Saxon Charters and Landscape Evolution in the South-Central Hampshire Basin
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
ProcHampsh Field Club ArchaeolSoc 50, 1994, 103-25 SAXON CHARTERS AND LANDSCAPE EVOLUTION IN THE SOUTH-CENTRAL HAMPSHIRE BASIN By CHRISTOPHER K CURRIE ABSTRACT THE CHARTER EVIDENCE Landscape study of the South Central Hampshire Basin north of Methodology Southampton has identified evidence for organised land use, based on diverse agricultural, pastoral and woodland land uses in the The methods used to eludicate the bounds of the Saxon period. Combined study of the topographic, cartographiccharter s discussed below are based on a long and charter evidence has revealed that the basis for settlement standing knowledge of the areas under patterns had largely developed by the tenth century. Highly consideration. This was combined with organised common pasturing is identified within gated areas as topographical information given on the earliest being the origin of English commons in the later historic period.Ordnanc e Survey map (one inch, 1810 edition, Evidence for possible river engineering is discussed. sheet XI), particularly with regard to the parish Charter evidence suggests that this developed landscape, boundaries shown thereon. In some cases this was underwent reorganisation in the Late Saxon period, with ecclesiastical bodies at Winchester being the major beneficiaries.supporte d by knowledge of earlier documents. It Although dealing with a small geographical area, this study is accepted that much of the boundaries of these raises implications for the nation-wide study of the origin of estates will be conjectural. Where the boundary land-use traditions and settlement in England. appears to follow close to the earliest known parish boundary, it has been assumed this is the course of die charter bounds, unless there is good INTRODUCTION reason to think otherwise. It has been of help in this study to have The South Central area of the Hampshire Basin recourse to Grundy's pioneering work on the is delimited in this essay as that area formerly bounds in the 1920s (Grundy 1921, 1924, 1926, covered by the historic manors of North and 1927). However, differences in interpretation South Stoneham, Bishopstoke, and Durley. These noted by this research seem to suggest anomalies are all covered by Saxon charters giving bounds. in Grundy's methodology. Firsdy, it seems he may It is mainly a region of clays, with large patches have worked from maps without detailed of sand and gravel. Modern land uses are knowledge of the area he was discussing on the restricted almost entirely to pastoral and ground. He also appears to have worked from woodland regimes. Ordnance Survey maps that were current at die The area was still characterised in the time (that is 1920s editions). If diis is die case, die nineteenth century by extensive areas of common parish boundaries given on these maps would and woodland. Piecemeal development, both for have been misleading as a number of important housing and for industrial estates following the changes had been made between die earliest OS construction of the M27, threatens much of the maps and die 1920s. Although Grundy must have region at present, although large areas of recognised this, there is no indication that he woodland still survive for both forestry (Stoke referred to earlier maps to any great extent. Park Wood) and recreation (Upper Hamble It is further noted that some of Grundy's Country Park). This essay derives largely from the translations are at variance with those given in study of the bounds of inter-related charters of standard Anglo-Saxon dictionaries. This study the later manors outlined above. The post- makes an attempt to work from a translation of Norman evidence is considered in a separate the bounds that is more acceptable to modern essay (Currie forthcoming). scholars. 104 HAMPSHIRE FIELD CLUB AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY N t ~»—" -•»«_ /-v .-' i i15kl. N \ /I / nl Winchester /»-' > I S -w"v "~"-l 'Study Southamptor Area •"i n^rv Fig 1. Location map showing the study area CURRIE: SAXON CHARTERS AND LANDSCAPE EVOLUTION 105 The Charters Further, as Brookes' research does not seem to dispute the content of the charter, it might be Bishopstoke, Durley, and North and South allowed that the bounds given are those that die Stoneham are all covered by charters that give New Minster had claimed in the early tenth bounds. There is also a charter for Horton, but century, whether from tradition, or an earlier this does not have bounds. This setdement is not document now lost, need not concern this recorded as a manor in die Victoria County History, discussion. It has been decided, therefore, to take but has come to be identified by this study as a the bounds given as representing genuine marks 'lost' early settlement. that may have existed before die making of the The relevant charters are discussed Bishopstoke charter of AD 960. chronologically. Grundy's main point was that the boundary marks, Wifel's Stigele (Wifel's Stile) and Cuntan a) The Durley Charter (Sawyer 360, Birch 596). Heale (Cu ntan's Hollow) occur on both charters. This (Appendix 1) is a charter of King Edward to However, whereas the later Bishopstoke charter the New Minster at Winchester dated AD 900. It names these marks consecutively, the earlier grants lands at Micheldever, Cranbourne, Durley charter has six other marks in between. As Curdridge, Durley, Rigeleah (Slackstead) and both Wifels' Stile and Cuntan's Hollow appear to Candover, and gives bounds. Only those for be on the line of a stream, Ford Lake, it is Durley are examined here. Grundy gives the considered that the later boundary followed die Durley bounds much consideration on account of stream between the two points (Grundy 1924, their differences with the AD 960 bounds of 84-85). At least one of the Durley boundary Bishopstoke (Appendix 2), where the two manors marks indicates without question that the adjoin (1924, 82-85). This gave rise to his boundary has moved to the west side of the conclusion that the boundary was altered stream (mark 5: Of thorn stocce be westan burnam on between AD 900 and 960. tkone grenan weg — from the stump (stock) on the More recently, Brooks (1982) has suggested that west side of the bourne to the Green Way). this charter may be an eleventh-century forgery. Although Grundy was pardy able to associate He does not, however, seem to doubt the marks on the Durley charter with surviving authenticity of the content, as he considers it was features, he did not offer a detailed opinion on made to justify the administration of a disparate what parts of the estate of Bishopstoke were group of estates as a single unit of 100 hides (i.e. a included in Durley by this claim. The overall hundred) (Brooks 1982, 215). Interestingly, that impression he gives is that die boundary moved to additional part of Durley (roughly conversant the west of the stream to the north of the present with the area know in medieval times as East Snakemoor Farm, up to Knowle Hill, and then Horton) claimed here by the New Minster is the across country to 'Cuntan's Hollow', which was subject of a later dispute between the monks of St identified as the northern tip of Durley parish Swithun's Priory and Bishop Henry de Blois near Moplands Copse (1924, 84-85). This area of (1129-71) (Goodman 1927, 3, 12). How this land land covers about 200 acres, and includes the came to be disputed is not known, but it suggests entire extent of East Horton Farm as it was in the that the motives for the original forgery may stem nineteenth century (HRO 38M48/74). Brook's from a dispute between the bishop and New tracing of the bounds does not differ radically Minster in the tenth century. In this respect, a from Grundy's, as he argues it is not possible to charter of AD 963 x 975 (Sawyer 827, Birch identify the individual trees, 'green ways' or 1158) granting both Horton and Bishopstoke to 'small paths' mentioned (1982, 196). Although the bishop in the same document may be relevant generally agreeing with this point, this author (see below, charter d). argues that a long-standing knowledge of the area Although the bounds given by Grundy are can bring the bounds under closer scrutiny. largely accepted, fieldwork has enabled the The six additional boundary marks require present author to elaborate on these conclusions. detailed discussion. Grundy's opinion diat Wifel's 106 HAMPSHIRE FIELD CLUB AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY Stile was near Snakemoor Farm can be improved approximatley SU 498170. Both bounds are on. Although, Grundy seems to think that the sufficiently close to make little difference to the Durley boundary in this vicinity followed the overall interpretation. stream, that shown on the 1810 one inch From the stump the bounds followed along die Ordnance Survey map shows a slight divergence west side of the stream to the 'Green Way'. If the to the west. This takes in only a very small part of 1810 boundary does follow an old stream course, the western bank, and quickly resumes the this part of the boundary would follow this line modern stream a few hundred metres north. Such until it comes to the road at SU 502173. This a change could be explained by a shifting stream 'way' is of significance as it leads to die medieval course. This deviation need not be seen as an church of Durley, standing alone on a hilltop at argument against the AD 960 boundary of SU 505170. Although, the earliest part of the Bishopstoke following the stream for its entire existing church dates to the thirteenth century, a length between Wifel's Stile and Cuntan's Hollow, Saxon predecessor is possible.