Herefordshire Archaeology, is the county archaeological service maintained by Herefordshire Council. The service exists to assess, investigate, document, conserve and promote the archaeology and historic landscape of Herefordshire. This website provides information and resources on different aspects of the archaeological landscape and historic environment of Herefordshire; including access to the Herefordshire Historic Environment Record and information on the work of Herefordshire Archaeology.

The Historic Environment Record is a publicly accessible data service containing the most comprehensive available information on the historic environment of Herefordshire. The HER Search function allows access to the Historic Environment Record's databases; which includes the monuments, sources and the historic field names. 

The Events, Projects and Publications pages include the latest archaeological publications from the county, details of forthcoming events, and background information on projects.

Herefordshire's Past pages contain information on Herefordshire history and can be used as a starting point for research or to assist in educational activities.

The Information and Resources pages have information for archaeologists and researchers working in Herefordshire, information for Historic Environment tourists, and information of interest to metal detectorists, and more.

Herefordshire Archaeology is the county archaeological service maintained by Herefordshire Council. It is part of the Built and Natural Environment team in the Council's Economy, Communities and Corporate Directorate. The service exists to assess, investigate, document, conserve and promote the archaeology and historic landscape of the county and cathedral city. The service currently comprises a core staff of three: the Archaeological Advisor (who deals with planning enquiries and development advice), the Archaeological Projects Manager (who deals with research projects, Countryside Stewardship and partnership projects), and the Historic Environment Record Officer.

The service is based at the Herefordshire Archive and Record Centre (HARC), Fir Tree Lane, Rotherwas, Hereford, HR2 6LA.

The vision for Herefordshire Archaeology is for a service that:

• provides a regulatory and investigative framework for improved understanding and management of the County's archaeological resource.
• actively contributes to such understanding and conservation, and acts widely as an advocate for the local historic environment.
• provides public access to information on the resource via the County Historic Environment Record, and events, activities and publications.

Herefordshire Archaeology provides:

• an advisory service for historic conservation, actively pursuing effective resource management and supporting regeneration initiatives.
• a documentation and information service, centered upon the County Historic Environment Record, and its website Herefordshire Through Time.
• an investigative and community service, with fieldwork, conservation works, local heritage projects, public events and productions.

Conservation Advisory Activity

Herefordshire Archaeology provide conservation advice. This includes advice on the archaeological and historic landscape implications of development within and beyond the planning system, including in respect to farming and forestry. The Archaeological Advisor also manages the Hereford Area of Archaeological Importance, and the Archaeological Projects Manager advises on the longer-term management of important historic landscapes and ancient monuments, produces Conservation Management Plans, and deals with Countryside Stewardship matters.

Data Management; The Historic Environment Record

The Historic Environment Record (HER) is an integral part of the county archaeological service, it is the most comprehensive available index to Herefordshire's historic environment. The HER is based around a Geographic Information System (GIS) database and consists of a paper and digitised records of all known archaeological and historic sites in Herefordshire, spanning the full range of human activity in the county. Records have been drawn from a wide variety of sources, including reports of archaeological fieldwork, books, journal articles, maps (including historic maps), aerial photographs, national lists and registers, student dissertations and field observations from antiquarian and modern recorders. It is a constantly evolving database and records are often added and updated.

Herefordshire's HER was originally held by the Museum service but since the 1980s it has been maintained by the archaeology service of the relevant local authority, first by the former Hereford and Worcester County Council and since 1998, by Herefordshire Council. The HER seeks to inform the management and enjoyment of the historic environment by providing a documentation and information service for members of the public, professional archaeologists from external organisations, colleagues within Herefordshire Archaeology, and other staff within the Council who are carrying out historic environment-related work. The HER is used to provide information for a wide range of purposes, including development control, agri-environment and other conservation schemes, academic research, local history, tourism, education and outreach.

Investigative and Community Activity 

The investigative aspects of the work of the county archaeological service are varied, and are delivered by means of a series of projects and partnerships. The Archaeological Projects Manager delivers much of the service agenda for investigation and recording (including survey and excavation), research, outreach, interpretation and working with local communities.

Herefordshire Archaeology is engaged in work that aims to raise public awareness and appreciation of the county's archaeology and historic landscape. Forthcoming events, including an annual symposium, monthly historic landscape walks, and other engagements can be found on the events page of this website. A series of archaeological project summaries and reports is produced each year.

Email: julian.cotton@herefordshire.gov.uk.

Telephone: 01432 383350.

Tim Hoverd BA ACIfA, Archaeological Projects Manager: Tim studied archaeology at both Bournemouth and Sheffield Universities, graduating from Sheffield in 1992. He worked for the City of Hereford Archaeology Unit from 1992 to 1996 and for Archaeological Investigations Ltd. from 1996 to 1999. In 1999 Tim joined Herefordshire Archaeology as the Archaeological Projects Officer, a role which involves him in a wide range of partnership field projects and public/community events.

Email: thoverd@herefordshire.gov.uk.

Telephone: 01432 383352.

Peter Reavill BA, MA MCIfA, Peter is a landscape and public archaeologist as well as a small finds specialist. He studied history and archaeology as an undergraduate at the University of Wales: Bangor (1995-8) and undertook a master’s degree in Landscape Archaeology at the University of Sheffield (2002-3). He has worked as a field archaeologist, archaeological advisor, landscape consultant, and post excavation specialist concentrating on both rural and urban sites and assemblages from Wales, Ireland and Southern England. Peter was the Finds Liaison Officer for Herefordshire and Shropshire working for the British Museum’s Portable Antiquities Scheme between 2003 and 2022. In this role, he worked closely with both Herefordshire Museums and Herefordshire Archaeology supporting chance finders of archaeological objects and treasure. He still acts as a national finds specialist concentrating on material from the prehistoric periods.

Peter has belonged to the Chartered Institute for Archaeologists since 2002 and has held their highest grade of professional membership (MCIfA) since 2010. Those who gain this level of professional accreditation have specific extensive knowledge and specialisms, as well as a well-attributed record of substantial responsibility, accountability and experience within historic environment practice. In the past Peter has edited West Midlands Archaeology and his most recent co-edited publication is The Public Archaeology of Treasure

Peter's present post with the team concentrates on the management and development of the counties Historic Environment Record. 

Email: peter.reavill@herefordshire.gov.uk

Telephone: 01432 380130.

The News, Events and Projects pages are divided into separate sections for the three topics.

• Events includes information on various Herefordshire Archaeological events.
• Projects provides background and general information on major projects carried out by Herefordshire Archaeology.
• Publications contains an easy to access list of accessible Herefordshire Archaeology publications

Please note: In response to the COVID-19 (coronavirus) outbreak, in accordance with government guidance and in the interest of public safety. All walks will be cancelled and none further will take place until further notice. Please check back for updates and we hope to see you when they return.

Since April 1999 Herefordshire Council, Archaeology Section has been organising a series of morning, afternoon and evening walks throughout the county. These walks are designed to introduce members of the public to the constantly changing aspects of life, both past and present, that influence the type of landscape in which we live. People from the local community and from further afield are welcome. A reasonable level of fitness is required as some of the routes are over steep or uneven ground. Dogs are welcome on short leads (unless stated for specific walks).

These walks are free but due to the large numbers who regularly attend these Historic Landscape Walks, we have had to implement a booking procedure.

If you would like to attend one or more of the above walks you will need to reserve a place by calling archaeology on 01432 383 352 or sending an email to Tim Hoverd. Bookings will be taken only over the 7 days prior to each walk. If you book and then find that you cannot attend a walk please let us know so that we can let someone else attend.

Opportunities to Volunteer

A number of our events and projects rely on volunteers to lend a hand and help. Archaeological work can be surveys, excavations or assiting the Historic Environment Record in data entry and historic research.

You can find below a list of current opportunities to volunteer. If you are interesting in contributing to any of these please contact the Archaeological Projects Manager, Tim Hoverd on 01432 383352 or thoverd@herefordshire.gov.uk.

This section contains background and general information on selected projects carried out by Herefordshire Archaeology. Some projects are jointly funded by bodies such as Historic England or education bodies, who are working in partnership with Herefordshire Archaeology. There are various community-based projects that provide opportunities for members of the public to get involved in different ways. Contact details are provided where this is the case.

The Hereford Archaeological Research Framework

The Hereford Archaeological Research Framework document is a brief review of current understanding of the archaeology of the city of Hereford - its significance, its potential, and, above all, its gaps and its limitations, with a view to the identification of research priorities for the immediate future.

Eaton Camp Fieldwork 2012

Excavation work carried out at Eaton Camp, Eaton Bishop in May 2012 was carried out by Herefordshire Archaeology on behalf of the Eaton Camp Historical Society and funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund.

Hereford City Wall Conservation Management

During 2009 and 2010 Herefordshire Archaeology, with funding from English Heritage, carried out a study of the city walls and prepared a plan for their future. The plan addresses the issues of the physical condition of the walls and their maintenance, the need for improved public access and the use of the walls as a historic asset for enhancing civic pride and sustaining the economic development of the city as a whole.

The recommendations include urgent repairs to some sections of the walls, providing better public access and the creation of a signage scheme for interpreting the walls as well as a self-guided city walls walk.

Olchon Valley Excavation, Summer 2010

During the summer of 2010, Herefordshire Archaeology and Manchester University collaborated on the excavation of a prehistoric site in the Olchon Valley in south-west Herefordshire.

Credenhill Iron Age Hill Fort Excavations

The Woodland Trust was been awarded a Heritage Lottery Fund grant to conserve and study Credenhill Park Wood, which it purchased in 2003. Credenhill hill fort - the largest in the Welsh Marches - stands within this wood. A six-week archaeological excavation was carried out at the fort in August and September 2007, under the direction of Peter Dorling of Herefordshire Archaeology. The team consisted of Herefordshire Archaeology staff members, local volunteers and Cardiff University students. These excavations are part of a longer-term project being undertaken in partnership with the Woodland Trust. This wider project will also involve the removal of conifer trees (planted in the 1960s) from much of the fort, and the restoration of the surrounding woodland to mixed deciduous cover.

The 2007 excavations featured in a Time Team Special documentary about hill forts that was made over the summer of that year and included footage of other Herefordshire sites. The programme was broadcast on Channel 4 television in June 2008.

Excavation at New Weir Iron Works, Symonds Yat West

Between April and May 2009, Herefordshire Archaeology carried out a four week season of excavation at New Weir Iron Works at Symonds Yat West.

The aim of the excavation was to try to identify areas where specific processes were taking place, to examine the evidence of those processes and to get some idea of how the site functioned. Little work has been carried out on forges of this date. This information gained therefore fed into the long-term management of the site and into its interpretation.

The site was in use from at least the 1590s up until the 1800s. It was known to be a forge for refining iron from nearby furnaces and to have incorporated a slitting mill, probably for nail and/or wire production, and later a rolling mill. The various forges, mills and hammers were powered by water wheels.

The project is an element of the "Overlooking the Wye" project funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund. This Landscape Partnership Scheme was designed to improve and promote enjoyment, understanding, accessibility, involvement, conservation and management of the historic environment in the landscape of the lower Wye Valley.

The Lower Lugg Valley Archaeology and Aggregates Project

The aim of the Lower Lugg Archaeology and Aggregates Project (which ran from 2006 to 2009) was to improve understanding, management, protection and promotion of the visible and buried remains of past human settlement within the Lower Lugg Valley. The project was funded by the Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund (as administered by English Heritage), and was managed by Herefordshire Archaeology (the archaeology service of Herefordshire Council).

The project stemmed from the development since the 1980s of large scale gravel quarrying in the Lower Lugg flood plain. Spectacular archaeological discoveries at Wellington Quarry have included the 1200-year-old remains of two of Britain's earliest known watermills, a Roman country estate, and the 4000-year-old burial of a local tribal leader.

These finds have confirmed that the Lower Lugg Valley has long been a significant area of intensive human settlement, and that nationally-important archaeological remains of this activity still survive. At the same time, given ongoing use of the Lower Lugg landscape for modern purposes such as gravel quarrying, farming and residential development, it is clear that effective management of the archaeological legacy of the Lower Lugg is a significant future challenge.

City of Hereford Urban Archaeological Database Project

This was a data-cleaning and enhancement project, commenced in 2006 and completed in October 2008. It was funded by English Heritage as part of their national Urban Archaeological Strategy programme. New SMR records have where necessary been added and existing records checked, reorganised and re-mapped such that, it is hoped, virtually every archaeological trench excavated in the city and historic suburbs, and every monument, are now accurately located on Herefordshire Council's GIS.

Herefordshire Aerial Archaeological Survey, 2007 - 2011

An English Heritage-funded programme of aerial survey allowed the recording of archaeological sites and landscapes. The programme aimed to provide a record of cropmarks, large-scale projects in the landscape, provide support to urban characterisation projects and to maintain a record of sites under threat. 

A significant development from previous aerial survey projects is the availability of a pilot at Gloucestershire Airport. This has enabled us to start to get a much more systematic coverage for the south of the county, which until now has been very sparsely covered by reconnaissance flights. Many previously unrecorded earthworks have been now been photographed and will be added to Herefordshire's Historic Environment Record.

Roman Families Project 2014

The Roman Families Project was carried out by Herefordshire Archaeology on behalf of Herefordshire Council. It was made possible by funding from the Ministry of Defence Armed Forces Community Covenant Grant.

The Roman Families Project aimed to involve and attract families, youth groups and local inhabitants of the Credenhill Garrison community in the archaeological investigation of Roman Credenhill, in particular the area immediately around the Roman town of Kenchester (Magnis). The project aim was to enable families from both the military and civilian realms (both adults and youth) to work as a team within an entirely different setting and acquire new skills and experiences through the process of archaeological investigation and event days. The project focused on an enclosure site within the Roman Park Playing Fields, Credenhill; a park owned by Herefordshire Council and maintained by the Credenhill Parish Council. Investigations of the site started in April 2014 with a geophysical survey. The results of this survey were used to guide a community excavation carried out between 7th and 27th July 2014. This report discusses the results of that excavation, along with the subsequent post-excavation analysis.

Archaeology at Croft Castle

In 2000 the Croft Estate comprised 560 hectares of ground that has recently been expanded with the purchase of further former estate ground near Lucton. Two winter seasons of archaeological survey across the estate in 2001 and 2002 have demonstrated the remarkable preservation of earthwork remains across the five kilometre east-west extent of the estate. The major divisions of the area include now heavily planted land leased to the Forestry Commission, open common and former coppices, the parkland in the environs of the mansion, the surviving wood-pasture in and around Croft Ambrey, and arable fields and pasture on the lower slopes.

By the end of the 2002 season, both an inner and an outer ward of the medieval castle had been located with a moderate degree of confidence. Traces of narrow ditches and pits lines beneath the later demolition deposits and workshop area appear to indicate the presence of timber structures that represent an early (and possibly timber) phase of the castle. The mortuary Inventory for Sir James Croft in 1590 survives in a fragmentary state in the British Library. Research by Valerie Goodbury indicates that the rooms listed include both a hall and a chapel. A glazed heraldic floor tile fragment from the excavation matches those now partially flooring the parish church, and this, as well as the stained glass, may have derived from this chapel.

The excavation clearly indicates that we can trust the dendrochronology to specify the date of construction of the present mansion. This therefore means that the earliest terraced garden of the Elizabethan period belongs to the demolished mansion. Moreover, the Restoration period formal garden clearly used in its basal layers brick and tile (and other) demolition material from the same mansion, while being planned outwards from the present mansion.

Perhaps the most remarkable conclusion from the 2002 season's investigations concerns the present mansion. Herbert Croft, the second son of the Sir William killed in the Civil War, was a renowned cleric. He famously shamed Parliamentary soldiery intent on defiling Hereford Cathedral when Dean there, and was praised for his sober manner, by John Aubrey in his Brief Lives. It is no doubt of some significance that Herbert was appointed Bishop of Hereford in 1661. It was said that he used Croft as his country home when in the county, but not in residence at Hereford. As such, not only is Croft Castle a late addition to the corpus of Spenserian mansions, but it is also an unusual example of a mid-seventeenth century bishop's palace.

The "Rotherwas Ribbon"

The Rotherwas Ribbon is an unusual and enigmatic Neolithic or Early Bronze Age linear structure consisting of a 6 to 8 metre wide burnt stone surface located within a hollow/cut. A 67m length of the Ribbon was identified, uncovered and partly excavated in 2007 during a PPG16 supported archaeological recording exercise in advance of the construction of the Rotherwas Access Road, Herefordshire. The structure was associated with a significant bone, pottery and flint artefact assemblage, and also appeared to be spatially and chronologically linked with a group of eight pits (six of which were filled with burnt stone) which were located immediately adjacent to the Ribbon. The Ribbon was also cut by two later (Iron Age/Roman?) ditches on broadly the same alignment, and itself cut an earlier linear feature. A group of six radiocarbon dates (obtained from carbonised hazel samples from two of the pits and a charcoal spread on the Ribbon surface) lie within a late 3^rd/early 2^nd millennium BC date range, and suggest that the last use of the feature was during this period. 

Many of Herefordshire Archaeology reports can now be found online on the Archaeology Data Service (ADS).

1999

• Ray, K. & Hoverd, T. 1999. Archaeological Works at Sutton St. Michael, Herefordshire 1999: An Interim Statement. HAR: 01

2000

• Hoverd, T. 2000. Investigations at Mere Hill, Aymestrey. HAR: 02
• Hoverd, T. 2000. Ashgrove Quarry, Marden: Preliminary Archaeological Investigations in 1999. HAR: 03
• Hoverd, T. 2000. Mansell Lacy Medieval Settlement: An Earthwork Assessment. HAR: 04
• Hoverd, T. 2000. Earthwork and Structural Survey at Walk Mill Farm, Ewyas Harold. HAR: 05
• Hoverd, T. & Roseff, R. 2000. The Venn Farm, Bishops Frome. Earthwork Survey and Archaeological Field Reconnaissance. HAR: 06
• Ray, K. & Hoverd, T. 2000. Mounboon & Lower Witherstone Farms, Little Dewchurch: An Historic Landscape Appraisal, HAR: 07
• Ray, K. & Hoverd, T. 2000. Archaeological Reconnaissance Surveys of Sites in Herefordshire, 1999. HAR: 08
• Ray, K. & Hoverd, T. 2000. A Project Assessment for Research by Eardisland Oral History Society at Burton Court, Eardisland, Herefordshire. HAR: 09
• Ray, K. & Hoverd, T. 2000. Archaeological Observations in the Walterstone area: An Historic Landscape Walk Report. HAR: 10
  
• Hoverd, T. 2000. A Geophysical Survey at Longtown. HAR: 16

2002

• Hoverd, T. 2002. Herefordshire Woodlands Pilot Scheme: Phase 1. Lea Bailey Inclosure. HAR: 51
• Hoverd, T. 2002. Herefordshire Woodlands Pilot Scheme: Phase 1. Wigmore Rolls. HAR: 52
• Hoverd, T. 2002. Herefordshire Woodlands Pilot Scheme: Phase 1. Nether Wood, Aconbury. HAR: 53
• Hoverd, T. 2002. Herefordshire Woodlands Pilot Scheme: Phase 1. Rodd Wood. HAR: 54

2003

• Ray, K. & Hoverd, T. 2003. Croft Castle Estate: An Archaeological Survey 2001-2. Volume 1. HAR: 49
• Ray, K. & Hoverd, T. 2003. Croft Castle Estate: An Archaeological Survey 2001-2. Volume 2. HAR: 49
• Hoverd, T. 2003. An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of Moccas Estate. HAR: 68
• Williams, D. N. 2003. Herefordshire Woodlands Pilot Study: Phase 2. Sned Wood, Aymestrey. HAR: 75
• Williams, D. N. 2003. Herefordshire Woodlands Pilot Study: Phase 2. Wapley Hill Wood, Staunton-on-Arrow. HAR: 83
• Cotton, J. 2003. 'Edgar Street Grid' Hereford: An Archaeological Issues Paper. HAR: 90
• Hoverd, T. 2003. An Archaeological Survey of Herefordshire Woodlands in the Malvern Hills AONB, 1999-2002. HAR: 101
• White, P. 2003. The Leen, Pembridge: A Whole Farm Archaeological Survey. HAR: 103

2006

• Atkinson, C. 2006. Garway Hill Common, Garway, Herefordshire: An Archaeological Evaluation. HAR: 214

2007

• Atkinson, C. 2007. Crafta Webb, Bredwardine Herefordshire: An Archaeological Investigation. HAR: 227
• Atkinson, C. 2007. Herefordshire Commons Survey. Hergest Ridge Common, Kington Rural CP. HAR: 232
  
• Bapty, I. & Preece, N. 2007 Past and Present: Quarries, Archaeology and the Lower Lugg Valley.

2008

• Rimmington, N. 2008. Little Doward Camp, Ganarew Parish. HAR: 229
• Preece, N & Rimmington, N. 2008. Herefordshire Historic Farmsteads Characterisation Project Report. HAR: 261

2009

• Hoverd, T. & Thomas, J. 2009. Olchon Court Bronze-Age Cairn Summary.

2010

• Atkinson, C. 2010. Bredwardine: Church Orchard. A Community Field Investigation. HAR: 229

2011

• Lello, R. & Williams, D. 2011. Further Lower Brockhampton: A Survey of the Moated Site Complex, Bromyard, Herefordshire. HAR: 99
• Hoverd, T. & Ray, K. 2011. Archaeological Investigations at New Weird, Herefordshire. HAR: 181
• Bapty, I. & Atkinson, C. 2011. Further investigations of the Rotherwas Ribbon. Stage 1a: LiDAR Survey. HAR: 280
• Bapty, I. & Williams, D. N. 2011. Further Investigation of the Rotherwas Ribbon. Stage 2: 2010 Excavation Assessment/Interim Report. HAR: 281
• Atkinson, C. 2011. Old Bredenbury: A Community Investigation. HAR: 290
• Atkinson, C. 2011. Eaton Camp, Ruckhall, Eaton Bishop CP. Stage 1: Field Survey and LiDAR. HAR: 296
• Atkinson, C. 2011. Eaton Camp, Ruckhall, Eaton Bishop CP. Geophysical Survey. HAR: 296
• Hoverd, T. & Williams, D. 2011. Evaluation Excavations at Lower Brockhampton, Bromyard, Herefordshire. HAR: 298
• Hoverd, T. 2011. Further investigations at Merlin's Cave, Symond's Yat, West Herefordshire. HAR: 299
• Dorling, P, N. 2011. New Weir Forge, Whitchurch, Herefordshire: A Report on Excavations in 2009 and 2010. HAR: 306
• Baker, N. 2011. Hereford's City Defences: A Conservation Management Plan. HAR: 000
• Baker, N. 2011. Hereford's City Defences: A Conservation Management Plan: Gazetteer Part One. HAR: 000
• Baker, N. 2011. Hereford's City Defences: A Conservation Management Plan: Gazetteer Part Two. HAR: 000

2012

• Dorling, P. Cotton, J & Rimmington, N. 2012. Little Doward Hillfort, Ganarew, Herefordshire: A Report on Excavations in 2009 and 2011. HAR: 295
• Hoverd, T. 2012. Further investigations at Merlin's Cave, Symond's Yat West, Herefordshire. HAR: 299
• Atkinson, C. & Bishop, L. 2012. An Exploratory Excavation of The Knapp, Bredwardine. HAR: 300
• Atkinson, C. 2012. Whitman's Hill Coppice, Cradley CP: A Woodland Survey Report. HAR: 307
• Atkinson, C. 2012. An Exploratory Excavation at Whitman's Hill Coppice, Cradley. HAR: 311
• Bapty, I. 2012. Rotherwas Industrial Estate Heritage Assessment and Conservation Management Plan. HAR: 312 [DRAFT]
• Dorling, P. 2012. Eaton Camp, Ruckhall, Eaton Bishop, Herefordshire: A Summary Report on Excavations in May 2012. HAR: 313

2013

• Baker, N. 2013. An Archaeological Research Framework for the City of Hereford. HAR: 310
• Atkinson, C. 2013. 'The Dinedor Origins Project'. Site of Medieval Village, Dinedor: An Archaeological Field Survey. HAR: 327
• Atkinson, C. 2013. 'The Dinedor Origins Project'. Site of Medieval Village, Dinedor: A Geophysics Survey. HAR: 328

2014

• Atkinson, C. 2014. 'The Dinedor Origins Project'. Site of Medieval Village, Dinedor: A Community Excavation. HAR: 330

• Dorling, P. 2014. Eaton Camp, Ruckhall, Eaton Bishop, Herefordshire: A report on Excavations in May 2012 and June 2013. HAR: 332
• Dorling, P. 2014. A Conservation Management Plan for "Leintwardfine Roman Station of Bravinium" (Branogenium), Leintwardine, Herefordshire. HAR: 341

2015

• Atkinson, C. Williams, D. Lantz, G. & Baker, N. 2015. 'The Roman Families Project' Roman Park Playing Fields, Credenhill: A Community Excavation. HAR: 347
• Hoverd, T. 2015. A report upon a Post-Roman cemetery at Merlin's Cave, Symond's Yat West, Herefordshire. HAR: 351

________________________________________________________________________________________________

2025

• Reavill P. & Hoverd T. 2025: Forestry Commission Project K – Creating SHINE data for Low Sensitivity Areas in England: Herefordshire. HAR 420

Historic Environment Today (HET) was Herefordshire Archaeology's newsletter which ran from 1998 to 2012, it contained information on archaeology of Herefordshire and the activities of the unit. The whole archive can now be found here. 

Volume 1

• HET. Volume 1. Issue 1. October 1998.

Volume 2

• HET. Volume 2. Issue 1. February 1999.
• HET. Volume 2. Issue 2. May 1999.
• HET. Volume 2. Issue 3. September 1999.
• HET. Volume 2. Issue 4. December 1999.

Volume 3

• HET. Volume 3. Issue 1. May 2000.
• HET. Volume 3. Issue 2. August 2000.
• HET. Volume 3. Issue 3. October 2000.
• HET. Volume 3. Issue 4. December 2000.

Volume 4

• HET. Volume 4. Issue 1. March 2001.
• HET. Volume 4. Issue 2. June 2001.
• HET. Volume 4. Issue 3. September 2001.
• HET. Volume 4. Issue 4. November 2001.

Volume 5

• HET. Volume 5. Issue 1. April 2002.
• HET. Volume 5. Issue 2. July 2002.
• HET. Volume 5. Issue 3. October 2002.
• HET. Volume 5. Issue 4. December 2002.

Volume 6

• HET. Volume 6. Issue 1. May 2003.
• HET. Volume 6. Issue 2. July 2003.
• HET. Volume 6. Issue 3. October 2003.
• HET. Volume 6. Issue 4. January 2004.

Volume 7

• HET. Volume 7. Issue 1. April 2004.
• HET. Volume 7. Issue 2. June 2004.
• HET. Volume 7. Issue 3. October 2004.
• HET. Volume 7. Issue 4. December 2004.

Volume 8

• HET. Volume 8. Issue 1. April 2005.
• HET. Volume 8. Issue 2. July 2005.
• HET. Volume 8. Issue 3. October 2005.
• HET. Volume 8. Issue 4. December 2005.

Volume 9

• HET. Volume 9. Issue 1. June 2009.
• HET. Volume 9. Issue 2. September 2009.

Volume 10

• HET. Volume 10. Issue 1. May 2007.
• HET. Volume 10. Issue 2. August 2007.
• HET. Volume 10. Issue 3. October 2007.
• HET. Volume 10. Issue 4. December 2007.

Volume 11

• HET. Volume 11. Issue 1. April 2008.
• HET. Volume 11. Issue 2. July 2008.
• HET. Volume 11. Issue 3. August 2008.
• HET. Volume 11. Issue 4. December 2008.

Volume 12

• HET. Volume 12. Issue 1. May 2009.
• HET. Volume 12. Issue 2. October 2009.
• HET. Volume 12. Issue 3. November 2009.
• HET. Volume 12. Issue 4. April 2010.

Volume 13

• HET. Volume 13. Issue 1. October 2010.
• HET. Volume 13. Issue 2. January 2011.

Volume 14

• HET. Volume 14. Issue 1. Summer 2011.
• HET. Volume 14. Issue 2. Spring 2012.

Volume 15

• HET. Volume 15. Issue 1. Autumn 2012.

Herefordshire Historic Environment Record Database

The Historic Environment Record (HER) is a record of all known archaeological and historic sites in Herefordshire. This online version of the HER's monuments database gives a summary description of each site and a list of the sources of information used to compile it. Where archaeological work has been carried out, this is also recorded.

Search the Monuments Database >>

Search Sources Database >>

Field-Names and Landowners Database

This database allows you to search for information on historic field-names and landowners for the county. Most of the field-names in the database come from the tithe maps, which date to the years around 1840. The names were collected by the Herefordshire Field-Name Survey from the original maps and surveys held in Herefordshire Record Office. The general editor of the Survey was Ruth E. Richardson.

Search the Field-Names and Landowners Database >>

Use of the Online Databases

Please note that the information shown in the Herefordshire Through Time online databases is not suitable for commercial or Neighbourhood Planning use. Organisations or individuals requiring information for commercial, professional or planning purposes should contact the HER directly to arrange an enquiry by means of the relevant proforma. You can also arrange a visit to consult the full Historic Environment Record and associated holdings. Please see information for contractors or read the HER Guidance Document.

Public Access

Please note that inclusion on this website does not imply public access to any of the archaeological sites. Most of the sites are on private property and are not open to the general public.

Database Conditions of Use

Use of the searchable online Herefordshire Historic Environment database is subject to conditions. To read our Conditions of Use statement, click here. 

Before using this search facility, please read our Database Conditions of Use. Contractors must note that the online databases are not suitable for commercial purposes. In these cases, a formal enquiry must be requested using the HER Data Request proforma and the HER Licence proforma on the Information for Contractors page.  

To search the HER

Use the text boxes and drop-down menus in the search form to select sites matching specific criteria, such as Roman villas or Medieval sites in Hereford. You can search in two ways:

Search by HER Number

Use this option to search for a specific monument for which you already know the HER number. Type the number into the box and click on the "Start search" button.

Advanced Search

This allows you to search for all monuments in the database that meet your chosen criteria. There are a number of options you can choose from:

• Site Name: type in a keyword from the site name.
• Parish: select one or more parishes from the drop-down menu. To choose more than one, hold down the Ctrl key while clicking on your mouse.
• Grid reference: see the instructions on the Search page.
• Period: select periods from the drop-down menus to define a date range to be searched. Tick Unknown date and/or Undated to include those records in your search. Choose Narrow to include only sites whose dates are wholly within your chosen period, or Broad to include sites whose dates may extend beyond the chosen period.
• Site Type: choose one or more site types from the drop-down menu, or type the site type you are interested in into the box. Please note that the search results will return all records that exactly match your chosen site type and all records that are sub-categories of that site type. For example, searching on "barrow" will return records indexed as "barrow", "long barrow", "round barrow", and so on. Some search results may include related sub-categories with different names, for example searching on "castle" will also return records indexed as "motte and bailey", "keep" and "ringwork". These sub-categories are based on a nationally-agreed system of definitions produced by English Heritage. Note that if you only want to search on a sub-category, you must choose that specific term from the drop-down list, for example if you are only interested in long barrows, you need to choose "long barrow", not "barrow".

When you have defined your search criteria, click on the "Start search" button to run the search.

Sources

In addition to searching the database of Historic Environment records it is possible to make an independent search of Sources. These include both bibliographic references in conventional journals and books, and unpublished "grey literature" reports, such as excavation and survey reports housed in the HER offices in Hereford. Some unpublished reports are available to download from this web site. All HER sites are linked to a source, but not all sources are linked to HER sites yet.

Hints

• Once you have run your search, you can click on underlined green text to see more details.
• Many combinations of search terms will not exist (e.g. there are no Roman railway stations), so it is usually advisable to start with a broad search, then refine it further.
• Use the Browse Monuments links. These take you through a series of linked pages listing the sites by location, period or type, so you can move through successive pages listing (for instance):

1. Summary of sites in All Parishes;
2. All sites in Ledbury parish;
3. All sites in Ledbury of Roman date;
4. All kilns in Ledbury of Roman date.

Search Monuments here >>

Sources are the items of information that have been used to compile the monument records (and other related records) in the Historic Environment Record database. These include both bibliographic references in conventional journals and books, and unpublished "grey literature" reports, such as excavation and survey reports housed in the HER offices in Hereford. Records of the individual sources are held in a separate database. You can search this database in two ways:

Search by Source Number

This allows you to search for more information on a specific source for which you already have the Source record number. Source numbers relating to each monument are listed at the end of the monument's HER entry. To carry out your search, type the number of your chosen source into the box and click on the "Start search" button.

Advanced Search

This allows you to search the Sources database in a more general way, retrieving groups of records that fit search criteria defined by you. A number of options are available:

• Author: search for a keyword from an author's name (usually the surname)
• Title: search for a keyword taken from the source's title
• Date: search for a specific year (it is not possible to define the date more closely than this)
• Source type: search for a particular source type, such as aerial photographs, by selecting from the drop-down menu
• Series: this search is only available when searching for the source type Unpublished Reports. When Unpublished Reports is selected, the Series drop-down menu is activated, allowing you to highlight your selection from the list of organisations.

You can choose to search on just one of these options, or on a combination of two or more. When you have finished defining your search, click on the "Start search" button to run the search.

Search Sources here >>

Most of the field-names in the database come from the Tithe maps, which date to about 1840. They were collected by the Herefordshire Field-Name Survey, organised by members of the Archaeological Research Section of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club (general editor Ruth E. Richardson), between 1987 and 1993 from the original maps and surveys held in Herefordshire Record Office. We are very grateful to the Research Group for allowing us to use their work. They were then typed up over two years by HER volunteers working from home. The landowner names were collected by Geoff Gwatkin from the original apportionments (surveys) and given to the HER. Geoff has now produced a series of 19th century parish maps with the field-names and list of landowners, and these are available for purchase directly from Geoff Gwatkin (e-mail: geoff.gwatkin@btinternet.com; website: http://www.geoffgwatkinmaps.co.uk/).

The maps are far more informative than a mere list of names. Looking at them you can see the Medieval village, i.e. where the common fields, woods, tracks, meadows, village centre, outlying farms and quarries lay. Seeing the field-names all together in the database can tell us much. It is possible to search for curiosities (were there any gibbets, saffron fields, tobacco plants, lime kilns?), to compare the amount of meadow or pasture between parishes, and to look for industrial sites (e.g. glassworks), crops (e.g. flax, hemp) or particular plants (e.g. juniper, lime). The landowner names are also useful, as in list form it is possible to search quickly for a particular person and to get some idea of who owned what, and where.

How to locate the field

Fields were grouped by landowner, so consecutive numbers are often scattered about the parish. There is no grid reference specific to the field name; you will need the hard copy map to find the location of the field. The maps are held at Herefordshire Record Office (tel: 01432 260750) and in Hereford Library, or transcriptions can be bought directly from Geoff Gwatkin (01989 565852). Copies of Geoff Gwatkin's transcriptions are also available for viewing in the HER office, but for copyright reasons we cannot provide copies.

How to find a person

Type part of the name, or the entire name, in the appropriate box. Remember that many people had the same name, and often the same person had their name spelt slightly differently in different parishes. Remember also that this is a list of landowners, not of tenants. Most of the fields had tenants as well as landlords, and sometimes they were the same person, but usually not. The only way to find the tenant is to go to the original document.

The online version of the HER database is limited - as such it should not be used for the basis of commercial, planning or academic research. Instead, please submit a formal HER Enquiry.

Prior to contacting the HER please read the HER Guidance Document.

Anyone wishing to request HER Data, please complete both the HER Data Enquiry Form and HER Licence Request Form, and email them to herenquiries@herefordshire.gov.uk.

These forms should be used for all enquiries whether they be; commercial, academic, funded researcher, students, Neighbourhood Planning Groups or private researchers. For EIA, EWCO or other agri-environmental scheme requests please mark the purpose of enquiry in email and the HER response will be tailored to your needs.

For all commercial and agri-environmental enquiries there will be a charge.

Our charges are:

Our current charges are:

HER Commercial Search Rates:

• Standard (10 day response)         £150 per hour.
• Priority (2 day response)              £234 per hour.
• Admin Charge for null return results. This will be applied where the HER does not hold any records: £35

An additional charge for non-standard data or the provision of printed materials / creation of mapped results will result in an additional service charge. This will be a minimum of 30 minutes at the appropriate service rate.

After the initial first hour all searches will be costed to the nearest 15 minute at the appropriate service rate

Historic Environment Agri-Environmental Advice Rates:

This will be applied to all agri-environmental work including the English Woodland Creation Offer (EWCO) and Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA).

• less than 2 hectares         £64
• 2-5 hectares                     £99  
• 5-25 hectares                   £150
• 25 hectares +                   price on request
• Admin Charge for null return results. This will be applied where the HER does not hold any relevant information: £35

We aim to deliver all HER searches within a single chargeable hour. For those that take longer we charge incrementally in 15 minute periods at the above relevant rate.

Search costs are normally waived for private researchers, students and occasionally in other circumstances. Non-commercial rates  can also be applied in some instances and the HER is happy to discuss these matters on a case by case basis via the above email address

If your enquiry is related to planning or development, please contact the Herefordshire Archaeology's Archaeological Advisor, to discuss your project, on 01432 383350.

Conditions of use

1. Herefordshire Council holds copyright of the Historic Environment Record (HER) compiled data. The information may be used for research but the source must be acknowledged.

2. Information obtained from the HER database must not be used for purposes that could, knowingly or unknowingly, damage (or lead to damage to) the historic environment.

3. The material in the database is not suitable for professional or commercial use such as planning and development control, agri-environment scheme applications or the development of strategic policies, management plans or similar. If you require information for these purposes you should contact our Archaeological Advisor (telephone 01432 383350, or e-mail: jcotton2@herefordshire.gov.uk) or our Archaeological Projects Manager (telephone 01432 383352 or e-mail: thoverd@herefordshire.gov.uk).

4. The information in the database has been compiled from a variety of sources, some of which are very old and not all of which have been verified. Therefore, Herefordshire Council and Herefordshire Archaeology cannot accept responsibility for any omissions or errors, or for any consequences arising from use of information contained within the database. 

This section provides access to a selection of useful information. Topics covered include some specific to Herefordshire Archaeology and this website, and others of wider interest and application.

• Working in the Historic Environment is for historic environment professionals carrying out work in Herefordshire. It includes a downloadable Scheduled Monument Consent application form, Area of Archaeological Importance (AAI) Certificate application form and an Area of Archaeological Importance (AAI) Operations Notice form. The Area of Archaeological Importance covers the central area of the city of Hereford. It also includes information and proforma relating to requesting HER Data.
• Metal Detecting includes important information for anyone wishing to metal detect in Herefordshire, including the Portable Antiquities Scheme, the laws relating to metal detecting, and the Treasure Act.
• Historic Environment Tourism includes information on interesting sites and attractions in Herefordshire that are open to the public, as well as suggestions for self-guided walks and for school visits.
• Referencing the Herefordshire Through Time Website gives helpful guidelines for students and researchers on how to provide references for information from this website used in essays and other work.
• Links to Other Websites provides links to websites that may be of interest to users of Herefordshire Through Time.

Event Numbers

Prior to any work inside the Historic Environment (e.g. watching brief, building recording, excavation), please contact the Historic Environment Record (01432 260130 or e-mail herenquiries@herefordshire.gov.uk) for an HER Event Number. This Event number uniquely identifies the work inside the county and is used to help manage archaeological data. This event number should be quoted on all correspondence (including WSIs), archive and publication work afterwards.

Requesting HER Data

The online HER database must not be used for the basis of commercial assessments, please submit a formal HER Enquiry.

Anyone wishing to request HER Data for any purpose, please complete both the  HER Enquiry Form  and HER Licence Request Form and return by email to herenquiries@herefordshire.gov.uk   

These forms should be used for all enquiries whether they be; commercial, academic, funded researcher, students, Neighbourhood Planning Groups or private researchers. For EIA, EWCO or other agri-environmental scheme requests please mark the purpose of enquiry in email and the HER response will be tailored to your needs.

For all commercial and agri-environmental enquiries there will be a charge.

Our current charges are:

HER Commercial Search Rates:

• Standard (10 day response)         £150 per hour.
• Priority (2 day response)              £234 per hour.
• Admin Charge for null return results. This will be applied where the HER does not hold any records: £35

 An additional charge for non-standard data or the provision of printed materials / creation of mapped results will result in an additional service charge. This will be a minimum of 30 minutes at the appropriate service rate.

After the initial first hour all searches will be costed to the nearest 15 minute at the appropriate service rate

Historic Environment Agri-Environmental Advice Rates:

This will be applied to all agri-environmental work including the English Woodland Creation Offer (EWCO) and Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA).

• less than 2 hectares         £64
• 2-5 hectares                     £99  
• 5-25 hectares                   £150
• 25 hectares +                   price on request
• Admin Charge for null return results. This will be applied where the HER does not hold any relevant information: £35

We aim to deliver all HER searches within a single chargeable hour. For those that take longer we charge incrementally in 15 minute periods at the above relevant rate.

Search costs are normally waived for private researchers, students and occasionally in other circumstances. Non-commercial rates  can also be applied in some instances and the HER is happy to discuss these matters on a case by case basis via the above email address

If your enquiry is related to planning or development, please contact the Herefordshire Archaeology's Archaeological Advisor, to discuss your project, on 01432 383350.

Submitting HER Data

Once your work inside Herefordshire's Historic Environment is complete, all reports and data should be submitted to the HER, it does not matter what is the origin of the work, it can be from development, personal research or local history group investigations. Submitting your data and research to the HER helps improve the knowledge of Herefordshire's Historic Environment and allows the data to be incorporated into the overall historical record. This is especially useful to aid further research, highlight work or have your findings included in the planning process.

To submit reports or data please e-mail herenquiries@herefordshire.gov.uk or submit hard copies to the HER at Herefordshire Archives and Records Centre (HARC). Report data is ideally submitted in PDF format, if necessary then photographs in JPG or TIFF. Digital GeoData can be in Shapefile, DWG/DXF or MapInfo Tab format. We also encourage the uploading of your work to the ADS through OASIS. Doing this allows a greater visibility to your work.

Working inside the AAI (Area of Archaeological Importance)

In 1983, the Hereford City Council made a Designation Order to define the historic core of Hereford, as an Area of Archaeological Importance (under the 1979 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act). The Hereford Area of Archaeological Importance (AAI) encompasses the whole zone within the medieval walls of the city, together with some of the early suburbs and former monastic precincts.

Herefordshire Council, has the responsibility for ensuring that everyone living, or working, or otherwise carrying out any activities within the designated Area know of its existence, and complies with the regulations affecting it. Herefordshire Archaeology, is responsible for determining what archaeological works might be required in response to receipt of Operations Notices. It is also the service which, if necessary, is authorised to inspect, to record or to excavate sites. It can also authorise other archaeological organisations to carry out investigations in its place.

It is an offence under the Act to undertake any operations within a designated Area of Archaeological Importance which may disturb the ground, or flood any site, or tip upon any site, without giving the administering Authority six weeks notice of the commencement of those operations.

Notice must be given using a pair of prescribed forms; the AAI Operation Notice and an accompanying AAI Certificate.

More information is available in the Herefordshire AAI Guidance Document, or contacting the Herefordshire Archaeological Advisor, via email jcotton2@herefordshire.gov.uk or telephone 01432 383350.

Working inside a Scheduled Monument

Any groundwork within designated Scheduled Monument is prohibited without the express permission from Historic England, this includes metal detecting. Permission can be sort by contacting Historic England and obtaining a SMC.

Objects give us considerably more information about the past if they are recorded in a scientific way and only in the place where they were found, with the context of their position fully recorded. It is often the stratigraphy that gives us the best archaeological information about an area.

While it is often the case that metal detecting only removes objects from the plough soil, where the stratigraphy has already been damaged, recording the position of an object as exactly as possible is still of vital importance to the archaeological record. If finds of pottery and flint are also accurately recorded it is possible to map out settlement sites. This helps to improve our understanding of the county's heritage.

A metal detectorist can become part of a team of trained enthusiasts and join a field walking programme, where the area is walked in plotted transects and any objects retrieved are recorded in their exact findspots. The finds are later identified and a report is written. This type of research can provide valuable information about the history of the local landscape.

If you are interested in researching the past and getting involved in archaeology then please contact the Tim Hoverd, the Archaeological Projects Manager, who will advise you on research beneficial to the Historic Environment Record.

If you metal detect

If you choose to metal detect other than as part of an organised project then:

• Remember that you must always have the landowner's permission to metal detect. This applies to both private and publicly-owned land. Any finds that you may make on private land without permission belong to the landowner, and you may be prosecuted for trespass. Permission must be sort from Herefordshire Council before operating on any Council or Public Land. 
• Remember it is illegal to metal detect on a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM) without a licence from Historic England.
• Remember it is illegal to metal detect within the Area of Archaeological Interest (AAI) without a licence from Herefordshire Council.
• Remember that, on land under the Environmental Stewardship Scheme, metal detecting is not permitted on sites of archaeological interest without the written permission of the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). Where legally-protected sites (SAMs) are concerned, written permission from Historic England is also required. You should also note that the stewardship agreement holder is required to protect and maintain archaeological sites and other landscape features on the farm, including those on land not in the stewardship agreement. This also applies to metal detectorists working on such land.
• Only metal detect on ploughed fields and do not dig below the ploughsoil.
• Record where you discover finds as accurately as possible, giving the date of discovery and providing a six- or eight-figure National Grid Reference. Ordnance Survey maps tell you how to work out the correct grid reference.
• If you discover finds, contact Herefordshire Archaeology immediately. This will not affect your legal rights, but may allow more information to be recovered. Removing all the artefacts can damage the very information that we are trying to recover.
• You can also take your finds, with the information on when and where you found them, to the Herefordshire Museum for identification. The museum will not keep the objects. The person to contact is Judy Stevenson (telephone 01432 260692). Alternatively, you can take your finds to the Portable Antiquities Scheme's Finds Liaison Officer for Herefordshire and Shropshire, Peter Reavill. He is based at Ludlow Museum in south Shropshire (telephone 01584 813641).

The Portable Antiquities Scheme (PAS) is a voluntary scheme to record archaeological objects found by the public in England and Wales. If recorded, these artefacts have the potential to tell us a great deal about the past, such as how and where people lived and about the types of objects they made and used. The aims of the scheme are as follows:

• To advance knowledge of the history and archaeology of England and Wales by systematically recording archaeological objects found by the public.
• To raise awareness among the public of the educational value of archaeological finds in their context, and to facilitate research on them.
• To increase opportunities for active public involvement in archaeology, and to strengthen links between metal detector users and archaeologists.
• To encourage all those who find archaeological objects to make them available for recording and to promote best practice by finders.

The scheme is entirely voluntary, so you are not legally obliged to report all your finds. However, you must report material which constitutes Treasure, or which you believe may be Treasure (see section below on The Treasure Act). The scheme records every type of artefact, not just metal objects. All objects made before about 1700 are recorded, and more modern finds are recorded selectively. It is often best to let your local Finds Liaison Officer (FLO) see all your finds, especially if you are unsure what they are; a nondescript lump of metal may turn out to be of archaeological interest.

For further information, visit http://finds.org.uk/

Where can I metal detect?

Scheduled Ancient Monuments (SAMs)

It is an offence to metal detect without the written permission of the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport on a Scheduled Ancient Monument or on land within zones designated as Areas of Archaeological Importance (i.e. those in Hereford, York, Chester, Exeter and Canterbury). Some local authorities also have byelaws prohibiting the use of metal detectors on their land. It is against the law of trespass to metal detect without the landowner's permission. If you see anyone using a metal detector on such a site, please remind them of the law, as their actions reflect badly on the hobby of metal detecting.

Land under the Environmental Stewardship Scheme

The Environmental Stewardship Scheme is operated in England by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). It is a scheme in which farmers and land managers enter into ten-year land management agreements to achieve specific environmental objectives. In Environmental Stewardship agreements, two conditions specifically relate to the use of metal detectors.

• On agreement land, metal detecting is not permitted on sites of archaeological interest without the written consent of Defra and, where legally-protected sites are concerned, English Heritage. It may be possible to obtain this permission, if you agree to certain recording conditions. Neither your nor the landowner's rights will be affected.
• The agreement holder is required to protect and maintain archaeological sites and other landscape features on the farm, including those on land that is not under the land management agreement, and you are expected to agree to these conditions too.

Private land

Remember: It is against the law of trespass to metal detect on private land without the owner's permission. Any finds that you may make on private land without permission belong to the landowner, and you may be prosecuted for trespass.

Public land

You must have the permission of the owner or authority responsible for the land before you begin metal detecting.

On 24th September 1997, the Treasure Act 1996 came into force in England and Wales. This Act replaced the common law of Treasure Trove in these countries, and was extended on 1st January 2003. Under the Treasure Act, there is a legal obligation to report all finds of Treasure.

What is Treasure?

The following finds are Treasure under the Act, if found after 24th September 1997 (or, in the case of category 2, if found after 1st January 2003):

1. Any metallic object, other than a coin, provided that at least 10% by weight of metal is precious metal (that is, gold or silver) and that it is at least 300 years old when found. If the object is of prehistoric date it will be Treasure provided any part of it is precious metal.

2. Any group of two or more metallic objects of any composition of prehistoric date that come from the same find.

3. All coins from the same find provided they are at least 300 years old when found (but if the coins contain less than 10% of gold or silver there must be at least ten of them). Only the following groups of coins will normally be regarded as coming from the same find:

• hoards that have been deliberately hidden
• smaller groups of coins, such as the contents of purses, that may have been dropped or lost
• votive or ritual deposits.

4. Any object, whatever it is made of, that is part of the same find as another object that is Treasure. An object or coin is part of the 'same find' as another object or coin if it is found in the same place as, or had previously been together with, the other object. Finds may have become scattered since they were originally deposited in the ground.

5. Any object that would previously have been Treasure Trove, but does not fall within the specific categories given above. Only objects that are less than 300 years old, that are made substantially of gold or silver, that have been deliberately hidden with the intention of recovery and whose owners or heirs are unknown will come into this category.

What objects do not qualify as Treasure?

The following types of find are not Treasure:

• objects whose owners can be traced
• unworked or natural objects, including human and animal remains, even if they are found in association with Treasure
• objects from the foreshore which are wreck
• single coins found on their own
• groups of coins lost one by one over a period of time.

If in doubt, it is always safest to report your find. Your local Finds Liaison Officer (FLO) will be glad to record all archaeological objects that you find. The FLO for Herefordshire and Shropshire is Peter Reavill, who is based at Ludlow Museum (telephone 01584 813641). Details of FLOs for other areas can be found at http://finds.org.uk/, e-mail info@finds.org.uk or telephone 020 7323 8611.

Reporting a find

All finds of Treasure must be reported to the local Coroner within 14 days of the find being made, or within 14 days after the day on which you realised the find might be Treasure (for example, as a result of having it identified). The obligation to report Treasure finds applies to everyone, including archaeologists. Finds can be reported in person, by letter, fax, telephone or e-mail: the Finds Liaison Officer for Herefordshire (Peter Reavill, telephone 01584 813641) will be able to help you to do this. You will always receive an acknowledgement and information on where to deposit your find. The Coroner for Herefordshire is D M Halpern, 36/37 Bridge Street, Hereford, HR4 9DJ, telephone 01432 355301.

Where will I have to take my find?

In each Coroner's district, there is a local agreement between the Coroner, the Finds Liaison Officer (FLO), local government archaeological officers (in Wales, the Regional Archaeological Trusts) and local or national museums, about where Treasure finds should be deposited. Since 2003, a national network of FLOs has been established across the whole of England and Wales. The FLOs are the main point of contact for Treasure finds. (Details of local FLOs can be found athttp://finds.org.uk/, e-mail info@finds.org.uk or telephone 020 7323 8611.)

Upon depositing the find you will be given a receipt. You will need to provide information about exactly where you made the find, wherever possible to the equivalent of a six-figure National Grid Reference. In official dealings, the parish or a four-figure National Grid Reference (1km²) will be used, whilst a more general location description may be used for particularly sensitive finds. It is strongly recommended that you and the landowner should keep the find-site location confidential.

The body or individual receiving the find will notify the Historic Environment Record as soon as possible (if that has not already happened), so that the site where the find was made can be investigated by archaeologists if necessary.

What if I do not report a find of Treasure?

The penalty for not reporting a find that you believe (or there is good evidence for believing) to be Treasure, without a reasonable excuse, is imprisonment for up to three months, a fine of up to £5,000 (level 5), or both. You will not be breaking the law if you do not report a find because you did not at first recognise that it might be Treasure, but you should report it once you realise this.

What if the find is identified as Treasure?

If the find is Treasure the British Museum or the National Museums Wales will be informed. They will then ascertain whether they or any other museum wishes to acquire it from the Crown.

If no museum wishes to acquire, the Secretary of State will disclaim it. The Coroner will then notify the landowner that the object is to be returned to you after 28 days, unless the landowner objects. If there is an objection, the Coroner will retain the find until the dispute is resolved.

What if the find is not identified as Treasure?

If the find is not Treasure, the Coroner will be informed and the find would normally be returned to you without the holding of an inquest.

What if a museum wishes to acquire the find?

The Coroner will hold an inquest to decide whether the find is Treasure. If the find is declared to be Treasure then it will be taken to the British Museum so that a valuation can be recommended by the Treasure Valuation Committee: this amount is what a museum will pay to acquire the find. However, the Department of Culture, Media & Sport wishes to encourage finders and landowners to consider donating their finds (therefore waiving their right to this financial reward) and gives certificates to all those who do. This in no way prejudices the rights of finders and landowners to claim a reward if they so choose.

How is a fair market value for a Treasure find arrived at?

The Treasure Valuation Committee, which consists of independent experts, values all finds that museums wish to acquire. The Committee will commission a valuation from one or more experts drawn from the antiquities or coin trades. You, the landowner and the acquiring museum will have the option to comment on this valuation, and/or to send in a separate valuation for the Committee to consider. The Committee will inspect the find and arrive at a valuation. If you are then dissatisfied with the Committee's recommendation, there are opportunities to appeal. If you are still dissatisfied, you can then appeal to the Secretary of State.

What if the Coroner or the National Museum loses or damages my find?

They are required to take reasonable steps to ensure that this does not happen but, if it does, you should be compensated.

Who is eligible to receive a share of the reward?

This is set out in detail in the Treasure Act Code of Practice. To summarise:

• the finder who has obtained permission to be on the land from its owner, and acted in good faith
• the landowner
• the person who occupies the particular site as a tenant of the owner (unless this is precluded by the terms of the tenancy agreement).

Who is not eligible to receive a share of the reward?

• An archaeologist who makes a Treasure find
• A finder or landowner who has acted in bad faith, and not in accordance with the Treasure Act Code of Practice, may expect a reduced share of the valuation, or none at all.

How long will it take before I receive my reward?

The period between the find being received by the Coroner, or by the organisation to whom he/she has directed that the find be delivered, and the payment of an ex gratia reward should not be longer than twelve months (provided no challenges are made), although it may be necessary to exceed this period in exceptional cases such as large hoards of coins, or finds that present particular difficulties.

Further advice about Treasure

Finders are strongly advised to obtain a copy of the Treasure Act Code of Practice, which provides further information about the Act, including guidance on the payment of rewards and advice on the care of finds. It also has lists of useful contact addresses. The Code can be downloaded from the Department for Culture, Media & Sport's website (http://www.culture.gov.uk/) or obtained from the British Museum's Treasure Registrar, your Finds Liaison Officer or through the National Council for Metal Detecting (http://www.ncmd.co.uk/) or the Federation of Independent Detectorists (http://www.detectorists.net/, http://www.fid.newbury.net/).

Before you go metal detecting:

1. Not trespassing; before you start detecting obtain permission to search from the landowner/occupier, regardless of the status, or perceived status, of the land. Remember that all land has an owner. To avoid subsequent disputes it is always advisable to get permission and agreement in writing first regarding the ownership of any finds subsequently discovered (see http://www.cla.org.uk/ or http://www.nfuonline.com/).

2. Adhering to the laws concerning protected sites (e.g. those defined as Scheduled Monuments or Sites of Special Scientific Interest: you can obtain details of these from the owner/occupier, Finds Liaison Officer, Historic Environment Record/Sites and Monuments Record or at http://www.magic.gov.uk/). Take extra care when detecting near protected sites: for example, it is not always clear where the boundaries lie on the ground.

3. You are strongly recommended to join a metal-detecting club or association that encourages co-operation and responsive exchanges with other responsible heritage groups. Details of metal-detecting organisations can be found at http://www.ncmd.co.uk/ or http://www.fid.newbury.net/.

4. Familiarising yourself with and following current conservation advice on the handling, care and storage of archaeological objects (see http://finds.org.uk/).

While you are metal detecting:

5. Wherever possible working on ground that has already been disturbed (such as ploughed land or that which has formerly been ploughed), and only within the depth of ploughing. If detecting takes place on undisturbed pasture, be careful to ensure that no damage is done to the archaeological value of the land, including earthworks.

6. Minimising any ground disturbance through the use of suitable tools and by reinstating any excavated material as neatly as possible. Endeavour not to damage stratified archaeological deposits.

7. Recording findspots as accurately as possible for all finds (i.e. to at least 100m², using an Ordnance Survey map or hand-held Global Positioning Systems (GPS) device) whilst in the field. Bag finds individually and then record the National Grid Reference (NGR) on the bag. Findspot information should not be passed on to third parties without the agreement of the landowner/occupier (see also clause 9).

8. Respecting the Country Code (leave gates and property as you find them and do not damage crops, frighten animals or disturb ground-nesting birds, and dispose properly of litter: see The Countryside Code).

After you have been metal detecting:

9. Reporting any finds to the relevant landowner/occupier; and (with the agreement of the landowner/occupier) to the Portable Antiquities Scheme, so the information can pass into the local Historic Environment Record/Sites and Monuments Record. Both the Country Land and Business Association (http://www.cla.org.uk/) and the National Farmers Union (http://www.nfuonline.com/) support the reporting of finds. Details of your local Finds Liaison Officer can be found at http://finds.org.uk/, e-mail info@finds.org.uk or telephone 020 7323 8611.

10. Abiding by the provisions of the Treasure Act and Treasure Act Code of Practice (http://finds.org.uk/), wreck law (http://www.mcga.gov.uk/) and export licensing (http://www.mla.gov.uk/). If you need advice your local Finds Liaison Officer will be able to help you.

11. Seeking expert help if you discover something large below the ploughsoil, or a concentration of finds or unusual material, or wreck remains, and ensuring that the landowner/occupier's permission is obtained to do so. Your local Finds Liaison Officer may be able to help or will be able to advise of an appropriate person. Reporting the find does not change your rights of discovery, but will result in far more archaeological evidence being discovered.

12. Calling the Police, and notifying the landowner/occupier, if you find any traces of human remains.

13. Calling the Police or HM Coastguard, and notifying the landowner/occupier, if you find anything that may be a live explosive: do not use a metal detector or mobile phone nearby as this might trigger an explosion. Do not attempt to move or interfere with any such explosives.

This code of practice is voluntary, but the following organisations have endorsed it: British Museum; Council for British Archaeology; Country Landowners and Business Association; English Heritage; Federation of Independent Detectorists; Museums, Libraries and Archives Council; National Council for Metal Detecting; National Farmers Union; National Museum Wales; Royal Commission on the Historic and Ancient Monuments of Wales; Portable Antiquities Scheme; Society of Museum Archaeologists.

English Heritage Properties

Arthur's Stone (HER 1528)

Edvin Loach Old Church (HER 1154)

Goodrich Castle (HER 349)

Longtown Castle (HER 1036)

Rotherwas Chapel (HER 547)

Wigmore Castle (HER 179)

National Trust Properties

Berrington Hall (HER 4016 & 5896)

Brockhampton Estate (HER 939 & 938)

Croft Castle and Parkland (HER 6347)

Cwmmau Farmhouse (HER 53769)

The Weir Garden (HER 718)

Other Properties

Belmont Abbey (HER 9430)

Brobury House Gardens (HER 4410)

Burton Court (HER 1688)

Eardisland Dovecote (HER 7183)

Eastnor Castle (HER 6709)

Hampton Court Castle, Gardens and Parkland (HER 6556)

Hellens Manor (HER 480)

Hereford Cathedral (HER 386)

Kentchurch Court (HER 6785)

Shobdon Park Garden Temple (HER 11176)

The Summerhouse, Homme House (HER 52055)

Herefordshire Museums

Coningsby Medieval Museum

Hereford Museum & Art Gallery

Herefordshire Cider Museum

Hereford Waterworks Museum

The Judge's Lodging

Leominster Folk Museum

Mappa Mundi and Chained Library

The Old House, Hereford

Weobley Museum

This section provides directions for self-guided walks around Herefordshire's six market towns and a City walk in Hereford.

The walking map points out some historical areas of interest along the route, more information on these historical assets can be found by using the HER Database.

• Bromyard Walking Map
• Hereford Walking Map
• Kington Walking Map
• Ledbury Walking Map
• Leominster Walking Map
• Ross-on-Wye Walking Map
• Weobley Walking Map

1. Information from the Historic Environment Record (HER) Database

If you are writing an essay or dissertation and you make a reference to an HER entry, you must be careful to scroll down to see which particular source was used to draw up the HER entry. Any description of a site or monument is either a composite of the views of several authors, excavation reports or an entry based on a personal observation. Each statement in the HER entry will be referenced to at least one source. You should, therefore, in addition to citing the Herefordshire HER number, also quote the sources(s) the particular information you are using has been taken from. The HER entry in itself is not a primary source!

You will find that each source is footnoted within each HER entry. Sometimes several numbers are put together, indicating that the information is taken from several sources.

For example, if you want to quote the HER entry on Hereford Castle, you must carefully look at which part of the entry you are referring to. The written sources are footnoted within each entry. If you want to cite, "The castle earthworks and house called Castle Cliff occupies the south east angle of the walled town said to have been built by William fitz Osbern soon after the Conquest.", you must find the original source, which is Number 8, Noble, F., "Medieval boroughs of West Herefordshire",Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club. If the information is gained from a watching brief or excavation, this will also be foot-noted. The Events section (you must scroll further down the page to see the Events entries) refers to all excavations, watching briefs and other work associated with a given site.

The correct foot-note for the above-mentioned quote would be:

Herefordshire HER Record 456, information from Noble, F., 1964, "Medieval boroughs of West Herefordshire", Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field ClubXXXVIII Part 1, 62-71.

The reference should also include (if relevant) the year of publication, the page number (if given) and, in the case of a journal or periodical, the volume number.

There are nearly 100 Historic Environment Records (HERs) in Great Britain, so you must be sure to state Herefordshire HER. Some HERs are still referred to by the older title of SMRs (Sites and Monuments Records), and there is also a number of UADs (Urban Archaeological Databases) which cover English cities.

2. Text from other sections

At the bottom of each section you will see the name of the original author. You should therefore footnote any quotes with:

The author's name, Herefordshire Through Time and the URL in the address box of any given page.

For example, Toria Forsyth-Moser, Herefordshire Through Time, http://htt.herefordshire.gov.uk/herefordshires-past/the-medieval-period/the-norman-conquest/

3. The guest author section

Quote the name of the author, the title of the essay, Herefordshire Through Time and the relevant URL.

For example, Roz Lowe, "Sir Samuel Meyrick and Goodrich Court", Herefordshire Through Time, http://htt.herefordshire.gov.uk/herefordshires-past/the-post-medieval-period/herefordshire-life/guest-author-essay-sir-samuel-meyrick-and-goodrich-court/

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2004]

Hereford Record Office: Large collection of original documents and maps from AD 1000 to 1950. Search room and library available. Herefordshire Archive and Records Centre, Fir Tree Lane, Rotherwas, Hereford HR2 6LA. telephone 01432 260750, e-mail archives@herefordshire.gov.uk. Also limited search available online.

Hereford Cathedral Library: Archives of four manors (Canon Pyon, Norton Canon, Woolhope and Preston-on-Wye) and 27 parishes in Herefordshire. Search room and library. Cathedral Close, Hereford, HR1 2NG, telephone 01432 374226, e-mail library@herefordcathedral.co.uk

Herefordshire Libraries: Large collection of local history books, old maps. Plus county-wide aerial photographs (1947, 1:25,000) and Alfred Watkins photographs, Duncumb Histories and Old Straight Club archives. Unpublished Herefordshire histories by Blount, Parry, Williams, Webb, Bird and Hill. Letters, Guild minutes and a large collection of old manuscripts. Unpublished hundreds of Stretford, Wigmore, Wolphy and Greytree. About 200 antiquarian books. 

Most of the above are not on the online catalogue, but they are on the library's card index. The library is in Broad Street, Hereford, HR4 9AU, telephone 01432 383600; the library is closed on Mondays.

Hereford Museum:  Covers social history, artefacts, learning and resource centre; telephone 01432 342492, e-mail herefordmuseums@herefordshire.gov.uk. The museum is also located in the library building in Broad Street, Hereford.

Woolhope Club Transactions:  Local history journal held in all the main libraries, with over 100 volumes beginning in 1851. A huge range of topics is covered, and you may well find that whatever you are researching someone before you has done so too. There are index volumes, which can be searched online on the Club's website.

Herefordshire Ceramics: Includes online information on archaeological pottery and forms found in the county.

Roman Kilns: Includes online information about the location of Roman Kilns found throughout the country.

England's Past for Everyone Ledbury Project: England's Past for Everyone was a Heritage Lottery-funded project involving communities across the country, which ran from 2005 to 2010. Authors and researchers worked alongside volunteers to bring local history to life. In Herefordshire, England's Past for Everyone focused on the historic market town of Ledbury. Herefordshire Archaeology staff members were involved in various aspects of this project.

Blanche Parry: Local Historian Ruth E. Richardson's Homepage. Contains topics on the history of Herefordshire including information on using Field Names for survey and early archaeological work in Herefordshire.

Local History & Civic Society websites

• Bromyard & District Local History Society
• Dinedor Heritage Group
• Cusop History Group
• Eardisland Oral History Group 
• Ewyas Lacy Study Group
• Garway Heritage Group 
• Hereford Civic Society
• Herefordshire Family History Society  
• Herefordshire Lore
• Ledbury Civic Society
• Ross-on-Wye Civic Society
• Weobley Local History Society 

National websites

The following national sources of information will also include Herefordshire information:

The National Archives: The National Archives are located in Kew, London. Many Herefordshire-related documents are held here. View the online catalogue for information on the Archives' holdings.

The British Library: Complete catalogue of published books online: it includes over 1100 books with Herefordshire in the title.

Historic England Archive:  Search over 1 million catalogue entries describing photographs, plans and drawings of England's buildings and historic sites, held in the Historic England Archive. Including photographs dating from the 1850s to the present day, ranging from architectural details to archaeological landscapes, from country houses to coal mines, covering counties from Cornwall to Northumberland.

National Heritage List for England (NHLE): Historic England's official and up-to-date database of all listed and designated heritage sites in England.

PastScape: PastScape is a quick and easy way to search over 420,000 records held in the National Record of the Historic Environment (NRHE). You'll find information on archaeological, architectural and maritime sites.

Heritage Gateway: A portal that allows you to search across national and local records of England's historic sites and buildings, including listed buildings. Also provides contact information for England's SMRs and HERs.

Archaeology Data Service (ADS):  The ADS supports research, learning and teaching with high quality and dependable digital resources. Provides a number of searchable archaeology-related databases, including library catalogues.

OASIS: Online Access to the Index of Archaeological Investigations. Provides an online index to the mass of unpublished archaeological contractor reports (grey literature) that has been produced as a result of the advent of large-scale developer-funded fieldwork.

Portable Antiquity Scheme (PAS): The Portable Antiquities Scheme is project to encourage the voluntary recording of archaeological objects found by members of the public in England and Wales.

Vision of Britain: Comprehensive data sets including population, poverty, industry, boundary changes and more.

Images of England: English Heritage's digital library of photographs and descriptions of England's Listed Buildings. All descriptions and many images can be searched online.

MAGIC: Comprehensive data set of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs), countryside designations (e.g. Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty), Scheduled Ancient Monuments and more. Also information on environmental schemes.

Environment Agency Open Data: Environment Agency Data for LiDAR Data.

National Library of Scotland: Includes many georeferenced OS maps of England.

Victoria County History: Founded in 1899, the VCH is an encyclopedic record of England's places and people from earliest times to the present day. Based at the Institute of Historical Research in the University of London since 1932, the VCH is written by historians working in counties across England.

Other useful addresses

The following links are useful websites for those with wider interest in Archaeology:

Council for British Archaeology (CBA): An independent charity that brings together members, supporters and partners to give archaeology a voice and safeguard it for future generations.

British Association of Archaeologists (BAA): Association to promote the study of archaeology, art and architecture and the preservation of our national antiquities. 

European Association of Archaeologists (EAA): Association that represents for all professional archaeologists of Europe.

British Archaeological Jobs Resource (BAJR): Archaeological employment, training and industry news.

External Links Statement

We are not responsible for the content or reliability of the linked websites. References or listings should not be taken as endorsement by Herefordshire Council of any kind. We cannot guarantee that these links will work at all times and we have no control over the availability of linked pages.

We use the term "external links" to mean content not published by http://www.herefordshire.gov.uk/. Please notify editor@herefordshire.gov.uk if you have any concerns about external links found on our site.

The archaeological and historical periods covered are:

The Prehistoric Period: Iron Age Herefordshire overview; Bronze Age Herefordshire overview; Neolithic Herefordshire overview; Mesolithic Herefordshire overview; and Palaeolithic Herefordshire overview.

The Romano-British Period: Overview of Roman Herefordshire; the Roman Invasion of Britain; Administration and Towns; Food and Diet; the Roman Army; Timeline; Roman Herefordshire; and Roman Sites.

The Anglo-Saxon Period: General overview; New Beginnings (transition from Roman Britain); Life; Saxon Herefordshire; Hereford's Saxon Origins; Saints; Churches; the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle; Charters; the Vikings; the End of the Anglo-Saxons; Herefordshire Sites; and a Timeline.

The Medieval Period: Overview of Medieval Herefordshire; The Norman Conquest; Countryside and Landscape; Towns; Villages; The Domesday Survey; Castles (including a gazetteer of the county's many castles); Hereford Cathedral; Churches; Monasteries; the Knights Templar and Knights Hospitaller; the Barons' War; the Wars of the Roses; and the Black Death.

The Post-Medieval period: Following a general overview, topics covered include Herefordshire Life (Tudor education and apprenticeship, poverty); the English Civil War (background, Herefordshire's involvement, the effects on the county); Architecture (the range of local building types and their construction); Agriculture and Industry (cider and perry, hops, livestock; iron-making, milling, lime-making, tanning, brewing); Transport (railways, canals, turnpike roads, droving, packhorses); Public Health (19th century medical improvements, hospitals, asylums); Institutions (Hereford library, prisons, workhouses, Non-conformist chapels including a gazetteer of the county's chapels); Crime and Punishment (changing attitudes, methods of punishment); and Slavery (connections with Herefordshire).

There is also an article on Herefordshire's Changing Population over time.

It is divided into five shorter periods:

• the Palaeolithic (c. 100,000 BC to c. 10,000 BC);
• the Mesolithic (c. 10,000 BC to c. 4,000 BC);
• the Neolithic (c. 4,000 BC to c. 2,000 BC);
• the Bronze Age (c. 2,000 BC to c. 800 BC);
• and the Iron Age (c. 800 BC to AD 43).

These pages give brief general overviews of each of these periods, and discuss the situation in Herefordshire during them. To read them, click on the links above or on the titles in the menu on the left-hand side of the page.

During the last phase of the Ice Age (the Devensian: 18,000 - 10,000 years ago), glaciers covered the west of Herefordshire as far east as the area now occupied by the city of Hereford. Added to this, Herefordshire is located on slightly acidic soil, which means that very little organic archaeological evidence much older than 20,000 years old survives. Consequently much of the Palaeolithic evidence that has survived here has been found in cave and rock shelters. In Herefordshire we have two important prehistoric caves in the south of the county, Arthur's Cave (HER no. 902) and Merlin's Cave (HER no. 3358).

The modern human species (homo sapiens) first appeared around 35,000 - 40,000 BC, and was occupying north-west Europe in the later Ice Age. The earliest recorded evidence of human activity in the Marches dates back between 50,000 - 100,000 years ago. These early humans developed ways of utilising flint as tools, such as knifes and spears. This meant that they became more successful in their hunt for food and could begin to move further into the more distant areas of the county.

In Herefordshire the evidence for human activity goes back very early, and is concentrated into five small areas: Colwall; Doward; Kington; Sarnesfield; and Tupsley.

Glacial activity and continuous erosion by the River Wye have formed much of the landscape of southern Herefordshire. There are two caves at Doward which provide archaeological evidence; Arthur's Cave and Merlin's Cave have both been extensively excavated and have displayed an almost complete stratigraphic sequence that covers at least 25,000 years. 

In King Arthur's Cave, which was excavated in 1924-7 by the University of Bristol Spelaeological Society, the sequence includes animal bones (woolly rhinoceros, giant deer, wild ox, hyena and mammoth), bone tools, a human burial, and flint and stone artefacts. These are currently in Hereford Museum's stores.

At the height of the Ice Age huge ice sheets covered Wales and most of the west and north Midlands. One such ice sheet is thought to have bisected Herefordshire roughly north to south. At this time most of the county would have been completely covered by a thick layer of ice, up to 180m deep in places.

By 17,000 BC the ice sheets had begun to melt and Herefordshire was slowly being uncovered. Southern Britain was gradually colonised by sub-arctic tundra grasses, mosses and dwarf varieties of trees. The growth of these plants in England caused the migration of animals in search for food, and these were eventually followed by small itinerant hunting groups of humans. These hunting groups changed their settlement patterns depending on environmental and climatic changes, so they would go where the weather and hunting were more conducive to survival.

By 12,000 BC the average winter temperature was around -5° centigrade. The hunting groups needed to find shelter to enable them to survive the harsh winter months. This is one explanation for the utilisation of Arthur's and Merlin's Caves at Doward.      

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2003]

The Mesolithic period covers approximately 6,000 years from 10,000 BC. This era was a period when Britain was undergoing climatic and environmental changes that were creating a more hospitable habitat.

Gradually (c. 8500-7500 BC), the climate in Herefordshire began to get warmer and new plants and animals began to colonise the land. These included species of birch, willow and aspen, as well as red deer, wild oxen and wild pig. The human hunting groups became more settled, and regular trading and hunting patterns were developed. 

By 7,500 BC these flora and fauna had been joined by the lime, alder, oak, hazel and pine.

7,500 years ago the average summer temperature would most probably have been a few degrees higher than today. These climatic changes are identified in part by studying pollen diagrams: in Herefordshire there are three pollen sequences dating back to the early post-glacial period, up to about 2,000 BC (HER nos. 5522, 32802 and 32803). These show that warm conditions were established by about 9,500 years ago (c. 7,500 BC). By the end of the Mesolithic period communities had developed, many had made the transition from hunting and gathering to farming as a means of food provision, and a small-scale agricultural industry had been formed.

Society had developed into extended family groups based on permanent settlements and territories, each with their own hunting, gathering and farming techniques. These settlement groups were able to take advantage of the seasonal fruits, berries and seeds that had emerged as a result of the increase in temperature. These fruits and berries would have also attracted more animals - such as roe and red deer and wild pig - which would have increased the food supply available. 

Around 6,500 BC, as the ice sheets continued melting, the water levels rose and the mainland links between Britain and Europe were severed - Britain was now an island for the first time.

Nearly all Mesolithic activity that we have evidence for in Herefordshire occurred in the south and west of the county, with the majority being from the late Mesolithic period. Much of this evidence is in the form of small pieces of waste flint and flint scatters. The Herefordshire evidence is mainly concentrated into three areas: the Golden Valley, Ledbury (rural) and Great Doward. All three of these areas have something in common; they are all close to a range of hills and have rivers nearby.

Most of the finds from these three sites have been discovered upon the higher ground; this may indicate that the Mesolithic inhabitants of Herefordshire chose to settle in areas that were easily defended and that the valley floors were probably still very densely wooded at this time. However, it has to be borne in mind that no systematic study of flint, comparing finds from upland and lowland areas, has been done. Upland flints may also be easier to find as soils are thinner and vegetation is more sparse, meaning the flints are easier to see. Lowland areas have of course been ploughed for thousands of years and surface flints would long since have been buried, to re-surface only occasionally with the cycle of ploughing.

Herefordshire was an attractive option for people migrating from Gloucestershire and southern Wales. Archaeological evidence shows that there was an abundance of woodland resources, as well as animals, nuts and berries, and fish in the many rivers and streams. This gave the Mesolithic inhabitants of Herefordshire prime hunting and gathering territory; there was now less need to travel great distances for hunting and so a change from temporary settlements to permanent bases occurred.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2003]

This is the most recent of the three divisions of the Stone Age, and was the period when agriculture was introduced extensively to Britain and began to replace the gatherer-hunter system. Evidence from c. 4,000 BC shows that the Neolithic population had developed a system of small "allotments" throughout Western Europe.

In Britain, although much of the landscape was still very densely wooded, areas for farming had been cleared and domesticated sheep, cattle, pigs and corn were being imported, increasing the range of provisions that farming could supply. Pollen diagrams and alluviation studies suggest that most of Herefordshire would still have been densely wooded at this time, though agriculture and wood pasture clearance had commenced at the beginning of the Neolithic and were well established by its end (see pollen sequences HER 5522, 32802 and 32803).

Elaborate multi-chambered burial tombs built of megaliths (enormous stones) began to dominate the landscape of Neolithic Herefordshire. These tombs would not only have had a symbolic religious purpose but would also have had a social and political function. They would only have been fully accessible to those members of society above a certain social standing, and those buried in them would have probably been the more important members of the community.

Neolithic tombs in Herefordshire are located in two areas - the Golden Valley and the Black Mountains, both in the south-west part of the county. The siting of these tombs suggests that some religious importance was placed on the mountain ranges of the area, as a total of 18 tombs have been discovered within the Black Mountains. These tombs also suggest that Neolithic people were religious to a certain extent and believed in the after-life.

Many of the Neolithic sites in Herefordshire have also yielded Mesolithic finds. In fact it is quite rare to find a Neolithic site in Herefordshire that does not also contain Mesolithic evidence. This suggests continued habitation of sites through successive periods of time, and places additional importance on the location of sites. The fact that habitation sites have stayed largely the same but that social change was occurring suggests that it was the evolution of ideas from within communities, and not a migration of people, that caused these changes.

Neolithic settlements were sophisticated affairs. On Dorstone Hill in Herefordshire there is an extensive encampment (HER 1551), which was excavated from 1965 onwards. This settlement had evidence of a low wall and a stockade, suggesting that this had once been an enclosed camp and that the Neolithic population had felt the need to defend their settlement. The site also yielded over 4,000 pieces of flint, as well as polished stone axe-heads, pottery, storage pits and hut floors. This evidence points to the fact that the Neolithic settlements were on an organised plan, and that they were more sophisticated and technologically advanced than is sometimes thought.

As farming communities began to be established, networks of trade and communication grew up around them. Greenstone, which originates from the Penzance area of Cornwall, has been found at two different sites in Herefordshire (Elton and St Margarets), and axes from Cumbria and Gwynedd have been found at Almeley and Weobley in the north of the county.

Neolithic finds have also been discovered in more lowland areas of Herefordshire, and even in the valley floors of the River Arrow, above Titley and Staunton-on-Arrow, and of the River Teme at Buckton. This suggests that by the Neolithic period the county's valley floors had begun to be cleared of their dense woodland, and that the communities were beginning to move away from the uplands. An excellent example of a flint axe was recently discovered on the surface of a ploughed field next to a spring in Wellington (HER 31009), suggesting that this piece of land has hardly been disturbed in over 4,000 years.

The Neolithic period is also important due to the fact that it was at this time that polished stone axes began to be used. These tools would have been used for hunting, forest clearance and shelter building. Some of the more carefully worked axes would have been "prestige goods" and used for display only. The distribution of these axes throughout Herefordshire suggests that by the Neolithic period man had begun to travel through the different areas of the county.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2003] 

It was in this period that the landscape became comparatively treeless and open as people utilised the land for grazing, arable and ritual purposes.

It is thought that as the first metal began to replace stone as the material of choice for tools and other artefacts, we encounter the beginnings of a class system in Europe. As bronze required more effort than stone to turn it into something useful it became the material of prestige. It was usually only owned by the more powerful individuals, who received preferential treatment in life and death. 

Metal was first used as pure copper. It was then realised that alloying tin to the copper, making bronze, improved the quality of the metal by making it easier to work and the finished product less brittle, and bronze became the favoured metal.

Religion appears to have been an important factor in many of the Bronze Age sites in Herefordshire, which include possible henges at Clifford (HER 5970, 5972 and 9904), Whitney-on-Wye (HER 1014), Madley (HER 396) and Adforton, usually only denoted by cropmarks today. There is also a stone circle at Longtown (HER 12020), which most probably had ritual and religious functions for the community around it.

Round barrows were a common form of burial in the Bronze Age, and Herefordshire contains well over 140 of these sites. (Look up "barrow" and "ring ditch" in the HER Database.)

In the Olchon Valley two burials have been unearthed, one of which was a cist made of large slabs of local red sandstone. Inside was the skeleton of a man aged between 25-30. He had been buried in a crouching position with his head facing north, and at his feet was a barbed and tanged arrowhead. Also buried in the tomb was a clay beaker, which denoted that this was the burial of a noble man.

A beaker burial has also been discovered at Aymestrey (HER 7060), where a cist was uncovered containing the body of a young child. A reconstruction of the burial, complete with the original skeleton and beaker pot, can be seen in Leominster Folk Museum on Etnam Street. (This museum is also well worth a visit for its post-medieval artefacts.)

During the Bronze Age there appears to have been a move from single burials in chambered tombs to cremation and burial in level ground. Herefordshire contains two Bronze Age cemeteries - one at Southend Farm, Mathon (HER 3759) and one at Pontshill, south-east of Ross.

In the cemetery at Southend Farm, Mathon, has been found the only urn burial in the county. In 1907 the Reverend Blake visited the site and discovered fragments of two urns, which when reconstructed were found to be bucket shaped. The burial also contained bronze lance heads and a bronze shield boss; this shows that although the style of burial had changed the importance placed on grave goods had not.

At Pontshill a finger-decorated urn has been found not far below the surface, resting on a layer of charcoal which suggests that this was a cremation burial.

Many of the Bronze Age barrows in existence in Herefordshire occur near rivers. It may be that the Bronze Age people placed special religious importance on rivers and streams, or that they lived and worked the lighter soil found beside rivers and chose to bury their dead close to their settlements.

By the start of the Bronze Age the climate was relatively warm and dry, and would have probably been warmer than today's climate. This warm weather caused an increase in the area covered by oak and alder woodland.

Around the middle of the Bronze Age the climate began to become increasingly cool and wet. This would have meant that there was often insufficient sun to ripen many of the crops and the excessive moisture would have caused many to rot. The pollen diagrams (HER 5522, 32802 and 32803) show the "lime decline" of about 3,500 years ago, which was attributed both to increased farming and a cooler climate. It is thought that small-leaved lime has not spread naturally since this time (though it is occasionally planted). 

As the population was constantly rising this would have put a great strain on resources and more forest would have been cleared to meet the demand. Agricultural activity was intensified and a greater range of more sophisticated tools began to be developed.

The rich agricultural potential of the Herefordshire basin was not fully recognised in the Bronze Age, with the majority of settlements and barrows occurring on the fringes, though our distribution maps may not reflect the true situation as farming practices will have destroyed many sites.

As more and more tools were needed for everyday purposes, bronze soon became devalued and so it was no longer reserved for prestigious items.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2003]

Memorials to the dead had dominated the landscape of Neolithic and Bronze Age Herefordshire, and very little effort appears to have been put into permanent house building. During the Iron Age this began to change and huge settlements were constructed to mark out territories and function as a sign of power.

The hillforts of Iron Age Herefordshire are numerous. They are usually an irregular oval enclosure on a hilltop, covering an area of up to 50 acres in extent. They were enclosed camps with an inner rampart above a steep outer ditch designed to trap the enemy, allowing the defenders to deal with them with no easy escape.

The enclosure was often only surrounded by one rampart (univallate), which formed a ring around the contour of the hill about 100ft below the summit. Examples of this type of hillfort in Herefordshire include Aconbury (HER 910), Credenhill (HER 906),Wall Hills Camp (HER 913) and Sutton Walls (HER 912).
 
Later in the Iron Age the defensive structure changed from enclosures with one rampart to ones with a series of concentric ramparts (multivallate). This made the enclosures more defensively secure and attack by enemies more difficult. Often the multivallate camps would consist of an interior enclosure surrounded by one rampart with an outer annexe surrounded by another. Ivington Camp (HER 905), Little Doward (HER 901) and Midsummer Hill (HER 931) are all examples of this type of defence in Herefordshire.

The most accessible building materials in Herefordshire in the Iron Age were timber, soil and stone. Stone was used less for hillforts as it was difficult to transport up the hillside; it would only have been used extensively if it could have been cut from the surrounding hillside. Timber would have been used for strengthening the ramparts and for interior buildings.

There are over 2,000 Iron Age hillforts in Britain, with more than 30 in Herefordshire. However, not all of the hillforts in this county were built at great heights: in fact only Croft Ambrey (HER 177) and the Herefordshire Beacon (also known as British Camp; HER 932) were built over 1,000ft above sea level. The majority of hillforts in Herefordshire are on gently sloping land with an average overall rise of 350 feet.

Each of the enclosures in Herefordshire appears to have been built independently for the optimum local command, and not as part of a wider communication system.

Croft Ambrey, Credenhill and Midsummer Hill appear to have been carefully planned inside with closely packed lines of back to back housing in a rectangular plan. Settlements of the size of Croft Ambrey and Credenhill would have had a large population and would have needed a high level of organisation to function properly.

If it is considered that these hillforts were of a domestic rather than defensive nature then archaeologists have estimated figures of 75 to 100 people for every acre covered by an Iron Age hillfort. If this is correct then the population of Iron Age Herefordshire may have been as much as 30,000 people: this is a great deal larger than the 1086 Domesday Survey estimates for the county. (See John and Margaret West, A History of Herefordshire, 1985, p. 20.)

These "domestic" hillforts would have needed to farm large areas outside their defences to feed the inhabitants, perhaps even several thousand acres.

Finds from Iron Age Herefordshire are rare and most theories of Iron Age life are developed based on post-holes and fragments of pottery. Metal objects are rare and most organic finds (wood, bone, fabric, etc.) are dissolved in the acidic soil of the hilltops.

A discovery at Sutton Walls hillfort has provided the best insight into what the Iron Age Herefordian man looked like. Many skeletons, of both men and boys, were found dumped in one of the fort's defensive ditches. They may have been massacred as prisoners of war. From these bones the physical appearance of the victims was recreated. It was discovered that these Iron Age men were an average 5ft 8in tall, with some being over 6ft tall. Their faces had prominent jaws and heavy features. One of the skeletons was of a man in his forties, while another may have been in his fifties. Many of the men appeared to have been strong, and though their teeth had been worn the signs of decay were minimal.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2003]

In AD 43 the Roman Emperor Claudius sent a fleet to invade Britain. This was not the first Roman attempt at an invasion of Britain, as in 55 and 54 BC the Emperor Julius Caesar had made two unsuccessful expeditions. The AD 43 invasion landed at Kent with four legions and 50 auxiliary units commanded by Aulus Plautius. They quickly defeated the British tribal co-kings of the Catuvellauni, Caratacus and his brother Togodumnus. Togodumnus was killed and Caratacus fled into Wales. Claudius was also successful at Colchester, and from this point the legions proceeded in a four-year attempt to conquer the rest of southern Britain.

By AD 47 the Roman frontier of Britain was marked by the Fosse Way, which ran from Isca (Exeter) to Lindum (Lincoln), via Corinium (Cirencester) and Ratae (Leicester). This frontier was secured by a series of Roman forts. The Welsh Marches remained unconquered, and the threat from these unconquered peoples unnerved the Romans. This fear - as well as the incentives of the area's gold, silver, lead and copper resources - drew the Romans towards the west and Herefordshire.

For a few decades during the middle of the 1st century AD the Welsh Marches formed the western frontier in Britain. Herefordshire, in the centre of the Marches, does have evidence of settlements created by the Romans in the border area. Leintwardine, in the north-west of the county, shows signs today of its roots as a Roman fort. The high street, which runs straight through the centre of the village, still represents the via principalis or main street of a Roman settlement. The fort was built some time after the 1st century AD, and probably after the nearby fort at Buckton had been demolished. The purpose of the fort appears to have been that of supply depot for the central Marches. It would have aided further forays into unconquered territory by the Romans and may have been held by a single unit of 500 men. Closer to Hereford is the Roman town of Magna at Kenchester, which lies just a few miles to the west of the city. Nothing survives of the town above ground but its perimeter can still be traced in field boundaries, which enclose an area of 22 acres. Clear outlines of buildings and roads can also be seen on aerial photographs. Within the perimeter of the town were many substantial stone buildings; some even had mosaic floors, one example of which can be seen on the stairs of Hereford Library.

Within Herefordshire there are a further four small towns (Blackwardine, Stonechesters, Stretton Sugwas and Ariconium), and a few villas, for example at Wellington Quarry (HER reference no. 5522) and Putley. Very little is known about any of these sites. Contemporary with these "Roman" types of settlements are another type - native houses within large ditched enclosures. We know of at least two of these thanks to recent excavations (HER nos. 3216 and 6007), and there may be many more still awaiting discovery. Finds from these native sites included a wide range of 2nd and 3rd century AD Roman pottery and iron implements that had been imported into Herefordshire from the Manchester, Hampshire and Severn Valley areas, but there was no evidence for stone houses. It may be that the stone had been robbed out or that the houses were made of wood, thatch and mud that left no traces. At the moment we can only guess at how the people there lived, what they grew or where they worked.

Other evidence of Roman activity in Herefordshire takes the form of miscellaneous finds across the county and a legacy of Roman roads. The Romans are famous for their very straight roads, which formalised the quickest route from A to B. Roman roads exist in Herefordshire at Eardisley, from Craven Arms in Shropshire to Leintwardine - which still goes by the name of "Watling Street" - and one running across the north of Hereford city, which today is still called the "Roman Road". These roads were primarily designed to aid military communication rather than communication between native settlements. It is difficult to identify the tribe to which the people of Herefordshire belonged. An inscription on a milestone found at Kenchester contains the letters "RPCD", which usually stands for Res Publica Civitatis Dobunnorum. This suggests that Herefordshire may have belonged to the tribe of the Dobunni. However, many archaeologists do not agree with this suggestion. Before the Roman conquest the Dobunni tribe were known to have their own coinage and wheel-turned pottery: Herefordshire had neither, and so it is difficult to accept that two areas with such a vast cultural gap could have belonged to the same tribe. It has also been suggested that Herefordshire may have formed part of the tribe of the Silures, but this too is problematic. The Silures had numerous hillforts, as well as pottery, which again does not match the situation in Herefordshire.

The solution appears to be to put Herefordshire in the tribe of the Decangi, with whom the Roman Governor of Britain, Ostorius Scapula, waged war. This proposal cannot be agreed as definitely correct, as many of the pre-Roman settlements - such as Credenhill, Croft Ambrey and Midsummer Hill - have been burnt and abandoned. However, this fact in itself adds more weight to the argument that Herefordshire belonged to the Decangi, as when Ostorius Scapula waged war with this tribe and attempted to push them further into Wales, he destroyed and burnt the huts and settlements that stood before him.

The Romanisation of Britain brought about many changes in agriculture. One such change was the introduction of the payment of Tribute Tax, which meant that conquered communities had to provide corn for the Roman soldiers. This would have meant an increase in the working of arable land in the county. As a result, rotary querns were more extensively used and corn-drying ovens, like the one discovered at Sutton Walls in Marden (HER no. 912), were introduced.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

In the 1st century BC Britain was populated by Iron Age tribes, many of whom had close links with the tribes of northern France. Britain was divided among 24 different tribes of varying area, population sizes and levels of technological advancement. At least seven of these Iron Age tribes had their own coinage. Many of the tribes in the south-east of England benefited from trade routes with France and the rest of Europe, and commerce had begun to flourish. Tribes in the south-west of Britain and Wales controlled considerable mineral wealth in tin deposits and copper mines.

In 55 and 54 BC Julius Caesar led two expeditions into Britain from Boulogne, both of which landed on the Kent coast at Deal, a few miles north-east of Dover. These expeditions were short lived, and there were no further attempts by the Romans to land in Britain until Claudius' invasion in AD 43.

The First Roman Landing, 55 BC

The seed for a Roman invasion of Britain had probably been sown when the Armorican tribes on the coast of Brittany rebelled against the Romans with the help of tribes from southern Britain. Caesar recognised that he needed to subdue the tribes of Britain before they could create more problems within the unstable western edge of the Roman province.

On 26th August 55 BC, two Roman legions (about 10,000 soldiers) under the personal command of Julius Caesar crossed the English Channel in a group of transporter ships from the Portus Itius in Boulogne. By the next morning the Romans were not far from the cliffs of Dover, whose upper banks were lined with British warriors in horse-drawn chariots (an antiquated method of fighting no longer used by the Roman army). After an initial battle the British war leaders sought a truce and handed over hostages.

Four days later, when Roman back-up (including 500 cavalry soldiers and horses) also tried to land in Britain, they were beaten back by bad weather. The storm also damaged many of the ships already beached at Deal. This lack of cavalry seriously restricted Caesar's operations as soldiers were forced to repair their boats and were therefore at risk from the British tribes who began to take advantage with fresh attacks. After repairing most of the ships Caesar ordered the troops to return to Gaul, bringing an abrupt end to the first invasion attempt as it was now the end of the Roman campaigning season.

The Second Roman Landing, 54 BC

The following year, the Romans organised a much larger expedition to Britain, with a total of 800 ships transporting five legions and 2,000 cavalry troops, plus horses. They set sail from Boulogne on 6th July and landed unopposed the next day on a beach between Deal and Sandwich in Kent.

When the native Britons saw the size of the Roman army they quickly retreated inland. Julius Caesar immediately marched 12 miles inland to the Stour River, and at daybreak on 8th July the Romans and the Britons met in battle. The Britons used chariot warfare, with two horses pulling a driver and warrior, the latter hurling javelins and dismounting to fight at close quarters. However, the discipline, organisation and technique of the Roman army soon had the natives beaten and they were forced to retreat once more to a nearby hillfort (probably Bigbury) a mile and half from the river crossing. The Roman Seventh Legion attacked the hillfort but were kept out by trees that had been piled up at the entrance. To gain access, the Romans filled the ditches with earth and branches, making a ramp, and then captured the fort.

However, bad weather was once again to bring misfortune for the Romans. An overnight storm had driven most of the Roman ships onto the shore, and the main body of the troops returned to the beach to find at least 40 ships completely destroyed. Caesar's army then set about building a land fort into which the remaining 760 ships had to be transported, which took ten days.

During this ten-day delay a large British force was briefly united under a single commander, Cassivellaunus, who ruled the Catuvellauni tribe on the north side of the River Thames. It was Cassivellaunus' army that had met Caesar's troops at the Stour river crossing. After being driven back by the Romans towards the Thames, Cassivellaunus then set about destroying local food sources and using his chariots to attack the Roman legions. Unfortunately for Cassivellaunus other British tribes (including the Trinovantes and their allies) resented his control and defected to the Roman side. Through these tribes Caesar acquired much useful information, including the whereabouts of Cassivellaunus' stronghold.

Even as the Romans were preparing to attack his fortress Cassivellaunus was ordering his allies in Kent to attack the Roman camp at Deal. The attack failed and Cassivellaunus surrendered, but he appears to have been fairly treated by the Romans who had learned of problems in Gaul and made plans to return there. The Roman legions left Britain in early September 54 BC, and it was to be another 97 years before they would again attempt the conquest of Britain.

The Roman Invasion of AD 43

Following the death of Cunobelinus, who had been one of the most powerful tribal leaders in Britain and effectively the British "king", his throne passed to his two sons Togodumnus and Caratacus. By this time Rome and Britain were trading with each other, with Rome taking a special interest in the metals that Britain had to offer. However, most of Britain at this time was still defiantly anti-Roman, and was especially opposed to the taxes that were paid to Rome.

By this time Claudius was Emperor of Rome, and he needed to prove to the Senate that he was a competent and worthy successor. The reasons for Claudius' invasion of Britain were:

• The trade was bringing in a good income, especially for the wine growers, pottery manufacturers and Roman merchandisers in general. If Britain gained her independence these trade routes would suffer.
• If Britain broke away from Rome it might persuade other subjected nations to follow suit, and the rebellious Britons might offer support to those on the western edge of the Empire.
• The Spanish silver mines on which the Romans depended to produce raw materials for the manufacture of its currency were running low, and they had heard that south-west England and Wales were rich in copper, tin and lead ore.
• The invasion would prove to the Senate and the people of Rome that Claudius was not a weak emperor and that he could be a victorious and strong ruler.

The Invasion

To ensure success Claudius spent a great deal of time planning the invasion. Four years previously the Emperor Gaius had planned to invade Britain, but his mission had been abandoned. The cause of the reluctance was an obstacle that had confronted both of Caesar's invasions and defeated them both times: the sea. The Roman troops were terrified of the sea and what it could do to their ships, and perhaps even more terrified of being stranded on British shores with the barbarian natives all around. With this fear lying heavily on their minds the Roman troops of Claudius' invasion refused to board the ships, and their commander Aulus Plautius was unable to persuade them otherwise. To help him Rome sent Narcissus, the Secretary for State, to talk to the troops. Narcissus was an ex-slave and perhaps because of his lowly origins he was able to persuade the Roman troops to set sail.

This time, the Romans landed at Richborough in Kent and were unopposed by the Britons. When Caratacus heard of the Roman landing he knew that it would take some time to gather a force large enough to tackle the Romans head on, so he gathered as many troops as he could and prepared to meet the Romans at the River Medway.

The battle scene was set. The Romans and Britons faced each other from the opposite sides of the river bank. The Britons watched the Roman troops moving about on the other side, little knowing that while they watched eight cohorts of Batavian troops were slipping into the water unseen. The Batavians came out a little way from the British warriors and made their way to the back of their lines to where their chariots stood. They then began to disable the horses and the chariots, thus taking away the British army's back-up. This put the Britons into total disarray, and while they panicked two Roman legions successfully crossed the Medway and set up base on the British side. The Britons rushed at the legions and the battle carried on throughout the day, the Roman legions knowing that they had to stand firm until reinforcements arrived. By night more Romans crossed the river and the next day the fighting resumed with the Romans employing their tight group fighting tactics.

With superior armour, discipline and sheer force of numbers the Roman army was victorious and now had a large area of south-east Britain subdued, which they could use as a base from which to launch further expeditions into Britain to prevent the possibility of the remaining tribes forming a larger fighting force and launching counter-attacks.

The battle at Medway was one of the most significant battles in British history, for it enabled the Romans finally to get the stronghold in Britain that they so desired. It gave them a base from which to plan and carry out the Romanisation of Britain and the expansion of the Roman Empire. Unfortunately the exact site of the battle at Medway has not been definitively identified. After the battle the troops returned to collect their dead comrades and see that they were appropriately buried.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

The influence of the Romans brought about many changes in lifestyle. Prior to the Roman occupation the Celtic tribes of Britain had focused their daily life around the hillforts. These hillforts were simple defended camps on higher ground, in which the chieftain or king of the local tribe would live along with many of his animals, plus bodyguards, slaves and some members of his tribe. Within these camps were a number of simple roundhouses in which separate families lived. Other members of the tribe would live outside the hillforts, in small villages or isolated farmhouses. After the Roman invasion, "towns" and villages began to spring up on lower ground, often close to a river. These towns were simple in design with a main street running through the centre, and shops, houses and public buildings built alongside.

The houses of the Roman period were very different to the simple thatched roundhouses of the Iron Age. Roman houses were normally rectangular and built of a timber frame with wattle and daub inserts. They were often of two storeys and the roofs would be tiled. Inside the house there would be a cement floor, and sometimes highly-decorated tessellated mosaic pavements with geometrical designs. Some of the larger houses were equipped with under-floor heating (hypocausts), which consisted of a floor raised on brick pillars and a furnace built under the floor to allow heat to spread throughout the space between the ground and the raised floor. A system of flues would carry the heat from the basement to other parts of the building. In Herefordshire, we have evidence of mosaic floors and hypocaust systems from the Roman town at Kenchester.

Public buildings were also a feature of Roman towns. In Herefordshire we do not have much evidence of public buildings, but Kenchester does appear to have had a bath complex. The baths were an important part of Roman daily life, as men would go there to socialise, exercise and relax. Most baths consisted of three baths at different temperatures: the frigidarium (cold room); thetepidarium (warm room); and the caldarium (hot room). The rooms were heated by the hypocaust system explained above. The men would work their way around these three rooms, taking a dip in each to invigorate the mind and body. Rich men would spend whole days at the baths, being waited on by their servants, playing games and socialising. There would often be people on hand to give massages and to cleanse the client's body by rubbing in olive oil and then scraping it off with an instrument like a blunt knife, known as a strigil. In ancient Rome women were also permitted to use the baths, but had their own bath day separate from the men so that the two would never mix. Evidence from sites such as Caerleon in Monmouthshire suggests that at least some women in Roman Britain also used the public baths.

The richer members of Romano-British society, and those men who worked for the Romans, began to wear the Roman toga style of clothing. This consisted of a loose wrap-around piece of cloth. Many men also shaved and wore their hair short, like Romans. The poorer men of Roman Britain continued to wear the older Celtic style of clothes, consisting of a woollen tunic and trousers.

The greatest influence of the Romans was seen in trade and industry. Up until this time the Iron Age people had produced enough crops to feed themselves, and markets had been small, local affairs with not much cross-country trading. The influx of the Roman army meant that there was now an increased and permanent demand for crops, meat, leather and horses, all of which had to be provided by the local community. The larger the industry became, with new roads, public buildings and houses, the more need there was for engineers, carpenters and masons and the greater the need for raw materials. The Iron Age community began to learn new skills in order to create a romanised Britain. The system by which the local people provided the corn for soldiers was known as Tribute Tax. This would have caused an increase in the clearing of land for arable cultivation and resulted in the use of more rotary querns and corn-drying ovens.

Continental products were also being brought into the country. High-quality pottery and tableware was a feature of ordinary life for the Romans, and soon Britain was creating a demand for similar goods. One typical and easily-recognisable style of Roman pottery is known as Samian ware. This was red glazed pottery that was highly decorated with scenes depicting scenes of hunting and fishing. It was not an everyday kind of pottery and was only used at important banquets, due to the expense and time spent creating it. Samian ware was made in Roman Gaul (modern France), and extensive study of its clays and decoration has led to the identification of individual workshops that produced it. Wine was also being imported from Italy and other parts of the empire as Britain was being opened up to the world beyond her shores.

The Romans are famous for their road building, and they were quick to set up a network across the country enabling troops to travel quickly from A to B - usually in as straight a line as possible. Roman surveyors would plot a route between two points using a groma, four weighted strings hanging from a cross on a pole. The path of the road would then be cleared and a route cut into the ground. Foundations of chalk or gravel would be laid, and on top a layer of paving stones or cobbles would have completed the road surface. To prevent the build-up of surface water the Romans often dug drainage channels on either side of the road to carry the water away. Roman roads also had quite a pronounced camber (the curve of the road surface) to encourage the water to run off into the drains.

The Roman occupation brought about many changes to life in Britain, but these developments mainly affected the upper classes - those who could afford to build heated villas and visit the baths. For the ordinary farmer of Iron Age Herefordshire, the Roman invasion did not affect his day to day living to any great extent, and for some time he continued to wear his Celtic woollen clothes, live in his thatched roundhouse and feed his family on the food that he himself had grown.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

The governorship of Britain was one of the most important in the Roman Empire, and as such was usually held by men from the Roman aristocracy - the Senate of Rome - who had worked their way up the political ladder, holding various positions to gain essential experience.

In Britain, as commander-in-chief of the army, much of the Governor's time was spent on the battlefield, attempting to subdue unruly and rebellious tribes. Between campaigns, the Governor would travel around the province; each town would receive him with speeches and ceremonies and he would inspect new buildings, bridges and roads. The Governor was also the Lord Chief Justice of the province, and it was his responsibility to ensure that lawbreakers were captured and that peace and order were maintained.

To help the Governor in his duties he had a personal staff of about 30-40 individuals, including personal assistants, secretaries, police officers, couriers, accountants and clerks. Some of the staff would have been slaves or freedmen. There was also a legatus iuridicus, or law-officer, who could go around the province and deal with some of the legal matters to leave more of the Governor's time free for campaigns and peace-keeping.

The financial responsibility of an imperial province was in the hands of a high-ranking Procurator. These officials were chosen from among the equites, or knights, the class which ranked below the Senate and had its own political ladder of military and civilian posts. The Procurators were directly responsible to the Emperor and not to the provincial Governors, which sometimes caused tension between these two posts. The Procurators were responsible for the taxation of provinces in order to generate imperial revenue. The system of taxation can be divided into two types: direct and indirect. One type of direct tax was tributum soli, a tax on land and fixed property. The idea behind this was that all land in the Province belonged to the Roman state, and therefore those who lived on or made a living out of it could be expected to pay rent. Owners of taxable land were required to register it with the local record office. There was also the tributum capitis, a poll tax on property other than land, including that which was use for trade or commerce.

Taxes were mostly paid with coins, but grain, hides and other payments were sometimes demanded. The people of Roman Britain were also expected to provide the Roman army with grain, leather and lard. Sometimes this came under taxation and sometimes it was paid for at prices fixed by the government, most likely in their favour.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

The first town built in Roman Britain was near the site of the tribal capital of the Belgae, Camulodunum (modern Colchester in Essex). It was a colonia, a town of the highest rank, populated by Roman citizens, mostly retired soldiers. By populating the new towns with Roman citizens the government could ensure loyalty to Rome within a particular area and encourage the spread of Roman ideas in the province.

The administration of the new towns would have been based on the system used in Rome. This consisted of a Senate or ordo of up to 100 members, usually known as decurions. These would normally be men who had already held some sort of political office, but in a new province they could be trustworthy members of the local tribal aristocracy. You needed to be fairly well off to be adecurion as you were expected to contribute to the construction of the baths and other public buildings in your town. The ordo was also responsible to the Procurator for tax collection. Every year four magistrates were elected for each town. Between them they were responsible for minor matters of justice, public works and public order. The magistrates had to swear by Jupiter, the deified Emperors and by whatever gods were worshipped locally.

Roman towns were very ordered and strictly planned. One of the first stages would be to set out two main roads that bisected each other, and then from these to create a series of rectangular spaces in which houses and public buildings could be constructed. The two main roads in the town were known as the Cardo Maximus and the Decumanus Maximus. In small towns, such as Kenchester in Herefordshire, strict planning did not take place to any great extent and instead one road ran through the centre of the town with smaller roads running off it.

Within the town layout, areas would have been set aside for public buildings, which were an important feature of Roman towns. These buildings were even more important in the provinces as they created a sense of unity, so that no matter where you went in the empire there was always something that was instantly recognisable as Roman. These public buildings included temples, basilicas, baths, and sometimes even amphitheatres where dramatic performances were staged. Unfortunately at Kenchester and Leintwardine we do not have much evidence for public buildings, although both appear to have had small bath complexes for the relaxation of the inhabitants.

Herefordshire appears to have had only one Roman town - Magna, modern Kenchester - which was a small market town at the junction of four Roman roads. Due to this lack of Roman urbanisation it is likely that life in Herefordshire during Roman occupation carried on very much as before. Herefordshire was an agricultural area and the majority of its inhabitants would have centred their life around their farms and smallholdings, with the hillforts of the Iron Age still playing an important role in society.

The Roman settlements of Ariconium (Weston under Penyard) and Bravonium (Leintwardine) are unusual for Roman Britain in that neither appears to have had an overly-planned street system and neither appears to have had the public buildings that were such an important part of Roman administration. Leintwardine does appear to have had a small bath complex at the south end of the town but this was most likely for the benefit of the Roman soldiers than for the romanisation of the natives. The two sites appear to have grown up for different reasons. Ariconium was in an area rich in iron deposits useful for weapons and coinage, but not perhaps the ideal situation for habitation, while Leintwardine appears to have been a military site that grew up along the line of the Roman road between two much more significant forts - Wroxeter in Shropshire and Caerleon in Monmouthshire. It was a small cog in a larger wheel of Roman border control.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

The Romans did contribute to the increased popularity of many herbs and seasonings used in cooking. These included parsley, borage, chervil, coriander, dill, fennel, mint, thyme, garlic, leek, onion, shallot, rosemary, sage, savory, sweet marjoram and radish, all of which are still very much a feature of modern cooking.

The Romans also imported dates, almonds, olives and olive oil, wine, pine cones and kernels, fermented fish sauce (liquamen or garum), pepper, ginger and cinnamon, none of which was known in Britain at that time.

Roman dining was an elaborate affair with many weird and wonderful courses, ranging from milk-fattened snails to wild boar stuffed with live birds, which would fly out of the stomach when it was cut open. A Roman banquet would consist of several rich and filling courses. Roman ate whilst reclining on couches as they believed this position aided digestion and improved their ability to converse with one another. Much of the food served would have been eaten with the fingers, and so it was important to always have a napkin to hand.

Shellfish and seafood were a highly prized part of the Roman diet, and oysters were especially important. The Romans found that many of the coastal areas of Britain had excellent supplies of oysters - those from Colchester in Essex even became famous in Rome. At one excavation at Silchester in Hampshire over one million oyster shells were found in one deposit. Sea fish was also popular and from this the Romans made the fish stock known as liquamen or garum, which was made by baking the fishes' entrails (guts) in salt and then boiling them down to produce a sauce. This was stored for two months before use.

Snails were considered a delicacy by the Romans; they would be kept in jars and fed on wheat and milk until they were too fat to get back in their shells. At this point they were fried in oil and served with liquamen mixed with wine. The Romans also kept dormice in jars, and they too would be fattened up before being stuffed with minced meat and cooked. The dormice that the Romans ate were not the small breed that are found nesting in British cornfields today. The Roman dormouse was a much larger breed called the fat or edible dormouse (Latin name glis glis). This breed of dormouse can still be found in England, in one very small area of the Home Counties, not because they have survived since Roman times but because a wealthy collector imported some in the late 19th or early 20th century, and they escaped. They like to live in the attics of houses, and sometimes chew through electric cables with predictable results. They are expanding their range extremely slowly and will probably never get much beyond their existing area, unless someone releases more in another part of the country.

Farming practices in Britain also changes after the arrival of the Romans, as they were the first to enclose areas to be used as game parks for red, roe and fallow deer. Some of the larger villas also had hare gardens attached so that there was a plentiful supply of them for the dinner table. The Romans also ate plenty of wildfowl and built columbaria to keep pigeons in. These were tall, narrow towers with openings for the birds to nest in, very much like the medieval and post-medieval dovecotes which are still a part of the landscape today.

British cattle had been exported to the continent before the Romans arrived here. Beef was a popular meat, even being supplied to the Roman garrison as their meat ration. From bone evidence we can determine that there were several different breeds of cattle being reared in Britain in the Roman period. Cattle were extremely useful as they provided milk, butter, cheese, horn, hides and glue (from boiling the bones), as well as being used for traction (pulling ploughs and carts). Pigs were plentiful in Roman Britain, especially in the south and east. Lard made from pig fat was also part of the Roman soldiers' daily ration, and suckling pig was often eaten at Roman banquets. Hams could be kept for longer if they were salted or pickled in brine. The soldiers on Hadrian's Wall and the Antonine Wall ate a lot of lamb and mutton, and goats were also kept, as much for their milk as their meat.

We know that the Romans in Britain produced their own cheeses as moulds and strainers have been found at many Romano-British sites across the country. We also know that various forms of wheat were cultivated in Britain, and cereal grains were used for making porridge and gruel as well as baking. Flour would have been ground mainly at home using a rotary hand quern, but there is also evidence that commercial bakeries existed, especially in the larger towns. The Romans appear to have produced a number of different varieties of bread.

The Romans were responsible for introducing many varieties of vegetable that we still use today, such as cabbage, onion, leek, shallots, carrots, endive, globe artichokes, cucumber, marrow, asparagus, parsnip, turnip, radish and celery. The most important fruit that they brought to Britain was the grape. Britain became the northernmost province of the Roman empire where grapes could be ripened, although they were mainly restricted to the south. The wine made in Britain was supplemented with wine imported from the empire's other provinces, and wine was the usual drink of Roman soldiers. The Romans also introduced orchard crops such as medlar, mulberry, damson, plum and cherry.

All the various ingredients imported or cultivated by the Romans resulted in a very much more elaborate and seasoned style of cooking than the simple meat and vegetable stews of the Iron Age. Many of the recipes that were a common part of Roman dining would have appeared quite unusual to the Celtic people, and even today in our age of gastronomic experimentation some of the traditional Roman dishes seem quite unappetising - anyone for stuffed dormouse?

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

The Romans were famous for their highly skilled and disciplined army, with which they were able to conquer vast areas of the ancient world and become one of the most powerful nations of the period. The Romans had various types of soldiers with different skills for different purposes.

If you wanted to join the Roman army you would have to be a male citizen, at least 1.7m tall and in good health. You would be interviewed and given a medical examination, and if successful you would be required to swear an oath of loyalty to Rome and the Emperor before being assigned to a legion and sent to your posting. New recruits were put through vigorous training to ensure that they became proficient fighters. This training included not only combat techniques but also skills such as carpentry, road building and swimming.

In the army recruits were well fed, and a soldier could comfortably retire after his 25 years of service. A legionary's basic pay was about 300 denarii (silver pieces) a year, but out of this he had to pay for part of his food, equipment, pension and funeral savings. The balance of what was left was paid to the soldiers every three months or so.

At the top of the military hierarchy was the Praetorian Guard. This was the imperial bodyguard for the Emperor and they only took to the battlefield when led by the Emperor in person. They were normally based in Rome.

The legions formed the backbone of the Roman army, and there were 27 of these formations. They were tough, well trained, disciplined infantry made up of Roman citizens. A legion was composed of 10 cohorts, each containing 480 men, except for the first cohort which was double that number, giving a total of 5,280 men in a legion. Each cohort was then subdivided into six centuries of 80 men.

Attached to the legions was a small body of horsemen whose main duties were those of dispatch riders and guards; they were not part of the fighting cavalry core. At the time of the Roman conquest of Britain the emphasis was very much on the foot soldier who was to lead the troops into battle and bear the brunt of the attack. The soldiers on horseback were used as back-up.

There were also many specialist men who travelled with the troops. These included clerks, armourers, blacksmiths, stone-masons, carpenters and medical staff. Each legion also had its own architect and water engineer, whose job it was to find suitable sites for the temporary and permanent forts of the army. These men were regarded as technicians, not fighters.

All the legionaries were uniformly equipped with body armour. In the early period this consisted of a hardened leather jerkin (vest) reinforced with metal plates; it was later replaced with the more complicated metal strip armour. This armour went to the hip, and from the hip to the knee the soldiers wore either a heavy woollen tunic or an apron made of leather and bronze strips hanging from a belt.

The Roman helmet was a well-designed piece of equipment. The early type was like a jockey's helmet with a bronze dome and a horizontal projection at the back to protect the top of the spine. At the front the only protection came from a brow ridge, and there were hinged cheekpieces to protect the face. This helmet was later replaced by a helmet with an iron skull cap and deeper protection at the back of the neck.

The legionary shield was of a large semi-cylindrical type, which when held close to the body gave protection from the chin to the thigh along the whole of one side. To compensate for its size it was probably designed to be quite light, perhaps made from a light wood bound at the edges with metal with a strong central bronze boss for the internal hand grip. The outer surface was covered in leather, on which were elaborate gilded bronze patterns depicting war and victory.

The attacking weapons of the Roman legionaries included the pilum (javelin) and the gladius (short sword). The wooden pilum was around 7ft long with an iron tip, and each legionary carried two of these. They were designed to thrown at the enemy up to 30m away. They were intended to pierce the enemy's shield, whereupon the iron tip would bend under the weight of the wooden shaft. This made it difficult to pull out, forcing the enemy to abandon the shield. The legionaries would then engage the enemy in close combat with their short swords. The well-designed body armour of the Romans gave them a distinct advantage over the "Barbarian Britons". 

The different fighting techniques of the Romans and the Britons also favoured the invaders. The Celts were equipped with large swords and were used to fighting in open combat where they could swing their swords at individual men. The Romans, however, had been taught to fight in close formation and to keep this position, where the short gladius was much more effective than the long sword. The Celts were brave men and could be heroic fighters under the right leadership, but unlike the legionaries they had no effective organisation and once battle had commenced they often found it difficult to direct and manoeuvre different sections of fighters, whereas the Romans could quickly deploy sections of men using pre-arranged hand signals.

The main "frontal" attacks were carried out by the legionaries whilst another branch of the Roman army, the auxilia, fought at the sides. The troops of the auxilia were regarded as back-up to the legionaries. The auxilia were originally recruited from barbarian tribes from every part of the Roman Empire and often retained their local names and methods of fighting. In pre-Claudian times they often appeared as an ill-organised rabble of locals, but they later became an integral part of the Roman army. By the end of the 1st century AD there may have been as many as 200,000 auxiliaries in the Roman army, with each man being expected to serve for 25 years.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

The fort in Roman Britain required strong defences against sudden attack and comfortable quarters suited to a semi-permanent occupation. Thus its defences were designed to be permanent and massive and its internal buildings durable and solid. Nearly all Roman forts were "playing-card" shaped, i.e. rectangular with rounded corners. The headquarters building was placed in the centre of the fort, with space for soldiers' accommodation in front and behind.

A castellum was designed to house either a cohors quingenaria of 480 men or a cohors militaria of 800 men, both of which might include mounted attachments. These were symbolised by the additional word equitata, e.g. cohors militaria equitata. The castellum might also house an ala quingenaria of 512 men or the much rarer and more specialised ala militaria of 768 men. A cohort was divided into six or ten centuriae of 80 men commanded by a centurion, whilst the alae were divided into 16 and 24 turmae, each containing 32 men and commanded by a decurion. 

It has been estimated that a fort 400ft square could contain a cohors quingenaria (480 men), with an extra 3,750 square feet being needed for a mounted attachment. A fort of 400ft x 600ft could hold a cohors militaria (800 men) or an ala quingenaria (512 men), or even a cohors militaria equitata. An ala militaria required a fort 500ft x 700ft, and forts of this size are peculiar to Britain.

Normally a fort was rectangular and surrounded by a huge rampart bank known as the vallum and one or more ditches (fossae). The fort would have been entered via one of four gates in the rampart bank. In the shorter sides of the rectangle these gates were usually placed in the centre, but on the longer sides to allow for room for the central row of main buildings they were pushed towards the front of the fort.

In the middle of the fort stood the headquarters or principia, whose main entrance faced the front gate of the fort (the porta praetoria), and to which it was connected by a road called the via praetoria. At a right angle to the via praetoria was the via principalis, which ran in front of the headquarters and connected the two side gates, the porta principalis dextra (right main gate) and theporta principalis sinistra (left main gate).

Either side of the headquarters would have been the other official buildings, including the house of the Commandant and one or more granaries. In some forts there would also be a workshop or smithy. This block of official buildings divided the front area (praetentura) from the rear area (retentura). In these areas the long narrow barrack buildings for the soldiers would be found.

Parallel to the via principalis and dividing the central block from the rear  was the via quintata. From the back of the headquarters the via decumana ran from the headquarters to the back gate, orporta decumana. A further road ran all the way round the fort within the rampart, and this was called the via sagularis.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

AD 43: Claudius invades Britain.
 
AD 60: Roman invasion of the Druid sanctuary on Anglesey.
 
AD 61: Queen Boudicca of the Iceni tribe rebels and burns Colchester. 80,000 Britons killed. Boudicca poisons herself.
 
AD 70s: Governors Julius Frontinus and Julius Agricola are successful in gaining control in Wales.
 
AD 79: Agricola marches into Caledonia (Scotland).
 
AD 84: The battle of Mons Graupius in Scotland. Agricola defeats the Scottish tribes. 
 
AD 122: Hadrian's Wall is constructed in the North to act as a border between the conquered and unconquered. It runs from coast to coast between Bowness in the west and Wallsend in the east.
 
AD 142: The Antonine Wall is constructed to the north of Hadrian's Wall to again act as frontier control. It runs across the Forth-Clyde isthmus from Old Kilpatrick in the west to Carriden in the east.
 
AD 280 onwards:  Forts are built on the south and east coasts to guard against raids by Saxon pirates.
 
AD 286: Carausius, Commander of the British Fleet, seizes Britian and declares himself Emperor.
 
AD 296: Roman troops land to reclaim Britain.
 
AD 367: Picts, Scots and Allocotti tribes all invade Britain at once. The Roman army loses control and General Theodosius is sent in to try and restore order.
 
AD 383: The British Commander, Magnus Maximus, declares himself Emperor and takes most of the army from Britain.
 
AD 398: Barbarian tribes invade Britain again.
 
AD 406: Roman troops in Britain elect their own Emperor. However, so many German invaders have crossed the River Rhine into neighbouring Gaul that Britain is now cut off from Rome. The last Roman soldiers in Britain are sent to Gaul to deal with the Germans.
 
AD 410: The Emperor Honorius issues an edict that gives all the cities in Britain responsibility for their own defence. Roman Britain has come to an end.
 
[Original compiler: Miranda Greene, 2004]

The Roman occupation of Britain began in earnest under the Emperor Claudius in AD 43, and advanced with great rapidity over most of Britain. Within three or four years the whole country as far as the Exe, Severn and Humber rivers was under Roman control.

For a time the more remote districts, such as Herefordshire, were left under the protection of the native Celtic princes, but in the course of the next 30 years the Governor Ostorius Scapula and his successors were engaged in reducing the tribes of the highland districts to the north and west, and these areas were gradually absorbed by the Romans.

It was during these campaigns that Ostorius Scapula penetrated through Herefordshire and into the territory of the rebellious Welsh tribe, the Ordovices, whose southern boundary is thought to have lain between the Wye and the Teme. A fierce hill-top battle between the Ordovican "king" Caratacus and Ostorius Scapula ensued and the Ordovicans were defeated. The site of this battle is unknown but it is possible that it was in Herefordshire. Some scholars (Merrivale and Walters) suggest that it may have been on Coxall Knoll near Brampton Bryan, close to the Shropshire border, but no evidence has been found conclusively to confirm this theory.

The region of Herefordshire lies between the Midland Plains and the highlands of South Wales. This topography, and its situation as a borderland between lowland and highland zones has had much influence on its fortunes. Even before the Roman invasion it formed the frontier between British tribes, the Gloucestershire Dobunni and the Silures and Ordovices of Wales. It was later to become the limit of the Norman advance west after the Conquest of AD 1066.

At the time of the Roman occupation Herefordshire was, with the exception of the Wye Valley, an area unsuited to settlement occupation. The greater part of the area was covered in uncultivated forest, and while the highlands in the west formed useful natural defences these were not conducive to extensive settlement.

The Romans first entered Herefordshire during the long campaigns to subdue the rebel tribes of Wales, especially the powerful and warlike Silures (who held much of south-east Wales). After more than 30 years of fighting the Silures were finally subdued, and the Romans could begin to imprint imperialism on the area. The Roman administrators recognised that most of what is now Herefordshire was a westward extension of the English plain, which offered fertile soil ripe for settlement, although at this time much of it was covered by dense forest. An added attraction was that the area in the south towards the Forest of Dean offered iron deposits that had been successfully worked by the Celtic peoples for more than a century.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

The first move by the Romans against these troublesome tribes took place c. AD 48, when the Governor Ostorius Scapula advanced to the Upper Severn, established a legionary base at Wroxeter and pushed into north-east Wales. Trouble with rebel tribes in East Anglia cut this move short and the Romans did not regain the initiative until c. AD 50, when they advanced to the Lower Severn and established a legionary base at Gloucester.

In AD 51 the Romans staged an attack across the Severn which led to the famous battle between Caratacus and the Romans in Ordovican territory. The exact site of the battle is not known and it has been "sited" upon almost every hill-top in the Central Marches of Wales. Caratacus was defeated and his subsequent plan of carrying on the war from the territory of the Brigantes came to nothing.

In AD 52/53 the Silures stormed the legionary base at Gloucester and killed the commander in charge. Ostorius Scapula died before he could fulfil his vow of destroying the whole tribe in revenge. Under Ostorius Scapula's successor, the Governor Didius Gallus (AD 52-58), the Roman position on the River Severn was restored but no further pushes west were attempted.

The Governor Suetonius Paulinus (AD 59-62) moved the Roman troops forward from Wroxeter into north-west Wales. It was hoped that this campaign would push right up to Anglesey but a revolt by Queen Boudicca in AD 61 recalled Suetonius Paulinus back inland, where he attempted to defend Londinium (London) and the south-east. This revolt caused the Romans such problems that it was another 14 years before the troublesome Silures could be tackled again, and this time it was to be resolved by the Romans for good.

Governor Julius Frontinus moved from the base at Gloucester to Caerleon and from this strategic offensive base was able to overrun and subdue all of south Wales. To his operations belongs the road from Wroxeter to Caerleon (probably routed at first via Hereford and Monmouth and then later running via Kenchester and Abergavenny).

The military work of Julius Frontinus was enduring, and he must also be given the credit for introducing the Roman way of life into this area. Caerwent was founded as a political and cultural centre for the Silures c. AD 75, and there is evidence that the small market town of Kenchester began about the same time. From then onwards the Herefordshire area belonged to the civil zone of Roman Britain for as long as the Roman occupation lasted - a period of more than 300 years.

Within Herefordshire there are scant traces of troops or permanent garrisons, of civil administration or municipal life. The inhabitants of the province were not Romans, but romanised Britons. It was a sparse and moderately civilised population, romanised in language, arts and industries yet with no large Roman centre in the area to leave a lasting influence after the occupation.

We have no exact record as to when and why the Romans were forced to abandon Herefordshire, but there are signs that its towns were destroyed by violence and fire (large quantities of charred earth were found during excavations at Kenchester, Leintwardine and Ariconium), and no Roman remains have been discovered that date from later than the beginning of the 5th century AD.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

At Leintwardine research and excavation have established the existence of a playing-card-shaped camp, 14 acres in extent and surrounded by 3m high embankments. Within the entrenchments Roman tiles, pottery and coins have been found. This area has been identified with the Roman station Bravonium, which is mentioned in the Antonine Itinerary, Iter XII.

Kenchester, near the River Wye, has shown more extensive evidence of Roman occupation. It appears to have been a small market town around 20 acres in size, with suburbs beyond the town walls. It has been identified as the Roman town Magna or Magnis in the Antonine Itinerary. At this site large, intricate mosaic floors have been found (one of which has recently been dated to c. AD 350), along with hypocausts (under-floor heating systems) and painted wall plaster.

In the south-west of the county, at Weston under Penyard near Ross-on-Wye, are the remains of a small town or village which was connected with the iron mines of the nearby Forest of Dean. This area appears to be the site of Ariconium from the Antonine Itinerary. Coins, bronze artefacts and iron-working remains have all been found at this site. The boundaries of the settlement have not been conclusively identified and there has been no large-scale archaeological excavation.

There are also a few isolated Roman sites in the county. At Blackwardine near Stoke Prior, skeletons, pottery, coins and possible kiln remains were found when the Bromyard to Leominster Railway was constructed, and some traces of a Roman road have been observed. Another site is Stretton Grandison, also apparently on a Roman road, where interesting objects have been found and attempts have been made to match it with the Cicutio mentioned in the Antonine Itinerary, although no successful identification has yet been made.

A villa has been noted at Putley, near Ledbury (HER no. 3228) and there is another villa at Walterstone (HER no. 1454), where the Roman Watling Street crosses into Monmouthshire. In 1812 another Roman villa was discovered in the rectory grounds at Bishopstone (HER no. 7223), 1½ miles from Kenchester, during excavation for the rectory foundations. A tessellated pavement was exposed 40cm below the ground surface, measuring c. 10m² with the colours still clear and bright in a geometrical pattern. Unfortunately, this mosaic no longer exists.

Understanding the extent of the romanisation of Herefordshire is difficult because there is a lack of evidence from which to work. We do not fully know the extent of occupation by the Roman army in the county and it is likely that not all the Roman forts or marching camps that existed here have been identified. It may be that concentrated excavation, fieldwork and aerial photography will bring to light new sites or more fully explain those that we know exist. Hopefully in the future there will be a focus on uncovering what life was like here in the 1st to 4th centuries AD. Currently the picture of Roman Herefordshire is at best patchy and incomplete, but it is clear from the known villas, mosaic pavements, pottery and coins that romanisation of the Iron Age inhabitants did occur here to some extent.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

To find source information for the sites listed here, use the Historic Environment Record (HER) number to locate them in the online HER Database. 

ABBEY DORE (HER 4201): A section of the Roman road, known as Stoney Street, was uncovered in the railway station yard at Abbey Dore. Abbey Dore is situated on the direct line north-east of Abergavenny (Gobannium) to Kenchester (Magna).

ASTON INGHAM (HER 6619): In Combe Wood, in 1855, a hoard of coins was discovered deposited in two chests ready for transportation. They were said to number many thousands. All were bronze, and they dated from AD 235-340.

AYMESTREY (HER 7089): Within the outer enclosure (annexe) of Croft Ambrey (an Iron Age hillfort) is a circular mound of c. 10m diameter and c. 1m high. During the Roman period, following desertion of the village, a native sanctuary in the annexe (the Mound) was set up, used from c. AD 75 until at least c. AD 160. It lies towards the eastern half of the enclosure and midway between the defences of the main camp and annexe. The mound itself is only the most prominent of number of features. The monument had two phases of development. Just to the south of the sanctuary the annexe defences had been breached in Roman times, presumably to provide access.

BIRLEY WITH UPPER HILL (HER 31968): A few sherds of Romano-British pottery were found in April 2002, to the east and west of the Roman road.

BISHOPS FROME (HER 7428): A small bronze statuette of Jupiter found c. 1.3m below the ground surface. It is now held in Worcester Museum.

BISHOPSTONE (HER 7223): The site of a Roman villa was discovered during excavations for the foundations of the rectory in 1812. A tessellated pavement was exposed 40cm from the surface, c. 10m square with the colours still bright and clear. The design appears to have been a geometrical pattern. Sadly, this mosaic is no longer in existence. All around the rectory were found Roman bricks, coarse and fine pottery, fragments of cinerary urns and coins. Also in 1812, sandstone foundations were found to the west of the house. The foundations were about 1-1.5m wide, and a total length of c. 15m could be traced, but no part of the wall remained standing.

BRAMPTON BRYAN (HER 8314): In 1854 a number of Roman coins were found in fields on the Brampton Bryan estate, close to Coxall Knoll. Fragments of pottery were also found.

BRAMPTON BRYAN (HER 192): A possible marching camp of Ostorius Scapula was identified by aerial photography in fields c. 110m east of the church. It was perhaps used during Scapula's campaigns in AD 47-8.

BRAMPTON BRYAN (HER 6205): Romano-British pottery was found to the south of Coxall Knoll, Brampton Bryan.

BRINSOP (HER 6284): Traces of a Roman well were discovered in 1887 following the subsidence of soil in a field belonging to Eleven Acres Farm. The ground had sunk for c. 65cm in an irregular circle c. 2.5m in diameter. After excavation it was discovered that the sides were of undressed stones put together without mortar, but strongly built. Pottery and animal bones were found. For c. 5m the lower space was filled with several tons of rough blocks mixed with bones. Below was c. 1m of clay, and finally very wet sand. Excavation stopped at c. 12m due to encroaching water. The diameter of the well varied. At c. 10m there was a triangular recess and here were found bones of animals and fragments of pottery. Parts of two stone querns and three clay amphorae were also found. The well appears to have been used as a rubbish dump.

BRINSOP (HER 6880): A possible marching camp identified by aerial photography at grid reference SO 4300 4400.

CLEHONGER (HER 6274): In Hereford Museum there are bronze brooches, buckles, keys and bodkins (large, blunt needles) which were donated by a Mrs. Jenkins in 1895.

CREDENHILL (HER 6291): Roman remains have frequently been found in the village, which is close to the site of Magna at Kenchester. During the cutting of the Hereford and Brecon Railway, coins, pottery and other articles were found. The Roman road to Magna was cut through here transversely about 60cm below the surface.

DINEDOR (HER 7169): Coins of Galba and Vitellius (AD 68-9) were found in the Iron Age hill fort here.

DONNINGTON (HER 3713): Remains of masonry have been found, apparently forming a well with a domed top. Within it were tiles and pottery. One vase was described as being Samian ware.

DORSTONE (HER 7179): Finds on Dorstone Hill discovered during the examination of a Neolithic site produced dates of the Mesolithic to Roman periods.

EASTNOR (Various HER numbers): In 1876 some curious pieces of stone piping were discovered near the castle, made of oolite bored through the centre and socketed into one another; they were evidently water pipes. The nearest oolite available is at Bredon Hill, 12 miles away. There is no definite evidence that these pieces were Roman.

Finds in this area also include various fragments of Roman pottery discovered during field-walking.

EATON BISHOP (HER 5966): Two Roman lamps and an urn, found near the Roman road known as Stoney Street, are now in the possession of Hereford Museum.

There are also two sections of Roman road in this area. One road (HER 6883) runs from Magna and forms a parish boundary in this area. The other (HER 11123) is the Roman road from Magna to Ewyas Harold.

FOWNHOPE (HER 7343): A coin of the Empress Lucilla (AD 61) was found in Capler Camp. On the obverse is the bust of Lucilla and the reverse shows a priestess offering olive wreaths at an altar with the legend almost obliterated. The coin is now in Hereford Museum.

GANAREW (HER 7170): A Roman building and hypocaust were found at Sellarsbrooke in the 1970s. The Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club reported that Roman coins and swords had also been found in 1895 at the Camp on Little Doward (Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, 1895, p. 213).

GOODRICH (HER 826): At Coppet Wood Hill a large collection of 4th century coins was dug up in 1817 (TWNFC, 1882). Iron scoriae (lumps of metal slag) appear in great quantities around Whitchurch and Goodrich, strewn over the surface of fields.

GOODRICH (HER 825): A hollow bronze dodecahedron (a geometrical figure with twelve pentagonal faces), in perfect condition, approx. 5cm high and 2.5cm thick, was found on Coppet Wood Hill in 1887-8. Each face was pierced with a circular opening c. 1.25cm across, and each angle was furnished with a small, round knob. Its purpose is unknown, but it has been suggested that it was used as a gauge for measuring metal rods.

HEREFORD (various HER numbers): There are no indications that this city was ever under Roman occupation. The Roman road from Kenchester to Stretton Grandison passes a mile or two north of it. Most of the artefacts found in and around the city would appear to have come from Kenchester. In 1829 a small bronze statue of Hermes (HER 26969) was found during excavations in the town, but this too probably came from Kenchester.

Roman coins have been found around Whitecross, Hunderton and Elm Road - this area is not far from the Kenchester to Stretton Grandison road.

In 1821 a Roman altar was discovered in St. John Street (HER 458) and is now in Hereford Museum. It is described as a monolith, in good condition, measuring c. 1m high and 40cm in width and with a depth of 25-30cm. The stone is chiselled at the top, in front and at the sides, but is rough at the back. The capital and pedestal are nearly perfect, but a small piece is broken off one angle of the shaft. It seems to have carried an inscription which is almost completely illegible.

Roman altars have also been reported in Victoria Street (HER 7111).

KENCHESTER (HER 8927): A forger's lead coin impression was found in a field immediately south-west of the Romano-British town of Magna. The field - which is regularly ploughed - is likely to contain Roman extra-mural occupation.

KINGS PYON (HER 31983): An area of possible cropmarks lies about 400m to the west of Bush Bank. Field-walking produced a large amount of Severn Valley ware, two sherds of black burnished ware and two sherds of Samian ware. A metal detectorist has also found two Roman coins in the same location.

LEDBURY (HER 7123, 4068, 4069): Bronze Roman coins, found with worked flints and British or Romano-British pottery, within the area of British Camp on Wall Hills, a mile or two west of Ledbury. It is probable that only the coins are Roman.

LEINTWARDINE (HER 21078): During grave-digging in Leintwardine churchyard in the 1870s, Roman deposits were encountered: two layers of ash and charcoal, with tile, pottery, tin alloy objects and coins. The finds included a quernstone, the upper part of an earthenware pounding mill with a lip or rim (a mortarium), Roman pottery, an alloy ring and a coin of Constantine.

LEINTWARDINE (HER 31832): An inscribed Roman stone was found in rubble at Millfield House in Leintwardine. The stone reads IOM (new line) DIVOR O AV (new line) SALUT EV (new line)ORVM. It has been interpreted as reading "to Jupiter best and greatest (and) the divine (spirits) of all the emperors. For his well-being (and) theirs (this offering has been made)". It is apparently of local limestone. The stone is c. 30cm high, c. 32.5cm deep and c. 35cm wide.

LEOMINSTER (HER 9237): Eleven sherds of Romano-British pottery were discovered to the east of Stagbatch near Leominster.

LEOMINSTER (HER 9248): Four sherds of Romano-British pottery were found to the west of Cornhill Cop near Leominster.

LEOMINSTER (HER 26852): Flint flakes and Romano-British pottery have apparently been found in the area of Ivington Park, near Leominster.

LYONSHALL (HER 1087): A coin of Numerian was dug up by Mr. Burgoyne in 1949, where there are field names of: "Chesters", "Roman Hill" and "Roman Wall". Roman ornaments displayed at a Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club meeting at Moorcourt in 1949 were possibly from Lyonshall.

MONKLAND AND STRETFORD (HER 31870): A large quantity of late 4th and early 5th century coins have been found in this area by the landowner.

PEMBRIDGE (HER 31869): About 30 Roman coins of early 5th century date were found by a metal detectorist at Marston near Pembridge.

PETERSTOW (HER 4091, 4092): Remains of smelting works have been found here in a field, about five miles from the site of Ariconium. Large quantities of iron cinders, imperfectly smelted, have been found on Peterstow Common, and Roman coins and pottery have been found in the beds of cinders, which in some places are c. 3-6m thick.

PUTLEY (HER 7465, 3228): In 1876 a large collection of Roman remains was exhibited, found shortly before during the excavation of the foundations of the north wall of Putley church. The remains consisted of a lump of burnt clay and several roof and flanged tiles. The tiles had prints from cats, thumbs, sandals and cloth. In 1877, a Mr. Riley found a wall, roof tiles and pottery on his estate to the east of the rectory. The pottery was dated as 3rd-4th century AD.

ROSS-ON-WYE (HER 12103): A copper coin of the Emperor Trajan "in excellent preservation and of considerable beauty" was found in 1804; on the reverse was a horseman striking down his foe. Other coins found here seem to have come from Ariconium.

ROSS-ON-WYE (HER 4059): A coin of Constantine (AD 330-37) was found on the cricket field.

ROSS-ON-WYE (HER 11793): Romano-British pottery has been found within the churchyard.

ST WEONARDS (HER 6765): Roman coins, scoriae, etc. have all been reported here. It is also reported that when the tumulus near the church was opened, a piece of pottery supposed to be Roman was found (T. Wright, Wanderings of an Antiquarian,1853).

ST WEONARDS (HER 9443): A Roman road from Hereford to Monmouth.

STAUNTON-ON-ARROW (HER 7202): A series of finds discovered at Lee Wood, north-west of Staunton Court, during stone picking. A bronze figure-of-eight shaped object may be Roman.

STOKE PRIOR (HER 3898): At Blackwardine in this parish, tradition has asserted the existence of a fortified Roman town of considerable size, but although Roman remains have been found they are not numerous enough to point to the existence of an important Roman fort. No building foundations have been uncovered. The principal discoveries in the area were made during the construction of the Leominster and Bromyard Railway in 1881, when remains were uncovered at c. 1m. Among them are said to have been a gold bracelet and ring, and a large number of skeletons, "all buried doubled up in a sitting position at different distances from the surface" (TWNFC, 1885, p. 341). A kiln was also found, constructed of worked stones, which were afterwards utilised by the railway men. Among other finds were numerous oyster shells, querns, fragments of coarse red, yellow blue and black pottery, and twelve coins, mostly of the Later Empire. Among the pottery was part of an amphora of coarse red ware with the stamp "QICSEG"; being of poor quality it was thought to be local. The names given for the coins are Agrippina II (AD 49-59), Vespasian (a silver denarius), Tetricus (AD 268-73), Constans (AD 291-306), Constantine the Great (AD 306-37), Crispus (AD 317-26), Constantine II (AD 317-40) and Honorius (AD 395-433).

STRETTON GRANDISON (various HER numbers): The village of Stretton Grandison lay at the point where the Roman road, which runs eastward from Kenchester, comes to an apparent end. Another road (not definitely Roman) runs from here in a south-easterly direction. On a hill above the village there is an extensive camp, and it was therefore supposed that this place represents the station of Cicutio mentioned by the anonymous geographer of the Ravenna Cosmography.

During excavations for an aqueduct to carry the Hereford and Ledbury Canal over the River Frome in 1842, black soil containing animal bones, a Roman steelyard with weight attached, a bronze spearhead, two gold bracelets (one of coiled wire, the other a flat band with light scrollwork), fragments of ornamental Gaulish pottery and many pieces of coarse ware were dug up. A clay lamp was also discovered in a wood near the earthwork to the east of the church: it is of common form, with a volute on each side of the nozzle and no handle. On top is a relief representing Actaeon being attacked by a hound; stag horns are sprouting from his head. (Actaeon is a character in Roman mythology who dared to hunt the animals of the goddess Diana, so she turned him into a stag and he was attacked and killed by his own hounds.)

STRETTON SUGWAS (HER 785, 6297, 6298, 8466): A possible Roman settlement identified by aerial photography. A coin hoard was discovered in the grounds of The Priory and purchased by Hereford Museum. There were 170 coins, twenty of which date from the 1st-2nd century AD, but the bulk are bronze and date from Constantine the Great (AD 306-37) to Theodosius (AD 379-95). Romano-British bronzes have also been found near the Rectory.

TRETIRE (HER 6421): About 1830, an inscribed Roman altar was discovered which had subsequently been fashioned into a font; it is now in Tretire parish church. It resembles the rude capital of a pillar with a square hole in the top, and is about 70cm high and 40cm broad. It was found in two pieces and carried the inscription:

DEO TRIV(II)   
BECCIVS DON 
AVIT ARAM

"Beccius gave the altar to the God of the Three Ways".

WALFORD (HER 6394): At Bishopswood, a hoard of about 18,000 brass coins, nearly all of the Constantine period (AD 290-360), was discovered in three urns in 1895, some 50m to the north of the church. Some of the coins were given to the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, and eighty-four to Hereford Museum.

WALTERSTONE (HER 1454): A tessellated pavement was found about 1775 at "Cored Gravel" (sic.: possibly Coed-y-Grafel?), half a mile from Walterstone Camp and two miles north of Oldcastle.

WELLINGTON (HER 6897): Roman pottery and an oven were discovered in this area in the 1890s. They were later in the possession of Mr. J. Arkwright of Hampton Court. There is also a possible Roman road from Wellington to Suckley (HER 33759).

WEOBLEY (HER 6310, 31982): A Roman coin of Constantine the Great was found here in the 17th century. In 2001, two Roman brooches and six coins were found close to The Ley.

WESTON UNDER PENYARD (HER 839): 2nd-3rd century Romano-British pottery was found together with a coin of Antoninus Pius in the foundations of a new building 100m west of Cherry Orchard. Scatters of iron slag, charcoal and sherds from surrounding fields.

WESTON UNDER PENYARD (HER 21725): Seven items from Bromsash, but not specifically located:

1. Bronze triangular-section socketed spearhead or ballista bolt. It is a votive if it is a ballista bolt. Graham Webster thinks it is medieval and linked to the development of plate armour.
2. A small spearhead with a prominent rib. Its point is missing. Thought to be late Iron Age or Romano-British, although Graham Webster considered it Late Medieval.
3. A small oval stud, 23 x 13mm, with two small projecting attachment studs at the back. The projection has a thin line cut. Roman, 2nd - mid 3rd century (G. Webster).
4. A phallic pendant with a projecting phallus. Roman. A harness fitting (G. Webster) or a suspension loop for bucket or small cannister.
5. A short thin bronze strip, 24mm wide, with two crude circular studs attached to a thin plate 38mm long, with rounded ends connected at a break. The strip is too thin for armour and may have been from a box decoration (G. Webster).
6. Severn Valley ware face-pot fragment - most of the face survives. 2nd-4th century.
7. A roughly spherical ball of sandstone, weighing 140g, with an average diameter of 44mm. "It was considered to be too light and too small to be a ballista/catapult ball and is most likely a stone sling-shot." (Probably a grinding stone).

WESTON UNDER PENYARD (HER 21709): A flat-backed animal (bird/seal?) shape (brooch?) decorated with recessed hollows for coloured stones/enamel - "typical of late Roman period". Also a skillet leg with an inscription, "OVR F", cast and then hand-lettered. Its metal is possibly latten (brass or a similar alloy), with a mouldy chocolate look on the break.

WHITCHURCH (HER 8494): The remains of a possible villa, indicated by a tessellated pavement, were found in a meadow on the right hand side of a road leading to Monmouth. Coins, scoriae(lumps of metal slag) and cinders were also found.

[Original compiler: Miranda Greene, 2004]

About ½ a mile from the village of Weston under Penyard is the site of the Roman station of Ariconium. The site is mentioned in the 13th Iter of the Antonine Itinerary, where it is said to be 15 miles from Glevum (Gloucester) and 11 from Blestium (Monmouth).

Until the beginning of the 18th century the actual size of Ariconium was unknown, and some antiquaries placed it on the site at Kenchester, which has now been correctly identified as the Roman town of Magnis. The accepted site for Ariconium now lies on Bury Hill near Bollitree, about three miles east of Ross and one mile north of the road that leads to Gloucester.

The site is 350-400ft above sea level and has good views over the hills of Penyard, the Forest of Dean and the plains of Gloucestershire. The slope towards Weston under Penyard on the west is called Cinder Hill, and the ground here has turned up numerous scoriae (lumps of metal slag). Ariconium appears to have been an area of intensive iron working and possesses smelting furnaces and forges.

Apart from the frequent discoveries of scoriae, hand-bloomeries and floors, the extent of the site is marked by a blackened appearance of the soil which contrasts to the red soil of the rest of the county. The blackened soil is suggestive of the town having been destroyed by fire, like Kenchester and Leintwardine.

In the late 1700s Mr. Merrick, the estate owner, cleared the ground of undergrowth, and in 1785 a deep cavity was discovered during ploughing. Portions of walls still standing were discovered, and after excavation to a depth of 4-5ft a floor was uncovered, on which was laid a quantity of blackened wheat.

Among the antiquities found were fibulae (brooches/buckles), figures of lares (household gods), lachrymatories (tear-shaped bottles), lamps, rings and fragments of tessellated pavements. There were also many pieces of red and grey pottery, some with decoration.

In 1804, several skeletons were discovered and also the remains of a stone wall - apparently the facade of a building. The coins found at this site were chiefly of the Lower Empire, but they dated from Claudius (AD 41) to Constantinus (AD 340).

A bronze statue of the goddess Diana was exhibited to the Society of Antiquaries in 1788, but it has since been lost. No mosaic pavements had been discovered in this area by 1908, although it has been noted by a Mr. Southall that in the mid 1800s a farmer found a tessellated pavement but destroyed it "lest he should be bothered by antiquarian visitors". The possible site of this pavement is unknown.

In 1870 a Mr. C. Palmer exhibited coins and other objects to the British Archaeological Association. The coins included nine British ones, two being copper coins of Cunobelin. There were also 118 silver, billon (an alloy of silver) and copper Roman coins, dating from Claudius (AD 41) to Magnentius (AD 353), and also a consular coin of the Cordia family. He also exhibited four intagli (carved gem stones, two of which were of cornelian), glass beads, a silver ring, 20 bronze fibulae (brooches), rings, buckles and other bronze items.

By the beginning of the 21st century the sole trace of the town which can now be seen is a fairly steep bank under which the wall is said to be. There is also a stretch of Roman road which runs past this site.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

The Weston under Penyard/Bromsash complex

The concentration of iron-working activity in the Weston under Penyard/Bromsash area has long attracted comment. This activity has now been shown to extend back into later Iron Age times. However, it was during the Roman period that the scale of this activity increased, with the systematic exploitation of the Dean ore-bearing areas. The resulting complex of settlement and industrial activity has been characterised in interim reporting of the Ariconium study (Jackson, 2000).

It is clear that there was a focus of settlement activity on a ridge near Bromsash, some 6km east of Ross-on-Wye, and that this included several substantial buildings. However, it is also evident that the layout of roads and tracks linking the different settlement complexes in the vicinity was quite haphazard. In this way, the area involved appears to have possessed more the nature of a so-called "territorial oppidum" of the later pre-Roman Iron Age in southern Britain, with dispersed centres of activity within a loosely-defined precinct, than a narrowly-drawn and densely-set Roman town.

The industrial reason for this was well characterised by Stanford (1991, p. 101): "This open settlement, close to iron ore in the Forest of Dean, was devoted to industry requiring ample space for work and waste disposal". Besides building foundations and remains that included evidence for plastered walls and mortared floors, Bridgewater uncovered several areas with furnace remains and working hollows (Bridgewater, 1965). Meanwhile, considerable quantities of slag were found in two otherwise "domestic" enclosures 1km to the north of the main complex at The Great Woulding (Walters, 1999).

Robin Jackson has argued that the core area at Bromsash does constitute a "small town". He notes that "At the peak of the settlement in the 2nd and 3rd centuries several town houses occupied the western side of the hilltop where several roads converged". On slopes to the south and west, several small enclosures can be seen to extend alongside the roads, within and around which "a wide area was probably occupied by timber houses and other buildings with associated yards and pits" (Jackson, 2000, 13.2, p. 159).

At least four principal ironworking areas have been isolated in the Bromsash/Weston area (Jackson, ibid). The largest of these, excavated by Bridgewater, contained six furnaces together with slag pits and working hollows, and traces of timber buildings. One of these was identified as a charcoal store. Indications of iron smithing were also present. The site was in active use for a period of around a century from c. AD 135 before it appears to have been deliberately sealed, and was then covered by a domestic rubbish deposit.

Other ironworking and industrial locations

Further evidence of ironworking has come from sites that have otherwise been regarded as villas or farmsteads. An example is the claimed villa at Whitchurch, which produced considerable quantities of slag (Walters, 1908, p. 197). More dramatic still is the site at Cinders Grove, Peterstow, from which it is recorded that many tons of slag and ironworking waste were removed. Nearby, on Peterstow Common, Roman coins and pottery were found within a slag deposit over 4m deep (ibid, p. 193).

In contrast to ironworking, the evidence for pottery production within the confines of the historic county is thin. No certain kiln sites have been found, despite claims for them, for instance at Marley Hall, Ledbury. Here, Alfred Watkins had been shown pottery fragments that he believed must be wasters. However, Jack was of the opinion that instead, the pottery simply represented the site of another farmstead (Anon., Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, 1931, lxxiii). Other pottery production centres have been suggested at Cradley (near the known West Malvern kiln sites in Worcestershire), and at Grendon Green near Bromyard, but they have yet to be confirmed. The Severn Valley pottery industry is becoming better known, and the Malvernian kilns must have supplied a wide area, but it would be surprising if there were no kilns in Herefordshire.

© Dr. Keith Ray, 2004

References

Anon., "Winter Annual Meeting. Thursday, December 10th, 1931", Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, 1931, pp. lxix-lxxiv.

Bridgewater, N.P. (1965), "Romano-British ironworking near Ariconium", Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, 38, pp. 179-191.

Jackson, R. (2000), The Roman Settlement at Ariconium, near Weston-under-Penyard, Herefordshire: An Assessment and Synthesis of the Evidence. Archaeological Service, Worcestershire County Council, Report 833.

Stanford, S.C. (1991), The Archaeology of the Welsh Marches. (Second, revised, edition). Ludlow, privately published.

Walters, B. (1999), The Forest of Dean Iron Industry: 1st to 4th Centuries AD. Dean Archaeology Group Occ. Publ. 4.

Walters, H.B. (1908), "Romano-British Herefordshire", in William Page (ed.), The Victoria History of the County of Herefordshire, Volume I, 1908, pp. 167-199.

(Information taken from D.L. Brown, "The Romano-British Settlement at Blackwardine", Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, Volume XLVI 1990 Part III, pp. 390-406) 

Blackwardine is located two miles south-east of Leominster at SO 5300 5600. It lies on a plateau slightly raised above the level of the Humber Brook, which forms a boundary to the settlement area on the east. There are several Iron Age camps within the vicinity of the Roman settlement, most notably Risbury Camp and Bach Camp.

The cutting of the land for the Leominster and Bromyard Railway in 1882 was the first large-scale disturbance of the site. Unfortunately, any remains that were found were only seen by the workmen, whose descriptions of the items are not particularly detailed.

Structural remains included "about 30 ovens, full of ashes, built of worked stones", whilst graves were also discovered (T. Davies-Burlton, "Some traces of Roman and Saxon occupation of the district of Risbury", TWNFC XI, 1885, 340-2). Some coins were sent to the British Museum to be identified but many finds were reburied or kept by the workmen.

In 1980 a proposal was made to use the now-disused railway cutting for the disposal of refuse. As a result of the approval of this scheme work was begun in November and was monitored by the County Museum Archaeological Section and others.

The landfill scheme involved removing 3m of the base of the railway cutting to produce a more vertical face. This produced a long section about 4m high, cutting right through the archaeological area along the northern edge of the scheduled area. Excavation work in advance of machining was not possible so it was decided that a watching brief would be undertaken with significant features being drawn, photographed or recorded.

Work began in January 1981, by which time several features at the eastern end of the excavation had already been excavated or obscured by backfill. These included a pit containing Samian ware of the 1st century AD, recovered by Dr. Graham Webster on an early visit to the site, and another pit containing a well which had been excavated by A. Haines. The well contained pottery, Samian ware and a coin of Hadrian.

Forty-one features were identified in the cutting face. However, few were recorded with sufficient precision to add much information about the site. The pit containing the Samian ware (highly-decorative red glazed pottery) is likely to have represented the earliest phase of the site, with the appearance of early Flavian material.

The well was the first feature to be recorded by J. Sawle (Excavations Officer for Hereford and Worcester County Museum). It measured c. 36m in diameter, and was reported to have been over 5m deep.

The majority of the features identified were either pits or substantial post-holes, few of which provided any more information than an idea of profile and size. Only one pit was examined closely. It was a steep-sided, flat-bottomed pit 1m across and 1.2m deep, but its plan was not recoverable. Within the pit were found Severn Valley ware, Black-burnished ware and wheel-made Malvernian ware, suggesting a date in the later 3rd or 4th century AD for the use and backfill of this feature.

Twelve ditches were recorded, the alignments for which could be ascertained in only six cases; only the largest three produced any finds. Of the remaining six, their identification as ditches rested on the shape and the lie of the fill. Of the three ditches producing finds, the smallest was U-shaped, 4m wide and 3m deep. The pottery recovered dated from the late 2nd or early 3rd century AD.

The other two ditches formed the western limit of the area in which features were found, and contained material dating from between the 2nd and 4th century AD. The largest ditch was 30m wide and nearly 5m deep, with gently sloping sides. Four main layers were identified within the ditch, the lowest of which was a silty layer containing finds of mostly later 2nd century date. The layer above this was a fill layer yielding pottery and other finds of 2nd to 4th century date. No finds were made in the third layer, and the top layer was made up of topsoil.

Three further linear features were found to contain quantities of sandstone rubble or layers of mortar and stone. These were interpreted as stone foundations, either of drystone or as more substantial set-stone foundations.

Finds

The total number of finds from the railway cutting was quite small, but the pottery is nevertheless important. Two coins were found on the site, in the large ditch in the second from bottom layer. One was a coin of Domitian dated to AD 87, the other was a coin of Constantine I which dated from AD 322-3.

A total of 48 sherds of Samian ware were recovered from the main site, and 13 sherds from one of the pits. These included examples from south, east and central Gaul. A total of 714 sherds of coarse pottery were found on the site. Fragments of mortaria, bowls used for grinding cooking ingredients and similar to a pestle and mortar, were also found in the area. Two types of pottery make up the majority of finds within this site: Severn Valley and Dorset black-burnished ware.

Other objects found in 1980-1 include: an iron wallhook, a handle, a hinge, nails, a fragment of a quern stone, a small fragment of a glass vessel, three pig's teeth and two oyster shells. Other excavations at Blackwardine have also produced a fibula (brooch), an inscribed pewter plate, a shale bowl and a Byzantine coin. Leominster Museum also has glass beads and a horse figurine. Various owners of the site hold painted wall plaster, flue tiles and glass fragments.

Conclusions

Little is known about the exact nature of the site at Blackwardine. It has been suggested that it was the site of a Roman fort, and its siting close to a number of hillforts, near to a Roman road and on a prominence with a water supply goes some way to backing up this theory. It has been suggested that the site at Blackwardine was a Roman base during Ostorius Scapula's advances into the west of Britain (AD 48-9). However, the available dating evidence suggests a later date of the late 60s or early 70s AD. Another possibility is that it was a small village-type settlement.

Due to the limited amount of recorded excavation at this site, very little can be said with any certainty about its purpose, with even the exact limits of the Roman site unknown. 

Leintwardine is in the north-west of the county, close to the Shropshire border. The village lies on the line of the Roman road commonly known as Watling Street, which ran north to south from Wroxeter in Shropshire to Caerleon in Monmouthshire. Around the village may be traced the outline of a large, rectangular earthwork bank that encloses an area of 14 acres. Outside the bank was a ditch or fosse, and there were entrances on the east side and at the south-west corner.

In the 12th Iter (journey) of the Antonine Itinerary, Bravinium or Bravonium is recorded as situated 24 miles from Magna (Kenchester) and 27 from Viroconium (Wroxeter), and as it is likely to have been on Watling Street Leintwardine has been identified as the site of this Roman town.

The site is on the northern bank of the river Teme at its junction with the river Clun, and it occupies rising ground. The modern High Street was originally on the line of Watling Street, but this now lies to the east of the village, outside the embankment. The embankments around Leintwardine can still be easily traced; they are c. 20m wide and stand c. 3m above the surrounding ground. They form a rectangle c. 308m long north to south and c. 220m east to west.

At a depth of c. 1.3-1.6m below the surface within the fort is frequently found a layer of ashes and burnt materials, and from c. 0.3-0.4m below this is a further charred layer. Graves dug in the churchyard to a depth of almost 1m have revealed tiles, pottery, coins and bronze articles, mixed with ashes and charcoal. Along with the other areas of charred soil and wheat, this points to the fact that Bravonium was destroyed by fire, like Magna (Kenchester) and Ariconium (Weston under Penyard).

At Walford, not far from Leintwardine, an urn was discovered in 1736, in a tumulus on the right hand side of the road leading to Brampton Bryan. The urn is described as Roman, of yellow ware, with beading round the middle and base. It was 45cm in height. Unfortunately, the urn was broken open in the hope that it contained money, but only human bones and earth were found.

At Letton, three miles east of Leintwardine, a gold coin of the Emperor Tiberius was found about 1789. The obverse side bore the head of Tiberius and TI. CAESAR AUG. F. AUG. DIVI; on the reverse was a seated figure with lance and laurel branch, with the words PONTIF. MAXIM.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

Leintwardine lies at an important river crossing at the confluence of the Rivers Clun and Teme. The strategic importance of this location is indicated by the Iron Age hillfort, Brandon Camp, which overlooks the site, and the succession of Roman military establishments of the 1st and 2nd centuries AD that cluster around. These include:

• A military supply base on Brandon Camp itself (AD 55-60),
• Two temporary "marching" camps at Walford and Brampton Bryan to the south-west (both probably AD 50s or 60s),
• The cavalry fort at Jay Lane (AD 60s-70s) to the north-east,
• At least two successive cavalry forts at Buckton (AD 90-120 and AD 120-130), upriver to the west,
• And last but by no means least, the Roman military road known as Watling Street West, probably built in the AD 50s or 60s, with a bridgehead lying immediately to the west of the present-day bridge at Leintwardine.

From the AD 70s, a civilian settlement grew up alongside the road on the auspicious south-facing slope above the river. We can guess from documentary evidence that this included a mansio, or staging post for the Roman Imperial postal service, which will have provided food, beds and fresh horses for the couriers. In addition to this, several workshops, shops and houses sprang up, serving the needs of locals, passers by and the garrisons of the forts. We also know that a bath-house was built by the river, which will have provided the comfort and facilities that soldiers and officials from some of the warmer parts of the Empire will have appreciated!

Later, by the mid-2nd century, most of the military presence in this part of the country had been withdrawn to wars and frontiers elsewhere. The settlement at Leintwardine continued, although its character may have changed to that of a rural settlement rather than a trading centre. Some of the buildings discovered by excavations resemble the romanised houses found in rural settlements elsewhere in the country.

In the late 2nd century (certainly after AD 160 and probably after 170), a massive rampart with a series of outlying ditches was constructed around much of this settlement from the river crossing northwards. This was a massive undertaking, involving the preparation of large numbers of timbers and excavation of a huge amount of clay and earth to create the elaborate timber-laced ramparts. They would also have been topped by a palisade of timber. These ramparts are still visible today to a height of around six feet (2m) in places. There are two conflicting explanations for why they were built.

The first explanation is that the Romans evicted the local populace and built a substantial fort on the site, twice the size of the cavalry forts at Jay Lane or Buckton, but retaining the mansio and bath-house. There is no known historical event to link this to, but it would not be uncommon for a local uprising to have been put down with such force by the Romans.

My personal view is that the defences of Leintwardine were constructed to protect the settlement - and particularly the Imperial postal service - in a period of unrest and uncertainty between AD 193 and AD 208. At this time, the governor of Britain, Clodius Albinus, made an unsuccessful bid for the Imperial throne. His rebellion was finally crushed following the arrival in Britain of the Emperor Septimius Severus and his armies in AD 208. During this time many of the soldiers stationed in Britain were called away to campaigns on the continent. Defences were constructed around many towns and smaller strategic settlements on the road network at some time between AD 180 and 220. Future excavations of the defences might give us further clues to the truth of the matter.

There are indications that the ramparts were repaired and perhaps enlarged at least twice in the 3rd and 4th centuries AD, perhaps associated with other periods of uncertainty in the later Roman period (of which there are lots of examples). There is plenty of evidence of continuing occupation within the ramparts: several post-holes and pits containing finds of this period have been excavated, but so far we have very little evidence of the range of types of buildings present.

Of the archaeological finds, lots of decorated pottery, coins and even an altar inscription testify to the romanised lifestyle. More mundane artefacts perhaps tell us a lot more about the everyday lives of people in Roman Britain. Analysis of the finds has revealed a range of interesting stories, but I will leave this for someone else to tell.

In the historical documents, we think we can identify Leintwardine as a place called Branogenio. This is taken from Roman geographical texts, which used a source known as the Antonine Itinerary. This was a list of the Imperial postal stations across the Roman Empire. These texts were copied repeatedly from the Roman period throughout the Middle Ages (which is why they have survived to the present day). Consequently this name has been variously transcribed (e.g. Bravinium).

Interestingly, one of these geographers (Ptolemy) described Branogenio as a town of the Ordovices (the tribe who inhabited north-west Wales). He may have been just plain wrong, have misunderstood another tribal (or geographical) name, or the people of Leintwardine may indeed have had tribal links with the Ordovices.

Tribal affiliation represents an important part of the historical geography of Roman Britain because it had an impact on the political and economic lives of the inhabitants. For administrative reasons, Roman authority may have fossilised a rather more fluid state of affairs than had existed in the Iron Age. We think that there are three other tribal territories that come very close to Leintwardine. These are the Silures (South Wales, centred on Caerwent), the Dobunni (spreading from Gloucestershire northwards, probably including Kenchester, centred on Cirencester), and the Cornovii (Shropshire, centred on Wroxeter). The tribal affiliation of Leintwardine may have changed over time, but whether it can be assigned is an interesting question that we will probably never answer.

We do not know what happened in Leintwardine at the end of the Roman period. We can make some suppositions from the presence of both the church and the manor within the ramparts that occupation continued to some extent or other, or at least that the site was respected because of the ramparts, the road and the river crossing.

The Roman road itself runs along the line of High Street. However, most of the older buildings in the village are on Watling Street. We know that a previous bridge once lined up with Watling Street and was replaced by today's bridge. It seems likely that after the Roman river crossing failed, a new bridge was built which took most of the traffic around the ramparts to the east. This resulted in the renaming of the foremost street through the village as Watling Street.

The present day village spreads further and is a little larger than its Roman antecedent, but it has roots that go back a very long way.

© Duncan Brown, 2004 

(Information taken from S.C. Stanford, "The Roman Fort at Buckton, Herefordshire - Excavations, 1959", Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, Volume XXXVI, 1959, pp. 210-218)

In the summer of 1959 (during a drought), Mr. Arnold Baker observed and photographed a new Roman fort and temporary camp at Buckton Park, one mile west of the Roman town of Bravonium(Leintwardine). The sites are on level ground just above the flood plain of the Teme, which lies to the south, and on a hard yellow shale that forms a stiff buff clay subsoil.

The plan of the fort is a rectangle measuring approximately 560ft east to west by 460ft. The defences consist of ditches and rampart fronted by a stone wall. The east and west gates are central, the south gate lies some 2/5 of the distance along the south front, measured from the south-east angle. This identifies the main north-south street as the via principalis, so that the fort faced east. Each of the three visible gates was seen to be equipped with stone-built guard-chambers and central spina for a twin-portalled gateway. Inside the rampart is a wide intervallum road. In the central range of buildings, the outline of the principia (in stone) may be observed. To the south lay a granary, so that the space to the north will thus have been occupied by the commandant's house. Each half of the praetentura is divided by two north-south streets into one narrow and two broad building plots, and there seems to have been a similar arrangement in the retentura.

The Excavations, 1959

The Woolhope Club's excavations at Leintwardine in 1959 showed that the permanent fort built here soon after AD 150 remained the local military establishment until well into the 4th century. Until further work has been done it is impossible to the certain of the earlier history of this site, but the pottery finds suggest that it was also occupied in the late first century AD and then relinquished for the first half of the 2nd century. The discovery of the Buckton fort suggested that it may be the missing early 2nd century fort, and possibly too the 1st century precursor.

Summary of Results:

A 3ft trench was cut across the eastern defences and extended 3yds into the building area beyond the intervallum road. This limited excavation showed that, at this point at least, the defences are all a single period work associated with occupation between c. AD 120 and c. AD 160. The rampart wall and buildings were deliberately dismantled in Roman times, presumably c. AD 160 when a new fort was built at Leintwardine.

The following features were revealed during excavation:

• A ditch 15ft wide and 4ft deep.
• The foundations of a stone rampart retaining wall 4ft 10in wide and 1ft 6in - 2ft 9in deep.
• The base of a clay and turf rampart bank 17ft wide and 6-10 in thick.
• A marker slot 1ft wide and 9in deep.
• A gravel intervallum road 24ft wide and 9in thick.
• A drain 3ft wide and 1ft 6in deep.
• The position of the robbed wall of a (?) timber building.

Details of the section:

The ditch, cut in the hard natural shale, has a steep outer slope and a gentle inner one reaching right up to the wall. This inner slope, if projected, meets the top inner edge of the wall trench, and the difference in depth between outer and inner sides of this trench indicates that the ditch was originally cut from the line later used as the inner side of the wall trench. On the sloping surface the latter trench was dug. Trampled into the natural shale and clay subsoil are the masons' chippings scattered when the wall was built. These extend down to the inner slope of the ditch and into its bottom, proving that the wall and the ditch are contemporary.

The wall trench was dug on the inner slope of the ditch. In this were set the roughly-coursed foundations, bound with dumps of mortar and concrete. Although the stone used on the inner side was not dressed it was closely packed, completely filling the trench. At the front, well-mortared squared blocks were used, but it would seem likely that the single course exposed is the base of the dressed section of the wall. With the exception of some water-worn pieces in its core the wall was built of quarried purplish-red sandstone. The source for this is Coxall Knoll, an outlier of Old Red Sandstone in a district composed mainly of Wenlock Limestone and the massive Aymestrey Limestone. The Old Red provides better building stone than either of the limestones, but since Coxall Knoll is the nearest rock outcrop it cannot be argued that it was deliberately sought out by the Romans because of its quality.

Any estimate as to the height of this wall must be based on the evidence for the bank raised behind it. The wall foundations, with the facing stones removed to Roman ground level, show that the stone was removed deliberately for re-use elsewhere. The ditch section shows a thick spill of rubble and earth sliding down from the wall into the ditch and coming to rest on top of only a foot of primary clay silting. In this rubble there was hardly any large or dressed stone. This would have been taken away when the wall was demolished, and the low position on the ditch of the residual rubble shows the demolition took place soon after the neglect of the ditch.

Behind the wall the turf had been removed from a 17ft wide strip, exposing the firm clay subsoil and forming a 6in foundation slot in which the rampart bank was built. The base of this shows thin dumps of clay between retaining walls of turf and so suggests the method of construction used for the full height of the rampart. A 4ft front wall of turf would have been built to retain the clay and shale dug from the ditch and foundation trench, and afford a vertical face against which the stone wall might have been built. At the rear a sloping turf cover would have served to retain the core of the bank and so maintain a steep slope.

In estimating the original height of this bank and, consequently, its stone revetment the sources of material available need to be considered. There is first the turf and earth upcast from the ditch and wall trench, insufficient to provide the counterscarp bank 6ft wide and 3ft high. This would only provide a relatively small bank; but the absence of an old turf line from most of the section suggests that the turf was stripped from the whole fort site. This would provide sufficient extra material from 6in turves to raise the bank 12ft above the original ground level, allowing for a 6ft rampart walk on the bank itself, plus possibly another 3ft from the wall thickness. This estimate allows the probable height of the wall to be determined as 17ft 6in externally from ground level to the parapet, 3ft 6in above the rampart walk. To the merlon top it would have been a little under 20ft.

The intervallum road began close behind the rampart, leaving only 3ft between. The road was made of 9in of rammed clean gravel laid on the bared subsoil. On each side was a shallow gutter now filled with grey silt and gravel. There was no sign of more than one period of construction.

Below the western, inner, gutter and overlain by the edge of the road was a V-shaped drain 3ft wide and 1ft 6in deep, filled with large gravel and grey silt. The careful grading of the road base shows that this drain was intended to take the run-off from under the road as well as that from the buildings to the west. On such an impermeable subsoil surface drainage would have been a major problem. This drain - cut before the road making and building had begun - indicates the thorough planning of the engineers responsible for building the fort.

The westernmost eight feet of the trench showed the start of the built-up area. Here again no turf line was present and occupation material was embedded in the top 3 inches of clay subsoil. This was covered by a 3in destruction layer containing roofing tiles, stone slabs and iron bolts, which spilled onto an irregular shallow depression running north-south. The depression would appear to mark the former line of a timber wall, but from the section available it is not possible to decide whether a sleeper beam or stone sill was removed when the building was dismantled.

Finds:

There were no finds of pottery or other objects from below the rampart or road, or in the primary silt of the ditch. The Samian sherds are from the deliberate fill of the ditch and in a very soft condition. Although they would be in place in a Hadrianic-Antonine context, none is precisely datable.

The coarse ware was found unstratified in the ditch; on top of the rampart base; on the road surface; and in the destruction level in the building area. The limited pottery evidence agrees with the theory that the site was only occupied for a single, relatively brief, period.

The earliest material found here is the rustic ware. Such ware was common on late 1st century sites and appears to last until c. AD 130, so we can assume that the Buckton fort was occupied no later than this.

Conclusions:

The Buckton fort was occupied by a garrison of up to 1,000 troops some time between AD 120 and AD 160. The 1959 excavations have produced no evidence of earlier occupation and it must be provisionally concluded that the stone-walled fort was the first on the site.

There is no evidence of any repairs to the defences before the wall was demolished and the site abandoned, and it has been shown that this was a methodical dismantling occurring soon after the neglect of the ditch, and certainly therefore in Roman times. The occasion for this must have been the transfer to the Leintwardine site on the other side of the River Clun in c.AD 160.

This raises two problems with the Buckton fort. Why should the garrison have been moved at all in the middle of the 2nd century AD, and why should this move have been associated with a change from a stone-faced rampart to a timber-laced one? It is not clear whether the move was for strategic or geographical purposes, but it is probable that the move was part of the general reorganisation of the frontier in the Central Marches - suggesting that the repercussions of the northern revolt were felt along the Welsh frontier as well. These sites may then show the military response to a situation that had been allowed to get out of control.

Differences between Buckton and Leintwardine:

Buckton, on the Welsh side of the Clun, may be characterised as a forward, aggressive, confident position, in keeping surely with the whole tenor of the Roman army's activities in Britain under Hadrian. Even its thick stone wall reflects the permanence intended by engineers with confidence in the maintenance of the status quo. The "retreat" to Leintwardine, east of the Clun, c. AD 160 anticipated the need to control the Clun ford for the safe keeping of the north-south communications along Watling Street West, and would have allowed immediate troop movement eastwards without a river crossing.

The Leintwardine site is, then, one of greater overall strength, a site for the cautious, defensive army that took on the task of restoring order and maintaining communications after the troubles of the middle 2nd century AD. This concern with communications - great enough to allow the Buckton fort to be abandoned - lends support to the idea that the forces which had given trouble were in the immediate neighbourhood of the fort; that the descendants of the hillfort communities of Brandon, Coxall Knoll, Croft Ambrey, Wapley and others remained hostile to the conquerors into the late 2nd century AD, if not right through the occupation.

The second difference is the change in defences from the stone wall at Buckton to the logs and clay at Leintwardine. One explanation may be that the Roman army were experimenting with more efficient defences and logs and clay overcame the biggest problem of stone walls - vulnerability to sapping.

[Original compiler: Miranda Greene, 2004]

Description

Jay Lane Roman fort was discovered by aerial photography and has been tested by excavation. In 1978 the field was ploughed within hours of being bought. The field is very stony with Aymestrey limestone, which is not present in any quantity in other neighbouring fields. The site was excavated by S.C. Stanford in 1962, and a two hectare auxiliary fort of Ostorius Scapula's mid-1st century campaigns was discovered. Excavations revealed earth ramparts revetted with turf and with external ditches. There were timber gate-towers at the entrances, as well as corner and interval towers also constructed of timber. No internal buildings were excavated.

It is thought that the fort was developed in conjunction with the Leintwardine and Buckton forts.

The fort appears to have been dismantled around AD 70-80, based on Samian ware finds and the historical context.

The fort faces south-west, looking towards Coxall Knoll and the Upper Teme valley, and on this side the slope to the Clun is steep. The approach from the north-west is also fairly steep, but on the other two sides the ground falls away gently.

Excavation

Excavation has confirmed the presence of a double system of ditches. The ditches are V-shaped, 7-8ft (2m) wide and 3ft (1m) deep where they were well preserved on the north-east side. A berm(level space) 5ft (1.5m) wide separates them, and upon this a small bank may have been raised to increase the counterscarp of the inner ditch. On the steeply sloping north-western and south-western sides the ditches are shallower, and the outer ditch is especially weak.

No trace of a rampart bank was found, nor were there any postholes for a timber-framed rampart or palisade. The rampart must have been provided with a turf revetment, a suggestion that is backed up by the character of the ditch filling.

A further clue to the form of the rampart comes from the unexpectedly small gate-towers, of two ranks of posts rather than the more common three. If these towers are a guide to the width of the rampart, then it will have only have been about 9ft 6ins (2.9m). A rampart of this width would have stood no more than 10ft (3m) high to the rampart walk, although a breastwork and merlons could have raised this height to 15 ½ ft (4.7m).

Gatehouses

The gatehouses were identified by large post-pits in the natural clay and shale. The pits were square or oblong with sides 2-3ft long, and were 2.5-3ft deep from the modern ground level. Some of the pits showed as pink or brown clay with occasional flecks of charcoal against the bright yellow packing of clay and shale. This indicates that the post stumps rotted in situ, having perhaps been cut off.

These postholes show that three or four of the gatehouses were built upon two rows of five posts. At each end a tower 9.5ft square overall would have provided a guard-room at ground level. The space between the towers was divided centrally by two posts, leaving a 9.5ft passage either side. At the north-east gate two drains passed through these two middle areas.

Corner Towers

Only the south corner tower was excavated in 1962. On the basis of the four posts located this is assumed to have been a six-post structure, measuring 15ft by 8ft. The surviving posts-pits were very shallow on this steeply sloping corner and the post positions ill defined, probably through weathering and root penetration rather than robbing.

Interval Towers

Between the gates and corner towers were set interval towers with four posts each. Three were excavated, two on the north-west side and a third on the south-west side. The north-east tower on the former side was best preserved, showing that the posts were of the same scantling (cross-section) and set in pits of similar size and depth as those for the gateway timbers. The excavated towers show a size range of 8ft-10ft square.

The Fort Plan

The double ditches were interrupted by causeways for the four gates. The dimensions within the lip of the inner ditch are 537ft by 448ft, creating an enclosed area of 5.6 acres. Within the ramparts the dimensions are 507ft x 413ft, i.e. 4.8 acres. The shape of the fort is very nearly rectangular.

The width of the major roads may be assumed to be no less than about the 20ft of the gateways. In the retentura the areas either side of the via decumana would measure 122ft by 164ft, with dimensions of 200ft by 164ft in the praetentura. Planned thus, Jay Lane could accommodate six buildings of barrack size in the retentura and ten barracks plus two narrower buildings in thepraetentura. This is more accommodation than was required by the military infantry regiment at Fendoch in Perthshire, Scotland, and presumably indicates the presence of stables and extra stores. The site is too small for either a cavalry or part-mounted military regiment. Cavalry alae of 500 men are known to have occupied sites at Chesters (5.75 acres) and Benwell (5.64 acres) (both in Northumberland), so Jay Lane is only just below the known limits for such units. It is most probable that Jay Lane held an ala quingenaria of 500 cavalrymen.

The Date of Jay Lane Fort

The tactical advantages of this emplacement on the hill are appropriate for a front-line fort established at the time of the conquest; it marks the earliest military use of the Leintwardine position. Such as it is, the Samian ware found is all of the 1st century, with two pre-Flavian pieces and four that could date to the reign of Nero. Since there is no reason to believe that most of these finds were deposited late in the fort's history, we may use the latest items to provide a terminal date of c. AD 70-80 for the site. Since some of the gateway towers were considered not worth digging out, the occupation was probably of 15 or more years duration. As Jay Lane is a key point on the Watling Street West, its foundation is certainly to be related to a major development of the frontier rather than any minor campaign. Historically the bracket may be defined as AD 47-61, i.e. the start of the governorship of Ostorius Scapula and the reorganisation following the revolt of Queen Boudicca.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

About five miles west of Hereford and half a mile south-west of Kenchester is the site of a small Roman town, which the mileage of the Antonine Itinerary identifies as Magni or Magna. Close to this site is the Iron Age camp at Credenhill (HER 906), and only a mile to the west is a Roman villa at Bishopstone (HER 7223).

The site is well defined by hedgerows, and is an irregular kite shape covering an area between 17 and 20 acres. It was once surrounded by a stone wall with four gates, of which the foundations could once be traced. A part of the stone wall could be seen as late as 1861, when the last remaining section was taken down.

At the west end, in the garden of the Post Office, a high bank marks the line of the walls and some of the stonework was visible at the turn of the 20th century. It is also said that the route of the main street through the town can be traced in the crop growth, with the soil in this area being darker. The main street was about 15ft wide and ran from east to west. It has also been noted that in times of dry weather the outlines of houses can be traced by the growth difference in the crops.
 
The town, though small, shows evidence of Roman civilisation and technology, demonstrated by the existence of tessellated pavements, hypocausts (under-floor heating), drainage, glass and pottery.

H.B. Walters, in the Victoria County History, has stated that from the fact that the soil in this area is black (while that in the rest of the county is red), and that considerable quantities of charred and molten substances have been found, it is likely that the town was destroyed by fire. Many of the stones from the buildings are said to have been re-used in neighbouring villages and in Credenhill Church.

In 1669, a great vault with a tessellated pavement and a stone floor was found. This mosaic has recently been dated as c. AD 350. Until the early part of the 19th century the ruins appear to have been quite considerable, but the site was later cleared for cultivation. In 1877, a Mr. Thompson Watkin stated that the sites of the four gates were until recently quite visible. In 1840-2 Dean Merewether made a partial exploration of the site. A street was traced out by the remaining foundations of the walls on either side. The lower level of a suite of rooms and passages, forming a house of some size, was laid bare and there were traces of decorated wall plaster, as well as tessellated pavements and a hypocaust.

The tessellated pavements had mosaic patterns in red, blue and white, and some had images of fish and seahorses. Some of these mosaics are now held by Hereford Museum.
 
Only two inscriptions have been found at Kenchester - one was an oculist's stamp and the other a milestone dating from AD 283, which was discovered in 1795-6 in the foundations of the town's north wall. It is of local sandstone, 2ft high by 1ft 6in wide and 5in thick. The bottom had been broken off and the upper part was damaged.

The inscription on the stone read (interpretation on the right hand side):

IMP. C                  Imp(eratore) C(aesare) 
MAR AVR             Mar(co) Aur(elio) 
NVMORIAN          Num(e)rian 
O                         O 
RPCD                  Respublica Civitatis Dobunorum

This inscription is important as it is said to be the only one in Britain bearing the name of the Emperor Numerian, who ruled in AD 283-4.

The oculist's stamp is inscribed on four sides as follows:

T. VINDAC. ARIO               T. VINDAC(I) ARIOVISTI ANICET(UM)
VISTI ANICET
  
T. VINDACI AR                  T. VINDACI AR(I)OVISTI NARD(INUM)
OVIST. NARD
 
VINDAC. ARI                     (T.) VINDACI ARIOVISTI CHLORON
OVISTI. CHLORON

T. VINDAC. ARIO              T. VINDAC(I) ARIOVISTI
VISTI

On the top of the stamp is the word SENIOR in reverse and on the lower the word SEN. The name of the oculist Ariovistus does not occur elsewhere and is thought to be of German origin.

Anicetum may be another word for aniseed, whilst nardinum is an aromatic plant (also known as matweed) and chloron was a type of eye salve. So it is likely that all these names referred to common remedies for eye problems, and the side of the stamp used depended on which remedy needed to be labelled.

When the site at Kenchester was first cultivated numerous items were turned up by the plough. Coins found on the site and later donated to Hereford Museum include a variety of copper ones dating to the reigns of the Emperors Carausius (AD 287-93), Allectus (AD 293-6) and Constantine the Great (AD 306-37), plus silver coins of Domitian (AD 81-96), Nerva (AD 96-8) and Trajan (AD 98-117). The mints represented by these coins are London, Lyons, Treves, Arles, Siscia and Constantinople (modern Istanbul).

Another collection of coins included six silver coins: a denarius of Gaius Vibius Pansa; two of Trajan; and one each of Augustus (27 BC - AD 14), Antoninus Pius (AD 138-61), and Philip (AD 244-9). Other remains include a bronze key and some small bronze figures.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

"Kenchester standeth a iii myles or more above Hereford... This towne is far more auncyent then Hereford, and was celebrated yn the Romaynes tyme, as apereth by many thinges, and especyally by antique mony of the Caesare, very often fownd withyn the towne, and yn plowghyng abowt; the which the people ther cawlleth Duarfes Mony. The cumpace of Kenchestre hath bene by estimation as much as Herford, excepting the castel... Peaces of the walles and turrests yet appere, prope fundamenta, and more should have appered if the people of Herford towne and other therabowt had not yn tymes paste pulled downe muche and pyked owt of the best for their buildinges. Of late one Mr. Brainton... dyd fetch much tayled stone there toward his buildings... The place wher the town was ys al overgrown with brambles, hasylles, and lyke shrubbes. Neverthelesse here and there yet appere ruines of buyldinges, of the which the folisch people cawlle on the King of Feyres Chayre. Ther hath been fownd a nostra memoria lateres Britanici; ex et eisdem canales, aquaeductus, tessellata pavimenta, fragmentum catenulae aureae, calcar ex [auro] by side other strawng thinges. To be short, of the decaye of Kenchestre Herford rose and florishyd."

Here is a modern English version:

"Kenchester stands three miles or more above Hereford... This town is far more ancient than Hereford and was celebrated in the Romans' time, as appears by many things, and especially by antique money of the Caesars, very often found within the town, and in ploughing about; which the people called Dwarves Money. The extent of Kenchester has been by estimation as much as Hereford, except the castle... Pieces of the walls and turret still appear, prope fundamenta, and more should have appeared if the people of Hereford town and others thereabout had not in times past pulled down much and pyked out (stolen) the best for their buildings. Of late one Mr. Brainton... did fetch much tooled stone there for his buildings... The place where the town was is all overgrown with brambles, hazels and like shrubs. Nevertheless here and there still appear ruins of buildings, of which the foolish people call on the King of Fairies' Chair. There has been found (a) widespread memorials of Britain; out of these drains, aqueducts, tessellated pavements, fragments of a gold chain (and) a spur of gold, beside other strange things. To be short, from the decay of Kenchester, Hereford rose and flourished."

William Camden, 1610

"The town is an irregular hexagon, higher than the surrounding lands, but without fosse or ditch. Nothing remains of its splendour except near the east end, a piece of what was probably a temple, with a niche which was five feet high and three broad within, built of rough stone, Roman brick and indissoluble mortar and called the chair."

John Aubrey, 1670

"Old Roman buildings of brick were discovered, on which oaks grew. Bricks of two sorts, some equilateral, eight inches square and one inch thick, some two feet square and three inches thick. About the same time a vault was opened with a tessellated pavement, and Sir John Hoskyns found a hypocaust about seven feet square, with leaden pipes entire, and some pipes of brick, a foot long and three inches square, let artificially into each other."

Roger Gale, 1719, visiting what he called "Ariconium"

Gale described the site as "oval, of 50 or 60 acres with four gates or openings, two on the West, two on the North side". He mentions traces of walls and a niche described by Camden, "also a vault from which urns were taken with bones and tesserae", and he obtained coins of Caracalla and Severus Alexander from Colonel Dantsey (of Brinsop Court). The coins were mostly found on the north side, which had two gates opening that way; two roads were visible here. Gale also mentions burnt wheat, as showing the destruction of the town by fire, and describes a room at Hampton Court as being "paved with red Roman tiles six inches square brought from here".

William Stukeley, 1722

"The city of Hereford probably sprung up from the ruins of the Roman Ariconium, now Kenchester [we now know the site was Roman Magna, not Ariconium which is near Ross-on-Wye], three miles off, higher up the Wye but not very near it; which may be a reason for its decay. Ariconium [Magna] stands on a little brook called the Ine, which thence encompassing the walls of Hereford, falls into the Wye, nothing remaining of its splendour, but a piece of temple, probably within a niche, which is five foot high and three broad within... There are many large foundations near it. A very fine mosaic floor a few years ago was found intire, soon torn to pieces by the ignorant and vulgar. I took up some remaining stones of different colours, and several bits of fine potters ware of red earth... In another place is a hollow where burnt wheat has been taken up: some time since Colonel Dantsey sent a little box full of it to the Antiquarian Society. All around the city you may easily trace the walls, some stones being left everywhere, though overgrown by hedges and timber trees. The ground of the city is higher that the level of the circumjacent country. There appears no sign of fosse or ditch around it. The site of the place is a gentle eminence of a squarish form; the earth black and rich, overgrown with brambles, oak-trees, full of stones, foundations and cavities, where they have been digging. Many coins and the like have been found. Mr. J. Hill, JC, has many coins found here, some of which he gave to the society [the Antiquarian Society?]."

Stukeley also says: "Colonel Dantsey has paved a cellar with square bricks dug up here; my Lord Coningsby has judiciously adorned the floor of his evidence room with them".

Mr. Hardwick, writing to the Archaeological Journal, Vol. XIV

"About 1810-20, the site, which was a complete wilderness of decaying walls and debris was cleared. The principal street runs in a direct line east and west and was 12-15ft in width, with a gutter along the centre to carry off refuse water, as is traceable by the difference in the growth of crops. The streets appear to have been gravelled. No doubt many of the houses were of timber, for along the lines of the streets at regular distances the plinths in which the timbers were inserted have been taken out, the wholes being cut 4 inches square. The plinths measured 2ft in each direction and lay 2ft below the present surface."

Mr. J.J. Reynolds

"The only trace of exposed Roman walls that my 50 years knowledge can recall was removed by my uncle, Mr. John Hardwick, about the year 1861, when the fences were thrown down. It then formed a raised fence with scrub growing about it. It occupied a small portion of the north side, and carried the Kenchester footpath. When the site was first cultivated, and afterwards for some years, numbers of Roman remains were turned up by the plough. Many coins, nearly all small brass. No gold coins and very few silver. Many coins of the Manapian pirate, the British usurper Carausius (AD 287-293), Allectus (AD 293-6), Constantine (AD 306-337). Many small bronzes - figures of animals, finger rings, brooches, bronze knife handle, keys, pins, beads, querns, pottery and glass."

Mr. T. Wright, in Wanderings of an Antiquary (1853)

"Till recently the area of the Roman Town at Kenchester could be distinctly traced by the remains of its walls. They formed a very irregular hexagon, including between 20 and 30 acres. At present very little of the wall remains, and that is found chiefly on the north-west side of the area. It is faced with small stones arranged in what is technically called herringbone work and cemented together with mortar which is inferior to that usually found in the town walls of the Romans. In this respect it resembles Silchester and some other Roman remains in the country. The ancient defences of the town are very strongly marked in the garden of a cottager at the side of the high road at the western extremity of the site.

"By the kind permission of Mr. Hardwick some gentlemen of Hereford assembled by Dean Merewether proceeded some 5 or 6 years ago to excavate the site of the ancient city of Kenchester, but they seem to have gone to work without any system and to have no particular reason for digging a hole in one place rather than another. They came, however, upon a coarse tessellated pavement, and it was determined to carry it off entire and deposit it in the museum of the Philosophical Institution at Hereford. But the Herefordshire peasantry have their own particular notions about such monuments, and confident that an immense treasure lay concealed beneath it, they determined to be beforehand with the the learned antiquaries in carrying off the prize. Accordingly during the night when it was left unprotected, a party of them came with pickaxes and other implements and broke it all to pieces. A few fragments only reached the museum. The other articles found during the diggings are said to have gone into the private collection of the Dean, with which they were eventually dispersed. The money collected for the purpose was soon expended, and the diggers somewhat unhandsomely left to Mr Hardwick the task of filing up the holes they had made."

The above descriptions were taken from G.H. Jack, Excavations on the site of the Romano-British town of Magna, Kenchester, 1912-3, Report of the Research Committee of the Woolhope Club, 1916.

The Road

At this time the lines of the walls of the town were said to be still distinct, and at one point on the north-west corner the crumbling masonry was still visible. The outer walls appeared to be about 7-9ft thick and built of roughly squared blocks of local sandstone.

By this time there was no above-ground indication of the position of the town gates, but it was expected that the gates on the east and west sides would fall in line with the direction of the main road through the town. To uncover the main road two openings were made: one near the east gate and another nearer the middle of the site.

When the road surface was uncovered it was found to be 30ft wide with stone drains running along either side. The structure of the road was described as being of coarse gravel at the base, faced with finer gravel, the whole being 3ft thick. The road foundation material, 2ft 6in thick, being kept in place by slabs of rough masonry.

Down the centre of the road ran an open channel, which effectively split the road into two strips. The channel was found to be 2ft wide and 1ft deep, widening out towards the east wall to 4ft wide and 2ft deep. The channel would have been an obstruction to traffic and the exact purpose of it is unclear as the two side drains would have been more than sufficient for carrying away surface and refuse water. The walls of the side drains were constructed of roughly worked sandstone slabs, up to 5½ft. The bottom was paved with flat stones and the top covered (at least in some places) with slabs. The internal size of the drain was 12 inches square and the bottom was 1ft 9in below the road surface.

The Buildings

Very little walling above floor level existed by this time, and what remained varied from rough rubble work to squared stones laid in courses. Moulded stones were scarce, but five fragments of worked Bath stone were found during excavation. In Credenhill column heads and bases, which probably came from Kenchester, were seen surmounting the gate pillars of a farmhouse.

In one of the trenches there was some evidence of buildings, including two flagstone floors about 8 inches beneath the surface, along with the remains of a furnace. There was no trace of walls around the stone floor, and it is likely that the walls of these buildings were made of wattle and daub with a thatched roof. On the floor iron fragments, nails, lead (which had been molten) and fragments of plaster were found.

In further trenches other remains of buildings were uncovered, including a T-shaped section with an almost intact black jar alongside a stone altar and square pillar with plinth. In the eastern area of the site the trenches revealed the foundations of a series of buildings containing some fine pavements and several hypocausts (under-floor heating systems). It appears that this house bordered the main street, with a row of morticed stones suggesting an open verandah with wooden supports. The arrangement of houses is very similar to that at Wroxeter in Shropshire. The houses at Kenchester were long and narrow with alleys between, probably gravelled. The roofs of at least some of these buildings were covered with either stone or brick tiles. Many stone tiles of various sizes were found, some with nails still remaining in the holes. They were sandstone, diamond shaped and up to 2ft long and 1ft 4in wide and 1in thick. Each tile had two nail holes by which it was fixed to the wooden rafters of the house.

At a point 40yds from the supposed position of the east gate and bordering the north side of the road, a building 71ft x 24ft with rubble walls 2ft thick was traced. Inside this building a series of curbstones marked out the hearth, and burnt soil was found within. The flooring near the hearth was flagstones, whilst to the north it was concrete, which suggests that it was split into two apartments.

Forty feet to the west of this building and parallel to it was found another wall. Between the walls of this building but 60ft from the roadway was discovered a mosaic pavement 20ft long and 12ft 6in wide, made from quite large red, white, blue and brown tesserae (tiles). About three-quarters of the mosaic was intact; the remainder most probably having been damaged at the time the orchard (shown on Stukeley's 1721 plan) was uprooted. The design consists of two octagons with geometrical centres surrounded by a circle of scrollwork. Inside a plain blue outer edge is an ornamental border of scrollwork, similar to designs found at Silchester. Adjoining the pavement on the south side further mosaic remains were found as if in a corridor. All traces of walls adjoining the floor had disappeared. The remains of  a hypocaust system were also found in this area.

At a spot 60ft from the above mosaic pavement and at a level 5ft below it another larger and finer pavement was uncovered. It measured 25ft square. The design is an elaborate geometrical one, with interlacing curved bands and fret border. The pavement was made of red, blue, white and green tesserae of smaller size than the first pavement. This pavement can now be seen on display on the staircase of Hereford Museum, which is in the City Library building in Broad Street. On removing the pavement the following objects were found underneath it: pottery, including decorated Samian ware and coarse ware; a fragment of mortarium (the bowl from a mortar and pestle); iron nails; a snail shell; and a fragment of oyster shell.

On the extreme west of the excavations undertaken by Jack, two buildings with well-built structures were found. The masonry was squared and laid in neat and regular courses, 5in deep. The larger of the two was roughly 35ft square and was divided into two equal parts by a wall. The east wall contained a tile course - the first example of this noted on the site. The smaller building was 14ft by 10ft but contained nothing of particular interest. Near the south-eastern outer angle of this building a female skeleton was discovered, with bone pins, a bone button, a coin of Carausius and some small fragments of bronze. The position of the bones seemed to suggest that the body had been unceremoniously dumped into the hole dug for it. At a short distance away a lower jawbone was found.

During excavations another building was uncovered that Jack says "which I take to be a bath, and a deep, well constructed drain". The "bath" building measures 15ft by 6ft inside and the floor was paved with flagstones on a concrete foundation. The thick walls were plastered, and the angles both horizontal and vertical were thickened out with cement fillets. The position of this building was very close to the spot where an altar nicknamed "The Chair" (HER 21015) by Stukeley in 1721 was found. Jack suggests that the altar may have formed a niche in one of the walls of the bath house. 

From the ruins of one of the hypocaust systems many fragments of pink plaster or fine concrete were recovered, retaining traces of decoration on the face. Fragments of plaster painted indigo, green, red, yellow ochre, pink and blue were also found on the site. Some of the painting was quite elaborate, with one example displaying a leaf and dot design in indigo blue, green and white.  

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

This site is now generally called "Magnis", with a short -i-, to rhyme with "miss". This cannot be correct.

There are only two extant references to the name: in the Antonine Itinerary and the Ravenna Cosmography. These are merely entries in a list of routes, with mileages. This is the relevant section of the Antonine Itinerary:

ITER XII

Iscae ...                              Magnis          xii

Burrio          viiii                   Bravonio        xxiiii

Gobannio     xii                    Viroconio      xxvii

ITER XIII

Burrio ...                             Ariconio         xi

Blestio        xi                     Glevo            xv

The Ravenna Cosmography entry is similar. Note that all names are in the Dative case, with the sense of "from ... to ...".

In modern languages (as in Latin), it is normal to refer to any Latin name or noun in the Nominative form. It is wrong to say that Caerleon was called Iscae, even though that is the form of the entry quoted above - we use the Nominative form Isca. Similarly we say Londinium, not Londinio.

So what is the Nominative form whose Dative is Magnis? A Dative form in -is can only be a second-declension plural. Magnis must be the Dative plural of the adjective magnus, "large". (Incidentally, the ending is pronounced long, to rhyme with "geese".) Therefore the Nominative was one of the forms Magni (Masculine), Magnae (Feminine) or Magna (Neuter). There is no certain way of knowing which.

Common sense suggests that the name of the town was Magna Castra - "the big fort" - because of its position below the Credenhill hillfort. The Roman town was no doubt placed there for reasons of social engineering, as was so common. The hillfort might very well have had the British version of that name previously; it is and was very common in Welsh (Dinas Fawr, Dynevor, etc.). I expect the name Mægonsæte would be based on it, and thus the names "Marden", "Maund" etc. (Incidentally this makes no sense unless you realise that the Latin word for "fort" - castra - was grammatically plural although referring to a single object, like our words "trousers" or "scissors".)

Until recently most scholars knew their Latin and these facts were a matter of course. Older books use the form Magna, as does for example the notice by the Roman Mosaic in Hereford Museum. The form in -is has crept in this century and is now almost universally used. Perhaps it is not too late to re-introduce the correct form.

Footnote: all this assumes that the Kenchester town is the one to which the entry Magnis refers. Kenchester was previously thought to have been Ariconium. To my mind the mileages do not make perfect sense however you take them but the argument of the place-name is powerful.

© David Holton, 2002

The Site

New Weir is almost 1km south of the Roman town of Magna at Kenchester and is 0.5km west of the line of the Roman road which travels south from the eastern gate of Magna towards a presumed bridge crossing over the River Wye. The site is on a terrace of land, close to the Wye, at the south-eastern corner of the New Weir gardens. The terrace is 120m long and has a gentle slope from the steep river bank for about 30m, after which the ground rises steeply again. Springs occur at the base of the steep slope, above the river level.

Some 20m north-west of a modern pump house are the remains of an octagonal stepped cistern. The cistern, which was repaired early in the 20th century after its initial discovery in 1891, retains its original form and dimensions although some stones have been misplaced. The cistern is of six steps with each level shaped as an octagon, except for the base which is a single block with a 15cm hole in the middle.

Approximately 50m upstream of the cistern, two stone revetments support the river bank. The most distant one from the cistern is the best preserved, with masonry standing 4m high. The river elevation has a base of large blocks of cut stone with a well-coursed wall of smaller stones above. Similar masonry continues at right angles into the bank to the north-east, where the stonework rises higher and has a plastered surface. The large stone masonry foundation continues north-west from the main block of the revetment, and at right angles to it, an upper wall continues into the bank, and the remains of a mortar floor can be seen over 1m below the present ground level with building debris above. Traces of other walls and fragments of Roman tile and mortar are visible in the river bank immediately upstream. South-east of this upper revetment, and about 3m forward from its face, is a second, lower revetment. Only the large stone footings of this remain. Between the two revetments, in the river bank, is a mass of fallen roofing stone.

Discovery of a cistern, 1891

The spring supplying the hydraulic ram of New Weir had dried up, and a trench was excavated parallel to the river bank to seek a fresh supply. A spring was found and in following its course workmen found their work obstructed by enormous stones at a depth of between 4 and 9ft (1.2-2.7m). The stones were broken and moved until it was noticed that the stones were carefully carved and dressed and the remainder were excavated with more care.

What was revealed was a mass of masonry forming a series of steps, leading - in diminishing diameter - to a single large stone with a 15cm circular hole in the centre. When the hole was cleared numerous tesserae were discovered. The position of the hole was found to be on the course of a streamlet, the overflow of which was conducted to the river via a stone trough.

At this time a photograph and drawing of the cistern were sent to Professor Middleton at King's College, Cambridge, who replied that in his opinion, judging from the drawing, the cistern was likely to be medieval rather than Roman. 

The 1977 Excavations by Ron Shoesmith and M. G. Boulton

Ten trial holes of 1m squared were positioned along the terrace.

Trench 1: Located to the north-west of the main terrace. Below the turf were silt and gravel layers 0.7m deep and these sealed a stony layer, which in turn sealed a layer of clean alluvial silt (hill-wash). A fragment of Roman tile was found in the upper silt layer.

Trench 2: This trench was 11m south-east of Trench 1 and on the main terrace. Hill-wash material predominated and several fragments of Roman tile were also found.

Trench 3: 6m north-east of trench 2, close to the steep bank rising from the terrace. Excavated to a depth of 0.9m through hill-wash silt and gravel; no Roman material was found.

Trench 4: 14m south of trench 2 and 10m east of the upper masonry revetment. The upper levels of the trench contained much stone plus many fragments of Roman tile, several grey and white tesserae, a few sherds of Roman pottery and a piece of painted wall plaster. This stony layer was covered and filled with a grey silty material (hill-wash). About 0.8m below the surface, part of a mosaic pavement was found in the northern corner of the trench. It appeared that the mosaic was the corner of a pavement, possibly with robbed-out walls surrounding it on the south-west and the south-east. Both grey and white tesserae were used in the portion of the mosaic visible, apparently arranged in a geometric design. The pavement was laid on mortar which was also only present in the northern corner of the trench. Over 80 tesserae were still in place with 40 more loose in the overlying area, suggesting there had been little disturbance to this feature.

Trench 5: 5m north-east of trench 4 and with a ground level 1.29m above that of trench 1, this trench contained many stones, in places tumbled on top of one another, all within a grey hill-wash material. A few stones were removed, exposing further masonry. Many fragments of Roman tile were found amongst the stones. This stonework was presumably the spread of debris from a building.

Trench 6: This trench was 7m north-east of trench 5 and close to the steep bank rising from the terrace. Part of a stone cover of a water tank was found in the eastern part of the trench. The water tank was about 1m deep and 2.7m long, and was full of water. In the surrounding soil pieces of Roman tile were found.

Trench 7: This trench was 14m south-east of trench 5 at a point where river erosion has caused the terrace to become narrow. The ground surface was 1.85m above that in trench 1. This trench contained a thick layer of grey-brown silt sealing stone and river pebbles. At 0.6m deep white, black and grey tesserae and fragments of tile were discovered. At 0.8m deep many large stones were found to be sitting on a layer of clean gravel (undisturbed ground). The presence of building debris but no floor suggests that this trench lay just outside the limits of any building.

Trench 8: Situated 14m south-east of trench 7 and 18m north-west of the cistern. Modern disturbances were found to have removed most of the Roman levels. Along the north-eastern side of the trench, at a depth of 0.8m, a disused channel had been constructed from semi-circular field drains. The south-western section was also cut by modern disturbances (fragments of modern drainpipes). A narrow ridge in the centre of the trench contained some stone, Roman tile and pottery.

Trench 9: 16m south-south-east of trench 8 and 8m south-west of the cistern. The area had suffered from some erosion. Footings of a substantial wall running parallel to the river were exposed. The stones were left in situ. Overlying layers included hill-wash and loose stones (debris from stone robbing). Roman pottery, tile and tesserae were found in the upper levels but there was no definite evidence to indicate that the wall was Roman.

Trench 10: 2m north-west of the cistern. Below the topsoil was a layer of large stones, including one ashlar block, all within grey silty hill-wash. The stones and silt sealed a layer of broken stone roofing tile. Both layers contained Roman tile and some pottery, and the stone tile layer contained several chalk and sandstone tesserae. Under the roofing stone was a mixed calcareous orange layer, 20mm thick, on top of a clean white layer.

The Finds

Pottery: A total of 24 sherds were found, of which five were modern. The Roman sherds included:

1. A rim of a shallow bowl with out-turned rim. Soft sandy oxidised fabric with brown inclusions (Oxfordshire kiln?) of 4th century date.
2. A base of a bowl, soft sandy oxidised fabric with traces of a dark red colour (Oxfordshire kiln?) of 3rd or 4th century date.
3. A hooked flange from a bowl in a micaceous, fairly hard sandy buff ware. Probably late 3rd or 4th century in date.

The amount of pottery found was too small to form any definite conclusions, but it can be used to suggest occupation on the site in the late 3rd and 4th centuries AD.

Tile and Brick: Fragments were found in most trenches and include fragments with wavy, combed decoration. Identified pieces include hypocaust tiles, roof tiles and box flue tiles.

Metalwork: Seven nails and one possible handle were found.

Glass: Two small fragments - both could be of Roman date.

Plaster and mortar: Several fragments of opus signinum were found with small pieces of plaster. Opus signinum is a type of Roman hydraulic concrete partly composed of crushed brick. It was used for covering walls and floors.

A sample of plaster, found in situ on the south-eastern elevation of the upper revetment, consisted of a fine gravel mortar up to 47mm thick with a thin (2mm), fine, hard lime skin on the outside. This surface had apparently been whitewashed and may have had some dark red painted decoration.

A sample of the floor exposed in the erosion of the north-western elevation of the upper buttress consisted of a fine lime mortar with some glacial pebbles, occasional angular stone fragments and charcoal flecks.

Stone - Buildings: A few very small pieces of white Bath stone with traces of a carved decoration were found.

The masonry of the upper revetment is in two parts. The lower four courses are of large, squared blocks each of which contains a lewis hole, generally 0.5-0.6m squared. The upper courses are regularly laid using well-shaped stones in courses 0.13m thick, pointed and in places covered with good quality mortar. The lower revetment is more ruined and consists only of the larger, squared blocks.

The cistern is made of carefully shaped stones, each tier forming an octagonal shape.

Stone - Tesserae: Loose tesserae were found in several trenches and a small section of mosaic in situ was uncovered. The tesserae were all grey, white or black and most were c.15mm cubes, though a few were oblong.

Conclusions

The terrace was occupied during part of the Roman period by buildings of some stature. The nature and method of construction indicates that the complex was built into the river bank. The buttressing suggests that the course of the river in this particular area has changed little.

The physical limits of the terrace would not allow for a large courtyard, but the complex of buildings is at least 70m long.

The Use of the Buildings

The excavations and survey show that there is a complex of rooms in the vicinity of the revetments which includes at least one mosaic. Some 50m south-east there is apparently a further building complex close to the cistern, and the tesserae found in the central hole and in the trenches indicates the presence of one or more mosaics.

The cistern or pool is perhaps part of a water shrine or nymphaeum and as such would probably have had a prominent position within the villa complex.

The remains are apparently those of a medium-sized villa. The complex is sufficiently large to have incorporated two separate residential units, presumably with at least one bath building. It is possible that the site had religious significance and that the building complex incorporated a temple or a shrine.

The buildings could also have been the home of a merchant, supplying goods which had been transported up the river Wye.

Protection work, 1991

In 1991 the Cotswold Archaeological Trust (CAT) was asked by the National Trust to assist in the development of a scheme of riverside protection for the remains at New Weir. Initial preparatory work comprised standing structure, topographic, river bed and documentary studies of the site. In July 1995, with the river at its summertime low point, CAT returned to the Weir Gardens to assist with the execution of the riverbank protection works. This involved the insertion of a natural blockstone revetment along the riverbed, to the rear of which many tonnes of soil were to be dumped, turfed over, and the damaged bank re-profiled. In the immediate vicinity of the upstanding Roman remains a blockstone apron would replace the turf to ensure complete protection of the structures.

Before any aspect of the work could take place the line of the revetment had to be cleared of collapsed Roman masonry. Some 241 blocks and fragments, some weighing nearly a tonne, were recorded over a 100m stretch of the riverbed. All were examined and recorded.

A small-scale investigatory excavation was conducted on top of the upstream buttress prior to consolidation works. This revealed the presence of a small concrete-floored room or vestibule with a blocked doorway, once opening onto a possible flight of steps leading up from the river, but now only surviving three or four rises high. The adherence of painted plaster to one of the external faces of the buttress revealed an original decoration of white stucco onto which a design of rectangular blocks had been traced to create the effect of ashlar facing, the first time this had been found in situ in Britain. If the entire complex was treated in this way the total effect must have been grandiose when viewed from the south bank or from the river itself.

No further excavation could be carried out on the terrace, but it was possible to examine the eroded river bank in detail, thus revealing further walls between the buttresses and evidence that at least part of the area was once roofed. Understanding of the lower buttress was more problematical, but clearly it originally extended further into the river than previously thought and might have functioned as a landing stage or breakwater, or possibly supported rooms above in the manner of the upper buttress.

Despite many unanswered questions about form and function, we can say that this complex of elaborate and imposing buildings was undoubtedly once very grand.

(Information from Graeme Walker, Cotswold Archaeological Trust)

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

Roman bath complex, Stretfordbury, near Leominster

The site lies in a field directly west of a Roman road, which is known as Stonechesters. This in itself is interesting as it is well known that many places of Roman origin have "chester" in their name (e.g Chester, Silchester, Kenchester). "Chester" derives from the Latin word castra, meaning a camp. The area in which the complex is situated is on a level spur on a rectangular tract of land, of c. 4 acres in extent. The bath-house is 126m due west of the modern road .

This area has at times turned up Roman coins and pottery sherds, and in 1981 Mr. Frank Attwell was granted permission for minor excavation on the site. Several trenches were dug, and these revealed wall foundations considered to be Roman. Unfortunately much of the area had been subjected to stone robbing. However, it was found that the area concealed a large and complicated structure.

The complex consisted of three rectangular buildings, all adjoining and running parallel to each other on a north-south axis.

Building A consisted of two rooms and a corridor entrance connected to Building B. Both rooms and the passageway contained hypocausts served by a furnace positioned at the south-easterly end of the building. The pilae (pillars of the hypocaust) that had supported the floors of the rooms were constructed of square red tiles. Due to the severity of the stone robbing in this area it was not possible to give an accurate height from the base to floor level.

Building B: Fortunately most of the foundations that had supported this building remained intact. Within the foundations were the remains of a large, channelled hypocaust system fed by a fire-box at the northern end.

Building C: This building was entirely timber framed, except for the dividing wall separating the two buildings. The floor area in this building was stone slabbed but not heated.

Building A and its use

The building was of stone and concrete with very little timber, due to the fire risk from the under-floor furnace. The materials used in a building such as this, where the temperature was subject to fluctuations, also needed to be stable and not subject to expansion and contraction due to hot and cold as timber would have been.

The building was divided into three separate chambers with interconnecting hypocausts, each heated from the same furnace in Building A. This furnace supplied hot water to the bath, as well as heat below the floor level which was then circulated within the floors in Buildings A and B, and finally drawn up through wall flues to heat the rooms.

The furnace was built out from the main wall, with parallel walls of alternate brick and stone courses. The hearth was of red clay tiles supported by stone slabs. The entire construction would have probably been arched over and a hot water tank, of copper or bronze, suspended above it and fed by a cistern placed close by.

The wall remains consisted of mortar-bonded stone, roughly squared and dressed on the face side only. The core of the wall was mortar and rubble infill. The stone, of local origin, is rather porous grey limestone, the mortar being of a lime base and yellowish-brown in colour.

In Roman baths it was common to find four rooms. First was the apodyterium or changing room, which led to the frigidarium (cold room). Beyond this was the tepidarium (warm room), with the last room being the caldarium (hot room). This last room would have been placed directly over the furnace to gain maximum heat, suggesting that at the Stonechesters site Building A was thecaldarium, Building B the tepidarium, the room attached to Building B the frigidarium and the timber room on the end the basilica (public hall).

Although no dateable evidence was found on the site, remains were discovered that identified its function as a bath complex. These remains included parts of a concrete bath discarded when the building was demolished. The section recovered was found to be a large section of the base which still had concrete attached to it, suggesting that it had been placed directly on to the floor. The bath was also found close to the furnace, giving further weight to the argument that Building A was the hot room.

Building B and ancillary rooms

Although no detailed excavation was carried out on this building, the determination of its dimensions and probable usage were considered to be of some importance. The wall-lines, therefore, were exposed, which revealed that the building had once contained a large channelled hypocaust system. At the northern end a small room, which could have housed a cold bath, projects out beyond the main wall-line of the structure.

Building C, the bath basilica

The foundations of this building were traced and the construction method was revealed to consist of a simple trench packed with six neat rows of flat stone laid on edge at an angle of approximately 5°. These were then covered with mortar to produce a flat base.

A timber building, divided into several small rooms (possibly latrines), seems once to have stood at the far end.

The limited investigation at this time failed to uncover any further buildings that the bath-house may have served, but this is not to say that they do not exist.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

Roman surveyors would plot a route between point A and point B using a groma, four weighted strings hanging from a cross on a pole. The path of the road would then be cleared and a route cut into the earth. Foundations of chalk or gravel would have been laid and on top a layer of paving stones or cobbles would have completed the road surface. To prevent the build up of surface water the Romans often dug drainage channels either side of the road to carry the water away. Roman roads also had quite a pronounced camber (the curve of the road surface) to encourage the water to run off into the drains.  

Two roads passing through the county appear in the Antonine Itinerary. The route and origin of one are almost certain, but almost all traces of the other have disappeared.

The definite Roman road of Watling Street, which links Viroconium (Wroxeter) to Isca Silurum (Caerleon) ran due north and south from one end of the county to the other. Along different parts of its length it is known as East Street, Watling Street and Stoney Street.

From the north, the road enters the county close to Marstow near Leintwardine, after which it becomes difficult to trace for about a mile until just north of Leintwardine. After forming the main High Street of the village the road, known here as Watling Street, turns to the south-east towards Paytoe, where it becomes an almost obliterated track to about one mile beyond Wigmore, where it unites with the main road from Knighton to Leominster. The road then runs due south through Aymestrey and Mortimers Cross.

From here it splits with the modern main road and continues as a by-road, forming a parish boundary, for about a mile and a half, still keeping to the same southerly direction. At Brook Bridge it crosses the line of the Kington to Leominster Railway and again becomes barely distinguishable as a track. At Stretford it again joins a main road, which it sticks to as far as Canon Pyon. Here the two roads split and the Roman road runs past Tillington Court, sloping westwards round Credenhill Camp, to the Romano-British market town of Magna (Kenchester). 
  
From Kenchester the road diverges into two branches. The eastern branch of the road runs from what would have been the East Gate of Kenchester through Stretton Sugwas. In this area archaeologists have recently discovered the remains of the original Roman road surface while undertaking work for a new road system. The road then continues east from Stretton Sugwas, to the north of Hereford City through Holmer and across to Weston Beggard before turning north-east to the Newtown crossroads. From here it heads south-east to Stretton Grandison and Ashperton before going through Pixley (Trumpet crossroads) and Little Marcle. The road finally heads out of the county at Dymock.

The western branch from Kenchester continues westerly towards the Roman villa at Bishopstone. From this point it runs in a south-west direction until it comes to the River Wye, which it probably crossed at The Old Weir, Swainshill (now a National Trust property) via a ford or causeway.

From the Wye the road can be traced under the name of Stoney Street, past Eaton Bishop and over Worm Hill and Brampton Hill to Abbey Dore, where a section of the Roman road surface was revealed in the railway station yard in 1893, 18 inches below the surface. It is described as being 13ft wide, pitched with pieces of limestone larger than a man's head and with two distinct wheel tracks 4ft apart.    

The further course of this road is uncertain, but it probably ran past Ewyas Harold, Llancillo and Walterstone, where there is a Roman villa, and from here it most probably heads due south to the Roman town of Gobannium (Abergavenny).

Road from Blackwardine to Weston under Penyard

There is another possible Roman road from Blackwardine (north-east of Leominster) to Ariconium, Weston under Penyard (south-east of Ross). It is possible to trace the route of this road from Stretford to Blackwardine (marked on Ordnance Survey maps). After Blackwardine the road continues south to Saffrons Cross near Bodenham. The route of the road then disappears from Ordnance Survey maps. At Withington the road is picked up again as a straight line running directly south to Bartestree (we also have Roman remains in the Withington area). At this point the road would have also crossed the known Roman road from Kenchester to Stretton Grandison. From Withington the road appears to head towards Mordiford and then on to Fownhope before becoming the B4224 all the way to Fiddlers Cross near Weston under Penyard, which is believed to be the site of the Roman town of Ariconium.

Road from Mortimers Cross to Clyro

Another road has been suggested from Mortimers Cross, on the route of Watling Street, to Clyro where there was a Roman fort. In the Centenary Volume of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club (1951) it was proposed that the road split off south-west from Mortimers Cross past Shobdon, Staunton-on-Arrow and Lyonshall and almost all the way to Michaelchurch-on-Arrow. It is reported that in some places along this route the paved surface of the road shows up clearly.

Possible road from Blackwardine to Tedstone Wafer*

At its western end the road is presumed to have followed the present road west from Hatfield. East from Hatfield it is shown on the Ordnance Survey map as a footpath through Velvet Stone (grid reference SO 60 59) to Streetfield (SO 62 58). This alignment shows up quite clearly on aerial photographs. The road then passes across fields, where there are said to be remains of stone paving, to Thornbury Mill. It is then presumed to pass south of Wall Hills Camp (an Iron Age hillfort) to Hubbage, then down to the B4214 road which it follows for a short distance.

In June 1966 Mr. and Mrs. Roy Perry and Mathew Hale cut two trenches on the alignment at Hubbage (SO 64 59) on the line of a former road. In the first trench an uneven layer of sandstone was revealed, 3ft 6ins wide at a depth of 12-15ins. Large stones (8-10ins across) appeared to form a kerb on the south side. The second trench was 60yds to the east and showed a similar stone surface at a depth of 12ins. The width was 6ft with a marked depression 4ins deep in the middle and 3ins wide. A further test with an auger made at a point 60yds east of the second trench indicated stone at a depth of 12-15ins. The fact that a metalled surface extended in a direct line for 120yds rules out the possibility of it being the foundations of a building and points to the existence of a road. On the other hand the width of the metalling exposed is much less than that of the normal Roman road. So the evidence at this point cannot be regarded as conclusive.

In a large field at SO 6759, about half a mile south of the Roman fort site at Tedstone Wafer, there is a level terrace on a slope, running in an east-west direction for 300yds or more. Tests with an auger show a hard surface at depths between 9 and 15ins and at one point a trial trench showed a definite paved surface at a depth of 9ins. In the next field to the west auger tests showed a hard surface on the alignment but a small trench showed this almost certainly to be a rocky outcrop.

Possible road north-south at Tedstone Wafer*

Mr. Roy Perry and Mathew Hale (TWNFC, 1968) noticed a paved section at the entrance to a field at Green Farm, Tedstone Wafer, which looked somewhat like an ancient road. The present hedge runs north and south towards the Roman fort site on the north and the alignment would pass just to the west of the Roman fort. There is a paved road running close to the hedge in a northerly direction on a falling slope towards a stream bed where there is a paved ford. The paved road is about 11ft wide and 6-9ins below the surface. A small trial trench was dug and quite a definite paved surface exposed. On the rising slope beyond the stream the road reappears for a short distance but then is lost.

The course of this road to the south seems quite uncertain, though a slight clue may be found on the Ordnance Survey map with a section of modern road called "Green Lane" near Evesbatch, which is on a straight alignment running south-south-east for about a quarter of a mile.

* Information taken from Mathew Hale, "Roman Roads in Herefordshire", Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, Volume XXXIX Part II, 1968, pp. 327-332.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2004]

The Golden Valley area of Herefordshire is particularly interesting for its evident military importance during the Roman advance into Wales around AD 50, when their army moved on two axes, from Wroxeter and Gloucester. The southern thrust from Gloucester moved westwards, more or less along the line of the present A40 road. However, the flanks of the invasion route, serving as their supply line, would be open to attack (interdiction is the technical term) by tribal forces coming from the North. The Romans therefore used the Black Mountains as a blocking position, holding their open northern flank by the well-known temporary vexillation fortress at Boatside Farm, opposite Hay-on-Wye. But such blocking positions need surveillance to ensure that attackers cannot slip through; over the Black Mountains in this case. Roman military doctrine was quite clear in such cases; mount frequent cavalry patrols to observe any signs of enemy movement threatening to penetrate the block. The problem with regular cavalry patrols is that they are very vulnerable to being ambushed by enemy forces lying in wait.

The Roman army's answer to this problem was to establish a double patrol route consisting of two parallel tracks, intervisible from each other and separated by at least half a mile or so, and linked at intervals by cross paths; the whole layout rather resembling a ladder. The cavalry patrols would then weave from one track to the other in an irregular pattern, not repeated from one day to the next, to minimise the risk of being surprised by an enemy lying in wait. Since the alternative tracks were intervisible, there would be a good chance that the patrol could spot the frustrated ambushing forces and, being forewarned, avoid or perhaps attack them. The Roman cavalry patrol route through the Golden Valley is quite easily traced between Dorstone and Pontrilas. Its eastern arm uses a line occupied by the present B4348 road from Dorstone to Vowchurch, extended southwards along the B4347 and thence by footpaths to Kenderchurch near Pontrilas sawmills on the A465 road.

Roughly parallel to this line, and intervisible with it, the western arm of the patrol route runs on the opposite bank of the River Dore; through Ewyas Harold and Abbey Dore, the grounds of Bacton Stud, Turnastone, and the back road between Fairfield School and Dorstone. No fewer than 17 crossing points over the River Dore either remain in use or their sites are clearly visible on the map. Some at least of these crossings will represent the cross paths of the Roman cavalry patrol route.

After the invasion period the Golden Valley area seems to have developed economically; the known Roman Road between Kenchester and Madley being clearly visible as far as the B4348 and thence with more difficulty towards Bacton and Longtown. At Longtown the medieval castle sits in a massive earthwork that looks to be of Roman military origin. Indeed, the military logic for building the medieval castle would be identical to the reasons that would have led the Roman army to the same spot.

Tracing the possible routes of Roman roads makes a pleasant indoor pastime for winter evenings and can provide the inspiration for outdoor excursions for summer days. The obvious and well-known clues are the Roman preference for straight routes wherever possible. For those roads that remained in use throughout the Roman period, the accumulation of some 300 years of repairs and re-surfacing resulted in an extremely hard foundation and very durable surface that enabled them to remain in use for light traffic for a very long time after the end of Roman government in AD 410.

In medieval times the feeble agricultural tools then available were inadequately powerful to remove disused Roman roads, which accordingly became the field boundaries, footpaths, woodland edges, etc. whose alignments across the countryside we can still observe today. Bridges would probably be the first victims of lack of maintenance during the Anglo-Saxon period. No doubt medieval fords bypassed the broken Roman bridges, allowing the roads themselves to continue in use.

Mere straightness is not the sole criterion for attributing a Roman origin to a piece of road, since there are many straight sections of ancient trackways, or indeed modern roads across suitably flat terrain. Roman roads have an additional identifying characteristic due to the method used by the Roman army surveyors to lay out the route for the construction gangs to follow; they established straight sightlines from one crestline to the next (occasionally also from crest to the bottom of a river valley where a bridge or ford was to be built). Where a change of direction was required the adjustment in direction would be made at a crestline in an abrupt turn. Thus, if we plot an elevation cross-section of a conjectured Roman road and observe that the turning points lie on crestlines, then the conjecture is strengthened. Native trackways, generally being unsurveyed, do not tend to exhibit such a strong correlation between the terrain cross-section and turning points. Conversely, many Roman roads are not noticeably straight at all; the routeing of the cavalry patrol tracks in the Golden Valley being a case in point. Roman army tactical roads are characterised by their routeing in relation to the so-called "military crestline" which is located at the highest line in "dead ground" that cannot be observed by the supposed enemy from his side of the hill.

Native trackways, on the other hand, tended to follow the highest line, which ancient custom apparently regarded as neutral ground that could be used by passing travellers without their presence implying hostile intent. You can look at the line of the ridgeway running along the top of the hills between the Wye and Golden Valleys as an example.

© Mike Brown, 2004 

* Mike Brown is a retired RAF pilot and engineer who lived in Peterchurch from 1991 to 2001, but now lives in Peterborough. He has had a close interest in the Roman roads of Britain ever since he started his flying training in 1954 and noticed long alignments of features in the countryside that did not correspond with the Roman roads shown on the Ordnance Survey maps.

Hillforts and their annexes

There is a reasonable amount of evidence for continuity of occupation of some hillforts into at least the later first century AD. Besides Sutton Walls (Kenyon, 1954), such evidence has been forthcoming from within forts at Credenhill nearby (Stanford, 1971), and from Dinedor and Aconbury (Kenyon, op. cit.). Intensive occupation has been noted from excavations within Poston Camp near Peterchurch (Anthony, 1958). Further finds of Romano-British coins or pottery have been recorded from Iron Age hillforts. These latter include Herefordshire Beacon, Backbury Camp near Stoke Edith in the Frome Valley, Risbury Camp and Uphampton Camp west of Leominster. Further sites include Gaer Cop, Hentland, Wall Hills, Ledbury (Walters, 1908, 193), Timberline Camp, Madley and Capler Camp in the Wye Valley near Ross.

Occupation within hillfort annexes is likely at Ivington Camp near Leominster, at Walterstone Camp in the far south-west (Weddell, 2000), and possibly at Wall Hill, Ledbury. This tends to undermine the suggestion that Stanford has made that there was forcible eviction of the native population from such sites in the aftermath of the Roman conquest (1991, 91-4). The argument for forced removal is also to be questioned from recent reconsideration of the dating of occupation of Croft Ambrey. From the evidence of brooch chronology, it has been argued that the sequence there terminates well before the Roman conquest (Haselgrove, 1997, 60).

Villas and farmsteads

In contrast, few Roman villas or buildings featuring tiled roofs and carefully laid out floors (with or without tessellated pavements) are yet known from the county. Sites outside of the Kenchester area tend to cluster in the south and south-east. Two villas at Putley and a complex at Donnington, for instance, represent a group on the Leadon valley that continues down towards Dymock and on into central Gloucestershire and the Severn valley.

Another group is located between Ross and Monmouth in the Wye valley. This scatter includes the excavated villa complex at Huntsham near Goodrich that intriguingly was apparently contained within its own precinct wall (Taylor, 1998). Other sites nearby that also featured stone-built structures include Sellarsbrook at Ganarew and nearby Hadnock by Monmouth.

A variety of enclosures, many of which are broadly rectilinear or rectangular in form, have been demonstrated by excavation to contain Romano-British farmsteads. Again in the south of the county these include the oval earthwork enclosure at Lord's Wood, Whitchurch (Taylor, 2000), and the cropmark sites at Foxhall, Weston-under-Penyard (Walters, 1987). In the north of the county, the recently examined enclosures at Moorcourt Farm and Cold Furrow near Lyonshall and sites at Middle Field and Oxpasture, Leen Farm, Pembridge (White 2003) can now be added to this fast growing assemblage.

Further enclosures of this kind are known from aerial photographs and have been established by fieldwalking as featuring pottery of the period. Such sites include those located just to the north of Hereford at St. Donat's Farm, Burghill (Jackson et al., 1999) and near Wellington Court in the same area.

A perhaps higher status but apparently un-enclosed site is located in the valley of the Little Lugg at Liglok Field, Westhide (White, 2001). This site raises the question of site condition, since the remains examined as part of a recent Herefordshire Archaeology plough-damage study were recorded in the 1950s as being relatively well preserved, with intact wall footings. By 2001, the base of a corn-drying oven was the only feature to survive in situ recognisably. This situation mirrors that revealed in 2000 at Coed Lank, Garway, where the only significant trace of a former farmstead found within arable traversed by a Transco pipeline was again the base of a corn-drier.

Nor is the enclosure examined in woodland near Whitchurch the only known sub-circular or rectilinear (and likely Romano-British) farmstead enclosure known in the county. A square earthwork enclosure has long been known to exist high on the south-eastern flank of Garway Hill. A group of three such enclosures was recorded in the 1970s by the Ordnance Survey on Bircher Common, north of Leominster. During a survey here in 2001, a further possible enclosure was added (Ray and Hoverd, 2003). The sites are situated on the south-facing hillside along the 200m contour, and seem to be separated by a regular distance of 500m. Two of these sites feature pendant field enclosures also of squared or rectangular form.

Recent woodland survey by Herefordshire Archaeology has produced further examples of rectangular settlement enclosures surviving as earthworks. One of these is in the north of the county at Wigmore Rolls, near the Leintwardine area Roman camps and forts. The second is at Yarsop, near Hereford. The latter site again features an attached field system (Hoverd, 2003), and again, this appears to be attached to the south-west of the settlement enclosure.

Field systems that are clearly datable to the Romano-British period are of course extremely difficult to locate. However, given the numbers of surviving field systems now being traced in the county, there seems little doubt that some will eventually be proven to be of this antiquity. Some systems approximate closely to the size and scale of the better-documented "Celtic fields" of central southern Britain. An example is the group of lynchets forming a field system recorded as part of the Malvern Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty archaeological survey at Whitman's Hill Coppice, Storridge, Cradley (Hoverd, 2003).

© Dr. Keith Ray, 2004

References

Anthony, I.E. (1958), The Iron Age at Poston. Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club.

Haselgrove, C. (1997), "Iron Age brooch deposition and chronology", in Gwilt, A. and Haselgrove, C. (eds.), Reconstructing Iron Age Societies: New approaches to the British Iron Age, 51-72. Oxford: Oxbow Monograph 71.

Hoverd, T. (2003), An Archaeological Survey of Woodlands in the Malvern Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, 2000-2002. Herefordshire Archaeology Report .

Jackson, R., Buteux, V., Hurst, D. and Pearson, E. (1999), Evaluation at St. Donat's Farm, Burghill, Herefordshire. Archaeological Service, Worcestershire County Council, Report 723.

Kenyon, K.M. (1954), "Excavations at Sutton Walls, Herefordshire, 1948-1951", Archaeological Journal 110, 1-87.

Ray, K. and Hoverd, T. (2003), Croft Castle Estate: an Archaeological Survey, 2001-2. Herefordshire Archaeology Report 49.

Stanford, S.C. (1971), "Credenhill Camp, Herefordshire: An Iron Age Hill-Fort Capital", Archaeological Journal 127 (1970), 82-129.

Stanford, S.C. (1991), The Archaeology of the Welsh Marches (second, revised, edition). Ludlow, privately published. 

Taylor, E. (1998), "Report on the excavation of Huntsham Romano-British Villa and Iron Age Enclosure 1959-1970", Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club 48 (1995), 224-81.

Taylor, E. (2000), "Excavation of a Ring-Ditched Enclosure with Romano-British Pottery", Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club 49 (1997), 28-32.

Walters, H.B. (1908), "Romano-British Herefordshire", in Page, W. (ed.), The Victoria History of the County of Hereford, Vol. I, 167-199.

Walters (1987),

Weddell, N. (2000), "St. Ailworth: A Celtic Saint in the Black Mountains?", Archaeologica Cambrensis 116 (1997), 79-100.

White, P. (2001), "The impact of potato-growing on archaeological sites in Herefordshire: a preliminary study", West Midlands Archaeology 44, 63-7.

White, P. (2003), The Arrow Valley, Herefordshire: Archaeology, Landscape Change and Conservation. Hereford: Herefordshire Studies in Archaeology, Volume 2 (Herefordshire Council).

Temples in the landscape

Religion always seems to be treated as a "residual" or ancillary category in the archaeology of Roman Britain. However, to so marginalise religious practice is to misunderstand the centrality of the unseen in the lives of "romanised" Britons across three and a half centuries of Roman Imperial rule. The evidence is nonetheless often at best vestigial - at least in part because shrines and casual cult location are rarely identified through pot-scatter in ploughed fields.

Besides the new inscription evidence for a temple of Jupiter in association either with the fort or mansio at Leintwardine, there are some further indications of the presence of temples in the county. For instance, there have been finds indicative of a temple on a hilltop at Stretton Grandison (Walters, 1908, 195). Again (and perhaps not surprisingly) this is in close proximity to a roadside settlement. There is also a suggested temple at Ariconium (Jackson, 2000).

The altars at Hereford itself represent a remarkable concentration of shrine or temple furniture, and it has been suggested therefore that there was some kind of ritual focus near the crossing of the river Wye here (Shoesmith, 1980). At Broad Street in 2000, during the renewal of a main by Welsh Water, observations were made of some stone rubble apparently containing also opus signinum, sealed below medieval levels. This rubble might therefore represent the remains of significant collapsed Roman buildings.

A find that has been dismissed as indicative of the existence of a shrine or temple was the figure of Mercury found at Staunton-on-Arrow. This stone carving was found during the clearing of a rockery at the vicarage, and it is possible that it had been imported into the site by the rector, a known local antiquary (Painter, 1967). This may be the case, but other finds of Romano-British pottery have been made nearby, and the current residents say that they have found Roman coins in the garden in recent years.

The evidence for less formal worship is thinner still. An example is the two stone carved heads was found in the 1980s near Stretton Grandison during drainage works (O'Donnell, 1986).

Roman Christian Herefordshire

The scant evidence for Christianity in the county has been reviewed recently (Ray, 2001). A strap-end found by chance at Kenchester conforms to a type well established as having Christian connotations (ibid. 106; Mawer, 1995, 124). Meanwhile, at Upton Bishop, the building of a vestry in the nineteenth century resulted in the uncovering of medieval carved stones, and an enigmatic fragment of what appears to be a Roman tombstone. It has been suggested that the two figures in adjacent niches on this stone may be portrayals of early Christians at prayer, given the similarity of the treatment of vestments between the Upton Bishop figures and the well-known Lullingstone frieze figures (Ray, 2001).

Part of the reason that the Upton Bishop stone may be significant to the story of Christianity in Roman Herefordshire is that the best evidence for organised Christian communities comes from just this area. This is in the documented existence of Dubricius, as a bishop of the early church in the Ariconium/Archenfield area just to the south of Upton Bishop.

A "sacred" hillfort?

Perhaps the most remarkable indications of religious ritual and practice nonetheless come from an abandoned hillfort. Croft Ambrey, north of Leominster, appears to be Herefordshire's most complex Iron Age hillfort. However, Stanford's excavations in the 1960s added a further dimension to this, relating to activity there after the site was abandoned. Stanford saw this abandonment as having taken place following the Roman conquest, but on the evidence of the dating of a brooch sequence the site was long since abandoned (Haselgrove, 1997)

Stanford also mis-interpreted as an annexe, the southern area of the original hillfort (Ray and Hoverd, 2003, 23-5). In this area, he excavated a large platform and associated mound, that was found to have a complex developmental history, and produced many finds including pins and brooches. This material all dated to the Romano-British period, and the sequence indicates that the site was a shrine in use over a considerable time-span (Stanford, 1974).

The assumption has been that this was an isolated feature, representing occasional visits to the site by a displaced population. The archaeological survey carried out across the Croft estate included a detailed study of the fort (Ray and Hoverd, ibid.). As a result, two further locations with such shrine sites were noted. One of these had a remarkable row of ten or more structures arranged in a line - one feature among which produced calcined bone and another Romano-British tile and mortar.

What this indicates is not just a phenomenon like the alleged "pagan revival" that led to hillforts like Maiden Castle in Dorset having shrines placed inside them. Rather, this may represent a wholesale "sacrilisation" of a major Iron Age centre.

© Dr. Keith Ray, 2004

References

Haselgrove, C. (1997), "Iron Age brooch deposition and chronology", in Gwilt, A. and Haselgrove, C. (eds.), Reconstructing Iron Age Societies: New approaches to the British Iron Age, 51-72. Oxford: Oxbow Monograph 71.

Jackson, R. (2000), The Roman Settlement at Ariconium, near Weston-under-Penyard, Herefordshire: an assessment and synthesis of the evidence. Archaeological Service, Worcestershire County Council, Report 833.

Mawer, (1995),

O'Donnell, J. (1986), "Two Celtic Heads", Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club 45, 501.

Painter, K.S. (1967), "A Roman Stone Relief from Staunton-on-Arrow", Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club 39, 152-3.

Ray, K. (2001), "Archaeology and the Three Early Churches of Herefordshire", in Malpas, A., Butler, J., Davis, A., Davis, S., Malpas, T. and Samson, C. (eds.), The Early Church in Herefordshire, 99-148. Leominster. 

Ray, K. and Hoverd, T. (2003), Croft Castle Estate: An Archaeological Survey, 2001-2. Herefordshire Archaeology Report 49.

Shoesmith, R. (1980), "The Roman Buildings at New Weir, Herefordshire", Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club 43, 134-54.

Stanford, S.C. (1974), Croft Ambrey. Luston, Leominster: privately published.

Walters, H.B. (1908), "Romano-British Herefordshire", in Page, W. (ed.), The Victoria History of the County of Hereford, Vol. I, 167-199.

This period, often referred to as the Dark Ages, ran from the end of the Roman presence in the 5th century to the Norman Conquest in 1066.

Between the retreat of the Roman legions and the arrival of the Normans, very little historical information survives. The romanisation of the Welsh Border lands had been patchy and incomplete; the Latin language had made little progress in the area and native British was still spoken by the majority of the Welsh border people in the 5th century AD.

Under Roman rule, Britain had relied heavily on the Roman soldiers for its defence and had been relatively secure whilst their presence was maintained. When the legions left in the early 390s, there were still some troops remaining but the last of these left in 407 and did not return.

Britain was now under threat from raids by the Angles, Saxons and Picts ("painted men" from north of the Forth and Clyde rivers), but when the natives asked Rome for help the Emperor Honorius told them to look to themselves for their defence (Edict of Honorius, dated to 410). 

The Picts and the Saxons were defeated in 429, but the threat that they posed was still strong. Frontier people were brought into the Marches from Scotland to defend the area against the Irish whilst Saxon mercenaries were invited to settle in the area to create a defensive shield against more Pictish raids.

The Angles and Saxons who invaded post-Roman Britain came from the area that is now modern Germany and southern Denmark. The Anglo-Saxons did not find a prevalent Roman culture in Britain - indeed, what Romanisation had occurred had largely been destroyed or forgotten.

Traditionally, the initial Saxon conquest and occupation of the Herefordshire section of the Marches is credited to the Kings of Wessex in the late 6th century. By the middle of the 8th century Anglo-Saxon political control had been constituted throughout the whole of the Marches. On the western border of the Marches, Offa's Dyke delimited this area of control.

This dyke is the longest linear earthwork in Britain and was named after Offa, King of Mercia, who reigned between 757 and 796. The dyke stretches some 100 miles from the mouth of the River Wye to the estuary of the River Dee. There is a popular myth that the dyke was ploughed by the Devil in a single night, but it was most probably dug by Saxon mercenaries. Offa's Dyke is particularly elusive in Herefordshire. Only six miles of it remain, causing some people to say that it was never dug here and others to say that it has been severely ploughed out.

One important legacy that the Romans had left to the people of the Marches was Christianity. This new religion traditionally expressed itself in monasticism and the worship of saints.

Although Christianity had been recognised as a religion in Britain since 313, the old Celtic gods remained popular with the natives. The main upsurge in the popularity of Christianity came about from an influx of new ideas and priests from the open trade routes from western Gaul, the Mediterranean, Wales and Ireland.

Many churches were founded and set up during the 6th and 7th centuries. In Herefordshire, we have evidence of churches being dedicated to Celtic saints. At Woolhope there is a chapel with a piscina dedicated to Saint Dubricius (or Dryfig), who is reported to have been born at Madley, and at Dewchurch and Kilpeck there are dedications to Saint David, or Dewi. Many of the churches in Herefordshire that were once dedicated to Saxon saints were re-dedicated to Norman saints during the medieval period.

The Roman occupation of Britain had also reduced the importance and function of the earlier Iron Age hillforts. They were no longer expected to act as the regional centres of an area. The establishment of a religious and monastic social framework in the county brought new places into focus.

During the middle of the 8th century the stability of the county, brought about by a relative peace, appears to have created a need for centres of urbanisation in Herefordshire and the Marches. It is from this time that the first documented references to the city of Hereford appear.

Although Herefordshire was under the control of the Mercians, it was still under threat from other invaders. Vikings had continued to invade in the north of the country, which spurred on the Saxon settlers to develop fortified settlements or burghs. These were designed to restrict the advancement of the Scandinavian raiders and create safe places for people to retreat to. 

Hereford has been the centre of a diocese since the late 7th century and there are also traditions of an earlier Celtic church here, the church of St. Guthlac (HER 429) which was founded on the later castle site in the first half of the 8th century.

In the first half of the 8th century the Herefordshire kingdom of Mercia was involved in battles with the Welsh, including a battle at Hereford during the reign of King Offa. Excavations in Hereford have revealed city defences dating back to the 8th century. Hereford at this time covered an area of approximately 40 acres and lay on either side of a main street running east to west (modern day East Street and West Street).

Cuthbert, Bishop of Hereford from 736-740 (and afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury) set up a cross to commemorate Milfrith, king of the Magonsaete, and three earlier bishops. This dedication suggests that Milfrith, grandson of the last Mercian king, Penda, had founded a cathedral city in Hereford prior to this date, which would make it one of the earliest cathedral cities in Western Europe.

It certainly appears that there was a settlement in Hereford from around 700, when the kingdoms of the Magonsaete and Mercia were amalgamated. It was perhaps at this time that an earthen bank and ditch was constructed to contain the city.

In the 8th and 9th centuries Hereford and its surrounding area were attacked by the Welsh, and the earthen rampart was replaced by a stone and gravel rampart. The main street of this city is thought to have followed the line of modern day King Street, across the cathedral site and along Castle Street.

A considerable time elapsed between the building of a permanent defensive work around the city and the re-building of it as a more substantial city wall. This re-building is most likely to have occurred around 913-915, when Hereford was attacked by the Vikings. This massive timber rampart enclosed an area of the city including modern Victoria Street, West and East Streets and Mill Street - about 50 acres in total.

Under Athelstan, a mint was set up at Hereford, which was the only mint west of the Severn at the time. Settlement had also begun to occur outside of the city defences, suggesting a migration of people to a place of apparent safety, stability and commerce.

Hereford was classed as a burgh in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle in 914, and in 1030-40 a new stone cathedral was built, followed by a Norman-style castle c. 1050. In 1055 Gruffydd ap Llewellyn attacked the city, and the defences were enlarged and improved with timber revetments added. The population continued to grow and by the 12th century the town covered an area of 120 acres. The Saxon defences at this time ran along East Street to meet St Owen's Street and continued to the river. On the west, the defences ran from West Street through Eign Gate and down to the River Wye.

With the establishment of a castle at Hereford under the new Earl of Hereford, Harold Godwinson (later King Harold), the city defences were altered once more. The river crossing was pushed westwards until it was at the site it occupies now, which was outside the city defences. These new defences now enclosed an area some 90-plus acres in extent.

The need for a larger trade area pushed the city defences further out on the north side, and a market area was created which ran on an east to west axis rather than the traditional north to south one. Traditionally in Saxon towns trade was done in the area surrounding the churches and in the narrow streets, and it was not until the Norman period that large open market areas were created.

The archaeological evidence for Anglo-Saxon Herefordshire is disappointingly sparse. Much of our evidence comes from chance finds, with Hereford itself being the only major area of archaeological importance for this period. This lack of evidence supports the description of this period - in Herefordshire at least - as the "Dark Ages".

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

"In their days Hengest and Horsa, invited by Vortigern, king of the Britons, sought out Britain in the landing place which is named Ebba's Creek, at first to help the Britons but later they fought against them." Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, AD 449

The period of British history between the departure of the Roman legions and the Norman Conquest is often referred to as the "Dark Ages". There are a number of reasons for this; the written and archaeological record for this period is scarce, and the violence and lawlessness that came about from a withdrawal of formal government and administration added to its aura of bleakness.

In the years after the Roman departure the very identity of Britain changed as we became "England". The native Britons were either assimilated into this new identity, forced further west into Wales, Cornwall and Cumbria, or migrated to other parts of Europe.

Roman rule had been gradually accepted in Britain and the end of Roman Britain was not caused by rebellions or uprisings. Problems elsewhere in the empire had necessitated the movement of troops back eastwards, and whilst many in Britain expected them to return this was not to be the case. In 410 Britain received confirmation that she was now on her own, when her leaders wrote to Rome asking for help against the invading Picts and were told in an edict of the Emperor Honorius to defend themselves.

Within 30 years Britain had severed nearly all her ties with Rome and the end of Roman life, particularly in the more rural areas, was quick and complete. Anglo-Saxons began to arrive and the taking of control was made easier for them as there was no administration, Roman or otherwise, to adapt or overthrow.

One important factor in the speedy collapse of Roman Britain would have been the removal of the Roman economy. The economy that came over with the Romans had been responsible for everything that signified Roman Britain. The market for goods had brought with it towns, housing, clothes and laws. Across the country pockets of organised society had begun to appear, in contrast to the self-sufficient nature that had typified Iron Age Britain. After the collapse of Roman Britain many people would have returned to the almost self-sufficient life that had been lived before the Romans.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle begins its history with the coming of the first Saxons, Hengist and Horsa, to Britain. They had been invited by King Vortigern to help him in his battles against the fearsome Picts and Scots who had begun to invade Britain at the beginning of the 5th century AD. At first the Saxons helped the Britons to win victories against their enemy, but soon they turned against those who had invited them in the quest to secure riches and land for themselves.

After victories over the Britons they were quick to send messages home telling of the "worthlessness of the Britons and the excellence of their land" (Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, AD 449). Soon many more began to invade Britain in the hope of a profitable return. At first the British paid off the Saxon raiders with money called Danegeld (raised by taxes for this purpose) but the Saxons began to want more and the thought of easy money brought further invasions.

The Anglo-Saxons came from various tribes - Angles, Saxons, Jutes and Franks. They lived in the south of what is now Denmark and along the sandy coast of north-west Germany and Holland. Coming from such mountainous and wooded areas, they were particularly interested in the fertile fields of Britain.

The English (as the invaders called themselves) defeated several British Kings, and set up their own independent kingdoms. In 585 they founded Mercia (covering an area from the middle of England to the Welsh Border) and to the north the English kingdom of Northumbria stretched from coast to coast. Eastern Britain was now steadily becoming England. The natives who refused to accept the new rulers were pushed into Wales, Cornwall and Scotland, killed or sold into slavery.

The Anglo-Saxons and Mercia

The name Mercia comes from the Old English word Mierce which means "boundary", hence Mercia means "the land of the boundary people". This name may be significant in that part of the western border of Mercia formed the boundary between the Anglo-Saxon English and the unconquered Britons of Wales. Some scholars have suggested that the name may to refer to the boundaries the area shared with other kingdoms such as Northumbria.

It is thought that the first Anglo-Saxons in Mercia migrated across from East Anglia, travelling along river valleys. The date given for this is the early 6th century. With the arrival of the Anglo-Saxons in the area many of the Britons would have moved westwards into more securely British territory. As the Anglo-Saxons moved west from East Anglia many would have settled in places along the route that provided good water, fertile soils and timber for house-building. As a result the kingdom of Mercia would eventually stretch from Oundle and Northampton in the east to Hereford and Shrewsbury in the west. This kingdom soon developed two main divisions; Central Mercia and Outer Mercia.

Central Mercia was made up of one tribal unit, whereas Outer Mercia comprised a series of smaller tribes who would eventually owe allegiance to Central Mercia (see Sarah Zaluckyj, Mercia, p. 17). The tribes of Outer Mercia would often remain under the rule of their original king or leader who would govern on behalf of the King of Mercia - many of these smaller tribes would eventually be absorbed into the inner core of the kingdom. Outer Mercia included Herefordshire, Worcestershire, Gloucestershire, Shropshire, Cheshire, Northamptonshire, Leicestershire, Lincolnshire, Oxfordshire and Berkshire.

The early annals apparently indicate that the Kingdom of Mercia began in 585 with a man called Crida or Creod(d)a as king. (It is thought that Credenhill, which includes the site of an Iron Age hillfort, was named after this king.) He was then succeeded by Wibba/Pipba, who is thought to have reigned between 593 and 597. The first Mercian king mentioned by Bede is Cearl, who reigned for 10 years between 597-607. Cearl was succeeded by Penda, who was to become one of the most famous kings of Mercia.

The kings of Mercia were itinerant people, moving from one royal district to another and expecting the local nobility to feed and take care of them. This in itself was no small feat and it has been estimated that in the 7th century "10 vats of honey, 300 loaves, 12 ambers (casks) of Welsh ale, 30 of clear ale, 2 full grown cows, or 10 wethers (castrated sheep), 10 geese, 20 hens, 10 cheeses, an 'amber' full of butter, 5 salmon, 20 pounds of fodder and 100 eels" were required to feed and water the king and his men for one night (Nicholas Brooks, "Formation of the Mercian kingdom", inThe Origins of the Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms, 1989).

By travelling around the different communities of the large kingdom the king could demonstrate his power and influence and hopefully discourage uprisings or rebellions. He could also listen to criminal cases and complaints and so keep a role in the leadership of his kingdom.

Eventually the smaller Anglo-Saxon kingdoms of England became absorbed by the larger kingdoms, until the majority of the country was under the control of seven different main kingdoms. These were Mercia, Northumbria, Wessex, East Anglia, Sussex, Kent and Essex.

By the 8th century Mercia had come into her own and was considered one of the three most powerful kingdoms, along with Northumbria and Wessex. By this time her territory stretched from Kent in the south-east, through London and the Midlands and as far north as the Derbyshire Peak District. This area included rich, fertile soils for arable farming, and in the west there were large areas of woodland such as the Forest of Dean for timber. There were quarries for stone and lead and salt works at Droitwich and in Cheshire. All these would have combined to create a profitable industry for Mercia and with wealth her power would have grown.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

We know very little about the first few hundred years of the Anglo-Saxon period, largely because the Anglo-Saxons did not learn to read and write until the spread of Christianity with the mission of Augustine in 597. The earliest settlements would have been groups of three or four family farms. The houses, farm buildings and workshops would have all been of timber with sloping thatched roofs. Around the settlement there may have been a wooden wall for extra protection.

In time these settlements became villages with meeting places for the villagers. The people in charge of these villages would have been the chiefs who had led the settlers to Britain and given them land. In return the villagers worked and fought for their chief.

Burhs

A burh was a fortified settlement designed to protect the inhabitants from foreign raiders. Archaeological remains of these sites suggest that they were enclosures consisting of an earthen rampart topped by a stone or wooden wall and surrounded by a ditch. Burhs are often found located on water transportation routes and in turn the profit from trade would encourage further inhabitants.

The safety offered by a burh and the fact that its inhabitants provided a stable customer base would have encouraged the growth of a market within and without the burh's defences.

It is thought that King Alfred was responsible for the earliest period of burh building in England, and that he undertook this task to protect his people from the fearsome Danish Vikings who were raiding England at this time. Hereford itself has its origins as a Saxon burh and is often thought to be the most westerly burh from the river Severn. This means that it was in effect the last Anglo-Saxon stronghold in England before the Celtic land of Wales was reached.

The Domesday Survey identifies 112 places as burhs, and most of these were equipped with their own mints.

Homes and housing

"They sat long at supper and drank hard, with a great fire in the middle of the room. It happened that the sparks flew up and caught the top of the house, which being made of wattles (twigs) and thatch, was presently in flame." The Venerable Bede, 8th century monk and chronicler

The poorest homes of the Anglo-Saxons were much like those built by the Britons before the arrival of the Romans. They were round or rectangular huts made of wattle and daub and with thatched roofs. They were heated by a central fire, which was also used for cooking, and there was no chimney except for a smoke hole in the roof. Homes were lit by candles or pottery lamps that burnt animal fat. There were very few windows, and these were covered by shutters or cloth to keep the chill out in winter.

Often a family would share their hut with their animals with only a simple screen separating them. Some homes had compacted earth or clay floors, sometimes with straw mixed in, and some had dug-out floors covered with wooden boards. There was very little furniture and often the family would sleep on the floor. Near to the door of the house would sometimes be a shrine to a pagan deity.

Saxon buildings were made out of timber, which was in plentiful supply in Britain, and they varied from simple one-roomed buildings to elaborate halls for princes and kings. As they were made of wood they were prone to decay and at risk from fire, as the Venerable Bede has described. Due to the inevitable rotting of timber over the years very few remains of Saxon buildings are found today.

People in early Saxon settlements generally made their own household goods. Women spun wool into cloth to make clothes, and used plant dye to colour it. A robe or tunic gathered at the waist was the most common garment worn, with the women's tunics being longer than the men's.

Food and farming

The crops most frequently grown by the Saxons were wheat, oats, rye, barley (for cereal and beer), peas, beans and lentils. Honey was the only form of sweetener available and it was also used in the alcoholic drink mead. The Saxons enjoyed meat and pigs, cattle, goats and sheep were all kept.

In order to make meat last longer it was often preserved in salt. The Domesday Book for Herefordshire has several references to salt coming from Droitwich in Worcestershire, and there is even mention of a salt route at Acton Beauchamp that would have travelled through Ullingswick, Marden and Wellington. A reference to Leominster states "woodland 6 leagues long and 3 leagues wide which pays 22s. From these, 5s are given for buying timber in Droitwich, and 30 measures of salt are had from there" (Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, 1,10a, Phillimore, 1983). It is likely that the people of Herefordshire had been getting their salt in this way for generations. Salt would have also been used in making butter and cheese.

In the countryside the vast majority of people lived by farming. The Saxon farmers divided large open fields into long strips which they shared, so that everyone had an equal share of good and bad land. They would plough the fields with big, wheeled ploughs which were pulled by teams of oxen (which they also shared). As the ploughs were so large and so heavy it was difficult to turn them at the end of a row, which is why they divided their fields into long strips as it meant fewer turns.

In Herefordshire, by the time of the Domesday Book (1086) at the end of the Saxon period, approximately 90% of the population was involved in agriculture in some way, with the alternative employment being the occupations of reeve (bailiff or steward), moneyer (a person who coins money legally) and smith (a worker in metals).

Later much of the land was consolidated into large estates and the peasants would work the land for the lord in return for produce.

Society

Dark Age society was divided into several social classes, which might vary from place to place. At the top was the king, who was essentially a war leader. He was expected to lead his men into glory with rich financial rewards. A king who did not provide land, slaves or riches for his followers was not respected and would need to watch his back.

Below the king were two levels of freemen, the upper class thegns (or thanes) and the lower class ceorls (or churls). The difference between these two classes lay solely in the amount of land that they owned. A man could only be a thegn if he owned more than five hides of land (a hide was defined as the amount of land needed to keep one family). As a result of this condition a ceorl could often be richer than a thegn but own less land. Thegns had to be ready to fight for their king, and had other duties such as fortress building or bridge construction. Ceorls also had a duty to their king. They had to work a certain number of days for him on his land and supply him with goods such as honey, malt and yarn.

Below the thegns and the ceorls were the slaves. Slavery was one of the biggest commercial enterprises of the Saxon period, and slaves were essential to the running of society. The most likely source of slaves was war. Many of the native Britons who had been conquered by the Saxons had been forced into slavery. However, people could also become slaves if they were unable to pay fines. In some cases, families with very little money would sell their children into slavery to ensure they would be looked after in times of poverty or famine.

Slavery was not necessarily a role for life. A person could be bought out of slavery by their family, or if they had been enslaved due to the inability to pay a fine they could be released once they had worked enough to pay the fine off. A person could also be granted their freedom in their master's will.

In Herefordshire the ordinary ceorl had a heavy burden of contribution towards the church as well as the standard tithe. In the parochia of Leominster we know of two payments other than the tithe. The first was a payment called scriforn, which appears to have been unique to Leominster and seems to have involved the payment of cereal to the Priory Church. The second payment was known as a soul-scot and was made when a dead person was to be buried.

Administration

The countryside was divided into shires, and each shire was divided into hundreds. These made up the basic units of administration and justice. Those in charge of looking after the king's interests, collecting taxes and administering justice were the earldormen and shire-reeves (sheriffs).

The creation of the parish system came later in the Anglo-Saxon administration. The Anglo-Saxons also had a system of dividing the county into hundreds (areas made up of 100 hides of land). This system is probably as old as, if not older than, the parish system. Each hundred would have its own meeting place within its area, usually at a large and well-known feature in the landscape such as a barrow or a huge tree. The hundred would often be named after its meeting place, such as Hazeltree or Greytree in Herefordshire. A meeting of the hundred would take place every month and it was here that administrative and judicial functions were discussed. Only the more important landowners in the county would be present at these meetings.

In the customs for Hereford in the Domesday Book there is a requirement that all those citizens who owned a horse (i.e. the more wealthy ones) were to attend a meeting of all the hundreds, which took place every three years at Wormelow Tump, destroyed in 1896 during road widening. (See Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, Phillimore, 1983, Phillimore, p. 179a.) Interestingly, the suffix of the name Wormelow is taken from the nearby Worm Brook and in Old English worm meant "dusky". The low suffix probably refers to a burial mound, and indeed Wormelow Tump is thought to have been the burial place of King Arthur's son Amyr.

Religion

When the Anglo-Saxons came to Britain they were pagans. They worshipped gods of nature and held rivers, trees and wells in reverence; they also used spells and charms against evil spirits. To the Anglo-Saxons religion was not a source of spiritual enhancement, but a means of ensuring success in the material world. They would pray to the gods for successful harvests or victory in war. The Saxon gods Tiw, Woden, Thor and Frigg give us the names of the days of the week Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.

Both Saxons and Vikings believed in an after-life and people would be buried with the goods that it was thought that they would need in this next life, such as weapons and coins.

In late Roman times most Britons were Christians. When they fled from the Saxon invaders they set up small churches in Wales and the west. Monks from these and other "Celtic" churches later tried to convert the Saxons to Christianity. Missionaries were sent out by the Pope in Rome, arriving in Kent in 597 under the leadership of Augustine. King Ethelred, the Kentish leader, agreed to meet with Augustine, but only in open land where he believed the "magic" of the priest would do less damage. The mission to convert the king was a success and St. Augustine became the first Archbishop of Canterbury.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

In AD 597 an event occurred that was to change the social fabric of Anglo-Saxon England - the re-establishment of Christianity in England with the mission of St. Augustine.

England already had a flourishing church but it was mainly restricted to the area that had remained Celtic despite the Anglo-Saxon invasion, namely Cornwall. In this respect, Cornwall more closely resembled Wales, Scotland and Ireland. Britain had first been Christianised in the 3rd century, when the Romans were in occupation.

During the 4th century paganism had undergone a revival in Britain, and it became particularly strong in the years after the departure of the Romans. By the time the Anglo-Saxons reached Britain paganism was highly developed in content and mythology. Its purpose was fairly simple: to provide supernatural explanations and influences for all aspects of society, so that all events and outcomes could be associated with the relevant god, ritual or rite.

Paganism was very different to the structured belief system of Christianity in that it was based around undefined superstitions, customs and rituals - often quite personal to the believer.

Many of the elements of paganism related to the natural world, the earth, the sky and the harvest. For this reason paganism often persisted longer in rural areas, as it met the needs of the country dwellers.

Pagan Deities

Probably the most important Anglo-Saxon deity was Woden (also worshipped in Germany and Scandinavia under the name of Odin). It appears that the English thought of Woden as the God of wisdom and the dead. In Norse mythology Woden was the leader of the hunt, who flew across the sky with his hounds. Interestingly Woden is also connected with the idea of Santa Claus, as Woden too was thought to deliver gifts across the sky at the winter solstice.

Woden was also associated with the Valkyries, who were battle maidens who chose those to be killed in battle by reading bloody entrails. The slain chosen by the Valkyries were taken to Valhalla, a hall of the Gods, where they would feast by night and fight with the Gods in battle against their enemies the Giants, who represented evil.

Woden is best known as the God of War and creator of strife. It is also thought that the cult of Woden may have been responsible for the introduction of cremation burial, as in Icelandic literature it is recorded that Din (as Woden was known there) established cremation and that only those who were cremated after death could go on to join him. Sarah Zaluckyj has also suggested that this may be why the early Christian Church was so against cremation, as they saw it as a relic of paganism (see Sarah Zaluckyj, Mercia: The Anglo-Saxon Kingdom of Central England, Logaston Press, 2001, p. 49).

Earthworks are often associated with Woden and named after him. Grimsditch (HER no. 30825), a curved feature situated in between Lower Broxwood and Dilwyn in the north-west of the county and shown on Isaac Taylor's 1757 map, Bryant's 1835 map and the 1840s tithe map (but not on modern Ordnance Survey maps), is thought to be named after Woden as Grim was one of his nicknames. This feature no longer exists and the area where it has previously been marked on maps is now a flat field. Try typing "Grim" into our Field Names database and see how many fields have this in their name - perhaps it is a relic of a Saxon past.
 
Thunor or Thor, who is sometimes represented as the son of Woden, is another important pagan deity. His name means "Thunder" and it was believed that he drove across the sky in a chariot pulled by two goats, flinging his thunderbolt down on the people below. The rumble of thunder which comes with lightning was supposed to be the sound of his chariot wheels tearing across the clouds. Thor's name is often associated with the Anglo-Saxon place name of ley or leah, which means "a clearing", suggesting that his cult was associated with worship in groves and meadows. Through his association with oak trees he also became the protector of men's homes. He was also a type of fertility god due to his connections with fair weather and crop fertility.

Thor has also been associated with cremation burials and his swastika emblem had been found on many cremation urns, due to its meaning of good health and fertility.

The god Tiw was connected with both warfare and law and order. He is thought to be of older origin than both Thor and Woden, and may once have been the supreme god. He later became associated solely with warfare. The runic symbol of an upward-pointing arrow represented his name, and many warriors would carve this symbol on their weapons to bring them victory in battle.

Another pagan deity was Frigg or Friga. In Old English sources she is often represented as the wife of Woden and the mother of the gods. Through this maternal attachment she has come to be associated with childbirth and marriage.

Unlike Christians, who act out their religion through the belief in one god who controls all that is created, the pagan Anglo-Saxons venerated objects from the natural world, especially trees, rivers, streams and pools. They believed that many of these natural items contained spirits or elves who could do good or harm - this theory of religion is known as animism, the attribution of a soul to natural objects and phenomena.

As well as the beneficial gods and spirits, the Anglo-Saxons also believed in malevolent and evil spirits that had influence over daily life. These malevolent spirits included ghosts, elves, sprites and goblins. Often place-names were connected to these devious spirits, and in Herefordshire Shucknall Hill (in Weston Beggard) is thought to mean "Hill of the Demons" or "Goblin/Haunted Hill". The prefix succa (later changed to shuck) meant "demon" or "evil spirit", and presumably frightening or unpleasant things were connected with this area to cause it to be given this name (see Sarah Zaluckyj, Mercia: The Anglo-Saxon Kingdom of Central England).

Elves and dwarves were considered to be wicked, and elves in particular were thought to be responsible for bringing diseases by shooting arrows at their target. They were also thought to bring nightmares.

Dragons and snakes were potent symbols in pagan religion and were associated with guarding, especially burial mounds and treasure. The danger was thought to lie in disturbing the dragon or snake. The Old English term wynm, meaning "reptile" or "snake", may be found in the place-names of Wormhill and Wormsley in Herefordshire, meaning "Hill of the Dragon" and "Dragon's clearing" respectively.

Unlike the Christian church, Anglo-Saxon paganism did not take serious issue with other forms of religion and did not try to suppress them. From an organisational point of view Anglo-Saxon paganism lacked structure, and we know very little about how rituals were performed or how religious sites would have looked. The religion was very personal to the devotee, with prayers being made to certain gods at particular times of the year to guarantee a good harvest or victory in battle. The lack of universality and structure in the religion meant that it was not easy for Christianity to stamp it out completely, as at times of trouble pagans who had converted to Christianity would often find themselves going back to the old religious roots in the hope of achieving the result that they desired.

Christianity makes a Comeback

As mentioned above, the re-establishment of England as a Christian country came about in AD 597 with the mission from Rome of St. Augustine to Kent. Augustine came as a missionary to the king of Kent, knowing that it would easier to convert the populace if he had first converted someone with power and influence. However, a king had to have the support of his thegns before he could convert to Christianity.

The missionaries used promises of fame and glory to increase interest in Christianity and encourage the conversion of the Anglo-Saxons. To the Anglo-Saxons living in England the missionaries, with their strange ceremonies and apparently luxurious lifestyle, would have appeared quite enigmatic and enthralling. The missionaries also emphasised the fact that having one god meant that you were always certain to be praying to the right god, whereas with the Anglo-Saxon religion you had more than one god to appease to ensure things went the way you wanted. To persuade the pagans that their gods were not the best gods they also reminded the Anglo-Saxons of the fact that their gods had let them live a difficult existence in the cold north of Europe, while the Christians lived in the warm fertile lands in the south.

Many people were converted to the Christian religion, but it was not possible for it to completely stamp out the old pagan style of religion and worship. In times of particular hardship or trouble many of the pagans who had converted would return to their pagan roots and pray to the old gods for the help that they needed. As Christianity had not forced the pagans to give up their religion, and there had been no particular event or trouble that had caused them to convert, it was easy for them to use paganism when it appeared that Christianity was not working.

Monasteries

Most of the early work of spreading the Christian Gospel was done from the monasteries, however the monks of the 7th and 8th centuries would often travel (on foot) to the surrounding villages and preach to the inhabitants in an attempt to convert them. In the mid 7th century there were approximately 12 monasteries in England. A century later there were at least 200, showing how Christianity had spread. As more and more books in Latin were brought in by the missionaries writing became popular, and many of the monasteries began to produce their own religious books.

A book at this time was a very valuable and precious object which was copied by hand, and was often beautifully and intricately decorated with hand-drawn images and designs. There were books about the lives of saints, translations of the Bible, rules for monasteries and books of law.

Monasteries began to grow rich through donations of land and money given by followers, and they also had the right to claim one-third of any treasure a king won in war.

The use of elements of both religions - and the crossover between the two - is evident in burial practices after the mission of St. Augustine. A burial without an east-west alignment but with burial goods is pagan, whereas a burial on an east-west alignment but without burial goods is Christian. The Anglo-Saxons would bury personal items with the dead so that they were equipped for the afterlife. These goods included jewellery, weapons and money. Many 7th century graves have been found that have a Christian orientation but also contain grave goods. This indicates that there was a fear of letting the old religion go completely and an attempt at covering all options - appeasing the Christian god with the alignment of the grave but keeping in mind the pagan gods with the grave goods. Death was the time at which you were going to meet your god, whoever it might be, and so they were keeping all possibilities in mind.

In the 8th century grave goods begin to disappear but the east-west alignment remains. From this we can deduce that pagan burial rites had begun to disappear and be taken over by Christian ones.

As Herefordshire was on the border of Anglo-Saxon England and Celtic Britain (which remained largely Christian), there is place-name evidence that attests to the survival of Christianity after the Romans' departure. The place-name element eccles derives from the British word egles, which means "church" or "Christian centre". In Herefordshire we have Eccles Green in Norton Canon (HER 9006), Eccleswall Court (HER 803) to the south-east of Ross-on-Wye, and Eccleswall (HER 21372) in Linton, where there is also thought to be a Dark Age settlement. However, some place-names are thought to derive from personal names, such as Eccles Alley near Almeley, which is thought to mean "Ecca's Wood or clearing" (see Sarah Zaluckyj, Mercia: The Anglo-Saxon Kingdom in Central England).

Archenfield: British Christianity on the Border

The strength of the British Church in western England can be seen in Archenfield, a small British enclave on the edge of Mercia. Archenfield was created out of the British kingdom of Ergyng in the south-west of the modern county of Herefordshire. In AD 740 political control of Ergyng passed to the English: some of the territory became English and part of Mercia, while some remained British and came to be known as Archenfield. Welsh (or British) law was allowed to continue in this area, and as Mercia became more powerful the semi-Anglicised area of Archenfield acted as a safety zone between the Celts and the Anglo-Saxons.

The principal Celtic saint in Archenfield was St. Dubricius. Dubricius is the first bishop recorded as holding the see at Llandaff (although it was actually built before his time). The Llandaff Charters also record grants of land given to him by the reigning kings of Ergyng to enable him to found monastic enclosures, or llans as they would have been called.

Dubricius's earliest religious foundation was at Hentland in south-east Herefordshire. The origin of this name also has Celtic religious connotations, with Hen meaning "Welsh" and land coming from the word llan, which means "old church".

Llanfrother Farm, one mile north of Hentland, also has claims as the site of a monastery of Dubricius founded in the 6th century. The foundations of this possible monastery were allegedly still visible as late as 1633. Some writers have reported that the monastery housed 1,000 monks in training for the priesthood.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

During the Roman period Herefordshire had never evolved into an major area of culture, trade or society, but it is clear that here, as elsewhere in the country, the Romans had left their mark with market towns such as Kenchester and a fairly extensive road system. The traditional date for the end of Roman Britain is AD 410  when an edict from the Emperor Honorius instructed the people of the province to defend themselves and their homes against the invading Picts and Scots. Due to trouble elsewhere in the Empire it is highly likely that Roman soldiers and citizens that had made Britain their home had been moving back to mainland Europe for some time.

Large-scale Anglo-Saxon invasion and settlement did not occur in Britain until the middle of the 5th century and Herefordshire, being on the western edge of the Roman world, did not feel the effects until the end of the 6th century, when Anglo-Saxons arrived on the fertile plains of central Herefordshire.

After the departure of the Romans there seems to have been a downturn in trade and industry throughout Herefordshire, and indeed the rest of Britain. After 325 no coins were minted in Britain and money was imported from the Continent. After the Romans left the importation of coins stopped and the supply was not replaced by any British source, even though before the Romans arrived many of the Celtic tribes had regularly produced their own coinage. Raymond Perry has suggested that this may be due to the fact that after the Romans departed there was no longer any central or regional government to issue any coinage (see Raymond Perry, Anglo-Saxon Herefordshire, p. 7).

As a result of the collapse of the monetary system trade and industry would have suffered; without the coins to pay for items trade had to return to its old ways of bartering for goods with other items. This would have led to a decline in trade at all levels, as without coinage the people of Britain could no longer trade with their neighbours on the Continent. As a result many industrial sites would have become disused and many of the urban centres which relied so heavily on trade for their existence would have been abandoned. The people of post-Roman Britain would have most likely returned to their self-sufficient farming techniques of pre-Roman times. This would have caused a migration of people from urban centres back into the rural areas.

It is also thought that climatic change may have had an effect on Britain in the early 6th century, when the global temperature dropped sharply. This theory is supported by evidence from dendro-climatology. Tree-ring growth for the AD 530s and 540s shows a period of extremely cold weather (and hence poor growth) starting in 536. This would have caused crop failure, and even starvation. This circumstance may have meant a drop in population in Herefordshire in the 5th and 6th centuries, and would have increased the practice of subsistence farming as the people would have struggled to feed themselves, let alone have enough left over for trading.(see Raymond Perry, above, p. 12).

It is likely that the first Anglo-Saxons in Herefordshire found a somewhat less densely populated county than the Romans had over 500 years before them. The smaller population, and the results of the warfare, diseases and economic collapse, may have meant that the Anglo-Saxons' task of invasion was made much easier.

The migration of Germanic tribes to Britain began in the 5th century (the date usually given for this is 449), and the Anglo-Saxon settlement of Herefordshire represents the furthest push west of the invasion. It is hard to be certain of exact dates for Anglo-Saxon settlement as it would appear that the written word was not used by the Anglo-Saxons until the return of Christianity to Britain in 597.

It is likely that the new settlers in Herefordshire found some sort of hierarchical structure still in existence from when Britain was under Roman rule. At the top of the social scale would have been the British princes, and to support their leadership there was a warrior class. Underpinning the higher classes was a worker or servant population, who most likely would have had to supply food and other goods as a type of tax.

When the Anglo-Saxons arrived it is likely that the lower orders of society retained their social position as workers and providers, as they posed no threat to the new administration. The warriors and leaders would have retained their status only in areas where the invasion was peaceful. If the Britons had opposed the Anglo-Saxons' arrival then they no doubt would have been stripped of the privileges of their social position in order to avoid any further attempts at undermining Anglo-Saxon society.

In Herefordshire, the arrival of the earliest Anglo-Saxons did not at first lead to the wholesale colonisation of the county and two British districts, Archenfield and Ewias in the south-west, remained primarily British in population, character and law for a further 400 years. Archenfield had been incorporated into Herefordshire by 1086 and is surveyed in the Domesday Survey of that year, although it is listed as still having its own customs. Ewias was incorporated after Archenfield, later in the 11th century.

One of the customs described for Archenfield in the Domesday Survey is particularly gruesome:

"... If a Welshman has killed a Welshman, the relatives of the slain man gather and despoil the killer and his relatives and burn their houses until the body of the dead man is buried the next day about midday. The King has the third part of this plunder, but they have all the rest free." (Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, [A] 179b,4, Phillimore, 1983)

Because of the fact that Archenfield and Ewias remained predominantly British after the Anglo-Saxon invasion, it has been suggested that the River Wye formed the boundary in Herefordshire between the British and the Anglo-Saxons as both of the British areas are to the west and south of the river. As a result of the Anglo-Saxons' arrival in Herefordshire the population of Archenfield and Ewias may have risen as the British fled or were pushed out of their homes, so that the Anglo-Saxons in effect began to occupy semi-empty territory. In the areas where British people remained they continued to exist alongside the Anglo-Saxons as a self-contained group initially divided by culture and language, but eventually assimilated into Anglo-Saxon society.

Later Anglo-Saxon Herefordshire

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle for 917 records that "a great raiding ship came over here from the south from Brittany, and with them two jarls, Ohtor and Hroald, and then went around west until they got into the mouth of the Severn and raided in Wales everywhere along the banks where it suited them, and took Cameleac, bishop in Archenfield, and led him to the ship with them ... then after that the whole raiding-army went up and wanted to go on a raid against Archenfield; then they were met by [the men] from Hereford and from Gloucester and from the nearest strongholds, and fought gainst them and put them to flight, and killed the jarl Hroald and the other jarl Ohtor's brother, and a great part of the raiding army, and drove them into an enclosure and besieged them there until they gave them hostages, that they would leave the king's domain." (Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Worcester Manuscript, AD 917, p. 99)

This shows that although Herefordshire was on the west of Britain and furthest away from most of the raiding parties, it still had its share of conflict. It also shows that by this time Hereford had grown into a fairly substantial settlement that was capable of calling up men to fight for its cause, and demonstrates the importance of taking hostages as a way of negotiating peace.

The name Hereford means "army-ford", and it is likely that the town grew up around an important crossing of the River Wye. By the time of the Domesday Book in 1086 Hereford was the social, commercial, political and religious centre of the region, and it is likely that it had had this status since the foundation of a diocese here in the 7th century.

The presence of two religious institutions, the Cathedral and St Guthlac's Priory, within the same area would have encouraged the growth of a secular community, which in turned would have enticed traders and craftsmen who would have seen the opportunity to market their goods. At Hereford trade was probably most dependent on agriculture, and sheep, honey and salmon are all mentioned in the Domesday Book. There is also mention of brewing in the section on the Customs of Hereford, stating "Any man's wife who brewed ale inside or outside the City gave 10d as a customary due" (Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, [C] 179a,7, Phillimore, 1983).

The earliest defensive feature of the burh of Hereford was located on the western side of the city and consisted of a gravel rampart. The rampart may have been fronted by a structure and been topped by a fence or palisade, but the lack of preservation makes it hard to determine. This early structure was later replaced by a clay and turf rampart, thought to have been built in the late 9th and 10th centuries.

These rampart walls encompassing the city would have separated the urban centre from its rural surroundings, and in time the urban centre would have become the desirable place to live with houses within the city defences costing more than those outside. This would have been in part due to the increased security from raiding parties that the walls provided.

From the very beginning Hereford has been a frontier city and even today the Welsh border is less than 20 miles away to the west. It is very likely that this border was a lot closer in Anglo-Saxon times, and may have even been denoted by the River Wye. There has always been a volatile relationship between England and Wales, with the border territory being the location for frequent raids from both sides.

A contemporary document known as the Ordinance Concerning the Dunsaete has survived from Anglo-Saxon times: it records an agreed procedure for dealing with disputes between the English and the Welsh which appears to support the theory that at one time the River Wye was the border. The document seems to be of 10th century date and expressly refers to the border as a river, although it does not specify the Wye. The Ordinance deals with the problem of what should happen if property goes missing. The main item it deals with is stolen cattle (cattle being a valuable item of property). If the owner of the stolen cattle should follow the tracks and find that they lead to the river it is then the responsibility of the owner of the land on the other side to pick up the trail and search for the cattle. If he cannot find them after searching for nine days then he is liable to pay compensation to the cattle's owner.

The Ordinance also mentions the value put on a man as being one pound. Presumably this referred to slaves and the theft of slaves. The Domesday Survey records 18% of the population of Herefordshire as being slaves, but we do not know if the same rules of search applied as for cattle. The Ordinance also deals with the traversing of the border by Welsh and English, and records that the English shall only cross into the Welsh side and vice versa in the presence of an appointed man who then had the responsibility of making sure that the foreigner was safely escorted back to the crossing point.

Wales remained independent throughout the Anglo-Saxon period, and internally it was divided into five competing kingdoms. Each of these kingdoms was ruled by a Prince, and often they would lead raiding parties into England. One such period of resistance against the English and King Athelstan was led by Idwal Foel of Gwynedd. The upshot of this rebellion was that in 927 all five of the Welsh Princes who ruled within Wales met Athelstan at Hereford, acknowledged his overlordship as mechteyrn ("Great King") and agreed to pay him a huge yearly tribute of 20 pounds of gold, 300 pounds of silver, 25,000 oxen and as many hawks and hounds as the king wished. This event is recorded in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. (See Michael Wood, In Search of the Dark Ages, p. 135.)

Under King Athelstan the power of the Anglo-Saxons was at its height, and it was during his reign that further improvements were made to the city's defences. The timber defences that had been erected at the end of the 9th century were enhanced by the addition of stonework to the face of the wall (see Shoesmith, p. 80). A small stone wall was also added to the rear of the rampart, with a roadway about 2m wide and surfaced with pebbles behind this.

This level of fortification suggests a stable and profitable government in the area that was able to afford the material and manpower for these improvements. In the Anglo-Saxon period, as today, much of the revenue in Herefordshire came from land ownership and agriculture, with the great majority of the population living and working on the land.

Hereford was now a fortified burh of considerable size with houses inside and outside the city walls. There was a religious community as well as an economy built on trade and industry.

Towards the end of the 10th century Herefordshire was absorbed within the English State, however the unification of England did not immediately herald an era of stability and peace. Danish raids were a frequent occurrence and Æthelred II (The Unready) was repeatedly having to soften the blow of the raids by paying money to the Danes. This money was known as Danegeld and much of it was raised through taxes, which would have been unpopular with those that paid it.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

The history of the city of Hereford begins in the Saxon period. The name Hereford has Saxon origins, and according to the Oxford English Dictionary of Place-Names means "army-ford" (Eilert Ekwall, 4th edition, 1960).

In 1968, during work for a dual carriageway, excavations took place on the western part of the Anglo-Saxon defences in Victoria Street, less than 500m north-west of the cathedral. These revealed at least two (and possibly three) stages of pre-Conquest (1066) defences. The first phase was composed of a rampart formed of loose pink gravel. In excavating the area it was found that this stage overlay two L-shaped grain-drying ovens, which provided a radiocarbon date centring on AD 761. The date agreed is between the mid 7th and the mid 8th centuries. The first phase of the city defences must be later than this date because they lay on top of the ovens. Fragments of a Roman altar and masonry were also found to have been used in the construction of the ovens.

A timber-framed building had been built over the destroyed remains of the ovens and a small bank and ditch on the western side may have been associated with the house (a boundary bank?) or may have been the earliest phases of the defensive system. There was no dating evidence associated with the building or the bank, but this too was sealed by the first phase gravel rampart and this has been tentatively dated as mid 9th century, although an earlier date is possible. This means that the first phase may predate the reign of Alfred and his burh building programme in the late 9th century to guard against the Danish raids. There is even a possibility that the defences of Hereford date to the reign of Offa (757-796) (see Sarah Zaluckyj, Mercia, p. 201). In the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle there is mention of a "fortress west of the Severn" for the year 896. It is thought that this is likely to be Hereford, suggesting that the city was defended by this time. This puts the defences of Hereford as earlier than the main growth of burh building in the Midlands, which took place between 910-916.

The first-phase rampart was built from loose pink gravel mixed in with layers of clay, and originally enclosed an area of around 32 acres (13 hectares). There was probably once a fence on top of the rampart, and the gravel used to make the bank would have come from the defensive ditch on the outside. The cathedral precinct and the possible later 8th century grid pattern of streets were within these fortifications.

At the heart of the enclosure lay a crossroads which was the junction of a north-south route from the ford on the river Wye (which took in part of Broad Street) and an east-west route that survives partly in the modern streets of St. Nicholas Street, King Street and the western end of Castle Street. This put the cathedral right at the very centre of the defended area. The rectilinear, regular nature of the street system within the defences suggests that this was a planned defended town, probably pre-dating the 9th century. The fact that it may pre-date the Alfredian burh building programme is probably connected with its situation on the border of the conquered territory.

In the late 9th/early 10th century the gravel rampart was replaced with a turf and clay timber-faced rampart. This improvement of the defences also increased the defended area of Hereford to 52 acres (21 hectares). These defences later underwent improvements when they were revetted and strengthened with stone. The rear crest of this rampart was found during the Victoria Street excavations, and on the back of it two bone combs and a bronze finger ring were discovered. Unfortunately the front section of this phase of the defences had been removed during the construction of the medieval wall.
 
The improvements to the defences made in the early 10th century are attributed to Queen Æthelfleda, who was responsible for the building or enlarging of several towns in the West Midlands, including Warwick, Tamworth and Stafford.

Whilst much is known about the Saxon defences and their various stages, little is known about the Saxon town of Hereford. In 1972-74 the outlines of two Saxon timber buildings were found in Berrington Street, but the site had been partly destroyed by medieval pits. A large quantity of a type of Saxon pottery known as Chester ware was found. Underneath the Chester Ware a coin of Alfred (871-899) was found which helped to date the finds.

In Cantilupe Street the whole of the rampart was found because the line of the medieval wall was on a slightly different alignment and therefore the damage sustained by the Saxon remains was less. A 50m length of wall survived and is the only part in which the Saxon defences were well preserved throughout their entire width. Beneath the defences there was no sign of earlier occupation in this area, and the later phase (attributed to Æthelfleda) could be determined as consisting of clay and some turf consolidated with branches laid horizontally.

At first the rampart was fronted by a timber wall consisting of round posts 3ft (1m) apart, holding horizontal timbers. Later, a stone wall was built in front of it, acting as a massive revetment. In total the wall was about 6ft (2m) thick and had traces of a pink lime mortar. About 12ft (4m) from the front of the wall was a smaller wall about 2.5ft thick.

In 927 King Æthelstan called a meeting between himself and the Welsh Princes at Hereford, and it was around this time that the stone wall defences were built. This may have been to demonstrate to the Welsh the strength of Hereford and the difficulties facing any foreign raiders. The walls would also have helped Hereford during the Danish raids of the mid-10th century.

In 1055, Gruffyd ap Llewellyn and the Welsh attacked Hereford and burnt down the cathedral and castle. As a result of this Harold Godwinson, Earl of Hereford, built a new gravel rampart which now enclosed the market area to the north of the city.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

"Saints are persons believed to be connected in a special manner with what is viewed as sacred reality - gods, spiritual powers, mythical realms and other aspects of the sacred and holy." Encyclopædia Britannica, 15th Edition, 1977

The significance of saints is generally based upon real or alleged deeds and qualities that become apparent during their lifetimes, for example the power to perform miracles. Miracles are also often associated with the saints after their death.

The veneration of martyrs as saints came about during the period of severe persecution of Christians through the 1st to 4th centuries AD. Christians believed that martyrs who had suffered for their belief in Christ would be accepted into Heaven and could therefore be useful allies to the living.

After death it was believed that the "holiness" of the saint remained in his bones and other material possessions (known as relics), which is why religious institutions were often built on the burial place of a saint and why people would make pilgrimages to saints' tombs to ask for their help and guidance.

Christianity had originally been brought to Britain by the Romans in the 3rd century AD, but after the departure of the Romans paganism enjoyed a revival and Christianity was mainly confined to those areas on the west and north of Britain, namely Cornwall, Wales, Ireland and Scotland. When the Anglo-Saxons arrived they found a country rich in pagan ritual and superstition, much like the lands they had come from. It was not until the end of the 6th century that Christianity really made a comeback, with the mission of St. Augustine. As Herefordshire was on the border of the Celtic and Saxon territories it enjoyed a mix of both Christian and pagan religions. With the south-west of the county remaining Celtic the influence of the Church was visible, with many Celtic Saints being active in this area.

The "age of saints" is so interesting because it is a dim and distant reminder of life in the little-known period after the Romans (after 410) and before the Normans (1066), often called the Dark Ages. From around the 5th century a religious fervour took hold in Europe and holy men travelled across continents spreading the word of God and performing miracles. One of the centres of this spirituality was in Ireland and Wales, spreading just into Herefordshire. It is thought that some of our churches arose from early preaching places or monasteries of these first holy men, but it is very hard to prove. The dedications, shape of the churchyard and location by water are all clues that some churches are very early, possibly of the 5th to the 7th centuries, when the prevailing culture was British (i.e. "Celtic" or Welsh) rather than Anglo-Saxon. There are also clues in the Llandaff Charters (the Book of Llandaff, reproduced by J. Evans, © The National Library of Wales), though this book is difficult to interpret as it purports to be 7th century or earlier but was actually written in the early 13th century. In Herefordshire the following churches have been identified from the Llandaff charters:

Celtic saints and their Herefordshire churches

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

The second feature is that Herefordshire has remained largely unchanged by the industrial growth of the 19th century onwards, which brought about population increases in many other areas of England. These population rises often meant that the parish would grow too big for its church and new ones would need to be built. In Hereford City four new churches were built in the 19th century and two in the 20th to serve the new suburbs that grew up, but all of the market towns of the county have managed not to outgrow their parish churches of the medieval period (see D.M. Annett,Saints in Herefordshire - A Study of Dedications, Logaston Press, 1999).

The first saints were martyrs, and the churches were usually built at the place of their martyrdom and then became places of pilgrimage. For example, Clodock church near Longtown marks the burial spot of Prince Clydawg who was murdered out of jealousy and made a martyr through his pious life. Later, two other classes of saint were added - confessors and virgins. Like martyrs, they were made saints because of their dedication to their faith.

There are many reasons why a church may be dedicated to a particular saint. The saint may have been a personal patron of the bishop or lord who consecrated the church, or the church may have been attached to a monastery or larger religious house and the saint was the patron of that institution (e.g. Little Cowarne church was re-dedicated in 1992 and given the saint's name of St. Guthlac to demonstrate the fact that it was once attached to St Guthlac's Priory in Hereford). The dedication might be to the founder or benefactor of the church or it may mark the death- or burial-place of a particular saint. 

Dedication Changes

In cases where the church had originally been dedicated to a native saint (mainly Celtic), the dedication may have been changed at a later date to a more scripturally-related saint. Sometimes it was simply a case of adding the new saint's name to the existing dedication (e.g. Aymestrey had St. John the Baptist added to St. Alkmund), but in other cases the Celtic saint was superseded by the scriptural saint (e.g. at Kentchurch, St. Mary took over from St. Keyne).

One period when many dedications were changed was after the Norman Conquest of 1066. The Normans wanted to abolish the practice of using native saints, most probably for political reasons in order to suppress any feelings of solidarity among those they had conquered and to bring in their own way of doing things so that the native would recognise them as being in control.

Sometimes if a church was enlarged or rebuilt then it needed to be re-consecrated, and the bishop or person in charge of the consecration would often take the opportunity to change the saint's name to one that they favoured more.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

Clydog/Clydawg: Clydawg was a prince of Ewyas in the 5th/6th centuries and was the son or grandson of King Brychan of Brycheiniog (Brecknock), who was the father of many other saints. Whilst out hunting Clydawg was murdered by a rival who was jealous of his relationship with a nobleman's daughter. On the day of his funeral his body was to be carried on a cart pulled by two oxen, but when they reached the river Monnow they refused to cross and the yoke between them broke. The prince's body was laid on the bank and a spring is said to have issued forth at the spot. Clydawg was made a martyr and a church was built over his grave by the river.

Cynidir: Although Cynidir no longer has a church dedicated to him in Herefordshire, Kenderchurch preserves his name (the church here is now dedicated to St. Mary). Cynidir, like Clydawg, was the son or grandson of the King of Brycheiniog and founded several churches in Breconshire, including Glasbury where he was buried. Cynidir established a hermitage on an island in the river Wye near Winforton (only nine miles downriver from Glasbury). In 1675, Blount wrote that "Walter, a Canon of Wormsley Priory, betook himself to an Eremitical Life in a little island on upon the river Wey ... wherein he built a Chappel dedicated deo beatae Mariae, beato Kenedro - a Saxon saint as I suppose and afterwards it usually bore the name of St Kendred's Chapel."

In 1264 the hermitage was granted to Wormesley Priory. The buildings had disappeared by 1675 and only a 10ft high artificial mound remained (the course of the river Wye had also changed, now running ¾ of a mile to the south). In 1991, members of the Archaeological Section of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club visited the site to carry out an excavation of two trenches. The first trench revealed the possible remains of a round tower but lack of time prevented the second trench from being fully excavated.

Deinst: It is possible that Deinst or Deiniol founded the monastery at Bangor Iscoed. He was consecrated bishop by Dubricius. Tradition recalls that he founded the church at Llangarron in Herefordshire, and indeed this is the only church in England dedicated to him.

Dyfrig/Dubricius: Probably the greatest of the Herefordshire saints. In the 6th century he evangelised the kingdom of Ergyng (Archenfield), the name of which is continued in the Deanery of Ross and Archenfield. It is said that Dubricius was born at Madley in this county. The story is that King Peipiau of Ergyng (the Leper) noticed that his daughter Ebrdil was pregnant, and in anger (some say because the baby was his) he ordered her to be thrown into the river Wye. However, each time she was thrown in she was washed back to the shore and so the king ordered her to be burnt alive on a pyre. This time the pyre would not catch light. The next day Ebrdil gave birth to a son who she called Dyfrig  - "water baby". King Peipiau, taken by remorse, picked up the child and when the baby touched him he was miraculously cured of his leprosy.

Dubricius later went on to found many churches, monasteries and schools, chief among them being Hentland - whose name comes from the Old English words of hen, meaning "old", andllan, meaning "church" - and Moccas. He is also said to have founded a religious institution at Llanfrother, whose name means "church of the brothers". Dubricius and his disciples were very active in the spreading of Christianity throughout Archenfield and Gwent. He is also said to have been the first bishop of Llandaff.

Ethelbert: Ethelbert was King of the East Angles, and he wished to marry Aelfthryth, daughter of Offa, King of Mercia. In 794 Offa arranged for Ethelbert to visit him at his palace at Sutton (possibly the Iron Age fort of Sutton Walls). It is at this point that the story divides into two different versions. Version one states that Offa was at first in favour of the marriage, hoping that it would enable him to extend his kingdom, but when he realised that it was Ethelbert who would gain the most he decided to call the wedding off and execute Ethelbert. The other version of the story is that Offa invited Ethelbert to Sutton to marry his daughter but Offa's wife was jealous and persuaded Offa to kill Ethelbert.

Ethelbert was buried at Marden where a spring burst forth (it can still be seen at the west end of the church). Later, under much pressure from the people, Offa had the body moved to Hereford Cathedral, which was jointly dedicated to Ethelbert and the Virgin Mary. Ethelbert's tomb became a place of pilgrimage and many miracles are said to have happened there.

Today there is a well to the east of the Cathedral in Quay Street, leading up to Castle Green, that is dedicated to St. Ethelbert and features a 14th century carving of his head that was rescued from the West Front of the cathedral when it collapsed in 1786. There is some argument as to the original location of the spring, but the most detailed investigation has been undertaken by David Whitehead (see Herefordshire Archaeological News, No. 35, 1978). It is said that the water from St. Ethelbert's spring was particularly good at healing eye infections.

Keyne/Cein: Keyne was a daughter of King Brychan of Brycheiniog (see also Clydawg and Cynidir). She migrated to Cornwall but in Herefordshire she is said to have been the founder or patron of the church at what is now Kentchurch, though the dedication was later changed to St. Mary (possibly in the 13th/14th century when the cult of St. Mary was at its most popular). In the early days the parish was known as Llancein ("Cein's Church") or St. Keyneschurch (recorded as such in a Bishop's Register of 1302). There is a story that in the early 19th century a squire insisted on the insertion of the letter "T" into the parish name as his post was frequently misdirected to Kenchester, but there is no evidence for this. (See D.M. Annett, Saints in Herefordshire - A Study of Dedications, Logaston Press, 1999.)

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

Britain had first been Christianised during the occupation of the Romans in the 3rd century AD and the church had quickly flourished. After the departure of the Romans and during the arrival of the Saxons and their pagan religion the Christian church continued to survive in the Celtic areas such as Scotland, Cornwall and Wales, which Celtic Herefordshire bordered.

Christianity was re-introduced to England in 597 by St. Augustine and it began to take over from paganism, although the Saxons never completely gave up their own religion, often choosing to combine elements from both.

The Saxon Churches

St. Bridget, Bridstow (Historic Environment Record no. 4090) 

The name Bridstow is a derivation from the Saxon Bride and Stow, which signifies a place dedicated to St. Bride or Bridget. In the Liber Llandavensis (the Book of Llandaff) Bridstow is calledLlansan-ffread, the Welsh name of St. Bride.

The old church was consecrated in 1066 by Herwald, Bishop of Llandaff. It was a very plain edifice with two small aisles divided by light circular piers with a low square tower at the west end (Seaton, History of the Deanery of Archenfield, 1903).

With the exception of the west tower the whole church was rebuilt in 1862, but the chancel arch is of early 12th century materials reset.

St. Dubricius, Hentland (HER no. 6826)

This church is said to be on the site of the earliest religious house founded by St. Dubricius. The parish church was consecrated by the time of Edward the Confessor (1042-1066) and parts of the church are said to date from this time. The north aisle and the west tower, with bell openings, would appear to date from the 14th century. There are some 15th century figures in the east window. This is one of the earliest stone churches in the deanery, and it is thought to date from 1056. The chancel was rebuilt c. 1430. The church was rebuilt in the early 15th century, and restored in 1849 and 1897. It also underwent drastic restoration by Seddon in 1853.

St. David, Kilpeck (HER no. 715)

The Book of Llandaff suggests a church existed at Kilpeck ("Lann degui cilpedec") in the 8th century (Book of Llandaff, reproduced by J. Evans, © The National Library of Wales, p. 275). The present church was built perhaps in 1134 when a priory cell of Benedictines was established. In 1848 it underwent restoration by Cottingham. The nave, chancel and apse are of decreasing height and width. The church has flat buttresses and clasping corner buttresses. In 1134 the church of St David was given to the Abbey at Gloucester. 

Llangunville, Llanrothal (HER no. 31892)

There was a church at Llangunville in the time of King Meurig ab Arhfael of Gwent (848-74). This is known from a deed in the Book of Llandaff. Another deed records that there was a priest called Clemens.

St. John the Baptist, Llanwarne (HER no. 847)

Llanwarne means "the church by the swamp/marsh or alders" (Eilert Ekwall, Oxford Dictionary of English Place-Names)

The Book of Llandaff mentions a 7th century church in Llanwarne being given to Bishops of Llandaff. It records that one Catvuth ap Coffro gave to Trichan, 5th bishop of Llandaff, a piece of land in Llanwarne.

At the time of the Domesday Book (1086) the church belonged to the Bishop of Hereford, and by 1291 it belonged to Llanthony Priory. In 1861 there were plans to restore the church but this was to prove too difficult due to extreme damp, and in 1863 the church was replaced by the present Christ Church. The roof was taken off the old church and it was left as a ruin. In 1981 the tower was still complete and most of the walls still stood to their original height.

A survey was carried out in the late 1970s, before and after the collapse of some parts of the church*. In 1980, excavation was carried out in advance of consolidation. The earliest surviving feature above ground is a 13th century doorway in the south wall of the chancel. The western part of the north wall is of early 14th century date. The eastern part of the west wall was probably rebuilt in the 16th century and the north chapel probably in the late 14th century on the site of one of similar dimensions. The south aisle is early to mid 14th century and appears to have replaced an earlier structure on approximately the same lines. 
Excavation revealed pre-13th century church traces and floor levelling of many periods to raise the church's height. The church was largely rebuilt in the 14th century, perhaps as a result of earlier flooding.

Nothing visible remains of the church prior to the 13th century, but Ron Shoesmith has suggested that the remains may lie under the 13th century walls and that the church was rebuilt at this time to dimensions similar to those of the previous structure (see Shoesmith, "Llanwarne Old Church", in Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, 1981).

* The results of the photographic survey are held in the HER.

Church of St. Clodock, Longtown (HER no. 1458)

The present church at Clodock is said to lie on the site of an earlier wooden one. Clydawg, from whom Clodock gets its name, was a 6th century martyr. The discovery of a 9th century tombstone in nave of Clodock Church c. 1917 appears to reinforce the idea of a Saxon church on the site. The tombstone was rediscovered in a cupboard at the vicarage prior to its being demolished.

The inscriptions reads "HOC TUMLILIM RETINE T MEMBRA PUDIC E MUL IE RIS GUINNDA CAR AE COIU GIS QUAE FUIT IPSA IB IDEM", "This tomb holds the remains of that faithful woman the dear wife of Guinndas who was herself [born?] in the same place".

The stone is of local limestone and is Herefordshire's earliest known inscribed monument since Roman times. So far no record of Guinndas has been found. The stone now stands on a shelf at the eastern edge of the nave of Clodock church. 
 
The guidebook to the church tells the interesting story of how Clydawg became a martyr. "Our crowned Prince Clydawg, now King or Ruler of Ewias, was out hunting one day (according to the Book of Llandaff) and amongst those hunting with him was one who was jealous of his relationship with a lady friend. In his jealousy he killed Clydawg. On the day of his burial the two oxen carrying him refused to cross a ford and the yoke between them broke. He was buried, therefore, near the bank of the river. Such an act of murder made Clydawg, because of his godly life, a martyr". A CelticLlan or church was set up around his tomb and later a wooden church would have been built on the site, to be replaced with a stone one sometime in the 11th century.

St. Michael & All Angels Church, Moccas (HER no. 1775)

Built of coursed and squared local tufa with some sandstone dressings and a roof of stone slates in the second quarter of 12th century, when the land belonged to the diocese of Llandaff. It is still complete, except for the west wall which may have been rebuilt. The south porch is of C14-15 date. Moccas is said to have been the site of a Saxon abbey established by St. Dubricius sometime in the 5th century.

Although it was called a school, St. Dubricius' foundation at Moccas would have been an organised monastic community. The first building would have been small and made of wood. The last known abbot of Moccas was Bishop Comereg c. 590, and it is thought that the church would have closed after his death. At the time of the Domesday Book it was owned jointly by St. Guthlac's Priory in Hereford and Nigel the physician. Silas Taylor, the 17th century antiquarian, wrote "in the churchyard at Moccas are to be seen the foundations of a very large church to which this standing was but a chapple".

Silas Taylor (Harley MS 6726) records the tomb of King Drabeles, alias Pibianus king of Irchunfield, "whose tomb raised two feet from ground, of purest coloured marble, been perfect green , white, yellow, black in perfect proportion of rounds" within the church (see Rev. Charles J. Robinson, The Castles of Herefordshire and Their Lords, 1867). An evaluation of four trenches north-west of the churchyard enclosure in response to a planning application to extend the graveyard located seven burials. Radiocarbon dating put two of the skeletons at 11th to 13th century in date.

(For more information about Moccas church, see "The Church of St Michael and All Angels, Moccas, Herefordshire. A report on an archaeological trial evaluation" by Dale Rouse and John Eisel, held in the HER.)

St. David, Much Dewchurch (HER no. 6847)

The current church of St. David at Much Dewchurch is said to stand on the site of the c. 6th-11th century monastery of St. David.

In the Book of Llandaff it is recorded as "Lann deui ros cerion", one of the churches of Ergyng (Book of Llandaff, reproduced by J. Evans, © The National Library of Wales, p. 275).

The church has a plain Norman south doorway, with a Norman window above the porch, a Norman chancel window and a plain Norman chancel arch. The west tower is short, broad and unbuttressed with a 13th century date, except for a Victorian roof. The south porch contains timbers dating from the 14th century.

The church was consecrated during the reign of William the Conqueror (1066-1087). In 1292 in a taxatio it is attached to the Priory of Kilpeck.

St. Peter's Church, Peterstow (HER no. 7501)

According to the Book of Llandaff there once stood a church on this site that was consecrated by the bishop of Llandaff prior to the rule of King Harold (1066), and large stones in the base of the north wall of the nave are thought to be of pre-Conquest date.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

The following extracts are taken from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, translated and edited by Michael Swanton (J.M. Dent, 1996).

The Worcester Manuscript, AD 915

... Here in this year Warwick was built, and a great raiding ship-army came over here from the south from Brittany, and with them 2 jarls, Ohtor and Hroald, and then went around west until they got into the mouth of the Severn, and raided in Wales everywhere along the banks where it suited them, and took Cameleac, bishop in Archenfield, and led him to ship with them; and then King Edward ransomed him back for 40 pounds. Then after that the whole raiding-army went up and wanted to go on a raid against Archenfield; then they were met by [the men] from Hereford and from Gloucester and from the nearest strongholds, and fought against them and put them to flight, and killed the jarl Hroald and the other jarl Ohtor's brother and a great part of the raiding-army, and drove them into an enclosure and besieged them there until they gave them hostages, that they would leave the king's domain. And the king had arranged that there should be positions on the southern side of the Severn mouth from Cornwall in the west, eastwards as far as Avonmouth, so that they dared seek land nowhere on that side ... (p. 99)

The Peterborough Manuscript, AD 1048 [1051]

... Then the king sent for all his council, and ordered them to come to Gloucester around the second Festival of St Mary. The foreigners had then built a castle in Herefordshire in Earl Swein's province, and inflicted every injury and insult they could upon the king's men thereabouts ... (pp. 173-74)

The Worcester Manuscript, AD 1052

... In the same year Gruffydd, the Welsh king, raided in Herefordshire, so that he came very near to Leominster; and men gathered against him, both local men and French men from the castle. And there were killed very many good men of the English, and also from among the French ... (p. 176)

The Peterborough Manuscript, AD 1055

... and in this year Gruffydd and Ælfgar burned down St Æthelbert's minster and all the town of Hereford ... (p. 187)

The Abingdon Manuscript, AD 1055/6

... Then within a short while after this there was a council-meeting in London, and then Earl Ælfgar, son of Earl Leofric, was oulawed without any fault; and then he turned to Ireland, and there got himself a fleet, which was 18 ships apart from his own, and then turned to Wales and King Gruffydd with that troop; and he received him under his safe-conduct. And then they gathered a great army with the Irish men and with the Welsh race, and Earl Ralph gathered a great army against them at Hereford market-town, and they sought them out there; but before there was any spear thrown, the English people already fled, because they were on horse; and a great slaughter was made - about four hundred men, or five - and they none in return; and they then turned to the market-town and burned it down; and the famous minster which the reverend bishop Athelstan had built earlier, that they stripped and robbed of holy things, and of robes and of everything, and killed the people, and some led away [into slavery]. Then an army was gathered throughout all neighbouring England; and they came to Gloucester and turned a little way out into Wales, and lay there for some time; and in that time Earl Harold had a dyke built round the town [Hereford] ... (pp. 184, 186)

(1056) Here departed the reverend bishop Athelstan on 10 February, and his body lies in Hereford market-town ... (p. 186)

The Worcester Manuscript, AD 1053

... And soon after that, Earl Ælfgar, son of Earl Leofric, was outlawed wellnigh without fault; but he turned to Ireland and Wales and there got himself a great band, and travelled thus to Hereford; but there Earl Ralph came against him with a great raiding-army, and with a little struggle they were brought to flight, and many people killed in that flight, and then turned into Hereford market-town and raided it, burned down the famous minster which Bishop Athelstan built, and killed the priests inside the minster, and many others as well, and seized all the treasures in there and led them away with them. And then when they had done most harm, it was decided to reinstate Earl Ælfgar, and give him back his earldom and all that was taken from him. This raid was made on 24 October ... (pp. 185, 187)

The Worcester Manuscript, AD 1067

Here the king came back again to England on the Feast of St. Nicholas. And that day Christ Church in Canterbury burned down. And Bishop Wulfwig passed away, and is buried at his bishop's seat in Dorchester. And Prince Eadric and the Welsh became hostile and they attacked the castle-men in Hereford, and did them many injuries. And here the king set a great tax on the wretched people, and yet nevertheless always allowed to be raided all that they went across ... (pp. 200-201)

"Almighty [lit: 'the whole power'] father, sitting in the heavenly citadel and observing the declining fragility of the human race, he sent to us his only begotten [son], through him he arranged the ages with ineffable redemption, for the erasing of our sins. For the will of the same pious creator resolved and his compassion conceded that anyone could buy with the lowest things the highest things, with the things of the earth the things of the heavens, and to obtain the things that perish those which last forever.

"Therefore I, Edgar, obtaining by the favour of the divine goodwill the monarchy of the whole of the kingdom of Mercia, allot and freely grant to my faithful thegn Eahlstan for his acceptable money, that is 40 mancuses of pure gold, the lands in the district of the Magonsæte, that is 6 hides, in the place which is called by the inhabitants the place of Stanton [Staunton].

"That he might have it and possess it eternally, with all the benefits and rights relating to that land and thereafter he might have the power to do with it what he wants to do.

"And this land is surrounded by these boundaries:

"From the mill ford of the Arrow, then to Washford: from Washford along the top of Holneig, from the top of Holneig to the top of oak edge then along the top of the oak edge, then to the front part of the snaed way, from the snaed way round Hanley to Æcna-bridge, up along the brook, then to the dyke, along the dyke to Tanesbaec, from Tanesbaec along the boundary fence, then to the boundary of the community of Lene, along the boundary of the community of the Lene, then to Æthelwold's hedge, from Æthelwold's hedge to Heanoldan, from Heanoldan to the boundary thorn, then from the boundary thorn along the fence to the swing-gate, from the swing-gate along the paved road to the dyke gate, from the dyke gate to the third gate, then along the paved road back to Milford.

"And King Edgar grants by charter to his thegn Eahlstan a house in Hereford, in eternal inheritance forever.

(The section in italics is written in Old English, and the translation is taken from a piece translated by Margaret Gelling.)

"This land is to be free from all tribute/tax, great and small, and from royal service except bridge construction, fortress building and expeditions against the enemy.

"If, however, anyone shall wish to break or lessen my gift and concession may Almighty God lessen his days in this race and may he incur the wrath of God, unless he has made satisfactory amends with compensation previously. This deed is my gift in the year of our Lord incarnate 958. I declare this true in the ... Second year of my reign.

"These witnesses attended and are in agreement with this and write below and confirm it with the insignia symbol of the holy cross.

"I, Edgar king of the Britons of Mercia and Northumberland agree and order the insignia symbol of the holy cross to be written down."

(There then follows a list of other men who bear witness to this charter)

(Taken from an article in the Herefordshire Archaeological News, No. 74, 2003 by Rosamund Skelton of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club Archaeological Research Section)

There have been a number of suggestions as to the identification of the boundary set out in the Charter of Staunton-on-Arrow. The first was by Lord Rennell of Rodd; the second by Frank Noble; and a third by Beryl Lewis in a lecture to the Woolhope Club in 1998.

"The mill ford" is the first location mentioned and looking at the Arrow there is a possible mill site at OS grid reference SO 369 600, although this is fed by a leat and is not on the river, so it probably is a much later location than the one we are looking for. However, even the earlier mill ford was probably on the river in the vicinity of either this mill or another slightly further downstream at SO 371 596, where the modern parish boundary joins the river.

"Washford" is the next site and the tithe map of 1839 records a field called "Upper Wash Croft" at SO 360 603. It seems feasible that there may have been a ford somewhere near, particularly as a footpath leads down to the river by this field (although its destination now is a footbridge over the river further down). The relocation of the bridge away from the fording place is probably at a narrower crossing place.

"From Washford along the Arrow around the top of Holneig". Holneig could be interpreted as "island lying in a deep hollow" or possibly "a deep hollow island". The southern portion of the parish lies on an area of boulder clay and the ice has created some interesting land forms here, one of which is a deep, broad-bottomed basin west of Denby Hall at SO 345 607, almost entirely surrounded by steep slopes. Because it is not a normal valley created by running water it is still inclined to be marshy with poor drainage. It is a very striking feature but does lie a long way from the river, unless the feature gave its name to the whole area around it.

"From Holneig top onto the top of the oak edge, then along the top of the oak edge to the forward line of the snæd way". The oak edge is probably where the parish boundary follows the 230m contour around the hill leading to Weobley Ash Wood. Snæd can mean a detached piece of ground, so presumably the road led to a detached piece of ground. There is an old track along the north side of Green Lane Wood and Burcher Wood, and vestiges of this track are discernible as it comes down a ploughed field to cross the B4355; this is in an appropriate location for the snæd way and is also along the line of the parish boundary.

"From the snaed way around Heanlege (Hanley) to the oak bridge". Heanlege may mean either the high or the long clearing in a wood. The similarity of the name to that of the modern farm at Highland makes it seem likely that the Heanlege lay to the north and west of the modern Highland. Finding an "oak bridge" near here is not so easy; there are two possible locations which would allow a logical link to the next section of the boundary. One is at the bridge by Broadford or alternatively higher up the same stream at SO 336 615, a point to which a footpath is heading on the north side of the B4355. This stops short before reaching the stream because of the building of the railway beside the watercourse, however there is evidence on the tithe map of a track way continuing up to Highland on the same alignment before the building of the railway.

"Up along the brook then to the dyke". If the dyke is a bank rather than a water-filled ditch then a suitable bank is still partially visible in the landscape, lying on the south side of fields called Near Brink, Far Near Brink and The Brink on the tithe map. To make the boundary as described connect with this dyke requires a small brook flowing off Wapley Hill. Nowadays it is likely that this has been culverted or drained through field drainage as nothing is visible on the map.

"Along the dyke to Tanesbaec". Stansbatch, an existing settlement, seems to offer a good identification for this location and the bank south of The Brink leads to it. However the meaning ofTanesbaec is not clear; tan is either a twig, shoot or sprouting, while baec maybe either a stream or a valley. The later conversion of baec to batch in the surviving name suggests that "valley of the shoots" (coppice growth?) might be an appropriate interpretation.

"From Tanesbaec along the boundary fence then to the boundary of the community of the Lene". Frank Noble identified the land of the community of Lene as Osbern son of Richard's manor ofWapeltone, which "lay in Leominster before 1066" - that is, it was part of the lands of Leominster Abbey before it was dissolved in 1046. Bruce Coplestone-Crow lists later spellings of Wapeltone asWappelyth (1304) and Wapelethe (1399) and suggests that this name incorporates the Old English hilth used in Shropshire and Herefordshire for a distinctive type of concave hill-slope. He also suggests that the name wapol is variously interpreted as "marsh" or "spring". The south-east slopes of Wapley Hill still have a scattering of ponds which probably represent "kettle holes" surviving from the Ice Age in this glaciated landscape. This two hide manor had a population of one riding man, one villager and 22 smallholders with a total of 6 ploughs in 1086. The site of the settlement of Wapletone has been lost, although in this remote location it may be that these people lived in scattered dwellings but its proximity to the Welsh Border would make it dangerous. In 1086 Osbern son of Richard also owned the neighbouring 4 hide manor of Staunton, identified in the 12th century Balliol manuscript of the Domesday Book as Vure Stanton' et Maldelega (later Over Staunton and Mowley). As a result the boundary between Wapley and Staunton is difficult to identify. In the field there is a curving bank still partially identifiable where the field boundaries have not been ploughed out, which can also been seen on the tithe map running south of field numbers 129 (Godding's Wood), 128 and 129 (Bosley Fields) and 125 (Well Piece). This just might represent an ancient boundary such as the Lene community's boundary.

Frank Noble has suggested that the 4 hide manor of Over Staunton and Mowley combined with the 2 hide manor of Nether Staunton and Stocklow held by Ralph Mortimer in 1086 represents the original "6 manentes" of the Anglo-Saxon Charter. Interestingly, the division between these two manors has survived because each manor lay in a different medieval Hundred and the hundred boundary is shown on the tithe map. Nether Staunton and Stocklow had a listed population of 6 villagers, 4 smallholders with 4 ploughs, 4 slaves and 2 ploughs in lordship. It seems strange that the more marginal 2 hide manor of Wapley had as many ploughs as the 4 hide manor of Over Staunton and a far greater number of smallholders, making a larger number of people on the ground. It would be interesting to know what additional jobs the smallholders did - were they charcoal burners or perhaps woodmen?

"From the Lene community's boundary then the Aethelwold's hedge. Form Aethelwold's hedge to heanoldan". A suggested interpretation for heanoldan is the "high place of the deer", and the field name Henley Bank on the tithe map may give a rough indication of its location.

"From heanoldan to the boundary thorn". Frank Noble considered the boundary thorn was likely to be at the meeting place of the modern parishes of Pembridge, Byton and Staunton. The only other meeting point of boundaries is where Over Staunton and Nether Staunton meet on the Byton parish boundary.

"From the boundary thorn along the fence to the swing gate". This seems to be a somewhat enclosed landscape with fences and it may well be where the parish boundary passes in a series of right-angled bends close to the site of Stocklow Manor, the swing gate no doubt being located where the enclosed cultivated land ended on the "street".

"From the swing gate along the street to the dyke gate". Street is a term usually applied to Roman or paved roads, and the dyke gate is perhaps the most securely identified point in the whole charter boundary, being the point where the Rowe Ditch crosses the Roman road. In order that the swing gate may be on a street the Roman road would have to continue straight up to Stocklow Manor along the present parish boundary.

"From the dyke gate to the third gate. Then along the street then back to mill ford". I would suggest that the boundary follows the Rowe Ditch to the third gate on the second Roman road which comes south-west from Milton Cross, because if it had continued as the modern parish boundary does down the street to Milton Cross it would have said so. A long stretch of Roman road brings the boundary near to the River Arrow and a side road leading to various mill sites on either side of the modern Gig Bridge. The convergence of two paths from the south side of the river on Gig Bridge may indicate that this is an old crossing point and a possible location for "the mill ford" as there is a mill nearby.

The above passage taken from the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle demonstrates the utter fear that these foreign raiders brought out in the people of Anglo-Saxon England. The attack on the island of Lindisfarne was the first of a series recorded around the coasts of the North Sea.

The Anglo-Saxons had first arrived in Britain after being invited over by the ruling classes to help subdue raids by the Picts, Scots and Vikings who were taking advantage of the lack of organisation after the departure of the Romans. The deal had been that if the Anglo-Saxons could push back the enemy then they and their families were welcome to settle on land in Britain. As we have already seen, the settlement of the Anglo-Saxons was to alter British rule altogether. However, once the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms had been established they were still under constant threat of further Viking raids.

The Vikings were sea-faring men who came from Scandinavia, the places we know as Norway, Denmark and Sweden. They were farmers, traders and fishermen who, like the Anglo-Saxons before them, were finding it hard to make a living from their mountainous lands. They recognised the great wealth that England had to offer and were ready to take advantage of a land that was absorbed in squabbles and in-fighting.

The first Vikings to land in Britain were the Danes, and they were later followed by Norwegians. These first approaches of the Vikings to England appear to have been of a relatively peaceful mercantile nature, but soon their desire for wealth and land would spark off fearsome and bloody raids. The Vikings arrived in England on longboats designed to carry large numbers of men ready for the fight.

At first the raids were fairly infrequent but they soon became common occurrences with the numbers of both raids and raiders rising, and it became clear that the Vikings wanted to colonise England. From 835 barely a year goes past without the mention of a Viking raid.

These frequent Viking incursions into England (as it had become by this time) culminated in the landing of a "Great Army" in East Anglia in 865. The army was fierce and made wide territorial advancements into England, and by 875 the kingdoms of Mercia, East Anglia and Northumbria had succumbed to their power, leaving Wessex as the last kingdom under Anglo-Saxon rule. The Vikings then attacked Wessex in 878 and the king at the time, Alfred, was forced to flee, before being able to organise a force to counter-attack. He was successful and was able to push the Vikings northwards to the sea. He had shown that the Vikings could be beaten and, hoping to keep the peace, he allowed the Vikings to settle in East Anglia. The lands under Viking rule were known as Danelaw and here Danish laws, not Saxon, were in force.

While the Vikings had control of areas of England, what was it like? The Vikings, like the English they now dominated, were an agricultural community and they began farming on both new and already-cultivated land. The cheap labour that they were able to organise from those they had conquered enabled them to farm intensively with good rewards.

Other than this we know very little of the Viking invaders' life in the countryside, and we know only a little more about their life in the towns. We know that they recognised the importance of fortifying urban centres and they fortified many towns, including Cambridge and Northampton. These urban centres were initially used a places of refuge but later grew into markets and administrative centres. 

The split of Danish and Saxon law

The most important Viking centre in England was York, which the Vikings called Jorvik. York is close to the east coast of England and from here it was just a boat ride across the North Sea to the homeland of the Vikings. This meant that York soon developed as a centre of Viking trade; they minted coins here and established a major market.

As the Vikings became part of the urban society in England, so did the farmers and settlers in the more rural regions. They began to become anglicised, adopting English as their language and setting aside paganism for the Christian religion. Even though they had begun to integrate themselves into society the Vikings were still an unwelcome presence to many.

In 886 Alfred led an army into London to rebuild its city walls. The English now saw Alfred as their king; he made laws and restored monasteries, and for his achievements he was granted the nickname "The Great".

The peace between the Saxons and the Vikings did not last long, and in 890 Viking sea raids began again. The farmers that had settled in England joined these raiders in the hope of gaining some more land from the West Saxons, but Alfred and his troops fought them off.

Fighting continued after Alfred's death in 899, but now the English had the upper hand and Alfred's son Edward the Elder was able to take control of Danelaw, although York continued to have Viking kings until 954. In 924 Edward's son Athelstan became king, and in 937 he was victorious at the Battle of Brunanburh against an army of Vikings, Scots and Strathclyde Britons. Athelstan then became the first king to command loyalty from all of Britain. As a ruler he was interested in government, and ordered that coins should be used throughout the land and that burhs would become the centres of local government, where an ealdorman in each would rule in the king's name.

After Athelstan's death in 939 his successors, Edmund and Edgar, had to deal with new Viking raids and the Vikings were able to gain in power. York once again fell to the Danes. In 954 King Edred (English) invaded Northumbria and drove out the Viking leader Eric Bloodaxe, who was later killed. From this date England became permanently and formally unified.

Edred was now able to rule over a unified England with a more centralised government. This was not to be the last of the Viking attacks, as the English king Æthelred the Unready was soon to find his kingdom under attack from all sides. He failed to fight off the Danes because of his inability to unite the English for battle. Æthelred tried to buy the Vikings off, and then he tried to bribe Danish soldiers to fight for him with the promise of land. They demanded more and so Æthelred ordered a massacre of Danes living in England.

In 1013 the Danish king Sweyn ravaged England and Æthelred fled to Normandy. The English nobles asked Sweyn to be their king. He accepted but he died before being crowned. Æthelred returned but died himself in 1016, and the Viking leader Cnut was effectively in control of England, but on his death (in 1035) the country collapsed into a number of competing earldoms. After much battling for the Crown Edward, son of Æthelred the Unready, came to England from Normandy and was crowned king in 1043: he later became known as Edward the Confessor. 

After Edward's death in 1066 there was once again a dispute over the throne between Harold Hardrada of Norway, Harold Godwinson (an English noble) and William, Duke of Normandy. Harold Godwinson was initially crowned king but he quickly had to deal with the threat of Harold of Norway. Whilst fighting this battle at Stamford Bridge in the north of England, William of Normandy landed in the south and Harold Godwinson had to turn around and meet William at the Battle of Hastings. The Frenchman William was victorious and on Christmas Day 1066 he was crowned king, bringing to an end the Anglo-Saxon rule of England.

During the 250 years of the "Viking Age" Scandinavia had changed from a barely-known pagan region, poorly organised under a series of petty chieftains, to three great nations who were members of the Christian community. They had grown in power and wealth and travelled far and wide across Europe and to the west, going from England to Iceland to Greenland and even on to North America. They were a fearsome group of men who were ready to fight to the death to get what they wanted, but who were also able to settle in a new land and make homes and lives for themselves.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

However, at one point during the 9th century the Vikings were able to make incursions into the south of Herefordshire by sailing up the Severn and Wye rivers. Between AD 866 and 874 King Burgred of Mercia was involved in almost constant battles with the Vikings. By 877 the Vikings were in the position of being able to establish one of their own leaders, Ceolwulf, as king.

In 914 the Vikings made further visits to Herefordshire, and according to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle they ravaged Archenfield (the area in the south-west of Herefordshire that had remained British after the Saxon invasions) and took Cameleac, Bishop of Archenfield, as a prisoner. King Edward was forced to ransom the bishop back for the sum of forty pounds.

" ... Here in this year Warwick was built, and a great raiding ship-army came over here from the south from Brittany, and with them 2 jarls, Ohtor and Hroald, and then went around west until they got into the mouth of the Severn and raided in Wales everywhere along the banks where it suited them, and took Cameleac, bishop in Archenfield, and led him to ship with them; and then King Edward ransomed him back for 40 pounds. Then after that the whole raiding-army went up and wanted to go on a raid against Archenfield; then they were met by [the men] from Hereford and from Gloucester and from the nearest strongholds, and fought against them and put them to flight, and killed the jarl Hroald and the other jarl Ohtor's brother and a great part of the raiding-army, and drove them into an enclosure and besieged them there until they gave them hostages ..." Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, AD 915, Worcester Manuscript, p. 99

This attack by the Vikings prompted the Saxons of Hereford and Gloucester to join together and fight the Vikings back, using the element of surprise. The site of this battle is though to be "Killdane Field" (HER reference no. 12549) in Weston-under-Penyard, close to the site of the Roman town of Ariconium.

Other than this there is very little mention of Viking presence in the county, and we are distinctly lacking in Viking place-names or settlements that were characteristic of places elsewhere in the country where the Norsemen's presence was more noticeably felt.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

In AD 924 Athelstan, grandson of Alfred the Great, became king. In 937 he fought against an army of Irish Vikings, Scots and Strathclyde Britons at Brunanburh, and won. The north was now firmly under Saxon control. Athelstan was the first Saxon king to command loyalty from the whole of Britain.

Athelstan was concerned with good government and he also declared that one coinage was to be used. The burghs set up around the country were now to become the centres of local government with ealdormen ruling in the king's name. This means that places such as Hereford would have become the administrative centres for the areas surrounding them.

After Athelstan died in 939, his successors Edmund and Eadred had to fight new Viking raiders. England was not at peace again until Edgar became king of Wessex in 959. One of the important effects of Edgar's reign was his setting up of courts to keep law and order. The Church was also subject to changes at this time. By this point the monks running the monasteries had started to disregard the discipline of their orders, and so a new set of strict rules was drawn up by which all the monks had to live.

Edgar died in 975 and England was once again thrown into turmoil. Edgar's son, Edward, became king and a comet was seen (considered to be a symbol of bad luck); then followed a period of famine. In 978 Edgar was murdered, some say by his step-brother Æthelred and his thegns. Æthelred (nicknamed the "Unready") was proclaimed king and Edgar was declared a martyr. Just two years later the Viking raids began again and Æthelred tried to buy them off. First he paid them Danegeld (money raised by taxes for this purpose), and then he gave the Danish soldiers land on the condition that they now fight for him and not against him. However, the soldiers wanted more and in retaliation Æthelred ordered a massacre of Danes living in England. This severely angered the Danish King, Sweyn Forkbeard.

In 1013 Sweyn's army ravaged England and Æthelred was forced to flee to Normandy in France. The English nobles asked Sweyn to be their king and he accepted, only to die in 1014 before being crowned. Æthelred returned but died two years later.

Sweyn's son Cnut (or Canute) now led the Danish army in England, and he came up against Æthelred's son Edmund Ironside. Edmund fought the Danes so bravely that Cnut agreed to share the kingdom with him to put an end to all the fighting. Unfortunately, Edmund died within months of being made ruler and Cnut was free to rule England on his own. By this time Cnut had also married Æthelred's widow.

England was now part of a North Sea empire, together with Denmark and Norway, and Cnut's power was recognised by the Welsh, Scots and Irish. Cnut brought peace to England but through his rule also weakened royal power. As he was ruler of such a large area he was often away visiting his other lands, and he left the government of England in the hands of his trusted earls.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005] 

Edward was more Norman than English in background and habits, and he brought with him a group of Norman advisors. This caused much resentment and jealousy amongst the English nobles, and even the marriage of Edward to Earl Godwin of Wessex's daughter did not bring peace. However, many people respected Edward even though he was not a strong ruler. In 1053 Earl Godwin died and his son Harold became Earl of Wessex. Harold, like his father, disliked Edward and did not respect his rule.

Edward was very religious, and because of his liking for confessing his sins he was nicknamed "The Confessor". Edward's marriage produced no heirs and once again no-one knew who would succeed to the throne. The man holding the power in England was Harold, Earl of Wessex but William, a Norman noble, also laid claim to the throne, among other contenders.

Both William and Harold appeared to have a valid claim to the throne. Harold was the most powerful English earl; he had the support of the Whitan (the Anglo-Saxon parliament) and he was said to have been named by Edward as his successor in the year that he died (there is even a scene in the Bayeux Tapestry which appears to depict this event). William was the son of Duke Robert of Normandy; he had the support of the Church in Rome and also claimed that Edward had named him as heir.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

Harold led his men north to fight the Norwegians at the battle of Stamford Bridge near York. The English were victorious and Harald Hardrada and Tostig were both killed in the fighting. Then came the news that Harold had been dreading - William had landed in Sussex. Harold and his weary army headed south, and on 14th October 1066 the English and the Norman armies met on Senlac Hill near Hastings.

Harold was killed during the battle by an arrow which pierced his eye, and on Christmas Day 1066 William was crowned King of England. The Anglo-Saxon period was over and a new society was ready to take its place.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

Harold Godwinson owned large areas of land in Herefordshire, and on his death at the Battle of Hastings these lands would have passed into the control of William the Conqueror. Harold was most probably joined in battle by his most faithful thegns from Herefordshire. After their defeat those that survived would have most likely found their lands forfeited to William, and so many chose not to return home.

By the time of the Domesday Book in 1086 only two Englishmen are noted as still holding considerable lands, and that is out of a total of 36 landowners recorded for Herefordshire. These men are Eadric of Leysters and Ælmer who, judging by their lands, had once been important Anglo-Saxon men. For one reason or another they had managed to keep hold of their lands even after the Normans had moved in. That is not to say that other Englishmen did not hold land. The Domesday Book mentions other Englishmen (and sometimes women) who are recorded as being tenants of the Norman lords, even of the King himself. These Englishmen are in the minority, however, and the overall effect is of the displacement of the original English landowners in favour of the Normans.

However, Herefordshire was not prepared to lie down and let the Normans take control without a struggle, and there was organised resistance to the "foreigners" in the county. One particular Anglo-Saxon in this area who was especially opposed to the Normans, and who is mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle in 1067, is Eadric the Wild. Eadric was a large landowner in Herefordshire and Shropshire, and his lands are recorded in the Domesday Book. He was not in favour of the idea of forfeiting his lands to William, so he joined forces with the Welsh Kings Rhiwallon and Bleddyn and together they made raids in Herefordshire up to the River Lugg.

The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle says:

"And Prince Eadric and the Welsh became hostile and they attacked the castle-men in Hereford, and did them many injuries. And here the king set a great tax on the wretched people ..." (The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Worcester Manuscript 1066, pp. 200-201)

Whether the ordinary commoner of Herefordshire would have joined these rebellions is unclear. They had no large areas of land that were at threat, the raids risked the little property that they had, and there was even the possibility of enslavement by their supposed Welsh allies if they were unsuccessful.

Those Anglo-Saxons who did choose to fight would have found themselves up against a new and efficient type of military, for the Normans were people with a military mind. The most obvious manifestation of their military prowess was the castle. Castles had never been seen in England before the arrival of the first Normans, and these structures were probably the best way to guard against the English and Welsh raids. A castle could be used defensively to protect the lord and his men at times of attack, and it could also be used offensively as both a base from which to mount a raid into enemy territory and a handy headquarters for troops and weapons. A castle could also be used to house hostages, who were an extremely important bartering tool in times of war. 

As has already been mentioned, there were only four Norman castles in England prior to the Norman Conquest and three of these were in Herefordshire (Ewyas Harold, Hereford and Richard's Castle). This indicates the importance of Herefordshire at that time as a county on the border between the Anglo-Saxons, who were subjects of King Edward, and the Welsh, who were not. After the Conquest it was an area that was not only used as a buffer zone against the Welsh raids, but was also a base for expeditions by the Normans into Wales with the intention of oppressing that country.

In a short period of time the Normans had become both the major landowners and the men in charge of administration and justice. The Normans were also responsible for the end of slavery in England, as they absorbed this section of society into the class that they called villeins. These were men who were free but "owed" service to their local lord, such as work on his lands. The Domesday Survey for Herefordshire lists 1, 730 villeins out of a population of 4,453. There are also 739 serfs or servants listed, but these would be freemen attached to a particular lord.

The castles and military nature of the Normans eventually led to the suppression of the Welsh, although the Normans never actually managed to conquer them, but simply existed "peacefully" alongside them. The Welsh had been posing an ever-present threat since before the Roman Conquest.

The Normans had quickly put their stamp on English society but the changes did not extend to all areas of life. Most place-names continued in their Anglo-Saxon forms, although a few had Norman personal names attached, such as Edwyn Ralph and Mansell Lacy. Norman French may have become the administrative and judicial language but in everyday life Anglo-Saxon English continued to be spoken, and even today we are known as England and the English rather than as Normandy and the French.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

410: Britain has been under attack by the Picts and the Scots; the people ask Rome for help but the Edict of the Emperor Honorius in this year tells them to look to their own defence. Roman administration of Britain has come to an end.

432: Irish Scots arrive in Pictland.

450: Ambrosianus Aurelianus, son of the Roman Emperor Constantine, rises to power against British King Vortigern.

499: King Vortigern invites the Saxon rulers Hengest and Horsa to Britain to help the Britons against attacks. At first these Saxon men do help, but after realising the wealth and fertility of the land they encourage their countrymen to invade.

500: Death of King Arthur (according to legend).

537: Columba arrives on Iona and founds the Celtic Christian church.

585: The kingdom of Mercia is established with Creoda or Crida as its king.

597: St. Augustine arrives in Kent and converts King Æthelbert to Christianity.

722: The monk Bede writes his Ecclesiastical History.

740: The date originally thought to mark the construction of Wat's Dyke, a predecessor of Offa's Dyke. However, radiocarbon dating has recently put the date of its construction between AD 268 and 630.

750: The epic poem Beowulf is written.

c.790: King Offa takes control of East Anglia.

793: Vikings attack the monastic community at Lindisfarne Priory.

794: King Æthelbert of East Anglia comes to Herefordshire to ask King Offa for his daughter's hand in marriage. Offa's wife Cynefrith takes a dislike to him and persuades Offa to have him executed. Æthelbert is then buried at Marden church, just outside Hereford, but the public furore at his death causes Offa to have him re-buried in Hereford Cathedral, where he becomes one of its saints.

800: Alfred the Great is crowned as the first king of a unified England.

823: The Mercians invade Powys.

835: The Isle of Sheppey comes under Viking attack.

840: The Vikings turn their attentions away from England when the Frankish lands are weakened by the death of their Emperor.

850: The Saxons secure a naval victory against the Vikings off the Kent coast at Sandwich.

866: The Vikings mount a surprise attack against York and capture it.

867: The rival kings of Northumbria, Ælle II and Osbeorht, join forces against the Vikings but are defeated at the Battle of York. The Viking kings then make forays into Mercia.

871: King Æthelred pays the Vikings not to attack. The money used is known as "Danegeld" and is raised by taxes.

872: King Alfred buys peace with the Vikings and they move their army from Reading to London.

1040: Edward the Confessor is crowned king. He is to be the last of the Saxon kings of England.

c.1050s: Herefordshire is unique in having three of the four known pre-Conquest castles in England. These are Ewyas Harold, Richard's Castle and Hereford Castle.

1066: The death of Edward the Confessor leads to a dispute over the English Crown between Harold Earl of Wessex, William Duke of Normandy and Harald Hardrada of Norway. After the Battle of Hastings is fought between Harold of Wessex and William, the latter is victorious and becomes the first Norman King of England. He is renamed William the Conqueror.

[Original compiler: Miranda Greene, 2005] 

From its beginning the manor of Leominster and its Minster appear to have been the property of the Crown. By the time of the Norman Conquest it was held by Edith, wife of Edward the Confessor, and after the Conquest it passed into the hands of William the Conqueror. During the reign of Henry I (1110-135) the Royal manor and Priory of Leominster were transferred to the Benedictine Abbey of Reading. The date for this transferral was 1123. This meant that the government and justice of the town and the parishes within the Liberty of Leominster were now in the charge of the Abbot of Reading.

The Priory Church of St. Peter and St. Paul that stands in Leominster today dates from the middle of the 12th century, with later additions.

The Origins of the Name

The first element is the Old English leon, which refers to the lowland district watered by the Lugg and Arrow, with their tributaries. This word comes from the old Welsh lion or lian, meaning 'to flow' (as in the Welsh lliant, a torrent or stream). The Welsh name for Leominster was Llanlieni, which can be interpreted as "the minister of the district of floods", Llan being the Welsh place name element originally meaning 'enclosure', but eventually referring to a church, or the land around it. (Reference: Hillaby, J. and Hillaby, C. 2006 Leominster Minster, Priory and Borough c660-1539. p4-5) 

Leofric, Earl of Herefordshire, became patron of  - and largely rebuilt and endowed - the Minster or Priory sometime in the year 1035. In the Domesday Book the town is still known as Leofminstre.

In a Charter of King Henry I of 1123 the Priory is mentioned as Sancti Petri de Leominstri. In another Charter of 1554, granted by Queen Mary, the town is described as "Leonnpister, alias Lempster".

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

The Minster or Priory of Leominster was founded c. AD 660 by Merewalh, the Saxon king of Mercia, who is said to have lived at Compfordte Castle, a mile north-east of the town. He also had a royal enclosure at nearby Kingsland, where he is said to have been buried.

Merewalh was converted to Christianity through the preaching of Edfrith, a monk from Northumbria. The legend of the foundation of the minster at Leominster is recounted in the Life of St. Mildburg - Mildburg was one of Merewalh's daughters by his wife, the Kentish princess Eafe. Edfrith converted Merewalh by interpreting a dream which had been troubling the king. Edfrith had been forewarned of this event by a vision he had shortly after arriving from Northumbria, in which he subdued a huge lion that had appeared suddenly in front of him by offering it bread which it ate at his feet. After Merewalh's conversion, a church was built on the spot where Edfrith had had his vision. A monastery was founded in connection with the church, and its name preserved the memory of the lion of Edfrith's vision.

By the early years of the 17th century, a version of this legend was circulating in Leominster as a poem in English. Part of it was published in 1893 by F. Gainsford Blacklock; he described it as having been written in a "medieval monastic hand". Blacklock noted that a copy of this poem had survived the ruin of the Priory and come into the possession of Alfred Lewis Esq., JP.

Blacklock published the poem as follows:

"Six hundred, three score yere of grace; when Cadwallyn reignde Britaine, 
The faith wch fowre hundred yeres space, had there taughte; then decreased.
By saxon's persecutinge handm who chasde the Britaine's from this Land,
Yet as the Dragon Sathan sin causde the woman, the Churche to flie
Into the wilderness to dwell; and sougthe (but coulde not) her destrie.
She still reteinde parte of her seede; wch kept God's lawe, living in dreede.
So God reservde a remnant still; in Britaine, zealous of his name,
Who helde the faithe, workingse hiw will; and had not God recervde the same;
As Sodome, Gomorh had wee byn, most lothsome lake glutted with syn.
The worde of God within this land was in those days moste precious;
For fewe did it then understand; the people were so barbarous.
Then God, his glorie to arrere, to holie Edfride did appere,
Devoutlie prayinge Edfride was, wherewith the Lorde was pleased well,
In vaine his prayers did not passe, the Lorde apperede as stories tell:
Byd Edfride goe into the Southe, and preache his Gospell at Ridgmouth.
This message Edfride did unfoulde, to Bothall a most godlie man
Who much rejoict to heare it toulde; good Edfride with all gladne than
Take leave, an Angell was his guide, conducting him by the way side. 
Untill he came where children plade at ball; and one cride, Stop the ball
From Ridgemouthe; for if not, he saide, we have no more to play with all.
When Edfride heard him Ridgemouth name, he gave God glory for the same.
With thancksgiving, prayers amonge, unto the blessed Trinitie
He saide devoutelie evensonge: moste mekelie kneelinge on his knee.
And weery restinge on the grounde, by the brooke side so straingely founde:
There with such meate, as God him sent, he supped nature to content.
As he sate there, a Lion wilde, upon a sodaine came;
At first Edfride with feare was filde, but lyon meekelie like a lambe,
Tooke bread at hand, fawning him on, which banished all feare anon-
That nighte Edfride lodged abroade, in open fields near Ridgmouth banke
Next morne arisinge, unto God: for his safetie he rendre thancke.
A curteous knighte came to him tho: and to his place he wilde him goe,
Then Edfride went home with the knighte, to who he did God's words declare;
Wherein the knighte tooke much delighte, and hearkned there to woth greate care.
God's word prevailde, the knighte beleevd in Christe, and baptisme he receavde.
The kings had dreamde: two blacke dogs tooke llim by the throate, and a man olde,
The dogs from him with a kay stroke: but no man coulde his dreame unfolde.
The knighte besoughte the kinge to sho: his dreame to Edfride: he did so
When Edfride hearde the dreame, quod he: theis dogs re misbelief and syn,
Wherein you to much blinded be: to vex you sorre they will not lyn.
Unless Christe's faithe you doo embrace: and be converted unto grace.
Christe, God's owne sonne to save mankinde, tooke flesh on him and diede on tree;
His bitter Passion have in mynde, and beleve in the Trinitie.
Lay houlde on Christe by livelie faithe: soe shall you shun eternall deathe.
Into his faith baptised bee, for hos worship a Churche upreare.
The kinge receaved baptisme, and all his people Christened were.
Thus were theis dogs quite chaste away: which daylie soughte the kinge to slay.
The kinge through his Domynioun caused God's worde to be preached,
And infidelitie anon: was utterlie thence banished.
When greate commanders rule arighte; Inferiors followe with delighte;
Subjects followe king's example, ffor kings are gods to the people.
The kinge baptisde, to Edfride gave, to builde a Churche thyrtie plowlands
Which was begun with Counsell grave, but not in place where now it stands
What workmen wroughte by day, convaide was thence by nighte where now it laide,
At last wher't standes to worke they fell, a goodlie Church was shortelie pighte.
It pleasde the kinge exceedinge well: unto S. Peter it was dighte.
Stoctuna for it that place yelded store: wherein, it don, were founde no more,
Within short space were many moe Churches upreared greate, and
Nere to the place as produce shoe, but she was Mother Church.
And longe let last that unity but carles pastors let it shun.
The Towne with buildings did increase, inhabitants did multiplie,
And Edfride ruled the Church in peace, full fiftene yeres, and thene did die,
Upon the hill by did he dwell, calde yet Castle of Compfordte Dell."

The Suppressed Benedictine Minster & Other Ancient & Modern Institutions of the Borough of Leominster (Leominster Folk Museum, 2nd Edition, 1999)

The full document of the poem was given to the Herefordshire Record Office in 1980, when it was realised that Blacklock had omitted the final third of the poem. It was also noticed that the script, vocabulary and text used show it to be a work of the early 17th century. Joe and Caroline Hillaby have noted that it "incorporates wild anachronisms and local mythology". Details in the text suggest a date for its composition; there is a reference to Sir Philip Hoby, who was instrumental in Leominster's achieving its charter of 1544, and also one to Leominster's apprentices' charity, which was founded in or after 1585. The Hillabys suggest that the poem was written to "foster civic pride by stressing the august origins and great antiquity of Leominster, with its minster church that antedated [Hereford] cathedral. It was both a pæan to the town and a sermon to its people." The author was probably John Hackluyt of Eaton, son or grandson of Thomas Hackluyt, Clerk to the Council in the Marches. (Joe & Caroline Hillaby, Leominster Minster, Priory and Borough c660-1539, The Friends of Leominster Priory and Logaston Press, 2006, p. 261)

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

The man referred to in the text as "Bothall a most godlie man" is more commonly known as St. Botolph. He was a Norwegian native who came to Northumbria and is believed to have been appointed Abbot of St Peter's, Lindisfarne. He suffered death as a martyr at the hands of the Pagan Saxons. In the early days of the church at Leominster there is said to have been a small wayside cross or shrine to the memory of St. Botolph, one mile to the south of the town on the Hereford road. In the 1554 Charter of Queen Mary the area is referred to as "Bottolsgreene Field".On the 1840s tithe map the area is known as St. Botolph's Green. Until recently a house known as St. Botolph's stood on the side of the Hereford road in this area, but it has now been pulled down to make way for a new housing estate.

The locality referred to as Ridgmouth is situated at the confluence of the river Ridgmoor or Ridgmouth and the river Lugg, and is bounded by those streams and the Ludlow road. Today a Ridgemoor Road survives to the north-east of Leominster Priory.

Stoctuna is an old name for Stockton, which lies two miles north-east of Leominster in Kimbolton parish. It is thought that some of the stone for the building of the Priory came from here.

The story of Edfrith and the lion is unlikely to be true, although F. Gainsford Blacklock suggests that lions may have still been in existence in Britain after having escaped from the Romans - who used them in the arena - and bred successfully. The story is more likely to be an allegory where the fierce King Merewalh represents the lion that was "tamed" (Christianised) by Edfrith. The story is also represented in a carving on the Norman north-west door of Leominster Priory, where Edfrith is shown leading the lion into the church; this represents the leading of Merewalh to Christianity by Edfrith.

Merewalh made Edfrith the first head of the new religious house, and on Edfrith's death in AD 675 he was succeeded by Wolpher, the brother of Merewalh.   

The Priory, as the local centre of Christian missionary work, would have rapidly become more and more important. As a result of this status it would have been the recipient of a number of royal and noble benefactions. However, the very fact that it was wealthy would have put it in serious danger of attacks and raids.

In AD 760 the Welsh overran the district and plundered the Priory and the town. In the middle of the 800s the Danes attacked England, and nowhere escaped the plundering and violence. The churches and monasteries with their valuables were the most popular targets, and it is highly likely that Leominster Priory suffered at this time. 

In AD 980, under the rule of Æthelred the Unready, the Danes again attacked this area. They camped on a hill called Danefield and used this as a base from which to lead raiding parties into the town and to the priory. The Danes were led by Thurkil and King Swegyn (or Sweyn) of Scandinavia, whose son later became king of England and Scandinavia. Today, a Danesfield Drive exists in Leominster to the south-west of the Priory.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

Kenelm was a Saxon prince or earl of considerable wealth and power, within whose domain Leominster lay. He was a supporter of - and frequent benefactor to - the Priory, and it is thought that it was he who had a stretch of the River Lugg, called Kenwater, diverted to form the northern boundary of the Priory precinct.

Prince Kenelm died c.1060 and is believed to have been buried in the Priory, with a plaque to commemorate the event. This plaque remained in the Priory until the end of the 1500s, when it was damaged. Fortunately John Hackluyt of nearby Eaton made a record of the inscription:

"My foremost fathers did build upon this my town, and at Kenelmford and Meadwellhamsteade and Lincoln and Leicester and Kenelmworth and Clint and Kenelmstrone and Winchcomb and Hereford and Sutton and Kenchester and Westminster and Verulam and Nottingham and Warwick and Gloucester and Stanford and Berkeley and Tewkesbury and Runcorn and Tamworth and Edesbury and Sempringham and Lincoln and Cwichelme his Ley and Off: Church. Christ loved me, and was my most righteous defence always. I have loved Christe and for His love my lands I gave; but my Kingsland, and also my Kenelmworth, I do not give. I am Christ's Kenelm; and Kenelmbals is my kinsman at Clinton."

Blacklock says, "The ancestors of Kenelm had a residence or Castle to the north-east of Leominster at a place called Kenelbaldston, now known as Kimbolton. The road leading to this place from the town was known as Comish Way" (Gainsford T. Blacklock, The Suppressed Benedictine Minster & Other Ancient & Modern Institutions of the Borough of Leominster, Leominster Folk Museum, 2nd Edition, 1999).

Earl Leofric

Leofric was the Earl of Hereford, who gave much money to the Priory and partly rebuilt it; he also rebuilt the Benedictine Abbey of the Holy Trinity at Wenlock in Shropshire. Leofric was also responsible for the founding of the Monastery of Coventry. He was the son of the Earl of Mercia and the husband of the famous Lady Godiva of Coventry. Leofric died in 1055 and was buried at Wenlock. Leofric was also a duke in the army of King Cnut or Canute the Great.

It is said that his improvements to the Priory were expensive and decorative with the roof being decorated with gold and silver. At the time that Blacklock was writing (1897) there was said to have been a carved beam at the end of the South Nave, which survived the fire of 1699, and on this beam could be seen traces of precious metal. In honour of this great and good benefactor of the Priory the town changed its name from Llanlieni to Leofminstre.

Earl Swein

Swein or Swegin was the brother of Harold Godwinson (later King Harold) and he was a fierce and powerful Earl. In 1046 he led a raiding party into Wales, and on his return through the county he abducted the Abbess of Leominster, held her hostage and raped her. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle records the story thus:  "Here Earl Swein went into Wales and Gruffyd, the northern king, together with him, and he was granted hostages. Then, when he was on his way home, he commanded the abbess in Leominster to be fetched to him, and he kept her as long as it suited him and after let her travel home". (The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Abingdon Manuscript, translated and edited by Michael Swanton, J.M. Dent, 1996, p. 164)

This passage is also important as it implies that there were nuns at the Priory at this time. However, this does not mean that there were no longer monks there.

Prince Gruffyd ap Llewelyn

In 1046, Prince Gruffyd ap Llewelyn, Prince of Wales, led an army into the district of Leominster, causing great and vast destruction and levying heavy tribute on the monks. He was driven back by Swein, Earl of Hereford (see above). In 1055 Llewelyn again rode over the border into Herefordshire and occupied Leominster alongside a confederation of forces of the Welsh chieftains, and again he levied heavy taxes on the Priory. Ralph, Earl of Hereford at this time, marched to Leominster with his army to aid the people there. Llewelyn was prepared for the attack.

Blacklock says that at this time the south side of Leominster (which would have been the side that Ralph entered from) was protected by an earthwork rampart and ditch as well as a stone castle, which would have been situated in the area behind the present Minster School on South Street. The two forces met at the drawbridge to the castle and unfortunately Ralph was defeated and suffered great losses of men. Prince Llewelyn then marched on to Hereford and seized the city and the cathedral. It was not until Earl Harold (soon to be king) arrived with the troops of the Crown to fight alongside the earls of the area that the Welsh prince was defeated and sent back across the border. During this battle Leofgar, the Bishop of Hereford, was killed.

According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle it was about this time that Earl Harold "had a dyke built round the town" [of Hereford] (The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, Abingdon Manuscript [AD 1055], p. 186).

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

The cathedral at Hereford is known as the Cathedral Church of St. Mary and St. Ethelbert.

The building is constructed almost entirely of local sandstone of a mainly reddish colour. Some of the carved work in the presbytery is of Ketton stone, while the shafting in the north transept is of Purbeck marble. The roofs are covered in lead.

The history of the foundation

The diocese of Hereford is one of the oldest in the country. The compiler of the earliest surviving set of Anglo-Saxon Episcopal lists named the first in the line of the bishops of Hereford as Putta.

AD 676: According to the Venerable Bede (a monk and historian writing around 730), Bishop Putta of Rochester, after the sack of his own city and cathedral by Æthelred, was given a plot of land - assumed to be at Hereford - for a church.

740: Cuthbert, the fifth bishop, erected a cross of great magnificence there. In 741, Cuthbert was made Archbishop of Canterbury.

790s: The border was dominated by the rule of King Offa, famous for building the dyke along the Welsh Border. In 792 Ethelbert, King of East Anglia was eager to marry Offa's daughter but Offa's wife Cynefrith, opposed to the marriage, arranged for Ethelbert to be murdered (the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, however, states simply that Offa had Ethelbert beheaded, giving no reason). Many people objected to the beheading of Ethelbert, and so Offa was forced to bury him in Hereford. Ethelbert was made a saint and thereafter the cathedral was dedicated to Ethelbert and the Virgin Mary.

1012-1015: Bishop Athelstane II rebuilt the church at Hereford. He also gave the cathedral a copy of the Four Gospels, which can still be seen in the Chained Library today.

Hereford Cathedral had managed to escape the conversion to monasticism that many other cathedrals had undergone. This was mainly due to the fact that substantial revenue was required to support a community of monks, and Hereford was too poor.

1055: The building was seriously damaged by Welsh raids in 1055 and three canons, and four of their sons, who bravely fought to protect the cathedral were killed on its threshold. The cathedral was then burnt and only one book, the Cathedral Gospel, survived. The relics of St. Ethelbert were burnt or stolen.

1056: Bishop Athelstan died in this year and Edward the Confessor chose the warlike Leofgar (a chaplain of Earl Harold) to replace him. In 1056 Leofgar undertook a revenge attack against the Welsh but was killed in battle. Hereford was temporarily under the control of Ealdred, Bishop of Worcester.

1061: Shortly before the Norman Conquest of England in 1066, Bishop Walter of Lorraine was appointed. He was one of a group of foreign clergymen given control of English dioceses at this time. These foreign clergy brought with them the Rule of Chrodegang, a new constitution drawn up by the Bishop of Metz, which meant that Hereford would always be served by canons and never by monks. The pontificate of Walter was short and we have little information about him, but we do know that he does not appear to have improved the finances of the cathedral.

1079: Bishop Robert de Losinga, who was also from Lorraine, is said to have then built a church at Hereford, based on the two-storey basilica at Aix in France. This may have been the structure which formerly stood on the south side of the Bishop's Cloister, which was destroyed by Bishop Egerton in 1737. Bishop Robert had trained at the cathedral school at Liege (said to be one of the best) and under his leadership the cathedral finances began to improve, perhaps because of the experience that he had. Bishop Robert was also the first bishop to appoint an archdeacon in Hereford, and he began to acquire books for the cathedral.

1086: Bishop Robert may have been one of the commissioners for the Domesday Survey, published in this year. He also created small tenancies for members of the cathedral community. He died in 1095.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

During the Roman occupation of Britain the Marches area had been a boundary zone with the unconquered Welsh on the western side and the Romanised Britons on the east. After the Romans left, Wales was split into four main kingdoms: Gwynedd, Powys, Dyfed and Gwent. The Welsh were a strong and determined race and were known for their fierce reactions to attempts to rule them, hence the trouble the Romans had in their attempt to conquer them.

In the 8th century, the kingdoms of south-east Wales came under pressure from the Saxons who were looking to extend their lands and subdue any raids into their territory by the Welsh. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle for AD 743 records that Æthelbald of Mercia and Cuthred of Wessex fought the Welsh, the Llandaff Charter for c. 745 mentions destruction in the Hereford area by the Welsh, and in 760 the Welsh Annals record that Hereford was devastated by Welsh raiding parties. In 777 King Offa retaliated and harassed the Welsh, and in 783 he was involved in further attacks against the Welsh Britons.

King Offa ruled the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Mercia between 757 and 795, and was a renowned and powerful leader. He was also known as the Emperor of southern Britain and he ruled much of Anglo-Saxon England. On many of his charters (official land documents) he is recorded as "king of all the English". Offa was married to Cynethryth (later implicated in the murder of Ethelbert, King of East Anglia) and they had one son - Egfrith - and four daughters - Eadburh, Ælfled, Ælfthryth and Ethelburga. Ælfthryth and Ethelburga both became abbesses and the other two daughters married the Kings of Wessex and Northumbria.

In 787 Offa had his son Egfrith crowned during his own reign. This was most probably to secure the succession and to quell any other claimants that might come forward on Offa's death. As it turned out, Egfrith outlived his father by only 141 days. Offa himself had been involved in a struggle for the throne of Mercia. When Æthelbald, the previous king, was murdered by his own bodyguard a civil war ensued, with Offa and Beornred fighting for the throne. Offa was the victor.

During this period of civil war Mercia lost control of some of her client kingdoms, and her western border was also pushed back eastwards by the inhabitants of Powys, who took advantage of the unrest to regain some of the territory they had lost earlier to the Mercians. At this time Powys was under the rule of Eliseg.

Once Offa was firmly in control of Mercia it is likely that he had the dyke built to be a permanent demarcation of the boundary between the Welsh and his kingdom. It is believed that the events that led to Offa building the dyke are recorded on the Pillar of Eliseg near Llangollen. The inscription is now almost worn away, but fortunately it was recorded in 1696 by Edward Llhuyd. It reads:"Concenn being great-grandson of Eliseg erected this stone to his great-grandfather Eliseg. It was Eliseg who annexed [the inheritance of Powys] throughout nine [years?] from the power of the English, which he made into a sword-land by fire [or partly by the sword and fire]" (David Hill, "Offa Versus the Welsh", in British Archaeology, 2000, pp. 20-1).

The first mention of Offa's Dyke occurs in Asser's Life of King Alfred, written in 893, nearly 100 years after the dyke's construction is thought to have been begun: "There was in Mercia in fairly recent times a certain vigorous king called Offa, who terrified all the neighbouring kings and provinces around him, and who had a great dyke built between Wales and Mercia from sea to sea".

In total, from coast to coast, Offa's Dyke covers a distance of around 80 miles.

The main section of the dyke runs north from Kington (in north-west Herefordshire), and consists of a bank with a ditch on its western side. Originally the ditch was about 2m from ground level, while the bank towered nearly 8m above the ditch bottom in places. The size of the dyke and the quality of its construction can vary along its length, depending on the type of soil and the terrain.

The bank of the dyke is made from the soil removed during the cutting of the ditch. The bank is often strengthened internally with stone and turfs cut from along the line of the ditch and also from behind the bank.

For much of the length of the dyke the ditch has since been filled in, but when excavated it would appear to have been V-shaped with a smooth 45º angle up the side of the ditch that carried on up the side of the bank. This would have made climbing over the dyke extremely difficult.

On the western side of the ditch there is often a small counterscarp bank, also made from the material removed for the ditch. It is thought that the purpose of this feature was to increase the overall impression of the depth of the ditch. The width of the dyke, including the ditch and the bank, can be as wide as 20m in places. On top of the bank there is no evidence of either a wall or guard stations, so it would appear that the dyke was not manned but rather was designed to be an obstacle and deterrent on its own.
 
At its southern end Offa's Dyke seems to disappear into the sea, ending as it does on Sedbury Cliffs, overlooking the mouth of the River Severn. On cliff tops overlooking Chepstow is an eroded ringwork, about 40m wide, which has been interpreted as a Mercian fort by both Cyril Fox and David Hill of the Offa's Dyke Project.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

The fact that the dyke was obviously built as a barrier to the Welsh is evident in its construction. The ditch is always on the Welsh side, and the steepest face of the bank is always on the west.

Before building the dyke, King Offa and his men would have had to plan the route carefully so that particular settlements were included on the English side, and also so that the line followed the less tricky topography and always tried to keep a good view to the west. It is thought that the route may have been laid out using beacons from hill to hill along the route, and that these would have then been used as sighters. The more detailed line would have been laid out with stakes between the beacons. Any undergrowth or woodland would have had to be cleared on the line of the dyke and either side of it so that there was no cover for Welsh raiders. In all probability a plough was then taken along the line to mark the site for digging. The turf that was stripped on the line of the dyke was used to build or front the dyke, and the large bank was made from earth taken to create the western ditch.

The dyke was most probably built using some slave labour and by the enlisting of men from the various villages in Mercia. It is likely that each village was expected to send a certain number of men depending on its size; these men would be from the lower orders of society, those who were used to working on the land. These men would have been accustomed to working long hours with hard work, and the chances are that once you had completed digging your section you would have been allowed to go home, so there was more incentive to work harder! Those men who were not called up for manual work, i.e. the nobility, would probably have been expected to provide food and shelter for the labourers, as well as some of their tools.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

She says that the section of dyke found at Bridge Sollars and over Garnons Hill may have been built to block a Roman road that runs parallel to the river Wye. Other earthworks have been recorded in Britain that were built to block earlier Roman roads. Roman roads were a quick and effective way for the Romans to unify a once-disconnected landscape, but after the Romans left the use of dykes can be seen as one way in which to re-assert local independence.

Offa's Dyke in Herefordshire

The dykes at Holmes Marsh (HER 5577) and Lyonshall (various HER nos.) are built at right angles to a postulated Roman road which runs from Mortimer's Cross to Clyro. The ditches may have been used to block this road in the valley of the Curl Brook, as it is also blocked by the Rowe Ditch at Pembridge.

The last sections of Offa's Dyke in north-west Herefordshire are the small sections that run north from Lyonshall Park Wood, and are connected by hedgerows and low earthworks to a bank which comes out at the northern end of Berry's Hill, Titley. Despite intensive survey by the Offa's Dyke Project no connection can be found between the end of this section and the beginning of the main section on Rushock Hill, 1½ miles to the west. Marge Feryok suggests that this section may form part of a park or woodland boundary.

All these sections of dyke vary greatly in size and scale, and only the section at Lynhales in Lyonshall is anything near the dimensions of the main section of Offa's Dyke. Most of the sections are much smaller in size, and no dating evidence has been found that can place them as contemporary to the main section north from Rushock Hill.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

Just to the north of Kington in north-west Herefordshire the dyke can be seen quite clearly on Rushock Hill, which has good views of the Herefordshire plain to the River Wye. The dyke begins as quite a large bank with faint evidence of the ditch to the west. From Rushock Hill the dyke heads north before curving round to the west of Herrock Hill in Lower Harpton parish, then crossing the Hindwell Brook just below its confluence with other small brooks. From here the dyke continues out of the county.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

Cyril Fox of the Offa's Dyke Project has offered the opinion that the reason for the incomplete earthwork in the Herefordshire Plain is that the area was so densely wooded that this in itself formed a sufficient boundary. However, other scholars have argued this point as at the time of the Domesday Survey Herefordshire had the smallest amount of woodland recorded, and as timber was such an important economic and agricultural resource much of it would have been cut down. The forests themselves would have most likely been managed with the undergrowth being kept clear for hunting and pannage. (See David Hill and Margaret Worthington, Offa's Dyke: History & Guide, Tempus Publishing Ltd., 2003.)

Other suggestions for the origin of the sections in Herefordshire are that the earthwork was once a continuous line from Berry Hill to Lyonshall and that the gaps have been created by later agricultural practices.

Frank Noble has suggested that the gaps in Herefordshire were once filled by palisades (wooden walls) or felled trees, and Lord Rennel of Rodd has offered the theory that Offa's Dyke once included the short dyke known as Grimsditch and Rowe Ditch, both near Pembridge. Another suggestion is that the dyke never went further south than Rushock Hill and the earthworks in Herefordshire are separate earthworks of various dates, but this raises the question of why Offa would have built a boundary that dealt with only a part of the Welsh threat, in effect leaving the job half done?

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

A section of Offa's Dyke immediately to the south of the Welsh Border, running in a north-south direction before swinging around to the west. The section appears as earthworks except for section in the centre. Where it crosses the county boundary it is seen as a broad 17ft scarp with a ditch on the western side which is now largely silted up. From here the dyke heads up the flank of Herrock Hill. The dyke is present as a rounded bank ditched on both sides.

On Herrock Hill the dyke heads in a north-east - south-west direction around the scarp of the hill. On the open hillside the dyke, though direct, is irregular. It is a broad (26ft) rounded bank with a well-marked western ditch, and some spoil has also been taken form the east side. The dyke becomes smaller as it rises, with less definite ditching, and when it turns south-west along the face of the hill it presents those changes in profile. In some places it is a mere berm or shelf, while in others there is an upper and lower ditch. Where it comes around the very steep western face of the hill it is hardly visible where the soil has slipped from the rock.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

Here the dyke comes around Herrock Hill  and bears towards the east in a roughly west-east direction. By the Old Quarry its scale gradually increases as the slope is less steep. It is a bank with lower berm and upper spoil trench. On the saddle by spot point 1013, where it is gapped, it is a broad bank definitely ditched on the lower slope, now facing south. As it heads up the slope of Rushock Hill the dyke is a considerable bank.

From SO 2900 5900 the dyke heads north-east towards Kennel Wood. On the plateau the dyke is of normal dimensions and character, measuring 13ft on the scarp and 30ft wide overall, with a ditch on the south side. Numerous large boulders are found in the bank. The dyke then suddenly becomes small (1-2ft high) and irregular, and then the dyke becomes clearly defined again with a well-cut ditch, being 26ft wide overall (12ft on the scarp) and the ditch measuring 2ft deep.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

A cropmark continues in a straight route along the line of Offa's Dyke from Rushock Hill to Kennel Wood. It continues into Kennel Wood and Cave Wood. A natural spur has been built up to form a bank about 2m wide. This creates a 15m drop on the west side and a 6m rise on the east. A section through the bank can be seen at Kennel Cottage where an access road used by the Forestry Commission cuts the bank. It is constructed largely of earth. Henry Price's 1817 map of Herefordshire shows Offa's Dyke taking this course.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

A small section of earthwork to the north of Berry's Wood. The dyke reappears near to Flintsham Farm and has recovered its normal north-south alignment. It is well marked and appears as a flattened bank 50ft wide overall, with a broad western ditch and a gap in the centre aligned on the western slope of an isolated steep-sided wooded knoll.

At the north end the 1833 Ordnance Survey map shows the dyke heading northward up to the Titley - Kington road, thus adding 130yds to the known length. There is now no trace whatever on the level pasture field which occupies this area, but it may be accepted as the evidence of the early map is usually reliable. There is no evidence of the dyke to the north of the road on disturbed ground which slopes steeply down to the floor of the brook.
 
The dyke enters Berry's Wood and its bank merges into the slope of the knoll. At the point of its disappearance it is undamaged, 36ft wide overall with a broad western ditch. It was quite never constructed on the knolls beyond this point. From the south side of the knoll an ancient hedge-line leads down to the River Arrow, approximately in line with the continuation of the dyke on the other side of the river. This hedge is mainly on the alluvial flat, but a small portion near the knoll is on a gentle slope and here there are faint traces of a levelled bank which cannot be definitely identified with Offa's Dyke.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

There is a small stretch of earthwork to the north of the old railway line (SO 3200 5800). Just to the south of the A44 which runs through Lyonshall and to the south-west of Lyonshall Castle is a more defined section. The earthwork is unmistakable as a high, broad, rounded bank flanked on the west side by a flat ditch 12-13ft wide and full of wet silt. The overall width of the work is 50-60ft. The west ditch is very plain but the bank has been ploughed down.

At SO 3300 5500 the dyke is present as a fair-sized bank, and within a few yards it quickly develops into a sizeable earthwork and the western ditch becomes apparent, though it has evidently been ploughed in. The high and narrow ridge of the bank has been denuded by the tramping of cattle, the crest having been lowered by over 1ft in places since the century-old oaks which crown it were young trees. Here a streamlet that rises at Lynhales and originally flowed down a natural hollow was deflected by the dyke builders into their ditch. 
 
At SO 3400 5400 there is a banked feature with visible ditches on both sides running from Holme Farm to Wooton Ash. The ditch varies in width from 2-3m and  is very clear at the Wooton Ash end, with the bank being about 2m high; at the Holme Farm end it is only 0.5m high. This bank may be part of Offa's Dyke, and it can also be seen on RAF aerial photographs.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

In Yazor parish the earthwork that may have been part of Offa's Dyke has been extensively levelled in the area where it coincides with Claypits trackway, and also in Upperton farmyard to the south of the road. The dyke then becomes visible again in a field to the south, but here the bank has been ploughed down. The western ditch has also been filled in but the scarp still measures 13ft on the slope. To the south of the railway line in a pasture field the dyke is covered by a spoil heap for 25yds but then becomes present again, although somewhat smaller. The feature now becomes a boundary in pasture fields before gently sloping down towards the Yazor Brook. Just to the north of the Yazor Brook is a pond and in this area the dyke is much damaged, but to the south-west of the pond, in a grove of oaks, the bank and ditch are fairly perfect and moderate in size with the scarp measuring 16ft on average. The dyke continues down the slope, getting smaller before ending at the point where a marshy flat begins, 50yds from the present brook. Here no western ditch remains and the bank is perhaps 12ft at its highest.

Beyond the Yazor Brook the Ordnance Survey map is misleading as there is no trace of the dyke as indicated on the map between the stream and Bowmore Wood. Where the dyke does reappear on the 400ft contour to the south of the Wood it is not marked on the OS map.

The next possible stretch of Offa's Dyke begins on the south flank of Burton Hill, below Ladylift Clump. Here the dyke begins abruptly as a very large broad bank with traces of a western ditch. The dyke is a western-facing slope some 12ft high at its highest, with no westerly ditch remaining and within a pasture that has remained unploughed in living memory.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

Rowe Ditch is an artificial earthwork, consisting of a bank with a ditch on the western side, which straddles the river Arrow in the parishes of Pembridge, Staunton-on-Arrow and Shobdon.

It is a straight linear earthwork which traverses the Arrow Valley from north to south on two distinct orientations just to the west of the village of Pembridge. It is clearly a defensive structure whose straightness suggests that it was planned with some knowledge of Roman survey techniques.

The name "Rowe" may come from the Old English word ruh, meaning "rough" or "uncultivated", and in a document of 1219 it is recorded as Rogeditch or "Rough Dyke". In Old English the inflected form h was often exchanged for w. (See Eilert Ekwall, The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Place-Names, 4th edition, Oxford University Press, 1960, and Paul White, The Arrow Valley, Herefordshire. Archaeology, Landscape Change and Conservation, Herefordshire Studies in Archaeology Series 2, Herefordshire Archaeology, 2003, p. 20.)

It presently runs as an earthwork for nearly two miles, but at some point it extended further.

Rowe Ditch survives as a clear earthwork from Milton Cross (between Pembridge and Shobdon) southwards to Byletts (on the main Pembridge to Kington road). Aerial photographs show the monument continuing up the slope of the Arrow Valley at the north end, and excavations have revealed that it terminated near Vallet Covert in Shobdon parish.

On the First Edition Ordnance Survey Map of 1887, slopes are shown adjoining a house called Grimsditch. In Old Norse Grimr is another name for the pagan god Odin, and in the village of Bearwood there is a crescent-shaped earthwork which is also called Grimsditch, pointing to Anglo-Saxon connections in this area.
 
Trenches excavated in 2003 on a cropmark (HER 10370) which underlies Rowe Ditch suggest that the site was occupied in the Iron Age and Roman period. As Rowe Ditch overlies this feature it is therefore of a later date than Roman, and may be indicative of the Anglian arrival in this area sometime in the 7th century.

During the 1970s and 1980s excavations were carried out along the line of this monument, directed by David Hill. These excavations showed that the ditch survives in good condition below ground, being up to 2m deep and 5m wide in places.

As a result of these excavations it seems that Rowe Ditch probably dates from the earliest arrival of the English in the Arrow Valley, c. AD 650. The fact that the defensive ditch is on the western, Celtic side suggests that it was built by the English.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]

It enabled the careful investigation of a well-preserved rectangular structure, constructed from substantial oak beams. Fragments of several large millstones were also found and, although the upper elements of the structure had been robbed in ancient times, sufficient evidence survived to indicate that the large beams formed the base of the wheel pit for a vertical waterwheel.

Preliminary dating of some of the timbers, using the technique of dendrochronology (tree-ring dating), has indicated that the watermill was probably built sometime during the first half of the 8th century AD. Although the Romans had introduced watermills to England, possibly as early as the 2nd century AD, archaeologists know very little about the use of water power over the following six centuries. Charters and other documents indicate that mills were commonplace in the medieval landscape. By the late 11th century, the Domesday Book records over 6,000 mills throughout England, yet only a handful of early watermills have been excavated.
 
Apart from the late 7th century vertical-wheeled mills found at Old Windsor in Berkshire, project leaders Robin Jackson and Simon Griffin believe that this exciting new find is the earliest medieval mill yet identified in England. It pre-dates any of the documented examples and makes an important contribution to the study of early medieval watermills.

The site raises some interesting questions about early medieval watermill technology. Although both horizontal- and vertical-wheeled mills have been found, it has often been assumed that initially horizontal wheels were more common because they use a simpler technology, without requiring complex gearing to transfer the power to the millstone. Now the discovery of a vertical-wheeled watermill of such an early date at Wellington, along with the still earlier example from Old Windsor, challenges this assumption and raises important questions about the character of the earliest medieval mills in Herefordshire.

[Original author: Robin Jackson of Worcestershire Historic Environment and Archaeology Service. Originally published in Historic Environment Today, Vol. 3 Issue 3, October 2000] 

On 23rd September 1943, an anonymous recorder visited the site with a Miss Wight after the latter had received a report of the discovery of some bones at the quarry (which became disused in the same year). They found the centre of the excavation and the surrounding dumps strewn with human bones. In the quarry face they could make out fourteen graves with V-shaped sections at a depth of 3ft and positioned 6ft apart. The graves appeared to be oriented east-west.

The recorder commented that the bones appeared to be large. One of the workmen mentioned that when he had tried a lower jawbone that had been found against his own jaw it went round easily; the recorder commented that this man had a "quite a beefy" face. The teeth of the only skull found were examined and found to be very worn but strong.

One skeleton that was uncovered was found to be extended on its back, arms crossed with the hands at the groin (the finger bones having been found between the legs). Some of the vertebrae appeared to have been dislocated. Another skeleton which could be examined from the quarry face seemed to be extended with arms crossed and hands low (this time the finger bones were found in the pelvis). No weapons or ornaments were found with the skeletons, but workmen said that some weapons had been found and buried under a dump.

From the characteristics of the graves the recorder came to the conclusion that the site was that of a Saxon cemetery, possibly a battle cemetery which would account for the lack of a church nearby and for there being no children's skeletons. The workmen at the quarry said that in one pit "a lot" of skeletons had been found together: if this was a battle cemetery then it may be that the enemy bodies were all thrown in together and the bodies of allies given separate graves.

In 1950-51 the site was excavated as part of a school project. The author of the report was traced and it would appear that at this time seventeen graves on an east-west alignment were found.

The orientation of the graves on this alignment would point to their being of the Christian era. However, radiocarbon dating of two of the skeletons was un-successful, whilst a third produced a date of AD 340-540 (Oxford University Radiocarbon Laboratory, November 2001).

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005]  

Dewsall, a small parish of 250 hectares situated 7.5km south-south-west of Hereford, is on the edge of an area known as Archenfield. Archenfield is the anglicised form of Ergyng, the British Kingdom which occupied southern Herefordshire from the 6th or 7th century.

The site of the cemetery appears to lie within an oval enclosure of some 3.5 hectares, which also includes Dewsall Court and Dewsall parish church. This enclosure was bisected by a stream which runs in a shallow valley. The parish church and graveyard lie on the opposite side of the valley from Dewsall Court.
 
In 2001 a trench dug for a swimming pool at Dewsall Court disturbed four graves containing articulated human skeletons and three features interpreted as graves with disarticulated bone. One group of the disarticulated bone had been disturbed by 19th century wall footings as well as the swimming pool trench. Other human bones were recovered from the spoil heap and from earth around the edge of the cutting. Six of the graves found were aligned east-west.

Bones from two separate graves were radiocarbon dated to AD 650-890. A thick layer of charcoal from below a third and apparently within the grave gave a date of AD70-450. This grave had been cut by a later one.

The minimum number of individuals present was eleven. All four identifiable skeletons were adults. At least one of the other skeletons was a child (of 2 to 4 years of age) and one was an adolescent of 12 to 20 years old. Both male and female bones were present. Although only eleven burials were uncovered it is likely that the cemetery contained significantly more individuals, as only an area of 104 square metres was excavated.

The original slope of the ground had been terraced at some date after the cemetery went out of use.

The fact that the burials were on an east-west alignment and contained no grave goods does not necessarily indicate that they were Christian burials, as interments with these characteristics but dated to the prehistoric and early post-Roman periods have been recorded elsewhere. Dewsall lies in a triangle between Madley, Moccas and Llanfrother, which are presumed to be sites of early monasteries. The cemetery at Dewsall may have been in use from the 3rd to the 9th centuries.

In the light of these discoveries it was decided that the swimming pool would not be built, the area instead being made into a sunken garden.

Due to the fact that the original slope had been terraced, the sample of human remains discovered (a minimum total of eleven individuals) can only represent burials in about 70% of the 104 square metres excavated. This density would theoretically mean the possibility of upwards of 5,000 burials within the curvilinear enclosure of some 3.5 hectares. If the pre-Conquest population of Dewsall were higher than the historical known one, 5,000 would not be an improbable figure. A population of 250 could be expected to result in this number of burials over an 800 year period.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005, using information taken from Huw Sherlock and P.J. Pikes, "The First Millennium Cemetery at Dewsall Court, Herefordshire: An Interim Report", Archenfield Archaeology Report AA/01/30, 2002]

During the summer of 1973, Herefordshire County Council began a bridge widening scheme at Lugg Mills, Lugwardine, near Hereford. After dredging the river, divers were called in to inspect the river bank. In the process of carrying out the dive one of the divers cut his hand on a piece of metal, which on further inspection turned out to be a Saxon spearhead.

The spearhead is 35.7cm in length and is made up of three distinct sections:

1. The blade with a length of 20.4cm;
2. A plain, undecorated shank, from the base of the blade to the balustered first wire-winding being some 3cm in length;
3. The socket, a decorated section, having ten wire-windings up to the distill end of the spear, making up the socket, with a length of 12.3cm.

The colouration of the blade is grey-green towards the tip, with black patches around the damaged central portion of the blade, becoming black and red-brown on the shaft and socket. The wire-windings showed up black with a golden surface colouration in places.

The blade has a shoulder width of 5.3cm and maximum sectional thickness of 0.9cm, 16.8cm from its tip. Within the socket was a fragment of the wooden handle, with a length of 8.2cm.  
 
Professor A.G. Smith, Head of the Department of Botany at University College Cardiff, inspected the shaft and his report concluded that the wood was ash (Fraxinus Excelsior). It appeared to have been cut from the 10-20th year of growth of the tree; the tree itself was slow growing and must have been living in marginal conditions.

The metal of the spearhead was examined by the technical department of Henry Wiggins & Co., who found that the carbon content varied from less than 0.05% to 0.6%. The spearhead had been built from four different pieces: the socket; the tang; and the blade, which itself consisted of two pieces. The four pieces were joined by "smith-welding", i.e. pressure welding in the solid state by hammering at high temperature, ideally at least 1,000 degrees centigrade. This temperature could be achieved in a bellows-blown charcoal fire.

The radiographs showed that the inner piece of the blade had been made by the so-called "pattern-welding" technique, a technique that was widely used in western Europe in the Anglo-Saxon and Viking periods for the production of spear- and sword-blades.

The spearhead is now held by Hereford County Museum.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2005, using information taken from Herefordshire Archaeological News, No. 30, 1975]

The beginning of the medieval period is often dated to the Norman Conquest of 1066, an event which opened up England to new forms of culture, government and society. The England that the Normans found themselves faced with was very different to the lands that they had just left. The Normans quickly established themselves as feudal lords of a countryside that had very few towns and a widespread population. As soon as they had settled they began to found towns, villages, churches and castles. These developments organised the country and enabled the Normans to introduce control to a conquered territory.

Herefordshire and the Border lands had been unsettled before the arrival of the Normans, with the region being an attractive proposition for both the Saxons and the Welsh. The Normans had to contend with these Border skirmishes as well as trying to consolidate their existing holdings in the county.

Until the 1060s the Welsh had the advantage. They were led by two fearsome men, Gruffydd ap Rhydderch and Gruffydd ap Llewellyn; the latter raided Herefordshire as far as Leominster, until he was slain by Harold Godwinson and his half-brother Tostig.

Castles 

In response to the uneasiness of the Border area, the Norman lords - notably William Fitz Osbern - began to build castles on their lands, in order to create a system of control and demonstrate their power to their opponents. The first castles were built at Ewyas Harold, Richards Castle and Hereford, all three being built before 1066. The Norman lords were eventually forced to flee Herefordshire after Earl Godwinson's supporters rallied against them. 

This was not to be the last of the Norman presence in the county, for in 1066 they conquered the whole of England up to the Welsh border. Being unable to break into Wales and perform a complete take-over, the Norman lords used the Marches as their base for operations into Wales. One of the problems facing them in their attempt to conquer Wales was the difficulty of maintaining any political control that they had achieved. After a rebellion led by Eadric the Wild, King William created a system by which the counties of the Marches were governed as semi-autonomous earldoms. These new earldoms were based around the three Marcher towns of Chester, Shrewsbury and Hereford. The land within each of these was further divided between appointed Norman lords, so that the whole of the Marcher area became a series of miniature states. In each of these lordships one or more castles were built, and these became the centres of administration for each lordship. 

The areas of Wales that had been conquered became known as the "Welsh Marches" to distinguish them from unconquered Wales, pura Wallia or "Wales proper". Wales proper was still ruled under the native "law of Howel", while the Welsh Marches were ruled under the "Customs of the March" and the rest of England was under strict royal control.

With the autonomy that they had been granted the lords of the Welsh Marches were able to rule supreme in their own area. They had jurisdiction over all civil and criminal cases of any sort except for treason. They established their own courts, executed the sentences, and collected the fines themselves.

The Marcher lords had the right to impose forests and forest law (banning others from hunting in their forests). They were also able to establish their own boroughs and grant charters. There were no limitations on their castle building and they were allowed to wage their own private wars.

It was this ability to put up castles without royal approval that was paramount to the success of Norman control in Herefordshire. Castles were something of a new phenomenon to the people of Herefordshire (and indeed England). Despite their courage and determination not to be governed by the Normans, they could only put up the feeblest resistance to this new style of warfare and government.

The writer of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle describes the power that the Normans held over the natives a few decades after the Conquest:

"They greatly oppressed the wretched men of the land with castle work; then when the castles were made they filled them with devils and evil men. Then both by night and by day they seized those men whom they imagined had any wealth and tortured them. They were hung by their thumbs or by their head and coats of mail hung on their feet. They put knotted strings round their heads and twisted them till it went to the brains." Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, The Peterborough Manuscript, 1137, translated and edited by Michael Swanton, J.M. Dent, 1997, p. 264

In England the greatest concentration of earth and timber castles is in the Marches, with several hundred recorded examples; of these, over 120 are found in Herefordshire. The more significant of these castles were later rebuilt in stone, thus improving their defensive capabilities. Many of the castles built in Herefordshire led only a short active life and were abandoned for smaller, more comfortable moated manor houses nearby. They had sufficiently performed their function of administration and oppression, and as the Norman control of England became more settled their purpose as the centres of districts became less necessary.

The Norman conquest of England and the redistribution of land caused William the Conqueror to order a survey of ownership to be undertaken 20 years after the initial conquest. This survey was called the Domesday Survey.

The village and borough

The building of castles in areas which had otherwise been unorganised and scarcely populated had a knock-on effect on the society of medieval England. Small villages and boroughs began to grow up around the castles, taking advantage of the protection they offered and the economy that they created. Examples of these in Herefordshire include Kilpeck and Richards Castle. Before the Norman invasion, English society had mainly consisted of small self-sufficient family groups and trade between different groups was uncommon. 

As castles were built people began to relocate and settle within the immediate area of the fortification. Soon small economic units had been formed. The castles themselves provided sellers with a market to trade to, and as more and more people moved into the vicinity of each castle, and merchants went about their daily business, these small trading groups became important economic centres.

The role played by these towns in the formation of a stable environment did not go unnoticed by the Normans. In the unstable Marches the creation of new towns was undertaken on a greater scale than anywhere else.

At the time of the Domesday Survey all of Herefordshire's towns were agricultural manors, with only Wigmore being a borough, but there were many more borough foundations created throughout the medieval period.

The most natural place for these towns to develop was in the shadow of the mighty Norman castles, which were still responsible for the administration and protection of the area. Mainly these new boroughs were populated by people from the surrounding area, however the Domesday Book of 1086 also provides evidence that there were many Norman settlers in the country, with Herefordshire and the Marches having the highest concentration of foreigners.

Not all boroughs were successful. When the threat of Welsh attacks subsided and castles were no longer needed for their military function, many of the towns that had developed around them quickly realised the need to adapt themselves to a more economic function. Those that didn't - such as Richards Castle and Kilpeck - soon found that the market for their goods, i.e. the castle, had disappeared and the towns themselves soon followed.

Agriculture 

The construction of castles and the creation of villages and boroughs in post-Conquest Herefordshire had an effect on the appearance of the county's landscape. Large tracts of woodland were cleared to make room for these new communities, as well as for the new religious foundations.

The arable open field system had been adopted throughout the Marches and Herefordshire. This involved two or three large fields surrounding a settlement. These fields were divided into long narrow strips which were allotted to the villagers. These strips alternated between arable farming (crops) and fallow (land that is fertilised and left uncultivated for a season to allow it to regain its nutrients). However, this system was adversely affected in the 14th and 15th centuries by a number of factors, mainly a deterioration in the climate, failed harvests and the Black Death. The open field system was abandoned and replaced by enclosed pastoral farming. This system involved regular-shaped fields that were marked by boundaries, either woodland, ditches or hedges.

One trade which prospered in Herefordshire and the Marches during the Middle Ages was wool. Herefordshire and the Border lands had large areas of open moorland with fertile pastures ideal for the rearing of sheep. There was also a plentiful water supply for the treatment of wool. Hereford in particular was able to benefit from its ability to trade in both Marcher and Welsh wool. For example, many of the timber-framed buildings and market halls that can be found at places such as Ledbury and Pembridge were built out of the proceeds of wool. The breed of sheep that flourished at Leominster, the Ryeland, produced wool known as "Leominster Ore" and a street name Ryelands Road still exists in the town today. 

The success of the wool trade in Hereford is reflected in the almost continuous work that was carried out on the cathedral in the 14th century, as well as the restoration of the city's churches and the foundation of a grammar school in 1384. This school still exists, and is now known as Hereford Cathedral School.

The historian William Camden, who was writing about Herefordshire at the end of the 16th century, reported that "for the three W's, Wheat, Wool and Water it yieldeth to no shire of England".

However this trade was not enough to sustain the whole of the county. In many areas the decline in arable farming led to a number of deserted and shrunken settlements, although much of this decline happened in the post-medieval period.

The main reason for the decline in the population of settlements was the Black Death of 1348-9. Over half the clergy in Shropshire and Herefordshire died during the epidemic, probably due to their close proximity with the infected and dying. In Hereford, so many of the clergy died that unusual arrangements had to be made for the canons to take the services.

Religion and the church

Another major change in society that came about because of the Norman invasion was the church. Before 1066, the Anglo-Saxons had begun to introduce monasticism into England but the spread of it was somewhat limited. Having been preoccupied with the skirmishes over the Border, the development of parish churches in the county was slow. The Anglo-Saxon religion had first been introduced into Herefordshire in the 7th century.

The earliest foundations belong to the Benedictine monastic order and were in existence by the beginning of the 12th century. The first of the Cistercian houses in Herefordshire was at Abbey Dore in the south-west of the county, founded in 1147. Abbey Dore was very prosperous and had 17 associated granges, nine of which were in the Golden Valley.

Ecclesiastical centres had been established and, as well as the important religious site at Hereford, a monastic site had been set up at Leominster. The religious institution there was very important. It consisted of some 80 hides (a measurement of land) and is recorded in the Domesday Book as one of the largest manors in England. The Benedictine Priory was established here in 1125, when Henry I granted Leominster to the Abbey of Reading.

There are no well-preserved monastic sites remaining in the county, and the historical landscape of today misrepresents the religious structure of the county in the medieval period. During the medieval period there were over 20 religious communities, representing 11 religious orders.

Throughout the Middle Ages there were continual battles between England and France. These caused a patriotic backlash against the religious orders set up by the Normans. Much of the property of these religious orders was seized between 1390 and 1460 and given to schools and colleges. Henry VIII's Dissolution of the major houses between 1536 and 1539 was the death of many of the smaller priories. Flanesford Priory near Ross-on-Wye was one of the first to succumb, having been weakened by the plague. Even the more successful priories such as Wormesley and Aconbury were dissolved by 1539.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

At the beginning of the second millennium AD, in the days of King Ethelred (the Unready, 978-1016), Hereford had become one of the principal centres ofSaxon England. Evidence suggests that there could well have been a market in Hereford as early as 958.

The county itself, however, was not referred to as Herefordshire until the reign of Canute (1016-1035). In these early days, the area in the south-west of the county was called Archenfield; it was predominantly Welsh in its customs, laws and place-names. The River Wye was considered the boundary even after King Aethelstan exacted tribute from the Welsh kings at Hereford.

In the Domesday Book Hereford was listed as one of just sixteen shire towns ranking as cities. The market has always been an important source of income, another being the pilgrim industry associated with the Cathedral and the shrines of Saint Ethelbert and Saint Thomas Cantilupe.

During the early part of the 11th century the Godwin family were dominant in the county. In fact Harold Godwinsson (the King of England who was defeated and killed at the Battle of Hastings in 1066) had been Earl of Hereford and had held several manors and large tracts of land in the county. His land and that of other Saxon landowners was shared among several Norman knights as reward for their support of the new king William.

After the Conquest, in 1069, William the Conqueror gave his friend William fitz Osbern the title of Earl of Hereford and put him in charge of much of the border territory between Chepstow and Ludlow. Many motte and bailey castles were built here, in fact there are 122 such sites known in Herefordshire, more than in any other English county. This buffer zone between England and Wales, often called the Marches, was ruled by several powerful families, called the Marcher Lords: these were the Mortimers, the Bohuns, the Clares and the Marshalls.

The king had granted these lords all the land they could conquer, so it was in their interest to keep the border warfare going. The Marches continued to be fought over until well into the 15th century, when the ascent of the Tudor dynasty put a stop to the ongoing rivalries of the Welsh and English.

During the 12th century civil war between Stephen and Matilda, Hereford was besieged and changed hands several times.

In 1349, and again in 1362, the Black Death reached Herefordshire and wiped out a large proportion of the population.

In 1461, during the Wars of the Roses, Henry VIII's ancestor Owen Tudor was brought to Hereford after his capture at the Battle of Mortimer's Cross (near Leominster) and executed. His head was exhibited on the top step of the High Cross at the west end of High Town and lit by 100 candles. The execution place is marked by a plaque in the pavement in front of Marks and Spencer's store.

Some historians believe that with Hereford's loss of its frontier role, it also lost status and some of its economic significance. When Hereford's religious authorities declined to support Henry VIII's Reformation, he had the fulling and corn mills on the Wye destroyed, which led to further economic problems, as both the wool and corn trades were severely affected.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

What is a motte-and-bailey castle?

The earliest castles in Herefordshire are what archaeologists call motte-and-bailey castles.

A motte is a mound made of earth and rubble, on which was built a square timber tower used as a look-out, a place to fire on attacks from, and for storing weapons. On the top of the mound and surrounding the tower was a palisade made of timber with a platform on the inner side and wooden steps leading up to one side.

Sometimes a bailey is attached - that is an enclosed area which was used for horses and food storage. There are records of over 600 motte castles in England, 83 in Herefordshire alone. Nowadays all that often remains is the motte, the mound, perhaps with trees growing on it.

In Herefordshire, a motte is often called a tump. This word sometimes turns up in place-names, such as Newton Tump.

Many castles made of timber were eventually replaced by stone towers and walls.  Many of the castles in Herefordshire are now only ruins.

Who was responsible for introducing castle building into England?

The Normans were the first castle builders in England. The Saxons had burghs (towns) with a timber palisade and palisaded farms, but no castles. When the Normans first arrived in Herefordshire they built timber motte-and-bailey castles because these were relatively easy and quick to build. In time these timber castles were replaced by stone ones. The prototypes for these stone castles already existed in Normandy.

William the Conqueror was born at the castle of Falaise in Normandy. It was built of splendid white Caen stone. There has been some debate as to whether the stone with which Goodrich Castle keep was built was imported from Caen or whether it is a quartz conglomerate brought in from the Forest of Dean.

Falaise Castle was badly damaged during World War II, and was renovated over a period of 50 years using modern materials of concrete, glass and steel. Conservationists differ in their opinions as to the effectiveness of this approach, but the alterations do reflect the military image of power and might of the original castle without trying to return it to its original appearance.

The Norman word for keep is donjon, from which we get the word dungeon, as the earliest Norman prisons were in the castle keep.

Caen Castle is a good example of a Norman castle built to impress, and to control and defend the local population.

Why are three of England's earliest castles in Herefordshire?

Many historians believe that motte-and-bailey castles were built in England only after the Battle of Hastings (1066) by the conquering Normans. Herefordshire is unique in that King Edward the Confessor (1042-1066) encouraged Normans to settle in Herefordshire before 1066. [Note that the street behind All Saints Church in Hereford was called Frenschemanne Lane in the Middle Ages (it is now Bewell Street) and that the customs governing the townspeople in Hereford recorded in the Herefordshire Domesday Book have been compared with those of the town of Breteuil in Normandy.] Edward, who had a Norman mother, had spent 25 years in Normandy. The disputed succession to the throne of England can to a large extent be traced to Edward's part-Norman ancestry. He even made his Norman nephew Ralph (the Timid) Earl of Hereford when the Saxon Earl Godwin and his sons were exiled from England during an argument with the king. In response to the defeat of Bishop Ealdred of Worcester by the Welsh in 1049, Ralph and his Norman friends built at least three motte-and-bailey castles in Herefordshire (Hereford Castle, Ewyas Harold and Richard's Castle). These would have been the earliest in England because Saxon nobles did not build castles.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

"In the same year Gruffydd, the Welsh king, raided in Herefordshire, so that he came very near to Leominster; and men gathered against him, both local men and French men from the castle. And there were killed very many good men of the English, and also from among the French."

[Note: The castle near Leominster referred to may be called Comfort Castle, but the castle itself has disappeared. If anyone has any information about it, please pass it on to the Historic Environment Record staff.]

Herefordshire was attacked several times in the 11th century, and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle tells us about another of these attacks, in 1055. Gruffydd ap Llewelyn and his men sacked Hereford itself:

"... and then [the Welsh] turned into Hereford market-town and raided it, burned down the famous minster which Bishop Athelstan built, and killed the priests inside the minster, and many others as well, and seized all the treasures in there and led them away with them."

During the episcopacy of Bishop Aethelstan (1012-1056) a stone cathedral was built. The extent of the destruction during the Welsh raid is uncertain.

The present building was begun as a two-storey chapel by the Norman bishop Robert de Losinga (1079-1095) and developed into a cathedral during the episcopate of Bishop Reynhelm (1107-1115) (see Richard K. Morriss, Hereford Cathedral: A Report on the Archaeological Implications of the Proposed Chained Library Building to the South-west of the Cathedral, Section 4.3, Hereford Archaeology Series 96, City of Hereford Archaeology Unit, January 1991).

Gruffydd ap Llewelyn, the leader of the Welsh, may not have been a popular man in Hereford, but if we read another primary source - the Liber Landavensis, the Charter of the Cathedral of Llandaff - we get a different picture of him:

"And not degenerating from the nobility, piety, and liberality of his predecessors, but imitating and excelling them in energy and bravery, as well against the barbarous English on the one part, who always fled on seeing his face in battle, ..."

Most primary sources of this period of the early Middle Ages were written in Latin. This is what this quote is in the original Latin:

"Et non degenerans a praedecessorum nobilitate, pietate, et largitate, immo imitans, et praecellens rigore et fortitudine tum contra barbaros Anglos ex una parte, semper fugitivos, visa facie sua in acie belli ..."

Here we see that this chronicle, written in Wales, believes the English to be barbarous cowards.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002] 

After King Harold was killed at the Battle of Hastings in 1066, King William, the new king, distributed Harold's lands. The Domesday Book tells us who the owner was in 1085-6.

William was the illegitimate son of the Duke of Normandy - to this day some Normans still call him William the Bastard - and although his father made his knights swear to uphold William's right to succeed him as the next ruler of Normandy, when the Duke died some of the barons rebelled and tried to murder the young William. On one such occasion, a knight called Osbern died by having his throat slit whilst trying to defend the boy. It is interesting to note that after the conquest of England, William put his friend William fitz Osbern (fitz means "son of") in charge of Hereford and much of the border area. Osbern would have been pleased that his loyalty and bravery were eventually rewarded. In fact it was William fitz Osbern who, as Earl of Hereford, re-built Hereford Castle. [If you want to read more about this Norman knight, see "William fitz Osbern and the Norman settlement in Herefordshire" by David Walker, inTransactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, Volume XXXIX, 1969.]

Many landless knights fought for William at the Battle of Hastings and were rewarded by him with land. Many Saxons lost their land and their homes. William was a shrewd man. So that an individual knight did not get too powerful, the parcels of land granted to him were often spread out all over the country. That is one of the reasons important families often had estates in different counties.

After 1066 there was a lot of destruction because many Saxon nobles rebelled against King William. The Normans used great force to keep the land under their control and often destroyed the farms and manors which had belonged to the rebellious Saxon nobles. This is why many farms were not worth as much just after the conquest as they were beforehand. In Herefordshire there is the additional problem of recurrent attacks by the Welsh.

Here is what the Domesday Book tells us about some of the land previously held by King Harold in Herefordshire:

"Harold also held Chickward. 1 hide and 3 virgates of land, waste... In Huntington 3 hides... In Rushock 4 hides. Earl Harold held these lands. Now the King has them; they are waste."  (Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, 1,69, Phillimore, 1983)

Here is another Domesday Book example of a manor previously held by Harold:

"(Much) Marcle. Earl Harold held it. 17 hides which pay tax. ...

"In lordship 4 ploughs;

"36 villagers and 10 smallholders with 40 ploughs. These villagers plough and sow with their own seed 80 acres of wheat and as many of oats, except for 9 acres: 6 of these belong to William son of Baderon, 3 to St. Mary's of Cormeilles.

"In this manor is a reeve, 1 Frenchman and 1 riding man; they have 3 ploughs. 8 slaves, 1 ploughman and 6 female slaves.

"A mill which pays nothing, except sustenance for its keeper.

"Woodland which pays 5s which are given to Droitwich for 60 measures of salt ...

"... 1 hide of this manor is at Turlestane; before 1066 it paid 50 lumps of iron and 6 salmon ...

"Value before 1066 £30; value now as much." (Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, 1,7)

This is obviously a much richer manor which managed to retain its value. Taxes during this period were usually paid in money, however there were a number of Welsh communities settled in the southern and western part of the county and these were usually governed by their own traditions. With regard to taxes, for example, they often paid in kind, that means they paid with things they made or grew.

Manors were more or less self-contained, meaning that they managed to feed, house and clothe the villagers with items grown or made locally.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

"If anyone kills one of the King's men or commits house-breaking, he gives the King 20s as payment for the man and 100s in forfeiture. If anyone has killed a thane's man, he gives 10s to the dead man's lord."

The law, however, was different for the Welsh who lived in Archenfield, which today is the area around Ross-on-Wye.

"But if a Welshman has killed a Welshman, the relatives of the slain man gather and despoil the killer and his relatives and burn their houses until the body of the dead man is buried the next day about midday. The King has the third part of this plunder, but they have all the rest free."

Archenfield is in the south-west of the county. For a long time the border with Wales was the river Wye. Many place names in this part of Herefordshire attest to its Welsh origins (e.g. Llanwarne and Llangarron).

To make sure that the Herefordshire men of Welsh descent fought bravely on the side of the English, the men of Ross had to be in the front of the troops when attacking and at the back when retreating:

"When the army advances of the enemy, these men by custom form the vanguard and on their return the rearguard. These were the customs of the Welshmen in Archenfield before 1066."

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

The Marcher Lords became very wealthy. The Bohuns, for example, hired an Austin Friar (a type of monk) to copy and work on manuscripts for them (Janet Backhouse, Medieval Rural Life in the Luttrell Psalter, The British Library, 2000, p. 15). Status was very important, which is why families spent great amounts of money on surrounding themselves with the trappings of power: castles, retainers, beautiful clothes, horses and fancy armour for tournaments.

One Herefordshire family, the Mortimers, knew how to play the power game and carved out an important role for themselves during the Middle Ages. To read more about the powerful Mortimer family and their base at Wigmore Castle, click here.

Throughout the Middle Ages, whenever there were troubles in England - as, for example, when Stephen and Matilda were fighting for the throne - the Welsh rulers took advantage of this and attacked Herefordshire and the Marches. This is why many of the castles in Herefordshire are built in the area of the border with Wales.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

The Anglo-Saxon word pearroc means "a piece of land with a fence around it". The manicured park landscape that we associate with the country estates of the gentry were not developed until the 18th century. In the Middle Ages, the word "park" had a meaning closer to the Anglo-Saxon, in that this was land which was fenced in by the lord for his own use and, as we shall see, one of the main reasons was for keeping deer. The scholar Oliver Rackham estimates that around the year 1300 there were about 3,200 parks in England, covering nearly 2% of the land.

Deer parks

In the Middle Ages only lords were allowed to hunt, as was stipulated in the game laws. Hunting was the main sporting activity for the nobility, and both the meat and the hide were important assets. To make hunting easier, large tracts of land (100-200 acres) were enclosed into parks to keep the deer in. These parks were surrounded by banks and ditches and often topped by hedges or fences.

The park differed from the forest, the chase and the warren in that it was completely and securely enclosed (W.G. Hoskins, Fieldwork in Local History, 1983, p. 51). These boundaries can still be traced and provide evidence for the existence of deer parks in Herefordshire.

The Herefordshire Historic Environment Record records more than 50 deer parks. One of these is Hamnish Clifford in the parish of Kimbolton (HER no. 12023). The Charter of Reading Abbey, which was the mother house of Leominster Priory, mentions the deer park at Hamnish. The abbey granted Walter de Clifford 28 acres of land, including a spring, a stream and a small wood, so that he could enlarge his park. In exchange he was to pay 2s a year and a white doe skin (D. Whitehead, ed. by J. Patton, A Survey of Historic Parks and Gardens in Herefordshire, 2001, p. 187).

To discover the date of origin of a deer park, we need to look at written sources. Moccas Park (HER no. 7599), 17 km west of Hereford, has been described as "a beautiful, fascinating and significant place; the essence of the classic English deer park". It is now being conserved, studied and restored as an official parkland National Nature Reserve. Remains tell us it originated as a deer park, but to find the date of origin we need to consult written sources. David Whitehead has researched the history of Moccas deer park and has been unable to find any documentary evidence earlier than 1617, when Henry Vaughan of Moccas sent deer to stock the park of his cousin in Ireland (D. Whitehead, "The de Fresnes, Vaughans and Cornewalls: 1160-1771", in P.T. Harding and T. Wall (eds.), Moccas: an English deer park, English Nature, 2000).

Nevertheless, lack of evidence does not mean that a deer park did not exist in this area in the Middle Ages; it just means we do not know when it was created. The neighbouring estates had deer parks, such as the park of Ralph de Baskerville at Bredwardine and one in Dorstone belonging to Geoffrey de Bella Fago. It is possible therefore, that Moccas estate had a deer park too.

Many deer parks are associated with castles, at least 14 in the case of Herefordshire. Crenellation licenses were often granted at the same time as permission to enclose a park. Royal permission was needed to fortify a house and that included the crenellation of the house, whether for defensive purposes or just as a status symbol. Castles and deer parks both became status symbols, especially for families which had newly acquired the status of gentry, such as the Harleys or the Vaughns in Herefordshire.

During the fifteenth century, several more parks were created in Herefordshire by newly-established families: Sir Roland Leinthall of Hampton Court (HER no. 6560) was granted permission to empark 1000 acres, Richard de Beauchamp received a licence to crenellate and empark at Bronsil near Eastnor (HER reference no. 934) and the Harleys made a deer park at Brampton Bryan (HER reference no. 6213).

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

Many a poacher sat in the dungeon of Goodrich Castle awaiting punishment for as little as snaring a rabbit to feed his family. Medieval law stipulated that a poacher could have a hand chopped off, be blinded or have his testicles severed. In reality, though, according to the evidence of court proceedings, he was usually fined, imprisoned, outlawed or pardoned. "The Pipe Rolls show that already by 1150 the main effect of Forest Law was to provide revenue" (Oliver Rackham, Trees and Woodland in the British Landscape, 1976).

The animals preserved in these forests were fallow deer, red deer, roe deer and wild boar. The king's hunters were regularly sent into the forests to hunt boar for the king's table. Henry III had 200 wild boars from the Forest of Dean for his Christmas dinner in 1251. Not long after this period, however, the wild boar died out. Wild boar love wooded areas, and the landscape archaeologist Oliver Rackham maintains that wild boar survived longest in England in the Forest of Dean, because this was a heavily-wooded area. However even here the death knell of the wild boar was due to the development of the mining industry in the Forest, encouraged by Henry III. The species was kept alive in semi-captivity in swine parks, which continue to this day (Oliver Rackham, see above, pp. 36-37).

Hunting with falcons was also a popular pastime. Falconry, also called hawking, were practised only by the very wealthy. The birds were expensive, as was their upkeep and training. King Edward I was particularly keen on falconry. In the 1270s he had a special room built for his falconers, which backed onto an enclosed garden in which was built a bath for the king's birds. An aqueduct carried fresh water to this bath, which had four brass leopard-head spouts - some birdbath! The falcons were fed with doves raised in a dovecote on site (Compton Reeves, Pleasures and Pastimes in Medieval England, Sutton Publishing, 1995, p. 112).

Edward was so involved with his birds that when one of them was ill, he not only paid to have it specially looked after, but had a waxen image of the sick falcon made so that it could be offered at the shrine of St. Thomas de Cantilupe in Hereford Cathedral. He hoped that the intercession (prayers for someone - in this case the bird) of St. Thomas would make his bird better (Account of the household expenses of Richard, Bishop of Hereford 1289-1290, Camden Society, 1855).

In England wolves were more or less exterminated under Edward I by 1281. A man called Peter Corbet was hired to destroy all the wolves in the counties in the west of England, including Herefordshire. This campaign was supposedly commemorated by an iron wolf's head on a medieval door at Abbey Dore (HER reference no. 892) (Oliver Rackham, see above, p. 35).

Clearing and farming were forbidden. The king sometimes allowed nobles to have private forests called chases. These private hunting areas were subject to common law, however the lord of the manor had the exclusive right to hunt. Poachers were severely punished. Hunting lodges were built for the use of visiting lords wishing to hunt. The Historic Environment Record records two hunting lodges, one belonging to the bishop, who as a lord also had the right to hunt.

The Forest of Haye (Haywood), just south of Hereford, was a large royal forest during the Middle Ages and provided much of the timber for the building of Hereford Castle. A survey in 1583 estimated it at 760 acres of oak woodland and 155 acres of waste ground. In 1383 Richard II granted Hereford town 30 oaks from the "King's Forest of the Haye" to repair the bridge across the Wye (Letters close 29 January 6 Richard II 1383 - see the royal charters of the city of Hereford).

Several early medieval kings came to stay in Hereford on various occasions to enjoy the hunting. In the Domesday Book, in the section where the customs for Hereford are listed, there is the following record:

"When the King was engaged in hunting, by custom one man from each and every house went to stall game in the woodland" (Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, C 3, Phillimore, 1983).

The overlord for the town of Hereford was the king, and helping out with the hunt was part of a number of responsibilities the English townsmen had. (The Norman townsmen were exempt from this duty.)

There were other royal forests in Herefordshire. The Domesday survey mentions forests 13 times with references to several places. The entry for Bullinghope (Bullingham), for example, tells us that "the woodland is in the Kings Forest" (Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, 10,19). 

With regard to Cleeve (near Ross-on-Wye), it states: "In King William's Forest there is as much land of this manor as paid 6 sesters of honey and 6 sheep with lambs before 1066" (Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, 1,8).

A very important forest was Treville, near Kilpeck. William Fitz Norman was the Royal Forester, paying £15.00 to the King. In the early 13th century Hugh Fitz Waryn was custodian of the Royal Forest in Herefordshire.

In the north of the county, forests existed in Bringwood, Mocktree and Darvold. In the west was Treville, and in the centre the Forest of Hay. Toward the south were Aconbury and Harewood and in the west, Malvern Forest/Ledbury Chase. (Information from Penny Farquhar-Oliver.)

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

In fact, the rabbit corbel at Kilpeck Church (HER no. 715) is thought to be the earliest depiction of a rabbit in England (Oliver Rackham, The History of the Countryside, 1986). Many of the corbels at that church are pictures of animals related to hunting.

Rabbit warrens were enclosed areas of up to a square mile which were under the supervision of a warrener. In Herefordshire, there is evidence of a medieval warren at Norton (HER reference no. 4718). Archaeologists believe that pillow mounds - little bolster-shaped hillocks - could have been built specifically as rabbit warrens.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

Here is an example of a record of a woodland in Herefordshire:

"1,3 KINGSTONE

"King Edward held it ...

"A wood named Treville which pays no customary dues except hunting rights. The villagers who lived there before 1066 carried (the produce of) the hunt to Hereford and did no other service, as the Shire states." (Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Domesday Book: 17 Hereford, 1,3, Phillimore, 1983)  

Today only 1% of land is woodland. It is thought that the Forest of Dean was the last natural wildwood in England, and that this was felled in the 13th century.

Place-names have been studied to find out which settlement may have been near a wooded area. Place-names ending in -ley or -hurst appear to mean an inhabited clearing surrounded by woodland (see Oliver Rackham, above, p. 82). Weobley in Herefordshire is a good example.

In the Middle Ages most woodland was managed. Some of the woodland was used for pasture; pigs especially foraged in the wooded areas. Fallen nuts, acorns or beechmast were good pannage (food) for pigs. Large trees were felled for timber for houses and ship building, and underwood (such as hazels, ash and willow) was coppiced to produce poles and material for fencing, wattles and basket weaving. Even the bark was used for curing meat and tanning leather. Underwood also provided wood for fuel and to heat kilns for industry, such as glassmaking.

Both trees and underwood renew themselves if given a chance (e.g. by not letting animals eat re-growth and not burning stumps) and produce a sustained yield. Managed woodland provided a considerable source of income and owners were very careful to punish misuse.

This example of a lord bringing a case against someone who cut wood in his woodland in Herefordshire is taken from a manorial court document of 1344:

"The lord as plaintiff opposes Hugh de Wotton in a plea of trespass that Hugh and his household ... have cut his wood at Heckwood to a damage of 20s and a value of 20s and he brings his suit ... " (Record Office abstract, Manor of Pencombe 1303-1452, Arkwright Manorial Records A63). 

Whilst people were punished for taking or damaging trees in medieval England, the law was not as brutal as the Old German laws mentioned by the Roman author Tacitus. He noted that the penalty for someone who dared peel the bark off a living tree (and thus killing the tree) was to have his navel cut out and nailed to the tree and then to be driven round the tree until all his guts were wound about its trunk (Charles Mynors, The Law of Trees, Forests and Hedgerows, Sweet & Maxwell, 2002, p. 3).

The saying "by hook or by crook" comes from the Middle Ages when villagers were only allowed to take dead wood, not cut down trees or bushes. Fallen timber and dead wood could be cleared and pulled out with a shepherd's crook or a weeding hook. 

King Henry III tried to pay off some of his debts with the proceeds of the underwood of his forests. In 1255 he appointed agents, such as Peter de Neyreford and Nicholas de Rummesye, to raise money by selling the underwood (Oliver Rackham, Trees and Woodland in the British Landscape, revised edition 1990, p. 171). Medieval kings were not cash-wealthy and being able to reward someone with something money could not buy, such as a large oak tree or a deer, added to their status and helped to augment their authority.

The author Geoffrey Chaucer, for example, not being eligible for a knighthood as he was not a fighting man, was awarded the position of under-Forester of a Somerset forest (Oliver Rackham, see above, p. 172).

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

Some people say that to have a town you need a market, a charter (a legal document granting rights or privileges) and a jury of twelve. Others say that you need burghers (freemen or citizens of a borough) and a mayor instead of a reeve (a reeve looked after the affairs in the medieval village), and defences, such as a town wall.

Here are some elements shared by many medieval towns in England. But not every town had all these elements. For example, only a few towns in Herefordshire had defences. 

• Defences
• Street grid
• Markets and fairs
• Mint (where you make coins)
• A Charter from the king, saying you could hold a market or fair
• Religious organisation (cathedral, monastery, churches...)
• Population (you couldn't have a town with just 20 people)
• Judicial Centre (law court)
• Housing
• Shops and production of goods (craft people organised into guilds). Professor C. Dyer defines a town as a place that supported a wide range of professions (25 or more)

The Romans had towns in England, but the early Saxons did not build towns - they had trading or manufacturing centres. It was Alfred the Great in the 10th century who started towns (burhs) to defend settlements from Viking raids. During the time of the Domesday Survey Hereford was the only town in this county.

Town Charters were sealed with the seal of the lord who granted the charter. The seal was made of wax and was meant to prove the authenticity of the document it sealed.

For more information on medieval towns in Herefordshire, see the sections listed in the menu on the left.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

"There were seven moneyers there. One of these was the Bishop's moneyer. When the coinage was renewed, each of them gave 18s for acquiring the dies, and after the day on which they returned, within one month each of them gave 20s to the King, and the Bishop likewise had 20s from his moneyer."(Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, C 9, Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Phillimore, 1983)

The growing supply of money, especially of smaller denominations (halfpennies and farthings), aided the growth of towns. Between 1186 and 1330 the amount of money per person trebled.

Towns also gave some people new opportunities in a society that was very regulated and controlled. The saying "Town air makes free" arose from the practice whereby, if any unfree manorial tenant managed to stay in a town for a year and a day, he or she was set free. This freedom meant that the person could leave the town if they wished (in villages the villeins were tied to the manor), own or sell property and practise a trade.

The trades were organised into guilds (a kind of medieval trade union). Elected members of the guild controlled the quality and pricing of products of their particular trade in the town. Guild members also looked after each other in times of need. Learning and practising a trade could often lead to a better standard of living and a more respected social position in the town. In a period when there was very little social mobility, life in the new towns provided an opportunity to make money and be successful. Dick Whittington, for example, is a character based on the newly-found success of a country lad who as mayor achieves great things in London. Some people believe his name was actually Dick "Witthington" and that although he came from a Gloucestershire family he was born in Sollars Hope in Herefordshire.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

That not all medieval women were meek and subservient is reflected in a legend told about Ellen "the Terrible", wife of Thomas Vaughan. (They are buried together at Kington in a 15th century altar tomb.) The story tells us that Ellen dressed up as a man and attended an archery contest. Here she shot an arrow through the heart of the man she believed had killed her brother. (West 1985)

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

Townspeople, called burghers, owed loyalty not to a lord, but to the town council and the mayor. The mayor and the councillors were usually chosen from the wealthier merchants and craftsmen.

In the Town Hall in Hereford there is a charter which was granted to the burghers of Hereford by Richard II in 1383 stating:

"Richard II grants to the citizens, at the request of John Burley, Knight, that the bailiff for the time being shall be styled mayor. He is to be elected annually, as in time past." (Jancey, 1973)

During the 12th and 13th centuries there was a rapid growth in both population and agricultural output. People were producing more food and having larger families. Fewer people died of malnutrition and those who were not needed to work the land migrated to the towns.

How many people lived in towns?

Poll Tax documentation is a good primary source when looking at population figures. Using the figures provided in the tax records of 1377, it has been estimated that there were around 540 towns in England. London, by far the largest town, had 45,000 - 50,000 inhabitants. There were a further four towns of between 8,000 and 15,000 people, eight towns of between 5,000 and 8,000, and 27 of between 2,000 and 5,000 people. However, most market towns had between 500 and 2000 inhabitants. (Kate Tiller, English Local History, an Introduction, Alan Sutton, 1992)

Poll tax returns for Herefordshire

Every person aged 14 years or over had to pay a flat rate of four pence. In theory, the only exemptions were for beggars and priests, monks and nuns. In reality, however, it is thought that many unwaged people such as single women living with their families managed to avoid paying this tax. We have to keep this in mind when looking at specific figures.

Not all towns in Herefordshire are listed here, but this list gives us a good idea about the relative sizes of places. For Ledbury we have two figures, one for the population taxed within the town boundaries and one for those in the immediate surrounding area.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

Towns which grew out of successful settlements and villages are often called organic towns. The historian Maurice Beresford (in New Towns of the Middle Ages, Macmillan, 1999) divides medieval towns into two distinct categories, planned and organic towns. More recent scholarship, however, disputes this clear-cut division and asserts that all towns have an element of planning which can be seen in regular burgage plots (the citizens owned their houses but paid an annual fee for the plots of land they were built on), or a laid-out market place.

People soon realised that towns could bring profit. Successful markets and fairs, tolls charged at the gates, the fines raised from courts, the rent for burgage plots ... there were many ways in which a town could bring in revenue for its overlord. That is why many new towns were built deliberately, either on a new site or in place of an existing village. These towns are called planned towns or sometimes planted towns.

Planned towns

New towns were planned. The land was often drained and the streets laid out with gravel or cobbles. A market place (often wedge-shaped) was situated at one end with room for people to set up stalls and shops. Rectangular plots of land were laid out with the narrow front to the main street. People rented these plots and built their homes on them. At the back of the houses were yards, outbuildings, wells and rubbish pits. Some people kept chickens and pigs and some had small town gardens.

However well a town was laid out, though, there were no sewers or running water and rubbish was thrown into the streets. Medieval towns were smelly places!

Town Charters

A charter is a legal document. In the Middle Ages, the king or overlord of a town could grant his townspeople permission to do things, such as hold an annual fair, and the townspeople would receive a charter outlining this particular right. Medieval charters are often very attractive documents, written by trained scribes in Latin on vellum (pigskin) and rolled and sealed with the seal of the lord who had the charter issued.

Sometimes towns received a charter that allowed a wall to be built around the town with gates that could be locked. Defensive walls were not only useful for keeping out attackers. (In Hereford the walls were specifically constructed to defend against attacks by the Welsh.) They also gave the burghers control over who came into the town, and merchants could be charged tolls for bringing goods to a fair or market.

In Hereford, for example, the town was granted the right to charge tolls on goods brought for sale into the town over the Wye Bridge. This was to help pay for the repair of the bridge which at the time was in a poor condition. (Jancey 1973).
 
An earlier charter helped the citizens of Hereford to raise money for building the wall:

"Edward I grants to the bailiff and worthy men of Hereford the right to levy, for a period of five years, specified tolls on goods coming into the town for sale there, this revenue to be used for walling the city." (Murage grant, 1298 - Jancey 1973)

The Historic Environment Record contains 29 records relating to parts of the old town wall of Hereford. To access these you need to look under "site type" for "town wall".

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

In the same way that the Earl was powerful in temporal (civil) and military matters, the Bishop of Hereford, an important lord, was in charge of religious matters as well as being the landlord to several manors and many tenants. Whilst some medieval bishops were very spiritual men, others were more actively involved in political matters. A good example of a politically-minded bishop was Giles de Braose, second son of William de Braose, an important Marcher Lord known as "the terror of the Marches". Giles de Braose was Bishop of Hereford from 1200-1215. During King John's dispute with the Barons which led to the Magna Carta in 1215, Bishop Giles actively took the part of the Barons. (John Duncumb, Collections Towards the History and Antiquities of the County of Hereford, Vol. I, p. 1, 1804 (1996 edition, Merton Priory Press))

Hereford Cathedral has a medieval copy of the Magna Carta, which is currently on display at the Cathedral.

Religion played an important part in people's lives during the Middle Ages. It is therefore not surprising that the focal point for both religious and intellectual life in Hereford was the Cathedral. 

By 1300 the reputation of Hereford as a town of note had grown to such an extent that it was included on the famous Mappa Mundi. This map (now on display at Hereford Cathedral) was possibly used as a teaching tool at the medieval cathedral school. A map of the known world, created around 1300 by Richard of Haldingham, it is the largest and most perfectly preserved medieval round map in the world. This highly detailed map shows not only the three then-known continents of Europe, Asia and Africa, but also many European towns. It has Jerusalem at its centre, and includes religious images, biblical scenes and the sorts of beings and creatures medieval people imagined lived in far-away places (cannibals, for example). The map was brought to Herefordshire from Lincolnshire by Richard de Bello not long after its creation and is still here today. Hereford and the River Wye were added slightly later and show that the map maker moved to Hereford along with the map and added to it there. (Harvey 1996)

The Norman enlargement of Hereford

Commerce and culture can thrive only in a safe environment, and it was the rebuilding of Hereford Castle which made the existence of the town possible. William fitz Osbern not only enlarged the castle in Hereford, he also took a large site north of the original Saxon wall and developed a new part of town. In this way, Hereford is a combination of both organic and planned town. Already Edward the Confessor had encouraged Normans to settle in Hereford. All Saints Church was built for them and a new market area laid out. Settlers from Normandy were encouraged to come to Hereford with the promise of affordable burgage plots and exemption from most of the customary dues the English townspeople owed. The street where most of the Normans lived was called Frenschemanne Lane, which is now Bewell Street.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

This passage from the Domesday Book describes the privileges of the Normans in Hereford:

"... the English burgesses who live there have their former customs. But the French burgesses have all their forfeitures discharged for 12d, except the three above" (Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.). Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, C 14, Phillimore, 1983).

The "three above" refer to breach of the peace, house-breaking and highway robbery. If anyone was caught doing any of these, he paid a fine of 100s to the King, regardless of whether he was French or English. Every right or concession granted by the king had a price attached to it, however small. Here the Norman settlers have to pay 12d for not having to perform the annual duties of the English inhabitants.

The exact legal position of the burgher, the taxes he had to pay and any other kind of service depended on the town he resided in. Conditions varied from one place to the next. As we have seen, the Normans were granted favourable conditions to attract them to Hereford, an often dangerous border town. William Shakespeare, in his play Henry IV Part I, tells of the time Sir Edmund Mortimer, a prominent Marcher Lord, was made prisoner by the Welsh under the leadership of Owain Glyn Dwr:

"But yesternight: when all athwart there came

A post from Wales, loaden with heavy news;

Whose worst was - that the noble Mortimer,

Leading the men of Herefordshire to fight

Against the irregular and wild Glendower,

Was by the rude hands of that Welshman taken,

A thousand of his people butchered ..." (Act I, Scene I, 36-42)

Providing military service was an important responsibility and affected many men in the county. Not only was there the possibility of death or capture (and if you were not rich enough to provide a generous ransom, you were usually slaughtered if captured), but you also had to leave your fields or business without compensation for your time away. Therefore, living in Hereford was often a dangerous business and conditions would have to be favourable for people to want to settle here. New towns therefore often had more attractive regulations for newcomers than did more established places.  

Medieval people were very traditional in their approach to life. Change was a gradual process and not considered a merit in itself. The rights and responsibilities of the burghers in Hereford were recorded as custom, something given legitimacy through repetition and the passing of time. It was not until after the Black Death had so drastically reduced the population that lower status people started to question their servile position and the wages paid. (In some parts of the country this led to the Peasants' Revolt in 1381.) On the whole, however, inflation hardly existed during the Middle Ages and apart from illness and bad harvests leading to famine, or war, daily life was stable and people knew what was expected of them.

The customs of Hereford town

If we read the Customs of Hereford Town, carefully recorded in the Domesday Book (1086), we can see how the burgesses had more rights than villagers in these early days of town development, and yet also had responsibilities to the King. The services and money owed to the lord are listed. Here are some examples:

"If anyone of them [103 men dwelling inside and outside the wall] wished to leave the city, he could sell his house with the reeve's consent to another man who was willing to perform the service owed from it, and the reeve had the third penny of his sale. But if anyone could not perform the service because of his poverty, he let his house without payment to the reeve who ensured that the house did not remain empty and that the King was not without service."(Domesday Book, C 2)

Unlike a villager, the townspeople were allowed to leave, but the reeve (this is before Hereford had a mayor) had to make sure that military service would be provided by the person buying the property.

Here are other examples of service owed to the King: each dwelling had to pay taxes, provide four days agricultural labour and when the king was hunting in the area one man from each house had to go and help out (stall game in the woodland).

Conflict with the tenants of the Bishop

However, not every person living in Hereford was bound by these customs. The tenants of the Bishop, for example, had their own set of rules and regulations. This often led to friction between the free burghers and the tenants of the Bishop.

In 1227 the citizens attempted to make the tenants of the bishop and of the dean and chapter of the cathedral pay their share of the tallage (a tax to the king). When the tenants did not pay up, the burghers forcibly took goods and chattels from them to be held until they did pay. For this the burghers were excommunicated by the bishop and the king had to intervene to secure peace between bishop and citizens. (David Walker, "Hereford and the Laws of Breteuil", in Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, 1970)

St. Ethelbert's Fair and Mayfair

There were a number of similar disputes during the Middle Ages. In 1121 King Henry I had granted the bishop a fair at Hereford, lasting three days, at the feast of St. Ethelbert on 13th June. This fair was extended, and by the end of the reign of Henry III it lasted nine days. During the fair the Bishop of Hereford had temporary control of the city gates, allowing his officials to collect all the tolls from the produce coming to be sold at the fair. In 1241 the Bishop charged the citizens of Hereford with selling goods in their shops during the nine days of the fair, without paying him dues. The Bishop won his case, and the Hereford merchants had to pay the same toll and dues as the merchants coming from outside of the city for the duration of the fair. (David Walker, "Hereford and the Laws of Breteuil", in Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, 1970)

Over the years many fights took place between the Bishop's men from the Bishop's side of the city, called the Port, and the citizens from the mayor's side of the City. Eventually all weapons were barred from the City for the duration of the Fair. All citizens had to leave their arms within their inns or lodgings. St. Ethelbert's fair continues to this day, albeit only for three days in May - it is now called Mayfair. To this day the proclamation informing the citizens and visitors to the fair of the ban on weapons is still read at the opening civic ceremony. (Thanks to Councillor John Newman for this information.)

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

During the Madog uprising in 1295, Edward was actually forced to take refuge in Conwy Castle and his son and successor Edward, Prince of Wales, was born in Caernarfon Castle. Even the town borough at Caernarfon was heavily fortified, with high stone walls, towers and gatehouses. (P.H. Humphries, Castles of Edward the First in Wales, HMSO, 1983)

In fact Edward I was so keen on town planning that he even called a special parliament (in 1297) to discuss this subject and gathered advisors around him.

As in Wales, castles were an important feature in the medieval landscape of the Welsh Marches. A castle needed both men who could be called upon in times of attack to support the regular, often small, garrison, as well as a supply of food, drink and other goods. Several towns were also planted beside castles in the hope of creating a place for a market and fair and of providing the over-lord with income.

There were several towns planned around castles in Herefordshire. Most of these, such as Kilpeck, are now no more than villages. When the castles became obsolete in the 16th century (or even before this period), the towns around them lost their support and failed.

In most Herefordshire castle-boroughs, the main street was laid out in a straight line from the castle and church. This holds true for Ewyas Harold, Eardisley, Kilpeck, Wigmore, Lyonshall, Brampton Bryan and Mansell Lacy. At Weobley and Huntington, the church and castle are situated at opposite ends of the town.

The only town completely surrounded by a defensive wall with fortified gates and interval towers was Hereford. In only two other towns - Richards Castle and Kilpeck - did the castle share defences with the borough. Borough banks and ditches have also been recorded at Leominster. It is uncertain in many cases if the borough bank was meant as a boundary wall or was a defensive feature. Perhaps Brampton Bryan, Huntington, Clifford and Eardisley had defences in the form of at least a bank and ditch. It is hard to imagine that the latter two, which suffered badly from Welsh raids, did not try to fortify in some manner. (Ray 1990)

Richards Castle is an excellent example of a castle-dominated town. Its origins go back to the pre-Conquest period, when Richard le Scrob, a Norman, built a motte and bailey here in the 1050s. A century later a town developed. Robert Mortimer was granted a charter for a market and fair in 1216 and a document of 1304 records over 100 burgesses living here. According to the 1377 poll tax records, 134 people were taxed. However, the exact location for this settlement is unclear. The earthworks surveyed suggest that at most 50 burgage plots were laid out. Was a new town laid out further to the west? (Ray, 1990) This is a case where archaeologists, who study the physical remains, can collaborate with historians, who concentrate on written sources, to provide a better understanding of the history of our towns and villages.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

The Bishop of Hereford arranged for a survey of all his property to be undertaken around the year 1285. This survey is called the Red Book (because it was bound in red leather) and is a valuable primary source (written in Latin) because it lists all the tenants and how much rent they paid for their burgage plots. It is also a useful source for studying the kinds of names people had, what trades they practised and how many streets and shops there were.

According to this Red Book, Bromyard had seven streets and between 1000 and 1500 people. There were chaplains, millers, butchers, weavers, a blanket maker, a dyer, general merchants, leather workers, blacksmiths, ironmongers, a painter, a goldsmith, a baker, a beast leech (vet), and stud grooms. The weekly market was held on Mondays and there were two annual fairs. (Phyllis Williams, "Borough and Town" and "Markets and Fairs", in Joseph G. Hillaby and Edna D. Pearson (eds.), Bromyard: A Local History, Bromyard and District Local History Society, 1970) 
 
[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

"A slave of Edmund Ironside, King of England, thought that if his master died, then Canute, who thought he should be king, would be able to take over the throne. This slave also thought that he would be greatly rewarded by Canute. Edmund had a big house in Gloucestershire, and this is where this slave put a long, sharp spit in the latrine. [A bit like an enormous kebab stick with the sharp side up sticking out of your toilet!] When Edmund had to use the toilet in the dark, the slave held the candles so that he couldn't see what was there and the king was wounded terribly. Edmund had himself taken to his settlement in Ross and this is where he died in 1016. The slave went to Canute to claim his reward but Canute had him hanged from the highest oak." (Martin H. Morris, The Book of Ross-on-Wye, 1980)

Unfortunately, the truth of this story will never be known.

Unlike this legend, the Domesday Book entry for Ross is a more reliable source:

"In Ross (on Wye) 7 hides which pay tax. In lordship 1 plough; another would be possible. 18 villagers, 6 smallholders and a priest with 23 ploughs. 3 slaves; a mill at 6s 8d; meadow, 16 acres. The woodland is in the King's Enclosure. The villagers pay 18s in dues." (Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, 2, 24, Phillimore, 1983)

Ross and district was also a place contested by the king and the bishop. There were several manors in the area around Ross, some of which belonged to the king and some to the bishop. In 1228 a commission was set up to draw official boundaries between the lands of the two lords. The king had the manor in Penyard and the Bishop of Hereford the manor of Ross. In 1286 there was trouble when the bishop's huntsman caught a young stag. The king's foresters argued that the stag had been killed in the forest of the king. However, an inquest (a court hearing) found that it had happened outside the forest, in the bishop's chase.

King Stephen, in 1138, granted to the Bishop of Hereford (probably as a reward for his support in Stephen's power struggle with Queen Matilda) a Thursday market in Ross. On 26 January 1241, Henry III confirmed this market and granted a three-day fair to Ross on St. Margaret's Day (20th July).

During the reign of Edward I Ross, along with other Herefordshire market towns, received a writ (a legal document) requiring two representatives to be sent to parliament in London. Adam de la More and Thomas le Mercer went to this particular parliament, but the citizens of Ross decided that they could not afford to pay their members their expenses of two shillings a day and, along with Bromyard and Ledbury, asked parliament to be excused in future.

Throughout the Middle Ages, the Bishop would visit Ross and stay in his palace (not really a palace, but a large impressive house, built of timber with a gateway, a porter's lodge and a small building with a dungeon for priests who had done something very wrong!). This palace, which does not exist any more, was situated between the west end of St. Mary's Church and the north end of the Prospect.

The palace was where people paid their dues, and also where the bishop resided with his large retinue (his household). It took many people to look after the bishop, who in the Middle Ages was considered an important lord. According to Martin Morris, Bishop Richard Swinfield had a household of 40: squires and pages, serving men, cooks, a butler, a falconer, a farrier (someone who shoes horses), and an armed champion to fight for his rights. It took 36 horses to carry the bishop and his possessions. He often entertained other important people here. Many medieval bishops enjoyed hunting, and the bishop's chase near Ross would have made it a very attractive place to entertain visitors who liked to hunt.   
 
Having such a large number of people stay periodically would have boosted the economy of Ross and helped it to grow. According to the Red Book (a survey of the Bishop of Hereford's property undertaken in 1285), there were over 100 people who paid rent on their burgage plots or shares of a burgage plot. Adam le Mercer is described as holding unam seldam, a shop or a booth or even a barrow in front of a house - we don't know which. In total there were nineselde (Latin for shops or booths).                          

The medieval market place would have been larger than the present one. It has been suggested that it stretched from High Street as far as St. Mary's Street and along Broad Street as far as New Street. (Hughes 1999)

In the Red Book, the town of Ross is listed separately from the Bishop's manors outside of Ross. The town (Burgus de Rosse) brought the Bishop £10 15s and the area around Ross (Manerium de Rosse Forinsecum) £54 16s 2p in rental income annually.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

Richard de Capella is the bishop credited with the founding of the planned town, c. 1125. This new town had a wedge-shaped market place, called Middletown (today's High Street), located at right angles to the earlier market area (now Church Lane). Note, however, that the Market House is post-medieval, having been built in the early 17th century. Burgage plots were laid out on either side of the market place, except for the area occupied by St. Katherine's Hospital. At each end of the market place would have been a market cross. 
 
Two women, who lived near these crosses, took their surname from them: Juliana de la Crose and Agatha de Cruce (Latin for "cross") (Hillaby, see above, p. 32). Names can also indicate the sort of jobs people had. According to the Red Book (a survey of the Bishop of Hereford's property, carried out in 1285), the following names could be found in Ledbury: Johannes le Cupere (cooper or barrel maker), Aluredus le Mercer (someone who sells textiles), Wilelmus le ffolur (fuller, someone who makes woollen fabric), Galfridus Pelliparius (skinner, someone who skins dead animals to make leather), Walterus Plumiber (plumber), Nicholas Pistor (baker) and Galfridus Aurifaber (goldsmith).

[Note: Joe Hillaby's book on Ledbury (see above) has an excellent chapter on the origins of local surnames.]

The most popular male first names in Ledbury in the 13th century were William, Richard and John, while the most popular female names were Alice, Matilda and Juliana.

According to the Red Book, there were 282 tenancies in Ledbury, that is more than twice the number in Ross-on-Wye (105). The medieval street names reflect the commercial nature of town life: Middletown, the Stalls, the Butchers Row and the Shop Row. Edward III granted Ledbury citizens the right to collect money from merchants carrying goods for paving Middletown with gravel in the 14th century (Hillaby 1997, see above).

All important business would have been carried out at the Booth Hall, which stood on land on High Street now occupied by the Feathers Hotel. This was the meeting place of the borough court, and the place where the two members were chosen who represented Ledbury at Parliament in 1295 and 1305. Business deals were also made here, especially major ones which involved exporting wool to the continent. For example, the Italian merchant houses of Bardi and Peruzzi bought wool from Herefordshire. (Hillaby 1997, see above). The woollen industry was very successful in the early part of the 14th century, and this for some time masked the agricultural and commercial decline in many other areas of rural life.  

There were many bad harvests between the years 1290 and 1317 which led to hardship and, in 1316 and 1317, to famine. The population of Ledbury was already in decline when the Black Death hit in 1349. It took until the 16th century for many of the plots left vacant then to be reoccupied.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

Despite being an important ecclesiastical centre, Leominster did not become a town until the 1120s. Even in the Domesday Book it is recorded as a manor, albeit a wealthy one. It had a royal connection as it had belonged to Edith, wife of King Edward the Confessor and sister to Harold Godwinson. 

Bishop Richard de Capella founded a small borough around a triangular market place close to the precinct gates. (Today it can still be seen between Drapers Lane and High Street on the west and Corn Street to the south.) In 1170 Henry II granted a fair.

This borough grew so quickly that the citizens of Hereford became worried by the competition. The king was persuaded to move Leominster's market from Saturday to Friday, and the Leominster Michaelmas fair was stopped altogether in 1281 because it was seen to damage the fair held in Hereford in October (on the feast day of St. Denis).  

But the rivalry between Hereford and Leominster was not just carried out in court. In the 13th century the burghers of Hereford attacked Leominster, stole goods worth an estimated £2,000 and burned down a large part of the town (Joe Hillaby 1987, see above).

During the Middle Ages Leominster flourished. Its success was based primarily on the production of wool, leather and cloth. This industrial growth was aided by a number of water mills. Excavations during the 1990s on the former Poultry Packers site have shown that this area was used for industrial purposes from the mid-12th century to the 15th century. The discovery of a mid-14th century seal at the site suggests that not only were goods being produced but quantified and inspected prior to distribution.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002] 

Foundation of town or grant of market/fair

Herefordshire's medieval market villages

The following were market villages during the Middle Ages:

Bosbury, Bridge Sollers, Cradley, Dorstone, Eton Tregoz, Goodrich, Leintwardine, Much Marcle, Orleton.

(Ray 1990; Jean O'Donnell, "Market Centres in Herefordshire 1200-1400", in Transactions of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, Volume XL Part II, 1971)

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

When a town was granted rights it often had a charter (an official document) drawn up to attest to these rights. 

No new town was guaranteed economic success. War with Scotland put a heavy tax burden on the population, as did the war with France from 1337. Bad weather caused crop failures and cattle disease caused widespread famines in 1315-25. There was a 400% increase in grain prices because of the poor harvests (J. Schofield and A.Vince, Medieval Towns, Leicester University Press, 1994).

Some towns were affected by the ravages of the Black Death, some by war (the frequent incursions of the Welsh) and some were just poorly situated from the outset. Richards Castle, for example, however well sited for a castle (on a high bluff), was poorly situated for a market town. It failed to change from a town supporting a castle to a market town, providing commercial opportunities for the surrounding area. (Trevor Rowley, The Welsh Border: Archaeology, History & Landscape, Tempus, 2001)

During the reign of Edward I, and with his conquest of Wales, more peaceful times in Herefordshire meant that many castles were not needed any more. With the decline of these castles also came the decline of their attached towns. An example of this is Kilpeck, which was abandoned altogether.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

Most medieval people lived in the countryside. Many people lived in villages, but the size and shape of these were forever changing. As we shall see, archaeologists speak of shrunken, moved and even deserted villages.

The formation of villages is linked to arable or mixed farming, whereas in areas of pastoral (animal) farming, farmsteads and isolated crofts are more common. Keeping a flock of sheep could be managed by one family alone and it was better that this family lived near to the animals and was able to move about with them. In Herefordshire we have a combination of these two types of settlement patterns. 

In medieval Wales bondmen, who were tied to their lord, lived in hamlets and worked his land. Freemen lived in dispersed homesteads. With the Welsh influence in Hereford we can find dispersed homesteads, especially in the western parts of the county.

We have to keep in mind that the Domesday Book of 1086 (Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, Phillimore, 1983) was a survey of estates and manors, not villages. Some of these may in fact have been villages in nature, but until more research is undertaken we simply do not know how many villages there were in medieval Herefordshire.

The Domesday Book mentions 308 separate places of settlement in Herefordshire, although in some parts of the county the Domesday survey was not complete. 45% of these do not appear on the modern map. Unlike many other counties, the distribution of Domesday names is not similar to those of the present-day villages. Sometimes a Domesday name is represented today by a farm or an individual house. Alcamestune, for example, has survived as Chanstone Court Farm in Vowchurch, and Gadredehope is now Gattertop in Hope under Dinmore. (H.C. Darby and I.B. Terrett (eds.), The Domesday Geography of Midland England, 1954)

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

• Alac
• Alcamestune
• Almundestune
• Burcstanestune
• Caerleon
• Chetestor
• Cuple
• Curdesledge
• Edwardestune
• Elnodestune
• Lege
• Lincumbe
• Mateurdin
• Penebecdoc
• Querentune
• Stane
• Wadetune
• Westelet
• Westwoo
• Winetune
• Wluetone  

(Note: The Old English word tun/e is often attached to a placename and denotes "settlement", "village" or "enclosure", for example Winetune. -tun has also been interpreted as "outlying farm", which might account for the fact that some Herefordshire Domesday places are today only individual dwellings or farms.)

June Sheppard in "The origins and evolution of field and settlement patterns in the Herefordshire manor of Marden" has studied the settlement pattern around the estate on the manor of Marden. She concludes that in the 11th century there was a village near the centre of this estate, whereas the royal manor house, demesne, church and bond hamlet (where the servants who only worked on the lord's land lived) were about a mile to the west of the village. Towards the outlying parts of the estate were some single homesteads, as well as the village of Sutton St Nicholas and several small clusters of tenant dwellings. Her conclusions bear out the theory that during the Middle Ages in Herefordshire there was a mixed pattern of settlement.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

When the Saxons moved into new areas of England during the main wave of migration in the 5th century, they often put wooden palisades around their villages; these were very useful for defensive purposes and protection.

The Domesday Survey can tell us about the kinds of people who lived in rural communities in Herefordshire. Six main categories are mentioned:

• Villeins (villagers) - 1,730 (39% of the total population)
• Bordars (smallholders) - 1,271 
• Serfs (slaves, bondwomen) - 739
• Oxmen (ploughmen) - 142
• Men - 134
• King's men (of Archenfield) - 96

A bordar was someone who owed duties to the lord. Villeins were more substantial farmers in the community. They could serve on a jury and decide the custom of the manor. They still owed services and dues to the lord but they were less tied to the lord than bordars.

The minor categories include radmen (riding men) (68), Welshmen - all west of the line of Offa's Dyke (39, but this figure does not include the Welsh in Archenfield), priests (43), smiths (25), reeves (bailiffs or stewards) (35), and so on (H.C. Darby and I.B. Terrett (eds.), The Domesday Geography of Midland England, 1954).

Here is a passage from the Domesday Survey for Wellington, listing different categories of people:

"9 villagers, 8 smallholders, a priest, a reeve, a smith and 4 riding men; between them they have 8 ploughs. 11 male and 9 female slaves". (Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, 29,11, Phillimore, 1983)

In the early Middle Ages the lord's lands were often worked by slaves, but slavery gradually died out in the feudal system and was replaced by unfree villeins. Later on in the Middle Ages, peasants could pay a fee to get out of working on the demesne. However, until the 14th century most people were tied to their villages and lords and could not marry or move without the lord's permission.

Manorial courts were held regularly, and the lord appointed a bailiff to be judge and overlook the proceedings. At these courts all kinds of cases were heard, mostly ones to do with the upholding of villagers' responsibilities and with minor infringements. The interests of the lord were paramount. If a villein died, the heir had to pay a heriot (a fine) to the lord in order to take over the holding. Early in the Middle Ages this was usually the best animal, later on this was replaced with a fee. When a tenant died leaving children under age, the lord was entitled to wardship and control of the child's inheritance, with a heriot when the child came of age.

The Herefordshire Record Office holds the manorial court records for the manor of Pencombe. Here is an excerpt for 1451: On the death of free tenant Richard Grafton,

"there comes to the lord for heriot: 1 red ox price 7s, 1 red steer price 2s 8d, 1 red male calf price 16d and 1 pig price 12d, which heriot remains in the keeping of Joanna his widow." (Arkwright Manorial Records, A63, Herefordshire Record Office)

Feudalism is the name given to the way in which medieval society was organised. It took the form of a pyramid: at the top was the king, below him the barons and bishops, below them the knights and abbots, and at the bottom the villagers. In the same way that the feudal structure was very rigid, the social hierarchy in the village was well developed. Villagers were very conscious of their status, guarded their position, however menial (lowly), and were knowledgeable about local custom which specified exactly what their responsibilities were and what was owing to them. The responsibilities of course outweighed the benefits by a great margin.

Most village houses were situated around a village green or along a main street, with a strip of land behind the house for the personal garden and perhaps a back lane. There would have been a network of primitive roads serving the local fields.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

In wattle and daub construction, twigs of hazel, willow or cleft oak were intertwined and daubed on both sides with a muddy mixture of earth, chopped straw and dung, with chalk or lime added if available.

Hedges were an important resource in medieval Herefordshire. Hazel was a particularly useful source of wood, especially for peasants who did not often have (legal) access to managed woodlands. Hedgerow species can help us to interpret the age of the hedge.  

The construction of a cot cannot be called timber frame, as the timbers were not worked into joints and the timber posts were rarely set in straight lines. In fact the lord of the manor kept the best wood for himself, so only inferior, slender posts would have been used. The result was flimsy and not very durable. The untreated wood would soon decay and the building collapse. 

Manorial court records are a good primary source for the kinds of trouble that villagers could get into. During a court session on 29th August 1451 (during the reign of Henry VI), Joanna Mascald, a tenant at will, and Henry Noke were accused of wrongly and without permission cutting down two oaks and selling them (Arkwright Manorial Records, A63, Herefordshire Record Office). In this case we have two people who cut down trees belonging to the lord. These trees were then sold, presumably as timbers or ceiling rafters for building. 

The roof construction of the cot was equally flimsy. If rafters were unavailable, which probably more often than not was the case, then bundles of branches were lashed together and interlaced with smaller bits of wood to support thatching. Straw, if available, was the preferred material for thatch. After harvest, when the first frosts had made the remaining corn stalks brittle, they were snapped off and used for thatch.

The geology of the western side of Herefordshire differs to that of the rest of the county. More stone, such as sandstone and - in the northern areas - limestone, is available to be used as building material. Even lower status houses (the houses of the poor) would have been built using stone in a drystone wall construction and using stone tiles on the roof instead of thatch. Availability of building materials, and perhaps even weather conditions, would have influenced how houses were built. On the Welsh borders it is windy and very wet, and stone roofs would have been more durable than thatch. Unfortunately no buildings survive, but the building platforms in sites of deserted villages look lumpier and more uneven if the houses were constructed with drystone walls.
 
Even though cottages did not have chimneys, some houses had stone hearths in the centre of the room, which would have made for a very smoky environment. Sometimes, due to the fire hazard, the cooking facility was outside in a makeshift external kitchen. (Thanks to Mr. J. Tonkin and Mr. P. Gibbons for information about construction of medieval houses.)

The floors of the cottages were made of beaten earth or clay. Rushes or straw were sometimes put on the floor to provide comfort and warmth. Toilets of course were not part of these simple houses - a hole at the back of the yard would have been a possible medieval solution.

There is no evidence remaining for what sorts of doors were used, but we do know that poor people would not have had glass windows. Wooden shutters on a simple hinge would have been the height of luxury. Single room dwellings often did not even have window openings.

Furniture is mentioned in documents, but no peasant furniture from before the 16th century survives. The best way to find out what sort of furniture villagers and smallholders owned, and what kind of lifestyle they had, is to read descriptions in primary sources.

Gerald of Wales, a scholar and churchman, went on a journey around Wales in 1188. The purpose of this trip, which set out from and ended in Hereford, was to accompany Archbishop Baldwin of Canterbury on a preaching mission to convince men to go on crusade to fight the "infidel".  

On his journey Gerald kept a diary, and from it we can find out lots of information on how the Welsh lived. If we consider that many people of Welsh origin also lived in parts of Herefordshire, we can certainly draw parallels. Gerald describes the simple manner in which many people lived:

"... there are no tables, no tablecloths and no napkins... Alongside one of the walls is placed a communal bed, stuffed with rushes, and not that many of them. For sole covering there is a stiff harsh sheet, ... They all go to bed together. They keep on the same clothes which they have worn all day, a thin cloak and a tunic, which is all they have to keep the cold out. A fire is kept burning all night at their feet, just as it had done all day, and they get some warmth from the people sleeping next to them. When their underneath side begins to ache through the hardness of the bed and their uppermost side is frozen stiff with cold, they get up and sit by the fire, which soon warms them up and sooths away their aches and pains. Then they go back to bed again, turning over on their other side if they feel like it, so that a different part is frozen and another side bruised by the hard bed." (Gerald of Wales, The Journey Through Wales/The Description of Wales, p. 238, translated by Lewis Thorpe, Penguin Classics, 1978)

Despite the lack of furniture and comfortable bedding, the Welsh took great care of their appearance. This is what Gerald says of how the Welsh look after their teeth:

"Both sexes take great care of their teeth, more than I have seen in any country. They are constantly cleaning them with green hazel-shoots and then rubbing them with woollen cloths until they shine like ivory." (Gerald of Wales, as above)

Archaeological evidence points to the use of cooking pots and cauldrons, not spits for roasting. This backs up the theory that villagers ate mostly soups and porridge, and perhaps stew.

The villeins, marginally better-off than the cottars, usually lived in houses of three rooms, often in the shape of longhouses. These longhouses had two living rooms at one end and a room for animals and farm stores at the other. Again, few long houses had chimneys, although some had smoke holes. The hearth would have been in the centre of the house and daily family life would have taken place in this area.

A rare example for a probable longhouse in Herefordshire is Llangunville Farm in Llanrothal (Historic Environment Record reference number 12195).

After the 13th century more prosperous villagers built separate buildings for their livestock, often at a right angle to the longhouse.

A good source of information on more substantial medieval houses is: J.W. Tonkin, "Medieval Houses in Herefordshire", in D. Whitehead and J. Eisel (eds.), A Herefordshire Miscellany, Lapridge Publications, 2000.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

A wealthy lord would own several manors, which usually consisted of a village and the surrounding land. A reeve would be chosen from among the local peasants as the person who looked after the lord's manor and who made sure that the villagers worked for the lord on the correct number of days.

Much of the lord's land was let out to the villagers for which they paid rent, usually in the form of produce. In many places the land was not separated by fences or hedges, but was joined into two or three large fields. Each field was split into narrow bands and each family was allowed a certain number of strips. These bands were scattered all over the fields, so that all had a share of good and not so good land. This system of farming is called open field or strip farming.

The rest of the land was divided into meadows for hay making, common pasture for the livestock, and woodland which provided timber for building, firewood, berries and nuts, game and forage for pigs. There might also have been a fish pond.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

Medieval farmers grew a range of crops: wheat, barley, oats and rye, as well as peas and beans. Poor people ate rye or barley bread and porridge and soups made of barley and oats. Only the wealthier people had wheat bread. The 1996 report on excavations in Hereford Cathedral Close summarises some of the findings:

"The plant and animal remains give some indication of the range of food eaten. Most of the evidence which has so far been examined came from deposits of eleventh and twelfth century date. The principal cereal crop was barley, with a fair amount of oat supplementing it, and smaller amounts of wheat and other cereals. A narrow range of fruits was available, most of which grew locally. Some, such as apples and pears, were cultivated, others were probably wild and included blackberries, elderberries and sloes. Figs, probably imported, were also found." (Richard Stone and Nic Appleton-Fox, A View from Hereford's Past, Logaston Press, 1996, p. 26)

In their gardens villagers also grew onions, leeks, garlic, turnips, lettuce, spinach and cabbages. Most of these would have been used as ingredients in soup, called pottage.  

Even though fruit consisted primarily of apples and pears, some people also had access to cherries and quinces. Peaches were a special delicacy. Apples and pears were cooked, used for cider and perry, and to some extent eaten fresh. Many people, however, believed that fresh fruit was bad for the health. This was also the view of current medical theory, the doctrine of the four humours. According to one medieval medical guide, the Regimen Sanitatis, fresh fruit could cause fevers.

Medieval recipe and cookery books are a good source of information. Unfortunately vegetables are not often mentioned, but there are references to parsnips, peas and gourds (marrows). There are references to radishes and carrots, which were grown in orange, purple, yellow and white varieties. Spices and herbs were used by the rich to flavour dishes. Sage, mint, fennel, parsley, marjoram, orach, borage, sorrel, basil and many other herbs were used widely.

English ale was made with malted barley or even oats, but not hops. Hops were grown as a herb in the 14th century. The process of brewing beer with hops was introduced into England in the 15th century. Hops serve as a preservative. Before the use of hops, ale had to be brewed frequently. (P.W. Hammond, Food and Feast in Medieval England, Alan Sutton, 1993)

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002] 

Sometimes villages were built from scratch, sometimes an existing village was redeveloped or expanded. There is not much documentary evidence to trace the origins of planned medieval villages, and the few examples we have do not come from Herefordshire. One example from Northumberland is the old village of West Thirston, which was devastated by Scottish raiding in 1324 and was rebuilt in the 1330s. Part of the original village was moved to create the new village of East Thirston to make the journey to and from the scattered field strips shorter.

Monasteries often kept better records than secular lords. There are several examples of village relocations connected to the Cistercian Order of monks. In the cases of East Witton in Wensleydale and New Byland on the North York Moors, it was more convenient for the Cistercians to relocate the villages. (Richard Muir, The Villages of England, Thames and Hudson, 1992)

Are planned, moved and expanded villages examples of medieval property development? Was the lord of the manor hoping to attract new free tenants who would add to his rental income?

Little research on or excavation of medieval villages has taken place in Herefordshire, however there is evidence of village planning in other parts of England. In Milburn in Cumbria, for example, the medieval village was laid out to a regular pattern. Each house plot has a narrow frontage to the village green and a long yard to the rear.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

Sometimes the lord of that village decided to use the fields to raise sheep or deer and the peasants had to move somewhere else. This was called enclosure. Sometimes the weather was terrible for several years in a row and there were many bad harvests. People starved or moved away.

During the period of the plague, around 1348, many villages were either left entirely empty because everyone had died or those few inhabitants who survived couldn't do all the work themselves. The difficulty in finding enough men to work the fields encouraged sheep farming. The wool industry therefore expanded greatly. In fact by 1500 there were approximately three sheep to every human being. Some areas which previously had been used for farming were turned into an ornamental park for the lord of the manor or a hunting ground. 

We can see the outline of many abandoned villages in aerial photographs. These photos can tell the archaeologist where to look for a medieval village, but they don't tell us why a village was abandoned.

Hampton Wafer

Pottery finds from an excavation at the deserted village of Hampton Wafer suggest that the village was established around the time of Edward the Confessor (first half of the 11th century) and was abandoned in the early 14th century. There is a Domesday Book reference to the manor of Hampton Wafer which confirms that the village was in existence in 1086.

We have no written sources of information as to why this village, like many others in Herefordshire, was abandoned. Perhaps it was so depopulated by the plague that it was no longer viable. If we consult the Historic Environment Record database we can also find a medieval chapel, a field called "Mill Meadow" and evidence of a field with ridge and furrow cultivation connected with Hampton Wafer.

Several churches in Herefordshire were joined together during this period because the land could not support more than one priest and the plague had so depopulated the area. An example of this is the merger of Great and Little Collington in 1352, where there is also evidence of a deserted village.

Some other examples of deserted or moved villages in Herefordshire:

• Chilstone
• Little Cowarne
• Devereux
• Edvin Ralph
• Hampton Wafer
• Hewland
• Hoarwithy
• Holme Lacy
• Kilpeck
• Wacton
• Wolferlow   

(Source: M. Beresford and J. Hurst, Deserted Medieval Villages, 1971, p. 190)

There are 166 records of deserted settlements in the Herefordshire Historic Environment Record (HER).

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

Villages were moved for one of several reasons. Sometimes the lord wanted to enclose for sheep farming or create a deer park near to his manor house and the village was in the way or spoiled his view. It is thought that the medieval village beside Croft Castle in north Herefordshire was moved to make way for the deer park.

Sometimes a village had to move because traffic patterns shifted. A village at a crossroads could prosper, one in the middle of nowhere was at a great disadvantage. Knapwell in Cambridgeshire is an example of a village which had to move in the 13th century because the road changed its course. (Nigel Saul, "A Prosperous People", in Nigel Saul (ed.), Historical Atlas of Britain, Prehistoric to Medieval, The National Trust and Sutton Publishing, 1997, p. 137)

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002]

Tithe barns

These barns are an integral part of the medieval landscape. People had to give a tenth of their harvest to the church and this produce was collected and kept in tithe barns. There are five tithe barns recorded in the HER, one of them a 13th-century aisled barn belonging to the Nunnery of Cormeilles (in France) who had land in the parish of Kings Pyon.

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2002] 

In 1066 King Harold was defeated at the Battle of Hastings by William, Duke of Normandy. On Christmas Day 1066 William was crowned King William I of England. As king, William granted the lands of the English nobility to his own loyal followers.

As a result of these sudden changes there was now no record of who owned what land throughout the country. For purposes of taxation a record of land ownership needed to be made, and so in 1086 the King commissioned men to be sent to each shire in England to find out what - and how much - each landholder now owned. A record was also made of what livestock was held on the land, how many ploughs were used, what men lived on it and what it was worth.

There is also a second possible reason for the commissioning of the Domesday Survey. Prior to William's defeat of King Harold there had been a number of other contenders for the throne of England - among these were King Canute of Denmark and King Olaf of Norway. These two men posed quite a threat to William's newly-acquired crown, and to ward off possible attacks he created a fund called the Danegeld which was used to pay off marauding Danish armies. This fund was raised by taxes, and so the Domesday Survey may have been commissioned so that King William could see how much tax was coming in and so knew what funds were in the Danegeld. 

It took twelve months for the Commissioners to gather the information from each shire. This was then copied into two books, later known as the Domesday Book. As the information recorded in the survey was deemed to be fact it was called the Domesday Book as Domesday refers to the "day of judgment". It took only two years to compile and publish all the information gathered, a sure testament to the determination and power of William the Conqueror.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

The Domesday Book was written with a goose quill on parchment made out of sheepskin (known as vellum) that had been vigorously treated. Originally it was written in Latin, the language of medieval scholars.

In each district the Commissioners took evidence on oath and made use of a local "jury" to verify facts. In each shire they had to determine:

• The name of the place, who owned it before 1066 and who owned it after that date
• The size of the land held. Usually measured in hides, a hide was an area considered large enough to support one family. The measurement varied from 60 to 120 acres depending on the agricultural worth of the land
• The number of villagers, cottagers and slaves; how many freemen?
• How much of the land was woodland, meadowland and pasture
• The number of mills and fish ponds
• The number of plough teams working on the land, eight oxen usually equalled one team.
• What the value of the land was before 1066 and what it was after that date  

As well as the above information the Commissioners would also record any other information that they thought was useful, such as local customs or taxes. Only the chief landowner was named in the Domesday Survey, all other inhabitants were merely counted. There was also no necessity to name individual buildings or castles. Those that are mentioned are usually included for taxation or land value reasons.

The information was collected and collated at Winchester and copied up as a single volume by one writer. Norfolk, Essex and Suffolk were copied into a second volume and the surveys of several towns, including London, were not transcribed.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002] 

The Domesday Survey of Herefordshire begins with a record of the customs observed in the county. At the time of the Survey 103 men lived inside and around the city wall and every dwelling paid 7½d, and 4d for the hire of horses. In August each man had to spend three days reaping at Marden and on one day had to gather hay wherever the Sheriff wished.

When the king was in the city every man without a whole dwelling had to provide an escort for the court. When the king was engaged in hunting in the county then by custom one man from every house went to stall (decoy) game in the woodland.

Inside the city there were six smiths, each of them made 120 horseshoes from the king's iron, and for these they were given 3d for each one. The smiths were exempt from any other kind of service.

There are a total of 15 different customs for Herefordshire mentioned in the Domesday Survey, all of which would most probably have been strictly adhered to. There are also a further ten customs for the dependent territory of Archenfield whose population was largely Welsh, and so lived by Welsh customs.

After the discussion of customs in the shire comes the list of landholders in Herefordshire, Archenfield and Wales. The Domesday Survey has a total of 36 different landowners for this area: these include King William, Robert, Bishop of Hereford, and four churches. Under each landowner the lands that he held are listed by the Hundred.

Three hundred and twelve separate places are mentioned in the Domesday Survey for Herefordshire. Of these 15 have very little or no information, 29 cannot be identified with modern places and 105 do appear on modern parish maps, although some are now represented as hamlets or farms.

Some villages on the modern parish map of Herefordshire, such as Abbey Dore, Kentchurch, Wacton and Brockhampton, are not mentioned in the Domesday Survey. This is because Abbey Dore and Kentchurch were not named as villages until the 12th century, and Wacton and Brockhampton until the 13th century.

The Domesday Survey had consistent ways of measuring the prosperity and population for most villages, and gives us data for each area that are easily comparable. Under most villages four recurring items are found measuring the prosperity of an area. They are:

• Hides
• Plough-teams
• Population
• Value of the area (pre- and post-1066)

The population of individual villages was also measured and the inhabitants "classified" according to their occupation, as far as possible.

The recorded population for Domesday Herefordshire is:

This gives Herefordshire a population of 4,453 at the time of the Domesday Survey (1086). The Miscellaneous category included Welshmen, Freemen, Reeves, Sergeants and Carpenters.

The population was not distributed evenly throughout Herefordshire. In the east of the county the population averaged eight people per square mile, in the west it averaged three per square mile and the north-west only one person per square mile. These figures can be compared with the distribution of plough teams in the county to build a picture of the distribution and settlement in Herefordshire. In the east of the county there were an average of five plough teams per square mile, in the west one per square mile and in the north-west fewer than one per square mile.

This distribution of settlement was caused by two separate factors. The west and north-west of the county was very unsettled, being on the Welsh border, and the threat of Welsh raids was ever present. The topography of the north and west was not conducive to supporting large numbers of people as the soil was poor and difficult to plough and cultivate.

The Domesday Survey was a very useful product of  the Normans' efficient recording. It shows the changes that had occurred in the country under its "new management". Although the major landowners were now foreign very little else had changed in the makeup of the country. In terms of villages, hundreds and regions Herefordshire was the same as it had been before 1066, but now with better organisation. The Survey was so detailed and precise that it was unmatched in Europe for many centuries, and it can tell us more than most other contemporary sources about the social makeup of England at the beginning of the medieval period.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

Before the Norman Conquest of 1066 the main threat to life and property in England had come from the fearsome raids of the Danes. To guard against these attacks Alfred the Great and his successors built a series of burghs or fortified towns to act as strongholds and places of refuge in times of danger. These were defended camps to protect people, and not fortifications as a form of government or control.

Archaeological remains of these sites suggest that they were enclosures consisting of an earthen rampart topped by a stone or wooden wall and surrounded by a ditch.

Castles and the Norman Conquest

The conquest of England represented a new political and military phase for the country. The Normans brought with them a new aristocracy, a new government and a new sophisticated form of art and architecture.

The Normans were a war-like people, being Vikings who had settled in Normandy in north-west France in the early 10th century. They then expanded their territories into England, Italy and Sicily. They became very powerful through the development of a social class system called feudalism. This was a system of obligations given by lesser people to more powerful ones. The castle was in part a manifestation of the feudal system and it indicated to subjects the ever-present power and threat of force.

By the time of the Domesday Survey in 1086 (twenty years after the Conquest), only a few of the 180 greater landlords in England were English. The Crown had acquired one-fifth of the land and the remainder was held by the Norman favourites of the king. The earldoms of England before the Conquest were split up and a new landed hierarchy formed.

In principle all land belonged to the king but was held by barons in return for knight's service. This could be up to 40 days a year at one of the king's castles. On the Welsh border the estates of the new earls of Chester, Shrewsbury and Hereford were allowed to rule almost independently and enjoyed many royal advantages. This administration was known as the Laws of the March because all these three areas were in the Welsh Marches. The government of the counties of these areas was put in the hands of individual Sheriffs.

Herefordshire and the French connection

Herefordshire was an unusual English county in that it appears to have had three castles prior to the Norman Conquest of 1066. As many of the lords who had settled here were in part French, they had begun to bring Norman ideas over with them.

In the build-up to the Norman Conquest King Edward the Confessor, a Frenchman in his habits, placed his nephew Ralph of Vexin in charge of Hereford. This caused Hereford to become rapidly Normanized.

Richard son of Scrob and Osbern of Pentecost soon followed Ralph. These two men built castles in the extreme north of the county (Richard's Castle) and in outlying Ewyas (Ewyas Harold Castle). These castles are two of only four known pre-Conquest castles, the other two being Hereford Castle and Clavering in Essex. Ewyas Harold Castle is thought to be the first castle built in England.

On the death of Edward the Confessor there arose a problem of succession. Edward had married the daughter of Godwin, Earl of Hereford, but had produced no heir by this marriage. Harold, son of Godwin, felt that he had a right to the throne of England as he was Edward's brother-in-law and was an Englishman of great standing after his defeat of the Welsh King Gruffydd of Gwynedd, who had invaded Mercia and sacked and burnt Hereford. However Edward had never forgiven Harold's father Godwin for the murder of his brother and had looked elsewhere for his successor.

Yet more intrigue was added to the question of Edward's successor when in 1064 Harold was sent as an ambassador of Edward the Confessor to Duke William of Normandy. He went apparently to swear an oath confirming that he would support William in his claim to the throne of England.

On 5 January 1066 King Edward died and the Whitan (the Anglo-Saxon Parliament) declared Harold King of England. Harold now had to deal with two other contenders for his throne. The first was Harold Hardrada of Norway, who invaded Northumbria and occupied York. Harold - who had been prepared to meet William's Norman invasion in the south - was forced to rush north and deal with this first threat.

Three days after defeating the army of Harold Hardrada at Stamford Bridge, Harold received news that the Normans had landed in the south. He rushed to meet them but his army was tired and his preparations for battle with the Normans fell apart. The English army was defeated by the Normans on 14 October 1066 at the Battle of Hastings and King Harold died on the battlefield, apparently the victim of an arrow through the eye. William was declared King William I the Conqueror on Christmas Day of the same year.

After the Battle of Hastings and the Norman Conquest there was a need for consolidation of the conquered land by the Normans. Castles were an ideal way to secure territories that had already been won. Not only did they help to control the people of the land, they also served as a visible reminder to those in the surrounding area of the power of the invader. This is why Herefordshire had such a high concentration of castles. It was an area already conquered by the Normans and it was an ideal base for any advancement into the unconquered territory of the Welsh. The Normans also needed to protect their new territory from raids by the Welsh.

One of William's earliest tasks in England after the Conquest was to provide a secure political and military base; castles were a way of achieving this aim. Castles were quickly built within all the shire capitals, such as Hereford Castle, which was situated in the heart of the county and would have had a sphere of influence radiating from it. These castles were to act as administrative and strategic centres for the Normans' further advances. Outside of towns, castles were built to act as local and regional bases for the new Norman aristocracy. Wigmore Castle, Richard's Castle and Ewyas Harold Castle are all substantial castles built before or soon after the Norman Conquest. Wigmore and Richard's Castle were built to control the north of the county to the Shropshire border, whilst Ewyas Harold castle was built to control the south of the county.

It was a fairly quick process to construct a network of castles throughout conquered territory. Timber castles could be put up in a couple of months, whilst stone castles could take years to build and would more often slowly replace already-established timber buildings.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

Herefordshire is an important county for the study of the development of the Norman Castle. Its position as a county on the Welsh border and the aggression of the Welsh princes quickly established it as a district of importance for frontier control after the Norman Conquest of England.

Once the Norman Conquest was completed each major landowner was allowed to build a castle as his main seat of power, which he held from - and on behalf of  - the King.

The earliest castles in Herefordshire after the Conquest were nearly all built of timber. This typical early Norman stronghold included a moated mound or motte, which would often have a wooden palisade (wall) and a timber tower, maybe even three storeys high. The motte may have had a court (or bailey) attached, which was often defended by ditches and palisades. The palisade could sometimes be further strengthened by the addition of towers or turrets.

The bailey was where the residential and commercial buildings of the castle would stand. These buildings would include workshops for the carpenters and blacksmiths, stables for the lord's horses, and storage buildings for supplies.

There are many castle sites in Herefordshire where the motte is little more than a mound with a surrounding ditch, but with no sign of an outer bailey. Such sites are known as castle mounds, tumps and twts. There is very rarely any sign of stonework on these sites and they may have been constructed as temporary defences at times of war (see for example Castle Twts, Kington, Historic Environment Record no. 347).

The extensive castle building by the Normans in Herefordshire before the Conquest caused friction among the natives, and when Godwin, Earl of Hereford returned from exile (he had been exiled for raising troops against King Edward the Confessor and disobeying his orders) he demanded that the Normans be banished and their castles destroyed. Many of the Norman lords fled but Osbern Pentecost remained and surrendered his castle at Ewyas Harold (HER no. 1499). The castle was dismantled in 1052.

In the Domesday Survey of 1086, 50 castles and two domus defensabiles (fortified manors) were mentioned in England. Of these, twelve (or one-quarter) are on the Welsh border with seven of the castles and both domus defensabiles being in Herefordshire. This demonstrates the importance of Herefordshire as a frontier zone. The need to conquer and consolidate in this county was stronger than in most other parts of England.

As Herefordshire was on the border with Wales it was important that the Normans install an efficient form of defence. Wales had not been conquered and the Normans were well aware of the power of the Welsh and the trouble that they could cause, so the Herefordshire border and its new castles were to act as a buffer zone between the conquered and the "rabble".

In 1067 the Norman king, William the Conqueror, put his cousin William fitz Osbern in charge of a castle-building regime in Herefordshire. In the four years between 1067 and the death of William fitz Osbern in 1071 he rebuilt the castles at Ewyas Harold and Hereford (HER no. 456) and built significant new castles at Clifford (HER no. 713) and Wigmore (HER no. 179). The lords of these new castles then gave sections of land to their knights in return for periods of military service. This regime split the county into castelries, creating a semi-military feudal system.

Henry I (1100-1135) had only one true heir, his daughter Matilda, though there were many pretenders (claimants), his nephew Stephen being one of them. When Henry died Stephen quickly crossed the border into Scotland and had himself crowned as King. People opposed to him quickly pledged their allegiance to Matilda and between 1139 and 1148 there was civil war in this country.

In 1138-9 King Stephen campaigned in the county, but Herefordshire was held by Matilda. Matilda garrisoned Hereford Castle against Stephen and rebuilt many castles along the Marches. Stephen marched on Hereford, and whilst taking the castle burnt the city and all below the River Wye. Matilda arrived soon after and overpowered Stephen's men. She created a new earldom in Hereford for Miles of Gloucester, one of her most loyal supporters. Miles' son Roger, along with Hugh de Mortimer and Gilbert De Lacy, were the chief barons when Matilda's son Henry came into power in 1154. These barons were responsible for building Aymestrey (HER no. 1701) and Longtown (HER no. 1036) castles, among others.

Another major period of castle building occurred around 1403, when the Welsh rebel Owain Glyn Dwr exposed Herefordshire to the risk of invasion by the Welsh and Henry IV, worried about the state of the border defences, ordered many castles to be re-fortified. Ewyas Harold, Goodrich (HER no. 349),Eardisley (HER no. 1073), Snodhill (HER no. 1557), Lyonshall (HER no. 355), Huntington (HER no. 944) and Brampton Bryan (HER no. 191) were all warned of the danger of not being prepared for Welsh attack. They were ordered to equip themselves with men, stores, arms and artillery. Unfortunately, Owain Glyn Dwr and the Welsh still took many castles in this area.

Timber is a very vulnerable material, prone to decay and damage by fire, and because of this all that survives of the many timber fortifications of the county are their earthworks. Even so, the ease of building in timber means that there are over 3,000 of these around the country that were built in the 150 years after the Conquest, compared to the 500-600 stone castles built between 1066 and the end of the medieval period.

A final, late period of castle building occurred during the English Civil War between King Charles II and Parliament (1642-1647). Herefordshire nobles were mainly on the side of the Royalist cause, with the notable exception of the Harleys of Brampton Bryan, who were Parliamentarians. Some castles were refortified but some were deliberately damaged to prevent the enemy from occupying them. Examples of this destruction to foil the enemy occur at Goodrich Castle, which had been occupied by both Parliamentarians and Royalists, and Croft Castle (HER no. 6347), which was slighted by Irish levies employed by Royalists.

Unfortunately the slighting of the castles meant that there was now a good supply of building stone available for other buildings. This has made the identification and study of castles very difficult. The best-preserved castles often survive in places where the surrounding town decayed once the castle lost its purpose and the lord no longer lived there (for example Clifford and Goodrich). In flourishing towns such as Hereford the stone from the castle was re-used for new buildings (such as the College of the Vicars Choral at Hereford Cathedral) and other works, and the castle all but disappeared.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

As stone defences became more common the wooden palisades (fences) round the tops of mottes were sometimes replaced with stone walls for added strength. These structures are now called shell keeps.

In Herefordshire stone castles were most notably built during the 13th century, with castles being constructed at Snodhill (HER no. 1557), Longtown (HER no. 1036), Lyonshall (HER no. 355), Huntington (HER no. 944) and Goodrich (HER no. 349).

The biggest problem with rectangular stone keep towers was that an enemy could undermine them quite easily. Tunnels could be dug under the corner, filled with wood and set alight, causing the foundation to give way and the tower to partially collapse. Many of the rectangular castle keeps were eventually replaced with circular ones as these were less vulnerable to undermining and damage by the enemy. The best example of a circular keep is the one at Ewyas Harold (HER no. 1499), but there are further examples at Longtown and Lyonshall.

In the earlier timber castles the gateway had been little more than a gap in the timber wall, but in the more sophisticated stone castles it became an important part of the castle's defensive system. The entrance to the castle evolved into a passage running through a tower within the curtain wall. Some castles, such as Brampton Bryan, had twin towers with the gatehouse passage running between them. This tower and passage system created an area for surveillance and enabled control of entry into the castle via the barbican (projecting watchtower) and portcullis gates.

The gatehouse was not the only defensive feature that occurred as a result of building in stone. Improvements were also made to the curtain wall. Corner towers were often added, as well as towers in the sides of the curtain wall as at Wigmore Castle (HER no. 179). These towers would give the castle a better defensive advantage over an attacking enemy.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

Before beginning to build a castle it was important to find a suitable site upon which to build. The ideal site would have a good water supply nearby; this was essential for the castle defences as a ditch filled with water would present more of an obstacle to an enemy than an empty one. Water was also needed for the castle community. They would use it for drinking, cooking, farming and for the animals. The survival of the castle inhabitants would depend on a sufficient water supply.

The water for the castle was normally supplied in one of two ways. The first was by means of digging a well, the underground water flow normally occurring naturally. The second was by means of a tank or cistern within the castle enclosure. This was sometimes in the form of a hole dug in the ground and lined with leather to make it waterproof. It would most probably have a roof and sides to keep animals out and help keep the water fresh. However, with stagnant water there were always health risks from typhoid and dysentery.

A good castle site would provide natural defences, for example on the spur of a hill or the head of a valley. It was also beneficial if it was in open land as this provided fewer places for an enemy to hide and gave less chance for a surprise attack. Good visibility from a castle was also important for communication. Castles would often communicate with each other by means of beacons (small fires) and messengers. The further you could see from a castle the sooner you could receive messages and act upon them.

Goodrich Castle near Ross-on-Wye is a very good example of a castle that has been well placed. It is on a crag of rock above a river, which not only gives it good defensive visibility but also means that supplies could be brought in easily to the close vicinity of the castle.

Another example of a well-sited castle is the one at Clifford in the west of the county. The mound for the castle has been cut out into a spur of ground, making it higher than the surrounding ground to the west, south and north, and a person with good eyesight could see clearly for a distance of about 10-15 miles. There is a naturally sharp slope on the north side that leads directly down to the river. The river would have provided protection from attack, transport (by rafting and towing) and a place to cross. On the west is an area that was probably marsh, which would have also protected this side of the castle from attack. On the east is a levelled area of land, which would have held the bailey buildings.

It was important that a supply of materials for the construction of the castle could be found nearby. As there was not the technology for moving materials long distances, supplies could be brought in more easily if the castle was on a river, such as Goodrich Castle, where the grey conglomerate for the keep is thought to have been brought up from the nearby Forest of Dean. Castles were often built near woods, with the trees being felled and cleared to provide timber and create the defensive open space.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

The number of people and the skill required varied greatly between stone and timber castles.

A timber castle would employ only the minimum of builders to construct it and required very little skill, as it was a simple design. A "skeleton" of the castle was erected as a timber frame. The joints of the frame were slotted together with mortise and tenon joints and a cylindrical peg placed through them both to hold it together. The panels of the frame would then be infilled with wooden stakes and covered with wattle and daub, which was a mixture of manure, straw, mud and horsehair.

The inhabitants of villages are likely to have had experience in basic carpentry, thatching, wattle and daub, etc. as they could not afford skilled labour to build their own dwellings, but it is unlikely that they possessed the skills required to construct stone castles.

Stone castles required a great deal more planning, labour and skill. An architect was employed to design and plan the castle; he would be highly skilled and would have probably worked on several different castles. The architects would most likely be Norman, as the native English had neither the knowledge nor the skill to build a castle of this type.

A master mason was employed to oversee the planning and building of the castle; he would also organise the accounts, as the construction of a castle required a great deal of expenditure. Most probably the money for wages would have been paid to the master mason for him to distribute. He would have decided how much each worker was entitled to, depending on his experience.

The master mason's chief responsibility was to establish the number of men and quantity of materials needed and also to decide on the plans and the order of operations. He was the equivalent of a modern day Project Manager. It is likely that the master mason gained his experience from overseeing smaller projects before advancing onto larger undertakings such as castles.

The stone for the castle structure was cut into blocks from the quarry by a group of skilled men called hewers.

The stone would then go to stonemasons who would carve the blocks into the right shape and size and add any decoration that was needed. They would cut the arrow-slit windows and the blocks to frame the doorways. This was a highly skilled job without much room for error.

The finished blocks would then be passed to the rough masons who would lay the courses of the walls. This job was very similar to that of modern day bricklayers; the blocks were cemented in with mortar before another course was laid.

The castle would also employ a number of other craftsmen. Carpenters were needed to make the doors, window shutters, palisade fencing, bailey buildings and roofs. The carpenters would have also made the scaffolding necessary for the erection of the castle. Highly skilled smiths were needed to make the portcullis gates, hinges and bolts, as well as many of the tools involved in construction. Labourers were required to do the fetching and carrying, as well as the more menial jobs such as digging the ditches and clearing rubble.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

The transportation of stone and other building materials was a logistical problem for medieval master masons. If feasible, a quarry was established as close to the site as possible. If a quarry could not be set up nearby then the master mason may have to obtain the necessary stone from independent quarry masters. With transport by road being slow, cumbersome and expensive the ideal way to convey the stone to the site was to use navigable rivers and waterways. Transport was a major source of expenditure in castle building. At Caernarvon Castle in Wales the total amount spent on materials in 1285-6 was £151 5s 6½ d, but the cost of transporting the materials came to £535 8s 8½d, in other words over three and a half times the cost.

Mortar for the walls was prepared by burning limestone or chalk in kilns to produce quicklime. This quicklime was then mixed with water to produce lime putty, to which sand was added. This mixture was then turned into mortar with the aid of a mechanical mixer; this was a circular well with a vertical centre-post to which was attached a horizontal beam with paddles. When the beam was turned the paddles stirred the mixture into mortar.

Lime mortar was time-consuming to build with. It takes a long time to go off (set) and because of this only a limited section could be built at a time before needing to wait for the mortar to set - sometimes up to a week. If you carried on building before the mortar was set then the weight of the walls would push the mortar out and there would be very little holding the wall together. Even today if you go right into the centre of a castle wall built 800 years ago you may find that the lime mortar has not completely gone off.

Lime mortar also required certain weather conditions. If it was raining or damp the mortar could wash off or take longer to set, if it was too hot then the stones off the wall would need to be kept damp to stop them absorbing the moisture from the mortar and preventing it from sticking.

The stone cutters in medieval castles were supplied with patterns of the stone carving details from which to work. Using compasses and a square, the master mason drew all the patterns out in full size on specially prepared plaster floors. These designs were then used to create wooden templates, which were given to the stone cutters. The stone cutter would then square his block to size, draw the outline of the template on each end of the block, and then cut it to shape. Today stonemasons still use templates to mark out the design on the stone before carving the decoration, however today templates are made out of hard-wearing plastic rather than wood, which is prone to rotting. 

The tools of the modern stonemason have changed very little since the medieval period. Stonemasons from Capps & Capps (who have worked extensively on Hereford Cathedral) still use simple metal chisels, lump-hammers and pairs of compasses to carve the blocks, the only difference today being that often the chisels are tipped with titanium which makes them considerably more robust than those of a medieval mason. Today a stonemason undergoes a seven-year apprenticeship which teaches him all about the working and carving of stone. It is likely that these skills were learnt in much the same way in the Middle Ages, with a lot of the learning taking place on the job. 

The finished blocks of stone would have been quite heavy, and the medieval builders developed several ways of lifting them into place on the wall. One way was to set up a system of jibs and pulleys where the turning of a wheel pulled a rope, which raised the stone. In larger castles these pulley systems could take the form of a treadmill attached to a large wheel, which was turned by a man walking round inside of the wheel.

Construction in the medieval period was often seasonal, with building being undertaken during the six months of the year when the weather was more conducive to working out of doors. Lime mortar has an extremely slow setting time, which would have meant that it was vulnerable to being washed away in bad weather. The slow setting time would have also meant that the height of construction in one day would have been limited as upper levels could not be laid until the mortar had dried below, giving a stable base on which to work. Dr. Warwick Rodwell (in The Archaeology of the English Church, Batsford, 1981) has estimated that medieval buildings were erected at a rate of 20-50cm a day.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

A timber castle could have been constructed in a matter of months from start to finish. The majority of the labour was required in the construction of the motte. Holden (1967) has estimated that a motte with a base diameter of 40m and a height of 5m would have taken 50 men 42 days to build if they were working a ten hour day.

This is working on the assumption that one man equipped with simple digging tools could shift 0.42m³ (15 cubic feet) of soil in one hour. The speed of digging would greatly depend on the quality of the tools and the dryness of the earth; the wetter the ground the harder it would have been to dig. A man would also dig less in the afternoon as he became tired, so a day's work may have not been much more than 2.4m³ (80-90 cubic foot). This output would have also depended on the type of soil that was being dug, as loamy and sandy soil is much easier to dig than soft rock or stiff clay.

In a timber castle a great deal of time would have been needed for carpenters to create the beams, floor-boarding and rafters. Spence Geddes (inEstimating for Building and Civil Engineering Works, George Newnes Ltd., 1963) has attempted to put estimates on the time taken by a skilled carpenter to carry out these tasks. He estimates that a carpenter could produce 2.5 cubic feet of ceiling beams and joists in one hour, 24 square feet of floor boarding in one hour and 2 cubic feet of rafters in one hour. However, it must be remembered that these approximations are for modern day carpenters using tools that are more sophisticated than those of a medieval carpenter.

Spence Geddes has also estimated the time taken by bricklayers and plasterers to perform their part of the work. To build a wall 14 inches thick and using a modern standard sized brick a bricklayer could lay 0.54 square yards in one hour. A medieval rough mason would have been using stones that were a lot larger than standard bricks. Although this would cut down on some of the time required, these blocks were heavier to lift into place and so any time made up by their size would probably have been lost because of their weight. A plasterer takes one hour to plaster 4 square yards of internal render with a hair and lime mortar, and would take the same time to do a coat ½ inch thick on the external walls.  

These estimates do not take into account the time taken to build the scaffolding so that the builders could reach the higher levels, nor the time taken to resource and provide the materials. These are also only approximate guesses for the simple construction of the castle, as the carving and finishing of the stone blocks would have taken a lot longer. In a discussion with Simon Hudson, a stonemason for Capps & Capps (currently working on Hereford Cathedral), he estimated that it would have taken one stonemason, working with two labourers, at least one month (if not more) to produce the stonework in the picture on the right (from the chapel at Goodrich).

The column and arches on the left, which are situated in the solar at Goodrich, are surprising in that Simon Hudson has estimated that each block of the column would have taken one day, whilst each voussoir (the curved blocks of the arches) would have taken up to two days. There may have been more than one mason working on it but Simon Hudson says that to get the blocks fitting together perfectly it would have been better for one man to have done it all.

To carve a simple block with accurate 90 degree angles such as the ones in the picture on the left may have taken a hewer or stonemason one day. Today blocks like these are cut by mechanical saw.

Accounts for expenditure recorded by the Exchequer are of some use on the subject of the length of time it took to build castles, as they list the materials purchased and the salaries paid. However, much of the labour used in the castle construction would have been forced and unpaid, and therefore no accurate record would have been kept of how many men were employed and for how long they worked.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

Timber dealers could often be found in towns. They were men who had the right to cut down trees from the surrounding woods and forests. If you did not own the trees that you required for timber you could negotiate for their purchase, but you would need to hire labour to cut and prepare them.

Timber was also required as fuel in the castle. There would be fires in the Great Hall and in the lord's solar (private room) as well as in the constable's quarters in the gatehouse. Fuel would also be needed for the fire in the kitchen, which would have probably been lit all day. The blacksmith's forge burnt charcoal, which was produced by burning wood in special outdoor hearths.

The stone required for constructing castles was more difficult to obtain. If possible a quarry or quarries would be opened up and worked as close as possible to the castle site (Caernarvon Castle in Wales had four quarries). These quarries were often supplemented by purchasing stone from elsewhere, and the selection was left to the master mason. Purchasing stone sourced some distance from the site caused its own problems. Stone was difficult and expensive to transport and men with carts would have to be hired to collect and deliver the stone. Sometimes they were paid by the day and sometimes they were paid by the trip, with probably only a maximum of two return trips in one day.

If limestone could be found near to the castle then lime for the castle walls would have been prepared on site; if not it would have had to be bought in ready to use.

It has been estimated by Glyn Coppack of English Heritage that Wigmore Castle could have housed a garrison of 200 men at times of war, 100 men when the lord was visiting and 30 in times of peace. Each person in the castle would have required roughly three hectares of land on which to produce enough food to live on. This means that Wigmore Castle would have needed to control and farm the equivalent of 90 hectares to feed the 30 people that lived there all year round. At times of war, or when the lord was visiting and the number of inhabitants increased, the food would have needed to stretch further and supplies would have been brought in from elsewhere. In the case of Wigmore Castle these supplies may have been procured from the various tiers of tenants and subjects in the surrounding area that the lord of the castle ruled.

Peasants were required to pay tithes to the village priest, which consisted of one-tenth of their produce. As well as having to plough, sow and harvest the lord's crops, peasants also had to get their own corn milled at one of the lord's mills. The lord kept part of their harvest as payment. This gave the lord another element of control over those living on his land and reinforced the idea that they were subservient to him.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002] 

Those who held land from the king could then sub-divide their land between their own tenants. The lowest level were the peasantry who held small plots of land just large enough to support their own family. In return for the land the peasants would work a few days on their lord's land. This system of dividing and sub-dividing land was known as the feudal system.

As well as being an administrative centre for a district, a castle was also a home built within a necessary military framework. As the medieval period progressed and there was less and less need for military action the emphasis came to be on the castle as a place of comfort rather than protection.

In the medieval period castle walls of stone were often plastered and lime-washed both inside and out, with the dressed (shaped) stones above the windows and doors left uncovered. The domestic rooms of the castle would have been decorated to the lord's taste with murals and tapestries. Glass was expensive and mainly used in churches, so the windows in castles were left open, or closed with wooden shutters. There were fireplaces in the living rooms and often a central hearth in the Great Hall. Toilets or latrines with chutes that discharged into the moat were common in many castles. 

A lord would often have more than one estate and would travel from one to the other; his possessions and staff would travel with him, leaving the unoccupied estates devoid of most of their furnishings and with only a skeleton staff to run them.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

When the lord was in residence the castle would be a hive of activity. It would become the home of the lord and his family and their servants, which would have included cooks and serfs to wait on the lord.

In times of peace and in the absence of the lord the castle would have been looked after by a Constable and a garrison of probably not many more than five or six men. They would ensure the general upkeep of the castle and protect it from marauders.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

The castle was the administrative centre of the area governed by a particular baron or lord. Villages would often grow up outside the castle walls, as the castle was where subjects would pay their taxes and fines, as well as where courts of law were held.
 
The castle keep (main fortified building) was where much of the activity would go on. On the first floor, in the Great Hall, members of the castle staff would eat and sleep. The ground floor contained the kitchens, with the storerooms and brewery in the basement. Often the castle keep would also contain a private room (the solar) for the lord and his family, and an attached chapel for private prayer. The Baron would sit in judgment over criminal cases and land disputes in the Great Hall. The castle prison was found inside the keep, as well as the castle armoury.

Records of the 11th and 12th centuries recount dovecotes and gardens within the castle grounds and fish ponds and parks associated with castles, such as Bredwardine (HER no. 1564) and Kilpeck (HER no. 714) Castles.

When a lord was visiting one his castles the number of inhabitants of the castle would suddenly rise overnight. The lord would bring with him a variety of servants so that his stay in the castle would be in relative comfort and his every whim attended to.

There were chamberlains, ladies-in-waiting, laundresses and weavers to ensure that the lord and his family were suitably dressed for every occasion. They would travel with the lord from castle to castle.

In the kitchen were:

• The cook, who chose and prepared all the meals for the lord
• Scullions, who helped the cook to prepare the meals
• Bakers, who baked every day except for Sunday
• Trenchermen, who served the food to the lord and his guests
• Pantlers, who were in charge of looking after the dry food store

At banquet times there would be people employed who ensured that the castle inhabitants enjoyed themselves. These included a brewer, a vintner (wine-maker), a butler, and various jesters and minstrels, who would perform humorous acts to entertain the lord and his guests.

The main meal of the day was usually eaten around eleven in the morning and would consist of several courses, which could last perhaps several hours. The lord and his family ate a lot of meat, with game and fowl, such as pigeons and peacock. To ensure that there was enough meat to last through winter they would salt their meat in large vats to preserve it. Salt was very expensive and so this process was only really an option for the lords and barons of castles.

To take away the heavy salted taste the food was flavoured with herbs such as sweet violet, parsley, primrose and borage. Onions and garlic were also used in large amounts to disguise the salty, stale taste. The food was often served on large slices of bread, called trenchers. This was to soak up all the juices and grease of the meal. After the meal these trenchers might be given to the peasants who waited around the castle hoping for some scraps from the lord's table. 

For pleasure the lord would often go hunting on the land surrounding the castle. The lord treasured his right to hunt in his forests. If anyone else was caught hunting in the lord's forests he would be severely punished, possibly having his right hand cut off or even being hanged. The lord employed huntsmen to ensure that his forests were well stocked with prey and to organise the day's hunting.

Ladies did not go hunting, although King John once bet the royal laundress that she could not keep up with the royal hunt, so she borrowed a horse and kept up with all the men, so proving the king wrong. Ladies did, however, enjoy falconry and hunting with other birds of prey. This type of hunting was considered more genteel than the fast pace of hunting on horseback. A falconer would look after the hawks, which were trained to catch rabbits and game birds.
 
A dog-keeper would care for the lord's hounds and train them to catch wild boar and deer. The lord would often have a favourite dog which would follow him around the castle and eat and sleep with the lord, sometimes appearing to be better treated than the men who worked for the lord. 

The castle was also a business for the lord, with income and expenditure. There was a steward who was in charge of the day-to-day running of the household. It is likely that the steward was in residence all year round and did not follow the lord from castle to castle. There was also a reeve and bailiffs, who organised the estate for the lord and collected rents, taxes and fines. A treasurer would collect the rents and taxes from the tenants of the lord. They would also mete out punishments to those that did not pay or were caught committing an offence.

The final person employed in the castle was the chaplain. He would conduct the religious services in the castle chapel. Sometimes a castle might have two chapels, the main one for the servants of the castle and another for the lord and his family situated in their private chambers. The lord and lady would attend a prayer service every morning to begin the day. The chaplain was one of the few members of the castle who could read and write. He would also say the grace before each meal, thanking God for the food He had given them.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

The castle needed to be prepared for attack, and men were employed to ensure that it was ready should the time come:

• Blacksmiths shod the horses and made weapons and protective items, such as the chain mail for the knights' armour
• Armourers looked after the weapons store and ordered new items to be made.
• Grooms looked after the horses of the lord and his knights
• A constable (second in command to the lord) took charge of the men employed to defend the castle

The soldiers of the castle would include archers and foot soldiers as well as the mounted knights.

Knights were members of the nobility who lived by a code of chivalry and virtue. They were trained to fight and were equipped with the best armour and weapons. The equipment of a knight could cost the equivalent of 100 years' salary for the average labourer. Knights were usually tied to a particular lord, meaning that they fought for his cause and performed knight's service of up to 40 days a year at one of his castles.

Foot soldiers were the ordinary men who lived and worked on the lord's estate. They would fight on foot and were usually only equipped with long pikes or spears. These men were the most likely to die in battle.

Squires, who were trainee knights from other noble families, sent to learn the skills required to one day become a knight, served the knights.

As well as these squires, heralds were also important in the daily business of the castle. Heralds were employed to carry the lord's messages from one place to another. They also designed the coats of arms for the different families. No two crests were ever the same and the herald would record the different designs in a book called an Armorial. After a battle the herald would ride around the battlefield and identify the dead or dying knights by their coats of arms.

 [Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

The next 100-150 years were to see great changes in the design of castles. Those who had the income to do so began to reinforce their castles by replacing the timber towers with stone and rebuilding many of the defensive features, such as the palisade, in stone. This change in material for the construction of castles meant that the earth and timber castles were gradually abandoned and the stone court with angle towers - such as Goodrich and Brampton Bryan - became the norm.

Transformations also occurred in the way that these new stone castles were defended. The entrance to the castle evolved by stages from a simple gap in the curtain wall to a gap with flanking towers and finally to a gatehouse with elaborate passage systems flanked by towers and defended by a portcullis and heavy wooden double doors.

This new style of castle was a serious investment that could only be undertaken by a financially secure lord or the king, and was no longer within the reach of any lord with a piece of land to his name, as the timber castles had been.

Medieval buildings were at greater risk of structural damage and decay, and all castles needed a certain amount of income set aside each year for repairs and modifications. As timber was prone to decay the timber-built castles required more damage control than the later stone castles.

A medieval castle was often erected with inadequate, or in some cases no, foundations. In later years this could lead to the subsidence or collapse of some structures.

There was no concrete in the medieval period, only lime mortar. The tools that the builders had access to were simple in form, and stonemasons found it easier to cut softer stone accurately into the shape and size required. However this meant that often the stone used for castles was easily weathered and eroded.

Medieval castles also lacked a damp course, which all modern houses have to have. This meant that castles were very exposed to the elements and subject to damp, which would eat away at the lower levels of the castle walls, often causing them to partially collapse.

The only way to heat a castle was by means of open fires. In timber structures the consequences of an out of control fire are obvious. In stone castles much of the interior was still built out of timber and so they too were vulnerable to damage caused by fire. There was no way of recouping losses in the event of an accident, which often meant that rebuilding was impossible.

All these factors meant that stone and timber castles required a great deal of upkeep and expenditure. The income of a castle depended heavily on farming, taxes and rents. When a castle was in use this capital could be quite high with money to spare for repairs. During times of war or poor harvest the income of a castle would be quite low and repairs would likely have been put off for a better day, which may never have come. 

In the medieval period a lord would sometimes own many castles; he could not live in all of these castles, nor is it likely that he could have afforded to pay staff to keep each castle. A large building, such as a castle, would need constant upkeep to remain in a habitable state. Drains would need un-blocking and rotting timber and roof tiles would have needed replacing, to name but a few of the endless maintenance duties. This meant that the tendency towards decay in uninhabited castles was high.

As a consequence of these factors new castles and castles rebuilt in stone were becoming less frequent, and the number of active castles in Herefordshire went into decline.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

The military aspect of the castle had changed. Now the emphasis was on the castle as a domestic home rather than a defensive fortress. Semi-fortified manor houses with crenellations and gatehouses were the nobility's new answer to castles and the symbol of aristocracy that they had once been. The "castles" of the later medieval era were designed to say more about the wealth and social status of the owner than the need for defence.

Castles also suffered as they were not developed to withstand the new forms of artillery. The introduction of gunpowder and the development of more sophisticated artillery called for more advanced castle design and many more of the smaller timber-framed castles became useless.

Cannons were developed in the 14th century and by the 15th century were widespread in Europe. These cannons could do serious damage to smaller castles. In the 15th century ammunition for cannons took the form of round stone balls, however methods changed and soon cast iron shot became the ammunition of choice. Cast iron has a density almost three times that of stone and is very hard. When fired against masonry it did not shatter on impact as stone balls often did and it could cause much greater damage. Gunpowder had first been mixed by the alchemists of the 13th century, and by the 14th and 15th centuries the grade of gunpowder and the experience of those using it had greatly improved, making it a much more effective form of attack.

The solution to cannon attack was to rebuild the masonry walls of the castle so that they were thicker. Again this required time and expense, which many castle owners did not have. Also castles that had been modified and adapted were no substitute for castles and other buildings that had been designed and built specifically to carry and withstand artillery.

The final nail in the coffin for castles in the Marches and Herefordshire came about because of their independence as separate Marcher lordships. To the successive monarchs of England the fact that on the borderland lords were ruling their own estates as quasi-kings, with no deference to the sovereign, was one that grated. The dissolution of these castles and estates came about in the 15th and 16th centuries when the Crown acquired many Marcher estates as a result of the Wars of the Roses. In effect this made the king the most powerful and far-reaching Marcher lord. This meant that many of the castles of the Marches now became uninhabited and began to fall into disrepair, and were fit neither for war nor residence.

As the king began to absorb more and more land it became less and less necessary to have so many administrative centres, and so many of the castles of Herefordshire and the borderlands became redundant.

Castles had been expensive to build and maintain, so as the necessity for military defence subsided after the 13th and 14th centuries men of rank began to look for  less burdensome and costly structures. These requirements were met in the form of the manor house. These large houses still displayed the trappings of high rank and status but were somewhat more comfortable and more affordable.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

Castle owners were now required to obtain a "licence to crenellate", which meant that structures with towers and battlements were controlled. These licences were granted by the king and were not issued to all and sundry. Castles could no longer be built by anyone that could afford to do so.

Within these licenses to crenellate the design elements of the castle lived on in later monastic and religious houses, as well as colleges in Oxford and Cambridge and in private manor houses. It was the role of the castle as a centre of administration, justice and power that began to decline rapidly.

The local lords and barons who would have previously built castles now looked for less burdensome structures that would at the same time indicate their power and status. These requirements were met by the manor house, which was more comfortable and cheaper to build and maintain.

Many of these new manor houses, such as Lower Brockhampton (HER no. 7157), had features that had long been associated with castles, such as moats and gatehouses. This gave the impression that the inhabitants were important and wealthy but allowed them to live more simply.

The Civil War in 1642 had a major effect on the life span of castles. Many castles in Herefordshire were damaged because of the fighting. Brampton Bryan (HER no. 191), which had been defended by the Parliamentarian Lady Brilliana Harley, had been hit so hard by cannon fire that little of the roof remained and hardly a dry room was left. And it was not just damage caused by fighting that was the downfall of the castles. Many castles were deliberately slighted by the Royalists or the Parliamentarians to prevent the other side from gaining control of them. Most of these castles were not repaired afterwards, as there were neither the funds nor the inclination by their owners to do so.

By the 17th century the castle, which for so long had symbolised the upturn in society and architecture in England during the medieval period, had almost ceased to be. Although many still existed in Herefordshire very few were in a habitable state. They continued to be passed down through the generations but now the family homes existed elsewhere.

There was one last brief return to the majestic architecture of the castle during a revival period in the late 18th and 19th centuries, when castles such as Eastnor (HER no. 6709) and Downton (HER no. 6365) were built. However, these "castles" were not a return to the necessity of fortification and defence. The purpose of these structures was grandiose decoration and artistic landscapes. They were grand statements of social standing and representations of the romance associated with medieval lords and ladies, knights and barons, which was being promoted by the literature and art of the period.

Never again would there be defensive architecture with the same plurality and profusion throughout Herefordshire, or indeed England. The differences between the social classes which had once been so vast were now beginning to level out and it was beyond the reach of most landowners to undertake such massive constructions. The manor house was now the "castle" of choice. It was, status wise, almost as good as the castle but much more comfortable, affordable and desirable.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

Fighting Men

In the medieval period there were two main types of fighting men: knights and foot soldiers.

Knights were members of the nobility. To become a knight you had to train hard and be prepared to live by virtue and chivalry. It was generally accepted in the medieval period that only the sons of knights could become knights. In battle knights rode on horseback and were dressed in strong metal armour designed to protect the body from sword blades and arrows. Knights also had helmets, shields and long swords. This equipment was very expensive and could often cost the equivalent of 100 years' salary of an ordinary labourer. 

Foot soldiers fought on the ground; they had very little body protection and were usually only equipped with pikes (long spears) or bows and arrows. It was these men who were most likely to die in battle.

Both sets of men were recruited by the lord of a castle to fight for his cause and if necessary to die doing so. Knights that served a particular lord were required to do knight's service at one of his castles  - this could be up to forty days per year.

By the 14th century some men had become professional fighters, realising that they could make more money out of the sacking and pillaging (robbing) of a town than by manual labour.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

The attackers found many different ways to try and force the defenders of a castle to surrender. The first was to use siege engines to attack the castle. There were several different types of siege engines, designed to get missiles over the tall castle walls or cause as much damage as possible. One method was to build a siege tower or "belfry". This was a quickly-constructed tower of wood that could be wheeled up to the castle walls, which would then allow the attackers to fire arrows and other missiles over the walls and onto the castle defenders. 

Other ways of attacking involved machines (known collectively as siege engines) that hurled missiles at the castle. These siege engines took three forms: the ballista (a kind of large crossbow), counterpoise machines (the trebuchetand the perrier), and the mangonel (a giant catapult). The ballista used the torsion method of propulsion. It was mounted on a wooden stand, and its arms were fastened to twisted ropes. The bowstring was then cranked back, and the increasing pressure put the ropes under strain. When the pressure had reached the right level, a release mechanism shot the missile towards its target. The ballista had a considerable range.

The perrier was the smaller of the counterpoise machines. It had a launching arm which pivoted on a bar, resembling a seesaw. To operate the perrier, a team of men pulled down on ropes fastened to one end. At the other end was a sling containing the missile. The missile's weight was affected by the force exerted by the men pulling on the rope, and when the rope was released the launching arm was levered forwards with great force, hurling the missile at speed. The perrier was relatively quick and easy to re-set and fire again. The trebuchet, on the other hand, was larger, heavier and slower to re-set. The downforce on its lever was provided by a ballast-filled box rather than a team of men, and it fired large rocks. The trebuchet's huge size and range made it the most effective of the siege engines.

The mangonel was used to throw missiles, such as rocks and ceramic-encased incendiaries, high in the air. It consisted of a cradle, which contained the missile to be fired. The cradle was pulled back using twisted ropes and then let go, releasing the missile. The missiles used were relatively small compared to the size of the mangonel itself, but they could be shot with some accuracy.

The attackers also tried to undermine the castle walls. This involved digging tunnels underneath the corner of one of the walls, filling it with twigs and wood and setting fire to it. The fire would eventually cause this area of wall to collapse, sometimes allowing the attackers entrance into the castle. Arrows coated in burning tar were also fired at the castle walls; the tar would stick and burn away the mortar between the bricks, causing the wall to partially collapse. A pointer, sometimes called a mouse, was used to dig away at the mortar around the stones of the castle walls, again in the hope of causing partial collapse.

Battering rams were made to try and break down the strong doors of the castle. These battering rams consisted of a very long, thick log that was rigged up on a mechanism with wheels. This allowed the attackers to push the battering ram along the ground and to hit the door of the castle, in the hope of smashing it in. Often the end of the battering ram would be covered in tar and set alight in the hope that this would do more damage to the castle's strong wooden doors.

Compassion was not a concept recognised by men at war in the medieval period. Any means that might secure a surrender by the opposition were used. At one castle siege at Crema in Italy, in 1160, the German Emperor Frederick Barbarossa had the captured relatives of the defenders tied to his siege-towers in the belief that the defenders would not set fire to them and risk the lives of their family, however he was wrong and the prisoners tied to the towers burnt to death.

If the attackers could not force their way into the castle then their other aim was to force the defenders out. This was done by cutting off their supplies of food. The besiegers wanted to impose starvation on the defenders in the hope of causing a quick surrender. They would burn down crops in the vicinity of the castle and slaughter livestock. At the siege of Brampton Bryan in Herefordshire during the English Civil War the castle water supply was poisoned in an attempt to weaken Lady Brilliana Harley and her men who were defending the castle. However Lady Brilliana's determination was strong and she defended her castle for 45 days until her besiegers withdrew to Gloucester.

Conditions inside the castle would begin to get worse the lower the food supplies got. People would be too weak to fight and illness and disease would begin to spread. Medical supplies, which were primitive at best, would quickly become scarce and many men would become unable to fight or would die from their wounds. With the castle surrounded by the enemy it was impossible to get new supplies in or the wounded out. As hunger and illness set in the morale of the inhabitants of the castle would suffer, to the advantage of the enemy. Men who had neither the spirit nor the energy to fight were a much more desirable opponent than the strong or bloodthirsty.

Sometimes the enemy would try and cause illness to those inside the castle, knowing that this would severely weaken their opponents. One particularly effective way was to poison the castle's water supply, however sometimes a castle would have an internal water tank. It has also been known for attackers to throw diseased animals over the walls of the castle in the hope of spreading disease to the inhabitants and the few animals they might be keeping inside. Without food and water and with disease rife in the castle the defenders would be at a considerable disadvantage.

If the inhabitants of the castle did surrender then their fate was in the hands of the victorious leader of the opposition forces. He could choose to spare their lives or have them executed. Goodrich Castle was besieged by Colonel Birch during the Civil War in 1646; on 31st July the inhabitants surrendered and Colonel Birch agreed terms that spared their lives. After an agreement had been reached the besiegers then had the right to sack and pillage the castle and its buildings. This meant that for three days they could seize the property and possessions of the defenders as their reward for defeating them. During these three days the victors could do as they pleased, and so the sacking of a castle was often more destructive than the war that had been waged against it.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

The ditch surrounding the castle mound was one of the first and most important defensive mechanisms that a castle presented to its enemy. If the ditch was breached then the attackers had to fight their way up the steep sides of the motte. The idea was to prevent your enemy from coming into close quarters with your fortress. Often at this point sorties (fighting groups) were sent out from the castle to attack. As they were fighting downhill they had the advantage as the men coming up were tired from the climb and the defenders could rain blows down upon them.

The most effective ditches were those filled with water as they were harder and more tiring to cross and the attacker would then be forced to fight in wet and heavy clothes. Often the wet ditches were dug too deep to be crossed by men or horses.
 
The defenders would also position archers along the castle walls to pick off the men of the opposing side. These archers would fire from the battlements or through narrow openings in the castle wall, called arrow loops. Both of these allowed the defending archer a view of the enemy but also gave him protection from any return fire. They would fire flaming arrows onto the siege towers and siege engines of the enemy, burning them down and rendering them unusable.

The defenders also used the battlements to pour things onto the attackers. These included boiling water and tar which would burn and scald the skin. They also had meutriers or murder holes through which they could fire arrows or pour hot liquids down upon the enemy. At Goodrich Castle, near Ross-on-Wye, these murder holes are found in the vaulting between the portcullises in the gatehouse passage. This meant that if the enemy managed to gain access to the castle then the defenders could attack and hopefully prevent the enemy from getting any further. The meutriers also had another purpose; they could be used to pour water onto fires that the enemy might light in the gate passage, as fire was one of the most commonly used and most destructive forms of attack.

The defenders also used siege engines such as the ballista, mangonel and trebuchet, their targets being the siege towers and temporary bases of the enemy. Their aim was to do as much damage as possible before the tables were turned.

The inhabitants of a castle had one advantage: as the enemy had no walls to hide behind, the defenders had a better view of what they were up to. Often this advantage could be used to play tricks on the enemy. At one castle siege the inhabitants caused a scene on one side of the castle, drawing the enemy to this area to see what the commotion was about. While the enemy was occupied a band of men on horseback rode out from another side of the castle and attacked them from behind. So the defenders could also use cunning to get an advantage over their opponents.

During another siege the defenders, seeing that their supplies were quickly running out and that the enemy were beginning to believe that their surrender would now be imminent, filled a pig carcass with the last of their grain and threw it out over the wall. The carcass burst and the enemy seeing all the grain believed that the castle had so much that they were even feeding their pigs on it. Thinking that the siege would continue for a long time before it was over they gave in and rode away. 

However, if the enemy was successful in preventing food and supplies from reaching the castle then victory was likely to be theirs. A castle may have had advance warning of the impending siege and been able to stockpile supplies, bring in their livestock and fill up their water tanks, but these supplies would not have lasted forever and as the stockpile went down so too would the living conditions. The defenders needed both meat and fresh vegetables to provide a healthy diet and to keep them fit and strong. Once these were in short supply then the health of the inhabitants was the first thing to suffer, and they became more susceptible to disease. Without food to sustain them, the men soon became tired and could not fight with any strength.

Castles were heated by fires, so once the fuel to keep these alight had been used then the castle became a cold and damp place to live. This made the inhabitants more at risk from fever, pneumonia and hypothermia, especially at night when the temperature dropped. Water was usually stored within the castle in tanks, but stagnant water is a breeding ground for diseases such as typhoid and dysentery; coupled with the poor diet this could quickly cripple the defenders.

At this point morale inside the castle was low. The strong needed to continue fighting to save the castle but the weak and ill needed treatment. When food got extremely low and there was hardly enough to go round, the weak and ill would be sent outside the castle and into the mercy of the opposition. Sometimes they would be free to go but sometimes the enemy would refuse to allow the sick to pass through their lines. They could not return to the castle as supplies were too low so they were stuck outside the walls of the castle and often left to die a slow death.

It was usually the starvation and poor health of the besieged that ended the battle. When the defenders could fight no longer they would surrender themselves to the enemy and hope for lenient treatment. Often they would offer the enemy the more precious items from within the castle in the hope that this would spare their homes from the destructive sacking which was the right of the victors.

[Original author: Miranda Greene, 2002]

The Pembridge helm is said to have belonged to Sir Richard Pembridge, an illustrious member of the Pembridge family associated with Clehonger and Pembridge Castle in Welsh Newton. Sir Richard fought alongside the Black Prince at Poitiers in France in 1356 and received many royal appointments and favours. He was also created Knight of the Garter. In 1371 he was made chamberlain of the royal household, but fell out of favour with Edward III when he refused to accept the office of Lieutenant/Deputy in Ireland. Many of his offices and lands were confiscated.

The 19th century antiquarian, the Rev Charles J. Robinson, stated that Sir Richard Pembridge had been buried in Blackfriars Monastery in Hereford, but when this building was demolished during the Dissolution, Richard's tomb was moved to Hereford Cathedral. The former cathedral librarian, Ms Joan Williams, however, has refuted this version, pointing out that Sir Richard Pembridge was buried in the Cathedral from the outset. There is documentary evidence that someone applied to the cathedral authorities to be buried in the cathedral next to the tomb of Sir Richard Pembridge, not long after Sir Richard's death.

Ms. Williams also informed me that the nickname of the effigy of Sir Richard is "the man with four legs". This came about because one of his legs was damaged during the Civil War. The damaged leg was replaced by a wooden one, which in turn was replaced by a marble one in the 19th century, hence four legs! I am told the wooden one still exists.

The helm, a tabard (a knight's sleeveless or short-sleeved coat) and shield were displayed with the tomb, but the helm was sold to Sir Samuel Meyrick, a great collector of armour and owner of Goodrich Court. The tabard and shield have long since disappeared, and are said to have been stolen. Other sources suggest that the shield was broken when the West Tower of the Cathedral collapsed in 1786. 
 
(I am grateful to Mr. Andrew Brown and Ms. Joan Williams for providing information for this article.)

[Original author: Toria Forsyth-Moser, 2003]

The entries in this section were originally written by Miranda Greene in 2002.

Historic Environment Record reference no. 10099, Ordnance Survey grid reference: SO 4041 7114

On the basis of aerial photographs and cropmarks a site has been identified that may have once been the location of a medieval motte.

On a ridge just to the east of the village lies a circular cropmark with an irregular ditch. This feature is too large to be consistent with a barrow, and unfortunately has been ploughed out making further assessment difficult.

Adforton was a demesne manor of the Mortimers in 1086. This fact makes its interpretation as a medieval castle site less likely as it is only 2km north of the main Mortimer seat, Wigmore Castle.

It is in a good position to regulate the passage of the road running north from Wigmore.

Allensmore: possible motte

HER no. 16507, OS grid ref: SO 4511 3588

The second half of the name comes from the Old English word mor,which means "wet, low lying ground". The presence of another settlement with the name More on the north-west side of Hereford probably encouraged the use of the affix Allen-, to distinguish the two places. The Domesday Book records that the bishop of Hereford had a manor called More in Straddle Hundred, south of Hereford. Records dating from later than the Domesday Book show that Allensmore was always in the hands of the bishop, and it probably acquired the affix Allen from Alan fitzMain (c.1141) who held the manor under the bishop. (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 24).

Located at this grid reference is a large circular feature, the very northern portion of which is still under pasture while the rest has been ploughed. This may represent a motte visible now only as a cropmark.

Almeley: Oldcastle twt

HER no. 1704, OS grid ref: SO 3281 5201

(Also known as Batch Twt)

750 yards to the north-west of the church of St Mary, on the end of a spur, can be found earthworks that suggest this area may have once been the site of a small medieval motte and bailey.

Description of the Oldcastle twt site today

The spur on which this motte and bailey stands has steep slopes to the east, west and south at the confluence of two streams.

The circular motte can be found on the southernmost point of the spur and has a base diameter of 40m. It rises 6m above the bottom of the ditch that lies between it and the bailey to the north. The base diameter of the motte is 40m. It is separated from the bailey by a ditch 10m wide and 2m deep that opens out at both ends upon natural slopes, which encircle the motte and are separated from it by a 7m wide berm.

The bailey is rectangular in shape with a ditch cut across the base of the spur and with an internal rampart. The bailey measures 40m x 30m and is bounded on the east and west by natural slopes. It is separated from a ridge to the north by a ditch 12m wide and 2m deep.

The inner rampart is 12m wide and 4.4m high, although this has been cut away in the centre for a length of 16m for an 18th or 19th century cottage.

Modern pathways have left the motte much mutilated and in a bad condition. A cottage has been built in what was probably once the entranceway on the east side. The bailey is currently under pasture.

History of Oldcastle twt

1360: Tradition has it that Sir John Oldcastle once lived here. Sir John Oldcastle (Lord Cobham in right of his wife) was born about 1360 and served as Sheriff in his native county in the seventh year of the reign of Henry IV. Lord Cobham was known as the Lollard martyr and rebel (Lollards were followers of John Wycliffe, the 14th century English religious reformer). He was condemned as a heretic and "hanged and burnt hanging" on Christmas Day 1417. Almeley has a better claim to be the birthplace of Sir John than the remote village of Oldcastle, which is beyond the borders of Herefordshire on the banks of the River Monnow.

1428: Sir John's son Henry obtained a restoration of part of the castle estates after they had been confiscated by the Crown. Almeley Castle came into the possession of his heirs, the Milbournes.

Almeley: Woonton Castle

HER no. 31114, OS grid ref: SO 3570 5242

Almeley Wooton means a "settlement near a wood", from the Old English wudu-tun (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 25).

Earthworks remains of a small castle have been noted approximately 400m east-north-east of Woonton. The site has been heavily ploughed in recent years and is currently under pasture. Enough of the earthworks survive to identify the castle mound, a possible motte and outworks.

Ashperton: Ashperton Castle

HER no. 460, OS grid ref: SO 6418 4151

Ashperton parish and village are some 5 miles north-west of Ledbury. There are several suggestions as to the origin of the name Ashperton - one theory is that is derived from the Old English words for "pear orchard", peretun, with aesc (meaning "ash tree") as a prefix. Another suggestion is that the name is derived from the Old English aescbeorh which means "ash hill".  The first suggestion is more likely as it fits more easily with the modern form. (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 26)

Description of the Ashperton site today

The remains of the site consist of earthworks forming an oval island within a moat and a roughly oval enclosure to the east, within which stands the church.

The island rises about one foot above the surrounding ground, which covers about 0.6 acres. This island is approached by a causeway on the east. The moat is approximately 20 foot wide on the east but it widens to an angle on the north, west and south.

Around the north and east sides of the outer enclosure runs a dry ditch. Traces of this ditch can also be seen on the east and south sides of the churchyard.

History of Ashperton Castle

1270: Ashperton was the property of John de Monmouth until this year, when John died and the land passed to William de Grandison, who was the son of a Burgundian noble. He was summoned to Parliament in the reigns of both Edward I and Edward II.

1292: William de Grandison had built a manor at Ashperton and in this year he received a licence from the king to crenellate, which meant that he could convert it into a castle. Three of the children of William themselves gained great distinction.

The eldest son, Sir Peter, was summoned to the parliament of Edward III and died in 1357. He is buried in Hereford Cathedral and his tomb, once supposed to commemorate one of the Bohuns, is on the north side of the Lady Chapel.

1327: The middle son, John de Grandison, was the great-nephew of Bishop Cantilupe (St. Thomas of Hereford) and was himself made Bishop of Exeter.

The youngest son, Sir Otho Grandison, was a statesman and warrior and was sent as an ambassador to the Pope by Edward II. Otho died in 1359 and left strict instructions for his burial. He wished that no horse or armed man should go before him, and his body should not be wrapped in a cloth decorated with gilt and arms, but in a plain white cloth marked with a cross.

18th century: Any stonework of the castle that remained was removed.

The castle has now completely disappeared but the moat around the island still remains and is full of water.

Avenbury: possible castle

HER no. 18107, OS grid ref: SO 6490 5070

Avenbury is a village in the north-east of Herefordshire, 2 miles south of Bromyard. It is nestled in a loop of the River Frome amongst the hills.

The second part of the name of the village, "bury", comes from the word "burh" which is the name for an Anglo-Saxon settlement that was surrounded by a bank of earth. This may suggest that a settlement existed here some time before the Norman Conquest of England in 1066.

There is a possible castle site here which is indicated in the 1840 Tithe Award for the village, where there are two fields recorded as Big Castle Field and Little Castle Field.  These fields were both owned by Benjamin Saunders in 1840.

Aylton: Castlefield

HER no. 18137, OS grid ref: SO 6580 3800

Aylton is a small parish in the east of Herefordshire, 3 miles west of Ledbury.

The name of the village means "Aethelgifu's estate". The personal name is feminine, which is rare. The Domesday Survey shows that in 1086 the estate was in the king's manor of Much Marcle and was therefore part of the area called Merchelai.  In the Herefordshire section of the Domesday Book the place name is identified as Aylton (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 29).

There is a possible castle site north-west of the church, of which very little is evident.

Aymestrey: Castle Mound, Camp Wood

HER no. 1701, OS grid ref: SO 3960 6540

Aymestrey is a parish in the north-west of the county, some 5 miles from Leominster and just to the south of Wigmore. The mound is situated in Camp Wood, north of the River Lugg. It is about 2 miles west of the church and lies on a small spur.

Description of the Aymestry site today

There is a circular mound approx. 37m in diameter and with a height of 5m.

There is no ditch to the west and south sides of the motte but there is evidence of scarping having been added to the already steep slope down to the River Lugg. The ditch surrounding the rest of the motte is deep and clear.

The interior of the motte is flat with a high bank surround and a continuous rampart, except on the west side.

Foundation and history of the Aymestry site

The castle is thought to have been founded by Hugh Mortimer c.1144-54.

Almeley is a small village in the north-west of Herefordshire, approximately 5 miles from Kington. The motte and bailey earthworks can be found south-west of the village church. The name of the village is derived from the word for "Elm Wood" with the medieval form of Alme-. At the time of the Domesday Survey (1086) it was known as Elmelie, but by the middle of the 11th century it was known as Almeleia. (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Record British Series 214, 1989, p. 25)

Description of the site today

Beside the church of Almeley is a grass-grown mound, upon which the keep of a medieval castle once stood.

The circular motte is 35m in diameter and 8m in height from the base of the encircling ditch. The ditch is 1.3m deep on the south side and 2.5m deep on the north side below the bailey. The ditch is 8m in width.

The bailey is 50m square and bounded by a ditch on the east side, 12m in width and 2m in depth. The ditch formerly continued around the north side but has since been filled in to form a graveyard extension of the nearby church.
 
The west side of the bailey is bounded artificial steepening of the natural slopes, presenting a bank 4.5m in height.

Traces of an inner bank can be seen on the north-west side of the bailey, and the original causewayed entrance appears to have been in the east side. To the south-west of the castle motte are two rectangular depressions, which are thought to have been fishponds supplying the castle.

Roughly 50m south-west of the motte, traces of two medieval fishponds can be seen. These fishponds - now dry - are at the foot of a ridge by a stream. One fishpond measures 42m x 20m and the other 50m x 18m. The whole site of the ancient castle is now under pasture.

The motte would have once had commanding views across to the south and east, giving it a defensive advantage.

Foundation and history of the castle

Neither the Domesday Survey nor the earliest lists of border fortifications make any mention of an ancient castle on this site and no evidence exists as to when Almeley Castle was built. It is presumed that the castle was built during the unsettled state of the country during the reign of Stephen, and it appears as a castellum in the Patent Rolls of John and Henry II.

1086: According to the Domesday Book, Almeley had passed into the possession of Roger de Lacy. It included four hides which paid tax, and land for eight ploughs.  The men from another village worked in Almeley and paid 37s 8d to do so. It became one of the estates of the de Lacy Honour of Weobley and as such was occupied by Roger Pychard in 1242. 

1216: William Cantilupe was constable of the castle in this year.

1231: Henry III received homage from Simon de Montfort when he stopped in Almeley on 22nd September 1231.

In the reign of Henry VII the castle was brought as dowry to Thomas Monnington of Sarnesfield by one of the twelve co-heiresses of Sir Simon Milbourne. Descendants of Thomas Monnington were the owners of Almeley Castle up to 1670.

From the Monningtons the castle passed to the Pembers of Newport and then through purchase to the Foleys of Newport.

Historic Environment Record reference no. 369, Ordnance Survey grid reference: SO 3713 3356

Situated in the Golden Valley, 0.1km south-west of Newcourt Farm, lies a fortified enclosure triangular in shape.

In the eastern corner of the enclosure there is a small motte, 18ft x 11ft and 8ft high, which has a sinking top. This motte is 5ft above the bailey with a "rampart" around the top, roughly 2-3ft above the ground level of the motte. The outer face of this rampart shows some signs of having been revetted with stone.

At the western apex of the enclosure is found a small, circular mound with a rectangular depression, no more than 6-8ft, showing traces of buried masonry.

The mound is protected on two sides (the north-east and south-east) by a mainly natural double scarp, which runs for 10ft below the enclosure. In between these scarps there is a berm. A ditch and inner rampart protect the third side of the enclosure. The exterior ditch may have once been a wet defence system.

In 1086 Gilbert held Bacton from Roger de Lacy. One of his descendants, perhaps William de Bacton or Richard de Hampton, is thought to have built this small castle.

Brampton Bryan: Lower Pedwardine, motte and bailey

HER no. 189, OS grid ref: SO 3680 7047

Two kilometres south of the church at Brampton Bryan lies a roughly circular mound, 28.3m in diameter. It rises 3.6m above ground with a slight ditch to the south.

From the earthworks that remain at this site it is possible to make out an outer rampart which forms a small ditch on the south side. The area of the site exhibits platforms, enclosures and holloways.

Due west are two fields which show old field banks and enclosures, and are probably the remains of an ancient field system. To the north, silted up fishponds can be seen in a valley.

The settlement is mentioned in the Domesday Survey of 1086 as being held by Ralph de Mortimer; at this time it was called Pedewrde.

Brampton Bryan: Upper Pedwardine, motte and possible bailey

HER no. 188, OS grid ref: SO 3649 7078

0.4km to the north-west of the site at Lower Pedwardine is found what may be the traces of a medieval motte and bailey.

The southern part of the mound appears to have once been 33m across but it is hard to be definite about this, as the mound has since been half cut by more modern farm buildings.

The mound indicates traces of a tower, a small bailey and maybe even a dovecote, indicated by circular foundations to the south. The site however has become very confused by later farm buildings, which interrupt the immediate landscape.

Bredwardine: Bredwardine Castle

HER no. 1564, OS grid ref: SO 3350 4430

Immediately south of the churchyard and adjoining the River Wye are the earthworks and foundations described as a motte and bailey.

Description of the Bredwardine site today

There is an irregular oblong-shaped bailey with a narrow projection at the south end, on which once stood the keep. The keep appears to have been divided from the bailey by a ditch. The slight mound of the keep indicates foundations of a rectangular building 78ft x 45ft with a projecting bay on the west side and with two banks extending from either end of the south side, indicating the position of the curtain wall.

The enclosure is protected on the east by a scarp to the river and on the north and west sides runs a ditch. A double scarp with berm encloses the south side.

Foundation and history of the Bredwardine site

The Manor was granted to John de Bredwardine at the time of the Norman Conquest in 1066.

1227: The Castle had become the property of the Baskerville family, with the Bohuns as their overlords. In the following century it was held by Hugh de Lacy.

The building on the site was termed "Oldcastle" as early as the reign of Henry III; it is thought to have been built soon after the Conquest. It was rebuilt as a fortress during the wars of Stephen and Matilda, but this fortress was dismantled in the reign of Henry II or III.

1374: In September of this year it was described as being called "Castel Place" without mention of any fortifications. Seventy years after this date it is described as being a waste site with no annual value.

The ruined castle and manor passed from the family of Baskerville to the Vaughan family. Roger Vaughan converted the castle and manor into a multi-gabled house, thus losing the fortified nature of the building that would have classed it as a castle. This house was named the "Castle of Gronw", but it became a castle in name only.

Bredwardine: Castle Coppice

HER no. 12018, OS grid ref: SO 3360 4400

Just south of the site of Bredwardine Castle are two small valleys, across which banks have been built to form fishponds. This is the first clue to what may have once stood here.

Excavation has revealed two phases of timber buildings followed by a possible three stages of stone buildings. The whole site is thought to have been built and altered from the 12th century to the 16th century.

The earlier periods of building could represent the remains of a castle or defended site, whilst remains from the 14th century appear to suggest that by this time it had become little more than a farm complex.

(Ron Shoesmith, Castles & Moated Sites of Herefordshire, Logaston Press, 1996, p. 64)

Brilley: Cwmma Farm

HER no. 5582, OS grid ref: SO 2760 5140

Brilley is a parish in the north-west of the county, close to the Welsh border. Its location near the border is evident in its name which contains elements of both Welsh and English.

2.8km north-east of the church, and just north of Cwmma Farm, is situated a circular mound 27m at its base and 5m in height. The mound is oval in shape and unusually even, with no flat top. Though damaged, the motte probably held a tower, as there is no room for anything else. Upon the wall on the counterscarp bank buried foundations of a chemise wall can be found. There is much loose stone on the site, some of which shows diagonal tooling.

The upper bailey contains buried foundations but is densely covered by trees and undergrowth. Other evidence has been destroyed by roads and ploughing

There still exist signs of substantial wet defences, and a stream that runs through the ditch on the west could have made this a wet moat.

Buckton and Coxall: mound at Buckton

HER no. 195, OS grid ref: SO 3831 7322

The parish of Buckton and Coxall is situated on low-lying land to the west of the village of Leintwardine. The first part of the name Buckton may come from the Old English Bucca which means "he-goat", but it may also be derived from the name of a person, Bucca. (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names,  British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 49)

Just to the south-west of Buckton Farm, and close to a mill leat from the River Teme, is an oval mound 39m across at the base and rising to 4m above the dry ditch, now partially destroyed. It is possible that this ditch was once fed from the mill leat, making it a wet defence.

Some stone exists in the mound, but not enough to be sure of the size, shape or scale of buildings that may have once existed there. The bailey may be underneath the present farm buildings and there is evidence of a second bailey on ground to the west of the motte.

Byton: motte and bailey

HER no. 11169, OS grid reference: SO 3705 6412

6.5km from Wigmore, just to the south of Byton church, can be found what is described as a motte with traces of a former shell keep and possible gatehouse to the south. The bailey, to the north, includes the church. At the south end there is evidence of a gatehouse with small twin towers like those at Brampton Bryan.

Documentary sources date this site to c.1190.

The village of Brampton Bryan is situated in the north-west corner of Herefordshire. The castle ruins are on a floodplain south of the River Teme, 50m north of the church. From this site the castle guarded an important route from Ludlow along the Teme Valley to Knighton and on into central Wales.

The castle was built at the point where the valley narrowed between the heights of Brampton Bryan Park on the south and Coxall Knoll (an Iron Age fort) to the north. This area has been important since Roman times, and three Roman forts are situated within 2.5km to the east.

Description of the site today

The monument includes the ruined earthwork and buried remains of the quadrangular castle. The medieval layout appears to have been of four ranges built around a courtyard, with a gatehouse contained within the southern curtain wall, to which a large outer gatehouse was added. The whole monument was constructed on a motte and surrounded by a moat, with the approach to the castle being from the south across a bridge to the gatehouse.

The north range contained the hall and service bay, both at first floor level, with the kitchen to the east. Private accommodation was found in the other ranges, with further chambers above the gate passage of the inner gatehouse and on the first floor of the outer gatehouse.

Unfortunately landscaping for the later house and gardens has obscured the full extent of the castle buildings. The steep slope to the north of the hall range wall, which now continues eastwards along the edge of the garden, probably represents the original northern extent of the motte.

The standing remains are built out of local sandstone rubble and ashlar, and are listed as Grade I. These ruins represent several phases of construction, and include the outer gatehouse, part of the inner gatehouse and part of the south wall of the hall and kitchen range. The earliest documentary evidence tells us that Bryan de Brampton had a "tower with curtilage" on this site in 1295.

The barbican

The barbican consists of two semi-circular towers and their stretches of curtain wall which connect them to the gatehouse. The towers are of two storeys with a height of approximately 25ft to their battlements and a circumference of c.5m.

The entrance to the castle is through these towers via a 13th century pointed archway. The towers on either side of the barbican entrance contain window-loops. These are very small and would be almost useless for defensive purposes or for letting light through. Therefore it has been suggested that their purpose was simply for decoration. 

The east and west towers provide access to the guard chambers. The door of the east tower appears to be of standard 13th century design. The west tower is entered via an archway underneath the entrance to the first floor. Its ground floor is almost circular and contains a well, which has now been almost completely filled in.

The eastern tower of the barbican has a passage which leads to a garderobe chamber to the north, housed in a square projection from the curtain wall. The room has one small light, a garderobe chute and a medieval fireplace. This suggests that this tower once provided living accommodation for a member of the castle staff.

The first floor of the barbican towers can only be reached by the mural staircase in the western curtain wall. The steps of this staircase are high and difficult to climb, while at the top is a coffin-shaped doorway. The first floor incorporates both the east and west towers as one; the west side has two windows with miniature seats.

The parapet gives the illusion of military function but in reality the 18 inch walkway and battlements would have been next to useless in times of attack.

The gatehouse

The great hall and inner gatehouse of the current structure are thought to be the earliest stages of construction, which were either Bryan de Brampton's work or were built shortly after 1309, when the castle passed to Robert Harley by his marriage to de Brampton's daughter Margaret.

The inner gatehouse projected inwards from the southern curtain wall, which still stands to its east and west, and its north and south wall stand almost to their full original height. Two arches through the wall form the entrance, with an opening for a portcullis between them. An early example of ballflower work can still be seen over the inner arch. 

There is a single arch at the northern exit of the gateway passage, to the east of which is a contemporary doorway and to the west the shell of a 16th century stair turret. The first floor would have housed the portcullis, and contains a single chamber, with a garderobe or latrine closet. Single windows, both with seats in their embrasures, flank a fireplace in the north wall. With the construction of the outer gatehouse two doorways were inserted into the south wall of the inner gatehouse, giving access to the upper staircases and walkway along the top of the outer gatehouse walls. At second floor level the single chamber in the inner gatehouse also has a fireplace and garderobe.

The outer gatehouse was added sometime later in the 14th century. The gateway in its south wall consists of two arches enclosing a portcullis groove. Two round towers flank this entrance, each of c.5m external diameter and with two storeys remaining. On the ground floor the east tower contains a polygonal chamber, with a fireplace in the south-west quarter with a single window to the west, and a garderobe to the north of the passage doorway.

The first floor chamber is open to a portcullis room over the gate arch, and has two windows and a gardrobe above the one on the ground floor. The portcullis room itself has a fireplace in the north wall. The west tower houses a circular chamber at ground level, with a well at its centre now infilled. The chamber above has two windows, one with ballflower ornament.

The remains of the hall and kitchen are c.12m north of the inner gatehouse. The courtyard, which separated them, was cut through within the last century to provide access between the later house to the west and the tennis courts to the east. All that remains of the hall block is part of the original 14th century south wall, and the three-storied 16th century staircase bay enclosing the original doorway. Both the hall and the service bay were at ground level and lit by windows facing onto the courtyard. The kitchen was at basement level and rose through two floors.

The staircase bay and the stair-turret were part of the considerable alterations begun in the 16th century by Thomas Harley. His intention was to increase the comfort and convenience of the castle to be that of a home rather than a military stronghold. 

Foundation and history of the site

1086: Brampton Bryan Castle is mentioned in the Domesday Survey of 1086 as part of the estate of Ralph de Mortimer. The date of the foundation of the castle is uncertain and may well have been some years after the Conquest of 1066.

1179: The de Bramptons were involved with Hugh de Mortimer in the foundation of the Abbey at Wigmore. The second stone was laid by Bryan de Brampton and the third by his son John.

1294: Bryan de Brampton (not the same as mentioned above) died and his daughter Margaret married Robert Harley. For almost 700 years since this date the castle has remained in the Harley family.

In the Wars of the Roses the Harleys took the field under the banner of the House of York due to their friendship with the Mortimers, and fought at the battle of Tewkesbury in 1461. The Harleys also fought in the battle against the Scots at Flodden in 1514.

1295: The earliest reference to a building at Brampton Bryan is in 1295 when the castle was described as having a tower with curtilage, a garden and a vivary. It was described as being worth £8 7s 8d per annum. The castle was held under the Mortimers, there being a yearly rent of 13s 4d and guard duty, which was due at Wigmore Castle for 40 days in wartime.

1603-: Sir Robert Harley was noted for his wit, learning, piety and his austere and decided character. He was very much a Puritan, was made Knight of the Bath and represented the counties of Radnorshire and Herefordshire in various Parliaments of James I and Charles I. As a member of these Parliaments Robert Harley was required to move away from Brampton Bryan and reside in London. It was left to his wife Brilliana to deal with the estate and the problems of being a Puritan in a Royalist area. The moat was filled and the services of a veteran sergeant called Hackluyt enlisted.

1642: The castle was almost entirely destroyed during the Civil War. It is apparent that the castle was still a defensive structure at the start of the Civil War: it was surrounded by a moat which could be filled with water, and approached by a drawbridge to the south. The Civil War tested the Harley family to their limits. During the war Herefordshire was very much a Royalist county. There were a few exceptions among some of the principal families, notably the Harleys. At this time Sir Robert Harley was married to his third wife, Brilliana, who was the second daughter of Viscount Conway.

1643: Sir William Vavasour, Royalist governor for the area, tried to persuade Brilliana to surrender her position but she refused. On 26 July Sir William Vavasour, Henry Lingen, Sir Walter Pye and William Smallman, supported by men on horseback and on foot, surrounded Brampton Bryan. 

On 30 July the church in front of the gatehouse was lost to the attackers and a great gun installed in the steeple. This gun was used to fire at the castle but, fortunately for Brilliana, to little avail. The Royalists then turned their attention to the village and burnt down the castle mills, 40 houses, the parsonage and the church. Despite the frenzied attacks of the Royalists the defenders suffered few casualties compared to the 60 deaths suffered by the opposition. (Ron Shoesmith, Castles & Moated Sites of Herefordshire, Logaston Press, p. 60)

On 9 September Colonel Lingen withdrew to Gloucester, leaving a castle of which "the roof ... was battered so that there was not one dry room in it".

Brilliana's piety and trust in God helped her to withstand the attacks by the Royalists. In her letters she wrote, "the Lord would show the men of the world that it is hard fighting against Heaven", and described her besiegement as "God's cause in which it would be an honour to suffer". Brilliana died in 1643, the victim of ill health brought on by the siege. 

1644: The castle was attacked by Sir Michael Woodhouse. Brampton Bryan's defence was strong but the attackers made clever use of mines and better artillery. The defenders finally surrendered and the buildings were sacked and burnt. The prisoners were transferred to Shrewsbury.

A couple of years later the Royalist cause was lost. Sir Robert Harley returned to Brampton Bryan and was able to claim recompense for damage done to the castle. His claim was granted at a sum of £13,000 pounds (£1,000 of which was for a study of books). This was a substantial amount, especially when compared to the sum of £1,000 pounds that was granted to Goodrich.

The castle remained in its ruined and burned state until the death of Sir Robert Harley in 1657. It has been the family seat of the Harleys from 1309 up to the present day.

Wilton means "the estate amongst the willows" (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names,  British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 44) or "the estate of Willa". Bridstow castle appears to have been more of a castellated mansion than a military castle. It stands less than 100 yards from the River Wye, guarding an important river crossing.

Description of the site today

Here stands a castle in ruins; the remaining walls are of local red sandstone with a few portions of tufa, which have probably been re-used. It has been suggested that this was once the site of a motte and bailey castle but all traces have now been removed. The castle was an irregular quadrilateral court with a curtain wall. It held a tower at each angle and one in the middle of the east wall. Within the courtyard, buildings would have stood against the curtain wall.

In the 16th century a house was built in the southern part of the castle, incorporating the south-west tower. This house was destroyed during the Civil War by Sir Henry Lingen and Lord Scudamore, and was rebuilt in the 19th century. 

The remains still visible consist of the west, north and part of the east walls, the south-west and north-west towers and the middle tower on the east wall. The site was formerly surrounded by a moat, which created a rectangular island. On the south side this moat has since been filled in, and on the east side the defences consisted of a scarp only.  

History and foundation of the site

1150: Henry I granted the manor of Wilton to Hugo de Longchamp to hold by service of two men at arms in the Wars of Wales. It is most probable that it was Hugo who erected the castle at Wilton.

1200: Hugo's descendant Henry de Longchamp paid scutage (a tax in lieu of service) for one knight's fee in Wilton. Henry's daughter Hawisia took the castle in her marriage settlement to William, Lord Fithurgh, whose heiress then took it as dowry to Reginald de Grey, Lord of the Honour of Monmouth and a Baron of Parliament.

1377-1394: Henry de Grey, a descendant of Reginald, was summoned to Parliament as Henry Grey of Wilton and was the ancestor of the noble family who enjoyed that title until the 17th century. One member of this family was Sir William Grey, 13th Baron and distinguished soldier. After defending the Castle of Guisnes against the French he was forced to surrender and was taken prisoner with a ransom of 20,000 crowns. To raise the money his family was forced to sell much of their property, and in 1576 Gilbert Talbot of Goodrich offered them £6000 for Wilton. The sale was never completed and the castle stayed in the de Grey family until the reign of Elizabeth I, when it passed to the Honourable Charles Brydges, cup bearer to King Philip.

The Hon. Charles Brydges was Deputy Lieutenant of the Tower of London when the warrant for the execution of the then Princess Elizabeth was issued. His delay in obeying this order was the act which saved the life of the young princess.

17th century: During the Civil War Wilton Castle was home to Sir John Brydges, who undertook military service in Ireland to escape the conflict at home. Sir John was married to Mary, eldest daughter of Lord Scudamore of Holme Lacy and sister of Sir Barnabas Scudamore, Royalist Governor of Hereford. When Brydges returned to England to gather more troops for Ireland he refused to let his house be used as a garrison for the Royalists. Scudamore and Henry Lingen, annoyed by his arrogance, took action and arranged for soldiers to burn the house to the ground whilst the family was at church.

This castle is one where building and reconstruction make dating more complex. The gateway was originally in the south wall where a 16th century house was built. In the 14th century reconstruction changed the earlier castle into a fortified dwelling, and by the 16th century all pretensions of defence had been lost.

Historic Environment Record reference no. 930, Ordnance Survey grid reference: SO 6709 4584

Occupying a strong, wooded position south-west of Fromes Hill and 0.3km east of the church can be found a motte hidden by post-war forestry.

Description of the Castle Frome site today

This motte is 45m in diameter, rising 4m above the bailey. The motte has slight sinking to the top. Stone can be found in the structure and may indicate the presence of stone walls.

The bailey has a deep ditch that surrounds the ringwork to the north, east and south. Entrance to the bailey was via a causeway across the ditch to the south. The general outline is visible on aerial photographs. These photographs show traces of two poorly-preserved baileys to the north and south.

Foundation and history of the Castle Frome site

It is very likely that Castle Frome was a stronghold from which the estates of Walter de Lacy in the Frome Valley were controlled. This suggests that the castle was most probably built just after the Norman Conquest of 1066.

It was in the King's control from 1155 to some time after 1216, when it was restored to the de Lacys. In 1244 Gilbert de Lacy borrowed £600 from Walter de Lacy, perhaps to begin a period of rebuilding at the castle.

Castle Frome: Millend Farm, possible castle

HER no. 9999, OS grid ref: SO 6565 4540

Close to the River Frome and 1.3km south-west of the church. Aerial photography has revealed a series of cropmarks that form a large, square enclosure with a smaller wide, square feature in the centre.

This site has been interpreted as a possible temporary castle built outside of winter months, or even a Roman signal station.

Clifford: Bach, motte and possible bailey

HER no. 581, OS grid ref: SO 2982 4337

A small motte on a platform, surrounded on three sides by a steep valley. The motte is situated 2.3km north-west of Dorstone and 1km south-east of Newton Tump. It lies almost directly on the border between the parishes of Clifford and Dorstone.

Roughly 3-4m high, it is circular in plan and created by scarping the naturally steep slopes of a spur to the west, south and east.

The mound is slightly domed in plan with a diameter of 24m north-south at its base and 10m at the top. It overlooks Newton Tump (HER no. 1401), 1km away to the north-west.

A railway embankment has sliced into the mound on the north-west, and any evidence of a bailey was destroyed when the railway was constructed. In 1977 the land was bulldozed to create fishponds, the mound being used as a dam. A possible vestige of a ditch may exist on the west side. The railway is now disused.

Clifford: Betw Hawkswood

HER no. 1231, OS grid ref: SO 2485 4274

The site consists of an earthwork on a slight natural spur from the north scarp of the hillside. There is a ringwork with an internal diameter of 12m which has been formed by a continuous bank 6m-8 m wide with a small gap on the south side, which was probably once the original entrance. The bank of the ringwork is 0.5m-1.5m high externally and 1m-1.5m internally.

There is no longer any evidence to say whether or not the site was once surrounded by a ditch. The most likely explanation for this site is that it is a medieval ringwork, or possibly the site of a siege castle.

Clifford: Old Castleton, motte and bailey

HER no.1015, OS grid ref: SO 2830 4560

The name Castleton means "farm by a castle" or perhaps "estate with a castle" (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 54).

Clifford is in the west of the county, right on the Welsh Border.

Four kilometres to the east of the main castle in Clifford is a well-preserved motte and bailey castle, standing on a rise on a bend of the River Wye well above the flood plain.

The motte rises 10m above ground on the south side but only 3m above the kidney-shaped bailey on the south, from which it is separated by a dry ditch. The diameter of the motte is 40m, while the bailey is 60m east to west and 40m north to south. A large rampart 11m-20m in width and 2m-4m in height internally bounds the bailey. The rampart rises to 3m-4m above the base of an outer ditch, which is 10m wide and 1.8m to 3.0m deep. The original entrance was through the south side.

Traces of masonry have been recorded on the motte, and there may have been a hall on a slight platform to the south-east. On the east and west sides were two lightly defended outer courts, but the bailey ramparts were not walled in stone.
 
Tradition has it that the castle was built by William fitz Osbern, however it differs from other known fitz Osbern earthworks and was very likely built by a follower of fitz Osbern, perhaps even his brother-in-law Ralph de Toeni or Tosny.  

Clifford: The Tump, Merbach

HER no. 24184, OS grid ref: SO 3040 4530

The name Merbach means a "stream-valley on a boundary". The parish boundary between Clifford and Bredwardine runs along the eastern side of the Merbach Hill. (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 55)

A tump (mound) overlooks the stream crossing at Merbach Bridge and the River Wye.

Combe: motte castle

HER no. 207, OS grid ref: SO 3478 6345

Combe comes from the Old English word cumb which means "short, wide valley". There is such a feature at SO 358 630, between Combe and Combe Moor. (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 60)

On the western border of the county lies a mound 20m in diameter and 1.6m above the surrounding dry ditch. It sits on marshy ground to the south of the Hindwell Brook, close to where it joins the River Lugg. The mound is much mutilated and rises 1.6m above the ditch, which is 1.1m deep. It has a flat top with a diameter of 20m. The ditches are now much silted up due to regular flooding.

From the entrance to the site the mound appears to be very unimpressive, but on moving closer it is clear that there is a ditch around the site but that the top of the motte is almost level with the ground on the other side of this ditch.

A channel appears to have once run from the brook on the north of the site to the ditches. This would have ensured that the ditches were wet but now means that when the river floods the water runs down this channel and into the ditches, causing them to become silted up.

The area belonged to the Marcher Lordships of Stapleton, which the Lord of Richards Castle, Osbern fitz Richard, set up on several waste manors in 1086. This site was possibly a ditched house platform of medieval date, similar to nearby Monks Court at Eardisland (HER 1685).

All the Marcher Lordships of Stapleton mentioned in the Domesday Book can be identified with modern places except one, Querentune.  As Combe is known to belong to this Marcher Lordship but has not been identified as any other place mentioned in the Domesday Book, it is likely that this motte at Combe represents Querentune.

Craswall: motte and bailey earthwork

HER no. 13050, OS grid ref: SO 2893 3275

Craswall means "cress stream", from the Old English words cerse (cress) and wella (well) (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 62).

Aerial photographs show a motte and bailey earthwork, with a mound and slight double enclosure, as cropmarks. It is associated with a possible deserted medieval village site (HER no. 13051).

Cusop: Cusop Castle

HER no. 1229, OS grid ref: SO 2390 4140

About ½ mile south-east of Hay-on-Wye and just south-west of St. Mary's church. This site occupies a strategic position along the Wye Valley.

Description of the Cusop site today

An oval-shaped court with remains of a ditch on the north-east, the road has largely destroyed the counterscarp and only part of the scarp remains to the south. Traces of an entrance survive near the middle of the north-east side.

The building of Castle Cottage has destroyed the scarp on the south-west. The court consists of two levels separated by an irregular low bank and slope. The southern part of the bailey is slightly higher than the remainder, from which it is partly separated by a low scarp increasing in eminence to the eastern end. The higher area was defended by a broad rampart on the east, behind which are slight sinkings which may be indicative of turf-covered foundations.

The site probably held no more than a pele tower (a fortified tower-house). The area was encircled by a moat and the earthwork is estimated to have covered an acre. The entrance was via an earthen causeway across the moat in the middle of the eastern side.

Foundation and history of Cusop the site

At the time of the Domesday Survey (1086) the King held the land. The first known builders and occupiers were the Cianowes, who were representatives of the county under Edward II, Edward III and Richard III.

The building was probably a fortified residence of the 12th-14th centuries. In the centre are loose stones, most likely from the original mansion. There is no vestige of masonry above ground, but in the early 19th century a portion of the gateway is said to have been still standing.

Cusop: motte and bailey

HER no. 1234, OS grid ref: SO 2360 4260

The second part of the name Cusop is thought to derive from the word hop, a "secluded valley" (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 63).

In Norman times a small fortification, probably no more than a watchtower, stood in what is now an orchard behind a farm.

Nothing is visible from aerial photographs taken by the RAF in 1946, and there are no visible traces of earthworks in the orchard. Extensive linear quarrying may have destroyed any remains.

Cusop: Mouse Castle

HER no. 1227, OS grid ref: SO 2483 4247

On top of a hill, ¾ of a mile north-east of St. Mary's Parish Church and just over a mile east of Hay-on-Wye.

The mound is oval shaped and 43m in diameter. Unfortunately earth has been excavated from the sides, which for a height of 2.3m are precipitous and held in place by roots.

Surrounding the motte is a broad ditch, which may have served as a small bailey, and surrounding it is a fragmentary rampart. There is a further outer rampart on the north-east and east. The surrounding ground slopes downward rapidly, except to the north-east where the slope is gentler.

The summit of the motte is an average of 20m in diameter with 4m high sides, steepened by quarrying for underlying stones. The bailey encircled the motte and was enclosed, except on the south. A fragmentary rampart still exists. On the south side there are steep natural slopes crowned with a scarp up to 2m high. Facing a ridge on the north-east and east sides is a large outer rampart 15m wide and 3m high, now largely mutilated.

The castle was built by Roger de Lacy. The name is said to come from a confusion of the Welsh Llygad yr ael ("eye of the sun") with Llygod, which means "mouse". The construction of the castle is thought to be that of a prehistoric hill fort altered to form a motte and bailey.

A shell keep appears to have once crowned the motte and buried foundations are present. The wide counterscarp bank between the motte and bailey looks as though it may have had a narrow forebuilding or hall.

At the western end of the village, the site on which Clifford Castle stands is large and - including the outermost defences - covers an area in excess of 4 acres.

Clifford Castle was a castle of the Norman invasion, of which there were many on the Welsh border. It is strategically built at the point where the River Wye enters Herefordshire from Wales; in fact the name Clifford means "ford by a cliff" (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 54).

Description of the site today

The castle is situated on a very steep natural spur above the south bank of the River Wye, cut across with two deep ditches with soil thrown up between them to form a motte 55m in diameter. This motte has a height of 5m above natural ground level and 8m above the base of the ditches.

Clifford Castle was most likely built in two separate stages. The first castle appears to have been built on a spur running east to west above the River Wye. Ditches were cut through the spur at various points and the earth was used to create ramparts. This created a triangular site with a hornwork at the point, then the motte and finally the bailey in the larger end section. The bailey is connected to the motte by a causeway to the east. Surrounding the mound and the hornwork on the south are the remains of a 75m long ditch, approximately 9m wide with a flat bottom which is 1m deep. 

Further out from the ditch is a curious pair of earthworks with a ditch or track in between them. These banks curve round to the western end of the site where one bank joins the apex of the hornwork and the other curves out, disappearing under the modern railway cutting. It is possible that these banks denote the outer defences of the town associated with the castle.

The motte area covers about half an acre, and upon the motte stand the surviving ruins of the west side of the castle. These ruins form an irregular polygonal court with a gatehouse to the north-east. The gatehouse has two D-shaped flanking towers, of which the walls now only exist to less than half their original height. These two towers would only have been large enough to consist of one room, but they were probably two storeys high. There is a hall on the north-west front and round towers at the other three angles.

Surmounted by a shell keep with walls up to 2m thick and 8m high, earth causeways link the summit to the bailey situated to the east. Only half of the bailey was included in the stone defences, and remains of the barbican gate (c. 2m) survive in the centre with projecting portions of the curtain wall to the north and south. The other half of the bailey was protected by an earthen rampart, of which parts remain.

The keep on the motte is thought to be of two phases. The earliest section on the north was revealed by the disturbance to the site caused by the construction of the railway track. The foundations of this wall rest on three levels of stepped plinth. This section of early walling ends abruptly on the east where the later second stage takes the corner and leads to the gatehouse. The earlier section of the keep is most likely the work of fitz Osbern and his engineers.

The second stage of the keep would have included the reduction of the motte and the digging of a ditch across it. A studded shell keep was then built upon the remains of the earlier keep. This second building phase is thought to date from the 13th century, however Paul Remfry (in his M.Phil thesis) has suggested a date of between 1075 and 1162, by comparing it to Tosny castle in Normandy which was owned by the same family as Clifford at this time.

Paul Remfry has backed up his theory with the evidence that the towers of the keep are not of a later date to the curtain wall and that the whole structure appears to be of one build. These towers are also not positioned on the corners, as would be expected if they were of 13th century design.

The gatehouse on the motte faces east. It is flanked by two D-shaped towers and leads onto the courtyard. The gatehouse and passage in the bailey were designed to split it into two parts, an inner and outer ward. The gatehouse in itself is unusual, with an inner and outer archway with a portcullis groove between them. The two towers of the gatehouse are joined to the archway by a joint, which indicates that they are of later date. Indeed, looking at the mortar of these towers it is more like concrete in its make up, which suggests that the towers may be of Victorian date.

The towers of the curtain wall would appear to have been the residential area of the castle, however there is no sign of a kitchen and the only fireplaces are in the hall on the north side. The north-west tower, or Rosamund's tower, contains two garderobe chutes.

It is impossible to tell now from which angle the bailey was entered. The entrance used today on the east of the site is obviously of modern origin. In the centre of the bailey area is what appears to be a gatehouse structure, which would have split the bailey into two parts. The gatehouse has two circular towers, each with a first floor chamber with a diameter of 9ft. The purpose of the structure may have been to act as a barbican for the motte.

Foundation and history of the castle

1069-1071: Clifford Castle is one of five castles mentioned in the Domesday Survey of 1086 and was built by William fitz Osbern, on wasteland formerly held by Browning, between 1069-1071.

The castle lay in England but was not subject to any Hundred (county division) or customary dues. It appears to have been the beginning of a Marcher Lordship, as the land and its owner owed allegiance to the king but were separate from the rest of the kingdom.

After settling problems caused by Welsh attacks, William fitz Osbern left England and returned to Normandy, only to be slain in a battle in Flanders. His lands, including Clifford, then passed to his son Roger de Breteuil. Roger granted the monks of nearby St Mary's the freedom to buy and sell within any of his lands without restraint. In 1078 Roger forfeited all his lands after being involved in a conspiracy against the king. Clifford Castle was held as a castellany and then as an Honour held direct from the Crown.

In the Domesday Survey Clifford is recorded as containing 16 burgesses, 13 smallholders, 5 Welshmen, 6 male and 4 female slaves. There was also a mill, which paid 3 measures of corn and 4 ploughmen with only 3 ploughs. The total value was £8 and 5s, which was a significant amount for a holding on the Welsh border.

1075: By this year the castle had been granted to Ralph Tosny of Normandy, as a base for operations into Wales. Ralph Tosny was still very active in Normandy and in his absence Clifford was rented to Gilbert, Sheriff of Hereford for 60 shillings.

Late 1130s: After marrying Margaret de Tosny, Walter fitz Richard assumed control of the de Tosny manors and with them control of the castle. Walter changed his name after succeeding to the property of Clifford and was later known as Walter de Clifford. Walter de Clifford's eldest daughter was the "fair Rosamund" who was apparently the lover of Henry II (1154-1189). They met when Henry stayed at Clifford Castle during his campaigns in Wales. When Henry had to go away he placed Rosamund in a safe house at the centre of a maze at Woodstock in Oxfordshire. The centre could only be found by following an almost invisible silver thread around the maze. However, Henry's wife Queen Eleanor heard about Henry's lover and found the thread leading to Rosamund's safe house. When she found the fair maiden, Eleanor forced her to drink fatal poison.

1170s and 1180s: During this period the Marches suffered setbacks, with the result that Clifford Castle and the northern bank of the Wye were said to now mark the boundary between England and Wales.

1221: Walter de Clifford II, Rosamund's brother, succeeded to Clifford in this year.Walter had been a staunch supporter of King John throughout his reign but later joined with Sir Richard Marshal, Earl of Pembroke in his dispute at the favouritism of Henry III. The king, as fickle as ever, first confiscated Walter's estates but later restored them to him in 1234.

1250: Walter received licence to marry his only daughter Matilda to her cousin William Longspee, who died in a tournament in 1256. This left Walter without any male heir and his daughter then became the sole heiress.

1260s: The castle was kept in reasonable condition and remained in the Clifford family until this period, when Matilda Clifford, widow of the Earl of Salisbury, became Baroness of Clifford.

During the Barons' War of the 1260s, John Giffard of Brimpsfield apparently used Clifford as a base. He abducted, raped and forcibly married Matilda. He was fined but Matilda accepted her situation and stayed with John in her Marches estate. John Giffard is said to have been a prominent figure in the opposition to Simon de Montfort, and he was one of the men who helped Prince Edward escape from Hereford Castle in 1265.

1280: John Giffard was granted licence by the king to hunt wolves with dogs and nets in all the forests of England (Rymer's Faedera ii, 58).

1299: John Giffard died. Clifford was granted by the Crown to the Mortimers of Wigmore.

1381: It is rumoured that Richard II and his uncle John of Gaunt stayed at Clifford Castle, but once the Welsh were conquered the castle was of no further importance and began to deteriorate.

Early 15th century: The castle was garrisoned against Owain Glyn Dwr, who stirred up an uprising of the Welsh and ravaged the lands right up to the fortress.

Excavations and finds

Excavations carried out between 1925 and 1928 by the owner of Clifford Castle (O. Trumper) revealed the base of towers flanking the entrance, with possible evidence for a portcullis, guardroom, southern tower and part of the curtain wall.

Further excavations in 1928 revealed a building with an inner bailey and annexe building on the east side on top of the mound.

Finds from 1925 include a Roman brooch, boar tusk and wolf vertebra.

Excavations in 1950 revealed the foundations of a tower on the motte, together with part of the curtain wall. Pottery, a bullet mould and iron nails were also found.

As a result of excavations of the barbican in 1951, a full plan was recorded together with the curtain walls. In 1952-3, a completed excavation of the barbican block and roadway uncovered pottery and iron, including arrowheads, a knife, a key and a bridle bit.

Three miles south-east of Clifford, on low-lying ground between the Merbach Hill and Little Mountain, this site guards the western entrance to the Golden Valley. Newton means "new farm". The settlement here may have replaced the one at Castleton which from then on became known as "Old Castleton". (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 56)

Description of the site today

The bailey forms a quarter-circle with the north and east sides straight and the west and south ones curved. A slight rampart and ditch surround it. The north-western side of the motte is completely enclosed and surrounded by a ditch.

The motte rises c. 5m above the level of the bailey, which has an entrance in the south. The motte is 28-32m in diameter and stands 5m above its encircling ditch. 

The ditch is up to 10m wide and increases in depth with ground slope from 1-2m north to south. A complex of ditches south of the bailey probably fed water to the bailey moat. The Bach Brook runs past the site to the north and may have been used to fill the ditches.

The ditch could also have been water-filled by means of diverting a spring 40m uphill to the south of the site. This was led by a contour-flowing channel into three side channels, one each leading into the west and east sides of the bailey ditch to flow downhill to the north arm and so to the brook. A third cut off the site on the west. There are also traces of a bank which subdivides the bailey into two wards.

The motte stands within the eastern corner of a D-shaped bailey, 80m across. A ditch up to 9m in width and 1.3m deep encloses the bailey. There are the remains of an inner rampart on the south and east sides, with a causeway entrance crossing the south side. 

South of the bailey are a series of lightly-defended platforms. The main earthwork covers an area of approximately 1.75 acres.

There is evidence of some buried foundations around the top of the small motte, which suggests that the keep was a polygonal tower similar to nearby Snodhill. Stone remains have also been found on the south-east corner and the eastern side, perhaps indicating a tower and gatehouse.

The stone on the motte is mentioned in the Victoria County History, and there are also signs of stone foundations in the bailey bank in a modern drainage cutting, which suggests that the bailey once had a wall around 1.5m thick. 

Foundation and history of the site

1086: At the time of the Domesday Book Clifford was in the hands of Ralph de Tosny, but the revenues and and ploughlands of the borough were collected by the Sheriff of Hereford. There were 16 burgesses, 13 smallholders, 5 Welshmen, 6 male and 4 female slaves, and the whole area had a value of £8 5s.

Clifford was later held by the de Cliffords.
  
It  has been suggested that the motte may have been built within a Roman fortlet because the shape of the bailey is so square, however there is little evidence to support this theory.

Considerable quantities of stone formerly on the site, including some diagonally-tooled stones in the moat, have now gone. This is another site that has been "tidied up". The several outer enclosures and formerly wet defences suggest an early castle, probably founded in the 11th century and with 12th century stonework. 

Seven kilometres north-west of Leominster, along an avenue of oaks and beeches from the main road between Mortimer's Cross and Orleton, stands Croft Castle, a mainly 15th and 16th century castle with later additions.

Description of the site today

The avenue from the main road comes to a halt in front of a Gothic-styled curtain wall most probably built in the 1790s. Through the arch in the curtain wall a driveway leads to the east of the castle.

The main buildings form a rectangular plan with a central courtyard. Each angle is finished with a cylindrical tower. The walls and towers possibly date from the 16th century - each of the towers contains 16th century windows. The walls on the west and south-west are slightly thicker than in the rest of the structure and may be earlier in date, possibly 15th century. The east range was reconstructed in the latter part of the 18th century.
 
In August 2002 Herefordshire Archaeology carried out a series of excavations in the grounds surrounding the present castle in an attempt to ascertain whether there are any earlier structures present. Approximately 25m to the west of the building stone walls were uncovered that appear to be medieval in date and could denote the presence of an earlier castle. Excavation also revealed the foundations of an undercroft (cellar), which would have most likely have been under a medieval hall, and in an outer ward of the medieval castle site an oven was found.

Between the walls of the medieval castle and the present castle was another building of brick and stone that seems to be Tudor in date and was probably part of the building that was destroyed during the Civil War.

The later castle measured 30m east to west within walls up to 1.2m thick. The south corner was at a right angle, but the east wall extends further to the north than the west wall. At each corner stands a tower, 3.3m in diameter and containing tiny rooms.

It is likely that the courtyard was originally reached through the gatehouse on the east side and that the medieval hall was on the west side, with two-storey ranges on the north and south sides of the court. No medieval features remain, and the four ranges are now three-storeyed; the corbelling on the tower marks the base of the original parapet. Dendrochronology of the timbers within Croft Castle date the earliest timber in the castle to 1662-3, which was the period when Herbert Croft was bishop of Hereford.

The 16th century north range is now the kitchen and library block. The east range was reconstructed c.1750-60 and the current porch and gable date from 1913.

The interior

To the right of the staircase is the Dining Room, which was once entered through the courtyard. The Georgian decoration of the room was carried out in 1913.

To the left of the staircase is the Oak Room. The panelling and chimney-piece date from the late 17th century and the ceiling with its vine pattern is from the mid 18th century.

The Blue Room has a ceiling dating from the 1750s. Thomas Johnes brought the Jacobean panelling to Croft from Stanage Park in Radnor. The chimney-piece dates from 1913.

The Drawing room has painted early Georgian panelling and a ceiling from the 18th century.

The Library contains copies of Johnson's Dictionary annotated by Sir Herbert Croft, as well as Bishop Croft's prayer book and manuscripts and early editions of the music of Dr. William Croft (1678-1727).

The grounds

The Spanish Chestnut avenue in the grounds of the castle is over 350 years old, stretches for over half a mile and was planted by Herbert Croft.

The grounds have escaped being "formalised" by 18th century gardeners and have been kept in a natural state. However, the Fishpool Valley with its steep banks and numerous pools was landscaped in the 18th century, but the emphasis was placed on its "rambling" state.

History of the Croft family

1086: At the time of the Domesday Survey Croft was held by Bernard under William of Écouis. The family were called de Croft for 400 years, and it is now thought that they were Normans introduced to Herefordshire before the Conquest.

1243: The earliest recognised Croft is Hugh de Croft, who helped rescue Prince Edward from Simon de Montfort and deliver him to Wigmore Castle.

1296-1727: The Crofts were also represented in Parliament, mainly for the Shire of Hereford or the Borough of Leominster.

1462: The Battle of Mortimer's Cross took place nearby on land belonging to the Croft family. This battle was decisive in putting the Yorkist King Edward IV (a Mortimer) on the throne. Sir Richard Croft, who fought at the battle, was a Knight for the Shire and Sheriff of the County of Hereford.

1471: Richard Croft captured Prince Edward at the Battle of Tewkesbury.

Under Henry VII Richard was made Receiver-General of the Earldom of March and Knight Banneret at the Battle of Stoke (1487). He was also Steward to the young Prince Arthur and Treasurer to the King's Household.

Edward IV and Richard III appointed Thomas Croft as ranger of Woodstock Park; he was deprived of this honour in 1491 because he had committed a  "detestable murder" in the Marches of Wales.

1535: In Leland's Itinerary Volume V, he describes the castle as "... the manor of the Crofts, sett on the browe of a hill, somewhat rokky, dychid and waullyd castle like".

1542: James Croft was Member of Parliament for Herefordshire.

1551: James was made Lord Deputy of Ireland by Edward VI; he retained this position for one year.

1552: James was made Deputy Constable of the Tower of London, most probably at the favour of Lady Jane Grey. Edward VI removed him from this position in 1553 because he had been foremost in demonstrations in favour of Queen Jane. In 1554 he was a prisoner at the Tower but he escaped with his life and was released on 1st January 1555. 

Queen Elizabeth appointed James Croft Governor of Berwick. At the siege of Liege he repelled the foe but in a second advance the English were worsted and James was blamed and ousted. Queen Elizabeth kept him as Privy Counsellor and Comptroller of her Household.

1558: Sir James Croft is buried in Westminster Abbey under a plain gravestone.

1643: William Croft sacrificed his life and fortune for the royal cause; he was taken prisoner at the siege of Hereford in 1643 and died two years later fighting for the King at Stokesay in Shropshire.

William's brother Herbert was dean and bishop of Hereford, and his son was granted a baronetcy as recognition of the sacrifices made by the Crofts.

1644: Croft Castle was plundered by Irish levies who had been employed by Royalists; this action was to prevent the castle being taken by the Parliamentarian enemy.

1645: King Charles I came to Leominster on 3rd September 1645, when he stayed at the Unicorn Inn in Broad Street. Williams' Guide to Leominster of 1808 states that he also visited Croft on this occasion.

1660s: Herbert Croft is Bishop of Hereford; he had earlier been chosen by Charles I to be one of his chaplains.

1746: The Civil War had a negative effect on the finances of the Croft family, and they never fully recovered from the problems it had caused. Eventually they were forced to mortgage Croft Castle to the Knight family. From them it passed by marriage to the Johnes family.

It was later sold by Thomas Johnes to Somerset Davies of Wigmore, who later became a Privy Councillor and Sheriff of Herefordshire.

1797: John Croft died and his title passed to his cousin, the Rev. Herbert Croft an 18th century author. He was succeeded by his brother Sir Richard Croft, a leading doctor. In November 1817 he attended Princess Charlotte, daughter of George IV, who sadly died after giving birth to a stillborn son.

1868-74: Sir Richard Croft's grandson, Herbert George Denman Croft, 9th Baronet, returned to Herefordshire and was elected as an MP. He lived at Lugwardine Court.

1923: The Trustees of Sir James Croft, 11th Baronet (then a minor) bought back Croft from the Kevill-Davies family. Sir James died on active service with the No.1 Commando in 1941. His grave lies in the parkland surrounding the castle.

Sir James bequeathed Croft to his cousin, the 1st Lord Croft (formerly Brigadier-General Sir Henry Page Croft), who was then the Under Secretary of State for War.

1947: Lord Croft's son Michael bought back the remaining 1,329 acres of the estate, but because of the large death duties, he later sold the castle and estate to Major Owen Croft, managing to keep it in the family.

1956: Major Owen Croft died and the future of the estate was in trouble. It was saved in partnership by the Ministry of Works, the National Trust and the Croft family. The Ministry of Works purchased the property and gave a grant for repairs, the National Trust took over the freehold, and Lord Croft and other members of the family provided an endowment needed to maintain the property.

The castle is still under the care of the National Trust and members of the Croft family still live there.

Suggested reading

O.G.S. Croft, The House of Croft, 1949
Diana Uhlman, Croft Castle, Herefordshire, National Trust guidebook, 2000

Historic Environment Record reference no. 2238, Ordnance Survey grid reference: SO 4155 5440

Two hundred and sixty yards south of Dilwyn church, in the garden of a private house, lies this moated possible castle site.

Description of the Dilwyn site today

A partially wet moat encloses a nearly circular area, c.165 ft in diameter, rising slightly above the surrounding ground with the remains of a rampart.

The site appears to be a ringwork with reduced remains of an encircling bank on the north side.The ditch is water filled on the east and south, but the north is infilled and only visible as a slight depression.

Buried foundations on the moat indicate a large shell keep with walls 5-6ft thick. Inside the shell, and slightly off-centre, is a large, roughly rectangular block of masonry, possibly an indication that there may once have been a stone keep on the site.
 
There is a large bailey to the east with two fishponds and an embankment giving it a boundary on the south-east with the road to the east and the north.

The upper bailey is hard to identify as most of the area is now covered by modern housing.

Foundation and history of the Dilwyn site

1086: At the time of the Domesday Survey William de Écouis held Dilwyn. It was given to Godfrey Gamages, and for a long time was the centre of his estate.

13th century: In the early part of this century it was held by William de Braose. In the middle of the century the manor was split into two and shared between the fitz Warins and the Mallorys.

Dorstone: Castle Mound, Nant-y-Bar

HER no. 1266, OS grid ref: SO 2784 4102

The earthwork and buried remains of a motte castle, located on the eastern point of a ridge running east-west near the head of the Golden Valley. The ridge slopes steeply down to the north and south.

The monument comprises a circular earthen motte mound, c.23m in diameter at the base. Its steep sides rise c.3m, and the mound's top is c.22m in diameter. On the top, the only feature is an earthen bank running around the rim. This bank is barely visible in the eastern quarter but survives to a height of nearly 0.6m and c.2m wide on the west. It probably supported a wooden palisade to strengthen the motte's defences.

The motte is surrounded by a ditch up to 4m wide; this is mostly infilled, but is clearly visible as an almost complete circle in the grass. It can be seen as a depression, c.0.3m deep, around the north and west, while it is narrower on the south and east where the ground slopes steeply away. The site's natural defences are weaker on the north, north-east and west, where the ground slopes less steeply, and on these sides an earthen bank has been constructed outside the ditch. This bank is visible as a slight rise c.3m on the north-west and east, while on the north it is c.0.5m high, probably because it was incorporated into a later field boundary bank.

On the east-north-east side the ditch is broken by a causeway; this continues as a hollow to the side of the mound. This hollow contains a small amount of masonry at the foot of the mound and also in the counterscarp bank close to the point where it joins the causeway. The causeway is most likely the original access to the motte, and the masonry may be the remnants of a stairway or the foundations of a bridge.

Downton: Castle Mound

HER no. 1645, OS grid ref: SO 4272 7347

Downton means "hill settlement", and was known as Duntune in the Domesday Survey of 1086 (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 75).

Two kilometres east-south-east of Leintwardine and 100m west of the old church is a mound, 21m across at the base and 3m high.

There is a possible ditch on the north-west and the north-east, and on one side a stream has been dammed to form part of the defences.

There is a slight sinking in the top, and it appears that the mound once possessed an octagonal-shaped tower thought to have been built by the lords of Richard's Castle as a smaller version of the one at Richard's Castle itself.

Traces of a bailey and other outer enclosures are apparent, but modern disturbance makes them difficult to interpret. The corner of the outer tower contains large pieces of masonry buried in tree roots.

Downton: Downton Castle

HER no. 6365, OS grid ref: SO 4450 7475

Downton Castle sits high above the River Teme in a wooded gorge.

The castle was bought by Richard Knight, a Shropshire ironmaster, in 1727. The present castle was built by his grandson, Richard Payne Knight, in 1772-8.

Richard Payne Knight was an archaeologist, anthropologist, writer and poet - an antiquarian through and through, the castle and its carefully landscaped grounds reflect his interests in art and nature. Richard Payne Knight wrote a book called The Landscape, in which he extols the merits of the Picturesque and attacks Capability Brown's gentle and natural layouts. The mansion is asymmetric in form and is decorated in a picturesque Gothic style with towers and battlements.  

Dorstone Castle is situated in a valley about 300 yards south-west of the parish church and east of the centre of the village. At the time of the Domesday Survey (1086) Dorstone was know as Dodintune, which means "the estate of Doda". The village name later changed to Dorsitone, which is probably a reference to the River Dore which runs nearby to the north of the village. (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 73)

Description of the site today

An oval-shaped motte 67 yards x 61 yards across the base. The ditch surrounding the mound is crossed by an earthen causeway on the north-east side. The mound has very steep slopes which lead up to a very flat top rising 28ft above the bottom of the surrounding deep, dry ditch, which has its outer bank facing west towards the Pont-y-Weston Brook.

A kidney-shaped bailey adjoins the motte ditch on the north-east and there are remains of a ditch on the south side. Buildings and a garden have largely destroyed a former scarp on the east side. The area covered is c. 2.5 acres; a scarp slope and outer ditch suggests a bailey was included this area. 
 
The flat top of the motte is crowned by mature trees. There is a partially-buried shell on the motte with indications of a D-shaped gate tower with portcullis slot. Pieces of dressed tufa can also be found in the ditch, which was formerly a wet defence. The ditch of the former large outer enclosure has recently been filled in. 

Foundation and history of the site

In the Domesday Survey for Herefordshire, Drogo son of Poyntz held it.  The land had been held by Earl Harold as 7 hides. No value for the land is given, nor is there any information on how many villagers, smallholders or ploughs existed there.                          

The de Sollers family held Dorstone in the late 12th century - 14th century, although the castle probably dates from earlier.

Silas Taylor (Harley. MS 6726) relates a curious tale taken from the Register of Bishop Trillec:

"In 1326 William Solers, Lord of Dorstone, and John Eggesworth chaplain to the Cantary, which ancestors of said Will. Solers founded, fell out about some of the profitts belonging to the foundation and it grew so high that by force William seized the lands and kept the proffitts soe that there was high doings, which comeing to ye Bishop's eares at that time, he gives an order and in it enjoynes the Deacon of Webbley to seize on the profitts and sequester them to his own use and soe they two snarling at another the Bishop went away with the Bone!"
 
1399: Johannes de Sollers holds Dorstone under the Mortimers of Wigmore.

1403: Henry IV entrusted the castle to Sir Walter Fitzwalter, asking him to strengthen it against possible raids by Owain Glyn Dwr. Unfortunately, many castles on the Welsh border fell to Glyn Dwr and it is possible that Dorstone was one of them, as no mention is made later of the castle as a fortress.

After this time Dorstone Castle changed hands several times. Lady Fitzwalter died about 1422, and afterwards the castle belonged to Richard de la Mare, a hero of Agincourt, whose death in 1435 is commemorated by a brass in Hereford Cathedral. The castle was then owned by the Lysters, who sold it to Morgan Aubrey. It was then purchased by the Cornewall family in 1780.

1645: It is possible that Dorstone Castle sheltered King Charles I for one night, for Symonds in his Diary tells us that on "Wednesday 17th September the whole army mett at a rendevous upon Arthurstone Heath neare Durston Castle, com. Hereford; and from thence his majestie marched to Hom. Lacy the seat of the Lord Viscount Scudamore". Lord Scudamore was a supporter of the Royalist cause.

3.2km west of Dorstone village, and immediately south-west of Mynydd-Brith Farm, is an oval mound with surrounding ditch and scarped, flat enclosure, which includes farm buildings and a possible deserted medieval village (DMV). The DMV (HER 11183) includes the earthwork remains of hollow ways, building platforms and an area of medieval cultivation remains.

Description of the site today

Mynydd-Brith is located halfway between the castles of Dorstone and Mouse Castle, Cusop, on a steep north-east facing slope above the Pont-y-Weston Brook.

The castle remains comprise an oval earthen motte mound, which measures c. 31m east-west and c. 28m north-south at the base. Its steep sides rise 5m on the east side and 2.5m on the west, reaching a flat summit up to 18m in diameter. A low stone wall runs part of the way around the mound's rim; this wall is mostly modern, but it is thought to directly overlie the remnants of earlier structures.

On the north side of the motte a path has been cut into the mound material; this is probably an original access to the top. The outer edge of this path has a stone wall revetment.

Evidence of a surrounding ditch can be seen as a shallow depression c. 8m wide on the south of the motte; it is less well defined on the east and west. On the north-west, the ditch has been replaced by a gently sloping area, while to the east it has been damaged by the construction of Mynydd Brith House and its gardens. The ditch extends to the south-west as a hollow which widens at the southern boundary of the site. This probably represents the remains of a hollow way, which gave access to the motte from the nearby lane.

Foundation and history of the site

At the time of the Domesday Survey (1086), Mynydd-Brith was known as Ruuenore, which in the Herefordshire Domesday Survey is annotatedFagemeneda.  Ruuenore means "at the rough ridge" and Fagemeneda is an English/Welsh hybrid of this name meaning "variegated mountain". Mynydd-Brith is a Welsh version of this meaning and means literally "speckled mountain". (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 74)

In the Domesday Survey Mynydd-Brith is recorded as "1 hide. Drogo has 4 ploughs in lordship; 7 villagers and 2 smallholders with 3 ploughs. 4 slaves and a mill at 2s. A priest and a smith." No mention is made of a castle in the parish, but it is suggested that it is of early origin and can perhaps be attributed to William fitz Osbern or one of his followers in the 11th century. It probably remained in use until the 12th century and was most likely superseded by the castles at nearby Dorstone.

Survey

In the winter of 1994 a survey was undertaken by the County Archaeological Service of Hereford and Worcester on behalf of English Heritage and the landowners. A previous survey had been undertaken in 1952, and the aim of the 1994 investigation was to determine the extent of the changes that had occurred in the interim years. The results of the survey were to enable the monitoring of the monument to facilitate the implementation of a management agreement.

The survey found a number of changes that had occurred since the 1952 survey. Most notably there were a number of exposed walls visible on top of the motte, the most substantial of which enclose the top area of the motte and may well represent the remains of a shell keep.Within this wall a number of less substantial walls remain, defining interior rooms. The lower courses of these walls are mortared but the upper ones are not.

A number of changes had also occurred in the bailey. Several piles of loose stone, outcropping lengths of wall and wall faces, as well as eroded hollows and depressions, were observed, none of which was noted in the 1952 survey. The eastern boundary of the site had also shifted several metres to the west due to the extension of the adjacent garden. There was also generally more scrub and small tree growth.

It was concluded that generally the site was in a stable condition, but that control of the scrub and small trees should be monitored to avoid further erosion of the surviving features.

Historic Environment Record reference no. 1685, Ordnance Survey grid reference: SO 4193 5880

On the north side of the River Arrow and 300m to the north-west of the castle mound is another mound, smaller than the first. It is roughly circular, measuring 28m across the base and rising 1.5m above the surrounding ground. It appears to be the reduced remains of a motte with faint traces of a ditch on the north side; there is, however, no evidence for a bailey.

The mound is flat topped with an off-centre depression. The site is near the river and the old centre of the village.

The name Monks Court suggests former possession by a monastic house, perhaps Wigmore Abbey. It is also situated close to Nun House, which was formerly in the possession of Limebrook Priory.

The raised mound may be an unusual form of moated manor, designed to raise buildings above the flood plain of the river. It seems unlikely that this is the site of a motte, considering that there is another one so close by.

Eardisland: mound, north of church

HER no. 1683, OS grid ref: SO 4207 5858

Eardisland comes from the Old English Earl's Leen which means "the Earl's land", the earl in this case being Morcar, son of earl Algar of East Anglia, who had the estate before 1066 (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 76).

The larger of the two mounds at Eardisland is 40m to the north of the church and south of the River Arrow.

Description of the Eardisland site today

This moated mound, probably a castle mound, is about 49m in diameter, rising 3m above the moat level. The proportions of the mound cannot firmly place it as a motte but the top (22m across) is large enough to have taken a shell keep.

The moat is fed by a cutting from the River Arrow less than 100m away to the north. A causeway crossed the moat on the north-west, however this no longer exists and access to the mound is difficult.

There is no trace of a bailey, but one could have existed and may have extended as far as the church road to the west and south-west.

Fish can be seen swimming in the stagnant moat today.

Foundation and history of the Eardisland site

1086: According to the Domesday Survey Eardisland was worth £12 (£6 before 1066) and was held by earl Morcar from the King.

1236: Eardisland was held by the de Braose family, who were responsible for building the castle. It later became one of the possessions of the Mortimers.

1650: Silas Taylor writes "there is on the north side of ye churchyard an old moated hall, was the seat of the Pembridges to have been".

Eastnor: Eastnor Castle

HER No. 6709, OS grid ref: SO 7350 3687

Eastnor is a parish near Ledbury, on the eastern boundary of the county.

Description of the Eastnor site today

Eastnor Castle forms the centrepiece of a 5,000 acre estate in the Malvern Hills. It is now home to the Hervey-Bathursts, who are direct descendants of the 1st Earl Somers. The castle was built between 1810 and 1824 by Sir Robert Smirke for the 1st Earl Somers. It was his intent to provide a suitably elaborate home to establish his family within the upper echelons of society. The castle is a classic example of the Norman Revivalist architecture that was popular at this period.

The castle is accessed via a low gatehouse with round towers on the road between Ledbury and Tewkesbury. The castle itself is rectangular in plan, with four circular embattled towers at the angles and a central keep.

Four thousand tons of stone were used in the construction of the castle. This stone was quarried in the Forest of Dean and brought to Ledbury by canal. The castle cost £85,923 to build, which today would be the equivalent of £8.5 million. Two hundred and fifty men worked on the castle every day for the first six years of its construction.

The building measures 320 ft x 180 ft with a 60 ft high entrance hall, which until 1989 displayed the family's armour collection. It has a Gothic Dining Room designed by A.W. Pugin for the 2nd Earl in 1849, which contains a huge chimneypiece with the family tree drawn on it.

Edvin Loach: ringwork

HER no. 11180, OS grid ref: SO 6630 5835

This site consists of a ringwork and bailey. Buried in the ringwork is stone, which may be indicative of a shell keep. There is a partially collapsed stone wall on the counterscarp bank bordering a farmyard. This wall is much thicker (approx. 5ft) than the usual field walls.

The 11th century church (HER 1154) and the later church of St Mary (HER 1364) both sit within the bailey of this site. The bailey ditch has recently been filled in. Other evidence may exist under the present farm buildings to the west and south.

Edvin Ralph: motte and bailey

HER no. 1006, OS grid ref: SO 6441 5745

One hundred metres to the west of the part-12th century parish church of St Michael lies a circular moat enclosing an island.

The motte is 37m in diameter and 2.1m high with evidence of buildings on its summit. The foundations are of a large shell keep. There are also indications of a substantial stone barbican.

The surrounding ditch is 1.9m deep, partially wet and approximately 50m in diameter. On the north side the ditch has been enlarged to form either a quarry or fishponds. To the north of the ditch are more foundations, which may represent a gatehouse or bridge.

There is a bailey and outer enclosure on the north and north-west, with evidence of buildings inside the bailey.

There are earthworks between the motte and the parish church, which may be the remains of a deserted medieval village.

Eye, Moreton and Ashton: Castle Tump

HER no. 5, OS grid ref: SO 5139 6499

0.2km west of the A49 and 350m north-west of Upper Ashton Farm is a motte raised on the end of a natural spur. Surrounding the motte is a now-dry watercourse.

The parish name of Eye, Moreton and Ashton is interesting in that each word has a separate landscape meaning. Eye means "raised ground on a marsh",Moreton means "marsh settlement" and Ashton means "ash-tree settlement". The three names together suggest that this parish is raised above surrounding marshy ground and is associated with  the growth of ash trees. (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, pp. 83-84)

The mound is roughly circular, 30m in diameter and rising 2.1m above the ground at the back of the spur, from which it is separated by a slight ditch. It is 5.7m above the ground surrounding the spur.

There are faint indications of a bailey, and the site is naturally defensible.

Fifty yards west of the church there is a motte and bailey earthwork, recorded in the Domesday Survey as a domus defensibilis, a fortified house. The castle is on one of the roads into Herefordshire from Wales, and must have been very vulnerable to attack by Welsh marauders. It is also in the centre of the district in which the Barons' Wars of the 1260s were waged.

Description of the site today

The earthwork is a roughly oval moated enclosure with a motte on the south-west side. The motte is c. 35½ ft in diameter at its base and rises 14ft above the bailey, from which it is not separated by a ditch. The moat is wet and encloses an area of c. 1.25 acres. Along the west and south-west sides is an outer bank, and further west a stream appears to have been used to form an irregular outer enclosure. A second stream and bank, again on the west side, form a second enclosure.

The moat is partly infilled, and only the south-west and part of the south arm, water filled, remain. These two streams appear to be connected to the watermill. 

The mound and wet ditches are the only traces of the ancient fortress - not even fragments remain.

Foundation and history of the site

1086: Eardisley is mentioned in the Domesday Survey as being held by Robert, from Roger de Lacy. The land did not pay tax, or any customary dues, and did not lie in any Hundred. A fortified house was there. In lordship there was one plough, two slaves and one Welshman who paid three shillings.

1183: Eardisley is known as a castle as early as this year, and in 1216, at the beginning of the reign of Henry III, it is found in a list of Herefordshire Castles.

1262: The Welsh were in open rebellion and, moving towards Hereford, plundered the castles of Weobley and Eardisley.

1263: Roger de Clifford was in possession and it was here that he imprisoned the foreign Bishop of Hereford, Peter de Aquablanca.

1272: William Baskerville was licensed to hold services in the chapel. The castle was probably the chief residence of the Baskervilles in 1272. The Baskerville family had two members of great note: Sir John who, as a boy, fought for Henry V at Agincourt; and James, who was one of three Herefordshire heroes made Knights Banneret by Henry VII after the Battle of Stoke in 1487.

1403: Henry IV ordered the castle to be fortified against attacks by Owain Glyn Dwr, even though by 1374 the castle had already been ruined.

1642-6: The castle was in the possession of Sir Humphrey Baskerville, a Royalist, and in the Civil War it was burnt down to the ground with only one of the gatehouses escaping ruin. A member of the Baskerville family was living in this ruin in 1670 in comparative poverty.

The Parish Register of Eardisley contains details of the burial of Benhail Baskerville in 1684, and attached to his name is the phrase "Dominus Manerii de Erdisley" ("Master of the Manor of Eardisley"). Benhail was the last of the male line of the Baskervilles, and the remainder of the property was sold to William Barnesley, bencher of the Inner Temple. He disinherited his son for marrying below his station and the estate became the subject of litigation (details of which can be found in The Gentleman's Magazine, Vol. 61). The son and his wife were successful, and inscribed on their gravestone is "- at length they overcame and died conquerors".

The heir of Barnesley was a lunatic and the castle and park were sold to Dr. Pettit, by whom they were later sold to Mr Perry who in turn bequeathed them to W. Perry Herrick, Esq. of Beaumanoir, Leicestershire.

Excavation

In 1990 a salvage recording was carried out at Eardisley Castle, following a planning application to convert a barn into four dwellings. The aim of the project was to observe and record archaeological deposits revealed during groundwork.

Six sections were recorded, and artefacts were recovered from most of the layers. In total, 46 sherds of pottery were recovered, of which 39 were medieval. Other finds included tiles, fired clay, ironwork, a Roman pottery sherd and a flint flake. The Roman pottery and flint flake were determined to be residual (probably stray) finds. As well as the pottery, fired clay daub fragments were also recorded. 

The ceramic remains that were uncovered dated mainly from the medieval period, within a date range of the 12th to the 14th centuries. The dating of this pottery is interesting since none of it appears to be later than 14th century, which suggests that the castle was disused until the 17th or 18th century, and yet historical evidence indicates that the castle continued to be inhabited until this period. The layers from which the fired clay daubs were recovered may date from the 12th century, when the village of Eardisley was burnt by the Welsh.

Bronsil Castle lies two miles east of Ledbury and one mile to the east of the parish church at Eastnor. It was built around the mid-15th century and is Grade II listed. It was built to incorporate the ruins of an earlier building, possibly a manor house of the Beauchamp family.

Description of the site today

Today only the foundations and fragments remain. The site is surrounded by a moat 20m wide and still wet. A modern bridge crosses the moat on the west side, opposite the gatehouse. Another bank and the remains of what was probably an outer ditch surround the moat itself.

The gatehouse ruin is c. 17m high and perhaps 3m in width. A rectangular window and a stringcourse are still visible. Ruins remain of the curtain wall and angle towers, which stand 0.3m-0.6m high in places.

The castle lay on an almost square island with sides of around 36m in length. It was originally enclosed on all four sides by a curtain wall, with angle towers at each corner. On the north, south and east sides there were intermediate towers, whilst on the west side there was an entrance passage with octagonal gatehouse towers on both sides and a possible drawbridge. A large part of the gatehouse tower ruin survived until 1991, when a major collapse occurred prior to consolidation work being undertaken. 

Until this point the ruin had survived to a height of 10m, and three moulded stringcourses could be distinguished. The lowest stage was featureless apart from a circular hole at the bottom, which may have been for drainage. This stage contained two almost complete chamfered arrowslit-shaped openings at different levels - one to the right and the other high in the left-hand face. Not a great deal of the third stage survived, but in drawings from 1731 by the Buck brothers another arrow slit can be seen.

Undergrowth and a lack of surviving buildings makes it hard to interpret the arrangement of internal buildings, but it is most likely that there was a series of buildings arranged against the curtain wall.

History of the castle

c.1240: The first record of Bronsil Castle is at this time, when it was linked to St Katherine's Hospital in Ledbury; no description of the structure is given.

1449: Richard Beauchamp, Treasurer to Henry VI, was given a licence to crenellate a mansion and enclose 300 acres of land in Eastnor as a park.

1460: The license to crenellate and enclose was repeated.

1496: Possession passed through a Beauchamp heiress to the Reed family.

1600s: The inhabitants of Bronsil Castle were "driven out" by a restless spirit, some of Lord Beauchamp's bones were brought back to the house from his grave in Italy and the spirit became calm. Mr. Reed moved to another of his seats, New Court at Lugwardine.

1644: Roundheads took the castle under the younger son of Richard Hopton, after some firing and a brief show of resistance by Thomas Cocks. Days later, Royalists from Hereford besieged the castle for 24 hours before Hopton surrendered and the castle was burnt.

1731: From illustrations by Samuel and Nathaniel Buck, it is clear that some of the outside walls and towers were still standing at this date. The castle was by now unoccupied and partly ruined.

1774: The Reed family sold Bronsil to Thomas Somers-Cocks, also of Eastnor parish.

1779: Kennion visited, to find only one tower remaining.

1840: The moat was partly cleaned out; it yielded weapons, buckles, irregularly-shaped spoons, and cannonballs.

1931: Most of the north tower was still standing, but the double ditches had become degraded.

1932: Consolidation work was carried out by the Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England, and two distinct build periods of the wall were identified. The inner side of the wall is bonded with yellowy-white mortar of 13th century date, while the outer octagonal face of the wall is bonded with pink mortar, probably from the 15th century when the existing castle was founded.

1967: The Ordnance Survey provided a plan of the earthworks and measurements; less than half of the tower survived at this time.

1990: The tower was now in a precarious condition.

1991: A large crack in the south-western tower caused concern and consolidation work began, however, before the scaffolding was completely erected a large part of the tower ruin collapsed into the moat.

It is not clear whether Bronsil Castle was designed to be a substantial fortress or little more than a fortified manor. The double moat and the size and scale suggest extravagance and pride, whilst history tells us of no great part played by the castle or its various owners. Richard Beauchamp was a member of the privileged coterie associated with the Yorkist ascendancy of Edward IV, which was fond of the romanticism of chivalric culture. Richard's status would have warranted - and indeed demanded - a flamboyant structure and this is certainly what appears to have existed at this site.

Ewyas Harold lies at the southern end of the Golden Valley. The castle, c. 300m west of the church, occupies the end of a spur running out from the west side of the valley.

Description of the site today

This castle is a remarkable example of a motte and bailey earthwork. The almost circular motte measures an average of 74m north-west to south-east and 64m transversely. It rises 13m above the ditch, which separates it from the spur. The motte is 10m above the kidney-shaped bailey. 
  
There is no indication of a ditch separating the motte and bailey, but it may have been infilled. The bailey is defended by scarp slopes, ramparts and ditches, with an original entrance most likely on the north.

To the south is a lower, outer bailey and excavations within it have provided indications that the original village was located here. Also to the south is an area which once may have contained fishponds.

The motte is built of stones and clay, while stone scattered around the crest may indicate a shell keep. 

Foundation and history of the site

This castle is very important historically, as it is one of only four pre-Conquest castles in the country. Along with Hereford Castle and Richard's Castle, it helps demonstrate the importance of Herefordshire as a border county at the time of the Norman Conquest.

It is unclear why the castle is called Ewyas Harold, but it has been suggested that it was after the first resident lord of the castle, Harold, who founded a religious house against the castle walls. Harold's son Robertus de Ewyas founded the Abbey of Dore at the beginning of Stephen's reign (1135) and built the parish church of Ewyas Harold. (Rev. Charles J. Robinson, Castles of Herefordshire and their Lords)

c.1050: The castle is believed to have been built by Osbern Pentecost. The castle of Osbern is thought to have been built on the existing foundations of an English burgh, laid down a century previously. He built his keep upon the mound and put a wall on the earthworks defending the platform of the lower bailey.

To the Anglo-Saxon natives the idea of building a private fortress so that you might lord it over your tenants was an alien idea, and not one that was welcome. They felt that these castles were a threat to their freedom and gladly supported Earl Godwin in his order that the castles of the Normans be destroyed.

1052: Earl Godwin is returned from exile. Godwin was returned to his power and it was decided that the French lords should be exiled or even executed. Some of the Normans of King Edward the Confessor's court retreated to the castle. They were outlawed and all fled except for Osbern, who surrendered his castle to Earl Leofric. The castle was dismantled and the lands of Ewyas given to Osbern's nephew.

1067-71: The castle is re-fortified by William fitz Osbern, Earl of Hereford, having been damaged by Earl Godwin or the Welsh. The plan of the new castle appears to have followed the structure of the original, with improvements that the advancement of technology allowed.

pre-1086: Alfred of Marlborough held the land and castle. It had 281 hides of land and was worth £302 4s 0d per annum. At the death of Alfred his daughter was denied claim to his land and the main parts went to Harold of Ewyas and Bernard de Neufmarche. It was probably Robert, the son of Harold, who gave the castle its present name. He was also responsible for its reconstruction.

1100: Harold founded a priory located within the outer bailey of the castle - the foundation charter refers to a chapel dedicated to St. Nicholas and served by monks.

Sybilia de Ewyas, the eventual heiress of the castle, married Robert de Tregoz in the early 13th century and Ewyas Harold remained with his descendants until the property became divided at the death of John de Tregoz in 1300. The castle was passed in dowry to Roger de la Warre. When Roger died the castle was seized by the king and Henry IV later granted it to Sir Philip de la Vache, who was made Knight of the Garter in 1309 for his service during the French Wars. 

1403: In this year custody was given to Sir William Beauchamp, Lord of Abergavenny, with the intention that it was to be fortified against Owain Glyn Dwr. From Sir William's heirs it passed to the Nevilles.

1538: It is noted that the castle is "ruinous and gone" (John Leland, Itinerary).

1645: In this year Charles I passed through Ewyas Harold, and Symonds (his antiquarian officer) noted the church and the castle. The castle could have given them no shelter, being in a ruinous state.

Despite being one of the most important castles in the country due to its foundation prior to the Norman Conquest, Ewyas Harold played little part in any events of historical importance. It is possible that King John stayed here during his visits to the Welsh Border, and it may have been Owain Glyn Dwr who reduced it to ruins during his raids into Herefordshire.

Ewyas Harold Castle is featured on the BBC's Hands on History website, which is aimed at families. The Hands on History site also includes free activity packs that families can download.

Historic Environment Record reference no. 850, Ordnance Survey grid reference: SO 6054 2820

Foy is a parish 5km to the north of Ross-on-Wye. Half a mile to the east of the parish church of St. Mary at Foy is a site named Campfield. The area is locally known as Hill of Eaton or Eaton Tregoz.

Description of the site today

An L-shaped length of scarped hillside with arms projecting north-east and south-west, which appears to be largely natural. Below the northeast arm is a smaller scarp, probably of a later date and constructed in connection with cart track. The area is known locally as Camp Field,  and it has been suggested that this may be the site of a possible Iron Age fort, but there is little definite evidence for the existence of such a site.

The site offers a good situation for a castle earthwork, but again there are no apparent remains of one. There is a possibility that this is the site of Eaton Tregoz Castle, which was built by John de Tregoz. His family were lords of Ewyas Harold and were of considerable importance during the 13th century. Robinson records that in 1280 John de Tregoz was permitted to endow a chapel within his castle to St. John the Baptist. The castle later passed through the family line to the de Grandisons, who in 1309 were granted a licence to crenellate by King Edward II. By 1375 the castle was in the hands of Hugh Waterton. An Inquisition on Hugh de Waterton dated 1420 details the castle buildings as: a hall with buttery and pantry; a great chamber above; a parlour; a chapel; several other chambers; a kitchen, bakehouse and brewery; stables and barns; a lower and outer gate, both with chambers over; two mills and a deer park of 144 acres. Another Inquisition, of 1433, lists the deer park as 1,000 acres enclosed.

The castle continued to be used by the Abrahall family, who gained possession of the castle in the 15th century. The last male heir of the Eaton branch of the Abrahall family was the Revd. George Abrahall, who died in 1673; his co-heirs divided the property.

Second possible site of Eaton Tregoz Castle

OS grid ref: SO 6120 2870

This site is close to the hamlet of Hole-in-the-Wall on the opposite bank of the River Wye from Foy, and not far from the other suggested castle site.

A description of 1805 notes that "At a place called Hole-in-the-Wall are the remains of some ancient building, consisting of the foundation of some well built walls with huge stones lying about. The site is now occupied by many cottages" (Brayly & Britain, Description of Herefordshire). Kelly's Directory for 1891 is more definite: "There once existed here a strongly fortified castle, dismantled and left ruinous during the feudal wars; only a portion of its walls now remains". It has been suggested that Court Farm and the adjoining cottages are all parts of the "castle" complex. The Archaeological Research Section of the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club made visits in 1971 and 1995, and noticed many re-used dressed stones. Court Farm contains a stone-vaulted cellar and an ogee-arched doorway. In 1971, dressed stones found in the area included transoms and others with moulding and chamfers, some of which were being used as kerb stones.

References

Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club, Herefordshire Archaeological News, Volumes 25 (1971) and 64 (1995)
Revd. Charles J. Robinson, The Castles of Herefordshire and their Lords, re-published edition, undated

Historic Environment Record reference no. 12638, Ordnance Survey grid reference: SO 5640 1680

Ordnance Survey aerial photographs taken in 1972 show what appears to be a ditched mound under the cover of trees in Elliots Wood. However, it does not appear on the First Edition Ordnance Survey map.

One kilometre north-north-east of Goodrich village, midway between Ross and Monmouth, Goodrich Castle stands on a ridge above the river, with a commanding view of the countryside below.

The name Goodrich has been attributed to two very different sources; some say that is taken from the Welsh name for the River Wye, Gwy, and reich, which means "territory". Other scholars say that it is a derivation from the name of the man credited with its origin, Godric of Mappestone (Godric Mapson) (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 91). 

Description and tour of the castle today

The steep scarp, which rises more than 30m above the water meadows, provides a strong natural defence along the west side via a deep lateral valley. The castle would have been a good defensive structure against possible attacks by the Welsh and would have provided a suitable base for forays into Wales.

On the south and east there is a wide rock-cut moat, whilst a smaller ditch surrounds the barbican, defending the gateway to the castle.
 
The castle rises from red sandstone, from which much of it is built. The castle consisted of a parallelogram-shaped inner ward with circular towers flanking each corner. Three of the towers are on square bases with spurs. Each tower was of three storeys, with the uppermost storey rising above the curtain wall. The fourth corner had a gatehouse and chapel tower. On the other side of the gate is a small circular turret similar to the other towers.

The walls linking the towers are straight, except on the south, where the wall is brought out to a point. 

The castle was - and still is - approached via a trackway which runs roughly alongside the east wall and leads into:

The barbican

The barbican of Goodrich Castle is well preserved and illustrates the use of this style of defence. It forced attackers to capture and pass over two bridges at right angles to each other. A stone wall encloses the barbican, against which the remains of a stone bench suggest the existence of previous lean-to buildings.

Behind the barbican is found: 

The gatehouse and chapel tower

On the right as you enter the gate passage is a small doorway, which leads to a porter's lodge on the right and a garderobe on the left.

In addition to the drawbridge there was a long, vaulted gate passage, 50ft long, that was protected by two portcullises. The grooves for these portcullises can still be seen in the roof arches.

In the vaulting between the portcullises, meurtriers or murder holes were used for pouring boiling water or molten lead upon the enemy. These holes run through the gatehouse roof and into the room above. 

The gate passage leads into the north-east corner of the inner ward, which has buildings on all sides. To the left is:

The chapel

The windows in the east and west walls are 15th century additions. The base of the altar and the original basin for washing communion vessels can still be traced in the recess of the eastern window.

The stone seat in the south wall dates to the 13th century. The later staircase in the north wall led onto the western gallery of the 15th century. Corbels carved as angels carrying shields support this gallery. The staircase also leads to rooms above the chapel and gate passage, and to the wall walk. The rooms above the gate passage had fireplaces, and traces of the portcullis workings can be seen.

The eastern range

The lower part of the eastern range is early 13th century. A long rectangular building once stood against the inner face of this wall. It was originally of one storey but in the 15th century a second storey was added and the parapet raised.

The south-east tower

Inside this tower is a spiral staircase leading to the roof. In the two upper rooms there are fireplaces and embrasures. This, of all the towers, appears to have been occupied by the guard. As such it has access to every other part of the walls. Steps lead down from the south-east tower to the:

Norman keep

This building is the earliest surviving work of the castle and dates from c.1160-70. The keep had three floors and was faced with ashlar (squared stone) masonry laid in level courses. It has shallow clasping buttresses (a mass of masonry projecting from the wall to increase its strength, encasing the angle) at each angle and pilaster buttresses from the middle of each side.

The keep is interestingly built of grey conglomerate, which was probably brought by river from the Forest of Dean a few miles to the south.

The doorway at ground level is a later creation, the original entrance being via the opening above the present door, which is now a window.

The uppermost storey is marked by a stringcourse decorated with chevron ornament, and two of the original windows are preserved. 

The kitchen

The kitchen is between the keep and the south-west tower. Inside is a fireplace between two ovens, which filled the centre of the outer wall. A third oven between the curtain wall and the keep is partly destroyed.

The entrance to the kitchen is in the corner of the inner ward, immediately beside the entrance to the Great Hall, presumably so that food could be transported quickly to the eager diners.

A low, covered walkway leads from the kitchen to the well on the north side of the courtyard. 

The south-west tower

Like the south-east tower, this consists of three floors; the lowest floor forms the basement, which is entered via steps down to the left.

The ground floor was entered by a double doorway from a passage behind timber screens from the Great Hall. The ground floor room was the buttery, which was used for the storing and distribution of liquor. On the floor the earlier foundations of a round tower of small diameter can be traced.

In the north wall the garderobe can be seen; it is reached by a stair leading from the Great Hall.

The great hall

This building occupies most of the western side of the courtyard, and measures 65 ft by 27 ft 6 inches. On the west there are three windows, each one with a trefoil head and a horizontal bar across the opening. Above the window nearest the south-west tower is a doorway that led onto the wall walk.

The remains of a large fireplace with corbelled hood still exist.

Inserted into the north wall is a late 14th century doorway; beyond this lies a small vestibule leading to the solar and other private rooms. Above this vestibule was a small chapel that would have been used by the family and friends of the lord.

The solar and north-west tower

Occupying the western half of the northern range of the courtyard is a two-storey building. Immediately in front and at the same level was the solar building. This building was separated into two by a screen of two arches, which rose through two floors.

In the south corner of this room there is a basin and arrangements for a pipe leading from the well. In the opposite wall a doorway, protected by double doors and a portcullis, leads into the outer ward. This back door would have been used as a way for the inhabitants to escape the castle unnoticed at times of attack.

The outer ward

The restricted area of the outer ward meant that it was kept free of buildings due to reasons of defence. When this area was no longer required for defence it housed the stables, but these buildings were burnt down during the Civil War by Colonel Birch and Colonel Kyrle, and now only the stone floors remain.

The inner courtyard can be reached from here by climbing steps beside the barbican.

History of the castle

From its position high above the banks of the River Wye, Goodrich Castle commands an ancient ford crossing of the river. This route is thought to be the original Roman road from Gloucester to Caerleon via Monmouth.

Goodrich Castle does not appear in the Domesday Survey, but seems to have been in existence by 1101/1102 as it is mentioned in a document under the name of Godric's Castle. This Godric is thought to be Godric of Mappestone. One possible explanation for its absence from the Domesday Book is that as the area had been laid to waste by the Welsh it had not been minutely surveyed.

1144: William fitz Osbern seized the castle during the anarchy of the reign of Stephen.

In the following reign the Crown holds the castle and manor.

1203: King John granted the castle and manor to William Marshall, Earl of Pembroke. The castle was held by the service of two knights' fees. Marshall's son William died at Goodrich in 1245. He was the last male of the line to hold these lands, but as he had fought for the Barons at Lincoln, possession reverted to the Crown.

1247: Goodrich passed to William de Valence, half brother to Henry III, by his marriage to the heiress of William Marshall. William de Valence and his son Aymer made many alterations to the castle. They knocked down the towers and outer walls and rebuilt them, leaving the original keep surrounded by new structures. This is why the keep is so distinctive in its light grey colour compared to the red sandstone of the surrounding buildings. Aymer de Valence died in 1323, and Goodrich Castle passed to Aymer's niece Elizabeth Comyn.

Elizabeth was forced to grant her rights to Hugh Despencer. Her husband Richard, 2nd Baron Talbot, who in the autumn of 1326 seized the castle, later disputed this.

1331-1355: Lord Talbot was summoned to Parliament by the title of "Richard Talbot of Goodrich Castle" (Rev. Charles J. Robinson, Herefordshire Castles and their Lords).

Richard Talbot apparently used the ransoms of prisoners of the French Wars to fund improvements to the fortress.

1356: Richard Talbot was succeeded by his son Gilbert, who fought with the Black Prince in the French Wars. Sir John Talbot, the 1st Earl of Shrewsbury, was the hero of 40 battles and was slain at the battle of Chatillon in 1453.

For many years Goodrich was home to the Talbots, who were made Earls of Shrewsbury in the 15th century.

1460: On the defeat of the Lancastrians and the forfeiture of the castle, Goodrich was granted to the Yorkist William Herbert. However, John, 3rd Earl of Shrewsbury made his peace with the king and regained control of his lands before his death in 1473.

1616: The death of the 7th Earl of Shrewsbury with no male heir brought Goodrich into the hands of Henry Grey, Earl of Kent. At this point the castle was no longer occupied.

1643: The Earl of Stamford, who had seized Hereford in the interests of Parliament, garrisoned the castle.

1646: The castle was the scene of one of the most desperate sieges in Herefordshire during the Civil War. The fortress was at first in the hands of Parliament, but was later occupied by a garrison led by the Royalist Sir Henry Lingen. Colonels Birch and Kyrle, along with 500 men on horse and foot, made an attempt to capture the castle but only managed to burn the stables and outbuildings.

Colonel Birch took possession of a great culverin (a type of cannon) from Gloucester, as well as other guns from Ludlow Castle in south Shropshire. He even built a cannon that could carry a shell of two hundredweight - this was called "Roaring Meg". This cannon stood until recently in the Churchill Gardens Museum in Hereford, but English Heritage has since had it moved back to Goodrich.

The castle remained strong and its defenders in good spirits. However, Colonel Birch gained fresh supplies and made successive attempts on the castle, which later surrendered. On 31st July terms were proposed and agreed that saved the lives of the defenders.

Colonel Birch was allowed to capture the fortress and its main contents of 30 barrels of beer. Besides Sir Henry Lingen were gentleman from some of the most distinguished families in the county, including the Bodenhams, Vaughans, Berringtons and Wigmores.

On 25th August 1646 a request was made that the castle should be completely destroyed; the following spring it was resolved that it should be de-garrisoned and slighted, making it virtually uninhabitable.

1740: Goodrich remained with the Earls of Kent until this year, when it was sold to Admiral Thomas Griffin.

The castle later passed through various hands until 1920, when it was placed with the Commissioner of Works. It has been under the care of English Heritage since 1984.

Construction and restoration

No remains of the Godric's Castle mentioned at the beginning of the 12th century have been discovered, however it is highly likely that the rock-cut moat follows the line of the original defences.

The earliest surviving piece of the castle is the Norman keep, dating from the middle to late 12th century.

The square enclosure with the angle towers was built around the keep in the early 13th century. Of this wall, only the east wall and the foundations of the south-west tower survive, the rest of the surviving curtain wall being of the 13th century when a period of extensive reconstruction occurred.

The barbican and the outer ward were added some time after 1296. The upper storey of the eastern range, as well as the added room on the gatehouse, were built later in the history of the castle. In this year we have evidence of royal clerks and workmen nearby, thus adding weight to the theory that the rebuilding of the barbican and keep happened in this period.

In 1280 and 1282 we have evidence of grants of oak trees from royal forests being made to Goodrich, suggesting a period of rebuilding at the castle.

Excavations

In 1988 a watching brief was carried out during the excavation of a trench for an electricity cable to light the ticket office. This long cable trench ran along the vehicular access road, around the outer edge of the ditch, past the barbican and into the outer ward.

During the work a Christian burial ground was discovered near the edge of the ditch to the south of the castle. The close proximity of the burial ground to the ditch suggests that it pre-dates the ditch.

Other finds include pieces of medieval encaustic floor tiles and pottery sherds dating from the 13th-20th centuries.

Historic Environment Record reference no. 5776, Ordnance Survey grid reference: SO 5240 2830

Elvastone may be a modern form of Elvareston, which may have meant "Aelfhere's estate". Harewood most probably comes from the Old EnglishHarewuda, "hare wood". (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 96)

Harewood is 2km to the south of Hereford, on the A49. It is suggested that there is a low-level moated site at Elvastone, 0.7km south of the disused church of St. Denis. This area has since been ploughed out and there are no visible signs of such a site on the surface.

Hentland: motte and bailey

HER no. 6415, OS grid ref: SO 5380 2420

In The Text of the Book of Llan Dâv (Old Welsh Texts) Hentland is known as Hennlann, which means "old church" (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 98).

This motte and bailey site has been much altered and defaced by modern cottages and gardens, however some basic outlines can still be seen.

The enclosure covers c. 0.75 acres with traces of a bank to the north-west and south-west sides. The surrounding ditch survives best on the south-west side, where the outer scarp is rock cut, up to 16m wide and 1.5m deep.

The bailey is c. 50m square, and the motte is located on its north corner.

The motte has a diameter of approximately 26m; it is difficult to be certain of its dimensions as it has been cut away on the south side. The motte still stands to 2.5m on the north side.

Humber: In Castle Croft, Stoke Prior

HER no. 30482, OS grid ref: SO 5190 5610

According to the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club's Field Survey there is a field name of "In Castle Croft" marked on the tithe map for Humber parish. This field is adjacent to one called "Calders Grave".

There are no indications of earthworks now present at this site.

Huntington: mound, south of church

HER no. 942, OS grid ref: SO 2478 5159

The name Huntington means "huntsmen's estate". Part of Huntington was in the Welshry of the Marcher lordship of Kington and the other part was in the Englishry. (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 108)

On the south side of the parish, a mound occupies a slight knoll. This mound is oval in form, 40m across and rising 2.7m above the surrounding ground.

The feature is very indistinct but traces of a sunken, almost rectangular, area can be determined on the south-east side adjacent to the mound.

At the time of the Domesday Survey in 1086 Earl Harold held Huntington.

Huntington: Turret Castle

HER no. 945, OS grid ref: SO 2590 5340

Occupying the base of a spur of Hell Wood running to the east, just over ½ mile east of the church, are the remains of a motte and bailey associated with the nearby Huntington Castle.

The motte is circular, c. 50m in diameter and rising c. 9m above the bottom of the ditch between it and the bailey. There is an irregular-shaped bailey to the east.

The bailey has remains of a rampart and ditch between it and the spur to the east. The entrance to the bailey is also on this side.

A badger sett has revealed part of the foundations of a wall, 5ft-6ft thick, which points to the existence of a shell keep. Around the site there are also buried and partly-exposed lengths of the curtain wall.

There is an outer bailey on the point of the ridge with possible foundations of a gatehouse. There do not appear to be any flanking towers; these were not necessary as it is a strongly defended ridge site.

The castle is thought to be 11th-12th century, and may even be a forerunner of nearby Huntington Castle.

Huntington: Turret Tump

HER no. 943, OS grid ref: SO 2465 5208

The name Huntington means "huntsmen's estate". Part of Huntington was in the Welshry of the Marcher lordship of Kington and the other part was in the Englishry. (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 108)

This site is on top of a 900ft knoll, nearly one mile south of Huntington parish church. Turret Tump is around 1¼ miles south of Huntington Castle and around 1¼ miles south-west of Turret Castle.

The site consists of a roughly circular mound with a diameter of 86ft at the base and rising 16ft. There is evidence of a ditch and outer bank on the south side of the site.

The motte is large enough to have supported a round or polygonal tower, although no evidence has been found for one.

Description of the site today

The modern visitor today will unfortunately no longer find a magnificent building on the site, which is now known as Castle Green. This area is now a recreation area with little of its history still visible. However, the surrounding earthworks and part of the surviving moat give testament to the capacity of the once-defended area.

The castle once occupied a site to the south and east of the city, with the River Wye running along the south and defended on its other three sides by wet moats and high ramparts. These ramparts - and the enormous scale of them - can still be seen clearly today. The post-Conquest castle consisted of a motte with a kite-shaped bailey to the east. The rampart on the north side rises 21½ ft above the water level of the existing moat. To the east, the ground outside is 29 ft below the top of the rampart, the old moat having been replaced by a modern road. On the west side a slight scarp indicates what once would have been the position of the ditch between the bailey and the former motte.

Foundation and history of the site

Hereford Castle is of great importance because it is one of only four known castles in England that date from before the Norman Conquest. The other three are at Clavering in Essex and at Ewyas Harold and Richards Castle, both of which are also in Herefordshire.

1052: The first castle built in Hereford was established by Ralph, son of the Count of Vexin, who was made Earl of Hereford in 1046. He is credited with constructing a castle and Norman garrison sometime before 1052, which enveloped the already established ministry of St. Guthlac. This castle was most probably built of timber.

1055: The castle was overrun by the Welsh, the town and cathedral were burnt and Gruffyd ap Llewellyn took vast spoil and booty. The castle was destroyed.

1066: William fitz Osbern, Lord of Breteuil in Normandy, was created Earl of Hereford. William was ordered to build castles along the Welsh border, and it seems that he certainly restored Hereford Castle, even if he did not entirely rebuild it. The castle (and not the city wall) became the focus of the city's post-Conquest defences.

1067: Edric the Wild, who took everything up to the bridge over the River Lugg, harassed the garrison of the castle.

1071: William fitz Osbern died and his son Roger took over possession of the castle. Roger was involved in an unsuccessful attempt to depose King William; consequently he forfeited the castle, which with a few exceptions remained a royal stronghold for the remainder of its active life.

1100: Henry I ascended to the throne, and before his death nominated his daughter Matilda as his successor. However the Council of Barons did not consider a woman fit to rule the country and offered the throne to the king's nephew and grandson of the conqueror, Stephen de Blois. This action caused many castles to be built along the Marches, and involved Hereford Castle once more in the politics of the nation.

1138: Geoffrey Talbot garrisoned the castle on behalf of Matilda. Stephen de Blois and his men marched on the city and whilst taking the castle "the insurgents set fire to the city and all below the bridge over the Wye was burned down".

1139: Matilda landed in Hereford, and after routing Stephen's men seized the city. During this trouble the burial grounds of St Guthlac's were dug up and used to consolidate the existing defences, and soon afterwards the ministry of St Guthlac's was moved outside of the defences of the castle. Matilda did not regain control of the castle until later in 1139, when both Geoffrey Talbot and Miles of Gloucester besieged the castle.

1154: Matilda's son Henry II granted the motte of Hereford to Roger of Gloucester. However, a rebellion followed and Henry retook possession. For the rest of its history the castle remained royal.

1216: King John made Walter de Lacy Sheriff of the county and granted him the custody of the royal castle at Hereford.

1217: Work was undertaken at Hereford Castle to strengthen it against the Welsh attacks, but by 1218 the threat had passed.

1260s: During the Barons' Wars Hereford Castle became, for a time, the headquarters of the Baronial Party, which had the influential Simon de Montfort as its governor. When the eldest son of the King, Prince Edward, was taken prisoner at the battle of Lewes it was to Hereford that he was brought. Edward was apparently allowed to take exercise on horseback on Widemarsh Common. It was during one of these excursions that Edward, having tired all the guards' steeds, jumped upon a fresh horse and made his escape to Wigmore Castle, the family seat of the Mortimers and a Royalist stronghold.

For the rest of the medieval period the bailey remained an integral part of the royal castle and was built up with service buildings and yards. Records of the castle in 1265 list a number of buildings within the bailey. These included:

• King's great and small hall
• Chambers for the King, Queen and their knights
• A counting house and exchequer
• Two gaols and a building for siege engines
• A stable, kitchen and bakery

1642: During the Civil War Herefordshire was very much a Royalist stronghold, though several principal families supported Parliament. In 1642 the Earl of Stamford's men took the city by surprise before retreating to Gloucester. The castle does not appear to have played an independent part during the sieges of the city in the Civil War. Its role at this time seems to be as part of the defensive circuit.

1643: It appears that the defences of the castle required some work, with the water in the ditches being only knee deep.

1645: After the Battle of Naseby, Prince Rupert retreated first to Herefordshire and then on into South Wales. He was followed closely by the Scottish army who were marching under the Earl of Leven. The city was put into a proper state of defence and a garrison installed - 1,000 citizens are said to have taken up arms in a defence that lasted five weeks. King Charles arrived in Hereford in September and the Scots, afraid of a revival of forces, began to disperse.

The decline of the castle

This appears to have been the last action that the castle was to see. It was eventually sold to Sir Richard Harley and several of his friends for "public use and benefit". Harley then granted the castle to the Justices of the Peace of the county and the demolition men moved in.

1752: The magistrates leased the Castle Green to a local organisation called the Society of Tempers, whose aim was to promote amiability and good temper among citizens. This organisation was eventually dissolved in 1831.

1833: The magistrates leased the Green to the city council for a period of 200 years at £1 per annum. The council is still responsible today for the maintenance and upkeep of the area in its present incarnation as a recreation area.

Restoration, repair and decay

From the middle of the 12th century it is evident from accounts that work was carried out on the castle. In 1181 a limekiln was built to provide the materials needed to rebuild a decaying section of the castle wall.

It is thought that the great keep on the western mound was built around the beginning of the 13th century. At about the same time a small tower was built at quite considerable cost. The walls and bridges were beginning to require regular attention during the first half of the 13th century, and in 1239 a new tower was built to replace the old one, which had by now collapsed.
 
Between the years 1250 and 1252 over £100 was spent on various areas of the castle, however a survey in 1254 revealed that this was not enough to correct the many major structural problems the castle now had. The roof of the great tower, as well as the steps leading up to the motte, were now in serious need of repair, as were both of the gates leading into the castle bailey. A more serious problem was the south wall of the bailey, which was in danger of being undermined by the river Wye. The sheriff was allowed to spend £60 on emergency repairs to the wall, which he did by making a quay to protect the castle wall from slipping into the river. 

King John and his successor King Henry III were regular visitors to Hereford, and thus it is certain that the royal apartments in the bailey were kept to a high standard. Improvements in 1245 cost a total of £176 7s 10d - the king's chamber was whitewashed and the queen's lengthened by 20 feet and painted. The queen was also provided with a wardrobe, a fireplace and a privy chamber. In 1256 a new kitchen was built, followed by a new chamber for the king's clerks in the 1260s.

The Edwardian conquest of Wales between 1277 and 1282 meant that Hereford Castle lost much of its importance as a stronghold on the Welsh border, and an inquisition in 1281 recorded that Hugh de Turbeville, while sheriff of Herefordshire, had burnt and destroyed the king's houses, engines of war and military stores within the castle. The reason for this action was not explained.

Surveys in 1291 and 1300 reveal that the roof timbers of the great hall had lost much of their lead and shingle and were beginning to decay as a result. The roof of the county hall was also in need of repair and some 65ft of curtain wall is said to have fallen. The almonry had also been demolished. In 1307 some repairs were made but these do not appear to have been sufficient, for when Queen Isabella came to Hereford in 1326 she was lodged at the Bishop's Palace, presumably because the castle was again in a state of disrepair.

The last major attempt at repair of the castle was made after renewed fighting in Wales following the uprising of Owain Glyn Dwr. Just under £100 was spent but gradually the castle fell into decay and disrepair.

In his Itinerary of 1538, John Leland, the king's antiquary, gives a description of the state of the castle: "The drawbridge is now cleane downe and the whole castel tending towards ruine. It hath bene decayed since the Bohun's time (Edward III), it hath bene one over the fayrest, largest and strongest castels in England." Leland also gives a good description of the decaying defences as they stood in his time: "The walls of it be high and strong, and full of great towres". These towers presumably sat upon the great earthworks that currently run along the north and east sides of the Castle Green and upon the walkway beside the river.

Most of what remained of the castle seems to have been destroyed in the 1650s, and the stone used to build a new dining hall for the Vicars Choral and other buildings within the city.

Although no visible traces of the many buildings of the castle remain on the Green it is still possible after long hot summers to see parch marks in the grass where, not far below the surface, lie some of the ruins of this once-great monument.

On the western border of Herefordshire, 2½ miles south-west of Kington, lies Huntington village. Approximately ¼ of a mile to the north of the church of St. Thomas Canterbury is the site of Huntington Castle.

The site can be accessed via two footpaths which run from opposite the Village Hall. 

Description of the site today

The motte is 40m across at the base and is situated to the south-west of the oval-shaped inner bailey. Apart from the west, where there is a steep scarp, there is a ditch with traces of an inner bank to the south and south-east. The motte rises 10m above the bailey.

The outer bailey is a crescent-shaped enclosure with double scarping on the south side and a ditch to the north and east. The inner bailey is approached by a causeway on the east side, and is enclosed by a curtain wall.

Foundations survive on most of the circuit; one fragment on the west side of the motte stands 20ft high. Towards the north are the remains of a tower with a rounded outer face, with part of the chamber adjoining the curtain wall on the east still surviving. There are traces of a window and two small recesses in the west wall. This tower appears to be of the 13th century.

Another piece of stonework can be found on the south-east side of the motte, halfway up and under trees and undergrowth. This stonework appears to have a low stone wall leading from it towards the east, which eventually runs down the motte through the ditch and out the other side.

It is difficult to see the earthworks today as the site is covered by thick undergrowth. 

Foundation and history of the castle

The castle was in the possession of the de Braose, de Bohun and de Stafford families during the Middle Ages.

Huntington Castle was most likely built as the successor of nearby Kington Castle.

1216-1228: At some point during this period the nearby castle of Kington was destroyed. Although Kington still remained the head of the barony, Huntington was now the fortress at its centre.

During the reign of Henry III the castle is mentioned as being of the honour of Brecknock, which was at this time in the possession of William de Braose. William de Braose was a supporter of the king against Llywelyn, but Llywelyn caught him in bed with his wife. It appears that William de Braose had been plotting with Princess Jean to assassinate Prince Llywelyn and seize control of the principality of Wales for himself. Llywelyn was warned of the plot by Earl Hubert Burgh, leader of the English government who also had a personal grudge against the de Braose family. Llywelyn had William tried for adultery and hanged from a tree.

1228: The stone keep on the site is believed to have been built around this date by William de Braose. In July of this year King Henry III ordered the castle to be seized by the Crown on the death of Reginald de Braose, who had previously been lord of Kington.

1231-34: Prince Llywelyn continued to invade the barony and did much damage, although he never managed to reach Huntington Castle. After his death in 1240 his son, Prince Daffyd, invaded the lordship and in 1244 defeated the armies of Ralph de Mortimer and Humphrey de Bohun in his attempt to seize the castle and its lands. Although he was victorious in battle he failed to take Huntington Castle before his death in 1246. Daffyd had no sons, but Ralph de Mortimer was succeeded by his son Roger.

1248: The widow of William de Braose died and Huntington Castle passed, through her daughter, to Humphrey de Bohun.

1256: The de Bohuns were given permission to hold a fair within the borough. In November of this year war once again came to this area when Llywelyn ap Gruffyd invaded the Welsh Marches and annexed them to the principality of Gwynedd.

1263-4: The Earl of Leicester's two sons depleted the territory of Roger de Mortimer. Prince Edward marched from London to Mortimer's aid, and committed the castles of Hay, Huntington and Brecon to Roger de Mortimer. Humphrey de Bohun regained his property in July of the same year.

1263-5: During the Barons' Wars the garrison at Huntington castle remained true to the de Mortimers, despite seeing the army of de Mortimer defeated many times. They managed to prevent the Baronial army from taking the castle until Simon de Montfort was defeated and killed at the Battle of Evesham on 4th August  1265.

1265: Royalists take prisoner Humphrey de Bohun at the Battle of Evesham. He died a prisoner at Beeston Castle in Cheshire. Huntington Castle stays with the de Bohuns for four successive generations.

1372: This was the year of the death of the last of the de Bohuns, who left two daughters as co-heirs. The elder daughter married Henry, Earl of Derby (later Henry IV), who was created Duke of Hereford by Richard II. Huntington was his property until his accession to the throne in 1399.

1399: The earldom and Huntington passed to Edward de Stafford, Earl of Buckingham. On 21st July 1403 he was slain at the Battle of Shrewsbury and possession passed to his widow.

1403: Under the orders of Henry IV, Edward de Stafford's widow undertook the re-fortifying of the castle against Owain Glyn Dwr, who was once again marauding up and down the Marches. John Smert, captain and constable of the castle, supplied a number of arrows and bows and a smith was employed to clean the arms. The keep was re-roofed, the gates re-hung, and palisading was created around the ponds and barn.

The first record of the fair at Huntington is in this year. This fair was held annually until 1956.

1460: The castle was recorded as being worth nothing.

1521: The castle appears to be still habitable as the office of constable continues. One of the towers was being used as a prison.

1564: The castle had been passed to the possession of the Crown. It was in this year sold to Sir Ambrose Cave for £6,328 5s 0d.

1568: The lands were sold to Francis Vaughan of Hergest. From him they passed through the hands of Garnons, Townsend, Holman and others.

1670: According to Blount, the keep and most of the walls were still standing.

1818: The castle became the property of Edmund Watkins Cheese, Esq.

Historic Environment Record reference no. 923, Ordnance Survey grid reference: SO 4149 2940

North-east of Howton Farm, between the A465 and the railway and one mile north-east of the parish church, is a mound. It is 45m in diameter with a flat top about 2m above the surrounding ground. There are faint traces of a ditch around the base.

Halfway up the side of the mound there is a visible step on all but the north side, where erosion caused by an oak tree has modified the profile. This step probably marks the position of a palisade or walkway around the motte.

The material for the construction of the mound appears to have come from the ditch, which is now infilled, as it is only visible as a line of thicker, darker grass. The ditch averages 10m wide and survives to a depth of 0.3m on the south-east.

Tradition says that this site was a burial place after a battle at Kilpeck Castle. It was partially opened in 1906 with no definite results.

This motte guards the southern approaches to the Golden Valley.

Kentchurch: Bowlstone Court Wood, defended site

HER no. 3980, OS grid ref: SO 4216 2700

East of Bowlstone Court Wood and about 1 mile to the north-east of St. Mary's parish church, Kentchurch.

A roughly oval mound 50 ft by 43 ft and 12 ft high, with three platforms on top surrounded by a dry ditch, except on the south-west where there is a natural slope towards a brook. There are traces of a causeway on the north-east side, with further earthworks to the south.

It was probably an early motte and bailey castle without stonework.

Kentchurch: Grosmont Castle, possible site

HER no. 6249, OS grid ref: SO 4162 2473

The name Kentchurch is thought to derive from the name of a female saint, Ceina (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 110).

According to local tradition this is the site of Grosmont Castle, however there is little evidence to support this.

At the site are earthworks of a rough square with what appears to be a ditch on the east side. This feature peters out to the north-east.

The enclosed area is very much disturbed and huge blocks of sandstone are exposed in places. There is evidence of quarrying but trees hide the disturbed ground.

There is nothing to suggest any feature that may pre-date the quarrying.

Kentchurch: Twyn y Corras, motte

HER no. 6248, OS grid ref: SO 4187 2493

Corras is situated 1km south of Kentchurch church. The mound is in the garden of Twyn y Corras.

The mound rises sharply to a height of c.12ft and has a flat top measuring 12ft across. It is probably a motte, to the south of which is a bailey containing a chapel excavated in 1988. The chapel displayed features typical of an early Norman manor chapel. The chapel had been enlarged sometime after 1200, and destroyed by 1400.

Other features are difficult to make out as gardening has disturbed the ground, and it was also once the site of a World War II Home Guard dug-out.

Kings Caple: Caple Tump

HER no. 921, OS grid ref: SO 5593 2880

Four miles north-west of Ross-on-Wye, on the bank of the River Wye on a low ridge south of the main road, is Caple Tump, just to the south-east of the parish church.

The motte has a diameter of 40m and is 2.5m high on the south and 3.5m high on the north. There are the remains of a bank around the flat summit, 4m-6m wide and 0.5m-1.2m high.

There is no trace of a bailey, although a depression to the south-east may be part of a ditch. The bailey may be underneath the church buildings to the north-west.

Finds from the adjacent Colley's Forge suggest that this site may once have contained an early Norman castle.

Kings Caple: castle?

HER no. 6441, OS grid ref: SO 5620 2860

Kings Caple is a parish 6.5km north-west of Ross-on-Wye. It sits on the west bank of the River Wye.

There is evidence of a possible ruined medieval castle on the southern edge of a plateau.

Kings Pyon: motte castle

HER no. 3204, OS grid ref: SO 4425 4895

1.6km south of Kings Pyon church, and 2km west of Canon Pyon, are the earthwork and buried remains of a small motte castle. It stands on a south-east facing slope above a tributary of Wellington Brook, which flows eastwards into the River Lugg.

The remains include a roughly circular earthen motte mound, c. 28m in diameter at the base and c. 17m in diameter at the top. The motte is steep sided and has a flat top, which is c. 2.4m high in the west and c. 1.7m high in the east. Ploughing around the mound has produced an angular boundary at the base, most noticeably on the south-east where the sides are less steep. A ditch is no longer visible, but material for the construction of the mound will have been quarried from a surrounding ditch now completely infilled.

The motte is planted with mature and sapling oak trees, all of which have died.

The motte is legally protected as a Scheduled Monument.

Kington: mound

HER no. 350, OS grid ref: SO 2915 5681

Irregular-shaped mound on the south side of Back Brook, in a field locally known as "Castle Hill". The sides of the mound have been artificially steepened in places.

The top is comparatively flat and has slight traces of a mound. A small portion of what may have been a rampart with scarping exists on the south side.

There is no spring or watercourse nearby that could have fed a moat and the identification of this site is uncertain, as its condition is quite bad.

The foundation of the castle appears to date from the time of Henry I (1100-135), who created an honour (a group of manors held by one lord) centred on Kington for Adam de Port. The castle was soon abandoned as Roger de Port joined an uprising against the king which Henry II quickly put down, with help from the Welsh. The lordship of Kington was then granted to William de Braose and its centre moved to nearby Huntington. (This information was taken from R.W.D. Fenn and J.B. Sinclair, The Parish Church of St. Mary the Virgin, Kington - a Brief History for Visitors, a booklet which is available in the church.)

Kington Rural: Castle Twts

HER no. 347, OS grid ref: SO 2770 5553

Two kilometres to the south-west of Kington, at Lower Hergest, is an earthwork. Castle Twts is situated very close to the Welsh border and very near to Offa's Dyke. Huntington and Turret Castle are also to be found nearby, to the south-west.

Description of the castle twts site today

The earthworks are to be found on top of a small knoll which, judging by its size and shape, was artificially steepened to form the mound.

There is a small motte towards the west, 17m across the base and 1.7m above the small bailey enclosure. The bailey is little more than a flattened area protected by scarp slopes. There are possible traces of an approach causeway, but no evidence of stonework.

The entrenchment on this site is very slight. The south side may have been scarped and the fall is sharp and defensive. To the north and east sides the slope falls away gently and offers no true protection.

The area is on the lower slope of a steep hill that rises up to Hergest Ridge, which is 423m above sea level. The steepness of the slope makes this a very good site defensively. Park Wood is situated nearby to the north-east, and the River Arrow runs north-east to Kington just below the site.

One theory is that this site was abandoned before completion.

Kington Rural: Chickward, possible motte and bailey

HER no. 33732, OS grid ref: SO 287 535

Three kilometres to the south-south-west of Kington, and just to the west of the road leading from Kington into the hamlet of Chickward, is a possible motte and bailey site.

There is an irregular mound, the top of which adjoins the road. The mound has a wet ditch on the south-west and west, and there is the possibility of an associated bailey in a field to the west.

In 1992 the Woolhope Naturalists' Field Club described it as a motte formed by cutting a great ditch across the end of the ridge with the bottom of the cutting now carrying the modern road.

The mound has a wet ditch fed by springs, with slight traces of a former dam. In the small paddock adjoining the site there appears to be the partially robbed out foundation trench of a substantial wall. The buried stonework in the trench is up to 2m thick. There is more buried stonework in the paddock.

The slight earth bank crowned by a hedge on the west side of the site was once fronted by a deep ditch which recently has been partially filled in. The larger field to the west of the site is level with or slightly higher than the mound.

The field to the south-west has yielded some early medieval potsherds which were difficult to date.

The top of the mound has humps and bumps, with the main one being a roughly rectangular platform forming the highest point on the south-west side of the mound. One hundred metres to the north-east are one or more ponds behind earth dams; these are possibly fishponds associated with the site.

This may be the site of a fortified dwelling or just a former farmhouse site. It has many of the features associated with other fortified sites in the area, such as fishponds, wet ditches and stonework. If it was a fortified site it is possible to imagine that the mound may once have held a rectangular hall or tower within a simple shell keep.

Also noted in the surrounding area were one or two houses with good worked stone in their walls. Most houses in this area tend to be of rubble or timber, so the worked stone may have come from the castle's defences.

The mound is not marked on modern Ordnance Survey maps.

Kinnersley: Kinnersley Castle

HER no. 1074, OS grid ref: SO 3460 4950

On the A4112, 3km east of Eardisley, the present Kinnersley Castle was erected towards the end of the 16th century on the site of an earlier building. From time to time foundations have been discovered that give an indication of the size and shape of the previous construction.

The name Kinnersley comes from Chinardeslege, which was in use around 1120. This word means "Cyneheard's clearing". (Bruce Coplestone-Crow,Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 116)

The foundations suggest that it was a rectangular building encircled by a moat, which was crossed on the east side by a drawbridge. It is impossible to say when these original foundations were laid.

History of the site

1250: Hugh de Kynardesley was sheriff of Herefordshire. At this time Kinnersley was a member of the great honour of Wigmore.

1316: John de Kynardesley, lord of Newchurch, received a pardon for having joined in the rebellion of the Earl of Lancaster against the king.

1340: Richard de la Bere was lord of Kinnersley by marriage. In this year he obtained a licence to hold a weekly market and annual fair there. Richard de la Bere served as Knight of the Shire in 1355 and was buried in Black Friars in Hereford in 1382.

The Duke of Buckingham hid his family at the castle after Richard III threatened his life.

The de la Beres retained possession until the reign of Elizabeth I when it passed as dower to Michael Lyster of Kent. It was later sold to Francis Smallman, who served as MP for Leominster in 1620. He died at Kinnersley in 1633.

For more information visit the Kinnersley Castle website.

Kilpeck is 7 to 8 miles south-west of Hereford. The earthworks of the castle lie between the small ornate church of c. 1140 to the east and a hollow to the west. The graveyard of the nearby church is now beginning to encroach on the castle site.

Description of the site today

The earthworks consist of a motte with a base diameter of c. 50m, rising 8m to a summit 28m in diameter with a large kidney-shaped inner bailey to the east, between the castle and the settlement. The motte is completely surrounded by a ditch. 

The inner bailey has the remains of a rampart along its north and south sides. It was entered from the south-east where a gap in the rampart is flanked on one side by a small mound, perhaps once a small gatehouse.

There are two outer baileys which survive on the south and west, surrounded by either ditches or scarps. The Royal Commission for the Historical Monuments of England (Inventory of the Historic Monuments of Herefordshire, Volume I: South-West, 1931, p. 158) noted a third outer bailey to the north when it surveyed the site, but this has since been destroyed.

The outer bailey is roughly square and lies to the south. It has an outer ditch and the remains of a rampart on its north and south sides. The bailey is entered from the south-west, where there is a gap in the rampart surrounded by a small mound, which could cover the remains of a gatehouse.

On the motte summit are two fragments of a shell keep wall about 2m thick and 5m high. The shell keep is thought to be polygonal in shape and perhaps large enough to have had a wall walk. This wall would have enclosed an area c.70m-80m in diameter. A deep well has also been discovered within. The remains of two round-backed fireplace flues, of the former internal lean-to buildings, are also visible within the wall fragments.
 
On the west of the site a stream has been dammed by a continuation of the north bank of the western outer bailey. This was presumably intended to form a fishpond.

History of the castle

The Book of Llandaff, a 12th century compilation of Anglo-Saxon charters, indicates that south-west Herefordshire was part of the British kingdom of Ergingor Archenfield, and suggests that a church existed here as early as the 8th century. Archenfield had many connections with Celtic religion and was the centre of the work of Dubricius, a Celtic saint born at Madley in the 5th century.

1086: In the Domesday Survey Kilpeck (registered as Chipeete) was given by William the Conqueror to William fitz Norman. The castle is thought to have been built around 1090 as the administrative centre of Archenfield. According to the Domesday Survey, Kilpeck had "3 ploughs, 2 serfs and 4 oxmen and there are 57 men with 19 ploughs" (Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Domesday Book 17, Herefordshire, Phillimore, 1983, 1,53). 

1134: The castle is mentioned when Hugh de Kilpeck gave its revenues to the newly-founded priory some 350m south-east of the church. Hugh also gave the nearby church of St. David and the chapel of St. Mary within the castle grounds to the Abbey of Gloucester. Hugh was probably responsible for the building of the church at Kilpeck and for the re-building of the castle some time before he died in 1169.

1200: John de Kilpeck and his heirs were granted the bailiwick (jurisdiction) of all the forests of Herefordshire in perpetuity by King John.

1204: Hugh's grandson John died young, leaving his son Hugh as heir. Due to the very young age of Hugh, William de Cantilupe, sheriff of Herefordshire, was appointed by the king to take control of the Kilpeck estate.

1209: Hugh came of age, but William de Cantilupe continued to administer the estate. Hugh did eventually take over his estate.

1211, 1212 and 1214: King John was entertained in the castle. His host was William de Cantilupe. These regular royal visits suggest that Kilpeck Castle had sufficiently luxurious accommodation by this time.

1244: Hugh died, leaving two heiresses. His eldest daughter Isobel married William Walerand and took Kilpeck as her dowry.

1259: The king granted a weekly Friday market and annual fair to Kilpeck.

1273: William Walerand had no direct heirs, and on his death Kilpeck passed to his nephew Alan de Plugenet, who owned vast estates around Hereford and who was one of the principal benefactors of the Abbey of Dore, 6km west of Kilpeck. He was also present at the Battle of Evesham in 1265.

1295-1297: Alan de Plugenet was summoned to Parliament as a Baron.

1299: Alan de Plugenet died; he was succeeded by his son Alan.

1309: Alan was granted the right to hold a weekly market at Kilpeck as well as a two-day fair twice a year.

1311: Alan Plukenet II was made a Baron at Parliament.

1325: Alan Plukenet II died without heir; his sister Joan was married to Edward de Bohun, and they inherited Kilpeck. At this time Kilpeck had a total value of £62 0s 6d - a considerable sum. Edward de Bohun granted Kilpeck to his brother-in-law, James Butler, Earl of Ormond. As the Earls of Ormond lived outside of the county the castle began to decay. The value had dropped by two-thirds when the Earl of Ormond died in 1338.

1349: The famines and Black Death of this time appear to have greatly affected the settlement that had been built up around the castle. The priory was often unable to pay its debts and was dissolved in 1428.

1467: Kilpeck remained with the Butlers until the 5th Earl was beheaded in March of this year. Kilpeck manor reverted to the Crown. King Edward IV granted it to Sir William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke, in reward for his services to the House of York.

1469: William Herbert was captured in battle at Edgecote, Banbury and beheaded for deserting King Edward. Edward restored Kilpeck to John, the 6th Earl of Ormond. John died in the Holy Land on his way to Jerusalem. He was described as the "goodliest knight and finest gentleman in Christendom".

John's brother Thomas, who was called as a Baron to the English Parliament, succeeded John. His elder daughter took Kilpeck as dower to James St. Leger.

1530s: When John Leland visited the castle he recorded that "sum ruins of the walls still stand".

1545: James St. Ledger and his wife's son, George, was lord of Kilpeck but the family terminated in heiresses.

1635-1645: Although the castle was by this time pretty much in ruins, it was still garrisoned in the Civil War, but was never attacked. The Parliamentarians, to ensure that it would never stand as the castle it had once been, slighted it at the end of the war.

17th century: Kilpeck passed to the Pyes of Saddlebow and the Mynde.

Kilpeck Castle had been built with an appreciation of the surrounding landscape. King John enjoyed the area when he hunted in Haywood Forest and it contained private gardens and ponds. Although the castle was abandoned in the 14th century, the park was still valued and mentioned as late as the middle of the 17th century. It is an excellent example of a planned medieval settlement where the village has grown up around the castle.

Excavation

In 1912 the graveyard of the church of St. David was extended into part of the inner bailey of the castle. By 1982 this area was almost full and the Parochial Church Council wished to extend into an area to the north. To determine whether this extension was a threat to the remaining archaeological record a 5m wide area along the western boundary of the proposed extension was stripped to the first archaeological layer and a 1m wide trench was excavated. At least seven different periods were identified.

The first period excavated was the pre-rampart deposits; they were constant at a horizontal level and lay over the natural red-brown clay and sandstone. This layer was interpreted as pre-castle ground surface.

The 2nd period was the rampart construction, which was composed of re-deposited clay and sandstone, which appeared to have come from the digging of the ditch. No associated features - such as palisade postholes or any stone walling - were found on the rampart.

The 3rd period consisted of a layer of stones covering an area c.15m north to south, lying over the tail end of the rampart to the north. It was made up of small fragments of sandstone onto which larger sandstone blocks had been placed. It was interpreted as a stone trackway or yard. 

Period 4 was cut by eight pits and four postholes. Nearly all of these continued beyond the boundary of the excavation, and so their exact shape and function is unclear.

Period 5 included three circular postholes, all on the same alignment and of approximately the same dimensions. They contained large packing stones and had probably contained the large vertical posts of a timber building.

Period 6 contained the remnants of two stone walls, and two stone surfaces were recorded within the area of the 5m wide excavation. One wall and stone area lay against the rampart at the north end and the other wall and stone area lay against the southern end. Both walls were composed of irregular flat sandstone pieces, with occasional pieces of limestone bonded together with clay. Due to the small area excavated it is unclear whether these walls were connected. Behind the wall at the north end, the gap between it and the rampart had been filled in with roofing tiles, some of which had been glazed. The stone layer at the south end was compacted and worn, and was interpreted as the remains of a yard surface.

Period 7 was composed of a thick orange-brown silty clay that covered the walls of period 6. This layer was probably derived from the weathering of, and downwash from, the rampart since the abandonment of the castle in the 15th century.

The finds

There were only a few finds recovered. Medieval cooking pots and glazed jug fragments were recovered from periods 1-6 and suggested a date range from the 12th to the 14th/15th centuries. A number of stone roof-tiles were recovered. Part of a spur, a knife blade and an iron buckle were recovered from the stone surface of period 6, and half a large sandstone grinding stone was found on the face of the eroded rampart.

The parish of Kingsland is situated some 5.5km north-west of Leominster. The castle mound can be found just to the west of the parish church of St. Michael. The name Kingsland means "the royal estate in Leen", and leen is Welsh for "district of the streams". (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 113)

Description of the site today

The site contains an oval motte with bailey to the east, about 56m across at its greatest extent. It rises to a height of 5m to the west. There is a ditch between the motte and the bailey to the north and east. A transverse ditch sub-divides the bailey. There are traces of ditches to the north-west and north-east of the bailey.

The motte contains a large hollow on the top edge of the north-west side. Stones are showing where the grass is worn; these display the partially-buried foundations of an octagonal shell keep, with seven or eight angle towers. Traces of a bridge abutment and barbican to the keep can also be made out. There is an outlet to the moat in the south-west corner and a stream on the south side.

In the bailey, mole tumps frequently expose white plasters and mortar. Some pottery of the early 12th century to the late 14th century has also been discovered.

History of the castle and site

Kingsland is said to have been the site of a palace of the Dark Age King Merewald, and up to the 19th century the adjoining meadow was known as Merwold Croft.

After the Norman Conquest of 1066 the area belonged to the king, hence the name of the parish.

1135: The parish had been given by Henry I to Philip de Braose of Radnor; the castle was probably founded about this time. 

1216: King John apparently stayed at Kingsland when he was wasting the lands of the de Braose.

1538: John Leland, the King's antiquary, noted that "there was a castle at Kyngsland ... the ditches wherof and parte of the keep be yet seen by the west parte of Kyngsland church". There is now no visible sign of the keep or any other castle construction.

It is thought that de Braose built the castle in the 1130s. It cannot have been a seat of importance by the mid 1400s as it is not mentioned in accounts of the nearby battle of Mortimers Cross, which was fought  in 1461 between the houses of York and Lancaster during the Wars of the Roses.

There is no mention of the castle in public records, but there is also the possibility that the Mortimers may have erected a fortified residence upon Saxon foundations.

Historic Environment Record reference no. 26893, Ordnance Survey grid reference: SO 6550 2200

Castle End is the place name of an area to the north-east of the parish church, but the exact site of the castle is not known. The Castle End place-names lie either side of a Roman road leading south from Ariconium.

The name Lea comes from the Old English word leah, which means "clearing" (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 119).

At the time of the Domesday Survey of Herefordshire (1086) Lea was held by the Church as a gift from Walter de Lacy. Before the Norman Conquest it had been held by Ansgot. Lea contained one hide which paid tax, in lordship there was one plough, two slaves and one smallholder. The value was 10s and there was enough land for one more plough. (Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Domesday Book 17: Herefordshire, Phillimore, 1983, 5,2)

Leintwardine: motte and bailey, Kinton

HER no. 15146, OS grid ref: SO 4090 7450

0.4km north-east of the church is a mound 18m in diameter and 2.5m high, the sides of which have a very gentle slope. There are vestiges of a ditch to the north-east, and to the south there is a stream which could have fed a moat. A slight bank may represent the edge of the bailey.

On the south-west side the mound has been cut away to create space for a house.

Leintwardine means "enclosure on the river Lent" and Kinton means "royal estate". Lent may formerly have been the name of the lower Clun. At the time of the Domesday Survey Leintwardine was in the county of Shropshire but was classed as the land of Earl Roger and Ralph of Mortimer. (Bruce Coplestone-Crow, Herefordshire Place-Names, British Archaeological Reports British Series 214, 1989, p. 122)

Leominster: Comfort Castle

HER no. 5248, OS grid ref: SO 5065 5958

On a map from 1754 a demolished castle, thought to have been erected in Saxon times, is marked. The position of this castle is traditionally said to have been on a hill ½ mile east of the town. Traces of earthworks remained c. 1538, according to John Leland, but now there are no remains.

Aerial photographs show an extensive area of disturbed ground at SO 5065 5938.

There is a mound with a ditch on top of Eaton Hill. On its west side the ditch is 1.5m deep, while the mound is 5-6m high. On top is a ruined building of stone with carved lintels. Oaks around 100 years old grow on the edge of the mound.

On the east side, a 20th century cement-lined reservoir has dug away at the mound.

John Leland (the King's antiquary) wrote in 1538 that tradition had it that the Saxon King Merwald or some of his successors had a palace or castle on a hill some ½ mile from Leominster called Comfort Castle, where "there be some tokens of ditches where buildings have been".

This site can no longer be identified.

History of Comfort Castle

At the time of the Domesday Survey Leominster was held by Queen Edith, along with 16 other manors. These 17 manors made up some 80 hides with 30 ploughs. There were also eight reeves, eight beadles, eight riding men and 238 villagers. There were eight mills at 73s, and the woodland paid 24s and pasture dues. The king had 60 hides in lordship, which held six priests, six riders, seven reeves, seven beadles, 81 smallholders, 25 slaves and 224 villagers. Each villager who had ten pigs gave one in pasture dues. (Frank and Caroline Thorn, Domesday Book 17: Herefordshire, 1,10a, Phillimore, 1983)

Leysters: castle mound

HER no. 2522, OS grid ref: SO 5683 6321

Note: Leysters is sometimes spelled "Laysters".

Nine kilometres north-east of Leominster is a circular mound just south of the 12th century church of St. Andrew at Leysters. The mound is 27m in diameter at the top and rises 2.4m above the ditch. The area is encompassed by a ditch 9m wide and up to 1.1m deep. There is no trace of a bailey.

Excavation in the 19th century produced ash, charcoal and rough stone. There is a possible deserted medieval village to the east.

History of the Leysters site

There are three references to Laysters in the Domesday Book. The first records Laysters in the Wolphy Hundred, Roger of Mussegros holds it. It had been held as two manors by Arketel and Arngrim. There was 1 hide which paid tax, and the value was 4s.  By the time of the Domesday Survey it was waste. (Frank and Caroline Thorn (eds.), Domesday Book 17: Herefordshire, 11,2, Phillimore, 1983)

The second reference records that Laysters was held by Durand of Gloucester and his nephew Walter. There were 2 hides which paid tax, but again it is recorded as waste. (Domesday Book 17: Herefordshire, 22,6)

The third reference says that Edric holds Laysters from the King [William], who held it himself from King Edward. There were 1½ hides which paid tax. The value had been 15s but it was then waste. (Domesday Book 17: Herefordshire, 36,2)

These three references suggest that Laysters was split into more than one manor at the time of the Domesday Survey.

Lingen: mound

HER no. 1666, OS grid ref: SO 3724 6810

North-north-east of the church in Lingen is a mound known locally as "The Churchyard".

It is roughly circular with traces of a bank surrounded by a dry ditch, except on the north where there is a deep gully and stream.

It is approached by a slanting causeway on the south, and on the east there are what may be traces of a small enclosure.

The diameter is c. 40m at the top of the mound, and it rises at most 3.8m above the ditch.

This site is approximately 1.1km north-east of Lingen Castle. It was possibly an early castle site or, more likely, the site of a fortified house.

Little Hereford: manor house and enclosures

HER no. 7009, OS grid ref: SO 5540 6800

Earthworks surrounding, and to the east of, Little Hereford church are said to be those of the house of the Delamere family.

Description of the Little Hereford site today

The site consists of a complex of earthworks, laid against the River Teme. There are two main enclosures represented, formed by ditches up to 2.1m deep with inner banks on the north and east sides.

A motte-like mound on the north bank of the river rises 3.4m from the ditch on the west side. A causeway, 0.4m high, crosses the site from the east side to the east corner of the churchyard.

The complex is defensive, almost certainly early Medieval and probably of manorial origin. It is thought that King Stephen may have camped here in 1140.

Llancillo: motte and bailey

HER no. 1477, OS grid ref: SO 3671 2554

To the east of St. Peter's Church is a circular motte 43m in diameter, surrounded by a dry ditch with outer rampart extending for 20m along the west side and widening at the south end into a slight mound.

Around the top of the mound are traces of rubble walling of a dormer keep or structure, but it is now mostly covered with soil. On either side are traces of scarps and banks, most probably of a later date.

On the north side are scarps enclosing a small stream, which would have possibly formed additional defences.

Forty metres north-west of the motte is a small rectangular mound, about 0.65m high, while in the field on the east side of the stream, 190m east of the motte, is a small portion of deep ditch and traces of banking.

The motte has a soil-covered wall, 1m to 1.3m high, around its summit. The ditch and outer bank are very clear, except where the bank has been removed to drain the ditch.

Surviving masonry reveals a shell keep and the foundations of a building on the extreme west side of the bailey.

The farmer believes that the land has never been ploughed.

The castle is thought to have been built by Richard Esketot, a tenant of the de Lacys of Longtown, around the 1090s.

Llangarron: Trippenkennett Bridge, motte

HER no. 6416, OS grid ref: SO 5030 2218

The site of a moated homestead south-east of Langstone Court and ¾ of a mile north-east of Llangarron parish church.

The site consists of a circular mound, 38m across, which is surrounded by ditches.

The excavation of the medieval homestead at Wallingstones in 1959-63 revealed four possible stages of building:

1. A ditch system and possible timber buildings, including a first floor hall with undercroft and garderobe tower. Site occupied pre-1250
2. Mound erected and house built, occupied c. 1250-1300/1325
3. House abandoned c. 1300-1325
4. House in use c. 1400-1500, curtain wall probably built and possibly a moat dug
5. Final destruction after 1500, no features discovered from this period

The finds from the site included pottery and ironwork of the 13th century and a round shield boss, all of which are now in the collections of Hereford Museum.

Llanrothal: Tregate Castle, motte

HER no. 933, OS grid ref: SO 4795 1715

Llanrothal is a parish in the south-west of the county, right on the Welsh border. The motte and bailey of Tregate Castle are on the banks of the River Monnow, close to Tregate Farm.

Description of the Tregate Castle site today

Situated on the south-west end of a spur is a motte with a base of 53m wide. It has a height of 3m on the south-east and 6m on the north-west. It is a roughly circular mound with a slight rampart enclosing the remains of masonry. This masonry probably represents a shell keep. In the walls of the nearby farm are worked stones which may have come from the castle site.

To the south-west is a series of terraces, which formed two or three outer courts of rectangular form. There are traces of a ditch on the north-east side. There are also traces of an outer ditch on the north-west; this ditch probably continued around to the north-east to cut the site off from a ridge top rising to this side.

Adjoining the site on the south is a small bailey, extending 6-12m from the base of the motte.

A box c. 3.3m square was cut on top of the motte and much black medieval pottery was found above the natural clay subsoil. In the north corner of the pit large blocks of tufa were discovered, which may also come from the shell keep. A 10m trench was also dug to cut the foot of the western rampart, but no defensive works were found.

Foundation and history of the Tregate Castle site

It is suggested that this is the site of a 12th century earth and timber castle, probably occupied for no more than 100 years. The present house stands on a corner of the castle motte. This house has architectural features dating from the 14th to 18th centuries, but was probably not much more than a fortified farmhouse.

Longtown: Castlefield, south of Belpha Wood

HER no. 1471, OS grid ref: 3589 2989

Longtown is a parish situated on a spur of ground between the River Monnow and the Olchon Brook, on the Welsh border in the south-west of Herefordshire.

In the Longtown tithe award of 1840, a field called "Castlefield" is mentioned and shown on the map on the parish boundary. In 1845, a "Castlefield" is mentioned in the tithe award for the neighbouring parish of Dulas.

Longtown: Great Hunthouse, mound and ditch

HER no. 1464, OS grid ref: SO 3430 2610

Longtown is a parish situated on a ridge of ground between the River Monnow and the Olchon Brook, on the Welsh border in the south-west of the county.

On the south-east border of Longtown parish, and 250 yards south-south-west of Great Hunthouse Farm, is a roughly oval mound which is partly natural and partly artificial. The site covers ¼ of an acre in extent, including the defences.

The mound has a flat top and is surrounded by a dry ditch, except on the east and north-east where the scarp abuts a small stream. On the south-west of the site the ditches have been infilled. There are traces of an inner rampart on the west side of the mound.