Normanton
Golf Course
Printed from the APC web site: navigation and non-essential images removed.
Please view on-line for full content (URL at end of document).
The results from the fieldwork undertaken at Normanton Golf Course provided an insight into the development of a buried landscape from the Iron Age to the present day. In terms the of density of remains, the western half of the site proved to contain much more archaeological evidence than the eastern half. This was mainly due to the concentration of activity in and around the enclosure in Zone 2. The recovery of stratigraphic relationships and targeted radiocarbon dates made it possible to create a sequence of development for the whole site.
In the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age, evidence suggested that the site consisted of an area of woodland and marsh divided by a series of natural boundaries. A north-south aligned stream (F176) fed into a main east-west channel (F226) which ran along the line of present day Whin Beck. The eastern half of the site appeared to be wetter than the west with an area of extensive marshland or shallow lake located in the northeast corner. This marsh was probably fed by a second stream, now known as Sewerbridge Beck which forms the current eastern boundary of the site. There was little evidence for human activity dating to this period although a Neolithic knife was recovered from the ploughsoil in Zone 3.
30m to the east of the stream (F176), on an area of high ground a posthole possibly dating to the Bronze Age (F153) was recorded during the investigation of Zone 2. Although no other features or structures relating to this were recorded, the posthole may indicate that this area was a focus for some form of activity at this time.
Period 2a
15m to the east of F153, a shallow pit (F232) was excavated which contained burnt animal bone and charcoal. Like F153, this feature appeared to be an isolated event on the area of high ground adjacent to the stream. A radiocarbon date placed this activity between 1206BC to 917BC (see Appendix H). This area of high ground within the valley bottom was located between three streams.
Period 2b
At some point during the mid-Iron Age, possibly between the 700 to 600 BC, a rectilinear enclosure (F37) was excavated to the east of the stream. This feature defined an area of approximately 1850m 2 , effectively bounding the top of the highest rise in the valley bottom. This enclosure appeared to be superimposed centrally over the disuse of earlier activity (F153, F232). No evidence for internal structures were identified for this phase although they may have been present, but not in a substantial enough form to survive later truncation.
The enclosure appeared to have existed in isolation within the landscape. Its location near to the confluence of two streams (F176 and F226) may be deliberate and suggests that these natural boundaries may have had political or ritual significance. The ditch of the enclosure appeared to be designed to drain water from its entranceway on the eastern side, downslope to its western leg, where it would have overflowed in times of particularly wet weather into the adjacent stream.
Period 2c
After a period of disuse the enclosure ditch was recut (F234) and the entranceway remodelled. The new enclosure was characterised by a substantial gateway (F211, F216) and a symmetrical corridor (F35, F36) leading to a central structure (S5). This structure comprised a squat screen or hut built from upright posts set within a trench. In the southeastern corner, there was a second structure, possibly built into the makeup of an internal bank (S5). This arrangement of buildings appeared to have been in use for a considerable period and efforts appear to have been made to maintain and repair them along with the funnel corridor and gateway.
There is nothing within the landscape to indicate any great change at this time and it appeared that the enclosure continued to exist as an isolated unit within the valley bottom, located within a system of natural boundaries. It is possible that activity on the site was associated with the gradual erosion of the woodland around it.
These buildings appear to have gone into disuse around 250BC and may have been occupied for up to 150 years. Structure 2 contained a significant amount of burnt daub within its backfill which indicated that this phase of occupation may have ended with the building being destroyed or levelled by fire.
Period 2d
After a period of silting the enclosure was recut into a complete circuit (F43). This was associated with the construction of a bridged and gated crossing over the site of the original entranceway. The grand corridor arrangement had disappeared but the central focus of the enclosure was maintained. A succession of three buildings (S4, S6, S3) were built over the disuse of previous activity centrally within of the enclosure. Within this sequence was a large pit (F40) the primary fill of which comprised a deposit of ash and burnt grain. Once this material had been deposited, the pit appeared to have been deliberately backfilled and capped with clay, possibly in preparation for a new structure.
The entranceway was covered with a cobble surface which may have extended over much of the site. If this had been the case, such a surface would have been ploughed away by later agriculture. The buildings within the enclosure appeared to have been in use between 150BC and 0AD. Evidence was recorded which suggested that the latest of these structures (S3) may have been destroyed by fire.
This period marked the hey day of activity within the enclosure. Evidence from outside the site suggested that the enclosure remained an isolated unit within a naturally defined landscape during this period.
Period 2e
By the late Iron Age the structural phases within the rectilinear enclosure appear to have ended. This was marked by a recutting of the ditch circuit (F235) and the sub-division of the enclosure with a series of fences (F103, F108). An annex was formed on the eastern side of the enclosure by an L-shaped ditch (F78). As well as defining a new area, this feature acted as an overflow for water accumulating along the eastern length of the ditch circuit.
This dramatic change in focus and activity relating to the enclosure appeared to be contemporary with other fundamental changes visible in the Normanton landscape. 200m to the north of the enclosure a major NE-SW aligned boundary (F245/F111) was created. The eastern end of this feature ran to the edge of the marsh or lake area in the northeastern corner of the development area. To the south, this ditch appeared to link with the northern end of the existing stream before turning westward to form a large bounded area some 130m wide. A subdivision of this enclosure was identified draining water from west to east (F248).
This episode of land division appeared to have been carried out in a cleared landscape and F234 was recorded as cutting two of the tree boles identified within Zone 3. It is not certain when or how the clearance of woodland was undertaken but it seems that it had been completed by the early 1st century AD. At this time the stream to the south of the enclosure (presently Whin Beck) may have been cleaned or evenly recut (F245). It is possible too that a major east-west boundary (F45) located on the slope to the south of this stream was also created at this time.
Consequently the evidence suggests that there was a fundamental change in the pattern of land division and expression of boundaries occurring in the late Iron Age which appears to have been contemporary with a change in use of the main rectilinear enclosure.
Period 3a
The division of the landscape which started in the late Iron Age continued into the Romano-British period. The enclosure circuit (F236) was recut and incorporated along its western side into a north-south aligned boundary ditch (F219, F220). Along its eastern side, the annex created by F78 was recut (F34) and modified to allow passage around the enclosure. F219 ran 70m southwards from the enclosure and effectively canalised an existing watercourse (F176). This appeared to coincide with a recutting of the main east-west aligned stream (F227, presently Whin Beck) and the creation of a bridged crossing (F258, F259, F260). 50m to the north of F236, F220 joined another east-west aligned ditch (F175) which was aligned parallel to F227 as well as F45 on the southern side the stream. This arrangement appeared to annex the enclosure into a bound area 160m wide between F175 and F227. The eastern side of this area would presumably have been bound by the wet area or Sewerbridge Beck.
In addition to these new divisions, existing boundaries at the northern end of the site were also recut (F244, F249, F255). The incorporation of the enclosure within this scheme appears to be significant, providing continuity of place rather than function in an otherwise changing landscape. This suggests once again that the site of the enclosure may have retained some significance. Much of this phase of land division was undertaken by effectively redefining natural boundaries (F176, F225) with formal ditches. This suggests that the natural features may have had political, territorial or ritual significance in the earlier periods.
Period 3b
The rectilinear enclosure at Normanton lost its relevance within the landscape in the mid- to late Roman period. F236 appeared to have silted up and gone into disuse at the same time as the north-south aligned boundary ditch located along its western length (F219, F220).
F175, the east-west aligned ditch to the north of the enclosure, was recut (F264). This appeared to be contemporary with a recutting of the boundaries to the north (F245, F245) and irregular enclosed area to the northwest (F248).
The eventual demise of the rectilinear enclosure made way for the creation of a series of east-west aligned long parcels of land bound at their eastern end by Sewebridge Beck. It was almost as if the enclosure had defined a claim to an area of land which included the confluence of three watercourses. This area was formally defined by ditches then finally incorporated into a single large field. This scheme of land division appeared to have fallen into disuse by the late Roman period.
From the archaeological evidence this area of Normanton appeared to be devoid of any human activity that would have left a trace in the ground for several hundred years. The next major event that occurred on the site was the creation of a major boundary. This was formed by the recutting of the east-west aligned stream (presently known as Whin Beck) to create a canalised channel in excess of 6.0m wide (F224). After a period of initial flow, the stream appeared to have silted up fairly quickly and collected debris. A radiocarbon date suggested that this may have occurred in the late 7th century AD. F224 appeared to continue in use as a slow-flowing, possibly stagnant stream for a considerable period after this.
Although there was no evidence for settlement activity contemporary with this feature, a series of drains were identified feeding into F224 along its northern bank. These features may be evidence that this area was in agricultural use at time.
In addition to forming the present parish boundary, Whin Beck was also the township boundary of Normanton. The redefinition of this channel on such a large scale during the 7th century, therefore, has significant implications for dating the creation of the township of Normanton.
Documentary evidence suggests that the stream is believed to have formed part of a township boundary in the late Anglo-Saxon period (Faull and Moorhouse 1981, map 12), surrounding the vill of Normanton. The place-name of Normanton, Normantone, occurs in the Domesday Book of 1086, and has been interpreted as meaning ' tun of the Norwegians,' 'i.e. Vikings who came to England from the west via Ireland' (Faull and Moorhouse 1981, 197).
The origin of township boundaries is not clear, and they form only one part of a complex division of land that occurred in the medieval and earlier periods. 'The responsibilities that went with these were important enough for it to be necessary for the inhabitants to know exactly where the boundaries lay. Consequently a great deal of time and effort was expended in defining them - banks, ditches, hedge, walls, large cut stones, gates - all testify to this abiding need to know their precise course. Any alteration could be to the detriment of the inhabitants and could result in action - legal or illegal' (O'Hare 1993, 17). Townships were frequently subdivided into smaller hamlets, which would in many cases contain their own field systems with boundaries of the larger manors and parishes often subdivided into townships (Faull and Moorhouse 1981, 265). Within townships the territory itself was less likely to be altered. Alexander (1993, 46), notes that the mostly widely used boundary marker in the past, as today, were watercourses. 'In addition to being topographical boundaries...they were unmistakable and needed no extra landmarks to clarify them...Where the river changed course, the old course tended to remain the boundary' (Alexander 1993, 46).
The early tenurial history of Normanton is obscure, complicated by the fact that in 1086, while the vill is recorded to have been within the soke of Wakefield, the church itself was not, and so no earlier documents have been found which describe this boundary. However, a study of historical sources has allowed for the compilation of a series of maps of West Yorkshire, which infer that the boundary represented by Winn Beck was of considerable importance from the Anglo-Scandinavian period onwards, and is likely to reflect earlier divisions of the landscape (Faull and Moorhouse 1981, Volume 4).
As already mentioned, the reconstructed township boundaries of West Yorkshire show the beck dividing Normanton from the township of Snydale to the south-east. The larger parish of Normanton, dedicated to All Saints, encompassed the townships of Normanton, Snydale, and also Altofts to the north-west. In 1066, the area of Normanton is recorded as having been held by Godric and Knutr, with the area of Altofts, whilst Snydale to the south-east was held by Earnwig (Faull and Moorhouse 1981, map 18).
Throughout the investigation the development area of Normanton Golf Course was dominated by the remains of ridge and furrow cultivation which was visible as extant earthworks and ploughed out furrows. It is not known exactly how long this regime of agriculture was in use, but the earliest pottery recovered from the furrows dates from the 13th century which suggests that the original field system was medieval in date. The latest material recovered from a furrow comprised fragments of clay tobacco pipe (Intervention 13). Together with observations made concerning the pattern of earthworks and their spacing (Intervention 1), this indicates that the original field system may have continued in use for a considerable period and had undergone different schemes of cultivation and development into the post medieval period. This pattern of cultivation was recorded continuing on the slopes of the hill on the southern side of Whin Beck.
A series of four north-south aligned ditches were created which ran from Whin Beck across the development area. These features were later divisions of the site which may have formalised existing furrows in a system of enclosure, and are clearly shown on the 1852 Ordnance Survey map. The ditches also served to drain water into the stream.
A system of ceramic land drains was implemented in the 19th century. The majority of these were located in the arable fields in the western and southern portions of the site. However, several were recorded running along the base of furrows where extant earthworks survived across the golf course.
apc > mga > projects > normanton golf course > sequence summary
