Davachs in Renfrewshire?

Davachs in Renfrewshire?

 

The only substantial evidence for davachs in Renfrewshire comes from place-names. We have three different names which incorporate the term ‘haddock’ or ‘haddoch’ and they are Haddockston (Houstoun parish), Goldenhaddock and Cornhaddock in Greenock parish. These are not recent names. Our references to Haddockston in Houstoun parish go back to 1452. (See Houstoun table).

 

However Haddock also appears as a personal name. The Rental Book of the Diocese of Glasgow, 1509-1570, was transcribed, edited and printed by Bain and Rogers, along with the Protocol Book of Cuthbert Simon, in: Liber protocollorum M. Cuthberti Simonis (Cuthbert Simon), 1499-1513; eds., Bain, J., & Rogers, C., London, 1875. English abstracts Vol I; Latin text Vol II. The Rental Book occupies pp 41-215 of Volume I. On pp 219-228 is an Appendix which gives translations of the Latin entries in the Rental Book. The Rental Book is subdivided into returns by Barony and within the Barony of Glasgow we find the following:

 

P 115 Margret Hoddok is rentalled in 8s 4d land in Weyster Daildowy, 1539/1540

Pp 152-3, 1553/4, Niniane Haddok, brother of Margreit (above) is rentalled in 12s 6d land in Wester Daldowye; plus another 4s 2d land in the same township.

P 178 1563/4 Niniaine Hadok consents to a new tenant in Westir Daldowe

P 205 1569, In the Barony of Carstairs, Jhone Hadok (presumably in right of his wife) is rentalled in 15s land in Carstairs.

 

The question then arises – did Haddock as a name come from the place, or did the place come from a family name? This is not an issue where we will be able to provide proof but I am inclined to believe the placename came first. The reason is very simple. The placename ‘Haddoch’ has a rational explanation and is found in the NE of Scotland where it represents ‘half-a-davoch’. This unit of land-assessment is also found in Gaelic-speaking areas where it appears as Lettoch (or similar). In English-speaking areas the word for ‘half’ was given in English so we have ‘haddoch’ – also abbreviated to ‘Haddo’. This provides a straightforward explanation for its occurrence as Haddockston, Goldenhaddock and Cornhaddock in Renfrewshire. If we assumed the personal name came first it would be more difficult to make sense of the names Goldenhaddock and Cornhaddock.

 

We have a good documentary pedigree for Haddockston, the last element of which probably represents ‘stone’ rather than ‘toun’. Perhaps there was a prominent boundary marker here. On 16 May 1627 we learn of a James Watson in Goldenhaddock who was one of those delivering the ‘answers’ to His Majesty’s Commission concerning the state of the parish of Greenock. (Reports on the State of Certain Parishes in Scotland, 1627, Maitland Club, Edinburgh, 1835, Parish of Greenock, p 190). Cornhaddoch and Cornhaddock appear in two versions of the Roy map from the middle of the eighteenth century.

 

We have a few other names which may represent davachs. The most likely is Gleddoch in Erskine parish. We should also note Ardoch or Airdoch in Eaglesham parish although this is less probable. We have a Glendauock in the Pont and Blaeu maps of Lochwinnoch parish which appears as Glendawok in Gordon(55). This looks to be the glen of Raith Burn (NS 2963/3063) but the name then disappears. Pudzeoch Burn NS 5167 serves as a western boundary for the King’s Inch, Renfrew, but more probably takes its name from ‘paddok’ which is an old Scots word for a frog or a toad. Finally, Spangoch behaves a little like ‘Haddoch’ in that over time the name became attentuated to Spango. We have occasional examples of the letter ‘d’ changing to ‘g’ (see under Doccanlie, Lochwinnoch parish) so perhaps this should be considered as a possible candidate. Was Spangoch once Spandoch with ‘g’ being substituted for ‘d’; later shortened to Spango rather as Haddoch in NE Scotland became Haddo?

 

(Loch Libo in Neilston parish is another example of a Renfrewshire name that has been shortened. RMP pp 92-96. W.W. Scott No 87, 1295 refers to Lochleboksyd. GD3/1/1/20/3 1528 has Lochlebochsyd).

 

So far this is not much to go on. I would only regard the 3 names in Haddock as hard evidence. Everything else falls under the heading of supposition. Furthermore there is almost no evidence in Renfrewshire that would allow us to say anything about the relationships between davachs and pennylands or davachs and merklands.

 

However there is a sense in which davachs may have left a ghostly outline in the records.

 

In the Paisley parish folder of this blog there is a file entitled “Paisley Abbey – merklands giving merks”. This examines a set of 70 Paisley properties to see if there is a link between land-valuations and silver rent paid. The conclusion was that such a link is clearly evident in the data.

 

Among the 70 there are 9 properties which did not pay a silver rent at all; they paid in oats. In the Rental manuscript we come across a periodic heading of ‘lands set for oats’ which featured these properties. Here also, there was a standard rental of 1 merkland returning 1 chalder of oats. Out of these 9 farms, which all lay around Paisley, I am going to select the three biggest:

 

Hillington, 9 merklands, returning 9 chalders of oats

Erkilston (Arkleston), 9 merklands, returning 9 chalders of oats

Inch, 18 merklands, returning 18 chalders of oats

 

These were large farms, not just by the standards of Paisley parish, but anywhere within Renfrewshire. Inch was particularly important, twice as valuable as Hillington or Arkleston. We also know that all three were classed as carucates. Land which later became known as Arkleston is given as a carucate in RMP pp 5-6, 1165 x 1173. Land which later became known as Inch is given as a carucate in the same document. Hillington was given as a carucate between 1226 and 1232. (See the file called “Early information about properties held by Paisley monastery” in the Paisley parish folder of this blog).

 

There has long been a suspicion that the term ‘carucate’ may have been given by early scribes to davachs. They were familiar with the Latin term for a ploughland; they may not have been familiar with the term davach which was possibly a Pictish word mediated through Gaels. What may have happened in Renfrewshire, enshrined in the foundation charter of Paisley Abbey, was that the scribe, probably a monk from Shropshire, labelled the native units the monastery was being gifted, as carucates.

 

We can give extra credibility to this proposal by looking at other documents from the same period. It took time for the native term ‘davach’ to be given a Latin guise. In the file ‘Towards a general theory of land-assessment’ (found in the ‘General Summaries’ folder of this blog) I have given examples of the earliest Scottish documents which refer to davachs. The first 6 instances all give a version of the word ‘davach’. It is not until 1323 that we meet the Latinised word ‘davata’.

 

But we can also see documents which may have been implying davachs without actually naming them:

 

RRS  II (131) c. 1171 x 1174 deals with a property in Fife and specifies forinsec service ‘pro dimidia carrucata terre Scotica’ (for half a ‘Scottish’ carucate).

 

RRS II (142) 1172 x 1174 refers to ‘dimidiam carucatam terre in Duldauach’ (Culdoich, Inverness-shire). The second element of the place-name ‘Dul-dauach’ is ‘davach’ and this davach either was, or contained, a half-carucate. The place-name continued for centuries because we can see it in Laing Charters (518) 1546, (1726) 1615 and (2008) 1627.

 

RRS II (469), probably 1205, deals with property in Fife. The requisite forinsec service is described as ‘quantum pertinet ad dimidiam Carrucatam terre scotticam in Karelis-schire’ (as much as pertains to a ‘Scottish’ half-carucate in Crail-shire). Just as in RRS  II (131) the carucate is described as being ‘Scottish’.

 

Implicit in this description is a distinction between ‘Scottish’ carucates and other (‘normal’) carucates. Perhaps the scribes were accommodating a native ‘Scottish’ unit (the davach) by labelling it as a particular type of carucate.

 

The three properties in Renfrewshire remained in monastic hands until the Reformation. They all paid rent in oats rather than cash. The fact that another 6 properties around Paisley did the same implies that these, too, were amongst the farms acquired early by the monastery. We have one arithmetic problem though. If Inch, Arkleston and Hillington were all carucates then why was Inch an 18 merkland whilst Arkleston and Hillington were only 9 merklands?

 

This is not an insuperable problem. The fact that two properties (Arkleston and Hillington) suggest a carucate was valued at 9 merklands gives us our baseline. Inch is the odd one out but its value of 18 merklands is not random; it is worth double either of the other two. The likeliest solution is that the Inch reflected in the fifteenth-century Rental book was now 2 carucates, most likely by the inclusion of other properties.

 

If we assumed a davach was the equivalent of 9 merklands then what would be our theoretical number of davachs in Renfrewshire? We have c. 2125 merklands (minimum) so 2125/9 gives approximately 236 davachs. (If, instead, we reckoned on 18 merklands to a davach then the total would be 118 davachs).

 

For comparison, the summary tables elsewhere in this blog give minimum returns of about 265 davachs in Sutherland, 276 in Ross and 198 in Caithness. A figure of 236 davachs for Renfrew does not seem outlandish but it has to be stressed this is just a notional figure.