While change was taking place on Wolverton’s western edge agriculture still remained the engine house of the economy. The new types of business at Stony Stratford may have been a welcome supplement to the manor’s economy but manorial life on the largest part of the manor was probably unchanged from the 11th century.

500 years elapsed from the Anglo Saxon settlers to the Norman establishment and we know extraordinary little about the period. Most of what we know can only be pieced together from archaeology and studies of land use form the period. There is very little documentary evidence which we can tie to Wolverton.
It requires a real effort of imagination to reconstruct life in those times. The local lord probably had the resources to construct a cruck-built hall, which could house his family and his principal followers. There was no privacy. People ate, talked, entertained, copulated and slept in a single room. It is possible that the kitchen was an outbuilding. The poorer peasants lived in small hovels of their own making, with low walls made of interleaved branches and filled with mud, together with roofs of thatched straw, unsupported by strong timbers and vulnerable to storms. Farming, as described earlier, was limited by the technology of the age, and probably only supported a handful of families.
Beyond the time of Wulfhere, who probably prevailed in the late 6th century we know little detail until the evidence of the Domesday Book. As the kingdoms developed Wolverton fell largely under the control of the King of Mercia where it became a frontier settlement on the edge of the Danelaw, where the Ouse became a border. It appears unlikely that Wulfhere founded a dynasty and at Domesday there is no single ruling family. It is almost certain that in the upheaval of these centuries no single family left its mark. Indeed, by the time of the Domesday record, there were three thanes on the Wolverton manor, neither one of them particularly powerful. Circumstances may have been fluid in each of these centuries. The only stable pattern that one can detect in the trend to land ownership and the development of hierarchies. The frequently-used phrase in the Domesday Book is “he could sell” when referring to the saxon thanes who once had possession of land, indicating that they had independent rights of ownership.
The peasantry meanwhile continued to do what they always did, try to scratch a subsistence living from the soil. Lords came and went, but while they were there they exacted their demands. Death and taxes it seemed were life’s only certainties. It would be wrong, however, to envision the peasantry as a homogeneous mass. Social mobility was possible then as in all societies at all times. And although all peasants were engaged in more-or-less the same activity, there were degrees of social and economic standing.
A treatise on estate management, known as the Rectitudines Singularum Personarum The Management of People), written in the early 11th century sets out three classes of peasant and probably fairly reflects the existing or emerging economy. The author describes three classes: the genat, the gebur and the kotsetla. There were of course slaves below these ranks. The geneat, at the head of the peasantry, while not free of service, was free from much of the routine drudgery and was expected to perform a range of general duties, often requiring some skill. He was entrusted with errands for his lord, some guard duties, maintaining the fences around the lord's house. The gebur was probably the forerunner of the Norman villein, a man who may have had up to 30 acres to tend and was committed to two days a week service on the lord's land and three days a week at harvest and seeding time. He was also assessed at various rents from his own land. The kotsetla, in the third tier, was the cottarius or bordarius of the Domesday Book, probably with 5 acres or so to till for his personal needs in return for work on the lord's desmesne every Monday and three days a week in August.
By the 7th century Western Europe was connected by trade to the Mediterranean world. The Caliphate of the Islamic world and the Byzantine Empire fostered a demand for extensive trade and even the outlying fringes of Europe were drawn into this highly developed web. Archaeological evidence provides us with artefacts from the Mediterranean, probably traded for metals such as tin and slaves to reinforce the labour force. During this period market centres, or emporia, began to emerge, or re-emerge in some instances. The overall picture is incomplete. Sites at London (Lundenwic), Ipswich (wic) and Southampton (Hamwic) are known to have been quite important. Other settlements across the south and east have been identified although the overall picture is indistinct.
In our local context there may have been some sort of trading centre at Buckingham and at Newport. Based upon our assessment of the later evidence one can assert with some confidence that there was no such trading post in Wolverton. Any trading needs (and this was still a society without much currency) could probably be met through occasional fairs at other centres.
The 12 to 15 generations from the departure of the Roman colonisers in 400 AD to the eleventh century, is a period where we can witness the results of social change without being able to supply a narrative as to how and why that change occurred. Historians of the 19th and 20th centuries who nourished the idea of the “dark ages”, a period of barbarity between Roman and Christian civilization. Even so, the archaeological evidence is accumulating from partial excavations and more advanced techniques of analysing land deposits and consequently newer theories are emerging which cause reconsideration of traditional views.
One agricultural practice which did emerge in these years before the conquest was the open field system. Rather than the system which might have applied during the Celtic period where families farmed sections of land around their own households, a highly organised system emerged whereby large open fields were farmed in strips by individuals. Crop rotation was practiced, with one field being left fallow each year. Anglian society had reached a level of organisation that permitted the development of the sophisticated three field system which allowed two fields under cultivation and a third lying fallow to allow the soil to recover its nutrients. Some have theorized that this system developed from a two field system, but more recent scholarship takes the view that the two field system was localized to Wiltshire and the south west and that the Midlands had always practised a three field system of cultivation. This open field system was the means by which these Anglians practised agriculture. That is, the cultivatable area was divided into strips of land. Individuals or families cultivated these strips and acquired customary rights over time.
It is possible that this agricultural revolution was the cause of the relocation of the Wolverton village. The first Anglian settlers had established themselves on the unoccupied land at Wolverton Turn, as mentioned earlier, but at some time before the 9th century they appear to have relocated to the lower ground. There are no clear reasons why. It may have had something to do with the growth in numbers of the Anglian community or to developments in farming practices, or a combination of these and other factors. As they were able to claim and farm the better land it must have made more sense to relocate the core of the village closer to the great fields.
The higher ground may historically have been wooded or scrub land and was probably undeveloped at the time of the conquest. A lot can be learned from names. The weald at Calverton probably extended across the Watling Street for some way and names from this area can offer some insight into the gradual clearing. Fuller’s Slade, for example, was a green clearing in a wooded area either cleared by a man named Full, or Fuller or Fowler, or held by someone of that name when it was first recorded.1 Greenleys (sometimes Grindleys) suggest also that green meadows have been cleared from wooded land. The furzes and bush fields to the south east of the manor suggest rough land that was probably not cultivated early. The area now known as Warren farm was likely a wooded area used for hunting rabbits – the warren.
The Warren may still have been wooded at this time, and certainly the higher land adjacent to the Calverton Weald must have been covered with woods. Wood was a resource for building and for fuel and probably under the control of the lord. Peasants would be given permission to harvest broken twigs and deadwood on the ground but would not be allowed, on pain of severe punishment, to cut down trees without payment.
So you could draw a fairly convincing picture of a manor that by the late 11th century had only developed alongside Bradwell Brook and the Ouse. Gradually, and probably over these two centuries, more land was cleared for arable purposes and for pasture. The work was extremely hard. Each tree had to be cut down by hand and the stump dug out. In addition these assarts, as they were called, were undertaken in a man’s spare time, on top of his hard work in his own fields and on the lord’s domain.
One practice, which expanded the amount of available land, was the founding of priories or monasteries on poor land. The foundation of Bradwell Priory by Meinfelin was typical. Meinfelin could earn some credit in heaven at no great cost to himself and the monks in subsequent generations would do the work to clear the land and make it productive.
This land usage continued until the enclosures began in the 16th century, but even if it had provided for a growing population for a century or so it was never much more than subsistence agriculture. While everything looked promising when Edward I’s youngest son succeeded to the throne in 1307, matters were infinitely worse eight years later with two successive harvest failure. The years 1315 to 1317 were subject to abnormally heavy rainfall and the yield was dire. In Wolverton we can picture most of the meadows close to the river being flooded and the higher clay lands becoming waterlogged. Prolonged rainfall inhibiting the ripening of crops and delayed the harvest. It was hard enough to preserve enough food for the winter months in normal years, but to encounter successive crop failures must have led to famine and the consequent death of both people and animals. Wolverton villagers would have cared more about this than Edward’s disastrous defeat at Bannockburn in 1314, although in their superstitious minds they may have connected the former as a presager of the famine.
There was no happy way out of a famine in medieval times. Food storage was limited and once supplies were used up there was no vehicle for providing aid. Valuable stock animals had to be slaughtered and inevitably people died of malnutrition or starvation.
Stock animals were expensive and not every peasant could afford them. Cattle and sheep were smaller animals than they are today and their yields of milk, wool, leather and meat were correspondingly diminished. The biggest challenge was to keep the animals away from the crops, in part the responsibility of the cow herd and shepherd, but just in case the village also employed a hayward (hay guard) to make sure that animals did not stray onto arable land. Some enclosures may have been built, either hedged or protected by earth bank or ditches to keep stock animals enclosed in winter.
Certain specialized jobs developed in this economy. The Reeve was a man employed by the lord of the manor as an administrator. He would ensure that services dues were met, that tithes were paid, and that disputes between the villagers were resolved.
The Hay Ward was often an assistant to the Reeve but his main function was to organise and control the cropping of hay. In all communities tis was a significant crop necessary for winter feed. All of the meadows in the north of the manor would be closely supervised by the hayward. He would determined when the grass could be mown and what portions were taken by the peasants and what portion reserved for the lord. He would determine the times when the meadows could be used for pasture and when they could not. At other times of the year he would be the enforcer if livestock on the commons got out of control and started to feed on the arable fields. He would give warnings to the owners of the cattle and possibly levy fines.
On the Watling street it was probably more of the same, except that here, innkeepers would have larger buildings and outhouses and a strip of land going back from the main street.
We could also present the argument that Wolverton grew as two villages. The manor village and the settlement at Stony Stratford. Their different purposes meant that they grew on different models. Whereas the Wolverton village developed irregularly, (and as it turned out impermanently) the west side of the Watling Street was defined by the road, and houses that were built there fronted the street with a back yard that may have extended to the footpath that once marked the eastern edge of Stony. And it is clear from later developments that these plots varied in size.

----
1 Fullwell appears in Radcliffe Deeds

Medieval Farming was based upon large open fields which were communally farmed. The lord controlled rights of access to the land, usually in return for payment of a portion of produce, or services, or money, or sometimes a combination of all three. From the labourers point of view these rights were customary and could be passed from father to son and so on. Typically 30 acres was held to be sufficient to support a family. The local picture was often more complicated than this, but as a general description this is how the manor worked. The large fields were divided into strips and crops were rotated each year. One field could be left fallow for one year in every three.
Professor Hyde’s analysis of Wolverton’s three great fields and the Lord’s demesne was developed from the 18th century enclosure map on page 180. He uses the later names to describe the make-up of the three fields of Wolverton. One of the fields, he explains, extended from Stony Stratford to the mill drive and was bordered to the south by the Wolverton Road. Thus all the fields named Rylands - a good giveaway to the arable properties of the soil - were in this field.
The second field was to the south of the Wolverton Road, starting at the corner turn and encompassing Barr Piece and Barr Close, Marron Fields, Dean's Close,  Roger's Holm and Lower Slade.  This was the land mostly covered by the Railway Works, McCorquodale's and the 19th century town.
Barr (OE baere) means barley and plainly takes its name from what was grown there. It is likely that the name Atterbury, often found in Wolverton and area, can trace its origin from this or a similar named field in the area. When surnames originated in the 14th century people were quite as likely to take their name from the place where they lived. Thus John atte Barre (John at the Barley Field) became in time, Atterbury.
I am not certain of the origin of Marron, but it may possibly come from the Old English maere, meaning great
The third field included Colt's Holm, Linces, Upper Hey, Kent's Hook and Debb's Hook and the Severidge. Great Dickens (great diggings) was probably part of the lord's demesne. Linces, from linchets meaning ledges of ploughed earth gives us a clue as to how this land was traditionally
used. Kent's Hook and Debb's Hook, meaning Kent's and Debb's corner respectively are also ancient Saxon names.
Nash Meadow, beside the river, was always pasture land.
The Lord's Demesne was probably the land that later became identified as the park, which was the land after enclosure that was reserved for the Longuevilles.
A lord was the pivotal figure in the manorial system which emerged after 1066. His wealth came from appropriating the best land for himself and requiring the peasantry on his manor to work his land for him. You could view this as a modified form of slavery or a version of tax in kind. In return the peasant got sufficient land for himself and his family and a certain security of tenure. Most scholars now believe that the so-called Feudal System never quite operated in the pure form I have described and that certainly after the plague years in the middle of the 14th century the old system gave way to one based upon money.
The first baron, Manno le Breton, established a motte and bailey castle near to the present site of Holy Trinity church and laid claim to the adjoining land for his demesne (domain). This would include the later named fields, Fiddler's Butts, Morter Pitts, Home Park, High Park, Park Meadow, Low Park, Kiln Close and Ludkin's Closes.
Fiddler's Butts was probably used for archery practice and Hyde suspects that Ratcliffe Close was also used for recreational purposes. The Morter Pitts would have been used to extract lime and Kiln Close suggests that there were once kilns on the present site of Wolverton Park House. Low Park was the original village settlement.
As I have already mentioned the great part of the manor to the south was not considered suitable arable land in earlier centuries. The Greenleys area, the Ardwell Fields (from OE aeord - meaning rough), the Furzes and the Bushy Fields were given over to pasture for the cattle and pigs. After enclosure these fields were used for sheep grazing, which was highly profitable when wool was about the only substance used for textiles. 
While the open field system was still in operation this land would not have been enclosed and may have resembled a heath. It was probably known as Wolverton Common, but due to the early enclosure of these lands the name has been lost to history.