Sussex History - a different view
|
Sussex History - a different view
|
|
|
SALTPANS As an amateur historian, it is possible to claim the right to flights of fancy, denied to those of a graver aspect. Perhaps this article is in that category. The traditional industry of the salt-marshes is salt-making, and many
remains of saltings can be seen. Salt was extracted from seawater in shallow embanked enclosures, through evaporation assisted by charcoal fires. It is
well known that Sussex had large numbers of these at Domesday, mainly concentrated in the broad estuarine marshes of the Rother, Pevensey, Ouse,
and Adur, but with a scattering of others associated with the Arun and Selsey. Few of these can excite any comment, being where this industry may However, I have the small privilege of living in a village, and manor, having had no known contiguity to any river or marsh, with the unlikely exception of four acres of meadow at Arundel in 1321 [SRS Vol. 60 Custumal]. And yet we read in Domesday that [East] Preston had “3 saltpans at 30d”. That this entry does relate to East Preston is safely vouched for, in that it is the only place of that name in the hundred, apart from West Preston, which is shown to have been part of Nunnminster, together with Rustington and Poling [AH Allcroft, Waters of the Arun]. The only other nearby places having saltpans were Nunnminster itself and Lyminster, with two each. It is conceivable that these were associated with the Black Ditch tributary of the Arun, then still a floodplain, but it is peculiar that no other Arun manor, from Climping and Littlehampton northwards had pans. Lyminster is remarkable in having had a population of over a hundred households, and land for 44 ploughs. Explanation for this is in its being the residue of a vast royal estate, latterly owned by Earl Roger, which had recently included Clapham, while clearly still representing more that one settlement. Amongst places that are not recorded in Domesday, are Wick, and Kingston [by Ferring] which were later given to Tewkesbury Abbey by the family of a later Earl of Arundel. The name Kingston is itself suggestive of its origin, and it would be a surprise if these villages were not part of the old Lyminster estate. We therefore have an alternative for the location of the saltpans. Those of Nunnminster being at West Preston, and those of Lyminster being at Kingston, on each side of East Preston. But this would necessitate the existence of saltmarsh extending along the coast east of the Arun. There is no record of this for either Kingston or East Preston, known to me, later than Domesday itself, although in 1321 Preston did have a large area of pasture. Nevertheless, there is the interesting matter of Kingston having possessed a minor “port” as late as the 14th century. The forthcoming volume of VCH may well quote reference for this, besides the fact that a shipmaster was taxed under Kingston in 1332. It is assumed the harbour was not at Kingston-Wick, the associated manor by the Arun. As late as the Armada Map of 1587, Kingston had a landing stade on the beach, against what appears to be a headland. There is also a quite clear reference in the Cowdray Archives [MD306] to saltmarsh at Rustington, as late as 1568. Firstly a marsh called Marsbrookes, of only 16 acres, that can be identified with land south of present day Mewsbrook; it was already in danger from the sea. But the more important entry states: “There is also -- one Salte marshe lyenge betwene the stonebeache and the fyrme lande conteyning by estymacion 100 acres being the comen for the tenants --” Then in Littlehampton, in the manor survey of 1633 [FW Steer 1961] there is note of a comment by the surveyor. “It is said that formerly the sea having drowned the pasture lands belonging to Little Hampton” It does not specify saltmarsh, but such an origin may be assumed. Now we arrive at the most extraordinary story, related by the water bailiff in The High Stream of Arundel 1621 [Fowler 1929]. “And here let me remember an Old Tradition that I have heard in my younger years by men of credit viz. Thomas Bishop, Henry Shelly of Warminghurst Esquires, and divers others. That the High Stream in Arundell Levell did issue in former times into the Sea at Penhouse in Lancing --.” This has been cited by HC Brookfield in SAC 90. Such traditions should not be rejected out of hand, for although the main Arun stream may not have done anything so eccentric, despite the effects of longshore drift, at least it does raise the possibility of compartments extending along the coast as late as the early 16th century. If none of this is proof for the location of saltpans in marshland related
to the Arun, but well to its east, at least it does point out interesting possibilities. |
|