History of Potterton 1

The History Of Potterton.

PART 1 THE EARLY YEARS - AGRICULTURE AND INDUSTRY

from The Barwicker No. 36
Dec. 1994

Back to the Main Historical Society page
Back to the Barwicker Contents page

The origin of the name Potterton is 'pottere tun', the potter's or potters' farm. In the Domesday Survey of 1086, 'Potertun' is included as one of the vills said to be within the 'soke' or administrative system of the manor of Kippax, Ledston and Barwick. From these early times it is clear that Potterton had a close but separate identity from Barwick. It was to remain this way for several centuries.

In his book 'The History of the Parish of Barwick-in-Elmet', Rev Frederick S Colman includes a summary of a survey of Barwick manor made in 1341. This gives much detail of the land holdings, tenants, rents and other services. The information for Potterton is slight however, emphasising the separate nature of the place at that time. Colman states: "Sir Robert de Nevill held the 'town of Podryngton' by the service of one knight's fee, there was a grange there and a messuage, with dovecote, that used to be the lord's capital messuage, the total rental being 13s.7d.; Kiddal paid 3s.2d. and Woodhouse 100s.6d.".

The 'knights fee' was a device begun by William I to establish a professional army of some 5000 armed, trained and mounted knights, whom he could call upon to defend his realm. He required that his tenants in chief should provide him with a specified number of such soldiers and for this purpose they gave grants of land to support the knights. This was the 'knights fee' and it passed to the heir on the death of the holder of the fee.

An area to the south of Potterton Hall has been identified as the site of the shrunken medieval village of Potterton (see map below), features of the earthworks incorporating a sunken holloway, terraced areas of dwelling platforms and ridge and furrow plough strips. The overall site covering an area of some 217 acres is scheduled as an Ancient Monument and, as such, is protected by the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act of 1979.

The holloway, which is the most well-defined feature of the earthworks, extends across the site from north west to south east, having a slight S shaped curve and an average depth of 3 feet. On the eastern flank of this are terraced areas considered to be the location of a small number of medieval dwellings. A platform near the field gate suggests the site of a larger house, and the places of other tenements, with their garths or enclosures, are defined with shallow ditches at either side of the holloway.


Further to the south of the site, there are indications of more trackways and holloways leading out into the surrounding fields. On the outer limits of the village are well-defined terraces of ridge and furrow, evidence of medieval open field strip ploughing. Although being one of the best preserved deserted medieval villages in the region, the general earthwork features are relatively slightly accentuated, because timber buildings were normal in the area during this period.

In early 1989, a watching brief was undertaken by the West Yorkshire Archaeological Service during maintenance work by the Yorkshire Electricity Board in the northern sector of the scheduled area. Although the amount of excavation undertaken, for placing poles and cable laying, was relatively small, several pieces of pottery that were recovered provided confirmation of the medieval occupation of this part of the site. The limited findings did, however, tend to suggest that the area formerly occupied by dwellings was probably less than had previously been estimated. The date and reason for the abandonment of the village site is unknown.


Aerial View of the Potterton Ancient Monument Site looking west
(by kind permission of West Yorkshire Archaeological Service).
Miry Lane, the holloway and the ridge and furrow are visible.

The best evidence for pottery making in Potterton was the excavation in 1962 of a medieval pottery kiln at Potterton Grange Farm. This had been used to make Cistercian ware and was last fired in about 1500AD, (see 'The Barwicker' No.27).

A 1424/5 survey of Barwick manor (see 'The Barwicker' Nos. 25 and 26), shows that Sir John Langton held Potterton under the same terms as his grandfather, Sir Robert de Nevill. Potterton later passed into the hands of the Danby family when Sir John Langton's grand-daughter married Sir James Danby. In his book Rector Colman lists what must have been only a fraction of the many land transfers that were made after the end of the Danby conection. He draws on sources that are no longer available to us. Many of the new landowners were not local people and so it tells us little about what life was like in Potterton at this time.

G D Lumb's 'Wills, Registers and Monumental Inscriptions of Barwick-in-Elmet' records the wills of 96 inhabitants of the old parish. Of these, 23 lived in Potterton, a surprisingly high proportion, indicating that the hamlet was relatively more populous than it is now. The wills listed below tell us what life was like for the people of Potterton in the years between 1572 and 1669.

NAME   OCCUPATION   WILL MADE   WIll PROVED 
John Setle   Husbandman   4 Jan. 1572  17 June 1572 
William Shanne   Yeoman  16 Mar. 1573  28 Apr. 1574 
Richard Danyell   Husbandman  13 Apr. 1574  9 May 1574 
Elizabeth Settle   Widow    7 May 1579 
Thomas Potter   Husbandman  15 Aug. 1584  14 Nov. 1584 
Robert Setle   Husbandman  1585  5 Feb. 1585 
Richard Shanne     31 May 1586  5 Apr. 1584? 
Henry Setle   Husbandman   7 Nov. 1586  21 Oct. 1587 
William Mawson     2 Dec. 1587   2 Nov. 1588 
Richard Wilson   Yeoman  14 Oct. 1595  6 Mar. 1594 
Leonard Sethle   Husbandman  3 June 1606  2 Oct. 1606 
John Haire   Wheelwright  11 Nov. 1606  22 Apr. 1613 
Richard Vevers   Tanner  1 Mar. 1610  4 Oct. 1611 
Margaret Potter   Widow   26 Mar. 1614   9 Apr. 1614 
Richard Settle   Husbandman  27 Aug. 1617  6 Nov. 1619 
John Setle   Yeoman   25 Aug. 1622   8 Nov. 1623 
Thomas Hemsworth     18 Dec. 1626   18 Oct. 1627 
Richard Settle   Tanner  13 Sept 1629  26 Feb. 1630 
Richard Potter   Yeoman   17 Oct. 1638   May 1639 
John Ball   Blacksmith  23 June 1644   Feb. 1644 
Richard Shan   Yeoman     Nov. 1646 
John Settle   Yeoman     17 Sept 1668 
Robert Settle   Chandler     21 Jan. 1669 


The list is dominated by farmers and rural craftsmen. The wording of the wills gives us some indication of the conditions under which the land was held. A husbandman was a tenant farmer paying rent to a landlord under the terms of some short term lease. However he had fixture of tenure to a considerable degree and the lease could be renewed. Thus Henry Setle in 1586 willed that his wife and sister "shall endeavour themselves to renew the Lease of the farme" on his death. Thomas Potter in 1584 stated that his farm and land should remain with his son "for ever".

A yeoman was the owner of the land that he cultivated. This did not necessarily mean that he owned the freehold but held the land under a long-term lease. According to Colman, on 20 May 1633, Sir John Ramsden of Longley Hall and Byram 'demised to Richard Shan his capital messuage here, with all lands belonging, for a period of 60 years at a rental of £18.12s.10d per annum'. In his will proved in 1646, Richard Shan, the yeoman, bequeathed to his wife "the whole farme with the appurtenaunces which I now houlde by lease granted to me by Sir John Ramsden, my Landlorde". Shan was a rich man and could afford to leave his six daughters £40 each.

The wills show bequests of money, clothes, furniture, household linen and other goods but it is the details of the land and property that give us most information about the lives of the people of Potterton at that time. Some of these husbandmen and yeomen rented out cottages and land to others. Thus in 1574, William Shanne, the yeoman, who bequeathed to his son his capital messuage (manor house), also owned three cottages which he rented out to Robert Talior, Thomas Londe and John Dawson. Land was also rented out by these husbandmen and yeomen and the conditions of the lease were sometimes included. Thus Richard Shanne in 1586 specified that the tenant of some of his land should not "plowe and ryve out the soil or grounde" during the term of the lease.

The wills show that the open field system of agriculture was operating at the time (see 'The Barwicker' No.31). William Shanne in 1574, held six acres of land in the fields of Potterton, "that is to say, in everie feilde two acres". The three fields noted here would be those named in a later survey as 'Raw Field, Beck Field and Northfield'; a fourth field, New Field, had probably not been created at this time. Crops grown at the time are mentioned including wheat, beans and barley (also malt).

However, even at this early stage of agricultural development, the process of enclosure of the open fields had begun. The following plots of land are mentioned in the wills; 'Quarrell Close', 'Ynge Close', 'Maynehouse Garthe', 'Beane Close', 'Little Feild Close', 'Crosse Close', 'Wheate Close'.

The keeping of cattle, pigs and sheep is indicated in the wills. This must have been a fairly small scale activity as bequests of single animals are frequently recorded. These seem to have been regarded as an investment as when Robert Setle in 1585 left one 'ewe hogge' each to five sisters "to be kepte together joynteley to the use of" the sisters until they became of age. The price of a cow is given as £3 and a lamb 3s.4d., quite substantial sums at the time. Wool seems to have been an asset even perhaps a source of pride in those days as when Elizabeth Settle gave to a woman friend or relative "one petticoate which shalbe maid upon my nowne wolle".

The precise type of animal is often given. For sheep, bequests were made of 'yowes' (ewes) and 'gymer' (gimmer) lambs. For cattle, we find 'why stirks' mentioned and brown, black and red cows. The importance of individual animals is emphasised when we read of 'one cow called Marygould' and 'one red cowe called Cherrie'. There is only the occasional reference to horses, usually a mare and foal. William Shanne in 1574 left his wife 'my draughte of oxen', a considerable asset. There is no mention in the wills of any male breeding stock, no bulls, rams, boars or stallions. Were these held in common or owned by the lord of the manor for common use?

Queen's Survey of Barwick Manor 1610 includes the following description of the 'bounder' (boundary) of the manor, which shows that the grazing on Potterton Moor was shared by the inhabitants of Potterton and Thorner.

"From which wood (Cockshot) the Bounder of the Said Mannor doth pass over a common called Potterton Moore; over which Moore (being the common lyinge within the mannor of Barwicke aforesaid from the East ende of the said Wood called Cockshutte), there lieth directly an olde ditch which remaineth to this day a very antient Bounder and doth divide and bounder the common of Potterton and Thorner being undivided in common between the tennants of both Mannors..." 


A deed dated 10 April 1612 reveals:

"Robert Ellys of Kyddall Esq. to Thomas Wetherall of Abberforthe, yeoman. Lease of rabbit warren on Potterton Moor for 21 years. Rent, 6 couple of 'bunnyes' each of first 6 years, and 15 couple each of remaining 15 years." 


Rabbits at that time were not regarded as a pest but as a valuable source of income for landowners. Besides providing meat at 6 weeks old, the rabbit skins made a useful fur. To prevent the rabbits from eating crops they could be contained in a warren if good banks were erected and maintained around the perimeter. Most warrens were situated on heathy, sandy or other waste land that was of little use for other purposes. It is likely that the Ellis warren contained mounds of loose earth constructed to provide the animals with suitable ground for making their breeding chambers.

A large warren would provide permanent employment for a 'warrener' and perhaps a 'net knitter' who made and repaired the nets for use as snares. As the rent for the Ellis warren was very low it is likely that it was a small undertaking. The Gascoignes had a warren on Barnbow Carr until the time of the Enclosure Award of 1804, when Sir Thomas Gascoigne destroyed it and was awarded 10 acres of enclosed land in lieu.

The Queen's survey of 1610 contains the details of the land holdings of 'free tenants'. They were 'free' of labour services.

Name   Occupation   Residence  
     
John Gascoigne     Barnbow  
William Ramsden    Longley 
Richard Vevers   Tanner   Potterton 
John Settle  Glover  Potterton 
Richard Settle  Webster  Potterton 
William Hopwood  Labourer  Potterton 
William Settle  Yeoman  Potterton 
Peter Saxton  Clerk  White Cote(?) 
Willam Danyell   Yeoman  Potterton 
John Ellis    Kiddal 
Richard Potter   Yeoman  Potterton 


All but one of the parcels of land described are held 'in knight's service', a surprising relic of medieval times. All the tenants paid an annual sum of £2 to the Queen, the lord of the manor, except Richard Vevers who paid only 2d. Most of the holdings of the tenants living in Potterton in 1611 are said 'to be held by free deed of John Gascoigne of Barnbow', a prominent landowner and later lord of the manor.

Whilst Potterton may have acquired its name from a medieval pottery industry (the potters tun), this now small quiet hamlet has over the years been the scene of a variety of other activities including the tanning of animal hides. The tan-yard, located south of the hall, and adjacent to what at one time was Potterton Green, was probably established around the beginning of the 17th. century.

In 1608-9, Richard Vevers (of the Potterton branch of the family) is described by occupation as 'tanner' when he acquired from John Gascoigne, a messuage (a dwelling and adjoining grounds) together with other property at Potterton. Later, Richard Settle is described as a tanner in the publication of his will dated 1629.

The conversion of animal hides into leather was a lengthy tedious business. Indeed, in the Middle Ages, guild laws decreed that it was a crime to remove a hide from a tan-pit, for finishing, in less than 'one year and a day'. It was first necessary to cure the hide to inhibit putrefaction and this was done by hand scraping, hosing with water, and either suspension in smoke or, more likely, soaking in brine pits. After thorough rinsing the hides were steeped for up to 48 hours in a lime solution to loosen and assist removal of hair roots. Double-handed knives were used for this purpose.

After this initial preparation, the hides were immersed for several months in 'ouse pits' containing tan liquid. In time the vegetable tannin solution fully penetrated the hide bringing about a chemical change which resulted in a supple and strong leather material. This was the essence of the tannin stage, when the hides could be treated in one piece or cut into sections - butts, shoulders, bellies and bends.

The tan liquid was usually obtained from oak bark but other woods used were spruce, hemlock and chestnut. As oak bark contains only about 10% active tannin content, large quantities were needed, even for a small tan-yard. In the final stage, the wet leather was allowed to dry out slowly, being hung in a well-ventilated drying shed.

The location of tanneries was generally influenced by the availability of raw materials, these being a regular supply of animal hides (no doubt from surrounding villages also), large quantities of water (treatment of one hide required some 250 gallons), lime and tannin. The tan-yard at Potterton would seem to have been ideally placed for these resources. A natural supply of water was on hand from local springs, and a number of soughs or drains were led into the yard and adjacent fish pond the latter possibly acting as a storage reservoir.

There would be ample supplies of limestone from local quarries and kilns and the general area was well wooded. Early editions of survey maps show Kiddal Oak Wood to the north of Potterton, a natural feature that no longer exists. Another advantage was Potterton's proximity to the Leeds-York road for transporting goods to the Leeds markets and elsewhere. In fact, until an improvement scheme was undertaken about 1820, the York road made a sharp detour to the south at Kiddal Lane End so that Potterton was much nearer the highway than today.

The wills and list of tenants in Potterton reveal the existence of other industrial processes. Robert Settle, a chandler, made candles from tallow, the hard fat of oxen and sheep, which could be softened by heating and pressed round the wick. Alternatively the wick could be dipped into melted tallow or it could be poured into a candle-shaped mould. This occupation is frequently linked with soap making, when tallow was boiled with wood ashes and the soap separated by adding salt.

For John Settle, the glover, the availability of leather in Potterton was probably the reason for setting up his business there. Richard Settle, a webster or male weaver, probably used locally spun wool for his cloth making.

The earliest Barwick-in-Elmet parish registers now in existence began in 1653, but Lumb includes the Bishops' Transcripts for the decade 1631-41. These show that for Potterton there were 28 baptisms, 24 burials and 5 marriages during this period. It is possible to calculate the approximate total population of Potterton during this decade by multiplying the above numbers by 30, 31 and 125 respectively. The results are tabulated below.

  Baptisms   Burials   Marriages 
Numbers   28   24  5 
Annual Average   2.8  2.4  0.5 
Multiplier  30   31   125 
Total Population (approx.)  84  74  62 


The number of marriages is too small to make an accurate calculation. If we say that the total number of men, women and children in Potterton during the decade 1631-41 was about 80, we will not be far out. This compares with a total of about 900 for the parish as a whole and 300 for Barwick village in this decade. Potterton at that time then must have had between 15 and 20 households, about twice the number at the present time.

The above documents show that Potterton, like many other settlements at that time, was a small community employed in mixed farming with rural crafts and its three open fields being reduced by enclosure. However, it was much more than that. It was also a centre of varied small-scale industry with trade links to neighbouring places.

ARTHUR BANTOFT and TONY COX

Back to the top
Back to the Main Historical Society page