Details

The monument includes earthwork and buried remains of a complex and extensive
area of archaeological remains, the dates of which span an approximately 4500
year period. It is located on either side of Eller Beck on the steep eastern
side of the Lune valley and has been identified by a combination of
documentary sources, aerial photography, field survey and limited excavation.
The monument extends across the Lancashire/Cumbria boundary and includes nine
prehistoric funerary cairns, two prehistoric hut circle settlements with
associated cairnfields and field systems, a prehistoric field system of the
type generally described as `coaxial', nine Romano-British settlements, two
medieval dispersed settlements with associated curvilinear field systems, five
medieval dispersed settlements, two curvilinear medieval field systems, three
medieval shielings, part of a later medieval field system, an early post-
medieval dispersed settlement and part of an early post-medieval field system.
A number of trackways of various periods lie within the monument. Documentary
sources also indicate that a late medieval deer park was created here in the
early 15th century.
The oldest features are considered to be five large prehistoric burial cairns
dated to the late Neolithic/early Bronze Age (about 2400-1500 BC), four of
which are aligned and lie in prominent positions along the watershed between
Eller Beck to the north and Leck Beck to the south. The most northerly of
these four cairns is the most complex and consists of an oval-shaped platform
measuring 30m by 28m and up to 1m high upon which a cairn measuring 14m by 12m
and up to 0.8m high has been constructed. The other three cairns in the
alignment measure between 14m-22m in diameter and 1m-2m in height. The
remaining cairn in this group lies on the top of a small knoll at SD64607836
and measures 12m in diameter and up to 0.6m high. Four other funerary cairns,
dating to later in the Bronze Age (about 1500-600 BC), lie close to the edge
of the valley of the Leck Beck; three are round and measure between 6m-14m in
diamater and 0.5m-0.6m high, while the fourth is oval-shaped and measures 16m
by 10m and up to 0.6m high. Two prehistoric hut circle settlements with
associated cairnfields and field systems are centred at approximately
SD64057798 and SD64497852 and are thought to date by analogy with field
systems elsewhere in northern England to the late Bronze Age/early Iron Age
(about 1000-300 BC). The eastern of these monuments includes three sub-
circular building platforms upon which timber huts would have stood. These
features lie within an area of field system remains which are characterised by
a patchwork of small irregular fields bounded by lynchets and stone banks. A
clearance cairnfield created by the dumping of stones in mounds during
preparation of the land for cultivation is also associated with the settlement
and field system, and some of these cairns are incorporated into the
prehistoric field boundaries. The western hut circle settlement consists of
two building platforms surrounded by a similar arrangement of fields and
clearance cairns.
Survey has demonstrated that a major reorganisation of the landscape occurred
during the later Iron Age/Romano-British period (about 300 BC-400 AD), as a
series of parallel boundaries formed by stone banks and lynchets were built to
divide the land into a series of strips at right angles to the contours, a
system generally described by archaeologists as a coaxial field system. Ten of
these coaxial field boundaries survive, with the longest running west to east
for about 630m, while the distance between each boundary is fairly consistent,
with almost all lying between 90m-120m apart. There are many short breaks
suggesting entrances in the boundaries. At least four of these boundaries have
adjacent and thus presumably contemporary trackways. No settlements
contemporary with this field system have been identified, suggesting that they
were sited elsewhere, perhaps in the valley bottom. If this was the case, the
trackways may have provided access for the stockmen to move animals from
settlements and winter pasture on the valley floor to upland summer pasture
beyond the limit of the coaxial field system on the valley side. However, two
small rectangular structures interpreted as huts or animal pens are an
integral part of one of the boundaries east of Threepenny Bit Wood, while a
sub-circular enclosure with a single entrance centred at SD64167864 is
approached by a trackway running adjacent to one of the field boundaries, and
is interpreted as a probable stock enclosure contemporary with the coaxial
field system. A rectangular enclosure, also interpreted as a stock enclosure
associated with the field system, lies a short distance to the north on the
east side of a modern field boundary.
Survey has also demonstrated that some of the Romano-British settlements are
later than the field system. These settlements were the small farmsteads of
the indigenous population during the Roman occupation (first to fifth
centuries AD); however, some of these settlements were clearly reused during
the medieval period. The settlement centred at SD64087837 comprises a sub-
elliptical enclosure subdivided into five compartments. There are three
entrances in the enclosure bank with additional gaps in the internal banks
giving access into the individual compartments. A trackway approaches this
settlement from the north and forks to pass either side of it. The settlement
centred at SD64007829 consists of a number of stone banks which define a
series of small enclosures lying predominantly east of a length of trackway.
Unlike many of the settlements here, this site is unenclosed. The settlement
centred at SD64037814 comprises a sub-elliptical enclosure within which a
number of stony banks or tumbled walls divide the interior into four strips
which are themselves further subdivided by stony banks. Remains of two hut
circles which provided accommodation for the settlement's inhabitants survive
within two of the internal strips. Two trackways converge at the settlement's
north west corner, pass round it, and continue south eastwards. A rectangular
structure on the western side of the settlement indicates later reuse. The
settlement centred at SD63797808 comprises a small sub-oval enclosure defined
by an insubstantial stone bank. There is an entrance in the north west from
which a track leads to a sub-circular building platform and an adjacent small
stock pen. The settlement centred at SD64187810 is sub-rectangular in plan and
is surrounded by a stone bank on all sides except uphill to the east. Two
cross banks subdivide the enclosure into three compartments which themselves
are subdivided by banks and scarps. A trackway approaching the settlement from
the north west and running down the western side gives access to each of the
three compartments, while the southern compartment has a second entrance in
its southern side. Limited excavation of this settlement in 1964 produced
evidence of a small hut and occupation debris of the second to fourth
centuries AD. The settlement centred at SD64397804 is crossed by a modern
field boundary. To the south of this wall the settlement is defined by a stony
bank, while to the north of the wall there is no evidence of an enclosing
bank. Of the internal enclosures, one in the southern half consists of a
steeply-sided hollow and is interpreted as a stock yard. Remains of a
rectangular structure indicate later reuse of this settlement. The settlement
centred at SD64207799 is a small triangular-shaped enclosure divided
internally into two compartments, with an entrance on the west giving access
into the northern compartment; the southern compartment is accessed by a gap
in the dividing wall. Various scarps suggest the remains of two buildings in
the northern compartment. The settlement centred at SD64057785 consists of a
sub-square enclosure defined on three sides by a stone bank with an entrance
on the north side approached by a trackway. Internally the main enclosure
contains a large hollow area interpreted as a stock yard and two adjacent
platforms interpreted as houses or ancillary buildings. There are also a
number of other small yards or pens. The northernmost settlement is centred at
approximately SD63857877 and consists of a sub-circular enclosure subdivided
into four enclosures, three of which are sunken, suggesting they were used as
stock pens. There is a building platform attached to the western side of the
enclosure and remains of a stone hut circle attached to the eastern side.
The remains of numerous medieval dispersed settlements also survive in the
constraint area. One centred at SD63907816 consists of a rectangular building
together with two adjacent small enclosures or stock pens. A more complex
medieval dispersed settlement is centred at SD64467840 and consists of a
rectangular building and three other building platforms all within an
irregular curvilinear enclosure which is accessed by a trackway from the south
west. Associated with this settlement is a large sub-rectangular enclosure
subdivided into three paddocks or fields. Other field systems lie to the east
and west; that to the east consists of a large curvilinear enclosure
subdivided into two, while that to the west consists of a smaller paddock
which uses the steep declivity to Eller Beck as its northern boundary. A
trackway runs along the eastern side of this field system. A third medieval
dispersed settlement consists of a rectangular building at the south east
corner of the Romano-British settlement centred at SD64087837. It has an
associated field system consisting of a large curvilinear paddock containing
four entrances. A trackway runs along its western side. A fourth medieval
dispersed settlement appears to have reused the Romano-British settlement
centred at SD64037814. Here two rectangular buildings have been built, one
overlying part of the earlier settlement, the other built up against the
northern corner of the earlier settlement. A fifth medieval dispersed
settlement consists of a rectangular building partly overlying the Romano-
British settlement centred at SD64397804. To the south of this another
medieval dispersed settlement represented by a rectangular building lies at
SD64397792, while a seventh medieval dispersed settlement consisting of a
rectangular building at SD64147810 lies immediately to the west of a Romano-
British settlement.
The remains of three medieval shielings also survive. These were small
rectangular stone-built huts, the largest here measures 9m by 6m, constructed
to provide accommodation for herdsmen tending animals grazing the upland
summer pasture.
Fragments of a late medieval field system survive at the south western side of
the monument, centred at approximately SD63847798 and consisting of a number
of field boundaries formed by slight stony banks with traces of shallow
ditches down one or both sides.
Also dated to the medieval period are a number of tracks running down the
eastern side of the monument which cut through features of an earlier date.
These tracks are considered to be different branches of a single route and are
likely to represent the route taken by herdsmen driving their flocks to summer
pasture on the higher ground.
Documentary sources indicate that a deer park was created hereabouts in 1402
by the lord of the manor, Sir Thomas de Tunstall. The deer park was in use for
approximately 250 years until the Civil War when it is thought that all the
deer were slaughtered for food by Parliamentary troops. The park's exact
location and boundaries are unknown but the county boundary between Lancashire
and Cheshire is traditionally thought to have marked its northern boundary.
All medieval settlement and agriculture within the boundaries of the park is
therefore thought to have ceased, as activities which hindered the grazing of
deer would have been prohibited.
An early post-medieval dispersed settlement is considered to have been
constructed shortly after the demise of the deer park. Remains of this feature
are centred at SD64337793 and consist of a group of four rectangular
buildings and a small stock yard. This settlement had been abandoned by the
late 1840's when the Ordnance Survey map of 1847 shows the present drystone
field boundary crossing the site. Nearby, and possibly associated with this
settlement, are remains of an early post-medieval field system centred at
approximately SD64477785, consisting of a small area of ridge and furrow
within a series of strip lynchets.
All modern field boundaries, gateposts and sheepfolds are excluded from the
scheduling, although the ground beneath these features, some of which lie on
top of earlier, prehistoric boundaries, is included. The circular plantation
in the northern part of the scheduling, the octagonal plantation (Threepenny
Bit Wood) and the covered resevoir are totally excluded from the scheduling.

MAP EXTRACT
The site of the monument is shown on the attached map extract.

Source: Historic England

Reasons for Scheduling

Unenclosed hut circle settlements were the dwelling places of prehistoric
farmers. The hut circles take a variety of forms. Some are stone based and are
visible as low walls or banks enclosing a circular floor area. Others were
timber constructions and only the shallow groove in which the timber uprights
used in the wall construction stood can now be identified; this may survive as
a slight earthwork feature or may be visible on aerial photographs. Some can
only be identified by the artificial earthwork platforms created as level
stances for the houses. The number of houses in a settlement varies between
one and twelve. In areas where they were constructed on hillslopes the
platforms on which the houses stood are commonly arrayed in tiers along the
contour of the slope. Several settlements have been shown to be associated
with organised field plots, the fields being defined by low stony banks or
indicated by groups of clearance cairns.
Many unenclosed settlements have been shown to date to the Bronze Age but it
is also clear that they were still being constructed and used in the Early
Iron Age. They provide an important contrast to the various types of enclosed
and defended settlements which were also being constructed and used around the
same time. Their longevity of use and their relationship with other monument
types provides important information on the diversity of social organisation
and farming practices amongst prehistoric communities.

Round cairns are prehistoric funerary monuments dating to the late
Neolithic/Bronze Age (2400-600 BC). They were constructed as stone mounds
covering single or multiple burials and are a relatively common feature of the
uplands. Their considerable variation in form and longevity as a monument type
provide important information on the diversity of beliefs and social
organisation amongst early prehistoric communities and a substantial
proportion of surviving examples are considered worthy of protection.
Cairnfields are concentrations of cairns sited in close proximity to one
another. They consists largely of clearance cairns, built with stone cleared
from the surrounding landsurface to improve its use for agriculture, and on
occasion their distribution pattern can be seen to define field plots. They
were constructed from the Neolithic period (from 3400 BC), although the
majority of examples appear to be the result of Bronze Age field clearance.
Their considerable longevity and variation in the size, content and
association of cairnfields provide important information on the development of
land use and agricultural practices.
The uplands of north west England comprise large areas of hill and mountain
terrain. As a result of archaeological surveys undertaken since 1980 certain
areas have become amongst the best recorded upland areas in England.
Prehistoric activity accounts for extensive use of these uplands, and evidence
for it includes well-preserved and extensive field systems and cairnfields, as
well as settlement sites and burial monuments. Taken together these remains
can provide a detailed insight into life in the prehistoric period. Of
additional importance is the well-preserved and often visible relationship
between the remains of earlier and later periods, since this provides an
understanding of changes in land use through time.
A coaxial field system is a group of fields arranged on a single prevailing
axis of orientation. They were constructed and used over a long period of
time, extending from the middle of the second millennium BC through until the
early first millennium AD, and vary enormously in size, with the largest
extending to almost 10,000ha. Less than 50 coaxial field systems have been
recorded in England; however, further survey work and analysis of aerial
photographs is likely to result in a substantial increase of numbers. They
provide important information on the development of land use during the Bronze
and Iron Ages.
Romano-British settlements were generally small, non-defensive, enclosed
homesteads or farms which were being constructed and used by non-Roman natives
throughout the period of the Roman occupation. Their origins lie in settlement
forms developed before the arrival of the Romans. These homesteads are common
throughout the uplands where they frequently survive as well-preserved
earthorks, and all sites which survive substantially intact will normally be
identified as nationally important.
Medieval rural settlements in England were marked by great regional diversity
in form, size and type, and the protection of their archaeological remains
needs to take these differences into account. To do this, England has been
divided into three broad Provinces on the basis of each area's distinctive
mixture of nucleated and dispersed settlements. These can be further divided
into sub-Provinces and local regions, possessing characteristics which have
gradually evolved during the past 1500 years or more.
This monument lies in the Lancashire Lowlands sun-Province of the Northern and
Western Province, an area extending form the moorlands of the western Pennines
to the coastal plain with its villages and hamlets. The southern part of the
sub-Province supports high densities of dispersed settlements, but there are
much lower densities further north, in the Craven Lowlands, the Ribble Valley
and the areaas around Morecambe Bay. In the Middle Ages the larger, lowland
settlements were supported by `core' arable lands, communally cultivated, with
seasonally occupied `shieling' settlements.
The Lune Valley and Morecamble Coastlands local region is characterised by
numerous small villages and hamlets, and has a mixture of high and medium
densities of dispersed farmsteads. Place name evidence, from British survivals
and early Old English names to Scandanavian and later Old English names,
indicates a long history of clearance and settlement.
In some areas of medieval England settlement was dispersed across the
landscape rather than nucleated into villages. Such dispersed settlement in an
area, usually a township or parish, is defined by the lack of a single (or
principal) nucleated settlement focus such as a village and the presence
instead of small settlement units (small hamlets or farmsteads) spread across
the area. These small settlements normally have a degree of interconnection
with their close neighbours, for example, in relation to shared common land or
road systems. Dispersed settlements varied enormously from region to region,
but where they survive as earthworks their distinguishing features include
roads and other minor tracks, platforms on which stood houses and other
buildings such as barns, enclosed crofts and small enclosed paddocks. In areas
where stone was used for building, the outline of building foundations may
still be clearly visible. Communal areas of the settlement frequently include
features such as bakehouses, pinfolds and ponds. Areas of dispersed medieval
settlement are found in both the South Eastern Province and the Northern and
Western Province of England. They are found in upland and also in some lowland
areas. Where found, their archaeological remains are one of the most important
sources of understanding about rural life in the five or more centuries
following the Norman Conquest.
Medieval enclosed field systems comprise fields defined and enclosed by a
physical boundary. These boundaries can take various forms, including walls,
hedges, earth and stone banks and ditches. Component features common to most
enclosed field systems include ridge and furrow and lynchets. The development
of enclosed field systems during the medieval period was a response to
population pressure and expansion onto marginal land, and the extent and
morphology of these field systems resulted from the nature of the topography
and social and economic constraints, such as the size of the population they
were intended to support. The majority of enclosed field systems are thought
to have been used for pasture but others contained cultivated ground. Some
continued in use throughout the post-medieval period and are a major feature
of the modern landscape. They occur widely throughout England with a tendency
towards upland areas associated with largely dispersed settlement patterns.
Medieval enclosed field systems offer good opportunities for understanding
medieval rural economy and provide valuable evidence regarding the morphology
of field systems, their extent and distribution.
Shielings were small seasonally occupied huts which were built to provide
shelter for herdsmen who tended animals grazing summer pasture on upland or
marshland. These huts reflect a system called transhumance, whereby stock was
moved in spring from lowland pasture around the permanently occupied farms to
communal upland grazing during the warmer summer months. Settlement patterns
reflecting transhumance are known from the Bronze Age; however, the
construction of herdsmen's huts in a form distinctive from the normal dwelling
houses of farms only appears from the early medieval period onwards (about 450
AD). Shielings are reasonably common in the uplands but frequently represent
the only evidence for medieval settlement and farming practice here. Those
examples which survive well and help illustrate medieval land use in an area
are considered to be nationally important.
Deer parks were areas of land, usually enclosed, set aside and equipped for
the management and hunting of deer and other animals. They varied in size
between 3ha and 1600ha and usually comprised a combination of woodland and
grassland which provided a mixture of cover and grazing for deer. Some parks
were superimposed on exisiting fieldscapes and their lay-out may have involved
the demolition of occupied farms and villages. Occasionally a park may contain
the well-preserved remains of this earlier landscape. The peak period for
laying out deer parks was between 1200-1350. However, they continued to be
created, albeit in lesser numbers, until the 17th century, and many of these
survive today, although often altered to a greater or lesser degree. Today
they serve to illustrate an important aspect of the activities of the medieval
nobility and still exert a powerful influence on the pattern of the modern
countryside.
Early post-medieval dispersed settlements are morphologically similar to
earlier medieval dispersed settlements in this area. They frequently occupy
the same or an adjacent area to that previously occupied by a medieval
dispersed settlement, and in some cases represent a continuity in use of the
medieval site into the early post-medieval period. However, many early
post-medieval dispersed settlements were constructed in response to population
pressure and movement onto marginal land or changes in existing land use.
Field systems associated with early post-medieval dispersed settlements
likewise followed a similar pattern.
The prehistoric, Romano-British, medieval and early post-medieval settlements
and field systems and the deer park at High Park, east of Bindloss Farm
survive well and will retain significant archaeological deposits associated
with use during these periods. The monument represents evidence of long term
management and exploitation of the landscape over an approximately 4500 year
period and contains a wide variety of monument classes. It will add greatly to
our understanding of the changing nature of settlement and economy in this
area during the period.

Source: Historic England

Sources

Books and journals
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 18
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Copy Gill, Cumbria, (1998), 15-18
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 13
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 12
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 26
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 22
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 22
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 15-16
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 14
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 18-19
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Copy Gill, Cumbria, (1998), 14-15
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 11
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 22
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 22-4
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 27-8
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 25
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 10
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 13-14
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 32
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 21
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 21
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 28
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 12
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 26-7
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 11
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 28
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 20
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 11-12
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 21
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 10
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 18-20
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 20-21
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 21
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 27-8
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 15
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 11
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 25
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Copy Gill, Cumbria, (1998), 27
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 14
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 12
Jecock, M, High Park, Lancashire and Cow Close, Cumbria: An Arch Survey, (1998), 22
Lowndes, R, 'Trans Cumb and West Antiq and Arch Soc. New Ser.' in Celtic Fields, Farms And Burial Mounds In The Lune Valley, , Vol. LXIII, (1963), 80-95
Other
AP No. MUCS151,18. In SMR No. 2666, Manchester University, Settlement east of Bindloss Farm,
Manchester University, Field system east of Bindloss Farm,
Manchester University, Field system east of Bindloss Farm,
SMR No. 2512, Lancashire SMR, Eller Beck T5, (1998)
SMR No. 2513, Lancashire SMR, Eller Beck T1, (1998)
SMR No. 2514, Lancashire SMR, Eller Beck T4, (1998)
SMR No. 2515, Lancashire SMR, Eller Beck T2, (1998)
SMR No. 2516, Lancashire SMR, Eller Beck T3, (1998)
SMR No. 2666, Cumbria SMR, Field system east of Bindloss Farm, (1987)
SMR No. 671, Lancashire SMR, Eller Beck and High Park, (1998)
SMR No. 6712, Lancashire SMR, Eller Beck and High Park, (1998)

Source: Historic England