Appendix

Open-field records, accumulating over many centuries, have revealed a wide range of inter-related themes. Combined use of the information from field books and furlong plans reconstructed by archaeological field-survey, have made it possible to identify fields, 'furlongs and meadows enabling detailed studies of township structures to be made~ The economy of the fields falls into the three natural topographical regional types of the county; the Soke of with its fen, the vills of the medieval forests, and the extensive champagne region lying along the Nene Valley and in the west. The Soke and the forest vills had good resources of fuel and grazing and did not experience the extreme difficulties of the west. During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and especially after 1570, the champagne region converted arable to leys and cow pasture, so improving the amount of fodder and grazing available. This did not occur in the fen and forest regions; there were no leys among the arable, and animals were allowed on the fallow only to manure it, not because they needed rough grazing. Champagne townships not too distant from forests sometimes had detached parts to provide woodland and woodland -pasture resources. townships were mainly two-field in the 13th century, changing continuously until almost all places operated a three-course tilth by the 18th century. More than three fields occurred in many vills after 1500, although they were usually grouped into three blocks for cropping. Forest vills often had multiple fields, probably caused byassarting. The ability of townships to change is illustrated by those uniting to form new and larger arrangements as at Barnack and , where two townships were united. Raunds and Ringstead shared the fields ofthe deserted Cottons, and Higham Ferrers and Newton Bromswold shared the fields of the lost Buscott. A regular order oflands occurred in many field systems; analysis of terriers and field books shows that probably all townships had their lands laid out in a regular manner. An ordered structure seems to have been created before the 13th century, since the older the record the more likely it is to show tenurial regularity. The number of yardlands, in many cases, directly relates to the Domesday assessment of 1086 and to the field-system structure, which leads to the conclusion that fields were created before 1066. They were created after c. 750 AD from archaeological evidence, and seem to have been laid out with long lands that later (before the mid-12th century) became divided into furlongs. At the other end ofthe life ofopen fields, when they were enclosed, flexibility is again revealed by the occurrence of partial enclosure. This happened at many places, among them Bradden, which had the greater part of one of its two field systems enclosed in 1509, long before the remainder in 1803. Several places such as Braybrooke, Morton Pinkney, Norton and Stanwick, had one of their three fields enclosed in the seventeeth century. Such action re-created an 'old fashioned' two-field arrangement in the first instance, but there was a rapid change of the two remaining fields back into three,

154 APPENDIX 155 except in the case of , which left its two fields while taking more than 35 years to agree to enclose them. The evidence of such changes, fossilised over a wide range of dates, may be interpreted as recording a continuous process of change, small units being amalga­ mated into larger ones. The archaeological evidence shows that there was much alteration of the Saxon settlement pattern. The survival of small townships, such as Buscott in Higham Ferrers and Potcote in , presumably relates to this earlier arrangement of small settlements, as do the double fields of Hardingstone and . Different sized yardlands at Wollaston in 1300 may be explained by an amalgamation of two field systems for each of the two separate' ends' ofWollaston, each associated with its own manor. Manorial history since 1086 is, amongst other things, the history of feudal disinte­ gration and the building up of private farms and estates. The field-system evidence shows this to have started before 1086; the two manors recorded at and Raunds are shown by the disposition of their lands to have once been single manors. It seems likely that when vills took on their late Saxon physical forms and fiscal ratings there was one manor for each settlement and township. This account of townships and field systems has been largely confined to unravelling their spatial and physical complexities, and the way that open-fields are related to the available resources. Sifting of so many records has also revealed much evidence on the pattern of land ownership and its changes over time. Social and economic history cannot be included in this book, but some examples of changes in rents and tenure are given, to illustrate the scope of the records. A rental of individual yardlands at , made in about 1650, lists new increased rents as well as rents that could be expected upon enclosure 1. The con­ cern with money may be an attempt to solve the financial problems of the lord, John Danvers, culminating in his 1652 sale. Interest in the dates at which old leases expired is explained by the rents; properties had been let at low (medieval) values of about l2s a yardland, but those already relet were raised to about £8 a yardland and were to be increased to £9 as long as Stowe remained open-field, and to about £20 if it were enclosed. The rental therefore shows an estate changing from a medieval condition, in terms of rented values, to one exposed to current agricultural prices. Yeomen paying such low real rents, 7.5 percent of the going rate, were in a good position to increase their wealth in the seventeenth century. Related to 1988 values, a 1,000 acre farm paying £80 an acre rent would save £72,000 per annum, which in 30 years would acrue (without interest) to £M2.16, sufficient to buy 1080 acres at £2,000 an acre. Thus a tenant could save enough to buy his land in a generation; doubtless the same process.es operated in the seventeeth century, and lay behind the financial ability of W ollaston tenants of the Bridgwater estate to buy their farms (the whole parish) in 16342. . Hemington shows the transfer of land from copyhold to freehold. The vill had two manors, one overlordship belonging to Peterborough abbey with possession split between three knightly families, and the other was the property ofRamsey abbey. The Peterborough manor was in a fragmented condition by the fifteenth century with a weak manorial custom. The estate had few local feudal dues recorded in sales, and, in 1 NRO S(G) 297-8; the document is undated but is before 1655 when it refers to unexpired leases. 2 Hall, Wol/aston, pp. 93- 98. 156 THE OPEN FlElDS OF NORTHAMPTONSHIRE 1488, Thomas Montagu, probably with the intention of building up an estate, bought all land possible, beginning with the main manor and taking land in hand. None of his purchases was accompanied by copyhold rights and so lands had become in effect freehold. By this means he was able to extinguish any manorial rights without fuss from the residents, who were probably few by that date in a small village, and establish leasehold on his own terms. A survey of the manor in 1512 is at pains to explain that all the holdings were held at the will of Thomas Montagu. Subsequent acquisition ofmonastic lands and tithes in 1540 (mainly belonging to the Abbey ofRamsey with some ofThomey Abbey and Hinchingbrooke Priory, Hunting­ don), which were already held on a long lease made in 1519, enabled Edward, son of Thomas Montagu, to complete the purchase of the whole ofHemington after which the Montagus could run the estate how they liked. Private enclosure took place in the mid seventeenth century, probably in 1661 3. A large body of evidence has been discovered for enclosure; searching for open-field. terriers of all dates naturally reveals enclosure dates, many of which were previously unkown. These are given at the end of each entry in the Gazetteer. The list below summarizes the data by century, ignoring partial enclosure, using the date of major enclosure.

Century Township Number Enclosed percent 15 9 3 16 33 12 17 42 15 18 136 49 19 56 20 20 1 1

Tol4l 277 100

It can be seen that there was very little enclosure (3 percent) before 1500 in Northamptonshire, and not very much during the 16th century (12 percent). Enclosure really begins in the seventeenth century, although very few places have had any details published. Some parishes had draft agreements for enclosure made in the seventeenth century that did not take effect, and they were not enclosed until the Parliamentary era (Crick, Hardingstone, Weedon Bee). The area statistics for Parliamentary enclosure will need revision to account for earlier partial enclosures. Details of land-holdings and ownership were made for each parish at enclosure, and a 'profile' of the social structure is therefore available. An example is given in the Gazetteer for Mears Ashby (1777). This study has provided a substantial amount of evidence describing the nature and operation of open fields in Northamptonshire. Further work is required on many of the topics discussed, and on parishes not yet studied, to elucidate the structure and management of all the field systems in the county. The Appendix below summarises the numeric information in the Gazetteer in a convenient form.

3 D. Hall 'Studies of Barnwell and Hemington, Northamptonshire' in The Salt of Common lift, edited by E. DeWindt, University of Michigan, forthcoming .. Open-field numberical data The numbers under 'number pf fields' are centuries. IT the tilth is known to differ from the number of named fields it is added in brackets. Demesne; C is compact, D dispersed. R represents a regular tenurial order.

PI4ce .Numberof folds lJmwne . TardImuls TenurilJl EnclDsure 4Y 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 .No acreage order date Percent date

Abington 1660 Abthorpe 3(2?) R 1823 Charlock 2 ,.1410 Foscote 2 1532- 1703 Addington Gt 2 3 3 3 42 28.5 R 1803 5 1760 Addington Li 3 3 3 3 D 20 R 1830 5 1575 Adstone 2 2 R ,.1604 Alderton 2 3(2?) 1819 All Saints 3 3 D R 1772 12 1632 St Peter 3 3 R 1772 11 1684 VI --....J Apethorpe 8 4 4- 1777 Hale 2 ,.1500 3 3 55.5 23 1767 39 1710 Ashby Canons 2 3 ,.1540 Ashby Castle 3 18 1651 Chadstone 1651 AshbyCold 3 60 ,.1625 AshbyMears 8 5(4?) 5(4?) C 50.5 19-24 R 1777 19 1577 Ashby S Ledgers 2 3 3 3 3 3 D 40 38 R 1764- 7 1463 The Lodge b.1512 Ashley 3 3 3 49 13 1806 12 1632 Ashton by OundJe 5 5 6(3) R 1807 9 1700 Aston le Walls 2 2 19 R 1712 42 1633 Appletree 1609-1720 Aynho 2? 3 4 50.5 1792 2 3 D 48 18 R 1779 Barby 4(3) 4(3) 50 30 R 1778 29 1684 Qnley 2 ,.1605 Barnack 7 9 1800 3 1718 Pilsgate 3 24 R 1800 PIoa NumberoffoltJs JJemesne rartlJonds Tenurial Enclosure 1ey 12 13 11 15 16 17 18 19 No acreage order dJJk Percent dJJk

Southorpe 2 2? 3 1841 Bamwel1 3 3 3 D 40 1683 14 1632 Barton Earls 7(5) 7(5) D 80 25 R 1771 13 1654 Barton Seagrave 3 7 1633 Benefield 2? 4? 4(3) 4(3) 1820 Billing Great 4(3) 4(3) 48 19 R 1778 Billing Little 3? c.1630 Blakesley 3 3 3 64 27- 30 1760 27-00 1647-85 FoxIey b.I720 Kirby b.1509 Sewel1 2 b.1720 Wood End 2 4 1779 22 c.I775 Blatherwycke 4(3) 4(3) c.l800 Blisworth 3 4 3 1808 Boddington Upper 2 2 2 2 20 26-34 R 1758 30 1677 Lower 31-8 R 1751 (JI- 2 3 1758 42 CO Boughton 3 4? 27 R 1756 21 1700 Bowden Little 2 3 3 51 21 R 1779 28-4() 1633-84 Bozeat 3 3 3 3 60 R 1798 4 1798 Brackley 2 2? 5? R 1829 Bradden 2 3 3 3 D 26 23 R 1803 42 1761 Brafield 4(3) 4(3) 4(3) 54 17 1827 Brampton Ash c.1658 Brampton Church 4(3) 45 c.l640 Brampton Chapel 4(3) 32 c.l640 3 C 26-30 R 1775 16-19 1700-33 Braybrooke 3 3 4(3) 3 D 63 19-25 R 1788 52 1658 Brigstock 3 3 3 5(3) 36 1795 Bringtons 2 3 3 29 R 1743 33 1680 Althorpe 2 2 24 1512 b.I680 3 3 3 3 3 3 C 95 20 R 1780 Brockhall 2 2 3 3 3 D 26 R 1611 Muscott 2 3 3 'D 19 R c.l600 Broughton 2 3 4(3) 6(3) 6(3) D 52 c.23 R 1786 PIoce Numherof fields Demesne rardkznds Tenurial Enclosure l-'!J 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 No acreage order daJe Percent daJe

BuckbyLong 5(3) 5(3) 37 1765 15 1656 Bugbrook 3 3 c.31 1779 35 1736 Bulwick 6 8(3) 1778 Burton Latimer 4(3) 4(3) D 1803 Byfield 2 2 72 R 1778 19 1778 WesthoIp 2 2 36 R 1778 36 1614 Trafford 1471- 1637 Castor 5 5 4 5 5 D 1895 Ailsworth 3 4 4 4 c.25 1895 1765 Milton 3? h.1576 Sutton 3 3 D 1901 3 1768 Upton h.I686 Chacombe 2 1635 2 42 c.I480 Chelveston 2 3 4(3) 1801 t; Caldecott 3 1801 1.0 Clipston 3 84 28 1776 43-51 1700-39 Nobold 3 3 3 R 1776 43 1767 Clopton 5(3) 3 6 D c.39 48 1633-1702 14 1633 Cogenhoe 4(3) 3? 1827 11 1627 Collyweston 3 3 3 15 1841 16 1638 Corby 3 4(3) 4(3) 4(3) R 1829 13 1633 Coton Clay 2 28 28.5 1652 CourteenhalI 3 1650 11 1637 Cranford S Andrew 2? 3 22.5 28 1775 Cranford SJohn 3 3 3 3 D 26-28 R 1805 10 1628 Cransley 2 3? h.1720 5 5 28 40-3 1782 23 1662 Crick 4(3) 4(3) C 80 30 R 1776 38 1632 Culworth 2 3(2) 3(2) 2 3(2) D 30 30 R 1612 Dallington 3 3 3 c.1725 2 3 3 3 3 3 D 40 c.28 R 1802 13 1672 Drayton 2 2 3 3 3 40 R 1752 Deene 5 1612 Deenethorpe 4(3) 1642 Denford 3 3(4) R 1765 PIoa NumberoJjie14s DemesM YardJanJs TmIlI'iIll Enclontre ~ 12 13 14 15 /6 17 18 /9 No acrr:tJtt order dtlU PertmJ dole

Denton 3 3 3 33 16 R 1770 Desborough 3 3 1776 Doddington 4(3) 4(3) 56 c.24 R 1766 8-15 1613-94- Dodford 3 C 48 20 1623 Draugbton 3 3 3 3 D R c.1727 54 1631 Easton on the Hill 3? 3? 3 3 24-35 1817 0-39 1722 Easton Maudit 2 2 2 2 R c.1639 Two townships Easton Neston & Hulcote 2 3 1499 Two townships? Ecton 3 6(5) 6(5) 6(5) 110 11- 13 R 1759 4-36 1627- 1748 FJkington 3? 48 b.l540 Etton 4 4 4 1809 Woodcroft b. 1547 Evenley 2 3 3 3 23.5 1779 EverdonGt 2 4 4 44- R 1764- 23 1685 Little 2 R 1764- Snorscombe 1508 ~ Eydon 2 2 28 23-5 R 1761 44- 1667 Eye 3 1820 FamdonEast 3 4(3) 45 43 R 1780 27-35 1655-1711 Farthinghoe 2 C c.1612 5 5 47.5 25-8 R 1751 53 1744- 2 2 - c.l500 Faxton 3 3 27.5 42 1745 31 1587 Mawsley 14~1590 Fmedon 8(3) 11(3) 12(3) R 1805 Flore 2 } 3 3 D 21 1778 29 1684 Glassthorpe c.1530 Gayton 3 c.1603 Geddington 4 5 D 15 1807 Glapthorn 9(3) 3 7(3) D 1813 Grafton Underwood 3 1777 Greens Norton 2 4(3) R 1799 32 1752 Caswell 1509 Duncote 3 1799 Field Burcote 1499 Grendon 3 3 3 1780 PIoce Numberof fields Demesne rardUuuls Tenurial EnclDsure ~ 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 No acreage order dale Percml dale

Gretton 3 4{3) D 1832 3 3 21 50 R 1764 51 1684 1774 2 1588 Haddon East North Fields 3 3 3 17 38 R 1773 40 c.1653 South Fields 3 D 25 21.5 c.l600 Haddon West 2 6 48 37 R 1764 Hannington 3 1802 28 1598 Hardingstone East Fields 3 5(3) 3 D 33 20-23 R 1765 2& 1660 West Fields 5 5 46.5 19-24 R 1765 Hargrave 3 7(3) 1802 4- 1671 2 3 3 5 28 67 1766 Hupole 3 4{3) 3 33 1778 35 1682 Harringworth 6 5(3) 1774 -O'l Hartwell 8 4 1826 - 41 1599 3 40 1774 20 1728 Helpston 3 3 3 3 D 1809 0-1 1631 Hemington 3 C 43 c.1657 Heyford Nether 3 3 40 1750 Heyford Upper 2 1712 Higharn Cold & Grimscote 2 3 3 3 50 1812 Potcote R h.1472 Higharn Ferrers 3 3 3 3 3 C 1838 3 3 3 26 1777 2 3 D 1580-7 17 1540 Horton 3 1561 Hothorpe 2 R c.l666 45 1639 Houghton Great 1612 Houghton Little 3 3 R 1827 14- 1723 3 3 3 24-28 1773 10 1700 Knuston 1769 Irthlingborough 6 6 6 25-6 R 1808 5 1682 Islip 5 3 36 1800 P/oa Numberoffields Dmwne rardlmuis Tenwial Enclosure by 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 No acrtIlgt order dJJte Percent d4k

Kettering 3 3 3 C 48 36 R 1804- 3 3 36 R 1777 King's Cliffe 6 6(3) 6 1809 Kislingbury 2 3 3 3 3 3 0 80 1779 Lamport 3 3 3 29 R 1794- 22 1583 3 34-.5 c.1650 Lilboume 3 36 R 1671 Litchborough 3 2 D 22- 24- 1711 29-37 1604- Loddington 3 3 D c.28 1656 Lowick 3 6 R 1771 Luddington 4{3) 3 3 1807 4- 1550 Lutton 1861- Lyveden b.1560 Maidford 3 3 3 C? 28 22~ R 1779 14- 1684- 3 3 c.1691 32 1686 Marham 4{3) c.1595 ;; Morton Pinkney 2 2 2 3 3 D 4-2 1760 110.:> Moulton 3 3 3 84- R 1772 34- 1684- 3 3 3 c.24- 1820 Nassington 3 3 3 1777 Newbottle b.l4-88 Astrop 4- 77 1772 27 1633 Charlton 3 3 59 R 1772 Newnham 5 5 C 4-8 R 1764-- Newton Bromswold. 4{3) 4{3) 4{3) 1800 Newton Willows .J c.1605 3 3 3 1778 Norton 2 3 3 32 1755 Thrup 2 19 R 1489 Oakley Little 3 3 3 1807 15 1727 Old 3 3 4-9 4-2-4- 1767 18 174-4- Oundle 3 3 3 3 D 29 1807 EImington c.1525 Passenham 4- c.l64-0 Deanshanger 3 3 3 1772 2 2 4- 4- 1771 Place Numheroffolds Demesne rardlaruis Tenurilll EncIDSUTe Ley 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 No acreage order date Percent dim

Paulerspury 3 3 3 3 20 1819 18 1631 Heathencote 3 3 1819 Peakirk 4 1809 P01ebrook 3 3 D 1790 Armston 3 3 R 1683 Kingsthorpe 3 3 c.1580 Gt Preston 2 2 2 2 3 34.75 36 R c.166O 20 1477 Wood Preston h.1525 Radstone Upper 2 2 2 25 21 c.1740 Nether c.1740 Raunds North Fields 2 3 40 1797 3 1739 Thorpe Fields 2 3 3 D 40 1797 Ravensthorpe 3 3 20.5 80 R 1795 3 25 25 R 1592 O'l -(.>;) Ringstead 3 3 4(3) 4(3) 1839 3 3 64 c.17 1809 Rushden 2 3 3 4(3) C 40 1778 Rushton 2 1581- 1604- Barford 3 3 D 10 1638-1720 3 3 21 1775 23 1609 Silverstone 2 4- 5 1824 Stamford S Martin 3 3 3 c.1795 Burghley D c.1550 Stanford on Avon C 36 34- c.1740 Stanion 2 3 3 36 1795 Stanwick 2 3 3 3 36 1834- Staverton 2 2 2 3 27 1774- Stowe Church 2 2 R c.171O Little 2 2 24- R c.171O Strixton 3 c.1620 Sulby 3 c.15oo Sulgrave 2 2 2 71.5 1760 4-2 1634 Sywell 5 6(5) R 1723--6 Thenford 24 R 1766 33 1684 PItJce Numherof folds Demmte rardLonds Tenurial EncIoSUTt Lt;y 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 No amoge order dim PercerU dale

Thomby 2 3 28 R 1623 2 ,: 1600 Titchmarsh 2 3 3 1778 10 1734 Towcester 3 3 4(3) 1762 15 1700 Caldeeote 2 1762 Twywell 3 3 36 1765 24 1618 Wadenhoe 3 4 4(3) R 1793 3 3 D 50 1776 Warden Chipping 2 1726-36 Stonton 2 2 2 D 12 c.1450 Warkton 3 1807 Warkworth 55.5 1764 Grimscote 1764 Overthorpe 20 24 1764 17 1761 Wannington 4(3) 3 D? 1774 Papley 1499 -0'> Watford 2 2 2 4 C 48 16 1771 ~ Murcott 3 6 24 1771 Silsworth 3 24 c.1550 Weedon Bee 4 3 3 3 D 69 12 1776 2 3 3 1771 Weekley 3 3 55.5 1807 Boughton c.154O Welford 3 C 53 26 1777 4(3) 3 .I 4(3) 5(3) 80 · 1765 13 1765 Welton 2 3 3 40 30 R 1754 Whiston 2? 21 1700 Whittlebury 2 3 R 1797 Wilby 3 29 R 1801 Winwick 2 2? 28 c.1607 Wollaston 3 3 . 3 3 3 C 84 24 R 1788 2 3 1758 Woodford (Huxlow) 3 82 1763 Wood Newton 3 3 3 1777 Wootton 3 3 .. J 1778 26 1705

Y ardley ~astings 5(3) 5 5 15-17 1776 Yarwell 4(3) 1777