€¦ · web view2021. 5. 10. · despite a considerable amount of historical and archaeological...

Northumberland National Park Historic Villages Atlas- Harbottle

HARBOTTLENORTHUMBERLAND

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL STUDY OF A BORDER TOWNSHIP

Compiled by:The Archaeological Practice Ltd.Newcastle upon Tyne

Commissioned by: The Northumberland National Park Authority

Northumberland National Park Hisoric Villages Atlas- Harbottle

CONTENTS

PART 1. INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY

1. BACKGROUND, AIMS AND METHODS

2. LOCATION AND TOPOGRAPHY

3. TERRITORIAL UNITS AND SETTLEMENT TYPES

PART 2. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE

4. LOCATION OF EVIDENCE

PART 3. SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS

5. SITE GAZETEER

6. HISTORICAL SYNTHESIS

7. SELECTED SOURCES AND SURVEYS

8. SUMMARY OF DATED EVENTS

PART 4. SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

9. CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

10. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSISTIVITY ISSUES

PART 5. APPENDICES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

11. GLOSSARY

12. BIBLIOGRAPHY

13. APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1: LIST OF HISTORIC DOCUMENTS

APPENDIX 2: LIST OF MODERN PHOTOGRAPHS

APPENDIX 3: LIST OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS

APPENDIX 4: LIST OF SITES AND MONUMENTS

APPENDIX 5: LIST OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS (GRUNDY 1988)

APPENDIX 6: PUBLIC RECORDS OFFICE CATALOGUE

APPENDIX 7: NORTHUMBERLAND RECORDS OFFICE CATALOGUE

The Archaeological Practice Ltd. 2004 2


ILLUSTRATIONS

FIGURESFIGURE 1: Location of Harbottle in NorthumberlandFIGURE 2: Location of Harbottle Township and Parish, Northumberland

National ParkFIGURE 3: Map showing the location of Harbottle township within Harbottle

ecclesiastical parishFIGURE 4: Cultural Heritage sites in Harbottle township study areaFIGURE 5: Cultural Heritage sites in the vicinity of Harbottle villageFIGURE 6: Cultural Heritage sites in Harbottle village coreFIGURE 7: Composite aerial photograph of Harbottle marking features or

known or potential interest (1)FIGURE 8: Aerial photograph of Harbottle marking features or known or

potential interest (2)FIGURE 9: Aerial photograph of Harbottle, marking features or known or

potential interest (3)FIGURE 10:

Extract from Mercator’s Map of Northumberland, 1595

FIGURE 11:

Extract from Speed’s Map of Northumberland, 1610

FIGURE 12:

Extract from Jansson’s Map of Northumberland, 1646

FIGURE 13:

Extract from Morden’s Map of Northumberland, 1695

FIGURE 14:

Extract from Warburton’s Map of Northumberland, 1716

FIGURE 15:

Extract from Kitchin’s Map of Northumberland, 1750

FIGURE 16:

Extract from Horsley & Cay’s Map of Northumberland, 1753

FIGURE 17:

A plan of Harbottle Estate belonging to Thomas Clennell esq., 1806 (NRO ZAN Bell 59/17)

FIGURE 18:

Enclosure map of Harbottle Common, 1817

FIGURE 19:

Extract from Fryer’s Map of Northumberland, 1820

FIGURE 20:

Tithe map of Harbottle village surveyed 1843

FIGURE 21:

Tithe Award for Harbottle, November 8th 1844

FIGURE 22:

A plan of properties on the north side of Harbottle village main street, c.1867 (NRO ZAN Bell 59/11)

FIGURE 23:

Extract from First Edition Ordnance Survey plan (1:10,000 series), 1865

FIGURE 24:

Extract from Second Edition Ordnance Survey plan (1:2,500 series), 1899

FIGURE 25:

Extract from Second Edition Ordnance Survey plan (1:10,000 series), 1899

FIGURE Extract from Third Edition Ordnance Survey plan of Harbottle,



26: 1923 (1:10,000 series)FIGURE 27:

Extract from Third Edition Ordnance Survey plan of Harbottle, 1923 (1:2,500 series)

FIGURE 28:

1762 Militia List for Harbottle (1)

FIGURE 29:

1762 Militia List for Harbottle (2)

FIGURE 30:

Extract from Parson and White’s Trade Directory, 1827

FIGURE 31:

Hodgson’s watercolour view of Harbottle castle, c.1830 (1)

FIGURE 32:

Hodgson’s watercolour view of Harbottle castle, c.1830 (2)

FIGURE 33:

Harbottle village and castle, distant view from the south, 1890

FIGURE 34:

Harbottle castle, view from the South-West

FIGURE 35:

Harbottle Castle, 1924 (1)

FIGURE 36:

Harbottle Castle, 1924 (2)

FIGURE 37:

View from near Drakestone showing part of the castle, and village street to right, 1930

FIGURE 38:

The Star Inn and Harbottle village street, 1931

FIGURE 39:

Harbottle Castle, view of the keep from the West

FIGURE 40:

Harbottle Castle, view of the keep from the East

FIGURE 41:

Harbottle Castle, view from the keep looking West

FIGURE 42:

Harbottle Castle, view of barbican excavations in 1999

FIGURE 43:

Harbottle New Castle

FIGURE 44:

Harbottle school

FIGURE 45:

Harbottle Presbyterian church

FIGURE 46:

Main street, West end

FIGURE 47:

Clennell Memorial Fountain

FIGURE 48:

Yard behind the Starr Inn

FIGURE 49:

Pant in garden of Woodbine Cottage

FIGURE 50:

View up Harbottle Castle access track towards the castle

FIGURE 51:

The extent of Umfraville holdings in Northumberland

FIGURE 52:

Vignette of Harbottle Castle on a a water colour map of Holystone Parish, 1786

FIGURE The Landscape of Lordship: An interpretive plan of medieval



53: Harbottle, showing the castle, park and borough.FIGURE 54:

12th-13th century Umfraville upland pasture grants to Newminster Abbey.

FIGURE 55:

The Gough Map c. 1350-60 (A) and a copy of the original (B), both in the Bodleian Library.

FIGURE 56:

Christopher Dacre’s plan of the castles, fortifications and ‘plenished towns’ (village settlements) along the Border, dated 1584

FIGURE 57:

Extract from Armstrong’s map of Northumberland, 1769, showing Harbottle in the context of upper Coquetdale.

FIGURE 58:

David Dippie Dixon’s drawing of the north face of the castle keep (1903), showing the gunports and the upper stone courses demolished during World War II.

FIGURE 59:

Harbottle’s Royal Observer Corps squad during World War II

FIGURE 60:

Known Cultural Heritage sites in the Harbottle study area

FIGURE 61:

Cultural Heritage sites in the vicinity of Harbottle village

FIGURE 62:

Archaeological Sensitivity Map of Harbottle (Catalogue numbers keyed to Appendix 4)



PART 1

INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY



1. BACKGROUND, AIMS & METHODS

The Northumberland National Park Historic Village Atlas Project is a collaborative project between the National Park Authority and local communities,* the main product of which is an atlas of Historic Villages in the Northumberland National Park (NNP) area.

Despite a considerable amount of historical and archaeological research within NNP, much of this work has been targeted on outlying sites and areas and there has been little targeted study of the historic villages themselves. Previous studies undertaken into the history of the villages, including those provided by the antiquarian, Hodgson (1820-1840), those contained in the County Histories, as well as the later work of Wrathmell (1975) and Dixon (1985), cover some of the same ground as the present studies, but are now in need of revision in the light of subsequent archaeological discoveries and historical findings, as well as changes to both the built fabric and community of the villages in the National Park area. Even John Grundy’s impressive work on the buildings of the National Park completed as recently as 1988 has been rendered out of date by the conservation, renovation, adaptation and, in some cases, demolition of many buildings covered in his report.

The increased pace of modern development within the National Park has put pressure on its cultural heritage resource, specifically its historic buildings and villages. One of the aims of the Historic Village Atlas Project, therefore, is to provide additional information which NNPA can use to further inform its approach to the management of sites of cultural heritage importance.

Changes in the social fabric of the area, often linked to the development work outlined above, mean that traditional lifeways maintained over many generations are now becoming increasingly rare or extinct. In particular, many traditional farming practices and the skills, tools and buildings used to support them have been lost and are being lost, and along with these has gone a regional vocabulary of specific terms and expressions. However, within the same communities there is also a considerable interest in the history and archaeology of the villages. Part of the purpose of the Historic Village Atlas Project, therefore, is to provide information and advice to facilitate not only greater understanding, but also active participation by community members in investigating and preserving aspects of the past. Some of the ways in which this can be achieved is through the presentation of data, guided walks and oral history recordings, all of which have been built into the project brief.

The study presented here was commissioned in order to redress the lack of systematic research into the historic settlements of the Northumberland National Park area, with the intention not only to contribute to the Regional Research Agenda, but to inform the planning and heritage management process, and provide impetus and encouragement for local communities to carry out their own work.

The main aims of the project are as follows:

* See the Acknowledgments section of the Synthesis volume for a list of institutions and individuals that have provided assistance in various ways.



To further the study, understanding and enjoyment of the historic villages, both by interested individuals and community-based groups.

To reinforce and develop the existing sense of place and belonging of individuals within the communities of the region.

To provide a springboard for future community-led initiatives by supplying information which community groups can use to develop their own proposals.

To facilitate the management of the cultural heritage by the NNPA

Village settlements, traditionally recognisable as clustered assemblies of houses and farmsteads, are scarce within the Park, where most settlements are isolated farms and hamlets. However, on the basis of their current status and what was known about their historic importance, the NNPA identified seventeen historic villages for study:

Akeld NT 957 296 GlendaleAlnham NT 996 108 AlndaleAlwinton NT 923 065 CoquetdaleByrness NT 764 026 RedesdaleElsdon NY 937 934 RedesdaleFalstone NY 724 875 North TynedaleGreat Tosson NU 027 006 CoquetdaleGreenhaugh NY 795 873 North TynedaleHarbottle NT 935 046 CoquetdaleHethpool NT 896 284 College BurnHigh Rochester

NY 832 982 Redesdale

Holystone NT 955 026 CoquetdaleIngram NU 019 164 Breamish ValleyKilham NT 884 325 GlendaleKirknewton NT 915 303 GlendaleTarset NY 788 855 North TynedaleWestnewton NT 903 303 Glendale

Villages do not exist as self-contained units, but rather as focal points within the wider landscape. It is important, therefore, in attempting an understanding of the development of villages themselves, that the study villages are investigated in the context of their wider landscapes which may be definable by bounded areas, such as parishes and townships, or by topographic features such as river valleys.

Modern villages exist within clearly demarcated territories known as civil parishes, which are generally based on the boundaries of earlier territorial units labelled townships – units of settlement with pre-Norman origins which were regarded as discrete communities within each ecclesiatical parish. The ecclesiastical parish represented a unit of land paying tithes to a parish church, and in upland Northumberland, these parishes were often vast, incorporating entire dales and numerous townships. A township has its own settlement nucleus and field system and is thus an area of common agricultural unity and is often equivalent to the medieval vill – though the latter frequently refers to a taxation unit or administrative entity, whereas a territorial township refers to the physical fabric of the community (fields, buildings, woods & rivers). Township



boundaries sometimes follow pre-Norman estate divisions and in some cases may even be earlier - it seems likely that a system of land organisation based around agricultural territories was in operation in Roman or pre-Roman times. Therefore, in some instances very ancient boundary lines may have been preserved by later land divisions. The various forms of parish and township and their development over time are discussed more extensively in the historical synthesis in Part 3.

In order to carry out a study focussing on the village core whilst attempting also to understand it within the local and regional context, a variety of approaches has been taken using information derived from a wide range of sources, including existing archaeological and historic buildings records, historic maps and documents, historic and aerial photographs and published information. In this part of the report (Part 1) the location of the village is discussed and an indication is given of the area covered by the study. Part 2 provides a background to the sources of information used to compile the report, listing the archives consulted and some of the most significant maps, documents and photographs used to compile a list of cultural heritage sites. Part 3 provides a listing of all the historic and archaeological monuments identified within the study area and synthesizes the collected data to provide a summary of the known history of the settlement. Part 4 contains suggestions for future work and sets out the report’s conclusions regarding the village’s historical development which in turn inform the judgements regarding the levels of archaeological sensitivity applied to different parts of the settlement and displayed graphically on the ‘sensitivity maps’. The appendices contain catalogues of the various categories of collected data. A glossary of historical terms used and a full bibliography are also provided.

This village report draws extensively upon an earlier documentary study of Harbottle Castle commissioned by NNPA in 1998 (Rushworth & Carlton 1998). The latter formed part of a programme involving documentary and archaeological research, structural consolidation and public presentation of the monument. The following report details the sources and nature of surviving evidence derived from this study and, by tackling a number of specific questions, suggests how this information contributes to a history of the village and wider township area.

The results of the previous documentary study had made it possible to identify and historically authenticate features such as the medieval baronial borough represented by the current village settlement and a deer park enclosing the castle and to begin to conceptualise the complex in its wider landscape setting. Associations - visual, familial, tenurial and functional - were established with, for example, the neighbouring Coquetdale township settlements, particularly Peels/Shirmondesden, Alwinton and Holystone, with the drove roads across the border and with the upland pastures, which saw massive monastic development with acquiescence and support of the lords of Harbottle in the 12th and 13th centuries. It was anticipated upon completion of the previous survey that continued detailed scrutiny of the documentary evidence relating to the neighbouring settlements, as well as the castle and manor of Harbottle itself, would enable further progress in interpreting and phasing the landscape of the castle and its environs.

One final point cannot be over-emphasized. Too often the completion of a substantial work of this kind tends to create the impression that everything is now known regarding a particular subject and thereby discourages further investigation. In compiling this report, the consultants have on the contrary been all too conscious of barely scratching the surface and aware that many additional avenues of research could have been pursued. The Historic Village Atlas should be a starting point not a conclusion to the exploration of this broad and fascinating field.



2. LOCATION AND TOPOGRAPHY

2.1 Location and topography

Harbottle lies in the upper Coquet Valley in central Northumberland, on the eastern boundary of Northumberland National Park (see figures 1 and 2). The modern settlement of Harbottle is located on the road that follows the River Coquet, linking small upland villages such as Barrowburn and Alwinton to the small town of Rothbury about 8km southeast of the village. 12.5km from the small market town of Rothbury, and some 15km south-east of the present Scottish border on the Cheviot Hills at Windy Gyle. The village lies immediately to the south and south-east of the castle in what may be a palaeo-channel of the river, whose present course bends north of the castle before meandering eastwards. The castle occupies a central ridge in the broad valley floor of the Coquet some 2km after the river emerges from its highland gorge, occupying an excellent defensive position, with steep descents to the river on three sides, and commands extensive views up and down the valley, and to the north. The castle dominates one of the major medieval highways into Scotland, Clennell Street, making it a point of strategic as well as tactical importance.

A small distance to the northeast lies the hamlet of Peels separated from Harbottle by the River Coquet which bounds the village to the north. The southern extent of the Cheviot Hills start to rise to the north of the village, while to the south the settlement is overlooked by the Simonside Hills, and to the west the land rises to the Otterburn Training Area. To the east the River Coquet flows through the undulating landscape of central Northumberland, reaching the coast at Amble, after passing beneath the majestic fortifications of Warkworth.

2.2 Area of Study

The area of study adopted is represented by the 19th-century townships of Harbottle and Peels, which fell in the historic ecclesiastical parishes of Holystone and Alwinton respectively (see figure 3), now combined into the modern parish of Alwinton and Holystone. Although the study is primarily concerned with Harbottle village and any former or extant monuments in immediate physical association, the various wider territorial frameworks of township, parish, manor and lordship have played important roles in the history and development of the settlement and cannot be ignored. The development of the parochial and township structures is discussed more fully in the next section whilst the medieval lordship, or liberty, of Redesdale is dealt with in the historical synthesis contained in Part 3.



3. TERRITORIAL UNITS AND SETTLEMENT TYPES

3.1 Parishes and Townships, Baronies and Manors

To understand the history of a particular village settlement, like Harbottle, it is necessary to distinguish and define the various different territorial units within which the village was incorporated, and which provided the framework for the development of that community. Each of these units related to different aspects of the settlement’s communal relations – religious, economic and administrative, and seigneurial – and their .function changed over time. The development of the institution of the civil township, in particular, was remarkably complex.

The Parish was the basic unit of ecclesiastical administration and essentially represented ‘a community whose spiritual needs were served by a parish priest, who was supported by tithe and other dues paid by his parishioners’ (Winchester 1987, 23). It was the payment of tithes - established as a legal principle since the reign of King Edgar 959-75 (Platt 1981, 47) - which gave the parish a territorial dimension so that the boundaries of the parish came to embrace all that community’s landed resources. Only the most remote areas of upland waste or ‘forest’, such as Kidland and Cheviot Forest, remained ‘extra-parochial’. Ecclesiastical parishes in the Northumbrian uplands typically covered extensive areas, sometimes very extensive areas, Simonburn in North Tynedale, Elsdon in Redesdale and Kirknewton in Glendale being amongst the largest parishes in the country. Holystone, like Alwinton, Ingram and Alnham, was not quite in the same class as Simonburn or Kirknewton, but, in common with almost all the upland parishes, it embraced several civil township communities or vills. In all, six of the seventeen villages studied in this survey were parochial centres in the medieval period, namely Holystone, Alwinton, Elsdon, Alnham, Ingram and Kirknewton. Others, such as Falstone, Harbottle, Akeld, Kilham, Hethpool and perhaps Byrness were the site of dependent chapels of ease. The presence of early medieval carved stonework at Falstone suggests it had long been an ecclesiastical centre and may have had greater significance in the 8 th and 9th centuries (as a small monastic site?) than it possessed later on. However several of our study villages contain no places of worship whatsoever, and it is clear that the traditional, almost unconscious, English equation of village and parish church does not apply in Northumberland, and certainly not in the Northumbrian uplands.

It is thus clear that these large medieval parishes embraced many distinct communities and the church was often too distant to conveniently serve all the spiritual needs of the parishioners in the outlying townships. However there are relatively few instances of new parishes being carved out of a well-established parish and practically none after 1150. The payment of tithes created a strong disincentive to do so since creating a new parochial territory would inevitably reduce the income of the priest in the existing parish. This relatively early fossilisation of parish territories was given added impetus once ownership of parish churches was largely transferred from the hereditary priests or local lay lords whose predecessors had founded the churches over to the monasteries in the 12 th and 13th

century, since these ecclesiastical corporations strenuously defended their legal and economic rights (Lomas 1996, 111, 116-7; Dixon 1985 I, 64). Instead the needs of the more distant township communities were catered for by the construction of dependent chapels of ease, which were established either by the monastic institutional patrons or on the individual initiative of local lay lords. Even so many townships had neither a church nor chapel of their own (Lomas 1996, 111-4).

In the medieval era the parish was a purely ecclesiastical institution and was to remain so until the beginning of the 17th century when the Elizabethan Poor Law Act of 1601 made this territorial unit responsible for the maintenance of the poor through the appointment of overseers for the poor and the setting of a poor rate (Statutes 43 Eliz. I c.2; cf. Winchester 1978, 56; Charlton 1987, 98). This is in many respects typical of the history of English local government whereby ‘new



administrative units have generally been created by giving new functions to existing territorial divisions’ (Winchester 1987, 27). Thereafter parochial administration of poor law was particularly prevalent in southern and midland England, where parishes were generally smaller and often coterminous with the civil townships. However in northern England even these additional functions tended to devolve down to the constituent townships which were a more convenient and manageable size than the extensive parishes. The modern civil parishes were established by the Local Government Act of 1889 and were substantially based on the earlier townships rather than the ecclesiastical parishes (Statutes 52/53 Vict. c.63).

The Township or Vill (derived from the medieval Latin ‘villa’) was the basic territorial unit in Northumberland, instead of the ecclesiastical parish. The term vill can be defined in two ways, on the one hand as a territorial community, which may be labelled the territorial vill, and on the other as the basic unit of civil administration in medieval England, the administrative vill. The two units were related and they could indeed be cover identical territorial divisions, but this was not always the case and they must therefore be carefully distinguished.

The territorial vill is synonymous with the English words town or township, deriving from the Old English tun, the commonest element in English placenames, i.e. a settlement with a distinct, delimited territory, the latter representing the expanse of land in which that particular community of peasants lived and practised agriculture. A township/territorial vill was not the same as the village itself, which was simply the nucleated settlement which commonly lay at the heart (though not necessarily the geographical centre) of the township, and where the bulk of the individuals who made up the community might reside. A classic township, centred on a nucleated village settlement, was composed of three main elements, the village itself, the cultivated arable land and meadows, and the moorland waste or common. However a township community might live scattered about in dispersed farms instead of or as well as being grouped together in a nucleated village or hamlet. Any combination of these elements was possible, but some permanent settlement was required for there had to be a community for a township to exist. Writing between 1235 and 1259, the lawyer Henry de Bracton defined the township thus (De Legibus et Consuetudinibus Angliae, iii, 394-5; cited by Winchester 1978, 69; Dixon 1985, I, 75-6):

“If a person should build a single edifice in the fields, there will not be a vill, but when in the process of time several edifices have begun to be built adjoining to or neighbouring to one another, there begins to be a vill.”

A township’s consciousness of itself as a distinct community would have been reinforced by the communal agricultural labour required to work the land. This is particularly obvious in the cases where the township was centred on a nucleated village, its members living and working alongside one another, but even in townships composed of scattered hamlets or farmsteads it was just as vital to regulate access to the use of communal resources such as the upland waste or commons. Such activities would have generated a sense of communal cohesion however fragmented the framework of manorial lordship and estate management in the township might have become over time (see below).

The boundaries of such township communities would have become fixed when the land appropriated by one community extended up to that belonging to neighbouring settlements (Winchester 1987, 29).



In the lowlands intensive cultivation had been practised for millennia prior to the medieval period, when townships are first documented. It is therefore conceivable/has been argued that many of these boundaries were of considerable antiquity, particularly where obvious natural features such as rivers and streams and watersheds were followed, although such antiquity is difficult to prove conclusively. In the uplands, settlement is thought to have experienced successive cycles of expansion and contraction in response to a variety of stimuli, including environmental factors such as climatic change, but doubtless also political and economic issues. This may have resulted in periodic obscuring of the boundaries when communities were not fully exploiting the available resources and hence had less need to precisely define their limits. In all areas the definitive boundary network recorded by the first Ordnance Survey maps is obviously a composite pattern, in which precise delineation occurred in a piecemeal fashion over the centuries.

The administrative vill: The term vill also designated the basic unit of civil administration in medieval England, representing a village or grouping of hamlets or farmsteads which were obliged to perform a range of communal administrative duties. The latter included the delivery of evidence at inquests, the upkeep of roads and bridges, the apprehension of criminals within its bounds and the assessment and collection of taxes (Vinogradoff 1908, 475; Winchester 1978, 61; 1987, 32; Dixon 1985 I, 78). The most comprehensive listing of these administrative vills is provided by the occasional tax returns known as Lay Subsidy Rolls. The assessment units recorded therein essentially correspond to the vills and, although clearly incomplete, sufficient survives of the 1296 and 1336 Northumberland rolls to provide a good impression of the number and distribution of the administrative units in many parts of the county (cf. Fraser (ed.) 1968, xv-xvi).1 In many areas these administrative vills correspond very closely to the territorial vills and with the later poor law townships (see below). Dixon has shown this to be the largely case in north Northumberland (north of the Coquet), for example (1985 I, 78-9). This was by no means the case everywhere in the border counties, however. In the district of Copeland in West Cumbria, where a predominantly dispersed settlement pattern of scattered ‘single farmsteads, small hamlets and looser groupings of farms’ prevails, Winchester has demonstrated that the administrative vills had a composite structure, frequently embracing several ‘members’ or ‘hamlets’ which correspond to the basic territorial townships (1978, 61-5). In many instances administrative vills were significantly larger than the later poor law townships. These relatively large, composite administrative vills correspond to what were termed villae integrae (‘entire vills’) elsewhere in England. It is possible that a similar pattern of composite administrative vills might be have been introduced in areas of the Northumbrian uplands such as Redesdale and North Tynedale, where hamlets and farmsteads were more common than nucleated villages. However these areas were liberties or franchises, like the lands of the Bishops of Durham, i.e. the normal apparatus of royal government was absent and their administration was entrusted instead to the baronial or ecclesiastical lord. This may have resulted in administration and justice being exercised through the structures of manorial lordship rather than a separate tier of specifically administrative land units. Finally, Winchester also suggests that the term vill gradually acquired a more specific administrative connotation as the organisation of local government became more standardised after the Statute of Winchester in 1285, with the result that in his study area, from the end of the 13th century, the term was restricted to the administrative units and no longer applied to the basic territorial townships (1978, 66-7).This idea of the vill as an area of land with defined boundaries, potentially enclosing a number of settlements, rather than a the territorial resource of a single community, is expressed in a passage by Sir John Fortescue, writing towards the end of the medieval period, and makes an interesting contrast with Bracton’s decription over two hundred years earlier (Fortescue, 54-55; cf. Winchester ibid. n.27):

1 The 1296 roll omits Alnham, as well as Fawdon and Farnham (two of the ‘ten towns of Coquetdale’), Caistron, Wreighill, Prendwick and Unthank and probably Branton, Hedgeley, Glanton, Little Ryle and Shawdon (Fraser (ed.) 1968, xv-xvi), but this is most likely simply to reflect the loss of parts of the original roll rather than the absorption of these vills in a larger’villa integra’. On the other hand the regalian liberties of Redesdale, upper Tynedale and the Northumbrian holdings of the Prince Bishops of Durham were never included in the roll (ibid., xiii).



Hundreds again are divided into vills . . . . the boundaries of vills are not marked by walls, buildings, or streets, but by the confines of fields, by large tracts of land, by certain hamlets and by many other things such as the limits of water courses, woods and wastes . . . . . there is scarcely any place in England that is not contained within the ambits of vills

The Poor Law Township, to use Winchester’s term (1978), is the form of township community most familiar today through in the works such as the Northumberland County History and Hodgson’s History of Northumberland, where, along with the parish, it provides the framework for the historical narrative of individual localities. The boundaries of these territorial communities were mapped by the 1st edition Ordnance Survey in the mid-19th century and they have generally been presumed to have had a long and largely uninterrupted history stretching back in most cases to the townships of the medieval period. They are conveniently depicted on the maps which front of each volume of the Northumberland County History, from which figure 3 in each of the individual village reports is derived. A more detailed record of each township territory is provided by their respective tithe and enclosure maps and other historic maps catalogued and reproduced in the village reports.

The assumption that the medieval administrative vill was the direct ancestor of the post-medieval poor law township, and hence of the modern civil parish, was a reasonable one since functionally they are somewhat similar, representing the most basic level of civil administration. However the actual line of descent is much more complex.

The administration of poor relief was originally established at parochial rather than township level, with the requirement of the Elizabethan Poor Law Act of 1601 that overseers for the poor be appointed in every ecclesiastical parish in England (Statutes 43 Eliz. I c.2; cf. Winchester 1978, 56). Following pressure in parliament to permit the subdivision of the huge ecclesiastical parishes in the northern counties into smaller, more convenient units, the 1662 Poor Law Act allowed ‘every Township or Village’ in northern England to become a unit for poor-rate assessment and collection with their own overseers (Statutes 14 Charles II c.12, s.21; cf. Winchester 1987, 27). Winchester has argued, on the basis of the arrangements he documented in the Copeland district of west Cumbria, that it was the territorial townships rather than the administrative vills which were most frequently adopted to serve as the new poor law townships. However in Northumberland north of the Coquet there was in any case relatively little difference between the medieval territorial and administrative units, as noted above, and about three quarters of the townships identifiable in the 13 th century may be equated with the poor law townships recorded by the Ordnance Survey. The disappearance or radical alteration of the remaining 25 percent was the result of settlement abandonment or colonisation during the late medieval period and estate reorganisation in the post-medieval period (Dixon 1985, I, 79-84) 2. The upland dales south of the Coquet were a very different matter. Redesdale and North Tynedale fell within the vast parishes of Elsdon and Simonburn respectively, the latter with a dependent chapelry at Bellingham which itself embraced all of upper North Tynedale. In Redesdale, six large ‘wards’ or townships are found, namely Elsdon, Otterburn, Woodside, Rochester, Troughen and Monkridge, plus the small extra-parochial township of Ramshope (Hodgson 1827, 82-3). The wards were almost certainly created in response to the 1662 act and presumably represent subdivision of the parish to facilitate the administration of poor relief. There is no indication that they existed at an earlier date. They are not recorded in the 1604 border survey, which instead lists a great number of ‘places’ or ‘parts of the manor’ within the constituent parishes of the Manor of Harbottle. These places were in most cases more than hamlets, groups of farms or individual farmsteads, the kind of small early territorial township found in upland areas. The twelve townships of upper North Tynedale, described in the County History (NCH XV (1940), 234-80), were established in 1729 by Thomas Sharp, Archdeacon of Northumberland, specifically to administer poor relief, each township being responsible for the maintenance of its own poor and setting a separate poor rate (Charlton 1987, 98-9).3 Some of these townships may have been based on earlier territorial units, but others have

2 Dixon (1985, I) provides a comprehensive summary of these changes for north Northumberland, including lists of abandoned early townships, new townships and identifiable boundary shifts or rationalisations.



rather artificial names – West Tarset or Plashetts and Tynehead- indicative of institutions established by bureaucratic fiat.

It is from these ‘poor law townships’, however ancient or recent their origins, rather than the medieval administrative vill, that the modern civil parish is directly derived in northern England. The Local Government Act of 1889, which established the civil parish, specifically stated it was to be ‘a place for which a separate poor rate is or can be made’ (Statutes 52/53 Vict. c.63 sec. 5). Today’s civil parishes, however, are generally somewhat larger than the preceding townships, in part as a result of more recent amalgamations.

The Manor was a territorial unit of lordship and the basic unit of seigneurial estate administration. Jurisdiction was exercised by the manorial lord over the estate, its assets, economic activities and customary and legal rights, through his manor court sometimes termed the court baron.

Manorial lordship thus represented only one link in the chain of feudal and tenurial relationships which extended from the lowly peasant through to the baronial superior lord and ultimately right up to the king himself. In its simplest form a township would be encapsulated within a single manor and would therefore have the same territorial limits. However such ‘classic’ manors were much rarer than primary school history lessons might have us believe. Then as now, the processes of succession and inheritance and the inevitable variability in human fortunes resulted in the amalgamation or, more often, fragmentation of estates. Most townships therefore were divided between a number of manorial landholders.

Thus a parish, township and manor could all be coterminous, with a small parish serving the spiritual needs of a single township community whose landed resources formed a single manorial estate and whose members were bound by a variety of personal and tenurial relationships to a single lord. However this simple arrangement was highly unusual in Northumberland, and particularly so in the upland areas of the county, where, as we have seen, the parishes were often very large (e.g. Simonburn, Elsdon, Alwinton-Holystone, and Kirknewton). Thus there were only 63 parishes in the county in 1295, whilst the total number of townships at the same time, although not precisely quantifiable, was probably not far short of 450 (Lomas 1996, 71, 108-10). The number of manors would have been greater still.

3.2 Villages, Hamlets and Farmsteads

The territorial labels discussed above can all be defined with relative ease, despite the complexity caused by their changing role over time (which is especially marked in the case of the township), since they describe specific entities which figure in legislation and other formal records from the medieval period onwards. However it is a very different matter when it comes to precisely defining the terms used to describe different types of settlement, such as ‘village’ or ‘hamlet’. As the foremost scholars of landscape and settlement studies have admitted (e.g. Roberts 1996, 14) it is extraordinarily difficult to define these terms with precision in such a way as to impose any absolute consistency of usage upon them.

For the purposes of this study the following definitions of settlement were used, all drawn from Brian Roberts’ extensive work, in particular the succinct discussion provided in Landscapes of Settlement (1996, 15-19):

3 Prior to 1729, the Chapelry of Bellingham had been subdivided into four wards for more convenient collection of the poor rate, but these wards had not set a separate rate.



VILLAGE: A clustered assembly of dwellings and farmsteads, larger than a hamlet, but smaller than a town

and A rural settlement with sufficient dwellings to possess a recognisable form (Roberts 1976, 256).

HAMLET: A small cluster of farmsteads

FARMSTEAD: ‘An assemblage of agricultural buildings from which the land is worked’

TOWN: A relatively large concentration of people possessing rights and skills which separate them from direct food production.

The most substantial body of work on village morphology is that undertaken by Brian Roberts (e.g. 1972;, 1976; 1977; 1990). Roberts has identified a complex series of village types based on two main forms, termed ‘rows’ and ‘agglomerations’, multiplied by a series of variable factors:

Regular or irregular The presence or absence of greens Complexity – e.g. multiple row villages Building density – infilling of toft areas Fragmentation – ‘exploded’ versions of row villages and village

agglomerations

This provides a useful schema for classifying villages, but it is difficult to determine what these different morphological characteristics actually signify. Dixon (1985, I,) is sceptical of regularity or irregularity as a significant factor, noting that irregularity does not necessarily mean that a village was not laid out in a particular order at a particular time; that the regularity of a layout is a subjective judgement; and that an irregular row may simply be a consequence of local terrain or topography. He also points out that however irregular it might appear, by its very existence the row constitutes an element of regularity. He is especially dismissive of the presence or absence of a green as a significant factor in village morphology, arguing that a green is simply an intrusion of the common waste into the settlement; if such a space is broad it is called a green, if narrow it is a street or gate.

In the case of the Historic Village Atlas Project a still more substantial problem is posed by the lack of detailed mapping earlier than c. 1800 for many of the 17 villages considered. In other words, there is no reliable cartographic evidence which predates the late 18th-19th century transformation of populous village communities of the medieval and early modern era into ‘farm hamlets’, i.e. settlements focussed on one or two large integrated farm complexes. In Northumberland, particularly in the northern half of the county, the 1st edition Ordnance Survey – so often the first resort in analysing settlement morphology – and even the relevant tithe map do not provide a reliable guide to the early modern or medieval form of any given village. Moreover the documentary evidence assembled by Wrathmell and Dixon suggests there was often a marked reduction in the size of the village population in the later 17th and early 18th

centuries, accompanying a gradual reduction in the number of tenancies. Thus, even where 18th –century mapping does survive for a particular village, it may actually under-represent the extent of the earlier, medieval and 16th-17th century phases of that settlement.



If Brian Roberts, using the methods of historical geography, has perhaps done more to shape current thinking on the overall pattern of medieval village settlement than any other scholar, at the micro level of the individual village and its components the seminal investigation in Northumberland has been Michael Jarrett’s archaeological excavation of West Whelpington village. Conducted over a period of fifteen years from 1966 onwards this revealed a substantial proportion of a medieval village (Jarrett et al. 1987; 1988). Lomas (1996, 71-86) has recently emphasised the fundamental degree to which our understanding of life in a medieval Northumbrian village rests on the programme of research at West Whelpington.

Two major studies (both regrettably unpublished), which to some degree were able to draw on the work of Roberts and Jarrett, comprise Stuart Wrathmell’s PhD thesis on medieval village settlement in south Northumberland (Wrathmell 1975) and Piers Dixon’s equivalent doctoral research on the medieval villages of north Northumberland (Dixon 1985). Dixon’s work, in particular is of fundamental importance for the Historic Village Atlas, as the citations in the text of the individual reports and the synthesis makes clear, since it covered many of the settlements in the northern half of the Northumberland National Park included in the Project. The villages in the central band of the county between the River Coquet and the North Tyne catchment remain as yet uncovered by any equivalent study, however.

This lacuna particularly unfortunate because a similar level of coverage of the south side of the Coquet and Redesdale would have served to emphasise how similar the settlement pattern in these areas was to that prevailing in upper North Tynedale and how different from that encountered in north Northumberland, even in the Cheviot uplands and Glendale. Lomas (1996, 86), has characterised the long Pennine dales in the eastern half of the county as areas of ‘commons with settlements’ rather than ‘settlements with commons’. These areas – North Tynedale, Redesdale, and the south side of Coquetdale, along with South Tynedale, and East and West Allendale largely outside the National Park – were distinguished by a prevailing settlement pattern of dispersed farmsteads and hamlets. In marked contrast, a more nucleated pattern predominated in the upland Cheviot valleys of north Northumberland, although the density of such settlements was inevitably reduced by comparison with the lowland districts in the northern part of the county. The excellent fertility of the Cheviot soils permitted intensive agricultural cultivation during optimal climatic phases, but only at locations within the massif where there was sufficient level ground – such as Hethpool – and even there substantial terracing of the adjacent hillsides was required to create enough ploughland to make the settlement viable.

To some extent the gap left by Wrathmell and Dixon in Redesdale and southern Coquetdale has been filled by the programme of investigation conducted by Beryl Charlton, John Day and others on behalf of the Ministry of Defence, which resulted in a series of synthetic discussions of various aspects of settlement in the two valleys (Charlton & Day 1978; 1979; 1982; Day & Charlton 1981; all summarised in Charlton & Day 1976 and Charlton 1996 and 2004). These may be compared with the summary of the development of medieval and early modern settlement in upper North Tynedale provided by Harbottle and Newman (1973). However the former was restricted in scope by its emphasis for the most part on the Otterburn Training Area (although the authors did extend their scope beyond the confines of the military range where this obviously provided a more



coherent analysis4), whilst the principal focus of Harbottle and Newman’s work was the rescue excavation of a series of early modern and later farmsteads threatened by the construction of Kielder Water, to which the settlement overview provided an invaluable but all too brief introduction. Hence all three valleys still merit comprehensive syntheses of their medieval/early modern settlement patterns, combining analysis of the historic maps and documents – including what is known regarding the pattern of seigneurial and ecclesiastical landholding – with the evidence of the surviving physical remains and site layouts.

4 In particular the initial overview provided by Charlton & Day 1976, plus Charlton & Day 1978, covering the late prehistoric and Romano-British settlements, and Charlton & Day 1982, dealing with the corn mills and drying kilns, extend their treatment well beyond the Otterburn Training Area.



PART 2

SOURCES OF EVIDENCE



4. LOCATION OF EVIDENCE

Medieval and early modern literary and documentary sources, covering up to the beginning of the seventeenth century, were principally consulted in published form, drawing on the resources of the University of Newcastle upon Tyne's Robinson Library and the Newcastle Central Library. These included collations of State Papers, including the Letters and Papers of Henry VIII and the Calendar of Border Papers, the 1604 Border Survey, the Calendars of Inquisitions Post Mortem and the Newminster Chartulary. Some original documentation relating to this period including maps and the Vetera Indictamenta criminal records was examined at the Public Record Office in London and Northumberland County Record Office, Melton Park, Gosforth.

For later the later period the following documentary, cartographic and photographic archives were consulted: Northumberland Sites and Monuments Record and aerial photographic collection at the County Council Offices, Morpeth; parish records and census details held at the Northumberland Public Records Office, Morpeth; Acts of Enclosure, petitions and deeds, photographs, tithe and other maps at the Northumberland County Record Office, Melton Park, Gosforth; Ordnance Survey and other maps held at Newcastle Central Library, Local Studies Section; and aerial photographs held in the collection of the University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Department of Archaeology. Additional maps depicting Harbottle in this period were discovered in the Public Record Office.

4.1 Archival and published records

4.1.1 Archival SourcesOriginal archival sources include census records and surviving parish details of baptisms, marriages and deaths held at the Northumberland County Public Records Office in Morpeth. The border surveys of 1415, 1542, and 1584, as well as the Border Watch Schedule of 1552, are also useful in providing contextual information on wider settlement. Although some medieval and early post-medieval sources were examined in original form, those providing most substantial evidence were consulted in published form.

The State Papers series were consulted principally with reference to the reign of King Henry VIII (LP Hen VIII), one of intensive diplomatic and military activity upon the borders (1509-47), though a few later references were taken up to the Union of the Crowns in 1603 (Cal SP). The state papers referring to Harbottle include many written from Harbottle itself – usually when the Warden of the Middle March was in residence in the castle. The most intensive exchanges regarding the castle occur during the earlier part of Henry’s reign, notably in the years 1515 and 1522-3 when Lord Dacre was Warden of the West and Middle Marches, although later years, 1537-9 for example, are also well represented. Two volumes of documents relating to the history of the Borders between 1560-1603 were published in the Calendar of Border Papers, edited by Bain in 1894 and 1896 (CBP – Calendar of letters and papers relating to the affairs of the Borders of England and Scotland preserved in Her Majesty's Public Record Office London). This period extends from a decade or so after the death of Henry VIII right up to the Union of the Crowns, which led to the abandonment of Harbottle and other castles within the Borders. In contrast to the Calendar of State Papers (Cal SP), almost all references to Harbottle concern exchanges relating directly to the castle or the settlement, rather than being written from the Harbottle.

Though not an archival source or collection as such the magisterial History of the King's Works, edited by H.M. Colvin (HMSO, London 1963--), deserves mention in its own right as it represents a synthesis of a vast quantity of primary documentation, particularly that held in the Public Record Office. It forms an extensive account, running to several volumes, detailing Royal building activities throughout the medieval and post-medieval periods. Its sources are various, but it draws heavily on



the Calendars of State and Border Papers (see above). Harbottle became a royal castle only as a result of an exchange of land between the King and a female Tailbois heir in 1546, and was in royal ownership for a little over half a century until given away in 1605 as a now redundant expense following the Union of the Crowns. However, for many years under both Henry VII and Henry VIII it was kept in the king's hand and occupied by the Warden of the Middle March (Colvin et al. 1975, 253) and some (probably very limited) repairs were carried out at the king's expense in 1519 (ibid.).

The Border Survey of 1604 (The Survey of the Debateable and Border Lands Adjoining the Realm of Scotland and Belonging to the Crown of England Taken AD 1604, (ed.) R P Sanderson (Alnwick, 1891)) provides a snap-shot of the manor of Harbottle immediately after the final abandonment of the castle as a functioning military installation. Sir Henry Widdrington is the owner of the castle with its associated demense lands lying partly in Redesdale, partly in Coquetdale. Associated properties listed in Coquetdale include Harbottle park and "Shermington, sometymes a towneshippe" (ibid.). Together these demeanes were worth some £283 13s. 4d. annually. Additionally at Harbottle 23 tenants, or burghers, are recorded, together with a fee farm held by one Persivall Potte, who additionally claims the customary right to the millstone quarry on Harbottle Cragg (ibid.), although this is denied by the Commissioners (op. cit. 111). A single water mill is recorded from the manor, standing on the river Coquet, and it is also recorded that stores of coal were recognised, but unlike the "greate plentie of stone" (op. cit. 108)., were not at that time exploited. Woodland is recorded as of little value, since it "lyeth in the high land which hath byn, and still is, wasted and decaied by the inhabitants of Scotland" (ibid.). It is further recorded that six men have been licenced to enclose land within the manor, though not, it would appear, in the immediate vicinity of Harbottle castle or the present village. Additional points of interest concern mention of the "demeanes of the late dissolved Abbey of Hallistones" (op. cit. 106) and the accumulated tithes of Harbottle and Alwinton valued at £95 annually (ibid.).

A survey of rents recorded in Redesdale, copied from an original roll in the possession of William John Charleton of Hesleyside 1618 paid to the lordship of Harbottle serves well, "as a census of Redesdale and an enumeration of the persons holding property in each village there, in 1618" (Hodgson 1832, AA1, 2, 326-338, 326). With respect to the present survey 20 named tenants, including two women, are said to hold one or more properties in Harbottle Towne, as well as summer pastures, presumably in the vicinity, at "Soppethaughe"(ibid.). Additionally Percivall Pott is listed in relation to "the ground called Harbottle Cragge", a fee farm above Harbottle on the south side of the Coquet valley.

The chartulary of the Cistercian abbey of Newminster was published by the Surtees Society (1876), in the original Latin (Chartularium Abbathiae de Novo Monasterio). It incorporates an important series of grants made by successive Umfraville lords in the 12th-13th centuries, of upland pastures in Kidland, in the northernmost part of the liberty of Redesdale (NC 73-81; cf. NCH XV (1940), 449-50). The earliest of these is dated to 1181 and the series spans roughly a hundred years. These charters are highly significant for our understanding of the development upper reaches of Coquetdale, the abbey's part in it, and the benefit which the Umfravilles may have derived from it. The chartulary also contains documents relating to the monastery's later tenure of the Kidland moorlands up to the Dissolution.

4.2 Listed monuments

In general, the geographical and chronological range of sites within and around the village may be regarded as normal, in so far as there can be said to be an expected pattern, for an upland river valley site in the Borders region. Prehistoric material from neolithic to Iron Age is well represented, with settlement evidence for both bronze age and iron age; Roman activity is indicated by roads, and a strong medieval presence attested principally by military installations and settlements. Notable by its absence here, particularly in view of discussions regarding pre-Conquest occupation at Harbottle, is



any indication of early medieval activity, whether monumental or artefactual. On a related theme it may be worthy of note that a minimum of five, probably six and possibly more, Iron Age/Romano-British settlement sites are known within the wider (25km2) vicinity of Harbottle, although no isolated artefacts have been found representing this period. This suggests not only that there is no easy correlation between the density of recovered artefacts and occupation sites for a given period. It is likely the Iron Age/Romano-British population of the region was relatively high, thereby circumstantially increasing the likelihood of occupation in this period at one of the most defensible locations in the region, the present Harbottle Castle site.

4.3 Historic Maps and Plans

All available historic maps and plans were examined and, where possible, copied. These include the successive county maps - Saxton 1576, Speed 1611, Armstrong 1769, Smith 1808, Fryer 1820, Greenwood 1828, etc. (figs. 11, 57, 19) - but more importantly the 1817 enclosure and 1844 tithe maps (figs. 18 & 20) and Ordnance Survey editions (figs. 23-27), as well as other detailed mapping, privately commissioned during the 17th-19th centuries. The tithe, enclosure and estate maps for the townships of Harbottle and Peels provide evidence for the layout of field patterns to assist in interpreting the extant earthwork systems. Further detailed evidence is supplied by the 1st edition Ordnance Survey, c.1860. The relationship of this baseline record to surviving earthworks is key to understanding the dynamic processes involved in the development of the settlement.

Mentioned below are a number of important maps worthy of a more detailed description:

The earliest depiction of Harbottle is incorporated in the 14th-century map preserved amongst the Gough MSS in the Bodleian Library, Oxford (cf. fig. 55). This probably dates to c. 1350-60. As is the case until the 18th century, this map depicts the castle rather than any (at this stage putative) associated village. On this particular map 'hbotell' is shown as a pair of towers with an attached building at the foot of the Cheviots (mons chivioth), close to the source of the Coquet in the very centre of the Northumbrian uplands. The map provides an impression of how the castle was viewed in the medieval world.

Harbottle features in stylised form on a majority of early-mid 16th-century maps, which may be consulted in modern reproduction form in Crone 1961 and Whittaker 1949. It even figures in cases, like the Angliae Descriptio of 1540, when few other places were shown suggesting that Harbottle, with its castle, was considered to be a location of some significance in the late-medieval and early modern period, as might be expected of the seat of the Warden of the Middle March.

One of the most interesting 16th-century maps is the ‘Plat’ or ‘Plan of all forts and castles upon the Borders,’ prepared by Christopher Dacre in 1584, in connection with his work on a royal commission set up to investigate the state the border’s defenses – both the physical fortifications and the communities of customary tenants who were bound to defend the frontier. The plan contains stylised representations of a great many castles, towers and townships along ‘the plenished ringe of the borders’, which marked the line of Dacre’s proposed defensive frontier ‘dyke’ (PRO MPF 284; cf. fig. 56) Although few topographical features are included, it gives a good impression of the way in which Dacre viewed the ‘plenished ring of the borders’, depicting as it does an evenly spaced line of village townships and fortifications skirting North Tynedale and Redesdale, and then passing through a string of settlements at the foot of the Cheviot massif. With regard to Harbottle, the plan clearly represents its castle as one of a small group of very large structures - the others being castles in the coastal belt, such as Dunstanburgh, Bamburgh



and Berwick - clearly suggesting its dominant role in the Middle March and its importance as the garrisoned outpost closest to the border in that remote upland sector. An additional caption notes ‘All waist to Scotland sixe myle’. The castle is shown schematically as a single, large, crennelated block, with adjacent groups of small buildings, to the north and south, which doubless represent the village borough alongside the castle complex, and conceivably also the nearby settlement of Peels, although this is less likely.

Saxton's map of Northumberland, in 1576, provides the earliest detailed cartographic depiction of Harbottle, which places it reasonably accurately within the context of specific, recognisable, local landscape features, notably the Coquet, and neighbouring settlements like Alwinton, Holystone, Park Head and Sharperton. The image is essentially repeated in Speed’s map in 1610 and thereafter a whole series of 17th and 18th-century maps were produced which were largely based on Saxton’s original survey and add relatively little significant new information to that found in Saxton and Speed. There is, however, a gradual improvement in the quality of the cartography and Horsley and Cay's map in 1753 provides some additional placenames in the upper reaches of Coquetdale.

With Armstrong's Map of Northumberland, in 1769, there is a major step forward in the level of detail depicted, both topographic and cultural. This is the first map clearly to show the village of Harbottle, clustered at the junction of the roads to Alwinton and Holystone, rather than merely a representation of its castle. The castle is depicted in a ruinous condition on the north side of the settlmeny with the descriptive label, 'ruins', whilst the new castle is shown as a gentry residence (of the Clennells) at the east end of the village. The mapping of the settlement structures is still probably fairly schematic, however, and need not give an accurate impression of the extent of the village.

A watercolour sketch of Holystone Parish in 1786, which includes field layouts, topographical features and roads, as well as a three-dimensional representation of Harbottle castle just outside the parish boundary (PRO MPI 243; fig. 52). The sketch depicts only the keep sitting on its mound, or motte. It seems doubtful that very much can be read into this, however, since the keep is depicted in a largely complete form, with crennelations and stairways, at a time when it is likely the castle had already been substantially reduced by quarrying. A generation or so later, in 1830, Hodgson's sketch shows the castle in much the same state as it presently survives, and it is uncertain whether the quarrying in the period between 1786-1830 was responsible for reducing the keep to such an extent, although the presence of several houses of early 19th-century date in the immediate vicinity should be noted.

From the beginning of the 19th century copious detailed map evidence becomes available beginning with an 1806 plan of Harbottle Estate by Surveyor J. Bailey (NRO ZAN Bell 59/17; fig. 17). The perimeter of the former deer park associated with Harbottle castle, can clearly be charted on this map (it becomes less distinct on later maps). In particular, the eastern boundary visible here as a continuous line becomes truncated by the time of the first Ordnance Survey. It also seems very likely from this map that the deer park may have extended to the south side of the Coquet, enclosing the present Ram's Haugh as well as the castle and associated fields, since both the suggested west and east boundaries of the park continue south of the river. This can be paralleled in the case of at least one other medieval park in Northumberland, Warkworth. The toponyms Park and Park Head attest to former parkland on the north bank of the river, while Camp Know suggests the possibility of earthworks due north of the castle, although there are no other documentary indications such as the shape of field boundaries or significant field names.

Important 19th century maps include the county maps of Northumberland published by Fryer in 1820 (fig. 19) and Greenwood in 1827-8, both of which show a road or track leading south from the village onto Harbottle Common. More detailed are the maps associated with the Harbottle Common Enclosure Award of 1817 (NRO QRA 32/1; fig. 18) and the Tithe Commutation Award of 1843 (map: NRO DT 209 S; award: NRO (C) EP.99/20/7; figs. 20-1). Both clearly denote individual properties



within the village and surrounding landholdings notably six, variously sized, elongated plots of the same length which appear to represent long tofts laid out within the defined limits of the medieval borough, perhaps individual burgage holdings, as recorded in the 1604 Border Survey (1604 Survey, 91; see below, 7.2 Selected Sources and Surveys). It is intriguing that these appear clearest and most regular on the earlier 1817 enclosure map, whereas by 1843 some alterations to the southern ends had started to disrupt the regularity of the pattern.

Also useful in revealing property holdings, with the names of owners and tenants, are a number of early and mid 19th-century estate plans produced by members of the Bell family, a well-known Newcastle firm of surveyors, land agents etc. (e.g. NRO ZAN Bell 59/2; 59/11 – showing the school and cottages on the north side of the main street (fig. 22); 59/9 and 59/18). However it is with the appearance of the 1st edition Ordnance Survey c. 1860 that comprehensive accurate mapping becomes available and the development of the village thereafter can be traced in detail on successive editions. No copy of the 1st edition 1:2500 Ordnance Survey map covering Harbottle village and castle was available for consultation at any regional record office, library or archive (although it was possible to find coverage of the area to the north, incorporating the bulk of the former park, which confirms the general reliability of the 1806 map regarding the course of the park boundary, whilst providing a more accurate cartographic outline). Instead the OS 1:10,000 series (6in to 1 mile), published in 1865, was consulted for the area of the castle and village (fig. 23). One intriguing feature evident on this map is what appear to be the southern ends of more long tofts, located to the south east of the village, sandwiched between the Harbottle-Holystone road and the park laid out on the south side of the (new) Harbottle Castle. Construction of the new castle and its park has probably erased most of the length of these tofts. The 1:2500 series was available for the 2nd edition published in 1897 (fig. 24) and the 3rd edition which appeared in 1923 (fig. 27).

4.4 Aerial photographic coverage

Four aerial photographs taken by Norman McCord and held in the collection of the Museum of Antiquities, University of Newcastle cover parts of Harbottle, while another two cover Peels, the location of the deserted medieval township of Chirmundesden. However the Historic Village Atlas has principally relied for aerial photographic coverage on the set taken by Tim Gates specifically for the project (cf. figs. 7-9).

4.5 Early photographs

Historic photographs from a range of sources were examined. A substantial proportion are held by Northumberland Record Office at Melton Park whilst others are in the possession of local residents including the owner of the castle site, John Common, and the Wallington Collection. These include a number of photographs showing the appearance of the village and its environs in the late 19 th and early-mid 20th centuries, in addition to various early views of the castle (see Rushworth & Carlton 1998).

4.6 Pictorial sources

Most pictorial representations of Harbottle have focussed on the ruined castle, 5 although even the this has not received the same attention from illustrators as the better-preserved Northumbrian castles and other monuments in the coastal plain or the Tyne-Solway corridor, perhaps because of its more remote location. The village itself appears rarely to have been the subject of artistic representation.

5 For a full listing see Rushworth & Carlton 1998.



Perhaps the most important are two watercolour sketches by John Hodgson which give a clear impression of the condition of the castle in c. 1830 (reproduced in NCH XV (1940), 485-6; see figs 31-32). Also useful is Dixon's pleasing line-drawing of the north curtain of the keep (published in Dixon 1903, 186; see fig. 58), which provides the most accurate record of any part of the castle prior to the advent of modern photography. The masonry and surviving gun-loops are well-depicted.

4.7 Recent reports and field evidence

The analysis of documentary evidence is informed by archaeological investigations at Harbottle, specifically at the castle site, including Honeyman's excavations in the 1930s, the limited excavation work and ground penetrating radar (GPR) survey carried out by the University of Newcastle, Archaeology Department (Crow 1998), and the structural and topographical surveys conducted by Ryder (1990), ASUD (1997) and RCHME (Bowden 1990). Additional information was provided by local informants, notably Mr John Common, backed up with field observations carried out in 1998 and 2003. The only known accounts of Honeyman's excavations are secondary reports contained in Hunter Blair (1932-4) and Volume 15 of the Northumberland County History (NCH XV (1940), 482-87, with photo, plan and sketch). A few small-scale interventions have been carried out in the village itself with limited results.



PART 3

SYNTHESIS &

ANALYSIS



5. GAZETTEER OF CULTURAL HERITAGE SITES

A summary site gazetteer is set out below. Fuller descriptions are provided in Appendix 4 and complete entries for those sites listed in the Northumberland Sites and Monuments Record (NSMR) may be consulted by contacting the Conservation Team at County Hall, Morpeth. The gazetteer sites are all located on figure 4 and, in the case of those in the immediate vicinity of the village and in the village core, on figures 5 and 6 respectively. For convenience figures 4 and 5 are reproduced in this section as figures 60 and 61, whilst the village core sites are marked on the archaeological sensitivity plan in Part 4 (fig. 62). For further ease of identifiability the site catalogue numbers are placed between square brackets when cited in the report text. Thus catalogue number 11 – the castle – would normally appear as [11], although in some cases a site may be more fully identified.

Table 1: Known sites of cultural heritage importance within the wider study area.

Catalogue No.

SMR No. Period Site Name Grid Ref Status

1 1055 POST MEDIEVAL Priest's Bastle (site unknown) NT 392000 605000 2 1057 BRONZE AGE Stone hammer NT 392000 606000 3 1078 POST MEDIEVAL Angryhaugh NT 392100 605600 4 1097 POST MEDIEVAL Boundary stone NT 391500 605250 5 1097 POST MEDIEVAL Boundary stone NT391500 605250 6 1098 POST MEDIEVAL Boundary stones NT 391850 605420 7 1101 POST MEDIEVAL The Chambers, boundary stones NT 391300 605300 8 1105 UNKNOWN Rectangular ditched enclosure NT 393000 605760 9 1113 MEDIEVAL Chiremundesden NT 395000 606000

10 1117 POST MEDIEVAL Foxton, deserted medieval village NT 396840 605450

11 1145 MEDIEVALMotte and bailey castle and shell keep castle at Harbottle NT 393250 604810 Grade I, SAM

12 1146 POST MEDIEVAL Chapel site NT 393580 604700 13 1147 BRONZE AGE Harbottle Peels, cist NT 394300 604700 14 1147 BRONZE AGE Harbottle Peels, cist NT 394300 604700 15 1148 NEOLITHIC Stone hammer NT 393000 604000 16 1149 POST MEDIEVAL Harbottle Castle (new) NT 393700 604630 Grade II17 1150 BRONZE AGE Perforated axe-hammer NT 393000 604000 18 1151 BRONZE AGE Barbed and tanged arrowhead NT 393000 604000

19 1157LATER PREHISTORIC

Stone hut circle 980m ENE of Wilkwood East NT 390240 603290 SAM

20 1158 ROMAN

Barrow Burn unenclosed hut circle settlement, 300m north of Yearning Law NT 390870 603920 SAM

21 1159 MEDIEVAL Crane Sike shieling NT390350 603300

22 1160 MEDIEVALChirmundesden/Peels, medieval earthworks NT 394200 604800

23 1160 MEDIEVALChirmundesden/Peels, medieval earthworks NT 394200 604800

24 1165 POST MEDIEVAL Harbottle Crag, linear farmstead NT 392300 602700 25 1168 POST MEDIEVAL Millstone Edge, quarry NT 391700 604300 26 1172 POST MEDIEVAL Boundary stones NT 390900 604000 27 1173 POST MEDIEVAL Boundary stone NT 391100 604100 28 1174 POST MEDIEVAL Boundary stone NT 391400 604900 29 1175 POST MEDIEVAL Boundary stone NT 391400 604800 30 1176 POST MEDIEVAL Boundary stone NT 391300 604600



31 1179 POST MEDIEVAL Yearning Crag boundary stone NT 390700 603600 32 1184 POST MEDIEVAL Old Coal Road NT 390320 603100

33 1188 POST MEDIEVALHarbottle Crag to Midway Nick, boundary stones NT 391000 602200 Grade II

34 1189 POST MEDIEVAL Presbyterian Church NT 393240 604680 Grade II

351351

3 POST MEDIEVAL Garden Cottage, Harbottle Village NT 393586 604701 Grade II

361351

4 POST MEDIEVAL Icehouse in garden of Windley NT 393550 604750 Grade II

371351

5 POST MEDIEVAL New Hall, Harbottle NT 393521 604686 Grade II

381351

6 POST MEDIEVALHarbottle Church of England aided First School NT 393491 604712 Grade II

391351

7 POST MEDIEVALPant or well in garden wall of Woodbine Cottage, Harbottle village NT 393453 604685 Grade II

401351

8 POST MEDIEVALClennell Memorial Fountain, Harbottle village NT 393393 604694 Grade II

411351

9 POST MEDIEVALBorder House and attached garden wall, Harbottle village NT 393311 604703 Grade II

421352

0 POST MEDIEVAL Plum Tree Cottage, Harbottle village NT 393276 604704 Grade II

431352

1 POST MEDIEVAL Cherry Tree House, Harbottle village NT 393287 604705 Grade II

441352

2 POST MEDIEVAL Ivy Cottage, Harbottle village NT 393275 604705 Grade II

451352

3 POST MEDIEVAL Waterloo House, Harbottle village NT 393265 604707 Grade II

461352

4 POST MEDIEVALWaterloo Cottage/Post Office, Harbottle village NT 393258 604707 Grade II

471352

5 POST MEDIEVAL Braeside, Harbottle village NT 393245 604709 Grade II

481352

6 POST MEDIEVAL The Stable, Harbottle village NT 393576 604648 Grade II

491353

9 POST MEDIEVAL The Peels Farmhouse NT 394269 604793

501354

0 POST MEDIEVALByre and shelter sheds c.40 yards north-west of The Peels Farmhouse NT 394261 604834

511354

1 POST MEDIEVALNos 4 and 5 (Peels Cottages), The Peels NT 394220 604830

521354

2 POST MEDIEVALStable and granary c.10 yards north of the Peels Farmhouse NT 394265 604812

531356

7 MEDIEVAL Harbottle deer park NT 393020 605350

541458

9 POST MEDIEVALPant/well in the garden of Fernlea and Brackenlea NT 393429 604688

551459

0 POST MEDIEVAL The Star Inn public house NT 393413 604689

561459

1 POST MEDIEVAL White House NT 393448 604665

571459

2 POST MEDIEVAL Wayside NT 393429 604671

581459

3 POST MEDIEVAL Hernspeth NT 393393 604673

591459

4 POST MEDIEVALForesters Cottage, The Copse, The Leash NT 393276 604685

601459

6 POST MEDIEVAL The Old Manse NT 392812 604787

61MEDIEVAL Medieval land division (possible

Burgage Plots) NT 393 60462 MEDIEVAL Harbottle Castle access track NT 39340 6047563 MEDIEVAL Ford NT 39370 00475



6. HISTORICAL SYNTHESIS

Harbottle is unique amongst the villages of the National Park in that it was the site of a major and longlasting baronial, and later, royal castle, and as such was the centre of government for a very large territory, the Liberty of Redesdale, one of the viceregal franchises used by the crown to administer the Northumbrian upland border zone. Only Elsdon, itself also located within the Redesdale liberty, has a castle which may originally have approached Harbottle in status, but the complete absence of any reference to this fortification in documentary sources and fact that it was devoid of any surviving masonry suggests that Elsdon Castle was a relatively shortlived site, perhaps abandoned in favour of Harbottle. Inevitably, the presence of such an important administrative seat had a profound impact on the development of the settlement at Harbottle in the medieval and early modern period.

The surviving structural remains of Harbottle Castle have been comprehensively discussed in several recent surveys (Ryder 1990, Bowden 1990, Crow 1998, and ASUD 1998) which summarise and bring up to date earlier descriptions (e.g. Hartshorne 1858; Hunter Blair 1932-34; 1944; NCH XV (1940)). Of the latter the most important is that incorporated in volume XV of the County History (NCH XV (1940)), which includes the results of Honeyman's excavations in the 1930s. Similarly, Rushworth considers most of the available documentary evidence in his detailed discussion on the origins and function of the castle. However, while attention has been focussed on the castle, the medieval and later village of Harbottle has received very little attention from an archaeological perspective.

6.1 Prehistoric Occupation and Land-Use

As yet there is no firm archaeological evidence for prehistoric, Romano-British or early-medieval occupation at Harbottle. Resource exploitation, at least, is highly likely in the surrounding area, given the combined potential, within 2km of the site, of valley bottom and highland zones, woodland and grassland habitats. Neolithic and bronze-age activity is attested locally by small finds and burials, respectively, whilst Iron-Age or Romano-British enclosures are relatively densely scattered in the wider vicinity, principally occupying promontories or ridges above the Coquet or its tributaries, not dissimilar to the castle site at Harbottle.

The prime defensible location of the castle site [11]6, on a flat-topped ridge overlooking steep slopes which drop down to the flat, marshy, river valley, raises the possibility that it too was once crowned by an Iron-Age hill fort, like that at the neighbouring, topographically similar site of Harehaugh (Carlton, forthcoming). It has recently been argued that the castle may overly earlier earthworks which may be of prehistoric date (Welfare et al. 1999, 58-9; Welfare 2002, 77). No evidence for a hillfort phase was recovered during recent excavations within the castle enceinte (cf. Crow 1998), but this does not represent a conclusive negative case. The extent of medieval construction works particularly in the area of the gatehouse where much of the recent investigation was focussed may have removed evidence of earlier activity.

6 The gazetteer sites referred to in the text are all located on figures 4 and 60. Those in the immediate vicinity of the village and in the village core are also shown on figures 5 & 61 and 6 & 62, respectively. For ease of identifiability the site catalogue numbers are placed between square brackets in the report text; thus catalogue number 11 would normally appear as [11].



6.2 The evidence for early medieval settlement

Most previous discussion regarding the pre-Norman history of Harbottle, however, has focussed on the possibility that it was the site of an early medieval fortress. This idea was first put forward in 1864 (Anon.) and subsequently found favour with many commentators (e.g. Dixon 1903, 177-8; NCH XV (1940), 472), to such an extent that it is now well-entrenched in virtually all the secondary literature, even though direct supporting evidence is lacking. The argument is well summarised in the County History (NCH XV (1940), 472):

The name Harbottle is Old English here-botl, meaning army building, i.e. barracks, and a garrison must have been maintained here before the Norman conquest as the ten towns of Coquetdale were bound to serve in the defence of Harbottle . . . but this service was ignored by the Normans, for after the conquest the ten towns were included in the barony of Alnwick, while Harbottle lay in the lordship of Redesdale. Therefore the service must be of pre-conquest date. In order to reunite the ten towns with the 'burh' at which the service was due, the Umfravilles held them from the lords of Alnwick.

6.2.1 Placename evidence: -botl namesEssentially, therefore, the case is based on two pieces of evidence: firstly the Old English derivation of the place-name Harbottle - here-botl - previously interpreted as 'army building' or 'station of the army' (Mawer 1920, 101); and secondly the apparently anachronistic obligation of ten townships outside the Liberty, in Coquetdale and the Ingram valley, to serve in defence of Harbottle. These may be dealt with in turn.

Harbottle is one of a number placenames in northern England and southern Scotland which incorporate the Old English suffix botl, generally translated as 'lord's hall'. It is perhaps the equivalent of the Latin term villa, which is used frequently in the works of Bede and his contemporaries to denote royal and ecclesiastical estates (cf. Higham 1986, 293). This class of placename has been considered to represent an early element in Anglian place-name formation, i.e. belonging to the fifth-sixth centuries, but it has recently been the subject reconsideration by Barrow (1998, 67-9), who points out that its distribution across southern Scotland suggests some of these names could have originated later on, in the 7th-8th centuries.

Other examples of this toponym in Northumberland include Shilbottle and Walbottle. The latter is particularly interesting in this context as it has been identified with the 7th-century Northumbrian royal estate centre located close to Hadrian's Wall mentioned by Bede (Hist. Eccles.), the villa regia ad murum. Antiquaries from Camden onwards have more often proposed locating this centre at Heddon on the Wall (cf. Camden 1607, 218), but Walbottle would appear to represent a more convincing translation of Bede's Latin and would accord better with his indication that it lay 12 miles from the sea. However decisive archaeological confirmation is lacking. Nor was any evidence of early medieval occupation found during the recent extensive excavations in advance of development at another site which has been included in this 'bottle' category, namely Bottle Bank on Gateshead bank of the Tyne above the historic bridgehead.

6.2.2 The Ten Towns of CoquetdaleThe second piece of evidence, the obligation of ten townships in Coquetdale and the Ingram valley, outside the Redesdale Liberty, to serve in defence of Harbottle, is most clearly expressed in the 1604 Border Survey:

(The ten towns in Coquetdale) by their ancient custome owe their service to Harbotle in Rydsdale to be comaunded by the Capten there to serve in feild on horse or on foote in the Princes affaires for the defence of the Border lands (1604 Survey, 116)7.

7 Cf. also 1604 Survey, 114: 'The Survaie of the Tenn Townes which have ancientlie don and nowe do their service to Harbotle Castle'.



The theory that the customary service of the ten Coquetdale townships represented a relic of some Anglian, defensive arrangement is not of itself implausible. Moreover the existence of a similar mid eleventh-century, fortified estate centre at Prudhoe has been suggested on the basis of excavation (Keen 1982, 175-7; but cf. Higham & Barker 1992, 49, 284-9).

However the evidence from earlier documents presents a rather different picture from those of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. In the inquisition post mortem for Robert de Umfraville, taken in 1325, the tenants holding all or part of the manors of Clennell, Biddlestone and Burradon were each listed as having to to pay sums for the guard of the castle of Alnwick, not Harbottle, as part of their dues (Cal IPM vi, no.607; see below 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys no.3)8. This was repeated as a simple total - '30s for the ward of the castle of Alnewike' - when the inquest into Robert's holdings at death was retaken in 1331 (Cal IPM vii, no.390; 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys no.4). This suggests that the manorial tenants of the ten townships retained some military obligations to the Alnwick barony up until at least the early 14th century. Furthermore none of the 13th and 14th century inquisitions specify that the tenants of the ten townships had to perform castle guard at Harbottle.

6.2.3 ConclusionsIt is possible therefore that the military service of the ten townships at Harbottle was a custom which developed in the later medieval period at a time when the warden of the Middle March was often based at Harbottle. However greater weight may be attached to the distinctive placename as evidence of early medieval settlement. If the first part of the placename, 'Har' ('Hir' in the earliest documentary references) is correctly derived from the Old English here ('army') - as proposed by Mawer and Hope-Dodds - an Anglian estate centre designed to provision military forces might be signified, although such a literal derivation might be too simplistic. The suggestion that the castle site originated as a late prehistoric hillfort (see above) is another complicating factor. If the hypothesis is valid, such earlier hillfort defences would still have been evident in the early medieval period and could conceivably have been reoccupied and refortified in the early medieval period by members of the Brittonic and/or Anglian elite, as many such sites were. Alternatively, the putative estate centre might have been established below the castle site (whether or not the latter was occupied by an earlier hillfort), perhaps in the area of the present village. These might be termed the Bamburgh and Yeavering models, respectively, by analogy with those two early medieval royal centres and their different relationship to earlier fortified sites.

One further point should be noted. Despite being the seigneurial capital of Coquetdale and Redesdale from the 12th century onwards, Harbottle was not a parochial centre. There was a chapel there, recorded from the late 13th century onwards, but it was apparently included within Holystone Parish. Documentary references to these two ecclesiastical sites are sparse and somewhat contradictory, obscuring the exact relationship between them prior to the 14th century, though it was evidently quite complex. What is clear, however, is that the foundation of the Augustinian nunnery at Holystone during the 12th century must have had a major influence on the ecclesiastical development of Coquetdale. Given the close link between early parochial evolution and the pattern of late Anglo-Scandinavian estate tenure (cf. Lomas 1996, 110; Dixon 1985, I, 63ff; Higham 1986), a fuller understanding of the history of both Holystone Church and Harbottle chapel is clearly a major priority, not only in its own right, but also for the light it may shed on the earlier medieval history of Coquetdale.

8 Clenyl. The manor held by Thomas Clenyl by service of half a knight's fee, 6s 8d for guard of the castle of Alnewyk and 15d for cornage.Bedilsden [alias Bitelsden]. A moiety of the manor held by Robert de la Vale by service of . . . , 6s 8d [alias 3s 4d] for guard of the said castle . . .Borouden. The manor, held by John de Borouden by service of . . . 13s 4d for guard of the said castle.



In the final analysis it is likely that only more extensive excavation can put an end to such speculation and definitively establish whether or not there was an early-medieval centre underlying the remains of the later medieval castle or the adjacent village at Harbottle, but the placename evidence, at least, does raise some intriging possibilities.

6.3 The medieval settlement and castle

Documentary evidence for the castle commences in the mid-12th century, from which time it appears to have been continuously occupied until the end of the 16th or early 17th centuries. During this time it functioned as a baronial seat and major Border fortress, playing a significant role in the defence of the northern frontier. Subsequently it was used as a stone quarry for the associated village, and as agricultural land, latterly mainly turned over to pasture.

The documents referring to Harbottle and the liberty of Redesdale during the medieval period include only a few appearances in the contemporary historical accounts of the period, usually in the context of warfare between the two kingdoms of England and Scotland. Much more common are references in several classes of official document:

· Inquisitions post mortem, the inquests conducted by the state from the mid-13th century onwards, following the death of a lord, to determine the annual value of his possessions, the person and age of the legal heir and to make provision for the widow (who would receive land and a dwelling for her support till her death). If the heir was underage the estates were repossessed by the Crown and managed for royal profit until he attained majority. This results in a series of inventories for the Umfraville domains during the mid 13th-14th centuries and for the subsequent period of Tailbois lordship in the 15th century.

· Ecclesiatical sources, notably charters recording gifts, leases etc to particular ecclesiastical institutions. Especially important for our understanding of the development of Umfraville holdings in Coquetdale are grants to Newminster Abbey.

· Writs and correspondence associated with legal disputes over property and inheritance, or relating to alleged abuses of baronial authority on the part of the Umfravilles, and their rights within the liberty vis a vis the Crown.

· Royal surveys - e.g. the 13th-century returns of the services owed by the tenants in chief to the Crown (Liber Feudorum) or the surveys of the Border defences, beginning in 1415 but especially common in the 16th century (see above).

It is possible to construct a narrative covering the history of Harbottle and its position as the capital of the liberty from these diverse sources (e.g. NCH XV (1940); Hunter Blair 1932-34). Some understanding of the original context of the different pieces of information is necessary, however, for this largely determines the kind of questions that can be asked of the evidence. Moreover, since the earlier historical accounts were compiled there have inevitably been improvements and some significant alterations in our understanding of the periods to which the documentary references to the castle belong. For example, it is now recognised that the Norman settlement in Northumberland occurred later than was once believed with the main feudal implantation taking place during the reign of Henry I. This has implications for our understanding of the establishment of the Umfraville fiefdom and the rapidity with which the caput was moved from Elsdon to Harbottle.

6.4 The origins of the Umfraville Liberty of Redesdale

A recent assessment of the evidence concluded that it is probable that the Umfravilles were established in Redesdale and Coquetdale at some point during the reign of Henry I, with an outside possibility that they acquired the liberty during the last decade of the 11th century. There is clear evidence to suggest that they had acquired the ten Coquetdale and Breamish valley townships which



lay within the barony of Alnwick, adjoining the liberty, before the death of Henry I (see below), and they were certainly well-entrenched in the north by the 1120s. Robert de Umfraville (probably the original Robert cum barba) appears as a witness to Scottish royal charters from 1120 onwards9. His sons, Odinel and Gilbert, subsequently feature in the same way. During the latter part of the reign of David I, when Northumberland fell under the effective control of the Scottish king, the Umfravilles became important members of that kingdom's new feudal aristocracy, with a small estate in Stirlingshire as well as their Northumbrian holdings (Ritchie 1954, 144; Tuck 1986, 3)10. Hedley has even suggested that it was David's son, Henry, earl of Northumberland between 1139-52, who was responsible for the award of Redesdale to the Umfravilles at some point after 1139 (1968, 209; cf. Lomas 1996, 19, 158), and whether or not this is correct the link between the earl and the Umfraville lineage was clearly strong. Gilbert, indeed, served as constable both of earl Henry and of the latter's successor, William (1152-57), David's younger grandson (who was eventually to become king himself as William the Lion - 1165-1214).

Liberties and franchisesThe territory which the Umfravilles acquired was not an ordinary barony like their other Northumbrian fief centred on Prudhoe. Instead it belonged to a class of lordship variously termed regalities, franchises or liberties, where the baron was responsible for performing the administrative and judicial tasks undertaken elsewhere by the sheriff and other royal officials. There were several of these in Northumberland, covering much of the county, including the Palatinate of Durham with its northern districts of Norhamshire, Islandshire and Bedlingtonshire, the liberty of Tynedale, and the ecclesiastical liberties of Hexhamshire and Tynemouthshire. This viceregal authority did not confer any right to alter or make laws, and its continuance was always conditional on the goodwill of the Crown, symbolised on the death of each baronial incumbant when the liberty automatically reverted to the state until a successor had been acknowledged. For the Crown this clearly represented a pragmatic and economical means of administering and policing the remote uplands of Northumberland.

6.4.1 The extent of the Umfraville domains (see fig. 51)The liberty of Redesdale included not only that valley of the Rede itself, from a point just north of its confluence with the North Tyne as far as the Scottish border, but also stretched north to incorporate the south side of the upper Coquet, including the entire catchment around the headwaters - the area known as Kidland - and of course the site of Harbottle castle itself. This represented two parishes in Redesdale - Elsdon and Corsenside - and one in Coquetdale - Holystone. In addition the Umfravilles held ten vills (townships) in the neighbouring de Vesci barony of Alnwick, comprising two blocks - Alwinton, Clennell, Biddlestone, Shirmondesden, Sharperton, Farnham (Thirnum), Burradon and Netherton, incorporating the north side of upper Coquetdale directly adjoining the liberty, and, separated from the remainder, Ingram and Fawdon in the Breamish valley. They were also granted Little Ryle, north of Netherton, in there own right as tenants in chief of the king. To the south of the liberty, another group of the estates, belonging to the barony of Prudhoe, stretched south along the North Tyne and eastward to the headwaters of the Wansbeck, separated by only three miles from the cluster of manors around the baronial caput at Prudhoe itself11. Possession of this vast swathe of territory, stretching from the lower Tyne to the Scottish border, made the Umfravilles the most powerful of the Northumbrian barons - 'Potentium de Nordthanymbria potentissimus' - up until the 14th century (Tuck 1971, 24)12.

9 ESC nos. 35, 82, 99, 104, 108, 112, 130-31, 137, 141, 177; RRS i, 8, 11-12, 21, 30-33, 41, 184?10 They did not, however, acquire the prestigious title of earl of Angus, via a judicious marriage, until 1243 and even thereafter never figured quite as prominently in Scottish affairs as some other Northumbrian barons did or as they themselves had in the early-mid 12th century (Tuck 1986, 3, 6).11 For the Umfraville holdings see Liber Feudorum i, 201 (1212); ii, 1114-5, 1118-9, 1121-2 (1242).12 Odinel de Umfraville in the Vita Oswini, xxx, 43. Cf. Matthew Paris' description of Gilbert de Umfraville, 1226-44 - 'the guardian and chief flower of the North' - cited by Bates 1891,201 and Hodgson 1827, 19.



6.4.2 Elsdon and HarbottleWhatever the precise date when the Umfraville liberty was established, it has generally been assumed that its initial seat was the great earthwork castle at Elsdon Mote Hills, comprising a half-ringwork and bailey (Hunter Blair 1944, 132-4; Cathcart King & Alcock 1969, 119; Quiney 1976, 177-8). The reason for the siting of the Norman ringwork-and bailey-castle at Elsdon Mote Hills is clear, if, as argued above, Elsdon was the pre-Norman caput for most of Redesdale. Even in the 13th and 14th centuries, when the seat of the lordship was well-established at Harbottle, Elsdon retained vestiges of its former status, most notably it remained the parochial centre for much of the liberty, embracing most of Redesdale up to the border. It was still one of the largest settlements, populated by free tenants, and was something of an economic centre.

However, the circumstances whereby the seat of the lordship came to situated at Harbottle, involving a presumed shift from Elsdon, which paradoxically resulted in the 'liberty of Redesdale' being administered from a castle in Coquetdale, remain much less clear. Whether examined from the standpoint of strategic requirements of border defence, or the administrative and policing considerations of the Umfraville barons, the position of Harbottle does not appear conclusively better than Elsdon. However, Harbottle is undeniably a site of some strategic importance (Bowden 1990; Hunter Blair 1944, 136), and is also situated closer to the border than is Elsdon Mote Hills, which may have been significant.

Nevertheless, however well its situation in Coquetdale enabled it to dominate and protect that valley, the castle appears ill-placed to perform those roles in Redesdale proper.

6.4.3 ConclusionsIn seeking to explain 13th-century pattern, two observations may be pertinent. Firstly, the Umfravilles did not attempt to administer the entire liberty from Harbottle alone, in the 13th century and thereafter. A subsidiary manorial centre, with a capital messuage (probably a two-storey hall-house typical of the region), was retained in Redesdale, overseeing the Umfraville holdings in that valley. However this was located not at Elsdon, but at Otterburn to the west, in the main valley.

Secondly, there is evidence to suggest the Umfravilles were attracted by the greater fertility of Coquetdale from the beginning of their tenure. They appear to have held the ten townships in Coquetdale and the Breamish valley from the reign of Henry I.

Given these factors two hypotheses can be advanced to explain the demise of Elsdon. It is possible that the size of the Umfraville lordship, including the adjoining Coquetdale and Breamish valley townships in the barony of Alnwick, rapidly led to the realisation that it was inconvenient to administer the liberty and its appendages from a single centre. Consequently Elsdon was replaced by two manorial sites, each more centrally located in its respective valley, Harbottle in upper Coquetdale and Otterburn in Redesdale. Alternatively it is conceivable that there were intitially two timber and earthwork castles, one to protect each valley. In this case Elsdon was abandoned, perhaps in the late 12th-early 13th century under Richard de Umfraville, because the liberty did not provide sufficient resources to support the reconstruction in stone and maintenance of two castles. It is noteworthy that Richard undertook major construction work at Harbottle c. 1220. In either case, it is likely that the Umfravilles were influenced by the greater fertility of the more northerly valley, in making Harbottle the principal focus of their liberty, in the same way that Coquetdale's upland pastures attracted greater interest from the monastic houses than did those of Redesdale. Thus, although reasons of state may not have been irrelevant in the final choice of the seat of the lordship and the construction of the castle at Harbottle, one may suspect that a decisive factor was the administrative and economic requirements of the Umfraville barons, themselves.

6.5 The Foundation of Harbottle Castle

6.5.1 The source and its context - Richard de Umfraville's letter of 1220



Our knowledge of the initial construction of Harbottle Castle[11, 16] derives from a considerably later source, namely Richard de Umfraville's letter defending the legality of his castle in the face of a royal order to demolish recent additions in 1220. Richard countered the claims that Harbottle was an unlicenced, or 'adulterine' castle in a letter to Hubert de Burgh in August 1220 asking the latter to intercede with the king on his behalf. The letter is crucial in providing the earliest succinct description of the castle's location, its perceived role and strategic value, as well as the circumstances of its original construction:

the castle is sited in the marches of Scotland, towards the Great Waste (Magnam Wastinam), to the great benefit of the kingdom as much in times of peace as war, more than nine leagues distant from Bamburgh castle, and was built by Henry king of England, grandfather of our lord the king, with 'aid' from the entire county of Northumberland and bishopric of Durham, on the orders of the aforesaid king Henry. . . . . . it is not adulterine, when it was constructed with the agreement and instruction of lord king Henry, to the benefit of the kingdom as much for the king as for peace . . ., (Royal Letters Hen. III i, no 856; cf. CalDocScot i, no 775)13

6.5.2 Harbottle and the Castles of Henry IIThe construction of Harbottle Castle fits into a wider pattern of modernisation by Henry II of the castles on his northern border after 1157 (Bates 1891, 5-6; Colvin et al 1963, 66). This involved both the king's own castles, exemplified by the major programme of work at Newcastle, between 1168-78, featuring, most prominently, the construction of the great stone keep by Maurice 'the Engineer' (Bates 1891, 6; Platt 1982, 40-5; Winter et al. 1989, 42-4) and instructions to strengthen key baronial or franchisal fortresses.

The castle seems to have been in existence by 1174, when one chronicler records it was captured by the forces of William the Lion (Benedict i, 65; cf. Ridpath 1848, 67)14. It is generally assumed that construction took place shortly after Henry had recovered full control of Northumberland (e.g. NCH XV (1940), 480; Hunter Blair 1932-34; 1944, 135-6), when work was also undertaken on the king's orders at Wark-on-Tweed and probably Norham (see above).

However there are certain puzzling aspects to this interpretation. The specific threat posed to the border, which presumably inspired the construction of Harbottle, arose because the Scottish crown, and in particular the last earl, William, was never reconciled to the loss of Northumbrian earldom, a threat which intensified after William ascended to the Scottish throne in 1165. However we have seen how closely connected with the Scottish court the Umfravilles were before 1157. William certainly considered Odinel de Umfraville II, who probably inherited the lordship of Redesdale and Prudhoe in the 1160s, to be his man, as Odinel had been brought up in the household of William's father, earl Henry, and was enraged by what he saw as Odinel's treachery in rallying to Henry II in 1173-74 (Jordan Fantosme, 29). It is perhaps curious therefore that Henry II put such effort into the building of a castle close to the border which was then to be handed over to a baronial lineage whose future loyalty in the event of Scottish invasion must have been in some doubt in 1157-58. It is possible therefore that the events described in Richard's letter should be assigned a somewhat later date, perhaps in the 1173-74 when Odinel was working on his main Northumbrian stronghold of Prudhoe.15

13 'quod situm est in marchia Scotiae versus Magnam Wastinam ad magnam utilitatem regni, tam tempore pacis quam guerrae, remotum a castello de Bamburc plusquam novem leucas, et dudum constructum per dominum Henricum regem Angliae avum domini nostri regis et, per auxilium totius comitatus Northumbriae et episcopatus Dunelmensis ex praecepto dicti Henrici regis'. . . . quod non sit adulterinum, cum constructum fuerit per assensum et praeceptum domini regis Henrici, ad [uti]litatem tam regis quam pacis regni. . . .14 In 1175 the Sheriff of Yorkshire listed among the 'prises and profits' from the king's lands and those of his enemies the sum of '&17 10s of booty taken before the castle of Odinel de Umfraville which the king of Scotland was then holding' (Pipe Roll 21 Hen II, 173; cf. Cal Doc Rel Scot i, 142). The castle is not named, but is usually assumed to have been Prudhoe, which William besieged (habebat - 'was holding' - is therefore understood to mean 'was besieging' Hedley 1968, 209-10). However it is conceivable that the castle was Harbottle, which is recorded as having been taken.15 See Rushworth & Carlton 1998, 33-6 for full discussion of these questions.



6.6 The medieval landscape of Harbottle (see fig. 53)

6.6.1 Introduction: territories and townshipsHarbottle, in the medieval period lay at the heart of seigneurial landscape designed to ensure the efficient exploitation of the lordship, comprising elements such as the castle, a deer park, the borough of Harbottle and the demesne manor of Shirmundesden (or Shermington), which can still be reconstructed from surviving features and documentary evidence. The post-medieval township of Harbottle essentially represents the extent of the medieval borough and its associated common. This explains why it excludes the castle site - the most substantial medieval monument in the present village - which instead falls within the township of Peels on the north side of Harbottle. Peels originated as the demesne of the Umfraville lords, comprising the castle with the adjacent haughs, the park and the manor of Shirmondeden, which was held directly. In a broader sense however the territory associated with the medieval monuments at Harbottle comprised the entire franchise of Redesdale, of which Harbottle Castle was the caput.

6.6.2 The CastleThe castle served as the administrative and logistical centre of baronial estate, the instruments and symbols of the Umfravilles' authority within their domain. The importance of Harbottle castle within its wider environs was even more accentuated by the vice-regal powers - regalis potestas - conferred upon the Umfravilles in the liberty of Redesdale, entailing responsibility for government duties and the dispensation of justice which would normally have been performed by the sheriff of Northumberland and other royal officials. It is best expressed by the terms by which the Umfravilles themselves claimed they held the Redesdale liberty in the returns they made to the Liber Feudorum, terms echoed by their tenants in the inquests post mortem held after the death of individual lords - 'by service of defending the said lands from wolves and robbers' (Cal IPM v, no.47, 1308; see below 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys no.2)16. This duty was of particular significance in the Redesdale liberty, with its major highways which led into Scotland through upland districts devoid of permanent settlement and which were hence vulnerable to brigandage. The castle was a vital instrument in enabling the Umfravilles to carry out this policing role. It held his courthouse and gaol where the Umfraville lord would exercise his vice-regal authority. Thus, in 1335-6, Gilbert de Umfraville declared that 'from time immemorial he and his ancestors had kept prisoners taken in their franchise of Redesdale in the jaol of their castle of Harbottle'. Owing to the damage wrought by the Scots, however, Harbottle was unserviceable as a jaol and he was given permission to use Prudhoe Castle for ten years instead (Northumb. Petitions 124-5, no.101)17. Above all the castle was the architectural expression of the lord's power. It provided a secure base, easily able to resist any band of 'latrones', and served to overawe the district and, inevitably, on more than one occasion was used to oppress, through false imprisonment, neighbours, tenants and any who had incurred the displeasure of the Umfraville lords18.

6.6.3 The boroughThe medieval settlement at Harbottle, which occupied the site of the present village, had the status of a borough. As such it differed from ordinary agricultural villages. Its property holding inhabitants,

16 Cf. Liber Feodorum i, 201 (1212) - 'by service of defending the valley from robbers'. In the forged Dodsworth deed, the broader but vague category 'enemies', which might conceivably include Scots, is substituted for 'robbers'. Compare also construction of Norham Castle c. 1121 by Bishop Ranulf Flambard to protect his franchise of North Durham from Scots and robbers (Symeon i, 168).17 qe come de temps dont y nad memoire lui et ses auncestres avoient garder touz les prisons pris deinz lour franchise de Redesdale en la prison de lour Chastel de Hirbodell . . . le quel chastel est abatuz par les Escoces issint qil ne ad nule meson en quele les ditz prisons purrent estre sauvement gardez.18 References to false imprisonment and other abuses of authority by Gilbert de Umfraville II in the later 13th century are assembled by Hodgson 1827, 23-8 and NCH XV (1940), 473-4 ; cf. esp. Northumb Assize R, 372, in 1279.



known as burgesses or burghers, were effectively freeholders. They owed low fixed rents and otherwise could sell or dispose of their property, or burgage plots, as they wished. The foundation date of the borough is not recorded, but it was certainly in existence by 1245 when it is mentioned in the Inquisition Post Mortem of Gilbert de Umfraville I. Indeed it may have followed relatively soon after the establishment of the castle, or at any rate its refurbishment in stone. The Umfraville barons who doubtless established the borough did so in order to profit from its commercial activity. The revenues they could extract included the rents paid by the burgesses for their burgage plots and grazing rights, plus the rents and tolls paid by those attending and trading at the periodic market and the annual fair. The sums paid annually by the burghers show remarkable stability:

1245 - £2 12s1331 - £2 13s 10d1604 - £2 12s 1d

Markets and fairs: The right to hold a market in the borough on Tuesday, once every three weeks, and an annual fair (on the feast of the nativity of the Blessed Virgin Mary) is referred to by Gilbert de Umfraville II during court proceedings in 1293. The Inquisition Post Mortem for Robert Tailbois in 1495 (see below, 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys no. 13) indicated the Tuesday market was by this time a weekly event. In the 1604 Border Survey (1604 Survey, 91, 111), the borough was labelled 'the town of Harbottle ... sometimes a market town' suggesting the market was no longer functioning by this time (although, if so, it must have been revived for it was recorded in the 19 th century). The 1817 Enclosure Award and 1st edition Ordnance Survey both mark the position of the fair ground, just to the west of the village on the south side of the road heading up the valley towards the border. Although apparently relatively remote, Harbottle was located at the junction of a number of cross-border routes and must have seen quite a lot of traffic.

The settlement: In 1604 Harbottle had 15 burger freeholders who possessed 23 houses and three outhouses. There is no indication of the number of burghers at an earlier date. The settlement was evidently established immediately below the castle where the Umfraville lords or their bailiffs could keep a close eye on it. The first detailed map evidence – the 1806 map of Harbottle estate (fig. 17), the 1817 Enclosure map (fig. 18) and the tithe map surveyed in 1843 (fig. 20) – suggests that by that stage the village principally comprised a single street between the old castle and the 17th century hall (also called Harbottle Castle). A few more houses are evident along the eastern approach road, to the south of the grounds of the new Harbottle Castle. It is unclear whether the latter dwellings represent the remnant of more extensive earlier spread of settlement along the road or perhaps more likely a limited post-medieval expansion. They are located in a series of freehold plots along the road, the majority of which have no buildings within (see below). The main street may originally have continued eastwards, at least as far as the site of the present hall. This route also led, via a ford over the Coquet, to the farm or hamlet of Peels, the site of the medieval settlement of Shirmondesden, which formed the demesne of the Umfraville lordship in place of Harbottle itself.

Field systems and common: In 1604 the burgage land included 67 acres of arable land, 9 acres of meadow and 24 acres of pasture (1604 Survey, 91; see below, 7.2 Selected Sources and Surveys). The Harbottle Inclosure Map of 1817, shows six, variously sized, elongated plots on the south side of the village, which may represent strips of arable land or meadow within the defined limits of the medieval borough. These strips run for a up to 300m down the slope and across Back Burn. A further series of plots, much shorter in length, but roughly similar in width, lie to the east of the village, sandwiched between the approach road, on the south side and Back Burn and the grounds of the new Harbottle Castle on the north. Again, these may represent some of the original strips of burgage land. They are shown terminating along the southern limit of the Park or lawn attached to the new Harbottle Castle, which coincides with Back Burn, but like the strips to the west it is possible they once continued northward across the burn. It is conceivable that when the Widdringtons relocated the manorial seat to the new hall they took a substantial chunk out of the burgage lands.



In addition to any meadow or pasture which lay within the borough limits, the burghers would have been able to graze their livestock on the moorland common to the south of the village. The extent of this common was estimated at 700 acres in 1604 (ibid.) and was not enclosed until 1817.

6.6.4 The parkAnother essential element of this baronial landscape was the park, which provided the lord with an enclosed hunting reserve immediately adjacent to his castle. The park was clearly in existence by 1296 when Edward I ordered his bailiff in Tynedale to transfer 20 live bucks and 80 live does be transferred from John Comyn's woods and parks (in the manor of Tarset in North Tynedale) to stock Gilbert de Umfraville's park at Harbottle. In the Inquisition Post Mortem for Gilbert II in 1308 the park was described as follows:

a certain park containing in circuit about one league, in which are wild animals; the sale of underwood of which yields nothing, but the agistment (rental from grazing rights) of it is worth 6s 8d.

The outline of the park is apparent on the earliest detailed maps such as the 1806 estate map, despite the interior having been parcelled up, and is evinced by field names ('Park' and 'Park Head' - 1806) and later houses ('Park House' on the 2nd edition Ordnance Survey). Indeed it can still traced in the present-day field layout. The bulk of the park enclosure lay on the north side of the Coquet, opposite the castle, but a narrow strip ran along the south side incorporating the later fields labelled Ram's Haugh, Castle Haugh, Castle Garth and Castle Hill on the 1806 map, with the result that the castle itself fell within the boundary of the enclosure. This pattern of fencing both sides of a river is commonly replicated in other medieval parks, e.g. Warkworth, and was presumably intended to provide the wildlife with access to the river for drinking whilst maintaining a secure enclosure. In the 1331 inquest post mortem of Robertde Umfraville, however, 'land called Ramshalgh' (i.e. Ramshaugh) is listed separately along with the castle and the borough, but was clearly still part of the seigneurial demesne.

There is no indication that the park was still in existence on Armstrong's map (1769), where parks are often depicted as palisaded enclosures. It had evidently been parcelled up into fields after the castle had fallen out of use at the end of the 16th century. When the present Harbottle Castle was built at the east end of the village, by the Widdrington's in the 17th century, the old park was effectively redundant. Subsequently a new park was established south of the 17th-century mansion to provide the requisite pastoral landscape visible from the house itself. This figures on maps from the 1st edition Ordnance Survey onwards (on the 1806 map it is labelled 'lawn').

6.6.5 The chapelThere was a chapel in the settlement for the convenience of the burgesses (cf. NCH XV (1940), 467), but the main ecclesiastical centre in this part of Coquetdale was in the neighbouring township of Holystone where the parish church was located and there was an Augustinian nunnery. The existence of the chapel is alluded to in 1287/8 when Adam of Harle is named in a lawsuit as the vicar of the church of Harbottle. In the following year Adam appears in a different case as the vicar of the church of Holystone, implying the same individual officiated at both places at this time. In 1312 the Bishop of Durham granted the chapel, along with Corsenside Church, to the nuns of Holystone Priory, to be held with the rectory of Holystone (NCH XV (1940), 455, 462-3, 467). Little is known of its later history. Witnesses testified that Gilbert de Umfraville IV was baptised in the church at Harbottle in 1390, which would suggest the chapel was still in us then (note: NCH caveat re. poss that this refers to a chapel in the castle), but it is not mentioned at the time of the dissolution, when the priory's holdings were sold or leased out, and it may have decayed and fallen out of use during the disturbed conditions of the later medieval period.

Nothing survives of the chapel today, but it lay at the east end of the village, at the entrance to the grounds of the present Harbottle castle. This area was once known as Kirk Knowe. When the



gardener's lodge was built there in the 19th century the foundations of the chapel were revealed and in 1871 workmen laying waterpipes found a skeleton, a sundial and a stone basin, perhaps a holy water stoup (NCH XV (1940), 467).

6.6.6 Peels/ShirmundesdenOn the north side of the Coquet east of Harbottle park was the farm complex of Peels, all that remains of the shrunken medieval settlement of Shirmondesden. The township and manor of Shirmundesden was a member of the barony of Alnwick and one of the ten towns of Coquetdale held by the Umfravilles from the Vesci overlords. The importance of this manor in completeing the seigneurial landscape around Harbottle lies in the fact that it formed part of the Umfraville's demesne, i.e. it was held by them directly, rather than being bestowed on subordinate baronial, gentry or ecclesiastical tenants (subinfeudation). The selection of this manor was presumably due to its proximity to Harbottle Castle and it was already fulfilling that function by 1325 (IPM) and probably even earlier. The settlement at Harbottle itself could not of course fulfill that function because of its burghal status. By the end of the medieval period the settlement had declined to a single farm, Peels. The 1604 survey itemised the demesne lands on the north side of the Coquet as follows (1604 Survey, 105; see below, 7.2 Selected Sources and Surveys):

The easte parte conteyneth, being of the park, 200 acresShermington, sometymes a towneshippe, 820 acres

Only one freeholder, the miller John Wainebye, and no customary tenants were recorded at 'The Peale' (op. cit.,).Substantial earthworks appear directly in front of the present buildings at the hamlet, with more extensive earthworks surviving, despite having been ploughed in recent times, on grassland to the north, between the river and present hamlet. Dividing these earthworks from the hamlet is a road and linear depression which may be the remains of a hollow-way or part of a palaeo-channel, or even a mill race. The remains of a water-mill were situated at the east end of the hamlet.

6.6.7 Mills and QuarryThe 1245, 1308 and 1398 inquests indicate two mills were held by the Umfravilles in the liberty of Redesdale. Neither of these is named, but one probably occupied the same location as 'the mill of Harbottle', which is listed by the 1604 Border Survey (1604 Survey, 106; see below 7.2 Selected Sources and Surveys) as part of the demesne of the Manor of Harbottle. The miller is named as John Wainebye who 'holdeth one water corne mill standinge upon the water of the Cockatt' for which he paid an annual rent of £2.(op. cit.). Wainebye is also listed amongst the burgher freeholders, but, uniquely, is placed in 'The Peale' (i.e. Peels), rather than 'Harbotle Towne' like the other 15 burghers, and held one house and two acres of arable there (op. cit.). This, combined with the survival of the remains of a water-mill at the east end of Peels hamlet suggests that the Harbottle mill of the 1604 survey was actually located at Peels rather than Harbottle itself. This would in turn imply that the river formerly flowed closer to Peels than its present course does. The valley bottom is relatively wide and flat at this point and could therefore have lent itself to changes of course. Moreover an associated sunken channel or holloway which may represent a palaeochannel is still visible. However the Armstrong's map clearly indicates that the Coquet was flowing along its present channel by 1769.

The 1604 survey also mentions a quarry on Harbottle Crag, where Percival Pott claimed the customry right to quarry millstones on payment of the annual sum of £10 (op. cit., 105). Percival may himself have occupied a mill at Holystone (op. cit., 92). The quarry site can still be traced, with around 60 whole and broken roughouts remaining, plus sled tracks. Quarrying probably continued here up until the beginning of the 19th century.

6.6.8 ForestThe forest of Whilke Wood embracing 13360 acres (op. cit., 105) also formed part of the manorial demesne in 1604. This can be identified with the valley of Wilkwood Burn (the upper course of



Barrow Burn) in the moorland west of Harbottle and presumably represented a seigneurial hunting range. Four of the customary tenants in Alwinton township, known as the 'Fosters of the Forrest of Harbotle', were recorded as paying only a peppercorn yearly rent for their farms (1.5d), on account of the services they rendered in the forest, presumably as hereditary foresters (op. cit., 117).

6.7 Patterns of exploitation in upper Coquetdale

A summary of the archaeological evidence for medieval settlement in and exploitation of Redesdale and upper Coquetdale has been provided by Charlton and Day (1979). A good example of impact that the establishment of a baronial seat at Harbottle had on the wider environs of the village is provided by the substantial monastic development of the upland pastures in Upper Coquetdale. This monastic investment followed the granting by the Umfravilles of vast acreages in Kidland to the Cistercian Abbey of Newminster, near Morpeth, in the 12th-13th centuries (see fig. 54).

6.7.1 The Newminster ChartersThe stages by which Newminster acquired its lands, pasturage and other rights and properties in Kidland is meticulously documented in the Abbey's chartulary (NC 73-81; cf. NCH XV (1940), 449-50). The relevant documents are set out below:

1181 Odinel de Umfraville II leased to Newminster Abbey, the grazing in his forest of Alwent and Kidland 'with all its hills and valleys', for a term of 29 years, for which the monks payed 220 marks to Odinel, 3 marks to his wife, Alice, and 5 marks to his eldest son, Robert (NC 73-4). The monks' rights were tightly circumscribed. They had no power to lease grazing rights themselves. They could take what wanted from forest by order of the lord's foresters, but their dogs were to have one foot cut off to prevent them chasing the lord's game.

Bounder 1 - by the boundary of Bitlesden (Biddlestone township) as far as the boundary of Clenil (Clennell township), and thence by stream ('rivulum') of Kidland (Kidlandlee Dean) southward as far as the great road ('magnam viam') of Ernespeth (Yarnspeth stretch of Clennell Street), and by that road as far as the river/burn ('rivum') of Ernespeth (West Burn?), and by that burn to its very source, and eastward to the boundary of William de Vesci (baron of Alnwick - i.e. the boundary of his manor of Alnham), and so as far as the aforesaid boundary of Bitlesden'.

1184 Robert de Umfraville confirmed lease for 40 marks, following the death of Odinel (also confirmed by Richard and Gilbert - Robert's brothers) (NC 74).

pre-1195 William de Umfraville - a third brother - gave the abbey his land on the Cheviot moor called 'Witetowes' (NC 75):

Bounder 2 - from the stream (Well Clough??) nearer the Hangande-scauhe (Yarnspeth Law??) towards the north just as that same stream falls into the Osweiburne (Usway Burn), and thus directly west as far as the cross which the aforesaid monks set up in the sight of my knights ('per visum militum meorum') there; and from there across to the nearest stream bed from the southern part of Hetherdes Rode (Ward Law?), from there straight on beyond Hardrode as far as the great quarry (ad petariam magnam) lying on the slope and from that slope between the 'rastres of Scrothope' (Shorthope), and there by that Gruin (?) as far as the river bank of Rohope (Rowhope) and so in crossing just at the point the stream of Elyn (Wardlaw Burn or perhaps Trows Burn?) flows into the aforesaid river of Rohope and by that same stream of Elyn as far as the road of Hinclesheued (Clennell Street approaching the border), and by that same road up to Wyndihege (Windy Gyle), and by Wyndihege as much as I have there (i.e along the Scottish border) as far as the source of the Osweiburne and by that same river as far as the road of Hernespeth (Yarnspeth - Clennell Street) and by that same road as far as the first-named stream closer to Hangandescawe.



1195/1216 Richard de Umfraville gave Kidland and Alwenthopes to Newminster (NC 76). This represents the same area as covered by Odinell's lease:

Bounder 3 - from the cross which I made the aforesaid monks set as a boundary at the head of Halrehopeburne (Allerhope Burn) down that same Halrehope burne southwards into the Alewent (Alwin), as far as the point where Kidlandburne (Kidlandlee Dean) flows into the Alewent, and so westwards up that same Kidlandburne as far as the ditch ('fossatum') which the monks made as boundary between themselves and Thomas of Clenill, and so by that ditch as far 'in Redepeth' onto the great road of Ernespeth (Yarnspeth - Clennell Street), and so by that same road of Ernespeth as far as the river of Ernespeth (West Burn?), and so by the river itself as far as the head itself of the river of Ernespeth (Yarnspeth Law?), and so eastwards to the boundaries of Eustace de Vesci (baron of Alnwick), and by those same boundaries as far as Cousthotelau (Cushat Law) and so as far as Steng (Sting Head), and so midway between Holhopcriwes (Wholehope Hill?) and Blakedenhed (Black Butt?), and so across Frodesmor (Wether Cairn/Wholehope Hill) as far as the afrorenamed cross at Halrehopeheued.

1195/1226 Richard de Umfraville granted the abbey Scorthope, Fastside and Alribarns (NC 76):

Bounder 4 - from that spot where the near stream bed (Murder Cleugh?) from the southern part of Hetheredrode (Ward Law?) flows into Heppdenburne (Hepden Burn/Barrow Burn), and so descending by the Hepdenburne as far as that place where the streambed from middle Alribarnclou (Barrow Cleugh?) falls into Hepdenburne, and thus ascending by the same clough as far as the cross which I caused to be set up in Hardrode (Barrow Law?) on the boundary between between the aforesaid monks and Henry the crossbowman ('balistarius') and so towards the south as far as the cross placed above the Swire of Fastside (?), and so southwards by crosses as far as the Koket, where the cross is placed above the bank, and so ascending by the Koket as far as Ruhopeburne (Rowhope Burn) and so up the Ruhopeburne as far as that point where the stream of Slyn (Wardlaw Burn/Trows Burn?) flows into the aforesaid Ruhopeburne, and thence eastwards by the boundaries of Ruhoppe to the aforesaid nearer streambed from the southern part of Hetherederode.

pre 1226 Richard de Umfraville grants to the abbey all the land in Hepden (mod. Barrowburn) which was formerly held by Henry the crossbowman (NC 77), and which Richard had bought from Henry (NC 77-78):

Bounder 5 - from that place where the stream of Hepden flows into the Koket (Barrowburn) up as far as the most northerly Altriclou (Barrow Cleugh?) and from there across as far as Hardrode (Barrow Law?) and thence as far as the saddle beneath the Cundos (?) and from there descending by the hanging willows on Fastesyde (?) as far as the Koket.

post 1226 Henry the crossbowman (balistarius) confirmed grant by Gilbert de Umfraville I of all land in Hepden which Henry had sold to his former lord Richard de Umfraville for 54 marks - the sum was actually paid by the monastery - and which Richard had transferred to Newminster (NC 77-78).

1226/44 Gilbert de Umfraville I gave Turfhill or Tursill - the hill now called Shillhope Law - to Newminster (NC 55, 66, 78; cf. NCH XV (1940), 437):

Bounder 6 - By the stream of Hepden (mod. Hepden Burn/Barrow Burn) northwards as far across as Wndinfald (?), and so from Wndinfald across by the boundary of Fairhaluh (Fairhaugh township) to the Oswaiburne (Usway Burn) and so by the Oswaiburne to the shieling/lodge ('logia') formerly belonging to William Bataille, now to John of Letelwell



(Batailshiel), and thence by the Thestirclou (Lee Cleugh?) southwards to Koket (Coquet) and so by the Coket ascending to Hepdenburne mouth.

1226/44 Gilbert de Umfraville I also granted the monastery a licence to build a fulling mill with associated mill-pond (stagnum) on his land on the south side of the Coquet at Hepden (Barrowburn), between Hepden Burn mouth and Rowhope burn - licenciam faciendi et firmandi stagnum molendini sui fullonici apud Hepden super terram meum ex australi parte de Coket, inter Hepdenburnemuth et Ruthopeburn (NC 78).

1226/44 Gilbert de Umfraville I and wife, Theophania, quitclaimed hunting rights on Cheviot and Coquetdale moors, which previous grants had retained, for sake of his father's and his ancestor's souls. Henceforth it was not lawful for anyone except the monks to hunt wolves and foxes on this land (NC 79).

1270 Gilbert de Umfraville II confirmed all his predecessors' charters and remitted 18 marks/ annum rent which monks had paid. Since his accession the monks had paid a total of £160 in rent to Gilbert (NC 79-80).

late 12th C? Monks entered into agreement with neighbouring lords over the return of straying horses (Robert de Muschamp) and boundary lines (Geoffrey de Lucy) (NC 80).

1233 The abbey made an agreement with Thomas, rector of Alwinton, over payment of tithes from Upper Kidland (mod. Kidlandlee), Holehope (Wholehope), Apetreley, Elfenseth, Whiteburne (White Burn), Ruhope (Rowhope) and their members Hernispeth (mod. Yarnspeth), Heppeden (mod. Barrowburn) and Turfhil (Shillhope Law) (NC 81).

(various dates) Newminster obtained grants of way-leave for their servants, flocks and herds on road to Kidland from all neighbouring landowners (NC, passim; NCH XV (1940), 450).

6.7.2 DiscussionThe boundaries of the various grants given above are simply those considered most likely. Many of the names given in the charters cannot be firmly identified with modern features and toponyms so other interpretations are possible. Indeed it is hoped that plotting out the record of the charters in this way will stimulate further discussion and hopefully perhaps field evaluation.

Something of the scale of investment the monasteries were putting into the Coquetdale uplands in the 12th and 13th centuries can be gauged from these and other documents. From the inquest post mortem for Gilbert de Umfraville I in 1245 we learn that the monks of Newminster had a grange in Rowhope (CalDocScot i, no.1667). Given the proximity of the fulling mill, which the Cistercians were permitted by Gilbert to build a little further down stream at Hepden (Barrowburn), it is tempting to see these installations as part of an integrated operation, with the fleeces from flocks shorn at the grange being processed at the fulling mill. The manner in which the Abbey and the Umfravilles marked their boundaries where there were no natural or pre-existing man-made features such as burns and roads is clearly evinced in the charters, with references to a ditch ( fossatum) dug by the monks of Newminster (bounder 3) and several mentions of crosses (bounders 2 and 4), including the manner in which these were erected in front of representatives from both parties ('ad crucem quam praedicti monachi posuerunt per visum militum meorum ibi' - bounder 2). Also hinted at is the continuing uncertainty, in the later 12th century, regarding the actual line of the border with Scotland along the high Cheviot ridges, expressed in William de Umfraville's cautious phrase 'as much as belongs to me there' (bounder 2 - cf. Barrow 1966, 38). It is likely that use of the Kidland pastures was largely on a seasonal basis, reflected in the numerous way-leaves the abbey negotiated with neighbouring landowners to enable its servants, flocks and herds to make the long journey in late springtime from



the monastery's lowland granges and estates,19 returning as autumn approached. In undertaking this transhumance, the herdsmen and livestock will inevitably have passed beneath the towering walls of Harbottle Castle, before dispersing into the different tributary hopes of upper Coquetdale.

Smaller areas had already been granted to individuals, the chief tenants or followers of the Umfravilles, men like William Bataille, whose logia (shieling) has given its name to present-day Batailshiel, John of Letelwell and Henry the Crossbowman, whose holding was purchased by the monks through Richard de Umfraville c. 1226. These individuals doubtless exploited the uplands as the Umfravilles themselves did, either by grazing their own stock on the pasture or by leasing it out to the ordinary tenants of the liberty and the ten townships who made use of the uplands through regular seasonal transhumance. The importance of pastoralism in the economy of the liberty is well-demonstrated by the figures given in Gilbert de Umfravilles inquest post mortem in 1245 (CalDocScot i, no.1667), where the lord was said to have held pasture for 1140 sheep, pasture for mares worth 12l, and 1400 acres of cattle pasture - or perhaps pasture for 1400 cattle. Later inquisitions refer to the existence of vaccaries (cattle farms) and berveries (sheep farms) held in demesne (Cal IPM v no. 47 - 1308; vii, no.208 - 1330; see below 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys no. 2), and the Umfravilles were already rearing horses on the pastures of Cottonshope in upper Redesdale in the later 12th century (Liber de Calchou; reproduced by Hodgson 1827, 15-18). The vaccaries and berveries, too, were doubtless situated in many of the hopes of upper Coquetdale and upper Redesdale, though, regrettably, the inquisitions do not identify the location of any of these seigneurial ranches. Explicit evidence for seasonal, pastoralist transhumance by the tenantry of the two valleys is hard to find before the later-medieval era, but it may be inferred from the agistment valuations (i.e. the sums payed for grazing rights) recorded for the upland hopes in the inquisitions post mortem of the Umfraville lords (Cal IPM v, no.47; vii, no.390; below, 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys nos. 2, 4), and in placename evidence (Batailshiel, Davyshiel and Garretshiel), the latter suggesting that the practice pre-dated the later 13th century. Indeed it is likely that the late-springtime journey, with livestock, from permanent valley-bottom settlement to high pasture had a long history amongst the communities of Coquetdale and Redesdale20.

The motivation of the Umfravilles in such extensive awards to Newminster were doubtless mixed. In part they were probably concerned to benefit their souls and reduce their term in purgatory, which the grateful prayers of the monks could help to secure, as reflected in the conventional expressions of piety in the documents. Odinel de Umfraville may well have been partially motivated by a realisation of impending mortality when he made the first of 'grants', but it is clear that transaction was essentially a straightforward lease, for which the Abbey had to pay a considerable sum - 228 marks in 1181, with a further 40 marks to Odinel's heir in 1184 to confirm the lease. Later grants by Richard, William and then Gilbert de Umfraville I appear more generous. Gilbert de Umfraville in particular, expresses direct concern for the soul of his father, Richard, and his other ancestors, when he gives the monks exclusive the hunting rights on the Cheviot and Coquetdale moors, which the Umfravilles had reserved to themselves in previous grants. However, in his confirmation of his predecessors grants, in 1270, Gilbert de Umfraville II reveals that up until that date the Umfravilles were still receiving a significant sum - 18 marks - every year from the monastery for the use of the Kidland pastures (NC 79-80). For the Umfravilles the transfer of pasturage rights to the monastery was perhaps an ideal, albeit indirect means of exploiting the upland tracts of their liberty, enabling them to benefit from the energetic, well-managed agricultural endeavour and investment which the monastery could provide. The rental brought in a steady income, with occasional opportunities for lump sum payments in the form of further 'grants' or fees for reconfirmation of previous agreements, without involving the lord in the trouble and expense of having to manage the sheep and cattle farming himself. Over time the petitions of the abbey would have helped to bring about a gradual increase in the extent of the grants and the privileges attached to them and a relaxation in their financial terms, but until the later 13th

19 These may have included Filton and Tolland beside Dere Street in the barony of Prudhoe, which were also the result of Umfraville grants to Newminster - cf. NC 63ff; CalDocScot i, no.1667 -1245.20 For a more detailed discussion of the documentary evidence relationg to pastoralism, transhumance and the seigneurial vaccaries/berveries of Redesdale and Coquetdale see Rushworth 1996, 11-13. Cf. also Ramm et al. 1970; Charlton & Day 1979 and McDonnell 1988.



century, at least, the Umfravilles must have found their dealings with Newminster financially as well as spiritually beneficial.

The security provided by the castle at Harbottle, newly fortified under Henry II, and clearly intended henceforth to serve as the caput of the lordship, may have been an important factor in stimulating monastic interest in developing the uppermost reaches of Coquetdale. Certainly there is a notable contrast between the extent of monastic holdings in upper Coquetdale and Redesdale. Though each valley had its own, small, religious establishment - the Benedictine nunnery at Holystone and the hospital at Elishaw - Redesdale attracted little interest on the part of external monastic houses to compare with Newminster's extensive pastures in Kidland and the Cheviot moors. The sum total, in fact, is restricted to the carucate (100 acres of ploughland) held by Jedburgh Abbey in Troughend (Liber Feodorum ii, 1122 - AD 1242), and the grant, to Kelso Abbey, of a tithe of the foals from the Cottonshope stud range, made by Odinel de Umfraville in the later 12th century and confirmed by his successors (Liber de Calchou; reproduced by Hodgson 1827, 15-18).

6.8 Harbottle and the impact of Border warfare, 1300-1600

The defence of the border did become an major issue during the reign of Henry II, at the time Harbottle Castle was either first constructed or perhaps first rebuilt, at least partially, in stone. However for most of the 12th and 13th centuries, Anglo-Scottish relations were on the whole good, particularly under Henry I, when the Umfraville liberty was probably first created, and after 1237 when the status of Northumbria was finally settled. At these times it is likely that the imposition of baronial authority and firm policing in the uplands were seen as more relevant roles for strongholds like Harbottle Castle. Order does appear to have been effectively imposed in Redesdale and Coquetdale during in this period. This long period of peace and prosperity undoubtedly provides the context for the foundation and growth of the borough community below the castle.

The period after 1300 witnessed prolonged periods of warfare between the two countries, beginning with Edward I's attempt to conquer Scotland. Moreover this warfare gradually undermined the maintenance of local law and order so that by the 15th and 16th centuries the problems of local policing were increasingly absorbing the attention of the officers of the Middle March in their headquarters at Harbottle. Equally disastrous for the maintenance of order in the Northumbrian liberties was the weak lordship which was a side-effect of the prolonged warfare. This was especially severe in Tynedale which had formerly been held by the Scottish kings and now went through a rapid succession of largely absentee landowners. In a franchise like Tynedale or Redesdale this was especially problematic since the enforcement of law and order depended on the initiative of the lord, rather than on permanent royal officials such as the sheriff or justices of eyre. The fortunes of the Umfraville lineage declined during these years as a result of the loss of their Scottish lands, the large debts incurred trying to recover them and a series of expensive widow's dowers (Tuck 1971, 32-33; 1985, 49-50; 1986, 7-8, 11-2). After the last earl of Angus, Gilbert III, had transferred the most important part of his estate, the barony of Prudhoe, to the Percies on his death in 1381 (Tuck 1986, 11-2), the Umfravilles were reduced to the level of little more than local gentry, and this may have affected their ability to maintain order. However they were at least present in the valley for much of the time and the long distinguished service of Sir Robert de Umfraville on the border, during the early 15th century provided an important stabilising factor. After 1436, however, when Umfraville line was extinguished and the liberty of Redesdale with its base at Harbottle came into the possession of the Tailbois lineage, Redesdale too will have suffered from largely absentee lordship. Increasingly the burden of providing both border defence and rural policing fell on the crown in the 15th-16th centuries, as the castle's two roles had merged into one overiding concern. This was finally formalised in 1546 when Henry VIII took the Redesdale liberty, including Harbottle, into the crown's hands, exchanging it for other lands with the sister and heir of lord Tailbois, Elizabeth, wife of Thomas Wymbysche of Lincolnshire (NCH XV (1940), 476).



The fortunes of Harbottle in the later medieval era was thus affected by a combination of the fortunes of war and the fate of its baronial proprietors as well as wider social and economic conditions, not to mention climatic fluctuations and epidemiological characteristics. One has only to compare the immense sums poured into the modernisation of the strongholds of Alnwick and Warkworth by the Percies, or Raby, by the Nevilles, the new magnate lineages which established themselves on the Border in the 14th century at the expense of the long-established lordships like the Umfravilles, to realise how much the fate of Harbottle was tied in with that of its lords.

Whilst all Northumberland's boroughs experienced declining fortunes in the 14th and 15th centuries, boroughs in the western parts of the county, like Harbottle, experienced greater relative decline than Newcastle, Morpeth and Alnwick, strung out along the Great North Road in the coastal plain (Lomas 1996, 88, 93).

Harbottle was directly involved in Border warfare on several occasions. The castle was besieged and taken by William the Lion in 1174 (Benedict i, 65), During the first Scottish War of Independence, it was assaulted on only two occasions, in 1296, unsuccessfully (Hemingburgh 277; Holinshed Chron. ii, 299; Cal. Close Rolls 1288-96, 493), and in 1318, when it was taken by Bruce (Chron. de Lanercost 235; Chron. de Melsa ii, 335; Scalachronica 60). These events doubtless caused considerable damage and disruption in the adjacent borough and neighbouring villages, as the Scottish forces plundered the area roundabout for provisions, but they were relatively rare events and probably less important in the long run than a number of other factors.

For much of the 14th century the castle was apparently in a state of disrepair, as a result of its capture by Robert the Bruce in 1318 (Chron. de Lanercost 235; Chron. de Melsa ii, 335; Scalachronica 60). Some of the buildings may have been rendered habitable, but it is likely the defences were in poor condition - derelict or dismantled. In 1335/36, Gilbert de Umfraville III reported that the damage to the castle was still so severe that there was not a single building (meson) in which prisoners, taken in the franchise of Redesdale, could be securely kept, as they had from time immemorial. This probably signifies that none of the mural towers or the keep was sound enough to use as for the purpose. However Harbottle probably served as a base for military operations by Sir Robert de Umfraville in 1399 and 1400 (cf. Hodgson 1827, 48-9; Ridpath 1848, 254), suggesting the castle was serviceable by this stage (Rushworth & Carlton 1998, 43). Sir Robert was certainly authorised to carry out repair work in 1432 (Cal. Pat. Rolls. 1429-36, 219, 328), and by 1438, after the castle had passed into Tailbois' ownership, the keep ('dungeon') was fit to house the constable, Roger Widdrington, and his household (Northumb. & Durham Deeds, 222, no.8). Thereafter a royal garrison was maintained in the castle and essential repairs were occasionally carried out. Work at the king's expense was in progress in 1519, for example (Colvin et al. 1975, 253). Expenditure on such repairs, on the maintenance of the castle garrison and the salaries of the Border officialdom - constables, keepers of Redesdale and Wardens of the Middle March periodically resident - may have provided some boost to the prosperity of the community at Harbottle.

A fascinating glimpse of the role of Harbottle as the headquarters of the Middle March is provided by the records preserved at the Public Record Office. These have been collated in the multiple volumes of the Letters and Papers of the reign of Henry VIII (LP Hen VIII) and the Calendar of State Papers (Cal SP), covering the reigns of Henry's successors, and in the two volume Calendar of Border Papers (CBP) assembled by Bain in 1894/96. A synopsis and discussion of this material particularly as it relates to the the history of Harbottle Castle is provided by Rushworth & Carlton (1998). Whereas the Border Papers cover the period between 1560-1603 and concern many exchanges relating directly to the castle rather than correspondence sent from it, which is the main focus of the State Papers series.21 Particularly significant is the material relating to the tenure of Lord Dacre, lieutenant of the East and Middle Marches and keeper of Redesdale and Tynedale between 1509-25, which accounts for the bulk of the 52 pieces of correspondence signed from Harbottle amongst the

21 52 out of 66 pieces of correspondence mentioning Harbottle between 1509 and 1527 fall into this category.



State Papers. The majority of Dacre's letters concern Scottish political affairs, rather than Border policing and it is evident that Dacre saw himself and his office as central to policy making in the Borders.

Repeated repair and reconstruction programmes are recorded at Harbottle Castle during the 16th century, in 1519, 1546-51 and 1568. By 1538 it is described as, " the chief strength of the Border of the Middle Marches, which is not habitable" (LP Hen VIII). The subsequent programme which began in 1546 probably involved the castle's reconstruction as an artillery fortress. Little work appears to have been carried out after 1568, however, and the extensive fabric rapidly decayed. Moreover security throughout the Border districts seems to have worsened as Elizabeth's reign progressed, with survey after survey proclaiming the need for more troops and repairs. In this context, Ellis (1995a & b), has highlighted the impact on Border security of Tudor reforms within provincial government, from 1534 onwards. These were aimed at creating an increasingly centralised government and more accountable periphery , by replacing the militarily powerful, Border magnates with a loyal 'service aristocracy' drawn from the local gentry. Whilst this policy may well have served the interests of the Tudor state, it failed to address the problems of maintaining security in the borders, which powerful magnates, like Dacre, alone had been able to provide, by relying upon their own tenantry to make up the deficiencies in royal garrisons and fortresses and implementing coordinated policies to sustain and expand that tenantry as far as possible (Ellis 1995a, 89-106). This was particularly necessary because the government proved increasingly unwilling to furnish substantial sums for garrisons and fortifications on any but a very sporadic basis (Colvin et al. 1982, 610-3). In the last analysis it seems that, however many appeals and reports they received from their officials on the border, court centred politicians had great difficulty in understanding the different realities and requirements of the border society. This tension underlies the history of Harbottle and its environs throughout the mid-late 16th century.

6.9 Upper Coquetdale –1700 – 2000

6.9.1 BackgroundThe term “Upper Coquetdale” is usually taken to signify the portion of the valley of the river Coquet and its tributaries lying between the source of the river in the hills along the Scottish border and the town of Rothbury. For the purposes of the Historic Atlas project, this terminology produces some difficulties as only part of this geographical area lies within the Northumberland National Park. The town of Rothbury lies to the north and east of the boundary of the Park which itself runs south of the river Coquet near Great Tosson. The river only becomes part of the Park a few hundred metres west of Hepple, where for several miles it forms the eastern boundary of Park from this point northwards to the farm of Angryhaugh. At Angryhaugh the Park boundary swings eastwards and the whole of the Coquet valley northwards is contained within the National Park.

Historically, the whole area of upper Coquetdale was contained within the parish of Alwinton and the extra-parochial district of Kidland, but this integrity has been destroyed by the Park boundary. Although all of Kidland, an ancient Lordship, is contained within the Park, areas of the valley formerly linked to the villages of Alwinton, Harbottle and Holystone are now outside the boundary of the Park. At the same time, two families, the Selbys and the Fenwicke-Clennells, owned much of the land in the upper Coquet valley, in the period 1700 to 2000. Neither of these families reside in the valley at the present time, nor have they left significant records from which to reconstruct details of estate management, both of which omissions present problems for the historian. The survey which follows is thus limited in its scope and suggests that much still needs to be done before a detailed account of the economic and social life of this area of the Northumberland National Park can be written.

6.9.2 Communications and economyAlthough the northern boundaries of Alwinton and Kidland lay along the border with Scotland, unlike North Tynedale and Redesdale, there was no direct road through the Coquet valley into Scotland. A



number of drove roads, such as the Street, crossed the Border and permitted cattle and sheep to be driven down the Coquet valley into England, but these did not constitute a permanent highway. The only road that followed the river from Alwinton to Makendon, the last farm in the northern part of the valley, finally led over the watershed into the neighbouring Rede valley. The status of this road was simply a track that crossed and re-crossed the river on a number of occasions as it went steadily northwards. In addition, there were no bridges at these crossing points and travellers simply had to ford the river, a process not helped by the Coquet’s propensity to rise rapidly following rain in the hills making passage of the river very dangerous. Progress of goods and people up and down the valley was limited and Barrowburn, where one of the major fords was located, became a dropping-off point for many trades people. Goods would be left at this farm to be collected by residents in the upper part of the valley at times which were convenient for the purchasers and when the river could be safely crossed.

This situation began to change in 1881 when a new bridge was erected across the Alwin, near to Alwinton, by public subscription. This bridge was adopted by the County Council and permitted access to the valley as far as Linbriggs where the first of the fords was encountered. Further work on the road and bridges did not take place until the 1930s, when road improvements were carried out and a bridge constructed at Linbriggs. No further work took place until after the Second World War when, in the 1950s, concrete beam bridges were installed that carried the road to the northern end of the valley, where final small bridges were built at Makendon and Fulhope in 1968. Even with these improvements, local people remember that goods were left at Barrowburn for collection up until the early 1970s! Another important feature of the Coquet valley was the absence of any railway development. Rothbury was the nearest railway station to the upper valley and access to it was subject to the same problems that afflicted the transport of goods and livestock in general.

Such limited means of communication meant that travel to and from much of upper Coquetdale was limited. Although stock wagons might reach the farms if the weather was good, droving continued to be the usual method of sending stock to market until the second half of the twentieth century. In many ways, this was not a major problem as farming in upper Coquetdale was limited to the production of cattle and sheep and wool. There was very limited cultivation of grain and root crops and, on the few farms where this did take place, it was strictly for home consumption and not for sale. Purchases of grain and fodder crops were also limited so that there was little need for extensive transportation of agricultural goods.

Beyond agriculture, there was virtually no other economic activity in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. There were limited coal deposits in the valley of the Wilkwood burn lying to the east of Harbottle and Holystone, but these were only mined for purely local sales and employed only a small number of miners. Because of the limited numbers of employees and sales, this activity receives no mention in nineteenth century directories of trades in the area. The only trades that are mentioned are those usually connected with rural village life – shop keepers, innkeepers, cobblers, stonemasons and estate workers such as agents and gamekeepers.

Although there may have been some visitors to the upper Coquet valley for the purposes of shooting and other field sports, the absence of game books and other evidence from the local estates means that this type of activity cannot be quantified. Tourists probably penetrated as far as the villages of Harbottle, Holystone and Alwinton in Victorian times, but the absence of a road system to the upper valley probably meant there were few visitors other than the most intrepid walkers before the second half of the twentieth century. At this point, the advent of travel by private motor car for greater numbers of people than previously increased the number of tourists to the area. Local sources suggest that many of these visitors were from other parts of Northumberland, for example the mining districts of the county, rather than from other parts of the UK or overseas. Even this trade dipped in the 1980s and early 1990s, but has since recovered.

Such a resurgence is to be welcomed as a result of the decline in the number of farms in the valley and the loss of employment opportunities that has been characteristic of upper Coquetdale as much as



North Tynedale and Redesdale in the twentieth century. During the late nineteenth century, farms and estates in upper Coquetdale had been affected by the depression in prices for both wool and sheep meat. As far as can be determined from the limited evidence available, prices and rentals decreased in a comparable manner to those experienced in the neighbouring valleys. Thus, there was little resistance from some of the landowners when the Army offered to purchase property to form part of the new artillery training area for which land in the Rede valley was also being purchased. In the case of one estate, that belonging to the Selby family, it was already being offered for sale due to massive financial problems faced by the owner. In consequence, the Army was able to purchase over 12 000 acres of upper Coquetdale for military purposes. Although this did not lead to an immediate loss of work in farming, the way was paved for the future.

In a similar manner to the experience of North Tynedale and Redesdale, farming in Coquetdale also suffered from a further collapse in prices in the 1920s and 1930s. Although this produced some loss of jobs as labour was reduced on farms, the eventual outcome was the sale of some parts of the valley to the Forestry Commission. Tree planting followed, particularly in the period 1950 to 1970, resulting in substantial areas of woodland around Uswayford, in Kidland and to the west and south of Harbottle. Initially the replacement of sheep farming by afforestation created alternative employment for those who would have formerly worked in agriculture. However, the development of mechanical aids for forest work and the increasing use of contractors, rather than labour directly employed labour by the Commission, has resulted in rural depopulation and an increasing need for alternative work. This has increasingly taken the form of work in the tourist industry, but the shortness of the season has meant that there are only a small number of seasonal jobs that has only reduced the loss of population, not stemmed it.

In order to understand the changes that have taken place in the valley, the history of four areas of upper Coquetdale will be briefly examined. These are the Lordship of Kidland and the three principal settlements of Alwinton, Harbottle and Holystone.

6.9.3 KidlandKidland originally formed the north-eastern part of the parish of Alwinton which was part of the Lordship of Redesdale in the eleventh century. However, it was detached from the parish in the twelfth century when it was leased to the monks of the Abbey of Newminster by members of the Umfraville family, who held the Lordship at that time. Eventually the family gifted the whole area, amounting to some 17 000 acres, to the monks who used it principally for summer upland grazing.

With the outbreak of the wars with Scotland at the end of the thirteenth century, the whole of Kidland became open to incursion by the Scots and the monks were forced to abandon using it. In consequence, when the Abbey of Newminster was suppressed in 1536 as part of the dissolution of the monasteries, the land was valued as worth nothing as there was no resident population and no livestock upon it and it passed into Crown ownership.

This situation continued into the seventeenth century as the Survey of Debatable Lands of 1604 reported that the area continued to be untenanted and that it was only used for summer grazing by those who could stock it free of all rent. In 1623, James I granted the whole of Kidland to James Maxwell, Earl of Dirleton, who, by 1630, was paying rent of £100 for the property. In order to make Kidland pay, the Earl appears to have begun to divide it up into farms which could be leased to rent paying tenants. Despite the fact that the property changed hands a number of times in the seventeenth century, the process of enclosure continued until Kidland was divided into eight or nine farms by the late eighteenth century with a rental valued in 1800 at £3000. By this stage, three-quarters of Kidland was owned by a Yorkshire family, the Legards, whose head, Sir Thomas Digby Legard, purchased the remaining quarter in 1841.

The Legards retained ownership of all of Kidland for only a short time before selling it to the second Earl of Durham in 1867. During the Earl’s ownership, the estate was surveyed by the Ordnance Survey, who reported that its true extent was only 11 800 acres. The Earl and his second son, who



inherited the estate in 1879, both used it for shooting purposes as well as leasing out the farms to sheep farmers. With a total rental of only about £2000, the estate was once more offered for sale and in 1890 was purchased by the Leyland family who owned Haggerston Castle and its surrounding estate. The Leyland’s policy was to use the estate for shooting and to this end built a large mansion for their personal accommodation. Unlike their predecessors, they did not lease all of the farms, but ran them as sheep farms managed by shepherds who were under the direct control of members of the Leyland family. This policy was successful for a time, boosted no doubt by the high prices paid for lamb and wool during the First World War. However, as prices slumped in the 1920s and the family was forced to pay death duties on their enormous properties, the Leylands were forced to put the estate up for sale once more. When the property was eventually sold in 1925, the estate was broken up among a number of new proprietors. Although they did their best to make their holdings pay, several of them sold out by 1950 to the Forestry Commission. Thus today, most of Kidland, all of which lies within the Northumberland National Park, has been planted with trees and the population, which had reached 79 by 1921, has diminished to less than 20.

6.9.4 Holystone and Harbottle These two settlements will be dealt with together because their histories are intertwined. Initially, Harbottle was the centre of the Lordship of Redesdale after it was removed from Elsdon in the twelfth century. However, with the decline in the status of the Lordship after the seventeenth century, the Chapelry of Holystone, with its five associated townships, became the more prominent description of the area surrounding the two villages. Most of the chapelry, with the exception of some land on the east bank of the Coquet forming part of the two townships of Holystone and Harbottle, is contained within the boundary of the Northumberland National Park.

Ownership of the land in these two townships, as well as in the three others, Barrow, Dueshill and Linsheels, was dominated by the same three families in Alwinton, although there were also a number of other, smaller proprietors. Of the three largest estate owners, the Fenwicke-Clennells appear to have been the greatest with their seat at Harbottle. Their estates had belonged to the Clennell family until the early nineteenth century when they passed to the Fenwickes through a surviving female line. The new owners changed their name to Fenwicke-Clennell in recognition of their good fortune.

Of the two principal settlements, Harbottle was the larger. Bulmer’s Directory of 1886 lists Harbottle as having ten retail businesses and two inns, while Holystone boasts only six businesses and a single inn. Outside these villages, the principal occupation was farming. Thus, the economic pattern described for the Alwinton townships applies to the Holystone ones as well. Agriculture dominated until after the First World War, some land having been taken for the Army ranges immediately before the War. Subsequently, land was purchased for forestry, more land was sold to the Army and the number of farms declined. Although the main landed proprietors, other than the Selbys, continued to operate their estates into the second half of the twentieth century, they were ultimately forced to sell out. More land than in the Alwinton townships was retained in private hands and a number of new estate owners, for example the Renwicks at Holystone and the Beavans at Linsheels, appeared on the scene in the twentieth century. They helped to retain some employment and continued local traditions from the past, for example Major Renwick’s support for the Coquetdale Coursing Club before and after he Second World War, but they have inevitably had to relinquish land in the face of adverse economic conditions.

These conditions have had effects elsewhere. Holystone no longer has a shop, nor an inn, while Harbottle has fewer shops than in the past and only a single hostelry. As in Alwinton, hopes for the future tend to be centred on tourism or a an influx of commuters to the villages whose incomes are derived from sources outside the valley, but whose spending may cause an upturn in the local economy.

6.10 Harbottle from 1600 to the present day



The 1604 Border Survey provides the clearest overview of Harbottle in the late 16th and early 17th centuries (see below, 7.2 Selected Sources and Surveys). There were still 15 burger freeholders in 1604, who paid much the same sum as the burghers had always done. Their built property consisted of 23 houses and three outhouses. However it is likely that the centuries of disruption and turmoil had taken their toll on the fortunes of the community. The settlement apparently no longer merited the title a market town, although that the weekly Tuesday market, which certainly still existed in 1495, apparently continued into the 19th century (Bulmer 1887, 736). Nor does the survey make any mention of the annual fair, although the fairground at west end of the village is marked on the earliest available detailed maps and two annual fairs are recorded by Parson & White’s trade directory in 1827 (Parson & White 1827, 475), so this may in fact have been maintained throughout the period. The township of Shirmondesden had declined to an even greater extent, as documented by the 1604 survey (where it is labelled Shermington and Charington):

Charington sometymes a township and nowe used as demeane to Harbottle and therin valued (1604 Survey, 117, cf. also 105)

By this time the township appears to have consisted of a single farmstead or hamlet, Peels, where the miller and burgher freeholder, John Wainbye had a house and 2 acre plot of land (op. cit., 91, 106). Presumably the actual cultivation or grazing of the former township's 820 acres was leased out to neighbouring farmers, yielding £41 per annum according to the 1604 survey (op. cit., 105).

Documents relating to the castle available for the last two decades of the 16th century show it was in a state of continuing decay, brought about by neglect of the structure, although a garrison continued to be stationed there, with 20 fresh horsemen arriving, for example, in March 1596 (CBP; 13 March 1596, no. 234). Precisely when the castle was abandoned is unclear, though its appearance in 1604 as "an old castle, much decayed" (1604 Survey, 105), suggests not only that no repairs had been carried out recently, but that some robbing may already have commenced by that time. The Union of the Crowns in 1603 had finally made such border fortifications redundant and James I granted the manor of Harbottle to George, Lord Home of Berwick. Perhaps the last occasion that Harbottle fulfilled its old role as headquarters of the Middle March, occurred on the eve of the Civil War in 1639. Sir Jacob Astley wrote from there to Secretary Windebank in that year (Cal SP, Dom. 1638-39; cited by Hunter Blair 1932-34, 224):

At Harbottle the bordermen, about 150, came to me to present their services for His Majesty’s use, much desiring to have arms for their money to defend themselves; they were all short and broad-shouldered men , with broad swords and blue capes (or caps) all upon little nags; they are fit for times of war to burn and spoil and there is good use to be made of them. Mr Roger Widdrington holds them all at his command, and is entirely for his Majesty’s services.

The castle, demesne, park, tithes and water mill of Harbottle, and 23 burgages and three closes in the settlement, had come into the possession of Roger Widdrington of Cartington in 1635-7 (NCH XV (1940), 477). Widdrington subsequently built himself a new mansion, also called 'Harbottle Castle', at the east end of the village. This probably occurred soon after he acquired the manor. In 1655, John Rushworth and John Brownell purchased the manor house and desmesne lands of Harbottle with a corn mill and fulling mill from the parliamentary commissioners, Robert's heir, Sir Edward Widdrington, having forfeited the land as a royalist in 1650. This would imply the hall was built between 1635-1650 and it is unlikely there was any building work whilst the Civil War was in progress. Elements of this 17th-century house are said to survive within the Dobson exterior of 1829 [16]. The old castle, already in serious decay, may well have used as a quarry for the building stone. Analysis of the map evidence suggests that construction of the new hall on its present site swallowed up a large chunk of the borough's land, but the Widdringtons may have found willing sellers amongst the local freeholders. Moreover the return of a resident gentry lineage may have been provided some compensation and a boost to the local economy.



There are no detailed maps recording Harbottle in the 18 th century. Armstrong’s map (fig. 57) makes it clear the village had a similar layout in 1769 to that of the present settlement, with the Clennell’s mansion occupying the east end of the site, the ruined castle to the north. The village itself lined either side of the road which ran up the valley from Holystone to Alwinton, standing at the point where the road bent sharply round from south to west, just as today. Another track – again lined by buildings –branched off the main route and proceded eastwards, past the Clennells’ hall, to cross the Coquet by means of a ford and thence continued towards Peels and other outlying farmsteads.

The Militia List of 1762 (figs. 28-9) records nine able bodied adult males in Harbottle Constabulary, in addition to the petty constable. These men pursued a wide variety of trades, showing that the village was the commercial and service centre for the surrounding neighbourhood rather than a purely agricultural settlement, a legacy, perhaps of its earlier status as a borough. These tradesmen included an innkeeper, a tailor, a couple of weavers, a cooper and his wheelwright, a shovelmaker and another wheelwright, with a hind servant making up the numbers. In Peels Constabulary, or township, seven men were listed besides the petty constable. These pursued a more restricted and agriculturally biased range of trades, with two servants, a barnman and a husbandman residing there, along with a smith, a tailor and the miller (the latter demonstrating that the water mill at Peels was still functioning in this period).

A Presbyterian congregation, then known as ‘The Protestant Dissenting Congregation of Harbottle’, was first established in the village in about the year 1713 (Dixon 1903, 198). It numbered 250 in 1717 when it was known as the Coquetwater congregation (NCH XV (1940), 468). David Dippie Dixon has provided a detailed summary of the history of this congregation, including many primary 18th-century records (1903, 198-212). The original meeting house was a converted dwelling house which stood on the site of Cherry Tree Cottage [43]. Parson and White’s directory for 1827 records that a proper chapel was built in the village in 1756 (Parson & White 1827, 475) and this is supported by the contemporary documentation recorded and reproduced by Dixon (1903, 198-200). The 1756 meeting house ‘was a plain, square building, with a thatched roof, having eight windows and two doorways in the south front, according to the usual “Meeting-house” style of architecture in vogue at that period’. This typically austere 18th century non-conformist chapel was – equally typically – replaced by a much more ‘churchified’ edifice [34], in 1854 (see Ryder, below).

Nonconformist Churches in the Northumberland National ParkBy P F Ryder

There are only three nonconformist churches within the Park, all formerly Presbyterian (and now United Reformed Church), making it a sharp contrast to the Pennine Dales thirty miles to the south where virtually every hamlet had either a Wesleyan or Primitive Methodist Chapel, and frequently both. None of the three buildings are of outstanding architectural merit, but chronologically they are spaced out through the 19 th century, and are each very typical of their era. Birdhopecraig of 1826 is very much an archetypal nonconformist meeting house; it could equally well have been an urban Wesleyan chapel. Well-built but plain, it is very much a Georgian ‘preaching box’ with a gallery sweeping around three sides and a hipped roof. It survives relatively unaltered, except for one very typical 20th-century change; the rear part of the gallery, the seating that it offered long surplus to requirements, has been partitioned off to form a separate room. Then comes Harbottle of 1854, now disused. It is not clear whether anything of the internal arrangements survive, but externally this is a building that looks much more like a church; the form is still a simple rectangle but the style is the popular lancet-Gothic, not particularly scholarly, in vogue across the whole country, relatively plain but with exuberant touches in a bell-cote-like turret on one end and a spiky finials on the other.

Finally, Falstone combines the contrasting aspirations of Georgian and High Victorian nonconformity, chaste functionality and prosperous display. The original 1807 preaching box was very much a typical Georgian independent chapel (cf. Glanton) in having a



characteristic elevation in which two larger arched windows flanked the pulpit, and originally had a vertical pair of smaller windows to each side, lighting the spaces above and below the galleries. In 1876 it was remodelled to suit current taste, and to give more of the impression of being a church. The interior was turned round to face one end – admittedly west rather than the Anglican east – rather than the side, and a porch-cum-tower with some quirky architectural detail added, topped by a spire. The galleries were done away with. Later still came 20th-century changes, again typical throughout nonconformity, the altar replaced the pulpit as the central liturgical focus, and declining numbers allowed the rear part of the interior to be partitioned off, like the back of the gallery at Birdhopecraig, to provide a separate room for social functions, or small meetings..

From the beginning of the 19th century the development of the settlement can be traced in detail using the map evidence and sources such as the enclosure and tithe awards and printed directories. Many of the village's present buildings were constructed during the late 18th-early 19th centuries, (see below). This may have been responsible for further robbing of the castle, but the majority of the settlement’s standing structures appear to have been built of more recently quarried stone composed of large, even, finely-dressed blocks of pale, biscuit-coloured sandstone, and any use of the ruins as a quarry had certainly ceased by c. 1830 when Hodgson's sketch shows the remains in much the same state as they survive today. The hall [16] was completely rebuilt in an austere classical style by John Dobson for Thomas Clennell in 1829 (fig. 43).22 Comparison of the 1806 survey and the 1st edition Ordnance Survey (figs. 17 & 23) shows that the rebuilt house occupies the same site as its predecessor and indeed adopts a very similar plan in outline, giving some credence to the idea that the building may preserve elements of its earlier fabric within the Dobson casing. The other buildings in the surrounding grounds – the stables [48], the Garden Cottage [35], the icehouse [36], the ‘kennels’23 and the old greenhouse and potting sheds – were probably belong to the same episode and may well also have been built by Dobson or by his Office. Much of the village may have been rebuilt at the same time (Grundy 1988, 178). Many of its buildings – for example Border House[41], Waterloo House [45], Wayside [57], Hernspeth [58] and New Hall [37], as well as Garden Cottage and the stables mentioned previously – exhibit similar architectural details, notably the curious square finial at the top of the gable, which is characteristic of Dobson’s work on estate ancillary buildings elsewhere in Northumberland. This together with the beautiful stone and fine quality of the masonry used give the village an extremely pleasing harmonious quality (fig. 46).

A Free School was founded in the early 19th century by William Dixon who endowed it with a house in Newcastle which was sold to produce sufficient income to educate 16 scholars a year. Thomas Clennell paid for the education of a further 13 free scholars. The present school building [38] was erected by public subscription, in 1834, as a Church of England National School, and remains in use today (fig. 44). In that same year, the National School Society became the first body to receive a government grant for public education. A schoolmaster’s house was also provided. The Presbyterian chapel rebuilt in 1854 at a cost of £600. This too still stands, though it is no longer used as a place of worship. Associated with the chapel was a hall, capable of seating 150 people, which was built in 1893 at a cost of £200 (Kelly 1910, 168). A fountain [40] was erected by public subscription, in the centre of the village, in 1880, in memory of Mrs P.F. Clennell and her contribution to the life of the village ()fig. 47.

The Buildings of Harbottle Village P.F. Ryder

The former Presbyterian Church stands at the west end of the single street of Harbottle village., on the south side of the road. In plan it is a plain rectangle, 22 The porch over the original entrance was added later c. 1850.23 Recent analysis by the Traditional Architecture Group suggests that this building was in fact be a poultry house. The authors are grateful to Albert Weir of Northumberland National Park Authority for this information.



constructed of roughly-coursed and roughly-squared stone with tooled and margined dressings. The gable front has a two-centred doorway with a large window of three stepped lancets, with open spandrels, above and a roundel in the gable, above the doorway is a table with the date ‘1854' and on either side a large lancet window. The gable is topped by a corbelled-out octagonal turret with a swept stone spire. The side elevations - the eastern with a series of buttresses - each have five lancets and the south end gable carries a spiky finial. Interior not seen.

The Village StreetOn the north side of the street many of the houses are of early 19 th century date, and built of good-quality squared stone, whitish in colour, with small-paned sash windows. Near the west end Waterloo House has a projecting two-storeyed porch with a segmental chamfered archway. Then comes the three-storeyed Cherry Tree Cottage , its added top floor having half dormers and the initials ‘GRT’ and date ‘1868' ; the central door has an attractive patterned overlight. Next door is Plum Tree Cottage, rather more altered, and then the three-bay Border House, an unalteed front age with 16-pane sashes and an old insurance plate above the door. In the centre of the village is the Star Inn, another three-bay house with 16-pane sashes, with to the west of it a fine drinking foundation of 1880 with ai inscription hymning the virtues of Mrs Clennell of Harbottle Castle. To the east of the inn are another pair of early 19th-century houses, Fern Lea and Bracken Lea and then, set well back from the street, Harbottle First School, an excellent Victorian school building, a symmetrical composition consisting of a single-storeyed range with a projecting centre bearing the inscription ‘NATIONAL SCHOOL 1854'; its windows have elliptical-arched heads, reminiscent of 16th-century Cumbria back, and there are octagonal chimney stacks. At the east end of the street is the Village Hall, a two-storeyed block set at right angles to the street with a big Gothic window in a raised stone surround, lighting the hall on the first floor.

The upland common south of the village was enclosed in 1817, but even though common ownership may have ceased large tracts were left as open grazing land in the possession of particular landowners, principally the Fenwicke Clennells, rather than being divided up into individual fields. The trade directories still record a range of occupations at Harbottle in the 19 th century and two annual fairs, for sheep etc., were still held at Harbottle on 8th July and 19th September during the early 19th century (Parson & White 1827, 475; Dixon 1903, 195). However Bulmer’s Directory noted, in 1887, that the weekly market, formerly held in the village on a Tuesday, had ‘been discontinued for some years’ (Bulmer 1887, 736), whilst Dixon, writing a couple of decades later, stated it had ‘ceased long ago’ (1903, 195). Dixon also reported that ‘the fair has been discontinued for several years’ ( ibid.), though the memory of ‘the great event of the year in that upland district’ with all its customs, was still very much alive (op. cit., 195-6):

Harbottle fair was in days gone by the great event of the year in that upland district, at which all the farmers and shephers out of Coquet and Redewater foregathered, and not only were large numbers of hill sheep and cattle sold, but many other transactions of sale and barter, there took place. But harbottle fair served another purpose most congenial to border men; it afforded a convenient opportunity, and was a favourite time, for the settlement of personal and family grudges, therefore many were the free fights that took place between men of Rede and men of Coquet.

The population of the township rose in the first part of the century from 128 in 1801, reaching a recorded peak of 181 in 1821. By the end of the century however the township’s population figures had declined. 113 were recorded in the 1901 census and 119 in 1911 a process which continued during the remainder of the 20th century. The range of businesses operating in the village now is much reduced. The Presbyterian chapel has become redundant, but the school is still open and the Star Inn continues to offer a hospitable welcome. As with other villages in the Northumberland National Park, Harbottle’s reduced importance as a commercial and service centre for the surrounding area has been balanced by the greatly improved standard of living enjoyed by today’s residents and



the much wider range of opportunities available. The 20 th century’s terrible wars left there mark on Harbottle, both in human casualties and, perhaps aptly, in the fabric of the ruined castle which watches over the village, when the top of the keep was used modified to installed a Royal Observer Corps observation post to spot German bombers during World War II (cf. figs. 58-9). Some historical notices for the 19th and 20th centuries have been recorded in the school magazine, The Drakestone Star, but a detailed history of the village in the 20th century and above all the personalities who have enriched its life remains to be written, a task perhaps most appropriately undertaken by members of the local community.



7. SELECTED SOURCES AND SURVEYS

7.1 Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem (Cal IPM)24

Includes all indexed references from or relating to Harbottle.

1. Sir Gilbert de Umfranville, Earl of Angus. 30 April 29 Henry III (1245); Cal IPM vol I, no. 49; the fuller text in CalDocScot i, no.1667 is reproduced here.There are in the manors of Hyrbottle, 408 acres of land and 3 roods, whereof each is worth yearly 5d; total, 10l 3s 7_d. Also there are 80 acres of meadow [and] 18½ acres, whereof each of 20 is worth yearly 6d, and of 78½, each is worth yearly 2d; total thereof, 23s 1d. Also there are two mills there, worth yearly 17l 11s 4d. Also a burgus (borough) returning by the year with grazing, 4l 12s. Also the jurors say there are within the manor of Otterburne in demesne, 168½ acres and 1 rood, whereof each is worth yearly . . . Also there are in the said vills (of Otterburn and Alwinton) 2 bracinagia (brewhouses) worth yearly 25s. . . . .Also (in the manors of Redesdale and Coquetdale) there is pasture for 1140 sheep, worth 111s 8d. Also the pasture for mares is worth 12l. Also they say regarding the cow pastures, 1400 [acres?], 900 of which are worth 4d and 500 worth 2d - that the total is 23l; besides Hollesden, worth 2 marks. Also the forges there render iron, worth yearly 4l 2s. Also the wards there are worth yearly, 18s 4d. Also there are six entire knights' fees, and one sixth of a knight. Also they say that the monks of Novi Monasterii (Newminster) hold three granges (in the liberty of Redesdale and the barony of Prudhoe) viz., Tolland, Fyleton and Ruhehope (Rowhope) and pay yearly 12l.

2. Gilbert de Umframvill alias Dunfranvyl, Earl of Angus, alias Denegus. Whelpington, 13 Oct., 1 Edward II (1308); vol. V; no. 47."Redesdale ...with the liberty, in which is the castle of Hirbotell (extent given), including a borough called Hirbotell, a capital messuage at Oterburn, a park nearly a league in circuit, and free tenants in Ellesden, all held freely of the king in chief by service of defending the same from wolf and robber.Alwenton, 200a arable and 10a. Meadow, the lordship of the ten towns of Alwenton, Clonhill, Bydellesden, Angreham, Fuadon, Ryhill, Scharberton, Nodirton, Boroudon, and Thirnum, which rendered nothing to the earl but knight's service and suit at his court of Hirbotell, and two water-mills, all held of the heirs of Vesci in chief of the barony of Alnewyck by service of 2 knights' fees, and doing suit at the court of Alnewyck.Robert his son, aged 30 and more, is his next heir".

3. Robert de Umframvill, alias de Umfraunvill, Dumframvill, late Earl of Angus. 10 May, 18 Edward II (1325); vol VI, no. 607.Redesdale Liberty (extent given), inluding the site of the castle of Hirbotil and lands woods and rents in [Redesheved, Herlessyde], Spithope [Nuthope], Cotynghopp, Suleshop [Kyneshope], Yerdhopp, Carwyk, Coketmore, Mickelwanges, Little Wodbourn, Wolrych and Helvesdon.Helvesden [alias Ellesden]. A messuage and a carucate of land, held by John son of William by service of one twentieth of a knight's fee and 1d yearly; a messuage and a carucate of land, held by William de Sok . . . . (?) by service of one fortieth of a knight's fee and suit of court; and a messuage and a carucate of land, held by Gilbert de Caprewyk (?) by service of one twentieth of a knight's fee, 5s 2d rent, and suit of court.All held of the king in chief by service of keeping the liberty of Redesdale from robbers and wolves.24 Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other analagous documents preserved in the PRO, covering the reigns of Henry III-Henry VII (HMSO, London, 1898--).



Schirmundesdene [alias Shirmunden]. The manor (extent given).Alwenton. Four bondages and 4 cottages, all wasted by the Scots.Faudon. The manor (extent given).Clenyl. The manor held by Thomas Clenyl by service of ½ knight's fee, 6s 8d for guard of the castle of Alnewyk and 15d for cornage.Bedilsden [alias Bitelsden]. A moiety of the manor held by Robert de la Vale by service of ½ knight's fee, 6s 8d [alias 3s 4d] for guard of the said castle, 40d [alias 15d] for cornage, and suit at the court of Schirmundesden.Borouden. The manor, held by John de Borouden by service of a knight's fee, 13s 4d for guard of the said castle, and 15d cornage.Nedderton. A moiety of the manor held by Henry son of John by service of ½ knight's fee, and 15d for cornage.Thirnom. A moiety of the manor held by John de Horseley by service of 7½d; and the other moiety held by Hugh de Raymyngton and Joan his wife by service of 7½d and 1lb pepper, price 18d, yearly.Angram [alias Angraham] (Ingram). The manor held by John de Laybourn by service of ½ knight's fee, and 15d for cornage.[Foxden and] Scharperton. Four messuages and a carucate of land, held by Gilbert de Borouden by service of ¼ knight's feeAll held (of the king in chief?) as of the barony of Alnewyk by service of . . . . yearly.

4. Robert de Umframvyll, or de Humframvyll, late Earl of Angus. 13 July, 5 Edward III (1331); vol. VII; no. 390 (Reopened inquest in connection with dispute over the size of the dower awarded to Eleanor, wife of Robert, cf. no.3 above).Herbotel. The castle (extent given), including 6a. Land called 'Ramshalgh', and a borough in which are divers free tenants rendering 53s. 10d. yearly for the said borough, held with divers lands and tenements underwritten, within the liberty of Redesdale.

5. Stephen de Bolton, deest. 25 Edward III; vol. IX; no. 684.Northumberland. Herbotell.

6. Eleanor late the wife of Robert de Umframvyll, knight. 8 May, 42 Edward III (1368); vol. XII; no. 250."Alwynton. 5 messuages, 5 husband-lands and a cottage in the hands of tenants at will rendering 22s. Yearly, held in dower of Henry de Percy, as of the manor of Alnewyk by knight's service"."Wolrig by Herbotill. A messuage and a bovate of land, held in dower".

7. Gilbert de Umframville, earl of Angus. Northumberland. 4 Richard II (1380); xv; no. 434.He was seised of the castle of Herbotill and manor of Otterburn... with the late king's licence to him and heirs of his body, with successive remainders in tail male to ... (his brothers).

8. Thomas Umframvill. Northumberland. 25 May, 10 Richard II (1387); vol. XVI; no. 470.He was seised of Hyrbotyll castle and two thirds of the manor by virtue of a fine levied in the king's court. The other third held by Henry de Percy, earl of Northumberland, and Maud his wife, by endowment of Gilbert de Umfravyll, earl of Anguse, sometime husband of the said Maud. The premises are worth only 100s. A year because of the war and the destruction and burning by the Scots.

9. Thomas Umframvill, knight. Northumberland. 1 April, 14 Richard II (1390/1); vol. XVI; no. 1043.Hirbotill. The castle and two thirds of the manor of Otyrburn held of the king in chief by knight's service. They are worth only 10 marks yearly due to the war and destruction and burnings formerly done by the Scots.



10. Robert Horsle, knight. 14 Jan., 15 Richard II (1392); vol. XVII; no. 56."Caldton... in Redesdale, held of Gilbert Umframvill...by homage and fealty, and by service of rendering 4d. yearly for ward of the castle of Hirbotill".

11. Maud wife of Henry earl of Northumberland. 10 March, 22 Richard II (1398); XVII; no. 1246.Died seised of various places, including:Oterburn. The manor, with divers places, scalings and wastes, to wit, ......21s. 2d. rent from Herbotle....."All the lands etc. In Redesdale are held of the king in chief by knight's service.Shirmondesden in Cokdale. A third part of the demense lands of the manor, to wit, 100acr. land (i.e. ploughland) towards the east and 26 acr. meadow, a third part of the park and of 2 water-mills, 3s. 11d. rent of assize, 2s. 4d. castle ward, 1 lb. Pepper and 1lb cummin from three husbandlands in Alwenton, three cottages there and a third part of a pasture called Butterland, held of Henry earl of Northumberland by knight's service".

12. Gilbert Umfravile - Writ for proof of age. 28 Jan., 1412; vol. XIX; no. 1005.Born at Harbottle castle and baptise Thomas Umframvill d in Harbottle church.Proof includes: John Lysle, 44 and more, was building a new house at Harbottle that day.

13. Robert Tailbois, Knight. 30 May, 10 Henry VII (1495), Cal IPM Hen VII, vol. I; no. 971.Properties inherited by George Tailboys from his father include:The castle of Herbotell, which is worth nothing yearly.Also details the Manor of Oterburn, also worth nothing, and various pastures, messuages, tofts, Ellesdon church, Halistane abbey, etc., most of which are worth little or nothing due to their situation in the Marches."All the lands and tenements which are within the bounds of the said castle and manor are said to be and are within the liberty of Riddisdale".Various obligations are also inherited, including:(5) a fair at Herbotell within Ridesdale on the feast of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin Yearly, with court of piepowder, and (6) a market on Tuesdays weekly there,..."

14. Thomas Grey, Knight. Commission and Inquisition. 13 Henry VII (1498), Cal IPM Hen VII, vol. III; no. 10.Properties inherited by Ralph Grey, his son, include the following manors:Alneham, worth 10l.Chirmundsden, or Chirmundisd', worth 5 marks.Bitlisdon, or Butlisden, worth 10l.Clenhill, worth 100s.Nedirton, worth 10 marks.Buereweton, or Burueton, worth 20 marks.Allenton, or Alwenton, worth 5 marks.Hetton, or Heton, worth 10 marks.Ambell, worth 10l.Sharperton, worth 100s.Thirnam, or Thitnum, worth 10 marks.

7.2 1604 Border Survey - Manor of Harbottle



Demeanes (op. cit., 105-6)Sir Henry Witherington, Kt, houldeth the Castle of Harbotle, with the deeanes therunto belonging, parte wherof lyeth in in Ridsdale and parte in Cubedale; the ancient yearly rent whereof is

£21 16s 6d

Rydsdale One ould castle, much decayed, the seate whereof, with haugh adjoininge,conteyneth 50 acres; Rate - 2s; Yearly value £5.The forest of Whilke Wood conteyneth 1336 acres; Rate 4d; Yearly value £222 13s 4d

Cubedale The east part conteyneth, being of the parke 200 acres; Rate 18d; Yearly value £15Shermington, sometymes a townshippe, 820 acres; Rate 12d; Yearly value £41.

Total 14430 acres; Yearly value £283, 13s, 4d

All which hee holdeth during pleasur by virtue of his office

Persivall Potte houldeth Harbotle Cragg and payeth yearlie rent for the same - 3s 4dThe particular: The digginge of millstones on Harbottle Crag; the value per annum - £10Which he claymeth to houlde by custome.

(Land and tithes associated with 'the late dissolved Abbey of Hallistones')

John Wainebye holdeth one water corne mill standinge upon the water of the Cockatt, and payeth yearly rent for the same - 40sOne water corne mill; the valewe per annum is - £13 6s 8d

(Compare no. 11 above – Cal IPM xvii, no.1246 (1398), for itemisation of the third of desmesne lands in Shirmundesden held in dower by Maud, widow of Gilbert de Umfraville III)

Freeholders - Burgage lande (1604 Survey, 91)

Places Freeholders' names Rent Building Known ground

Thomas Gibson 8s 2 houses1 outhouse

3 acres meadow17 acres arable

Nicholas Trumble 1s 4d 1house 2 roods arableThomas Smith 4s 4d 2 houses

1 outhouse1 acre meadow6 acres arable

Thomas Gibson jun 3s 1d 2 houses 2 roods meadow1 acre arable

Nicholas Smith 5s ½d 3 houses 2 roods meadow1 acr 2 rd arable

Laurence Edgarr 1s 5d 1 house 2 roods arableRobert Swann 5s 4d 2 houses

1 outhouse6 acr 2 rd arable

Harbotle Town Cuthbert Browne 6s 6d 3 houses 11 acr 2 rd arablePeter Edgarr 2s 1 house 3 acres arableWilliam Gibson 1s 10d 1 house 4 acres arableAndrew Rutherford 3s 6½d 1 house

1 outbuilding3 acres meadow6 acres arable

George Carr 1s 6d 1 house 2 roods arableJohn Swann 3s 2d 1 house 2 roods meadow

5 acres meadowJohn Hetherington 2s 4d 1 house 2 acres arableGeorge Wilkinson 4d 1 house 2 acres arable

The Peale John Waibie 2s 2d 1 house 2acres arable



Sum total £2 12s 1d 24 houses4 outbuildings

9 acres meadow69 acres arable24 acres pasture102 acr 1 rd total

Common proportionable is 700 acres

MEMORANDUM. The Towne of Harbotle was sometymes a market towne, and the tenants, ther inhabitinge, clayme to be free burgers and to hould their tenements in as free a sorte as the freehoulders doe their land; who paye one years rent uppon every alienation as the freehoulders do.(op. cit., 109)BURGHERS There are in Harbottle: Tenants - 23; Rent - £2 12s 1d; Quantity - 102 acres, 700 acr

common etc.

7.3 1604 Border Survey – ‘Survaie of the tenn townes in Cubedale’

Township Descent Number of

Tenants

Rent Quantitie

Rate Value

li.

s.

d. acr. ro. li. s.

d.

CHARINGTON

Charington sometimes a township and nowe used as a demeane to Harbotle and therin valued



8. SUMMARY OF DATED EVENTS

Late-11th to mid-12th centuries - The Umfravilles acquired their liberty of Redesdale, along with the barony of Prudhoe, at some stage between c.1095-1152, but most probably in the reign of Henry I (1100-35), in company with most of the other Norman barons who were established in Northumberland. The first of the lineage, Robert de Umfraville, known as 'with-the-beard' (cum barba), was certainly present in the north by c.1120, and must have held at least one of the lordships by then. He also seems to have been enfeoffed with the 'Ten Townships' in Coquetdale and the Breamish valley before the death of Henry I. The ringwork and bailey castle at Elsdon probably belongs to this initial early-12th century phase and it is not impossible that a timber and earthwork castle was also built at Harbottle at this time to serve as a second, more northerly fortress in the liberty.

1139-57 - During the weak , troubled reign of King Stephen, Northumberland and Cumberland, though still nominally parts of England, fell under the effective control of David I of Scotland. David's son Henry was made earl of Northumberland in 1139. The Umfravilles figure frequently in Scottish royal charters during this period, one of Robert's sons, Gilbert, serving as constable to earl Henry. Holystone Priory is first mentioned during David's reign, in a reference to one of his lost charters (RRS i, 111, 171 no. 93).

1157/89 - Henry II ordered and supported the construction of a castle at Harbottle by Odinel de Umfraville, part of a sustained effort by Henry to strengthen the strategic fortresses on the northern border of his kingdom (Royal Letters Hen. III, i, 140-1, no.856; cf. CalDocScot i, no 775). This may have occurred shortly after 1157, when Henry recovered his northern counties compelling King Malcolm IV of Scotland to exchange Northumberland and the Carlisle district for the earldom of Huntingdon, as with similar work at Wark-on-Tweed and Norham. Alternatively it may follow the warfare of 1173-74, when the castle was seized by King William of Scotland (see below), and represent a major reconstruction in stone of a previous timber castle damaged siege and assault. It is not made explicit in the documentary source (cf. 1220 below) whether this represents the building of a completely new castle or the the restoration of an older timber one.

c.1174 - In the course of his campaign to regain Northumbria, King William of Scotland entered Northumberland and took Harbottle Castle from Odinel de Umfraville II - Rex Scotiae . . . cum reliqua parte exercitus sui ivit per Northumbriam, terras regis et baronum suorum devastans, et cepit armis . . . castellum de Hyrebothle, quod Odenellus de Dunfranvilla tenuit (Benedict i, 65). The castle was recovered by Odinell following the capture of William in front of Alnwick castle later in the year.

1181 - Earliest grant, actually a lease, of pasture rights in Kidland to Newminster Abbey by Odinel de Umfraville (NC 73-4).

1182 - Robert de Umfraville succeeded Odinel II.

1194 - Richard de Umfraville succeeded his brother Robert. In 1199 King John granted him by charter the privilege of exclusive hunting, grazing and other rights in his forests of Redesdale and Coquetdale (cf. Hodgson 1827, pl. facing p.8).

1207 - Dispute over the wardship of the heir of Henry Bataille between Richard de Umfraville and Eustace de Vesci, lord of Alnwick. Henry Bataille had held Faudon and a moiety of Netherton in the ten townships as a fief of the Umfravilles (Curia Regis R., 9 John, 58-60; Northumb. Pleas, 30-1, no.1030).



1215 - Richard's lands given by the king to Hugh de Baliol after he is suspected of involvement with the conspiracy of the barons.

1220 - Umfraville lands restored by Henry III and building work at Harbottle was commenced by Richard de Umfraville. However, construction was stalled by the king's suspicions, since Richard failed to apply for a fresh licence. In one of the earliest documents naming Harbottle, a brief dated July 3 1220, the sheriff was ordered to inspect the castle with a jury of 12 and to reduce it to its state before the baronial revolt of 1215-7 (Rot Lit Claus i, 436b). Richard successfully protested, arguing the castle had first been constructed on the orders of Henry II, and describing the castle as 'sited in the marches of Scotland, towards the Great Waste, to the great benefit of the kingdom as much in times of peace as war' (Royal Letters Hen. III, i, no.856).

The north tower and bailey division may date from this time (though a 14th century date is also possible); the motte itself was probably crowned by a shell keep and perhaps also a large central tower, as at Mitford Castle (cf. Crow 1998, 11). The fallen mass of masonry at the foot of the motte has multiple chamfered plinths suggesting it belonged to a 13th-century keep (Ryder 1990, 6).

13th century? {1076} - Fabrication of a deed purporting to represent the grant, by William the Conquerer, of the lordship, valley, and forest of Riddesdale, with all the properties formerly possessed by Mildred, the son of Akman, late lord of Riddesdale, to Robert de Umfraville (Robert with-the beard) in 1076, to hold by service of defending that part of the country from enemies and wolves (Northumb & Durham Deeds, 220; cf. round 1910, 296-8; Hedley 1968, 208).

1226 - Gilbert de Umfraville I succeeded Richard (NCH XV (1940), 472).

1244 - Gilbert de Umfraville married Maud, countess de Angus, niece of William the Lion.

1245 - Gilbert, 'the chief flower and guardian of the North' (Matthew Paris), died, leaving an infant son, Gilbert de Umfraville II, with Harbottle committed to the custody of Robert de Crepping, then to Simon Montford, earl of Leicester. The manor of Harbottle then consisted of: 408 acres and 3 roods of land, 2 mills and a borough. Within the manor also were various pastures, 2 brewhouses and iron forges (Cal IPM i, no. 49; CalDocScot i, no.1667; above 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys no.1).

1266 Gilbert II, first earl of Angus, came of age.

1267 - Gilbert imprisoned William Douglas at Harbottle for 11 days, and robbed him.

1275 - Walter de Sweethope complained of being imprisoned at Harbottle and continued to be harassed even after Edward I took him into his protection - suggests nature of the power of the Umfravilles.

1279 - Gilbert charged at the assizes with various accusations, incl. false imprisonment (Northumb. Assize R., 372).

1293 - Gilbert claimed rights to keep a gaol, etc. by ancient right. Also claimed a market at Harbottle on Tuesday every 3 weeks, an annual fair, toll and gallows at Harbottle and elsewhere.

1296 - Resisted two-day siege by the Scots, suffering much damage. Order from Edward I to his bailiff in the liberty of Tynedale, formerly held by the Scottish king, to restock the Harbottle park with 20 live bucks and 80 live does from John Comyn's woods and parks in North Tynedale (Hemingburgh 277; Holinshed Chron. ii, 299; Cal. Close R. 1288-96, 493).

1308 - the following return followed the death of Gilbert II: "There is a certain park, containing in circuit about 1 league, in which are wild animals....Also there is a certain borough called Harbottle, the rent of which is worth £2" (Cal. IPM. v, no. 47; above 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys no.2). It



is also recorded that the castle, "is worth nothing annually within the enclosed ground, because there are great and lofty buildings there which take much to support them" (possibly a reference to the cost of repairs undertaken following the Scottish assault of 1296).

1316 - Gilbert's successor Robert given safe conduct for his envoys to obtain corn for the garrison at Harbottle (Cal. Pat. Rolls 1313-17, 398).

1316-17 - Robert retained 45 men-at-arms and 120 hobelars (light cavalry) to garrison both Prudhoe and Harbottle (cf. Northumb. Petitions 163-4, no.138).

1318 - Robert the Bruce captured the castle and partly dismantled it (Chron. de Lanercost 235; Chron. de Melsa ii, 335; Scalachronica 60).

1319 - The English ordered to dismantle the castle as part of a treaty with the Scots which returned it to the sheriff of Northumberland (Cal Pat Rolls 1317-21, 416; Hartshorne 1858, 56).

1325 - Site of castle still in hands of Robert de Umfraville at his death (Cal IPM vi, no.607; above 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys no.3).

1331 - Extent of the castle given (Cal IPM vii, no.390; above 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys no.4).

1335/36 - Gilbert de Umfraville III reported that the damage to the castle wrought by the Scots (in 1318) was still so severe that there was not a single building in which prisoners, taken in the franchise of Redesdale, could be safely guarded, as they had from time immemorial. He received the king's permission to use his castle at Prudhoe for ten years, to hold those prisoners, while Harbottle Castle, was repaired (Northumb. Petitions, 124-5, no.101; Cal Pat Rolls 1334-8, 238).

1351 - The castle was still in ruins and hence unusable as a jaol. The use of Prudhoe Castle was licenced for another 10 years (Cal Pat Rolls 1350-54, 42).

1380/1 - Gilbert III divided the Umfraville estates, with his half-brother, Thomas de Umfraville I, succeeding to Harbottle and the liberty of Redesdale in 1381 (Cal IPM; above 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys no.7), whilst Henry Percy earl of Northumberland acquired the barony of Prudhoe (Tuck 1986, 11-2).

1387 - Sir Thomas de Umfraville II succeeded (Cal IPM; above 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys no.8). In the following year he fought at the battle of Otterburn.

1390 - Gilbert IV succeeded (Cal IPM; above 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys no 9).

c.1400 - The castle had been rendered both habitable and defensible (NCH XV (1940), 482). Sir Robert de Umfraville, Gilbert's uncle, was constable, commanding a garrison of 20 men-at-arms and 40 archers. He inflicted sharp defeats on Scottish raids into the liberty at Fulhope Law (at the headwaters of the Coquet) in 1399 and Redeswire in 1400 (Hodgson 1827, 48-9; Ridpath 1848, 254).

1421 - Gilbert died childless, so Harbottle passed to Sir Robert de Umfraville.

1432 - Sir Robert empowered conscript stonemasons and labourers to repair the castle and reminded to pay the workers 'promptly and reasonably' (Cal. Pat. Rolls 1429-36, 219, 328).

1436 - Sir Robert de Umfraville died and the family of Umfraville ended in the male line. The castle passed to the heir of Gilbert III, William Tailbois and his wife Eleanor (sister of Gilbert III).



['1432']- Walter Tailbois, son and heir of William, confirmed to William Gledhill the constableship of the castle of Harbottle, which he was granted by Robert Umfraville, late lord of Redesdale (Northumb & Durham Deeds, 221 no.7 - the date is suspect as Robert did not die till 1436).

1438 - Roger Widdrington made constable, 'as wele for werr as for pece, abiding and dwelling in his propre person with his meny and houshold within the dungeon of the said castell ' (Northumb & Durham Deeds, 222 no.8).

1464 - William Tailbois fought with the Lancastrians in the Wars of the Roses and was beheaded after the battle of Hexham. The family estates confiscated and Harbottle awarded to Richard Ogle.

1472 - The castle , was restored to Sir William' s son, Robert Tailbois.

1483 - Richard Musgrave made lieutenant of his lordship in Redesdale and Coquetdale.

1494 - John Heron of Ford made constable of the castle.

1498 - Values individually attached to the 10 towns of Harbottle in an inquisition (Cal IPM Hen VII; see above, 7.1 Selected Sources and Surveys no. 14).

1509 - Thomas, lord Dacre, prayed the council for the discharge of bonds wrongfully made for the payment of 2000 marks in the half of which he was bound to Sir George Tailbois for keeping the castle of Harbottle which the late Henry VII took from Sir George (LP Hen VIII).

1513 - Dacre in residence at Harbottle is clearly viewed with some suspicion by the king, on whose behalf he claims to be campaigning in Scottish territory (LP Hen VIII).

1515 - Royal birth: After death of James IV of Scotland at Flodden (1513), his widow, Margaret, sister of Henry VIII, married the earl of Angus (not related to the earlier earls, the Umfravilles). Margaret and her husband moved across the border to seek protection from Henry VIII after the failure of a plot against the regent, Albany (all part of the intrigue surrounding attempts to get possession of James IV's son and heir, James V). Lord Dacre sheltered them at Harbottle on 8th Oct. 1515 and on the 15th Oct. Margaret gave birth to a daughter, Margaret (subsequent grandmother of James VI of Scotland and James I of England, under whom the crowns were united in 1603). The queen was ill and on 16th November moved to Morpeth via Cartington (LP Hen VIII), Harbottle being in bad repair with a garrison of 80 men (NCH XV (1940), 475).

1517 - Dacre in residence at Harbottle becoming ever more deeply involved in the intrigues of Scottish affairs; constantly manoeuvring. French ambassadors at Harbottle with Dacre en route to Scotland (LP Hen VIII). Presents suggestions for fortifying the Borders and proposes rules concerning pasturing .

1518 - Dacre's arrest of Redesdale thieves ends in disaster as they are ambushed between Harbottle and Rothbury, despite which he claims that the borders are "not far out of frame" (LP Hen VIII).1519 - Work was in progress a the king's expense (the castle having remained in the care, if not ownership, of the crown since its confiscation in 1464).1522 - Dacre briefly describes a raid into Scotland with 4000 men, presumably assembled at Harbottle, and a Scottish raid on Harbottle leading to the theft of stock from Peals (LP Hen VIII;). Notes an Anglo-Scottish confrontation at Alwinton.

1523 - Dacre notes a cordial meeting with men of Redesdale at Harbottle (LP Hen VIII; ). Description of Harbottle castle, "in sore decay". Sir William Bowmer has the captainship of Norham and Harbottle .

1526 - Sir William Eure confirmed as vice-warden of the Middle Marches (LP Hen VIII)..



1527 - Eure moves temporarily to apprehend the Lisles at Felton (LP Hen VIII). Harbottle regarded as providing no protection for Tynedale.

1538 - The most detailed of a series of 16th century surveys was carried out and the castle described as unfit for the keeper of Redesdale to inhabit (LP Hen VIII; NCH XV (1940), 482). A recommendation was made for complete take-over by the Crown and a list of necessary repairs produced (thereby giving a good impression of the range of buildings present at that time, and their intended function). Poor security of Harbottle noted. Repeatedly described in poor terms: "in great decay" (no.73); the chief strength of the Border...which is not habitable" (no.75), etc. Note of court held at Harbottle (no.73).

1539 - Reminder to Henry VIII of need for repairs (LP Hen VIII).

1540 - Harbottle "sore decayed" (LP Hen VIII).

1541 - Application made for permission to bring stone from Holystone nunnery and Brinkburn priory for repairs (NCH XV (1940), 484).

1543 - Parr wrote to the council stating that Ratcliff (deputy warden of the Middle Marches) and Sir Ralph Eure (Keeper of Tynedale and Redesdale) certify the poor state of the "key of Redesdale" (LP Hen VIII). Later described as "in sore decay". Recommendation that the warden of the East and Middle Marches spends at least a month per year at Harbottle .

1545 - Harbottle to be declared to the king and repaired (LP Hen VIII).

c.1546 - The heir of lord Tailbois, his sister Elizabeth, wife of Thomas Wymbysche of Lincolnshire, exchanged Redesdale and Harbottle for other lands with Henry VIII (NCH XV (1940), 476). A view of the castle following repairs (LP Hen VIII).

1551 - the castle is called "the king's majesty's castle of Harbottle", which had been in extreme ruin but was now partly repaired (ibid.). The western and northern sides of the shell keep had been rebuilt since 1541 in their present form.

1552 - The castle was said to be the best residence for the warden of the Middle Marches (Cal SP Ed. VI).

1556 - A survey carried out by two captains from Berwick put the costs of necessary repairs at £240.

1560 - John Forster became warden (until 1595) and repeatedly complained about the ruinous state of the castle

1563 - Further repairs carried out and a garrison maintained (NCH XV (1940), 482).

1564 - A survey of the castle regarded as necessary (Cal SP Eliz. I; NCH XV (1940), 476).

1571 - Note of a garrison at Harbottle (Cal SP), and an expression of doubt regarding its cost benefits (no.96).

1580 - List of the 10 towns of Harbottle and their able bodied men in a muster book (CBP).Harbottle castle in need of repair .

1583 - In Rules for the Defence of the Borders, Harbottle with Chipchase is recommended as the main place of defence for the protection of Redesdale and Tynedale (CBP). It is further recommended that the garrison at Harbottle should be 50 horsemen and 400 footmen .



1585 - Queen's desire for a new survey (Cal SP Eliz. I). Foot garrison discharged (CBP); though later in the year it is suggested that 100 men should be posted there (CBP). A survey of Harbottle and other castles was carried out at the end of the year ( CBP & Cal SP); it was said that the inner ward is reasonable, but the outer ward almost down.

1586 - Sir John Forster notes that the Queen has no house but Harbottle castle for the warden of the March to use on truce days.

1587 - Recommendation for a posting of 2-300 men into the Middle March (CBP), specifically 100 to Harbottle in case of sudden invasion . Later a figure of 150 men shared between Chipchase and Harbottle is mentioned , which in the following months is reduced to 50 at Harbottle alone , a figure finally authorised in June . The following month, however, is a report of Scottish raiding within 2 miles of Harbottle . A further survey of the Borders follows in the Autumn .

1588 - Despite recommendations for repair, little seems to have been done, for during the alarm of the Armada in August some Teviotdale thieves broke in and "carried away much goods without either showt of crie" (CBP; NCH XV (1940), 476).

1595 - A survey to examine repairs carried out at Harbottle (CBP).Suggestion that Sir John Forster should be replaced as warden and that in the meantime 25-30 horsemen should be stationed at Harbottle. Problems with feeding stock on hay due to wet Autumn and difficulties arising from the dismissal of Sir John Forster . Records of two Scottish raids into Harbottle . Muster record for the ten towns . At the end of the year Eure describes the poor state of the castle where his keeper lies " in meane sorte" .

1596 - Note regarding pay for 80 horsemen at Harbottle (CBP). Harbottle is described as vulnerable to attack so 20 horsemen are sent there from York . Recommendation for the repair of the gaol . Eure requests funds for the repair of at least part of the castle . By the end of June the gaol has still to be repaired, however , and by mid-July Eure is desperate; "Harbottle crieth for help" .Survey of the castle carried out by the surveyor of Royal lands in Northumberland, Anthony Feldon, assessing the work carried out by Sir John Forster c. 1568 and recommending further repairs (Colvin et al. 1975, 253-4).

1597 - The castle was so ruined by the turn of the year that its captain had to move for the winter to Otterburn (CBP). A further plea for assistance follows .

1598 - Request for a commission of inspection to be sent to view the decay, since without a functioning installation at Harbottle it is said to be impossible to recover the wasted countries of Tynedale and Redesdale .

1604 - The castle was "an old castle, much decayed" (1604 Survey, 105; see above 7.2 Selected Sources and Surveys). At this time there were 15 burgers at Harbottle, 1 at the Peale, and 24 houses between them.

1604-5 - All crown lands in Tynedale and Redesdale, including the castle and manor of Harbottle, granted to George, lord Home of Berwick, created earl of Dunbar (Cal SP James I; NCH XV (1940), 477).

1611 - Elizabeth, daughter of the Earl, inherited his Northumbrian estates in 1611 with her husband (NCH XV (1940), 477).



1635-7 -The latter outlived his wife and sold the castle, demesne, park, tithes and water mill of Harbottle, and 23 burgages and three closes in Harbottle, to Roger Widdrington of Cartington (ibid.). He subsequently used the castle as a quarry to build the nearby mansion, also called 'Harbottle Castle'.

1650 - The latter's son, Sir Edward Widdrington, forfeited his lands as a Royalist (ibid.).

1655 - The manor house and all demesne lands of Harbottle, with a corn mill and fulling mill were sold to John Rushworth and John Brownell, but recovered by Sir Edward after the restoration (ibid.).

1713 - Presbyterian congregation established at Harbottle, meeting in a converted dwelling house.

1721 - Mary Widdrington died (ibid.).

1723 - The latter's husband, Sir John Gascoigne of Parlington, died (ibid.).

1731 - Sir Edward Gascoigne, their son, conveyed Harbottle to Luke Clennell of Clennell (NCH XV (1940), 478).

1756 - First purpose-built Presbyterian chapel erected in the village.

1796 - Passed by marriage to the Fenwicks who took the additional name of 'Clennell'.

1816 - Harbottle Common enclosed by an act of George III (NCH XV (1940), 479). The award was implemented in 1817.

1829 - Harbottle (new) Castle was rebuilt by Dobson. The other estate buildings and many of those in the village probably belong to the same period.

1834 - Church of England ‘National School’ building and master’s house constructed.

1854 - Presbyterian chapel rebuilt in a more ‘ecclesiastical’ form.

1880 - The Clennell Memorial Fountain was built by public subscription

1935 - Excavations carried out on the castle by Honeyman.

c.1940-47 - Occupation of the keep by the Royal Observation Corps, involving some excavation and demolition of masonry.

1990 - To arrest further decay of the castle, Northumberland County Council began the process of consultation leading to the present programme of documentation, consolidation and public display.

1997-99 - Excavations carried out by on the castle by J.G. Crow. Consolidation work undertaken.

1999 - In September Harbottle Castle was opened to public following excavation and consolidation.



PART 4:

SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS&

RECOMMENDATIONS



9. CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

The post-medieval township of Harbottle represents the extent of the medieval borough and its associated common. This explains why it excludes the castle site - the most substantial medieval monument in the present village - which instead falls within the township of Peels on the north side of Harbottle.

The township of Peels originated as the demesne of the Umfraville lords, comprising the castle with the adjacent haughs, the park and the manor of Shirmondeden (or Shermington), which was held directly.

Based on the survey of the castle earthworks by the RCHME, it has been plausibly suggested that the castle originated as an Iron Age hillfort, into which a motte was later inserted (probably during the 12th century AD). No excavated material of late prehistoric date has yet been recovered from the site to confirm this hypothesis.

The presence of an Anglian estate centre has been inferred on the basis of placename evidence – the Old English suffix botle is considered to signify ‘lord’s hall’ and is thought to be a relatively early formation, although some doubt regarding its exclusively early occurrence has been raised recently. No archaeological evidence to substantiate the existence of such an Anglian estate centre has been recovered.



10. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY ISSUES

The grades of sensitivity shown on the accompanying archaeological sensitivity map (fig. 53) are based on the conclusions drawn from the available archaeological, documentary and cartographic evidence. The following guidelines have been adopted as the basis of classifying the sensitivity areas. Sites or areas where the survival of archaeological remains can be demonstrated are accorded high sensitivity. Areas where the former existence of historic settlement is known or suspected, but the degree of survival of any associated archaeological deposits is uncertain, are generally accorded medium sensitivity.

1. The site of the major medieval monument – the castle – is accorded high sensitivity.

2. The built-up area of the village and the grounds of the new Harbottle Castle ,where the discovery of the remains of the medieval chapel were reported in the 19th century are accorded medium sensitivity.

3. The area of long tofts stretch down to Back Burn to the south and south east of the village also represents an important component of the borough, requiring the active engagement of the National Park Authority to ensure that, as far as practicable, significant alterations to any of the field boundaries are avoided. Similar policies should apply to the boundary of the former medieval park belonging to the Umfravilles.

4. The settlement of Peels is accorded medium sensitivity. The site of the watermill is accorded high sensitivity.



PART 5:

APPENDICES&

BIBLIOGRAPHY



11. GLOSSARY

Advowson the legal right to appoint a priest to a parish church.

Agistment the grazing of livestock on pasture belonging to someone else.

Alienate to grant land to someone else or to an institution.

Assart land cleared for cultivation.

Assize a legal procedure

Barony the estate of a major feudal lord, normally held of the Crown by military tenure.

Borough a town characterised by the presence of burgage tenure and some trading privileges for certain tenants.

Bovate measure of arable land, normally equivalent to approx. 12-15 acres. This measurement especially popular in eastern and northern counties of England.

Burgage A form of property within a borough

Capital Messuage A messuage containing a high status dwelling house, often the manor house itself.

Cartulary a book containing copies of deeds, charters, and other legal records.

Carucate a unit of taxation in northern and eastern counties of England, equivalent to eight bovates or one hide (120 acres).

Charter a legal document recording the grant of land or privileges.

Chattels movable personal property.

Common land land over which tenants and perhaps villagers possessed certain rights, for example to graze animals, collect fuel etc.

Common law a body of laws that overrode local custom.

Copyhold a tenure in which land was held by copy of an entry recording admittance made in the record of the manor court.

Cotland a smallholding held on customary tenure.Cottar an unfree smallholder.

Croft an enclosed plot of land, often adjacent to a dwelling house.



Custom a framework of local practices, rules and/or expectations pertaining to various economic or social activities.

Customary tenure an unfree tenure in which land was held “at the will of the lord, according to the custom of the manor’. In practice usually a copyhold of inheritance in Cumbria by the sixteenth century.

Deanery unit of ecclesiastical administration consisting of a group of parishes under the oversight of a rural dean.

Demesne land within a manor allocated to the lord for his own use.

Domain all the land pertaining to a manor.

Dower widow’s right to hold a proportion (normally one-third) of her deceased husband’s lad for the rest of her life.

Dowry land or money handed over with the bride at marriage.

Enfeoff to grant land as a fief.

Engross to amalgamate holdings or farms.

Farm in medieval usage, a fixed sum paid for leasing land, a farmer therefore being the lessee.

Fealty an oath of fidelity sworn by a new tenant to the lord in recognition of his obligations.

Fee/Fief hereditary land held from a superior lord in return for homage and often, military service.

Fine money payment to the lord to obtain a specific concession

Forest a Crown or Palatinate hunting preserve consisting of land subject to Forest Law, which aimed to preserve game.

Free chase a forest belonging to a private landholder.

Freehold a tenure by which property is held “for ever”, in that it is free to descend to the tenant’s heirs or assigns without being subject to the will of the lord or the customs of the manor.

Free tenure tenure or status that denoted greater freedom of time and action than, say, customary tenure or status, a freeman was entitled to use the royal courts, and the title to free tenure was defensible there.

Free warren a royal franchise granted to a manorial lord allowing the holder to hunt small game, especially rabbit, hare, pheasant and partridge, within a designated vill.

Furlong a subdivision of open arable fields.



Glebe the landed endowment of a parish church.

Headland a ridge of unploughed land at the head of arable strips in open fields providing access to each strip and a turning place for the plough.

Heriot a death duty, normally the best beast, levied by the manorial lord on the estate of the deceased tenant.

Hide, hideage Angl-Saxon land measurement, notionally 120 acres, used for calculating liability for geld. See carucate.

Homage act by which a vassal acknowledges a superior lord.

Knight’s fee land held from a superior lord for the service of a knight.

Labour services the duty to work for the lord, often on the demesne land, as part of the tenant’s rent package.

Leet the court of a vill whose view of frankpledge had been franchised to a local lord by the Crown.

Manor estate over which the owner (“lord”) had jurisdiction, excercised through a manor court.

Mark sum of money equivalent to two-thirds of a pound, i.e., 13s. 4d.

Merchet a fine paid by villein tenants.

Messuage a plot of land containing a dwelling house and outbuildings.

Moot a meeting.

Multure a fee for grinding corn, normally paid in kind: multure can also refer to the corn thus rendered.

Neif a hereditary serf by blood.

Pannage payment for the fattening of domestic pigs on acorns etc. in woodland.

Perch a linear measure of 16½ feet and a square measure equivalent to one fortieth of a rood.

Quitclaim a charter formally renouncing a claim to land.

Relief payment made by a free tenant on entering a holding.

Rood measure of land equivalent to one quarter of an acre; and forty perches.



Serf an unfree peasant characterised by onerous personal servility.

Severalty land in separate ownership, that is not subject to common rights, divided into hedged etc., fields.

Sheriff official responsible for the administration of a county by the Crown.

Shieling temporary hut on summer pasture at a distance from farmstead.

Socage a form of tenure of peasant land, normally free.

Stint limited right, especially on pasture.

Subinfeudate the grant of land by on a lord to another to hold as a knight’s fee or fief.

Subinfeudation the process of granting land in a lordship to be held as fiefs

Suit of court the right and obligation to attend a court; the individual so attending is a suitor.

Tenant in chief a tenant holding land directly from the king, normally termed a baron.

Tenement a land holding.

Tenementum a land holding (Latin).

Tithe a tenth of all issue and profit, mainly grain, fruit, livestock and game, owed by parishioners to their church.

Toft an enclosure for a homestead.

Unfree tenure see customary tenure.

Vaccary a dairy farm.

Vassal a tenant, often of lordly status.

Vill the local unit of civil administration, also used to designate a territorial township community (prior to the 14th century)

Villein peasant whose freedom of time and action is constrained by his lord; a villein was not able to use the royal courts.

Villeinage see customary tenure and unfree tenure.

Virgate a quarter of a hide; a standardised villein holding of around 30 acres. Also known as a yardland.



Ward administrative division; the word implies a guarded or defended unit. The term most commonly relates to large administrative subdivisions of the county (usually 5 or 6) from the 13th century.Equivalent to a Poor Law township in Redesdale from 1662 onwards and in upper North Tynedale (Bellingham Chapelry) between 1662-1729.



12. BIBLIOGRAPHY

12.1 Published Documentary Sources

Medieval

Benedict Gesta regis Henrici Secundi Benedicti Abbatis. The Chronicle of the Reigns of Henry II and Richard I (1169-1192) known commonly under the name of Benedict of Peterborough, (ed.) W Stubbs, Rolls Series 49, 2 vols (London, 1867).

Cal Charter R. Calender of the Charter Rolls, preserved in the Public Record Office, covering the period 1226-1516 (London, 1903-27).

Cal Close R. Calender of the Close Rolls, preserved in the Public Record Office, covering the period 1272-1509 (London, 1900-63).

CalDocScot Calendar of Documents relating to Scotland preserved in Her Majesty's Public Record Office, London, I: AD 1108-1272, (ed.) J A Bain, (Edinburgh, 1881).

Cal Fine R. Calender of the Fine Rolls, preserved in the Public Record Office, covering the period 1272-1509 (London, 1911-63).

Cal IPM Calendar of Inquisitions Post Mortem and other analogous Documents preserved in the Public Record Office. Multiple vols, covering the reigns of Henry III-Henry VII (London, 1898--).

CalMisc Calendar of Inquisitions Miscellaneous (Chancery), preserved in the Public Record Office, 7 vols., covering the reigns of Henry III-Henry V (London, 1916-69).

Cal Pat R Calender of Patent Rolls, preserved in the Public Record Office, covering the period 1232-1578 (London, 1891--).

Chron. de Lanercost Chronicon de Lanercost, 1201-1346, ed. J Stevenson (Edinburgh, 1839).

Chron. de Melsa Chronica Monasterii de Melsa [Meaux] a fundatione usque ad annum 1396, auctore Thoma de Burton, Abbate, (ed.) E A Bond, Rolls Series 43, 3 vols (London, 1866-68).

Curia Regis R. Curia Regis Rolls, preserved in the Public Record Office, 16 vols, covering the reigns of Richard I-Henry III (London, 1923-79).

De Legibus et Consuetudinibus Angliae Henricus de Bracton, De Legibus et Consuetudinibus Angliae, (ed.) T Twiss (HMSO London,1883).

ESC Early Scottish Charters prior to 1153. (ed.) A C Lawrie; (Glasgow, 1905).

Fortescue Fortescue, Sir John, De Laudibus Legum Angliae, (ed.) S B Chrimes (Cambridge, 1942).

FRASER, C M, 1968, The Northumberland Lay Subsidy Roll of 1296. (ed. in trans.) C M Fraser, The Society of Antiquaries of Newcastle upon Tyne, Record Series 1 (Newcastle upon Tyne, 1968).

GALBRAITH, V H, 1928, Extracts from the Historia Aurea and a French Brut, The English Historical Review 43, 208-15.

Gough Map Map of Great Britain c. 1360 (Gough Map). Facsimile in full colour. Bodleian Library (Oxford, 1958).

HE Bede, Historia Ecclesiastica, printed and translated in Bedes Ecclesiastical History of the English People, (ed.) B Colgrave and R A B Mynors (Oxford, 1969).



Hemingburgh The Chronicle of Walter of Guisborough, previously edited as the chronicle of Walter of Hemingford or Hemingburgh, (ed.) H Rothwell, Camden Society, 3rd series, 89 (London, 1879).

HODGSON, J, 1820, 1828, 1835, History of Northumberland, Part 3, vols. I, II & III: Containing Ancient Records and Historical Papers. (Newcastle upon Tyne).

Holinshed Chron. Holinshed, R, The . . . chronicles of England, Scotlande and Irelande, (ed.) H Ellis, 6 vols (London, 1807-8).

HSC Historia de Sancto Cuthberto, published in two editions:Symeonis Dunelmensis Opera et Collectanea (ed.) J Hodgson Hinde, Surtees Society 41, I, 138-52 (Durham, 1868).Symeonis Monachi Opera Omnia (ed.) T Arnold, Rolls Series 75, I, 196-214 (London, 1882).

Illustrations Illustrations of Scottish History from the Twelfth to the Sixteenth Century, selected from unpublished MSS in the British Museum and the Tower of London, (ed.) J Stevenson, Maitland Club (1834).

Iter of Wark Iter of Wark, 1279, (ed.) C H Hartshorne, Memoirs illustrative of the history and antiquities of Northumberland - Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at Newcastle, 1852. Vol. II, Feudal and Military Antiquities of Northumberland and the Scottish Borders. (London, 1858), Appendix III, ix-lxviii.

Jordan Fantosme Chronicle of the War between the English and the Scots in 1173 and 1174 by Jordan Fantosme, (ed.) F Michel, Surtees Society 11 (Durham, 1840).

Laing Charters Calendar of the Laing Charters, (ed.) J Anderson (Edinburgh, 1889).

Leges Marchiarum Leges Marchiarum, ed. W Nicolson (London, 1747).Liber de Calchou Liber de S. Marie de Calchou. (ed.) Cosmo Innes, Bannatyne

Club, 2 vols (Edinburgh, 1846).Liber Feodorum Liber Feodorum. The Book of Fees commonly called the

Testa de Nevill. 2 vols - Part I: AD 1198-1242; Part II: AD 1242-1293 and Appendix, (ed.) H C Maxwell Lyte, 2 vols., Public Record Office (London, 1920, 1923).

Liber Niger Scaccarii Liber Niger Scaccarii, (ed.) T Hearne (London, 1774).MACDONALD, A, 1950, Calendar of Deeds in the Laing Charters relating to

Northumberland, AA4, 28, 105-31.Matthew Paris Matthaei Parisiensis, monachi sancti Albani, Chronica Majora,

(ed.) H R Luard, Rolls Series, 7 vols (London, 1872-74).NC Chartularium Abbathiae de Novo Monasterio, Ordinis Cisterciensis,

fundatae anno mcxxxvii. (ed.) J. T. Fowler, Surtees Society 66, 1876 (Durham, London & Edinburgh, 1878)

Northumb. Assize R. Three Early Assize Rolls for the County of Northumberland, saec. xiii. (ed.) W. Page, Surtees Society 88, 1890 (Durham, London & Edinburgh, 1891).

Northumb. & Durham Deeds Northumberland and Durham Deeds from the Dodsworth MSS. in Bodley's Library, Oxford. Newcastle upon Tyne Records Series 7, 1927 (Newcastle upon Tyne, 1929).

Northumb. Petitions Ancient Petitions relating to Northumberland. (ed.) C.M. Fraser, Surtees Society 176, 1961 (Durham & London, 1966).

Northumb. Pleas Northumberland Pleas from the Curia Regis and Assize Rolls 1198-1272. Newcastle upon Tyne Records Series 2, 1921 (1922, Newcastle upon Tyne).

Percy Bailiff’s Rolls Percy Bailiff’s Rolls of the Fifteenth Century, (ed.) J C Hodgson, Surtees Society 134, 1921 (Durham & London).



Pipe Roll The Great Roll of the Pipe of the Reigns of Henry II, Richard and John. Multiple volumes, Pipe Roll Society (London, 1884-1955).

Placita de Quo Warranto Placita de Quo Warranto temporibus Edw. I, II & III in curia receptae scaccarii Westm. asservata, Record Commission (London, 1818).

Red Book Red Book of the Exchequer, (ed.) H Hall, Rolls Series 99 (London, 1896).Rot. Cart Rotuli Chartarum in Turri Londiniensi asservati.Rot. Hundred. Rotuli Hundredorum temp. Hen III et Edw. I, ed. W Illingworth

and J Caley; 2 vols, Record Commission (London, 1812-18).Rot. Lit. Claus. Rotuli Litterarum Clausarum in Turri Londinensi asservati,

(ed.) T D Hardy, 2 vols., covering the period 1204-27, Record Commission (London, 1833-34).

Royal Letters Hen III Royal and other historical letters illustrative of the reign of Henry III, from originals in the P.R.O., (ed.) W W Shirley, Rolls Series 27, 2 vols (London, 1899).

RRS i Regesta Regum Scottorum I: The Acts of Malcolm IV King of Scots 1153-65, together with Scottish Royal Acts prior to 1153 not included in Sir Archibald Lawrie's 'Early Scottish Charters', (ed.) G W S Barrow (Edinburgh, 1960).

RRS ii Regesta Regum Scottorum II: The Acts of William I King of Scots 1165-1214, (ed.) G W S Barrow (Edinburgh, 1971).

RRS v Regesta Regum Scottorum V: The Acts of Robert I King of Scots 1306-1329, (ed.) A A M Duncan (Edinburgh, 1988).

Scalachronica Scalachronica, the reigns of Edward I-III as recorded by Sir Thomas Gray, trans. Sir H Maxwell (Glasgow, 1907).

Symeon Symeonis Dunelmensis Opera et Collectanea, (ed.) H Hinde, Surtees Society 41 (Durham, 1868).

Vita Oswini Vita Oswini Regis, in Miscellanea Biographica, (ed.) J Raine, Surtees Society 8, 1-59 (London & Edinburgh, 1838).

Early-modern

1604 Survey Survey of the Debateable and Border Lands adjoining the Realm of Scotland and belonging to the Crown of England taken A.D. 1604, (ed.) R P Sanderson (Alnwick, 1891).

1618 Rental 'A rental of the ancient principality of Redesdale 1618, copied from an original roll in the possession of William John Charleton, of Hesleyside, esq.', (ed.) R W Hodgson and J Hodgson, AA1, 2 (1832), 326-338.

1826 Poll Book The Poll Book of the Contested Election for the County of Northumberland from June 20th to July 6th, 1826. Alnwick, 1827.

1841 Poll Book The Poll Book of the Contested Election for Northern Division of the County of Northumberland taken on the 9th and 10th days of July, 1841, to which is added an Appendix with Copies of the Poll Books for1722 & 1734. Newcastle upon Tyne, 1841.

1852 Poll Book The Poll Book of the Contested Election for Northern Division of the County of Northumberland taken on the 22nd and 23rd days of July, 1852. Newcastle upon Tyne, 1852.

CBP Calendar of Letters and Papers relating to the affairs of the Borders of England and Scotland preserved in Her Majesty's Public Record Office, London; (ed.) J Bain, 2 vols. (HM General Register House, Edinburgh, 1894, & 1896).



Cal SP Calendar of State Papers, Domestic Series, preserved in the Public Record Office, multiple volumes, with addenda, covering the reigns of Edward VI-George III (London, 1856--).

Compounding Records Records of the Committees for Compounding, etc. with Delinquent Royalists in Durham and Northumberland during the Civil war, etc. 1643-1660. (ed.) R. Welford, Surtees Society 111, (Durham, London & Edinburgh, 1905).

EPR The Register of Baptisms, Marriages and Burials solemnized in the Ancient Parish Church of Elsdon in the County of Northumberland from AD 1672 to AD 1812. (ed.) T. Stephens, Society of Antiquaries of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, (Newcastle upon Tyne, 1912).

HODGSON, J, 1822, Calenders of prisoners confined in the High Castle in Newcastle upon Tyne, at the Assises for Northumberland in the years 1628 and 1629 (drawn from Sir Thomas Swinburne's Sherrif's Book), AA1, 1, 149-163.

Leland Itin The Itinerary of John Leland the Antiquary, in or about the years 1535-45, (ed.) L T Smith, 5 vols (London, 1907-10).

LP Hen VIII Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the reign of Henry VIII, preserved in the Public Record Office, 21 vols (London, 1862-1932).

Pococke 'Northern Journeys of Bishop Richard Pococke' in North Country Diaries II, (ed.) J. C. Hodgson, Surtees Society 124: 199-252 (Durham, London and Edinburgh, 1915 for 1914).

PSAN2, 9 (1899-1900): 196-197 (An 'Award on Umpirage' of 1703 relating to Petty Knowes).

PSAN3, 3 (1907): 23-29 'Buryness register of Baptisms and burials' (covers the period 1797-1813).

PSAN3, 9 (1919-1920): 57ff 'The Coleman Deeds' (p. 58 for 18th-century deeds etc. relating to Petty Knowes and Rochester).

Statutes The Statutes of the Realm: Printed by Command of His Majesty King George III, from original Records and authentic Manuscripts. Vol II. (London, 1816; repr.1963).



12.2 Secondary Bibliography

Journal and Corpora Abbreviations

AA1 Archaeologia Aeliana, First Series etc.Corpus Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Stone Sculpture. Volume I: County Durham and

Northumberland. R Cramp, (1984), Oxford University Press for the British Academy; Oxford.

CW2 Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmoreland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society, Second Series etc.

PSAN4 Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Newcastle upon Tyne, Fourth Series etc.

PSAS Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland.

References

ALLASON-JONES, L, and McKAY, B, 1985, Coventina’s Well. A Shrine on Hadrian’s Wall. Trustees of the Clayton Collection, Chesters Museum.

ANON., 1864, A History of Harbottle and its Neighbourhood; in The Alnwick Journal, 15 Dec. 1864, 478-9.

ARKLE, T, 1841, A statistical account of the landed estates in the Parish of Elsdon, in the County of Northumberland: Explanatory of a new and correct map of the parish shewing each estate, its quantity, value, tithe rent charge, land tax, etc. Newcastle upon Tyne.

ARKLE, T, 1879-81, Elsdon Mote Hills, History of the Berwickshire Naturalists Club 9, 538-542.

ASUD, 2002, The Breamish Valley Archaeology Project: Annual Report 2001. Archaeological Services, University of Durham, Unpublished report.

BAILEY, J, and CULLEY, G, 1805, General View of the Agriculture of the County of Northumberland. 3rd edition, London.

BAILEY, M, 2002, The English Manor c. 1200-c. 1500. Selected Sources translated and annotated. Manchester University Press; Manchester.

BARNWELL, P S, and GILES, C, 1997, English Farmsteads, 1750-1914. Swindon: Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England.

BARROW, G W S, 1966, The Anglo-Scottish Border, Northern History 1, .21-42.BARROW, G W S, 1969, Northern English society in the twelfth and thirteenth

centuries, Northern History 4, .1-28.BARROW, G W S, 1973, Pre-feudal Scotland: shires and thanes, in The Kingdom

of the Scots: Government, Church and Society from the 11th Century to the 14th Century. London, 1-68.

BARROW, G W S, 1974, A note on Falstone, AA5, 2, 149-52BARROW, G W S, 1998, The uses of placenames and Scottish history - pointers

and pitfalls, in S. Taylor (ed.) The Uses of Place-names. Edinburgh, 54-74.BATES, C J, 1889, The dedications of the ancient churches and chapels in the

Diocese of Newcastle, AA2 13, 317-45.BATES, C J, 1891, The Border Holds of Northumberland, AA2 14.BATES, C J, 1895, The History of Northumberland. London.BEAN, J M W, 1954, The Percies’ acquisition of Alnwick, AA4 32, 309-19.BEAN, J M W, 1958, The Estates of the Percy Family, 1416-1537. Oxford.BECKENSALL, S, 1992, Northumberland Place Names. Rothbury.BIRLEY, E, 1961, Research on Hadrian's Wall. Kendal.BONSER, K J, 1970, The Drovers.



BOSANQUET, R C, 1933-1934, The Roman tombs near High Rochester, PSAN4, 6, 246-251.

BOWDEN, M, 1990 (unpub.), Harbottle Castle - Archaeological Survey Report. Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England (Newcastle).

BRUCE, J C, 1857, An account of the excavations made at the Roman station of Bremenium during the summer of 1855, AA2, 1, 69-85.

BRUCE, J C, 1858, An account of the excavations of 1852, in Memoirs illustrative of the History and Antiquities of Northumberland: Proceedings of the Archaeogical Institute, Newcastle Meeting, 1852, Vol 1, 135-149.

BRUCE, J C, 1867, The Roman Wall, 3rd edition; London & Newcastle upon Tyne.BRUCE, J C, 1875, Lapidarium Septentrionale, or a Description of the Monuments

of Roman Rule in the North of England. London & Newcastle upon Tyne.

BRUCE, J C, (ed.) 1880, A descriptive Catalogue of Antiquities, chiefly British, at Alnwick Castle. Newcastle upon Tyne.

BULMER, T F, (ed.), 1887, History, Topography and Directory of Northumberland. Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

BUTLIN, R A, (ed.) and STALEY N, (cartography), 2003, Historical Atlas of North Yorkshire. Westbury Publishing; Otley, West Yorkshire.

CAMDEN, W, 1722, Britannia. (ed. E. Gibson), London.CASEY, P J, and SAVAGE, M, 1980, The coins from the excavations at High

Rochester in 1852 and 1855, AA5, 8, 75-87.CATHCART KING, D J, and ALCOCK, L, 1969, Ringworks of England and Wales,

Chateau Gaillard 3, 90-127.CATHCART KING, D J, 1983, Castellarium Anglicanum; 2 Vols. New York.CHARLTON, D B, 1986, The Story of Redesdale. Northumberland County

Council; Hexham.CHARLTON, D B, 1987, Upper North Tynedale: A Northumbrian Valley and its

People. Northumbrian Water, Newcastle upon Tyne.CHARLTON, D B, 1996, Fifty Centuries of Peace and War. An Archaeological

Survey of the Otterburn Training Area. The Ministry of Defence Otterburn Training Area.

CHARLTON, D B, 2004, The Archaeology of the Otterburn Training Area, in P Frodsham (ed.) Archaeology in Northumberland National Park. Council for British Archaeology Research Report 136; York, 324-37.

CHARLTON, D B, and DAY, J C, 1976, Upper Redesdale, Northumberland: an archaeological survey, in P A G Clack and P F Gosling (eds) Archaeology in the North, 228-242.

CHARLTON, D B, and DAY, J C, 1978, Excavation and Field Survey in Upper Redesdale, AA5 6, 61-86.

CHARLTON, D B, and DAY, J C, 1979, Excavation and Field Survey in Upper Redesdale: Part II, AA5 7, 207-233.

CHARLTON, D B, and DAY, J C, 1982, Excavation and Field Survey in Upper Redesdale: Part IV, AA5 10, 149-170.

CHARLTON, D B, and MITCHESON, M M, 1983, Yardhope. A shrine to Cocidius? Britannia 14, 143-53.

CHARLTON, D B, and MITCHESON, M M, 1984, The Roman cemetery at Petty Knowes, Rochester, Northumberland, AA5, 12, 1-31.

CHARLTON, E, 1859a, Notes on North Tynedale in 1279, AA2 3, 147-157.CHARLTON, E, 1859b, The inquisition after the death of Adam de Charlton of

Tyndale, AA2 3, 261-262.



CLACK, P A G, and GOSLING, P F, 1976, Archaeology in the North. Report of the Northern Archaeological Survey. Northern Archaeological Survey with HMSO.

Corpus Corpus of Anglo-Saxon Stone Sculpture. Volume I: County Durham and Northumberland. R Cramp (1984), Oxford University Press for the British Academy; Oxford.

COLLINGWOOD, W G, 1927, Northumbrian Crosses of the Pre-Norman Age. London.

CONZEN, M R G, 1969, Elsdon, in J Philipson (ed.) Northumberland National Park, HMSO, London, 71-82.

COWEN, J D, 1935, Prehistoric section, in A History of Northumberland. XIV: The Parishes of Alnham, Chatton, Chillingham, Eglingham, Ilderton, Ingram and Whittingham. The Chapelries of Lowick and Doddington, (ed.) M Hope Dodds, Newcastle upon Tyne, 21-67.

COWPER R A S, 1970-71, Northumbrian drove roads, Journal of the University of Newcastle upon Tyne Agricultural Society 24, 30-33.

CRAMP, R, and MIKET, R, 1982, Catalogue of the Anglo-Saxon and Viking Antiquities in the Museum of Antiquities, Newcastle upon Tyne. University of Newcastle upon Tyne; Newcastle upon Tyne.

CRASTER, E, 1954, The Patrimony of St Cuthbert, The English Historical Review 69, 177-99.

CRONE, G R, 1961, Early Maps of the British Isles AD 1000-1579. 2 parts; London.

CROW J, 1993, Survey and excavation at High Rochester, Northumberland 1992, Universities of Durham and Newcastle upon Tyne Archaeological Reports 1992, 16, 30-34.

CROW J, 1994, High Rochester, survey and excavation 1993, Universities of Durham and Newcastle upon Tyne Archaeological Reports 1993, 17, 29-37.

CROW J, 1995a, Housesteads. Batsford, London.CROW J, 1995b, High Rochester 1994: Third Interim Report. Dept of Archaeology,

University of Newcastle upon TyneCROW J, 1998, Harbottle Castle, Survey and Excavations 1997. (unpublished

report prepared for The Northumberland National Park Authority). University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Department of Archaeology.

CROW J, 2004a, Survey and excavation at Bremenium Roman fort, High Rochester 1992-98, in P Frodsham (ed.) Archaeology in Northumberland National Park. Council for British Archaeology Research Report 136; York, 213-23.

CROW J, 2004b, Harbottle Castle. Survey and Excavations 1997-99, in P Frodsham (ed.) Archaeology in Northumberland National Park. Council for British Archaeology Research Report 136; York, 246-61.

DANIELS, R, 2002, Medieval boroughs of northern England, in C. Brooks, R Daniels and A Harding (eds.) Past, Present and Future: The Archaeology of Northern England. Durham; Architectural and Archaeological Society of Durham and Northumberland Research Report 5, 185-196.

DAY, J C, and CHARLTON, D B, 1981, Excavation and field survey in upper Redesdale: Part III, AA5, 9, 267-298.

DIXON, D D,1895, Whittingham Vale, Northumberland: Its History, Traditions, and Folk Lore. Newcastle upon Tyne.

DIXON, D D, 1903, Upper Coquetdale, Northumberland: Its History, Traditions, and Folk Lore. Newcastle upon Tyne.

DIXON, P, and MARSHALL, P, 1993, The Great Tower in the Twelfth Century: The Case of Norham Castle, Archaeological Journal 150, 410-32.



DIXON, P J, 1985, Deserted Medieval Villages of North Northumberland: A Settlement History from the Twelth to the Twentieth Century, (2 Vols) Unpub. PhD thesis, University of Wales

ELLIS S G, 1995a, Tudor Frontiers and Noble Power: the Making of the British State, Oxford.

ELLIS S G, 1995b, Frontiers and Power in the early Tudor State, History Today 45, 35-42.

FAIRCLOUGH, G, 1983, Fortified Houses and Castles, in P A G Clack and J Ivy (eds.) The Borders; Durham; 81-99.

FAULL, M, and WOODHOUSE, S A,1981, West Yorkshire: an Archaaeological Survey to AD 1500. Wakefield.

FENTON, A, 1976, Scottish Country Life. Edinburgh.FRODSHAM, P, (ed.) 2004, Archaeology in Northumberland National Park.

Council for British Archaeology Research Report 136; York.FRODSHAM, P, and WADDINGTON, C, 2004, The Breamish Valley Archaeology

Project 1994-2002, in P Frodsham (ed.) Archaeology in Northumberland National Park. Council for British Archaeology Research Report 136; York, 171-89.

GATES, T G, and O’BRIEN C, 1988, Cropmarks at Milfield and New Bewick and the recognition of Grubenhauser in Northumberland, AA5 16, 1-9.

GRIFFITH, E, 1974, A History of Northumberland Water Mills. Unpublished.GRUNDY, J, 1988, Historic Buildings of the Northumberland National Park: A

Report to the National Park Authorities. Napper Collerton Partnership.HALL, G R, 1889, Notes on a pre-Conquest memorial stone from Birtley, and

fragments of crosses from Falstone, North Tynedale, AA2 13, 252-77.HALLAS, C, 1999, Rural responses to Industrialisation – The North Yorkshire

Pennines 1790–1914. Peter Lang; Bern.HALSDANE, A R B, 1968, The Drove Roads of Scotland (2nd edition), Edinburgh.HARBOTTLE, B, 1974, Note on excavation at The Belling, Archaeological

Newsbulletin CBE Group 3, May, 9-10.HARBOTTLE, B, 1977, Note on excavation at The Belling, Archaeological

Newsbulletin CBE Group 3, 13.HARBOTTLE, B, and NEWMAN, T G, 1973, Excavation and Survey on the Starsley

Burn, North Tynedale, 1972, AA5, 1, 137-75.HARRISON, 1577, Description of Britain.HART, C R, 1975, The Early Charters of Northern England and the North

Midlands. Leicester University Press; London.HARTSHORNE, C H, 1858, Memoirs illustrative of the history and antiquities of

Northumberland - Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at Newcastle, 1852. Vol. II, Feudal and Military Antiquities of Northumberland and the Scottish Borders. London.

HARVEY, P D A, 1993, Maps in Tudor England. The Public Records Office/The British Library; London.

HEDLEY, I, 2004, Metal hills and kelties: Signposts to an industrial past, in P Frodsham (ed.) Archaeology in Northumberland National Park. Council for British Archaeology Research Report 136; York, 306-23.

HEDLEY, W P, 1968, 1970, Northumberland Families. 2 vols., Newcastle upon Tyne.

HIGHAM, N, 1986, The Northern Counties to AD 1000. London.HIGHAM, N, 1993, The Kingdom of Northumbria AD 350-1100. Alan Sutton;

Stroud.HIGHAM, R and BARKER, P, 1992, Timber Castles. London.



HODGSON, J, n.d., (post 1810) A Topographical and Historical Description of the County of Northumberland. (in 'The Beauties of England and Wales' series).

HODGSON, J, 1822, Observations on the Roman station of Housesteads, AA1, 1, 263-320 (271 - 'urns of native type' found by 18th century ironstone prospectors at Petty Knowes).

HODGSON, J, 1827, History of Northumberland, part 2, vol. I: Containing the History of the franchise of Redesdale, and of the Umfreville Family; Also, of the Parishes of Elsden .... Newcastle upon Tyne.

HODGSON, J, 1840, History of Northumberland, part 2, vol. III: Newcastle upon Tyne.

HODGSON, J C, 1907, Holystone, AA3 4, 107-46.HODGSON, J C, 1908, An attempt to elucidate the descents of the family of Alder

of Prendwick, AA3 5, 16-39.HODGSON, J C, 1916, Notices of ruined towers, chapels, etc., AA3, 13, 1-16.HODGSON HINDE, J, 1869, Inedited Contributions to the History of

Northumberland. (Privately published, Newcastle upon Tyne).HONEYMAN, H L, 1927, The Golden Pots, AA4, 4, 90-103.HOOLE, K, 1984, North-Eastern Branch Lines Past and Present. Oxford

Publishing Co.; Poole.HOPE TAYLOR B, 1977, Yeavering: An Anglo-British Centre of early Northumbria.

London: HMSO.HORSLEY, J, 1732, Britannia Romana. London.HUGILL, R, 1939, Borderland Castles and Peles. London.HUNTER BLAIR C H, 1932-34, Harbottle Castle; History of the Berwickshire

Naturalist's Club 28, iii, 215-231.HUNTER BLAIR C H, 1944, The early castles of Northumberland. AA4, 22, 116-70.HUNTER BLAIR C H, 1947-49, Elsden; History of the Berwickshire Naturalist's

Club 31, 40-47.HUNTER BLAIR C H, 1957, Herbert Lewis Honeyman, AA4, 35, 252-59.HUTCHINSON W, 1778, A View of Northumberland, 1776. Vol. 1, Newcastle upon

TyneJARRETT, M G, 1987, The Deserted medieval village of West Whelpington,

Northumberland, AA5, 16,JARRETT, M G, 1988, The Deserted medieval village of West Whelpington,

Northumberland, AA5, 17,JENKINS, S C, 1991, The Rothbury Branch. The Oakwood Press; Headington,

Oxford.JOBEY, G, 1960, Some rectilinear farmsteads of the Roman period in

Northumberland, AA4, 38, 1-38.JOBEY, G, 1962, A note on scooped enclosures in Northumberland, AA4, 40, 47-

58.JOBEY, G, 1964, Enclosed stone-built settlements in north Northumberland, AA4,

42, 41-64.JOBEY, G, 1965, Hill-forts and settlements in Northumberland, AA4, 43, 21-64.JOBEY, G, 1973, A Romano-British settlement at Tower Knowe, Wellhaugh,

Northumberland, AA5, 1, 55-79.JOBEY, G, 1974, A Field-Guide to Prehistoric Northumberland, Part 2. Frank

Graham; Newcastle upon Tyne.JOBEY, G, 1977, Iron Age and later farmsteads on Belling Law, Northumberland,

AA5, 5, 1-38.



JOBEY, G, 1978, Iron Age and Romano-British settlements on Kennel Hall Knowe, North Tynedale, Northumberland (1976), AA5, 6, 1-28.

JOBEY, G, 1982, The settlement at Doubstead and Romano-British settlement on the coastal plain between Tyne and Forth, AA5, 10, 1-23.

JOBEY, G, 1983a, A note on some northern palisaded sites, in A Connor & D V Clarke (eds.) From the Stone Age to the Forty Five. Donald; Edinburgh, 197-205.

JOBEY, G, 1983b, Excavation of an unenclosed settlement on Standrop Rigg, Northumberland, and some problems related to similar settlements between Tyne and Forth, AA5, 11, 1-21.

JOBEY, G, 1984, A settlement on Boggle Hill, Thorneyburn (NY 783862), AA5, 12, 241-242.

JOBEY, G, and TAIT, J, 1966, Excavations on palisaded settlements and cairnfields at Alnham, Northumberland, AA4, 44, 5-48.

JOLLIFFE, J E A, 1926, Northumbrian institutions, The English Historical Review 41, 1-42.

JONES, G. R. J. 1976 Multiple estates and early settlement, in Sawyer P. H. (ed.) Medieval Settlement, Continuity and Change. London, 15-40.

KAPELLE, W E, 1979, The Norman Conquest of the North: The Region and its Transformation, 1000-1135. London

KEEN, L, 1982, The Umfravilles, the castle and barony of Prudhoe, Northumberland, Anglo-Norman Studies 5, 165-84.

KELLY, 1910, Kelly’s Directory of Durham and Northumberland.KNOWLES, W H, 1899, The bastle house at Doddington, Northumberland, AA2,

21, 293-301.LAWSON, W, 1971, The Newcastle to Carter Bar Road (A696 and A68), AA4, 49,

187-209LAX, A, 1999, Border troubles and Border farmers: A study of bastle houses in

the upper Tarset Valley, Northumberland, in ‘We were always chasing time.’ Papers presented to Keith Blood, (Northern Archaeology 17/18, Special edition), 165-172.

LOMAS R, 1996, County of Conflict: Northumberland from Conquest to Civil War. East Linton.

LONG, B, 1967, Castles of Northumberland. The Medieval Fortifications of the County. Harold Hill; Newcastle upon Tyne.

McCORD, N, 1982, An Introduction to the History of Upper North Tynedale, (Northumbrian Water)McCORD, N and THOMPSON, R, 1998, The Northern Counties from AD 1000,

Longman; Harlow, Essex.McDONNELL, J, 1988, The role of transhumance in northern England, Northern

History 11, 1-16.McNAMEE, C, 1997, The Wars of the Bruces: Scotland, England and Ireland,

1306-1328. Tuckwell Press, East Linton.McOMISH D, 1999, Wether Hill and Cheviot Hillforts, in ‘We were always chasing

time.’ Papers presented to Keith Blood, (Northern Archaeology 17/18, Special edition), 113-121.

MACDONALD, S, 1979, The role of the individual in agricultural change: the example of George Culley of Fenton, Northumberland, in H S A Fox and R A Butlin (eds.) Change in the Countryside: Essays on Rural England, 1500-1900. London: Institute of British Geographers Special Publication, no. 10.

MACKENZIE, E, 1825, An Historical, Topographical and Descriptive View of the County of Northumberland and Parts of County Durham situated North of



the River Tyne with Berwick upon Tweed. 2nd edition; Newcastle upon Tyne.

MACKICHAN, N D, 1998, The Northumberland Central Railway, its Concept and Context. Whittingham, Northumberland.

MACLAUCHLAN, H, 1852a, Memoir written during a Survey of the Watling Street, from the Tees to the Scotch Border, in the years 1850 and 1851. London.

MACLAUCHLAN, H, 1852b, The Watling Street. The chief line of Roman Communication leading across the Counties of Durham and Northumberland, from the River Swale to the Scotch Border. London

MACLAUCHLAN, H, 1864a, Memoir written during a Survey of the eastern branch of the Watling Street, in the county of Northumberland, in the years 1857, 1858 and 1859. London.

MACLAUCHLAN, H, 1864b, Eastern branch of the Watling Street, in the County of Northumberland, together with a branch extending from High Rochester to Whittingham. London.

MACLAUCHLAN, H, 1867, Notes not included in the Memoirs already published on Roman Roads in Northumberland. London.

MAWER A, 1920, The Place Names of Northumberland and Durham. Cambridge.MEIKLE, M M, 2004, A British Frontier? Lairds and Gentlemen in the Eastern

Borders, 1540-1603. Tuckwell Press; East Linton.MIKET, R, 1976, The evidence for Neolithic activity in the Milfield basin,

Northumberland, in C Burgess and R Miket (eds.) Settlement and Economy in the Third and Second Millennia BC, Oxford; British Archaeological Reports, British Series 33, 113-146.

MILLER, E, 1976 for 1975, Farming in northern England during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, Northern History 11, 1-16.

MILLER, H, 1887, Geology of the Country around Otterburn and Elsdon. Memoirs of the Geological Survey.

MITFORD, E B, 1939, Life of Lord Redesdale. MITFORD, R, 1989, From Bremenium to High Rochester. (unpub. BA diss., Dept of

Archaeology, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne).MOORE, M, 1915, The Lands of the Scottish King in England: The Honour of

Huntingdon, the Liberty of of Tyndale and the Honour of Penrith. George Allen & Unwin Ltd; London.

MORRIS, C D, 1977, Northumbria and the Viking settlement: the evidence for land-holding, AA5, 5, 81-103.

NCH XI (1922), A History of Northumberland. XI: The Parishes of Carham, Branxton, Kirknewton, Wooler and Ford. K H Vickers (ed.), Newcastle upon Tyne & London.

NCH XIV (1935), A History of Northumberland. XIV: The Parishes of Alnham, Chatton, Chillingham, Eglingham, Ilderton, Ingram and Whittingham. The Chapelries of Lowick and Doddington. M Hope Dodds (ed.) Newcastle upon Tyne & London.

NCH XV (1940), A History of Northumberland. XV: The Parishes of Simonburn, Rothbury and Alwinton, with the Chapelry of Holystone and the Lordship of Kidland. M Hope Dodds (ed.), Newcastle upon Tyne & London.

O’BRIEN C, 2002, The early medieval shires of Yeavering, Breamish and Bamburgh, AA5 30, 53-73.

O’BRIEN C, and MIKET R, 1991, The early medieval settlement of Thirlings, Northumberland, Durham Archaeological Journal 7, 57-91.

O'NEIL B, 1960, Castles and Cannon. Oxford, 42-45.OSWALD A, JECOCK M, and AINSWORTH S, 2000, An Iron Age hillfort and its

environs on West Hill, Northumberland. English Heritage Survey Report.



OSWALD A, and McOMISH D, 2002, An Iron Age hillfort and its environs on St Gregory’s Hill, Northumberland. English Heritage Archaeological Investigation Report Series AI/1/2002.

OSWALD A, 2004, An Iron Age hillfort in an evolving landscape. Analytical field survey on West Hill, Kirknewton, in P F Frodsham (ed.) Archaeology in Northumberland National Park. Council for British Archaeology Research Report 136; York, 202-12.

OWEN, S F, 2003, Redewater Views 1912 – 1937. The Heritage Centre, Bellingham.

PARSON and WHITE, 1828, History, Directory and Gazetteer of the County of Northumberland.

PEASE, H, 1924, Otterburn. The Tower, Hall and Dene and the Lordship, or Manor, of Redesdale, AA3 21, 121-31.

PETER McGOWAN ASSOCIATES with CROW, J, and RUSHWORTH, A, 2002, Housesteads Roman Fort, Conservation Plan. 2 vols. English Heritage.

PEVSNER, N, GRUNDY, J, McCOMBIE G, RYDER, P, WELFARE, H, and LINSLEY S, 2001, The Buildings of England: Northumberland. Reprinted 2nd edition; Yale University Press, London.

PLACKETT, R L, 1996/97, Roads and Tracks in the English Middle March. Part one from Roman Road to the New Line, Tyne and Tweed, 51.

PLATT C, 1981, The Parish Churches of Medieval England. London: Secker & Warburg.

PLATT, C, 1982, The Castle in Medieval England and Wales. London.PSAN2 iv, (1889), 10,: Falstone.PSAN2 ix, (1900), 229-47, Harbottle, Alwinton and Hepple Woodhouses.QUINEY, A, 1976, Elsdon, Archaeological Journal 133, 173-178.RAINE, J, 1852, The History and Antiquities of North Durham.RAMM, H G, McDOWELL, R W, and MERCER, E, 1970, Shielings and Bastles.

Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (England); London.RENNISON, R W, 1979, Water to Tyneside. Gateshead.RICHMOND, I A, 1936, Excavations at High Rochester and Risingham, 1935, AA4,

13, 170-198.RICHMOND, I A, 1940, The Romans in Redesdale, in M Hope Dodds (ed.), A History

of Northumberland XV, Northumberland County History Committee; Newcastle upon Tyne, 63-154.

RIDPATH, G, 1848, The Border History of England and Scotland (1979 facsimile reprint of the 1848 edition). Edinburgh.

RITCHIE, R L G, 1954, The Normans in Scotland. Edinburgh.RIVET, A L F, and SMITH, C, 1979, The Place-names of Roman Britain. 2nd edition;

London.ROBERTS, B K, 1972, Village plans in County Durham: a preliminary statement,

Medieval Archaeology 16, 33-56.ROBERTS, B K, 1976, The northern village: an archaeological perspective, in P A

G Clack and P F Gosling (eds) Archaeology in the North, 255-265.ROBERTS, B K, 1977, Rural Settlement in Britain. Longman; Folkstone. ROBERTS, B K, 1987, The Making of the English Village. A Study in Historical

Geography. Longman; Harlow, Essex. ROBERTS, B K, 1990, Back lanes and tofts, distribution maps and time: Medieval

nucleated settlement in the North of England, in B E Vyner (ed.) Medieval Rural Settlement in North East England, Durham, 107-125.

ROBERTS, B K, 1996, Landscapes of Settlement. Prehistory to the Present. Routledge, London and New York.



ROBERTS, I D, 1992, Upland Farming in Northumberland (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne.

ROBERTS, I D, and WEST, M, 1998, Bellingham North Tynedale and Redesdale. Tempus.

ROBSON, R, 1989, The Rise and Fall of the English Highland Clans: Tudor Responses to a Medieval Problem. Edinburgh

ROUND, J H, 1910, Peerage and Pedigree: Studies in Peerage Law and Family History. 2 vols; London.

RUSHWORTH, A, 1996, High Rochester Fort: A Documentary Assessment of Post-Roman Occupation (unpublished report; commissioned by The Northumberland National Park Authority). The Archaeological Practice, University of Newcastle upon Tyne.

RUSHWORTH, A, and CARLTON, R J, 1998, Harbottle Castle: A Documentary Study. (unpublished report; prepared for The Northumberland National Park Authority). The Archaeological Practice, University of Newcastle upon Tyne

RYDER, P, 1990, Bastles and Towers in the Northumberland National Park. Unpublished report for Northumberland National Park Authority.

RYDER, P, 2004, Towers and bastles in Northumberland National Park, in P Frodsham (ed.) Archaeology in Northumberland National Park. Council for British Archaeology Research Report 136; York, 262-71.

St. JOSEPH, J K, 1950, Castles of Northumberland from the air. AA4, 28, 7-17.SALWAY, P, 1965, The Frontier People of Roman Britain. Cambridge.SEWELL, G W M, 1992, The North British Railway in Northumberland. Merlin

Books; Braunton, Devon.SMITH, D J, 1962, The shrine of the nymphs and the genius loci at Carrawburgh,

AA4, 40, 59-81.SPRING, D, 1963, The English Landed Estate in the Nineteenth Century: its

Administration. Johns Hopkins; Baltimore.STOBBS, A W, 1986, Memories of the LNER: Rural Northumberland. PenrithTATE G, 1866, 1868-9, The History of the Borough, Castle and Barony of Alnwick.

2 vols; H H Blair, Alnwick.TATE G, 1868, Harbottle Castle; in Berwickshire Naturalist's Club 5, 427-37.TAYLOR, C C, 1983, Village and Farmstead. London.TAYLOR, G N, n.d., The Valley of the Fords: 900 Years of Redesdale. Privately

printed.TAYLOR, G N, n.d. (b), The Story of Elsdon. Frank Graham, Newcastle upon

Tyne.THOMPSON, D M, 1977, Female Agricultural Workers’ Costume in the Borders

from 1890 to 1939. A consideration of functional aspects and self-consciousness of style. Unpublished MA thesis, Open University.

TOMLINSON, W W, 1888, Comprehensive Guide to the County of Northumberland. Newcastle upon Tyne.

TOPPING, P, 1981a, The prehistoric field systems of the College Valley, north Northumberland, Northern Archaeology 2(1), 14-33.

TOPPING, P, 1981b, Hethpool stone circle, Northern Archaeology 2, 3-10.TOPPING, P, 1983, Observations on the stratigraphy of early agricultural remains in the Kirknewton

area of the Northumberland Cheviots, Northern Archaeology 4(1), 21-31.TOPPING, P, 1989, The context of cord rig cultivation in later prehistoric Northumberland, in M

Bowden, D Mackay and P Topping (eds.), From Cornwall to Caithness: Some Aspects of British Field Archaeology, Oxford; British Archaeological Reports, British Series 209, 145-157.

TOPPING, P, 1997, Different realities: the Neolithic in the Northumberland Cheviots, in P Topping (ed.) Neolithic Landscapes. Oxbow; Oxford, 113-23.



TOPPING, P, 2004, Hillforts, farms and fields. Excavations on Wether Hill, Ingram 1993-2002, in P Frodsham (ed.) Archaeology in Northumberland National Park. York; Council for British Archaeology Research Report 136, 190-201.

TREVELYAN, G M, 1931, The Middle Marches, in Clio, a Muse. Longmans.TUCK, J A, 1971, Northumbrian Society in the fourteenth century, Northern

History 6: 22-39.TUCK, J A, 1985, War and society in the medieval North, Northern History 21,

33-52.TUCK, J A, 1986, The emergence of a Northern nobility, 1250-1400, Northern

History 22, 1-17.VINOGRADOFF, P, 1908, English Society in the Eleventh Century: Essays in

English Medieval History. Oxford.WADDELL, J, 2003, Mills around Otterburn, Northumbrian Mills 22, 5-6.WADDINGTON, C, 1998, Cup and ring marks in context, Cambridge

Archaeological Journal 8(1), 29-54.WADDINGTON, C, 1999, A Landscape Study of the Mesolithic-Neolithic in the

Milfield Basin, Northumberland. Oxford; British Archaeological Reports, British Series 291.

WADDINGTON, C, BLOOD, K, and CROW, J C, 1998, Survey and excavation at Harehaugh hillfort and possible Neolithic enclosure, Northern Archaeology 15-16, 87-108.

WALLIS, J, 1769 The Natural History and Antiquities of Northumberland. W & W Strahan; London.

WALTON, J, 1962, The Border – a National Forest Park Guide.WARN, C R, 1975, Rural Branch Lines of Northumberland. Frank Graham;

Newcastle upon Tyne.WATTS, S J, 1971, Tenant-right in early seventeenth-century Northumberland,

Northern History 6, 64-87.WATTS, S J, 1975, From Border to Middle Shire, Northumberland 1586-1625.

Leicester.WELFARE, A, 1995, The Mote Hills, Elsdon, Northern Archaeology 12, 45-50.WELFARE, H, 2002, The Uplands of the Northern Counties in the First Millenium

BC, in C. Brooks, R Daniels and A Harding (eds.) Past, Present and Future: The Archaeology of Northern England. Durham; Architectural and Archaeological Society of Durham and Northumberland Research Report 5, 71-77.

WELFARE, H, BOWDEN, M and BLOOD, K, 1999, fieldwork and the castles of the Anglo-Scottish Borders, in P Pattison, D Field and S Ainsworth (eds.), Patterns in the Past: Essays in Landscape Archaeology for Christopher Taylor, Oxford, 53-60.

WELFARE, H, and SWANN, V, 1995, Roman Camps in England: The Field Evidence. RCHME/HMSO, London.

WELLS, J A, 1998, The Railways of Northumberland and Newcastle-upon-Tyne 1828 – 1998, (Powdene Publicity).

WELSBY, D A, 1982, The Roman Military Defence of the British Provinces in its Later Phases. BAR 101, Oxford.

WHITTAKER, H, 1949, A Descriptive List of the Maps of Northumberland 1576-1900. Newcastle upon Tyne.

WILSON, K, AND LEATHART, S, 1982, The Kielder Forests. A Forestry Commission Guide. Forestry Commission.

WILSON, R J A, 1988, A Guide to the Roman Remains in Britain. 3rd Edition, London.

WINCHESTER, A J L, 1978, The medieval vill in the Western Lake District: Some problems of definition, CW2 78, 55-69.



WINCHESTER, A J L, 1987, Landscape and Society in Medieval Cumbria. Edinburgh.

WINCHESTER, A J L, 2000, The Harvest of the Hills: Rural Life in Northern England and the Scottish Borders, 1400-1700, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.

WOOD, J, 1822, Some account of a Saxon inscription, on a stone found near Falstone in the County of Northumberland, AA1 1, 103-4.

WRATHMELL, S, 1975, Deserted and Shrunken Villages in Southern Northumberland from the Twelfth to the Twentieth Centuries. Unpublished Ph. D. thesis, University of Cardiff.

WRIGHT, G, 1989, The Northumbrian Uplands, David and Charles.YOUNG, A, 2003, Railways in Northumberland. Martin Bairstow; Farsley, Leeds.YOUNG, R, 2002, The Palaeolithic and Mesolithic periods in Northern England, in

C. Brooks, R Daniels and A Harding (eds.) Past, Present and Future: The Archaeology of Northern England. Durham; Architectural and Archaeological Society of Durham and Northumberland Research Report 5, 19-27.

YOUNG R E, 1997, Land Adjacent to Townhead House, Harbottle - An Archaeological Assessment (unpublished report; copy lodged with Northumberland SMR). Tyne and Wear Museums Service.



13. APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1: LIST OF HISTORIC DOCUMENTS

APPENDIX 2: LIST OF MODERN PHOTOGRAPHS

APPENDIX 3: LIST OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS

APPENDIX 4: LIST OF SITES AND MONUMENTS

APPENDIX 5: LIST OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS (GRUNDY 1988)

APPENDIX 6: PUBLIC RECORDS OFFICE CATALOGUE

APPENDIX 7: NORTHUMBERLAND RECORDS OFFICE CATALOGUE

[NOTE: Historic Maps & Documents (M&D), Historic Photographs (HP) and Modern Photographs (MP), listed in Appendices 1 & 2, are archived in digital form



with the Northumberland National Park Authority and Northumberland Records Office]
