Portsmouth Harbour Hinterland Project Research Toolkit

2016

Contents

Introducon 3

Background 3 Aims 3 Assessment Framework 4 Introducon to the Assessment framework 4

Stage 1: Idenfying the asset 4 Stage 2: Researching the asset 5 Stage 3: Assessing signiﬁcance 6

Considering issues for change 8 General research guidelines 8 Introducon 8

Desk‐based research 8 Documentary sources 9 Cartographic sources 9

Aerial photographs 9 Oral history 10 Site inspecon 10

Key narrave themes and research priories 10 Delivering research and encouraging engagement 12 Promong and managing community research 12

Examples 13 Secondary published sources xx

Appendix xx

Cover Image © David Hyde hp:// www.spinnakertower.co.uk/Libraries/ Feature_Boxes/David_Hyde_winner.sﬂb.ashx

List of Tables: Table 1: Summary of assessment framework

stages

Table 2 Summary of themac groups and asset examples www.mola.org.uk Table 3 Signiﬁcance of Heritage Assets in relaon © MOLA Mormer Wheeler House, 46 Eagle Wharf Road, to the dockyard London N1 7ED tel 0207 410 2200 fax 0207 410 2201 Table 4: Key narrave themes and research prior‐ email:[email protected] Museum of London Archaeology is a company limited by guarantee ies Registered in England and Wales Company registraon number 07751831 Charity registraon number 1143574 Registered oﬃce Table 5: Research data sources Mormer Wheeler House, 46 Eagle Wharf Road, London N1 7ED

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 2

Introducon

Background yard. This has been divided according to to beer understanding the historic environ‐ themes relang to different acvies as well as ment; The Royal Navy established Portsea Island as chronological phases of development. The its main harbour and base in the 16th century. The idenficaon of heritage features within project has been kindly supported by the ex‐ Subsequently, the surrounding rural hinterland the hinterland associated with the dockyard; perse of Dr Ann Coats, Chair of the Naval was developed with an extensive supporng Dockyards Society and Dr Duncan Redford, The assessment of their significance in rela‐ infrastructure, protected by significant sea and Head of Research at the Naonal Museum of on to parcular sites, areas, structures or land defences. Much of this survives today, the Royal Navy. themes; either as standing structures, historic places or buried archaeological remains, but the signifi‐ Idenficaon of any issues for consideraon cance of these ‘heritage assets’ as parts of the to be raised at an early stage of the develop‐ Aims infrastructure of the docks is not always fully ment process. recognised. This Historic England funded pro‐ This research toolkit has been prepared for ject aims to raise awareness and understand‐ local community groups and heritage profes‐ The toolkit contains several elements. These ing of the historic influence of the Royal Navy sionals to: comprise: on Portsmouth’s hinterland. This will assist undertake further research to develop the local decision‐making, planning, development themac narrave presented in the main Research guidelines. The toolkit is primarily and management of the historic environment. project report; desk‐based and this forms the main element. There are also guidelines and ps for site Idenfy heritage features (buildings, land‐ inspecon; The project has drawn together and reviewed scape features, and monuments etc), record archaeological records, historic documents, key elements and assess their significance. A pro‐forma research sheet for known or photographs, maps and drawings, as well as potenal assets idenfied by the desk‐based Highlight heritage issues that may arise in previous studies of the survey area. The data research and where possible inspecon. The early stages of proposed development and was analysed to idenfy relevant heritage as‐ form is intended to ensure consistency and change. sets not currently recorded by the Historic to facilitate incorporaon into the project Environment Records (HERs) or Naonal Rec‐ Enable users to expand and develop under‐ database ord of the Historic Environment (NRHE). The standing of the broad themes presented in Examples produced by volunteers using the assets have been recorded in a database that is the narrave and the heritage assets associ‐ toolkit. linked to an electronic mapping ‘Geographical ated with them.

Informaon System’ (GIS) From this data, maps of the distribuon of types of heritage The toolkit provides guidelines that are intend‐ asset by theme and historical period have been ed to facilitate: produced. These have been used to create a narrave of the development of the Ports‐ Connued research on speciﬁc sites, areas, mouth hinterland, which can be aributed to structures, themes introduced in the narra‐ the presence of the Royal Navy base and dock‐ ve of the main report, with an overall view

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 3

Assessment Framework

Introducon interpretaon.

This assessment framework will: Sympathec change and development can maintain and increase the value of these herit‐ enable local community groups and individu‐ age assets as disncve elements of the land‐ als to idenfy heritage features, assess their scape. Crucially, significant features may only significance and undertake further research be revealed through assessment to inform development proposals, including buildings, enable an inial assessment for each of archaeological remains and areas, which may these stages, which can then be deepened merit more detailed invesgaon or even des‐ later as required ignaon. It can be used for all types of heritage asset, We have developed a Heritage Asset Recording whether they are ‘designated’ or not. This is Sheet so that the historic character and signifi‐ because, whilst designated heritage assets cance of a building or site can be recorded, raise the significance of historic buildings and illustrated and assessed, and then sent to the sites, they only comprise a proporon of the local Historic Environment Record. The stages features that owe their historic character and set out below will help you conduct this assess‐ development to the naval dockyard, and that ment, begin the assessment of a wider area, or contribute to the special character and disnc‐ consider key issues if you are applying for her‐ veness of the Portsmouth hinterland. Many of these features await discovery and fresh itage consent or planning permission.

Table 1: Summary of assessment framework stages

Stage Tasks 1: Idenfying the asset Establish what the asset comprises of. Consider to what extent the dockyard has inﬂuenced the presence and development of the asset.

Establish which themac group(s) the asset belongs to (its relaonship with the dockyard).

2: Researching the asset Use documentary sources to further understand the asset’s relaonship to the dockyard, in‐ cluding inﬂuences on its development.

Examine historic maps to place the asset in its surrounding context and to idenfy any changes that have occurred over me.

Where possible, conduct a visual inspecon of the site complete with photographic record.

3: Assessing signiﬁcance Consider the signiﬁcance of the asset, including amongst other things its quality of survival, illustraon of the dockyard’s history, potenal to reveal more through further study.

Stage 1: Idenfying the Asset

Idenficaon cases assets will have gone through periods of Establishing the relaonship with the dock- uses unrelated to the dock yard A heritage asset can be a building/ structure, yard an archaeological earthwork or below‐ground Establishing the themac group(s) the asset remains, or an area containing some or all of Once the asset has been idenfied, you will contributes to these things. need to consider what its historic funcon was. This will allow you to further examine The main project report introduces a number You may wish to come back to this assessment how the asset was influenced by the presence of key themes that heritage assets in the as you learn more about the asset. For exam‐ of the dockyard. In some cases the historic Portsmouth hinterland illustrate and provide ple, you may discover that the land around an funcon of an asset will be evident, such as evidence for. The text for these themes are historic building has potenal to contain ar‐ the purpose built military features in the hin‐ chaeological remains of buried structures of terland; in others its historic funcon in rela‐ based on exisng knowledge and provide a interest in addion to the features that can be on to the dockyard will be more ambiguous starng point for further research, idenfying observed above ground. and will require further examinaon. In some features associated with the and exploring the

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 4

connecons between the different themes Using the toolkit eral guidance on using maps to idenfy chang‐ associated with the naval dockyard. es to an asset and its wider seng is outlined You can now find out more about the historic in ‘mapping and library resources’. The checklist below will help you to categorise context of the asset and its relaonship to the the funcon of the asset within the specific dockyard, using the relevant part of the pro‐ Site survey themes of the project. forma recording sheet appended to the Visual site survey from publicly accessible are‐ Toolkit. The funcons of some sites and structures will as will then help you to idenfy what has sur‐ be idenfied in the descripons for listed Documentary research, using the sources vived from different phases of the asset’s de‐ buildings and other designated heritage assets, listed under each theme and in Table 4 , will be velopment and its wider seng. Historic Environment Record entries, or in an invaluable help in deepening understanding It is recommended that you take photographs documentary sources such as primary archival of an asset’s history and relaonship to the of the site, along with wrien notes to record documents, published books, and historic dockyard and how it was influenced. what you have learnt. Guidance on conducng maps. Comparison of historic and current maps (such a site survey is presented in the appendix. Once idenfied, you can then group heritage as those listed in Table 3) will help to idenfy assets into their relevant themac group, as how the asset and its wider seng has idenfied below. changed over me, and also whether any key phases in its development appear to be relat‐

Stage 2: Researching the asset ed to key developments in the dockyard. Gen‐

Themac Group Asset Examples Ship building, fing out, and ordnance Boatyards, mber yards, foundries, ropewalks, hemp fields Food Producon and Processing Farmsteads, barns, granaries, malt houses, ice houses, canning works, market gardens, mills, slaughter houses, breweries Transportaon and Communicaons Roads, railway lines, packet ships Accommodaon Houses‐ terraces for the workers, villas or private residences for naval officers. Barracks for army and naval personnel. Materials Provision Quarry pits, brick kilns, stone masons Military Funcon Forficaons and military installaons Sea Defence, Land Reclamaon, and Revetments, groynes, drainage channels Water Management Administraon and Finance Evidence of a dockyard/naval influence on civic administraon and finance in the hinterland. Retail and Markeng Specialist shops and markets. Health and Welfare New hospitals, new welfare facilies, specialist medical and social instuons Educaon Specialist schools and academies Religion and Burial Naval influence on local churches, memorials and burial grounds. Recreaon Pubs, social clubs (especially ex‐service clubs or worker’s clubs), brothels Crime and Punishment Prisoner of War camps, specialist naval prisons, parole towns Clothing Provision of specialist clothing for dockyard workers, sailors and military personnel Immigraon/Ethnicity This is ambiguous, is there any evidence for diverse populaons? Gender This is ambiguous, is there any evidence for the roles of women?

The Naonal Planning Policy Framework (2012 defines a heritage asset as “A building, monument, site, place, area or landscape idenfied as having a degree of significance mering consideraon in planning decisions, because of its heritage interest.”

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 5

Quick start to research

Useful sources for heritage designaons and sites of local signiﬁcance and interest are:

 www.HistoricEngland.org.uk/list for designated heritage assets.

 Historic maps at your local archive.

 A very useful source, which enables you to view historic maps and modern aerial photographs side‐by‐side, is hosted by the Naonal Li‐ brary for Scotland at hp://maps.nls.uk/os/6inchengland‐and‐wales/. Other sources are www.old‐maps.co.uk and hp:// project.oldmapsonline.org/about

 Modern OS maps can also be viewed at www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk, and online mapping by Google and Bing

 Useful Informaon about local heritage, including archaeology, can be found at www.heritagegateway.org.uk or by contacng your local Historic Environment Record: Hampshire Archaeology and Historic Building Record Portsmouth City HER Chichester District

Stage 3: Assessing significance proven relaonship with the dockyard, and its its curlage. contribuon to the area around it, contribute Historic character of a heritage asset and its Once an asset has been idenfied and a link to to its significance. The level of importance wider seng results from how it has the influence of the naval dockyard on the given to its significance varies on numerous changed up to the present. This is the sum of hinterland established through research, as‐ factors but, as a rule of thumb, will depend on all aributes which may include: its associa‐ sess the heritage significance of the asset in how well the physical fabric that reveals the ons with people, its visual aspects; the fea‐ itself and the significance of the asset to the significance is preserved when compared to tures, materials, and spaces associated with overall story of the dockyard hinterland devel‐ other examples. For example, a feature would its history, including its original configuraon opment. These may differ; for example a local‐ be considered of high importance if it is the and subsequent losses and changes. ly listed building may be of ‘medium signifi‐ only surviving example of its type. cance’ according to the criteria below, but may Context is used to describe any relaonship have considerably more significance in terms between an asset and other heritage assets, of its associaon with the dockyard, for exam‐ Assessing dockyard hinterland significance which may be visual or funconal. These ple it might have been built to provision a par‐ You can now assess the area around the asset relaonships can extend well beyond what cularly important material to the dockyard and how it contributes to the story of the might be considered an asset’s seng, and under contract; a connecon which is currently dockyard and the hinterland around it, using can include the relaonship of one heritage not realised by either the local authority or the the quesons posed in Table 4. asset to another of the same period or func‐ local community. on, or with the same designer or architect. Published guidelines on assessing seng will

help you idenfy the issues for managing Asset significance change within the sengs of heritage assets The Oxford City Character Assessment Toolkit ‘Significance’ lies in the value of a heritage (historicengland.org.uk/images‐books/ (oxford.gov.uk/ PageRender/decP/ asset to this and future generaons because of publicaons/gpa3‐seng‐of‐heritage‐assets/). CharacterAppraisalToolkit) provides a good its heritage interest, which may be archaeolog‐ The seng of a heritage asset is defined as introducon to assessing the character of are‐ ical, architectural, arsc or historic. Archaeo‐ ‘the surroundings in which a heritage asset is as within an urban context and recording the logical interest includes an interest in carrying experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may features that give a parcular area its sense of out an expert invesgaon at some point in change as the asset and its surroundings place. There is a rapid appraisal form and a the future into the evidence a heritage asset evolve. Elements of a seng may make a posi‐ more detailed review form, nong and scoring may hold of past human acvity, and may ve or negave contribuon to the signifi‐ the values of elements such as buildings, apply to standing buildings or structures as cance of an asset, may affect the ability to space, vegetaon/landscape, light/dark, noise/ well as buried remains. Known and potenal appreciate that significance or may be neu‐ smell and views, with an overall ‘spirit of place’ heritage assets within the site and its vicinity tral’ (HE 2015, 2). It also includes useful defini‐ score. Whilst the present project is focussed have been idenfied from naonal and local ons for curlage, character and context, on establishing connecons between heritage designaons, HER data and expert opinion. which are different to seng: assets and the key narrave themes, this guid‐ ance nevertheless provides ps on what to Table 3 will allow you to assess the contribu‐ Curlage is a legal term describing an area look out for on considering context and seng on that a building or asset makes to the histo‐ around a building (ownership, funconal of a heritage asset, which can be useful when ry of Portsmouth’s naval dockyard, and its associaon and layout, both past and pre‐ assessing significance in the present project’s place in naonal and internaonal history. This sent). The seng of a historic asset will in‐ research proforma. should help you to examine how the asset’s clude, but generally be more extensive than,

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 6

Table 3 Importance of Heritage Assets in relaon to the dockyard

Significance Explanaon Guidance Heritage Interest The asset must have a ‘heritage interest as de‐ Survey and research will help to reveal the heritage interest of an asset. scribed in the Naonal planning Policy Framework. Try preparing a simple descripon of the asset to start picking out its defining fea‐ The four types of heritage interest are: Historic, tures and the reason you think it is ‘heritage’. Next consider how the interest of the Archaeological, Arsc, or Architectural. asset provides a connecon with the dockyard or its hinterland? The interests will be the elements of the asset that Use the themes in Table 2 to consider whether the asset provides a parcular con‐ can be conserved. These may be physical, i.e. the necon with or illustraon of an aspect of the dockyard’s history. This might be structural elements of a building of architectural through its use (past or present), form, locaon, appearance or other aspect. interest, but may also be intangible and depend on knowledge of the asset – such as the connecons a With buildings it is useful to consider whether any aspect of the architecture is place provides to past people or events. parcularly related to the uses of the dockyard or its hinterland. Could further study of the asset including any archaeological remains or earthworks that may be present reveal more relang to the themes in table 2? – This is archae‐ ological interest. Value ‐ Age Is the asset parcularly old or does it relate to a Consider what remains to be seen dang from any or each of these periods and parcular period of importance for the dockyard, whether surviving features of this period relang to the dockyard are common or such as the periods of 19th and 20th century wars not. Generally the older it is the more important its age is to its significance as when the dockyard was expanded or forfied? fewer examples of its type will survive (i.e. it is rare). However, even some recent features may have been ‘one‐offs’ and so provide an important representaon of Periods that may relate to different areas of inter‐ est include the dockyard’s history in this period (e.g. the Goport ‘diving tower’).

Pre‐1815: The early period of the dockyard’s de‐ velopment, up to and including the Napoleonic How well does the asset help to illustrate the changes that were taking place in and wars. Surviving assets are extremely rare. around the dockyard, as well as its relaonship with the hinterland at this point? 1815‐1914: The period of the naval arms race between the ‘Great Powers’ leading up to the First World War. This includes many technical innova‐ ons, the development of the Britain’s naval em‐ pire and the increasing forficaon of the dock‐ yard through construcon of the Palmerston ‘follies’ 1914–1945: Including the two World Wars, and the development of aerial and submarine warfare and defence. 1945 < Including the period of the Cold War and demilitarisaon. Value ‐ Integrity Is the asset parcularly complete or unaltered as While many relavely recently created heritage assets may be well preserved or an example of its type, or does it include a number unaltered, it is likely that older ones will have seen a degree of change over me. In of elements of different date that reveal adapta‐ older heritage assets a high degree of integrity will be an important element of ons over me which help to reveal the story of their significance. the dockyard and its hinterland? However, it shouldn’t be forgoen that a heritage asset may have significance for the way it documents changing use over me. Consider carefully whether any alteraons you can detect represent changing uses relang to the history of the dockyard ort its hinterland. Value ‐Group Many heritage assets form part of a wider land‐ Does the asset form part of a group of assets that would be incomplete without it? scape that may contain several heritage assets Consider whether the asset has any parcular relaonship with other nearby as‐ either of a similar type or represenng comple‐ sets. mentary elements that contribute to an apprecia‐ on of the wider significance of the area. An exam‐ Whilst rarity can be important, a grouping of assets can reveal a lot about the histo‐ ple would be a group of contemporary dockside ry of a area and make an even greater contribuon to its character. structures and machinery. Parts of group may be of contemporary date and form mutually supporve elements of a landscape or could be successive replacements of a feature illustrang the development of technology to respond to a single issue over me.

Value ‐ Community Many people have lived and worked in the Ports‐ Does the asset have any parcular associaon with a community? Are these associ‐ Associaons mouth dockyard area and their involvement with ated with the dockyard or it’s hinterland or represenng a parcular aspect of its the dockyard has oen drawn them into a commu‐ story? nity of interest. The diﬀerent armed forces and Do the community sll use the asset or does it help them remember their origins or their internal divisions such as the Royal Marines contribute to their identy? and Fleet Air Arm have created communies with‐ in wider communies, who have their own places of historic interest, such as barracks, chapels and memorials. The civilian populaons of the towns surrounding and supplying the dockyards also have their own sense of identy, oen interrelated with connec‐ ons with the dockyard and its hinterland infra‐ structure.

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 7

Considering issues for change

If you are an owner, developer or an agent or made that will be publicly available or for lined in more detail in Table 5 architect working for either, the understanding archaeological recording associated with Desk-based research gained from Stages 1, 2 and 3 will help you ground works on the site develop an applicaon that complies with na‐ The research toolkit is primary aimed at desk‐ The level of recording should be proporonate onal plan policy, and also local plan policies. It based research, ideally followed up by site to the known or potenal significance of the will also help idenfy where professional ad‐ survey in the from publicly accessible areas. building and site. The most basic Historic Eng‐ vice and support, and perhaps more detailed The toolkit proforma ensures that any wrien land Level 1 survey level provides a site plan research and survey, would be helpful. notes, map extracts, photographs, etc. are cross‐referred to text and photographs. Level 2 entered in a consistent format ready for entry The objecves for sustainable development is a more detailed descripve record and as‐ onto the project database, which uses the are set out in both naonal and local planning sessment of significance, which is oen re‐ same fields as the form. Depending on the policy. The Naonal Planning Policy Frame‐ quired for sites with designated heritage as‐ management of the project data following work (NPPF) places good design, the enhance‐ sets. It will usually take between 1–3 days, compleon of the project, the proforma may ment of local disncveness and conservaon depending on the scale and complexity of the be made available as an online digital form of the historic environment at the heart of site. Levels 3 and 4 are appropriate for the that inputs directly into the project database. sustainable development and good planning. most significant buildings, Level 4 being the Adopted and emerging local development most detailed with a greater range of draw‐ The project database is a useful starng point plans embody the understanding, conservaon ings. It involves more detailed historical re‐ for further research into a parcular asset. It and enjoyment of the historic environment. search using estate, the and historic Ord‐ uses the HER and NHRE unique ID numbers nance Survey maps and usually documentary and provides a brief summary. Secon 2 of the The Naonal Planning Policy Framework sources. For further guidance see Understand‐ project report describes the nature of these (NPPF) stresses the importance of: ing historic buildings: policy and guidance for publicly accessible records; an appointment Conserving heritage assets in a manner ap‐ local authories (2006: hps:// can be made to visit the relevant HER in order propriate to their significance and pung content.historicengland.org.uk/images‐books/ to inspect the full records for a parcular asset, them to viable uses consistent with their publicaons/understanding‐historic‐buildings‐ or the informaon can be requested by email. conservaon. policy‐and‐guidance/understanding‐ The NHRE data can also be requested digitally historic.pdf/). or individual records viewed on the Pastscape Retaining and enhancing local character and website (pastscape.org.uk). The Naonal Herit‐ Provision is also made for archaeological re‐ disncveness, bearing in mind that the age List (historicengland.org.uk/lisng/the‐ mains (buried heritage assets) within the plan‐ great majority of historic buildings do not list/) has informaon on designated assets, ning system: ‘Where a site on which develop‐ fulfil the criteria for lisng, and are not iden‐ such as listed buildings and scheduled monu‐ ment is proposed includes or has the potenal fied as heritage assets. ments. These databases typically reference to include heritage assets with archaeological The more significant the heritage asset the their sources and this can be followed up with interest, local planning authories should re‐ greater the weight that should be given to its further research. quire developers to submit an appropriate conservaon and the amount of detail provid‐ desk‐based assessment and, where necessary, In terms of known heritage assets the main ed in an applicaon. Making contact with local a field evaluaon.’ (NPPF, paragraph 128). aim of the project is to aempt to determine authories is an important step, once the site whether these are associated with one or and the need for any professional help has more of the project themes and establish this been assessed. They have specific processes link with confidence, so that the significance of General research guidelines to follow for designated heritage assets and the asset in relaon to the development of the areas, and may require a more detailed level of Introducon Portsmouth hinterland is realised for future recording of buildings and archaeological fea‐ resource management ‐ one of the key aims of This secon provides a starng point for more tures which is proporonate to the known or the project. potenal significance of the asset in its seng. detailed research, and outlines the secondary and primary sources that will help you beer The HERs and NHRE are only a record of data Recording may be required: understand heritage assets associated with the from past archaeological invesgaons, sur‐ In support of a planning applicaon and to narrave themes of the project. Secon 4 of veys, chance finds, or other research carried inform the development of a scheme, once the project report provides an analysis of what out. Much remains to be discovered. Use of an inial assessment and discussion with the we know with distribuon maps and a gaz‐ the sources outlined below will help you to planning authority has idenfied potenal eeer, and how these fit into the themes we idenfy previously unrecorded assets associat‐ for change within a farmstead. have idenfied: this shows that there are few ed with the hinterland’s development and in known assets associated with any one of the similar fashion to establish their significance.  Once permission has been secured, to make key themes. a record before and during the implementa‐ There are two levels at which you can do re‐ on of the scheme. The local planning au‐ Table 4 lists the narrave themes along with search: thority may aach recording condions to a two or three suggested research priories for Secondary research uses published sources planning or listed building consent to ensure each theme. It also includes a pointer to data which are easily to hand. These must always that a record of a farmstead or building is sources for further research, which are out‐ be fully referenced so that the reader can

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 8

view the supporng material if required. They around 1840 were scrunised as part of com‐ typically comprise published histories, books, piling the project database, but a review of journals and arcles, wrien for a specific pur‐ other maps, e.g. estate maps (private land pose and where connecons with the project surveys which can be very early) and enclosure themes have or have not been made. maps (enclosure of open fields, typically late 18th or 19th century) may well prove fruiul in Primary research is ‘original’ research compris‐ idenfying other assets. Historic maps are ing a factual first‐hand account wrien by the increasing available online: original maps are researcher involved in the study. This might typically held within the county record office or entail for example scrunising postal and trade local studies centre, Brish Library or Naonal directories, census returns, trade contracts, Archives but some may be elsewhere, for ex‐ photographs, historic maps in order to idenfy ample at the Royal Marime Museum. potenal heritage assets, draw out connec‐ ons and associaons which were not previ‐ Check whether proof of idenfy is required for ously known or realised in the HERs. It takes a reader’s cket for accessing maps. It is not more me, but it can lead to enrely new and usually permied to take photocopies of excing discoveries. unique historic maps which may be damaged in the process. If you are taking digital photos Documentary and library resources of a map there may be a small charge. A good Primary documentary records, such as Postal p is to check the images while you are there trade directories, generally available online for to ensure that they are in focus, and also to the 18th century onwards, can provide an un‐ capture the area of interest but also a buffer derstanding of economic make up of an area, around it to ensure that none is missing. The for example the types of businesses there are; second best opon is tracing using good quali‐ further research may then establish whether ty permatrace although this is me consuming. these are directly linked to the presence of the Always record the name, date and reference dockyard. Census returns can provide a picture number of the maps examined, and if prinng of the social make up of an area in terms of out images write the map reference and date profession and also whether there are poten‐ on the back in pencil. Record maps viewed but al links to the dockyard. Early contracts be‐ not relevant, and maps in the collecon but tween the Royal Navy, dockyard and external not seen (somemes they are too fragile to contractors with the hinterland area can reveal take out of the archive). A p is to take a how food and materials were supplied. When printout of current mapping (e.g. 1:10,000 viewing primary records always record the Streetview) and/or the Ordnance Survey 1st name, date, archive reference number, along edion map of the area of interest and a large with brief descripon, even when the material area around it in order to help locate the area was viewed but found not to be relevant, or covered by the historic map; it can be difficult where material exists but was not viewed (e.g. to locate an area if it has changed considera‐ where it is missing or too fragile to view). bly, and having a broad covering of roads and Secondary documentary sources, such as pub‐ rivers and built up areas in a broader area can lished histories and journals provide the au‐ help with this. thor’s synthesis of original records with a rea‐ Aerial photographs soned conclusion. Secondary sources typically have an addional layer of interpretaon and Aerial photographs dang from the 1940s are should be viewed crically. Any research which normally used by archaeologists to idenfy draws upon a published source should always cropmarks, parchmarks and earthworks from reference the author, year or publicaon and the air. Cropmarks and parchmarks are the page number in the main text with a full biblio‐ result of differenal crop or grass growth graphic reference noted and compiled in a (respecvely), due to moisture variaons re‐ bibliography. In this way all text is referenced sulng from the presence of subsurface fea‐ and can be followed up in the future if neces‐ tures of possible archaeological interest. For sary. example, pits and ditches retain moisture and can lead to greater crop/grass growth, where‐ Mapping and historic map sources as buried stone walls and earthworks can lead Maps can be very useful in providing the loca‐ to stunted crop/grass growth. on of heritage assets which may or may not Air photos are either ‘vercal’ or be extant above ground. The historic Ordnance ‘oblique’ (‘specialist’). The former are taken Survey maps (from the 1860s onwards) and during general survey at high altude in lines the parish Tithe (church tax) maps from across the county with the camera poinng

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 9

directly down. The laer are taken by special relave archives. For further informaon on 5. Health and welfare aerial reconnaissance typically either to record oral history projects, please see The Oral Histo‐ 6. Educaon a specific building or group of buildings or a ry Society: ohs.org.uk/advice/geng‐started. cropmark or earthwork of archaeological inter‐ 7. Religion/burial est. Site Inspecon 8. Recreaon The main collecon is at the Historic England The research toolkit is primarily desk‐based. 9. Transport and communicaons Archive in Swindon (historicengland.org.uk/ However reconnaissance inspecons, viewing images‐books/aerial‐photos/). Vercal photo‐ assets idenfied from inial research from 10. Accommodaon publicly accessible land, recording any features graphs need to be requested via a 11. Materials provision ‘coversearch’ or your area of interest. Oblique of historic interest through photography and photographs are on open shelves and arranged notes, is a valuable enhancement. In parcular 12. Military funcon the heritage significance of above ground as‐ by grid reference (e.g. TQ2456SE). The other 13. Administraon and finance main collecon is the Cambridge University sets may only be apparent following the site Collecon of Aerial Photography visit, which will provide informaon on wheth‐ 14. Gender (geog.cam.ac.uk/cucap/about/). The relevant er the feature is sll extant, its condion, cur‐ 15. Sea defence, land reclamaon, and water HER may also have selected air photos. The rent use, likely vulnerability/threat (natural or management county or local authority will have recent ver‐ otherwise) and also the relevance and signifi‐ 16. Immigraon and ethnic diversity cal runs over the county. cance of its immediate context and seng. Secon 5.2 provides guidance on assessing 17. Crime and punishment DN Riley’s Aerial Archaeology in Britain pub‐ significance of an asset and also its context in lished by Shire Archaeology provides a good terms of associaon with the dockyard hinter‐ 18. Other short introducon to idenfying archaeological land. Following the project data analysis and the features from the air. As with other research wring of the narrave, and in consultant with material, always keep a reference of the pho‐ The appendix includes a copy of the MOLA site the project experts and Historic England, a tograph (library number, sore, frame, year). visit guidance sheet, which is used for carrying number of research priories for each theme Laser copies can be obtained for a small fee. A out desk‐based assessments and includes have been idenfied. These are set out in Ta‐ p is also to make a photocopy of the image, some general ps. Also included is a generic ble 4 below. Whilst these are not intended to annotate with a north arrow, circle the feature site visit risk assessment sheet. Site visits are be proscripve, it does provide a steer on of interest, and in the margin off the image normally safe and the risks low and the re‐ where further research by volunteers and local sketch the cropmark based on the original searcher may feel it unnecessary. It neverthe‐ community groups would perhaps best be image. This will make it much easier to idenfy less encourages the researcher to think about focussed. later on from the laser copy. If possible take the health and safety aspects and considering printouts of current mapping (e.g. 1:10,000 potenal risks. Risks that can be more than Table 5 and Table 6 include a list of useful Streetview) and sketch plot the cropmark on ‘low’ might be entering a disused building, sources intended to act as a start for research that. Generally, photographs of a smaller scale confined space, or foreshore work. It is the but it is likely that during the source of the than 1:10,000 are not useful for idenfying sole responsibility of the researcher to ensure research other relevant sources are idenfied. cropmarks. Oblique/specialist photographs, if that there is permission for access to such they cover the area of interest, oen provide areas and that they are safe. the best images. Key Narrave themes and research Oral history priories

For more modern periods, you may wish to The main project report introduces the key undertake an oral history project to document narrave themes. It sets out the current state the experiences of people in the hinterland of knowledge in terms of the publicly accessi‐ area. This can be a fantasc opportunity to ble databases – the HERs and the NHRE ‐ and idenfy the more intangible social influences provides a good starng point for further more of the dockyard. in‐depth research to try to establish further Undertaking an oral history project comprises connecons between known and possible of three stages. Stage 1, is outlining the aims, heritage assets, both buried and above ground, objecves, and researching the project. The and the development of the hinterland associ‐ beer prepared you are, the more useful the ated with the naval dockyard survey results will be. Stage 2 will be undertak‐ The narrave themes are as follows (those in ing the interviews, it is suggested that digital bold are of parcular interest to HE): recording equipment and/or video camera are 1. Ship building, fing out and armaments used to document them. Always seek permis‐ sion from the interviewee beforehand. The 2. Food producon and processing final stage of an oral history project will be to 3. Retail and markeng archive and deposit the informaon with the 4. Clothing

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 10

Table 4: Key narrave themes and research priories Theme Research priories Key data sources

1 Ship building, ﬁng out, 1a: How did the local ship yards source their materials? Census records; Archival armaments records; Local history 1b: What happened to the local ship yards’ populaons? – did they relocate, retrain? sources; Published books; 1c: Can a link between the Emsworth ship building industry and the dockyard be proved? Historic maps

2 Food producon and 2a: Develop a greater understanding of the impact the contractor state had on farming in the Archival records; historic processing hinterland. maps; published histories 2b: Which farms in parcular were supplying contractors? 2c: We know that flour was milled locally. What else was sourced locally? 3 Transport and communi‐ 3a: What impact did the restricons on Portsmouth Harbour have on other ports along the Published books; Archival caons coast? records; Historic mapping 3b: What control did the Admiralty Board exercise over the exisng infrastructure in the hin‐ terland? 4 Accommodaon 4a: Develop a greater understanding of where dockyard workers and naval officers lived e.g. Census records; Trade direc‐ specific streets and houses. tories 4b: Did the dockyard play any role in the development of new towns such as Waterlooville?

5 Materials provision 5a: Can saw pits be idenﬁed in the hinterland? Archival records; Historic mapping 5b: Can we idenfy which mber merchants and woodlands were supplying the dockyard. 5c: Other than Funtley Iron Works, where else in the hinterland area was iron provisioned – Treadgold’s? 6 Military funcon 6a: Develop a greater understanding of the relaonship between the development of the Historic mapping; Census dockyard and the military presence in the hinterland records; Published books; 6b: Can we see an intermingling between civilian and military populaons, such as marriages and births? 6c: Do examples of the Garrison Houses sll exist?

7 Sea defence, reclama‐ Aside from the development in the harbour the influence of the dockyard on this theme is not Historic mapping; on, water management well understood from the main project sources. Can examinaon of primary documentary sources or more in depth research further our understanding of the dockyard’s influence on water management in the hinterland? 8 Administraon and The influence of the dockyard on this theme is not well understood from the main project Archival records finance sources. Can examinaon of primary documentary sources or more in depth research further our understanding of the dockyard’s influence on the local economy? 9 Retail and markeng 9a: did the military presence aracted by the dockyard lessen coastal and internaonal trade? Trade directories; Published books

10 Health and welfare 10a: Can a reason for the rise of psychiatric care in the late 19th/early 20th century be iden‐ Published books; local histo‐ ﬁed? ries

11 Educaon 11a: is it possible to establish where the children of dockyard workers were being educated Census records; Archival before the invenon of state schools? records; Published books 11b. What was the nature of apprenceship in the yard, and does this have bearing on schools in the area? 12 Religion and burial The inﬂuence of the dockyard on this theme has highlighted some developments using the Census records; Parish rec‐ main project sources. The examinaon of primary sources may further our understanding of ords; Published books; Local how the dockyard’s inﬂuence on religious pracce and burial. histories

13 Recreaon 13a: Did the naval and dockyard worker's social clubs develop into a recreaonal acvity for Published histories; archival the wider public? records 13b: Did the docks inﬂuence on Portsmouth's recreaonal acvies around the harbour spread further into the town and its hinterland? 13c: Was there a rural tourist economy for dockyard workers and their families?

14 Crime and punishment 14a: Is it possible to idenfy the known receiving houses within the hinterland area? Historic maps; Census rec‐ ords; Archival records; Pub‐ 14b: Is there evidence of a parole town in the hinterland area? lished histories 14c: Did Portsmouth suﬀer more from smuggling than other ports? Were its docks a primary reason for its use by smugglers? 15 Clothing 15a: Were clothes produced locally or elsewhere? Published histories

16 Immigraon/Ethnic The influence of the dockyard on this theme is not well understood from the main project Census records; Parish rec‐ diversity sources. Can examinaon of primary documentary sources or more in depth research further ords; Published histories our understanding of the dockyard’s influence on the social makeup of the hinterland? 17 Gender The influence of the dockyard on this theme is not well understood from the main project Published histories; Trade sources. Can examinaon of primary documentary sources or more in depth research further directories. our understanding of the dockyard’s influence on the social makeup of the hinterland? Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 11

Delivering research and encouraging engagement

Managing the data an asset map that can be interrogated by click‐ historic building condion survey. It might be ing on the asset. possible to bolt the research form onto the Whilst it is outside the scope of the project to back of this survey, so that anyone going out to establish, co‐ordinate or manage community The web form can be via a link to an exisng complete a condion survey in the Portsmouth involvement in the use of the research toolkit website (local archaeological and historical hinterland area can consider links to the dock‐ and the proforma sheets so produced, this society, Historic England, the Cizan project, yard, or to the research quesons outlined in secon provides some suggesons on how this MOLA or such) or a project specific website Table 4. might be achieved whilst being mindful of can be created fairly easily using free website avoiding any significant financial outlay. soware such as Wordpress. The Toolkit could be sent to local archaeologi‐ cal sociees and history/interest groups to try The proforma sheets are designed to be readi‐ Tablets or smart phones with mobile data can and engage them in the project. With this ly incorporated into the project database, ei‐ access the online form so that data can be course of acon it would be worth holding a ther as an enrely new entry (i.e. for a previ‐ added whilst in the library, record office, or workshop session in the area to familiarise the ously unrecorded heritage asset) or by enhanc‐ even in the field on a site visit. groups with the Toolkit and the proforma re‐ ing an exisng entry by incorporang the re‐ A website/page and online database, similar to cording sheet. sults of research into the record. The most “War Memorials efficient approach, and the one that is likely to CITiZAN, the coastal and interdal zone ar‐ Online” (warmemorialsonline.org.uk) may be have a successful outcome in terms of parci‐ chaeological network is a community archaeol‐ an alternave opon, where surveyors can paon and also regarding the accuracy of the ogy project hosted by MOLA with an office at upload observaons made on the pro‐forma data, would be to minimise the stages of data Fort Cumberland with partners the Naucal toolkit sheets. handling. At worst this could be: Archaeology Society. CITiZAN will endeavour to Another idea is to use a crowd‐sourced or promote the use of the proforma recording researcher writes research notes by hand funded applicaon, such as micropasts.org. sheet during their training sessions which oc‐ (i.e. in the field) Run in conjuncon with University College cur in the survey area, where appropriate. researcher types up hand‐wrien notes into London, Micropasts “supports (a) modular Word document using proforma research applicaons for massive online data collecon sheet and emails this to the database admin‐ about archaeology, history and heritage, as istrator well as (b) a micro‐funding model for sup‐ porng new (not‐for‐profit) research projects database administrator enters the proforma where collaboraon between academic instu‐ informaon into the database ons and volunteers is a key feature.” Further There is plenty of scope for error in transcrib‐ to this “the soware used to build the plaorm ing from one stage to the other. It also me is enrely free and open source, and the data consuming for the researcher and database [created] is also required to be open‐licensed administrator. and publicly available.”

A more eﬃcient method would be to have one Other methods of managing the data might be stage, which is inpung the data from the via SharePoint which is a Microso Oﬃce web research directly into the project database. applicaon plaorm that combines various Where mulple researchers are involved, the funcons intranet, extranet, content manage‐ only feasible way of achieving this is for the ment, document management, web content database to be accessible via a web interface management etc. SharePoint can be used to with the proforma sheet an on online form, provide web‐facing access to external users. the informaon from which is incorporated Depending on permission levels, the web inter‐ directly into the database. The database has face can be used amongst other things to man‐ been designed to allow for this: it is in Mi‐ age site structure and content, view usage croso Access 2010 format which allows web‐ analycs, and manage data. based access. The data would therefore be Promong and managing commu‐ stored in a central locaon that is publically accessible. Database entries should ideally be nity generated research checked and approved by a web administra‐ Along with adversing the project through tor/moderator, perhaps either a volunteer standard media channels, eg HE, CBA, CIfA, member of a local archaeological and historical ADS, MOLA and local society websites, Face‐ society, the HER, Portsmouth or Hampshire book, Twier and any associated newsleers, authority, Historic England or such. The ad‐ one way of drawing in interest would be to link vantage of this method is that the results are the research with other related projects. updated right away and are readily disseminat‐ ed. Assets in the database can be presented on HE recently produced volunteer guidance for

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 12

Examples

Portsmouth Harbour Hinterland Project Heritage Asset Recording Sheet

Asset name Camp Down Semaphore Station (Farlington Redoubt) National Grid Reference: 468900 / 106400 Status: Is the asset nationally designated? Yes | No National Heritage List no. Historic Environment Record (HER) no.: 38756 Not currently on HER National Record for the Historic Environment (NRHE) no.: Not currently on NHRE Asset type (circle relevant) Building/Structure, extant | Building/Structure, non-extant | visible earthwork | cropmark/parchmark | archaeological remains | archaeological remains no longer surviving Photograph of asset or historic map Surveyor’s description: (What is the asset? What was it used for? How old is it? Who extract if no longer extant made/built/designed it? What is it made of? What shape/size/plan form is it? Are there any Hampshire & Isle of Wight LXXVI (Surveyed distinguishing features of its outside/inside/surface or buried parts? How does it interact with its 1859 to 1866) 1870 surroundings? What can you tell about its history? Condition)

Site quarried away. No visible archaeological remains, possible cropmarks at site location. Assessment is based on documentary and cartographic evidence. The new Semaphore Stations were of far more substantial construction than the Shutter Stations they replaced. There were four different designs to suit the different geographical locations. The one at Portsdown was an ordinary looking country bungalow of five rooms each about 13 feet by 11 feet. The roof was slated and the walls were rendered brick. The Semaphore room was 8 feet by 7 feet 9 inches and sat on top of the building which was unique to this station. The telescopes were located in tubes set in holes cut through the walls.

Historic/Archaeological Dockyard Interest Themes (or Score relative importance 1-5 e.g. 1 = low contribution to significance) Ship building, 1 Armaments 1 Food production 1 Shopping and 1 Clothing 1 fitting out and processing markets Hospitals, 1 Education 1 Religion/burial 1 Recreation and 1 Transport and 5 Health, Welfare Socialising communications Accommodation 1 Materials 1 Military function 3 Administration 1 Gender 1 provision and finance Immigration and 1 Crime and 1 Other (state)...... ethnic diversity punishment What features of the asset reveal The asset’s associations are revealed directly through the function and form these associations? of structure that formally existed.

Integrity: How well preserved is it? Not preserved, site quarried away. Had the structure remained extant, its Does it include evidence of several important significance on the landscape would be elevated to very high, as it would periods of use and adaptation? be a unique feature to the hinterland area.

Community Value: What communities n/a have a particular association with it and how? Documentary references: Are there Built in 1821-22 when the semaphore replaced the shutter-telegraph documentary and cartographic sources that system, and linked the Compton telegraph station to that at Portsmouth provide further information on this asset? either directly, or if industrial smoke obscured the Portmsouth-Camp Down sighting line, indirectly via a semaphore station at Lumps Fort. general reference, (The Old Telegraph 1976, 57-58, G Wilson) online ref: http://www.portsdown-tunnels.org.uk/ancient_sites/telegraph_p2.html

Name of recorder: A N Person Date: 24/02/2016 Organisation: A N Organisation Email/phone: Contact details:

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 13

Portsmouth Harbour Hinterland Project Heritage Asset Recording Sheet Asset name Dock Mill National Grid Reference: 465000 / 98900 Status: Is the asset nationally designated? Yes | No National Heritage List no. Historic Environment Record (HER) no.: 33321 Not currently on HER National Record for the Historic Environment (NRHE) no.: Not currently on NHRE Asset type (circle relevant) Building/Structure, extant | Building/Structure, non-extant | visible earthwork | cropmark/parchmark | archaeological remains | archaeological remains no longer surviving Photograph of asset or historic map Surveyor’s description: (What is the asset? What was it used for? How old is extract if no longer extant it? Who made/built/designed it? What is it made of? What shape/size/plan form is it? (Ordnance Survey 1st edition) Are there any distinguishing features of its outside/inside/surface or buried parts? How does it interact with its surroundings? What can you tell about its history? Condition)

The former site of Dock Mill. Comprises two phases of tower mill, neither of which are extant. Mill built during the Napoleonic Wars in response to provide affordable flour for the working class. Later known as the Old Dock Mill, also as the Shipwright’s Mill. The mill was constructed in 1796-7 in Pesthouse fields, Portsea (196-SU-640 013) and was in working order by 1799. It was a tower mill with a domed cap, originally with humanoid statue as finial, chain drive and common sails with outrigger(http://www.hampshiremills.org/History- %20%20Dock%20%20Mill%20Portsmouth.htm). The New Dock Mill built in Southsea in 1816, demolished in 1922, was a seven storey brick tower, 100ft high, 40ft diameter at the base, tarred, with a domed cap, patent sails and fantail and a gallery around the second floor. Historic/Archaeological Dockyard Interest Themes (or Score relative importance 1-5 e.g. 1 = low contribution to significance) Ship building, 1 Armaments 1 Food production 4 Shopping and 1 Clothing 1 fitting out and processing markets Hospitals, 1 Education 1 Religion/burial 1 Recreation and 1 Transport and 1 Health, Welfare Socialising communications Accommodation 1 Materials 1 Military function 1 Administration 1 Gender 1 provision and finance Immigration and 1 Crime and 1 Other (state)...... ethnic diversity punishment What features of the asset reveal Although the mill does not survive, photographic records tell us what these associations? the asset looked like. In the absence of river power, wind mills used to make flour, a staple for food production. Age: Key Periods Represented (circle relevant How common is it as a feature of this type and periods) date? Pre-1688 1689-1760 1761-1814 1815-1889 Common Uncommon Rare Unique 1890-1918 1919-1959 1960< Group Value: What assets/features are Dock Mills Cottages, 9 Napier Road (Grade II listed). List entry associate with it and how? number: 1103842

Integrity: How well preserved is it? Mill does not survive. Records show different periods of use from Does it include evidence of several important 1796. In 1922 the Mill was put up for auction and not sold. It was periods of use and adaptation? demolished the following year. Traces of the mill were observed during a watching brief in the area, site code: 2007/206. (Southampton City Council archaeology Unit. http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archsearch/record.jsf?titleId=19 38874 Community Value: What communities The asset was very important due to its founding organisation – the ‘United have a particular association with it and how? Society’, which was a co-operative consisting of Dockyard employees and their families (est. May 10th 1796). The money for purchasing the land and erecting the mill was raised by subscription. The Army Board of Ordnance participated in the costs of building the New Dock Mill. The significance therefore lies in the social impact the dockyard had on the city of Portsmouth, and stands unique in the hinterland area.

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 14

Documentary references: Are there The Hants Chronicle on 4th June 1796, documentary and cartographic sources that ‘Sun Fire Insurance Policy 696876 dated 31 Dec 1799’ provide further information on this asset? The Hampshire Courier 24th of November 1815 The Hampshire Courier 13th of March 1816 The Hampshire Chronicle of 16th December 1816 The Hampshire Chronicle in November 1817

http://www.hampshiremills.org/History- %20%20Dock%20%20Mill%20Portsmouth.htm

Map of 1842 gives the building as No 902a

Registered copy will of John Heathcote of Dock Mill, 1878, Winchester Probare District registers.

Name of recorder: A N Person 24/02/2016 Organisation: A N Organisation Email/phone: Contact Details:

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 15

Portsmouth Harbour Hinterland Project Heritage Asset Recording Sheet

Asset name Haslar Royal Naval Hospital, Burial Ground ‘The Paddock’ National Grid Reference: 460982/98612 Status: Is the asset nationally designated? Yes | No National Heritage List no. 1001558. Historic Environment Record (HER) no.: Not currently on HER National Record for the Historic Environment (NRHE) no.: 1435130 Not currently on NHRE Asset type (circle relevant) Building/Structure, extant | Building/Structure, non-extant | visible earthwork | cropmark/parchmark | archaeological remains | archaeological remains no longer surviving Photograph of asset or historic map extract if Surveyor’s description: no longer extant Ordnance Survey Map, 1906 Area of greenspace enclosed by a wall to the rear of the Haslar (NMRN Library) Hospital site. This area is known to contain unmarked burials. The space covers circa. 7 acres. The burial ground is in overall good condition and the site is reserved as park land by the current owners and is therefore under no immediate threat from development. The Site is bounded by The Solent on the SE side and Haslar road to the North. Known 18th/19th century burial ground used by Haslar Naval hospital in the years 1753-1826. There are no known markers of graves in this area however there are known burials that were uncovered by Oxford Archaeology (2005) and Cranfield Forensic Institute (2007,2008, 2009, 2010, 2013). The probable number of burials is likely to exceed 20,000. Historic/Archaeological Dockyard Interest Themes (or Score relative importance 1-5 e.g. 1 = low contribution to significance) Ship building, 1 Armaments 1 Food production 1 Shopping and 1 Clothing 1 fitting out and processing markets Hospitals, 5 Education 1 Religion/burial 5 Recreation and 1 Transport and 1 Health, Welfare Socialising communications Accommodation 1 Materials 1 Military function 3 Administration 1 Gender 1 provision and finance Immigration and 1 Crime and 1 Other (state)...... ethnic diversity punishment What features of the asset reveal The burial ground is associated with the Royal Naval Hospital at Haslar, these associations? and was used to inter military personnel. Age: Key Periods Represented (circle relevant How common is it as a feature of this type and date? periods) Pre-1688 1689-1760 1761-1814 1815-1889 Common Uncommon Rare Unique 1890-1918 1919-1959 1960< Group Value: What assets/features are Haslar Royal Naval Hospital; Clayhall Cemetery; Fort Blockhouse associate with it and how?

Integrity: How well preserved is it? Very well preserved. The site is currently not in use and will be Does it include evidence of several important redeveloped into residential accommodation in the coming years periods of use and adaptation?

Community Value: What communities n/a have a particular association with it and how? Documentary references: Are there • The National Archives Kew documentary and cartographic sources that • The National Maritime Museum provide further information on this asset? • The National Museum of The Royal Navy Library • Portsmouth Records Office • Site Report by Oxford Archaeology, 2005 • Numerous Cranfield reports and publications • Archive of archaeological records currently held by Cranfield, later to be deposited with local museum Name of recorder: A N Person Date: 24.02.2016 Organisation: A N Organisation Email/phone: Contact details:

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 16

Portsmouth Harbour Hinterland Project Heritage Asset Recording Sheet Asset name The Trafalgar Public House (Trafalgar Square) National Grid Reference: 460607 / 100419 Status: Is the asset nationally designated? Yes | No National Heritage List no. Historic Environment Record (HER) no.: 63264 Not currently on HER National Record for the Historic Environment (NRHE) no.: Not currently on NHRE Asset type (circle relevant) Building/Structure, extant | Building/Structure, non-extant | visible earthwork | cropmark/parchmark | archaeological remains | archaeological remains no longer surviving Photograph of asset or historic map Surveyor’s description: (What is the asset? What was it used for? How old is extract if no longer extant it? Who made/built/designed it? What is it made of? What shape/size/plan form is it? (Ordnance Survey 1st edition) Are there any distinguishing features of its outside/inside/surface or buried parts? How does it interact with its surroundings? What can you tell about its history? Condition)

Public House sited at junction of Forton Road and the Crossways in Gosport west of Portsmouth Historical Dockyard. 2 storeyed brick structure building. The site lies on a main road in to Gosport, North of the railway line and within a developed residential area. The pub is close to the Forton Barracks which housed the Royal Marine Light Infantry. So whilst a link to naval activity and Portsmouth Harbour can be identified it is unlikely the public house had any impact on development in the local environs. Areas outside the harbour and Gosport would have been served by local public houses.

Historic/Archaeological Dockyard Interest Themes (or Score relative importance 1-5 e.g. 1 = low contribution to significance) Ship building, 1 Armaments 1 Food production 2 Shopping and 1 Clothing 1 fitting out and processing markets Hospitals, 1 Education 1 Religion/burial 1 Recreation and 3 Transport and 1 Health, Welfare Socialising communications Accommodation 1 Materials 1 Military function 1 Administration 1 Gender 1 provision and finance Immigration and 1 Crime and 1 Other (state)...... ethnic diversity punishment What features of the asset reveal Associations are evident through the pub’s function. Drinking a these associations? principal recreational and social activity. The Influence of the dockyard however, is much less significant on public houses in Gosport. Age: Key Periods Represented (circle relevant How common is it as a feature of this type and periods) date? Pre-1688 1689-1760 1761-1814 1815-1889 Common Uncommon Rare Unique 1890-1918 1919-1959 1960< Group Value: What assets/features are No associated assets/features associate with it and how?

Integrity: How well preserved is it? Structurally extant, currently still in use as a public house. Whilst the Does it include evidence of several important 18th century date listed on the HER cannot be substantiated the periods of use and adaptation? 2nd edition OS map shows a public house at the site reflecting continual use and adaptation over time. Community Value: What communities Likely to have a small community association as the pub is outside have a particular association with it and how? the centre of Gosport, serving the living/working population in the near vicinity (Leesland, Gosport)

Documentary references: Are there Public house shown on OS 2nd edition 6 inch map. documentary and cartographic sources that Cannot find documentary references relating to the pub. provide further information on this asset? Name of recorder: A N Person 24/02/2016 Organisation: A N Organisation Email/phone: Contact details:

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 17

Portsmouth Harbour Hinterland Project Heritage Asset Recording Sheet Asset name (if known) Funtley Ironworks National Grid Reference: 454980 / 108200 Status: Is the asset nationally designated? Yes | No National Heritage List no. Old OCN Historic Environment Record (HER) no.: 22675 Not currently on HER National Record for the Historic Environment (NRHE) no.: Not currently on NHRE Asset type (circle relevant) Building/Structure, extant | Building/Structure, non-extant | visible earthwork | cropmark/parchmark | archaeological remains | archaeological remains no longer surviving Photograph of asset or historic map Surveyor’s description: (What is the asset? What was it used for? How old is it? Who extract if no longer extant made/built/designed it? What is it made of? What shape/size/plan form is it? Are there any (e.g. Ordnance Survey 1st edition) distinguishing features of its outside/inside/surface or buried parts? How does it interact with its surroundings? What can you tell about its history? Condition) Iron mill wall and mill race The site of an iron works constructed in 1775. The works were bought by Henry Cort who perfected his iron puddling process here. He was the inventor of the rolling mill and the puddling furnace which were of importance for the production of iron during the Napoleonic Wars. Around 1880 the works burnt down and the site was abandoned. There is a plaque on one of the surviving walls. A mill race and pond bay are still visible. The most extensive remains of the ironmill are those of the millpond and watercourses. The dam for the millpond carries a small lane which had been ‘paved’ with slag from the iron works (this is now topped with tarmac). Immediately to the south of the lane is a wheel pit for the ironmill.

History of site: Possibly built in early 17th century, established by the 3rd Earl of Southampton. He leased it to the Gringo’s in 1640. Owned by John Gringo at some point in the 17th century – produced large quantities of nails for ship building and dockyard use. Owned by William Attwood, Cort’s wife’s uncle.Taken over by Cort in 1775.

In 1783 and 1784 he took out patents for his new processes, which represented major technological advances in the production of wrought iron, using coal and water power. The processes which he patented were for "rolling" in 1783 and for "fining" or "puddling" in 1784 Bankrupted in 1789 after the death of his partner’s father Adam Jellicoe, who had financed his patents by borrowing money from the Navy, thus the debts were transferred to Cort who had to surrender his patents to the Crown. He died a broken man in 1800 in relative poverty. The iron works at Funtley and Gosport along with its stock was passed to Samuel Jellicoe, son of Adam, and he remained there until his death 30 years later. Jellicoe owned Fontley Iron Mill until it was sold in 1815 to John Bartholomew, who had worked for Henry Cort as a “finer”. Shown on 1859 OS 6” map

Historic/Archaeological Dockyard Interest Themes (or Score relative importance 1-5 e.g. 1 = low contribution to significance) Ship building, 5 Armaments 3 Food production 1 Shopping and 1 Clothing 1 fitting out and processing markets Hospitals, 1 Education 1 Religion/burial 1 Recreation and 1 Transport and 1 Health, Welfare Socialising communications Accommodation 1 Materials 1 Military function 1 Administration 1 Gender 1 provision and finance Immigration and 1 Crime and 1 Other (state)...... ethnic diversity punishment What features of the asset reveal Iron mill wall and mill race are the only traces left Iron slag can still be seen these associations? on the site.

Age: Key Periods Represented (circle relevant How common is it as a feature of this type and date? periods) Pre-1688 1689-1760 1761-1814 1815-1889 Common Uncommon Rare Unique 1890-1918 1919-1959 1960< Group Value: What assets/features are Date: 1775 to 1880. Though there had been an ironworks at this site for associate with it and how? almost 200 year prior to Cort inheriting it from his wife’s uncle. The site has two associated buildings nearby, both listed; Ironmaster's House (grade II), where Henry Cort lived and Funtley House (grade II) home of Samuel Jellicoe, partner of Cort. Integrity: How well preserved is it? The buildings of the ironworks are no longer extant, Does it include evidence of several important periods of use and adaptation?

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 18

Community Value: What n/a communities have a particular association with it and how? Documentary references: Are Yes, appears on various OS maps ( Ordnance Survey 1st edition, there documentary and 1859) cartographic sources that provide further information on this asset?

Are there documentary and cartographic sources that provide further information on this asset? There is a website devoted to Henry Cort http://geneagraphie.com/Henry%20Cort/index(1).htm Henry Cort Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Cort Detailed biography of Cort - http://www.gracesguide.co.uk/Henry_Cort_by_Samuel_Smiles Historical Metallurgical Society newsletter http://hist- met.org/images/pdf/hmsnews50.pdf The River Hamble: A History By David Chun

Name of recorder: A N Person Date: 24.02.2016 Organisation: A N Email/phone: Organisation Contact details:

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 19

Table 5: Research data sources Data source Locaon / website Comment Historic maps (Tithe, enclosure, Portsmouth Record Oﬃce, Portsmouth estate)

Hampshire Record Oﬃce, Winchester hp://www3.hants.gov.uk/archives Published books Brish Naonal Copyright Library, London Refer to theme bibliography in Sec‐ on 3.2 Archival records Royal Naonal Marime Museum, Portsmouth Royal Naonal Marime Museum, Greenwich Contains Navy Board’s contracts Internet data sources See table 3. Postal records Naonal Archives, Kew Census returns Naonal Archives, Kew Trade Directories University of Leicester, special collecons: hp://specialcollecons.le.ac.uk/ Hampshire Historic Environ‐ The Archaeology and Historic Buildings Record / AHBR, Hampshire ment Record data County Council hp://www3.hants.gov.uk/landscape‐and‐heritage/historic‐ environment/historic‐buildings‐register.htm Portsmouth Historic Environ‐ Portsmouth City Council ment Record data hp://www.portsmouthcitymuseums.co.uk/portsmouth‐ museum/portsmouth‐museum‐and‐records‐archaeology‐ collecon Local History Portsmouth City Museum hp://www.portsmouthcitymuseums.co.uk/portsmouth‐ museum/portsmouth‐museum‐and‐records‐archaeology‐ collecon Local History Portsmouth History Centre, Museum Road, Portsmouth [email protected] Local History Royal Armouries Museum, Fort Nelson, Portsdown Hill Road, Fare‐ ham hp://www.royalarmouries.org/visit‐us/fort‐nelson Local History The Spring Arts and Heritage Centre, 56 East Street, Havant, Hampshire hp://www.thespring.co.uk/ Local History Emsworth Museum/Emsworth Marime & Historical Trust (EM&HT) hp://emsworthmuseum.org.uk/ Local History Gosport Local and Naval Studies Centre hp://www3.hants.gov.uk/library/gosport‐localandnaval.htm Local History Westbury Manor Museum, West Street, Fareham hp://www3.hants.gov.uk/westbury‐manor‐museum Local History Jewish Historical Society of England Transacons/Jewish Historical Studies. hp://www.jhse.org/content/jhse‐papers Local History Guide to Sources at Portsmouth History Centre hps:// www.portsmouth.gov.uk/ext/documents‐external/lib‐ localhistoryguide‐2013.pdf Local History Fareham Society hp://www.farehamsociety.hampshire.org.uk/ Local History Gosport Discovery Centre, High Street, Gosport hp://www3.hants.gov.uk/gdc.htm Local History Gosport Society hp://www.gosportsociety.co.uk/ Local History Gosport.Info – Local photos and informaon hp://www.gosport.info/index.html Local History Kent Street Bapst Church Birth Register 1730–1837 hp:// homepage.ntlworld.com/rcaville/Kent%20St%20Intro.htm

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 20

Local History Memorials and Monuments in Portsmouth. hp:// www.memorials.inportsmouth.co.uk/churches/royal_garrison/ Local History Palmerston Forts Society. hp://www.palmerstonfortssociety.org.uk/ Local History Portsmouth Jewry. hp://www.jackwhite.net/portsmouth‐synagogue/ aubrey_contents.htm Local History Portsdown Tunnels. hp://www.portsdown‐tunnels.org.uk/The Local History Portsmouth Museums and Records Service. hp://www.portsmouthmuseums.co.uk/ Local History Portsmouth Society. hp://www.portsmouthsociety.org.uk/ Local History Friends of Highland Road Cemetery hp://www.friendsoighlandroadcemetery.org.uk/ Local History St Agatha’s Church. hp://www.stagathaschurch.co.uk/gallery/walk‐around‐church/ Local History Stephen Pomeroy's Local History hp://homepage.ntlworld.com/stephen.pomeroy/local/local.htm Portsmouth newspapers Development of the dockyard in rela‐ (various) onship to the city and its hinterland Naval Miscellany Vol VII Timber supply issue 1803‐1830. See also paper by P K Crimmin

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 21

‐ ‐

onal

ons/englands

collec ‐

images# on/process/na ‐

on/hedgeregs/

hedgerows ‐

catalogues/search ces

books/archive/archive

‐ countryside the ‐ no ‐ uk/default.htm ‐

of ‐ ‐ on

heritage.org.uk/

‐ e.co.uk/all heritage.org.uk/professional/protec history.ac.uk/ ‐ ‐ h.gov.uk/mpp/mcd/mcdtop1.htm sh onalarchives.gov. england/ ‐ ‐ for nder.english

‐ ﬁ list link

‐

p://magic.defra.gov.uk/ p://historicengland.org.uk/images p://www.heritagegateway.org.uk/gateway/chr/default.aspx p://hansard.millbanksystems.com/ p://www.pastscape.org.uk/default.aspx p://www.na p://www.cartography.org.uk/default.asp?contentID=705 p://www.english p://view p://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/greylit/browse.cfm p://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/regula p://www.bgs.ac.uk/discoveringGeology/geologyOfBritain/viewer.html p://www.bgs.ac.uk/data/boreholescans/home.html p://www.eng ps://www.gov.uk/protec p://www.historicaldirectories.org/hd/index.asp p://www.oxford.gov.uk/PageRender/decP/CharacterAppraisalToolkit.htm ps://www.thegaze p://www.britainfromabove.org.uk/ p://wellcomelibrary.org/search p://www.portcullis.parliament.uk/CalmView/Aboutcatalogue.aspx p://www.bri p://www.connectedhistories.org/resource.aspx p://www.oldbaileyonline.org/ p://www.biab.ac.uk/ p://www.imagesofengland.org.uk/ h h h h h h Internet heritage places/ h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h ‐

centu

litera ‐ the

and

social 21st

by al designated

grey

interac archive

and the

held an

poten

via public

including

including turn

medical

records (the

ons the

science. England 1500–1900

at onwards

million heritage.

covering

3 archaeological

database publica England present period 1850s environment, ‐

assets

recorded

the the biomedical

rarity, images, 1665

around

Wales for around

natural 1674–1913 of search

and

Britain

from

debates

and

the reports

ons Crown, townscape/built buildings, map designated

archaeological

map archaeological

including

ons

Bailey, villages

the ve to

1919–53 resources

about England,

listed Old and of England healthcare geology contemporary

record descrip of on

of collec Parliament

more from the

the on on statutorily and digital interac

from

interac

of character

towns

of abstracts

map archaeological

and all monuments

via Archives. an

library

ons

es, of of

informa

major and

newspaper map

legisla legisla via

containing

ci assess

HERS of data

edi

monuments on ons ons 22

historical

photographs contemporary

Heritage) cial of to to

photographs directories

history ﬃ published sed

‐

o Proceedings

onal

Access resources, Geographic Photos Descrip Digi English Na Web Hedgerow Historic Descrip Catalogue Trade Descrip Directory map Interac References Borehole The Hedgerow Includes 170,000 Toolkit history, vulnerability The Aerial Local Catalogue Photographic ture Parliamentary ry.

‐ on

ons

country catalogue Collec

Toolkit List

Box

ons Viewer Viewer on Service

Descrip

Archaeological History

Archives Reed Heritage Leicester Data

Above

Class Britain Britain Histories

Irish regula

of Images Protec Online

Assessment England

name

Gateway Millibanks of of

onal

County

of from

and

hedgerows Na Gaze sh

Bailey

Heritage The Bri MAGIC Hedgreow PastScape Monument ViewFinder University Wellcome Architectural Archaeology Resource Geology Hansard Bibliography Geology Character The Britain Old Connected side Guidance: Victoria Parliamentary Images

and and

Society ordshire ordshire

on Society Society

RCAHMS Her Her online Archives

York Leicester

of of Council

tools of of Collec

es es Archives

England England England England England England England England

City Cartographic Geological Geological History

eld eld sh sh sh onal sh

RCAHMW, ﬃ ﬃ Parliament Government

EH/IHBC/ALGAO Bri Bri Historic UK Provider Historic Historic University CBA Bri Natural Oxford Natural Na Bri TSO/HMSO Universi Historic EH, University Universi Wellcome Historic She She UK Parliamentary Historic research

‐

and

data

ogues Internet and

6: archives

catal

ive h Type Geology Government planning Digital Archaeology Library c Table

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 22

‐ of ‐

ons/department

ralsuk/buildingStones/StrategicStoneStudy/ les ﬁ

pro ‐

industry ‐ p://www.bgs.ac.uk/mine ps://www.gov.uk/government/publica p://www.archaeologyuk.org/cba/projects/dob/ p://www.cementkilns.co.uk/ p://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archives/view/ h EH_atlases.html h environment h h h eh_monographs_2014/

ons ADS. kilns

wastes

and

landscapes descrip

plants inc.

Available

materials,

military

PDFs. stones

cement

20th as

industries,

processes, about

building online

1895

the

to records know

individual

since info

guides

on monographs Ireland

Agency

wanted processes

its

county

documentary and

subjects. by

ever put

and

contamina has you

historical

Britain UK

of Various in and in County Environment Field All EH

Atlas

‐ DOE

Kilns

on: Stone

Mono and

les Ireland Britain

of pro ﬁ Plants

Building and

contamina

County Land industry Defence Cement Archaeological Britain graphs

Agency

England

Moore

EH/BGS Environment CBA Dylan Historic

‐ spe

sources

c Subject ci ﬁ

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 23

Secondary published sources

This secon provides a published sources list by theme, which has been Brish Isles and Ireland. Oxford: Oxbow Books. put together by project expert, Dr Ann Coats. Saunders, A. (2004). Fortress Builder: Bernard de Gomme, Charles II’s Military Engineer. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Simmons, G. (1993). Buckler’s Hard: warship building on the Montagu 1. Ship building, fing out and armaments estate at Beaulieu. New Arcadian Journal, 35(6), 24‐47. Allum, P. (July 2004). Camper & Nicholsons. A Short History of Camper Srland, A. (2005). The men of the Mary Rose. Stroud: Suon. and Nicholsons 1782–2005. Good Old Boat, 37, 23. Retrieved from hp//:www.goodoldboat.com/ Travers, Commander, R. (1955). The House that Jack Built. Bartlet, A. (1974). The ironworks at Sowley in the manor of Beaulieu Wells, Captain John G. (1980). Whaley: The Story of HMS Excellent 1830 c.1600–1820. (Ts, Beaulieu Palace House (Hants.), Archives; also to 1980. London: Her Majesty’s Staonery Office. Hants. R.O., TOP Beaulieu 3). Winton, J. (1989). The Naval Heritage of Portsmouth. Southampton: Flatman, J. (2013). Appendix 6 High to Post‐Medieval Chapter: Archaeo‐ Ensign. logical Remains of Vessels from Great Britain, Northern Ireland and Ireland 6th–16th centuries AD. Marine Historic Environment Research Framework. Retrieved from hp:// 2. Food producon and processing archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archiveDS/archiveDownload? t=arch‐1043‐1/disseminaon/pdf/publicaon_appendices/ Allen, M. J. and Gardiner, J. (2000). Our Changing Coast: a survey of the Appendix_6_High_to_Post‐Medieval.pdf interdal archaeology of Langstone Harbour, Hampshire. York: Council for Brish Archaeology Research Report, 124. Gawn, R. W. L. (1955). The Admiralty Experiment works. Haslar Notes from Quarterly Journal of The Instute of Naval Architects, 97(1). Dock Mills Portsmouth. (2015). Retrieved from hp:// www.hampshiremills.org/History‐%20%20Dock%20%20Mill% Gilbert, K. R. (1965). The Portsmouth block‐making machinery. London: 20Portsmouth.htm Her Majesty's Staonery Office. Dock Mill, Southsea. (2012). Retrieved from hp:// Goodman, S. (1998). Portsmouth Warships 1900–1950. Tiverton: www.ataleofonecity.portsmouth.gov.uk/place/old‐dock‐mill‐ Halsgrove southsea/ Goss, J. (1984). Portsmouth‐built warships, 1497–1967. Emsworth: Ma‐ Eley, P. (1988). Portsmouth breweries 1492–1847. Portsmouth Paper, son 51. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Holland, A. J. (1961). Shipbuilding, mainly for the Crown, in the South‐ Fox, R. T. and Kemp, D. J. (1981). The ginger beer boles of the Ports‐ ampton area, 1650–1820 (unpublished M.A dissertaon). South‐ mouth Harbour region 1981. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. ampton: University of Southampton. Hatcher, A. (1992). The fishing industry in Portsmouth an overview. Holland, A. J. (1963). Naval Shipbuilding on the Hamble River before Centre for Marine Resource Economics, University of Portsmouth. 1815. Mariner's Mirror, 49, 21‐27. Mahias, P. (1959). The Brewing Industry in England 1700–1830. Cam‐ Holland, A. J. (1963), The Beaulieu River: its Rise and Fall as a Commer‐ bridge: Cambridge University Press. cial Waterway. Mariner’s Mirror, 49, 275‐287.

Holland, A. J. (1971). Ships of Brish Oak. The Rise and Decline of Wood‐ en Shipbuilding in Hampshire. Newton Abbot: David and Charles. 3. Retail and markeng

Holland, A. J. (1993). Buckler’s Hard, a rural shipbuilding centre. Ems‐ Horne, R. S. (March 1969). Britain's first Co‐op in Portsmouth? Hamp‐ worth: Kenneth Mason. shire, 9(5) 29‐30. Horne, R. S. (1968). Brunel's blockmills. Portsmouth: Portsmouth Royal Parkinson, C. N. (1948). Portsmouth Point, 1793–1815. London: Univer‐ Dockyard Historical Society. sity Press of Liverpool. Jeffery, W. (1903). The king’s yard. A story of old Portsmouth. London: Riley, R. C. (1976). The industries of Portsmouth in the nineteenth centu‐ Everi. ry. Portsmouth Paper, 25. Portsmouth: Portsmouth City Council. Lavery, B. (1989). Nelson’s Navy. London: Conway Marime Press. Thomas, J. H. (1984). The seaborne trade of Portsmouth 1650–1800. McKee, A. (1982). How we found the Mary Rose. London: Souvenir Portsmouth Paper, 40. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Press. Thomas, J. H. (1993). Portsmouth and the East India Company in the Padfield, P. (1966), Aim Straight: a Biography of Sir Percy Sco, the eighteenth century. Portsmouth Paper, 62. Portsmouth: City of Father of Modern Naval Gunnery. London: Hodder and Stoughton. Portsmouth. Pulverta, D. with Dean. K. (2009). The warship figureheads of Ports‐ Webb, J. (1982). Portsmouth Free Mart Fair ‐ The Last Phase 1800– mouth. Stroud: History Press. 1847. Portsmouth Paper, 35. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Riley, R. C. (1985). The evoluon of the docks and industrial buildings in Portsmouth Royal Dockyard 1698–1914. Portsmouth Paper, 44. 4. Clothing Portsmouth: Portsmouth City Council. Riley, R. (1974). The Portsmouth Corset Industry, in J. B. Bradbeer (Ed.) Ripley, B. (1982). Horsea Island and the Royal Navy. Portsmouth Paper, Portsmouth Geographical Essays, 1. Portsmouth: Portsmouth 36. Portsmouth: Portsmouth City Council. Polytechnic. Rule, M. (1982). The Mary Rose. London: Conway Marime Press. Saunders, A. D. (1995). Fortress Britain: Arllery Forficaons in the

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 24

5. Health and welfare Osborne, C. E. (1903). The Life of Father Dolling. London: Edward Ar‐ nold. City of Portsmouth (1956). A history of Portsmouth drainage, 1865– 1956. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Padfield, P. (1966), Aim Straight: a Biography of Sir Percy Sco, the Father of Modern Naval Gunnery. London: Hodder and Stough‐ Dolling, R. R. (1896, 1906). Ten years in a Portsmouth slum. London: ton. Masters & Co. Stedman, J. (2002). People of Portsmouth: The 20th Century in their Gulliver, D. (1971). Dame Agnes Weston. London: Phillimore. own Words (Illustrated History). Derby: Breedon. Halle, M. (1971). Portsmouth’s Water Supply 1800–1860. Portsmouth Surry, N. (1981). Hampshire apprences to the Painter Stainers Compa‐ Paper, 12. Portsmouth: Portsmouth City Council. ny, their professional acvies and social origins c. 1600–1795. Haersley, R. (1999). Blood & Fire: William and Catherine Booth and Papers and Proceedings of the Hampshire Field Club, 37, 63‐71. their Salvaon Army. London: Doubleday. Thomas, E. G. (1979/1980). The apprenceship and selement papers Hawkes, H. (1884). Recollecons of John Pounds. London: Williams & of the parish of St Thomas, Portsmouth. Portsmouth Archives Norgate. Review, IV, 12‐19. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Hopkins, J. C. (1872). Acve Service or Miss Sarah Robinson’s work among our sailors. 7. Religion/burial Osborne, C. E. (1903). The Life of Father Dolling. London: Edward Ar‐ nold. Barnard, E. K. (1977). The windows of Portsmouth cathedral. Ports‐ mouth Paper, 27. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Rawlinson, Robert (Superintending Inspector). (1850). Report to the General Board of Health on the Sewage, Drainage and Water Barnard, E. K. (1988). From parish church to Portsmouth Cathedral, Supply of Portsmouth. HMSO 1900–39. Portsmouth Paper, 52. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Rawlinson, R. (1851). A Further Report on Portsmouth. Barre, P. (1968, 1975). The Organs and Organists of the Cathedral Church of St Thomas of Canterbury at Portsmouth. Portsmouth Revell, A. L. (1978). Haslar. The royal hospital. Gosport: Gosport Socie‐ Paper, 4. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. ty. Besse, J. (1753). A collecon of the sufferings of the people called Quak‐ Robinson, S. with Guthrie, J. (1876). Chrisanity and Teetotalism. A ers 1650–1689. London: Luke Hinde. Voice from the Army (A Collecon of Leers from Soldiers and Others). Church Publishers (1966). A short history of the parish of St. John the Bapst, Rudmore, Portsmouth. Ramsgate: Church Publishers. Robinson, S. (1892). Yarns. Cooper, W. D. (1973). Methodism in Portsmouth 1750–1932. Ports‐ Robinson, S. (1898). A Life record. mouth Paper, 18. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Robinson, S. (1914). My book. A Personal Narrave. London: Partridge Crooks, C. P. and Crooks, D. C. (1996). The guides' guide to the cathe‐ and Co. dral church of St Thomas of Canterbury. Portsmouth: Portsmouth Cathedral. Stanford, J. and Paerson, A. T. (1974). The Condion of the Children of the Poor in Mid Victorian Portsmouth. Portsmouth Paper, 21. Dwyer, G. (1981). Diocese of Portsmouth, Past and Present. Ports‐ Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. mouth: Portsmouth Diocesan Centenary Commiee. Verrier, M. (1992). St Mary's Hospital, Portsmouth. Portsmouth: Shep‐ Fontana, V. J. L. (1989). Rebirth of Roman Catholicism in Portsmouth. herd. Portsmouth Paper, 56. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Weston, A.E. (1889). Jongs from my Log, Portsmouth and Devonport. Furley, O. W. (1959). The pope‐burning processions of the late seven‐ teenth century. History, 44, 17‐23. Weston, A.E. (1911). My Life Among the Bluejackets. London. Hampshire County Council. (1993). St Agatha’s Church, Portsmouth. Weston, A.E. (1879). Temperance Work in the Royal Navy. Kessinger Winchester: Hampshire County Council. Pub. Co. Hanna, K. A. (Ed). (1988). The Cartularies of Southwick Priory, Part I. Wintz, S. G. (1884). Our Blue Jackets: Miss Weston’s Life and Work Hampshire Record Series, IX. Winchester: Hampshire Record Among Our Sailors. London: Hodder & Stoughton. Office.

Hanna, K.A. (Ed). 1989. The Cartularies of Southwick Priory Part II. 6. Educaon Hampshire Record Series, IX, X. Winchester: Hampshire Record Oﬃce. Coats, A. (2007). A double tragedy. In Worthington, G. (Ed): The Life and Times of John Pounds of Portsmouth: Originator of Ragged Hubbock, R. (1976). Portsea Island churches. Portsmouth Paper, 8. Schools (pp. 22‐24). Portsmouth: John Pounds of Portsmouth Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Heritage Appeal. Isherwood, L. (1975). Chrisanity comes to Portsmouth a short history Ga, L. V. (1986). The Portsmouth Beneﬁcial School 1755–1939. Ports‐ of the establishment of Chrisanity on Portsea Island. Havant: Ian mouth Paper, 46. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Harrap. Hawkes, H. (1884). Recollecons of John Pounds. London: Williams and Lilley, H. T. and Everi, A. T. (1921). Portsmouth Parish Church. Ports‐ Norgate. mouth: Charpener. Jayne, R. E. (1925). The Story of John Pounds: Founder of Ragged Lucas, P. (Nov 2008).The Story of Rudmore retold ‐ 100 years on. The Schools, London: Epworth Press. Trusty Servant, 106 (pp. 8‐10). Retrieved from hp:// wyksoc.com/document.doc?id=23 Oliver, R. D. HMS Excellent 1830–1930: a Short History of the Royal Naval Gunnery School at Whale Island. Portsmouth: Charpener.

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 25

Quail, S., Barre, G. and Chessun, C. (Eds). (1989). Consecrated to Pray‐ December 1987–17 January 1988. Portsmouth: City Museum & er, a Centenary History of St Mary’s Portsea, 1889–1989. Ports‐ Art Gallery. mouth: City of Portsmouth. Sargent, H. (1971, 1979). A History of Portsmouth Theatres. Portsmouth Quail, S. and Wilkinson, A. (Eds). (1995). Forever building. Portsmouth: Paper, 13. Portsmouth: Portsmouth City Council. Portsmouth Cathedral Council. Stavert, G. (1987). A Study in Southsea. From Bush Villas to Baker Squibb, G. D. (Ed). (1991). The Visitaon of Hampshire and the Isle of Street. Horndean: Milestone. Wight 1686. Harleian Society, New Series, 10. London: Harleian Stedman, J. (2002). People of Portsmouth: The 20th Century in their Society. own Words (Illustrated History). Derby: Breedon. Ward, W. R. (1995). Parson and parish in eighteenth‐century Hamp‐ Surry, N. (1992). Art in a Dockyard Town: Portsmouth 1770–1845. shire: replies to bishops' visitaons. Hampshire Record Series, XIII. Portsmouth Paper, 59. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Winchester: Hampshire County Council. Surry, N. (2008). A Portsmouth Canvas. The Art of the City and the Sea Williams, J. F. (Ed.). (1913). The early churchwardens accounts of Hamp‐ 1770–1970. London: Fortune Press. shire. Winchester: Warren and Son /London: Simpkin and Co. Taswell, L. (1775). Portsmouth Guide. Portsmouth: Carr. Willis, A. J. (Ed.). (1963). Hampshire marriage licences. London: Re‐ search Publicaon Co. Webb, J. (1987). Sir Frederick Madden and Portsmouth. Portsmouth Paper, 47. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Wright, H. P., Archdeacon (1873).The Domus Dei or Royal Garrison Church. Portsmouth. Yates, N. (1978). Ritual Conﬂict at Farlington and Wymering. Ports‐ 9. Transport and communicaons mouth Paper, 28. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Albert, W. and Harvey, P. D. A. (Eds). (1973). Portsmouth & Sheet turn‐ Yates, N. (1983). The Anglican Revival In Victorian Portsmouth. Ports‐ pike commissioners' minute book 1711–1754. Portsmouth Record mouth Paper, 37. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Series, 2. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Yates, N. (2003). Church and chapel in Portsmouth and south‐east Burton, L. and Musselwhite, B. (1987). Crossing the harbour. Ports‐ Hampshire, 1660–1850. Portsmouth Paper, 73. Portsmouth: City mouth: Milestone Publicaons. of Portsmouth. Course, E. (1969). Portsmouth Railways. Portsmouth Paper, 6. Ports‐ mouth: City of Portsmouth. 8. Recreaon Caord, N. (2011). Disused Staons: Gosport. Retrieved from hp:// www.disused‐staons.org.uk/g/gosport/index31.shtml Bardell, M. (2012). The Isle of Wight, Portsmouth and the Solent. Ox‐ ford: Signal Books. Eley, P. (1999). The Bale of Gosport Railway Staon 1840–41. Win‐ chester: Hampshire County Council Museum Service. Barringer, T. J. (1988). The Cole family: painters of the English land‐ scape 1838‐1975 : an exhibion at Portsmouth City Museum and Harman. R.G. 1963). The Hayling Island Railway (BLH Art Gallery, 1 April–26 June 1988 and Art Gallery 1 April–26 June No.18).Teddington: Branch Line Handbooks. 1988 and Cartwright Hall, Bradford, 15 July–30 August 1988. Harper, C. G. (1923). The Portsmouth road the sailors’ highway. Lon‐ Portsmouth: Portsmouth City Museum & Art Gallery. don: C. Palmer. Brown, R. A. (1982). The 1906 guidebook to Portsmouth and Southsea. Harvey, M. G. and Rooke, E. (1997). Railway Heritage, Portsmouth (150 Horndean: Milestone. years of railways around Britain's principal naval port). Keering: Brown, R. (1985). The Portsmouth emporium a nostalgic reminder of Silver Link Publishing. some of the traders, shops and businesses. Horndean: Milestone. Kent, P. (1994) Rails to the Yards. Gosport: Gosport Railway Society. Brown, P. (2005). Marime Portsmouth a history and guide. Stroud: Marden, D. (2011). The Hidden Railways of Portsmouth and Gosport. Tempus. Southampton: Kestrel. Brown, R. (2009). The pubs of Portsmouth. Stroud: Amberley. Milton, A. F. and Bern, L. T. A. (Eds). (1977). Portsmouth city transport Clark, P. (2000). Brish Clubs and Sociees 1580–1800: The Origins of 1840–1977. Portsmouth: A .F. Milton. an Associaonal World. Oxford Studies in Social History. Oxford: Paye, P. (1979). The Hayling Railway. Usk: Oakwood Press. OUP. Sinﬁeld, C. A. (1982). The post in Portsmouth. Southsea: Portsmouth Defoe, D. (1962). A tour thro' the whole island of Great Britain (2 vols). and District Philatelic Society. London: Dent. Smith, K. and Mitchell, V. (1984). Chichester to Portsmouth. Midhurst: Gould, R. F. (1899). Military lodges. London: Gale & Polden. Middleton Press. Morris, C. (Ed.). (1947). The journeys of Celia Fiennes. London: Cresset Vine, P. A. L. (2007). London's lost route to Portsmouth. Chichester: Press. Phillimore. Nash, A. (1975). A. E. Cogswell, architect within a Victorian city. Un‐ Was, E. (1987). Fares Please. History of Passenger Transport in Ports‐ published Dissertaon, Portsmouth: School of Architecture, mouth. Horndean: Milestone. Portsmouth Polytechnic. Wilson, G. (1976). The old telegraphs. Chichester, Phillimore. Parkinson, C. N. (1948). Portsmouth Point, 1793–1815. London: Univer‐ sity Press of Liverpool. Paerson, A. T. (1972). Portsmouth Nineteenth–Century Literary Fig‐ ures. Portsmouth Paper, 14. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth.

Portsmouth City Museum & Art Gallery (1987). W.L. Wyllie marine arst 1851–1931: an exhibion of watercolours & etchings. 10

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 26

10. Accommodaon Peacock, S. (1977). A 17th century survey of the manor of Eastney and Milton. Portsmouth Archives Review, 2, 16‐25. Portsmouth: City Balfour, A, with Hollins, P. and Broadbent, G. (1970). Portsmouth. City of Portsmouth. Buildings Series. London: Studio Vista. Pevsner, N. and Lloyd, D. (1990). The buildings of England. Hampshire Beresford, M. (1959). The Six New Towns of the Bishops of Winchester, and the Isle of Wight. London: Penguin. 1200–55. Medieval Archaeology, 3, 187‐215. Pike, S. with Marn, T. (2010). Thomas Ellis Owen: shaper of Ports‐ Chalklin, C. W. (Ed.). (1974). The provincial towns of Georgian England. mouth, ‘father of Southsea’. Portsmouth: Tricorn. London: Arnold. Proctor, F. J. (1931). Reminiscences of Old Portsmouth. Portsmouth, Chalklin, C. W. (1974). The making of some new towns, c. 1600–1720. Proctor & Co. In C. W. Chalklin, M. A. Havinden, Eds, Rural change and urban growth 1500–1800 (pp. 229‐252). London: Longman. Quail, S. and Stedman, J. (1993). Images of Portsmouth. Derby: Breedon. Chapman, J. (1978). The common lands of Portsea Island. Portsmouth Paper, 29. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Quail, S. (2000). Southsea Past. Chichester: Phillimore City of Portsmouth (1976). Owen's Southsea: outstanding conservaon Riley, R. C. (1972). The Growth of Southsea as a Naval Satellite and area. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth Planning Dept. Victorian Resort. Portsmouth Paper, 16. Portsmouth: Portsmouth City Council. Cramer, J. (1985). The book of Portsmouth. Buckingham: Barracuda. Riley, R. C. (1980). The Houses and Inhabitants of Thomas Ellis Owen’s Davey, C. R. (Ed.). (1981). The Hampshire lay subsidy rolls. Hampshire Southsea. Portsmouth Paper, 32. Portsmouth: Portsmouth City Records Series, IV, Winchester: Hampshire Record Office. Council. City of Portsmouth (2011). Urban Characterisaon Study. Portsmouth: Riley, R. C. (2010). Old Portsmouth: A Garrison Town in the Mid‐19th City of Portsmouth. Century. Portsmouth Paper, 76. Portsmouth: Portsmouth City City of Portsmouth (2011). Alan King, compiler, Portsmouth Encyclope‐ Council. dia. A History of Places and People in Portsmouth, with an Index Rogers, P. and Francis, D. (1994). Bygone Portsmouth. Chichester: to Streets. Retrieved from hp://www.portsmouth.gov.uk/ Phillimore. media/PENC_UPLOAD_2011.pdf Southern Region, RIBA (n.d.). Modern architecture in Portsmouth: an City of Portsmouth (n.d.). Portsmouth through the Centuries. Ports‐ introducon to buildings in the area from 1933 to the present mouth: Portsmouth City Records Office. day, including a city centre walk &an out of city car trail. Southern Curs, W. with Villar, D. (1978). Southsea: its story. Alresford: Bay Tree. Region, Royal Instute of Brish Architects/Portsmouth Depart‐ ment of Architecture & Civic Design/Portsmouth Polytechnic Curs, W. (1984). Portsmouth and Southsea remembered. Portsmouth: School of Architecture. Curs. Stapleton, B. (2002). The Admiralty Connecon: Port Development and Fox, R. and Barton, K. J. (1986). Excavaons at Oyster Street, Ports‐ demographic change in Portsmouth 1650–1900. In R. Lawton, W. mouth, Hampshire, 1968–71. Post‐Medieval Archaeology, 20, 31‐ R. Lee, Eds, Populaon and Society in Western European Port 255. Cies, c.1650–1939. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Gates, W. G. and Young, F. J. H. (Ed.). (n.d.). The Portsmouth that has Stedman, J. (1995). Portsmouth reborn destrucon & reconstrucon, passed. Portsmouth: Portsmouth & Sunderland Newspapers. 1939–1974. Portsmouth Paper, 66. Portsmouth: City of Ports‐ Gates, W. G. with Besant, Sir W. (1900). The Illustrated History of Ports‐ mouth. mouth. Portsmouth: Charpener. Stedman, J. (2013). Portsmouth in the Tweneth Century: A Photo‐ Harwood, J. (1980). Portrait of Portsea 1840–1940. Southampton: En‐ graphic History. Wellington: Halsgrove. sign. Triggs, A. (1984). Portsmouth past and present. Horndean: Milestone Hoad, M. (1972). Portsmouth ‐ As Others Have Seen It ‐ I ‐ 1540–1790. Triggs, A. (1989). Portsmouth: history in hiding. Southampton: Ensign. Portsmouth Paper, 15. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. WEA (2007). Memories of Portsea. Portsmouth: WEA Local History Hoad, M. (1973). Portsmouth ‐ As Others Have Seen It ‐ II‐ 1790‐1900. Group. Portsmouth Paper, 20. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Webb, J. (1977). An Early Victorian Street ‐ The High Street, Old Ports‐ Lewis, E. and Marn, J. (1973). Rescue Excavaons on a Saxon Sele‐ mouth. Portsmouth Paper, 26. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. ment Site at Rowner, 1971. Rescue Archaeology in Hampshire, 1, 38‐51. Westwood, F. (1974). Views and scenery of Southsea and Portsmouth. Petersfield: Westwood. Lloyd, D. W. (1974). The buildings of Portsmouth and its environs. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. White, L. (1989). The Story of Gosport. Southampton: Ensign. Maxwell, A. (2010). Portsmouth. A Descripve Poem, in Two Books. Michigan: Gale ECCO. 11. Materials provision Nash, A. (1975). A. E. Cogswell, architect within a Victorian city. Un‐ Addyman, P. V., Hopkins, B. G. and Norton, G. T. (1972). A Saxo‐ published Dissertaon, Portsmouth: School of Architecture, Norman poery‐kiln producing stamped wares at Michelmersh, Portsmouth Polytechnic. Hampshire. Medieval Archaeology, 16, 127‐30. Parkinson, C. N. (1948). Portsmouth Point, 1793–1815. London: Univer‐ Bell, M. and Limbrey, S. (Ed.). (1982). Archaeological Aspects of Wood‐ sity Press of Liverpool. land Economy. Brish Archaeological Reports Internaonal Series Paerson, A. T. (1976). Portsmouth. Bradford‐on‐Avon: Moonraker 146. Oxford. Press. Brooks, E. St. J. (1954). Sir Hans Sloane. London: Batchworth.

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 27

Cunliffe, B. (1996). The Iron Age of Hampshire: an Assessment. In Hin‐ son. ton, D. A & Hughes, M., Archaeology in Hampshire: A Framework Cunliffe, B. and Munby, J, (1985). Excavaons at Portchester Castle, IV, for the Future. Winchester: Hampshire County Council. Medieval, the Inner Bailey. London: Society of Anquaries/ Eley, P. (2000). The Gosport Iron Foundry and Henry Cort. (Gosport Thames & Hudson. Local and Naval Studies Centre hp://www3.hants.gov.uk/ Cunliffe, B. and Garra, B. (1994). Excavaons at Portchester Castle, V, library/gosport‐localandnaval.htm) Post Medieval 1609–1819. London: Society of Anquaries. Evelyn, J. (1670). Silva, or a discourse of forest‐trees, and the propaga‐ Davey, W. (n.d.). The royal marines and the dockyards 1755–1949. Roy‐ on of mber in His Majeses dominions. London: Royal Society. al Marines Historical Society, 3. Eastney Royal Marines Museum.

Defoe, D. (1962). A tour thro' the whole island of Great Britain (2 vols). 12. Military funcon London: Dent. Ambler, J. and Lile, M. (2008). Sea Soldiers of Portsmouth: A Pictorial Easthope, W. (Ed.). (n.d., c.1944). Smien City ‐ the story of Portsmouth History of the Royal Marines at Eastney and Fort Cumberland. under blitz: the story of Portsmouth in the air raids 1940–1944. Tiverton: Halsgrove. Portsmouth: The Evening News. Blumberg; H. E., Hennessy, G. H. and Donald, A. J. (Eds). (1979). Royal Evans, D. (2006). Arming the Fleet. Gosport: English Heritage/ marine records 1755–1792. Royal Marines Historical Society, 2. Explosion! Eastney Royal Marines Museum. Field, J. (1994). Portsmouth dockyard and its workers, 1815–1875. Burton, L. (1981). Gosport goes to War 1939–1945. Gosport: Gosport Portsmouth Paper, 64. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Society. Geddes, A. (1970, 1980). Portsmouth during the great French wars Burton, L. (2004). Wings over Gosport. Gosport: Gosport Society. 1770–1800. Portsmouth Paper, 9. Portsmouth: City of Ports‐ mouth. Coad, J. G. (2013). Support for the Fleet. Architecture and engineering of the Royal Navy’s Bases 1700–1914. Swindon: English Heritage. Godwin, G. N. (1904). The civil war in Hampshire 1642–45. Southamp‐ ton: Gilbert. Coad, J. G. (1978, 1982). Fort Brockhurst. Department of the Environ‐ ment. Greenhill, B. (1983). The Crisis in Naval Ordnance. Monograph 56, Greenwich: Naonal Marime Museum. Coad, J. G. (1981). Historic Architecture of H.M. Naval Base, Ports‐ mouth, 1700–1850. Mariner's Mirror, 67(1), 3‐64. Hoad, M. J. and Paerson, A. T. (1973). Portsmouth and the Crimean War. Portsmouth Paper, 19. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Coad, J. G. (1986, 1991). Calshot Castle English Heritage Jenkins, P. (1986). Bale over Portsmouth ‐ a city at war in 1940. Mid‐ Coad, J. G. (2005). The Portsmouth Block Mills: Bentham, Brunel and hurst: Middleton Press. the start of the Royal Navy’s Industrial Revoluon. Swindon: Eng‐ lish Heritage. Jones, G. H. (Nov. 1982). The Irish fright of 1688: real violence and im‐ agined massacre', Bullen of the Instute of Historical Research, Coats, A. (2000). The economy of the navy and Portsmouth: a discourse LV(132), 148‐153. between the civilian naval administraon of Portsmouth dock‐ yard and the surrounding communies, 1650 to 1800 Jordan, R. (1988). Portsmouth in the Glorious Revoluon of 1688. Ports‐ (Unpublished DPhil thesis). University of Sussex, Falmer. Available mouth Paper, 54. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. online from the Brish Library Ref. uk.bl.ethos.311116. Lane, A. (1999). The Royal Marines Barracks, Eastney: a pictorial histo‐ Coats, A. (2007). A double tragedy. In Worthington, G. (Ed): The Life ry. Tiverton: Royal Marines Museum/Halsgrove. and Times of John Pounds of Portsmouth: Originator of Ragged Lipscomb, F. W. (1967). Heritage of Sea Power. London: Hutchinson. Schools (pp. 22‐24). Portsmouth: John Pounds of Portsmouth Heritage Appeal. Lowe, J. A. (Ed.). (1990). Records of the Portsmouth division of marines 1764–1800. Portsmouth Record Series, 7. Portsmouth: City of Colvin, H. M. (Ed.). (1982). History of the king’s works IV, part II, 1485– Portsmouth. 1660. London: HMSO. Magrath, P. A. (1992). Fort Cumberland 1747–1850, Key to an Island's Corney, A. (1968). Southsea Castle Portsmouth: Portsmouth City Muse‐ Defence. Portsmouth Paper, 60. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. ums. Mitchell, G. (1988). Hilsea Lines and Portsbridge. Gosport: David Corney, A. (1980). Forficaons in Old Portsmouth. Portsmouth: Ports‐ Moore. mouth City Museums. Mitchell, G. & Cobb, P (2003). Fort Nelson and the Portsdown Forts Courtney, S. and Paerson, B. (2005). Home of the fleet a century of (2nd edn). Solent Papers, 3. Gosport: David Moore. Portsmouth Royal Dockyard in photographs. Stroud, Suon/Royal Naval Museum. Mitchell, V. and Smith, K. (1986). Branch Lines around Gosport. Mid‐ hurst: Middleton. Cunliffe, B. (1970, 1984). Portchester Castle. Portsmouth Paper, 1. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Moore, D, (1992). Fort Brockhurst and the Gomer‐Elson Forts (2nd edn). Solent Papers, 6. Gosport: David Moore. Cunliffe, B. (1975). Excavaons at Portchester Castle, I, Roman. Reports of the Research Commiee No. XXXII. London: Society of An‐ Moore, D. (2004). Fort Gilkicker (3rd edn). Solent Papers, 5. Gosport: quaries/Thames & Hudson. David Moore. Cunliffe, B. (1977). Excavaons at Portchester Castle, II, Saxon. London: Morris, C. (Ed.). (1947). The journeys of Celia Fiennes. London: Cresset Society of Anquaries/Thames & Hudson. Press. Cunliffe, B. (1977). Excavaons at Portchester Castle: III: Medieval, the O’Connor, J. (2006). Southwick House – Where D‐Day Began. Retrieved Outer Bailey and its Defences, Reports of the Research Com‐ from hp://historyarcles.com/southwick‐house/ miee No. XXXIV. London: Society of Anquaries/Thames & Hud‐

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 28

Paerson, A. T. (1968, 1985). ‘Palmerston's Folly’: The Portsdown and York, N. L. (2001). Burning the Dockyard. John the Painter and the Spithead Forts. Portsmouth Paper, 3. Portsmouth: City of Ports‐ American Revoluon. Portsmouth Paper, 71. Portsmouth: City of mouth. Portsmouth. Paerson, A. T. (1970). Portsmouth ‐ a French Gibraltar? Portsmouth Paper, 10. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. 13. Administraon and finance Paerson, A. T. (1977). Visits of Brish monarchs to Portsmouth The Ashworth, G. J. (1976). Portsmouth’s Polical Paerns 1885–1945. Silver Jubilee of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, 1952–1977. Portsmouth Paper, 24. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Baugh, D. A. (1975). The cost of poor relief in south‐east England, 1790 Paerson, A. T. 1978). The naval muny at Spithead 1797. Portsmouth –1834. Economic History Review, 2nd series, XXVIII, 50‐68. Paper, 5. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Bushaway, R. W. (1992). Rite, legimaon and community in southern Peake, N. (1986). City at war: a pictorial memento of Portsmouth, Gos‐ England, 1700–1850: the ideology of custom. In B. Stapleton, Ed., port, Fareham, Havant, and Chichester during World War II. Conflict and community in southern England. Stroud: Alan Suon. Horndean, Milestone. Cohen, S. S. (1991). Thomas Wren: Portsmouth's patron of American Pool, B. (1966). Navy Board Contracts 1660–1832. London: Longmans. liberty. Portsmouth Paper, 57. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Powell, M. (1977). Spithead the navy's anvil. London: Redan & Vedee Coleby, A. (1987). Central government and the localies: Hampshire Priestley, E. J. (1977). The Portsmouth captains. Journal of the Society 1649–1689. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. of Army Historical Research, 55, 153‐164. Coleby, A. (1986). Military‐Civilian Relaons on the Solent 1651–1689. Pugh, M. (1956). Commander Crabb. London: Macmillan. Historical Journal, 29(4), 949‐61. Riley, R. C. (2005). Marime City: Portsmouth 1945–2005 (In Old Photo‐ Cook, R. (1982). Portsmouth at the Polls: One Hundred and Fiy Years graphs). Stroud: History Press. of Reformed Elecons in a Naval Dockyard Borough, 1832–1982. Studley: Brewin Books. Sadden, John (1990). Keep the home fires burning The story of Ports‐ mouth and Gosport in World War 1. Portsmouth: Portsmouth Dymond, D. (1971). Portsmouth and the fall of the puritan republic. Publishing and Prinng. Portsmouth Paper, 11. Portsmouth: Portsmouth City Council. Sadden, J. (2001 ). In Defence of the Realm. Chichester: Phillimore. Dymond, D. (1972). Captain John Mason and the Duke of Buckingham. Portsmouth Paper, 17. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Sadden, J. (2012). Portsmouth & Gosport at War. Stroud: Amberley Publishing. East, R. (1891). Extracts from the Portsmouth Records. Portsmouth: Lewis. Smith, J. (2002). The Book of Hilsea. Gateway to Portsmouth. Tiverton: Halsgrove. Field, J. L. (1981). The Bale of Southsea. Portsmouth Paper, 34. Ports‐ mouth: City of Portsmouth. Smith, J. (2005). The Story of Nelson's Portsmouth. Tiverton: Halsgrove Lockyer, R. (1981). Buckingham: the life and polical career of George Smith, P. (1994). The Portsmouth Convict Hulks 1780–1850 Villiers first Duke of Buckingham 1592–1628. London: Longman. (unpublished Dissertaon). Portsmouth: University of Ports‐ mouth. Marn, G. (Ed.). (1995). Portsmouth Royal Charters 1194–1974. Ports‐ mouth Record Series, 9. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Sproule, H. D. (1960). James Burney's opinions on the naval munies of 1797. Mariner's Mirror, 46(1), 61‐2. Peacock, S. E. (1975). Borough Government in Portsmouth, 1835–1974. Portsmouth Paper, 23. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Thomas, J. H. (1987). Portsmouth and the First Fleet 1786–1787. Ports‐ mouth Paper, 50. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Prothero, I. J. (1979). Arsans and polics, John Gast and his mes. Folkestone, Dawson. Tomlinson, H. (1973). The Ordnance Office and the King’s Forts, 1660– 1714. Architectural History, 16, 5‐25. Quail, S. with Hardiman, R. (1988). Civic Pride and Sterling Silver. The Civic Plate and Insignia of the City of Portsmouth. Portsmouth: Warner, J. (2004). John the Painter: Terrorist of the American Revolu‐ City of Portsmouth. on. New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press. Quail, S. (1994). The origins of Portsmouth and the first charter. Ports‐ Warner, O. (1974). Portsmouth and the Royal Navy (3rd edn). Ports‐ mouth: City of Portsmouth. mouth: Ryman. Quail, S. (2005). Portsmouth. A History and a Celebraon. Portsmouth: WEA (2010). Women at War. Portsmouth: WEA Local History Group. City of Portsmouth. Webb, J. (1968, 1977). The Siege of Portsmouth in the Civil War. Ports‐ Saunders, W. H. (1880). The Annals of Portsmouth. London: Hamilton. mouth Paper, 7. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Slight, H. and J. (1828). Chronicles of Portsmouth. London: Relfe. Webb J. et al. (Eds). (1981). Hampshire Studies. Portsmouth: Ports‐ mouth City Records Office. Surry, N. W. and Thomas, J. H. (1976). Book of original entries 1731– 1751. Portsmouth Record Series, 3. Portsmouth: City of Ports‐ Webb, J. et al. (Eds). (1989). The Spirit of Portsmouth. A History. Chich‐ mouth. ester: Phillimore. Surry, N. (1983). Petersfield and Parliament: One Hundred Years of a White, L. (1989). The Story of Gosport. Southampton: Ensign. Pocket Borough 1685–1783. Petersfield Papers, 7. Petersfield: Whitmarsh, A. (2007). Portsmouth at War. Stroud: The History Press. Petersfield Area Historical Society. Williams, G. H. (1979). The western defences of Portsmouth harbour Thomas, J. H. (1984). "Learned in the laws of England": Recorders of 1400–1800. Portsmouth Paper, 30. Portsmouth: City of Ports‐ Portsmouth, 1658–1685. Portsmouth Archives Review, 7, 1‐22. mouth. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth.

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 29

Webb, J. et al. (Eds). (1989). The Spirit of Portsmouth. A History. Chich‐ 17. Crime and punishment ester: Phillimore. Bateson, C. (1959). The Convict Ships 1787–1868. Glasgow: Brown Son Williams, J. F. (Ed.). (1913). The early churchwardens accounts of Hamp‐ & Ferguson. shire. Winchester: Warren and Son /London: Simpkin and Co. Beae, J. M. (1986). Crime and the Courts in England 1660–1800. Ox‐ Willis, A. J. (Ed.). (1963). Hampshire marriage licences. London: Re‐ ford: Oxford University Press. search Publicaon Co. Branch Johnson, W. (1970). The English Prison Hulks. Chichester: Willis, A. J., Hoad, M. J. and Grime R. P. (1971). Borough Sessions Papers Phillimore. 1653–1688. Portsmouth Record Series, 1, City of Portsmouth. Campbell, C. F. (2001). The Intolerable Hulks: Brish Shipboard Confine‐ ment 1776–1857 (3rd edn). Tucson Ariz: Fenestra Books. 14. Gender: women’s roles Carson, E. (1974). Smugglers and revenue officers in the Portsmouth area in the eighteenth century. Portsmouth Paper, 22. Ports‐ Day, A. (1998). The forgoen ‘mateys’: women workers in Portsmouth mouth: City of Portsmouth. Dockyard, England, 1939‐45, Women's History Review, 7(3), 361‐ 382. Coats, A. and MacDougall, P (Authors and Editors). (2011). The Naval Munies of 1797: Unity and Perseverance. Woodbridge: Boydell Guillery, P. (2000). The Further Adventures of Mary Lacy. The Georgian Press. Group Journal, X, 61‐9. Retrieved from hps://www.english‐ heritage.org.uk/content/imported‐docs/p‐t/marylacyweb.pdf Cramer, J. (1967, 1983). A History of the Police of Portsmouth. Ports‐ mouth Paper, 2. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Parkinson, C. N. (1948). Portsmouth Point, 1793–1815. London: Univer‐ sity Press of Liverpool. Cramer J. (1986). Death on the Common at Portsmouth, 1782. An Ac‐ count of the Trial and Execuon of David Tyrie for High Treason. Riley, R. (1974). The Portsmouth Corset Industry, in J. B. Bradbeer (Ed.) Portsmouth. Portsmouth Geographical Essays, 1. Portsmouth: Portsmouth Polytechnic. Garneray, L. (1957 reprint). The French Prisoner. London: Merlin Press. Riley, R. C. (1976). The industries of Portsmouth in the nineteenth cen‐ Garneray, L. (2003). The floang prison: the remarkable account of nine tury. Portsmouth Paper, 25. Portsmouth: Portsmouth City Coun‐ years' capvity on the Brish prison hulks during the Napoleonic cil. Wars (translated from the French with a foreword and notes by Richard Rose). London: Conway. Stedman, J. (2002). People of Portsmouth: The 20th Century in their own Words (Illustrated History). Derby: Breedon. Paerson, A. T. 1978). The naval muny at Spithead 1797. Portsmouth Paper, 5. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Warner, J. (2003). Marital violence in a maral town; husbands and wives in early modern Portsmouth, 1653–1781. Journal of Family Smith, P. (1994). The Portsmouth Convict Hulks 1780–1850 History, 28, 258‐76. (unpublished Dissertaon). Portsmouth: University of Ports‐ mouth. WEA (2010). Women at War. Portsmouth: WEA Local History Group. Sproule, H. D. (1960). James Burney's opinions on the naval munies of 1797. Mariner's Mirror, 46(1), 61‐2. 16. Immigraon/Ethnic diversity Thompson, P. (1980). Portsmouth Borough Gaol in the Nineteenth Cen‐ Green, G. L. (1989). The royal navy & Anglo‐Jewry 1740‐1820. London: tury. Portsmouth Paper, 33. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Geoffrey Green. Warner, J. (2003). Marital violence in a maral town; husbands and Lipean, V. O. (1954). Social History of the Jews in England. London: wives in early modern Portsmouth, 1653–1781. Journal of Family Was & Co. History, 28, 258‐76. MacDougall, P. (2005). Visitors, Selers and Asylum Seekers: Diversity in Warner, J. (2003). Violence against and among Jews in an early modern Portsmouth since the Late 18th Century. Portsmouth Paper, 75. town: tolerance and its limits in Portsmouth, 1718. Albion, 35(3), Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. 428‐48. Meisels, I. S. (1908/10, 18 March 1907).The Jewish Congregaon of Warner, J. (2004). John the Painter: Terrorist of the American Revolu‐ Portsmouth (1766–1812), Transacons of the Jewish Historical on. New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press. Society, 6. York, N. L. (2001). Burning the Dockyard. John the Painter and the Newman, E. (1951/5). New facts about the Portsmouth Jewish Commu‐ American Revoluon. Portsmouth Paper, 71. Portsmouth: City of nity. Transacons of the Jewish Historical Society, 17. Portsmouth. Perry, Thomas W. (1962). Public Opinion, Propaganda & Polics in Eighteenth Century England. A Study of the Jew Bill of 1753. Cam‐ 18. Other bridge MA: Harvard University Press. Berridge, D. W. (1984). Monuments and Memorials in the City of Ports‐ Roth, C. (1932/5). The Portsmouth Community & Its Historical Back‐ mouth. Portsmouth. ground. Transacons of the Jewish Historical Society, 13. City of Portsmouth (December 2006 updated December 2011). Statuto‐ Stedman, J. (2002). People of Portsmouth: The 20th Century in their ry List of Buildings & Ancient Monuments. Portsmouth: City of own Words (Illustrated History). Derby: Breedon. Portsmouth. Retrieved from hp://www.portsmouth.gov.uk/ Warner, J. (2003). Violence against and among Jews in an early modern media/Statutory_List_2011.pdd town: tolerance and its limits in Portsmouth, 1718. Albion, 35(3), City of Portsmouth (2011). Local List of Buildings of Architectural or 428‐48. Historic Interest. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Retrieved from Weinberg, A, (1985). Portsmouth Jewry. Portsmouth Paper, 41. Ports‐ hp://www.portsmouth.gov.uk/media/Local_List_2011.pdf mouth: City of Portsmouth. Wolf, L. (1934). Essays in Jewish History. Jewish Historical Society.

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 30

Dix, J. K. and Scaife, R. (2000). Locaon, geology, and topography. In Hind, J. and Phimester, J. 2014 Gosport Historic Urban Characterisaon Allen, Michael J; Gardiner, Julie (Eds.). Our Changing Coast a sur‐ Study (for English Heritage) vey of the interdal archaeology of Langstone Harbour Hamp‐ Jones, Eric L. (2010) Locang the Industrial Revoluon Inducement and shire (pp. 8‐10). York: Council for Brish Archaeology. Response. Doubleday, H. A. (Ed). (1903). Victoria County History, Hampshire, 1. King, P. W. (1995) ‘Iron ballast for the Georgian Navy and its producers’ London. Mariners Mirror 81.1, 15‐20 Doubleday, H. A. and Page, W. (Eds). (1903). Victoria County History, Knight R (2013) Britain against Napoleon – the organizaon of victory Hampshire, 2. London. 1793‐1815. Hampshire County Council (1986). Hampshire treasures: Portsmouth. Knight R, and Wilcox MH (2010) Sustaining the Fleet 1793‐1815‐ The Winchester: Hampshire County Council. Brish Navy and the Contractor State Hampshire County Council (2005). Threatened Historic Buildings in Lake J. and Douet J. (1998) The Naval Dockyards. A Themac Survey. Hampshire Register: Portsmouth. Winchester: Hampshire County English Heritage; unpublished report. Council. Retrieved from hp://www3.hants.gov.uk/bar_2005.pdf Lake, J. (2003) Themac Survey of the Ordnance Yards and Magazine Hodson, D. (1978). Maps of Portsmouth before 1801. Portsmouth Rec‐ Depots. English Heritage; unpublished report. ord Series, 4. Portsmouth: City of Portsmouth. Lavery, B. 1987 The Arming and Fing of English Ships of War 1600‐ Howell, A. N. Y. (1913). Notes on the Topography of Portsmouth. Ports‐ 1815 Conway: Greenwich. mouth: Barrell. Lawton R and Lee R (2002) ‘The Admiralty Connecon – port develop‐ Hughes, E. and White, P. (Eds). (1991). The Hampshire hearth tax as‐ ment and demographic change in Portsmouth 1650‐1900’ in Pop‐ sessment, 1665. Hampshire Record Series, II. Winchester: Hamp‐ ulaon and Society in Western Port Cies 1650–1939. Liverpool shire County Council. University Press. HWTMA/NAS, Hampshire & Wight Trust for Marime Archaeology & Macdonald, J (2010) The Brish Navy’s Victualling Board 1793‐1815 – Naucal Archaeological Society (2006). Forton Lake Archaeology Management, Competence and Incompetence Project: Year 1 Report. Macdonald, J (2004) Feeding Nelson’s Navy – the true story of food at HWTMA/NAS, Hampshire & Wight Trust for Marime Archaeology & sea in the Georgian era Naucal Archaeological Society (2007). Forton Lake Archaeology Project: Year 2 Report Morriss, R (2011) The foundaons of Brish Marime Ascendancy – Resources Logiscs and the State 1755‐1815 HWTMA/NAS, Hampshire & Wight Trust for Marime Archaeology & Naucal Archaeological Society (2008). Forton Lake Archaeology Thomas JH 1984 The Seaborne Trade of Portsmouth 1650‐1800 Ports‐ Project: Year 3 Report mouth City Council Mudie, R. (1838). Hampshire Its Past & Present Condion (3 vols). Win‐ Vancouver C (1810) General Views of the Agriculture of Hampshire. chester: Robbins. Wessex Archaeology (1999) The Royal Dockyard at Portsmouth, type‐ Page, W. (Ed). (1905). Victoria County History, Hampshire, 3. London: script report Constable. Wessex Archaeology (2000)The Royal Naval Bases at Portsmouth Man‐ Page, W. (Ed). (1911). Victoria County History, Hampshire, 4. London: agement Proposals typescript report Constable.

Page, W. (Ed). (1912). Victoria County History, Hampshire, 5. London: Constable. Reger, J. (1996). Chichester Harbour. A history. Chichester: Phillimore. Rudkin, D. (1986). Archaeology. Hampshire Treasures Survey, II Ports‐ mouth (pp. 1‐8). Winchester: Hampshire County Council. Swire, H. (1916). Tidal charts for the neighbourhood of the Isle of Wight. Portsmouth: Griﬃn. General Coad, J. G. (1983) Historic Architecture of the Royal Navy: an introduc‐ on., London Coad, J. G. (1989) The Royal Dockyards, 1690‐1850, Aldershot Coad, J .G. (2013) Support for the Fleet . Architecture and Engineering of the Royal Navy’s bases, 1700‐1914, English Heritage: Swindon. Coad, J. G (2005) The Portsmouth Block Mills. English Heritage: Swin‐ don. Cocro, W. D. (2000) Dangerous Energy: the archaeology of gunpowder and military explosives manufacture. English Heritage: London. Evans, D. (2004) Building the Steam Navy. The Royal Dockyards and the Victorian Bale Fleet. Conway Marime Press: London. Evans, D. (2006) Arming the Fleet. The Royal Ordnance Yards, 1790‐ 1945. Explosion Museum; Southampton. Hampshire Field Club c 1900 Decayed Hampshire Manufactures.

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 31

Appendix Asset Recording Sheet

Portsmouth Harbour Hinterland Project Heritage Asset Recording Sheet

Asset name National Grid Reference: Status: Is the asset nationally designated? Yes | No National Heritage List no. Historic Environment Record (HER) no.: Not currently on HER National Record for the Historic Environment (NRHE) no.: Not currently on NHRE Asset type (circle relevant) Building/Structure, extant | Building/Structure, non-extant | visible earthwork | cropmark/parchmark | archaeological remains | archaeological remains no longer surviving Photograph of asset or historic map Surveyor’s description: (What is the asset? What was it used for? How old is it? Who extract if no longer extant made/built/designed it? What is it made of? What shape/size/plan form is it? Are there any (eg OS 1st edition) distinguishing features of its outside/inside/surface or buried parts? How does it interact with its surroundings? What can you tell about its history? Condition)

Historic/Archaeological Dockyard Interest Themes (or Score relative importance 1-5 e.g. 1 = low contribution to significance) Ship building, Armaments Food production Shopping and Clothing fitting out and processing markets Hospitals, Education Religion/burial Recreation and Transport and Health, Welfare Socialising communications Accommodation Materials Military function Administration Gender provision and finance Immigration and Crime and Other (state)...... ethnic diversity punishment What features of the asset reveal these associations?

Integrity: How well preserved is it? Does it include evidence of several important periods of use and adaptation?

Community Value: What communities have a particular association with it and how?

Documentary references: Are there documentary and cartographic sources that provide further information on this asset?

Name of recorder: Date: Organisation: Email/phone: Contact details:

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 32

Site visit guidance sheet Risk assessment It is the sole responsibility of the researcher to ensure that there is permission for access the area for site visit and that the area and any buildings in it are safe. Ideally complete a site visit risk assessment form. Inform someone when and where you are going and ensure they have your mobile phone number and that you have their number. Phone the person before and aer the visit. Only view from publicly accessible areas and respect privacy when taking photographs. If the area looks unsafe or dangerous for any reason do not enter. You will need to take

Digital camera. Baery charged; memory card empty; autoset to take high quality images. Clipboard with copies of Ordnance Survey maps (not smaller than 1:10,000) for annotaon. Preferably covered with permatrace (stapled or clipped) for use with a 6H pencil in case of inclement weather. Research notes and toolkit survey proforma. Mobile phone and ID. Take client phone number in case of access diﬃculty etc. Hand-held GPS and compass for rural sites to locate new features (nong error margin) and for transects. The aim of the site visit Determine the topography and nature of the site and note exisng land use Provide further informaon on known archaeological remains within the site, in parcular survival / condion of upstand‐ ing monuments / built heritage such as idenﬁed on historic mapping and aerial photographs etc. Idenfy new / previously unrecorded archaeological / built heritage resources within the site Note past ground disturbance or landscaping within the site which may have compromised archaeological survival or bur‐ ied/preserved remains. Assess whether the historic or visual seng of listed buildings, scheduled monuments or other relevant designaons would be impacted by the proposed development (if required by brief). Instrucons On your photo map, note who carried out site visit and date, along with light and weather condions. The accuracy of the survey should be clearly stated. Note areas not accessed, giving reasons, and other limitaons such as crops or obscuring vegetaon growth or limited access. Sck to public rights of way or areas where access has been approved. Do not trespass. If anyone asks, you are undertak‐ ing an archaeological study. Do not menon proposals. Takes lots of photos, at least two of each site, and also general shots. Annotate Ordnance Survey maps arrows/photo no. showing direcon of photo along with useful notes/key in margins so as not to cluer map. Use hachures to illustrate the direcon of slope of earthwork features. For each known/new site provide: 1) a descripon 2) an interpretaon. Include type, dimensions (m), orientaon, surviv‐ al,, condion associated features. Qualify interpretaon with possible/probable/ known. Archiving. Take a photograph of your annotated photo map. Tips

Where possible, check where trackways / railways cross watercourses as there may structures of historic and / or land‐ scape interest such as fords, culverts, bridges or sluices. Deep rung from vehicles on unmetalled trackways can somemes expose archaeology, such as so ditch fills (although this may be geological) and structural remains (not to be confused with rubble metalling). Ideally, pasture / heath / downland /woodland should be walked in 20–30m transects. A compass bearing can be used to maintain the transect. If the site is under arable culvaon, it is worthwhile to overlook the field from all field edges as even slight undulaons in the topography and differenal crop growth may indicate buried archaeological features. Snging neles live on phosphate and may be found in places previously inhabited. Discovery of previously unknown barrows are not uncommon, in parcular on the false crest (this looks like the valley/hill summit but is actually the summit’s lower slope). Always note false crests. A site visit is a RCHME ‘Level 1’ survey (RCHME 1999 Recording Archaeological Field Monuments – a descripve specifica‐ on).

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 33

Site visit guidance sheet Guidance by landscape type Urban environment: Note nature and likely date of exisng buildings and current land use. Note the size and shape of land plot (narrow frontage/long thin plot indicates medieval burgage plot). Note and sketch on the photo map the locaon and extent of ground raising and truncaon from landscaping, terracing and detail changes in ground level across site. Compare the site level vs. pavement level. This is important for deter‐ mining archaeological survival potenal. Where possible note and sketch the locaon of exisng foundaons (e.g. slab, pad) and basements (extent/depth) which may have compromised archaeological survival.

Field Systems: Although the evoluon of field systems is best traced through cartographic and air photograph evidence, old field systems can oen be seen on the ground, parcularly in a germinang arable crop. Note any ridge and furrow earthworks (corrugated surface resulng from medieval ploughing) and extent, survival and condion. Note field boundaries and form, ie double hedge and ditch, bank and slight ditch (include dimensions) as these may help date the boundary. Substanal ditches and banks may be ancient, eg parish boundary. Make a careful note of the extent of mature hedgerows as these may be protected if they follow a boundary shown on the Tithe or earlier maps, and which will needed to be included in your assessment. Old plash‐ ing (living wale fence) may indicate historic stock proofing. Note past and current impacts such as ploughing, quarrying, land‐ scaping and other disturbance which may have affected archaeological survival. Woodland: Sinuous and zig‐zag edges are typical of ancient woods and may reflect successive small intakes of farmland from forest. Straight edges are characterisc of the post‐1700 planned landscape resulng from enclosure. Much archaeology may be preserved within woodland. External medieval woodland boundary banks will normally have a large bank and external ditch, pos‐ sibly with old pollarded trees on bank top or ditch side slope (even though they may now be inside wider woodland). Internal woodland boundaries may be present, indicang manorial divisions or old field systems, along with old quarries, ponds, saw pits and sunken lanes. Provide loose interpretaon if unsure. Coppicing is indicave of intensely managed woodland for charcoal etc. resulng in a tree stump or low stool possibly hundreds of years old. Pollarding is indicave of former woodland pasture (possibly within a deer park); similar to coppicing but with shoots above reach of livestock, resulng in ‘lumpy’ trees. Vegetaon species may indicate primary/secondary woodland (e.g. Oxslip ‐ rarely found in secondary woodland). Water Features: Water features are spring‐fed or use gravity and may be managed by channels, dams and sluices. They can be difficult to interpret. Watermeadows (irrigated pasture next to a river) will have a main drain controlled by sluices and a network smaller drains that look like widely spaced ridge and furrow; fishponds are typically triangular or rectangular and are somemes embanked or formed by a dam across a narrow valley; duck decoy ponds will have curving ditches leading off to lure wildfowl; medieval moats are typically 3‐6m wide dry or water‐filled ditches that partly or wholly enclose a single or double island; leats may feed a watermill, ponds may be part of a designed landscape or a water‐filled former quarry. Built heritage Photographs 1. Take in as much of the heritage asset as possible. Include at least one side and one end. 2. Only take photos of building detail if it is self‐explanatory. Include obvious dang features and inscripons 3. Include the heritage asset within site in views 4. Lots of general views, but try to include part of the site in each view, to provide context 5. Take photos of designed views (e.g. through gated entrances) and views on early illustraons Take photos towards site from nearby listed buildings, conservaon area, registered park Notes: 1. Note basic physical details (no need for architectural terms): number of storeys, basement, load‐bearing bricks, frame, mate‐ rials, roof type (pitched, hipped, flat), chimneys (if none, why not), likely age, likely funcon. 2. Look out for anything suspicious – is the building of heritage interest? The older the building the more changes likely. In par‐ cular note buildings that are not typical, have unknown funcon, are unusual, that do not fit typical building type. 3. Flag up remnants of original buildings (e.g. main building may be modern, lodge and boundary walls may be old) 4. Check external walls (parcularly with the gable ends) for evidence of former adjoining structures. Where possible determine if the building(s) has an added façade

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 34

Portsmouth Historic Hinterland 35