Study of the Parish Landscape

 The following essay was written as an independent study for level three

of the BA Honours degree in Local Policy, in 1997. The complete text is shown but the illustrations and appendices will be added later, as they need to be scanned separately.

 

STUDY OF THE PARISH LANDSCAPE

 

Karen Plumridge

January, 1997

 

 

 

“Professor Hoskins always emphasised that ‘everything is older than we think’ but even he did not realise just how far back in time much of the basic man-made framework of this country actually goes.” (Christopher Taylor, 1988). To what extent have subsequent studies of the wider English landscape provided us with the criteria by which to assess the delimited parochial landscape?

 

Professor Hoskins’ Making of the English Landscape was first published in 1955. It has been described as “one of the greatest history books ever written….because it established landscape history as a new and proper branch of historical study” (Taylor 1992). After more than forty years of being studied and written about by historians following in Hoskins’ footsteps, landscape history ought to be becoming more authoritative and clearer, but Taylor says that the opposite has happened; “The more detail we have gone into and the more carefully we have looked at the evidence, both on the ground and in documents, the more uncertain we have become of our conclusions”. This essay seeks to find out how far the published works of the last forty years can help the interested lay person make sense of the local landscape, and uses my own parish, East Hanningfield, as an example.

 

It would seem logical that the first step to take, when trying to interpret the landscape of a given area, is to establish whether or not its name provokes any clues. Both Morant (p.35) and Reaney (p.250) cite Domesday book as the earliest appearance of the name Hanningfield, where it was spelt Haningefelda and Haneghefelda. Reaney interprets this as meaning the open country (feld), of the people (inga), of hana or Han. Cameron explains the latest research into such compound names and concludes that they belong to an early stage of name-giving in Anglo-Saxon England. “The bulk of them presumably belong to the late 5^th to 7^th centuries. Names in –ingas and inga still form a unique and fascinating group and they remain the earliest and identifiable habitative place-names, even if they seem now not to have the special significance of high antiquity which once attached to them” (Cameron p.71).

 

Studies have found that the –ingas and –inga names do not coincide with pagan burial sites, which indicates an origin in the ‘colonisation’ stage rather than the ‘pioneer’ stage of Anglo-Saxon settlement, and that ham names predate –ingas and –inga names. From this we can assume that the area now known as East, West and South Hanningfield was named later than the nearby Woodham settlements.

 

We cannot assume that human settlement in the Hanningfields dates from their naming. Although Hoskins thought that most of the Romano-British villages had been deserted by the 4^th or 5^th centuries (p.51), his opinion had been based upon an under-estimation of the population of Roman Britain; it is now known that the population of England during the Roman and Saxon times was even higher than it was at the time of the Norman invasion (Taylor 1992 p.8). The Anglo-Saxons did not move into an underpopulated, deserted landscape, so it is possible that they renamed rather than created Hanningfield. This possibility will be seen as significant when some aspects of the landscape are being examined, but is made more plausible by the existence of a Celtic name in the parish. The stream called the Pant is thought to get its name from the British word for valley (pant) (Reaney pp.xxvii & 564). Continuity in the naming of a landscape feature would seem to suggest that the area has been continuously inhabited at least since the time of the Roman occupation.

 

Having established the temporal extent of the Hanningfields, the next logical step would seem to be to identify the physical limits of my study parish. Anyone seeking to find the dramatic Saxon boundary banks illustrated in The Making of the English Landscape (p.78) will be sorely disappointed in East Hanningfield. Nothing like that exists.

 

Beresford says, “The boundaries of parishes and townships are among the oldest features marked on any modern Ordnance map. Only the Roman and prehistoric antiquities are older. No medieval building is as old” (p.27). He goes on to warn about 19^th century boundary changes and advises cross-checking with Tithe and Enclosure Award maps or with the first edition six-inch Ordnance Survey maps (Ibid). Following this advice it has been possible to establish that some small alterations have taken place on the northern boundary; an area of Rettendon Parish has been brought into the parish on the eastern side, and a protuberance of about four fifths of a mile along Church Road towards West Hanningfield village had been amputated, leaving a more regular shape. The new land taken from Rettendon will be ignored for the purposes of this study, because to search the records of an additional parish would entail as much work again.

 

Having established where the original parish boundary ran it has been possible to examine some lengths at a distance and others at close quarters to see whether there is any subtle evidence to prove its importance. On the whole it looks much the same as the other field boundary hedges in the parish. In one place where two fields have been joined, the boundary is marked by a lone tree, in some others the hedge consists of one or two species plus oak trees and has obviously been planted relatively recently.

 

Before looking in more detail at the manmade landscape of my parish it is worthwhile looking briefly at the geology beneath. East Hanningfield is at the southern most point of the Tiptree/Danbury Ridge which runs Northeast/Southwest for about 25 km (15miles) its centre point being roughly 8km (5miles) East of Chelmsford. “During the Anglian Glaciation the ice was banked against the North side of the Danbury Hills” (Bristow p.62). This explains the large gravel deposits in parishes to the North, including the neighbouring parish of Sandon, and the reason that East Hanningfield has none. When the well in the Rectory grounds was being dug in the early 19^th century there was found to be 9.1m (25’) of “light brown imperfect marl” identified as Claygate Bed, and 128.02m (420’) of London Clay (Ibid p.14): the Rectory stands at approximately 60m (197’) above sea level. Bristow describes the soil which developed on the London Clay as heavy and poorly draining, extensively cultivated for cereals and sugar beet.

 

Being at the end of a ridge, East Hanningfield is hilly, although quite modestly so in national terms. The highest peak is 72m (249’) above sea level and the next 64m (210’). The hills provide the opportunity to see views of the landscape, which in the flatter parts of the county are hidden behind the first hedge. Although there are signs of modern agriculture and life in the forms of silos, radio masts, pylons, water treatment works, motor traffic and giant chicken sheds present in almost every view, the rural character predominates and gives an appearance of timelessness. Whether the parish landscape has changed little since Domesday Book or even Roman times remains to be determined.

 

When looking at the landscape in my parish, what you see is fields, for the most part enclosed by hedges, and a few farm houses and cottages dotted here and there. It would not be unreasonable to say that the fields are the landscape, but before looking at them in detail it is necessary to have a basic understanding of the administration with the parish in times past. In the early days of Christianity in England ‘parish’ meant “the territory within which a particular church ministered, and from which the church drew economic support” (Beresford p.36). As more churches were built, parishes got smaller. Parish boundaries became very important because they established the limit of the land from which tithes, one tenth, were due to the church, and the extent of the parish priest’s responsibilities (Ibid). It is not necessary to know the complicated history of tithes but it should be noted that tithes were converted to rent charge payments by the Tithe Commutation Act of 1836, which was the reason for the Award Maps to be drawn, and the rent charges ended in 1936 (Hey p.440). Tithes were a legal obligation by the 8^th century (Ibid) so were an important aspect of life for over a thousand years.

 

In addition to the parish, there was the manor which could be larger or smaller than the parish and would not necessarily have the same boundaries. The manor was “a system of social and economic organisation based on tenants holding land from a superior lord” (Ellis p.7). Freeholders held land for a cash rent, villeins paid rent but had to provide other services to the lord and cottars or bordars had no land and worked for the lord or his tenants (Ibid pp.9-10). Following the Black Death in the 14^th. century these definitions became somewhat relaxed in that villeins became ‘customary holders’ with deeds setting out the terms of tenure, and freeholders and customary holders could hold land by the other type of tenure and by leasehold. Customary hold is for the most part synonymous with copyhold tenure (Ibid p.12) which was only abolished in 1924 (Hey p.296).

 

Before the Norman conquest and at the time of the Domesday Survey, the three Hanningfields were held separately, but at some time during the reigns of the first Norman kings they came to be held by one lord. Morant records how William Montchensy held ‘Hanenfeld’ in the reign of Henry II, and how they were purchased by John Lord Petre, Baron of Writtle who died 11^th. October, 1635 (p.36); it would be unnecessary to list all the intervening lords of the manor. The Lordship of the manor remains with the Petre family, and Lord Petre retains ownership of the Tye, East Hanningfield’s village green.

 

At some time after the Domesday Survey a new manor was created in East Hanningfield, which is now called Claydons Manor. Morant says that William Claydone, who died in 1330, held it of Robert Lord Fitz-walter (p.36). This manor is of particular interest because it has a moat. No building stands within the moat: the timber framed manor house, Victorian farm house and modern bungalow all stand nearby. According to Cantor, moated homesteads belonged to the smaller feudal landowners, were in existence by 1150 and reached their high point during 1200-1325 (p.138). It is quite possible that the manor had been in existence for some considerable time before William Claydone’s death. Moats had the advantage of keeping water available in case of fire, of keeping wild animals away, of serving the additional purpose of being a fish pond and of being a status symbol (Ibid. p.139). It is suggested that, in parts of Essex, moated sites developed where woodland was cleared during the Middle Ages (Ibid. p.142). “Isolated moats are often positioned close to the parish boundary in formerly densely wooded areas and some historians interpret this an an indication that they date from the time when the last land in the parish was cleared for cultivation” (Hunter et al p.19). Claydons Manor is remote from the village and East Hanningfield manor and runs along the northern parish boundary, so we can surmise that it could well be the site of medieval woodland.

 

There is a misconception that field shapes and hedges date from the 18^th century, the time of Parliamentary Enclosure (Hunter et al & Taylor 1988 p.140). Taylor puts this down to Professor Hoskins’ concentration on the topic of enclosure, although Hoskins did not put forward the view of total late enclosure (Taylor 1988 p.140). “The enclosure movement… was indeed limited to a broad zone between Yorkshire and Dorset” (Ibid).

 

The first Parliamentary Enclosure took place in 1604, the last in 1914, with the vast majority in the second half of the 18^th century (Hey p.151). Turner notes that by 1600 Essex was almost entirely enclosed (p.38) and a search through the Acts of Parliament relating to Essex for the period 1695 to 1901 revealed no Enclosure Acts connected with East Hanningfield. The Walker map commissioned by Lord Abergavenny in 1615 shows that at least the lands in the Manor of East-West Hanningfield consisted of enclosed fields. From this it is safe to assume that there were no ‘open fields’ in East Hanningfield by 1600, but this raises the question of when, if ever, there had been.

 

“Though by 1300 there were various forms of open or strip field farming over much of England, this type of cultivation was not employed everywhere. There were large parts of the country where no strip fields existed and agriculture was based entirely on enclosed fields” (Taylor 1975 p.94). Hoskins notes that in Devon, Kent and Essex “most of the fields had been reclaimed direct from the forest and moorland without passing through the open field stage at all, or had been enclosed from open-field at an early date” (p.180).

 

There is a connection between isolated farmsteads or hamlets and enclosed fields (Taylor 1975 p.94), so it is relevant to note the earliest known dates of some of the farmsteads which are not sited at the village centre. Reaney associates Salesfrith Farm with Alexander ate ffryth in 1332; Hill Farm with Godfrey ate Hulle in 1327; Neville’s Farm with John de Nevylle in 1337; Romans Farm with Peter le Romeyn in 1254; Huntingdon’s Farm with John Huntyngdon in 1481 and Ralph’s Farm with Thomas Rolfe in 1485.  In addition to these outlying farms there are a few shown on the Walker map which existed in 1615 but do not now or had already been deserted. Reaney also notes an early instance of the use of field names in 1391, these were Smaldowne, thought to be Little Down, and Wellefeld, Well Field; both can be found on the Tithe map. So in East Hanningfield there were farmsteads distributed about the parish at a time when open field farming had just become established in other parts of the country. This would seem to suggest that if there were open fields in East Hanningfield, they did not cover the whole farmed area of the parish. 

 

One possibility is that as the population expanded during the middle ages new fields were cleared from the surrounding woodland at the limits of the parish and were immediately enclosed while the original open-fields still existed (Taylor 1975 p.94). Such clearance of woodland is called assarting. The presence of Nether Riddens alongside Greate, Upper, Middle, Lower and just plain Ridden on the Walker map suggest woodland which had been cleared, from the word ryding (Field 1993 p.67) or ryden (Reaney p.588). These fields run along the old Northeast parish boundary from behind the Tye towards Rettendon. Nether Riddens is now Great Reddings.

 

East Hanningfield’s field names are not particularly exotic but are interesting as clues to local social and agricultural history. Of the 96 fields having acreages as names on the Tithe Assessment all but three are accurate to the nearest acre. Thousand Acres is actually a little more than three, and is a fairly common example of the use of irony (Field 1993, p.260). It is a mystery why Great and Little 12 Acres should be so called (Nos 252 & 253). One is ten and the other six, so they are not even a twelve acre field that has been divided.

 

Amongst the names there are examples describing the productivity of the fields, such as Hunger Downs, Small Gains and possibly Wants Field. Some names refer to plants for example Thistly Field, Furze Field, Hop Hedges mead and Perry (pear) Field, and other to fauna such as Cow Field, Rookery Mead, The Rookery and Little and Great Ravens Nest Field. The rooks are still here, but not the ravens although it seems they were once common. There are shape names like Three Corner Field and Shoulder of Mutton, and Rainbow Fields are usually curved and when ploughed appear like the arcs of a rainbow.

 

Several fields have names which refer to pits. Apart from Clay Pit Field, the pits were probably marl pits. Bristow comments that, in the Chelmsford area, “numerous small pits… occur on the outcrop of the chalky Boulder Clay. Each farm appears to have had at least one such pit, and it is probably that the chalky clay was dug for local use in marling the soil” (p.92). Reaney notes that there is documentary evidence for the marling of bad land in Essex as early as the reign of Henry II (p.586) and Bristow supposes that “the practice probably died out with the establishment of good road and rail communications when better quality lime could be brought in from the chalk pits further afield” (p.92).

 

An intriguing name which has a significant history is Nightless Green Hoppet. A hoppet is a very small enclosure and Nightless comes from night leas which is a place where animals are kept at night (Field 1972). The Green was a small green outside the village which has been encroached upon and now no longer exists. From the Tithe map it looks as though Nightless Green Hoppet was part of that encroachment as does Long Slip. Since the Tithe map was compiled the last of the Green has been taken into Little Nightless and the road side hedge of Road Four Acres has been brought forward level to the line of the fence in front of Nightless Green Hoppet.

 

Nightless Green Hoppet

Not all of the fields on the Walker map of 1615 are named, so it is not possible to know for certain how many of them still had the same name in 1840 when the Tithe Map was compiled. Those that are recognisable are Periie Fielde, two Broade Fields, Pan Field Mead, Hop Hedges, Church Fields (Nearer Church Field), Parke Corner and Kugh Landes (New Lands). Black Pitt Fielde has become Three Cornered Field and the Pasture, which are now the playing fields, and Stocks Field is now the School. For some reason, the presence of black in a field name often indicates Roman remains (Richardson). The nearest known Roman settlement is at Downhouse Farm in West Hanningfield, just over the parish from Little Claydons.

 

The presence of Lodge Farm towards the South of the parish would appear to indicate the existence of a park at some time, and the Walker Map confirms this by denoting which percells (fields) were, or had been, in the Parke. Morant notes that Hugh de Vere “had license 27^th Edward I (1299) to enlarge his park at East Hanningfield, within the bounds of the forest, with eleven acres of land” (p.35). There is only one enclosure within the park on the Walker Map of this size and that is Park Corner, but boundaries within the park are likely to have changed between 1299 and 1615.

 

The forest mentioned by Morant does not mean woodland: it is the royal forest which, in the 13^th. century, covered the whole of the southern half of Essex and one fifth of England (Cantor pp.61 & 62). The forest was “an area outside the common law of the land and under special laws and regulations designed to protect the king’s hunting” (Ibid. p.57). During the first half of the 14^th. century the forest in South Essex dwindled to the areas which are recognisable today as Writtle and Epping (Ibid. p.68).

 

Parks were enclosed areas “to provide hunting for the lord of the manor and a source of meat” (Cantor p.75). They required elaborate boundaries to keep the animals inside. Frequently there would be a steep bank topped with a palisade or hedge with a wide ditch on the inside (Hunter et al p.17). The boundaries of the fields which make up the park, like the parish boundaries, do not look any different from other field boundaries in the parish, and, in fact, on the Southeast side the park and parish boundaries are one and the same.

 

“The park perimeter usually followed a compact course to keep its length to a minimum and a roughly elliptical to circular shape was common” (Cantor .75). Also, a park was usually at some distance from the manor house (Lasdun p.8). East Hanningfield’s park had an angular shape and was abutting or enclosing the manor house and church. It is possible that the shape of the park in 1615 was the result of several extensions, as Cantor says many parks began quite small and were gradually enlarged when the fortunes of their owners permitted (p.75). There is also the consideration of compensation. Lords were supposed to compensate any peasants who lost rights to the land when it was emparked (Lasdun p.18). Also it was usual to empark waste land or wood, not productive arable (Cantor p.75), so perhaps, in a parish where the land was being used intensively, there had to be a certain amount of compromise about the siting of the park. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, the park contains a source of water which fills the pond, which in turn drains into the Pant, the stream at the lower end of the park. Fish was a necessary part of the diet during Lent and on fast days, so fish ponds were an important element of any park (Lasdun p.6). The pond remains where it was recorded on the Walker Map.

 

The Pond from the South

It should be noted that within the park there could be fenced off areas for allowing coppice to re-grow, or new trees to mature because deer prevent natural regeneration. If hay was grown for Winter feeding, it would also need protection from the deer (Lasdun p.7). This means that some boundaries in the park might be older than the time when it was returned to agriculture, which is sometime before the Walker Map was commissioned. They might even be older than the park itself.

 

There is a local myth that the village of East Hanningfield was in the area of the church until the time of the Black Death when it moved up the hill to its present site along the Tye. This probably originates from people having read that isolated churches mean ‘abandoned villages’.

 

It has already been shown that East Hanningfield had a dispersed settlement pattern quite early, certainly before 1348 when the plague struck. Also the park surrounds the church and manor house. It is more likely that either the village was moved to make way for the park, or it was never there in the first place. At Rivenhall, in Essex, “an exceptionally detailed archaeological survey” has established that there was never a village near the church (Muir 1982 p.57).

 

The 19th century Church stands by the village and has the policehouse for a neighbour.

When the old church burned down in the 19^th century its replacement was built opposite the Rectory, beside the Tye, on a site called Bawdes on the Walker Map. According to Field, Tye (teag) in Old English meant an outlying Common, but later came to be applied to enclosed areas (1993 p.24). It would have been possible to close the Tye off at both ends, so it could be either of those definitions. What is odd is that beyond the Tye was the Common and, beyond that, Nightless Green. Bailey suggests that more than one green in a village is due to there having been more than one manor (pp.24-25), which seems to fit the circumstances, the Common and Nightless Green being in Claydons manor and the Tye in East Hanningfield manor.

 

Rowley says that village greens developed or were created form the late Saxon period onwards; that their origins are far from straightforward and “there is no single explanation to account for the phenomenon” (p.31). Greens were used for rough grazing and recreation (Hey p.207).

 

Commons are somewhat different in that specific people had the right to use the common in particular ways. These rights differed from one manor to the next but the more usual ones were pasture for cattle, sheep and horses; pannage for pigs; estovers for wood; piscary for fish and common in the soil for extraction or removal of sand, stones and such like (hey p.105). East Hanningfield Common looks as though it might have been much larger, at some time, than it was depicted on the Tithe Map. North of the Common, and roughly parallel with it, there is a continuous field boundary running directly from the Chelmsford Road to the Bicknacre Road at South Gibcracks Corner. It could be a continuation of the Bicknacre Road, because at that point the road bends sharply to the South. Whatever it means, it certainly makes a prominent line on the map.

 

The Common and Surrounding Fields, 1840

One question which has arisen during the research for this essay, and for which a satisfactory answer has not been found, is where was the 60 acre wood which is mentioned in the will of William Seamer, proved 13^th February, 1565/6? It appears again in the Feet of Fines 1590 and 1591 (Emmison pp.76 & 87). By a process of elimination it must have been in the Northeast of the parish, but there does not seem to have been enough space for it in one piece. Perhaps it straddled the Bicknacre Road or was in several parcels.

 

This essay has not attempted to trace the history of the local roads. Christopher Taylor says that, with a very few specific exceptions, roads are undateable (1992 p.191). In general it is probably safe to say that the Southend Road which runs through Rettendon and goes to Chelmsford is probably at least as old as those places, which are known to be Roman. The Main Road through the village will probably be as old as the Tye which is Saxon. The lane and footpaths to the church are likely to be as old as the manor, or at least as old as the places they connect with it. One piece of road which is not old is the section of Pan Lane from the first right-angle bend to the Southend Road. On the Walker Map there is no bend: the road continues straight where now a footpath heads for the Plough and Sail Public House. The most likely explanation for the detour is that the lane flooded from time to time because it crossed low ground close to the Pant, and so a route at a slightly higher level came into use.

 

To be able to gain an initial understanding of the landscape in East Hanningfield, it has been necessary to use a wide range of references. The primary reason for this is that very little has been written in the way of serious books about the Essex landscape. There are plenty of ‘coffee table’ books, but they do not provide the information needed to understand it. As has been shown, Essex is something of an individual: it does not fit in with the experiences of other counties. The task has been, therefore, to sort through many works to find facts and ideas which might be relevant, before applying those facts and ideas to my parish. It is safe to say that individually, studies of the wider English landscape are of little help when it comes to assessing the parochial landscape, in Essex at least. They would probably be of more use in the midland counties where landscape history seems to have been more conventional, or to have set the convention. In sum, the studies do provide the criteria by which to assess the delimited parochial landscape, but they do not make it a simple task.

 

Another difficulty is the landscape itself. The recent and continuing destruction of hedgerows in the parish means that even the most up-to-date maps are inaccurate. This causes problems when trying to relate what is on the ground to present and past maps. It also means that landscape features themselves are disappearing, and the more they are destroyed the fewer clues there are to the landscape of the past.

 

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

BAILEY, B. (1985) The English Village Green, Robert Hale Ltd., London. ISBN 0 7090 2339 1.

 

BERESFORD, M. (1971) History on the Ground; six studies in maps and landscapes, Methuen & Co. Ltd., London ISBN 416 15130 2.

 

BOWEN, H.C., (undated) Ancient Fields; A tentative analysis of vanishing earthworks and landscapes, British Association for the Advancement of Science, London.

 

BRISTOW, C.R. (1985) Geology of the country around Chelmsford; Memoir for 1:50,000 geological sheet 241, Natural Environment Research Council, London, HMSO ISBN 0 11 884335 4.

 

CAMERON, K., (1996) English Place Names, B.T. Batsford Ltd., London. ISBN 0 7134 7378 9.

 

CANTOR, L. Editor, (1982) The English Medieval Landscape, Croom Helm Ltd., London. ISBN 0 7099 0707 9.

 

EDWARDS, A.C. & NEWTON, K.C. The Walkers of Hanningfield, surveyors and Mapmakers Extraordinary, Backland Publications Ltd., London. ISBN 0 7212 0614 X.

 

ELLIS, M. (1994) Using Manorial Records, Public Record Office Publications, London. ISBN 1 873162 12 X.

 

EMMISON, F.G. (1993) Feet of Fines for Essex, Volume VI 1581-1603, Leopard’s Head Press Ltd., Oxford. ISBN 0 904920 26 7.

 

FIELD, J. (1972) English Field Names; A Dictionary, David and Charles, Newton Abbot. ISBN 0 7153 5710 7.

 

FIELD, J. (1993) A History of English Field Names, Longman, London. ISBN 0582 08158 0.

 

HOSKINS, W.G. (1985) The Making of the English Landscape, Penguin, Middlesex. ISBN 0 14 015410.

 

HEY, D. (1996) The Oxford Companion to Local and Family History, Oxford University Press. CN 3785.

 

HUNTER, J.M. HEDGES, J.D., ROBERTS, G.C.S. & RANSON, C.E. (1979) Essex Landscape No. 1; historic features, Essex County Council.

 

LASDUN, S. (1991) The English Park; royal, private and public, Andre Deutsch Ltd., London. ISBN 0233987193.

 

MORANT, P. (1778) The History and Antiquities of the County of Essex, Publisher unknown, London.

 

MUIR, R. & N., (1989) Fields, Macmillan, London. ISBN 0 333 43622 9.

 

REANEY, P.H. (1935) The Place Names of Essex, English Place Name Society, Cambridge at the University Press. ISBN 521 07505 x.

 

RICHARDSON, R. (1995) The Herefordshire Field-Name Survey, In Current Archaeology No 145.

 

ROWLEY, T. (1978) Villages in the Landscape, Orion Books Ltd., London. ISBN 1 85797 341 0.

 

RUMFITT, S. ASSOCIATES (1996) Public Rights of Way: Legislation & Responsibilities, Unpublished seminar paper.

 

TAYLOR, C. (1975) Fields in the English Landscape, J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd., London. ISBN 0 460 04159 2.

 

TAYLOR, C. (1992 reset of 1988 edition) Editor & reviser, HOSKINS, W.G. (1976) The Making of the English Landscape, ISBN 0 340 56648 5.

 

TURNER, M. (1980) English Parliamentary Enclosure; its historical geography and economic history, Wm Dawson & Sons Ltd., Folkstone. ISBN 0 7129 0982 6.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 APPENDIX THREE

 

Place names taken from the Walker Map of East West Hanningfield, 1615

(East Hanningfield only)

 

 

 

 

FIELDS Stable Field, Boade Fielde, Pitt Fields, Parke Meade, Lodge Meade, Sluce Meade, Cunnie Fielde (coney=rabbit), Hall Meade, Pan Fields, Panfielde Meade, Dolphins Grove (Dolphin was the Inn), Olde Pitt Fielde, Upper Hills, Gate Fields, Bushey Leaze Hills, Bushey Leaze, Pitte Fielde Meade, Hills Meade, Hills, Home Fielde, Perrie Fielde,  Tenakers (10 acres), Long hose (sock shaped?), Wyse Leaze, Wrights, Smiths Garden, Nether Ridden(s), Great Ridden, Ridden, Upper Ridden, Middle Ridden, Lower Ridden, Blackpitt Fields, Sterswell, Easte Fields, Churchlande Grove, Church Lande Fielde als Thisley Fielde, Churchlande, Tilingdon, Tilingdon Meade, Dolphins Meade, The Playing Place (football?).

CROFTS Bridge Crofte, Chalke Crofte, Barne Crofte, Lambe Crofte, Crouch Crofte, Rush Crofte, Hatches Crofte, Scarles Croft. HOUSES Dolphins, Amye Stiles, Bawdes, Pegas, Gowyers, Bells, Willis, Samons als Paprills, Huntingdons, Chaignells als Chains, Swiftes - scite of house orchard & yearde, Chittwood als Colde Stacies als Janins, Wheelers, Gegills als Royles, Couldde Dennis, Michells als Balshams, Cockwrights, Frenches, Neves, Ralph at Reves, Theyres, Folkes.

 

 

 APPENDIX FOUR

 

Maps of East Hanningfield in Essex Record Office

 

[D/DR] John Walker 1615. Contains field & house names, occupiers of land, basic architectural information and whether boundaries were hedged or fenced.

 

[D/DP] East, West & South Hanningfield surveyed for Lord Petre of Writtle, 1800. contains some field names and occupiers of land.

 

[D/DGe] Wyatts Farm surveyed by W. Polley, 1819. contains field names & names of adjoining owners.

 

[D/DDw P13] Hill Farm, 1813. Concerns cultivation.

 

[D/DQ 50/4] Little Claydons, 1813. Concerns cultivation.

 

[D/DU 34] Claydons Farm & Manor, 1835-50. 10 maps in a book. 1 or 2 fields to a page. Field names and crops in each field.

 

[D/Ke P2] John Dew mapped 211 acres for Filmer Honeywood. 18th century - not seen.

 

[D/DCm P1] Timothy Skynner mapped 200 acres for Honeywood in 1736 - not seen.