Post on 20-Jun-2020
1
Forgotten Heritage: the landscape history of the Norwich suburbs A pilot study. Rik Hoggett and Tom Williamson, Landscape Group, School of History, University of East Anglia, Norwich.
This project was commissioned by the Norwich Heritage, Economic and Regeneration Trust and supported by the East of England Development Agency
2
Introduction
Over recent decades, English Heritage and other government bodies have become
increasingly concerned with the cultural and historical importance of the ordinary, ‘everyday’
landscape. There has been a growing awareness that the pattern of fields, roads and
settlements is as much a part of our heritage as particular archaeological sites, such as ancient
barrows or medieval abbeys. The urban landscape of places like Norwich has also begun to be
considered as a whole, rather than as a collection of individual buildings, by planning
authorities and others. However, little attention has been afforded in such approaches to the
kinds of normal, suburban landscapes in which the majority of the British population actually
live, areas which remained as countryside until the end of the nineteenth century but which
were then progressively built over. For most people, ‘History’ resides in the countryside, or in
our ancient towns and cities, not in the streets of suburbia.
The landscape history of these ordinary places deserves more attention. Even relatively recent
housing developments have a history – are important social documents. But in addition, these
developments were not imposed on a blank slate, but on a rural landscape which was in some
respects preserved and fossilised by urbanisation: woods, hedges and trees were often retained
in some numbers, and their disposition in many cases influenced the layout of the new roads
and boundaries; while earlier buildings from the agricultural landscape usually survived.
Moreover, fashionable cities like Norwich were often fringed by concentrations of country
houses and landscape parks, elements of which were also often retained when areas were
developed. What is particularly interesting is that elements of the old agricultural landscape
were often preserved in suburban areas better than in the ‘real’ countryside, especially in
intensively arable areas like Norfolk, where hedges, trees and woods were often removed
wholesale in the second half of the twentieth century.
Raising public awareness of the historical importance of these ‘ordinary’ landscapes is
important for a number of reasons. It helps foster a sense of place; it adds a layer of interest
and social value to the environment experienced by the majority of the population; and it
encourages the preservation of historically important but otherwise neglected historical
features. In the case of Norwich, such ‘suburban’ areas are extensive, occupying the space
between the medieval city walls and the open countryside. The following pages describe some
aspects of the landscape history and archaeology of an area of west Earlham, on the western
3
fringes of Norfolk. This project was commissioned by the Norwich Heritage, Economic and
Regeneration Trust and supported by the East of England Development Agency. It is not
intended as a complete study: had time and resources been available, more attention would
have been paid to the character and significance of the streets and houses constructed here in
the course of the twentieth century. But this pilot project does give some indication of how a
larger study might approach the landscape history of superficially uninteresting pieces of
suburbia.
4
Figure 1. The Study Area, showing West Earlham to the north and UEA to the south.
5
The Study Area
As can be seen in Figure 1, the study area embraces a substantial area of Earlham parish.
Beginning in the north, its boundary is defined by the line of Bowthorpe Road as it runs
south-east to join the Five Ways roundabout. It then follows Bluebell Road southwards until it
meets the south-western extent of the grounds of the University of East Anglia. The boundary
then turns west, to follow the line of the River Yare upstream towards the north-west, under
the Earlham Road bridge, before turning north again along the line of the Earlham parish
boundary, back to the Bowthorpe Road. The area so defined encompasses the UEA campus,
Earlham Park, several patches of marshland, areas of woodland and a large amount of post-
war council housing. Within the study area there are a number of significant standing
buildings, ranging from the medieval church, through Earlham Hall, to the buildings of the
UEA itself. There is also an assortment of surviving earthworks, particularly within Earlham
Park. There has never been any significant archaeological work conducted here, although a
number of discoveries have been made by chance and reported to the authorities. Now a
predominantly urban suburb of Norwich, the study area was very well mapped from the late
nineteenth century onwards, and some earlier maps also survive.
History in the Garden
People usually think of archaeological artefacts as things which are found on excavations, or
which might be recovered from the surface of fields in the open countryside, through metal
detecting or ‘fieldwalking’ – the process of carefully examining the surface of the ploughsoil to
recover pottery and other debris indicating the sites of early settlement. But finds of prehistoric
flint or pottery can also be made in the suburbs, and gardens have yielded important finds.
A search of the Norfolk Historic Environment Record (HER) – the official archaeological
archive for the county - reveals that a number of important finds have been made in the study
area. Yet only one piece of deliberate archaeological work has been conducted here: a
‘watching brief’ carried out in 1993 in the area of Earlham Lodge, which revealed Post-
Medieval tile and very little else (NHER 29915). All of the other archaeological finds
discussed below have been discovered accidentally, suggesting that the potential for
archaeological discoveries within the study area is very high, and that by raising awareness of
the kinds of artefacts likely to turn up in gardens a great deal of important archaeological
evidence could be recovered.
6
Figure 2. The locations of the HER entries discussed in the text.
7
Figure 3. The Neolithic flint axehead from UEA (NHER 9321). 1:1.
Four axeheads from the Neolithic period (the ‘new stone age’, the period between around
4000 and 2300 BC) have been found. In 1950 a flint axehead was discovered in the garden of
7 Hanbury Close (NHER 9320) and was subsequently donated to Norwich Castle Museum
(NCM108.950). Similarly, the cutting end of a polished flint axe was discovered in the garden
of 25 Wycliffe Road in 1958 (NHER 9319). A chipped flint axehead was discovered
protruding from the footpath near to the UEA Broad in 1988 (NHER 24993). Another,
partly-polished flint axe was handed in by workmen during the construction of a new road at
UEA in 1992 and is illustrated in Figure 3 (NHER 9321). That four such axes should have
been discovered within such a small study area, none of them the result of deliberate
archaeological activity, is clearly indicative of a high level of activity within the area during the
8
Neolithic period. These finds are paralleled by numerous other discoveries from the
surrounding area, all pointing towards an extensive Neolithic occupation of the river valley.
The discovery of polished examples is suggestive of a relatively high-status presence, further
strengthened by the discovery during the construction of the UEA Broad in 1977 of a
perforated stone mace-head of Neolithic or possible Bronze Age date, illustrated in Figure 4
(NHER 13215).
Evidence of Neolithic activity within the study area has been discovered at six other sites. A
flint borer was found in the woods adjacent to Bluebell Road in 1974 (NHER 9378) and an
awl was found in an area of redeposited rubbish in 1975, although only its very general
location was noted (NHER 9402). A flint scatter including cores and scrapers was found on
the surface at the Bluebell Road Nurseries in 1977 (NHER 13410), the material was
subsequently lodged with Norwich Castle Museum (NCM98.987). Further flints, including
cores, scrapers and worked flakes were discovered nearby in the spoil thrown up while digging
the UEA Broad in 1977 (NHER 13411), these too are now in Norwich Castle Museum
(NCM94.978). A number of other worked flints discovered on the UEA site were reported in
1981, including a core, scraper and worked flakes, although their precise locations and dates
of discovery are unknown (NHER 17457). Finally, a broken flint core was reported from the
area in 2001, although again the circumstances and date of its discovery are unknown (NHER
36575).
It is also possible that the giant deer antlers discovered under six feet of peat while sewers were
being dug at UEA in 1990 are also prehistoric; they were reported as such in the local press at
the time (Eastern Daily Press 21/11/1990), but the find does not appear to have been
followed up by any of the archaeological authorities (NHER 25913).
9
Figure 4. The perforated stone mace-head from the UEA Broad (NHER 13215). 1:1.
The Bronze Age – the period between c.2300 and 700 BC – is also represented within the
study area, although to a much lesser extent that the Neolithic. Two tanged and barbed flint
arrowheads have been discovered. The first was discovered 1969 in a sandpit (or possibly a
golf course bunker) in the UEA area (NHER 9321) and is now in Norwich Castle Museum
(NCM363.969). The second was found in a flowerbed in 1997, although it is not very
precisely located (NHER 33057). An 8cm long Late Bronze Age copper spearhead was
discovered in the garden of 21 Wakefield Road in 1958 (NHER 9322): it too is now in
Norwich Castle Museum (NCM109.958). It is telling that all three Bronze Age artefacts from
the study area are projectile points, two arrows and a spear, all of which could conceivably
have been lost while hunting and need not represent any kind of permanent settlement.
Only three HER entries record Roman evidence from the study area. In 1947 sewage
trenches dug during the construction of the new housing estate cut through a Roman refuse
pit approximately 50cm below the surface (NHER 9323). The pit contained a number of
pieces of Roman pottery, including at least two sherd of greyware which are now in Norwich
10
Castle Museum (NCM116.947). The other Roman find was made in 1964, when a copper
Roman coin of the House of Constantine was found in the garden of 31 Calthorpe Road
(NHER 9324). While the coin may be considered a stray-find, the presence of the refuse pit
probably suggests settlement in the area – presumably a small farm of some kind. A Roman
coin and a bronze hair pin with a faceted head were discovered with a metal-detector outside
Earlham Lodge in 1993 (NHER 9413)
The only Anglo-Saxon artefact to be reported from the study area is a silver penny of
Harthacnut, dating to c.1040-42, discovered in the footings for a garden wall at 107 St
Mildred’s Road in 1982 (NHER 18830).
Human remains of an unknown date were reportedly discovered by two schoolboys digging in
a sandpit in 1955 (NHER 9389). The bones were described as ‘ancient’ and given that the
sandpit lies to the extreme east of the study area, well away from the churchyard, it seems
likely that they must have pre-dated the Christian era. Another records legends of battles
associated with Bunker Hill, in the north-west corner of the study area, and also notes the
possible discovery of human remains at this spot (NHER 12290). No references are given for
these associations and there is no further discussion, but it is possible that the stories stem from
the hill’s being named after Bunker Hill, Massachusetts, scene of a famous battle of the
American Revolutionary War in 1775.
Historic Buildings and Designed Landscapes
Archaeologists are not only interested in artefacts, or even in very ancient remains, from the
Roman or prehistoric periods. They also record, interpret and seek to preserve ‘standing
buildings’. Many buildings of medieval or post-medieval date have been preserved within the
suburban landscape. In the case of the Earlham study area, there are four principal examples:
the parish church of St Mary (NHER 9326); the Church Farmhouse/Earlham Lodge
complex next to the church (NHER 9413); the dovecote on the opposite side of the road
(NHER 9414); and Earlham Hall (NHER 9412). Of these, the last two form part of a wider
historic landscape of considerable importance – Earlham Park, arguably one of the most
important designed landscapes within the Norwich area.
The church of St Mary lies at TG19030830 and is a Grade I listed building (Figures 5 and 6).
11
Figure 5. St Mary’s Church, Earlham, from the south-west.
It is a small building of flint and brick, comprising a western tower, nave, chancel, south porch
and north transept. The tower is square, built of flint and red brick and has a stair-turret at its
north-east corner. There is a change of building style below the belfry stage, suggesting that
the tower was heightened, and the brick battlements are clearly a later addition. Pevsner and
Wilson (1997, 344-5) note that the north and south tower windows have internal splays
suggestive of a Norman date, but that the north tower window is now blocked. The north-
west corner of the nave exhibits stone long-and-short style quoins, a kind of construction
technique which can be of Anglo-Saxon (pre-Conquest) date, although nobody has claimed
this in this particular case. The nave, chancel and transept all have Y-tracery windows and
there is a blocked north door in the nave. The gable and outer arch of the porch have been
renewed, and Mortlock and Roberts believe that its height suggests that there was once an
upper room above it (1985, 34). The roof of the nave has clearly been lowered at some point,
evidenced by the surviving traces of its earlier line on the eastern face of the tower. The roof
is now lead, although the north transept has a tiled roof, a north door of its own and once
contained an altar, for there is a squint through into the chancel. The exterior of the chancel
is rendered, but its interior contains 14th century blank arcading and there is a blocked 16th
century priest’s door on its north side. Inside, there is a 19th century western gallery, an
octagonal Decorated font and a Decorated rood screen, served by stairs in the south-east
12
corner of the nave. The lectern is made from a recycled angel from a hammerbeam roof and
there is an alabaster monument to six Bacon children, removed from the demolished St Giles
in the Fields in London and set on the north wall of the chancel.
Figure 6. St Mary’s Church, Earlham, from the north-east.
Figure 7. The southern elevation of Church Farmhouse, facing onto the churchyard.
13
Facing onto the north side of the churchyard is Church Farmhouse, a Grade II listed building.
(Figure 7). The core of the building is 16th century, with later 17th century alterations, and it is
constructed from flint rubble and a timber frame, although now heavily restored. It has
octagonal chimneys and the upper storey is slightly jettied (i.e., projects forward above the
ground floor) to the south. The building complex is arranged in a T-plan, the north-south
running arm being known as Earlham Lodge (Figure 8). The HER ascribes it a late-17th or
18th century date to the Lodge, which has an early 19th century eastern façade.
Figure 8. Earlham Lodge viewed from the east.
Earlham Hall lies in the middle of Earlham Park: this probably does not occupy the site of the
original manor house, which was almost certainly on the site of the present Earlham Lodge.
This was described as ‘much dilapidated’ in c.1750 by which time it had presumably become
a farmhouse. Earlham Hall itself is often said to have been built in 1642, but there is good
evidence for an earlier building in the gable wall below the dated tie-irons. Further evidence
for the existence of this early building is found inside, where its front wall and that of an
adjoining 16th century block now form one side of an internal passage. On the ground floor
this wall has been cut away so that, but for the insertion of modern steel beams, the wall
would be hanging in mid-air.
14
By 1642, the date of a major reconstruction, the house had probably been in the hands of the
Houghton family for over 25 years, the previous owners (the Hobarts) having moved to their
newly built Blickling Hall c.1619. The Hall and estate were owned by the Waller family from
1657 until 1682 and by the Bacons from 1682 until 1786, when it passed to the Franks. The
Franks never lived in the house, but leased it to the Gurney family until 1912.
The building has been substantially altered since 1642 but something of its appearance can be
gleaned from two later drawings of c.1725 and 1755. It seems that wings were added at both
ends of the building, that a hall (or perhaps a chapel) was built in the position of the present
drawing room wing, and that the building was possibly widened by the addition of a corridor
along the north side. These alterations are clearest in the dated western gables where the new
work can be seen above and to the left of the 16th century gable. The old east-west roof was
truncated and a new north-south one put in, extending from the new wing over the west end
of the old building.
Figure 9. Earlham Hall by Humphrey Prideaux, c.1725.
The earliest surviving drawing of Earlham Hall was made by Humphrey Prideaux in c.1725
(Figure 9). His sketch is drawn from the far side of the Norwich-Watton road and shows the
15
north front of the hall framed by an avenue and with a large block of mature trees –
presumably a wilderness – adjoining the house to the west. The house was surrounded by
fields and a dovecote is depicted in the foreground, probably the same dovecote as still stand
in the park today although moved by the artist as it would otherwise not be visible from his
vantage point. The Prideaux drawing is difficult to interpret but shows that the building had
already achieved the form that was to be more accurately recorded in the 1750s.
Unfortunately, the east end of the building (left on the picture), which is the least well
understood part of the building, is obscured by trees. However, it apparently shows both an
extension to the 1641 east wing and the existence of a kitchen (marked by massive chimneys)
on the site of the present one. Further east again is shown a 17th century barn now
incorporated into the 18th century stable block. It is possible that the corridor added to the
north side of the building dates to this period rather than to 1641. This would fit well with
what is know of Waller Bacon’s life, for having remarried childless in 1703, he took over the
house at his mother’s death in 1712, fathered four children and had an active parliamentary
career between 1715 and 1734. His family and professional commitments together could
easily have provided the stimulus to extend the building.
Figure 10. A tracing of the 1829 estate map.
16
By the 1790s a landscape park had been laid out around the hall, for it is shown, somewhat
schematically, on William Faden’s county map of 1797, apparently covering an area of about
80 hectares. However, an estate map of 1829 (Figure 10) suggests that by this date, at least,
some of the southern, outer part of this area was divided into fields, some apparently under
arable cultivation, although interspersed with clumps and plantations, suggesting that this
area, although a part of the designed landscape, had more the character of ornamented
farmland than landscape park in the normal sense - indeed, there was no perimeter belt of
trees separating the ornamented farmland from the park proper. This was not an unusual
arrangement in an arable county like Norfolk (even the great Holkham Park included large
areas of arable land within its perimeter belts).
Figure 11. Earlham Park by Richenda Cunnington, 1841 (Norfolk Records
Office MS6256/T133F).
The core of the park covered c.35 hectares and featured a number of lines of trees. Some of
these represent relict field boundaries: when parks were laid out in the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries, hedgerow trees were usually retained in some numbers as hedges were
removed, in order to provide an instant sylvan scene. But two lines seem to represent an
avenue running north-eastwards from the hall, serving as a main entrance. Another avenue,
not aligned on the hall, ran east-west through the north-west of the park, while a third ran
17
north-east–south-west beside the river Yare. The Prideaux sketch does not show these
avenues, whereas a sketch of 1841 by Richenda Cunningham (Figure 11) depicts one of them
with young trees, suggesting that they may have been planted in the late-eighteenth or early-
nineteenth century. In addition to the main approach from the north-east, the map of 1829
also shows two carriage drives, one running directly north from the hall and one running
through the parkland to the south. The former is now devoid of trees, but survives as a very
distinct earthwork cut into the hillside (Figure 12, and highlighted in yellow on Figure 13).
Figure 12. The earthwork of the northern approach, looking north from the hall.
These features of the park had changed little by the time the Earlham Tithe Award was
drawn up in 1846 (Figure 33), but the first edition of the 6” Ordnance Survey of 1886 shows a
number of alterations to the park and the gardens (Figure 32). A perimeter belt had by now
been established along the southern boundary of the park, excluding views of the farmland in
this direction.
The pleasure grounds immediately surrounding the house are bounded by a ha ha with a
hedge planted in the bottom of it (highlighted in blue on Figure 13), probably a mid
eighteenth-century feature. More importantly, to the south and west of the house are a series
of earthwork terraces, preserved in the turf of the lawn. These are of considerable
18
archaeological importance, for they seem to mark the site of formal geometric gardens,
probably early-eighteenth century date (Figure 14). Such gardens were very artificial in
character, and featured terraces, walls, and level areas occupied by lawns or parterrres –
geometric arrangements of planting and paths. Their creation therefore involved much earth-
moving, and – when their remains have not subsequently been intentionally levelled – they
can often survive, as here, as striking archaeological sites.
Figure 13. The earthworks of Earlham Park, highlighting features discussed in the text.
These are not the only earthworks associated with Earlham Hall, however. Within the park
there are a number of earthworks which relate to the landscape that existed before the park
was laid out in the eighteenth century – relics of a lost agricultural landscape. These a ‘hollow
way’ – a sunken linear feature representing the course of a lost road; and a number of old field
boundaries. Amorphous scarps in the north-west of the park relate to buildings which lined
the road and which were cleared away in the twentieth century. Figure 13 (drawn by
19
Brendan Chester-Kadwell of the Landscape Group at UEA) shows the most important
earthworks which survive within the park.
Figure 14. A plan of the earthworks and ha has in the pleasure grounds at Earlham Hall.
It clearly shows the course of the hollow-way, highlighted in green, which runs from beyond
the southern extent of the park, disappears under the gardens and re-emerges to the north,
where it heads for the bridge over the river Yare (Figure 15). Also highlighted in red are the
upstanding remains of hedge-banks, remnants of the fields which existed prior to the creation
of the park: some of these may date back to the sixteenth century, or even earlier. In the far
south-west corner of the park, three trees still stand in a line on the top of one of these banks,
one of which is a massive pollarded oak with a circumference which suggests a sixteenth-
century date (Figure 16). People scarcely notice it: yet it the oldest living thing in Earlham.
20
Figure 15. The earthworks of the hollow-way looking south from the hall garden.
Figure 16. Alignment of three trees on a hedge-bank in the park.
One striking feature of the park is the dovecote, which stands opposite the church at
TG19150822. It is built of brick and approximately 5m square and 9 metres high. The roof
21
is pyramidal, slated and has a lantern-style opening on the top (Figure 17). The interior of the
building is lined with nesting boxes. The building is Grade II listed and both Wilson and
Pevsner (1997, 345) and the listing ascribe it an 18th century date, largely on the grounds that
a dovecote is shown to the north-east of the hall in Prideaux’s engraving of 1725, whereas the
present one stands to the north-west. This was probably an act of artistic licence on the part
of Prideaux, for the site of the present dovecote was not visible from his vantage point and he
may have altered his composition to include this important indication of status. Only manorial
lords, wealthy landowners, were allowed by law the right to erect a dovecote, so they were
proudly displayed. Sometimes they were sited close to the mansion, but here the location is
perhaps explained by the fact that the buildings is clearly visible to travellers crossing the
bridge over the river and approaching Norwich. It announced, as it were, the presence nearby
of a gentleman’s residence.
Figure 17. The Earlham Park dovecote from the north-west.
Earlham Park is thus full of archaeological and historical interest, with a wealth of fine trees of
eighteenth-, nineteenth- and twentieth-century date. The Earlham estate was owned by the
Waller family from 1657 until 1682, and from the Bacons 1682 to 1786, passing then to the
Franks; but the latter family never lived at the hall, and much of what we see in the park today
was the work of the Gurneys, who leased the hall throughout the nineteenth century, and up
22
until 1912. It was they who, in the early part of the twentieth century, created the Rose
Garden to the east of the house, and the rockery/bamboo garden beside it, both of which
survive in good condition.
One other interesting feature of the park is of even more recent date. In the north-west
corner, at TG19050823, are the remains of a Spigot Mortar (or Blacker Bombard)
emplacement dating from 1940, set into an earthen bank and covering the strategically
important bridge across the river Yare (Figure 18). These weapons, which fired a 20lb high-
explosive mortar, were widely deployed by the Home Guard during WWII. The remains
comprise a concrete plinth with an embedded steel mount, on which the mortar would have
sat. There would have been a pit dug around the plinth, in which the operators would have
sat, but this appears to have been since filled in (Figure 19). There are very few examples of
these emplacements in Norwich, making this one particularly important.
Figure 18. The Earlham Park Spigot Mortar emplacement.
23
Figure 19. A reconstruction of a Spigot Mortar in action.
The ‘Everyday’ Landscape
As already noted, the ‘everyday’ landscape of the suburbs is hardly noticed by historians and
archaeologists. The evolution of the different kinds of house in the West Earlham area cannot
be discussed in detail here, although a subject of immense interest and importance. What can
be discussed, however, is how this landscape developed over time, from the early nineteenth
century onwards.
Using the 2006 Ordnance Survey Master Map as a base-map, the following map sheets have
been used to ‘regress’ the area – that is, work backwards in time to show which features
originated when. In essence, this succession of maps allows us to peel back the layers of the
landscape, almost like excavating an archaeological site. The maps used were:
DATE SCALE SHEET 2006 1:10,000 MasterMap 1995 1:10,000 TG10NE 1982 1:10,000 TG10NE 1971 OS 6” TG10NE 1957 OS 6” TG10NE 1951 OS 6” LXIII SW 1938 OS 6” LXIII SW (Special Emergency Edition) 1929 OS 6” LXIII SW 1919 OS 6” LXIII SW 1887 OS 6” LXIII SW
Figures 21 and 23 to 31 show the steps of the map regression, using the modern ‘MasterMap’
(the digital on-line map produced by the Ordnance Survey) as a base and working backward
until all of the present landscape features are accounted for and ascribed a rough date of
24
origin. On each map blue represents rivers and standing bodies of water, roads and tracks
are dark grey and buildings are shown in light grey. The features highlighted in red on
each map are new features – i.e., those which were not on the next earliest map in the
regression sequence: thus, for example, a feature coloured red on the 2006 map would not
have been shown on the 1995 map. As the sequence progresses backwards through time
those features which have already appeared in red, i.e. which post-date the current map, are
highlighted in green. The features highlighted in yellow on the 1971 map are those which
were only had their positions sketched onto the previous map of 1957, as they were then in
the process of being built. Likewise, on the 1957 map those same sketched features are
highlighted in yellow, whereas properly plotted new features are coloured red. Yellow is used
in the same way on the 1951 and 1938 maps, again where certain features were merely
sketched in by the surveyors.
Figure 20. The University Village photographed from the air in 1963, showing the original
buildings of the University, Earlham church in the foreground and the Earlham Park dovecote to the right.
Figure 21 shows the modern Ordnance Survey ‘MasterMap’ of the study area, with features
not present on the 1995 map highlighted in red: it is immediately apparent that the period
1995-2006 saw the construction of a large number of new buildings to the east and north of
the UEA campus, as well as a handful of buildings within the core of the university campus.
North of the Earlham Road, which divides the study area into two halves, a substantial
development comprising the University Village and a housing estate had also occurred, on the
site of what had been a part of the original university campus (later the ‘University Village’:
Figure 20). In addition to these major developments, it can be seen that a number of new
25
houses were added to the streetscape during this period, in some cases representing rebuilding
on older sites, in others the slotting in of new structures between existing buildings.
Figure 22 highlights the features that appear on the 1995 Ordnance Survey map, but which
were not shown on the 1982 map. It can clearly be seen that the period 1982-1995 saw no
new building within the area of the West Earlham housing estates, while the UEA campus saw
the addition of an athletics track and a number of new buildings were constructed in and
around the core of the University. This period of relative stasis follows a period of more
intensive development, as can be seen from Figure 23, showing the features constructed
between 1971 and 1982. A large number of the buildings of the modern university campus
were constructed during this period and the UEA Broad was dug out. Within the West
Earlham estate a number of garages and several blocks of flats were also constructed.
Figure 24 shows the new features which appeared in the study area between 1957 and 1971, a
period which saw the construction of much of the housing in West Earlham and also the
beginning of the UEA campus. As noted above, all of the housing highlighted in yellow on
this map had appeared on the 1957, but only as sketched outlines of where the houses would
be, not as fully-surveyed features. Similarly, Figure 25, showing features constructed between
1951 and 1957, indicates that by the time of the updated survey the road network of the new
estate had been laid out and the first rows of houses completed, in the north-west corner of the
study area. Figure 26 shows features constructed between 1938 and 1951 and highlights the
beginning of construction of the road network in West Earlham, along with some of the first of
the council houses (these are shown on the map of 1938 but only schematically, as sketched
outlines). This figure is complemented by the 1946 vertical aerial photograph of the study
area (Figure 27), taken by the RAF, which captures the moment at which the road pattern
first began to be laid out. It also shows the pattern of field boundaries which existed at this
time, and also the municipal golf course, opened in 1932, which occupied what was to
become the site of the UEA campus.
26
Figure 21. The Study Area in 2006, highlighting in red the features which had appeared
since the 1995 map was drawn.
27
Figure 22. The Study Area highlighting features of the 1995 map which were not shown on
the 1982 map.
28
Figure 23. The Study Area highlighting features of the 1982 map which were not shown on
the 1971 map.
29
Figure 24. The Study Area highlighting features of the 1971 map which were not shown on
the 1957 map.
30
Figure 25. The Study Area highlighting features of the 1957 map which were not shown on
the 1951 map.
31
Figure 26. The Study Area highlighting features of the 1951 map which were not shown on
the 1938 map.
32
Figure 27. The 1946 vertical aerial photographic survey of the study area.
The various maps presented here show clearly that the vast majority of the built environment
within the study area was constructed in the post-war period, between 1946 and the late 1950s
in the case of the housing estates and from the 1960s onwards in the case of the UEA campus.
Moving earlier in time, the pace of change is noticeably slower: we are now dealing with the
gradual development of an essentially agricultural landscape. Figure 28, showing features
appearing in the landscape between 1929 and 1938, thus show little change, other than the
proposed areas of new housing (again sketched in rather than fully surveyed by the OS).
Figure 29, showing features appearing between 1919 and 1929, show little change, other than
33
in the gardens lying in the immediate vicinity of Earlham Hall. Figure 30, showing features
built between 1887 and 1919, only highlights the construction of a couple of new houses.
Figure 31 highlights the buildings within the study area which predate the 1887 OS map in
red. It also highlights those areas which have remained essentially undeveloped since 1887 (in
pink). The 1887 Ordnance Survey map itself is shown in Figure 32.
This is not the earliest map to show the entirety of the study area, however, The Earlham tithe
map of 1846 is reproduced in Figure 33; Figure 34 shows the same map, but with the modern
Ordnance Survey MasterMap of the study area superimposed upon it. This demonstrates
that despite the extensive urbanisation of the study area, a number of features and common
boundaries have been preserved: in particular, most of the large patches of woodland in the
study area survive, while the original course of Larkman Lane survives as a footpath, running
within a hollow way, which runs behind a row of houses in the centre of the study area.
Moreover, it is also apparent that the layout of the principal roads established in the course of
the twentieth century, and many of the principal property boundaries, either replicates, or
had their alignment strongly influenced by, the pattern of field boundaries and features in the
earlier, agricultural landscape.
‘The Fields Beneath’
The survivors from the old agricultural landscape fall into two broad categories: the remains
of old field boundaries (hedges and hedgerow trees); and woodland. Few of these features are
of any extreme antiquity. In the middle ages, and perhaps as late as the seventeenth century,
much of the land in the area was farmed as ‘open fields’, in which the holdings of individual
farmers took the form of unhedged, intermingled strips. These fields were probably enclosed
gradually, in piecemeal fashion, but – typically for the area – many boundaries were then
realigned during the agricultural revolution period, to make the kind of tidy, rational farming
landscape demanded by fashion. Some earlier boundaries survived, however, especially on the
sides of public rights of way like Larkman Lane.
34
Figure 28. The Study Area highlighting features of the 1938 map which were not shown on
the 1929 map.
35
Figure 29. The Study Area highlighting features of the 1929 map which were not shown on
the 1919 map.
36
Figure 30. The Study Area highlighting features of the 1919 map which were not shown on
the 1887 map.
37
Figure 31. The Study Area showing buildings which predate the 1887 map in red and
highlighting areas which have remained undeveloped since 1887 in pink.
38
Figure 32. The 1887 Ordnance Survey map of the study area.
39
Figure 33. The Study Area as depicted on the Earlham tithe map of 1846.
40
Figure 34. The Earlham tithe map with the modern OS MasterMap overlaid.
Field Boundaries.
The field boundaries shown on the OS 6” of 1887 survive to a remarkable extent within the
West Earlham area. Sometimes the hedges have gone, but lines of tree remain: good examples
include the oaks along on the eastern side of the southern section of Wilberforce Road, once
the southern part of Larkman Lane; the oaks along Scarnell Road; and those (some more than
250 years old) on the southern side of Earlham Green Lane. Sometimes, only single trees
mark the line of a lost boundary, like the oak on the north side of Earlham Green Lane, or
that which stands on the corner of Taylor Road and Enfield Road.
41
In other places, fragments of actual hedges remain. The central section of Larkman Lane
survives, as already noted, as a sunken footpath – a ‘hollow way’. It is lined with fragments of
ancient hedge, containing wych elm and hazel, as well as a number of large oaks. The
northern section of Larkman Lane (i.e., what we today call Larkman Lane) is bounded by a
rather purer hawthorn hedge, of relatively recent date (but nevertheless, predating the housing
here); and other field hedges survive in part along Bridge Farm lane and beside the alley
running parallel to Calthorpe Road.
Most of the hedgerow trees are of eighteenth or nineteenth-century date but some much older
examples also survive, such as the massive oak pollard at the junction of the Earlham Road
and Bluebell Lane (at the Five Ways roundabout).
The extent to which these fragments of the old field pattern remain in West Earlham is
remarkable, and it would be interesting to see if this is paralleled elsewhere in the Norwich
suburbs.
Woodland
The extent to which woodland has survived the process of suburbanisation is also surprising.
Indeed, virtually every area of woodland and plantation shown on the OS 6” of 1887 remains
to this today, albeit sometimes in degraded condition. Particularly striking in the modern
landscape are Long Grove, along the southern edge of Earlham Road, dominated by beech
trees; and the southern belt of Earlham Park, mainly oak and invasive sycamore. More
complex are the interconnected Twenty Acres Wood and Bunkers Hill, still remarkably intact
within the housing of West Earlham and a valued recreational resource. These are not areas
of ancient woodland but late eighteenth century plantations. They still retain elements of their
original planting: beech and oak with girths of three metres or more; sweet chestnut with
girths of as much as four metres; and sycamore with girths of 2.5 metres. There are also some
phenomenal examples of Scots pine, again with girths in some cases of three metres. There is
no trace of a coppiced understorey (unless the scattered examples of hazel represent its
remnants) and large areas are occupied, typically, by invasive sycamore.
42
Figure 35. The location of the trees discussed in the text.
43
The Way Forward.
This report is not intended to be a systematic and detailed study of the landscape history of
the Earlham area. In particular, as already noted, a more comprehensive piece of research
would pay more attention to the social history of the twentieth-century housing itself.
Nevertheless, we believe that the work presented here shows the extent to which the suburbs,
superficially uninteresting as they may be, are in reality packed with historical interest. How
might such work be taken further? Given adequate funding, we would aim to do the following.
• Extend the study to other parts of the Norwich suburbs.
• Compile a series of reports, written in an accessible style, which would be sent to the
relevant community groups. These would clearly indicate the features of historical
importance in each area, worthy of enhancement, preservation and (perhaps)
interpretation.
• Undertake a number of public lectures and walking tours to highlight the significance
of each community’s landscape heritage.
• Encourage closer links between local residents and the Portable Antiquities Scheme,
with a view to encouraging the recognition and reporting of garden finds.
• Send copies of reports to the city council planning department, to raise awareness of
the historical importance of the Norwich suburbs.