Monument record 600/3/6 - Probable Medieval/Post Medieval Moat (Morphed Aerial Archaeology Interpretation)

Earthwork: Non-destructive fieldwork

{1} May be the remnant of the north west corner of the precinct boundary with building platforms at the edges. The central depression was a pond.

{2} Immediately east of the church, within the churchyard, are several low scarps up to 2m high which may be, in part, the foundations of the medieval church.
To the south of the church there was formerly an L-shaped pond, with a large outer bank which retained the water. This is usually descibed as a moat. It has recently been altered and partly filled in. The embanked area and moat have previously been ascribed to the priory and are traditionally called ‘The Canons Walk’ or ‘The Vineyard’. However there is not direct evidence fort his assumption and indeed, air photos show that before it was destroyed, the bank running along the south west side of the area overlay ridge and furrow. Unless this ridge and furrow was very early the bank or terrace walk probably belongs to the 16th century gardens of Sir John Cope’s house. The form of the earthworks would agree with either hypothesis.
In a modern paddock west of the church are a group of indeterminate scarps and hollows of unknown purpose and date.

{4} One of the earliest post-medieval pleasure gardens to be identified is that at Canons Ashby in Northamptonshire. It was laid out in 1540 by Sir John Cope on one side of a new house constructed from the ruins of the former priory and was abandoned in 1551 when a replacement house was erected some distance away. This garden had many of the features of a medieval garden including an inner moated enclosure attached to the house and a group of still water ponds in an outer garden. Yet this latter feature was bounded, not by a confining wall, but by a flat-topped terrace walk, the perambulation of which allowed views across the adjacent countryside as well as of the internal garden. Thus it combined the traditional idea of a garden, with its enclosed spaces, with new concepts abandoning the old cloistered effect.

{6} The definition of the monastic precinct is difficult because of the absence of detailed documentary evidence and limited excavation evidence. The large, L-shaped ‘moat’, which is in fact more a terrace, provides a distinct boundary on the south side, while to the north-east degraded earthworks may represent a return of this boundary.

{8} Also the moat, enclosure banks and ponds to the south-east survive in part, despite recent infilling and ploughing.

<1> FOARD G.R., 1984, ORAL REPORT TO SMR, (unchecked) (Oral Report). SNN50947.

<2> Royal Commission on The Historical Monuments of England, 1981, An Inventory of The Historical Monuments in The County of Northampton, p.36 site 2 (checked) (Series). SNN77381.

<3> Northamptonshire SMR Collection of Aerial Photographs, Used with NMR & CUCAP collections (Aerial Photograph(s)). SNN104822.

<4> Taylor C., 1983, The Archaeology of Gardens, p.41-42 (checked) (Series). SNN41440.

<5> RCHME, 1992, Canons Ashby, Northamptonshire: An archaeological survey by the RCHME, December 1992, (unchecked) (Report). SNN71599.

<6> FOARD G.R., 1982, Canons Ashby, Northamptonshire: An Archaeological Report, 1982, p.3 (checked) (Typescript Report). SNN45382.

<7> Ordnance Survey, 1950, Ordnance Survey 1950s Mapping Series (SP55), (unchecked) (Map). SNN46916.

<8> Steane J., 1974, The Northamptonshire Landscape, p.121 (checked) (Book). SNN5137.

Record last edited

Jun 19 2024 12:40PM