Hubbry Logo
Ridge and furrowRidge and furrowMain
Open search
Ridge and furrow
Community hub
Ridge and furrow
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Ridge and furrow
Ridge and furrow
Ridge and furrow
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Ridge and furrow in Cold Newton, Leicestershire
Ridge and furrow in Stony Stratford, Buckinghamshire
Ridge and furrow in Grendon, Northamptonshire
Ridge and Furrow, in East Leake, Nottinghamshire

Ridge and furrow is an archaeological pattern of ridges (Medieval Latin: sliones) and troughs created by a system of ploughing used in Europe during the Middle Ages, typical of the open-field system. It is also known as rig (or rigg) and furrow, mostly in the North East of England and in Scotland.[1][2][3]

The earliest examples date to the immediate post-Roman period and the system was used until the 17th century in some areas, as long as the open field system survived. Surviving ridge and furrow topography is found in Great Britain, Ireland and elsewhere in Europe. The surviving ridges are parallel, ranging from 3 to 22 yards (3 to 20 m) apart and up to 24 inches (61 cm) tall – they were much taller when in use. Older examples are often curved.

Ridge and furrow topography was a result of ploughing with non-reversible ploughs on the same strip of land each year. It is visible on land that was ploughed in the Middle Ages, but which has not been ploughed since then. No actively ploughed ridge and furrow survives.

The ridges or lands became units in landholding, in assessing the work of the plougher and in reaping in autumn.[4]

Origin

[edit]
Ploughing with a single-sided plough in a ploughing match, showing furrows heaped towards centre of strip (The different strips will eventually meet). This is not yet ridge and furrow, as the strip has only been ploughed once in this location.

Traditional ploughs have the ploughshare and mould-board on the right, and so turn the soil over to the right. This means that the plough cannot return along the same line for the next furrow. Instead, ploughing is done in a clockwise direction around a long rectangular strip (a land). After ploughing one of the long sides of the strip, the plough is removed from the ground at the end of the field, moved across the unploughed headland (the short end of the strip), then put back in the ground to work back down the other long side of the strip. The width of the ploughed strip is fairly narrow, to avoid having to drag the plough too far across the headland. This process has the effect of moving the soil in each half of the strip one furrow's-width towards the centre line each time the field is ploughed.

In the Middle Ages each strip was managed by one family, within large open fields held in common, and the locations of the strips were the same each year. The movement of soil year after year gradually built the centre of each strip up into a ridge, leaving a dip, or "furrow" between each ridge (this use of "furrow" is different from that for the small furrow left by each pass of the plough). The building up of a ridge was called filling or gathering, and was sometimes done before ploughing began. The raised ridges offered better drainage in a wet climate: moisture drained into the furrows, and since the ridges were laid down a slope, in a sloping field water would collect in a ditch at the bottom.[4] Only on some well-drained soils were the fields left flat. In damper soil towards the base of the ridge, pulses (peas or beans) or dredge (a mixture of oats and barley) might be sown where wheat would have become waterlogged, as Thomas Tusser suggested in the 16th century:

For wheat till land
Where water doth stand.
Sow pease or dredge
below in that redge.[5]

A lidar view of the site of Wormleighton village in Warwickshire.

The dip often marked the boundary between plots. Although they varied, strips would traditionally be a furlong (a "furrow-long") in length, (220 yards, about 200 metres), and from about 5 yards (4.6 m) up to a chain wide (22 yards, about 20 metres), giving an area of from 0.25 to 1 acre (0.1 to 0.4 ha).[6][7][8]

In most places ploughing continued over the centuries, and later methods (especially the reversible plough) removed the ridge and furrow pattern. However, in some cases the land became grassland, and where this has not been ploughed since, the pattern has often been preserved. Surviving ridge and furrow may have a height difference of 18 to 24 in (0.5 to 0.6 m) in places, and gives a strongly rippled effect to the landscape. When in active use, the height difference was even more, over 6 feet (1.8 m) in places.[8]

This drawing explains the origin of ridge and furrow patterns.

Curved strips

[edit]
An oblique lidar view of the site of Hunnum Roman fort and immediate landscape to the south (north of Halton SMV) with early ridge and furrow in Northumberland

In the early Middle Ages ploughing was done with large teams of small oxen (commonly eight oxen in four pairs), and the plough itself was a large, mainly wooden implement. The team and plough together were therefore many yards long, and this led to a particular effect in ridge and furrow fields. When reaching the end of the furrow, the leading oxen met the end first, and were turned left along the headland, while the plough continued as long as possible in the furrow (the strongest oxen were yoked at the back, and could draw the plough on their own for this short distance). By the time the plough eventually reached the end, the oxen were standing lined up facing leftwards along the headland. Each pair was then turned around to walk rightwards along the headland, crossing the end of the strip, and they then started down the opposite furrow. By the time the plough itself reached the beginning of the furrow, the oxen were already lined up ready to pull it forwards.

A lidar view of Medieval ridge and furrow and associated lynchets and strip lynchets at Heddon Hill in Northumberland
A lidar view of Southorpe Deserted Medieval Village in Hornsea, Yorkshire.

The result of this was to twist the end of each furrow slightly to the left, making these earlier ridge and furrows into a slight reverse-S shape.[8] This shape survives in some places as curved field boundaries, even where the ridge and furrow pattern itself has vanished.

If the oxen had been turned right at the end of the furrow, they would immediately have had to turn right again down the returning furrow, making the line of oxen cut across the top of the ploughed strip and thus pulling the plough out of the ground before it reached the end of the furrow, as well as having potential difficulty from two adjacent lines of oxen moving in opposite directions. Alternatively, if lined up rightwards along the headland, some would already be past the beginning of the new furrow, and these would have to be moved awkwardly sideways into the furrow to be ready to plough. Turning to the left made one turn at a time and avoided a sideways move.

As oxen became larger and ploughs more efficient, smaller teams were needed. These took less room on the headland, and straight ploughing became easier – and easier still when heavy horses were introduced. Late Middle Ages ridge and furrow is therefore straight.

Surviving locations

[edit]
Rig and furrow at Roughrig reservoir, near Airdrie, North Lanarkshire in Scotland
A lidar view of rig and furrow at Armadale, West Lothian in Scotland.

Ridge and furrow often survives on higher ground where the arable land was subsequently turned over to sheep walk in the 15th century and has not been ploughed out since by modern ploughing methods, today surviving still as pasture and grazing for sheep where the effect is clearly visible, especially when the sun is low or after a dusting of snow. It is often associated with deserted medieval villages.

Some of the best-preserved ridge and furrow survives in the English counties of:

In Scotland, 4-600 acres of rig and furrow survive in one area outside the town of Airdrie.

Similar agricultural landforms

[edit]
  • Cord rig, cultivation ridges created by spade digging
  • Lazy beds, cultivation ridges created by spade digging
  • Lynchets, sloping terraces on steep hillsides, created by gravity on hillslopes subject to ploughing
  • Raised bed gardening, a modern system of raising cultivated land above the surrounding ground
  • Run rig and rundale, Scottish and Irish land-use patterns named after their characteristic ridges and furrows
  • Water-meadows, grassland with ridges and dips to control irrigation – superficially similar to ridge and furrow, but the origin, pattern and use were very different

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Ridge and furrow

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Ridge and furrow is an ancient agricultural technique involving the formation of parallel raised ridges separated by sunken furrows across fields, typically created through ploughing or manual earth-moving to enhance drainage on heavy, waterlogged lands. This method, often resulting from the repeated use of non-reversible mouldboard ploughs in open-field systems, produced distinctive linear earthworks with ridges commonly 4 to 24 yards wide, allowing excess to collect in furrows while promoting and warming for growth. The practice also facilitated retention during dry periods and the incorporation of to improve fertility, making it adaptable to various types prone to stagnation. Historically, ridge and furrow cultivation emerged in the , with and archaeological evidence placing its origins as early as the 7th to 8th centuries AD in regions of Northern and Central , such as the and foreland. In , it became widespread from the late Saxon period onward, particularly in the from to , where subdivided strip fields were routinely "cast up" into ridges rather than ploughed flat as in . The technique persisted through the late medieval and post-medieval eras, up to the in some areas, before declining with acts and modern farming machinery; it was notably absent on free-draining or soils, concentrating instead on claylands north of escarpments like the . Comparable systems have been documented globally, including ridged fields used by indigenous Mississippian peoples at sites like Angel Mounds in over 1,000 years ago, highlighting its independent development or diffusion beyond . Today, ridge and furrow survives as a key archaeological feature, visible as undulating or under crops via and surveys, offering insights into medieval agrarian economies, , and communal farming practices. Its preservation is influenced by factors such as avoidance of deep ploughing, permanent use, and minimal modern disturbance, with ongoing studies using multi-dating methods like optically stimulated (OSL) and radiocarbon to refine chronologies and assess pedological impacts. These remnants underscore the technique's role in before industrialization, influencing contemporary discussions on and historical .

Overview

Definition

Ridge and furrow refers to an archaeological landscape feature consisting of parallel earthen ridges—raised strips of soil—separated by deeper furrows or troughs, resulting from systematic medieval ploughing practices. These ridges typically measure 5 to 10 meters in width and can reach heights of up to 0.5 meters, creating a distinctive undulating across former arable fields. This pattern is closely associated with the communal open-field farming systems prevalent in medieval , especially in , where large fields were subdivided into long, narrow strips allocated to individual tenants or households within a village or manor. These strips, often arranged in blocks called furlongs approximately 200 meters long, facilitated shared cultivation and among the community, reflecting the socio-economic organization of agrarian life during the period. Today, ridge and furrow survives as visible earthworks in many rural landscapes, particularly where former has been converted to permanent , preserving the contours against . The wavy patterns are often most evident from elevated viewpoints or through , which reveals extensive networks across regions like the and , serving as key evidence for studying medieval .

Formation Process

The formation of ridge and furrow primarily resulted from repeated ploughing using heavy mouldboard s drawn by teams of oxen, which turned slices consistently to one side, leading to the accumulation of into elevated ridges flanked by sunken furrows. These s, equipped with an asymmetrical mouldboard on the right side, inverted the furrow slice to the right as the plough advanced, a that evolved from simpler ard ploughs lacking mouldboards but adapted for inversion in medieval . The process began with the ard's basic scratching action but transitioned to side-turned handling to build , enabling the progressive displacement of during each pass. Ploughing proceeded in systematic strips known as furlongs, typically measuring around 220 yards in length, starting from the field edges or central lines and advancing inward or outward in a manner to concentrate toward the center. Right-handed operation ensured that each furrow's was thrown uphill onto the developing , with the —often eight oxen—maneuvering in a curved path at the strip ends to maintain alignment, resulting in the characteristic S-shaped undulations. A single season's ploughing might displace to a depth of 15-20 cm, but the key was the "gathering" or "filling" technique, where alternate passes turned furrows inward from both sides of the strip, preventing soil scatter and promoting central buildup. Over multiple seasons, this repetitive action caused cumulative displacement, with ridges gradually rising as layers of inverted compacted and elevated the central axis, sometimes requiring up to 36 passes per strip to achieve pronounced heights of 1-1.2 meters or more. The consistent one-sided turning avoided evening out the field, instead amplifying the relief through annual reinforcement, where prior ridges guided subsequent furrows and further entrenched the pattern. This mechanical persistence transformed flat into a durable, undulating optimized for the plough's limitations.

Historical Development

Origins

Ridge and furrow cultivation emerged in Britain during the early medieval period, following the Roman withdrawal around 410 CE, as Anglo-Saxon communities shifted from the individualized farming of Roman villas to more communal open-field systems. Archaeological suggests earlier origins in , such as in Northern and Central during the 7th to 8th centuries AD, prior to its adoption in Britain. This transition is evidenced by archaeological findings of early field boundaries and palaeoenvironmental data indicating a move toward expanded arable landscapes on heavy clay soils, where raised ridges improved drainage for crop growth. Pollen analysis from multiple lowland sites across Britain reveals a marked arable expansion between the 7th and 9th centuries, with increased proportions signaling intensified cultivation practices associated with proto-open-field arrangements. For instance, in and the South West, dated pollen cores from bogs and sediments show cultivation rising sharply around the late 7th to early 9th centuries, aligning with the initial adoption of ridge and furrow to manage wetter soils. These changes reflect broader Anglo-Saxon agricultural innovations, including the use of ox-drawn ploughs that created the characteristic ridged patterns. By the early medieval period, similar ploughing techniques linked to open-field systems had spread across parts of north-western , addressing drainage challenges on heavy clay terrains through ridging methods. Archaeological traces of early medieval field systems in north-western , such as fossilized ridges under later features, support this dissemination, tied to the introduction of heavy mouldboard ploughs that facilitated communal arable farming.

Medieval Prevalence

Ridge and furrow achieved peak prevalence in during the 11th to 15th centuries as a core element of the , which structured much of the country's feudal agriculture, especially in lowland regions like the . This cultivation method was deeply embedded in manorial economies, where lords divided communal arable land into narrow, elongated strips assigned to villeins—unfree tenants bound to the manor—who worked them collectively to sustain the estate's productivity. The strips were integrated into the three-field rotation system, whereby one field was planted with for bread, another with spring crops like or for brewing and soil enrichment, and the third left to recover nutrients and control weeds, thereby optimizing yields on heavy clay soils common in these areas. In the , ridge and furrow encompassed a substantial portion of , with archaeological surveys indicating that up to 90% of some townships' areas were under this intensive cultivation, reflecting its role in supporting dense populations and manorial self-sufficiency. This widespread adoption enhanced drainage on waterlogged soils and promoted even crop growth, contributing to the of feudal lords who relied on labor for farming and customary rents. Historical records and visual evidence corroborate the technique's dominance during this era. The of 1086 records extensive ploughlands across England, which were typically cultivated using techniques that produced ridges and furrows to facilitate drainage and with mouldboard ploughs drawn by teams. Similarly, 14th-century illustrations in the portray peasants ploughing fields with multi- teams, capturing the labor-intensive process central to medieval agrarian life. These depictions often show curved field ends resulting from the swing plow's .

Decline and Transition

The decline of ridge and furrow cultivation began in the , driven by early enclosures that consolidated open fields into private holdings, reducing the need for the communal ploughing practices that created the ridges. Improved ploughs with mouldboards, which turned more efficiently and favored level fields, further encouraged the abandonment of traditional ridging in favor of cross-ploughing or "stitching" to flatten land post-enclosure. In regions like , this shift was evident by the early , as farmers adapted to intensified arable production on enclosed parcels. The 18th-century agricultural revolution accelerated this transition through widespread parliamentary enclosures, which privatized common lands and imposed hedged boundaries, often erasing or fossilizing ridge patterns. Between 1760 and 1820, approximately 4,000 such acts were passed in , enclosing around 7 million acres—about one-sixth of the country's land—and enabling more rational farming layouts incompatible with ridged fields. Socio-economic pressures, including rapid from approximately 5 million in 1700 to 8.3 million by 1801, heightened demand for efficient , prompting landowners to invest in enclosures to boost amid the Industrial Revolution's labor shifts. By the , under-drainage technologies, such as clay pipe systems developed in the early 1800s, rendered ridges obsolete by providing superior subsurface water management on leveled fields. The introduction of steam-powered ploughs in the mid-1800s further diminished ridging, as these machines required flat for effective operation and deeper . While most ridge and furrow had vanished from active use by the 1800s, remnants persisted in remote or upland areas until the early , where traditional methods lingered before modern mechanization fully supplanted them.

Physical Characteristics

Profile and Dimensions

Ridge and furrow features exhibit a characteristic undulating profile formed by parallel raised ridges separated by sunken furrows, with ridges typically displaying a convex cross-section or, less commonly, a flat-topped form. The ridges measure 5 to 20 meters wide at the base and stand 0.3 to 0.6 meters high in well-preserved examples, while furrows range from 3 to 6 meters wide, yielding an overall of 10 to 15 meters from crest to crest. These dimensions vary according to and regional practices; in heavy clay soils, ridges can achieve greater of up to 1 meter in height with steeper profiles to enhance drainage, whereas lighter sandy or loamy soils produce shallower features with reduced . Ridge lengths generally extend 180 to 400 meters along a single furlong, though some can reach up to 700 meters in exceptional cases. At the ends of fields, ridges may curve slightly due to turning maneuvers, but the primary linear morphology dominates the overall profile. Quantification of ridge and furrow dimensions relies on advanced techniques such as surveys for broad-scale topographic mapping and ground-based surveys, including GPS and measurements, for precise cross-sectional profiling. These methods reveal that centuries of natural , combined with post-medieval ploughing and changes, have diminished original heights in many sites, flattening the once more pronounced .

Curved Strips

The distinctive curving of ridges at field boundaries in ridge and furrow landscapes arose from the mechanical limitations of medieval ploughing practices. Plough teams, typically comprising eight or more oxen yoked in a long line to pull heavy, non-reversible mouldboard ploughs, could not execute sharp turns at the ends of furlongs without risking tangling or inefficiency; instead, they followed gradual, sweeping paths that produced reverse "S" or "C" shaped curves in the soil accumulation. This curvature was accentuated by the right-sided mouldboards on ploughs, which consistently turned soil clockwise, further influencing the leftward bend during team maneuvers. Such curved strips are prevalent in the headlands of former open fields across , appearing in many surviving sites as a hallmark of medieval cultivation. Surveys indicate they constitute a substantial portion of preserved earthworks, for example accounting for 27% of recorded ridge and furrow in . Historical examples date to at least the 12th century, as seen in field patterns around Laxton, , where the —originating in the late medieval period—preserves these reversed-S forms in its arable layout. These curves held practical implications for land management, directly mirroring the irregular boundaries of individual strip holdings within communal fields and embedding them into the landscape. During later enclosures from the 16th to 19th centuries, the fossilized curved patterns often complicated efforts to straighten hedges and consolidate plots, leading to piecemeal adaptations that retained elements of the medieval morphology in modern field edges. By around 1600, the reversed-S form had largely become obsolete as technology evolved, but its traces persisted as evidence of pre-plague era farming constraints.

Agricultural Significance

Drainage and Soil Benefits

Ridge and furrow cultivation provided essential drainage benefits on waterlogged clay soils common in medieval Europe, where furrows channeled excess rainwater away from crop roots, minimizing the incidence of rot and waterlogging that could devastate yields on heavy, impermeable ground. For soil management, the system facilitated fertility enhancement through manuring, with livestock waste applied during fallow periods contributing to organic matter accumulation primarily on the ridges. Geoarchaeological analyses reveal persistently higher phosphorus levels (up to 1000 mg kg⁻¹ in ridge horizons) and organic carbon in these soils centuries after abandonment, indicating sustained fertility gains from low-intensity historical practices. Adapted to the humid environments of Northern Europe, ridge and furrow supported practices like broadcasting seeds directly onto ridges for optimal exposure, while furrows served as natural barriers that reduced soil erosion by over 50% compared to flat fields, preserving topsoil integrity across sloped or rain-prone terrains.

Integration with Open-Field Systems

Ridge and furrow topography was a fundamental component of the medieval open-field system, where arable land was organized into large unfenced fields subdivided into narrow strips called selions, typically measuring 7 to 9 yards in width and extending up to a mile in length. These strips were allocated to individual peasant households in a scattered manner across multiple ridges within the field, ensuring that no single tenant held a disproportionate share of the most fertile or poorly drained soils. This distribution was enforced through manorial customs and oversight by the lord's officials, promoting equitable access to land resources amid varying soil conditions and promoting communal stability in village agriculture. The ridge and furrow configuration aligned seamlessly with the three-field prevalent in much of medieval , in which one-third of the —typically an entire field—was left each year to restore and provide communal for . During the period, the ridges could be maintained or reshaped without interfering with cropping cycles, as ploughing occurred annually on the sown fields to reinforce the undulating pattern. Village by-laws, recorded in manorial custumals and enforced through local courts, regulated this rotation to synchronize planting, harvesting, and across holdings, preventing overuse of any section and integrating ridge cultivation into the broader agrarian calendar. Socially, the demands of ridge and furrow ploughing fostered extensive among villagers, as the heavy wheeled required teams of eight or more oxen yoked in tandem to turn the dense clay soils effectively. These teams were typically shared among multiple households, necessitating coordinated labor during the ploughing season and reinforcing communal bonds in the open-field village. Evidence from 13th-century manorial court rolls, such as those from estates like St Albans and , illustrates the social tensions inherent in this system, with frequent entries documenting disputes over strip boundaries, inheritance rights, and improper land transfers that could disrupt equitable holdings. The ridges' role in improving drainage further supported this communal framework by mitigating waterlogging across shared strips.

Preservation and Examples

Surviving Sites in England

One of the most prominent surviving examples of ridge and furrow in is found at Laxton in , recognized as the country's last remaining open-field village where medieval cultivation practices, including intact ridges, continue to be maintained in a working landscape mapped as early as 1635. This site exemplifies the rare persistence of communal farming systems, with earthworks visible across extensive furlongs accessible via public footpaths and managed by local authorities. In , ridge and furrow earthworks are preserved in pasture around Caus Castle at Westbury, where medieval strips remain discernible as low undulations in the , offering public views from nearby trails while highlighting the form's integration with historical fortifications. Similarly, in Derbyshire's Osmaston area, particularly within the Needwood and Claylands, ridge and furrow survives under permanent , protected from erosion and visible in historic parks like Osmaston Park, though access is limited to designated walks. Preservation of these features has been aided by the conversion of former arable land to permanent grassland following parliamentary enclosure in the 18th and 19th centuries, which halted deep ploughing and allowed earthworks to endure in uncultivated areas. Aerial photography and LiDAR surveys have been instrumental in identifying and mapping these remnants, with Historic England records documenting over 240 sites as scheduled monuments nationwide. In modern times, several sites in , such as those at Canons Ashby and Old Sulby, hold status, ensuring legal protection and occasional public interpretation through guided visits. Despite this, threats persist from agricultural intensification, including unauthorized ploughing that can erode earthworks, and urban development pressures that risk overwriting landscapes.

Sites in Continental Europe

Ridge and furrow cultivation relics are documented across northern and central continental Europe, with notable preservation in regions where historical agricultural practices transitioned to less intensive land use. In northern Germany, particularly in Lower Saxony, several sites exhibit well-preserved medieval patterns identified through multi-proxy dating approaches, including optically stimulated luminescence (OSL), radiocarbon analysis, and pollen studies. These methods have dated formations in areas like the Altmark and the southwestern Harz foreland to the High and Late Middle Ages, spanning the 10th to 14th centuries, with some evidence of earlier origins in the 7th to 8th centuries and continuation into the modern era. Further south, rare examples appear in around Lake Mikri Prespa in the Prespa , where ridge-and-furrow patterns reflect historical communal farming systems. These features are associated with medieval agricultural landscapes, potentially linked to Byzantine-era activities evidenced by nearby structures like the Achillios Basilica, dated from the 6th to 14th centuries. The patterns here, visible in aerial surveys, highlight adaptations in wetland-adjacent environments for and drainage. Preservation of these sites is generally stronger in abandoned or forested fields, where modern ploughing and have had minimal impact. Recent LiDAR-based mapping studies in the 2020s, such as those in Poland's abandoned mountain villages and Czech open-field remnants, have revealed extensive surviving ridge-and-furrow networks, contrasting with near-total erasure in active arable areas of . These non-invasive techniques have enabled the detection of microrelief features under vegetation cover, underscoring regional variations in survival due to post-medieval land-use changes.

Comparisons

Similar Agricultural Landforms

Celtic lazy beds, also known as feannagan in , represent a traditional cultivation method with roots in earlier periods but employed primarily and from the 17th to 19th centuries for growing potatoes on marginal soils. These hand-dug ridges, typically up to 2.5 meters wide with narrow drainage channels between them, were formed by spading sods of and incorporating desalinated as to enhance and facilitate runoff. Unlike broader medieval ridge and furrow systems, lazy beds were narrower and designed for small-scale, labor-intensive farming on wet, infertile land, often persisting as visible earthworks in areas like the Western Isles and west until the potato famine of the 1840s. In 20th-century America, contour ploughing emerged as a technique, particularly from the 1930s onward, under federal programs like the Soil Erosion Service to combat Dust Bowl-era degradation caused by straight-line plowing on slopes. This method involves creating furrows and ridges that follow the natural contours of hillsides, slowing water runoff and reducing by up to 50% compared to up-and-down plowing, while being adapted for mechanized to minimize soil disturbance. Developed through university demonstration plots in states like , it prioritizes over permanent field patterning, differing from historical ridge and furrow by its curved, slope-adaptive layout rather than linear strips. Continental Esch systems in medieval involved open-field arable lands, known as Esch or Gewannflur, where broad ridges were cultivated under three-field rotations, with periods allowing soil recovery on heavy clay soils. These ridges, common from the 9th to , facilitated drainage similar to English ridge and furrow but were often leveled after the medieval period due to and improved plowing techniques, leaving fewer preserved earthworks. Historical indicate Esch fields were organized into communal strips for production, emphasizing collective management in regions like . Asian balk systems, prevalent in Southeast Asian upland farming such as the Sloping Agricultural Land Technology (SALT) in the , incorporate permanent unplowed vegetative strips—typically 0.5 to 1 meter wide—spaced along contours to control erosion and retain soil on sloping terrain. These balks, often planted with nitrogen-fixing trees or grasses, alternate with cultivated areas in setups, preventing runoff in intensive or systems while supporting and long-term . Adopted since the late in response to , they differ from temporary furrows by remaining uncultivated indefinitely to stabilize landscapes in tropical environments.

Key Distinctions

Ridge and furrow is distinguished by its formation through systematic side-turning of soil using animal-drawn non-reversible mouldboard ploughs, resulting in broad, permanent undulations across entire fields, a practice unlike the temporary, spade-dug ridges of lazy beds or the leveled surfaces produced by modern reversible ploughs. This method created enduring waves typically 150-200 meters long and 10-15 meters wide, optimized for heavy clay soils in medieval , where the plough's design prevented deep inversion and instead built up convex ridges over repeated seasons. In contrast, lazy beds, prevalent in Irish and Scottish potato cultivation from the 17th century onward, though the technique has earlier origins, were narrower (about 1-2 meters), manually constructed for specific crops, and intentionally dismantled after harvest, lacking the permanence and scale of ridge and furrow. As a temporal marker, ridge and furrow is diagnostic of open-field systems from the 8th to 18th centuries in medieval and , particularly in and the , where it reflects communal arable farming before widespread enclosure. It is absent in earlier Roman rectilinear field systems, which employed more efficient, turn-wicket ploughs capable of bidirectional soil turning and straight, narrow furrows without pronounced ridging, often aligned with villas and centuriation grids. Post-enclosure furrows from the onward, by comparison, were straight, hedged, and machine-formed within individual holdings, erasing the sinuous, reversal-patterned waves characteristic of medieval strips and lacking their archaeological visibility as earthworks. The scale and intent of ridge and furrow further set it apart, as it was implemented at a communal level across vast open fields divided into shared furlongs, primarily to enhance drainage on waterlogged soils by channeling excess moisture into furrows while increasing cultivable surface area. This field-wide approach contrasted with individual plot methods, such as small-scale ridging in gardens or for , and was not crop-specific like potato-oriented lazy beds, instead supporting mixed cereal rotations in a tenure system. Unlike localized techniques, its broad application facilitated equitable access among villagers, with furrows also serving as informal boundaries between strips.

References

  1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2020.105049
  2. https://www.oxoniensia.org/volumes/1964-5/sutton.pdf
  3. https://agris.fao.org/search/en/providers/122535/records/65dfc75763b8185d9caed48b
  4. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/0A0F9BD9CA81EF65D95747F9E8A62E19/S0003598X00066060a.pdf/ridge_and_furrow_survival_and_preservation.pdf
  5. https://news.iu.edu/college/live/news/35908-iu-research-collaboration-uncovers-earliest
  6. https://digventures.com/monuments/ridge-and-furrow/
  7. https://kids.kiddle.co/Ridge_and_furrow
  8. https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100420807
  9. https://www.bradfordonavonmuseum.co.uk/ridge-furrow
  10. https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/iha-field-systems/heag204-field-systems/
  11. https://www.bahs.org.uk/AGHR/ARTICLES/03n2a2.pdf
  12. https://profsusanoosthuizen.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/oosthuizen-2005-medieval-archaeology-vol.-49.pdf
  13. https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1669&context=gees-research
  14. https://www.archaeopress.com/Archaeopress/DMS/CFC3D74A424D42A581FB8271DCD7A985/9781789691924-sample.pdf
  15. https://dspace.library.uu.nl/bitstream/handle/1874/347096/Landscape.pdf?sequence=1
  16. https://www.economics.utoronto.ca/munro5/L06Manorialism.pdf
  17. https://heneb.org.uk/archive/cpat/projects/longer/histland/maelor/msagricu.htm
  18. https://www.midgleywebpages.com/domesday.html
  19. https://www.penultimateharn.com/medieval_history/the-medieval-farming-year/
  20. https://bahs.org.uk/AGHR/ARTICLES/47n1a1.pdf
  21. https://bahs.org.uk/AGHR/ARTICLES/03n1a3.pdf
  22. https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/BFI_WP_2022-30.pdf
  23. https://www.thelandmagazine.org.uk/articles/short-history-enclosure-britain
  24. https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/publications/dssg-agriculture/heag238-agriculture-ssg/
  25. http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/5762/
  26. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0341816220305993
  27. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/12/3/544
  28. https://historicengland.org.uk/research/results/reports/89-2019
  29. https://www.medieval.eu/laxton-the-last-medieval-village-and-home-of-robin-hood/
  30. https://archeox.conted.ox.ac.uk/www.archeox.net/fact-sheets/ridge-and-furrow.html
  31. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/gea.21916
  32. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1006005
  33. https://www.bahs.org.uk/AGHR/ARTICLES/14n2a1.pdf
  34. https://historicengland.org.uk/research/results/reports/8065/TrentandBelvoirValesEasternArable
  35. http://www.nottsheritagegateway.org.uk/places/laxton.htm
  36. https://www.heritagegateway.org.uk/Gateway/Results_Single.aspx?uid=66343&resourceID=19191
  37. https://nationalcharacterareas.co.uk/needwood-and-south-derbyshire-claylands/key-facts-data/
  38. https://thegardenstrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/EH-Farming-the-historic-landscape-Caring-for-archaeological-sites-in-grassland-2004-1.pdf
  39. https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/results/?search=monumentType%253A%2522Ridge%2BAnd%2BFurrow%2522&searchType=NHLE%2BSimple
  40. https://heritagecalling.com/2021/12/06/explore-englands-hidden-past-from-the-air/
  41. https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1017187
  42. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/jul/26/arts.highereducation
  43. https://www.appropedia.org/Lazy_bed
  44. https://livinghistoryfarm.org/farming-in-the-1930s/crops/contour-plowing/
  45. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235982268_Grainlands_The_landscape_of_open_fields_in_a_European_perspective
  46. https://www.echocommunity.org/en/resources/f8d9f1d8-6734-412d-84e4-d82161bf392f
  47. https://www.cifor-icraf.org/publications/downloads/Publications/PDFS/JA00104.pdf
  48. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2590002
  49. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169555X25001886
  50. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271820595_A_classification_of_ridge_and_furrow_by_an_analysis_of_cross-profiles
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.