The Battle of Edgehill, 1642 - Terrain Conjecture

Preface

Unlike earlier studies, modern research seeks much more understanding towards interpreting historic battlefields by lending greater attention to the terrain and its physical archaeology, which is a core principle shared by this analysis. Reconstructing the narrative for the Battle of Edgehill has benefited from extensive attention, but knowledge of the specific terrain, and precise locations for key actions, remains poor. Even well into the 21st century speculation and debate continues regarding, not the fundamental battlefield location, but the accurate placement of events, initial deployment lines and positions at the close of battle.

Thankfully new evidence, details and insights continue to arrive and the conclusions from an extensive metal detecting field survey across significant parts of the battlefield in 2004–2006 no doubt promises to yield notable improvements in our knowledge; with what must be the largest addition of new evidence for several decades. Interpreting all available fragments of information still holds the potential for differing narratives and conclusions and while new evidence comes to light there always remains the possibility that this can only fuel even greater disparity in opinion?

My own long held doubts concerning many deployment conjectures are regularly challenged and often by seemingly modest details. A member of the Warwickshire County Council's 'Archaeology Warwickshire' team casually tells me of a separate archaeological find he knows of which provides evidence of a cannon firing from the slopes above Radway Grange, which is both fascinating and unsettling as it initially appears to conflict with several conjectures and some modern and progressive supposition. One curious and surprising affect given by modern insights is the seemingly increasing possibility that some early oral histories of the battle, and its locations, might possibly bare more credence than previously thought? Clearly, the more that is known about the battlefield the greater our chances of understanding the battle. No matter how small a detail. As I write, I eagerly await the continued results of field surveys to be published (sometime in 2012) which should promise fresh insights or continued confirmation and presumably largely from the battlefield and its latest archaeology.

Most early conjectures have suffered from a limited knowledge of the physical battlefield of 1642, have resorted to generalised assumptions and as a result, not been influenced by the realities of the battle's contemporary landscape. In 2011 in an effort to gain an improved understanding in greater detail of how this setting may have appeared, I produced this modest research. But reconstructing the scene presents severe challenges and relying upon pure contemporary topography alone to interpret ancient ridge and furrow, dog leg field boundary kinks and reverse 'S' hedgerows, ultimately presents only an approximate, unreliable and confusing plethora of possibilities. If attempting to pinpoint land use and enclosures specific to a time and without documented evidence of land use, any number of variables across a timeline can compromise accuracy. But among several details new to me and new to publications concerning the battle, I was pleased to establish several hedgerows contemporary with the battle, eliminate some confusion and establish a more accurate depiction of the terrain utilised by the Parliamentarians.

Varied sources provided insights for this study and are listed in my notes, but clearly two documents in particular prove invaluable for this purpose. The first has seemingly only become familiar to scholars of the battle in recent years, but its clues still don't appear to have been fully considered. Instrumental in helping establish which enclosures may have existed during the battle is the 18th century pre–enclosure map and survey "The Inclosure of the Common Field called Radway Field" document, which came into the possession of the Warwickshire Record Office in the mid 1970s and provides important clues for establishing how the battlefield may have appeared in the 1600s.¹

The second document is much more modest but is surprisingly insightful and is evidently unknown to previous studies of the battle. An estate plan drawn at the beginning of the 18th century surveys a farm which existed close to Radway Field, but firmly within the Kineton Field. Made in 1701, less than 60 years after the battle, the document captures the farmstead of Battle Farm in early transition, as some of the details of land usage no longer fit the names provided for some enclosures and last minute pencil additions also capture the latest intentions for their use.² Positioned very close to where it's commonly believed that much of the battle took place, the farm clearly derives its name from the event but was also clearly well established long before the survey was made.³ As there is no mention of any farm from any contemporary accounts of the battle it's reasonable to judge that Battle Farm was its original name and was established after 1642.

It's an unusual document as it demonstrates an enclosed farm within a common field which wasn't yet formally enclosed and wouldn't be until 1779.⁴ Furthermore, assessing the map's detail approximates that the farm was first laid out somewhere around the middle of the second half of the 17th century, which is post battle, but it does provide plentiful clues regarding the earlier terrain and the surrounding area.

Throughout this terrain conjecture I've "illustrated" the passages with contemporary quotes which either relate to an area of the landscape in question and may reinforce a supposition, or suggest how an element of the landscape may have influenced proceedings. In general, as this document concerns itself with the battlefield landscape, most quotes which reference physical features of the terrain have been included for completeness. The core content is intended to be of interest to any study of the battle, but I have included some passages and explanations to accommodate most readers.

Scott, Turton & Von Arni, in their 2004 book 'Edgehill - The Battle Reinterpreted', said it is hard to visualize the field as it would have been, but to envisage the battle one must try. Much work remains to be undertaken on this aspect. I agree, so I made a start…

Introduction

we [the Parliamentarians] presently marched forth into a great broad Field, under that Hill, called, The Vale of the Red Horse, and made a stand some half a Mile from the Foot of the Hill, and there drew into Battalia, where we saw their Forces come down the Hill; and drew likewise into Battel in the Bottom; a great broad Company

From clear unequivocal contemporary accounts and physical archaeology, it's established that the Battle of Edgehill was largely fought between an elongated small hill or swell in the land and the Edgehill escarpment, south of Kineton (Warwickshire) and largely where the southern section of the current DSDA (Defence Storage and Distribution Agency) Kineton, now occupies.

On the afternoon of Sunday 23rd of October 1642, it was here the two opposing armies of the English Civil War deployed across part of the plain in the large open field, which once constituted the two large common fields of Great Kineton Field and Radway Field. Together these open fields formed a large, roughly oval, expanse stretching diagonally across from Little Kineton, south east towards Knowle–end hill - which is at the northern end of the Edgehill escarpment - to the north of Radway village. At its widest the expanse reached over 3.2 kilometres in breadth.

The Enemy [the Parliamentarians] had all the Morning to draw up their Army, in a great plain Field, which they did to their best Advantage.

These open ancient fields were typical of common grazing land and the open field system of farming still in use at the time; prior to the parliamentary enclosure acts becoming prevalent the following century. The existence of these open fields throughout the region is recorded, not in farm names, but by place names such as Harbury Field, Napton Fields and the neighbouring Oxhill Fields and Tysoe Field.⁵ Defining their presence a respected boundary hedge often evolved which for Kineton and Radway Fields remains obvious by surviving sections of very distinct, aged, characterful and irregular hedging along the southern and northern limits of what were the field's main perimeters. These represent a much more natural evolution, are easily recognisable from aerial imagery, datable from the ground⁶ and correspond with the perimeters of Radway field clearly mapped by the pre–enclosure survey.⁷

The rising ground and minor elevation which the Earl of Essex - Captain–General and Chief Commander of the Parliamentarian army - initially occupied, is described at the time as a little round rising hill.⁸ This sizable swell in the land runs to approximately one mile in length and generally faces the slopes of Bullet hill (just north of Radway village), at a 90 degree angle to the Banbury road.⁹ This swell of land peters–out towards the Banbury road where it features several ripples and smaller branches or fingers. The highline is thought to have been much nearer its military reverse slope.¹⁰ Essex's position sits at the centre of the combined open fields, falls more sharply at its rear (when facing the battle) and overlooks the Tysoe parish boundary where an ancient field known as 'Kingemewolde' is believed to portray the hill as a 'wold' within its name.¹¹ This is of interest when matched with evidence that the early use of 'wold' generally once referred to open parkland type terrain with scattered concentrations of wooded areas.¹² Essex's wold is highest at the south (where the modern plantation of 'the Oaks' sits) before it dips slightly on route to its northern section.

There is evidence that adds detail to the general scene regarding areas which had already succumbed to owners or individual tenants establishing hedged enclosures. Contemporary accounts - which include descriptions of leaping over several hedges on route to engage the enemy and a near contemporary plan which included enclosures across part of the open field - all famously relate this open area of the plain being either flanked or encroached upon by smaller hedged enclosures. King James II, who was present at the battle as a child, would also later describe a small hedged enclosure, which appears to have been situated close to the centre of Radway field.¹³

There was between the Hill [Edgehill] and Town [Kineton] a fair Campaign [open expanse], save that near the Town it was narrow, and on the right hand [south] some Hedges, and Inclosures: so that there he [Essex] placed Musqueteers, and not above two Regiments of Horse, where the ground was narrowest; but on his left Wing [north] he placed a Body of a thousand Horse, Commanded by one Ramsey a Scots man;[sic]

Professor Wanklyn, (2006), points out the probability of poorer quality land on the western fringes, as indicated by later field and farm names such as Starveall, Moorlands and Hardwick Gorse.¹⁴ And predating the battle, when the celebrated cartographer John Speed looked down upon the scene from Edgehill in 1611, he wrote the meadowing pastures with the green mantles [are] so embroidered with flowers that from Edgehill we might behold another Eden.¹⁵

With the exception of the smaller enclosure act for Little Kineton in 1733, Sanderson Miller of Radway Grange (who arranged the enclosure act for Radway village little over a hundred years after the battle) was amongst the first to initiate a formal enclosure and was something of a pioneer in the region. Radway Field's enclosure would remain a rare example in the vicinity for many years making the conjoining Kineton and Radway fields not necessarily a strikingly lone remnant of a disappearing landscape. When endless Hawthorns were planted to create the new enclosure hedgerows, the Radway Field was lost forever, but with formal enclosure also came the right to dig perimeter ditches which would also transform drainage and alter the physical habitat further, leaving little evidence of any former marsh or general boggy areas.

The open and common field system of farming would largely survive unchanged through much of the 18th century but its clear that such tracts of land were not necessarily completely void of hedgerows or enclosures prior to this, as there's unequivocal evidence for the Great Kineton field - used for the battle and being the largest of two or three common fields around Kineton - featuring farming estates with extensive enclosure around a hundred years prior to formal parliamentary enclosure.¹⁶ Further evidence for enclosures, barns and mixed farming use in open common fields also exists throughout their history.¹⁷

Essex's hill

Rebell's Army [Essex] down in the bottom by Keynton, which soon after began to draw up in battell in the plain before that village, but advance no further [sic]

The top

not being able to break them [the Royalist Foot], we retreated to our former station.

Several springs, small pools, and marshy courses of water would also have long been features, as these are clearly recorded by 20th century large scale OS mapping, with four noted within the Battle Farm 1701 map.

Establishing an informed understanding and empathy for the general state, usage and evolution of the common fields in this area suggests that through their central region an open uninterrupted terrain persisted.

Studies concerning the battle have paid much attention to an old hedgerow, which the Victorian Reverend George Miller believed was influential in the action and describes it as running between Battle and Thistle farms.³³ It's confirmed that this hedgerow existed, but it has remained unclear and debated whether it predated the battle as Miller believed? He would also credit this hedgerow with being the only hedge to have existed between Radway and Kineton during the battle.³⁴

From evidence provided in the Battle farm map of 1701, it becomes more likely that Battle farm, and almost certain that Thistle farm, did not exist prior to the event. (Battle farm was named after the battle and Thistle farm - where the old hedgerow led to - is simply described as 'New farm' in the 1701 document). This makes hedgerows in this immediate area less likely around the time of the battle. The map does confirm the presence of Red Lane (or Road), as expected, which is believed to be an ancient route and in use during the battle, but this again challenges the likelihood of there having been a hedgerow predating this and crossing its route. With enclosures logically creeping into the open fields from their perimeters and where established hedgerows already provided natural foundations to link with, it is much more plausible that no such hedge existed across the top, or near the top, of this small hill the morning Essex and his men arrived.

Miller's hedge (as it is sometimes known) is said to have been partially accompanied by a track from Thistle farm. The 1701 map highlights the continuation of Red Lane towards Radway, but omits any reference to the lane forking off towards 'New Farm' (later Thistle farm) as shown in later maps. This suggests the track linking Thistle farm with the Banbury Road as likely to have been its original access and a minor detail further challenging the existence of a hedgerow here predating the farms.

The balance of probabilities and lack of any contemporary supporting evidence for a hedgerow having crowned Essex's hill during the battle, or noted as being to the rear of the Parliamentarian battalia, in itself helps convey an open hilltop adorned only with brushwood and gorse. If the farms weren't here during the battle (such as New Farm in the 1701 map), along with their plethora of enclosures, then it becomes even more difficult to imagine a hedgerow here. But evidence for dismissing this hedgerow, if it were needed, is provided again by careful map regression with the Battle Farm document. The hedgerow described by Miller traversed the hillside from Battle farm to Thistle farm and at one stage cuts across the present day triangular 'Graveground coppice' (Fig 1). The hedgerow is illustrated by Burne, who also inspected the hedge, in his 1950 book³⁵ with a more detailed version recreated in the 2004 Edgehill study by Scott et al³⁶ but most helpfully, the hedgerow's route is clearly evident in aerial photography taken of Warwickshire by the RAF in 1947.³⁷ In the Battle Farm map, at the precise point where the hedgerow should continue across,³⁸ what is now the copse, the hedgerow curves purposefully S.E towards the route of the lane and appears to follow the lane's western edge for the remainder of the farm's territory. This feature is lost by the first edition 19th century OS maps, but at this time this detail illustrates a hedgerow which has been consciously planted, respecting the lane or track, and with the intention of defining the farm's territory and is not the signature of a hedgerow predating the farm's enclosures.³⁹ If the hedge had existed here prior to the farm it wouldn't have featured this design which establishes the hedgerow to have arrived with the farm and was not adopted by the farm. Establishing that the farm came after the battle also establishes that Miller's hedge came after the battle.

Ultimately there is no reason for a hedgerow to have existed here, but due to the area having been an open common field there is reason for a hedge not to have existed here. The Reverend, being a country man, no doubt could recognise a particularly old hedgerow, but the Battle Farm map of 1701 simple confirms that Miller's hedge was indeed an old hedge and probably first became established in the second half of the 17th century - which was prior to any of Miller's descendants living in the area - but which was still after the conflict.

As there is also no mention of such a hedgerow across the top, or front, of Essex's hill by any contemporary accounts, Reverend George Miller - writing in the very late 1800s - becomes the original source of information regarding this hedge, which he also cites as the only hedgerow between the hills and Kineton⁴⁰ during the battle and later confirms between Radway and Kineton there was only one hedge till 1756.⁴¹ By 1889 he attributes this assertion to tradition with no further reference to any supporting sources for this premise. (I believe he has confused local knowledge of the Parish hedgerow - discussed later - with his hedgerow; on Essex's hill). It appears that the coincidental halt of battle detritus finds falling short of a prominent old hedgerow - which linked the two farms - may well have influenced his interpretation that the fighting here must have in part been checked by the hedge.

No studies of the battle prior to Miller's introduction of there being only one hedgerow [between Radway and Kineton]⁴² give consideration or mention to such a prominent or significant hedgerow. Walford (1886), Barrett (1896) or Beesley (1841)⁴³ show no such preoccupation with such a hedgerow or interpret that one, or only one, existed crossing the field or hill. This either places Miller as a sharper battle historian by reading the terrain and being ahead of his time or only highlights that Miller inadvertently creates the entire subject. Regrettably Miller's supposition regarding his hedge has inspired unnecessary confusion and deliberation for modern studies of the battle.

Relating perhaps to a more northerly region of Essex's small hill (and land ripples), the official Parliamentarian account provides a contemporary description that the Parliamentarian's left horse advanced a little forward to the Top of a Hill, which for this region also does not suggest the presence of hedges:

our Left Wing of Horse ["our rear"] advanced a little forward to the Top of a Hill, where they stood in a Battalia, lined with Musqueteers [sic]

Clearly not conclusive, but there is a contemporary drawing of the action at Edgehill, which appears to be from a birds–eye perspective towards the rear of Essex's men (perhaps to the right of their left cavalry position) and situated on a raised plateau of land; presumably the top - or near to the top - of Essex's hill. It shows infantry stationary behind a row of around 9 Parliamentarian cannons firing from above both armies, whose main infantry are fully engaged on the slopes below and creating their own plumes of gun powder smoke. Cavalry are shown to be facing the cannons, upon the Parliamentarian's left, while cavalry are seen in the distance (on their right) riding towards Edgehill, or to the rear of the Royalist's main body. The Edgehill escarpment is clearly seen in the distance (presumably trailing away south to Sun Rising Hill). While this illustration may or may not be factually correct in its detail or scales, whoever drew the scene was however clearly aware of the general topography. There are no hedgerows.⁴⁵

they [the Parliamentarians] discharged at us three Pieces of Cannon from their left Wing, commanded by Sir James Ramsey, which Cannon Shot mounted over our Troops, without doing any Hurt…

The central area

The parish boundary

Kineton field met with Radway field approximately halfway between the two settlements and sat either side of the modern civil parish boundary, which is still detailed in today's OS maps. The presence of a hedgerow subscribing to the route of this boundary is clearly illustrated in Radway's mid 18th century pre–enclosure map, (Fig 2) but one of its most conspicuous features is how approximately half of the boundary is free of hedgerow in one continuous section as it traverses the open field region. But the fortune of this boundary feature running directly through the very heart of the battlefield provides an important opportunity for establishing some key details.

As such boundaries - which didn't follow a natural feature such as a water course - were often marked by a hedgerow (with some older hedgerows even acting as and establishing political and territorial boundaries) then appreciating the age of this boundary provides vital clues for understanding the hedged terrain of 1642. Its well documented that three estates were held in 'Manor Radway' as early as 1086 and that King Edgar had granted 10 hides in 'Manors Kineton' 117 years prior to this⁵⁶ but tenth century charters for the parish actually and accurately describe this section of the parish boundary in detail, confirming its long origins.⁵⁷

Remarkably the route for this section of the parish perambulations - which traversed directly across the central battlefield*¹ - also corresponds with the even earlier boundary of the Anglo–Saxon Mercian and Hwicce territories.⁵⁸ Evidence for dating these bounds (being the route of the parish boundary) across the edge of Kineton field is given by what 'The Place-Names of Warwickshire' affirms as being in no doubt that translations describe this boundary as the 'boundary of the Mercians'⁵⁹ with field names accurately and physically confirming this as the same boundary which survives today.⁶⁰

The two field names - captured by George Salmon in his 1756 pre–enclosure survey - of 'Martlemore lays' and 'Martlemere Furlong' derive their names from the Mercian boundary they shadow.⁶¹ The fields are still discernable in modern aerial images and broken remnants of their probable original dividing hedgerow are still present in Salmon's map, confirming, that at least one, will have at one time been enclosed, which also establishes that their parish boundary borders would also have once been hedged.⁶²

The, still, surviving remnant of faint reverse 'S' hedgerow - pointing towards the DSDA camp road of Liskeard road, nearby and to their north,⁶³ is also shown by Salmon and also demonstrates that a hedgerow would - at one time and as typically expected to - have lined the parish boundary for the remainder of the gap shown in Salmon's document.

Appreciating the historic age of this boundary, pre–dating the battle by at least a thousand years, helps substantiate the almost certain implication that any hedgerows along this specific and significant border, which are shown around a hundred years after the battle (in the 1756 map) will have also existed before the battle.

The parish boundary hedge might present itself as a natural and obvious candidate for the hedgerow which was described in the Official Royalist Account to have crossed the field⁶⁴ as this description is occasionally interpreted to mean a hedgerow which crossed the field 'left to right' dividing the two opposing armies. This statement should be read to mean a, or any, hedge which encroached upon the general field. Appreciating this quote within the full context of the larger statement, avoids confused meanings:

It being perceived that the Rebels [the Parliamentarians] had placed some Musqueteers under a Hedge that crost the Field, where the Encounter was to be made, that flanked upon their left Wing, there were some of the King's Dragooners sent to beat them off… [sic]⁶⁵

We know that this longer description is referring to Ramsey's Musketeers, which lined hedges on the Parliamentarian's left flank, so when considering the crost the Field quote in the company of its additional detail, it substantiates the more common and traditional interpretation, defined by 'flank' (and not parallel to the front lines). This coupled with the significant detail that the hedge flanked upon their left Wing makes it clear that the account is describing a hedge which generally crossed the flank of the battlefield in relation to the armies and their deployment lines. There remains no contemporary account of a hedgerow impeding the centre of the Royalist's advance, but there are descriptions of the foot progressing steadily forward.⁶⁶ This maintains the scene suggested by the 1756 map of much of the parish boundary hedgerow having disappeared long ago and prior to 1642.

his Majesty's Army was wholly drawn up in Battell, at which time they march'd on with a slow steady pace, and a very daring resolution. [sic]

There is little reason to suppose that around a kilometre of parish hedgerow which was allowed to disappear by the 18th century conversely will have been required in the 17th. A series of complete enclosures stacking northward along the surviving parish boundary hedgerow, shown in Salmon's map, quietly provide the most logical explanation for the hedgerow's maintenance along this section.*¹ It also becomes plausible that the absence of any parish boundary hedgerow along the remaining section - crossing Radway field - was to allow easy uninterrupted common grazing or access at one time and ultimately permitted the visualisation for a pitched battle here. An example of communal use of common land between villages is provided by neighbouring Chadshunt.⁶⁷ Notably, this central region, having been dominated at one time by open field strip farming and selions, did not require enclosure.

The seemingly pointless remnant of hedgerow and overshoot of the parish boundary hedge, passing the last enclosure (seen in the 1756 map), also indicates that the main boundary hedge predated the small adjoining enclosures and conversely also supports the original premise that the boundary was marked by a hedgerow along the parish territory. This chronology provides the most obvious and reasonable probability for the hedgerow network shown in this area by Salmon's survey.

The narrowed centre, free from obstructions and where there was likely no hedgerow during the battle, along with encroaching enclosures from south of the boundary where it joins Red road/lane, may have influenced Essex's unusual and uneven deployment.⁶⁸

… so that there he [Essex] placed Musqueteers [on his right], and not above two Regiments of Horse, where the ground was narrowest;

Radway brook

A notable attributory of the River Dene meandered south across the centre of the general battlefield - as it does today but before engineered improvements - roughly parallel with the parish boundary, and is featured regularly in the battle's secondary narratives. For some this provides a natural feature to divide the two armies as they retired in the field once night fell.

One detail within the 1756 pre–enclosure map indicates just how significant this water course would have been, as a ford ("Dogdaleford") is required and noted just south of where the parish hedgerow ends within Radway Field. Walford in his 1904 second edition mentions a ditch to the front of the Parliamentarians, and is likely to have been referring to the Radway brook, which he describes with its wet clay banks.⁷⁶

as it grew dark two Regiments [of Parliamentarians] at last made a stand; and having the Assistance of Cannon, and a Ditch before them, held us play very handsomely

A water course breaks east from the Radway brook and is recorded in Salmon's 1756 map to then fork again as if heading towards the north of the village and also running south west skirting the Langdon Lane. A water course running along the track holds the potential to be described as a ditch and both features could provide alternative locations when considering events.

I have interpreted the long straight feature to the east of the square 'bite' detour anomaly in the parish boundary within this region as shown in Salmon's 1756 map, to be an early manmade ditch (and not a hedge).⁷⁷

Enclosures - south

The left Wing [of the Royalists], Commanded by Mr Wilmot, had as good success [as the Royalist's right wing], though they were to charge in worse ground, among hedges, and through gaps and ditches, which were lin'd with Musqueteers [sic]

Outside of the Radway field and on the extreme left of the 1756 pre–enclosure map, George Salmon records the position of 'Pratts Barn' - conveniently next to Red Road/Lane - while, corresponding to the same area, the 1701 Battle Farm estate plan incorporates two enclosures - both south of the parish border and listed as being in Tysoe - not far from the barn as Pratts Ground and Pratts Meadow. Pratt's barn seems to be a local landmark and relevant to Salmon's 1756 map, as the now well–known King's Leys Barn, isn't featured.⁸⁹

The barn is situated outside of the Battle Farm land and over 600 metres from 'Pratts Ground' with land owned by a Mr Printree dividing them. The farm map also notes that the land which Pratts Barn occupies is owned by yet another individual, with land immediately neighbouring the Pratt Meadows, to their west, belonging to a Mr Blakeman.⁹⁰ This mixed picture of land ownership, with a reference to the 'Pratt' name appearing across it, strongly suggests the surviving place and barn names refer to a previous owner (or tenant). The scenario of one isolated meadow associated to the Pratt name and an estranged barn still known as 'Pratts Barn' 55 years after the Battle Farm map was drawn, helps establish that the surname of Pratt had previously been associated with this area of the landscape.⁹¹

The two Pratt meadows are highlighted as being in Tysoe, relating to the adjoining parish, are listed separately in the Battle Farm document and awkwardly connect with the farm by only a short section of an adjoining border, making their existence exclusive from Battle Farm possible and likely. These combined details suggest that these enclosures existed prior to Battle farm (which is estimated to have been established some years after the battle) and which in turn places the Pratt enclosures within the realms of being contemporary with the battle. Their position, adjoining the parish and open field borders is also conducive to the natural evolution of enclosures appearing from the edges. (The western edge of Pratt's meadow in the map also records the original meandering perimeter of Radway Field).

The left Wing [of the Royalists] was opposed to the Enemies right, which had the shelter of some Hedges lin'd with Musqueteers [sic].

This reasoned inference inadvertently introduces an additional insight into the battlefield terrain in this region. Following the timeline logic and clues presented by the surname of Pratt it becomes plausible to establish the presence of Pratt's barn within the contemporary field of conflict. Such structures were present across this landscape, as that described later by King James II most probably concerning King's Leys Barn, just over 1.3 kilometres to the east, and isolated barns remained a common feature of the first series OS maps for the vale in the 1800s.⁹²

seeing they [the Parliamentarians] were not strong enough to encounter with the King's left wing, and lin'd the bushes with some dragoons to make a shew [sic].

Versions of enclosures (lining the southern edge of Red Lane from the parish boundary) are included by Pannett in his 1970s research/conjecture, and listed as ancient enclosures in the Battlefields Trust publication of 2005.⁹⁴ There is clear evidence for ancient farming through the series of modern enclosures leading towards the slopes of Edgehill, with a known field of ancient origin forming the surviving rectangular enclosure opposite the junction where King John's Lane joins Tysoe Road.⁹⁵

Wilmot, Fielding and some other principal officers were in the [Royalists] left Wing, with a Regiment of Dragoons, to defend the Briars on that Side… Sir Richard Bulstrode. Memoirs and Reflections.

Significant tracks skirting earlier fields in this area - between Lower Westcote Farm on the Tysoe road and the parish boundary - are featured in the first series of OS mapping (1834, sheet 53) and are unusual details within the neighbouring landscape; suggesting surviving headlands. G.Miller first highlights, and later elaborated upon by A.Burne, that numinous bullet and detritus finds from the battle had turned up around the Lower Westcote Farm area, which still sits upon a Bridleway. This Bridle path echoes a track - shown in the OS maps - which once crossed directly to Little Kineton and a concentration of finds at the farm may imply that the route and track was contemporary with the battle. Determining if these fields, running towards Edgehill and the former Westcote hamlet (on the hillside), were enclosed at the time of the battle may only be speculative.

With the accompanying evidence provided by the ancient Martlemore Lays enclosure - which appears to straddle Red Lane - suggesting that further enclosures continued south, skirting the parish boundary, a vivid picture of enclosures tracing the southern edge of the parish border - joining with Pratt's Ground and Meadow - becomes convincing.

While local evidence for Anglo–Saxon activity here around 900 years earlier⁹⁶ and the strong curve of Martlemore Lays seemingly continuing onto and across the top of Martlemere Furlong - leaving the parish boundary - makes it possible to consider if these fields even predate this boundary,⁹⁷ there remains no absolute confirmation however that Martlemore Lays (or Martlemere Furlong) were still enclosed during the time of the battle. But due to their undisputed age being centuries older it might be reasonable to suspect that their associated hedgerows were at least largely dilapidated by the time of the battle, as they are shown to have mostly disappeared all together in the 1756 pre–enclosure map. The dramatic extent to which the majority of bordering hedges had been allowed to degenerate and disappear from all perimeters of Martlemore Lays by the mid 1700s, provides an indication that the hedge's demise had begun a long time previously. The fragmented state of the one remaining hedgerow also implies a natural or gradual decay and not a single purposeful act. This hypothesise also falls in with the logic of how the parish boundary hedge no–longer had any practical use in this area of the Radway field and was not maintained, allowing it to disappear.

a party of the enemy [Royalists] being sent to line some hedges on our right wing, thereby to beat us from our ground, were repulsed by our dragoons.

The stacked enclosures - centre

The presence of ridge and furrow would usually influence subsequent enclosure and which will have been added piecemeal prior to parliamentary enclosure. This can typically create formations assuming ordered rectangular shapes of around a furlong in length while fields predating ridge and furrow are typically irregular in appearance. Relative to the study of the Edgehill battlefield this provides a pivotal in-sight into features which combine to offer important clues for the chronological evolution of this immediate field network. The oblong rectangular enclosures recorded in Salmon's 1756 map - which stack 'north to south' along the eastern edge of the parish boundary hedge, provide succinct and striking evidence of enclosures being formed by grouping several open field strips.

These enclosures, while not displaying any ridge and furrow, do feature hedgerows with reverse 'S' patterns (running down slope, echoing a ploughing logic) and providing strong evidence that these furlongs were once ancient strips and ploughed. Professional archaeologist Glenn Foard observes an example of reverse 'S' hedgerow along one of these enclosures in his 2005 interim Edgehill survey report (and suggests therefore that it is probable that the hedge was one of only a handful of hedgerows which existed in the heart of the battlefield).⁹⁹ There are other neighbouring examples of this detail, which also indicate that these small enclosures were laid out along the furrow of an open field strip system.

The southern most example of such reverse 'S' hedgerows in this region - currently aligning with or pointing towards Aberfoyle Road (on the munitions camp) nearby - provides an interesting detail, as it does not feature in Salmon's 1756 survey.¹⁰⁰ This obviously demonstrates that this hedgerow was planted no earlier than the second half of the 18th century, but it was still influenced however by the presence of ridge and furrow. Closer inspection of Salmon's map reveals a long stretch of designated land running northwards through this area called 'The Lower Kineton fide [side] furlong'. As the map name describes - 'furlong' meaning 'furrow length' - its width does average a furlong, which is the typical measurement for ancient open field strips. This confirms ploughing activity here at one time, but clearly questions the possibility of the stacked enclosures existing prior to the 17th century.

Contemporary accounts do describe hedgerows impeding the Royalist's right, and according to many deployment conjectures, the "stacked" enclosures stretching northwards to the Banbury road, recorded by Salmon, would fit with these general descriptions. But within his map there is a small clue which hints at, or confirms, the likelihood of these smaller enclosed areas having been turned over to pasture and grazing; most probably as soon as they were created. Studying the primary source in detail, Salmon's pre–enclosure map features a small spur of hedge set at a right angle from the southern most horizontal (east to west) hedgerow, just before the parish boundary hedge makes a square 'bite' or detour.¹⁰¹ This small detail illustrates that at one time a hedgerow had been used to create a particularly small square enclosure at the top of the 'bite' indent. At the northern end of these enclosures, next to the road, the map also shows remnants of a small drove way entrance made from the hedges.¹⁰² These details suggest that these enclosures were used for livestock, and due to the hedgerow's evident demise at the smallest enclosure next to the 'bite' detour by 1756, its also indicative of enclosures which probably and significantly predated the era in which the map was made.

A square enclosure - which clearly exists today - has been cast at the northern most point of these stacked enclosures (adjacent to the road) in at least one and possibly two books in recent years to have provided Parliamentarian musketeers with hedgerow cover; forming part of their author's conjecture.¹⁰³ The southern boundary of this field would have provided Ramsey's musketeers with the cover he had planned for firing into the flanks of the Royalist Right-Horse during their expected charge. But Salmon's survey and map reveals that this field shape (with a southern hedge, forming a square shape) had not yet been created by the middle of the 18th century.

Largely within this general central area of the Radway field a distinctive long and slightly curving hedge line is depicted in the Salmon 1756 map, which essentially frames the Kerswell Quarter. In the modern day field and with the map's own reference to 'Ditch' (where the line reaches the Langdon Lane), the purpose of this feature is confirmed. But details recorded at the top of the map (associated with this feature), such as 'New Ditch Lower Furlong' and 'New Ditch Middle Furlong' suggest - when combined with its impressive engineering - that this feature is relatively recent and this conjecture opts to omit its accompanying hedgerows from its reconstruction of the battlefield terrain over a hundred years previously.

The night after the battle our army quartered upon the same ground that the enemy fought on the day before.

North - rear of Essex's hill

The enemy drew down the hill, and we went into the field near Keinton [sic].

A.Burne the well-known military historian of battlefields writes of another author in his renowned work 'The Battlefields of England' (1950) when he quotes C.J.Ribton–Turner (Shakespeare's Land. 1893) who records In the fields round the Battle and Thistle Farms, and especially in one on Battle Farm, called the Lower Bladon, sloping towards Kineton, large numbers of bullets have been discovered. The Battle Farm map of 1701 now accurately locates this field for us as plot number 89 adjacent to the lane.¹²⁰ (But the field is not suggested as being enclosed during the battle).¹²¹

This larger area is dominated by the ancient Red Road (or Welsh Lane) which cuts–through from Little Kineton. Many modern conjectures, and even possibly Henry Beighton's map of 1728, suggest that the Parliamentarians approached the field largely along its route. Latterday archaeological finds along its ditches and around the fields where it reaches Little Kineton appear to confirm its use and suggest that it was also used to vacate the scene.¹²²

Col. Hollis's Regiment, it was not dismaid, but, together with the other Regiments of that Brigade, marched up the Hill [the rear of Essex's hill], and so made all the haste they could to come to fight.

A rise in the land partly along the lane/track which forks off (or rather continues straight) from Red road is known locally as 'Lucas's Knoll'. The region where this lane kinks strongly south is suggested by local tradition to be where Lucas rallied his Horse before pursuing fleeing Parliamentarians towards Kineton.¹²³

The area within the common field between Little Kineton and Kineton, south of the river Dene and fords, may be the location described by Edward Kightley as Great Kings Field¹²⁴ and where Essex (and others) camped. Around this region smaller enclosures also surrounded the village and town. Modern metal detector finds suggest this may be the region for much of the Parliamentarian baggage train or camp and if this is correct, the place–name alone implies a larger than typical acreage. Kightley recites how the field is believed at the time to have witnessed a much earlier battle featuring King John, which would demonstrate a sizable landscape.

Staying in a little field with a way through.

While the Battle Farm map from 1701 dutifully names all the land owners neighbouring its perimeters (including their title of Mr), it is notable and informative that the one exception is to the north where the document simply states Moore. Obviously describing the terrain, it also implies that the slopes to the rear of Essex's hill (when facing the battle) had remained free from any enclosure and would support unhindered action (seen by the horse) around this vicinity. There were no hedges towards the rear of Essex's hill in this region.

The Edgehill escarpment

Whereupon great Preparations were made, and Precautions taken, for decending the Hill, which was very steep and long, and had been impracticable, if the Enemy [the Parliamentarians] had drawn nearer to the Bottom of it; but we saw by the Ranging their Army, that they intended to stay there for us, having a good Market Town by them, and not far from Warwick. In the first Place, it was resolved, that Collonel Washington, with his Regiment of Dragoons, should descend the Hill, and possess some Inclosures and Briars on the right Hand of our Army, and a forlorn Hope of Six Hundred Horse were ordered likewise to descend before the Army, and the Carriage Horses of the Cannon were put behind the Carriages, excepting a Horse or two before, and the Foot were ordered to descend as well as they could. [sic]

It's clearly documented from several accounts that the Royalist army initially observed their enemy from Edgehill and that they would eventually descend to the plain below during the early afternoon. The Royalist army did not formally deploy on the hilltop on the day of the battle, but it is noted that part of their army did so the following morning.¹²⁶

It's well–known that the Edgehill escarpment remained un–wooded until Sanderson Miller, of Radway Grange, began his extensive planting and landscaping of the slopes along the hill in the mid 18th century. Holmes and Young (1974) reiterate the description given by George Miller - Sanderson's descendant - that a small wood did exist in the proximity above the Radway Grange during the battle.¹²⁷ There are occasional suggestions from secondary sources that the modern beeches are supposed to represent the King's troops, but this can only be assumption based upon Sanderson's habit of planting commemorative trees elsewhere.¹²⁸ (And if it were correct, it should be noted that the woods originally didn't extend as far north along the crest as they do today, as shown in first series OS mapping).

Standing at 212 metres at its highest point, in places the "hill" achieves surprising gradients of one in four, and along much of its width, now cloaked by the tree canopy, the gradient proves unexpectedly difficult. Several springs rise through the hill and such features lend their name to a stretch of the same scarp a little further south, near the modern A422. Here, Spring hill remains free of trees and presents a vivid example of how the Edgehill slopes will have appeared at the time. This, and the 18th century Radway enclosure map, illustrate that Edgehill would have featured prominent 'brakes' of gorse growth, as is still the case throughout the neighbouring slopes to the east.

The route traversing along the full length of the hill's crest is believed to have existed at the time,¹²⁹ while roads in the area which have known dates - such as the A422 at Sunrising Hill being completed in 1770¹³⁰ - are likely to have merely formalised earlier rough routes and tracks. But the lack of any quality maps, or roads, throughout the county certainly made navigation and progress difficult for both armies.¹³¹ There is physical evidence still visible within the woods and immediately adjacent to the western edge of the modern road (B4086) as it curves and descends the hill, of a shallow but discernable track which may correspond to the original route down this hillside. While its width may not correspond with what's typically expected, its consistent width, its continued length and its surviving engineered banking are notable.

Many conjectured narratives employ King John's Lane, south of Radway, which is still an active bridleway in use today - as it descends the hill towards the Tysoe Road - as likely to have been used by some of the Royalist army. One of the most respected works concerning the battle by Peter Young in the 1960s,¹³² describes this route as: track down which Royalist left would have descended the hill.

Bizarrely the Reverend of Radway, George Miller writing in 1896, indirectly attempts to eliminate this possibility. With his great grandfather (Sanderson Miller) having orchestrated the enclosure of Radway field in 1756, he might have been considered an authority on its history when he states: Village lore and traditions require sifting before their truth and genuineness can be relied on. One or two errors connected with this locality need to be corrected. There is a road in Radway parish which is often called King John's Road. It is supposed that the King [John] came down the Edge Hill by it when he held his court at Kineton. In the first place, this road was only made when the parish was enclosed in 1756. Many alterations were made in the parish roads then, and especially in those on the hillside.¹³³

'King John's Lane' or track (running up the hill)¹³⁴ does appear in maps made from 1787 to 1789, by William Yates & Sons, but does not appear in Henry Beighton's map of 1728 (while another nearby track on the hilltop's plateau does feature); both appearing to correspond with Miller's statement. Removing this lane from the 1642 scene would remove a significant element of common narrative and place further emphasis upon the contemporary account of most of the horse and seemingly all of the cannon descending at the northern section on their right hand [side].¹³⁵ However, just about every other source, whether referring to the battle or simply the area's general history, confidently interprets this road as ancient and the natural continuation of the route which continues to Little Kineton predominantly known as Red road.¹³⁶

Centred on the hill stands the prominent castellated Radway Tower, designed and built by Sanderson Miller in the mid 18th century, and is partly famed for the local tradition of marking the spot where the King planted his standard before the battle. While there is evidence that local tradition existed to put King Charles on the hill near to the modern Edgehill village or hamlet (where the tower is),¹³⁷ there is no contemporary evidence for Charles raising his Standard here¹³⁸ or for Sanderson's hexagonal round house folly successfully pinpointing the exact location, which is the sole assertion made by his great grandson - the Rev George Miller - in the late 1800s.¹³⁹ There's also evidence that Sanderson Miller's plans were influenced by the scarce availability of suitable land and not a known location for any tradition.¹⁴⁰ At best it might be interpreted that the original notion was to highlight the general centre of where the Royalist army was believed to have occupied.¹⁴¹

It's often noted that Sanderson Miller was also responsible for accompanying shanty ruins, occasionally referred to as the 'arched wall'. But the site, on the opposite side of the road to his tower and Egge Cottage, already featured genuine 12th century buildings or ruins when he purchased it. Clearly inspired by these antiquated structures, Miller's acquisition of Edge or Ratley Grange came with the description of the remains of the monastic grange in the conveyance. While Miller is known, to have dramatically embellished what there was, primarily with the arch, Jennifer Meir - writing in detail of Miller's work - describes a large Gothic arch forming an entrance to the stables, above which was an oriole window, and beside the arch were the tumbledown remains of the old Grange, which Miller left to give verisimilitude to the supposed antiquity of the whole site.¹⁴² Photographs survive illustrating this description with one in particular showing the surprising extent to which the stone structure continues, showing its significant height and substantial footing.¹⁴³

Commentators have ignored the presence of stone buildings at this location during the time of the battle. Ratley Grange was used as an administrative centre (and formerly owned by ecclesiastical monks at Stoneleigh) and once loosely occupied where the current Castle Inn public house car park now sits. Sanderson Miller had purchased the ruins of this monastic grange at the same time as the land for his tower to compliment his shanty ruins castle theme (with his neighbouring cottage also designed with mock round tower bases) on the opposite side of the road. But importantly, parish records for the grange buildings showing them apparently still in use exist from the 17th century with some relating to the early 1600s. Situated only partly in the Radway parish and presumably after the Dissolution of the Monasteries - around a hundred years before the battle - it's ownership or use appears to have changed hands in 1609 to Walter Palmer of Radway yeoman, and John Palmer his second son of the capital messuage [the main building of an estate and/or house in which the owner of the estate normally lives] and site of the grange called the Edge Grange, or Ratley Grange in Ratley.¹⁴⁴ Several records continue to illustrate activity and use through the early and mid 17th century. Even after removing Miller's additions and embellishments, the photographic and historic records supports a significant building or complex of buildings to have occupied this spot long before the arrival of Sanderson Miller and certainly contemporary with the battle.

Salmon's 1756 map shows the Rately Grange footprint and what would become the modern Edgehill village or hamlet, along with several buildings, stretching well over 140 metres in length along the road.¹⁴⁵

The slopes, directly above Radway Grange, are known to have once been occupied by monks - a small convalescent cell in the middle ages - who established a track here running down the hill directly to the village.¹⁴⁶ Evidence of this track survives within the present day grassed slopes and is probably due to modifications or enhanced surface work made by Sanderson Miller in the 18th century, but H.Rogers first observes its potential use for Royalists to have descended here, in his 1968 battlefields compendium.¹⁴⁷ The track appears to have been too steep to be used by horse or cart in the steepest section which traces eastwards to the hill's crest (now within the woods) perhaps even in Miller's time, but it presents a plausible route rarely considered.

[The King's army] began to descend the Hill, the Foot getting down several Ways which the Horse could not do, by reason of the Hill's Steepness

A little further south along the scarp the formerly larger hamlet of Westcote still survives as a group of modern buildings (Westcote Manor Farm), with aerial details corroborating this as one of Warwickshire's lost villages. With ancient fields and small enclosures still evident around its slopes its even suggested by 1937's 'History of Radway' that it was almost destroyed by artillery during the battle, but more convincingly it is also the setting for the tale of a proud baker standing guard outside his shop protecting his wears after the battle.¹⁴⁸

Between the Bridleway of King John's Lane and the modern village of Edgehill, stretching along the hill's sloping edge and close to the road is a stretch of land which is shown in Salmon's 1756 map as an enclosure called 'The Wood Close'. In the corresponding particulars recording the 1756 enclosure act for Radway this field is listed and described as an old enclosed ground. This would position it as almost certainly enclosured during the time of the battle and to have adorned the hilltop here when the army were making their preparations to descend.¹⁴⁹

From contemporary accounts and some local tradition it appears that there was much Royalist activity around the northern end of the escarpment and around Knowle–end hill. From the Camp Lane junction spreading south towards Ratley was Ratley Common Field and it is this area which is occasionally (and should be) suggested as being where much of the Royalist army will have congregated while awaiting their instructions. Isolated within the centre of this field was the ancient inclosed lands of W.Harrison called Wood Closes and its 445 metre long enclosure is preserved in today's landscape.¹⁵⁰

As soon as we came to the Top of Edgehill, which looks upon Keynton, we saw the Rebels Army drawing out, and setting themselves in Battalia [sic].

The sweeping curve which the modern B4086 road largely follows, at the northern end of the scarp, appears to have been the main route for the Royalist Horse to the fields below. Regular statements referring to marching subtly corroborate this as there is nowhere else men could march or descend with any decorum.

he [the King] march'd down the hill [sic].

the King's Forces march'd down the Hill [sic].

[The King] marched downe the hill [sic].

the Kings foot quitting the field, retreated towards that side of the hill, from whence his Majestie first marched downe to engage; upon which retreat your Majestie was unhappily left behind in a large feild [sic].

A hilltop position might possibly illuminate a statement from a contemporary letter written by a Royalist at the battle: The same night of the battle he [the King] made great fires in his quarters. The earl [of Essex] made none.¹⁵²

Below, the village of Radway was tightly surrounded by scattered small enclosures.

Conclusion

our [Royalist] Army was drawn up at the Foot of the Hill.

For the benefit of the reader viewing this document in isolation without reference to other sources, a brief deployment conjecture is offered:

Reviewing the information provided by the terrain, how the terrain may have appeared in 1642, published archaeological finds and contemporary accounts, alone, a supposition for the army's initial deployment lines are presented, and might be interpreted as: Initial Royalist deployments commencing approximately from the road junction where Langdon Lane joins the Banbury road, south–westwards to south of Westcote farm (which is situated on the Tysoe Road). Parliamentarian lines may not have been deployed in a precise manner, without a straight frontage, due to the terrain, but faced the opposition from the lower slopes of Essex's hill and generally faced towards Bullet hill. Their left wing will have matched the Royalist's right, but their right wing not falling as far south as (or parallel with) their direct counterparts. The distance between the two armies may not have been even or consistent and the Royalist defensive positions appear to have ended the day approximately where the Langdon Lane runs south across the battlefield.

D. Harridence. December 2011.
Curator of www.battleofedgehill.org

Minor typos & errata corrected: Jan 2012.

Updates to the original document:

*1. Jan 2012: On closer inspection of the physical topography here, I can also confirm that the parish border section which is largely represented by the surviving parish hedgerow in the 1756 pre–enclosure map occupies and follows the crest of a subtle but significant rise, mild elevation or swell in the land. This gentle rising ground runs south from the end of the first enclosure south of the Banbury road to the previous location of Watt's bushes (and it too might also conceivably fit a contemporary description of a little round rising hill when considered in profile). This topographic detail would prove logical concerning its original parish boundary function, while the coincidence of this section of parish hedgerow surviving - only along the elevated section - may clearly be related. Standing on the modern Yardley Chase Road (within the DSDA camp) - looking east - the sightline is obstructed and you cannot see the terrain over and beyond its highline. Lord Bernard Stuart (in his letter) described how the Royalist right rode uphill towards the enemy, which doesn't appear to account for, or include, the obvious descent on the western side of this elevation. Possibly related, the Official Parliamentarian Account also states their foot [the Royalist infantry] which appeared to us divided into nine great bodies came up all in front. This same account also described Parliament's reserve left horse having advanced a little forward to the Top of a Hill.

*2. Jan 2012: An image from 1922 clearly shows a comprehensive and thick spread of gorse across this area as described in 1937. (Francis Frith collection. Ref: 72078). (A larger and high–resolution copy of this image is in the author's possession).

*3. Jan 2012: Ibid. The 1922 photograph also reveals no evidence of ridge and furrow (only ant hills) which demonstrates that this region is unlikely to have ever been ploughed as it pre–dates modern farming and the conversion from strip farmed land, to pasture, would have preserved the ploughed corrugations (and pre–empts the clearing of gorse and arable farming captured in the RAF 1947 verticals). This further dramatically minimises the suggested acreage of ploughed land in the Tincey & Roberts map illustrations and suggests that this whole vicinity on the western side of the parish boundary was always general pasture. This could position the Parliamentarians closer to the parish boundary. (The accurate placing of this scene is only possible after accurately locating the vantage point of a sister image - used as a commercial postcard - was first achieved as part of this study. For the first time these images now provide genuine informative value and are only now known to capture the fieldscape lost under the modern DSDA bunkers).

As well as the sprinkling of contemporary quotes throughout the text, additional statements which related directly to the physical terrain include:

1. towards the close of the day we discovered a body of [Royalist] horse marching from our rear on the left of us under the hedges, which the life–guard (whom I have then found) having discovered to be the enemy, and resolving to charge them, sent to some of our troops that stood within musquet–shot of us to second them; which though they refused to do, and we had no way to come at them but through a gap in the hedge, we advanced towards them [sic]. Edmund Ludlow.
2. when a body of horse appeared advancing towards us from that side where the enemy was. We fired at them with case–shot. Edmund Ludlow.
3. when I was entering in to the field, I thinke 200 horse came by me with all the speed they could out from the battell [sic]. Edward Kightley (Parliamentarian).
4. our Left Wing of Horse ["our rear"] advanced a little forward to the Top of a Hill, where they stood in a Battalia, lined with Musqueteers. But they wheeled about, abandoned their Musqueteers, and came running down with the Enemies Horse at their Heels [sic]. Official Parliamentarian Account.
5. When quartered under Wormington hills: when it was dark, we saw several Fires not far from us. Sir Richard Bulstrode (Royalist).
6. our whole Regiment drew into the Fields. Sir Richard Bulstrode (Royalist).

Notes:

1. George Salmon's Radway pre–enclosure survey/map. 1756. Warwickshire County Record Office. CR1596/197. (Reproduced for the first time in full, at www.battleofedgehill.org).
2. 'Battle Farm - In Hand'. Battle Farm Sketch Map. 1701. Birmingham Libraries & Archives. Z/2832. (Published for the first time at: www.battleofedgehill.org).
3. Farm house yards and gardens are listed.
4. Little Kineton was enclosed in 1733.
5. The Place–Names of Warwickshire. (Gover & Others). 1936. Introduction.
6. Hooper's hedgerow dating technique - while controversial and approximate, it is thought to provide decent indications when dating within the last 1000 years.
7. Today, northern edges of several adjoining enclosures, next to and north of the main B4086 road - either side of Bramley Road - with some sections on the northern side, now apparently deviate slightly from their original course. But still clearly detectable by wonderful deep etchings, scaring and remnants of water courses close by.
8. I am unable to confirm this, but secondary sources regularly quote it, without citing its origin. (An anonymous newsletter or pamphlet of the time is presumed).
9. Tincey & Roberts ably describe this hill as a tongue of land at around 300 feet above sea level, which extends out towards Kineton, falling sharply to give the effect of a hill from that side. From the Radway side this area is also rising ground, although only by a few feet. 'Edgehill - 1642'. ( 2001). They continue, and describe how Ramsey's left–wing Horse was also positioned on a small hill.
10. Edgehill - The Battle Reinterpreted. (Scott, Turton, Von Arni). 2004.
11. The Place–Names of Warwickshire. (Gover & Others). 1936. p282.
12. Change and Decay: The Warwickshire Manors of the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield from the late thirteenth to the late sixteenth centuries. Thesis by Penelope Jayne George Upton. 2002. p206. www.Lra.le.ac.uk/handle/2381/8235
13. These references are explored in more detail later.
14. Decisive Battles of the English Civil War. (Malcolm Wanklyn). 2006.
15. Atlas of Great Britain. John Speed. 1611.
16. Battle Farm [in Kineton Field] is clearly recorded as an established farming stronghold in 1701. Birmingham Libraries & Archives. Z/2832.
17. Contemporary accounts from the battle and settlement evidence.
18. King James II's account: Life of James II. Published from the original Stuart MSS in Carlton House, ed. by T.S. Clarke, 2 vols. London, 1816.
19. Sanderson Miller and his Landscapes. (Jennifer Meir). 2006. (Chapter 5).
20. A photograph is shown in 'Edgehill 1642' (Brigadier Peter Young). 1967. Plate 18.
21. Rambles Round the Edge Hills. (Rev George Miller). 1896. He had also confidently described the presence of bush and furze throughout Essex's positions and their position being amongst the bushes, in the Archaeological Journal (Royal Archaeological Institute). 1889 (Vol 46).
22. Salmon's map. 1756. Warwickshire CRO. CR1596.
23. The King spent the night on or near Edgehill by such a fire as could be made of the little wood, and bushes which grew thereabouts. Clarendon. 'History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in England'.
24. Shakespeare's Country. (John Russell). 1942. p124.
25. Edge Hill: the battle and battlefield. (Edwin Alfred Walford). 1886. 1st Ed.
26. Edge Hill: the battle and battlefield. (Edwin Alfred Walford). 1904. 2nd Ed.
27. Edgehill - The Battle Reinterpreted. (Christopher Scott, Alan Turton, Dr Eric Von Arni). 2004.
28. History of Radway (Warwickshire Village History Society). 1937.
29. Battle Farm sketch map. 1701. Birmingham Libraries & Archives. Z/2832.
30. The centre of 'Hawk Furze' was approximately: LAT/LONG 52.13696, −1.49015. (No 95 in map. Fig 1). The document appears to capture a farm in transition, with the latest enclosure divisions updated by pencil, and the establishment of quality land slowly eroding the previous habitats, with the further 13 acres of 'Rough Piece' apparently having been recently added to the farm. The pencil updates may well have been added years later, emphasising further the duration of the place names and what they described.
31. LAT/LONG 52.13212, −1.4872 and LAT/LONG 52.13600, −1.48384, respectively. Numbers 100 & 99 in the map (Fig 1) respectively.
32. Memoirs of Edmund Ludlow, 1625 - 1672.
33. Battle farm (buildings): LAT/LONG 52.13840, −1.49032. Thistle farm (buildings): LAT/LONG 52.14229, −1.48434. G.Miller: Archaeological Journal (Vol 46), 1889. Illustrated Naval and Military Magazine, 1890. Rambles Round the Edge Hills, 1896.
34. Several publications and reports adopt the hedge's existence during the battle as orthodoxy, but one notable publication which doubts this is 'Edgehill - The Battle Reinterpreted'. (Scott/Turton/Von Arni). 2004.
35. Battlefields of England. (Colonel Albert Burne). 1950.
36. Edgehill - The Battle Reinterpreted. (Scott, Turton, Von Arni). 2004.
37. Sources of these images for the Edgehill area include: Warwickshire Historic Environment Record (HER), the Battlefields Trust website, and battleofedgehill.org.
38. Approximately LAT/LONG 52.13992, −1.48661. Fig 1: the north corner of No 96 in the map.
39. The track's indirect course will have evolved from the natural levels of the terrain.
40. Rambles Round the Edge Hills. (Rev George Miller). 1896.
41. Ibid. Appendix. (He also stated that there was only one hedgerow between Radway and Kineton in his 1889 contribution to the British Archaeological Journal. Royal Archaeological Institute. Vol 46). This 2011 terrain review establishes, beyound resonable doubt, that the parish boundary hedgerow almost certainly existed during the battle, making Miller's own assertions define his own hedgerow as improbable.
42. Ibid. He mentions this detail at least three times and twice in the Archaeological Journal (Vol 46).
43. Edge Hill: the battle and battlefield. (Edwin Alfred Walford). 1886. Battles And Battlefields In England. (Charles Raymond Booth Barrett). 1896. The History of Banbury. Alfred Beesley. Published 1841. (p312).
44. Official Parliamentarian Account: The Account of the Battel at Edgehill, Oct 23. 1642. as publisht by Order of the Parliament.[sic].
45. The precise origins of this drawing are unclear, and I am only aware of its reproduction in secondary sources. 'Edgehill 1642' (Tincey & Roberts), 2001, describe it as an illustration of Edgehill from a contemporary newsbook. p72. (Currently available online at http://www.scribd.com/doc/59495382/5/THE-CAMPAIGN#page=74 although some of the finer detail is lost in this online reproduction). It seems it is part of the enormous and celebrated collection of pamphlets and newsbooks of George Thomason; available at the British Library. A larger version is reproduced in 'The English Civil Wars 1642 - 1651' (Peter Gaunt). 2003. p36.
46. Decisive Battles of the English Civil War. (Malcolm Wanklyn). 2006.
47. The English Civil War. (Peter Young & Richard Holmes). 1974.
48. Battle Farm sketch map. 1701. Birmingham Libraries & Archives. Z/2832. (LAT/LONG 52.13600, −1.48384; 52.13134, −1.48472; 52.13228, −1.48277, respectively. Numbers 97, 101, 96, in the map - Fig 1 - respectively).
49. 2005 Edgehill interim report. Battlefields Annual Review. (Ed, Jon Cooksey). 2005. (ISBN: 1 84415 281 2). Also currently available from the Battlefields Trust website.
50. Approximately LAT/LONG 52.13224, −1.48138, and as seen in RAF 1947 aerial images.
51. LAT/LONG 52.13532, −1.48303.
52. The Place–Names of Warwickshire. (Gover & Others). 1936. (p282).
53. A Full and True Relation of the great Battell fought between the King's Army, and his Excellency, the Earle of Essex, upon the 23 October last past≠ [sic]. Letter from Captain Edward Kightley to his friend Mr. Charles Lathum. London: November the 4, 1642. Thomason Collection, British Library, London.
54. Royalist letter: A private captain in Lindsey's regiment (True Relation). British Museum, Harl. MS. 3783, fo. 61.
55. Battle Farm sketch map. 1701. Birmingham Libraries & Archives. Z/2832. (Fig 1: No 97 in the map).
56. A typical source: The Victoria History of the Counties of England - Warwick. Vol 5 - Kington Hundred. 1949.
57. Warwickshire Anglo–Saxon charter bounds, Volume 10. Della Hooke. 1999. (p65).
58. The Place–Names of Warwickshire. (Gover & Others). 1936. (p272 & p282).
59. Ibid. p5 of Introduction chapter.
60. Warwickshire Anglo–Saxon charter bounds, Volume 10. Della Hooke. 1999. (p65). In researching how old this parish boundary was - in order to make informed and confident judgements concerning the terrain - this 2011 review was surprised to discover the boundary's significance. Not one published work relating to the battle has ever acknowledged this unexpected detail, which would and should clearly influence several elements of speculation concerning the battlefield landscape.
61. Having evolved from an intermediate form 'Merclemere' (circa 1265) and 'Martimow'. The fields are shown in the bottom left of Fig 2.
62. Approximately, the surviving remnants of hedge (in the 1756 map) which separated the two fields/enclosures ran north to south at: LAT/LONG 52.13415, −1.47666.
63. LAT/LONG 52.13689, −1.47604. The reverse 'S' is better preserved by the RAF 1947 aerial images.
64. Official Royalist Account: "A Relation of the Battel fought between Keynton and Edgehill, by His Majesty's Army and that of the Rebels; Printed by his Majesty's Command at Oxford by Leonard Lichfield, Printer to the University, 1642".[sic]. Peter Young (c1) suggests that the author was, the now celebrated, William Dugdale who was present at the battle.
65. Ibid.
66. whereupon our whole Army advanced in very good Order. Official Royalist Account.
67. Chadshunt, is typical of a number of south Warwickshire villages, in that it was paired with another village, when sharing the same field systems. C.Dyer, 'Chadshunt', MSRG Annual Report 4 (1989), p35.
68. First discussed by G.Davies' The Battle of Edgehill', in The English Historical Review, 1921. Ed 36.
69. Warwickshire Anglo–Saxon charter bounds, Volume 10. Della Hooke. 1999. (p65).
70. Pleasant Spots & Famous Places. (John Alfred Langford). Writing in 1855.
71. Howitt's visits to remarkable places. 2nd ed. (William Howitt). 1839.
72. Warwickshire Delineated. 2nd. 1821.
73. Black's Guide to Warwickshire. There are several updated editions - many using this statement. This quote is confirmed in the 1881 edition.
74. Picturesque England - Its Landmarks & Historic Haunts. (L.Vanlentine). 1893.
75. The distances provided by A.Burne in 'Battlefields of England' (1950) would point approximately to a LAT/LONG 52.13916, −1.48341 position.
76. Edge Hill: the battle and battlefield. (Edwin Alfred Walford). 1904. 2nd Ed. Its noted by Mary Harris (Unknown Warwickshire) in 1924, that the area still suffered stiff clay, that takes as many as four horses to draw the plough.
77. Approximately: LAT/LONG 52.141576, −1.472946
78. Lord Bernard Stuart, letter. (British Museum). First printed by G.Davies' The Battle of Edgehill', in The English Historical Review, 1921. Ed 36.
79. History of Radway (Warwickshire Village History Society). 1937. p33.
80. It continued a long life: "Valuation of Radway Grounds Farm" £918 in 1890. Warwickshire CR2433|31/349.
81. Battlefields of Britain. (A.Burne), 1950 - quoting C.J.Ribton–Turner (Shakespeare's Land), 1893. LAT/LONG 52.14171, −1.47700.
82. Official Parliamentarian Account: The Account of the Battel at Edgehill, Oct 23. 1642. as publisht by Order of the Parliament. [sic].
83. LAT/LONG 52.14591, −1.47760
84. LAT/LONG 52.14787, −1.47874 (centred to the enclosure shown in the RAF 1947 aerial images).
85. Warwickshire Anglo–Saxon charter bounds, Volume 10. Della Hooke. 1999. (p65).
86. Approximate centre of field: LAT/LONG 52.15203, −1.48121.
87. Copyright of the Monarch and is kept privately at Windsor Castle's Royal Library, but is reproduced by Peter Young (in his 'Edgehill 1642' book, with a larger version reproduced in the 1967 impressions).
88. Official Parliamentarian Account: The Account of the Battel at Edgehill, Oct 23. 1642. as publisht by Order of the Parliament. [sic].
89. Warwickshire CRO. CR1596. (Barn: LAT/LONG 52.13453, −1.47962). Birmingham Libraries & Archives. Z/2832. (Pratts Ground: LAT/LONG 52.12836, −1.48567. Pratts Meadow: LAT/LONG 52.12925, −1.48891. Numbers 105 & 106 in the map - Fig 1 - respectively).
90. This would be the same Blakeman family discussed by G.Miller. 'Rambles Round the Edge Hills. p58.
91. No satisfactory records relating to a Pratt family in this vicinity can be found.
92. The barn appears to have occupied almost the same location as the third and smallest of the mass graves, as described by secondary sources (Burne, and Ribton–Turner). This could raise the potential of the barn - as like with King's Leys Barn - being used by the fatally injured?
93. Another example of shew by King James II in the same document: who commanded them do not first shew them the bad example. (Show).
94. Pannett: A specialist in topography - his Edgehill deployment and battlefield conjecture was first published in The Battlefields Trust 2005 interim Edgehill report. Battlefields Annual Review. (Ed, Jon Cooksey). 2005. (Also currently available to download from the Trust's website).
95. LAT/LONG 52.12553, −1.46842. Radway Reconstruction 1756 enclosure award. (S.G.Wallsgrove). 1997. Warwickshire CRO. Z939(L). 'History of Radway'. 1937. p29.
96. Saxon burials from the Middle Saxon period were found at nearby Rately in 2011. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-15837458
97. As an aside, the straight route of the boundary coincides with the western edge of Martlemere Furlong and appears to relate to the kink in Red Lane. The boundary route also kinks here (at the north eastern point of 'Martlemore Lays') and this appears to have been dictated by a small pond/spring (as shown in late 20th century OS large scale mapping) at this position.
98. Memoirs of Edmund Ludlow, 1625 - 1672. Ludlow's version of events and Parliamentarian success here are contested elsewhere.
99. Caption for Figure 5.
100. Centre of hedge: LAT/LONG 52.13988, −1.47335.
101. The small spur of hedgerow would have been here: LAT/LONG 52.14250, −1.47663.
102. LAT/LONG 52.14847, −1.47670.
103. LAT/LONG 52.14766, −1.47547. (Fig 2).
104. "A brief relation of the battle at Red horse field under Edgehill". Letter by Bernard Stuart - Commander of the King's Lifeguard. British Museum, London.
105. Chapter 3. End of the Radway & Radway Tower section. Rambles Round the Edge Hills. (G.Miller). 1896.
106. King James II's account: Life of James II. Published from the original Stuart MSS in Carlton House, ed. by T.S. Clarke, 2 vols. London, 1816.
107. LAT/LONG 52.13794, −1.46089.
108. G.Miller: Archaeological Journal, 1889 (Vol 46 from p36). This lane is also depicted in a battlefield plan used as part of J.G.Grant's 1979 Edgehill metal detecting survey (map 'C'), which overlays a John Bartholomew & Co map. (Origin unknown). Re: Warwickshire Historic Environment Record (HER): (No: 1198).
109. Local tradition marks a spot where the two Princes are said to have watched the battle which is close to where this track is said to have been. he [the King] order'd the Duke of Richmond to carry them [the two Princes] out of the battell, & conduct them to the top of the hill [sic]. (King James II). But the barn appears to have eventually become part of a farmstead, yard or small complex of buildings at one time and this track, or road, may still post–date the battle.
110. Memoirs and Reflections upon the Reign and Government of King Charles I. (Sir Richard Bulstrode). Pub 1720. There can be little debate concerning what he may have meant by right or left, when he confirms his logic again when correctly placing Sun Rising hill to his left: Prince Rupert was resolved, that Monday Night, to go down the Hill, at a place called Sun–Rising, a Mile on our left Hand. on the Right is a historic detail which challenges some deployment conjectures.
111. Anonymous London Royalists letter. First published by G.Davis. 1921.
112. e.g. Edgehill 1642. (J.Tincey & K.Roberts). 2001. p83.
113. History of the Rebellion and Civil Wars in England: Begun in the Year 1641 by Edward Hyde, 1st Earl of Clarendon Vol 2, pt 1. (From p44).
114. Contemporary antidotes all feature the King being on the hill the following morning. e.g. The next morning King CHARLES sends for him to the top of Edge Hill (Edward Walsingham's account). Only local tradition and secondary sources place him below, on the plain (in or near King's Leys Barn), during the night.
115. Official Royalist Account: A relation of the Battel fought between Keynton and Edgehill. 1642.
116. The 20th century myth of the King spending the night at King's Leys Barn is explored in depth in: Edgehill - Local Traditions. (Harridence). www.battleofedgehill.org.
117. 'A Brief Relation to the Life and Memoirs of John, Lord Belasyse: written and collected by his secretary, Joshua Moone.' Begun in 1650.
118. Sir Robert Walsh. A True Narrative and Manifest. (1679).
119. Memoirs of Edmund Ludlow, 1625 - 1672.
120. Approximate centre of what was the field: LAT/LONG 52.14290, −1.49354. (SP 348494).
121. Later metal detecting surveys also found many bullets in this area. Foard 2005.
122. Source: Volunteers from the 2004–2006 metal detecting surveys.
123. LAT/LONG 52.14452, −1.50592 (approx).
124. "A Full and True Relation of the great Battell" [sic]. Letter from Captain Edward. Thomason Collection, British Library, London.
125. Ibid.
126. and in the [Monday] Morning, as soon as it was Day, [we, the Royalists] drew half the Body of the Horse into Battalia, at the Foot of the Hill, and the rest of the Horse and the Foot on the Top of the Hill, where the Standard was placed. Official Royalist Account: 'A Relation of the Battel fought between Keynton and Edgehill, by His Majesty's Army and that of the Rebels'
127. The English Civil War. (Peter Young & Richard Holmes). 1974.
128. This is not mentioned in Miller's diaries, or by any descendants.
129. The Place–Names of Warwickshire. (Gover & Others). 1936. (p272). Gover suggests an ancient route ran from Stoneleigh through Ufton, Bishops Itchington and Knightcote, to Brailes. Apparently Dugdale refers to the red earth colour being visible (which sheweth it self) from a good distance due to the road ascending up Edgehill: neer the passage up Edg–hill [sic]. (Radway - originally spelt Radweii or Radweia - is thought to derive from the words 'rod' meaning red and 'weia' meaning road).
130. www.kineton.org.uk/plan/fullreport.PDF
131. Edgehill and Beyond. (Philip Tennant). 1992.
132. Edgehill 1642. (Peter Young). 1967.
133. Rambles Round the Edge Hills. (G.Miller). 1896. (Appendix). Caution - his lone assertions concerning a single hedge which crossed the battlefield have caused confusion and debate.
134. The modern road/lane ends, and the bridle path begins its ascent, approximately here: LAT/LONG 52.124054, −1.466192.
135. "A Full and True Relation of the great Battell" [sic]. Captain Edward. British Library.
136. This is a surprising claim by G.Miller? A recent conversation with 'Warwickshire Archaeology' also expressed confidence concerning its likely age.
137. The History of Banbury. (Alfred Beesley). 1841. (Battle of Edgehill - p312).
138. There is one contemporary description which involves the King's standard marching with the army down the hill (Clarendon. Vol 2 pt 1) and one which states it was placed on the hill the next morning (Official Royalist Account).
139. Rambles Round the Edge Hills. (G.Miller). 1896. Edwin Walford also states this, but only in his second edition of his Edgehill book, published in 1904 (and not the 1886 edition).
140. Sanderson Miller and his Landscapes. (Jennifer Meir). 2006. Meir informs us that Sanderson purchased a cottage, to demolish, with a small piece of land adjoining his property where it provided a level plateau for his designs (and where he'd site his tower).
141. There is a contemporary reference from the official Royalist account of the Standard being on the hill, but this relates to preparations the following day (Monday): …and the rest of the Horse and the Foot on the Top of the Hill, where the Standard was placed.
142. Sanderson Miller and his Landscapes. (Jennifer Meir). 2006.
143. Photograph: Warwickshire County Record Office. PH352/150/11. (Photograph, PH352/150/3, confirms its location).
144. Warwickshire County Record Office: Deeds relating to "Edge Grange", or "Ratley Grange", in Ratley (no ref) 1609–1734. Includes, L5/45 1609, and others.
145. John Ashby & Dan Batchelor also highlight, with photographs, in their book detailing the parish that 16th century cottages were clearly present. Ratley - The Story of a Warwickshire Parish. circa 2005.
146. Sources inc: Rambles Round the Edge Hills. (G.Miller). 1896. A History of the County of Warwick - Vol 5. (Ed. L.F.Salzman). 1949: Edge Grange, on the slopes of Edge Hill.
147. Battles and Generals of the Civil Wars 1642 - 1651. (Colonel H.C.B.Rogers). 1968.
148. History of Radway (Warwickshire Village History Society). 1937.
149. Ibid. Name listed in place–names mentioned in the Award. p31.
150. Radway enclosure award reconstruction. (S.G.Wallsgrove). 1997. Warwick County Record Office Z939(L). LAT/LONG 52.12645, −1.43745. (SP386477).
151. Memoirs of Sir John Hinton. 1679. Physician to his Majesty.
152. Anonymous London Royalists letter. First published by G.Davis. 1921.