Monument record 1396 - Pytchley

{1} The village of Pytchley is referred to as Pictselei in the Domesday Book, where it is recorded as being part of peterborough Abbey.

{4} The earthwork remains of an abandoned part of the medieval settlement of Pytchley, to the south-east of the present village were assessed for scheduling.
The village of Pytchley lies about 3 miles to the south-west of Kettering, towards the top of a south facing slope and overlooking one of two streams that define the north and south boundaries of the parish. Settlement once extended slightly further to the west and north of the present village, and also within fields to the south-east, the area which is the subject of this assessment. The village grew beyond its C19 limits with the addition of new housing to the east and south in the early and mid-C20. A map of the north part of Pytchley dated 1622 demonstrates that the common fields had by then been enclosed. Protest riots in 1607 may have been in response to the enclosure of 140 acres of land by Sir Euseby Isham, who also built Pytchley Hall in about 1580-90. The hall was sited immediately to the south of the church, and was demolished in 1829. The manor house of the Engaynes, who held land in Pytchley until the mid-C14, is said to have been sited slightly further to the south, in the ‘Cow-pasture south of the church’, its position marked by ‘wells, ponds, moats’ (J. Bridges, in his History and Antiquities of Northamptonshire, Vol II, 1791).

The Royal Commission of Historic Monuments of England (1979) survey of the parish records the earthworks in the fields to the south of the Isham Road, and these are also represented on the images compiled by the National Mapping Programme from aerial photographs.

The area under assessment, three fields to the south of the Isham Road and west of Springer’s Hill, includes the earthworks and buried archaeological remains of part of the medieval village of Pytchley. The most immediately striking feature here is the depression towards the south-west corner of the field to the south of The Elms, measuring about 25 metres from east to west and 50 metres from north to south. This marks the crossroads of four routes, surviving as hollow ways entering from the north-east, east and north-west, and as a footpath to the south-west. The scarp between the hollow ways to the north is particularly pronounced, rising about 2.5 metres above the junction. The hollow ways to the north-east and north-west are very evident both from the air and on the ground, and are between 1 metre and 1.5 metres deep, whereas that to the south, though visible on aerial photographs, is relatively slight on the ground. The route to the west is marked by the footpath, and by a stone bridge over the stream, capped with a concrete slab; these lie outside the area under assessment. Within the field to the south of the hollow ways are traces of ridge and furrow, apparently a continuation of that to the north.

As well as the hollow ways, the field to the south of The Elms contains slight ridge and furrow running from north to south, parallel with the present field boundaries. Within the angle of the two hollow ways to the east of the junction or crossroads the ridge and furrow is overlaid by further earthworks, which the National Mapping Programme (NMP) and the Royal Commission earthwork survey both identify as closes (crofts) in plan, though slightly differently configured. The Royal Commission report interprets these as garden plots defined by pre-existing cultivation ridges heightened to form boundary banks, containing house sites, or tofts. The report further suggests that the survival of cultivation ridges within the closes indicates a short period of occupation. The area of disturbed ground shown on the Royal Commission plan to the west of the crossroads is no longer apparent (2013). At the north-east the ridge and furrow is interrupted by slight irregular mounds, not shown on the Royal Commission survey plan.

The hollow way running towards the north-west turns slightly to the north where it crosses the field boundary, which it follows on its west side until it reaches the cemetery south of the Isham Road. Fragmentary earthworks to the west of the hollow way include a rectangular depression. This area may be identifiable as ‘the Cow-pasture south of the church’ which, according to Bridges, contained the manor house of the Engaynes. Further to the north, and immediately south of the cemetery, is a platform, a rectangular area with a bank to the south and west up to 1 metre high, stepping up to a further levelled area to the northwest. These probably represent the garden or courtyards of the late-C16 Pytchley Hall. To the east of the hollow way and immediately south of the Isham road, are further rectangular platforms with scarps not more than 0.5 metres high; these may also be formal garden closes, or courtyards associated with Pytchley Hall. To the east of these is a rectangular pond, parallel to the road, identified as a the remains of a once longer pond or canal associated with the formal gardens of the hall.

The settlement remains at Pytchley are not scheduled due to lack of diversity, the relatively poor survival of the earthworks and lack of documentation.

<1> Wolframm-Murray Y., 2011, An Archaeological Watching Brief at All Saints Church, Pytchley, Northampton June 2011, p.3 (checked) (Report). SNN107442.

<2> Billington V., 2000, Woad-Growing in Northamptonshire, p.59-70 (unchecked) (Article). SNN102516.

<3> Taylor, CC, 1978, Aspects of village mobility in medieval and later times, p. 131 (Report). SNN110876.

<4> English Heritage, Designation Advice Report, Settlement remains to the south-east of the village of Pytchley (Report). SNN113190.

Record last edited

Oct 17 2023 3:57PM