sign in sign up
<<
Home , Aldwincle, Arbury, Arbury Hill, Bulwick, Farthingstone, Hackleton

MAPPING ANCIENT LANDSCAPES IN

10 A critique of Northamptonshire’s NMP project by Glenn Foard and Alison Deegan

This final chapter assesses the methodology some data entered into the SMR for all sites that evolved during the course of when the NMP project began in 1994. As a implementation of the National Mapping consequence, it is not easy, nor indeed Programme in Northamptonshire between useful, to quantify the results of the 1994 and 2001, and considers its impact on reconnaissance programme and the NMP data creation and subsequent data man- project in terms of the numbers of sites ipulation, interrogation and dissemination. identified through NMP that were new to It also compares some aspects of the NCC the SMR, a standard that is often used to approach with that employed for con- measure the contribution of many other temporary and subsequent NMP projects in NMP projects. However, the analyses and other areas, discussing the lessons that can results reported in the preceding chapters of be learned now that this large project has this volume provide a more effective been completed. This analysis draws heavily definition of the contribution of this project upon the Management Report for the than do simple statistics based on the Northamptonshire NMP Project, available previous shortcomings of the SMR. online from the Archaeology Data Services From the beginning the Northamp- (ADS) (http://ads. ahds.ac.uk), which tonshire NMP Project was conceived as a provides essential background information, wholly digital project, drawing upon explains in detail the development of the experience gained in GIS mapping of the methodology and documents the sources county’s historic environment since 1993, and timescale of the work. and exploiting the digital rectifications that had been retained from previous years of Data creation mapping using AERIAL. Although at that time it was NMP policy not to use or The direct acquisition of aerial photo- produce large-scale (1:2 500) mapping. graphic data through aerial reconnaissance, RCHME made an exception for the discussed in chapter 2, was integral to the Northamptonshire project because the NCC approach to aerial archaeology. From efficiency of the process could be the start of the intensive reconnaissance demonstrated, and, using a large-format programme in 1977, long before the computer plotter, the project was able to inception of the NMP project, NCC generate the high-quality hard copy quarter- employed a rolling programme of exam- sheet output then required by the RCHME ination, SMR record creation, rectification (Northamptonshire Heritage 1994, 21). (first manually and then, from the early An effective methodology and efficient 1980s, by computer, using Aerial software) implementation had been achieved through and reporting of the results of the NCC the NCC IT advisor’s careful choice of aerial reconnaissance programme (Foard leading GIS software (MapInfo) and their 1979a, 1980a, 1980b, 1981, 1982a, 1983; provision of ongoing high-quality specialist Deegan 2002, 19–20). This rolling support, largely by Phil Sydee. It was also a programme was intended both to enable the result of careful design of the data structure results to influence further reconnaissance to facilitate the intended objectives, building and also to be available for resource upon the principles of analysis of historic management purposes. Thus, the arch- environment data, initially developed in aeological data were quickly assimilated into 1979, which underpinned the design of the the SMR and, although the rectification was whole SMR and its associated GIS datasets unable to keep up with rate of new (Foard 1978). As far as practicable, this discovery, a considerable quantity of data methodology was further enhanced over the had already been interpreted, rectified and lifetime of the project. The use of MapInfo

156 A CRITIQUE OF NORTHAMPTONSHIRE’S NMP PROJECT

Professional (versions 2.1–6.0) as a site, and the map object. For example the common platform for most aspects of data data entry for a single ring ditch has a creation and manipulation was critical. unique relationship with a single graphic Most internally-derived datasets were object in the map data. Although there are created or, if created in other software, some exceptions to this rule, these can be delivered in MapInfo. This included SMR easily be accounted for within any GIS point data, the index of air photographs, query. The result is that the data can be AERIAL transcriptions, base map data searched on any of the MORPH2.2 fields (including both modern OS Landline and and the results accurately quantified, and georeferenced OS First Edition 1:10 560 distributions analysed. It is worth noting mapping) and supplementary datasets such that GIS can automatically generate as the BGS geological mapping, contour accurate grid references from mapped data, land use mapping, and mineral plans, objects and, importantly, almost without all of which have been used in the analyses exception will actually be positioned on in the preceding chapters. Even the complex part of the object, which is preferable to the morphological data entered into the original practice of manual reading and input used RCHME MORPH2.2 database was by most current NMP projects. Detailed retrieved and linked to the relevant quantifications and distributions cannot be individual graphic objects in the MAPINFO automatically generated from the data tables. Each dataset was linked through produced by recent and current NMP consistent reference numbering to enable projects because the unique one-to-one automated concordance between different relationship was abandoned along with the datasets. This obviated many of the data MORPH2.2 database in favour of the migration problems that are still regularly National Monuments Record standard experiences by other NMP projects where database (currently known as AMIE). no common platform is employed. Moreover, although some morphological Analysis of the timescales of past and recording is still practised by some current present NMP projects suggests that the NMP project, because there is no link Northamptonshire approach was highly between the record and object it is not efficient. The average time spent on each possible to retrieve and display the map quarter sheet (5km ? 5km area) in the objects based on any morphological criteria. Northamptonshire project was 11.5 days Put simply, one cannot, for example, (Deegan 2002, table 9). The average times retrieve, count and display all the ring spent per sheet on a contemporary non- ditches that are less than 10m in diameter, digital project in was more as is possible with the NCC NMP data. than 16.5 days (Kershaw 1997). More Such methods of data interrogation have recent digital projects with which one of the been fundamental to the analyses in the authors has been involved: Till-Tweed, preceding chapters, in particular the Lower Wharfedale, and Thornborough investigations into the distribution of Henges have taken on average 24, 21, and cropmark, soilmark and earthwork sites, 24 days respectively (Deegan 2003, 2004, and of the monuments of the and 2005). Direct comparison between these Bronze Age. Although under the current projects is not possible: the Northamp- NMP methodology similar work could tonshire project did not record all ridge perhaps be repeated on smaller projects, it is and furrow features, and had the benefit unlikely that any other county-wide projects of access to existing plots. However, we could be tackled in this way. believe that the methodology and processes Another important aspect of the employed by the Northamptonshire project Northamptonshire NMP data is the were far simpler to apply and, most complete traceability of each mapped object importantly, to check, than the Auto back to the source photography. Mapping CAD-based strategy used by most current for each site is generated from one or more NMP projects. rectified plots or photographs, the information for which is stored in a separate Data interrogation GIS table (see Deegan 2002 for more information about the data structure). This One of the important principles of the not only allows users to easily return to the Northamptonshire NMP dataset is the one- original photographs, but is also an to-one relationship between the smallest important aspect of maintaining data recording unit, which is the MORPH2.2 standards, much like providing a full

157 MAPPING ANCIENT LANDSCAPES IN NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

bibliographic reference for a cited work. furlongs. Others have attempted a more Other NMP projects have been slow to detailed approach: identifying and defining adopt this principle. The NMR record individual furlongs with a single arrow to only documents the best illustrative depict the direction of ploughing (for photographs for any site or group of example NMP projects for Lower sites, but more recent NMP projects Wharfedale, Till-Tweed, Thorn-borough have started to record the source Henges and the Magnesian Limestone in photograph within the tables attached to the South ). The contribution of the AutoCAD drawing, although this is not latter approach has yet to be tested and yet a universal standard. may never be clear from these projects alone, given the relative infrequency of Project shortcomings surviving medieval open fields in these project areas. While recent NMP projects Some of the shortcomings to the North- have reported on medieval and post- amptonshire approach and its application medieval themes in their relative have been discussed in previous chapters, publications, these have tended to deal with but are worth re-iterating together here. specific monument types or activities, We have noted the effect that a lack of for example salt extraction, pillow mounds specialist knowledge has had on the NMP and township boundaries, rather than mapping of medieval, post-medieval and tackle more integrated themes like the modern military archaeology (see chapters 8 nature of settlement (Grady 1998; Harrison and 9). The use of historic and modern forthcoming; Horne forthcoming). It is oblique and vertical aerial photographs in important that before another NMP the identification and recording of 20th- project is run in the heartlands of ridge and century military remains has developed furrow survival, which includes limited considerably since the completion of the areas of various counties such as Northamptonshire project. This develop- and as well as ment has been precipitated by a general substantial areas of the (Hall increased awareness brought about by the 2001a), that this issue is explored in detail work of the Defence of Britain project and in consultation with specialists in medieval associated publications, improved training landscape, taking account of related for NMP interpreters and the high profile of ongoing research (for example Foard et al, the Coastal NMP project, which 2005), and an effective and efficient recorded a wealth of military detail methodology established that will produce (Newsome 2003). Even recent inland NMP relevant data and analysis. projects, such as those at Lower Wharfedale, Till-Tweed, Thornborough Henges and the Distinguishing cropmarks, ongoing Magnesian Limestone project, have soilmarks and parchmarks benefited significantly from the expert guidance of ’s Roger Neither the MORPH2.2 database nor the Thomas and produced records of 20th- current NMP system of recording century military remains that reflect his distinguishes between the different types of specialist input. levelled sites: cropmarks, soilmarks and Unfortunately this overall improvement soilmarks. From the beginning, the NCC in recognition and understanding of 20th- process of recording distinguished cropmark century military remains is not mirrored from soilmarks sites, and this information for the medieval and post-medieval was included in a field that was added to the periods. As discussed in chapter 8, other MORPH2.2 when it was exported to the problems for these periods were GIS. The significance of the appearance of experienced by the Northamptonshire soilmarks has been discussed in chapters 3, NMP project and are not unique to this 6 and 8. Unfortunately this practice was not project: approaches to mapping ridge and extended to soilmark sites in grass, but it furrow, depiction of earthwork features, can now be seen that to have done so and the use and integration of ground would have significantly aided the analysis survey data. Most current NMP projects of some medieval remains (see discussion persist with recording at a in chapter 8). It would not be an onerous very simple level – an outline around the task to record such distinctions in all future greatest visible extent with internal arrows NMP projects, but would require a major depicting the various alignments of the programming change to the NMR database.

158 A CRITIQUE OF NORTHAMPTONSHIRE’S NMP PROJECT

On a related note, the various analyses in 1994 until its review in 1999, there was employed for this publication have brought also a failure in the Northamptonshire to light the difficulties met when attempting project to implement the processes with a to compare different sites with differing consistently high level of care. This failing levels of cropmark or soilmark clarity. The points up the need for closer monitoring of Northamptonshire NMP data, like other the fine detail of interpretation, not just the projects, are intended for use without overall throughput of data, something that necessitating recourse to the original was not carried out with sufficient vigour photographs. The MORPH2.2 database did either by NCC or by English Heritage/ record for the user the quality of the original RCHME. As a result, the preparation of this image, but not the interpreter’s perception publication had to be preceded by extensive of the quality of the cropmark or soilmarks. data tidying, which helped to resolve some It would have been useful if there was some of the recording issues, but there remain measure of the perceived clarity and within the project dataset some poor graphic completeness of archaeology that is visible representations and weak interpretations; in the photographs, although in the absence and in certain important cases information of excavation this could only ever be a is absent. subjective statement. This would also have been an interesting adjunct to the mapping Conclusion of cropmark amenable ground undertaken for chapter 3. Despite its limitations, the - NMP should be assessed above all on Project implementation the degree to which it has advanced understanding and accessibility of aerial There can be little doubt that despite some of data. The effective implementation of GIS the shortcomings discussed above, the technology has made aerial data in high Northamptonshire approach to the NMP resolution digital map form an integral part project and aerial photography in general was of the historic environment record of the balanced and well-considered. Even as the county since the early 1990s. This has first of the digital NMP projects, its enabled that evidence to significantly principles and methodology have not, in the influence both practical day-to-day manage- opinion of the authors, been advanced upon ment of the historic environment as well as in more recent projects. However, the results facilitating intensive analysis as part of the of the Northamptonshire NMP Project definition of research agenda for the county reflect not only the methodology, but (Tingle, 2004; http://www.le.ac.uk/arch also the manner of its implementation. aeology/research/projects/eastmidsfw/index. Unfortunately, although efficient and html). A great deal has been achieved in the effective methodology and process is an present volume in the analysis of both essential prerequisite for a high-quality spatial pattering and the analysis of plan product, this also requires a high level of skill form, at both the landscape and the and consistency in implementation of the individual element level. However, wider interpretation, rectification and mapping of potentials remain in the Northamptonshire individual sites. Substantial limitations in NMP dataset for computer-based analysis, this can be seen in the Northamptonshire to fully exploit the way in which the dataset. In part this has been identified above individual graphic objects have been created as a result of lack of appropriate training and and indexed in GIS. guidance in specialist areas of interpretation, The Northamptonshire NMP shares something that was recognised as a problem many of the successes and failings of the nationally and has been addressed over the NMP process nationally. Rather like the first past few years; in some themes, such as Ordnance Survey 1-inch mapping of the medieval landscapes, it has been seen that it contemporary landscape in the early 19th also reflects a weakness in the NMP process, century; 200 years on the NMP is working as it does purely from aerial data, producing the first national mapping of the when extensive other datasets and contextual pre-medieval landscapes. Like its information is required to enable effective predecessor, although the overall product is interpretation. As we have seen, such broadly consistent nationally, the work of shortcomings have not as yet been addressed different surveyors is being undertaken nationally. However, from the beginning of according to slightly different methods and the formal Northamptonshire NMP project so producing a slightly different end

159 MAPPING ANCIENT LANDSCAPES IN NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

product. Just as with the Ordnance Survey new insights to the primary aerial data itself. mapping it will be necessary to improve and The Northamptonshire project has thus, enhance the datasets in future decades, not from the outset, saved all the digital data it only to improve consistency, but also created, including all the rectified images, to integrate new data and, building upon the make them available not just for individual lessons learned, to tackle issues like that of reference, but also to enable the images the medieval landscape not adequately dealt themselves to be integrated fully into a with in this initial programme of work. future enhanced mapping system. Using It is often said that the NMP product is GIS technology, it should be possible in the intended for use without necessitating near future to effectively integrate the digital recourse to the original photographs. This is images themselves within the system, thus valid, but only to a degree, for such going far beyond the system implemented in mapping can only ever represent an initial the Northamptonshire NMP. In such ways guide to the evidence. There will often be it is to be hoped that this project, for all its additional non-aerial data that can be limitations, has shown the importance of brought to bear on any individual site, both exploiting to the full the current which it was not practicable to exploit in potentials of information technology and NMP, while another interpreter with more attempting to identify and facilitate longer- time or different experience will often bring term research opportunities.

160 References

Allen, D 1967 ‘Iron Currency Bars in Britain’. Proc Prehist Soc 33, Butler, A, Clay, P and Thomas, J 2002 ‘A causewayed at 297–335 Husbands Bosworth, ’, in Vandell, G and Topping, — 1981 ‘The excavation of a Beaker burial monument at Ravenstone, P (eds) Enclosure in Neolithic Europe. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 107–9 , in 1978’. Archaeol J 138, 72–117 Anderton, M J 2000 ‘Twentieth Century Military Recording Project – Cadman, G E 1998–9 ‘Northamptonshire Bombing Decoys’. World War Two Radar Stations’. Swindon: RCHME unpublished Northamptonshire Archaeol 28, 139–42 report Campbell, G and Robinson, M 2007 ‘Environment and land use in Ashbee, P 1960 The Bronze Age Round Barrows in Britain. : the valley bottom’, in Harding and Healy The Area Project. Phoenix A Neolithic and Bronze Age Landscape in Northamptonshire. Avery, M, Sutton, J E and Banks, J W 1967 ‘Rainsborough, Swindon: English Heritage, 18–34 Northants, : Excavations 1961–65’. Proc Prehist Soc 33, Case, H J 1982 ‘The linear ditches and southern enclosure, Stoke’, 207–306 in Case, H J and Whittle A W R (eds) Settlement Patterns in the Atkins, R, Parry, S, Holmes, M and Meadows, I 2000 ‘Excavations of Oxford Region: Excavations at the Abingdon Causewayed Enclosure Settlements at Aerodrome (1996) and at Ecton and other Sites. London: Counc Brit Archaeol, 60–74 (1992–3) Northamptonshire’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 29, Case, H J and Whittle, A W R (eds) 1982 Settlement Patterns in the 43–72 Oxford region: Excavations at the Abingdon Causewayed Enclosure and Other Sites. London: Counc Brit Archaeol Bamford, H M 1985 Briar Hill. Excavation 1974–1978. Northampton: Catling, H W 1982 ‘Six ring-ditches at ’, in Case H J and Northamptonshire Develop Corp Whittle A W R Settlement Patterns in the Oxford region: Excavations Barclay, A and Harding, J (eds) 1999 Pathways and Ceremonies: the at the Abingdon Causewayed Enclosure and Other Sites. London: Cursus Monuments of Britain and Ireland. Oxford: Oxbow Books CounBrit Archaeol, 88–102 and Neolithic Studies Group Chapman, A 1995 ‘Crick’. Archaeol 25, 37–9 Barclay, A, Lambrick, G, Moore, J and Robinson, M 2003 Lines in — 1996–7 ‘The excavation of Neolithic and Medieval mounds at the Landscape. Cursus Monuments in the Upper Thames Valley: Crossroads, Northamptonshire’. Northamptonshire Thames Valley Landscapes Monograph 15. Oxford: Oxford Archaeol Archaeol 27, 3–50 Beaver, S H 1943 ‘Part 58. Northamptonshire’, in Dudley Stamp, L — 2000–1 ‘Excavation of an Iron Age Settlement and a Middle (ed) The Land of Britain: the Report of the Land Utilisation Survey of Saxon Cemetery at Great Houghton, Northampton’. Britain. London: Geographical Publications Ltd, 331–92 Northamptonshire Archaeol 29, 1–42 Bellamy, B, Jackson, D and Johnston, G 2000 ‘Early Iron Smelting in — 2003 ‘Three Bronze Age burial sites in Northamptonshire’. the Rockingham Area: A survey of the evidence’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 31, 1–14 Northamptonshire Archaeol 29, 103–28 Civil Aviation Authority 1991 Aeronautical Chart ICAO Scale Bewley, R H 2001 ‘Understanding England’s historic landscapes: an 1:500 000 Sheet 217ICD Southern England and Wales Edition 17 aerial perspective’. Landscapes 1, 74–84 Clay, P 1999 ‘A first causewayed enclosure for Leicestershire’. Past Boutwood, Y 1998 ‘Prehistoric linear boundaries in Lincolnshire and 32, 3–4 its fringes’, in Bewley, R H (ed) Lincolnshire’s Archaeology from the — 2002 Aspects of Settlement and Land-use from the Mesolithic to the Air. Lincoln: Soc Lincolnshire Hist Archaeol, 29–46 Iron Age in Central England. Univ : School of Archaeology Bradley, R 1982 ‘The excavation of an oval barrow beside the and Ancient History Abingdon causewayed enclosure, ’. Proc Prehist Soc 58, Cleere 1976 ‘Some operating parameters for Roman ironworks’. 147–52 Bull Instit Archaeol London 13, 233–46 — 1993 Altering the Earth: the Origins of Monuments in Britain and Cocroft, W D 2001 Cold War Monuments: an assessment by the Continental Europe. Edinburgh: Soc Antiq Scotland Monogr Ser 8 Monuments Protection Programme. English Heritage digital report Brown, A E 1991 Early . Univ Leicester: Depart Adult Educ Condron, F 1997 ‘Iron Production in Leicestershire, and in association with Council Northamptonshire in Antiquity’. Trans Leicestershire Archaeol — 1996–7 ‘Earthworks at Pilton’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 27, Hist Soc 71, 1–20 210–13 Council for British Archaeology Group 9 2001 South Midlands — 1998, ‘Dick , (1916–1998), Field Archaeologist’. Archaeology Newsletter, 31, 33–4 Northamptonshire Archaeol 28, 1–3 Cowley, D E and Foard, G R 1979, ‘Aerial Archaeology in Brown, A E and Foard, G 1994 The Making of a County History: Northamptonshire’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 14, 91–7 John Bridges’ Northamptonshire, Leicester: Univ Leicester — 1980 ‘Aerial Photography’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 15, 174–9 — 1998 ‘The Saxon landscape: A regional perspective’, in Williamson, T and Everson, P (eds) The Archaeology of Landscape. Darvill, T and Thomas, J 2001 ‘Neolithic in Atlantic Manchester: Manchester Univ Press northwest Europe: some recent trends’, in Darvill, T and Thomas, — 2004 ‘The Anglo-Saxon Period’ in Tingle, M E (ed) The J (eds) Neolithic enclosures in Atlantic Northwest Europe. Oxford: Archaeology of Northamptonshire. Northampton: Northamptonshire Oxbow Books, 1–23 Archaeol Soc, 78–101 Darvill, T and Thomas, J (eds) 2001. Neolithic Enclosures in Atlantic Brown, A G 2000 ‘Floodplain vegetation history: clearings as Northwest Europe. Neolithic Studies Group Seminar Papers. Oxford: potential ritual spaces’, in Fairbairn, A S (ed) Plants in Neolithic Oxbow Books Britain and Beyond. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 49–62 Dawson, M. 2000 ‘The Ouse Valley in the Iron Age and Roman Brown, A G and Meadows, I 1998 ‘Environmental analysis of a periods: a landscape in transition’, in Dawson, M (ed) Prehistoric, Neolithic/Early Bronze Age palaeochannel of the at Roman and Post-Roman Landscapes of the Great Ouse Valley. Turnells Mill Lane, , Northamptonshire’. London: Counc Brit Archaeol, 107–30 Northamptonshire Archaeol 27, 185–91 Deegan, A 1999 ‘The Mapping Project’. Swindon: Brown, T 2005 ‘The Environment of the Raunds Area’, in Parry, S J RCHME unpublished report (ed) Raunds Area Survey: an archaeological study of the landscape of — 2003 ‘Till-Tweed ALSF/NMP Project, Northumberland: Raunds, Northamptonshire 1985–94, Oxford: Oxbow Books Summary Report’. English Heritage Aerial Survey Report Series Buckley, D G, Major, H and Milton, B 1986 ‘Excavation of a AER/6/2003, October 2003 possible Neolithic long barrow or mortuary enclosure at Rivenhall, — 2004 ‘2957 NMP Acceleration: . Lower Wharfedale , 1986’. Proc Prehist Soc 54, 77–91 National Mapping Programme Project. Management Overview:

161 MAPPING ANCIENT LANDSCAPES IN NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

Summary of Resources and Results’. English Heritage Aerial , Northamptonshire’. Medieval Archaeol 47, Survey Report Series Aer/5/2004, November 2003 41–95 — 2005 ‘Thornborough Henges Air Photo Mapping Project (ALSF — 2001b ‘Anglo-Saxon Northamptonshire’. The 3897 Main). Management Overview: Summary of Management Archaeological Research Framework Project. and Resources’. Archaeological Services WYAS, unpublished http://www.le.ac.uk/archaeology/research/projects/eastmidsfw/ report, March 2005 — 2001c ‘Medieval Northamptonshire’. East Midlands Archaeological Dix, B 1986–7 ‘The Raunds Area Project: Second Interim Report’. Research Framework Seminar Series Northamptonshire Archaeol 21, 3–30 — 2001d ‘The Medieval Small Towns of Northamptonshire’. Dix, B and Jackson, D 1989 ‘Some Late Iron Age Defended Northamptonshire SMR: unpublished report Enclosures in Northamptonshire’, in Gibson, A (ed) Midlands — 2004 ‘Medieval Northamptonshire’, in Tingle, M E (ed) The Prehistory. (Counc Brit Archaeol Res Rep 204). London: Counc Archaeology of Northamptonshire. Northampton: Northamptonshire Brit Archaeol Archaeol Soc, 102–33 Dobinson, C 1996 and 2000 ‘Twentieth Century Fortifications in Foard, G, Hall, D and Britnell, T 2004a. ‘The Rockingham Forest England. Volumes I to XI plus Supporting paper AA/1 Searchlight Project’. Northamptonshire Past Present 57, 83–90 sites in WWII A Sample list’. : Counc Brit Archaeol — 2004b ‘The Rockingham Forest Project’. Northamptonshire SMR: unpublished report unpublished report — 2000 Fields of Deception. Britain’s bombing decoys of World War II. Foard, G, Hall, D and Partida, T 2005 ‘Rockingham Forest, North- Swindon: English Heritage amptonshire: the Evolution of a Landscape’. Landscapes 6, 1–29 — 2001 AA Command Britain’s anti-aircraft defences of World War II. Foard, G and Pearson, T (1985) ‘The Raunds Area Project: First Swindon ad London: English Heritage and Methuen Interim Report’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 20, 3–11 Dobinson, C, Lake J and Scholfield, J 1997 ‘Monuments of War: Ford, S 1995 ‘The Excavation of a Saxon settlement and a Mesolithic defining England’s 20th-century defence heritage’. Antiquity 71, surface scatter at Northampton Road, , 288–99 Northamptonshire’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 26, 79–108 Dudley Stamp, L 1943 The Land of Britain. The Report of the Foster, P 1988 Changes in the Landscape: An Archaeological Study of the Land Utilisation Survey of Britain. London: Geographical Clay Uplands in the Area of Northamptonshire. Sheffield: Publications Ltd Univ Sheffield Foster, P J, Harper, R and Watkins, S 1977 ‘An Iron Age and Edis, J, Macleod, D and Bewley R 1989 ‘An archaeologist’s guide to Romano-British settlement at Hardwick Park, Wellingborough, the classification of cropmarks and soilmarks’. Antiquity 63, Northamptonshire’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 12, 55–96 112–26 Ehrenreich, R 1985 Trade, Technology and the Ironworking Community Gates, T and O’Brien, C 1988 ‘Cropmarks at Milfield and New in the Iron Age of Southern Britain. (Counc Brit Archaeol Res Rep Bewick and the Recognition Grubenhaüser in Northumberland’. 144). London: Counc Brit Archaeol Archaeol Aeliana 5 (XVI), 1–9 English Heritage nd Report on the Pilot Survey of Scheduled Ancient Gibson, A M 2002 ‘The Later Neolithic Palisaded Enclosures of the Monuments. English Heritage: internal report ’, in Gibson, A M (ed) Behind Wooden Walls: English Heritage 1998 Monuments of War: the evaluation, recording and Neolithic Palisaded Enclosures in Europe. Oxford: Brit Archaeol Rep management of 20th century military sites. Swindon: English S101, 5–23 Heritage Gibson, A M (ed) 1989 Midlands Prehistory: Some Recent and Current — 2000a Twentieth-Century Military Sites. Swindon: English Heritage Researches into the Prehistory of Central England. Oxford: Brit — 2000b Survey of Military Aviation Sites and Structures Summary Archaeol Rep 214 Report. Thematic Listing Programme. Swindon: English Heritage Gibson, A N and McCormick, A 1985 ‘Archaeology at Grendon — 2002 ‘Scheduling of Harperley POW camp, Co Durham’. Press Quarry, Northamptonshire. Part 1: Neolithic and Bronze Age sites Release dated 18 July 2002 excavated in 1974–1975’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 20, 23–66 Gibson, M L 1982 Aviation in Northamptonshire. Northampton: Fairbairn, A S (ed) Plants in Neolithic Britain and Beyond. Oxford, Northamptonshire Libraries Oxbow Books 5 Giggins, B L and Laughton, J 2003 ‘Catesby: An Interdisciplinary Foard, G 1978 The Northamptonshire Sites and Monuments Record. Study, part II’. Northamptonshire Past Present 56, 35–55 Northampton: Northamptonshire Grady, D 1998 ‘Medieval and post-medieval salt extraction in — 1979a, ‘Aerial Archaeology in Northamptonshire’. North-East Lincolnshire’, in Bewley, B (ed) Lincolnshire’s Northamptonshire Archaeol 14, 91 Archaeology from the Air. The Society for Lincolnshire History and Foard, G 1979b ‘Archaeological Priorities: Proposals for Archaeology, 81–95 Northamptonshire’. Northamptonshire County Council: Grimes, W F 1961 ‘Settlements at Draughton, Northants, unpublished report Colsterworth, Lincs and Heathrow, ’, in Frere, S S (ed) — 1980a ‘Aerial Photography’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 15, 174–9 Problems of the Iron Age in Southern Britain. London: Instit — 1980b ‘Aerial Photography in Northamptonshire’. Aerial Archaeol Archaeol Occas Pap 11, 21–8 6, 8–16 Gwilt, A 1997 ‘Popular practices from material culture: a case study — 1981 ‘Aerial Photography’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 16, 205–7 of the Iron Age settlement at ’, in Gwilt, A and — 1982a ‘Aerial Photography’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 17, 103–11 Haselgrove, C Reconstructing Iron Age Societies. Oxford: Oxbow — 1982b ‘Aerial Reconnaissance in 1981: Thames Valley’. Aerial Books, 153–66 Archaeol 7, 37–8 — 1982c ‘Charcoal Burning and Iron Production in Haigh, J G B 1993 ‘A new issue of AERIAL – Version 4.20’. Northamptonshire – Soilmark Evidence’. CBA Group 9 Newsletter AARGnews 7, 22–5 12, 28–31 Hains, B A and Horton A 1969 Central England. British Regional — 1983 ‘Aerial Photography 1982’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 18, Geology. British Geological Survey, 3edn. London: Her Majesty’s 179–83 Stationary Office — 1988 ‘A framework for Saxon evidence from Northamptonshire’, Hall, D N 1971 ‘Pre-Roman Iron Age sites at ’. in Jones, R F J, Bloemers, J H F, Dyson, S L and Biddle, M Archaeol J 6, 17–22 (eds) First Millennium Papers. Oxford: Brit Archaeol Rep Internat — 1972 ‘Modern Surveys of Medieval Fields’. Bedfordshire Archaeoll J Ser 401 7, 53–66 — 1995 ‘Report on Aerial Reconnaissance in Northamptonshire — 1985 ‘Survey Work in Eastern England’, in Macready, S and 1977–1994’. Northamptonshire SMR: unpublished report Thompson, F H (eds) Archaeological Field Survey in Britain and — 2001a ‘Medieval Land Use, Settlement and Industry in Abroad. London: Soc Antiq Occas Pap (NS) VI, 25–43

162 REFERENCES

— 1993 The Open Fields of Northamptonshire: The Case for the — 1981 ‘Archaeology at an ironstone quarry in the - Preservation of Ridge and Furrow. Northampton: Northamptonshire Wakerley area 1968–1979’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 160, 14–33 County Council — 1982 ‘Great Oakley and other Iron Age sites in the area’. — 1995 The Open Fields of Northamptonshire. Northampton: Northamptonshire Archaeol 17, 3–23 Northamptonshire Record Society — 1983 ‘Excavation of an Iron Age Site at Brigstock, Northants’. — 2001a Turning the Plough: Midland Open Fields: Landscape Northamptonshire Archaeol 18, 7–32 Character and Proposals for Management. Northampton: — 1984 ‘The excavation of a Bronze Age barrow at , Northamptonshire County Council and English Heritage Northants’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 19, 3–30 — 2001b ‘ Project Archaeological Survey (part 4)’. — 1988–9 ‘An Iron Age Enclosure at Wootton Hill Farm, Northamptonshire SMR: unpublished report Northampton’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 22, 2–21 — 2004 ‘Post Medieval Northamptonshire (1500–1750)’, in Tingle, — 1993–4 ‘Excavations of the hillfort defences at Hunsbury, M E (ed) The Archaeology of Northamptonshire. Northamptonshire Northampton, in 1952 and 1988’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 25, Archaeol Soc, 134–48 5–20 Hall, D and Martin, P 1979 ‘Brixworth, Northamptonshire: An — 1993–4 ‘Archaeological Evaluations at Upton, Northampton’. intensive field survey’. J Brit Archaeol Assoc 132, 1–6 Northamptonshire Archaeol 25, 69–76 Hall, D and Nickerson, N 1969 ‘The earthworks of ’. J — 1996–7 ‘Further Evaluation at , Daventry, Northampton Mus Art Gallery 6, 22–34 Northamptonshire’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 27, 143–64 Harding, A F with Lee, G E 1987 Henge Monuments and Related Sites — 1997 ‘Archaeology at Grendon Quarry, Northamptonshire. Part 2: of Great Britain. Oxford: Brit Archaeol Rep 175 Other prehistoric, Iron Age and later sites excavated in 1974–1975 Harding, J and Healy, F 2007 The Raunds Area Project. A Neolithic and further observations between 1976 and 1980’. and Bronze Age Landscape in Northamptonshire. Swindon: English Northamptonshire Archaeol 26, 3–31 Heritage — 1998–9 ‘Roman Ironworking at Laxton’. Northamptonshire Archaeol Harrison, B (forthcoming) ‘Ouse and Derwent: medieval documents 28, 259 and air photographs’, in Haselgrove, C 1984 ‘Comment on Jackson, D A and Ambrose T M 1978 ‘Excavations at Wakerley, Hingley’. Scottish Archaeol Rev 3, 27–30 Northants’. Britannia 9, 115–242 Healy, F, Harding, J and Bayliss, A 2007 ‘The development of the Jackson, D A and Dix B 1986–7 ‘Late Iron Age and Roman monuments’ in Harding and Healy The Raunds Area Project. A settlement at , Northants’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 21, Neolithic and Bronze Age Landscape in Northamptonshire. Swindon: 41–94 English Heritage, 37–198 Jackson, D A and Harding, D W 1969 ‘The Iron Age and Anglo- Hill, J D 1992 ‘Can we recognise a different European past? A Saxon site at Upton, Northants’. Antiq J 49, 202–21 contrastive archaeology of later prehistoric settlements in southern Jackson, D and Tylecote R F 1988 ‘Two New Romano-British iron- England’. J Europ Archaeol 1, 57–75 working sites in Northamptonshire – a new type of furnace?’. Hingley, R 1990 ‘Iron Age Currency Bars: The archaeological and Britannia 19, 275–98 social context’. Archaeol J 147, 91–117 Jones, D 1998 ‘Long barrows and Neolithic elongated enclosures in Hodge, C A H, Burton, R G O, Corbett, W M, Evans, R, Seale, R S Lincolnshire: An analysis of the air photographic evidence’. Proc 1984 Soils and their Uses in Eastern England. Harpenden: Soil Prehist Soc 64, 83–114 Survey of England and Wales Jones, R and Page, M 2003 ‘Characterising Rural Settlement and Hollowell, R and Brown, A E 1971 ‘Aerial Photography and Landscape: in the Middle Ages’. Medieval Fieldwork in the Upper Nene Valley: A record of fifteen years’ Archaeol 47, 53–84 work’. Bull Northamptonshire Federation Archaeol Soc 6, Leicester, Jones, R J A and Evans, R 1975 ‘Soil and cropmarks in the University of Leicester Department of Adult Education recognition of archaeological sites by air photography’, in Wilson, Holmes, M 1995 ‘’. South Midlands Archaeol 25, 41 D (ed) Aerial Reconnaissance for Archaeology. (Counc Brit Archaeol Holyoak, V 2002 ‘Crash Sites and the War Dead’ The Archaeologist Res Rep 12). London: Counc Brit Archaeol, 1–11 44, 26–7 Hope-Taylor, B 1977 Yeavering: An Anglo-British Centre of Early Keighley, J J 1981 ‘The Iron Age’. in Faull M L and Moorhouse S A Northumbria. London: HMSO (eds) West Yorkshire: An Archaeological Survey to A. D. 1500. West Horne, P D (forthcoming) ‘An embankment cross at Wheldrake Ings, Yorkshire Metropolitan County Council 1, 115–35 and a note on the type’, in Hull, G 2001 ‘A late Bronze Age Kershaw A 1997 ‘National Mapping Programme, Lincolnshire ringwork, pits and later features at , Northamptonshire’. Mapping Project, Project Review’. RCHME internal document Northamptonshire Archaeol 29, 73–91 Kershaw, A and Horne, P (eds) (forthcoming) ‘A perfect flat …’ Hunter, R and Mynard, D 1977 ‘Excavations at Thorplands near Understanding the archaeology of the Vale of York. English Heritage Northampton 1970 and 1974’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 12, Kinnes, I and Thorpe I J 1986 ‘Radiocarbon dating: use and abuse’. 97–154 Antiquity 60, 227–33 , D 1986–7 ‘An Iron Age hillfort at Castle Yard, Jackson, D A 1974 ‘Two new pit alignments and a hoard of currency , Northamptonshire’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 21, bars from Northamptonshire’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 10, 31–40 13–45 — 1975 ‘An Iron Age Site at , Northamptonshire’. Linington, R E 1982 ‘Four ring-ditches at Stanton Harcourt’, in Northamptonshire Archaeol 10, 31–93 Case, H J and Whittle A W R (eds) Settlement Patterns in the — 1976a ‘The excavation of Neolithic and Bronze Age sites at Oxford Region: Excavations at the Abingdon Causewayed Enclosure , Northants 1967–1971’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 11, and other Sites. London: Counc Brit Archaeol, 81–7 12–70 Losco-Bradley, S and Kinsley, A G 2002 Catholme: An Anglo-Saxon — 1976b ‘Two Iron Age Sites North of , settlement on the Trent Gravels in . : Depart Northamptonshire’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 11, 71–88 Archaeol Univ Nottingham — 1978 ‘Neolithic and Bronze Age activity in the Harringworth area’. Loveday, R and Petchey M 1982 ‘Oblong ditches: a discussion of Northamptonshire Archaeol 13, 3–5 some new evidence’. Aerial Archaeol 8, 17–24 — 1979a ‘A Middle Iron Age site at , Northamptonshire’. Lowry, B (ed) 1996 20th Century Defences in Britain: An Introductory Northamptonshire Archaeol 14, 10–16 Guide, 2edn. York: Counc Brit Archaeol, Practical Handbooks in — 1979b ‘Roman Iron Working at and Gretton’. Archaeology 12 Northamptonshire Archaeol 14, 31–7 — 1980 ‘Roman Buildings at Ringstead, Northants’. Mackie, D 1993 ‘Prehistoric Ditch Systems in Ketton and Tixover, Northamptonshire Archaeol 15, 12–34 Rutland’. Trans Leicestershire Archaeol Hist Soc 67, 1–14

163 MAPPING ANCIENT LANDSCAPES IN NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

Malim, T 2000 ‘The ritual landscape of the Neolithic and Bronze Palmer, R 1976 ‘Interrupted ditch enclosures in Britain: the uses of Age along the middle and lower Ouse’, in Dawson, M (ed) aerial photography for comparative studies’. Proc Prehist Soc 42, Prehistoric, Roman and Post-Roman Landscapes of the Great Ouse 180–4 Valley. London: Counc Brit Archaeol 119, 57–88 —. 1996 ‘A further case for the preservation of earthwork ridge-and- Martin, P and Hall, D 1980 ‘Brixworth, Northamptonshire: new furrow’. Antiquity 70, 436–40 evidence for prehistoric settlement and agriculture’. Bedfordshire Parry, S J 2006 Raunds Area Survey: An archaeological study of the Archaeol J 15, 5–14 landscape of Raunds, Northamptonshire 1985–94. Oxford: Oxbow Martin, R A and Osborn, G 1976. An Outline of the Geology of Books Northamptonshire. Northampton: Northamptonshire Nat Hist Fld Pattison, P and Oswald A 1993–4 ‘An Iron Age hillfort at Clb, Geological Section (SP673728)’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 25, 179 McOmish, D 2003 ‘Cursus: Solving a 6000-year-old puzzle’. Brit Piggot, S and Piggott, C M 1939 ‘Stone and earth circles in ’ Archaeol 69, 8–13 Antiquity 13 (50), 138–158 Meadows, I 1995 ‘Wollaston’. South Midlands Archaeol 25, 41–5 Pollard, J 1996 ‘Iron Age riverside pit alignments at St Ives, — 2003 Dating Briar Hill.controversial Radiocarbon Results from the ’. Proc Prehist Soc 62, 93–115 Neolithic Causewayed Enclosure at Briar Hill, Northamptonshire. Pryor, F 1998 Etton, Excavations at a Neolithic Causewayed Enclosure. Portsmouth: English Heritage Centre for Archaeology London: English Heritage Menuge, A and Williams, A 1999 Royal Ordnance Depot, , Pryor, F, French, C, Crowther, D, Gurney, D, Simpson, G and Northamptonshire. Swindon: RCHME Taylor, M. 1985 The Fenland Project No. 1: Archaeology and Moore, W R G 1973 Note. Northamptonshire Archaeol 8, 27 Environment in the Lower Welland Valley. Cambridgeshire — 1980, ‘The Development of Archaeology in Northamptonshire’. Archaeological Committee 2 Northamptonshire Local History News 48, unpaginated — 1975 ‘A later Neolithic site at Ecton, Northampton’. Rackham, O 1996 Trees and Woodland in the British landscape:. the Northamptonshire Archaeol 10, 3–30 complete history of Britain’s trees, and hedgerows. London: Moore-Colyer, R 1996 ‘Ironstone, People and Politics, Land Phoenix reclamation around Corby Northamptonshire, c 1850–1980’, Riley, D N R 1982 ‘Radley 15, a Late Beaker ring-ditch’, in Case, H J Landscape Hist 18, 57–70 and Whittle A W R (eds) Settlement Patterns in the Oxford Region: Moorey, P R S 1982 ‘A Neolithic ring-ditch and Iron Age enclosure Excavations at the Abingdon Causewayed Enclosure and other Sites. at Newnham Murren, near Wallingford’, in Case, H J and Whittle London: Counc Brit Archaeol, 76–80 A W R (eds) Settlement Patterns in the Oxford Region: Excavations at Robinson, M 1992 ‘Environment, archaeology and alluvium on the the Abingdon Causewayed Enclosure and other Sites. London: Counc river gravels of the south Midlands’, in Needham, S and Macklin, Brit Archaeol, 55–9 M G (eds) Alluvial Archaeology in Britain. Proceedings of a Conference Sponsored by the RMC Group plc 3–5 January 1991, Newsome, S 2003 ‘The Coastal Landscapes of Suffolk during the . Oxford: Oxbow Monogr 27, 197–208 Second World War’. Landscapes 4, 42–58 Robinson, M 2007 ‘Panel 2.1 The prehistoric palaeohydrology and Northamptonshire Archaeology 1989 ‘Archaeological Evaluation at floodplain development of the River Nene in the Raunds area’ in Watermills, Northampton’. Northamptonshire Archaeol: Harding and Healy The Raunds Area Project. A Neolithic and Bronze unpublished report, July Age Landscape in Northamptonshire. Swindon: English Heritage, — 1990 ‘An archaeological evaluation at Kings Heath, 18–34 Northampton’. Northamptonshire Archaeol unpublished report, RCHME 1960 A Matter of Time: An Archaeological Survey of the River October Gravels of England. London: HMSO — 1993 ‘North-West Bypass, Northampton Stage 2: Trial Royal Commission on Historical Monuments 1975 An Inventory of Trenching’. Northamptonshire Archaeol: unpublished report, the Archaeological Sites in North . London: May HMSO — 1994a ‘Excavations of Iron Age and Roman Sites at the DIRFT — 1979 An Inventory of Archaeological Sites in Central near Crick: Interim Report’. Northamptonshire Archaeol: Northamptonshire. London: HMSO unpublished report, December — 1981 An Inventory of Archaeological Sites in North West — 1994b ‘Swan Valley, Northampton. Archaeological Recording Northamptonshire. London: HMSO Action. Stage 2. Interim Report’. Northamptonshire Archaeol: — 1982 An Inventory of Archaeological Sites in South West unpublished report, December Northamptonshire. London: HMSO — 1999a‘An archaeological evaluation at Brackmills Link Road, — 1984 An Inventory of Architectural Sites in . Northampton’. Northamptonshire Archaeol: unpublished report, London: HMSO March — 1985 An Inventory of Archaeological Sites in Northampton. London: — 1999b ‘Wootton Fields. Assessment Report’. Northamptonshire HMSO Archaeol: unpublished report, January–February — 1999c ‘ Quarry. An Archaeological Evaluation’. Salter, C and Ehrenreich, R 1984 ‘Iron Age iron metallurgy in Northamptonshire Archaeol: unpublished report, December Central Southern Britain’, in Cunliffe, M D (ed) Aspects of the Iron — 2003 ‘Physiographic Methodology V2’. Northamptonshire Age in Central Southern Britain. Oxford: Univ Oxford Comm Archaeol: unpublished report, December Archaeol 2, 146–61 Northamptonshire Heritage 1994 ‘Northamptonshire Air Photo Schofield, J 2004 Modern Military Matters. Studying and Managing the Mapping Project Project Design (Outline Proposals)’. Twentieth-Century Defence Heritage in Britain: A Discussion Northamptonshire SMRl: unpublished report Document.counc Brit Archaeol Res Rep, http://www.britarch.ac.uk/pubs/mmm/mmmindex. html Oswald, A, Dyer, C and Barber, M 2001 The Creation of Monuments. Schrufer-Kolb, I 1999 ‘Roman Iron production in the East Midlands, Neolithic Causewayed Enclosures in the . Swindon: England’, in Young, S M M, Pollard, A M, Budd, P and Ixer, R A English Heritage (eds.) Metals in Antiquity. (Counc Brit Archaeol Res Rep 792). Oxford Archaeological Unit 1991 ‘King’s Heath Whitelands, Oxford: Counc Brit Archaeol, 227–33 Northampton, Archaeological Evaluation Report’. Oxfordt Scott, E 1993 A Gazetteer of Roman Villas in Britain. Univ Leicester, Archaeol Unit: unpublished report, June Sch Archaeol Stud: Leicester Archaeol Monogr 1 Shaw, M 1993–4 ‘The discovery of Saxon sites below fieldwalking Page, M and Jones, R 2003 ‘Medieval settlements and landscapes in scatters: settlement evidence at Brixworth and Upton, the Whittlewood area: interim reports 2002–4’. Medieval Set Res Northamptonshire’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 25, 77–92 Group Annu Rep 18, 27–45 Shaw, M and Blinkhorn, P 1992 ‘Iron Age settlement evidence at

164 REFERENCES

Top Lodge, near Ringstead Grange, Northamptonshire’. Brit Archaeol Res Rep 48). London: Counc Brit Archaeol, 3–5 Northamptonshire Archaeol 24, 3–12 Windell D. 1981 ‘: an Iron Age enclosure’. Shaw, R and Foard, G 1995 Flights into the Past: A Resource Pack from Northamptonshire Archaeol 16, 65–70 Northamptonshire Heritage. Northampton: Northamptonshire Windell, D, Chapman, A and Woodiwiss, J 1990. From barrows to County Council bypass: excavations at West Cotton, Raunds, Northamptonshire Simpson, W G 1985 ‘Excavations at Maxey, Bardyke Field, 1985–1989. Northampton: Northamptonshire County Council 1962–63’, in Pryor et al (eds) The Fenland Project No.1: Archaeology Winton, H 1998 ‘The cropmark evidence for prehistoric and roman and Environment in the Lower Welland Valley. Cambridgeshire settlement in West Lincolnshire’, in Bewley, R H (ed) Lincolnshire’s Archaeological Committee 2, 251–5 Archaeology from the Air. Soci Lincolnshire Hist and Archaeol, , D J 1989 ‘Chapter 18 Bombing and gunnery ranges in the 47–68 Second World War’, in Smith, D J Britain’s Military Airfields Woodfield, C P T 1980 ‘The Egg Rings: a defended enclosure in 1939–45. Wellingborough: Patrick Stephens ’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 15, 156–7 Steedman, K 1995 ‘Excavation of a Saxon site at Riby Cross Roads, Woodward, P J 1986 ‘Ring-ditch sites in the Great Ouse Valley: notes Lincolnshire’. Archaeol J 151, 212–306 relating to the Bronze Age burial sites at Roxton, Radwell and Stoertz, C 1997 Ancient landscape of the Yorkshire Wolds. London: Willington with specific reference to double ring-ditches’. RCHME Bedfordshire Archaeol 17, 7–9 Strachan, D 1998 Essex from the Air. Essex County Council Strachan, D and Ingle, C 1998 ‘The Essex Mapping Project, Fourth Annual Progress Report: April 1998’. Essex County Council Maps Internal Report Centre for Ecology and Hydrology 2000 Land Cover Map 2000. Strachan, D, Brown, N and Knopp, D 2000 ‘The Stour Valley : Centre for Ecology and Hydrology Project. 1. A Cropmark Landscape in Three Dimensions. Field, E E and Holland, J L 1928 Land Utilization Map of the County Assessment Report and Draft Updated Project Design’. Essex: of Northampton. Six inch to one mile. Northampton: Essex County Council: Planning: unpublished report, February Northamptonshire Education Committee Soil Survey of England and Wales 1983 Soils of England and Wales: Sheet 4, Eastern , W E 1949 ‘Inclosure Movements in Northamptonshire’. England. 1:250,000. : Ordnance Survey. Northamptonshire Past Present 1, 19–33 Taylor, A 1979 ‘Note in Department of Environment Summary Reports’. Proc Prehist Soc 45, 332 Digital sources Taylor, A F and Woodward, P J 1985 ‘A Bronze Age barrow Ballinger, J 2000 ‘An Archaeological Resource Assessment of Modern cemetery, and associated settlement at Roxton, Bedfordshire’. Northamptonshire (1750 onwards)’. East Midlands Archaeol Res Archaeol J 142, 73–149 Framework, Taylor, C 1974. Fieldwork in Medieval Archaeology. London: Batsford www.le.ac.uk/ar/east_midlands_research_framework/htm — 1983 Village and Farmstead: A History or Rural Settlement in England. London: Philip Chapman A 1999 An Archaeological Resource Assessment of the Neolithic Taylor, J 1997 ‘Space and Place: Some Thoughts on Iron Age and and Bronze Age in Northamptonshire. East Midlands Archaeological Romano-British Landscapes’, in Gwilt, A and Haselgrove, C Research Framework. Reconstruction Iron Age Societies. Oxford: Oxbow Books, 192–204 www.le.ac.uk/ar/east_midlands_research_framework/htm Taylor, S and Dix B 1985 ‘Iron Age and Roman Settlement at Ashley’. Northamptonshire Archaeol 20, 87–112 Deegan, A 2002 ‘Northamptonshire National Mapping Project: Thomas, A and Enright, D 2003 ‘Excavation of an Iron Age Management Report’. Northamptonshire County Council, Settlement at Wilby Way, Great Doddington’. Northamptonshire unpublished report, October 2002. http://ads. Archaeol 31, 15–69 ahds.ac.uk/catalogue/resources. html?nmp Thomas, J 2003 ‘Prehistoric pit alignments and their significance in the archaeological landscape’, in Humphrey, J (ed) Re-searching the Gillings, M, Pollard, J, Wheatley, D and Peterson, R 1999 Longstones Iron Age. Leicester: Sch Archaeol and Anc Hist 11 Field, Beckhampton: an interim report on the 1999 excavations. Tingle, M E 2004 The Archaeology of Northamptonshire. www.arch. soton.ac.uk/research/avebury Northampton: Northamptonshire Archaeol Soc — R 2000 Longstones Field, Beckhampton: an interim report on the 2000 excavations. http://www.arch. Upex, S 1977 ‘The collections of the Nene Valley Research soton.ac.uk/Research/Avebury/Longstones00/LSE_interim00.doc Committee’. Aerial Archaeol 1, 31–2 Upex, G S 2003 ‘A migration period site at , Kidd, A 1999 An Archaeological Resource Assessment of the Later Bronze Northamptonshire: Surveys and excavations up to 2002’. South and Iron Ages (the First Millennium BC) in Northamptonshire. East Midlands Archaeol 33, 41–51 Midlands Archaeological Research Framework. www.le.ac.uk/ar/east_midlands_research_framework/htm Waddington, C 1997 ‘A review of “Pit Alignments” and a tentative interpretation of the Milfield Complex’. Durham Archaeol J 13, Monuments Protection Programme 1989a Wooton Hill Style 21–34 Enclosures. Monument Class Description. http://www.eng- Wainwright, G 1989 The Henge Monuments. Ceremony and Society in h.gov.uk/mpp/mcd/whl. htm 1989b Pit Alignments. Monument Prehistoric Britain. London: Thames and Hudson Class Description — no longer available online Warrilow, W Owen, G and Britnell, W 1986 ‘Eight Ring-ditches at Four Crosses, Llandysilio, Powys 1981–1985’. Proc Prehist Soc 52, Northamptonshire County Council 2002 ‘Chapter 3 Demography’. 53–87 Monitoring Report, Williams, J 1976 ‘Excavations on a Roman site at Overstone, near www.northamptonshire.gov.uk/council/environ/sustainabledevelop Northampton’. Northamptonshire Archaeol. 11, 100–33 ment/landtransp/monitorinreport/Chapter3.asp — 1979 ‘Two Iron Age Sites in Northampton’. Northamptonshire County Council Phillips G 1998 An Archaeological Resource Assessment of The Mesolithic Williams, J H and McCarthy, M R 1974 ‘A double ditched enclosure in Northamptonshire. East Midlands Archaeological Research at Blackthorn’, in Williams, J H (ed) Two Iron Age Sites in Framework. Northampton. Northampton , 44–66 www.le.ac.uk/ar/east_midlands_research_framework/htm Wilson, D R 1978 ‘Pit alignments: Distribution and Function’, in Bowen, H C and Fowler, P J (eds) Early Land Allotment. (Counc Subterranea Britannica http://www.subbrit.org.uk/

165 MAPPING ANCIENT LANDSCAPES IN NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

Taylor, J 1999 An Archaeological Resource Assessment of Roman Vince, A 2004 ‘An Archaeological Resource Assessment and Research Northamptonshire. East Midlands Archaeological Research Agenda for the Early and Middle Anglo-Saxon Period (c 400–850) Framework. www.le.ac.uk/ar/east_midlands_research_ in the East Midlands’. East Midlands Archaeol Res Framework, framework/htm www.le.ac.uk/ar/east_midlands_research_framework/htm

166 Index

Figures in bold refer to settlements 3, 125, 128–32 Blackthorn 101, 102, 108, 122 Bronze Age 45, 79 illustrations and tables. surface scatter 125, 125–6, 113, 114, 121, mortuary enclosures 51–2 127, 132 140, 140, 140–1, 141, 143 Redlands Farm Long Barrow Wollaston 122, 127, 128, 129, Blinkhorn, P 90 51 A 130, 131 34, 92, 93, 94 secondary 58 Addison, Christine 1 annual reports 10 Boardman, Mike 13 110, 121 AERIAL 156 Camp 82, 94 Borough Hill 82, 127 Byfield 92, 93, 94, 104, 105, 110 aerial archaeology, development 82, 94 Boughton 41, 87 of 3–5 archaeological investigation 3 Boughton Green 130, 131 aerial reconnaissance 6 archaeological resource, the 35 boundaries 82, 86, 88–9, 89–90, C and Anglo-Saxon studies Archaeology Data Service 94, 94–5, 95, 99, 100, 110, Cadman, G. E. 4 125, 135 (ADS) 1 133–4 Calceby, Lincolnshire 50 annual reports 10 archives 1, 4, 6–7 Bozeat 16, 104, 105, 106, 107, School, the 78 distribution of photographs area covered 1, 2 108, 109, 127, 127 Cambridge University 7, 7–8, 8, 9, 9, 10 Armishaw, Adrian 154 92, 93, 117, 121 Committee for Aerial earliest 7 artefact sites 71–2, 73 Brackmills Link Road 45, 74 Photography (CUCAP) 4, 6, effectiveness 15 Ashbee 53 Bradley, Pippa 78 7, 7, 17, 35, 136 filling in the blanks 18 Ashley 90, 121 Bradley, R 53, 69 Cambridgeshire 12, 46, 49, flight paths 11, 12, 12, 18 Ashton 116, 118, 118, 121 Brafield 108, 121 54, 64, 69, 70, 73 funding 11 Aston 78 Brafield on the Green 107 cameras 13 versus ground survey 138 Autodesk 139 Brampton, Cambridgeshire 54 Campbell, G 60 hours flown 14, 15, 15 Avenue, the, Raunds 49, 50–1, Briar Hill 45 107, 108 incidental photography 17–18 66, 67, 70, 75 Anglo-Saxon burials 132 Castle Yard 90, 94, 109 and medieval studies 136–7 127 Anglo-Saxon sites 126 Catesby 42, 92, 110, 140, and military remains 152–4, 155 causewayed enclosure 46, 47, 141, 143 NCC 9–18, 10, 11, 12, 14, 54, 61, 68–9, 75, 78, 129–30 Catholme, Staffordshire 125 15, 35, 36 B pit alignment 94, 122 causewayed enclosures 10 by others 6–9 Bamford, H M 46, 78, 122 pits 56 Briar Hill 46, 47, 54, 61, photographers 13–14 Gun Defended Area 153 sunken-featured buildings 68–9, 75, 78, 129–30 pilots 13–14 ( Lodge) 129–30 Dallington 47, 48, 54, 61, progress reviews 10 116, 117–18, 118 WH-style enclosure 101, 102, 68, 75, 78 restrictions 12 Barby 139 103, 103 distribution 60, 62, 65 spatial coverage 12 , Cambridgeshire Brigstock 30, 100, 101, 104, excavated or investigated 75 specialist 34–5 49, 51, 64 105, 106, 110, 115 Mesolithic 61, 64, 65 update, 2006 19–20 Barnwell 100, 101, 111, 115 British Steel 34 pit alignments 122 value of data 139–42 barrows Brixworth 125, 127, 131–2 cemeteries 70, 132–3 agriculture 30–1, 36, 39, 108–9 bowl 53 Bronze Age 82, 86, 88, Air Operators Certificate Bronze Age 70, 73 artefact sites 68, 72, 72 90, 98, 99, 103, 104 requirements 13 dating 69 barrows 70, 73 Chapman, A 52, 53, 69, 72 aircraft 13, 13 excavated or investigated 73–4 burials 45, 79 charcoal industry 10–11, 16, Alderstone Field 90 Leicestershire 78 distribution of monuments 26, 31, 33, 124 Aldwincle 45 levelled 50 66–71, 67 Charlton 134, 134 barrows 69, 73 long 48–50, 49, 50, 51, 60, environmental conditions 59–61 Charnwood 78 cropmarks 51–2 61–4, 62, 63, 64–5, 65, findspots 59, 59 92, 93 mortuary enclosure 51, 57, 74, 75–6, 78 human activity and geology 3 Cheshire 159 76, 79 pond 53 landscape 45–6 61, 75, 79, pit alignments 122 round 52, 52, 79 monuments 45–6 82, 117 ring ditches 53, 57, 69, 74 Rutland 78 monuments and geology 71, 72 curvilinear enclosure 47, 48 WH style enclosures 102 West Cotton 58 open settlements 81 chronology 45 Anglo-Saxon period Beckhampton 48 ring ditches 53, 69 82, 86, 88, and aerial photography 125, 135 Bedfordshire 46, 51, 54, 55, settlements 58–9, 81 98, 100, 104, 105 archaeological survey 125–7 73, 77 sites 46 Clay, Patrick 78 burials 127, 132–3 Bellamy, B et al 123 Brown, A E 138 Cleere 124 cemeteries 132–3 105, 106 Brown, A G 8, 143 climatic conditions 28 continuity of landscape from Bewley, R. H. 3 Buckinghamshire 12, 73 Clopton 115, 139 Roman period 133–5 Biddenham 90 Buckley 116 92, 93 excavated sites 126, 127 Biggin 137, 137 43, 92 Cold War 152 human activity and geology 3 Black Death, the 3 Bulwick 61, 75, 79, 120, 123 34 oval enclosures 128, 128 Black Grounds 116, 117 curvilinear enclosure 47, 48 Condron, F 121 pottery 126–7, 132 Blacklands 116, 117, 118, burials Corby 34, 89 reuse of hillforts 127 118, 121 Anglo-Saxon 127, 132–3 Cosgrove

167 MAPPING ANCIENT LANDSCAPES IN NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

elongated monument 49, 51 oval enclosures 58, 77 enclosures 95–9 G long enclosure 64, 75 ring ditches 55, 56, 66, 76 large enclosures 102 Gartree Road 119 mortuary enclosure 49, 51, 76 damage and destruction 144 location 103–4 Gayton 34, 92 ring ditches 69 agricultural 16, 31, 43 move to 95 Geddington 95, 133 villa 115 quarrying 34, 51 small sub-circular enclosures geology 1–3, 12, 16, 16, 18, 21 villa 42, 113, 133 war time 105 104, 105–6, 108, 110, 110 alluvial deposits 24, 26 Cottingham 121 Darvill, T 48 Wooton Hill (WH) style boulder clay 24, 25, 26, 26, Cotton Henge 52, 55, 56, 59 data sources 21 enclosures 100–2, 102, 29, 30, 36, 71 Cowley, D. E. 6, 9, 13 dating 103, 103, 110 and boundaries 95 Cranford 98, 99, 104, 105, Anglo-Saxon burials 132 Enclosure Act, the 136 and cropmarks 16, 16, 18, 21, 107, 108 cropmarks 42 enclosures. see causewayed 23, 23–4, 24, 26 102, 103, 103, 104 enclosures 48 enclosures; curvilinear and earthworks 23, 26, 28, 30 cremations 70–1 ring ditches 69 enclosures; enclosed settlements; major formations 39 Crick 81, 86 Daventry 109, 127, 138 long enclosures; mortuary and monuments 64, 71, 72, Crick Covert 81 Dawson, M 90, 90–1 enclosures; oval enclosures; 71, 72, 73 cropmarks 3, 4, 9, 10 90 Roman period; Wooton Hill overview 38–40 Aldwincle 51–2 deer parks 31, 33 (WH) style enclosures and parchmarks 26 amenability 36, 37 Defence of Britain Project English Heritage 11, 14, 16, permeability 26, 27, 36, 39 average density 21, 23–4, 42 4, 150, 154, 159 19–20, 46, 140–1 and pit alignments 82, 86, biases in data 36 Dix, B 100–2, 105, 122 environmental conditions, 122–3 Boughton 41 Dobinson, Colin 150 Neolithic and Bronze Age 59–61 and settlements 3, 110–11 on boulder clay 24, 25, 26, Dodford 49, 51, 64 Essex 64, 70, 153 23 28 26, 30, 36, 71 Draughton 104, 105, 109–10 Etton 46 and soilmarks , 26, , and continuity of landscape Drayton 138 107, 108 29, 36 133–5 123 92 soils 39 dating 42 Durobrivae 113, 121 Everson, Paul 9 stratigraphic sequence 38 development conditions 36 116, 117 excavations 3, 17, 45, 126, 127 Giants Hill, Lincolnshire 50 distinguishing 159–60 Gibson, A N 52 distribution 22, 71, 71 Giggins, B L 141 distribution on boulder clay E F 115, 133 18, 18, 19 Earls Barton 45, 54, 55, 66, farming. see agriculture Glassthorpe 143, 143 Ecton 40 74, 76, 92 93 GPS 12–13 formation 40–1 earthworks 4, 9 Faxton 135, 135 Great Park, Brigstock 30 and geology 16, 16, 18, 21, agricultural damage 31 Field, Ken 8 grapes 108 23, 23–4, 24, 26 distribution 22 field systems 15, 24, 35 Great Doddington 93, 102, Grendon 51–2 and geology 23, 26, 28, 30 Iron Age 26 113, 114, 122 number of photographs 15, 15 Kalendar 43 medieval 138, 144 40, 98, 100, number recorded 42 44 Neolithic 58–9 107, 108 and pit alignments 82 medieval 136, 137, 137–8, Roman 26 Great Houghton 93, 95, 105, poor evidence of Anglo-Saxon 140, 141, 142, 143, 144 field walking 3, 8, 45, 59, 78, 106 features 129, 135 number recorded 44 82, 100, 121, 125, 131 Great Oakley 81, 89, 109, 123 quality 93 photographs taken 15 Findon 34 Great Weldon 121 Ravensthorpe 41 recording conventions 138–9 102, 103, 103, 105, 106 92, 94 recording conventions 139 Roman 43 Fineshade 118 Grendon 45 ring ditches 54 survival 35 Flagstones, Dorset 69 agriculture 108 Roman period 117, 117 value of aerial data 139–42 flight logs 12, 18 cropmarks 51–2 and settlements 93, 95, 100 visibility 43–4 flight paths 11, 12, 12, 18 elongated monument 49, 51 Tansor 48, 51–2 and woodland 31 flint, worked 51, 59 field systems 58–9 visibility 40–1 107 Flore human remains 58 Croughton 12, 134 112, 113 flint scatters 59 land boundaries 82 Crow Hill 94, 127 106, 109 long barrow 49, 50, 61–2, long enclosure 64, 66, 75 96, 134 Ecton 40, 92, 93, 94, 95, 110 63, 75–6 mortuary enclosure 49, 51, currency bars 94, 110 Ehrenreich, R 110, 124 mortuary enclosure 49, 51, 76, 79 cursus monuments 51, 64, 78, 79 elongated monuments 66, 76 pit alignments 94, 122 curvilinear enclosures 47, 48, 56, 49, 50–1, 60 oval enclosure 63, 77 ring ditches 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 62, 65, 75, 82, 99, 105–6, Elton, Cambridgeshire 49 possible palisade defined 56, 57, 58, 69, 74, 76 106, 107, 108, 110, 127 Elton Henge 52, 54, 55, 56, 66, 76 enclosure 58, 59 sunken-featured buildings enclosed settlements Foard, G. 6, 140–1, 141 129, 129, 130 arrangement 95–9, 96, 98 Forest of Arden 16 Gretton 94, 110, 121, 122, 133 D curvilinear enclosures 105–6, 55, 58, 77, 96, 114 Grimes, W F 105 Dallington 106, 107, 108, 110 Four Crosses, Powys 79 ground survey Anglo-Saxon burials 132 defensive 103, 105 funding 11 versus aerial data 138 causewayed enclosure 47, 48, distribution 95 funnel-entranced enclosures value of data 139–42 54, 61, 68, 75, 78 ditches 95–9 89–90, 108 Guilbert, Graeme 78 henge 66 double-ditched enclosures 102–4 Furnell’s Manor 127, 129 Guilsborough 90, 94

168 INDEX

H findspots 98 clearance 89, 108 and aerial photography 136–7 hachures, use of 138–9 hillforts 94 continuity 133–5 continuity of landscape from 135 100, 101 human activity and geology 3 discontinuity in 134–5, Roman period 133–5 Hall, D 31 iron industry 109, 123–4 Iron Age 95 earthworks 136, 137, 137–8, 140 141 142 143 Hall, D N 138 land divisions and boundaries medieval 136–7 , , , , 144 144 Hall, D P 45, 59, 60, 61, 72, 78 94–5 Neolithic 45–6 field systems 138, 85 86 87 Harding, A F 79 landscape 95 overviews , , ground survey 136, 138 Harding, J 68 open settlements 81, 89, 90–1, Roman 95 human activity and geology 3 91 92 49, 51, 64, 75 , , 93–4 Langham Road 127 lack of specialist knowledge 159 116 Hardwick Park 99 population 90 Laxton , 118, 120, 123 landscape 136–7 142 143 Hargrave 98, 99, 100, 111 pottery 89 Lee, G E 79 parchmarks , , 143–9 98 109 82, 86, 88, 95, 98, settlements 24, 81, , , Leicestershire 48, 50, 51, 54, problematic nature of remains 99, 100, 107, 108, 110, 110–11, 133 66, 75, 76, 76–7, 78, 121 145 112, 113, 121 soilmarks 15 Lincolnshire 12, 50, 121, 125, settlements 50, 133, 136–7, 142 112, 113, 121 surface scatter 100, 111 139, 157 138, 140–1, , 143–4 109 92 Harrington 19 iron industry 11, , 109–10, sites 136 33 Harringworth 109, 120, 121, 123–4 lithic scatters 45 woodland 31, 92 114 123 Roman 109, 113, 119–21, , 93, Meole Brace, 79 120 116 Hazeltongue Lodge, , 123–4 , 117 Mesolithic, the 61 107 112 62 Leicestershire 50 58, 69, 79, 90, Little Houghton , 111, , distribution of sites 61, 116 Healy, F 68 94, 102, 127 , 117 enclosures 61 98 63 Hemington 115 Islip , 99, 100 livestock, sheep 108 findspots 63 henges 52, 66, 67, 79 Llandysilio, Powys 56 flint scatters Maxey henge 53, 54, 55, 69 location 1 monuments 61–6 106 ring ditches 53, 54, 56 J Loddington 105, tool assemblages 61 hengiforms 50, 56, 79 Jackson, D 100–2, 105, 122; Lodge, the 52, 81 metal detecting 100, 131 Henslow Meadow 49 or D A 81, 93, 108, 111; lodging 41 methodology 3–5, 21, 35, 112 Higham Ferrars 115, 115, 116, or Dennis 78 , 113 156, 160 117, 125, 128, 128 Long Dole 52, 81 data creation 156–7 hillforts 81–2, 84, 89, 90, 91, Long Enclosure, Raunds data interrogation 157–8 94, 102, 103, 109, 127 K 51, 69, 75 links to photographs 157–8 43 Hindwell, Powys 79 Kalendar long enclosures 64–5, 66, project implementation 160 44 101 67 Hingley, R 110 Kelmarsh , , 127 , 70, 75 shortcomings 158–9 116 HLC project 21, 31 Kettering 20, 34, , 117, 121, Long Melford 70 timescale 157 54, 55, 66, 76 132, 133 Long Mound, West Cotton Midlands Prehistory (Gibson) 78 49 112, 121 Ketton 48–9, , 69, 75 Midlands, the, prehistoric Hollowell, R. 3, 6, 7, 8, 9 ditch boundary 88, 89 Longmans Hill 50 heritage 78–80 49 Huggate, Yorkshire 50 elongated monument , 51 Longstones Field 48 Mileoak 133 88 human activity, and geology 3 landscape Loveday, R 51, 78 military remains 4, 17–18, 150, 142 human remains 58 long enclosure 64, 70, 75 154–5, 159 49 Hunsbury 82, 94, 103, 109, 127 mortuary enclosure , 51, Lowry, B 152 and aerial photography Husbands Bosworth 47, 48, 75 66, 76 Luddell Field 132 152–4, 155 151 Husbands Bosworth, pit alignments 82, 95 Luftwaffe, the 9 air raid shelters 151 Leicestershire 78 ring ditches 69, 70 aircraft crash sites 151 Husbands Bosworth airfield 12 129 airfields , 152 115 151 hut circles 90, 91, 93, 105 Kings Cliffe , 121 M anti-aircraft batteries , 152, Kings Heath 52, 102, 103 McCormick, M 52 153, 153, 154–5 Kings Sutton 66, 76, 121 McCormick, Tony 78 anti-tank ditches 151 I ring ditch 55, 55, 56 Madmarston Castle 110 bombing decoys 151, 153 images examined 4 Malim, T 46 bombing ranges 151 incidental photography 17–18 MapInfo Geographical number recorded 44 industrial monuments 4, 20 L Information System 3, 4, 139, other resources 154 Inspectorate of Ancient Lamport 76, 96, 97, 99, 139 156–7 pillboxes 151, 153 Monuments 11 ring ditch 54, 55 mapping 3, 4–5 prisoner of war camps 10, 42, 45, 107, 108, land division 94–5 Markham, Philip 1, 13, 13–14 151, 152 116, 117, 117, 118 land use 28, 32 Marston St Laurence 72, 92, 93 representation 35 Iron Age 89 agricultural 30–1, 39 Martin, P 45, 59 road blocks 151, 153 agriculture 108–9 overviews 88 Maudit 105 ROC Posts 151, 152 continuity of landscape from quarrying 34 Maxey 46 searchlights 151, 152, 153, 133–5 reservoirs and water features 34 henge 53, 54, 55, 69 154, 154 distribution of settlements 97 urban development 33–4 pit circle 58 sites 150, 151, 152, 153, 153 enclosed settlements. woodland 31, 33 ring ditch 69, 73 Spigot mortars 151, 153 see enclosed settlements Land Utilisation Survey 30 Maxwell, Gordon 13 Thor missile site, Harrington enclosures 52 landscape 59–61 107, 108, 115 19, 151 field systems 26 Bronze Age 45–6 medieval period Z Batteries 153

169 MAPPING ANCIENT LANDSCAPES IN NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

Misterton, Leicestershire monuments 45–6, 78 Parry, S J 11 recording conventions 138–9 54, 55, 76 monuments and geology Petchey, M 51 recording units 21, 157 Molesworth 12 71, 72 Abbey 137 Redlands Farm 127 monuments 45–6. see also ring ditches 69 photographs Redlands Farm Long Barrow individual monument types settlements 58–9 coverage 34–5 48, 49, 50, 51, 64, 76 chronology 73 sites 46 distribution of 7, 7–8, 8, 9, Regional Research Framework distribution 60, 66–71, 71, 12, 96, 96, 9, 10 (RRF) 125 71–2, 73 99, 127 infrared 40 reservoirs and water features 34 and geology 64, 71, 72, 71, New Bewick 131 limitations 34–5 results, quantifying 21 72, 73 Newbottle 76, 81, 82, 85, 89, links to 157–8 Richardson, Derek 13 Mesolithic 61–6 104, 105 NCC 14, 15 ridge and furrow 4, 16–17, Neolithic 45–6, 66–71, 67, Newnham Murren, Oxfordshire number 7, 7, 9, 14, 15 21, 31, 35, 44, 136, 138, 72, 78 74 by photographer 6 144, 145, 159 shift in location focus 66–9, 73 non-causewayed enclosures. stereoscopic 44 Riby Crossroads 125 sites 46 see ring ditches value of data 139–41 ring ditches 51–2, 79 Monuments Protection Northampton 20, 152 physiographic model 60–1, 93–4 on boulder clay 71 Programme 105 Northampton Museum 8 Pickering, Jim 6, 7–8, 8 Bronze Age 69 Moore, W. R. G. 8 Northamptonshire County Piddington 121, 127 causewayed 56, 60, 66, 74 MORPH classification system Council 1 Pilton 140 dates 69 4, 157 Northamptonshire County Pineham Barn 52 defining 52 mortuary enclosures 49, 51–2, Council (NCC) 136, 156 pit alignments 82, 83, 84, 85, diameter 52, 53, 53–4, 57, 57, 65–6, 66, 67, 74, 76, aerial reconnaissance 9–18, 11, 86, 86, 87, 88, 88–9, 89, 57, 69, 79 78–9 14, 35, 36 90, 94, 94–5, 99, 108, distribution 60, 66–9, 67, Moulton 87, 92, 98, 107, 111, distribution of photographs 10 110, 122–3 68, 69–70, 71, 73 112, 121 flight paths 10, 12, 12 pit circles 58 excavated or investigated Moulton, Broughton 82 flying programme 12–18 pit clusters 93 73–5, 76–7 mounds hours flown 14 Pitsford 34, 49, 62–3, 76, 82, 87, intersecting other monuments enlargement and refurbishment photographs taken 14, 15 88, 95, 98, 99, 100, 132 70–1 70 Northamptonshire Garden Trust place names 125 large 54–6, 55, 60, 66–9, 67 Rainsborough Camp 50 17 Polebrook 47, 61, 75, 79, modification of 57, 58 Tansor 45, 74 Northamptonshire Landscape 131, 132 morphology 54 Mount Pleasant 79 project 119 population, Iron Age 90 multiple 56–8, 57, 60, 66, Northamptonshire NMP project Portable Antiquities Scheme 68, 69, 74, 79 1–5 132 Neolithic 69 N Northamptonshire School of post-built houses 90 number 52, 52 Flying 13 Potlock 78 palisade defined 79 mortuary enclosure 49, 51, Northumberland 159 pottery ring-gullied huts 90 66, 76 Nosey 88 Anglo-Saxon 126–7, 132 Ringstead 113, 121, 122 pit alignments 86 Beaker 79 Rivenhall, Essex 64 ring ditches 54, 55, 66, 69, 76 Grooved Ware 79 Robinson, John 1 8, 113, 115, 130, O Iron Age 89 Robinson, M 59, 60, 108 130 Octagon Farm, Bedfordshire Roman 51, 111, 113, 127 Rockingham Forest 3, 9, 11, 16, National Forest 139 51, 52, 70 project implementation 160 17, 24, 31, 36, 82, 89, 100, National Mapping Programme Old A 102, 103, 104, 110 Pryor, Francis 78 109, 111, 113, 119–21, 136 (NMP) 1–5, 45, 50, Old B 105, 106 98, 100 Rollings, Alex 8 79–80, 125, 136, 137, omissions 35 Roman period 138, 138–9, 160 Open Fields project 31 coins 131 National Monuments Record 1 Ordnance Survey 9 Q continuity of landscape from National Monuments Record Orton Meadows 110 quarried land 21, 28, 32, 34 133–5 Centre 7, 157 9, 130, 132 quernstones 108 continuity of settlement with Nene, River 1, 8, 12, 24, 30, Ouse, River 1, 12, 46 Quinton 102, 103, 103, 104 Iron Age sites 112, 113, 121 38, 45, 46, 59–60, 79, 82, oval enclosures 58, 63, 77, 91, cropmarks 117, 117 108, 113 128, 128, 134 distribution of settlements 116 Neolithic, the 53 Overstone 113, 133 R earthworks 43 artefact sites 67, 72, 72 Oxford Beds, the 38 Radley, Oxfordshire 74 enclosures 52, 111, 113, distribution of monuments Oxfordshire 12, 46, 74–5, 110 rainfall 28 115, 121 66–71, 67 Rainsborough Camp 50, 82, field systems 26 enclosures 48, 52 85, 89, 94, 109, 127 findspots 96, 98 environmental conditions P Raunds 98, 99, 100, 101, human activity and geology 3 59–61 palisade defined enclosures 108, 111, 125, 128 iron industry 109, 113, field systems 58–9 58, 59, 78, 90 Raunds Area Project 3, 11, 45, 46, 119–21, 120, 123–4 findspots 59, 59, 63 Palmer, R 1, 46, 48 48, 50, 58–9, 69, 78, 136 landscape 95 flint scatters 65, 72, 82 parchmarks 26, 31, 41–2, 42, Raunds Furnells 131 limekilns 99 human activity and geology 3 42, 117, 141, 142, 143, Ravensthorpe 41 nucleated settlements landscape 45–6 143–9, 159–60 Ravenstone, Buckinghamshire 73 115, 116, 117

170 INDEX

pottery 51, 111, 113, 127 Shaw, M 90 107, 108, 113, 115 Weekley Hall 81, 89 roads 113, 116, 118–19, 119 Shawell, Leicestershire 54, 55, sunken-featured buildings (SFBs) Weldon 119 rural settlements 111, 112, 113 66, 76–7 125, 128, 129, 129, Welford 139 settlements 3, 24, 99–100, sheep 108 129–31, 130 Welland, River 1, 12, 51–2 109, 110, 132 sites, number of 5 Sutton, Cambridgeshire 69 Wellingborough 20, 107, 108, soilmarks 15 Sites and Monument Record 49, 50, 63, 76 133 surface scatter 100, 111 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 7, 8, 10, 45, Swan Valley 52 West Cotton 45, 52, 54, 58, towns 116, 117–18, 118 59, 78, 127, 138, 150, 156 Swinehead, Bedfordshire 66, 67, 70, 78, 140 villas 42, 56, 100, 113, 114, Skendleby, Lincolnshire 50 54, 55, 77 Long Mound 48–9, 49, 69, 75 115, 115, 116, 117, 122, Soil Moisture Deficit (SMD) Sywell 93, 95 West Kennet 79 127, 132, 133, 134 28, 40 Sywell airfield 12, 13, 14 Weston 144 Roman Roads 113, 116, soilmarks 4, 9, 10, 144 Whilton Lodge (Bannaventa) 118–19, 119 average density 26, 43 116, 117–18, 118 Rothersthorpe 96 Brigstock 30 T Whittlewood Project 3, 136 Rothwell 103, 103, 110 Bugbrooke 43 Tansor Whittlewood-Salcey Forest round houses 81, 93 distinguishing 159–60 Anglo-Saxon burials 132 3, 11, 16, 36, 109, 119, Roxton, Bedfordshire 73 distribution 22 cropmarks 48, 51–2 125, 136 Royal Air Force 4, 7, 9, 17, 136, distribution and geology mortuary enclosure 49, 51, 76 Wooton Bank 95 137, 144, 153 23, 26, 28, 29, 36 mounds 45, 74 96, 99, 110, 103, Royal Commission on the formation 42–3 ring ditch 53, 69 103 Historical Monuments of photographs 10, 15, 15–16, 17 Tap Lodge 90 Wilby Way 81, 93, 102, 108 England (RCHME) 3, 6, recording conventions 139 Taylor, J 10 Williams, J 8 8, 10, 11, 12, 14, 82, 117, visibility 43 terminology 52 48 119, 136, 137, 140, 144 and woodland 31, 33, 33 82, 115 Windell, Dave 78, 140–1 Royal Ordnance Depot, Weedon soils 24 Thomas, J 48 Winwick 139 150, 152, 152 Sol Central 129 Thomas, Roger 159 Wittering, RAF 12 Rudston, Yorkshire 50 Southern Enclosure, Stanwick Thorpe 98, 99, 100 Wollaston 92, 93, 94, 107 55, 56, 58, 66, 77 94, 96, agriculture 108 Rutland 12, 78, 82, 121 Southwick 47, 48, 61, 75, 78, 99, 134 Anglo-Saxon 122, 127, 128, Rutland Forest 16 101 Thorplands 113, 121 129, 130, 131 spatial coverage 12 Thrapsoton 81 enclosed settlement 99 96, 103, 103 Thurning 113, 115 landscape 83 S Standlake, Oxfordshire 74 timber post structures pit alignments 82, 89, 94, Salcey Forest 36, 100, 101, 119 129, 131–2 94–5, 110 109, 119, 136 Stanton Harcourt, Oxfordshire Titchmarsh 59, 92, 113, 116, Roman 112, 113, 114, 121 Salter, C 124 74–5 117, 118, 118 Woodford 100 92, 93, 112 Stanwell Spinney 101, 102 tool assemblages 61 Woodford Huxloe 116, 117 Scheduled Monuments at Risk Stanwick 45 116, 117 woodland 3, 16, 17, 21, 28, 31, Project 20 agriculture 108 trackways 82, 95, 99, 100 32, 33, 33, 124, 136 Scott, E 113 causewayed ring ditch 56 transcription 3 clearance 60, 64, 73, 108 Segmented Ditch Circle, land boundaries 82 Twywell 90, 95, 108 Woodward, P J 69 Stanwick 66, 67, 70, 74 ring ditches 52, 55, 66, 67, 77 Wooton Fields 94, 121 settlements. see also enclosed Segmented Ditch Circle Wooton Hill 100–2 settlements 66, 67, 70, 74 U Wooton Hill Farm 103, 110, Anglo-Saxon 3, 125, 128–32 settlement 58–9 Upex, S. 6, 8–9, 9, 132 122 area 93 Southern Enclosure 55, 56, Upton 50, 52, 74, 125, 129, 130 Wooton Hill (WH) style arrangement 101 58, 66, 77 urban development 21, 28, 32, enclosures 100–2, 102, background 81 villa 114, 115, 116, 117, 127 33–4 103, 103, 110 Bronze Age 58–9, 81 Staverton 93, 104, 105 World War I 150, 151, 152 desertion 3 Staverton A 47, 61, 75 V World War II 17–18, 150, 151, 153 vegetation 60 distribution 110–11 Staverton B 54, 55, 66, 77 distribution of open 93–4 Staverton C 54, 55, 66, 77 and geology 3, 110–11 Stenigot, Lincolnshire 50 W Y Iron Age 24, 81, 89, 90–1, stock pens 90, 95, 108 Wakerley 90, 95, 102, 109, 113, 109, 154 91, 92, 93–4, 95–108, 97, Stoertz, C 50 114, 120, 121, 132, 133 133 98, 109, 110–11, 133 47, 61, 75 Walcote, Leicestershire 49, 51, Yeavering, Northumberland 125 linear arrangement 96, 97 Stoke Bruene 113 64, 75 Yorkshire Dales 139 medieval 50, 133, 136–7, Stonehenge 69 Wallow Bank 63 Yorkshire Wolds 50, 125 138, 140–1, 142, 143–4 Stour valley 53–4, 70 Warkworth 152 Neolithic 58–9 Stowe-Nine-Churches 82, 86, Warmington 127 open 81, 89, 90–1, 91, 92, 93–4 87, 88 12 Roman 3, 24, 99–100, 109, 110, Strachan, D, et al 70 117, 119 111, 112, 113, 115, 116, Strixton 95, 100, 101, 108, Weedon 150, 152, 152 117–18, 118, 121–2, 132 111, 130 Weekley 95, 96, 102, 113, 119, Sharnbrook 100, 101 Suffolk 159 121, 133

171 Northants Cover v3 16/1/08 16:18 Page 1 Mapping Ancient Landscapes in Northamptonshire Aerial reconnaissance and the National Mapping Programme project in Northamptonshire have recovered and mapped evidence of archaeological activity of widely varying character, from field systems through settlement remains to funerary monuments, and ranging in period Mapping Ancient from the Neolithic to the 20th century. This volume presents research and analyses of the project’s results. The Landscapes in introduction is followed by two chapters that consider the reasons for the biases in the distribution of aerial photographic evidence in terms of reconnaissance and the impact of Northamptonshire soils, geology and past and present landuse on the survival and visibility of earthworks, cropmarks and soilmarks. The subsequent by Alison Deegan and Glenn Foard analyses of the project’s results are presented primarily by period. The monuments and landscapes of the Neolithic and Bronze Age are discussed in the context of results from archaeological excavations, in particular the Raunds Area Project, followed by a review of the wider evidence for these periods in Northamptonshire and the Midlands. For the Iron Age and Roman period there is an attempt to characterise the settlements, boundaries and com-munications across different landscape zones.The three chapters on the Anglo-Saxon, medieval and post-

medieval landscapes and on 20th century military remains review the contribution of the aerial by Alison Deegan and Glenn Foard archaeological evidence and consider whether this was maximised by the project. The final chapter assesses the methodology that evolved during the course of the project and its impact on data creation and subsequent data manipulation, interrogation and dissemination.

Front cover: Panoramic view of the Nene Valley looking north-east. Floods reveal the extent of the Nene floodplain and in a few places show the course of now abandoned river channels.(NCC colour slide SP9776/10 22nd October 1987 NCC copyright) Back cover: Detail of the buried stone walls of medieval buildings and structures along one street in Blatherwycke, brought into sharp contrast by the parching of the grass during a very dry summer. (NCC colour slide SP9795/23 July 1995 NCC copyright)

ISBN: 10-digit: 1 905624 42 5 13-digit: 978 1 905624 42 3 Product Code: 51253