Beek, R. van/B.J. Groenewoudt/L.J. Keunen, 2014: Establishing the dates of farm sites (A.D....

Establishing the dates of farm sites (A.D. 800–present) in Salland (the Netherlands): Aninterdisciplinary approach

Roy van Beek1, Bert Groenewoudt2, Luuk Keunen3

1Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands, 2Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands, Amersfoort,the Netherlands, 3RAAP Archaeological Consultancy, Zutphen, the Netherlands

We present an interdisciplinary method for establishing date ranges of farm sites (A.D. 800–present) andreconstructing regional settlement dynamics. An experimental field strategy was designed to refineestimates regarding the ages of individual farmsteads based on historical data and physical and historicalgeography. Archaeological test pitting was employed to recover settlement debris in carefully selectedlocations. In the course of one week, we investigated 13 farm sites and were able to refine age estimatesusing artifactual evidence. The field strategy is applicable in situations where concentrations of settlementdebris related to farm sites are buried under younger sediments.

Keywords: interdisciplinary research, Medieval settlement, dispersed settlement, historical geography, farmsteads, test pitting, settlement debris

IntroductionThis paper describes an interdisciplinary research

method used to analyze and reconstruct Medieval

and post Medieval settlement patterns in the south-

western part of the Salland region in the eastern

Netherlands (FIGS. 1, 2). High quality archaeological

and historical data are available here, as well as

detailed information on the physical geography of the

region. The research method may be useful in other

areas, although regional differences must not be

neglected. The results and methods reported here can

be compared with those in neighboring countries

such as the U.K., where this type of research is in a

more advanced stage.

The deepest roots of the modern settlement pattern

in Salland are assumed to go back to the 9th century

A.D. (Groenewoudt et al. 2006). The oldest farms still

in existence today were founded around that time and

formed the pivotal points for later developments. The

general outlines of the modern cultural landscape

gradually emerged and crystallized as a phased

expansion and intensification of the settlement

pattern took place (e.g., Spek and van Exter 2007;

van Beek 2009). In some locations, especially around

early churches, hamlets and villages developed

(Keunen 2006a, 2011). The result of this process

was a combination of dispersed and nucleated

settlement. Many questions regarding this develop-

ment remain unanswered. Which processes produced

these settlement patterns and how do they relate to

earlier occupation and landscape organization? How

old are the farmsteads (a farmhouse with its out-

buildings, water wells, field systems, and all other

structures associated with it) in these regions actu-

ally? What is the reliability of existing models

concerning Medieval settlement development?

Interdisciplinary Records in the Dutch MedievalCountrysideThe importance of an interdisciplinary study of

Medieval settlement and cultural landscapes is cer-

tainly recognized in the Netherlands. Research has

been undertaken in the northern (Waterbolk 1973,

1980, 1982; Waterbolk and Harsema 1979; Spek 2004),

central (Blommesteijn et al. 1977; Heidinga 1987), and

southern Netherlands (Slofstra et al. 1982; Theuws

1988; Leenders 1996). Until recently, hardly any

detailed, interdisciplinary and diachronic studies of

the Middle Ages had been carried out in the eastern

Netherlands (van Beek and Keunen 2006a; van Beek

2009). An important exception is the long lasting and

large scale research undertaken in the vicinity of the

city of Zutphen (Groothedde 1996; Bouwmeester et al.

2008). Research in the adjacent German Munsterland

region (Nordrhein-Westfalen) mostly focuses on

deserted villages (German: Wustungen) (Simms 1976;

Bergmann 2001, 2006). These studies differ consider-

ably, although some combine archaeological and

Correspondence to: Roy van Beek, Faculty of Archaeology, LeidenUniversity P.O. Box 9515, 2300 RA Leiden, the Netherlands. Email:[email protected]

� Trustees of Boston University 2014DOI 10.1179/0093469013Z.00000000074 Journal of Field Archaeology 2014 VOL. 39 NO. 1 51

historical evidence. Standardized research methods

are lacking. Therefore, the prediction made by the

historical geographer Vervloet (1988: 388) that the

boundaries between historical geography and archae-

ology would gradually fade away has only partly come

true.

Recent developments in Medieval landscape archae-

ology in the U.K. provide inspiration. Rippon and

Gardiner describe the growing coordination of archae-

ology, history, and historical geography, and call for a

closer integration of field archaeology, local history,

the study of standing buildings, place names, and

paleoenvironmental evidence (Rippon and Gardiner

2007; Rippon 2009). In the 1950s, the study of the

English Medieval landscape mainly focused on

deserted sites amenable to survey and excavation

(Beresford 1951). The decades that followed witnessed

both an enlargement of the research scale and a

growing interest in interdisciplinary studies (e.g.,

Hooke 1988; Hamerow 1991; Rippon 2009: 232;

Christie and Stamper 2012). Especially in Denmark,

the Netherlands, and northern Germany, the main

focus gradually shifted from sites to entire landscapes

and from specific timeframes to long term perspectives.

The extensive settlement excavations at Vorbasse,

Denmark (e.g., Hvass 1983, 1986), Gasselte, the

Netherlands (Waterbolk and Harsema 1979), and

Flogeln, Germany (Schmid and Zimmermann 1976)

are well known. Even though Scandinavian research,

especially since the 1980s and 1990s, has witnessed

an increase in interdisciplinary studies (e.g., Emanue-

lsson et al. 2003), approaches to the rural Medieval

countryside are very diverse and––as in the

Netherlands––still lack standardized research methods

(Fabech and Ringtved 1999).

An interesting development in the U.K. is the

growing number of studies focusing on the investiga-

tion of still-occupied settlements and other features of

the countryside through the excavation of small test

pits and surface survey (Rippon and Gardiner 2007:

231; Rippon 2009: 237). Well known early examples

are the studies of Shapwick (Aston and Gerrard

1999) and the villages of the Whittlewood area (Jones

and 003; Page and Jones 2007; Lewis 2005).

The Salland region offers good possibilities for

implementing an interdisciplinary approach to the

study of developmental changes in the Medieval and

post Medieval cultural landscape. Settlement patterns

have not been researched intensively yet, but a

relatively large number of Medieval settlements have

been excavated (van Beek 2009; van der Velde 2011).

Archaeology is the main source of information with

regard to the Early (A.D. 450–1000) and High (A.D.

1000–1300) Middle Ages. From the Late Middle Ages

(A.D. 1300–1500) onwards sufficient historical data

are available to permit a detailed reconstruction of

habitation development at various scales. Many relics

of the settlement pattern that gradually crystallized

during the Medieval and post Medieval periods are

preserved in the modern countryside and offer

possibilities for research. However, there are some

important methodological issues that need to be

addressed. These are mainly encountered at the

intersection between archaeological information and

historical and historical geographical data. Besides

differences in the levels of detail and scientific

contexts in which data are collected––which reflect

the lack of true interdisciplinary studies in this

region––there is little chronological overlap between

the ‘‘territories’’ of archaeology and historical geo-

graphy. Archaeological research into post Medieval

settlement patterns is hampered by the fact that,

Figure 1 Location of the study area (rectangle) in Salland,

the Netherlands, in northwestern Europe.

Figure 2 Mechanical test pitting in progress at the Harme-

link farmstead in southwestern Salland.

Beek et al. Establishing the dates of farm sites (A.D. 800–present) in Salland (the Netherlands)

52 Journal of Field Archaeology 2014 VOL. 39 NO. 1

compared to the preceding periods, the archaeologi-

cal visibility of farm buildings constructed after ca.

A.D. 1250 is very poor, whereas the oldest construc-

tion parts of extant farms rarely date back further

than ca. A.D. 1650 (FIG. 3) (Verspay 2007; van

Doesburg and Groenewoudt in press). This gap is

attributable to the introduction of new building

techniques and the destruction of archaeological

evidence owing to the continuous use of late

Medieval farm sites up to the present.

The archaeological visibility of farm buildings is

strongly related to building techniques. Since pre-

historic times, in many parts of northwestern Europe

where deep soils are found, roof posts of farm

buildings have been anchored in foundation pits.

This type of construction is called ‘‘earthfast post

construction’’ (in German, Standerbau) (Zimmermann

1998: 19–24). In the Netherlands, the shape of house

plans changed during the Early Middle Ages from

rectangular to boat-shaped. This development can also

Figure 3 Rough dates and life spans of excavated Medieval settlements in the eastern Netherlands. Dotted lines: habitation

uncertain. Settlements dating to after the 13th century A.D. have low archaeological visibility (marked in gray). Adapted from van

Beek 2009: fig. 13.11, 447.


Journal of Field Archaeology 2014 VOL. 39 NO. 1 53

be observed in other parts of northwestern Europe

(e.g., Waterbolk 1999). The archaeological visibility of

such boat-shaped houses is usually excellent, especially

from the High Middle Ages. In Dutch literature the

ensuing ‘‘disappearance’’ of settlement features on the

sandy Pleistocene soils is generally dated from the 12th

to early 14th centuries with an emphasis on the second

quarter of the 13th century (Theuws 1989: 182, 1990:

56; Hiddink 2005: 30). It is thought that buildings with

earthfast posts mostly disappeared at that time in

favor of timber-framed buildings with posts archored

on pad stones, or with foundation walls in brick or

stone, or with wooden foundation beams (Klapste

2002). The foundation elements now rested on the

surface or in shallow pits or trenches that left only

faint traces in the soil, if at all. These traces were often

obliterated by later soil disturbances. Therefore,

farmsteads dating from the Late Middle Ages can

often be recognized only by artifacts and features like

wells, ditches, or outbuildings with earthfast post

constructions. Few of these sites have been properly

documented (FIG. 3).

Another reason why farmhouses from the Late

Medieval period have virtually disappeared from the

archaeological record is that the custom of periodi-

cally shifting settlements to other locations (see

below) ended around that time, after which the

location of farmsteads remained fixed. Many of the

oldest farms in Salland have hardly moved since

the 13th–14th century. The excavations of three

farms belonging to the former hamlet of Eme, near

the city of Zutphen, provide clear evidence of this

(Reuselaars 1996). Evidently periodic rebuilding has

done significant damage to any remains of previous

building phases (Bouwmeester et al. 2008: 304–381).

The transition to brick-built farmhouses in the 18th–

19th century and the introduction of stables with

sunken floors and manure cellars has been destruc-

tive. Furthermore, in many cases standing farms

impede the archaeological accessibility of farm sites.

On a more general note, it is clear that attempts to

reconstruct regional settlement patterns are ham-

pered because reliable archaeological information—

i.e., solid facts with regard to foundation dates and

life spans—is available for only a tiny fraction of all

(presumed) farm locations. This makes any recon-

struction of settlement patterns based on archae-

ological evidence alone hypothetical at best.

Some of the shortcomings can be overcome with

data from other scientific fields. Such data should not

be approached as complementary resources, but used

to design interdisciplinary research projects. Following

the plea by Rippon and Gardiner (2007), we directed

our attention to paleoenvironmental data, historical

geographical research, and studies of place, field, and

farm names. Botanical analyses shed light on trends in

Medieval habitation intensity, land use patterns, and

subsistence economy (c.f. Rippon et al. 2006).

Unfortunately, in our research area detailed analyses

of samples from Medieval contexts near settlements are

rare and do not permit far reaching conclusions.

Groenewoudt and colleagues (2007) give a first

impression of general trends in vegetation structure in

the immediate vicinity of settlements between the Late

Bronze Age and Middle Ages. The value of detailed

historical analysis has already been proven in the

eastern Netherlands. In the last decade a small number

of studies in the regions of Twente and Salland have

demonstrated that different periods of occupation can

be distinguished in the foundations of ‘‘historical’’

farmsteads (van Beek and Keunen 2006b; Spek and

van Exter 2007; Groenewoudt and Scholte Lubberink

2007). Reconstructions are based on different criteria,

such as the earliest historical references, landownership

registries, farm names, and the chronological varia-

bility in the geophysical positions of farms on the

landscape. Near Raalte (Salland region), these age

assumptions correlate well with archaeological evi-

dence (Spek and van Exter 2007; van der Velde 2011).

Research Questions and MethodologyFor this study, we followed two lines of inquiry. One

assessed the reliability of possible connections

between archaeological data and historical geogra-

phical information in well investigated areas. While it

may be tempting to assume that archaeologically

investigated Medieval settlements and nearby farm-

steads known from historical sources are connected––

the former being predecessors of the latter, and each

being reflected in different types of scientific records

with their own strengths and weaknesses––this may

not be so. Claims that archaeological evidence

corresponds with historical evidence, and indeed

represents the same farm, need to be well founded.

Such claims generated the first research question.

Which scientific criteria can be used to test the

connection between archaeological settlement sites

dating from the Early and High Middle Ages and

historical geographical information on the Late

Middle Ages and early modern period in the same

microregion? To answer this question, a series of

criteria drawn from archaeology, historical geogra-

phy, Medieval studies, and toponymy were selected

(van Beek and Keunen 2006b).

The same elements were also important for the

second research theme: the development of a method

for predicting and testing the life spans of farmsteads.

As mentioned above, it seems possible to reconstruct

different phases of historical farmsteads in the

Medieval and post Medieval countryside by analyz-

ing and combining historical geographical and

geophysical data. Such hypotheses need to be tested



against—and, if reliable, combined with—archaeolo-

gical data. This raises the problem that archaeologi-

cal data are inadequate in many areas and collecting

sufficient data by excavation is time consuming and

costly. The second research question was therefore as

follows. Is it possible, using historical geographical

and geophysical data, to make reliable predictions

of the ages of farmsteads and the phases of specific

landscape units? This research question was address-

ed in a pilot study in the Salland region. Estimates of

the ages of a series of farmsteads were made and were

tested by means of small scale archaeological test

pitting and surface survey. Both the general assump-

tions underlying this test and the methodology are

discussed in more detail below.

In the following section, we provide a general

outline of the Medieval habitation history of the

Salland region, as derived from current archaeologi-

cal and historical geographical information. We

focused on the origin and development of the

dispersed settlement pattern that characterizes large

parts of this region. The development of nucleated

settlements is poorly studied; therefore, we did not

include it in our study. The general trends described

below serve as the scientific background for later

sections. Even though the importance of regional

differences should not be underestimated (e.g., for the

U.K., see Roberts and Wrathmell 2000; Rippon 2007)

it is probably safe to assume that at least the main

outlines of habitation development are comparable to

processes in other parts of the eastern Netherlands and

adjacent regions.

Pilot Area: The Salland RegionThe landscape of the Salland region was produced by

the combined activity of wind, water, and ice during

the Saalian and Weichselian ice ages. It is part of the

European Sand Belt (Koster 2009; Tolksdorf and

Kaiser 2012). In the Late Weichselian, the drifting of

Pleniglacial sand deposits resulted in the formation of

numerous coversand ridges and hummocks. This

landscape structure, characterized by a rapid alter-

nation of (relatively) high and low areas, influenced

habitation patterns throughout prehistory and his-

tory (van Beek 2009: 135–151) (FIG. 4).

Late prehistoric settlements generally consist of

single farmsteads (van Beek 2009: 153–202, 2011).

Farmsteads frequently moved over distances of up to

several hundreds of meters. This dynamic pattern

virtually disappears by the first century A.D., at the start

of the Roman period (12 B.C.–A.D. 450), when nucleated

and larger settlements with fixed locations appear (van

Es 1973, 1988; van Beek and Groenewoudt in press).

Some smaller and less structured settlements

inhabited in the 5th–6th centuries A.D. more closely

resemble the dynamic late prehistoric settlement

system than the fixed, nucleated, and larger Roman

period settlements (van der Velde 2011: 125–127).

The same pattern has been observed in the U.K.

(Hamerow 1991). Between the 6th and 8th centuries

Figure 4 Simplified map of southwestern Salland and the location of the pilot area and tested farmsteads. Figure 6 contains

greater detail.



A.D., the single farmstead again became the dominant

settlement type. Whether this shift was gradual or

abrupt is unknown.

Many excavated rural settlements (isolated farm-

steads mostly) date to between the 9th and 12th

centuries. The higher number of sites from this period

points to a significant increase in settlement density,

rather than to a trend caused by factors such as

sampling bias. Virtually all are situated on or near the

lower slopes of sandy ridges and without exception

consist of single farmsteads. These farmsteads were

still mobile, but rarely moved over distances exceed-

ing a few dozen meters. Together they constitute the

dispersed settlement pattern that survives today. In

the following centuries, expansion and intensification

took place. A similar, significant shift in settlement in

the 9th century has been observed in the neighboring

German region of Westfalen. Grunewald (2005: 81)

documents a transformation from settlements con-

sisting of several contemporary farmsteads into

various single farmsteads. The latter are found in

the same microregions as their predecessors, but in

slightly different locations—generally within a dis-

tance of a few hundred meters. Many of these single

farmsteads probably developed into farms that still

exist today.

From the 9th century onwards the rural landscape

rapidly became more structured and organized. This is

based on the uniformity in size, layout, and location of

settlements and the increase in their number. Only

rarely are older settlement features or artifacts

encountered at these locations. Thus, there is no clear

evidence that remains of earlier occupation phases,

referred to as antecedent features in the English

literature (Roberts 1987: 22), played an important

part in structuring the cultural landscape. It is likely

that some of these lowlying 9th-century settlements

were new, whereas others were the successors of earlier

settlements nearby (FIG. 5). From the Late Roman

period onwards, settlements gradually shifted from the

upper parts of large sandy ridges to their lower slopes

(Groenewoudt and Scholte Lubberink 2007).

Beginning in the 9th century, the upper and central

parts of sandy ridges were predominantly used as

arable land. The lower slopes were surrounded

by strings of farmsteads (see below). These radical

changes probably relate to a combination of economic

and demographic growth, as well as changing agri-

cultural practices, including intensification. They may

also reflect Frankish influence in some way (van der

Velde 2004: 49; Groenewoudt and Scholte Lubberink

2007: 58; van Beek 2009: 449).

Figure 5 Gradual movement of a Medieval settlement near the town of Borne (Twente), ultimately ‘‘fixed’’ as two separate

farmsteads at the base of the Stroomesch. A) Settlement finds from the 7th–9th centuries A.D.; B) 9th–10th centuries A.D.; and C)

11th–12th centuries A.D. Adapted from Groenewoudt and Scholte Lubberink 2007: fig. 10.



For reasons discussed above, there are few archae-

ological data that postdate the 12th century. It seems

that at the end of the 14th and 15th centuries many

farmsteads were moved to their present locations

(van Doesburg and Groenewoudt in press), if they

continued to be inhabited at all. Farmstead biogra-

phies can be very diverse. Open fields developed on

the largest and most fertile sandy ridges during the

Late Medieval period (Spek 2004; Groenewoudt and

Scholte Lubberink 2007). From the 14th and 15th

centuries onwards (Spek 1992, 2004: 760–761) both

open fields and smaller plots resulting from manuring

became covered with thick plaggen soils (Pape 1970)

(see below), burying archaeological sites and making

them difficult to identify.

Beginning in the 16th century, many new, mostly

small farmsteads were founded. The appearance of

these small holdings is probably connected to

increasing population and agricultural intensification

(Bieleman 1987). Numerous small farms were also

founded in the 18th and early 19th centuries. Unlike

farmsteads with Medieval origins, these more recent

farms are usually located in less favorable positions

on the landscape (e.g., next to smaller sandy ridges,

on less fertile soils). The division of common lands

(commons) around the middle of the 19th century

(Demoed 1987) triggered the foundation of many

new farmsteads on land that was sparsely settled

before then.

Criteria for Linking Archaeological andHistorical FarmsTo evaluate the general outline presented above it is

essential to identify links between archaeological and

historical geographical data. Are the excavated farms

and the ones mentioned in historical sources really

the same? We approach this question by discussing

criteria that, within our research area, have proven to

be relevant. They can be applied in microregions

where both types of data are available, or they can be

used in constructing a framework for future archae-

ological excavations.

Distance between sitesThe distance between an archaeological site and a

farmstead known from historical sources is an

obvious first criterion in establishing whether or not

the two are related. A relationship becomes more

likely as the distance between them decreases. When

several historical farmsteads are situated in close

proximity to each other, the exact location of an

archaeological site can be important.

Geophysical settingMost predecessors of historical farmsteads are

situated in roughly the same landscape units,

although exceptions to this rule are known (e.g., at

Oldenzaal) (Oude Rengerink 2005). When natural

boundaries such as brook valleys or moist depres-

sions are found between the two, a connection

becomes less likely. When an archaeological site

and a historical farmstead are situated on the same

side of a sandy ridge, for example, this may be

important in establishing a positive relationship.

Age differenceIn general, the relationship between an archaeolog-

ical site and a historical farmstead becomes more

likely the closer they are in age. The availability,

character, and quality of historical sources, and the

limited archaeological visibility of Late Medieval

farmhouses must be taken into account. With regard

to the period after the 12th century, features like

wells, pits, and ditches filled with artifacts, and

concentrations of stray artifacts (such as pottery)

can indicate continuous habitation at a specific

location. When such deposits are absent, it becomes

more likely that the farmstead concerned ceased to

exist or was moved farther away. In future archae-

ological research on Medieval settlements it is

important to be attentive to more recent artifacts

that suggest continuous habitation, instead of focus-

ing on remains of farm buildings and outbuildings

alone.

Spatial changesDuring large scale archaeological research it is often

possible to reconstruct spatial changes within medi-

eval settlements. Farmhouses and outbuildings were

rebuilt frequently and sometimes they shifted gradu-

ally in a specific direction. By analyzing these spatial

trends it is possible to identify whether a farmstead

moved towards a historically known or still existing

farmstead location. In the period between the 9th and

12th centuries, the distances over which these shifts

occurred were, on average, smaller than in late

prehistory, and in some cases farmhouses were rebuilt

several times at exactly same location.

Domanial propertyWithin the field of Medieval studies a model has been

developed to determine whether a farmstead might

have a Medieval predecessor. In general, Medieval

landownership was stable. The geographic position of

manorial property is useful for reconstructing the

High and possibly even the Early Medieval cultural

landscape (Bijsterveld 1989; Theuws 1991; Noomen

1991, 1993; Spek 1993, 2004); therefore, land

registries of old manorial institutions should be

consulted. Detailed studies have proven that this

method can determine the oldest parts of landed

property and that the findings accord well with

archaeological evidence (Spek and van Exter 2007).

Specifically, when a farmstead is known to have

belonged to the estate of an institution of Early or

High Medieval origin, there is a good chance that



remains of Medieval predecessors will be found in the

vicinity. This mainly applies to the manor houses, but

may also apply to the oldest feudal land holdings. It

is also possible that peasant farms or feudal lands of

Late Medieval institutions have even older origins.

Peasant property existed in the High Middle Ages as

well, and sovereign nobility and Late Medieval

institutions such as monasteries probably frequently

acquired their property through gifts from peasant

owners.

Property complexesIn the province of Drenthe, immediately north of

Salland, Spek (2004: 978) demonstrated that property

complexes in open fields were more dynamic than

generally assumed. The oldest phase for which we

have comprehensive cartographic coverage for the

Netherlands is the first half of the 19th century. The

recent date hampers a detailed reconstruction of

Medieval property, especially with regard to the

distribution of plots across an open field. The same

problem has been encountered by researchers in the

U.K. (Page and Jones 2007; Rippon and Gardiner

2007: 233). If we succeed, however, in reconstructing

the spatial composition of property, it may be

possible to predict where Early and High Medieval

predecessors of farmsteads are located. It is unlikely

that a farmstead situated near a sandy ridge adjacent

to arable fields had a predecessor in a different

location. It is likely that the composition of property

on smaller arable complexes were more static than in

open fields, as the former complexes often belonged

to adjacent farmsteads for long periods of time.

Parcel shape and allotmentOn 19th-century topographic maps, square parcels

with rounded corners are often visible in the vicinity

of farmsteads. Originally they were interpreted as the

first plots of land that were reclaimed and transform-

ed into insular arable fields in woodlands (Spek

2004: 679–681). Interdisciplinary research has demon-

strated that these old parcels actually reflect former

farmstead locations. In the province of Drenthe they

date to the period between the late 8th and 11th

centuries A.D. This may be true for the eastern Nether-

lands as well.

Spek (2004: 978) analyzed the dynamics of prop-

erty complexes as well as allotments. As noted above,

the oldest land registry maps are unsuited to the

reconstruction of Medieval and even early modern

landscape patterns and processes. However, using

17th-century maps, he managed to reconstruct

changes through time of open fields in Drenthe

(Spek 2004: 670–675). The boundaries of reclamation

blocks, which were divided into elongated strips, are

a constant factor through time. Furthermore, a

correlation appears to exist between small scale land

divisions with square parcels and the locations of

archaeologically investigated Roman period and

Early Medieval settlements. The relationship between

archaeological data and these types of land divisions

and their ownership provides another promising line

of inquiry.

Farm and field namesIn Salland, different phases can be recognized in farm

names (Ter Laak 2005: 26–28). The basis of the farm

name is often a person’s name, frequently a Germanic

male name. Most of these farm names end with the

suffix ‘‘-ink’’ and became fixed in the 12th and 13th

centuries. Before that, farmstead names were prob-

ably shorter versions of the names of their owners or

inhabitants, without the suffix. For example, the

farmstead called ‘‘Takun,’’ near the city of Zutphen

became ‘‘Tanckinck’’ in the 13th century (Ter Laak

2008: 418). Names ending in ‘‘-huis’’ (house) or ‘‘-man’’

(man) are also common, and appear to be slightly

younger than the above type. Not all farmstead names

were linked to people. As demonstrated in other

regions (e.g., Gelling and Cole 2000), both farm and

field names can reference specific landscape features.

Farm names cannot be assumed to be static, and

therefore their ages should not be used uncritically to

date farmsteads. However, combined with other

historical and geophysical evidence, they can give

an indication of the origin and change through time

of a particular farmstead, and ultimately determine

whether a connection with archaeological finds in the

same microregion is likely. An interesting phenom-

enon is the field name ‘‘hoesstie,’’ which is common

—in different forms—in the Twente region bordering

Salland to the east (Scholte Lubberink 2009). It

literally means ‘‘homestead.’’ On a parcel with this

name, the remains of a farmstead dating to the 11th

or 12th century were excavated (FIG. 6) (Oude

Rengerink 2005). Therefore, these field names can

be used to trace deserted Medieval farm sites.

InfrastructureIn other regions of the Netherlands, excavations have

demonstrated that road systems were sometimes

important structuring elements within Medieval

settlements. The large settlements of Kootwijk in

the Veluwe area (Heidinga 1987) and Gasselte in the

province of Drenthe (Waterbolk and Harsema 1979)

are well known examples. Some of these roads

remained in use throughout historical times. When

excavated settlements and historical farmsteads have

comparable positions with respect to road systems or

other infrastructure, such as fords or bridges, this

may indicate that the two are related.

Testing the Estimated Ages of FarmsThe nine criteria described above can be used to

evaluate the relationship between excavated Medieval



settlements and farmsteads known from historical

sources. Often historical evidence is used in Dutch

Medieval archaeology as a secondary source to gain

extra information. This can provide insight into the

changes through time of specific farmsteads in

specific microregions, but does not exploit the full

potential of the historical information available.

Also, the scarcity of Late and post Medieval

archaeological information precludes a materials-

based reconstruction of long term settlement patterns

on a regional scale. As a result, we take the opposite

approach here: we use historical geographical infor-

mation to predict the age of farmsteads.

Historical geographical research has led to a better

understanding of Medieval and post Medieval

cultural landscapes in Salland, helping to establish

different phases of farmstead building (FIG. 7). It is

possible to estimate the age of farmsteads by

combining characteristics such as ownership, the

earliest historical references, and the geophysical

setting. These elements partly overlap with the above

criteria. The age estimates do have some limitations.

In the Netherlands, it is rare that the exact date a

farmstead was built can be derived from historical

sources (van Doesburg and Groenewoudt in press;

see Keunen 2006b for an exception). Therefore, we

use age estimates with an error margin of a few

centuries, generally in the form of a terminus ante

quem. This applies mainly to the earliest phase of

farm building where the geographical position of a

manorial property is an important source of informa-

tion. The value of archaeological field research is

greatest for this phase. Estimates become more

accurate as farmsteads get younger and historical

data increase. For most parts of Salland, the oldest

historical sources date to the 14th century.

These age estimates can take the form of hypoth-

eses or predictions, which can be tested archaeolog-

ically. Rural homesteads produce concentrations

of waste, at least from an archaeological survey9s

point of view (Groenewoudt 1994: 20–21) (FIG. 3).

Underneath many plaggen soils, there is often an

earlier worked layer that is probably agricultural in

origin (FIG. 8A). At archaeological sites (especially

settlements) these layers contain large amounts of

heavily fragmented material (e.g., pottery) from the

original surface and disturbed upper parts of post-

holes and other manmade features. The diameter of

such artifact scatters measures ca. 30–40 m (FIG. 8B).

The association of archaeological sites beneath

plaggen soils (with intact stratigraphy) with relatively

large and dense concentrations of settlement debris

offers the opportunity to trace and date settlements

by sampling the lower parts of plaggen soils through

coring, test pitting, or sieving (Groenewoudt 1994,

2002).

We estimated the ages of 35 farmsteads in the

southwestern part of Salland, and selected 13 for field

testing (FIGS. 4, 7; TABLE 1). The 13 farmsteads were

spread over different hamlets with Medieval roots.

All but one belonged to the supposedly oldest phase

of Medieval farms. Seven farmsteads dated back to at

least the 12th century A.D. and possibly even earlier.

Five farmsteads were founded in the 14th century

A.D., but might have earlier roots as well. One

farmstead (‘‘Bieleman’’) with an anticipated post

Medieval date (16th century) was chosen in order to

establish whether the archaeological results differed

from those at the other locations.

The Oxerhof farmstead in the the hamlet of Oxe

illustrates how the age estimates of farmsteads are

actually put together. The Oxerhof farmstead is

Figure 6 Near the city of Oldenzaal, an 11th and 12th

century rural settlement (A) was excavated on a parcel with

the field name ‘‘hoesstie’’ (homestead). It probably repre-

sents the predecessor of the modern Hendrikman farmstead

(B) situated slightly further north; the earliest historical

reference to it dates to A.D. 1385. Adapted from Scholte

Lubberink 2009: fig. 3 and Oude Rengerink 2005: map 3.



believed to date at least from the 12th century. The

Oxerhof (‘‘curtis Oxe’’) is first mentioned in a

document dating from 1294 or 1295 A.D. (van Beek

et al. 2007: 15–16). At that time it was an important

manor farm governing 11 other farmsteads belonging

to the property of the Count of Guelders; this

domanial situation likely predates the late 13th

century. This date is consistent with the location of

the site on a large, fertile sandy ridge that runs

parallel to a natural brook valley. The early historical

reference, property situation, and favorable setting

all supported the hypothesis that this farmstead

belonged to the oldest occupation in the Salland

countryside.

All selected sites display the typical site location for

Medieval and post Medieval farmsteads, near the

edges and slopes of sandy ridges. This is illustrated by

four of the investigated farmsteads in the hamlet of

Essen (FIG. 9). At 11 research locations farmsteads are

still present today. At one location only a barn

remains; the main building was demolished in the

second half of the 20th century. The final farmstead,

the one with the most recent expected age, was

abandoned and demolished at some point in history.

We investigated all 13 farmsteads in the course of

one week. One or two test pits, measuring 263 m,

were excavated as close to each farm as possible,

preferably on the edge of the historical fields (FIGS. 2,

8C). These were the most promising locations to

recover archaeological material for dating the earliest

occupation, for the following reasons. Archaeological

predecessors are often situated a short distance from

modern farmsteads. The earliest reclaimed lands were

probably situated on sandy ridges closest to farms.

Figure 7 Distribution and estimated ages of farmsteads predating A.D. 1830 in the former Gooiermarke and Oxermarke

(southwestern Salland). All farmsteads, some extant and others known from historical sources, are indicated and grouped into

four general age classes. Adapted from van Beek 2009: fig. 7.18, 197.



Settlement refuse was used to fertilize fields.

Vegetable gardens and arable land closest to the

farm were fertilized most heavily.

In the test pits we removed most of the top layer—

usually a plaggen soil—mechanically using a small

mobile excavator (transportable on a trailer). From

the lower parts of the plaggen soil downward we

continued to excavate manually. The goal was to

recover datable settlement debris, especially pottery.

Where possible, we conducted small scale field

surveys focusing on arable fields close to the farm-

stead as well as on banks of ditches and molehills.

Based on the density, stratigraphic position, condi-

tions of preservation, and nature of recovered

materials, we determined whether they reflected

settlement refuse of a local farmstead, or if they were

deposited along with fertilizer, sod, or more recent

city waste (Haselgrove et al. 1985).

Results and Implications of the Field TestsEven though the amount of diagnostic material

differed significantly among sites, ranging from a

few ceramic sherds to dozens accompanied by other

artifact types (e.g., stone, glass, metal). At 11

farmsteads we recovered sufficient material from

reliable contexts to establish approximate archaeo-

logical dates. At two farmsteads (‘‘Lingeveen’’ and

‘‘Groot-Wechele’’) we collected large quantities of

artifacts. At these locations the test pits were

probably placed directly atop the Medieval farm-

steads. In general, the archaeological data support

the age predictions based on historical geographical

data (TABLE 1). In most cases the predicted dates

could be refined. The farmsteads often turned out to

be between one and three centuries older than the

terminus ante quem predictions. The established

dates mainly fall between the 9th and 13th centuries

A.D. As expected, the post Medieval ‘‘Bieleman’’

farmstead is the only exception; the archaeological

materials point to an origin in the 18th or possibly

17th century A.D. As its first historical reference dates

back to 1547, this is the only investigated farmstead

for which historical data predate the archaeological

evidence.

Based on these results, we suggest that detailed

historical geographical research can generate more

reliable estimates of the ages of farmsteads; these

estimates can then be tested easily by means of small

scale archaeological survey and excavation. With

regard to the farmsteads assumed to be the oldest,

from the High or even the Early Medieval period, age

predictions have wide margins of error and can only

be refined through archaeological research. The

opposite pertains to farmsteads founded in the post

Medieval period. At that point the greater body of

historical evidence sometimes even permits the

determination of an exact foundation date.

None of the investigated farmsteads appears to

predate the 9th or 10th century A.D., as earlier

Medieval materials are lacking. This is consistent

with the results of previous archaeological research,

Figure 8 A) Simplified soil profile and explanation of

plaggen soils. Adapted from Spek (2004: 816). During small

scale test pitting aimed at dating farmstead foundations, the

lower parts of plaggen layers and fossil cultural layers are

the most promising contexts to collect relevant artifacts; B)

Model of refuse density at residential settlements. Adapted

from Groenewoudt 1994: fig. 3, 21; C) Schematic position of

the test pitting area in relation to a modern farmstead, its

Medieval predecessors, and the assumed location of the

oldest arable fields.



Figure 9 Series of seven farmsteads on the northern slope of an elongated coversand ridge in the hamlet of Essen, as

depicted on the oldest land registry map (early 19th century). The four farmsteads investigated in the field test, indicated with

circles, date back at least to the 12th and 13th centuries A.D. (they might even be older). The same is probably true for the three

other farmsteads.

Table 1 Farmsteads in southwestern Salland investigated in the archaeological field tests, their predicted ages, and thefoundation dates based on archaeological evidence. Predictions are based on a combination of historical geographicalinformation (e.g., ownership and earliest historical reference) and the physical geographical setting. The archaeologicaldates are mainly based on pottery finds. T5find from test pit; S5survey find.

Farmstead (hamlet) Predicted age Archaeological date Number of pottery finds

Borgelink (Okkenbroek) 12th century or earlier No reliable indications 5 (T) 1 (S)Harmelink (Okkenbroek) At least 14th century,

possibly earlierAt least 12th/13th century,possibly slightly earlier

5 (S)

Odink (Linde) 12th century or earlier No reliable indications 7 (S)Reterink (Linde) 12th century or earlier Possibly 11th/12th century 5 (T) 12 (S)Bieleman (Linde) 16th century 18th century, possibly 17th century 67 (T) 22 (S)Daggenvoorde (Linde) 12th century or earlier Probably 10th/12th century 9 (T) 12 (S)Lingeveen (Linde) 12th century or earlier 9th/10th century 44 (T)Wilminck (Essen) 12th century or earlier At least 11th/12th century,

possibly 9th/10th century17 (T)

Banninck (Essen) At least 14th century,possibly earlier

Probably 10th/12th century 29 (S)

Tjoonk (Essen) At least 14th century,possibly earlier

Probably 10th/12th century 16 (S)

Haverkamp (Essen) At least 14th century,possibly earlier

Probably 13th century 12 (S)

Groot-Wechele (Wechele) At least 14th century,possibly earlier

At least 11th/12th century,possibly 10th century

1 (T) 157 (S)

Oxerhof (curtis Oxe) 12th century or earlier At least 11th/12th century 80 (T) 33 (S)



discussed above; from this period onwards farmsteads

were moved towards the edges and slopes of sandy

ridges and gradually became fixed in their locations.

Judging from the artifacts, the ‘‘Lingeveen’’ farm-

stead, for example, dates to the 9th or 10th century

A.D. The number of finds from later Medieval and post

Medieval phases illustrates that this farmstead was

continuously inhabited until the present day, shifting

location only a few dozen meters.

Most of the other investigated farmsteads were

founded slightly later, between the 10th and the 12th

or 13th centuries; it is difficult to be more specific.

The materials recovered from these sites consist of

locally produced ceramic bowls (German: Kugeltopf)

(Verhoeven 1998) and a smaller amount of Pingsdorf

and Paffrath pottery imported from the German

Rhineland. These ceramic types had relatively long

life spans. Therefore, large assemblages are required

to refine age estimates.

Between the 9th/10th and 13th centuries the

cultural landscape in Salland filled up rapidly; this

is demonstrated by the results of the field research in

the Essen hamlet (FIG. 9). All four farmsteads

investigated appear to have been established by the

12th and 13th centuries A.D., and probably even

earlier. These settlements survive today.

The Salland countryside has undergone significant

changes since late prehistory. Although this region

has a deeper history of occupation, the main outlines

of the modern settlement pattern date back to around

the 9th century A.D. By combining different types of

data it is possible to arrive at more reliable estimates

of the ages of farmsteads, and therefore to under-

stand the successive settlement phases that are

crystallized in the modern landscape.

ConclusionsHere we describe the development of interdisciplinary

methods to permit more reliable reconstructions of

Medieval and post Medieval rural settlement pat-

terns. It is clear that the integration of different lines

of evidence can improve our understanding of the

development and structure of Medieval rural land-

scapes. However, this is not an easy task. Evidence of

Medieval and post Medieval settlement patterns is

preserved in different forms, and must be studied

using different fields of science, each with its own

methods and research traditions.

We used the criteria presented above to assess the

relationship between Medieval archaeological data

and historical settlement data. A large body of

archaeological data is available already, especially

for the High Middle Ages, and these data continue to

accrue rapidly as a result of development-led archae-

ology (e.g., Bazelmans 2012; Bradley et al. 2012).

Integrating different types of data reveals local

processes, and, in some cases, permits the reconstruc-

tion of farmstead biographies spanning a thousand

years or more. It is important to stress that societal

and institutional circumstances varied considerably

across northwestern Medieval Europe. Therefore, the

relevance and applicability of each criterion may vary

in different circumstances.

The most promising results should be expected

from regional- or microregional-scale projects that

integrate archaeological, historical geographical,

physical geographical, toponymical, paleobotanical,

and architectural evidence (c.f., Rippon and Gardiner

2007). Our study of the Salland region represents a

small scale pilot project with positive results. We

adapted the archaeological techniques applied in our

field test from studies in the U.K and the United

States. Test pitting within the context of research into

Medieval settlement patterns and the development of

villages has taken place mostly in the U.K. Judging

from our results, this method is also appropriate in

those parts of northwestern Europe where concentra-

tions of settlement debris related to farm sites are

buried under more recent deposits such as the man-

made plaggen soils of the Netherlands, Germany,

Belgium, and Denmark. We also demonstrate that

the speed and efficiency of test pitting in these areas

can be improved by mechanization and careful

selection of sample sites. Because of their large size

(263 m) nearly all test pits produced enough data-

ble material to refine estimated founding dates of

farmsteads.

AcknowledgmentsResearch was conducted by Wageningen University

and by the Cultural Heritage Agency of the

Netherlands as part of the project entitled, A

Cultural Biography of the Coversand Landscapes in

the Salland and Achterhoek Regions, and funded by

the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research

(NWO). We would like to thank Klaas Greving, Wim

Jong, and Jan Krist (Cultural Heritage Agency) for

participating in the fieldwork. Jan van Doesburg

(Cultural Heritage Agency) assisted with the pottery

analysis. Menne Kosian (Cultural Heritage Agency)

assisted with the artwork. Jelle Vervloet (Wageningen

University) commented on an earlier version of the

manuscript. We also thank two anonymous reviewers

for their useful comments. Alistair Bright (Leiden)

edited the final English draft.

Roy van Beek (Ph.D. 2009, Wageningen University) is

a Postdoctoral Researcher at the Faculty of

Archaeology, Leiden University. His research interests

include modeling long term landscape formation

processes in the Twente region. He is also affiliated

with Ghent University (Belgium) as a guest lecturer on

late prehistory in northwestern Europe.



Bert Groenewoudt (Ph.D. 1994, University of Amster-

dam) works at the Cultural Heritage Agency of the

Netherlands (Amersfoort) as a Senior Researcher in

landscape archaeology. He focuses mainly on the

evaluation of archaeological sites and landscapes, long

term processes of landscape change, and the archae-

ology of marginal landscapes.

Luuk Keunen (Ph.D. Candidate, Wageningen Univer-

sity) specializes in nature conservation and historical

geography. He works as a project manager for the

RAAP Archaeological Consultancy (Zutphen). He

advises on matters concerning cultural heritage in

relation to policy and spatial planning.

ReferencesAston, M., and C. Gerrard. 1999. ‘‘Unique, Traditional and

Charming. The Shapwick Project, Somerset,’’ The AntiquariesJournal 79: 1–58.

Bazelmans, J. 2012. ‘‘Serving Two Masters: Dutch ArchaeologySince the Valleta Convention,’’ in L. Webley, M. VanderLinden, C. Haselgrove, and R. Bradley, eds., Development-LedArchaeology in Northwest Europe. Proceedings of a RoundTable at the University of Leicester 19th–21st November 2009.Oxford: Oxbow Books, 9–21.

Beresford, M. W. 1951. The Lost Villages of Medieval England.London: Blackwell Publishing.

Bergmann, R. 2001. ‘‘Wustungsforschung. Die landlicheBesiedlung im Mittelalter,’’ in U. Becker, H.-P. Kuhnen, V.Brieske, and R. Bergmann, eds., Der Kreis Soest. Fuhrer zuarchaologischen Denkmalern in Deutschland 39. Stuttgart:Theiss Verlag, 113–123.

Bergmann, R. 2006. ‘‘Hofwustungen und Eschsiedlungen imsudwestlichen Munsterland,’’ Siedlungsforschung. Archaologie-Geschichte-Geografie 24: 195–217.

Bieleman, J. 1987. Boeren op het Drentse zand 1600–1910. Eennieuwe visie op de ‘‘oude’’ landbouw. A.A.G.-bijdragen 29. Ph.D.dissertation, Wageningen University. Utrecht: Hes Uitgevers.

Bijsterveld, A. J. 1989. ‘‘Een zorgelijk bezit. De benedictijnerabdijden van Echternach en St. Truiden en het beheer van hungoederen en resten in Oost-Brabant 1100–1300,’’ NoordbrabantsHistorisch Jaarboek 1989: 7–44.

Blommesteijn, C. M., H. A. Heidinga, H. H. van Regteren Altena,and C. L. Verkerk, eds. 1977. De Veluwe, archeologisch-historische verkenning van de bewoningsgeschiedenis tot 1200,project middeleeuwse archeologie en middeleeuwse geschiedenis1975–1976. Universiteit van Amsterdam, Albert Egges vanGiffen Instituut voor Prae- en Protohistorie, Working Paper 4.Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.

Bouwmeester, H. M. P., H. A. C. Fermin, and M. Groothedde, eds.2008. Geschapen landschap. Tienduizend jaar bewoning enontwikkeling van het cultuurlandschap op de Looerenk inZutphen. Zutphen-Hertogenbosch: Gemeente Zutphen/BAACBV.

Bradley, R., C. Haselgrove, M. Vander Linden, and L. Webley,eds. 2012. Development-Led Archaeology in Northwest Europe.Oxford: Oxbow.

Christie, N., and P. Stamper, eds. 2012. Medieval Rural Settlement.Britain and Ireland, AD 800–1600. Oxford: Windgather Press.

Demoed, H. B. 1987. Mandegoed schandegoed. De markeverdelin-gen in Oost-Nederland in de 19de eeuw. Zutphen: Walburg Pers.

Emanuelsson, M., A. Johansson, S. Nilson, S. Petterson, and E.Svensson. 2003. Settlement, Shieling and Landscape: The LocalHistory of a Forest Hamlet. Lund Studies in MedievalArchaeology 32. Lund: Lund University.

Fabech, C., and J. Ringtved, eds. 1999. Settlement and Landscape,Aarhus University Press. Proceedings of a Conference in Aarhus,Denmark, May 4–7 1998. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.

Gelling, M., and A. Cole. 2000. The Landscape of Place-Names.Donington: Shaun Tyas.

Groenewoudt, B. J. 1994. Prospectie, waardering en selectie vanarcheologische vindplaatsen: een beleidsgerichte verkenning vanmiddelen en mogelijkheden. Nederlandse ArcheologischeRapporten 17. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam.

Amersfoort: Rijksdienst voor het OudheidkundigBodemonderzoek.

Groenewoudt, B. J. 2002. ‘‘Sieving Plaggen Soils: ExtractingHistorical Information from a Man-Made Soil,’’ Berichtenvan de Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek 45:125–154.

Groenewoudt, B., M. Groothedde, and H. van der Velde. 2006.‘‘De Romeinse Tijd, Middeleeuwen en vroegmoderne tijd inMidden- en Oost-Nederlands zandgebied’’, NOAA chapter 20,version 1.0 (www.noaa.nl): 1–59.

Groenewoudt, B. J., H. van Haaster, R. van Beek, andO. Brinkkemper. 2007. ‘‘Towards a Reverse Image. BotanicalResearch into the Landscape History of the EasternNetherlands (BC 1100–AD 1500),’’ Landscape History 29:17–33.

Groenewoudt, B., and H. Scholte Lubberink. 2007. ‘‘Essen enplaggendekken in Oost-Nederland vanuit een archeologischperspectief,’’ in J. van Doesburg, M. de Boer, J. Deeben,B. Groenewoudt, and T. de Groot, eds., Essen in zicht. Essen enplaggendekken in Nederland: onderzoek en beleid. NederlandseArcheologische Rapporten 34. Amersfoort: Rijksdienst voorArcheologie, Cultuurlandschap en Monumenten, 53–77.

Groothedde, M., ed. 1996. Leesten en Eme. Archeologisch enhistorisch onderzoek naar verdwenen buurschappen bij Zutphen.Kampen: Stichting Archeologie IJssel/Vechtstreek.

Grunewald, C. 2005. ‘‘Archaologie des fruhen Mittelalters vom 5.bis zum 9. Jahrhundert in Westfalen. Ein Uberblick,’’Archaologie in Ostwestfalen 9: 71–86.

Hamerow, H. F. 1991. ‘‘Settlement Mobility and the ‘MiddleSaxon Shift’: Rural Settlements and Settlement Patterns inAnglo-Saxon England,’’ Anglo-Saxon England 20: 1–17.

Haselgrove, C., M. J. Millett, and I. M. Smith, eds. 1985.Archaeology from the Ploughsoil: Studies in the Collection andInterpretation of Field Survey Data. Sheffield: University ofSheffield.

Heidinga, H. A. 1987. Medieval Settlement and Economy North ofthe Lower Rhine. Archaeology and History of Kootwijk and theVeluwe (the Netherlands). Assen: Van Gorcum.

Hiddink, H. A. 2005. Archeologisch onderzoek aan de Beekseweg teLieshout (gemeente Laarbeek, Noord-Brabant. ZuidnederlandseArcheologische Rapporten 18. Amsterdam: Free UniversityAmsterdam.

Hvass, S. 1983. ‘‘Vorbasse. The Development of a SettlementThrough the First Millennium AD,’’ Journal of DanishArchaeology 2: 127–136.

Hvass, S. 1986. ‘‘Vorbasse. Eine Dorfsiedlung wahrend des 1.Jahrtausends n. Chr. in Mitteljutland, Danemark,’’ Bericht derromisch-germanischen Kommission 67: 529–542.

Hooke, D., ed. 1988. Anglo-Saxon Settlements. New York:Blackwell.

Jones, R., and M. Page. 2003. ‘‘Characterising Rural Settlementand Landscape: Whittlewood Forest in the Middle Ages,’’Medieval Archaeology 47: 53–83.

Keunen, L. J. 2006a. … der grosse und kleine hoff undt darauffbestehendes dorpff Neede … De ontwikkeling van de hof en hetdorp Neede. Kleine Reeks deel 12. Eibergen: Stichting Stad enHeerlijkheid Borculo.

Keunen, L. J. 2006b. ‘‘Biografie van een boerenerf in de buurschapWechele bij Deventer. den camp te Weechle daer die busschplach te stane,’’ Historisch-Geografisch Tijdschrift 24: 49–57.

Keunen, L. J. 2011. ‘‘Middeleeuwse dorpsvorming in Oost-Nederland. Een verkenning van de historische relatie tussenhoven, kerken en dorpen,’’ Historisch-Geografisch Tijdschrift29: 60–72.

Klapste, J., ed. 2002. The Rural House from the Migration Period tothe Oldest Still Standing Buildings. Ruralia 4. Prague: Pamatkyarcheologicke.

Koster, E. A. 2009. ‘‘The ‘European Aeolian Sand Belt’:Geoconservation of Drift Sand Landscapes,’’ Geoheritage 1:93–110.

Leenders, K. A. H. W. 1996. Van Turnhoutervoorde totStrienemonde. Ontginnings- en nederzettingsgeschiedenis vanhet noordwesten van het Maas-Demer-Schelde gebied, 450–1300:een poging tot synthese. Ph.D. dissertation, University ofAmsterdam. Zutphen: Walburg Pers.

Lewis, C. 2005. ‘‘Test Pit Excavation Within Occupied Settlementsin East Anglia in 2005,’’ Medieval Settlement Research GroupAnnual Report 20: 9–16.

Noomen, P. N. 1991. ‘‘Koningsgoed in Groningen. Het domanialeverleden van de stad,’’ in J. W. Boersma, J. F. J. van denBroek, and G. J. D. Offerman, eds., Groningen 1040.



Archeologie en oudste geschiedenis van de stad Groningen.Bedum and Groningen: Profiel, 97–144, 279–288.

Noomen, P. N. 1993. ‘‘Middeleeuwse ontwikkelingen in Rolderdingspel,’’ in J. G. Borgesius, P. Brood, M. A. W. Gerding,P. N. Noomen, H. Noorman, and H. Westebring, eds.,Geschiedenis van Rolde. Meppel: Boom, 83–111.

Oude Rengerink, J. A. M. 2005. Plangebied De Graven Es, fase 3:Kaalters Kaamp en De Hoesstie, Gemeente Oldenzaal. Eenproefsleuvenonderzoek en opgraving. RAAP-rapport 1146.Brummen: RAAP Archaeological Consultancy.

Page, M., and R. Jones. 2007. ‘‘Stability and Instability inMedieval Village Plans: Case Studies in Whittlewood,’’ in M.Gardiner and S. Rippon, eds., Medieval Landscapes. LandscapeHistory After Hoskins 2. Oxford: Windgather Press, 139–152.

Pape, J. C. 1970. ‘‘Plaggen Soils in the Netherlands,’’ Geoderma 4:229–255.

Reuselaars, I. 1996. ‘‘Boerderijen en hun bewoners. De gebouw-plattegronden van de laat-Romeinse tijd tot en met de LateMiddeleeuwen,’’ in M. Groothedde, ed., Leesten en Eme.Archeologisch en historisch onderzoek naar verdwenenbuurschappen bij Zutphen. Kampen: Stichting ArcheologieIJssel/Vechtstreek, 77–104.

Rippon, S. 2007. ‘‘Emerging Regional Variation in HistoricLandscape Character: The Possible Significance of the ‘LongEighth Century,’’’ in M. Gardiner and S. Rippon, eds.,Medieval Landscapes. Landscape History After Hoskins 2.Oxford: Windgather Press, 105–121.

Rippon, S. 2009. ‘‘Understanding the Medieval Landscape,’’ inR. Gilchrist and A. Reynolds, eds., Reflections: 50 Years ofMedieval Archaeology, 1957–2007. Society for MedievalArchaeology Monograph 30. London: Maney Publishing,227–254.

Rippon, S., A. G. Brown, and R. Fyfe. 2006. ‘‘Beyond Villages andOpen Fields: The Origins and Development of a HistoricLandscape Characterised by Dispersed Settlement in SouthWest England,’’ Medieval Archaeology 50: 31–70.

Rippon, S., and M. Gardiner. 2007. ‘‘Conclusions: The Future ofMedieval Landscape Studies,’’ in M. Gardiner and S. Rippon,eds., Medieval Landscapes. Landscape History After Hoskins 2.Oxford: Windgather Press, 231–235.

Roberts, B. K. 1987. The Making of the English Village. A Study inHistorical Geography. Harlow: Addison-Wesley.

Roberts, B. K., and S. Wrathmell. 2000. An Atlas of RuralSettlement in England. London: English Heritage.

Schmid, P., and W. H. Zimmermann. 1976. ‘‘Flogeln – zurStruktur einer Siedlung des 1. bis 5. Jhs. n. Chr. imKustengebiet der sudlichen Nordsee,’’ Probleme derKustenforschung im sudlichen Nordseegebiet 11: 1–77.

Scholte Lubberink, H. B. G. 2009. ‘‘Verlaten middeleeuwse erven,’’’t Inschrien 2009(1): 12–16.

Simms, A. 1976. ‘‘Deserted Medieval Villages and Fields inGermany, A Survey of the Literature with a SelectBibliography,’’ Journal of Historical Geography 2–3: 223–238.

Slofstra, J., H. H. van Regteren Altena, N. Roymans, and F.Theuws. 1982. Het Kempenproject, een regionaal-archeologischonderzoeksprogramma. Bijdragen tot de studie van het BrabantsHeem 22. Waalre: Stichting Brabants Heem.

Spek, T. 1992. ‘‘The Age of Plaggen Soils. An Evaluation of DatingMethods for Plaggen Soils in the Netherlands and NorthernGermany,’’ in A. J. Verhoeve and J. A. J. Vervloet, eds., TheTransformation of the European Rural Landscape.Methodological Issues and Agrarian Change. Brussels: SocieteBelge d’Etudes Geographiques, 72–91.

Spek, T. 1993. ‘‘Historisch-geografische verkenningen van hetmiddeleeuwse landschap van Balloo,’’ in J. G. Borgesius,P. Brood, M. A. W. Gerding, P. N. Noomen, H. Noorman,and H. Westebring, eds., Geschiedenis van Rolde. Meppel:Boom, 47–82.

Spek, T. 2004. Het Drentse esdorpenlandschap. Een historisch-geografische studie. Ph.D. dissertation, Wageningen University.Utrecht: Matrijs.

Spek, T., and L. van Exter 2007. ‘‘Bewonings- en ontginnings-geschiedenis van het kerspel Raalte tijdens de Middeleeuwen enVroege Nieuwe Tijd. Een historisch-geografisch onderzoek tenbehoeve van de archeologie,’’ in H. M. van der Velde, ed.,Germanen, Franken en Saksen in Salland. Archeologisch enlandschappelijk onderzoek naar de geschiedenis van het land-schap en nederzettingsresten uit de Romeinse tijd en VroegeMiddeleeuwen in Centraal Salland. ADC-monografie 1.Amersfoort: Archeologisch Diensten Centrum, 399–530.

Ter Laak, J. C. 2005. De taal van het landschap. Pilotprojecttoponiemen in de Berkelstreek. Rapportage ArcheologischeMonumentenzorg 123. Amersfoort: Rijksdienst voorArcheologie, Cultuurlandschap en Monumenten.

Ter Laak, J. C. 2008. ‘‘Toponymische gegevens ten zuiden enoosten van Zutphen,’’ in H. M. P. Bouwmeester, H. A. C.Fermin, and M. Groothedde, eds., Geschapen landschap.Tienduizend jaar bewoning en ontwikkeling van het cultuur-landschap op de Looerenk in Zutphen. Zutphen-Hertogenbosch:Gemeente Zutphen/BAAC BV, 383–419.

Theuws, F. C. W. J. 1988. ‘‘De archeologie van de periferie. Studiesnaar de ontwikkeling van bewoning en samenleving in hetMaas-Demer-Schelde gebied in de vroege middeleeuwen,’’unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam,Amsterdam.

Theuws, F. C. W. J. 1989. ‘‘Middeleeuwse parochiecentra in deKempen 1000–1350,’’ in A. Verhoeven and F. C. W. J. Theuws,eds., Het Kempenproject 3. De Middeleeuwen centraal. Waalre:Stichting Brabants Heem, 97–216.

Theuws, F. C. W. J. 1990. ‘‘Het laatmiddeleeuwse cultuur-landschap,’’ in J. Bazelmans and F. C. W. J. Theuws, eds.,Tussen zes gehuchten. De Laat-Romeinse en middeleeuwsebewoning van Geldrop ’t Zand. Amsterdam: Van GiffenInstituut voor Prae- en Protohistorie, 52–57.

Theuws, F. C. W. J. 1991. ‘‘Landed Property and ManorialOrganisation in Northern Austrasia: Some Considerations anda Case Study,’’ in N. Roymans and F. C. W. J. Theuws, eds.,Images of the Past. Studies of Ancient Societies in NorthwesternEurope. Studies in Pre- and Protohistorie 7. Amsterdam: VanGiffen Instituut voor Prae- en Protohistorie, 299–407.

Tolksdorf, J. F., and K. Kaiser. 2012. ‘‘Holocene AeolianDynamics in the European Sand-Belt as Indicated byGeochronological Data,’’ Boreas 41: 408–421.

van Beek, R. 2009. Relief in tijd en ruimte. Interdisciplinaironderzoek naar bewoning en landschap van Oost- Nederlandtussen vroege prehistorie en middeleeuwen. Ph.D. dissertation,Wageningen University. Enschede: Ipskamp.

van Beek, R., and B. J. Groenewoudt. 2013. ‘‘An Odyssey Alongthe River Vecht in the Dutch-German Border Area. ARegional Analysis of Roman-Period Sites in GermaniaMagna 89,’’ Germania.

van Beek, R., B. Groenewoudt, and L. Keunen. 2007.Archeologisch veldonderzoek van boerenerven in de omgevingvan Colmschate (Overijssel). De toetsing van een historisch-geografisch verwachtingsmodel. Beknopte RapportageArcheologische Monumentenzorg 5. Amersfoort: Rijksdienstvoor Archeologie, Cultuurlandschap en Monumenten.

van Beek, R., and L. J. Keunen. 2006a. ‘‘A Cultural Biography ofthe Coversand Landscapes in the Salland and AchterhoekRegions. The Aims and Methods of the Eastern NetherlandsProject,’’ Berichten van de Rijksdienst voor het OudheidkundigBodemonderzoek 46: 355–375.

van Beek, R., and L. Keunen. 2006b. ‘‘Van huisplattegronden enhistorische erven,’’ in H. Clevis and S. Wentink, eds.,Overijssels Erfgoed. Archeologische Kroniek van Overijssel over2005. Zwolle: Stichting Promotie Archeologie, 83–111.

van der Velde, H. M. 2004. ‘‘Landschapsordening in de VroegeMiddeleeuwen. Het ontstaan van het middeleeuwse cultuur-landschap in Oost-Nederland,’’ in R. M. van Heeringen, E. H.P. Cordfunke, M. Ilsink and H. Sarfatij, eds., Geordendlandschap. 3000 jaar ruimtelijke ordening in Nederland.Hilversum: Verloren, 43–59.

van der Velde, H. M. 2011. Wonen in een grensgebied. Eenlangetermijngeschiedenis van het Oost-Nederlandse cultuur-landschap (500 v. Chr. – 1300 na Chr. NederlandseArcheologische Rapporten 40. Ph.D. dissertation, VrijeUniversiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam. Amersfoort:Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed.

van Doesburg, J., and B. Groenewoudt. in press. ‘‘In Search of theInvisible Farm. Looking for Archaeological Evidence of LateMedieval Rural Settlement in the Sandy Landscapes of theNetherlands (1250–1650 A.D.),’’ in Medieval Europe in Motion.Essays in Honour of Jan Klapste.

van Es, W. A. 1973. ‘‘Roman-Period Settlement on the Free-Germanic Soil of Drenthe, Overijssel and Gelderland,’’Berichten van de Rijksdienst voor het OudheidkundigBodemonderzoek 23: 273–280.

van Es, W. A. 1988. ‘‘Genetische Siedlungsforschung in denNiederlanden mit besonderer Berucksichtigung der landlichenSiedlungsarchaologie im ersten Jahrtausend n. Chr.,’’ in P.Burggraaf, ed., Genetische Siedlungsforschung in Mitteleuropa



und seinen Nachbarraumen. Bonn: Verlag Siedlungsforschung,345–364.

Verhoeven, A. A. A. 1998. Handgemaakt aardewerk in Nederland(8ste-13de eeuw): enkele studies over Middeleeuwse kogelpot-ten. Amsterdam Archaeological Studies 3. Amsterdam:University of Amsterdam.

Verspay, J. P. W. 2007. ‘‘Onzichtbare Erven. Het Brabantseplatteland in de Late Middeleeuwen,’’ unpublished M.A.thesis, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam.

Vervloet, J. A. J. 1988. ‘‘Grundzuge der Entwicklung derHistorischen Geographie in den Niederlanden mit besondererBerucksichtigung der genetischen Siedlungsforschung,’’ in P.Burggraaf, ed., Genetische Siedlungsforschung in Mitteleuropaund seinen Nachbarraumen. Bonn: Verlag Siedlungsforschung,365–417.

Waterbolk, H. T. 1973. ‘‘Odoorn im fruhen Mittelalter,’’ NeueAusgrabungen und Forschungen in Niedersachsen 8: 25–89.

Waterbolk, H. T. 1980. ‘‘Hoe oud zijn de Drentse dorpen?Problemen van nederzettingscontinuıteit in Drenthe van de

bronstijd tot de middeleeuwen,’’ Westerheem 29: 190–212.

Waterbolk, H. T. 1982. ‘‘Mobilitat von Dorf, Ackerflur und undGraberfeld in Drenthe seit der Latenezeit: ArchaologischeSiedlungsforschungen auf der nordniederlandischen Geest,’’Offa 39: 97–137.

Waterbolk, H. T. 1999. ‘‘From Wijster to Dorestad and Beyond,’’in H. Sarfatij, W. J. H. Verwers, and P. J. Woltering, eds., InDiscussion with the Past. Archaeological Studies Presented toW. A. van Es. Amersfoort: Stichting Promotie Archeologie/Rijksdienst voor het Oudheidkundig Bodemonderzoek, 107–118.

Waterbolk, H. T., and O. H. Harsema. 1979. ‘‘Medieval Farms-teads in Gasselte (Province of Drenthe),’’ Palaeohistoria 21:227–265.

Zimmermann, W. H. 1998. ‘‘Pfosten, Stander und Schwelle und derUbergang von Pfosten- zur Standerbau. Eine Studie zuInnovation und Beharrung im Hausbau,’’ Probleme derKustenforschung 25: 9–241.



Beek, R. van/B.J. Groenewoudt/L.J. Keunen, 2014: Establishing the dates of farm sites (A.D....

Documents

Transcript of Beek, R. van/B.J. Groenewoudt/L.J. Keunen, 2014: Establishing the dates of farm sites (A.D....