www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/archaeology

The Historic Towns of Cambridgeshire

An Extensive Urban Survey

WISBECH

FENLAND

Draft Report Text Last Modified: 10 May 2002

This document is an unfinished draft report compiled as a part of the Cambridgeshire Extensive Urban Survey. All archaeological sites reported on since the date of last modification given above are not included in this text. Throughout the text reference is made to Historic Environment Record (HER) numbers, Listed Building (LB) numbers and Scheduled Monument (SM) numbers. For further information on any of these sites the reader is referred to the Cambridgeshire Historic Environment Record. This report should be cited as: Cambridgeshire Extensive Urban Survey: Wisbech. Draft Report 10/05/2002.

0 5

Kilometres

10

CAMBRIDGE

SOUTH CAMBRIDGESHIRE

EAST CAMBRIDGESHIRE

FENLAND

HUNTINGDONSHIRE

Wisbech: Parish Location

Date: 31/08/2007Scale (at A4): 1:400000 Based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission of the

Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes copyright and may lead to prosecution. 100023205 2007Rik Hoggett By:

2

3

INTRODUCTION 4 LOCATION AND TOPOGRAPHY 6

GEOLOGY 7

BRIEF HISTORY OF THE TOWN 9

EVIDENCE 11

DOCUMENTARY 11 ARCHAEOLOGICAL 15

LISTED BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 17

PARTICULAR BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCTIONS 20

ADDRESS 22

OTHER PROJECTS 27 FENLAND DRAINAGE PROGRAMMES 28

SYNTHESIS 31

PREHISTORIC 32

ROMAN 33

SAXON 34 MEDIAEVAL 35

POST-MEDIAEVAL 37

INDUSTRIAL 38

SUMMARY 39

RESEARCH DIRECTIONS 40 SAXON 40

MEDIAEVAL 40

MEDIAEVAL / POST-MEDIAEVAL 40

BIBLIOGRAPHY 41

4

Introduction “Britain’s historic towns and cities, particularly those which occupy sites first settled within the Roman period, are some of the largest and most archaeologically complex sites in the country. They have experienced continuity of occupation over a very substantial period of time. The buried archaeological deposits which have formed through time, and the buildings and structures (e.g. castles, town walls, mediaeval houses) which survive today, form a nationally important resource for the study of the past and for the understanding of the development and growth of urban centres as a whole in the country. Equally, we value these towns for the link we provide to our history, not only through their individual monuments and buildings but because of the way past occupation has influenced the modern townscape, through street plans, major monuments (e.g. cathedrals) and collections of buildings.” Managing the Urban Archaeological Resource, English Heritage (1992) The idea of Cambridgeshire as an urban environment is perhaps a surprising one, and does not fit with the image of small villages with thatched cottages clustered around mediaeval churches, or the rolling fields of black soil stretching beyond the horizon. Yet the landscape we see today is a product of centuries of interaction between mankind and nature, and urbanism can be seen in many forms. The archaeological resource is precious to us all, yet is immensely fragile, and is both finite and non-renewable. Every time a historic building is altered or demolished, or a development takes place on cleared ground, the potential exists for damage to be inflicted upon the archaeological record. The archaeologists of the County Archaeology Office work in partnership with developers, local, regional and national organisations, and local planning authorities to manage planning guidelines and protect, record and promote the archaeology of the County to the highest standard. The care of the historic environment depends on the support and interest of the general public. Archaeology is a tool used to comprehend and explain the physical remains of the past and makes a significant contribution to the quality of life, character and distinctiveness of local communities. The County Archaeology Office is dedicated to disseminating information about the historic environment through improving access to its findings. Today, Cambridgeshire is one of the most dynamic and expanding counties in England in terms of development and archaeology. Much of the pressure for housing is being met by building on vacant plots of land within our existing settlement centres, and the character of our historic landscapes is continually being updated and irrevocably altered. This environment needs to be recorded and assessed, so the County’s archaeologists, planners and researchers can better understand the area in which we live and work.

5

Recent initiatives undertaken by the County Archaeology Office have recognised the interest in the past demonstrated by the people of Cambridgeshire, and it is through such partnerships and collaborations that we aim to improve the quality of life for the County by increasing access to the past. English Heritage are promoting Extensive Urban Survey as an effective way to ensure the appropriate conservation and management of the urban archaeological resource in England based upon careful assessment of existing knowledge. Surveys undertaken by other local authorities have greatly enhanced the integrity and quality of the urban archaeological resource, and it is our intention to bring to Cambridgeshire the benefits of such an endeavour. This report is a draft archaeological and historical assessment of Wisbech and forms part of the Cambridgeshire Extensive Urban Survey of 31 historic settlements in Cambridgeshire. This project, funded by English Heritage, forms part of a nation-wide reassessment of the management of the urban archaeological resource. The project is being carried out by the County Archaeology Office of Cambridgeshire County Council. This report has been compiled using a number of sources, including the Cambridgeshire Sites and Monuments Record, the Database of Listed Buildings held by the County Planning Department, and various cartographic and documentary records, in particular the Victoria County History (Wright and Lewis 1989). The maps and tables were prepared using the computerised mapping system and database of the Cambridgeshire HER.

6

Location and Topography Wisbech is located in the northern part of the Fenland District adjacent to the A47 Trunk Road linking Peterborough and Kings Lynn. The town is located on the estuary of the River Nene, the history of which is fundamental to an understanding of the town. The parish itself was formerly known as Wisbech St Peter (to differentiate it from Wisbech St Mary), and is surprisingly small in comparison to the rest of the Fenland parishes at 1868 hectares. It abuts with Norfolk, and the village of Walsoken (in effect the eastern suburb of the town) lies partially in the neighbouring county. The boundaries have been fairly static since 1933, when much of the rural area of the parish was transferred to Elm and March, and the urbanised areas of Leverington and Walsoken became part of Wisbech Borough. The relationship between the Borough of Wisbech and the parish is intertwined, but the two have always been co-extensive. Wisbech is the largest Corporate Town in the district, and its Charter was granted in 1549. The Port and associated facilities are still in the care of the Corporation. Topographically, the area unsurprisingly is fairly flat, with a height range from 5m OD around the church to 0m OD along the Nene. The west side of the Nene is fairly uniform at 2m OD.

7

Geology1 Flandrian deposits (i.e. deposits since the last Ice Age) comprise mainly marine clays, silts and sands. Most Roman and subsequent activity occurs on an upper silt deposit. A layer of peat was identified beneath the town by road works at a depth of 1.5m. This deposit is cut by the roddon of the Old Croft River (roughly the Well Stream, now Churchill Road / Elm Road), and overlaid by the sandy deposits of the estuary of the Nene, where such material is banked up against the sea defences to around 1m higher than the landward side. Silting and flooding are common elements of the story of Wisbech. The silt area of the northern fenlands is an interesting phenomenon associated primarily with environmental change in the past two millennia. There exists a band of silt running roughly east-west, stretching form the estuary at Kings Lynn to the Lincolnshire border that encompasses the current town of Wisbech, hence is known within the County as the Isle of Wisbech. To the south of this island lies the peat fen (mainly fresh water) and to the north the salt waters of the Wash. The Nene estuary at Wisbech marks an intrusion into the island of the salt waters. This land is all reasonably low (roughly less than 10m OD), and has been subject to various flooding episodes. The Fenland Survey drew upon the work of Ian Shennan (1986) and identified various occasions where the balance between Fenland (reduced sea levels) and Wash (rising sea levels) environments have favoured one or the other. These are:

Event From To Wash I Prior to c.6300 BP Fenland I c.6300 BP c.6200 BP Wash II c.6200 BP c.5600 BP Fenland II c.5600 BP c.5400 BP Wash III/IV c.5400 BP c.4500 BP Fenland IV c.4500 BP c.4200 (3900) BP Wash V c.4200 (3900) BP c.3300 BP Fenland V c.3300 BP c.3000 BP Wash VI c.3000 BP c.1900 BP Fenland VI c.50 AD (1900 BP) c.400 AD (1550 BP) Wash VII c.400 AD (1550 BP) c.800 AD (1150 BP) Fenland VII c.800 AD (1150 BP) c.1000 AD (950 BP) Wash VIII c.1000 AD (950 BP) Onwards

From Fenland Survey vol. 92 This information is crucial to an understanding of the deposits within the parish, and should be borne in mind when reading the following text. It also

1 See Hall 1996 2 ibid

8

ensures a relatively deep overburden for the archaeology, and could go some way to explaining the lack of archaeological finds in the area. Silting is an important phenomenon in the area, has been so for centuries. The Roman Fen Causeway in nearby March parish began life as a canal until it silted up so rapidly that it became a road instead. All the rivers in the area have suffered from it, and even the Wisbech - Upwell canal became unviable as a result. The causes for this activity can be best summarised by the fact that the incoming tide has a very strong current and only takes 3 hours compared to the outgoing tide that takes 9 hours. Several large rivers drain into the Wash, and in essence silt and gravel are swept upstream by powerful tidal action that the ebb is too weak to remove. This in turn leads to blockages and reduced flow that leads to flooding, particularly at times of heavy rainfall or spring thaw.

9

Brief History of the Town Prehistoric remains are virtually unknown in the parish, apart from a few stray finds that are more often than not unprovenanced. The Flandrian deposits are mainly marine in origin, and cover most effectively anything predating the last Ice Age. The area was almost entirely submerged during the Iron Age, and dry land only began to emerge in the Roman period. Roman activity falls into two types – salterns and agricultural settlements. Salterns are associated with the roddons that lie along the fen edge, and are the most numerous Roman type. The predominantly urban nature of the parish again masks potential archaeological finds, with only small scale settlements known from the area of the by-pass. Finds of coins and pottery from within the town suggest a possible Roman antecedent however. It should be noted that the main Roman communication routes across the Fens lie to the south of Wisbech parish. There is virtually no evidence of early Saxon activity on the island apart from two brooches located under the Corn Exchange. However, throughout the Saxon period the island was settled and drained, and at some point before the mediaeval period Wisbech (first referred to as such in 1013) became the primary settlement centre, probably due to its location on two main water courses (the Nene or Wys Beck and the Great Ouse tributary known as the Well Stream). By the time of Domesday, all the area belonged to Ely Abbey, and with the creation of the see in 1109 the town was granted to the diocese rather than the convent. The town had a castle, a large church, two market places and became the commercial centre for the island. The use of the town as a port is probable from its earliest beginnings, but the vagaries of silting and other natural deposits were such that the fortunes of the port fluctuated wildly. It was not until systematic drainage of the Fens and the creation of adequate exits for the waters that silting became less of a concern by the post-mediaeval period. Even so, until the 19th century, a port downstream at Sutton Bridge functioned as a main docking area for larger vessels. Wisbech hit the peak of its prosperity during the 18th and 19th centuries, and the wealth of magnificent Georgian architecture reflects this. The drainage of the fens guaranteed by the use of steam pumps from the 19th century onwards gave rise to an incredibly fertile soil mixture of clay and peat, which promoted market gardening as an intensive agricultural product, much of which was exported out of Wisbech port to Europe and Britain. In 1895 potatoes were identified as a particularly profitable crop. The railway arrived in 1847, and did have an impact on the commercial activity of the port. However, the two did co-exist throughout the remainder of the century that arguably saw the town at its wealthiest and most active. Market gardening is still a important factor of the local economy, although the port has declined, moving more towards the recreational market to make up

10

for the loss of commercial shipping. With the construction of the Freedom bridge in 1971 across the Nene, access to the traditional warehousing and wharf areas within the town was barred to all but the smallest ships, and the town was effectively recognising the change in its fortunes. The population has been fairly static in recent years:

Year Population 1563 1000 est. 1676 2000 est. 1801 4710 1851 10594 1861 9276 1931 15129 1951 17430 1981 17390 1986 18080 1991 19050 1997 19270

The change in population of 1.2% from 1991 to 1997 is of particular significance, as these years mark the advent of PPG16 and developer funded archaeology, and demonstrate the lack of housing pressure on the town3. This in turn could explain the lack of recent archaeological investigations in the area. The other item of note in these population figures is the fact that in the 16th and 17th centuries, Wisbech’s population was less than both Ely and Whittlesey.

3 See below

11

Evidence Documentary The name Wisbech derives from the Wys Beck, the stream that is now the main outflow of the River Nene4. Alternatively, the Tribal Hidage (a Mercian tribute list probably dating from the 7th or 8th century) refers to a people known as the Wixna; this has been taken to refer to the area of Wisbech, but the exact location of these people is uncertain. Wisbech was not urban in form until the mediaeval period, but as a corporate town, the surviving archival sources are fairly extensive. The first mention of the town is in the spurious charter of 664 AD, in which King Wulfhere of Mercia endowed the Abbey of Peterborough with quite extensive lands (S68). This document refers to a boundary following a river going to Elm and Wisbech. Its date is probably more likely to be mid-tenth century upon the refoundation of the Fenland monasteries, when claims upon land holdings by right of precedent gave rise to many forgeries. The first authentic reference to Wisbech is in a document of c.1000 (1013), in which Oswy and Leoflade gave the vill to the Abbey of Ely on the admission of their son Aelfwine as a monk5. Domesday has several references to the town and surrounding area:

5.55 The Abbot of Ely holds Wisbech. 10 hides. Land for 10 ploughs. In Lordship 1 hide and 1 virgate; 2 ploughs there. 15 villagers, 10 acres each; 13 Freeman with 2 ½ hides, who could not an d cannot withdraw; all of them, 8 ploughs. 17 cottagers; 2 slaves From fisheries, 1,500 eels; meadow for 10 ploughs; pasture for the village livestock. The total value is and was 100s; before 1066 £6. This manor lies and lay in the Church’s lordship.

5.56 In the same village 2 fishermen who pay 14,000 eels to the Abbot, and 13s 4d from presentations. The Abbot [of Ely] has jurisdiction over all the men in this village.

6.2 In Wisbech the Abbot [of Bury St Edmunds] also has 1 fisherman who pays 5,000 eels.

7.12 In Wisbech the Abbot of Ramsey has 8 fishermen who pay 5,260 eels.

9.4 In Wisbech the Abbot of Crowland has 3 fishermen who pay

4 EPNS Placenames of Cambridgeshire 5 Liber Eliensis

12

4,000 eels.

18.9 In Wisbech William [of Warenne] has 6 fishermen who pay 3,500 eels and 5s.

The Inquistio Eliensis, a collation of the landholdings of Ely Abbey made from drafts of Domesday Book for the Abbey, differs only slightly in the details, mainly over amounts. The Inquisitio Comitatus Cantabrigiensis (the shire court proceeding that ratified the work of the Domesday Commissioners) is damaged, and the sections relating to the Two Hundreds of Ely are sadly destroyed. The VCH notes that Wisbech is the only vill in the are to be surveyed, and as such the entries probably refer to the entire silt island and not just the modern town area or parish6. Hence the estimated 11th century population of 300-350 should be spread over the area. The image of Wisbech provided by these entries is of one primary manor owned by the Abbot of Wisbech, whose main income derived from its fisheries, in particular eels. The importance of the eel harvest was such that other major landowners had an interest in the area. These were mainly ecclesiastical, but also included William of Warenne, recently calculated to have been one of the wealthiest men in the past millennium. Interestingly, the Inquisitio Eliensis records that the fishery rights Abbot of Bury St Edmunds were held under the jurisdiction of Ely, suggesting possible business practice on the part of Ely Abbey. A comparison between this estate of Ely and others shows that Wisbech was not particularly valuable. Ely manor itself had a value in 1066 of £33, and over half of the manors in the Two Hundreds of Ely were of higher value than Wisbech. It is also worth noting that Domesday makes no reference to ancillary infra-structure in the settlements: the Cambridgeshire Domesday as a whole is somewhat lacking in information concerning churches, although mills are often mentioned elsewhere, but not in Wisbech. The creation of the modern parish area of Wisbech can be traced to 1109 when upon the creation of the diocese of Ely, the vill was divided. In essence, the convent of Ely acquired the manor of Wisbech Murrow (now Wisbech St Mary) whereas Wisbech Barton (now St Peter) became part of the holdings of the diocese. The manor of Wisbech Barton remained in the hands of the diocese until 1652, and as such is fairly well documented. A good summary can be found in the VCH, and there will be no attempt to reproduce it here7. In essence the documentation reports on a predominantly agricultural manor. Attempts were made at land reclamation during the mediaeval period, but the result of these was usually half-drained land that formed pasture during dry summer but was

6 Pugh 1967 p.243 7 ibid pp.243-6

13

usually inundated during winter. The main agricultural crop was corn, but the value of the crop fluctuated wildly. Indeed the value of the entire manor varied widely, with it occasionally being a liability. On balance, the manor was a run profitably and in 1540 had a value of £115 13s 9d. In comparison, the manor of Wisbech Murrow was valued at only £13 at a similar time8. This price may reflect the increasing value of agricultural surpluses that were to enervate the post-mediaeval trading centre of the town, although it should be noted that the price of corn was declining from a high in the 14th century. The wide variations in the price of both the manor and the main corn crop were mainly due to flooding, and the available records are most eloquent on this matter. The area was subject to frequent and devastating floods as silting coupled with a wet winter overstretched the available water outlets and the surrounding low lying land fell victim. The Chronicles of Matthew Paris record the flood of 1236, that cost hundreds of lives, destroyed the castle (see below for details of the history of the castle) and destroyed many messuages around the New Market9. The aftermath was still being dealt with in 1251. A survey of 1356 also records derelict houses, a ruinous castle and manor and large tracts of land that were not deemed worthwhile reclaiming – the dyke repairs being more than the land was worth. Flooding has always been a fact of life in this area, as is witnessed in 1810 when it is recorded that in winter boards had to be laid over the layers of loose silt that otherwise turned to mud. Although the situation has vastly improved since the application of hydrological principles to drainage schemes, the floods of 1979 overflowed the banks of the Nene and inundated the town centre. For more detailed discussion on Post-Mediaeval drainage schemes and their effect on the town, see below. The documentation suggests that the responsibility for maintenance of the flood defences rested with the landholders whose holdings abutted the banks; Wisbech Barton manor for example employed a dyke keeper. This lead to some unsatisfactory situations, such as in 1439 when the negligence of the owner of 24 acres caused the breach of the Wisbech Sea Dyke at Guyhirn and the subsequent flooding of 13,400 acres. The situation was intensified by the Dissolution of the monasteries in 1539, and the break-up of large tracts of single holdings. The subsequent confusion over land ownership no doubt contributed to the apparently frequent floods of the later 16th century. Thorney Abbey, for example, had 16,000 acres of former monastic lands flooded during the 1570s. In 1531, Henry VIII granted the authority to maintain sea defences to the Commissioners of Sewers, and in 1600 the Act of Drainage was passed. To return to the town itself, another very fertile source of archival information again summarised in the VCH are guild records, in particular the Guild of the Holy Trinity, that after the Dissolution formed the basis of the Wisbech Corporation. By 1389, Wisbech had six guilds: St Peters (1327), St John the Baptist (1384), Holy Trinity (by 1379), Our Lady, St Thomas and Corpus Christi. In addition, by 1462 the Guilds of St George, St Lawrence and Holy

8 ibid p.233 9 Chronicon Maiora ii,9

14

Cross were in existence, but of all these the Holy Trinity was by far the most important. Its records exist from 1379, but certain entries within these accounts suggest that it had been in existence for several years before. The building traditionally identified as a mediaeval Guildhall (29 Hill Street) is covered below. There was a chantry of the Holy Trinity at an altar in Wisbech parish church, and the early Ordnance Survey maps show a site of Holy Trinity chapel in Staithe Field, now lost under a housing estate. The estates of this guild were taken over by the Corporation upon its formation in 1549, and the records of both institutions are a valuable source of data for the town. The Corporation was reformed under the Municipal Corporations Act of 1835, and is still in existence today as the caretaker of the docks. The current connection between the Wisbech Corporation and the dock facilities is the end result of a long relationship, and it is Corporation records that provide most of the information on the rise and fall of Wisbech’s commercial status that is outlined below. Most of the Corporation records were indexed by Jackson in the 19th century10. Wisbech St Peter was never subjected to a formal Enclosure Award, as the land surrounding the town was enclosed piecemeal upon reclamation by the entrepreneurs who initiated the drainage process. The predominantly urban nature of the parish means that the race to claim the new tithes from virginal, reclaimed land did not commence, with the result that the landscape of the parish is not littered with 19th century church and farmstead construction. Other maps available for the town and surrounding area are varied. There are no detailed maps prior to 1830, with the surveyed map of J Wood. This is supplemented by 1850 map by FJ Utting, and the map of the town drawn up under the Public Health Act in 1853. The latter in particular is a valuable resource for the study of the town, particularly if combined with Wood’s map of 1830 and the 1st Edition Ordnance Survey. Maps of the area prior to the Ordnance Survey comprise a map of Marshland of c.1600, and a Hundredal map dated 1637 but apparently datable to an original in 1597 form the recorded ownership of the manor (listed as under the care of Queen Elizabeth I – the see was vacant and therefore in her care from 1582 to 1600). One unusual but extremely rich source of information is the availability of historic photographs. The Lillian Rean Trust within the town curates a collection of around 100,000 photographs and negatives taken in the early decades of the 20th century, and although the full extent of this archive is uncertain, those that are available offer a unique insight into the development of the town at a time when its prosperity was arguably beginning to decline. In addition, Samuel Smith took photographs of the town and the surrounding area in the 1850s. These also offer a fascinating resource.

10 See Pugh 1967 pp.261-5

15

Archaeological In stark contrast to the wealth of archival, photographic and architectural evidence for the town, the archaeological information is very sparse. It has been seen how the population of the town has been fairly static or subject to only gradual growth, and as such the pressures for housing development witnessed elsewhere in the County are not present. Antiquarian interests and the discovery of stray finds is also less than elsewhere. There have been no large scale archaeological investigations in the area, and even the Fenland Survey did not place the same amount of emphasis on the parish that it did on others, probably due to the extensive urbanisation of the area. A full list of archaeological events is contained within Appendix I, and this reveals only one area of systematic investigation and excavation, being along the line of the Wisbech by-pass as part of the Fenland Survey. This has identified several areas of Roman activity and settlement in the area, primarily associated with the roddon (i.e. raised ground) of the Ouse and Nene outflow. Very few sites are known from the area to the north and east of this roddon anywhere in the isle, which has prompted the Fenland Survey team to comment that perhaps the Wash estuary was substantially wider than it was in the mediaeval period11. However the reports of Roman material from the Marlborough Court area behind Elgoods Brewery on North Brink do challenge this conclusion. The only systematic archaeological investigation in advance of development has been undertaken in the Cromwell Road area close to the bypass. Evaluation work here in 1995 located only mediaeval field systems (probably darlands) and also Roman pottery. Cromwell Road is close to the roddon that saw most activity, so pottery scatters (as a result of manuring) are perhaps to be expected. Unfortunately the creation of the Horsefair and Church Mews shopping area in 1987 saw the demolition and clearance of 8 acres of the historic core of the town without any archaeological intervention. Where work within the parish has been undertaken, the results are interesting, and may explain the lack of archaeology in the area, as the depths of deposits and overburden are extensive. The excavation at Little Church Street identified 1.2m of silt overburden, with a further 3m of archaeological deposits. The lowest deposits were located by use of an auger, and the natural underlying deposits still had not been reached. Work in the Market Place extended 95cm below the surface, and still only reached post-mediaeval deposits (identified by the organic rich deposit associated with the spreading of an old sea bank – Crab Marsh Bank – in the 16th century. All the Roman sites in the parish and indeed in neighbouring parishes are under heavy deposits of silt, up to 1.6m in places.

11 Hall 1996 pp.169-82

16

The silting is associated with flooding, and the Little Church Street site identified nine distinct episodes of heavy flooding being followed by housing redevelopment. The Fenland Survey has also identified a layer of peat 1.5m deep beneath the town and carbon dated to 2130 +/-50 BP. Presumably this formed as a result of the water inundation during the Iron Age. The implications of this are clear, Although it is dangerous to attempt to construct deposit models on such little information, it would be reasonable to assume that the Mediaeval and Roman deposits of the town are deep and covered by extensive silt deposits. Anything pre-historic will be underneath roughly 4m of silt, and a further 1.5m of peat. Given this depth, it is perhaps unsurprising that little pre-mediaeval archaeology is known from the area. It is therefore plausible that the potential for survival of deposits is high, and given the depths that waterlogged deposits would also be encountered. However little modern development requires intrusion to that depth, perhaps limiting the possible sources of funding for archaeological investigation of the town.

17

Listed Buildings and Construction If the archaeology is sparse then the architectural wealth of the town s exactly the opposite. Pevsner describes the North Brink in particular as ‘one of the finest Georgian brick streets in the country’12, and the overall development and prosperity of the town can traced by its buildings. Very few Mediaeval remains are visible in the town, and where architecture of this age survives it is as a component of other structures. One example is No.27 Hill Street, formerly the Guildhall of Holy Trinity and later the Grammar School. This contains much Mediaeval fabric, including corbels in the main hall believed to have supported the roof at as level lower than the current structure. However current reordering works has removed the plaster from the wall in the main hall, and revealed the slash cut of a window now blocked up. The style of this window is consistent with 14th century tracery, and the position intersects the roof line proposed by the mediaeval corbels. Hence the corbels are probably relocated, and the building is considerably taller than first imagined. In the roof space of No.27, the west gable wall is constructed of red bricks of an unusual size and found nowhere else in the building. The use of red brick as a building material in Cambridgeshire is common from the mediaeval period onwards, due to a lack of timber to construct the more traditional framed type building. Only one building within the town is constructed entirely of stone, being the Baptist Chapel in Hill Street, rebuilt in 1859. A full listing is in Appendix 1, and a summary of the available listed buildings records is as follows:

Grade Number Grade I 3 Grade II* 23 Grade II 254

The Grade I listed buildings are the former Angles Theatre (1840) and Theatre Workshop (1793) and the former Empire Cinema (1932). The parish church and the current Wisbech Castle are both Grade II. As one would expect, a large portion of the listed buildings are Georgian and originate in the town’s rebuilding and extension plans of the 18th century. These areas include North Brink (including Peckover House), South Brink (to a lesser extent), Old Market, Market Place, High Street and the Castle estate. These places all retain their fundamentally Georgian character. Recent building work inside the Rose and Crown Hotel on the Market Place has confirmed that the structure has several phases of greater antiquity than

12 Pevsner 1970 p.499

18

the visible fabric would suggest. The listing description states that the building is a 17th century (1601) coaching inn with a facade of c.1857. This can be seen in the current construction, and suggests a deliberate attempt to modernise the street at a cheaper cost than a programme of new construction. It also has implications for other properties in the vicinity, for the area is comprised of similar faced buildings, leading one to wonder how many 17th century or even earlier buildings are hidden behind Georgian and Regency facades. However one untapped resource of information lies in the below ground structures of the town. For an area on the limit of the water table, there are a surprising number of cellars and vaults in the area of the castle and market. No accurate survey exists of these, but a newspaper article from 1929 gives an itinerary of structures extant at that time, many of which are now lost. A productive exercise would be an attempt to retrace the route of this article with a contemporary business directory of the time. Of those known to exist, the vaults under No. 29 Market Place are probably the most important. These comprise a three bay chamber with a vaulted ceiling, although this has been truncated on two bays by the post-mediaeval building above it. The surviving third vault is later medieval is style. The vault ribs are supported by corbels, and the central boss is of a male face surrounded by a wreath. One interpretation of this is it is a representation of Jesus, but the iconography is more reminiscent of a Green Man. The vaults extend towards the Market Square before ceasing. These have been ascribed to the Guild of the Holy Trinity, on the grounds that they appear to be mediaeval and religious in origin, and represent some evident wealth and influence. However the distance from the 29 Hill Street is too far, so one identification must be incorrect. Vaults also exist beneath the Rose and Crown Hotel, the earliest of which are post-mediaeval and heavily silted (roughly 3-4 feet as an estimate). Behind the Rose and Crown, the Anchor Chambers has a vault running from the Nene waterfront towards the Market Square. The nature and date of this cannot be ascertained as the vault is inaccessible at the current time, but it too is heavily silted. Beneath the castle are vaults traditionally associated with the late 15th century phase of the castle by Bishop Morton (see below for a full description of the castle). These can be accessed today. It is known that the area surrounding the castle had some form of underground passages radiating from the castle towards the market. These were filled in by the District Authority to prevent the collapse of the road above. On the opposite side of the river, work in 1996/7 on the Schooner Wharf warehouse located a brick built, vaulted structure leading away from the river. In all likelihood this was a similar structure to that under the Anchor Chambers, but unfortunately it has since been filled in.

19

The following buildings are classified as ‘at risk’ by Fenland District Council: ‘Flint House’, 67 Lynn Road 11 High Street 12 High Street 29 Market Place 11 North Brink Anchor Chambers, 8 Nene Quay Richard Young Memorial, Lynn Road 3 School Lane Waldersey Pumping Station, South Brink Leverington Cemetery Chapel and environs, Leverington

20

Particular Buildings and Constructions 1) Wisbech Castle The origins of the castle are uncertain. Tradition (Matthew Paris13) states that it was built after the rebellion of Hereward the Wake in 1071 by William the Conqueror to help subdue the Fenlands, but very early on in its life it was entrusted to the Diocese of Ely when the holdings of Ely were split in 1109. It became associated with the manor of Wisbech St Peter, performing the legal functions of the estate, compared to the manorial site of Barton, which was the administrative and economic centre. The earliest form of the castle is unknown. It was heavily damaged in the floods of 1236 and rebuilt as a place for bishops to hold court and also as a prison. In the 14th century, it was the home of a constable and a bailiff, but was again ruined by the 15th century. It was again rebuilt, this time by Bishop Morton, allegedly of brick. The footings of the boundary wall of this phase were located in Medworth Place in 1971, but again little is known of the actual structure and layout. It is known that these phases had a moat, for a section of this was discovered in 1955 at the rear of 15-17 Market Place in 1956. This revealed pottery and leather ware of 13th and 14th century date. A projected outline of the castle from this has an area of 4 acres enclosed by the moat and wall that ran between Castle Mews / Wilderness Walk and High Street / Market Place, down past the church, along Love Lane and down Ghost Passage (where a plaque on the wall marks the line of what was presumably Morton’s Wall). Whilst this would explain the circular nature of the street pattern in the area, it cannot be totally proven. However, this projected line places the moat under the Museum, where extreme subsidence and sag is visible in the current structure. After the rebuilding work of Morton, the castle was used as a bishop’s residence and then as a prison for Roman Catholic recusants. The town declared for Parliament in the Civil War, and in 1658 the manor was purchased by Secretary Thurloe, who demolished Morton’s palace and replaced it with a house similar to Thorpe Hall, Peterborough, built by Inigo Jones. After the Restoration, the castle was returned to the diocese, but was leased out until sold at auction in 1793 to Joseph Medworth of Bermondsey. A plan of the sale confirms the enclosed area as 1 hectare. He redeveloped the entire Castle Estate into the Georgian cityscape seen today, and built the current Regency style house in 1816. 2) Other manors The only manor of note other than the diocesan estate was at White Hall, now a farm 1½ miles along North Brink. The manor house was demolished in

13 Chronicon Maiora ii,7

21

1807. A chantry existed at this site, and a possible rectangular cropmark may survive in the field adjacent to the other farm. Two small manors are mentioned, being Corners (or Corins) Holt in Wheatmath’s Field to the north-west of the town which is mentioned from 1512 – 1803, and Reppes, of unknown location from 1542 to 1697. 3) Churches (Protestant) The main parish church is of Saints Peter and Paul, a not uncommon dedication normally associated with the earliest churches founded after the conversion by the Roman church to Anglo-Saxon England in 597 AD. However, there is no evidence to place the church that early in date. The floorplan is unusual in that it consists a north aisle, two south aisles and nave with clerestory. The chancel is off the nave and has a south chapel leading off the first south aisle, and the tower is to the north, almost unattached to the north aisle. The earliest fabric is late 12th century, being the chancel, clerestoried nave, north and south aisle and a west tower. This would be a very large (and expensive) church to have constructed at the time in what was not a particularly wealthy area, but this is probably a reflection in the role of the town as a diocesan estate. The second south aisle was added in the 14th century, but in the latter part of the same century the west tower collapsed, demolishing the south arcade in the process. The new tower was built in 1525, and the building restored in 182614. It is interesting to speculate about the collapse of the tower. Such disasters were not uncommon in the mediaeval period, but what is interesting is the replacement of the tower on the north side rather than in its original location. A possible explanation could lie in the proximity of the supposed mediaeval moat, which runs within 10m of the west wall of the church and would have destabilised the ground. The relationship between the church and castle is interesting. If one considers the contours of the immediate area, it is evident that the castle, market and church are built on the 5m area, presumably the highest and driest in the area. But the central point of the high ground is dominated by the church, not the castle, with the market to the immediate north. The current church is 12th century, when the castle and presumably the moat, was already supposed to have existed. Therefore, presumably a church was already on the site before the castle, forcing the castle construction to take place slightly off to one side of the most topographically favourable location that was already taken by the church. This existing church probably did not have a tower, in keeping with most later Saxon buildings at this level, or the existing one was only small, hence the proximity of a large and undermining ditch. The later tower proved

14 Pevsner 1970 pp.494-7

22

too much for the location, and hence was rebuilt away from the offending area. This is, of course, speculative. Two other Anglican churches have been built in the town, in recognition of the growth of the town in the 19th century. These were the Octagon Church (built 1831 in the Old Market) and St Augustine’s, built in 1868/9 in Lynn Road. The Octagon was based on the design of the Octagon of Ely Cathedral, and comprised a octagonal nave, chancel, south porch and turret. The lantern on the turret was removed as unsafe in 1846. It was intended as a Chapel of Ease for the parish church, and occupied as a permanent curacy. It was closed in 1946 and demolished in 1952. The site is now occupied by Lloyds Bank, but the overgrown and closed off cemetery is still extant. St Augustine’s comprises a chancel, clerestoried nave, aisles and turret, and is still active. The existence of the Chapel of the Holy Trinity has been mentioned above, but the location is in the vicinity of the 20th century housing estate in Cocketts Drive. In addition, the parish church of All Saints, Walsoken lies in the County of Norfolk. 4) Other denominations This information is best presented in tabular form: Address Denomination Date

Built Current Status

Notes

St Mary & St Charles Borromeo, Queens Road

Roman Catholic

1854 Active

Deadmans Lane [Alexandra Road]

Particular Baptists

1692 Demolished. Under British Legion Club

Cemetery

Ship Lane [Hill Street]

Johnsonian Baptists

1794, rebuilt 1859

Active Only stone building in town

Artillery Street Johnsonian Baptists

1897 Closed and derelict

Closed 1937

Falcon Lane General Baptists

Late C17

Lost Was 35*32ft. Cemetery

Crescent Passage

General Baptist

1803 Extant Replaced 1873 Cemetery

Victoria Road Zion Baptist 1856 Closed Ship Lane [Hill Street]

Presbyterians ? Became Unitarian C18

Great Church Street [Alexandra Road]

Unitarians 1851/8 Closed Closed 1870s

Castle Square Congregationalists

1818 Active

23

South Brink Congregationalists

1848 Lost

North Brink Society of Friends

? Active Current one built 1854 on earlier site

Deadman’s Lane [Alexandra Road]

Methodist ? Lost Meeting place in barn

The Crescent Methodist 1803 Active Enlarged 1835

Kirkgate Street Methodist Modern Active Church Terrace Primitive

Methodist 1868 Active Replaced by

modern building

Little Church Street

United Methodist

1862 Lost/demolished

Russell Street Seaman’s (Bethel) Chapel

1828 Demolished Closed 1879/83

East Street Salvation Army 1885 Demolished West Street Salvation Army Modern Active 5) Cemeteries The cemetery of the parish church of Saints Peter and Paul was closed in 1855 to further burials. The site is now cleared of many of the memorials, particularly to the south-east of the building. The yard has been truncated, and clearly covered a larger area in the past, as in 1994 workmen digging the road on Church Terrace to the east of the church located Christian burials. Pressure was mounting on the available space earlier in the 19th century, for an extension was opened in 1832 on Kings Walk, initially to bury victims of a cholera outbreak, but in 1840 it received the correct consecration and a mortuary chapel was built. This too was closed in 1855, and is now an open space; most memorials and the chapel have been cleared. The main general cemetery (unconsecrated) was opened on Leverington Road in 1835 and a funerary chapel by William Adams built in 1848. This site is now closed (although the occasional burial does still take place), and the 2 ½ acre cemetery is heavily overgrown and derelict pending a reassessment of its status. It is classified as ‘At Risk Factor 1’ (i.e. high) by Fenland District Council. The current general cemetery is on Mount Pleasant Bank, is also unconsecrated and has a mortuary chapel. St Augustine’s Church does not have a cemetery. The Octagon Church did possess one, and it is still extant, albeit heavily overgrown and almost inaccessible. The various sects of the Baptist Church also had cemeteries at various locations, and human remains can be expected to be encountered in the areas of Alexandra Road, Falcon Lane and Crescent Passage. It is known that Wisbech had a leper hospital by 1378 on the border with Elm parish, and also a hospital of St John the Baptist that was founded before

24

1279 but was derelict by 1352. The locations of both these are unknown, but presumably both would have possessed cemeteries. 6) Schools The earliest school known was attached to the Guild of the Holy Trinity and was presumably based in the Guild Hall on Hill Street. Wisbech possessed a school by 1581/3, and a permanent building (location unknown) in 1710. Again, information about schools is best presented in tabular form: Address Type Date Status Notes Church Terrace Boys 1811 Replaced Lower Hill Street Girls 1811 Replaced Closed 1928 St Peters, Church Terrace

Boys 1874 Closed Replaced earlier Church Terrace School. Now a hall

St Augustine’s. Lynn Road

Girls 1874 Closed Now a hall

Alexandra Road Boys 1803 Lost? Closed 1840 Victoria Road Boys 1840 Closed Closed 1928. Now a house The Crescent (behind)

Girls 1834 Closed Demolished 1876

Elm Road Girls 1876 Extant Current Elm Road School site

South Brink (3 miles)

Girls 1876 Closed Now a house

Queens School, Queens Road

? 1925 Closed Car Park site and Community Education Centre

Kirkgate Street, Walsoken

? 1858 Closed Derelict

Norwich Road, Walsoken

? 1875 Extant Nene County Infants School

Girls High School, North Brink

Girls 1904 Extant Now Wisbech Grammar School

7) Public Spaces Markets – Wisbech has two extant Market Places, being the Old Market and Market Place, on either side of the river. No market charter is known for either. Old Market was so-called by 1221, and the new market was probably laid out as part of the construction of the Castle after the Norman Conquest15. This suggests that Old Market may be pre-Norman in origin, a theory substantiated by its proximity to the manorial site of Wisbech Barton, the administrative centre of the estate. The Old Market has been traditionally associated with local agricultural needs, such as seed, corn, local agricultural suppliers, and in more recent times banks and accountants. The new market area was however wealthier and had more tenants. 15 Pugh 1967 p.240

25

A timber market existed near the Well Stream in the south-east part of the town. The narrow tenements of Norfolk Street and Wets Street are a reflection of this layout. Presumably a Horse Market existed on the site known as Horse Fair, but the recent redevelopment of this area would probably have destroyed any evidence of this site. A sheep market is recorded as being in existence on the Corn Exchange site in 1830. A Butter Market was built in 1801 and demolished in 1851 on the corner of Bridge Street, Nene Quay and High Street. By 1849 this was known as the Customs House, reflecting a change of use. The site is now occupied by the Clarkson Memorial. A Shambles existed in the east side of Market Place. This was located adjacent to the Shire Hall (1680) and built in 1595. It was demolished along with the Shire Hall in 1810. An account of the time states that unusual timbers were discovered with strange carvings, possibly indicative of a previous structure. Unfortunately, the area was heavily disturbed by the construction of underground public conveniences in 1964 that have since been infilled. Others – the Civic Park was laid out in 1869 and measured 19 acres. The workhouse occupied a three acre site on Albion Place, was built in 1722 and demolished in 1969. This is now the bus station. The Public Assistance Institution (later Clarkson Hospital) was constructed in the 1840s and demolished in 1971. The site is now under Mill Close. 8) Communications The first mention of a bridge is in 1317 over the Well Stream. The Nene Bridge is referred to in Corporation records, and appears to have been more or less close to the current bridge. This was made of wood until 1757, when it was replaced by a stone one. This was unsafe and replaced by an iron swing bridge in 1855/7, designed to facilitate access for ships to the upper Nene16. The current concrete bridge was constructed adjacent to the iron one in 1931. This continuous sequence of construction and demolition, coupled with the numerous reinforcements and recuts of the bank have probably destroyed any evidence of the earlier structures. The Freedom Bridge was constructed in 1971. The railway arrived in 1847 (Eastern Counties Railways) and 1848 (East Anglian Railways). The former constructed a station near the current goods sidings, and the latter a station under the old Octavia Hill centre (now a new housing development). The Eastern Counties line is still used for goods transport only, but the other is dismantled.. The former line appears to have been intended to cross the Nene and continue northwards, but to do so would have entailed crossing the Peckover estates. Local tradition has it that the Peckover family, staunch Quakers, refused to allow the railway across their land.

16 ibid p.265

26

It has been demonstrated how a dip in population can be seen in 1861. This has been attributed to the impact of the railway on both the activities of the docks and also because it provided the population with a means of transport from outlying areas. However one impact it did have was the provision of transport for a large workforce to come to the fruit farms in the later part of the century; it was common for entire families to come up from London’s East End for the harvest until the Second World War. The railway was used to transport goods to and from the dock areas. A line was installed by Midland and Great Northern from the Old Market along the east bank of the Nene, and another by Great Eastern on the west bank. Both are now closed and dismantled. In 1884 Great Eastern opened a steam tramway alongside the canal to Outwell. Its receipts were poor and it reverted to goods use. It is also dismantled. The canal was built in 1794-7 along the Well Stream that was effectively blocked by silting. It was initiated and paid for by the Corporation. It leads from Outwell through to the Nene in the town, but was never really a success commercially due to rapid silting. The canal was infilled during the 1950s and is now under Churchill Road. Its path can be followed through the rural areas to Outwell, where its inlet can still be seen. The sluice that formed the outlet into the Nene is still visible in the bank near Freedom Bridge.

27

Other Projects Very little other work has been done in the environs of Wisbech. The Fenland Survey was hampered by the more extensive urban areas within the parish than elsewhere within the fen region. The results of the Survey have been incorporated into the text. The Defence of Britain Project has identified seven sites within the parish, being one loop-holed wall, two pill boxes and four spigot mortar emplacements. However, checking the grid references shows that four sites are in Wisbech St Mary and one is in Elm. Only the loop-holed wall and one spigot mortar are in the town, on Chapel Street and Harecroft Road respectively. The majority of sites identified by the Project in East Anglia are airfields and anti-invasion features, and as such are mainly in rural environments. Hence the same restrictions as with the Fenland Survey apply.

28

Fenland Drainage Programmes17 The history of the town is intimately bound up with the history of land reclamation and drainage in the fens. It has been demonstrated how Wisbech lies at the end of a spur of silt separating the salt water of the Wash from the fresh water of the fens themselves. This somewhat precarious location is what gives rise to the closeness between land reclamation and settlement in the area. Such an assessment has by necessity to move beyond the parish boundaries. Wisbech has always been part of a greater whole here, be it the vast extent of the estates of the Abbey of Ely or the activities of the Bedford Corporation. A recut of a sluice in Earith can have disastrous effects on the flow of the Nene through the town, and for a place that is governed by its trade, this can be vital. The Fenland Survey estimated that land reclamation in this area began during the Anglo-Saxon period. Prehistoric land use is unknown, but the area was waterlogged during the Iron Age. The environmental archaeology behind the reconstruction of Fenland climate has been detailed elsewhere, but in summary, it appears that water levels may have receded during the Roman and immediate sub-Roman period, before rising again from the Late Saxon period through to the Mediaeval period. The effect on this would have been the emergence of dry land during the Roman period, primarily in strips along the roddons. These sites can be seen as part of the Fenland Survey, and are mainly rural, based upon the salt production industry with some animal rearing. Roman drainage systems appear to have been based upon the roddons, with sinuous channels respecting natural alignments. The area was divided according to the field system known as limitatio, a method of land division commonly found on estates owned directly by the Imperial house18. Extensive sea defences are not seen until the later Saxon period. There were in effect two defences either side of the Nene estuary, being the Sea Bank in the east (Norfolk) and the Fen Bank in the west (Cambridgeshire). Both are extensive earthworks (the Sea Bank stretches to Upwell) and were always assumed to be Roman, hence the name ‘Roman Bank’ in Leverington parish. However, on the Norfolk side, sites show incursions of tidal silts during the Middle Saxon period, but nothing for the Late Saxon, suggesting that the defences were in place by this date. The Fen Bank has two phases, an Inner and an Outer Bank. The Inner Bank is probably created during the Late Saxon period, and the Outer was in existence by c.1200. The Inner Bank would have had the effect of reclaiming land around Wisbech St Mary19. The question arises as to whom was behind this programme of reclamation of protection, and the answer has to be the church and Abbey of Ely, the sole 17 See Darby 1968 for full details 18 Hall 1996 pp.176-7 19 ibid p.186

29

landowner of the silt island by the time of Domesday. Ely was refounded in 970AD with a series of land grants from King Edgar, being in essence the entirety of the Two Hundreds of Ely. Ely was refounded as part of the monastic reform movement driven by Bishops Oswald, Aethelwold and Archbishop Dunstan which was intended to create a purer form of monasticism. One aspect of this was the desire to remove ecclesiastical institutions from the sphere of influence of the secular aristocracy, who traditionally had patronised and benefited institutions, in essence transforming them into private religious houses. One way to remove the church from such influence would be to bestow it with new land, reclaimed by a programme of drainage and reclamation resourced by individual people and institutions. It can no coincidence that just about every fen edge and island estate was owned by the church at the time of Domesday. Ely was active in river diversion and canalisation at the time. The Fenland Survey elsewhere on Abbey lands has identified straight cut drainage ditches, and also the diversion of the Nene through March to prevent flooding at Coldham, all of which were designed to improve the area as a whole, and can be dated to the late Saxon or mediaeval periods. The Sea Banks were active in this period also, but the area was still subject to heavy and disastrous floods. At some point during the 13th century (possibly as a result of the 1236 floods) the Ouse and Nene combined flow diverted from Wisbech to Kings Lynn as the estuary at the former was too silted to be a viable flow. This raised the importance of the Well Stream as a river outlet, and also contributed to the mediaeval wealth of Kings Lynn. Various attempts were made during the mediaeval period to redivert the water flow back through Wisbech, but one of the main opponents to such schemes was the University of Cambridge, which was unwilling to risk any impact on its water connections with Lynn. The first straight cut drainage channel was Morton’s Leam, built for the Nene between Stanground and Guyhirn at he end of the 15th century at the instigation of the then Bishop of Ely. However, the 16th century saw extensive flooding (see above), and the continuation of the Nene and Ouse through Lynn. All the activities of the mediaeval period were basically piecemeal reclamation, achieved by draining a particular area in a particular fashion, often without regard or knowledge for the impact elsewhere. Nevertheless, Camden’s Britannia of 1586 and 1607 showed that large areas of silt were available for pasture. The first large scale attempt at Fenland water management was by the Dutch engineer Vermuyden in the employment of the Earl of Bedford. A survey of 1618 had revealed that the Nene was blocked at Wisbech near the outflow, and the existing sluice at the Horseshoe had failed. Vermuyden’s plans called for nine major cuts and recuts, with numerous smaller channels. Although the work was opposed by the towns of Ely and Cambridge, the University of Cambridge and the Bishop of Ely (fearful for their trading links through Lynn), the work commenced in 1630 until 1653. Wisbech

30

lies on the boundary between the North and Middle Bedford Levels (the border is the Nene Washes). Vermuyden stated that the Nene at Wisbech was blocked, so the Ouse was diverted permanently through the 100ft Drain to Lynn. This resulted in the blockage of the Ouse estuary at Lynn. The first crops from the Bedford Levels were in 1653 and declared a success. However the area still flooded and by 1700 the fens were again in trouble. It was the introduction of machine pumps that saved the area, first wind then steam and finally diesel in the 20th century. During the 18th century, over 250 mills appeared in the Middle Level. Once the water has been removed from the fields into the drains, there is also the problem of the egress into the sea. Here was the main problem for Wisbech, as the Nene estuary was insufficient. In the 18th century the main egress of the river lay roughly 4 miles north of the town into a sandy estuary, and the flow through the town was slight and the Wisbech Corporation opposed any plans that might block off the harbour. In 1751, Nathaniel Kinderley commented that small boats had, forty years previously, been able to get to the town , but now they had to offload at Sutton onto lighters. In 1773, Kinderley’s Cut was constructed above the town, which lowered the North Level waters by 5 feet and eased shipping into town. However, this had the effect of creating immense sand banks below the cut, and still only ships of 40-60 tons displacement could move up from Sutton bridge docks. Various proposals made by Thomas Telford and Sir John Rennie were rejected as too expensive, but as a compromise new cuts were made; the Woodhouse Marsh Cut in 1832 from the town to Kinderley’s Cut, and the Nene Outfall Cut of 1827-32 above the extant one to the Wash. This lowered the level of the Nene, freed up drains further inland and ensured that ships could now get to the town. The impact upon trade is evident, with 55040 tons of shipping in 1829 to 167,443 in 1847. The Nene was still problematic in the area of the town, and various improvements were made along the river towards Peterborough in the 1930s that ensured that the extensive floods of 1947 had little impact on the town. The installation of mechanical pumps driven by steam and later diesel opened a new avenue of trade in the town, especially for Newcastle coal to drive the steam pumps.

31

Synthesis This section is based upon a compilation of the knowledge above to present an overview of the development of the town. For ease of reference, this has been produced chronologically.

32

Prehistoric We have very little knowledge of the area at his time, as any deposits are most likely beneath extensive peat and silt deposits. However, the most likely places for occupation would be along the roddons and high ground in the area. The main Nene/Ouse roddon runs roughly along the southern bypass, and the highest found is under the current town, the depths of whose deposits have never been ascertained.

33

Roman Roman activity can be seen in various places within the town. The receding waters left a dry area that proved attractive along the roddons, but it appears that occupation was limited. The main area of Roman activity in the fens lay to the south, and it is possible that the siltlands were too marginal20. The roddon lies to the south of the town, and Roman activity in this area has been identified. Having said that, there is evidence of salterns and the salt industry. There is the distinct possibility that the area formed part of the imperial estate, so what one would have was not self-sufficient farmsteads but components of a greater whole; in this case salt producers with limited livestock. Unfortunately, later silt deposits make identification of sites difficult. Then possibility of Roman remains to the west of the town is interesting. Here would be the furthest away from the estuary and possibly the driest part of the island. This part of the town is undeveloped, probably because of the extensive land holdings of the Peckover family, and now the National Trust. This has hindered the expansion of the town, forcing it eastwards instead. It is considered likely that Roman remains are present to the west and north-west of the town. It should also be noted that it was this area that saw the location of most of the known Roman coin deposits and hoards.

20 See Potter 1991 for a full account of Roman Fenland

34

Saxon Saxon activity is again little recorded. It is known that by the Norman Conquest the entire silt isle supported around 50 households under the overlordship of the Abbey of Ely. Again the issue of marginal land comes into play, and the construction of the two sea defences either side of the estuary to protect the landscape from water incursions demonstrates the determination of the church to hold onto these fertile lands, and also proves that the island was subject to centralised authority. Again, it is most likely that Saxon settlement is to be found in the north and west of the current town, i.e. into the silt island itself. That this area was noted as the Old Market by the end of the 12th century is suggestive of the antiquity of this area as a settlement centre, as is the establishment of the administrative centre of the manorial estates on this side. It should also be noted that the main access route from Ely to Wisbech would have been along the Old Croft River, through Upwell to the settlement. The best disembarkation point for such a journey would have been the location of the Old Market. Nucleation of Anglo-Saxon settlement into the villages and towns that we see today tends to be a phenomenon associated with the reorganisation of the landscape that took place from the 10th to the 12th centuries. However other factors can take precedence, and it is likely that the island was a network of smaller hamlets and farms, with lands divided by drains and a central focus at the main point of water contact, where the market and manorial centres happened to be. Whether a church existed in this later Saxon landscape is uncertain. Certainly a manor usually had an associated church, yet in Wisbech’s case the church is across the river next to the castle. It has been shown above how the church could predate the castle, but this would place a later Saxon church effectively on a peninsula over the water from its manor. Whilst not unusual in itself for a Saxon development, it would require more evidence to prove this than is currently available. Another possibility is that the late Saxon church was demolished and rebuilt next to the castle deliberately as a reaction to the support by Ely Abbey of Hereward the Wake. This would as yet undiscovered church to the north of the river, and again is not unknown in the area. A third option is that the scattered nature of the settlement did not justify the expenditure of resources on a church.

35

Mediaeval Wisbech in Domesday Book was not a particularly large or important, yet throughout the mediaeval period the core of the modern town that we know evolved. The construction of the church, castle and new market moved the focus of settlement away from the north bank of the Nene, a process accentuated when the Nene outflow was finally blocked by silt in the earlier mediaeval period, laving the Well Stream as the most important water course in the emerging town. The maintenance of two market places is indicative of a change in focus for activity on the Isle. The Old Market maintained its local connections, but it is likely that the new market became more associated with the commercial trade that was beginning to emerge during the 13th century. Given the problems afflicting the water flows out of the town, it is interesting to speculate as to why a port evolved here. It appears that the more reliable water flows lead through Lynn, and certainly Cambridge and Ely regarded Lynn as their main trading town. Wisbech and its environs must have possessed some attribute that focussed trade here, and although it did afford access to the western fens (in particular Holme and Yaxley) presumably there was a commodity here that was traded. This probably was the agricultural surplus generated by the fertile lands, especially when an ongoing programme of drainage created more of the same. Agricultural surpluses have always been the main export from the town, in one form or another. First it was corn, then cole-seed and rape-seed, and in more recent times market gardening, especially fruit, although vegetables are also popular. Wisbech was under the ownership of the church of Ely, although the bishops were a somewhat distant presence. The control of the town rested with the Guilds, in particular the Holy Trinity, which exercised its authority widely, and evolved into the town’s Corporation. The town however, remained fairly small in size, compared to similar ones in the region. Only one church was built (compared to the 42 in Huntingdon during the mediaeval period). The population was centred on around the two cores, the Old Market and the castle areas, but the town did not stretch much beyond these areas. The marginality of the land may have had something to do with this, for despite the continuing existence of the sea defences, and the ongoing reclamation projects, the core area (around the castle) flooded on a regular and catastrophic basis. It is quite possible that the town existed as a focus for the area, but most of its population still inhabited the hinterlands in scattered settlements. Most of these hinterlands fall outside the remit of this survey. However, the area to the immediate south-west of the town has revealed a form of agriculture known as darlands. These are drainage ditches roughly 2m wide used to delineate strips of agricultural land. These strips are around 12m wide

36

and 160 long, which corresponds reasonably well to plots of land identified under the Midlands system of ridge and furrow.

37

Post-Mediaeval The main growth of the town took place in the post-mediaeval period, when the population expanded rapidly. This could be down to several factors. Firstly, widespread drainage of the fens coupled with mechanical means of pumping water off the lands created wide swathes of very fertile agricultural land that could be used for crops or (in the case of marginal land) summer pasture. Secondly, there were deliberate attempts to free up the flow of the Nene through the town and improve access to the port facilities. The impact of this was two-fold. The area could now generate larger agricultural products to export, and also the access to the port was improved to permit larger vessels to ship it. The use of mechanical pumps generated a need for certain products, in particular wood and coal. Most of the port facilities were located below the Town Bridge, especially out towards the Horseshoe sluice to the north. Sutton bridge still provided a mooring for large vessels. As the trade grew, so the town prospered. The creation of extensive and elaborate Georgian and Regency properties are a reflection of that. However there was also a requirement for housing for the growing number of labourers that served the port and the town, and there are several references to a lack of such housing in the 18th and 19th centuries. The areas around Walsoken were always regarded as the poorer areas, so it is unsurprising that this is the direction in which the town expanded from the mid-19th century. It also grew southwards, and the terraces around Victoria Road, Milner Road and such like were laid out at this time. The town expanded along Leverington Road and Lynn Road in a linear fashion, and in time Walsoken became totally absorbed. Expansion westwards was hindered by he fact that the wealthy families (especially the Peckovers) who owned the houses around here also owned the land, and would not permit much development in their vicinity. The town probably reached its zenith by the end of the 19th and into the 20th century. At the opening of the 21st, Wisbech is still recovering from the decline of its port and trade, and still is trying to find a new purpose for itself. Its population is static, and the whole area is economically depressed.

38

Industrial Wisbech does not appear to have any specific industrial development beyond that associated with its trade and food production. Despite its role as a trading port, little ship building took place – only 21 ships were launched between 1778 and 1850, when production ceased. The ship yards were located on the right bank of the river towards the Horseshoe. The town possessed two breweries, one of which is still in production (Elgoods on the North Brink) but the other was demolished to make room for the police station and courts.

39

Summary Wisbech is a town of immense architectural importance, yet is also one that is little understood archeologically. It probably began as a focus of Late Saxon activity and occupation, and its favourable location at the time when it was needed provided the momentum to transform it into a trading centre initially on a regional and then on a national and international basis. There can be no other towns within the County with so few archaeological interventions, so as a result archaeological survival is difficult to predict. However it would be fair to say that deposits in the west and south of the town, where they would be protected by both flood deposits and lack of land development, would be in a reasonable state of preservation. Fenland District Council have identified areas of redevelopment, but these are mainly piecemeal infill, and will be considered in the strategy document. The hinterlands of Wisbech are beyond this survey, which is unfortunate, for as a town that provided a focus for a topographical area (in this case the silt islands) then this relationship is vital.

40

Research Directions Given the imbalance between architectural and archaeological information for the town, these vary from vague/basic to very specific. Reference should also be made to the Research Frameworks for the Eastern Counties for more general guidance. Prehistoric and Roman • Identify any pre-Roman activity and settlement • Ascertain the nature of Roman occupation of the town and its vicinity • Determine the depths of overburden protecting these deposits Saxon • Locate the core settlement and determine its evolution from the scattered

hamlets that preceded it • Establish a chronology for the earliest drainage and reclamation works in

the area Mediaeval • Establish the boundaries of the castle • Establish the relationship between the two separate areas either side of

the Nene • Continue with a chronology for water management Mediaeval / Post-Mediaeval • Identify to what extent the mediaeval town is masked by later development

– cellars and frontages • Identify and quantify the role of trade, the scale and nature of goods

exported • Assess the importance and development of the town in comparison to its

Fenland counterparts such as Boston and Kings Lynn

41

Bibliography Part I- General Reading Brown, A.E.. Roman Small Towns in Eastern England. (Oxford 1995) Ayers, B. The urbanisation of East Anglia: the Norwich perspective. (Norwich 1993) Ayers, B. Anglo-Saxon, Medieval and Post-Medieval (Urban). Research and Archaeology: A Framework for the Eastern Counties, 1. Resource Assessment. (Norwich 1997) Ayers, B.. Saxon, Medieval and Post-Medieval Urban. Research and Archaeology: A Framework for the Eastern Counties, 2. Research Agenda. Draft April 1999. Brown, N. and Wade, M. Research and Archaeology: A Framework for the Eastern Counties 2: Research Agenda and Strategy. Draft April 1999. Carver, M Underneath English Towns. (London 1987). Carver, M. Arguments in Stone. (Oxford 1993). Darvill, T.. Monument Protection Programme. Monument evaluation manual. Part IV. Urban Areas. Vol 1 Text and Appendices. Vol. 2 Urban Areas Form Descriptions. (English Heritage 1992) Darvill, T. and Fulton, A. The Monuments at Risk Survey of England 1995. (Bournemouth University and English Heritage1998) Eddy M.R. with Petchey M.R. Historic Towns in Essex: an archaeological survey. (Essex County Council 1983). English Heritage. Exploring our Past: Strategies for the Archaeology of England. (1991) English Heritage. Managing the Urban Archaeological Resource. (1992) English Heritage. English Heritage Archaeology Division Research Agenda. (Draft April 1997.) Essex County Council. Historic Towns in Essex: Proposals for a new survey of the historic towns of Essex. (ECC Planning Department, Archaeological Advisory Group 1995). Glazebrook, J. et. al. (ed.). Research and Archaeology: A Framework for the Eastern Counties. 1. Resource Assessment. (East Anglian Archaeology Occasional Paper 3, 1997)

42

Going, C. 1997. Roman. In Glazebrook, J. et. al. (ed.) 1997. Research and Archaeology: A Framework for the Eastern Counties. 1. Resource Assessment. East Anglian Archaeology Occasional Paper 3: 35-46. Ottaway, P.. Archaeology in British Towns: from the Emperor Claudius to the Black Death. (London 1992) Rae, J. and Saunders, A.. Sources for Cambridgeshire Archaeology and Landscape History. 3 vols. 1980. (MSS held in CCC SMR.) Ray, K. The development of archaeological strategies for historic towns in England: an ALGAO review. (Association of Local Government Archaeology Officers 1998.) Reynolds, S. Decline and decay in late Medieval towns: a look at some of the concepts and arguments . Urban History Yearbook (1980.) SCEALA 1998. Regional Strategy for East Anglia 1995-2016. Standing Committee of East Anglian Local Authorities. Schofield, J. Medieval and later towns. In Vyner, B. (ed.) Building on the Past 195-214 (RAI 1994) Society for Post-Medieval Archaeology 1988. Research Priorities for Post-Medieval Archaeology. Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies 1985. Priorities for the Preservation and Excavation of Romano-British Sites. Part II – Wisbech Bentham, J The History and Antiquities of the Conventual Church of Ely Cambridge (1771) Blake E (ed.) Liber Eliensis (London 1962) Blakeman P Book of Ely (Buckingham 1994) Brown N & Glazebrook J (eds.) Research and Archaeology: A Framework for the Eastern Counties Vol.2 research agenda and strategy (Norwich 2000) Cambridgeshire and Huntingdonshire Archaeological Society Transactions Camden, W Britannia (London 1586) Cograve B & Mynors R( eds.) Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English People (Oxford 1969) Darby H The Mediaeval Fenland (Cambridge 1974)

43

Dark P The Environment of Britain in the First Millennium AD (London 2000) East Cambridgeshire District Council Ely Local Plan (1988) East Cambridgeshire District Council East Cambridgeshire Local Plan Deposit Draft (1997) Elvington CR (ed.) A History of Cambridgeshire and the Isle of Ely Vol. VII: Roman Cambridgeshire (VCH London 1978) Godwin H Fenland: its ancient past and uncertain future (Cambridge 1978) Hall D The Fenland Survey Vol. 10: Cambridgeshire Survey, Isle of Ely and Wisbech (Norwich 1996) Jackman R & Potter T Exacvations at Stonea, Cambridgeshire 1980-1985 (London 1996) John E Land Tenure in Early England (Leicester 1960) Morris R Churches in the Landscape (London 1989) Pevsner N The Buildings of England: Cambridgeshire (London 1977) Proceedings of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society Publications of the Cambridge Antiquarian Society Pugh RB, A History of Cambridgeshire and the Isle of Ely Vol.IV (VCH London 1967) Reaney PH The Place-Names of Cambridgeshire and the Isle of Ely (EPNS No.19, Cambridge 1943) Rumble A (ed.) Domesday Book Vol.18: Cambridgeshire (Cambridge 1981) Sawyer P Anglo-Saxon Charters: An Annotated List and Bibliography (London 1968) Schofield J & Vince A Mediaeval Towns (London 1994) Taylor CC The Cambridgeshire Landscape (Cambridge 1975) Vancouver C, General View of the Agriculture of the County of Cambridgeshire (Cambridge 1794) Waller M The Fenland Project Vol.9: Flandrian Environmental Change in Fenland (Cambridge 1993)