GardenBanter.co.uk - Is this the right NG?

GardenBanter.co.uk (https://www.gardenbanter.co.uk/)

- sci.agriculture (https://www.gardenbanter.co.uk/sci-agriculture/)

- - Is this the right NG? (https://www.gardenbanter.co.uk/sci-agriculture/18122-right-ng.html)

Is this the right NG?

I've been looking at some old field maps (tithe maps) of this area, which
have raised some questions about historical land use. Is this an appropriate
NG to raise them on, or does anyone know any more appropriate places?

May glorious Shamash make his face to shine upon you

Gilgamesh of Uruk
(Include Enkidu in the subject line to avoid the spam trap)

Is this the right NG?

Gilgamesh writes
I've been looking at some old field maps (tithe maps) of this area, which
have raised some questions about historical land use. Is this an appropriate
NG to raise them on, or does anyone know any more appropriate places?

uk.business.agriculture

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.

Is this the right NG?

"Gilgamesh" wrote in message
...
I've been looking at some old field maps (tithe maps) of this area, which
have raised some questions about historical land use. Is this an
appropriate
NG to raise them on, or does anyone know any more appropriate places?

May glorious Shamash make his face to shine upon you

Gilgamesh of Uruk
(Include Enkidu in the subject line to avoid the spam trap)

Sounds interesting to me. I think history its very relevant to we farm our
ground.

Is this the right NG?

Here's the first conundrum :
I noticed that many of the old field boundaries are curved in a sort of
backward-S shape. The only book I could find in the library says this is
characteristic of enclosed strips which were ploughed by oxen (If I read
things aright, that means any time up to about mid-18th century), but gives
no explanation beyond the suggestion that it made them easier to turn.
Well, with a single-bottom plough, that does'nt make sense to me, unless you
plough in one direction only. An acre is already an 11-mile walk - would
anyone willingly double that to 22 miles? The logical layout would be the
classic furrow long by stetch wide acre, although the land hereabouts is
relatively light, so you might well be able to plough more than an acre in a
day (Is it just coincidental that an acre is usually quoted as much as a
skilled man with a scythe could reap in a day? The field layouts for
Champion Country were probably set before the Black Death, when reaping was
done with a sickle)

--
May glorious Shamash make his face to shine upon you

Gilgamesh of Uruk
(Include Enkidu in the subject line to avoid the spam trap)
"Richard McDermott" wrote in message
...

"Gilgamesh" wrote in message
...
I've been looking at some old field maps (tithe maps) of this area,
which
have raised some questions about historical land use. Is this an
appropriate
NG to raise them on, or does anyone know any more appropriate places?

May glorious Shamash make his face to shine upon you

Gilgamesh of Uruk
(Include Enkidu in the subject line to avoid the spam trap)

Sounds interesting to me. I think history its very relevant to we farm our
ground.

Is this the right NG?

You really are in the wrong group here. You should repost to
uk.business.agriculture. On the principle that I already said that, and
you didn't, you don;t know how to so I have x-posted this post. However
bear in mind that some posters do not x-post so a valuable reply my not
appear on sci.ag.

Gilgamesh writes
I noticed that many of the old field boundaries are curved in a sort of
backward-S shape. The only book I could find in the library says this is
characteristic of enclosed strips which were ploughed by oxen (If I read
things aright, that means any time up to about mid-18th century), but gives
no explanation beyond the suggestion that it made them easier to turn.

That is often correct.

Well, with a single-bottom plough, that does'nt make sense to me, unless you
plough in one direction only.

ER, no. They were ploughed in lands. So the animals start to turn when
they are out of the furrow making the plough turn, and equally swing
wide coming in. These small changes add up each time you go round so the
field gets a 's' shape. This can still be seen when you have students on
cultivations in small fields.

An acre is already an 11-mile walk - would
anyone willingly double that to 22 miles?

Only if the land is very sloping.

The logical layout would be the
classic furrow long by stetch wide acre, although the land hereabouts is
relatively light, so you might well be able to plough more than an acre in a
day (Is it just coincidental that an acre is usually quoted as much as a
skilled man with a scythe could reap in a day?

I have seen both 'definitions'. I doubt either are more than piecework
estimates. Chains, poles, perches and furlongs are very old
measurements.

The field layouts for
Champion Country were probably set before the Black Death, when reaping was
done with a sickle)

Reaping was still done with flint sickles in parts of scotland in the
start of the 30C.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.

Is this the right NG?

"Oz" wrote in message
...

Reaping was still done with flint sickles in parts of scotland in the
start of the 30C.

Pardon? I can't even hazard a guess on that one.

let me rephrase ....

start of the 20C ...

the convention would be C20th ... or even C30th ... but at least we'd have
understood.

I'd like to know more about flint sickles.

Mary

Better?

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.

Is this the right NG?

Mary Fisher writes

I'd like to know more about flint sickles.

It was a travellers journal I once read that stuck in my memory.
Apparently the locals preferred their flint sickles because:

1) They were much cheaper than steel ones.
2) They were lighter and easier to use.
3) They only needed 'sharpening' once every few days.
4) They cut better.

The date was about 1902.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.

Is this the right NG?

"Oz" wrote in message
...
Mary Fisher writes

I'd like to know more about flint sickles.

It was a travellers journal I once read that stuck in my memory.
Apparently the locals preferred their flint sickles because:

1) They were much cheaper than steel ones.
2) They were lighter and easier to use.
3) They only needed 'sharpening' once every few days.
4) They cut better.

The date was about 1902.

If all the above is right why aren't they still used?

And how did they get a piece of flint big enough?

Or were they very small sickles?

The only result of your reply is to make me even more curious!

Thanks,

Mary

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.

Is this the right NG?

"Oz" wrote in message
...

You really are in the wrong group here. You should repost to
uk.business.agriculture. On the principle that I already said that, and
you didn't, you don;t know how to so I have x-posted this post. However
bear in mind that some posters do not x-post so a valuable reply my not
appear on sci.ag.

Gilgamesh writes
I noticed that many of the old field boundaries are curved in a sort
of
backward-S shape. The only book I could find in the library says this is
characteristic of enclosed strips which were ploughed by oxen (If I read
things aright, that means any time up to about mid-18th century), but
gives
no explanation beyond the suggestion that it made them easier to turn.

That is often correct.

Well, with a single-bottom plough, that does'nt make sense to me, unless
you
plough in one direction only.

ER, no. They were ploughed in lands. So the animals start to turn when
they are out of the furrow making the plough turn, and equally swing
wide coming in. These small changes add up each time you go round so the
field gets a 's' shape. This can still be seen when you have students on
cultivations in small fields.

An acre is already an 11-mile walk - would
anyone willingly double that to 22 miles?

Only if the land is very sloping.

The logical layout would be the
classic furrow long by stetch wide acre, although the land hereabouts is
relatively light, so you might well be able to plough more than an acre
in a
day (Is it just coincidental that an acre is usually quoted as much as a
skilled man with a scythe could reap in a day?

I have seen both 'definitions'. I doubt either are more than piecework
estimates. Chains, poles, perches and furlongs are very old
measurements.

The field layouts for
Champion Country were probably set before the Black Death, when reaping
was
done with a sickle)

Reaping was still done with flint sickles in parts of scotland in the
start of the 30C.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.

Until you cross-posted, uk.business.agriculture didn't show up on the list
of ngs. There is something odd going on since I switched to an @anytime@
connection. Now I can see it, I'll use that for further queries.

Thanks for your comments - the field boundaries I had noted were mostly
around the 200-250 yard mark, that's why I suggested a single stetch rather
than lands, obviously, once the strip shape was established, you would
continue to plough it that way - anything else would leave a lot of short
work up to the berms between strips (more likely ditches in this case since
they are mostly on the flood plain of the Wom brook).
Yes, I know the sickle is still in use - although we had progressed to
steel, I used one 2 or 3 times in the 1950's & 60's to open up the
cornfields for the self-binder - and Orwell notes the use of the sickle in
North Africa between the wars (as well as plough teams of an ox & an ass)
--
May glorious Shamash make his face to shine upon you

Gilgamesh of Uruk
(Include Enkidu in the subject line to avoid the spam trap)

Is this the right NG?

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...

"Oz" wrote in message
...

Reaping was still done with flint sickles in parts of scotland in the
start of the 30C.

Pardon? I can't even hazard a guess on that one.

let me rephrase ....

start of the 20C ...

the convention would be C20th ... or even C30th ... but at least we'd have
understood.

I'd like to know more about flint sickles.

Mary

Better?

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be
accepted.

They have "teeth" made of dressed flakes of flint set in a wooden handle
(originally a jawbone IIRC) In some parts of the world, they still use
obsidian (black volcanic glass) for very similar reasons.

--
May glorious Shamash make his face to shine upon you

Gilgamesh of Uruk
(Include Enkidu in the subject line to avoid the spam trap)