Rufford Red Lion Square

[£1.38]

Planning quite literally from before time immemorial.   

 

I like the idea of establishing what sort of place Rufford was pre-railway.  Once connected, we can expect rapid expansion, but the appearance and arrangement of the nucleus of the town will have been determined by its previous history.  Did it have a market?  Borough status and burgage plots, for example?

 

There must be other Notts coalfield towns and villages that could provide precedents, showing what they were both before and after the railway connected town and pit.

The best precedents are probably just over the border in Derbyshire - Bolsover in particular springs to mind as a compact market town serving a stately home (Bolsover Castle). Bolsover grew rapidly with the development of the coalfield, but the old centre continued to be the commercial centre. Might be too early though, as coalfield development as far east as Rufford was very late - 20th century and some even post-ww2.

 

As Rufford was on a main road to the North, it was likely to have had one or two old coaching inns - effectively replacing Ollerton.

 

The Mansfield & Pinxton railway proposed a branch to Ollerton from Mansfield in the 1820s or 30s. I guess that might have gone to Rufford instead, had Rufford town really existed.

[James Harrison]

 

 

There must be other Notts coalfield towns and villages that could provide precedents, showing what they were both before and after the railway connected town and pit.

 

 

A very good point; there must be.  An interesting thing is that this particular part of the Nottinghamshire coalfield was only developed comparatively late- in the 1910s/ 1920s- and the local towns and villages that might give me a clue grew up literally overnight in the early 1920s.  So the sort of phased development I have in mind doesn't work if I use those for inspiration. 

 

But then if you look elsewhere you have the example of Hucknall, which started out as a market town and then benefitted from the industrial revolution.  There are (were?) certain restrictions to the granting of town charters- one of which was that the town in question had to be demonstrably greater than a days' walk from the nearest market-10 kilometres in modern money.  Now, the nearest market to Rufford would have been Mansfield (charter granted 1227), which on the OS map works out around 11 kilometres distant, as the crow flies. 

 

My one fixed rule is that Norman Eagles' backstory (such as it exists or I can find it) is canon- and he named his station Rufford Market Place.  Therefore, following my one fixed rule, Rufford was granted a charter.  I would say that said charter would only have been granted after 1536- prior to this date the Abbey and Mansfield would have put up fierce resistance to a market- and it would only have been after one or other of these opponents had been knocked out that a petition would have been successful.  

 

It is reasonable to assume that the Abbey would have provided a church for inhabitants of the village.  It is also the case that markets generally are/ were close to the church- a relic of the days when church attendance was mandatory, when markets were held on Sundays and of the immortal desire of traders to be situated right where they can gain the most custom- so it would follow that the market place would be alongside or close to the church. 

 

Let's use that church/ market complex as ground zero for planning out the rest of the town.  Where would it have been situated?  If we look at my sketch map I posted a few months ago, we can see Rufford Abbey.  I don't think the church would have been too far away from that.  Let's put the church slightly to the west of the Abbey, the market place to the west of that, and then that neatly adjoins Market Place station. 

[James Harrison]

The best precedents are probably just over the border in Derbyshire - Bolsover in particular springs to mind as a compact market town serving a stately home (Bolsover Castle). Bolsover grew rapidly with the development of the coalfield, but the old centre continued to be the commercial centre. Might be too early though, as coalfield development as far east as Rufford was very late - 20th century and some even post-ww2.

 

As Rufford was on a main road to the North, it was likely to have had one or two old coaching inns - effectively replacing Ollerton.

 

 

 

Interesting; duly marked down for research.  One of the points of diversion with my narrative is that coal mining around Rufford began earlier than in real life- around the early 1800s rather than the 1910s- but then that POD is brought about by the town actually being there to start with!  (A kind of chicken and egg situation- the mines giving the town purpose only open earlier because the town is there to provide a workforce....)

 

I was thinking that in saying that the church and market place were near the Abbey might thereby place the town centre too far south for Red Lion Square to have worked as an truly urban design; however the mention of coaching inns.  Being on a main post road, you would need coaching inns at regular intervals, such as you get along the A5 for instance (10-mile intervals rings a bell for some reason- and would be a reasonable explanation as to why there's an 18th Century coaching inn on the A5 roughly on the Staffs/ Shrops border in, quite literally, the absolute middle of nowhere).  If I were to place a coaching inn a little to the north of the market place and the church, I can make the argument that the town centre is bookended by those- and it provides a nice setting out marker for planning the rest of Red Lion Square around.  So the Midland station would be at the one end of town and open onto the church, the market place and the road to the south and the Great Central station would be at the other end of town and open onto the road to the north.

 

Coming back to the market place and the church; my thoughts are that as they would be pretty much right on the boundary of the Abbey lands, would demarcate the extent of any growth of the town in that direction.  In other words, the presence of the Abbey would 'encourage' any growth of the town as a result of the market to be away from it- to the north and the west, rather than the south and south-east.  My traced map shows the GCR station to the northwest of the Midland....    

[£1.38]

Bear in mind that Sherwood Forest was immediately west of the A614 main road. This would likely have limited growth in the early town to being largely east of the A614 - unless it was already developed when the royal forest was declared, of course.

 

The Royal Palace at Kings Clipstone was not far away to the west. That might have added to the importance of the place.

 

The technology was not available in the 1800s to mine coal at the depth it is found around Rufford. That is why mines were only developed in the 1900s

Edited June 25, 2017 by £1.38

[£1.38]

Also remembered that this area was a major hop growing area in the 19th/early 20th century. Good excuse for a brewery?

[James Harrison]

The A614, "Old Rufford Road" as it is known, does make an appearance on my traced map.  It's the thick pencil line running north-south.  There's a long strip of land to the east of the A614 out to a lake and my putative canalised river that would provide growing space for the town centre.  The presence of Sherwood Forest makes things more interesting of course, because it means the whole town extends less to the east-west and instead would stretch out north-south, maybe mushrooming out the further from the centre you get- much like Lincoln, which is also long and thin. 

 

 

Also remembered that this area was a major hop growing area in the 19th/early 20th century. Good excuse for a brewery?

 

I was thinking, for a much later phase of the project, of building a waterworks and narrow gauge railway.  A brewery might work even better. 

[Edwardian]

James, what happens to your abbey post dissolution?  Does the abbey church get used as the parish church, giving Rufford a much larger and more impressive church than its original village status would warrant? 

 

if it is granted a charter subsequently, so becomes a market and then a coaching stop, the town could grow around the abbey church.  Perhaps it could reach its zenith in the Eighteenth century and then doze until the coming of the railway (I forget when you said that was).  Access to the coal deposits, say late Nineteenth or early Twentieth Century would herald new wealth and traffic, pricing a heyday just at the point in time depicted by your layout.

 

I don't know how that fits with the development of other places in the area. 

[£1.38]

This

 

 

Became this

 

[James Harrison]

 

 

The technology was not available in the 1800s to mine coal at the depth it is found around Rufford. That is why mines were only developed in the 1900s

 

I'm not going to warp reality so much to say the coal beds were shallower, or the technology to exploit them developed earlier.  Happily of the five (I think there were?) around the area, three of them were working by the conclusion of my 1918- 1922 era (Mansfield 1904, Rufford 1911 and Clipstone 1912).  Blidworth started 1923 and Bilsthorpe 1925- potential perhaps for Red Lion Square to host a permanent way depot for track gangs and equipment laying branches and sidings to the two new pits?

 

 

James, what happens to your abbey post dissolution?  Does the abbey church get used as the parish church, giving Rufford a much larger and more impressive church than its original village status would warrant? 

 

if it is granted a charter subsequently, so becomes a market and then a coaching stop, the town could grow around the abbey church.  Perhaps it could reach its zenith in the Eighteenth century and then doze until the coming of the railway (I forget when you said that was).  Access to the coal deposits, say late Nineteenth or early Twentieth Century would herald new wealth and traffic, pricing a heyday just at the point in time depicted by your layout.

 

I don't know how that fits with the development of other places in the area. 

 

Post-dissolution, the Abbey's history is as-per real life, so circa 1600s is built into a mansion and country park (thereby providing an immutable barrier to the town growing in that direction). 

 

The Abbey church does become the parish church; the market place alongside it and therefore becomes a nodal point around which the rest of the town grows.  Because of Sherwood Forest to the west, the erstwhile Abbey to the south and water to the east, means the only direction the town can grow in is along the length of what is now the A614, to the north.  Mileages being what they are the principal coach staging inn is a little way north of church, providing another nodal point. 

 

 

This

 

 

Became this

 

 

Very, very useful indeed!  Where did you find those?

 

Definitely need to start sketching all of this out I think. 

Edited June 25, 2017 by James Harrison

[James Harrison]

Now this site has quite a mass of historical information.  http://www.parkwoodoutdoors.co.uk/centre/rufford-abbey/activity/123/history 

 

Ahh. The lake is artificial and only dates from the 1750s. 

[£1.38]

Very, very useful indeed!  Where did you find those?

 

 

Just browse Rufford Abbey ( for images) on the Internet. Nothing clever really

[£1.38]

Looking through my files etc. I found these maps that might help

 

Here is a C18 map of the area, which also shows the divisions of the county with dotted lines..

 

 

and a boundary map of Sherwood Forest. This shows that my earlier statement was incorrect - the boundary was beyond the river, to the east of the abbey.

 

 

Here is a map of the Doomsday places. Rufford is shown at the confluence of Rainworth Water and the stream that comes in from the south east - i.e. pretty close to where the Abbey was placed and the remains of the stately home now are,

 

 

as circled in orange on this modern map

 

.

 

Adding 2+2 to make 6, I wonder if the trackway and footpath running north-south through this site might have been the original north-south route in medieval times. The current main road bypasses all the villages south of Ollerton, which suggests the A614's route might be relatively modern - though it does show on Chapman's map of 1774.

 

All this suggests to me that if the village/town of Rufford was moved slightly or squeezed to make way for the abbey, it is more likely to be south of the abbey than to the north - and on the banks of the river (Rainworth Water), rather than on the current main road.

 

Here is a suggestion, not to be taken too seriously, which follows the southern and eastern edges of the abbey estate.

 

 

There would be a new main road south west to the A614, shown in red. All existing trackways and footpaths would be roads, including the north-south and east-west routes. You would end up with a town where the main street ran around the boundary of the abbey - a lopsided town with the main buildings down one side of the street. Probably a far-fetched idea? Never mind, it was fun to do.

 

 

EDIT

 

Just remembered that Bury St Edmunds is very similar in layout. Perhaps not such a bad idea after all.

Edited June 25, 2017 by £1.38

[Edwardian]

Looking through my files etc. I found these maps that might help

 

Here is a C18 map of the area, which also shows the divisions of the county with dotted lines..

 

x1.jpg

 

and a boundary map of Sherwood Forest. This shows that my earlier statement was incorrect - the boundary was beyond the river, to the east of the abbey.

 

x2.jpg

 

Here is a map of the Doomsday places. Rufford is shown at the confluence of Rainworth Water and the stream that comes in from the south east - i.e. pretty close to where the Abbey was placed and the remains of the stately home now are,

 

x4.jpg

 

as circled in orange on this modern map

 

.x3.jpg

 

Adding 2+2 to make 6, I wonder if the trackway and footpath running north-south through this site might have been the original north-south route in medieval times. The current main road bypasses all the villages south of Ollerton, which suggests the A614's route might be relatively modern - though it does show on Chapman's map of 1774.

 

All this suggests to me that if the village/town of Rufford was moved slightly or squeezed to make way for the abbey, it is more likely to be south of the abbey than to the north - and on the banks of the river (Rainworth Water), rather than on the current main road.

 

Here is a suggestion, not to be taken too seriously, which follows the southern and eastern edges of the abbey estate.

 

x5.jpg

 

There would be a new main road south west to the A614, shown in red. All existing trackways and footpaths would be roads, including the north-south and east-west routes. You would end up with a town where the main street ran around the boundary of the abbey - a lopsided town with the main buildings down one side of the street. Probably a far-fetched idea? Never mind, it was fun to do.

 

 

EDIT

 

Just remembered that Bury St Edmunds is very similar in layout. Perhaps not such a bad idea after all.

 

Sounds entirely plausible to me.

 

Notts market town enlarged and industrialised, could have looked not dissimilar to this:

Edited June 26, 2017 by Edwardian

[£1.38]

Hucknall is probably a bad example for several reasons. Bolsover is more like a traditional market town

 

 

or Tuxford

 

From http://www.oldtuxford.com which has lots of old photos for inspiration

Edited June 26, 2017 by £1.38

[James Harrison]

Those last three or four posts have me regretting I can only select one of 'thanks', 'informative', 'creative' etc etc etc.  There's a lot of invaluable material there- particularly the early maps showing where Rufford was prior to the Abbey (my assumption of being to the west was based upon on presence of the main road, which the more I look at it the more it resembles an 18th Century post-Enclosures route). 

 

I quite like the idea of a lopsided mainstreet; it's an interesting way of organising things.  Come to think of it, Oxford isn't too dissimilar- if you look at the High Street, Broad Street and Holywell you have a similar arrangement of small town buildings down one side and massive Institutional piles on the other. 

 

If I were to make the Abbey itself the nodal point around which to plot the rest of the town, things start to slot in more happily.  If we go back to the illustration of the Abbey circa 1250, we can see the Abbey Church is to the east of the river and the south of the millpond.  To the south of the Church we have the boundary and the gate chapel, so if as I'm thinking the Abbey Church is also Rufford parish Church the obvious area for the market place is along the south boundary of the Abbey. That trackway or footpath, it seems odd that it should suddenly kink out to the east having run north/south.... hitting the Abbey boundaries would be a compelling reason for it to change course. The market could grow up around where it turns to run to the east, and then extend to the east and follow the trackway round when it turns back to the north. 

 

It might mean that ultimately the country house isn't built directly on the site of the Abbey of course- it may be built a little to the north elsewhere on the Abbey lands.  With the dissolution of the Abbey, if there is a town nearby quite a lot of the worked stone would probably have been robbed out.  Then landowners weren't noted for building their country homes with a town right on their doorstep.  Probably the Abbey estate would have been bought, but the Abbey itself left to moulder, with the exception of the Church which is adopted by the town.  Moving the house away from the Abbey means that when the Midland build their line in the 1840s the owner of Rufford Abbey isn't so fierce an opponent when the railway is laid out along the eastern edge of the market place- itself skirting the Abbey- and opens a station there.  You could almost imagine the Midland building a grand edifice in Walpolean mock Gothick to ape the Abbey ruins.  (What a model that would make!)

 

Then if (looking at modern OS map) you take that track that runs west, north of Manor Farm, and make that the main route to the modern A614, it's about level with where I was planning to site Red Lion Square originally.  A little further to the east admittedly but I can work with that quite easily. 

[£1.38]

Apologies to Edwardian for dismissing his photos in one brief line, but I was in a hurry this morning. Hucknall was a very remote, shoddy village before the collieries arrived in the mid to late C19 (even by Nottinghamshire standards) and is still referred to by locals as 'Mucky Uckna'. It has undergone quite a few changes since Edwardian times, including the demolition and replacement of loads of buildings. Geographically, it was more or less a dead end. The main road north, through Annesley Park, was once closed at night and was never a main road until relatively recent times.

 

The question of the route of the A614 puzzled me a lot, so I did a bit of digging tonight. I found this quote on a local history site...

 

`The other track that is presumed to be Roman is supposed to run from Blyth and perhaps Bawtry through Ollerton in the direction of Nottingham. This is certainly a very old track and in places is still known as the "great way" or the "great street"; where it passes near Rufford Abbey is bordered by a very wide and deep ditch of considerable age. This is mentioned in early records as "the ould dyke." Numerous hill forts of British origin lie on or near this track. It is very straight from Bilby Gate to Ollerton and thence not quite so direct as far as the fork to Oxton.'

 

I am not sure which Inclosure Act included Rufford, but the Ollerton Inclosure Act was dated 1778 - after the Chapman map of 1774, which clearly shows the A614 on its present route. Interestingly, it was never a turnpike road, which surprised me a bit.

 

On railway schemes for the area, the Nottingham Archives has a good collection of documents, I believe. Even the listing shows quite a variety....

 

http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/browse/r/h/98efd4d8-77e2-48c6-9593-833eee59f62b (see RH column)

 

You might also be interested in this bit on the Newark & Ollerton Railway and its proposed extension to Worksop.

 

https://www.lner.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5305

 

This topic concentrates on the idea that the Great Northern would have run it, but of course it could have been GC, or even a joint line if it extended to Worksop.

 

[£1.38]

Found a bit more on this site, which is full of useful information https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1001085

 

The Nottingham to Doncaster road, shown on the 1637 map as the way to Eakring, ran immediately south of the Abbey to the edge of the registered boundary, c 100m north of Old Kennels. In 1658 it was moved c 1.5km west of the house to run north/south as seen on the 1725 plan. The Edwinstowe to Wellow road which ran east/west c 200m north of the Abbey was also moved then. Both the Wellow road and the Nottingham road, now (2000) the A614, were moved to their present positions c 1765

[t-b-g]

Your first plan had a great deal of the feel of Chesterfield Market Place about it, the second one less so. That wasn't built by the GCR but became part of it in 1907.

 

As a rare example of a real terminus in the area it has given me much inspiration over the years.

 

My next project is a "what if" based in the area. The GCR was a late comer to Mansfield but what if the MS&LR had built a branch there earlier to compete with the Midland. Using the buildings and canopies from Chesterfield Central but with the building probably at ground level, that should give it the right feel.

 

I wish you all the best with the project. Anything GCR is OK by me!

[£1.38]

I am not sure which Inclosure Act included Rufford, but the Ollerton Inclosure Act was dated 1778

 

Rufford parish was effectively the Rufford Estate and would more or less all have been owned by one person, so an Inclosure Act would never have been needed. The Lord of the Manor could pretty well do as he liked.

[James Harrison]

Found a bit more on this site, which is full of useful information https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1001085

 

The Nottingham to Doncaster road, shown on the 1637 map as the way to Eakring, ran immediately south of the Abbey to the edge of the registered boundary, c 100m north of Old Kennels. In 1658 it was moved c 1.5km west of the house to run north/south as seen on the 1725 plan. The Edwinstowe to Wellow road which ran east/west c 200m north of the Abbey was also moved then. Both the Wellow road and the Nottingham road, now (2000) the A614, were moved to their present positions c 1765

 

Being the road linking Nottingham and Doncaster, and in my world running through Rufford, that could be a turnpike road.  Looking at the Nottinghamshire section of this table (http://www.turnpikes.org.uk/English%20turnpike%20table.htm) there were certainly several in the area, so it's not too great a leap to make the argument one would have gone to Rufford.  A turnpike trust buys the Nottingham- Doncaster road, (we've already discussed how it would have run along the south edge of the Abbey and then turned north after a short run to the east), sets about improving it and the fact it runs right through Rufford market place- is a bit of a bottleneck.  So from the market place they build a new road heading a short way west and then north, which turns the east side of Rufford into a bit of a backwater whilst opening up the west side for new growth. 

 

Which would mean we now have almost an old town (built when the road ran to the east) and a newer part of town that grows along the re-routed road, the boundary between the two being the western side of the market place.  The east side being a backwater makes it the more financially viable option when the Midland Railway comes in the 1840s, which although it reinvigorates the market place at the same time forms a barrier to further extension to the east.

 

And then the MSLR coming in from the west, there's no real gain from it crossing what is now the A614.  It can only run a mile and then it's going through somebody's front porch... no, I say it would more likely terminate on the west side of the road.  Maybe opposite a coaching inn....

[James Harrison]

Your first plan had a great deal of the feel of Chesterfield Market Place about it, the second one less so. That wasn't built by the GCR but became part of it in 1907.

 

As a rare example of a real terminus in the area it has given me much inspiration over the years.

 

My next project is a "what if" based in the area. The GCR was a late comer to Mansfield but what if the MS&LR had built a branch there earlier to compete with the Midland. Using the buildings and canopies from Chesterfield Central but with the building probably at ground level, that should give it the right feel.

 

I wish you all the best with the project. Anything GCR is OK by me!

 

Thanks! I wasn't going for anywhere immediately recogniseably GC, though that first track plan was quite heavily based around Ruddington Fields on the northern half of the preserved stretch.  The second plan I decided to switch out the crossovers in favour of a locomotive traverser- it's a little more unusual, allows me to save a little space, and struck me as something the GC might have done if building a new terminus on an old site at the turn of the 20th Century.  The goods yard plan I've not finalised yet; I struggle to get a plan I'm happy with that doesn't take up masses of space.  

[James Harrison]

It's nice when idly googling 'Nottinghamshire market towns' you find something that can't possibly fail to be useful.

 

 

Duly ordered. 

[Edwardian]

It's nice when idly googling 'Nottinghamshire market towns' you find something that can't possibly fail to be useful.

 

 

Duly ordered. 

 

Look forward to the intellectual and modelling fruits of your purchase in due course ......

[James Harrison]

That book is on back-order with the retailers at the moment, so it may be a little while before I get my grubby mitts on it.  Beyond a couple of sketch plans (very much drawn with an elastic ruler) macro-scale town planning is on hold for the present until the book arrives.  I've gone so far as to get a handle on how the street plan would generally have developed, got a decent backstory for why the town exists and why the railway should have gone there, and plotted out where the railways would have gone and were the stations would have been, which is probably about all I need until micro-scale world building begins and deciding the form and function of buildings. 

 

Now speaking of buildings, the only non-railway building I'm absolutely determined must be on the layout is that Watson Fothergill-designed confection that I posted a few months ago.  Reading the latest-published work on his career, it turns out that it's actually his former studio in Nottingham.  Which only exists because his previous studio was forcibly purchased and pulled down to make way for the Great Central mainline.  I'm sure he'll be turning in his grave to find out I'll be putting a miniature version of it in the vicinity of a railway station.... "not again" you can almost imagine him muttering.   There's rather a nice photograph of it in a book I forget I even had- "Powerhouses of Provincial Architecture" published by the Victorian Society- which means I can start drawing it up without needing my computer right next to the drawing board, which is always a distraction and usually gets in the way. 

 

I get the feeling somehow that this is going to end up like one of my old University projects.  Reams and reams of research, shelves full of books that are read once and then forgotten about, several sketchbooks filled to the point of the spines having burst and at the end of it- a final result that is probably representative of about 10% of the thought and effort that went into the whole thing. 

[James Harrison]

This is the photo I started with.

 

 

And this is my initial crack at sketching it. 

 

 

I drew this on squared paper at a scale of 5mm to the foot, so it's 20% overscale.  For my current purposes I can work with that; before I build the model it needs to be properly drawn up.  No, the purpose of this drawing was firstly as a practice shot to see which bits might prove to be ticklish to design, let alone build, secondly to puzzle out some of the proportions and approximate dimensions of the various elements, thirdly as an inital crack at generating a drawing at all.

 

You might well ask why I have gone to this effort at all; the sorry fact is that there are very, very few drawings surviving from Watson Fothergill's practice and none at all (according to the catalogue of his work published in 2012 or 2013) of this particular building.  So; if you want a drawing of it, either do it yourself or go without....

 

I have, you will note, erred in some aspects.  I'm convinced that the entire first floor needs to be shifted a little to the left, and the first floor windows probably a little narrower- I've had to omit one window entirely to get the oriel bay in- and that oriel itself is, I think, a little too broad.  The floor to ceiling heights (I decided on 9' as a starting point) are probably about right, possibly a little too tight assuming a window cill height of 3'- the windows fit in well enough but the lintels are then quite a tight fit.  10' floors might be a better bet.  I've included on the drawing a suggestion of the terracota Medieval architect on the first floor.  I'm not certain that will make to the final model- it would be absolutely nightmarish to make and definitively mark the building out as an architect's studio.  We're talking here about an architect who, given a commission to design a newspaper office, decided to put the heads of Liberal politicians onto the facade as a form of decoration.... ergo a little figure holding a plan and with a model cathedral at his feet would definitively be an architect.   

 

It can't be a 100% accurate copy in any case- you will note how the building is built on an incline whilst the OS map of the Rufford area shows it to be almost a perfectly flat plain- and I'm not sure I want a perfect replica of the existing building anyway.  I'd be happier with something that is recognisable as being of the Fothergill catalogue, had he designed something in Rufford (which would have been quite likely as he certainly had commissions in Tuxford and Ollerton). 

 

So, it needs tweaking, but not a bad first attempt.