West Midlands Regional Research Framework for Archaeology, Seminar 5: Dalwood 6
Medieval small towns (presentation).doc
The archaeology of medieval small towns in the west midlands
Hal Dalwood
Worcestershire County Council Archaeological Service, Woodbury,
University College Worcester, Henwick Grove, Worcester WR2 6AJ
Introduction
This paper is an overview of the archaeological research framework for smaller medieval towns in the West Midlands. It should be read in conjunction with Nigel Baker’s discussion of the major medieval towns (Baker, this web site).
There are sound reasons for viewing smaller towns as a settlement type that is distinct from both larger towns and rural settlements. The distinction is a useful one for both developing an archaeological research agenda for the medieval period and for ensuring effective professional practice.
We need a working definition of towns, and historians and archaeologists broadly agree that such a definition can best be defined in terms of their economic basis and social structure. Chris Dyer has offered this definition: ‘we define towns as permanently established concentrations of people, who were pursuing a variety of non-agricultural occupations, in which crafts and trades would predominate but which also included administrators, clergy, schoolteachers, prostitutes and other specialists. To would-be migrants, the towns beckoned because they gave opportunities for different skills and talents’ (Dyer 2002, 187-8).
Medieval towns should not be defined by simple criteria such as legal status, population size, physical dimensions, morphology, or the presence of distinctive types of monument (such as town walls). Although there is no difficulty in recognising large medieval towns as a distinctive type of settlement with complex social and economic structures, the full range of medieval urban settlements is not so well understood. The distinction between the smaller towns and rural settlements depends on an assessment of documentary sources, together with archaeological, architectural and topographic evidence (Dyer 1994, 292). Archaeologists need to recognise the distinctive character of smaller towns in terms of relevant research framework, not least because such an understanding is the starting point for archaeological research management.
Small towns were an important aspect of the medieval settlement pattern. They were numerous in medieval England, and it has been estimated that by 1300 about 20% of the population is estimated to have been town dwellers; perhaps half of them living in the 450 to 500 small towns across the country (Keene 2000). In England, historical research has identified the majority of medieval urban settlements through the distinctive legal status they often acquired (Beresford and Finberg 1973; Beresford 1981).
There has been a wealth of archaeological research in larger towns since the 1970s, and the results of this work have made a major impact on current knowledge of urban history (Ottaway 1992; Schofield and Vince 2003). However the contribution made by archaeological evidence from smaller medieval towns has been very small, and this cannot simply be explained as a low level of re-development. Across England, the archaeological potential of smaller medieval towns has been poorly understood by archaeologists, or even misunderstood. In the past, archaeological research in smaller towns has tended to focus on significant monuments, such as castles or monastic institutions, with little interest in investigating smaller towns as settlements with a range of social and economic functions that formed an important part of the medieval landscape.
However in recent years new approaches are being developed, and these have led to an increase in archaeological fieldwork. It has been argued that: ‘over time…this upswing in archaeological work in smaller towns will have a considerable academic impact’ (Gerrard 2003, 209).
Character of the evidence in the region
The West Midlands region contains numerous smaller towns, and in this respect it is typical of southern and midland England. The existence and the location of the majority of medieval smaller towns in the region is known from detailed documentary research based on state record (Beresford and Finberg 1973; Beresford 1981). Many aspects of individual settlement lordship, chronology, economy, and religious institutions are known from Victoria County Histories and local historical studies. Older historical research tended to focus on documentary evidence for the legal status of towns (such as the dates of borough charters). Modern historical research has adopted a broader framework, and previously ‘invisible’ towns have been revealed through detailed documentary research, such as Redditch (Worcs) and Knowle (Warks) (Dyer 1994).
Archaeological research in medieval towns of the west midlands began in the major towns in the late 1960s. However there was important early work in a number of small towns, with Droitwich (Worcs) seeing sustained and concentrated archaeological attention from the mid-1970s (Freezer 1981). The results of this programme led to a detailed understanding of salt production in this town (Hurst 1997; Woodiwiss 1992). However the archaeological attention focused on Droitwich was a special case in the west midlands region as a whole, and archaeological research in smaller medieval towns up to the 1990s was very limited.
The smaller medieval towns of Herefordshire, Worcestershire and Shropshire were the subject of an ‘extensive urban survey’ in the 1990s (the Central Marches Historic Towns Survey). The survey was part of an initiative launched in 1992 by English Heritage, and comprised a detailed study of over 50 urban settlements, excluding the three county towns (cf Schofield and Vince 2003, figure 8.3). The Central Marches Historic Towns Survey drew on archaeological information as well as a range of other sources, and used morphological analysis to develop an understanding of each town. This study led to a notable increase in archaeological fieldwork resulting from planning conditions: in some market towns in Worcestershire there were real developments in archaeological knowledge (Dalwood 2000).
The individual assessment reports produced as part of the Central Marches Historic Towns Survey synthesised archaeological information. For most towns, the quantity of existing archaeological information was rather limited. However the provision of synthesised information, and a coherent assessment of the archaeological potential of every identified medieval town, proved to be a sound basis for archaeological resource management (Dalwood and Atkin 1998). Currently, similar ‘extensive urban surveys’ are planned for other counties in the region.
Although there has been a demonstrable increase in archaeological understanding of some towns in the region since the 1990s, it is beyond the scope of this paper to provide a detailed assessment of the general pattern. However the contributions to the medieval seminar suggest that the level of archaeological fieldwork in smaller medieval towns is highly variable across the region
Methodological problems
The character of archaeological deposits in smaller medieval towns needs to be understood, as it has implications for archaeological research potential, for fieldwork methods, and for mitigation strategies. Archaeological deposits tend to be relatively shallow and widely dispersed in comparison to the centres of larger towns. The evidence revealed in narrow evaluation trenches may seem unimpressive. The careful targeting of trenches based on an understanding of the likely disposition of deposits, and the use of wide evaluation trenches, should be considered.
The survival of medieval building remains is highly variable, and cellars have often removed all deposits from the areas adjacent to street frontages. However medieval buildings have been excavated on street frontages, preserved beneath later buildings, and such survivals are rather unpredicatable.
In many urban plots in smaller towns there are few substantial features containing large artefact and ecofact assemblages. Pottery, for example, may largely survive as redeposited material in post-medieval soils, and sampling of such deposits should be considered as this material can build up a general understanding of settlement chronology and growth.
Similarly, palaeo-environmental material may be rare, and sampling strategies need to maximise the information where it survives. A few smaller towns contain fairly extensive waterlogged deposits (eg Much Wenlock, Shropshire) or have localised waterlogged deposits in town ditches or marshy areas on the urban fringe (eg Leominster, Herefordshire). Such areas are of particular importance in regional terms.
Research agenda.
A number of areas of for future research can be identified:
1. Towns in their landscapes. Sometimes towns are seen as distinct entities, separate from the rural landscapes: this is a modern perception. We need to understand small medieval towns within their landscape. They lay within a network of routeways which were the arteries of trade. The surrounding rural hinterland was served by each small town as a market centre, and this hinterland can be mapped from documentary research. The hinterland provided staple food for the town dwellers, and was the place of birth of a proportion of the urban inhabitants and so linked by ties of birth. Archaeological evidence has great potential for illuminating these urban-rural links, and thus not only throwing light on local economic systems but on social networks. However the development of such a broad research framework is a major challenge (Perring 2002).
Most of the smaller towns in the region were founded in the 11th or 12th century. The current understanding of the impetus for urban foundation comes from historical studies, which point to an active role for either the church, or the local aristocracy, in market town foundations. Archaeological approaches which are based on a detailed understanding of the local medieval landscapes in which towns were established may lead to a more sophisticated understanding of urban origins.
2. Medieval town planning: urban landscapes. Plan-form analysis based on 18th or 19th century plans allows a hypothetical interpretation of the medieval plan of smaller towns. These town plans are the result of conscious decisions. Such plan analysis is achievable for every smaller medieval town in the region, and allows comparison with towns with similar morphology. The archaeological study of towns has been characterised by this ‘landscape’ approach since the 1970s. On one hand such studies identify areas of archaeological sensitivity, such as monastic precincts or churchyards which may be obscured by later change, and therefore underlies planning decisions relating to modern development. On the other hand such studies provide the fundamental understanding of the urban landscape and as such are an essential context for archaeological fieldwork.
3. Buildings. Some medieval small towns in the region contain nationally significant groups of medieval buildings (eg Weobley, Herefordshire), and there is potential for developing a more coherent approach to research into medieval urban buildings in the region.
In many much of the medieval housing stock has been replaced. However the buildings of the urban poor do not survive anywhere. There is enormous potential to develop the understanding of medieval vernacular architecture through studies of standing buildings and archaeological evidence. Archaeology can contribute to the understanding of the building types of medieval towns where no medieval houses survive, and to the study of the changing use of building materials (such as the introduction of roof tiles).
4. Crafts and trades. Small medieval towns were urban communities, with most of the population engaged in crafts and trades. The range of occupations was not as great as the larger towns, and craft production was largely focused on the needs of the local rural population rather than the requirements of the elite. Although some crafts are largely invisible archaeologically, small towns provide clear evidence for how medieval townspeople made their living. For most medieval towns, documentary sources can only give the broadest insight into occupations: archaeology offers the possibility of obtaining fine-grained and comprehensive evidence.
5. Varied development patterns. Historical research suggests that small towns tended to develop in broadly similar ways, and have similar economic structures. Across the region, many small medieval towns had lost their urban functions by the 16th century, and had become villages. It would be difficult to ignore the role of the marcher lords in Herefordshire and Shropshire (and in Wales) in the foundation of new towns, which led to the distinctive distribution pattern of medieval towns in the region. The decline of the institution of marcher lordships clearly had a significant effect on the long-term survival of a high proportion of marcher boroughs.
However it is possible to see some other distinctive types of small town, such as inland ports on the River Severn. Archaeology can make a contribution to the understanding of these urban settlements. In addition there are few ‘specialised’ small towns with unusual economic functions: Droitwich (Worcs) is probably the best known in the region, and archaeological study of medieval salt production is well-established (Hurst 1997).
6. Developing research agendas for smaller towns. Smaller medieval towns were not as complex and varied as larger towns in terms of their social structure. Smaller towns were the centres of local areas and tended to be similar to each other. One fruitful archaeological approach to smaller market towns would be work within a comparative framework, seeing different towns as examples of the same settlement type. The goal could be to synthesise archaeological information from a number of different small towns across the region, in order to develop the understanding in a number of thematic research areas (for example food supply, or building types). Such approaches would focus on existing information and offers the potential to produce insights into apsects of towns that are relevant across the region.
References
Beresford, M W, 1981 English medieval boroughs: a handlist: revisions 1973-81, Urban History Yearbook (1981), 59-65
Beresford, M W, and Finberg, H P R, 1973 English medieval boroughs: a handlist, Newton Abbot
Dalwood, H, 2000 The archaeology of small towns in Worcestershire, Trans Worcestershire Archaeological Society, 3rd ser, 17, 215-221
Dalwood, H, and Atkin, M, 1998 The impact of extensive urban survey in Hereford and Worcester. Hereford and Worcester County Archaeological Service report
Dyer, C, 1994 The hidden trade of the middle ages: evidence from the west midlands, in C Dyer, Everyday life in medieval England, London: Hambledon, 283-303
Dyer, C, 2002 Making a living in the medieval ages, London: Yale
Freezer, D F, 1981 Droitwich, in J Schofield and D Palliser (eds) Recent archaeological research in English towns, London: Council for British Archaeology, 33-5
Gerrard, C, 2003 Medieval archaeology: understanding traditions and contemporary approaches, London: Routledge