Along the Track: NORFOLK
The 'Discarded' section: Heacham to
Grime's Graves
In October 1949, when Dr.
Rudge read his first paper on the subject to the Essex Field Club, he
concentrated on the fieldwork he had conducted that summer on his home turf
in Essex. But he already suspected - through knowledge of sporadic
puddingstones in Cheshunt, St. Albans, Chesham and Henley - that his Track
continued westwards. Having found a few in Suffolk, he and his wife then
made assumptions about its course and found five boulders along a roughly
north-south line in north-west Norfolk. These were at Heacham, Grimston,
Gayton, and two at Snettisham. He considered these "strong presumptive
evidence" that the Track continued up to the shores of the Wash.
By November 1951 he had
jettisoned one of the Snettisham stones, but found three more along the same
approximate line. These all remained as mark-stones on the Track up to 1954,
after which they seem to have been quietly forgotten. (Although in a letter
dated July 22nd 1961, he stated that he had now traced his Track "to the
cliff edge at Hunstanton!" By what evidence this was revealed remains
unknown.)
In 'The Lost Trackway' -
most of which its editor John Cooper said can be reasonably dated to 1983,
the year before Rudge's death - any puddingstone finds north of Grime's
Graves were considered to be "insufficient to justify further intensive
search." Among these he mentioned only the northernmost stone, at Heacham
church, but added another, at Narborough Mill, which he seems to have been
told about in rather vague terms at a late date.
So, I begin by looking at
this 'discarded' portion heading southwards from Heacham near the Norfolk
coast.
It must be borne in mind
that NONE of the following stones in this first section ended up as part of
the 'final version' of the Track.
***********
Heacham
'At St. Mary's church'
(first mention in print 1950; read to the Essex Field Club 1949):
The map reference Dr. Rudge
gave for St. Mary's of TF682380 isn't far off, but the stone itself should
more accurately be TF6813837970. He variously described a block of
conglomerate at the church as 'under a buttress', 'under a tower buttress',
and 'beneath a buttress on
the
south side'. By the time of 'Lost Trackway', he had narrowed it down to
'under a buttress of the church porch' - which is exactly where it is, under
the west buttress of the south porch.
As my photograph shows, the
stone is a roughly semi-circular slab, measuring 80cm x 75cm x 18cm high,
jutting out from just beneath the buttress. This is a rough ferruginous
conglomerate containing small pebbles, a type occasionally encountered in
Norfolk. But it doesn't seem to be carstone, which the church is partly made
from, as well as much of the churchyard wall.
Carstone (sometimes spelt
carrstone) is actually a form of sandstone, usually without
pebbles, and coloured anywhere from a pale orange to a gingery brown. It
occurs commonly in the cliffs of the Hunstanton area, and was once quarried
at many sites throughout north-west Norfolk. I mention it here because it
will crop up again along the Track shortly.
The author Shirley Toulson1
went looking for this particular stone and somehow managed to miss it, even
though it's immediately visible when you approach the church along the main
path. Instead, she found no more than a "slither of conglomerate" at the
foot of the north buttress of the tower - an object that I couldn't find at
all.
1. Shirley Toulson: 'East
Anglia: walking the ley lines & ancient tracks' (Wildwood House, 1979),
p.50.
Heacham
'At schoolhouse' (first
mention in print 1952; read to the EFC 1951):
This stone is somewhat
problematic. Rudge gives no details of the stone itself but says it is
'behind schoolhouse', then 'in grounds of schoolhouse'. The map reference he
gives - TF679372 - takes you to Heacham Infant & Nursery School, at the
junction of School Road and the Broadway. I've been there, and there's no
boulder anywhere on the school grounds nowadays. However, the
afore-mentioned Shirley Toulson also went in search of this stone, and found
it "in the back wall of the old school house, which is now a private
dwelling".1
But the 'old school house' Toulson refers to is nearly half a mile north of the Infant School, and 130m
west of the church. It's beyond the archway next to the Green, among the
private houses within the southern end of Heacham Park. It turns out that
there was indeed once a school here, founded in 1838 by the vicar, and known
as the Top School. The diagram that Toulson gives in her book is a little
misleading, but it's clear that she's actually referring not to the school
building itself, but to the Master's House close by, built for the vicar in
1837. This stands at TF6798637971, and is now known as No.34 Hunstanton
Road.
The fact that Rudge never
described the stone, and never mentioned it again in print after January
1952, leads me to conclude that he never saw this rock himself. His
typewritten notes (apparently dating from his stone-searching heydays in the
early 1950s) say, after listing the one at the church: "Also reported by Mr.
Newton-Brain, one behind the School". This would be an error for Charles
Lewton Brain, who retired to Heacham in 1947 and became an enthusiastic and
respected amateur archaeologist. Rudge obviously knew nothing of the old
school near the church, and instead naturally assumed it to be the one
further south, which would have been the only active school in the village
at the time.
I've ventured through the
archway near the Green, but all the houses there are sequestered away behind
locked gates. It's a very private area, and I have little hope of ever
gaining access to be able to search for this stone.
1. Shirley Toulson: 'East
Anglia: walking the ley lines & ancient tracks' (Wildwood House, 1979),
p.50.
Snettisham
'At old church' (first
mention 1950):
Here, about 2½ miles
south of the previous stone, Rudge said he found a conglomerate block "in
the foundations of the ruins of Snettisham old church", and gave the map
reference TF691344. This isn't particularly accurate, but takes you to the
vicinity of St. Mary's, the current parish church, which dates from the 14th
century. There's no actual 'old church', but in the churchyard just a single
pier some 3m high is all that remains of a massive chancel of the existing
church which was demolished in about 1600 (TF6908034281.) Rudge's
conglomerate should therefore be somewhere at the base of this flint work
column, but Toulson failed to find it in the late 1970s. I visited in June 2016
and also failed, but one angle of the pier is filled at the base with
rubble, so it could still be hidden there. The chances are that it's just a
piece of the local carstone, which is very common in buildings of the area.
Snettisham
'In wall of house' (only
mention 1950):
This stone was simply said
to be "in the wall of a house", but the location given of TF682347 actually
takes you to woodland north of the village, where there have never been any
houses. Luckily, in his undated typewritten notes, he describes it as being
under the corner of a house next to the post office, in the main street. In
Rudge's time the post office was in the market place, in the terraced house
now numbered 27 Lynn Road. Beside the house is a narrow dirt alleyway, and
immediately next to it a very old cottage, No.25, under the south corner of
which is a small lump of pale stone about 30cm x 20cm x 10cm high
(TF6847734286).
This,
however, is NOT a natural conglomerate of any kind. It's simply old
and poorly-made concrete, with very little aggregate in it, that I think was
just a rough attempt to replace some missing bricks. There's a smaller but
similar object at the corner of a wall next to Stockley's pharmacy about 40m
away along the same street. And there's a much larger block of the same
material 60m further south along Lynn Road, at the corner of Hope House.
It's odd that Rudge never mentioned either of these.
This was the first stone
that he discarded from his early version of the Track. Possibly, this was
because he soon realised what a poor specimen it was; but more likely, it
was because it was about 600m west of the church, and thus considerably off
the route he was proposing. He had already said in his 1949 paper that it
was out of alignment with the other four stones found at that time.
Ingoldisthorpe
'At church'
(first mention 1952):
Just
less than a mile to the south of Snettisham is St. Michael's church, at
TF69073276. Rudge describes many "brown puddingstone boulders" under the
walls and buttresses, with another half-buried in the churchyard, at the
west end. This latter is now quite exposed, 70cm x 50cm x 30cm high, sitting
about 5m away from the west wall. It looks as if it has been partly shaped
for use in the church fabric, but never used. But - like those smaller rocks
under the buttresses and walls (mostly on the north side) - this is NOT
puddingstone. All these are composed of the local and very common brown
carstone, with no visible pebbles in them at all.
Conveniently for his
theory, Dr. Rudge failed to mention the 50cm high sandstone boulder deeply
embedded on the south side of the churchyard. There is as much evidence
(i.e. none at all) for this to have been here since Neolithic times as
his stones. If his Track was supposed to have been marked by only
conglomerates, in order that the prehistoric traveller would follow the
correct path, surely a different boulder on the same site would have been
somewhat confusing? After a gap of 5½ miles, we reach:
Grimston
'Wall of house in village'
(first mention 1950):
Dr. Rudge gave two very
similar map references for this stone: firstly TF722222, then later
TF722221. Both of these take you to farm land
just
off Gayton Road, just north of the church. The nearest house to this spot is
No.52, called 'The Springs', whose walls are a patchwork of carstone and
clunch. However, Rudge's typed notes are once again helpful, as there he
describes it as "a small stone beside a house near [the] village square."
That takes us about 250m north, to the old market place at the junction of
Gayton Road, Congham Road and Massingham Road. And there, at TF7206622437,
is a pebbly brown carstone rock measuring 52cm x 30cm x 21cm high. It sits,
oddly, on a low concrete base in a blocked-up doorway of the house attached
to the Post Office Stores. I've made enquiries, but no one can tell me who
set it there or why. I suspect that it might be the same rock visible in
pictures of 1910 and 1920, that was then a corner-guard at the nearby Bell
Inn (now the Old Bell Guest House.) Two miles further south is:
Gayton
'Behind Mill Stores' (first
mention 1950):
Again there are two similar
map coordinates given for this stone: TF732193, then TF733193. The second
one takes you to the yard of the old tower mill, while the first is located
at the nearby Mill House, now a care home. This reference fooled me for
years, because right on the corner of Mill House, there is indeed a large
rectangular stone, 72cm x 35cm x 36cm high. When I first saw it in the 1970s
it was painted black, but the coating has now worn away and it can be seen
to be sandstone, not puddingstone. There are other loose stones nearby, and
some closer to the old mill yard entrance which were there in old pictures
from the early 1900s. And just to the left of the entrance is a 32cm square
block of actual flinty conglomerate - but it wasn't there when I first
visited.
It
was only in 2016 that I realised that once again Rudge's map references were
inaccurate, and that I'd been looking in the wrong place. His published
articles said that the puddingstone was "behind Mill Stores" and "in lane
behind Mill Stores". His notes say "behind Mill Inn Stores". While there has
never been a building with either name at Gayton, there was a 'Mill
End Stores', about 75m away to the north-west. Now a residence called Mill
End House, while its frontage faces Lynn Road, beside it runs Grimston Road.
Dr. Rudge's photo (left) in the 'East Anglian Magazine' in 1952 enabled me
to locate the correct spot as being TF7312219327, at the corner of an
outbuilding attached to the back of Mill End House in Grimston Road.1
The building line, a blocked-up window, a curve in the pavement curb and a
drain cover all point to this as the actual site.
Oddly, while his photograph
shows two stones of the same type sitting loose on the surface, he only ever
spoke about a single stone. He recorded it as a "white siliceous
conglomerate", and described it in his notes as "the only doubtful one" in
the Norfolk section of his Track. This is somewhat ironic, given his poor
identification of stones so far. A small picture of both stones - then in
the garden of Mill End House - can be found
in the parish's 'Character Assessment' of 2019, where they are accepted as
part of Rudge's Track without reservation.2 They are clearly
conglomerates, with small rounded pebbles set in a whitish sandstone matrix.
Both were probably placed
beside the road in past times to protect the corner of the building. More recently the
property stood empty for a while, and the present owners have told me that
one of the stones was taken for safekeeping into a neighbouring garden. The
whereabouts of the other is less certain, but may still be nearby.3
Not far away is Gayton Hall, where more conglomerates have been reported,
and which Rudge never knew about. Photographs of these suggest them to be
closer to carstone, in that the matrix appears to be ferruginous.4
1. Anonymous (with info from
Rudge): 'Pudding-stones' in 'East Anglian Magazine' Vol.11, No.5 (Jan.
1952), p.246.
2. 'Gayton & Gayton Thorpe
Character Assessment' (Gayton & Gayton Thorpe Neighbourhood Plan, 2019),
p.13.
3. Information gratefully
received from Sarah Ellis of Gayton, 17/9/2019.
4. 'Gayton with Gayton
Thorpe Parish Plan' (Gayton Parish Council, 2006), p.8.
Narborough
'At Narborough Mill' (only
mention 'The Lost Trackway', 1994):
The only Ordnance Survey
reference Rudge gives for this stone is TF7413, which is certainly the grid
square that contains Narborough Mill, but he gives no other location or
indeed description. This is about 4½ miles south of Gayton. I suspect that
this was one that was reported to him only in his later years. Without more
information, it's impossible to track down.
Beachamwell
'The Cowell Stone' (first
mention 1952):
Veering slightly more
south-east, after just over 2½ miles we reach the next mark-point. Rudge's
given grid reference is TF767093, which is about 200m south of the true
location, at TF7673509558. The Cowell Stone is quite a notable one for
Norfolk, sitting on a spot that was
once
the junction of three ancient Hundreds and three parishes. It also rests on
the grassy verge of an old track called Salter's Way, on the line of both a
Roman road and the (allegedly prehistoric) Icknield Way. When I first saw it
in about 1973 it was deeply embedded, with only about 25cm showing above
ground. But in the 1980s it was dug up by two local historians and moved a
few metres along and further back from the track. Now, its visible
dimensions are 1m x 89cm x 60cm high, and it has a small iron plaque
attached, stating it to be (on no evidence at all) a 'waymarker' of the
Bronze Age.
Even in late 1951 Rudge
hadn't seen this stone, but said in one of his letters that, "from its
photograph it is clearly a conglomerate".1 He apparently didn't
change that opinion when he visited it the following year - but it's NOT
a conglomerate at all. It is a plain sandstone, probably from the area of
Spilsby in Lincolnshire, in common with many erratic boulders left in
Norfolk after the last Ice Age. An empty stretch of over nine miles is next,
heading south-east to Cranwich.
1. Letter from Dr. Rudge
to Mrs R. Pilcher, 5/10/1951.
Cranwich
St. Mary's church (first
mention 1952):
In his 'Essex Naturalist' article of March 1952, Dr.
Rudge included Cranwich church (TL78279487) as a point on his Track, but
made no
mention
of any stone here.1 By July 1952, in the 'East Anglian Magazine',
he was citing a "layer of pudding-stone" encircling the round tower - but
it's a single string that only goes partially around, and it is NOT
puddingstone.2 Once again, it's the very common dark brown
carstone, here with no pebbles in it at all. Rudge was told by the rector
that the church was supposed to be the site of a 'pagan chantry', because of
the fact that it sits in a perfectly circular churchyard, and that
prehistoric flint tools were often found there. The trouble with this is
that 1) the shape of the churchyard is almost certainly determined by the
slight natural mound upon which it sits, 2) it's far from a perfect circle,
and 3) although Neolithic flints have been found all over the parish,
there's nothing in the archaeological record to show that any came from the
churchyard.
1. E.A. & E.L. Rudge: 'The
Conglomerate Track' in 'Essex Naturalist' Vol.29, part 1 (March 1952), p.31.
2. E.A. Rudge: 'The
Puddingstone Track: Further Discoveries' in 'East Anglian Magazine' Vol.11
(July 1952), p. 516.
***********
From Cranwich, Rudge
believed that his Track then headed four miles south-east to the ancient
flint mines now deep within Thetford Forest, at the place called Grime's
Graves - which is where his final version of the Track now begins.
Grime's Graves to the Suffolk border
Grime's Graves is a site of
great importance for British archaeology, and the reason why Dr. Rudge
believed the Track had been constructed in the first place.
Although at that time he
had not discovered any stones leading directly to it, even in his first
paper read to the Essex Field Club in 1949, he believed that his Track had a
"strongly suggestive link" to Grime's Graves. His suspicion was that "this
track is probably the old flint trading route for the East Anglian
settlements." By the time of his second paper, read two years later, he was
certain of the connection. Indeed, he became convinced that the Track was "a
trade route for flint and other goods" between Norfolk and the area of
Stonehenge.
With its hundreds of pits,
Grime's Graves is one of only ten known Neolithic flint mining sites in
England; it is also the most-studied, and the only one open to the public.
It is now known that its beginnings belong to the later Neolithic period,
with the main extraction activities being carried out from c.2650 BC until
c.2380 BC - far too late for Rudge's chronology.
Grime's Graves
(Weeting)
'On edge of clay pit'
(first mention 1952):
The first rigorous
archaeological excavations to take place here in the modern period occurred
in 1914, with the resulting report being published the following year, in
the 'Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society of East Anglia'.
In 1951 Rudge consulted
that report, and noted on the accompanying sketch plan of the site a clay
pit just outside the southern end of the mining area. This pit (at
TL81728958) dates from the 18th or 19th century, and was dug for marl, a
type of clay rich in nutrients, which
was
widely used in post-medieval times for fertilising the land. According to
him, the plan showed just within that pit "a feature described as an
'Erratic Boulder'." Upon visiting the site, he found what he termed "a
sandstone conglomerate containing flint pebbles" that was now near the
bottom of the pit, not far from a dried-up spring on its eastern side.1
He never described it in any greater detail, but his published photograph
(left) shows a somewhat angular rock probably no more than about 60cm across
and 40cm high, seemingly just resting on the surface.
By July 1952, Rudge had
been told that the stone used to stand on a slope just outside the pit, but
had rolled down into it. However, by the time of 'Lost Trackway' the tale
had mutated somewhat. In that, he claimed that the 1914 excavation plan
showed "a mound labelled 'tumulus', surmounted by a small dot labelled
simply 'stone'." Supposedly the custodian of Grime's Graves told him the
boulder had been dislodged from the top of the mound to lay at its foot.2
Much of this is far from
accurate. I have a copy of that 1914 plan, and yes, it shows the pit, with a
dot just within its northern edge - actually labelled as 'Glacial Erratic',
not 'Erratic Boulder' - but the only mound shown on the whole plan is 300m
away to the north-east! It's indeed labelled 'Tumulus', but there is no
stone marked on it. (This mound is that named 'Grimshoe' by the Saxons, was
found to be mostly formed of mining rubble, and may be later than the
Neolithic.) Although this particular mound is nowhere near the pit, Rudge
was convinced that his Track-builders had erected a mound purely for a stone
to be set on top of it as a sighting-point - an idea that crops up again
several times along his route. There are a few low banks of different shapes
and sizes clustered about the eastern side of the clay pit, but these are
simply the eroded remains of spoil heaps from the marl extraction; they have
never been considered as archaeological features.
Rudge said that the stone
"was sufficiently remarkable as the only boulder found in the district to
receive special mention by the surveyor". In that same year, 1951, he also
remarked in a letter to one of his followers that "It is the only boulder in
the area, obviously brought from a distance".3 While it may have
been the only stone on the excavation surveyor's plan, it wasn't the only
rock in the pit. Rudge conveniently ignored another, even after being
challenged on it by the geologist and fellow Field Club member S. Hazzledine
Warren in 1954. The excavation report not only records two stones, but even
specifies the types of rock: "On the Santon side of the plantation is a
boulder clay pit, in which lie two erratic boulders. One of these was
identified by Professor P.F. Kendall, F.G.S., of Leeds University, as
Lincolnshire flint, the larger one being Carstone, from the Lower Greensand
of Lincolnshire".4 As Warren pointed out when he saw them
himself, "both are normal erratics in the Chalky Boulder Clay in which the
pit was dug", and he saw no need for any more fanciful explanation.5
Rudge's 'sandstone conglomerate with flint pebbles' was presumably the one
of 'Lincolnshire flint.'
I first visited the pit in
May 2016, following the forest trails and across open heath from Santon
Downham. (The photo left is an aerial shot of Grime's Graves from the west.
The location of the pit is circled in red.) The pit itself is about 70m long, 25m wide, and several metres
deep. It's now surrounded by trees and densely filled with bracken,
brambles, nettles and thorny bushes. Rain and the intrusion of tree roots
have caused a lot of soil slippage, making passage difficult. But, right
where the 1914 plan shows it, I unearthed the tip of a boulder at
TL8172089598. I was only able to expose a small portion of it, measuring
75cm x 45cm x 15cm high. Although this had to be the one described as
carstone, it didn't have the typical brownish colouration of that rock; and
though I found the site of the dried-up spring, I could find no trace of
Rudge's flinty conglomerate in the dense vegetation.
I returned in October that
same year, but by then the bracken was above head height, and denser than
ever. I couldn't even find again the stone that I had already discovered,
let alone Rudge's. If it's still there, probably nothing short of a complete
clearance by flamethrower would enable it to be found.
1. E.A. & E.L. Rudge: 'The
Conglomerate Track' in 'Essex Naturalist' Vol.29, part 1 (March 1952),
p.24-5 (read 24/11/51.)
2. E.A. Rudge (ed. John
Cooper): 'The Lost Trackway' (1994), p.4.
3. Letter from Dr. Rudge to
Mrs R. Pilcher, 18/6/1951.
4. W.G. Clarke (ed.):
'Report on the Excavations at Grime's Graves, Weeting, Norfolk, March-May
1914', in 'Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society of East Anglia' (1915),
p.34.
5. S. Hazzledine Warren:
'The Conglomerate Track' in 'Essex Naturalist' Vol.29, part 3 (1954), p.177.
From here Rudge imagined
that his Track continued for another two miles in its south-easterly
direction, over the burial mound known as Blood Hill - which dates from the
Bronze Age, and wouldn't have existed during the Neolithic works at Grime's
Graves - and then carried on for three miles over Gallows Hill (now known to
be a Bronze Age/late Iron Age site), and south into Thetford.
Thetford
St. Nicholas Street (first
mention 1952):
Initially, Rudge's only
comment was: "In our opinion this street is aligned along the ancient track,
and thus is probably the oldest thoroughfare in Thetford".1
Unfortunately for his theory, it turns out that St. Nicholas Street is very
probably a late addition to the town's medieval road plan.2
This street then went
unmentioned in his later published works until 'Lost Trackway'. There, he
stated "the track enters Thetford by the railway station and continues in
the same direct line towards the famous ford along St. Nicholas Street, one
side of which is lined with an unbroken series of puddingstone boulders from
the station to the river".3 At its north-west end, the street did
indeed once join Mundford Road in the area of the railway station, but it
has stopped well short of that since the early 19th century. Unfortunately
the whole eastern side of St. Nicholas Street was swept away in a 1974
redevelopment, then cut in half by the London Road inner relief route. Very
few buildings are left that were there in Rudge's time, and I've been unable
to find any old photographs to show this 'unbroken series of boulders'. The
south-east end of the street continues on to meet Minstergate.
1. E.A. Rudge: 'The
Puddingstone Track: Further Discoveries' in 'East Anglian Magazine' Vol.11
(July 1952), p. 515.
2. Alan Crosby: 'A History
of Thetford' (Phillimore, 1986), p.42.
3. E.A. Rudge (ed. John
Cooper): 'The Lost Trackway' (1994), p.10.
Thetford
Minstergate (first mention
1952):
In the 1950s, Rudge claimed
that there were still traces of the original ancient ford over the Little
Ouse river, visible next to the 19th century Town Bridge on its western
side. This is unlikely, as the river had been heavily canalised since before
he was even born. According to him, "here are two conglomerate blocks lying
one on either bank".1 At this point he clearly hadn't seen these
stones himself, as a few months later he was describing two on the south
side and four on the north. The latter, on the southern side of the street
called Minstergate, were actually 75m from the river, and 90m from the
bridge, so could hardly be said to have marked the ford, as he claimed. He
also said they were only "a few steps" from the junction with the main road.
Rudge, however, was very poor at estimating distances, as even the nearest
stone was almost 50m away from the meeting with Bridge Street.
His (rather indistinct)
photograph2 shows the stones - one of them quite a large boulder
- spread out against a brick wall and the frontage of a building, all of
which have since been demolished. They have been replaced by what is now
No.1 Museum House, and the access way beside
it. The stones were still there in 1970, when a newspaper article said that
they "push through the pavement surface along Minstergate Street, whitewashed so that
folk may avoid falling over them".3 Three of the boulders have
since been removed, but one, the smallest, remains,
embedded in the path just below the Minstergate street sign, at TL8684483179
(photo left.)
Whatever the others were, this is NOT
a puddingstone, or any type of conglomerate. This is a rounded 'hump' of
sandstone, or possibly siltstone, with no trace of a pebble
in its surface. It measures 85cm x 40cm x 30cm high.
Quite remarkably, Rudge
seems to have entirely missed an actual sandstone conglomerate, complete
with visible pebbles, right next to the bridge. This one measures 85cm x
65cm x 25cm high, and is embedded just outside the gatepost to Bridge House,
at TL8685383091. Judging from old photographs, it has been in that position
since at least the 19th century.
1. E.A. & E.L. Rudge: 'The
Conglomerate Track' in 'Essex Naturalist' Vol.29, part 1 (March 1952), p.24
(read 24/11/51.)
2. E.A. Rudge: 'The
Puddingstone Track: Further Discoveries' in 'East Anglian Magazine' Vol.11
(July 1952), p.514.
3. R.D. Clover: 'The
Infancy of Thetford' in 'Eastern Daily Press' 20/2/1970.
Thetford
'Maltings' boulders (first
mention 1952):
250m away on the south side
of the river stood the second set of what Rudge called his 'ford stones' -
although again they were nowhere near the actual ford. While only 50m from
the river bank, they were in fact 140m away from the bridge. He did
acknowledge that they probably
weren't in their original positions, "but they are of such a great size that
surely they have not been moved very far".1 His photograph (left)
shows two large angular boulders, each perhaps a cubic metre in size,
propped against the corners of a small brick and cobble-faced building. This
seems to have been a cottage or perhaps an office attached to the main 19th
century maltings complex, most of which was swept away in a redevelopment of
1962.
He described the stones as
being "in a tiny lane leading to the 'Maltings'. The lane leads off the Bury
road, a few yards from its junction with the Newmarket road." A study of old
maps shows that there was only ever one lane leading to the maltings off
what is now Old Bury Road, an eastward extension of Star Lane now known as
The Drift. Once again Rudge's distances are shown to be unreliable, as his
"few yards" is in fact 100m. I've managed to locate the building against
which the stones stood: it was at approx.
TL86858293, now occupied by the western corner of a
group of flats named Heath Court (previously home to the magistrates court.)
A newspaper of 1970 hints
at the final fate of Rudge's stones: "Until recent months two great boulders
stood by a building at the bottom of a lane near The Planes in Bury Road;
the building has now been destroyed and what became of the boulders is
unknown".2
Including Rudge's 'ford
stones', and the conglomerate outside Bridge House, I have evidence of 14
boulders clustered within a 100m radius of the Town Bridge. Those that
survive are definitely sandstone, including 3 large rocks beside the Haling
Path on the south side of the bridge. This makes me wonder if all of them
were not simply dredged up from the bed of the river when the current bridge
was being built in 1829.
1. E.A. Rudge: 'The
Puddingstone Track: Further Discoveries' in 'East Anglian Magazine' Vol.11
(July 1952), p.514.
2.
R.D. Clover: 'The
Infancy of Thetford' in 'Eastern Daily Press' 20/2/1970.
From here, Rudge felt
that his Track lay roughly on the same line as the existing A134 to Bury St.
Edmunds, traversing Barnhamcross Common and heading south for about two
miles to the village of Barnham, in Suffolk.
Suffolk
►
Back to Contents ► |