Cherry Hall, Main Street GRINDLETON Ribble Valley

Home , Grindleton, Ribble Valley, Rimington, Slaidburn, Stonyhurst, Whitewell

NEIL ARCHAEOLOGICAL SERVICES Established 1994 NIGEL R. J. NEIL, MA, MSc, MIfA, LRPS 5 HILLSIDE, CASTLE PARK, LANCASTER, LA1 1YH Tel/Voicemail 01524 844 728 Mobile/Voicemail 07968 621 530 e-mail: [email protected] Desk-based assessments & evaluations Archaeological watching briefs Standing building survey & analysis Garden History projects Environmental Impact Assessment Outreach and lectures

Cherry Hall, Main Street GRINDLETON Ribble Valley Borough Lancashire Heritage Statement and Desk-Based Archaeological / Historical Assessment Planning Application ref.: 3 / 2011 / 0095P (Re-submission of Application ref. 3 / 2010 / 0002)

(Left) Cherry Hall in c. the 1920s (Clitheroe Library); (Right) Mr Thomas Scott (1833-1913) of Cherry Hall, village pinder [keeper of the pinfold] and respected amateur bee-keeper (Clitheroe Library)

DRAFT 2 12 July 2011

m Commissioned by Mr and Mrs Simon Cherry, Cherry Hall, Grindleton, and Jonathan Hadfield (Engineering and Surveying), Chipping Cherry Hall, Grindleton, Ribble Valley, Lancs.: Heritage Statement, App ref. 3 / 2011 / 0095P 1

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Neil Archaeological Services were commissioned by Mr and Mrs S. Cherry, of Cherry Hall, Main St., Grindleton, BB7 4QT, and their architect Jonathan Hadfield of Chipping, to provide a Heritage Statement, in support of Planning Application ref. 3 / 2011 / 0095P, for erection of two affordable dwellings in the garden to the NE of Cherry Hall. This document is supplementary to, and enhances and corrects in minor details, the Feb 2011 Planning and Heritage Statement provided by The Planning and Development Network, Clitheroe. I visited the site (NGR SD 75787 45888) on 24 May with the architect, and undertook a ‘walk over survey’ of the vicinity. 1.2. A desk-based assessment of Grindleton, with particular reference to the development site, has been undertaken, visiting Lancashire Archives, Preston (formerly Lancashire Record Office, LRO) on 26 May and 2 June, and Clitheroe Library on 11 July. The Access to Archives (A2A) and The Genealogist websites have also been used, and the archaeological significance of the site and Grindleton village placed in context with reference to the Archaeological Research Framework for North West England. Where the report refers to Ribble Valley Borough Council’s Grindleton Conservation Area Appraisal (Oct 2005), this has been abbreviated to “the CAA”. 1.3. Lancashire County Archaeology Service response: Douglas Moir, Planning Officer (Archaeology), in Lancashire County Council Environment Directorate has commented (pers. comm.): ‘although I did have a look at the [previous] application (3/2010/0002) I sent a “no comment” response concerning the application. I made that decision on the basis that - in the absence of a medieval church - the settlement was likely to have been very small in the medieval period, and therefore any archaeological deposits of this period difficult to pinpoint with any confidence, and that the concentration of post-medieval occupation was likely to be to the south of the application site (as evidenced by the few listed buildings there are). This was however only based on the information held on the Lancashire Historic Environment Record [LHER], 1st edition OS [1850s], and aerial photographs. It was considered that any recommendation for a watching brief would therefore be too speculative to meet one of the planning tests of reasonableness.’ Mr Moir does not mention the Early Medieval importance of Grindleton, or the early chapel (LHER PRN 10050; demolished 1804), to which the lane beside the proposed development led (see below). 2. DESK-BASED ASSESSMENT 2.1 Grindleton never achieved (or had already gained, then lost) the status of a medieval market or urban centre, and was therefore NOT considered sufficiently important to merit inclusion as one of the 57 towns for which brief archaeological and historical assessments were carried out (LUAU 1998), followed by 33 detailed surveys, as part of Lancashire County Council’s historic towns survey programme http://www.lancashire.gov.uk/corporate/web/index.asp?siteid=4398&pageid=20340&e=e. Furthermore, having been in the West Riding of Yorkshire until 1974, Grindleton’s history has not yet been summarised by the Victoria histories of the counties of England, unlike adjacent ‘old-Lancashire’ townships, and so sources for the place are more disparate. It is understood that no previous archaeological fieldwork in the village has been done, apart from a pre-conversion barn survey at Stone Hill Fold, c. 80 m NW of Cherry Hall (Ken Davis, LCAS, pers. comm.). The regional importance of Grindleton before the Norman Conquest was evidently considerable, though it is difficult to define the specific area to which the historical sources refer. 2.2 Whilst there is good evidence for the continuity of major land tenure boundaries created in pre- Conquest times, and for the establishment of a “nascent parish structure” (Rachel Newman 2006, 100), the origins of ‘nucleated settlement’ in the North West are difficult to pinpoint. However, it is generally agreed that Early Medieval (aka Dark Age) settlement was ‘dispersed’, in the form of

For the use of Mr and Mrs S. Cherry, Mr J. Hadfield (architect), Neil Archaeological Services The Planning & Development Network, Ribble Valley Borough Council, and Lancashire County Archaeology Service only July 2011 Cherry Hall, Grindleton, Ribble Valley, Lancs.: Heritage Statement, App ref. 3 / 2011 / 0095P 2

settlement, sometimes within large oval enclosures, with the exception of slight evidence for continued occupation in some of the towns established during the Romano-British period. The nucleated plan of Grindleton village contains the text-book features of planned villages in the north of England: “a single main street, with narrow lanes extending out, and strip-like crofts extend away from the central communal village space, and often there is back lane facilitating access to the rear of the crofts” (Roberts 1990) - conforming to a pattern seen throughout Cumbria (Shap and Hale have been studied most thoroughly), and in North Lancashire, such as at Yealand Redmayne. But, whilst this village plan, as exhibited at Grindleton, is popularly believed to be pre-Conquest, research throughout North West England strongly suggests that this is unlikely to pre-date the late twelfth century (C. Newman 2006, 118; C. and Richard Newman 2007, 97). Archaeological fieldwork on nucleated villages has, however, been lamentably sparse throughout the North West, and largely comprises topographical survey, with the exception of the excavations at Rickerby (Cumbria), Tatton (Cheshire), and largely unpublished work at Easington (Lancashire), and Fazakerley (Merseyside) (C. Newman 2006, 119). 2.3 Whatever the date of the establishment of the village plan of Grindleton, the extent to which the proposed development might or might not impinge on this aspect of the village’s historical character is – from their earlier responses – clearly a matter of concern to the parish council and Ribble Valley Borough Council. An important issue for the local authority to consider is how to balance their laudable desire to retain those few examples of the former crofts/tenements at Grindleton which remain without infill, against the present writer’s submission that the retention of the boundaries of the tenements is arguably more important than the extent of infill. The boundaries of the Cherry Hall plot will be retained by the present proposal. The retention of only one or two surviving open crofts/tenements, in a village where the vast majority have been infilled, is not seen by the present writer as a sustainable heritage resource. Meanwhile, the perception of the village as formerly comprising a great many long, narrow, plots is still largely discernible, though more so cartographically than on the ground. It should be noted that the majority of those of Grindleton’s tenements/crofts which have lost their East to West integrity of boundary had done so prior to the 1884 first edition Ordnance Survey 1:2500 map, while the actual infilling of the parts of plots behind the Main Street frontage, especially those houses accessed from Back Lane, post-date 1884. 2.4 There are no indications whatsoever on the ground of the village’s pre-Conquest importance, and no reason to suggest strongly that there is likely to be below-ground evidence surviving on the proposed development site, as it is set well back from Main Street. 2.5 Early Medieval history: there is documentary evidence to show that the village of Grindleton (or more correctly the township as a whole) was of considerable regional importance in the Early Medieval period – i.e. the ‘sub-Roman period’, popularly known as the Dark Ages, between the Roman withdrawal of c. AD 410 and the Norman Conquest of 1066. Bowland was part of the British kingdom of Rheged (which extended from Galloway to the River Mersey) until it was annexed by Northumbria some time before AD 730 (Kenyon 1991, 70-1). Its inhabitants spoke Cumbric, a Brythonic dialect closely related to Old Welsh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheged). 2.6 Domesday Book (1086) relates that, twenty years earlier at the time of the Conquest, Gretlintone was the caput, or leading vill, of an estate of that name (the entry ends “these lands belong to Gretlintone”), which - with a great many other estates - belonged to Earl Tostig (killed at Battle of Stamford Bridge; brother of King Harold II). Gretlintone was a ‘multiple estate’ or maenor wrthtir, comprising 13 vills and an extent of 38 carucates (M. Higham 1985; 2007, 149-51), or approximately 38 x 120 = 4560 statute acres = c. 11,250 hectares. A carucate was the area that

could be ploughed by 8 oxen in a year, though this varied with the quality of land (http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/28336?redirectedFrom=carucate#eid). The vills of Grindleton and West Bradford were initially retained ‘in hand’ as demesne, rather than being re-granted to lesser lords, as were Mitton and other manors (Shaw 1956, 219). 2.7 Place-name: the definition of the place-name Grindleton given in the CAA (p.8) ‘the village or settlement of Grentel’s people’ (Ekwall 1940, 196) should probably be revised. Smith (1961, 196) considers the many spelling-changes for the place-name that have occurred, and concludes that “manor/estate/farmstead [tun] near [-ing] the Grendel’, the latter being ‘gravelly place or stream’, now Grindleton Brook, is the most likely derivation. The loss of the medial element –ing, often denoting Anglo-Saxon family ownership (Mills 1976, 46), occurs late, between the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. 2.8 Medieval history: the late Dr Mary Higham, for whom researching the Forest of Bowland was a life’s work, found documentary evidence that ‘pre-feudal’ terms of tenurial service and obligations survived in Bowland for as long as 300 years after the Conquest, partly because these lands remained largely as one administrative unit, and partly because of their designation as ‘forest’, over which the Crown exercised a tight legal grip. For example, in 1258, for each of the 24 bovates (⅛ of a carucate) in Grindleton, villagers had to “make 3 cartings to [the de Lacy castle in] Pontefract, and plough for one day and mow for 9 days” (Shaw 1956, 224). In addition, the chief forester claimed rights of puture (‘food, drink, and lodging, or the equivalent in money, for the maintenance of themselves, their attendants, and their animals’; http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/155291?redirectedFrom=puture#eid) from some holders of c. 30 acres or more (Shaw 1956, 242). The lucrative stock-rearing economy of Bowland, using a system of vaccaries or cattle farms (N. Higham 2004, 107-13), ensured that the laws governing the ‘forest’ also resulted in aspects of the historic landscape remaining fossilised. Mary Higham linked the hillfort on Simpshey, c. 1600 metres NW of Cherry Hall, and the church at Waddington (M. Higham 2007, 149), as focal points in this early Christian hub, though this has yet to be proven. 2.9 Earl Tostig’s lands were granted by King William I to Roger of Poitou (M. Higham 1985; 2007, 150), along with most of what later became Lancashire, and this ‘superior lordship’ continued to be amalgamated until Roger’s exile in 1102 (Shaw 1956, 8), when it was conferred as the Honour of Clitheroe on Robert de Lacy. The Honour passed by marriage from the De Lacys to Thomas, Earl of Lancaster in 1311, and subsequently was incorporated into the Duchy of Lancaster. In 1661, Charles II gave the Honour to General George Monk, Duke of Albemarle - as a reward for his assistance in the Restoration – from whom it descended to the Dukes of Buccleuch (VCH 1, 312-13; 6, 361). King Henry VII officially ‘disafforested’ the royal forests including Bowland in 1507, at which time the principal owning family in Grindleton were the Foules, some of whose lands were inherited by the Waddingtons, and in turn the Holdens of Chaigley, and finally the Fitzherbert-Brockholes of Claughton near Garstang (Greenwood and Bolton 1955, 13). Unfortunately, no archives relating to Grindleton have been identified by the present writer among these families’ papers in Lancashire Archives, though further searches could be undertaken. 2.10 Grindleton Chapel, and Higher Chapel Lane: such historic significance as the vicinity of the proposed development has lies largely in the fact that Higher Chapel Lane lies adjacent to the North side Cherry Hall. Higher Chapel Lane and Lower Chapel Lane– which is between Roseberry Cottage and Rushton House, c. 60 m to the SE – were the only access routes (Fig 1) for villagers to Grindleton Old Chapel, which lay c. 500 m to the NE of Main Street at SD 7607 4613 (Fig 2). These two lanes are linked by Back Lane, now a footpath, which passes to the NE of the 50-60 metre-long tenements (plots) fronting onto Main Street, including the Cherry Hall plot. It

would have been in this chapel that the non-conformist curate Rev’d Roger Brierley (d. 1637) would have preached. Brierley he was leader of the Grindletonians, a forerunner of the Society of Friends (‘The Quakers’) and was unsuccessfully tried (along with some parishioners) in the Consistory Court of York in 1617 (CAA, 9; Ainsworth nd a; Grindleton Parish Council 1955, 9).

Fig 1 (L): Extract from 1848 tithe map (LRO PR 3031 /4 / 3), showing proposed development site, in relation to Higher and Lower Chapel Lanes. Fig 2 (R): Extract from OS 1850 6 inch to 1 mile map, showing proposed development site, in relation to site of old chapel demolished in 1804. 2.11 According to the artist Charles St. Clair of Preston (d. 1865), the chapel was demolished in 1804. His sketches (Fig 3) of Oct 1823 (LRO DDPD 22/10) are presumably copies of earlier drawings, which have not been located. The detail of the doorway shows an arch in receding un-moulded planes – which implies at least an early Norman date, if not Anglo-Saxon (c.f. St Patrick’s Chapel, Heysham, Lancs.), a view supported by the small plain rectangular windows. At the right-hand (East) end is a later chancel, with a post-Reformation hood-moulded window, and traceried east window. The new church at Grindleton, dedicated to St Ambrose (Listed Grade II), was built in 1805 and consecrated in 1809 (http://www.imagesofengland.org.uk/Details/Default.aspx?id=183271&mode=adv; Urban 1822, 106). The St Ambrose Parish Church 150th anniversary pamphlet (Grindleton Parish Council 1955) adds little to what is already known, besides a few anecdotes, which are not relevant here. A date-stone re-used in or near the gate to St Ambrose’s, variously described as of 1702 with the initials RH and RA (Ainsworth nd a) or 1709 (Grindleton Parish Council 1955, 12) probably refers to the later chancel. Ainsworth says that “if my information is authentic, the present church was built with the stones of the old church practically”, suggesting that pre- Conquest or medieval architectural elements of the old chapel might also survive, re-used.

Fig 3: Charles St Clair’s 1823 sketch of Grindleton Old Chapel, demolished in 1804 (LRO DDPD 22/10), with enlargement of door arch detail (R). 2.12 The Cherry Hall site: the manuscript tithe map (1848) and apportionment schedule of 1846 (LRO PR 3031 /4 / 3) shows that the owner of the Cherry Hall site (no. 15) was John Dixon, and the occupier John Scott, who had a ‘cottage and garden’ 38 perches in extent, with 3d per annum tithe being payable to the landowner. This was Dixon’s only property in Grindleton, and it has not been

possible to identify him in any earlier or later documents. It is possible that the cottage/house on the tithe map was the older part of the present Cherry Hall, since this is the name given on the OS (1850) map, surveyed only a year later in 1847, though the footprint of the house in 1850 appears to differ, being set (apparently) farther back from Main Street on the OS map. The 1884 and 1909 editions of the OS 1:2500 scale maps show the house much as today, excluding the recent rear extension. No buildings are shown on any of these maps on the site of the proposed development. 2.13 No primary or secondary documentary reference has been found to indicate the origin of the name “Cherry Hall”, and no orchard is shown on this site on the tithe map of 1846. It is however, presumed to refer to there being cherry trees there; the remaining specimens have been studied by a specialist and are considered to be both recent and not worthy of preservation. The former jam- making factory (now Bramble Croft, on the west side of Main Street, opposite Lower Chapel Lane; CAA, p.15, and modern interpretative map, signed ‘CMH’, in village file, Clitheroe Library) serves to demonstrate the fame of Grindleton – recorded in oral history - for damson jam (Mr S. Cherry, pers. comm.), but the fruit trees used appear to have been scattered around the village, rather than being in larger orchards. For more than half of the nineteenth century and the first decade of the twentieth, the resident of Cherry Hall, Thomas Scott (1833-1913) was a respected bee-keeper who claimed to have first become interested in bees at the age of three (Anon 1913), but the house seems already to have acquired its name before his birth. 2.14 Census records 1841-1901: from the census records and a newspaper article, it can be confirmed that Cherry Hall remained in the tenancy of John Scott and his children from at least 1841 until at least 1913. In 1841, when the street was called Town Gate (Old Norse gata ‘road’, as in Galgate, nr. Lancaster; Mills 1976, 86), the tenants were John Scott (aged 35, N.B. ages were given to nearest 5 years in this census; a hand loom cotton weaver), his wife Tabitha (30), and children Ann (10), Thomas (8), Margaret (6), Elizabeth (4), Helen (1) (The National Archives HO 107/1321/14, f5). In 1851, John is shown as aged (accurately) 45, Tabitha is 40, and Ann (20), was now a power loom weaver, cotton, and Thomas (18, ditto, of silk). Margaret is not mentioned, and had probably died (parish registers, available on microfiche, have not been researched). She had been named after her grandmother because, in April 1849, John Scott of Grindleton is named as the son and heir of Margaret Scott (d. 15 Dec 1846) in her administration bond – i.e. she died intestate (LRO WRW/A 182 / 64). In 1851, Elizabeth (14) is already a weaver of cotton, as is Ellen (11, not Helen), and there are three younger children, Jane (9), John (6, scholar), and Richard (3) (TNA HO 107/2256, f61). 2.15 Cherry Hall is named in the 1861 census schedule. John Scott is now a cotton and silk weaver, and all the children are now in weaving occupations (TNA RG 9/3086; Grindleton p.15). John Scott Snr. is not shown in 1871, and so had probably died. Tabitha (now 65) is described as a housekeeper, and her son Thomas a gardener; Ellen and Richard are still cotton weavers, but John Jnr. (25) is a stone cutter (TNA RG 10/4163, Grindleton p.10). Tabitha and the four unmarried children are still at the house in 1881, and John and Richard (whose age is given incorrectly) are now both ‘stone-cutters, quarry’ (TNA RG11/4171, f45). In 1891, Cherry Hall is again named; Tabitha has presumably died, because Thomas (aged 57, gardening labourer) is head of household, living with his brother Richard, still a ‘quarry labourer stone’ (TNA R12 / 3387, f39). In 1901, Thomas (68) is still resident, and is described as ‘gardener’, with ‘own account’ inserted under employer. His sister Ellen (60), a spinster, now shared the house (TNA R13 / 3892, f65). The 1911 census for this area is not yet available through this portal. 2.16 Remarkably, both an obituary and a photograph of Thomas Scott survive (Anon 1913). He was a respected amateur bee-keeper (photo: report cover), who related that there had been as many as

150 hives in Grindleton earlier in his lifetime. He was also the village pinder (keeper of the pinfold, which was situated c. 140 metres north of Cherry Hall) until at least 1896. The pinder was an important local official, usually employed by the parish council, who rounded up lost cattle, and fined their owners when they claimed their animals. Ainsworth (nd a) says that “formerly there was a system of tallies in use by the pinder; these were notched sticks cut down the centre, one half being retained by the pinder and the other half by the owner of the cattle.” 2.17 No pre-1841 evidence of tenure for Cherry Hall has been located, but R. Lang’s 1765 MS map of ‘Grindleton Town’, in his survey of the lands of Edward Parker, esq., of Browsholme (LRO DDB 84 / 1, plan XVI) shows a building on the site (though not owned by Mr Parker), orientated parallel to Main Street (Fig 4), so Cherry Hall probably replaced an earlier house. Also, a family called Scott had had a long association with Grindleton. On 27 Oct 1777, Henry Fidler of Sawley, innkeeper, surrendered to John Scott of Grindleton, yeoman, in the Slaidburn manor court a ‘house, garden, orchard, barn, shop, near Grindleton Cross, in tenure of John Carter, shoemaker’ (LRO DDX 54 / 60). Sixteen years later, on 28 Oct 1793, John Scott of Grindleton, yeoman, mortgaged to Robert Wignall of Grindleton, yeoman, Cross House in Grindleton ‘and two other cottages or dwelling houses lately erected and built by the said John Scott the elder, and situate in Grindleton’, in the possession of Robert Pinder and Thomas Dewhurst (LRO DDX 54 / 25). A yeoman was a tenant or freehold farmer of substantial means; it is possible, but not certain that this was the father or grandfather of John Dixon’s 1848 tenant. The site of Grindleton Cross, in the centre of Main Street c. 100 m SSE of Cheery Hall, can be identified on the 1765 map (Fig 4, arrowed), though it is not shown on the 1848 tithe or early OS maps. Cross Fold – a lane leading east from Main Street – and Cross House (see Fig 2), on Back Lane, still exist. The 1765 map is the earliest located for the town, though The National Archives at Kew hold a series of maps, dated c. 1595, of Grindleton Moor (see Sources located but not seen).

Fig 4: Extract from MS map of Grindleton in Parker survey of 1765, showing location of Grindleton Cross (LRO DDB 84 / 1, plan XVI). 3. WALK-OVER SURVEY of proposed development site and vicinity 3.1 Working in a clockwise direction from the junction of Main Street and Higher Chapel Lane, the pair of outshuts behind Cherry Hall (numbered 1 on Fig 5), which the developer proposes to partly remove (north half only) to improve vehicle access to one of the new cottages, are shown on the c. 1884 OS 1st edition 1:2500 map, but not on the OS (1850) 1st edition 6 inch, or 1848 tithe map. Cloaked in ivy, as they are (Figs 6 and 7), they might easily go unrecognised, and – whilst less visually significant than the two-storey free-standing outbuilding at the SW corner of the

Cherry Hall site (No. 9 on Fig 5; from around the same date) are nevertheless part of a recurring theme around the village. The curving wall forming the parking access is modern and not significant.

Fig 5: OS (1884) 1st edition 1:2500 map, overlain (some distortion) onto current OS map (screenshot of Lancashire County Council MARIO website). Neil Archaeological Services OS Licence: No. 100045377. 3.2 Around half way up Higher Chapel Lane, on the S (Cherry Hall) side, a linteled void (No. 2 on Fig 5), which extends below ground level (Fig 8) may be part of a drainage sough, which is possibly still functioning, and may run across the lane and/or under the Cherry Hall development site, but of unknown date. At the back of the feature is a sheet of recent asbestos concrete. 3.3 The gate pier (Figs 9 and 10) at the NW corner of the Cherry Hall plot (No. 3 on Fig 5) is built of machine-made Wombwell brick, partly rendered, and is probably early twentieth-century in date. Whilst not significant in itself, there are no extant examples close-by to indicate what kind of gate-post of pier might have preceded it. The MARIO map (Fig 5, no. 4; not shown on OS 1972) shows a modern building close to the gate-pier which was probably an insubstantial detached garage or shed, of which there is now no obvious trace. Walls within the E end of the garden (Fig 12) are post-1972, and not significant. A mature tree has caused a c. 3 metre stretch of the mortared E boundary wall to collapse (Figs 9 and 11). The tithe map (Fig 1) and OS maps of 1850 and 1884 (Fig 5, no. 5) show a building at the junction of Back Lane with Higher Chapel Lane, within the field now called Higher Stone Hill, which is no longer extant, though the boundary wall was not studied closely for blocked openings (entrances, windows, etc.). The field is called Hey Wife Croft in the tithe schedule (ref no. 130) and was owned by the executors of the late Thomas Altham, and occupied by Thomas Oddie). Because of the dense ivy coverage, it is difficult to get a clear idea of the typical construction of the extant boundary walls (Fig 5, no. 6), but they appear to be lime-mortared, slobber-pointed, and (in the few places where coping survives, mainly in adjacent plots) with a very rough coping of thick flat stones, either not projecting at all or very slightly projecting to the Back Lane side. 3.4 The 1884 OS map (Fig 5, no. 7) shows a well, on the E side of Back Lane, within a widened part of the lane. This is not shown on the 1909 or later maps, and the area is now extremely overgrown (Fig 14). A stone drainage channel running across the lane is extant slightly farther S, conceivably an overflow from the well. 3.5 The SE boundary of the Cherry Hall plot (no. 8 on Fig 5; Fig 15) appears to comprise only of trees and shrubs, with no remnants of a wall visible. The substantial two-storey outbuilding at the

SW corner of the plot (no. 9 on Fig 5; Figs 16 and 17; not known whether in the applicants’ ownership) is an important visual element both in the streetscape - being an unaltered structure of post-1850 but pre-1884 date - and in so far as it could partly screen the appearance of the new cottages from Main Street.

Fig 6 (L): Cherry Hall outshuts (No. 1 on Fig 5), looking SW, and Fig 7 (R) looking East. Scales 2 m

Fig 8 (L): Linteled void (No. 2 on Fig 5) in Higher Chapel Lane. Scale divisions 0.5 m; Fig 9 (centre) the gate pier (No. 3 on Fig 5) at the NW corner of the site, looking into the proposed development site, scale 2 m, and Fig 10 (R) looking SE down Back Lane.

Fig 11 (L) Back Lane side of collapsed portion of boundary wall, scale divisions 0.5 m; Fig 12 (R) modern walls in E end of Cherry Hall garden, scale 2 m.

Fig 13 (L): Return in E boundary wall on Back Lane, adjacent to garden of Stonehill Cottages; Fig 14 (R) the area of widening in Back Lane. The ranging rod approximately marks the position of the well shown by the OS (1884). Scale divisions 0.5 m.

Fig 15 (L): South boundary of Cherry Hall plot; Figs 16 (centre) and 17 (R): two-storey outbuilding at SW corner of plot. 4. CONCLUSIONS 4.1 Assessment of the evidence for a pre-Conquest settlement: Douglas Moir of Lancashire County Archaeology Service (LCAS) has previously stated (pers. comm.) that “the –ton ending [of the place-name], village morphology and street names (e.g. Back side and Top of Town) [to the north of Cherry Hall, higher up the hill] could be seen as indicators of the limits of a medieval or early post-medieval settlement”. The limits of the Conservation Area accurately reflect this. The CAA (p. 8) is also correct in asserting that “if it is a Saxon planned village, its importance must have been eclipsed by the Norman Conquest, and the siting of the court and castle at Clitheroe.” However, since no previous development-led or research-led archaeological work is known to have been undertaken in Grindleton, it is a matter of speculation as to whether any buried pre- Conquest archaeology survives and, as stated above, the nucleated village plan is more likely dto date from a century or so after the Conquest. The published and manuscript cartographic evidence, from the 1765 Parker of Browsholme survey to the OS 1850 and 1884 maps, clearly demonstrate that the ‘town’ centre – represented by the cross in the middle of Main Street, destroyed between 1765 and 1850 - was c. 100 metres to the SE of Cherry Hall. The St. Clair drawing of the chapel demolished in 1804, and the continued existence of the two lanes leading to it, represent evidence for the chapel’s early date and limits to the settlement. It is possible that this was only a chapel of ease for the earlier St Helen’s Church, Waddington (c. 1435), since the Grindleton parish registers begin late (c. 1744) http://www.lancashire.gov.uk/corporate/web/?siteid=4528&pageid=30844&e=e), but this may be an accident of survival. Rev’d T. D. Whitaker (1878) makes scarcely any mention of Grindleton in his History of Craven. 4.2 The Archaeological Research Framework for North West England: the ‘Framework’ is part of an England-wide initiative, sponsored by English Heritage but written by a diverse range of archaeologists. In the NW Resource Assessment, Rachel Newman (2006, 97-9) demonstrated the challenges of recognition of post-Roman settlement on Romano-British sites, and of identifying and dating post-Roman rural settlement. In the Research Agenda volume, Newman and Brennand (2007, 81-4) open the Early Medieval chapter by saying that it “... is perhaps the most challenging of all those eras defined by archaeologists, other than those at the very beginning of human activity in Britain.” A number of factors conspire to make “these vital 700 years ... even more under-represented in the archaeological record of the region than they are in the country as a whole.” Among nearly 60 potential and ongoing initiatives for this period alone, Newman and Brennand (2007, 84), recommend:  “Examine, wherever possible, presumed centres of early medieval activity, particularly the nature of surviving archaeological deposits, coupled with a detailed programme of dating. These might include settlements with churches producing early sculpture, or medieval estate centres re-occupying Roman sites.”

The theme of the need for radiocarbon dating on early medieval sites, to make up for the general lack of closely-dateable artefacts, and refine the chronology of those artefacts recovered, is common to almost all of the initiatives proposed in the Early Medieval Agenda. 4.3 Considering the somewhat scathing views expressed about lack of fieldwork, and the prevalence of unpublished excavations, relating to the post-Conquest development of nucleated settlements throughout the North West (para 2.2 above), few of the medieval period Framework agenda initiatives specifically relate to this aspect of the historic environment (C. and Richard Newman 2007, 101), with the possible exception of:  “Study of how dispersed settlement evolved across a township/manor, related to other settlements and accessed the exploitable resources of their environs. A range of techniques, particularly paleoenvironmental sampling of landscapes and selective excavation, should be encouraged.  Landscape-based surveys should be undertaken at various levels of historic land holdings and divisions such as the honour, manor, and township, to test the underlying hypothesis of both county-based Historic Landscape Characterisation and Roberts’ and Wrathmell’s (2002) national analysis of settlement patterns.” 4.4 Whilst the proposed development site at Cherry Hall may, on the one hand, be seen as being set back far enough from Main Street to be less than likely to preserved below-ground pre-Conquest archaeology, it is undoubtedly very close to Higher Chapel Lane, which itself has significance from the Norman period, if not earlier. 4.5 On this basis, LCAS may wish to review their 2010 decision to make a ‘no comment’ reply to the application. They could recommend to RVBC that a mitigation strategy (e.g. pre-determination evaluation – e.g. trial trenches - and/or a watching brief during groundworks) be implemented, rather than that the application be refused on archaeological or heritage grounds. This would ensure that there was positive benefit from the development, not only in the affordable housing that it would create, but by helping to advance the archaeological research agenda, for making which decision the parish and RVBC could take credit. Such a programme, which would have to be funded by the developer, would be done to an LCAS specification, and a written scheme of work from an archaeological contractor, and would include post-excavation reporting and, if appropriate, specialist assessment of artefacts and ecofacts (e.g. animal bone, palaeoenvironmental evidence), and radiocarbon dating of a series of samples, if suitable materials were found. 4.6 If planning approval is given, and an archaeological condition applied, this should embrace limited further desk-based assessment, including more thorough study of the Lancashire Historic Environment Record (HER) for the vicinity, and the records of the Portable Antiquities Scheme should be checked for early medieval metal detectorist and other artefact find-spots in and around Grindleton. 4.7 The proposed development offers some opportunities to conserve, repair, and maintain heritage assets within the Grindleton Conservation Area, specifically the road surface of Higher Chapel Lane, the path surface of Back Lane, and the boundary walls to both of these, as far as these are within or immediately adjacent to the bounds of the proposed development. 4.8 The CAA (p. 16) says: “Back Lane itself is an unadopted road, which in places resembles a footpath passing between field walls and high hedges”. Under the heading Opportunities, the CAA (p.18) says “Back Lane could be a more attractive footpath and bridleway if better maintained: parts are currently overgrown, potholed and rutted, and parts have historic cobbles that are in

danger of deteriorating without maintenance.” Also “Greater use might be made of the footpaths leading ... along Back Lane and eastwards from Back Lane if the paths were kept clear of vegetation and rubbish, and were better signposted. The village already has a Heritage Trail concentrating on the core of the village, and it would be good to supplement this by creating a circular walk that takes in the brook, fields and church around the village.”

BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary sources Clitheroe Library (Local Studies) Grindleton village file, Bib Id 353926, Folder containing photocopied maps, leaflets, newspaper articles, and book extracts.

Grindleton photographs folder.

Lancashire Archives, (formerly Lancashire Record Office), Bow Lane, Preston, PR1 2RE Note: Lancashire Archives are now closed to the public, during engineering works, until the end of October 2011 DDB Parker family of Browsholme DDB 84/1 Survey and plans of Edward Parker's lands in Browsholme, ..., Grindleton, Waddington, ... and Chapel Town in Yorkshire, and Chipping in Lancashire. By R. Lang, 1765

DDPD Pedder Muniments DDPD 22/10 Sketch-book of Charles St. Clare, 1804-1835 Higher Brockholes, Altham Waddington, Grindleton (old chapel 1823, taken down 1804), Heysham, Whalley, Slaidburn, Bailey, Wycollar, Cuxton, Broughton, Kirkland, Lytham, Woodplumpton, Chorley, Chipping, Whitewell and Turton.

DDX 54 Misc deeds, Capt. F. B. Mitchell collection DDX 54/25 Mortgage: for £100: John Scott of Grindleton, yeoman, to Robert Wignall of Grindleton, yeoman -- Cross House, etc. in Grindleton (and see DDX 54/60) … and two other cottages or dwelling houses lately erected and built by the said John Scott the elder and situate in Grindleton … in possession of Robert Pinder and Thomas Dewhurst, 28 Oct. 1793

DDX 54/60 Surrender in manor court of Slaidburn: for £80: Henry Fidler of Sawley, and Elizabeth his wife, innkeeper, to John Scott of Grindleton, yeoman -- house, garden, orchard, barn, shop, near Grindleton Cross, in tenure of John Carter, shoemaker, 27 Oct. 1777

DDX 59/1 "A Survey of Stonyhurst Estate situated at Aighton, ... and Little Bowland, in the County of Lancaster. Likewise at Grindleton, ... and Crickle, in the West Riding of the County of York, belonging to Edward Weld, Esq. By John Sparrow, Land-Surveyor in Hammersmith, Middlesex." 1774

PR 3031/4/3 Grindleton tithe apportionment, 1846 and Map of the township of Grindleton constructed for the tithe commutation, by S. A. Dawson, 1848

WRW/A Western Deaneries of the Archdeaconry of Richmond (Amounderness) WRW/A 182/64 Administration bond for Margaret Scott, Grindleton, Mitton, Yorkshire “Know all men by these presents that we John Scott of Grindleton in the parish of Mitton in the county of York, weaver, and William Waterworth of Preston in the Parish of Preston in the county of Lancaster, glazier, and Christopher Wood of Preston in the parish of Preston in the county of Lancaster, weaver, are holden … The condition of this obligation is such that if the within-bounden John Scott, natural and lawful son , next of kin, and administrator of all the singular goods chattels and credits of Margaret Scott of Grindleton in the parish of Mitton in the county of York within the archdeaconry of [blank] in the Diocese of Ripon, widow, deceased, who departed this life intestate on or about the fifteenth day of December in the year of our lord [1846] ... do make or cause to be made a true and perfect inventory of all and singular the goods … of the said Margaret Scott … on the 25th April 1849”

The National Archives, Kew, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 4DU (researched via http://www.thegenealogist.co.uk/ website) 10-yearly national Censuses 1841 HO 107 / 1321 / 14, f.5 1851 HO 107/2256, f61r and v 1861 RG 9/3086; Grindleton p.15; folio no. not shown 1871 TNA RG 10/4163, Grindleton p.10; folio no. not shown 1881 TNA RG11/4171, f45 1891 TNA R12 / 3387, f39 1901 TNA R13 / 3892, f65

Cartographic sources OS, 1850 1:10,560 [6 inches : 1 mile], County Series: Yorkshire Sheet 182, 1 edn, surveyed 1847, Southampton: Ordnance Survey (digital copy courtesy of Lancashire Place-Names Survey)

OS, c. 1886 1:2500, County Series: Yorkshire Sheet 182.3, 1 edn, re-surveyed 1884, Southampton: Ordnance Survey http://mario.lancashire.gov.uk/agsmario/

OS, 1909 1:2500, County Series: Yorkshire Sheet 182.3, 2 edn (rev. 1907), Southampton: Ordnance Survey (copy in LRO)

OS, 1972 1:10,560 [6 inches : 1 mile], National Grid Series, Ordnance Survey (digital copy courtesy of J. Hadfield)

Secondary sources Ainsworth, R., [no date a, c. 1930] Grindleton village, Accrington Observer and Times, [date not recorded] [photocopy, Grindleton village file, Clitheroe Library]

Ainsworth, R., [no date b, c. 1930] Folk-lore of Grindleton, Accrington Observer and Times, [date not recorded] [photocopy, Grindleton village file, Clitheroe Library]

Anon, 1913 A well-known bee-keeper: death of Mr Thomas Scott of Grindleton, The [?Clitheroe] Times, Fri 11 April 1913 [photocopy, Grindleton village file, Clitheroe Library]

Brennand, M., Chitty, G., and Nevell, M (eds), 2006 The Archaeology of North West England: an archaeological research framework for North West England. Vol 1. Resource assessment, Archaeology North West, 8 (Issue 18), Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers, English Heritage, and the Council for British Archaeology North West

Brennand, M., Chitty, G., and Nevell, M (eds), 2007 Research and archaeology in North West England: an archaeological research framework for North West England. Vol 2. Research agenda and strategy, (Archaeology North West, 9 (Issue 19), Association of Local Government Archaeological Officers, English Heritage, and the Council for British Archaeology North West

Ekwall, E., 1940 The concise Oxford dictionary of English place-names, 2 edn, Oxford: Clarendon

Greenwood, M., and Bolton, C., 1955 Bolland forest and the Hodder valley: a history, Rawtenstall, privately publ (repr Staining, Blackpool: Landy, 2000)

Grindleton Parish Council, 1955 A parish book of Grindleton and Sawley: prepared during the one hundred and fiftieth year of the parish church of St. Ambrose, London: Home Words

Higham, M. C., 1985 Pre-Conquest settlement in the Forest of Bowland, in Baldwin, J., R., and Whyte, I. D. (eds) The Scandinavians in Cumbria, Edinburgh: Scottish Society for Northern Studies, 28-41. Reprinted in Crosby, A. G. (ed.), 2007 Of names and places: selected writings of Mary Higham, Bristol: English Place-Name Society and Society for Name Studies in Britain and Ireland, 149-63

Higham, N. J., 2004 A frontier landscape: the North West in the Middle Ages, Macclesfield: Windgather Press

Kenyon, D., 1991 The origins of Lancashire, Manchester: Manchester University Press

LUAU, 1998 Lancashire extensive urban archaeological survey: assessment report, unpublished report for Lancashire County Archaeological Service, Jan 1998, Lancaster: Lancaster University Archaeological Unit (copy held by Lancashire County Archaeology Service)

Mills, D 1976 The place-names of Lancashire, London: Batsford

Newman, C., 2006 The medieval period resource assessment, in Brennand et al, 115-44

Newman, Rachel, 2006 The Early Medieval period resource assessment, in Brennand et al, 91-114

Newman, Rachel, and Brennand, M., 2007 The Early Medieval period research agenda, in Brennand et al, 73-94

Newman, C., and Newman, Richard, 2007 The Medieval period research agenda, in Brennand et al, 95-114

Roberts, B. K., 1990 Back lanes and tofts, distribution maps and time, medieval nucleated settlement in the north of England, in Vyner, B. (ed) Medieval rural settlement in the North East of England, Durham: Architectural and Archaeological Society of Durham and Northumberland Research Report 2, 107-25

Roberts, B. K., and Wrathmell, S., 2002 Region and place: a study of English rural settlement, London: English Heritage

Shaw, R. C., 1956 The royal forest of Lancaster, Preston: Guardian Press

Smith, A. H., 1961 The place-names of the West Riding of Yorkshire, part 6 East and West Staincliffe and Ewcross Wapentakes, English Place-Name Soc, 35, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

‘Urban, Sylvanus’ (pseud. of Nichols, J. and others, editors), 1822 Rev. Thomas Dunham Whitaker, LLD, FSA [obituary], Gentleman’s Magazine, 92, Feb 1822, 105-07 http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=NUrvQ5oAZ4kC&pg=PA106&lpg=PA106&dq=grindleton+old+chapel&source=bl&ots=RxtUY4h5wL&sig=JJEhdaLR US27QrRH38wlNI_dfRE&hl=en&ei=K5zqTZHiBYHQhAe45aC6Bg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CC8Q6AEwBDgU#v=onepage& q=grindleton%20old%20chapel&f=false

Whitaker, Rev. T. D., 1878 The History and Antiquities of the Deanery of Craven, 3 edn, London

Sources located but not seen Primary sources Lancashire Archives, Bow Lane, Preston, PR1 2RE Note: Lancashire Archives are now closed to the public, during engineering works, until the end of October 2011

DDX 54 Misc deeds, Capt. F. B. Mitchell collection DDX 54/5 (1607) to /39 (1846-7), re. Grindleton DDX 54/7 Probate copy of will of Thomas Altham of Grindleton, yeoman -- to younger children Thom, Chris. and Dorothy £40. Messuage in Grindleton called Willfrids, and barn, turfhouse and stable, 2 gardens, croft, and closes of "oxgang or rodd Land" called the Meanehicklifs, Great Hickliffs, Oldhills, Fearnhickleheg, Radmorehole, Radmores, Chappell Ing, and Croft (12ac. of rodd land); also messuage in Grindleton in tenure of Timothy Taylor (1r.); also 3ac.3r.24f. of new improvement on Grindleton Fell; also parcel at the lesser end of the Greenlands (32f.); also closes called the Greenlands and Lower Cowley meadow (2½ac.14f.), all to John Horner, whitesmith, and George Horner, husbandman, both of Grindleton, in trust for maintenance of younger children, then to son and heir Richard. Executor, father Richard. Dated 3 Jul. 1724. Seal.

MCL, acc 6517 Grindleton Wesleyan Methodist Chapel.

PR 3038 Grindleton, St Ambrose (Mitton), Yorkshire; Diocese of Bradford (C = Christenings, M = Marriages, B = Burials, BT = Bishop’s Transcripts, MI = Monumental Inscriptions) C 1744-1875 M 1844-1847 B 1805-1812, Orig reg PR 3038 C 1744-1875 B 1805-1812 Orig reg, Microfilm PR 3038/1/1-3 C 1744-1875 M 1844-1847 B 1797-1812 Copy reg, Microfiche PR 3038 C 1744-1847 B 1805-1847 Copy BT, Microfilm MF 3/22 D 1800-1988 MI Microfiche Searchroom

Sheffield Archives, 52 Shoreham Street, Sheffield, S1 4SP ACM/S/537 Several rentals, bound in one, of the estates of Nicholas Shireburn in the county of York, 1719 and others without date. Relate to Wigglesworth, ... Grindleton, etc.

Yorkshire Archaeological Society, Claremont, 23 Clarendon Road, Leeds, LS2 9NZ MD 102 Pudsay collection, deeds and miscellaneous items Relating to family property in Rimington, Bolton, Bolton by Bowland, Grindleton, in West Yorkshire, and places in Cheshire, County Durham, Lancashire, Lincolnshire, Northumberland, and Sussex, 12th to 19th centuries

MD335 / 1 Collection of Harry L. Bradfer-Lawrence (1887-1965), land agent and antiquary MD335 / 1 / 1 / 34 / 10 Grindleton: Horner Brown estate 1643-1837 3 bundles, deeds and correspondence re. legal cases, etc. http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/a2a/records.aspx?cat=207-brad_1&cid=1-1-34-10&kw=Dixon%20Grindleton#1-1-34-10

MD335/1/4/3/14 Survey of lands in Grindleton belonging to George Horner, 1783 1 volume, survey by M. Oddie, includes at front small drawing of farm house with barn and garden; and three coloured plans showing the Fields estate, the premises in the village and the Moor Fields [Former ref: Box 29]

West Yorkshire Archive Service, Wakefield Headquarters, Registry of Deeds, Newstead Road, Wakefield, WF1 2DE Q West Riding Quarter Sessions QE 13 Land Tax QE 13 / 13 / 17 Land Tax, Grindleton, 1781-1786, 1788-1815, 1817-1832

The National Archives, Kew (among many other items relating to Grindleton generally), C 132 Chancery: Inquisitions Post Mortem, Series I, Henry III C 132 /21 / 13 Edmund De Lascy alias De Lacy. Yorkshire: Bowland, ... Grindleton, Bradford, Bowland Forest, Pontefract; Lancashire: Wapentake of Blackburnshire, etc, Chipping forest, Clitheroe.

MPBB Maps and plans extracted to extra large flat storage from records of the Exchequer MPBB 1/3 4 items extracted from E 178/2747. Plans of lands in dispute in area of Grindleton, Lancashire. To illustrate cause Thomas Coore and others, tenants of Sawley, v Robert Parker and others, tenants of Grindleton, c. 1595 MPBB 1/3/1 Plan of lands in Grindleton, Holden in Bolton-by-Bowland, Sawley and Slaidburn, showing place names, River Ribble, acreage, bridge, road. Cardinal points in border, c. 1595 MPBB 1/3/3 Plan of land at Grindleton and Champion, showing field names, rivers, houses, 'Holden improvements'. Two scale bars surmounted by dividers: about 1 inch to 30 [?rods]. Cardinal points, c. 1595

Secondary sources L.F.H. & H.S, 1991a Register of burials in the Chapelry of Grindleton in the County of York, January 9th 1813 to January 9th 1924 [2 Microfiches], Lancashire Family History and Heraldry Society

L.F.H. & H.S, 1991b St. Ambrose Parish Church, Grindleton: monumental inscriptions, transcribed by Doreen Horner et al, [Microfiche]

Nelson, G. K., 1991 To be a farmer's boy, Stroud: Sutton. Includes A Lancashire life, transcripts of a recording made by Charles Simpson, a farm worker of Grindleton (1892-1984) (In Library store room, LRO)

Whitaker, Rev. T. D., 1805 The History and Antiquities of the Deanery of Craven, 1 edn, London