Norwich - A Salt City?

[Vaughan]

On University Challenge just now (it was my wife of course, watching it) one of the questions was the ancient meaning of "WICH" in a place name. Answer ? Salt production.

Ahem. . . . 

So where was this salt produced then, except from salt flats? In a Great Estuary?  

Answers on a postcard please, to 3, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam.

[ChrisB]

Maybe it goes back to Roman times and a bit later.

[JennyMorgan]

But then there are good folk who dispute the Big Estuary theory, aren't there?

[ChrisB]

Or it's influence in Monastic Times would have been extended to the North Coast.  To Walsingham, and onwards to the "Salt Marsh Coast"  How did Salthouse get its name? I guess salt production.

[ChrisB]

Just now, JennyMorgan said:

But then there are good folk who dispute the Big Estuary theory, aren't there?

I read somewhere that huge quantities of fish were supplied to Peterborough from Norwich which supports the estuary theory and equally eels from Ely. I suppose it is all open to a bit of speculation.

[jillR]

my chambers etymological dictionary  1907 ..... etymology of names of places says  .....

 

 

[JennyMorgan]

Where's Tim when we need him?

A History of Norwich:

http://www.localhistories.org/norwich.html

[grendel]

4 minutes ago, jillR said:

my chambers etymological dictionary  1907 ..... etymology of names of places says  .....

 

 

that makes more sense

[jillR]

 it would seem  logical that quantities of fish and salt would have been brought to Norwich by boat from Lowestoft.

when I came to Norwich in the 80s there were eel catchers nets every where on

the Wensum and yare

[JennyMorgan]

More information:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/-wich_town

'As wīċ also means "bay" in Old English, wich and wych are also used in names to denote brine springs or wells. By the eleventh century, the use of -wich in placenames had been extended to include areas associated with salt production. At least nine English towns and cities carry the suffix, although only five of these tend to be associated with salt: Droitwich in Worcestershire and the four -wich towns of Middlewich, Nantwich, Northwich and Leftwich in Cheshire.'

I see Northwich, I don't see Norwich.

[Vaughan]

Sorry about that, I have an awful sense of mischief!

It was a question on University Challenge though. But they have been known to get it wrong before, regarding National Parks, as I remember.

I too, think the salt was probably produced on the N. Norfolk coast around Brancaster and Blakeney.

I am sorry no-one "picked up" on this, though :

1 hour ago, Vaughan said:

Answers on a postcard please, to 3, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam.

That was Tony Hancock's address, on "Hancock's Half-hour".

[JennyMorgan]

You little tinker!

[MauriceMynah]

Is there any reason why salt wouldn't have been produced on Breydon, or even a lot further up even as the waterways are now?

[JennyMorgan]

6 minutes ago, MauriceMynah said:

Is there any reason why salt wouldn't have been produced on Breydon, or even a lot further up even as the waterways are now?

Probably not on Breydon itself but quite likely on a 'saltings' or salt pan created besides Breydon. It still happens down at Maldon.

[Polly]

Hhhhho yes I did notice the address. 

[Bound2Please]

6 hours ago, JennyMorgan said:

 It still happens down at Maldon.

Big business still in Maldon, in fact Maldons biggest export I believe still. Not a wich in site except the old Which top of the hill.

Charlie

[wombat nee blownup]

As you exit the Bure and turn toward Breydon, the whole of the land facing which is an area known as Cobholm and surrounding area was salt marsh where apparently one of Englands biggest windmills was sited halfway along which is now Gatacre Road, how far it extended toward Norwich I don't know

[quackers]

"Although they were clearly a valuable resource by later Saxon times, we should not assume that the marshes already had a landscape like that of today. In particular, they were crossed by a number of tidal creeks: for as well as sheep and pasture, Domesday records a number of salt pans in the area, especially on the island of Flegg. Some of these were presumably situated close to the coast - the vill with the largest number was Caister, with no less than 19 - but others were probably located on tidal creeks. In fact, there are considerable problems with Domesday's account of salt pans. Some vills with large numbers - such as Rollesby - cannot possible have had direct access to tidal waters by this time. Although the present parish of Rollesby does contain areas of low-lying ground which comprise a continuation of the main body of the Halvergate Marshes, these are occupied by areas of relatively recent peat which cannot have formed in saline conditions. Like other high-value resources listed by Domesday, salt pans may often have been located some way away from the parish which now bears the name of the vill under which they are listed, and thus a detailed analysis of their location is meaningless. Nevertheless, when combined with the evidence of slightly later documents, Domesday can sometimes provide an indication of the extent of tidal penetration. Domesday records that, included in St.Benet's holding in South Walsham, there were two salt houses: and in the 1140s, when the abbey leased its demesne lands in South Walsham, the property included a marsh with 300 sheep and salt pans. This marsh, which later  became the detached section of South Walsham parish in the heart of the [Halvergate] 'triangle', had no river frontage and any salt pans here must have made use of tidal water flowing up what is now the Halvergate Fleet, which forms its southern boundary. Perhaps the pans which Domesday lists in Halvergate and Tunstall were similarly located beside this lost watercourse."  (Professor at the UEA) Tom Williamson, "The Norfolk Broads, a landscape history", MUP, 1997 at p. 46

Phew!! I shall now go and soak my two typing fingers in hot water.

Those seeking to wind up Timbo on the subject of the Great Estuary should bear this in mind: even its most ardent Victorian proponents concede that whatever once may or may not have existed had disappeared by about 500 AD, long before the Saxo-Norman times about which Tom Williamson was writing.

Bill Saunders

[Timbo]

Eh? what? My trusty Spidey Sense let me down on that one...Thank goodness Bill was there!

Behielde macunge þá uncyste ne andgiet ágenspræc. Sorry my 'English' is a little rough to say the very least...

'Wic' is not really anything to do with salt production. It is a 'loan word' from the Latin 'vicus' meaning a small town, settlement or farm, usually a dairy farm. Later the suffix would be added to a semi fortified settlement of trade.

Of course East Anglia but particularly Lincolnshire were famed for salt production. Recent discoveries of Roman salt pans on the Norfolk coast point to a long history. However I should point out these were discovered in an area that would have been submerged if the Great Estuary did exist. My home town of Gainsborough has Roman salt works based upon gypsum...now then...having said all that...

I wonder if you guys know about the sinkholes appearing in Norwich? You know the ones that occur when the old salt mines collapse? Where they took out the gypsum? OK, OK I know I'm throwing the 'Estuarites' a bone and gypsum is formed on lake beds...but NOT in the geological, archaeological or historical time scale of any estuarine theorem.

[Vaughan]

I hope all realise that my "dig" was more at the veracity of University Challenge, than anything else. I know I have a little go at Timbo now and again, but I have a feeling he doesn't mind that much! It certainly creates a debate and this one has become fascinating.

I have indeed heard of the mines under Norwich but my knowledge is more of sea salt, having lived near Aigues Mortes in the Rhone Delta, where production is huge. Salt was indeed as valuable as precious stones in the old days as it was the only way to preserve meat and fish. There was a dedicated Salt Road going north into France from Aigues Mortes, after taxes had been paid. The road was guarded by Roman soldiers, who were paid half their wages in salt. Hence the word "salary" which we still use today for our wages.

I am afraid there are those who were brought up on the estuary theory who are still a bit difficult to be weaned from it. In my case, I grew up in Thorpe, and so all around me, is the clear delineation between the flat marshes and the pronounced high ground around it. Even the BA still have this, as the boundary of their area of responsibility. You only have to cruise past Bramerton to see how marked this is.

I do accept what Timbo and Bill say about the creation of peat but for me, this pronounced high ground is still a mystery. Was it caused by a meandering river? Not in my opinion. Was it Glacial? If so it is a strange shape, though I am told there were glaciers in this area. Is it what is left of continental shift, when the UK was joined to mainland Europe?

So my question still is, if this did not used to be an estuary, then what created this topography? It can't have been just peat!

[Timbo]

The simple answer Vaughan is that it's glacial geology. These last few years have been the first time I've explored the area 'around' the Broads. I'm a Lincolnshire lad from the Isle of Axholme so I know what 'flat' means. So I anticipated the topology 'inland', so to speak, of the Broads to be as flat as the 'Isle'. I was very pleasantly surprised to find that far from a flat landscape Broadland is full of little rolling hills.

Norfolk is not the deeply gouged landscape of Northern Britain or indeed my home in the Trent Valley carved out as glaciers ground through the landscape. Norfolk is made up of the 'crap' pushed in front of the glaciers as they moved southwards...waits for some wag with an analogy of Yarmouth.

So effectively you have glaciers moving southwards gouging out the river valleys pushing the debris in front of it, sweeping over Lincolnshire scouring out the Lincoln Edge (that I live on now) pushing through Lincolnshire (notice how F L A T it is) and then stops and starts to retreat leaving the 'rubble' behind as Norfolk. The best practical analogy is if you sweep sand with a yard brush from a large pile across a concrete floor. The large 'pile' (Yorkshire) gets eroded, in front of it is a flat plain where the brush picks up a lot of sand (Lincolnshire) and at the end of the brush stroke the sand gets scattered in lots of smaller piles (Norfolk). The geological term is 'glacial till', the sands and gravel that make up the 'bumps' of Norfolk.

I hope that helps Vaughan or was it as clear as glacial till? 

 

[Vaughan]

About as clear as what they are dragging up out of Gt Hoveton Broad at the moment, if you saw the local TV last night.

Seriously, though, it explains a great deal and thank you for that. One must admit that the general topography of Norfolk, including the Broads, is unusual, to say the least!

[Timbo]

14 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

About as clear as what they are dragging up out of Gt Hoveton Broad at the moment, if you saw the local TV last night.

I wish the lottery would come and pay for someone to clear up my Dad's mess in my back yard!

14 minutes ago, Vaughan said:

Seriously, though, it explains a great deal and thank you for that. One must admit that the general topography of Norfolk, including the Broads, is unsual, to say the least!

I was just thinking about my answer Vaughan. Of course after you have all of the jumble from the glaciation, you then get the more standard geological processes coming into play. Sea level rises forming sedimentary geology...and of course the peat, and then a fall in sea level.

As our very own continental 'drift' , you, more than most, will probably appreciate the frustration Bill and I feel with the blinkered inwards looking attitude when it comes to the geology, geography and archaeology of Norfolk. It's as though continental Europe and the rest of the UK does not exist. What really get's my goat is that the BA uses the exact same datum to plan it's responses to future changes in sea level yet ignores that the same datum sets 1st century sea levels at one to one and a half meters below modern levels.

I am aware that it is the bobble hatted, binocular-ed spuggie botheres of the RSPB who are responsible for this idiocy which begs the question why do RSPB members need bobble hats when they have their heads shoved so far up their bums? 

[TheQ]

The glacial explanation, which I was taught at school, along with things like the tilt  rebound of the UK does bear out the 3 inches of soil and then sand when I lived near Horning.

Timbo if I've got this right,

þancian

[ChrisB]

The glacial rubbish pushed ahead is often refered to as a Moraine if loose. The cliffs between Bacton and Runton are such rubbish which is why they errode so much from seeping rain water being unconsolidated. The land has started to slip badly again at Overstrand way above where the sea could reach. I think it used to be generally accepted the glaciers finished about the Thames Valley. When I was young glacial action was said to be the cause of the pudding stone found around where I went to school in Hertfordshire but I believe modern thinking is is formed by just drying out.