if WZ, =i THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Volume 76 for 1981 [PUBLISHED 1982] THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE CHANGE OF TITLE The journals issued to Vol. 69 as parts of The Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine (Part A: Natural History; Part B: Archaeology and Local History) were for a time published under separate titles as The Wiltshire Natural History Magazine and The Wiltshire Archaeological Magazine. The sequence of volume numbers continued, beginning in each instance with Vol. 70. The magazine now reverts to its original title. The numerical sequence continues. WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE, 1981 Vol. 76 ISBN 0-9501965-7-6 ISSN 0262-6608 © 1982. WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL & NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY Produced for the Society by Alan Sutton Publishing Limited, Gloucester. Typeset Janson 10/12 by Alan Sutton Publishing Limited Printed in Great Britain by Redwood Burn Limited, Trowbridge EE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL §° °°” AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE __ . VOLUME 76 FOR 1981 (Published 1982) CONTENTS PAGE | SIBSTIROURUNE, NIG Ssp eC rhe ace Ae hc MP l PNPRIAL “PHOTOGRAPHY IN, WILTSHIRE }975'—81 by Roy Canham 22. oe 0. life. ce gece he eee eee ees 3 Ficssury Rincs: A RECONSIDERATION OF THE INNER ENcLosuRE by Margaret Guido and I.F. Smith ... 9 21 THe CHARACTERISATION OF Earty Bronze AGE JET AND JET-LIKE Materia By X-Ray Fiuorescence by G.D. Bussell, A.M. Pollard avd D.C. Baird ................ 27 EXCAVATION OF AN IRON AGE ENcLosURE AT GROUNDWELL Farm, BLUNSDON St. ANDREW, 1976 —7 Pym Ma stopnetg Gi pel Mis, aie la tcticte aus epnsdibeh sp vane vette cpa viet eps ocascBesans ete Mic eck Cie tan didnialo. yoe Goal dea Sten 3B INV ARDUOF HE BURE OB! CRICKLADE by-Jeremy Haslam: «f2.f5 Wve decdiena dae Duitiv esse cane de on ef Recent Acquisitions By Devizes Museum or ANCIENT British, SAXON AND Norman Corns Camus ANDlam OLDS OM gape: estat ss sfetasict hy = L a aS / re \ == ii fH \ re oN SSS y, SSS 4 \ FS \ SS ; SS LYS \ \ SES L ss i \ S > \ = ws \ \ S \ \ : S7 \ N Mdd|j/) 1 My Myra oe yeas 5 ; ~ 77 Mpg UMA Wet 7 . “, eS VS Z we 4i/ libn Monnaie ee Secs aa ERT TAR FAVA Angie ~< = AULT LR es oe is Ske pee ee ee ; es 0 50 100 150 te Si ake: 0 500 Figsbury Rings. Plan reproduced by kind permission of R.C.H.M. (England). Crown Copyright reserved. FIGSBURY RINGS 23 also of the space already enclosed. In an attempt to account for the anomaly, it might be postulated that an earlier feature had been exploited in preference to the usual expedient of digging quarry-pits close to the rampart. Pursuing conjecture one stage further, it is suggested that the most likely precursor would have been a Class If henge, the one type of monument which was regularly provided with a pair of opposed entrances. The size of the area enclosed, with diameters of some 219 m by 171 m, would be appropriate for a henge of this class in Wessex (Burl, 1969, 11). If this was the case, the bank would presumably have been thrown up on the outside of the inner ditch, thus providing initially a most convenient quarry. Once this was exhausted, recourse could be made to the next readily available source — the ditch of the putative henge — either on the first occasion or when the rampart was strengthened for the second time. The two original entrance causeways would have been preserved for ease of access to the interior; any remnants of the bank that might have been left i situ would be unlikely to have survived the subsequent ploughing. This hypothesis has no claim to originality; others have noted the henge-like appearance of the ground plan (cf. Cunnington, 1925, 48, 50; Wailes, 1976, 333) and Stukeley (1725, 137) had long since anticipated our attempt to account for the ‘missing’ bank. However, the finds described below, in particular the sherds of Grooved Ware in the Durrington Walls style, may now offer some support to the notion that a Late Neolithic henge preceded the hill-fort. Pending further excavations, other interpretations remain possible. Wailes (op. cit.) has suggested that the inner ditch might constitute a ‘ritual’ site of Iron Age date within the hill-fort; Collis (1977) has also drawn attention to a series of Late Bronze Age/Iron Age monuments which display peculiarities of construction reminiscent of the earlier henges, some of them apparently combining ceremonial and defensive functions. THE EARLIER PREHISTORIC FINDS (FIG. 2) The excavation report mentions only five sherds of ‘Bronze Age’ pottery; in fact there are 16 Late Neolithic and Bronze Age fragments, together with 13 worked flints. Each find is marked with a site code: ‘Ex. A’, etc., for finds from the ‘irregular holes’ in the central area and ‘D.’, etc., for those from cuttings in the inner ditch. Two of the ‘holes’, ‘H’ and ‘D’, may have antedated the Iron Age occupation; both yielded fragments of Grooved Ware. The fresh condition of the fragile sherds from ‘H’ suggests that these were an original deposit; the only other find from this feature was a flint flake. The slightly weathered fragments from ‘D‘ (described in the report as ‘All Cannings Cross type’) may also have been 7 situ, associated with two flint flakes and the single piece of antler found during the excavations. The ‘semi-circular enlargement’ at the edge of ‘D*, full of charcoal and burnt flints, seems to have been an intrusion responsible for the presence of part of a ‘mealing stone’ and two undecorated Iron Age sherds. The Beaker fragments from ‘A’ and ‘l were probably derived; there was an Iron Age sherd in ‘A’ and the numerous burnt flints from ‘I’ suggest the kind of activity recorded from Iron Age contexts on the site. The Beaker and Collared Urn fragments from the inner ditch had certainly been displaced from their original positions. Grooved Ware. The fragments appear to represent three vessels. 1 ((Ex. H’). Four sherds from the rim and body of one vessel; laminated fabric contains grog and shell. Below the rim three horizontal lines above vertical/oblique lines, all made by overlapping impressions of a small curved implement; similar impressions above and below the cordon. On the body a single vertical incised line separates panels of incised diagonal lines. 2 ((Ex. D’). Two body sherds retaining traces of a carbonized deposit on inner surfaces; compact fabric contains fine sparse grog and shell. Incised decoration, comprising horizontal and diagonal lines, represents part of a motif similar to that on the body of no. 1. 3 (Ex. D’). Body sherd, apparently from another vessel. Fabric as no. 2, but lacks carbonized deposit. Decoration consists of three vertical incised lines. All three vessels may be attributed to the Durrington Walls style as defined by Wainwright with Longworth (1971, 240—2). Beakers. Six vessels are represented by base and body sherds. Illustrated pieces are marked as follows: nos. 4 and 5, ‘D.c.2’; no. 6, ‘Ex. A’; no. 7, ‘D.c’; no. 8, ‘D.b.S’ (?surface); no. 9, ‘Ex. I’. In 24 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE QWQdsoo000 HosgosoyY s = FIG. 2. Late Neolithic and Early Bronze Age finds from the 1924 excavations at Figsbury Rings. Scale, 1:3. addition there are two small body sherds which appear to belong to no. 4, both marked ‘D.c’. All fragments contain grog; other visible inclusions comprise pellets of red iron ore (nos. 5 and 6), quartz sand (nos. 4 and 8), and sparse fine flint (no. 4). Individually the Beakers are unremarkable and were classed as ‘indeterminate’ by Clarke (1970, 504: no. 1183). Collectively they merit further comment. Apart from no. 8, which is too abraded to show fine details, the sherds have in common several distinctive traits. The impressed decoration has been executed with combs about one millimetre thick which had produced square indentations rather than the more common rectangular form. On nos. 4—6 plain zones have been left round the bases. Surface colours are ‘sealing-wax red’, noted by Clarke (1970, 86) as particularly characteristic of Wessex/Middle Rhine Beakers, otherwise occurring with significant frequency only in the European Bell Beakers (sbid., 434). The vessels from Figsbury are too fragmentary to permit firm attribution to either class but their remarkably uniform appearance does suggest that the phase of Beaker activity on the site was very short. Collared Urn. 10 (D.f). Fragment from the base of a collar, possibly refired; fabric contains grog and occasional grains of quartz sand. Surviving decoration consists of horizontal lines of coarse twisted cord impressions. Worked flints. The only item of intrinsic interest is the finely flaked flint chisel (no. 11). The implement lacks both of the original ends; there is no trace of grinding. The marking ‘E.R.S.’ indicates that it came from the excavation along the inner side of the hill-fort rampart. Flints from the ‘holes’ in the central area comprise one flake from ‘Ex. B’, two flakes, one utilized, from ‘Ex. D’, and a broken flake from ‘Ex. H’. The ditch cuttings produced two scrapers, a heavy retouched flake with bruised edges, and a further five flakes, one of them retouched and one utilized. (There is also a sample of the waste from the gun-flint workshop found in cutting ‘e’.) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS For help in the preparation of this note the writers wish to thank Professor Stuart Piggott, Miss J.M. Sheldon, and especially Mr H.G. Welfare of RCHM(E) who, having arrived independently on the basis of the field evidence at the hypothetical sequence of events that is put forward here, has most generously discussed the problems, suggested improvements to the text, and arranged for the use of the new site plan. FIGSBURY RINGS 25 REFERENCES Burl, H.A.W., 1969. Henges: internal features and regional groups. Archaeol. J., 126 1—28 Clarke, D.L., 1970. Beaker Pottery of Great Britain and Ireland. 2 vols. (Cambridge) Clay, R.C.C., 1925. A gun—flint factory site in South Wilts. Antig. J., 5, 423-6 Collis, J., 1977. Iron Age henges? Archaeol. Atlantica, 2, 55—63 Cunnington, M.E., 1925. Figsbury Rings. An account of the excavations in 1924. WAM, 43, 48—58; site plan inserted at p.143 Gater, J.A., 1981. Figsbury Rings. Ancient Monuments Laboratory Report, series Geophysics 25/1981 (Department of the Environment) Moore, C.N. and Rowlands, M.J., 1972. Bronze Age Metalwork in Salisbury Museum (Salisbury) Stukeley, W., 1725. I[tinerarium Curtosum Wailes, B., 1976. Dun Ailinne: an interim report, 77 Harding, D.W. (ed.), Hillforts: Later Prehistoric Earthworks in Britain and Ireland (London), 319— 38 Wainwright G.J. with Longworth, I.H., 1971. Durrington Walls: Excavations 1966—1968 (Rep. Res. Comm., Soc. Antig. London, no. 29) Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine. 76 (1982) The Characterisation of Early Bronze Age Jet and Jet-Like Material by X-Ray Fluorescence by G.D. BUSSELL, A.M. POLLARD AND D.C. BAIRD A confusion seems to have long existed in the archaeological world over the description of articles of jet-like appearance. Those which look black and shiny are normally identified as jet, whilst poorer quality laminating material is immediately referred to as shale, or Kimmeridge Shale. This classification, which rests almost completely on the surface appearance of the article can result in other, possibly misleading, conclusions being drawn particularly about the provenance of the material concerned. A preliminary investigation into Early Bronze Age objects of jet-like material from North Derbyshire and Yorkshire indicated that appearances could indeed be misleading (Bussell, 1976). Archaeological material from two museum collections (Sheffield and Hull) and from two EBA sites in North Derbyshire were analysed using Neutron Activation Analysis (NAA). Geological samples of jet and cannel coal were also examined in order to provide an accurate point of reference for comparison of results. It was discovered that the most important discriminatory element was iron (Fe), occurring in very much smaller concentrations in the geological jets than in the cannel coals. When the archaeological samples were examined it was possible in most cases to place an object into a jet or a non-jet category based mainly upon its Fe content. By this method many objects previously assumed to be jet were shown to be, in fact, non-jet. Table 1 shows a summary of the results obtained on the material from Northern England, divided up into general forms. The waste and semi-worked flakes are from workshop sites in North Derbyshire, thought to be utilising the local cannel coals (Swine Sty and Totley Moor). Not surprisingly, therefore, no jet was found amongst this material. The remaining objects are from burial sites, and show a mixture of raw materials. The ‘lignite’ is intermediate _ between jets and non-jets, and readers are referred to a forthcoming article in Archaeometry for a full -_discusson of this point (Pollard, Bussell and Baird, 1981). __ This preliminary work has now been continued by the authors at the Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, Oxford University. With the kind assistance of Mr. Annable _and Dr. Robinson, ready access was allowed to the “jet” and “Kimmeridge shale” objects in the Devizes Museum EBA collection. Analysis this time was by X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF), a more rapid method than NAA but similar to it in being completely non-destructive. New geological material from the University Museum, Oxford, and the samples originally examined by NAA were analysed in addition to the Devizes material to ensure that there was compatibility of results derived from the two methods. Anyone _wishing to have more information on the quantitative aspects of this work is also referred to the | forthcoming Archaeometry article. _ Again it was found that a low concentration of Fe was most important in the identification of jet. Presumably this jet came from the only large source in this country, the area around Whitby in North Yorkshire. Certainly the geological jet from Whitby matched in most major elements the _group of material identified by XRF as being of jet. _ Other elements of some discriminatory value were potassium, titanium, strontium, chromium, vanadium and zirconium. Of these, the most useful were potassium and strontium, although neither was reliable enough on its own. At no time was any attempt made to identify the provenance of the /non-jets (shales, cannel coals, etc.,), these being far too common in occurrence and too variable in composition to make it a worthwhile task. 28 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Following the examination of the Devizes material, similar analyses were also carried out on smaller collections of EBA objects from the Ashmolean, Salisbury and Dorchester Museums, and as expected Fe proved to be the main discriminatory element. Table 2 gives a summary of the results of our investigations. For each sample the museum number and form is given, followed by our identification of the material. The data on the Devizes collection has been published elsewhere, but is included here for convenience. The Wigber material is from an excavation in Derbyshire, and the results have been included in Table | rather than the summary for the South, Table 3. Of the total number of objects analysed from the South of England, about half were identified as jet (Table 3). The majority of these had previously been catalogued as “shale” or “jet/shale”. The remainder were a mixture of non-jets, possibly but not necessarily from the Kimmeridge area. This raises some interesting questions of an archaeological nature, in particular about the form in which the jet arrived in the Wessex area, the importance attached to it by its users, and the reason for the use of jet when other very similar materials were available much closer to hand. Some types of object appear to have been made from only one class of raw material (Tables 1 and 3). The non-jet types include rings (19 examples), pestle pendants (5), large conical buttons (2), large biconical beads (2) and ‘shale’ cups (2). We suggest that these represent the locally-made objects, but it is equally possible that they were imported from some other source of non-jet material. Of the remaining items, only the belt-sliders are not found in any material other than jet, although the majority of the long biconical beads (24 out of 33) and all but | of the 12 small biconical beads are jet. It is interesting to see that the rarer and more exotic forms such as the double axe bead and the fluted ring are made of jet, but with only one example of each we cannot be certain that they were not made from other materials. Counter to this argument, we note that the unusual belt/pulley rings (of unknown use) are found in both jet and non-jet. A striking example of jet and shale being found together in the same object is provided by the mace head from Dorset County Museum, Dorchester. The body is of jet, but the gold covered studs inlaid into the body are of some non-jet material, probably shale. Whether this was intentional (i.e. using gold to cover a less expensive material) or the result of some later modifications, we do not know. The main conclusions from this work are: i) jet and non-jet can be distinguished by a rapid and non-destructive chemical analysis using X-Ray Fluorescence; ii) items manufactured from both jet and non-jet materials are found all over England; iil) some forms, such as belt sliders, appear to have been made only from jet, whereas others (rings, pestle pendants) are found only in non-jet materials. A possible trend is that the more delicate and intricate objects were made only in jet; this may be related to the workability of the various raw materials. Our survey is far from complete, even for the Early Bronze Age. We hope to extend our work geographically to Newcastle and Scotland, and possibly at a later stage to look at jet and jet-like material from other periods. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors would like to express their thanks to Dennis Britton of the Pitt-Rivers Museum, Oxford for his advice and guidance, and to the curators and staff of all the museums that have lent us material. EARLY BRONZE AGE JET 29 REFERENCES Bussell, G.D., 1976. ‘A Preliminary Neutron Activation Analysis of Ornaments of Jet and Similar Materials from Early Bronze Age Sites in North Derbyshire and Yorkshire’, M.A. Thesis, University of Bradford. Pollard, A.M., Bussell, G.D. and Baird, D.C., 1981. “The Analytical Investigation of Early Bronze Age Jet and jet-like Material from the Devizes Museum’, Archaeometry 23, forthcoming. TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS FROM THE NORTH OF ENGLAND (Sheffield Museum & Hull Museum) FORM JEL NON JET ‘LIGNITE TOTAL Waste flakes — 19 l 20 Semi-worked flakes — 2 — 2 Biconical beads (long) 7 + — 11 Rings — 4 _ 4 Spacer plates l 3 oe + Disc beads l 3 —- + Belt sliders 1 — — l V-perforated beads _ l — — 10 36 H 47 TABLE 2 CATALOGUE NUMBERS AND TENTATIVE RESULTS Number Museum No. Provenance Description Material DEVIZES l DM900 Upton Lovell Golden Barrow Large conical button Non Jet 2 DM1058 Wilsford G7 Fluted bead Jet 3 DM1058D Wilsford G7 Fluted bead Non Jet 4 DM 1053 Wilsford G7 Spherical bead Lignite? 5 DM 1056 Wilsford G7 Double-axe bead Jet 6 DM1059 Wilsford G8 Large conical button Non Jet 7 DM926 Preshute, Manton Gla Fluted bead Lignite? 8 DM918 Preshute, Manton Gla Conical bead with Non Jet gold wire decoration 9 DM922 Preshute, Manton Gla Necklace of beads Lignite? 10 DM327 Amesbury G39 Biconical bead Jet 11 DM327 Amesbury G39 Biconical bead Jet 12 DM328 Amesbury G39 Small conical button Jet 13 DM311 Durrington G14 Pestle pendant Non jet 14 DM311 Durrington G14 Pestle pendant Non Jet 1D). DM311 Durrington G14 Pestle pendant Non Jet 16 DM312 Durrington G14 Large spherical bead Jet plz DM296 Normanton Down G15 Spherical fluted bead Non Jet (18 DM296 Normanton Down G15 Spherical fluted bead Non Jet DM332 DM332 DM332 DM333 DM 1076 DM 1075 DM944 DM944 DM947 DM947 DM947 DM947 DM947 DM946 DM306 DM305 DM305 DM305 DM355 DM355 DM356 DM356 DM356 DM356 DM357 DM357 DM357 DM357 DM357 DM 1336 DM 1338 DM 1339 DM474 DM473 DM475 DM465 DM464 DM794 DM795 DM795 DM1788 DM1788 DM1788 DM303 DM303 DM 1048 DM 1048 DM 1048 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Upton Lovell G2a Upton Lovell G2a Upton Lovell G2a Upton Lovell G2a Oakley Down Oakley Down Winterbourne Stoke G68 Winterbourne Stoke G68 Winterbourne Stoke G67 Winterbourne Stoke G67 Winterbourne Stoke G67 Winterbourne Stoke G67 Winterbourne Stoke G67 Winterbourne Stoke G67 Wilsford G32 Wilsford G32 Wilsford G32 Wilsford G32 Upton Lovell Gl Upton Lovell G1 Upton Lovell GI Upton Lovell G1 Upton Lovell G1 Upton Lovell G1 Upton Lovell G1 Upton Lovell G1 Upton Lovell G1 Upton Lovell G1 Upton Lovell G1 Locality Unknown Locality Unknown Locality Unknown Winterbourne Monkton Winterbourne Monkton Winterbourne Monkton Winterbourne Stoke Winterbourne Stoke Bishops Cannings Down Collingbourne Ducis G16 Collingbourne Ducis G8 Collingbourne Ducis G8 Collingbourne Kingston G8 Collingbourne Kingston G8 Collingbourne Kingston G8 Durrington G47 Durrington G47 Wilstord G3 Wilsford G3 Wilsford G3 Biconical bead Biconical bead Biconical bead Fluted ring Large flat button ‘Pulley’ ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Ring Small conical button Biconical flat bead Long biconical bead Long biconical bead Long biconical bead Ring Ring Long biconical bead Long biconical bead Long biconical bead Long biconical bead Small biconical bead Small biconical bead Small biconical bead Small biconical bead Small biconical bead ‘Pulley’ ring Conical button Conical button Large button ‘Pulley’ ring Button ‘Pulley’ ring Flat button Ring Biconical bead Long biconical bead Small biconical bead Small biconical bead Small biconical bead Small biconical bead Ring Ring Biconical bead Biconical bead Biconical bead Jet Jet Jet Jet Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Jet Jet Jet Jet Jet Jet Jet Jet Jet Jet Non Jet Jet Jet Jet Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Jet Jet Jet Jet Jet Non Jet Non Jet Jet Jet Jet EARLY BRONZE AGE JET 68 DM 1048 69 DM 1048 70 DM 1048 71 DM348 IZ DM1792 ASHMOLEAN 1 1940. 180 2 1937.171 3 City Farm Site 2 4 1945.99 5 1958.76 6 1932.44 SALISBURY l 97/61 2 97/61 3 97/61 4 98/61 5 98/61 6 98/61 ia 230/1933 7b 230/1933 8 230/1933 9 230/1933 10 2c4 16 11 2c4 14 12 191 13 192 WIGBER (Derbyshire) NIWA MN BW Nr — WIG75 118 WIG75_ 3300 WIG75 4161 WIG75 4159 WIG75 4407 WIG75 4408 WIG76 6041 DORSET 1 2 3 1954:3).4 1937.1276 1884.:9.37 Wilsford G3 Wilsford G3 Wilsford G3 Wilsford G39 Locality unknown Stanton Harcourt Stanton Harcourt Cassington Cassington Shrewton 5] Shrewton 5j Shrewton 5j Shrewton 5] Shrewton 51 Shrewton 51 Easton Down Easton Down Easton Down Easton Down Barrow 26 Angle Ditch, Wor Barrow Amesbury Wigber Wigber Wigber Wigber Wigber Wigber Wigber Maiden Castle Clandon Barrow Biconical bead Biconical bead Biconical bead 12 beads Conical button Fluted bead Fragment Belt slider Pestle pendent Pestle pendent Long biconical bead Ring Ring Long biconical bead Small biconical bead Small biconical bead Biconical bead Biconical bead Belt slider Fragment Cup Cup Fragment Biconical bead Biconical bead Ring bead Ring Ring Ring? Ring Fragment Mace head 31 Jet Jet Jet Jet Non Jet Jet Jet Burnt bone? Jet P) Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Jet Non Jet Jet Jet Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Jet Jet Jet Jet? Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Non Jet Body — Jet Studs — Non Jet 32 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF RESULTS FROM THE SOUTH OF ENGLAND (Devizes, Salisbury, Dorset & Ashmolean Museums) FORM JET SHALE ‘LIGNITE’ TOTAL — 22 — 15 l 12 Long biconical beads 17 Rings — Small biconical beads ll Small conical buttons 3 Fluted beads 2 Pestle pendants = Belt/Pulley’ rings 2 y l | oN Flat buttons Spherical beads Large conical buttons Large biconical beads — ‘Shale’ cups — Belt sliders 2 Necklaces l Fluted ring l — — 1 l Nm NDR RSE NY NMHe we r)MN | Double ring Mace head — |] KF NIN NINN Ww tmn (shale studs) — 44 42 3 oe) ‘© Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine. 76 (1982) EXCAVATION OF AN IRON AGE ENCLOSURE AT GROUNDWELL FARM, BLUNSDON ST. ANDREW, 1976—7 by CHRISTOPHER GINGELL with contributions by JENNIE COY, ANDREW DAVID and PETER FASHAM SUMMARY Excavation was carried out in 1976—7 of the greater part of an Iron Age enclosure in advance of industrial development. Within this double-ditched enclosure of several probable phases a sequence of four wall-trenched roundhouses was recorded, with ancillary structures probably used for crop storage. [he pottery assemblage is dated to the fifth to third centuries B.C. and compared to similar assemblages from Thames Valley sites. The animal bones contained principally the three main dom- esticates, with pig more abundant than on Iron Age sites elsewhere in Wessex. The enclosure is discussed as a possible variant of the ‘banjo’ form and interpreted as accommodating a single family unit engaged in mixed farming. INTRODUCTION The proposed construction of a new industrial estate necessitated excavation of an Iron Age enclosure at Groundwell Farm, Blunsdon St. Andrew (SU 157889). The excavation was directed by the writer for the Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Society and the Department of the Environment, and lasted from April 1976 to December 1977 with interruptions in autumn 1976 and summer 1977. An area determined by a new road and associated landscaping was stripped by the developer, the Borough of Thamesdown and all features within that part of the enclosure were excavated. The finds and records have been deposited in Swindon Museum. GEOLOGY AND LOCATION (FIG. 1). The enclosure was first recorded on aerial photographs by Major Allen (Ashmolean, Allen 654— 56) and later by Dr. St. Joseph (Cambridge AF V 29), and was transcribed for the Wiltshire Sites and Monuments Record by R.A. Canham. It lies at 125m to 129m O.D. on the dip slope of the Corallian ridge which runs SW/NE through N Wiltshire and Oxfordshire, between the Oxford clay and gravels of the Thames Valley and the Kimmeridge clay vale which borders the Wiltshire downland (FIG. 1b). The bedrock of the site itself is Coral Rag of probably not more than 2m depth. Sections observed in a trench 150m SW of the enclosure during construction work in 1976 showed that the Lower Calcareous Grit indicated as silt and sand by the Geological Survey is absent; the Upper Corallian and Oxford Clay are here almost in contact, with only a layer of ammonite-bearing limestone 0.30m thick dividing the two, representing either the absent Lower Calcareous Grit or the Trigonia Perlata Limestones (Arkell 1927). Further downslope towards the stream the Oxford Clay is capped with only 0.15m of sandy detritus. This geological conformation causes the surface of the water table to rise to within 0.50m of the ground surface in the area of the enclosure for much of each winter, a factor that has determined several characteristics of the settlement, notably the absence of storage pits. It is also reflected in the place-name of the adjacent farm, Grundewylle in a charter of A.D. 962, probably meaning a ‘deep spring’ (EPNS, Wiltshire, 179). to Geological Symbols Alluvium Head River Terrace Gravels om a : 2 = = = . Sw NOON Lower Chalk Sn == Greensands and Gault Clay Sands and Limestones of Kimmeridge Kimmeridge Clay orallian mostly “Coral Rag” Limestone Oxford Clay Crop marks from aerial photographs Contours in metres OD surveyed within development | 125 area ra GROUNOWELL FARM Cricklade 5 Pond Road i ee ut pena, sf ae 0 50-100 ; : == I metres Ermin Way Roman: Roade. New Industrial Estate Penhill Housing Estate FIG. la. Location b. Geology of Swindon area c. Contour map of Groundwell Farm showing cropmarks recorded by aerial photography. AN IRON AGE ENCLOSURE AT GROUNDWELL FARM 35 The site lies within one of a group of irregular fields of undated enclosure, lately pasture but group ICE ‘ EG a BEERY DP. probably arable in recent centuries. Broad ridge and furrow lay across the site from N to S, the furrows cutting up to 0.15m into the bedrock, presumably part of a south field belonging to the 2) AY P y =P. ging medieval manor of Blunsdon St. Andrew. AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY The crop marks show a modified ‘banjo’ enclosure with adjoining ditches (FIG. Ic.). The enclosure itself is irregular in shape and double-ditched. The out-turned flanking ditches of the original S entrance are cut off by two apparently continuous ditches across the entrance passage. Two further lengths of ditch open out SE and SW of the entrance, that to the SW being angled, perhaps indicating a field boundary. Attached to the N side of the main enclosure is a small enclosure with no visible entrance. GEOPHYSICAL SURVEY (FIGS. 2 and 3). A fluxgate gradiometer survey was carried out by the Geophysics Section of the Ancient Monuments Laboratory in September and October 1976. The survey, recorded on the national grid, covered the unexcavated parts of the site. Only in the N part of the enclosure was the excavated area extended, by a further 10m., to examine part of the area surveyed geophysically. A summary report (A.M. Lab. Rep. No. G23/76) follows. THE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY by ANDREW DAVID The site responded extremely well to the survey carried out with a fluxgate gradiometer. The main ditch system of the enclosure and a pair of substantial and possibly later ditches show as clear positive anomalies against an undisturbed magnetic background. Soils derived from the type of limestone (Jurassic Corallian) that underlies the area are very susceptible to the magnetic enhancement processes of burning and decomposition that accompany human occupation. Magnetic susceptibility tests on soil samples show that the topsoil (16 x 10-6 emu/gm) is at least twice as susceptible as the subsoil (5 x 10~° emu/gm). Thus, wherever there is a relative increase in the depth of the topsoil at the expense of the subsoil, ie. over the more substantial of the archaeological features, the local magentic field is considerably increased. This enhancement is further improved where burning or decomposition have taken place, and where the anomalies are strongest it is probably due to a concentration of one or both of these processes. It is worth noting that of the enclosure ditches on the N half of the site, the outer has a weaker magnetic response than the inner. It is clear from the magnetometer traces that the ditches do not all belong to the same phase of construction. The double-ditched enclosure has a narrow neck-like entrance over 45m. long and 6m. wide not visible on aerial photography, the ditches of which open away from each other to the S whence they return towards the enclosure, forming partial enclosures of their own to either side of the entrance-way. Across this arrangement lie two parallel ditches best seen where they cut the entrance-way. Between these ditches the entrance anomalies largely disappear, perhaps the result of the latter being filled by the non-magnetic subsoil excavated from the former. It can thus be assumed that these two parallel ditches may, at least in part, be later than the enclosure complex. Another area of interest is at the northernmost limit of the enclosure, where the uniformity of the two ditch anomalies appears to be briefly disturbed, indicating a small gap in the enclosure boundary. Magnetic enhancement is strongest to either side of this gap — an occurrence to be expected at ditch terminals where rubbish may have accumulated. Additional evidence suggesting the possibility of an entrance here is the faint indication of ditches spreading northwards to either side of the gap. These appear to be insubstantial, although the strength of the anomalies may be reduced by the depth of soil on this part of the site. There may also be evidence here, along with the THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE GROUNDWELL FARM Magnetometer survey, 1976 @® -: grid pegs excavated features are outlined yess FIG. 2 Magnetometer survey of area unexcavated in 1976 AN IRON AGE ENCLOSURE AT GROUNDWELL FARM GROUNDWELL FARM Magnetometer survey, 1976 Magnetic anomalies < 10 gamma excavated features are outlined FIG. 3 Magnetometer survey: computer interpretation, oy 38 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE weaker response from the outer boundary, to suggest that the two ditches were not of contemporary construction. Scanning closely with the magnetometer over post-holes (both granary post-holes and post-holes in the hut circles) gave a response of 5-6 gamma, and the hut gullies themselves gave a response varying from 2-7 gamma. In such circumstances it was hoped that similar features might be detected beyond the area of the excavation. On a site where the soil response has been proved to be so good it is unlikely that the survey will have missed substantial features — particularly in the areas where human activity might have been concentrated. Smaller and weaker features such as post-holes may have remained undetected perhaps through being too small and or disposed unfavourably to the orientation of the survey, but despite this, it is safe to conclude that most of the important features of the buried site have been located. THE EXCAVATIONS The excavated area, consisting of the site of a new service road and of a curved screening embankment to the N, was stripped of ploughsoil for the developers with two box-scrapers drawn by Caterpillar D8 tractors. Excavation by hand was then carried out of an area of approximately 2,200 square metres within a grid whose coordinates are those of the National Grid. (The site recording used a false point of origin which is N.G.R. SU 155885 as EINE ESS. The National Grid reference is used in this publication). All post holes were half-sectioned, whilst wall trenches and beam-slots were excavated to provide both longitudinal and cross sections. Features were numbered F1 to F260, layers in sequence within features, the record being stored in a card index. Small finds of metal, bone, stone and glass were separately numbered and their co-ordinates, stratigraphical details and levels listed in the finds con- cordance. General finds, including pottery, were numbered in a single sequence of bag numbers (1—1207), finds from each stratigraphical context sharing one bag number, listed in the concordance. All recorded features were completely excavated apart from the main enclosure ditches. A section through the inner ditch on the eastern side was taken to 0.60m where the water table was encountered. The water table remained near this level during the two winter seasons and, in porous bedrock, could not be reduced by pumping. The upper part at least of the ditch was nearly straight- sided, the entire upper fill consisting of a ploughsoil containing abundant Romano-British pottery. No traces of bank material survived, nor were any structural features of Iron Age date found beyond the enclosure ditches. SUMMARY OF PHASES 1. A number of individual post-holes, eg: Features 24, 122. Since there are no Iron Age features outside the enclosure, it is probable that the earliest phase of the enclosure ditches belong to this eee 2. House 1. 3. House 2. 4+. House 3. 5. House 4. B Limestone Q Burnt Limestone g Sarsen Qrtint stippling indicates loam content Key to sections. 39 AN IRON AGE ENCLOSURE AT GROUNDWELL FARM ‘sainqeajy papsosai jje Surmoys urjd ag + “OA g9SL + 1688 As Olt O fa) un 06 = ee Lou ) ZolkY = 801) (s) Set ey) (lew Ao) (*s) oe ee) 661 a LSL L61 764 el ~ OD ae) sO 102 esl 8 BI ea) WHE) © 961 (uz) gsi TS) zl [a\ Bou =O (0 98 Bez) Cpuez vA) 6EZ h7A®) ezQ. C822 £€zO SU 1573 8890 -}- a. House 1 b House 2 c. House 3 d. House 4 & { N od es ep oe : e. Four post structures, unphased f. Other structures, unphased 0 10 20 30 40 50 a a metres Sa FIG. 5 The succession of phased structures. AN IRON AGE ENCLOSURE AT GROUNDWELL FARM 41 6. Four-post structures, beam-slot structures, small square foundations. At least some of these structures are later than the latest roundhouse, House 4; for example, four-post structure | and beam-slot structure A. It is however probable that some of these small structures were in use at the same time as the roundhouses. The form of the settlement at the end of its life remains problematic. The geophysical evidence suggests that the location of another house in the N part of the enclosure is unlikely. There is however the presumably later N annexe: which may have contained the latest house. Alternatively the enclosure may have been used only for storage, penning of stock or industrial activities in its last phase. 7. Probable Romano-British levelling of the enclosure, suggested by the fill of the inner ditch, F120. 8. A narrow straight-sided trench of Romano-British date, possibly constructed to support a palisade, F41, was cut across the settlement from the S, ending abruptly within the fill of F1. Settlement debris collected in an area about 30m SW of the enclosure. 9. Medieval open-field cultivation. At an unknown date a grave, F150, was cut into the edge of a strip-field on the site of House 4. THE ROUNDHOUSES (FIGS 6-8). A succession of four Iron Age roundhouses occupied much of the S part of the enclosure. These all employed, in greater or lesser degree, wall trenches in their construction, but show a variety of solutions to the problem of central support in large conical roof structures. The houses are described in chronological order. House 1 (FIG. 6) consisted of a single circular wall trench, diameter 13.0m with SE entrance and no internal support. None of the post-holes within the house was of a substantial nature, nor did any form obvious structural groups. On the N side of the wall trench the inner half of the packing material was capped with a compacted surface of small stone rubble. This would appear to represent a floor, indicating that the outside wall stood at the centre of the trench. Individual post positions were not distinguishable within the trench, and it is possible that the construction of such continuous foundation trenches was intended for plank-built walls employing cleft planking with larger cleft or round timber structural posts at intervals. (In this connection it may be noted that most clear post- pipes on the site preserved the form of squared timbers; see for example F115, House 2). Round- houses with plank-built walls are known from Northern Britain, e.g. West Brandon, Co. Durham House B (Jobey 1962, Fig. 4, Pl. I) and West Plean, Stirlingshire House II (Steer 1958, Fig. 2, Pls. XV, XVI). The entrance was wide (3.90m) and may have contained a porch or partitioning which has left no structural remains. This house was cut at FE and W by the wall trenches of House 4, by a Romano-British trench (F41), shallow post-holes (e.g., F2), and the entrance blocked by two later four-post structures. It was however later than a number of post-holes (e.g., F24, F122) which probably represent the earliest phase of activities within the enclosure. House 2 (FIG. 6) consisted of a central four-post stricture surrounded by a shallow wall-trench of 11.75m diameter. The entrance at the SSE was flanked by two large post-holes and small slots with terminal post-holes, probably the sides of an external porch. To the N, S and E the structure was surrounded by a second wall-trench 2.0m beyond the inner one and concentric with it except for inturned terminals at the SE and SW. This second trench is slightly deeper than the first and has an entrance with paired post-holes at the E and another in front of the porch of the inner structure. The discontinuity of this wall-trench, together with the relatively light construction of its entrances and the absence of evidence for replacement of the four-post frame, argue against the interpretation of this as a replacement of the inner trench, or as a separate structure. The inner four-poster (F. nos. 58, 68, 69 and 71) was set diagonally to the entrance, the well-cut post-holes showing no evidence of re-use or replacement. The inner wall trench (F65) contains three possible replacement posts (F. nos. 78, 143, 164), and is an accurate arc except on the SW side. The western main entrance post-hole / XO AEPFPOIOVIL e SS PEF XXVIII XXVI YP IN TPOKXIX ye N \ House 1 XXIX 1 XXVIII 1 XXVII i} 1 XXIII XXII Ep 24 _SF69N NF71 S_ F69 ! oy House 2 << wF68 € wF115€_ Eoay- wero N\\ F1411® i scale for House 2 sections 2 — a i metres FIG. 6 above: House 1, plan and sections; below: House 2, plan and sections. 126:20M ODF PE. ASsh Wwe bao ae House 3 oi 70 FIG. 7 House 3, plan and sections. 44 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE (F'.64) was not re-cut and does not adjoin the wall-trench. The eastern post-hole (F138) contains an inserted post position (F148). Both main post-holes appear contemporary with the porch slots (F141, F167), and F138 and F65 were probably packed in the same operation. The outer wall trench contains one replaced post-packing of Oxford Clay near the N terminal of the E entrance. The northern of the two E entrance post-holes (F115) was also recut and packed with Oxford Clay preserving a perfectly square post-pipe which contained a secondary fill of burnt daub. Its southern partner (F116) was not re-used. The pair of post-holes flanking the outer S entrance (F139, F140) were well matched in cut and packing. Erosion of the SW side of the whole structure makes interpretation difficult. Thus House 2 may be seen as a circular porched roundhouse supported by a central four-post arrangement and surrounded by an outer wall with main and side entrances. This may simply be an enclosed yard, but the comparatively substantial nature of the outer wall trench and its concentricity may represent a lean-to extension with a secondary roof-pitch. Such an ‘outshot’ could be attached to roundhouses, and is known from an example at Overton Down, Wilts (Fowler 1967, FIG. 1; 1968, p. 109). House 2 is replaced by House 3, whose entrance post-holes cut F45, and by House 4, whose wall-trenches cut both F45 and F65. House 3 (FIG. 7) comprised a roundhouse of 12.0m overall diameter which employed both a structural post-circle and a slight outer wall-trench. Its massive entrance post-holes at the SE of the outer wall-trench were the two largest post-holes, and the deepest features, within the settlement. The basic framework of the structure depended upon the circle of eight posts set in post-holes Features 171, 176, 192-5, 200, 201. These were ramped post-holes, as the sections show (FIG. 7), with post settings at the inner ends. The diameter of the post ring was 5.75m (between post centres), with an average circumferential spacing of 2.25m (range 2.00m to 2.30m), excepting a wider space of 2.90m inside the entrance between F194 and F195. Of the entrance post-holes, F79 had a principal post-pipe (surviving depth: 0.83m) with a probably subsidiary to the NE at the edge of the doorway (0.49m surviving). F137 had a single rectangular pipe near the N corner (depth 0.87m). The quantity and depth of secondary fill in both post-holes suggests that other posts may well have been set. The entrance diameter between main posts was 2.40m. The outer wall trench (F153) was shallow and ill-defined, with a number of slight lobes in the outer edge which might represent post-settings. The NW and S sides of the trench had been erased by ridge and furrow cultivation. House 4 is interpreted as a structure supported by a ring of eight posts, with rafters extending to eaves beyond an outer wall, probably of wattle and daub. In this outer wall was set a substantially built entrance with perhaps a shallow porch. Floor space must have been restricted by the annular framework of stanchions. This house replaced House 2, whose outer wall-trench was cut by F79 and F137, and succeeded by House 4, whose wall-trenches cut traces of F153 on the SE side. House 4 (FIG. 8) was the largest of the four roundhouses, 19.5m overall in diameter, and distinguished by its double wall-trenches and economy of design. The inner wall-trench (F4), of 17.5m greatest overall diameter, was roughly circular, with a rather flattened W side. This trench was accurately cut in the limestone with slightly sloping sides and a narrow flat base, and incorporated a small inturned porch on the E side flanking an entrance 1.50m wide. At intervals of 1.10m to 2.00m individual post positions (F. nos. 125-131) were recognised on the S side. These, however, may simply be replacement posts. The general absence of post positions, as in House 1, may suggest planked con- struction. An interesting piece of burnt daub was found in the primary fill of F4 but, as is described later, the impression of fine basketwork it bears probably does not relate to the construction of house walls. Very little daub was found in the wall trenches of any of the houses. The outer wall trench, F3, was similar, though shallower. It did not, however, continue to the entrance itself on the S side, and terminated well short on the N side. The average distance between the centres of the two trenches was 1.00m. The three centre post-holes, F13, 34 and 43, formed a triangle with sides 4.30, 4.35 and 4.30 metres in length, and were deep and cylindrical, quite different in character from any AN IRON AGE ENCLOSURE AT GROUNDWELL FARM 45 House 4 a F127 S F43 DUCA. i -f +4126-20M 00 oe ea FIG. 8 House 4, plan and selected longitudinal sections and profiles. All drawn sections in archive. 46 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE other post-holes within House 4. The broad feature no. 2, containing some burnt stone, may have been the base of a central hearth. House 4 cut all the earlier houses, and was cut by a number of features, including four-post structure I and beam-slot structure A, another possible four-post building. The house in its simplest reconstruction, employing the inner wall-trench and central trio of posts supporting a ring-beam, represents a substantial building of economical design. The problems would have been largely of size: 17.5m in diameter and, assuming 1.5m eaves and a 45° roof-pitch, a height of some 10.25m. This considerably exceeds better known houses like Pimperne, Dorset, (Harding and Blake, 1963) at 12.8m diameter and probably c. 8.0m in height. The size and design of roundhouses is most likely to have been determined by available timber, which in turn was determined by woodland management. The essential timbers would be three posts of c. 9.50m. Rafter lengths of between 10.0 and 12.5m (depending on construction of apex) could be achieved by judicious scarfing of shorter lengths if these joints were staggered in a tightly woven construction of horizontal rods. The outer wall trench presents more difficulty in interpretation. Since it is unlikely to form a complete replacement for the inner wall, having a gap of c. 8.0m on the eastern side, three possibilities are suggested: 1) a rainwater gully or drainage trench; 11) an additional wall to provide extra support at the eaves; or 111) a contemporary double construction with a cob or rubble infilling. To these suggestions the following objections may be raised: 1) there is no outfall for drainage and the fill was of rubble packing material; ii) the eastern terminals are assymetrical. This would perhaps be explained by the presence of an outer storm-porch and annexe which have left no structural remains; 111) although an outermost wall of cob between planked or hurdle shuttering is an attractive solution to the problems of thrust imposed by between five and ten tonnes of thatch (when dry) on rafters between 10.0 and 12.5m in length, there are no stratigraphical indications to support this interpretation. No remains of any construction material used above subsoil level could have survived the erosion of ridge and furrow and post-enclosure cultivations. However, the secondary fill of the wall trenches was largely loam and refuse, suggesting that timber walls were removed or burnt out. Some variations in the destruction of the building are suggested, since the E half of both trenches had a greater depth of secondary fill. OTHER STRUCTURES AND FEATURES Four-post structures (Figs 4, 9). Seven four-post structures can be identified with some certainty and others may exist amongst the remaining post-holes. Their shapes and principal dimensions between post-hole (or pipe) centres are as follows: Features Longest side Shortest side Shape (metres) (metres) I 20: 25, ~ 26, 40 2.50 2.40 square II 33, 34, 35, 189 2.60 1.90 trapeze Il 162, 163, 170, 186 2.50 1.30 trapeze [V 177,178, 179, 180 275 Plein) square Vv Dil D0 3he Dine s 3.60 2.50 rectangular VI 222 2256 25 252 4.05 3.00 trapeze Vil 241, 242, 243, 244 3.10 2.40 trapeze Clearly two structural types are represented: square and trapezoidal/rectangular. I and IV are square and of similar size, with well-matched post-holes. All the post-holes of I contained considerable quantities of carbonized grain in their upper fills. The traditional interpretation of above-ground granaries is still attractive in the case of these structures. Of the trapezoidal and rectangular structures, II, III and V have considerably broader post-holes on one side. V and VII have a fifth AN IRON AGE ENCLOSURE AT GROUNDWELL FARM 47 © 180 1 N N Structure 179 2 O TH@) 178 \O- Bronze Pin * 12680m OD 227 Structure 12680m0D+ Gai@e C253 Structure 12620m0D x Quern Stone 99°" G56 Ay7.¢ 7 126:80m OD NE & 126:80m OD Scale for plans FIG. 9 Four-post and other structures, plans and sections. ‘suonsas pur surjd ‘997 s1mieay puke sinjonNs IO[S WRAg OL “A GO W 02-971 ° 290° a7 oo °o8$ ° Ce) irs a HOS tela 2 Ose ee 22D Soe. SOP ge pia, See z a : y Be ea es P06 2O- : Is Pee) °, C0 d 2 o: a Z, os 3 A i SEES eG) 8 50Q; AER ESE OD 9 ER: D Beery Cae ep. g S Oo C SEE eet ( SBMESS g PR L2O DAES ghee ECS 8S rob ANS 2.5 §0. 9 woe 3 402 4 ae ae . 2 % es ° ° QJ Q ob, Gry G CS 9 : 0 S502 92 Peg : 902 4 Coo? oot’ 6 Qe ad . Accession number 20.1981. Gilded on the reverse and with the remains of two thin silver strip-mounts affixed by four plugs to the obverse, to turn the coin into a piece of jewellery. Found at Edington (1981) and presented by A. Aldridge. From the same dies as BMC 1196 and the same obverse die as F. Elmore Jones lot 701. Henry I Quatrefoil on cross fleary type (BMC xv). Mint and moneyer unceraain. obv +hENRI[ | rev illegible Weight (1.01 gms.). Die ratio <. Accession number 45.1980. Found at Edington (1980) and presented by A. Aldridge. RECENT ACQUISITIONS OF COINS BY DEVIZES MUSEUM 91 28 Stephen Watford type (BMC i). Wilton, Tumas. obv +STIEL rev [+T]VMASEON:PILT] Weight 1.27 gms. Die ratio ?. Accession number 122.1981. Purchased from Baldwins, ex Glendining’s 13 Nov. 1974, lot 157, from the Prestwich, Lancs. hoard (1971). 29 France, denier of Deols under Raoul IV, V or VI. obv +RADVLFV$ rev +DADOLICO Weight (0.73 gms.). Accession number 70.1980. Type Poey d’Avant 1946. Dieudonne attributes this type to Raoul VI, c 1160. Pierced. Found in Marlborough and presented by N. West. BIBLIOGRAPHY Allen, D.F., 1961. “The Origins of Coinage in Britain: a Re-appraisal,’in Frere, S.S. (ed) Problems in the Iron Age in Southern Britain, 97 — 308. 1964 ‘A Study of the Dobunnic Coinage’ in Clifford, E.M. Bagendon: A Belgic Oppidum, 75 — 149. 1968 ‘The Celtic Coins’ in Richmond, I.A., Hod Hill Volume IT, Excavations carried out between 1951 and 1958 43 — 57. 1976 ‘Did Adminius Strike Coins?’, Britannia VII, 96 — 100. Evans, J., 1864. The Coins of the Ancient Britons. Gunstone, A.J.H., 1977. Ancient British, Anglo-Saxon and Norman Coins in West Country Museums (Sylloge of Coins of the British Isles, 24). Haselgrove, C., 1978. Supplementary Gazeteer of Find-spots of Celtic Coins in Britain 1977. Kent, J.P.C., 1981. “The Origins of Coinage in Britain’ in Cunliffe B. (ed) Coimage and Society in Britain and Gaul: Some Current Problems (C.B.A. Research Report No. 38), 40 — 42. La Tour, Henri de, 1892. Atlas de Monnaies Gauloises. Mack, R.P., 1966. ‘Stephen and the Anarchy, 1135 — 1135’, B.N.J. 35, 38 — 112. 1975. The Coinage of Ancient Britain (3rd edition, revised). Nash, D., 1978. Settlement and Coinage in Central Gaul c. 200-50 B.C. (B.A.R. — S 39). Poey d’Avant, F., 1858. Monnaies Feodales de France. Robinson, P.H., 1975 ‘The Savernake Forest Find of Ancient British and Roman Coins (1857), BIN J45. 11, 1977. ‘A Local Iron Age Coinage in Silver and perhaps Gold in Wiltshire’, B.N./. 47, 1—20. Rodwell, W.J., 1976. ‘Coinage, Oppida and the Rise of Belgic Power in South-Eastern Britain, in Cunliffe, B., and Rowley, T. (eds) Oppida: the Beginnings of Urbanisation in Barbarian Europe (B.A.R. — § 11) 181 — 367. Scheers, S., 1977. Traite de Numismatique Celtique II, La Gaule Belgique. Shortt, H. de S., 1948. ‘The Mints of Wiltshire’, Num. Chron. 6th ser.8, 169 — 187. ate ti SC ite Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine. 76 (1982) A NOTE ON THE TWELFTH CENTURY SCULPTURE FROM OLD SARUM CATHEDRAL by MALCOLM THURLBY In two studies on the sculptural decoration of the W front of Lincoln cathedral, added after the fire of 1141 by Bishop Alexander, George Zarnecki has suggested the influence of the W portals of Abbot Suger’s St-Denis which were completed by 1140.' Referring to the 1775 report and crude drawing by James Essex Zarnecki draws attention to the former existence of a single pair of column figures on the Lincoln central portal as a reduced copy of Suger’s exemplars.* He further makes a striking parallel between the inhabited scrolls on the jamb shafts of both places.’ The analogies may be taken further for the form of the beak-head decoration on the Lincoln central doorway is akin to the masks joining the medallions on the jambs of the S doorway of the St-Denis facade, especially with regard to the flattened, widely spread nostrils, and the finely drilled pupils of the eyes.*(FIGS. 1, 2). This comparison is particularly interesting for Zarnecki has shown that the Lincoln heads are similar to one from the cathedral of Old Sarum now preserved in Salisbury Museum.*(FIG. 3). Extending the parallel to St-Denis one notices the similar almond-shaped eyes with finely drilled pupils, and the shallow fluting of the tongue. (FIGS. 2,3). The connection between Sarum and Lincoln is not difficult to explain. The Sarum sculpture was the product of the patronage of Bishop Roger, 1102-39, the uncle of Bishop Alexander who commissioned the Lincoln work.°® It therefore seems likely that Roger’s sculptors were kept in the employ of the family after the completion of their work at Sarum by moving to Alexander at Lincoln. The relationship with St-Denis is rather more perplexing. There are of course no difficulties in seeing the influence of pre-1140 St-Denis sculpture 1. G. Zarnecki, Later linglish Romanesque Sculpture, London 1953, 20-28, 57; G. Zarnecki, Romanesque Sculpture at Lincoln Cathedral, 2nd. revised ed. Lincoln Minster Pamphlets, 1970; see also G. Zarnecki, ‘English 12th-Century Sculpture and its Resistance to St. Denis’, Tribute to an Antiquary, (Essays presented to Marc Fitch by some of bis friends, ed. F. Emmision and R. Stephens, Leopard’s Head Press, 1976, 84-6; for St-Denis see:— S.McK. Crosby, L’Abbaye Royale de Saint-Denis, Parts, 1953; W. Sauerlander, Gothic Sculpture in France, 1140-1270, London, 1972, 379-81; S.McK. Crosby, ‘The west portals of Saint-Denis and the Saint-Denis style’, Gesta, IX, 1970, Iff; S.:McK. Crosby and P.Z. Blum, ‘Le portail central de la fagade de Saint-Denis’, Bulletin Monumental, 131, 1973, 209ff; S.McK. Crosby et al, The Royal Abbey of Saint-Denis in the Time of Abbot Suger, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1981. 2. Zarnecki, 1970, 18, plate 28a. 3. Zarnecki, 1970, 17, plates 30 and 31. 4. For the Lincoln beakhead see:— F. Henry and G. Zarnecki, ‘Romanesque arches decorated with human and animal heads’, Journal of the British Archaeological Association, XX, 1957, 22-3. 5. Zarnecki, 1953, 22, 56; F. Henry and G. Zarnecki, 1957, 22—3. On the excavation of the sculpture at Old Sarum see Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, XXIII, 1910-11, 509, and XXV, 1912-13, 94, 98. I should like to thank Peter Saunders, Curator of the Salisbury and South Wiltshire Museum for facilitating my study of the Sarum sculpture under his charge. 6. On the patronage of Bishop Roger see R.A. Stalley, ‘A twelth-century patron of architecture. A study of the buildings erected by Roger, Bishop of Salisbury 1102-39’, Journal of the British Archaeological Association, Series 3, 34, 1971, 62-83 especially 7 ff for Sarum cathedral. Work on the cathedral was not completed by the time of Roger’s death in 1139 for William of Malmesbury tells us that Stephen appropriated the money Roger left for the completion of the cathedral; (William of Malmesbury, Historia Novella, ed. K.R. Potter, Nelson’s Medieval Texts, 39). The fact that this money was appropriated by the king and that Sarum inspired details are found at Lincoln after 1141 must mean that the sculptural decoration was executed in the 1130's. 94 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE FIG. 1. LINCOLN CATHEDRAL West central portal, detail of right ST-DENIS West front, right portal, left jamb, detail of mask, pre-1140. OLD SARUM CATHEDRAL Voussoir, c. 1135, from rose window? (Salisbury and S. Wilts. Museum.) jamb, after 1141. SCULPTURE FROM OLD SARUM CATHEDRAL FIG. 4. OLD SARUM CATHEDRAL Corbel, c. 1135. (Salisbury and S. Wilts. Museum.) FIG. 5. DREUX Fragment of capital, seated king. (By courtesy Yale University Art Gallery.) FIG. 6. ST-DENIS Head of a king from W. facade, c. 1140. (By courtesy Walters Art Gallery.) FIG. 7. OLD SARUM CATHEDRAL Voussoir, c. 1135, from rose window? (Salisbury and S. Wilts. Museum.) 96 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE on the post-1141 decoration at Lincoln, but how is one to account for the similarities between Sarum and St-Denis both being executed in the 1130's? It is reasonable to suggest that the grotesque heads in question are simply derived from sources in the west of France, for Zarnecki has demonstrated that the manner of application of the head to the voussoir at Sarum is dependent on sculpture in Touraine, Poitou and Anjou, while the Lincoln arrangement is specifically akin to that at Mesland, (Loir-et-Cher).’ But such an explanation will not account for further, more pronounced analogies between the Sarum sculpture and the St-Denis workshop. One corbel head from Roger’s cathedral is of particular interest for it provides a striking parallel for the head of a king from the Adoration of the Magi capital from the collegiate church of St-Etienne, Dreux, now in the Yale University Art Gallery, which, because of the close relationship with the head of a king from the west front of St-Denis now preserved in the Walters Art Gallery, Baltimore, must be attributed to the Suger atelier. (FIGS. 4, 5,6) In the Dreux and Sarum heads the bulbous eyeball with deeply drilled pupil, the clearly delineated eyelids and brows, the smooth cheekbones, centrally parted hair brushed to hug the upper forehead and fall to the side of the face, and the emphatic channeling of the philtrum between the nose and the upper lip, are all so close that an intimate connection is undeniable.(FIGS. 4,5). The parallel may be extended to the recently discovered head of a queen from the west-central portal of St-Denis, and the same treatment of the eyes and philtrum is seen in the Baltimore St- Denis head which also has a moustache growing from the nostrils as in the Yale Dreux king. (FIGS. 4, 5,6). It has been assumed that the voussoir from Old Sarum, to which we have referred in connection with Lincoln and St-Denis, came from a doorway.'(FIG. 3). Had this been the case then the head carved on the stone would have been placed upside down for the stone tapers from the bottom to the top of the head.'' It is true that such an arrangement would not be without parallel in the Romanesque period but as the only other voussoir found during excavation of the site tapers in precisely the same manner then one might question the placement of the heads on the voussoirs of a portal.(FIG. 7). Would it not be more logical to suggest that these voussoirs were not originally set upside down as part of a doorway but were placed round the correct way on the lower section of a rose window? Such a theory cannot be proven, but it is interesting to note that the motif of the rose window with a richly carved surround including grotesque masks is paralleled on Suger’s W front. '*(FIG. 8). Given the relationships between Sarum and St-Denis noted above, to which may be added the occurence of ‘ravioli’ ornament in both places, the possibility of the former existence of an elaborate rose window at Sarum becomes more tenable.'’ Although the lower voussoirs of the St- Denis rose do not include heads placed correctly for the viewer such an arrangement is adopted in 7. F. Henry and G. Zarnecki, 1957, 22-3. 8. For the Yale/Dreux king (no. 1938-103) see W. Kahn, ‘A King from Dreux’, Yale University Art Gallery Bulletin, 34, no. 3, Winter 1974, 14-29. For the Baltimore head, (The Walters Art Gallery 27.22, ex. coll. Kelekian, Henry Walters), see M.C. Ross, ‘Monumental Sculptures from St-Denis. An identification of fragments from the portal’, Journal of the Walters Art Gallery, III, 1940, 91-107; S. Scher, The Renaissance of the Twelfth Century, Providence, R.I. 1969, 149-55. 9. For the St-Denis queen’s head see L. Pressouyre, ‘Une tete de reine du portail central de Saint-Denis’, Gesta, XV, 1976, 151-60. A similar treatment of the eyes and the moustache growing from the nostrils is seen in the head of ‘Childebert’ from St-Denis in the Walters Art Gallery, see M.C. Ross, 1940, figs. 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, & 10. The latter feature is also seen in the four heads in foliage on the central capital of the right jamb of the left doorway of St-Denis west front. 10. Zarnecki, 1953, 56; Henry and Zarnecki, 1957, 22. 11. Stalley, 1971, 76, suggests that the application of these heads to the stone was ‘in an experimental stage’ for ‘two faces on the voussoirs were carved upside down, as if the sculptor had no model on which to base his work.’ Accusing the sculptor of such incompetence is, I believe, quite unjustified. 12. The tracery of the St-Denis rose is not original: see S. McK. Crosby, 1953, 39-40. 13. J adopt the term ‘ravioli’ after Stalley, 1971, 76. It occurs on the inhabited scroll column from St-Denis now in the Musee de Cluny, Paris: see Zarnecki, 1970, plate 31. SCULPTURE FROM OLD SARUM CATHEDRAL 97 FIG. 8. ST. DENIS West front, rose window, pre-1140 (tracery renewed). the left oculus of the S transept facade of Notre-Dame-en-Vaux, Chalons-sur-Marne.'* The masks and heads within symmetrical foliage on the Chalons-sur-Marne oculus are derived from St-Denis and therefore the inclusion of viewer-oriented heads at Chalons adds an important element of plausibility to the reconstruction of the Sarum voussoirs as part of a rose window. 14. For Chalons-sur-Marne, Notre-Dame-en-Vaux south transept facade and detail of left oculus see A, Prache. Champagne Romane, Zodiaque, 1981, plates 95 & 96; and W. Sauerlander, ‘Skulpturen des 12 Jahrhunderts in Chalons-sur- | Marne’, Zeitschrift fur Kunstgeschichte, 26, 1963, 97-124, especially 100-102, fig. 9. 98 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE The connection between Roger’s Old Sarum and Suger’s St-Denis is not that surprising. Suger and Roger were probably the greatest patrons of the arts of their period in France and England respectively.'? The precise nature of the relationship between the two works is problematical. Given their contemporary date the priority of one building over the other cannot be decided for sure. One can simply question whether there was a French sculptor working in England or an English sculptor working in France. Whichever the case the Sarum sculpture must be seen in connection with the most important sculptural programme of the time in Europe. '® 15. For the patronage of Abbot Suger see E. Panofsky, Abbot Suger on the Abbey Church of Saint-Denis and Its Art Treasures, Princeton, 2nd. ed. 1979; for Bishop Roger see Stalley, 1971, 62-83. 16. The impact of Suger’s portal design with the large sculptured tympanum, column figures and figurated archivolts was both immediate and prolonged in France, and had important ramifications, through intermediaries, in Spain and Germany. These major design elements of Suger’s doorway were to have little influence in England as Zarnecki has demon- strated: G. Zarnecki, “The Transition from Romanesque to Gothic in English Sculpture’, Studies in Western Art, I, Princeton, 1963, 152-8; Zarnecki, 1976, 84—6. The decorative elements of Suger’s sculpture are, however, important for England. The heads with foliage issuing from their mouths on order four of the Rochester cathedral west portal are derived from similar heads on the St-Denis rose, while the heads set in foliage medallions on order three of the same doorway are related to those on the central right capital of the north doorway of the St-Denis west front. The head at the apex of the wheel window at Patrixbourne (Kent), the left label stop on the south doorway of the same church, and the grotesque masks on the panels recently discovered in the Canterbury cathedral cloister are likewise akin to this French monument and its Parisian and north French derivatives. Finally, a head preserved in the Sainsbury Centre for Visual Arts, University of East Anglia, Norwich, probably of Kentish origin, which I am preparing for publication, is also related to Suger’s sculpture. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine. 76 (1982) NO 15 MINSTER STREET, SALISBURY, A FOUR- TEENTH CENTURY TIMBER-FRAMED HOUSE by J.A. REEVES and H.M. BONNEY ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION Investigation of No 15 Minister St by the Royal Commission on Historical Monuments in the course of its survey of the city of Salisbury revealed the presence of a timber-framed building which on the basis of the limited evidence visible, mainly roof timbers, was dated to the late medieval period. ! Recent extensive renovation of the property, in particular the stripping of the interior and the removal of the rendering and tile hanging from the rear (W) facade, exposed much timberwork formerly hidden. In addition to part of the roof most of the framing of the W end of the building has survived, as well as much of the framing of the N and S side walls. In the light of this new evidence a somewhat earlier date is appropriate for the building; the period 1340-70 is suggested. With the ready agreement of the owners, the Prudential Assurance Company, the Commission was able to make a record of the newly exposed features and this forms the basis of the following account, here published with the kind permission of the Secretary to the Commission. The building occupies a small plot, there is no garden or yard, between Minster St on the E and the churchyard of St Thomas on the W (FIG. 1). It is a characteristic example of a tenement which probably originated soon after the foundation of New Salisbury (c. 1220) as the standing for a stall backing against the churchyard and facing the then open market place to the E. Rows of such stalls soon encroached upon the market place and were subsequently rebuilt in more permanent form as shops and dwellings. Both No 15 Minster St, and No 13 on its S side, may be presumed to have developed in this way; No 17, on the N side, was a larger property which extended much further W along the N side of the churchyard. No 15 appears to have been built against the jettied N wall of No 13 leaving beneath the jetty and between the walls of the two buildings a narrow space 18 ft (5.5m) by 3 ft (0.9m) which at some stage, perhaps in medieval times, was incorporated into the ground floor of No 15 (FIG. 2, section A-A). During the rebuilding of No 13 in the late 19th century this arrangement was retained by the insertion of a steel-supported jetty. No 15 is a three storeyed building of three bays; two full bays to E and W with a narrower bay centrally between them. The W front is double-jettied, as was presumably the E front, but the latter has been replaced and, in the process underbuilt at ground and first-floor level, like the adjacent frontages in Minster St. As a result little evidence of its initial form has survived. Rebuilding has also destroyed almost all evidence of the construction and subdivision of the original ground floor, now ‘incorporated with the first floor into a single storey. A short length of the base of the original N wall, comprised of flints laid herring-bone fashion, has been uncovered below present floor level which, like the level of Minister St itself, appears to be higher now than in the medieval period. _ The framing of the walls of No 15 is of very substantial dimensions, comprising heavy studding with diagonal braces half-lapped into the intermediate studs. The principal posts are chamfered and stopped at each storey. The timbering of the W end is clearly intended to be seen externally; the diagonal braces are curved and decorated with multiple shallow cusping (FIG. 2). The central bay of the roof is defined by two tie-beam trusses with chamfered, lightly arch-braced collars, curved 1. City of Salisbury Vol. 1, 63, Mon. 52. Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, London 1980. 100 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE mee ea PS Ee MARKET PLACE = windbraces and butt purlins. The principals of the W truss, which alone is complete, are cusped and chamfered above the collar. A heavy soot deposit on the upper part of the S wall within the central bay suggests that it was once the site of a framed chimney but no structural evidence has been found of its former existence. The most distinctive feature of No 15 Minster St, and one as yet without any close parallel in Salisbury, is the extensive use of shallow cusping. Cusped decoration of braces is most widesread in Western England, especially the west midlands,’ though it occurs as far E as Berkshire, and it is best known in the deep-cut, flamboyant form, associated particularly with the 15th century and later. 2, Smith, J.T. “Timber-framed building in England’ Archaeological Journal 122 (1965), 148-9. NO 15 MINSTER STREET, SALISBURY 5 yr Ag@egagagBahaas& nr EN eS — OEE 3 l 4 Ba —— —_———S —SSSS=== mt” ii) Section looking South a 5 0 Composite Section A-A 30 Feet ==: Metres 0 1 10 | Space junder ‘jetty 10 , No. 13 | 102 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE FIG. 3 a. Wind-brace housing. b. Scarf joint of wall-plate. Shallow cusping develops somewhat earlier and is to be found largely in 14th century contexts. It appears in its most massive form at Baguley Hall, near Manchester, a building of the mid-14th century in which even the minor scissor-bracing of the wall panels is cusped.* In Southern England it is to be seen, for example, in the 14th century wall bracing at Harley Wespall church, Hants,* and at Fyfield Manor, Berks,’ and in the later 14th century barn at Church Farm, Lewknor, Oxon.° One of the more elaborate examples of this form of decoration is Fiddleford Mill, Sturminster Newton, Dorset, a manor house of c. 1375.’ A fragment of a window head of multiple cusped lights cut from the solid survives in the W gable of No 15 and may be compared to similar windows found in Salisbury at No 9 Queen St, dated 1306-14, and at No 49 New Canal, perhaps of c. 1330.° Other features of some interest in the context of 14th century carpentry are certain of the joints. The wind-brace housings into the purlins employ notched-lap joints (FIG. 3a), a type much used in the 13th century but apparently declining in use by c. 1340 in major buildings such as cathedrals.” How long such joints continued to be used among carpenters in the construction of altogether more modest buildings is as yet unknown. A stop-splayed and tongued scarf joint (FIG. 3b) is used in the construction of the wall-plate; similar, but not identical, joints have been assigned an early 14th century date.'° j-AuR A SUGGESTED HISTORICAL CONTEXT A succession of medieval deeds survive for No 15, beginning in 1360 and ending in 1465 when it came into the possession of Thomas Tropenell of Great Chalfield. Several of the deeds are therefore 3. Smith, J.T. and Stell, C.F. ‘Baguley Hall: the survival of pre-conquest building traditions in the fourteenth century’ Antiquaries Journal 40 (1960), 131-51. Mercer, E. English Vernacular Houses 164. Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, London 1975. Wood, M. The English Medieval House pl. xxviiA. London 1981. Mercer, E. op. cit., 194. Inventory of Dorset Vol. Ill Pt. 2, 273-4. Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, London 1970. City of Salisbury Vol. 1, 83-4 and 102. Hewett, C.A. English Historic Carpentry 149-51, 170. London 1980. ibid. 265. CN AMS _ Oo NO 15 MINSTER STREET, SALISBURY 103 preserved in the Tropenell Cartulary (compiled 1464-86), others amongst the archives of the City of Salisbury. The tenement can be securely identified by its position at the corner of St Thomas’s churchyard, and also because the adjoining properties to N and S belonged to the Vicars Choral, to whom they were given in the fifteenth century; both properties therefore figure in the Parliamentary Survey of Church Lands of 1649-50 and in the “Terrier of Lands belonging to the Vicars Choral’ of 1671."' At this period, No 15 belonged to the Elliot family. Thomas Elliot is recorded in 1650 as owning the property, and in 1671 the owner was ‘Mr Nicholas Elliot. In 1627 ‘Nicholas Elliot of Sarum’, (perhaps the father of Thomas) was married to Emily Nicholas, daughter of John Nicholas of Winterbourne Earls.'* John Nicholas’s aunt was Maria Tropenell, daughter and coheiress of Giles Tropenell of Great Chalfield, and it may be assumed that by this connection the property descended to the Elliots. Subsequent owners after Nicholas Elliot are not known as the deeds held by the present (1981) owner refer only to a nearby property, No 11. The recorded ownership of No 15 begins with Richard Riborgh, a very wealthy citizen, who had been active in Salisbury since at least 1347, buying numerous properties in the town. His own dwelling house, acquired in 1355-56, was one of the very large properties which occupied the N side of New St Chequer (New Canal).'* In 1359, a year before his death, Riborgh bought a tenement beside St Thomas’s churchyard, '* which can be identified with No 15 Minster St, and in 1360 when he drew up his last will and testament the arrangements for this property were detailed. The will is not completely legible because of severe ink staining, but enough can be deciphered to establish that Riborgh hoped to found a perpetual chantry for himself and his family in St Thomas’s church, endowing it with No 15 which he describes as “a tenement with shops, solars and cellars.” Failing that, the executors, and after them Riborgh’s heirs, were to hold the property themselves for the term of their lives and the life of the longest lived among them, to find and maintain a suitable chaplain to celebrate mass every day for ever for the souls of Richard Riborgh and others. From his will, Riborgh seems to have been a pious man; numerous bequests to religious houses and individual clergy are mentioned, including his private chaplain. His son Peter was still a minor and was left in the care of his mother Joan with a proviso that should she die also, Robert de Godmanston should act as the boy’s guardian.'* In the event it appears that both mother and son died soon after Riborgh and that his properties were disposed of by his executors.'° Significantly the Godmanstons were the next owners of No 15 Minster St and they did succeed, in 1380-81, in founding a perpetual chantry in St Thomas’s, in memory of Robert Godmanston. '’ In 1412, Margaret, widow of William Godmanston (son of Robert), transferred No 15 to John Swyft, ironmonger, describing it as ‘a messuage with chambers and solars built above, which she and her husband had acquired, as a shop, from the executors of Richard Riborgh.'* The implication of this deed is that the building was no longer used for commercial purposes. If No 15 was no longer a shop, could it be that the Godmanstons rebuilt or altered it to provide a dwelling house for the priests serving the Godmanston chantry which was founded during their ownership? This must 11. Sarum Dean and Chapter Muniments Parl. Svy. 1649-50 Large Bundle f.7, Bundle 38 f.3; Vicars Choral Terrier 12. Register Winterbourne Earls, Harleian Society 104/106 (1954). My thanks to Mr Reeves for this reference. 13. Sarum Corporation MS. Domesday Book III Register f.13. 14. ibid. f.16. 15. Sar. Corp. MS. Will of Richard Riborgh, dated 1360, proved 1362. There are two versions:— 1) I £.39. Complete, but partly obliterated. 2) G 23/150/88. A partial copy, largely concerned with a small bequest to the Mayor and Commonalty, supplies most of the wording obliterated in version 1. I am indebted to Miss P.A. Rundle for her kind assistance in deciphering the damaged version of the will. 16. Sar. Corp. MS. Dom. Bk. I and Dom. Bk. III Register. Deeds of Robert de Bechfonte, various dates 1363-84. 17. VCH Wilts. VI p. 148-50. 18. Sar. Corp. MS. Dom. Bk. II f.106. 104 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE remain conjectural, as there is no direct documentary evidence, but the site and size of the tenement would have been very suitable for the purpose. In 1547, at the Suppression, a Godmanston chaplain was living in a little house beside the cemetery of St Thomas’s worth 2s per annum quit rent to the Bishop of Salisbury,'? presumably No 15. A number of wealthy merchants had owned the tenement in succession and been responsible for its repairs; all had strong connections with St Thomas’s church. In the 1420s it was referred to as ‘Godmestoneplace’ in the will of John More (1428). One of More’s executors was Robert Warmwell, the next owner of No 15. On his death in 1447 he left to John Wyly two tenements with solars, cellars, and chambers, beside St Thomas’s churchyard, (Nos 15 and 17 Minster St) on condition that Wyly paid a chaplain 8 marks of silver for ten years to celebrate mass in the Chapel of the Trinity in St Thomas’s church, in memory of Warmwell and others.*! The Trinity chapel, in which the Godmanston chantry was located, was probably the N choir aisle of St Thomas’s, about to be rebuilt and enlarged after the collapse of the chancel roof in 1447. In 1455 John Wyly leased both 15 and 17 Minster St to William Swayn*” who in 1448 had founded two chantries in the S chancel aisle of St Thomas’s. In 1465 Swayn began to build a new chantry house, the present N vestry of the church which stands immediately W of No 15.7 He appears to have had no further use for No 15 for in that year, with his agreement, John Wyly gave the tenement to Thomas Tropenell.** Swayn had already given No 17 to the Vicars Choral some four years earlier.*° The founding of chantries and obits, both by ecclesiastical and secular patrons, was becoming increasingly common in the 14th and 15th centuries, and provided a livelihood for large numbers of unbeneficed clergy; ‘in some districts they outnumbered the beneficed clergy by nearly two to one . . . they were the ecclesiastical equivalent of the landless labourers’.*° Their duties were relatively light, their education often slender, their behaviour not always exemplary. A common dwelling house was often provided for them, the grander foundations providing a full college establishment under the supervision of a warden. For the lesser foundations the arrangements were less formal. Another example to No 15 Minster Street is the group of three houses at the opposite corner of St Thomas’s churchyard (Nos. 48-52 Silver Street) built for the priests of Bishop John Waltham’s chantry in the Cathedral, founded in 1395, and refounded in 1471-3 when the houses were rebuilt.’” Yet other priests were living along the N side of the churchyard, where a row of four small houses belonging to the Mayor and Commonalty were occupied in 1474-84 by the parish priest of St Thomas’s and three other chaplains.** The houses were removed in 1835 when the over- crowded churchyard was enlarged.” It is fortunate that demolition has not been the fate of No 15 Minster St. 19. Benson, R. and Hatcher, H. The History of Old and New Sarum being Vol. VI of Hoare, R.C. The History of Modern Wiltshire. 18. 20. Sar. Corp. MS. Tailors’ Guild Deeds No. 60. 21. The Tropenell Cartulary, ed. Davies, J.S., 235. Wiits. Arch. & N.H. Society, 1908. 2. ibid. 23. VCH Wilts VI, 149. 24. Trop. Cart. 240. 25. Sar. Corp. MS. Dom. Bk. IV f.5. 26. Pantin, W.A. The English Church in the 14th century, 28-9. Cambridge 1955. 27. City of Salisbury Vol. 1, 64, Mon. 63. Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, 1980. 28. Sar. Corp. MS. City Chamberlains Account Rolls 1474 and 1484. 29. City of Salisbury Vol. 1, 61, Mon. 37. Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, 1980. | Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine. 76 (1982) A DOMESTIC CRUCK BUILDING AT POTTERNE by N.B. CHAPMAN and P.M. SLOCOMBE No. 10, Coxhill Lane at Potterne is a cruck-built house which the Wiltshire Buildings Record were able to examine while extensive renovation was taking place in 1980 (ST 996583).' It lies about 100 yds. SE of the well-known 15th century Porch House aligned along the S side of Coxhill Lane, once the road from Potterne to Devizes. The site may well have been part of the Bishop of Salisbury’s estate at Potterne from the medieval period onward but its history cannot be traced until the mid 19th century when it was in the possession of Henry Stephen Olivier Esq. who held the manor of Potterne leasehold from the Bishop of Salisbury. At that time it was in the occupation of Jacob Pearce and was described as a house, blacksmith’s shop and garden of 2 roods and 32 perches with 7s Od payable to the vicar as rent-charge.’ Summary The building is situated in the lowland area N of Salisbury Plain where survivals indicate that cruck construction was common in the late medieval period. The house had a one-bay central hall open to the roof, flanked on the W by an unheated parlour and on the E by a through passage and a service room or rooms (FIG. 1). A date in the early 16th century is suggested. The plan, which also incorporates a hearth at the service end of the hall, is one frequently found at this period in the West of England and is similar to several examples recorded in Monmouthshire.’ Later features, including a timber-framed chimney, a wide-chamfered beam and close studding above and below a dormer window, suggest that the open hall was converted to two storeys in the late 16th or early 17th century. Architectural description The cottage is straw thatched and timber-framed and a pair of full crucks is readily visible at the W end (FIG. 2a). A closer inspection of the building reveals two further pairs of crucks now masked by later alterations. The cruck trusses are set about 13 ft. (c. 4 m) apart and the internal span of the building is 16 ft. (4.9 m) at ground floor level. The structure is set on a plinth of local greensand rubble. Some of the infill panels of the timber framing are still in wattle and daub, others have been replaced in brick. The cruck spurs joining the wall posts to the crucks have decayed and have been replaced in most cases by iron ties. The principal room of the building was the central hall and there is clear evidence that it originally had an open hearth. The whole of the roof area over the hall, including the ridge piece, purlins, windbraces, rafters and the battens for the thatch, is heavily smoke blackened. The lighting of the room can be, at least partially, deduced. In the S wall three peg holes in a rail indicate the position of a four-light mullioned window or the jambs and single mullion of a two-light window. At the front of the house one peg hole remains to suggest that there may, perhaps, have been a similar window in | the panel now partly occupied by the top of a later window. There was never a door which led directly into the open hall from outside. The sill beam runs unbroken along both the N and S sides of the room. The through passage to the E of the hall is, 1. A full photographic record and further notes and drawings are deposited in the Central Record of the Wiltshire Buildings Record in Devizes Public Library. The Record is grateful to the owner, Mr P. Kelly for his permission to examine | the building. 2. WRO, Potterne Tithe Apportionment, 1839. The plot is 216. The property is not included in the 19th century lists - of copyhold and leasehold possessions of the manor. 3. Fox, Sir Cyril, and Raglan, Lord, Monmouthshire Houses Part 1, Cardiff 1951. 106 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE FIRST FLOOR : 1 () 1 2 3 4 5 Metres SS ——————E———EEE—ES | ees te a pers eee ee ed Feet 10 5 10 15 20 19c extension at tt tt ia Let PARLOUR Former smithy GROUND FLOOR FIG. 1 however, an original feature as evidenced by the W jamb of the doorway on the N wall which extends below the level of the sill beam. The unheated parlour at the W end of the house was divided from the hall by a closed cruck truss. Some of the original framing of this partition still stands including the N jamb of the doorway. It is chamfered with a step and concave stop. It is likely that from the beginning the parlour end was ceiled over. The upper floor is supported by a central beam, similarly chamfered and stopped to the doorway and resting at each end on jowled posts which are integral parts of the framing. The window at the W end which lights the upper floor may be original but later timbers mask the frame. Access to the upper room cannot have been from the room below as the sawn off ends of the joists in the tiebeam show that, before the insertion of a late staircase, the joists ran across unbroken. There must have been a stair from the hall and a doorway through the partition, perhaps at the position shown (FIG. 2b).* The framing of the partition at first floor level is partly pegged and partly nailed. 4. The pitched lintel though of early shape is not an old feature. It is a replacement head made of two thin boards dating probably from the late 18th or early 19th century. A CRUCK BUILDING AT POTTERNE 107 a_i FIG. 2 a. West elevation b. Section A-A looking West. The timbers of the cruck truss at the W end of the house are much less substantial than those of the other two cruck trusses remaining. It is possible that they were being reused when the house was erected as the one to the S has two redundant mortices, one for a lower purlin and one for a collar. These mortices are not matched on the cruck on the N side which also has a redundant raking seating, perhaps for a purlin. The cruck blades of this truss do not reach the apex but extend to a few inches beyond the collar, which is original, in order to form the base of a half-hip. The roof of the parlour end originally had a pair of curved, plain windbraces about 12 ins (0.3m) wide on each side. They have all been removed but in the hall, where there was the same arrangement, two still survive. Both rooms also have a single row of purlins, usually halved on to the backs of the crucks but in the case of the cruck on the S side between the hall and the parlour, the purlin rests on a splint nailed to a post at the back of the cruck, (FIG. 2b). Another difference is that the purlin on the N side of the hall is chamfered but the one on the S is not. The lower end of the building to the E of the hall was extensively rebuilt in brick in the late 18th or 19th century. However, the lower part of some timber framing survives on the N side and a beam is embedded in the E end wall. This beam has the seating for a central post with ogee mouldings on each side of it. If it is in its original position it indicates an axial division of the lower end into two rooms and also that the lower end previously extended another bay to the E since the seatings for _ joists are open on the E side. It should be noted that the through passage is structurally in the service end and not in the hall. This may explain the need for another bay at the lower end. The chamfer _ stops at the far ends of the beam are of step and concave type like those on the central beam in the _ parlour end, the beam on the W side of the through passage and on the doorway between the hall and the parlour. This consistency may suggest that the beam is original and that the service end like _ the parlour end was originally ceiled. | Later development | Sometime after the original building of the house, when halls with open hearths had gone out of — | fashion, a timber-framed smoke hood with wattle and daub panels and a stone rear wall (reredos) was 108 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 1, lhe ee ee ee ea Ss 1 Vy, y a / cite Watt UT 0 TRIN 1 () ) 2 3 4 5 Metres Feet 1 0 5 10 15 20 FIG. 3 North elevation. constructed at the E end of the hall, probably close to the position previously occupied by the open hearth. The lintel of ash wood has a depressed four-centred head and a plain chamfer runs round the lintel and jambs. The lower parts of the jambs have rotted away so no chamfer stops remain. At the same time a new upper chamber was made above the hall. The stairs to the new chamber were situated at the rear of the hall next to the doorway from the through passage (FIG. 1).° A single beam above the fireplace lintel forms part of the framing of the timber chimney and spans the rear of the room acting as a trimmer for the stairs. A central summer beam was also inserted across the hall and given support at the S end by an additional timber nailed to what had been the lintel of the hall window. This beam is one of the most attractive features of the house. It has a broad 3% in (90mm) chamfer with a roll and concave stop and is decorated with St. Andrew’s crosses in circles inscribed at 6 in (152 mm) intervals along the chamfer of the E side, facing the fireplace. The chamber made above the hall was lit by a dormer window with diamond mullions and panels of close studding above and below, inserted at the same date. In the late 18th or early 19th century the E end of the building was almost entirely rebuilt in English Garden bond brickwork and was possibly reduced in length. The new brick end wall accommodated a chimney stack for a range on the ground floor and a fireplace with a hob grate in the bedroom above. The building was divided into two dwellings with the addition of a brick lean-to together with a new fireplace, front door and stairs at the W end. After 1900 the building returned to a single dwelling. The smithy had closed and its buildings, attached to the E end of the house, decayed. 5. Before the construction of the fireplace and stairs the doorway must have been in a slightly different position as mortices and peg holes for a partition run across the underside of the beam above it. The beam itself is framed into the cruck truss and must be original. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine. 76 (1982) 1 WESTCOURT, BURBAGE by N. J. MOORE Summary. A small vernacular house dated 1686 was studied during renovation, It was comparatively well appointed, and is a fine example of a developed timber-framed house built at a time when this method of construction was already declining in popularity. The house, at SU 226 618, was first seen during a field meeting of the Wiltshire Buildings Record in March 1981 in the Pewsey area. It had already been stripped and the outer walls wholly replaced, leaving only the original N wall enclosed by a later outshut, but much of the debris remained on site for examination. The datestone, simply carved with raised figures and border, provides an opportunity rare in Wiltshire for exact dating of vernacular timber-framing; although probably removed. from its original position during 19th century refacing, there seems no reason to doubt that it belongs to the building and records the date of erection. In plan it is a lobby-entrance house of the classic type developed in the 16th century, with a chimney in the middle, an entrance facing it on the S and stairs (formerly) adjoining it on the N, and with rooms on either side, here of roughly equal size. That to the W was the kitchen and had the larger fireplace, complete with oven on one side and a wooden seat across the further corner. The oven is original, although it has suffered repairs, and is an early domestic example; the brick-built cupboard opposite the front door is largely beneath the oven (partly shown in FIG. 1) and has been explained to the writer as a warm overnight house for dough, preparing it for rapid baking in the morning. The room to the E was the parlour, with the best bedroom over it; both rooms are heated and have small cupboards high up in the S jamb of the chimney. That the bressummer of the parlour fireplace is plain while those of the other two have chamfers with ogee stops suggests that it was originally concealed by an overmantel panel, for which the dowel-holes remain. Although the house is of one main storey with a semi-attic, the roof-space was also utilised originally as a loft, its floor carried on beams and joists tenoned into the rafters, and reached by stairs above the main ones; there is even a doorframe N of the chimney into the W room. The floorboards of the loft are now missing and may always have been loose (a practice known from 17th century inventories), and there is no evidence of original lighting. The outshut is not structurally part of the house and in its recent form was an addition; the lack of original windows in the back wall of the main build is compatible with an earlier impermanent outshut, but the evidence is inconclusive. The row of mortices in the studs and square holes in the brickwork visible in Section B—B (FIG. 2) indicate the former presence of a ceiling. The framing is in three bays, which are spanned by a floor rail, and there is a lower mid-rail between the studs, forming roughly square panels. It is characteristic of the late 17th century date that bracing, both in the walls and roof, occurs only in the end bays. The lower part of the central bay on the N is now completely open and it is uncertain how it was originally finished. There are signs of a lower intermediate rail, but the floor rail has no mortices for studs; possibly there was a _ back door and that in some way this explains the lack of them. - The brick of the base walls and of the nogging is original, as is clearly seen where it has been removed. The internal partitions, which alone remain on the first floor, were originally filled chiefly with bricks, but there were also small panels of wattle and daub, e.g. above the door-frames. The bricks are of irregular size (9% — 9% by 444 — 4% by 2 - 2% ins, 235-240 by 110-115 by 50-65 mm): and poorly laid, but are similar in size, colour and texture to those in the chimneystack. | THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 110 First Floor BY uv n « 8) = a D n Ge ° vu = Nn Ground Floor 30 Feet 1S 20 25) 10 10 0 Metres 1 FIG. | WESTCOURT, BURBAGE 5 0 5 10 15 20 Feet = et | I 0 2 4 6 Metres FIG. 2 Key for all Figures. ----=-- beams and joists ® ~~ section through original timbers —-— rafters . «, replaced sons: features now missing y Briclwuoet 2 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE ] O ] er — el ——l Metres D CO QAQAGSYN NAAQAAQAN Section A-A FIG. 3 1 WESTCOURT, BURBAGE 113 The sequence of construction is easily deduced. First the bricklayer built the base walls, then the house-wright framed the structure at least up to the roof, after which the bricklayer nogged the walls and constructed the chimney, the brickwork of the latter taking up irregularities in the first floor framing timbers. There is a space between the partition and chimney on the E which keeps the timbers well away from the upper fireplace where there is a hearth support of arched brickwork (FIG. 3). The timbers throughout the building are stout and well finished, those of the framing mainly straight. Beams and joists are chamfered with stops, the beams on both storeys having elaborate stops of known late 17th century Wiltshire type (FIG. 4) and the common joists on the upper floor (where alone they remain) have run-out stops. Doorways on the first floor are plain but one discarded from the ground floor was chamfered with base stops similar to those on the beams — a degree of elaboration seldom met with. Carpenter’s assembly marks are abundant and well preserved on the back wall. In general timbers were not clean enough to be identified, but at least one ceiling beam and part of the framing were of elm, though oak and one example of ash were seen also. Possibly the combination of elm for the framing and nogging of porous bricks was a bad one and led to the unusually rapid decay of substantial timbers. The roof is half-hipped and has eyebrow dormers lighting the upper storey, which are clearly original. In general the structure is typical of its date with collars, clasped purlins and diminished principals. The tiebeams are very short and tenoned into doorposts and the windbraces, generally omitted by this date, are short, almost vestigial features. The trusses in the end walls have collars clasping the purlins, and the ceiling beams are lodged in the brickwork. In the intermediate trusses the collars are lower, directly supporting the loft floor, and the purlins are braced onto them by short tapering struts, a simple stratagem to keep clear the maximum area of roofspace for storage purposes. Although the original owner wanted a small, well finished house, he intended to utilise every inch of it. Uae | Beam Stop 120 6 12 Inches 5 0 15 30 Cms FIG. 4 114 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am grateful to the owner Mr Simon Guppy for kind permission to study his house, to my colleague Peter Spencer for advice and practical assistance with the drawings, and to Dr Peter Fowler, Secretary of the Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, for permission to publish material partly prepared under the Commission remit to record buildings under threat. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine. 76 (1982) A SELECT ACCOUNT OF THE PRIVATE PAPERS OF BISHOP SETH WARD IN THE WILTSHIRE RECORD OFFICE by WILLIAM SMITH Comparatively few private papers of the bishops of Salisbury are deposited in the Diocesan Record Office.’ This dearth owes as much to the ambiguous status of these documents as a class of ecclesiastical records as to the vicissitudes of the history from which they are inseparable. For while the majority of such papers relate directly or indirectly to the administration of the diocese, they remain distinct from the general run of formal, official diocesan records by virtue of their frequently informal and unofficial nature. Thus, accounts, correspondence, notebooks, and a variety of other matter of a more or less private category might be removed by the bishop on retirement to be deposited, presumably, with his own family muniments, while disposal in the event of death in office seems to have rested with the dean and chapter,’ or perhaps an appropriate official of the episcopal household. In either case much material would have been lost or destroyed, adding to such disorders as those created by parliamentary confiscations during the Interregnum.* Losses probably occurred also during the 19th century, when collections from diocesan archives were removed to the Public Record Office in the wake of the reforming activities of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners appointed in 1835 to assume administration of episcopal and capitular temporalities.* Even then the history of dispersal or destruction was not at an end. Select bishops’ papers, falling prey with other diocesan records to the wartime demand for salvage, disappeared for all time at around 1942,° leaving the present sparse accumulation available today in the Wiltshire Record Office. This comprises the papers of bishops Seth Ward (1667-89), Thomas Sherlock (1734—48), John Hume (1766-82), Shute Barrington (1782-91), Walter Kerr Hamilton (1854-69), George Moberley (1869-85), and John Wordsworth (1885-1911).° The largest and historically most valuable collection is that of Seth Ward, whose episcopate covered a formative and critical period in the development of English nonconformity. Ward’s surviving papers here consist of his Liber Notitiae Generalis, or memoranda book; a copy of Sir Christopher Wren’s survey of the cathedral, made in 1669; and letters and other matter dating mainly 1671-83, and illustrating many of the bishop’s activities and concerns.’ The character of Seth Ward was as many-sided as his attainments were outstanding and diverse. His career as bishop has parallels with that of a distinguished predecessor in the see of Salisbury, _ John Jewel (1560-71), whose own times were similarly preoccupied with the issues of ecclesiastical _ consolidation and unity.* Like other Caroline bishops, Ward was faced with the delicate and difficult _ task of enforcing adherence to the established church throughout his diocese, and adopted a policy of _ discretion and moderation towards the uncertain, while invoking the terms of the Conventicle and Five Mile Acts against the openly recalcitrant. Whether by instigation of the Crown or personal | Formerly at the Wren Hall, Salisbury, but since May 1980, at Trowbridge. | See n.27. D. Owen, Records of the Established Church in England (Brit. Rec. Assoc.), 1970, p.13. Ibid. I am indebted for this information to Miss Pamela Stewart, former Assistant Diocesan Archivist. For a brief account of these collections, see Guide to the Record Offices, Pt. 1V, p.18. (Wiltshire County Council, 1973). Another collection of Ward’s papers is deposited in the Bodleian Lib. (Add. MSS. and Tanner MSS.); see n.28. J.E. Booty, John Jewel as Apologist of the Church of England (Church Hist. Soc.). , eCNIYAMWN 116 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE conviction, Ward seems to have been so successful in his prosecution of Dissent that, according to Walker, ‘there was not one Conventicle in the city of Salisbury, and but few in the whole County of Wilts; and these two were in the extream Parts of it towards Somerset-shire.”? Ward’s biographer, Walter Pope, relates that his subject’s thoroughness occasioned so much resentment that in 1669 the nonconformists petitioned the Privy Council against him, pleading that the persecution had ruined the cloth trade at Salisbury, thereby removing ‘the Livelihood of eight Thousand Men, Women, and Children.’'° In the event, the indictment of Ward proved unsuccessful, but there are indications that the Crown itself was becoming increasingly uneasy about some of the measures said to be employed by the bishop of Salisbury in maintaining the integrity of the established church." As a result of the more relaxed religious policies of James II, indeed, Ward is stated to have been enjoined to moderate his zeal and not ‘Molest the Dissenters.’'? Ward’s reputation as a persecutor derives in the main from Pope, however, and seems to be exaggerated, confuted as it is by the court and visitation records of the period. '° Besides his administrative abilities, Ward was known also for a kindly disposition which manifested itself in generous hospitality and innumerable acts of charity, the foundation of the College of Matrons at Salisbury being a lasting memorial to his concern for the aged and the poor.'"* No less great than his standing as a prominent churchman was Ward’s reputation as the distinguished mathematician and scientist who, as Savilian Professor of Astronomy at Oxford, was a founding member of the Royal Society.'® Bishop Ward’s first task on his translation to the see of Salisbury in 1667 was to restore the cathedral, which had suffered dilapidations as the result of neglect during the period of the Civil War and the Commonwealth. '° In 1669 Ward invited Christopher Wren, his friend and pupil at Oxford, to survey the cathedral in order to assess its defects, whereupon a draft ‘not above two sheetes’'’ was deposited with the bishop for future reference.'* The present copy amongst Ward’s private papers comprises eleven pages, and may represent an expanded version of the original survey. Closely detailed are faults in the structure and fabric of the tower and spire, transepts, roof, and other parts of the building, so that ‘proper remedies may be applyed to restore it; where age, injuries of weather or the neglect of it in times of trouble have occasioned weaknesse, and tendensy, towards Ruine.”'” Wren’s observations, supported by a number of sketches, are shrewd and informed, such as those concerning structural damage arising from the oldest fault in the cathedral’s design, the poor foundations sunk in marshy ground.*° Other remarks indicate, however, that Wren, in keeping with his age, could be insensitive to the technical and intellectual rationale underlying the methods of the medieval architect, whose ‘general mistakes’’ would be judged in a different light today. Wren’s advice was sought also in the design of the bishop’s seat in the cathedral. By terms drawn 9. J. Walker, Sufferings of the Clergy, London, 1714, p.159. 10. W. Pope, Life of Seth, Lord Bishop of Salisbury (Luttrell Soc. Reprints, XX1), p.71. 11. Ibid. pp.73-4. 12. Ibid. p.74. 13. V.C.H. Wilts. iii.45. 14. Fora brief history of the College see Particulars of the Life, Habits, and Pursuits of Seth Ward. . . , Salisbury, 1879, and V.C.H. Wilts. vi. 169-70. 15. For Ward’s life and achievements see J.M.J. Fletcher, ‘Seth Ward, Bp. of Salisbury,’ W.A.M. xlix, 1-16. 16. Pope, Life, p.65. 17. J. Aubrey, Brief Lives, ed. O.L. Dick, reprinted Harmondsworth, 1978, p.474. 18. The original draft seems to have gone astray (Aubrey, Brief Lives, pp.474—5). 19. W.R.O. Dioc. Rec., Bp’s. Priv. Pap. (Ward), Wren, [Survey of the Cathedral], p. 1. 20. Ibid. p.2. 21. Ibid. p.3. THE PRIVATE PAPERS OF BISHOP SETH WARD lly up at the beginning of 1672 between Ward and Alexander Forth,” the craftsman who had undertaken to execute the work for the fee of £58 5s. 6d., the seat erected in the choir was to have ‘the lower part. . . of good wainscote, the upper part of Deale with the proper Carvings and mouldings already agreed and directed according to the Said modell by Dr. Christopher Wren his Majesties Surveighour.’”? The agreement is signed by Wren and bears the signet of Ward, this comprising the device of the see of Salisbury combined with Ward’s private arms while bishop of Exeter: the Blessed Virgin impaling a cross flory.** Other papers relating to the work are bills for joinery and carving,** and Forth’s final account.*° Another of Ward’s friends was John Aubrey, the antiquarian and biographer, whose intimate and illuminating character-sketches posterity has valued so greatly. By his own account, Aubrey was himself responsible for saving a set of the bishop’s papers from an undignified end, though it is unlikely that this material forms the present collection in the Wiltshire Record Office. Aubrey’s account relates how a member of Ward’s household staff took advantage of the bishop’s decease to gain access to his personal property and abuse it with thoughtless familiarity. Shortly after Ward’s death in January 1689, Aubrey visited his late friend’s London residence, presumably with a view to assist in clearing up the estate, and ‘searcht all Seth, Episcopus Sarum’s, papers that were at his house at Knightsbridge. . . where he dyed. The custome is, when the Bishop of Sarum dies, that the Deane and Chapter lock-up his Studie and put a Seale on it. His scatterd papers [Aubrey] rescued from being used by the Cooke since his death; which was destinated with other good papers and letters to be put under pies.’”’ Aubrey’s papers, which would have included this collection of the deceased bishop of Salisbury, were transferred shortly before their owner’s death to Thomas Tanner, whose own large collection of manuscripts was bequeathed to the Bodleian Library, where it has been preserved since 1735.*° Most of bishop Ward’s papers relate to the administration of the diocese, and contain details of incumbents, fabric, visitations and presentments, parochial affairs, patronage, and a variety of other matter. The diversity of content of these sources may be illustrated by a selection. A draft letter, 11 September 1674, records the bishop’s permission to the vicar of Long Wittenham (Berks.) to reside elsewhere during protracted repairs to his vicarage for ‘by reason of the poverty of Ann Holland the Relict of Brian Holland the late Vicar of the said parish, Mr. John Bickle the present Vicar hath not been able to recover any money, whereby he might be enabled to repaire the said Vicaridge house (which is not now habitable).’? There is an account for repairs to the parish church of Steeple Ashton (Wilts.), August 1672,*° and a certificate by four ‘ministers’ attesting that the aisle of the parish church of Speen (Berks.) has been rebuilt in accordance with the bishop’s wishes, being ‘allsoe decently firmely and substantially well done.”! At the triennial episcopal visitation, 31 October 1671, Simon Lowth, rector of Tilehurst in the deanery of Reading, presented particulars regarding tenure, administration, and maintenance of the parish almshouses, together with complaints of en- 22. No other reference to Forth has so far been found, though he was certainly a member of the Salisbury Company of Joiners, a short account of which is given by C. Haskins, Ancient Trade Guilds and Companies of Salisbury, Salisbury, 1912, /PP- 339-62. 23. W.R.O. Dioc. Rec., Bp’s. Priv. Pap. (Ward), 23. 24. G. Oliver, Lives of ie Bishops of Exeter, Exeter, 1861, p.154 : ‘Azure, a Cross fleuree or.’ 25. W.R.O. Dioc. Rec., Bp’s. Priv. Pap. (Ward), 24. _ 26. Ibid. 25. 27. Aubrey, Brief Lives, p.475. 28. Article on Thomas Tanner in Oxford Dict. of Christian Church, 2nd edn., ed. F.L. Cross and E.A. Livingstone. 29. W.R.O. Dioc. Rec., Bp’s. Priv. Pap. (Ward), 45. 30. Ibid. 37. 31. Ibid. 47. 118 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE croachments by neighbouring villagers on other property in the parish, and notification of distribution of money bequeathed for charitable purposes.** Episcopal intervention in the affairs of parochial government, when occasion demanded it, is illustrated by bishop Ward’s settlement of the disputed election of churchwardens at Westbury (Wilts.), 11 August 1673. Contention had arisen over whether Thomas Rawlins or Edward Passions was the legitimate official. The matter was referred first by the parish to the ordinary of Westbury, Dr. Daniel Whitby,*’ from whom it passed in turn to the diocesan, whereupon it was determined by inquest eliciting ‘the Voluntary Oath of Seven Sufficient Witnesses,”** and taking into account the reports of all interested parties, including the vicar of Westbury, Richard Nichols. Bishop Ward decided finally in favour of Passions, concluding that “Thomas Rawlins hath unduely and illegally entered upon the Execution of the said office, and. . .ought immediately to resigne the same to the said Edward Passions who is forthwith to take the oath of Churchwarden and Exercise the same according to Law.’*° In consideration of the defeated party, however, the parish is to repay Rawlins ‘whatsoever moneys he shall justly demand as laid out for the use of the. . .parish dureing his Execution of the said office.”*° Another set of papers is concerned with briefs. A letter from the Privy Council, 4 March 1672, urges the bishop of Salisbury to expedite the collection requested throughout his diocese for the redemption of Christians captive in Algiers.*’ The officious note sounded by Council may be gauged by the generous sum of £951 17s. 3d. already contributed,** and an indignant Ward replies that he has made ‘diligent enquiry Concerning all places and parishes within the Diocese. . . [and] there is not any place or parish of any considerable moment which hath not sometime. . . made returnes of the monies Collected.’ The resources of the cathedral chapter seem, however, to have been overlooked in this instance, for £30 was hurriedly collected by an embarrassed dean and dispatched to the bishop with a communication that the ‘brethren. . . seemed to be a little abasht; for therein they at once saw their own Littleness, and your great Candor to cover it.’*° Briefs resulted also from the royal proclamation of 1678 ordering national contribution in aid of the rebuilding of St. Paul’s cathedral,*' recently destroyed in the great fire. The king’s demand was followed up by the bishop of London, who seems to have written to every diocese urging prompt and generous response.*” Ward’s own letter to his clergy enjoins them to use their ‘utmost care and diligence in promoting the ends of these his Majesties Letters patents according to the tennor of them.’*? A substantial part of the papers provides a valuable source for the history of nonconformity in the diocese. Archbishop Sheldon required the submission of precise information regarding the whereabouts and activity of dissenting clergy ejected in consequence of the 1662 Act of Uniformity. Episcopal licensing of schoolmasters, surgeons, and general practitioners of medicine was introduced during this period as a means of controlling dissenters, increasing numbers of whom were pursuing illicit preaching and pastoral activities while supporting themselves in other capacities. Bishop Ward granted a number of licences, the authority issued in 1672 permitting Benjamin Woodbridge, a 32. Ibid. 36. 33. Precentor at the Cathedral (W.H. Jones, Fasti Ecclesiae Sarisberiensis, Salisbury, 1879, p.333. 34. W.R.O. Dioc. Rec., Bp’s. Priv. Pap. (Ward), 43. 35. Ibid. 36. Ibid. 37. Ibid. 1. For briefs of this nature see W.E. Tate, Parish Chest, 3rd edn, p.120. 38. W-.R.O. Dioc. Rec., Bp’s. Priv. Pap. (Ward), 6. 39. Ibid. 4 (letter to Council, 30 March 1672). 40. Ibid. 3. 41. Ibid. 7. 42. Ibid. 8. 435 Mbids "9: THE PRIVATE PAPERS OF BISHOP SETH WARD 119 nonconformist divine, to teach at Newbury (Berks.) being a notable instance.** Woodbridge (1622—84)** was appointed chaplain to the king at the Restoration, and attended the Savoy conference in 1661, where he served as a commissioner. In order to avoid compromising himself by subscribing to the Act of Uniformity passed during the following year, Woodbridge retired in obscurity to Newbury, preaching there for a short period without interference from the authorities until his apprehension and imprisonment. Before 1665 Woodbridge consented to conformity, and was released from gaol only to resume his preaching activities at Newbury, where his relationship with the authorities fluctuated. The Declaration of Indulgence approved in 1672 allowed him public expression of his convictions, but the respite thus granted was brief, and Woodbridge was prosecuted anew when the government decided to reinforce the terms of the 1662 Act of Uniformity during the following year. Woodbridge was forbidden henceforth ‘to preach or hold any meeting for any kind of religious Exercise within the Publique Hall belonging to the towne or Corporation of Newbury . . . or dureing the time of the performance of Divine Offices in the Church, any Licence or preference of Licence to the Contrary notwithstanding.’*° This injunction was issued by bishop Ward on 26 August 1673, and is subscribed by Woodbridge, who undertakes to observe the conditions stipulated therein. Preaching like Benjamin Woodbridge was one form of protest open to the dissenter; refusal to attend divine service of the established church was another. The latter not infrequently occurred among ordinary people, even though an offender might risk alienation by his parish, which was bound by law to delate the lapsed with a view to restoring them once more to the Anglican fold. At the bishop’s court convened at Marlborough, 15 September 1672, the churchwardens of St. Mary’s presented William Hughes and his wife ‘for not Comeing to divine Service, and for teaching a schoole without Licence.’*’ Hughes had been pronounced contumacious on an earlier occasion for failure to attend church, and now stood excommunicated,* the same penalty having been incurred also in 1669, when Hughes chose not to appear in court to answer charges of keeping conventicles.”” In 1676 the bishop of London, Henry Compton, sought to unite the dissenters with the established church against the catholics. Compton requested the clergy to submit census returns recording every conformist, nonconformist, and popish recusant over the age of 16 years.°” The returns were voluntary and are far from complete, being evidently disregarded by many parishes. Recordings were made in the diocese of Salisbury, and particulars are available for the archdeaconries of Berkshire, Salisbury, and Wiltshire.*! A notebook kept by Ward lists returns from the bishop’s own jurisdictions.°** The overall figures submitted to Ward led him to estimate that there were in his diocese as many conformists as there were catholic recusants and other dissenters, and ‘Ninety Eight Thousand and Seventy four Persons More.”* It is argued, however, that these results are misleading, and that Ward deliberately falsified his returns so as to convince the Crown that the dissenting element in the diocese was ‘small enough to be persecuted with impunity.’ The returns may nevertheless be taken as sufficiently representative to establish the relative distribution of dissent throughout a large part of the diocese, and indicate that protestant nonconformity was particularly 44. Ibid. 60. 45. D.N.B. xxi.856-7. 46. W.R.O. Dioc. Rec., Bp’s. Priv. Pap. (Ward), 61. 47. Ibid. 65. 48. Ibid. 49. Ibid. 50. W.N.Q. tit. 535-8. 51. W.R.O. Dioc. Rec., Bp’s. Priv. Pap. (Ward), 68. 2. Ibid. 66. 3. Ibid. 68. 54. J.A. Williams, Catholic Recusancy in Wiltshire (Cath. Rec. Soc.), p.25. 120 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE prominent at Bradford-on-Avon, North Bradley, Melksham, and Trowbridge, the areas of the Wiltshire woolcloth industry.* Figures relating to recusants are probably less reliable, but show appreciable concentrations at Stourton, Tisbury, Wootton Bassett, and other places where the leading catholic families of the county are known to have resided.*° The penal laws against the papist were rarely invoked in full rigour,*’ but they were ever present im terrorem, making the recusant’s life one of anxious uncertainty by putting him at the mercy of the informer. Refusal to communicate in his parish church often brought the recusant’s beliefs to light, and excommunication, which carried with it loss of social privilege and rights under the law, was the usual form of punishment, supplemented in some cases by imprisonment. Bishop Ward’s Liber Notitiae Generalis, or memoranda book, refers to prisoners held in Salisbury gaol under writ de excommunicato capiendo.°* The Liber Notitiae was maintained throughout Ward’s episcopate in continuation of a practice begun while bishop of Exeter.°? This private record offers insight into its compiler’s personality, interests, and administrative abilities. Ward’s methodical habits became widely known, and Pope relates that in his notebook the bishop ‘particulariz’d all the Rectories and Vicarages. . ., all the Patrons Names, with their undoubted and disputable Titles; as also the Names of all the Incumbents, with their several qualifications, as to Conformity, or Nonconformity, Learning, or Ignorance, peacable, or contentious Conversation, Orthodox or Heretical Opinion, good or scandalous Lives. . . He found by daily experience, that this stood him in great stead, and did him eminent service: For when any Clergy-man of his Diocese came to him, as soon as he heard his Name, he knew his Character, and could give a shrewd guess at his business, and so was out of danger of being surprizd.’”° A variety of other matter appears also in the Liber Notitiae, and includes articles of visitation, astronomical tables, autobiographical notes, briefs, lists of the county gentry and justices of the peace, maps and plans, medical prescriptions and remedies, notes on the Order of the Garter, and transcriptions of the archives of the dean and chapter. The abundance of prescriptions and remedies reflects Ward’s preoccupation with his health, which was never robust and fluctuated according to mood, with the result that the bishop ‘delighted much in Fysic Books, which wrought the Effect upon him, which they usually do upon Hypocondriacal Persons, that is, made him fancy that he had those Diseases which he there found described, and accordingly take Remedies for them.’*' The entries relating to the Order of the Garter concern Ward’s elevation as chancellor to that dignity, which for more than a century had been discontinued as an ecclesiastical office and bestowed on laymen.* In 1669 Ward proved that it belonged by prescriptive right to the bishops of Salisbury, and was sworn in as chancellor on 25 November 1671, being the first Anglican prelate to hold the office.°* Excerpts from the capitular archives are supplemented by several, separate transcriptions, which include copies of Domesday surveys of episcopal lands in Berkshire and Wiltshire.** Ward’s 55. See also V.C.H. Wilts. iii.119. 56. Williams, Catholic Recusancy, passim. The parish and family of Stourton during this period form part of Sister Bernadette’s unpublished B.Ed. thesis, ‘Some Aspects of Catholic Life in Wilts. 1660-1850,’ College of Sarum St. Michael, July 1976. 57. The Stourton family seems to have been exceptional in that it suffered much hardship and privation on account of its beliefs (Bernadette, ‘Aspects of Catholic Life,’ p. 10). 58. Noted also by J.A. Williams, Recusant History, vol.7, no.3, Oct. 1963, pp.130-1. 59. Pope, Life, p.68. Ward left his Exeter notebook for his successor, Anthony Sparrow. 60. Pope, Life, pp.68—9. 61. Ibid. p.70. 62. J.M.J. Fletcher, ‘Seth Ward,’ W.A.M. xlix.9. 63. Ibid. A copy of Ward’s petition to the Privy Council regarding the chancellorship has been preserved (Bp’s. Priv. Pap. (Ward), unnumbered papers. THE PRIVATE PAPERS OF BISHOP SETH WARD 121 interest in the muniments probably originated as part of his general work in restoring the cathedral, and was appreciated by Aubrey, who observed that his friend ‘perused all the Records of the Church of Sarum, which, with long lyeing, had been conglutinated together; read them all over, and taken abridgements of them, which haz not been donne by any of his predecessors. . . for some hundreds of yeares.’” Few entries were made in the Liber Notitiae after 1680, coinciding with the period which saw the decline of Ward’s health and vitality. What additions there are appear in a wavering, irregular hand, reflecting the old bishop’s ‘disturbd spirit, wherby at length, he quite lost his memorie.”*° The cause of this malaise is held generally to be the bitter dispute between Ward and the dean of Salisbury, Thomas Pierce,°’ arising from the former’s grant of the rich prebend of Teignton Regis to his nephew, Thomas Ward.°®* Pierce had long desired this for his son, Robert, and was incensed by the bishop’s refusal to honour promises claimed by Pierce to have been made earlier in his favour. The matter was pursued in protracted and extraordinary fashion, wherein the dean sought absolute power over the cathedral as part of his determined campaign of revenge against the bishop and his nephew. An attempt was made to prove that the cathedral was a royal, free chapel with decanal privileges extending back to before the Conquest, being exempt as such from episcopal visitation and jurisdiction, and subject directly, and only, to the Crown. Pierce was arrogating to his office a control far exceeding the normal powers of the dean, and imagined as reaching beyond the diocese, comparable only with those of the metropolitan.” The wild claims of the dean of Salisbury, together with his protest against the assumed right of the bishop to collate to prebends, are outlined in his formal petition to the king, 19 July 1683. Pierce asserts with confidence that ‘by the great Charter, and Statute of both the founders, The King and Osmond, all the Prebendarys [are]’° in a Special manner exceppted from the Bishops Jurisdiction, and placed directly under the Deane as under their Sole Immediate Ordinary to whom they all take the Oath of Canonical Obedience, and to whom is committed in Expresse Termes both the Government of their souls and the correction of their manners. . . That in all the Few Contests which have been between the Bishops and Deans of Sarum, their Superiours have still adjudged for the Deans against the Bishops as to the Jurisdiction of the whole close of Sarum, and all other the Deans peculiars.’’' Elsewhere, such weighty authorities as Coke and Lyndwood are cited in support of the presumed powers of the dean of Salisbury,’* but it becomes clear from the vagaries of Pierce’s arguments that bluster has taken the place of veracity, and that browbeating has been resorted to in order to gain acceptance of fabrications. Against the assertion that the dean’s ‘whole Deportment. . . hath been very discreet and satisfactory’” is archbishop Sancroft’s view that Pierce’s conduct had greatly disturbed the life and harmony of the cathedral, disrupting much of the careful work of restoration achieved over the past twenty years.’* Pierce is criticised, moreover, for ‘an insufferable Boldness’’* in presuming to state the king’s rights in the affair, and for proposing how far the royal 64. W.R.O., Dioc. Rec. Bp’s. Priv. Pap, (Ward), 51. 65. Aubrey, Brief Lives, p.474. 66. Ibid. p.475: See also Anthony a Wood, Athenae Oxonienses, ed. Philip Bliss., London, 1813-20, vol. iv, col. 251. 67. D.N.B. xv.1146-8. 68. Wood, Athenae Oxonienses, iv.250—1, and V.C.H. Wilts. iti.195—7. 69. W.R.O. Dioc. Rec., Bp’s. Priv. Pap. (Ward), 12 (justification of the dean, 8 Feb. 1683), 15 (the dean’s petition, 19 | July 1683), 20 (archbishop Sancroft’s report to the king). 70. Text reads ‘and.’ 71. W.R.O. Dioc. Rec., Bp’s. Priv. Pap. (Ward), 15. 72. Ibid. 18. 73. Ibid. 12. 74. V.C.H. Wilts. iii1.196. 79. W.R.O. Dioc. Rec., Bp’s. Priv. Pap. (Ward), 20, p.3v. 22 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE prerogative ‘may or may not contend’”’ in the ‘unkind Struggle between the Bishop, Dean and Chapter.” The matter was referred finally to the king for a decision, which was given in Ward’s favour, Pierce being obliged to submit and apologise for the disruption he had caused. Reconciliation between dean and bishop took place in July 1686, and peace was again restored.’* The acrimony of the dispute, however, had affected Ward, who is thought to have become mentally impaired through worry,” in addition to his declining physical condition. Entries in the Liber Notitiae suggest that Ward’s last years were spent increasingly at his London residence, no doubt because of the unpleasant and partisan atmosphere at Salisbury during this period.*® Bishop Ward died at Knightsbridge on 6 January 1689,*' apparently from self-inflicted malnutrition,*’ his body being removed for burial to Salisbury, where his nephew erected a memorial to him with a prolix Latin inscription. *° This account has attempted to show how the private papers of Seth Ward relate to their owner’s life and times. In order to achieve the desired end a selection of material was deemed necessary, the governing criterion being those sources best considered to illustrate the activities of Ward both as a Caroline bishop and as a person in his own right. 76. Ibid. 77. Ibid. 20, p.6. 78. V.C.H. Wilts. iii. 196. 79. Aubrey, Brief Lives, p.475. 80. Wood, Athen. Oxon. iv.251. 81. Pope, Life, p.196, wrongly gives the year as 1683. 82. Aubrey, Brief Lives, p.475, and Wood, Athen. Oxon., iv. 251. 83. Reproduced by Pope, Life, pp.196—200. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine. 76 (1982) EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY CORONERS AND THEIR CLERKS by R. F. HUNNISETT A recent Wiltshire Record Society volume contains a full calendar of all the Wiltshire coroners’ bills known to survive from 1752 to 1796." It was in 1752 that county coroners, and the coroners of some boroughs and liberties — Wootton Bassett and Corsham in Wiltshire — were empowered to claim for the expenses they incurred in holding inquests on dead bodies. They could claim up to £1 for holding any inquest, and every coroner invariably claimed the full amount. They could also claim 9d. a mile for travelling from their homes to any place where an inquest was to be held unless it were in a gaol; but no payment was allowed for the return journey.’ The published bills represent a fairly large proportion of those which were submitted at quarter sessions for approval by the justices of the peace and subsequent payment by the county treasurer. * Although primarily statements of account, they all list the inquests on which the claims were based and most of them give a reasonably full summary of the findings. That information is of particular value because only a handful of original Wiltshire inquests survive from the later 18th century, including just one out of the three thousand or so held by the county coroners.* It is a reasonable assumption that no coroner omitted to claim for any of his inquests. The survival of so few original inquests is surprising. Although there was no practical need or legal obligation for them to be preserved indefinitely, it might have been expected that more would have escaped destruction, if only by chance. It is certain, however, that the coroners, or their heirs or assigns, must have kept them for some time, perhaps for a matter of years. Odd inquests were summoned into one or other of the central courts, particularly King’s Bench, and all those which resulted in a verdict of murder or manslaughter had to be taken to the assizes if, as usually happened, a suspect was arrested and detained in the county gaol.° Only the full inquest would suffice for such purposes, and no coroner would have dared to dispose of the originals until he was certain that no further call for them was possible. Indeed, it is probable that few coroners deliberately threw out any inquests which they themselves had held. The one least likely to have done so was William Clare, a Devizes surgeon, son of another surgeon and coroner and himself coroner for the northern part of Wiltshire from 19 March 1771 until early February 1823.° His bills show clearly that he was abnormally conscientious and that he had a social conscience remarkable for his time. He adjourned one inquest, held in Devizes bridewell in 1787, because the dead prisoner was so emaciated. The next day the inquest resumed and the jurors found that the allowance of a twopenny loaf a day was ‘a very short and scanty one, inadequate to and insufficient for the support and maintenance of the body of any man’. Their verdict was that death was due to lack of sustenance and the cold weather. They expressly exculpated the keeper of the gaol 1. Wiltshire Coroners Bills 1752~1796, ed. R.F. Hunnisett (Wilts. Rec. Soc. xxxvi). ! 2. ibid. p.xxix. | 3. ibid. pp.xxxiv—xxxv. 4. ibid. pp.xxxvii-xl. 5. ibid. p.xxx. 6. ibid. pp.xlviii-xlix. 124 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE and his deputy, stating that they had merely carried out their orders.’ As a direct result of the inquest the prisoners’ allowance was increased.* On another occasion, in 1793, Clare adjourned an inquest held upon a man who had died as a result of an accident while working in a quarry in Kemble because he considered the working conditions to be dangerous. He summoned the master of the works and the owner of the land to the adjourned session ten days later, at which they promised to make the alterations then agreed.” A third example of his public spiritedness comes from 1788. On 11 January he held an inquest at Chippenham upon the body of William Deverill, who had been missing for over a week, having accidentally fallen into the Avon from a narrow foot-bridge called Back Avon Bridge. Because the bridge had been the cause of many previous deaths, Clare adjourned the inquest for a fortnight to allow the matter to be considered and dealt with at a vestry meeting. Its decision, to widen and strengthen the bridge and to render it safer in time of floods, was duly reported to the resumed inquest on 25 January.'° It so happened that the quarter sessions at which Clare was due to present his six-monthly bill were held at Devizes on 16 January 1788, between the two sittings of the Chippenham inquest. '! The result is that the original sitting was entered near the end of one bill and the adjourned session appears as the third entry on the next one. The latter entry refers back to the earlier one in its opening words: Adjournment of an inquisition begun to be taken at Chippenham on the 11th instant and included in my last bill. That, however, throws no light on William Clare’s record-keeping practices. Much more informative was an inquest he held in 1790. There had been a brawl in a Melksham public house, the Unicorn, which resulted in the death of William Rutty. On 10 January the inquest jury found Jonathan Fillis guilty of his murder, although at the following Lent assizes he was acquitted of murder and convicted of the lesser charge of manslaughter. Despite the fact that the verdict of the coroner’s jury was returned at the first sitting, there was an adjournment to 18 January to allow the inquest to be engrossed and for it then to be signed and sealed by the jurors.'* Once again the first sitting is on one bill, presented by Clare at Devizes quarter sessions on 12 January,'” and the adjournment is recorded on the next; and again there is a reference back, this time in the words: At Melksham on an adjournment of inquisition 20th charged in my last account. That passage proves that William Clare kept a record both of his inquests and also of the entry numbers assigned to them in the relevant bills, and it led the present writer to suggest that he probably added the numbers to the original inquests which, of course, he retained.'* The suggestion is strengthened by the fact that it is only the inquests, and never the other entries on the bills, that are ever given numbers. Not even separately entered adjournments of inquests are numbered. Indeed, the adjournment of the Melksham inquest of 1790, the second entry on a new bill, was at first numbered ‘2nd’, but that was almost immediately erased. In short, activities for which coroners claimed money but which did not give rise to separate formal documents were entered on their bills but were excluded from the numeration of the entries.'° There are, however, objections to the theory that coroners numbered their original inquests. One is that the only surviving inquest held by an 18th-century Wiltshire county coroner, the well known inquest held by John Clare, William’s father and predecessor, upon the body of Ruth Peirce who was 7. ibid.no. 1557. 8. ibid.p.li. 9. ibid.no. 1881. 10. ibid.nos 1564, 1569. 11. ibid. pp.97, 99. 12. ibid.nos 1689, 1692. 13. ibid. p. 108. 14. ibid.p.xlii, where the reference to the adjournment is erroneously given as no. 1569 instead of no. 1692. ibid. pp. xli-xlii. EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY CORONERS 125 ‘struck dead with a lye in her mouth’ in Devizes market place, is not so numbered, although the summary of it in the bill is called ‘Inquisition 9’.'° Another is that it can never have been essential for inquests to be cited by such entry numbers, and some bills had no numbered entries. '’ Furthermore, mest coroners must have felt it to be in their interest to retain some record of the expenses they had incurred, at least between the submission of their bills and their payment, and probably from the date of each inquest. Not only might it have been considered improper for such notes to be written even on the dorse of the formal inquests, but if the record of an inquest were summoned into a superior court before payment of the bill, as some certainly were for assizes,'* the information would then have had to be copied again elsewhere. Claims not based on inquests, few as they were, would always have had to be noted elsewhere. Fresh light has recently been thrown on this problem. While the calendar of the 18th-century bills mentioned above was being printed off, two documents were noticed which had been folded in half and bound inside the cover of a Wilton poor rates book of 1768.'° One of them, although incomplete, its right-hand side having been trimmed to the size of the book and the top and bottom cut or torn away, was identified as a coroner’s bill of 1754.*° For convenience it will be referred to in this article as bill B. Its entries proved to be inquests which are also on a bill already known, the second bill presented by George Whitmarsh,*' hereafter called bill A. There can be little doubt that it originally contained-all twelve of the inquests on that bill, although in its present mutilated condition two are completely missing and three others are represented by only a few words. George Whitmarsh belonged to a Wilton family of surgeons and apothecaries, several members of which served as south Wiltshire coroner during the late 18th and early 19th centuries. He himself held office from some time before January 1753 until his death on 21 June 1767.** Like other south Wiltshire coroners, he usually submitted annual bills at the quarter sessions held at Salisbury, which in his day were always in January.” Bill A was presented on 15 January 1755 and contains all the inquests held by him during the preceding twelve months.” Bill B is no rough aide memoire: it is also of parchment and is engrossed as handsomely as the formal bills which Whitmarsh, and other coroners, presented. On the other hand, it is not a duplicate of bill A. In order to facilitate a comparison of the two documents they are printed in full transcript side by side as an appendix to this article. Given its formal nature, bill B most likely had a heading. It almost certainly contained the fees: its right-hand side is now cut away, but dotted lines run from the last word of each entry to the present right edge. As can be seen, it omits the jurors’ verdicts given in bill A. Otherwise their wording is substantially the same, except that bill B, surprisingly, provides some additional information about the second death, namely that the corpse was found in Moody’s stable. Several difficult questions come immediately to mind. Why were two bills compiled? Which was written first? Who wrote them? Why do they differ? Was 1754 an exceptional year or did Whitmarsh, and possibly other coroners, frequently have two formal bills drawn up? Many of those questions cannot be answered with complete confidence, but they must be con- sidered in the light of one important fact: that bills A and B were written by two different people. 16. ibid. pp.xxxix—xl. 17. ibid. p.xlin. 18. e.g. ibid.nos 1390, 2788, which were required at assizes even before the presentation of the bills. 19. Among W.R.O. 1242/92. 20. The identification was made by Mr John d’Arcy, to whom I am indebted for bringing his discovery to my notice. 21. W.R.O. AS5/2/1/80; Wilts Coroners’ Bills, nos 2110-2121. 22. Wéults Coroners’ Bills, pp.xlix-t. 23. ibid. pp.xxxv—xxxvi. 24. ibid. pp. 138-9. 126 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAFOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Bill A, which is in the same hand as that presented in the previous year, his first bill, was very probably written by Whitmarsh himself. Bill B cannot have been because it is in the same hand as the bills of the rest of his period of office, the last of which was compiled and submitted after his death. If bill B had been compiled piecemeal throughout the year as each inquest was held, it could have been that Whitmarsh employed a new clerk shortly before the quarter sessions of January 1755 and that he wrote bill A and his predecessor wrote bill B. But the appearance of bill B suggests strongly that it was written all at one time. Both bills must therefore have been drawn up shortly before the quarter sessions. It is highly unlikely that Whitmarsh employed two clerks at the same time. Hence the probability that bill A is his own work. Possibly he first employed a clerk in late 1754 or early 1755, was dissatisfied with his first attempt at drawing up the bill and so rewrote it himself, thereby showing him how it should be done in later years. In that case bill B may always have been unique. It would be strange if his dissatisfaction arose from the clerk’s omitting the formal verdicts, since he accepted such omissions in later years and they would certainly not have rendered the bill unacceptable to the J.P.s. Perhaps there were more serious defects in the entries now missing. However that may be, bill B’s whole appearance suggests that it was originally intended as the bill which was to be presented. That it contains information not in bill A proves that it must have been drawn up with reference to the originals, and not from bill A as might have been expected if it had always been intended for the coroner’s own use. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that bill B was drawn up before bill A. It would be interesting to know who acted as Whitmarsh’s clerk. It is unlikely that he incurred the unclaimable expense of taking a clerk with him when he held inquests, and, if he did not, he must almost certainly have written out the formal inquests himself, as John Clare is known to have done.” If his only need for a clerk was to draw up his bill once a year, he could no doubt have hired one. It is unlikely, of course, that he would have entrusted all his subsequent bills to the same man whose work he had discarded in January 1755. That may be an argument against the theory that bill B is a reject: it is a far stronger argument against his having employed a clerk on a casual basis. Whitmarsh, like other Wiltshire coroners of the period, was a professional man of substance, and a very busy one. The likelihood is that he trained a member of his staff to act as coroner’s clerk when needed. That would account for bill B’s later history. It would have been kept among Whitmarsh’s papers until his death and then turned out. The next year, because it was so sturdy, it was used to strengthen the binding of a local poor rates-book. The fact that no other second bills have yet come to light does not mean that there were no more. Whitmarsh’s inquests do not survive, although they would have been smaller and less useful for humbler services. Whitmarsh was not unique in employing a clerk to write at least some of his bills. Alexander Forsyth, who was coroner of south Wiltshire from December 1767 until May or June 1795,°° wrote his first six bills himself. The next three were written by someone else. The following seven are by Forsyth again, as are two of the last nine, the rest being in a third hand.’’ It is likely that Forsyth, a busy Salisbury surgeon,” also employed his own servants as scribes when necessary. It is remarkable that John Clare, an even busier coroner as well as a surgeon, did all his own clerical work.”” William Clare was the busiest coroner of all, and it is difficult to tell from the hand if he wrote all, some or none of his bills. The internal evidence is also conflicting. In favour of his having written at least some of them is the occasional use of a racy style near to direct speech and even of the first person.” 25. ibid.p.xl. 26. ibid. pp.xlix-l. 27. ibid.p. xii. 28. ibid. pp.xlix—t. 29. ibid.p.xl. — 30. ibid.p.xli. EIGHTEENTH-CENTURY CORONERS 127 Such passages, however, are mostly confined to entries not arising from inquests and never occur within the body of inquest entries. They may therefore have been copied directly from Clare’s notes by a clerk. The argument that Clare used a clerk is supported mainly by what is clearly the result of miscopying in some of the bills. The letters ‘ur’ are sometimes rendered ‘in’, as with Hinsteed for Hursted, Binton Hill for Burton Hill, and Pinton (and Penton) for Purton. More trouble was caused by ‘str’, Hare Street appearing as Harespeat and Stratton St Margaret as Shatton St Margaretts.*' It is as unlikely that one man could have so misread his own writing as that Clare would have been so ignorant or forgetful of the names of places at which he frequently sat as coroner. On balance one must conclude that he also had clerical assistance with his bills, albeit of an untutored nature. Appendix Bill A Inquisitions taken before me, George Whitmarsh, one of the coroners for the county of Wilts, at the severall times, places and distances from Wilton hereunder mentioned and on view of the several dead bodies hereunder named, since the general quarter sessions of the peace held for the said county at New Sarum the fifteenth day of Janury in the year 1754. February 6th 1754. At Amesbury, eight miles distant, on Peter Nutt, late of Russell in this county, there found dead and on the inquest to dye a naturall death. Fee £1 6s. Od. 25th February. At Wilton, on Robert Hedges, found dead there and on the inquest to dye a naturall death. Fee £1 Os. Od. 10th March. At Kingston Deverill, seventeen miles distant, on Nicholas Card of Maiden Bradley, found dead under a hay reek and by the inquest to dye a natural death. Fee £1 12s. 9d. 15th March. At Alvediston, ten miles distant, on William Ingram, there found dead in a barn and by the inquest to dye a naturall death. Fee £1 7s. 6d. 6th April. At Maiden Bradley, twenty miles distant, on the body of a woman unknown, there found dead in the common fields and by the inquest to dye a naturall death. Fee £1 15s. Od. 19th May. At Combe Bisset, three miles distant, on Thomas Wall, late of Cranborn in the county of Dorset, killed by a fall from his horse and found by the inquest accidentall death. Fee £1 2s. 3d. 31. ibid.p.xli, no. 1080. Bill B 175...) Hebruary. 6th. j.:. February 25th. At Wilton, on Robert Hedges, found dead in ... Moody’s stable. March 10th. At Kingston Deveril, 17 miles distant, on Nichola... of Maden Bradley, found dead under a hay rick. March 15th. At Alvediston, 10 miles distant, on William In . . . there found dead in a barn. April 6th. At Maden Bradley, 20 miles distant, on anu... woman, there found dead in the common fiel . . . May 19th. At Coomb-bisset, 3 miles distant, on Thomas Wa... of Cranbourn in the county of Dorset, killed by ... his horse. 128 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 25th July. At Great Woodford, four miles distant, on Edward Dear, killed by the accidentall going off of his gun and so found to be by the inquest. Fee £1 3s. Od. 28th July. At Amesbury, eight miles distant, on William Edwards, late of Winterborn Earles in this county, carter, who was killed by the forewheell of a waggon and so found to be by the inquest. Fee £1 6s. Od. 20th September. At Charleton in the parish of Downton, seven miles distant, on John Miles of Bemerton in this county, carter, killed by accidentily overturning a waggon loaded with wheat and found so to be by the inquest. Fee £1 5s. 3d. 21st September. At Stappleford, four miles distant, on Mary the wife of George Northover, wheelwright, who, being a lunatick, cut her own throat and so found by the inquest. Fee £1 3s. Od. 19th December. At Stoford, three miles distant, on George Blake of the same place, a child about six years old, who on the 17th instant, as he was coming from Great Wishford to Stoford aforesaid over a certain bridge called Stoford Bridge, by accident fell into the river and was drowned and so found to come by his death by the inquest. Fee £1 2s. 3d. 28th December. At Downton, eight miles distant, on Thomas Cooper, servant to William Hayter of the same place, miller, who by accident fell into the said mill pond and was drowned and so found to come by his death by the inquest. Fee £1 6s. Od. Total £15 9s. Od. [Subscribed] January the 15th 1755. Examined and allowed by us. [Signed] E. Pitts. John Turner. July 25th. At Great Woodford, 4 miles distant, on Edw... killed by the accidental going off of his gun. July 28. At Amesbury, 8 miles distant, on Willia... late of Winterborn Earls in this county ... was killed by the ... September 20th. At ... distant ... car... September 2 Ist. ... Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine. 76 (1982) THE TOPOGRAPHY AND HISTORY OF NORTH MEADOW, CRICKLADE. by B. JANE WHITEHEAD INTRODUCTION North Meadow, Cricklade, is a flood meadow lying immediately north-west of the town. It occupies nearly 110 acres, stretching for about one mile between the River Thames on the south-west and its tributary, the River Churn, on the north-east, just upstream from their confluence at Cricklade. Its main interest lies in its increasingly rare association of flora, of which the most notable species is the Snakeshead Fritillary (Fritilaria meleagris). Until fairly recent times this plant used to thrive along the Thames floodlands but it is now estimated by the Nature Conservancy Council that 80% of the total British population is found in North Meadow. Its survival here is undoubtedly linked with the ancient Lammas Land management regime, where the land is held in common with grazing rights for the inhabitants of Cricklade from 12 August each year until the following 12 February, when the grass is subdivided into allotments for the first Vesture of Hay Crop. During this period the meadow is closed to grazing, and cutting for hay rather than silage allows the flora to mature and regenerate. This is particularly important for the fritillary as it is dormant during the grazing season, starts to grow in spring and produces its flowers in early May, so that by hay-making time the seeds are ripe and ready for dispersal. This regime has probably survived relatively undisturbed from at least the early Medieval period and has certainly precluded drastic 20th-century sward ‘improvements’. The Nature Conservancy Council has recognised the importance of the site as a fossil agricultural land- scape by declaring it a National Nature Reserve in March 1973 in the interests of conservation. It is relatively easy to identify the meadow as flood plain pasture producing natural vegetation under the protection of an anachronistic system of land management. This analysis, however, ignores the delicate interplay of physical and human factors in a small area over a long period of time. The meadow must be considered in the context of the surrounding flood plain where the physical history of the shifting channels and changing water table has affected the overall drainage qualities. Human interference has modified the flood plain further by straightening river channels, cutting additional ditches and developing under-drainage. There are traces of channel evidence in North Meadow itself to suggest that it may well have been modified in these ways, although it is very difficult to say when and to what extent. However, even if it has remained relatively un- disturbed, all the neighbouring fields show ample evidence of extensive draining. This would result in a general lowering of the water table, so that indirectly North Meadow is affected. Perhaps a further reaching implication for the future is the large scale extraction of gravels which now occupies an increasing acreage of meadowland upstream, with planned expansion nearer to Cricklade. The aim of this study is to try to link the topographical detail of the meadow with its historical development. Aerial photographs provide an ideal view of the meadow in its physical setting from which a detailed plan of the main topograhical features can be drawn (FIG. 1). The interpretation of these features involves speculation about the evolution of the flood plain and the history of land-use before the first extensive documentary reference in the 18th century. The Inclosure Award of 1824 is the richest source of information, since for the first time the legal status of the meadow and its management is stated in full detail. It quotes the ancient custom which is still perpetuated, thus providing the link between modern practice and that of time immemorial. However, there have 130 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE obviously been some post-Inciosure modifications to the meadow for which there does not appear to be documentary evidence, so once again speculation takes the place of direct statement. PHYSICAL BACKGROUND: THE INFLUENCE OF GEOLOGY AND RELIEF ON DRAINAGE AND VEGETATION Cricklade is situated in the Oxford Clay vale of north Wiltshire, at the confluence of the Thames and Churn rivers, which rise as dip slope springs on the Cotswold scarpland, flowing across the Cornbrash and Forest Marble of the Upper Jurassic series. These belts contributed gravel drift which was deposited extensively by glacial meltwater streams flowing over the stiff, impermeable Oxford Clay. The present rivers cut their channels through this patchy surface distribution of gravel and clay, depositing veneers of recent alluvium which accumulate during perennial flooding. The main band of alluvium appears downstream from Cricklade and there is some evidence to suggest that upstream the rivers have not maintained consistent courses. North Meadow lies well within the Oxford Clay vale at about four to five kilometres from its junction with the Cornbrash. Gradients in the vale are very slight, the meadow only falls from about 81 metres in the north-west corner to 78 metres in the south-east, a distance of 1% kilometres. There is local warping down the centre which is followed by a prominent drainage channel aligned approximately from north-west to south-east (FIG. 1). On aerial photographs its course can be clearly traced cutting across present channels and field boundaries upstream for nearly a kilometre. Its meandering shape distinguishes it from the more regular pattern of artificial drains which are tributary to it. Tonal variations on one set of photographs,’ which appear to have been taken when the land was drying out after flooding, reveal darker traces where probably ribbons of alluvium were draining at a slower rate than the surrounding gravels. These may well be the fossil remains of former rivers, abandoned perhaps during flood braiding or during human adjustments to the channels. Fig. | shows clear evidence of the main central channel with tentative suggestions of others which are far less marked. The level of the underground water table is linked to the varying permeability caused by the distribution of clay and gravel and the local variations in relief. In general the surface alluvial soils are damp and heavy with a high water table held in the gravel terraces by the underlying Oxford Clay. Recent bore holes have been made in the Thames Valley around Cricklade in connection with assessing the sand and gravel resources.* Data obtained from the northern side of the centre of North Meadow revealed that from a surface level of 78.3 metres water was struck at 76.9 metres, at a depth of 1.4 metres. It would be interesting to know how consistent this level is across the meadow and to what extent it is affected by fluctuations other than short-term seasonal flooding. The soil profile obtained from the bore hole revealed an upper horizon rich in humus 0.4 metres deep, with underlying alluvium of varying colour and composition one metre deep, and gravels consisting of a mixture of oolitic, shelly, coralline and sandy limestone pebbles with scattered angular flints I. metres deep. This surface drift is mainly permeable, with the impermeable bluish-grey Oxford Clay lying at a depth of 2.5 metres. The natural vegetation of the meadow is in direct response to its drainage qualities. The gravel subsoil is very significant since, despite the high water table resulting from the lowland relief and general impermeability, it ensures rapid drainage after inevitable flooding. Under these conditions a rich collection of grasses and herbs has been encouraged and has flourished with the minimum of disturbance under the traditional management of Lammas Lands. In order to understand the 1. R.A.F. Official Photo. 106G/UK/1721 6 Sept. 46 nos. 5076, 5077, 5078 held by Royal Com. Hist. Mons., Salisbury. 2. P. Robson, Mineral Assessment Rep. 18 for sand and gravel resources around Cricklade, Inst. Geol. Sciences (1975), 54. NORTH MEADOW, CRICKLADE 131 significance of precise associations of flora both their present and past ecology must be investigated.’ The former can be directly observed, but inevitably reflects the legacy of inherited influences which are more difficult to analyse. It can be a relatively controlled enquiry if the date at which the present sward began to develop is known, but in the case of natural flood meadows this is virtually impossible. The following historical discussion comments on the evidence of human acitivity in and around North Meadow with particular reference to the impact this may have had on delicate balances in the physical environment. DIAGRAM TO SHOW CHANNEL FEATURES IN NORTH MEADOW AND NEIGHBOURING FIELDS N a v\ KEY ; \\ Rives AS ( Major river channels es ( enclosing North Meadow ss, Q Q @ Water meadow channels \ (@) in N.W. and N.E. corners, part of a series extending along the R.Churn and R. Thames Lines of poor drainage revealed on aerial photographs during flood Tecession, indicating traces of former river channels 7, Parallel blocks of regularly spaced shallow ° 200 400 “trenches orientated towards deeper channels Seale (—_____“1___"" Metres EARLY HISTORY AND THE PROBLEM OF IDENTIFICATION The general problem of research into a small specific area of land is that it is most likely to have escaped any sort of documentary reference in which it can positively be identified. This is particularly true of the earlier periods, from which documents have simply not survived or were not drawn up if there was no need to record what was at the time unexceptional routine. If documents are available they are frequently few and far between, recording legal and financial information rather than details of farming procedure.* However, by piecing together all available contemporary references a general idea may be given of what is likely to have happened. In the case of North Meadow it is possible to be more specific, since there are full details about the perpetuation of its commonable rights in the Inclosure Award and so assumptions can be made about practice before 3. J. Sheail and D. Wells, “The Historical Approach to Ecology of Alluvial Grasslands’, Paper 8, 62—7, Symposium No. 5 Monks Wood Experimental Station, ‘Old Grassland — Its Archaeological and Ecological Importance’ (1969). 132 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE this. Nevertheless this does not reveal when the meadow was first used or when indeed its present boundaries were established. The foundation of Cricklade can be dated to the reign of Alfred, as one of a chain of planned defensive Saxon boroughs, strategically located beside the routeway developed by the Romans as their South-eastern approach to Cirencester. As the borough was a plantation settlement, its land holdings would be the appurtenances of the established rural manors, which supplied burgesses from distances of up to 20 kilometres, from Aldbourne and Ramsbury in the south-east and Clyffe Pypard in the south.” The Domesday Survey of 1086 confirms the economic importance of Cricklade, rating it as a borough liable for payment of the ‘third penny’ to the Royal Exchequer. Since the grazing rights on North Meadow traditionally belong to the residents of the old borough, it is reasonable to assume that the organisation included the Lammas Land routine. The Lord of the Hundred and Borough was responsible for the appointment of officials to oversee the management on his behalf and this was legally administered at the Courts Leet. So Lammas Land grazing and hay cutting must have started when the inhabitants of the Saxon borough needed subsistence for their animals. North Meadow was probably designated for this purpose in the first place but problems arise when firm evidence about its boundaries is sought. The Domesday Survey confirms the extent of the natural flood pastures by quoting outstanding meadow acreages around Cricklade relating to the valleys of both Thames and Churn.° All the settlements mentioned can be identified with existing place names but there may be little correlation between the land contained within the parish boundaries of the present villages and the manorial extents quoted at the time of Domesday. It is particularly difficult to reconcile the present acreage of North Meadow with the evidence of 1086. It was considered to be part of Chelworth lands within Bradon Forest Inner Boundaries for the purposes of the Inclosure Act of 1814. This was the second of two Acts filed for Cricklade, the first dealing with the main extent of Great and Little Chelworth manor and uthing in 1786.’ In fact the Chelworth manors were among some of the more confused and in the 14th century many holdings were amalgamated under the manor of Abingdon Court which was included in and subservient to the manor of the Hundred and Borough of Cricklade.* This legal rearrangement confirms the association of North Meadow with the borough householders. However, it was nominally still Chelworth land for which Domesday records only twenty five acres of meadow. This might represent just the Abingdon Court manorial share in the larger meadow but could it mean that its present boundary, defined by river channels, was not at that time established? Undoubtedly the course of the Churn has evolved through several stages, modified by physical readjustment during flooding as well as by human diversion. Historically the most important channel is the one carrying the county boundary between Gloucestershire and Wiltshire, upstream from North Meadow, which has been identified as part of a Saxon charter boundary dated c.999.° Clearly this is an artificially straightened course, which Dr. Thomson was inclined to think pre-dated the charter. Aerial photographic evidence strongly suggests that the end of the fossil channel discussed earlier (FIG. 1) links with this original Churn just at the point where a completely straight cut has been made south-eastwards to join the northern tip of North Meadow. Maybe the Churn did flow down the centre of the northern part of the meadow, perhaps diverging to join the meandering stream which forms its eastern edge. This appears to be a natural channel of historical significance since it C.C. Taylor, “The Historical Approach: Problems and Pitfalls’, Paper 7, 57-61, ibid. F.W. Morgan, ‘Domesday Geog. Wilts.’, WAM. 48, 79. R. Welldon Finn, ‘Wiltshire’, Domesday Geog. S.W. Eng., ed. H.C. Darby and R. Welldon Finn (1967), 40. Wilts. Inclosure Awards (Wilts. Rec. Soc. xxv), 68, 69. Materials for Hist. of Cricklade (Cricklade Hist. Soc. 1958-60), ed. T.R. Thomson, 56. T.R. Thomson, ‘Northern County Boundary’, WAM. 65, 202. oN AME NORTH MEADOW, CRICKLADE 133 carried the boundary between Cricklade St. Mary and Cricklade St. Sampson before the parishes were united in 1898. Deliberate reorganisation of river channels during the Saxon era is likely to be connected with the provision of mill streams. The Domesday Survey records mills for both Latton and Cricklade, so both the Churn and the Thames were involved. What is now the main channel of the Churn was clearly cut for this purpose, flowing along a more easterly course to serve Latton Upper and Lower Mills. The Thames flows in an apparently straightened channel on the south side of the meadow to reach West Mill at Cricklade but probably follows much the same course (FIG. 2). The short link between the old Churn and the Thames which forms the north-western edge of North Meadow and follows the charter boundary may have been made when this improved mill stream provided an efficient drainage route. Therefore, in reorganising the rivers into mill streams the present main Churn to Latton was certainly cut, the Thames was straightened to West Mill, and the original Churn was straightened at its upper end and possibly diverted by a new cut into the Thames so that its lower section was deprived of water and now survives only as a fossil trace. Admittedly this argument ignores the plausibly natural channel which meanders transversely across the main gradient and stream lines, carrying the Latton Cricklade parish boundary around the northern side of North Meadow. This, too, looks as though it might have been an earlier Churn, but no evidence has come to light to suggest how it fits into the chronology of the other channels. This discussion illustrates the problem of trying to fit physical evidence into an historical framework where the dating of precise patterns is not possible. FIGURE 2 DIAGRAM TO SHOW PATTERN OF HAY ALLOTMENTS LATTON PARISH BY THE INCLOSURE AWARD, 1824 Boundary of North Meadow as defined on the Award map (a) North West corner, now excluded (b) Lammas Ham, now a separate field (c) Channel straightening arranged under the Latton Inclosure Award, 1805 ==== Allotment boundaries recorded on the Award map =(d) Meadow entrance (now a few metres upstream) @ Boundary stones mapped in present position 0 B06 Metres (2) New drain prescribed in the Award 134 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE MANAGEMENT OF THE MEADOW AND THE IMPROVEMENT ERA The first documentary references to management routine appear in glebe terriers for the two Cricklade parishes. In 1588 the glebe for Cricklade St. Sampson included Lammas tithes of cattle pastured in common according to ancient custom, while in the terrier of 1608 for Cricklade St. Mary mention is made of a share in Northmead measuring about one acre.'” Both sets of details are repeated in similar terriers at intervals throughout the next hundred years. They provide evidence that the Lammas grazing custom was long established and that the land was divided for allocation, probably in strips for hay shares. There is a fuller statement of how the grazing was administered in a Survey of the Manor of Abingdon Court, which formed part of the property included in the manor of the Hundred and Borough of Cricklade, drawn up in 1721: ‘. . . the North Mead have no Stynt, it is broak with horses and beasts Lammas Eve after twelve a clock at noon, by all the inhabitants of Cricklade St. Maryes and Sampsons, that have any goods to put there, . . . formerly they put no sheep into Northmead but now after the grass is eaten by the black cattle they stock it with sheep.”"’ This clearly limits the people eligible for pasturing their animals in the meadow. The specific reference to ‘black cattle’ as opposed to ‘beasts’ is interesting. Could they have been droves of Welsh itinerant cattle accommodated for a period on the meadow? Certainly it was on one of the main drove routes used by cattle from central and south Wales on their way via fattening pastures to market in London or south-east England. In 1821 William Cobbett commented on the fine fields and pastures all around Cricklade and mentioned meeting about two thousand Welsh cattle, mainly heifers in calf, in separate droves between Cirencester and Cricklade on their way from Pembrokeshire to Sussex fairs.'* If the black cattle were itinerant an extension of grazing rights beyond the inhabitants of the borough is implicit. The wording of the survey suggests that their presence in 1721 had introduced a relatively recent adjustment to the grazing routine with the cattle feeding on the aftermath following the hay crop and the sheep put on to the shorter winter turf ready to take advantage of the early spring bite. A century later from Cobbett’s evidence it seems likely that this pattern of more intensive stocking was being maintained, no doubt in response to the more vigorous economic climate which developed during the 18th century. No mention is made in 1721 of the management of the hay crop, but the pattern of ownership is described in the preamble to the Inclosure Award, with reference to several people having rights to land in dispersed and intermixed lots.'* Presumably prior to the consolidated and orderly allotment of land prescribed by Inclosure the hay shares would have been arranged in strips according to Medieval custom. A detailed analysis of the hay shares giving acreages, but not their shape or arrangement, appears in the 1811 Survey and Valuation of the Parsonage of Cricklade St. Sampson and the Manor of Abingdon Court which had an interest in the meadow."* It lists the owners and lessees of the hay crop, describing them as proprietors and occupiers, quoting for each plot the quality of the ground, the quantity held, its price per acre and the total yearly value. There were twenty four plots in North Meadow, all described as ‘mead’ and valued at 5s. per acre. This was the highest normal price for meadow ground, reflecting the quality of the pasture. However, in the Survey mention is also made of the two hedged closes bordering the Thames on the south side of the 10. W.R.O., Glebe Terriers, Cricklade St. Sampson and St. Mary (Chapter 98/1). 11. Materials for Hist. of Cricklade (Cricklade Hist. Soc. 1958-60), ed. T.R. Thomson, 61. 12. W. Cobbett, Rural Rides, vol. i, quoted in first ride from London to Gloucester in section covered on 7 Nov. 1821. 13. W-.R.O. 143, Inclosure Award, 1824. 14. Ibid., Glebe Terriers for Cricklade St. Sampson and St. Mary (Chapter 98/1). NORTH MEADOW, CRICKLADE 135 meadow, Lammas Ham and Picked Ham, which were described as ‘water mead’ and assessed at 6s. per acre. This distinction is important as it implies that a system of carefully regulated drainage was being applied to these closes which raised the value of their pasture. The main aim of this water meadow system was to control the river level with sluice gates, or hatches, in order to direct water on and off the fields through irrigation and drainage ditches. This involved laying out each field in a carefully adjusted pattern of ridges and furrows to allow a constant trickle of water over the whole meadow surface when required. In this way seasonal fluctuations of the water table could be more controlled to produce a continuous growth of pasture for early spring feed, hay reaping and aftermath grazing. It lengthened the period of available pasture and helped to avoid loss through standing flood water or drought.'* North Meadow lies at the edge of the area which was physically suitable for water meadow development. As the rivers became larger and more deeply entrenched within their banks in the clay lowlands downstream it was more difficult to divert the flow laterally and maintain it over the reduced floodplain gradients. Upstream, along the River Churn as it flows down the Cotswold dip slope, a series of water meadows was constructed, probably in the latter half of the 18th century. Between Cirencester and Cricklade lies South Cerney where, in 1789, the Revd. T. Wright wrote ‘An Account of the Advantages and Method of Watering Meadows by Art’. In the same year William Marshall commented on the number of meadows which had been improved'® but in a later report'’? he was very scathing about the standard of channel construction compared with the excellent examples in south Wiltshire. Most of the writers at this time were struck by the neglected and unproductive state of the common pasture in the clay land, recommending drainage or water meadow development as overdue improvements. This was an argument for inclosure, the case being forcibly stated by Marshall in his second report. The evidence of the two hedged closes, Lammas and Picked Hams, in the 1811 Survey shows that this had happened on a piecemeal scale around North Meadow and the modern channel evidence confirms that the water meadow system had been applied in these small manage- able units. The channel pattern indicates an emphasis on drainage rather than irrigation, possibly dictated by the clay land relief but also specifically criticised by Marshall as a hallmark of the Revd. Wright’s meadow construction.'* In the pre-Inclosure period it is unlikely that any improvement was made to the common meadow, so the channel evidence in FIG. 1 probably belongs to a later date. It would be interesting to know by what right Lammas Ham, recorded on the Inclosure Award map as one of the North Meadow allotments, had been inclosed separately. The Inclosure Act of 1814 is of prime importance for two main reasons. First, it provides the first complete statement of the ancient practice of Lammas grazing and hay allocation, together with the modifications introduced by the Commissioners which established the basis of the modern manage- ment. Secondly, the map which accompanied the Award in 1824 is the first documentary definition of the boundaries of the meadow. The shape of the boundary channels is remarkably similar to that of today with the exception of a short stretch of the northern side. The Latton Inclosure Act of 1801 instructed that part of the channel carrying the parish boundary with Cricklade St. Sampson should be straightened to ease drainage. This necessitated mutual exchange of five small pieces of land which became detached from their former parishes and created the meander island within North Meadow." Two plots of land appear on the Award map as allotments within the meadow which are 15. For more detailed discussion see B.J. Whitehead, ‘Management and Land-Use of Water Meadows in Frome Valley, Dors.’, Procs. Dorset Nat. Hist. and Arch. Soc., \xxxix, 257. 16. W. Marshall, Rural Economy Glos. (including dairy management of N. Wilts.), 11 (1796), 151. 17. W. Marshall, Review of Co. Reps. to Bd. of Agric., ii (Western Dept., Glos.) (1810), 441. 18. Ibid. 19. Glos. Rec. Office, Q/R1/6, Down Ampney, Latton and Eisey Inclosure Award, 1805. 136 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE now considered to be outside. One is Lammas Ham and the other is in the extreme north-west corner. This was effectively cut off from the meadow when the North Wilts Canal was built across the corner on its way to join the Thames and Severn Canal at Latton. The Canal Act of Authority was passed in 1813 but in 1824 the detached corner was still considered an integral part of the meadow. As an alternative to early agricultural organisation based on the assumption of common rights, the principle of inclosing land in order to control its use had gathered momentum from early private agreements in the 13th century through increasing efforts to achieve some sort of organisation. By the mid 18th century the diffusion of improvement ideas, typified by Marshall and other reporters to the Board of Agriculture, had accelerated the rate considerably. The first of the General Acts for Inclosure was passed in 1801 to try to standardise procedure and encourage the movement. The second of the Cricklade Acts in 1814 was in response to this, using the generally agreed format. The progress of the Award was delayed, initially because an Amending Act was required in 1815 to correct boundary confusion between the two Cricklade parishes when North Meadow was erroneously described as within the parish of Cricklade St. Mary, instead of St. Sampson, and later because the two Commissioners appointed to the task had to be replaced. In the preliminary statement of the aims of the Act, North Meadow is specifically mentioned as an exception to the general policy, excluded from inclosure and retaining its commonable rights. These are then precisely defined, acknowledging that . several persons had and used and exercised the right to mow and take annually to their own use the first Vesture of Hay Crop and from and after the twelfth day of August in every year to the twelfth day of February in the following year all persons residing and occupying houses within the said Manor and Borough of Cricklade . . . exercised the right to depasture their cattle in and upon the said Meadow . . .’”° So the ancient Lammas routine is fully stated, establishing that present custom maintains the tradition of earlier centuries otherwise glimpsed only in stray references. Nothing is said in the Act, however, about the administrative details of this routine and the appointment of officials. While the meadow retains its common status the Act does introduce two modifications to its management. The first of these was to rearrange the division of the hay lots into consolidated units. The pattern of the new allotments was shown on the Award map of 1824 (FIG. 2). On the accom- panying schedule the allotments are described by owner and acreage. Twenty four people had interests in the hay crop, so the lots were apportioned according to their previous share with additional land added to those who contributed to the office of reeve. The map shows thirty allotments, with a few exchanges and purchase of lots also recorded. It was expressly stated that the hay owners should not demarcate their allotments in any way so as to interfere with the common grazing, so small boundary stones were set up at intervals along the plot boundaries. The position of boundary stones today is shown in FIG. 2, indicating how little the allotment pattern has changed. Some of the old stones are carved with initials which refer to names recorded in the Inclosure Award, but many have been replaced by more obvious, though less sightly, concrete blocks left over from 1939-45 war defences. A map drawn of the allotments in 1970, before the Nature Conservancy Council acquired most of the hay rights, shows that they had been consolidated since 1824, while retaining the old pattern, with fifteen plots shared among ten owners.*! Apart from specifying the hay allotments, the Inclosure Commissioners also ‘did appoint set out and construct a new Drain’ in the meadow. Its course is shown on the Award Map (FIG. 2) and is 20. W-.R.O. 143, Inclosure Award, 1824. 21. J. Sheail et al., ‘Grasslands and their history’, ch. 1 in Grassland Ecology and Wildlife Management, ed. E. Duffey (1974), 31 NORTH MEADOW, CRICKLADE 137; precisely described in the text. Its dimensions were to be 6 feet wide on the meadow surface and 3 feet wide across the trench bottom for the lower 66 yards of its course, grading regularly to 4 feet wide on the meadow surface and 2 feet wide across the bottom at its upper end; it was to be 18 inches deep here, increasing in depth downstream as was necessary to ensure efficient drainage. Maintenance was to be the responsibility of the adjoining allotment proprietors. It seems likely therefore that it was an improvement rather than an innovation, but it must have modified the water table of the meadow significantly and directed ebbing floodwater. POST INCLOSURE ORGANISATION AND LATER MODIFICATIONS One of the main contributions of the Inclosure Act was to highlight the legalities of management, with the result that what probably went on more or less unnoticed for centuries now assumed prime importance in the business of the borough. This is recorded in the papers relating to the Court of Cricklade Hundred and Borough. A series of these survives from the mid 18th century until the early 20th century.” It is interesting to note that in the presentments to the Hundred Court no mention at all is made of North Meadow before 1829, whereas from1838 to the end of the sequence of papers in 1855 its administration heads the list of business. The rights of the inhabitant householders of the Manor and Borough of Cricklade are asserted through a Steward, High Bailiff and Jurors who act on behalf of the Lord of the Manor. They appoint a Hayward whose duty is to supervise the grazing management and general upkeep of the meadow. Clearly this administrative framework has been inherited from the earliest manorial organisation for which there is no contemporary evidence, apart from stray references to officials in occasional Court Rolls.** The 19th-century presentments at the Hundred Court consist of a fairly standard repetition of regulations and reports of any violations or nuisances which arose from time to time. In the first entry for 1829 a statement is made of the fees payable to the Hayward for stock to be turned out in the meadow. Cattle and horses were rated at 2d. per head, sheep at 10d. per score, the proceeds being split between the Hayward and a fund for the maintenance of gates. The Hayward was responsible for checking the stock and charging fines for impounding stray animals or for pasturing stallions, bulls or rams in the meadow. From 1836 there were reminders that only the inhabitant householders of the borough were entitled to exercise grazing rights, with the interesting dictinction in 1837 between horses and cattle which were admitted from 12 August and sheep which had to wait until 9 September, presumably when the longer aftermath had been grazed down to some extent. There were also injunctions against blocking the meadow entrance with stone, manure, or rubbish. In 1844 and 1845 the number of stock was limited to ten head of cattle and thirty head of sheep per person, with five officials appointed to enforce the order. Fees by this time had risen to 4d. per head for cattle and horses and ls. 8d. per score of sheep, although the rate for cattle and horses fell to 2d. per head again in 1850. These clauses suggest that the meadow was in high demand for grazing in 1844-45 but maybe the fees had to fall to encourage balanced stocking five vears later. Another regulation which appeared in 1844 is important for its implications: . nO Owner or occupier of any allotment in the Common Meadow called North Meadow shall place any Manure in or upon any part thereof or open any Hatches or Watercourses so as to convey ¢ | 22. W.R.O. 374/98, Cricklade Hundred Ct. papers, presentments 1754-1855; 374/100, Letters relating to Chelworth Manor, Cts. Leet and appointments 1828-1928. | 23. Public Record Office, S.C. 2/208/37, 38, Cricklade Ct. R. 138 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE water upon any part of the said Meadow between the 12th day of August and the 12th day of February in every year.’* This reference to hatches and watercourses provides evidence that some effort to construct a water meadow had been made by this time. Presumably it would have postdated the Inclosure Award, or else it would have been mentioned there. Maybe improved drainage as a result of the new drain encouraged other efforts to control the water supply. From the wording of the regulation it sounds as though the improvement was in the interests of the owners of the hay crop, since watering was forbidden during the grazing period. On aerial photographs there is clear channel evidence that water meadow development took place at the north-western end of the meadow and possibly also in the north-eastern corner (FIG. 1). A feeder channel, controlled by a hatch situated in the detached part of the meadow beyond the North Wilts Canal ran close to and parallel with the River Thames, but most of the channels were apparently for drainage, emptying either into the northern boundary stream leading to the Churn, or into the Thames distributary surrounding Lammas Ham. The other feeder channel for the north-eastern corner has no obvious hatch evidence and perhaps functioned as a short cut for river water turning the corner of the meander. It is likely that these two corners were the only parts of North Meadow near enough to the river channels to be successfully developed as water meadows, but initiative presumably also had to come from the owners of the hay lots there. One of the allotments by the Thames was under the same ownership as Lammas Ham, so maybe this was developed as a logical extension which then linked up with the increasingly important sequence of meadows upstream. However, it is interesting that there is no apparent documentary reference to their construction and the question again arises as to who had the right to interfere with the common land. The administration of the meadow did not always proceed smoothly. In October 1851 the High Bailiff convened a meeting of the inhabitant householders to review the whole procedure. The proposition to maintain the ancient custom was carried unanimously, but there was a precise state- ment of the division of duties. The High Bailiff was to record all the horses, cattle, sheep, and other beasts, while the Hayward actually admitted them into the meadow. Three Jurymen of the Court Leet were responsible for inspecting the beasts in the meadow, for impounding those illegally there and for bringing their owners to answer the charge. A letter in 1858, referring to general problems of legal discipline, mentions specifically infringements of the common rights. Correspondence in 1899 led to the Parish Council taking over responsibility for the meadow management duly delegated at the Manor Court Leet held in July of that year but relinquishing it again by January 1918, having admitted that it had no power to discharge its disputed responsibility.*” No doubt similar problems of discipline were traditionally an occupational hazard! In the mid 19th century another drainage improvement was being recommended and gradually introduced. At this time a series of Prize Reports were instigated and published for each county by the Royal Agricultural Society to encourage a review of progress in the improvement era. In references to the Cricklade area the Gloucestershire survey mentions the excellence of the water meadows in the Cotswolds, extending into the dairy belt of North Wiltshire. The Wiltshire report deals more with the problem of draining stiff claylands, with reference to the new technique of under-drainage, noting that only surface trenching and not subsoil ploughing was undertaken.” Under-drainage involved creating a network of subsoil channels, which originally were either filled with permeable material or left hollow with their roofs supported by stone or tile slabs. The mass 24. W.R.O. 374/98, Cricklade Hundred Ct. papers. 25. Ibid. 374/100, Letters relating to Chelworth Manor. 26. J. Bravender, ‘Farming of Gloucestershire’, Jn/. Royal Agric. Soc. Eng., xi, 129 and E. Little, ‘Farming of Wiltshire’, in ibid. v, 177. NORTH MEADOW, CRICKLADE 139 production of earthenware tiles and pipes from the 1840’s encouraged a much wider application of the technique, with consequently more investigation into the optimum depth and spacing of the channels in relationship to the drainage qualities of the subsoil. Evidence of this development in the Cricklade area is found in an 1889 Lease of Parsonage Farm, where the tenants should: ‘. . . lay out repair and keep repaired all . . . piped drains watercourses . . . belonging to the said promises and open scour cleanse and throw all ditches watercourses and drains .. .”‘. . . and will at their own expense haul and draw all materials which shall be necessary and required for . . . under- draining the said lands or any part thereof and for making repairs.’”’ There is no indication as to exactly where under-drainage was carried out, but presumably in the decades of agricultural prosperity before decline towards the end of the 19th century it might have been undertaken fairly generally in the Thames flood plain. If so, this improvement together with the water meadow development and the regulation of river flow which this involved must have influenced the level of the water table. It is difficult to assess to what extent North Meadow would have been affected, either indirectly through modifications to neighbouring fields or directly through further efforts at drainage on its own surface. There are certainly traces of other channels apart from those of former river courses and in the water meadow corners. FIG. | shows regular parallel blocks extending across the main body of the meadow, most of them aligned towards the central drain. Significantly this alignment is slightly different on the north and south sides of the drain, confirming that it must pre-date the channels. These are difficult to detect on the ground, consisting of shallow wide-floored trenches between low-angle ridges which are only clearly revealed when there are a few inches of standing flood water. As some of them, at least, cut transversely across the hay allotment boundaries, it appears that they represent a more general effort at improving drainage of the meadow as a whole. But who would have undertaken this collective responsibility? Again, there appear to be no documentary clues. Nor is it clear whether they were dug as shallow surface ditches or whether they could represent the slumped profiles of some under-draining technique. A small exploratory trench excavated across one of the channels revealed no trace of soil disturbance, so it seems likely that they were surface features only. The cumulative effect of drainage activity must have modified the physical balance of the meadow. However, it is difficult to say in terms of vegetation adjustment whether this outweighs natural fluctuations in the hydrological cycle over the centuries. More recently human impact has intensified, eradicating rather than modifying the natural environment. Continued improvement in drainage technology has meant that it is now feasible to plough up the meadow growth of centuries, reseed with selected species and control their development with inorganic fertilizers. This has happened upstream from North Meadow where the water meadows had largely fallen into disuse. They probably reached their zenith in the mid 19th century, but still played an active part in the agricultural economy well into the 20th century. Their decline is mainly related to the increasing intensification of land use, when their dependence on craft labour and unadaptability to mechanisation began to be serious drawbacks. Within memory many of them have become completely derelict, or at best only casually used, so radical ploughing and drainage treatment was necessary to bring the land back into production. This therefore represents complete replacement of the natural associations of meadow fllora. Of equally significant ecological impact is the replacement of meadow land with extensive gravel pits. Most of these lie in a belt from Poole Keynes to South Cerney, where the conversion of the landscape has been recognised with the creation of the Cotswold Water Park. Gravel extraction at 27. W.R.O., Lease of Parsonage Farm, Cricklade St. Sampson, 1889 (Chapter 97/1). 140 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE South Cerney is long-standing, with instructions from its Inclosure Commissioners in 1808 to make provision for land allotments to supply gravel for making and repairing the parish roads.** With the concrete technology of the 20th century, the demand for the rich gravel resources of the Thames flood plain has far oustripped this initial purpose. The need for building materials has made it financially desirable to reassess the land-use of the area in terms of extractive industry rather than agriculture. [he immediate physical change has been to convert the underground water table into acres of lake surfaces, with no doubt far reaching hydrological adjustments. As this development extends further downstream towards Cricklade, North Meadow is likely to come well within the sphere of influence. If the expansion of recreational facilities continues at a similar rate, the potential influx of visitors poses another ecological challenge. By virtue of its ancient status North Meadow may be immune to direct interference, but the fate of the more delicately balanced species in its plant community may be endangered. It is in this context that concern is felt for the future of the wild fritillary, whose life-cycle is not fully understood but appears to be among those most vulnerable to disturbance. CONCLUSION Essentially North Meadow remains what it has always been, natural flood plain pasture subject to seasonal inundation. The meadow flora as a whole survives because it can tolerate these conditions, but this generalisation does not reveal the significant adjustments which may have taken place within the plant community in response both to the physical evolution of the flood plain and human modifications to its drainage qualities. Over the centuries, with the firmer definition of river courses including artificial straightening to encourage more efficient flow and the creation of a network of surface and subsoil channels, surface drainage must have improved. This would be reflected in the composition of the meadow pasture. However, this also depends on the use made of the land. Although in the case of North Meadow this appears to have been predictable for the last thousand years, since there seems no reason to doubt that the Lammas routine has been consistent, it ignores the botanical effect of changes in stocking density during the grazing period and possibly of reaping techniques for the hay crop. There must have been constant and probably imponderable micro- environmental adjustments. Only comparatively recently has any real threat emerged to the whole ecological balance. It is a fascinating problem to try to unravel all the complex threads of development in the history of North Meadow. Since much of the analysis must be speculative it is essential to draw on the expertise of as many linked disciplines as possible. In order to understand the botanical composition reference must be made to geographical and geological interpretations of the physical characteristics, with documentary and field investigations from the historical point of view. In this way it is possible to assess in some measure man’s impact on the landscape, and hopefully to control any irreversible trend towards extinction of an environment through increasing pressure in the future. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This paper was written at the suggestion of the staff of the Nature Conservancy Council and the initial research was carried out during a Sabbatical term as Schoolmistress Fellow Commoner at Girton College, Cambridge, in 1973. I would like to thank the Mistress and Fellows for offering me this opportunity, and Wiltshire County Education Officer and the Headmaster and Governors of Marlborough Grammar School for agreeing to my absence. 28. Glos. Rec. Office, AP3 D182, S. Cerney Inclosure Award, 1808. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine. 76 (1982) THE FIRST ‘APPRENTICED’* GEOLOGIST by J.M. EDMONDS INTRODUCTION In Britain, geology emerged as a science in the first half of the nineteenth century under men who had received very little formal training in the subject. One exception was John Phillips (1800-1874), who was born at Marden, Wiltshire and received his schooling in the county. In 1853, Phillips was appointed deputy to the incapacitated Very Reverend Professor William Buckland, Reader in Geology at Oxford, and he became his successor three years later. Phillips had previously been professor at King’s College, London and also for a short time at Trinity College, Dublin; and he received the degrees of D.C.L. at Oxford and LL.D. at Cambridge and Dublin. Whilst Keeper of the York Museum in 1831, he was one of the principal founders of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, and for thirty years was its assistant or executive secretary, later serving as president of that body and also of the Geological Society of London. He was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1834 and was an honorary member of a number of scientific societies both at home and overseas.’ John Phillips had however enjoyed very few of the educational advantages which were regarded as being necessary to ensure advancement in one or other of the ancient Universities at that time. He was left an orphan at the age of seven with a younger sister and brother, and came under the guardianship of a maternal uncle who had to travel widely in connection with his profession as a canal engineer and mineral surveyor. Phillips completed his formal education by the age of fourteen and then joined his uncle in London as his assistant at a time when the latter was suffering acute financial embarrassment. Not long afterwards they travelled the country on surveying engagements for several years without settled home; and he did not achieve independence until he was twenty-five years of age. Such adverse circumstances might well have been insurmountable by even the most gifted boy, yet this was the man who at the age of thirty could be described in the private diary of the physician- geologist, G.A. Mantell, as ‘one of the most pleasant, modest, sensible men I ever met’. Phillips’s accomplishments were manifold and his publication both of research and text-books were widely acclaimed and much used. He remained a bachelor and his sister, Ann, from whom he had been separated for sixteen years was his companion and housekeeper from 1829 until her death in 1862. PARENTAGE AND CHILDHOOD John Phillips was born on 25 December 1800 at Marden, Wiltshire, son of John and Elizabeth Phillips*. His father, also John Phillips, was baptised on 5 March 1769, at Myddfai, near Llandovery, Carmarthenshire. He was the younger son of Jenkin David Phillips (1734-97) and his wife Anne, nee Powell, (1730-1808). The other son, David Phillips otherwise David Jenkin, took over the family * ‘The word is used here to indicate training in youth designed for a specified trade or calling under the supervision ot a skilled practitioner; and not in the formal or legal sense of binding by indenture for a period of years with payment of a premium. 1. G. Rolleston and H.J.S. Smith, J Memoriam, John Phillips, M.A. D.C.L., F.R.S., (Oxtord, 1874), 11 pp. J.W. Davis, ‘Biographical Notices of Eminent Yorkshire Geologists: 1. John Phillips’, Proc. Yorkshire Geol. and Polytechn. Soc., vol. 8, (1885), 3-20. T. Sheppard, ‘John Phillips’, Proc. Yorkshire Geol. Soc., vol. 22, (1933), 153-187. 2. E.C. Curwen, The journal of Gideon Mantell, surgeon and geologist (1940, London), 96. 3. Marden parish register, Wiltshire RO 5 10/3. 142 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE property of Blaen y Ddol Howel, Myddfai* and John was trained for the Church. Although a number of his relatives were ordained, he himself did not take Orders and in May 1795 he was appointed an Assistant in the Excise at Bristol°. A year later, after a request to be transferred to ‘Kington Ist Ride, Wales Middle Collection’, subsequently withdrawn, he was promoted ‘Officer of Stow Ride, Glocester Collection’®, and moved to Oddington, a village some 2 miles east of Stow-on-the-W old, Gloucester- shire. Whilst stationed there he met Elizabeth Smith’ and they were married at her home village ot Churchill, Oxon. on 19 April 1798°. Elizabeth was the daughter of John Smith, blacksmith, and Ann his wife, and she had three brothers, William, Daniel and John. Almost immediately after the marriage, Phillips was transferred to Wiltshire as ‘Officer of Lavington Ride, Sarum Collection” and taking up residence in the parish of Marden, the first two children, Ann and John, were born.!° Shortly after the birth of the second child, John Phillips ‘prayed leave to relinquish’ his post with the Excise’’ and it may be assumed that there were urgent personal reasons for his resignation. The family appears to have left Marden and moved a short distance into Somerset, for on 18 March 1803 a second daughter, also named Ann was born at Midford, three miles south of Bath’. The family was then possibly living at Tucking Mill House, a property belonging to William Smith, the eldest brother of Elizabeth Phillips’. William Smith was a land and mineral surveyor with an extensive practice based on the neighbour- hood of Bath, and he was for five years Surveyor and Assistant Engineer of the Somerset Coal Canal. In 1798, when he was negotiating the purchase of land adjacent to the line of the canal for the Company he bought Tucking Mill House, and although he himself spent very little time there after 1800, it was occupied from time to time by his relatives and he retained the ownership until 1819. Arising out of his work, Smith had developed a deep interest in geology and it was while surveying the Somerset collieries and the proposed line of the Coal Canal in 1794-5 that he made his discoveries of the fundamental principles of the stratigraphy of the rocks and of the use of fossils in determining their sequence. * William Smith was later to become the dominant figure in the youthful life of his nephew, John Phillips. The family circumstances of John Phillips the elder seem to have changed once more in the Autumn of 1803, enabling him to apply for reinstatement in the Excise, and he was ‘restored to be Officer of Deddington Ride, Oxford Collection’.** This move took the family to the village of Steeple Aston, a village 10 miles north of Oxford, and only 12 miles from Elizabeth Phillips’s old home at Churchill, where her brother, Daniel and his family still lived.’ 4. National Library of Wales, Wynnstay Ms. no. 133, 870-1: quoted by kind permission of the Librarian. in 1854, Professor John Phillips placed a memorial tablet to his grandparents in Myddfai Church. (Mentioned in G. Evans, “The story of the ancient churches of Llandovery’, Trans. Hon. Soc. Cymmrodorion for 1911-12, (1913), 42-250, see p. 212). 5. Excise Board Minutes: EBM 394 of 22 May 1795. Quoted by kind permission of the Librarian, H.M. Board of Customs and Excise. 6. EBM 398 of 19 and 29 April, 19 May 1796. 7. Born 13 September 1772; baptised 8 November 1772 (Churchill p.ch. register). 8. Churchill p.ch. register. 9. EBM 407 of 8 June 1798. 10. Ann, born 11 Nov. 1798, bapt. 18 Nov. 1798, died in infancy; John, born 25 Dec. 1800, bapt. + Jan 1801. 11. EBM 421 of 11 March 1801. 12. Baptised 10 April 1803 (Monkton Combe p.ch. register); place of birth as given in Census return for Oxford (1861). 13. J.M. Eyles, ‘William Smith’s home near Bath; the real Tucking Mill’, J. Soc. Biblphy nat. Hist., vol. 7 (1974), 29-34. 14. L.R. Cox, Wiliam Smith and the birth of stratigraphy (1948, London, Int. Geol. Congr.), 8pp. J.M. Eyles, ‘William Smith (1796-1839). A chronology . . .’, Proc. Geol. Soc. Lond., no. 1657 (1969), 173-176. 15. Excise Board Minutes: EBM 435 of 26 August 1803. 16. Letters of 1827 and !828 to John Phillips from the wife and daughter of the Rev. James .\rmetriding, rector of Steeple Aston, Oxon., give details of the family’s stay in the village. They had lived for a time in ‘the cottage at the end of the churchyard’ (J. Phillips MSS. Colln., O.U.M.). second son Jenkin, born here was baptised at Churchill 10 April 1806 (entry in Churchill church register). THE FIRST ‘APPRENTICED’ GEOLOGIST 143 At the beginning of 1806 John Phillips was promoted ‘Officer of Coventry 3rd Division’,’’ and he died at Coventry in January 1808."° William Smith heard the news when he was at the home of his brother John, Broadfield Farm, near Hinton Charterhouse, Somerset, only a mile or so south of Tucking Mill, and the two brothers at once joined in a compassionate letter to their brother Daniel at Churchill,’? which ended: “That respect which distance has rendered it impossible for us to pay to the Funeral of a Man whom we all loved and highly esteemed we shall most cheerfully lend to his family. John and I have theretore agreed to make her and her children as comfortable as possible, and think she had better leave Coventry immediately. If you can send for her and her children to Churchill I hope you will do it without delay — and as she was always partial to this neighbourhood and in her last letter expressed a desire to come here we will contrive to fetch her at any time she shall think proper. There is plenty of room for her and her Children at Broadfield and their maintenance out of the farm will not be felt — there is also a good school at Beckington where her son John shall be provided for and well educated, which being but four miles off will be more agreeable. When she comes here we will endeavour to arrange other matters to her satisfaction and with the hope that she will bear with her affliction as well as possible, we remain Your affectionate Brs Wm. & J. Smith Elizabeth Phillips returned to her home village with her three young children, but on 28 July 1808 she also died,”° and the responsibility for the care and upkeep of the three orphaned children, John aged seven, Ann aged five, and the intant, Jenkin aged two, then fell to the mother’s three brothers. Jenkin seems to have remained at Churchill in the care of Daniel Smith, but John and Ann were collected by William Smith on | January 1809 and taken by post chaise to Broadfield Farm to be left with the other brother, John Smith.” EDUCATION AT HOLT SCHOOL AND FARLEIGH HUNGERFORD Many years later (in 1866), Phillips recorded for a friend this outline of his school years’: ‘When I was nine years of age, my uncle Smith took me by the hand, while walking over some cornbrash fields near Bath, and showed me the pentacrinite joints. He afterwards immersed them in vinegar to show the extrication of carbonic acid, and the flotation or ‘swimming’ of the fossils. Before my tenth year I had passed through four schools, after which I entered the long-forgotten, but much to be commended, old school at Holt Spa in Wiltshire. Lately I rode through the village, and was sorry to find the place deprived of all that could be interesting to me. At Holt School a small microscope was given to me, and from that day I never ceased to scrutinize with magnifiers, plants, insects, and shells. In after-lite this set me on making lenses, microscopes, telescopes, thermometers, barometers, electrophori, anemometers, and every kind of instrument wanted in my researches. When you see me now xaAezrws Badulwr, tired with the ascent of Gea Fell, and the rough path of he Zmutt Glacier, you will hardly credit me as the winner of many a race, and the first in many a desperate leap. My work at this school was incessant for five years. I took the greatest delight in Latin, French, and Mathematics, and had the usual lessons in drawing. We were required to write a good deal of Latin, especially our Sunday Theme, — of such, I wrote many for my idle associates. | 17. EBM 446 of 8 January 1806. 18. EBM 457 of 9 February 1808. 19. Draft letter in Wm. Smith MSS. collection, dated 31 January 1808. 20. Buried 31 July 1808 at Churchill, where there is a gravestone in the churchyard. ~ 21. Diary and account book of Wm. Smith in W.S. MSS. collection. 22. J. Phillips in Anon., ‘Prot. John Phillips’, 74e Athenaeum, no. 2427, (1874), 597-8. 14 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE worked through Moles’ Algebra and Simpson’s Euclid, the two first books completely, and selections of the others. The French master was a charming old Abb-e, a r"efugi"e, whose patience and good- nature and perseverance were quite above praise. We spoke and wrote French in abundance. Of Greek, I learned merely the rudiments, to be expanded in after-life. I did not work at German till some years later: Italian I merely looked at.’ The school at Holt to which John Phillips was sent was owned by David Thomson Arnot, who was also the ‘Proprietor of the Wells’. Thoughout the eighteenth century, Holt had some reputation as a spa by reason of a mineral spring or well, which was ‘known for efficiency in scorbutic cases’** and by 1731 the Great House was open and used as a residence for visitors to the Spa**. By 1790 the Spa seems to have declined in popularity and in that year a boarding school for young ladies was opened ‘by Miss Dryall (late of Westbury, near Bristol) and proper assistants, at the Great House’’’. In addition to the usual subjects, it was proposed that French and Italian would be taught by ‘First Masters in their Several Professions’. This school did not survive long, for in September 1794 David Arnot opened a boarding school for boys with the fees at 16 guineas per annum including board.*° Nine years later Arnot was attempting to sell his school as a going concern. The advertisement in the Bath Chronicle of 24 November 1803 read?’: “To School Masters. Holt School Wilts to be sold in fee. ‘To be sold by private contract, on the most reasonable terms the Great House, Garden, etc. at Holt, an excellent situation for a classical school on a genteel scale. The present proprietor will engage to find six to ten pupils as Boarders to any gentleman capable of teaching the Latin Classicks and also use his utmost influence amongst his friends for a number of respectable Day-Scholars in the village and neighbourhood. The situation is such as (with proper care and application on the part of a Teacher) will always command a respectable school, besides the advantage of being well known in the same line for the last ten years, during some part of which, nearly seventy pupils were accommodated in the House, the rooms of which are large, airy and spacious. This school has always had the free use of the Holt-Spa Water which contributes very much to the health of the pupils. . .’ It appears that Arnot continued to run the school and it may be surmised that William Smith sent John Phillips there because it was known to and recommended by his friend, the Rev. Benjamin Richardson, rector of Farleigh Hungerford, Somerset. Richardson (1758-1832) had graduated at Christ Church, Oxtord in 1781. He appears to have made the acquaintance of William Smith through mutual membership of the exclusive Bath and West of England Society. In June 1799, when they were dining at the house in Bath of Rev. Joseph Townsend, rector of Pewsey, Wiltshire, Richardson ‘wrote down, from Smith’s dictation, the different strata according to their order of succession in descending order, commencing with the chalk, and numbered, in continuous series, down to the coal, below which the strata were not sufficiently determined . . . To this description of the strata was added, in the proper places, a list of the most remarkable fossils which had been gathered in the several layers of rock. The names of these fossils were principally 23. Advertisement in Bath Chronicle, (1780), quoted by K.B. Batchelor, The story of Holt, no. 1, Holt Spa, (Yeovil, 1970), 7 pp., see p. 2. 24. H. Eyre, A brief account of the Holt Waters, (London, 1731), p. 27. 25. Bristol Mercury and Universal Advertiser, (1 March 1790), quoted by K.B. Batchelor, op. cit., 3. 26. Advertisement in Bath Advertiser, (18 September 1794), quoted by A.W. Waters, Notes on Eighteenth Century Tokens, (London, 1954), p. 35. 27. Ref. kindly communicated by Dr. & Mrs. V.A. Eyles. THE FIRST ‘APPRENTICED’ GEOLOGIST 145 supplied by Mr. Richardson, and are such as were then, and for a long time afterwards, familiarly employed in the many collections near Bath”. He continued as the faithful and generous friend, and was untiring in his efforts to persuade Smith to publish his researches and claim the rewards of his geological discoveries. Richardson was the owner of land at Holt and also trustee on behalf of his wife of property there which she had inherited from her father Richard Whatley of Bradford-on-Avon. In 1802, he was trustee for Arnot in connection with his leasing of a close of land at Holt and in 1809 Arnot held the lease of a property called Huckshards, which belonged to him’. It is not possible to say whether Arnot took an active part in the academic activities of the school but it was to him, as owner, that Wm. Smith paid the fees for the schooling of John Phillips, as noted in his account book for 19 January 1813: ‘sent Bt J.S. [John Smith] per post 30£ Bill to pay one due to Mr. Arnot, J. Phillips schooling’. By this time Smith’s financial circumstances were becoming exceedingly strained and in 1814 he was twice arrested in London for debt at the instance of creditors in Bath, only being freed through the good offices of Sir Joseph Banks, President of the Royal Society*®. David Thomson Arnot was declared bankrupt in 1815 and subsequently the Great House was divided into tenements, with seventeen families living there in 1821°*. Phillips recorded** that he left Holt Spa school in 1814, and much later he recalled* that: ‘From the tragedies and comedies of school, I passed to a most pleasant interlude, by accepting a twelve-months’ invitation to the home of my ever honoured friend, the Rev. Benjamin Richardson of Farleigh Castle, near Bath, one of the best naturalists in the West of England, a man of excellent education, and a certain generosity of mind, very rare and very precious. Educated in Christ Church,** he retained much of the indefinable air of a gentleman of Old Oxford, but mixed with this there was a singular attachment to rural life, and farming operations. Looking back through the vista of half a century, among the ranks of my many kind and accomplished friends, I find no such man; and to my daily and hourly intercourse with him, to his talk on plants, shells, and fossils, to his curiously rich old library, and sympathy with all good knowledge, I may justly attribute whatever may be thought to have been my own success in following pursuits which he opened to my mind.’ That the regard was mutual is shown in a letter which Richardson wrote to William Smith on 17 March 1815°*°. A strong admonition to Smith to finish and produce a certain report which would enable a writ out against him to be settled, is succeeded by the remark: ‘Your nephew is with me and I esteem him the higher, the more I know him. It is a pity his talents should be unemployed, at the time he should be actively engaged in the profession in which he is destined to rise.’ A few days later Richardson again wrote*® to Smith: 28. J. Phillips, Memoirs of William Smith, LL.D., (London, 1844), p. 29. 29. WRO 960/3, 1041/3. 30. L.R. Cox, ‘New light on William Smith and his work’, Proc. Yorkshire Geol. Soc., vol. 25, (1942), 1-99, see p. 44. 31. Salisbury and Winchester Journal, 5 June 1815; K.B. Batchelor, op. cit., 4. 32. University of London Library MS. no. 517, quoted by permission of the Librarian. 33. J. Phillips in Anon., op.cit, 597. 34. Benjamin Richardson matriculated 1777; graduated B.A. 1781. 35. W.S. MSS. collection. 36. bid. 146 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Farley, near Bath. 22nd March 1815 My dear Friend, Pray attend to my address as above; for want of it your letters take a fortnight’s tour. Yesterday | recd. yours of the 15th and 18th together and both missent. I am astonished how you could have sent our first crude ideas to the press without inspection. The printed paper inclosed is one continued error. For God’s sake do not suffer it to get abroad; because there is now betore the public knowledge enough of the subject to detect, expose and damn the paper and the System together. | have amended it and if not perfect, it is free from error. You know the Clay no. 3 is 300 ft. thick. Forest Marble no. 6 is 20ft. and instead of being the top cover of Oolite, is divided by white clay at least 60ft. which should be inserted. I can see no reason for leaving out the Seend Rock, Coral Rag, Kelways, and Cornbrash’’. Phillips shall make out the lists you desire without delay and furnish you mineralogical information from Werner on veins. | am more than proud of your success with the honour of a visit from the Premier** and the prospect which now begins to open. Your Brother has sent the Map to Marlborough and that point is settled. Phillips presents his most dutiful regard to you, and with the utmost sincerity I am, Ever Yours, B.R.’ After John Phillips left the household of Benjamin Richardson and arrived in London on 21 November 1815 to join his uncle, cordial messages continued to be exchanged which reveal their mutual regard. A letter of 19 December 1815 to Smith which dealt mainly with the whereabouts of a mislaid consignment of fossils sent by Richardson from his own collection at Smith’s request, ends with a personal message: ‘I thank my friend Phillips for his kind letter, which was very pleasing and satisfactory to me, as his only loss on the road was a bad cold, and found nothing worse in exchange on his introduction to Town. I beg to inform him I have been reading Bakewell’s Lectures on Geology (who I hear is now in Bath and has 2 or 3 attendants) and I find it an intelligible popular work,*” worth his perusal: the plates giving a clear View of Werner’s Metallic Veins, as well as the Coal strata and their Dykes or Faults; tho’ he is more ignorant of the succession of the Strata, than even Mr. Farey himself,*° after both have presumed to write so much about it. I have just seen your Brother very well, but had little time to converse. He has maps to supply the demand of the day, which I hope may be a propitious one. When any Maps are sent me to Bath, you will please favour me with advice of them, that | may know where to send without delay. Mr R. presents her kind remembrance to you and Phillips, with which I am Ever Yours B. Richardson’ Another letter from Richardson to Smith of about this time contains the paragraph: “This early Winter has made coughs very prevalent with us, and | am fearful for my friend Phillips, whose health was by no means good whilst with us, and change of scene and situation with such Weather is by no means favourable to its improvement. You will not fail to convey the pleasant tidings of your treaty with the Museum, as soon as it be realized, y 37. Published in W. Smith, A Memoir to the Map and Delineation of the Strata of England and Wales with part of Scotland, (London, 1815), xii + 51 pp., table facing p. 8. Table reproduced in T. Sheppard, ‘William Smith: His Maps and Memoir’, Proc. Yorkshire Geol. Soc., vol. 19, (1917), 75-253; facing p. 127. 38. Robert Banks Jenkinson, second Earl of Liverpool (1770-1828), Premier 1812-27. 39. R. Bakewell, Av introduction to geology, 2nd edition, considerably enlarged, (London, 1815), xxvii + 492 pp. + 7 pls. 40. For John Farey’s relationship with Wm. Smith, see L.R. Cox, op. cit., 38-43. THE-FIRST ‘APPRENTICED’ GEOLOGIST 147 ‘APPRENTICESHIP’ WITH WILLIAM SMITH IN LONDON In the Autumn of 1815, Smith was closely engaged in two projects which he had to complete in order to raise money needed urgently to satisfy his creditors. His large geological map of England and Wales had been engraved and published by John Cary in August 1815 and Smith was busy supervising the colouring of copies and issuing them to subscribers and purchasers*’. A second preoccupation was his negotiation with the Treasury over the purchase of his fossil collection for the British Museum”. Towards the end of September, his brother John was staying with him and helped him to clean the specimens betore their inspection and valuation, and when he returned to Somerset in early November John Smith took with him twelve copies of the map for subscribers in the West of England. As soon as John Phillips arrived at Smith’s house, he was put to work on the fossils under guidance, as is recorded in the following extracts from William Smith’s diary: 1815 Nov 21. J. Phillips came to London. 23. With J.P. arranging shells according to Linneus. 24. J.P. arranging Grasses & other plants and naming them &c. 25. Mr Halford & Stinson — abt. Plan for Mr Adamson . . . Evening J.P. drawing said Plan of Coal Ground for Sale in the Forest of Dean. 27. Evening at Illuminations tor Peace — shewed J.P. 1815 Dec 4. To B. Museum with J.P. 16. Took J.P. to the Cattle Show. 24. Went with J.P. to Mr. Sheffield’s (borrowed Book). 1816 Feb 5. Making out Cornbrash & Forest Marble Fossils with J.P. Mar 2. Took J.P. with me to Crayford in Kent. . Walked with J.P. to Mr Shetfield’s & borrowed Llwyd &c on Fossils. Maysecl5.. (2 Paid®. -.'Clark, J.-P. Shoes, 13s°0d.’ The purchase of Smith’s collection had finally been arranged at the beginning of 1816 but it was June (10th, 18th and 19th) when it was delivered to the British Museum. There is little doubt that John Phillips was actively engaged in this transfer although there is no further mention of him in Smith’s diary until November. On I June 1816 the first part of Smith’s Strata Identified by Organized Fossils was issued and he began to press for an additional payment for the work involved in making the catalogue of the collection. In his memorial to the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury of August 1816, he said**: ‘Five months of my time with that of an able assistant have been assiduously employed in sorting classing arranging naming describing and writing on the numerous specimens the names ot the places from whence they were obtained.’ Smith then listed a number of scientific works in Latin, French and English which had been consulted and concluded: ‘My Lords, the great labour of combining a systematic with the stratified arrangement being entirely new and never before attempted by anyone, | humbly beg Your Lordships consideration and reward.’ This memorial received support from William Lowndes of the Tax Office, who added his commendation: ‘I can with truth bear Testimony to the motive which actuated him to the incessant Labour for many months, in forming the Catalogue raisonné which to him was an entire new Study, 41. V.A. Eyles and J.M. Eyles, ‘On the ditferent issues of the first geological map of England and Wales’, Anz, scr., vol. 3, (1938), 190-212, see p. 193. L.R. Cox, op. cit., 46-7. 42. J.M. Eyles, ‘William Smith: the scale of his geological collection to the British Museum’, Ayn. sct., vol. 23, (1967), 177- 212, see 199-200. 43. J.M. Eyles, op. cit., 201. 148 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE appears to have executed well with the assistance of his Nephew a Lad of very considerable Acquirements and of Ability.’ By the end of October 1816, after further submissions, the additional sum of £100 had been paid to Smith. On 4 November 1816, William Smith obtained plans from the Grand Junction Canal office (he had been asked to advise them) ‘& set J.P. to work about them’ and on the 7th ‘Mr Sale called & took fair Plan J.P. had drawn™. Part 2 of Strata Identified containing a further five plates of fossils was also issued about the same time. Phillips recorded** that he remained in London through 1816 and did not accompany Smith on his various professional journeys until the autumn of 1817. There would certainly have been much work for him to do at 15 Buckingham Street in naming and labelling a supplementary collection which Smith was trying to sell to the British Museum, in maintaining contact with William Cary in Smith’s absences regarding the colouring and sale of Smith’s Geological Map, and above all in the preparation for publication of the catalogue of the collection, Stratigraphical System of Organized Fossils. Part 1 of this work was published in August 1817 and Part 2, although never issued was ready at the same time. Descriptions of the species of fossils were drawn up and incorporated in the catalogue and both parts are generally recognised as being largely the work of John Phillips*®. At this time too, Phillips was extending his drawing ability by acquiring the art of lithography*’, all of which taken together, was enough to keep this boy of sixteen years of age busy during his guardian’s absences. In April 1816, William Smith spent a week at Swindon at the request of the proprietors of the Wiltshire and Berkshire Canal to examine the prospects of a well then being dug to supply water for their own summit lockage and the down lockage of the North Wilts. Canal. At the time of this visit, the well had not fully penetrated the Kimmeridge Clay and to aid his predictions on the eventual success of this undertaking, Smith surveyed the area and marked the strata of the district on the canal map. In this work he had the assistance of his brother, John Smith. In 1817, Smith published two toolscap-size lithographed sections of strata, which had been executed by John Phillips.** One of these was titled ‘Strata south of London, dipping northward’; the other, ‘Section of Strata, North Wilts. showing W. Smith’s Principles of Obtaining Water for Canals.’ In the latter, the west to east line of section passes from Banner’s Ash, near Wootton Bassett, through Swindon to just north of Badbury Camp, and shows uniformly eastward-dipping strata from the Clunch (i.e. Oxford) Clay to the Chalk. The position of the well which had been examined in the previous year appears near the centre of the section starting in the Oaktree (i.e. Kimmeridge) Clay and passing down to the Coral Rag and Pisolite above the Clunch Clay. This well record was of some importance in the development of Smith’s knowledge of the detailed succession of the Upper Jurassic formations enabling him to distinguish the Coral Rag as a strati- graphical unit for the first time and so revise the table of strata which he had published in 1815 in the ‘Explanation’ of his Map. PRACTICAL SURVEYING IN THE COUNTRY The first journey together was into East Anglia and the earliest fieldnotes of the sixteen years old John Phillips to survive, written on three pairs of sheets of octavo-size notepaper, begin with the heading*? 44. W.-S. diary: 45. MS. list of dates, /oc. cit., 46. TuR: Cox, op: cit. , 5/7. 47. In 1817, copies of a ‘Section of strata, North Wilts.’, lithographed by J. Phillips, were being sold by Wm. Smith, see L.R. Cox, op. cit., 60-1. 48. John Phillips, op. cit, 80-86; V.A. and J.M. Eyles, op. cit., 205-6; L.R. Cox, op. cit. 60-1; J.M. Eyles, ‘William Smith: A Bibhography of his published writings etc.’, Ju/. Soc. Biblphy Nat. Hist., 5, 87-109, see p. 98, item 17. 49. J. Phillips MSS. collection. THE FIRST ‘APPRENTICED’ GEOLOGIST 149 Bury [St Edmunds] Sept 30 1817 ‘In the Barnoak*? [‘? Weldon’ written above in Wm. Smith’s hand] stone of Bury Abbey saw: Small corals; Small wheels of Encrinus; Small Turritellae; Upper valve of small Chama & many other shells composing the greater part of the stone & confusedly intermixed. The stone is not so laminated as that in Farley Castle. Mindham Priory — in this Building Caen stone and Barnoak full of shells. Caen stone used in the finer work.’ From the Fens, William Smith and his young assistant went directly to the next assignment in south Yorkshire. Phillips wrote brief notes on the Lias south of Newark, and before they came to Retford ‘there was a very curious instance of facility in tracing an outcrop of stone between soft strata. Some irregular beds of stone in the Red Marl, formed by their outcrop a kind of terrace in the ground, to be seen very distinctly for 2 miles parallel to the road’. There was comment on the Magnesian Limestone exposures beyond Doncaster and the notes were written up when they reached Went Bridge, 10 miles NNW ot Doncaster, on 3 October 1817. Here Smith had preliminary discussions with Lord Hawke** at Womersley Hall regarding a plan for a new canal joining the river Aire at Knottingley to the river Don at Doncaster, with a branch running eastwards down the river Went from Went Bridge. They stayed three weeks in this neighbourhood and on 19 October John was set to work copying a plan at Col. Cooke’s house at Owston Hall*’, near the line of the proposed canal and five miles south-east of Went. Soon afterwards, Smith and Phillips moved to north-east Yorkshire, and on 24 October at Whitby John Phillips listed ‘localities of fossils near Whitby from Mr. J. Bird’s collection’. At Scarborough on 27 October the boy wrote ‘Messrs Hinderwell and Hursley have good collections’ and ‘about 50 Bathing machines. The sand very fine & level without any unpleasant holes’. At the end of 1817 they were back in London and it seems that Phillips remained there during the first part of the next year. Smith was in the West Country and the Forest of Dean in February and March, and he was again being hard pressed by creditors. In the meantime the boy was growing up in circumstances which can be imagined from the description which Smith himself has given: ‘In London a taxgatherer of one denomination or another is never very long absent trom your door. With their heavy hands my old rusty knocker too often made my high old house echo to the attics. I might have reduced taxes by stopping up windows and, indeed, by shutting up useless rooms, but it was only a house of call for me on my way through London and a depot for my fossils; for | had no time to devote to the economy and comforts of housekeeping. I never half furnished it, never had a dining table; no carpets crossed my old oak floors, no rich curtains darkened my windows; and though my rent was high I had no expensive living, no dinner parties, no wine merchants to pay — that was a dunning I was ever free from in London’.* His nephew later reflected that ‘at too early an age [he) began to enter the shadows of those calamities in which his revered relative was plunged’. ‘Would that this epoch of his revived and enlarged reputation had also been the dawn of more prosperous fortunes, or that, satisfied with the degree in which he had accomplished his gigantic task, he had left to others the completion of his work, and devoted himself for a time to even the humblest of those professional labours by which he had been at least supported through oppressive difficulties, and 50. Properly ‘Barnack near Stamford’. Both Barnack and Weldon stones were used during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries for the great Fenland abbeys. 51. Edward Hawke (1774-1824) who assumed the additional surname of Harvey on marriage, third Baron Hawke. 52. Bryan Cooke (1765-1821), M.P. for Malton, Colonel of the 3rd West York Militia. High sheritf of Denbighshire, 1794. 53. L.R. Cox, op. cit., 78, quoting W.S. MS. 150 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE by which he must have already grown comparatively rich but for the incessant drain of money in following up discoveries which no living man could reasonably hope to complete!**’ There were however compensations which came from companionship with the man himself. ‘His house was full of maps, sections, models, and collections of fossils. His hourly talk was of the laws of stratification, the succession of organic life, the practical value of geology, — its importance in agriculture, engineering and commerce, — its connection with physical geography, — its influence on the occupations of different people, and the distribution of different races’.°° John Phillips also had the inestimable advantage of meeting Smith’s scientific friends and taking part in their discussions as an equal. He later recalled an early encounter with Baron George L. Cuvier during the visit of the latter to England in 1818 when, ‘youngest of a large entourage at Sir J. Bankes’ conversazione, I had then the privilege of listening to this the greatest of modern biologists’ .°° In July 1818, Smith once more set off for Yorkshire taking Phillips with him and on the way they called in at Dunchurch, Warwickshire to procure a lithographic stone. There was a period of intensive survey in the Went area to establish the line of the proposed canal in which Phillips had his part, and in September he noted: ‘500 plans printed from the Dunchurch Stone, 200 from a Womersley stone’” whilst Smith recorded in his diary that on 22 October ‘J.P. copied the Survey of Dun River; also D* R' trom the General Map’. ‘Towards the end of the year William Smith and his nephew paid an extended visit to Oxfordshire to see their relatives at Churchill and Long Compton. For both, it seems to have been the first time since Smith collected John and Ann after their mother’s death ten years before. Smith returned alone to Yorkshire and, leaving Phillips to spend Christmas and his eighteenth birthday at Churchill, noted in his diary when they parted: ‘15 Dec. advanced J.P. £1.’ The youth’s financial dependence at this time is further illustrated by Smith’s instruction in the middle of January: “The inclosed will enable you to proceed to Town either by the night coach from Chipping Norton, or if you could get to Woodstock, by the day coach of Tuesday next’.°* On 22 January 1819 John rejoined his uncle in London, where active preparations were being made for the submission of a Parliamentary Bill for the Aire and Don Canal and Drainage. This involved a brief return visit to south Yorkshire in the last week of February, Phillips accompanying Lord Hawke in his carriage in both directions. The Bill failed in the House on 6 April and with it went the immediate prospect of regular employment in supervising the construction of the canal. SHARING THE CRISIS IN SMITH’S AFFAIRS At this time, Phillips dedicated a somewhat sentimental array of verses to his friends at Farleigh Hungerford which are inscribed: ‘1819. Written on the occasion of an expected voyage to America’.*” The circumstances which gave rise to this statement are recorded in Smith’s diary: 1819 April 15. Peter Browne Esq.°' came & said he was commissioned by the United States of America to employ an engineer to survey, level, estimate & report on the practicability of overcoming the difficulties of passing the falls on navigable rivers in N. Carolina. 54. J. Phillips, op. cit., 77. 55. J. Phillips in Anon., ‘Eminent living geologists; I. John Phillips’, Geol. Mag., vol. 7, (1870), 301-6, see p. 302. 56. J. Phillips, Geology of Oxford and the Valey of the Thames, (Oxtord, 1871d), xxiv + 523 pp., see p. 230 footnote. 57. These may be the draft plans dated 1818, mentioned by L.R. Cox, op. cit., 59. The quotations are from Phillips’s notes at Oxtord. 58. W.S. MSS. collection. 59. J.P. MSS. collection. 61. Peter Browne (1794-1872). M.P. for Rye, 1818-1826; sometime H.M. Charge d’Affaires at Copenhagen. THE FIRST ‘APPRENTICED’ GEOLOGIST 115) 17. Again saw Mr P.B. about proposed trip to America. 22. Mr Brogden® called and particularly desired I would not think of going to N. Carolina. 29. Mr Brogden called to inform me he was likely to succeed in procuring me £200 for the work which relates to the British Museum. There seems to have been no further consideration of the American proposal. Financial problems had again loomed up before William Smith, and his brother John arrived in London at the beginning of May 1819 to discuss them. Smith had begun a project for quarrying building stone at Combe Down near Bath and had laid a railway for taking the stone down to the Coal Canal, but a failure in the quality of the stone caused the scheme to be abandoned and Smith was left with a heavy load of debt. Smith and Phillips spent the last part of May in Yorkshire on an assignment at a lead mine in Swaledale but shortly after their return to London Smith was arrested for debt and in June 1819 he was confined to the King’s Bench Prison where he remained for nearly ten weeks.°? It was while he was there that Phillips, left to cope with ali the problems which beset them, must have unburdened himself to his old friend in Somerset for he received the following letter from the Rev. Benjamin Richardson: Farley, 15 July 1819, a Dry St. Swithin. My dearest Friend, Before I had expressed my thanks for your former favours, your second kindness has reached me with the Sections, Maps and 4 nos. of Strata identified . . . Above all, you have done credit to yourself & to the late Duke of Bedford, by the portrait I am proud to receive.” In the centre of the largest hay harvest I have ever been concerned for (45 acres), the nomination of the County Member at Devizes tomorrow, wh. I am involuntarily called to attend, together with domestic illness in my house & village, allow me little time to do justice to your kind communications, but in the midst of all you must not allow yourself to suppose that you have been forgotten by me. | have long had Hill’s promise to provide Lias, and God willing shall not lose one moment after tomorrow to stir up his exertions for you, & in the interval you will be pleased to inform me what a good press will cost, & if possible (for | have more leeches than one at a time upon me) the price shall be transmitted by the return of Post.® I am, good Sir, believe me not insensible to your disagreeables, & those of your Uncle, & would it possible remove them. I will call into [being] something more than good words & wishes to serve you both. In the interval let us look forward with a ray of hope & the mens conscia recti will cheer us in the worst of times. Mrs. R. is pretty well & begs her kind regards to you & to your Uncle, in which she is most cordially joined by yours ever B. Richardson. After his release from prison Smith set off again for south Yorkshire to work on a modified proposal for the Aire-Don canal, and on 12 September 1819 he wrote to Phillips:°° 62. James Brogden (1765-1842). M.P. for Launceston, 1796-1832; chairman of the Ways and Means Committee in the House of Commons. 63. J.M. Eyles, ‘William Smith: Some aspects of his life and work’, pp. 142-158 in (ed., C.J. Schneer), Towards a history of geology, (Cambridge, Mass., 1969), see p. 157. 64. J. Phillips, op. cit., plate facing p. 40. 65. Phillips had evidently asked for money from his generous triend in order to buy a lithographic press. W. Hill of Combhay, engineer, had been associated with Smith in the quarry venture and was to be asked about a Lias lithographic stone. He was trustee and executor of Mrs. Richardson’s will made in 1833. 66. W.S. MSS. collection. 152 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Dear John, [ am glad to hear of a little suspension of hostilities that I may have a few days to compose myself and get in some money; and to that end I must trouble you to look up the small packet of papers which contains the Aire and Dun Bill, diaries &c. relating thereto. When that is delivered I may probably get from the new concern some advance toward the payment of rent. Holmes says I must charge 5 guineas per day. The line of summit level which I have found out and proved by levels past all difficulties is worth to the concern more than a hundred guineas a day. It tar exceeds my first expectations and my first view of the ground. Sir Frans. Wood®” said my first proposal by Nostal Ponds was the natural line but the level of the Barnsley Reservoir brings the line south of Wragby close by the coalpits and on a clay summit to Ackworth Moor top where the tier of locks may literally be built in a freestone quarry.°* Tomorrow I shall get the surveyor (for the Barnsley Canal) to follow me with his survey. The estates are large — the great owners have been seen and promised their maps — but we shall not be ready without your assistance. Lord Hawke expected you was come down. If he comes up this week you will come down with him as he returns to Doncaster Races which are the week following. There will be five applications to Parliament from this neighbourhood next session, and consequently much contention. You can hold yourself in readiness to come as soon as you receive the needful. Bring the section and the copies of the large plan; as the plan of the Went Canal will be long and narrow the lower part of the line can be cut out of the Aire and Dun plans and joined to the new part. It will be less that 20 miles — straighter than any of the roads — no tunnel and very little deep cutting — and excellent ground to hold water. [he Barnsley proprietors seem to like it. I have written to Sir James Jelf.© I shall look over the survey map and send it back with Mr. Huggins’s lease tomorrow. If I recollect any thing else | may probably get a frank from Lord Hawke tomorrow and write again. I am, Yours sincerely, Wm. Smith. In October, Smith and Phillips travelled to the Forest of Dean to make a survey of the Bullopill colliery new Newnham tor the owner Sir James Jelf,”” returning to Yorkshire at the end of the month.”°? Whilst they were in Yorkshire Smith was compelled to give up his property at Tucking Mill, Midford to his chief creditor. The tenancy of his London home was also relinquished and in his absence he had ‘to submit to the sale of his furniture, collections and books, preserving in fact only his papers, maps, sections and other drawings, through the kindness of a most faithful friend’.”" This disaster in the affairs of William Smith marked the transfer of John Phillips trom youth to manhood and from the role of apprentice and assistant to partner and support. Although they returned to London tor a short time at the beginning of 1820, it was to stay in lodgings and make preparations for a final departure. On 7 February, William Smith and his wife together with John Phillips lett by coach bound tor Leicestershire and Yorkshire.” London quitted with disgust; the charming fields regained; and the healthy exercise of land- surveying and engineering kept all misfortunes out of mind . . . But J. Phillips seemed to avoid the petrified organisms as delusive snares and stuck closely to the chain, theodolite and spirit level.” 67. Francis Lindley Wood (1771-1846), second Baronet of Bowling Hall and Hemsworth Hall, Yorks. 68. Original plan in West Yorkshire C.R.O. and Registry of Deeds, titled ‘Map / of the Intended / Went Canal / From / The Barnsley Canal near Cold Hindley / To the Tideway of the Dutch River / Near Newbridge / In the West Riding of / Yorkshire / William Smith, Engineer, 1819’. Deposited by Dixon Holmes. 69. Sir James Jelf (1763-1849) of Oaklands, Newnham, Glos., banker and sometime mayor of Gloucester. 70. W.S. diary. Ae =)eBhillips; ops cit2, 09 i: 72. W.S. diary. 73. W.S. MSS. collection. THE FIRST ‘APPRENTICED’ GEOLOGIST IES This was to mark the beginning of a wandering existence for four years mainly in the north of England that ended in a final settlement in Yorkshire with semi-retirement for the older man and the opening of a long and distinguished career for his younger companion. ”* ASSESSMENT OF THE INFLUENCE OF WILLIAM SMITH AND BENJAMIN RICHARDSON The major formative influences in Phillips’s development were the tutelage of his uncle, William Smith, and the oversight and encouragement of the Rev. Benjamin Richardson, and they each had, in marked degree, a different albeit complementary role in his training. Richardson was Smith’s senior in age by ten years. They had made their approach to geology along entirely different routes. Smith had acquired his know ledge of the rocks and their fossil content by direct observation and deduction in the course ot his professional activities. His discoveries owed little if anything to the writings or teaching of others and he was correctly described as ‘an original discoverer’. On the other hand the Revd. Benjamin Richardson was a country parson with a conventional Oxford classical education who had approached geology by way of a general interest in natural history. Before he met Smith, he had collected and given names to fossils from the quarries of the Somerset- Wiltshire border, but he had not given any thought to their significance as indicators of a strata succession or series. An older friend, the Rev. Joseph Townsend, Rector of Pewsey, had added to his own mathematical training at Cambridge a period at Edinburgh studying science and medicine, and then had spent some years in inspecting and evaluating his father’s mining properties in Wales, Southern Ireland and Cornwall besides travelling on the Continent. It was the historic discussion between these two and William Smith in 1799, which brought that flash of understanding of the relationship between the bedded rocks and their organic contents. They both immediately recognised the importance of Smith’s observations and thereafter they continually encouraged and even impor- tuned him to publish and claim his priority. Although William Smith assumed the immediate guardianship of John Phillips just as the boy passed his eighth birthday, the constant travel which his work entailed between 1809 and 1815 must have precluded the opportunity of immediate guidance of Phillips’s studies. Apart from a_ brief reference to instruction in the meaning of fossils, Phillips makes no reference or acknowledgment to Smith during the period of his schooldays, in marked contrast to his frequent allusions to his debt to his uncle after 1815. It is here unnecessary to chronicle in detail the movements of William Smith during these years. His mass of documents, maps and fossils collections were already stored at his house in London. His engagements took him as far as Sussex, Suffolk, Northamptonshire, Yorkshire, Cheshire, and South-West Wales, besides the Forest of Dean and Somerset. No doubt, when Smith was based near at hand, as when advising the Corporation of Bath in 1810 on the failure of the hot- springs and supervising the restoration of the water-supply, or when he was examining and reporting on breaches and loss of water in a section of the Kennet and Avon Canal, the boy Phillips learned from him details of his work and was imbued with the ambition to follow the same profession. John and his sister were living at Midford as members of the household of John Smith, another uncle, and in sucha rural setting it needed nothing more than personal inclination for him to develop his taste for natural history in its various aspects. When John Phillips entered the house of Benjamin Richardson in 1814, he experienced for the first time an environment of academic calm and detachment, and at the same time he came under the direct superintendence of one who was prepared to devote unstinted attention to a willing and talented pupil. He was given the freedom of a large and richly varied private library, the resources of which were 74. J.M. Edmonds, “The geological lecture-courses given in Yorkshire by William Smith and John Phillips, 1824-25, Proc. Yorkshire Geol. Soc., vol. 40, (1975), 373-412. 154 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE reinforced with frequent borrowings from lending libraries of Bath and London. He was encouraged to sort, classify, and name the contents of Richardson’s fossil cabinet and other natural history collections, using under guidance the whole range of reference works available. He was set to work to improve his natural ability as an artist by copying the excellent drawings of fossils prepared by the Rev. Joseph Townsend for his work The Character of Moses’*> and when William Smith appealed to Richardson for help in preparing his data for his Memoir to the Map and Delineation of the Strata, the task of compiling the material was placed in the first instance on Phillips. When therefore Phillips, not yet fifteen years old, arrived in London in November 1815 to join William Smith, he had at his command, thanks almost entirely to the nurturing of Richardson, a remarkable theoretical knowledge of geology and of the systematic classification of organic remains. He competence was noted by his seniors and John Farey commented that Smith was in 1817 aided by ‘an ingenious young man his nephew and assistant, Mr John Phillips, (who had made himself enough acquainted with the language and works of some of the best systematic writers on natural history)’.”’ In London, work continued for Phillips on much the same lines as at Farleigh Hungerford but in an entirely different atmosphere. First the cleaning and naming of Smith’s fossil collection before transfer to the British Museum and then the compiling of the catalogue, fell to the lot of the boy, but reference books had to be borrowed and the whole work was carried out under the cloud of monetary stress and necessity. During the years that immediately followed, Phillips was caught up in the recurring crises in Smith’s financial affairs to an extent that was long to influence his own desperate desire for security, an anxiety which was not finally abated until he reached Oxford some forty years later. The compensation lay in the realisation that he was serving in an apprenticeship. His task was mainly in copying plans and tidying up reports, and he also learnt how to lithograph, constructing a portable press with the cooperation of his uncle. Within a year or two he even had the idea of turning this skill to profit and prepared a sheet advertising his services in ‘drawing and printing from stone’’’ — an offer which seems to have come to nothing. There was the privilege of hearing the stimulating talk of the senior man and the unconscious absorbing of his knowledge, experience and skill. This was accentuated when in 1817, Phillips was enabled to join Smith in his assignments in the country. From this time, he became the active field assistant and began the practical training of a surveyor, learning to use chain and theodolite, and to him also fell the duty of preparing the finished plans. His early notes show that he was taught to record information about the construction of canal bridges and wharfs, about the costs and general economic data of mining ventures, about pumping engines and mineral trucks and tramways, and all the facts which could properly be required in a report presented by a civil engineer. But alongside the surveyor there was the geologist and always new information had to be added to William Smith’s maps. Phillips was taught to record details of quarry sections and exposures, and the lessons received from Smith in this way provided the initial training which later turned Phillips into the most meticulous field geologist of his generation. While William Smith had very little time, opportunity or even inclination to keep abreast of geological advances during this long period of acute financial embarrassment, he nevertheless contributed constantly to Phillips’s practical training both as an engineer and as practising geologist. It was however to Benjamin Richardson that Phillips was indebted for his scientific discipline and instruction, and to both of his instructors, he was ever ready to acknowledge his permanent debt. 75. J. Townsend, The Character of Moses established for Veracity as an Historian: recording events from the Creation to the Deluge, (2 vols., Bath and London, 1813, 1815). 76. J. Farey, ‘On the importance of knowing and accurately discriminating Fossil Shells, as the means of identifying particular beds of the Strata, in which they are enclosed’. Phil. Mag. and Jl., vol. 53, (1819), 112-132; p. 114. 77. J.P. MSS. collection. Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine. 76 (1982) NEW AND LITTLE-KNOWN JURASSIC REPTILES FROM WILTSHIRE by J.B. DELAIR INTRODUCTION For over 160 years Wiltshire has yielded an abundant and scientifically important harvest of reptilian fossils. Comparatively few of these have been noticed in the literature, however, and of those so treated relatively few have been adequately described, even though several have been made the types of distinct new genera and species. Some of these animals are unique to Wiltshire. Many of the earliest accounts date from the first half of the nineteenth century, when standards of description were somewhat uneven and, in addition to some of the actual specimens having since been lost or destroyed, that has resulted in our knowledge of the relevant animals being less than satisfactory. The recent location in the Bath geological collections of additional Wiltshire material belonging to certain poorly known Jurassic saurians, and at Devizes of remains representative of a hitherto undescribed marine reptile, enables the county’s palaeontological records to be extended accordingly. This material is discussed below, existing genera being dealt with first. ABBREVIATIONS Bath M., Bath Museum; BMNH, British Museum (Natural History); CUM, Cambridge University Museum; Dev. M., Devizes Museum; OUM, Oxford University Museum. I. Cardiodon rugulosus (Owen). FIG. 1. Practically all that was known about this Jurassic dinosaur was summarised by the present writer in 1973', when it was noted that the original teeth described and figured by Owen in 18417 had been obtained shortly before that year by Chaning Pearce from the Forest Marble beds near Bradford-on- Avon and that Swinton, in 1934, had suggested that the teeth wer probably inseparable from those of the allied dinosaur Cetiosaurus, a large herbivorous quadrupedal form generally similar to Brontosaurus and Diplodocus’. As the complete dentition of Cefiosaurus is unknown, Swinton’s suggestion is of uncertain merit. Except for a similar but imperfectly preserved solitary tooth (R.1527 BMNH) from the Great Oolite of Cirencester* the aforementioned Wiltshire teeth have until now constituted the only Cardiodon material known. By any standard, such evidence for Cardiodon as a distinct genus is indeed slender. The presence in the Bath collection of an essentially identical but previously unrecorded tooth (M.2032 Bath M.) is therefore of considerable interest. The specimen, which is also imperfect, comes from the Forest Marble of an unlocalised site in Wiltshire, and seems to have been a part of the old Charles Moore collection. Sufficient of the tooth is preserved, however, for some distinctive features to be ascertained; these are: 1. Crown thickest in the middle, with both lingual aspects laterally compressed into gently rounded ridges. 2. Base of crown somewhat constricted and devoid of striations. Delair, J.B., 1973. The Dinosaurs of Wiltshire, WAM, 68, 4. Owen, R., 1841. Odontography, 291, pl.75a, fig. a—b. Swinton, W.E., 1934. The Dinosaurs, London, (table of British Dinosaurs). 4. Lydekker, R., 1889. On the Remains of Eocene and Mesozoic Chelonia, and a Tooth of (?) Ornithopsis, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., 45, 245. wane 156 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE 3. Fine vertical striations, lacking a regular pattern, beginning on external surfaces immediately above basal constriction. The dimensions in table 1. relate to the base of the crown only (no others are possible owing to the incompleteness of the specimen). Bath Mus. M2032. 0 50mm fees peers ars FIG. 1. Cardiodon rugulosus (Owen). TABLE 1 Anterior/posterior diameter of the base of the crown 15 mm. Anterior/posterior diameter of maximum preserved width 20 mm. Transverse diameter of base of crown 13 mm. Various small differences occur between the Bath specimen and the original teeth figured by Owen but these, outweighed by the similarities, are not improbably due to the several teeth coming from different positions in the jaws. Until a complete dentition of Cetiosaurus is known, it would seem best to continue regarding Cardiodon as a distinct form. It is, in that connection, noteworthy that a large number of scattered ‘Cetiosaurus remains from the Forest Marble and adjacent formations appear to indicate several separate genera, of which the named forms are largely ill-defined and the others await description. Il. Marmarosaurus obtusus (Owen). FIG. 2. This genus is known from teeth only. The specimens upon which it was founded came from the Forest Marble of an unrecorded Wiltshire locality and were, again, part of the Chaning Pearce collection, being described by Owen in 1841°. Since that date, the genus has been mentioned very infrequently,° ’ no doubt because the original teeth seem to have been lost and because the affinities of the genus are difficult to determine from Owen’s illustrations. The recent discovery in the Bath geological collections of the crowns of eight sub-cylindrical teeth (M.2033a—b and M.2034a-f Bath M.) from the Forest Marble of an unprovenanced Wiltshire locality, resembling one of the teeth described and figured by Owen, affords additional information on this rare and ill known saurian. Of the Bath teeth, only M.2033a and M.2034c are complete. The remainder exhibit crowns with naturally worn apices or with the apices having been broken off. The heights of the two intact teeth are 21 mm. and 19 mm. respectively; their respective basal diameters 5. Owen, R., 1841. Op. cit., 291, pl.75a, figs. 5a—b and 6a-c. 6. Woodward, A.S., 1885. On the Literature and Nomenclature of British Fossil Crocodilia, Geol. Mag., 2, dec. 3, 508, (table). 7. Woodward, A.S. and Sherborn, C.D., 1980. British Fossil Vertebrata, London, 249. JURASSIC REPTILES L57 Bath Mus. M2033. levy h Fe (} of AA A ta Sd orig b “OL te d ae f Bath Mus. M2034. ABBREVIATIONS:—a@_ anterior 0 ( laterat 30mm FIG. 2. Marmarosaurus obtusus (Owen). are 9 mm. and 10 mm. For purposes of comparison, the dimensions of the incomplete specimens are shown in Table 2 TABLE 2 Specimen Height (as preserved). Width at base. M.2033b 10 mm. 6 mm. M.2034a 16 mm. 5.5 mm. M.2034b 13 mm. 7. mm. M.2034d. 12 mm. 6 mm. M.2034e 12 mm. 5 mm. M.2034f 13 mm. 5.5 mm. The crowns of all the Bath teeth have highly polished surfaces ornamented with very fine vertical striae which tend to coarsen somewhat towards the apices. Slightly recurved, the teeth exhibit no other significant features. The affinities of Marmarosaurus remain uncertain, although it is worth observing that Woodward* discussed it in relation to the crocodilia. The above teeth do indeed possess many similarities to those of teleosaurian crocodiles, which were common members of most middle Jurassic reptilian faunas. Accordingly, the genus is provisionally referred to the crocodilia. III. Bathyspondylus swindoniensis gen.et spec.nov.. FIG. 3. General History In 1896, E.H. Goddard published a short account of the then recent discovery of part of a niod tly sized sauropterygian skeleton in the Kimmeridge Clay of the old Swindon Brick and Tile Company’s pit at Swindon’. Sauropterygians were surface-swimming aquatic reptiles broadly divisible into long- 8. Woodward, A.S., 1885. Loc. cit. 9. Goddard, E.H., 1896. Pletosaurus macromerus (?) from the Kimmeridge Clay of Swindon, WAM, 28, 179-180. 158 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE necked (Plesiosaurian) and short-necked (Pliosaurian) forms; all had paddle-like limbs with which they rowed themselves through the water. The remains, which comprised forty-seven disarticulated vertebral centra with broken neural arches and ribs, various imperfect pelvic elements, and several paddle bones, were placed in Devizes Museum and identified as those of a young individual of either Phiosaurus macromerus or P. brachydeirus. Of these, the first species has since been transferred to the related genus Stretosaurus'”. Goddard correctly observed that, as complete sauropterygian skeletons are rarely encountered in the Kimmeridge Clay, the Swindon reptile was particularly noteworthy despite its modest dimensions, some seven feet as preserved. It is, therefore, rather surprising that subsequent palae- ontological research has ignored or overlooked both the specimen and Goddard’s account. A restudy of the specimen (1774 Dev. M.) shows that it belongs to neither of the above named species nor to any other described sauropterygian and that it is, moreover, not even a true pliosaur. The following description constitutes the first detailed account of it. Spinal Column. Forty six consecutive vertebral centra belonging to the neck (cervical), shoulder (pectoral) and trunk (dorsal) regions of the spinal column are preserved. A solitary tail (caudal) centrum is also preserved. Only one centrum, a dorsal, has part of a neural arch articulated to it and only four late dorsal centra (nos. 42, 43, 44, and 45) are distorted through post mortem crushing. Each centrum bears a numbered label, dating from Goddard’s day, which records the correct sequence of the centra. These permit an accurate study of the changing shapes and proportions of the centra in series. The dimensions of the centra are given, in millimetres in Table 3. TABLE 3. Centrum Maximum Maximum Antero-posterior length Antero-posterior length no: (Transverse) width (Vertical) height along neural canal along ventral keel Anterior terminal face 1 43 35 33 33 2 48 37 34 35 3; 47 38 35 34 4. 54 42 36 36 Di 53 42 35 36 6. 59 46 39 40 ile 63 49 37 39 8. 65 51 40 37 9. 67 53 39est. 36 10. 75 59 40 39 lets 76 60 40 40 [2% 80 60 41 39 13% 89 72 45 36 14. 91 Wi 42 39 15. 97 7h) 45 42 16. 105 79 45 41 17. 108 81 44 41 18. 109 78 43 41 19. 98 76 47 42 20. 108 81 48 42 Dale 111 86 46 42 22 113 82 44 44 DB 115 83 45 43 24. 110 Th 43 42 DSi. 106 81 47 +44 26. 110 86 45 41 10. Tarlo, L.B., 1959. Stretosaurus, gen.noy., a Giant Pliosaur from the Kimmeridge Clay, Palaeontology, 2, pt.1, 52. JURASSIC REPTILES 159 Centrum Maximum Maximum Antero-posterior length Antero-posterior length no: (Transverse) width (Vertical) height along neural canal along ventral keel Anterior terminal face 737 104 84 49 49 28. 103 99 48 40 29. 106 96 47 43 30. 98 90 49 42 31. 106 94 48 47 322 101 92 49 45 33. 102 92 49 45 34. 100 90 50 47 35. 102 91 46 45 36. 108 94 48 43 Sie 95 90 49 48 38. 98 94 46 +4 39. 92 90 50 41 40. 98 94 45 45 41. 90 76 35 38 42. 94 73 31 distorted 43. distorted distorted 35 distorted 44. 90 distorted 35 distorted 45. 90 distorted 33 distorted 46. 100 80 5) 37 47. 81 70 31 31 Except at the rib facets and the sutures of the neural arches, every centrum is externally smooth and devoid of rugosities. Vascular foramina pierce several centra laterally. All the centra possess flat or incipiently concave terminal faces, having gently bevelled edges. The floor of the neural canal runs the entire antero-posterior length of every centrum and is pierced medialy by two relatively large elongated nutritive foramina (FIG. 3). The floor of the neural canal is usually the uppermost surface of each centrum and in the cervical and pectoral regions is truly emarginate. Cervical centra. The atlas/axis and perhaps the earliest two anterior cervicals are missing. The terminal faces of the first nine or ten centra of the preserved series are transversely oblong (FIG. 3a). This transverse width increases significantly between centra ten and sixteen (FIG. 3b), but then less so up to centrum twenty, which is either the last cervical or the first pectoral, probably the former. Simultaneously, the initial oblong configuration progressively changes to that of a horizontal oval. The antero-posterior length of each succeeding centrum, measured ventrally, increases far less markedly than its transverse width, whereby the posterior cervicals are proportionally much shorter than the anterior ones. The anterior and posterior terminal faces are of almost equal width and area throughout. Small pits occupy the centres of the anterior terminal faces. The earlier cervicals exhibit weakly developed ventral keels. Pectoral centra. Possibly centrum twenty (noted above) and certainly centra twenty-one to twenty- three are pectorals (FIG. 3c). In these, the transverse diameters of the terminal faces and the antero- posterior lengths increase only marginally, although the contours of the terminal faces themselves change to something approaching an inverted hemisphere (FIG. 3d). Small bosses occupy the centres of the anterior terminal faces. The posterior terminal faces are slightly smaller than their anterior counterparts. Ventral keels are absent and the rib facets and the sutures for the neural arches coalesce laterally in the usual fashion. Dorsal centra. Twenty-three dorsal centra are present; probably the hindermost three or four are missing. In the first thirteen centra immediately following the pectorals, the terminal faces rapidly change to a subcircular configuration in which the width is greater than the height (FIG. 3e); thereafter they become proportionally less wide in the next four centra, i.e. in nos. thirty-seven to 160 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE EllG.3: BATHYSPONDYLUS SWINDONIENSIS. centrum gen. et sp.nov. no:7 centrum no:25 ABBREVIATIONS:- a.t.f. anterior terminal face; f.n.c, floor of neural canal; r.f. rib facet; s.n.a. suture for neural arch; v.f. vascular foramen. 1774 Devizes Museum. Kimmeridge Clay, Swindon. O 50mm —_—SE ee FIG. 3. Bathyspondylus swindomensis gen. et spec. nov. JURASSIC REPTILES 161 forty (FIG. 3f). From centrum forty-one rearwards the centra become relatively wider again as their heights diminish proportionally and more rapidly than their widths. The posterior terminal faces are always appreciably smaller than the anterior faces. Ventral keels and central pits or bosses are absent. Caudal centra. One centrum only is preserved. Very probably it comes from the anterior half of the tail, but it is insufficiently well preserved to afford useful data. Neural arches. No complete neural arches are preserved and nothing of special significance can be made out from the numerous extant fragments except that they appear to be of a general plesiosaurian pattern. Ribs. Similar remarks apply to the scores of rib fragments associated with the above described material. Pelvic girdle. An ischium and a pubis, both much abraded, occur together with another almost complete pubis and part of what is considered to be the other ischium. Of these the first two bones measure 248 mm. x 197.5 mm. and 254 mm. x 185 mm. respectively, but little else about them invites attention. Iwo further bones, each 172.5 mm. in length, appear to be iliac bones, although if so they are unusually small relative to the other pelvic elements. Limb bones. Several complete and broken phalangeals and metacarpals occur. These, conforming to the usual sauropterygian limb design, are of some interest in that they exhibit pliosaurian rather than plesiosaurian affinities. No traces exist of cranial bones, teeth, the pectoral girdle, or the larger limb bones, although a few indeterminate detached fragments may once have belonged to one or more pectoral bones. DIAGNOSIS Centra very short antero-posteriorly and with the terminal faces always wider than high. At least nineteen cervicals (but probably twenty-one excluding the atlas/axis), with terminal faces of equal area, initially of a transversely oblong outline but progressing posteriorly to that of a horizontal oval. Pectorals three (possibly four) in number with terminal faces having an inverted hemispheric outline. At least twenty-three dorsal centra (but probably twenty-seven), possessing posterior terminal faces always smaller than their anterior counterparts, and of a subcircular to oval contour. All terminal faces flat or incipiently concave. Weakly developed ventral keels on anterior and middle cervicals only. Rugosity confined to rib facets and the sutures of the neural arches. Floors of neural canals emarginate in cervicals and pectorals. The type species. DISCUSSION As noted by Goddard, the present specimen represents a juvenile individual. From this it might be argued that the erection of a new name for its reception is questionable, but close comparison of the remains with published descriptions and figures of other Upper Jurassic sauropterygians discloses so many differences between those forms and the present animal that it appears highly improbable that all are solely morphological effects. These differences are discussed below. Diagnostic features in sauropterygians concern structural and proportional differences in skulls, teeth, cervical centra, limb girdles and phalangeal bones. Owing to the incompleteness of the Swindon specimen, comparison is restricted to the cervical centra and the phalangeals, the pelvic bones being too imperfectly preserved to be of help. Upper Jurassic sauropterygians occur abundantly only in the Oxford Clay and Kimmeridge Clay formations. In the older Oxfordian beds plesiosaurs predominate, even though pliosaurs are strongly represented, whereas the reverse situation occurs in the younger Kimmeridgian strata. Not surprisingly the best preserved plesiosaurs are from the Oxford Clay and the most complete and informative pliosaur remains are often of Kimmeridgian age. In the following paragraphs, these better preserved individuals have been compared with the Swindon specimen. 162 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE The general resemblance of the present cervical centra to those of the various species of the well known Oxfordian plesiosaurs Cryptocleidus and Muraenosaurus immediately establishes _ the plesiosaurian affinities of Bathyspondylus swindoniensis. Andrews, however, has observed that the cervical centra ascribed to Muraenosaurus leedsi, M. durobrivensis and the ill known Crimoltosaurus infraplanus and C. hexagonalis are essentially so similar that, on their own, they cannot be separated specifically or used for diagnostic purposes'’. Nothwithstanding this observation, the anterior cervicals in the present animal are unlike any in the forms just mentioned except those of M.durobrivensis'*, which possess terminal faces shaped similarly to Swindon centrum no.7 (FIG. 3a). Even these, however, are proportionally longer than in our specimen, have differently positioned rib facets, exhibit considerable rugosity round the bevelled borders, and have non-emarginate neural canals. Significantly perhaps emarginate neural canals are much more frequently seen in pliosaur centra. The contour of a terminal face of an immature cervical centrum (41955 BMNH), from the Kimmeridge Clay of Weymouth, Dorset, which was made the type specimen of Cimoliosaurus brevior in 1889,'* approaches that of Swindon centrum no. 16, although it has a proportionally longer body, possesses rib facets occupying a smaller area, and exhibits a noticeably concave anterior terminal face. In 1889 Lydekker"* referred several isolated cervical centra characterised by short antero-posterior dimensions (a feature of the Swindon specimen) to the large Kimmeridgian reptile Colymbosaurus brachistospondylus. This plesiosaur had been founded by Hulke in 1870'° on material in which cervical elements were missing. Lydekker’s action was prompted by the very short antero-posterior length of the dorsal centra of C. brachistospondylus, a characteristic he thought might extend to the cervical centra of that form. The dorsals of Hulke’s species, however, are very unlike those of the Swindon specimen, whereby Lydekker’s correlation of these centra is extremely questionable and it may well be that the aforementioned isolated cervicals should now more properly be assigned to the Swindon genus. The cervical centra of another large Kimmeridgian plesiosaur Colymbosaurus manseli, certainly known only from Kimmeridge Bay, Dorset, also approach those under review, although they are narrower in proportion to their height and have much more deeply concave terminal faces. '® The small size of the anterior cervicals in the Swindon specimen indicates that the skull can only have attained modest dimensions and that it must have been of plesiosaurian rather than pliosaurian type. However, although the characters of the cervicals of Bathyspondylus are plesiosaurian, their total number (nineteen as preserved, and an estimated twenty-one for the complete series) aligns with the totals exhibited in the most complete pliosaur skeletons, not with those in plesiosaur skeletons. The comparative totals, extracted from the references cited, are summarised in Table 4. Numbers in parenthesis signify estimated totals. 11. Andrews, C.W., 1895. The Pectoral and Pelvic Girdles of Muraenosaurus leedsi, Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., 16, ser. 6, 430. 12. Andrews, C.W., 1910. A Catalogue of the Marine Reptiles of the Oxford Clay, Part I, British Museum (Natural History), London, pl.v, fig. I. 13. Lydekker, R., 1889. Catalogue of the Fossil Reptiles and Amphibians in the British Museum (Natural History), Part I, London, 243, fig. 75. 14. Lydekker, R., 1889. Op. cit... 200-201. 15. Hulke, J.W., 1870. Note on some Plesiosaurian Remains obtained. . . in Kimmeridge Bay, Dorset, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.., 26, 612-618. 16. Hulke, J.W., 1870. Op. cit., 611-613. JURASSIC REPTILES 163 TABLE 4. Oxfordian species. Kimmeridgian species. Pliosaurs Liopleurodon ferox (R3536 BMNH) 20 Simolestes vorax (R3319 BMNH) 20 Peloneustes philarchus (R3318 BMNH) 22 (R2438 BMNH) 19 (R2441 BMNH) 19 Phosaurus andrewsi (R3891 BMNH) 16 P. brachydeirus (J9245 OUM) 10 (19-20) P. brachyspondylus (J35991 CUM) 19 Stretosaurus macromerus (J35990 CUM) 7 (19-20) Bathyspondylus swindoniensis (1774 Dev.M) 19 (21) Plesiosaurs Cryptocleidus oxoniensis (R2860 BMNH) 30 (R2862 BMNH) 28 (R2416 BMNH) 27. (30) (R2417 BMNH) 30-1 C. platymerus (R2412 BMNH) 18 (28) C. richardsont 32 Muraenosaurus leedsi (R2421 BMNH) 43-4 (R2422 BMNH) 42 (R2423 BMNH) c40 (R2424 BMNH) 34 (R2864 BMNH) 45 Muraenosaurus durobrivensis (R2428 BMNH) 36 (42) (R2863 BMNH) 42 M. platyclis (R2678 BMNH) 38 Colymbosaurus manseli (40106—8, 42496 BMNH) 28 (30) Other described sauropterygians from the above formations either lack complete cervical series or are so dissimilar as to be irrelevant to the present discussion. The phalangeals of Bathyspondylus are robust, being thick in proportion to their length and with markedly subcircular cross-sections. This is a typical pliosaurian condition. Interestingly, Colymbosaurus manseli also possesses plesiosaurian centra but pliosaurian limbs!’ being in that respect hitherto unique among Kimmeridgian plesiosaurs. Colymbosaurus has accordingly always been difficult to classify with taxonomic precision. The same difficulty now applies to Bathyspondylus. That the two forms are noticeably similar is quite clear, although the differences between them, including a proportionally shorter neck in Bathyspondylus, are considerable and are not, in the Swindon animal, wholly due to morphological factors. The invention of a new appellation to distinguish the present remains would therefore appear to be merited. 17. Delair, J.B., 1958. The Mesozoic Reptiles of Dorset, Part II, Proc. Dorset Nat. Hist. & Arch. Soc., 80 (1959), 63. 164 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Acknowledgements. The writer is indebted to Mr F.K. Annable for making the present material available on extended loan, to Mr A.M. Burchard for much initial help at Devizes, to Dr A.J. Charig for allowing access to several sauropterygian specimens in the national collection, and to Mr R. Pickford for access to the Bath Museum material described herein. ADDENDUM At the time of going to press, a second partial skeleton of Bathyspondylus swindoniensis has been obtained from the Kimmeridge Clay of Oday Common south of Abingdon (grid reference SU 492 949) by M. Bailey and P. Oldfield. The specimen, which consists of twenty five centra, mostly consecutive, from the cervical, pectoral and early dorsal regions of the vertebral column, several broken neural arches, various fragmentary ribs (including abdominal ribs), an almost perfect pubes and three phalangeal bones, represents a slightly larger individual than the Swindon animal. These remains, found in February 1981, now form part of the private fossil collection of Mr. Paul Oldfield of 4 Oakridge Road, Basingstoke, Hampshire and confirm many of the distinctive osteological features noted in the Swindon specimen. NOTES A POSSIBLE AXE POLISHING STONE FROM BURY WOOD CAMP, COLERNE A sarsen stone showing signs of heavy polishing on six surfaces was found within Bury Wood Camp, Colerne (ST 818741) by Miss Susan Rooke, and has been given to Devizes Museum, where it has been registered as 44.1981. It was found at the field edge, showing traces of damage to the upper surface caused by ploughing, while a concretion of redeposited calcium carbonate on the under surface indicates that it had previously lain undisturbed for many years. However, this deposit covers one of the polished surfaces which suggests an earlier provenance. The stone, weighing approximately 20 kg. is a sub-angular, polygonal boulder of a hard, fine grained cemented form, lacking signs of bedding, significant stony inclusions or a coarser sandy component. Details of the six, oval, polished faces are tabulated below together with comparable information of similar surfaces located on sarsen stone 18 within the West Kennett Long Barrow and others produced experimentally in the production of flint and stone polished axes by the writer, also on sarsen. DIMENSIONS CM APPROX. AREA CM? 16 x 20 x 0.2 320 BURY 12 x 6 x 0.4 fe WOOD 10 x 10 x 0.2 100 CAMP Il x. 16 x 0.3 176 11 x 20 x 0.6 220 10 x 8 x 0.7 80 STONE 18 WEST KENNETT 23a XoSiixae 414 LONG BARROW DP exe 3.0 iexe? 150 EXPERIMENTAL 16 x 13 x 0.8 208 SARSEN 11 x 12 x 0.6 132 The figures showing depth are approximate. However in general where they are shown as less than 0.3 cm. the lowest parts of the natural undulations in the sarsen have not been removed while those over 0.4 cm. show well polished concave surfaces. The similarity of the grooves with those found in the West Kennett Long Barrow and to those produced experimentally argue that the stone may have been used to polish flint axes. Other flint implements have been found on the hill top. The extensive use to which this sarsen has been put and the distance from its probable source on the Marlborough Downs, approximately 18 miles to the E, clearly demonstrates the value placed upon a hard fine grained stone suitable for polishing tools in an area generally lacking a suitable alternative stone. The first of the experimental examples, which most closely resembles the sarsen described, was used to produce three axes over a combined time of 166 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE approximately 40 hours. The deposition of calcium carbonate over one of the polished surfaces certainly suggests a long period since its abandonment. The absence of sarsen artifacts from the excavations conducted by Grant King’ suggests that sarsen did not play an important part in the economy of the Iron Age hill fort; the quern stones found were made of Old Red Sandstone. PHILIP HARDING 1. Piggott, S. The West Kennett Long Barrow: Excavations 1955-56 (H.M.S.O., London. 1962) 2. Grant King, D., WAM, 58, 40-7. and 185-208; 62, I-15; 64, 21-50. MEGALITHS NEAR STONEHENGE In an earlier note’ the late R.S. Newall drew attention to the following passage dated 1720 in William Stukeley’s Common-place Book: ‘On Salisbury Plain near Stonehenge. In the sheep-penning there several barrows called the King’s Graves, the stones which once stood there are lately carryed away.” Newall identified the King’s Graves with the Seven Barrows or New King Barrows about % mile due E of Stonehenge and the sheep-penning with Penning Bottom, the dry valley just E and SE of Stonehenge (c. SU 128419). He suggested that the stones were visible in a drawing by J. Hassell, which comprises Plate 1 of the second edition of Inigo Jones’ Stonehenge, published 1725, and he went on to conclude that they had probably been removed to fill in holes in the road (now A 303) where it crosses the valley bottom. There are good reasons for doubting the validity of Newall’s identifications and, therefore, his conclusions. The information about the stones would appear to derive from John Aubrey’s Monumenta Britannica rather than from Stukeley’s own experiences in the Stonehenge area where he was at work intermittently between 1719 and 1724. The relevant passage from the Monumenta is as follows: ‘In the Farme of West Amesbury (within which is that famous Antiquity of Stonehenge) is a place called the King’s Graves (which is now the Sheep-penning of West Amesbury) where doe appear five small Barrows, or Tumuli, at one corner of the Penning. At the end of these graves were stones, which the people of late years, sc. since 1640, have fetcht away: for in these parts, stones (except flint stones) are very scarce. Mrs Trotman of Bishopstone, wife of Anth: Trotman, who then lived at the farme (from whom I have these excellent remarques and traditions concerning Stonehenge and these Barrows) told me that there were some letters on the stones: but what they were I could not learn.” This would appear to be the origin of Stukeley’s note and it clearly indicates that the stones were removed some eighty years before either the entry in his Common-place Book or his fieldwork around Stonehenge. There are grounds for disputing Newall’s identification of the King’s Graves with the Seven Barrows or New King Barrows. The clue is provided by Colt Hoare who, in attempting to elucidate this very passage of Aubrey, commented as follows: 1, Newall, R.S. ‘Megaliths once near Stonehenge’, WAM 61 (1966), 93. 2. “The Family Memoirs of the Rev. William Stukeley. . .’ The Surtees Society 73 (1880), 139. 3. Long, W. ‘Stonehenge and its Barrows’, WAM 16 (1876), 142-3. NOTES 167 ‘In vain I searched for all these matters, for the remembrance of them exists not even by tradition. I was enabled, however, to ascertain the position of West Amesbury Penning, which lies in a little vale between tumuli 134 and 137.” Hoare went on to suggest that the ‘King’s Grave’ [sic] was ‘a large solitary barrow on the hill above the river, on which a clump of trees has been planted and is called King Barrow by Dr. Stukeley’. But this is the large barrow (Amesbury 23; at SU 13544137) on Coneybury Hill and Hoare is almost certainly in error in attempting to identify it with the ‘five small Barrows’ known to Aubrey as the King’s Graves. The latter lay some distance to the W at the corner of West Amesbury Penning the position of which may be determined fairly precisely by means of the barrows numbered 134 and 137. These numbers, assigned by Hoare, appear on his map ‘Stonehenge and its Environs” and relate to barrows at SU 12854135 and SU 12534116 now known as Amesbury 19b and 17 respectively.° Aubrey’s ‘King’s Graves’ are much more likely to be the barrows within and close to Luxenborough Plantation of which three (Amesbury 18, 19 and 19a) are still visible today. There remains the question of the ‘stones’ observed by Newall in the Hassell drawing mentioned above. Close scrutiny suggests that these are not stones at all; drawn in outline they appear as minute feathers in the middle distance and are surely bushes not standing stones. Furthermore any stones removed c. 1640 could hardly appear in Hassell’s drawing which is clearly of early eighteenth century date; the dress of the figures alone necessitates such a conclusion. Further support is provided by the fact that this drawing and three others by Hassell occur only in the 1725 edition of Stonehenge and not in the first edition of 1655. D. J. BONNEY 4. Hoare, R.C. The History of Ancient Wiltshire Part I (1810), 198. 5. tbid., inter pp 170-71. 6. VCH Wilts I Part i (1957), 150. AN IRON SIGNET RING FROM EASTON GREY The ring was discovered by the first named of us while field-walking after ploughing near Easton Grey. At the same time a silver denarius of Lucius Verus and a bronze antoninianus of Carausius were picked up. ' As may be seen from the illustration, the ring is of normal late second century type with a flatish ribbon hoop, widening on the upper side to take a gem-stone. This remains in place although slightly encrusted by corrosion of the ring on the left side.” It is a red jasper, cut with the device of an animal head. The beast has a long snout or beak, with its mouth partially open to reveal a pointed tongue. Its forehead is set well back and its eye is overhung by a prominent brow. A pointed, dog-like ear is shown on the crown of the creature’s head and the vignette is terminated by rolls of hair or by feathers at the junction between head and neck. 1. We would like to thank Dr. Glenys Lloyd-Morgan of the Grosvenor Museum, Chester to whom these objects were first submitted. The drawing was kindly supplied by Nick Griffiths. 2. See Henig, M. A Corpus of Roman Engraved Gemstones from British Sites, (BAR 8, second edition, 1978), 35, fig. 1, tvpe -V. The ring is 27.7 mm in external diameter and 15.5 mm in width across the bezel. The hoop is broken away at the narrowest point where it would have been some 3 mm across. The gem has a flat upper face and is of oval shape c 12.5 mm by 10.5 mm. It shows slight surface wear but is well polished within the cut areas. 168 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Scale 1:1 Iconographically there is a very strong resemblance to the eagle head type often shown on jasper intaglios.* There is one example of the type from a second century deposit in a drain at Caerleon and we may also note the eagle head which forms part of a ‘grotesque’ on a stone from Corbridge.* However in this instance the lack of a hook at the end of the putative beak and the pointed ear strongly suggest that the gem engraver has adapted his model to portray a wolf.*° The change is not altogether successful, but it was presumably only done late in the engraving when the craftsman realised that he had not left enough room for the beak. At any rate it evidently satisfied one customer who bought it and had it set. The style of cutting, employing rather coarse wheel grooves while at the same time making an effective us of patterning (i.e. on the hair/plumage) is entirely characteristic of Antonine glyptics and agrees with the dating of the ring form to the second half of the second century.° D. BROOMHALL and M. HENIG 3. Ridler, A. de, Collection de Clercq VIL.ii (Paris, 1911), no. 3316; Zazoff, P. et al. Antike Gemmen in deutschen Sammlungen.4. Hannover, Kestner-Museum (Wiesbaden 1975), nos. 1273 and 1276. 4. Caerleon gem, information from David Zienkiewicz; Corbridge, Henig, op.cit., no. 378. 5. See figure of wolf in Zazoff, op.cit., no. 1213. 6. Style as Maaskant-Kleibrink, M. Catalogue of the Engraved Gems in the Royal Coin Cabinet, the Hague, (The Hague, 1978), 252 (on jaspers in the ‘Small grooves style’). A MEDIAEVAL PENDANT FROM WEST COULSTON The small bronze pendant illustrated below was found at West Coulston in 1980 and is now in Devizes Museum (accession number 90.1980. 1). The pendant is 25.5 mm. high, of cinquefoil (five-lobed) shape, within which a raised shield bears a lion rampant. Above the shield are two triangular groups of raised pellets, the left-hand ones barely visible, divided by a tapering ridge, an extension of the border of the pendant. To either side is a bird-like creature, moving outwards, with its head turned back towards the shield. There are no discernible traces of enamel. Identification of the heraldry is unlikely, both because of the lack of colour and because the lion rampant is one of the commoner heraldic charges. The use of birds or animals to fill the spaces around a shield is also common, especially on quatrefoil (four-lobed) ornaments and seals of the fourteenth century.' A pendant of quatrefoil shape, with three wyverns surrounding a shield, is 1. The Heralds Commemorative Exhibition, Catalogue No. 87, (1934), 66 and pl. XLIX. NORES 169 Scale 1:1 recorded from Darlington, Yorkshire.’ Perhaps the most important feature of the object is its cinquefoil shape: of some three hundred such objects known to the writer, it is the only one of this form. Reference to the London Museum Mediaeval Catalogue* will show the most common types, but several other shapes are known. Although generally regarded as “horse trappings” or “harness ornaments”, many of these pendants are very small and may have served other purposes, perhaps as personal ornaments or badges.* In view of its small size this may have been the case with the West Coulston example. NICHOLAS GRIFFITHS 2. Antiquaries Journal Il, (1922), 143-4. 3. London Museum Mediaeval Catalogue (1940), 118, fig. 38. 4. For a pendant on the collar of a dog from the feet of an effigy, Burlington Fine Arts Club: Catalogue of a collection of objects of British Heraldic Art (1916), Case C, No 36, 28-9. THE MELKSHAM RING - A JACOBEAN RELIC IN DEVIZES MUSEUM In WAM 72/3 (1978), 178f., I published a Roman ring set with an engraved agate gem depicting a raven, laurel and tripod. The ring had been presented in 1872 to Devizes Museum by Mrs. Ann Jane Kenrick, living at that time in Melksham and it was tentatively allowed that it might have been found in that part of Wiltshire although there was no other written information on the ring to suggest this. Further information on the ring which has subsequently come to light shows, however, that far from being a possible Wiltshire find, the ring was almost certainly not even found in Britain.' In compensation for this, its more recent history is of considerable interest. The ring appears to have been first recorded when in the collection of Abraham Gorlay (Gorlaeus) the Flemish collector who was born in 1549 at Antwerp and died in 1609. He published illustrations of his intaglios in 1601 as Abrahami Gorlaei Antverpiani, Dactyliotheca seu Annulorum sigillartumquorum apud Priscos tam Romanos usus (Leiden or Delft 1601; reprinted 1609). Ours is shown on the fifth plate as No. 10 and described as “An Fer (sic), Gem, Achat, incisa Corvvs Apoll.” The Gorlaeus gems continued to be cited, described and illustrated as a highly celebrated cabinet for example by Jacobus Gronovius in Abraham Gorlaeus Dactyliotheca, Pars Prima (Leiden 1695) who lists 1. Despite its antique form, I am no longer entirely convinced that the ring is Roman. Apart from the very large size more suitable for the Dactyliotheca than the finger, bronze and brass were seldom used with gems of high quality: and the intaglio is an excellent Augustan signet-stone. The ring may in fact be a sixteenth century copy of a Roman one. 170 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE the ‘Melksham’ ring on p. 4, although around the time of Gorlay’s death his collection had in fact been dispersed. Some of the gems entered the collection of Thomas Howard, Earl of Arundel (see A. Furtwangler, Die Antiken Gemmen (Leipzig and Berlin 1900), iii, pp 403-4) while others were purchased by James I for Prince Henry, a close associate of the Earl of Arundel’s. Unfortunately Prince Henry died a few years later in 1612, and his works of art and antiquities passed to his brother Charles, later King Charles I. Evidently the gem collection was not totally dispersed under the Commonwealth and Elias Ashmole was able to take wax impressions of the intaglios in Charles II’s collection (now in the Bodleian Library: Ms. Ashmole 1138). Curiously our intaglio was not amongst them but it was seen and recorded, by means of a drawing, in 1665. Ashmole describes it as follows: This is the figure of an old Brass ring much esteemed by King Charles the first and now in his Majestie’s Cabinet. It had a (space in manuscript) set in it whereon are engraved the symbols of Divin acord. That is to say 1. A Tripode: was a three footed stoole placed in the Temple of Apollo at Delphos, whereon the prieste sitting, delivered oraculous Risponses and Therefore it became sacred to Apollo. 2. A crow. This bird was also sacred to Apollo and from its flight the Augures often took their Auguries. By Statius the Crow is called Comes Tripodum, and therefore upon the Riverse of some coynes this Bird is made sitting in the middle of the Tripod and is here placed by it. 3. A Branch of Lawrelle, wo" tree was consicrated to Apollo, and for that cause we often finde (on the Riverse of Coynes also) Tripodes to be adorned therewith. (Bodleian Library, MS Ashmole 826 fol 60°) How and when the ring left the Royal collection is not known for certain but Mr. Hugh Pagan who is preparing a study of early coin collectors points out that Mrs. Kenrick was the grand-daughter of John Chamberlaine (1745-1812), Keeper of Coins and Medals to King George III. Her father, the Revd. G.T. Chamberl!aine lived at Ansford (Somerset) and later at Kenton (Devon) and from her birth in 1824 until her death in 1901, Mrs. A.J. Kenrick’s associations were entirely West Country. In her married life she lived at Melksham and later at Keevil. While she may have had opportunities to purchase items in her collection elsewhere, and there is a possibility that the ring was even acquired locally (which would in part explain why it was given to Devizes Museum), the link with John Chamberlaine is too close to ignore; it may be supposed that he was given this treasure at some time and that it passed down through his family. Certainly Devizes Museum is grateful for Mrs. Kenrick’s generosity in presenting the ring to the museum collection in 1872. When her obituary described her as “. . . A great lover of antiquities” who “had during her liftime accumulated a store of relics of the past ages of which any antiquarian might feel proud”, the connexion of one of her treasures with Gorlaeus and the Stuarts had presumably been forgotten — WAM xiii, 343 describes it merely as ‘A bronze Roman ring with antique gem.’ There remains only to thank David Sturdy for suggesting that I might find some interesting gems mentioned in the Ashmole papers, Mrs. Diana Scarisbrick (who is preparing a full scale study of gem collecting in England) for showing me Gorlaeus’s catalogue, and telling me something about him and Paul Robinson and Hugh Pagan for information about Mrs. Kenrick and her forebears. MARTIN HENIG NOTES L71 SIMULATION OR DISSIMULATION? A FIGURE FROM THE BROOKE COLLECTION As the result of an enquiry circulated in the Museums Bulletin by Dr. D. Palmer, of Trinity College, Dublin, a small carved relief of a female exhibitionist, alleged to be a sheela-na-gig, has been reported from the Wiltshire Archaeological Society’s museum at Devizes. Dr. Palmer’s interest lies, not only in tracing missing Irish figures, but also in investigating the methods and motives of nineteenth century local collectors of curios. This makes the Devizes carving, being an item from the Brooke Collection, doubly interesting, as a number of pieces amassed by Joshua Brooke (whom O.G.S. Crawford called ‘a rather crazy and disreputable collector’) have since proved to be of dubious worth. It would seem appropriate at this time to examine the carving in question in order to assess its authenticity. Scale 1:1 The carving is on a roughly circular dise of rock chalk about 4/2” in diameter (actual size: 116mm in height x 117mm in width x 21mm thick). It is of a nude woman, arms slightly akimbo, hands resting on the front of the thighs which are widely splayed to reveal the pubic triangle in the centre of which is a small incision representing the vulva. The right leg from just above the knee is missing as is part of the left foot. The shoulders are wide, rounded, and on them sits the head without any eZ THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE sign of a neck. Apart from heavy pectoral muscles in place of breasts the body is scarcely delineated. The broad face is cherubic. A scratch mark runs the length of the body. This may be accidental or an attempt to delineate a phallus, thus making the figure bisexual. Seen from certain angles the gash does appear to terminate, under the right pectoral muscle, in a kind of glans. However, the root of this ‘phallus’ does not cut into the pubic triangle, which has been drawn with great care, and this suggests that the male organ, lacking the precision with which the rest of the carving is presented, is a later and clumsier tampering with the piece, probably by someone other than the original creator. Curiously enough a parallel can be drawn with a figure recently discovered at Lammas in Norfolk’, but in this case a male figure has been crudely hacked about to turn it into a female. There are, finally, traces of a dark red paint which apparently covered the upper surface of the piece. Two features are of especial interest, the face and the pubic area. The face, framed by a short hairstyle cut straight across the brows and shaped down over the ears, is broad across the cheeks. Nose, small mouth and chin are sensitive. The face is an effective and attractive feature of the carving. The pubic triangle is small but cut with great care, so that a sharp, curved line separates it from the abdomen; it has a crescentic appearance with the two horns cutting into the thighs, which are somewhat crudely separated. The whole pubic area is carefully smoothed, with a tiny central cut. That this figure is not a true sheela-na-gig may be gauged from an examination of the following factors. 1. Its provenance. The figure was found reputedly at Sharpridge, Hackpen Hill, East Wilts., a remote, uninhabited area. No known sheelas have been found in complete isolation: for the most part they are built into the fabric of churches or of castles (in Ireland). It is significant that Crawford states, when speaking of Brooke’s finds, that ‘the sites of many are suspect.” 2. Its size. Sheela-na-gigs were intended for display in prominent places, on corbel tables for instance and vary between one to three feet in length. The smallest, on the east door jamb of Tugford Church, Salop. and at eye-level very nearly, measures 7” (178mm) in length. The Sharpridge figure is rather too conveniently pocket-sized. 3. Its material. Exposed to weathering for many centuries sheelas are made of hard rock. Chalk figures are unknown. 4. Its features. The face of the Brooke figure is delicately and gracefully executed. This cannot be said of the faces of sheelas. Not for nothing is one translation of the cryptic Irish name given as ‘Hag of the Castle.’ Disproportionately large, the head is always ugly to the point of repellence. Hair is conspicuously absent or in the form of tresses. The nose is a long ugly triangle, the mouth a gash, sometimes showing teeth. Ears are prominent and unshapely. 5. ‘The sexual organs. Sheelas call attention to their over-sized and gaping vaginas, usually, anatomically speaking, quite incorrectly brought forward from under the pelvis so that they can be seen. The Sharpridge vulva is more correctly placed, but is small, almost coy, as if the carver had been overcome by pudeur when he reached this stage of his carving; the vulva is an after- thought, or a pornographic one. 6. Its display. There is no mistaking the gesture of the genuine sheela. It is obscene, but far from erotic. The intention is to shock, not to titillate. The very coyness of the Brooke carving together with the pleasing face would have made it a slightly erotic piece three-quarters of a century ago. In conclusion, this carving is not a sheela-na-gig, whatever else it might be. It does /ook medieval, and could not be taken for a Roman phallic artifact, and therefore seems to be a deliberate attempt to forge a sheela-na-gig. Information about Irish sheelas was available, especially in the last decades of 1. ‘To be published shortly in the Bulletin of CBA Group 6. 2. Crawford, O.G.S., Said and Done (1955), 27. NOTES 173 the nineteenth century and first decades of the twentieth, in the Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, and in the Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy. \n the JRSAI of 1894 and 1900 the Rath figure is illustrated and in 1906 a photograph of the Ballynahinch sheela was published. Nearer home, two short articles on sheela-na-gigs appeared in 1905 in a volume of WAM which also included an account of the paper read by Brooke to the fifty-second AGM of the Society and numerous references to archaeological finds made on Hackpen Hill. The first of these articles described the Oaksey, Wilts. carving, drawing attention to two plates showing seven examples in Payne Knight’s Account of the Remains of the Worship of Priapus, which had been reprinted in 1866.° The second article? was in the nature of an addendum to the first and includes a quotation concerning sheelas from Forlong’s Faiths of Man. It mentions two plaster casts of sheelas in the British Museum. More particularly, in describing the Llandrindod stone it comments that ‘a medical man (according to the Radnor Antiquary) stated that the colouring of the stone was due to blood’. In the Witt Collection in the British Museum (acquired 1865), as well as the two plaster casts, was ‘Chloran’, a sheela mentioned by Goddard. ‘Chloran’ was illustrated, furthermore, with the Ballynahinch figure in Thomas Wright’s Worship of the Generative Powers 1866. Wright was another assiduous collector of phallic objects.* It can be seen, then, that a certain amount of descriptive material about sheelas was readily accessible in 1905 or thereabouts. It was an opportune moment for a collector to acquire one, and Brooke, whose paper on the Silbury and Marlborough mounds showed him to be ‘a disciple of the Phallic theory’’ would be anxious to procure a specimen of an artifact such as already existed in Wiltshire at Oaksey. Did a fabricator of simulated antiquities manufacture a sheela, suitable daubed in ‘blood’ in order to satisfy Brooke’s needs? Did Brooke know the real origin of the carving, and, in choosing Hackpen Hill, at that time very much in the public mind, for the location of the ‘find’ was he dissimulating? The most curious aspect of the matter is that he left us no record of the acquisition of what must surely have been, if genuine, one of the most extraordinary items in his collection. J.A. JERMAN Thanks are due to the Curators of Devizes Museum for their kind assistance; Dr. Paul Robinson for indicating source material; Diane Robinson for drawing the figure and suggesting the possible phallic significance of the gash on the body of the carving. Mr. Mike Corfield, Conservation Officer at Salisbury, expressed an opinion about patination and surface condition. Goddard, Rev. E.H., ‘Notes on a Carved Figure on the Wall of Oaksey Church’, WAM 34 (1905-6), 156-8. ‘Carved Figure on the Wall of Oaksey Church’, ibid., 295. Anderson, J., Witch on the Wall (1977), 15. WAM 28 (1896), 78. Nn Bw Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine. 76 (1982) WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL REGISTER FOR 1980 This Register for 1980 is arranged by chronological period and by parishes. In order to save space, ‘80’ does not precede the serially numbered entries in the text, but this prefix should be used to identify individual items in future cross-references. The Register has again been compiled on a selective basis. Records of much unassociated flintwork and of pottery, when of uncertain date or of common Romano-British or medieval types, have been omitted as well as a number of other uninformative stray finds. While it is no longer practical to include all stray finds, it is hoped that contributors will continue to supply full records so that future Registers may be compiled from as comprehensive a range of material as possible. Accessions to museums are noted by the short name of the museum (Devizes or Salisbury), followed by the accession number. For objects remaining in private collections, the sources of information noted are museum records or individual informants, not necessarily the owners. Particulars of attribution and provenance are as supplied by the museums, societies and individuals named. Where there is reason to doubt the accuracy of the find record, this caveat is given in the text. Acknowledgements to individual donors for those gifts to the Society’s museum at Devizes which fall within the chronological range of the Register (prehistoric to c AD 1500) will be found in the Curator’s reports for 1980. Abbreviations C century, as in C2, second century CMR Cricklade Museums Record DB Devizes Museum Day Book HHSFR Highworth Historical Society Field Research Unit PP in private possession SAS Swindon Archaeological Society TMAR Thamesdown Museum Archaeological Records WAM Wiltshire Archaeological and Natural History Magazine PALAEOLITHIC 5 Potterne, N of Montecello Farm. SU 00355960. Small flint assemblage of possible Mesolithic date. Devizes 7.1980. 6 Wanborough, Cross Keys. SU 20588378. Scraper. TMAR. 1 Hankerton, Brook Farm. ST 968913. Frag- ment of chert hand-axe. Devizes 6.1980. 2 Langley Burrell, site of post-medieval pottery kiln excavated in 1978. ST 92757542. Large, honey-coloured flint flake. Devizes 142.1980. NEOLITHIC 7 Aldbourne, Southward Barn. SU ee 26657370. Polished flint chisel. PP. Devizes 3 Highworth, The Willows. SU 20639254. DB 743. Assemblage of worked Mesolithic and 8 Avebury, Knoll Down. Around SU Neolithic flints and waste flakes recovered 073695. Three scrapers and waste. Devizes from silt around a spring. HHSFR. 15.1980. 4 Minety, Braydon Brook. ST 99149197. 9 Box, Alcombe. Around ST 801696. Scraper.. SAS. Assemblage of Neolithic and Bronze Age WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL REGISTER FOR 1980 10 | _— 12 13 15 16 IZ 18 20 21 flints, including a petit-tranchet arrowhead, 2 leaf-shaped and 2 barbed and _ tanged arrowheads; a polished axe fragment; cores, scrapers, waste and burnt waste. Devizes 110.1980. Pewsey, NW of Denny Sutton Hipend. SU 153585. Butt of polished greenstone axe. Devizes 120.1980. Stanton Fitzwarren, W of the village. SU 17489023. Flint scraper and hammerstone. SAS. BRONZE AGE barrow G.70, Earls Farm Amesbury, Down. SU _ 18234196. Flint assemblage. (WAM 72/3 (1980), 1-27). Salisbury 46.1980. Amesbury, barrow G.71, Earl’s | Farm Down. SU_ 18404188. Flint assemblage. (WAM 72/73 (1980), 1-27). Salisbury 47.1980. Avebury, Knoll Down. Around SU 073693. Two decorated Beaker sherds and a sherd from the side/base of a (?) collared urn. Devizes 21.1980. Box, Alcombe. See above, no. 9. Broad Hinton, E of Manor Farm. SU 11857712. Casting waste fragment of possible Bronze Age date. Devizes 18.1980. Collingbourne Kingston, S of Grafton Clump. SU 253578. Four sherds. Devizes 1.1980. Collingbourne Kingston, surface of track N of Snail Down. SU 220523. Five sherds. Devizes 63.1980. East Coulston, Upper Baynton Farm. ST 94345381. Thin butted flat axe of the Migdale-Marnoch tradition (PPS 29 (1963) 263 ff.). Devizes 100.1980. Edington, Tinhead. ST 94005382. Bronze awl. Devizes 141.1980. Little Bedwyn, Horseleaze Wood. SU 237672. Tip of Bronze spearhead. Devizes 19.1980. Milston, spur W of barrow G.43 on Milston Down. SU 202460. Two beaker sherds and three domestic beaker sherds; collection of heavily gritted sherds; three fragments of polished sarsen. Devizes 61.1980. De 23 24 25 26 27 28 we) 30 31 33 175 Preshute, Barton Down. SU_ 16847115. Five heavily gritted sherds and a struck sarsen flake. Devizes 49.1980. Roundway, Nine Hills. SU 00955958. Small fragment from the cutting edge of a bronze axe. Devizes 56.1980. Swindon, Bouverie Avenue. SU 158883. Re-examination of the LBA urns excavated in 1935 (WAM 48, 353-6), shows that the sherds represent five vessels. TMAR. Upavon, 27 Anson Avenue. SU_ 160553. Beaker tanged and barbed arrowhead. PP. Devizes DB 775. West Overton, N of Herepath on Overton Down by barrow G.9. SU 126710. Beaker sherd with combed decoration; rim-sherds from bi-conical and collared urns; uncertain Bronze Age body sherd. Devizes 11.1980. Winterbourne Bassett/Broad Hinton, on the Ridgeway. SU _ 13077495. Small palstave, type as F.K. Annable & D.D.A. Simpson, Guide Catalogue of the Neolithic and Bronze Age Collections in Devizes Museum (1964), no. 591. PP. Devizes DB 764. Winterbourne Stoke, Barrow G.30. SU 11014294. Flint assemblage (WAM 72/73 (1980), pp. 1-27). Salisbury 48.1980. Winterbourne Stoke, barrow G.45, Green- land Farm. SU 09894410. Flint assemblage (WAM 72/73 (1980), pp. 1-27). Salisbury 49.1980. Winterbourne Stoke, cuttings across Stonehenge Cursus. SU 109429. Flint assemblage (WAM 72/73 (1980), pp. 1-27). Salisbury 50.1980. Uncertain findspot, from the downs above West Lavington and Easterton. Group 1 (shield pattern) palstave of Acton Park phase 1. PP. Devizes DB 739. IRON AGE Aldbourne, below Upper Upham. SU 22647697. Elaborately decorated La Tene | bronze fibula. (See CBA Arch. Review, 1972, 42). devizes 139.1980. Alton Barnes, foot of Knap Hill by Work- way Drove. Su 122633. Haematite body sherd; furrowed bowi rim sherd. Devizes 176 34 35 36 37 38 39. 40 41 43 44 8) 46 31.1980. Bromham, pipe-line W_ of Mother Anthony’s Well villa) ST 99106380. Dobunnic silver coin, Allen type F (Mack 382). PP. Devizes DB 767. Bromham, as above. ST 98906395. Atrebatic gold stater of Tincommuius, type Mack 96. Cast in DM. PP. Devizes DB 769. Great Bedwyn. W of Chisbury hillfort. SU 27666595. Potin coin of the Senones, type de la Tour 7417. See above p. 88. Devizes 87.1980. Purton, Dogridge. SU 07998758. Bronze coin of the Cantii, under Adminius. New type: see above p. 86. TMAR. Since acquired by DM. Upavon, Upavon Hill. SU 143552. Base gold stater, type Mack 62. See above p. 85. PP. Devizes DB 761. See below no. 74 for Roman finds from this site. Pewsey, Denny Sutton Hipend. SU 1657. Bronze coin, apparently of a new type. Cast in DM. PP. Devizes DB 763. Pewsey, NW of Denny Sutton Hipend. SU 153585. Two rotary querns; one steep sided, the other of bee-hive type. Devizes 115.1980. Potterne, Rangebourne Mill. Around ST 999597. Sherd from haematite-coated cordoned bow]; sherd from haematite-coated furrowed bowl; plain haematite-coated sherd. Devizes 39.1980 B, C and F. Uncertain findspot ‘near Mildenhall’. Durotrigian bronze stater, type Mack 317-8. See above p. 86. Devizes 28.1980. Uncertain findspot ‘on crown land in mid- Wilts’. Gold quarter-stater, type Mack 71. PP. Devizes DB 777. ROMAN Alton Barnes, W of Knap Hill. SU 116637. Group of coarse ware sherds. Devizes 31.1980. Avebury, Knoll Down. SU 073693 to 073694. Collection of sherds including early bead-rim, Savernake and Samian_ wares. Devizes 15. and 20.1980. Avebury, pipe-line trench S of Silbury Hill. SU 100683. Large fragment from a 47 48 49 50 | 52 aH 38 59 63 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE grey-ware bowl; Samian sherd. Devizes 124.1980. Amesbury, garden of 11, Holders Road. SU 16154175. Quinarius of Allectus. PP. Salisbury. Blunsdon St. Andrew, Groundwell Farm. SU 15108960. C2 sherds and tile fragments. SAS. Bratton, Melbourne House. ST 915525. Antoninianus of Claudius Gothicus and small follis of Constantine I. PP. Devizes DB 747. Castle Eaton, R. Thames at Kempsford. SU 16039648. Trial excavation failed to locate the crossing of the ford. Numerous Cl—4 sherds and tile fragments recovered from silt. SAS. Castle Eaton, Blackford Lane. SU 15929620. Scatter of C2—4 sherds. SAS. Cricklade, Hatchett’s Ford. SU 10419382. Nine C2—4 bronze coins from the site of the ford. CMR. ware 3 Cricklade, The Forty. SU 09929313. Follis of the house of Constantine. CMR. Cricklade, Saxon Close. SU 09899342. Denarius of Julia Domna. CMR. Cricklade, Fiddle Farm. SU 09469342. Follis of Constans. CMR. Cricklade, Thames Lane. SU 10269376. C2—4 sherds. CMR. Cricklade, The Keels. SU 09519500. Extensive scatter of C1l—4 sherds, tile and a denarius of Marcus Aurelius. CMR. Highworth, North Leaze Farm. SU 19229334. C2-3 sherds found within the “Highworth Circle”. HHSFR. Highworth, Priory Green. SU 20549233. Four stone buildings linked by paths; numerous Cl—4 sherds and tile fragments and C2 coins. HHSFR. Lacock. ST 901682. Follis of Constans or Constantius If. PP. Devizes DB 749. Lacock, ST 911682. Six C4 folles of Constantine II (2), Valens (2) and illegible(2). PP. Devizes DB 745. Latton, Duke’s Brake. SU 07579744. As of Domitian; follis of Constantine I, fibula. CMR. Mildenhall, Black Field. About SU 217692. WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL REGISTER FOR 1980 Fibula, type Collingwood Sii. Devizes 102.1980. Milton Lilbourne, NW of Sunny Hill Farm. SU 168624. Small enamelled plate brooch. PP. Devizes DB 742. Monkton Farleigh, garden of Monksfield. ST 80456558. Pot hoard of late C3 coins with terminal date, c 286. At present with HM Coroner, pending an inquest. Potterne, Rangebourne Mill. Around ST 999597. Group of coarse ware sherds, C4 coins and metalwork including a ring with blue glass gem-stone (see WAM 74/5 (1981) 186). Devizes 39. and 40.1980. See also above no. 41. Purton, Dogridge. SU 08078737. Scatter of C2-4 sherds. TMAR. See above no. 37. Roundway, Nine Hills. SU 00545950. Bronze furniture fitting. Devizes 95.1980. Stanton Fitzwarren, W of village. SU 17489023. Ploughing revealed a_ large quantity of coral rag building stone with associated RB pottery in an area 50m x 110 m. SAS. Steeple Ashton, East Town Farm. ST 896553. Follis of Constantine I. PP. Devizes DB 757. Swindon, Wheeler Avenue. SU 159872. Follis of Constantius I. TMAR. Swindon, Coate Water. SU 176823. As of Domitian and C2—4 sherds. TMAR. Swindon, 16 Princess Street. SU 15278431. Re-examination of the ‘Roman’ glass bottle fragments shows that they are of C19 date. TMAR. Upavon, SW side of Upavon Hill. Around SU 143552. Pot hoard of 111 folles of Diocletian, Maximianus I, Galerius, Constantius I, at present with HM Coroner pending an inquest. 39 stray coins (Julia Domna to Gratian) and bronzes including a miniature socketted axe and _ seal-box lid. Devizes DB 761. See also above no. 38. Wanborough, St. Paul’s Drive. SU 19408490. C2—4 sherds and a stone layer noted. SAS. Wanborough, Lotmead Farm. SU 19548524. Three late Roman pewter dishes recovered from within the Roman town. — iS) mn a | Wid TMAR. Wanborough, Kite Hill. SU 20728261. As of Vespasian and follis of Constantine I. TMAR. Wroughton, Clout’s Wood. SU 13818011. Denarius of Antoninus Pius. TMAR. West Lavington, SE of Wick Farm. SU 00315459. Follis of Constantine I. PP. Devizes DB 773. Uncertain “found near Swindon” (? Wanborough). Denarius of Galba type Cohen 55. Seaby’s Coin and Medal Bulletin, October 1980 p.314 no. C 765. EARLY MEDIEVAL (c AD 450-1000) Castle Eaton, bank of R Thames. SU 14629607. Decorated bronze and iron horse- bit of C6—7 date. HHSFR. Devizes, Wick Green. SU 008606. Bronze brooch (?) in the form of two symmetrical interlaced snakes. cf. David A. Hinton Catalogue of the Anglo-Saxon Ornamental Metalwork 700-1100 in the Department of Antiquities, Ashmolean Museum (1974). p.16 no. 8. Devizes 41.1980. Edington, W of Upper Bayntun Farm. ST 939538. Bronze strap-end with schematized animal head terminal. cf. David A. Hinton, ibid., p.22 no. 16. Devizes 97.1980. Highworth, Priory Green. SU 20549255. Remains of a sunken house constructed within a room of a Roman building were excavated. Post-holes and hearths were recorded; sherds and a clay loomweight fragment were found. HHSFR. Ogbourne St. George, Round Hill Downs. SU 215755. Grass tempered sherd. Devizes 12.1980. MEDIEVAL (c AD 1000-1500) Ashton Keynes, Kent End. SU 05249448. Extensive scatter of C12—14 sherds recorded on old land surface during removal of top soil prior to general extraction. CMR. Bishops Cannings, Bourton. SU 045644. Base silver sterling of William of Namur (1337-91) struck at Meraude. PP. Devizes DB 740. 178 88 89 90 9 — 95 96 97 98 ae, THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Castle Eaton, S bank of Thames. SU 16039648. C13-15 sherds, decorated floor tiles and a bronze strap-end. SAS. Cricklade, Thames Lane. SU 10249367. C13-15 sherds. CMR. Edington, Tinhead, NW of moated site. ST 941539. Henry I penny, type Brooke 15. See above p. 90. Devizes 45.1980. Hullavington, Surrendell, Day House Field. n.g.r. not given. Cut halfpenny of William I of Scotland (1165-1216); moneyer Hue Walter. PP. Devizes DB 738. Lacock. ST 910681. Henry V penny. PP. Devizes DB 746. 3 Latton, dredged from the R Thames. SU 11189404. C13 bronze spoon. CMR. Maiden Bradley, garden of 75 High Street. ST 801388. Anglo-Irish penny of Edward I; Dublin mint. PP. Devizes DB 756. Minety, Moor Farm. SU 02769178. Examination of a large mound cut by ditch digging revealed an area of house platforms and a “hollow way”. Numerous C14—15 “wasters” and kiln debris were recovered. CMR. Pewsey, garden of Southcott Lodge. SU 17015904. Assemblage of C12-14 sherds. Devizes 30.1980. Rodbourne Cheyney, Moredon, Park Farm. SU 13108731. Road construction revealed a possible clay and stone building platform. A few sherds of C13—15 date were recovered. CMR. Roundway, N of Oliver's Camp. SU 0065. Lead/pewter button or cap-badge with an eight-spoke wheel design and background of gold foil. PP. Devizes DB 768. See also no 103 below. Rowde, Rowde Court. ST 97906245. Circular bronze mirror case. (This class to 100 10 — 103 104 105 106 be published in the Perth excavation report). Devizes 59.1980. Swindon, Liden. SU 179837. Group of C13-15 sherds. TMAR. Swindon, Wood Street. SU 15668380. A small excavation at the rear of the National Westminster Bank revealed no traces of early structures. Two sherds were found (with some post-Medieval material). SAS. Trowbridge, garden of 42 West Ashton Road. ST 86275771. C14 limestone head representing a ‘Jack in the Green’ class of figure. Devizes 17.1980. West Coulston, Upper Baynton Farm. ST 943539. Pewter/lead mount, badge or brooch, with cruciform decoration and traces of background of gold foil. Devizes 92.1980. See also above no. 98. West Coulston, Baynton House. ST 947539. Bronze armorial pendant. See above p. l68ff. Devizes 90.1980. UNDATED Melksham, garden of 7 Severn Road. ST 90256485. Carved chalk head. Devizes 136.1980. Whiteparish, Castle Copse. SU 248226. Sandstone saddle-quern found during ploughing. Salisbury 84.1980. CORRIGENDA In the Register for 1979 it was incorrectly stated that the items under the following numbers (1, 5, 6, 54, 66, 68, 73, 93, 129, 130, 167 and 173-6) derived from the J.W. Brooke collection. They were in fact found by Mr. J.E. Chandler (and his father) who kindly presented them to the Devizes Museum. REVIEWS Wiltshire Coroners’ Bills, 1752-1796 ed. R.F. Hunnisett (Wilts. Record Society, vol. XXXVI), 1981. Accounts of inquests are frequently sought by family and local historians, but for Wiltshire, and I believe for most counties, coroners’ files rarely survive until recent times. For much of the 19th century the lack of archives can be remedied by recourse to newspaper files, which often go into considerable detail, especially if the death was caused by suicide or accident of a spectacular kind. Newspapers of the 18th century, however, rarely mention inquests, and if they do, give few details, and our knowledge of the work of the coroners in the second half of the century is largely based on these bills, which they submitted to Quarter Sessions to claim their fees and travelling expenses under an Act of 1752. The value of the series as a source has been appreciated for many years, but few searchers have been able to spare the time to read through several large bundles of closely written parchments to find references of interest. Dr. Hunnisett’s edition, besides being a model of its kind, forms a perfect example of the value of the work of a Record Society in making such obscure records available in printed form with full indexes and explanatory matter. All interested in Wiltshire history will find this volume a rich quarry. Prefaced to it is an appreciation of one of our vice-presidents, Professor R.B. Pugh and a biblio- graphy of his work. P.A. RUNDLE Catalogue of the Jackson Collection of Manuscript Fragments in the Royal Library, Windsor Castle, with a Memoir of Canon J.E. Jackson and a List of his Works by Jenny Stratford, xiv + 106 pp. (Academic Press), 1981, £9.50. Like most early antiquaries, Canon John Edward Jackson, the first editor of this Magazine collected during his long antiquarian career many original documents. Those related to the Hungerford family are now among his Hungerford collections in our library, and many others are in his topographical notes in the library of the Society of Antiquaries. The small group of 39 items described here are fragments of mainly literary and liturgical MSS. dating from the 9th to the 17th centuries which he appears to have rescued mainly from the bindings of books, and which he used to illustrate the point made by Aubrey about the homely uses to which such MSS. were put after the Dissolution. They were sold among his books in 1895 (apparently for £1 2s.) and subsequently given to the Royal Library at Windsor. Here they are described in a fully professional way, and some, including leaves from a breviary from Amesbury Abbey, are illustrated. The memoir of Jackson which precedes the catalogue is the best account of his life so far compiled, and is of the greatest local interest. A north-country man, he first became involved in Wiltshire (and especially Hungerford) studies when curate at Farleigh Hungerford. His interest extended to Grittleton, a former property of his Houlton patrons at Farleigh, and in 1845 he was appointed by Joseph Neeld to the living of Leigh Delamere, to which Norton was subsequently added in plurality. Thenceforth he lived the life of a conscientious incumbent combined with a zealous antiquarian until his death in 1891. His way of life during those years is vividly evoked in this well-written memoir. kK.H. ROGERS 180 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE The Redmans of Halfway House. by Clodagh O’Grady, privately printed, Ramsbury, 1978. The core of this well-produced family history is a manuscript history of the Redmans written by Thomas Edward Redman about sixty years ago. This has been expanded by Miss O’Grady into a full account of the descendants of John Redman (1702-1784) of Shaw near Melksham, many of whom farmed in various parts of Wiltshire. Family documents have survived well, and enabled Miss O’Grady to clothe the bare bones with much interesting flesh to produce an excellent example of a well-researched family history. K.H. ROGERS Seend, A Wiltshire Village Past and Present by Edward Bradby, xii + 244 pp. (Alan Sutton), 1981 £3.95 paperback, £6.95 hardback. Although one is accustomed to speak easily of increased interest in local history in recent years, the tangible results of the increase, in the form of printed work, are still few. This is especially true in the field of parish history. It is a salutary exercise to attempt to list parishes in Wiltshire (apart, of course, from those dealt with in the V.C.H.) which have a history based on an adequate use of the great wealth of printed and archive sources now available. To produce such a history, the amateur has to master a few preliminary techniques, to acquaint himself with the sources and what they will tell him, and most important of all, to work steadily through them. The footnotes of a parish history will quickly reveal the pertinacity with which this has been done, and provide a first touchstone of success. Mr. Bradby’s reveal immediately how thoroughly he has used our own library and the Record Office; he has also left no stone unturned in the village, and has found documentary sources in private hands and a rich vein of reminiscence. But finding material is only the first of the local historian’s tasks. He then has to incorporate it into a text for publication. Here again, Mr. Bradby’s book is a model of its kind; each of its fourteen topical chapters starts the reader at a point in the village evocative of the subject to be pursued, and keeps illustrating it by referring to buildings still to be seen. There are many excellent illustrations of places and people, and some attractive drawings by James Lynch. The final obstacle which the parish historian has to surmount is to get his work into print. This book was commissioned by the Seend Trust; the Carnegie Trust made both a grant and an interest- free loan as part of the Civic Trust Heritage Interpretation Scheme, and the Parish Council and local supporters also made gifts and interest-free loans. Profits will be used by the Seend Trust in its work of preserving and improving local amenities. Like the book, the manner of its publication will, I hope, provide an example for emulation to other parishes. K.H. ROGERS OBITUARIES Harry Ross who died at Westbury on 6 April 1981 was a native of London, and took a first in history at London University. After a period as a research librarian at the Institute of Historical Research, he spent three years lecturing at the University of South Africa, and then returned to a post as staff tutor in the London University Extension courses. In 1938 he published Usopias Old and New. During the war he ran the London Committee for Education for H.M. Forces, and was deputy director of the Forces Education Unit of the B.B.C. After the war Ross settled in Westbury as senior lecturer in local history and archaeology for the Extra-mural department of Bristo! University, a post he held until his retirement in 1969. He was responsible for the vigorous post-war development of both disciplines. In collaboration with the Universities of Keele and Birmingham he instigated and developed extensive field work in the archaeology of Roman Europe, and will be especially remembered for his work on the Roman villa at Barnsley Park near Cirencester. His knowledge of local history was extensive, and it is a matter of regret that a history of Westbury, or an account of the Romanesque churches of Wiltshire, both of which he was so amply qualified to produce, were never written. Ross was instrumental in forming the West Wiltshire branch of the Historical Association, and was a co-opted member of the Libraries and Museums Committee of the County Council for many years. His gifts as a committee man were considerable, and were used to the advantage of the Society on the council and various committees. He also served as meetings secretary for a time. Harry Ross brought zest and good humour to all his activities, and his cheerful presence is much missed. He leaves a widow and one son. Dr. Theodore Radford Forrester Thomson of Corstorphine, F.R.Hist.S., F.S.A., F.S.A. (Scot.), died at Cricklade on 18 July 1981, aged 84. He was one of those who took their Little Go, then Greek and Paley (from Epsom College) in March 1914, but came into residence, at Caius, only in 1917, having been placed on the retired list on account of wounds to serve in the Foreign Office. At Caius he was captain of the hockey club, and played occasionally for the University. Between the wars he lived a varied life, world wandering, in general practice, historical research, and farming in Rhodesia. After the Second World War he settled to general practice in Cricklade. Thomson was senior Fellow and one time hon. librarian of the Society of Genealogists. He was primarily a medieval genealogist and topographer, and showed a special gift in elucidating the bounds of the Saxon charters of north Wiltshire, correcting and enlarging the pioneer work of Grundy. He was author of The Material of Possibilities (1934), A Catalogue of British Family Histories (1928, 1935, 1976); Bradon Forest (1953); An Introduction to Cosmology (1978), and of numerous articles and reviews in this Magazine, the T.L.S. and the Antiquaries’ Journal. He also edited the 1954 edition of the Epsom College Register, a model of its kind. He will be remembered best, however, for his work on the history of Cricklade. He edited the volume modestly entitled Materials for a History of Cricklade, of which he wrote major parts, and published much more in the Bulletin of the Cricklade Historical Society. He exercised a pervading influence on all the affairs of that Society and its museum, and served as High Bailiff of the borough. Thomson sat for many years on the Wiltshire County Records Committee, the Wiltshire V.C.H. Committee and the committee of our own Society, of which he was President 1966-70. He and his wife Janet, who survives him, were well known in our library and at meetings and other functions. He leaves three sons and two daughters. 182 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Group Capt. Andrew Willan, C.B.E., D.F.C., D.L. died at Teffont on 12 November 1981, aged 65. After reading physics at Oxford he joined the R.A.F. in 1937. He served as a bomber pilot early in the war, was captured in 1940, and spent the rest of the war as a prisoner. On retiring from the R.A.F. in 1960 he was elected to the County Council, on which he served for twenty years; he was chairman of the Education Committee 1965-1968, vice-chairman of the Council 1968-1973, and chairman 1973-1979. Among his many other public posts he was vice- chairman of the Wessex Regional Health Authority and chairman of the Salisbury Diocesan Board of Finance. Willan represented the County Council on the Society’s council for several years, and was also chairman of the Wiltshire V.C.H. Committee. Not least among the improvements which Wiltshiremen owe to Willan has been the growth of County Council support for the cultural life of the county. We in the Society owe him a great debt for his support of our museum and library. Not only could we rely on his wise counsel: he also played a major role in establishing the system of County Council grants which is central to our financial well-being. He leaves a widow, two sons and a daughter. Joan Swanborough died on 27 December 1981, aged 64. Born in a tranquil valley in north west Wiltshire where, as a child, she roamed the countryside, Joan grew up to know and love the local plants, birds and animals. Later on, guided and helped by Donald Grose, she became a leading botanist in the county. For many years she went about her botanising activities on a bicycle and it was only increasing disability in the last two or three years of her very active life that finally forced her to give up her favourite transport; it was common to find the machine propped against a road verge and then to spot Joan, always cheerful and always delighted with her find whether it was a rarity or the humblest weed. When Donald Grose resigned in 1970 he nominated Joan to represent B.S.B.1. in north Wiltshire and she took his place on the Natural History Section Committee. In 1971 she was elected as Plant Recorder for the Section; in this capacity she compiled annual Plant Notes for the Wiltshire Natural History Magazine and, although often in pain and in hospital for treatment, she continued this work until the end of her life and prepared her last report for publication a few weeks before she died. Joan was also Hon. Secretary to the Section Committee from 1975 until 1977 and, when the Flora of Wiltshire was reprinted in 1978, she served on a small committee which was responsible for the contents. She seldom missed a committee meeting and she led many expeditions in the field. Joan was also a valued member of Box Archaeological and Natural History Society, advising them on botany and persuading them to keep botanical records. She took a great interest in Biddestone Primary School and often led the children, on walks and other outings; she was at ease with young people generally and nearly always had one or two with her, feeding them with botanical knowledge and home-made cake alternately. She was a member of the Alpine Garden Society and of the Monthly Gardening Club at Lackham College of Agriculture, where she established a garden of arable weeds. Joan and her husband Ron were a devoted pair. Together they travelled all over Britain, Joan studying plants, Ron photographing them. For the many friends who valued Joan the memory of her will remain to cheer their lives and help them to carry on her work in the way she wanted. INDEX FOR VOLUME 76 NOTE: A page number in italic denotes an illustration. A page number followed by 7 is a reference only to the footnotes on that page. The following abbreviations are used: abp., archbishop; bp., bishop; ch., church; Chas., Charles; coll., college; Edm., Edmund; Edw., Edward; Eliz., Elizabeth; fam., family; ff., following pages; Fred., Frederick; Geo., George; Geof., Geoffrey; Hen., Henry; Jas., James; K., King; Ld., Lord; Mic., Michael; Phil., Philip; Ric., Richard; Rob., Robert; Sam., Samuel; Thos., Thomas; Wal., Walter; Wm., William. County references are pre-1974 where applicable. Abingdon (Berks.), Dinosaur skeleton near, 164. Abingdon Court see Cricklade. Addedomaros see Kings. Adminius (Amminus) see Kings. Aerial photography in Wiltshire, 1975 —81, 3—19; see also Blunsdon St. Andrew. Aethelred II, coins, 88 —90; see also Cricklade. Aldbourne, rural Manor, 132. Alexander, bp. of Lincoln, 93. Algiers, collection of money to redeem Christians in, 118. Allington, crop marks at Manor Farm, 9. Alvediston, inquest at, 127. Amesbury, barrow on Coneybury Hill, 167; inquest at, 127—8;, Sheep Penning of West, 166 —7. Animal bones, Iron Age, 21, 68 —73. Arnot, D.T., 144. Aubrey, John, 117, 121, 152. Avebury, coin from, 88. Axe polishing stone, 165 —6. Baird, D. (with G.D. Bussell and A.M. Pollard) paper on jet and jet-like materials, 27 —31. ‘Banjo’ enclosure, Iron Age, 73 —4. Barrington, Shute, bp. of Salisbury, 115. Bath (Som.), museum, 155 ff. Bathyspondylus swindoniensis, 157 ff. Beads see Jet objects. Beaker see Pottery. Beit-sliders see Jet objects. Berwick Down see Tollard Royal. Beversbrook see Calne. Bickle, J., 117. Blunsdon St. Andrew, Iron Age enclosure at Groundwell Farm, 33—75. Bone and antler objects, Iron Age, 23, 67, 65. Bones, animal, 68 —72. Bones, human, 67. Bonney, D.J., note on Megaliths near Stonehenge, 166 —7. Bonney, H.M. (with J.A. Reeves) paper on timber framed house at Salisbury, 99 — 104. Books, reviews of, 179-80. Bourne Bottom see Figheldean. Box, mesolithic flints at, 4; Roman villa at, 4; earthworks in valley of Lid Brook, 70. Bradby, Edw., author of book on Seend, reviewed, 180. Braden Forest, 132. _ Bradford-on-Avon, dinosaur fossils mear, 155; non- conformists at, 120. Bremhill Wick, platforms and ridge-and-furrow at, 75. Brinkworth, deserted medieval settlement near, 76. Brixton Deverill, Cold Kitchen Hill, Coin from, 87. Brontosaurus, 155. Bronze objects, Iron Age, 63 —64, 65; see also sword. Brooke, Joshua, 171. Broomhall, D. (with M. Henig), note on an iron signet ring from Easton Grey, 167. Broughton Gifford, 73. Buckland, Professor Wm., 141. Burbage, timber framed house at, 109-114. Burh see Cricklade. Bury Wood Camp see Colerne. Bussell, G.D., (with A.M. Pollard and D.C. Baird), paper on jet and jet-like materials, 27 —31. Buttons see Jet objects. Calne, British coin from, 85; deserted medieval village at Beversbrook, 3, 76. Canham, Roy, paper on Aerial Photography in Wiltshire, 3-19. Cantii see Tribes. Cardiodon rugulosus, 155 ff., 156. Cattle droves, 134. Cetiosaurus, 155 —6. Chalons-sur-Marne, Sculpture on Notre-Dame-en-Vaux, 97. Chapman, N.B. (with P.M. Slocombe), paper on A Domestic Cruck Building at Potterne, 105 —8. Charleton see Downton. Charlton, Settlement site on Charlton Down, 86. Chelworth see Cricklade. Chippenham, crop marks around 4, inquest at, 124; neolithic chambered tomb at Lanhill, 4. Chisbury Camp see Little Bedwyn. Churn, River, course of at Cricklade, 132, water meadows on,, 135; Clare, John, coroner, 124—6. Clare, Wm., coroner, 123 ff. Clyffe Pypard, rural manor, 132. Cobbett, Wm., 134. Cold Kitchen Hill see Brixton Deverill. Colerne, coins from, 86—7; Roman villa at, 4; stone axe from Bury Wood Camp, 165. Collared urn see pottery. College of Matrons see Salisbury. Combe Bissett, inquest at, 127. Compton, Henry, bp. of London, 119. Coneybury Hill see Amesbury. Coroners and their clerks, paper on. 123—8. Coroners see Forsyth, Alexander; Clare, John; Clare, Wm.,; Whitmarch, Geo.. 184 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Corsham, coroners of, 123. Cov, Jennie, contribution by, 68-73. Cricklade, A ‘ward’ of the Burh, paper on, 77 —81; Abingdon Court Manor included in, 132; Boundary with Latton, 133; Chelworth Manors in, 132; Topography and history of North Meadow, 129-140. Cruck building at Potterne, 105 —8. Cunnington, M.E., excavations at Figsbury Ring, 21, 23. Cunobelin see Kings. David, Andrew, contribution by, 35 —8. Delair, J.B., paper on New and Little-known Jurassic Reptiles from Wiltshire, 155 — 164. Devizes, coroner of, 123 —4; Dinosaur remains in Museum, 158, 160; inquest on Ruth Pierce, 125. Dissent and non-conformity in the seventeenth century, 116—122. Ditteridge, worked mesolithic flints at, 4. Diplodocus, 155. Dobunni, see Tribes. Domesday survey, 132-3. Downton, inquests at, 128. Drainage see Land. Dreux, sculpture at St. Etienne, 96, 95. Durotriges, see Tribes. Easton Grey, coin from, 86; signet ring from, 167. Edington, coin from, 90. Edmonds, John, paper on The First Apprenticed Geologist, 141 — 154. Edward the Confessor, coins of, 89—90. Elliot fam., 103. Ermine Street, 80-1. Etchilhampton, deserted medieval village at, 3, 77. Farleigh Hungerford (Som.), Rev. B. Richardson, rector of, 144. Fasham, P.J., discussion (with C.J. Gingell) of excavations at Groundwell Farm, 73 —4. Figheldean, Celtic fields at Bourne Bottom, 79. Figsbury Rings, 21—5. Flint implements, flakes, etc., 23 —4. Flora and ecology, 131—40. Forsyth, Alexander, coroner of South Wiltshire, 126. Forth, Alexander, 117. Four-post structures, Iron Age, 41, 46-9, 47, 48. Fritillaria meleagris, 129 tf.. Geological Survey, 33-8. Giants Caves see Luckington. Gingell, C.J., paper on Excavation of an [ron Age Enclosure at Groundwell Farm, 33 —75. Goddard, E.H., 157-8. Godmanston fam., 103. Gorlay (Gorlaeus), Abraham, 169. Grave, medieval, 67. Great Chalfield, 102. Great Smithcot Farm see Brinkworth. Great Somerford, crop marks on terrace gravels, 4. Great Woodford, inquest at, 128. Griffiths, Nicholas, note on medieval pendant, 169. Grittleton, barrow site at West Foscote Farm, 8. Groundwell Farm, Blunsdon St. Andrew, excavation of Iron Age enclosure, 33-75. Guido, Margaret (with I.F. Smith), paper on Figsbury Rings, 21—5. Guppy, Simon, 114. Hackpen Hill see Wroughton. Harding, Philip, note on a stone axe from Bury Wood Camp, 165. Hare Street, 127. Harley Wespall (Hants.), 102. Haslam, Jeremy, paper on A ‘ward’ of the Burh of Cricklade, 77 —81. Henge monument, 23 —4. Henig, M., note on the Melksham ring, 169; (with D. Broomhall) note on an Iron signet ring from Easton Grey, 167. Henrv I, Coins of, 89-90. Hill Fort (Figsbury Rings), 21—5, 22. Hoare, Sir R. Colt, 166—7. Holland fam., 117. Holt, John Phillips attends school at, 187; school offered for sale, 144. Houses, Iron Age, see Groundwell Farm; timber framed see Burbage, Potterne, Salisbury. Hume, John, bp. of Salisbury, 115. Hunnisett, R.G., paper on Eighteenth century coroners and their clerks, 123 — 128; author of book on Wiltshire Coroners’ Bills, reviewed, 179. Inclosure Act and Award see Land. Iron Age Enclosure, 33—75. Iron objects, 64—5, 65. Jackson Collection of manuscript fragments and memoir of Canon J.E. Jackson, book reviewed, 179. James II, King, 116. Jerman, J.A., note on a figure from the Brooke Collection, Wale Jet, Early Bronze Age, 27 —31. Jewel, John, bp. of Salisbury, 115. Jurassic Reptiles, 155 —64.. Kemble (Glos.), accident at, 124. Kennet and Avon Canal, 153. Kimmeridge clay, dinosaurs from, 162, 164; other fossil remains in, 33. Kings, Celtic, Saxon and Norman, 83—91. Kings’ Graves, barrows, 166. Kingston Deverill, inquest at, 127. Kingston St. Michael, enclosure and ditches near, 8. Knightsbridge (London), 122. Lammas Lands, 129 ff. Land, drainage, 129 ff.; Inclosure act, 131 ff.; water meadows, 135 ff. Langley Burrell, ring ditches near, //. Lanhill see Chippenham. Latton, mills at and boundary with Cricklade, 133. Liber Notitiae (bp. Seth Ward’s notebooks), 120— 2. Lignite see Shale and Jet. Lincoln, mint at, 88; sculpture in cathedral, 93, 94. Little Bedwyn, coin from, near Chisbury Camp, 88. Long Wittenham (Berks.), 117. INDEX Lowth, Simon, 117. Luckington, Neotlithic chambered tombs (Giant’s Caves) at, 4. Lydiard Millicent, earthworks at, 3, 74. Mace head see Jet objects. Magnetometer survey, 35, 38, 36, 37. Maiden Bradley, inquest at, 127. Malmesbury, mint at, 90. Manors, rural see Aldbourne, Clyffe Pypard, Marden and Ramsbury. Mantell, G.A., 141. Marden, birthplace of John Phillips, 141. Marlborough, bp’s court at, 119, coin from near, 86. Marmarosaurus obtusus, 156, 157. Marshall, Wm., reports on land drainage etc. 135. Megaliths see Stonehenge. Melksham, inquest at, 124; non-conformists at, 120; ring from, 169. Midford (Som.), Phillips fam. living at Tucking Mill House, 142. Mildenhall, coins from, 85, 86, 88. Mills, water, 133. Moberley, Geo., bp. of Salisbury, 115. Moore, N.J., paper on 1, Westcourt, Burbage, 109 — 14 Morden, Manor of, 79. More, John, 104. Museum accessions in Wiltshire (not indexed under parishes), 161—5. Nettleton, Neolithic chambered tomb (Lugbury) at, 4. Newall, R.S., 152. Newbury (Berks.), non-conformist divine allowed to preach, 119. New Copse Down see West Lavington. New King Barrows, 166. Nichols, Ric., 118. Non-conformity see dissent. North Bradley, non-conformists at, 120. North Meadow see Cricklade. North Wilts. Canal, 136. Oaksey, sheela-na-gig at, 173. O’Grady, Clodagh, author of book on the Redmans of Half-way House, reviewed, 180. Obituaries, 169 —70. Old Sarum, paper on twelfth century sculpture from cathedral, 93 —98, 94, 95. Olivier, Henry Stephen, 105. Orcheston. Down, Celtic fields on, 78. Overton Down, Iron Age round house on, +. Passions, Edw., 118. Pearce, Chaning, 155; Jacob, 105. Peirce, Ruth, 125. Pierce, Thos., Dean of Salisbury, 121. Pendant from West Coulston, 168. Penning Bottom, 166. Pewsey, Timber framed house in area of, 109; Rev. Joseph Townsend, rector of, 144; Vale of, archaeological features in, 6. Phillips, Ann, 141 ff.. 185 Phillips, John, biography of, 141 — 154. ~ Pleiosaurs, list of species, 163. Pletosaurus, 158. Plesiosaurs, list of species, 163. Pollard, A.M. (with G.D. Bussell and D.C. Baird), paper on jet and jet-like materials, 27 —31. Pope, Walter, 116. Potterne, domestic cruck building at, 105 —8. Pottery, Late Neolithic 23, 24; Bronze Age, 23 —4, 54, Iron Age, 50-63, 56—59; affinities and dating, 62 —3; imported wares, 62 —63,; Romano-British, 21, 38. Prudential Assurance Company, 99. Purton, coins from, 86. Ramsbury, rural manor, 132. Rawlins, Thos., 118. Redmans of Half-way House, book on, reviewed, 180. Reeves, J.A. (with H.M. Bonney), paper on Timber framed house at Salisbury, 99 — 104. Reptiles, Jurassic, in Wiltshire, 155 —64. Riborgh fam., 103. Richardson, Rev. Benjamin, I+. Ring, Roman, 169—70; Signet, 167 —8, see also Jet objects. Robinson, Paul, paper on coin acquisitions by Devizes Museum, 83—91. Roger, bp. of Salisbury, 93. Rogers, K.H. reviews books by Edw. Bradby, 180; Clodagh O’Grady, 180; Jenny Stratford, 179. Roman villas see Box, Colerne. Ross, Harry, obit., 181. Rooke, Miss Susan, 165. Rushall Down, Settlement on, 86. St.-Denis, sculpture at, 93 ff, 04, 95, 97. St. Paul’s Cathedral, contribution to rebuilding, 118. Salisbury, cloth trade in, 116; College of Matrons, 116; memorial to bp. Seth Ward, 122; house in Minster St., 99 — 104; mint at, 90; recusants in gaol, 120; St. Thomas’s churchyard, 103-4; Wren’s survey of cathedral, 115 —7. Salisbury Plain, shadow-site photographs of, 6. Sancroft, abp., 121. Sarsen see axe polishing stone. Savernake Forest, hoard of British Coins in, 85. Saxon defences see Cricklade. Sculpture, possibly sheela-na-gig, 171—3. Seend, A Village Past and Present, book reviewed, 180. Senones see Tribes. Seven Barrows, 166. Shale (Kimmeridge shale), 27 —31. Sharpridge, Hackpen Hill see Wroughton. Sheela-na-gig, 171-3, 177. Sheldon, abp, 118. Sheldon Manor, deserted village near, 0. Sherlock, Thos., bp. of Salisbury, 115. Slocombe, P.M. (with N.B. Chapman) paper on A Domestic Cruck Building at Potterne, 105 —8. Smith, I.F. (with Margaret Guido), paper on Figsbury Rings, 21—5. Smith, Wm., paper on The Private Papers of bp. Seth Ward, 114-122. Smith, Wm. (civil engineer and geologist), 142 ff.. 186 THE WILTSHIRE ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY MAGAZINE Snakeshead Fritillary, 129 ff.. Somerset Coal Canal, 142. Speen (Berks.), aisle of church rebuilt, 117. Stapleford, inquest at, 128. Steeple Ashton, church repaired, 117. Stephen, coins of, 89, 91. Stoford, inquest at, 128. Stonehenge, megaliths near, 166. Stourton, recusants at, 120. Stratford, Jenny, author of book on Jackson Collection of manuscript fragments and memoir of Canon J.E. Jackson, reviewed, 179. Stone objects and quern stones, 67—8, 66. Stretosaurus, 158. Stukelev, Wm., 166-7. Suger, Abbot, 98 ff. Sutton Benger, crop markings at, /2. Swanborough, Joan, obit., 182. Swayn, Wm., 104. Swindon, coin from, 88; sauroptervgan skeleton near, 157. Swinton, W.J., 155. Sword, bronze, leaf shaped, 21. Tanner, Thos., 117. Thames and Severn Canal, 136. Thames, River, course at Cricklade, 132. Thomson, Dr. T.R.T., on Saxon boundaries at Cricklade, 132; obit., 181. Teeth, of Jurassic reptiles, 155-7, 156, 157. Thurlby, Malcom, paper on Sculptures from Old Sarum Cathedral, 93 —8. Tilehurst (Berks.), 117. ‘Timber-framed houses, 99 ff., 707, 102, 106, 107, 108, TIO, LEE, 012, Tisbury, recusants at, 120. Townsend, Rev. Jos., 144. Tribes, Ancient British, Gaulish, Celtic, Saxon and Norman, coins of, 83—91. Trinovantes, see Tribes. Tropnell fam., 102 ff.. Trowbridge, non-conformists at, 120. Tucking Mill House see Midford (Som). Tytherton Lucas, enclosure ditches at, 7/2. Upavon, British coin from, 85. Upper Shaw Farm see Lydiard Millicent. Waltham, John, bp. of Salisbury, 10+. Ward, Seth, bp. of Salisbury, papers of, 115 —22; persecutes dissenters, 116; founds College of Matrons, 116; Professor of Astronomy, 116; Chancellor of Order of the Garter, 120. Ward, Thos., nephew of bp. Seth Ward, 120. Warminster, coin from, 87; mint at, 88. Warmwell, Rob., 104. Water meadows, 135. Wessex and Mercia boundary, 80-1. West Amesbury see Amesbury. Westbury, dispute over election of churchwarden, 118. West Coulston, medieval pendant from, 168—9, 769. West Foscote Farm see Grittleton. West Lavington, Celtic fields at New Copse Down, 19. Whitby (Yorks.), Jet from, 27. Whitby, Dr. Daniel, 118. Whitehead, B. Jane, paper on North Meadow, Cricklade, 129 — 140. Whitmarsh, Geo., Coroner, 125 ff.. Willan, Group Capt. A., obit., 182. Wilton, Coroner of, 125 ff.; inquest at, 127; mint at, 90— 1. Wiltshire Coroners’ Bills, book on, reviewed, 179. Winterbourne Earls, 103. Woodbridge, Benjamin, 118 ff.. Wootton Bassett, Coroners of, 123, recusants at, 120. Wordsworth, John, bp. of Salisbury, 115. Wren, Sir Christopher, 115, surveys Salisbury Cathedral, 116; designs bishop’s seat, 116. Wroughton, carved figure found at Hackpen Hill, 172. Wvly, John, 104. X-ray fluorescence, 27 —31. Zarnecki, George, 93. marie ta re = ares, i tears * = I ) ; 4 ; f, : «I : 1 ~~ Mae A : : \ a ; a =! us : ‘ ime ; - " ms ne a 5 ww \ 1 Von \ ; \ . ait \ i 5 . 2% a4 tories Sy eeretee errata Sipegacgtant sateen ye 2 a oo ee Sera een fe = vip re: Zo 2 peicetas Season reeset et Non 08 ene = sh Ha g™ SPAN s