North-west of England during the Anglo Saxon era

authun

Ad Honorem
Aug 2011
5,219
#31
Agreed. And it was the volume grain production which supported the villa system. But if we accept that volume grain production is just one economic model, rather than being the only one, the fact hat such a system did not eixst in the north doesn't automatically mean that the north was economically inactive or underdeveloped.



But not impossible. Cattle bones found at the forts at Carlisle and Birdoswald show the same mutations, suggesting a shared and local supply.

Again, I stress, lancashire, south of the Vale of Eden. Roughly between the Mersey and River Lune. I think with the Lune and Ribble flood plains and the other numbers smaller streams feeding the area with water, it was too low, too wet and the soils too heavy. To the north however, as you can see from this relief map, Carlisle and the Wall are well served by better soils. If you know of a map of british settlements in lancs, I'd be grateful. It is supposed to have been a territory of the Brigantes but, during the roman period, their important places were to the east at places like Stanwick Castle and Aldeborough.

 
Jan 2014
2,566
Westmorland
#32
Again, I stress, lancashire, south of the Vale of Eden. Roughly between the Mersey and River Lune. I think with the Lune and Ribble flood plains and the other numbers smaller streams feeding the area with water, it was too low, too wet and the soils too heavy. To the north however, as you can see from this relief map, Carlisle and the Wall are well served by better soils. If you know of a map of british settlements in lancs, I'd be grateful. It is supposed to have been a territory of the Brigantes but, during the roman period, their important places were to the east at places like Stanwick Castle and Aldeborough.
Can I ask what mapping software you use? Your maps are always good and I'd like to learn how to do my own rather better than I can now.

I'm afraid I don't have a map of Romano-British settlements in Lancashire. It's argued that Fleetwood was Portus Setantii, but I don't know how valid that argument is.

Heysham was a major early Christian site. A scattering of ham and eccles names on the Fylde (for them as don't know, the bit that sticks out between the Lune and the Ribble) seem to attest a relatively early Anglo-Saxon presence, even though that presence (as in Cumbria) isn't very visible archaeologically. Treales, near Kirkham, is a rare British survival containing tref (village). The Lune doesn't have much of a flood plain, although the lands around the Ribble look much more like the Fens - especially around Hesketh Bank, near Southport.

East Lancs is upland. The main Roman road north ran from Ribchester up to Burrow in Lonsdale, where the Lancaster road forked off along the Vale of Lune. Lancaster may well be the Alauna of Iter X of the Antonine Itinerary (old arguments that Alauna was Watecook near Kendal do not stack up).

Lancaster itself got a 'Saxon Shore' style fort in the late Roman period of which a chunk (now know as the Wery Wall) still survives. It is just above St Georges' Quay, which was where the port was in Georgian times.
 
Nov 2008
1,390
England
#33
I never said it was populated to a similar density. I just said that it wasn't underdeveloped.
I`ve just consulted David Hill`s Atlas of Anglo-Saxon England and there is a map of population density estimated from the Domesday Book. The population density for Northumbria was low compared with south-east England. For Cumbria and Lancashire, the ratio was under 2-5 people per square mile, but there were areas particularly in Yorkshire for a higher density of just under 5 people per square mile. The settlement patterns recorded in the Domesday book reflect this. Lancashire seems to have been a back water, and the map depicting land quality shows relatively poor land for the north-west of Northumbria, but there were though some areas described as good agricultural land .
 
Jan 2014
2,566
Westmorland
#34
I`ve just consulted David Hill`s Atlas of Anglo-Saxon England and there is a map of population density estimated from the Domesday Book. The population density for Northumbria was low compared with south-east England. For Cumbria and Lancashire, the ratio was under 2-5 people per square mile, but there were areas particularly in Yorkshire for a higher density of just under 5 people per square mile. The settlement patterns recorded in the Domesday book reflect this. Lancashire seems to have been a back water, and the map depicting land quality shows relatively poor land for the north-west of Northumbria, but there were though some areas described as good agricultural land .
That's interesting. Do we know how David Hill gets to his calculations?

Is it is finescale map or does it just show a more localised picture?
 
Nov 2008
1,390
England
#35
That's interesting. Do we know how David Hill gets to his calculations?

Is it is finescale map or does it just show a more localised picture?
Those two maps I mentioned were based on The Domesday Geographies of England edited by H. C. Darby, published in 1969. The atlas by David Hill which was published in 1981 is aimed at the specialist not the generalist, and no doubt some of the information contained within has been has been developed further by now. Nevertheless, a good book which may still be found in academic libraries. A word of caution for Anglo-Saxon fans on this forum who may seek a copy. An atlas of pretty coloured maps it is not. All the maps are in black and white. And, oh yes, it deals mainly with Anglo-Saxon history from the time of Bede until just after the Norman conquest.
 

authun

Ad Honorem
Aug 2011
5,219
#36
Those two maps I mentioned were based on The Domesday Geographies of England edited by H. C. Darby, published in 1969. The atlas by David Hill which was published in 1981 is aimed at the specialist not the generalist, and no doubt some of the information contained within has been has been developed further by now. Nevertheless, a good book which may still be found in academic libraries. A word of caution for Anglo-Saxon fans on this forum who may seek a copy. An atlas of pretty coloured maps it is not. All the maps are in black and white. And, oh yes, it deals mainly with Anglo-Saxon history from the time of Bede until just after the Norman conquest.

Found this map on the researchgate web site:



An explanation is given at Figure 2. Approximate population densities in AD 1086. The small grey...

There are some other interesting maps linked to that page.
 
Jun 2015
5,730
UK
#37
It makes sense, since there is more scope for arable farming in the south and east of England. What are the black squares though - towns/cities with high populations?
There is a square roughly where Milton Keynes should be now. Since it didn't exist back then, I'm wondering if this is Olney in Buckinghamshire.
 

authun

Ad Honorem
Aug 2011
5,219
#38
It makes sense, since there is more scope for arable farming in the south and east of England. What are the black squares though - towns/cities with high populations?
There is a square roughly where Milton Keynes should be now. Since it didn't exist back then, I'm wondering if this is Olney in Buckinghamshire.
Without reading the statistical treatment used to create the heat map, i can only point towards what it says in the text: "Towns that were absent from Domesday but whose additional urban populations have been estimated based on other documentary evidence are shown as black squares."

The grey dots are the census points, placenames and manors. There were however about 18 towns with population centres with more than 2000 inhabitants. The author of this map must have used a lower threshold as there are, I think, 23 larger places. The populations of these centres must be calculated differently than those for the placenames and manors which were agricultural in nature.
 

authun

Ad Honorem
Aug 2011
5,219
#40
Bedford wasn't in Domesday? that's surprising. Norwich and Ipswich were also squares.
I don't know which towns are absent from Domesday but some places like London, Bristol, Winchester, Tamworth are. The BBC site mentions that:

"The place-names found in the Domesday Book are township and estate names, and may include other villages and hamlets that receive no specific mention in the text; for example, the Domesday entry for Shepshed, near Loughborough, includes the settlements of Long Watton, Lockington and Hemington, but they are not specifically mentioned. "

When calculating the population, the grey dots are treated thus:

"A very simple multiplier of 4.75 has been used to convert all recorded individuals in Domesday to hypothetical household complements and this then allows for the further addition of certain urban populations ignored in Domesday but estimated from other records (following Moore 1997). "

This won't work for either the urban centres or those not mentioned, ie the blacks quares, so they have been calculated differently. Obviously, if one multiplied all the names mentioned in the Domesday entry for York by 4.75, the population would be under represented. It's urban, not agricultural.