Agricultural History Review, Volume 59 Part 2 (2011), p. 332

This is an excellent book on a subject of considerable interest to all agrarian historians. The book’s focus is on the historic use of lime as a soil additive and it sets liming in the context of land improvement. To this end it provides us with a case study and extensive examples that others can use for comparison in their own research areas. The research aims extend beyond establishing the time frame for liming as a soil improver to include its use in areas without a limestone geology and those which were not subject to parliamentary enclosure. Further, close attention is paid to the question of who initiated the use of lime and how its use proceeded over time.

Johnson’s research area is extensive and extends eastwards from the Lune to beyond Richmond and from Kirkby Stephen southwards, stopping short of Keighley. (His current research is extending this area to include the whole of Westmorland.) The period covered is as far back as he can find evidence, so that the discussion runs from the thirteenth to the twentieth century. The evidence itself benefits from the author’s notable experience as a local archaeologist and the wide range of contacts he has built up over the years. The latter enables him to use the kind of small private archives often unavailable to agrarian historians, who tend to depend upon those of the big estates deposited in county record offices. Of particular value are the diaries and commonplace books which still exist in significant numbers but which do need this kind of personal contact to locate. He is prepared to use all relevant material to support his exploration of the physical landscape, climatic conditions or changes in market demand in pursuit of a wider understanding of his subject, and his detailed discussions contain clear descriptions of both evidence and processes. This blending of examples and discussions from a range of sources and research techniques provides us with the strongest evidence of the antiquity of liming and its widespread application, and shows that the initiative for its use could come from either farmer or landlord. Johnson’s discussions and arguments have a robustness and clarity that reflect a lifetime of observing and thinking. Nor should we overlook the frequent, relevant and good-quality diagrams, maps and coloured photographs, which we have come to associate with BAR reports.

For the benefit of those unfamiliar with BAR (British Archaeological Reports) it should be explained that these are (generally) rapid conversions of theses and dissertations into A4, soft-backed publications available on request from www.hadrianbooks.co.uk. The dissemination of recent research requires no justification although the straight publication of academic submissions does not always provide a literary style of English. The concept of ‘archaeology’ is stretched far beyond the usual framework: whilst BAR 493 is The maritime and riverine landscape of the west of Roman Britain, BAR 497 uses probate evidence to examine The material culture of the tradesmen of Newcastle upon Tyne, 1545–1642. This range of content makes them an exciting resource, but BAR reports have two significant drawbacks. The first is the cost: the 2011 publications range in price from £37 to £73. The second is much more serious. Academic texts lose much of their functionality if there is no index, and this reviewer cannot recall a BAR report that has possessed this fundamental item. This absence is unacceptable, and only partially addressed by the very detailed contents pages.

David Johnson’s authoritative discussions cover a lot of ground. This includes his pungent criticism of Historic Land Characterisation as ‘too one-dimensional, it is desk-based (so arguably ignores landscape) and does not provide a mechanism for exploring past landscapes’, a point of view that this reviewer is very happy to support.