The Medieval and Post Medieval Landscape of Onley Fields Farm Northamptonshire

Peter Wardle Colin Lacey & Heather Papworth

Published by PAW Print Publishers, 38 Elvendon Rd, Goring on Thames, Berkshire, RG8 0DU.

PAW Print Publishers is the publishing section of the Historic Environment Consultancy, advisers on all aspects of the historic environment. www.historicenvironment.co.uk

First published 2016 ISBN 978-0-9562381-3-9

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Bibliographic Information Wardle,P., Lacey,C. & Papworth,H., 2016, The Medieval and Post Medieval Landscape of Onley Fields Farm Northamptonshire, PAW Print Publishers, Goring on Thames

This book is sold subject to the condition that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, resold, hired out, or otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent publisher

No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

Copies of this book may be obtained from www.historicenvironment.co.uk.

Designed and typeset by Peter Wardle & Colin Lacey Printed by The Historic Environment Consultancy

All photographs © Dr Peter Wardle unless stated otherwise.

The Medieval and Post Medieval Landscape of Onley Fields Farm Northamptonshire CV23 8AN

Peter Wardle Colin Lacey & Heather Papworth

Contents Acknowledgements ...... iii Introduction ...... 1 Structure of The Report ...... 1 Methodology ...... 4 Topography & Geology Location ...... 4 The Deserted Medieval Village ...... 5 The Structure of The Village ...... 6 Trackways ...... 7 The Field System ...... 8 Archaeological Excavation (Evaluation) of The Field System ...... 9 The Post Medieval Landscape – The Oxford Canal ...... 13 The Early Canal ...... 13 The Later Canal & The New Marina Inlet ...... 18 The Bridges ...... 22 Bridge 81: Borstal Bridge ...... 23 Bridge 82: Rowdyke Bridge ...... 28 Bridge 83: Hazels Bridge ...... 32 Onley Fields Farm ...... 37 The Victorian Great Central Main Line Railway ...... 38 Historic Photographs ...... 39 The Layout of the Railway ...... 41 The Main Line Embankment ...... 43 The Siding Embankment ...... 46 The Crossing ...... 49 The Subway ...... 50 The Twentieth Century ...... 53 The Wartime Supply Depot ...... 53 The Prisoner of War Camp ...... 57 The Post War Establishment ...... 58 The Prison Complex ...... 59 Conclusions - The Evolution of The Landscape ...... 60 Bibliography ...... 62 Appendices 1. Photographic Recording of the Field System 2. The Oxford Canal 3. The Great Central Main Line 4. The Archaeological Evaluation 5. Archaeology Warwickshire Evaluation Report

List of Figures Figure 1: General Location Plan (Inset Scale 1:5,000,000) ...... 2 Figure 2: Detailed Location Plan ...... 3 Figure 3: Topography of Barby, Onley and the surrounding area (Image from Google Maps). .... 4 Figure 4: The Deserted Medieval Village of Onley, 1:5000 after RCHME 1981 ...... 5 Figure 5: The structure of Onley DMV overlaid on the RCHME 1981 survey...... 6 Figure 6: Trackways & Deserted Medieval Village overlain on modern OS mapping ...... 7 Figure 7: Extent and layout of Field System...... 8 Figure 8 The Location of Trenches Scale 1:2500 ...... 9 Figure 9: Cross Section of Ridge and Furrow (Trench 33) ...... 11 Figure 10: Map illustrating route of the 18th century canal and the 19th century alteration ...... 14 Figure 11: Map illustrating route of the 18th Century canal and the 19th Century alteration...... 15 Figure 12: Ordnance Survey 1884 1:2500 plan, reduced to 1:5000 ...... 16 Figure 13: Profiles across canal around proposed inlet profiles ...... 21 Figure 14: Location of canal profiles ...... 21 Figure 15: OS 1” map of 1834, 1:25,000 ...... 22 Figure 16 Plan of Bridge 81 Scale 1:200 ...... 23 Figure 17: Plan of Bridge 82, 1:200 ...... 29 Figure 18: South elevation, Bridge 82 ...... 29 Figure 19: Plan of Bridge 83, 1:200 ...... 32 Figure 20: North elevation, Bridge 83 ...... 33 Figure 21 The original Design of Embankments and Cuttings (Rolt 1971) ...... 38 Figure 22 The Layout of the Railway Based on the 1910 OS 1:2500 Plan ...... 42 Figure 23: Location of embankment profiles ...... 45 Figure 24: Embankment profiles ...... 45 Figure 25: The crossing as seen on the 1910 1:2500 Ordnance Survey map ...... 49 Figure 26: The Subway Scale 1:200 ...... 50 Figure 27 : Extract of 1947 air photograph showing Supply Depot and Prisoner of War Camp. 53 Figure 28: Layout of Supply Depot, from 1947 air photograph ...... 56 Figure 29 : Plan of Prisoner of War Camp from 1947 air photograph, 1:2500 ...... 57 Figure 30 : Extract from 1967 1:10,000 map, reproduced at 1:5,000...... 58 Figure 31 : Modern aerial view of the prisons and housing estate (Google Maps)...... 59 Figure 32 Phased plan of extant structures, 1:10,000 ...... 61

List of Plates Plate 1: Evaluation Trench 33 ...... 10 Plate 2 Composite Photograph of Ridge and Furrow ...... 11 Plate 3: Looking northeast towards the Oxford Canal...... 12 Plate 4: Looking southeast towards the Railway Embankment and the Wartime Siding...... 12 Plate 5: View northeast along bank of early canal, southern part of the land ...... 17 Plate 6: View to west into early canal bed ...... 17 Plate 7: View to south from inlet area ...... 18 Plate 8: View to north from the position of the new inlet area ...... 19 Plate 9: Towpath in location of inlet ...... 19 Plate 10: Panoramic view of location of inlet from east side of canal ...... 20 Plate 11: Bridge 81 Looking North ...... 23 Plate 12: Bridge 81 viewed from the north ...... 24 Plate 13: East aspect, Bridge 81 ...... 24 Plate 14: The southern wall of Bridge 81 shows evidence of repair ...... 25 Plate 15: Newer brickwork has since been added to the top of the southern part of bridge 81 .. 25 Plate 16: Bridge 81 looking north ...... 26 Plate 17: Underside of bridge 81 showing evidence of repairs to the structure ...... 26 Plate 18: Detail of earthen bank leading up to the east of bridge 81 ...... 27 Plate 19: A narrowboat passes south under bridge 81 ...... 27 Plate 20: South aspect, Bridge 82 ...... 28

Plate 21: North aspect, Bridge 82 ...... 28 Plate 22: Bridge 82 looking west ...... 30 Plate 23: Looking south towards Bridge 82 from Bridge 81...... 30 Plate 24: Bridge 82 viewed from the south ...... 31 Plate 25: South aspect, Bridge 83 ...... 32 Plate 26: North aspect, Bridge 83 ...... 33 Plate 27: West aspect, Bridge 83 ...... 34 Plate 28: East aspect, Bridge 83 ...... 34 Plate 29: Underside of Bridge 83 ...... 35 Plate 30: Detail of southeast pillar, Bridge 83 ...... 35 Plate 31: Bridge 83 viewed from the towpath to the south ...... 36 Plate 32: Onley Fields Farmhouse east elevation (J Marine Ltd., 2012)...... 37 Plate 33: West elevation of the farmhouse and remnants of a previous structure (foreground). 37 Plate 34: Contractor's saddle tank locomotive 'ANNIE', ...... 39 Plate 35: Looking south along the embankment towards Barby spoil bank c. 1897 ...... 39 Plate 36: Horse-drawn Howitzer battery being loaded at Barby, c. 1914-5 ...... 40 Plate 37: Horse-drawn Howitzer battery being loaded at Barby, c. 1914-5 ...... 40 Plate 38: View along main line embankment from northern end ...... 43 Plate 39: Panoramic view of northern part of embankment from the east ...... 43 Plate 40: North end of main line embankment from the west following clearance of scrub ...... 44 Plate 41: View of east bank of main line embankment, north end ...... 44 Plate 42: Railway siding embankment viewed from the north ...... 46 Plate 43: View of siding embankment from the east following clearance of scrub ...... 46 Plate 44: West side of siding embankment ...... 47 Plate 45: Platform of siding embankment viewed from north ...... 47 Plate 46: Panoramic view of west side of siding embankment (southern part) ...... 48 Plate 47: Panoramic view of siding embankment from the east ...... 48 Plate 48: View towards location of crossing from the east ...... 49 Plate 49: Looking East ...... 51 Plate 50: Looking West ...... 51 Plate 51: Looking West ...... 52 Plate 52: Detail of retaining wall Looking East ...... 52 Plate 53: ‘WD’ marked sleeper ...... 54 Plate 54: ‘STENT’ marked sleeper ...... 54 Plate 55: 'E' marked sleeper ...... 54 Plate 56: Discarded concrete sleepers ...... 55 Plate 57: Concrete sleepers used to block deep brick-lined shaft ...... 55 Plate 58: Detail of brick shaft ...... 55 Acknowledgements

The project was commissioned by Joe Oliver of J Marine Ltd the landowners for and behalf who paid for this project. The project was supervised by Lesley-Ann Mather County Archaeological Advisor of Northampton County Council for and on behalf of the Local Authority. The excavations were led by Caroline Rann of Archaeology Warwickshire and managed by Stuart Palmer of Archaeology Warwickshire. Extensive use was made of the Topographic Survey by Midland Surveys Ltd.

Introduction

In 2014 Planning Permission was granted for the construction of a canal-side marina at Onley Farm, Barby, Northamptonshire CV23 8AN (Grid Reference SP 518 700) (Daventry District Council. Planning Reference: DA/2012/0440). This was preceded by a programme of archaeological assessment and evaluation including geophysical survey and trial trenching by Cotswold Archaeology. The following reports were prepared. 1. An archaeological desk based assessment (Jordan & Leung, 2012) 2. A geophysical survey (Bartlett 2011) 3. An archaeological evaluation (Carlyle 2012) These reports are available from the Historic Environment Record and on the Historic Environment Consultancy website (www.historicenvironment.co.uk) and the Archaeological Data Service. The following planning condition was imposed: 35. No phase of demolition or development works shall commence on site until the applicants, their agents or successors in title have secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation (WSI) for that phase which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The WSI will allow for an earthwork survey of the ridge and furrow cultivation remains within the phase site and the recording of the affected parts of the Oxford Canal and the former Great Central Railway where appropriate (to be agreed in the WSI). Provision will be made for depositing the final approved report with the Northamptonshire Historic Environment Record. Construction of the Marina was to be carried out in four phases and a programme of mitigation was drawn up and approved by Lesley-Ann Mathers County Archaeological Advisor of Northamptonshire County Council for all four phases of the development in Northamptonshire. This Written Scheme of Investigation of was duly updated for formal approval by Daventry District Council (document dated 27/10/2015). This identified a number of stages and topics of research, survey and evaluation: These were: 1. Interpretation of Aerial Photography 2. Recording the Railway 3. Recording the Canal 4. Recording the Medieval Field System 5. Archaeological Evaluation The Archaeological Evaluation (Archaeological Trial Trenching) had a twofold purpose: 1. Detailed excavation of ridge and furrow 2. Establishing if any earlier archaeological remains were present beneath the ridge and furrow. It was decided that, given the length of time construction of the marina would take, as far as possible the programme of work for all the land in Northamptonshire would take place prior to initial construction. It was found early on that the extent of vegetation on the course of the former railway line meant that it was not possible to fully record some elements of the railway which all relate to Phase 2 of the construction of the Marina. The Evaluation – trial trenching - was undertaken on 23-27 March 2015 by Northamptonshire Archaeology (Jones and Rann 2015). No pre-ridge and furrow archaeological remains were located. The other recoding and research was undertaken in the period March 2015 to March 2016. Structure of The Report This report covers all archaeological work required by Northamptonshire County Council to be undertaken prior to construction commencing. It is supplemented by the following archival reports which are appended: Topic Scope Field System Photographic Survey of Field System The Canal Photographic Survey of the Canal and structures. Text from main report included The Railway Photographic Survey of the Railway and structures. Text from main report included Evaluation Grey Literature report produced by Warwickshire Archaeology The reports on the Oxford Canal and the Great Central Main Line are presented as freestanding reports. All the reports are available on http://www.historicenvironment.co.uk/projects/barby and the Archaeological Data Service. 1

Figure 1: General Location Plan (Inset Scale 1:5,000,000)

Figure 2: Detailed Location Plan

3 Methodology The photographs were taken with a Nikon D800. Elevated photographs were taken using an extendable tripod with a remotely controlled motorised tripod head. The Digital Survey was manipulated in Coreldraw and Autocad, with additional points being added following survey with a Leica Total Station. Photo rectification was undertaken using Photomodeller. TopographyGeology & Location The village of Barby lies 151m (495ft) above ordnance datum on a north-facing slope, which forms part of a ridge running south from Barby towards Welton and Daventry. The Royal Commission Historic Monuments England (1981) describe the land surrounding Barby as ‘undulating’ with steep slopes to the west, northwest and southwest of the town. The land towards Onley, situated to the west of the village, is predominantly flat and lies 90m (295ft) above ordnance datum. The deserted medieval village (DMV) and the areas associated with it are stated by the RCHME (ibid.) to reside on the majority of land within this region of the parish.

Figure 3: Topography of Barby, Onley and the surrounding area (Image from Google Maps). The geology of the area surrounding Onley is that of Charmouth Mudstone Formation bedrock, with a small band of alluvium situated adjacent to the stream that runs to the south and southwest of Onley (British Geological Survey online viewer). Barby is situated on Dyrham Formation bedrock consisting of Siltstone and Mudstone.

4 The Deserted Medieval Village

The well-preserved earthwork remains of Onley Deserted Medieval Village are located in the western part of Barby parish. Scheduled as an Ancient Monument in 1955 due to the preservation of the earthworks, they depict the overall village form, plan and associated agricultural practices. There is little documentary evidence to provide a date for the settlement, although the earliest reference identified dates to 1272. Excavations conducted by Carlyle (2012) place the age of the surrounding field systems within the 13th to 15th Centuries. Desertion is thought to have occurred by the early 17th century after a series of poor harvests and outbreaks of disease, although the surrounding fields, found largely to the south and east of the village, were likely to have remained in cultivation.

Figure 4: The Deserted Medieval Village of Onley, 1:5000 after RCHME 1981 Whilst limited, references to the village have been identified by Historic England (No Date), the earliest of which is a document from 1272 that refers to the village and a George de Cantelupe, who held the nearby manor of Barby (Mason 2008). The next reference dates to 1345, which notes “tenements in Onle” (RCHME 1981; Hatton 2005). In 1484, the manors of Barby and Onley were leased prior to their purchase in the early 17th century by a Giles Isham (Hatton ibid.). Based upon evidence extracted from the wills of villagers in Onley, few families remained in the village by the early 1600s as many had relocated to neighbouring villages (Hatton, ibid.). From 1555 to 1558, Hatton states that northern Europe suffered from protracted rainfall and subsequent crop failure, followed by an epidemic that killed thousands of people, and thus it was likely that one or two entire families from Onley were wiped out. Further poor weather conditions and bad harvests were experienced in the 1580s and 1590s, albeit without significant and concurrent outbreaks of disease. However, a virulent outbreak, speculated to be plague, occurred between 1604 and 1610 (. A record dating to 1610, held by the National Archives (reference E163-17-8), was transcribed by Hatton and relates to the depopulation of Northamptonshire villages in 1607 (West Northamptonshire Local History, No Date). Within this record the landowner, ‘Gregorie’ Isham, was ordered to build himself a new house that included a large demesne and two further farm houses in Barby, each with an associated 40 acres of land. In the 18th century Bridges (1791) describes Onley as “a hamlet of seven shepherds houses”. However, by 1841 Allison et al. (1966, p35) state that nineteen people were resident in five scattered farms that are still extant - an observation based upon 1791 canal mapping, which illustrates the five farms, marked as “Onley Lodges” (West Northamptonshire Local History, No Date-a). 5 The Structure of The Village The village, one of 333 in the county (RCHME, 1981-a), covers an area of 28 hectares and has been somewhat obscured by subsequent ploughing, forming an overlay of ridge and furrow, which the RCHME (1981) state makes the site of “unusual interest” and “one of the most important in the county”. Further, the streets identifiable within the earthwork complex illustrate the “unusual origin” of these medieval features (RCHME 1981-a). Other features consist of fishponds, closes and lanes, many of which have been degraded by later ridge and furrow earthworks (Figure 5). Mason (2008) identifies a circular mound in the middle of the village that is postulated to be the site of a dovecote or windmill. Excavations within the area have yielded no evidence of buildings, although this is thought by Hatton (ibid.) to be due to the limited trench size used by K.A. Franey in 1949, who discovered a scattering of stones, pottery and nails as well as a paved road (Allison et al. 1966, p.20). The later RCHME survey identified a small number of 14th century pottery shards located on the stream bed (RCHME 1981) that runs along the western edge of the village. Large cobble-stones were also found in the stream by a local farmer that Hatton (ibid.) postulates could be related to foundations of cob- walled dwellings and walls associated with the medieval village. The site of a church that served the villagers in terms of masses and prayers, rather than for burials, was located 300m to the west of the DMV, but Hatton (ibid) states that this was destroyed during the construction of the M45 motorway. Its location coincided with drove-routes, one of which ran through the village prior to the construction of the fish ponds and was subsequently deviated along its northern edge. To the east, the drive-route to Barby was deviated during the construction of the canal in the 1790s (Hatton ibid.).

Figure 5: The structure of Onley DMV overlaid on the RCHME 1981 survey.

6 Trackways

Figure 6: Trackways & Deserted Medieval Village overlain on modern OS mapping

7 The Field System Medieval ridge and furrow to the east of the village overlies its eastern edge whilst to the northwest and southeast, narrow-rig ploughing features, stated by the RCHME (1981-a) to be 2-3m wide and associated with practices dating to the late 18th and 19th centuries, are present. Beyond this, to the east, south and west are normal medieval ridge and furrow with ridge widths estimated at 5-7m (RCHME 1981-a). Whilst the RCHME (ibid.) states that no date has been identified relating to the enclosure of fields at Onley, the resultant conclusion by Hatton (ibid.) is that climatic and disease factors potentially encouraged the enclosure of pastures, particularly of plough-land, to the north of Onley in 1603-1607, which caused great consternation amongst the population and has been associated with the main stage of desertion. Hatton (ibid.) suggests that the land immediately within and around the village remained unenclosed for 30 to 40 years, due to its association with plague, although the fields may still have been tended.

Figure 7: Extent and layout of Field System.

8 Archaeological Excavation (Evaluation) of The Field System In total 30 archaeological trial trenches have been excavated (Cotswold Archaeology 14 (Carlyle 2012) Warwickshire Archaeology 16 (Jones and Rann 2015)) covering a total area of 3347m2.. Of the Cotswold Archaeology’s trenches 9 were located perpendicular to the ridge and furrow; in contrast all of the Warwickshire Archaeology trenches were laid out perpendicular to the Ridge and furrow in order to specifically record the ridge and furrow. No traces of ridge and furrow were located in trenches 29-31, the western most part of the development area, suggesting that either the ground was very heavily disturbed or that the field system was absent in this area. The sole dating evidence from these excavations was three sherds of pottery described as follows: The medieval assemblage consisted of three sherds of pottery retrieved from furrow fill 402. These were identified as two joining sherds in an oxidised sandy ware and a single sherd of a sandy argillaceous-tempered ware. While the argillaceous-tempered ware appeared to be of an early medieval type, the oxidised ware was likely to be of 13th - to 15th-century date. The recent fieldwork and this survey found that the ridges were between 8m and 9m apart, which is more widely spaced than noted by the RCHME. Over most of the survey area the ridge and furrow survived to a height of circa 0.5m (Jones and Rann 2015).

Figure 8 The Location of Trenches Scale 1:2500

Plate 1: Evaluation Trench 33

Figure 9: Cross Section of Ridge and Furrow (Trench 33)

Plate 2 Composite Photograph of Ridge and Furrow

A series of photographs were taken of the medieval ridge and furrow earthworks to coincide with the excavations conducted by Archaeology Warwickshire (Jones and Rann 2015), examples of which are given below. This photographic archive is a record of the earthworks that fall within the area of the proposed development area. A full description of the methodology, photograph locations and the photographs themselves can be found in the accompanying document by Wardle, Papworth and Lacey (2016).

Plate 3: Looking northeast towards the Oxford Canal.

Plate 4: Looking southeast towards the Railway Embankment and the Wartime Siding.

12 The Post Medieval Landscape – The Oxford Canal

The new Marina included a junction with the Oxford Canal and involved the removal of a portion of the now disused stretch of the canal. The Canal was constructed originally between 1769 and 1794 and was then modernised, straightened and widened in 1829. The Early Canal In the Northern part of the study area the canal hugs the 100m contour and is relatively straight. In the Southern part the canal was straightened in the 1830s and the original canal was abandoned. This survived as a heavily overgrown channel circa 1m deep and 20m wide. The canal follows the 102m (332.25 feet) contour. To achieve this, an embankment circa 1.5m in height was constructed in the lower sections. James Brindley was the first “engineer” to build a canal, the Bridgewater Canal, in 1759 and this is thought to be the first canal constructed. This was instigated by the Duke of Bridgewater who was looking to improve the transport of coal from his coal mines at Worsley to Manchester. Brindley is credited with the invention of the technique of puddling clay to produce a water tight lining (www.wirralmodelengineeringsociety.co.uk). The success of the Bridgewater Canal resulted in him being commissioned to build more canals. He believed that it would be possible to link the rivers Mersey, Severn, Trent and the Thames by constructing the Grand Trunk Canal. The second leg of this network to be commissioned was the connection of the Trent to the Mersey thus allowing the transport of pottery from Stoke without the use of pack horses. Flash locks were an early invention to enable boats to navigate inland waterways and were the norm on rivers in Britain. They were usually constructed at weirs and the change in water level was brought about by the sudden introduction of water. This was both dangerous and slow to operate, and thus flash locks were not generally suited to canals. Pound locks had been invented in China in 983 and were introduced in Britain in the 1560s, operating on the principle that the change in water level was brought about the gradual introduction of water. Brindley invented the narrow lock with a width of 7’6”, which was narrower than the standard width of river barges. Part of the thinking behind this was that smaller boats meant that smaller tunnels could be bored, which were less labour and cost intensive. The standard width of 7 feet six inches was introduced for all locks and bridges on canals and thus smaller boats were required, giving rise to the term ‘narrow boat’. The Oxford Canal was a part of this early system. In April 1760, Royal Assent was granted to connect the industrial Midlands at Coventry with London, via the Thames at Oxford. The original purpose of the alteration was to transport coal from coalfields in the Midlands to Oxford and along the River Thames. James Brindley was appointed to be the engineer. The initial estimated cost was £200,000 (Cross-Rudkin 2010). The key feature of Brindley’s designs was the principle of contouring, that is following the contours of the landscape and thus minimising the need for tunnels, aqueducts and earth removal as well as reducing the number of locks. It had the disadvantage of increasing the length of canal to construct and more importantly increasing journey times. Brindley’s canals were built to a standard design with a total construction depth of 8’6” (2.615m) consisting of 18” (461mm) from the bank to the top of the water, a water depth of 4’6” (1.384), to allow a draft of 3’ (923mm), and a puddling thickness (the waterproof liner) of 2’6”(769mm). Thus a large volume of bedrock was dug out in any event, which could be used to create an embankment to allow the canal to traverse an area of lower ground, reducing the depth that had to be dug out in the lower ground. The height of water chosen for this section of the canal was 332’ 3” (102.23 mAOD). Construction began in 1769 at Coventry although financial difficulties delayed completion until 1789. The opening of the canal caused the price of coal to drop dramatically in Oxford. The following table details the chronology of the Oxford canal (adapted from: http://www.jim- shead.com/waterways/History.php?wpage=OXFD) Jan 1767 James Brindley surveyed the route for the canal. Jan 1769 Promoted by Act. Jan 1769 Samuel Simcock was appointed as James Brindley's assistant. May 1769 James Brindley subscribed for £3,000 worth of shares June 1769 Samuel Simcock and James King, the clerk of works, were told to set out the canal from Longford "in as Strait a Line as the Ground will permit".

13 Sept 1770 James Brindley sent his resignation to the company following a minute that they issued saying "the Engineer Surveyor and Clerks of this Company do not associate or drink with any of the Inferior Officers or Workmen". The company apologised for any offence caused and the resignation blew over. Autumn Jan 1772 Samuel Simcock was appointed engineer at a salary of £200 a year. January 1775 Promoted by Act. January 1779 Samuel Simcock and Robert Whitworth surveyed the line for the canal from Banbury to Oxford. January 1786 Promoted by Act. January 1786 James Brindley Appointed Resident Engineer of the canal. January 1786 A Bill was presented to Parliament which included the proposition that Samuel Simcock, Samuel Weston, and four others should build the canal from Banbury to Oxford for £29,000 on condition that they were given exclusive carrying rights and two-thirds of the profits. This was not accepted. January 1790 Open except for Isis Lock.

Figure 10: Map illustrating route of the 18th century canal and the 19th century alteration

Figure 11: Map illustrating route of the 18th Century canal and the 19th Century alteration.

Figure 12: Ordnance Survey 1884 1:2500 plan, reduced to 1:5000

Plate 5: View northeast along bank of early canal, southern part of the land

Plate 6: View to west into early canal bed

17 The Later Canal & The New Marina Inlet The sinuous route that resulted from the principle of contouring of the original canal was found to prolong transit and thus considered to be too costly. This led to a significant program of reconstruction to straighten sections of the canal during the 1830s. The chronology is as follows: Late Jan 1793 James Barnes surveyed the northern Oxford Canal on behalf of the Grand Junction Canal Company to show how it could be widened and shortened. January 1794 Promoted by Act. January 1799 Promoted by Act. January 1807 Promoted by Act. January 1808 Promoted by Act. January 1829 Promoted by Act. January 1829 William Cubitt was appointed consulting engineer to direct the straightening of the canal between Braunston and Hawksbury. This was completed in 1834. January 1829 William Ferguson was appointed resident engineer for the work of shortening this section of the canal. The new line opened on 13th February 1834. January 1829 Charles Vignoles surveyed a shortened and improved line for the canal. Late Jan 1829 Sir Marc Isambard Brunel engaged to recommend action on widening and shortening the canal line. He presented his proposals and a bill for £512 19s 7d. January 1830 Frederick Wood made a number of chain survey books giving details of locks, bridges, mileposts and other canal features. Some of these were used to assist canal inspections for over a hundred years after they were prepared. January 1853 Frederick Wood produced a plan for a 12 chain (264 yard) cut north of Hawksbury Junction which would have cut out the awkward turn and shortened the route through to the northern part of the Coventry Canal by 2 miles.

The proposed marina requires an inlet to be opened in the western side of the canal between Bridges 81 (Borstal Bridge) and 82 (Rowdyke Bridge). Photographs detailing this area follow:

Plate 7: View to south from inlet area

Plate 8: View to north from the position of the new inlet area

Plate 9: Towpath in location of inlet

Plate 10: Panoramic view of location of inlet from east side of canal

Figure 13: Profiles across canal around proposed inlet profiles Figure 14: Location of canal profiles

21 The Bridges The Ordnance Survey 1” map of 1834 shows that the number of bridges across the canal in the study area increased from 1 to 3 in the period 1834-1886, only Bridge 81 being on the location of an original bridge. The size of the bricks of Bridge 81 suggests an early nineteenth century date. Three bridges are associated with the canal found within the vicinity of Onley and Barby. The two northern-most bridges along the 18th century canal shown in Figure 11, No.81 and No.82, are brick-built hump-backed bridges. These are one form of many original bridge designs that were built in either brick or stone with an archway providing access for both the canal and towpath beneath it (Canal & River Trust, No Date). The bricks were predominantly laid in the ‘English Bond’ style, which was favoured by civil engineers for its strength (Lynch 1994). However, brick proportions in each bridge are suggestive of 19th century construction. Their appearance in Bridge 81 is of a soft red handmade/wirecut type, whilst those used in the pillars of Bridge 82 are of a pink-red hue and are slightly harder than those used in Bridge 81. Bridge 82 also contains a decorative course of blue engineering bricks. The southern-most bridge, Bridge 83, is situated on the 19th century section of the canal and is also built of red brick laid in the English bond.

Figure 15: OS 1” map of 1834, 1:25,000

22 Bridge 81: Borstal Bridge Bridge 81 is the northern-most bridge within the project area and is situated due east of the Onley prison complex. The bridge is constructed with soft, irregular red brick, although the colour of the brick appears darker on the north-facing elevations. The bricks are laid in the English Bond style with dimensions approximately 230 x 70mm, suggesting a construction date during the 19th century. Later repairs to the bridge have been undertaken using hard, regular red bricks which are visible towards the top of the southern elevation and have been used to form the outer archway under the northern elevation of the bridge. There is little ornamentation with the exception of four dressed ashlar blocks of stone placed atop each end of the bridge. The top of each block sits in-line with the top of the brickwork.

Plate 11: Bridge 81 Looking North

Figure 16 Plan of Bridge 81 Scale 1:200

23 Plate 12: Bridge 81 viewed from the north

Plate 13: East aspect, Bridge 81

24 Plate 14: The southern wall of Bridge 81 shows evidence of repair

Plate 15: Newer brickwork has since been added to the top of the southern part of bridge 81

Plate 16: Bridge 81 looking north

Plate 17: Underside of bridge 81 showing evidence of repairs to the structure

26 Plate 18: Detail of earthen bank leading up to the east of bridge 81

Plate 19: A narrowboat passes south under bridge 81

27 Bridge 82: Rowdyke Bridge Bridge 82 is situated due west of the southernmost extent of Onley Village, to the south of Bridge 81 and displays more decorative features. As in Bridge 81 the bricks used to construct the majority of Bridge 82 are soft, irregular red bricks with some inclusions, laid in English Bond style, with dimensions of 220x65mm. There are some variations in brick type, with a course of vitrified dark grey headers forming the top row of three courses that project from the wall of the bridge, just above the arch. Vitrified bricks are also used to decorative effect to line the arch and provide a cap to the top of each elevation and pillar. The pillars, situated at the end of each elevation, are constructed using the more decorative Flemish Bond. There is also evidence of repair work in the form of hard red, regular bricks, with dimensions of 210x60mm, and are dated to the 19th century.

Plate 20: South aspect, Bridge 82

Plate 21: North aspect, Bridge 82

Figure 17: Plan of Bridge 82, 1:200

Figure 18: South elevation, Bridge 82

Plate 22: Bridge 82 looking west

Plate 23: Looking south towards Bridge 82 from Bridge 81.

Plate 24: Bridge 82 viewed from the south

31 Bridge 83: Hazels Bridge Bridge 83 is situated to the southeast of HMP Onley, and to the south of Bridge 82. Its appearance differs slightly from Bridges 81 and 82 due to the use of railings to form the walls either side of the path rather than brickwork. The structure is built of fairly soft, red, regular bricks laid in the English Bond style with dimensions of 225x75mm, suggesting a construction date during the 19th century. Vitrified bricks form a decorative parapet along the top of each elevation, which coincides with three courses of vitrified bricks that project from the pillars, also constructed in English Bond, at each end of the bridge. The archway of the bridge utilises both the soft red and the vitrified bricks in its construction. The vitrified bricks not only comprise the majority of the archway on the north elevation of Bridge 83, but have also been extensively used in the horizontal courses above the arch.

Plate 25: South aspect, Bridge 83

Figure 19: Plan of Bridge 83, 1:200

Figure 20: North elevation, Bridge 83

Plate 26: North aspect, Bridge 83

Plate 27: West aspect, Bridge 83

Plate 28: East aspect, Bridge 83

Plate 29: Underside of Bridge 83

Plate 30: Detail of southeast pillar, Bridge 83

Plate 31: Bridge 83 viewed from the towpath to the south

36 Onley Fields Farm A building is depicted in the location of Onley Fields Farmhouse on the 1816 Parish Map and the 1840 Tithe Map of the Parish of Barby. The latter records a two storey building in red brick and render, with concrete chimney stacks and a machine cut tiled roof along with some ancillary farm buildings (Cotswold Archaeology 2012, p.20). It is not known as to whether the building depicted on early mapping is a part of the current farmhouse structure. It has been extensively rebuilt since the survey of the 1840 map and the farm buildings surrounding it have altered following changes in agricultural needs.

Plate 32: Onley Fields Farmhouse east elevation (J Marine Ltd., 2012).

Plate 33: West elevation of the farmhouse and remnants of a previous structure (foreground).

37 The Victorian Great Central Main Line Railway

Near the eastern boundary of the new Marina were the remnants of the former course of part of The Great Central Main Line railway adjacent to the canal. The railway had a double track as well as signalling equipment and related infrastructure which has been entirely removed. To the south of Onley Fields Farm, the railway ran on an embankment whereas to the north, the railway was at ground level. There are no obvious visible remains of the railway to the north, however the embankment of the main line survives to the south. West of this, there is a second embankment – considered to have been constructed when the area was used as a Munitions Depot during the Second World War. The Great Central Midland Line was the last main line built in Victorian Britain opening in 1899. It ran from Sheffield in the North to Marylebone in London via Leicester and Loughborough. The GCML was built by Sir Edward Watkin with the aim of establishing a high-speed service between London and the North to compete with the lines operated by other companies. Watkin is also known for works to the Metropolitan Railway, still in use as part of the London Underground network, and a project to dig the first tunnel beneath the English Channel, which started in 1880 and abandoned after 1.8km of tunnel had been excavated. Watkin took the view that in the future trains would run continuously to the Continent and the stations were built so that they could take contintenal trains without the being completely rebuilt. The report by Lord Beeching on the future of the railways concluded that the Great Central Midland line was duplicated by other routes and was therefore closed in 1966. Two sections of the line are preserved by heritage railways, located in Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire. The relatively late date for the railway and the desire for speed means that the railway was constructed with a very different specification to other railways. This included:  A gradient of less than 1:176  A curve radius of greater than 1 mile (1.6km)  To allow the running of heavier bigger engines and trains.  Wholesale clearance of buildings in towns . The specifications made use of the newly invented (1884) steam shovel. There were standard designs for both cuttings and embankments. On embankments there was an overall track bed width of 31’ (28.61m) at the base and 21’6” (19.8m) at the top. The slope of the embankment was variable but always with 4” (307mm) of ‘soiling’ a layer of topsoil. There was also a provision for a drainage ditch and a fence.

Figure 21 The original Design of Embankments and Cuttings (Rolt 1971) 38 Historic Photographs The construction of the Great Northern Line was documented by the Leicester photographer Sydney Newton although he was not commissioned to do so. The archive of these photographs is held in the Leicestershire Record Office. The website http://www.railwayarchive.org.uk extensively reproduces them. The following two photographs are reproduced from this resource.

Plate 34: Contractor's saddle tank locomotive 'ANNIE', built by the Hunslet Engine Co. of Leeds, and photographed in 1896 at rest with her crew and a gang navvies between Rugby and Willoughby (Archive Reference L2420)

Plate 35: Looking south along the embankment towards Barby spoil bank c. 1897 (Archive Reference L1884)

39 The following two photographs are reproduced from http://www.warwickshirerailways.com. They purport to show the loading of a horse-drawn Howitzer battery onto a train at the Army Ordnance Depot at Barby on 11th August 1914. The website suggests the depot was operational prior to the commencement of the First World War, owing to the date of the photographs, and that, during the Second World War, it had its own WD 0-6-0ST locomotives. It is also noted by the website author that the date may be incorrect as there was a major mobilisation of troops in the area in 1915 prior to the Gallipoli campaign, which utilised railway facilities across this part of the country. The second of the photographs shows the Howitzer battery from a different angle. The goods wagon carrying the load appears to be coupled to a passenger carriage, reinforcing the suggestion troops may have been moved at a similar time.

Plate 36: Horse-drawn Howitzer battery being loaded at Barby, c. 1914-5

Plate 37: Horse-drawn Howitzer battery being loaded at Barby, c. 1914-5

40 The Layout of the Railway

Embankment Starts

Crossing

Subway

Culvert

Milepost

Canal Crossing

Bridge

Figure 22 The Layout of the Railway Based on the 1910 OS 1:2500 Plan

42 The Main Line Embankment There are no physical traces of the railway north of Onley Fields Farm.At its northern end, the main line embankment survives to a height of 2.12m (97.16) on its western side. On the eastern side the embankment is smaller – a few hundred millimetres, reflecting the slope of the land from west to east. The height of the trackbed appears to have been at 97.78m. From the outset, the railway was fenced.

Plate 38: View along main line embankment from northern end

Plate 39: Panoramic view of northern part of embankment from the east

Plate 40: North end of main line embankment from the west following clearance of scrub

Plate 41: View of east bank of main line embankment, north end

Figure 23: Location of embankment profiles

Figure 24: Embankment profiles

45 The Siding Embankment The siding embankment is the only surviving earthwork from the marshalling yard constructed to allow for the loading and unloading of munitions when the area to the northwest of Onley Fields Farm was used as an Ordnance Depot. Towards its southern end, the embankment is largely obscured by vegetation.

Plate 42: Railway siding embankment viewed from the north

Plate 43: View of siding embankment from the east following clearance of scrub

Plate 44: West side of siding embankment

Plate 45: Platform of siding embankment viewed from north

Plate 46: Panoramic view of west side of siding embankment (southern part)

Plate 47: Panoramic view of siding embankment from the east

48 The Crossing The crossing originally served a trackway leading over the canal at bridge 81. No trace of the crossing remains in the modern landscape.

Figure 25: The crossing as seen on the 1910 1:2500 Ordnance Survey map

Plate 48: View towards location of crossing from the east

49 The Subway The subway, located so as to give access to agricultural land either side of the railway embankment, is constructed of hard-fired bricks. The vertical walls of the underpass are constructed in English bond, the stretchers consisting of grey-brown bricks, the headers of black engineering bricks. Inside the subway, at the head of the vertical walls, a projecting dressed stone course is present, with surface mouldings. Above this, the vaulted roof of the subway is constructed of grey- brown bricks arranged in stretcher bond. Each side of the embankment, the subway features a façade comprising a curved retaining wall either side of the underpass opening. brick buttresses support the flanking walls, and at their ends, brick columns The opening itself has four courses of vertical engineering brick headers arranged over the arch. The flanking walls follow the English bond pattern noted in the walls of the underpass, with engineering brick headers and grey-brown stretchers, starting in line with the arch and curving outwards through a rightangle to the extent of the embankment at each end.

Figure 26: The Subway Scale 1:200

Plate 49: Looking East

Plate 50: Looking West

51 Plate 51: Looking West

Plate 52: Detail of retaining wall Looking East

52 The Twentieth Century

The Wartime Supply Depot A Supply Depot was constructed to the northwest of Onley Fields Farm at beginning of the twentieth century. The depot has its own railway sidings linked to the mainline. It was used variously as an Army Ordnance Depot storing munitions and weapons, and a Ministry of Food storage Depot during its operational period. A Supply Depot is considered to be an obvious target for enemy attack and this is why it is believed not to have been depicted on any mapping until 1967, when the Ordnance Survey 1:10,000 map covering the northern part of the area shows buildings, roads and railway sidings, labelled ‘Depot’. There is no map of similar date showing anything to the south. The layout of the depot is clearly shown in 1940s air photographs of the area (Figure 27). The photographs show that a siding is present off of which a shunting yard can be seen parallel with the mainline. A track runs to the northeast around rows of store buildings and three spurs run southwards between the stores themselves, facilitating the loading and unloading of goods (Figure 28). During the Second World War the depot was used by the Ministry of Food until it was taken over by the Royal Ordnance Depot at Weedon, located c.12 miles south of the site, for storage of ammunition and ‘returned stores’ – small arms and machine guns returned from demobilised military units. The site remained a sub-depot of Weedon until its closure in 1959 (Catford 2011).

Figure 27 : Extract of 1947 air photograph showing Supply Depot and Prisoner of War Camp. The physical nature of the store buildings is unknown. There is insufficient detail visible in historic air photographs. No trace remains in the modern landscape, owing to the area being subsequently developed into prison facilities and a housing estate. Evidence for the railway sidings remains in the form of concrete railway sleepers, marked variously with ‘WD’ (War Department), ‘STENT’ and ‘ ’ (thought to relate to the Empire Stone Works) None of these are in their original locations, however they are present across the site, forming roadways, fencing and blocking deep openings in the ground. Overgrown piles of these sleepers are

53 found adjacent to the eastern fence of the housing estate. It is considered unlikely these were brought into the site when such a number would have been present following the demolition of the depot.

Plate 53: ‘WD’ marked sleeper

Plate 54: ‘STENT’ marked sleeper

Plate 55: 'E' marked sleeper

STENT concrete sleepers were patented by Dudley Hepburn Stent of Delhi, India, in 1923 (see http://www.google.co.uk/patents/US1460115) suggesting parts of the depot rail network where these were used must post-date this time.

Plate 56: Discarded concrete sleepers In addition, three brick-lined shafts are present in the vicinity of the railway sidings. The function of these is unknown. The openings of the shafts are blocked with concrete sleepers.

Plate 57: Concrete sleepers used to block deep brick-lined shaft

Plate 58: Detail of brick shaft In addition to the surviving railway features, the road layout of the southern part of the Supply Depot is visible in the current plan of the housing estate. The northwest boundary of the depot is also respected by the present boundary of HM Prison Onley.

Figure 28: Layout of Supply Depot, from 1947 air photograph

56 The Prisoner of War Camp The prisoner of war camp was constructed largely in a north-south alignment from a number of buildings which, from their regularity in plan form, are considered to have been prefabricated. To the north of the site there are four groups of four long buildings, approximately 19.8m x 6.75m (65 x 22 feet) in plan, arranged around a central building measuring c.11.2m x 8m (37 x 26 feet). These are considered to be barrack buildings around a central ablutions block. Similarly sized buildings were present in different arrangements around the southern part of the site. A large area is present to the northeast that may have been an exercise yard or sports pitch.

Figure 29 : Plan of Prisoner of War Camp from 1947 air photograph, 1:2500

57 The Post War Establishment Little is known about the use of the Prisoner of War Camp following the end of the Second World War. It is suggested that camp buildings became a military intelligence establishment. As stated above, the Supply Depot continued as a sub-depot to the Royal Ordnance Depot at Weedon until 1959. After this, its role is uncertain. The northern part of the site, including both the depot and the Prisoner of War camp buildings was still present up to the late 1960s. It is marked on the 1967 Ordnance Survey 1:10,000 map as a depot. The map ends mid-way down the site and thus the southern extent of the surviving depot is unknown.

Figure 30 : Extract from 1967 1:10,000 map, reproduced at 1:5,000.

It is noted from the 1967 map that the number of tracks in the railway sidings has decreased.

58 The Prison Complex Immediately following the publication of the 1967 Ordnance Survey map, the supply depot and prisoner of war camp were removed. The road layout of the southern part of the depot was retained and a housing estate largely made up of semi-detached properties was constructed. A borstal was built to the north, with the staff occupying the houses to the south. Three facilities are present at Onley: HMP Onley, HMP Rye Hill and Rainsbrook Secure Training Centre. HM Prison Onley is a Category C men’s prison, operated by Her Majesty’s Prison Service. It is located on the northern part of the Supply Depot, retaining its shaped western boundary. Onley opened as a Borstal in 1968, and became a Young Offenders Institution in 1976. The prison gradually increased in size as new accommodation was added. HM Prison Rye Hill is located alongside HM Prison Onley to the east. It is a private prison holding Category B prisoners operated by G4S. It opened in 2001 and occupies the entirety of the site of the former prisoner of war camp. To the west of HM Prison Onley, Rainsbrook Secure Training Centre is located. This is again operated by G4S and was opened in July 1999. The centre is a residential child/youth facility that was expanded in 2002.

Figure 31 : Modern aerial view of the prisons and housing estate (Google Maps).

59 Conclusions ‐ The Evolution of The Landscape

The excavation and survey work conducted at Onley, in combination with documentary research, demonstrates almost continual habitation of the area and, in particular, agricultural activity since the 13th century. The medieval village of Onley was abandoned in the seventeenth century and a switch from arable to pastoral agricultural activity happened at this time. The predominantly agrarian economy lasted until the early 20th century, even with the construction of the canal in the late 18th Century. The only notable change to the Onley region beyond this was the subtle alteration of a trackway, in use since at least the medieval period, to account for the canal. A significant milestone in the development of the landscape was the further addition of infrastructure in the form of the Great Central Main Line railway, which opened in 1899. This facilitated the construction of a Supply Depot during the early 20th century that transformed a large area immediately to the southeast of Onley Deserted Medieval Village from agrarian to industrial use. Subsequently, the Deserted Medieval Village became divorced from its ridge and furrow furlongs in and beyond this development. During World War II a Prisoner of War camp was positioned to the east of the Supply Depot, with a number of buildings still present up until the late 1960s when, along with the structure associated with the Supply Depot, the site began to be redeveloped. Whilst the road layout of the Depot still remains in the southern half of the site, it is now characterised by semi- detached housing that was built to coincide with the construction of a Borstal in 1968, to provide living quarters for staff. Since this time, the site of the Depot has been destroyed, with the exception of the road, to create a number of prison facilities and a secure training centre.

Figure 32 Phased plan of extant structures, 1:10,000

61 Bibliography

Allison,K.J., Beresford,M.W.,& Hurst,J.G., 1966 , The Deserted Villages of Northamptonshire, Leicester University Press, Leicester Bartlett, A.D.H., 2011, Barby Pools Marina Northamptonshire and Warwickshire: Report on Archaeological Geophysical Survey for Cotswold Archaeology, Bartlett-Clark Consultancy, Canal & River Trust, Undated, Oxford Canal , Canal & Rivers Trust, https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/canals-and-rivers/oxford-canal, Accessed 23rd April 2015 Canal & River Trust, Undateda, Canal Bridges, Canal & Rivers Trust, https://canalrivertrust.org.uk/news-and-views/features/canal-heritage/canal-bridges, Accessed 23rd April 2015 Carlyle,S., 2012, Barby Pools Marina Onley, Northamptonshire and Willoughby, Warwickshire: Archaeological Evaluation for J Marine Ltd, Unpublished report., Cotswold Archaeology Catford,N., 2011, Weedon Royal Ordnance Depot, Subterranea Britannica, http://www.subbrit.org.uk/sb-sites/sites/w/weedon/index2.shtml Cotswold Archaeology, 2012, Chapter 9: Archaeology and Cultural Heritage. Planning application for a 550-berth marina at Onley Fields Prison Farm, Daventry, Environmental Statement Volume 1., Unpublished Report, Cotswold Archaeology Dow,G.,1959, Great Central, Volume 1 Progenitors 1813-1863,Locomotive Publishing Co, London Dow,G.,1959, Great Central, Volume 2 Dominion of Watkin 1864-1899,Locomotive Publishing Co, London Dow,G.,1959, Great Central, Volume 3 Fay sets the Pace 1900-1922,Locomotive Publishing Co, London Evans,D., 2006, Army Camps: History and Development, 1858-2000., English Heritage, London, Hatton,G.W., 2005, The Medieval Settlement at Onley, Northamptonshire: an evaluation of the process of formation and desertion of the medieval settlement, with special reference to its significance within the larger community during the 16th and 17th centuries, West Northamptonshire Local History, http://www.westnorthantshistory.co.uk/dbase/data/docs/Region/Onley/formation-and-desertion-of- onley-v4.pdf, Accessed 10th April 2015 Healy, JMC, 1977, Great Central Memories, Baton Transport, London Historic England, Undated, List Entry Summary: Abandoned medieval village of Onley, Historic England, http://list.historicengland.org.uk/resultsingle.aspx?uid=1003900, Accessed 10th April 2015 J Marine Ltd., Undated, Barby Pools Marnia: Design & Access Statement, J Marine Ltd Jordan, C., & Leung. R., 2012, Archaeology and Cultural Heritage , Environmental Impact Assessment, Cotswold Archaeology Jones, L, and Rann, C., 2015, Barby Pools Marina, Barby, Northamptonshire: Archaeological Evaluation, Archaeology Warwickshire Report 1521., Archaeology Warwickshire Lynch, G., 1994, Brickwork: History, Technology and Practice, Volume 1, Wimbledon, Donhead Mason, P., 2008, An archaeological desk-based assessment of land at HMP and YOI Onley, Willoughby, Rugby, Northamptonshire Archaeology, Northampton Rann, C., 2015, Written Scheme of Investigation: Archaeological Evaluation. Barby Pools Marina, Onley Fields Prison Farm, Onley Park, Barby, Northamptonshire, Archaeology Warwickshire Rolt, L.T., 1971, The Making of a Railway, Hugh Eveln, London Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England , 1981, Barby, An Inventory of the Historical Monuments in the County of Northamptonshire, Volume 3, Archaeological Sites in North- West Northamptonshire, 12-14, RCHME, London Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England, 1981 a, Sectional Preface, in An Inventory of the Historical Monuments in the County of Northamptonshire, Volume 3, Archaeological Sites in North-West Northamptonshire, xxiii-lv, RCHME, London Walker, C, 1973, Main Line Lament – The Final Years of the Great Central Route to London, Oxford Publishing Company, Oxford

62 Wardle, P., 2014, Archaeological mitigation strategy, Barby Pools Marina Phase 1, Land at Onley Fields Prison Farm, Onley Park, Barby, Northamptonshire, CV23 8AN, The Historic Environment Consultancy Report No 2014/1128 Wardle,P., Lacey,C. & Papworth,H., 2016, The Medieval and Post Medieval Landscape of Onley Fields Farm Northamptonshire: The Medieval Field System, PAW Print Publishers, Goring on Thames Wardle,P., Lacey,C. & Papworth,H., 2016, The Medieval and Post Medieval Landscape of Onley Fields Farm Northamptonshire: The Oxford Canal , PAW Print Publishers, Goring on Thames Wardle,P., Lacey,C. & Papworth,H., 2016, The Medieval and Post Medieval Landscape of Onley Fields Farm Northamptonshire: The Great Central Railway, PAW Print Publishers, Goring on Thames warwickshirerailways.com, Undated, LNER Route: Leicester to Marylebone - Rugby Central Station: gcrcs53, Warwickshire Railways, , http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lner/gcrcs53.htm, Accessed 11th June 2015 warwickshirerailways.com, Undateda, LNER Route: Leicester to Marylebone - Rugby Central Station: gcrcs54, Warwickshire Railways, http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/lner/gcrcs54.htm, Accessed 11th June 2015. wirralmodelengineeringsociety.co.uk, Undated, James Brindley (1716 - 27 September 1772), Wirral Model Engineering Society, http://www.wirralmodelengineeringsociety.co.uk/Articles/JamesBrindley.pdf, Accessed 15th June 2015 West Northamptonshire Local History, Undated, The Inquisition of Depopulation, 1607, West Northamptonshire Local History, http://www.westnorthantshistory.co.uk/depopulation-inquisition- 1607, Accessed 10th April 2015 West Northamptonshire Local History, Undated a , Documentary Evidence, West Northamptonshire Local History, http://www.westnorthantshistory.co.uk/documentary-evidence, Accessed 10th April 2015 Walker, C, 1973, Main Line Lament – The Final Years of the Great Central Route to London, Oxford Publishing Company, Oxford