MEDIEVAL OPEN FIELDS IN EASTERN BLACKDOWNS
FORMER MEDIEVAL OPEN FIELDS IN THE
EASTERN BLACKDOWNS
ROGER W. CARTER
INTRODUCTION
A major contributor to the beauty and fascination of
the hilly landscape of the eastern Blackdown Hills
is its varied field patterns, a large proportion of which
owe their appearance to their origin in arable
farming. The modern landscape is dominated by the
straight banks of surveyed 19th-century enclosure
of former common land. Much of this was once
rough waste land within which existing fields were
described by the map makers as ‘old inclosures’. The
distinctive patterns of these ‘old inclosures’ are the
subject of this paper, particularly those which are
argued to represent relict medieval open fields. A
number of these fields are examined in detail within
a study area (Fig. 1) comprising seven Somerset and
bordering parishes: Chard, Chardstock, Combe St
Nicholas, Membury, Wambrook, Whitestaunton and
Yarcombe, which together cover the fertile eastern
border zone of the hills extending eastward into a
lower zone of more extensive arable land.
This paper arises from detailed parish surveys of
the study area of which two, Wambrook (Carter
1977) and Whitestaunton (Carter 1981), have been
published. Other published studies are of Tatworth
Middle Field (Down and Carter 1989) and of the
parish of Chardstock combining landscape study and
history (Wood and Carter 1999). The parish survey
Fig. 1 Location maps
153
153
SOMERSET ARCHAEOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY, 2008
methodology involved fieldwalking, pottery spread
surveys, and building analysis with the results tied
in to the 1:10560 OS map. Map regression was used
to reconstruct the earlier 19th-century landscape of
c. 1840 and then from these maps to attempt a
reconstruction of the mid 14th-century landscape of
c. 1340 – at the time when medieval arable fields
had extended to their maximum and whose
cultivation patterns can be seen in a surviving field
pattern. For this the clues given by field names were
combined with the evidence of land usage from
fieldwalking and the crucial evidence from
documents. It is not claimed that reconstructions
back to c. 1340 are as accurate as the c. 1840 date
but they are as informative and reliable as those
obtained from other methods and often have a
broader application. None of the regressive maps of
the above parishes have been published yet, but
portions of them have been used to support the
evidence used below in this paper.
It should be emphasised that this system of
regressive reconstruction of earlier landscape is
based upon fieldwork and documentary records and
differs from landscape characterisation. The
methodology outlined here emphasises how the
characteristic shape of the Blackdown fields is an
adaptation to suit the local steep environment and
to utilise its fertile and moist soil. As with other
detailed field studies, those on the Blackdowns have
revealed that any simple generalised picture is
complicated when individual parishes are looked at.
At this level it can be seen that differences in geology,
topography, ownership, and history affect the field
and settlement patterns.
BACKGROUND
Terminology
Open fields were operated in systems of two or three
so that each field was cultivated by annual crop
rotation, including a year lying fallow. In the eastern
Blackdowns each field was surrounded by a hedge
and was subdivided into blocks called furlongs and
then into strips allocated to manorial tenants. Access
to the strips was via sladeways which ran parallel to
the furlongs. These gave access onto the headlands
that ran across the ends of the strips. Medieval
ploughing was done by using a team of up to four
yokes (pairs) of oxen, circling within each furlong
from a top central point to form a ‘land’. Controlling
water run-off and minimising soil erosion was
154
Fig. 2 Example of an open field on a slight to
moderate slope
important. On level ground lands were ploughed into
large ridges (ridge and furrow) but sloping ground
was generally preferred, in which case the ridges
were angled to the right of the slope, looking down.
Steeper slopes were usually not ridged unless soil
drainage was bad. As the population grew over the
years, extra land was reclaimed from the waste and
added to the field. This was often steeper and poorer
in quality which made regular lay-out and cultivation
more difficult.
As well as open field furlong shapes, similar
shapes can be found frequently in even larger areas
where there were thought to be no open fields. The
interior of these areas was used as arable land, and/
or pasture. Most appear to have had a substantial
outer protective bank. These were square-section
banks, some 2m wide and sometimes with dry-stone
faced sides and topped with a double hedge. These
enclosures may have been what many outlying farms
in Chard and adjacent parishes operated as simple
infield/outfield cultivation systems. In these, the
infield was manured heavily and cultivated intensively.
Outfield land beyond this protected area was more
extensive but could be subdivided with impermanent
barriers. Figure 2 shows an idealised subdivided
open field on a slope and with an outer bank.
Waste was usually rough pasture, moor or scrubby
woodland. On the high ground it was covered with
bracken or heather. On lower ground it was more
likely to be wet moor with marsh grass and sallow.
Waste was used as grazing for a controlled number
of animals, as a source of fuel, minerals and fodder,
or for hunting wild animals as permitted by the
manorial administration. Specialised activities took
place in small isolated groups of fields, sometimes
utilising a water source to aid a process or as a source
of power. Waste on which tenants had common rights
MEDIEVAL OPEN FIELDS IN EASTERN BLACKDOWNS
(commons) was sometimes used as a stopping place
by drovers and banked drove roads between
commons can survive.
Previous work
Gray (1915, 258–66, 269–70, 412) suggested that
open fields were present but not numerous in the
area, commenting on their internal subdivisions and
surrounding hedge. Shorter (1950), however, pointed
out that the present day survival of some strip-shaped
closes meant that these fields were once quite
numerous, and this was confirmed from documentary
sources (Finberg 1949). Fox (1970) published
detailed fieldwork in east Devon following it with
an important study of outfield cultivation in Devon
and Cornwall (1973), while Whitfield (1981)
analysed the sources of information available.
MEDIEVAL DOCUMENTARY SOURCES
Chard
A reference to features in Tatworth Middle Field
occurs in 1343. It should be noted that by this date,
lynchets (shelves) had been made, and final extra
land reclaimed (breach). The Manor Hallmoot for
the year 1363 states that there were 300 acres of
arable of which two thirds were sown and one third
fallow. This suggests a three-field system. A land
charter of 1411 for land in Crimchard mentions ‘the
common field of that hamlet’. This suggests an
infield. A survey by the Steward of Tatworth just
before the map and survey of 1599 states that ‘much
of the groundes lye by landshares in the fields and
meadowes’ (Chard History Group 1974).
Chardstock
The manor of Chardstock was the site of one of the
five palaces of the Bishop of Salisbury and its
documentary records are particularly extensive
(Wood and Carter 1999). There are references from
1155 to the end of the medieval period to furlongs,
landyards, closes and there are references to the
names of over 25 fields in the 16th century.
Combe St Nicholas
In 1234, it was stated that 107 acres of wheat and
149 acres of oats should be sown, and 78½ acres of
land left fallow (Aldridge 1927, 14).
Membury
A deed mentions intermixed arable acres in the
furlong called Moorland (Exeter City Record Office
49/26/3/1 f.33v and 49/26/1/1).
Yarcombe
The vicar was provided with 30 acres of arable lying
together in Little Furlong (Oliver 1846, 251 (vii)
and 258 (52)).
CASE STUDIES
Tatworth Middle Field
Figure 3 shows Tatworth Middle Field (ST 323 061;
Hoskins 1987, 24), as it was in 1599 redrawn
accurately using its surveyor’s notes and with a
proposed inclosure pattern of hedgebanks. A contour
map (Fig. 4, left) of the same area is shown. The
strip patterns are complex and it can be suggested
that this ‘great field’ has grown by stages (Fig. 4,
right). Stage 1 on either side may once have been
infields for Tatworth and South Chard. Stage 2
appears to be the setting-out of opposing strips in
the central gully so that they drain down to the ‘slade
way’. The northern set of these is angled so that its
strips run down the slope, getting shorter towards
the west. This leaves Stage 3 as a trapezoid central
furlong whose C-shaped strips run along the contour.
Stage 4 was on difficult and narrow slopes where
strips were laid out across the slope and scarped into
short, wide lynchets called Shelves (presumably a
local name for lynchets). Finally Stage 5 comprised
the highest and poorest land, farthest from a
settlement and next to the massive Chard Parish
boundary bank. This was cleared before 1343 and
was called ‘breach’, meaning reclaimed land. The
regular furlongs to the south were called Parrocks –
meaning small marked-off plots.
That plough teams of about three to four yokes of
oxen, were used to cultivate the Middle Field can be
seen by the almost straight or reversed S-shaped
strips. A later modification was to extend a furlong
and call it Longshanks. Ploughing of this would have
needed a strong oxen team. Its furrows match those
in Breach and are basically C-shaped with a short
extension to the east. Another modification was to
form two rectangular plots for beans. It was observed
that the later imposed hedges followed the line of
the headlands and furrows closely and that the latter
155
SOMERSET ARCHAEOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY, 2008
Fig. 3 Tatworth Middle Field with strips and later inserted banks and hedges
Fig. 4 Tatworth Middle Field; left: contours with slope running from top to bottom of figure, right:
stages of development
156
MEDIEVAL OPEN FIELDS IN EASTERN BLACKDOWNS
N
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C C
C
C C
C
Crimchard
village
Parks
100m
Fig. 5 Crimchard Field; C = C-shaped furlongs, dotted lines = location of headlands
were usually straight or reversed S-shaped. This
latter conformation is thought to be because the
slopes of the field were not too steep.
Crimchard Field
The field pattern of Crimchard Field (Fig. 5; ST 315
091) is taken from the 1799 manorial survey of Chard
(SRO DD/SAS C/212). Figure 6 shows the contours.
It is not clear where the field ended on its north end
or whether there were other Crimchard fields. The
hillside is steeper than at Tatworth, especially
towards the top but is more even across the contours.
Not all field boundaries run along former headlands
but the latter survive as prominent ridges allowing
the structure of the carefully planned field to be seen.
Many hedgebanks down the slope are C-shaped (as
Fig. 6 Contours for Fig. 5, slope running from top
to bottom
157
SOMERSET ARCHAEOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY, 2008
marked) and not reverse S-shaped. This was a
response to the steeper slope. For most of this field,
the pattern of the headlands is regular and most
follow the contours.
While at Tatworth current footpaths conform to
the structure of the field and thus are helpful in
reconstructing the field plan, this is not the case with
several of the Crimchard Field footpaths. This
suggests that the furlongs ceased to be used as arable,
and that enclosure took place well after 1599. The
footpath above Parks appears to be ancient and
distorts the headland pattern. It was possibly an early
way that ran to the Wadeford Roman villa area. The
Parks field name is similar to Parrocks in Tatworth
– there was no park in Crimchard.
N
F
3l
3l
3Q
F
158
3S
C
3C
3C
D
3R
3S
D
3R
3T
3T
3C
Alston Field
This field (ST 303 028) is by the hamlet of Alston
(Aelfweald’s tuna) and is situated on a nearly level
valley-side plateau in the South Tithing of
Chardstock parish (Fig. 7). The field slopes gently
from west to east and the headlands are identifiable
and continuous. It was ploughed into broad ridge
and furrow that can still be seen in places. The whole
field is enclosed with a hedge and bank which
survives and fronted much waste to the north and
west. This may be the complete system although a
further field to the east remains a possibility. Being
a fairly level field, some furrows follow a reverse-S
profile. Cleave Hill rises steeply to the west and there
is a steep fall to the River Kit on the east. This was a
small open field with a strip system, crop rotated in
three subdivisions which run north and south. Details
of this, the tenants and apparent rotation of the strips
have been published (Wood and Carter 1999, 128–
9). Footpaths respect the boundaries and the present
hedgerows indicate C-shaped furrows. Up to five
strips under one tenant are bundled together and are
aligned with the adjacent furlong. Figure 7 shows
this with the tenant’s land marked as coded on the
1781 map (Donn, Survey Henley Estate, Dev RO).
It is not known whether this was original or as a
result of later strip exchange to ease cultivation. An
important survival feature is that an outer trackway
still surrounds most of the boundary. The northern
furlong may have been called Fursham. There seems
to have been some strip exchange and consolidation
judging by the various widths of the blocks and the
way that most tenant’s holdings conveniently line
up across the field. This was also noticed to a lesser
degree in Tatworth Middle Field but on Alston Field,
it has affected the spacing of the imposed hedges.
D
3C
3C
3T
3C
3R
3R
3S
Z
D
3R
3R
3R
3R
3R
F
F
D
D
3R
F
S
Z
3T
3T
F
D
D
D
C
D
100m
Fig. 7 Alston Field: ownership pattern in 1781
Wilmington Field and Cleave Hill
Alston was one of the two ‘tuna’ or major farms of
the manor and is now a small hamlet. The other was
Wilmington (Wulfhelm’s tuna) situated in the North
Tithing but this is now only represented by Woonton
(?a corruption of Wilmington) farm. The field (Fig.
8) lies on the north-facing slope of Cleave Hill, in
Chardstock parish, and appears to have had C-shaped
furrows. To the east of these is the edge of a steep
slope (hence the place name ‘cliff’ in Cleave Hill)
on which is a long bank running north–south. Nearby
are the earthworks of the shrunken hamlet that
probably was Wilmington but is now called Holy
City – the latter maybe referring ironically to the
deserted village in the place called Holy (a la Hole
was mentioned in the 1422/3 accounts of John
Crowne, Reeve (Dor RO). At the south of the hill
are several rounded enclosures with the appearance
of having been reclaimed from waste land, perhaps
MEDIEVAL OPEN FIELDS IN EASTERN BLACKDOWNS
respectively). In the centre are groups of furlongs
running at right angles to Wilmington Field. These
can be grouped by ownership in the manorial survey
of 1781 into similar sized units with nominal areas
of 15 acres thus equating to the medieval half virgate
unit. They often included a small farm by then. The
surrounding main enclosure, being on a hill-top and
with a large bank could be prehistoric in origin.
According to the documentary sources, Cleave
was single tenancy between 1155 and 1427. The
tenancy of Edward of Clive c. 1120 may be
represented by the central blocks, which appear at
some time to have been divided into three, the central
one being the largest. Each was used for cultivation
and subdivided into furlongs. They were unlikely to
have been held in common or cultivated in strips. At
some stage the whole unit appears to have been split
up evenly into groups of furlongs and, at some point,
hedged to provide extra flexibility and/or security.
The area was presumably originally outfield but related
to Wilmington rather than Alston (below the hill and to
the east which was in Chardstock South Tithing).
N
3G
3G
3G
3F
3F
3F
3F
3F
3F
3F
2R
2R
Shelves 3M
2R
2R
2R
2R
3M
2R
2R
3M
3M
3M
3E
3M
3E
Northay, Southay, Woodhayes and Hayne
3E
3E
3E
3E
3E
O
T
3N
O
T
O
3N
T
3N
O
3N
3N and 3 O fields
continue west and
are part of Yard
and Twist farms
T
O
O
3O
3O
3O
3O
3O
3O
3O
3O
3O
3O
3P
3P
3P
3P fields are
Goathill
100m
3P
3P
3P
3P
3P
Fig. 8 Wilmington Field and Cleave Hill:
ownership pattern in 1781
in prehistoric times. These, called Goat Hill, were
probably pastoral and attached to the ancient farms
of Twist and Yard (first mentioned in 1280 and 1332
Whitestaunton parish has two large ovoid, hilltop
enclosures called Northay (Fig. 9) and Southay (Fig.
10). Both have farms of this name and the latter
includes the univallate hill-fort, Horse Pool or
Hawberry. Northay has a very regular layout split
by an earlier central way that runs across the pattern
and passes the two Northay barrows. The C-shaped
fields to the east were plainly furlongs and therefore
were part of an open field, but there is no evidence
for strip cultivation. The field names with an ‘acre’
suffix would probably have been open arable when
named, however the ‘close’ suffix, while possibly
still arable, would have been added upon enclosure
with bank and hedge. Southay is less regular than
Northay and has a greater number of lands in ‘acre’
and ‘land’, both names that indicate arable
cultivation. This and the field name ‘benhayes’
meaning bean fields, was also arable. Also in the
parish and at mid valley-side height is Woodhayes
(Fig. 11) which has a central farm with conjoined
fields and woodland rising behind. All field name
suffixes are ‘close’ suggesting that the whole
economy was based on pasture. Finally, at a still
lower level is Hayne (Fig. 12). This gives the
impression of being the least regular in arrangement
and use. To summarise, all four ‘hay’ type farms seem
to be of infield/outfield type and yet they consisted
largely of furlongs. Even if the hay boundaries are
159
SOMERSET ARCHAEOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY, 2008
N
100m
C
A
C
Northay
Barrows
C
C
C
A
C
C
L
C
A
C
C
C
Field name suffix
A Acre L Land
C Close M Mead
F Field
M
Fig. 9 Northay: types of cultivation in 1841
C
N
L
A
L
C
A
n
Be
C
A
L
C
ha
ye
s
A
A
C
F
A
A
A
A
Field name suffix
A Acre
C Close
F Field
L Land
100m
Fig. 10 Southay: types of cultivation in 1841
160
MEDIEVAL OPEN FIELDS IN EASTERN BLACKDOWNS
N
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
100m
Field name suffix
C Close
Fig. 11 Woodhayes: types of cultivation in 1841. C
= field name suffix ‘close’
N
Field name suffix
A Acre
C Close
F Field
L Land
C
C
C
L
C
F
F
M
systems. Here obstacles such as valley-side rivulets,
or change of slope, also occur to break the evenness
of the furlong network. The fields lie in a deep valley
and have the pattern of a fine series of furlongs with
C-shaped sides that in places are three tiers deep.
Hedgerows have not always survived and the original
pattern is much more complete on 19th-century
maps. On the west ridge the pattern on its level top
does not change to conventional rectangular furlongs
but the furlong pattern of the slope continues in a
distorted and broken way. This may be because the
furlongs had to meet those adjoining, but reversed,
on the downward slope of the next valley. The
apparently short furlongs on the map are
foreshortened owing to the vertical view of a steep
slope. Another aspect is that of soil creep. Close to
the village the foot of a steep furlong has apparently
been severed by erosion to a gully but continued to
be in cultivation across the slope. This produced large
negative and positive lynchets at the top and bottom
of what became a square field. In times past, a local
farm task in winter (that continued into the 20th
century) was that of hauling soil from the bottom to
the top of such fields to prevent this effect.
Documentary evidence that infield was divided into
strips and waste was used as sporadically cultivated
outfield has been given above. Field evidence for
this flexibility in planning can be seen at Membury
where the complex adjustment to find the best
plough-line over uneven and sloping ground could
only have been done in an open and undivided field.
C
DISCUSSION
M
100m
Fig. 12 Hayne: types of cultivation in 1841
prehistoric (as seems probable) the furlong
boundaries do not appear to be following any of the
regular pre-medieval cultivation patterns. Groups of
furlongs do however show some irregular rounded
structures suggesting their survival from early
reclamation from the waste.
Membury
Figure 13 shows the field pattern around Membury
in Devon for comparison with the above field
The purpose of the first three case studies (Tatworth,
Crimchard and Alston) was to examine known
Blackdown open fields that had strip systems and
find out what relationship their c. 1840 hedge pattern
had to the c. 1340 furlong shape and pattern. It was
obvious from the hedge pattern of ‘old inclosures’
that such shapes and patterns were not confined to
former strip fields but that furlongs were
characteristic of most of the medieval landscape.
Many of these had field sides running down-slope
that follow a characteristic reverse-S or a C profile.
The later hedgerows were thus built on the
subdivided boundaries of open fields, the field’s
slope influencing the course of the plough and hence
the profile of the boundary. In the period up to 1340,
some arable field systems developed into rotated crop
systems held in common. In this they resembled
much larger systems to the north-east. It is apparent
161
SOMERSET ARCHAEOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY, 2008
N/S
Ridge
ME
MB
UR
Y
N
Shells
100m
Fig. 13 Field system around Membury village: * = section of furlong
detached by erosion
162
MEDIEVAL OPEN FIELDS IN EASTERN BLACKDOWNS
that there were many types of medieval open fields
each falling within the broad categories of arable,
pasture, meadow, wood or waste. They were held
from a variety of centres, from farm to hamlet, to
sub-manor, to manor itself, and held and/or worked
in single or in common.
Infield/outfield field systems dominated the
landscape and the open fields were often subdivided
into furlongs and/or strips by non-permanent
boundaries. Figure 8 shows this complexity as it
includes former open fields operating as a strip field,
half virgate tenancies and outfield pasture. In the
case study of the group of hay features (Figs 9–12)
in Whitestaunton parish it was shown that groups of
furlongs were often within older, even prehistoric,
banked enclosures and even sub-features. These were
in open fields of infield/outfield type without any
evidence of having been divided into strips. The
1881 field name suffixes indicated systems varying
from arable to mainly pasture. Within the hays no
evidence has been recognised of regular premedieval arable patterns affecting the furlong
pattern. Instead, features suggest early reclamation
from waste.
On sloping ground, oxen teams ploughed from a
headland slightly across a slope. Because of the
length of a team, it was necessary to start along the
headland and finish on the foot of the furlong. This
resulted in a reverse S-shaped furrow. Steeper slopes
were ploughed differently resulting in a C-shaped
furrow. It is thought that this is because a shorter
plough team was used which allowed a start pointing
down the furrow. The plough’s mouldboard normally
threw soil to the right, that is, downhill as the C
shape was followed. Normally this might have been
thought undesirable but perhaps it illustrates how
difficult it was to plough such steep slopes.
The cultivation of difficult slopes on a rocky subsoil led to the development of a lynchet furlong
suited to the local topography and geology. Steep
slopes in and near the study area and in its vicinity
to the east were cultivated by the use of at least four
methods corresponding to the terrain. Where the
valley sides are steep but long horizontally, there
are long horizontal terrace lynchets with almost
parallel sides. Where the hillside slopes are gentler,
lynchets are of varying tread, width and slope. In
land that was difficult to gain access to there were
short rectangular lynchets as at Shelves in Tatworth
Middle Field (Fig. 3). Another common and
distinctive form ran partly across the slope. To
accommodate slopes curving horizontally, the
furlong shape changed to become more triangular.
These sometimes have the field name ‘shool’ from
resemblance to a shovel. For slopes curving in two
to three dimensions, the furlongs were curved more
to the horizontal and some were rotated to form a
cascading pattern with complex headlands. To fit
larger areas, furlongs interlocked in a repeating
pattern to form coherent field systems with long
linear headlands as in the Membury case study (Fig.
13). Study of the pattern of these, with access ways
and other features, is an essential part of any
regressive reconstruction of landscapes. The
arrangement of access ways and headlands and the
shape of furlongs is a key factor in identifying former
subdivided arable field systems even though this may
not be within an identifiable outer enclosure. These
furlongs, although not originally hedged, were rarely
divided into strips as were those to the north-east of
the Blackdowns.
Acknowledgements
Thanks are due to Miss H.M.T. Parmiter and Mr P.J.
Wood for their help in fieldwalking and for sharing
their knowledge of farm practice and local history;
to Prof M.A. Aston for his helpful advice over many
years; and to Mr D. Bromwich for his invaluable
help in finding references
References
Aldridge, Revd G. de Y., 1927. ‘History of Combe
St Nicholas’, SANH 73, 14.
Carter, R.W., 1977. Parish Surveys in Somerset, 1.
Wambrook, Taunton.
Carter, R.W., 1981. Parish Surveys in Somerset, 4.
Whitestaunton, Taunton.
Down, T., and Carter, R.W., 1989. ‘Tatworth Middle
Field’, SANH 133, 103–24.
Chard History Group, 1974. The History of Chard,
Chard.
Finberg, H.P.R., 1949. ‘The open field in Devon’,
Antiquity 23, 180–7.
Fox, H.S.A., 1970. ‘Field systems of East and South
Devon, 1’, East Devon, 82.
Fox, H.S.A., 1973. ‘Outfield cultivation in Devon
and Cornwall: a reinterpretation’, in Havindon,
M. (ed.), Husbandry and Marketing in the SouthWest 1500-1800, Exeter.
Gray, H.L., 1915. English Field Systems, Cambridge
(Mass).
Hoskins, L.W., 1987. The History of Tatworth and
Forton, Chard.
163
SOMERSET ARCHAEOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY, 2008
Oliver, G., 1846. Monasticon Dioecesis
Exoniensis, Exeter.
Shorter, A.H., 1950. ‘Field patterns in Brixham
parish, Devon’, Devonshire Ass Rep Trans 82,
271–80.
164
Whitfield, M., 1981. ‘The medieval fields of southeast Somerset’, SANH 125, 17–29.
Wood, P.J., and Carter, R.W., 1999. History of
Chardstock, Chardstock Historical Record
Group.