Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
The South Harris machair: sources and settlements
Emma J Holmes MackinnonRelated papers
Machair nan Eilean Siar (Machair of the Western Isles)
Scottish Geographical Journal, 2005
The Smertae and the need for the Brochs of Scotland
The Highland Scottish Tribe recorded by Ptolemy as the Smertae (variously Smaertae) have remained a mystery. Even heavyweight "authorities" have clutched at straws-and because of their backgrounds (largely in history and linguistics, and missing geography and any firm connection with the real world) they have come to no useful conclusions. While this paper does aim to provide one or two answers, mainly the intention is to frame and direct future research, offering others with expertise they may not even have realised they had an opportunity to slot their knowledge into a pattern which makes sense.
Roman and native in south-east Scotland: the problem and the potential
2002
The lecture presented a resume of the problems inherent in the study of the inter-relationship beween Roman and native in Scotland, both indicating the nature of, and bias within, the evidence, and reviewing its potential. The need to understand the nature of native settlement before, during and after the Roman occupation was stressed. A regional approach to this study was advocated, with emphasis on multiperiod landscape studies. The value of aerial survey in particular was highlighted and the methodology for analysing material so obtained laid emphasis on the need for mapping and detailed transcription as a basis for morphological analysis. The need to examine the chronological development of settlement in a regional context was also stressed and the value of comparing different regions demonstrated. The implications of this regional approach for our understanding of the Roman period were considered, taking the examples of Angus, Fife and East Lothian, the lecturer's own resea...
The Political Geography of North East Scotland in Roman Times v3
This paper, originally written two years ago, has been badly in need of updating in the light of the dramatically new understanding of early Pictish and Scottish history set out in papers I have written subsequently. What is new in this version of this paper is the identification of the Boresti as "The Dolphin Tribe" otherwise "The Moraymen". The specific problem arose from a resistance to an intelligent interpretation of Ptolemy's geography of Scotland - creating a milieu in which an approach to the prehistory/development of Pictland is impossible. I addressed this problem in my book "Arthur: Legend, Logic & Evidence" - so now sense can be made of evidence on the ground; the dynamics of political power and the results of unrecorded wars which led to the boundaries the confederated Pictish kingdom can be seen - not perfectly, but with a different order of magnitude of resolution.
Roman Scotland: a guide to the visible remains by D J Breeze. Pp. 62, figs. 33. Frank Graham, Newcastle, 1979. £1.20
Glasgow Archaeological Journal, 1979
Settlement-Names and Society: analysis of the medieval districts of Forsa and Moloros in the parish of Torosay, Mull (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Glasgow, 2017)
This is a study of settlement and society in the parish of Torosay on the Inner Hebridean island of Mull, through the earliest known settlement-names of two of its medieval districts: Forsa and Moloros. The earliest settlement-names, 35 in total, were coined in two languages: Gaelic and Old Norse (hereafter abbreviated to ON). The settlement-toponymy provides irrefutable evidence that ON-speakers settled locally and named their settlements in ON. In subsequent centuries, long after ON ceased to be spoken locally, these ON settlement-names were perpetuated by local Gaelic-speakers. Many of these ON settlement-names are still used locally and are recorded on modern maps; others have fallen out of use. The same can be said of the earliest settlement-names of Gaelic origin. New etymological analysis of the earliest known forms of these settlement-names, considered alongside local pronunciation where available, forms the basis of this thesis. Much of this analysis challenges previous research. A number of the settlement-names have not hitherto been located or been subject to etymological analysis, no previous study having comprehensively engaged with their earliest forms. The earliest known forms are recorded in fiscal evaluation dating to the final decade of the 15th century and, as such, the settlement-names provide a window on the Late Medieval period. The settlement-names also provide an invaluable insight into settlement and society in the Norse period; i.e. the period in which ON was spoken locally. Norse is employed here as both an adjective, as in the Norse period, and a noun, in reference to speakers of ON. Thus, application is broadly to what is now Scandinavia and contemporary inhabitants thereof, as opposed to the more typical modern application of Norse to Norway and its inhabitants. Individual place-name elements employed in ON settlement-names provide an insight into how the local landscape was perceived and utilised agriculturally by these immigrant ON-speakers. In some cases, proposed personal names identify individuals associated with specific settlements. At least one ON settlement-name is likely to provide evidence of the religion of those who coined the name. Syntactic analysis of the Gaelic settlement-names highlights the possibility that some were coined in the Early Medieval period. It also identifies names which are perhaps unlikely to have been coined before the early 10th century. Loan-words borrowed in both directions, i.e. from Gaelic to ON and from ON to Gaelic, are identified and these reveal something of the chronology of individual settlement-names, in addition to providing evidence for language contact. The distribution of ON settlement-names and the fiscal status of settlements bearing ON names can also reveal something of the status of immigrant ON-speakers and the status of local Gaelic-speaking communities. The date of the earliest known forms probably post-dates the period in which these ON names were coined by around six centuries and this clearly allows for significant displacement of settlement-toponymy. However, settlement-names of ON origin apply to both settlements of principal and of relatively low fiscal status and the implication is that there was a significant amount of continuity in settlement-toponymy up to the date of the earliest known fiscal sources. The dearth of contemporary textual sources for the Early Medieval and Norse periods and of local archaeology relating to these periods identifies these settlement-names as invaluable sources of information for contemporary settlement, society and language in the districts of Forsa and Moloros. Part One Chapter 1 sets the research in context in providing geographical, geological, topographical, tenurial, ecclesiastical and fiscal information for the two districts. Chapter 2 comprises a review of previous studies on local settlement-toponymy. Chapter 3 identifies the sources which provide the earliest known forms and outlines the employed methodology. Chapter 4 provides an historical framework and engages with Norse toponymy furth of Mull across Britain and Ireland. Chapter 5 presents discursive analysis addressing the predominant research questions. Chapter 6 presents conclusions. Part Two The place-name survey presents raw spatial data and etymological analysis, where not included in chapter 5, for each of the 35 settlement-names.
The Gaelic clans of Galloway
The importance of Galloway's Gaelic clans (or kindreds) on the medieval and later history if south-west Scotland has been neglected. The research presented here re-assesses their importance and significant influence on the history of the region.
The South Harris Machair: Sources
and Settlements
Emma Jane Anderson
BA, MA (Hons)
Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of
Research in Celtic Studies
School of Humanities
College of Arts
University of Glasgow
September 2014
2
Acknowledgements
This project has been made possible by financial support from the Thomas Reid award
(University of Glasgow College List), and the Duncan and Morag MacLean Studentship
awarded by Celtic and Gaelic, University of Glasgow. Friends in Harris and Glasgow,
staff at the School of Scottish Studies, Edinburgh, particularly Ian Fraser, who took a
morning out of his retirement to set me on my path, and the School’s wonderful
archivist, Caroline Milligan. Also Jake King, Bill Lawson (who suggested the machair area
as a suitable study) and the many others who have helped me to locate sources and
provided stimulating discussion on names.
I wish to specifically acknowledge the unstinting personal support of the Celtic and
Gaelic staff at the University of Glasgow. This project has been interrupted, variously,
by illness, childbirth, house moves, serious illness in my family, conference papers, PhD
applications and of course exams. From academic advice down to tea and sympathy,
they have all been absolutely outstanding in their support.
Dr Simon Taylor in
particular has been an endless source of wisdom, advice and biscuits. All errors in this
thesis of course remain absolutely my own.
Final thanks go to my family, particularly Neil, my husband, for his boundless patience
in relation to everything from childcare to IT support. Without his support this thesis
would almost certainly never have been completed. Thanks to our son, Duncan for
discovering the value of sleep at a sufficiently early age to render me sane enough to
get back to work. Most of all, thanks are due to John Anthony Holmes, my Father. It is
he who first sparked my interest in place-names during family holidays in Cornwall
where he would have me collect –pen and –porth names in order to keep me quiet on
long journeys, and then help me to work out what they ‘meant’. It is my Dad who
bought me my first maps and globes and troubled himself to sit down and explain them
to me. I also have him to thank for inspiring me through his own ceaselessly enquiring
mind: despite circumstances which meant he had no access to formal education beyond
the age of 15, he combined a relentless curiosity about the world around him with a
formidable work ethic, teaching me that intellectual challenges lead to appreciation
and enjoyment of one’s existence, and not just ‘pieces of paper’, however affirming
those might be.
3
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................. 7
1.1 THE PROJECT ................................................................................... 7
1.2 TOPOGRAPHY ................................................................................... 8
1.3 LANGUAGE AND POPULATION ................................................................... 8
1.4 EXISTING SCHOLARSHIP .......................................................................... 9
1.5 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................. 12
2 HISTORICAL EVIDENCE ........................................................................ 14
2.1 PRE-NORSE PERIOD ............................................................................ 14
2.1.1 PRE-HISTORIC EVIDENCE: SETTLEMENT PATTERNS AND CELTIC LINKS .......................... 14
2.1.2 EVIDENCE FOR EARLY MEDIEVAL GAELS IN THE HEBRIDES ...................................... 16
2.2 MEDIEVAL SETTLEMENT ........................................................................ 18
2.2.1 ICELANDIC SOURCES ........................................................................... 18
2.2.2 IRISH AND NORSE SOURCES: CONTACT CONSIDERATIONS ....................................... 19
2.2.3 INTERPRETING THE EVIDENCE .................................................................. 20
2.2.4 THE SETTLED NORSE .......................................................................... 20
2.2.5 IDENTITY IN HEBRIDEAN-NORSE COMMUNITIES ................................................. 22
2.2.6 TAXATION SYSTEMS IN THE HEBRIDES .......................................................... 24
2.3 VALUATION: ACCOUNTS, ROLLS AND RENTALS ................................................ 26
2.3.1 FUNCTION AND PURPOSE ...................................................................... 27
2.3.2 REFLECTIONS OF LANDHOLDING ............................................................... 29
2.3.3 LINGUISTIC CONSIDERATIONS .................................................................. 32
2.4 EARLY MODERN AND MODERN PERIODS ........................................................ 34
2.4.1 DEAN DONALD MUNRO: A DESCRIPTION OF THE OCCIDENTAL I.E. WESTERN ISLANDS OF
SCOTLAND. ............................................................................................ 35
2.4.2 MARTIN MARTIN: A DESCRIPTION OF THE WESTERN ISLANDS OF SCOTLAND .................... 36
2.4.3 WILLIAM MACGILLIVRAY: A HEBRIDEAN NATURALIST’S JOURNAL 1817-1818 ................. 38
2.5 STATISTICAL ACCOUNTS AND ORIGINES PAROCHIALES SCOTIAE ............................... 40
2.5.1 OLD STATISTICAL ACCOUNT (1791-9) ........................................................ 40
2.5.2 NEW STATISTICAL ACCOUNT (1834-5)........................................................ 40
2.5.3 ORIGINES PAROCHIALES SCOTIAE (1854)...................................................... 41
3 MAPS, PLANS AND CHARTS .................................................................. 42
3.1 EARLY MAPS.................................................................................... 42
4
3.2 AINSLIE AND BALD .............................................................................. 45
3.2.1 THE AINSLIE GROUP .......................................................................... 48
3.2.2 THE BALD GROUP ............................................................................. 50
3.3 MARINE CHARTS ................................................................................ 61
3.3.1 CHARTS DRAWING ON AINSLIE ................................................................. 61
3.3.2 HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEY....................................................................... 62
3.4 THE ORDNANCE SURVEY ....................................................................... 68
3.4.1 THE ORDNANCE SURVEY ORIGINAL OBJECT NAME-BOOKS ..................................... 68
3.4.2 THE ORDNANCE SURVEY MAPS ................................................................ 73
4 SOUTH HARRIS SETTLEMENT-NAMES....................................................... 79
4.1 PLACE-NAME STUDIES IN HARRIS ............................................................... 79
4.1.1 A.A. CARMICHAEL ............................................................................ 79
4.1.2 F.W.L. THOMAS .............................................................................. 81
4.1.3 D.MACIVER ................................................................................... 83
4.2 ELEMENTS EMPLOYED IN HARRIS SETTLEMENT-NAMES ......................................... 84
4.2.1 DATING THE SETTLEMENT-NAMES: THE NORSE NAMES ......................................... 84
4.2.2 THE GAELIC NAMES ........................................................................... 88
4.2.3 EXISTING NAME CONSTRUCTIONS .............................................................. 92
4.3 GAZETTEER..................................................................................... 95
4.3.1 BORVE/NA BUIRGH ........................................................................... 96
4.3.2 HORGABOST .................................................................................. 97
4.3.3 LOSGAINTIR ................................................................................... 98
4.3.4 NISABOST ..................................................................................... 99
4.3.5 SCARASTA ....................................................................................100
4.3.6 SEILEBOST ...................................................................................101
4.3.7 TAOBH TUATH ...............................................................................103
4.3.8 SOUTH TOWN ................................................................................104
4.3.9 NORTH COPOPHAILL/ NORTH CAPOPHAILE (NF 97705 93477) AND SOUTH CAPOPHAILE (NF
96495 92477 ........................................................................................104
4.3.10 DRUIM A’ PHUIND ..........................................................................105
5 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................ 106
5.1 MAP SOURCES ................................................................................ 109
5.2 PRIMARY...................................................................................... 112
5.3 SECONDARY .................................................................................. 112
5
5.4 WEB RESOURCES ............................................................................. 117
Figure 1-1: Area of Study (South Harris Machair) .. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 1-2: Machair Areas of Scotland ................................................... 8
Figure 2-1: Topographical Features of the Seilebost Area .......................... 14
Figure 2-2:Broch Distribution in Scotland .............................................. 15
Figure 3-1 Pont/Blaeu (pub 1654) ....................................................... 43
Figure 3-2 Pont/Blaeu (pub. 1654) ...................................................... 44
Figure 3-3 Bald's Plan of Harris 1805 ................................................... 46
Figure 3-4 Ainslie's Map 1789 ............................................................ 47
Figure 3-5 MacKenzie's Map 1776 (L) and Ainslie's Map 1789 Map (R) .............. 48
Figure 3-6 Thomson's Map (1822) ........................................................ 49
Figure 3-7 Wyld’s Map (1846) ............................................................ 50
Figure 3-8: Thomson's Map (detail) .................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
Figure 3-9: Thomson's list of Sources, 1824 ........................................... 51
Figure 3-10 Arrowsmith's Map (1807) ................................................... 51
Figure 3-11 Arrowsmith 1807 (Long Island) ............................................ 52
Figure 3-12 Arrowsmith Map (detail) ................................................... 52
Figure 3-13 Black's Map (1862) .......................................................... 53
Figure 3-14 Bald Map Detail "Contents of Harris" ..................................... 54
Figure 3-15 Bald 1805 plan: Boundaries Highlighted ................................. 55
Figure 3-16 Bald Map Luskintire ......................................................... 56
Figure 3-17 Bald Map Nisibost area ..................................................... 57
Figure 3-18 Bald Map: Scarrista-North Town ......................................... 58
Figure 3-19 Huddart and Depot Generale de la Marine .............................. 61
Figure 3-20 Heather's Chart 1804 ....................................................... 61
Figure 3-21 Hydrographic Survey 1: Losgainntir Area ................................ 62
Figure 3-22 Hydrographic Survey 2: Nisaboist Area .................................. 63
Figure 3-23 Hydrographic Survey 3:Borgh Area ....................................... 63
Figure 3-24 Hydrographic Survey 4: Taobh Tuath Area .............................. 64
Figure 3-25 Hydrographic Survey: North Lewis 1849 ................................. 66
Figure 3-26 Hydrographic Survey, South Harris 1860 ................................. 67
Figure 3-27 Ordnance Survey 1st Ed 6in/Mile ...... Error! Bookmark not defined.
6
Figure 3-28 OSNB Inverness-shire Outer Heb. Vol 4/p.262 .......................... 68
Figure 3-29South Harris "Forest" 1in/Mile 3rd ed. (1911) ............................ 75
Figure 3-30 South Harris Forest Pop.ed. 1931 ......................................... 76
Figure 3-31 1in/Mile Pop.ed. (1923) .................................................... 77
Figure 4-1 Bald's Map 1805 (Boundaries Highlighted) ................................ 85
Figure 4-2 Bald's 1805 Map (detail) ..................................................... 93
Figure 4-3 1st ed. 6in/Mile Ordnance Survey Sheet XVII (1881) .................... 94
7
1 Introduction
1.1 The Project
The Outer Hebrides have been settled by speakers of a range of languages over
the centuries, with a variety of Celtic and Germanic languages making a
contribution to the toponymic record. By examining the name-coining choices
made by successive settlers, it is possible to gain an insight into how they
viewed and used the land. Despite this rich heritage, little work has been done
on place-names or indeed on the sources in which they might be found. Even
where existing-name constructions continue to be productive long after the
language of coining has disappeared can be insightful when one examines what
they are applied to: particular features likely to adopt this practice can emerge,
and the names themselves may offer insight into landholding and taxation
practices over time. The area chosen for this study is shown in Fig. 1 below, and
includes all settlements on the South Harris machair, from Losgaintir in the
north, to the settlements at the south end. At the south of the machair only
Taobh Tuath continues to exist as a settlement today.
The forms shown on the
map below will be used as the standard name-form throughout this thesis, as
they are taken from the most recent Ordnance Survey (OS) edition available
online via EDINA.1
Figure 1-1 Area of Study (South Harris Machair)
1
http://digimap.edina.ac.uk/digimap
1.2 Topography
The Isle of Harris shares a land mass with neighbouring Lewis, but is almost
separated from it by lochs Seaforth and Reasort. It is composed of Precambrian
lewissian gneiss, with anorthosite intrusions, responsible for the famous ‘moonrock’ appearance of parts of the island.2 Notably the island stood in for Jupiter
in ’2001: a space odyssey’. 3
Harris contains Clisham, which
at 799m is the highest hill in
the Western isles, and the
island is substantially more
mountainous
than
its
neighbours, particularly in the
north. 4 The island is divided
into North and South Harris by
the narrow isthmus at Tarbert,
with the southern part of the
island being characterised by Figure 1-2: Machair Areas of Scotland
rocky bays on the east and fertile machair on the west. As shown in Fig. 2
above, machair is found only in the north and west of Scotland (including
Orkney, Shetland, Outer and Inner Hebrides and a few mainland sites) and the
north-west of Ireland, and is an internationally important wildlife habitat.5
1.3 Language and Population
Census data groups Lewis and Harris together, which, while reflecting their
geographical status can present difficulties in obtaining sufficiently localised
data. However, 2011 data from the National Records office shows the current
population of the Isle of Harris at 1916, reflecting an established trend of
population decline. 6 This reflects a general trend of population ageing and
decline across the Western Isles, although recent population increases in Lewis
2
A.McKirdy and R. Crofts: Land of Mountain and Flood: The Geology and Landforms of Scotland. Edinburgh.
(Birlinn.2007) p.94 and C.Gillen: Geology and Landscapes of Scotland (Terra Publishing 2003) pp.63–4.
3
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/locations visited 08/04/2014
4
S.Johnstone, H. Brown and D.Bennet, D The Corbetts and Other Scottish Hills. Edinburgh. (Scottish
Mountaineering Trust 1990) p.240
5
http://www.snh.gov.uk/about-scotlands-nature/habitats-and-ecosystems/coasts-and-seas/coastalhabitats/machair/ visited 08/04/14 and http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/gcrdb/GCRsiteaccount231.pdf p.1
6
http://www.cne-siar.gov.uk/factfile/population/islandpopulations.asp accessed 10/04/14
9
Benbecula and Barra have yielded a potentially misleading figure of 4.5%
population increase since 2001. 7 Furthermore, a Comhairle nan Eileanan an Siar
(CneS) report on the census data indicated that birth rate in the Western isles
increased in line with overall population growth in the period from 2001-2011.8
While the Western Isles has the highest proportion of Gaelic speakers within the
population at 52% (with 61% of the population recording some Gaelic
proficiency), regional fluctuations are difficult to assess due to the methods of
data collection: while Lewis and Harris overall have the lowest proportion of
people with some Gaelic proficiency in the western isles at 59%, Scalpay, which
is situated adjacent to Harris, has the highest Gaelic proficiency at 80%. 9
Furthermore, it must be remembered that the language situation is not a static
picture: the proportion of children educated in Gaelic on Harris (which has two
schools offering GME (Gaelic Medium Education) has increased in recent years,
with the most recent primary 1 intake being predominantly to the GME stream,
most of whom would have been excluded from this census data as it only
requested information about individuals over the age of 3.10
1.4 Existing scholarship
Publications relevant to this thesis fall into several categories. These include
early studies, like D. MacIver’s Place-names of Lewis and Harris (1934) which is
essentially a collection of names accompanied by attempted interpretations
rather than a scholarly examination of name-elements. Scholarly approaches
follow a fairly long trajectory, and may focus on the names of a defined area,
coinings in a particular language or a combination thereof.
While no study specific to South Harris has ever been undertaken (to the best
knowledge of this author), studies of other parts of the Hebrides do exist,
although of course one should remember the dangers of comparing one island
with another.
7
Although all may be broadly categorized as ‘Hebridean’, the
ibid
http://www.cne-siar.gov.uk/factfile/population/documents/LACensusProfile2011.pdf accessed 10/04/14
9
ibid
10
ibid
8
10
settlement and linguistic records can be quite different, as can the sources that
provide the names. The early Irish foundation at Iona, has resulted in a wealth
of contemporary, or near-contemporary information for the early medieval
period for the Southern Hebrides, albeit of varying degrees of reliability. The
Western Isles however are virtually absent from the historic record: The islands
are referred to in a number of Old Norse (ON) sagas, but these offer little in the
way of identifiable place-names. Furthermore, many of the sources survive only
in later copy. Approaches to such evidence as there is will be dealt with in
Chapter 2 below. Scholarly studies of a local area might be argued to have
begun with the work of Captain F.W.L. Thomas, whose work with the
Hydrographic Survey and friendship with Alexander Carmichael provided him
with a wealth of information on which to base his hypotheses. Capt. Thomas
made a number of contributions towards the study of settlement in the
Hebrides, including some which touch on Harris place-names and which begin to
examine language contact issues in the Hebrides. These are discussed more fully
in Chapter 4.1. Books studying names across Scotland vary in focus and in
quality, but in terms of developing an effective approach to onomastic science
more widely, the work of W.J. Watson in the early part of the 20th century
marked a key stage of development. This was built upon in the work of W.F.H.
Nicolaisen, whose approach to the study of onomastics has done much to
contribute to the development of a scientific methodological framework for
name-studies, and whose 1976 book Scottish Place-names: their Study and
Significance is still a central work today.
Throughout the 20th century, scholarship in relation to the Western Isles
continued to develop: on one hand, there was an increasing interest in language
contact led by scholars such as Kenneth Jackson, while on the other, the role of
onomastics in unpicking the history of the western Isles in the period of Norse
settlement was realised. Indeed, the 1959 International Congress of Celtic
Studies included a paper on place-names from Magne Oftedal alongside
discussions of Norse-Gaelic contact and its impact on art, literature and
11
language although the proceedings were not published until 1975. 11 Oftedal’s
time living on Lewis resulted in his Village Names of Lewis in the Outer Hebrides
(1954), a study with obvious relevance to this thesis. Increasing interest in all
forms of onomastics led to the creation of bodies such as The International
Council of Onomastic Sciences, founded in 1949, and, more locally to the
present study, the Scottish Place-name Society, launched in 1996. Such bodies
contribute a great deal to our understanding of the broader toponymic heritage
of Scotland through publication outputs and conferences.
Regarding studies
specific to the Hebrides, Oddgeir Eysteinsson’s Norse Settlement-Names of
North Harris made a detailed examination of Norse names in North Harris as part
of an unpublished master’s thesis at the University of Aberdeen in 1992. This
examines only Norse names and does not extend either to Gaelic nomenclature
or indeed to the southern part of the island. Other notable studies include
Richard Cox’s The Gaelic Place-names of Carloway, Isle of Lewis (2002) and
Anke-Beate Stahl’s unpublished PhD thesis Place-names of Barra in the Outer
Hebrides.
All of these have a sound academic basis, with Cox in particular
taking a detailed approach to language and morphology. Both rely to a much
greater degree than this study on the evidence of informants, although a number
of place-name recordings from the 1960’s (sadly incomplete) held in the School
of Scottish Studies (University of Edinburgh) have been consulted.
While detailed surveys of the area are clearly in short supply, specialist studies
of particular elements, such as Gammeltoft’s detailed analysis of bolstaðrnames are of tremendous value, and also represents a recent innovation in a
long historiographical trajectory stretching from Marwick and Watson, through
Nicolaisen right up to Gammeltoft himself. Gammeltoft’s approach in his 2001
publication The Place-name Element Bólstaðr in the North Atlantic Area is
particularly noteworthy in that it examines one element over a large area. Given
that Norse involvement in the Northern and Western Isles was not uniform; this
study is particularly useful for examining the development of the element
bolstaðr in wide-ranging linguistic and social contexts. wider historical studies
11
Ó Cuiv (ed):The Impact of The Scandinavian Invasions on the Celtic-Speaking Peoples 800-1100 AD (Dublin
1975)
12
have much to contribute towards this study in terms of contextualisation, and
range from general surveys, such as Woolf’s From Pictland to Alba (2007),
through to the laudable and extensive work of genealogist and local historian Bill
Lawson, whose source collections, publications and personal opinions have all
provided stimuli for this project.
1.5 Methodology
There are two key aims for this project: the first is to identify and critically
discuss sources for Harris place-names, drawing them together in a manner that
has not been done to date, while the second is to discuss the evidence such
names provide for settlement and human activity in the south-west Harris area.
Due to the scarcity of relevant studies for the Harris area, the identification and
analysis of potential name sources of itself represents original research and will
be a central aspect of the project.
This will be presented as follows: Chapter 2 will examine evidence which might
be deemed ‘historical’ in the widest sense and will incorporate archaeological
evidence as well as material from early sources and chronicles for the
prehistoric to medieval period, and travel accounts and journals from the early
modern period onwards. It will also include evidence produced for a specific
purpose which can be securely dated, including Rentals, Valuation Rolls and
sources such as Statistical Accounts and Origines Parochiales Scotiae. Chapter 3
will focus on maps, estate plans and charts and discuss the imperatives and
methodologies
behind
their
production.
This
chapter
will
discuss
interdependencies between sources and the implications of this for the
cartographic record. The processes of data-collection for map-making and the
role of authorities and local informants will be discussed where appropriate. In
particular, this project will engage with recent technological developments as a
means of evidence collection.
The Ordnance Survey notebooks have very
recently been made available as a digitised resource at the time of writing. This
offers a huge number of advantages to the place-name scholar, and this thesis
will undertake a detailed examination of the name-books, not only as a source
of names for a gazetteer, but as a historical source in their own right. The name
13
books draw on an extensive range of resources, and wherever possible,
ambiguities over which sources are referred to will be resolved, by comparative
analysis of the name-data contained within them.
Chapters 4 and 5 of this thesis will focus on linguistic evidence in greater depth,
providing detailed examination of the elements identified in the sources
identified in chapters 2 and 3. Chapter 4 will deal with existing scholarship
specifically covering the machair area in their historical context and apply
relevant existing studies in discussion of the generic and specific elements found
in the machair area. Chapter 5 will present conclusions drawn from this study
and the accompanying gazetteer, which will be provided in chapter 4 for ease of
reference.
14
2 Historical Evidence
2.1 Pre-Norse Period
2.1.1 Pre-historic Evidence: Settlement Patterns and Celtic Links
Naturally fertile, the west part of Harris has been settled and cultivated for
several millennia, and Historic monuments, and are reflected in the onomastic
record:
Horgabost reflects the presence of a chambered cairn, and possibly
associated monuments at Nisabost, through the ON specific horgr (grave), while
Na Buirgh employs ON borg the element coined by Norse settlers to describe the
ancient ruined sites that they found upon their arrival rather than, as Martin
Martin wrote c.1695, the names settlers gave to their own forts.12
While the present-day landscape of Harris is largely devoid of trees, this is
unlikely to always have been the case, and as Megaw and Simpson have noted,
the Isles were likely to have been much more wooded at the time of the earliest
Norse settlement. 13 As
fig. 2.1 (right) shows,
small traces of wooded
land still remain, near
Horgabost
and
Na
Buirgh, and it seems
likely
both
that
this
area would have been
more extensive in the
early
medieval
Figure 2-1: Topographical Features of the Seilebost
Area
period
and that successive population groups would have deemed such fertile land,
with a read source of fuel and building materials, an ideal site for cultivationbased settlement.
12
Martin Martin: A Description of the Western Islands of Scotland Circa 1695 (Edinburgh 2002)
p.33
13
J. Megaw and D. Simpson: Introduction to British Prehistory (Leicester 1979) p.22
15
Seilebost is located next to multiple watercourses, providing superior
circumstances for water-loving willow trees to grow. A cognate attestation is
Sellebister, Orkney.14 By thinking about what the pre-historic landscape looked
like, it becomes clear that it is possible that such trees
were a feature at that site and offers a plausible
explanation for the name. The evidence of names such
as Seilebost can in turn challenge assumptions evident
in historiographical approaches: as Richard Cox has
noted, there has been a tendency to assume that the
deforestation of the Hebrides was due to a ‘scorched
earth’ approach by the incoming Vikings. 15 Seilebost
represents a coining referring both to settlement for
agricultural purposes and to the continuing presence of
trees known from pre-historic times in the period of
Norse settlement.
Figure 2-2: Broch
Distribution in Scotland
Early linguistic evidence is both scant and difficult to interpret; Ptolemy’s
writings provide a whole host of names which appear to be Celtic for the groups
who lived in Scotland c.200 AD.16 However, the problems of this evidence are
legion: we cannot be sure exactly where they applied to, who was included and
who the informant for these names was or indeed what language s/he spoke. We
can’t be sure whether these labels are what the groups in question called
themselves (endonyms) or whether these were simply exonymic reflections from
a Celtic-speaking outsider.
Archaeological evidence can once again help to build up a picture, although,
unsurprisingly, the record is varied, as is the degree of exploration. Although
examination of the archaeological record shows that people settled on the
Machair as early as the Mesolithic period, it also offers information about their
14
Gammeltoft, P: The Place-name Element Bólstaðr in the North Atlantic Area (Copenhagen 2001) p.145
R Cox:The Gaelic Place-names of Carloway, Isle of Lewis (DIAS 2002) p.2
16
I.Armit: Celtic Scotland (London 2005) p.69
15
16
cultural context: As Ian Armit has suggested, Bronze- and Iron-age round
structures represent a distinctively insular cultural difference from continental
Europe. 17 Of course, not all parts of the British Isles used exactly the same
structures, and regional variations, such as the concentration of broch-type
structures in the Northern and western Isles and down parts of the Western
seaboard show (See fig 2.2 above).18 However, this evidence supports the broad
principle that Celtic-speakers inhabited the British Isles, including the Northern
and Western Isles in the Bronze- and Iron-Ages. Harris requires a great deal of
further investigation in terms of its early round structures, but many likely sites
have already been identified: the CANMORE database managed by the Royal
Commission for the Ancient and Historic Monuments of Scotland lists burials,
agricultural sites and round structures, or potential round structures at several
sites on the machair, including at Luskentyre, 19 Horgabost, 20 Na Buirgh 21 and
Scarasta.22 The oldest known settlement in the Western isles, dating back c.
9000 years, is to be found to the west of Taobh Tuath, and has been the subject
of extensive archaeological exploration.23 From shell middens through to a postmedieval farmstead, there is ample evidence for the continued settlement and
cultivation of the land, before, during and after the arrival of ON speakers.24
2.1.2 Evidence for Early Medieval Gaels in the Hebrides
Despite conducting extensive research to test his hypothesis of pre-Norse Gaelic
underlay, Richard Cox has been able to discover any Gaelic name that can be
conclusively dated to earlier than the 12th century.25 However, coinings in Old
Norse suggest that Early Gaelic speakers may have been nearby at the time
Norse raiders and settlers arrived.
17
Papar names are ultimately derived from
ibid p.26
image courtesy of http://www.geos.ed.ac.uk/~mscgis/12-13/s1262144/
19
http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk/en/event/972192/
20
http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk/en/site/336295/details/h140+horgabost+harris/
21
http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk/en/site/336906/details/borve+harris/
22
http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk/en/site/336965/details/s64+scarista+harris/
23
Rubh a Tea paill headla d Harris, Western Isles of Scotland Written Scheme of Investigation for
Programme of Archaeological Fieldwork (University of Birmingham 2010)
24
C. Burgess Ancient Lewis and Harris: Exploring the archaeology of the outer Hebrides ( Thomson 2008)
pp. 90-91
25
R. Cox: Notes on the Norse Impact on Hebridean Place- a es JSNS 1 p.142
18
17
Latin, with papa giving Early Gaelic (EG) pápa, which in turn becomes ON papi.26
The term carries the meaning of pope, a ‘father’ or a religious recluse, and is
applied to sites throughout the Norse settled areas. 27
However, with the
exception of a couple of examples in north-east Caithness, all –Papar sites are
located on islands. There are two in (unusually) close proximity both to each
other to the area under discussion, although none actually within it. These are
the island Pabbay in the sound of Harris and Paible on Taransay.28
There is evidence besides the likely borrowing from EG to support that such sites
were home to Gaelic-speaking religious practitioners: several Norse sources,
although surviving only in later copies state specifically that the papar were
Irish. 29 Landnámabók and Íslendingabók both report that not only were the
Christians on the islands Irish, but that they left behind bells, books and croziers
when they departed. 30 Furthermore, Pabbay has considerable archaeological
evidence for early settlement, including two chapels, while Taransay has yielded
early stones, including a small cross-marked stone discovered by Capt. F.W.L.
Thomas at a site adjacent to two chapels. 31
However, despite all of this
evidence for early Gaelic-speaking inhabitants in the vicinity, as with the
evidence presented by names such as Borve for earlier inhabitants, it must be
noted that the surviving names are still ON coinings and as such are ultimately
exonyms which reflect the ON perspective on their predecessors in the area and
their settlements.
26
A. MacDonald: The papar a d so e Pro le s: a Brief ‘e ie Cra ford, B ed The Papar in the North
Atlantic: Environment and History (St Andrews 2002) p.15
27
ibid p.25 (distribution map) http://edil.qub.ac.uk/dictionary/search.php
28
http://www.paparproject.org.uk/hebrides.html this proximity might well provide a solution as to why
Taransay is not also called Pabbay.
29
Even accepting the complexities of terminology for Scots and Irish, it seems reasonable to accept that QCeltic speakers were in question here.
30
MacDonald, Papar pp.13-4
31
I Fisher: Crosses i the O ea : so e papar sites a d their s ulpture i Cra ford, B ed The Papar in the
North Atlantic: Environment and History (St Andrews 2002) p.44
18
2.2 Medieval Settlement
Viking raids on Scotland’s western seaboard, and indeed on Ireland had certainly
begun by 794 where the Annals of Ulster record the “…Uastatio omnium
insolarum Britannie a gentilibus.” (Devastation of the Islands of Britain by the
gentiles.)32 Such an excursion would have required the raiders to pass between
the Scottish mainland and the outer isles, including some notoriously dangerous
waters, and surely suggests that the Vikings had sufficient prior knowledge of
the area to navigate successfully and identify suitable raiding targets. In the
period of Norse settlement, documentary evidence is understandably scant, but
limited sources are nonetheless available, which provide insight into the Western
Isles in the medieval period.
2.2.1 Icelandic Sources
Many sources, particularly annals and saga material, refer to Viking raids, but
the precise identification of places involved can be difficult.
In many cases,
such sources are written well after the events in question, and even where
multiple sources appear to agree, one must bear in mind both the potential for
interdependency and that they represent the view of one historic event at a
later point in time, albeit one nearer than our own.
As Woolf has noted,
Landnámabók was most likely written in the twelfth century, with later versions
subject to influence by later saga material.33
A significant problem with these sources is that it is not always clear exactly
who is being referred to: as Woolf has noted, Icelandic texts discussing the ninth
century but which survive from the 12th-14th-centuries may distinguish fairly
consistently between Írland and Skotland, but fail to mention the Picts.34 To
complicate the situation further, Eyrbyggia saga refers to Irland and Irland the
Great, while Latin texts often opt for Scotia (Scotland) and Scotia Magna
32
http://www.ucc.ie/celt/online/G100001A.html visited 31/08/14 A.O.Anderson: Early Sources of Scottish
History: A.D. 500 to A.D. 1286 (Edinburgh 1922) pp.254-5. Ge tiles here arries se se of heathe I.e. nonChristian, rather than the original meaning of non-Jew.
33
Woolf (2001)pp.278-282
34
ibid p.282
19
(Ireland).35 It seems likely that what is going on in the Eyrbyggia instance is that
the Gaelic-speaking portion of Argyll and the Hebrides are denoted by Irland,
while Irland the great refers to the island of Ireland. It appears that the text has
been updated to make sense to readers contemporary to the version of the text,
rather than to the events described. This in turn creates problems for modern
readers by obscuring the situation contemporary to the events described, and
imposing the views at the time the text was written.
2.2.2 Irish and Norse Sources: contact considerations
The discussion above highlights the caution needed when using such texts as
evidence, but also raises a further consideration: Alex Woolf raises the
possibility that the origin of the journey to ‘Ireland the Great’ in Eyrbyggia Saga
lies in a Latin source, rather than Norse oral tradition. While this is plausible,
the possibility that by the 12th-13th centuries the compilers of the Icelandic sagas
were aware of the origin myths surrounding the Gaelic-speaking population of
Scotland derived from the Fergus Mór legend recorded in sources such as the
Annals of Tigernach and Dindshenchas Fer nAlban.
Like the Icelandic material discussed above, these sources are problematic in
relation to the period before they were written, and of course this origin theory
is now much disputed, with archaeological evidence of, for example, the
distribution of crannogs, suggesting that there was a longstanding two-way
cultural exchange rather than an invasion. 36
That does not preclude the
possibility that the compilers of the Norse sagas picked up on it, indeed, given
the extent of Norse settlement in Scotland by the time that the sagas were
written down in the form we have them today, one would be more surprised if
they were not aware of Gaelic sources and the ‘information’ contained in them,
historically accurate or otherwise.
35
36
ibid p.285
E. Ca p ell, Were the S ots Irish Antiquity 2001 vol 288 p.287
20
2.2.3 Interpreting the evidence
A rather gloomy picture of the reliability of our sources emerges from the
foregoing discussion, but that is not to say that such sources are to be ignored,
rather that care is needed when claiming an early attestation of a place-name,
or citing such sources as evidence. In the context of studies such as this, annals
and saga material are vital sources of information about governance and social
activity. While this may not yield actual place-names, evidence of settlement by
Norsemen and bearers of Norse names can provide a context and a very
approximate terminus ante quem for Old Norse place-name coinings in the area.
As Alex Woolf has noted, assessing when Vikings began to raid and settle in the
Northern Hebrides is a challenging pursuit: annals make very few identifiable
references to what is now Lewis and Harris.37 Furthermore, the early references
to attacks, such as that made in a letter of 793 by Alcuin of York in relation to
assaults on Northumbria, record Viking activity in the British Isles, but at some
remove from the area in question.38
Misinterpretation of sources has complicated the issue yet further: while raids
on sites like Iona are readily identifiable, others are more problematic. An entry
in the annals of Ulster for 795 apparently reports the first Viking raid on
Scotland, stating that ‘Sci’ was pillaged and wasted. 39 However, as Claire
Downham has shown, this almost certainly represents a scribal alteration from
Old Irish scrín, ‘shrine’, which makes much more sense and places the locus of
activity firmly in Ireland. 40
This is a prime illustration of the difficulty of
working with place-names that are not widely attested in early sources;
particularly where so little contextual information is provided.
2.2.4 The Settled Norse
References to Gall-Ghàidheil in AU in 855-6 may possibly refer to Hebrideans,
although this is far from certain and could refer to people from Ireland, the
southern Hebrides or the Isle of Man, which all saw extensive interaction
37
38
39
40
Woolf , Pictland p.43
Ibid p.43
www.ucc.ie/celt/online/T100001A/
Do
ha , C: A I agi ar ‘aid o Sk e i
9 ? . S ottish Gaeli Studies ol
pp192-6
21
between Norse and Gaelic speakers.41 As Thomas Clancy has noted, references
to Gall-Ghàidheil apparently disappear between 857 and 1034.42 However, by
866, Scottish and Irish Gallaibh were employed in an assault on Fortriu.43 Who
are these ‘Irish and Scottish’ Gallaibh? While a full exploration is beyond the
scope of this thesis, such references suggest that ‘foreigners’ are well settled
and are impacting upon domestic politics from bases within Ireland and
Scotland. A thorough understanding of such settlement is obviously helpful when
trying to contextualise name-coining, and so is examined here in considerable
depth. One often needs to look beyond the polemic of the reporting in the
sources: as Clancy has noted, there is plenty of evidence to demonstrate that
not all Norse settlers were church-smashing barbarians: By the second half of
the tenth century, the king of the Gaill had accepted Christianity, dying at Iona,
and had at least one praise-poem in Gaelic written for him.44
Even references to military activity referring to Gallaibh from Ireland and
Scotland suggests structured and organised settlement: such references point to
a society that was successfully organised from the perspective of military
service and was capable of feeding and sheltering a large number of people.
While references to Scottish Gallaibh do not of course guarantee that they were
settled in Harris, or even in the Hebrides, the large corpus of Norse farm-names
suggests settlement rather than overwintering, as does the presence of
buildings and burials that are clearly Norse in style.45
Bearing in mind the caveats above in relation to reliability, sources discussing
Norse settlement in the Hebrides can offer up the occasional name, as well as
information which supports the archaeological evidence for settlement in the
Western Isles specifically. By 873 Landnámabók refers to the marriage of one
Thorstein, a son of Olaf the White as taking place in the Hebrides, and Gretti’s
Saga attests to the practice of overwintering in the ‘Barra Islands’ and using
41
Anderson, Sources pp 285- , T. Cla : The Gall-Ghàidheil a d Gallo a JSNS 2 (2008) pp.24-5
Clancy, Gall-Ghàidheil p.25
43
Anderson, Sources p.296, p.302
44
Clancy Gall-Ghàidheil p.25
45
http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk/en/site/335605/details/nisabost+harris/
42
22
them as a base for summer raiding.’46 Rule by any given individual alone does
not necessarily mean that their culture has been embedded in the area
governed, but sources from both Irish and Norse sources clearly imply that a
well-developed social and military community was in place in the Hebrides in
the early middle ages underneath the obvious Norse overlordship.
While no thing sites (parliament sites in ON communities) have been identified
in Harris, they are attested on the Scottish Mainland, at Dingwall, in Faroe, and
on the Isle of Man, and date back to the end of the first millennium. 47 Given
Harris’s geographical positioning within the ‘sea road’ from Scandinavia, and
Northern Scotland to Ireland and the western seaboard of Britain, and the
relative lack of detailed examination of it from a historic, archaeological or
onomastic point of view, the absence to date of thing names should not be
taken as evidence of absence.
Indeed, given the number of place-names
pointing to Norse settlement and particularly agricultural activity, it seems
reasonable to conclude that Norse-speakers were socially and culturally
embedded in south-west Harris: the Norse names are not ‘top down’ impositions
of an invading ruling class, but a reflection of life on the ground in Norse
settlements.
2.2.5 Identity in Hebridean-Norse Communities
A further consideration is the matter of how Norse-speaking settlers in the
Hebrides perceived themselves: Eyrbyggia Saga provides an excellent example of
just how complex such identities were seen to be, even several hundred years
later:
“This was the time [c.874] when king Harold the Fairhaired came to the
kingdom of Norway. Many noble-men fled to escape this war, out of their
odal-lands and out of Norway; some east beyond the Ridge, others West
over the sea. There were some who remained in winter in the Hebrides or
the Orkneys but in the summers plundered in Norway and did much harm
in king Harold’s dominion.”48
46
Anderson, Sources p. 305
http://www.thingproject.eu/
48
Anderson, Sources p.349
47
23
According to this source it was these events that lead to Harold deploying Ketil
Flatnose to subdue the area. However, he in turn rejects the overlordship of the
Norwegian king, and the saga reports:
“Ketil Flatnose was lord in the Hebrides, but they said that they knew not
that [Ketil] would bring under King Harold the dominion to the west of the
sea. And when the king heard this, he took under himself the possessions
that Ketil had had in Norway.”49
Not only does this suggest the extent to which ‘domestic’ Norwegian politics
spilled over into the Hebrides, or were at least perceived to have done so by the
time the sagas were written, it is also potential evidence for how the islands
were settled and ruled. Of course, we should not take such narratives as gospel,
given the concerns about the reliability of such sources, but it does offer an
insight into how later medieval Norse-speakers understood the settlement of the
Hebrides to have come about.
Eyrbyggia Saga reports that Ketil Flatnose took most of his family with him, and
Landnámabók states that his children, except Bjorn, accepted Christianity: 50 an
early sign perhaps that he had no intention of returning. It is plausible that the
noblemen who fled before him did the same: an odal was heritable land, and to
flee from it represented a commitment to carving out a new life in the islands.
Such abandonment of odal land required the immediate location and settlement
of alternative land and in Ketil’s case Eyrbyggia Saga claims that the Hebrides
passed to his son, Helgi, after his death in the mid 880’s. 51 It seems likely that
such a situation might be the cause of the coining of place-names containing
farm elements such as -staðir and –bólstaðr. The Eyrbyggia and (even less
reliable) Laxdoela sagas both suggest that Ketil Flatnose followed after an
earlier wave of settlers. Even though there are issues of accuracy, and possibly
49
Ibid p.349
see Ibid pp.349-363 save one Bjorn, who is later attested in this Saga, as well as Landnámabók both as
atte pti g to regai his father s la ds fro his ase i Ja tala d, S ede , a d as refusi g to a ept
Christianit like the other hildre of Ketil. The latter poi t u derli es the e te t to hi h Ketil s fa ily
had become established in the Hebrides.
51
Anderson, Sources p.361
50
24
interdependency between these two sources, it is worth acknowledging that the
version of events was considered sufficiently plausible to the audience it was
written for. Given the extent of evidence for Viking raiding and settlement in
the Irish material, which is more often contemporary to the events described
around the 9th century, it seems plausible that such relocations were fairly
common, and, with caveats acknowledged the material can offer us potential
motive and dating for settlement in South-west Harris; a factor to be borne in
mind during the discussion of the linguistic evidence in chapter 4 below.
2.2.6 Taxation Systems in the Hebrides
The late c.12 Historia Norwegaie notes that both the Northern and Southern
(i.e. Orkney, Shetland and ‘our’ Western) Isles yielded considerable tribute
‘tributa’ to the King of Norway.52 The source notes that while the former was
ruled by Earls, the latter was under the control of a series of ‘reguli’ or petty
kings. 53 This difference may suggest that an older practice of governance in
Harris may have influenced social organisation for the incoming settlers. Also
worth noting is that the revenue yield, discussed above,
was regarded as
considerable, suggesting that the islands generally were both considered of
value (although this may have been for strategic as much as agricultural reasons)
and were capable of rendering substantial tribute. In turn, this points to a well
settled and organised community: the Hebrides may have been a considerable
asset in terms of men and ships to whoever ruled them. Furthermore, in 1299,
Haakon V noted that the dues to Norway (100 marks) under the Treaty of Perth
were less than half the previous dues from the Hebrides.54 In turn, the Chronica
of Robert of Torigni states that the Kingdom of Man and the Hebrides was held
against (i.e. the holder was a vassal of) the King of Norway, for the sum of 10
52
“Quae quidem diversis incolis accultæ nunc in duo regna sunt divisæ; sunt enim meridianae insulae regulis
sublimatae, brumales vero comitum praesidio decoratae, qui utrique regibus Norwegiae non modica
persolvu t tribute” dis ussed,A.O. Joh se : The Pa e ts fro the He rides a d Isle of Ma to the Cro
of Norway 1153: A ual Fer e or Feudal Casualt ? The Scottish Historical Review, Vol 48, No. 145
(1969) p.18
53
ibid p.18
54
Knut Helle discussed ibid p.18
25
gold crowns on the accession of each new Norwegian king, suggesting that the
Hebrides were a well-established and reliable source of revenue .55
The complex nature of such power exchange mechanisms and potential of
population groups to provide revenue underline the probable strategic
importance of the area and the subsequent necessity of keeping a sea-going
populace under control in order to prevent gratuitous raiding.
Alternatively, a
ruler might use the same mechanism to facilitate deliberate raiding in order to
reprimand transgressors against his authority, cf the revenge taken by the
Norwegian king for the transgressions of Ragnvald, in the early c.13, who had
sworn duplicitous allegiance to the kings of both Norway and England. 56 As
Johnsen notes, however, there is a world of a difference between the demands
exacted on these local rulers and any attempt at direct taxation of the
populace: indeed, there is no evidence that they paid dues to anyone other than
their church and/or local king. 57 However, some evidence for Norse taxation
practices has survived beyond the period of Norse settlement: as Gareth
Williams has noted, Ounce-lands and Penny-lands were employed as units of
taxation in the Western Isles. 58
Names such as Fivepenny Borve, Lewis,
demonstrate that the practice had the potential to impact upon place-names.
However, while Williams has argued convincingly for a 20 penny-land to the
ounce-land ratio in the Outer Hebrides generally, the evidence provided in the
rental of 1724 (see appendix 1) is the only source available for Harris and is no
way suggestive of such a practice. 59 However, this source does attest to the
shifting of values over time: one entry notes that: “… The Isle of Pabbay, being
once sixteen penny lands but now only ten pennies…”60 As such it seems likely
that the assessed value of the settlements had shifted over time, and more
evidence is required to fully test Williams’ hypothesis.
55
Ibid p.24
Ibid p.24
57
Ibid p.34
58
D.G.Williams: Land Assessment and Military Organisation in the Norse Settlements of Scotland c.900-1166
Unpublished PhD thesis (University of St Andrews 1996) pp 43-4
59
Ibid p.46-7
60
B.Lawson: A Selection of Source Documents from the Isle of Harris 1688-1830 (Bill Lawson Publications
1992) p. 7
56
26
2.3 Valuation: Accounts, Rolls and Rentals
Legal documents and sources such as Robert Heron’s 1794 account also survive:
Heron’s account notes that MacLeod of Harris gets £888 sterling of yearly rent
from the tacks men on the Machair. 61 Such revenues show that Harris was a
valuable source of income for those who controlled it throughout history. The
description is also useful in that it is made evident that the machair was
perceived by MacLeod and Heron at least as a single ‘region’ of Harris and
treated as such for taxation purposes, while the land itself is divided up among
many tacks-men. This corroborates the evidence of rolls and rentals, which are
also discussed below.
The rentals here are recorded from copies of inaccessible originals, many of
which are in private hands. Values are, according to Lawson, shown in Scots
merks for the 1688 rental and pounds Scots thereafter..62 This rental, and those
up to 1779 (when the island passed out of the ownership of MacLeod of
Dunvegan to MacLeod of Berneray) are problematic as sources in that they show
only the tacks men, rather than further sub-leases, which, according to Lawson,
were often to joint tenants, while the valuation roll is a completely different
kind of document which may not show the full number of tenants of the
machair.63 However, these rentals are useful for a number of reasons, and show
the diverse value of individual tacks, population changes and linguistic variations
over the period they cover. All names and relevant information taken from this
document are included in Appendix 1, and where appropriate, the gazetteer.
61
Discussed B Lawson: Harris in History and Legend (Birlinn 2008) p,2
See Lawson, Sources p.1. IMPORTANT NOTE: Lawson informed me that he had not had personal access to
all of these papers and that some of the rentals were drawn from those published by MacBain in the Prc.
Gael. Soc. Inv. The original Dunvegan records are not generally made available to researchers, although
there is every reason to believe that they still exist. Any party pursuing further analysis of this information
should make every effort to secure access to the originals, as it is not possible to ascertain the accuracy of
copied spellings, although clearly there has been some effort taken to preserve original orthography
throughout the transmission process via MacBain and Lawson. Furthermore, I have not reproduced rentals
in their entirety here for reasons of space, only those parts which are relevant to the current discussion.
63
Lawson, Sources p.1
62
27
2.3.1 Function and Purpose
While these sources are being considered together, a glance at appendix 1 will
show that they do not all follow the same format or offer the same information.
In fact, the imperative behind the creation of these documents varies
enormously and needs to be borne in mind when handling and comparing these
sources. While the 1688 rental is a fairly straightforward record listing personalname, place-name and value, it is the only one of the group which is recorded in
merks, rather than pounds Scots. It is also a quite different source to the sworn
testimony required in the 1724 assessment: the origins of the 1724 rental lie in
legal dispute between MacLeod of Dunvegan (who had just come into his
majority) and his former tutor.64 As such, the format is quite different to the
1688 record, and instead records the sworn oaths of the tacks men, witnessed by
lawyers as to the yearly rent, in both money and, strikingly, in goods, from the
tacks.
The result of this is a record that is in one sense less comprehensive than that in
the 1688 rentals, but at the same time a strong sense comes through of which
were the key tacks, and how they were assessed.
In particular, the use of
penny-lands as a land assessment unit is shown in no other rental. A form of
national land tax, cess, is referred to in this document. The value for cess is not
explicitly stated for every entry, and is sometimes included with the overall
rental figure. Where it is shown, each penny land correlates to roughly £2 scots
of cess (although Roderick Campbell of North Capophaile pays only £6 for his
3.25 penny-lands). Monetary values are given as ‘Scots money rent’.65
A clear advantage to a rental which is also a legal deposition, like that of 1724,
is the level of detail offered. Instead of ‘headline’ figures on valuations, the
figures are instead broken down. Furthermore, non-monetary values are also
shown. These are not only useful as evidence of payment, but they also help us
to understand how the land was used. While the inclusion of meall demonstrates
64
65
Ibid p.1
Ibid p.5
28
that some of the land was put to arable use, butter and cheese point to dairy
farming. The almost universal inclusion of wedders (Scots term for castrated
male sheep) in the machair area and on Pabbay, although not invariably
elsewhere, indicates that sheep were being farmed in an organised manner on
the machair well before the advent of clearances made it a much more large
scale operation.
The 1754 rental reverts to the 1688 format (also used in the 1818 and 1830
rentals) and shows a somewhat different pattern of settlement and taxation on
the island. Rents have risen sharply, and the overall value of the land is more
than three times what it was in the first rental, with the total value rising from
£1867.6.7 in 1688 to £6302.17.0 in 1754. However, the land on the machair was
becoming concentrated in fewer hands: as Appendix 1 shows, by 1754 The
Borves were in the hands of just one individual, only for them to be divided
again by 1818 between the minister at Borvemhoir and 19 tenants between
Borvemeanach and Borvebheg
The 1813 Valuation Roll is a completely different type of document, and
contrary to the name, does not show actual valuations at all, as it predates the
1854 Lands Valuation (Scotland) Act. Bill Lawson, a local Harris historian who has
actively studied patterns of marriage and emigration notes that this roll is
irregular in that it records both people who weren’t tenants, such as a shepherd
at Druimfuind, but proposes that the roll may only record the name of one
person on behalf of all the other tenants in some of the smaller settlements. 66
For this reason, it is not possible to make conclusive comments on land-holding
practices in this source. As with all the other rentals, it has not been possible to
see the original of this document, which is believed to be in private hands. A
further point of note is that this roll appears to have been prepared by someone
without local knowledge, as there are a few irregularities which show up for
parts of the island outside of this study. For example, an entry is made for
Scalpay, but also for Isle Glas, the latter of which is the local name (Eilean Glas)
66
Ibid p.2
29
for the former. Whilst it is acknowledged that several islands called Scalpay do
exist in the Hebrides, there is only one associated with Harris and therefore
likely to appear on this roll. As such, caution should be taken when handling the
data from this source.
The 1830 rental was made due to Court Process against MacLeod of Harris, but
follows the same format as the 1688, 754 and 1818 documents. This has survived
through preservation in Court of Session Papers.67
2.3.2 Reflections of Landholding
2.3.2.1 Valuation, Tenants and Sub-tenants
The value of individual tacks listed in the 1688 rental ranges from only 4 merks
(part of Borve More) through to 172 merks (Selebost). A considerable degree of
devaluation over time can be seen: even accepting that a merk = roughly 2/3 £
Scots, the value has fallen dramatically by the 1818 rental, where it is listed as
having a value of £89.40.0. Moreover, while only 1 tenant, Angus Campbell, is
listed in 1688, 18 are listed in 1818. Crofting began in earnest, driven in part by
the demand for kelp; the collapse of which industry shortly after 1818, following
the end of the Napoleonic Wars, had a devastating impact on the island’s
economy.
While the concentration of people on the land is understandable from an
economic perspective, from a financial, and even a social one the beginning of
the end is visible. Not only would it be much more difficult to collect rent from
so many individuals, the chances were higher that someone would default. Note
in the 1724 rental indicate that there was a good deal of tension between
tenants, owners and sub-tenants: while the presence of MacLeods from Ullinish
and Talisker (Skye) as tacks-men supports the idea that MacLeod of Dunvegan
had initially settled the machair with his own kinsmen, it also demonstrates the
friction that absentee ownership created both MacLeod of Dunvegan and
Campbell in Ensay complain about the attempts of ‘Tallisker and Ullinish’
67
discussed Lawson, Sources p.2 , Court of Session papers ref CS/96/239
30
MacLeods to demand more money from them.68 Sub-letting, in the context of
general consolidation of parcels of land into the ownership of one individual,
makes it very hard to see what such tenancies were worth: The example of in
the 1724 rental shows that sub-letting seems to have been going on: both
Campbell and MacLeod are listed as having interests there, but it appears that
valuation and amount paid are frequently not the same, often resulting in
dispute.69 However, the 1724 settlement at Druimfuint is shown as productive
land at this time, possession of which was worth disputing, while today the
settlement has disappeared completely.
The part of Shelebost not in Stewart’s hands shows a reduction in value from
£89.4.0 in 1818 to £43.10.0 in the 1830 rental, divided among 11 tenants
showing just how rapid the rate of change and decline was in the first half of the
nineteenth century. 70 Across the machair, it is evident that, if not actually
cleared yet in every case, the tenancy had fallen into the hands of an individual
who would shortly begin that process. Following the sale of the island in 1779
by MacLeod of Dunvegan, a series of absentee landlords employed tacks-men to
enforce their will and maximise profit, without regard to the populace.
In
many cases this was the factor, Donald Stewart, whose increasing tenure on the
machair, holding Luskyntire, Nisabost, Part Borve Vore,(now showing lenition)
Scaristavore and Part Shelibost provided leverage for him over the remaining
crofters.71
The gradual increase in tenancies of varying sizes on the east coast, with rental
amounts seeming to suggest the splitting of plots, suggests that either some of
the cleared people made their way to the bays, or that the population was
increasing for other reasons, such as the setting up of fishing stations.
Certainly, the increase in tenancies in the bays does not fully account for the
number of persons who have disappeared from the machair by comparison with
earlier documents, and according to Lawson, (who has made extensive study of
68
see Appendix 1
Ibid
70
Ibid
71
Ibid
69
31
emigration on a case-by case basis, and should in no way be overlooked for his
detailed knowledge of this subject), at least 400 people are recorded as having
gone to Cape Breton, Canada in the 1820s and 1830s, a figure he suspects as
showing less than half the actual number.72
2.3.2.2 The Organisation of the Land
Names appear and disappear on these rentals for a variety of reasons. Scarasta
does not appear in the rentals until 1724, by which time it is already divided into
North or Meikle Scarista and South or Little Scarista. 73 This is difficult to
explain, although Bald’s map indicates the presence of a Church glebe there
later on, in between the two settlements, so it is possible that at the earlier
stage the whole of Scarasta may have been church lands.
Alternatively, the
possibility that the generic term employed was staðir (pl) rather than staðr (sg)
might be considered.74 The Old Statistical Account of 1791-9 mentions that the
church has only recently been constructed, but given that tenants are listed for
the area near the original chapel on the south coast of the Uidh at Taobh Tuath,
it could be that the church-lands were always at Scarasta along with the chapel
dedicated to St Bride referred to in the Statistical Accounts and that this was a
factor, besides population shift, in the relocation of the church. 75
Nisabost is absent from the rentals until 1813, while Horgabost is only present
until the previous record of 1754. This suggests that the two were counted as
one settlement, sometimes listed by one name, sometimes by the other.
Certainly the evidence provided by Bald’s 1805 estate plan (see 3.3.2 below)
indicates that the two fell within the same boundary by the time his map was
made, and that the tack stretched right across the island. The relatively low
value for such a large tack is explained by how little of it would have been
suitable for farming.
72
73
Lawson Harris p.10 Lawson emigration p.3
see appendix 1
74
See ch.4 below for discussion
75
Old Statistical Account: accessed via http://stat-acc-scot.edina.ac.uk/link/1791-99/Inverness/Harris/
p.342
32
2.3.2.3 Population Change and the Onomastic Record
What cannot be seen in the rentals is where boundaries change: while the rent
amount appears relatively stable (57.14 merks for Horgisbost in 1688, £65 for
Nishbost in 1818) one needs to consider the possibility that the amount of land
represented under that name was actually shrinking. Certainly the number of
tenants and settlements in the bays appearing in the rentals explodes in the
1818 rental: no settlements in the bays appear in the 1754 rental, but by 1818
settlements such as Greosavay, Cluer, Kyles Stokinish. Leckley, Ardvey,
Lickstock, Geocrab, Ardslavay, Manish and Quidnish are listed, each with several
tenants taking equal or near-equal shares. The division of land suggests that
these tenants are new and that there hasn’t been time for one individual to
acquire multiple tenancies. Given that Bald’s map of 1805 shows the larger
tacks, running across the island, change must have been dramatic and rapid in
the period between 1805 and the 1818 rental.
The names in the bays are interesting: a large proportion of names employing
ON elements, or ON elements borrowed into Gaelic, are in evidence, which
suggests that these names are not ‘new’. The nature of the names is worth
considering though: these are all sea-focused elements: bays, rivers and
headlands abound as stimulus for name coining in the bays, suggesting that the
coinings may be indicative of sea-based activity in the ON period, rather than
the agricultural settlements suggested by names in –bólstaðr and staðir.
2.3.3 Linguistic Considerations
The range of languages in evidence in the local toponomy in the 1688 rental is
striking: besides the major Norse settlement names like Borve, we have on one
hand English specifics (Little Borve) and on the other Gaelic (Borve More). In
turn, Druimphuint is entirely Gaelic (ScG) in its construction. while the spelling
throughout the text does not follow modern orthographic conventions, the
recording of voicing (in personal and place names generally, including in wordinternal positions, as with Luscandir and slenderisations (Druimphuint and the
personal name qualifier ‘oig’ rather than ‘og’), as well as orthographic
33
confusions such as ‘Nion’ for ‘nighean’, show that Gaelic was not only spoken
widely in the area and informing coining practices (as we might expect), but at
least understood by the party recording the rental.
The application of Gaelic, Scots and English modifiers as ON farm sites are
subdivided, consolidated and re-divided throughout the period covered by the
rentals creates an interesting and varied picture. The situation of Borve is
particularly interesting: on one hand, the smaller settlement goes from Little
Borve in the 1688 rental to Borrowbeg in 1724. On the other, Midle Borve makes
an appearance, and the Borve More of the 1688 rental becomes Meikle Borve by
1724, but returns to Borve Vore by 1830.
Such examples show that the
alterations to the name-forms took place in a context of lexical understanding:
semantic meaning is retained. The variation from place to place, combined with
linguistic shift in both directions, suggests that that by this date there was a
high level of Gaelic-English, or Gaelic-Scots, bilingualism amongst the
inhabitants of the machair. It seems likely that it was this, rather than the
means of recording the names that is responsible for the forms preserved. This
rental depicts a remarkable linguistic diversity, coupled with the retention of
both primary settlement names and landholding practices such as the pennyland. Scarista Bheag on the other hand shows a complex evolution from Norse
generic and specific, a probable lexical loss and addition of the further
(suffixed) qualifying element bheag in Gaelic by the 1754 rental, which treats
the initial name as a feminine noun. Finally, it is contrasted with its counterpart
to the north: Meikle Scarista (1724, 1754) has gone through a similar process,
but it has a Scots qualifier affixed to the Norse name.
Language contact is a particularly interesting feature which can be examined in
this document, for example ‘Eye’ appears to be an ON loan into ScG (uidh)
realised with Scottish-English orthography in this document. On the other hand,
wholly Gaelic elements (rather than loans from Norse) such as bheag are
orthographically correct, suggesting some familiarity with written Gaelic on the
part of the writer.
Further points of interest from a linguistic perspective
include the continued retention of the voiced dental (d, rather than t) in
34
Luskindar, and the introduction of a fricative/s/ into Horgasbost (1754). This not
exhibited in any other source examined in this thesis: some sources show
epenthesis, i.e. Horagabost in source a recorded by Gammeltoft from a list
made in the 1930’s and currently in private hands. In Gammeltoft’s study, no
cognate forms of the name were identified in Scotland, making this a
particularly interesting survival.76
A final note is required on personal names: these sources are a rich source of
personal names, and can, accepting the caveat that there is a relatively small
name-stock on Harris, suggest continuation of tenancy, for example the listing of
people with the surname
Campbell at
Selebost (1688)/Shellibost
(1724).
Conversely, the consolidation of estates into larger entities can be equated with
individuals, such as Alexander MacLeod (1754, Luskindar, Shealibost etc) and
later on Stewart (1830, Luskintyre, Nisabost, part Borve Vore and Scaristavore).
As such it is possible to see how changes, from the emergence of crofting to the
clearance period, came to happen, rather than simply testifying that they did
happen.
2.4 Early Modern and Modern Periods
Despite the shortage of late medieval sources for Harris, continuing value of
taxation revenue from the Hebrides into the early modern period is evident in a
range of historic documents: rentals and valuations have survived from 1688
onwards and are discussed below, as are ‘travel’ journals and diaries containing
relevant information and place-names.
Several ‘travel’ journals survive from this time. Some, like Martin Martin’s, were
designed for a popular audience, whilst William MacGillivray’s diary is a chance
survival of a personal effect. These contain references to a number of names,
discussed below, and included in the accompanying gazetteer.
76
Gammeltoft, bolstaðr p.124
35
2.4.1 Dean Donald Munro: A Description of the Occidental i.e. Western
Islands of Scotland.
Dean Donald Monro made his tour of the Western Isles in 1549, and several
copies of his account survive.
Furthermore, it is believed that his account
informed the work of his colleague in the early reformed Church, George
Buchanan, in his preparation of his Rerum Scoticarum Historia, published in
Edinburgh in 1582. 77 While the account takes an unusual route (by today’s
standards at least) around the isles, and is hard to follow in places on account of
this, a number of references to Harris are contained in the text.
Unfortunately for this present study, none of the place-names under discussion
are specifically discussed within the text. However, the account should not be
completely overlooked, as references to Harris itself, and the islands associated
with it, again underline the agricultural fertility of the South Harris area, with
several of the islands in the sound opposite the machair itself being recorded as:
“gude for corn store and fishing”.78 South Harris itself is described thus:
“This south part of the cuntrie callit Haray is verie fertile and frutfull for
corn, store and fisching, and tways mair of delvit nor of teillit [dug and
tilled] land in it”79
This shows that Harris was under agricultural cultivation of a not dissimilar sort
to that shown in rentals from nearly 70 years later: the topography of the island
dictates that the frutfull area be situated along the machair. He reports that
the area is noted for its sheep and salmon at this time, attesting to the presence
of native sheep in the area in the period before non-native breeds were
introduced during the clearances.
77
A Description of the Occidental i.e. Western Islands of Scotland (Edinburgh 2002)
p.250
78
Ibid p.332
79
Ibid p.337
36
2.4.2 Martin Martin: A Description of the Western Islands of Scotland
Published in 1703 and relating a visit in 1695, Martin’s account is one of the
earliest available.
It contains a few forms, pronunciations and snippets of
information, and casts light on how his contemporaries viewed both the island
and its history. The inclusion of place-names on the east coast, such as Stokness
and Finisbay is particularly significant, as it testifies to their being in common
currency in the pre-clearance era. Marvag is specifically stated as having houses
situated in it, whilst Finisbay and Stockness are simply described as lochs, with
no specific reference to habitation.80 Within the machair area, the most detailed
information is given about Borve, for which he displays a remarkable amount of
perception about the origins of the name, even if it is, ultimately, wide of the
mark:
“There are several ancient forts erected here, which the natives say were
built by the Danes … these forts are named after the villages in which they
were built, as that in Borve is called Down-Gorve, etc.”81
Martin’s writing is both entertaining and informative, offering up the following
custom: “The air is temperately cold, and the natives endeavour to qualify it by
taking a dose of aquavitae, or brandy …” We learn that the population has
retained a considerable degree of pre-Reformation belief, and has retained a
chapel dedicated to the Virgin Mary on Pabbay, whilst the general populace,
being Protestant along with their owner, but still celebrate the festivals of
Christmas, Good Friday and St Michael’s day (the latter of which involves a quite
remarkable horseback festival.82
In terms of the usage of land, it is clear that the machair area was under
cultivation at this point: “The west coast is for the most part arable on the
seacoast”, 83 even going so far as to detail the remarkable yields of barley
(allegedly up to 14 ears from each grain) which the then proprietor, Norman
80
Martin, Description pp.31-2
Ibid p.33
82
Ibid p.40, p.42
83
Ibid p.31
81
37
MacLeod had produced under the correct conditions. Furthermore, Martin
records actual agricultural practices:
“It is observed in this island as elsewhere, that when the ground is dug with
spades and the turfs turned upside down, and covered with sea-ware, it
yields a better product than when it is ploughed.”84
While this source yields only a few names, it tells a good deal about where
Harris was settled, and how the land was used. Given the laborious nature of
obtaining good agricultural results described above, it is possible to see how
settlements were subdivided for reasons of management in the Gaelic-speaking
period. In turn, it suggests that the Norse settlers may have also required many
hands to till the land, but that this was organised in a different way: by ‘topdown’ management, perhaps organised on the basis of extended family groups,
which would allow for the retention of a single identity for one staðir or
bolstaðr. Reflecting back to the suggestion that the Western Isles were governed
by petty kings, rather than Jarls presented by the Historia Norwegaie, (discussed
in 2.2.6 above), one wonders if it might be possible that early social organisation
practices such as those found in early Ireland may have been employed in the
pre-Norse period. Much more detail from the archaeological record that is
currently available would be required to test this hypothesis, but it is certainly
an avenue for further research. The CANMORE database offers the following
detail on one site at Horgabost:
“Apects [sic] of more extensive settlement, including stone clusters. Third
location is possibly part of a circular enclosure. Last two locations ends of
wall 11m long, east-west aligned, parallel to first building in complex.”85
Much more detail from the archaeological record that is currently available
would be required to test this hypothesis, but it is certainly an avenue for further
research.
84
85
Ibid p.37
http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk/en/event/971131/
38
2.4.3 William MacGillivray: A Hebridean Naturalist’s Journal 1817-1818
A quite different source, created for a totally different purpose, is provided by
the personal journals of William MacGillivray. A naturalist and artist William
MacGillivray was raised at Taobh Tuath. While most of his journals are now lost,
one of the few that does survive, for the years 1817-8, records a visit to his
childhood home. MacGillivray habitually walked everywhere, including on one
occasion, from Aberdeen to London. As such his view is quite literally that of a
man on the ground, offering us an insight into people as well as the flora and
fauna. Written in a period where we have other evidence, in the form of maps,
plans, roll and rentals to corroborate the information provided, this is a source
worthy of detailed examination.
The journal gives a strong sense of the social condition of the island, and offers
an insight into the period of clearance on the Machair. In particular, it is set just
before the clearances began in earnest on the island: according to the journal,
Luskentir at this time was a huge farm that stretched across Beinn Losgaintir to
Ceanndibig on the other coast, rather than the comparatively small settlement
that it is today.86 Furthermore, the major route between North and South Harris
passed over the shoulder of Beinn Losgaintir before travellers could turn either
towards Stioclett, which is now in ruins, or towards Tarbert, which was much
smaller and less significant in MacGillivray’s time than it is today. This both
underlines the size and significance of the original farm, and reminds us not to
impose ideas about present-day settlements and transport links onto the past.
Several place-names are referred to in the text, with all of those under
discussion in the present survey making an appearance. MacGillivray’s spelling is
inconsistent, and it is worth noting that the spellings supplied in the appendix to
the print edition do not always correspond to those within the text of the
journal itself. Taobh Tuath is variously written as North Town North-Town and
Northtown. However, from the text itself, and the appendices to the journal
provided by Robert Ralph, we can draw a range of information.
86
W MacGiilvray A Hebridea Naturalist s Jour al 1 1 -1818 ed R. Ralph (Stornoway 1996) p.157
39
For the place-name scholar and social historian, the contents and appendices of
MacGillivray’s journal are tremendously helpful: not only do they help us to
establish a chronology for the clearance process, but perhaps even more
importantly, they offer an insight into the daily lives and outlooks of people
actually living in South Harris in MacGillivray’s day in a way that no map ever
can hope to do. The process of change in the clearance period comes through
very clearly: even the presence of MacGillivray’s relatives at the farmhouse of
Northtown itself points to a society in a state of flux. As Ralph notes, the farms
of South Harris had originally been under the control of cadet families of
MacLeod, so the decision to let to MacGillivray shows the extent to which family
ties had been forgotten. In turn, the MacGillivray’s tenure was far from secure,
and the later parts of the journal, particularly from April onwards, detail the
owner’s attempts to remove MacGillivray’s family from the tenancy of the farm.
The low regard that MacLeod was held in is apparent from an incident which
MacGillivray relates whereby the preacher at Scarista (for whom it appears he
had little respect) condemns from the pulpit “…the injustice of MacLeod and his
Factor [Stewart].”87 MacGillivray himself has little good to say about MacLeod
and his factor describing Stewart as a wretch and a coward, and calling MacLeod
to account over his broken promises to his uncle. We also learn that the rent for
that year was set at the considerable sum of £170, and MacLeod gives his
promise that a lease will be agreed at the end of that time. 88 Posterity however
has shown that, unsurprisingly, MacLeod and his scheming factor did not keep
their promise, and the clearing and consolidation of Harris continued apace until
virtually all of the area under discussion was under the control of Stewart.
MacGillivray perceives this when he notes that Stewart’s prevention of the giving
Northtown to the MacNeils of Kyles was in all likelihood borne of his hatred of
the MacNeils, but moreover, was most likely “… a stratagem for getting it into
his own hands.”89
87
Ibid p.122-3
Ibid p.121
89
Ibid p.121
88
40
Where the smaller townships were concerned, there appears to have been an
emerging pattern of joint-tenancy. This is corroborated by the rentals for 1818
discussed in 2.3 above. Such a division may have been caused by rising rents, but
would have had the effect of making the townships increasingly difficult to make
pay, preparing the ground for Stewart to move in. However, it seems that the
failure of the kelp industry following the Napoleonic Wars meant that tenants
were no longer able to afford the rising rents, and the townships were cleared
and consolidated into large sheep stations.
2.5 Statistical Accounts and Origines Parochiales Scotiae
2.5.1 Old Statistical Account (1791-9)
This text opens with a surprising nugget of information, namely: “Till of late,
this parish has been designated Kilbride, from one of the churches or cells in it
so called.” 90 The parish of Harris is divided into three in this account, with
information pertinent to this study being located in the second section (the
others pertaining to the islands around Harris and North Harris respectively).
The account gives a positive view of Harris, referring to: “… it’s many natural
advantages, and the genius of its inhabitants …”91 It makes clear that both sides
of South Harris were inhabited at the time of writing, and records a number of
names pertinent to this study and states that; “… the names of the principal
farms in this division appear to be Norwegian, e.g. Scarasta, Borough or Borve,
Nisabost, Horgabost and Shelabost.” although interpretation is not attempted
beyond noting that they are farms.92
2.5.2 New Statistical Account (1834-5)
Whilst repeating a good deal of information contained within the Old Statistical
Account, there is noteworthy material here about land use and population
change. Despite the account having been written in the midst of the period of
clearances on the machair, the overall population of the island is recorded as
having grown, from 1969 in 1755 to more than 4000 at the time that this account
90
OSA p.342
OSA p.343
92
OSA p.347
91
41
was written, in 1834-5. The clearances themselves are directly referred to, and
the author states: “ Some of the most fertile farms, possessed by small tenants,
have been depopulated and converted into extensive sheep-walks.” 93 The rise
and subsequent decline in kelp revenues, from £7000 to £3500 is noted, as are
the declining wages in the parish and the purchase of the estate for sum of
£60000 by the earl of Dunmore, who we know had significant interests in the
Island from at least 1876, as he is referred to as ‘proprietor’ of several estates in
the Ordnance Survey Original Object Note Books (OSNB).94 Annual raw goods
revenues from the island are valued at £11,900 in this account. A brief attempt
is made to unpick the etymology of the island’s name, which is given as ScG Na
Hardibh and interpreted as meaning ‘the heights’.
However, specific place-
names within the machair area are referred to, but the account is well worth
reading for its contextual information. Furthermore, the minister’s discomfort
about the failure of the proprietor to ameliorate the situation of the poor comes
through very strongly in the text, and corroborates the evidence of economic
decline on the island laid out in the rentals.
2.5.3 Origines Parochiales Scotiae (1854)
This contains a number of very helpful leads to 16 th-and 17th-century documents
that mention the Isle of Harris, and is worth consulting on that basis alone.
However, while it is a rich source of background information about the
ownership of the island, it is not a particularly fruitful source of names, other
than forms for Harris itself offered at the beginning, the only name in the area
under consideration which gets a specific mention is Borve.95
93
New Statistical Account: accessed via http://stat-acc-scot.edina.ac.uk/link/183445/Inverness/Harris/14/155/ p.157
94
Ibid p.157
95
Origines Parochiales Scotiae: The Antiquities Ecclesiastical and Territorial of the Parishes of Scotland Vol
II.I (Bannatyne Club, Edinburgh 1854)
p.379
42
3 Maps, Plans and Charts
Maps and marine charts offer a very particular perspective on names, and when
handling them it is vital to not only consider the specific purpose for which they
were made, such as to map an estate, show marine topography etc, but also to
consider the perspective and intent behind those who made and commissioned
them. On a very basic level, a marine chart shows a totally different set of
information to, for example, an estate plan: the former has quite literally a seabound perspective and is likely to reflect names and places that are relevant to
maritime navigation, whilst the latter may be more concerned with landward
boundaries, settlements and land usage. Both are relevant, but the data set
included in each is likely to be rather different. This chapter will examine a
variety of maps and charts, from the earliest to record place-names on Harris
through to the most recent Ordnance Survey edition, which provides the
‘standard’ forms in this discussion.
The imperatives and methodologies behind the process of map-creation will be
discussed where appropriate. The recent digitisation of the Ordnance Survey
Original Object Name-Books (OSNB) has made them available for the first time,
and transcriptions of the entries relevant to this thesis were made as part of the
research process.
The contents and their implications are discussed in some
depth below.
3.1 Early Maps
Several early maps cover Harris, but they all present a number of problems. As
discussed above, Ptolemy refers to a number of population groups with Celtic
names as early as the second century AD, but securely locating these groups is
problematic.
Several attempts were made in the Sixteenth century to map
43
Scotland, but no really successful representation was made until Blaeu’s Atlas of
1654.96 The Atlas provides the following description:
“Leogus et Haraia insulae ex Aebudarum numero, quae quamquam isthmo
cohaereant, pro diversis habentur.” (Lewis and Harray of the numbre of
the Western Yles, which two although they ioyne be a necke of land ar
accounted dyvers Ylands.) 97
Figure 3-1 Pont/Blaeu (pub 1654)
Although published in 1654, as the descriptions indicated, they are drawn from
the work of Timothy Pont (c.1560-c.1614). These maps do not contain any of
the settlement names pertinent to this study and seems to overwhelmingly focus
on island names, coastal features and hydronyms. It is difficult to be sure
whether or not Pont ever visited the islands in person, and unfortunate that the
only one of his manuscripts to survive for this area pertains to South Uist: the
original chart may well have offered a wealth of information about the process
by which Pont constructed his maps.
96
97
http://maps.nls.uk/view/00000476
http://maps.nls.uk/view/00000476
44
The only name that may have any bearing on this survey is Howsanes. This name
is placed in an area that looks like the Taobh Tuath peninsula, and which is
surrounded by islands whose names support that hypothesis, such as Papa
(Pabbaigh) and Ensay (Ensaigh). The derivation is very possibly ON húsa nes ‘the
ness of houses’.98 Certainly, the Taobh Tuath area is of noted archaeological
importance, and the site is one of only a few in the West of Scotland with
evidence of habitation at multiple sites in the area from the Mesolithic period
through to the present day.99 A variety of dateable material, including a juvenile
crouched burial dated to 245-406 AD, and an Iron age broch near the site of
rubh’ an teampuill (NG NF 970913) provide further evidence that the area was
settled, rather than occupied on a seasonal basis. 100 As such, it is certainly a
candidate for the site of a place called húsa nes. However, this situation is
complicated by the presence in North Harris of a settlement called Husiness
(mod. Huisinish).
A site
with this name is referred to
quite
separately
from
Northtown in a rental from
1688.
101
Also
on
a
peninsula, this site (approx.
grid ref. NA986 115) has
98
Figure 3-2 Pont/Blaeu (pub. 1654)
with thanks to Dr Simon Taylor for his helpful discussion on this point
‘ubh a Tea paill headland Harris, Western Isles of Scotland Written Scheme of Investigation for
Programme of Archaeological Fieldwork (University of Birmingham 2010)
. pp 2-3
100
A. Maldonado: Christianity and Burial in Late Iron Age Scotland Unpub PhD thesis (Glasgow 2011) p.83
101
Lawson Sources p.3
99
45
evidence of what may be early habitation in the nearby area in the form of
round dwelling structures. 102 It is not marked with that name on this map,
However, the names of some the islands marked to the south and west do
correspond to some of before concluding that this map may indicate that what is
now the peninsula near Taobh Tuath was actually known as húsa nes at some
stage, one must acknowledge that if this shows a mis-location of where Huisinish
is today, that would not be out of character with the map generally. As the
image below shows, a number of settlements are marked at quite some distance
from where one would expect: no settlement name at all is marked where one
would expect Huisinish to be, while fig 3.2 shows Ballellen and Valtos as being
located on the east coast South Harris, near Loch Langavat, rather than in Lewis.
Other maps reproduce the name Howsanes at this point, including Jansson’s map
of 1659, but these are clearly drawing on Blaeu as a source.103 Herman Moll’s
maps from the early eighteenth century mark Harris, but not any of the
settlements on it, and Roy’s military survey from the middle of the same century
does not extend to this area. The first map to really examine Harris and provide
name-forms is Ainslie’s map of 1789.
3.2 Ainslie and Bald
While the existence of some sort of relationship between sources is relatively
easy to establish, through examination of names and chronology, the details of
such a relationship are often less clear.
102
In the discussion below, will be
http://canmore.rcahms.gov.uk/en/site/336976/details/hh7+huisinis+harris/ there are extensive building
remnants in the area, but very little research has been done into their date. It should be borne in mind,
that, as is ofte the ase, the ar haeologi al re ord is ot e e either i ter s of e ploratio or of the
detail of recording.
103
http://maps.nls.uk/scotland/detail.cfm?id=141
46
demonstrated that the majority of map sources for Harris derive either from
Bald’s 1804/5 estate plan or Ainslie’s map of 1789. We know from Bald’s map
that he was an assistant to Ainslie, although his map of Harris is much more
detailed than anything produced by Ainslie, as comparison of figs 3.3 and 3.4
below shows. The two maps were produced within just a few years of each
other, and by men known to have been colleagues, but appear to come from two
completely separate surveys.
Figure 3-3 Bald's Plan of Harris 1805
Margaret Wilkes, a former head of the map collection of the National Library of
Scotland (NLS) has suggested that Ainslie’s age (around 60 in 1789, when his map
was made) may have led him to delegate the task of surveying Harris to his 16
year-old apprentice, William Bald.104 At face value, it would seem surprising for
the two colleagues to have undertaken separate surveys in such a short space of
time. However, there are reasons to question Wilkes’ hypothesis: Bald’s estate
plan was required as evidence in a legal dispute and requires a far greater level
104
Wilkes, M: Missi g Presu ed Lost in MacLeod, F (ed) Togail Tir: The Map of the Western Isles
(Stornoway 1989) pp.43-48 p.45
47
of detail than Ainslie’s map could offer. This alone would have necessitated a
return visit to the island. However, there is reason to believe that Bald cannot
have been responsible for Ainslie’s map, as the spellings given for the same site
are different in the two manuscripts. While the 1789 map records Scarista and
Nisabust, the 1805 plan offers Little Scarrista/Muckle Scarrista and Nisibost.
Put simply, Ainslie’s map records names both in different forms and in less
detail. The same lack of detail is evident in landscape features. For Bald’s
plan, linked to a land dispute, both natural and man-made features were central
to establishing area boundaries and facilitating assessments of value. 105 The
land dispute is itself a reason for a second survey to be made, and it makes
sense that a reputable surveyor, who had recently been active in the area might
be approached for such as task.
In such a case, it is likely that when the first map was made, there was no
expectation of more detail ever being required, and that the detailed plan of
1805 was probably necessary
due to the insufficiencies of
the
1789
work
for
the
purposes of a land dispute.
Clearly the two maps require
to
be
discussed
as
independent sources. In cases
Figure 3-4 Ainslie's Map 1789
like Ainslie’s, where his map is
clearly the source for many
others, it is much more difficult to establish whether the later maps in the same
group drew directly on the oldest source, or on one of the intermediate maps.
As will become apparent, this has a significant impact on the Ordnance Survey
sources referred to in the OSNB. While at a glance, a wide range of sources seem
to be available, when derivation from Ainslie or Bald is accounted for, the range
narrows considerably. Having established that the two maps should be treated as
105
th
J Caird: Earl 9 Ce tur Estate Pla s i Ma Leod, F ed Togail Tir: The Map of the Western Isles
(Stornoway 1989) pp.49-78 p.49
48
independent works originating from the same workshop, the relationship of
various sources to either Bald or Ainslie’s map will be discussed in detail below.
3.2.1 The Ainslie Group
Stemma 3-1: Proposed Relationship of Maps in Ainslie Group
Assessment of the influences upon Ainslie’s map-making process is hampered by
missing sources, as his original drawings are lost. Comparison of Ainslie’s map
with a surviving map by Murdoch
MacKenzie
suggests
that
the
earlier map may have been one of
the models available for Ainslie:
the detailing of the coastline is Figure 3-5 MacKenzie's Map 1776 (L) and
broadly similar. However, as one Ainslie's Map 1789 Map (R)
might expect, the marine chart is more detailed in relation to the coastline.
The link cannot be conclusively proven or disproven due to the absence of the
other relevant map, covering the area from Seilebost to Druim a’ Phuind.
49
Even
where
relationships
are
explicitly
stated
by
publishers,
further
investigation is worthwhile on account of the circumstances of production of
these two maps. The introduction to Thomson’s atlas explicitly states that
Ainslie’s map was his source for Harris. 106 The relationship between the two
sources is significant here though: Thomson’s atlas (see fig. 3.6 below)
reproduces spellings that appear to be drawn from Bald’s map of 1805, rather
than the 1789 version. Given Bald’s connection to Ainslie, it seems likely that
when Thomson named Ainslie as a source, he was actually referring to the Bald
plan.
The marine chart group connected with Anslie’s map has been discussed
elsewhere, but is marked on stemma 3.1 above for ease of reference. Cary,
Stockdale and Faden share a number of features with Ainslie’s map. While none
is an exact reproduction, the relationship between them is evident through
similarities both in the selection and spelling of the names shown.
Figure 3-6 Thomson's Map (1822)
106
Wilkes, Missing p.45
50
Stemma 3-2 Direct Relationships to Ainslie
In turn, the maps by Wyld and Carrington from
1846 are identical to each other for the area
under discussion and seem likely to derive
from Faden based on the writing of Scarist for
Scarista on all three. There is of course an
important caveat to be borne in mind in
relation to all such discussions, namely that Figure 3-7 Wyld’s Map (1846)
the use of one map as a source by a second
cartographer in one location does not invariably mean that the entire map is a
copy. The examples outlined here are intended as discussions of the area in this
thesis only, unless otherwise stated.
3.2.2 The Bald Group
This section has been split into two parts. 3.2.2.1 examines the relationship
between Bald’s estate plan and later maps, some of which are sources referred
to in the OSNB. Section 3.2.2.2 is a detailed analysis of Bald’s plan: this map is
the single most detailed image of the area under discussion at any point prior to
51
the arrival of the Hydrographic and Ordnance Surveys more than 50 years later,
and it was made just before the clearances really began in earnest.
3.2.2.1 The Bald Group
Thomson (1822)
Black (1862)
Bald (1805)
Hebert (1823)
Arrowsmith (1807)
McCulloch (1840)
Stemma 3-3: Proposed Derivations from Bald 1805
As discussed above, it seems likely that the ‘Ainslie’ map referred to in
Thomson’s introduction and on the maps
themselves (see fig 3.9) is Bald’s 1805 plan,
rather than the 1789 version. Furthermore,
where the OSNB refer to ‘Johnson’s map’, it
Figure 3-8: Thomson's list of
seems likely that it is Thomson’s map that is
Sources, 1824
being referred to: as Wilkes has noted,
Johnson was the surveyor used by Thomson, and his name appears at the foot of
all maps of the western Isles in Thomson’s Atlas.107
The next map containing variant names in this
group is Arrowsmith’s 1807 map. Rather than
representing the evidence from a new survey,
Arrowsmith’s
map
states
that
it
was
“Constructed from Original Materials obtained
Figure 3-9 Arrowsmith's Map
(1807)
107
Wilkes , Missing p. 45
under the authority of the Parliamentary
52
Commissioners”108 It is evident at a glance that multiple sources were drawn
upon for the compilation of the map of the Long Island: as fig 3.11 below shows,
Harris is shown in much more detail than Lewis. The names recorded on
Arrowsmith and McCulloch’s editions preserve
some of the forms used on Bald’s map: a
comparison of the three using the table in
appendix 2
shows that
Bald’s recording of
Seilebost as Chillibost, and Scarasta as Scarrista is
apparent on the later maps too.
However, the
correlation is not absolute: Bald’s Horgabot
becomes Hargabost in the hands of Arrowsmith. It
seems likely that although Bald’s plan was used as
a source for Arrowsmith, it was not the only
Figure 3-10 Arrowsmith
1807 (Long Island)
source. One solution is that there is another missing map which was a further
source for Arrowsmith.
In terms of design, the level of coastal detail is greater
than that shown in Bald’s map, or indeed any other
map discussed so far, including marine charts. The area
marked in fig.3-12
shows the coastline near Scarasta
in a different way to any of the maps discussed so far.
This study has examined all of the known maps held by
the National Library of Scotland and so it seems likely
that either Arrowsmith did some original work, as well Figure 3-11
as drawing on existing sources, or more likely, there is Arrowsmith Map
a further source which is at present missing.109
(detail)
As with Arrowsmith’s map, Hargabost also appears on Hebert’s 1823 map.
Hebert’s map is much less detailed, but acknowledges the role of the
parliamentary committee, and by extension, Arrowsmith’s map, in its creation.
108
http://maps.nls.uk/view/74400703
It should be noted that while all maps depicting the Hebrides have been examined, only those yielding
names for the survey area have been included in the appendix and/ or discussed above.
109
53
However, there is so little detail on this map that it cannot be considered a key
source for this project, but is included on the stemma above in order to highlight
its connection with the Bald group.
McCulloch’s ‘geological’ map of 1840 reproduced Arrowsmith’s work of 1807,
and acknowledges this fully on the main sheet.110 The remaining map, Black’s
map of 1862, which potentially belongs to this group, is not a straightforward
source. That Black’s work draws on Bald, or at least Thomson, is evident from
the correlation of names shown in appendix 2, However, it also shows names not
marked on any of the other maps or marine charts, such as Cnoc Quoit, shown in
fig.3-13 below.
Despite the reference on the printed copy to Ordnance survey and admiralty
charts as sources on the title of the map, the names included suggest a wider
range of sources were drawn on: For example Hagabost appears here, but the
only other source using this form identified to date is Thomson’s map.
Furthermore,
The
OS
actually draw on Black
as a source, rather than
the other way around.
At
the
point
Black
created his map, or at
least the Harris portion
of it, the Hydrographic
survey would have been
available, and the two
Figure 3-12 Black's Map (1862)
share
some
name-
forms, such as Aird Nisaboist. However, the Ordnance survey were yet to visit
Harris. As such, Black’s map may be linked to Bald’s original plan, via Thomson’s
map, as well as to the Hydrographic Survey. this example provides an example of
the difficulties involved in displaying the relationships between maps: while the
110
ref
54
stemma above is helpful in showing that a relationship exists it is much harder
to show the degree of such a relationship. As such, Stemma 3.3 provided above
is intended as an outline illustration only.
3.2.2.2 Bald’s Map as a Source for the South Harris Machair c.1805
This map is referred to repeatedly as a source for the Ordnance Survey
notebooks in the area, but care is needed: Bald was the assistant of Ainslie,
whose work is referenced in the OSNB as a source. As has already been
discussed, a large number of the map sources for Harris are derived from either
Bald or Ainslie’s maps, but their close working relationship can result in one
being confused for the other. The degree of detail on Bald’s map is a significant
advance on that employed in Ainslie’s, and the professional connection should
not be overstated, although the fact that Ainslie and Bald produced their maps
only 5 years apart needs to be borne in mind when using them as evidence for
settlements in Harris. The ‘estate plan’ referred to as an OSNB source
reproduces the names on Bald’s map sufficiently well to establish that the plan
that the OSNB refers to as ‘estate plan’ is in fact Bald’s.
Figure 3-13 Bald Map Detail "Contents of Harris"
55
This ‘map’ is essentially an estate plan, made for the owner, one Alexander
Hume. 111 Fig. 3-14 above shows the ‘contents of Harris’ is included in the
bottom right corner of the original map. The first column shows land ‘Arable
with the plough’ while the second and third focus on pasture. This makes this
map a quite remarkable resource: in one place it encapsulates the growing
tension between (absentee) owner and tenant over centres of population which
were also valuable pasture land. This slightly different agenda underlying the
mapping process, is particularly useful for our examination of settlement in the
area, as it is more concerned with the location of people (and therefore rental
income) than, for example, an admiralty chart might be.
Figure 3-15 shows Bald’s map with
some boundaries highlighted.
This
reveals a number of interesting
features: first of all the sheer size of
some of the tacks by the time that
this map was made. Luskintire takes
up over a third of the area of south
Harris, and spans the island from
west to east, as do the tacks at
Nisibost and Borve. While the tacks
at Scarrista and North Town are
smaller, they contain a relatively
Figure 3-14 Bald 1805 plan: Boundaries
high proportion of good farmland.
Highlighted
In addition, several settlements are marked in the Bays area of the East Coast.
None of them are especially large, but it is nonetheless clear from this map that,
as the rental evidence suggested there were people settled there before the
clearance period. Several of the settlements on the west are clearly quite large,
notably at North Town, South Town, Muckle and Little Scarrista and Borve, and
111
Caird, Estate Plans p.58
56
it is clear that at this time it was the machair area that was the main area of
settlement. Tarbert, (located on the neck of land from which it takes its name
at the top of the figure above), is barely visible and constitutes little more than
a handful of dwellings at this stage. The map is sufficiently detailed to require
to be separated into three images for the purpose of discussion.
A: Luskentyre-Seilebost Area
Figure 3-15 Bald Map Luskintire
The sheer size of the original tack at Luskintire is clearly visible, and crosses
right over to the east coast at Dieraclate. The spelling in this form suggests that
Kintyre may be the generic element employed here, but this problematic name
will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 4 below. Small topographical details,
such as small islets like Holm Beg are completely omitted, but settlement areas
are clearly marked. Despite the size of this tack, there are remarkably few
houses marked, and those that are there are confined to the west part of the
area, beside the burial ground.112 The spelling of ‘Chillibost’ has been discussed
under the entry for this source in the OS name-books
112
It is worth noting that all of the burial grounds on Harris are over on this west coast area, due to the rocky nature of other parts of
the island. The coffin route from the bays to the west coast is still marked today by old cairns and by a tourist pathway. This serves to
57
B:Nisibost Area
Figure 3-16 Bald Map Nisibost area
In the second segment of the map, a fairly substantial settlement is shown at
Horgabot with a much smaller one in evidence at Nisibost. Horgabot is marked
as being within the boundaries of ‘Nisibost’, and indeed this is a point of
interest about this map, as it may help to explain how Horgabot was treated
administratively, i.e. as part of Nisibost. Bald’s role as a map maker extended
to marking boundaries and indicating population centres. Both are evident to a
much greater degree in his map than some of the other map sources available
for the area.
remind us that despite the presence of hills and water in between, the west and east coasts were not completely cut off from each
other.
58
In contrast with the approach taken by the Ordnance Survey, Bald pays scant
attention to ‘antiquities’ in the landscape: Neither MacLeod’s Stone nor the
chambered cairn at Horgabot is marked, although the dun at Borve is indicated
as duine, perhaps on account of its proximity to a quarry. Overwhelmingly, Bald
focuses on human activity in the landscape. That is not to say that natural
features aren’t marked: they are. However, in some cases, as in the duplication
of Cleatt Nisibost on the figure above, it is done with little attention to detail.
Rivers, lochs and the coast are marked in reasonable detail, but it should be
remembered that in many cases these form an obvious natural boundary
between sites. One of the features of secondary names in this area is that they
are frequently applied to subjects such as watercourses, which help to locate
and/or define the primary settlement. This is helpful when trying to reconstruct
the earlier landscape using names: although Horgabot has by this time been
absorbed into Nisibost in terms of boundaries, the locations of rivers and lochs
help us to see where the original boundaries are likely to have been. The
settlement names themselves employ easily identifiable specifics to facilitate
differentiation between the bolstaðr on the headland and the one at the nearby
chambered cairn.
C: Borve, Scarrista and North Town
Figure 3-17 Bald Map: Scarrista-North Town
59
As well as marking a number of significant population centres, this map attests
to non-agricultural activity. An asbestos quarry is clearly marked near Borve,
which perhaps provided another source of employment for local people before
the area was cleared for sheep. There are some difficulties with the map at this
point, which demonstrate why perhaps the Ordnance survey didn’t use it to the
extent that one might have expected: While Scarrista is divided into Muckle and
Little, Borve is marked in three ways: as Borve, as L. Borve and as M. Borve.
The problem here is that there are no less than three Germanic languages
potentially present: The original coining language of Borve, Old Norse, is
modified by, variously, Scots and English. The use of abbreviations for
settlements around Borve is potentially confusing. We know from rental records
and other sources that Borve is often split into three, but which is which here?
M. Borve could be Mid Borve or Muckle Borve. L. Borve is most likely ‘Little
Borve’, but the designation of a third site simply as Borve without modification
makes for a potentially complicated situation. ‘Mid’ seems a more likely solution
given that Borve itself is marked and one would expect this to be the largest
settlement.
The glebe, or church lands, separates the two parts of Scarista, but
interestingly, the value of the land is also entered onto the reckoning sheet
discussed above, perhaps reflecting a statutory obligation to provide one. It is
clear from the boundary markings that the division of Scarista was a relatively
recent happening, as was the creation of the glebe (which, as the Statistical
Accounts show, reflected a relatively recent relocation of the parish church).
Common grazing land to the east of these sites is marked here, showing that at
the point of coining, Scarista was probably a staðir of considerable size.
The North Town area is relatively self-contained, and its geographical
positioning facilitates this. Although the presence of a considerable hill in the
middle of the tack has implications for land use, there is plenty of good land in
the area, and as archaeological excavations have shown, there is ample
evidence for thousands of years of settlement and cultivation in the area.
60
To conclude discussion of this source, it remains to say that it is absolutely
invaluable for identifying where the original boundaries might have lain: despite
the later subdivisions, the retention of the settlement name in features such as
streams points the way. The boundaries that were contemporary to the writer
were drawn deliberately for the purpose of asserting ownership and assessing
value, but their very presence helps the viewer to observe subdivision and
change. By comparing these boundaries with natural features, it is possible to
form a hypothesis of where the boundaries might have been at the point of
coining versus where they have moved to. For example, in the case of Scarrista,
several artificial boundaries have been imposed by way of subdivision, but the
area as a whole is bounded by water, from the shore on one side, along to the
sands that divide it from North Town, but also by small rivers, streams and other
inlets, making a quite natural boundary for the area.
3.3 Marine Charts
3.3.1 Charts Drawing on Ainslie
As figure 3-19 shows, the Depot Generale de la Marine map of 1803 is very
clearly derived from Huddart 1794, to the point that it is to all intents and
purposes a copy of it. Huddart is clearly part of the Ainslie group, as discussed in
3.2.1 above. Matters of derivation are not black and white though: examination
of the Heather map of 1804 shows that it may well have drawn on the Huddart
chart, as they mark broadly the same items as other maps in the Ainslie group.
Figure 3-18 Huddart and Depot Generale de la Marine
Heather’s map also preserves
the same settlement names
and many of the spellings
with only small variations.
For example, Heather gives
Luskender while Huddart has
Luskinder.
This raises some
considerations: first of all,
one might well expect maps Figure 3-19 Heather's Chart 1804
from approximately the same
period to share stylistic features. Likewise, they may identify the same
settlements, as these are likely to have been the key sites at the time all of the
maps were made. That is not to say though that they did not draw on each other
to some degree, and the central point that these maps require careful treatment
62
as they present, broadly, the same evidence is still valid. Rather awareness of
these factors is needed when using them as evidence. As the stemma showing
sources for the OSNB 3.4.1 shows, what seems like an overwhelming amount of
evidence for one name may in fact represent either a cluster of map making
activity over a short period, or actual interdependency of sources.
3.3.2 Hydrographic Survey
The Hydrographic survey chart of 1860 is much more detailed, and a good deal is
known about its
creation.
It is
later
date,
in
and reflects the
skills
and
resources
available to the
two
highly
experienced
naval captains
who undertook
Figure 3-20 Hydrographic Survey 1: Losgainntir Area
the work: Captains Thomas and Otter. Captain Thomas’s early contribution to
the study of Harris place-names and antiquities is discussed in 4.1.2 below.
Captain Otter was also a highly capable man, and was in fact responsible for the
Scottish survey.113 His survey of the wider area began in 1846 in Stornoway, with
his chart of the harbour. By 1860, he had both experience and contacts in the
islands. 114
The survey covering the machair area was undertaken in 1860,
approximately 3 years after Captain F.W.L Thomas had joined the project.
While it is likely that Huddart and Heather’s charts were available to the men, it
is clear from examination of the map that this survey represented genuine
innovation in the maritime mapping of the Western isles. As such, it is not
113
G Ma Lea a d F.Ma leod,: Captai Otter a d Captai Tho as i Ma Leod, F ed Togail Tir: The Map
of the Western Isles (Stornoway 1989) pp.117-22
p.117
114
Ibid p.117
63
appropriate to include the Hydrographic survey as a derivative of one of the
earlier charts: it is clearly
original. At the same time,
it is likely that the earlier
charts were part of the
broader body of evidence
used by Thomas and Otter,
a classic example of the
dangers
and
difficulties
associated with studying
source derivation.
The Hydrographic survey
Figure 3-21 Hydrographic Survey 2: Nisaboist Area
is so detailed that it is
necessary to split the original map into four sections in order to reproduce it
effectively here. It is remarkable for a number of reasons, not least of which is
the sheer level of detail that is preserved. Rivers are fully marked, and details
down to walls in some cases are shown. Not only are a large number of names
not recorded elsewhere shown here, but the orthography is heavily Gaelicised.
The inclusion of names not shown on other maps is of particular interest when
Figure 3-22 Hydrographic Survey 3:Borgh Area
one considers that this map predates the work of the Ordnance Survey in the
64
area. Monadal and Allt Milleadh Mna appear only on this map. Monadal is listed
only on this chart at this time, and seems to show another ON name that was
still in use in the area. Its omission from rolls and rentals is perhaps explained by
the fact that it
does not appear to
be a settlement,
although
as
Doreen Waugh has
demonstrated, the
presence
of
the
ON element Dalr Figure 3-23: Hydrographic Survey 4 Taobh Tuath Area
does not always
preclude settlement.115 Allt Milleadh Mna is recorded in the OSNB as a variant
of Abhuinn Scarasta Mhor, but the source listed is ‘Admiralty chart’, so this,
along with the corroboration provided by the spellings recorded of names such as
Seilabost, provides support to the hypothesis that ‘Admiralty chart’ referred to
in the OSNB is in fact the Hydrographic survey. Allt Milleadh Mna is of itself
interesting with a literal derivation of ‘Stream of a Woman’s Ravishing.’ Given
that the name isn’t recorded elsewhere, and the known presence of Hebridean
crew, such as the pilot John MacDonald on the survey ship, this perhaps records
a local name for the site.116
These local inputs, as well as the presence of the Hydrographic survey in the
area shortly after the period of the clearances makes this map an invaluable
source offering a detailed view of the settlement situation. Borve makes an
interesting case in point: we know that the clearance history of the area around
Borve was particularly complex. Borve appears to have been subdivided into
smaller settlements, with Gaelic and English elements applied to them, a
practice which was clearly established by 1688, as the rentals for that year
115
D.Waugh: Caith ess: A other Dip i the S eerag Well i A. Woolf, (ed): Scandinavian Scotland: Twenty
Years After (St Andrews 2009) pp.31-48
116
MacLean Captain Otter p.120
65
record Little Borve, and Borve More.117 The land was first cleared in 1839, as a
result of the pressure brought to bear by the tacksman Stewart, who held the
land on either side and refused to renew his lease unless he was given Na Buirgh
as well. 118 The Inverness Courier of July 1839 records that troops from the
mainland were deployed to enforce the eviction, attesting to how little support
Stewart had on the island.119
In 1847, Borve was resettled by a new owner, only to be cleared again around
1853. 120 The Hydrographic survey map clearly shows a reasonable number of
buildings at Borgh Bheag, Borgh Meadhanoch and Borgh Mhor. However,
evidence from the Highlands and Islands commission shows that the reality of
life in the area was far less stable than the ‘snapshot’ image provided by a map
suggests: John MacLeod of Aird Asaig gave evidence to that commission in 1884,
which reported that tenants were forced from one place to another within the
Borve area before finally being forced off the area completely.121
This reflects a shortcoming in the use of maps as evidence, rather than a
deficiency in Capt. Thomas’s recording process: the changes in the settlement
happened so recently that one might well expect the buildings there to be in a
reasonable state of repair, and not suitable for labelling as ruins. In addition,
the principal concern of the survey was the production of a marine chart, not
the recording of human settlement. Captain Thomas’s connections with the
island, and correspondence with Carmichael (discussed 4.1 below) explain how
he came to have such detailed knowledge, but that he went to the effort to
mark it on a marine chart is testament to his passion for the island’s history.
Indeed, there is strong correlation between the forms he discusses in his 1876
article and the forms that appear on the map. A particularly noteworthy
example is Torgabost shown in fig 3.22 above, which only appears in his article
and on this map. The specific discussion of Thomas’s work below details much
117
Appendix 1
B.Lawson: Harris in History and Legend (Birlinn 2008) p14
119
discussed Ibid p.15
120
Ibid p.16
121
Highlands and Islands commission, disc. Ibid p.17
118
66
of his methodology, but his application of his historical knowledge to these maps
illustrates both his capability as a marine surveyor and as a scholar as well as the
resources that were made available to him to permit such a detailed charting of
the area. Taobh Tuath appears in its Gaelic form for the first time, a literal
translation of North Town, although on the Hydrographic Survey chart, the other
settlements to the south and east have disappeared. Despite this, the name has
become fossilised to a degree: it is now only the ‘North’ town in the sense that
it is on the north slope of the nearby mountain. The settlements South Town
and Druimafuint, which provided an alternative relative location for a ‘North
Town’ have disappeared from the map.
One
final,
but
very
significant point to note
about
the
Hydrographic
survey is its relationship
with the Ordnance Survey.
The Ordnance Survey were
active
in
Cromarty,
Isle
of
1848-52,
Ross
including
Lewis,
and
the
between
at
least Figure 3-24 Hydrographic Survey: North Lewis 1849
partly on the instigation of the owner, Matheson, whose authority comes through
so clearly in the Lewis volumes of the OSNB series.
The records of the
Hydrographic department of the Ministry of defence actually list the OS maps as
a source. 122 However, it is important to note that Caird’s assertion that the OS
maps were used as evidence in the Lewis survey cannot be universally applied:
In the parts of Lewis that the Hydrographic survey visited first, for example the
area around Stornoway and the North Minch, they sometimes covered the area
at either around the same time, or even before the Ordnance survey.
For
example, the Hydrographic Survey surveyed the North Minch, from Stornoway to
the Butt of Lewis in 1849, but the corresponding 1st edition maps for Lewis were
122
MacLean and MacLeod, Captain Otter pp.117-8 As MacLean et al note, a comparison of the treatment
of the two areas would be most worthwhile
67
Figure 3-25 Hydrographic Survey, South Harris 1860
the result of surveys taking place between 1848-1853. As such, the OS surveys
may have been sources for some parts, but not for others. The 1849 map (Fig.
3-25) )shows a quite different approach to that taken by the time the survey
reached Harris over a decade later (see fig. 3-26 above), and marks only the
most basic landward features.
The Harris surveyors benefitted both from
greater experience, but also from the likely presence of Capt. Thomas, reflected
in the increased attention to detail in relation to antiquities and settlements
evident on the Harris map, compared with Otter’s map of the North Minch 11
years earlier.
Harris, which was at that time part of Inverness-shire was not surveyed until
1876-8. The result of this is that whilst some Ordnance Survey material was
available for part of the Hydrographic survey’s work in Lewis, the OS had yet to
visit Harris at all. As such, the job of the surveyors was considerable, and the
production of this map marked a huge leap forward in the cartography of Harris.
The 6in/mile 1st ed. maps of Harris record much less detail than the
Hydrographic charts, not only in terms of coastal features, which one might
expect, but in terms of labelling settlements and geographical features. It is
also worth noting that no 25in/mile map of Harris was made, apart from for the
settlement at Tarbert.
3.4 The Ordnance Survey
This chapter will examine the processes and imperatives behind the Ordnance
Survey’s (OS) work in Harris, which took place from 1876-8. The newly-digitised
name-books are discussed in depth in 3.4.1, with relevant entries transcribed
and included in appendix 3. Section 3.4.2 will explore the development of the
OS maps from earliest edition through to the present day. Alexander
Carmichael’s involvement with the project will be discussed in chapter 4.
3.4.1 The Ordnance Survey Original Object Name-Books
This section will examine the evidence of the Ordnance Survey Original Object
Name Books from a range of perspectives: first of all, evidence and alternative
forms for each of the key settlements has been extracted and recorded.
It
should be noted that I have not recorded every name, only those that contain
the name of the settlement within them. Other names in close proximity have
been examined, but will be discussed only where they are appropriate as
evidence in order to control the size of this project. Having collected the name
sources from the OS material, some analysis is then given on the treatment of
names and variant spellings within the source, as well as on informants where
appropriate.
Names will be dealt with in a North-South order, starting at
Luskentyre in the north and ending at Druim a’ Phuind/ Drimophuind in the
south. A.A. Carmichael is the most frequently cited individual person for these
names, but a distinctive pattern emerges as to how his evidence is handled, and
a separate section following the name discussion will explore this in more depth.
3.4.1.1 OSNB Orthographic Preferences and Problems
The OSNB and 1st edition maps
show an overwhelming preference
for
names
with
non-Gaelic
orthography, although forms with
Gaelic
spellings
provided
by
Carmichael are corroborated by
other reliable sources, including
the tremendously detailed work of
Figure 3-26 OSNB Inverness-shire Outer Heb. Vol 4/p.262
69
another government agency; the Hydrographic survey. While it is known that the
two surveys did not work together, although they were in the Western Isles at
the same time, the OSNB do refer to the Admiralty Charts, but frequently reject
the forms they propose. On one hand, the survey engaged the help of individuals
such as A.A. Carmichael for the specific purpose of commenting on the Gaelic
forms and proposing derivations in a manner that is not applied to the nonGaelic names. However, in the 1st edition maps, Gaelic orthography is largely
rejected: Beinn Losgainntir is ignored in favour of Ben Luskentyre.
Close examination of the notebooks helps us to see how this came to be. Fig 328 shows landscape features on or near to Ben Luskentyre. 123 In these examples,
the only forms offered were Gaelic forms, and so an anglicised version could not
be favoured in such instances and the Gaelic form was used. Furthermore, those
names were being collected so that they could be used to effectively label the
map, and place-name collection was not the primary objective of the exercise.
It appears that Carmichael’s contributions may have come after the name-books
were drafted and so in many cases it is unclear whose authority is accepted
here, as several of the authorities are marked either by a single line, ‘ditto’
mark or in some other manner liable to be rendered invalid by a later
amendment. This is a problem throughout these notebooks, and even signs and
symbols that would normally indicate that the same source as for the previous
entry was used are used in an inconsistent and confusing manner. Any future
examination of OSNB sources named in this thesis should be sure to make direct
reference to the original source.
The level of detailed examination applied to names in the machair area is
inconsistent and it seems likely that the surveyors took more time and trouble
over places where they found people: Nisabost and Horgabost are both treated
very briefly, but in both cases, no actual settlement is described. While at
Borve, the settlements evident in earlier evidence had disappeared, the
123
OSNB Inverness-shire Outer Hebrides Vol.4 .p.262 http://www.scotlandsplaces.gov.uk/digitalvolumes/ordnance-survey-name-books/inverness-shire-os-name-books-1876-1878/inverness-shire-outerhebrides-volume-04/262#zoom=2&lat=471.39999&lon=1777&layers=B
70
presence of substantial farms, with some (although probably not many) people
present, drew the surveyors to lavish more attention on them. This is an
important distinction to bear in mind when handling these sources; as such a
perspective is a potential source of distortion.
The Gaelic elements here cause significant trouble and confusion for the
Ordnance Survey, and their treatment is very unsystematic indeed, often on
account of a name-form from one source being preferred in one instance, for
example the numerous confusions of mòr/mhòr and beag/bheag evident in
appendix 3. while in the next, a form is taken from a completely different
source, written at a different time and using different orthographic conventions.
3.4.1.2 Linguistic Patterns and Distinctive Features
In terms of language, no attempt is made to propose an etymology for
Luskentyre, or any of the Settlement-names coined in ON. This reflects the
broader practice observed in the Harris OSNB volumes of the OS not seeking out
etymologies for coinings in languages other than the one spoken in the area, i.e.
Gaelic.
Names involving ‘Seilebost’ are spelt much more consistently than those for
Luskentyre, although the same broad tendency to prefer anglicised over Gaelic
spellings is also in evidence. In five of the six instances provided here, a Gaelic
element is added to Seilebost, creating an existing-name construction.
Sometimes the element involved is English as in Seilebost River but this is
notable in its relative inconsistency with other hydronyms in the area, which
overwhelmingly opt for a Gaelic modifier. Even in this instance, Carmichael does
offer ‘Abhuinn Seilebost’ as an alternative, but ‘Seilebost River’ is chosen as the
final form. The introduction of a Gaelic element into secondary names
employing the settlement name is remarkably consistent: Table 1 below includes
only names that are well- attested. Bothan Buirgh for example is excluded, on
the grounds that Carmichael was probably asked to provide a Gaelic form, rather
than that he argued for its use. Even with such exclusions, the extent of this
practice across the area is notable.
71
Table 3-1 Gaelic Elements in Secondary Names
Primary settlement name
Number of
secondary names
employing
settlement name
Number of secondary
names applying
Gaelic modifier to
existing names
Luskentyre
3
3
Seilebost
6
5
Horgabost
2
2
Nisabost
3
3
Borve
3
2
Scarista
4
4
Taobh Tuath/Druim a'
Phuind
3
3
The forms offered for Seilebost (see appendix 3) are also worthy of closer
examination. Linguistically, the alternative forms here exhibit a number of
points of interest.
The first of these relates to the word-initial‘s’.
This is
written as ‘sh’ by Carmichael and in the Admiralty Chart but ‘ch’ by Johnston’s
map, Black’s map and a source referred to as an ‘Old estate plan’ identified
earlier in this chapter as Bald’s estate plan. As discussed in sections 3.2 above,
and in 3.4.3 below, there is extensive interdependency between the sources
used, and the apparent prevalence of ‘Ch’ forms are in fact all ultimately
derived from Bald’s plan. However, is should not be ignored, as it may reflect
an alteration of sound in Harris Gaelic from /s/ to /tʃ/.This is supported by
72
evidence from a source in private hands, but cited by Gammeltoft, which
records the same sound, but in a document from c. 1930. 124
3.4.1.3 Social Change Reflected in the OSNB
Several settlement names, such as Horgabost are not given listings as
settlements in the OSNB.
Horgabost had been cleared well before the OS
arrived in Harris, but even earlier sources such as Bald’s estate plan mark
Horgabost within the bounds of Nisabost (itself absent as a settlement listing in
these books). Thus a gradual process of depopulation and land consolidation
becomes very evident, even in a source such as this, which is not concerned in
the least with population movements as a primary intention.
The apparent absence of the original settlement site here from the name books
is absolutely fascinating, yet completely overlooked by the OS, reflecting the
fact that it was primarily their job to reflect the world as it was at the point of
survey, not as it had been, particularly where change had been relatively
recent. Antiquities have the dual advantage of being inert, unlike population
groups. They also speak of a more distant past rather than more contentious
recent history. Cleared villages would have been of little interest to the OS on
either count. While Horgabost itself is listed as a possible form, under ‘Gleann
Horgabost,’the surveyor avoids making separate entry for Horgabost, even
though the estate map clearly shows that a settlement was once there. It is, by
its absence, a form of proof that any meaningful settlement had disappeared at
this point (although it is a township once again at the time of writing), as well as
demonstrating the degree to which the OS books represent a historic ‘snapshot’
of the time at which they were compiled.
Borve has similarly disappeared; surviving in a number is names which reflect
later human activity, from the subdivision of crofts in Borvemore and
Borvebeg¸or, ironically, in the name Borve Lodge: a name applied to a building
created for, and used by an English-speaking absentee landlord. Borvemore and
Borvebeg are both described as fairly substantial farms, in a good state of
124
Gammeltoft, -bólstaðr p.145
73
repair, but while Bald’s estate plan of 1805 shows that there were small hamlets
at Borve [mor] and Borvebeg, the description in the name books shows that
these hamlets had disappeared. 125 Nowhere in this discussion is the antiquity
responsible for the name ‘Borve’ (a prehistoric Dun) discussed, possibly because
it sits someway off the main route way that the surveyor would probably have
followed. By examining the name-forms shown in appendix 3 here, we can see
the evidence of activity over a remarkably period, by people who spoke at least
4 languages: Old Norse, Gaelic, Scots and English.
3.4.2 The Ordnance Survey Maps
As part of the sources survey for this project, a large number of Ordnance Survey
maps were examined, and the settlement names recorded. These are available
in appendix 3.
This section will deal with how the 1st edition maps were
created, and how the sources for those maps related to each other, as well as
examining the evolution of OS maps to the present day, noting changes to
conventions and practice.
125
see appendix 3
74
3.4.2.1 Sources and Source-interdependencies
Local
Informants (6
individuals)
Alexander
Carmichael
Hydrographic Survey
1860
Ainslie 1789
Ordnance Survey
Original Object Namebooks
Bald estate plan
1804/5
Black's Map (1862)
Johnson/Thomson
1822
Richmond plan
1772/other missing
source
Stemma 3-4 Inter-relationships between OSNB Sources
As stemma 3-4 shows, while a simple count of the sources used in the OS
notebooks for settlements on the South Harris machair apparently shows a wide
variety, close examination
of dependency and interdependency
of sources
shows that many sources share a derivation. Estate plans are referred to in an
inconsistent manner, and although it is sometimes clear that Bald’s 1804/5 plan
is meant, some entries are simply labelled ‘Old estate plan’. When comparison
is made with Bald’s map, it is clear that there is at least one other estate plan
being used: an ‘old estate plan’ is given as a source for Traigh Chillibost,
Horgabost and Nishishee. The first of these doesn’t appear on Bald’s 1804/5
plan at all, while the others use a different spelling to that on Bald’s map.
There are relatively few estate plans of Harris surviving, but one other is known
about: Richmond’s plan of 1772, which was produced in support of a legal
75
dispute.126 The reference to an ‘old’ plan in the name-books leads one to believe
that it is likely to be older than Bald’s plan. Furthermore, some of the forms
recorded as from the ‘old estate’ plan do not match: The OSNB attributes
Horgabost to such a plan, but the form on Bald’s plan is clearly written
Horgabot, suggesting that a different source was used.127 While it has not been
possible to obtain a copy of Richmond’s plan, it is at present the only other
known plan for the Isle of Harris and is therefore highly likely that this is the
item in question.
3.4.2.2 Orthographic Conventions and Changes
The OSNB demonstrate that range of sources and informants were drawn upon in
the creation of the first edition maps, and the surviving correspondence
between Carmichael shows
that
the
decisions made
were not uncontroversial.128
Despite
this,
the
names
recorded on the maps were
subject to very little change
until fairly recently. Small
amendments are evident,
for
example
6in/mile
the
second
1903
edition
map (sheet XVIII) corrects
Figure 3-27 South Harris "Forest" 1in/Mile 3rd
ed. (1911)
the recording of Seilebost River so that the text runs north-south, rather than
south-north as in the first edition, and is consistent with other labels on the
map. However, it is clear that the names on OS maps were subject to reasonably
regular review, as some names, for example South Harris Forest are not listed in
the OSNB, and only appear in later editions of the map.
126
Caird ,Estate plans p.57
See appendices 2 and 3. While Horgabot looks er like a error o Bald s pla , it is o etheless learly
written and cannot be mistaken for Horgabost.
128
give page ref for discussion
127
76
South Harris ‘Forest’ is a particularly problematic name: it doesn’t appear on
the 1st edition map at all, but emerges on 1in/mile 3rd ed (1911)129. On fig X, it
is marked as running from Glen Horgabost to the Laxdale river, but, as shown in
fig. 3.30, it has been
relocated
to
the
Luskentyre side of the
estuary
by
pop
ed,
sheet 18 (1931).130
There
is
difficulty
Figure 3-28 South Harris Forest Pop.ed. 1931
label,
apparent
a
further
with
this
namely
the
absence
of
trees. This can be explained through interpretation of ‘forest’ in this context as
a deer-hunting park, rather than actual woodland.
In Gaelic, such hunting
‘forests’ are denoted by the term frìth, which is never applied to woodland.131
Translation from Gaelic to English generally results in designation as forest
though. The ‘re-Gaelicisation’ of the names in more recent OS editions has
proved most useful for re-establishing this distinction.
However, the 1996
1:10000 sheet 18 unfortunately gave this as this as Coille Ceann a deas na
Hearadh as did various editions of Western Isles tourist board maps from the
same period. 132
A coille, unlike a frith is always used to denote woodland.
However, following the formation of the Gaelic Names Liaison Committee in
2000, which eventually developed into Ainmean-Àite na h-Alba, such issues
were resolved and the most recent edition map now employing, correctly,
coille.133
129
http://maps.nls.uk/view/74490632
http://maps.nls.uk/view/74400535
131
cf Dwelly pg.456
132
With thanks to Dr Simon Taylor, University of Glasgow and Mrs Kate Langley, Rhenigadale, for their
assistance in locating these out-of-print editions. It seems likely that the Tourist map was drawing on the OS
form: given the high levels of Gaelic speakers in the W.Isles, it seems unlikely that such an error would
occur in a purpose-made map.
133
ref map http://www.gaelicplacenames.org/aboutus.php
130
77
Orthographical corrections take a variety of forms in these maps, from the very
simple, as with Seilebost River above, to problematic translations like frìth. In
between these extremes lie amendments to names that are intended to increase
consistency and transparency.
using Scarasta as an element.
One such example is provided by settlements
In early OS maps, these are marked with
inconsistent lention: Scarastavore but Scarastabeg appear on most editions until
1in/mile pop ed, sheet 18 (1931) at which point lenition is consistently applied,
albeit not with conventional Gaelic orthography at this point, and Scarastabeg
becomes Scarastaveg.134
As discussed in relation to earlier maps and charts, an understanding of the
intended purpose behind map-creation is central to interpreting them as
sources. Very broadly speaking, names disappear on these maps for three main
reasons. Firstly, the actual settlement might disappear, secondly the scale of
the map may mean that some micro-toponyms are missed off for reasons of
space, and finally, the intended use may further influence such choices.
Although their original purpose
was military use, OS maps are
now the standard map series in
use in the British Isles. As such,
their usage has evolved over
time,
and
various
scales,
offering a varied degree of
details are available.
The
production of ‘popular’ series
Figure 3-29 1in/Mile Pop.ed. (1923)
maps, such as the one shown in
fig 3-31 is worthy of particular
discussion.
134
http://maps.nls.uk/view/74400535
While scale is of course a consideration, it may not be the only factor under
consideration: While the larger scale OS maps, such at the 1 st ed 6in/mile show
considerable detail, this map focuses on settlements, hills, and some (but not
all) antiquities.
As Bald’s estate plan shows, watercourses in the area
frequently represent a natural boundary between one settlement and another,
and are named accordingly. Bald’s map was particularly concerned though with
boundaries and valuations, whereas this map is intended for a much wider
readership, and as such focuses on roads and hills as orientation features. In this
map, rivers are marked as landscape features, but in no way highlight
boundaries.
By examining maps over an extensive period, it is possible to see which
settlements have been removed. Drimophuind is marked in the first and second
6in/mile maps, but subsequent maps cease to record the name, even though we
know from MacGillivray’s journal and from rental evidence that there was
historically a settlement at this site. Often, as with Horgabost and Nisabost, the
secondary names, which may initially have applied to boundary features, survive
after the settlement itself. On the most recent map, only Clett Druim a’phuind
is shown, with no sign that the settlement had ever existed. Likewise, Abhainn
Nisishee is shown, but the site of the former settlement is unlabelled.
79
4 South Harris Settlement-names
This chapter will examine the early attempts by Capt. Thomas and MacIver to
interpret the Harris names, Carmichael’s impact, both as advisor to the OS and
as a friend to Capt. Thomas, as well as Thomas’s own contributions to
knowledge (4.1). This will be followed by detailed analysis of the name
elements that appear in the gazetteer with reference to relevant commentary
from place-name scholars who have examined either a particular element, or
who have conducted a survey in the Hebrides (4.2). The gazetteer itself is
included as 4.3 for ease of reference.
4.1 Place-name Studies in Harris
4.1.1 A.A. Carmichael
Carmichael’s surviving correspondence, as well as the numerous entries in the
relevant OS name books for Harris which are attributed to him, attest to his
considerable involvement as an ‘authority’ for the OS. Such ‘authority’ status at
the compilation stage was by no means a guarantee of acceptance in the final
map versions though.
Despite his own criticism in correspondence with the OS of their orthographic
practices, where he criticises their alteration of some Gaelic names as
‘rendering them unintelligible’ Carmichael was the ‘local authority’ for a
number of entries in the OS name books in Harris, the Uists and Barra.
Carmichael undertook the work for free, and indeed went to some considerable
trouble. This surviving correspondence, preserved in the Carmichael Watson
collection of the University of Edinburgh clearly defines Carmichael’s role in the
OS process.
“ … I am nearly done of the Ordnance Survey correcting, and drich work it
has been to me. The system pursued by the Ordnance Survey in regard to
taking up place-names is altogether erroneous. Non-Gealic speaking men
go about among non-English speaking people to take down Norse-Gaelic
names with their Englsih meanings! These lists then are sent to the district
office…[where] there is a Gaelic writer who is expected to write down the
names correctly. And finally the lists are sent down to the ‘local
80
authority’ who is asked but is ‘not expected to do more than give his
opinion’ of this precious nonsense … And in point of fact, I am myself the
one local authority as far as known to me who has done more than simply
sit and home and ‘give an opinion’. I have gone to the locality and in every
instance corrected the place-name from the living voice on the spot… I
have gone to all this trouble and expense without either asking or
expecting payment, but simply from a desire to have the work correctly
done and thereby benefit posterity.”135
Clearly, there was a world of difference between how the Ordnance Survey
regarded his role, namely as a verifier of sorts, and how he himself, quite
naturally as a collector and folklorist, saw it. Carmichael however, did not let
his concerns go unvoiced, as this correspondence with the Ordnance survey,
surviving in the collections of the National Library of Scotland shows:
“… I found that many of [the] place-names which I was at so much
pains and expense in collecting were entire [sic] left out that some names
on the old maps were left unaltered and that some were altered in form
thus lending the meaning different.. I took the liberty of drawing the
attention of the Dir G of the OS to these alterations and the reply was
that names were omitted to save expence [sic] that old names were left
out as they were obviously incorrect & [so] as to avoid confusion and that
the final mode of spelling rested with the Inspector General.”136
The impact of the OS practices on the Harris notebooks fortunately renders few
names totally unintelligible, although the alteration of Carmichael’s Abhuinn
Seilebost to Seilebost River is a little problematic. As discussed in chapter 3, it
is a disruption to the system found elsewhere in the region. These others use
Gaelic names, which have a greater semantic range than English river. For
example, some water courses are designated Allt, others Abhuinn and so on.137
One important aspect of Carmichael’s work as an onomastician has been to date
largely overlooked: Carmichael corresponded warmly with Capt. F.W.L. Thomas,
as surviving letters in the Carmichael-Watson collection show.138 Unfortunately,
135
M. ‘o so : The Li i g Voi e i Ma Leod, F ed Togail Tir: The Map of the Western Isles (Stornoway
1989) pp.97-104 p98
136
Unpublished letter, reproduced at http://maps.nls.uk/os/6inch/os_info3.html
137
see appendix 3
138
D Siùbhart The Life and Legacy of Alexander Carmichael (Islands Book Trust 2008) p.127 Unfortunately,
this part of the collection was not fully digitised at the point this thesis was written, but further
investigation of this correspondence would certainly reveal a great deal about the relationship between
Carmichael, Thomas and the OS.
81
this part of the collection was not fully digitised at the point this thesis was
written, but further investigation of this correspondence would certainly reveal
a great deal about the relationship between Carmichael, Thomas and the OS.
However, examination of the name-forms provided by both men to the OS,
Carmichael in his role as a local authority, and Thomas as the likely creator of
the Hydrographic Survey chart covering the machair area shows a considerable
correlation.139
However, the agreement is not so absolute that one could propose that
Carmichael edited Thomas’s Gaelic names for him. Torgabost on the admiralty
chart is distinctively Thomas’s work, as discussed in 3.3.2 above, and he is on
occasion responsible for a completely different name-form, such as Allt Milleadh
Mna (vs Carmichael’s Abhuinn Scarasta Mhor) recorded in the OSNB. 140
As
Stiùbhart suggests, Carmichael would doubtless have been an invaluable source
for Thomas’s Hydrographic Survey, given his dual roles as civil servant and
folklorist. In turn, Carmichael’s acknowledgement of his friend’s contributions in
his contributions to PSAS attest to the two-way nature of the exchange. 141
However, the OSNB show that although Carmichael was a potential influence for
Thomas, he was not his sole source. There is a sense of irony to the fact that the
relationship between Thomas, Carmichael and the OS is revealed principally
through the rejection of the forms offered by the two men to the Ordnance
Survey.
4.1.2 F.W.L. Thomas
Captain Thomas’s interest in Hebridean place-names may well have resulted in
his presence in the area for the purpose of marine charting. Writing in PRSAS in
1876, he makes some remarkably pertinent observations about the difficulties of
representing Norse and Gaelic names in an English speaking context:
“Why write the Gaelic forms on the Government maps and charts? or, Why
not write the Gaelic names in Gaelic orthography and the converse with the
139
transcribed in appendix 3
ibid
141
Stiùbhart, Life and legacy p.127
140
82
Norse? Well, up until this time, who could tell which were the Norse? and
the effect of writing the Gaelic names in vulgar English is to render them
unintelligible.”142
Of course, as someone involved in the process of map compilation, he was well
aware
of
the
difficulties
of
balancing
purpose
with
accurate
wider
representation. His remarks on the general difficulty of representing coinings
with an origin in one language, which has been modified in another and which is
being shown on a map for use principally by speakers of neither of those
languages are very perceptive. Thomas signals an awareness of linguistic
considerations and geographical distribution: he attempts discussion of the
treatment of Norse elements in Gaelic-speaking contexts, particularly the shift
from word-initial H- in ON to T in Gaelic, which explains the presence of
Torgabost on the 1860 survey map.143 While he contextualises Hebridean names,
noting they almost universally have equivalents in the Northern Isles, he also
argues that the origins of the Hebridean names are ‘closer to Icelandic’ than
their Northern cousins, although he observes that there are only two -bólstaðr
names recorded in Landnámabók, compared with a much wider distribution in
the Northern and Western Isles.144
Capt. Thomas’s methodology is set out in detail in his 1876 article, and it
appears that he undertook a study which was quite remarkable for the time in
which it was written. His work was reasonably well-known at the time, and was
explicity drawn on by MacBain in his study of the Highlands and Islands. 145
Drawing names from Lewis and Harris rentals, he tabulated them took down
every variant form that he could find, from a range of authorities, then mapped
them against rentals from Orkney and Shetland, finally examining Landnámabók
and an Icelandic valuation roll. In total, he claims to have mapped over 12000
names.146 While the table is not reproduced in his article, it is possible that it
remains in the library of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland through whom he
142
Thomas, PRSAS vol. 11 p.474
Ibid p.473 see chapter 3.3.2 above for further discussion
144
Ibid vol. 11 p.475
145
MacBain pp80-4
146
Thomas, PRSAS vol. 11 p.474-5
143
83
published much of his work. While, as discussed in chapter 2 above, there are
inherent risks in dealing with early sources without applying critical analysis, the
basic approach taken by Capt. Thomas is not a world away from the approach
taken by place-name scholars today. Indeed, it could be argued that to an
extent his work foreshadowed that of Gammeltoft’s the Place-name Element
Bolstaðr in the North Atlantic Area although of course Gammeltoft’s work builds
on a wider foundation of toponymic and linguistic scholarship. It would appear
that Capt. Thomas is an individual whose contribution to Hebridean namestudies has been somewhat overlooked, and his work certainly would merit
further investigation. In particular, his discussion of Luskentire as potentially a
Gaelic name is explored in 4.2 below.
Thomas states that one of his key sources for Harris is a ‘proved rental’ of
1830.147 However, while the name-forms in the rental do match with those in his
account, names such as Horgibost are also discussed. This does not appear in the
1830 rental, but given Thomas’s local contacts and his knowledge of the area, it
seems highly likely that he would have had access to sources to fill in the gaps
about settlements he knew to have existed.
4.1.3 D.MacIver
Early place-name studies for Harris are few, but in 1934 a headmaster from
Babyle, D. MacIver, published a small book via the Stornoway gazette press.
While the methodological approach to, and analysis of many of his names are
suspect, it is, nonetheless one of the few studies covering the machair area
which was compiled specifically to examine place-names other than the OS
notebooks, (to which MacIver does not appear to have had access). It is at the
very least worth consulting for the names which it preserves. It has become
fashionable to condemn early studies, and indeed, Oftedal damns “amateurs like
D. MacIver, whose chief merit is their keen interest in the topic …” with faint
praise.148 While the layout of his volume is problematic, and shortcomings of
147
148
Thomas p.474
M. Oftedal. Village Names of Lewis p.3
84
this study are many, particularly his shortcomings in philology, for an early
attempt, there are points to commend it too, notably his use of local
informants:
“… For North and South Harris, I had the help of two Clergymen, natives of
the districts … who guided me pleasantly over the land and seas of that
pleasant country …”149
Luskentyre provides an ideal small case study of his handling of material. The
derivation is (almost certainly incorrectly) given as Gaelic, and, he proposes,
derived from “Lios, leus or Losg ‘burning heather’, kin ‘headland’ and tire:
‘land’.”150 MacIver’s derivation of kin as ‘headland’ rather than simply ‘head’ is
obviously incorrect, and is a prime example of the shortcomings of his study. He
also fails to develop on alternative interpretations of lios, skipping straight to a
folk-etymology. However, his inclusion of a folk etymology about the use of the
settlement as a beacon site is worthy of comment: the difficulty of this name
has led to a number of such tales about it, one example of which is recorded in
the archive of the School of Scottish Studies, Edinburgh.151
4.2 Elements employed in Harris Settlement-names
4.2.1 Dating the Settlement-names: The Norse Names
The gazetteer (4.3 below) provides the following settlement names:
Borve (ON)
Druim a’ Phuind (ScG)
Horgabost (ON)
Luskentyre (? possibly ScG)
Nisabost (ON)
North Copophaill (ENG/ON)
Scarasta (ON)
Seilebost (ON)
149
MacIver p.1
Ibid p.42
151
http://www.tobarandualchais.co.uk/en/fullrecord/46091/1
150
85
South Copophaill ENG/ON)
South Town (ENG)
Taobh Tuath/ Northton (ScG/EN)
Of these names, the majority of are Old Norse, but the proportion is not as high
as the 4:1 ration suggested by Capt. Thomas. 152 Settlements in ON –bólstaðr are
not divided into smaller parts, and this is perhaps reflective of the relatively
small size of the Harris examples. Borgh and Scarasta however have been
subject to later subdivision, although if, as Nicolaisen suggests, the name
Scarasta derives from pl. staðir and not singular staðr, the name may always
have indicated a group of settlements, rather than an individual one. 153 The
later subdivisions employ these forms in existing-name constructions, modifying
the ON settlement-name with a Gaelic adjective, usually mòr or beag, but in the
case of Borve, meadhanoch. As appendix 1 (rolls and rentals) shows, these
modifications have historically fallen into and out of use in a manner reflective
of landholding practice in the area.
4.2.1.1 Dating the Norse Names
In terms of dating, both –bólstaðr and –
staðir may be relatively early coinings.
However, a degree of caution is needed,
particularly with the -bolstaðr names.
While Nicolaisen has observed that some
of the Orcadian settlements in –bolstaðr
could be very early, this is based in part
on their size and cannot be said to be
true of the Harris examples.154 Similarly,
the hypothesis that –bolstaðr sites had Figure 4-1 Bald's Map 1805
152
discussed http://www.uhi.ac.uk/en/research-enterprise/cultural/centre-for-nordicstudies/publications/11JS5011012Macniven16.pdf
153
W. Nicolaisen Scottish Place-names: their Study and Significance (John Donald 1976, this ed. 2001) p.119
154
Ibid p.119
86
approximately half the value of staðir ones is not borne out in Harris, although it
must be acknowledged that the comparision rests solely on the evidence of one
rental from 1724.155
In this rental, the value of Scarasta adds up to 7 pennylands, and the area
around Taobh Tuath totals at least 6.25.156 On the other hand Horgabost which
may incorporate Nisabost, (discussed Ch 2.5 above) is rated only 2.5 penny-lands
and seilebost is worth only 2. Given that Bald’s map marks Luskintire as such a
large tack in 1805, the valuation of only 3 penny-lands, compared to the
relatively small holdings at Scarrista, seems puzzling.
However, one must
remember that very little of the land held at Losgaintir would have been good
farm-land, while the relatively small –bolstaðr/-staðr/-staðir settlements were
on good land. Similarly, as Bald’s map shows, while at the time of his mapping
the settlements at Scarasta were relatively small, but the majority of it was
usable as farm-land. As such, it seems reasonable to propose that the best land
for farming (i.e. those in - bólstaðr and staðir on Harris)would be the earliest to
be settled, and that while the early dating hypothesis based on size applied to
Orkney cannot be said to apply here, the relative value and high-quality of the
land points to early settlement.
Rixson has argued that these elements are
secondary, but he did so in a context which expressly excluded the Hebridean
material.157 While the small size of these settlements suggests that they may
have been secondary in the sense of not settled by the leading elites, they are
still amongst the best farmland in the area and as such candidates for examples
of early coining.
From a linguistic perspective, the development of the element – bolstaðr in
particular is thoroughly discussed by Gammeltoft.158 Gammeltoft’s summary of
the Scottish development of these generics highlights a number of interesting
points. He notices a general loss of the final consonant(s) d(r), and attributes
this to the word-initial stress of Germanic languages, which leaves this ending
155
see appendix 1
This is excluding some data in which the proportion of land in the area listed is unclear)
157
D. Rixon: The Shadow of Onomastic graffiti JSNS 4 p.131
158
Gammeltoft, – bolstaðr pp.82-96
156
87
vulnerable to attrition. 159 This by itself is not sufficient grounds for dating,
although it has clearly happened in the Harris examples. This could easily have
evolved once the names were in-situ, and it is not necessary to rely on the
dating of this process in Norway in order to evaluate the situation in Harris.
Furthermore, the change could have occurred as a result of contact with Gaelic,
which tends to erode consonant clusters, especially where they are word-final as
is the case here. The medial ‘l’ is likewise potentially in a weak position at the
start of a cluster of three consonants, and thus is vulnerable to loss, although it
is worth noting that some of the Islay forms apparently exhibited ‘l’ until
relatively recently. 160
the shortening of a stem vowel when followed by a
consonant cluster in ON appears to be reflected in the Hebridean examples, and
Gammeltoft proposes that this practice of vowel alteration become established
in Norway between 1100-1350, but later in the Northern Isles.161
As discussed in 2.2.4 above, dating the exact point at which Gaelic began to gain
influence in the Hebrides is problematic. One linguistic consideration which may
help to date the names is the total loss of the ‘ðr/ðir’ in Harris: examples from
the Northern isles of-bolstaðr often occur with a supporting svarabhakti vowel
intruding before a final r to create a syllable, e.g. names in -bister a
development which can be traced to written sources dating to the c.13. 162 This
process is not evident in any of the Harris examples, suggesting the loss took
place early, hinting that Norse influence, at least onomastically, was on the
wane in Harris before the secession of the Hebrides to Scotland in 1266 and that
the Harris –bost settlement names were established well before this date.
In fact, there is strong evidence to suggest a lengthy period in which Gaelic and
Norse co-existed to some degree. While the islands were formally ceded in the
Treaty of Perth, OPS suggests that the islands remained very much part of the
Lordship of the Isles until this was finally ceded to the crown in 1493. 163 In such
159
Ibid p.94
Ibid, p.94
161
Ibid p.93
162
Ibid p.95
163
OPS p.377
160
88
a context, a Norse-speaking populace is unlikely to have disappeared overnight,
but rather the circumstances would have been ripe for Gaelic and ON to exist
side-by side for some time, with Gaelic enjoying increasing status, as suggested
by Clancy. 164 While this suggests both that the form –bost could have been
arrived at quite early on, but also that existing-name constructions using Gaelic
to modify ON which show a loss of lexical sense, like Aird Nisaboist are likely to
be quite late, perhaps closer to the 1688 rental than previously imagined.
However Gammeltoft’s assertion that monosyllabic reflexes of bólstaðr in the
Hebrides were disyllabic until recently seems hard to apply to the Harris record,
given the (admittedly date-limited) attestations all suggest monosyllabic –
bost.165 As such, we can be sure that the ON farm-names in Harris were coined
before 1200, and that they may well be as early as the first settlements by
Norse-speakers in the area.
4.2.2 The Gaelic Names
4.2.2.1 Early Names?
As discussed in Cox, there are a number of difficulties in establishing early
names.166 Ch. 2.1.2 above discussed the evidence for Early Gaelic speakers in
the area provided by –papar names, but other examples of potentially early
names in the area are hard to date. Furthermore, a general absence of
references to settlements in Harris is evident in normally fruitful sources, such
as RMS, RPS etc.167 Losgaintir is discussed below, leaving one name which may
be early. Kilbride is attested in only one source, the Old Statistical Account.
That source informs us: “Till of late, this parish has been designed Kilbride from
one of the churches of cells in it…”168 –Cill names are often prime candidates
164
Clancy, Advent and Expansion see 2.2.4 for discussion
Gammeltoft, bólstaðr pp.95-6
166
R. Cox: Notes on the Norse impact on Hebridean Place-names Journal of Scottish Name Studies 1 (2007)
varia, p.143
167
No reference was found to any settlement in South Harris in these sources, and most references to
various forms of Harris, including those given in OPS either simply gave the whole island as part of a list of
property or represented a personal name form. That said, exploration of such sources may well be
beneficial for the investigation of the name Harris itself both as a personal and a place-name, which was
outside the scope of this thesis.
168
OSA p. 376
165
89
for confusion and can sometime represent forms such as –coille ‘wood’ etc.169
However the presence of a saint’s name, ‘Brigit’, or ‘Bride’ places this in the
sphere of a likely –cill site. Trying to postulate an early date on the basis of a
single attestation is an obviously risky enterprise, but it is worth noting that the
cult of Brigit was strong in early Ireland, with several attestations in Western
Scotland likely to be early in date and so the possibility cannot be entirely ruled
out that this was an early site. 170 Again, further archaeological investigation
would be advantageous: local history has it that there are some very old carved
gravestones buried in the churchyard of the present church at Scarasta.171
4.2.2.2 Losgaintir – A Problematic Name
Of the apparently Gaelic settlement names, none are as straightforward to
interpret as the ON examples above. It cannot even be totally certain which
language Losgaintir was coined in: the word-initial stress is suggestive of a
Germanic origin, and it seems clear that the specific element is fronted. Capt.
Thomas and the (less reliable) MacIver both suggest ScG derivations for the
name, however Carmichael’s contributions to the OSNB simply correct the
spelling and do not attempt a derivation. Attempted derivations are shown in
almost all of the Gaelic names, or names with Gaelic in the OSNB, and Watson’s
own note-books record a folk etymology about Losgaintir and it is striking that
this one was omitted.172 The most detailed attempt at analysis is provided by
Capt. Thomas’s 1876 article:
“probably for lios- cinntire, either the flowery (luxuriant) land's end; or
the lis-headland; from lios= a garden; also a fort; and cin-tire a
headland.”173
If the Gaelic derivation suggested by Capt. Thomas is correct, it would be an
interesting name. The relative scarcity of –lios names as a specific mean that
comparative material is in short supply: Luss, Loch Lomond is one potential
169
Nicolaisen, Scottish Place-names p. 166
W.J Watson: Celtic Place-names of Scotland p.274
171
Lawson, Harris pp 18-19
172
http://www.carmichaelwatson.lib.ed.ac.uk/cwatson/en/cataloguehierarchy
173
Thomas PSAS p. 501
170
90
example in simplex form and it appears with a diminutive suffix in Lusragán.174
Given the wealth of underexploited archaeological material in the area
discussed in 2.1.1 above, the derivation from ‘fort’ is not implausible. Certainly
Losgaintir’s position on the machair, lying at the foot of one of the highest hills,
easily accessible from the machair, but beside an estuary whose formation (with
a corresponding spit of land on the other side at Corran Seilebost) facilitates
defence makes it a reasonable candidate site.
Of still greater interest is the –kintyre element. While an alternative ON specific
is provided by Ljós,’light’.175 No such alternative suggests itself for –kintyre. As
an element, -kintyre has a lot to recommend itself in this context:
geographically speaking, it is entirely plausible, as it is both a headland and the
end of the machair area. Gaelic derivation does inevitably raise questions of
date though: the name –kintyre is attested in Argyll as early as the 8th Century in
Adomnán’s Life of Columba, where it is literally translated into Latin as Caput
Regionis.176 The revelation in the Old Statistical Account that an earlier name
for the parish of Harris was Kilbride (4.2.2.1 above) and the presence in the area
of –papar names (2.1.2) means that early Gaelic speakers in the area cannot be
completely ruled out.
However, an alternative possibility is that this name might represent a Gaelic
translation of an ON one. This is hard to prove beyond speculation, and there are
no early forms that suggest anything other than Losgaintir, but the use of –tir
could, at a stretch, represent a translation of ON –land. Marwick has suggested
that –land names appear to be early primary settlement names, to which –
bolstaðr settlements were sometimes secondary, although this has been
challenged in recent years, with Rixson arguing for a much wider range of
applications.177 Certainly, the relative remoteness from the other settlements
argues against Marwick’s hypothesis that –land names are often fairly central to
the settled area, and the broader range of applications proposed by Rixson is
174
Watson, CPNS p.450
http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~kurisuto/germanic/oi_cleasbyvigfusson_about.html
176
Watson, CPNS p.92
177
Marwick, Orkney farm Names p.29 Rixson, Graffiti ,pp136-7
175
91
required to make it fit. However, it is not possible to suggest more than the
most tenuous of possibilities on so little evidence, and it is likely that the ON
name for the site shall remain unknown.178
4.2.2.3 A ‘Late’ Gaelic Name
Taobh Tuath is the Gaelic name applied to the settlement at the opposite end of
the machair, but presents a completely different range of challenges. Despite
the remarkable range of archaeological evidence for continuous habitation,
name-forms are hard to come by. 179 The earliest attestation is as Northtown
from the 1688 rental, corroborating the evidence of maps from the Bald
group.180 Of the early maps, Blaeu 1654’s Howsanes is a likely mislocation of the
settlement Huisinish in North Harris and is discussed in 3.1 above. The Ainslie
group provide Turva however, and this is a much more difficult matter to
resolve. No obvious solution presents itself from either language. However, this
form is restricted solely to the Ainslie group.
The wider attestations in both English and Gaelic exhibit a number of interesting
features: While the settlements at Borgh and Scarasta are subdivided using the
original settlement name in an existing-name construction, a number of small
settlements with a variety of names are to be found in the Taobh Tuath area.
Northtown, Southtown, Druimfuint and North Copophaill (for Ceapabhal, the
nearby hill) all appear in the 1688 rental. All names operate on a basis of
relative positioning: the –towns to the north and the south of the hill, and a
settlement on the North slopes of the hill itself all derive their names in some
way from the location on the hillside combined with the English habitative
element –town. The exception is Druimfuint, whose derivation ‘The Ridge of the
Pound’ may suggest that this was a site that was originally part of another farm
but which has retained a name indicating its original purpose upon subdivision.
This however has clearly happened in a Gaelic-speaking context, and it is
interesting that the practice of using an existing-name construction noted for
178
Marwick p.29
for discussion of early inhabitants see 2.1.1
180
See appendix 2
179
92
the ON farmsteads has not been employed here. The present name, Taobh Tuath
(although Northton is still in common use, particularly among English-speakers),
first appears in the record with the Hydrographic survey of 1860. It is worth
noting that the OSNB do not record any form of Taobh Tuath whatsoever for the
settlement, but apply it to the North-side sands. Even usage widely refers to
the settlement as Northtown, and Carmichael, who provides a Gaelic form for
the sands does not amend the settlement name, suggesting that he saw Taobh
Tuath as indicating an area, rather than a settlement.181
It is clear that Capt. Thomas used Gaelic names on his survey wherever possible,
and the recent policy decisions of the Ordnance Survey may be responsible for
the presence of Taobh Tuath on recent maps. However, the lack of early forms,
and difficulty of interpreting Turva, which might be ON leads one to question if
Taobh Tuath was ever used in a habitative sense before recent times. As such,
it seems that this is a much more recent Gaelic settlement name, and that the
original meaning may have been more locative, the north ‘side’ of the hill,
rather than specific to the settlement. It is only with the relatively recent
changes to population in the area (the current settlement is somewhat east of
the original), coinciding with the decline of the other settlements in the area
which has led to this form becoming fixed at that site, while on-the-ground
usage still favours Northton over Taobh Tuath.
4.2.3 Existing Name Constructions
One issue that makes calculation of proportions of ON/ScG names difficult is the
use of ON names in existing-name constructions by Gaelic speakers, as they are
‘coined’ in Gaelic, but contain ON names, although the lexical sense on the ON
element has often clearly been lost, for example Dun Borgh. In terms of date,
such constructions obviously post-date the Norse settlement, and the tendency
to exhibit a loss of semantic sense suggests that coining took place well after
Norse speakers had left the area. References to existing-name constructions are
relatively to track down so long as they apply to settlements, for example the
181
See appendix 3
93
numerous examples offered in appendix 1. However, the recording of secondary
names is much less consistent: valuations tend not to mention them. With such
names, it is actually more interesting to examine how long the primary name
survives, and where, rather than how far it can be traced back.
The most
common Gaelic elements in existing name constructions in the OSNB are:
Abhuinn
Aird
Beinn
Clett
Faodhail
Gleann and
Tràigh.182
These forms are, broadly, corroborated
by
the
maps
displayed
in
figures
throughout this thesis, although few of
these maps offer the level of detail in
relation to hydronyms, particularly those
applied to rivers. These features are
significant
though:
they
apply
to
permanent features in the landscape and
as such will have provided reliable Figure 4-2 Bald's 1805 Map (detail)
reference points throughout their history.
Such names may in fact have employed the settlement name in their
construction on the basis that they have a role in defining the area’s boundaries.
For example, while Bald’s map (fig. 4.2) marks Horgabot and Nisibost within the
same boundary, two rivers can be seen: the northern-most one has Nisibost to
the south and Horgabot to the north, dividing the two settlements and
effectively confining Nisibost on the headland which gives it its name, as to the
south of the watercourse there is a confluence with a second stream which
182
See appendix 3
94
effectively cuts off
the settlement from
its
neighbours.
In
turn, the boundary
with Borve to the
south
follows
this
second watercourse.
The two on the 1st ed
6in/mile
(at
Seilebost and Scarasta) Figure 4-3 1st ed. 6in/Mile Ordnance Survey Sheet XVII
certainly
seem
to (1881)
perform a boundary function (see fig.4.3).183 In the case of Scarasta, this lends
weight to the hypothesis that the derivation may have been from the plural
staðir rather than staðr: while Na Buirigh appears frequently as Borve simplex,
Scarasta only does so in maps in the Ainslie group, which show very little detail.
Local features
Although the corpus of names examined here is of course very small, nonetheless
a few local features emerge. In existing-name constructions, the term faodhail
(ford) is applied to Losgaintir, Seilebost and Taobh Tuath. However, a search of
attestations in the OSNB shows a strong correlation of the name with machair
areas. Such wider comparative research would certainly be an avenue worth
pursuing. Personal names in place-names are a further area worthy of study,
and the Harris examples also present some anomalies: while Nicolaisen suggests
that personal name specifics are common in ON farm names, they do not appear
to be present in any of the examples present on Harris. 184 Two of the three –
bólstaðr names have clear local features to provide the specific elements, whilst
Seilebost is likely to come from ON Selja ‘willow’.185
183
This example has been chosen because the corresponding sheets covering Nisabost, Horgabost and
Seilebost are spread over 3 different sheets!
184
WHFN Scottish Place-namesp.125
185
see 2.2.4 above
95
Table 4-1Faodhail attestations in the OSNB
4.3 Gazetteer
The gazetteer is included within the thesis for ease of reference. Please refer to
the appendices as appropriate.
4.3.1 Borve/Na Buirgh
NG03355 94517
The Borves 1754
Borve Ainslie Group 1789-1846186 Black, 1862
Little Borve Rental 1688, Roll 1813,
L. Borve (Bald Group)187
Borrowbeg Rental 1724
Borvebheg Rental 1818
Borve, Borogh OPS 1854
Borve Beg (OSNB informants 1878)
Borogh-beag Carmichael (1878)
Borgh beag Hydrographic Survey (1860)
Midle Borve Rental 1724
Mid Borve Rental 1813
Borvemeanach Rentals, 1818, 1830
Borve More 1688 Rental
Meikle Borve 1724 Rental
Borvemhoir 1818 Rental
Borve Vore 1830 Rental
Borogh-Mor (Carmichael 1878)
Borgh Mhor (Hydrographic Survey 1860)
Borvebeg Burn 1878 (OSNB)
Borve Lodge 1878 (OSNB)
Little Loch Borve 1878 (OSNB)
Simplex name from ON borg ‘fort’, almost certainly named for the nearby broch.
Extensive division, consolidation and re-division throughout 19th century, Cleared
in 1838, re-settled and then cleared again in 1847. Existing name constructions
all use ScG Mòr/Beag/Meadhanoch with inconsistent lenition. Carmichael’s
forms, as elsewhere, show epenthesis. Secondary names mark watercourses –
potential boundary.
186
187
See appendix 1. All maps show same form
exc. Black 1862
4.3.2 Horgabost
NG 04485 96287
Horgisbost 1688 Rental
Horgibost 1724 Rental
Horgasbost 1754 Rental, Richmond estate plan?188
Horgabot Bald 1805
Hargabost Arrowmith group 1807-1840.189
Hagabost Thomson group190 1822-62
Horgabost OPS 1854
Torgabost Hydrographic survey 1860
Horgabost Bartholomew 1902
Glen Horgabost OSNB 1878 (unknown)
Gleann Horagabost 1878 Carmichael
Liana Horgabost Carmichael 1878
Liana Horgaboist Hydrographic Survey 1860
Not shown at all in Ainslie group. Given incorrectly by MacIver as ON Torg
‘market’ Capt. Thomas proposes Torgabost as correct form, by which means
we can establish he was likely to be responsible for the Hydrographic survey
map. Suitable chambered cairn nearby to provide specific element: derivation
ON Horgr ‘grave’. Generic is –bólstaðr giving ‘farm of the grave(site).’
Secondary names employ Gaelic elements taken from topographical features.
188
Drawn from OSNB appendix
see appendix 2
190
ibid
189
4.3.3 Losgaintir
NG 07395 99147
Luscandir 1688 Rental
Luscandir 1724 Rental
Luskindar, 1754 Rental
Lusk. 1789-1846 Ainslie group191
Luskinder 1794-1803 Huddart group
Luskintire Bald 1805, Black 1862
Luskenture Arrowsmith group 1807-40
Luskentyre 1813 and 1868 rolls OSNB informants 1878
Luskyntire 1818 Rental
Luskentir MacGillivray 1818
Luskintyre1830 Rental
Ben Luskentyre OSNB 1878
Beinn Losgainntir Carmichael 1878
Faodhail Luskentyre OSNB 1878
Faodhail Losgainntir Carmichael 1878
Tràigh Luskentyre OSNB 1878
Traigh Losgainntir Carmichael 1878
Complex derivation discussed in 4.2.2 above. Possible ScG Lios ‘plant’ or
alternative of ‘fort’ proposed by Capt. Thomas. If ScG, generic is likely –kintyre’
headland, but this is an extremely problematic name. Secondary names again
mark permanent topographical features. Faodhail is also discussed 4.2.2 above.
191
Excl. huddart stem
4.3.4 Nisabost
NG 046665 96547 (approx: settlement no longer exists)
Nisabust Ainslie 1789 and Huddart branch 1794-1804
Nisibost Bald Group 1805-40
Nisebost 1813 Roll
Nishbost 1818 Rental
Nisabost 1830 Rental, OPS 1854
Aird Nisibost Hebert 1823
Ard Nisabost OSNB 1878
Àrd Niseboist Carmichael 1878
Aird Nisaboist Hydrographic survey 1860
Clett Nisabost OSNB 1878
Cleite Nisaboist Hydrographic survey 1860
Traigh Nisabost OSNB 1878
Tràigh Niseboist Carmichael 1878
Derivation ‘Farm of the Ness’ from ON – bolstaðr and ON –nes. Absence of early
forms is partially explained by apparent combination with Horgabost in the
rentals.
4.3.5 Scarasta
NG 01605 93727
Scarista Ainslie Group 1789-1846, Black 1862
Scarasta OPS
North or Meikle Scarista 1724 Rental
Meikle Scarista 1754 Rental, Thomson 1822
Muckle Scarrista Bald 1805
Mickle Scarrista Arrowsmith branch 1807-40
Scarasta More 1813 Roll
Scaristamhoir1818 Rental
Scaristavore 1830 Rental
Scarastavore OSNB 1878
Scarasta Mhor Carmichael 1878
South or Little Scarista 1724 Rental
Scarista Bheag 1754 Rental
Little/Litt.Scarrista Bald group 1805-40
Scarasta Bheag 1813 Roll
Scaristabheg 1818 Rental
Scarastabeg 1878 OSNB informants
Traigh Scarasta 1878 OSNB informants
Tràigh Scarasta 1878 Carmichael
Allt-Milleadh Mna Hydrographic Survey 1860
Abhuinn Scarasta Mhor OSNB informants/Carmichael 1878
ON, but specific derivation unclear. Capt. Thomas proposes personal name +
Staðr but see 4.2.1 for possibility of pl. Staðr.Settlents appear divided
throughout rentals, not emerging in them until 1724. Part of Scarasta appears
to be churchland. Note unusual alternative form Allt Milleadh Mna ‘Stream of a
woman’s ravishing’. Sole attestation is Hydro. Survey. May reflect an actual
event or a folk etymology.
4.3.6 Seilebost
NG 06865 96707
Selebost 1688 Rental,
Shellibost 1724 Rental,
Shelabost 1791-9 OSA, 1854 OPS
Chillibost Bald group 1805-40,
Seilibost 1813 valuation roll, Shelebost 1818 rental,
Shelibost 1830 rental,
Seilabost 1860 Hydrographic Survey(detailed),
Seilibost 1902 Bartholomew,
Faodhail Seilebost OSNB 1878
Traigh Chillibost Bald 1805
Traigh Seilabost Hydrographic Survey 1860
Tràigh Seilebost OSNB informant 1878
Corran Seilabost Hydrographic Survey 1860
Corran Seilebost OSNB informant 1878
Beinn Sheileboist Hydrographic Survey 1860/Carmichael 1878
Ben Seilebost OSNB 1878
Glen Chillibost Bald 1805, Black 1862
Glen Seilebost OSNB 1878
Glen Sheileboist Carmichael 1878
Seilebost River OSNB 1878
Abhuinn Seilebost Carmichael 1878
Suggested derivation: ‘Farm of the Willow’. The forms provided for Seilebost
are reasonably consistent across time, but the apparently large number of
attestations should take into account the likely interdependencies discussed in
the main thesis. Unlike Borve and Scarista, but in common with the otherbólstaðr names, Horgabost and Nisabost, it does not seem to have been
subjected to subdivision later on, perhaps reflecting the relatively small size.
The Ordnance Survey did not attempt etymologies for the known Norse names,
and so no potential explanations are forthcoming from that source. Both MacIver
and Capt. Thomas made attempts on it, and successfully identify the generic
102
element as bólstaðr. Capt. Thomas offers simply renders it ‘farm’ in English.
MacIver’s offers ‘family household’.
Regarding the specific element, a variety of explanations are proposed: Capt.
Thomas’s suggestion of derivation from O.N. Skel is unlikely. It is possible to see
why he, as someone who had visited the area in question might arrive at such an
etymology though as the site in question is beside an extensive sandy beach. On
the other hand, this beach is a nearby feature, rather than something actually
on the - bólstaðr site and in addition is one of several similar beaches in the
area. As such it seems unlikely that -skel would be a suitable specific element
as it doesn’t sufficiently distinguish it from other settlements near to ‘shellybeaches’. MacIver proposes alternatives derived from heljr ‘cave’ or hella ‘flat
stone’. However none of the written forms support this though: although lenition
of ‘s’ in Gaelic can cause the initial sound to soften to ‘h’, several of the
recorded spellings are provided from non-Gaelic sources, which would almost
certainly have recorded such a name as beginning with ‘h’. Chillibost is provided
on occasion, but some of the sources depend on each other and the form
probably arises from the Bald map. O.N. Seljr ‘willow’ is a possible option
offered by Gammeltoft, supported by a cognate for from Orkney Sellebister and
discussed in 2.1.1 above.192 Secondary names are discussed in 4.2.2 above.
192
Gammeltoft bolstaðr p.145
4.3.7 Taobh Tuath
NF98785 89917 (modern) NF 9823591647 (approx. site c. 1688)
Howsanes Blaeu 1654193?
Turva Ainslie Group 1789-1846194
Northtown Rental 1818, OSNB informants 1878 Bald195
Northton 1868 Valuation roll
Taobh Tuath Hydrographic Survey 1860
Tràigh an Taobh Tuath (Northside sands) Hydrographic Survey
Tràigh an Taoibh Thuath OSNB/Carmichael
This name is discussed in greater depth in 4.2.2 and 3.1, but presents an
interesting paradox: on one hand, this is known to be the oldest continuously
inhabited site in the Western Isles, and one of the oldest in Scotland, yet it has
one of the youngest names. The current OS map for of Taobh Tuath appears for
the first time on Capt. Thomas’s Hydrographic survey of 1860. Thomas opted
overwhelmingly for Gaelic names and forms on his map, and while the presence
on his crew of Gaelic speaking staff is acknowledged, it is interesting to note
that Carmichael does not provide a Gaelic form for the settlement, only for the
sands nearby. There is not one attribution of Taobh Tuath as a settlement rather
than as a locative description relative to the adjoining hill, that can be traced to
an informant in these sources. The name of course is a direct translation of
North Town, but taobh in Gaelic has a wider semantic range, and so can be used
to indicate ‘side’. The early presence of other tenants in very close proximity,
for example those at North Copophaill discussed below, is likely to have meant
that
Taobh Tuath would have been insufficiently specific to identify the
separate farm at North town. The name has gained use recently (indeed, it is
used in this thesis) but this could be driven in part by its presence on OS maps
and also by the disappearance of the other settlements: there is now no
question as to which settlement Taobh Tuath is, even though the name hints
that there were previously others.
193
but see 3.1 for discussion of likely mis-identification
this is the only name marked on the peninsula and it is not even certain that it refers to a settlement
195
all maps in bald group use Northtown, or Nth. Town, probably to accommodate factors of scale: there is
no reason to believe that this particular name is derived from any other source than the Bald map given the
otherwise very high correlation shown in appendix 2.
194
104
4.3.8 South Town
NF9698591677 (approx.)
Southtown 1688 Rental, MacGillivray
S. Town Arrowsmith 1807, Thomson 1822, McCulloch 1840
Southtown MacGillivray 1818
This settlement no longer exists: While the 2007 OS Explorer 455 (1:25000)
marks Taobh Deas, no settlement, or even ruins are marked on the map. The
Hydrographic survey does not mark the settlement, although it does mark the
nearby ruins of the church.
As for Taobh Tuath this name is a relative
designation of locality.
4.3.9 Ceapabhal Area
North Capophaile (NF 97705 93477) and South Capophaile (NF 96495 92477
These names are attested only in the 1688 and 1724 rentals. However, given the
high valuation given to North Town in the 1830 rental, it is possible that these
had been absorbed into a single farm. Both contain the ON name for the hill on
which they are situated, which has ON fjall as a generic, with a specific
suggested by Capt. Thomas: kúpaðr ‘bowl, cone’196 so ‘Cone (shaped) hill’
which certainly fits with its appearance.
196
Thomas PSAS 1876 p.486
4.3.10
Druim a’ Phuind
NF 99905 89277 (approx.)
Druimphuint 1688
Druimfuint 1724
Druimaphond 1754
Drymohoind Ainslie group exc. Huddart branch
Drymochoind Huddart Branch
Druimfuind 1813 Roll
Drimophuind OSNB 1878
Druim a’ Phuind Carmichael 1878
Clett Druim a’ Phuind 1878 Carmichael/OSNB
Abhuinn Druim a’ Phuind 1878 Carmichael
This ScG name has a relatively straightforward derivation of ‘Ridge of the
Pound’, suggesting that at some stage, this site was part of a larger farm,
probably that at Taobh Tuath. Attestations are fairly consistent, with no ON
forms attested supporting the likelihood that this represents the division of a
farm after the end of the norse-speaking period. It is worth noting that it is not
marked on the very detailed Hydrographic survey map, which suggests that the
settlement was already in decline by this date
106
5 Conclusions
In making final remarks on the evidence presented in this thesis, it seems logical
to review the evidence on a chapter-by-chapter basis.
The discussion of
medieval sources in Chapter 2 acknowledged the difficulty of handling material
written at a later time than the events described (see 2.2.3). However, the
place-name evidence examined here supports the principle of settlement
suggested by the saga material.
The significant number of farm-names, and
their location on some of the best land on Harris, suggests that settlement there
was fairly early, and indeed fairly dense. As later historical accounts suggest,
this was not the easiest land to work, and requires intensive labour even though
it is likely to have been the best available.
The preponderance of settlement names on the west side of the island is
contrasted with the sea-focused terminology deployed on the east side, where
generics in ON –vagh and – nes abound. Where –nes appears on the west, it is
used as a specific element to locate a farm-name on an obvious geographical
landmark as Nisabost. Both the agricultural nature and density of the ON names
on the machair argues against a ‘scorched earth’ approach on the part of the
Vikings, as do the names themselves. The employment of ON borg ‘fort’ to a
likely broch site, and horgr, to an existing chambered cairn suggests that the
Norse didn’t simply appear out of nowhere, wipe out the inhabitants and settle
down: they had some idea not only of what was there, but what it was used for,
and they applied their own terminology to what they found.
While Gaelic terms are often employed in existing-name constructions and as
such do not always show awareness of the semantic sense of the ON form, the
manner in which they are applied, often to likely boundary markers, such as
rivers suggests that the broad boundary pattern from the Norse period was
maintained. The rate at which the land is subdivided and re-consolidated, only
to be divided again in these rentals mean that one cannot necessarily
extrapolate that Gaelic and Norse did not exist side by side for an extended
107
period: such sub-division is clearly going on throughout the period for which we
have documentary evidence, and has to be taken as evidence of coining in action
rather than historic forms,
Furthermore, the retention in some form of the
penny-land system is another aspect of Norse heritage being retained in a later
Gaelic-speaking environment, which suggests a period of co-existence.
Only by examining sources closely and in a comparative manner is it possible to
see the potential for difference between a long-standing lexical loss of a Norse
name early in the Gaelic-speaking period and a relatively recent consolidation
and re-division. A similar situation applies to maps: as demonstrated in chapter
3, the degree of interdependency in these sources is very high. That is not to
unduly criticise the cartographers: often, as in Thomson’s case, they
acknowledge where they got their material from. In others, a range of sources
are drawn upon and it may not be obvious where the interdependencies lie and
indeed how extensive they are. Black’s 1862 map is one such example: it is
certainly not wholly derivative of Bald’s or Thomson’s maps in the way that
Arrowsmith’s and McCulloch’s maps were clearly related, but the influence is
there and awareness is vital when cataloguing apparent historical attestations.
What appears to be an overwhelming body of evidence for one form is
undermined if they all ultimately derive to some degree from a shared source.
This becomes a pressing issue when examining the apparently broad range of
evidence presented in the Ordnance survey Original Object Name Books. This
discussion revealed some particularly surprising information. While the older
maps actually exhibited a high degree of interdependency, the two government
mapping agencies working in the Outer Hebrides at approximately the same time
had virtually no impact on each other.
The Hydrographic survey presents a
remarkable level of detail as well as extensive use of Gaelic orthography, in a
manner that one may not perhaps expect from a government agency.
Carmichael’s struggles to persuade the OS to accept his Gaelic forms are much
better documented, and his relative fame compared with Captain Thomas in the
Gaelic-speaking world means that his views have been better known.
108
This thesis has shown that Captain Thomas was the driving force between the
Hydrographic Survey chart covering this area: comparison with his published
output through the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland identifies name forms,
such as Torgabost which are only found in his work. Even more remarkably, he
may have had an impact on the mapping process of Gaelic names by being the
first source to designate Northtown as Taobh Tuath.
The surviving correspondence between the two men is worthy of investigation as
soon as it becomes available, as it is clear that they made an early and
significant contribution to the study of Hebridean place-names.
A particular
feature is their apparent use of informants for name-forms. If, as Carmichael’s
correspondence (discussed 4.1.1) suggests, he returned to the informants named
by the OS workers and corrected the spellings, the extent of epenthesis that his
forms of Borgh ‘Borogh’
and Horgabost ‘Horagabost’
show, reflects
pronunciation on the machair itself. These forms are important, and the forms
collected by Gammeltoft from a 1930’s source which was inaccessible to this
study also shows the intrusion of /ə/ to break up the consonant cluster.197 This is
an avenue worthy of further research by a competent linguist: the relatively
settlement clearances on the machair have had an impact on dialect surveying:
while Cathair Ó Dochartaigh’s Survey of the Gaelic Dialects of Scotland includes
information from Harris, none of his informants come from the machair area,
and even if they had done so, the relatively recent resettlement of the area has
implications for how ‘local’ such forms could be considered to be.198
Finally, this thesis has highlighted a number of avenues for future research. An
approach using archaeological material on a comparative basis would offer a
wealth of information about where various population groups settled in relation
to each other over time. This would be potentially advantageous when weighing
the evidence of potentially early forms.
Should some of the circular-walled
enclosures that are so prevalent, but so under-explored, in the area prove to
197
Gammeltoft , -bólstaðr p.124
See map provided on inside cover of C Ó Dochartaigh: Survey of the Gaelic Dialects of Scotland 5
volumes (Dublin 1994)
198
109
date from the early medieval period, rather than the pre-historic, this could
have serious implications for how we interpret the names. Likewise, a more
detailed understanding of what Norse settlement actually looked like would help
to contextualise out theories on how the land was used. The work of Capt.
Thomas is certainly worthy of more attention than it currently gets, and the
intimation in his 1876 article that a comparative chart containing over 12,000
names was deposited by him in the library of the Antiquaries Society should
certainly
be
investigated.
Examination
of
the
currently
unavailable
correspondence between Thomas and Carmichael could potentially illuminate
the strong correlation between the forms Carmichael
provided as a ‘local
authority’ for the OSNB and the forms recorded in Thomas’s survey. Last but not
least, the very small corpus presented here was dictated by the scope of the
project: a survey over a wider area, ideally by a scholar with
a stronger
background in linguistics than the author of this thesis, is likely to yield a good
deal more comparative material, allowing contextualisation of Harris, both in
the western Isles and beyond.
Bibliography
5.1 Map Sources
Ainslie, J: Scotland, drawn from a series of angles and astronomical
observations (Edinburgh 1789) http://maps.nls.uk/joins/807.html
Arrowsmith, A: Map of Scotland constructed from original materials (London
1807) http://maps.nls.uk/joins/747.html
Bartholemew, J: Harris (Edinburgh 1912)
http://maps.nls.uk/atlas/bartholomew/page.cfm?id=1194
Black, A: Black's new large map of Scotland (Edinburgh 1862)
http://maps.nls.uk/joins/759.html
110
Bald, W: Map of Harris (Ballantyne 1805) via
http://maps.nls.uk/counties/detail.cfm?id=660
Blaeu, J: Aebudae Insulae sive Hebrides; quae Scotiae ad occasum
praetenduntur / lustratae et descriptae a Timotheo Pont. (Amsterdam 1654)
http://maps.nls.uk/atlas/blaeu/page.cfm?id=77
Blaeu, J: Leogus et Haraia insulae ex Aebudarum numero, quae quamquam
isthmo cohaereant, pro diversis habentur. Lewis and Harray of the numbre of
the Western Yles, which two although they ioyne be a necke of land ar
accounted dyvers Ylands. (Amsterdam 1654)
http://maps.nls.uk/atlas/blaeu/page.cfm?id=104
Campbell, R: A new and correct map of Scotland or North Britain, with all the
post and military roads (London 1790) http://maps.nls.uk/joins/723.html
Carrington, F: A map of Scotland divided into counties shewing the principal
roads, railways, rivers, canals... on a scale of five miles to an inch (London
1846) http://maps.nls.uk/joins/1037.html
Cary, J: A new map of Scotland, from the latest authorities (London 1801)
http://maps.nls.uk/joins/727.html
Depot Generale de la Marine: Carte particuliere de la cote occidentale
d'Escosse, depuis le Cape Wrath jusqu'a la Pointe d'Ardnamurchan (Paris 1803)
http://maps.nls.uk/coasts/chart.cfm?id=857
Dorret, J: A general map of Scotland and islands thereto belonging. (London
1750)
Faden: A map of Scotland drawn chiefly from the topographical surveys of John
Ainslie (London 1807) http://maps.nls.uk/joins/746.html
111
Hebert, L: Scotland (London 1823)
http://maps.nls.uk/scotland/detail.cfm?id=752
Huddart, J: A new chart of the West coast of Scotland from the point of
Ardnamurchan to Cape Wrath. (London 1794)
http://maps.nls.uk/coasts/chart.cfm?id=827
Hydrographic Office: Sound of Harris to Aird Bhreidhnis, including Lochs Tarbert
& Resort (London, 1860) http://maps.nls.uk/coasts/admiralty.cfm?id=1326
MacCulloch, J: A Geological Map of Scotland by Dr MacCulloch (London 1840)
http://maps.nls.uk/joins/1346.html
Mackenzie, M: A general chart of the west coast and western islands of Scotland
from Cantire to Cape Wrath and Butt of the Lewis. (London 1775)
http://maps.nls.uk/coasts/chart.cfm?id=832
Ordnance Survey 1st ed. Inverness-shire (Hebrides), Sheet XII, XIII, XVII and XVIII
Survey date: 1878 Publication date: 1881 http://maps.nls.uk/view/74426970
Ordnance Survey 1 in “popular edition” Sheet XVIII 1931
http://maps.nls.uk/view/74400535
Ordnance Survey later editions via
http://digimap.edina.ac.uk/ancientroam/historic
Stockdale, J: Map of Scotland from the latest surveys (London 1806)
http://maps.nls.uk/joins/734.html
Thomson, J: Western Isles (Edinburgh 1822) http://maps.nls.uk/view/74400142
Wyld, J: Scotland with its islands (London 1846)
http://maps.nls.uk/scotland/detail.cfm?id=757
112
5.2 Primary
Lawson, B: Register of Emigrants from the Western Isles of Scotland 1750-1900
Volume 1 – Isle of Harris (Bill Lawson Publications 1992)
Lawson, B: A Selection of Source Documents from the Isle of Harris 1688-1830
(Bill Lawson Publications 1992)
Martin, M: A Description of the Western Islands of Scotland Circa 1695
(Edinburgh 2002)
MacGillivray, W: A Hebridean Naturalist’s Journal 1817-1818 ed R. Ralph
(Stornoway 1996)
Monro, D: A Description of the Occidental i.e. Western Islands of Scotland
(Edinburgh 2002)
New Statistical Account: accessed via http://stat-accscot.edina.ac.uk/link/1834-45/Inverness/Harris/14/155/
Ó Dochartaigh, C: Survey of the Gaelic Dialects of Scotland 5 volumes (Dublin
1994)
Old Statistical Account: accessed via http://stat-accscot.edina.ac.uk/link/1791-99/Inverness/Harris/
Origines Parochiales Scotiae: The Antiquities Ecclesiastical and Territorial of
the Parishes of Scotland Vol II.I (Bannatyne Club, Edinburgh 1854)
5.3 Secondary
Anderson, A.O: Early Sources of Scottish History: A.D. 500 to A.D. 1286
(Edinburgh 1922)
113
Armit, I: Celtic Scotland (London 2005)
Burgess, C: Ancient Lewis and Harris: Exploring the Archaeology of the Outer
Hebrides (Glasgow 2008)
Caird, J: ‘Early 19th Century Estate Plans’ in MacLeod, F (ed) Togail Tir: The Map
of the Western Isles (Stornoway 1989) pp.49-78
Campbell, E: ‘Were the Scots Irish’ Antiquity 2001 vol. 288 pp.285-92
Clancy, T: ‘Gaelic in Medieval Scotland: Advent and Expansion’ Rhys Lecture,
2009 published in Proceedings of the British Academy 167 (2010)
Clancy, T: ‘The Gall-Ghàidheil and Galloway’ in Journal of Scottish Name
Studies 2 (2008)
Cox, R: The Gaelic Place-names of Carloway, Isle of Lewis (Dublin 2002)
Cox, R: ‘The Norse Element in Scottish Place-names: Syntax as a Chronological
Marker’ Journal of Scottish Name Studies 1 (2007) pp. 13-27
Cox, R: ‘Notes on the Norse impact on Hebridean Place-names’ Journal of
Scottish Name Studies 1 (2007) varia, pp.139-44
Downham, C: ‘An Imaginary Raid on Skye in 795?’ Scottish Gaelic Studies vol 20
(2000) pp 192-196
Eysteinsson, O: Norse Settlement-Names of North Harris unpub. M.Litt Thesis
(Univ. Of Aberdeen 1992)
114
Fisher, I: ‘Crosses in the Ocean: some papar sites and their sculpture’ in
Crawford, B (ed) The Papar in the North Atlantic: Environment and History (St
Andrews 2002) pp39-58
Gammeltoft, P: The Place-name Element Bólstaðr in the North Atlantic Area
(C.A. Retzels Forlag A/S 2001)
Gillen, C. Geology and Landscapes of Scotland (Terra Publishing 2003)
Jennings, A and Kruse, K: ‘One Coast – Three Peoples: Names and Ethnicity in
the Scottish West during the Early Viking Period’ in A. Woolf, (ed): Scandinavian
Scotland: Twenty Years After (St Andrews 2009) pp.75-102
Jackson, K: ‘The Celtic Languages during the Viking Period’ in Ó Cuiv (ed): The
Impact of The Scandinavian Invasions on the Celtic-Speaking Peoples 800-1100
AD (Dublin 1975) pp.3-9
Johnsen, A.O: ‘The Payments from the Hebrides and Isle of Man to the Crown of
Norway 1153-1263: Annual Ferme or Feudal Casualty?’ The Scottish Historical
Review, Vol 48, No. 145 (1969) pp. 18-34
Johnstone, S. Brown, H. and Bennet, D: The Corbetts and Other Scottish Hills.
Edinburgh. (Scottish Mountaineering Trust 1990)
Kruse, A: ‘Explorers, Raiders and Settlers. The Norse Impact upon Hebridean
Place-names’ In Gammeltoft, Hough and Waugh, (eds): Cultural Contacts in the
North Atlantic Region: The Evidence of Names. (NORNA 2005)
Lawson, B: Harris in History and Legend (Birlinn 2008)
MacDonald, A: ‘The papar and some Problems: a Brief Review’ Crawford, B (ed)
The Papar in the North Atlantic: Environment and History (St Andrews 2002) pp.
13-25
115
MacIver, D: Place-names of Lewis and Harris (Stornoway 1934)
MacLean, G and Macleod, F: ‘Captain Otter and Captain Thomas’ in MacLeod, F
(ed) Togail Tir: The Map of the Western Isles (Stornoway 1989) pp.117-22
Maldonado, A: Christianity and Burial in Late Iron Age Scotland. Unpub PhD
thesis (Glasgow 2011)
McKirdy, A, and Crofts, R: Land of Mountain and Flood: The Geology and
Landforms of Scotland. (Edinburgh 2007)
Marwick, H: ‘Orkney Farm-names’ Proceedings of the Orkney Antiquarian
Society Vol. IX (1930-1) pp. 25-34
Megaw, J and Simpson, D: Introduction to British Prehistory (Leicester 1979)
Nicolaisen, W.F.H: Scottish Place-names: their Study and Significance (John
Donald 1976, this ed. 2001)
Nicolaisen, W.F.H: ‘The Semantic Structure of Scottish Hydronomy’ Scottish
Studies 1 (1957) pp.211-240
Oftedal, M: ‘Norse place-names in Celtic Scotland’ in Ó Cuiv (ed): The Impact of
The Scandinavian Invasions on the Celtic-Speaking Peoples 800-1100 AD (Dublin
1975) pp.43-50
Oftedal, M: Village Names of Lewis in the Outer Hebrides (1954. Reprint: Islands
Book Trust 2009)
Rixson, D: ‘The shadow of Onomastic Graffiti’ in Journal of Scottish Name
Studies 4 (2010) pp.131-158
Robson, M: ‘The Living Voice’ in MacLeod, F (ed) Togail Tir: The Map of the
Western Isles (Stornoway 1989) pp.97-104
116
Rubh’ an Teampaill headland Harris, Western Isles of Scotland Written Scheme
of Investigation for Programme of Archaeological Fieldwork (University of
Birmingham 2010)
Sharples, N and Smith, R: ‘Norse Settlement in the Western Isles’ in A. Woolf,
ed: Scandinavian Scotland: Twenty Years After (St Andrews 2009) pp.103-130
Stahl, A: Place-names of Barra in the Outer Hebrides unpublished PhD thesis
(University of Edinburgh 1999)
Stone, J: ‘Timothy Pont’ in MacLeod, F (ed) Togail Tir: The Map of the Western
Isles (Stornoway 1989) pp. 13-22
Stùibhart, D: The Life and Legacy of Alexander Carmichael (Islands Book Trust
2008)
Thomas, F.W.L: ‘ Did the Northmen Extirpate the celtic Inhabitants of the
Hebrides in the 9th Century?’ Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of
Scotland (April 1876)
Thomson, F: Lewis and Harris: History and Pre-History (Edinburgh 2005)
Watson, W.J: The Celtic Place-names of Scotland (Edinburgh 2011)
Warrack, A: Chambers’s Scots Dictionary (London 1955)
Waugh,D: ‘Caithness: Another Dip in the Sweerag Well’ in A. Woolf, (ed):
Scandinavian Scotland: Twenty Years After (St Andrews 2009) pp.31-48
Wilkes, M: ‘Missing Presumed Lost’ in MacLeod, F (ed) Togail Tir: The Map of the
Western Isles (Stornoway 1989) pp.43-48
117
Williams, D.G: Land Assessment and Military Organisation in the Norse
Settlements of Scotland c.900-1166 Unpublished PhD thesis (University of St
Andrews 1996)
Woolf, A: From Pictland to Alba (EUP 2007)
5.4 Web Resources
canmore.rcahms.gov.uk
www.cne-siar.gov.uk
http://digimap.edina.ac.uk/digimap
www.goes.ed.ac.uk
www.imdb.com
www.snh.org
www.defra.gov.uk
http://edil.qub.ac.uk/dictionary/searh.php
http://www.ling.upenn.edu/~kurisuto/germanic/oi_cleasbyvigfusson_about.htm
l (Cleasby -Vigfusson dictionary
http://www.paparproject.org.uk/hebrides.html
http://www.ucc.ie/celt/online/G100001A.html
www.ucc.ie/celt/online/T100001A/
http://www.thingproject.eu/
Related papers
MetodeAnalisis Volumetri : Teori, Soal dan Pembahasannya
Safni, Zilfa, Refilda, Yulizar Yusuf, 2023
The Israeli elephant in the settler-colonial room
Postcolonial Studies, 2022
Asemiotics and Ecocentric Reading (Afterword to S. Lydon and B. Murnane (eds), Romantic Realisms)
2024
Szczerbiec (the jagged sword)-The coronation sword of the kings of Poland
… , arte militar y vida cultural en …, 2011
Faith and Community: Their Deployment in the Modern Study of Byzantino-Arabica
Petre Guran and David A. Michelson, eds. Faith and Community around the Mediterranean: In Honor of Peter R. L. Brown. Études Byzantines et Post Byzantines, new series, vol. I (VIII). Bucharest, Académie roumaine; Heidelberg: Herlo Verlag UG, 2019 [2020], 239-250. , 2019
Sex-and Duration-Specific Unemployment Outflows and Labor Market Policies
Discussion Papers (IRES …, 1995
Surfactant-based modification of sodic-Algerian illite clay for the preparation of polymeric membranes: application for separation of iron and zinc ions from aqueous solutions
Polymer Bulletin, 2018
Farmers awareness and ethno-veterinary practices regarding porcine cysticercosis in the province of Boulkiemde, Burkina Faso
Journal of Medicinal Plants Research, 2021
I–Thou Communication in Distant Education from the Perspective of Martin Buber’s Philosophy
Filosofija. Sociologija, 2022
Computing Observability of Gates in Combinational Logic Circuits by Bit-Parallel Simulation
Computational Mathematics and Modeling, 2019
Electoral Politics of Jamat-e-Islami Pakistan (1987-2009)
Global Social Sciences Review, 2016
On the Role of Magnetic Shunts for Increasing Performance of Transverse Flux Machines
IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, 2017
- Find new research papers in:
- Physics
- Chemistry
- Biology
- Health Sciences
- Ecology
- Earth Sciences
- Cognitive Science
- Mathematics
- Computer Science