| BHTA commissioned Trent & Peak Archaeological 
              Unit to carry out a survey of three of the oldest houses in Bingham. 
              Richard Sheppard carried out the surveys. Robert Howard of the Nottingham 
              Tree-ring Dating Laboratory inspected the buildings to see whether 
              they might be dated through dendrochronology. BHTA is grateful to 
              the owners of the houses for allowing this intrusion into their 
              homes and for permission to publish the reports on them. There are several candidates for the title 
              “oldest house in Bingham”. Among them are Beauvale House, 
              The Manor House and number 19 in Market Place, and the Post Office 
              House in Long Acre. Research on these has not yet been started. 
              The three chosen for this survey are 21 Long Acre, 61-63 Long Acre 
              and 23 Long Acre East. Despite a spread of modern housing around its 
              flanks, at its centre Bingham retains its original medieval rectilinear 
              street pattern with the most important streets running east-west. 
              One of these is Long Acre (formerly known as Husbandman Street) 
              and still the principal east-west route through the town. At its 
              east end its alignment continues as Long Acre East, now just an 
              access road for local inhabitants. This former lane once continued 
              through the deserted medieval village in Crow Close ending roughly 
              where Carnarvon Primary School now is. The three properties examined 
              for this report lie along this general route-way and both the present 
              and earlier names for the road reflect the largely agricultural 
              background of the area through which it passed.  There are no detailed maps of Bingham that 
              survive from before the tithe map of 1840. A survey carried out 
              in 1586 for Sir Brian Stapleton, the then Lord of the Manor, showed 
              that the annual rentage then due to him was £95-14s-7½d. 
              Ownership then passed to the Stanhope family (Earls of Chesterfield) 
              who owned Bingham until 1871. It then passed to the Earl of Carnarvon 
              and eventually the Crown in 1925. The latter still owns some of 
              the property in the town, including one of the buildings covered 
              by the survey (Craddock 1980). Open field agriculture had ended 
              by 1684 and many small privately-run tenanted farms had become established. 
              Wills and inventories surviving from the 17th-18th centuries show 
              that most Bingham people with property were involved in agriculture. 
              The Hearth Tax returns of 1674 listed 117 households, and with an 
              estimated population of 500-550 based on an average figure of 4.5 
              persons per household, Bingham was bigger than most other villages 
              to the east of Nottingham, including Radcliffe-on-Trent and Cotgrave, 
              although not necessarily any wealthier. Dating the Bingham buildingsThe problem of dating is fundamental to building archaeology. The 
              late Maurice Barley pointed out that buildings like those in Bingham 
              are very rarely documented or have any inscribed evidence or dateable 
              fittings or mouldings, and as a result are usually impossible to 
              date to within less than 50 years (1986, 243). This highlights the 
              continuing importance of dendrochronology where oak timbers survive 
              and are of suitable age when felled. This can often provide major 
              surprises: both 40-44 Castle Gate and 40-44 Cartergate in Newark 
              were thought to be late 16th – mid 17th century on stylistic 
              grounds but were found to be of mid-14th century origin when tree-ring 
              dated (Arnold et al 2002, 58, 90). Tree-ring 
              dating has provided one clear and precise date for 61-63 Long 
              Acre and a possible date-range for the cottage. Otherwise, it is 
              a consideration of other factors in an archaeological approach that 
              has to be employed here to date the remaining building (21 Long 
              Acre) and the alterations to the others.
 Bricks are difficult to date, as their size could vary 
                          from place to place. Early 17th century bricks used 
                          in the general area around Bingham were generally no 
                          more than 2-2¼ins (50-57mm) in thickness and 
                          local tendencies suggest that bricks that were 2 3/8 
                          ins (60mm) in thickness are uncommon in the 17th century. 
                          Bricks in Bingham may show a tendency to be both thicker 
                          and longer than elsewhere, possibly due to local production 
                          methods and the continued use of similar moulds in brick 
                          kilns. This continuation is evident at no. 21 Long Acre 
                          as it occurs in the upper walling rebuild mentioned 
                          above, in the addition in the north-west corner and 
                          the building added on to the south end (the latter two 
                          with English garden bond coursing). A brick of similar 
                          dimension was also used in a barn built after 1776 at 
                          Cooper’s Cottage in Bingham. Further study of 
                          older buildings in Bingham may establish how widespread 
                          this brick size was and its longevity.
 The bricks used in the three buildings surveyed 
              are of the following dimensions:  • 61-63 Long Acre: 
                          2 3/8 ins (60mm) thick and just under 9ins (229mm) long. 
                          Random coursing with some multiple headers. The later 
                          wing has bricks about 2½ins (57mm) thick and 
                          9½ ins (241mm) long, set in Flemish bond.• 21 Long Acre: between 2¼ - 2 3/8 ins 
                          (57-60mm) thick and about 9½ ins (241mm) long. 
                          Random coursing with indications of a Flemish garden 
                          wall bond (e.g. Monk bond: two stretchers to each header, 
                          per course). Similar sized brick used in later phases 
                          of building. Thicker brick in Flemish stretcher bond 
                          in upper part of Room 7.
 • 23 Long Acre East: 2½ ins (63mm) thick 
                          and 9¼ ins (235mm) long, but higher up walling 
                          bricks are nearer to 2¾ ins (70mm) and 9½ 
                          (241mm) respectively. Variation of Flemish stretcher 
                          bond, with alternating 2-3 headers and 2 stretchers 
                          in one course, and then 1-3 stretcher courses.
 | Summaries of the findings of this 
                          survey are given below, but the full details for each 
                          house can be had by clicking onto the address. If you 
                          want to read a short comment on housing in the 14th 
                          to 18th centuries in the East Midlands click 
                          here.  21 Long Acre 
              is a two-storey house at the north end of a range of adjoining brick-built 
              buildings, which together are Grade II listed. The house is of L-shape 
              plan, with a row of three ground-floor rooms of differing sizes 
              and a short east wing featuring a basement-cellar and an upper room; 
              there is also a later single-storey room attached at the north-west 
              corner. The brick walls of the main row sit on a part stone - part 
              brick plinth, and straight joints attest to various changes to the 
              upper part of the building. Internally, there are timber beams, 
              back-to-back fireplaces and plank doors that indicate a building 
              of some age. Unfortunately, the building’s timbers consisted 
              mainly of softwood or young oak and were unsuitable for tree-ring 
              dating. The building is something of a conundrum. There 
              are indications of former timberwork in the walling and some internal 
              timbers have clearly been moved from elsewhere. The presence of 
              a plinth, a low floor level relative to outside the building and 
              indications of an internal division reminiscent of late medieval 
              influence – a communal ‘low’ end with a central 
              hearth (here the back-to-back fireplaces) and open to the roof, 
              and a partitioned-off ‘high’ end with an upper chamber, 
              are perhaps suggestive of a 16th century origin. Otherwise, the 
              brickwork, the L-shape plan, the internal layout and suggestions 
              of symmetrical positioning of doors and window openings date the 
              building to somewhere after 1650. The upper brickwork was altered, 
              a floor was inserted or replaced and the building re-roofed in the 
              18th century. Straight joints, changes in the brick coursing and 
              a dip in the roofline show that this was carried out in two separate 
              phases. Apart from the replacing of its thatched roof with pantiles, 
              the building has changed little since then. 61-63 Long 
              Acre is an L-shaped two-storey building, which is Grade II listed. 
              Its roadside frontage and gable-ends date from the late 19th century 
              when it was refurbished to a vernacular revivalist design, probably 
              on behalf of its then owner Lord Carnarvon. The building consists 
              of three rooms of similar size and a larger room that was added 
              to the north-east corner, forming a wing. Now divided into two residences, 
              the building has been further extended in recent years. During an 
              inspection by conservation officers to approve proposed improvements, 
              the building was found to contain part of a cruck frame, an old 
              building method where pairs of large timbers are joined together 
              to form the apex of a roof.  The plan of the building conforms to that of 
              most farmhouses built in the 17th century, with a large chimney-stack 
              and back-to-back fireplaces set between two rooms, and a third room 
              with an end fireplace, in this instance probably added later. The 
              remaining part of the main range’s rear elevation not now 
              obscured by later additions has early brickwork and some timbers 
              showing. Dendrochronology has dated the main part of the building 
              precisely to 1617. Whether the brickwork is original to that date 
              or was added later, replacing earlier mud and stud infilling between 
              timberwork, remains unresolved. Some of the internal wall-faces 
              may be hiding parts of the original timber-framing beneath their 
              plasterwork. The building was originally 1½ storeys high, 
              with lofts or garrets beneath a steep thatched roof. The first-floor 
              bedrooms date from the 19th century improvements. The rear part 
              of the building was probably added in the 18th century, by which 
              time farmhouses required more space for dairies, washrooms and for 
              housing farm labourers. 23 Long Acre 
              East is also known as Donkey Green’s Cottage after a late 
              19th century occupant who is recorded in an early photograph, with 
              other family members, standing beside the building. This building 
              is small, and originally consisted of two rooms and an upper loft 
              beneath a thatched roof. It is typical of many small buildings built 
              before 1750, most of which have since been lost or been altered 
              beyond recognition. This cottage has a number of timbers showing 
              in its east frontage, which now consists mainly of brickwork, and 
              others remain within an inner passageway. The building has been 
              fully modernised inside and other single-storey extensions have 
              been added to its north end. One of the internal timbers, a post supporting 
              a remaining cross-beam, has been dated to somewhere between 1570 
              and 1590. Whilst this sample alone cannot convincingly date the 
              building, the building is of a type that existed then. Although 
              now called a cottage it could then have been used by a small farmer 
              or tradesman. Probably originally built solely of timber studs and 
              mud infill its main walling was refaced and in places fully replaced 
              by brick in the 18th century. Later still, the south gable wall 
              was rebuilt. The inside now has modern partition walling but timbers 
              remain to indicate the position of the original room division, the 
              floor level and a wall-plate shows where the roof started. Despite 
              modernisation it retains its original form and something of its 
              earlier character. A recent history Donkey 
              Green’s Cottage drawn up from documentary evidence is 
              also available. |