|
Historic landscape assessment is about recognising the ways in which the present countryside reflects how people have exploited, changed and adapted to their physical environment through time, with respect to different social, economic, technological and cultural aspects of life. Historic landscape character is thus partly about characteristic patterns of change and important relics of past change and partly about the ways in which the resultant pattern of physical features in the countryside vary consistently from one place to another because of consistent underlying constraints or influences of geography, history and tradition.
The study commissioned by Hampshire County Council will be developed on the basis of a recognition that landscape is dynamic and ever changing. The key issues are how present day society wishes to engage with and influence the direction and pace of future change in ways currently perceived to be desirable for maintaining links with the past that enrich the present environment.
In order for the study to contribute to strategic planning within the county the results must be of relevance to:
Strategic structure planning for:
Links in strategic advice to:
The study team assembled by the Oxford Archaeological Unit and Scott Wilson Resource Consultants for the purposes of the study of Hampshire is made up of a combination of archaeologists, information technology and geographical information systems specialists, a landscape historian and a landscape architect. This combination was designed to encompass the range of skills needed to analyse the existing landscape and to present information in ways appropriate to the requirements of the client.
Historically, interrelationships between landholding, farming, settlement, communication, trade, industry and social and cultural interaction operated on widely different physical scales. The resultant patterns of their physical expression in towns and in the countryside are best explored through a hierarchy of scales which relate to present day levels of strategic and local decision-making, at county, district and parish level. The approach proposed here reflects all these various factors, emphasising:
The Brief proposes an approach based closely on the model adopted for the studies of Cornwall and Avon, and more recently the Cotswolds AONB and elsewhere. The present study takes these models as a starting point and, through the use of GIS, hopes to be able to take the analysis and presentation of the results somewhat further, as explained below.
Hampshire has already been well covered by conventional landscape and ecological and historic assessment and characterisation at various scales (from national to local) which have been undertaken at different times and by different organisations. While on the one hand this can provide a rich source of different perspectives on a subject where there is no single ‘right’ answer, there is also the danger that adding yet another perspective could lead to unnecessary confusion if previous work is not taken into account.
Our approach is firmly based on seeing historic landscape assessment as a process of enrichment and refinement of landscape characterisation, rather than as a separate or rival approach. In. essence it should ideally enrich the traditional approach (which tends to see the landscape from the perspective of the present-day visual qualities of the countryside) by putting more emphasis on time-depth and the ways in which different areas reflect different patterns and rates of change.
A further probable source of difference between the two approaches will be that the Historic Landscape Assessment will be primarily desk-based using maps and air photographs, whereas previous landscape assessments have been more ground-based and visual. This ‘vertical’ rather than ‘horizontal’ perspective is likely to produce results which are less easy to appreciate on the ground but which are nonetheless valid.
We therefore see a dynamic, interactive relationship between the present study and previous landscape assessment work in Hampshire, so that previous work provides both part of the foundations on which this study builds, and a sounding board against which to test and compare results, by which real differences arising from the historic landscape approach can be distinguished from minor discrepancies.
The presentation of results will not attempt to amalgamate the results of this study with previous ones but will draw attention to the nature of differences between them.
In addition to the core objectives set out in the Brief, we see the study as pointing the way to future use of the results for developing strategic planning and advice in two particular ways.
Firstly through relating the assessment to (modern) parishes representing real historical geographical entities and relating to present day local communities
Secondly through modelling how future change might affect key historic landscape attributes. We believe that this goes beyond the strict requirement of the Brief but offers a new and exciting way of applying the results of historic landscape assessment
The methodology set out below follows that outlined in the Brief and elaborates some of the key issues of working. It also goes somewhat beyond the Brief in suggesting levels and types of analysis which we believe would make the study particularly useful in respect of some of the core objectives in terms of strategic policy and advice.
The work proposed falls into three main stages:
Stage A will involve a detailed identification of access to sources; the development and preparation of the working methods; the establishment of the database and GIS; a review of previous work and the piloting of the Historic Landscape Types
Stage B will be the core task of establishing generic descriptions and detailed mapping the Historic Landscape Types, and preparation of the report and digital archives
Stage C will be involve the GIS analysis of the Historic Landscape Types to generate Historic Landscape Areas and in turn to analyse these in order to generate parish descriptions and higher level analyses. These analyses will also form the basis for experimenting with predictive modelling of future change for settlement pattern and possibly for woodland cover.
The result of this work will be twofold:
The sources of data to be used will be based on those listed in the Appendix to the Brief issued by the client. These will be supplemented (subject to permission of the Countryside Commission and English Heritage) with data derived from some of the key historic landscape data sets underlying the Countryside Character map (held by South East Regional Research Laboratory), and (if available at a suitable scale), the English Heritage settlement pattern mapping undertaken by B. Roberts and S. Wrathmell.
A number of studies have shown that most of the process of historic landscape assessment relies on interpretation of modern maps showing the level of detail depicted at 1:25,000 scale (effectively the same level of survey detail as 1:10,000). This interpretation of the modern base maps relies on a range of other sources. Overall, three levels of utility can be defined for these sources.
Core sources are of fundamental importance for basic identification or interpretation of historic landscape types and are in constant use for the mapping of historic landscape types. Characteristically these will be maps providing comprehensive coverage of the current environment or particular aspects of it from which particular aspects can be interpreted (e.g. grassland, heathland, woodland) habitat survey maps of unimproved or accurate historic maps providing comprehensive coverage, (e.g. 1st edition OS 1" maps) from which change from previous centuries can be directly mapped.
Supporting sources directly assist or refine interpretation and will tend to be referred to fairly continuously. These sources also provide comprehensive coverage but tend to provide more tangential or less precise information which assists interpretation but less directly than the core sources (e.g. geology and soils, air photographic cover, pre-OS map coverage).
Indicative sources are mainly of value in helping to define historic landscape types, rather than directly assisting their mapping, usually because they are too selective in their coverage or in the ways in which the data they record has been collected (e.g. site and monuments record, most environmental designations, secondary sources, surveys of particular areas).
In this section the tasks identified for each of the three stages are set out and methods of working are briefly summarised.
Stage A
Task A1: consists of five elements, aimed at developing a coherent project design. This will involve:
Task A2: consists of five elements;
Task A3: consists of a single major element;
Task A4: consists of two elements;
Task A5: consists of a single major element;
Task A6: consists of a single element;
Task A7: the final task in the first stage consists of the first review and progress report. This will involve the presentation of the draft Historic Landscape Types and the results of the pilot mapping together with any updates on methodology etc. Comments on the draft Historic Landscape Types and any methodological issues will be received and noted.
Stage B
Each task in stage B consists of a single element, leading up to the second review of progress.
Task B1: in the light of the pilot study and comments, a definitive list, descriptions and examples of Historic Landscape Types to be used as descriptive record of types and guidelines for full mapping project will be prepared
Task B2: characterisation of each unit of landscape according to defined Historic Landscape Types and mapping them. This mapping will probably be done by taking one block of 100km2 at a time and mapping each Historic Landscape Type in turn, starting with the smallest and easiest to define and ending with the largest and most difficult to subdivide.
Task B3: the scanning, vectorising, geo-referencing and labelling of polygons according to Historic Landscape Types.
Task B4: the refinement and subdivision of Historic Landscape Types on screen and the generation of a database of numbered polygons with locational references and Historic Landscape Type summary descriptions.
Task B5: the second progress report and review to present mapping of Historic Landscape Types and supporting data; to receive comments and to discuss the basis for combining Historic Landscape Types into Historic Landscape Areas.
Stage C
The third stage will consist of twelve tasks, the final on of which will be the production of the report and digital archive.
Task C1: The definition of simplified Historic Landscape Character Areas using Historic Landscape Types digitally overlaid on base maps to identify those polygons which may be combined to create the Areas.
Task C2: The digital generation of maps showing Historic Landscape Character Areas and the generation from the GIS of standard descriptions based on occurrence of different Historic Landscape Types within the area.
Task C3: The refinement of descriptions derived from the database with commentaries on the particular characteristics of the Historic Landscape Types for that area and more generally of the key patterns of historical interaction and change for the Historic Landscape Area. This will be done where possible by reference to sample vertical air photographs of each relevant area and to larger scale assessment data (e.g. Countryside Character data sets for settlement pattern, woodland cover and parkland).
Task C4: The assessment of the visual robustness of a selection of the major Historic Landscape Areas by field observation in areas where they adjoin; record visual impressions with photographs and sketches.
Task C5: The use of Parish vectorised boundary layers to generate examples of Parish-based Historic Landscape Type and Historic Landscape Area maps and descriptions derived from the Historic Landscape Type and Area data sets.
Task C6: The generation of maps of parishes which share common Historic Landscape characteristics in order to define major Historic Landscape Zones or Districts and to use GIS to generate descriptions of them based on those for the contributory Historic Landscape Areas.
Task C7: To review and analyse differences between ‘conventional’ and historic landscape areas.
Task C8: To conduct a pilot study to experiment with the modelling of future change for key Historic landscape attributes (probably settlement pattern and forestry).
For settlement pattern this would use the Countryside Character settlement pattern data set based on post-code data referenced to historic settlement pattern, (through comparison with either Roberts’ and Wrathmell’s interpretation of the 1st edition 1" OS map data, or with the comparison of this source with the extent of modern settlements suggested for this study). This will provide the basis for statistical modelling of the effect of adding properties in different numbers, densities and configurations, to assess whether these would retain or obscure historic patterns. If successful, this will make it possible to explore whether thresholds or indicators can be defined below which a given density and dispersal of new houses would retain historic character, and how these thresholds might vary for different parts of Hampshire according to whether settlements were more or less dispersed within each parish.
For woodland cover a similar process would use the data set developed for the Countryside Character project, or could (perhaps more usefully) use relevant woodland and plantation Historic Landscape Types mapped for this project.
Other possibilities for modelling change would be identified and briefly discussed.
Task C9: The third progress report and review will present the Historic Landscape Areas maps and samples of the parish-based output and will review the value and potential of the modelling change exercise. The synopsis and form of report and digital archives will be proposed, comments will be received and the scope and format of report will be agreed.
Task C10: The compilation of the draft report which will include the approach and methodology, as follows:
Task C11: The penultimate task will be the receipt and evaluation of the comments on the draft report by the working party
Task C12: The final task will be the production and editing of the final report and the digital archives.
| Top of Document |
Arch Division Homepage |
List of Summaries |