Land Near Home Farm Cottage Crick Road, , , NN6 7UE

Heritage Statement: Proposed Western Fishing Lake

Mark Singlehurst, BA (Hons), DipTP

March 2019 1

1.0 Introduction: Site Location, Description and Application Background

1.1 The planning application site to which this Heritage Statement relates comprises farmland at Home Farm Cottage, Watford, near Daventry, upon which it has previously been proposed that a new fishing lake be constructed on the east side of the tree-lined brook, surrounded by five movable fishing lodges in the form of large shepherd’s huts. The relevant planning permissions are DA/2016/0161 and the approved Discharge of Conditions 3 & 9 on the same (C/2016/0161), which included a revised proposal for the shepherd’s hut design (under Condition 3) in December 2017. The site is located approximately 1 kilometre (0.6 miles) north of the settlement of Watford and off the Watford Road that links Watford and Crick. The lies approximately 900 metres (0.56 miles) to the west. The lies approximately 400 metres (0.25 miles) to the west. The railway line runs 150 metres (492 feet) to the north and east.

1.2 The applicant’s dwelling (Home Farm Cottage) is located 230 metres (0.14 miles) to the north, close to the main Home Farm building complex. The site of the fishing lake lies 70 metres (230 feet) back from the Watford Road. The land is generally level but slopes gently north east to south west. The land immediately to the east and north rises steeply. The southern and western boundaries are defined by existing field boundaries marked by mature hedgerows. There is an existing field entrance in the south-western corner of the site which in turns links to the existing access to the Watford Road. The character of the landscape surrounding the site is wholly rural and comprises land in agricultural use. The approach to the site along the Watford Road is through parkland, which was formerly associated with Watford Court, a mansion with 16th-century origins that was demolished in the 1970s. Home Farm, as its name suggests, was formerly Lord Henley’s own estate farm, approached across Watford Park via a long, straight track from the Court to the farm. There were many other farms within the wider estate, most of which were described as ‘lodges’.

1.3 This land is classified as Grade 3 (good to moderate quality) agricultural land, which is described as:

Grade 3 – good to moderate quality agricultural land: Land with moderate limitations which affect the choice of crops, timing and type of cultivation, harvesting or the level of yield. Where more demanding crops are grown, yields are generally lower or more variable than on land in Grades 1 and 2.

1.4 There are a number of protected trees in the locality, including some covered by a Tree Preservation Order within the hedgerow to the north. The mature ash tree in the south-western corner of the field within which the application site is sited is also subject to a Tree Preservation Order. According to the information held by the Council, none of the trees immediately adjacent to the planning application site are subject to an Order – and, in any event, it is not proposed to remove any trees or sections of hedgerow as part of the construction of the fishing lake.

1.5 The original planning permission proposed that the water feed for the new fishing lake would either encroach on to the course of the stream or be immediately adjacent to its course and fed via a diversion of the stream. The latest approved plans (site sections) indicate that the fishing lake would be roughly linear in shape and constructed to a consistent depth of one metre, with a flat bed. The lake would be constructed adjacent to the western field boundary, 60 metres in length and 17 metres at its widest point. The shape of the lake was kept deliberately natural. Dependent on ground conditions, the lake would be clay-lined to ensure retention of water. Existing hedgerows to the site boundaries would be reinforced with new planting where required. The field was otherwise to be left open, since this was part of the character of the area, and there was no proposal to create further enclosure. Low level planting would be undertaken in the immediate vicinity of the hardstandings for the transportable accommodation. Appropriate native aquatic and margin/riparian planting would 2 be undertaken within the extent of the fishing lake, to establish it as a natural feature and to provide habitat and biodiversity.

1.6 The current proposal involves adding a second fishing lake on the west side of the brook or stream, which would also be fed by that watercourse. It would have a similar irregular shape and meandering margins to the original proposal and would be related to the eastern lake in such a way as to suggest a single lake bisected by the tree lined brookstray. The new lake would have the same depth and flattened bed, together with matching access pathway and fishing ‘pegs’ (platforms) at the lake edge (another five positions). As with the eastern lake, a pedestrian path would link from the lake to the access drive to the south. The originally proposed eastern lake would have an area of approximately 835 square metres and an equivalent volume in cubic metres. The proposed western lake would have a larger area/volume of 1,400 square/cubic metres, giving a total of 2,235 square/cubic metres.

1.7 The scheduled remains of the 18th century landscaped gardens of Watford Court, which lie over part of the shrunken medieval village of Watford and its associated ridge and furrow cultivation, are located a few hundred metres to the south-east of the application site. The Grand Union Canal conservation area lies to the south-west. The approved eastern lake (DA/2016/0161) was not considered to affect the archaeological remains, but the proposed new lake would sit within an area of ridge of furrow, which aerial photographs show to be quite well preserved.

1.8 Ridge and furrow is a significant historic landscape feature in the district. Policy BN5 of the West Northamptonshire Joint Core Strategy Local Plan, Part 1, adopted in December 2014, is relevant. It states that development in areas of landscape sensitivity and/or known historic or heritage significance will be required to sustain and enhance the heritage and landscape features which contribute to the character of the area, including (b) significant historic landscapes, including ridge and furrow. Applicants are required to demonstrate an appreciation and understanding of the impact of development on surrounding heritage assets and their setting, in order to minimise harm to these assets.

1.9 To this end, the local planning authority has requested that this application be accompanied by a heritage appraisal and impact assessment, which should describe the significance of the heritage assets and consider the potential impact of the proposal upon the ridge and furrow and the setting of the Scheduled Ancient Monument (and ideally the canal conservation area). The Statement should demonstrate what efforts have been made to minimise the impact of development upon such features. The present Heritage Statement has therefore been prepared to address these matters.

2.0 The Scheduled Monument at Watford Park

2.1 That part of the 18th-century garden remains at Watford Court that lies over the site of the shrunken medieval village of Watford, together with its associated ridge-and-furrow cultivation, was designated as a Scheduled Monument (No. 1021465) on 21st February 2011. The reasons given for its designation included the following:

“The village was a significant component of the rural landscape in most areas of medieval . Although the sites of many villages have been occupied continuously down to the present day, many have declined considerably in size, particularly since of C14 and C15. The reasons for diminishing size were varied but often reflected declining economic viability or population fluctuations. As a consequence of their decline, parts of these villages are 3

frequently undisturbed by later occupation and contain well-preserved archaeological deposits. The significance of the shrunken medieval village remains at Watford is amplified by the adjoining ridge and furrow, evidence of an extensive medieval cultivation system which takes the form of parallel rounded ridges separated by furrows and which provided rich, well-drained land for planting crops. In the context of the settlement, the headlands of the open-field systems will provide important information regarding the layout and chronology of the agricultural regime upon which the settlement depended.

“The earthwork and buried archaeological remains of the C18 gardens, shrunken medieval village and ridge and furrow at Watford survive well. Supporting evidence in the form of earthwork survey, the mapping of parch marks and documentary and cartographic sources enables clear interpretation of the remains and attests to their national importance. As the archaeological remains have lain undisturbed beneath open parkland since the early C19, there is a high potential to inform on the nature of medieval settlement and agricultural practice and the design and structural components of the C18 formal garden. The archaeological remains of the medieval and C18 period have group value with each other and with the listed structures associated with Watford Court…”

2.2 The designated area is bounded by Watford village to the east and south, by a brook which runs to the west, and by the Long and Barleypiece Spinneys to the north and north-west. Home Farm lies some distance to the north-west of the designated area, but the locality of the application site does include several fields showing clearly visible remains of unscheduled ridge-and-furrow cultivation. All that remains of the once fine landscaped gardens and parkland that lay to the west, north and south-west of Watford Court are earthworks that indicate its formal layout and design, visible as shadows within the contours of the land on aerial photographs. They include the remains of a rectangular moated water feature, a double pond with islands and a terraced formal garden with parterres.

2.3 Watford Court itself was first built in 1568 by Richard Burnaby, for his wife Anne Woodhull, who was related to Queen Catherine Parr. The Burnabys sold the estate to Sir George Clerke of Willoughby in 1623; and his descendants sold the estate to the 2nd Lord Henley in 1836. The Henleys continued to live at Watford Court until the 6th Baron Henley died in 1962. Little is known of the history of the site, but the building that was demolished appears to have incorporated a considerable part of the 1568 house; it was certainly added to in the 17th century and greatly restored and enlarged on more than one occasion during the 19th century. Once empty, the house gradually fell into disrepair and had become derelict and vandalised by the early 1970s. Despite plans to preserve the house, by March 1971 the local Mercury & Herald newspaper reported that it stood

“…decaying and forlorn, the lead stripped from its roof by thieves, ceilings and walls ruined by damp and the whole threatened by rot. No-one has lived there since 1967 - the present Lord Henley's home is in Cumberland - and the visits of weirdies and robbers have made it a problem to the police. The whole village was delighted when Lord Henley submitted a plan to demolish the Court and erect 15 to 20 houses… But the Northamptonshire county planning authority refused to allow the demolition of Watford Court and gave permission for the erection of only six houses.” 1

Nonetheless, the house had deteriorated so much by 1975 that its demolition was allowed; on the site a number of detached houses have since been built, but the old coach house (late C17), Brockhill Lodge (1823) and various remnants of the garden and kitchen garden walls in Road, Main Road and Church Street (including gate piers) were all listed at grade II in 1968 and 1987.

1 Source: https://watfordvillage.weebly.com/the-village.html 4

Watford Court prior to its abandonment as the Henleys’ family seat; the church tower can be seen behind the trees to the right

2.4 Also listed at grade II in 2011 was Bridge No. 69 on the railway to the north-east of Watford Court (illustrated below). This is a metal and stone bridge that carries the Hanslope-- Rugby Loop Line constructed in 1877 across the north ride of Watford Park. Lord Henley (3rd Baron) is said to have influenced the bridge's design. This is known as ‘Pulpit Bridge’ because of its distinctive parapet features and also because Lord Henley was a lay rector, who is believed to have taken Rogation Services for estate workers on or near to the north ride. This is reflected in some of the bridge's design motifs and its colloquial name. In 1885, the Northington title held by Lord Henley’s great grandfather was revived when he was created Baron Northington of Watford in the County of Northampton, in the peerage of the . This title gave him and the later Barons an automatic seat in the House of Lords. Pulpit Bridge marked the point where trains would halt to take Lord Henley to and his seat in Parliament, linking Watford with world affairs. He died, aged 73, in November 1898 and was succeeded in his titles by his eldest son Frederick.2

2 Source: http://patrickbaty.co.uk/2013/02/19/lord-henley-bridge/ 5

3.0 Home Farm and Other Farms on the Watford Court Estate

3.1 Map and newspaper archive evidence strongly suggest that ‘Home Farm’ was – as its name suggests – originally Lord Henley’s own farmstead associated directly with Watford Court itself. There are a number of references in 19th century local newspapers to “Lord Henley’s Farm” at Watford and his employment of farm bailiffs to manage this farm. Old Ordnance Survey maps show the farmstead which later became known as ‘Home Farm’ directly linked via a long, straight track running north-westwards through the park to Watford Court itself (see map extract below).

Above: extract from 1884 25-inch Ordnance Survey map, showing the link between the Home Farm (top left) and Watford Court (bottom centre), with the access track highlighted in yellow

3.2 There are what appear to be two farms close to Watford Court, on the north side of Kilsby Road. The easternmost one is the modern Park House, which was occupied by William Henry Ashby in 1911, who was described as a ‘grazier’ rather than a farmer. The other group of buildings to the west of Park House, despite the presence of a walled yard and barn-like buildings next to the road, was actually built specifically to house Lord Henley’s fox-hunting hounds close to Watford Court – but far enough away to ensure the dogs’ barking was not heard from the Manor House! Kilsby Road, the road on the north side of the village, is still known locally as ‘Dog Kennel Lane’. It was probably Robert Henley, 2nd Baron Henley (1785-1841) that first brought about this name. The kennels, once thatched, have been used as a storage and farm barn in more recent years. Neither premises were used as the Court’s ‘home farm’, therefore, but rather the group of buildings at the edge of the park to the north-west. 6

3.3 As there was a large, three-storey farmhouse, associated farm cottages and farm outbuildings on the Home Farm site, it is reasonable to suppose that the farm bailiff and/or other tenant farmers would have lived on the site and that they would duly appear in the Watford parish census returns and Watford entries in the various county trade directories published frequently during the 19th century. However, unfortunately the matter is not as simple in practice: many of the earlier censuses and directories merely listed the names of the farmers and their families without giving the names of the farms on the estate. Only the most remote farms were identified. Moreover, the census returns did not always follow the same route round the parish. Some enumerators covered all the outlying farms first; others followed a logical route but started from different ends in different years.

3.4 To make matters even more complicated, in the 1861 census many of the farms were identified merely as ‘Lodge House’ or ‘Farm House’, whilst in 1871 five separate farms were all called ‘Watford Lodge’, rising to six so called in 1881. The same practice was followed in the local newspapers, where numerous ‘lodges’ occupied by different tenant farmers were consistently all identified as ‘Watford Lodge’. It could not have been a case of several families all living in the same farm house, as the census lists each lodge separately, often separated by several other properties, and until 1881 gives different acreages of land for each lodge, sometimes quite large. This situation is illustrated in detail in Appendix 1 to this Statement. It is not clear why such a confusing practice was continued for so long. Only from the mid-1880s did separate names begin to be adopted for the different farms or lodges. It was common practice in the 19th century to call the smaller farms ‘lodges’: they usually only provided a farm worker’s cottage alongside the farm outbuildings, rather than a full-sized independent farmhouse. A number of them have now disappeared; even when they were standing, they were not all named on Ordnance Survey maps.

3.5 The upshot of all this is that it is impossible to ascertain which, if any, of the ‘lodge’ farms listed in the census returns and directories was to be identified as Lord Henley’s own ‘home farm’. The name ‘Home Farm’ was not adopted until the time of the 3rd Lord Henley’s death in 1898, when this farm and some other estate property was put up for sale by auction. Prior to that, there are occasional references in newspapers to “Lord Henley’s Farm” at Watford and advertisements for new farm bailiffs. The only named bailiffs I have been able to identify from readily available archival sources are John Lowe (c. 1869-1886), his son Henry or Harry Lowe (soon sacked for embezzling funds (October 1887), W.S. Goodwood and William Robinson (1881 census), James Clarke (Kelly’s Directory for 1890) and Thomas Harvey (1891 census). Out of all these, the farms where they lived are not identified at all, except that James Clarke lived at “The Lodge”.

3.6 John Lowe was obviously greatly esteemed and valued by Lord Henley; he served as bailiff for some 17 years until his death, having previously worked as a shepherd and farm labourer at William Gilbert’s ‘Watford Lodge’ farm. When he died, Lord Henley paid for an elaborate headstone to be erected in the churchyard of SS. Peter & Paul’s Church in Watford (next to the Court). One of his sons, Henry or Harry, was presumably his father’s successor as bailiff or ‘head workman’, living at Lord Henley’s own farm (unnamed in the newspaper account, except as “Lowe’s lodge” and “Lord Henley’s farm buildings”) but sadly, he was found to have kept money given him by Lord Henley as other men’s wages and had not handed over money received for the sale of pigs. He lost his job and was sentenced to four months’ hard labour.3

3.7 On the face of it, if the ‘lodge’ farms generally only had cottage residences associated with them, the Home Farm farmhouse would seem too large to be called a lodge; nevertheless, the use of the name ‘Lodge’ to identify a farmstead appears to be common practice in this part of

3 https://watfordvillage.weebly.com/churchyard-memorials.html; Northampton Mercury, 29/10/1887 7

Northamptonshire: many other farms beyond the bounds of the Watford estate also use ‘Lodge’ as the second element in their names. The word ‘lodge’ is typically used to signify a small house at the gates of a park, or in the grounds of a large house, occupied by a gatekeeper, gardener, farm tenant or other employee. In this case, the emphasis seems to be on farmsteads, which were perhaps once all tied to large landowners’ estates, but some of which have since been sold off as individual private properties.

3.8 It is possible to eliminate a few of the lodges from the search because they were occupied for a long time by the same families and can be identified after they were eventually given individual names. For example, Thomas and Sarah Haynes can be linked to what became Rectory Farm, south- west of Watford village; the Mumfords and Whitmells occupied the remote Silsworth Lodge to the north-east; and from at least 1829 until at least 1901 the Abbey family occupied Rodmore Lodge, some distance from Watford Court to the east. The Collis family lived at Murcott Lodge (and later Bridge House Farm, Murcott) and the Tebbitts at Green Hill Farm to the south. The Paynes were associated with Farm and the Pools/Pooles with what eventually became known as Pool’s Lodge, Pool’s Covert or Covert Lodge, just north of the railway line. There were two William Gilberts who farmed at Watford during the 1850s to 1880s, one with over 260 acres and the other with around 60 acres. During 1882 to 1890, local directories refer to William Gilbert as farming from both ‘The Lodge’ and ‘The Villa’. The 1901 census had a ‘Gilbert House’ (no longer occupied by anyone with that name), but none of these names can be clearly identified on the early Ordnance Survey maps.

Above, left to right: Rodmore, Silsworth and Watford Lodges; the latter is the farm described in paragraph 3.8

3.9 Eventually, the only farm still identified as ‘Watford Lodge’ became that occupied by Robert Ashby Senior and then Junior on the West Haddon road to the north-east side of Watford Park. It was a stone farmhouse adjacent to the road, with its farmlands bisected by the road and consisting of 153 acres of pasture and arable/cropping land when it was put up for sale in July 1892. Robert Ashby’s Watford Lodge farm comprised 257 acres in the 1851 and 1871 censuses.

3.10 After the sale of Home Farm at the end of the 19th century, it became the property of Edmund Abbey Jnr. He was there, aged 41, in the 1901 census, with waggoner Charles Marlow, aged 30, occupying Home Farm Cottage. An H. Garner was also associated with Home Farm in June 1906, when he was mentioned in the Rugby Advertiser as the secretary of the Watford Cricket Club. Edmund Abbey was still at Home Farm in 1911, but by 1914 Henry Osborne Beardsmore was the farmer there. He sadly committed suicide there by drowning himself in a well in June 1924. By 1934, the farmer was Arthur Richard Allen, who remained until at least 1967. He had a herd of British Friesian cattle and won many prizes for these at agricultural shows over the years. When Allen was preparing to leave in September 1967, there was a dispersal sale of his entire Daneford herd of 92 dehorned British Friesians, plus 55 pedigree Suffolk sheep, 150 cross-bred ewes and lambs, together with numerous agricultural implements. The farmhouse was separated from its

8 associated fields and sold with just 1.25 acres of land for £11,000 in 1971 by Howkins & Harrison. A business called ‘Lydette Antiques’ was based there in 1972.4

3.11 Today, the outbuildings attached to the Home Farm farmhouse have been converted into separate private residences and the detached ‘Home Farm Cottage’ has been extended and much modernized. Neither are listed buildings. The old track leading from Watford Court to the farm has been partially obliterated by the new line of the Crick/Watford Road, which winds through Watford Park until its junction with Kilsby Road, a short distance north of Watford village. The rest is now only discernible as a faint impression on aerial photographs. The open space of the old Watford Park has been preserved, together with Long Spinney, Barleypiece Spinney, some unnamed spinneys and at least one pond. Some of the old parkland trees also survive, with groups of chestnut, sycamore and beech; and new ones have been planted to redefine the lines of the old park rides. The Jurassic Way long-distance footpath now follows the old North Ride. Old ridge-and-furrow can be seen with varying degrees of clarity to both sides of the North Ride, both sides of the modern Watford Road (further to the west) and also in the fields to the south-east of Home Farm. Still more is apparent south of Watford village and east of the M1, notably near and west of the B5385.

4.0 Surviving Ridge-and-Furrow Cultivation

4.1 Landscape Character Area 95, the Northamptonshire Uplands, is described as “one of the classic sites for deserted settlements and ridge and furrow, overlaid by a mixture of Tudor and parliamentary enclosure hedges”. This makes the area of “outstanding interest” and “vulnerable to ploughing up and unthinking damage.” Interestingly, in 1952, the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries announced special £10-per-acre “ploughing-up grants” to encourage farmers to destroy ridge and furrow fields because they were difficult to cultivate.5

4.2 The Historic Landscape Character Assessment carried out for the Regional Park in 2003 discusses the area around Watford on pages 28-29 and 133. It focuses upon Watford’s complex history of enclosure, the deserted medieval village of Silsworth, the Watford Open Field remains and the Watford Court parkland and garden remains, as well as Watford’s “shrunken village” remains. It does also mention ridge and furrow, but states that the best surviving ridge and furrow earthworks in the district are around the villages of Winwick and Thornby, as well as Cold Ashby. M. W. Beresford and J. K. S. St Joseph’s Medieval England: An Aerial Survey ( University Press, Second Edition, 1979) discusses surviving ridge and furrow near Watford on pages 37-38. It includes an aerial photograph taken in December 1968 of fields near the M1 motorway, looking west (see reproduction below, page 10). These can be identified from recent Google Earth aerial photography as the fields south of Watford village and east of the B5385, beyond the surviving parkland of Watford Park. Whilst “Much of this land has never been ploughed since enclosure”, even at that time, several of the fields seen in the photograph had had their ridges levelled by ploughing. The ridge-and-furrow fields within Watford Park and near Home Farm are not discussed.

4.3 Historically, Watford parish was made up of the three townships of Watford, Silsworth and Murcott. Anciently, the demesne of Watford (land attached to the manor and retained by the owner for his or her own use) lay mostly in one large block to the north of the manor house, with only a few furlongs laid separately elsewhere. During the 16th and early 17th centuries, Watford had a two-field

4 Evening Telegraph, 20/11/1971, 14/3/1972 5 Northampton Mercury, 8/8/1952 9

‘open field’ system, which had become four fields by 1632. Another four fields were created when half of the township was enclosed in 1664. The rest was enclosed, along with Murcott, by a Parliamentary Act of 1771.6

4.4 Watford still has extensive remains of a once larger settlement, bearing witness to its earlier form in the medieval period. The following description comes from the village’s history website:

“Settlement remains lie in two places, N.W. and S.W. of Watford Church, on land sloping west that is overlaid by the later garden remains of Watford Court. Significant traces of medieval dwellings also appear on the Kilsby Road (Dog Kennel Hill/Lane), on the road out of the current village; these consist of four or five small rectangular closes with what may be former house-sites, together with a rectangular stone building. Behind these closes, to the South, are four small paddocks, three of which have ridge-and-furrow within them. On the North side of the Kilsby Road are at least three other small closes, with slight indications of former buildings within them. In 1547, one resident, John Gyfford, farm[ed] 2000 sheep in Watford and Silsworth.

“It is possible that the site once extended further East towards the current village, but the area to the North of the road has been ploughed and only slight indications remain. On the South side, the remains of the gardens of Watford Court have obliterated all traces. No date for the abandonment of this part of the village is known, though it had certainly disappeared by 1740. The significance of the shrunken medieval village remains at Watford is amplified by the adjoining ridge and furrow, evidence of an extensive medieval cultivation system which takes the form of parallel rounded ridges, separated by furrows, and which provided rich, well-drained land for planting crops.” 7

6 David Hall, The Open Fields of Northamptonshire, Northamptonshire Record Society, 1995 (Publications, Volume 38), pages 69, 111, 357-358 7 Source: https://watfordvillage.weebly.com/early-times.html 10

4.5 ‘Ridge and furrow’ is basically an archaeological pattern of ridges and troughs, created by a system of ploughing used in Britain and Europe during the Middle Ages, typical of the ‘open field’ system of farming. This system was first adopted immediately after the Roman period and continued in use until the 17th century in some areas, as long as the open field system survived. The surviving ridges are parallel, ranging from 3 to 22 yards (3 to 20 metres) apart and up to 24 inches (61 centimetres) tall – they were much taller when in use. Older examples are often curved. Ridge and furrow topography was a result of ploughing with non-reversible ploughs on the same strip of land each year. It is visible on land that was ploughed in the Middle Ages, but which has not been ploughed since then. No actively ploughed ridge and furrow survives today.

4.6 Traditional ploughs had the ploughshare and mould-board on the right, and so turned the soil over to the right. The plough therefore could not return along the same line for the next furrow. Instead, ploughing was done in a clockwise direction around a long rectangular strip. After ploughing one of the long sides of the strip, the plough was removed from the ground at the end of the field, moved across the unploughed headland (the short end of the strip), then put back in the ground to work back down the other long side of the strip. The width of the ploughed strip was kept fairly narrow, to avoid having to drag the plough too far across the headland. This process had the effect of moving the soil in each half of the strip one furrow's-width towards the centre line each time the field was ploughed.

4.7 During the Middle Ages, each strip was managed by one family, within large open fields held in common, and the locations of the strips were kept the same each year. The movement of soil year after year gradually built the centre of each strip up into a ridge, leaving a dip, or ‘furrow’ between each ridge. In the early Middle Ages, ploughing was done with large teams of small oxen (commonly eight oxen in four pairs), and the plough itself was a large, mainly wooden implement. The team and plough together were therefore many yards long, and this created a particular pattern in ridge and furrow fields.

4.8 When reaching the end of the furrow, the leading oxen arrived first, and were turned left along the headland, while the plough continued as long as possible in the furrow (the strongest oxen were yoked at the back, and could draw the plough on their own for this short distance). By the time the plough eventually reached the end, the oxen were standing lined up, facing leftwards along the headland. Each pair was then turned around to walk rightwards along the headland, crossing the end of the strip, and they then started down the opposite furrow. By the time the plough itself reached the beginning of the furrow, the oxen were already lined up, ready to pull it forwards. The result of this was to twist the end of each furrow slightly to the left, making these earlier ridge and furrows into a slight reverse- ‘S’ shape. This shape survives in some places as curved field boundaries, even where the ridge and furrow pattern itself has vanished.

4.9 As oxen became larger and ploughs more efficient, smaller teams were needed. These took less room on the headland, and straight ploughing became easier – and easier still when heavy horses were introduced. Late Middle Ages ridge and furrow is therefore straight. Ridge and furrow cultivation is often associated with deserted medieval villages.8

4.10 The remains of ridge and furrow cultivation in the fields lying south-east of Home Farm and Home Farm Cottage, the subject of the planning application with which this Statement is associated, are not scheduled and apparently do not feature in the Northamptonshire Historic Environment Record. Searches within 500 metres and one kilometre of postcode NN6 7UE on the Heritage

8 Paragraphs 4.5 to 4.9 are adapted from the Wikipedia article on ‘ridge and furrow’. 11

Gateway website returned nil results under the HER section. A comparison of the 2010 and 2018 Google Earth aerial photographs on page 12 below (and also on page 1) shows that the ridge-and- furrow runs approximately north-south in the field west of the Crick/Watford Road, but west-east in the field between the road and the brookstray/hedgerow, continuing in the lower portion of the triangular field to the east of the brook.

4.11 The ridge and furrow can be seen to have been eroded close to the brook and field boundary on the east side, which is the proposed site for the approved eastern lake. It is a little better preserved on the west side of the brook, but even here the ridges are more pronounced on the west side of the field, near the road. Whilst there would certainly be minor loss of ridge and furrow to create the western lake, this would be quite narrow and would hug the eastern field boundary and edge of the brook, such that the better-preserved western part of the ridge and furrow would remain. Whilst any loss of historic ridge and furrow is regrettable, here the affected area is not particularly well preserved and there are still extensive remains of this type of cultivation in many of the fields to the south, west and north-west of the application site.

12

4.12 The focus for previous scholarly studies and the Scheduled Monument has been the fields to the west and south of Watford village. The ridge and furrow fields near Home Farm have been partially cut off from these since the creation of Watford Park and Watford Court’s gardens several centuries ago. To the north of the railway line, extensive ploughing has destroyed any remains of ridge and furrow in those fields, which are now the site of the wind turbines on the Watford Lodge Wind Farm. Planning permission for these was granted in 2011, but they were not erected until 2015.

4.13 The north-western boundary of the Scheduled Monument at Watford Park finishes approximately 665 metres to the south-east of the site for the proposed western fishing lake; any view towards the site of the lake from the boundary of the Monument is obscured by Long Spinney and two more distant mature hedgerows. There is no longer any ridge and furrow within that part of Watford Park that lies north-west of Long Spinney. The creation of a second fishing lake close to the approved lake would not, therefore, have any detrimental physical or visual impact upon the Monument or its setting.

5.0 The Grand Union Canal Conservation Area

5.1 The Grand Union Canal now forms a series of connected Conservation Areas straddling several district council boundaries, including South Northamptonshire, Daventry, Blaby, Oadby & Wigston and others further afield. The Daventry stretch includes , which are on the south-western boundary of the historic Watford Park, now bisected by the M1 motorway. The flight of locks is not, however, within sight of the proposed fishing lake. The canal runs about 405 metres to the west of the proposed western fishing lake near Home Farm. The trees on the east bank of the canal and three hedgerows intervene between the canal itself and the site for the proposed second fishing lake. It is not likely, therefore, that the lake could be seen from the canal; nor are the existing ridge and furrow remains in the affected field discernible from the vicinity of the canal. It may be concluded that the creation of the proposed fishing lake and disturbance of a limited area of ridge and furrow in that location would have no measurable negative impact upon the character or setting of the Grand Union Canal Conservation Area.

Site for western fishing lake

Grand Union Canal

13

Above: Watford Locks (Wikipedia)

6.0 Conclusions

6.1 As it appears very likely that Home Farm was historically Lord Henley’s own private farm on the Watford Court estate, managed by his farm bailiff(s), it is probable that the fields to the south-east of the farm buildings and farm house were once farmed in association with that farmstead, as they do not farm part of the formal, ornamental parkland further to the south-east. The ridge and furrow present in those fields is likely to be medieval in origin, however, and so was not associated with the Watford Court farm, which post-dates them by several centuries. The reason ridge and furrow has survived in this locality is that the land in question was used for pasture and grass-keeping rather than for arable, so was not ploughed. Changes to land ownership and use at Home Farm, Home Farm Cottage and the former Watford Court estate mean that the historic relationships have been lost to some extent. Given the existing planning permission for the eastern lake, the addition of a western lake would not greatly add to the changes in this landscape. Although minor loss of undesignated ridge and furrow would result, much would remain, and the opportunity for historical research would not be lost. The integrity and setting of the Watford Park Scheduled Monument and the Grand Union Conservation Area would not be harmed. The historical associations of the existing Watford Park and Home Farm, being unrelated to the creation of the ridge and furrow, would not be compromised by the loss of a small area of ridge and furrow close to the brook and field boundary.

The existing gated road through Watford Park, looking towards the Home Farm site 14