Compared to enclosed parks, on which much has been published recently, forests and chases (the ‘royal’/'private’ distinction cannot be meaningfully maintained, according to Jones) are difficult territory for archaeologists; even if a perambulation exists, it may not spell out boundaries that are easy to locate today, and even a perambulation did not fix them for all time. Fluidity of size is matched by fluidity of terrain; the uplands of the north involved great tracts subject to forest law, as Winchester shows, but the Welsh borders had many more small patches, investigated by Silvester. They were not confined to high ground, however, nor dictated by geology; although clays, gravels and sands that lent themselves to woods and wood-pasture were more likely to be brought under forest law than intensively cultivated limestone and chalk, much of central England nevertheless was preserved hunting territory, even though cultivation was not prevented, as Thomas's mapping of ridge and furrow in Bernwood shows. Nor was the Norfolk Breckland made forest despite its heaths, nor large parts of the Weald of Kent and Sussex despite its woods.

The last observation arises from viewing the useful prefatory map, a reminder that this volume, a prequel to one on the post-medieval period, arises from a mapping exercise undertaken as part of research funded by St John's College, Oxford, the British Academy and the Marc Fitch Fund. The volume arises from an associated conference, and brings together various authors, most of whose names are familiar because they have worked on forests and related topics for many years; and, as with many such volumes, material that the authors have presented in their previous work can be recognized. Useful though it is to have this brought together, omissions both geographical and thematic are obvious; the south west gets little mention, and the stress of most authors on hunting and on timber means that major industrial activities, such as stone and mineral extraction and smelting, and minor ones, such as clay potting, get little attention. To what extent these benefited from what, for other purposes, were restrictions, and whether – as perhaps in the Weald – they developed as much outside as within areas where forest law applied, is not explored. Nor is much consideration given to the effect of the application of the law to zones previously exempt; in Purbeck, Dorset, for instance, monastic houses’ right of wreck on their estates was eroded because the whole island became forest in the thirteenth century. In the fourteenth century, Purbeck was called ‘warren’, despite its deer; the distinction may arise from conflicts over hunting claims, but Jones devotes only a short passage to the problem, mainly in relation to Sussex. Similarly, hawks, mews and hawking get several mentions, but not a chapter to themselves.

Fuel and commoners’ rights to it get attention, as indeed they should. Medieval demand was prodigious; the recent work by Jim Galloway and others has shown how supplies of timber to London had to be augmented with coal. It made woodland as important as arable land – what was the effect on Epping and other forests close to the capital, and indeed vice versa, if the restriction of vert and venison impeded tree-felling? Urban demand is not taken into account, though the cartloads of fuel granted to some religious institutions is – the amounts consumed in a few of them by members of the royal family must have been resented by the ordinary inmates – and the small priory at Studley, near Oxford, once received 100 cartloads (but not per day, as Thomas unfortunately goes on to say, and Butlin repeats; it was one horse load).

Production is on good-quality paper. Provision of four indexes seemed to me more to confuse than to help, but I could not fault their accuracy, except that Butlin's chapter has escaped attention. There are some fine colour illustrations, in Gillingham's case without any discussion in the text to justify its appearance or to explain what it shows. The font size is uncomfortably small, and sloppy proof-reading has insulted one of the contributors by leaving a string of question marks in the biographical statement. Ponderous footnoting makes the lengthy end-list of references unnecessary and of little value because it is not adequate as a bibliography: Foard (Rockingham), Riley and Wilson-North, Gillard, Cannell (all Exmoor), Fleming and Ralph, Saunders (both Dartmoor), are amongst the absentees. These faults might deter readers who want to pursue forest topics, which would be a pity because this volume shows that much remains usefully to be done. The accompanying website is easily found (<sjc.ox.ac.uk/forests>), but neither I, nor someone more computer-competent, could open the gazetteer, and messages sent to the contact address were returned as undeliverable.