The smallest house in the High Country conceals its appeal. While Sir Thomas Smyth was conceiving and building the fine Hill Hall, an artisan was eyeing a strip of waste land by the side of the road in the north of the High Country. The outcome was Oak Cottage.
Oak Cottage, Clatterford End, with its oak tree relief in the external plasterwork, is thought to be a rare survival of a squatter’s dwelling¹. The practice of building a house on a piece of land to which the squatter had no title was widely encountered. Suitable sites were sometimes found on common land or in woods, generally well away from villages. Of their nature, such margins would occupy poorly productive or steeply sloping land or regions liable to flood. The dwelling erected would likely be of rudimentary construction with no garden and foregoing such amenities as a back entrance². They were common in areas such as the New Forest. Generally, the squatter had no immediate right to the land but in English law “squatter’s rights” rested on the concept of adverse possession, the adverse possessor having been in peaceful and undisputed possession of the land for 12 years³.
At the time of the building of Oak Cottage, the increase in such dwellings across the country was of concern; not only were they uncontrolled, they were often poorly built and poorly maintained. An Act, passed in the reign of Elizabeth I, sought to restrict such developments by “cottagers and paupers”. A second act in 1662, the Act of Settlement, set out to limit these developments by restricting the movement of those citizens who were not freeholders or who could not afford a rent of £10 per year. There followed “ideologically inspired squats” and on one occasion paupers squatted in the towers of Windsor Castle⁴.
Returning to Oak Cottage, the original house was, notably, very small. A single room on the ground floor led to the only room on the second floor. The floor dimensions are just 4.88m by 3.66m. A chimney (1.98 x 1.22m) heats the ground floor. Although, the base of the chimney is built of bricks, commonly used in the 16th and 17th centuries, there is some evidence to suggest that this chimney might have been be a replacement for a timber framed stack.
There is further evidence of some structural changes. The floor appears to have been raised, 76mm in the west wall and 180mm in the east wall, the discrepancy apparently to correct the building’s list to the east. The present door and window have been added to the east wall, and no evidence of either is apparent in the original frame.
The very survival of Oak Cottage perhaps indicates a higher standard of construction and craftsmanship than is hinted at above. The timber framing is properly constructed. All the studs were pegged into the wall plates and tie beams. Both north and south walls had primary bracing, but this remains only on the latter. The side walls are lightly braced. Interestingly, each of the four corner posts is a different shape, the builder probably using just what he had available at the time. The conclusion is that the squatter was maybe a carpenter with good knowledge of contemporary building techniques.
John Walker has summarised some of the dating features. The use of jowled corner posts declined towards the end of the 16th century. Joists are very narrow and laid on their narrower side, suggesting a date later rather than earlier in the 17th century. The primary bracing in the end walls was common in the early 17th century. However, evidence of open diamond mullion windows and a frame that was once exposed argues towards its construction in the first half of the 17th century. The conclusion is that Oak Cottage is indeed contemporary with Hill Hall!
In 1984, Oak Cottage was in need of some restoration. The plaster was stripped to expose the timber frame. While scaffolding poles supported the wooden sill, foundations, of concrete and some depth, according to the current building regulations, underpinned the cottage for the first time in its 350 years existence. Modern amenities were added to the cottage in a new construction at the south end to replace the lean-to outshot.
¹ This article is based on a detailed survey of the cottage carried out by John Walker in 1984. John Walker’s expert notes have remained unpublished. ² William G. Savage, “Rural Housing” (T. Fisher Unwin, 1915) ³ Dennis Hardy and Colin Ward, “Arcadia for All” (Mansell, 1984).