T H E wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPON

LANDSCAPE
OF

IN D U S T R Y
P a tte r n s o f c h a n g e
IjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA in th e
1 gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA I r o n b r id g e G o r g e
JUDITH ALFREY
and CATHERINE CLARK

J baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

n
K
THE LANDSCAPE OF
INDUSTRY
Patterns of change in
the Ironbridge Gorge gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONML

J u d ith A lfr e y a n d C a th e rin e C la rk wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYX

R
m b

London and New York

B
 First published 1993
by Routledge
11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE

Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada

by Roudcdgc
29 W est 35th Street, New York, NY 10001

© Judith gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFE
A lf r e y and Catherine Clark 1993

Typeset in 10 on 12 point Garamond by

Seiwood Systems, M idsomer Norton

Printed and bound in Great Britain by

Biddles Ltd, Guildford and Kings Lynn

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted

reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic,
mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter
invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any
information storage or retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publishers. baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGF

B ritish L ib ra ry C a ta lo g u in g in P u b lica tio n D a ta

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

L ib ra ry o f C o n g ress C a ta lo g in g in P u b lica tio n D a ta

Alfrey, Judith
The landscape of industry: patterns of change in the Ironbridge
Gorge / Judith Alfrey & Catherine Clark.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
1. Industrial archaeology — England — Ironbridge (Shropshire)
2. wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
M ines and mineral resources — England — Ironbridge (Shropshire) —
History. I. Clark, Catherine (Kate) II. Tide.
T26.G7176 1993
609.424'56-dc20 93-20280

ISBN 0-415-03319-5
 CONTENTS

L ist o f illu stra tio n s viii

P refa ce xi

A ck n o w led g e m en ts xiii

1 THE LANDSCAPE AS A SOURCE OF HISTORICAL EVIDENCE 1

L a n d sc a p e e vid e n c e 3
S p a c e , tim e a n d ty p o lo g y in la n d sc a p e su rv ey 4
H o u sin g a s a h isto rica l so u rce 6
T h e stru ctu re o f th e stu d y 8 baZYXWVUTSR

2 THE INDUSTRIALISATION OF THE GORGE 11

In tro d u c tio n 11
T h e m e d iev a lfo u n d a tio n s o f in d u stry 11
L a n d -o w n ersh ip a n d th e o rig in s o f in d u stria lisa tio n 14
C o a l a n d in d u stria l d ive rsity 16
T h e In d u stria l R e vo lu tio n in th e G o rg e: in teg ra tio n , in n o va tio n a n d th e 21
fa c to ry system
S p e cia lisa tio n a n d th e p ro d u c tio n o f p re stig e g o o d s 25
T w e n tie th -ce n tu ry p io n e ers 28

3 M INERAL RESOURCES IN THE LANDSCAPE 31

T h e g e o lo g ic a l la n d sc a p e 31
M in in g e vid en c e a s a rc h a e o lo g y 33
T h e S ilu ria n la n d sc a p e 34
T h e C a rb o n ife ro u s la n d sc a p e 37
C oal 40 jihgfedcbaZY
Iro n sto n e 46
S a n d sto n e 48
C la y 49
W a ste 55

v
 CONTENTS

4 THE HUM AN LANDSCAPE baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

60
L a n d sca p e o f p o w e r 61
C o m m u n ic a tio n in th e la n d sc a p e 67wvutsrqpo

5 INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS IN THE LANDSCAPE 86

In tro d u ctio n 86
E a rly in d u stria l stru ctu res 87
T h e d e v elo p m en t o f th e iro n iv o rk in g sh e d 89
T h e c h a n g in g c era m ic s c o m p le x 95
B u ild in g p ro d u c ts: b ric ks a n d ro o ftile s 101
E n ca u stic tile s 104
A d a p tiv e re-u se: in d u stria l b u ild in g s a s a n e c o n o m ic resou rce 108
P io n ee r in d u stries 110
A rc h a eo lo g y , a rc h ite ctu re a n d fiin c tio n a lis m in in d u stria l b u ild in g s 111

6 LANDSCAPE OF HOUSING: THE GEOGRAPHY OF 114

SETTLEM ENT
O rig in s o f in d u s tr ia l se ttle m e n t: b efo re 1 7 0 0 114
In d u stria lisa tio n : th e e ig h tee n th c e n tu ry 120
S e ttlem en t a n d th e o rg a n isa tio n o f in d u stry 123
E a rly in d u stria lisa tio n : la n d u se a n d se ttlem en t 127
U rb a n g ro w th a n d c h a n g e a fie r 1 7 7 9 130
T h e g ro w th o f Iro n b rid g e 134
T h e la n d sc a p e refo rm ed : in to th e tw en tie th c e n tu ry 142
C o n c lu sio n 144

7 SHAPING THE LANDSCAPE: PROCESSES OF DEVELOPM ENT 145

In tro d u c tio n 145
In d u s tria l se ttlem e n t: sh a p in g th e p lo ts 145
B u ild in g in a la n d m a rke t 153
F o rm a l d e ve lo p m en t: C o a lb ro o k d a le a n d C o a lp o rt 162
A n in h erita n c e o f la n d a n d b u ild in g : d e ve lo p m e n t d u rin g th e n in e te en th 164
c en tu ry
P la n n in g a n d re d ev e lo p m en t: resp o n ses to th e b u ild in g sto c k 168

8 T H E M AKING OF AN INDUSTRIAL VERNACULAR 169

E a rly in d u stry a n d th e v ern a c u la r th resh o ld 169
T h e c rea tio n o f in d u stria l h o u sin g typ es 173
D esig n in g th e in d u s tr ia l h o u se 176
T h e g r o u p in g o f in d u s tr ia l h o u ses 180
T h e c o n stru ctio n o f th e in d u stria l h o u se 182
In n o v a tio n a n d tra d itio n b efo re 1 8 0 0 184
C la ssic ism a n d th e n in e te e n th -c en tu ry v e rn a c u la r 186
T h e d e clin e o f v ern a c u la r p ra c tic e 192
vi
 CON TEN TS baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCB
C o n clu sio n : th e fo rm a tio n o fa n in d u strial vern a cu la r 194

9 THE INDUSTRIAL LANDSCAPE TODAY: FROM ANALYSIS TO

PROTECTION 199
P ro tectin g th e la n d sca p e 202
N o tes 205
B ib lio g ra p h y 233
B ib lio g rap h y o f m ap s 242
In d ex 246

vii
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

0.1 The Ironbridge Gorge: eighteenth-century sites xiv

0.2 The Ironbridge Gorge: nineteenth-century sites xv
1.1 ‘View of the Cast Iron Bridge ’ , E. Edgecomb 1786 1
1.2 Aerial view of the Ironbridge Gorge 2
2.1 M edieval sites mentioned in the text 12
2.2 Post-dissolution sites mentioned in the text 15
2.3 The Benthall lead smelter, 1788 18
2.4 Cast-iron pots advertised in the Coalbrookdale Company catalogue of 20
1875
2.5 Forging iron in a small hand-operated forge 24
2.6 An elaborate cast-iron fountain from the Coalbrookdale Company 26
catalogue of 1875
3.1 M ineral resources in the Ironbridge Gorge 32
3.2 View of the Gorge from Patten ’s Rock Quarry, 1856 35
3.3 The archaeology of the Benthall Edge limestone industry: (a) plan of 38
quarries and (b) stratigraphic matrix
3.4 Extract from Samuel Parsons ’ M ap c.1621 showing inserts or mines on 43
the riverbank
3.5 ‘ Lateral mineshafts beside the Severn ’ , Dibden 1801 44
3.6 The Broseley Hall Estate M ap showing early evidence for railway, pits 45
and also limits of underground working
3.7 ‘A dams Engine and Ironstone Pit’ , M adeley W ood 1847 47
3-8 Bell pits cut by eighteenth-century clay working at the Saggar W orks, 53
Caughley
3.9 The after-effects of the Jackfield slip 58
4.1 The topography of the Ironbridge Gorge: streams, relief and main 61
waterpower sites
4.2 The 1902 Ordnance Survey M ap for Coalbrookdale 63
4.3 A schematic section through the Coalbrookdale Valley showing 64
waterpower installations, c.1801
4.4 Pools in Coalbrookdale 65
4.5(a)-(b) The Benthall Valley showing a series of pools and industrial sites 68, 69
viii
 L IST O F IL L U S T R A T IO N S

4.6 The Bedlam wooden tramway 72

4.7 A team of horses brake a loaded coal wagon as it descends Jigger’s Bank, 73
Coalbrookdale
4.8 The Hay Inclined Plane while still in operation in the 1890s 75
4.9 ‘Ironbridge ’: a heavily laden cart hauls logs up Tontine Hill, showing 77
trows moored at the riverside
4.10 The Free Bridge, Jackfield, soon after it was constructed 80
5.1 The M althouse, Coalbrookdale 88
5.2 Section through the pair of ironworking buildings at Newdale showing 90
the underlying archaeology
5.3 The interior of the erecting shop, Coalbrookdale 93
5.4 The Coalbrookdale W orks in the 1840s 94
5.5 (a) The Caughley China W orks; (b) M osaic workers 97
5.6 The Coalport China W orks early in the nineteenth century 100
5.7 The Craven Dunnill Encaustic Tileworks at Jackfield, c.1878 106
5.8 M aws tileworks at Jackfield c.1915 107
6.1 The beginnings of settlement: Coalbrookdale and M adeley W ood 116
before 1700
6.2(a) The Lloyds, M adeley W ood; (b) Severnside, Ironbridge 117
6.3 The impact of industrialisation: Coalbrookdale and M adeley W ood, 121
c.1750
6.4 Upper Coalbrookdale in 1758 122
6.5(a)-(b) Jackfield and Calcutts, c. 1720 124
6.6 ‘A Plan of Coalbrookdale ’, 1753 125
wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
6.7 The beginnings of an urban landscape: Ironbridge and Coalbrookdale, 130
c.1800
6.8 An urban landscape: Ironbridge and Coalbrookdale, c. 1850 131
6.9 The south bank of the river in 1789 132
6.10 Ironbridge, c. 1835 135
6.11 Severn Terrace, Ironbridge, c. 1900 140
6.12 Jackfield, c. 1890 141
7.1 The Plott of Broseley, Samuel Parsons ’ map, c.baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHG
1621 146
7.2 The Plott for the Bounties of the Common in Broseley, c. 1658 148
7.3 A Survey of Several Lands in the Lordshipp of Broseley, 1686 149
7.4(a)— (c) The plotted landscape: extracts from Samuel Parsons ’ map 150
7.5 The plotted landscape survives: extract from the Broseley Tithe M ap, 154
1840
7.6 Jockey Bank, Ironbridge, 1976 156
7.7 M adeley W ood, 1952 161
7.8 Ironbridge hillside, c. 1890-1900 166
8.1 (a)-(b) Contrasting building processes: two houses in M adeley W ood 170
8.2(a)-(c) Eighteenth-century cottage design in the Gorge 174
8.3 Creating a terrace: Barratts Hill, Broseley 181
8.4 Creating a terrace: Tea Kettle Row, Coalbrookdale 184
ix
 LIST OF ILLU STRA TIO N S

8.5 Charity Row, Coalbrookdale 185

8.6(a)-(b) A new urban style: mid-nineteenth-century houses in Ironbridge 187
and Coalbrookdale
8.7(a)— (d) M id-nineteenth-century houses in Coalbrookdale 188
8.8 Distinctive designs: houses in Ironbridge and Coalbrookdale 192

X
 PREFACE jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIH

The literature of the landscape is a vast and continuously expanding one. But perhaps
because of literal definition of landscape as ‘scenic ’, there has been relatively little
written on the landscapes of industry. The industrial landscape may seem to com ­
prise waste heaps, ugly buildings, squalid houses, and is often dealt with in a per ­
functory manner, as being too complex, or too destructive. Yet in shaping what we
see around us, industrialisation — not just the Industrial Revolution but also the years
preceding and succeeding it — has been of paramount importance.
This book has set out to study such a landscape in one small area, the Ironbridge
Gorge. Its research and preparation was funded by the Nuffield Foundation, and
based at the Ironbridge Institute. The original brief for the survey was to develop
new ways of undertaking field survey in industrial areas, as well as to provide a data
base for the Gorge itself.
The survey was special for a number of reasons — because it covered such a
small area, because it dealt with an area with a strong historical tradition and rich
documentary sources, and because we were able to combine the study of standing
buildings with other forms of landscape evidence. W hat we hope we have been able
to do as a result is to begin to use landscape evidence critically, as a historical source
in its own right.
If the landscape is a historical source, it is also a valuable resource. As ecological
environment, the landscape is something we now cherish and care for. But there is
also a human element to that environment - an inherited historical landscape which
surrounds us, and shapes our activities. Those decisions which might affect the
ecological environment will also affect this historical landscape. W e hope that by
exploring the potential of the landscape for the study of history, as well as considering
its role in shaping history, we have set out a case for a more considered and integrated
approach to its conservation.
Judith Alfrey
Catherine Clark

xi
 ACKNOW LEDGEM ENTS

The research and preparation of this book, based at the Ironbridge Institute and
carried out between 1985 and 1988, were made possible by a grant from the Nuffield
Foundation; we would like to express our thanks to the Foundation for this funding,
and to Anthony Tomei for his particular help and encouragement. W e have also been
helped throughout by the staff of the Ironbridge Institute and Ironbridge Gorge
M useum Trust, and would especially like to thank M ichael Stratton and Barrie
Trinder, John Powell and M ichael Vanns, Janet M arkland and Carol Sampson. M any
other people have helped us in many ways, during research and writing, but we are
particularly grateful to all those people in the Ironbridge Gorge without whose co ­
operation the fieldwork for this study would not have been possible.
Judith Alfrey
Catherine Clark

xiii
 C oalbrookdale
F urnaces

M adeley

: — Loadcroh W harf
M adeley W ood

im acos

a
T ar W orks J JT
J
/y Jackfield
♦ * H ay Indined P lane \

C oalport C hina W ork*

B roseley W ood

Broseley

_C aughley

S tandard G auge R a iw a y

S cat* baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
Km

0 .1 The Ironbridge Gorge: eighteenth-century sites mentioned in the text (Shelley W hite)
wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHG

xiv gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED
 I

L ig h tm oo r B ric k w o rk s . (

f --* A
C o albro ok d a le +D G re a t W a re h ou se
Iron w o rk s
L o E n g in e e rin g S ho p

i jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
xs%
A lb ert E d w a rd
B rid g e M a d e le y

i
M a d e le y H ill B ric k w ork s
S e v e rn F o u n d ry
o x , S ev e rn W a re h o u s e * • W o o d la n d s B rick w o rk s

i Iro n b rid g e

B u rto n 's B ric k w o rk s '^ ^ gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCB

• B in ts H ill B ric k w o rk s . ..

B lis ls H id F u rn a c e :
Iro n b rid g e a nd B ro s e le j
S ta tio n .
1 CoaNord'^^^x^
Ladyw ood
B ric k w o rks 'C ra ve n O u n n ill*'*,
R ock T a * w o rta
t P ip e w ork s ■ :
B e ntha ll P aris h
L o g g o 's H ill M aw 's K
M ilb u rgh T ile rie s
T ile w ork s
P ip e w o rk s

• ■ K in g S t P ip e w o rk s
C oa lp ort S la to n

S ta tio n

• B ro s e le y T ile rie s
G itc h fie ld B ric k w o rk s x \*

• T h e D u ng e
S tan da rd G au g e R a ilw a y B ro s e le y P a ris h

S c a le Km baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

0 .2 wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED
The Ironbridge Gorge: nineteenth-century sites mentioned in the text (Shelley W hite)

xv
 1

THE LANDSCAPE AS A SOURCE OF

HISTORICAL EVIDENCE baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK

The Ironbridge Gorge is often called the ‘ Cradle of the Industrial Revolution ’ . It
enters history books as the place where Abraham Darby first smelted iron in 1709
using coke and not charcoal as a fuel, thus paving the way for the mass-production
of iron. Other technical innovations followed, including the first use of iron rails,
and new contributions to the technology of steam engines and locomotives. And it
was here in 1779 that the newly discovered properties of iron were demonstrated
with a spectacular iron bridge that spans the Severn Gorge, the first iron bridge in
the world (fig. 1.1). The Iron Bridge has become a symbol of both the Industrial
Revolution and Britain ’s eighteenth-century industrial achievements.

1 .1 ‘A View of the Cast-Iron Bridge ’ , E. Edgecomb 1786 (SSMT40)

1
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

The history of the Gorge illustrates the processes of social and economic change
which had rheir roots in the proto-industries of the seventeenth century, and which
continued into the urban economy of the late nineteenth century. The traces of this
history are imprinted on the landscape, and this book uses detailed local study to
show how the landscape of the Gorge is not just a backdrop for technological
achievement, but is also a rich source of evidence for the context and course of
industrial change (fig. 1.2).
The book rakes baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
as its focus the landscape and communities of the Ironbridge

>.• jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONML

5 '® L
’ .I

1 .2 Aerial view of the Ironbridge Gorge (IGM T 1991.2294) gfedcbaZYXWVUTSR

Gorge, and studies their origins, growth and decline. By working within these very
narrow parameters, it has been possible to exploit the potential of landscape as a
historical source, and integrate physical evidence with other material in an under ­
standing of industrial change, examining not only how industrialisation came about,
but also how it was sustained and developed.
A second and more practical thread to the work was the need for more information
for planning decisions. The Ironbridge Gorge is one of less than a dozen W orld
Heritage Sites which relate to the history of industry; it is also a Conservation Area
which contains seven Scheduled Ancient M onuments and over two hundred Listed
buildings. Yet despite this protection, planning decisions are often made without
taking full account of the historical landscape. Elements within the landscape, such
as the water-power systems, or early industrial housing, have been lost through failure
to recognise their importance, and have not always been acknowledged and reflected

2 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
 LANDSCAPE AS H ISTO RICA L EV ID ENCE jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO
in the system of protection. The mechanism for protecting archaeological sites is the
Sites and M onuments Record held by the County Council, but it includes only a
small proportion of the potential number of sites in the Gorge. Augmenting the Sites
and M onuments Record was a prime justification for the work. However, it became
clear that decisions needed more than just new archaeological points on the map. It
was necessary to identify and present the links between these sites, to understand the
historical structure of the landscape. In order to do this, gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO
a more complex type of
survey was needed.

L a n d s c a p e e v id e n c e
■
Economic histories of the Industrial Revolution commonly rely almost exclusively
on documentary evidence; when physical evidence is used, it is often only to confirm
or deny documentary sources, and is not usually used as a primary source in its own
right. It is the landscape as a primary source of information which provides the central
theme of this book, and its data are all those physical elements which remain or can
be recorded, or which can be reconstructed from maps and documents. The principal
sources for this study were therefore themselves landscape features - the shape and
structure of the land, and the modifications made to it during its exploitation, the
physical evidence of industry, buildings, architecture and settlement.
Our use of the term ‘ landscape ’ includes the widest range of features — from river
to culvert, field to waste-heap, cottage to council-house — but the integrity and
coherence of this industrial landscape have been respected by placing each distinct
class of evidence firmly in its physical context and drawing out the spatial and
chronological relationships between them.
The use of landscape evidence is not new. The evidence constituted by the landscape
is familiar territory to local historians, following the pioneering work of
W . G. Hoskins,1 and several other disciplines have as their subject components of
the landscape: historical geographers draw inferences from the reconstruction of
landscapes, and the spatial dimensions of social and economic conditions; urban
historians study urban forms to analyse the development of towns, with a strong
emphasis on social patterns; architectural historians take as their data building form;
traditional archaeologists have used temporal as well as spatial data to look at evidence
for change over time.
Each of these disciplines uses physical evidence - buildings, spatial organisation,
archaeological deposits and urban form — but the industrial landscape in its own right
can also constitute a class of historical evidence. Although there have been several
studies devoted to the identification of the characteristic landscapes and features
associated with particular kinds of industrial development, such studies usually select
different landscapes to illustrate different stages of development, and do not consider
how a single landscape changes. This study aims to develop an integrated approach
to landscape study, and does so by bringing together different classes of evidence in
the analysis of a single area as it changes through time. It begins to make links between

3
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

different aspects of the landscape, and between different disciplines and data which
can be used in its study.
The data for the study were gathered through an intensive archaeological survey
of the Ironbridge Gorge. Unlike many such surveys, we did not confine ourselves to
a single period, nor did we stop short at any particular date, analysing with equal
attention the modern and ancient landscape. The survey involved the collection of
data relating to buildings, plots and the landscape as a whole. This book is a direct
product of that archaeological survey, and sets out to explore how landscape study
could contribute to a better historical understanding of the Ironbridge Gorge.gfedcbaZYXW

S p a c e , t im e a n d t y p o lo g y in la n d s c a p e s u r v e y

W hy should archaeology, a discipline traditionally associated with earlier segments of

the past, be a suitable way of integrating different types of recent landscape evidence?
Archaeologists have always had to deal with physical evidence for the past, and often
in the absence of written records. The subject has evolved specialised techniques for
deriving historical information from artefacts and sites. Three of the fundamental
principles which underpin the treatment of such data are by no means unique to
archaeology, and taken together they do provide a suitable framework for dealing
■ baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
with landscape evidence.
Recognition of patterns of change through time is basic to archaeology, and is
enshrined in the concept of stratigraphy. Stratigraphy is in origin a geological prin ­
ciple, which was applied by excavators to the build-up of layers on a site. The same
I principle can be applied to landscapes and buildings. The landscape is a palimpsest
i
of past activities, built one on top of the other. By stripping down the layers of this
palimpsest, it should be possible to understand what can be seen today. In the same
way, buildings change, and it is often only through adaptation that historic buildings
remain standing. These changes are not just superficial alterations, but are part of the
process of building itself. Recognising this cycle of change forms a key to under ­
standing the historical processes which have shaped the landscape.
The second principle is that of setting information in its contemporary, spatial
context. Spatial patterning is a geographical concept, which again is applied in
archaeology. The concept of ‘context ’ is the basis of archaeological excavation, in
which the information value of a find lies more in where it is found than in what it
is.2 A coin may have no value to an archaeologist unless it can provide information
! about the context in which it was found. Context in the industrial landscape may be

i the land around a building, the relationship of a furnace to its water-power system,
or the line of a coal outcrop. Identifying ‘context’ is thus a way of linking the buildings
and individual industries with their wider landscape setting.
The third concept is the idea of the typology. The earliest notions about prehistory
i were based on the recognition that artefacts could be grouped by materials, and this
concept has remained a valuable approach to the classification of objects.3 In the case
of a landscape, the objects might be buildings, for example. Buildings themselves are
only rarely documented, and the date, builder and occupier are not often known.

4
 LANDSCAPE AS H ISTORICAL EV ID ENCE baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ
But through systematic quantitative and comparative analysis (discussed in more
detail below) it is possible to identify significant patterns of variation through time.
These patterns can help not only in the dating of local buildings, but also in
understanding the social, economic and cultural contexts of their use.
By applying the basic archaeological principles of time, space and typology, we
hoped to be able to use landscape data in a more rigorous fashion than had hitherto
been possible. But in order to use these concepts to make a coherent analysis of the
patterns which we observed in the landscape it was necessary first to refine the field
techniques of archaeology to make them more applicable to the particular problems
posed by the industrial landscape.
The first difficulty was the traditional archaeological concept of ‘the site ’ , which is
the usual way of collecting information. There were several problems with the idea
of the site understood as a closely delineated point on a map; the first was that it
effectively divorced a building or industry from its wider spatial setting. Second,
selection of specific sites risked discriminating between categories of information and
selecting only the most interesting. For industrial sites where operations are linked
to complex networks of transport or power, it can be difficult to draw bound ­
aries. Finally, the idea of a site as a single entity was not easy to sustain where every
building or industry seemed to have gone through a complex cycle of reuse and
change.
Therefore another means of collecting information was adopted — plot survey.4
Plots are the basic units in which all land is divided, described and conveyed; they
may be of any shape and size and range from a tiny garden to a large area of open
heath. They are not just arbitrary divisions of land, but have a historical significance.
They reflect continuity in the organisation of land, and the way land is divided; plots
can indicate the circumstances in which a building was built, or show changing
patterns of agriculture. Plot boundaries may also be important in the recognition of
past processes of land development. Plot survey was also a way of ensuring total,
rather than selective, coverage of the landscape. 5
The plots shown on the 1902 Ordnance Survey M ap (fig. 4.2) were taken as the
basis for the survey. The choice was practical since full coverage was easily available,
and also made sense in the field in that the map included the standard-gauge railways
which had radically transformed the landscape in the late nineteenth century.6
i A single plot might contain many different features; during survey numbers were
therefore assigned to all identifiable features within each plot, in order to ensure that
equal weight was given to different types of information. The archaeological technique
of a stratigraphic matrix was used to organise this information chronologically, to
sequence and phase complex sites.7 The value of this technique in a landscape context
was demonstrated particularly well in the limestone industry of Benthall Edge, where
over a hundred quarries, approach roads and spoil heaps were numbered and recorded.
A diagram was constructed showing their stratigraphic relationships, and from this
it was possible to identify the different phases of quarrying from the medieval
period through to the twentieth century, as well as transport routes, and the type
of stone quarried, despite the minimal quantity of documentary evidence. The

i
 THE LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

matrix was thus a way of analysing change through time in the most rigorous manner
possible.gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

H o u s i n g a s a h is t o r ic a l s o u r c e

The survey which forms the basis for this study also sought to develop the use of
housing as a historical source. Settlement patterns and building design can contribute
to understanding the process of industrialisation, since they are a direct product of
patterns of economic and social change. The location of housing, and the patterns
of its development, map out a wider land use, influenced both by the presence of
industry and by the organisation of landholding. The distribution patterns, types of
development and certain architectural characteristics found in the Gorge themselves
provide evidence for the process and structure of industrialisation.
This study used the phasing, distribution and design of buildings as evidence for
the history of industrialisation and the creation of an industrial way of life. It aimed
to identify those features characteristic of the landscape of industry - its patterns of
settlement, its housing types and their significance — and to show how industrialisation
took place in the spheres of architecture and building design.
In carrying out this programme of research, the plot-based approach discussed
above in the context of industrial archaeology was also used. This meant that building
was considered first as a particular land use, and spatial context was given due
attention. And since it was the history of the plot, rather than a conventional
architectural history, which provided the starting-point for research, no chronological
cut-ofF date was adopted, with the result that any building of whatever age or status
was considered. In addition, buildings which no longer survived were recorded
wherever possible, using a range of documentary sources. Previous buildings on a
site, and the several phases of development characteristic of many of the buildings in
the area were also taken into account. The histories of buildings themselves were
registered, thus considering not only the moment of construction, but also the
patterns of use which modified and conditioned the survival of the buildings in the
area.
Initially surveyed by parish or local area, the discussion in this book presents a
synthesis of the results across the whole Gorge. The data were analysed first by
considering the distribution of settlement and its characteristic forms. The study
looked at the spatial relationships between buildings and industry as evidence for the
organisation and control of land use, using the chronology of settlement to help map
out the major phases of industrial development. The forms of settlement provide
evidence for the changing structure and organisation of the industrial economy and
society, as small and isolated settlements were gradually drawn together in an urban
framework.
The study also considered patterns of development by looking at the relationship
between buildings, and charting the distribution of single dwellings, pairs and terraces.
These relationships provide direct evidence of the organisation of development and
the processes which shaped the landscape of building. Thus the pattern of building jihgfedc

6
 LANDSCAPE AS H ISTORICAL EV ID ENCE

associated with industrialisation began as a scatter of single buildings but soon

encompassed the development of coherent terraces. This pattern of change came
about through the piecemeal expansion of buildings as well as the deliberate building
of groups, and is indicative of the location of resources in the economy and the
emergence of a property market.
The codification of design and the architectural development of building also
reflected the course of industrialisation: as a commitment of resources, buildings give
at least some indication of a distribution of wealth. The large numbers of houses built
by professional craftsmen for a population that was not engaged in agriculture in the I
early eighteenth century suggest the extent of a prosperity based on mining and
manufacture; the gradual diversification of housing types suggests the emergence of
a distinctive social hierarchy, especially during the nineteenth century. In housing, as
in industry, development was constantly shaped by the inheritance of the existing
building stock, and new jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
architectural forms were themselves largely derived from
existing models.
A comparative and quantitative study of buildings in the area identified the design
processes used in building, and used this to classify the major local building types.
There are two principal design processes for building: one relies on pattern books or
the role of an architect, the other, which is more traditional or vernacular, appeals to
and modifies the design embodied in existing buildings. Each process of design must
work with a given development type and architectural vocabulary which comprises
all the elements of building - constructional technique, plan, sectional form, detail
and decoration. The role of traditional methods of design in the development of
the Gorge is underscored by the identification of a common form and configura ­
tion of elements in many buildings, even where size and number of units in the plan
varies. These similarities suggest that such buildings were built with reference to a
common model. In other buildings, by contrast, the disposition of elements appears
unique.
Conventional design methods could produce widely different types of building at
different times: while the eighteenth-century cottage has much in common with the
small classical house of the mid-nineteenth century, the access to a new architectural
vocabulary and changes in the size and scale of new building mark the later building
out. It is the combination of a process of design with a particular architectural
vocabulary which defines the building type.
These types are historically specific - they are not just plan-type families or stylistic
categories but belong to particular phases in the development of the area. They are
of interest not just as a means of quantifying and phasing the development of industry
but in so far as they give direct evidence for the development and structure of
industrial settlement and society in which social stratification could be expressed even
in hierarchies of architectural form and detail. The method of design and the
architectural vocabulary used represent a series of choices available to builder and
client, and reflect a social structure; how the building was to be used and who
commissioned it are visible in its final form.
A building also represents a series of choices and requirements governing size and

7
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

cost. These requirements will dictate what design and development process is used
and will to some extent shape the choice of architectural vocabulary. The historical
choices can be reconstructed by analysis of design process, development type and
architectural vocabulary to enable building to be used as an index of social and
economic change.8
Change and alteration were also considered as an important source for the history
of the area, charting changes in land use and valuation and in housing standards. The
study aimed not just to consider new building types and the sequence of architectural
innovation but to look at the diversification of the building stock. The survival or
modification of early buildings alongside the development of new forms was a key
factor in the changing structure of settlement. gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIH

T h e stru ctu re o f th e stu d y

The Ironbridge Gorge has long been the focus of historical research. Since the
pioneering work on the technical and historical aspects of the Coalbrookdale
Company Ironworks, the field has broadened to include ceramic and other industries.
Historical illustrations and descriptions of the area have been drawn together in
different volumes, and individual monuments have been the subject of many pub ­
lications. Thorough synthesis of the area was presented in Barrie Trinders baZYX The
In d u stria l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire? This body of historical research has cast light on
some of the best-known historical remains in the area, particularly the Old Furnace
in Coalbrookdale, and the Iron Bridge itself, and has certainly helped to ensure their
preservation. In most cases, however, the starting-point has been the documentary
evidence.
In presenting the results of the Nuffield Survey, it was decided to reverse this
strategy and start with the physical evidence. This book therefore takes as its basis
the surviving or documented field remains of the Ironbridge Gorge, and moves from
there into historical analysis. Each of the following chapters, with the exception of
the first, which sets out the general historical background, deals with a different class
of evidence or technique of analysis.
The prosperity of the Gorge has often been attributed to its natural resources - the
minerals, coal, ironstone, clay and limestone. But the way in which these resources
were used was far from straightforward. Exploitation was not just a matter of avail­
ability but depended on a whole range of complex factors. In order to trace the
relationship of mineral resources to the process of industrialisation, it is not enough
just to deal with the natural landscape; the overlying pattern of human agency has to
be deciphered as well (chapter 3).
The landscape could be as much a hindrance as a resource. M any of what at first
appear to be the natural advantages of the area actually came to hamper industrialists,
so the height which provided water-power inevitably made transport difficult, and
declining navigation made the River Severn an awkward route in later years. But such
adversity generated ingenious solutions, and some of the best-known developments
in canal and railway technology were a direct result of the difficulty of negotiating

8
 LANDSCAPE AS H ISTORICAL EV ID ENCE

the natural topography of the Gorge. One of the factors in the process of indus ­
trialisation is this relationship between the natural landscape and human activity,
which is best deciphered through field evidence (chapter 4).
Industrial buildings are only just beginning to be seen as worthy of detailed
architectural analysis, but are rarely the subject of archaeological attention. Even less
is known about the slightly nondescript, very generalised buildings which are not
specific to any particular process. It is these buildings which are least often protected.
Yet those which do remain in the Gorge, mainly associated with the iron industry,
highlight the emergence of a type of industrial vernacular in the form of the single ­
storey shed. This tradition survives today in the modern sheds of Telford, and is
obviously worth further investigation.
Such buildings can also document the process of industrialisation. The study
of the location and development of industrial buildings through time provides a
stimulating perspective on the whole process of industrialisation. M any innovations
have been claimed for the Ironbridge Gorge, and technical innovations are often held
to be markers of industrial progress. And yet if the whole sample of industrial
buildings which survives is considered, innovation appears to be the exception rather
than the rule — it becomes clear that ‘make do and mend ’ was far more common than
the more celebrated periods of innovation. Thus, the study of the location and de ­
velopment of industrial buildings through time provided a different perspective on the
process of industrialisation than that given in more traditional accounts (chapter 5).
The spatial distribution and phasing of house-building, the forms and patterns of
its development, and the characteristics of its design can also evince the economic,
social and cultural impact of industrialisation in the Gorge. These form the subjects
of the second half of the book, which is concerned with how industrialisation
happened in the spheres of domestic architecture, of settlement forms and planning.
Changes in the structure of settlement take place in the context of social and
economic change, and can be used to chart the formation of an industrialised economy
from its proto-industrial origins. Just as industrial buildings graphically demonstrate
the tenacity of tradition, and the importance of adaptation rather than innovation, so
in housing, too, each generation accommodated its inheritance of building, extending,
modifying, but only rarely starting afresh. Nevertheless, a series of incremental changes
throughout a long history of adaptation achieved a thorough transformation in the
structure of settlement in the area, and an early pattern of scattered small hamlets
became the framework for an urban landscape in the nineteenth century. Current
management strategies which seek to conserve as much of this historical landscape as
possible are only the latest of many revaluations of the built resources of the Gorge.
If the resultant pattern of settlement in the area looks at first sight haphazard, it
can in fact provide a sensitive index of the organisation and process of industrial
change. Housing reveals such a history through its location in relation to other forms
of land use, through the relationship between its design and its use, but also through
the history of its development. W hile development in the Gorge was a baZYXWVUTSRQPO
d h o c and
individual in the earliest days of its industrial exploitation, the conditions were soon
established for a market in land and housing, encouraging more coherent organisation,

9
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

and both intensive and extensive land development. But this never amounted to
extensive redevelopment, as land was released for building only in small plots, and its
ownership was never consolidated in a few hands. Early prosperity endowed early
buildings with a value for subsequent generations, and resources were never
sufficiently concentrated to encourage wholesale replanning. As a result, the Gorge is
a peculiarly rich historical landscape, each generation working within the constraints
of its inheritance (chapters 6 and 7).
Such early prosperity is decisively illustrated in the early emergence of an industrial
vernacular, for which informal rules of design and traditions of construction had
evidently been formulated by the early years of the eighteenth century. The adoption
of new vocabularies, the reinterpretation of existing models of practice, and the
pattern of alteration can all chart the changing structure of an industrial society, with
a minutely graded social and economic hierarchy carefully mirrored in the distribution
of its building types (chapter 8).
The purpose of this book is to demonstrate the use, as well as the limitations, of
physical evidence in studying the process of industrialisation in the Ironbridge Gorge.
It is hoped that the results will have a practical application in the future management
of this landscape, if only by setting out more clearly its historical structure. There is
much more to be learned from the Gorge, and it is vital that future changes respect,
rather than obscure, its history. Perhaps the principles underlying this study can also
be applied to other industrial areas before their essential character, and the information
they contain, is lost.

10
 2 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

THE INDUSTRIALISATION OF THE

GORGE gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGF

I n tr o d u c tio n

Because the Ironbridge Gorge has been the subject of a great deal of historical research,
it provides an ideal location in which to explore the relative contribution of landscape
evidence to understanding the past. As early as the eighteenth century, visitors left
accounts of the industrial wonders of the Gorge, and artists celebrated the achievement
of the Iron Bridge and the spectacle of industry in a sylvan setting. Later visitors were
rather more sceptical, seeing the once great area looking run-down and derelict, but
these doubts gradually turned to an awareness of the role the Gorge and its per ­
sonalities played in the Industrial Revolution. The local historian, John Randall,
writing in the second half of the nineteenth century, was the first to describe the
breadth of industries in any detail. In the 1950s, as part of a growing national interest
in industrial archaeology, there was a renewed interest in the Gorge, focused on the
technical history of the iron industry. Such work was instrumental in the estab ­
lishment of a small museum at the old ironworks, and eventually the formation of
the Ironbridge Gorge M useums. The expansion of this group of museums to include
a chinaworks and a tileworks generated further new work on the whole range of local
industries. 1
This chapter draws heavily on this previous research, seeking to set out the history
of industrialisation from the medieval period to the present day. The aim is to present
a wider context for the better-known events of the Industrial Revolution period. This
provides a useful background to our exploration of the landscape evidence.

T h e m e d ie v a l f o u n d a t io n s o f i n d u s t r y

There is very little evidence for occupation in the Gorge before the Norman Conquest.
In this part of Shropshire, ancient woodland survived1 to a very late date and there
was little settlement. However, there were at least two clearings in the vicinity of the

u
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

Gorge, one at M adeley and one at Caughley, estates which had been given to the jihgfedc
5 double monastery at M uch W enlock, founded in 690.

F O R E S T O F M T G ILB E R T

B u W w a s-' M a d e le y
t
B ridge T o S hrfnal
C o a lb ro o kd ale
4 A,.
• R iver S e ve rn
! •B uikJw as A bb ey
B rockho le s
* MWaododele y
baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
LO N G F O R E S T
'• *
H a y W eir.

•.B en tha ll P arish

J } H igh B id din g s
i5 M uch W enlock P arish I x
B roseley P a rish
( M uch W e nlo ck
P nojy ;

i*
r
‘s C a ug hle y P arish
To S hrew sbury \s 's c
B a rrow P a rish ’. ® ?\
• W ille y P a nsh .. \
L in le y P a rish
i\s

X M inin g D e er P ark * M il S H IR L E T T F O R E S T

F ish W e irs I C h urch S S axon C lea nn g

O p e n R etd gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
0 5 10
I J

J Scale
2 .1 Medieval sites mentioned in the text (Shelley W hite)
Km baZYXWVUTSRQPONML

The boundaries and lands of W enlock Priory were the most important influence
in setting the pattern of land use and ownership in the Gorge until the formation of
Dawley New Town. The early monastery at W enlock fell into disuse, but was
refounded in the eleventh century with most of its lands intact. The Domesday survey
shows that it included the manor of M adeley, the parish of Little W enlock on the
north side of the Severn, and the large parish of W enlock on the south which included
the area of the later parishes of Broseley, Benthall and adjoining parishes (fig. 2. 1).2
M uch W enlock remained the administrative centre for Dawley, M adeley, Broseley
and W enlock until 1966.
Shortly after the Conquest, much of south Shropshire was designated as a royal
forest under laws which preserved land (not necessarily wooded) for hunting, and
restricted settlement, agriculture and the exploitation of minerals. The parishes of the
Gorge fell into the Long Forest, and thus the freedom of W enlock Priory to develop

12
 IND USTRIALISA TIO N OF THE G O RG E

its lands was proscribed. The monks were fined for clearing at Benthall in 1125 and
at Broseley in 1250, while at the same time the Crown was able to raise money by
granting private estates in the forest in Benthall and the eastern part of Broseley. W ith
disafforestation, from the thirteenth century, the pace of clearing increased but much
of the Gorge nevertheless remained wooded. W oodland remains on the slopes even
today and much of it can be shown to be of ancient origin?
I wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
A second abbey was founded in 1135 by the Savignacs (later Cistercians) at
Buildwas. In contrast to W enlock, little attempt was made to build up a local estate;
instead the monks acquired scattered lands in Staffordshire, Derbyshire and around
Chester, and farmed their own small local estates directly? Thus, although the supply
of local raw materials and produce was important to the abbey economy, Buildwas
cannot be said to have had the same long-term impact on the local landscape as
W enlock.
The present pattern of settlement was largely derived from the policies of W enlock
Priory, which controlled the parishes of M adeley, Benthall and parts of Broseley until
the Dissolution. In Broseley, the medieval centre around the present church was
surrounded by open fields and patches of woodland, with common land to the west?
The east of the parish was dominated by large freehold farms, which perhaps began
as forest grants. The priory kept control of a third of the parish, some farmed directly
and other parts by tenants, and had another large estate in Benthall around the
present church. Traces of the deserted village which once formed the centre of Benthall
parish can be seen at the back of the hall. In M adeley the medieval settlement probably
lay around the present church with an outlying settlement at Coalbrookdale where
open fields were noted in the thirteenth century. W hen the priory was granted
permission to hold a market in M adeley from 1269, a ‘new ’ town was in effect
created — about 60 burgage plots were laid out along the newly improved road from
Shifnal to W enlock, and a market-place was set in the centre. 6
Small-scale industry was another source of income. By far the best-documented
early industrial activity was the construction of mills primarily for grinding corn. The
River Severn itself was too variable in height for use as a source of water-power, but
the many small streams dropping down into the Gorge were ideal. There were mills
on the W ashbrook in M adeley, just to the north of the present Blists Hill site. Another
mill lay in Broseley in 1188, there was one at Benthall in 1317, and two by 1545 in
Broseley. The sixteenth-century mill at Coalbrookdale was almost certainly not the
first mill in the valley. The impact of these early water-powered installations is
apparent in the landscape. Although the mills no longer survive, the valley pools
created to supply them with water remained a lasting landscape resource, to be reused
by later industrialists (see Chapter 4). Another landscape survival is the medieval fish
weirs on the Severn, which remain obstacles to navigation even today.7
Building materials for both W enlock Priory and Buildwas Abbey were found in
the Gorge. Buildwas lies in an alluvial valley with little local stone. Limestone for
mortar and for walls came from Benthall Edge and sandstone for facings and dec ­
orative work came from Broseley by river. This was most likely the same source of
the golden coal-measure sandstone as was used in the construction of W enlock Priory

13
 I
1 jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA THE LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONML
(although the red sandstone would have come from Bridgnorth). Both were paved
with decorative tiles, the clay for which, when fired, closely matches that from the
nearest outcrops in Broseley and Jackfield.
In contrast with evidence from the Forest of Dean or the W eald, there is little to
suggest that the Gorge was a substantial medieval mining area, even though local coal
was low in sulphur and suitable for both domestic and industrial uses. There are
scattered references to mining - coal was brought from Benthall to Buildwas in 1250,
and mined near modern Ironbridge in 1322. Ironworking was equally limited:
W enlock had forges at Shirlett and an ironstone quarry at Little W enlock, and the
4 monks of Buildwas may have had a small bloomery. Strong monastic control had
created a situation in which neither the free miners who had opened up the Forest of
Dean nor the entrepreneurial landowners of the W eald were able to operate. Only
the early mining at the High Riddings in Broseley just prior to the Dissolution
suggests any activity by freeholders.
Thus the long-term effect of monastic involvement in the Gorge was the cen ­
tralisation of what little industry there was under monastic control. Even in agri­
culture, direct farming had been replaced by the extraction of heavy rents as a source
of income. Settlement in Barrow, W illey and perhaps Coalbrookdale contracted and
the area remained wooded. The valuable mineral resources had barely been touched,
except to supply the local needs of W enlock and Buildwas. At the Dissolution, the
Gorge presented an area of great opportunity.

L a n d - o w n e r s h ip a n d t h e o r ig in s o f in d u s t r ia lis a t io n

On 26 January 1540, W enlock Priory was dissolved and its lands broken up and sold
(fig. 2.2). W ithin a century, the Gorge was a coal-mining area of national importance
and new industrial settlements had spread over the old agricultural commons. This
change in the scale and pace of industrialisation was the result of the activities of four
men: Sir Basil Brooke, John W eld, Lawrence Benthall and James Clifford. They (or
their families) had purchased former monastic lands from the Crown to add to
existing inherited estates. Fully aware of the potential of these lands, they set about
utilising neglected resources. W ith capital from other interests, and control of min ­
erals, timber, transport and often labour on their own land, they were in a unique
i
l
! gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
position to exploit the area to the foil.8
In Broseley, James Clifford had inherited two-thirds of the manor, and was able to
acquire the remaining third which formerly belonged to the priory. He leased out the
farming lands and set about exploiting the minerals himself. Through the efforts of
Clifford and others, the coal industry transformed from one supplying the local,
domestic market, to an export-orientated one, supplying a national demand for coal
via the River Severn. Adits were dug directly into the coal seams from the hillsides,
■
and in order to get the bulky mineral down to waiting barges on the river Clifford
constructed a sophisticated transport system with early inclines, and some of the first
wooden railways in the country. 9
John W eld, a London lawyer who purchased an estate at W illey, was even more

14
 IND U STRIALISA TION OF TH E GORGE jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO

M ad eley C o u rt

C o aJb roo kd ale F u rn a ce

I M ad ele y

M ad ele y
W o od
B en th all H a ll
’i
B e n th al
M arsh
£ B ro s ele y W oo d

T u ckie s
„o .
I B rose ley

C liffo rd 's H o u se

; W ille y H a ll
C a ug h le y

: W ille y
F u rn ac e baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
I

M in ing W a gg on w ay s gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED
i C h u rch

0 5
■ |
|_ __ __ __ __ l

S cale Km baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED
2 .2 Post-dissolution sites mentioned in the text (Shelley W hite)

intent on maximising returns from all of his properties. As well as enclosing lands
and making agricultural improvements, he opened coal-mines, using his own timber
for props and construction. M ost of his estate lay away from the river, and in order
to get his coal to market he was forced to negotiate with his neighbours to lay
wagonways across their estates. W eld spent £500 on an old charcoal blast furnace at
the Smithies, and was able to smelt his own iron.10
By 1645, the township of Benthall was one of the largest sources of coal on the
Severn, producing 30,000 tons of coal a year, yet at the Dissolution it had been only
a tiny, wooded parish. Lawrence Benthall II, the grandson of one of the post­
Dissolution speculators, presided over the transformation of the parish. By the 1630s,
he had dug mines, laid railways, built cottages and imported labourers.
M ines in M adeley parish had first been opened up by John Brooke. His son, Basil
Brooke, had widespread interests in coal and ironworks in the Forest of Dean. He
used capital from these enterprises to expand coal-mining in the parish, and to operate
an ironworks. In the 1620s he was experimenting with making steel, very possibly at
the old timber-framed malthouse (now demolished) in Coalbrookdale, which was
described in 1734 as a former steelhouse.11

15

k
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQP
M ining and ironworking required labour, and in this traditionally agricultural area
of closed communities labour was in short supply. Clifford, W eld and Benthall built
cottages for their workmen and encouraged them to settle on the old commons. In
Broseley W ood, for example, a classic ‘squatter ’ pattern of settlement was created with
houses dispersed on small random plots. The so-called ‘scummes and dregges of many
countries ’ 12 who came into the area caused the older agricultural tenants to riot over
their lost common lands.
But the landowners may have had another motive in settling people on commons.
Most of the Broseley and Benthall commons were on marginal land that was poorly
drained or on steep slopes with poor soils. It was on precisely these types of land that
coal was likely to occur — outcropping on the valley sides, or lying just under the
surface of marshy areas. There was therefore a direct association in these parishes
between commons and coal, and rights over this coal were of intense interest. By
settling their own tenants on common land, the landowners were attempting to
establish their right to mine that land. W hen Benthall and W eld entered into a
dispute about old grazing rights on Benthall M arsh, their underlying argument could
well have been about the right to mine and to lay rails, and when Benthall built
cottages in Broseley W ood he could equally have been claiming a right to mine
there.13
In the period leading up to the Civil W ar, there is evidence for industry on another
scale, the work of a class of industrialists with less capital to spend. Shallow coal­
mines, with their characteristic ring of spoil (known as bell pits) are to be found
scattered through the woods of Broseley, Benthall and Caughley. These pits are
difficult to date, but were probably dug by individual miners in the seventeenth
century without the capital to pump mines or build railways on any large scale. These
miners could have cited manorial rights in order to stake their claims to underlying
coal. Other individuals set up small forges and ironworks; pieces of charcoal-rich iron
slag can be seen in the Caughley woods and along Linley Brook, and there was an
old smithy elsewhere in W illey. There were local brickmakers supplying W eld and
Benthall with bricks, and the beginnings of a clay pipe industry in M uch W enlock
and Broseley.

C o a l a n d in d u s t r ia l diversity

The Civil W ar saw the end of the monopoly of the landowners in local industry.
Weld, Brooke and Benthall were all Royalists who were fined heavily and had their
lands confiscated. The Coalbrookdale ironworks were sequestrated, and the M adeley
mines fell into disrepair. The coalworks of Benthall had been of such strategic
importance to Shrewsbury and Bridgnorth that the hall was garrisoned, but it later
fell to the Parliamentarians.1'' Coincidentally, much of the easily accessible coal had
been worked out, with the result that production was never established again on the
same relative scale. 15 Clifford had died earlier in 1620, and all his Broseley lands were
dispersed in small lots to pay ofFcreditors. For all their efforts, investment in industry
had generated no lasting prosperity for the landowners. W eld advised his successors jihgfed

16
 IND USTRIALISA TIO N OF THE GORGE

not to be ‘busy in searching for coals, nor in Ironworks ’ , and turned increasingly to
agriculture."* The Benthall estate became an agricultural one, and Broseley and
eventually M adeley were broken up into smaller units. Yet by building roads and
tramways, digging mines and encouraging new industrial settlements these land ­
owners had created a solid industrial infrastructure within the landscape which was
to become the base for the next phase of industrialisation.
The break-up of the landed estates created an opportunity for individuals with less
capital, and often no freehold land of their own, to take the initiative in coal-mining
and industry. This was most apparent in mining, where probate inventories document
the emergence of the charter master, or master collier, who took over responsibility
from the landowner for getting coal, laying railways and maintaining mines. 17 Such
men were wealthy members of society, and built themselves timber-framed houses
on the riverside, away from the traditional agricultural lands. Several of these houses
survived into this century.
These industrialists used their money to improve their mines and transport systems.
New and deeper mines were dug in Broseley W ood and on the high ground in
M adeley. To service these mines, horse gins were used for winding and pumping, and
in 1719 a consortium of miners installed the earliest steam engine in Shropshire to
pump water from a shaft which can still be seen in M adeley W ood.18 The transport
network linking these mines with the river was also improved. New inclines or ‘winds ’
for letting coal down to the riverside were built, and mining leases often included the
right to lay rails for wagonways. As a contemporary observer remarked, many of these
routes were short-lived and taken up at the expiry of a lease. Few of the documented
routes of this date are actually visible on the ground, but by the early eighteenth
century there is evidence for more permanent routes, built level with embankments
and made-up surfaces. 19
Associated with the development of transport from the mines came the improve ­
ment of the riverside itself. W eld and Clifford had wharfs for loading their coal on
the river bank, which were probably little more than enclosures. Clifford was also
mining close to the riverside - he was accused of dumping spoil in the Severn from
mines near theTuckies in Jackfield. By the mid-eighteenth century, permanent wharfs
were built at the end of key tramway routes such as the M eadow and Loadcroft wharfs
on the north bank, and Lloyd Head and the Tuckies on the south bank. The river,
however, was never improved. Despite persistent pressure to improve navigation by
the construction of locks, there was strong local opposition, and the river level
continued to fluctuate wildly from season to season. The banks constantly eroded,
old fish weirs such as ‘ Eve ’s M ount ’ impeded traffic, and for many months of the year
navigation was impossible. 20
The evidence for riverside developments underlines the persistent links between
pits and the River Severn, and implies a continuing export trade in coal. But at the
same time new uses for coal attracted a group of diverse industries to the Gorge, all
of which can in one way on another be linked to the availability of local coal supplies.
The most noticeable industrial feature to an observer standing near the river in
1746 was the lead smelter at Bower Yard, ‘vastly poisonous and destructive to

17
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND USTRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ

r
-----

2 .3 The Benthall lead smelter seen to the right in this view of the Iron Bridge
Francis Chesham (after George Robertson), 1788 (IGM T AE 185. 765) baZYXWVUTSR

everything near it’ (fig. 2.3).21 There were three or four such smelters in the eighteenth
century, all located on the riverside and using ore from W ales and coal from local
pits. Lead smelting was one industry for which there seems to have been little rationale
in the Gorge apart from abundant coal supplies and perhaps a certain tolerance for
noisome and polluting industrial enterprises. Another industry directly associated
with coal-mining was the extraction of mineral tar from local sandstone by M artin
Eele at the Calcutts. The tar was used to caulk boats, or distilled to produce varnish
and medicinal oils. Just to the east were the Salthouses, where natural brine was
collected from coal pits and boiled to produce salt.22
Tar manufacture and salt-making were relatively minor operations in comparison
to the two main coal-related industries of the area — ceramics and iron. By the late
seventeenth century, the manufacture of pottery, clay tobacco-pipes, bricks and roof ­
tiles was well established using the variety of clays which came as a by-product of
coal-mining. M ost of these enterprises supplied a local market, generated by the
growing industrial settlements.
Two distinct pottery-making traditions persisted in the Gorge - the manufacture
of coarse earthenwares for local use, and the production of a small amount of fine
table-wares for an export market. Fine white salt-glazed stoneware was made at
Jackfield and in Broseley from the early eighteenth century, in coal-fired kilns. Typical
salt-glaze saggars are to be found in garden walls throughout these areas. This industry
was short-lived, but almost every garden on the south of the river produces sherds of

18
 IND U STRIALISA TION OF TH E GORGE

yellow and brown slip-trailed pottery and coarse, dark earthenwares. By the mid ­
eighteenth century there were at least four places at Jackfield and another at Benthall
making such wares in domestic workshops.23 Clay tobacco-pipe manufacture also
operated on a small scale from the 1640s. Using fine white clays from local coal
measures, pipes were made as a sideline to other activities, and distributed widely
through W ales, Staffordshire, Cheshire and the W est M idlands. 2 '*
Buildings, better than any other source, document the growth of the brick industry.
Prior to 1700 brick was a rarity, used on the occasional large house such as that
bought by W eld at W illey, but from this date onwards the use of brick in domestic
buildings increased dramatically. A great number of small cottages were built to house
rhe growing population of coal-miners, bargemen and labourers, all of similar form,
and all built in brick (discussed further in chapter 8 below). Industrialisation came
about not only because of the availability of coal, but through the growth ofsettlement
associated with mining.
Abraham Darby ’s use of coal in metal-working and iron-smelting is perhaps the
best-known example of the role of local coal in industry. W hen Darby arrived in
Coalbrookdalc in 1709, he found a charcoal blast furnace that had been out of
operation since 1705 when the dam had burst and his predecessor, Shadrach Fox,
had absconded. Darby leased forges, charcoal houses, asteelhouse and other buildings,
all linked together by a complex water-power system which may have dated back to
the sixteenth century. 25 There were a few cottages, but not the populous mining
communities of other parrs of the Gorge. Darby established a complex pattern of
manufacturing, apparently intending to produce iron and copper, and make brass at
Coalbrookdalc, and to work brass and iron at Tern.26 For the first time, Darby was
able to use coal rather than charcoal to smelt iron. Unfortunately, the iron he produced
was suitable only for casting and not for making wrought-iron, the most versatile
form of iron. The market for his iron was thus a limited one. Darby ’s operation
therefore remained small — he and his employees sold the pots at markets and fairs in
exchange for cash in the same way as many other traders (fig. 2.4). It was only after
Darby ’s death that the operation began to expand, and to deal directly with other
industrialists.
The success of all of these industries depended nor only on coal but also on labour.
There were two factors which encouraged the growth of an industrial population: the
availability of land for settlement, and the opportunity for a full seasonal round of
employment. New communities of miners had been established earlier on the old
commons of M adeley and Broseley, but by the mid-eighteenth century they had
trebled in size. Settlements which had begun as casual, unregulated scatters of housing
had become almost prosperous suburbs. It is clear that these were not agricultural
households — they were located well away from farm land, the plots in which the houses
stood were small and very few occupants owned cattle or agricultural implements at
their death.27
Yet industry was unlikely to have provided year-round employment. Coal-mining
was largely concentrated in the summer months when the water-table was lower and
pumping less of a problem. Coal could only be transported by river in winter when

19
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONM
Negro Pot, with long legs.
W ine measure.
Common Pot.
i J S 1 !■ 11 -3 galls.
W ine measure. each. Oval Pot.
i i S 1 »i i J r a IK
W ine measure.
each.

per gallon. per gallon. per gallon.

2 to 4 galls. , rising i gall. , 2 to 4 galls., rising \ gall., 2 to 4 galls., rising 4 gall.,
4 to io ,, ,, I „ 4 lo i° >» 41010 „
io to 20 ,, ,, 2 ,, io to 20 ,, 2 ,, io to 20 ,, 2 »»
20 to So ,, 5 ,, zotoSQ ,, • or per cwt.
5 >»
or per cwt. or baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
per cwt.
Common Kettle. W ine measure, Flat-bottom Kettle. Shallow Kettle.
j 1 5 i i) >.J i 1 b »'i »- W ine measure. W ine measure.
each.
1 J I 1.1 Is 'Ift'IK .
each.

wo lO T J
2 .4 Cast-iron pots advertised in the Coalbrookdale Company catalogue of 1875
(1GMT 1989.4311)

the levels were high enough for barge traffic. Clay mined in the summer months was
weathered over the winter in readiness for building work during summer, so brick jihgfedc
and pottery production took place largely in the spring. Iron production was con ­
centrated in the autumn and winter, rather because there were shortages of water to
power the bellows in the summer. The seasonal nature of many jobs allowed industrial
work to become a more viable occupation. There was also scope for part-time
involvement in low-capital manufacturing such as clay pipe making, or pottery ­
making in a kiln attached to a row of cottages.
A common model for the origins of the Industrial Revolution is based upon rural
communities supplementing agricultural income with part-time industrial work such
as spinning or weaving. This form of production has been termed ‘proto-indus ­
trialisation ’ and was typically on a domestic scale, required little capital, and was
geared towards national markets. Proto-industrialisation has been seen as a first step
towards the large-scale industrialisation which took place in, for example, the textile
industries of the late eighteenth century.28
Instead of an agricultural population, there was in the Gorge an industrialised
population, turning to by-employment to supplement a seasonal income. The import­
ance of this pattern of work was that it enabled an industrial labour force to grow
and survive. The ready availability of coal had encouraged a diverse range of industries
which could support a full-time industrial labour force.
In the period up to 1750, there had emerged a landscape which was to provide the

20
 IND USTRIALISATIO N OF TH E GORGE

base for an extraordinary expansion in local industry. It was not so much the
availability of a single raw material - coal — but rhe diversity of natural and man ­
made resources it generated, which was to enable industry to expand so rapidly. Those
who had made fortunes from industry in the earlier eighteenth century grouped
together into partnerships which had the capital to integrate what had hitherto been
different industrial activities. 29 These new, powerful, co-ordinated operations were
the ironworks and factories of the later eighteenth century.gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK

T h e I n d u s t r ia l R e v o lu t io n in t h e G o r g e :
in t e g r a t io n , in n o v a t io n a n d t h e f a c t o r y s y s t e m

To what extent can an industrial revolution be recognised in the Ironbridge Gorge?

Certainly between 1745 and 1805 a very real transformation took place in the
industrial landscape. There was a phenomenal growth in ironworking as five vast new
works were set up in the Gorge. The construction of tramways, canals and roads
brought better links with the rest of Britain. Three new porcelain factories were set
up, employing hundreds of workmen in purpose-built factories. Even the long-
established brickworks and potteries increased their scale of production. Behind this
transformation lay a new form of industrial organisation: integration. Entrepreneurs
and small partnerships of colliers had evolved into integrated companies which were
able to control more of the means and processes of production than their predecessors.
Raw materials, production, transport and marketing were all integrated into a single
operation. W ith more capital they were able to build bigger works, ’0 to use the newest
technology and to produce for a wide market, beyond the Gorge.
Although the iron industry dominates accounts of the Gorge in the late eighteenth
century, it was in the ceramics industry at sites like Caughley and Coalport that the
greatest changes took place. In the late eighteenth century, the introduction of tea-,
coffee- and chocolate-drinking had created a market for fine teawares imported from
China. In response to this growing demand, European manufacturers experimented
with the production of porcelain in imitation of the Chinese blue and white wares.
At Caughley, in the fields to the south-east of the Gorge, Thomas Turner of W orcester
built a factory employing about 100 people to manufacture the new soft-paste
porcelain. Fine clay and flint were imported by river and brought probably by rail
to the site. Local coal, clay and fireclay were used for saggars, to fire the kilns and
for the new buildings. At first wares were sent back to W orcester for decoration, but
later blue printing was done at Caughley itself and the finished products dispatched
by river. On what today seems a greenfield site, Thomas Turner was able to utilise
coal-mines, tramways leading to wharfs, a saggar works and an earlier earthenware
works. He was able to integrate these existing resources with his own network of
contacts in W orcester, to set up a business which was far removed in size and
complexity from the earlier domestic workshops of Jackfield. 31
Caughley remained an isolated phenomenon until 1796, when a second large
factory was built on the riverside at Coalport to manufacture creamware, a fine
earthenware developed in the 1740s. Creamware was marketed assiduously by Josiah

21
 T H E L A N D S C A P E O F IN D U S T R Y wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZY
W edgwood and became one of the first British wares to be exported on a large scale.
At Coalport, W alter Bradley made a range of other wares in addition to creamware,
but seems to have operated for only a few years. M uch more successful in the long
term was the factory built nearby by a former employee of Thomas Turner, Edward
Blakeway. W ith two other partners, he built a new porcelain manufactory opposite
Bradleys works. A third factory was set up to make porcelain in 1800, on the site of
(or reusing) Bradleys works, but operated only briefly until John Rose took over the
whole Coalport site in 1814, becoming the sole manufacturer. Together, these works
employed hundreds of people in a range of three-storey buildings. M any different
specialised processes were integrated into one operation — grinding raw materials,
making saggars, producing and decorating wares, and eventually marketing, as the
company acquired outlets locally and in London.32
By choosing Coalport as a site, these works were taking advantage of a new link
between the river and the canal system established by W illiam Reynolds. Reynolds ’s
father had purchased 20 acres of land at the Sheepwash in 1787/8, a ‘ rugged uncul­
tivated bank which scarcely produced even grass ’.33 W ith the completion
of the Shropshire Union Canal to the top of the hill above Coalport, an inclined
plane down to the riverside and a length of canal parallel to the river, the site
became a prime industrial location.33 W illiam Reynolds constructed a massive sand ­
stone quay, and a large warehouse spanning the canal and river for transferring
goods from one to the other. He saw the area as a potential industrial estate, with
different industries ‘united like links in a chain ’ , and encouraged a timber-yard,
ropeworks, chainworks, a brickworks and a bag factory to be set up. In partnership
with Lord Dundonald, he planned a huge chemical works on the site, but it
was never built. Although Coalport was Shropshire ’s most important river port
by 1797, it never became the new town Reynolds had envisaged. Only the
chinaworks, the timber-yard and chainworks operated for any length of time and,
despite Reynolds ’s plans for housing, most workers continued to live on the south
bank.
In the late eighteenth century, another transformation occurred in the way common
earthenware was manufactured. There was a new pottery at Haybrook in 1743,
another at Caughley by 1754, and by 1773 there were three factories at Jackfield and
a new works at Benthall. There were further potteries at Ladywood, Coalmoor, on
rhe top of Bridge Bank in Benthall and at Horsehay.35 All of these were located
on the buff clay outcrops, near coal-mines, and often on main turnpike roads away
from the river so that pottery could more easily be sent to market. But the key to this
new scale of operation seems to be that several, at least, were making slipwares
using new mass-production techniques. Early-eighteenth-century wares are coarse,
handmade pieces with decoration trailed on in thick lines. Yet the fields around
Broseley are strewn with a standardised type of pottery, flat with a pie-crust edge and
very thin yellow and brown slip trailing.36 The press-moulding technique for making
these had been known since the seventeenth century.37 However, in the eighteenth
century, plaster moulds were introduced, enabling this pottery to be mass-produced
to a standard design. Slip and powdered glaze were then applied to the wet clay before

22
 IN D USTRIA LISA TIO N OF TH E GORGE

it was fired in a coal-fired kiln. Plaster moulds and single firing made the wares quick
and easy to produce, and relatively cheap (see Chapter 5).
In the iron industry a similar transformation took place. 38 Coke-smelted iron had
been made in the Dale for almost fifty years, in furnaces no larger than the average
charcoal furnace. Yet in the space of a decade in the 1750s four new works were built
in the Gorge at M adeley W ood, Horsehay, Calcutts and New W illey to the south.
These new works had larger furnaces, produced more iron and employed more
people, but the most obvious way in which they differed from earlier works was the
degree to which operations were integrated. Nothing makes this new conception of
an ironworks clearer than the grand design for Newdale, a purpose-built works set
up to the north of the Gorge. There, on a greenfield site, houses, ironworking
buildings and perhaps a blast furnace were laid out; a tramway was built to nearby
mines and limeworks, so that the full range of ironworking activities were organised
to take place at one location.39
M ining was the first activity to be integrated with ironworking. Abraham Darby
had been supplied with raw materials by individual contractors,'10 but from the 1750s
his successors, the Coalbrookdale Company, began to lease their own minerals at
Lawley and Dawley and to take responsibility for supplying their own coal and
ironstone. This was taken a step further when the company bought up land in the
the M anor of M adeley and leased the mineral rights to most of the parish. 41 And as
ironmasters turned to coal-mining, so miners turned to ironworking. The M adeley
W ood Company was originally set up to mine coal, but soon built iron furnaces on
the riverside at Bedlam, and a partnership of colliers built another new ironworks at
Lightmoor. The coal industry was no longer totally orientated towards export, and
iron and coal-mining had become, perforce, an integrated operation.
Ironworking as an activity also began to move north, as an increasingly large
percentage of the coal and ironstone for the works was obtained from the deeper
seams in the northern part of the coalfield. New works were built at Ketley and
Horsehay by the Coalbrookdale Company. This was not the only large organisation,
however. A classic extension of the trend towards integration can be seen in the
development of the parish of Lilleshall. Here coal had been exploited on a piecemeal
basis since medieval times by charter masters, paying royalties to the lords of the
manor. As the demand for minerals increased, a new partnership was set up by the
landowners to take over mining and to invest in the area — a canal was built to carry
minerals across the estate, and later blast furnaces were built at Snedshill (1780) and
Donnington W ood (1785).42
A second group of ironworks built on the south bank of the river displays a
rather different rationale. Furnaces were built at Barnetts Leasow, Calcutts, Benthall,
Broseley and Coneybury. Part of the reason for this was that forging remained an
activity separate from iron-smelting, still dependent on charcoal fuel and water ­
power. An eighteenth-century forge still comprised a finery, a chafery and a hammer —
a technology little changed since the medieval period (fig. 2.5). Despite the develop ­
ment of steam-power, even in 1800 forging was ‘chiefly carried out by means of
trifling brooks ’, according to Thomas Telford. In 1773 a new technique for producing gfedcbaZYXW

23
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF INDUSTRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIH

i
I

1/ I ..’ -■ ■ ■ .

jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
2 .5 Forging iron in a small hand-operated forge

wrought-iron with charcoal was patented by John W right and Richard Jesson. Small
pieces of iron were heated in clay pots and thus did not come into contact with the
coke used as fuel. Known as ‘stamping and potting', or the Shropshire process, this
method was adopted by the ironworks at Horsehay, Old Park and Kerley.43 But new
forges continued to be located on the River Severn away from the main ironworking
area — at W ren ’s Nest, Eardington and Hampton Loade. It was partly to supply this
river-based demand for forging iron that the Barnetts Leasow furnaces were set up
on the south bank of the river in 1796.
The other aspect of the south-bank industry was casting. Specialist castings had
been produced at Coalbrookdale for many years, but the widest demand was for
domestic and agricultural items cast in the foundry. Foundries at Benthall and
Broseley ironworks were able to take advantage of cheap local supplies of iron but
otherwise were no different from numerous other foundries in towns throughout
Britain. These works had access to road as well as river transport and were essentially
supplying a local consumer market, unlike the specialist works to the north.
As a strategy, the integration of an existing industrial landscape had allowed
industrialists to build and operate bigger and more profitable works than had hitherto
been possible. But with the rapid expansion of industry elsewhere in the country, the gfedcbaZY

24
 IND USTRIALISA TIO N OF TH E GORGE

ever larger scale of operations and generally falling prices in the early nineteenth
century, integration was no longer a profitable option. Despite new canals and
turnpike roads, the Gorge remained, as it always had been, an isolated area, away
from the main centres of industry and population. W ith its high transport costs
and by now outdated working practices, production in rhe Gorge was becoming
increasingly uncompetitive. In the mid-nineteenth century, producers reversed their
strategy and switched from integration to specialisation.gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK

S p e c ia lis a t io n a n d t h e p r o d u c t io n o f p r e s t ig e g o o d s

By the early nineteenth century, iron production in the Gorge was outmoded and
uneconomic. M atters reached a nadir between 1815 and 1822 when there was a
depression in the price of pig-iron through the ending of the Napoleonic wars and
the availability once more of continental supplies to Britain. All five of the Broseley
furnaces were out of production in the early 1830s and iron-founding continued for
only a short time afterwards. Part of this collapse was due to a shortage of local raw
materials,44 but the extraction of ironstone continued long after smelting ceased. The
Gorge was fundamentally an isolated location, too far from markets for either
iron or raw materials. Even the opening of the Shropshire Union Canal wharf at
W appenshall in 1835, which linked the Gorge for the first time with the national
canal system, brought few benefits to the south bank.
The fortunes of the Coalbrookdale Company were somewhat different. In the
early years of the century the works were in a poor state — the furnaces were out of
blast and the great steam engine which recycled water was being demolished.45 One
of the Horsehay furnaces was closed, the Ketley works ceased operations in 1816 and
the possibility of closing Coalbrookdale altogether was raised. The situation was
similar throughout the coalfield. Unlike the works on the south bank, the Coal­
brookdale Company was able to adapt to these changes. Following a general improve ­
ment in the iron market and a change of management in 1830, the Coalbrookdale
Company enterprises were reorganised. The forges at Coalbrookdale were closed and
the Dale specialised in casting and foundry work, particularly pumping engines and
domestic castings. Forging was moved to Horsehay, where new puddling-furnaces
and rolling-mills were built, and pig-iron was supplied from the newly purchased
Lightmoor furnaces. No longer did one works undertake the full range of ironworking
activity.
Specialisation was more than just a matter of reducing the range of activities; it
involved the production of a limited range of prestigious goods aimed at a volatile
consumer market. In this way, producers could add value to their goods to overcome
the problems of transport out of the Gorge. At Coalbrookdale the company became
renowned for art castings (fig. 2.6). Under Francis Darby and Abraham Darby IV,
fountains, sculptures, gates and garden furniture were produced to the designs of
artists employed by the company and later encouraged by the setting up of an art
school in the Literary and Scientific Institute in 1859. Through its display at the
Great Exhibition of 1851 the company became internationally famous for such

25
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF INDUSTRY

Se c i : gfedcbaZYXWV
[» < • > « ■<
S ■• . K ^S baZYXWVUTSRQP
if C v. >

t ’l'J. < 1 w .-l !<*.> ,-i> » .l" i - <> it I < »ie,- Z

rV jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM
baZYXWVUTSR
r -i».l -(.•», lit i .H - ’ i *•<•' ri'w il
L

2 .6 An elaborate cast-iron fountain taken from the Coalbrookdale Company Catalogue of

1875 (1GMT1989. 4313)

products, and exported them around the empire. M edals were awarded at various
other exhibitions, and in its publicity the company claimed to be the biggest ironworks
in the world. The company further attempted to enhance their reputation through
the manufacture of terracotta at Lightmoor. M oulded statues, architectural faience,
vases and garden products were added to the more mundane output of bricks, tiles
and drains, but production was abandoned after only a short period.
In the northern part of the Coalbrookdale Coalfield, smelting continued, but
although production was at its highest in 1869 this was only 2 per cent of the national
output in comparison to 40 per cent in the 1770s. In absolute terms, the importance
of the coalfield was declining. As new processes such as Bessemer steel­
making were introduced, ironmasters preferred to undertake new ventures in more
convenient locations rather than rebuild old and decaying works. The crisis in the
coalfield was reached in the 1880s when all but two or three works closed down. The
Horsehay site was sold, but a new partnership continued in operation as an engin ­
eering firm specialising in the assembly of bridges and other complex iron structures.46
The strategy was so successful that production at the site only ceased in 1985.
During the early nineteenth century, there was an extraordinary growth in another

26
 IND U STRIALISA TION OF TH E GORGE

very specialised industry - the manufacture of dark purple clay roof-tiles. 47 By 1840
the Tithe maps show that there were no fewer than thirteen brick- and tile-works in
the Gorge and, of these thirteen, most were principally producing roof-tiles. This
level of production may have been linked to the new and deeper coal-mines, which
brought access to the best seams of clay for making tiles. W hat is so unusual about
this industry, however, is the size of the works; contemporary brickworks elsewhere
consisted of little more than a few thatched shelters and an open-air clamp or kiln,
but at Jackfield there were well-organised works on a large scale all producing the
same things.48
These factories must have been producing for a wide regional market. Output far
exceeded the local demand for roof-tiles, even though almost every building in the
Gorge seems to have been reroofed. The works were located on the riverside, away
from the main roads or centres of population like Broseley and M adeley. Goods must
have been exported by river and perhaps canal to a wider market. Nevertheless, the
construction of the Severn Valley Railway in 1862 was a boon, and several works
built their own sidings in order to dispatch goods directly by rail. The railway created
a demand for tiles which existing processes could not meet, and new mechanised
production techniques were introduced. At the same time, the railway network made
W elsh slate more competitive, and the roof-tile works came under increasing pressure
to produce cheaper goods. Unfortunately, when they did so, the quality decreased
and Broseley tiles acquired a poor reputation. Production exceeded demand, and
because they were laid out for specialist tile-making they were unable to diversify into
brickmaking. By 1940 almost all the works had closed - labour shortages, transport
costs, clay shortages and outdated works all contributed to make them uneconomic.
Broseley tiles did not play a part in Britain ’s post-war building boom.
This trend towards low-bulk, specialist goods for a national market was nowhere
more obvious than in the encaustic tile industry.49 By 1883 Jackfield was the location
of two major manufactories with an international reputation for decorative tiles. The
tiles of M aws and Craven Dunnill were to be found in houses, churches and public
buildings around Britain, and were some of the few products of the Gorge to reach
the outposts of the empire. Plain red floor-tiles had been made in the eighteenth
century, but the earliest attempts to produce more elaborate tiles took place at a
Jackfield works in the 1830s. Encaustic floor-tile production was initiated on a more
permanent basis by the brothers George and Arthur M aw at Benthall on a site
fashioned out of the old Benthall ironworks. They were principally attracted by the
good clays of the Gorge, which had already been transported down the river to their
W orcester site.
Production continued at Benthall for almost 30 years, during which time many
new processes for making tiles were patented. But the site proved to be crowded and
inefficient, and so the company moved to a new 5j-acre site on the riverside to the
east of Jackfield. Here in 1882 they laid out a complete purpose-built works designed
by the architect Charles Lynam of Stoke-on-Trent, to incorporate all the production
processes in a logical whole. But before this factory was built Charles Lynam had
designed another encaustic tile factory for the Craven Dunnill partnership. This gfedcbaZYX

27
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF INDUSTRY gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPON
partnership took over an old pottery which had recently been used for making
geometric tiles. The pottery was demolished and a new factory built which would
facilitate the speed and efficiency with which clay could be moved around the site.
The works were very successful, initially capitalising on the demand for repro ­
duction medieval floor-tiles created by the programme of new church building and
restoration in the mid-nineteenth century. New and more elaborate finishes and
glazes were developed, and tiles became increasingly ornate. Like the Coalbrookdale
Company, M aws and Craven Dunnill both gained an international reputation for
high-quality, specialist products.
The same trend towards prestigious products can bbee seen in the attempts to
establish a local art pottery industry.50 W hile the mass-production of common
earthenwares continued at sites in Jackfield, at Benthall and on Bridge Bank, two
potteries moved briefly into the production of art pottery. Classical urns with incised
decoration and extraordinary pieces with moulded fruit and vegetables were produced
for a short period. Although art pottery never thrived, the fact that expensive,
individually produced decorative items were seen as a more successful business
proposition than mass-produced domestic pieces reflects the situation of the Gorge
where transport costs restricted large-scale production.
Despite the construction of new roads and canals in rhe eighteenth century, and
even three different standard-gauge railways in the nineteenth century, transport
remained the biggest barrier to commercial success in the Gorge. Raw materials were
running out, and there were few large markets nearby. M anufacturers realised that
quality and reputation were more important than mass-production and cheapness to
the continuity of local industry, and specialised in the production of a limited range
of high-quality finished goods. Yet it is debatable to what extent prestige goods were
conomic; plain tiles with simple repetitive motifs became the staple of M aws and
Yaven Dunnill, and at Coalbrookdale the market for domestic stoves and bricks
ecame more important in the later nineteenth century than ornate statuary and
terracotta urns. W hile companies acquired a reputation for prestige goods, their
fortunes were based on much more mundane products.

Twentieth-century pioneers

At the outbreak of the Second W orld W ar, a visitor might have seen a dismal future
for the Gorge. Changing fashions left no market for the prestigious iron and ceramic
industries, and with the labour shortages of the war, ailing industries had closed for
ever. Yet, ironically, it can be shown that industry continued to operate in often novel
and pioneering forms throughout the first half of the twentieth century, and it was
only through official policies in the 1960s and 1970s that industry stagnated and
almost ceased.
Iron-smelting ceased at Blists Hill in 1912, the Coalbrookdale Company closed its
Severn Foundry in 1917 and Coalport China W orks closed in 1926. The remaining
brickworks closed at the outset of the Second W orld W ar.51 Along with this industrial
depression went declining population, and a visibly deteriorating landscape. Slag

28
 IN D USTRIA LISA TIO N OF TH E GORGE

heaps and pit waste littered the slopes of the Gorge, and Jackfield was almost buried
under mounds of faulty red tiles. Even the wooded hillsides were scarred with open
clay working and bald heaps of Pennystone waste. Yet industrial activity persisted.
The buildings of the old works were taken over by a series of small industrial
enterprises.52 They were often undercapitalised, and old buildings could be used as
cheap premises. In Ironbridge, the old malthouses and warehouses of the riverside
were reused by an assortment of tradesmen, including wire sieve-makers, the makers of
iron patten rings for workmens clogs, wiredrawers and ironmongers. Such industries
served the needs of a local working population and were the forerunners of the small
garages which appeared along the W harfage and Dale End early in the twentieth
century, and remain there today.
Such small workshop enterprises servicing local or at best regional needs are typical
of most built-up areas. Capital investment was low, the element of skill high, and
there was no need for elaborate transport arrangements. But industries supplying the
needs of Ironbridge alone provided insufficient employment for those left out of work
by the closure of old works. New industries were attracted to the area by a large pool
of labour, by the availability of old buildings and by the planning policies of the two
world wars. After heavy bombing, the London firm of Chillcotts Ltd moved into part
of the old Coalport factory in 1941, where they made gaskets, washers and exhaust
systems until the 1960s. In another part of the works Frank Hawker Ltd made fancy
metalware powder compacts, lipsticks and trays. There was a new vogue for teddy ­
bears in the 1920s, and the M errythought Company was set up in the old Severn
Foundry.
Teddy-bears are still made in Ironbridge today, bur many more of the industries
which began life in the Gorge have since moved away. In the 1940s and 1950s,
Ironbridge was effectively a ‘nursery ’ for small industrial enterprises. Initially set up
in old buildings, several — such as Clifford W illiams making pyjamas — expanded to
the extent that they were able to move to new purpose-built works elsewhere. In the
old buildings of the Calcutts Ironworks, W .H. Smith began making machinery for
the local clay industry in the 1870s and later aeroplane parts during the Second
W orld W ar. They were taken over by M essrs M arshall Osborne & Co., and moved
into the old Craven Dunnill factory. Since then, they have moved to new premises
in Telford. W hat most differentiated these industries from the small workshops of
Ironbridge or Broseley was their market. All were orientated either to a national or,
in the case of M errythought, an international market. The population simply could
not sustain the localised industries which might be found in and around a large city.
Despite a falling population, a remote location and the closure of the larger works,
industry had managed to survive. By pioneering new processes or products, and by
keeping capital costs local, firms could establish themselves and, if they were suc ­
cessful, move away to more convenient sites. Today some of the older manufacturers
remain, but in recent years few new firms have set up in the area. There has been a
distinct slowing of industrialisation in the Gorge as a result of policies imposed by
the New Town of Telford.
In January 1963, much of the Coalbrookdale Coalfield including the Gorge was

29
 T H E L A N D S C A P E O F IN D U S T R Y baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ
designated as Dawley New Town by the M inistry of Housing and Local Government,
and set aside for what was to be the largest new development in the British Isles. The
I
aim was to attract overspill population and industry from Birmingham to a totally
new environment. Sceptics argued that in fact the existence of old industrial buildings
already created the preconditions for industrial expansion, and that the provision of
new premises might have the opposite effect of deterring industry, through high
costs.53 In the early years, it seemed that these fears were justified; few industries came
to the area, and at one point the rate of creation of jobs was falling. In 1968 the
whole concept was reconsidered, a greater area taken in, and the town renamed
Telford. W ith the completion of the M 54 and the lifting of restrictive policies which
brought in industry from a wider area, the industrial fortunes of Telford have revived.
Ironically, by deliberately trying to encourage industries to come into the area, the
planners had halted the process of industrial regeneration which was already well
established in and around Ironbridge. 54
As part of the planned new town, the Gorge was set aside as an area of amenity
value for recreational purposes. The official image of the landscape had changed from
one of squalor and dereliction to one of ‘special quality ’ .55 New industry was to be
discouraged, and the emphasis moved from development to preservation. Indus ­
trialisation had, for the first time, been deliberately fossilised. At first the Gorge was
seen as a local beauty spot, for picnicking and listening to the sound of running
water 56 — derelict buildings were demolished, and a programme of tree planting
undertaken.
At the same time another view of the Gorge was emerging. There was a growing
awareness of the importance of the historic remains and in particular the Old Furnace
at Coalbrookdale and the Iron Bridge, and a group was pressing for the establishment
of an industrial museum.57 It was recognised that there were many more sites and
buildings of significance than could be housed in a single museum, and the remit
widened to include a much broader concept of industrial archaeology. The idea of
preserving an industrial landscape as a whole, rather than isolating relics in a museum
setting was a new concept and not something which gained immediate acceptance.
Nevertheless, by 1980 most of the Gorge was designated as a Conservation Area.
Further demolition was regulated, and grants were provided for the rejuvenation of
old properties. Industrial remains and old buildings had triumphed over trees as the
official view of the area was transformed from one of local amenity value to one of
nternational status as a W orld Heritage Site.

3 0 wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM
 3wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJI

M INERAL RESOURCES IN THE

LANDSCAPE

The landscape is a document. Imprinted on it are the effects of the natural processes
of many millions of years, and of the more recent human activities of the last few
thousand years. Surrounding us is a palimpsest of the past, its various changes
superimposed one upon the other to create the pattern which we see today. This
pattern is a record which documents these events, a record which is in itself a source
of historical evidence for the past, in the same way that a written document charts
the past. The landscape is a source of physical history in its own right, but, as with a
document, there are many different ways of reading it. Like a document, the landscape
has to be viewed critically and with great care.
Two aspects of the landscape which can be related to industrial development are
the natural landscape and the man-made one. Inevitably the two become interrelated
through time, but it is more convenient to begin here with the natural landscape.
This chapter sets out the way one of the key features of the natural landscape — the
underlying minerals - was exploited by industrialists, and the way in which those
minerals, in turn, affected the pattern of industrialisation. The intention is not to
put forward a crude model of economic determinism, but to explore the complex
relationship between minerals and the wider economic pattern. gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPON

T h e geological landscape

The landscape of the Ironbridge Gorge is spectacular. The River Severn, meandering
past the rolling countryside around Buildwas, abruptly enters a steep-sided, wooded
valley. Passing through this, its course drops away over rapids, its banks alternately
built up for wharfs, or cutting away massive heaps of industrial waste. Near Apley
the surrounding agricultural lands once more slope gently down to the river bank.
Exposed on either side of the Gorge as far as Coalport are valuable minerals — coal,
clay, ironstone and limestone (fig. 3.1). Fast-flowing streams drop down into the river
from the surrounding plateau, a potential source of water-power for early industry.
Their progress has created a series of side valleys - Coalbrookdale, the W ashbrook
Valley, Benthall Valley and the Calcutts Valley. It was these minerals, the power

31
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQP
supply, and the river itself as a means of transport that made the area such an attractive
industrial location.

■IS ISi' I t baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

Low er C oal M easures M iddle C oal M easures . ‘. U pper C oal M easures

F ault Lines C oal O utcrop

N orth R iver S outh

S evern

0 1 2 3 4

S cale baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
Km

3 .1 Mineral resources in the Ironbridge Gorge (Shelley W hite)

To industrialists, the minerals of the Coalbrookdale Coalfield were among the

most im portant natural resources available to them. Coal, clay, ironstone and lime ­
stone were used by industry for over 500 years. But the pattern of mineral exploitation
was complex — for example, it was not just a matter of digging out all the available
coal until it was exhausted. There were many different types of coal, which served
different purposes. As industry developed, so did the demand for coal, while at the
same time new mining technology made new seams and reserves available to industry.gfedcbaZY

32
 MINERAL RESOURCES IN LANDSCAPEwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXW

For other minerals, too, this constantly changing pattern of availability, technology,
demand and understanding can be traced in the landscape. The exploitation of
minerals is a classic case study of the way the human landscape interacts with the
underlying geological one.
It is most convenient to discuss this landscape in terms of a geological resource: in
other words, where different seams occur, and how they occur — whether deep beneath
the surface or as outcrops. It is possible to interpret quarries and pit heaps, to predict
where other mining areas might be found and to understand differences in mining
techniques. At its most basic level, this information presents us with a general history
of mining, but if we take a wider view of the landscape the underlying geology
provides a single framework for the development of the area as a whole. M in ­
ing provides a context for the broad span of industrial development from the early
opening up of the Gorge to the eighteenth-century iron industries and the specialist
clay industries of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. A geological framework
is a useful vehicle for understanding the field evidence for mining and indus ­
trialisation.'gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

M i n i n g e v id e n c e as a r c h a e o lo g y

As a class of archaeological evidence, mining has to be dealt with carefully, not least
because of the inherent dangers of underground workings. Open-surface quarries
may be easy to see but, by their very nature, they may obscure earlier workings. It is
usually assumed that the visible surface pattern only reflects the most recent oper ­
ations, with the implication that nothing earlier can have survived. Nevertheless,
traces of earlier workings, or hints of their existence, may remain high up on the sides
of quarries, or in the evidence for associated activities such as access roads or old spoil
heaps. It is vital that even recent mining landscapes be treated in a careful archae ­
ological fashion, and not dismissed outright on the grounds that earlier working has
been lost.
Underground remains are much more difficult than surface workings for the
non-specialist to explore. Tunnels and shafts are rarely accessible without specialist
equipment and the means of monitoring gas levels. The pumping and winding
equipment on which their operation depended has generally been lost, and large areas
may be flooded or collapsed. Even if mines are not to be entered, it may be difficult
to locate mine entrances, which decay very rapidly once they go out of use. O f the
many tunnels known in the Gorge, only one or two are still visible today.
Other field sources of information for mining are indirect. W aste in fields or
around old shafts may be visible as heaps or as stains in a ploughed field, perhaps
visible in aerial photographs. Unfortunately for archaeologists, many local mining
techniques such as long-wall mining used old spoil to prop up the roof and so did
not produce much surface spoil. At other mines, spoil was dumped into the river and
washed away. A second source of surface evidence is patterns of subsidence, which
can reveal old or inadequately capped shafts, the presence of workings on an outcrop,
or underground workings close to the surface. The amount of subsidence relates to

33
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IN DU STRY

the working methods, the roof material and the seam thickness. Typical patterns
might be shaft collapses, crown-hole incidents associated with outcrop or shallow
workings, and general trough subsidence.
W here they cannot be seen, mineral workings can be identified on deposited plans,
but legislation requiring public deposition was introduced in only the 1870s, so the
survival of mine plans from before that date is a random matter. The earliest Ordnance
Survey maps which routinely show shafts or recently abandoned shafts date to 1883,
which is very late in the history of mining in the Gorge. M ore useful is the recent
1:10560 Geological Survey sheet SJ60SE, which collates historical information about
shafts, and includes the results of trial-hole borings. Information about old workings
can be found in these. Geological cores may reveal voids, or the presence of ‘gob ’ or
waste from old workings, and can also be a useful source of information.
Once identified, mining remains are at risk of treatment in the interest of public
safety by such techniques as concrete capping or, more drastically, total infilling by
grouting. These can render mines permanently inaccessible.gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO

T h e S ilu r ia n la n d s c a p e

The most dramatic and visible evidence for mining in the Gorge is the remains of
the limestone industry. Towering above the Iron Bridge is Lincoln Hill, pale yellow
and scarred by open quarrying for limestone.
The limestones of the Silurian Formation occur in a ridge across the western end
of the Gorge, and were used for iron-smelting, building stone, lime mortar and
cement. Four hundred million years ago, equatorial Shropshire lay under the large,
shallow Iapetus Ocean.2 The climate was warmer than today, and extensive coral reefs
formed on the floor of the ocean. The gradual transgression of this sea formed the
Silurian limestones, known as the W enlock Shales. The Silurian limestones underlie
the later Carboniferous deposits, but through faulting have been pushed up, and are
exposed on the surface as a high ridge crossing the valley from north to south. On
the north is Lincoln Hill, pushed up by the Lightmoor Fault and denuded of its
covering coal measures. On the south bank, Benthall Edge is a continuation of this
ridge, turning south-west to become W enlock Edge eventually.
The limestone itself is of variable quality. The uppermost band of W enlock
Limestone is good-quality stone, and contains many of the prized ‘ballstones’ or ‘crog
balls ’3 — residual lumps of pure coral which create a very high-quality stone. The
surrounding and lower measures are of lesser quality and rest on the very poor-quality
lower Benthall and Tickwood Beds. The uppermost levels were used as fluxing stone
in iron-making, to draw out impurities during the smelting process. This stone could
also be used for building, but the local material could not be cut smooth, and is more
commonly used for rubble fill, or rough cottage walls in and around M uch W enlock.
The lower, poorer quality stone was burnt for building or agricultural lime.
The limestones of Shropshire played an influential role in the history of geology
in Britain. Shropshire was a focus of very early geological interest, partly because of
the econom ic importance of its minerals, and partly because of its relatively simple

34
 MINERAL RESOURCES IN LANDSCAPEwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXW

geological sequence. It was through studying the fossils in the limestone strata of
W enlock Edge that M urchison was able to develop his great Silurian System, one of
the first geological sequences to be fully defined. His book, baZYXWVUTSRQPONML
T h e S ilu ria n S y stem , first
published in 1835, generated a great deal of controversy over the dating of geological
measures and was eventually to become instrumental in the revision of ideas about
the age of the world. Hamstrung by an antediluvian explanatory framework, the
published academic understanding of geology developed very much more slowly than
the practical one.
There is evidence for the exploitation of the Silurian limestones on Benthall Edge,
dating back to the thirteenth century. Benthall Edge is a 100-metre-high scarp
of limestone on the south bank of the river. The cliff is capped with high-
quality limestone, which is needed for fluxing; and lower deposits of poorer-quality
stone could be burnt for lime and building mortar. Along the top of the ridge is a
long string of limestone quarries, with associated spoil heaps, roads, railways and
limekilns (fig. 3.2). The Edge is a classic example of an industry which has left: very
extensive remains in the landscape, but for which very little documentation has ever
been found.

. " ‘a .--: ?' ; ., -. , * gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

OK

3.2 View of the Gorge from Patten ’s Rock Quarry, 1856. A truck loaded with limestone and
the gear for an incline may be seen in the foreground

In order to understand this industry, a detailed survey of all the remains was
undertaken.'’ Over 100 quarries, roads and limekilns were identified and mapped as
part of an intensive archaeological survey. Through the use of an archaeological matrix

35
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IN DU STRY

which recorded the relationships between quarries, it was possible to analyse the
landscape evidence for the history of limestone mining here (fig. 3.3).
To the west, medieval quarrying is linked with the very early road to the nearby
Cistercian abbey of Buildwas. The quarries feed out onto a road which zigzags down
the steep escarpment to the abbey. These workings have been cut by later workings,
and there is no evidence that they continued in use.
The second phase of working can be linked to the iron industry. The quarries that
run along the very top of the scarp provided the fluxing stone needed in the smelting
of iron. These quarries were working the high-quality ballstones and uppermost reef
limestone, which was acknowledged to be ‘of the best quality for smelting iron ’.5 The
stone was removed via a group of roads and inclines which converge at a point on
the river bank where a wharf was located, known as the Stone Port. Few of these
quarries have limekilns, suggesting that relatively little of the stone was burnt baZYXWVU
in situ ,
although there was a pair of kilns by the wharf. This phase of exploitation represented
the transport of fluxing stone by river to supply the early eighteenth-century iron
industry at Coalbrookdale. Documentary evidence refers to barge owners shipping
stone to Ludcroft W harf at the foot of Coalbrookdale shortly after 171 7. 6
Another series of long, open quarries is linked with a railway, leading in the
opposite direction, away from the river and towards the fields of Benthall and Broseley.
Twenty kilns are known from map and field evidence all relating to this railway. M ost
of this stone was used for agricultural lime. One set of kilns was new in 1800 and the
railway was still in use for lime-carrying in 1844. 7 The railway was connected with
Benthall Rail, a wooden, horse-drawn railway in existence by 1686 which runs down
to the River Severn. Finally, at the eastern end of the scarp two inclines lead down to
ten limekilns on the river bank. Initially the lime was taken by river but when the
quarries were reopened in c. 1926 8 another incline, crushing machinery and a railway
siding were built. The pattern of quarrying reflects a move from exploiting high-
quality stone for fluxing to lower-quality stone for lime and agriculture. Yet the better
stone can still be seen in the quarry face, and has by no means been exhausted. The
exhaustion of limestone was perhaps not the only explanation for the demise of
working.
There were also extensive workings on Lincoln Hill, where the great open gash of
a former quarry can still be seen above the Iron Bridge.’ In fact, only a small
proportion of the originally extensive works can be viewed today.
A more superficial survey of the works than was possible at Benthall suggests a
similar pattern — until c. 1760, the working of high-quality limestone following the
outcrop of the stone. Only suggestions of this early phase survive, including the
quarrying of the area around the Swan public house.
Once the surface stone was exhausted, working continued underground. On the
south side of the river there is no evidence for underground working, but here the
measures slope downwards beneath the town of Ironbridge. Below the hill were
hollowed-out caverns, their roofs supported by pillars of remaining stone in a tech ­
nique known as ‘pillar and stall’ working. The technique leaves large voids, and often
results in surface collapses, which is indeed what has happened in the vicinity of

36
 M IN ERA L RESOURCES IN LANDSCAPE gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM
Lincoln Hill. Because of the danger posed to the road, the workings have recently
been filled in by the County Council, and are no longer accessible.10
The final stage of working on Lincoln Hill took place during the nineteenth
century, when the poorer-quality remaining stone was worked for building and
agricultural lime, a phase which coincides with a building boom in Ironbridge itself.
O f the 32 kilns shown in 1842, only three survive — two are preserved on the
Ironbridge W harfage, and above them lie the collapsing remains of a third kiln. Once
again, what survives today represents only a small part of the industry at its greatest
extent.
This latter kiln was almost certainly one of the kilns painted by Turner. The
Lincoln Hill workings were very much part of the drama of the industrial landscape;
they were also painted by M unn, and mentioned by many visitors, including Perry,
who described the hill as a ‘frightful precipice ’ and Katherine Plymley, who admired
the ‘grand, rude arches ’ of the caverns."
Benthall Edge and Lincoln Hill were among the closest sources of limestone for
local furnaces, but most of the ironmasters were forced to obtain fluxing stone from
more distant sources. The Coalbrookdale Company bought limestone from M uch
W enlock and Gleeden Hill, 4 km beyond Benthall Edge. The partners in the railway
to the Stone Port at Buildwas (who operated the furnaces at Bedlam, Calcutts and
W ren ’s Nest) obtained stone from W yke and Tickhill, and not from the nearby
Edge. 12 By 1835 the better stone had been worked out, and the furnaces were using
stone carried from Llanymynech on the W elsh border along the Shropshire Union
Canal. 13 It seems that the Harries family, who owned the mineral rights to Benthall
Edge, were content to allow the quarrying of poorer-quality shales for lime burning,
but did not provide limestone for competing furnace owners, however profitable this
might have been.
The significance of limestone is often underplayed, partly because the industry has
generated so little documentation" and partly because remains have been lost or
obscured. As with other mining operations, working did not cease once the better ­
quality stone had been exhausted and the boom period of the Industrial Revolution
had passed. The growing demand for agricultural products generated by indus ­
trialisation and the rapid construction of housing in Ironbridge, 15 combined with the
practical difficulties of keeping burnt lime dry, created an extensive market for lime
which was filled locally throughout the nineteenth century.16

T h e C a r b o n if e r o u s la n d s c a p e

The coals, clays and ironstones of the Carboniferous measures were the chief source
of the Gorges economic advantage in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. But
their exploitation was neither straightforward nor simple.
During rhe Carboniferous period Shropshire was covered with eroding river chan ­
nels, interspersed with large areas of swamp and lake. The layers of peat formed from
swamp vegetation became the coal seams, while tectonic movements led to occasional
marine incursions, creating the marine bands in which ironstones are found. The

37
 .X

3 |
c U §
E baZ
.y
it
E gfed
g
Z = s s^
^3% ® ! i S
E
.»
I ct

3
§ wvut

S'
?l
® 'X
£
■ .

3
I
t?
-§
S< =
c
o
s
J

1 i
!
s
&
•»
-S
s
CQ
OJ

^O

&
_o

1
4&!'
com v
, CM CM CM

B
V

£
8eg

\o \ i

, i J r>
1
a
^x_y8?
xvk 1 co r> m
k cm cm o

8\\=X ~
w
 JI § !
a
>»
baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
CD

I5 i
c
o
_>»
I
£
&
s
i
!
•U

S
a
tn
S baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
1 ■J

© gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
L I gl

<M
_i X l 7
i
® I ?
-Hp-
i
i
H
I
S|
T0
o

i
ft
Ld |
-Ko
«

I
” s-fsy- 7511

li o I
s 1 r& i
5-8-5pR
i
3| [Mn
I I
s T1
s s I w»_«o
r> r>

T
ol
I

FT ©
B
* — -J «

CM

I o

------- 5
o
. o1
g_ i
i I
L
S3

I I r- »-
TI
£ 11 I
o o
<•> «
CM CM i «
<0

2
! tn
LU
H
I
s
I H wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSR
!
o
Q
a
? o $
 THE LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

Shropshire Coalfield extends almost 20 km from Lilleshall in the north to W illey in

the south and is conventionally divided into three: the Lower Coal M easures, the
M iddle Coal M easures and the Upper Coal M easures. The Ironbridge Gorge itself
was created very much later during the last glaciation. W hen the ice sheet of the last
glaciation melted, a large lake formed between the watershed of the W enlock and
Pennine ridges, and the face of the ice sheet. As the water-level rose, the lake
overflowed at the Ironbridge col, cutting through the coal measures and limestones.
The resulting Gorge still retains the characteristics of a recently formed valley — the
sides are steep, and fast-flowing streams have created side valleys. The cutting provided
an easily accessible section through the principal Carboniferous minerals — iron, coal
and clay.17

Coal

The importance of coal in the process of industrialisation has been shown in chapter 1
— a seventeenth-century industry with medieval origins can be seen to underpin the
earliest economic development of the Gorge. In the eighteenth century coal-mining
and the discovery of new applications for coal stimulated industrial diversification,
and by the 1750s coal was integrated with local ironworking as the industry moved
from export to local consumption, the miners themselves providing an industrialised
population which adapted well to other industries. Coal-mining continued through ­
out the nineteenth century and into this century, largely as an adjunct to clayworking
but still with an economic role to play.
Landscape features associated with coal can be clearly seen around Ironbridge.
Groups of houses such as ‘The M ines ’ and Broseley W ood began as coal-mining
setdements, remote from the traditional agricultural town centres. The pattern of
industrial housing is a product of the needs of miners, and this in turn generated a
local brick industry. The first transport links down into the valley were stimulated by
the need to get coal to the Severn, and coal supplies were vital to ironworks such as
Bedlam. The remains of the many industries which relied upon coal supplies have
shaped the development of the south bank of the river. The need to maintain supplies
of coal generated external transport links such as canals and railways, after local
supplies had been exhausted. And the legacy of coal-mining today remains in the
areas of poor soils, and in the disturbed and slipping ground which is not economic
to develop.
But the basis of all this activity was the coal itself — the seams of the M iddle and
Lower Coal M easures. In order to understand the development of the coal industry,
it is necessary first to be aware of the properties of these seams and the way in which
they occur on the ground.
In sequence, the lowest measures are the Lancashire Ladies and the Crawstone
Coals, which were only ever mined from shafts. The lowest seam to outcrop on the
surface was the Little Flint Coal. Above this were the Best, Randle and Clod seams —
some of the most highly prized coals which outcrop on the river bank between the
Iron Bridge and the Free Bridge, and on the surface in Benthall parish. Field survey gfedcbaZ

40
 M INERAL RESOURCES IN LANDSCAPE

in Benchall parish has shown that there is a consistent link between outcrops of the
coal and surface evidence for early workings. Above this was the Ganey Coal — a
much-worked seam probably in association with the Ganey Clays — and the poorer-
quality Clunch or Viger Coal. The uppermost measure in the Lower Coal M easures
was the New M ine Coal — a highly sulphurous coal which was rarely worked until
the nineteenth century. The Big Flint Coals of the overlying M iddle Coal M easures
were also worked. 18
Early industrialists were highly selective about coal seams. Long before the proper­
ties of coal were documented, local miners distinguished the different strata. Low
sulphur content was the main quality sought in the seventeenth century and all but
the M ain Sulphur and the New M ine seams were suitable. It is to these low-sulphur
coals that Darbys success in smelting iron with coke has commonly been attributed.19
By the mid-eighteenth century a more critical distinction amongst local coals
emerged - it was universally recognised that the only coal suitable for smelting was
Clod Coal.20 W ith improved iron-making technology higher sulphur levels could be
tolerated. By the mid-nineteenth century, the use of coal for the railways, pottery,
brick- and tile-making, and in gas production, was on such a scale that smelting was
only a very small proportion of its use. These new uses meant that seams once thought
to be exhausted were reopened 21 — a process that continued to the present day with
open-cast mining of worked-out coal seams and coal wastes of very low grade, for use
in electricity power stations. M ining evidence has to be understood in terms of the
demands of industry.
The physical effect of the Gorge itself was to cut through these coal measures,
exposing them to the surface on either side of the river. In other areas such as Benthall
and Broseley town, faulting and erosion brought coal close to the surface. Thus coal
was accessible in the area before the development of the complex mining technology
of the past two hundred years. These two factors - quality and access — were
instrumental in the development of coal-mining here earlier than in comparison to
other mining areas in Britain, and continued to govern the pattern of working.
The third factor in understanding the pattern of exploitation was the level of
resources available to miners. The choice of mining technique is a factor of the scale
of operation and the capital available. Broadly, mining techniques developed from
medieval open quarries of coal outcrops, through bell pits and hillside adits, to deeper
shafts and long-wall mining. However, in reality methods were thoroughly baZYXWVUTSR
ad hoc
and depended more on individual circumstances and the investment available than
on the inevitable march of technological progress.
The classic landscape pattern of shallow bell pits — depressions surrounded by
circular mounds of spoil — survives on the south bank at W orkhouse Coppice in
Benthall, Deerleap W oods in Broseley and in the woods at Caughley. Shallow pits
occur where the coal is relatively close to the surface, and those that are preserved
clearly follow the seam outcrop. At Caughley, one band of bell pits reflects the outcrop
of the Best, Randle, Clod and Ganey seams, and a second, further down the slope,
the Little Flint Coal.22 Dating bell pits is almost impossible, and it can only be
assumed that the majority of Benthall pits are mid-seventeenth-century in date, when

41
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IN DU STRY

coal production was at its peak, and that those at Caughley are pre- 1750, when they baZYXW
were cut by later clay workings.
Part of the problem in dating bell pits - and indeed other types of mining — is that
there was not a simple temporal transition from the use of bell pits to deeper mining.
Rather, the mining technique seems to have been dependent upon available resources.
Landowners such as James Clifford in 1575 and John W eld in the 1630s were able
to sink deep pits which presented a problem of waste disposal and required pumping,
at the same time as individual miners were working single bell pits. Even the open
working of coal on the surface — for which there is evidence at Linley, at Bagleys
Rough and other areas — is undatable. It can be assumed to be the earliest technique
used in the medieval mines, and yet coal was worked from surface outcrops during
the strike of 1912 and at W oodside much more recently.
The way in which coal seams outcropped on the sides of the valley dictated that
one of the most common techniques was the adit or insert — a tunnel dug directly
into the seam from the hillside, with smaller galleries leading ofF it. The technique
was common by about 1608, when James Clifford dug ‘fower inserts ’ at Ladywood
(figs 3.4 and 3.5), 23 and was still in use for getting fireclay and coal from above the
white brickworks at Benthall in the 1950s. W hat was notable was the length of these
inserts in the seventeenth century — 1000 yards and longer.24 Unfortunately, adits
have a notoriously poor survival rate as field evidence. The Benthall adits just above
the Iron Bridge ceased working in 1953, and were visible in the 1960s, but today
little more than a depression in the hillside survives. Clifford ’s adits were mapped in baZYXWV
c. 162 1 25 but despite archaeological excavation there was nothing visible in the dis ­
turbed river bank where they ought to have been found. 26
In the second half of the eighteenth century there was a clear transition to mining
on a company basis, as part of the integration of ironworking operations. Companies
purchased mining operations, such as the limestone workings at Lincoln Hill, which
were bought by the the M adeley W ood Company, or the investors in the W illey
furnaces who bought coal-mining operations. These companies could command large
amounts of capital, and so there was a corresponding change in the scale and
techniques of coal-mining. The Broseley Hall Estate M ap of 1728/65 shows that
there were several pits in Jackfield mining huge areas of coal by the long wall method
(fig. 3.6).27 A long, continuous working face is kept open, and the space behind filled
with gob to support the roof. M odern workings frequently encounter old gob in coal
seams, and the practice may explain why so few pit heaps from early workings can be
identified.
By the mid-eighteenth century, both adits and shafts were large enough to require
more elaborate technical investments, including ventilation and mechanical means
for forcing out water. Earlier mines had had air shafts, and ‘soughs ’ for drainage, but
little evidence of these survives. The Ladywood Sough comes out alongside the old
I railway track below the hairpin bend on Broseley Bank and is still flowing copiously,
a very ochrous water. However, at Benthall a small brick structure survives which
may well have been the base of a chimney which created a through draught to
ventilate an adit. One of the rare surviving pieces of field evidence for pumping is at gfedcbaZ

42
 MINERAL RESOURCES IN LANDSCAPEgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM

M a k e - ly e . W ood

TT>e K ^ver o f Sabren t

ft 0 ^ *
Tn, ,

^o^-n &/esjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTS

^■n a e-t. /.
J n s ttis '7 ~ Z -J o

'L wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVU
= r jL^ie.
—-'tOcDct
C r° ^

ft A Co
baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK

\ 1

V
4

*‘/.y
^7

3 .4 Extract from Samuel Parsons ’ Map c.1621 showing inserts or mines on the riverbank baZYXWVUTSR
(SRO 1224)

the Lloyds Coppice on the north bank of the river. There two shafts, pump rods and
brick foundations survive from a pumping and winding engine. This could well be
the earliest in the Shropshire Coalfield, erected by the lessees of the M adeley mineral
rights in 1719.28
Company investment in mining is also visible in the remains of the Heslop engine
base, excavated at Blists Hill.29 There the M adeley W ood Company erected a Heslop-
style engine in the 1790s to pump water from a shaft. Heslop engines were a variant
on the Boulton & W att engine, developed by a local man and widely used in the
area. Two characteristic ‘ haystack ’ boiler bases remain, but the rest of the engine base
has been altered by the insertion of a later engine. 30
The Tar Tunnel at Coalport is the only safe and easily accessible mine in the area.

43
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND USTRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK

3 .5 Lateral mineshafts beside the Severn, Dibden 1801 (IGM T SSMT18)

The M adeley W ood Company proposed a novel solution to removing coal from the
base of their shafts - a tunnel driven in from the riverside to the bottom of the
shafts.'1 Soon after it was begun, the tunnellers struck a source of mineral tar, and
the operation was diverted to tar extraction. It was only after the tar was exhausted
that the tunnel was taken through to the coal shafts, where it acted as a drain. The
tunnel remains open to the public today as part of the museum complex, and can be
explored for several hundred yards. ’ 2
If the eighteenth century was a period of innovation and investment in local
mining, the later nineteenth century stands in contrast as one of ‘make do and mend ’ .
The pattern of company mining by large ironworking concerns had given way to one
where coal-mining was mainly an adjunct to brick and tile manufacture. Easily
accessible supplies of the famous Clod Coal had been exhausted, ironmasters had
developed new sources of coal and ironstone in the northern part of the field and
most of the market for Broseley coal was local. By 1840, the majority of shafts in
Broseley were worked by brick- or tile-makers, who were producing coal for their
own use, and coal-mining had ceased altogether in Benthall. 33 The high number of
accidents in local mines reflects the rather casual nature of mining technology. 34
Although pits were generally deeper and more extensive than they had been, old

44 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDC
 rte
n r-
yM1 jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
‘y.j

-V baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
•j -C ru u c h
X
0 7>'°‘ p^-
C
ij"
D
z

^4y7 /
‘T h e Q .rn t'y y,nJ / / M.-/«

CaF \ .
n r?
u li • -

7
\/W * r J h

IS,

f5 )..l ■fibre

/•£.<« ‘ittZou

“gg baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
i
'r^.
£
' a i^-^cU
\
t/.M /'fiK
C—j Pi/^'
• /r z
I
3 .6 The Broseley Hall Estate Map showing early evidence for railways, pits and also limits of
1 1 n/4/*rr»r/-»! • rtrl <irzv«-K • ^»»»
underground working. D <._. J
Based C OT 1 z o r»
on SBL (Nicola Smith) gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO
- — • — — • ^ — — --
MSS, c.1728/65
 THE LANDSCAPE OF INDUSTRYwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXW

engines, such as rhe one at Deep Pit in Broseley, remained in operation, often working
shafts up to 150 years old, and hand winding was common.35
Although the main seams were said to be worked out, sporadic mining did take
place earlier this century. Clod Coal was certainly being worked at the Viger mine in
Benthall in 1953 where the remains of adits and an inclined plane over the railway
line are just visible, 36 and several old pits were reopened around Benthall hall during
the Second W orld W ar. M ore recently there has been renewed mining activity through
open-cast working. The Ironbridge power station has generated a market for local
coal which need not be of particularly high quality, and this was supplemented by
the supply of clay to brickworks in Telford. At Caughley and the Deerleap, where
mining was abandoned earlier this century, new open-cast techniques on a vast scale
have made the seams once again economical.
Thus, while the quality of coal and the ease of access to it lay behind the pattern
of early coal-mining, later mining was a complex and changing process, dependent
not so much on adopting the latest mining technology, but on the amount of
investment industrialists made available. Coal-mining moved from being a dominant
industry in its own right to becoming simply an adjunct to other industries, and in
doing so lost the ability to attract investment.

Ironstone

O f the many ironstone bands found over the north of the coalfield, only two occur
significantly in this area - the Pennystone and the Crawstone. 37 The most commonly
exploited was the Pennystone, consisting of small, smooth nodules of iron carbonate
in a band of mudstone, sometimes capped with irregular masses of ironstone. It was
one of the most valuable of the ironstone seams.38 It outcrops on either side of the
Gorge around the 100 m contour and lies under the Big Flint Sandstone, which often
provides a good stable roof to mines. Pennystone was brought to the surface in its
clay matrix, which was left to weather and the lumps of ironstone picked out, often
by women (fig. 3.7). The nodules were then calcined, by being roasted in heaps, and
later in specially designed ovens.39 This reduced the total bulk of the ore, removed
water and impurities, and was normally done at the ironworks prior to charging the
furnace, rather than at the mine itself.
Crawstone — a sandstone impregnated with ironstone — occurs near the bottom of
the Lower Coal M easures and was mainly obtained by deep mining, but it outcrops
in M adeley W ood, and possibly elsewhere near the riverside in Ironbridge and
Benthall. It is the only ironstone measure found south of Broseley, where it is said to
be of better quality, and there was extensive evidence for mining it in the late
nineteenth century.40
From an early date, ironmasters clearly appreciated the distinction between these
two types of ironstone. Thus the ‘ Baull ’ stone and ‘ Flatt’ stone bought by Abraham
Darby I in 1708 were strictly differentiated in quantity and price. They indicate a
degree of deliberate mixing of stone even at an early date.41 The reason that such care
was taken to select the right ore was because of the problem of phosphorus. M ost jihgfedcba

46
 MINERAL RESOURCES IN LANDSCAPEwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXW

]
«’ <
G* ■ gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM
I 'A ,■
I
Efei**'jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

T< baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

W ifi baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
3 .7 ‘A dams Engine and Ironstone Pit’ , Madeley W ood 1847. W omen may be seen to the right
of the image picking ironstone nodules out of the clay matrix (IGM T 1992.9785)

impurities in iron-ore are lost during smelting; phosphorus remains, producing an

iron which is fluid in casting. The phosphorus levels in local ore may explain Abraham
Darby Is concern at selecting the right ore, which would allow him to produce thin
castings.42
Unfortunately, pig-iron high in phosphorus is ‘cold-short’ or brittle, and unsuitable
for making wrought-iron, thus limiting the use of early coke-furnace iron to relatively
crude castings. The recognition and selection of low-phosphorus ironstones
(specifically the Ballstone, Blackstone and Pennystone) by Abraham Darby II in the
mid-eighteenth century made it possible to produce pig-iron suitable for making
wrought-iron in a standard charcoal finery. 45
Ironstone mining techniques were similar to those of coal, with a broad, bur by no
means absolute, succession of bell pits, replaced by shafts and adits. Coal and iron
were often mined together, although on the north side of the river, where thicke
ironstone seams were found, ironstone continued to be mined as a separate operation
A Crawstone mine in Ironbridge, operating as late as 1842, worked a circular long
wall face, accessed through three tunnels. About 0.6 m of massive ironstone was
worked, as well as the thin seam of coal on the floor. Evidence for the techniques
used in working the Pennystone comes from mines to the north, where thicker seams
were worked in different levels.44
From the surface, the key to identifying former Pennystone mines is the large,
often bare spoil heaps and the ochrous water running off the mine outlets. Pennystone
mines produced at least 10 tons of spoil for every ton of iron produced, and in order
to remove the iron nodules more easily the spoil was left to weather on the surface.

47
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

The clay was apparently ‘ injurious to vegetation ’ due to the salinity of the deposits,
and so the mounds remain for years without grass. It broke down to a clay which was
occasionally used in brickmaking. 45 The most obvious heap is at the north side of the
Free Bridge, where a vast flat-topped, bare mound is approached by a steep track cut
into its side. Two little stone cottages have been built on the top - almost certainly
squatting on otherwise abandoned and useless land. 46
Several Pennystone mines have been located in Ironbridge, although only one is
open, but because of bad air it has not been fully explored.47 There were also
Pennystone mines on the south bank of the river in Ladywood, but only the spoil
heaps remain visible on the surface today.
Crawstone mines are less easy to identify on the surface, as they do not produce
the same quantity of waste. At least one Crawstone mine remains in Ironbridge. It
consists of a tunnel with three main passages branching off it, and was worked using
the long wall system. It seems to have operated between c.1823 and 1840, and the
stone was sent by inclined plane down to the riverside below. 48
Ironstone mining on the south bank remained important well after the smelting
of iron had ceased in the Gorge. By 1840, James Foster had purchased land and
transport networks in Jackfield, and was using them to transport iron-ore to the
riverside for export to the Black Country. There were apparently calcining kilns on
the river bank, although no evidence for these is visible amongst the tile waste tips of
Jackfield.
At Blisrs Hill, however, there are the remains of two features relating to the calcining
of ironstone. To the south of the furnaces is a level area, cut as a terrace into the
hillside, with a brick wall retaining the canal embankment. Large quantities of brittle,
russet-coloured ironstone finings can be found scattered on the ground, suggesting
that this was the site of open calcining heaps, where ironstone was roasted to drive
off impurities. At the rear of the furnaces themselves are the remains of a purpose-
built calcining kiln in the form of the circular kiln mouth.
The mining of ironstone has left few visible remains. Yet the presence of ironstone
must have been one factor in the siting of the early iron industry, and the physical
conjunction of coal and ironstone — often in the same shaft - must have been
instrumental in the development of coke-smelting.

Sandstone

The bands of sandstone found between coal measures also proved to be a useful local
resource. Coal-measure sandstone was one of the earliest local building materials, and
survives in early phases of houses in Benthall, Broseley and Ironbridge (chapter 6). It
may have been used in early buildings at the Coalbrookdale works (chapter 5) but,
apart from the Great W arehouse at Coalport, was rare in industrial buildings except
as a foundation material as in the engineering buildings which remain today at
Coalbrookdale. Sandstone was often used where there was contact with water (e.g.
the riverside walls at Coalport or in Ironbridge)4 ’ and also in retaining walls against
earth banks. Sandstone retaining walls are a key feature of the steep lanes of Ironbridge

48
 MINERAL RESOURCES IN LANDSCAPEwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXW

and along the line of the former Coalbrookdale railway. Sandstone was also employed
for furnace hearths prior to the introduction of brick, and to provide loose sand for
furnace castings.
The measures which produced sandstone were the Big and Little Flint rocks.
Evidence for sandstone mining can be seen in local names such as ‘The Quarry ’ in
Broseley W ood, thought to be the medieval source of sandstone for Buildwas Abbey.
There is field evidence for sandstone mining in the vicinity of Lodge Farm, Ironbridge.
Stone and sand were transported from here down Church Hill to the Coalbrookdale
Company works. Sandstone mining was also noted in exploratory boreholes near
Bedlam Furnaces. 50
The abutments for the Iron Bridge required two types of stone - rubble stone used
to fill the abutments, and wrought ashlar facings.51 Some of the stone came from the
garden of Charles Hornblower in Ironbridge, which the Bridge Proprietors were
obliged to make good in 1787. It is likely, therefore, that some of the terraces and
areas of Ironbridge have been created by quarrying for sandstone.
There were other mining ventures which are more difficult to trace archaeologically.
Salt brine exuded from the Flint Coal in M adeley parish,52 and also was thought to
have been extracted at the Salthouses in Broseley. M ineral tar was worked at Coalport
and Coalbrookdale.

Clay

Clayworking began much earlier, and lasted much longer than any other industry in
the Gorge. Bricks, tiles, pots and clay pipes were made in the area over three
hundred years, and perhaps longer. 53 Even the established iron partnerships such as
the Coalbrookdale Company and the M adeley W ood Company include brick and
tile manufacture as part of their output. W e tend to assume that iron and coal
dominated the industrial prosperity of the area, yet in 1835 many of the inhabitants
of Benthall were employed in the potteries, and brick- and tile-making remained an
industry of regional and most likely national importance well after the demise of
iron-smelting in the Gorge.
Clay is a bulky raw material, and bricks themselves represent relatively low added
value in comparison to, for example, pottery, where the profit for the amount of clay
is much higher. Transportation costs were therefore much more significant in the
heavy clay industries; to minimise costs, brick- and tile-works were located as close
as possible to clay sources. Thus, the industrial sites cluster at or around the main
sources of clay.
Clay is found in a series of different seams between the bands of the coal measures,
but each of these seams has very different properties. In order to understand the
variety of clayworking which took place, and where it took place, it is important to
understand the clay itself. The clay industries were dependent on three very different
types of clays with different properties - the surface clays, the red clays (including the
tile clays), and the fireclays.
Surface glacial clays were probably the first source of clay used to make bricks in

49
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IN DU STRY

the area, a pattern which has been identified in other parts of Britain. 54 The earliest
dated brickwork here is seventeenth century.55 In general, such bricks are red but
occasionally burnt blue. They are thinner than later bricks, and slightly distorted. In
section they are often coarse, with pebbles, air holes and other inclusions. The mixing
of the clay is irregular, and bands of white and red can often be seen. Common house ­
bricks do not necessarily require specialist clay, and in rhe case of these early bricks
the colour seems to be a product of the firing rather than of any individual clay
source. Such bricks were probably fired at a low temperature in an open clamp,
perhaps using wood as a fuel: over-fired bricks burnt blue, the remainder a soft red
colour. These brickmaking operations were small, and often impermanent. Itinerant
brickmakers such as Jos. W hitefoot on the W illey Estate would have set up their kilns
at or near the building site to fill an order. Others set up kilns in populated areas,
again to be close to builders rather than clay sources. One lease mentions the ‘liberty
to make brick on the premises for the use of the premises only ’ .56 It is unlikely that
such operations would have mined their own clay, or bothered to transport clay long
distances.
Local surface clays would also have been used in the individual brick kilns to be
found scattered amongst the farms throughout the period, often indicated on maps
as ‘ Brick Kiln Field or Leasow ’ . Only at the Dunge Brickworks to the east of Broseley
was surface clay exploited commercially. There, a fat grey clay was found, which made
a characteristic yellow to grey brick with black spots, which can be recognised on
some Broseley buildings today.57
The red clays were concentrated in the Coalport and Hadley formations of the
Upper Coal M easures, which outcrop to the south and east of Jackfield and around
Blists Hill. Their most important properties were a high iron content, and a degree
of plasticity which enabled them to be moulded, making them very suitable for brick
and tile manufacture. W ithin this category, there were two distinct types of clay -
the clays used in making roof-tiles, and the softer red-burning clays.
W hen they were under threat from competing roof materials in the early twentieth
century, the manufacturers of Broseley roof-tiles made much of their unique clay.58
They argued that the quality of their tiles was totally dependent upon a clay found
only in the Broseley area. The clay was found deep in the Hadley formation, and
thus could not be open-worked. Because it was so hard, it had to be mined by
blasting, and once on the surface required weathering to break it up. Such processes
made it more expensive to get than open-worked surface clays. The tiles it produced
were characteristically dark purple or brown, and very hard, since the clay was able
to withstand very great heat in the kiln. The clay was sufficiently plastic to be
moulded, but did not shrink or warp during firing, and produced an even, regular
tile.
The deep mining of tile clay must have been established by 1776, when Arthur
Young saw ‘great numbers of blue tiles ... burnt here, and sent by the Severn to a
distance’ . 59 The Hollygrove and Ladywood works and probably several others were
certainly founded in the latter part of the eighteenth century. By 1840 the Tithe map
shows a series of large concerns already functioning on the riverside at Jackfield,gfedcbaZ

50
 M INERAL RESOURCES IN LANDSCAPE

characterised by a heavy investment in buildings and a scale of operation very

unusual for the brick and tile industry. These works are nominally described in the
apportionment as ‘brick kilns ’ but they were almost certainly manufacturing roofing ­
tiles for export as well. Each of these works was located by the riverside, away from
centres of population, and most had a path and loading area on the riverside itself.
By far the best archaeological evidence for the industry comes from the pre ­
ponderance of purple/brown roof-tiles on the roofs of the Gorge and on buildings
towards Bridgnorth and Shrewsbury. Very few buildings survive from these works.
None of the shafts which provided the deep clay can be explored as they are either
flooded or have been capped. Tiles are almost the universal roofing material, with the
exception of a few slate-roofed buildings dating to the period after the construction
of the railway line.
The red clays of the same formation could not take such intense heat, and burnt
red in the kiln. They were ideal for floor-tiles, producing a fine-grained product
which would gradually wear smooth. The products had to be dried very carefully and
slowly, or they would be liable to crack during firing.60 Clay floor-tiles are often found
in eighteenth-century buildings, the earliest of them seem to be stamped ‘ l.B. Davis ’ .
As the clays were found in the same formation, firms producing roof-tiles often
also produced red clay products. By the late nineteenth century, most of the Jackfield
firms made a standard range of products including roof-tiles, floor-tiles and decorative
finials, in red, blue, brown and white, suggesting that they had access to different
sources of clay. So far no evidence has been found for the manufacture of earthenware
pottery from red clays and, although the famous Jackfield ware has a red body, wasters
of this ware have not yet been found. Red clays were, however, used at Benthall in
the twentieth century for black-glazed electrical goods and lampstands, and seem also
to have been used for art pottery.
The important issue is whether the clays were responsible for the demise of the
Broseley roof-tile industry in the late nineteenth century. Various culprits have been
blamed for the problems manufacturers faced from the 1880s onwards, including
competition from slate, and ‘bacteria’ in the clay. Tile manufacturers claimed that it
was the customers ’ insatiable demand for red tiles which caused manufacturers to
produce a soft red product (or even to sell the under-burnt tiles) without the
traditional hard-wearing properties associated with the purple tiles. But the problem
may equally have been that manufacturers tried to cut costs by economising on the
long drying time normally associated with a tile clay and thus producing an inferior
product. M ost of the firms had moved over to the semi-plastic process, and invested
heavily in machinery. 61
Archaeological evidence certainly confirms that there were problems. The quantity
of wasters rose dramatically in the late nineteenth century, when Jackfield was deluged
by great heaps of machine-made roof-tiles, discarded around the kilns. M ost of these
tiles have been stamped with the maker’s name, a practice which dates to the period
of the formation of a Broseley roof-tile association in the 1880s. Roof-tiles are a
common feature in retaining walls and buildings all around Jackfield, and steps and
garden walls around houses are constructed with banks of tiles. Tiles are used to great

51
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

effect in alternate courses with bricks in a shed to the rear of the Craven Dunnill
W orks. All this suggests that there was suddenly an excess of roof-tiles, created by
either falling prices or falling quality.
W hilst the red clays and the tile clays were often used together in manufacturing,
the fireclay operations were generally separate. Fireclays are not found at all in the
Upper and M iddle Coal M easures, but do occur in the Lower Coal M easures,
outcropping in Benthall, Jackfield and Ironbridge. For this reason, fireclay industries
are concentrated on the southern side of the river, where these measures are near the
surface.
The fireclays were typically high in silica (making them plastic) and alumina
(increasing refractory properties), with a small iron content. This meant that they
fired to a cream or light pink colour. The main refractory seams were the New
M ine Clay and the Ganey Clay. There were also white-burning clays such as the
Clunch Clay, the Randle Clay and the Clod Clay, which lacked refractory qualities
but which could be used for white brick, sanitary wares and floor-tiles. W hite
clays could also be glazed to produce sinks, or coloured with a wash to produce
polychromatic brickwork. In fact, many of the blue bricks used in Ironbridge are not
high-fired blue engineering bricks, but white bricks, coloured with a blue exterior.62
The best-quality white clays were the Ganey Clays, which outcrop in Benthall and
in the Deerleap, and are accessible from shafts elsewhere. At Hilltop Farm in Benthall,
just opposite Broseley W ood, is a wonderful clay-mining landscape, where clay has
been cut out from the hillside, leaving the marks of old roads, quarries and spoil
heaps across the slope.
An equally impressive open clayworking landscape in the same measures was
mapped at Caughley (fig. 3.8). There, a survey of Ambrose Gallimores saggar works,
dating to 1754 or earlier, showed an area of depressions which proved to be working
on a surface outcrop of the Ganey Clay.63 This clay would have been excellent for
saggar-making, and several pieces of unused saggar were in fact found in the area.
W hat was unexpected was that roof-tiles made of a white clay were also found on the
site, the only instance of white roof-tiles yet seen in the area. The clay workings could
be shown to cut, and thus postdate, a series of bell pits for mining coal, showing that
these were at least pre-1760s in date.
The white clays were also mined from adits to the west of the Iron Bridge, above
the site of Burtons W hite BrickW orks. As a form of mining evidence, adits disappear
very quickly. At least one of these adits - working as recently as 1953 - could be seen
only ten years ago, but has since disappeared. The entrances to two others are,
however, visible, as is a brick construction which provided ventilation to the mine.
The routes of the tramways by means of which clay was removed from the mines do
survive, as do the remains of the inclined plane, taking clay over the railway line to
the brickworks itself.
There were two main nineteenth-century brickworks using this white clay —
Burtons at Bower Yard, and the white brickworks at Bedlam on the site of the old
furnaces. The clay was of such quality that both firms were exporting white clay down
the River Severn, as well as producing their own bricks. Burton ’s white bricks were gfedcbaZ

52
 5
X
CD
=
o
ul
I

s W

s
I
o

£wvuts
u gfedc
z
S'
-S >
g
(J
J
<' I I
<5
' I 88
I CO
QJ baZY
I
J
o jihgfe
£

&
2
,;?' so
I . o
UJ •6
'-k: ................................ W -- 5
/ S 8
_c
5 tap
I IbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
S
"5

a:
I
y : 'r / V s ( S
CD
x -
§
. /
I =5
CQ
°O
«S

w
-< ■ / ^////////
8 /.p - f \
Zk ^ r '>
V kk z :\S 1
8^ I 11 k A " ''' K -'

S5s I I A x/
I
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

used on the now demolished Ironbridge station, and can be seen in the base of a
footbridge which still stands on the site, while bricks from the Bedlam site — stamped
‘M adeley W ood Co.’ - can be seen on the steps leading up to the church in Ironbridge.
W hite clays were also used by the earthenware pottery industries, in particular for
the manufacture of slipwares. From the mid-eighteenth century onwards these firms
were producing press-moulded and wheel-thrown wares with a bufFfabric, decorated
with a red slip. There were at least three potteries at Benthall, and others at Ladywood,
Jackfield, Caughley and Little W enlock, all of which are located near sources of these
white clays. There is field evidence for clayworking at Benthall and Caughley, within
a few hundred metres of the pottery site. The distribution of potteries closely reflects
the occurrence of white clays on or near the surface.
A local source of white clay was also one of the factors in the development of the
clay tobacco-pipe industry in Broseley. The most likely candidate for this clay would
be the Big Flint Clay, the uppermost clay surviving in Benthall and Broseley. The
clay fired very white, and had excellent plastic properties which would allow it to be
moulded into fine clay pipes. It was found in only a few areas, where it was located
quite near the surface and could well have been worked out very early; this might
explain the concentration of clay pipemaking in Benthall and Broseley near the source
of the clay. The shortage of local clay may also explain the transition of the clay
tobacco-pipe industry to imported clays in the nineteenth century.65
Despite the qualities of local clays, several nineteenth-century firms, including
M aws and Craven Dunnill encaustic tile manufacturers and the Coalport porcelain
works, were dependent upon imported clays. However, as is so often the case, clay ­
working practices had changed. Each of these firms had originally been been attracted
to the area by the qualities of the local clays, but later changed to imported clays as
the demands of the manufacturing process changed.
George and Arthur M aw were already using imported clay from Benthall at their
W orcester tile factory when they decided to move their manufacturing operations to
Benthall in 1852. George was an amateur geologist, and highly knowledgeable about
local clay sources. W e do not know precisely which sources of local clay the firm used,
but the site they chose at Benthall was located so as to be able to take advantage of
both rhe white and the red clays. In the 1860s, the firm was still using local red clays,
as it was considering buying an old pottery at Jackfield for the clays rather than the
buildings.66 Local informants suggest that the firm was using the Randle Clay to
make floor-tiles during this century, as well as importing clays.
In fact, one of the M aws ’ clay-mines still survives. The mine lies to the rear of the
original M aws encaustic tile factory site in Benthall. The adit reaches a short way into
the hillside, and is lined with plain encaustic tiles, which have very effectively preserved
it and prevented the soft sides from collapsing. Small side galleries lead to clayworking
faces, left just as they were abandoned, no doubt at the time of the move to Jackfield
in 1882.
W hite clays were the source of a brief revival of ceramic manufacture at Benthall
and at the old Bower Yard works in the twentieth century. In response to the massive
demand for town drainage, both firms manufactured glazed sanitary pipes - the

54
 MINERAL RESOURCES IN LANDSCAPE

Bower Yard works until 1955, and the Benthall site until 1984.67 One of the reasons
for the closure was the popularity of plastic drainpipes. Part of the sanitary pipeworks,
including a kiln, still remains within the old pottery works at Benthall, now used for
the storage of agricultural machinery. O f the Bower Yard works, nothing remains bar
an impressive retaining wall by the riverside built up, in best local tradition, of waste
and unusable sanitary pipes.
It would, of course, be wrong to isolate the role of clay from that of coal. Coal and
clay were often worked together, particularly by brick- and tile-making firms who
used the coal to fuel kilns. Coal, as much as clay, made the Gorge attractive to ceramic
industries of all types. However, it is also possible to see a pattern of succession in
coal and clayworking. At Jackfield and Blists Hill, shafts which had been sunk in the
eighteenth century for coal were in use in the nineteenth century for the extraction
of clay. Once again the investment in the landscape generated by the coal industry
had been utilised by subsequent industrialists, long after the early mines had stopped
working.
The reuse of old coal shafts is also an example of the perception of value in mineral­
working. Clay is a low-value mineral, rarely mentioned specifically in mining leases
until the mid-nineteenth century. Equally, the sulphur coals were considered of little
value and not worked until the nineteenth century, when engine technology made it
possible to use what had hitherto been useless coals. Changes in ironworking tech ­
nology also placed a new value on individual types of ironstone. And the level of
perceived value is reflected in turn in the level of investment. The export of coal
in the seventeenth century was able to attract a higher relative level of investment
than the mining of a small amount of coal by a brickworks in the nineteenth century.
Thus the exploitation of minerals, like any other aspect of the landscape, has to be
seen in the context of time and space. It is not possible to rely on recent mining
practices to interpret the eighteenth century, because there has been considerable
change through time. M ineral exploitation is not just a question of physical supply;
the sheer physical amount of each mineral remaining in the ground was often less
relevant than the economics of working it. Even today there are supplies of coal and
clay, yet underground mining ceased many years ago.
The relationship between raw materials, exploitation and settlement has often been
seen in terms of models of economic determinism, implying that natural availability
determined the choices made by communities. Yet what can be traced here is a highly
complicated pattern in which access to minerals, the individual properties of different
minerals, and the level of available investment all overlie the physical geography.

W aste

The relative industrial decline of the late nineteenth century created an atmosphere
of desolation which many visitors commented upon. This was created not just by the
closing of industries, and the movement of people out of the area, but by the still
bare and relatively recent heaps of industrial waste and scars of old mining which
dominated the Gorge.

55
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IN DU STRY

The by-products of industrialisation have done as much as any individual industry

to shape the landscape of the Gorge today. W aste, pollution, and the side-effects of
old workings, such as landslip, have had a profound effect. W hen Svedernstierna
visited Coalbrookdale in 1802/3, he noted that

Everywhere in this district one frequently comes across caved-in shafts and
hollows in the earth in areas where there are houses and gardens. Some houses
had recently collapsed and others were standing at such an angle that I don ’t
understand how people could live in them.68

Few of the contours we see are those of the original landscape, now obscured by heaps
of roof-tile waste and mountains of coal- and clay-mining debris. No garden is
without its complement of pottery; roads are made of slag or pipe waste, and boundary
walls of old sanitary pipes. The pattern of present-day building, of woodland, of
agriculture and even of settlement as a whole can all be related to the lasting effects
of past industries. W aste is another key to reading the landscape.
The most obvious category of waste is that from iron-smelting and founding. In
the blast furnace, impurities in the iron-ore and coke combine with limestone to
form a mass which floats on top of the pure iron. This is tapped periodically, and on
cooling forms a glassy slag. The local cold blast-furnace slag of the mid-nineteenth
century is a marbled light and dark blue material, with few bubbles, whereas that
from the eighteenth-century Benthall furnaces is black. Old iron was always recycled
in the blast furnace, and so practically never survives in any quantity on archaeological
sites. Equally, any slag with a high iron content, such as that made in the rather
inefficient early charcoal furnaces, would be recycled.6 ' But ironworks produced many
tons of unusable slag each year, as well as old casting sand, boiler ash from steam
engines, and slags from the activities associated with ironworking — forging and
casting.
Removing this waste from ironworks was a constant problem. Cinder heaps were
frequent landmarks in the past, surviving today only as field names. Once water ­
power was replaced by steam, old pools provided a useful dumping ground for slag,
as at Horsehay in the nineteenth century, or Coalbrookdale today. Slag occasionally
appears as a building material, topping boundary walls at Coalbrookdale, making up
the splendid retaining wall which was recently demolished at Horsehay, or dumped
by the roadside in great blocks, as at Coalport. Otherwise, it has simply built up on
furnace sites in great quantities.
At the Benthall furnaces, situated in a narrow valley, removal of slag was a constant
problem. The owners of the furnaces were accused of dumping cinder and ashes on
the road in 1781, and in 1795 were obliged to pay their landlord for the right to
dump waste. One solution they adopted was to use the slag and ash for surfacing
roads; they contracted with the proprietors of the Iron Bridge to surface Bridge Bank,
the Iron Bridge itself and parts of the W harfage with ‘three tons of furnace cinders to
each yard in length of a road nine yards wide, and thirty loads of ash to cover them ’ .70
This ash can often be seen in modern service trenches.
The use of slag for road surfacing became an important industry in its own right

56
 M INERAL RESOURCES IN LANDSCAPE

after the First W orld W ar, when two firms operated at Blists Hill between 1920 and
1941, setting up crushing equipment close to the old blast furnaces. 71 The crushed
slag was mixed with tar, and then sold commercially for road-making. Although
nothing remains of these operations, they have left a legacy of instability on the site
today, caused by digging out and redumping great areas of fill.
Ironworking must also have affected agriculture, or at least the value of agricultural
land. A local land surveyor commented that at Coneybury furnaces the land was
‘chiefly mounted upon and entirely spoiled for agricultural purposes ’, whilst there
was a field near the Broseley furnaces which ‘when in grass is certainly at times injured
by the Smoke from the Furnace ’ . 72
The damage from coal-mining was much more widespread than that from iron-
working. It was the fields in and around Broseley and the slopes leading down to
Jackfield which were most ‘trespassed upon by the working of the mines ’ . Admittedly,
the tenant or miner was obliged to pay damages to the landlord during the course of
working, and to level the mounts and make good the land at the end. Nevertheless,
it was Vickers ’ opinion that at the end of working most such land would be worth
relatively little in agricultural terms, 75 and although the landlord might gain something
by this arrangement, tenants of neighbouring houses often suffered. Occasionally a
tenant was obliged to replace a house spoiled by mining, but more commonly houses
seem to have been allowed to collapse.
Coal-mining, in conjunction with ironworking, was in fact responsible for the
disappearance of several settlements (fig. 3.9). Groups of houses formerly existed at
M one W ood and Coneybury, near the furnaces, and at Croppers Holes just below
the Benthall furnaces. By the late eighteenth century, several of these houses had been
rendered uninhabitable by the pits.74 Today there is no settlement at Coneybury, and
only one or two cottages in what were formerly Croppers Holes and M one W ood,
although remains of houses could still be seen in the early 1 960s. Settlement, therefore,
was as well able to contract as to expand.
The pattern of woodland today is also related to early coal-mining. Very dense
areas of early bell pits at Deerleap, at Caughley and at The M ines have remained as
woodland, as the spoil heaped onto the surface rendered the land useless for agri­
culture. The deeper shafts of the nineteenth century left great standing pit mounds
which still tower over Broseley today. These mounds, too, tend to be covered with
trees which provide some measure of stability to their steep sides. This is one of the
reasons why it is in the woodlands that some of the best-preserved archaeology
survives — mining made it unusable for agriculture, and thus preserved it from the
problems of deep ploughing which have subsequently destroyed many sites.
By far the most damaging legacy of mining has been surface landslips, created by
underground voids. M iners were not always scrupulous about respecting surface
boundaries, and several Broseley buildings have been affected. The Red Church at
Jackfield was reputed to be haunted by a ghost who threw down the partly completed
building. The church suffered constant problems and was later demolished. The
culprit was said to be nearby clay-mining, which had undermined the foundations of
the building.

57
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND USTRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIH

W’ 1

3 .9 The after-effects of the Jackfield slip (IGM T1 982.240)

During rhe equally dramatic Jackfield slip, houses moved up to 18 m, and roads
split open. ’ As a result, yet another community - the Salthouses - was totally
demolished. The problem lay with the W allace pit just above the area, dating back to
at least the 1760s, and mined first for coal, and later for tile clay. The pits were
pumped during working, and during W orld W ar II when the site was used as an
ammunition dump, but after the war pumping ceased, and the ground surface sheared
away from the more solid bedrock. Slipping continues in the area even today, with
so much movement that only a temporary road surface can be laid across the site. It
is certainly unsafe to build in this area today.
Slips also occurred on the north bank, in the Lloyds area, although it is less easy
to attribute this directly to mining. Again, all of the documented cottages have gone,
and the effects of slip are such that the Lloyds is one of the few areas where none of
the eighteenth-century plots can be identified.
Ceramic industries, too, left an imprint on the landscape. Like blue slag, pottery
waste is found as surface makeup on local roads, frequently some distance from its
likely origin. But its impact on the landscape is tiny in comparison with the havoc
wrought by the debris of roof-tile manufacture. W ith the changeover to more mech ­
anised production after the 1870s, the quality of Broseley tiles seems to have fallen,
and huge numbers of cracked or unusable waste tiles were produced. Some were used
in novel ways as steps, boundary walls or even instead of bricks in building con ­
struction, but most were dumped around the works, totally burying the site of the

58 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
 M INERAL RESOURCES IN LANDSCAPE

old Calcutts furnaces, or spilling down onto the side of the railway below Hollygrove.
A very large proportion was dumped downhill onto the river bank at Jackfield, where
erosion has exposed several metres of unstable tile waste. The act of dumping is an
indication that the riverside and towpath at Jackfield had gone out of use by the late
nineteenth century, and that there was relatively little civic pride or planning control
operating in the community.
Dumped waste material often created usable land for industries which were short
of space on narrow or unstable sites. At Coalport, excavations have shown the
southern ranges of the works to have been built on top of 2-3 m of tipped porcelain
wasters, lying on the river banks.76 This was no doubt a response to the floods of
1795 which caused some damage to the riverside site. At M aws, too, on the south
bank of the river, masses of tile waste have been dumped on the bank. The resulting
platform created extra land, used eventually for additional buildings, and even a
tennis-court. Even the original M aws site at Benthall is now a platform, several metres
above the valley floor, where a combination of ironworking waste and tile waste has
been used to create additional flat land. Industrial waste was thus a convenient and
cheap form of landfill.
The influence of waste on the landscape should therefore not be underestimated.
It has been demonstrated that waste and old workings clearly affect the pattern of
settlement which has survived today. Agriculture is limited, partly by the lack of flat
land, but also through the effects of coal and iron waste on soils. New building today
is difficult in areas of old mining, areas of landslip, and on parts of Jackfield heaped
with old tile waste. And finally, even the shape and form of much of the landscape
today is not natural: it represents the contours of the aftermath of mining, and of the
waste products which industry has created.
The landscape of the Gorge today, therefore, can be seen to be a direct product of
centuries of mining. Housing, agriculture and industry have all been influenced not
only by the availability of minerals, but by the legacy of past mining practices. This
is a clear example of the need to see the minerals not just as a resource, but as a
determinant, whose effects upon the landscape need to be understood through time
and space.

59
 4 wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK

THE HUM AN LANDSCAPE baZYXWVUTSRQP

There is no doubt that the physical geography of the Gorge had an impact — whether
advantageous or detrimental - on the pattern of industrialisation. The steep-sided
valley with minerals outcropping on each side, the small but fast-flowing streams and
the river at the bottom provided a physical framework which shaped settlement
and industrial development. Given that landscape evidence provides only part
of the wider industrial picture, we have nevertheless shown that it is impos ­
sible to ignore the physical setting of the Gorge in understanding the decisions made
by industrialists.
But to see industrialisation in the landscape just in terms of the effect of natural
resources on the activities of industrialists is too simple a model. Superimposed upon
the natural landscape is what could be described as the human landscape — a landscape
constantly modified and changed by human activity. The human landscape is made
up of all the landscape features created by past occupants - transport links, pools,
housing, mines and even piles of industrial waste. The very existence of these features
dictates where and how later generations can operate. In this way the landscape
becomes not just a resource, but a determinant, playing a significant role in defining
the options available to an industrialist at any given moment. It is vital to consider
this inherited, human landscape as well as the natural landscape in any analysis of the
field evidence for industrialisation.
One of the concepts which can be found within this human landscape is evidence
for technical change. The adoption of innovations can be seen clearly in the layout
and technology of industrial sites, as well as in the choice of their location. As
elsewhere, the evidence from the Gorge shows that technical progress is neither simple
nor linear, nor does it occur in isolation from wider economic considerations. The
influence of individual engineers cannot be studied here, but it is possible to see the
take-up of innovations in the context of the historical landscape, and to explore the
relationship between the two.
This chapter therefore takes a systemic approach to the field evidence, looking at
the human landscape and the light it throws on industrialisation. In order to do this,
two aspects of industrialisation have been chosen which can be readily seen on the
ground — power and communication.

60
 TH E HUM AN LANDSCAPE jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK
Landscape of power

M inerals were not the only factor which attracted the early ironworking industry to
the Gorge: the production of iron in a blast furnace required large amounts of air to
be blown into the furnace which in turn depended upon a form of motive power.
The source of this power was water. Among the most important resources to be found
in the Gorge in the eighteenth century were the streams which rushed down the steep
sides of the valley into the River Severn. W ater and height provided the power for
ironworking (fig. 4.1).

■ \ baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ

'0 0 m < ^7

B on ’ ha l Pnrith

| ; . Land over 1 50m

Sca!o Km gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCB
4 .1 The topography of the Ironbridge Gorge: streams, relief and main water-power sites
(Shelley W hite)

Unlike minerals, this resource could not be transported, so ironworks were, until
the development of steam-powered blowing, invariably located on streams or rivers.
Yet even in the eighteenth century it is possible to see important changes in the
choices ironmasters made about the location of their works. These decisions are a

6 1 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IN DU STRY

useful source of evidence for the way in which innovations were adopted during one
of the most crucial periods in the development of ironworking technology — the
1750s.
W hen Abraham Darby came to the Gorge in 1709, he found an existing ironworks
consisting of a furnace and several forges with a complex water-power system. 1 At the
top of the Coalbrookdale Valley, a seventeenth-century charcoal-fired furnace was
built into a bank, formed by the dam of a pool. The pool was located at the junction
of two streams, one from the north-east, and one from the north-west. O f all the
valleys feeding into the Gorge, this was the only one with two well-established streams
and a good supply of water from a large catchment area. There was also the advantage
that the natural topography sloped steeply at this point, and so there was plenty of
height to allow an overshot wheel to operate.2
The Upper Furnace Pool was not the only pool in the valley. Further down the
valley at Coalbrookdale another pool had been created to power the Great Forge, a
pool which could well date back to the earliest ironworking in Coalbrookdale in
1536. Below this was what was later known as the Boring M ill Pool, just above the
M iddle Forge, and at the bottom of the Dale the Lower Forge Pool, powering the
Plate Forge. At the top of the Dale, above the Upper Furnace Pool was a new pool,
built perhaps by Shadrach Fox in 1698, not to power any ironworking directly, but
to act as a storage reservoir for the Upper Pool. At least one of the Coalbrookdale
pools originated as a pool for the mill of 1520, a pattern which was repeated
commonly in the choice of an ironworking site.3 Thus, Abraham Darby inherited a
well-established water-power system, parts of which dated back to the sixteenth
century. In itself, this water-power system already represented a considerable financial
investment, to which in 1715 he added a sixth pool to power his new Lower Furnace,
immediately below the Upper Furnace (figs 4.2 and 4.3).
But by 1734 it became apparent that there was insufficient rainfall during dry
summers to keep both furnaces in full operation/ In order to augment the system, a
horse gin was installed, to recycle water through the system. The gin was by the new
furnace and therefore must have lifted water about 10 m from the Upper Forge Pool
back into the Lower Furnace Pool. The company could have chosen to use one of
the steam engines they were currently manufacturing to do the job, but had found,
on comparison, that the horse gin was more efficient than the steam engine. This
arrangement worked well, and for the first time was able to get iron production up
to the level of a charcoal blast furnace.
The horse gin had always been seen as a temporary measure, and by 1744 it was
replaced by a Newcomen fire engine with a greater capacity. The engine seems to
have been located on the site of the present Coalbrookdale Chapel.5 There is no direct
evidence for the working of the pump, however, the engine site is about 10 feet
(3 m) above the Upper Furnace Pool (242' OD). W ater could therefore have been
lifted into a lade, and run back down into the pool to serve both the Upper and
Lower Furnaces (fig. 4.4).
This engine - and its horse-powered predecessor - established the fundamental
principle of recycling water to keep a blast furnace in continuous production. A blast gfedcbaZY

62
 •391
3 S 4 4 W f -5-
r P
1290
t ?X 0' - !84/.7<a. S p rin g 278
•199/ ” 2,, J/
282
'^Be\ -997
2 92 ^< ? baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
< -<B<r? 2 8 lj

<
-w
289
790 <?>
^291
•348i W o o d sid e
7
(V
29OJ
X :: r'^'^
■ - * & # •& * * & . «

■ « £> * - & * .?
?. 3 2 4
-•J 1-823 \ Co W il ^ Q Q ’-
td b ro b k d a le I r o n .

(: 328
JffSX VQ-221 a ^-
l704&£ V-S^-A 4
«. Q ’- ■

tJaie Coppice.
. L o w e r - v-
S jr o n -B r id g e 1 C }.

-4 0 2 7
=3 on^T-sar ^**14 62
432

433 X
/ — 43 1-116 ) \SS
I -•x.%. -**•

439
€ O A gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA •655 jihgfedcb
• ®fi)A 437
a ^ 1 -1 0 0
\\ C I 435JW 440
\-v»c«a
r Captain ’s A\j jLidfc p° -6 1 3

A ^W
I Coppice'
/■S U<q 42o Th •
^PP* 1- ^X - ’ J k<J I I Spnngt
L ^ e r a d /' # S c i-
A? A Ak c •b ra e P o o t^ • .* . • lT ^-
428 \Z «Z -J l# *<- ititutioi
< X 21 - - XT;
HA.
sW W 519
J661
wvuts
•

F o rg e 525 ^7

4 .2 ‘The 1902 Ordnance Survey Map for Coalbrookdale, rhe map edition on which the
Nuffield Survey was based. This section shows the Coalbrookdale W orks and its associated pools.
 ?

* =+

5 § gfedcbaZYXWV
£2
.2
•i
:«•
H c
u

|_
i u

£
b£

J| wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedc
i «z>

-S '
I £u
i -«
-g
o
i
”s
u
o
f i
i □
2
i •5
.2

n
.2
E
! -C

: + <

r
IjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
j

• ;
i s
 TH E HUM AN LANDSCAPE jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM

U p p er F u rn a c e n <
S ite
_ C a rp e n te rs R o w

L o w e r F u rn a c e 1
P o ol

G re a t F o rg e P o ol

O v e rflo w S lu ic e s

U p p e r F o rg e baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

4 .4 The system of pools and ironworks in Coalbrookdale, based on an illustration by J.

Farrington, 1789

furnace did not necessarily require a very large amount of water, but steady and
uninterrupted blowing, and ironmasters could not risk the supply of water running
out; mechanical pumping proved the solution, and had a demonstrable effect on
increasing output.
The principle of recycling water was adopted from the outset at each of the new
furnaces built in the area as part of the extraordinary expansion of ironworking during
the 1750s. It is very clearly reflected in the change in the type of sites used for
ironworks. Previously the emphasis had been on achieving a fast-flowing, reliable
head of water with as much height as possible, through dams or' long leats. Now it
was necessary to have a steady supply of water, but height and volume were no longer
so important.
The first of the ironworks to employ this new principle in its construction was
Horsehay, built by 1755- 6 The partners chose a traditional site below an old mill
pool, which they had (with some difficulty) to reconstruct. This pool provided very
little height and was only fed by one small stream. Several other pools were also
built — one to the north-east as a holding pool, and two pools below the works, fed
by a different stream. W ater ran from these lower pools through a tunnel to the
bottom of a pumping shaft, where it was lifted directly over the water-wheels. It
seems, therefore, that the large Horsehay Pool acted mainly as a storage reservoir, and
was also useful for cooling. It had no direct role to play in providing power.
The idea that a water supply could be below the ironworks is nowhere better
demonstrated than at the M adeley W ood Ironworks on the banks of the River Severn,
in blast by 1756. 7 The furnaces there are built into the hillside, to give the traditional
advantage of high charging; but, unlike any earlier furnaces, there was no water-

65
I jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
T H E L A N D SC A P E O F IN D U S T R Y wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYX
supply above the works. Instead, water was pumped up from the river and directly
over the water-wheel (or via a small holding pool). None of the investment in dams
or pools was necessary, the fluctuating levels of the river were no problem 8 and there
was a constant supply of water.
This location pattern was repeated at the sites chosen for the New W illey Ironworks
(1757), the Lightmoor furnaces (1756), at Ketley (1778/9) and at the forges at W ren ’s
Nest (1779). Each was located on a small stream with relatively little height, sites that
could not have been contemplated without the capacity for recycling. Nevertheless,
each site still required land and capital investment in pools for holding water — there
were four pools at the W illey furnaces and three at Ketley — and ironworks were still
irrevocably tied to a water supply.
Logically, direct blowing should have liberated ironworks from dependence on all
but the most minor supplies of water, and enabled them to be located much closer
to supplies of raw materials. Direct blowing was the next major technical innova ­
tion to affect iron-smelting. The combination of cylinder bellows, patented
by Isaac W ilkinson, and the new Boulton & W att engines was first successfully
tried by John W ilkinson at the New W illey site in 1776. Yet, as is so often the case
with innovations, direct blowing was not adopted immediately or, for some time,
universally. In order to understand this it is necessary to look at the landscape ev ­
idence.
The initial advantages of the Coalbrookdale Valley, with its string of pools, soon
proved to be a very real restriction. Having established a system of water recycling, the
Coalbrookdale Company was reluctant to replace the existing water-driven blowing
equipment and wheels. Thus, faced with further water shortages in the 1770s, the
company installed what was then one of the largest steam engines built, the baZYXWVUTSRQP
R eso lu tio n ,
to extend the recycling system. W ater was brought from the Boring M ill Pool, through
a tunnel half a mile long, up a shaft 120 feet (37 m) high and back down to the
Lipper Furnace Pool. Rather than invest in direct blowing, as they did at other sites,
the company chose to continue to adapt their working methods to the restrictions of
Coalbrookdale. Ironically, the result was a situation in which the ‘most work [was]
done at these places with the least water, of any place in England ’ .9
W ith the exception of Coalbrookdale, direct blowing was almost universally estab ­
lished by 1802. Some companies were able to adapt their recycling engines located
(unlike Coalbrookdale) close to the furnaces, and others brought in new engines.10
New ironworks which incorporated the principle directly could be located away from
streams and, as a result, there was a migration of furnaces to the north, closer to new
supplies of coal and ironstone and to transport networks.11
Forging and many of the other activities associated with shaping iron were also gfedcbaZY
dependent upon water-power - one of the factors which long acted against the
integration of furnaces and forges, as few sites had the capacity to supply both . 12 The
new blast furnaces sent their iron off to distant water- (and charcoal-)powered forges
and it was only in the 1780s, when steam-power was applied to hammering, rolling,
slitting and blowing, that smelting and forging activities were once again integrated.
W ater also remained necessary for cooling - the new rolling mills at Horsehay had

66

■ iim iia
 THE HUM AN LANDSCAPE jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONML
their own water outlet, and relied on the large surface area of the pool to cool and
recycle the large amounts of water needed to cool the rollers.
The continued importance of water-power to the iron industry even after the
introduction of steam is apparent from landscapes such as the Benthall Valley (fig.
4.5a-b).13 The narrow Benthall Valley falls over 100 m in a distance of just over a
kilometre. It rises in the area of the Deerleap, but is today culverted down most of
the valley. In places the brook is supplemented by runoff, but otherwise the catchment
area of the stream is small. In the valley, there were originally three mills and
their pools, and pools for a boring-mill, machine house and the furnaces. Unlike
Coalbrookdale, the valley is narrow, and thus any water-powered equipment would
have had to make use of height rather than volume to generate power. The lowest
corn-mill was famous for its high, narrow water-wheel, and there was also a boring
mill, described by the engineer John Rennie.H
The pools at Benthall were still in use in 1835, and indeed a water-wheel still
operated at Coalbrookdale in the 1920s.15 A small water-wheel base survives at the
Coalbrookdale Lower Forge site today, and was used to generate electricity in the
1930s. It is very apparent that, despite the efficiency of steam as a source of power,
there were situations where it was not used. There may have been many reasons for
this, including the prohibitive costs of the royalties payable on Boulton & W att
engines, but equally one has to consider the natural advantages of the landscape of
the Gorge, which provided free power through the fortuitous combination of water
and height.
W ater-power was one of the resources which attracted industry to the Gorge in
the early eighteenth century. The principle of recycling water, developed as a solution
to the problems of Coalbrookdale, was a key factor in the rapid expansion of
ironworking in the 1750s. Ironically, the very efficiency of this system, and the
cheapness of water-power, militated against the adoption of technological innovations
such as direct blowing later in the century. It is clear once again that the adoption of
technology takes place not in a vacuum, but in the context of many different factors,
including the existing, inherited industrial landscape.

Com m unication in t h e landscape

The natural form of the Gorge with its steep and unstable sides, dropping over
100 m to the river, inevitably created transport problems for industrialists. Access to
■ w
the riverside was difficult down the slopes, and crossing the river could be dangerous.
There was no large resident population in the area, so goods had to be transported
away from the Gorge to markets. Equally, as supplies of locally occurring minerals
diminished, they had to be brought into the area from outside. The whole pattern of
industrialisation through time has to be seen in the light of transportation, and how
industrialists dealt with the problem of getting in and out of, as well as across, the
Gorge.
The paucity of known medieval, Saxon or earlier settlement in the Gorge is
evidence in itself for the problems of access. Apart from a Bronze Age find in the

67
co
0)

co baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
nJ jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
"O &
co «n w
ZJ co
co o
o wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWV
JC
□ e co
o
LU jD

< >»
« ®

< c «
X
° E
■o
® ®
M -C
LU
« r
CD tn >-

•
/7
= I:. o
tn
®
o

o
>.
T>

i
o■
<0

M
tn .
©

co
w £ s

o «
i *
CO
o baZYXWVUTSRQPONM

o
o
 ■o

1 I
2 wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
o

o
8
r
<9 3
I • I

11
w

o
*
o
i
! C/>
I
®

1
2
®
a>
S
ia

s
1
I - ) baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
• U || Iin e j 2
-g
o
JU
E
O

=73
-5
* 5
- 5E
tn
1 -G
H
I D 2 jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSR
o
o
t-

co
9

«
O

S 0 JJS U J

o
o
2 2
CM
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

river, there is nothing so far to suggest prehistoric occupation. There was very little
medieval or earlier settlement in the valley, and the earliest known roads bypass the
Gorge well to the north or the south. River crossing-points are often natural foci for
settlement, but the nearest major crossing and settlement is at Bridgnorth. baZYXWVUTSRQP

T h e tra m iv a y n e tw o rk

It was only with the growth of the coal industry in the seventeenth century that there
emerged a need for good access to the banks of the Severn. Easily accessible coal
seams and the value of the River Severn as a means of transport to markets were two
important factors in the growth of the Severnside coal industry. Unfortunately, many
mines were located in Broseley, or on estates such as John W eld ’s, well away from the
riverside. Coal was bulky, and the existing road network minimal. An early solution
to the transportation of coal was the development of the wooden tramway.
Broseley is well known as one of the earliest places in Britain to have used
tramways. 16 In 1608, Star Chamber proceedings record a dispute between Broseley
landowner James Clifford and his tenant, Richard W ilcox. W ilcox agreed to allow
Clifford to dig pits for coal on the land he held as tenant, but after a dispute over
compensation due to W ilcox the latter was given the right to dig his own pits
elsewhere. The dispute erupted into violence, with miners imprisoned down shafts
and cottages demolished. As part of the proceedings, there are detailed descriptions
of ‘a vary artificial! Engine or Instruments of Timber ... therewith to convey coles ...
unto the banck of the River of Severn ’, which has been interpreted as an early example
of a wooden railway. 1 '
W ooden tramways continued to be used by the local coal industry and, from the
1740s, were adopted by the ironworks. It was as a result of this association with the
coal industry that the expedient of using iron rather than wood for the rails was first
adopted at Coalbrookdale in 1767.18
Archaeological evidence for both wooden and iron tramways is fragmentary. Part
of rhe problem is locating the actual routes. W here they are documented, for example
in mining leases, it may be possible to identify the route through field names. But, as
W illiam Ferriday remarked in 1755, many tramways were ‘of the mushroom breed,
mly the produce of one night’ . ” The rails would be taken up at the expiry of a lease
and most likely reused elsewhere, so there would be very little remaining on the
ground. For example, a ploughed field at Rowton through which a railway was known
to have run produced no evidence for a change in soil colour or a dip in the contours
which might suggest a tramway route. At ironworks, old rails, like any other scrap
iron, would have been broken up and remelted in the furnaces.
Continuity with later routes would logically be another means of identifying
tramway lines. Yet if this is assumed within rhe small area of Jackfield, there are at
least four different contenders for the most likely route of James Clifford ’s railway
line.20 In the few instances where tramways are mapped, as at Blists Hill in 1840,
1886, 1902 and 1927, the rate of change over 20 years is enormous, suggesting that gfedcbaZ

70
 TH E HUM AN LANDSCAPE

tramways were still being laid in a temporary fashion to serve changing industrial
needs.
This phenomenon explains why some tramway routes do not conform to the image
of the nineteenth-century railway, carefully laid level in cuttings or embankments and
often taking a longer route to avoid climbing. Fieldwork suggests that the majority
of tramway routes did not create the hollow ways one would expect from roads, and
involved little investment in earthworks. M any were not at all level - for example
routes through Caughley climbed and dipped over rather than went around hills, and
engravings show horses hauling cylinders up the steep slope of Jiggers Bank in
Coalbrookdale.
Nevertheless, some clear routes can be identified and are still in use as footpaths.
Those in Jackfield, and in the woods to the north of the Tuckies are well laid, level
and about a metre wide. The Gorge is full of footpaths, which most likely originated
as tramways. For example, a track hugs the eastern side of Coalbrookdale, passing
below the wall of the church. A plan of 1788 to build a canal from the foot of Brierly
Hill, along the side of the Dale, was abandoned, and a railway built instead on the
same route. The canal route must have been level, and investigation shows that the
Coalbrookdale route follows the 275-foot contour, at precisely the height of the foot
of Brierly Hill. This evidence does suggest that, by the later eighteenth century,
tramway routes had become much more permanent, and involved greater engineering
input than earlier lines.
One of the few surviving tramway bridges can be seen at Newdale — a stone
structure crossing a stream. Although it has not been documented, the bridge is
directly on the line of an excavated tramway, and almost certainly must have carried
rails.
There is some archaeological evidence for the rails themselves. W ooden rails
have been found by chance in an excavation to the west of Bedlam Furnaces
(fig. 4.6).21 Oak sleepers were used to space lengths of oak rail, set on a bed of
furnace slag and occasional bricks. The rails themselves were not flanged, but the
one surviving wooden railway wheel has a thick, exterior flange. The gauge of the
rails was 1.14 m (3 ft 9 in) — narrower than northern gauges, but typical of
Shropshire. One wooden wheel has also been found, with a flange suggesting that
it was a tramway wheel.
The transition from wood to iron in tramways was gradual. Flanged iron wheels
were first adopted, followed by iron rails.22 Only later were flanged rails taken up.
The first rails are known from historical accounts, and consisted of iron plates 6 feet
long, set on wooden bases (a possible alternative explanation for the Bedlam timbers).
No examples of these were thought to have survived until work at Newdale identified
pieces of iron set into a reconstruction of the north building, dated to 1768. The
pieces of iron were broken in two, with holes for bolts at either end, and match
closely historical illustrations. These could well be the first examples of Coalbrookdale
rail.23
Sections of flanged iron plateway occur more commonly around the area, often
In situ plateway has been found at Coalbrookdale behind jihgfedcbaZYXW
reused in buildings as lintels. baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

71
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF INDUSTRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJI

BED LAM W AG G O NW AY

'v oid

i G a s B oa rd
1 T re n c h

0
• P e g H oles
M e tres

4 .6 The Bedlam wooden tramway

Rose Cottage, and also at Blisrs Hill associated with the Heslop engine base. The rails
are of cast- or wrought-iron, flanged on the inside and bedded in ash or slag. 24
Even after the construction of the railways in the 1 860s, horse-drawn tramways
(or plateways) remained in operation for local use at ironworks, continuing until well
into this century. M aps show that, on sites such as Blists Hill, there was a far greater
density of tramways in the late nineteenth century than can be documented for any
other period. Tramways continued in use around Coalbrookdale and at Horsehay as
local transport networks, often with interchanges to the main railway network
(fig. 4.7).
The use of tramways provides another example of a local innovation of early date,
which remained in use for three centuries as a perfectly serviceable, if somewhat
antiquated, practice. However, although tramways provided a solution to moving
goods along bad roads, there remained the problem of negotiating the steep slopes to
reach the riverside. Even where coal-mines opened out onto the hillside, their
entrances were usually some way above the river itself, and few routes around the
Gorge could be devised which did not involve a slope too steep for a horse and cart.
The solution was the use of the short incline or ‘wind ’ . jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
72
4.7 A wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
team of horses brake a loaded coal wagon as it descends Jigger’s Bank, Coalbrookdale.
W illiam W illiams, 1777 (Shrewsbury Museum)

The principle of the incline was basic:

a large barrel or wind is fixt at the Top on which runs a large Chain; and at the
end of this is a W ooden W aggon that will hold 2 tons each. This chain reaches
to the river, and when the W aggon is loaded at the Top it gets a going gradually,
which brings the empty one up, and so continues till the vessel is laden. 25
Several inclines are known from documents. Names such as ‘ W ynd ’ on a cottage
at Jackfield refer to rhe sites of wind-houses for old inclines. The earliest device of
this type is James Clifford ’s ‘tylting rails’ of 1607 — interpreted as a short, rope-worked
incline near the river. Such inclines were later used at coal-mines in M adeley W ood,
the Tuckies, the Lloyds and probably in Ladywood to let coal down to waiting boats.
Further away from the river, there was a tramway incline on Jigger’s Bank which until
1802 served the Coalbrookdale ironworks.
Fieldwork has also revealed the lines of several other tramways. By far the steepest
and longest slope to be negotiated is the drop from the quarries at the top of Benthall
Edge down to the riverside. There is a series of inclines down which limestone was
lowered, one of them clearly replacing an earlier, rather tortuous zigzag path up the
hillside. An incline relating to a documented eighteenth-century tramway route is
also the most likely explanation for the massive clay ramp, several metres wide, to be
found in the woods below Rowton. 26

73
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJI
The combination of inclines and tramways thus provided an industrial transport
network for moving bulky materials around the Gorge. However, the principles
established by the builders of the tramway network were also applied to other forms
of transport such as the canal. In fact, it is unlikely that a canal link between the
Severn Gorge and the industrial areas to the north would ever have been contemplated
without the inclined plane having first been developed as a means of descending into
the Gorge.

T h e c a n a l n e tw o rk

Canals, like tramways, were restricted by the awkward topography of the Gorge. The
slope was too steep, and the quantity of water required too great, to contemplate a
flight of locks as a means of getting from the top of the slope to the bottom. The
principle of the inclined plane, as developed on the railways, was therefore used. It
was first applied to canal construction at Ketley, about 4 miles (6 km) to the north.
There, instead of letting railway wagons down the slope, tub boats were floated onto
a cradle, and lowered down two parallel sets of rails to a canal basin at the bottom.27
Two short stretches of water-filled canal at Coalport and Blists Hill, linked by the
Hay Inclined Plane, are all that remains of the Shropshire Canal network in this
area.28 In 1788, it was proposed to build a canal, to run south from the existing canal
at Oakengates, dividing into two branches linking with the River Severn at Coalport
and Coalbrookdale. 29 The problem was that each branch terminated at a point at
least 100 m above the River Severn.
Under the original scheme, the western branch of the canal was to terminate at
Brierly Hill just above Coalbrookdale. From here, goods would drop down a pair of
shafts to another canal branch, running along the eastern side of the Dale. An incline
would then take goods down to the riverside.
W e know that the Brierly Hill shaft system was built as designed.30 The canal
divided into four fingers, with two 1 20-foot-deep vertical shafts between them and a
winding-drum between the centre pair. Goods were to be wound down the shafts
into trucks on a short railway line leading out through a tunnel. One of the shafts
and part of the wall has been exposed, and it has been possible to identify the tunnel
opening out of which the tramway came. From there, the tramway led down and
icross the valley on the dam of the Upper Pool, linking with a further tramway route.
Originally it was proposed to build a second stretch of canal along the valley side.
A puzzling ‘navigation ’ appears on early maps,31 but otherwise there is no evidence
for the canal. However, there is a clear level route, following the contour around the
side of the valley and marked by occasional stretches of stone wall, and slightly
staggered field boundaries. Thus field evidence conclusively shows that the tramway
was built. Less easy to identify is the inclined plane at the bottom of the Dale.32
The shafts at Brierly Hill are cut by the deep swathe of an inclined plane leading
south, which seems to support the documentary evidence for the replacement of the
system in 1794. Archaeological survey, however, has revealed a more complex
picture.33 The first inclined plane to be built in fact lay to the east, and was linked

74
 THE HUM AN LANDSCAPE baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDC

‘■ W V e

a .. / s baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

'4 i
jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK
•• ,
t 1

4 .8 The Hay Inclined Plane while still in operation in the 1890s (IGMT1 982.2713) gfedcbaZYXWVUT

to the existing tramway route across the dam. On stratigraphic evidence, the
second incline could only have been built once the canal system went out of use.
The second incline links with a different tramway, leading to the Coalbrookdale
works. It seems that the shafts were in operation until 1794, when they were replaced
by an inclined plane. A second inclined plane was built later, probably relating to the
permission given in 1 800 to the Coalbrookdale Company to build a tramway on the

75
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

canal towpath leading to the Horsehay and replacing the old Jigger’s Bank line. 34
This complex sequence of events makes sense of a fundamental discrepancy
between the documentary evidence and what could originally be seen on the ground —
the six years from 1794 to 1800 during which both the canal and an iinclined plane
operated. It also underlines the difficulties of getting goods in and outt of the Gorge,baZYXWV
seen in the large number of short-term and rather awkward solutions.
The same problems were faced by the builders of the eastern branch, terminating
above Coalport, but their solution was more effective and longer-lived. Here, an
incline was to take goods down 207 feet to a stretch of canal parallel to the river (fig.
4.8). Because the river level fluctuated, there was no lock between the canal and the
river. Instead, goods were to be transferred from the canal to the river on a series of
short inclined planes and also via a great warehouse, built straddling the canal and
the river bank.
The Hay Inclined Plane still survives — partly because its maintenance was a
condition of the agreement to built the London and North W estern Railway line
through the area in 1857 - and thus it operated until 1894. During restoration, the
surface was built up with 3000 tons of new ash. M ost of the rails have been replaced
to match the L&NW R Bl 90 track put in during the final phase, although wrought-
iron bridge rails survive at the top. However, the canal basins at the top and bottom
survive intact, as do the remains of the winding-engine house of 1793 and stables at
the top. One of the problems at Briefly Hill was that the system was self-winding. At
Blists Hill an engine was installed, which archaeological evidence seems to confirm
was a Heslop engine.35
The canal at Coalport was backfilled early this century, but was partially re ­
excavated by the Ironbridge Gorge M useum in conjunction with Telford Develop ­
ment Corporation. The exercise revealed the remains of the W att M eadow stop lock
of 1792, and reopened the old water channel linking the top canal to the bottom,
but did not expose the extension arm of 1810.
The construction of canals in the Gorge was an expensive and difficult operation,
which from field evidence did not bring new settlement or investment on a scale
commensurate with that in other areas.

R ive rsid e w h a rfi

In contrast to the evidence for very heavy investment in other forms of transport,
what is most notable about the River Severn, on the south bank at least, is the lack
of wharf installations (fig. 4.9). Reynolds’ riverside development at Coalport, and the
Coalbrookdale Company ’s Loadcroft and M eadow W harfs stand out as the few
documented loading places, but there are few other visible remains. And yet the
number of boats using the river, bargemen, repair yards and boat builders was
historically very high.
In part this may be a problem of archaeological survival. The archaeology of the
riverside on the south bank and parts of the north is complicated by the dumping of
vast quantities of industrial material, including roof-tiles, mining waste and iron-

76
 TH E HUM AN LANDSCAPE

4 .9 ‘ Ironbridge ’ : a heavily laden cart hauls logs up Tontine Hill, while trows may be seen
moored at the riverside. A stage coach can just be seen on the bridge (IGM T1978.73)

working waste. Some of this was deliberate, to counteract the problem of slipping.
The make-up of the old Salthouses road, for example, comprised several metres of
compacted tile waste and furnace slag. This was particularly noticeable in excavations
at Ladywood where several metres of cinders and ash covered an early-nineteenth-
century settlement, and on the south bank opposite mining waste was tipped across
the whole area. The river itself is actively cutting into parts of the banks, and
archaeological material can be seen eroding out at Salthouses, at Jackfield and at
Ladywood.36 Finally, the construction of the Severn Valley Railway, with its com ­
bination of cutting and levelling along the south bank, seriously affected the survival
of riverside archaeology.
River levels fluctuate by several metres each year, and winter flooding is common.
There were major floods in 1770 and 1795, alternating with periods of very low
water; often the river was not navigable for three or four months of the year.
Navigability was declining in the late eighteenth century, blamed by Thomas Telford
on the draining of riverside fields. And although a Navigation Bill was proposed in
1786, it was blocked by local interests. There are few weirs, and little control over
levels. Such fluctuations may explain why a lock was never constructed between the
river and the Coalport Canal, and why the river was rarely used directly as a source
of water-power.
The combination of poor survival due to dumping, and the variable nature of the
river itself explains why many of the arrangements for unloading cargoes were very
casual, involving little more than a bit of land at the end of a path.

77 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

Nineteenth-century photographs commonly show boats tied to the riverside, with

little more than a plank between the boat and the bank. The Tithe M ap shows each
of the brickworks of Jackfield as having a path and a small enclosure on the riverside,
but most of these were cut by the Severn Valley Railway; today there is little evidence
for built wharfs at these sites. Each of the early coal-mines also seems to have been
linked with an area for loading on the riverside, probably little more than a track
or incline, terminating in an enclosure. Little or nothing can be seen of Cliffords
'four wharf places ’ of 1608 in the Ladywood area, or of the wharfs at the ends
of the main tramways down from Benthall, Buildwas, the Tuckies and Tarbatch
Dingle.
Nevertheless, it is possible to identify some more formal wharfs on the south bank.
A 2-metre-high stone wall remains at Lloyd Head — the terminus for a group of
tramways through Jackfield which continued to operate into the nineteenth century.
There is also archaeological evidence for wharfs at the Calcutts. The bank is now
being eroded by the river, but traces of wooden piles in the river and sandstone walls,
retaining dumped layers of ash and slag, suggest a large installation, creating a level
platform on the riverside beneath the steep bank. The site was the terminus of the
Jackfield rails, and was used for loading coal in 1748. The Calcutts Ironworks loaded
boats there and in 1840 the ironmaster James Foster and the brickmaker Hezekiah
Hartshorne used the area. There are also stone walls at Bower Yard on the south side
of the Iron Bridge.
The major wharfs were on the north bank. Little survives of the M eadow W harf,
but at Loadcroft W harf — a railway terminus from the late seventeenth century
onwards - the elaborate Severn W arehouse and a loading ramp (now substantially
rebuilt) can be seen. From the Severn W arehouse along the whole of the W harfage
to the Iron Bridge, a retaining wall of sandstone blocks survives (see below), broken
by several ramps leading down to the water ’s edge.
The most important wharf remains are those of W illiam Reynolds ’ Coalport
development, built in the 1790s. Although the proprietors of the Preens Eddy (or
Coalport) Bridge were given permission to construct wharfs 60 yards either side of
the new bridge in 1780, there was little or no development by 1788. 37 The completion
of the canal alongside the river by 1793 involved major construction work along the
banks. A massive stone retaining wall was built, extending from the Coalport Bridge
at least as far as what is now the Brewery Inn. It comprises large sandstone blocks
tied with iron cramps and, at the western end, supported on brick arches. Set into
the wall are the foundations for the stone warehouse, built spanning the canal.38
These walls are rapidly collapsing and in need of urgent conservation. The stonework
and the remains of the warehouse are evidence for the level of investment, and the
vision of Reynolds, which was perhaps not borne out by the long-term success of the
venture.
The archaeology of the riverside is vulnerable and often difficult to investigate.
M any of the links between transport routes and the riverside have been lost through
erosion, and others have been obscured by later dumping. Yet the use of the river is
documented as a major economic activity. It has to be accepted that in this instance

78
I wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA f

THE HUM AN LANDSCAPE

the documentary evidence may be a better source for levels of activity than the baZYXWVUTSR
archaeology.

B rid g e s

The major communication problem within the Gorge was, of course, crossing the
river. If the physical nature of the river made the construction and the survival of
wharfs very precarious, it made the bridging of the Gorge even more difficult.
Problems caused by flooding and erosion were further exacerbated by the unstable
nature of the river banks caused by natural slippage and later mining. There were few
natural crossing-points for the river which were not affected either by unstable banks
or by uncomfortable approach routes. 39
Physical restrictions were one reason for the lack of permanent river crossing before
1779, but the second, and most important, was demand. The seventeenth-century
coal industry had been export-based, and the tramway system was orientated towards
the river. However, the need to cross the river increased dramatically with the
integration of the large ironworking concerns and the change in focus of the coal I
industry from export to local supply. M any ironmasters held mineral leases on the
opposite bank, or obtained bricks and supplies from distant works. The railway
network and the road system were growing in response, and a crossing-point was
badly needed.
The location of the Iron Bridge has to be seen in the context of the existing
landscape. Like the later Coalport M emorial Bridge, the Buildwas Bridge and the
Free Bridge, it was built on the site of a ferry. In other words, the site was already an
established river crossing-point which had generated riverside settlement and road
I access to the river bank well before the bridge was built.40
Once opened, the new bridge had a major effect on local patterns of communication
by bringing traffic for the first time through the Gorge itself. A new turnpike road
was built through Leighton to Shrewsbury to compete with the M uch W enlock route.
At the bottom of Coalbrookdale, the old road was straightened and a new brick
bridge built over the stream in 1781. The road along the W harfage was improved,
and a new road built up what later became Church Hill, and in 1828 the struggle to
maintain the road on the south bank was abandoned, and a new route built up to
Broseley. Coaches running from Shrewsbury to Bridgnorth were diverted through
the Gorge to view the new bridge, and local inns profited from new customers. Prior
to the construction of the bridge, what is now the town of Ironbridge was little more
than a scatter of houses along the W harfage, and a straggling suburb of M adeley at
the top of the hill. A market-place, and a new inn, established soon after the
construction of the bridge, became the focus of the new town (see chapter 6).
The Iron Bridge still stands today, despite several attempts to demolish it.42 The
south abutment - originally stone - was reconstructed first in timber, and later in
iron, as a result of flood damage and pressure from the banks. The original black ashy
surface has been replaced by a modern gravel finish, and the railings, once coated
with mineral tar, have been painted. A mirror-image concrete arch under the water jihgfedcbaZYX

79
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND USTRY

strengthens the iron arch and prevents the abutments from moving together. 43
There is a toll-house on the south side of the bridge, and contemporary with an
extension to the building a second single-cell building was constructed to the east.
Although undocumented, the structure was part of the gate emplacement, and seems
from its position to have related to payment for foot passengers or stabling. The
Tontine stables to the north-west have been demolished, although their stone-built
foundations remain.
In 1779, the same year that the Iron Bridge was built, a timber bridge was built at
Preens Eddy, near Coalport, and completed in 1780. 44 The stone abutments on the
north and south sides today relate to this early bridge. It was damaged in 1791, and
repaired with iron ribs after floods in 1799. The bridge was rebuilt in iron in 1818,
and is one of the earliest iron bridges still in commission. The bridge was a speculative
venture as part of the general development of Coalport, and unlike most of the other
bridges did not relate to a pre-existing river crossing. There were plans by the
proprietors to build wharfs up and downstream, which were only partly fulfilled, and
the road link to Broseley on the south side was not completed until 1797.
No other road-bridge was built across the Gorge until 1909 when increasing
demands for a toll-free crossing and a fortuitous legacy resulted in the construction
of the ferro-concrete Haynes M emorial (or Free) Bridge, once again on the site of an
old ferry (Adams ’ Ferry) (fig. 4.10). The bridge is of significance as a fine example of
M ouchel-Hennebique ferro-concrete construction and, whilst not the earliest in
Britain, is one of the few such structures to be listed.44

r baZYXWVUTSRQPON

I :baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

4 .1 0 The Free Bridge, Jackfield, soon after it was constructed (IGM T 1980.1645) jihgfedcbaZYX

Since then three further river crossings have been built in the Gorge. The 1922
footbridge at Coalport was built as a memorial to the dead of the First W orld
W ar on the site of the Coalport (or W erps) Ferry. The bridge linked the working gfedcbaZ

80
 TH E HUM AN LANDSCAPE

communities of Jackfield with Coalport — a major source of employment. Two further

bridges are associated with the Ironbridge Power Station: the Pratt truss steel bridge
of 1932 and a concrete road-bridge linked to Ironbridge B station, which opened in
1969.
W ith the exception of the power-station bridges and the Coalport Bridge, each
bridge that has been built across the Gorge has been located on an established
crossing-point at a point of clear demand. However, once a bridge has been built,
there is almost always pressure for improvements in the associated road network. At
Coalport, Ironbridge, the Free Bridge and most recently the Buildwas Bridge, road
improvements followed bridge construction, and the bridges continue to exert a
powerful influence on road policy. The location of the very earliest ferry crossings
continues to influence the form and functioning of the transport network today.baZYXWVUTSRQP

T u rn p ike ro a d s

The construction of roads in the Gorge cannot be divorced from the pattern of river
crossings. Once built, bridges exerted a powerful influence on the pace and scale of
road building and improvement. Nevertheless, roadmakers faced the eternal difficulty
of getting from the riverside up and out of the Gorge, and the solutions they adopted
were to have a significant effect upon the subsequent development of the landscape.
Plymley was not impressed with local roads. ‘The roads in this country, both
turnpike and private are generally bad; the private ones ... are almost impassable.’ 16
The roads of the Gorge were notoriously bad, and, as the minutes of the Proprietors
of the Iron Bridge show, constantly in need of repair. Even today, the Coalport road
moves continually, and the old road through Jackfield has completely collapsed into
the river. The problems today are twofold - natural slippage on the steep slopes,
and the legacy of past mining activity - and are likely to be the same problems as
those that faced earlier road-builders. Thus road-building in the Gorge has always
required technical ingenuity.
Despite the development of tramways, and improvements in the canal network,
local firms continued to rely upon road transport using packhorses or wagons. The
Benthall potteries, for example, arc well away from the river on the south bank, and
must have been sending material into W ales by road. However, the most graphic
evidence for the continuing importance of road transport comes from the distribution
of Broseley pipes, many of which must have been transported overland.'17
The medieval road network largely bypassed the Gorge to the north and south,
and there were few cross-routes until the construction of the Iron Bridge in 1779.
The earliest routes down into the Gorge seem to have been little more than tracks.
Paradise in Coalbrookdale was an old bridle way, and there were tracks down through
M adeley W ood and what was to become Ironbridge. On the south side of the river,
there was a Horseway down to Adams ’ Ferry by the seventeenth century, 48 and routes
down to the river from Benthall and Broseley W ood. There are also traces of routes
further to the east. Such roads were a matter of custom, and received little main-

81
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQ
tenance. Few have left any trace on the ground unless they were later adopted as
turnpike roads or county roads and improved.
The road from Shifnal to M uch W enlock crossed the Gorge from east to west,
leading from Buildwas Bridge along the river, up Lincoln Hill towards M adeley. The
original route of this road can be seen a little to the north of the current route, and
is reflected in the line of early cottages at the bottom of Coalbrookdale. It was
turnpiked in 1764 but the diversion at the bottom of Coalbrookdale dates to the
1 780s, when a new bridge and a turnpike gate were built. 4 ’ The road was particularly
■
steep up Lincoln Hill, but because it ceased to be a turnpike it now retains its
eighteenth-century character; it is narrower than a modern road, with a sharp junction
onto the W harfage, and an almost impassable climb.
In the latter half of the eighteenth century — partly as a result of the road-building
powers given to bridge proprietors — a group of new turnpikes were constructed
through the Gorge. Some of these were based on existing lanes; others were new,
purpose-built roads. M ap evidence makes it possible to draw a clear distinction
between the two.
On the south bank, the proprietors were able to use the route up Bridge Bank, but
on the north bank a new road was constructed.50 This became Church Hill, and the
map shows the road cutting through earlier rectangular plots to create oddly shaped
ones.
M adeley Hill (1810) and the road up to Broseley (1826) were both built in response
to continuing problems with the steep routes up the valley sides from the Iron Bridge.
Neither followed an earlier route for more than a short distance. Both are straight
and cut across the hillside, providing a gentler slope than their precursors. Both cut
through existing field boundaries, and the stratigraphic relationship with earlier
buildings and roads is awkward. The Broseley road sweeps up to the east of Broseley
to meet the Bridgnorth road, the M adeley road to meet the turnpike road at Hilltop.
As with late-eighteenth-century tramway routes, the scale of engineering of these
two roads stands in contrast to earlier roads. M adeley Hill is supported on brick
arches and the Broseley road cuts diagonally across a hillside on a large earth embank ­
ment, both of which required considerable ingenuity. W e know nothing of the
surfacing, although the earlier roads up from the Iron Bridge (and indeed the bridge
itself) were surfaced with ashes and slag from the Benthall Ironworks.51
It was rare that roads and tramways shared the same route. 52 The right to lay rails
was usually included in a mining lease, with the rails on private land; and, at least
locally, it was not until the construction of the mainline railways that parliamentary
Acts were passed. Edward Harries had given up Benthall Rail when the road was
turnpiked (although in the 1880s rails that still crossed the road created continual
problems by overturning carriages). Otherwise, most railways followed totally separate
routes. Occasionally, old railways became public footpaths, or even (as in the present
course of Coach Road) public roads.
The situation in Coalbrookdale was highly complex. The earliest mapped road ran
up the valley, around the Upper Forge Pool dam, and dropped down into the works
opposite the chapel. A parallel tramway route was built through the Dale, but did

82
 r

THE HUM AN LANDSCAPE baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED

not share the carriageway. In 1817 the road was turnpiked, the new road following
the old road as far as the chapel, and then being diverted in front of Carpenters Row,
effectively cutting through the gardens. Even in 1902, most of the tramway route
through the Dale was grade separated from the road. The distribution of early
settlement suggests that the road through the Dale was largely used by the works;
early cottage^ are to be found along the old course of the coach road to the north ­
west of the Dale, on Paradise and Church Roads.
Equally complex is the W harfage in Ironbridge, today a single road made up of
several original features — a turnpike at the bottom of Lincoln Hill, a private quay
belonging to the Coalbrookdale Company along the riverside, a lane known as
Tontine Hill, part of the Ironbridge market-place and finally M adeley Bank. As part
of the deal with the Coalbrookdale Company to use the W harfage, the proprietors
agreed to build the wall to widen the road — presumably the large sandstone walls
which at present form the riverside.53
The pattern of main roads through the Gorge today is largely the result of
the early-nineteenth-century improvements following the construction of the Iron
Bridge. M adeley Hill, the W harfage and the road up to Broseley form the main
routes — Bridge Bank and Lincoln Hill remain as awkward and difficult as they were
in the eighteenth century. It is still not easy to cross the Gorge from north to south,
and to this end a bypass has been built to the west to provide for much of this north ­
south traffic.

T h e sta n d a rd -g a u g e ra ilw a ys

In the mid-nineteenth century, the Gorge was still crossed by two eighteenth-century
bridges. The M idlands were accessible from the Gorge by road, and by one branch
of the canal operated via a cumbersome inclined plan. Otherwise, the river remained
the main method of transport out of the Gorge. The nearest centres of population,
and thus markets for industrial products, were Shrewsbury and Birmingham, and
transport costs were beginning to dominate the costs of production.
The linking of the Gorge to two national railway networks — the London and
North W estern Railway and the Great W estern Railway - ought to have solved these
difficulties and brought new opportunities to the area. In 1862 the Severn Valley
Railway was opened from Hartlebury to Shrewsbury along the south bank, and in
1864 the link to this line from Lightmoor through Coalbrookdale and across the
river was opened. An L&NW R line was completed along the old canal and down the
W ashbrook Valley to terminate at Coalport in I860.54
The construction of the railway had a devastating effect upon the community of
Jackfield. The railway cut through a densely populated area, and at least 50 houses
were demolished. Others lost gardens or were separated from their plots of land.
Elsewhere in the Gorge the impact was minimal, and the routes managed to avoid
major settlements. Nevertheless, the construction of the railway required a major
engineering input in order to overcome the physical problems of the Gorge. Viaducts
carried the Great W estern Railway route down Lightmoor Dingle, across the Upper

83
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONML
Furnace Pool and along the side of the Dale. The Albert Edward Bridge, designed by
John Fowler, was built to carry the line across the river to link with the Severn Valley
Railway. 55 Along the south bank, a large viaduct clings to Benthall Edge. Subsidence
was a continuing problem at Jackfield and further south, often solved by the dumping
of industrial waste.56
Certainly local industries took advantage of the new railways. Craven Dunnill ’s
new factory was built beside the railway line in 1874, and M aws moved down to
Jackfield soon after. Several of the brickworks built railway sidings which can still be
seen, and the old wharfs were closed down and dumped upon. M ost of the brickworks
advertised delivery by rail or by river. To the north, the Coalbrookdale Company

i;gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
built a railway siding, and the M adeley W ood Company at Blists Hill built a wharf
to link their own tramway system with rhe main line. The Coalport China W orks
now had railway access, as did the limestone workings on Benthall Edge.
The railway would be expected to have had an immediate impact on the river
trade, and on the local tramway networks, and yet it was almost 50 years before either
totally disappeared. New tramways continued to be built around sites such as Blists
Hill and Jackfield throughout the second half of the nineteenth century, and it was
only in the 1920s that these networks seemed to contract. The plateway siding at
Blists Hill, for example, was only replaced by a mainline siding in the works after
1902. Equally gradual was the impact on the riverside. Huge quantities of waste were
dumped upon the wharfs at Jackfield, and the old wharf at Loadcroft became an
engineering works in 1901. The railway company was obliged to maintain the Hay
Inclined Plane and the operations of the canal, but these barely survived into the
twentieth century. Brickworks continued to advertise river transport, and the last
trow-the W baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
illia m — travelled down-river in 1875.
If the railway brought some prosperity to the brick and tileworks, it did not
result in long-term industrial growth or local prosperity. The population of Benthall
continued to decrease, the houses demolished in Jackfield were not replaced. No new
industries opened, although there was a brief rejuvenation of limestone working at
Benthall in the 1920s. The railways failed to have any major impact on the pattern
of closure of ironworks, including Blists Hill in 1912.
The Coalport station closed for passengers in 1952 and freight in 1960, and
the Coalbrookdale line remains open only for coal traffic to the power station. The
Severn Valley Railway station on the south bank closed in 1963 and the line in
1970. Only two of the four stations which once served the Gorge survive, and
both have been adaptively reused — one as a wood workshop, and the other as a
private house.
Ironically, the solution to the long-standing transportation problems of the Gorge
proved of no lasting value. W ith the construction of railways, access to the Gorge
was now relatively easy, but the base of population, skills and demand no longer
existed, and the raw materials were no longer economic to exploit. The heroic
investment made to overcome the problems of transportation in the eighteenth
century had brought short-term benefits, but the continuing investment needed to
maintain these systems proved too expensive in the early nineteenth century. By the
i 84
 TH E HUM AN LANDSCAPE

time the standard-gauge railways were built, the stagnation of industry and population
was established and the railway had little impact.
Thus, the pattern of industry cannot be divorced from the network of roads,
railways, canals and river transport which supplied it, and these cannot in turn be
separated from the physical difficulties of crossing the Gorge. This communication
network was part of the human landscape imposed upon the Gorge, and inherited
from generation to generation. It continues to exert a powerful influence on the
Gorge today. It is possible to argue, therefore, that the roads, bridges and footpaths
of today have their origins in the demands of the seventeenth-century coal industry.
Equally, the inheritance of water-power from - in some cases - the medieval period
had a strong influence on the eighteenth century, and meant that water-power
continued to be important until well into the twentieth century. Yet the physical
geography which made water-power possible hindered transport links. As ever, it is
important to set industry not just in its contemporary landscape, but in the context
of the landscape it inherited from the past.

85
 5 gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

INDUSTRIAL BUILDINGS IN THE

LANDSCAPE

I n t r o d u c t io n

This chapter is about the principles by which one can use the archaeology of
industrial buildings as a source for understanding the process of industrialisa ­
tion. Industrial buildings and their works are prime evidence, not only for the
technologies of different industries but also for the way that firms developed, the
cycle of decision-making and the pattern of industrialisation. Industrial buildings
have tended to be regarded as a subcategory of architectural history, with particular
attention being given to the exceptional, the most ornate, the most unusual, the
earliest or the largest. Architectural historians of industrial buildings are more often
concerned with the dichotomy of function and ornament, whereas the industrial
archaeologist places the main emphasis on process and the development of new
building materials. These approaches only come together where a building illustrates
through its materials an ‘ industrial’ development.1 The availability and use of
paterials, both traditional and modern, will be seen not as an end in itself but as one
>f the many factors in the evolution of industrial building form.
M uch of the history of industrial buildings has been seen in terms of the textile
mill - the archetypal factory. Yet there are no such mills in the Gorge, and few of the
typical industrial works to be found here could be described as factories in the
traditional sense, nor did they even fall under factory legislation until the 1860s.2
The Gorge therefore presents a rather different view of industrial buildings.
A works evolves not as a series of single buildings, but as a complex of different
but related features, typically centred around an existing resource, such as a mine
or tramway, wharf or pool. The changing nature of the industrial structure offers a
basis for understanding the evolution of industrial complexes. This, in turn, may
lead to insights into the directly practical aspects of running a works, in terms
of basic process, finishing, storage and more subtle factors such as advertising,
labour control and the expression of pride and confidence? At the root of the
analysis of these patterns is the issue of whether the concept of the factory
is a useful one; or whether it might not be more useful to see the process in
more flexible terms, as the development of works made up of distinctly industrial
buildings.

86
 IN D U S T R IA L B U IL D IN G S IN L A N D SC A PE

Traditionally the evolution of industrial buildings and sites has been discussed in
terms of the emergence of the factory (typically the textile mill) — a centralised
unit for mass-production, power, control of labour. This approach very strongly
emphasises the central structure and its appendages. In the Gorge and many other
regions where there is no great tradition of textile-working, it may be that the idea of
the industrial works is a more apt framework for discussion. The works may be
defined as a group of industrial buildings or structures, sharing a common purpose
and enclosed by a boundary wall or by an area leased or owned by a particular
business. 4
The structures which make up an industrial works can be fruitfully divided between
those which are specific to a particular process (for example, the blast furnace, kiln
or engine house) and buildings which are much more general in their conception,
primarily concerned with protection from the weather, and the provision of light and
ventilation. There has been a tendency to elevate the importance of the former as the
focus of investment; they have the advantage of being readily identifiable remains
whose retention can be justified more easily than an apparently anonymous shed.5
Yet the surviving evidence of the highly specific structures of the industries within
the Ironbridge Gorge indicates that they are not as central to the working of industry
as has been assumed. Unlike structures such as windmills it is not justifiable to study
them in isolation. Although a blast furnace may be the focus of an eighteenth-century
ironworks, ceramic kilns are short-lived, and their remains may be scattered in
different areas within a works. The question may therefore be asked whether, during
the eighteenth century, there emerges a distinctive ubiquitous, industrial building
type, apart from the specific kilns or furnaces, and, if so, what implications it has for
the pattern of industrialisation.
Here in the Gorge, the industrial building type marks not a revolution but an
evolution from a strong vernacular tradition, largely rooted in domestic and agri­
cultural architectural practice.6 It may be more appropriate to trace the emergence of
a vernacular tradition in industrial buildings-perhaps a works or ‘factory vernacular’.7

E a r ly in d u s t r ia l s t r u c t u r e s wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVU

It has been shown in chapter 2 that local industry must be seen in the context of
events in the sixteenth and seventeenth century. Chapter 8 details the pattern of
local vernacular housing, whereby a tradition of timber and stone construction was
suddenly, and very thoroughly, replaced by the almost universal use of brick in the
small workers ’ cottages of the early eighteenth century. Far fewer industrial buildings
remain from this period, but traces of a similar transition can nevertheless be seen.
One building which may well be associated with seventeenth-century ironworking
in Coaibrookdale is Rose Cottages, a two-storeyed timber-framed group of cottages,
with a dated stone porch of 1636 added to it. An agricultural origin has been suggested
by the fact that it is wider than most similar examples of domestic buildings, 8 but it

87
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF INDUSTRY

5.7 The Malthouse, Coalbrookdale, rhe possible site of Basil Brookes steelhouse
(IGM T1 982.256)

sits at the base of one of the Coalbrookdale pools, in a good position to utilise water-
power.
A second building of possible industrial origin in the Dale was the ‘malthousc,
formerly a steelhouse ’, located at the south end of the Upper Forge (fig. 5.1).
Demolished in the 1 960s, photographs and plans show that it too was timber-framed,
and set adjacent to a source of water-power. This was certainly part of the seventeenth-
e■ ntury Great Forge complex, and either this or Rose Cottages may have originally
een the ‘Calbroke Smithy ’ of 1536. 9
A third potential industrial structure was 1 5/1 5a Holly Road, Little Dawley, just
to the north of Coalbrookdale; adjoining a small, late-sixteenth-century cruck-framed
building was a seventeenth-century box-framed structure. 10 In the yard outside,
remains of an ironworking bloomery with no related buildings were found in associ ­
ation with medieval pottery.
Evidence for early industrial buildings must therefore be sought further within the
tradition of large timber-framed buildings, which may in turn relate to techniques of
agricultural barn building as a solution to covering large areas. It is also possible that
there was an early industrial building tradition using stone. Abraham Darby I
employed ‘masons ’ and ‘tilers’ in the early days ar Coalbrookdale which might imply
the use of stone in building. Local seventeenth-century domestic structures made use
of coal-measure sandstone and there are remains of seventeenth-century stone barns
in the area (for example, that at Hay Farm). 11
But it was the use of brick and tile which provided the wherewithal to construct

88
 IND USTRIAL BUILDING S IN LANDSCAPE

large, reasonably fireproof buildings for industrial purposes in the eighteenth century.
Brick was robust, relatively cheap and could be built to a greater height with less mass
than was possible with stone. It was ideal for large simple structures and allowed for
greater flexibility in openings. The popularity of brick as a building material was not
confined to the brick cottages, built in large numbers for an increasingly industrialised
population from the early eighteenth century. In less domestic contexts it can be seen
in the tradition of large-scale brick and tile barns of the mid-eighteenth century, and
on a smaller scale in the brick-built sheds to the rear of a domestic property, serving
as a brewhouse or, more rarely, blacksmith ’s shop. Thus the simple, gabled brick
structure was well established as a local vernacular tradition by the mid-eighteenth
century.gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

T h e development of t h e ironworking shed

The development of an industrial vernacular can be seen most clearly in the ironworks
of the mid-eighteenth century. At this date, there is clear evidence for a series of large,
gabled brick buildings, with tiled roofs supported by substantial timber trusses.
W hile some industries could readily operate in the open-air, the bulk of the stages
in ironworking needed to take place under cover. Processes such as hammering,
casting and reheating necessitated that any buildings should embrace a relatively large
area, should be well lit and ventilated, and should be relatively fireproof. The buildings
should also be strong enough to withstand the vibration of hammering, and intense
temperature changes. There was no need for the centralised power supply of a textile
mill, the well-lit bench space of a workshop or weaver ’s cottage.
The best examples of the eighteenth-century ironworking shed were the buildings
at Newdale, about 6 km to the north of the Gorge, where a pair of well-preserved
buildings dated to 1759-60 stood.12 They were built by the Coalbrookdale Company
as a model ironworks, on a site which had no readily available water-power. Two
double-gabled brick buildings remained, one in use as a farmhouse, the other as :
barn. Archaeological investigation of the buildings prior to their demolition showe
that, in their original form, the buildings were open to the roof. A massive iron valle
beam separated the two bays of the buildings, and this was supported on a pair 01
cast-iron columns in the centre of the room, creating a large open space. The buildings
were lit by a series of small rectangular windows on the north-east and west sides,
and by larger rectangular openings in the east gable wall. Kingpost trusses supported
a tiled roof. Outside the original openings to the buildings were the remains of two
air furnace bases, filled with slag and iron scrap. There was archaeological evidence
for another industrial building to the north-west, with open arcaded sides, and central
hearths with a pair of pits which seem to have been used as water baths to cool iron.
The two Newdale buildings provided rare evidence for the appearance of eighteenth ­
century ironworking buildings rather than furnaces (fig. 5.2). They mark the very
early use of a hybrid mixture of wood and iron in construction — cast-iron was used
to support the building and in the valley gutter instead of the more usual timber. The
high roof provided ventilation, and minimised rhe risk from sparks, while the large

89
 1
□ J 1
g>

1
£
□ □
■s

1
J
□ •1
□ 3
I
gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
B
i
2

IjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM

s r
11
3

-S-g
^2
'H
GO

« £
•S i

it
.E -a
11
-d W
t£>-g

□ 1 s
U
o
.-
u_
c
<U
O %
•h aj

□
GO d r>
o
z
4 S' &•
■S E
o
fg
m 2 £
z "S

5
UJ
—j

o
□
< wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
.2 ’ 3
2^.b
s.
•A re
£
LU
z
 IND U STRIAL BU ILD IN G S IN LANDSCAPE

windows provided ample light. The double gabled form was copied in the roof of the
row of back-to-back houses built nearby at the same time. Both sets of buildings were
on a similar alignment, suggesting that the site had been conceived as a highly
organised community set within a rectangular area cut out of the surrounding fields.
This formula emerged again at the Upper Forge, Coalbrookdale, where there
remains a single-gabled, tall brick shed, lit by a circular opening under the south
gable. It was built soon after 1753 as a forge, and by 1786 a hammer engine had been
installed in the strong brick tower which abuts the north end. Subsequently the forge
was extended to the south, and in the nineteenth century a water-wheel was inserted
and the roof partly raised as a mill and stable for the Coalbrookdale Company. Later
a large opening was cut into the front of the building during its use as a garage and
plant hire firm. The present roof is not primary, and an illustration of 1786 shows
the original to have had small slatted vents. Once again, multiple uses illustrate the
flexibility of this building type.15
One unusual feature of the Upper Forge is the use of arches; semicircular relieving
arches are built into the fabric of several elevations of the original structure, either to
carry it over a former watercourse or to strengthen a building in which cranes were
used. In the front fafade (now largely rebuilt), there are traces of a primary opening
in the form of a much shallower arch, perhaps used to remove large sections or plates
of wrought-iron from the building.
On a larger scale, the Soho foundry at Smethwick, built by 1807,14 uses huge
arched openings on the boring mill, with further arches on the foundry, pattern and
turner ’s shops. Elsewhere it is used for abnormally large doorways, such as the Dukes
grain warehouse and Castlefields warehouse, M anchester. But it is the Horsehay
Ironworks in the Gorge which provides evidence for one of the most splendid arcaded
ironworking buildings.
The New Rolling M ills at Horsehay, just to the north of Coalbrookdale, mark the
development of the local industrial building type to a much larger scale to contain the
new technology for rolling wrought-iron.15 Built as part of the reorganization of the
works in 1806, the building was a triple pile, brick and tile structure, lit by three tiers of
iron-framed windows with a primary arcade at ground level which was later enlarged.
At one point, Horsehay was capable of rolling the largest boiler-plate in the world; it
specialised in rolling sections of different shapes and sizes, producing up to 500 tons
per month. The arches would have allowed the easy removal of large boiler plates from
the building. The rolling mills were thus a key feature of the site. The mills were steam-
powered from the outset, and contained four trains with reheating furnaces. The orig ­
inal engine was replaced in 1849, but must have taken water from the pool for con ­
densing. An adaptable building, it was converted into a machine shop in the 1 890s; it
was reroofed in 1902 and again in 1838 and finally demolished by 1956.
An illustration of 1858 shows such a building in operation — balls of iron are
placed under a hammer, iron plates are fed through paired rollers onto a small cart,
whilst bar iron is passed by hand over a pair of rollers to be rolled again.16 The picture
clearly demonstrates the need for space in a rolling mill, solved so well in the structure
through the use of multiple gables and iron support. Yet from photographs, the tiered

91
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

windows and arches give the impression of a very much larger building than the
known dimensions suggest - it was just 23 feet to the valley gutters - and may have
been a deliberate attempt to increase the impression of size.
The rolling mills at Horsehay were designed by Edmund Darby, then manager of
the works, and built to his specifications by M essrs W etickliss & Sons, a local
Ironbridge building firm.17 This is one of the few industrial buildings whose designer
and builder are documented, and it is significant that they are both local. Otherwise,
company accounts make reference to the supply of bricks and the work of masons,
and we know that the ironworks invested in brickworks for their own use, but there
are few hints as to who conceived or built these structures.
The Erecting Shop to the south of the Great W arehouse is a direct successor —
albeit a more specialised one — of the eighteenth-century ironworking shed.18 Built
by 1882, this is a single-storey brick shed with hipped roof, and a span much greater
than could be achieved through the kingpost truss. Inside, the additional height of
the building allowed for the track of a travelling overhead crane to be built into the
fabric of the structure, and the use of piered construction lightened the mass of the
walls. The interior was lit by large, arched, multipaned windows in the eastern and
western walls. Interior photographs baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDC
c. 1900-5 show row upon row of pumps, each
being assembled by an individual operator, not yet incorporating the linear organ ­
isation of mass-production (fig. 5.3). 19
If the erecting shops demonstrate the growing need for height and space in the
ironworking shed, the Severn Foundry of 1901 continues the trend towards enclosing
larger and larger areas. Four ranges are placed at right angles to each other, to create
a vast open interior supported on iron columns and lit by clerestory windows.
Considerable extra width was gained through the use of the queenpost truss — an
eighteenth-century feature which became standard on many other industrial buildings
such as the Coalbrookdale Long W arehouse 20 — and extra light came through large
multipaned windows. The foundry was built to accommodate the production of gas
cookers for the London council-house building programme, but the demand was
short-lived and it closed during the First W orld W ar. It is now used for the manufacture
of teddy-bears, showing just how adaptable the industrial shed could be.
The alternative solution to enclosing a large area was the use of multiple gables on
the distinctive ‘saw-toothed ’ building at the southern end of the Coalbrookdale site.2 '
There a single-storey building of the late nineteenth century has a rather ponderous
nine-ridged hipped roof, each ridge with north light. It is supported by iron columns,
cast to resemble girders. Interestingly, rhe building is three-sided, the rear wall being
originally open, suggesting that it would have led directly into another covered
ironworking area. This adjoining structure has since been replaced by a more recent
one.
The multiple-ridged roof was also taken up by the company in the North Lights
building, keyed into the rear of the Long W arehouse and built in the early twentieth
century. In fact the concept of the north light shed had been developed in textile
mills by the 1850s, and was relatively late in the Gorge, underlining the general
impression that the pace of innovation set in the mid-eighteenth century had declined gfedcbaZY

92
 IN D U STRIA L BUILDIN GS IN LANDSCAPE gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO

11 11 jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJI
a HGFEDCBA
H i

baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
5.3 The interior of the ere<icring shop, Coalbrookdale (IGM T1 981.3020)

by the nineteenth century, when Coalbrookdale no longer played a major role in

national ironmaking.
It is apparent from the buildings used by the Glynwed Company today for casting
and finishing that the evolution of ironworking buildings has culminated in most
production now taking place within open sheds, with high roofing and unbroken
floor space. Asbestos, coated profiled steel and plastic cladding on a steel frame were
adopted rapidly by the iron industry and represent the ultimate expression of the
generalised industrial shed, providing little more than light and cover from the
weather. The last big brick buildings were constructed at Horsehay in the early
twentieth century, and thereafter brick was used only for offices or specialist structures.
It may be that the little-appreciated ironworking sheds of the Ironbridge Gorge
represent a precedent for the anonymous inter-war production area, and for the
modern steel-framed industrial unit. Clearly it is important that the evolution of an
early industrial vernacular in the eighteenth century, and its later development, is
explored more fully for other regions and other industries.22
It has also become apparent that the development of the single- storey ironworking
shed in the eighteenth century was very different from that of the multistorey textile
mill. The multistorey ironworking building was the exception; it tended to be
associated not with primary manufacturing, but with warehouses, storage or drawing

93
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

offices or, as at the Soho M anufactory, the upper storeys were used for workers ’
accommodation.■ ’ The emphasis on power and machines, and their incorporation
into centralised operations has meant that the history of industrial building in the
eighteenth century has concentrated on the development of the great textile mills.
Yet the buildings of Coalbrookdale, Horsehay, Newdale and no doubt many other
areas demonstrate a very different tradition — less pretentious, based more in local
practice and concerned with the problems peculiar to ironworking.
Although they share many common features, the warehouses which survive today
are in a very different tradition from that of the industrial shed. The Great W arehouse
at Coalbrookdale (1838) and the Severn W arehouse on the riverside display a com ­
bination of the structural confidence visible in other industrial buildings, with the
take-up of features of a more heroic industrial tradition - that of the multistorey
warehouse or mill.
W hen a new letterhead was drawn up for the company in the 1844, 2,1 it featured
the Great W arehouse - a three-storey building of nine bays, its double-pile roof
surmounted by an ornate cast-iron clock added in 1843 (fig. 5.4). Iron columns
support the massive wooden floors and are used in the lintels, sills and frames of the jihgfedcba

HI tlnfc.- />»■ J

3 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

5 .4 The Coalbrookdale Works in the 1840s. The newly built Great W arehouse can be seen in baZYXWVU
rhe middle distance (CBD59. 82(22))

doors and windows. Until c. 1827, the Upper W orks had been a jumble of structures,
which had as their cores the buildings of 1753 and earlier. In the 1 830s, the site was
reorganised and began to move into the production of art castings. The Great
W arehouse lay in the centre of the site, visible from further down the Dale, and acted
as an elegant front to the older buildings. 25 If the model for the industrial shed was
akin to a barn or small workshop, the basis for the Great W arehouse was very different;

94
 IN D U S T R IA L B U IL D IN G S IN L A N D S C A P E

many elements are local, but the scale of the building and the clock express a very
different tradition.26
Equally anachronistic in the context of local ironworking buildings was the Severn
W arehouse of 1838/9, facing out over the River Severn - then the busiest approach
to the Gorge. Built of red and yellow handmade brick, with castellated turrets, mock
arrow loops and pointed windows, it is so far divorced from the local tradition of the
industrial shed that it may well have been architect-designed. The iron-framed
multipaned windows are a local feature, but here they are pointed. Even on a national
level the building was unusual, being one of the rare examples of Gothic detailing
applied to an industrial warehouse. 27 It is worth noting that both the Severn W are ­
house on the river, and the Great W arehouse on the road/tramway network, were
concerned with the dispatch of products rather than integral with manufacturing. To
this extent they stand outside the tradition of the manufacturing shed, and more
within the ambit of the pottery entrance or warehouse.baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED

T h e c h a n g i n g c e r a m ic s c o m p le x wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXW

In isolation, the ironworking shed demonstrates the way in which the demands of an
industry can be related to changes in building techniques and materials through one
specific emerging industrial building type. However, relationships between structures
may actually tell us more about the general process of industrialisation than individual
buildings. In the most simplistic terms, the study of the industrial works can tell us
about the way an industry has evolved, the changing rationale of industrial man ­
agement and the nature of work. Perhaps the most fundamental issue lies in trying
to define how far managers were governed by a mentality of ‘make do and mend ’,
and at what point they took the bolder decisions to build anew, to rebuild existing
works or to relocate elsewhere onto a greenfield site.
The ceramic industries provide the best approach to considering the evolution of
industrial works, as they represent widely differing approaches to the same basic
process - that of burning and preparing clay. There could not be a greater contrast
between the Coalport china factory of the 1790s and a contemporary brick kiln,
isolated in a field and serving a local farmer. These very different approaches to
the organization of ceramic manufacture can be seen in pottery-making, china
manufacture, brick- and tile-making and in the production of decorative tiles.

P o tte ry m a n u fa c tu re

The remains of one of the earliest pottery-making sites in the Gorge stand at Jackfield
today. Now much altered, this row of four small cottages once had a kiln attached to
their eastern end, and can be identified as one of the three ‘mughouses ’ shown on an
early eighteenth-century estate map (fig. 6.5b). The houses provide rare evidence for
pottery-making on a domestic scale, where a works consisted of little more than a
house or cottage with associated kiln. Archaeological evidence suggests that common
domestic black and yellow earthenwares were made here, probably for local dis-

95
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

tribution. By this date there was already manufacture on a different scale. To the
north of the mughouses lay M orris Thursfield ’s Potworks — a kiln abuts an L-shapcd
range, laid out in a rough courtyard form behind a house. This type of semi-domestic
manufactory has been identified from the Potteries, where it would have included
workshops, a drying shed and perhaps a clay preparation tank. 28 Coal and clay
supplies would have come from pits to the north, and lead was obtainable from a
local smelter.
The courtyard form common in the Potteries from the late eighteenth century can
be seen again at the Benthall Pottery, built in 1772 by John Thursfield. 29 W ithin
what is now an agricultural machinery store, isolated walls of the original pottery still
stand. By 1902, the entrance at the front facing out onto the road led into a hollow
square, with kilns set within it. Clay was brought directly from a pit to the north ­
east, to what were most likely clay preparation buildings. Amongst the buildings
shown on the plan there would have also been areas for slip preparation, moulding
and throwing, drying, glazing and firing. It is unlikely that the basic layout of the
works had changed much over the previous century, although the kilns were almost
certainly altered and rebuilt. This formal arrangement contrasts with the scattered
Haybrook Pottery immediately to the south, erected in 1743, and also with John
Miles ’ pottery at Ladywood, where the round potteryware works, the flat potteryware
works and an oven were spread along a hillside and on the road leading up from the
Iron Bridge.30
The fragmented walls standing at Benthall are all that remain of at least seven (and
probably more) other earthenware manufactories established in the area by the late
eighteenth century. 31 All were supplying a very uniform product - hollow-wares
and press-moulded flatwares which were more standardized than the early Jackfield
products. Such pottery was basic, utilitarian ware, used in the kitchen or dairy, and
nntemporary inventories show that these wares were becoming more common. But
i■ ncrease in the number of potteries was more than just a question of local demand,
1 it may be that this increase, and the technical standardisation, represent a form
mass-production in pottery-making.
Morris Thursfield ’s old works at Jackfield remained in use until well into the
nineteenth century.32 The site was briefly taken over for experiments in porcelain
manufacturing prior to the construction of the Coalport works, and was briefly used
also for fine creamwares and mochaware. By the mid-nineteenth century, standard
domestic earthenwares of no great quality were once more in production in what was
by now an almost derelict site. The tenants complained to the works owner, M r
Harries of Benthall, about the state of the factory, but did not have their lease
renewed, and although several other prospective potters considered the site it was
eventually taken over for the manufacture of encaustic tiles (fig. 5.5b), and finally
demolished just after the construction of the Craven Dunnill factory on the site in
1874. By this stage, the buildings had become almost incidental to the manufacturing,
and much of the value of the site was its proximity to clay resources.
‘Ordinary yellow and other common wares ’ were also made in the mid-nineteenth
century at the now united Benthall and Haybrook works. Both the position of these jihgfedcb

96
 IN D U S T R IA L B U IL D IN G S IN L A N D S C A P E

-
> - baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

ka 01 El Hl H i! g gB j'ra IU p
Ea a a wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
ig l ? W r : ;l

B w t 'S fc _® Kj
dp
I" '
’ 7 7 '^

5.5 (rf) The Caughlcy China W orks, taken down in 1815 (IGM T 1986. 1 1057)

(A) M osaic workers at Craven Dunnill. As at Coalport, the need for well-lit bench space
influenced the layout ol the buildings (IGM T 1982. 873)

97
 THE LANDSCAPE OF IN DU STRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ
works, well away from the river, and their output suggest a small-scale pottery, relying
on fairly basic technology and supplying the varying demands of a regional domestic
market — possibly extending into W ales — by road. In 1882, there was a short-lived
move into art pottery, perhaps to try to reach a wider market, but the project was
never an economic success, and it seems that, while the smaller Haybrook Pottery
continued to specialise in such wares, the larger Benthall works moved back towards
the production of the old staples — cheap, coarse earthenwares, drainpipes, lamp bases
and, later, electrical fittings.
Elsewhere in the country, pottery buildings were as much a matter of image as of
function, and it is perhaps not a coincidence that no engravings exist of these
earthenware potteries, and barely any of the buildings themselves have survived.33
W hat little evidence we have suggests that they were smaller, less elaborate and
employed fewer people than the well-known contemporary works, yet nonetheless
one can see in this industry many of the trends which were affecting other local
industries. Pottery-making had gone through a late-eighteenth-century revolution in
production methods through the use of plaster moulds and in some areas steam
(which deserves further study), but the building evidence suggests that the industry
had never had the confidence to grow or invest in large new works. The trend towards
mass-production is visible in the eighteenth century, and, as in other industries, a
move towards prestige production in the late nineteenth century was backed by more
mundane output. Yet neither conspired to make the Ironbridge Gorge a major centre
for pottery manufacture.

C h in a

The large china manufactories at Caughley and Coalport fit much more neatly into
a conventional pattern of eighteenth-century industrialisation, with large centralised
factories employing many people and supplying a growing national market.
At Caughley on an isolated hilltop about 4 km to the south-east of the Gorge,
Thomas Turner of W orcester in partnership with Ambrose Gallimore, in 1772/5
built a complete manufactory, equal in scale and pretension to any at that time in
urban Staffordshire.34 The works were in the form of a hollow square; the main
entrance was a large arch in the centre of a three-storey building, with decorative
quoins and a hipped roof (fig. 5.5a). Above the main arch is another arched window,
presumably for loading raw materials into the upper floors. The buildings to either
side, and presumably those to the rear, were notably plainer; on one side was a two-
storey range with a hipped roof, multipaned windows and a clock and on the other
side was a single-storey building, again with a clock set into the facade. Two very
large, fat bottle kilns can just be seen to the rear, and across the road in the front of
the site is a pool with several sheds beside it.
Although there was plenty of space for building in the fields at Caughley, the
factory was built in an area that was already industrialised. Gallimore had operated
an earthenware works there, built originally in 175 1,35 the coal-mines which Turner
later leased were well established, and access to wharfs and a warehouse on the

98
 IN D U S T R IA L B U IL D IN G S IN LANDSCAPE baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK
riverside was by an existing railway. To the south, sitting on an outcrop of fireclay,
was the T-shaped saggar works, with two kilns, which were later incorporated into
the works. 36 As there was no power locally, raw materials for the works were ground
at the smithies, on Linley Brook.
Caughley was conceived as more than a porcelain works — the design was carried
through into Caughley Place, an apparently highly ornate ‘chateau ’ built by 1795
above the works and said to have been designed by one of the French workmen. The
only building which remains standing on the site today is equally unusual — it is the
‘ Roundhouse ’ to the east, square with blind windows, a decorative plinth of moulded
brick and brick quoins. It repeats the motifs of the main works and of Caughley
Place, and must have served as a gatehouse to the works, or to the Browne estate on
which the whole group was set. 37
This concern with appearance relates to Josiah W edgwood ’s Etruria W orks at
Burslem, 38 but not to the original W orcester site, completed only three years earlier
to manufacture creamware, where the company had taken over W armstry House and
adapted it to their own purposes. There, an ornamental Palladian entrance with clock
and bell looks out over the canal, while behind it more mundane buildings form a
courtyard. The layout of Caughley reflects the same courtyard plan formalised by
W edgwood and ultimately derived from earlier earthenware potteries. At the Etruria
W orks, W edgwood produced creamware, the first British pottery type to be mass-
produced and widely sold. W edgwood ’s success has been seen to lie very much in the
weight he placed on marketing and presentation, and the appearance of his works
was part of the image of his product. In the same way, Caughley was built to produce
not domestic earthenware but porcelain of high quality for a discerning market. The
appearance of the works became part of the image of the product. Skilled workmen
were brought from France, and the names of many of the engravers and painters are
recorded.
Following W edgwood ’s success at Burslem, the manufacture of creamware spread
to many parts of England including Coalport, where W alter Bradley operated a
creamware manufactory between 1796 and 1800.39
Coalport is, however, better known as a china manufactory. Today one range of
the original works built by Edward Blakeway and John Rose in 1795 survives (fig.
5.6). It is an imposing three-storeyed brick building of five bays with a central loading
door, under a riled, kingpost and strut roof which was originally hipped. Each floor
is lit by windows with single ring-cambered heads and cast-iron frames, but the cast-
iron columns and beams inside, and the first-floor windows were added later. The
building butted onto the front of another range, presumably of similar appearance,
with two kilns, one at either end. It was built by Samuel and W illiam Smith of
M adeley, local builders, to the partners ’ design.'10 In contrast to the ironworking shed,
with its image of strength, shelter and ventilation, this is very much a workshop on a
human scale. The aim was to light areas where operatives could sit at work-benches
in reasonable comfort and warmth. There was no need for the central power trans ­
mission of a textile mill, but still the multistorey, centralised, well-lit building pre ­
vailed.

99 wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJI
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO

’M b A L

e l baZYXWV

K . ,t y e a a f K . — — „ "“ t — . ’T ~ ” — .-=_ _ ._ > , ' I

B fc\ V -— A, riV,'.-* , _^«r^ „ — xestew^S>SM

5 .6 The Coalport China W orks early in rhe nineteenth century, after a painting by Muss
(IGM T1986. 14088) jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJI

In contrast to what was to become a standard pottery layout, the Coalport works
were long and narrow in plan, stretched out between the canal and the road. Blakeway
and Rose were taking advantage of W illiam Reynolds ’ attempt to create a transport
terminus linking the River Severn with the canal system, and with it an industrial
estate. 41
There were other factors which contributed to the haphazard layout of Coalport,
y 1800 a second competing porcelain works had been built across the canal, but the
.nterprise was short-lived, and by 1814 the site (along with any remains of Bradleys
works) was incorporated within the existing works. The form of these works can be
seen in an engraving - the original buildings have been extended in a line to the east
and west with a jumble of buildings, lean-tos and kilns. Across the canal on the river
bank are the two kilns, main building and engine house of the second works. Viewed
from the canal and riverside, at least, the works have lost any of the formal pretension
they may have originally had, and have become an accumulation of buildings on a
restricted site.
One other early building survives to the east of the present site. Originally built as
six cottages for workmen by 1797, the building was converted to a warehouse by
1814 (perhaps with the addition of an extra range). This conversion seems to
have been very thorough — the classical frontage displays wide sash windows, and
pedimented door-cases with fanlights, details which are totally incompatible with the
standard artisans dwelling of the late eighteenth century.42 The implication is that

100
 IND USTRIAL BUILDING S IN LANDSCAPE baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ
the roadside frontage was perhaps more important than the riverside, although there
is no evidence for an elaborate entrance.
W hen, in 1902, the manager at the time, Charles Bruff, decided to rebuild the
increasingly run-down works, he did so without major alterations to the form of the
site, an action which may reflect how few changes had taken place in the manufacture
of china in the interim. John Rose ’s buildings were demolished and rebuilt on the old
footings, using iron-framed windows, but with the addition of a bellcote building
and showroom facing out onto the road. New machinery was installed, new kilns
were built, and the present entrance buildings constructed, yet, as a visitor noted, the
‘ancient and the modern mingle in the most harmonious fashion ’, and old cottages,
workshops and kilns survived from the early days.
Very little is known of the way in which processes of pottery production related to
buildings at Coalport and Caughley. Yet to some extent these were minor con ­
siderations. In china manufacture, the skill and expertise outweighed more practical
factors such as the efficiency of the works. M uch of Coalport’s success was due to the
• Igf
ability of its managers to take over and absorb the materials, skills and workmen of
other factories - Caughley, Swansea and Nantgarw were closed and the moulds and
some workmen taken to Coalport. Individual artisans were valued, and their names
or marks not submerged by the general company image. The firm relied on continuous
innovation in designs, colours and forms, yet there were few innovations in their
technical processes — all processes were done by hand. Coal-fired up-draught kilns
were used, and although steam was applied to blunging and mixing clay, moulding
and pressing remained hand-operated.
By the mid-nineteenth century, the buildings of Coalport were neither exciting
nor very salubrious, and it is unlikely that the works were very efficient. Nevertheless,
as with other potteries, image remained important. W hilst others built grand
entrances, Coalport used its location as part of its image - prints of the works were
distributed in the same way as Perry had produced engravings of Coalbrookdale,
pottery often depicted the Ironbridge or local scenes and the factory itself was at
times referred to as Coalbrookdale. Coalport was calling on the traditions of industrial
manufacture rather than its buildings to justify itself.

B u i l d i n g p r o d u c t s : b r ic k s a n d r o o f - t ile s

The same pattern ofa series of heavily capitalised, specialist operations serving a regional
or national market, growing out of a broad-based, local industry can be seen in the
brick- and tile-works of the nineteenth century (fig. 6.12). Large purpose-built roof ­
tile works, with heavy investment in machinery, achieved a spectacular but relatively
short-lived success in comparison to more flexible operations on a smaller scale.
Traditionally, brick- and tile-making had been a low-capital industry, with little
investment in buildings or plant and little consideration of prestige. Illustrations
show a brickworks of 1800 consisting of little more than a few thatched shelters, a
straw-covered drying hack and a clamp or kiln of a temporary nature.43 W ork was
seasonal, employment casual and the returns not high enough to justify the extensive jihgfedcbaZYX

101

I
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND USTRY

buildings of, for example, a contemporary chinaworks. The industry was slow to
adopt innovations such as coal-fired kilns or mechanical clay preparation, techniques
which had long been used in the pottery industry. Brick- and tile-works were not
included in the Factory Acts until 1867, and then only after a Commissioners ’ report
on the horrific working conditions.
There is plenty of evidence in the Gorge for the type of small brick- and tile-works
common in any settled area of Britain where there was suitable clay. Amongst the
coal-mines of M adeley W ood there were isolated kilns, where brick was rapidly
replacing wood for props, tunnels and engine houses. Tucked between the houses of
Broseley W ood or Ironbridge there were kilns presumably serving a local market and
often operated by a local builder. There were kilns in fields as late as 1847, and
plenty of field names suggesting earlier brickmakers scattered about the area. The
manufacture of tiles (or bricks) ‘on the premises for use on the premises only ’ was
probably more common than is documented.'14
Although this small-scale tradition persisted, it is clear that by the mid-eighteenth
century brick- and tile-making was established in a more organised fashion as part of
the integration of ironworking. There were brickworks at Horsehay in 1755, and at
the same time the Dale Company was providing bricks to sites in W ales;45 W illiam
Reynolds established a brickworks as part of the development at Coalport, and
Charles Guest of the Broseley furnaces made bricks at Benthall. W e do not know
what these brickworks looked like, but it is clear that the demand for bricks made it
economic and perhaps necessary for ironworks to produce their own bricks on an
industrial scale.
M ap evidence shows the striking concentration of brick- and tile-making in
Jackfield by 1840: Ladywood, Coalford, Hollygrove and Broseley works were very
similar, large works, with a heavy investment in buildings. Each had several sheds,
used for clay preparation and for moulding, and presumably for drying.46 Rectangular
and circular structures, located on the downhill side of the works, were clearly
kilns and drying stoves. Each operation was located on a tramway or road leading to
the river, except two works which were close to Broseley on the Bridgnorth road.
There is little documentary evidence to explain the conundrum of these works —
their size, their location and the scale of operation in an industry notorious for its
undercapitalised, temporary operations. They were clearly unusual, but none of the
works survives. 47 The Broseley Tithe M ap describes them as ‘brick-kilns’, but they
must also have manufactured roof-tiles. 48 Neither brick nor roof-tile manufacture
was mechanised at that date, but roof-tiles required more specialised processes and
buildings — different clay, a different pug mill, better drying facilities, and more
controllable kilns. W ell before the construction of the Severn Valley Railway with its
increased access to markets, there were large thriving purpose-built works here, in an
area away from the nearest residential areas but close to the River Severn. The evidence
of the buildings seems to indicate the large-scale manufacture of roof-tiles for a
regional or possibly national market in Jackfield by 1840.
Between 1840 and 1889 there was an extraordinary boom in roof-tile manufacture
fuelled by the construction of the railway, increasing mechanisation and an inordinate

102
 IND USTRIAL BUILDING S IN LANDSCAPE

demand for durable roofing tiles. In the 1870s, the plastic process was mechanised,
and in the 1890s the semi-plastic process was introduced involving drier clay, more
machinery and fewer buildings.'1'’ At the end of the century, there was a sudden and
catastrophic decline in the industry.
The best-preserved brick- and tile-making works stands at Blists Hill, on the east
side of the canal.50 Little survives of the three small sheds of 1847, but by 1883 the
buildings which stand today were largely complete. The works were set up by the
M adeley W ood Company, as a subsidiary activity to their ironworks on the site. Sold
after the closure of the ironworks in 1912, they remained in operation until the
1950s.
The M adeley W ood works was conceived as a complete working unit for the
plastic process of brick- and tile-making of the 1870s, comprising steam-driven clay
preparation machinery, heated drying sheds and down-draught kilns, which were laid
out as far as possible to facilitate the movement of clay through the works by gravity.
Clay was brought from the mine by plateway to weathering heaps, then hauled into
the upper floor of the clay-preparation room, where it dropped through crushing,
grinding and tempering processes to the ground floor. There a pug mill, wire-cutting
machine and a bat machine for tiles were probably housed. The engine house abutting
the clay-preparation room to the east powered the crushing machinery and haulage.
From the clay-preparation room, bricks or tile bats would have been taken to the
pressing shed — a large open-sided building, with five furnaces at the north-east end
and underfloor ducting. Tile bats would have been dried, pressed and left: to dry
again. From there the tiles would be moved to the Drying Stove to the east, a building
apparently unique to the area, comprising two vaulted bays, separated by brick pillars,
the whole heated by underfloor ducts. After 14 days, the tiles were ‘white dry ’ and
conveyed to kilns, where they were burnt along with common bricks. Kilns were the
most expensive and difficult buildings in a brick- and tile-works, but would last about
12 years if well constructed. It was more economical — and more common — to build
them in pairs, sharing a chimney,51 although there were three original kilns at Blists
Hill, all of which were down-draught intermittent kilns with six to eight fireholes
protected in typical local fashion by an arch.52
A second clay-preparation room (perhaps for the semi-plastic process) was added
to the works in 1902, along with offices and another boiler, but as there was little
increase in firing or drying capacity, the brick and tile may have been finished across
the canal at the newly completed western works. Less complete today, these were
purpose-built as a tileworks with an estimated output of 7 million tiles per year.53
The drying shed is a large rectangular structure with four parallel gables decorated
with terracotta finials. Inside, brick pillars support the roof. There was a range of
stoke-holes along the front of the building, and heat was carried beneath the floor in
ducts. Two brick-vaulted drying kilns abut the west side of the building, both used
for secondary drying. The buildings housing the bat machines, and the kilns to the
south have been completely demolished, but a post- 1902 shed remains to the south.
Other standing evidence for brickworks is sparse, 54 but it is clear that a local style
of works had emerged by the late nineteenth century (and possibly earlier), developed

103
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO
to cope with specialist tile manufacture. Down-draught kilns protected by arches,
and vaulted drying stoves were local varieties; clay-preparation buildings and pressing
stoves were more common features of the M idlands.
Yet this specialisation had its drawbacks. By 1889 the industry was under pressure
from slate and from other forms of roofing material, and the quality of the product was
deteriorating (ironically because the semi-plastic process may have been unsuitable for
local clays). The level of investment in buildings may have contributed to the
problem - in 1894 an observer noted that there was ‘no lack of capital in the erection
of tile-making plants in the Broseley district, some of which would astonish a few
who believe in cutting this item down to the lowest possible extremity ’ , but only a
few years later there were problems in diversifying into brick, as the works were ‘ laid
out especially for the manufacture of roofing tiles ’ .55 M any works had filled large
export orders, but with greater competition transport costs became a factor which
weighed heavily against the local product, and even a brief revival of hand-made tile
manufacture associated with the Arts and Crafts movement failed to revive the
industry, most of which closed by the time of the First W orld W ar.

E n c a u s t ic t ile s

The encaustic tile manufactories of Craven Dunnill and M aws were built in response
to the extraordinary vogue for tiles as a decorative medium, fuelled initially by the
mid-Victorian boom in church building using reproduction medieval tiles, and later
by the success of the industry itself, which promoted new techniques and designs
through royal and architectural patronage.56 These manufacturing complexes rep ­
resent a uniquely documented attempt to combine the circulation of clay and goods
around the works in an orderly fashion whilst retaining the elegance and appearance
of a pot bank. By the time these specially designed factories were built, encaustic tile
manufacture had become a highly complex works procedure, with as many processes
as a pottery, if not more.
In the early days of encaustic tile manufacture, tiles were made in different premises.
W hen Herbert M inton adopted the earliest patent for the mechanical production of
encaustic tiles in 1830, he ‘commenced the manufacture in a single room ... at the
earthenware works, and only three men were at first employed ’.57 W ithin about five
years, there was a short-lived attempt to make encaustic tiles at Jackfield, this time
not in a pottery, but in Exley ’s roof-tile plant.58 The same tradition of working in
existing premises can be seen at George and Arthur M aw ’s early works at W orcester,
where the brothers had bought moulds and equipment from Fleming St John, who
in turn was using the old W orcester Porcelain works to make tiles.59 Later on, the
business from which the Craven Dunnill Company emerged operated in an old and
derelict pottery.
W hen the M aw brothers came to the Gorge in 1852, they opened a tileworks on
the site of the old Benthall Ironworks. The site chosen was in the Benthall Valley, a
narrow, steep site, hemmed about by pit heaps and by waste from the old ironworks.
They may have used the buildings of the ironworks at first, but by the time they left

104
 IND USTRIAL BU ILD IN G S IN LANDSCAPE baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK
the site in 1883, very little of the original ironworks remained; to the east of the road
were a series of sheds and two kilns, covering almost all of the flat land available, and
across the road on a platform created out of the old cinder heap were another group
of sheds and four kilns. The buildings seem to have grown in a haphazard fashion,
with kilns scattered about the site. The position was an awkward one, close to the
clay and coal which the M aws had already been using at W orcester, but it was cramped
and there was a steep drop down to the riverside, or by 1862 the railway line.
I Despite the difficulties of the site, the time spent at Benthall was a period of
innovation and success. After many experiments, commercial production of plain
tiles, with many new colours, began in about 1856. 60 Enamel and majolica tiles were
produced from 1862, the old plastic process was replaced by the dry, dust-pressed
technique in 1863 and steam pressing was introduced into the existing layout in
1873. 61 But already the company was aware of the problems of the site, and from
1862 had been buying land for a new works on the river bank at Jackfield. 62
Encaustic tiles were also being made in the 1 860s at the old, run-down Jackfield
pottery, where John Hawes had made earthenware.63 Joined by Denny in 1867, they
were replaced successively by Hargreaves and then Craven, and in 1872 the part­
nership of Craven Dunnill was formed, expressly to expand the manufacture of tiles,
and to rebuild the old pottery as a new tileworks. 63
M eanwhile, the first purpose-built encaustic tile manufactory had been constructed
at Stoke in 1869. 65 The need for a new building was precipitated by a legal case
between the china- and tile-making sides of the M inton Hollins business, and funded
by the resulting compensation. M ichael Daintry Hollins chose local architect Charles
Lynam, and together they created a showpiece factory which combined the ornate
facade of a pot bank with the principle of linear production, so that clay and products
could be moved around the works in an orderly fashion.
For their new factory at Jackfield, completed only five years later in 1874, the
Craven Dunnill partners chose the same architect. Four acres of ground were leased
next to the pottery alongside the newly opened Severn Valley Railway and work
commenced on the new buildings. The old works were later demolished, 66 and
warehouses, showroom office and entrance lodge erected on the site. Lynam used
some of the elements of his public buildings in Stoke such as the pointed arched
windows and intricate ceramic detailing of the North Staffordshire Infirmary (18 63) 67
in the facade of Craven Dunnill, and added an extraordinary spire (fig. 5.7). As at
Stoke, clay was brought into the rear of the works, into a blunging house, and from
there to slip kilns and mill room, presumably all in the eastern end of the site. It was
then conveyed to purpose-built clay arks, where it was stored. The press shops,
encaustic rooms, drying stove, saggar house, firing and glaze kilns seem to have been
concentrated initially in the northern part of the building, culminating in the packing
room, from which they were dispatched onto rhe railway. The tiles thus undertook a
complete circuit of the works. There was a steam engine attached to the blunger, and
a gas works at the rear of the site.
In 1879, construction was well under way at the new M aws factory for the
manufacture of ‘classical adjuncts of architectural embellishments, as well as of their

105

i
 wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUT
T H E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

i-.'

5 .7 The Craven Dunnill Encaustic Tileworks ar Jackfield, c. 1878 (IGMT1 983.1063) jihgfedcbaZY

porcelainic and fayence adaptations to articles of domestic utility ’ (fig. 5.8). 'h The
new works finally opened in 1883. It was much larger than the Benthall site, covering
5j acres, and once again was designed to facilitate the movement of clay and tiles
around the different processes. The most modern equipment, most of it designed
by the company, was incorporated in special buildings, and provision made for
extending the various departments without losing the relationship between premises.
Unlike the other works, M aws included a fully mechanised firebrick works.
The three works illustrate changing ideas about tile production between 1869 and
1883. W hile the buildings at Stoke are very scattered, with wide carriage drives
between each, both M aws and Craven Dunnill were on linear, cramped sites, and
there is little space between buildings. At all three sites, the initial clay-preparation
block remained separate, but while rhe workshops at Stoke are an isolated block,
elsewhere they are much closer to the kilns, presumably so that ware can travel
backwards and forwards as necessary. Stoke combined plastic and dust-pressed manu ­
facture in different parts of the workshop block, whilst M aws was largely given over
to dust-pressed techniques.
Power at Stoke 6 '’ and at Craven Dunnill was initially limited to the separate
mill block, whilst at M aws steam pressing was incorporated into the design of the
workshops, as well as in the clay-preparation area, and the waste steam used to heat
drying sheds. Craven Dunnill had its own gas-works in 1874.
The workshops at Stoke were heated by steam pipes and their own stoves; the
‘green ’ tiles were then transferred to a hothouse or drying shed parallel to the kilns.baZYXW

106
 IND USTRIAL BUILD IN G S IN LANDSCAPE baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ

I baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
? to * -'

Ife
5 .8 Maws dieworks at Jackfield c. 191 5 (IGM T1982. 1740) jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO

The sorting house and painters ’ shops were in a separate block with the finishing
kilns, whereas at M aws the kilns were in a continuous line.
The three works also had very different transport arrangements; at Stoke there was
no direct link either to the canal or to the railway; Craven Dunnill was built beside
the railway, and M aws also had a separate railway siding to which goods were delivered
directly. M aws had an additional tramway link to the coal and clay pits from which
coal could be discharged into a subterranean area near to the kilns.
As with any factory site, the efficiency of the initial layout was short-lived. The
most frequently altered and rebuilt element at each site was the kiln bank - at Stoke
there were about 12 kilns, but by 1877 there were 20. At Craven Dunnill the up ­
draught kilns were converted to down-draught ones,'0 and a continuous gas-fired
Dressier tunnel kiln was added in the middle of the site. Only five years after it
opened, M aws were considering adding new kilns and equipment to their site. New
gas plant was installed by the Horsehay Company, and the first firing of a new gas
kiln using the plant was in 1905. A Dressier kiln was installed in 1919 outside the
works to the north, which must have broken up any existing pattern of circulation. 71
Only 30 years after the new factory was completed, Craven Dunnill said that if the
business was to be continued it would necessitate a general rearrangement of the
works and a heavy outlay.72 M aws continued operation, although in a much reduced
form, until 1969, whereas at Craven Dunnill production wound down much earlier,
and by 1952 a firm of precision engineers had taken over the site.
Tile-making is an example of a classic cycle of industrialisation which can be traced
through the industrial works: a phase of experimentation as part of another business;
the first larger operations on old or converted sites; and finally the confidence to

107
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

invest in new efficient premises whose image, in turn, becomes part of marketing the
product. Once built, these premises soon become cramped, circulation is interrupted,
products change and production becomes inefficient, and the whole cycle may begin
again elsewhere. W hat differentiated tileworks from brickworks or potteries was the
sheer complexity of the manufacturing processes, many of which required specialist
buildings. But such premises were expensive - although the first Stoke factory was
built on the basis of a compensation claim, Craven Dunnill and M aws were built for
a more buoyant market, by well-capitalised partnerships. It is difficult to see how the
expenditure could be justified in an out-of-the-way area, without the confidence
afforded by a national, still less an international, market.gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONML

A d a p t iv e r e -u s e : in d u s t r ia l b u il d i n g s a s a n e c o n o m i c r e s o u r c e

Cheap and flexible premises remaining after one industry after another had closed in
the early twentieth century actually acted as an incentive to new industries to move
into the area. Instead of the area stagnating, there were probably more new small
industries at this time than at any other period, and thus the industrial cycle was re ­
established.
In fact the adaptive reuse of industrial buildings was an old-established practice. 73
If they hadn ’t been shaken to pieces, ironworking sheds were particularly adaptable —
two of the sheds at Newdale became a barn and a meeting house in the 1760s, and
the Upper Forge became a nineteenth-century mill. Even specific structures such as
iron furnaces were reused — Abraham Darby adapted an old charcoal furnace, and
at Bedlam an iron furnace became a brick kiln. There was by no means a firm separa ­
tion between industrial and residential buildings - the conversion of redundant
ironworking buildings into tenements, often while the rest of the site was still in
operation, occurs frequently in Coalbrookdale in the early nineteenth century 74
and can be used as a measure of declining industrial activity. M ining buildings
survive less often, although at least one mining engine house at Jackfield is now
a house.
Old buildings fulfilled a much more important function — that of attracting new
industries, particularly to settled areas, where there was a demand for goods and
services by the local working population. The two building types commonly found
in urban areas, which proved most useful, were malthouses and warehouses.
M althouses were one of rhe most common urban building types in industrial use.
In rhe late eighteenth century, most pubs brewed their own beer, but with the
centralisation of brewing in the hands of larger firms local brewing was abandoned.
Attached to most local public houses of this date is a malthouse, usually a two-
storeyed gabled building with a large open space inside, tiny windows to restrict light,
and a kiln at one end, providing a useful space that could be readily adapted to
industrial needs. Local malthouses were converted to all sorts of industrial purposes -
a bakery on the W harfage, a cinema at Dale End, an aluminium smelter at M adeley.
Because the structure of a malthouse was so close to that of an industrial shed,
malthouses themselves were often adapted from industrial buildings - Brookes

108
 IND U STRIAL BUILD IN G S IN LANDSCAPE

steelhousc was a malthouse by 1734, and the Benthall lead smelter had been converted
by 1765.
On the Ironbridge W harfage during the nineteenth century were sieve- and riddle ­
makers, wiredrawers, blacksmiths, tinsmiths, ironmongers, and the makers of iron
patten rings for workmens clogs.75 M any of these were located either in malthouses
or, more often, in the old two-storey warehouses built to serve the river trade, which
were no longer needed after the construction of the railways. Such industries served
the needs of a working population, and in a sense were the logical precursors of the
industries which today most commonly occupy old industrial buildings - garages.
As significant users of old buildings, garages have been among the most important
influences in the conservation of historic industrial buildings. The earliest garages
appear in Ironbridge in about 1922, and by 1941 there were four motor engineers in
Coalbrookdale, and several more on the W harfage and at Dale End, almost certainly
in existing buildings. At Coalbrookdale, Lower Forge is still occupied as a garage, and
elsewhere the Benthall pipeworks and the Coalford brick-drying shed are used for
truck repairs. Similar businesses occupied the Coalbrookdale Upper Forge (plant hire
firm) and the Blists Hill brickworks (haulage contractor) in the 1950s and 1960s.
The King Street Tobacco Pipeworks in Broseley provides an example of the way in
which a larger business — in this case a small factory — was able to move into and
adapt an old warehouse. On a patch of common land in Broseley W ood, a long
timber-framed building was constructed, with a small vented brick stable added at
the north end. The long building was demolished to its base wall level, and recon ­
structed as a long brick building, with an open hoistway facing the street, and six
enormous windows in the rear wall. By 1838, the big windows had been blocked for
a seed warehouse with two tenements on rhe ground floor, and the vented stable
block was now offices. Later the warehouse was converted to two more tenements
and a pair of cottages was built at the back of the building.
The site only became a pipeworks relatively late in its history, when it was bought
in 1883 by Rowland Smitheman, a local builder, who converted it into a factory.
Pipemaking, like china manufacture, required workshops rather than large open
sheds, and it was a simple matter to convert warehouses and cottages into the necessary
accommodation. A kiln was erected in the courtyard, the cottages knocked through
into one building, and rhe upper storeys of the warehouse opened up again. The old
office became a chaff store and packing area, and a new office was set up in one of
the tenements on the ground floor. As Broseley W ood became built up and access
more difficult, the old entrance to the north was blocked, and big double doors
inserted. Smitheman sold the site to the Southern family who already made clay
pipes elsewhere in Broseley, and who kept it in operation until the late 1950s, when
it was abandoned with the equipment still intact.
Old buildings ideally served the needs of such small workshop enterprises, typical
of most built-up areas. On the whole they were small craft-based industries directly
servicing local needs with low capital investment and a high element of skill. They
were individual operations, and did not rely on any organised putting-out system.
Nevertheless, there was also a tradition of small, purpose-built industrial work-

109
 T H E L A N D S C A P E O F IN D U S T R Y

shops, often located in urban areas amongst housing. These were usually small sheds,
on a domestic scale, but they often displayed features characteristic of a particular
industry such as hearths or ventilation systems. They are common in the W est
M idlands, where smithing, chainmaking, weaving, leatherworking and nailing each
produced a characteristic building type.76 One of the main problems with such
buildings is survival - the rate of destruction of outbuildings tends to be much higher
than street-front buildings as rear yards are converted into gardens or outbuildings
into unrecognisable garages. A good group of such buildings remains in M uch
W enlock,77 but relatively few have survived in the Gorge. This in itself makes the
Old Armoury in Ironbridge — one of the few purpose-built workshops to survive -
particularly unusual. High up on the hillside, the building originally had two storeys
at the back and one facing the street. At the lower level, heavy brick and iron arches
support a first-floor working area of seven hearths set around the walls, lit by windows,
which were, however, truncated by the addition of the third storey. The windows
provided direct light to each hearth, implying a level of fine and detailed work. Used
as assembly rooms in the late nineteenth century, the stone chimneys of the hearths
can still be traced as scars in the wall. The building was used by a patten-ring maker
(manufacturing the iron rings on the bases of workers ’ clogs) in 1847, but may
originally have been built for a forging business such as W alton ’s, which made chains
in Ironbridge.
One small industrial building also stands in Church Street. It is a simple two-
storey structure, entered from the upper floor, with evidence for a hearth in the
basement. Dating to the early nineteenth century, it remains in use for light industry
and metalworking today.

Pioneer industries

The closure of the large traditional industries left a supply of abandoned industrial
complexes, as well as an unemployed skilled labour force. These conditions, in the
context of the government planning policies of the two world wars, attracted a
series of new industries to the area. Such enterprises had no links with the mining,
ironworking or ceramics industries which had so long dominated the local economy;
they were small-scale, flexible enterprises, responding to the changing demands of
consumers and often pioneering new products. The Gorge had, in effect, become a
nursery for new industry.
The old Coalport factory was a particularly useful site. The Nuway M anufacturing
Company had moved in there in 1927, and in 1941, after heavy bombing, the
London firm of Chillcots moved their sheet-metal Gasket Division into part of the
old works, where they made gaskets, washers and exhaust systems which were stacked
in the kilns. In another part of the works Frank Hawker Ltd made fancy metalware
powder compacts, lipsticks, mirrors and trays. The company had moved in in the
1940s, at the request of the M inistry of Supply, and operated until the mid-1960s.78
Other firms moved into the area to start new enterprises. In the Coalbrookdale
Com pany ’s Severn Foundry, an employee of a W ellington toy firm set up the M erry- jihgfedcba

1 1 0 gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED
 IN D U S T R IA L B U IL D IN G S IN L A N D S C A P E baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ
thought Company to manufacture teddy-bears and soft toys. The building was light
but a little too large; it was easily adapted, however, by being subdivided into sewing
and cutting areas. Teddy-bears are still made in Ironbridge today, but many more of
the industries which began life in old buildings in rhe Gorge have since moved away
into larger premises. In the old Drill Hall, Clifford W illiams began making pyjamas
and khaki shorts in 1951 and when the space proved too small the firm acquired the
Old Armoury for storage. It was so successful that in 1962 a new purpose-built works
was built in Queen Street, M adeley, and since then plants have been built in Telford,
Leominster and Oswestry. A similar process of expansion from a small pioneering
industry in old buildings occurred at the old Calcutts Ironworks, where W .H. Smith
began making machinery for the local clay industry in the 1870s, as well as general
1
smithing, iron and brass founding. The firm made aeroplane parts during W orld W ar
II and in 1941 were taken over by M essrs M arshall Osborne & Co. Ten years later
they took over the old Craven Dunnill tileworks, and since then have moved into
new premises in Telford.
Industry today still follows the same pattern of small firms in old industrial
premises, especially on the south bank of the river, outside the area of Telford. Here
copper reclamation takes place at the old Rock Tileworks, gates are manufactured on
the old M ilburgh Tiles site, and garden sheds assembled in one of the old Doughty
Tileworks buildings. The old M aws works now houses craft industries. On the north
side of the river, furnace heating elements are made in the Old Armoury in Ironbridge,
rubber products are made at part of the Coalport works and teddy-bears at the old
Coalbrookdale foundry.
Thus the supply of old industrial buildings played a central role in continuing the
industrial cycle by attracting new industries, which, once established and successful,
would move out into larger premises. In fact, it might be suggested that the oppor ­
tunity to establish a brand-new, purpose-built works is more the exception than the
rule in the general course of industrialisation. This pattern is well established foi
other parts of the country too.79

I
A r c h a e o lo g y , a r c h it e c t u r e a n d f u n c t io n a lis m in in d u s t r ia l b u ild in g s wvutsrqponmlkjihgf

This study has taken an explicitly archaeological view of industrial buildings, con ­
centrating upon the physical evidence for the buildings themselves, their setting and,
where possible, their development through time. Inevitably, it is a study which lacks
personalities or finances and may not satisfy economic historians but it nevertheless
provides an opportunity to explore the nature of the physical evidence - and, by
implication, the importance of buildings themselves, however humble, as a resource.
The history of industrial buildings has most often been expressed in terms of
machines and power, particularly in the application of centralised power to the textile
mill. But here power is far more important in the landscape than in building
development. As often as not, power was bodged into buildings, well after their
construction - a hammer engine added to the Upper Forge, or steam added to an
existing brickworks. A multistorey porcelain workshop may superficially resemble a

111
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

textile mill, but the power was applied elsewhere, and even away from the site. The
concept of centralised power is therefore rarely helpful in understanding the original
plan or structure of local buildings, although it is often a major contributing factor
to their evolution.
If power is only one of many factors in a buildings evolution, how relevant is the
concept of the factory in the Gorge? The legislation relating to factories referred
almost exclusively to textile factories until well into the nineteenth century, and
contemporary writers excluded organisations in which ‘mechanisms do not form a
connected series, nor are dependent on one prime mover’ ;80 more recently the
concept has been widened to encompass anywhere where the means of production
are concentrated on one site.81 But by becoming more general the concept has become
less useful. It seems more appropriate to refer to ‘ industrial complexes’, a term which
better encompasses the variety of building types which might be found on any one
site, and to look for other models in order to understand individual buildings.
Equally, the term ‘factory ’ does not easily fit one of the industrial building types —
the ironworking shed where the aim is not so much to accommodate people and
power as to protect, support and ventilate large, space-hungry processes. W ith a few
exceptions (Soho), early ironworking buildings have often been derided as grim and
austere,82 their form subservient to any process which may go on inside. Yet it is
possible to see a generalised single-storey shed, developing as a building type in its
own right, irrespective of the processes it contains. In the Gorge the use of bricks and
of gable parapets places its origins firmly in the local tradition of barns and of small
industrial housing. But the demands of strength and light create new features -
timber trusses with iron ties, the use of iron to support buildings and for light, the
increasingly fine, multipaned cast-iron window. Ventilation comes through roof vents,
or the typical circular gable opening and sweeping arches provide ingress for bulky
objects.
Is it more useful, then, to look at these building types in terms of the debate
between functionalism and architecture? As a style, the former is dominated by
functional considerations, and acquires aesthetic value almost coincidentally. But the
im portant factors in the industrial shed are space, light and ventilation, and these
could be achieved as easily by a roof propped up by pillars. In each of the ironworking
sheds there is a clear attempt at an aesthetic — arched multipaned windows where
shutters might have done, decorative brickwork, gable details, etc. Yet this is not an
aesthetic which relates to major contemporary architectural trends. Its roots are
instead to be found in local vernacular practice, and it continues to develop in the
nineteenth century, not with reference to domestic structures, but by now established
industrial motifs. M ultipaned windows, brickwork, roofs continue to evolve along
their own trajectory as an industrial mode of practice, but until more early iron-
working buildings are identified, the buildings of the Gorge must stand as a model
for the origins of a coherent industrial building type.
As well as setting at least one industrial building type firmly within local practice
and pragmatism, it has been possible to look at complexes or groups of buildings as
working units. This is best done through ceramics, where a startling array of buildings

1 12
 IND U STRIAL BUILDING S IN LANDSCAPE

and forms is geared towards one basic process — that of preparing and burning clay.
The degree of complexity is not simply governed by technology (it was over 50 years
before innovations in pottery-making were applied to brick), but by external, and to
archaeologists invisible, factors, such as marketsand capital. W ithin the same industry,
the buildings document very different strategies which at their most basic must relate
to profit — if sufficient value could be added to the clay, the outlay on works was
justified. Once again, it is not possible to understand buildings purely in terms of the
application of the most up-to-date and efficient technology: they have to be seen
much more as products of a local — and economic — context.
But a longer archaeological view also makes it clear that any advantage to be
gained from a purpose-built works, or scheme of efficiency, was short-lived. And this
underlines one of the eternal problems in establishing the pattern of flow in a ceramics
operation. Kilns in particular were frequently rebuilt on a 20- or 30-year cycle, and
equipment was changed to meet market demands. M ost processes left few marks on
the surviving buildings, and without documentation the task is a daunting one.
However a works was initially conceived, it was unlikely to stay that way for long.
Not only did the function of buildings change within industries, it also changed
from industry to industry. One of the main fallacies of an architectural or a functional
approach to industrial buildings is to treat them as static entities with a single purpose.
The changing pattern of building use is as much an industrial trend here as the
expansion of the iron industry or the growth of brickmaking. The small and mobile
industries were actually encouraged by the availability of buildings, in the same way
as raw materials attracted the larger industries. Buildings in this case become more
than a product of industrialisation: they become a factor in their own right.
Finally, all of these buildings have to be seen within the peculiar landscape of the
Gorge, against a recurring pattern whereby the initial attraction of raw materials
inevitably had to be set against the high cost of transport, and the eventual exhaustion
of minerals. However elaborate the works, the realities of day-to-day operation in a
difficult valley with no large centre of population nearby had to be overcome.
Buildings are not isolated entities, but functioning parts of the landscape which
cannot be considered separately.
As in the industrial landscape, the two fundamental elements of an archaeological
approach — context and change — come together to provide an alternative perspective
on industrial buildings. The advantage of a small area, containing a very diverse
sample of buildings, also acts as a discipline, making it less easy to select the biggest,
the best or the most typical. There is much more to be learned from the buildings
of the Gorge, especially by the detailed survey of the less obvious structures, but
only if they survive the pressures of modern development, with their information
reasonably intact.

113
 6

LANDSCAPE OF HOUSING: THE

GEOGRAPHY OF SETTLEM ENT

'The village of M adeley, comprehending hundreds of detached houses, ... reminded

me of the drawings of a Chinese town, as the same indiscriminate jumble of beauties. ”
This description, inspired by a popular view of Chinese art, was written shortly after
the Iron Bridge had been built. The same idea of a Chinese landscape was used in a
description of Cromford, and conveys striking similarities with other rural industrial
landscapes, as for example the Pennine landscape of textile outworking described by
Daniel Defoe, where there were ‘ Houses scattered and spread upon the sides of the
hills even from the bottom to the top ’ .2 In this apparently random scatter of settlement
the landscape of the Gorge is connected with other areas where industry developed
outside the structure of urban or planned development.
To early visitors, the landscape of the Gorge was also an aesthetic landscape,
perceived as an embodiment of sublime disorder. In this ‘jumble of beauties ’, however,
a clear pattern of land use is discernible, and the development of settlement can be
closely connected to the changing economic organisation of land and resources
in the three Gorge-side parishes of M adeley, Benthall and Broseley. This chapter
studies the changing relationships both among settlements and between industry and
settlement, using these themes to trace the development of the Gorge as an industrial
area. It charts the gradual transformation of a ‘ rural conurbation ’ of separate hamlets
with distinct economies to an integrated urban area centred on the small town of
Ironbridge.gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

O r ig in s o f in d u s t r ia l s e t t le m e n t : b e f o r e 1 7 0 0

Before the dissolution of the monasteries, settlement on the slopes of the Gorge was
confined to a number of farms in woodland clearances, an occasional mill, perhaps a
small community in Coalbrookdale. There are isolated references to the exploitation
of minerals in the Gorge since at least the fourteenth century, and there arc references
to mining and iron manufacture that date back even earlier than this (see chapter 2),
but nothing to suggest that this was on any scale, or that it generated any permanent
new settlement. The principal focus of settlement remained the nuclei of Benthall,
Broseley and M adeley. Settlement in the Gorge itself was minimal, and has left little
trace.3

114
 LANDSCAPE OF H O USIN G baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHG

But from the end of the sixteenth century the slopes of the Gorge became the focus
for the growth of settlement on a new scale, at a time when the exploitation of its
mineral resources was given serious attention by the landholders who had purchased
the old monastic estate. There are references in manorial documents to new settlement
in the parishes of Broseley and Benthall outside the old nuclei,4 and after c.1620 there
are a number of maps which trace the development of settlement in the area
of Broseley W ood.5 An observer in 1690 noted that ‘the ancient waste of commons of
Broseley is now in greatest measure built up and enclosed by poor people, and has
become as a county town ’ .6 By the end of the seventeenth century, references to
unlicensed cottage-building in M adeley W ood make it clear that this area also was in
the process of settlement, and the Easter Book for 1711 lists 148 names in M adeley
W ood alone.7 A series of probate inventories refers to settlement in the Gorge area
baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
after c. 1675, giving some idea of the nature of its communities and their resources. 8
In spite of the documentary evidence for settlement during the late sixteenth and
early seventeenth centuries, the only earlier buildings to have survived are the small
number of large houses built in the early seventeenth century by mine- and barge ­
owners. It is only from the later seventeenth century that there are significant numbers
of small dwellings and cottages either still surviving or for which there is pictorial or
photographic evidence. Perhaps it was only in this period that buildings were con ­
structed in such a way that they were valued enough to survive. The houses of
the late seventeenth century were built by professional building craftsmen — their
predecessors may have been more primitive structures (see chapter 8). The emerg ­
ence of what were to become permanent buildings marks a key stage in the develop ­
ment of the Gorge, and is an indicator of the resources generated in new communities
dependent on mining and manufacturing. It is from this period that the development
I. of settlement can be charted in some detail.’
The location of late-seventeenth-century settlement can be precisely mapped across
the Gorge (fig. 6.1). The pattern of development suggests dispersed settlement ordered
as a number of loose nuclei or small hamlets. On the north bank of the river, although
some houses were built in relative isolation, most formed loose clusters of building,
perhaps the largest being at M adeley W ood Green, where Bedlam Hall was built in
the early seventeenth century, and where there were several cottages.10 Some of these
small settled areas can be related to specific patterns of economic activity - clusters
of early houses near what was to become the site of the Iron Bridge and at the Lloyds
I mark wharfage areas and ferry crossings at pools on the river, and on the slopes of the
Gorge early settlement closely followed the outcropping coal seams (fig. 6.2).
These hamlets had commonly known identities and boundaries, and their differ ­
entiation remained important into the twentieth century. The nineteenth-century
census enumerators, for example, were confident of the difference between Foxholes,
Brockholes, and Lincoln Hill in Ironbridge, or between Coalford, Lloyds Head,
Calcutts, Jackfield and Salthouses on the south bank. These different local names
recalled the several separate communities formed in the early period of settlement in
the Gorge.
South of the river, settlement followed a similar pattern. In Benthall, the medieval

115
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ

6 .1 The beginnings of settlement: Coalbrookdale and Madeley W ood before 1700. Map based
on surviving and documented early buildings (N. Smith)

village had been deserted by the mid-seventeenth century, and encouragement was
given to settlement for mining as the outcropping coal measures in the east of the
parish were exploited.11 The earliest surviving buildings are alongside areas where the
remains of bell pits provide evidence of early mining activity. Similarly, in Broseley,
new settlements were established at this time on the former commons of the parish,
distinct from the nucleated main settlement, and again connected with the develop ­
ment of mining — the earliest recorded new settlement was at Coalpit Heath, where
a coalpit and associated houses were recorded as early as 1 550. 12
A series of separate settlements along the river were also linked with mining, the
domestic pottery industry and with river traffic: Coalford, Salthouses and Lloyds
Head all had substantial numbers of seventeenth-century buildings, and one late-
seventeenth-century house still survives at Calcutts — a community at Ladywood, and
another at Jackfield are shown on the map of 1620. Calcutts and Ladywood were
both loading-points for the transport of coal from nearby mines.13
These new settlements had a distinctive form. The individual houses were for the
most part detached in small plots of land, but were concentrated in particular areas. 1'
A num ber of large and ornately constructed buildings were the focus of several of
these hamlets: two such houses were built in the early seventeenth century at Coalford,

1 16
 L/XNDSCAPE OF H OU SIN G

IDi

6 .2 (a ) The Lloyds, M adeley W ood, c. 1880 — 1900. A small settlement established at a river
crossing by rhe early seventeenth century served as a focus for successive generations of
development, the light cluster of cottages around Lloyds Hall contrasting with the scatter of
houses beyond (IGM T 1988.284)

(b ) Severnside, Ironbridge, 1895-1905. The tight packing of houses below the Iron Bridge
suggest the importance of this site, which had been a river crossing long before the building of
the bridge (IGM T 1982.1863)

117 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IN DU STRY

and they faced another across the river (Lloyds Hall). These houses were all timber­
framed with a two-storeyed hall and cross-wing plan form, the facades embellished
by a series of gables marking the three principal bays. In 1672, the owner of one of
these houses at Coalford was Adam Crompton, a master collier. Another substantial
house, Bedlam Hall, was described as a Jacobean mansion before it was demolished
in the nineteenth century.
Other houses which survived from this period were considerably smaller - most
were cottages with a two-unit plan, though Parsons ’ map of Broseley in c. 1620
baZYXWV
suggests that there were also a number of single-celled dwellings. The profile of
housing which can be derived from Hearth Tax returns and probate inventories, while
weighted towards the better-off members of the community, confirms this pattern of
building distribution: large numbers of small cottages, and a small number of more
substantial dwellings.15 This housing profile corresponds closely with what is known
about the organisation of the early industrial society — the division between master
colliers and labourers is mirrored in the structure of housing stock: it was the master
colliers who were responsible for building the larger houses; the rest were the cottages
of labourers. 16
There was a coherence in the structure of these early settlements that suggests that
they were neither marginal nor poor. Studies using probate inventories and other
documentary sources have demonstrated the presence of general traders in these areas
by the late seventeenth century: the Gorge was not an entrepot for a region — these
traders served the local population. Their presence, and the growing importance of
consumption within the home, give an index of prosperity and suggest the significance
of a cash income for the population of the Gorge.17
Documentary and map evidence suggests that these seventeenth-century settle ­
ments were primary, the first major development of this land for building. Although
mining and manufacturing are recorded for a much earlier period in both Benthall
and M adeley W ood, there is nothing to suggest that these activities had generated
any permanent settlement. The absence of a settlement record (and of evidence of
coherent and sustained industrial activity) may suggest that this early industry was
small in scale, probably seasonal, perhaps temporary. This accords with the early
development of industry in other areas. In South W ales, for example, the early
charcoal iron furnaces relied on seasonal work — housing was provided only for key
workers, and labourers may have squatted or lodged in farmhouses. 18
Neither is there any evidence that these were marginal agricultural settlements
turning to industry as a means of eking out a poor livelihood from the land.
Documentary records show that the first settlers in Benthall and the outlying parts
of Broseley were identified as miners; they were also described as incomers to the
area.19 W hile probate inventories show that it was not uncommon for miners to keep
some stock, and the distribution of houses in plots of land enabled small-scale
cultivation and animal husbandry, it is clear that such activities were secondary in the
economy of the area, and the plots surrounding the houses were too small to sustain
anything other than the simplest husbandry.20
But the new settlements were not established on unused or waste land. The

118
 I
LANDSCAPE OF H O USIN G
I w
northern slopes of the Gorge comprised part of the woodland of the parish of M adeley
and were an integral part of its pre-industrial economic structure, used for coppice
timber and for pannage. But a process of enclosure associated with the growing
I baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
importance of pastoral farming had already begun to reduce the importance of
wood and arable in the agrarian economy of the parish well before the seventeenth
century, and by this time mining was already under way on the slopes of the Gorge. 2 '
Unsuited for cultivation, the wooded slopes of the Gorge were the principal locus of
early mining, and also provided fuel for the charcoal iron furnaces.
A similar pattern of land use can be identified in Benthall, where there was a more
radical shift in its organisation as the medieval agricultural village was literally replaced
by a new industrial settlement on the margins of the parish. The estate was sim ­
ultaneously exploited for agriculture, and the woods of Benthall Edge were an integral
part of its economy.22
In Coalbrookdale the land formed part of a number of farms already independent
of the manor of M adeley by the seventeenth century. These were progressively sold
in small lots in the early years of the eighteenth century. Some of the land in the Dale
remained in agricultural use until the mid-nineteenth century, and housing crowded
the steeper slopes which could not be productively used for agriculture. 23
In Broseley, the greater part of the industrial settlement (the area known as Broseley
W ood) had previously formed part of the common lands of the parish, and the early
settlement of this area sparked ofF riots within the parish, the villagers jealous of their
lost common rights.24 But this was not a straightforward conflict between agricultural
and industrial interests. Large blocks of common and open fields were steadily eroded
by enclosure and the formation of consolidated holdings during the seventeenth
century, a process illustrated in the series of estate maps showing the formation of
individual tenements taken from the former common. 25 Landowners may even have
encouraged building on the commons as a means of consolidating their rights over
the mineral deposits. Settlement associated with mining therefore appears to have
been part of a wider reorganisation of land use within the parish.
To the north a number of large farms (probably originating as woodland clearances)
were already separate from the principal part of the parish by the early seventeenth
century, and it was on part of these estates that most riverside development took
place.26 This development formed a series of small separate settlements which closely
mirror the pattern of landholding on these farms.
Changes in the organisation of the economy are underscored in the roles taken by
landlords in the exploitation of mineral resources. In all three parishes, the stimulus
to seventeenth-century exploitation of minerals came from the major landholders,
who made a substantial investment in mining and transport networks.27
Industrial settlement can therefore be placed in the context of more general shifts
in the economic organisation of the parishes of the Gorge. These shifts encouraged
the more rapid development of mining and manufacturing from the mid-seventeenth
century as wealth was invested in the exploitation of resources on the new estates
created by the dissolution of W enlock Priory. At the same time, the pattern of land
use was modified by the creation of consolidated holdings. Enclosure is sometimes

119
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO
said to have entailed impoverishment, the creation of surplus labour and under ­
employment; 28 close links between the enclosed landscapes of pastoral farming and
rural industry have been demonstrated elsewhere. W hile there is no evidence for an
impoverished rural population in the Gorge turning to industry to eke out meagre
agricultural incomes, the loss of common rights certainly brought about a change in
the basis of rural labour and may have been an important precondition for the
creation of an industrial labour force. In addition, the formation of small consolidated
holdings perhaps encouraged the development of alternative sources of income from
under-used or unprofitable land, either by industry or housing development.

I n d u s t r ia lis a t io n : t h e e ig h t e e n t h c e n t u r y

The early eighteenth century witnessed a major phase of building and expansion of
settlement throughout the Gorge, alongside the continued exploitation of its resources
for mining and manufacturing. M any buildings associated with this phase of growth
survive and their record is augmented by a series of descriptions and illustrations of
the Gorge as it became a notable place to visit later in the century. In addition, a
documentary record provides substantial evidence for the process of settlement in
title deeds and probate inventories.29
Eighteenth-century settlement consolidated development in those areas where
building had begun in the previous century. The limits of these old settled areas were
extended, and the density of their development increased. Distinctive clusters of build ­
ing can be identified as small terraces and groups of building were created through
a process of extension, subdivision and new building (fig. 6.3) (see chapter 7).30
Some of these clusters formed substantial nuclei that were already crowded with
building by the middle of the century - one such nucleus in M adeley W ood was
centred on the Golden Ball Inn which was first licensed in 1728. Another nucleus
was at Loadcroft W harf, where by mid-century there was a long terrace of 10 dwellings
later known as Nailers Row, at least nine other houses in a tightly built group, two
houses on the site of the Swan Inn, and two further terraces of around six and seven
dwellings built up along the line of Lincoln Hill, which was already an established
route in and out of the Gorge. 31
In other areas, development was more dispersed — in the Brockholes and Foxholes,
for example, cottages were strung out along the slopes of the Gorge, following the
outcropping coal seams. But in all areas it was now common to find individual plots
increasingly crowded, as new development concentrated in particular areas, rather
than a uniform spread of building across the landscape.
M any of the features of the eighteenth-century landscape of settlement can b e
illustrated by the development of Coalbrookdale:

In the year one thousand seven hundred, the whole village consisted of only
one furnace, five dwelling houses and a forge or two ... [now] its trade and
buildings are so far increased that it contains at least 450 inhabitants and finds
employment for 800 people.

120
 1

I wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
LANDSCAPE OF H O USIN G

6 .3 The impact of the industrialisation: Coalbrookdale and Madeley W ood, c.1750. Map
based on surviving and documented buildings (N. Smith)

32
This was how George Perry described the development of Coalbrookdale in 1753. ■

This pattern of growth is illustrated in the engravings to which this text was an
accompaniment: they show two distinct settlement types in upper Coalbrookdale —
on the one hand, a pattern of single cottages dispersed in small plots; on the other,
the earliest terraced housing.’3 Surviving buildings show that it was the terraced
housing which became characteristic of Coalbrookdales development — the single
cottages were gradually replaced by other buildings. The engravings record some ten
houses in addition to the six dwellings of Tea Kettle Row (fig. 6.4). Also at the upper
end of the Dale by this time there were at least ten other houses in three short rows —
other terraces were built close to the Upper and Lower Forge sites.34
The development of Coalbrookdale was also marked by the new building of
! baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
substantial houses for the ironmasters and managers of the ironworks. The earliest of
these were close to the principal site of the ironworks, and their development included
the creation of a formal landscaped garden: Dale House was built in 1715, Rosehill
in 1720 for Richard Ford, manager of the ironworks. By mid-century, the Darby
family had built another larger house some distance away (Sunnyside, built in 1 750). 35

121
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

6 .4 ‘The Upper Works at Coalbrookdale’, 1758. A scatter of cottages loosely grouped around
the works, the larger houses of the ironmasters and their managers above the furnace pool,
with Tea Kettle Row, rhe earliest recorded terrace in the Gorge, behind (F. Vivares, Elton
Collection: IGM T)

There was also a small number of houses of an intermediate size in the upper dale
which tradition links with the management of the ironworks. 36
A similar pattern emerged elsewhere in the Gorge. By the late 1750s, there were at
east six substantial houses to the north of the river: Belmont House was built on
Hodgebower in 1753, in an area being developed with small rows and groups of
cottages. Two substantial houses by the river may be of a similar date, and Severn
House was built c. 1757 by George Goodwin, a master collier and partner in the
M adeley W ood Company.3 ' On the south bank, Calcutts House was built in 1755
alongside cottage rows.38 None of these houses was a farm, and none had the basis
for substantial landed estates: Dale House in Coalbrookdale was built on a plot of
land that was only 60 yards by 60 yards in 1715 - the Darby family consolidated
landholding in this area only slowly over the next century and a half.3 ’
The clear hierarchy of housing types shows both the social structure and the
organisation of the industrial settlements. Industrial work was not a marginal occu ­
pation associated with poverty, but had generated its own organisational structure,
concomitant with its expansion and increasing capitalisation. It was agriculture which
continued as a marginal activity. During the eighteenth century, the small clusters of
houses that had characterised the early industrial settlements gradually became more
complex groupings with distinct identities. There was a shift from an ‘industrialised baZYXWVU

122 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
 LANDSCAPE OF H O USIN G

countryside ’ 10 to a series of small industrial villages, a kind of rural conurbation, quite

distinct from the principal townships of M adeley and Broseley, each with its own
economic and social structure clearly reflected in the number and range of building
types.
Broseley W ood represents an exception to this pattern. It was the largest area of
development which was predominantly workers ’ housing in the Gorge. The settle ­
ment was said to have been built up by poor people, ‘the dregs of many counties ’ .41
During the eighteenth century, industrial wealth was invested in building in Broseley
itself, which rose to pre-eminence and came to be important as a market-town. M any
of its eighteenth-century town houses survive, and can be directly compared with the
larger houses within the Gorge. Broseley W ood remained an integral part of Broseley
itself and formed an early industrial suburb of labour within a stratified urban spatial
and social structure. '2

Settlement and the organisation of industry

The pattern of settlement that had emerged in the Gorge by the mid-eighteenth
century was an integral part of a wider system of land use and ownership. Settlement
patterns form an important part of the evidence in a reconstruction of the process of
industrialisation, and the organisation and structure of industry.
One crucial determinant of settlement location was the pattern of landholding
underpinning all activity on the land (see chapter 7).43 But settlement location also jihgfedcbaZYXW
bore a strong link with the availability of raw materials, especially in the early
phases of industrial development. In Benthall the first industrial houses were in close
proximity to the bell pits of early mining activity, and in M adeley W ood there is a clear
connection between early settlement and the outcropping coal seams. In addition,
the development of more specialised mining was linked with the involvement of
landowners, providing the capital (in mining itself and also in transport) and making
available the land (see chapter 2). The particular disposition of settlement reflected the
existence of mining freeholds or leaseholds, and there is a close correlation between
the pattern of landholding and the location of settlement which is particularly clear
in the spread of communities along the south bank of the river.
The closeness of the links between the location of manufacture and its associated
settlement is also borne out in Coalbrookdale, where the main areas of settlement
were immediately adjacent to the furnaces and forges. Similarly, settlement clusters
by the river map out wharfage areas and ferry sites: on the south bank, some of these
were originally associated with mining, developing especially as loading points for
rhe shipment of coal. These settlements also made use of other local resources in the
establishment of a domestic pottery and clay-pipe industry. At Jackfield, small kilns
were attached to cottage rows (fig. 6.5a — b). The importance of the river traffic was
signalled in the nature of housing: it also generated a domestic economy of inns,
boarding-houses and brothels. Riverside inns were among the largest of the buildings
alongside the river.
But the links between housing and industry go beyond the simple matter of

123

I
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

0h>

part
*
! o f th e . The jihgfedcbaZYXWVU
? A .rt ?a rt o f h e .
do^v M e a .d o ^ C ow j/ew
o f th e
r& g~g- Future. • baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

A-

Co vz - pasture. baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJI
5
A

3 e,« h n y

z ‘
Cb C< D

(b
A
6 /-
gfedcbaZYXWVUTS
___ '

A adtasi rf& U 4e

r 7 v ' £/? - D (3 a-/C ert'S

E fo b R ic-X a fc/l %
p "fa d c d i
6 .5 (a ) Jackfield and Calcutta c. 1720. The Broseley Hall Estate Book records several distinct
settlements on the south bank of the river. The community at Jackfield had its ra iso n d 'etre in
pottery production.

location. The organisation and structure of industry is closely reflected in the organ ­
isation of housing — this can be demonstrated by investigation of the connections
between changes in industrial organisation and changes in the form of settlement, in
particular in the case of mining.

124
 OF H O USIN G
l a n d s c a p e jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

Pd> r t °F
t^A
Leaeou?

'T h e \ O x

P a s tu re
Qi
<s5s

0)

) S
GO

John Kidd i n g : gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGF

7 3 baZYXWVUTSRQP

G r y/lo',M/cfa

bf y/<i
1 ItsKn (San Sored
K tfn 'jiyySi
I ff/m 77^ea^<Ma
M ■(£afie/Ss
k/ CLrnm -J/uirtS-rmjS

< £nQ & tlt

y ^UmTM
tfott c^o^k

i? / ye /i

(*) 125
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

The development o baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

f mining in the area can be traced from the relatively simple
bell-pit mining through to long-wall adit mining and deep pit mining. The shift in
mining technologies appears to have taken place at different times in the different
areas of the Gorge - in Broseley, the long-wall method had already been adopted by
the mid-seventeenth century and surface extraction given place to deeper pit or adit
mining. In Benthall, mining was still by bell pit in the later seventeenth century. In
both cases, mining was a primary occupation from the outset.45
The greater investment required by more complex mining systems was associated
with the employment of a more specialised labour force. In the Black Country, the
development of deep mining techniques was associated with the introduction of more
specialised work, and with the decline of patterns of by-employment which had been
linked with small-scale, bell-pit mining. New techniques demanded new levels of skill
and an increasingly capitalised industry required a committed, full-time workforce.46
In the Gorge, settlement was associated with mining and manufacturing from the
outset: the seventeenth-century settlers of Benthall and Broseley W ood were described
as miners, 4 ' and although the small enclosures associated with the houses would have
sustained small-scale cultivation and animal husbandry the plots were not big enough
for subsistence agriculture. These plots were progressively reduced in size as more
housing was built during the eighteenth century.48
Housing and the mines themselves were in close proximity. This close physical
association may itself reflect the scale of industry and its organisation: in south-west
Lancashire, for example, permanent housing was a specific product of an increasing
scale of production.49 Survival of any settlement at all gives an indication of the
importance of industrial work.
The permanence of the houses themselves, especially from the late seventeenth
century, also suggests the importance of money in the economy. Little survives from
he earliest phases of documented industrial exploitation and associated settlement
ate sixteenth century to early seventeenth century), suggesting that a first generation
f housing was less substantial, to be replaced as soon as sufficient capital had
been acquired from wage labour. Fragmentary remains of early building phases
incorporated into eighteenth-century cottages give physical evidence for a process of
rebuilding.50 The largest houses of the Gorge that were built in the seventeenth
century appear to represent the investment of wealth derived from mining. It is only
from the late seventeenth century, and especially from the early eighteenth, that
workers ’ cottages survive in any numbers.
The separation of industrial work from that of agriculture also influenced the
nature of the houses built. In Benthall, late-seventeenth-century houses are generally
larger than their successors: this gives an indication not merely of investment but also
of economic organisation. The size of these earliest houses suggests an economy in
which small-scale agriculture played a part: this would have necessitated additional
domestic service space for the processing and storage of produce. An economy
dominated by specialised and capital-intensive industrial work taking place largely
outside the home and reliant on markets rather than subsistence agriculture permitted
dwellings of a smaller size. 51 Cottages built in Benthall during the eighteenth century

126
 LANDSCAPE OF H O USIN G

were often very small, and subdivisions of earlier larger houses over the same period
provide further evidence for changes in the use of domestic space. 52
Housing development in M adcley W ood followed a similar pattern. A number of
detached houses built in the later seventeenth century were subdivided and added to
in the early eighteenth century to create rows and clusters of very small dwellings. At
the same time, several single-celled houses were built.53 The growing numbers of
smaller dwellings may be linked with a parallel shift towards greater specialisation in
industrial work, linked in turn with the development of more capital-intensive
technology.
The evidence of building and settlement therefore suggests that early mining was
sustained along with small-scale agriculture but that this gave way in the early
eighteenth century to far more specialised industrial work, generating in turn other
fbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
by-employments that were themselves related to industry rather than to agriculture.
Development of settlement associated with the iron industry also exemplifies these
functional patterns. Again, location of resources was a primary determinant in the
location of the industry and its associated settlement. In Coalbrookdale, the blast
gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
! furnaces required only a small labour force, and the iron-using trades were on no
greater scale than in any small town. But both called for specialist work: from a very
early date, the industry was highly capital intensive, both for the furnaces and the
power system. The Hallen ’s Lower Forge works were making goods requiring very
specialised skills — the making of frying-pans was the most highly skilled of all metal ­
working activity, and Coalbrookdale was only the third place in the country where
this was done. A mid-eighteenth-century map of Coalbrookdale suggests that within
the area of the furnaces and associated industrial buildings there were several buildings
in which house and workshop were combined (fig. 6.6). 54
But if some small-scale workshops were integral to the domestic units, other
housing marks the separation of work and dwelling: terraces of small dwellings were
characteristic of Coalbrookdale by the mid-eighteenth century, though these followed
an earlier phase of isolated cottage-building in substantial plots.55 Possibly the earliest
terrace in the Gorge (Tea Kettle Row, 1735 — 42) was built for labourers in the
ironworks.

E a r ly in d u s t r ia lis a t io n : la n d u s e a n d s e t t le m e n t wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZ

The development of industry in the countryside must be seen in relation to the whole
economic structure of the area. Close connections between agricultural organisation
and industrial activity have been demonstrated in other areas;56 there is, for example,
a clear link between the early enclosed landscape of pastoral farming and domestic
industry. In some areas, industry developed as a supplement to poor agricultural
livelihoods, and the early hosiery and textile industries, for example, appear to owe
their origins to a pattern in which industrial work was taken up by an underemployed
and poor agricultural population.57
In the Gorge settlement was associated with industry from the outset. Some
industrial activity preceded the establishment of permanent settlement, and migration

127
 >_ S ^S f

J o J ^u ild n iA f.
J gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

; 1 ' IP
e
•s33
O

=
S il H jihgfedcb
s
0

I ........
- *> . * 1> ■

•Q
ftW Ih H H K ;
< 114.^ 4 is it* c ?o 3 y^4 ‘S R R j_
<o
r-
v
a~a a j: a a s a j S b 4 a a R -B-&-S-

34iw
~o
%
3
“ ,..
« s.*» 9 lx* |
o
: ‘a J- s- o
_2
ggW S K «4 fe w
J
"8
:A O fla bZ -15 a d
b

< HlhW _ _ _ “o .

.E
g€*
gg
s wvutsrqponm
.22
I >.
2
J□
<VP\ \ §
e
1
C?
•g
O

ex.
”S
§
■«- w a
T
* 5!
o
to
w -C
o ~
[Z o u H
z o < KO
E <
J■ ffl
p
Kd baZYXWV
“• J
u
> <
< o X
U b // "■ &
 r

LANDSCAPE OF H O USIN G

into the area seems to have played a part in the early formation of a labour force.
Those industries dependent on the availability of natural resources might be expected
to have a different pattern of organisation and development from others which were
more dependent either on agriculture or on craft? 8 In the Gorge, early industrial
specialisation based on the vigorous exploitation of natural resources led to early
prosperity, which was reflected in expanding settlement, the building of good-quality
houses and the acquisition of more domestic goods during the eighteenth century.
By this time, by-employments in the area were themselves industrial?’ The classic
model of proto-industrialisation, by contrast, supposes a land-hungry rural popu ­
lation drawn in to domestic, craft-based industries as outworkers for urban mer­
chants? 0 Incomers to the Gorge had skills already, whether as miners or potters, and
it was easy for them to settle in an area where land had low value, and where few legal
constraints were raised against settlement.
But even some areas where industry was based on the exploitation of natural
resources remained poor: the setdements in the Gorge are in marked contrast to those
associated with mining in other areas of Shropshire such as Clee Hill — where the
settlements remained isolated, the buildings less permanent, a dual economy more
important. M ining technology remained relatively primitive and poorly organised? 1
In the Gorge, industries grew rapidly in scale and capitalisation and, above all, the
economic basis of the settlements continued to diversify — not only was there an
increasing degree of social stratification, but also increasing industrial diversification.
By the late eighteenth century, a number of integrated industrial concerns had
developed, and the communities had lost their original dependence on a single
industry.
The importance of industrial specialisation in shaping the pattern of settlement
can be paralleled in other areas. The North-W est Leicestershire Coalfield had a similar
history of development, from scattered settlements associated with bell-pit mining,
to the creation of more concentrated settlements linked with more complex mining
systems? 2 Similarly, in the W est M idlands iron trade, the early development of the
( industry was characterised by a marked degree of specialisation and production for
markets in pursuit of profit — and it was considered by contemporaries in the late
seventeenth century to be a rich area. The Sheffield area shows a similar history? 2
Both were also characterised by the continued diversification of their industrial
base. Specialisation and diversification are the common factors in the stability and
prosperity of these early industrial communities.
The industrial landscape of the Gorge was marked by an early industrial special­
isation associated with the settlement of new areas. Although these new setdements
were organised for industry, they formed part of a wider pattern of estates and land
uses. In the context of the estates as a whole, agriculture continued to be important,
even benefiting from the expanding population on its margins. Nevertheless, there
was a marked separation of the industrial communities from the primary settlements,
and the new settlements formed a number of ‘industrial villages ’ which continued to
grow and diversify throughout the eighteenth century.

129 jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

/
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ

6 .7 The beginnings of an urban landscape: Ironbridge and Coalbrookdale, c.1800. Map based
on surviving and documented buildings (N. Smith) gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQP

U r b a n g r o w t h a n d c h a n g e a f t e r 1779

The construction of the Iron Bridge in 1779 marks a turning-point in the settlement
history of the Gorge, as the first stage in the creation of a small urban settlement,
the town of Ironbridge. During the nineteenth century the Gorge developed as a co ­
herent industrial district, and took on some of the characteristics of an urban area,
with the new town of Ironbridge as its commercial and social centre (figs 6.7 and
6.8).
But the development of Ironbridge must be set in the context of wider changes in
the economic and social landscape of the Gorge. As its industries diversified and
increased in scale, so its social structure gained in complexity. These economic and
social changes were directly reflected in the structure of settlement. From the late
eighteenth century, the built-up area in the Gorge increased both in extent and in
density as areas that had been settled early continued to grow. One new industrial
village, Coalport, was established. At the same time, land was opened up for settlement
of a new type. These changes were all part of the gradual urbanisation of the Gorge,

130
Z
t\
oo

t£
S

p
Jt?
"O
C3

s
-C

§
”5
<3
a" gfedcbaZ
O
ir >
wvutsrqp
oo

3
o

o
O

1u
OD
72
_o

2
U
8
•3
J
S

co jihgfedcba
^6
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IN DU STRY

which was most clearly expressed in the development of Ironbridge itself. This process
entailed a radical reshaping of the industrial landscape.

C h a n g e in th e e a rly se ttlem en ts

In the more complex industrial pattern of the late eighteenth century, the formerly
close association of particular industries with particular settlements became less clear.
New ironworks at Bedlam and Barnetts Leasow, for example, did not generate new
housing in their immediate areas. The existing settlement pattern was capable of
expansion under a vigorous housing market that was by this time well established.
There was a continuous process of new building and development throughout the
late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, but it was largely concentrated in the
old settlement areas. The principal phase of expansion was at the turn of the century,
characterised by an increase in the density of building on existing plots. This was the
result both of new building and of the extension of existing buildings. M ost of this
development comprised small houses for workers.64 jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED

fe?.gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA •< ? Si-

6 .9 The south bank of the river in 1789. This sketch by Joseph Farington shows a series of
settlements strung out along the south bank of the river. In the years that followed, this
landscape came to be overshadowed by the rapid growth of the brick and tile industries (IGM T)

Broseley W ood provides an example of this increase in the density of settlement,

and many of the surviving buildings date from this period: it became known as the
poorest area of the parish of Broseley, said to contain its filthiest and most dilapidated
houses and the subject of detailed scrutiny during the cholera scare of c.1830.65 In baZYXWV

132
 LANDSCAPE OF H OU SING

Coalbrookdale, a similar increase in the built area took place, partly through the
development of housing by the Coalbrookdale Company, which signalled an expan ­
sion of output in the ironworks in the 1780s, but also through private development
of small cottage rows, in a piecemeal process similar to the earlier pattern of develop ­
ment. Both areas had reached their maximum extent by baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFE
c. 1 840. 66
Similar developments took place in the riverside settlements, marking the shift from
predominantly domestic to larger-scale factory production in the local industries. A
sketch of the Coalford and Calcutts area in c. 1780 shows extensive but open develop ­
ment (fig. 6.9).6 ' But on the Tithe M ap of 1840 the settled area was intensely crowded
and densely built up. It was in this 60-year period that many of the larger and more
land-hungry brick- and tile-works were established. They required both more labour
and more land, displacing the older domestic economy and small-scale production.
The small nucleated settlements gradually lost their individual coherence as the
development of industry on a greater scale changed the pattern of land use and
introduced new relationships between home and work. However, the location of new
building was determined by the existence of earlier settlement nuclei: this was to lead
to a loosening of the ties between particular industries and individual settlements.
As land uses competed in the areas of early settlement, the greater concentration
of housing on pre-existing plots was an important aspect of the changing physical
and social character of settlement. In Jackfield the subdivision of larger buildings,
and the building of small terraced rows, were characteristic of the latter part of the
century, as the increased size of the brick- and tile-works generated a demand both
for more dwellings, and for houses which were not related to domestic production.
Riverside inns were among those buildings subdivided into several dwellings. But the
greatly increased scale of the late-ninereenth-century brick- and tile-works did not
generate new housing on a concomitant scale — very few houses can be directly related
either to Craven Dunnill or to M aws, suggesting that the growth of settlement of the
eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries had provided an infrastructure of housing
that was deemed sufficient. 68
Over the same time, the social composition of the earlier settlements changed. The
larger houses that had characterised the original areas were in many cases subdivided
during the nineteenth century - The Tuckies, and the two timbered mansions on
each side of the river were all subdivided into small units, reinforcing distinctions in
social character which were brought about by patterns of new building. Lloyds Hall
was a common lodging-house crowded with railway navvies and itinerant musicians
in the census of 186 1.69
In a parallel process, new land was opened up for housing of a rather different
type. During the 1830s, settlement in Coalbrookdale grew according to a new pattern.
Between 1827 and 1847, 8 houses were built on the previously open fields of Paradise,
and a further 5 houses along the roadside - houses which were of a distinctly different
type, and which were for the most part built singly in large plots.70 Ar the same time,
important changes were underway in the structure and organisation of the ironworks,
with the introduction of new grades of skilled workers and an altered management
hierarchy. The new houses were the homes of managers, draughtsmen and other

133
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

members of rhe new middle class, which was one product of these changes.71
But while there were changes in the form and structure of the industrial settlements,
until the development of Ironbridge the character of settlement in the Gorge remained
that of a series of industrial villages. The significance of this is underlined by the
development of Coalport, which was hailed as a new town, but which did not really
differ from the early settlements in being largely dependent on a single industry, and
in the scale, structure and pattern of its development.
The first settlement at Coalport was associated with the development of a transport
interchange and communication network, focused on the Hay Inclined Plane of
1792 and the bridge of 1780.72 The earliest houses were clustered around these two
points (some 14 houses near the bridge), and there is little evidence for any earlier
settlement in the area.73 Very soon afterwards, the first china-works was founded, and
further settlement followed, so that in 1802, Thomas Telford could write, ‘The works
at Coalport ... have succeeded to a very considerable degree, and they are striking
proof of the good effects of an improved inland navigation ... houses to the number
of thirty have been built and more still are wanted.’7 '1 However, rhetoric exceeded
reality, little further development followed, and Coalport was only a small settlement
in 1847, with some 38 houses associated with the chinaworks. It expanded little
thereafter — only 9 houses were built later in the nineteenth century, and it was only
the development of local-authority housing in the 1950s which added significantly
to its size.75
Development was piecemeal, in small groups that were each built in several phases,
In the second phase of development, plots were aligned with the road, but there is gfedcbaZY
otherwise no suggestion of formal planning.76
M ost of the housing at Coalport consisted of workers ’ cottages, though there were
a number of more substantial dwellings (six large houses and an inn in 1847)
associated either with management, or with small-scale family businesses (ropeworks,
timber-yard, inn). Contrasting land use is suggested by the crowding of cottages onto
small plots, and the layout of these larger houses, detached and in areas of garden. 77
Coalport never became a town. There was little diversification of trades, very few
shops and a small population. It remained largely dependent on a single industry.78
W hy Coalport remained so small may at least in part be explained by other changes
which were taking place in the Gorge at about this time, and, in particular, the
development of the town of Ironbridge.

T h e g r o w t h o f I r o n b r id g e

‘The present town may be said to owe its origins to the construction of the Iron
bridge, which here spans the Severn, and from which it derives its name. ’79 Although
there is evidence for a substantial earlier settlement in the area, development that
followed the building of the bridge did introduce some entirely new elements and
involved a radical change not only in its immediate area, but also in the settlement
geography of the entire Gorge. Although by the standards of other industrialising
areas Ironbridge remained a very small place, the development of the Gorge in the

134
 LANDSCAPE OF H O USIN G baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHG

nineteenth century acquired some of the characteristics of an urban area as functional

differentiation came to be expressed in spatial structure. The settlement can therefore
be compared with other urban industrial regions.

C h ro n o lo g y o f d e v e lo p m e n t

The bridge was constructed in 1779, and shortly afterwards the Tontine Hotel was
built and the market square laid out (fig. 6.10). The Trustees of the Bridge were
closely involved in both these schemes. 80 A visitor in 1801 noted that ‘ Near the
Tontine is a row of shops, in front of which a market is held weekly, on Fridays. The
butter cross and shambles arc neat slated buildings, supported by stone pillars.’81

- ■

y anti
■ i • baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
7 T ’f i A®

6 .1 0 Ironbridge, r. 1835- The building of the Iron Bridge was the spur to a dramatic change
in the organisation of the Gorge as Ironbridge grew up as a new town. In this lithograph, the
Tontine Hotel, Market Square and buildings, and large new commercial and residential
premises record the early stages of its urban development (IGM T 1980.304)

Several large blocks of shop buildings on the W harfage and High Street frontages
were established at the same time. In addition, a number of new cottages were built
on small plots, often where buildings already stood. Behind the main street frontages,
there were therefore areas that were intensely crowded with small cottages and
workshops. This pattern of land use was analogous to the court development in some
of the major cities, but was an inversion of that process, since the frontage buildings

135 jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCB
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

were actually new, and the crowded back building represented the intensification of
existing development.82
A second phase of development began in the 1 820s and was largely complete by
1847. This saw an increase in the density of the commercial area, with the building
of new blocks of shops to form continuous street frontages in the area around the
market square and the bridge. M uch of this development was on previously vacant
plots, though there is also evidence for the replacement of existing buildings.83
At the same time, a number of large villas and detached houses were built on
formerly empty plots on the slopes of the Gorge. Development of land for larger
housing continued into a third phase of development, beginning in the 1850s and
continuing with intermittent building into the 1880s. M ost of these early villas were
built on vacant plots in areas which had formerly been associated with mining, and
what appear to be blocked-up entrances to these mines still exist on Hodgebower and
Church Hill. But in the latter part of the nineteenth century several such houses were
built on the sites of rows of small cottages, suggesting a literal change in the valuation
of land. Alongside the larger villas there were a number of more modest houses,
built from the 1840s, also usually detached and in substantial plots,
the houses of a prosperous lower middle class.84 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

T h e fir m o fse ttlem en t

The pattern of land use in Ironbridge had been established by 1847. Its characteristic
features were a densely built central area focused on the bridge and market square,
progressively thinning out in density both alongside the river and up the slopes of
the Gorge. There was a continuously developed street line on both sides of the bridge,
and a degree of planned development, with the formation of large blocks, each
containing a number of separate shop and dwelling units, but designed to be read as
single buildings. The market square provided a commercial and aesthetic focus for
this development, and was again a formal piece of planning, created by cutting back
the natural slope to create a level platform. There were in addition a number of
prominent public buildings, including a parish church and two schools.85 Ironbridge
was also a central point in the local transport network — a centrality further emphasised
with the coming of the railway and the opening of a station in 1862.
All three of these elements (the pattern of development, the street lines, and the
existence of a coherent centre) were entirely new elements in the settlement geography
of the Gorge. Pockets of earlier development were absorbed into this new pattern,
the new street frontages concealing a jumble of smaller buildings. 86 An earlier plot
pattern survived as the tenurial basis for new development; these plots were big
enough to accommodate a single villa with pleasure grounds, pairs of more modest
houses, or clusters of small cottages.87 There was no pressure for larger-scale develop ­
ment.
These physical patterns are closely related to the functions of the settlement. In
the first place it was a commercial centre, with a market by 1801 .88 Development of
this market and associated retail shops formed the first phase of development, pre-

136
 LANDSCAPE OF H O USIN G

ceding its establishment as a residential area. In 1837, Ironbridge was described as

The merchantile part of the parish of M adeley, and here is the focus of
professional and commercial pursuits. The weekly market, the post office,
principal inns, drapery, grocery and ironmongery, watch making, cabinet
making, timber and boat building establishments, the subscription library,
subscription dispensary, branch bank, subscription banks, gentlemen of the
legal and medical professions, ladies boarding school etc. 89

This graphically conveys the extent and diversity of commercial and professional
pursuits focused on Ironbridge — a range which is indicative of its urban function
and suggests similarities with the constitution of other small market-towns. Almost
all the buildings in the central area were in use as shops by 1847, and most appear to
have been purpose-built.90
W arehouses, malthouses and inns comprised most of the development along the
river to the west, dispersed along the river front and dependent on it. Though some
of these (the Swan and the W hite Hart) predated the bridge, most were founded after
it; all establishments were either built or rebuilt in the years after the bridge was
erected.91 These buildings also formed an area with a coherent character, dependent
on river traffic and road trade, but with a lower density of land use than that of the
central area, each complex requiring considerable working space.
The slopes of the Gorge were the principal location of new residential development,
though clusters of cottages were crowded close to the commercial centre of the
settlement, largely built around a nucleus of buildings that had been there before the
bridge. On the slopes of the Gorge, as mines were disused, so housing developed.
These slopes were marked by the lower density of occupation except on those areas
where there was already settlement — clusters which stand out by their greater density,
but the smaller size of the buildings. M any of the new villas were surrounded by large
pleasure grounds and gardens.92
There was little other than light industry, or highly specialist production of
consumer goods in Ironbridge itself, and different land uses were associated with
different densities of development. The central commercial area was the most densely
built-up, along with the nuclei of earlier setdement, while nineteenth-century resi­
dential development was characterised by its spaciousness. Although on a very small
scale, Ironbridge therefore exemplifies some of the characteristics of an urban setde ­
ment, in terms of its spatial organisation and economic functions.93 Its spatial arrange ­
ment contrasts with both earlier development and the other industrial villages of the
Gorge. However, Ironbridge was only one component in the industrial landscape of
the Gorge - this landscape can best be understood during the nineteenth century as
an urban district, in which Ironbridge was the commercial and social centre.

Iro n b rid g e a n d th e G o rg e wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQ

As a commercial centre, Ironbridge was marked by a concentration of retailing,

including a number of specialist shops. The range of shops in Ironbridge and the

137
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND USTRY

density of their development contrasts with the small numbers of more general shops
in the outlying settlements of the Gorge. In Ironbridge, the central area is marked
by large purpose-built shops incorporating dwellings and storage space. Elsewhere,
ordinary houses and house-types were adapted during the nineteenth century, or
small additions made to existing buildings. 94 In the concentration of retailing, and
the existence of a number of more specialised shops, Ironbridge is marked as a
prosperous local centre. These were shops dependent on a central position and a wide
hinterland — they were not the neighbourhood shops of working-class districts.95
Study of the distribution of retailing throughout the Gorge as recorded in successive
trade directories confirms the central role of Ironbridge. In Pigot ’s Directory for 1846,
78 traders were listed under Ironbridge, 3 in Coalport, 11 in Coalbrookdale. That
Ironbridge was indeed the commercial district for M adeley is underscored by the fact
that M adeley itself listed only 23 traders, not many more than were recorded in
M adeley W ood (19 traders). In 1851, three shopkeepers were listed in Jackfield in
Bagshaw ’s Directory: in the same year, Ironbridge could boast bakers, booksellers,
butchers, cabinet makers, druggists, hairdressers, hosiers and milliners among the
range of its trades. The directories also show how these trades were concentrated in
the central district of Ironbridge, with over half the shops listed located in Bridge
Street, M arket Street and the W harfage, and all the specialist traders grouped in these
streets.
But Ironbridge was not the only local urban centre fulfilling a significant com ­
mercial role: in 1846, 74 traders were listed for Broseley, which was also an admin ­
istrative centre. Although Ironbridge was central to the Gorge, its hinterland remained
small. It was one of a network of small towns in the coalfield, each of which became
an important local centre, but none of which grew to regional pre-eminence.
Ironbridge also became the centre for a number of professional and public services.
An infant school was built in 1831, and the National School in 1851, both in the
central area. There were three chapels by 1835, and in that year a new Anglican
church, Saint Luke ’s, was built by subscription and with a grant under the Church
Building Act of 1818 - the provision of churches under the Act was largely confined
to urban areas, again suggesting the new importance of Ironbridge as a small urban
centre. It was designated as a separate parish in 1845. 96
Some administrative functions were gradually relocated here as the formal and
functional urban area was given recognition in the formation of a legal and admin ­
istrative entity. Ironbridge had been recognised as a separate ward within the parish
of M adeley since 1835. After 1889, it had its own district committee with the power
to appoint subcommittees, and responsibilities in the field of housing and public
health.9 ' The police station and court room, built in 1862, were used by the com ­
mittee, but in 1896 the Old Dispensary on the High Street was taken over and
became known as the M unicipal Buildings. 98 Public buildings enhanced the physical
and social impact of the central area, while at the same time other distinctively urban
services were introduced: the development of gas lighting provides an example.
A residential area with a character distinctly different from that of the previous
housing grew up as part of this new town. The large numbers of villa-type residences jihgfedcba

138
 LANDSCAPE OF H O USIN G

on the slopes of the Gorge were the homes of a commercial and professional class. A
number of houses in the area were the homes of industrialists who worked elsewhere
in the Gorge. The Orchard was the most flamboyant of these, and was built by
W illiam Davies, whose brickworks were in Jackfield. By 1885, H.P. Dunnill ofCraven
Dunnills tileworks was living there. Severn House was the home of Arthur M aw at
about the same tim e." John Randall described both the physical and the social
character of Ironbridge in 1880:

Clustering cottages are seen to perch themselves on ridges, or to nestle pleasantly

in shady nooks half hid by rocks and knolls and trees ... on points commanding
panoramic sweeps of country, of winding dales and wooded hills, have sprung
up villa-looking residences and verandahed cottages that tell of competence,
retirement, and those calm sweet joys that fringe the eventide of prosperous
life ... from the Severn to the summit, the hill is dotted with villas, gothic
and fanciful, fronted by grottoed gardens, flanked by castellated walls and
orchards.100

By this time, therefore, Ironbridge could be viewed as a picturesque paradise, and

house names and road names adopted during the nineteenth century reflect a pursuit
of the picturesque (Belmont Road and Bellevue Road, The Orchard, M ount Pleasant
and Prospect House were all first recorded in the late nineteenth century) (fig. 6.11).
Residential segregation was never complete, partly because of the constraints imposed
by previous settlement, but there was nevertheless a marked differentiation in the
pattern of land development in different areas. By the end of the nineteenth century,
Ironbridge was acquiring some of the popularity of a resort: the Crown Inn on
Hodgebower, with its pleasure gardens, was a particular focus of interest. 101
In the landscape of settlement, there was a growing contrast between the early
developed settlements where small cottage building was crowded onto constrained
plots, and new areas of development in which land was laid out more spaciously. This
reflected an increased social stratification. Industrialisation entailed both an increase
in the importance of services and the creation of more complex occupational hier­
archies.102 Ironbridge became a centre for commercial and professional services, and
housing was developed largely for this prosperous middle class. Changes in the wider
area of the Gorge helped reinforce this pattern. The early nineteenth century saw not
only the reorganisation of the Coalbrookdale Ironworks, but also the establishment
of larger industrial units - the brick- and tile-works of Jackfield in the latter part of
the nineteenth century were far larger industrial complexes than their predecessors,
and generated a new structure of industrial organisation.
So a distinct social area was formed within Ironbridge which was inhabited by
people who worked not just in the immediate area, but also in other parts of the
Gorge. Ironbridge developed away from directly industrial land uses, and came to be
largely residential and commercial. Although housing for workers remained close to
the sites of industry, other social classes tended to move away as new areas of land
were opened up specifically for housing development. As a result, a new hierarchy of
settlement was shaped across the Gorge.

139
 TH E L/XNDSCAPE OF INDUSTRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK

..- - a , k" i: i . ijjihgfedcbaZYX

. J
£ ‘ IT . ‘k . 2 a k - - / T • ■ /

_ __ -*^X .i

6 .1 1 Severn Terrace, Ironbridge, c.1900. ‘ From rhe Severn to the summit, rhe hill is dotted
with villas, gothic and fanciful’ (IGMT1 982.2336)

Such a link between a differentiated social structure and the spatial organisation of
settlement gives an indication of the extent of industrialisation and urban develop ­
ment and may be compared with the process historical geographers have described
as Social Area Theory. 103
One of the effects of this change was to create new relationships between the
industrial settlements and the town of Ironbridge. The area which is now known as
M adeley W ood, for example, which had been an important nucleus of settlement in
the early eighteenth century, had become a working suburb of Ironbridge by the mid ­
nineteenth. Jackfield (fig. 6.12) was considered to be baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDC

not all the world, but a very poor bit of the fag end of it .. . made up of old pit
shafts, pit mounds, rubbish heaps, brick ends, broken drain and roof and
paving tiles, dilapidated houses, sloughy lanes and miry roads

by H.P. Dunnill in 1 870. Io '’ Residential segregation was therefore not just a conse ­
quence of the creation of a general housing market and a stratified society - new and
larger industries not only used more land, but helped to create the desolation and
decay described by Dunnill. This was particularly true of the brick- and tile-works of

140 gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
 LANDSCAPE OF H OU SIN G gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK

r j » baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED

. -

t>

rhb-'baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

6 .1 2 Jackfield, c. 1890. ‘The fag end of the world ? (IGM T1 982.2337) jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTS

the south bank. For those who could, there was every reason to leave the immediate
site of industry.
This separation of different land uses and the changes in land valuation that it
entailed modified the social geography of the Gorge as a whole, and the relationships
between its various communities were reshaped. A new hierarchy of settlement and
distribution of land use gave a coherence to the landscape of the Gorge.105
Ironbridge assumed the role of central place within the economic and social
structure of the Gorge, largely on the strength of its commercial function. This
commercial development owed a great deal to the building of the bridge and the
road-building and improvements that were associated with it. Not only did they
create a physical focus for the new town, but they also literally made Ironbridge
geographically central to the Gorge. Trade directories make it clear that Ironbridge
was the centre for a network of communication based on road and river by the early
nineteenth century. One effect of this was to create a distinction between the centre
and the periphery which again was a new aspect of the settlement pattern. This
distinction was reinforced by the opening of the railway and Ironbridge station.
It is therefore possible to identify three major phases of settlement development in
the Gorge in the period from c. 1780. In the first place there was a considerable
increase in the extent and density of the settled areas, which was followed by the
emergence of a more diverse social structure, reflected in new house types and
settlement in new areas. This process of partial segregation was enhanced by the

141
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPON
development of Ironbridge as a small town centre, enabling the entire Gorge to attain
a functional and social coherence as an urban industrial district.

T h e la n d s c a p e r e f o r m e d : i n t o t h e t w e n t ie t h c e n t u r y

At all times, the process of development had involved the demolition and replacement
of existing buildings: few houses of the earliest phase of settlement survive; buildings
were successively enlarged and improved, sometimes leaving little trace of the original
structure; rows of cottages were pulled down and replaced by substantial villas in
Ironbridge in the later nineteenth century; even earlier, the Darby family, in con ­
solidating a private estate in Coalbrookdale, had been responsible for the demolition
of several cottages in the area known as the Rope W alk Coppice.106 Houses were
absorbed into new factory complexes or lost to new transport systems: construction
of the Severn Valley Railway, which opened in 1862, entailed a swathe of demolition
in the settlements on the south bank of the river as it was pushed through the areas
of densest development. The earlier tighdy clustered nuclei were destroyed, and
something of a linear pattern resulted, as the railway reoriented land use.
Powers available to local government were also used to modify the landscape in
the interests of public health and land-use planning. The Public Health Act of 1848
made possible the establishment of Boards of Health and Inspectors of Nuisances,
and additional bylaws. 107 As part of the Borough of W enlock, and thus already
part of an integrated local government area, there was little need or pressure for a
Board of Health in the Gorge, but the first bylaws for the M adeley Sanitary Division
of the Borough of W enlock were passed in 1850. They were primarily concerned
with the regulation of boundaries between public and private, with encroachments
onto the highways through construction of cellars, sewers, vaults or drains; with the
fall of roof-water to the pavement; with the regulation of nuisances, including wild
dogs and obscene literature, kite-flying and football-playing; and the removal of
waste. A system of inspection of houses and their sanitary provision was under way
by 1851, laying the foundations for later concern with the state of the buildings
themselves. By 1890, under powers conferred by the Housing of the W orking Classes
Act of 1885, houses deemed unfit for habitation could be closed, and lists of houses
so designated were brought before the Sanitary Committee.108 However, action
did not necessarily follow inspection — no deep sewers were laid in Ironbridge until
1978.
Thus by the early twentieth century, local agencies of administration subjected
the settlements to increased scrutiny following national legislation, and large-scale
inquiries into the nature of the housing stock were carried out. Local records do not
clearly set out the criteria under which housing was condemned, but a survey of
housing in Ironbridge was carried out in 1881, and the detailed investigation of 72
houses that followed suggests that concern was focused on overcrowding and the
adequacy of sanitary arrangements (in 1934 a slum was defined as a building which
‘ by reason of disrepair or sanitary defects ... bad arrangement or narrowness of the
streets [is] injurious to health ’). 100 Inevitably, the most densely built plots, which were

142
 LANDSCAPE OF H O USIN G

also concentrations of the smallest dwellings, became the focus of attention. At first,
action was taken on an a baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
d h o c\y ii\s , listing individual houses as unfit for habitation,
but a second stage of action saw the designation of small clearance areas. This process,
finds a counterpart in early municipal action in other urban areas.
Although the sanitary inspectors were vigilant, it is never clear how effectively these
powers were used locally: most housing clearance in the Gorge took place after 1950,
and though long lists of houses deemed unfit for habitation were produced at
committee meetings the evidence of maps suggests that most of the houses condemned
survived until the mid-twentieth century."0 Although there was some housing clear ­
ance in the 1920s, such direct action lagged way behind the system of inspections —
in 1934, clearance areas in Church Hill, Severn Side, St Lukes Road, Jockey Bank,
New Bridge Road and W esley Road were designated but it was not until the 1950s
that many buildings in these areas actually were demolished in tandem with the
extension of a public housing programme.
The public housing programme initiated after enabling legislation was passed
in 1919 modified the settlement geography of the Gorge both through new build-
ing and slum clearance associated with it. The first proposal for direct action in
building was in 1920, and in November of that year it was proposed to build 24
houses to serve the Ironbridge and Coalbrookdale area. This scheme was dropped in
the following June, and it was not until 1929 that any others were undertaken in the
immediate area of the Gorge, though housing schemes nearby may have had some
impact on the communities of the Gorge. The programme of public housing was
drawn up for a wider area than the strict limits of the Gorge as land was made
available for large developments in M adeley and Broseley - tenants of property in
the Gorge were not necessarily rehoused in the immediate area.111
The housing developments in the Gorge itself were confined by the established
structure of small plots, wherever land was available, but house-building and planning
were carried out according to officially determined standards. Space was allocated
to the new housing to provide a certain ratio of house to garden, and development
was carried out according to coherent plans, involving a regular pattern of land
use and layout. Access requirements oriented new housing to roads as far as
possible." 2
Some private building also took place, largely infilling in the existing plot pattern,
or developing on derelict industrial land, more rarely replacing earlier housing:
extensive bungalow building in Jackfield in .the inter-war period colonised old spoil
heaps, and in the Benthall Valley the site of the ironworks was laid out for development
in small plots in which a number of bungalows and detached houses were built. The
scale of these developments helped determine the adoption of planning standards of
land use: individual buildings were inserted into existing plots, but areas of speculative
building are identifiable by a new coherence in the organisation of space and orien ­
tation to roads. In the regulation of new development, as well as in the modification
of older environments, the introduction of planning controls had a significant impact
on the form of settlement.

143
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

Conclusion

The history of settlement in the Ironbridge Gorge can be traced from the first
formation of small industrial hamlets, each with its own economic and social structure,
to their eventual emergence as a small urban area. This pattern of change is interlinked
with the course of development in local industries — early specialisation created
the conditions for permanent settlement and investment in building; economic
diversification, and the establishment of an industrial culture, had expression in the
development of the Gorge as an urban area. The history of settlement belongs in this
context of wider historical change.
Early settlement and prosperity expressed in building laid down a pattern for later
growth and change. The components and organisation of the urban landscape were
firmly influenced by earlier histories: the location of industries and of the earliest
housing both formed a part in shaping an urban geography; the earliest settled areas
became problems for twentieth-century planning. The twentieth-century landscape
is still contained within the same pattern, and in spite of extensive demolition and
clearance the earliest nuclei are still visible. These continuities form a major element
in the present character of the area: how this inheritance was established and used in
the past is the subject of the next chapter, which examines the processes of develop ­
ment which shaped the landscape of building.

144
!
IwvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

7 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
! gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
SHAPING THE LANDSCAPE:
PROCESSES OF DEVELOPM ENT

I n t r o d u c t io n

The industrialisation of the Gorge entailed major changes in the geography of land
use and settlement patterns, outlined in the preceding chapter. This chapter traces
the ways in which this geography was shaped through the operation of particular
processes of land development and building. It shows that the various phases of
geographical development were associated with particular types of land development,
and that these in turn were linked with particular building types. The key to an
understanding of the processes making this landscape lies in changes in the valuation
and uses of land brought about by industrialisation. This chapter suggests that not
only the buildings, but also the plots and their pattern of development, can be related
to phases in the economy of land use.
Settlement in the first phase, up to the end of the seventeenth century, was
characterised by the intensive use of isolated plots of land, the absence of control and
regulation over the siting of development, and by a pattern of individual houses in
small plots. There was a high replacement rate of buildings. The second phase, up
to the late eighteenth century, was marked by both extensive and intensive use of
land, the fixing of tenures and boundaries, development within existing plots as well
as by extension of the built-up area. The survival of substantially built houses
contributed to the emergence of a land and property market, and to changing land
values. The third phase of settlement - between baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
c. 1820 and c. 1880 - was characterised
by the presence of an advanced housing market, large property-holding and tenant
classes, new housing types which made different use of the plotted landscape, and the
opening-up of new areas for building. In the twentieth century, public housing and
speculative development were accommodated within the same land-holding structure
but, as responses to a legacy of buildings, contributed to a revaluation of the housing
stock.

I n d u s t r ia l s e t t le m e n t : s h a p i n g t h e p lo t s

The early pattern of settlement, the landscape of the seventeenth and early eighteenth
centuries, shows a pattern of dispersed development, of building in small, randomly
distributed plots (fig. 7.1). This pattern can be traced in detail during the seventeenth

145
 7 'z ’T7 —

■A' jihgfedcbaZYX

I baZYXW

X'--

^\n v >7- W ?"

The Plott of Broseley, Samuel Parsons ’ map, cl 621 (redrawn, N. Smith) gfedcbaZYXW
7 .1 wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONML

146
 SH APIN G TH E LANDSCAPE

century in the parish of Broseley, by means of a series of maps (figs 7.2, 7.3 and 7.4).
These maps record a number of different types of plot. Some were defined by another
land use, as, for instance, plots of land for building along a roadside, or close to an
area of mineworking, or against the margins of marked-out fields or farms, but there
are others which were carved out of open land or woodland and where the building
of a dwelling preceded the marking of an enclosure. In still other areas the existence
of small empty plots which were already held by many individual tenants suggests
the early demarcation of areas for building. But in all these cases it is the presence of
a house, or the intention to build one, which has created the characteristic small
plots: the house is the nucleus of the plot.1
The overall form of the early plots was also variable - the size varied, as did the
shape. Some were more or less regular rectangular shapes, others an irregular circular
enclosure. Yet others were long narrow slangs alongside a boundary or road line (fig.
7.4). Although there are no maps for so early a period in other parts of the Gorge,
study of the pattern of plots as it survived into the nineteenth century does suggest
that similar variations occurred: in Benthall, for example, there is a scries of small
plots along the roadside, and an area of more irregular plot formation adjacent to an
early mining area. In M adeley W ood, the pattern of plots associated with the earliest
buildings shows some defined in relation to existing roads or boundaries, and others
as islands in open land.
The shape and relationships between plots provide evidence for the organisation
of previous land use, a haphazard pattern suggesting settlement on open ground, the
more regular enclosures suggesting subdivision of existing marked-out fields. In
Benthall and Broseley, for example, it is the plots that are taken from common or
coppice land that are the least regular - those constrained by existing boundaries or
features display a more ordered form (figs 7.2, 7.3 and 7.4).2
The definition of plots as enclosures for building brought about the subdivision of
already existing larger plots or fields in many cases, though in others it began a process
of dividing up previously open ground or woodland. By the early nineteenth century,
the establishment of small units of land, the creation of a landscape of small plots,
had gone beyond this immediate connection with building — by that time, the
landscape of M adeley W ood was already divided into small plots before the hillsides
were developed with the villas of Ironbridge.3
M ost of the plots shown on the early maps contain a single building, showing that
the first settlement took the form of individual houses dispersed in their own small
plots (fig. 7.4). Other sources confirm this pattern: an engraving of upper Coal ­
brookdale in 1758 shows a scatter of small and isolated dwellings.4 M aps made
in the nineteenth century record marked discrepancies in the scale of develop ­
ment on different plots — even in densely built-up areas, there remained some
solitary buildings.
Remnants of this pattern survive: many late-seventeenth-century or early-eight-
eenth-century buildings remain as isolated dwellings, and many of the terraces and
groups of cottages were built gradually by extending an original single building. This
pattern of building is the product of development by a large number of landholders

147
 M o KT h :

W ood Lands flTeengJjllL

^c^»M 7n.

<jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
f-

/d'a »

wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFE
7 .2 The Plott for the Boundes of the Common in Broseley, c. 1658 (redrawn, N. Smith)
=
I SH APIN G TH E LANDSCAPE jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM

- baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
O ig t
W -----

Cl K
Gj S s
T n*
I gfedcbaZYXWVUTSR
:r r r 7 ^ i5 ■ x<4 /
3^
AH

F
7 3 wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED
A Survey of Several Lands in the Lordshipp of Broseley, 1686 (redrawn, N. Smith)

(whether owners or tenants) building for themselves; the subsequent formation of

terraces or pairs of cottages, by contrast, immediately suggests a different order of
building organisation, more akin to speculation. That the earliest land development
and building was carried out as a private process, with no evidence of organised
housing provision, is confirmed by the documentary record.5
This piecemeal settlement pattern, of single buildings in small and irregular plots
which had no coherent overall plan, is reminiscent of the landscape of squatting,
defined as the development of land without tenurial rights. Squatting is associated
with self-building - there is a tradition that refers to the house built hastily overnight.6
The landscape of squatter settlement is characterised by random and dispersed
development, the absence of clear relationships between the buildings, the often
rudimentary nature of rhe building, and the frequency of alteration, similar in many
respects to the landscape of the Gorge. Often, but not invariably, squatting was

149
 4^"

wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
■
0*

£ l o }K

'V*

^0°^"baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

7 .4 (a )-(c) The plotted landscape: extracts from Samuel Parsons ’ map, showing the various
relationships of houses to plots jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONML

150
I wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

SH APIN G THE LANDSCAPE

The.

/ f» gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED
8 ^< 3
- - . A 8
f— v ®
<\c£>
&

7.4(b) 7.4(c)baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ

associated with that pattern of by-employment that frequently characterised the

growth of rural industry.7 The precise relationships between tenure and building,
which can be established for parts of the Gorge, enable this model of settlement to
be refined and modified, and show that the process of industrial settlement was as
much the product of particular kinds of land use and valuation as of particular
tenurial circumstances.
Some of the different tenurial arrangements under which early development in the
various parrs of the Gorge took place can be identified. The one that most resembles
squatting is the settlement in M adeley W ood. There, development during the
seventeenth century took place on the margins of the parish, in wood and common
land, and the precise location of building may have been outside the control of the
lord of rhe manor, in whose hands this land properly lay: there are a number of
records which refer to unlicensed cottage-building during the seventeenth century.
The existence of a large number of small plots which became freehold when the
manor was sold after 1705 - and the very fact that the manor was sold ofF in small
units of land — suggests that there were already a number of dbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGF
e fa c to holders of land
in small units. On the other hand, it was the lord of the manor who was actively
promoting the exploitation of mining in the area, so it was also in his interests that
settlement took place.8
In Broseley early development took place within a framework of holdings created
by the break-up of the manor. In this process, several estates and farms associated with
rhe exploitation of mineral resources on the land were formed by the consolidation of
smaller holdings. In the early seventeenth century, there were tenants on these estates
holding several parcels of land developed with buildings and mineral workings. The
commons had already fallen into private ownership — the early maps were made in
order to define and clarify disputed boundaries between different holdings.9 The
details of tenure given on Parsons ’ map show that even as early as c. 1620 there was a
system of leasing and subleasing and some tenants held several houses. There are also
references in contemporary documents which make it clear that some at least of the
landholders encouraged the process of settlement, since it gave them a supply of

151
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

labour with which to work their mines, and rights over mineral resources under
common land.10
In Benthall, the parish comprised a single estate, with a landowner who was actively
engaged in its exploitation: records from a dispute indicate that he also encouraged
settlement on formerly common lands, so that, although the landowner did not
himself engage in building work, and the new settlers were described by his opponents
at law as squatters, this was squatting by encouragement.11
But even though tenurial rights were established over the land, the absence of
coherent relationships between the plots and the buildings on them suggests that the
detailed process of settlement was uncontrolled. The concept of the open village
offers an alternative model for this unregulated, yet legally based settlement. This was
noted first in connection with rural settlement, but has usefully been extended to
industrial settlements by Barrie Trinder.12
An open village is one where there is no single landowner, where there may be
several small freeholdings, and where manorial rights are fragmented. In this situation
there would be no overall control over settlement, and building would be a vital
source of income on freeholds too small for other viable uses. This model fits
the parish of M adeley in the eighteenth century, since the manor was sold ofF in
smallholdings after 1705, and the manorial rights were divided among several holders
until reunited by Joseph Reynolds in 1781. Coalbrookdale had remained as a series
of coherent farms since it had been separated from the manor in 1540, but in the
early eighteenth century, one at least of these farms was sold ofFin small units oFland
for building, so creating a number of small freeholds.13 On the south bank of the
river, while Benthall remained throughout a single estate, Broseley comprised several
estates and farms during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries; and, although its
landowners took an active interest in the exploitation of their lands, leasing and
subleasing placed effective control over building in other hands. 14
There was therefore no single tenurial structure unifying the different areas of the
Gorge. The three processes of land development that can be traced by the early
eighteenth century — encouragement by landowners, sales and leases, and baZYXWVUT
d e fa c to
settlement through squatting - relate to this variety of tenure. The variations in the
organisation of the plots of land, whether they were marked out for building first, or
whether it was the presence of a building which defined a plot, may also have been
in part the product of different tenures: but the resultant pattern was similar in each
case — small islands of settlement, and buildings in irregularly shaped plots.
However, the absence of consistent variations in the settlement pattern, cor ­
responding directly with tenurial differences, suggests that it was not ownership or
tenure which determined in detail the form taken by settlement.15 The irregular
distribution and variations in plot form, and the absence of planned relationships
between the plots, show that the precise allocation of plots for building was unregu ­
lated, even where the tenurial structure implied some sort of control. This pattern of
development, which combines an established, though varied, tenurial structure with
apparently haphazard development patterns, can be connected with the nature of
land use associated with the onset of industrialisation.

152
 SHA PING THE LANDSCAPE

The use of land in the Gorge area during the seventeenth century was intensive
but not extensive - the development of land for mining and manufacturing left large
amounts of underused or waste land which was not systematically exploited, and
which could therefore be taken up for settlement. It was also associated with the
creation of small blocks of landholding, where housing could become an important
source of income. In a settlement oriented to farming, by contrast, land use may be
extensive, and the availability of new land for building strictly limited. W illiam
Cobbett noted a similar distinction between farming countries in Kent, Hampshire
and Sussex. In Kent, ‘every inch of land is appropriated by the rich ... a country
divided into great farms .... The rabbit countries are the countries for labouring
men. There the ground is not so valuable. ’ "?
It was countries like these which might produce a pattern of squatter settlement,
and of by-employments. In the Gorge, once land was taken up for settlement, this
development became one factor changing the relative value of land: land with build ­
ings was more valuable than waste. This helped to establish a market in land, and it
was this, in turn, which helped to shape the second phase of settlement. gfedcbaZYXWVUTS

B u il d i n g in a la n d m a r k e t

The seventeenth-century landscape formed an uneven framework for later develop ­

ment. W hile the plots formed in the first stage of settlement clearly survived in some
areas, in other areas there was a more radical change. Comparison of the series of
seventeenth-century maps of part of Broseley with the Tithe map shows that in
certain areas the entire early plot pattern was obliterated in later development, not
by the creation of unified holdings permitting a more orderly pattern of settlement,
but by another series of small plots (fig. 7.5). Early buildings did not always survive
into the nineteenth century, and some may have been primitive structures that were
quickly replaced. The short duration of the buildings themselves in certain areas may
help to explain the absence of continuity of plot form: Hurst and Beresford have
shown that in some medieval villages the customary rebuilding of houses once a
generation was often associated with complete alignment changes if the buildings
were of poor quality. 17
Those late-seventeenth-century-buildings that survived into the twentieth century
were nearly all built according to definable traditions. There is no suggestion in these
coursed rubble and timbered houses of overnight or makeshift building. But these
are the buildings which did survive, arguably the best of those built. There are enough
of these to suggest that, by the late seventeenth century, there was money to be invested
in building, and sufficient guarantee of stability to permit substantial investment in
materials, skill and time. The extensive building phase of the early eighteenth century,
producing buildings that were clearly built by professional craftsmen, represented a
new phase in the development of settlement and in the formation of the landscape.
These buildings constitute an important capital investment.18 The ability to build
therefore depended on a degree of prosperity, and the shift to permanent professional

153
 THE LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

7.5 Extract from the Broselcy Tithe Map, 1840. The plot pattern continued to shape land use
i during the nineteenth century. At Lloyds Head, plots with only a single building contrast with
others crowded with development

I
building was dependent on the accumulation of capital resources, which itself was a
product of the economic development of the area.
The construction of permanent buildings helped to determine the survival of the
plotted landscape, and the level of investment in buildings was an important factor
influencing continuity of landscape features. The significance of the investment baZYXWV
represented by buildings is implicit in their survival, but it is also evidenced in the
adaptation of buildings for new uses: throughout the Gorge, early buildings have
;urvived through adaptation, by subdivision or amalgamation. In Coalbrookdale, for
example, a seventeenth-century building, once a ‘steelhouse ’, was in use as a malthouse
in 1786 and had become dwellings by 1805. 19
The seventeenth-century pattern of plots and settlement survived better in certain
areas than in others, and permanent professional building was established at different
rimes in different areas. These variations express differential investment in building,
which can be attributed to highly local economic circumstances, and to differences
in tenurial organisation.
Investment was influenced by the nature of tenure: studies in other areas have
shown that rebuilding can often be linked with security of tenure. An important
factor was the possession of an interest in property ‘sibi et heredibus ’ , and fieldwork
elsewhere has suggested a close correlation between manorial policy on tenure and
housing types and conditions.20 In the Gorge, rhe small plots on which building took
place were often subordinate to the principal tenurial divisions and were not always jihgfedcba

154
■ wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

SH APIN G TH E LANDSCAPE

secure holdings: before the sale of the M anor, cottage building in M adcley W ood was
unlicensed, while in Broseley W ood tenancies at will characterised some areas but not
others during the seventeenth century. These were the smallest and least secure units
of holding, and it is on these that there is most evidence for substantial modification
to the pattern of plots in later development. 21 Concomitantly, the survival of buildings
in greater numbers from the early eighteenth century may be evidence for the
introduction of securer tenures: in M adelcy W ood, for example, it may be no accident
that the creation of small freeholds in the early eighteenth century was immediately
followed by a rapid phase of new building.
At the same time, house-building depended on the availability of capital resources:
late-seventeenth- and early-eighteenth-century buildings represent a substantial
investment. The time-lag between the onset of mining and manufacturing and the
persistent survival of housing may be an expression of the time taken to accumulate
sufficient resources to invest in professional building.22
Development from the late seventeenth century was therefore the result of renewed
investment in building, relating both to tenurial and economic circumstance. Not
only were houses built substantially enough to survive, but settlement was also
continually expanding. Comparison of the three seventeenth-century maps of
Broseley shows something of how this expansion came about: open spaces between
the first islands of settlement had also been enclosed for building, and property
divisions formed recognisable roads, where the beginnings of a regular building line
was established.
Similar processes can be traced elsewhere as more plots were created, and develop ­
ment on existing plots intensified (fig. 7.6). There was a concentration of building in
certain areas, property boundaries formed footpaths and were sometimes coherently
aligned as lanes; new land was also occupied by development, though there were still
large areas which were not taken up with building, and pockets of empty land that
survived between settled areas.23 By the early nineteenth century, much of the land
in the vicinity of the settled areas was also divided into small fields and plots, showing
a definition of tenure and land use that embraced the whole landscape.2,1
If the siting of the first building plots was unregulated, the pattern of building that
emerged during the century that followed, characteristically of dense building on
small plots, suggests that this was very quickly formalised. The crowding together of
buildings from the early eighteenth century was the product of constraints on the
availability of new land for settlement, as the limits of tenure were more clearly
delineated, through ownership or through conflicting uses. The careful definition of
boundaries in title deeds from the beginning of the eighteenth century is evidence of
the concern to establish and protect the limits of tenure. In most areas there is a clear
boundary between areas used for building and areas that remained as fields or were
used in the context of industry. This shift to an intensive land use marks a second
stage in the development of industrial settlement, and it distinguishes the Gorge from
other squatter settlements such as Clee Hill and Snailbeach in the south of Shropshire
where precise uses and tenurial responsibilities were never firmly delineated.25
The development of intensive use of land on an extensive scale was a product of

155
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF INDUSTRY gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO

L ■ <
e
< •> > . •■ •••

? c 7; -'jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

7 ,6 Jockey Bank, Ironbridge, 1976. Early buildings served as the nucleus for piecemeal
development as settlement rapidly expanded, crowded in on plots that were already occupied.
This terrace was formed in such a way, from different buildings constructed at different times
(S h ro p sh ire S ta r: IGM T 1982.2189)

the rapid industrialisation of the area during the early eighteenth century. As the scale
and physical extent of land use in industry extended, so were changes in the value of
land brought about: the subdivision and sale of the various estates in the Gorge during
the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries is itself an indication of the importance of
land as a commodity with a definite value. The use of land for industry also created
a direct pressure on space available for building — in Coalbrookdale, for example, it
was the steep slopes of the valley which could not be used in an industry dependent
on water-power where housing concentrated. A hierarchy of investment, in which
there was a calculation of profitable land use, may have helped to shape the settled
landscape.
The growth of industry, and a population largely employed in mining and manu ­
facture within the Gorge, encouraged the consolidation of agriculture in the adjacent
countryside, and accentuated a division of land use. The industrial settlements
represented a large local market with some quite specialised needs - horses, for
example. The survival of productive farmland may account for rhe slow release of
land in lower Coalbrookdale for building, an area not developed before the early
nineteenth century; in Benthall, clear boundaries between agricultural land, industry
and housing were maintained throughout the nineteenth century. The industrial
development at Coalport and Blists Hill, which did take place on former agricultural

156 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
 SHA PING TH E LANDSCAPE

land, is quite disci net from the pattern of development elsewhere in the Gorge.
At the same rime,:, a growing population dependent on industrial work rather than
agriculti
on agriculture created a market for small houses which could be built on smaller
pieces of land as work took place largely outside the home. The subdivision of
plots to accommodate new building became possible: a similar process marked the
evolution of settlement in the textile areas of Lancashire, and has also been traced in
mining settlements in Cornwall.26
A particular pattern of development emerged as a response to this demand, con ­
strained by the organisation of land use and holdings. This pattern can be recon ­
structed through studying the relationship of the buildings of this phase to a plot
structure. In some areas, there is a close link between plot shape, building layout and
ownership - buildings and ownership both respect the plot boundaries - suggesting
that rhe plot was at once a unit of tenure and of development. 27 But even within a
small area there could be a marked discrepancy between different plots — one plot
may have had only a single building, others have been very densely developed.
There was, in addition, considerable variation between plots as to how land was
held. Some had a single owner and a large number of tenants; elsewhere, coherent
units of land were divided among a number of owners (or primary tenants in areas
of subtenanting), suggesting that an original plot had been sold off in small units,
either as development took place or in advance of it. The pattern of holdings in the
Ironbridgc area in the mid-nineteenth century, for example, also shows that some of
these holdings were achieved as the result of amalgamation of small plots: they show
a discrepancy between the way the plots were built up, and plots as units of tenure.
The plots had been developed in smaller units and subsequently amalgamated as
units of investment.
The transactions represented by the amalgamation of holdings and their frag ­
mentation suggest the importance of a property market. Variations in the size of the
units of tenure may reflect relative values of different areas of land: in the M adeley
W ood area, the smallest plots and units of tenure were in the centre of Ironbridge,
which was both an old-established area, and one where the value of land increased
rapidly following the development of the town. Elsewhere, a highly fragmented plot
pattern was the product of the age of settlement — in the earliest developed areas
successive divisions for inheritance and sale had produced very small holdings.28
The earliest pattern of a single house on each plot was modified by extensive
building but the variation within areas suggests that this was at least in part an
individual investment decision, though the economic development of different areas
of the Gorge also determined land values. Housing plots were the smallest econ ­
omically viable units of land, and an investor had a notional choice between a single
building commanding a high rent (as in the commercial premises in the centre of
Ironbridge, where the individual units of holding were also very small, and the larger
detached houses) and a large number of small cottages.
The expansion of settlement during the eighteenth century was shaped by the
overall economic development of land within the Gorge, reflected in the more
intensive exploitation of the plots. The specific responses of the inhabitants of the

157
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQP
Gorge can also be charted through wills and title deeds. Among the processes
responsible for shaping this intensification of settlement, the development of family
property was pre-eminent. Limitations on existing house type were soon felt as
families grew, and first houses were subdivided for children, or additions made,
representing above all an expansion of economic opportunity. ’9
David Levine and others have shown that the demographic regime typical of proto ­
industrialisation was one of population growth through natural increase reflecting a
falling age of marriage; this was itself a result of a decreased dependence on land for
a living, and the opportunity for good livings based on wage labour outside the home.
Development in the Gorge fits this model: M .D.G. W ankJyn has shown that the
substantial increase in population during the later seventeenth century was largely
owed to natural increase.30 W ills, probate records and title deeds stress the importance
of family formation in the creation of new households, employment in mining and
manufacture being conducive to early marriage. These new households were a mirror
of individual prosperity, and necessitated an increase in building.
It was the ability to provide for a second generation that underlay much of the
early development; this was often concentrated within the original plot, often involv ­
ing changes to the original building. W ills and title deeds show how new households
were created through subdivision or through additions to existing dwellings. A will
of 1728 arranged for the house to be divided between wife and son, another of 1746
between daughter and grandson; in W illiam Botteley ’s will of 1762, the kitchen,
cellar and parlour already in his occupation were left to a son, while the other part of
the dwelling-house, known as the little room, was left to another son. John Bayley,
collier, in a will of 1712, detailed the arrangements for the inheritance of the ‘tenement
in which I live and lately purchased of assignees of Comerford Brooke ’ , which had
been divided into three separate dwellings: his wife was to get the part he already
lived in, being the chief dwelling, his son Jonathon to get the little room with loft
over, his son Edward the middle part where he was already living, and his daughter
M ary the brewhouse and chamber over. 31
The ownership or lease of several houses and holdings was also common by the
early eighteenth century. Descriptions in wills indicate that sometimes separate houses
are clearly adjacent, and additional buildings had been built within the same plot:
the will of John Bayley in 1784 refers to ‘two houses, one I dwell in, the other adjacent
occupied by my son in law ’. Richard Cox, collier, 1774, had a freehold house and
another adjacent house which he had bought from his uncle, and a cottage he dwelt
in. Other wills suggest that sometimes quite detached plots of land were held in single
ownership: in 1782, for example, the will of George Hodgkiss left the rents of freehold
and leasehold houses at Dace ’s Hill and the Brockholes, and a house in the Lloyds.
These sources show that in many cases the occupier was also the builder, and there
are numerous references in wills to houses built or caused to be built: ‘the house I
have repaired and the new building added to ’ , Edward Boden, collier, n.d.; ‘ I have
I
erected a house and other dwellings ’ , W illiam Botteley, 1762; ‘The above 5 premises
near Ironbridge have been built or set out by me ’ , M ichael Hodgkiss, 1796. 32 Title
deeds also indicate that building was the responsibility of the tenant; there is some

158
 SH APIN G THE LANDSCAPE

evidence of rationalisation after the event; for instance, a lease of 1727 for land in
Broseley W ood shows that the tenant, Francis Eaves, had already built a house on
part of the premises. Other leases were made for the purposes of building, or refer to
enclosures from the waste. The property holders were colliers, watermen, barge ­
owners, smiths, furnacemen. They almost certainly did not literally build their own
houses, which in their design and construction more often suggest that they were the
work of professional builders (see chapter 8).33
These records show both a process of development within a single plot and rhe
holding of several plots. They show that, development within a plot could come
about either through subdivision or additions to an existing building, or through the
construction of a separate dwelling. They show that, while direct building to house
new generations within a family could be important, property could also form a
simple financial investment, through leasing. The will of M ichael Hodgkiss in 1796
clearly states this in referring to five leasehold houses which he had built or set out
for the benefit of his children. Subdivision of holdings within a family eventually
merged with the use of property as a form of investment, and property left in wills
to children may often have been tenanted. At the same time, migration to the area
created a need for new building, and new opportunities for the use of property as
income.34
Documentation for the sale and development of Furnace Bank Farm, Coal­
brookdale, during the eighteenth century also shows the value of property as invest­
ment, and the growing importance of a property market. Unlike the pattern of
settlement elsewhere in the Gorge, this farm was progressively sold off for development
in marked-out and defined plots, though in common with the rest of the Gorge there
was no systematic relationship between the plots so defined.35 All these plots were
described as ‘marked out and set separate ’ - they were almost certainly sold for the
express purpose of building, and were taken, not from farmland, but from coppice
woodland.
Furnace Bank Farm was acquired by a yeoman, George Dukeshill, in 1704 at the
break-up of the manor of M adeley, and he left it to his son, a carpenter, in 1717. It
comprised a farmhouse, a cottage, 42 acres and 14 acres ofcoppice. The first recorded
sale was in 1715, a small piece of land (60 yards by 60 yards) which was sold to
Abraham Darby for £24. Other sales soon followed: in 1717, 2 acres were sold to
John Thomas, and in 1720 George Cartwright had acquired a piece of land in Brick
Kiln M eadow for 50 sh. In 1738 the manager of the ironworks, Richard Ford,
acquired a large plot on which he built Rosehill House, Tea Kettle Row, and the
summer house called M ount Pleasant. In 1738 and 1743, Abraham Darby bought
two small plots which were used for the development of Sunnyside House. In 1748,
George Cranage bought a small plot and Thomas Cranage and John Thorpe also
bought small plots in 1741 and 1742.
Subsequent development on these early plots can also be traced. Abraham Darby
sold a small piece of the Sunnyside estate to George Cranage in 1748 and this
remained the property of the Cranage family until 1809. It was divided between
George and his son Edward in 1772, and the stable was converted into a new dwelling.

159
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND USTRY

Land acquired by Andrew Cartwright in 1720 was also developed as a family property:
in 1745 the property was mortgaged, described as ‘lately extended to form 2 dwell ­
ings ’.
In 1741 Thomas Cranage bought a piece of land which had four tenanted houses
on it by 1763. These properties were later sold ofF individually. John Thomas bought
a plot in 1717 which remained as family property, divided among children and
developed in consequence with at least two houses. Outbuildings were converted to
house at least three other households by 1794, and one house had been converted
into four tenements by 1810. John Thorpes single plot of 1742 contained five houses
by 1788 and nine by 1821 .3<s
The role played by private building on such small units of land in the development
of the Gorge links it with squatter settlements or open villages. But what distinguishes
the pattern of development in the Gorge from that of squatter settlements is both the
extent of development and the relative formality with which alterations and additions
to buildings were made. Building may have been piecemeal, but the final groupings
of buildings more often form regular terraces or pairs than the random clusters of
buildings with confused property divisions that are found in other areas of squatter
settlement.37 In the Gorge, the use of professional builders, suggested by the coherence
of housing design and construction after the early eighteenth century, is an index of
the prosperity of the area. It is this that marks out the Gorge as a prosperous industrial
region in the eighteenth century.
The transition from development based largely on a family economy to one
reflecting a more general housing market can also be traced in the buildings of this
period: there is ample evidence of formerly single cottages subdivided to form two
dwellings: there are pairs of cottages or small terraced rows which have clearly been
built piecemeal, by additions to an original dwelling unit; there are houses where a
front or rear wing has at some time formed a separate dwelling; there are plots
containing small clusters of building as additional houses were erected on the same
piece of land. 38
This pattern of building, in which a single house became the nucleus for additions
and modification, reflected the role of the occupier as developer. But rhe growing
importance of a market in property, shown in the increasing numbers of transactions
recorded in title deeds and wills, is reflected more fully in changes in the organisation
of building: from the early eighteenth century, pairs or terraces of cottages were also
being built as coherent, designed developments, early speculations in building (fig.
7.7). By the end of the eighteenth century, most new cottage-building took the form
of deliberately designed pairs or rows of cottages — and small individual houses were
relatively rare.39
Like the holdings built up piecemeal, these developments were also confined to
single small plots, and a row of as many as six cottages was rare. But planned
development of this sort represents an organisation of resources quite different from
gradual additions to a single house: in the one row which is fully documented, it is
clear that rhe cottages were built as a speculation, all leased out from the outset. The
distinction between those houses which were built as an individual development and

160
 SHA PIN G TH E LANDSCAPE baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGF

i -

O '- jihgfedcbaZY
••I .1 .''

“ r *■

fc :-
7 .7 Madeley W ood, 1952. Single dwellings, buildings extended gradually, deliberately
designed pairs and terraces, all contributed to the makeup of settlement in the Gorge (Denis
Bird: IGM T 1982.246) baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED

those which were part o f a small planned development was to become an important
element in the social hierarchy of housing types.10
Initially it was the first occupiers of the land who played a major part in its
development, and it was a system of owner-occupancy or secure tenancies which
underlay the early growth of settlement. But from an early stage property was also
held as income, though the boundaries between family property and property as
income and investment were not always clearly delineated. As early as 1705, specu ­
lation in property was recorded in M adeley W ood/1 and the use of property as a
form of income quickly meant that there was an ever-growing class of tenants. In
addition, the survival, adaptation and reuse of earlier buildings also suggest that the
earliest connection between occupancy and building work would have been quickly
modified. The development of a property market represents a very substantial change
in the organisation of building, as property came to have a value independent of its
immediate use.
The pattern of development in the Gorge up to the end of the eighteenth century
suggests that it is changes in the organisation of land use, and the concomitant changes
in its value, which strongly influenced the ways in which settlement developed. If
there was an early stage of primitive building on ill-defined plots of land, akin to
squatting, this was quickly superseded by increased investment in building, by rapidly
developing tenure and land use and the development of a market in land and building.
It was the development of mining and manufacturing during the late seventeenth

161
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

and eighteenth centuries that created the conditions for the growth of settlement, in
providing good livings, bringing about changes in the value of land, and in shaping
the organisation of land use into which settlement fitted. Development of housing
itself also helped bring about a reorganisation of land use and its value — buildings
that became permanent by virtue of the size of investment they represented were an
important element in shaping the landscape of industry.gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM

F o r m a l d e v e lo p m e n t : C o a lb r o o k d a le a n d C o a lp o r t

The origin of the idea of aesthetic design and planning for new settlements has been
assigned to the eighteenth century:42 an important contribution to the emergence of
new model settlements was the creation of planned industrial communities, where
development was undertaken by the major landowner or industrialist. 43 The housing
provided in Coalbrookdale by the Coalbrookdale Company has sometimes been
taken as an example of this, the creation of an industrial village by paternalist
ironmasters.44 However, company-house building took place only on a very small
scale, and did not initiate a new settlement type: in the 1780s, four terraces were
built, comprising 30 dwellings. The company did not repeat this direct intervention
in development again. The Coalbrookdale Company was never a major owner of
land for housing, and until the late nineteenth century concentration of ownership
was restricted to those areas covered by the works themselves. By the 1780s, Coal ­
brookdale was already a sizeable industrial settlement, and its earlier development
had included a number of small, speculatively built terraces. The scattered location
of the four company terraces, which did not aspire to a formal development plan,
suggests that the company was constrained in its acquisition of land for housing. 45
The short phase of direct building was characterised by the use of a coherent
building type, with a form which was repeated in each of the four terraces built. It is
this coherence that shows that the building of these terraces was a direct intervention
by the company, quire distinct from the development of privately held plots. The
records that accompany the development show that it was undertaken as a form of
investment: ten years after they were built, at least one of these terraces (Carpenters ’
i Row) was sold at a time when the company was looking for ways of reducing its
debts.46
Prior to their involvement in building at Coalbrookdale, the company had already
engaged in building elsewhere. Both at Newdale and at Horsehay, symmetrically
designed rows of houses had been built in the 1750s and 1760s. The rows at Newdale
adopted a back-to-back plan, and were conceived as part of the overall design of the
ironworks complex. At Horsehay, the cottage rows were characterised by a unity of
plan and form, but were in no sense a planned village. Horsehay also embraced a
more haphazard squatter settlement on the neighbouring Lawley Common. In each
case, building development by the company was carried out on a very small scale,
and, while individual buildings were carefully planned, there was no attempt to create
an entirely planned layout. 47
Coalport, the deliberate creation of W illiam Reynolds, was a rather more ambitious baZYX

162
 SH APIN G TH E LANDSCAPE

project which has sometimes been described as a new town: ‘ The whole of this lively
and beautiful place with its erections, belongs to W illiam Reynolds, who has still
continued planning and erecting for himself and others, sparing neither labour or
expense to render it as complete as possible.’48 The infrastructure of settlement was
laid down by Reynolds, based on a transport interchange and a new river crossing,
and investment in manufacturing led to the development of the Coalport China
W orks. As a settlement, however, Coalport grew very little, and remained at best a
village. M oreover, the process of development was not subject to an overall plan:
Reynolds was never the sole landowner, and building plots were not formally demar ­
cated. A first phase of development saw the clustering of buildings together on small
plots; a second stage of development made reference to a road line which followed a
property boundary, but the buildings themselves were not coherently planned or
aligned in relation to it.49
The leases suggest that in some cases building took place in advance of a specific
agreement: one referred to a house and kiln built ‘ in expectation of a lease ’. Reynolds ’
first lease and sale gave authority to build a range of building types, while tenants or
subtenants were free to build on allotted land, subject only to the need to maintain
existing and subsequent building in a good state of repair.50 Building rows that survive
were built in several phases and without use of a coherent design, in contrast to the
development of company housing in Coalbrookdale. Only one row, a terrace of 14
houses, had any suggestion of a coherent design - and even this was built in phases.51
The organisation of building was not subject to overall control, and was carried out
by a number of small property holders under lease.
Development at Coaibrookdale and Coalport may be compared with other areas
where housing was provided by the major landowner or industrialist. House-building
was an expedient to attract workers, but was often undertaken with reluctance.52
M ost estate settlements are attached to a single industry, but even many of these
demonstrate a reluctance to invest in extensive housing schemes except where absol ­
utely necessary. Under-capitalisation of industry left nothing to spare for phil­
anthropic provision.53 Unlike early factory colonies in the textile industry, or
settlements associated with the iron industry in W ales, the Gorge had a far more
diverse economic base: throughout the Gorge, the survival of a highly fragmented
tenurial pattern, the absence of any large-scale planned development and the large
numbers of small building projects suggest the wide distribution of resources sufficient
to carry out building on a limited scale.54
Both these company-inspired building projects make best sense in the context of
changes in the organisation of building work which were happening anyway, as small-
scale speculation by a distinct property-holding class superseded more individually
focused building work. Both the Coalbrookdale Company and Reynolds at Coalport
acted as speculative developers, on a scale slightly larger than the normal practice, but
without making a major modification to the overall shape or type of settlement.55

163
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQ
A n in h e r it a n c e o f la n d a n d b u ild in g : d e v e lo p m e n t d u r in g t h e n in e t e e n t h
c e n tu ry

By the standards of other industrial and urban areas, development in the Gorge after baZYXW
c. 1820 took place on a very small scale — absolute numbers of new buildings were
low, there was no large-scale planned expansion, and only limited speculative building.
But, in spite of these differences in scale, development during this period did shape
an urban landscape, which made use of an established pattern both of landholding
and of building.
As in other urban areas, the pattern of land-ownership was vital in shaping the
form of subsequent land use. In other towns, early urban building on fields and
gardens fitted existing blocks of landholding, and suburban growth was also con ­
strained by the existing field pattern: it was only where the units of ownership were
big enough that any semblance of overall area planning became a possibility.56
Development during the late eighteenth century and early nineteenth century
frequently entailed the subdivision of existing blocks of land and the creation of many
small freehold or leasehold plots, reflecting the formation of a market in land as its
value changed. Even where initial plots were themselves small, as in urban gardens,
for example, building was often followed by sales, creating further subdivision.57
W here development was part of a general building boom and rapid expansion of
settlement, it was informed by a notion of planning, and building was carried out
within a coherent framework.
In the Gorge, by contrast, the same shift in value and fragmentation of holdings
had taken place in an earlier period, when the small scale of development, the diverse
economic base, and the absence of a pre-existing urban framework had combined to
create a settlement formation which comprised many piecemeal units of land, divided
into small holdings with many owners. In Ironbridge, for example, there were large
numbers of property owners with an average of three houses each at mid-century.
This is superficially similar to the pattern found in other areas of the country,
though elsewhere it is often the result of sales of more coherent blocks of land as they
were exploited for building. 58 But in the Gorge the subdivision of holdings reflects as
much the age of a built-up area as the method of its settlement. Development in the
nineteenth century did not often involve further subdivision of already small units of
holding - equally, there was very little amalgamation of holdings. This was one factor
ensuring a degree of continuity in the structure of the landscape, as the small scale of
ownership discouraged its fundamental reorganisation in new development.
So, although the presence of many small units of landholding was a characteristic
common to many urban industrial areas, the timing of the formation of that pattern
was crucial in the differential development processes of the Gorge and towns like
Nottingham or Leeds, for example.59 In these other towns, divided ownership was
the result of subdivision of already planned layouts - in the Gorge, these divisions
had been formed without planning. The contrast is underscored by the fact that in
IgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
other urban areas roads and building plots were commonly set out in advance of
building, whereas in the Gorge this did not happen.60 The turnpike roads of the early

164 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
 SH APIN G THE LANDSCAPE

nineteenth century — M adeley Bank, Jigger’s Bank, and the Ladywood Road to
Broseley — cut across existing plot boundaries but were not systematically developed
with new building plots. W hile some new building in Ironbridge aligned itself with
the turnpike, more often the established pattern of plots remained the basis for
building work.01
Even the new and more self-consciously urban development of Ironbridge was
marked by the use of an existing pattern of plots and landholding. This process
differed from the earliest settlement formation in the Gorge, since when it had been
house-building itself which had entailed the creation of a landscape of small plots,
while in the nineteenth century the plots preceded development with housing. By
the mid-nineteenth century, the landscape of M adeley W ood was almost completely
apportioned in small plots; waste land was scarce, confined for the most part to the
margins of the settled area. But the pattern of plots was nor itself uniform: those areas
where building had already taken place were marked by the very small size of the
units of holding, often subdivided. Between these settled areas, plots were considerably
larger.
An increased stratification of building types contributed to the survival of the
established plot pattern since the bigger houses then being built could be accom ­
modated in the larger plots between the earliest settled areas. Development in Iron ­
bridge between c.1820 and 1880 was dominated by the building of substantial single
houses - the detached villas — though there were also several formally planned terraces
and groups of smaller houses. The villas fitted into small fields which became their
gardens: the larger and more valuable the house, the more land it was possible for it
to take up and still be an economic investment for the developer. 02 There was a
marked contrast between the older areas of settlement, with their crowded and
subdivided plots, and those which were developed from empty land in the nineteenth
century (fig. 7-8).
The absence of coherently planned urban development reflected a pattern of
landholding that was already heavily fragmented. Even where there were large blocks
of landholding, a system of leasing had developed which effectively removed the
control of building from the hands of the major landowners. M id-nineteenth-century
Broseley, for example, while it was dominated by a single landowner, had a structure
of tenants and subtenants which made it analogous to the pattern of landownership
and occupancy of M adeley parish where there were large numbers of freeholds. 03 In
M adeley W ood and Coalbrookdale, the land held by Joseph Reynolds was dispersed
in small plots, and evidence from title deeds for property in these areas suggests that
such holdings were commonly developed through leasing: clauses inserted in the
leases show that development was expected to be undertaken by tenants. 04
The survival of a heavily fragmented plot structure combined with the relatively
small numbers of new building projects to limit the possibility of overall planning or
layouts. A regular building line therefore developed only in the W harfage-High Street
area of Ironbridge. Even here, visual coherence was limited to those blocks in single
ownership, where a row of shops might be conceived as an overall design.05 Generally,
new building was undertaken in a series of independent developments, and the

165
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IN DU S FRY

-baZYXWVUTSRQPONML

“M 1

i
7 .8 Ironbridge Hillside, c.1890-1900. The centre of Ironbridge was characterised by the
intensive use of plots of land. Beyond, single houses in large gardens made different use of rhe baZYXW
pattern of plots

designed similarity of many different buildings reflects the organisation of building

work and the structure of demand rather than the existence of coherent units of
development or control. These similarities in building design, even where there was
no overall planning or large-scale development, are paralleled in other areas and
suggest the currency of specific models of building practice. 66
But within this apparent coherence of building design there is a detailed hierarchy
of building types, and an elaborate series of variations even on superficially similar
models of building. Size and number of rooms, the quality of finish and detail in
window heads, doorcases and ornamental brickwork were variables within ihe same
basic model. This proliferation of detail suggests close connections between rhe
structure of demand and the organisation of new building work, but these houses
were not generally built by their occupiers: the relative scarcity of owner-occupation
shows that they were built as speculative development, albeit on a very small scale.
Early housing had generally been built by or for first occupiers: inevitably this changed
as the housing market developed, and as buildings outlasted their first owners. By the
early nineteenth century, although owner-occupancy was not uncommon, there was
also a considerable tenant class.67 The records of title deeds begin to suggest that there
was a distinct property-holding class, of traders, entrepreneurs and professionals. 68
The problem is to reconcile the variety of building types with a speculative building
process: in small-scale projects, variations in the amount of money to be invested
could have produced something of the variety of forms found in the Gorge. But these
variations in the supply side had to correspond with a pattern of demand if the jihgfedc

166
 SHA PING TH E LANDSCAPE jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM
investors were to obtain sufficient return. W ithout detailed knowledge of rents, prices
and the relationship of household structure to the houses themselves, it is difficult to
reconstruct the operation of the housing market, but study of census returns does
suggest that there was a single household per house in the larger new dwellings. 69 The
pattern of variation may therefore also be a product of investors’ knowledge of housing
needs — of social structure, incomes and currently available housing stock.
All new building must be seen in the context of the whole building stock, and
alongside the survival of older buildings. A high proportion of new housing was for
a new market - the industrial and commercial middle classes.70 Census analysis shows
that in 1851 the highest proportion of professional, craft and retail occupations were
in that part of Ironbridge between Lincoln Hill, The W harfage/High Street and
Church Road: the highest concentration of labourers, miners and ironworkers was in
the area to the east of M adeley Hill. At the same time, the census shows intensive use
of earlier buildings, with frequent evidence of subdivision and overcrowding. During
the nineteenth century, many earlier houses were subdivided to form smaller dwelling
units. As in other industrial urban areas, new building had to be economically viable,
and housing for the poorest levels of society was not viable.71 It is this which helps to
explain the continuing use of the earliest buildings, some of which were very small
and crowded. Nineteenth-century building in the Gorge was characterised by the
solidity and sophistication of its design and construction even in quite modest
terraces, but studies from other urban areas provide a reminder that it was often the
oldest buildings, desperately overcrowded, which became the first slums. 72 The relative
values of old and new buildings played an important part in shaping the social
landscape of building: it was because there was already a large number of small
cottages that new building was dominated by the more expensive villa houses, and
that these remained in single occupation.
Trends in housing design and the pattern of building in new development after
c.1820 were towards the elaboration of distinctions in quality relating to socio ­
economic structure. Such architectural features as separate entrance halls and dec ­
orative facades were used to mark out differences between social groups (see chapter
8). Although there was no large-scale development in the Gorge, by 1850 there was
already a sophisticated housing market providing an elaborate hierarchy of qualities.
Above all, nineteenth-century development was shaped by a legacy of buildings
from the past. The nuclei of existing buildings were frequently used in new work,
and can still be traced as the survival of a ground plan, the incorporation of stone
walls in a later brick building, or building round a timber-framed or stone cottage in
a new terraced row.73 M any earlier and larger buildings were subdivided and other
earlier buildings adapted to new uses. The pattern of development in the nineteenth
century was therefore heavily influenced by its inheritance of earlier buildings, and
it was not until the early twentieth century that the replacement of existing buildings
was undertaken on any significant scale.

167
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQ
P l a n n i n g a n d r e d e v e lo p m e n t : r e s p o n s e s t o t h e b u i l d i n g s t o c k

The pre-existing plot structure and building stock formed a vital constituent of
development during the nineteenth century, and an inheritance for the public bodies
concerned with the regulation of the environment. The public regulatory processes
outlined in chapter 6 impacted on a local building industry and housing market
which was highly sophisticated and differentiated. There is no evidence to suggest
that the market mechanisms for the evaluation of the existing building stock were
instantly changed by the system of regulation - condemned houses were not immedi ­
ately demolished or replaced and in some cases continued in use even after the
introduction of public building programmes.
Ultimately, however, here as elsewhere, these building programmes did change
standards of house design and organisation in the building industry itself, pressing
for larger-scale building firms and the concentration of capital. Housing types that
conformed to national models and standards were introduced; the public housing
developments and those speculative building projects which adopted similar space
standards represented a concentration of development on an entirely new scale, even
though they did not substantially modify the existing pattern of plots and holdings;
by the 1950s, the existence of public housing was a major element in the re-evaluation
and demolition of older buildings.74 In a parallel process, smaller-scale private develop ­
ment was also designed to replace older property, either literally through demolition,
or through a transfer of investment.75
All these processes were conditioned as responses to a legacy of buildings: the
renewal programmes initiated by Telford Development Corporation also entailed the
demolition and replacement of many smaller, older cottages, as well as several of the
larger houses which had previously been subdivided. It is only with the recent interest
in landscape conservation that investment has again focused on these older buildings,
and previous subdivisions have been reversed and small cottages amalgamated. 76
Both development and redevelopment in the Gorge have continued to be shaped
by an inheritance from the first generations of industrialisation: the plot pattern and
its survival reflects a structure of landholding in which there was no overall control
over development; the organisation of land for industry, and the operation of a
property market constrained the shape of settlement, bringing about concentrations
of buildings in particular areas; a sophisticated property market and diversified social
structure regulated the provision of new buildings and the continued use of old ones.
The new buildings provided by the housing marker of the nineteenth century, the
speculative developments of the twentieth, and the introduction of public housing
entailed successive transformations in the use and value of land and building. But the
landscape of small plots and the pattern of investment in building established by
early industrialisation proved highly adaptable to subsequent patterns of social and
economic change.

168 gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED
I wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

THE M AKING OF AN INDUSTRIAL

VERNACULAR gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONML

Right on the edge of M adeley W ood are two single-storey houses (fig.8.1 a-b). They
are faced like bungalows of the 1950s, but the mix of waste materials — slag, coal­
measure sandstone, broken bricks and tiles — used to build them, the untidy collection
of additions tacked onto the back, and their position on the top of an old spoil heap
betray a different origin: these were once the poor houses of squatters on waste land,
rare survivals in this area. Not far away is a larger cottage, with a careful symmetry in
its two-unit plan and one and a half storeys, the facade emphasised with decorative
Flemish Bond brickwork: this is an example of eighteenth-century industrial ver­
nacular, typical in the Gorge. These houses stand at two extremes of building — on
the one hand, the expedient use of whatever materials came to hand, on the other,
carefully selected materials and a recognisable architectural aesthetic.
But the primitive building is of a type now rare in the Gorge, while the formally
designed cottage is common. The contrast between them highlights the level of
architectural and constructional sophistication attained in the majority of houses
built in the Gorge, and is emblematic of its development as a prosperous industrial
area. The industrial vernacular house - the result of a coherent process of design,
extensively used - is itself an important product of an industrialising society,
while the simultaneous existence of contrasting modes of building suggests the
complex social and economic texture of an industrial community. But industrial
vernacular building is a process subject to change, and the relationships between
modes of building have likewise been fluid. These patterns of change are integral to
a landscape shaped by a dynamic economic and social system, and the relationships
and patterns recorded in the design of local buildings are a rich source of evidence
for the breadth and depth of industrialisation in the Gorge.

E a r ly in d u s t r y a n d t h e v e r n a c u la r t h r e s h o ld

In an area celebrated for the early development of its industry, it should not be
surprising to find in the Ironbridge Gorgeearly housing which is specifically industrial,
not only in its known connection with an industrial population, but also in the
characteristics of its design, construction and use. The brick cottage so typical of the
early eighteenth century is arguably such a vernacular building, but is not the first

169
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF INDUSTRY

i X
■ ■ I
A
■■■ " '

X?:'
X t; Xs
baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

i rlW
‘W -
l^ (
I- • I
; ■ ta p
11 Hi
r5*M=^b: J
'■ ■ IE
s ’s- v • gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
KW ■ o
O' ........... ,,
IM c J

-i.
X-.

8 . K d )-(b ) Contrasting building processes: jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDC

two houses in Madeley W ood (M. W orthington) baZYXW

170
 AN IN D U STRIA L VERNACULAR

generation of house-building in the Gorge — and the significance of this new ver­
nacular can be elucidated by consideration of its precursors.
Industrialisation in the area has a longer history than surviving buildings and
settlements can themselves document: buildings have survived in significant numbers
only from the end of the seventeenth century, although from documentary records
we can locate the beginnings of extensive new settlement devoted to industry from
the early seventeenth century.1
W hat happened to the earliest houses of the Gorge? Evidence is scanty, but a
series of seventeenth-century pictorial maps of Broseley provide some clues as to its
distribution and character there.2 Comparison of these maps with the landscape that
survives suggests radical changes of land use and arrangement in some areas, where
early buildings were probably completely destroyed, as areas once built over were
cleared before later redevelopment.'1 On other plots, houses were apparently rebuilt,
even though land use remained apparently unchanged. Surviving seventeenth-century
buildings corresponding to those shown on these maps are rare.1
The poor survival rate for buildings of the earliest phases of industrial development
is important. The existence of first-generation houses which were replaced as soon as
circumstances permitted is a phenomenon common to other areas both of rural and
of industrial settlement, and, conceptualised as the ‘vernacular threshold ’ , it provides
an indicator of the local accumulation of wealth and resources, indicative of economic
development.5 W here houses do not survive, the implication is that either the
inhabitants did not have the means to build durably, or an increased prosperity later
created the desire and wherewithal for a complete rebuilding.6 Both may have been
true in the Gorge.
Rebuilding certainly did not necessarily imply flimsy original construction or the
use of poor materials. Representations of buildings on the early maps suggest some
quite elaborate construction such as storeyed houses with complex plans; buildings
survive where a substantial early timber frame was partially replaced, or encased in
brickwork during the eighteenth century. But other short-lived buildings may have
used poorer techniques, and the apparent extent of replacement suggests the inad ­
equacy of much early building; many early-eighteenth-century houses in the Gorge
contain fragmentary relics of roughly made stone structures. Rebuilding is also likely
to be associated with changes in the size and organisation of the house — alongside
the larger houses, the early maps also record tiny single-storeyed buildings; the
archaeological investigation of one early stone-built cottage (11 Benthall Lane)
showed a tiny single-storeyed cottage later improved with the addition of a low
attic storey. The resulting dwelling was still tiny, but nevertheless represented an
improvement on its predecessor.7
By contrast, surviving buildings from the seventeenth century, together with others
documented in illustrations and photographs, attain a constructional sophistication,
and often a size, which marks them out from the fragmentary traces of many of the
earliest structures. 8 They were for the most part substantially built, of large scantling
timber or well-coursed rubble; the common framing techniques used (box frame
with square panels, arch bracing and queen strut roofs) identify a school of timber

171
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

construction, suggesting the involvement of experienced building craftsmen. There

is a wide social cross-section of buildings, ranging from the large riverside mansions
of M adeley W ood and Jackfield to small cottages, which were nevertheless built
adequately enough to survive with a viable use. 9 This cross-section elucidates the
documentary record of probate inventories that shows such a range, with a prevalence
of single-unit houses occupied for the most part by miners. These dwellings, while
they were small, were not necessarily primitive. 10
There were already two contrasting building traditions during the seventeenth
century: on the one hand, a professional building process (related to rural vernacular
building traditions) which left many substantially made timber and stone houses as
its legacy;" and, on the other, a more rudimentary form of construction which has
survived either not at all or as fragments encapsulated in later buildings. The two
crudely built cottages at M adeley W ood (while almost certainly built much more
recently) may give some clue as to the nature of the lost generation of houses. The
contrast with other buildings in the area, even those built at least a century earlier,
highlights the level of architectural and constructional sophistication in the large
majority of Gorge houses. 12
The difference between the two traditions of building is one of access to resources,
not of stages of architectural development: primitive buildings that were made without
reference to a coherent architectural vocabulary were essentially the self-built houses
of the poorest levels of society. This primitive building, which exists outside the
mainstream of architectural development, self-building with minimum investment
in materials and craft, is paralleled in other industrialising areas where early building
was very primitive. In W est Yorkshire, for example, an observer of rhe early nineteenth
century noted that workers’ houses ‘appear to have been single apartments without
chambers, open to their thatched roofs, and supported upon crooks without chim ­
neys, without pavement, low, confined, dark and comfortless’, while in 1820 James
Loch said of Ketley, Shropshire, that ‘this township is occasioned by a numerous
mining population whose wretched huts have been erected from time to time on the
waste ’ . 13 Squatter settlements were characterised by building of this general type, and
there are numerous references to rural labourers living in similar constructions into
the nineteenth century.14 The fact that this type of building was very rare in the
Gorge after the late seventeenth century marks out its prosperity as an industrial
region.
This pattern of development can be paralleled in other areas where the concept of
‘vernacular threshold ’ has been employed to indicate the transition from impermanent
or primitive building to ‘the sudden emergence of buildings intentionally in per ­
manent materials ’ or ‘the new ability of people to build durably for the first time ’ . 15
Such a shift is essentially an economic phenomenon, marking a significant accumu ­
lation of resources: rebuilding might be a response to perceived new needs as much
as the replacement of inherently impermanent construction.16 In the Gorge, the
transition to a more capital-intensive building tradition was under way by a very early
date — the late seventeenth century.

172
 AN IND USTRIAL VERNACULAR

T h e c r e a t io n o f in d u s t r ia l h o u s i n g t y p e s

A dramatic series of developments in local building took place during the early part
of the eighteenth century. Settlement grew through new building and rebuilding, but
there were also qualitative changes. Houses of the first half of the eighteenth century
constitute a recognisable and new housing type: there are large numbers of highly
similar buildings, nearly all built of brick, apparently professionally built using
coherent techniques and designed according to a model, and as such representing
considerable investment (fig. 8.2 (a)-(c)).
The great expansion of settlement during the eighteenth century was dominated
by the use of brick in small buildings. Large houses were built intermittently as an
individual investment (the houses of mine-owners, ironmasters and barge-owners),
but the greatest quantity of building was concerned with small cottage- or house ­
building (the homes of miners, ironworkers, bargemen). These cottages of the early
eighteenth century have an identifiable common form: nearly all are one-and-a-half-
storeyed, of single- or two-unit plan, with much detail in common and similar
configurations of planning. The degree of similarity suggests that they comprise a
model of building practice which remained in use for some 50 years.
Brick had already been used in building in the Gorge and its immediate area: the
octagonal tower at W illey was built in 1618; Raddle Hall, Broseley, is dated 1663;
and Bedlam Hall was described as a Jacobean mansion before its demolition.17 But
these were houses of the gentry and there is no evidence to suggest that brick was in
common use before the early eighteenth century: none of the brick cottages in the
north end of Broseley W ood appeared on the map of 1686, while several can be quite
precisely dated.
There is evidence for much more extensive use of brick from the early eighteenth
century: Dale House and Rosehill were both built c. 1720. Calcutts House and
Belmont House used a similar style in the 1750s. O f the smaller houses, a cottage on
Hodgebower is dated 1714, and Tea Kettle Row was built during the years 1735 to
1742. A cottage on Chapel Road, Ironbridge, is dated 1735, while a pair of cottages
in Broseley W ood have title deeds which date them back to the 1740s.18 The great
majority of these cottages do not have direct dating evidence, but a typology of their
development would suggest that they largely fall into the first half of the eighteenth
century, though there is one terrace in Coalbrookdale dated 1764, and a
very similar type of cottage in W ellington is dated 1773. These brick cottages
represent a typological development of the stone or timber houses of the seventeenth
century — they employ common elements but in a much more formal and controlled
way.
This phase of building, dated to the first half of the eighteenth century, marked a
transformation of building no less dramatic than that of the origins of permanent
building during the seventeenth century. It represents the beginnings of an indus ­
trial building tradition: building in greater numbers, building in groups, the adoption
of brick, the growing standardisation of design and plan into a recognisable aesthetic.
Study of the forms and styles of building enable the process of design and construction

173 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

I gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF INDUSTRY

w baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

■ ■ q jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCB
SE]
IH B I

ar

8 .2 (a )-(c) Eighteenth-century cottage design in rhe Gorge. During the first half of the eight-
eenth century,, a coherent prototype for domestic building was established, brick-built and
baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
compact in pl;Ian. Single- and gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
t w o - u n it dwellings, pairs and terraces were derived from the same
model (M. W orthington)
 AN IND USTRIAL VERNACULAR

ij?

7^ T ’* gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
: -’ i
4baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

8 .2 (c)

in traditional buildings to be understood: this in turn throws light on the organisation

of society.
Studies of the evolution of building types has suggested that, where tradition rather
than academic architecture is dominant, change is brought about by the adaptation
of existing models.19 Communication about building design involved an appeal to
existing models of practice rather than the production of written plans, and this helps
to explain the conservatism of building over quite long periods. Thomas Hubka
identified a ‘folk design method ’ that used past precedent by disassembling existing
forms into their component parts and recomposing them in new forms. Henry Glassie
has also suggested that this recomposition was bounded by rules more or less strictly
adhered to.20 The development of building in the Gorge is also traditional in this
sense, and the gradual adaptation of models enables the rules of these so-called
traditional processes of design to be traced in detail.
The origins of the eighteenth-century brick cottage type suggest the free adaptation
of an existing rural building tradition: the planning of the brick cottages, and their
sectional form, with rhe gabled dormers to an attic storey, appear to be derived from
rhe timber and stone cottages which immediately preceded them. There are several
examples of literal adaptation, where a previous timber-framed or stone building
formed the basis of later extensions to form a small row, and in at least one of these

175
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

the timber-framed walls were removed, after erection of a brick load-bearing wall to
replace them. In M adeley W ood, a number of early brick cottages were built with
exposed timber trusses and framed dormers. The elements of the brick cottage — the
planning, the attic dormer windows, the projecting chimney stacks — can all be found
in timber or stone cottages, suggesting that it was these buildings which were the
source for the new type.21
But there are important differences between the timber, stone and brick cottages
which help to clarify the relationship between these different building types: taken as
a group, the brick cottages have a high degree of regularity in their formal arrangement,
whereas the surviving or documented timber and stone houses have far less consistency
of design, making it difficult to classify them according to a single model of practice.
W hile there are similarities of constructional technique and basic planning, there is
far more variation in volume, placing of doorways, chimneys, windows, and in the
relationship between these building components. 22 The brick cottages conformed far
more closely to a single model, showing a shift to a more controlled vocabulary and
form representing a refinement of a vernacular architectural language under the
pressures imposed by an extensive building programme.
Occasional examples of cottages built of stone to exactly similar specifications and
probably contemporary with them — stone houses on The W harfage, Severnside, and
Chapel Lane, Ironbridge - show that, while the adoption of brick was important, it
was not just a change of materials, but a new approach to the overall building design
which distinguished the eighteenth-century building phase. The same basic type
could be built in a number of different materials, a phenomenon also characteristic
of building elsewhere, showing that building form was not solely determined by
materials and constructional technique. 23

D e s i g n i n g t h e in d u s t r ia l h o u s e

single ­ gfedcbaZYXWVUT
M ost surviving early-eighteenth-century houses are based on a single- or two-unit
plan form with a corresponding number of heated rooms with gable-end stacks: the
most common arrangement in these has a central (or slightly off-central) doorway in
the two-unit form, and a door placed away from the stack in a single-unit plan which
may therefore be represented as half of the two-unit type. This almost invariable
central or near-central doorway became common practice during the eighteenth ­
century building phase — earlier cottages often had a doorway at one side of the main
elevation.2 '1 Frequently, rhe windows of the upper and lower storeys align, creating a
kind of symmetry. Again, this was established as common practice in the eighteenth
century, but was not applied with any consistency in the earlier phases of building.
In most cases, the units were arranged laterally, though in a few exceptional
examples a deep-plan form was adopted, with the second room contained as a wing
of the main range (as in Tea Kettle Row, for example). Additional half-rooms were
contained in an outshut, or in a rear wing, and occasionally in a parallel rear range,
and were sometimes later additions. Primary units were subdivided only rarely. A
surviving cottage on Hodgebower, Ironbridge, has a wing added to the front of an

176
 AN IND USTRIAL VERNACULAR baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIH
existing building, and there may once have been other buildings like this. A true
double-pile form was adopted in Dale House and Rosehill, by employing a roof
construction with a central well, but this was not taken up in other housing before
the nineteenth century.
The record of surviving buildings can be compared with that of probates and wills.
In the probate records of four parishes (Benthall, Broseley, Little W enlock and
M adeley) between 1673 and 1759, most houses were listed as having between two
and seven rooms, the records showing the minimum number of rooms. The industrial
parishes of the Gorge had the highest proportion of one-to-four-roomed houses,
I
implying a predominance of single- or two-unit planning. The greater number of
houses (17 from a sample of 48) in the parishes of M adeley and Benthall comprised
a principal room, variously called the dwelling-house or the kitchen, and a service
room (buttery, brewhouse,); a further 10-11 houses of two-room plan had house
and parlour; other houses had three rooms, house, parlour and service (12 houses);
nine houses recorded a single room, the house. In all cases, these were chambered
over. These records show that there were a number of houses with more than two
main rooms, though it is not always clear whether additional rooms were contained
within the main range or in a rear extension.25
The evidence of surviving buildings suggests that, in most cases, the basic two-
unit layout was adhered to, and a multiplication of wings and extensions housed
additional rooms. This conformity to a two-unit form was, however, sometimes
modified by the addition of an extra unit to accommodate additional family
members — but, in almost all cases, subsequent subdivision as two or three independent
units reintroduced conformity of plan. 26
Surviving buildings all have either a single- or a two-unit plan, but there are
variations in size and scale. These variations may suggest a hierarchy of means but
even very small houses were built with the same basic arrangement of plan as larger
ones and according to similar standards of construction: the same detailing and
techniques were often used both in small cottages and in larger houses. 27
Single- and two-unit forms can be considered together as a single model of practice:
one is half (or twice) the other. The same model was also used in a small number of
larger houses: in Coalbrookdale, there are two houses which date from the first half
of the eighteenth century and which are of two storeys with gabled attics in the
steeply pitched roofs, differing only in form from rhe cottages by the existence of an
additional storey and a central hall (and so employing elements of both vernacular
and polite architectural planning).28 M uch smaller variations in size can be charted
in the cottage form, and until recently there were several examples of single-unit but
two-storeyed houses with attics at Loadcroft W harf and Jockey Bank, representing
an upward extension of the basic type.29
Charting these variations of size and scale enables the typological development of
this cottage type to be established. For example, there are some houses which have a
precise symmetry, where the upper windows align with the lower, and the doorway
is exactly central between them. Even where the doorway is not quite central,
symmetry is achieved by the alignment of the windows in almost all the houses of jihgfedcbaZ

177
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

the Gorge. Even some of the smallest houses have carefully symmetrical facades. Rural
vernacular traditions tended to be more linear and less compact, and visual symmetry
was not always adopted. Instead, the different room values were given external
expression. The few buildings in the Gorge where the doorway is not central and the
windows do not align represent either an earlier form or one built with a lower
investment.30
The prevalence of compact and symmetrically planned cottages in the Gorge
suggests that this configuration became the prototype: it represents a rationalisa­
tion of the earlier building forms, the adoption of an aesthetic which became charac ­
teristic of urban and industrial building forms. Comparison with the few stone and
timber houses which remain shows that the regularity of this building type was in
many ways a novel concept for house design. The sheer scale of new building
encouraged the adoption of very similar forms, and the use of brick itself may have
helped to foster the adoption of more compact planning, since, unlike timber, it was
measured and constructed in very small units. The tendency to compact planning
was largely a development of the eighteenth-century brick-building phase. The
aesthetic which it represented was consolidated in later development, and the sym ­
metrical facade, associated with the adoption of classical motifs in the nineteenth
century, became a symbol of urbanisation.
There was a basic uniformity of design in sectional form as well as in ground
planning: all these houses have an attic storey, whether they had one and a half or
two and a half storeys, though houses of more than one full storey were always rare.
Variations to the form chart a range of means and of techniques — room heights
varied and attic dormers were contained wholly within the roof or cut the eaves line.
Single- and two-unit cottages were both built in the early eighteenth century, but
pictorial and documentary sources, together with surviving buildings, suggest that
the two-unit form was the most common. Its early prevalence is also documented in
probate inventories, which record a high proportion of buildings of this form; the
engraving of upper Coalbrookdale by Vivares, which provides important evidence
for the early housing of the Dale, shows a scatter of detached two-unit cottages with
two heated rooms and a central doorway.31 A high proportion of surviving eighteenth ­
century cottages have a similar form.
The same rules governing plan and sectional form were applied in the design of
both single- and two-unit-plan houses. The larger numbers of two-unit houses
surviving may suggest that this was the prototype for this model of building, used as
the basis of design for a number of different dwelling forms. The process in which a
particular building type could be modified by the subtraction or addition of plan
elements was identified by Glassie in his study of folk housing in M iddle Virginia,
showing how ideas were modified to suit economic and environmental needs, as the
same builders who built full houses also built fragmented versions for families with
less capital or a smaller piece of land. 32
In England, too, cottages could exist as complete scaled-down versions of small
house plans. 33 In the Gorge, the fact that a single-unit house is often exactly half of a
two-unit house, and that both these were used in the development of terraces, gives jihgfedc

178
 AN IN D U S T R IA L V E R N A C U L A R wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWV
an indication of a similar process. Similarly, the fact that a basic plan and form could
be adopted in houses of quite widely different size is also evidence for the use of a
dominant model. This was as true in the nineteenth century as it was in the eighteenth:
there are several small classical houses which are exact replicas of each other in all but
size. The dominance of a type as model is also apparent in the adaptation of building
to smaller plots — in Tea Kettle Row, for example, the rear wings are linked together
to form a continuous rear range — and exactly the same process of problem-solving
was used in the nineteenth century.
The variations of size and scale of building provide important evidence for the
social structure of these eighteenth-century industrial settlements. M ost notable is
the existence of the small, single-unit cottage. Studies of vernacular architecture in
other parts of Britain have noted that the single-unit cottage was proper only to the
lowest ranks of society, that it was gradually replaced, and is the last building type to
be developed in a permanent form.34 However, in the Gorge, as in other industrialising
regions, this smallest of cottages became more, rather than less, prevalent. The smallest
cottages that survive appear to be as well built as their larger neighbours, and many
are part of a pair or row, designed with attention to an aesthetic, and as an organised
development.
At the same time, the numbers of single-unit cottages were increased as earlier two-
unit houses came to be subdivided. This process of subdivision took place throughout
the eighteenth century: the majority of two-unit houses comprised pairs of single ­
unit dwellings by the mid-nineteenth century. Single-unit houses were p baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK
a r e xc elle n ce
the homes of industrial workers — when the two-unit plan was adopted again in
the early nineteenth century, it signalled the emergence of a new middle class. At
the same time, very small cottages continued to be built, and the earlier ones con ­
tinued to be lived in, as the social structure diversified. 35 The fact that the single ­
unit form became more rather than less common is a mark of the extension of in ­
dustrial work and suggests not so much a decline in living standards as the growth
of specialist work outside the home, and the emergence of a differentiated social
structure.
The large houses built for ironmasters and mine-owners belonged to a rather
different architectural tradition: a significant change in architectural model also
occurred in the design of the larger house, since traditional planning and construction
(timber framing, hall and cross-wing plan types) appropriate to the seventeenth
century had been abandoned by the early eighteenth, when Dale House and Rosehill
were built. These buildings adopted a very different configuration, involving more
massing, building in a compact double-pile form, and with a greater number of
storeys, and a highly symmetrical composition. The internal planning reflected the
external symmetry, arranged about a central entrance and stair hall, and making a
more marked distinction between front and back, public, private and service rooms.
This principle of planning was also taken up in some houses of an intermediate size
associated with works managers and barge- and mine-owners.36 This plan and form
suggests an urban inspiration, and it is likely that drawings or even asurveyor/architect
were used in carrying out the work, which could then have been adapted and copied

179
 I- w
TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONM
in some of the lesser houses. This planning tradition was also taken up later in houses
of the early nineteenth century, where the presence of a central stair hall was one of
the distinctions between the more lavish and expensive buildings and the more
modest.
Basic building planning was not seriously modified throughout the eighteenth
and the beginning of the nineteenth centuries-all the elements employed in planning
the nineteenth-century small house had been available since the early eighteenth
century, including the central hall and double-pile plan first adopted in Dale House
and Rosehill, the single-unit cottage with an additional half-room, and the continuous
use of a two-unit plan. gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

T h e g r o u p i n g o f in d u s t r ia l h o u s e s

The eighteenth-century cottages were built either as single buildings of one- or two-
unit-plan form, or as pairs, or as short terraces, though there were a few less coherently
arranged clusters of buildings. For the most part, the pairs and terraces appear simply
to take the form of single-unit cottages added together to form a row, but there are
examples of more innovative planning. Pairs of cottages were often the result of
i subdivision of an existing house which made little structural impact, but they were
also deliberately designed as an integral block, where the subdivision of space between
dwellings involved interlocking rooms or attention to external symmetry - two
cottages in Broseley W ood, now in use as one, had a similar interlocking of small
half-units in the plan, and a strict external symmetry, until modifications were recently
made to the layout. Paired houses were also designed as two quite independent
dwellings built to adjoin each other. 37
A terrace like 8-14 Barratts Hill, Broseley, was merely a string of separate houses
(fig. 8.3), but others were conceived as the framework for more complex planning,
with interlocking units. Units within a terrace varied in size, even when the terrace
was a single development, suggesting that the terraced form was thought of as a
collection of quite independent houses. One indication of this, for example, is in the
arrangement for the construction of chimneys, which are almost never shared between
adjoining houses — where this does occur it almost always denotes a phased con ­
struction, the adding-on of a new house. The sharing of chimneys was adopted in
the Coalbrookdale Company housing of the later eighteenth century but even after
that it was not consistently taken up.
There were some more innovative systems of planning: Tea Kettle Row is one of
these. Here, each dwelling comprises two and a half units, but instead of being
arranged laterally, as would be usual, they are arranged in a double-pile form, and the
individual units of the terrace interlock to create an efficient use of space, while
maintaining the external appearance of symmetry. This suggests that this row was
formally planned, probably on paper, before construction: it was built by Richard
Ford, then the manager of the Coalbrookdale Ironworks, as a small speculation.
Exactly this system was also taken up in the later Coalbrookdale Company housing,
though using much smaller units.

1 180
 AN IN D U STRIA L VERNACULAR

3 baZYXWVUTSR
8 .3 Creating a terrace: Barratts Hill, Broselcy jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPON

There were therefore two distinct systems for terrace design, comprising either the
terrace as a string of separate houses or the terrace as a unified whole, which could
not be separated into its component parts. Tea Kettle Row and Engine Row show
that, even where the terrace was conceived as an integral whole, the individual units
could still vary in size (as they do in most of the other terraces) (fig. 8.4). There was
no conception of standardisation, in which all units had to be identical.JS
Discussion of development (see chapter 7) has shown how the arrangement of
buildings in groups originated in many cases as a solution to a private need within a
family, and was often brought about by the piecemeal expansion of an existing house,
rather than by deliberate row-building, although there are also examples of short
terraces designed and built as a single development.3 '1 This development process helps
to account for the prevalence of terraces which are merely strings of separate houses.
But where this piecemeal building did take place it was most often contained within
a formal design, so that terraces did emerge with a strong sense of symmetry and
sometimes with internal planning sacrificed to external arrangement, as where a
property division cuts a window. This provides further evidence that building design
was not a d h o c, but involved appeal to commonly held models, implemented by
professional builders. As a design process, it could be compared with those processes
of adaptation which have been recorded in certain settlements such as Holywell Lane,
where additions and changes were not organised according to a coherent set of formal
rules.'10 In addition, of course, building in groups or rows immediately implies some
sort of speculation or organisation of provision.

181

I
 THE LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY

i ,> -

S.-f Tea Kettle Row, Coalbrookdale, was planned from the outset as a single building, the
planning of individual dwellings subordinated to the design of the whole

The construction of the industrial house jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTS

From the beginning of the eighteenth century, building in the Gorge was d om in a te d
by the use of brick, which was used for the large mansions and small cottages alike.
In rural areas, adoption of brick was usually associated with radical architectural and
social changes. Eric M ercer noted that

most brick houses had better accommodation than their predecessors in the
same areas: there might be more rooms, the rooms might be larger, and the
house was nearly always higher ... it seems therefore that where brick houses
first appeared, they provided the answer to a new demand. They reflected not
a slight improvement in standards but a new style of living for an emergent
class of moderately wealthy men. 41

In the Gorge, use baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

o f brick in the eighteenth century also marks a transition in
the organisation of society, the accumulation of sufficient resources to invest in build ­
ing, and it also signals the production of building materials on some considerable

182
 AN IND U STRIAL VERNACULAR baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ
I
scale. It shows the development of professional building practice, clearly evidenced
in the use of coherent models, in which the elements of building planning were for ­
I malised to a degree notably different from most of the earlier stone and timber
houses which survive in the Gorge. These changes can be related to the rapid ex­
pansion of settlement, and the necessity for an extensive programme of building
work.
The particular use of brick in the Gorge gives evidence for the organisation of
design and craft in building. Bricks were regularly bonded and their physical properties
were exploited decoratively, both in bonding, where the pattern inherent in Flemish
Bond, and the different colours of headers and stretchers, could be used to decorative
effect, and in such details as dentilled eaves and decorative sill bands. The use of
relieving arches and segmental lintels demonstrates an understanding of the con ­
structional properties of brickwork, confirming that these buildings were the work of
professional builders. The use of decorative and constructional detail also provides
an indication of the resources invested in building — there are a few cottages which are
constructed according to more minimal standards, without dentilled eaves, without
segmentally arched lintels.42
The existence of a clear body of rules in building planning, construction and
decoration demonstrates the role played by professional building craftsmen during
the eighteenth century. Here, the evidence of architecture supplements a very meagre
documentary record, though the terms of some wills refer to houses ‘built or caused
to be built ’ , and one includes an elaborate set of instructions about building which
shows how knowledge of building was not only a professional responsibility, but was
also widely shared:'13 in 1720-1 John Brooke, leaving a cottage to his son, charged
him with the duty

at his own proper cost and charges to well and sufficiently build or cause to be
builded for my said wife a good, firm and substantial dwelling house ... with
good and well-burnt bricks ... to contain 16 foots in length, 13 foots in breadth
between the walls, and 12 foots high to the wall from the ground to the wall
plate, with good and sufficient fire places, and also a shear to goe the length of
the said building and an oven for the use of the same. The roof of the said
house and all the timber therein used to be all good sawd timber and to be
covered with good and sufficient tile.44

The detailed description of the proposed property shows how the owner specified a
house type, probably with reference to existing practice, in terms of both its dimen ­
sions and its construction, showing something of the techniques of communication;
the phrase ‘cause to be builded ’ gives a brief suggestion of a commissioning relation ­
ship with a builder.
The early development of industrial housing design in the Gorge, showing the
early establishment of a school of building which relied on professional craftsmen, is
substantially different from the pattern of development that has been traced in other
industrial areas, where the shift from primitive to professional building occurred later,
often under the aegis of larger-scale land development.45 W hat differentiates the

183
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO
Gorge is the early date for substantial, good-quality housing for workers, and the fact
that this was not provided as a planned, paternalist development. Early housing in
the Gorge is superior to that in other areas, and is also better than rural cottages of
equivalent size. Single-roomed rural cottages of this date, for example, are very
rare survivals. Small size and good construction techniques combined by the mid ­
eighteenth century to demonstrate an organised process for the design and building
of workers ’ dwellings, showing both the availability of resources for building and the
existence of an industry of building-materials and craftsmen.

I n n o v a t i o n a n d t r a d it io n b e f o r e 1 8 0 0

It was not until the 1780s that a new type of cottage-building was introduced in
work undertaken by the Coalbrookdale Company in Coalbrookdale.46 The four
company terraces all employed the same model of building which, unlike the earlier
cottage, had two full storeys, a simpler form with a shallower roof pitch, and a single
building range. The company housing took up principles of planning that had first
been used in Tea Kettle Row, an interlocking form of units giving an efficient use of
space within the terrace block (fig. 8.5 (a)-(b)). But in each of the four blocks the
precise configuration of internal space varied in each dwelling unit — the terraces were
therefore not based on the repetition of identical units. This was an aspect of terrace
design also characteristic of earlier building, but in this case, where the variations
were contained within a rigidly uniform exterior, it suggests that the design process
began by determining the overall area and form of the row, and that the individual
house plans were made to fit within that determined volume.
Other details of the design also show a departure from tradition in the interests of
efficient utilisation of space, such as the adoption of corner fireplaces, and the
grouping of chimneys between individual units. As in the earlier Tea Kettle Row,
the design of this housing was not strictly based on an arrangement of traditional
forms.
Other development from about the same time bears only a superficial resemblance
to these buildings, using two full storeys, but in other respects it follows the principles
of planning which had characterised the earlier housing. One important difference
was the scaling down of this planning to build much smaller dwellings.47 This
development should perhaps be associated with those changes in the housing market
traced in the previous chapter - the emergence of a large tenant class, and the
extension of speculative building.
Two distinct design processes can be identified in the development of housing in
the Gorge until the late eighteenth century: one, vernacular or traditional, used and
adapted existing forms; the other was probably a literate process, starting with
drawings. The latter was at this date associated only with development on a larger
scale (the company housing was arranged in terraces of eight or ten units — other
contemporary building was rarely in rows of more than three units), with greater
resources behind it.

184
 1 gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
ft
i - (■ !' § H=J jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
I
th

I
fi
i
s
E IH £
kt..' 7/////^
.1 _o

te - S S
|. ......
I1 IB IU IIIII
HI 7///////////7Z7^
5
<
yi

CO

.. ..... o

bp

ABB,
t '?•; .1-
t.'l c5
iF iiT 'ri''; ■ '
■

I
i t .
§

M 1'-- :' I".: ■ |

ihh'j:,'’-'
S
" ~s-t] I I
V////////A
v

SJ
t 8
£

b£)

>p. 7/Z7/////7//A

I
OJ -c

24J J
it- £ 2

i|i|l = s

B a
E 2
•>:
s

M1
Bj
l'| ffl'iil i 11
IF'!
Ps--
liB
I ir

»•

w ,:-
,1,1. .
!

rnisaffl 1 &
'!i ' I" I i1 :H|i|T
I
w-
7/////////////%

7//////X nV//Z/Z/ZZ///Z/7/7/
11
u° -c
wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcb
&
£ -8
s-
<w *u, " 8

I
ca W

W ::t c
ca
L ■; ’ 06 a.
‘ * 1 II ii. ■ ;:- i il:lli |i'
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQP
Classicism gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDC
a n d t h e n in e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y v e r n a c u la r

I n the early nineteenth century, a new phase of house-building was characterised by

the adoption of another model house form, the small ‘classical’ house. This was a
two-unit house type, of two full storeys, whose architectural references derived from
a classical vocabulary. The central or near-central doorway was contained within an
architrave more or less elaborated, sash windows had flat arched heads, sometimes
stuccoed in imitation of stone.
The earliest houses of this type were built in Coalbrookdale: a series of maps show
the development of Paradise, where houses of this type were being built between
c. 1828 and 1847 (eight in all).48 A house of the same type on Church Road in
Coalbrookdale is probably slightly earlier, and may represent the prototype for this
new housing. By 1847, five other houses following the same model had been built
along W ellington Road. The model was also used extensively in the development of
Ironbridgeafter c. 1840 (fig. 8.6 a-b). The earliest dated building using this vocabulary
in Ironbridge is a terrace of small dwellings, which, while only one room wide, are
evidently derived from the basic classical model: they had been built by 1846. 4 ’
M any of the Ironbridge houses of this type were built after 1847. The latest known
example of this housing type was a house on W ellington Road, Coalbrookdale, which
was built some time between c. 1860 and c.1870, using the classical vocabulary. 50 A
variant of this type was also developed, probably in the 1850s, in which ‘picturesque
Tudor ’ detail was substituted for classical — hood moulds and casement windows
replaced sashes and flat-arched heads. Building planning remained identical. 51
Like the cottage form which preceded it, the small classical house also almost
always had a rwo-unit-plan form, usually two rooms of unequal size, with one or two
others contained in a rear wing or outshut. M ost of the houses were built detached,
though sometimes with only a notional separation between them, but there are two
terraces in Ironbridge which adopted a single-unit form, and a pair of unequally sized
houses built as a single development in Coalbrookdale. The elevation was highly
symmetrical, though the central position of the doorway was sometimes displaced in
small houses without a central hall. It was invariably flanked by a pair of sash windows,
exactly aligned with those upstairs. Only rarely was there an upper window over the
doorway. 52 Symmetry and planning were tighter and more compact than in the earlier
houses, and room heights were greater with the use of a full second storey.
M apping the variations in this house type suggests that it was designed according
to a vernacular practice similar to the one identified in the building of the eighteenth
century, using a prototype adapted to the particular requirements of each develop ­
ment. This is shown especially clearly in those houses where exactly similar planning
and detail were used, but transposed to houses of quite different scale (fig. 8.7 (a)-
(d)). Similarly, two apparently identical houses forming a pair in Coalbrookdale turn
out on examination to have been built at least 20 years apart - one is the exact replica
o f the other, though very slightly bigger.53
By this time, the organisation of building as an industry can be traced in more
detail. Not only was the landscape baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDC
o f the Gorge dominated by building-materials

186
 AN IND USTRIAL VERNACULAR baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHG

£ ? jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

H “H (i±l ’

ite lts ig l a. 1.gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

It Th
SET
T --

8 .6 (a )-(b ) A new urban style: mid-nineteenth-century houses in Ironbridge and Coal­

brookdale (M. W orthington) baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGF
 THE LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY baZYXWVUTSRQPONML

A gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
7SSSSSSSSSS.

i
E
. !15B3 e . SSg
1 jihgfedcbaZY
£1 •■ ■
.1 . hm m -

9 J
M e tre s □
baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
8 .7 (a )-(d ) M id-nineteenth-century houses in Coalbrookdale. The classical or picturesque
vocabulary applied to small houses during the mid-nineteenth century used variations in size
and detail to produce an elaborate architectural hierarchy (Barry Jones)

industries, with brick- and tile-works proliferating on both sides of the river, offering
highly differentiated products, but significant numbers of people were employed in
building trades. In 1851, for example, in the immediate area of Ironbridge alone,
there were 28 bricklayers, 4 builders, one of whom employed 20 men, several joiners,
painters, plumbers and glaziers. Some of the brick manufacturers also acted as
builders. The builders were almost always their own architects and only the larger
buildings like the Tontine Hotel and the church involved architects who were not
themselves builders. 54
Although the process of design involved in building these houses was the traditional
one of adaptation of an existing model, the nineteenth-century classical house was
an important departure from the kinds of building which had dominated develop ­
ment during the eighteenth century. In the first place, patterns of use of the earlier
houses were changing, and as larger houses were subdivided, there was a growing
predominance of the smaller single-unit dwellings: in this context, the classical house
represented a new house type even though it was not an innovation in terms of its
formal planning. The houses were almost always built in two-unit form as single
dwellings; room heights and floor area were larger than earlier buildings; most were
detached whereas the tendency throughout the eighteenth century had been towards
larger numbers of pairs and terraces of small houses. Detached cottages in single
occupation were rare by the early nineteenth century.
A new use was made of architectural decoration and stylistic detail. The classical

188
 AN IN D U S T R IA L V E R N A C U L A R baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIH

i ■■' ■ fn ii
■■
nn 'm i
nn
i:::
niiil jiiii 1<S|

!!!! »»
tf Iwvutsrqponmls
kjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
M i jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHG

= -

r baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

II
8 .7 (b )

vocabulary had been used in larger houses in the early eighteenth century, when Dale
House and Rosehill were built; it was only now taken up in smaller houses. Early use
of this vocabulary had been focused on those larger houses built as individual
investments, but in the small classical house of the nineteenth century the style was
formalised for development on a larger scale, making use of a widely followed model
of practice, and building components which were being produced in large quantities
by local industries.55
In the small cottage of the eighteenth century, similar detailing had been applied
across a range of house sizes. In the later classical model, stylistic detail was used
consciously to differentiate: large houses of works managers were built according to
■
the same configuration as quite modest small houses but, although the planning was

189

i
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO

s t
I baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFE
E
a

t
<a -
■
■ sir J jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSR
baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHG
—K >

8 .7 (e)

<Tf
1
ar
i -Jr = ‘^ = F = ^ ~
om JJ

I L

8 .7 (d )

the same, gradations of social difference were expressed in a fine architectural hierarchy
of appropriate decoration. The largest houses had ornate door-cases with fanlights
and pediments: window lintels were often decorative cast-iron: the smaller houses
more often had minimal timber architraves, and brick-arched heads over windows
which imitated stucco with paint.
Above all, the small classical house embodied a new aesthetic. It furthered the use
of symmetry, and stressed the facade: the hierarchy of detail reveals the use of casement

190
 AN IND U STRIAL VERNACULAR gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM
windows on the back, the facade given special emphasis by the use of decorative
brickwork or special facing brick. This aesthetic apparently had a particular con ­
nection with urbanism. In Ironbridge, a classical vocabulary was used from the 1780s
in the central buildings around the bridge, and its adoption for small houses was part
of the expansion of settlement there in the second half of the nineteenth century,
consolidating its establishment as a town. Houses of this type were associated with
the use of new land for building, and the reshaping of the Gorge as an urban
environment. Even in Coalbrookdale, the period of its use coincided with the new
provision of communal facilities — school, church, art school and institute. 56
In Coalbrookdale, where its use originated, the adoption of this house type can be
related to a precise social context. The 1830s saw the beginning of a new pattern of
industrial organisation within the Coalbrookdale Company, with the closure of the
forges and the development of art castings. Associated with this was the emergence
of a new class of superior artisan. By 1851, Digby W yatt noted that the company
gave employment to 4000 people, including many with very specialised skills: ‘clerks,
artists, modellers, carvers, pattern makers, moulders, furnacemen, casters, finishers,
smiths, fitters, japanners, painters, gilders, bronzists, and decorators all contribute to
the elaboration of that extraordinary series of objects which are constantly issuing
from this establishment’ .57 Fogarty noted that ‘the skilled workers engaged in the
works are a superior class ’ .58 The tradition of highly skilled work was not in itself
new, but reorganisation and new work practices greatly increased its extent.
At the same time Alfred and Abraham Darby, managing the works jointly from
1830, introduced changes in the regulation and organisation of labour and working
conditions: they broke up the old system of semi-autonomous workshops and intro ­
duced a new level of foremen and process or department managers. 59 In Ironbridge,
too, the new house type can be associated with the development of urban services
and trades. A classical vocabulary was adopted exclusively for all commercial develop ­
ment in the wave of building that followed construction of the bridge, and the
housing development that followed is closely connected with a class of tradespeople
and professionals.
1 jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
These changes begin to suggest the emergence of a new class structure, parallel to
the new stratification of building produced by the development of this larger and
more pretentious housing type, alongside the cottages already in existence. W hile
the commercial development of Ironbridge did entail some rebuilding of existing
structures according to the new aesthetic, for the most part the small classical houses
were an addition to the whole building stock, not a replacement for the earlier
cottages: they represented a diversification of the building stock, not merely a change
in architectural fashion. This contrasts with the earlier period, where evidence suggests
that numbers of buildings were literally replaced. The new model of building was
itself highly differentiated in size, setting and degree of architectural elaboration.
This differentiation of the building stock had important parallels in the new social
hierarchies ofchanging industrial organisation, commerce and professional services. baZYXWVU
A s part of a differentiated social geography, it was also a major element in the
development of the Gorge as an urban area.60

191

I
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF INDUSTRY

T h e d e c lin e o f v e r n a c u la r p r a c tic e

Ever since the early mine-owners and ironmasters had built mansions for themselves
in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, there had been a small but steady
volume of building which represented an individual investment, not designed accord ­
ing to a generally held and widely used model, but according to plans and styles
specific to each case (fig. 8.8). The building of Dale House and Rosehill (c. 1720 and
1715 — 17) marks the first use of academic architecture in the Gorge: a number of
other houses followed which employed an individually interpreted classical vocabulary
(see, for example, Calcutts House, Belmont House, both 1753, Sunnyside, 1750,

■ ■ :

8 .8 Distinctive designs: houses in Ironbridge and Coalbrookdale. Individually commissioned

houses might aspire to a uniqueness of style.gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM

The W hite House, probably early nineteenth century). In the nineteenth century,
freer styles were adopted in building several large villas in Ironbridge: The Orchard,
Southside, M ount Pleasant, The Old Rectory, The Shrubbery were built according
to highly individual designs.
But it was not only the largest of the houses which were conceived as individual
designs - there were also numbers of other buildings which did not conform to the
basic models of practice that were commonly applied. M any of these were built for a
specific purpose, so that, for example, while it is possible to identify certain common
elements in the design and planning of the many latc-eighteenth-century inns that baZYXWVU

192 jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDC
 AN IND USTRIAL VERNACULAR baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIH
were built in the Gorge, they do nor constitute a narrowly interpreted building type.
The distinction between the commonly used vernacular model and the individually
designed building is an important one, but it did not mark only a distinction between
large houses built as individual investments and smaller cottages built by traditional
methods. Not all of the smaller houses in the Gorge were designed according to
traditional practice, and not all of the larger houses were built to individual speci­
fications. There is a pair of large late-nineteenth-century villas in Ironbridge that are
exact copies of each other, both in planning and in use of materials - both use buff
brick and W elsh slate, the latter otherwise rare in the Gorge. 01 A number of smaller
houses have quite distinctive designs, suggesting that they were individually com ­
missioned and designed.
During the nineteenth century, the numbers of houses built to individual designs
f increased as a proportion of the whole housing stock, while the overall volume of
building work diminished. The proportion of larger houses that were probably
directly commissioned by their owners increased and was especially associated with
the growth of Ironbridge, where variety in architecture was seen as an important
contributor to its picturesque character.62 The greater use of individual designs was
enhanced by a programme of public buildings, where the process of design and
building is occasionally documented: the Ironbridge Police Station, for example, was
built by the Borough of W enlock, following criticism from a government inspector.
Plans and a tender for building were obtained from John and Samuel Nevett,
i Ironbridge builders who were also responsible for the design and construction of the
National School. 63 In addition, there were a number of terraced groups as well as
individual small houses which did not constitute a recognisable housing type, sug ­
gesting that local builders had access to different sources of design, possibly through
the use of pattern books.M The elaboration of detail in some of these houses may also
indicate a level of investment that distinguished them from earlier buildings which
were otherwise of a similar size.
The reliance on local vernacular models interpreted by the builders themselves was
undermined not only by the growing proportion of individually commissioned houses
and public buildings, but also by the introduction of nationally available models:
there is one terrace in Coalbrookdale, built baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
c. 1 890, which adopts a plan form common
in bylaw housing across the country.65
The major building programme of the early twentieth century again took up the
use of nationally available models. A public housing programme was initiated in 1919
following the Housing and Town Planning Act of 1919, which gave authority to
acquire land and build, as well as to alter, enlarge and repair existing dwellings.
Schemes were under way in the area by 1924, bur it was not until 1929 that land in
Coalbrookdale was acquired for housing development (the product of a second phase
of public housing, following recommendations that architects, and not the borough
engineers, be used in drawing up plans). 66 The design of these houses followed
national imperatives and standards: the Tudor W alters Report, for example, specified
that domestic functions should be separated as far as possible, with cooking con ­
centrated in a scullery, and with a separate, indoor bathroom. 67

193
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND U STRY gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQP
These standards were locally interpreted, but on a scale hitherto unknown, as
housing provision was planned for a larger community than just the Gorge, and
planning was based on an overall perception and interpretation of housing need; it
also proceeded in tandem with slum clearance programmes, especially after the
Housing Act of 1930. In November 1933, for example, the M adeley Sanitary Com ­
mittee determined that 23 new houses would be needed to rehouse 118 persons from
unfit dwellings. 68 The basic model for building was invariable, though there were
differences in size, according to the principal classification into ‘parlour’- and ‘non-
parlour’-type houses. Uniformity was upheld as an ideal: in April 1931, agreeing the
tender for a further development on Dale Road, Coalbrookdale, the M adeley Sanitary
Committee elected to build pairs of non-parlour houses with bay windows ‘because
the Council had parlour-type houses adjoining, and for the sake of uniformity the
council thought it desirable to adopt them (bays) for the non-parlour type houses ’ .69
This uniformity was achieved merely through the exact repetition of plan, form and
detail and was not associated with the adoption of a recognisable academic archi­
tectural vocabulary.70
Uniformity of this exactitude had an element of deliberate social classification, but
also reflected changes in the organisation of building practice: the use of architects
who were not the builders (W enlock Borough Council appointed M r George Riley
as its Housing Scheme Architect in January 1925)/ 1 the necessity to comply with legal
requirements regulating structure and services; economies of scale as development was
organised in larger units. These factors were also to influence private development,
and speculative building in Broseley W ood during the 1950s was characterised by the
repetition of identical models.72 The uniformity of the industrial vernacular which
dominated building practice during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries was
reached by quite different means, as an existing model of practice was appealed to,
adapted and reinterpreted in each case. But the distinction between building as
individual development and building according to a model remains as valid now as
it was in the eighteenth century, and, as an indicator of the nature of investment, is
an important element in the social hierarchy of settlement.

C o n c l u s io n : t h e f o r m a t io n o f a n in d u s t r ia l v e r n a c u la r

The design process that dominated the provision of housing in the Gorge from the early
eighteenth to the late nineteenth centuries was a vernacular building tradition of a
kind more often associated with rural settlement, but is identifiably the product of an
industrialising society. It is vernacular in its use of a type or model of practice, which
is constantly adapted and varied. Elements of building were reassembled in different
combinations according to clearly defined rules. These rules formed the basis of a com ­
munication between client and builder, and in their application they also provide the
basis for an understanding of the society that used them.
However, the vernacular process of building design in the Gorge differed from a
rural vernacular not only in the scale and organisation of building, but also in the
evolution of the formal qualities of the buildings themselves, a pattern of change

194
 AN IND USTRIA L VERNACULAR

characterised by the adoption and gradual refinement of highly regular interpretations

of building. The interrelationships of design, use and the circumstance of building
have helped to shape a distinctively industrial landscape, identifiable through its
settlement pattern, its patterns of development and its aesthetic.

H o u se d esig n a n d p a tte rn s o fd ev elo p m en t

The industrial landscape was distinguished by the increased scale of development, as

houses built to serve purely individual needs gave place to investment on a larger
scale, the building of pairs, terraces and groups of buildings. W hile there existed
groups of buildings with no overall plan or coherent form, the majority of buildings
that survived were arranged in more formal groups. A design process specific to the
pair or terrace was gradually formulated.
This developed from the stringing together of individually designed houses in a
coherent way to the creation of types of design specific to the terrace. The earliest
example of this deliberate group design is Tea Kettle Row, which was completed by
1742. In this development, as in others of the early eighteenth century, the size
and configuration of the individual units varied: the housing of the Coalbrookdale
Company, built in the 1780s, introduced uniform volumes, though individual con ­
figuration still varied. By the nineteenth century, the principle of identical units was
to dominate building practice, though with the adoption of freer styles in the late
nineteenth century varied forms within a group were re-established, but under a
different design process.
Building in pairs went through a similar pattern of development, from the joining
together of separately conceived dwellings to the creation of deliberate designs that
mirrored each other - in the nineteenth century, the concern for symmetry and
balance even resulted in the design of pairs imitating a single house. 73
In all these cases, the more innovative forms continued to employ elements of the
traditional vocabulary, but there was a slow shift in the process of design, as the basic
type or model, the single house, was displaced as a unit of development, to be replaced
by new forms designed according to a different paradigm. But the adoption of new
forms was not in this case a complete break with tradition or the introduction of
outside ideas. Rather it was the slow adaptation of a building process to suit changing
circumstances of development. It was only in the late nineteenth century that styles
and types of building that were not traditional in their references were introduced.

H o u se d esig n a n d u se

Perhaps thebaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
most important connection between house design and use relates to the
ability to afford to build durably in the first place: the design and construction of
buildings in the Gorge after the late seventeenth century is clear evidence for the
involvement of professional builders. Even the smallest cottages were substantial
investments, and it is this shift to professional building which first distinguishes the
Gorge as a prosperous industrial region, where most classes had access to sufficient

195
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IN DU STRY

resources either to commission building or to pay the rents of substantially built

properties.
In traditional building, the size of house, and the degree of its decoration, cor­
responded very closely with social position and status. The distribution of building
types is therefore an important clue to the understanding of social structure. The
scale of building development, the distribution of types, the patterns of their location,
the use of architectural detail and style and the age of building are all variables which
may be expressive of social status.
In the eighteenth century, the distribution of house types suggests that the basic
social divisions were relatively simple — there are large numbers of small single- or
two-unit houses, a small number of rather larger dwellings, and a very few large
houses. These were closely related to particular places of work. Social distinction was
emphasised primarily in distinctions of size, though the larger houses also used an
architectural vocabulary which was not adopted for the majority of buildings. These
used exactly similar forms, though variations in size and in the quantity of decoration
again mapped out differences in access to resources. The higher proportion of
surviving small houses after the late seventeenth century is indicative of the expansion
of the industrial economy, with a growing class of workers mainly employed outside
the home. Although this was a general trend, its timing varied according to very local
economic conditions: in Jackfield, for example, a number of inns survived as larger
undivided buildings into the nineteenth century, when the decline of the river trade,
and the growth of factories, generated a need for small dwellings to replace the larger
units of a predominantly domestic economy.
By the early nineteenth century, the social structure (as reflected in the housing
stock) was more complex and the introduction of rhe small classic house represented
the adoption of a new housing type, since it was larger, more often built in isolation
rather than in groups, and used a distinctive architectural vocabulary. W ithin this
housing type, fine gradations of detail imply a finely graded social hierarchy. In these
new houses, architecture was used in a new way to express social distinctions — facades
were emphasised with different materials and more elaborate detailing, the scale of
decoration of the facade varied with the level of investment in building. The growth
and development of an industry of building-materials in the Gorge - the proliferation
of brick- and tile-works making products of widely different texture and colour; the
introduction of decorative cast-iron building components — multiplied the choice
available to builder and client, necessitating a more detailed specification of require ­
ments. These choices remained closely tied to social status and the means available
for investment.
At the same time, the earlier, smaller cottages, by now often subdivided to form
single-unit dwellings, formed the nuclei of more densely built-up and apparently
poorer areas, which were the first to be condemned under the inspection procedures
that were developed in the second half of the nineteenth century. The mere survival
of older building stock, much of it poorly maintained and in bad condition by the
end of the nineteenth century, provided a further dimension to the stratification of
society within the Gorge, as those who could afford new houses built them, but the jihgfedc

196
 AN IND U STRIAL VERNACULAR

survival of the older and smaller property shows that there was still a market for it.
This is confirmed by the fact that very small new houses were also still being built in
the second half of the nineteenth century: cottages with tiny one-and-a-half-room
plans were built in Church Road, Coalbrookdale, between 1847 and 1881.baZYXWVUTSRQPON

H o u sin g a n d th e g e o g ra p h y o f se ttle m e n t

The grouping of early eighteenth-century buildings into small clusters in which

several cottages were built adjacent to a much larger house, and the connection
between this pattern and the organisation of a very local economy, has already been
discussed. This pattern survived, but with less resonance in the nineteenth century.
M any of the early large houses were subdivided, and a new generation was built
beyond the immediate environment of industry itself. At the highest social level, the
mansions of the Darby family — Sunnyside and the W hite House - provide an
example of this, though its biggest impact was in the development of Ironbridge,
where the slopes of the Gorge were promoted as a picturesque environment.
There is a strong connection between the development of housing in this area and
the varied architectural values of individually commissioned private housing. The
development of particular architectural styles associated with the function and charac ­
ter of certain areas is also evidenced in the almost exclusive use of a classical vocabulary
for the buildings of the centre of Ironbridge, even to the extent of replacing existing
buildings to harmonise in style. This process was still important into the twentieth
century (and before planning laws provided public sanction for a level of control),
and one shop on the W harfage, for example, was rebuilt as the mirror image of its
neighbour.
The interrelationship of these three elements (design, settlement and use) was not
only expressed in the architecture of housing: similar distinctions mark commercial
building during the nineteenth century, when Ironbridge developed as a small urban
centre. Here, the commercial buildings that are grouped round the square use a
classical vocabulary articulated to form coherent blocks out of individually owned or
occupied units. The design of the commercial premises was specific to their function,
containing shops, stores, workshops and dwellings. These were usually three-storeyed,
to provide domestic space over the shop itself, and sometimes very large, with
additional accommodation for servants, apprentices and assistants. Constraints on
design, such as the need for open floor space, encouraged the use of such space-saving
features as corner fireplaces and, later, cast-iron columns. 7 ''
Further away from this commercial centre, shop buildings were either adapted
from existing houses or built as modifications of a basic house form, fitting the shop
itself into the front room. Sometimes a shop was built as an extension to an existing
building, a single-storeyed projection from the facade. Few of these survive now, but
are recorded in photographs, while title deeds refer to ‘newly erected shops now used
as one shop in front of the dwelling ’ , for example. There are even a few small shops,
which, while purpose-built, were made in a very rudimentary way, suggesting minimal
investment. 75

197
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IN DU STRY

In the industrial vernacular of the Gorge, as elsewhere, the architecture and design
of buildings was the product of a communication between client and builder, in
which there was a close relationship between the architecture and a perception of
building use: the architecture was the result of choices about size, degree of decoration
and constructional sophistication, which depended on the resources available for
building and so on the identity and means of the client or intended occupier.
Several distinct processes of baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
d e sig n have been identified: at one extreme was self-
building, which resulted in rudimentary structures with little explicit architectural
quality' — apart from an early stage of building, there are few examples of this type of
building in the immediate area of the Gorge itself. At the other extreme were the
large houses or public buildings which were specially commissioned and designed to
individual specifications, probably through a ‘ literate ’ process of design involving an
architect or the use of a pattern book. But until the later nineteenth century the
majority of building work was carried out according to a process of design which
may be defined as traditional or vernacular. The basic unit of design, the single house,
formed a prototype which was gradually modified to suit changing patterns and scales
of development. A new paradigm for design was introduced in the late nineteenth
and twentieth centuries, when literate, nationally determined and regulated design
processes became standard for almost all building work.
Because of the dominance of certain design methods, the distinction between
speculative building and the small houses commissioned by their owner-occupiers is
marked primarily at the level of scale: the possibility of economies of scale and the
development of more rational solutions. Conversely, the variety of detail observed
in the nineteenth-century building stock was not necessarily an index of owner­
occupancy.
The developers of building in the Gorge faced a series of choices: location of
development, its organisation and the method of design. It is because these choices
resulted in a particular range of aesthetic and landscape characteristics that buildings
can now be used as evidence for the origins, development and structure of an
industrialising community.

198
 9 wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGF

THE INDUSTRIAL LANDSCAPE

TODAY: FROM ANALYSIS TO
PROTECTION

The landscape of the Gorge is celebrated as the setting for a series of significant
developments in the history of industry and technology: this study has aimed to
understand more precisely what constitutes that landscape and how it was developed,
setting terms of reference for comparison with other areas. There have been two
strands to this inquiry: it has looked at how industrial development took place in the
landscape - identifying patterns of development and change in individual industries,
in the relationships between industries, as well as in the building and settlement
associated with them. It has also considered what this landscape evidence can say
about the process of industrialisation, as a sequence of social and economic change.
The central element of the methodology used here was the detailed survey of a
small area. This made it possible to range across different types of evidence in great
detail. Different classes of evidence could be brought together, and disciplinary
boundaries crossed. From this work, it has been possible to explore the use of
traditional archaeological techniques such as stratigraphy, context and typology, as
well as techniques of analysis developed in vernacular architecture studies.
W hile the survey sought to test the value of landscape evidence in its own right, it
was vital to recognise the limitations of field evidence. The landscape is selective in
what it represents. Certain classes of evidence, such as industrial waste, were over-
represented in rhe archaeological record, whilst others (early communities known
from documentary records, for example) have completely disappeared. At the same
time, poorly documented activities such as limestone working were well represented
in the field.
Landscape study is necessarily limited to local events. Economic activities and their
organisation are visible in the landscape; markets and external decisions are not.
Capital is visible as investment in plant and buildings, but its movement and sources
are not. Housing may indicate social structure, and give some evidence for the
relationship between industry and labour, but it is not direct evidence of a labour
market; how people lived, how they made their livings, the social and economic
structure of the household, social mobility, and migration are not visible in the
landscape.
There are thus questions which field study will never be able to answer, but every
source has its limitations. The landscape remains a primary document in its own

199
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IND USTRY

right, and deserves the same critical, but respectful, treatment as any other document.
The techniques of archaeology and building history used in this study go some way
towards this: by studying the relationships between the components of the industrial
landscape and how they changed, a detailed understanding of the course of indus ­
trialisation has been possible.
By focusing on spatial setting, and the patterns of change over time, it has been
possible to look again at the complex, and changing, process of industrialisation. The
most striking aspect of this process in the Gorge was its diversity: the iron industry
was one of a whole range of industries established long before, and continuing well
after, the period of the Industrial Revolution. These industries — and in particular the
mining of coal - created an industrial framework on which the spectacular expansion
of the iron industry of the 1750s could be based. Equally, the expansion of ceramic
industries continued well into the nineteenth century, relying on that same established
industrial framework.
In order to understand these industries, it is necessary to understand their mineral
base. Coal, clay, limestone and ironstone are each found in a variety of seams, and
each seam has different industrial properties. Understanding these properties has to
be the first step in charting the pattern of exploitation. It is then necessary to look at
the nature of the access to each seam, the changing pattern of demand, and the
technology and capital available at any one time to make use of a given seam. The
survey also emphasised that mineral resources have to be seen in conjunction with
one another, and not just as isolated entities.
Overlying the natural landscape is a human one, created and modified through
time. This in itself can be seen as a resource for industry — an existing transport
network, power system, and industrialised labour force were all prerequisites for
expansion in the mid-eighteenth century. At the same time, such a resource could
become a limitation as the ability to expand became hampered by outdated equipment
or crowded sites. The constant interplay between the inherited landscape and the
pattern of industrialisation shows how important it is to see industry in a chronological
framework.
Industrial buildings have been equally useful in investigating this process by
marking cycles of innovation, and of ‘make-do and mend ’ . Overall, it has been
possible to show how not just a natural but an inherited landscape helped, hindered
and influenced the pattern of industrialisation, and that, without an understanding
of this inheritance, the process of this industrialisation can never be fully understood.
Study of settlement and housing also reveals the progress of industrialisation in the
area. The distinctive pattern and structure of settlement established during the early
eighteenth century is evidence for a specialised local economy in which settlements
were closely associated with particular patterns of industrial organisation. There was
also a qualitative shift in the pattern of building in the early eighteenth century - the
use of materials and techniques intended to be permanent, in what is termed the
‘vernacular threshold ’ . These new buildings represented investment substantial
enough to be upheld over a long period of time, and give valuable evidence of the
organisation of the economy, since they indicate that there was money to invest

200
 THE IND USTRIAL LANDSCAPE TODAY

in building even among miners, trowmen and found ry-workers. The use of pro ­
fessional building craftsmen for small cottages, and the absence of a large property-
owning class, or of significant involvement by industrialists, provide clear evidence
of local prosperity founded on mining and manufacture.
At the same time, the shift towards smaller dwelling units, and a progressive
reduction in the amount of land associated with individual dwellings, suggest a
growing dependence on work outside the home: these dwellings were cottages — the
homes of people who were not engaged in agriculture, and without land other than
a small garden plot. The division of land into many small plots (and among many
owners) gives some indication of the distribution of resources, concentrated in few
hands only towards the end of the nineteenth century.
The continuing development of the industrial economy, shaped by these new
developments, is visible in new patterns of organisation in the landscape: new forms
of social stratification are clear from the expanding range of housing types through
the later eighteenth century, but especially in the nineteenth. The emergence of a
market in land, and of speculative building, is a significant aspect of the economic
context of industrialisation which may best be explored through housing evidence.
By the mid-nineteenth century, the limitations of the Gorge were making them ­
selves felt: industries responded by turning to the production of high-value, specialist
consumer goods, and the industrial economy shaped by these new developments
produced new patterns of organisation in the landscape. By the middle of the century,
the Gorge had acquired the character of an integrated urban area, albeit on a very
small scale. This urban landscape was shaped by increasingly differentiated patterns
of development and land use across rhe Gorge, with Ironbridge itself as its retail and
civic centre. The social hierarchies sustained by changes in industrial and commercial
organisation were expressed in the stratification of housing types and their dis ­
tribution. Subsequent change took place without significantly displacing the struc ­
tures of settlement and land use established by the later nineteenth century.
This study has defined the Gorge as a particular kind of industrial area, not
just by identifying the interrelationship of elements for a structural analysis of
industrialisation, but also by examining the course of change over time. Detailed
investigation of this local landscape reveals industrialisation as a continuous process
rather than an event. The study has shown how, at every stage of development, there
was an inheritance of circumstances which established both limits and a framework
of possibilities. This inheritance was the structure of landholding, and the organisa ­
tion of resources in the landscape, but it was also the investment in transport, power
systems, and buildings. Periods of new investment, opening up new land, establishing
factories on greenfield sites, and major new building programmes stand out from the
more usual process of adaptation and compromise.
Not only is the landscape a document, it is also a determinant. In the course of
this study, we have been able to identify ways in which the landscape itself constrains
and shapes the patterns of historical change. But the landscape which determines is
itself the altered landscape which survives. So industry operates within the limits of
the land available, on a plot which may owe its form to the clearance of medieval

201
 TH E LANDSCAPE OF IN DU STRY

woodland; faced with a complex pre-existing water-power system, the Coalbrookdale

Company chose to use new technology to recycle water rather than blow furnaces
directly; a key factor in the expansion of the roofing-tile industry during the nine ­
teenth century was the access to deep clays, which was possible as old coal-mines
were deepened in the search for new sources. Similarly, many buildings from the late
seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries have survived only at the expense of a
series of changes. Often, these changes comprise literal adaptation, but may also be
less radical changes of use: the movement of houses down a social scale is an example
of this. The earliest cottages survived in a diversified social structure as new buildings
with higher standards of space brought about a revaluation of the building stock.gfedcbaZY

P r o t e c t in g t h e la n d s c a p e

A study of the landscape such as this can also contribute to the case for conservation.
As more is understood about the historical significance both of particular landscape
components and of the structure of the landscape as a whole, so it becomes possible
to reassess the criteria used in the evaluation of individual sites and structures, and to
develop a more rigorous appraisal of resources.
Any landscape component has some historical significance, but not everything can
or should be kept. A degree of selectivity as to what is, and is not, worthy of special
protection is always needed. Under the existing planning and legislative framework
for protection, seven individual sites within the Gorge have been scheduled as Ancient
M onuments - the Darby Furnace, the Iron Bridge, Bedlam Furnaces, Blists Hill
Furnaces, the Hay Inclined Plane, Coalport Bridge and W illey Furnaces. Over two
hundred buildings have been Listed, including several grade I and II* structures.
M ost of the Gorge is a Conservation Area in which the demolition of buildings is
controlled, as are certain classes of development. W ithin this area, alterations to
existing buildings, and the design of new buildings, must meet strict criteria before
they are approved. In 1986, the Conservation Area was designated a W orld Heritage
Site by UNESCO, as part of an attempt to establish an ‘effective system of collective
protection of the cultural and natural heritage of outstanding universal value ’. 1
Nevertheless, during the period of the survey, the pace of development quickened,
with applications both for large-scale working - open-cast mining - and piecemeal
new housing development. Despite a relatively high level of statutory protection,
change continues to take place rapidly, often taking little account of the historical
framework which the survey has begun to identify.
The system of protection itself provides only a partial and unbalanced rep ­
resentation of the scope of landscape resources in the area. The survey highlighted
the diversity of industries, but four of the seven Ancient M onuments in the area are
iron furnaces. One group of brickworks buildings is Listed, but the remains of the
encaustic tile industry at Jackfield have only minimal protection. No limekilns or
quarries are Scheduled, and very little protection is given to mining remains. The
best protection for mineral remains ar present results from the designation of Sites of
Special Scientific Interest, where the classification rests on environmental criteria. But

202
 TH E IND USTRIAL LANDSCAPE TODAY

woodlands tend to have grown up on old industrial areas, which in turn protect the
remains from ploughing and development. This link between natural history and
industrial archaeology should be more widely acknowledged, and integrated into the
management of these sites in order to afford adequate protection to industrial remains
in their own right.
The current system of protection is strongly oriented towards individual sites and
buildings. Although linear features such as canals and tramway routes can be protected
for their whole length, either by scheduling or through Conservation Area status,
often these features are treated as isolated fragments which make little sense, while
the water-power systems which unite valleys and groups of sites may be culverted,
infilled or diverted. The importance of linear and other systems should also receive
specific acknowledgement in planning guidelines.
Historic Buildings listing is one of the cornerstones of effective conservation. Early
assessments tended to emphasise particular architectural qualities, but attention is
increasingly being given to the significance of buildings in the historical development
of the local area. Historical criteria for listing in an area such as the Gorge should
assess buildings by reference to their location and development type, rather than
by the selection of individual examples of certain architectural styles. The record
constituted by the Statutory List should not privilege one period over another, but
should adequately represent the changing patterns of development, the changing
applications of aesthetic vocabularies over time, and perhaps even typical patterns of
alteration and change.
But this study was not just concerned to add to the number of protected sites
monuments and buildings. By focusing attention on the spatial organisation of th<
landscape, it suggests a way in which historical information can be registered even
where literal preservation is not possible. Change within this industrial landscape has
previously taken place within a framework of strong continuities in spatial organ ­
isation. New development could still be accommodated within that pattern, provided
its structure is adequately understood.
It was one intention of the original survey to develop techniques of landscape
survey which would be applicable to other areas. Clearly there are many other areas
of recognised historical importance which could benefit from the same kind of
intensive approach that has been employed here. In particular, areas where there are
complex spatial and chronological relationships between land uses could use this
approach to gain both a greater understanding of historical processes and a more
historically informed basis for landscape management. Above all, the greatest benefit
and opportunity of landscape study lies in the identification of previously undervalued
historical resources.

203
 NOTES gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFE

A b b r e v ia tio n s baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
B C W : B ritish C la y w o rk e r: T h e O rg a n o f th e B ric k a n d T ile T rad es, London
IGM AU: Ironbridge Gorge M useum Archaeology Unit
IGMT: Ironbridge Gorge M useums Trust
PRO: Public Record Office
SBL: Shropshire Borough Library
SRO: Shropshire Record Office
TDC: Telford Development Corporation
VCH: Victoria County History

1 T h e l a n d s c a p e a s a s o u r c e o f h is t o r ic a l e v i d e n c e

1 W .G. Hoskins, T h e M a k in g o f th e E n g lish L a n d sc a p e , Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1955.

2 P. Barker, T e c h n iq u e s o f A rc h a e o lo g ic a l In v e stig a tio n , London, Batsford, 1982.
3 B. Graslund, T h e B ir th o f P re h isto ric C h ro n o lo g y : D a tin g M e th o d s a n d D a tin g S y ste m s in
N in e te e n th -C e n tu r y S c a n d in a v ia n A rc h a e o lo g y , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1981;
D. Clarke, A n a ly tic a l A rc h a e o lo g y , London, M ethuen, 1978.
4 Plot survey as a technique to link town plan, building form and land use in urban survey
was developed by the historical geographer M .R.G. Conzen in, for example, his surveys ofW hitby
and Alnwick ( ‘The growth and character ofW hitby ’ in G.H.J. Daysh, ed., A S u rv e y o fW h itb y
a n d th e S u r ro u n d in g A re a , Eton, 1958; A ln w ic k , N o r th u m b e r la n d : A S tu d y in T o w n P la n A n a ly sis,
Institute of British Geographers Special Publication no. 27, London, Institute of British Geogra ­
phers, 1960). His work has been the subject of renewed interest and development by a group of
historical geographers (J.W .R. W hitehand, ‘ Background to the urban morphogenetic tradition ’
and ‘Conzenian ideas: extension and development’, in T h e U rb a n L a n d sc a p e , London, Academic
Press, 1981) and stands as a model for all involved in landscape analysis.
5 Plot numbers were allocated to parcels of land in each parish by the Ordnance Survey
prior to 1945 after the introduction of the national grid, though they were om itted in
dense urban areas (J.B. Harley, O rd n a n c e S u rv e y M a p s: A D e sc rip tive M a n u a l, Southampton,
Ordnance Survey, 1975).
6 Several other maps were available. The Tithe surveys were the earliest large-scale com ­
prehensive coverage of the area, but varied in quality and the selection of detail (R.J.P. Kain
and H.C. Price, T h e T ith e S u rv e y s o f E n g la n d a n d W a les, Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press, 1985); the first edition Ordnance Survey maps of the 1880s were only partly available,
and the modern Ordnance Survey editions lacked many historical features.

205
 NOTES

7 M . Biddle, ‘M etres, areas, and robbing ’, W baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJ

o rld A rc h a e o lo g y , vol. 1, 1969, pp. 208 — 19;
E.C. Harriss, P rin c ip le s o f A rc h a e o lo g ic a l S tra tig ra p h y , London, Academic Press, 1979.
8 In looking at buildings as the product of particular contexts, this work drew on studies
in vernacular architecture, which have explored the connections between buildings and use by
emphasising the links between hierarchies of building types and social and economic structure.
The approach taken here draws particularly on work by Henry Glassie and others, analysing
vernacular architecture in the United States, and principally concerned with identifying pro ­
cesses of design by analysis of characteristic forms and elements of building gathered in a
comprehensive area study. A study of housing at Le Creusot (C. Devilliers and B. Huet, L e
C re u so t: n a issa n c e e t d e v e lo p p e m e n t d'une v ille in d u strie lle 1 7 8 2 — 1 9 1 4 ) was also valuable: this
distinguished between vernacular and polite processes of design, showing how each relates to
particular patterns of development. It defined a building type not as a simple classification of
architectural elements, but as a concept or model which structured building practice in the
past. M any of the studies on vernacular architecture in Britain, drawing out the connections
between buildings and a social hierarchy, have also proved invaluable (see, for example, R.W .
Brunskill, Illu stra te d H a n d b o o k o f V e rn a c u la r A rc h ite ctu re , London, Faber & Faber, 1978).
9 A comprehensive bibliography of historical sources for the Ironbridge Gorge is to be
found in this volume (pp. 233 — 45). gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

2 T h e i n d u s t r i a li s a t i o n o f t h e G o r g e

1 Barrie Trinder, T h e M o s t E x tra o rd in a ry D istric t in th e W o rld , 2nd edn, Chichester, P h il-

limore, 1977; John Randall, B ro se le y a n d its S u rro u n d in g s, M adeley, Salopian & W est M idland
Office, 1879; John Randall, A H isto ry o f M a d e le y Shrewsbury, Salop County Library, 1880,
reprinted 1975; see also accounts in the S h re w sb u ry C h ro n ic le o f 1859 and VCH 1908; R.A.
M ott, ‘Abraham Darby I and II and the coal-iron industry ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e N e w c o m e n
S o c ie ty vol. 31, 1987 pp. 271 — 287; Arthur Raistrick, D y n a sty o f Iro n fo u n d e rs, London, Long ­
mans, 1953; Stuart Smith, A V iew fr o m th e Iro n B rid g e , Ironbridge, IGMT, 1979; Catherine
Clark, Iro n b rid g e G o rg e, London, Batsford 1993. The most comprehensive accounts are Barrie
Trinder, T h e In d u stria l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , 2nd edn, Chichester, Phillimore, 1981, and
VCH XI and X (forthcoming), on which this chapter is broadly based.
2 H.P.R. Finberg, E a rly C h a rte rs o f th e W e st M id la n d s , 2nd edn, Leicester, Leicester Uni­
versity Press, 1971, pp. 197-216.
3 W .E. W iggins, A n c ie n t W o o d la n d in th e T e lfo rd A re a , Telford, Telford Development
Corporation, 1986.
4 VCH II.
5 Samuel Parsons ’ map of Broseley, r.1620, SRO 1224/1/32.
6 VCH XI, p. 28.
7 D. Pannett, ‘ Fish weirs on the River Severn ’, S h ro p sh ire N e w sle tte r, vol. 41,1972, pp. 4 — 7.
8 At the same time a clear demand for coal can be demonstrated — the ‘Chronicles of
Shrewsbury ’ note a fuel crisis, and the excitement of finding coal near Shrewsbury.
9 See chapter 4.
10 SRO 1224/163; M .D.G. W anklyn, ‘John W eld of W illey 1585 — 1665: an enterprising
landowner of the early 17th century ’, J o u r n a l o f th e W ilk in so n S o c ie ty vol. 3, 1969, pp. 88-99;
M .D.G. W anklyn, ‘John W eld of W illey: estate management 1631-1660 ’, J o u r n a l o f th e
W ilk in so n S o c ie ty vol. 4, 1970 — 1, pp. 63 — 71.
11 Lease quoted in Arthur Raistrick, op. cit., p. 286.
12 PRO Star Cham ber 8 310/16, quoted in M .J.T. Lewis, E a rly M o d e r n R a ilw a y s, London,
Routledge, 1970.
13 VCH forthcoming; Parsons’ map of Broseley, 1637-8 (fig. 7.1); SRO 1224/1/19.
14 VCH I, p. 454.
15 Field and map evidence (OS map, 1902) shows some pics in the late nineteenth century,

206
 NOTES

national scale.jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQP
but Benthall was never again seen as a major colliery on a gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHG
16 SRO 1224/163.
17 Barrie Trinder and J. Cox, Y e o m e n a n d C o llie rs in T elfo rd , London, Phillimore, 1980;
baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFE
Barrie Trinder and J. Cox, M in e r s a n d M a rin e rs: P ro b a te In v e n to rie s fo r B ro se le y a n d Iro n b rid g e ,
forthcoming.
18 The shaft is still open and visible; Anon., ‘ Excavations at Lloyds Coppice Engine ’,
unpublished M S, IGM T Library, 1970; Barrie Trinder, T h e In d u s tria l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire ,
2nd edn, Chichester, Phillimore, 1981.
19 See chapter 4.
20 Barrie Trinder, T h e In d u str ia l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , pp. 65, 68; see also Telfords
account of river levels, in J. Plymley, A G e n e ra l V ie w o f th e A g ric u ltu re o f S h ro p sh ire , London,
Board of Agriculture, 1803, pp. 317-33.
21 S. Simpson, T h e A g re e a b le H isto ria n o r th e C o m p lea t E n g lish T ra veller, quoted in Barrie
Trinder, T h e M o st E x tra o rd in a ry D istric t in th e W o rld , 2nd edn, Chichester, Phillimore, 1988,
pp. 15-16.
22 M . Eele, ‘An account of making Pitch, Tar and Oil out of a blackish stone in Shropshire,
communicated by M r M artin Eele, the Inventor of it’, R o y a l S o c ie ty P h ilo so p h ic a l T ra n sa c tio n s,
vol. 19, 1697, p. 544.
23 Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, B e n th a ll a n d B ro seley W o o d : T h ir d In te rim R e p o rt o f
th e N u ffie ld S u r v e y Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1987, pp. 44ff.; John M alam, ‘ W hite salt-
glazed stoneware manufactured at Jackfield ’, W e st M id la n d s A rc h a e o lo g y , vol. 24, 1981, pp. 45-
50; see also below, chapters 3 and 5.
24 D.A. Higgins, ‘The Clay Pipe Industry of Broseley and Benthall’, Ph.D. thesis, University
of Liverpool, 1987.
25 Raistrick, op. cit., chapter 4.
26 N. Cox, ‘Imagination and innovation of an industrial pioi > n e e r : the first Abraham Darby ’,
In d u s tria l A rc h a e o lo g y R e v ie w , vol. 12, 1990, pp. 127 — 44.
27 Barrie Trinder and J. Cox, M in e r s a n d M a rin e rs-, see also chapter 6.
28 Joan Thirsk, ‘Industries in the countryside ’, in EJ. Fisher, ed., E ssa ys in th e E c o n o m ic a n d
S o c ia l H isto ry o f T u d o r a n d S tu a r t E n g la n d in H o n o u r o f R .H T a w n e y Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, 1961; reprinted in Thirsk, T h e R u r a l E c o n o m y o f E n g la n d , London, Ham-
bledon Press, 1984, pp. 217 — 34.
29 Barrie Trinder, ‘The development of the integrated ironworks in the eighteenth century ’,
T h e In s titu te o f M e ta ls H a n d b o o k a n d L ist o f M e m b e rs, London, Institute of M etals, 1988, pp.
217-26.
30 Although leasing often meant that such works lacked permanence.
31 See chapter 4.
32 Roger Edmundson, ‘Coalport China W orks, Shropshire: a comparative study of the
premises and background to their study ’, In d u stria l A rc h a e o lo g y R e v ie w , vol. 3, 1979, pp. 122 —
45.
33 J. Plymley, o p . c it..
34 Barrie Trinder, C o a lp o rt N e w T o w n , Ironbridge, IGMT, 1978.
35 E. Benthall, ‘Some xviiith century Shropshire potteries ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e S h ro p sh ire
A rc h a e o lo g ic a l S o c ie ty vol. 55, 1957, pp. 159 — 70; VCH I, p. 434; A.W .J. Houghton, ‘Caughley
Porcelain W orks near Broseley, Salop ’, In d u s tr ia l A rc h a e o lo g y M a g a zin e , vol. 5, 1968, pp. 184 —
92; L. Jewitt, C e ra m ic A r t o f G re a t B rita in , London, Virtue, 1978, p. 190; SRO 2713/41; see
also below chapter 2.
36 A. Jones, T h e C o a rse E a rth e n w a re s, Ironbridge, IGM AU, 1988.
37 E Celoria and J. Kelly, ‘A post-medieval pottery site and a kiln base found off Albion
Square, Hanley, Stoke on Trent, Staffordshire, England ’, C ity o f S to k e M u s e u m A rc h a e o lo g ic a l
S o c ie ty R e p o rt, vol. 4, 1973.
38 This section is based on Barrie Trinder, T h e In d u s tr ia l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire ,
pp. 21-9.

207
 N OTES

39 M .C. Horton, N baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

e w d a le : T h e N o r th B u ild in g , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989; see
also chapter 4.
40 Coalbrookdale Company M inute Book, IGM T library.
41 Raistrick, op. cit.
42 M .C. Horton, N e w d a le : A n In d u s tr ia l T o w n sh ip o f th e M id -E ig h te e n th C e n tu ry , Ironbridge,
Ironbridge Institute, 1989.
43 Barrie Trinder, T h e In d u str ia l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , p. 40; archaeological evidence for
stamping and potting has been found at W illey (R. Terry, ‘A n archaeological survey of the
W illey Valley ’, essay, Ironbridge Institute, University of Birmingham, 1989) and on the Tern
at Duncote (Catherine Clark and Amanda gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIH W in k w o r t h , D u n c o te F a rm , A tc h a m , A R e p o rt fo r
E n g lish H e rita g e , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989) and at Horsehay.
44 Particularly Clod Coal, see below, chapter 3.
45 J.W . Hall, ‘Joshua Fields Diary of a tour in 1821 through the M idlands ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f
th e N e w c o m e n S o c ie ty vol. 6, 1925-6, pp. 30 — 2; see also painting by Holmes-Smith, discussed
in Stuart Smith, op. cit.
46 Catherine Clark, H o rse h a y Iro n w o rk s, S h ro p sh ire , A R e p o rt fo r W re k in D istric t C o u n c il,
Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989.
47 John Randall, A H isto ry o f M a d e le y , N.M . Dawes, ‘A History of Brick and Tile Production
in the Coalbrookdale Coalfield ’, unpublished M S., IGM T library, 1979; A.J. M ugridge, B ric k
a n d T ile M a n u fa c to rie s in th e S e v e rn G o rg e, Jackfield, Orchard Press, 1987.
48 See below, chapters 3 and 5; fig. 6.12.
49 See below, chapter 4; VCH I, p. 446; L. Jewitt, op. cit., pp. 184, 190; John Randall, A
H isto ry o f M a d e le y
50 M . M essenger, P o tte ry a n d T ile s o f th e S e v e rn V a lle y London, Remploy, 1979, pp. 1 Iff.;
E. Benthall, op. cit.; VCH I, p. 434; Clark and Alfrey, op. cit., pp. 66 — 71.
51 W .H. W illiams, ‘ Dawley New Town Historical Survey: Industries ’, unpublished M S.,
IGM T library, 1964, and local industries card index held in IGM T provide details of local
post-war industries.
52 See local directories such as those published by Kelly and Pigot.
53 R.S. Tolley, ‘Comments on the changing industrial geography of eastern Shropshire ’, W est
M id la n d s S tu d ie s, vol. 5, 1972, pp. 1-5.
54 Telford Development Corporation documents held in IGM T library.
55 Telford Development Corporation press release, 1975.
56 Draft Policy Plan for the Severn Gorge, Telford Development Corporation, 1964.
57 E. Thomas, ‘Origin of the Ironbridge Gorge M useum Trust’, unpublished M S., IGM T
library, 1982.

3 M in e r a l r e so u r c e s in th e la n d s c a p e

1 The local geology is well covered in J. Prestwich, ‘On the geology of Coalbrookdale ’,
T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e G e o lo g ic a l S o c ie ty o f L o n d o n , 1836, pp. 413-95; John Randall, A H isto ry o f
M a d e le y Shrewsbury, Salop County Library, 1880, reprinted 1975; TH . W hitehead e ta l, T h e
C o u n try b e tw ee n W o lv e rh a m p to n a n d O a k e n g a te s, S h e e t 1 5 3 , M emoirs of the Geological Survey,
1928; B.A. Hains and A. Horton, B ritish R e g io n a l G e o lo g y : C e n tra l E n g la n d , London, HM SO,
1969; Ivor Brown, ‘M ineral working and land reclamation in the Coalbrookdale Coalfield ’,
Ph.D. thesis, Leicester University, 1975, pp. 9-27; RJ.I. Hamblin, I. J. Brown and J. Elwood,
‘M ineral resources of the Coalbrookdale Coalfield ’, M e rc ia n G e o lo g ist, vol. 12, 1969; it is also
presented on Geological Survey sheer SJ60SE, 1:10560. Field evidence for mining is best
covered in Ivor Brown, ‘ Underground in the Ironbridge Gorge ’, In d u s tria l A rc h a e o lo g y R e v iew ,
1979, pp. 158-69, and in reports of the Shropshire M ining and Caving Club.
2 Peter Toghill and K. Chell, ‘Shropshire geology - stratigraphic and tectonic history ’, F ie ld
S tu d ie s, vol. 6, 1984, p. 59.

208
 NOTES

3 M .C. Crosfield and M .S. Johnson, ‘A study of Ballstone and the associated beds ’, baZYXWVUT P ro ­
c e e d in g s o f th e G e o lo g ica l A sso c ia tio n , vol. 25, 1914, pp. 207 — 9; J. Prestwich, op. cit.,
pp. 413-95.
4 Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, B e n th a ll a n d B ro seley W o o d : T h ir d In te r im R e p o rt o f
th e N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1987.
5 SRO, Cooper and Co., box 188 — a lease of 1806 for Tickwood Ironworks.
6 Quoted in Barrie Trinder, T h e In d u stria l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , Chichester, Phillimore,
1981, p. 15.
7 Benthall Tithe M ap, 1844; E a st S h ro p sh ire J o u rn a l, 22 October 1800.
8 A date has been cut into the construction of one kiln.
9 Ivor Brown, ‘The mineral wealth of Coalbrookdale ’, B u lletin o f th e P e a k D istric t M in e s
H isto ric a l S o c ie ty vol. 2, 1965, pp. 255-89; D.A. Holmes, ‘The working of W enlock Lime ­
stone ’, Ironbridge Institute dissertation, 1987.
10 Ove Arup, L im e sto n e M in e s in th e W re kin A re a , R e p o rt fo r S h ro p sh ire C o u n ty C o u n c il,
privately printed, 1986; W ardell Armstrong, L im e sto n e M in e s in th e W re k in A re a : P h a se I R e p o rt
fo r S h ro p sh ire C o u n ty C o u n c il, privately printed, 1984.
11 Stuart Smith, A V iew fr o m th e Iro n B rid g e , Ironbridge, IGMT, 1979; Barrie Trinder, T h e
M o s t E x tra o rd in a ry D is tric t in th e W o rld , Chichester, Phillimore, 1988, pp. 22, 48. These
superb caverns were accessible until very recently, but have now been filled in because of road
collapse.
12 Barrie Trinder, T h e In d u str ia l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , p. 59.
13 M ary M acleod, M ichael Stratton and Barrie Trinder, L la n y m y n e c h H ill: A n A rc h a e o lo g ic a l
a n d H isto ric a l E v a lu a tio n , privately printed for L & R Consultants, Ironbridge, Ironbridge
Institute, 1987.
14 One of the difficulties in documenting the industry is that lime-burning was often
intermittent and done by itinerant specialists who travelled around a circuit of kiln-owners.
15 John Plymley, A G e n e ra l V iew o f th e A g ric u ltu re o f S h ro p sh ire , London, Board of Agric ­
ulture, 1803, p. 344.
16 Lime-burning, like other mining activities, may have been a second employment. The
Post Office Directory of 1856 lists John Patten as lime-burner and barge-owner, although coal­
miner and farmer is a more common link.
17 P. Toghill and K. Chell, op. cit., pp. 59 — 101.
18 The sequence of coals was first published in detail by W illiam Reynolds in J. Plymley, op.
cit., p. 57.
19 R. Tylecote, A H isto ry o f M e ta llu r g y London, The M etals Society, 1976.
20 J. Prestwich, op. cit., p. 259.
21 In 1814 the brick- and tile-maker W illiam Davis of Lloyds Head leased a ‘stink ­
ing coal foot rid ... and sulphur coals ’ from Alexander Brodie (SRO Cooper and Co., box
188).
22 Catherine Clark e t a l., C a u g h ley S a g g a r W o rks: A n A rc h a e o lo g ic a l E v a lu a tio n , Ironbridge,
Ironbridge Institute, 1988, fig. 3.
23 Quoted in M .J.T. Lewis, E a rly W o o d e n R a ilw a y s, London, Routledge, 1970, p. 99.
24 VCHXI, p. 46.
25 Samuel Parsons ’ map of Broseley, c.1621.
26 Catherine Clark, Amanda W inkworth and M ick W orthington, L a d y w o o d B rid g e S ite ,
Iro n b rid g e , T elfo rd : E x c a v a tio n a n d D o c u m e n ta ry R esea rch . A R e p o rt fo r S h ro p sh ire C o u n ty
C o u n c il, Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1990.
27 Broseley Hall Estate M ap, 1728/65, approximate areas of working can be calculated at
53,125 cubic metres, 9375 cubic metres, and 9687 cubic metres (assuming the coal to be
roughly 0.5 m thick). The transition to company working also included limestone — the
M adeley W ood Company also took over the Lincoln Hill works.
28 Anon., ‘Excavations at Lloyds Coppice Engine, Ironbridge ’, unpublished M S., IGM T
library, 1970.

2 09 wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM
 N O TES

29 D. Higgins in M ichael Trueman, baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDC

A rch a e o lo g y in Iro n b rid g e 1 9 8 1 — 1 9 8 5 : W o rk C a rrie d
O u t b y th e Iro n b rid g e G o rg e M u s e u m A rc h a e o lo g ic a l U n it, Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute,
1988, pp. 44 — 54; J.S. Leese, ‘Old English power plants ’, P o w er, vol. 36, 1912, pp. 108-9.
30 Remains of a haystack boiler survive at the Blists Hill brick- and tile-works across the
canal, and may have been moved from one of these engines.
31 Ivor Brown, ‘The Tar Tunnel, Coalport’, S h ro p sh ire N e w sle tte r, vol. 32, 1967, p. 9; Ivor
Brown and Barrie Trinder, T h e T a r T u n n e l, Ironbridge, IGMT, 1979.
32 Fossil tar was also found at Oilhouse Coppice in Coalbrookdale, but there are no visible
remains today. Simpson mentions the extraction of ‘ British oil’ at Coalbrookdale, quoted in
Barrie Trinder, T h e M o s t E x tra o rd in a ry D is tric t in th e W o rld , p. 16.
33 Broseley Tithe M ap, 1840; table in Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, J a c k fie ld a n d
B ro seley: F o u rth In te rim R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989,
p. 35.
34 Ivor Brown, ‘Some mining accidents in the Broseley Field ’, J o u r n a l o f th e W ilk in so n S o ciety,
vol. 8, 1980, pp. 3 — 5.
35 F.R. Gameson, ‘An 8-man pit - an historic beam engine and the craft of Harry Roberts ’,
S h ro p sh ire M a g a z in e , 20 — 1 M arch 1952.
36 IGM T library, LR/IB/1 10.
37 J. Prestwich, op. cit., pp. 413-95. Blunt called the seams ‘spatous ’, and ‘argillaceous ’ (in
C. Hulbert, H isto ry a n d D e sc rip tio n o f th e C o u n ty o f S h ro p sh ire , Shrewsbury, 1837, p. 437;
printed and published by author).
38 The yield was about 35 per cent iron (T. Parton, N o te s o n th e S h ro p sh ire C o a lfie ld , London,
Colliery Guardian Office, 1868). Brown gives the yield as 665 kg per cubic metre (Ivor Brown,
‘M ineral working and land reclamation ’).
39 Calcining is described by Lewis (quoted in Barrie Trinder, T h e M o s t E x tra o rd in a ry D istric t
in th e W o rld , p. 32).
40 A third type of ironstone was found at M adeley, the New M ine ironstone. It was dug at
Styches Pit, and reputedly 6 feet (2 m) thick (TH . W hitehead e t a L , op. cit.).
41 In 1793 — 6, ironstone from Ladywood was valued respectively at £212.10.00 per acre for
‘Pinnystone ’ and £100.17.6 for ‘Crawstone’ (SRO 515/2/187).
42 R.A. M ott, ‘The Coalbrookdale Group Horsehay W orks part I ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e
N e w co m e n S o c ie ty , vol. 31, 1957, pp. 68-70.
43 Ibid., pp. 83 — 4. Svedestierna noted that ‘the M adeley W ood pit iron is some of the best
in England. ... the Craw or Cross stone was a peculiar kind of ironstone and a small quantity
of it along with other mines gave the iron that peculiarly soft quality. ’
44 Ivor Brown, ‘M ineral working and land reclamation ’, p. 114.
45 J. Prestwich, op. cit., pp. 434 — 5; Children ’s Employment Commission, C h ild re n s E m p lo y ­
m e n t C o m m issio n R e p o rt, British Parliamentary Papers 16, 1842, p. 41.
46 These cottages were owned by the Reynolds family until after the mid-nineteenth century,
and one of them is still occupied by descendants of the Brown family for whom they seem to
have been originally built.
47 Ivor Brown, ‘Underground in the Ironbridge Gorge ’, p. 163.
48 Ibid., p. 164; Ove Arup, op. cit., p. 18.
49 Details of the rebuilding of these is included in the minutes of the Proprietors of the Iron
Bridge (IGM T library).
50 Ivor Brown, ‘M ineral working and land reclamation ’, p. 165.
51 Estimate, reproduced in Neil Cossons and Barrie Trinder, T h e Iro n B rid g e , Bradford-on-
Avon, M oonraker Press and IGMT, 1979, p. 21.
52 Townson, quoted in Barrie Trinder, T h e M o st E x tra o rd in a ry D is tric t in th e W o rld , p. 53.
53 John Randall, T h e C la y In d u strie s In c lu d in g th e F ic tile a n d C e ra m ic A r ts o n th e B a n k s o f
th e S e v e rn , M adeley, The Salopian and W est M idland Journal Office, 1877.
54 R.J. Firman and P.E. Firman, ‘A geological approach to the study of medieval bricks ’, T h e
M e r c ia n G e o lo g ist, vol. 2, 1967, pp. 299-317.

210
 NOTES

55 W illey Old Hall, Broseley, built by 1618; soft red bricks always predate harder kiln-fired
bricks whenever both appear in the same building.
56 SRO 1224/3/503 — a lease of 1734 between Samuel Edwards and Richard Beard.
57 Clark and Alfrey, J a c k fie ld a n d B ro seley.
58 N.M . Dawes, ‘History of brick and tile production on the Coalbrookdale Coalfield,
unpublished M S, IGM T library, 1979; A rc h ite c ts' C o m p e n d iu m a n d C a ta lo g u e , 1901; B C W ,
November 1908; Clark and Alfrey, J a c k fie ld a n d B ro se ley , chapter 6.
59 Arthur Young, 13 June 1776, quoted in Barrie Trinder, T h e M o s t E x tra o rd in a ry D istric t
in th e W o rld , p. 34.
60 B C W , M ay 1894, p. 30.
61 B C W , January 1903, p. 332; January 1912, p. 233; November 1886; T. Jones, ‘Impressions
of the Coalbrookdale area ’, unpublished M S, IGM T library, n.d.; Clark and Alfrey, J a c k fie ld
a n d B ro seley, pp. 61 — 3.
62 G e o lo g ic a l S u rv e y a n d M u seu m , 1920, pp. 148-54; Ivor Brown, ‘The mineral wealth of
Coalbrookdale ’, p. 340; Clark and Alfrey, B e n th a ll a n d B ro seley W o o d , chapter 5.
63 Catherine Clark e t a L , op. cit.
64 D.A. Higgins, ‘The clay pipe industry of Broseley and Benthair, Ph.D. thesis, Liverpool
University, 1987.
65 It has also been claimed that the same fine white clay was used for making salt-glazed
stoneware at Jackfield (John M alam, ‘W hite salt-glazed stoneware manufactured at Jackfield ’,
W e st M id la n d s A rc h a e o lo g y , vol. 24, 1981, pp. 45-50), and that pipe clay was the basis of late-
eighteenth-century white earthenwares such as Queensware (S. Shaw, H isto ry o f S ta ffo rd sh ire
P o tte rie s a n d th e R ise a n d P rog ress o f th e M a n u fa c tu r e o f P o tte ry a n d P o rc e la in , Hanley, Simeon
Shaw, 1829).
66 SRO Cooper and Co., Broseley Box 189, 7 M arch 1862, letter from M aws to Harries,
the landlord of the Jackfield Pottery, ‘ ... we do not think you will find any tenant of the
potteries would require the red clay for which we ask ’; he then goes on to offer to buy the site.
The company also offered to buy the clay under Saint M ary ’s Church, which was to be
demolished.
67 Clark and Alfrey, B e n th a ll a n d B ro se le y W o o d .
68 W .A. Smith, ‘A Swedish view of the W est M idlands in 1802 — $ , J o u r n a l o f W e st M id la n d s
S tu d ie s, vol. 3, 1970, pp. 45-54.
69 M .D.G. W anklyn, ‘John W eld of W illey 1585-1665: an enterprising landowner of the
early 17th century ’, J o u r n a l o f th e W ilk in so n S o c ie ty , vol. 3, 1969, p. 96.
70 M inutes of Proprietors of the Iron Bridge, 8 December 1783.
71 W illiams ’s index, IGM T library.
72 SRO 515/5/234, 515/4/100, 515/2/187.
73 SRO 515/8/232.
74 SRO 515/5/62.
75 Ivor Brown, ‘M ineral working and land reclamation ’, p. 481; D.J. Henkel and R.W .
Skempton, ‘A landslide at Jackfield, Shropshire in a heavily overconsolidated clay ’, P ro c e e d in g s
o f th e In te r n a tio n a l C o n fe re n c e o n th e S ta b ility o f E a r th S lo p e s, 1954, pp. 131 — 7.
76 D. Blake-Roberts and G. Blake-Roberts, ‘The results of recent excavations in Coalport,
Shropshire ’, E n g lish C e ra m ic C irc le T ra n sa c tio n s, vol. 2, 1981, pp. 71 — 80.

4 T
gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK
h e h u m a n la n d s c a p e

1 VCH XI, p. 49, on which the next paragraph is also based.

2 The site must have been an improvement on contemporary works such as the ironworks
on the Tern where long leats had to be dug to gain sufficient height for a good flow of water
(Catherine Clark, baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
e t a l., D u n c o te F a rm , A tc h a m : A n A rc h a e o lo g ic a l E v a lu a tio n in A d v a n c e o f th e

211
 N O TES

A 5 B y-p a ss, Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989). Although there was a corn-mill at Calcutts,
the Severn was rarely used for power as the annual rise and fall was too great to allow a wheel
to operate.
3 At W illey one of the furnace pools was created from medieval fish ponds, and at Benthall
and Horsehay earlier mill pools had been used.
4 Arthur Raistrick, D y n a sty o f Iro n fo u n d e rs, London, Longmans, Green & Co., 1953,
p. 107.
5 ‘A n Afternoon View of Coalbrookdale ’, c.1777, by W illiam W illiams (c . 1740-98) shows
a large engine part-way down the valley.
6 R.A. M ott, ‘The Coalbrookdale Group Horsehay W orks part I ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e
N e iu c o m e n S o c ie ty , vol. 31,1957, pp. 271 — 87; R.A. M ott, ‘The Coalbrookdale Group Horsehay
W orks part II ’, T ra n sa ctio n s o f th e N e w c o m e n S o c ie ty , vol. 32, 1959, pp. 43 — 56.
7 Stuart Smith, ‘New light on the Bedlam furnaces, Ironbridge, Telford ’, J o u r n a l o f th e
H isto ric a l M e ta llu rg }' S o c ie ty vol. 13, 1979, pp. 21-30.
8 Except during the floods of 1795 when the water ran back up the tunnel (Barrie Trinder,
personal communication).
9 Charles W ood, 1754, quoted in Barrie Trinder, T h e M o s t E x tra o rd in a ry D is tric t in th e
W orld , Chichester, Phillimore, 1988, p. 21.
10 Barrie Trinder, T h e In d u s tr ia l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , Chichester, Phillimore, 1981,
pp. 273-4.
11 From an archaeological point of view the new blast furnaces built without extensive water­
power systems disappear more readily in the modern landscape. Sites such as Barnet’s Leasow,
Snedshill, Old Park and Hollinswood were much more ephemeral in landscape terms, and are
almost impossible to identify today.
12 Barrie Trinder ( ‘The development of the integrated ironworks in the eighteenth century ’,
T he In stitu te o f M e ta ls H a n d b o o k a n d L is t o f M e m b e rs, 1988, pp. 217 — 26) suggests that charcoal
supplies were equally important.
13 Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, B e n th a ll a n d B ro se le y W o o d : T h ir d In te rim R e p o rt o f
th e N u ffie ld S u r v e y Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1987, pp. 77-85.
14 R.B. M atkin, ‘John Rennie ’s diary of a journey through northern England 1784 ’, E a st
K en t M a r itim e T ru st H isto ric a l S tu d y no. 2, 1986, p. 24.
15 Hitchcock ’s map o f Benthall 1835, SRO 3956; S. Peskin, ‘Early recollections of Coal-
ookdale and some o f its villages and incidental events ’, unpublished M S, IGM T library,
)48.
16 J.U. Neff, T h e R ise o f th e B ritish C o a l In d u str y London, Routledge, 1932; R.F. Savage and
L.D. Smith, ‘The waggonways and plateways of east Shropshire ’, thesis, School of Architecture,
University of Birmingham, 1965; M .J.T. Lewis, E a rly W o o d e n R a ilw a y s, London, Routledge,
1970.
17 Quoted in Lewis, ibid., p. 96.
18 T h e L o c o m o tiv e M a g a zin e , 1917; Barrie Trinder, T h e M o st E x tra o rd in a ry D is tr ic t in th e
W o rld , pp.72 — 3.
19 Quoted in M .J.T. Lewis, op. cit., p. 241.
20 Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, J a c k fie ld a n d B ro seley: F o u rth In te r im R e p o rt o f th e
N u ffie ld S u r v e y Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989, p. 29.
21 N.W Jones, ‘A wooden waggon way at Bedlam Furnace, Ironbridge ’, P o st-m e d ie v a l
A rc h a e o lo g y vol. 21, 1987, pp. 259-62.
22 Barrie Trinder, T h e In d u s tr ia l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , p. 73.
23 M ark Horton and David de Haan, personal communication.
24 M ichael Trueman, A rc h a e o lo g y in Iro n b rid g e 1 9 8 1 — 5 : W o rk C a rried O u t b y th e Iro n b rid g e
G o rg e M u se u m A rc h a e o lo g y U n it, Ironbridge, IGMAU, 1988, p. 45.
25 S. Simpson, quoted in Barrie Trinder, T h e M o s t E x tra o rd in a ry D is tr ic t in th e W o rld .
26 Clark and Alfrey, B e n th a ll a n d B rose le y W o o d , p. 51; Clark and Alfrey,J a c k fie ld a n d B ro se le y
p. 136.

212 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
 NOTES

27 Barrie Trinder, T baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

h e In d u stria l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , p. 76.
28 R. Terry, ‘A n archaeological survey of the W illey Valley ’, essay, Ironbridge Institute, 1989,
gives details of survival to the north of the Gorge.
29 George Youngs map of 1788, Boulton and W att Collection, Birmingham Library.
30 From the evidence of Reynolds ’ sketchbook.
31 Lease map of Coalbrookdale, 1805, SRO 1681/138; J. and C. Greenwoods map of the
county of Salop, 1827, SBL.
32 Barrie Trinder, C o a lb ro o k d a le 1 8 0 1 : A C o n te m p o ra ry D e sc rip tio n , Ironbridge, IGMT,
1979.
33 R. Beale, T h e O ld W in d : A P re lim in a ry R e p o rt, Ironbridge, IGM AU, 1988.
34 Shropshire Canal Company minutes, quoted in Barrie Trinder, T h e In d u stria l R e v o lu tio n
in S h ro p sh ire , p. 82.
35 M ichael Trueman, op. cit., p. 38.
36 S. Duckworth, ‘ Benthall to Coalport: an interpretive assessment of the south bank of the
River Severn in the Ironbridge Gorge ’, dissertation, Ironbridge Institute, 1988.
37 G. Young ’s map of 1786, SRO 1681/179.
38 M entioned in Barrie Trinder, C o a lb ro o k d a le 1 8 0 1 : the warehouse was taken over by the
L&NW R as part of their commitment to retaining the canal-river interchanges, and partly
demolished by 1902: Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, C o a lp o rt a n d B lists H ill: S e c o n d In te rim
R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1986, pp. 77 — 9; Barrie Trinder,
C o a lp o rt N e w T o w n , Ironbridge, IGM T, 1978.
39 The history of the Gorge ’s bridges can be found in A. Blackwall, H is to r ic B rid g e s o f
S h ro p sh ire , Shrewsbury, Shropshire Libraries and the Highways and Transport Departm ent,
1985, with some additional material in Catherine Clark, A rc h a e o lo g ic a l a n d H is to r ic a l Issu es
R e la tin g to th e P ro p o se d N e w R o a d B rid g e a t L a d y w o o d , Iro n b rid g e : A R e p o r t fo r E n g lish H e rita g e,
Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989.
40 It may be that these ferries in turn relate to the sites of fords, cleared out of the river in
1741 (Barrie Trinder, T h e In d u stria l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , p. 69). Ownership, too, was a
relevant factor in deciding what land would be available for a bridge, so bridges tended to be
built where there was a demonstrable benefit to rhe landowner.
41 Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, C o a lb ro o k d a le : F irst In te rim R e p o r t o f th e N u ffie ld
S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1986, p. 56.
42 T h e E n g in e e r, T J June 1924, p. 725; M ark Harwood-Little, personal com m unication.
43 Neil Cossons and Barrie Trinder, T h e Iro n B rid g e , Bradford-on-Avon, M oonraker Press,
1979, pp. 119-25; A. Blackwall, op. cit., pp. 101-12.
44 Barrie Trinder, C o a lb ro o k d a le 1 8 0 1 .
45 Catherine Clark, A rch a e o lo g ic a l a n d H isto ric a l Issu es R e la tin g to th e P ro p o se d N e w R o a d
B rid g e a t L a d y w o o d , Iro n b rid g e , A R e p o rt fo r E n g lish H e rita g e , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute,
1989, chapter 2.
46 J. Plymley, A G e n e ra l V iew o f th e A g ric u ltu re o f S h ro p sh ire , London, Board of Agriculture,
1803, p. 273.
47 D.A. Higgins, ‘The clay pipe industry of Broseley and gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK
B e n t h a ll ’ , Ph.D. thesis, University
of Liverpool, 1987.
48 M ining map of 1676, SRO 3703/10.
49 Barrie Trinder, T h e In d u stria l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , pp. 86ff.; Neil Cossons and Barrie
Trinder, op. cit., p. 39.
50 M inutes of the Proprietors of the Iron Bridge, 15 September 1775. The contractor, from
1776 at least, was Abraham Darby, who continued to maintain the road.
51 ‘Furnace cinders 3 tons to the yard in length with 30 loads of ashes to cover the cinders ’
were used on one route (M inutes of Proprietors of the Iron Bridge, 8 Decem ber 1783). W aste
industrial material including slag, pipe-waste and tiles was often used for road surfacing (see
chapter 2 above). Recent excavations at Duncote have revealed an eighteenth-century road also

213
 NOTES

paved with iron slag (Catherine Clark and Amanda W inkworth, D baZYXWVUTSRQ
u n c o te F a rm , A tc h a m ,
Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1990.
52 The distinction between roads and railways is not always clear. W agonways, gateways,
wind-ways, way-boards and horseways are some of the terms used locally on leases and on
maps (see derailed discussions in M .J.T. Lewis, op. cit., p. 256, and R.F. Savage and L.D.
Smith, pp. 5-7.
53 M inutes of the Proprietors of the Iron Bridge, 17 July 1782.
54 John M arshall, T h e S e v e rn V a lley R a iliv a y , Newton Abbot, David 8 c Charles, 1989.
55 Catherine Clark, op. cit., p. 11.
56 This must be the explanation for dumps of Coalport waste on the south bank of the river
towards Bridgnorth. gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

5 I n d u s t r i a l b u i ld in g s i n t h e l a n d s c a p e

1 E. Jones, In d u s tria l A rch itec tu re in B rita in , 1 7 5 0 -1 9 3 9 , London, Batsford, 1985; J.M .

Richards, T h e F u n c tio n a l T ra d itio n in E a rly In d u s tr ia l B u ild in g s, London, Architectural Press,
1958; A.W . Skempton and H.R. Johnston, ‘The first iron frames ’, A r c h ite c tu r a l Review, vol.
131, 1962, p. 176.
2 The term ‘factor’ originally referred to an agent or a trader, and a factory was a repository
for his goods. It was only in the Health and M orals of Apprentices Act of 1802 that the term
was formally recorded as referring to manufacturing buildings (previously ‘shop ’ might have
been used). Ure ’s (1835) definition of the factory system referred specifically to a ‘combined
operation of many orders of work people in tending ... a series of productive machines
continuously impelled by a central power ’. The definition excluded works in which the
mechanism did not form a connected series. The early nineteenth-century usage became
enshrined in a series of acts referring to factories, and it was only in 1864 that the legislation
was widened, first to cover domestic industry, and later (1867, 1878) to a wide range of
industrial premises (B.L. Hutchins and A. Hanson, A H isto ry o f F a c to ry L e g isla tio n , London,
P.S. King & Son, 1903). In T h e D e v elo p m e n t o f th e F a cto ry, London, Cornmarket, 1970,
Jennifer Tann adopts the wider definition of the factory as being ‘means of production
concentrated in one place ’.
3 S.D. Chapman, T h e C o tto n In d u s tr y in th e In d u s tr ia l R e v o lu tio n , London, M acmillan,
1987, and Jennifer Tann, T h e D e v elo p m e n t o f th e F a c to ry , for example, both look at the
evolution of the factory in these terms but with particular emphasis on textiles.
4 W .H. Pierson, ‘Notes on early industrial architecture in England ’, J o u r n a l o f th e S o c ie ty o f
A rc h ite c tu r a l H isto ria n s, vol. 8, 1949, pp. 1 — 31, sets out a clear distinction between the
development of the multistorey factory of light industries, and the complexes of heavier
industries such as ironworking, characterised by large, open, single-storey structures of a ‘low
horizontality ’.
5 For example, windmills and non-ferrous metal mines.
6 E. Jones, op. cit., p. 95. M ost studies have identified a path whereby industrial architecture
draws upon constructional techniques and aesthetics pioneered through engineering (N.
Pevsner, P io n e e rs o f In d u s tria l D e sig n : F ro m W illia m M o rris to W a lte r G ro p iu s, Harmondsworth,
Penguin, 1975), while vernacular traditions were routed by the development of Britain ’s railway
network and the widespread shipm ent of mass-produced building materials from the 1850s
(Alec Clifton Taylor, T h e P a tte rn o f E n g lish B u ild in g , London, Faber, 1972).
7 The term ‘industrial vernacular ’ is commonly applied to domestic buildings ‘whose
construction is almost entirely in the hands of a full-time specialist’ (B.K. Roberts, R u r a l
S e ttle m e n t, Basingstoke, M acmillan Education, 1987).
8 Eric M ercer, E n g lish V e rn a c u la r H o u se s, London, HM SO, 1979, p. 196, although Freddie
Charles, who was involved in the restoration of the structure, suggests that the building is a
com bined workshop and dwelling, originally a blacksmith ’s with a central hearth.

214
 NOTES

9 VCH XI, p. 48; John Randall, baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

A H isto ry o fM a d e le y , Shrewsbury, Salop County Library,
1880 reprinted 1975, p. 60.
10 H. Thom pson and A. W inkworth, L ittle D a tu ley 1 9 8 3 — 8 5 , Ironbridge, IGMAU, 1988.
11 Coal-measure sandstone was frequently used in Ironbridge in retaining walls or foun ­
dations built against earth. For example, the late-nineteenth-ccntury Glynwed engineering
building has stone foundations.
12 M .C. Horton, N e w d a le : A n In d u str ia l T o w n sh ip o f th e M id -E ig h te e n th C e n tu ry , Ironbridge,
Ironbridge Institute, 1987.
13 The Boring M ill is another industrial building in Coalbrookdale, but the date of the
present structure is problematic. There was a boring mill there in 1734, which was rebuilt in
1780 (Arthur Raistrick, D y n a sty o f Iro n fo u n d e rs, London, Longmans, Green & Co., 1953,
p. 152; Barrie Trinder, C o a lb ro o k d a le 1 8 0 1 : A C o n te m p o ra ry D e sc rip tio n , Ironbridge, IGM T,
1979). The present structure is probably the 1780 building, but could be more recent — it is a
brick shed, with steep gabled roof, kingpost trusses with iron ties, and two massive openings,
one containing a huge wooden door. It has been built on earlier footings.
14 E. Jones, op. cit.
15 Catherine Clark, H o rse h a y Iro n w o rk s, S h ro p sh ire , A R e p o rt fo r W re k in D is tr ic t C o u n c il,
Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989.
16 The building seems to be iron-supported; however, the illustration is somewhat idealised -
it suggests four bays rather than three, and arches of a slightly different profile.
17 W . Norris, ‘Horsehay Ironworks’, unpublished M S, IGM T library, 1876.
18 Ibid.
19 There were obvious advantages to including a crane within a building, but the major
limitation at the erecting shops was space. At Horsehay the large travelling cranes were in the
open by 1902.
20 Catherine Clark, op. cit.
21 W . Buist, A survey of the wing shop, one of the buildings belonging to the Coalbrookdale
Company ’, assignment, Ironbridge Institute, 1990-1.
22 See illustration of Dowlais Ironworks, r.1840, in E. Jones, op. cit.
23 W .H. Pierson, ‘Notes on early industrial architecture in England ’, J o u r n a l o f th e S o c ie ty o f
A rch ite c tu ra l H isto ria n s, vol. 8, 1949, p. 9.
24 The company used an engraving by W W Law entitled ‘View of Coalbrookdale ’ (IGM T
CBD59.82).
25 The original function of rhe building is not known, although by 1884 it was used as the
company ’s commercial offices.
26 The unsuitability of multistorey structures for ironworking is noted in the problems over
the Bridgewater foundry, designed so as to be converted to a textile mill if need be (E. Jones,
op. cit., p. 100).
27 Ibid., p. 112, although there are similarities to the show warehouses of the textile
manufacturers of Leeds, Bradford, M anchester and Barley.
28 D.M . Smith, ‘Industrial architecture in the Potteries ’, N o r th S ta ffo rd sh ire J o u r n a l o f F ie ld
S tu d ie s, vol. 5, 1965, p. 82; S. Beaver, ‘The Potteries: a study in the evolution of a cultural
landscape ’, In s titu te o f B ritish G e o g ra p h e rs T ra n sa c tio n s a n d P a p ers, vol. 4, 1964, p. 12.
29 Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, C o a lp o rt a n d B lists H ill: T h ir d In te r im R e p o rt o f th e
N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1987, pp. 66 — 70.
30 In 1805 this works comprised ‘3 kilns, hovels, smoke houses, warehouse, stock of
earthenware etc.’ (SRO 4791/1/5).
31 Three ar Jackfield, John M iles ’ pottery at Ladywood, two potteries at Benthall and one at
Coalmoor, Little W enlock.
32 Larissa Rimmell, ‘A n archaeological and historical study of the eighteenth-century pottery
industry at Jackfield, Shropshire ’, thesis, Ironbridge Institute, 1983.
33 VCH II, 1967.

215
 NOTES

baZYXWVUTSRQPON
34 A.W .J. Houghton, ‘Caughley Porcelain W orks near Broseley, Salop ’, In d u stria l A rc h a eo lo g y
M a g a z in e , vol. 5, 1968, pp. 184 — 192; John Randall, T h e C la y In d u strie s In c lu d in g th e F ictile
a n d C e ra m ic A r ts o n th e B a n k s o f th e S e v e rn , M adeley, The Salopian and W est M idland Journal
Office, 1877 , pp. 30-3; illustration in S a lo p ia n M o n th ly J o u r n a l April 1875.
35 W . Chaffers, T h e N e w C h a ffe rs M a r k s a n d M o n o g ra m s o n P o tte ry a n d P o rc e la in , London,
Reeves & Turner, 1912, p. 766.
36 Thomas Bryans map of Caughley, 1780, SRO 1224.
37 At the same time Caughley Hall was rebuilt, and Inert Farm remodelled.
38 R.S. Edmundson, ‘Coalport China W orks, Shropshire: a comparative study of the prem ­
ises and the background to their study ’, In d u s tria l A rc h a e o lo g y R e v ie w , vol. 3, 1979, p. 124.
39 R.S. Edmundson, ‘Bradley and Co., Coalport Pottery 1796 — 1800 ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e
N o r th e r n C e ra m ic S o c ie ty vol. 4, 1981, pp. 127 — 55; D. Blake Roberts, and G. Blake Roberts,
‘The results of recent excavations in Coalport, Shropshire ’, E n g lish C e ra m ic C irc le T ra n sa c tio n s,
vol. 2, 1981, pp. 71-80.
40 R.S. Edmundson, op. cit., p. 126.
41 Reynolds deliberately encouraged industrial development, and soon attracted a timber ­
yard, chainworks, ropeworks, brickworks and bag factory, all of which he said were ‘united like
links in a chain ’. He also built at least 30 houses, and had a vision of a chemical works which
was never completed. The area never did grow into a centre for settlement, but was a success
as a transport point.
42 It is also radically different from the other row of cottages built at the same time, but not
converted — Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, C o a lp o rt a n d B lists H ill: S e c o n d In te rim R e p o rt
o f th e N u ffie ld S u r v e y Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1988, p. 60.
43 W H . Pyne, M ic ro c o sm : O r a P ic tu re sq u e D e lin e a tio n o f th e A rts, A g ric u ltu re s a n d In d u strie s
o f G re a t B rita in , Luton, Luton M useum, 1808, reprinted 1974.
44 SRO 1224/3/503.
45 Arthur Raistrick, op. cit., pp. 87-8.
46 Broseley Tithe M ap, 1840. In the 1850s, tiles were always dried under cover, bricks less
often so (E. Dobson in F. Celoria, ed., J o u r n a l o f C e ra m ic H is to r y vol. 5, 1971, p. 42).
47 This impression of almost casual organisation is borne out by the evidence of the Children ’s
Employment Commission of 1862; works relied on independent contractors, who would bring
their own children to help and be responsible for paying them. Payment was by piecework,
and even the fireman responsible for burning the bricks was paid by results. Patent brickmaking
presses were available by 1850 but there is little evidence for the use of machine-made bricks
locally. Presses were common in the mass-production of bricks for railways but the railways
came late to rhe area, and even then bricks were supplied from elsewhere.
48 Directory evidence (Pigot’s, for example), available by the 1850s, shows a standard range
of output, which typically included ‘plain and ornamental pressed roof-tiles, ridge, hop and
valley tiles in shades of red and brindled ’, as well as bricks and floor-tiles.
49 Clark and Alfrey, C o a lp o rt a n d B lists H ill, p. 60.
50 M . Ham mond, ‘The Blists Hill Brickworks project’, unpublished M S, IGM T library,
1979; N.M . Dawes, ‘ History of brick and tile production on the Coalbrookdale Coalfield ’,
unpublished M S, IGM T library, 1979; M ark Rowland Jones in Clark and Alfrey, C o a lp o rt a n d
B lists H ill, pp. 28-35. Elsewhere, isolated buildings survive, including a small office and clay ­
grinding shed at the Dunge works (R. Pickering, ‘The Dunge Brick and Tile W orks ’, thesis,
Ironbridge Institute, 1988), a shed at the Rock W orks, and a single shed now used as a lorry
garage. M ost of these buildings have been considerably altered and contain no equipment in
situ .
51 Broseley Tithe M ap, 1840.
52 Further examples can be seen in A.J. M ugridge, B ric k a n d T ile M a n u fa c to rie s in th e S e v e rn
G o rg e, Jackfield, Orchard Press, 1987. Recently a small brickworks of this type with its kiln
and drying shed intact has been identified at Bourton, to the south of M uch W enlock.

216
 NOTES

53 In comparison to the 4 million tiles or 1.5 million bricks or a combination of both

produced at rhe original site. (N.M. Dawes, op. cit).
54 One drying shed survives at Jackfield, now a lorry garage; built by 1883, it is now brick
with a machine-made decorative tiled roof, pierced by more recent roof lights. Regular brick
piers support roof trusses, and there are traces of a boiler base and chimney at the south end.
Another shed survives partly intact at the Rock metal recycling works. A small clay-preparation
shed associated with the Broseley Tileries stands near the Dunge.
55 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
B C W , 1894 and January 1903.
56 A.T. Herbert, ‘Jackfield decorative tiles in use ’, In d u str ia l A rc h a e o lo g y R e v ie w , vol. 3, 1979,
pp. 146 — 7.
57 L. Jewitt, C e ra m ic A r t o f G re a t B rita in , London, Virtue, 1878.
58 The work was under the supervision of Peter Stephen, a Coalport china modeller. M intons
of Stoke threatened legal action, and production ceased (VCH forthcoming, and John Randall,
B ro se le y a n d Its S u rro u n d in g s, M adeley, The Salopian and W est M idland Journal Office, 1879,
p. 135.
59 L. Jewitt, op. cit., p. 182.
60 A fire of 1856 destroyed a large order.
61 M ost of the major patents — for example, mill machinery for the dry process, the steam
blunger, and steam press for dry-pressed tiles - were taken out whilst the M aw brothers were
at Benthall.
62 In 1862 the company considered buying the Jackfield Pottery, and had ‘lately commenced
a distinct branch of manufacture for which the Jackfield Potteries might be made available but
the necessary alteration and improvement would be such that no tenant would be inclined ’
Il
(SRO 1681/189). The statement may refer to the production of majolica.
63 SRO 1681/189.
64 By 1870 dust-pressed tiles were being made. Two colour geometric tiles in patterns of
four and eight were found from these partnerships during archaeological investigations.
65 G. Kay, ‘M inton, Hollins and Co. The tile factory in Shelton Old Road, Stoke on Trent’,
dissertation, Ironbridge Institute, 1988; TA. Lockett, C o lle c tin g V ic to ria n T iles, London,
Antique Collectors Club, 1982; J. Barnard, V ic to ria n C e ra m ic T ile s, London, Studio Vista,
1972.
66 Excavations by IGMALJ confirm that the production of tiles followed pottery at the old
kiln; in addition, the 1874 engraving shows altered buildings on the south-western corner.
67 G. Kay, op. cit.
68 John Randall, B ro se le y a n d Its S u rro u n d in g s, pp. 146-7.
69 W here all of the machinery was designed and executed by M r George Kirk of
Etruria Ironworks, except the patent clay presses of M essrs Needham and Kite { T h e B u ild e r,
1869).
70 The four kilns in the illustration of 1874 are up-draught, and in a position different from
the remains of those that can be seen today.
71 A. Pears, ‘M aw and Company: 1900-1910 ’, dissertation, Ironbridge Institute, 1989.
72 SRO 1681/189.
73 And still is. M any examples can be seen in Telford, in the Black Country, the Leeds Street jihgfedcbaZYX
area of Liverpool, and in old textile mills.
74 Apportionments to the Coalbrookdale lease maps of 1805, 1827 and 1838 include
references such as ‘Old machine house, one tenement’, and ‘hammer engine, now a tenement ’,
quoted in Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, C o a lb ro o k d a le : F irst In te rim R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld
S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1986, p. 211.
75 This information comes from the many directories for the area including Pigot (1835,
1838) and Kelly ’s (1856-1941).
76 See, for example, D. Hey, R u r a l M e ta lw o rke rs o f th e S h e ffie ld R e g io n : A S tu d y o f R u r a l
In d u stry B e fo re th e In d u stria l R e v o lu tio n , Leicester, Leicester University Press, 1972; M arie

I
217 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
 NOTES

Rowlands, baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
M a ste rs a n d M e n in th e W est M id la n d s Iro n T ra d es B e fo re th e In d u s tr ia l R e v o lu tio n ,
M anchester, M anchester University Press, 1975; Paul Collins, W a lsa ll L e a th e r In d u stry , Iron-
bridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989.
77 N. Smith, ‘A n investigation into the commercial life, trades, and craft-industries of
nineteenth-century M uch W enlock ’, dissertation, Ironbridge Institute, 1989.
78 Government initiative also encouraged the Coventry Tool and Gauge Company to move
into a set of outbuildings in M adeley in 1941, where they made high-precision tools until
1980. Details of twentieth-century industries come from W illiams’ index, IGM T library.
79 Kenneth Hudson, F o o d C lo th e s a n d S h e lte r, London, John Baker, 1978, chapter 5.
80 Andrew Ure, T h e P h ilo so p h y o f M a n u fa c tu re s, London, Bohn, 1835.
81 Jennifer Tann, op. cit.
82 W .H. Pierson, op. cit., notes this in early industrial structures. gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO

6 L a n d s c a p e o f h o u s in g : t h e g e o g r a p h y o f s e t t le m e n t

1 The Torrington Diaries: Barrie Trinder, T h e M o s t E x tra o rd in a ry D is tric t in th e W o rld ,

London and Chichester, Phillimore, 1977, p. 34.
2 Daniel Defoe, A T o u r th ro u g h th e W h o le Is la n d o f G re a t B r ita in , first published 1724 — 6;
this edition, Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1979, pp. 491-2.
3 VCH XI pp. 45-6; above, chapter 2.
4 VCH XI, p. 28; VCH X (draft M S, Broseley); VCH X (draft M S, Benthall).
5 Samuel Parsons ’ map of Broseley, c.1620, SRO 1224/1/32.
6 M .D.G. W anklyn, ‘Industrial development in the Ironbridge Gorge before Abraham
Darby ’, W e st M id la n d s S tu d ie s, vol. 15, 1982, pp. 3 — 7.
7 VCH XI, p. 28; SRO 2280/2/10.
8 Herefordshire Record Office, Diocesan Probate Records.
9 See below, chapter 8; a detailed inventory of early buildings and discussion of the primary
sources available for their study are contained in Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, interim
reports of the Nuffield Survey, C o a lb ro o k d a le , Iro n b rid g e , J a c k fie ld and B e n th a ll, Ironbridge
Institute, 1985-8.
10 For Bedlam Hall, see H.W . Forrest, T h e O ld H o u se s o f W e n lo c k , Shrewsbury, W ilding &
Son, 1922, p. 100; for discussion of the evidence for early housing in this area see Clark and
Alfrey, Iro n b rid g e , forthcoming.
11 VCH X (draft M S).
12 VCH X (draft M S).
13 See above, chapter 2; Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, J a c k fie ld a n d B ro seley: F o u rth
In ter im R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u r v e y Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989, provides a more
detailed discussion of the documentary, archaeological and architectural sources for this area.
14 This settlement pattern is shown in Parsons ’ map of Broseley, SRO 1224/1/32, and the
Broseley Estate Book, Shrewsbury Public Library collection (SPL); it can also be traced through
surviving buildings and the photographic records of buildings which survived into the twentieth
century, in the archives of SPL and Ironbridge Gorge M useum Trust (IGM T).
15 ‘The Shropshire Hearth Tax return of 1672 ’, S h ro p sh ire A rc h a e o lo g ic a l a n d P a rish R e g iste r
S o c ie ty 1949; Adam Crom pton ’s house became ‘ The Dog and Duck ’ - along with Lloyds Hall
it survived as a row of cottages until c.1950. There are photographs of both these houses in
the archives of IGM T and SPL; Herefordshire Record Office Diocesan Probate Records.
16 Probate inventories, which often give details of occupation and personal wealth, provide
valuable evidence on who lived in the houses of this period; for the organisation of early mining
activity, see above, chapter 3.
17 W anklyn, op. cit.
18 Jeremy Lowe, W e lsh In d u str ia l W o rk e rs H o u sin g , Cardiff, National M useum of W ales,
1977.

218
 N O TES

baZYXWVUTSRQPON
19 VCH X (draft M S, Broseley); W anklyn, op. cit.; J.U. Neff, T h e R ise o f th e B ritish C o a l
In d u stry , London, Geo. Routledge &: Sons Ltd, 1932, pp. 308 — 9.
20 Probate inventories are a valuable source of information about the organisation of the
domestic economy: stock-keeping was far less common in the Gorge than elsewhere in the
East Shropshire Coalfield at this time (Barrie Trinder, personal communication); see also Barrie
Trinder and Jeff Cox, Y e o m e n a n d C o llie rs in T elfo rd , London, Phillimore, 1980,
pp. 70-2.
21 The process of enclosure and the use of the woodlands are discussed in VCH XI, pp. 40-
4.
22 The site of the former village adjacent to Benthall Hall and Church is marked by the
remains of house platforms near an area of ridge and furrow — the earliest houses to the west
of the parish date from the late seventeenth century, though documentary records suggest that
the settlement of miners in the parish was taking place by at least 1630: Catherine Clark and
Judith Alfrey, B e n th a ll a n d B ro se le y W o o d : T h ir d In te r im R e p o rt o f th e N u fp e ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge,
Ironbridge Institute, 1987, pp. 25-30 and 202; VCH X (draft M S, Benthall).
23 VCH XI, pp. 29 and 36; title deeds in SRO 1681 and 1987 enable the pattern of
development of Furnace Bank Farm in upper Coalbrookdale to be traced in detail: they show
that, although this farm was largely sold off in small parcels after 1705, these plots were taken
from coppice land rather than fields: even in 1780, 35 acres of the original 42 acres of
agricultural land remained.
24 VCH X (draft M S, Broseley); W anklyn, op. cit.
25 Parsons ’ map, SRO 1224/1/32.
26 See above, chapter 2; Clark and Alfrey, J a c k fie ld a n d B ro se le y
2 7 See above, chapter 2 for the roles of Benthall, Clifford, Brooke e t a L in the early
exploitation of resources.
28 J.D. Chambers and G.E. M ingay, T h e A g r ic u ltu ra l R e v o lu tio n , 1 7 5 0 -1 8 0 0 , London, Bats-
ford, 1966, pp. 96 — 104; E.L. Jones, ‘Agricultural origins of industry ’, P a st a n d P re se n t, vol. 40,
1968, pp. 58-71; Joan Thirsk, ‘Industriesin the countryside ’, in FJ. Fisher, E ssays in th e E co n om ic
a n d S o c ia l H is to r y o f T u d o r a n d S tu a r t E n g la n d , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1961,
pp. 70-88; M arie B. Rowlands, M a ste rs a n d M e n in th e W est M id la n d s M e ta h u a re T rad es before
th e In d u s tr ia l R e v o lu tio n , M anchester, M anchester University Press, 1975, p. 5; W .G. Hoskins,
T h e M id la n d P e a sa n t, London, M acmillan & Co. Ltd, 1957, pp. 227 — 8, 247 — 76.
29 Detailed discussions of the buildings of this phase are contained in the interim reports of
the Nuffield Survey; Trinder, T h e M o s t E x tra o rd in a ry D istric t in th e W o rld , is an anthology of
visitor ’s descriptions of the Gorge; Stuart Smith, A V ie w fr o m th e Iro n B rid g e , Ironbridge,
Ironbridge Gorge M useum Trust, 1979, brings together the principal artists ’ views of the
Gorge; the principal deed collections which relate to the development of land in the Gorge are
contained in SRO 1681 and SRO 1987: there is a detailed discussion of these sources in
Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, C o a lb ro o k d a le : F irst In te rim R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u rvey
Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1986.
30 Barrie Trinder, ‘The open village in industrial Britain ’, in M arie Nisser, ed., In d u stria l
H e rita g e : T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e T h ird In te r n a tio n a l C o n fe re n c e o n th e C o n se rva tio n o f In d u stria l
M o n u m e n ts, Stockholm, 1981, pp. 375-6; B.A. Holderness, ‘Open and close parishes in
England in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries ’, A g r ic u ltu ra l H isto ry R e v ie w , vol. 20, 1972,
pp. 126-39.
31 VCH XI, p. 29; Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, Iro n b rid g e : F ifth In te rim R e p o rt o f th e
N u ffie ld S u rv e y Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, forthcoming.
32 Trinder, T h e M o s t E x tra o rd in a ry D is tric t in th e W o rld , p. 19.
33 Smith, op. cit., pp. 14 — 15.
34 Ibid.; Clark and Alfrey, C o a lb ro o k d a le .
35 Rosehill and Dale House are both pictured by Vivares in 1758; title deeds recording the
building of these houses are SRO 1681/31 and SRO 1681/179; Sunnyside is also pictured by

219
 NOTES

Vivares; its building is recorded in a memorandum in SRO 1681. Photographed prior to its
demolition in 1856. IGM T 1984.6457 and 6440.
36 The Tobacco House and Springhill are both mid-eighteenth century: W oodside House is
apparently also substantially of this period, though refronted c.1830; Vivares also records
another large mid-eighteenth-century house near the site of the present British Legion Club.
37 VCH XI, p. 28; Clark and Alfrey, baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
Iro n b rid g e .
38 Benthall Old Vicarage was also built c. 1700: Clark and Alfrey, B e n th a ll a n d B ro se le y W o o d ,
pp. 225-6.
39 Acquisition of land in upper Coalbrookdale by the Darby family is documented in title
deeds in SRO 1987.
40 W H.B. Court, T h e R ise o f th e M id la n d In d u strie s 1 6 0 0 — 1 8 3 8 , London, Oxford University
Press, 1938.
41 W anklyn, op. cir.
42 The suburban status of Broseley W ood is discussed in Clark and Alfrey, B e n th a ll a n d
B ro se le y W o o d ', rhe process by which the settlements of Coalbrookdale, Coalport, M adeley
W ood and Jackfield acquired a quasi-suburban status in relation to Ironbridge during the first
half of the nineteenth century is discussed below.
43 The influence of tenurial patterns in the riverside communities is discussed in Clark and
Alfrey, J a c k fie ld a n d B ro se le y
44 Broseley Estate Book; Clark and Alfrey, J a c k fie ld a n d B ro se le y .
45 J.U. Neff, op. cit., pp. 308 — 9; VCH X (Broseley draft M S).
46 W .H.B. Court, op. cit.; M arie Rowlands, ‘Society and industry in the W est M idlands at
the end of the seventeenth century ’, M id la n d H is to r y , vol. 4, 1977, pp. 48-60.
47 W anklyn, op. cir.
48 The gradual dim inution of plot sizes as a consequence of land development is discussed
below, in chapter 7; in contrast to the Gorge, eighteenth-century lead-miners in the Pennines
mixed farming and mining, and scattered hamlets had several acres of meadow and pasture
even in the mid-nineteenth century (John Rule, T h e L a b o u r in g C la sses in E a rly In d u s tr ia l
E n g la n d , London, Longman, 1987, pp. 82 — 4; Ian Blanchard, ‘ M iners and the agricultural
community ’, A g r ic u ltu ra l H isto ry R e v ie w , vol. 20, 1970, pp. 96 — 106).
49 J. Langton, G e o g ra p h ic a l C h a n g e a n d In d u stria l R e v o lu tio n : C o a lm in in g in S o u th -W e st
L a n c a sh ire , 1 5 9 0 — 1 9 0 0 , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1979.
50 Clark and Alfrey, B e n th a ll a n d B ro se le y W o o d , p. 103; below, chapter 8.
51 R.W . Brunskill, T ra d itio n a l B u ild in g s o f B r ita in , London, Gollancz, 1981, p. 25; M .W .
Barley, T h e E n g lish F a rm h o u se a n d C o tta g e , London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1961.
52 Clark and Alfrey, B e n th a ll a n d B ro seley W o o d , chapter 3.
53 Clark and Alfrey, Iro n b rid g e , Trinder ‘The open village in industrial Britain ’.
54 This map details ‘W arehouse and Tenement, W arehouse and Thomas Finches House ’;
title deeds to property in upper Coalbrookdale also suggest that house and workplace were
pmetimes in the same building: SRO 1987/7/3-4 describes a house with an adjacent smiths
lop in 1773, the shop converted into a dwelling by 1777; the Pan shops at the lower end of
kialbrookdale were so described on Thomas Slaughter ’s map of 1775 in IGM T library, but
iave all the appearance of ordinary domestic buildings of the early eighteenth century.
55 Vivares’ engraving of upper Coalbrookdale shows both patterns of development; Clark
and Alfrey, C o a lb ro o k d a le .
56 Joan Thirsk, ‘Industries in the countryside ’; David Hey, T h e R u r a l M e ta lw o rk e rs o f th e
S h e ffie ld , R e g io n : A S tu d y o f R u r a l In d u stry b e fo re th e In d u str ia l R e v o lu tio n , Leicester, Leicester
University Press, 1972; M arie Rowlands, M a ste rs a n d M e n in th e M id la n d s Iro n T rades-, E.L.
Jones, ‘The agricultural origins of industry ’; Pauline Frost, ‘Yeomen and metalsmiths: livestock
in the dual economy in south Staffordshire, 1560 — 1720 ’, A g r ic u ltu r a l H isto ry R e v ie w , vol. 29,
1981, pp. 29 — 41.
57 Hoskins, op. cit., chapter 10.

2 20 wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPO
 N O TES

58 Richard Dennis and Hugh Clout, baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

A S o c ia l G e o g ra p h y o f E n g la n d a n d W a les, London,
Pergamon, 1980, pp. 28 and 46; Fernand Braudel, C iv iliz a tio n a n d C a p ita lism 1 5 tb ~ l8 th
C e n tu ry , Vol. 2, T h e W h e e ls o f C o m m e rce , London, Collins, 1983, pp. 321-9.
59 Barrie Trinder, T h e In d u stria l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire .
60 Hans M edick, ‘The proto-industrial family economy ’, in Peter Kriedte, Hans M edick
and Jurgen Schlumbohn, eds, In d u stria lisa tio n b e fo re In d u stria lisa tio n , Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, 1981; Franklin M endels, ‘Agriculture and peasant industry in eighteenth
century Flanders ’, J o u r n a l o f E c o n o m ic H isto ry , vol. 27, 1972, pp. 241-61; David Levine, F a m ily
F o rm a tio n in a n A g e o f N a sc e n t C a p ita lism , London, Academic Press, 1977, chapters 2-5, shows
how a combination of poor agriculture, the absence of a dom inant landowner and unregulated
freeholds encouraged the development of industry in the Shepshed area of Leicestershire during
the late seventeenth century.
61 Trevor Rowley, T h e S h ro p sh ire L a n d sc a p e , London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1972, pp. 151 —
2.
62 Swannington Festival Group, S w a n n in g to n V illa g e T ra il, 1982, identifies a succession of
mining sites in the parish of Swannington, Leicestershire; D.W . Baker, S w a n n in g to n F e stiv a l
G ro u p D e v e lo p m e n t P ro po sa ls, 1984, outlines the chronology of mining development in the
parish from shallow bell pits for surface mining to the exploitation of deeper and deeper seams.
In the investment by the major landholders, and the existence of specialist miners, this area
provides an interesting parallel to the Ironbridge Gorge.
63 W .H.B. Court, op. cit.; David Hey, op. cit.; M arie Rowlands, M a ste rs a n d M e n in th e
M id la n d s Iro n T ra d es.
64 Buildings of this phase are detailed in the interim reports of the Nuffield Survey.
65 Clark and Alfrey, B e n t h a ll a n d B ro se le y W o o d , p. 119; SRO 604.
66 Development in Coalbrookdale is detailed in Clark and Alfrey, C o a lb ro o kd a le-, the Tithe
maps for M adeley and Broseley reveal the extent of development at mid-century — the Broseley
map in particular records the existence of very tight clusters of buildings, apparently forming
groups of virtual back-to-back cottages. A similar pattern of development in Shepshed,
Leicestershire, is described in Levine, op. cit., pp. 69 — 70: ‘M ean Cottages, low and narrow...
fronting onto the streets or around common yards, and often built in odd shapes to squeeze
into odd pieces of land ’.
67 Above, chapters 2 and 5; Joseph Farington ’s sketch of the Gorge provides the best available
view of rhe south bank of the river at this time.
68 Clark and Alfrey, J a c k fie ld a n d B ro seley
69 The Tithe maps for Broseley and M adeley record that subdivision of these larger houses
had already taken place.
70 Lease maps; Clark and Alfrey, C o a lb ro o k d a le , pp. 142 — 56.
71 Arthur Raistrick, A D y n a sty o f Iro n fo u n d e rs, London, Longmans, Green & Co.,
pp. 256-63; Lawley, ‘A rt and ornament in iron: design and the Coalbrookdale Company ’,
IGMT, unpublished manuscript, 1979; Trinder, T h e In d u stria l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , Clark
and Alfrey, C o a lb ro o k d a le , pp. 154 — 6.
72 SRO 1987/31; Trinder, T h e In d u stria l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , p. 127.
73 A map of 1788 shows the area as farm land, and field evidence confirms that, with one
exception, there were no buildings in the area ar this time. George Young, ‘Plan of a Navigable
Canal proposed to be made from the M arquis of Stafford ’s Canal in Lilleshall Parish to
Communicate with the River Severn ... near Coalbrookdale ’ (W orcester, 1788), Boulton and
W att Collection, Birmingham City Library; Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, C o a lp o rt a n d
B lists H ill: S e c o n d In ter im R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1986,
pp. 89, 91.
74 Trinder, T h e In d u s tria l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , p. 132.
75 M adeley and Sutton M addock Tithe Surveys show the situation at mid-century; later
development traced in Clark and Alfrey, C o a lp o rt a n d B lists H ill, pp. 99-100.

221
 NOTES

76 Ibid., pp. 100 — 2.

77 This contrast is still visible, though several of the cottages have now been demolished: the
M adeley and Sutton M addock Tithe M aps, and the Ordnance Survey M ap of 1883 record
this pattern of land use.
78 Trade Directories, which provide a detailed account of retailing, trade and industry after baZYXW
c. 1820, reveal little expansion or change in the local economy. The population of Coalport
remained small. In 1863, it was ‘a small place with 400 inhabitants ’ (Kellys Directory).
79 John Randall, op. cit, p. 335.
80 Neil Cossons and Barrie Trinder, T h e Iro n B rid g e : S y m b o l o f th e In d u s tr ia l R e v o lu tio n ,
Bradford-on-Avon, M oonraker Press, 1979, pp. 41 — 6.
81 Anon., A D e sc rip tio n o f C o a lb ro o k d a le in 1 8 0 1 , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Gorge M useum
Trust.
82 S.D. Chapman, ‘W orking-class housing in Nottingham during the Industrial Revolution ’,
and M .W . Beresford, ‘The back-to-back house in Leeds, 1787 — 1937 ’, in Stanley D. Chapman,
ed., T h e H isto ry o f W o rk in g C la ss H o u sin g : A S y m p o siu m , Newton Abbot, David & Charles,
1971; M artin Daunton, H o u se a n d H o m e in th e V ic to ria n C ity , London, Edward Arnold, 1983,
chapter 2.
83 The M adeley Tithe M ap shows the extent of development in 1847. In the central area,
little was added after that date; title deeds for a number of properties on the W harfage and
Tontine Hill suggest that the present early-nineteenth-century buildings may have replaced
earlier houses (TDC Schedule of Deeds); the evidence for this is discussed in more detail in
Clark and Alfrey, Iro n b rid g e , forthcoming.
84 A map series, the Tithe Survey of 1847, and rhe first and second edition Ordnance Survey
M aps, enable this development to be traced in detail.
85 The public buildings are discussed in W . Grant M uter, T h e B u ild in g s o f a n In d u str ia l
C o m m u n ity , London, Phiilimore, 1979, pp. 10 — 21.
86 M ost of these crowded plots were cleared c.1950, but there are a number of photographs
in the IGM T archive which record the areas east and west of the bridge.
87 M .R.G. Conzen, ‘The morphology of towns in Britain during the industrial era ’, in J.W .R.
W hitehand, ed., T h e U rb a n L a n d sc a p e : H isto ric a l D e v e lo p m e n t a n d M a n a g e m e n t, Institute of
British Geographers, Special Publication no. 13, 1981; Richard Dennis, E n g lish In d u s tr ia l
C itie s o f th e N in e te e n th C e n tu ry : A S o c ia l G eo g ra p h y, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press,
1984, chapter 5.
88 Anon., A D e sc rip tio n o f C o a lb ro o k d a le in 1 8 0 1 ', Neil Cossons and Barrie Trinder, T h e Iro n
B rid g e , pp. 41 -6.
89 Charles Hulbert, quoted in Barrie Trinder, T h e M o s t E x tra o rd in a ry D is tr ic t in th e W o rld ,
p. 101.
90 Clark and Alfrey, Iro n b rid g e .
91 Ibid.
92 The Tithe Apportionment specifies pleasure grounds at the Orchard, Southside and
Parsonage; villa development in other towns is also discussed in T.R. Slater ‘ Family, society
and the ornamental villa on the fringes of English country towns ’, J o u r n a l o f H isto ric a l
G e o g ra p h y , vol. 4, 1978, pp. 129 — 44; Leonore Davidoff and Catherine Hall, F a m ily F o rtu n e s:
M e n a n d W o m en o f th e E n g lish M id d le C la ss 1 7 8 0 -1 8 5 0 , London, Hutchinson, 1987,
pp. 364 — 6.
93 B.D. Clark and M .B. Gleave, eds, S o c ia l P a tte rn s in C itie s, Institute of British Geographers
Special Publication no. 5, 1973; Harold Carter and Sandra W heatley, ‘Some aspects of rhe
spatial structure of two Glamorgan towns in the nineteenth century ’, W elsh H isto ry R e v ie w ,
vol. 9, 1978-9, pp. 32-56; Harold Carter, ‘Towns and urban systems’, R. Lawton, ‘ Population
and society ’, R.A. Dodgson and R.A. Butlin, eds, A N e w H isto rica l G e o g ra p h y o f E n g la n d a n d
W a les, London, Academic Press, 1978; for a discussion of urban qualities and character, see P.J.
Corfield, T h e Im p a c t o f E n g lish T o w n s 1 7 0 0 -1 8 0 0 , Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1982;
and W hitehand, U rb a n M o rp h o lo g y

222
 I wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
NOTES

94 A typology of shop buildings is detailed in Clark and Alfrey, baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJI Iro n b rid g e .
95 Ian M itchell, ‘The development of urban retailing 1700 — 1815 ’, in Peter Clark, ed., T h e
T ra n sfo rm a tio n o f E n g lish P ro v in c ia l T o w n s, 1 6 0 0 -1 8 0 0 , London, Hutchinson, 1984; Roger
Scola, ‘ Retailing in the nineteenth century town ’, in J.H. Johnson and Colin Pooley, eds, T h e
S tru c tu re o f N in e te e n th -C e n tu r y C itie s, London, Croom Helm, 1982; Gareth Shaw and M .T.
W ild, ‘Retail patterns in the Victorian city ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e In s titu te o f B ritish G eo g ra p h ers,
vol. 4, 1979, pp. 278-91; the concepts of Central Place Theory, and Social Area Theory, to
which this relates, are discussed in Peter Daniel and M ichael Hopkinson, T h e G e o g ra p h y o f
S e ttle m e n t, Edinburgh, Oliver 8 c Boyd, pp. 84, 124, 193-8; D.T. Herbert, U rb a n G eo g rap h y:
A S o c ia l P e rsp e c tive , Newton Abbot, David & Charles, 1972; and Richard Dennis and Hugh
Clout, op. cit. pp. 14 — 19.
96 M uter, op. cit. p. 11; VCH XI, p. 64.
97 Ibid., pp. 56-8.
98 M inute books of the M adeley Sanitary Committee, W enlock Borough Records, detail
the building of the police station and court room, and the government report that led to it;
Anthony Sutcliffe, ‘ In pursuit of the urban variable ’, in Derek Fraser and Anthony Sutcliffe,
eds, T h e P u r su it o f U rb a n H isto ry , London, Edward Arnold, 1983.
99 Trade Directories and the census enable residents of certain named houses to be traced,
although in this area, where there is rarely a coherent street pattern, matching up unnamed
houses to the census is not reliable; for Severn House and The Orchard see M uter, op. cit.,
pp. 61 and 67.
100 John Randall, op. cit., p. 349.
101 Trade Directories suggest that house names like these had become very popular by 1885.
102 The connection between occupational and social hierarchies is discussed in E. Pawson,
‘The framework of industrial change ’, in Dodgson and Butlin, eds, op. cit.; Dennis and Clout,
op. cit.
103 For a discussion of Social Area Theory see E. Pawson, ‘The framework of industrial
change ’, in Dodgson and Butlin, eds, op. cit.; Dennis and Clout, op. cit.
104 H.P. Dunhill, quoted in Iro n b rid g e Q u a rte rly , Ironbridge, 1984.
105 Studies of residential segregation in other towns are made in A.M . W arnes, ‘ Residen ­
i
tial patterns in an emerging industrial town ’, in Clark and Gleave, op. cit.; Colin Pooley,
‘Choice and constraint in the nineteenth-century city ’, and Richard Dennis ‘Stability and
change in urban communities: a geographical perspective ’, in Johnson and Pooley eds,
op. cit.
106 M arginal notes in title deeds in SRO 1987 refer to a num ber of houses ‘Pulled down and
thrown into the Rope W alk Coppice ’.
107 J.N. Tarn, F iv e P e rc e n t P h ila n th ro p y , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1973,
chapters 5 and 7; S. M artin Gaskell, B u ild in g C o n tro l: N a tio n a l L e g isla tio n a n d th e In tro d u c tio n
o f L o c a l G o v e rn m e n t B y e -L a w s in V ic to ria n E n g la n d , London, British Association for Local
History, 1983.
108 M inute Books of the M adeley Sanitary Committee, W enlock Borough Records.
109 Ibid.
110 Revised editions of Ordnance Survey M aps, 1927, 1961.
111 M inute Books of the M adeley Sanitary Committee, W BR; VCH XI, pp. 30 — 1; VCH X
(draft M S, Benthall and Broseley).
112 M artin Daunton, ‘Public place and private space ’, in Fraser and Sutcliffe, eds, op. cit.,
has suggested that there was an ideological element to the opening up of space after the
dangerous introspection of the earlier courts; the more open layout of these new building
schemes was a characteristic of municipal housing involvement anywhere following criteria set
out in the Tudor W alters Report of 1918.

223 jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCB
 N O TES

7 S h a p in g t h e l a n d s c a p e : p r o c e s s e s o f d e v e l o p m e n t

1 Samuel Parsons ’ map, SRO 1224/1/32; map of Langley ’s Tenement, SRO 1224/2/33.
2 This paragraph is based on analysis of plots shown on the Tithe surveys of 1840, 1844
and 1847.
3 The M adeley Tithe Survey shows that most of the land between Lincoln Hill and New
Bridge Road was organised as a system of small plots: many of those not taken up for building
were in use as gardens.
4 Engraving by Francis Vivares reproduced in Stuart Smith, baZYXWVUTSRQPONML A V iew fr o m th e Iro n B rid g e ,
Ironbridge, Ironbridge Gorge M useum Trust, 1979, pp. 14 — 5.
5 Although Parsons ’ map of Broseley shows that some plots contained more than one house,
the relationship between them suggests either an independent building process, or the creation
of a new house through addition to the original dwelling.
6 See, for example, John Burnett, A S o c ia l H isto ry o f H o u s in g 1 8 1 5 — 1 9 7 0 , London,
M ethuen, 1978, p. 35.
7 Trevor Rowley, V illa g e s in th e L a n d sc a p e , London, Dent, 1978, pp. 142 — 4, compares
settlement at Brierley Hill and Clee Hill with stake claims in Derbyshire; a detailed study of a
particular development is provided by Ken Jones e t a l., ‘ Holywell Lane: a squatter community
in the Shropshire Coalfield ’, In d u s tr ia l A rc h a e o lo g y R e v ie w , vol. 6, 1982, pp. 163-85.
8 VCH IX, pp. 28-9. The sale of small freeholds is detailed in title deeds in SRO 1681.
9 A detailed account of the history of the Broseley Estates is given in VCH X (draft M S);
chapter 2 above provides details of the consolidation of landholding by C lif fo r d and W eld;
Parsons ’ map gives information on tenancies, and a rent roll of 1744 — 5 is reprinted in
J. Randall, B ro se le y a n d Its S u rro u n d in g s, M adeley, 1879, pp. 60-4.
10 M .D.G. W a n k ly n , ‘Industrial development in the Ironbridge Gorge before Abraham
Darby ’, W e st M id la n d s S tu d ie s, vol. 15, 1982, pp. 3 — 7; above, chapter 2.
11 VCH X (forthcoming); above, chapter 2.
12 B.A. Holderness, ‘Open and close parishes in England ’, A g r ic u ltu ra l H isto ry R e v ie w
vol. 20, 1972, pp. 126 — 39; Barrie Trinder, ‘The open village in industrial Britain ’, in M arie
Nisser, ed, In d u s tria l H e rita g e : T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e T h ir d In te r n a tio n a l C o n fe re n c e o n th e C o n ­
se rva tio n o f In d u s tr ia l M o n u m e n ts, Stockholm, 1981.
13 For sales of land in rhe manor of M adeley, see VCH XI, pp. 28 — 9; the sale of land in
Coalbrookdale is documented in title deeds in SRO 1987.
14 VCH X (draft M S); above, chapter 2. The extent of unlicensed building is given in
presentments for the manor of the M arsh in 1785 for ‘encroachments on the Lord ’s W aste ’
(SRO 1224/2/260), but these presentments suggest a way of establishing control without direct
involvement in building - the fines would function as rents.
15 Although the type of settlement and plot cannot be directly related to tenure, the nature
of building was influenced by it.
16 The limitation on land for new building is especially apparent in ‘close ’ parishes: gfedcba
B.A. Holderness, op. cit.
17 M .W . Beresford and J.G. Hurst, eds, D e se rte d M e d ie v a l V illag es, W oking, Lutterworth
Press, 1971.
18 Some costs are suggested in title deeds: 2 acres of land in Coalbrookdale were sold for
£30 in 1738, 3| acres for £60 in 1743; in 1781, two houses with gardens were sold for £150;
in 1745-6, a cottage with a recently added extension, also in Coalbrookdale, was mortgaged
for £60: SRO 1987.
19 For Rose Cottage, see Eric M ercer, E n g lish V e rn a c u la r H o u se s, London, HM SO, 1979,
p. 196; unpublished notes prepared by F.W B Charles, IGM T, 1981; and Thomas Slaughters
‘Plan of Coal brookdale ’ in 1753, M useum of Iron, Coalbrookdale; for the M althouse complex,
see G. Young, ‘Plan of that Part of Coalbrookdale Bounded by the Lands of John Powis
Stanley ’, 1786, SRO 1681/179; ‘M ap referring to annexed Lease ’, 1805, SRO 1681, box 138;
and Arthur Raistrick, D y n a sty o f Iro n fo u n d e rs, London, Longmans, Green 8c Co., 1953,

224
 NOTES

p. 286. This information is summarised in Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, baZYXWVUTSRQP C o a lb ro o k d a le:
F irst In te r im R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1986, pp. 36, 106.
20 R. M achin, T h e H o u se s o f Y e tm in ste r, University of Bristol Department of Extramural
Studies, 1978, pp. 126, 145-55; M achin, ‘The great re-building: a re-assessment ’, P a st a n d
P rese n t, no. 77, 1977, pp. 33-56.
21 Information on tenancies is taken from a series of title deeds in SRO 1681, 1987 and
1224; Parsons ’ map provides the evidence for tenancies at will in parts of Broseley W ood.
22 See, for example, S.D. Chapman, ‘W orkers ’ housing in the cotton factory colonies, 1780-
1850 ’, T ex tile H isto r y , vol. 7, 1976, pp. 112-39.
23 This paragraph is based on analysis of distribution and phasing patterns of development
during the eighteenth century, drawing on the evidence of standing buildings augmented by
pictorial records. Clear examples of the establishment of building lines on plot boundaries are
provided by the Jockey Bank and Chapel Road areas of Ironbridge.
24 The Tithe Surveys for the parishes of Benthall, Broseley and M adeley show this coherent
pattern of land use in the settled areas — outside these, woodland and waste was recorded, for
example, at the Lloyds, M adeley. This is the only area where recognisable ‘squatter cottages’
still exist.
25 Trinder, T h e M a k in g o f th e In d u s tria l L a n d sc a p e , Gloucester, Alan Sutton, 1987, p. 48;
Trevor Rowley, T h e S h ro p sh ire L a n d sc a p e , London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1972, pp. 151 — 2.
26 John Rule, T h e L a b o u r in g C la sses in E a rly In d u s tr ia l E n g la n d 1 7 5 0 -1 8 5 0 , London,
Longman, 1986, pp. 82 — 5.
27 The pattern of plots can be reconstructed from field and map evidence, the relationships
of buildings to plot boundaries giving some indication of plot histories. The siting of buildings
may mark out plot boundaries, for example. The Tithe Apportionments enable the pattern of
ownership to be superimposed.
28 Richard Dennis, E n g lish In d u s tria l C itie s o f th e N in e te e n th C e n tu ry : A S o c ia l G e o g ra p h y
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1984, chapter 5, describes a similar process of plot
subdivision in other urban industrial areas.
29 Trinder, T h e In d u s tria l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , London, Phillimore, 1973, pp. 187-8;
Trinder, ‘The open village in industrial Britain ’.
30 David Levine, F a m ily F o rm a tio n in A n A g e o f N a sc e n t C a p ita lism , London, Academic
Press, 1977, chapters 2-5; W anklyn, op. cit.
31 This and the following two paragraphs are based basedon i wills and probate inventories in
Herefordshire Record Office, Diocesan Probate Records.
32 Ibid.; SRO 1224/3.
33 Occupations are given in wills, probates and title deeds.
34 Trinder, T h e In d u str ia l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , pp. 181 — 5.
35 Title deeds for Furnace Bank Farm are in SRO 1987.
36 This series of deeds also enables the increasing value of property to be traced, in a period
of relatively low inflation: in 1781, two dwelling houses with gardens were sold for £150; a
single house was sold for £80 in 1782, the same house fetching £105 in 1790, and £115 in
1797; in 1773 a house and smith ’s shop were sold for £105, and for £115 seven years later
when the shop had also been converted into a dwelling. This former shop had been mongaged
for £80 by 1791.
37 The former settlement at Holywell Lane, recorded in Jones e t a L , op. cit.; certain areas of
the North-W est Leicestershire Coalfield display a similar pattern of growth - outlying settle ­
ments in the parishes of Swannington and Coleorton, for example.
38 See, for example, 15-17 and 37 — 39 Hodgebower, 31 W esley Road, Ironbridge, 26-27
Cobwell Road, Broseley.
39 For examples of early speculative terraces, see 40 — 42 Quarry Road Broseley, and Tea
Kettle Row, Coalbrookdale, both c.1740, and 45-47 W ellington Road Coalbrookdale, c.1760.
40 The building of Tea Ketde Row is fully documented in SRO 1681/179, which shows

225
 N O TES

that the land was acquired by Richard Ford, manager of the Coalbrookdale Ironworks, in
1738, and that there were five houses under lease by 1753. Ford himself probably lived in
Rosehill House.
41 VCH XI, p. 29. The extent of leasing is revealed in title deeds in SRO 1681 and 1987.
42 Gillian Darley, baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
V illa g e s o f V isio n , London, Paladin, 1978, pp. 17-18.
43 Ibid., pp. 122-37; S.D. Chapman, op. cit.
44 Trinder, T h e In d u s tr ia l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , pp. 190, 198 — 9.
45 Clark and Alfrey, C o a lb ro o k d a le , pp. 136-9; J.M . W ood, C o m p a n y H o u sin g fo r th e S h ro p ­
sh ire Iro n F o u n d rie s, University of Liverpool dissertation for Royal Institute of British Architects,
1974; W . Grant M uter, T h e B u ild in g s o f a n In d u str ia l C o m m u n ity, London, Phillimorc, 1979,
pp. 36 — 44.
46 M inute Books of the Coalbrookdale Company, 1789-97, IGM T archives, CBD 59.82.3.
47 W ood, op. cit.
48 Anon., A D e sc rip tio n o f C o a lb ro o k d a le in 1 8 0 1 , IGM T, 1979.
49 Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, C o a lp o rt a n d B lists H ill: S e c o n d In te r im R e p o rt o f th e
N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1986, pp. 89 — 103.
50 SRO 1681/181 and 1987/31/5.
51 The development of Jug Row appears to have been begun by one of the operating
companies of the China W orks, Horton, Pugh & Anstice, as tenants to Francis Darby. Eight
houses were shown on a lease map of 1805 — there were 14 dwellings by 1808 (SBL 18992
and IGM T 1976.103).
52 In ‘W orkers ’ housing in the cotton factory colonies ’, Chapman links the continued use
of existing housing in early textile communities with capital shortages in the industry; the
reluctance of entrepreneurs to engage in house-building in other than exceptional circumstances
is discussed briefly in Rule, op. cit., pp. 99-101.
53 Jeremy Lowe, ‘Housing as a source for industrial history ’, In d u s tr ia l A rc h a e o lo g y , Vol. 8,
1982, pp. 13 — 35; Chapman, op. cit.
54 This point is discussed in connection with the organisation of the ironworks in Clark and
Alfrey, C o a lb ro o k d a le , pp. 114 — 15 and 118; a similar pattern of development in those areas of
the Gorge associated with mining and other manufactures suggests a similar social structure:
the use of capital derived from coal-mining and barge-owning in building is discussed above,
chapter 3.
55 Neither in Coalbrookdale nor in Coalport were any community or public buildings
provided by the developer.
56 M . Beresford, ‘The back-to-back house in Leeds, 1787-1937 ’, in S.D. Chapman, ed, A
H isto ry o f W o rk in g -C la ss H o u sin g , Newton Abbot, David & Charles, 1971; Robert Newton,
‘Exeter 1770 — 1870 ’, in M .A. Simpson and TH . Lloyd, eds, M id d le -C la ss H o u sin g in B rita in ,
Newton Abbot, David S t Charles, 1977.
57 C.W . Chalklin, T h e P ro vin c ia l T o w n s o f G e o rg ia n E n g la n d : A S tu d y o f th e B u ild in g P ro cess,
London, Edward Arnold, 1974, chapter 5; Judith Alfrey, ‘The poor houses of the Lanes:
working-class housing in Carlisle ’, M .A. dissertation, University of M anchester, 1985; Richard
Dennis, op. cit., pp. 151 — 3.
58 Chalklin, op. cit., pp. 57-9, 167-8.
59 Beresford, ‘The back-to-back house in Leeds ’, S.D. Chapman, ‘W orking-class housing in
Nottingham during the Industrial Revolution ’, in S.D. Chapm an, ed, T h e H isto ry o f W o rk in g -
C la ss H o u sin g , Newton Abbot, David & Charles, 1971.
60 Chalklin, op. cit.
61 Development in Paradise, Coalbrookdale, involved the subdivision of formerly larger
fields as building plots; it is recorded in a lease map of 1827 (an unreferenced dye-line in
IG M T library), and the Tithe M ap of 1847.
62 The development o f villas in large plots is discussed in Richard Roger, ‘Rents and
ground rents: housing and the land market in nineteenth century Britain ’, J o u r n a l o f H isto ric a l

226
 NOTES

G eo g ra p h y, vol. 4, 1979, pp. 129 — 44; for urban fringe belts, see M .R.G. Conzen, ‘The
morphology of English towns during the industrial era ’, in J.W .R. W hitehand, ed., T h e U rb a n
L a n d sc a p e , London, Institute of British Geographers Special Publication no. 13, 1981.
63 This information is taken from the Tithe Apportionments for the parishes of M adeley
and Broseley.
64 In 1829, for example, a lease of land in Coalbrookdale specified an annual rent set at £10
with a supplement for all buildings after the first — leases of other plots of land in Coalbrookdale
were quickly followed by building. In Ironbridge, leasing was also common practice on the
blocks of land held by Reynolds, and one lease of a malthouse specified a rent of £32 a year,
with an additional 5 shillings for every dwelling house which might thereafter be built (SRO
1987/11, 12, 21, and SRO 1681 box 143).
65 Examples of this are 12-13 Tontine Hill, which was designed as a pair, and 25-27 High
Street, which is a single building incorporating three separate units.
66 The contrast between the pattern of development, and the homogeneity of building style,
characterised settlement in the Gorge from the early eighteenth century. The major models of
practice for building are discussed below, in chapter 8. In ‘Rents and ground rents ’, Richard
Roger links the need for economy in building working-class housing to the homogeneity of
design, contrasting this with the more flamboyant designs commissioned by the middle classes.
67 Title deeds reveal the extent of leasing which is also documented in the Tithe Apportion ­
ments.
68 Title deeds for the Ironbridge area after c.1790 mention a carpenter, a schoolmaster, two
merchants, two maltsters, a draper, a shoemaker, barge-owners and gentry. This contrasts with
deeds from an earlier period in which occupations are more commonly miners and colliers,
bargemen, foundrymen and labourers. A similar pattern is revealed in Coalbrookdale, where
carpenters, colliers, iron-moulders and smiths dominate transactions before c. 1790: thereafter,
cordwainers, victuallers, a tea-dealer, and a banker are listed. After c.1803, however, property
was increasingly concentrated in the hands of the Darby family. In Broseley, early deeds record
colliers, carpenters, a bricklayer among yeomen and gentry - but the Forresters were also
acquiring property on a large scale after c. 1795 (SRO 1224, 1681 and 1987).
69 W here new building was mismatched with the demand for housing, larger houses
intended for a middle class were sometimes subdivided as tenements: in the Gorge, new
building seems to have found an appropriate market. Although some of the houses built in the
late eighteenth to early nineteenth century were quickly altered by the addition of further
dwellings, there are very few examples o f subdivision; the effects of an imperfect housing
market are discussed in M .J. Daunton, C o a l M e tro p o lis: C a r d iff 1 8 7 0 — 1 9 1 4 , Leicester, Leicester
University Press, 1977, chapter 5.
70 Census analysis reveals that, in 1851, the highest proportion of professional, craft and
retail occupations was in that part of Ironbridge between Lincoln Hill, The W harfage/High
Street and Church Hill: the highest concentration of labourers, miners and ironworkers was
in the area to the east of M adeley Bank. Overcrowding was even more severe in 1861, but this
was largely due to an influx of labour associated with construction of the Severn Valley Railway.
71 Colin Pooley, ‘Choice and constraint in the nineteenth-century city: a basis for residential
segregation ’, in J.H. Johnson and Colin Pooley, eds, T h e S tru c tu re o f N in e te e n th -C e n tu ry C ities,
London, Croom Helm, 1982.
72 H J. Dyos and D.A. Reeder, ‘Slums and suburbs ’, in H J. Dyos and M ichael W olff, eds,
T h e V ic to ria n C ity : Im a g es a n d R e a litie s, vol. 2, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1983,
pp. 359-86.
73 42 — 43 Bridge Road, Benthall, and 2 — 5 Severn Terrace, Ironbridge, are examples of the
incorporation of early buildings into an early-nineteenth-century terrace; 22 — 25 Church Hill,
24 St Luke ’s Road and Severn Bank, Ironbridge, incorporate earlier building fabric; the plan
of The Chestnuts, Coalbrookdale, was constrained by two earlier buildings which were on the
site.

2 2 7 wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM
 N OTES

74 These aspects of public housing provision have been fully researched elsewhere: see, for
example, Ian Bentley, Ian Davis and Paul Oliver, D u n r o a m in : T h e S u b u rb a n S e m i a n d Its
E n e m ie s, London, Barrie & Jenkins, 1981.
75 A num ber of houses were built following the demolition of earlier buildings — see, for
example, 27-28 The W harfage, Ironbridge, 10-12 King Street, Broseley; bungalows at The
Knowle, Jackfield, are said to have been built by former occupiers of older property nearer the
river.
76 The current revival of interest in surviving older properties and their modernisation and
adaptation to new uses is a complex process in which the intervention of a public authority
through planning and building forms a part. The impact of regulation, industrial decline, and
revival under the aegis of Telford New Town on the evaluation of the building stock, and their
implications for the design of new property will form part of the subject of Alfrey, L iv in g w ith
H isto ry (forthcoming).

8 T h e m a k i n g of a n i n d u s t r ia l v e r n a c u la r wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcb

1 See above, Industrial Foundations, and Landscape of Housing: the Geography of Settle ­
ment.
2 Samuel Parsons ’ M ap of Broseley, SRO 1224/1/32; M ap of Langley ’s Tenement, SRO
1224/1/33.
3 To the south of Priory Com m on, in W oodlands Green and ‘Rotherhurst ’s Tenement ’,
buildings survive on a number of the plots shown on these maps. None is earlier than the first
half of the eighteenth century. In the area of W oodlands Green, a number of other buildings,
which were shown on the Tithe M ap and which may have been early survivals, were demolished
later in the nineteenth century.
4 There is, for example, a building on Queen Street where a tim ber frame has been encased
in a later brick core - a star-shaped brick stack may belong to the same building phase as the
framing and is probably early seventeenth century; traces of timber frame also survive in
buildings on Fox Lane.
5 W .G. Hoskins, ‘The re-building of rural England, 1570-1640 ’, P baZYXWVUTSRQPON
a st a n d P rese n t, vol. 4,
1953, pp. 44 — 59, reprinted in P ro v in c ia l E n g la n d , 1963; R. M achin, ‘The great re-building: a
re-assessment’, P a st a n d P re se n t, vol. 28, 1977, pp. 33 — 56; Eric M ercer, E n g lish V e rn a c u la r
H o u se s, London, HM SO, 1975, pp. 8 — 9.
6 Stuart W rathmell, ‘The vernacular threshold of northern peasant houses ’, V e rn a c u la r
A rc h ite c tu re , vol. 15, 1984, pp. 29 — 33.
7 One building of this type has been investigated archaeologically, and is discussed in
IGM AU BE 84; other buildings of this kind are discussed in Clark and Alfrey, B e n th a ll a n d
B ro se le y W o o d , pp. 103 — 4.
8 These buildings are discussed in Catherine Clark and Judith Alfrey, C o a lb ro o k d a le : F irst
In te r im R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1986; B e n th a ll a n d
B ro se ley W o o d : T h ir d In te r im R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge Institute, 1987; and
Iro n b rid g e : F ifth In te rim R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, forth ­
coming; Lloyds Hall is discussed and illustrated in H.E. Forrest, T h e O ld H o u se s o fW e n lo c k ,
Shrewsbury, W ilding & C Son, 1922, p. 89.
9 Among the larger houses of this phase were Lloyds Hall and the house which later became
the Dog and Duck: they belong to a rural building tradition and arc notably less sophisticated
than contem porary building in such towns as Bridgnorth, M uch W enlock and Shrewsbury; a
single-unit timbered cottage survived on Jockey Bank, Ironbridge, until recently — a similar
cottage survives on Coalport Road, Broseley; 34 — 35 Belmont Road, Ironbridge, is now two
dwellings but may have been built as a single dwelling with a two-unit-plan form; other
buildings of this phase are detailed in the interim reports of the Nuffield Survey.
10 Herefordshire Record Office, Diocesan Probate Records.

228
 NOTES

11 The use of rural forms in early industrial housing is paralleled elsewhere: Jeremy Lowe, baZYXWVUTSR
W e lsh In d u str ia l W o rk e rs ’ H o u sin g , Cardiff, National M useum of W ales, 1977; Christian Devil-
liers and Bernard Huet, L e C re u so t: n a issa n c e e t d e v e lo p p e m e n t d ’u n e u ille in d u strie lle 1 7 8 2 -
1 wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
1 9 1 4 , M acon, Champ Vallon, 1981, pp. 164 — 6.
12 The two surviving buildings are built on waste land above W esley Road, Ironbridge.
13 Royal Commission on Historical M onuments, W o rk e rs H o u sin g in W e st Y o rksh ire, 1 7 5 0 -
1 9 2 0 , London, HM SO, 1986, chapter 1; Barrie Tri nder, T h e In d u str ia l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire ,
London, Phillimore, 1981, p. 188.
14 A few buildings of this type survive in Lightmoor; a similar building, restored to its
original nineteenth-century form can be seen at the Blists Hill Open Air M useum; for the
poverty of rural dwellings, see J.H. Bettey, ‘Seventeenth century squatter dwellings: some
documentary evidence ’, V e rn a c u la r A rc h ite ctu re , vol. 13, 1982, pp. 28-30; Enid Gauldie, C ru e l
H a b ita tio n s, A H isto ry o f W o rk in g C la ss H o u s in g 1 7 8 0 — 1 9 1 8 , London, George Allen & Unwin,
1974, pp. 22 — 4; John Burnett, A S o c ia l H isto ry o f H o u s in g 1 8 1 5 — 1 9 7 0 , London, M ethuen,
1980, pp. 30 — 47.
15 R.W . Brunskill, Illu stra te d H a n d b o o k o f V e rn a c u la r A rc h ite ctu re , London, Faber & Faber,
1974, pp. 26 — 7; RCHM , R u r a l H o u se s o f th e L a n c a sh ire P e n n in e s 1 5 6 0 — 1 7 6 0 , London, HM SO
1986, pp. 81-84.
16 M achin, op. cit.; W rathmell, op. cit.; R.J. Brown, T h e E n g lish C o u n try C o tta g e , London,
Hamlyn, 1979, p. 20.
17 Raddle Hall, Broseley, is dated 1663; Bedlam Hall, M adeley W ood, was described as a
brick Jacobean mansion in Forrest, op. cit., p. 100, but as timber-framed in John Randall, A
H isto ry o f M a d e le y , M adeley, 1880, p. 333.
18 24 Hodgebower and 9 Chapel Road, Ironbridge, 40 — 41 Quarry Road, Broseley W ood;
title deeds for Tea Ketde Row are in SRO 1681/179.
19 De Villiers and Huet, op. cit., pp. 154-60; Henry Glassie, F o lk H o u s in g in M id d le
V irg in ia , Knoxville, Tenn., University of Tennessee Press, 1975, chapter 6; Thomas Hubka,
‘Just folks designing: vernacular designers and the generation of form ’, in Dell Upton and John
M ichael Vlach, eds, C o m m o n P la ces: R e a d in g s in A m e ric a n V e rn a c u la r A rc h ite c tu re , Athens, Ga,
University of Georgia Press, 1986, pp. 426-33.
20 Glassie, op. cit., chapter 4; Glassie, ‘ Eighteenth-century cultural process in Delaware
Valley folk building ’, Hubka, ‘Just folks designing ’, Dell Upton, ‘Vernacular domestic archi­
tecture in eighteenth-century Virginia ’, in Upton and Vlach, eds, op. cit., pp. 394-425, 426-
32,315-35.
21 See, for example, 34 Hodgebower, 34-35 Belmont Road, Ironbridge, 42 — 43 Bridge Road,
Benthall, 57 — 59 Hodgebower, Ironbridge (demolished); a num ber of stone and timber or brick
and timber buildings now demolished in M adeley W ood and Jockey Bank are documented in
photographs in the IGM T archive.
22 W hile the exact location of original openings in timber-framed cottages cannot always be
determined, the arrangement of wide dormers in Yew Tree Cottage, Coalbrookdale, and 68
Ladywood serve as examples of a form which was not replicated in later building, and contrasts
with the simpler construction used in smaller cottages in M adeley W ood.
23 See, for example, cottages at Severnside (demolished), 12 Chapel Road, Ironbridge; G.D.
Newton, ‘Single-storey cottages in W est Yorkshire ’, F o lk L ife , vol. 14, 1976, pp. 65 — 74.
24 See, for example 14-15 W oodlands Road, 57-59 Hodgebower, Ironbridge (demolished);
a timber-framed cottage on Coalport Road, Broseley, has a doorway against the stack — this
was also the original arrangement in a stone cottage at Darnley, near Broseley, where the
doorway was later moved to the centre of the facade when the building was refronted.
25 Herefordshire Record Office, Diocesan Probate Records.
26 One will suggests an arrangement of this sort, where a house had been divided into
three (John Bayley, collier, 1712); structural survey of 22 The W harfage, Ironbridge, during
alterations carried out by IGM AU revealed that this building had also gone through a similar
sequence of development.

229
 N OTES

27 The close correspondence of house size and social rank or economic means is taken as an
axiom of vernacular architecture: see, for example, Brunskill, op. cit., p. 22.
28 Springhill, W oodside; another house of this type is illustrated in Vivares ’ engraving of the
Upper W orks, and reproduced in Stuart Smith, A baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHG
V iew fr o m th e Iro n B rid g e , IGM T, 1979,
p. 14; other buildings with a similar form appear in illustrations of the riverside at Benthall,
Loadcroft W harf and the Lloyds (IGM T).
29 The eighteenth-century houses at Coalford, Jackfield, range from a single-unit cottage to
a large two-unit house, but all employ the same basic vocabulary; a similar range of variation
is apparent in Broseley W ood.
30 See, for example, 4 Speeds Lane, Broseley, where asymmetry is also associated with poorer
standards of construction and decoration — wood lintels instead of cambered brick window
heads, and an absence of the ornamented eaves band which characterises many houses of this
period.
31 Probate records; Hearth Tax returns of 1672 also illustrate this distribution — for example,
of 28 houses in Benthall, 13 had two hearths and 5 had one hearth: T h e S h ro p sh ire H e a rth T a x
R e tu r n o f 1 6 7 2 , Shropshire Archaeological and Parish Register Society, 1949; Smith, op. cit.,
p. 14.
32 Glassie, F o lk H o u sin g in M id d le V irg in ia , chapters 4 and 6.
33 Brunskill, ‘Traditional domestic architecture of south-west Lancashire ’, F o lk L ife , vol. 15,
1977; Newton, op. cit.
34 Brunskill, H o uses-, M .W . Barley, T h e E n g lish F a rm h o u se a n d C o tta g e , London, Routledge &
Kegan Paul, 1961; the convention of classifying buildings according to plan types and arranging
these in a series beginning with a single unit as the most basic and therefore typologically
earliest form may overlook the fact that the single-unit cottage became more widely used: W .
Grant M uter, T h e B u ild in g s o f a n In d u s tria l C o m m u n ity, London, Phillimore, 1979,
pp. 28-30.
35 A num ber of single-unit cottages with only a tiny additional service room were built in
the second half of the nineteenth century: see, for example, 8 — 16 Church Road, Coalbrookdale.
36 See, for example, Springhill, W oodside, Coalbrookdale; Calcutts House, Jackfield;
11 The W harfage, Ironbridge.
37 For examples of buildings designed as pairs, see 40 — 41 Simpsons Lane, Broseley W ood,
38 — 39 Hodgebower, Ironbridge.
38 For examples of the terrace as a row of independent dwelling-units, see 8-14 Barratts
Hill, Broseley, The Calcutts, Jackfield, Panshop Bank, Paradise, Coalbrookdale (demolished).
39 See, for example, 15-17 and 31-35 Hodgebower, Ironbridge.
40 K. Jones, e t a L , ‘Holywell Lane: a squatter community in the Shropshire Coalfield ’,
In d u str ia l A rc h a e o lo g y R e v ie w , vol. 6, 1982, pp. 163-85.
41 M ercer, op. cit., p. 133.
42 Compare, for example, 22 and 27 Cobwell Road with 4 Simpsons Lane, Broseley;
decorative brickwork is used on the chimneys of 24 Hodgebower, dated 1714; decorative
Flemish Bond is used on 36 and 44-47 W ellington Road, Coalbrookdale.
43 Evidence for early builders is, however, sparse: probate records only record one glazier,
and one stonemason and bricklayer during the period c. 1660 — 1760.
44 Herefordshire Record Office, Diocesan Probate Records, John Brooke, 27 M arch
1721.
45 Royal Commission on Historical M onuments, W o rke rs H o u sin g in W e st Y o rksh ire,
op. cit., chapters 2 and 3; J. Lowe, ‘Housing as a source for industrial history ’, In d u s tr ia l
A rc h a e o lo g y , vol. 8, 1982, pp. 13-35; Barley, op. cit.
46 Charity Row, Carpenter ’s Row, Chapel Row and Engine Row were all built by the
Coalbrookdale Company c. 1781-9: Clark and Alfrey, C o a lb ro o k d a le , pp. 130-4, 136-9.
47 See, for example, The Cottage and Jasmine Cottage, Cherry Tree Hill, Coalbrookdale.
48 ‘M ap referring to rhe Annexed Lease ’, 1827, unreferenced dye-line, IGM T liabrary; Tithe
M ap, 1847.

230
 NOTES

49 Information made available by owner from privately held title deeds.

50 14 W ellington Road.
51 Three houses on Cherry Tree Hill employ this detail - they were built by 1851 (Plans for
the Great W estern Railway, SRO 1969); houses with similar detailing in Ironbridge all postdate
the Tithe Survey of 1847.
52 This contrasts with housing in M adeley, for example, where a very similar model is used
employing a central window over the door, sometimes blind.
53 These two houses, built to adjoin each other, employ an identical style with small
variations in size — they were not built as a pair, however — only one existed in baZYXWVUTSRQPON c. 1860, the date
of a photograph.
54 Evidence for the extent and organisation of building work is taken from the 1851 census;
additional, but less comprehensive information is contained in the trade directories for the
period.
55 Cast-iron lintels for window heads were commonplace, though very few houses used cast-
iron for the windows themselves. A range of decorative brick was available from c.1830, and
white brick was especially popular in the growth of Ironbridge. Blue, red, white and ‘kiss-
marked ’ bricks were all exploited for their decorative properties: The Orchard, Church Hill,
Ironbridge, built for a Jackfield brickmaker, is a text-book for this variety, but many smaller
houses were built with decorative string courses, or a sharply contrasting Flemish Bond (for
example Raymore, Paradise, Coalbrookdale).
56 A number of these houses were built with a definite orientation to a street-line, apparent
on W ellington Road, Coalbrookdale, Hodgebower and M adeley Bank, Ironbridge; the parallel
formation of essentially urban facilities is documented in M uter, op. cit., pp. 10-22.
57 Quoted in I. Lawley, ‘Art and ornament in iron: design and the Coalbrookdale Company ’,
1979, M S in IGM T library.
58 Quoted in Trinder, T h e In d u str ia l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , p. 199. These houses were not
built by the Coalbrookdale Company, though their work elsewhere at Horsehay and Sandybank
Row also makes a distinction between housing for the ‘superior artisan ’ and the general labourer,
clearly marked in the degree of architectural sophistication.
59 Arthur Raistrick, D y n a sty o f Iro n fo u n d e rs, London, Longman, Green & Co., 1953,
pp. 256-63.
60 In 1851, for example, Paradise House was the home of Charles Crookes, then an assistant
to an ironfounder, later listed as an ironmaster himself. His household included two servants.
Numbers 11 and 12 Paradise were occupied by a modeller and an accountant, and Prospect
House on Church Road was occupied by a draughtsman at the iron foundry.
61 The Hawthorns and 57 Belmont Road.
62 J. Randall, op. cit., pp. 346 — 50.
63 The building of the police station is documented in the M inute Books of the M adeley
Sanitary Committee, W enlock Borough Records, 1859 — 63.
64 See, for example, 29 Church Hill and 25 — 30 Hodgebower, Ironbridge.
65 15 — 22 W oodside.
66 M inute Books of the M adeley Sanitary Committee.
67 Tudor W alters Report, 1918.
68 M inute Books of the M adeley Sanitary Committee.
69 Ibid.
70 The desire for uniformity as an expression of community, as well as of economy, did
not necessarily lead to adoption of the neo-Georgian style: Ian Bentley, ‘ Individualism or
community? Private enterprise housing and the council estate ’, in Ian Bentley, Ian Davis and
Paul Oliver, D u n r o a m in : T h e S u b u r b a n S e m i a n d Its E n e m ie s, London, Barrie & Jenkins, 1981,
pp. 104 — 21.
71 M inute Books of the M adeley Sanitary Committee.
72 9-19 Cobwell Road, Broseley W ood, Fernlea, Riversdale, etc. Bridge Road, Benthall;

231
 N O TES

there are also a num ber of bungalows in Jackfield where a basic model has been adapted to
different specifications — see Calcutts Road and the Knowle, for example; the interwar develop ­
ment of Chapel Road, Jackfield, used an identical plan for 10 dwellings: small differences occur
in the detailing.
73 5-6 Ladywood, Ironbridge, 41 — 42 W ellington Road, Coalbrookdale.
74 See for example, ‘Au Pont de Fer’, High Street Ironbridge; Beddows Building, M adeley
Bank, Ironbridge. The social dimensions of purpose-built shops like these are discussed in
Leonore Davidoff and Catherine Hall, F a m ily F o rtu n e s: M e n a n d W o m e n o f th e E n g lish M id d le
C lass 1 7 8 0 -1 8 5 0 , London, Hutchinson, 1987, p. 366.
75 Former shop adjacent to Jackfield Church built largely from corrugated-iron sheet and
reused components.

9 T
gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFE
h e i n d u s t r ia l l a n d s c a p e t o d a y : f r o m a n a ly s is t o p r o t e c t i o n

1 UNESCO, baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
C o n ve n tio n fo r th e P ro te c tio n o f th e W o rld C u ltu ra l a n d N a tio n a l H e rita g e .

232
 BIBLIOGRAPHY jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONM

Alfrey, J., ‘The poor houses of rhe Lanes: working-class housing in Carlisle ’, University of
M anchester, M .A. dissertation, 1982.
------- baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
L iv in g w ith H is to r y , forthcoming.
Allied Ironfounders Ltd, A llie d Ir o n fo u n d e r s in S h ro p sh ire , Ketley, Allied Ironfounders, 1959.
Anon., ‘The Coalbrookdale tramroad ’, T h e L o c o m o tiv e M a g a zin e , 15 December 1917,
I pp. 443 — 45.
Anon., ‘Excavations at Lloyds Coppice Engine, Ironbridge ’, unpublished M S, IGM T library,
1970.
A rch ite c ts* C o m p e n d iu m a n d C a ta lo g u e , 1901.
Aston, M ., In te rp re tin g th e L a n d sc a p e , London, Batsford, 1979.
Atkinson, D., T o b a cco P ip e s o f B ro seley, S h ro p sh ire , London, privately printed, 1970.
Baker, D.W ., S w a n n in g to n F e stiv a l G ro u p D e v e lo p m e n t P ro po sa ls, privately printed, 1984.
Barker, P., T e c h n iq u e s o f A rc h a e o lo g ic a l E x c a v a tio n , London, Batsford, 1982.
Barley, M .W ., T h e E n g lish F a rm h o u se a n d C o tta g e , London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1961.
Barnard, J., V ic to ria n C e ra m ic T iles, London, Studio Vista, 1972.
Beale, R., T h e O ld W in d : A P re lim in a ry R e p o rt, Ironbridge, IGM AU, 1988.
Beaver, S., ‘The Potteries: a study in the evolution of a cultural landscape ’, In s titu te o f B ritish
G e o g ra p h e rs T ra n sa c tio n s a n d P a p ers, 1964, vol. 4, pp. 1 — 31.
Benthall, E., ‘Some xviiith century Shropshire potteries ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e S h ro p sh ire A rc h a e ­
o lo g ic a l S o c ie ty , 1957, vol. 55, pp. 159-70.
Bentley, I., ‘Individualism or community? Private enterprise housing and the council estate ’,
I in I. Bentley, I. Davis and P. Oliver, D u n r o a m in : T h e S u b u r b a n S e m i a n d its E n e m ie s,
London, Barrie & Jenkins, 1981.
Beresford, M .W ., ‘The back-to-back house in Leeds, 1787 — 1937 ’, in S.D. Chapman, cd., T h e
H isto ry o f W o rk in g -C la ss H o u sin g : A S y m p o siu m , Newton Abbot, David & C Charles, 1971.
Beresford, M . W . and Hurst, J.G., eds, D e se rte d M e d ie v a l V illa g es, W oking, Lutterworth Press,
1971.
Beresford, M .W ., Hurst, J.G. and Rahtz, P.A., W h a rra m : A S tu d y o f S e ttle m e n t o n th e Y o rk sh ire
W o ld s, London, Society for M edieval Archaeology, 1987.
Bettey, J.H., ‘Seventeenth-century squatter dwellings: some documentary evidence ’, V e rn a c u la r
A rc h ite ctu re , 1982, vol. 13, pp. 28 — 30.
Biddle, M ., ‘M etres, areas and robbing ’, W o rld A rc h a e o lo g y 1969, vol. 1, pp. 208 — 19.
Blackman, J., ‘The development of the retail grocery trade in the nineteenth century ’, B u sin ess
H isto ry 1962, vol. 5.
Blackwall, A., H isto ric B rid g e s o f S h ro p sh ire . Shrewsbury, Shropshire Libraries & the Highways
and Transport Department, 1985.
Blake Roberts, D. and Blake Roberts, G., ‘The results of recent excavations in Coalport,
Shropshire ’, E n g lish C e ra m ic C irc le T ra n sa c tio n s, 1981, vol. 2, pp. 71-80.

233
 BIBLIO GRAPHY

Blanchard, I., ‘M iners and the agricultural community ’, baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLK A g r ic u ltu ra l H isto ry R e v ie w , 1970,
vol. 20, pp. 96 — 106.
Braudel, E, C iv ilisa tio n a n d C a p ita lism F ifte e n th to E ig h te e n th C e n tu ry , vol. 2, T h e W h e e ls o f
C o m m e rc e , London, Collins, 1983.
Broadbridge, S.R., ‘Joseph Banks and the W est M idlands iron industry ’, S ta ffo rd sh ire In d u stria l
A rc h a e o lo g y S o c ie ty J o u rn a l, 1971, vol. 2, pp. 1-20.
Brown, I., ‘The mineral wealth of Coalbrookdale ’, B u lle tin o f th e P e a k D is tric t M in e s H isto ric a l
S o c ie ty , 1965, vol. 2, pp. 255-89.
------- ‘The Tar Tunnel, Coalport’, S h ro p sh ire N e w sle tte r, 1967, vol. 32.
------- ‘M ineral working and land reclamation in the Coalbrookdale Coalfield ’, Ph.D. thesis,
Leicester University, 1975-
------- ‘Underground in the Ironbridge Gorge ’, In d u str ia l A rc h a e o lo g y R e v ie w , 1979, vol. 3,
pp. 158-69.
---- ‘Some mining accidents in the Broseley Field ’, J o u r n a l o f th e W ilk in s o n S o ciety, 1980,
vol. 8, pp. 3 — 5-
Brown, I.J. and Trinder, B.S., T h e T a r T u n n e l, Ironbridge, IGM T, 1979.
Brown, R.J., T h e E n g lish C o u n tr y C o tta g e , London, Hamlyn, 1979.
Brunskill, R.W ., ‘Traditional domestic architecture of south-west Lancashire ’, F o lk L ife , 1977,
vol. 15, pp. 65-80.
------- Illu stra te d H a n d b o o k o f V e rn a c u la r A rc h ite ctu re , London, Faber & Faber, 1978.
------- T ra d itio n a l B u ild in g s o f B rita in , London, Gollancz, 1981.
Buist, W , ‘A survey of the Engineering Shop, one of the buildings belonging to the Coal­
brookdale Company ’, unpublished assignment, Ironbridge Institute, University of Birm ­
ingham, 1991.
Burnett, J., A S o c ia l H isto ry o f H o u s in g 1 8 1 5 -1 9 7 0 , London, M ethuen, 1980.
Carter, H., ‘Towns and urban systems ’, in R.A. Dodgson and R.A. Butlin, eds, A N e w H isto rica l
G e o g ra p h y o f E n g la n d a n d W a les, London, Academic Press, 1978.
Carter, H. and W heatley, J.S., ‘Some aspects of rhe spatial structure of two Glamorgan towns
in the nineteenth century ’, W e lsh H isto ry R e v ie w , 1978-9, vol. 9, pp. 32-56.
Celoria, F. and Kelly, J., ‘A post-medieval pottery site and a kiln base found off Albion Square,
Hanley, Stoke on Trent, Staffordshire, England SJ 885474 ’, C ity o f S to k e o n T re n t M u s e u m
A rc h a e o lo g ic a l S o c ie ty R e p o rt, 1973, vol. 4.
Chaffers, W , T h e N e w C h a ffe rs M a rk s a n d M o n o g ra m s o n P o tte ry a n d P o rc e la in , ed. Frederick
Litchfield, 13th edn, London, Reeves & Turner, 1912.
Chalklin, C.W ., T h e P ro vin c ia l T o w n s o f G e o rg ia n E n g la n d , A S tu d y o f th e B u ild in g P ro cess
1 7 4 0 — 1 8 5 0 , London, Edward Arnold, 1974.
Chambers, J.D. and M ingay, G.E., T h e A g r ic u ltu ra l R e v o lu tio n , 1 7 5 0 — 1 8 0 0 , London, Batsford,
1966.
Chapman, S.D., ‘W orking-class housing in Nottingham during the Industrial Revolution ’, in
S.D. Chapm an, ed., T h e H isto ry o f W o rk in g C la ss H o u sin g : A S y m p o siu m , Newton Abbot,
David 8 c Charles, 1971.
------- ‘W orkers ’ housing in the cotton factory colonies 1770-1850 ’, T ex tile H isto ry , 1976, vol.
7, pp. 112-39.
------- T h e C o tto n In d u s tr y in th e In d u s tr ia l R e v o lu tio n , London, M acmillan, 1987.
Children ’s Employment Commission, C h ild re n s E m p lo y m e n t C o m m issio n R e p o rt, British Par­
liamentary Papers 16, report no. 381, 1842.
------- C h ild r e n s E m p lo y m e n t C o m m issio n F ifth R e p o rt, British Parliamentary Papers,
1862.
Clark, B.D. and Gleave, M .B., eds, S o c ia l P a tte rn s in C itie s, Institute of British Geographers
Special Publication 5, London, Institute of British Geographers, 1973.
Clark, C., H o rse h a y Iro n w o rk s, S h ro p sh ire , Report for W rekin District Council, Ironbridge,
Ironbridge Institute, 1989.

234
 BIBLIO GRAPHY

------- baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
A rc h a e o lo g ic a l a n d H isto ric a l Issu es R e la tin g to th e P ro p o se d N e iu R o a d B rid g e a t L a d y w o o d ,
Iro n b rid g e , report prepared for English Heritage, Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989.
------- Iro n b rid g e G o rg e, London, Batsford, 1993.
Clark, C. and Alfrey, J., C o a lb ro o k d a le : F irst In ter im R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge:
Ironbridge Institute, 1986.
------- C o a lp o rt a n d B lists H ill: S e c o n d In ter im R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge
Institute, 1986.
------- B e n th a ll a n d B ro seley W o od : T h ird In te r im R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge,
Ironbridge Institute, 1987.
------- J a c k field a n d B ro seley: F o u rth In te r im R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge
Institute, 1989.
------- Iro n b rid g e : F ifth In te rim R e p o rt o f th e N u ffie ld S u rv e y , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute,
forthcoming.
Clark, C. et al., C a u g h le y S a g g a r W orks: A n A rc h a e o lo g ic a l E v a lu a tio n , Ironbridge, Ironbridge
Institute, 1988.
Clark, C., Horton M . e t a L , D u n c o te F a rm , A tc h a m : A n A rc h a e o lo g ic a l E v a lu a tio n in A d v a n c e
o fth e A S B y-p a ss, Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989.
Clark, C. and W inkworth, A., D u n c o te F a rm , A tc h a m , for English Heritage, Ironbridge,
Ironbridge Institute, 1990.
Clark, C., W inkworth, A. and W orthington, M ., L a d y iu o o d B rid g e S ite , Iro n b rid g e , T e lfo rd :
E x c a v a tio n a n d F u rth e r D o c u m e n ta ry R esea rch , Report for Shropshire County Council,
Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1990.
Clarke, D., A n a ly tic a l A rc h a e o lo g y 2nd edn, London, M ethuen, 1978.
Clarkson, L.A., P ro to -in d u stria lisa tio n : T h e F irst P h a se o f In d u stria lisa tio n , Basingstoke, M ac ­
millan, 1985.
Clifton-Taylor, A., T h e P a tte rn o f E n g lish B u ild in g , London, Faber, 1972.
Collins, R, W a lsa ll L e a th e r In d u stry Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989.
Conzen, M .R.G., ‘The growth and character of W hitby ’, in G.H.J. Daysh, ed., A S u r v e y o f
W h itb y a n d th e S u rro u n d in g A re a , Eton, 1958.
------- A ln w ic k , N o rth u m b erla n d : A S tu d y in T o w n -p la n A n a ly sis, Institute of British Geographers
Special Publication no. 27, London, Institute of British Geographers, I960.
------- ‘The morphology of towns in Britain during the industrial era ’, in J.W .R. W hitehand,
ed., T h e U rb a n L a n d sc a p e : H isto ric a l D e v e lo p m e n t a n d M a n a g e m e n t, Institute of British
Geographers, Special Publication no. 13, London, Institute of British Geographers,
1981.
Corfield, P.J., T h e Im p a c t o f E n g lish T o w n s, 1 7 0 0 -1 8 0 0 , Oxford, Oxford University Press,
1982.
Cossons, N. and Trinder, B., T h e Iro n B rid g e , Bradford-on-Avon, M oonraker Press and IGMT,
1979.
Court, W .H.B., T h e R ise o f th e M id la n d In d u strie s 1 6 0 0 -1 8 3 8 , London, Oxford University
Press, 1938.
Cox, N„ ‘Imagination and innocation of an industrial pioneer: the first Abraham Darby ’,
In d u s tr ia l A rc h a e o lo g y R e v ie w , 1990, vol. 12, pp. 127 — 44.
Crosfield, M .C. and Johnstone, M .S., ‘A study of Ballstone and the associated beds ’, P ro c e e d in g s
o f th e G e o lo g ic a l A sso c ia tio n , 1914, vol. 25, pp. 207 — 9.
Crossley, D. and Cleere, H., T h e Iro n In d u stry o f th e W e a ld , Leicester, Leicester University
Press, 1985.
Daniel, P. and Hopkinson, M ., T h e G e o g ra p h y o f S e ttle m e n t, Edinburgh, Oliver & Boyd, 1989.
Darley, G., V illa g es o f V isio n , London, Paladin, 1978.
Daunton, M ., C o a l M e tro p o lis: C a r d iff 1 8 7 0 -1 9 4 0 , Leicester, Leicester University Press, 1977.
____ H o u se a n d H o m e in th e V ic to ria n C ity : W o rk in g C la ss H o u s in g 1 8 5 0 -1 9 1 4 , London,
Edward Arnold, 1983.

235
 BIBLIO GRAPH Y

Dauncon, M ., ‘Public place and private space ’, in D. Fraser, and A. Sutcliffe, eds, baZYXWVUT T h e P u rsu it
o f U rb a n H is to r y London, Edward Arnold, 1983.
Davidoff, L. and Hall, C., F a m ily F o rtu n e s: M e n a n d W o m en o f th e E n g lish M id d le C la ss 1 7 8 0 —
1 8 5 0 , London, Hutchinson, 1987.
Dawes, N.M ., ‘History of brick and tile production on rhe Coalbrookdale Coalfield ’, unpub-
lished M S, IGM T library, 1979.
Defoe, D., A T o u r th ro u g h th e W h o le Is la n d o f G re a t B r ita in , first published 1724-6, Har-
mondsworth, Penguin, 1979.
Dennis, R., ‘Stability and change in urban communities: a geographical perspective ’, in J.H.
Johnson, and C. Pooley, eds, T h e S tr u c tu r e o f N in e te e n th C e n tu ry C itie s, London, Croom
Helm, 1962.
------- E n g lish In d u s tria l C itie s o f th e N in e te e n th C e n tu ry : A S o c ia l G e o g ra p h y Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, 1984.
Dennis, R- and Clout, H., A S o c ia l G e o g ra p h y o f E n g la n d a n d W a les, London, Pergamon, 1980.
Devilliers, C. and Huet, B., L e C re u so t: n a issa n c e e t d e v e lo p p em e n t d 'u n e v ille in d u strie lle 1 7 8 2 —
1 9 1 4 , M acon, Cham p Vallon, 1981.
Dobson, E., ‘A rudimentary treatise on the manufacture of bricks and tiles ’, reprinted in
F. Celoria, ed., J o u r n a l o f C e ra m ic H is to r y 1971, vol. 5.
Dodgson, R.A. and Butlin, R.A., eds, A N e w H isto ric a l G e o g ra p h y o f E n g la n d , London,
Academic Press, 1978.
Drury, P.J., ‘Post-medieval brick and tile kilns at Runsell Green, Danbury, Essex ’, P o st-M e d ie v a l
A rc h a e o lo g y 1975, vol. 9, pp. 203-21.
Duckworth, S., ‘Benthall to Coalport: an interpretive assessment of the south bank of the
River Severn in the Ironbridge Gorge ’, dissertation, Ironbridge Institute, University of
Birmingham, 1988.
Dyos, H J. and Reeder, D.A., ‘Slums and suburbs ’, in H.J. Dyos, and M . W olff, T h e V ic to ria n
C ity : Im a g es a n d R e a litie s, vol. 2, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1983.
Edmundson, R.S., ‘The Coalport China W orks: a study of the circumstances and dating of
the riverside group of buildings, particularly the “ Smuggler” area ’, unpublished M S, IGM T
library, n.d.
------- ‘Coalport China W orks, Shropshire: a comparative study of the premises and the
background to their study ’, In d u str ia l A rc h a e o lo g y R e v ie w , 1979, vol. 3, pp. 122 — 45.
------- ‘Bradley & Co., Coalport Pottery 1796 — 1800 ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e N o r th e r n C e ra m ic
S o c ie ty 1981, vol. 4, pp. 127 — 55.
Eele, M . ‘An account of making Pitch, Tar and Oil out of a blackish stone in Shropshire,
communicated by M r M artin Eele, the Inventor of it’, R o y a l S o c ie ty P h ilo so p h ic a l T ra n sa c tio n s,
1697, vol. 19, p. 544.
Falconer, K., G u id e to E n g la n d 's In d u s tr ia l H e rita g e , London, Batsford, 1980.
Finberg, H.P.R., E a rly C h a rte rs o f th e W e st M id la n d s , 2nd edn, Leicester, Leicester University
Press, 1971.
Firman, RJ. and Firman, P.E., ‘A geological approach to the study of medieval bricks ’, T h e
M e rc ia n G e o lo g ist, 1967, vol. 2, pp. 299-317.
Fisher, F.J., E ssa ys in th e E c o n o m ic a n d S o c ia l H isto ry o f T u d o r a n d S tu a r t E n g la n d in H o n o u r o f
R H T a w n e y Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1961.
Forrest, H.W ., T h e O ld H o u se s o fW e n lo c k , Shrewsbury, W ilding & Sons, 1915.
Fraser, D. and Sutcliffe, A., eds, T h e P u r s u it o f U rb a n H isto r y London, Edward Arnold, 1983.
Frost, P., ‘Yeomen and metalsmiths: livestock in the dual economy in south Staffordshire,
1560-1720 ’, A g r ic u ltu ra l H is to r y R e v ie w , 1981, vol. 29, pp. 29 — 41.
Gameson, F.R., ‘An 8-man pit - an historic beam engine and the craft of Harry Roberts ’,
S h ro p sh ire M a g a zin e , 20-1, M arch 1952.
Gaskell, S.M ., B u ild in g C o n tro l, N a tio n a l L e g isla tio n a n d th e In tro d u c tio n o f L o ca l B y e L a w s in
V ic to ria n E n g la n d , London, published for the British Association for Local History by
Bedford Square Press, 1983.

236
 B IB L IO G R A P H Y baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFED
Gauldie, E.» C r u e l H a b ita tio n s, A H isto ry o f W o rk in g C la ss H o u s in g 1 7 8 0 — 1 9 1 8 , London,
George Allen & Unwin, 1974.
Geological Survey and M useum, ‘Refractory materials, fireclays ’, S p e c ia l R e p o rts o n th e M in e r a l wvutsrqpo
R eso u rces o f G re a t B r ita in , 1920, vol. 14, pp. 148-55.
Glassie, H., F o lk H o u s in g in M id d le V irg in ia , Knoxville, University of Tennessee Press,
1975.
------- ‘Eighteenth century cultural process in Delaware Valley folk building ’, in D. Upton and
J.M . Vlach, eds, C o m m o n P la ces: R e a d in g s in A m e ric a n V e rn a c u la r A rc h ite c tu re , Athens, Ga,
University of Georgia Press, 1986.
Graslund, B., T h e B ir th o f P re h isto ric C h ro n o lo g y : D a tin g M e th o d s a n d D a tin g S y ste m s in
N in e te e n th -C e n tu r y S c a n d in a v ia n A rc h a e o lo g y Cambridge, Cambridge University Press,
1981.
Hains, B.A. and Horton, A., B ritish R e g io n a l G e o lo g y : C e n tra l E n g la n d , London, HM SO, 1969.
Hall, J.W ., ‘Joshua Field ’s Diary of a tour in 1821 through the M idlands ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e
N e iv c o m e n S o c ie ty , 1925-6, vol. 6, pp. 30 — 2.
Hamblin, R.J.O. e t a L , ‘M ineral resources of the Coalbrookdale Coalfield ’, M e rc ia n G eo log ist,
1969, vol. 12, pp. 9-27.
Ham mond, M ., ‘The Blists Hill Brickworks Project’, unpublished M S, IGM T library, 1979.
Harley, J.B., O rd n a n c e S u rv e y M a p s: A D e sc rip tiv e M a n u a l, Southampton, Ordnance Survey,
1975.
Harriss, E.C., P rin c ip le s o f A rc h a e o lo g ic a l S tra tig ra p h y , London, Academic Press, 1979.
Henkel, D.J. and Skempton, R.W ., ‘A landslide at Jackfield, Shropshire in a heavily over ­
consolidated clay ’, P ro c e e d in g s o f th e In te r n a tio n a l C o n fe re n c e o n th e S ta b ility o f E a r th S lop es,
1954, pp. 131-7.
Herbert, A.T., ‘Jackfield decorative tiles in use ’, In d u str ia l A rc h a e o lo g y R e v ie w , 1979, vol. 3,
pp. 146 — 52.
Herbert, D.T., O rb a n G e o g ra p h y : A S o c ia l P e rsp e c tive , Newton Abbot, David & Charles, 1972.
Hey, D., R u r a l M e ta lw o rk e rs o f th e S h e ffie ld R e g io n : A S tu d y o f R u r a l In d u s try b e fo re th e In d u s tr ia l
R e v o lu tio n , Leicester, Leicester University Press, 1972.
Higgins, D.A., ‘Blists Hill mine ’, unpublished M S, IGM T library, 1985.
------- ‘The clay pipe industry of Broseley and Benthall’, Ph.D. thesis, University of Liverpool,
1987.
Higgins, D.A. e t a L , T h e B ro seley P ip e w o rk s: A n A rc h a e o lo g ic a l a n d H is to ric a l E v a lu a tio n ,
Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1988.
Holderness, B.A., ‘Open and close parishes in England in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries ’, A g r ic u ltu r a l H isto ry R e v ie w , 1972, vol. 20, pp. 126-39.
Holmes, D.A., ‘The working of W enlock Limestone ’, Ironbridge Institute, 1987.
Hopwood, A., ‘A history of M essrs M aws & Co. 1850 — 1970 ’, unpublished M S, 1975.
Horton, M .C., N e w d a le : A n In d u s tr ia l T o w n sh ip o f th e M id -E ig h te e n th C e n tu r y Ironbridge,
Ironbridge Institute, 1987.
---- N e w d a le : T h e N o r th B u ild in g , Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1989.
Horton, M .C. and Biddle, S., G ra n v ille C o u n tr y P a rk : A n E v o lv in g In d u stria l L a n d sc a p e in
L ille sh a lL T elfo rd , Report for W rekin District Council, Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute,
1987.
Hoskins, W .G., ‘The rebuilding of rural England 1570 — 1640 ’, P a st a n d P re se n t, no. 4,
pp. 44 — 59, reprinted in W .G. Hoskins, P ro v in cia l E n g la n d , London, M acmillan, 1953.
------- T h e M a k in g o f th e E n g lish L a n d sc a p e , Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1955, reprinted 1971.
------- T h e M id la n d P e a sa n t, London, M acmillan, 1957.
Houghton, A.W .J., ‘Caughley Porcelain W orks near Brosley, Salop ’, In d u s tr ia l A rc h a e o lo g y
M a g a zin e , 1968, vol. 5, pp. 184 — 92.
Hubka, T, ‘Just folks designing: vernacular designers and the generation of form ’, in D. Upton
and J.M . Vlach, eds, C o m m o n P la ces: R e a d in g s in A m e ric a n V e rn a c u la r A rch itec tu re , Athens,
Ga, University of Georgia Press, 1986.

237
 B IB L IO G R A P H Y wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUT
Hudson, K., baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
F o o d C lo th e s a n d S h e lte r, London, John Baker, 1978.
Hulbert, C., H isto ry a n d D e sc rip tio n o f th e C o u n ty o f S h ro p sh ire , Shrewsbury, 1837.
Hutchins, B.L. and Hanson, A., A H isto ry o f F a c to ry L e g isla tio n , London, P.S. King & Son,
1903.
Jewitt, L., C e ra m ic A r t o f G re a t B r ita in , London, Virtue, 1878.
Johnson, J.H. and Pooley, C. eds, T h e S tr u c tu r e o f N in e te e n th -C e n tu r y C itie s, London, Croom
Helm, 1962.
Jones, A., T h e C o a rse E a rth e n w a re s, Ironbridge, IGM AU, 1988.
Jones, E., In d u s tr ia l A rc h ite c tu re in B r ita in 1 7 5 0 -1 9 3 9 , London, Batsford, 1985.
Jones, E.L., ‘The agricultural origins of industry ’, P a st a n d P re se n t, 1968, no. 40, pp. 58 — 71.
Jones, K., Hunt, M . e t a l, ‘Holywell Lane: a squatter com munity in the Shropshire Coalfield ’,
In d u str ia l A rc h a e o lo g y R e v ie w , 1982, vol. 6, pp. 163 — 85.
Jones, N.W ., ‘A wooden waggonway at Bedlam Furnace, Ironbridge ’, P o st-M e d ie v a l A rc h a e o lo g y ,
1987, vol. 21, pp. 259-62.
Jones, T., ‘Impressions of the Coalbrookdale area ’, unpublished M S, IGM T library, n.d.
Kain, R.J.P. and Price, H.C., T h e T ith e S u rv e y s o f E n g la n d a n d W a les, Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, 1985.
Kay, G., ‘M inton, Hollins & Co. The tile factory in Shelton Old Road, Stoke-on-Trent’,
unpublished dissertation, Ironbridge Institute, University of Birmingham, 1988.
Langton, J., G e o g ra p h ica l C h a n g e a n d In d u s tr ia l R e v o lu tio n C o a l M in in g in S o u th w e st L a n c a sh ire ,
1 5 9 0 -1 9 0 0 , Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1979.
Lawley, I., ‘Art and ornament in iron: design and the Coalbrookdale Company ’, unpublished
M S, IGM T library, 1979.
Lawton, R., ‘Population and society ’, in R.A. Dodgson and R.A. Budin, eds, A N e w H isto ric a l
G e o g ra p h y o f E n g la n d a n d W a les, London, Academic Press, 1978.
Leese, J.S., ‘Old English power plants’, P o w er, 1912, vol. 36, pp. 108 — 9.
Levine, D., F a m ily F o rm a tio n in a n A g e o f N a sc e n t C a p ita lism , London, Academic Press, 1977.
Lewis, M .J.T., E a rly W o od e n R a ilw a y s, London, Routledge, 1970.
Lockett, TA., C o lle c tin g V ic to ria n T iles, London, Antique Collectors ’ Club, 1982.
Lowe, J., W e lsh In d u s tr ia l W o rk e rs ’ H o u sin g , Cardiff, National M useum of W ales, 1977.
---- ‘Housing as a source for industrial history ’, In d u str ia l A rc h a e o lo g y , 1982, vol. 8, pp. 13 —
35.
M acdonald, M ., ‘The Craven Dunnill clay arcs ’, unpublished essay, Ironbridge Institute,
University of Birmingham, 1988.
M achin, R., ‘The great re-building, a reassessment ’, P a st a n d P re se n t, 1977, no. 77, pp. 33-56.
---- T h e H o u se s o fY e tm in ste r, Bristol, University of Bristol Department of Extramural Studies,
1978.
M acleod, M ., Stratton, M ., and Trinder, B., L la n y m y n e c h H ill: A n A rc h a e o lg o ic a la n d H isto ric a l
E v a lu a tio n , for L&R Consultants, Ironbridge, Ironbridge Institute, 1987.
M alam, J., ‘W hite salt-glazed stoneware manufactured at Jackfield ’, W est M id la n d s A rc h a e o lo g y ,
1981, vol. 24, pp. 45-50.
M arshall, J., T h e S e v e rn V a lley R a ilw a y Newton Abbot, David &: Charles, 1989.
M athias, P., T h e F irst In d u s tr ia l N a tio n : A n E c o n o m ic H isto ry o f B r ita in 1 7 0 0 — 1 9 1 4 , London,
M ethuen, 1969, reprinted 1974.
M atkin, R.B., ‘John Rennie ’s diary of a journey through northern England, 1784 ’, E a st K e n t
M a r itim e T ru st H isto ric a l S tu d y N o . 2 , 1986, pp. 23 — 6.
M aw, G., ‘Notes on the drift deposits of the valley of the Severn ’, Q u a rte rly J o u r n a l o f th e
G e o lo g ic a l S o c ie ty o f L o n d o n , 1864, vol. 20, p. 142.
M edick, H.» ‘The proto-industrial family economy: the structural function of household and
family during the transition from peasant to industrial capitalism ’, S o c ia l H isto ry , 1976,
vol. 1.
M endels, E, ‘Agriculture and peasant industry in eighteenth-century Flanders ’, J o u r n a l o f
E c o n o m ic H is to r y 1972, vol. 27, pp. 241-61.

238
 B IB L IO G R A P H Y wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUT

M ercer, E., baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

E n g lish V e rn a c u la r H o u se s, London, HM SO, 1979.
M essenger, M ., P o tte ry a n d T iles o f th e S e v e rn V a lley, London, Remploy, 1979.
M itchell, I., ‘The development of urban retailing 1700 — 1815 ’, in P. Clark, ed., T h e T ran s ­
fo r m a tio n o f E n g lish P ro v in c ia l T o w n s 1 6 0 0 — 1 8 0 0 , London, Hutchinson, 1984.
M ott, R.A., ‘Abraham Darby 1 and II and the coal-iron industry ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e N e w c o m e n
S o c ie ty , 1957, vol. 31, pp. 49-94.
------- ‘The Coalbrookdale Group Horsehay W orks part I ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e N e w c o m e n S o ciety,
1957, vol. 31, pp. 271-87.
------- 'The Coalbrookdale Group Horsehay W orks part II ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e N e w c o m e n
S o c ie ty , 1959, vol. 32, pp. 43-56.
M ugridge, A.J., B ric k a n d T ile M a n u fa c to rie s in th e S e v e rn G o rg e, Jackfield, Orchard Press,
1987.
M urchison, R.I., S ilu ria , 4th edn, London, John M urray, 1867.
M uter, W .G., T h e B u ild in g s o f a n In d u stria l C o m m u n ity , Chichester, Phillimore, 1979.
NefF, J.U., T h e R ise o f th e B ritish C o a l In d u stry , London, Routledge, 1932.
Newton, G.D., ‘Single storey cottages in W est Yorkshire ’, F o lk L ife , 1976, vol. 14, pp. 65-74.
Newton, R., ‘ Exeter 1770-1870 ’, in M .A. Simpson and TH . Lloyd, eds, M id d le C la ss H o u sin g
in B rita in , Newton Abbot, David & Charles, 1977.
Norris, G., ‘A survey of the heavy erecring shop, Coalbrookdale ’, unpublished essay, Ironbridge
Institute, Birmingham University, 1989.
Norris, W , ‘Horsehay Ironworks ’, unpublished M S, IGM T library, 1876.
Oliver, P., Davis, I. and Bentley, L, D u n r o a m in : T h e E n g lish S u b u r b a n S e m i a n d Its E n e m ie s,
London, Barrie & Jenkins, 1981.
Ove Arup, L im esto n e M in e s in th e W re k in A re a , Report for Shropshire County Council, 1986.
Pannett, D., ‘Fish weirs on the River Severn ’, S h ro p sh ire N e w sle tte r, 1972, vol. 41, pp. 4 — 7.
Parton, T., N o te s o n th e S h ro p sh ire C o a lfie ld , London, Colliery Guardian Office, 1868.
Pawson, E„ ‘The framework of industrial change ’ in R.A. Dodgson, and R.A. Butlin, eds, A
N e w H isto ric a l G e o g ra p h y o f E n g la n d London, Academic Press, 1978.
Pears, A., ‘M aw and Company: 1900-1910 ’, unpublished dissertation, Ironbridge Institute,
University of Birmingham, 1989.
Peskin, S., ‘The changes of rime ’, unpublished M S, IGM T library, 1945.
------- ‘Early recollections of Coalbrookdale and some of its villages and incidental events ’,
unpublished M S, IGM T library, 1948.
Pevsner, N., P io n e e rs o f M o d e rn D e sig n : F ro m W illia m M o rris to W a lte r G ro p iu s, Har-
mondsworth, Penguin, 1975.
Pickering, R., ‘The Dunge Brick and Tile W orks ’, dissertation, Ironbridge Institute, University
of Birmingham, 1988.
Pierson, W H ., ‘Notes on early industrial architecture in England ’, J o u r n a l o f th e S o c ie ty o f
A rc h ite c tu ra l H isto ria n s, 1949, vol. 8, pp. 1 — 31.
Plymley, J., A G e n e ra l V ie w o f th e A g ric u ltu re o f S h ro p sh ire , London, Board of Agriculture,
1803.
Pooley, C., ‘Choice and constraint in the nineteenth-century city: a basis for residential
segretation', in J.H. Johnson, and C. Pooley, eds, T h e S tr u c tu r e o f N in e te e n th -C e n tu r y C itie s,
London, Croom Helm, 1962.
Presrwich, J., ‘On the geology of Coalbrookdale ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e G e o lo g ic a l S o c ie ty o f L o n d o n ,
1836, series 25, pp. 413-95.
Pyne, W .H., M ic ro c o sm : O r a P ic tu re sq u e D e lin e a tio n o f th e A rts. A g ric u ltu re s a n d In d u strie s o f
G re a t B rita in , reprinted 1974. Luton, Luton M useum. 1808.
Rackham, O., T h e H isto ry o f th e C o u n n y siile , London. Dent, 1987.
Raisrrick, A., D y n a sty o f lro n fo u n d e rs, London. Longmans, Green & Co, 1953.
Randall, J., T h e C la y In d u strie s In c lu d in g th e F ic tile a n d C e ra m ic A r ts o n th e B a n k s o f th e
S e v e rn ..., M adeley, The Salopian and W est M idland Journal Office, 1877.

239
 BIBLIO GRAPHY

Randall, J., B baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

ro se le y a n d Its S u rro u n d in g s, M adeley, The Salopian and W est M idland Journal
Office, 1879.
------- A H isto ry o f M a d e le y reprinted 1975, Shrewsbury, Salop County Library, 1880.
Richards, J.M ., T h e F u n c tio n a l T ra d itio n in E a rly In d u s tria l B u ild in g s, London, Architectural
Press, 1958.
Rimmell, L., ‘An archaeological and historical study of the eighteenth and nineteenth century
pottery industry at Jackfield Shropshire ’, dissertation, Ironbridge Institute, University of
Birmingham, 1983.
Roberts, B.K., R u r a l S e ttle m e n t, Basingstoke, M acmillan Education, 1987.
Roger, R., ‘Rents and ground rents: housing and the land market in nineteenth-century Britain ’,
jo u r n a l o f H isto ric a l G e o g ra p h y , 1979, vol. 4, pp. 129 — 44.
Rowlands, M ., M a ste rs a n d M e n in th e W e st M id la n d s Iro n T ra d es b e fo re th e In d u str ia l R e v o lu tio n ,
M anchester, M anchester University Press, 1975.
------- ‘Society and industry in the W est M idlands at the end of the seventeenth century ’,
M id L in d H isto ry, 1977, vol. 4, pp. 48 — 60.
Rowley, T, T h e S h ro p sh ire L a n d sc a p e , London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1972.
------- V illa g e s in th e L a n d sc a p e , London, Dent, 1978.
Royal Commission on Historical M onuments, W o rk e rs ’ H o u s in g in W e st Y o rksh ire 1 7 5 0 — 1 9 2 0 ,
London, HM SO, 1985.
------- R u r a l H o u se s o f th e L a n c a sh ire P e n n in e s 1 5 6 0 -1 7 6 0 , London, HM SO, 1986.
Rule, J. T h e E x p erien c e o f L a b o u r in E ig h te e n th C e n tu ry E n g la n d , London, Croom Helm, 1979.
---- T h e L a b o u r in g C la sses in E a rly In d u stria l E n g la n d , London, Longman, 1986.
Savage, R.E and Smith, L.D., ‘The waggonways and plateways of east Shropshire ’, thesis,
School of Architecture, University of Birmingham, 1965.
Scola, R., ‘Retailing in the nineteenth-century town ’, in J.H. Johnson and C. Pooley, eds, T h e
S tru c tu re o f N in e te e n th -C e n tu r y C itie s, London, Croom Helm, 1982.
Shaw, G. and W ild, M .T., ‘Retail patterns in the Victorian city ’, T ra n sa c tio n s o f th e In s titu te o f
B ritish G e o g ra p h e rs, 1979, vol. 4, pp. 278 — 91.
Shaw, S., H isto ry o f th e S ta ffo rd sh ire P o tte rie s a n d th e R ise a n d P ro g ress o f th e M a n u fa c tu r e o f
P o tte ry a n d P o rc e la in , Hanley, Simeon Shaw, 1829.
Shropshire Archaeological and Parish Register Society, T h e S h ro p sh ire H e a r th T a x R e tu rn o f
1 6 7 2 , 1949.
Simpson, M .A. and Lloyd, TH ., eds, M id d le -C la ss H o u s in g in B rita in , Newton Abbot, David &
Charles, 1977.
Skempton, A.W . and Johnston, H.R., ‘The first iron frames ’, A rch ite c tu ra l R e v ie w , 1962,
vol. 131, pp. 175-86.
Slater, T.R., ‘Family, society and the ornamental villa on the fringes of English country towns ’,
J o u r n a l o f H isto ric a l G eo g ra p h y, 1978, vol. 4, pp. 129 — 44.
Smith, D.M ., ‘ Industrial architecture in the Potteries ’, N o r th S ta ffo rd sh ire J o u r n a l o f F ie ld
S tu d ie s, 1965, vol. 5, pp. 81 — 93.
Smith, N., ‘The Upper Forge, Coalbrookdale ’, essay, Ironbridge Institute, University of Birm ­
ingham, 1988.
------- An investigation into the commercial life, trades and craft-industries of nineteenth ­
century M uch W enlock ’, dissertation, Ironbridge Institute, University of Birmingham,
1989.
Smith, R.S., ‘England ’s first rails: a reconsideration ’, R e n a issa n c e a n d M o d e r n S tu d ie s, 1960,
pp. 119-34.
Smith, S., ‘New light on the Bedlam Furnaces, Ironbridge, Telford ’, J o u r n a l o f th e H isto ric a l
M e ta llu r g y S o c ie ty 1979, vol. 13, pp. 21 — 30.
---- A V iew fr o m th e Ir o n B rid g e , Ironbridge, IGM T, 1979.
Smith, W .A., ‘A Swedish view of the W est M idlands in 1802-3 ’, J o u r n a l o f W e st M id la n d s
S tu d ie s, 1970, vol. 3, pp. 45-54.

240
 B IB L IO G R A P H Y

Sutcliffe, A., ‘In pursuit of the urban variable ’, in D. Fraser and A. Sutcliffe, eds, baZYXWVUTS T h e P u rsu it
o f U rb a n H isto ry , London, Edward Arnold, 1983.
Swannington Festival Group, S w a n n in g to n V illa g e T ra il, privately printed, 1982.
Tann, J., T h e D e v e lo p m e n t o f th e F a c to ry London, Cornmarket, 1970.
Tarn, J.N., F iv e P e rc e n t P h ila n th ro p y Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1973.
Terry, R., ‘An archaeological survey of the W illey Valley ’, essay, Ironbridge Institute, University
of Birmingham, 1989.
Thirsk, J., ‘Industries in the countryside ’, in EJ. Fisher, ed., E ssa ys in th e E c o n o m ic a n d S o cia l
H isto ry o f T u d o r a n d S tu a r t E n g la n d in H o n o u r o f R .H . T a w n e y Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, 1961.
Thomas, E., ‘Origin of the Ironbridge Gorge M useum Trust’, unpublished M S, IGM T library,
1982.
Thomas, J., T h e R ise o f th e S ta ffo rd sh ire P o tte rie s, London, Adams & Dent, 1971.
Thom pson, H. and W inkworth, A., L ittle D a w le y 1 9 8 3 — 5 , Ironbridge, IGMAU, 1988.
Thorn, F. and Thorn, C., D o m e sd a y B o o k : S h ro p sh ire , Chichester, Phillimore, 1986.
Toghill, P., G e o lo g y in S h ro p sh ire , Shrewsbury, Swan Hill Press, 1990.
Toghill, P. and Chell, K„ ‘Shropshire geology-stratigraphic and tectonic history ’, F ie ld S tu d ie s
1984, vol. 6, pp. 59-101.
Tolley, R.S., ‘Comments on the changing industrial geography of eastern Shropshire ’, W est
M id la n d s S tu d ie s, 1972, vol. 5, pp. 1-10.
Trinder, B.S., T h e M o s t E x tra o rd in a ry D is tr ic t in th e W o rld : Iro n b rid g e a n d C o a lb roo kd a le,
Chichester, Phillimore, 1977; 2nd edn, 1988.
------- C o a lp o rt N e w T o iu n , Ironbridge, IGMT, 1978.
------- C o a lb ro o k d a le 1 8 0 1 : A C o n te m p o ra ry D e sc rip tio n , Ironbridge, IGMT, 1979.
------- ‘Coalport Bridge: a study in historical interpretation ’, In d u str ia l A rc h a e o lo g y R eview ,
1979, vol. 3, pp. 153-7.
------- T h e In d u s tria l R e v o lu tio n in S h ro p sh ire , 2nd edn, Chichester, Phillimore, 1981.
------- ‘The open village in industrial Britain ’, in M arie Nisser, ed., In d u s tr ia l H e rita g e : T ra n s ­
a c tio n s o f th e T h ird In te r n a tio n a l C o n fe re n c e o n th e C o n se rv a tio n o f In d u s tria l M o n u m e n ts,
Stockholm, 1981.
------- T h e M a k in g o f th e In d u s tria l L a n d sc a p e , Gloucester, Alan Sutton, 1987.
------- ‘The development of the integrated ironworks in the eighteenth century ’, T h e In stitu te
o f M e ta ls H a n d b o o k a n d L is t o f M e m b e rs, 1988, pp. 217 — 26, London, Institute of M etals.
Trinder, B.S. and Cox, J., Y e o m e n a n d C o llie rs in T elfo rd , London, Phillimore, 1980.
------- M in e r s a n d M a rin e rs: P ro b a te In v e n to rie s fo r B ro se le y a n d Iro n b rid g e , forthcoming.
Trueman, M ., ed., A rc h a eo lo g y in Iro n b rid g e 1 9 8 5 — 6 : W o rk C a rried O u t b y th e Iro n b rid g e G o rg e
M u se u m A rc h a e o lo g y U n it, Ironbridge, IGMAU, 1986.
------- A rc h a e o lo g y in Iro n b rid g e 1 9 8 1 — 5 : W o rk C a rried O u t b y th e Iro n b rid g e G o rg e M u se u m
A rc h a e o lo g y U n it, Ironbridge, IGMAU, 1988.
Tylecote, R., A H isto ry o f M e ta llu rg y London, The M etals Society, 1976.
Upton, D., ‘Vernacular domestic architecture in eighteenth-century Virginia ’, in D. Upton
and J.M . Vlach, eds, C o m m o n P la ces: R e a d in g s in A m e ric a n V e rn a c u la r A rc h ite c tu re , Athens,
Ga, University of Georgia Press, 1986.
Upton, D. and Vlach, J.M ., C o m m o n P la ces: R e a d in g s in A m e r ic a n V e rn a c u la r A rc h ite c tu re ,
Athens, Ga, University of Georgia Press, 1986.
Ure, A., T h e P h ilo so p h y o f M a n u fa c tu re s, London, Bohn, 1835, 3rd edn, 1861.
VCH, T h e V ic to ria H isto ry o f th e C o u n ty o f S ta ffo r d V o lu m e II, 1967.
------- V ic to ria H isto ry o f th e C o u n tie s o f E n g la n d , S h ro p sh ire V o lu m e I, reprinted 1968, London,
Dawsons for Institute of Historical Research.
------- T h e V ic to ria H isto ry o f S h ro p sh ire V o lu m e II, London, Oxford University Press, 1973.
------- T h e V ic to ria H isto ry o f S h ro p sh ire : V o lu m e X , London, Oxford University Press, 1985.
------- T h e V ic to ria H isto ry o f S h ro p sh ire : V o lu m e X I, T elfo rd , London, Oxford University Press,
1985.

241 gfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
 B IB L IO G R A P H Y

W anklyn, M .D.G., ‘John W eld of W illey 1585-1665: an enterprising landowner of the early
17th century ’, J o u r n a l o f th e W ilk in so n S o c ie ty , 1969, vol. 3, pp. 88-99.
------- ‘John W eld of W illey: estate management 1631-1660 ’, J o u r n a l o f th e W ilk in so n S o ciety,
1970-1, vol. 4, pp. 63-71.
------- ‘ Industrial development in the Ironbridge Gorge before Abraham Darby ’, W e st M id la n d s
S tu d ie s, 1982, vol. 15, pp. 3-7.
W ardell Armstrong, L im e sto n e M in e s in th e W re k in A re a : P h a se 1 R e p o rt, for Shropshire County
Council, 1984.
W arnes, A.M ., ‘ Residential patterns in an emerging industrial town ’, in B.D. Clark , and
M .B. Gleave, eds, S o c ia l P a tte rn s in C itie s, Institute of British Geographers Special Pub ­
lication 5, London, Institute of British Geographers, 1973.
W hitehand, J.W .R., ‘Background to the urban morphogenetic tradition ’, and ‘Conzenian
ideas: extension and development’, in T h e U rb a n L a n d sc a p e , Institute of British Geographers,
Special Publication no. 13, London, Academic Press, 1981.
W hitehead, T.H., Robertson, T„ Pocock, R.W . and Dixon, E.L., T h e C o u n tr y b e tw e e n W o l ­
v e rh a m p to n a n d O a k e n g a te s S h e e t 1 5 3 , M emoirs of the Geological Survey, 1928.
W iggins, W .E., A n c ie n t W o o d la n d in th e T elfo rd A re a , Telford, Telford Development Cor ­
poration, Stirchley Grange, 1986.
W illiams, W .H., ‘Dawley New Town historical survey: industries’, unpublished M S, IGM T
library, 1964.
W ood, J.M ., ‘Company housing for the Shropshire iron foundries ’, University of Liverpool
thesis for Royal Institute of British Architects, 1974.
W rathmell, S., ‘The vernacular threshold of northern peasant houses ’, V e rn a c u la r A rc h ite c tu re ,
1984, vol. 15, pp. 29-33.
Young, A., T o u rs in E n g la n d a n d W a les, London, London School of Economics, 1776, reprinted
1932.

B i b l io g r a p h y o f M a p s wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXW
c.1621
T h e P lo tt o f B ro seley
Samuel Parsons, with amendments by Francis Langley.
SRO 1224/1/32.

1637
P lo t o f c e rta in e c o m o n s ly in g w ith in y e to w n e sh ip p s o f P o sn a ll B e n ta ll B ra d le y & W y k e in y e
c o u n tie o f S a lo p . ..
Samuel Parsons
SRO 1224/1/18

1637-8 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
P la tt o f th e C o m m o n s in B ro seley, B e n ta ll, B ra d le y a n d W y k e
Samuel Parsons
SRO 1224/1/19

1658
P lo t o fth e B o u n d s o f th e C o m m o n in B ro seley
SRO 1224/1/21

1658
M a p o f L a n g le y s T e n e m e n t
SRO 1224/1/33

242
 B IB L IO G R A P H Y wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSR
1 67 6
M a p sh o w in g la n d s th ro u g h w h ic h m in in g in se ts p a sse d
SRO 3703/10

1 7 28 /65
B ro se le y H a ll E sta te M a p
In two folios, with additions in 1760s and early nineteenth century
SBL

1752
C a rte to p o g ra p h iq u e d e la c o m te d e S a lo p o u S h ro p sh ire
John Roque
SBL

1753
A P la n o f C o a lb ro o k d a le
Thomas Slaughter
1GM T jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA

1780
A S u rv e y o f C a u g h le y E sta te in th e P a rish o f B a rro w a n d th e C o u n ty o f S a lo p
Thomas Bryan
SRO 1224

1 78 6
P la n o f th a t p a r t o f C o a lb ro o k d a le b o u n d e d b y th e la n d s o fJ o h n P o w is S ta n le y
G. Young, W orcester
S R O C o op er & C o . 1 68 1, B o x 179

1788
P la n o f a N a v ig a b le C a n a l p ro p o se d to b e m a d e fr o m th e M a r q u is o f S ta ffo r d ’s C a n a l in L illish a ll
P a rish to c o m m u n ic a te w ith th e R iv e r S e v e rn a t S ty c h e ’s W e ir n e a r C o a lb ro o k d a le . ..
George Young, W orcester
1": 1 furlong
B ou lto n & W a tt C o llec tion , B irm in g ha m .

1805
M a p re fe rrin g to th e a n n e x e d lea se, Coalbrookdale
SRO Cooper & Co. 1681, Box 138

1 8 08
M a p o f S h ro p sh ire
Robert Baugh
Reprinted 1983, Alan Sutton for Shropshire Archaeological Society, with an introduction by baZYXWVUTSR
Barrie Trinder.

1 8 14 -15
O rd n a n c e S urv e y D ra ft M a p S h e e t 2 1 3
2 ": m ile
SBL

1827
M a p o fth e C o u n ty o f S a lo p fr o m a n A c tu a l S u rv e y m a d e in th e y e a rs 1 8 2 6 a n d 1 8 2 7
J. tc C. Greenwood.
1 ": m ile
SRO/SBL

243
 B IB L IO G R A P H Y wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVU
1833
F irst E d ition O rd n a n ce S u rvey M a p
Sheet 41, Shrewsbury
1": mile
Reprinted David & Charles, 1980.

1835
M a p o fth e P a rish o f B e n th a ll in th e F ra n chise o fW e n lo c k a n d C o u n ty o fS a lo p e: th e esta te o f
T h o m a s H a rries E sq.
Surveyed by W. Hitchcock 1800
Alterations surveyed and map drawn by A. Hitchcock 1835
3 chains: inch
SRO 3956

1838
A m a p o f C o a lb ro o k-D a le Iro n w o rks in th e P a rish o fM a d e ley in th e C o u ntry o f S a lo p referred to
th e A n n e xe d L ea se
SRO Cooper & Co. 1681, Box 138

1840
Broseley Tithe Map
IGM T

1840
Sutton Maddock Tithe Map

1844
P la n o f th e P a ro ch ia l C h a p elry o fB en th a ll in th e C o u n ty o fS a lo p
Benrhall Tithe Map
6 chains: inch
SRO

1847
P la n o f th e P a rish o fM a d e le y in th e C o u n ty o fS a lo p In th ree p a rts w ith E n larg em ents
Madeley Tithe Map
Part 1 — 3 chains: inch
Part 2 — Enlargement showing lower part of Coalbrookdale lj chains: inch
Part 3 — Enlargement showing upper part of Coalbrookdale 1| chains: inch
SRO

1856
S h ro p sh ire U n io n R a ilw a y a n d C a n a l
1:3168
SRO DR 367.

1857
P la n to C o n n ect th e S evern V a lley R a ilw a y w ith th e S h ro p sh ire U n io n T erm in u s a t C o a lp o rt
1:3168.
SRO DR 369a.

1883 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
F irst E d itio n
Ordnance Survey
25": mile
Sheets 43.11. 43.12, 43.13, 43.14, 43.15, 51.1, 51.2, 51.3, 51.4, 51.5, 51.6, 51.7.

244
 B IB L IO G R A P H Y wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUTS
1902
S eco n d E d itio n
Ordnance Survey
25": mile
Sheets 43.11, 43.12, 43.13, 43.14, 43.15, 51.1, 51.2, 51.3, 51.4, 51.5, 51.6, 51.7.
1927
R evised E dition
Ordnance Survey
25": mile
Sheets 43.11, 43.12, 43.13, 43.14, 43.15, 51.1, 51.2, 51.3, 51.4, 51.5, 51.6, 51.7.
1956-8
R evised E ditio n
Ordnance Survey
1: 2500
Sheets: SJ 6702, 6703, 6802, 6803, 6902, 6903
1961-5
D a w ley D evelo p m en t C o rp o ra tio n P h o to g ra m m etric S u rvey o f D evelo p m en t A rea
1:500
Sheets: 0412, 1512, 0514, 0513, 0611, 0612, 0613, 1614, 0710, 0711, 1308, 1309, 1407,
1408, 1409, 1410, 1507, 1508, 1509, 1511, 1512
IGMT
1970 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
R evised E d ition
Ordnance Survey
1: 2500
Sheets: 6802, 6902
1978
Geological Survey
1: 10560
Sheet: SJ60SE

245
 INDEX

Abraham Darby Furnace see Upper Furnace Benthall M arsh 16

Adams ’ Ferry 80, 81 Benthall Parish 40
adit see coal-mining Benthall Pipeworks 109
agriculture 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 37, Benthall Pottery xv, 22, 28, 54, 55, 81, 96,
56, 57, 59, 118 — 19, 126, 156; agricultural 98
buildings 87, 88; agricultural lime 34, 36, Benthall Rail 36, 82
37 Benrhall Valley 31, 67, 104, 142
Albert Edward Bridge xv, 84 Benthall, Lawrence 14 — 16
aluminium smelter 108 Birmingham 83
Apley 31 Black Country 48, 126
archaeology 3, 4, 5, 33, 51, 56, 70, 74, 76, Blakeway, Edward 22, 99, 100
95, 200, 203; of buildings 9, 89, 111, baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJI
blast furnace see ironworking
112 — 13; excavation 4, 42, 59, 77; Blisrs Hill 13, 50, 57, 72, 156; brickworks
landscape survey 3-5, 35-6, 56, 59, 60, xv, 84, 103, 109 {see a lso M adeley W ood
199, 203; of riverside 78; plot survey 5, 6; Company); calcining 48; canal 48, 74, 76
stratigraphy 4, 5, 35, 75; typology 4, 5 (see a lso Shropshire Union Canal,
Arts and Crafts movement 104 Coalport Canal); coal-mining 43, 54;
Ironworks xv, 28, 57, 89, 202; tramways
barge see trow 70; 71, 72; see a lso Ironbridge Gorge
Barnetts Leasow ironworks xiv, 23, 24 M useum
Barrow 14 Boring M ill 62, 64; pool 62, 64, 66
Bedlam Brickworks see M adeley W ood Bower Yard 17, 52, 54, 78 (see a lso
Company brickworks brickworks: Burtons ’)
Bedlam Hall 115, 118 Bradley, W alter 22, 99, 100
Bedlam ironworks xiv 23, 37, 40, 49, 65, 71, brass 19
108, 132, 202 Brewery Inn, Coalport 78
Bedlam rails 71,72, 82 see a lso tramways brick- and tile-making 18, 19, 20, 21, 22,
bell pit see coal-mining 26, 27, 40, 41,42, 49, 50, 51, 52, 84,
Belmont House, Ironbridge 122, 173 101-4; fire 106; see a lso building materials,
Benthall 16, 17, 27, 31,36, 67, 68, 69, 78, brick and tileworks
81, 104, 109; coal-mining 14, 15, 16, 41, brick and tileworks xv; Broseley 102;
42, 44, 46, 52, 116, 123; parish 12, 40; Burtons ’ 52, 54, 55; Coalford 102, 109;
pottery manufacturing 19, 22, 28, 54, 55, Doughty ’s 111; Dunge 50; Exleys 104;
81,96, 98; settlement 13, 116, 118, 123, Hollygrove 50, 58, 102; Ladywood 58,
126, 152 102; M ilburgh 111; The Rock 111
Benrhall Edge 5, 13, 34, 35, 37, 38, 73, bricks see building materials
84 Bridge Bank 22, 28, 56, 82, 83
Benthall Ironworks xiv, 23, 24, 27, 56, 57, bridges 79-81; see a lso Albert Edward Bridge,
82, 104 Buildwas Bridge, Coalport Bridge,

246
 IND EX

Coalport M emorial Bridge, Free Bridge, Carboniferous 34, 37

Iron Bridge, Newdale Bridge Carpenters Row, Coalbrookdale 65, 162
Bridgnorth 14, 16, 51, 70, 79, 82 cast iron reeiron
Brierly Hill, Coalbrookdale xiv, 71, 74, 76; Caughley xiv, 12, 16, 71; mining 41,42,46,
see a lso inclined planes 52, 57; pottery manufacture 21, 22, 52,
brine extraction 18, 49 53, 54, 97-9
Brockholes, Ironbridge 120 Caughley Roundhouse 99
Bronze Age 67 Caughley China W orks 21, 97 — 9
Brooke, Basil 14, 15, 16, 87, 108 Caughley Place 99
Brooke, John 15 Caughley Saggar W orks 22, 52, 53, 54, 98
Broseley 13, 14, 16, 17, 19, 27, 29, 36, 57, chainmaking 110
70, 79, 138; brick- and tile-making 27, charcoal 1, 15, 19, 23, 47, 66 see a lso blast
50, 51, 104 {see a lso Jackfield, brick- and furnace
tile-making); clay pipe-making xv, 54, Charity Row 65, 185
109; coal-mining 14, 16, 17, 41,44, 46; Chester 13
ironstone-mining 46; ironworking 23, 24, Chillcotts Ltd 110
25, 57; mill 13; Parish 12, 13; pottery china see pottery: porcelain
manufacture 18, 22; roads 79, 80, 82, 83; Church Hill, Ironbridge 79, 82, 110
settlement 13, 16, 19, 57, 116, 118, 147, Church Road, Coalbrookdale 83
151, 165; woodland 13, 41, 57; see a lso churches see Coalbrookdale, Jackfield,
Broseley W ood, Jackfield, Ladywood Ironbridge
Broseley Hall Estate M ap see maps Civil W ar 16
Broseley Ironworks xiv, 23, 24, 25, 57, 102 clay 8, 14, 18,21,22, U , 28,31,32,37,40,
Broseley Tile M anufacturers Society 51 41,46, 103; fireclay 52; mining 19, 29,
Broseley tileries 102 42, 49-55, 57, 58
Broseley W ood 16, 17,40, 49,81, 102, 109; clay pipe-making 16, 18, 19, 20, 49, 54, 81,
settlement 119, 123, 132, 155 109
BrufF, Charles 101 Clifford W illiams Ltd 111
Clifford, James 14, 16, 17, 42, 70, 73, 78
building industry 172, 183 — 4, 186-8; house ­
building 158, 171 p a ssim \ house-design Coach Road, Coalbrookdale 81, 82
160, 166, 173 p a ssim -, house-planning Coal M easures 40, 41,46, 48, 49, 50, 52
177 — 9 p a ssim coal 8, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,21,23,31,
building materials: brick 19, 49, 50, 51, 52, 32, 37, 40-6, 55, 78, 79
79, 82, 89, 112, 173, 182-3; concrete 79, coal-mining 15, 17, 22, 27, 40, 47, 57, 58,
80, 81; lime 34, 35, 37; roof tiles 26, 27, 70, 72; adits 14, 41,42, 43, 44, 46, 126 —
7; bell pits 16, 41, 42, 52, 53, 57; long ­
51, 52, 58, 86 {see a lso roof tiles); slag 56;
slate 27, 51,104; sandstone 48, 49, 78, wall 33, 41, 42, 45; open-cast 46; and
80, 83, 87, 88, 110; timber 87, 171; see settlement 126; shafts 33, 41,44
a lso cast-iron, limestone Coalbrookdale 13, 14, 15, 19, 30, 36, 49,
Buildwas 31,78 see a lso Stone Port 56, 62, 63, 64, 73, 74, 79, 83, 101; church
Buildwas Abbey 12, 13, 14,36,49 71; industrial buildings 15, 19,62, 64,65,
Buildwas Bridge 79, 81, 82 87, 88, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 108, 109, ill;
burgage plots 13 M ethodist Chapel 62; pools 62, 64, 65,
Burtons brickworks 52, 54, 55 66, 67, 68; settlement 119-23, 127, 133»
162; tramways 71, 72, 75, 83
Calbroke Smithy 88 Coalbrookdale Com pany 8, 20, 23, 25, 26,
Calcutts House 122, 173 28, 37, 66, 75, 76, 83, 84, 89, 91, 191,
Calcutts Ironworks xiv, 23, 29, 37, 58, 78, 202; brickworks 49, 102; housing 133,
111 162-3, 184 — 5; ironworks 16, 24, 28, 36,
Calcutts, Jackfield 18,31,78, 116, 133 46, 49, 62, 73, 94, 139 {see a lso Upper
canals 21, 23, 25, 28, 40, 71, 74-6, 78 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
see Furnace, Lower Furnace)
a lso Shropshire Union Canal, Blists Hill Coalford 102, 109, 116, 133
canal, Coalport canal Coalmoor 22

247
 IN DEX

Coalport 43, 48, 56, 76, 78, 80, 81, 83, 102; Ferriday, W illiam 70
canal 74, 77 (se e a lso Shropshire Union ferries 79, 80, 81, 123
Canal); ferry 90; pottery manufacture 21, fish weirs 12, 13, 17
22, 28, 29, 54, 59, 84, 96, 98-101; Ford, Richard 121, 180
settlement 134, 162-3, 165; station xv, 84 Forest Law 12, 13
Coalport and Jackfield M emorial Bridge 79, Forest of Dean 14, 15
80 Foster, James 48, 78
Coalport Bridge xiv, 78, 80, 81, 134, 202 Fowler, John 84
Coalport China W orks xiv, 21, 22, 28, 29, Fox, Shadrach 62
54, 59, 84, 96, 98, 99-101,111 Foxholes, Ironbridge 120
Colepitt Hill, Broseley Frank Hawker Ltd 29, 110
commercial buildings 197 Free Bridge 40, 48, 79, 80
Coneybury Ironworks xiv, 23, 57 Furnace Bank Farm, Coalbrookdale 159-60
Conservation Area 2, 30, 202, 203
copper-smelting 19 Gallimore, Ambrose 52, 98
Craven Dunnill Tileworks, Jackfield xv, 27, Gleeden Hill 37
28, 29, 52, 84, 96, 97, 104-8, 111 Glynwed Company 93
Crawstone 46, 47, 48 Golden Ball Inn, M adeley W ood 120
Croppers Holes, Jackfield 57 Great Exhibition 25
Crown Inn, Ironbridge 139 Great Forge see Upper Forge
Great W arehouse, Coalbrookdale xv, 92, 94,
Dale Company see Coalbrookdale Company 95
Dale End 29, 108, 109; see a lso Severn Great W estern Railway 83
Foundry, Severn W arehouse Guest, Charles 102
Dale House 65, 120, 173, 179
Darby Furnace see Upper Furnace Hallen ’s Forge see Lower Forge
Darby, Abraham I 1, 19, 41, 46, 47, 88, 108 Harries, Edward 82, 96
Darby, Abraham II 47 Hartlebury 83
Darby, Edmund 92 Hartshorne, Hezekiah 78
Darby, Francis 25 Hawes, John 105
Davis, LB. 51 Hay Inclined Plane, Coalport xiv, 22, 75, 76,
Dearleap, Broseley 41, 46, 52, 57, 67 84, 134, 202
Deep Pit, Broseley 45 Haybrook Pottery, Benthall xiv, 22, 96, 98
Denny, James Haynes M emorial Bridge see Free Bridge
Derbyshire 13 hearth tax 118
Dissolution, the 13, 14, 15, 114, 119 Heslop Engine 43, 71, 76
Domesday Survey 12 High Riddings, Broseley 12, 14
Donnington W ood ironworks 23 Hollins, M ichael Daintry 105; see a lso
Doughty ’s Brickworks 111 M inton Hollins
Drill Hall, Ironbridge 111 Hollygrove Brickworks, Jackfield 50, 58, 102
Dundonald, Lord 22 Hornblower, Charles 49
Dunge Brickworks 50 horse gin 17, 62
Dunnill, H.P. 139 Horsehay 162
Horsehay Ironworks 23, 24, 25, 26,56, 65,
Eardington 23 66, 72, 93, 102, 107; Rolling M ills 91-2
Eele, M artin 18
baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
encaustic tiles T J , 54, 104-8; see a lso M aws ’ , inclined plane 14, 17, 22, 36, 46, 72-4, 75,
Craven Dunnill 76; see a lso Brierly Hill, Hay Inclined Plane
Engineering Shop see Erecting Shop Industrial Revolution 1,3, 11, 20, 21, 37,
enclosure 119 200
Erecting Shop, Coalbrookdale xv, 92, 93 industrial buildings 9, 29, 30, chapter 5;
/
Etruria W orks 99 adaptive reuse 84, 91, 100, 104, 107,
Exley ’s Brick and Tileworks, Jackfield 104 108 — 11; brick- and tile-making 27, 28, 51

248
 IND EX

101-4; engine houses 87, 103, 108; Ketley Ironworks 23, 25

garages 109; ironworking 15, 23, 25, 26; kiln: brick 27, 50, 51, 95, 101, 102, 103,
malthouses 15, 19, 29, 108, 109; pottery ­ 108; calcining 46, 48; clay pipe-making
making 19, 27; power in 111-12; 109; Dressier 107; encaustic tile 105-7;
warehouses 22, 29, 48, 76, 78, 92, 93, 94, lime 35, 36, 37, 202; malting 108; pottery
98, 108, 109; workshops 29, 109 — 10 see 18, 20, 23, 55, 87, 95-6, 99, 100, 101
a lso kilns King Street Pipeworks, Broseley 109
inns 123, 137
insert see coal-mining Ladywood 22, 42, 43, 48, 50, 54, 73, 77, 78,
Iron Bridge 1, 8, 11, 18, 30, 34, 36, 40, 42, 96, 116
49, 52, 78, 81, 83, 130, 202; construction Ladywood Brick and Tileworks xiv, 58, 102
of 79,80 Lawley 23, 162
iron: cast- 1, 19, 24, 25, 47, 71, 80, 82, 89, lead smelter xiv, 17, 18, 96, 109
94; wrought-iron 19, 47, 71,91; see a lso Leighton 79
ironworking Lightmoor 23, 83
Ironbridge 30, 37, 40, 48, 56, 77, 79, 81, Lightmoor Brickworks xv, 26; Ironworks xiv,
102; church 54, 138; commerce 136-7; 25, 66
industrial buildings 29, 109, 110; mining Lilleshall 23, 37
14, 36, 46, 47, 48, 49, 52; market 79, 83, limestone 8, 13, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38,
135 — 6; public services 138; roads 79, 82, 40, 56, 73; lime kilns 35, 36, 37, 202;
83, 110; settlement 134 — 41; station 54; mining 5, 35, 36, 37, 42, 84, 199; see a lso
see a lso M adeley W ood, W harfage Benthall Edge, Lincoln Hill
Ironbridge Gorge M useum 11,30, 76 see a lso Lincoln Hill 34, 36, 37, 42, 82, 83, 120
Blists Hill Linley 16, 42, 99
Ironbridge Power Station 46, 81 Listed buildings 2, 202, 203
ironstone 29, 31, 32, 37, 44; calcining 46, Literary and Scientific Institute 25
48; mining 14, 23,25,46-8 Little Dawley 88
ironworking 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 89; blast Little W enlock 12, 14, 54
furnace 23, 46, 49, 56, 61, 62, 87; local government 138, 142-3, 193-4
bloomery 14, 88; casting 24, 25, 56, 90; Llanymynech 37
charcoal furnace 15, 19, 23, 56, 62, 108; Lloyds, The, Jackfield 115
finery 47; forge 16, 19, 23, 24, 25, 56, 66, Lloyds Head, Jackfield 78, 116
91, 110; smelting 19, 20, 23, 26, 34, 36, Lloyds Coppice, M adeley 43, 58, 73
41, 56, 66; stamping and potting 23 — 4; Loadcroft W harf xiv, 17, 36, 76, 78, 84, 120
steel-making 15, 19, 26, 88; see a lso London & Northwestern Railway xiv, 76, 83
individual ironworks London 22
Long Forest 12
Jackfield 14, 18, 19, 21, 22, 28, 48, 58, 70, Long W arehouse 92
83, 84; brick- and tile-making 27, 50, 51, Lower Forge 62, 67, 109, 127
78, 102, 139 (se e brick and tileworks); Lower Furnace 62, 64, 65; pool 62, 64
coal-mining 42, 54, 57, 78, 108; pottery Lynam, Charles 27, 105
manufacture 22, 54, 95-6; Red Church
M adeley 12, 13, 15, 16, 17, 19, 23, 27, 49,
57; settlement 123, 133, 140; see a lso
Calcutts, Ladywood, Lloyd Head 79, 108, 111; coal-mining 43; roads 82,
Jackfield Pottery site 27, 28, 54, 105; see a lso
83
Craven Dunnill W orks M adeley Hill 82, 165
M adeley W ood 17, 23, 46, 47, 73, 81, 102;
Jackfield Tile M useum see Craven Dunnill
W orks settlement 115, 120, 127, 140, 147, 151,
Jesson, Richard 23 155, 165
M adeley W ood Com pany 23, 42, 43, 44,
Jiggers Bank, Coalbrookdale 71, 73, 75, 165
Jockey Bank, Ironbridge 156 103, 122; brickworks (Bedlam) 49, 52,
54, 108; see a lso Bedlam Ironworks, Blists
Ketley 24, 66, 74 baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
Hill Brickworks

249
 IN D E X wvutsrqponmlkjihgfedcbaZYXWVUT
M althouse, Coalbrookdale 15, 19, 88 pig iron see iron: cast-iron
M anchester 91 planning controls 2 — 3, 142 — 3, 193 — 4,
maps 74; Tithe M aps 5, 50, 78, 102, 133, 202-3
153-4; Ordnance Survey 70; Broseley Plate Forge see Lower Forge
Hall Estate M ap 42, 45, 123 — 5; Samuel plateways see railways
Parsons ’ 1621 map 43, 118, 146, 150-1 Plymley, Joseph 81
M arshall Osborne 29, 111 Plymley, Katherine 37
M aw & Co 27, 28, 54 pottery manufacture 18, 20, 41, 49, 123;
M aw, Arthur and George 27, 54, 104, 139 buildings 19, 22, T 7 , 94, 95-101, 113;
M aws ’ Tileworks, Benthall 54, 59, 104 — 5, kilns 18, 20, 22, 55, 87, 95-6, 99, 100,
106 101
M aws ’ Tileworks, Jackfield xv, 27, 59, 84, pottery: art 28, 51; coarse earthenware 18,
105, 106, 107, 108 19, 22, 28, 51; creamware 21, 96, 99;
M eadow W harf xiv, 17, 76, 78; jee a lso Jackfield ware 51; medieval 88; porcelain
wharves 21, 54, 59, 96-101, 104 {see a lso Caughley
M errythought Ltd 29, 110 — 11 China W orks, Coalport China W orks);
M iddle Forge, Coalbrookdale see Boring M ill salt-glazed 18; slipped earthenware 19, 54,
M ilburgh Tileries, Jackfield 111 95,96
M iles, John 96 Preens Eddy Bridge see Coalport Bridge
mills 12, 13,62, 65,67,91, 108 probate inventories 118
M inton Hollins ’ Factory, Stoke-on-Trent proto-industrialisation 2, 20, 118 — 20
105-8 public health 142
M inton, Herbert 104 public housing 143
M one W ood, Broseley 57
M ouchel-Hennebique 80 railways: Coalbrookdale rails 70, 71; standard
M uch W enlock 12, 13, 16, 34, 37, 79, 81, gauge 27, 28, 46, 51, 54, 72, 76, 77, 83-
110; see a lso W enlock Priory 5, 102; stations 54, 84; tramways 23, 35,
M ughouses pottery 95 36, 47, 52, 65, 70-4, 75, 78, 79, 81, 82,
M unn, Paul Sandby 37 83, 84; wooden wagonways 14, 15, 16,
M urchison, Roderick 35 17, 21,45; see a lso Great W estern Railway,
London and North W estern Railway,
nail-making 110 Severn Valley Railway
Nailers Row 120 Randall, John 11
Nantgarw pottery 101 Rennie, John 67
Navigation Bill 77 Resolution Engine 66
New Inn pipeworks see Benthall pipeworks retailing 137-8
New W illey Ironworks 23, 66 Reynolds, Richard 22
Newdale; housing 162; ironworks 23, 89 — Reynolds, W illiam 22, 76, 78, 100, 102, 162
91,94, 108; tramway bridge 71 Rock Brick and Tileworks, Jackfield 111
Norman Conquest 11,12 roof tiles: manufacture 26, 27, 50, 51, 52,
North Lights Buildings, Coalbrookdale 92 58, 101 — 4: see a lso brick and tileworks,
Nuffield Archaeological Survey 8 building materials; roof tiles
Nuway M anufacturing Company 110 Rose Cottage, Coalbrookdale 71, 87, 88
Rose, John 22, 99, 100, 101
Oakengates 74 Rosehill House, Coalbrookdale 121, 179
Old Armoury, Ironbridge 110, 111 Rowton, Broseley 70, 73
baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
Old Furnace see Upper Furnace
Old Park Ironworks 24 salt see brine
Orchard, The, Ironbridge 139 Salthouses, Jackfield 18, 58, 77
sandstone see building materials
Paradise, Coalbrookdalc 81,82, 133, 186 sanitary pipes 52, 54, 55, 56
Parsons, Samuel w m aps Scheduled Ancient M onuments 2, 202, 203
Pennystone ironstone 29, 46, 47 Second W orld W ar see W orld W ars

250
 IND EX baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
settlement: Saxon 67 Tickhill 37
Severn Foundry xv, 28, 29, 91, 110 Tickwood Beds 34
Severn House, Ironbridge 139 Tontine Hill, Ironbridge 77, 83; see a lso
Severn Valley Railway xv, 27, 77, 78, 83, 84, W harfage
102,105 Tontine Hotel, Ironbridge 135
Severn W arehouse xv, 78, 94, 95 Tontine Stables, Ironbridge 80
Severn, River 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 24, 31,36, tramways see railways
40, 44, 50, 52, 57, 65, 70, 74, 76, 77, 95, trow 14, 77, 84
100 Tuckies, Jackfield 17, 71, 73, 78, 133
Shifnal 13, 82 Turner, J.M .W . 37
Shirlett 14 Turner, Thomas 21, 22, 98
Shrewsbury 16, 51, 79, 83 turnpike roads 22, 25, 79, 81 — 3, 164
Shropshire County Council 13, 37
Shropshire Union Canal 22, 25, 37, 74; see UNESCO 202
a lso Blists Hill canal, Coalport canal Upper Forge 62, 64, 65, 87, 91, 108, 109,
Silurian System 34, 35 111, 127
Sites and M onuments Record 3 Upper Forge Pool 82
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) 202 Upper Furnace 8, 30, 62, 64, 65, 202
slag 16, 28, 56,71,77, 78, 82 Upper Furnace Pool 62, 64, 66, 74, 83-4
Smith, Samuel and W illiam 99
Smith, W H . 111 wagonways see railways
Smitheman, Rowland 109 W ales 18, 19, 27,81,98, 102
Snedshill Ironworks 23 W appenshall 25
Soho Foundry, Smethwick 91, 94 W ashbrook 13,31,83
Southorn family 109 waterpower 2, 4, 13, 19, 20, 23, 31, 56, 61 —
squatting 149, 160 7, 85, 89,91,202, 203
St John, Fleming 104 W att M eadow, Coalport 76
Staffordshire 13, 19, 98, 105 W eald, the 14
steam engine 56, 62, 91; blowing 61; Boulton W edgwood, Josiah 21,99
and W att 66, 67; Deep Pit 46; hammering W eld, John 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 42, 70
91; Heslop 43; in brick-making 103; in W enlock Edge 34
encaustic tile manufacture 105, 106; W enlock Limestone 34; see a lso limestone
Newcomen 62; pumping 17, 62 W enlock Priory 12, 13, 14
Stoke-on-Trent 27; see a lso M inton Hollins W erps, Jackfield 80
Stone Port, Buildwas 36, 37, 38 W est M idlands 110
Sunnyside, Coalbrookdale 121 W etickliss & Sons 92
Svedernstierna 56 W harfage 29, 56, 78, 79, 82, 83, 108, 109,
Swan Inn, Ironbridge 137 135,165
Swansea Pottery 101 wharfs 17, 36, 76-9, 80, 83, 84, 86, 98; see
a lso Loadcroft W harf, M eadowcroft
Tar Tunnel 43 W harf
tar 18,44, 49, 57, 79 W hite Hart Inn, Ironbridge 137
Tarbarch Dingle, Broseley 78 W hitefoot, Jos 50
Tea Kettle Row, Coalbrookdale 127, 173, W ilkinson, Isaac 66
176,179-80 W ilkinson, John 66
Telford 9, 29, 30, 46, 111 W illcox, Richard 70
Telford Development Corporation 30, 76, W illey 14, 19, 37, 50; Ironworks xiv, 42,
168 202
Telford, Thomas 23, 1 7 W illiam (trow) 84
tenure 151-2, 154-5, 157 wind see inclined plane
textile mills 86, 87, 89, 93, 94, 99, 111, 112 woodland 11, 13, 14, 16, 56, 203 see a lso
Thursfield, John 96 Broseley
Thursfield, M orris 90 W orcester 21, 27, 54, 98, 99, 104, 105

251
 IND EX

M althouse, Coalbrookdale 15, 19, 88 pig iron jeeiron: cast-iron

M anchester 91 planning controls 2-3, 142-3, 193-4,
maps 74; Tithe M aps 5, 50, 78, 102, 133, 202-3
153 — 4; Ordnance Survey 70; Broseley Plate Forge see Lower Forge
Hall Estate M ap 42, 45, 123 — 5; Samuel plateways see railways
Parsons ’ 1621 map 43, 118, 146, 150 — 1 Plymley, Joseph 81
M arshall Osborne 29, 111 Plymley, Katherine 37
M aw & Co 27, 28, 54 pottery manufacture 18, 20, 41, 49, 123;
M aw, Arthur and George 27, 54, 104, 139 buildings 19, 22, 27, 94, 95-101, 113;
M aws ’ Tileworks, Benthall 54, 59, 104 — 5, kilns 18, 20, 22, 55, 87, 95-6, 99, 100,
106 101
M aws ’ Tileworks, Jackfield xv, 27, 59, 84, pottery: art 28, 51; coarse earthenware 18,
105,106, 107, 108 19, 22, 28, 51; creamware 21, 96, 99;
M eadow W harf xiv, 17, 76, 78; see a lso Jackfield ware 51; medieval 88; porcelain
wharves 21, 54, 59, 96 — 101, 104 (se e a lso Caughley
M errythought Ltd 29, 110 — 11 China W orks, Coalport China W orks);
M iddle Forge, Coalbrookdale see Boring Mill salt-glazed 18; slipped earthenware 19, 54,
M ilburgh Tileries, Jackfield 111 95, 96
M iles, John 96 Preens Eddy Bridge see Coalport Bridge
mills 12, 13, 62, 65,67,91, 108 probate inventories 118
M inton Hollins’ Factory, Stoke-on-Trent proto-industrialisation 2, 20, 118-20
105-8 public health 142
M inton, Herbert 104 public housing 143
M one W ood, Broseley 57
M ouchel-Hennebique 80 railways: Coalbrookdale rails 70, 71; standard
M uch W enlock 12, 13, 16, 34, 37, 79, 81, gauge 27, 28, 46, 51, 54, 72, 76, 77, 83-
110; see a lso W enlock Priory 5, 102; stations 54, 84; tramways 23, 35,
M ughouses pottery 95 36, 47, 52, 65, 70-i, 75, 78, 79, 81, 82,
M unn, Paul Sandby 37 83, 84; wooden wagonways 14, 15, 16,
M urchison, Roderick 35 17, 21,45; see a lso Great W estern Railway,
London and North W estern Railway,
nail-making 110 Severn Valley Railway
Nailers Row 120 Randall, John 11
Nantgarw pottery 101 Rennie, John 67
Navigation Bill 77 Resolution Engine 66
New Inn pipeworks see Benthall pipeworks retailing 137-8
New W illey Ironworks 23, 66 Reynolds, Richard 22
Newdale; housing 162; ironworks 23, 89 — Reynolds, W illiam 22, 76, 78, 100, 102, 162
91,94, 108; tramway bridge 71 Rock Brick and Tileworks, Jackfield 111
Norm an Conquest 11,12 rooftiles: manufacture 26, 27, 50, 51, 52,
North Lights Buildings, Coalbrookdale 92 58, 101 — 4: see a lso brick and tileworks,
Nuffield Archaeological Survey 8 building materials; roof tiles
Nuway M anufacturing Company 110 Rose Cottage, Coalbrookdale 71, 87, 88
Rose, John 22, 99, 100, 101
Oakengates 7 4 Rosehill House, Coalbrookdale 121, 179
Old Armoury, Ironbridge 110, 111 Rowton, Broseley 70, 73
Old Furnace see Upper Furnace
Old Park Ironworks 24 salt see brine
Orchard, The, Ironbridge 139 Salthouses, Jackfield 18, 58, 77
sandstone see building materials
Paradise, Coalbrookdale 81, 82, 133, 186 sanitary pipes 52, 54, 55, 56
Parsons, Samuel remaps Scheduled Ancient M onuments 2, 202, 203
Pennyscone ironstone 29, baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
46, 47 Second W orld W ar see W orld W ars

250
 IND EX baZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDCBA
settlement: Saxon 67 Tickhill 37
Severn Foundry xv, 28, 29, 91, 110 Tickwood Beds 34
Severn House, Ironbridge 139 Tontine Hill, Ironbridge 77, 83; see a lso
Severn Valley Railway xv, 27, 77, 78, 83, 84, W harfage
102, 105 Tontine Hotel, Ironbridge 135
Severn W arehouse xv, 78, 94, 95 Tontine Stables, Ironbridge 80
Severn, River 8, 12, 13, 14, 17, 24, 31, 36, tramways see railways
40, 44, 50, 52, 57, 65, 70, 74, 76, 77, 95, trow 14, 77, 84
100 Tuckies, Jackfield 17, 71,73, 78, 133
Shifnal 13, 82 Turner, J.M .W . 37
Shirlett 14 Turner, Thomas 21, 22, 98
Shrewsbury 16, 51, 79, 83 turnpike roads 22, 25, 79, 81-3, 164
Shropshire County Council 13, 37
Shropshire Union Canal 22, 25, 37, 74; see UNESCO 202
a lso Blists Hill canal, Coalport canal Upper Forge 62, 64, 65, 87, 91, 108, 109,
Silurian System 34, 35 111, 127
Sites and M onuments Record 3 Upper Forge Pool 82
Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) 202 Upper Furnace 8, 30, 62, 64, 65, 202
slag 16, 28, 56,71,77, 78, 82 Upper Furnace Pool 62, 64, 66, 74, 83-4
Smith, Samuel and W illiam 99
Smith, W .H. 111 wagonways see railways
Smitheman, Rowland 109 W ales 18, 19, 27,81,98, 102
Snedshill Ironworks 23 W appenshall 25
Soho Foundry, Smethwick 91, 94 W ashbrook 13,31, 83
Southorn family 109 waterpower 2, 4, 13, 19, 20, 23, 31,56, 61 —
squatting 149, 160 7, 85, 89,91,202, 203
St John, Fleming 104 W att M eadow, Coalport 76
Staffordshire 13, 19, 98, 105 W eald, the 14
steam engine 56, 62, 91; blowing 61; Boulton W edgwood, Josiah 21, 99
and W att 66, 67; Deep Pit 46; hammering W eld, John 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 42,70
91; Heslop 43; in brick-making 103; in W enlock Edge 34
encaustic tile manufacture 105, 106; W enlock Limestone 34; see a lso limestone
Newcomen 62; pumping 17, 62 W enlock Priory 12, 13, 14
Stoke-on-Trent 27; see a lso M inton Hollins W erps, Jackfield 80
Stone Port, Buildwas 36, 37, 38 W est M idlands 110
Sunnyside, Coalbrookdale 121 W etickliss & Sons 92
Svedernstierna 56 W harfage 29, 56, 78, 79, 82, 83, 108, 109,
Swan Inn, Ironbridge 137 135, 165
Swansea Pottery 101 wharfs 17, 36, 76-9, 80, 83, 84, 86, 98; see
a lso Loadcroft W harf, M eadowcroft
Tar Tunnel 43 W harf
tar 18,44,49, 57, 79 W hite Hart Inn, Ironbridge 137
Tarbatch Dingle, Broseley 78 W hitefoot, Jos 50
Tea Kettle Row, Coalbrookdale 127, 173, W ilkinson, Isaac 66
176, 179-80 W ilkinson, John 66
Telford 9, 29, 30, 46, 111 W illcox, Richard 70
Telford Development Corporation 30, 76, W illey 14, 19, 37, 50; Ironworks xiv, 42,
168 202
Telford, Thomas 23, 77 W illiam (trow) 84
tenure 151-2, 154-5, 157 wind see inclined plane
textile mills 86, 87, 89, 93, 94, 99, 111, 112 woodland 11, 13, 14, 16, 56, 203 see a lso
Thursfield, John 96 Broseley
Thursfield, M orris 90 W orcester 21, 27, 54, 98, 99, 104, 105

251
 IN DEX

W orkhouse Coppice, Benthall 41 W right, John 23

W orld Heritage Site 2, 30, 202 Wyke 37
World Wars 28, 29, 46, 57, 58, 80, 92, 104,jihgfedcbaZYXWVUTSRQPONMLKJIHGFEDC
111 Young, Arthur 50

252