Talk:The Fens

Suggestion for reformation of this page

I've been following this page for a while, and I think it's rather too unweildy to become a good discussion on the Fens of East Anglia. I have been part of the problem, as I've been trying to correct and add to the sections on the history of drainage in the fens. But I think it needs to be split up in to a series of pages, with a main page to simply describe the region as it exists today (a low-lying artifically drained arable farming region), with only a brief historical section; the history of the Fens could be relegated to another page or a series of pages. I can start to write some material for the history of the drainage - I already have some for the Roman period forwards. But I don't know how to create wikipedia pages or administer complicated things like that. I was wondering if someone with more experience can help with the administration if I can produce some content. *jb (talk) 21:39, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm editting the page right now - I've moved some text off the page to make editting it easier, but I don't intend to delete any of it and will restore it in another section. *jb (talk) 02:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay (I'm having a conversation with myself now :) - I think that maybe the page could be re-formed by sorting the categories better, rather than creating new pages. The history section will probably have a lot of drainage history, of course, I wouldn't like it all to be drainage history. Maybe if we want to have a very detailed drainage article it could be its own article (since it is definitely a topic of general interest). But for the history in general: I'm just going to throw out some topics off the top of my head, but don't have time to write right now. I would be happy for other people to write about them (some are started on the page now, but could be expanded). I'm listing this stuff now as a kind of rough draft; some of it might be just too much detail for this article, but I'm throwing it down and it can be pruned - especially the bits on drainage which probably should be their own article. A lot of the early stuff I'm getting from Hall and Coles' Fenland Survey (excellent book on the archeological survey of the fens, from prehistory to Anglo-Saxon), also some recent articles in a book on water management editted by Hadrian Cook and Tom Williamson (Water Management in the English Landscape: Field, Marsh and Meadow, 1999); stuff on drainage and riots is from Darby, Medieval Fenland, Draining of the Fens(both 1940), also Lindley, Fenland Riots (1982).

• Bronze age and Iron Age fenland, what little we know about their farming (probably pastoral), that there were more Iron Age than we thought
• Romano-British fenland: most recent research shows no plan of drainage, most canals apparently only for transportation, sea floods still penentrating inland; economy based on pastoral farming, some local arable, and salt production (as far inland as Littleport - crazy eh?); don't know the answer about the Imperial estates question (whether the Emperor claimed ownership of new lands), important settlement at Stonea
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Fenland: introduction of serious drainage and protection works - notably the Sea Bank, called the "Roman Bank" by some antiquarians, a lot of other canals, lodes, banks (Halls and Coles frustratingly don't itemise these, but maybe other publications do); should also expand on the monastaries as important landowners in the area

• Forests in the fenland - I don't know much about this at all, since my research has been on drainage, but I would like to know more -- it's fascinating that the Royal Forest seems to have been in the middle of the peat fens of south Lincs, and it makes me wonder how forested peat fens elsewhere (such as Cambs) would have been
• origin of the Commissioners of Sewers in the 13th century (should be its own sub-topic - probably should eventually be its own entry for Commissions of Sewers in general)

• Early Modern Fenland (c1500-1750) - need some basic description of the nature of the region, some stats maybe from 16th cent (we have the Lay subsidy of 1524-25, the Ecclesiastical Returns of 1563) which show that the region was still very low population density when compared to other areas of southern England, but also had great variation across the fenland as parts of the fenland (especially the silt fens in Lincs, or near King's Lynn) were much richer than other areas of the Fens, fen-edge parishes (like Over or Willingham) also growing rapidly in population and becoming dense even compared to the upland parishes, though parishes in middle of the Fens like Littleport are very low population density

• Dissolution of the Monastaries - I think scholars are still not quite sure what this meant for the region; it's obviously significant (because they were such major landowners), but no one has satisfactorily pulled apart the specific effects, though it may have contributed to the poor maintenance of the works and to flooding; definitely should be mentioned
• Sea Levels? Climate change and the Little Ice Age? I haven't come across any definitive writing about relationship between overall sea-levels, and rainfall with flooding - does anyone have any good references for local sea levels in the late 16th century? But there are hints that there are connections between local climate change and an increase in flooding in the fens in the late 16th/early 17th century; there was a major flood in 1607, for example, in the same year as a major drought in Turkey (when the rainfall patterns shift to rain on Britain, Turkey gets drought - this has happened recently as well)

• Drainage and Enclosure c1600-1750 - this should cover the basic history, from the General Drainage Act of 43 Elizabeth (giving permission for lords and commoners to alienate part of their commons to pay undertakers for drainage), though some of the projects (Waldersey, Hatfield Chase, Lindsay Level, as well as Great/Bedford Level)

• Resistance to the drainage & enclosures, and the Civil War - covering reaction of local community, riots, relationship to Civil War, fact that civil war interrupted and destroyed works, and undermined claims of most of the undertakers in Lincolnshire while reaffirming the claims of the Earl of Bedford in the Great Level (because he was a Parliamentarian); Restoration and the formation of the Bedford level Corporation (1663), fact that it remains authority in area until about 1920

• My own research has been entirely on the Bedford Level - I don't know what persists from the various Lincolnshire projects except that there are some late 17th century acts to do with Deeping Fens

• Failure of Seventeenth century drainage due to subsidence, especially in peat areas, lack of adequate funding for the maintenance of the works

• Despite claims of drainers (and some historians of the agricultural revolution), Bedford Level remains mostly pastoral and subject to floods, though locations of floods may have changed (more in southern Level than northern - Earl of Bedford had an esate in northern Level which greatly increased its production); Lincolnshire, northern Norfolk fens (outside of Great Level) also continue to be primarily pastoral regions
• Enclosure of about 1/2 of the Fenland - 95,000 acres to the Bedford Level Corporation, but also many small enclosures allowed by the 1663 Act (they even pass another act in the 1680s? to say enough enclosures already)

• Creation of local drainage boards and improvements to drainage c1750-1850: basically recognising the failure of the BLC Works - communities petition for and create local drainage boards between the 18th and 19th centuries

• importance of pumps - first wind, then steam - to overcome the problem of land subsidence

• Drainage in Lincolnshire, other fens -- about the same time - need more details

Christopher Taylor has observed (in article in Cook and Williamson, 1999) that the interest in drainage is directly related to the price of agricultural products - when prices go up in the 18th century, a lot more money being put back into works; but during the agricultural depression of the late 19th century they are allowed to decay again, and areas flooded again, only to be drained yet again during WW2 and after, and now maybe being flooded again (as Wicken Fen is being expanded). Basically, drainage was/is a real ebb and flow, not a one time process; this should be noted in any article specifically on drainage. For this article, I think the discussion of the modern drainage organisation (such as linking to different Drainage Boards which are active today) should be separate from the history section. *jb (talk) 16:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Adventurers vs Undertakers

As I understand it, the 'Gentlemen Adventurers' were people who had invested actively in the Dutch East India Company, and were rewarded by being given an area of bog that no one wanted near Boston, Lincolnshire. They drained it, and the area is today known and even signposted as as 'Adventurers Land'

In this context, my reading of Adventurer is 'speculator' or 'investor'. The people (ad)ventured their capital in a project such as a cargo from China or draining land, on condition that in return for its success, they got their cut of the profit. I suspect that you are combining the stories of more than one venture.

Adventurer does mean someone who adventurers money, and there is no connection with the Dutch East India Company. There were "Adventurers" in all the different drainage schemes; those near Boston in the 1640s were headed by the Earl of Lindsay. As far as I know, he lost his title to those lands during the Civil War and (unlike the Earl of Bedford in the Great Level, renamed the Bedford Level) he did not get them back at the Restoration. Lindley's book details all of the different groups of drainers in the 1630s and 40s. - *jb

There were two types of people involved in Fen Drainage. The 'Adventurers' and the 'Undertakers' The role of the Adventurer has been widely covered, but the 'Undertaker' was the person who actually undertook the work. In this day and age he(she) would be known as a 'Contractor'.(TonyDodson 09:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC))

Was the Dutchman Cornelius Vermuyden an 'Adventurer' or an 'Undertaker'? TonyDodson 08:42, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

An undertaker. 131.111.164.208 14:41, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Vermuyden was an undertaker, since he was not an investor; there continued to be many other "undertakers" or "takers of works" - this was the generic term for anyone hired to maintain or build drainage works (banks, canals, sluces). In the Bedford Level in the late seventeenth century, they often complained about not being paid. - *jb (talk) 16:03, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Formation

From the Formation section: "The three principal soil types resulting from this are the mineral-based silt, resulting from the energetic marine environment of the creeks and clay from the marsh and mud-flats." Only two soil types are listed, unless the sentence following is meant as the third. Educated clarification is needed. Pjrich 20:01, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

I hope that is clearer. If not, discuss it further. It was interesting to find that someone had read it! :-) (RJP 21:20, 9 September 2005 (UTC))

Ely Cathedral

Ely Cathedral, on a rise of ground surrounded by fenlands, is known as the "Ship of the Fens". Its siege in 1071 is a story in itself.

Then tell it, either here or in the Ely Cathedral article (which currently says nothing about it); hinting that something interesting happened but not saying what is unbelievably irritating! Loganberry (Talk) 04:14, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Point taken. The trouble is that it involves Hereward "the Wake" and as it stands, the article on him needs a lot of work before it can usefully be referred to from other articles. That in turn involves a controversy between those who accept the Hereward story more or less as history presents it and those who regard it as more or less myth. It is easier to write about something else. :-) (RJP 07:35, 22 September 2005 (UTC))

All right then; I'm certainly no expert (if I were, I'd have written the story up myself!), so I agree that removing the reference seems like the best plan for the moment. Loganberry (Talk) 11:26, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

There is an excellent source on the medieval history of Ely now in print - the Liber Eliensis, which has recently been translated and edited. It is a medieval chronical from Ely, from either the 12th or 13th century (don't remember date of first entries). It includes a medieval account of Herewald the Wake and the seige of Ely. Any historian would say that there is no problem presenting the story as written in the sources, with the note that this storyis controversial (and citations to academic history which questions it). History is all about presenting and questioning historical sources. - 65.94.48.44 21:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC) username *jb

Draining the Fens

"Nonetheless, these works are now much more effective than they were until the mid-twentieth century" doesn't make any sense. I've delete the 2nd half. If the original author would care to explain what they meant then we can have something that doesn't leave the reader baffled as to what is being conveyed.Ewx 14:24, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Map

Just passing through here, but this page would really benefit from a map of the area. Matthew 22:48, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Rewriting

I have been rewriting this article, but I do not have time to do it in one go. There is a lot of work that needs to be done. A map would be a very good idea, but I do not have access to one that is in the public domain. I may not get back to it for weeks or months, depending on when I have time. I have added headings to sections with the intention that they be expanded - for example, the pre-Roman settlement, Roman Farming, etc. Right now, the whole history section is very disorganised and disjointed, and needs to be reorganised chronologically.

One thing I am aware of is that this article is actually on the whole of the Fens in southern Lincolnshire, Cambridgeshire, Norfolk, etc. This is fine, but we need to be clear on what is happening where. For example, the Lincolnshire Fens were not drained in the seventeenth century - some drainers attempted to do so, but they were prevented by the riots and after the civil war the works broke down. However, in the Great Level, the drainers (eventually called the Bedford Level Corporation) had their title and authority reaffirmed after the Civil War, and continued to run the drainage there until about 1920. Obviously, this means the history and economy of the levels could be very different, and we need to be clear on which bit of the Fens we are writing about. We may need to look at added sub-articles. - *jb 15:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)