s under Ralph Dutton with several plantations of beech and other trees across the Park. During the early years of the 20 th century the entranceway to the house was altered with the creation of a gatehouse ( 128053 ) and driveway which was put across the northern slope to join the house up with the main Winchester – Petersfield Road. This short-cut allowed visitors views of the extended Park before reaching the enlarged house as well as avoiding a drive through the village to get to the house. Traces of an earlier alignment to the drive appear to survive in the northwest corner of the estate ( 157812 ).
4.6.10 Upon inheriting the estate in 1935 Ralph Dutton decided to demolish most of the Victorian mansion and sought to reveal the Georgian core of the house giving the whole house the 18th-century appearance visible today ( 157761 ). From the 1930s–1960s, Ralph Dutton remodelled the garden to create something more in keeping with the neo-Georgian house. This included incorporating the earlier lime avenue (157842 ) into the scheme of the garden with the addition of a temple and statue of Diana (see front cover of Gazetteer, Volume 2 ).
5 CONCLUSIONS
5.1 Summary
5.1.1 The purpose of the survey was to examine and record all sites and monuments within the NT Estate at Hinton Ampner. This involved visiting existing monuments identified in the Hampshire Archaeology and Historic Buildings Register (HAHBR) as well as identifying new sites through a walkover survey. Within the parkland surrounding the house, the extent of each existing or new site was recorded via GPS onto a pocket GIS to accurately represent the extent of the archaeological site as lines or polygons. By identifying the location and extent of each individual monument within the parkland this will assist in the future management of the estate rather than simply creating a basic plot of points on a map.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 16
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
5.1.2 Outside of the parkland, time constraints led to recording of features via a central co-ordinate to identify the position of the monument. Across the estate, management recommendations were also added for each monument where appropriate. These are presented in detail within the Gazetteer, Volume 2.
5.1.3 Prior to the commencement of the survey, there were 64 historic environment records for the estate. The HAHBR contains 39 records, which comprise of 12 buildings, 12 are listed, 23 sites/ monuments, 3 findspots and 1 documentary source. These range from prehistoric find spots and Bronze Age barrows through to post-medieval garden features and modern houses. In addition, the NT SMR records a further 25 post-medieval to modern buildings within the estate.
5.2 Brief historical review and significance
5.2.1 The historical and archaeological resource of the National Trust estate at Hinton Ampner is significant at several levels. The known and potential remains of prehistoric earthworks in and adjacent to the estate make the estate an important landscape for the Bronze Age period. The positioning of barrows near to the valley floor in this part of Hampshire reflects a different tradition to that displayed in other areas of the county where barrows are typically situated on hill tops or in prominent positions. The Hinton Ampner Park barrow group is of particular significance as its location within proximity of a Neolithic long barrow suggests a possible continuity in settlement from the Neolithic to the Bronze Age.
5.2.2 Despite the moderate level of surviving Bronze Age earthworks, evidence from the Iron Age is poor with only one findspot of pottery from within the estate. Fortunately aerial photography has revealed Iron Age settlement sites in the vicinity of the study area with a late Iron Age ‘banjo’ enclosure to the east of the estate showing evidence of continuity into the Roman period with finds of Iron Age and Romano-British date. Archaeological excavations at an Iron Age ‘banjo’ enclosure and subsequent Roman villa at neighbouring Bramdean indicates an occupied rural landscape across this part of east central Hampshire.
5.2.3 Of particular significance to the development of the landscape is the sizable parish boundary which demarcates Hinton Ampner from Kilmeston. The boundary bank is within Hinton Ampner and as such the boundary encloses the parish. This may be attributed to the Saxon period and may indicate an early medieval origin for the parish, perhaps developed from a small Saxon landholding.
5.2.4 The main visible feature that can be attributed to the medieval period and traceable within the landscape is the large break of slope which encloses the central area of parkland. This is speculated to represent a possible park pale.
5.2.5 During the post-medieval period the landscape was exploited principally for farming. The emphasis appears to have been on agriculture with 70% of Hinton Ampner parish occupied with arable fields in 1839. The picture is similarly reflected in the present day landscape with mixed farming, with the emphasis on cereal crops, still in evidence today. In addition to farming, the numerous ‘dells’ (former chalk and gravel pits) which are found across the
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 17
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
estate and surrounding district bear testament to the industrial use of natural resources from the 18 th and 19 th centuries.
5.2.6 Within Hinton Ampner Park, the landscape has expanded and developed around the central core of the house. Much of the present day parkland dates from the late 19 th -20 th century when it was deemed necessary to create suitably enlarged grounds for the recently enlarged Victorian mansion. Protected from 20 th century ploughing, many earlier features remain visible within the present landscape including possible evidence of a medieval deer park as well as the remains of defunct field boundaries, the site of former brick kilns and the substantial remains of an earlier formal garden comprising of terraces, ha-ha, drives and tree avenues. The designed landscape reached beyond the proximity of the parkland around the house into the wider landscape with a possible eye-catcher or mount.
5.2.7 There are 42 buildings recorded within the estate, 14 are listed. Of the listed buildings, two are of National importance; Hinton Ampner Place, an early 18 th century rectory and Hinton Ampner House, the main parkland house. The other listed buildings are of Regional Importance and mainly relate to the cluster of buildings around Hinton Ampner village. Many are late 17 th century in construction with minimal remodelling. These buildings contribute to the local vernacular style and local distinctiveness of the estate. In addition, an unlisted, small late 19 th /early 20 th century lodge on the edge of the park contributes to the parkland sense of place of the National Trust holding.
5.2.8 These significant historical and archaeological resources, represented in part by the 164 sites inventoried in Volume 2 , mean that the estate is a significant landscape of importance to people of many different interests and pursuits. The wide range of archaeological and historical sites present in and adjacent to the Hinton Ampner estate makes this landscape an important area which, combined with the aesthetic beauty of the area makes the estate a significant British historic landscape.
6 RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1 Introduction
6.1.1 Only broad outline management recommendations relating to general considerations are given here. Specific recommendations for individual sites are given in the Gazetteer in Volume 2.
6.2 Management recommendations: general considerations
6.2.1 These general management recommendations conform to those set out in the National Trust’s Archaeology and the Historic Environment (2000), 24-30.
6.2.2 Integrity of the estate
Recommendation: Management should try to ensure that the integrity of the estate as a whole is preserved.
This goes beyond retaining the land as a single unit, but includes the preservation of all the features within it, not just those that are obviously
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 18
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
historic such as the buildings. Old tracks, hedgerows and even old trees are as important in a landscape as historic buildings.
6.2.3 Trees
Recommendation: Historic recognition of trees should be extended to include all historic trees, including those not planted as part of designed landscaping.
The difference with trees in non-designed areas is that they do not necessarily need replacing if they die. It is often preferable that areas of historic woodland are allowed to regenerate naturally. What is required of management, however, is that practices should not be adopted that will accidentally damage historic trees. This includes considerations such as the inappropriate siting of car parking in areas where this will cause root compaction to historic trees.
6.2.4 Hedgerows
Recommendation: Historic hedgerows and boundaries should be respected.
Some of the hedgerows on the estate may be of some antiquity. These should be vigorously preserved, both as habitats and as historical boundary alignments. Where hedgerow trees are lost through natural causes, the management should consider their replacement. Care should be taken to ensure replacements are in keeping with the original hedge. Such statements may be obvious, but exotic species, even when they are closely related cultivars to native species, should not be encouraged.
It should be noted that, since June 1997, planning regulations have been introduced to protect hedgerows considered to be important. It is now an offence to grub up a hedgerow without applying to the local authority for permission. They, in turn, assess whether the hedgerow merits preservation, and gives a decision accordingly (Howard 1998). Further details can be found in Appendix 2, section 2.5.
6.2.5 Trackways
Recommendation: Historic trackways should be respected.
The trackways which run across the study area may be amongst the oldest features on the estate. It could be argued that many of the old tracks are prehistoric in origin. It is vital that they should not be harmed in any way. A diversion of old tracks for the convenience of motor vehicles should be particularly resisted.
6.2.6 Staff awareness
Recommendation: All NT staff should be made aware of the need to report incidents likely to have impact on the historic aspects of the landscape.
The management should ensure that all staff should be aware of the need to protect the historic landscape and potential archaeological sites. This awareness needs to be extended to all field staff, especially those working
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 19
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
out on the estate. The management might consider the need to extend this to tenant farmers. This could be achieved through routine awareness/training sessions arranged through the Estates Department.
6.2.7 Farming practices
Recommendation: Farming practices should be monitored for impact on archaeological sites.
The management should be aware of any changes in current practice proposed by tenant farmers. Proposed changes in ploughing techniques, the alteration of land use, new drainage measures, or the adaptive re-use of farm buildings are possible threats to the historic landscape and archaeology. These should be subject to negotiation between the tenant and the NT to avoid potential damage.
Permanent pasture is an ideal environment for the preservation of archaeological remains. However, intensive stock management or conversely the allowance of scrub encroachment needs to be avoided. Drainage works should also be avoided near archaeological remains.
6.2.8 Historic buildings
These recommendations apply to all buildings recorded on the NT estate.
1. Any modifications or repairs affecting these structures should be preceded by an archaeological/analytical survey. This should include a basic plan, and where appropriate sections and elevations, at a scale of at least 1:50, supported by written descriptions and photographs. Photographs should be taken in digital, colour and monochrome; the latter for long-term archival purposes.
2. Subsequent opportunities arising to record historic fabric during repair work should be taken to supplement this record. Details of any new repair work should be recorded and added to this entry in the Sites and Monuments Record.
3. Historical fabric should not be removed from these buildings or their environs without consulting the National Trust archaeological advisers.
4. Should below ground excavation be undertaken in the vicinity of these buildings, advice should be sought from the National Trust archaeological advisers.
6.2.9 Metal detecting
Metal detecting is a growing hobby in the UK. It can cause considerable damage to archaeological sites. As a matter of policy, metal detecting should not be allowed on any National Trust land. Only in special circumstances can detecting be permitted, and then only if it is carried out under archaeological supervision, as part of a structured project approved by National Trust Archaeological Advisers. See appendix 5 for current NT guidelines.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 20
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
6.2.10 Burrowing animals
Burrowing animals such as rabbits and badgers can do extensive damage to archaeological remains. Mechanisms for the control of such animals can be found as document guidelines on the DEFRA website:
http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-countryside/vertebrates/default.htm
7 ARCHIVE
7.1.1 Copies of this report will be housed at the NT Head Office in Swindon, at the Regional Headquarters at Hughenden Manor, at the Thames and Solent Regional Archaeological Archive at Stowe Gardens, Buckinghamshire and at the property headquarters based at Hinton Ampner. The archaeological inventory that results from the survey will be added to the national computerised database currently being developed by the Trust.
7.1.2 Copies of the report are also to be placed in the National Monuments Record, Swindon, Wiltshire, and at Wessex Archaeology’s main offices in Salisbury, Wiltshire.
8 COPYRIGHT
8.1.1 Copyright of this report is retained jointly between the National Trust and Wessex Archaeology. Both organisations agree to consult over any subsequent requests for reproduction and/or publication of the survey data in any form.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 21
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
9 REFERENCES
9.1 Original sources in the Hampshire Record Office (hereafter HRO):
Maps examined in HRO:
21M65/F7/117/2 Tithe Map for Hinton Ampner 1839 21M65/F7/131/2 Tithe Map for Kilmeston, 1838
Maps examined (not in HRO):
Ordnance Survey maps (supplied by C. Flindt of Manor Farm): OS 6” map (1895 revision) OS 25” sheet 51.2, (1909 ed) OS 25” sheet 51.6, (1909 ed) OS 25” sheet 51.7, (1909 ed)
Other maps
1957 British Geological Survey Map (Drift),1:63,360, Alresford, Sheet 300 Saxton’s 1575 Map of Hampshire Taylor’s 1759 Map of Hampshire
9.2 Original sources in print
Morris, J., 1982, Domesday Book. Hampshire , Phillimore
9.3 Secondary sources
Berkshire Archaeological Services (BAS), 2003, A Survey of Non-Scheduled Archaeological Sites in the East Hampshire AONB
Branigan, K, 1982, ‘Celtic farm to Roman Villa’, in Miles, D(ed), The Romano-British Countryside, Studies in Rural Settlement and Economy , B.A.R. British Series 103(i)
Coates, R, 1989, The Place-names of Hampshire , Batsford
Cobbett, W, 2001, Rural Rides , Penguin
Currie, C, 2005, Garden Archaeology, A Handbook , CBA Practical Handbook 17
Department of the Environment, 1990, Planning Policy Guidance: archaeology and planning, Planning Policy Guidance 16 , London, HMSO
Draper, J C, 1968, ‘Mesolithic distribution in south-east Hampshire’, Proc Hampshire Field Club Arch Soc , 22, 110–119
Dutton, R, 2000, A Hampshire Manor, Hinton Ampner , National Trust
Evans, J. G., 1971, ‘The Impact of Neolithic Man.’ in Simpson, D. D. A., (ed) Economy and Settlement in Neolithic and Bronze Age Britain and Europe
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 22
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
National Trust, 2000, Archaeology and the historic environment: historic landscape survey guidelines
Perry, B. T., 1968, ‘Excavations at Bramdean, Hampshire 1965 and 1966, and a discussion of similar sites in southern England’ Proc Hampshire Field Club Arch Soc , 29, 41–77
Perry, B. T., 1982, ‘Excavations at Bramdean, Hampshire 1973 to 1977’ Proc Hampshire Field Club Arch Soc , 38, 57-74
Page, W (ed), 1908, Victoria County History, Hampshire , Vol III
RCHME, 1979, Long Barrows in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight , HMSO
Schandla-Hall, R. T, 1977, Winchester District: The Archaeological Potential , Winchester City Council
Stoodley, N and Steadman, M, 2001, ‘Excavations at Sharvards Farm, Meonstoke: The Anglo-Saxon Cemetery’ Proc Hampshire Field Club Arch Soc , 56, 129-169
Wessex Archaeology, 2004, Land at Warnford Road, Corhampton, Hampshire, Archaeological Desk Based Assessment , unpublished client report, Ref: 56660.01
9.4 Websites
http://www.geog.port.ac.uk/webmap/hantsmap/hantsmap/hantsmap.htm Historic Hampshire maps reproduced by the University of Portsmouth
http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-global/w-localtoyou/w- thames_solent.htm The National Trust Thames and Solent
http://www.english- nature.org.uk/special/sssi/sssi_details.cfm?sssi_id=2000227 English Nature’s citation for River Itchen SSSI
http://www3.hants.gov.uk/landscape-and-heritage/historic- environment/historic-buildings-register.htm Hampshire Archaeology and Historic Building Record (HAHBR)
http://www.hants.gov.uk/record-office/ Hampshire Record Office
http://www.bramdean.hants.gov.uk/html/treasure.htm Bramdean & Hinton Ampner Website
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 23
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
9.5 Contact details
Gary Marshall NT Thames and Solent Region Archaeologist The National Trust Stowe Gardens Buckingham, MK18 5EH 01280 818808 [email protected]
James Taylor NT Hinton Ampner Property Manager Bramdean, nr Alresford, Hampshire SO24 0LA [email protected]
Paul White Principal Heritage Consultant WA Heritage Wessex Archaeology Old Sarum Park Salisbury, SP4 6EB 01722 326867 [email protected]
Matt Rous Consultant/ Researcher WA Heritage Wessex Archaeology Portway House Salisbury, SP4 6EB 01722 326867 [email protected]
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 24
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
Appendix 1: Key to tithe map unit numbers
In order to try to show how the estate was managed in the past, the groupings of units are given as in the tithe award. This often reflects units of management or individual farms. The numbered units refer to the tithe maps reproduced in Figure 6. Only units (or part units) within the current National Trust estate are listed here. Size of Land is given as a, r and p corresponding to Acres, Rods and Perches.
Hinton Ampner Tithe Map 1839 (HRO 21M65/F7/117/1) Plot Owner Occupier ARP State Name 9 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 0,3,36 Pasture Plot Burrows 11 John Godwin James Child 0,2,3 Pasture Meadow England's 12 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 31,3,30 Arable Hedgerow 13 Lord Sherborne Hon. William Legg 14,0,0 Pasture Home Park 15 Lord Sherborne Hon. William Legg 8,1,14 Pasture Buck Kiln Park 16 Lord Sherborne Hon. William Legg 4,0,6 Pasture Home Park 17 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 8,2,32 Wood Deer Park 18 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 41,2,10 Arable Little Down House, Garden, 19 Harry Wright Harry Wright 0,3,19 N/A Yard 20 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 13,0,31 Pasture Sheep Park 21 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 14,3,4 Pasture Aylings Park 26 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 10,2,10 Pasture Upper Meadow Hither Lower 27 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 14,0,39 Arable Lambury 28 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 10,0,7 Pasture Middle Meadow 29 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 10,1,26 Pasture Lower Meadow Further Lower 30 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 17,1,21 Arable Lambury Further Upper 33 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 20,2,25 Arable Lambury Higher Upper 34 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 19,1,4 Arable Lambury 40 John Godwin James Child 3,3,4 Arable Harts Peak 56 John Godwin James Child 6,2,1 Arable Dell Close 61 John Cooper John Cooper 5,2,26 Pasture Cow Pasture 62 Harry Wright Harry Wright 2,3,36 Arable The Field 67 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 4,3,11 Arable Browns 69 Harry Wright Harry Wright 1,2,20 Pasture The Meadow Piece adjoining 70 Frederick Caiger Henry Harfield 1,2,7 Pasture Dean Acre 71 Frederick Caiger Henry Harfield 2,1,20 Arable Dean Acre The Orchard 75 Frederick Caiger Henry Harfield 1,2,5 Arable Paddock 76 John Godwin James Child 9,3,34 Arable ? Rev Thomas Parsonage 77 John Godwin Johnson 2,2,32 Pasture Meadow 88 John Godwin James Child 1,2,22 Pasture Barn Meadow Rickhouse 90 John Godwin James Child 1,1,39 Pasture Meadow Little Brooms 91 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 25,0,8 Arable
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 25
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
Plot Owner Occupier ARP State Name Field opp. 93 John Griffith John Griffith 1,1,32 Arable Schoolhouse Gt Brooms 98 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 30,2,57 Wood Hedgerow Upper Chalk 99 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 31,3,14 Arable Field Lower Chalk 100 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 21,1,2 Arable Field 102 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 26,1,4 Arable Row Hill 103 John Godwin James Child 5,2,12 Arable Corner Close 104 John Godwin James Child 5,2,14 Arable Slab Close 105 Frances Lowth William Woodward 3,3,17 Arable Kilmeston Close 108 John Godwin James Child 2,2,0 Arable Cow Close 109 John Godwin James Child 6,3,26 Arable South Close Rev Henry Hubbard 110 (Glebe) William Page 6,3,36 Arable Parsonage Field 111 John Godwin James Child 5,3,5 Arable Seven Acres 112 Frances Lowth William Woodward 2,2,3 Arable Lower White Hill 113 Frances Lowth William Woodward 3,0,20 Arable Upper White Hill 114 Frederick Caiger Elizabeth Ford 6,2,6 Arable White Acre 115 John Godwin James Child 1,1,24 Wood Hedgerow 116 John Godwin James Child 12,3,21 Arable Great Close 117 John Godwin James Child 12,3,31 Arable Whitefield 118 John Godwin James Child 5,1,26 Arable Lacey's Close 119 Frederick Caiger Elizabeth Ford 4,1,7 Arable ? 120 John Godwin James Child 6,2,25 Arable Halls Close 121 Frederick Caiger Elizabeth Ford 2,3,14 Arable ? 122 John Godwin James Child 1,5,36 Arable Coppice Close 123 John Godwin James Child 6,0,27 Arable Broad Close 124 Frederick Caiger Elizabeth Ford 4,8,6 Arable Broom Gate 125 Frederick Caiger Elizabeth Ford 4,2,12 Wood Hurst Wood Batsfield 127 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 1,2,14 Wood Hedgerow 128 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 5,1,0 Arable Batsfield 129 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 60,3,34 Wood Hurst Wood 130 Frederick Caiger Elizabeth Ford 8,2,33 Arable Bottom Field 131 Frederick Caiger Elizabeth Ford 9,2,0 Arable Barn Field Upper Batsfield 137 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 0,3,17 Wood Hedgerow 138 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 4,0,35 Arable Upper Batsfield Charles Grove 139 Lord Sherborne Lord Sherborne 26,1,6 Wood Wood Hurst Down 140 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 4,0,35 Wood Hedgerow 141 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 21,3,8 Arable Hurst Down Middle Hurst 142 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 22,3,15 Arable Down Burrow Hurst 143 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 24,2,10 Arable Down 144 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 11,2,3 Arable Dell Close 145 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 20,1,0 Wood Hedgerow 146 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 21,2,14 Wood Jones Wood
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 26
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
Plot Owner Occupier ARP State Name 147 Lord Sherborne Lord Sherborne 6,2,4 Wood Bettes Coppice 150 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 18,0,24 Arable Wood Close 152 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 11,2,18 Arable Lime Close 153 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 19,11,1 Arable Lower White Hill 154 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 22,1,19 Arable Upper White Hill Bottom White 156 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 26,3,2 Arable Hill 157 John Godwin James Child 5,2,16 Arable ? 158 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 7,1,13 Arable Row Hill Light Shot in 159 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 28,1,30 Arable Compt. Compt 160 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 1,3,20 Wood Hedgerow 161 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 32,2,27 Arable ? Compt 162 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 1,1,3 Wood Hedgerow 163 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 20,3,12 Arable Park Field Sandhills Shot 187 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 15,4,60 Arable in Compt. Sandhills 188 Lord Sherborne John Spencer 1,3,23 Wood Hedgerow Thomas Rhoades Little South 193 esq Sarah Collis 3,2,29 Arable Fields
KilmestonTithe Award 1840 Map 1838 (HRO 21M65/F7/131/1) Plot Owner Occupier ARP State Name Charles Gearing 7 Walter Long Esq and George Whale 21,1,33 Arable Barn Field Charles Gearing 8 Walter Long Esq and George Whale 1,1,3 Mead House Meadow William Chafy, William Chafy, Gilbert Ainslie, Gilbert Ainslie, George Archdall, George Archdall, John Wood as John Wood as Trustees and 10 Trustees Henry Budd 15,0,9 Arable Chalk Hill 11 Ditto Ditto 0,1,33 Wood Wood and Road 12 Ditto Ditto 1,0,13 Mead Pages Mead Cottage, Yard, 13 Ditto Ditto 0,1,16 N/A Garden 14 Ditto Ditto 8,8,11 Arable Spark Shot 15 Ditto Ditto 8,3,2 Arable Spring Shot 16 Ditto Ditto 7,3,15 Arable Spring Shot 17 Ditto Ditto 25,3,16 Arable Hinton Field Charles Gearing 19 Walter Long Esq and George Whale 10,1,34 Arable Paddock 20 Ditto Ditto 36,1,24 Arable Spring Shot 21 Ditto Ditto 1,2,25 Wood Gaston Row 22 Ditto Ditto 7,1,10 Arable Court Field William Chafy, William Chafy, Gilbert Ainslie, Gilbert Ainslie, George Archdall, George Archdall, John Wood as John Wood as 33 Trustees Trustees & H Budd 3,2,34 Pasture Home Paddock
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 27
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
Plot Owner Occupier ARP State Name William Chafy, William Chafy, Gilbert Ainslie, Gilbert Ainslie, George Archdall, George Archdall, John Wood as John Wood as 34 Trustees Trustees & H Budd 12,0,35 Arable Gaston 41 Ditto Ditto 9,0,22 Arable Hinton Field 46 Ditto Ditto 15,3,2 Arable Great ? 51 Ditto Ditto 9,1,0 Arable Little Lamborne 53 Ditto Ditto 1,2,5 Wood Row 60 Ditto Ditto 21,0,18 Arable Broom Field 63 Ditto Ditto 12,1,24 Arable Little Warr Part of Church 88 Ditto Ditto 2,2,37 Pasture Paddock Part of Church 97 Ditto Ditto 3,3,35 Pasture Paddock Church 102 Ditto Ditto 2,0,38 Arable Paddock 108 Ditto Ditto 3,3,26 Arable Brown's Close 160 Ditto Ditto 16,0,16 Arable Henmore 167 Ditto Ditto 1,2,39 Wood Row and Put
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 28
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
Appendix 2: Guidelines for the management of archaeological sites on the National Trust Estate at Hinton Ampner: general principles and legislation
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Introduction and general principles
The Guidelines given here are similar in nature to those given in Wessex Archaeology’s guidelines for the management of the archaeological sites on the National Trust Estate at Afton, Compton and Brook Down (Wessex Archaeology 2007).
It should be noted that the Guidelines given here are of a general nature. Specific recommendations for individual archaeological sites on the Hinton Ampner Estate can be found in the archaeological inventory (Volume 2).
1.2 General principles
The purpose of any Archaeological Management Guidelines is to provide the basic recommendations for the preservation of archaeological features and the conservation of the historic landscape in question. These guidelines have been drawn up from published material, and the authors' experience. Although the guidelines are for archaeology, where possible they have been integrated with objectives for any nature conservation interest there may be within the estate. The guidelines are to be used as appropriate according to the characteristics of the land, and have been tailored to suit these individual requirements.
The client should realise that any guidelines given in this report represent best practice. In some cases practical usage of the land may not allow these high standards to be fully implemented. This report recognises the practical limitations of the guidelines in certain circumstances. However, the client is urged to try to attain these standards whenever possible. If they can not be maintained, advice should be sought from the Regional Archaeologist for methods of mitigating the impact of any damaging operations.
The guidelines are often drawn up according to habitat/landscape type rather than archaeological site/feature type. This is because the same archaeological feature can occur in different habitats that require different land management activities to conserve the habitat structure. The report will try to point out any potential conflict with the nature conservation interest if this occurs.
An archaeological or historical feature is defined as any object or site arising from man's past use of the land. The feature can survive extant as an earthwork or ruin, buried beneath the ground level as stratified deposits, a surface scatter of artefacts, a crop or soil mark. Marginal land such as heathland and commons is more likely to contain extant earthworks and features, whereas agrarian landscapes contain more sites as crop marks or find scatters. This is a direct result of the intensity and type of land use activities prevailing.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 29
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
The Key Management Guideline for any archaeological feature or site is to minimise the amount of disturbance. Physical disturbance can be either man-induced such as through development, forestry such as planting and harvesting, or agricultural practices such as cultivation or outdoor pig-rearing. Similarly insidious activity such as burrowing into extant earthworks by rabbits and the like, or through root action by trees and shrubs; the latter is often the result of neglect or abandonment of positive land management. Chemical disturbance to stratified deposits occurs through drainage, root action and chemical applications (e.g. fertilisers and pesticides).
How a site or feature is managed depends upon its form or structure, but the main rule to remember is to minimise the disturbance both during any management action and afterwards; for example when removing tree and scrub growth from a barrow, and preventing any subsequent erosion of the profile by access or water.
2.0 Statutory protection of archaeological sites
2.1 Ancient Monuments Legislation
The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 (AMAA Act 1979) provides the statutory protection for archaeological sites of national importance. The Act defines a monument as: a) any building, structure or work, whether above or below the surface of the land, and any cave or excavation; b) any site comprising the remains of any such building, structure or work or of any cave or excavation, and c) any site comprising, or comprising the remains of, any vehicle, vessel, aircraft or other movable structure or part thereof which neither constitutes nor forms part of any work which is a monument as defined within paragraph (a) above; and any machinery attached to a monument shall be regarded as part of the monument if it could not be detached without being dismantled. (Section 61 (12)).
The AMAA Act 1979 also distinguishes between a monument as above and an ancient monument which is a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM); and any other monument which in the opinion of the Secretary of State for Culture Media and Sport (with English Heritage acting as adviser to the government on heritage matters) is of public interest by reason of the historic, architectural, artistic or archaeological interest attaching to it (Section 61 (12)).
Selection of monuments of national importance for England is based on criteria published in Annex 4 of the Planning Policy Guidance: Archaeology and Planning (PPG 16) (DoE 1990). These criteria are indicative rather than definitive. The AMAA Act 1979 does not allow for the protection of the setting of monuments. It was thought that this was best achieved through the local planning process.
The National Heritage Act 1983 established the Historic Buildings and Monuments Commission for England (English Heritage) whose prime duties are: a) to secure the preservation of ancient monuments and historic buildings situated in England.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 30
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire b) to promote the preservation and enhancement of the character and appearance of Conservation Areas situated in England. c) to promote the public's enjoyment of, and advance their knowledge of, ancient monuments and historic buildings situated in England and their preservation.
With regard to (a), English Heritage have taken a number of sites of high archaeological and historical importance under their direct management as English Heritage Guardianship Sites (both Wales and Scotland have their own equivalents). Many of these were taken over from the Ministry of Works, but they are being added to from time to time. (Where appropriate some of these Guardianship Sites have been transferred more recently to the care of local authorities, a development that has not always been popular.)
The Monument Protection Programme (MPP) undertaken by English Heritage was begun in 1986. It was designed to review and evaluate the existing information on known archaeological sites, to identify those of national importance and which should be protected by law. If a monument is deemed of national importance it is placed on the 'Schedule' and protected by the AMAA Act 1979. The MPP is also reviewing scheduled sites to ensure that they fit the criteria for national importance.
Land use activities affecting a Scheduled Ancient Monument require consent from the Secretary of State. These are activities which result in the demolition, destruction or damage to the SAM and includes archaeological excavations: also repair, tipping or making alterations to a SAM; any flooding or tipping on land on, in or under a SAM. However some land use activities are exempt. Namely agriculture, forestry and horticultural works providing that this was the normal land use of the previous five years. This exemption does not include major ground disturbance operations, such as drainage, sub-soiling or tree planting.
Field Monument wardens are appointed by English Heritage to visit scheduled sites on a regular basis to inform landowners of their existence, and to offer advice on the best form of management for the monument.
The AMAA Act 1979 allows for grants for management agreements for monuments (whether scheduled or unscheduled), relating to the ongoing surveillance and management, including shrub management, pest control and fencing. Capital grants are available to owners that include consolidation of masonry structures.
The management of archaeology within the planning framework is detailed in the Planning Policy Guidance 16 (DoE 1990).
2.2 National Nature Reserves (NNRs), Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and Special Areas of Conservation (SACs)
NNRs are designated under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949, and represent the best examples of a particular habitat. They are managed by English Nature who in many cases lease the site from the land owner. They are the equivalent of English Heritage's Guardianship Sites. SSSIs are areas of land of special nature conservation interest of national importance under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (Amended) and Wildlife and Countryside (Amendment) Act 1985. The biological sites are selected using criteria published in 1989. These criteria formed the basis of those used for ancient monuments.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 31
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
On designation, a list of potentially damaging operations (PDOs) is forwarded to the landowner for which consent is required from English Nature. Management agreements are then drawn up for the site to avoid those activities. The nature conservation interest of a given site may conflict with any archaeological site within the SSSI and vice versa. At the same time any given PDO may also be damaging to the archaeology. A lack of awareness of the respective conservation interests within a given area can lead to conflicts, especially if resources are limited for on-site meetings and monitoring programmes. However there is considerable opportunity to draw up integrated management agreements that can benefit either interest, and overall NNR and SSSI status can provide effective protection to archaeological sites, in particular non-scheduled ones. This could be achieved through the Site Management Statements being produced by English Nature.
2.3 Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas
The law relating to listed buildings has been consolidated into the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 [LBA]. The listing of buildings of special architectural or historic interest is the responsibility of the Secretary of State, and central to it is the drawing up of the list under Section 1 (1) of the LBA. A building includes 'any structure or erection and any part of a building, structure or erection but does not include any plant or machinery comprised in a building'. It also includes any object or structure fixed to the building, and any object or structure within the curtilage of the building which, although not fixed to the building forms part of the land, and has done so since before 1 July 1948. (Section 1(5) LBA). Buildings are graded according to their relative importance.
Grade I are those buildings of exceptional interest (only about 2% of listed buildings so far are in this grade).
Grade II* are particularly important buildings of more than special interest (4% of listed buildings).
Grade II are buildings of special interest, which warrant every effort being made to preserve them. These criteria are non-statutory, and all that is required under the Act is that the buildings are of special architectural or historic interest. Listed Building Consent is the mechanism by which demolition, alteration or extension to a listed building is controlled. Work undertaken without this consent is an offence. For a more detailed account of listed buildings see Hunter and Ralston 1993 & Planning Policy Guidance 15 (DOE 1994).
Section 69 of the LBA imposes a duty on local planning authorities to designate as conservation areas any 'areas of special architectural or historic interest the character or appearance of which is desirable to preserve or enhance'. This enables local authorities to effect conservation policies for a given neighbourhood or area (DOE 1994). Section 71 of the Act places a duty on the local authority to publish proposals for the preservation and enhancement of conservation areas, which are based on clear assessment and definition of an area's special interest.
The PPG 15 specifically refers to Conservation Areas [4.2] within the built environment, and also to the wider historic landscape [2.26] where the onus is in the local authorities to define planning policies that take account of the historic landscape.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 32
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
2.4 The Treasure Act, 1996
It is an offence to use a metal detector in a protected place (i.e. on a Scheduled Monument, one in Guardianship, or in the ownership of the Secretary of State, or a local authority, or in an area of archaeological importance). It is also an offence to remove any object of archaeological or historical interest found using a metal detector from a protected site without consent from the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport.
The Treasure Act came on to the statute books in September 1997, following the drawing up of a Code of Practice between users of metal detectors, landowners and the archaeological community (Department of National Heritage 1997). It replaces previous legislation known as treasure trove. The new act strengthens the law on treasure trove. Objects other than coins that contain at least 10% by weight of gold or silver, and are at least 300 years old will be deemed Treasure. All coins more than 300 years old, and found in hoards will be deemed treasure, as well as all objects found in clear archaeological association with items that are Treasure will be deemed to be Treasure whatever they are made of. Advice on the exact changes to the law made by the Treasure Act should be sought should the need arise.
Deliberate concealment of Treasure, and failure to report finds to the County Coroner will be liable to 3 months in prison, or a fine up to £5000 or both.
2.5 Hedgerow Regulations
In June 1997 new regulations were introduced giving statutory protection to certain types of hedgerow. Permission is now required before certain types of hedgerow can be removed, either in whole or part. It is strongly advised that expert opinion is sought before any changes, other than cutting, to hedgerows are made.
These regulations apply to hedgerows that: i) marks a historic parish boundary. ii) incorporates a Scheduled Ancient Monument. iii) incorporates an archaeological feature recorded in the County Sites and Monuments Record (SMR). iv) is wholly or partly within an archaeological site recorded in the County SMR and is associated with that site. v) marks the boundary of a pre-1600 AD estate or manor recorded in the SMR or held at a Record Office. vi) is visibly related to a building or feature of a pre-1600 AD estate or manor. vii) is recorded in a document at a Record Office as an integral part of a pre- Enclosure field system. viii) is part of, or is related to, a building or feature associated with a substantially complete pre-Enclosure field system.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 33
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire ix) is part of, or is related to, a building or feature associated with a pre-Enclosure field system, and that system is identified in a local planning authority document as a key landscape characteristic.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 34
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
Appendix 3: Recommendations for built structures
1.0 Introduction
Built structures can occur in the form of relict industrial, agrarian and recreational features or currently functioning buildings such as domestic houses, or reused industrial structures and farm buildings.
2.0 Threats and potentially damaging operations
The main threat is from lack of maintenance and loss of use, leading to a general decay in the fabric of the built structure, the rate of decay depends on the materials used, age of structure, and previous use. Once the roof is no longer water tight then decay accelerates. This is made worse by vandalism and removal of material for reuse elsewhere. If the structure is not protected the end result is demolition and realisation of the potential market value of the site as a redevelopment plot.
Threat also comes from unsympathetic reuse and development with loss of the historical integrity of the building, especially if it was once part of a larger complex that has now disappeared.
Buildings under threat include farm structures, which are not suited to modern farming methods and machinery; farms that have ceased agrarian activity and are threatened with fragmentation and development; industrial structures such as lime kilns, brick works and rural craft buildings (carpenters' yards etc.). Buildings and structures associated with designed and parkland landscapes, such as ice houses, game larders etc.
3.0 General management guidelines for built structures
Establish which buildings within the estate are statutorily or locally listed, some relict built structures may be also listed or scheduled (see above). Ensure that any management agreements still fulfil the objectives for the conservation of the structure. Listed building consent for works to listed buildings must be sought from the local planning authority.
3. 1 Consolidate relict structures and ruins to make them safe and prevent further decay. Seek advice from the National Trust Buildings department, HBC, and, where appropriate, English Heritage, the local District Council on methods of repair.
3.2 Where possible repair using original materials and techniques.
3.3 To safeguard a historic building it must retain some function. Explore avenues for sympathetic reuse of redundant buildings.
3.4 Those buildings requiring further analysis and recording should be identified as well as those structures in immediate danger.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 35
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
Appendix 4: Metal detecting on National Trust land
This note sets out National Trust policy on Metal Detecting on its properties in England and Wales. It is intended for use by metal detectorists and aims to clarify why we will only allow metal detecting on our land under controlled circumstances.
Metal detecting on National Trust land
• Metal detecting is generally not permitted on national trust land, unless under exceptional circumstances, and only ever under a licence agreement;
• Licence agreements will only be issued by a national trust archaeologist where metal detecting can help further archaeological knowledge or protect archaeological remains;
• Unauthorised metal detecting contravenes national trust bylaws and is a criminal offence on scheduled monuments;
• All finds, with the exception of ‘treasure’, remain the property of the national trust;
Why can’t I metal detect on National Trust land? The National Trust recognises that metal detecting is a popular and growing hobby that can help increase our understanding of the past. We are keen to find ways of working closely with metal detecting clubs and societies that can help interpret and protect our properties for future generations. However, we cannot allow unauthorised or unsupervised metal detecting on our land, even where it’s under the plough.
All land in National Trust ownership means it has been entrusted to our care for the benefit of everyone. We recognise that most metal detectorists are highly responsible and actively report finds to their local Finds Liaison Officer, but we remain concerned at finds being taken out of the ground without proper recording or archaeological supervision. Every National Trust property is of archaeological interest, and we are currently undertaking a long-term programme of survey and research to help understand them better. When finds are taken out of context, we lose another piece of the jigsaw, which means it makes it harder for us to care for our archaeology. This is why we only allow metal detecting under exceptional circumstances with the control of a Licence Agreement.
What is a Licence Agreement? This is a written agreement between the National Trust and the metal detectorist that will allow access under special conditions. You are unlikely to receive a Licence Agreement unless you are able to show full commitment to its terms and conditions.
Under what circumstances can I get a Licence Agreement? Licence Agreements will only be issued where it can be shown that metal detecting can actively increase archaeological knowledge, limit damage to archaeological sites, help locate pipes and services during engineering works, or very exceptionally to locate lost personal items.
Archaeological research projects - A proposal might be made for the use of metal detectors in a collaborative project in which the appropriate National Trust
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 36
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
Archaeologist aims to supervise and work alongside metal detectorists to inform archaeological survey and research, or as part of a controlled excavation project.
Rescuing finds from arable landscapes or on eroding coastlines - Situations might arise in which areas of National Trust land are identified as being of archaeological significance, but are at risk to damage and loss of artefacts through arable cultivation, or natural processes such as coastal erosion or sea level rise.
Engineering works or recovery of lost possessions - Applications for using a metal detector for the location of underground service pipes by contractors, or genuine applications for the recovery of lost personal metal items by a member of the public.
The National Trust will not issue a Licence Agreement for metal detecting on Scheduled Monuments nor within its parks, gardens or farmland under pasture.
Who issues Licence Agreements? Only a National Trust Archaeologist can issue a Licence Agreement (contact your nearest Property or Regional Office for details). National Trust property staff, tenants and farmers are not authorised to give permission to metal detect on Trust land.
Can I keep what I find? This will depend on the nature of the Licence Agreement. All finds – with the exception of ‘treasure’ - remain the property of the National Trust. This is due to the ‘inalienable’ status of our land, which means it cannot be sold or exchanged without an Act of Parliament.
Can I make a claim for an Award if I find ‘Treasure’ on National Trust land? Under the Treasure Act 1996 anything that might be considered ‘treasure’ must be reported to the local Coroner. Claims for awards cannot be made without the consent of the landowner. However, there may well be circumstances where an award can be shared between the finder and the National Trust. We will put any money we receive back into the conservation, storage and display of the object.
What happens if I metal detect without a Licence Agreement? You will be asked to leave the property and not return with the intention to metal detect. We will report all unauthorised metal detecting on Scheduled Monuments to the Police and may take action to reclaim items taken from National Trust land without permission.
However, if you have made finds on National Trust land in the past, we do encourage you to tell us or report them to your local Finds Liaison Officer (see below). We are keen to see and learn more from them.
How do I know I’m on National Trust land? All National Trust land is shown on 1:25000 scale Ordnance Survey maps. Access into National Trust land is clearly marked with a green oak leaf and acorn sign. If in doubt, contact the nearest Property or Regional Office, or ask the local tenant.
Are you discriminating against metal detectorists? No – all archaeological research carried out on National Trust land, other than that undertaken by Trust staff or their contractors, must be subject to a Licence Agreement. This includes universities, students, local societies and individuals. We believe this is a fair and honest approach that ensures we can continue to conserve the special places in our care.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 37
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
How can I find out more? Contact the National Trust Archaeology department at: National Trust, Heelis, Kemble Drive, Swindon. Wiltshire, SN2 2NA e-mail: [email protected] telephone: 01793 817400
More details on the Treasure Act, Finds Liaison Officers and the Government’s Portable Antiquities Scheme can be found on www.finds.org.uk or call 020 7323 8611.
Help is also available from the National Council of Metal Detectors – see www.ncmd.co.uk
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 38
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
Appendix 5: Glossary of common archaeological terms
Acre : a unit of land measurement equal to 4840 square yards (4047 sq m). Equivalent to 4 rods.
Archaeology : the study of human past by means of the material relics people have left behind. By material relics, this means both materials buried within the soil (artefacts and remains of structures), and those surviving above the surface such as buildings, structures (e.g. stone circles) and earthworks (e.g. hillforts, old field boundaries etc.). Even the study of old tree or shrub alignments, where they have been artificially planted in the past, can give vital information on past activity.
Artefacts : any object made by man that finds itself discarded (usually as a broken object) or lost in the soil. The most common finds are usually pottery sherds, or waste flint flakes from prehistoric stone tool making. Metal finds are generally rare except in specialist areas such as the site of an old forge. The absence of finds from the activity of metal detectorists is not usually given much credibility by archaeologists as a means of defining if archaeology is present
Assart : usually taken to be a clearing made from former common or waste. This term tends to imply a medieval date for colonising of former uncleared or unenclosed land.
Bote : the right to take certain materials from the common. The prefix usually denotes the type of material. For example heybote, means the right to take wood to make fences or hedges; housebote means the right to take wood for repairing houses.
Cropmark : marks in grass or arable crops that represent features in the landscape visible from the ground or air. These may represent any archaeological features that have become buried.
Desk-based assessment : an assessment of a known or potential archaeological resource within a specific land unit or area, consisting of a collation of existing written or graphic information, in order to identify the likely character, extent and relative quality of the actual or potential resource.
Earthwork : Profile features in the landscape visible from the ground or air. These may represent any archaeological features that have become buried.
Evaluation : a limited programme of intrusive fieldwork (mainly test-trenching) which determines the presence or absence of archaeological features, structures, deposits, artefacts or ecofacts within a specified land unit or area. If they are present, this will define their character, extent, and relative quality, and allow an assessment of their worth in local, regional and national terms.
Furlong : when used as an open field term, it means the length of a furrow. In time 'furlongs' came to apply to a block of furrows.
Hedgebanks : banks of earth, usually with a ditch, that have been set up in the past on which is planted a stock-proof line of shrubs. There is written evidence that they were made from at least Roman times, but they are suspected as existing in prehistoric times. Hide: the amount of land that could be ploughed in a year by one family. Usually 120 acres, but local variations existed from 60 to 180 acres dependent on soil quality.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 39
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
Hundred : administrative division of the shire that declined in importance in the later medieval period. Exact definitions can not be made, but a hundred usually comprised a number of later parishes or manors. Often thought to represent 100 taxable hides.
Lord/Lordship : a man, woman or institution (such as an abbey) who holds manorial rights.
Manor: land held by a lord, usually with the right to hold its own manorial court to enforce the local agricultural customs. Some manors later developed into parishes, but many parishes could contain four, five or more manors within them. Occasionally manors can be spread over two or more parishes.
Medieval AD 1066-1540
Open Fields : also known as Common Fields, a system of communal agricultural without permanent internal fences. These fields were farmed by the village as a whole, each tenant ploughing a series of strips, often distributed at random throughout the field.
Perch : A unit of land measurement equal to 30¼ sq yards.
Period : time periods within British chronology are usually defined as Prehistoric (comprising the Palaeolithic, Mesolithic, Neolithic, Bronze Age, Iron Age), Roman, Saxon, Medieval and Post-medieval. Although exact definitions are often challenged, the general date ranges are as given below.
Post-medieval AD 1540-present
Pottery sherds : small pieces of broken baked clay vessels that find their way into ancient soils. These can be common in all periods from the Neolithic onwards. They often find their way into the soil by being dumped on the settlement rubbish tip, when broken, and subsequently taken out and scattered in fields with farmyard manure.
Prehistoric c.100,000 BC - AD 43. This is usually defined as the time before man began making written records of his activities. This is further sub-divided into:
Palaeolithic or Old Stone Age 100,000 - 8000 BC Mesolithic or Middle Stone Age 8000 - 4000 BC Neolithic or New Stone Age 4000 - 2000 BC Bronze Age 2000 - 700 BC Iron Age 700 BC - AD 43
Rod : A unit of land measurement equal to ¼ acre or 1,210 sq yards.
Romano-British AD 43-410
Saxon AD 410-1066
Site : usually defined as an area where human activity has taken place in the past. It does not require the remains of buildings to be present. A scatter of prehistoric flint- working debris can be defined as a 'site', with or without evidence for permanent or temporary habitation.
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 40
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
Project Design : a written statement on the project's objectives, methods, timetable and resources set out in sufficient detail to be quantifiable, implemented and monitored.
Settlement : usually defined as a site where human habitation in the form of permanent or temporary buildings or shelters in wood, stone, brick or any other building material has existed in the past.
Stratigraphy : sequence of man-made soils overlying undisturbed soils; the lowest layers generally represent the oldest periods of man's past, with successive layers reaching forwards to the present. It is within these soils that archaeological information is obtained.
Villein : term for medieval tenant farmer, often holding by unfree tenure. In the earlier medieval centuries, would have performed services to the lord for his land, but from c. 1300 this was often commuted to a rent.
Virgate : unit of land in medieval England, usually 30 acres, but it could vary from 8 to 60 acres depending on the locality.
Watching brief : work, usually involving ground disturbances, that requires an archaeologist to be present because there is a possibility that archaeological deposits might be disturbed.
Worked flint or stone : usually taken to mean pieces of chipped stone or flint used to make prehistoric stone tools. A worked flint can comprise the tools themselves (arrowheads, blades etc.), or the waste material produced in their making (often called flint flakes, cores etc.).
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 41
National Trust Estate WA Heritage Hinton Ampner, Hampshire
Figures 1 - 9
All the data contained in these Figures has been incorporated in the attached CD as individual layers in ESRI shapefiles (*.shp). This will enable the user to import each map layer with the data from the survey into ArcGIS software and view the maps and data at any desired scale and incorporate them into other media if needed.
All figures have been incorporated with Volume 1 on the CD as a Portable Document Format (*.pdf) file.
Figure Description 1 Location Plan showing study area 2 Archaeological sites within the northern half of the Study Area 3 Archaeological sites within the southern half of the Study Area 4 Historic map regression - 1575 Saxton’s Map of Hampshire - 1759 Taylor’s Map of Hampshire 5 Historic map regression - 1810 OS Old Series 1” Map of Hampshire 6 Historic map regression - Copy of 1839 Hinton Ampner and 1838 Kilmeston Tithe Map 7 Historic map regression - 1869 (Rev.1895) OS map 6” : 1 mile - Section 1 1869 (Rev.1895) OS map 6” : 1 mile - Section 2 8 Historic map regression - 1869 (Rev.1895) OS map 6” : 1 mile - Section 3 1869 (Rev.1895) OS map 6” : 1 mile - Section 4 9 Historic map regression - 1869 (Rev.1895) OS map 6” : 1 mile - Section 5 Modern map of Field names for manor farm within the Study Area
WA doc. ref. 67660.01 Archaeological & Historical Survey 42