As anyone will understand who knows Essex buildings, it is quite possible (notwithstanding what
had been said) that the medieval lodge, or part of it, survived embedded in the later building. At the
least, it should have been possible to recover something of its construction from the reused timbers.
But the Committee, lacking all sense of history, were not content with demolishing the building: they
must needs try to destroy the closes and level the site as though nothing had ever existed.
The site of New Lodge
Deer-parks, as well as Forests, had lodges. They were placed so that as much as possible of the park
might be visible from the lodge: the parkers needed to keep an eye on the deer. The same ought to be
true of Forest lodges, although there are not many ascertainable sites. The distribution of trees and
woods at the time the lodge was built needs to be taken into account.
In Enfield Chase, which was a non-compartmental Forest rather like Epping but more compact in
shape, four lodge sites are known. The original, now marked by a moat, was Camlet Lodge; it was in
the middle of the Chase, on a flat hilltop, with a not very good view unless there was a tower. In the
fifteenth century this was replaced by East, South and West Lodges.14 These are on three more abrupt
hills, forming a triangle with Camlet in the middle; they are slightly off the hilltops so as to give a
better view outwards towards the edges of the Chase. A map made by Westlake in 1700 (which may,
however, be tendentious) shows the Forest consisting of tree'd areas and plains, and suggests that
something then survived of the sight-lines from the lodges.
In Hainault Forest, according to Chapman and Andre's map, 'Henhault Lodge' was situated on Hog
Hill; this would have been the best viewpoint in the Forest, although in Chapman & Andre's time it
was much hemmed in by trees.
In Hatfield Forest, matters are easier. The Lodge, a fifteenth-century building, still stands; and this
was a compartmental Forest, divided into woods and plains, in which the woods had permanent edges
with banks round them. I have been able to show that it was placed at the precise spot that gave the
best view of the plains. The sight-lines between the woods converge exactly to within a few feet on
one end of the original lodge (Rackham 1989). (There are now many more trees in the plains, so that
the views can no longer be seen on the ground.)15
In Epping Forest the distinction between plains and tree'd areas was not. of course, formally defined.
The plains, however, seem to have been unexpectedly stable up to the nineteenth century. Of these, the
second biggest was Loughton Fairmead; * although smaller than Leyton and Wanstead Flats, it was in the
middle of the Forest and probably more important for the deer. Beginning to the west of Knighton Wood,
it ran north below Warren Hill; at the present Fairmead Pond it turned sharply westward to reach the edge
of the Forest by Lippetts Hill. It was thus some three miles long by 1/4 - 1/2 mile wide.
The earliest Ordnance Survey indicates that New Lodge was precisely placed on rising ground on
the outside of the bend in Loughton Fairmead (Fig. 3). It would have overlooked the whole of the
Fairmead to the south and west, as well as anyone coming into the Forest via Lippitts Hill. The
sight-lines were still well preserved in 1870, except that encroachment on the east of the Forest had
destroyed the south end of the Fairmead. More has changed (through lack of grazing) in the subsequent
120 years than in the previous 500. Trees have sprung up and the Fairmead is now largely overgrown;
the present Fairmead Bottom and Whitehouse Plain are shrunken remnants of it.
Other Lodges
The name New Lodge implies that somewhere there was an Old Lodge, but as far as I know the
site has never been discovered.
A long narrow Forest, such as Epping, would have been hard to cover from just one lodge, although
Loughton Fairmead would have been the place where deer were most likely to congregate. The
evidence for other lodges is meagre, and I must suppose that the Foresters did much of their business
from their homes outside the Forest.
In 1444 Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester issued this order:
Since there is not in the said Forest any lodge for the convenience of the ministers of my
lord the King . . . nor any pimfold for impounding and keeping cattle, swine, and sheep . . .
you cause to be newly constructed ... a lodge and a pimfold . . . one pair of stocks for the
punishment of evildoers in the Forest. . .16
* The name suggests that there was a fair here, like the fairs in Hainault and Hatfield Forests, hut there seems to he no record of it.
12