Example of Ancient Danish Loom; from the Färoes, now in Bergen Museum.
Example of Ancient Danish Loom; from the Färoes, now in Bergen Museum.
The still existing popular dialect is an excellent proof that the resemblance of the inhabitants is not confined to an accidental or personal likeness. Many words and phrases are preserved in the local dialect which are neither found nor understood in other parts of the country. These terms are not only given to waterfalls, mountains, rivulets, fords, and islands, but are also in common use in daily life. The housewife has her spool and spinning wheel from "spole"; her reel and yarn-winder from "rock" and "granwindle"; her baking-board from "bagebord." She is about to knead dough, from "deig"; and in order to make oaten bread, or thin cakes beaten out by the hand, we have clap-bread or clap-cake, form "klapperbröd" and "klapper-kake." She spreads the tablecloth, "bordclaith," for dinner, "onden"; while the fire smokes, "reeks," as it makes its way through the thatch, "thack," where in olden times the loft, "loft," was the upperroom or bower, "buir." Out in the yard or "gaard," is the barn, "lade," where is stored the corn in "threaves." In the river are troughs, "trows," used to cross over. These were two small boats, cut out of the trunks of trees, and held together by a crosspole. By placing a foot in each trough the shepherd rowed himself across with the help of an oar. He goes up the valley, "updaal," to clip, "klippe," the sheep. It is said that Canute the Great crossed over the river Severn in this manner, when he concluded an agreement with Edmund Ironsides to divide England between them. Blether, from "Bladdra," is also a common expression, meaning to "blubber or cry," to gabble or talk without purpose. Another form of the word is "bleat," as applied to sheep.
Other words now in use from the Norse are "twinter," a two-year-old sheep, and "trinter," a three-year-old. A "gimmer lamb" is a female lamb. The lug-mark,i.e., a bit cut out of a sheep's ear that it may be recognised by the owner, is from lögg mark." Lög is law, and thus it is the legal mark. The "smit" or smear of colour, generally red, by which the sheep are marked occurs in the Bible of Ulphilas in the same sense as smear. Another proof may be found on the carving in the knitting sticks made and used by the Northern peasantry of the present day. The patterns are decidedly Scandinavian.
Of the people of this district, it may be said thatin their physical attributes they are the finest race in the British dominions. Their Scandinavian descent, their constant exposure to a highly oxygenised atmosphere, their hereditary passion for athletic sports and exercises, their happy temperament, their exemption from privation, and many other causes, have contributed to develop and maintain their physical pre-eminence, and to enable them to enjoy as pastime an amount of exposure and fatigue that few but they would willingly encounter. Thomas de Quincey, who lived thirty years among them, observed them very closely, and knew them, well, after remarking that "it is the lower classes that in every nation form the 'fundus' in which lies the national face, as well as the national character," says: "Each exists here in racy purity and integrity, not disturbed by alien inter-marriages, nor in the other by novelties of opinion, or other casual effects derived from education and reading." The same author says: "There you saw old men whose heads would have been studies for Guido; there you saw the most colossal and stately figures among the young men that England has to show; there the most beautiful young women. There it was that sometimes I saw a lovelier face than ever I shall see again." The eloquent opium-eater gave the strongest possible proof that his admiration was real by taking one of these "beautiful young women" to wife.
The men of our northern dales do not pay muchrespect to anyone who addresses them in language they are not accustomed to, nor do they make much allowance for ignorance of their own dialect. In a northern village we once stopped to speak to an old lady at her door, and began by remarking that the river was much swollen. "We call it a beck," said the old lady, turning her back upon us, and telling her granddaughter to bring out the scrapple. "Whatever may a scrapple be?" we asked, deferentially. "Why, that's what a scrapple may be," she said, indicating a coal-rake in the girl's hand. As we moved away, we overheard her say to a neighbour, "I don't know where he has been brought up. He calls th' beck a river, and doesn't know what a scrapple is!" They have a very quick sense of humour, and often practice a little mystification on inquisitive strangers. To a tourist who made the somewhat stupid inquiry, "Does it ever rain here?" the countrymen replied: "Why it donks, and it dozzles, and sometimes gives a bit of a snifter, but it ne'er comes in any girt pell," leaving the querist's stock of information very much as he found it.
The first invasion of the Danes took place in the year 787, and to Scotland they gave the name of "Sutherland," and the Hebrides were the southern islands, or "Sudreygar," a name which survives in the title of the Bishop of Sodor and Man.
The Forest of Rossendale contains eleven "vaccaries," or cow-pastures (we are told by Mr. H. C. March, M.D.), which were called "booths,"from the huts of the shepherds and cowherds. From this we trace Cowpebooth, Bacopbooth, and Crawshawbooth. Booth is derived from the old Norse "bûd," a dwelling, while from "byr" and "boer" we get the surnames Byrom, Burton, Buerton, Bamber, Thornber. "Forseti" was the judge of one of the Norse deities, and the word supplies us with Fawcett, Facit, or Facid as it was spelt in 1781, and Foster. Unal was a Danish chief, whose name survives as a surname Neal, Niel, and O'Neil. From the old Norse "yarborg," an earthwork, we get Yarborough, Yerburgh, Sedburg, and Sedberg. Boundaries have always been matters of great importance, and "twistle" is a boundary betwixt farms. Endrod was King of Norway in 784, and his name furnishes Endr, whose boundary becomes Entwistle, and also Enderby. Rochdale is derived from "rockr," old Norse for rock, and dale from the Norse "daal," a wide valley; thus the Norsename Rochdale supplanted Celtic-Saxon name of "Rachdam." "Gamul," meaning old, was a common personal name among Norsemen. In a grant of land dated 1051, fifteen years before the Conquest, appears the name of Gouse Gamelson, which is a distinct Norse patronymic. Gambleside was one of the vaccaries or cow-pastures of Rossendale Forest, and was spelt Gambulside. In Anglo-Saxon and Teutonic dialects "ing" is a patronymic, as in Bruning, son of Brun, says Mr. Robert Ferguson, M.P., in his "Surnames as a Science." But it has also a wider sense. Thus, in Leamington it signifies the peopleof the Leam, on which river the place is situated. From a like origin comes the name of the Scandinavian Vikings, Vik-ing; the people from Vik, a bay. Sir J. Picton, in his "Ethnology of Wiltshire," says: "When the Saxons first invaded England they came in tribes, and families headed by their patriarchal leaders. Each tribe was called by its leader's name, with the termination 'ing,' signifying family. Where they settled they gave their patriarchal name to the mark, or central point round which they clustered."
Considering the great number of these names, amounting to over a thousand in England, and the manner in which they are dispersed, it is impossible to consider them as anything else than the everyday names of men. This large number will serve to give an idea of the very great extent to which place-names are formed from the names of men who founded the settlements. It must be remembered that the earlier date now generally assigned for the Teutonic settlements tends to give greater latitude to the inquiry as to the races by whom the settlements were made, as well as the fact that all our settlements were made in heathen times. From the neighbouring tribe of Picts we retain one form "pecthun," from which we derive the surnames of Picton, Peyton, and Paton. This may suggest that we owe the name peat to the same origin. We have also the word pictures, probably formed from "pict," and "heri," a warrior.
Under the reign of Ethelred II. the supremacy of the Anglo-Saxons had already passed away. As a people they sank, and left only a part of their civilisation and institutions to their successors, the Danes and Normans. The development of a maritime skill unknown before, of a bold manly spirit of enterprise, and of a political liberty which, by preserving a balance between the freedom of the nobles and of the rest of the people, ensured to England a powerful and peaceful existence.
Danish settlers in England conferred a great benefit on the country, from a political point of view, by the introduction of a numerous class of independent peasantry. These people formed a striking contrast to the oppressed race of Anglo-Saxons. Turner says: "The Danes seem to have planted in the colonies they occupied a numerous race of freemen, and their counties seem to have been well peopled." The number of these independent landowners was consequently greatest in the districts which were earliest occupied by the Danes, where they naturally sprung up from the Danish chiefs parcelling out the soil to their victorious warriors.Twenty years after the Norman Conquest there was a greater number of independent landed proprietors, if not, in the strictest sense of the word, freeholders, in the districts occupied by the Danes, and under "Danelag," than in any other of the Anglo-Saxon parts of England. The smaller Anglo-Saxon agriculturists were frequently serfs, while the Danish settlers, being conquerors, were mostly freemen, and in general proprietors of the soil.
Domesday Book mentions, under the name of "Sochmanni," a numerous class of landowners or peasants in the Danish districts of the north, while in the south they are rarely to be found. They were not freeholders in the present sense of the term. They stood in a feudal relation to a superior lord, but in such a manner that the "Sochmanni" may best be compared with our present "hereditary lessees." Their farm passed by inheritance to their sons, they paying certain rents and performing certain feudal duties; but the feudal lord had no power to dispose of the property as he pleased.
The following is an abstract of a paper on Tithe and Tenure in the North, by the Rev. J. H.Colligan:—
Danish Influence on Land Tenurewas originally a military one. In Westmorland the manors were granted round several great baronies or Fees. The barons held their estates "in capite" from the king, upon conditions that were mainly military, while the lords of the manors held of the barons, theirchief duty being, to keep a muster-roll of their tenants for the discharge of the military claims of the barons. The tenants held of the lord by fines and services, the latter being, until the close of the XVIth century, of a military character. This baronial system, perfected by William the Conqueror, gave enormous power into the hands of the barons.The Hudlestons, of Millum Castle, Lancashire, exercised the prerogative of "jura regalia" for twenty-two generations. They also had the privileges of "wreck of the sea." Some of the barons had the power of capital punishment, others, again, had the right to nominate sheriffs. They held their own courts and could be either friends or rivals of the king, to whom alone they owed homage, with service at home or abroad. The authority thus obtained by the barons was distributed to the knights and lords of the manors, who, in their turn, levied conditions upon their dependants.This system of devolution of power received from the king was enjoyed also by the church, and kept the counties always ready for war. When the martial spirit began to forsake the land, and peaceful and sporting pleasures arose, we find a new form of tenure. Lands and tenements are given for the apparently trifling conditions of keeping up eyries of hawks for the baron, or of providing a gilt spur, or of producing a rose, sometimes out of season but generally in the time of roses, or of making presents of pepper, ginger, cloves, or some other tasty trifle. A number of these rents require no explanation, as they are only the reflex of the passion of the age. Horses, dogs and hawks for the knight, pepper, ginger and cloves for the monks, are easily understood. The reasons for the rose and stirrup, the spur and the glove are not so apparent. It ispossible that originally they were symbolical of real rent or service. The transition from the actual to the symbolical must have taken place in the XIVth and XVth centuries.We have hitherto been speaking of the relationship between the barons and the monks, the knights and the lords of the manor. There is no reference to tenants, because there was no such thing as a free individual tenure before the middle of the XVIth century. The soldier-tenants clung round the barony of the manor, and their position was defined as "tenantes ad voluntatem." It was only in Elizabeth's reign that the demands of the tenants began to be formulated, and the unique form of tenure called "tenant right" appeared on the border. It is difficult to discover when and how the movement for freedom on the part of the tenants began, but it certainly is associated with the Reformation, and is seen plainly in those places where protestantism was vigorous.We shall examine the growth of this form of tenure as it appeared in a Cumberland manor. In the neighbourhood under consideration we find three kinds of tenants. At the one extreme were the Drenges, who were probably Saxon slaves; at the other were tenants by right, who were probably equal in dignity and privilege in the early days to the lord of the manor himself. In Cumberland and Westmoreland traces of the Drengage tenements may be found, and the Bondgate, Appleby, is an illustration of Drengage dwellings. The tenants by right are found in Cumberland, where they are now called yeomen, and in Westmorland, where they are known as statesmen (steadsmen), and in North Lancashire, where, to the regret of the writer in the Victoria County History, the yeomen are gradually disappearing. Mr. J. Brownbill says that tenant right was frequentlyurged all over Furness and Cartmel and in Warton and the northern border of Lancashire. He refers to the particulars in West's "Antiquities of Furness."We have not been able to ascertain the origin of the tenure as it applies to North Lancashire, but on the borders it is the outcome of an interesting and unique form of service called Cornage. It is still a disputed point as to the origin of the word. Some holding it to from the fact that the lord gave notice of the enemies' approach by winding a horn; others that it was much earlier in its origin, and arises from the horn or cattle tax, still known in Westmorland as neat- or nowt-geld. Whichever origin be taken, it is clear that, from the time of Queen Elizabeth, the keeping of the borders was an important service, and is seen from the fact that the tenant could not hire another to take his place.In regard to this border service, known as Cornage, the lord had several privileges which included wardship or control over the heir, until he was 21 years of age; marriage, which gave him the right of arranging a marriage if the inheritance had devolved upon a female; and relief, which was the payment of a certain sum by the heir upon taking possession of the inheritance. The chief privilege which the "tenant-by-right" possessed for his border service was that of devising his tenement bywill, a privilege which is much prized until this day. At the Restoration the "Drengage tenure" was raised into a Socage tenure, and it was under this tenure, with that of Cornage, and sometimes with a combination of these forms, that most of the tenements of the manors of Cumberland and Westmorland were held. These holders came to be described as customary tenants. The customary tenant is distinguished from the freeholder, and the copyholder, in that he is not seised of his landin fee simple, as is the freeholder, and is not subject to the disabilities of the copyholder, nor are his customary dues considered derogatory to the nobility of his tenure. The customary tenant is therefore between the freeholder and the copyholder, with a number of well defined privileges. The two most important duties of the average tenant in Cumberland and Westmorland were those of warfare and the watching of the forests. The former depended entirely upon the attitude of the other kingdoms, especially Scotland; the latter was a long and laborious service laid upon the tenant until the middle of the XVIth century. The counties of Cumberland and Westmorland were dense forests until long after the Norman Conquest, and the timber for the royal shipyards was grown in these highlands of England. The forests were full of game, and the regulations in connection with the preservation of game and the upkeep of the forests were most exacting upon the people.From the middle of the XVIth century, however, these ancient laws and services began to lose their force, and a new set of regulations arose to meet the new environment. Slowly but surely the feudal system had passed away. Here and there a relic remained, but it was impossible to ignore the rights of men who could no longer be bought and sold with a tenement. From the first year of the reign of Elizabeth the border service is well defined and the claims of the tenants became fixed. Several years before, Lord Wharton, as Deputy-General of the West Marches, drew up a series of regulations for the protection of that part of the border. In an interesting article by Mr. Graham, we find how the men of Hayton, near Carlisle, turned out every night with their spears, and remained crouched on the river bank in the black darkness or the pouring rain. It is a typicalexample of borderers engaged upon their regular service. This system had superseded the feudal system. The feudal tenure survived in many instances where a power. Like one of their own tumultuous forces, when once directed into the right stream, they went to form that new product which we call an Englishman. The documents, which were discovered at Penruddock in the township of Hutton Soil—the "kist" is in the possession of Mr. Wm. Kitchen, Town Head, Penruddock—relate to a struggle between the lord and the tenants of Hutton John, Cumberland, on the subject of tenant right. So far as we are aware these documents are unique. The various authorities on Cumberland history give reference to a number of these disputes but no mention is made of the Hutton John case, so that we have here for the first time a full knowledge of what was probably the most important of all these trials. In addition, while there are no documents relating to the other cases, we have here every paper of the Hutton John case preserved. The story of the discovery is that the writer (the Rev. J. Hay Colligan) was searching for material for a history of the Penruddock Presbyterian Meeting House when he came across a kist, or chest, containing these documents. (A calendar of these documents may be found in the Cumberland and Westmorland Transactions for 1908.) The manor of Hutton John had long been in the possession of the Hutton family when it passed in 1564 to a son of Sir John Hudleston of Millum Castle by his marriage with Mary Hutton. Her brother Thomas had burdened the estate on account of his imprisonment lasting about fifty years. It was the son of this marriage, Joseph by name, who became the first lord of the manor, and most of the manorial rights still remain with the Hudleston family. After Joseph Hudlestoncame three Andrews—first, 1603–1672; second, 1637–1706; third, 1669–1724—and it was with these four lords that the tenants carried on their historical dispute. The death of Thomas Hutton took place some time after 1620 and was the occasion for raising a number of questions that agitated the manor for almost a century afterwards. It flung the combustible topic of tenure into an atmosphere that was already charged with religious animosity, and the fire in the manor soon was as fierce as the beacon-flare on their own Skiddaw.The position of the parties in the manor may be summed up by saying that Joseph Hudleston insisted that the tenants were tenants-at-will, and the tenants on the other hand claimed tenant right. Whatever may have been the origin of cornage, it is clear that by the XVIIth century it was synonymous with tenant right. The details in the dispute cannot here be treated, but the central point was the subject of a general fine. This fine, frequently called gressome, was the entrance fine which the tenant paid to the lord upon admittance. In some manors it was a two years' rent, in others three. An unusual form in the manor of Hutton John was a seven years' gressome, called also a running fine or a town-term. This was the amount of two years' rent at the end of every seven years. The contention of the tenants was, that as this was a running fine, no general fine was due to the lord of the manor on the death of the previous lord. From this position the tenants never wavered, and for over seventy years they fought the claim of the lord. Upon the death of Thomas Hutton the tenants claiming tenant right refused to pay the general fine to Joseph Hudleston. After wrangling with the tenants for a few years, Joseph brought a Bill against them in 1632. He succeeded in obtaining a report fromthe law lord, Baron Trevor, which plays an important part in the case unto the end. He apparently disregarded the portion which applied to himself, and pressed the remainder upon the tenants. The tenants thereupon decided to send three of their number with a petition to Charles I. and it was delivered to the king at Newmarket. He ordered his judges to look into the matter. The civil war, however, had begun, and the whole country was about to be filled with smoke and flame. Needless to say the tenants took the side of Parliament, while the lord of the manor, the first Andrew, was described in the records as a Papist in arms. During the civil war the whole county of Cumberland was in action. The manor of Hutton John was mainly for the Parliament. Greystoke Castle, only two miles from the manor, surrendered to the Parliamentary troops. The termination of the civil war in 1651 was the date for the beginning of litigation between the Hudleston family and the Parliament on the subject of the manor. After this was over the struggle between the lord and the tenants began again. In their distress the tenants sent a letter to Lord Howard of Naworth Castle, whose Puritan sympathies were well known. This is a feature of the case that need not be dwelt upon, but without which there can be no complete explanation of the story. The struggle was in fact a religious one. The occasion of it was the entrance into a Cumberland manor of a Lancashire family, and the consequent resentment on the part of the adherents of the manor, who boasted that they had been there "afore the Hudlestons." The motives which prompted each party were those expressed in the words Puritanv.Papist. The year 1668 was a memorable one in the history of the dispute. In that year the tenants brought a Bill of complaint against thelord at Carlisle Assizes. The judge, at the opening of the court, declared that the differences could be compounded by some gentlemen of the county. All the parties agreed, and the court made an order whereby Sir Philip Musgrave, Kt. and Bart., and Sir John Lowther, Bart., were to settle the case before September 21st. If they could not determine within that time they were to select an umpire within one week, who must make his award before Lady-day. Sir Philip Musgrave and Sir John Lowther accepted the responsibility placed upon them by the court and took great pains to accommodate the differences, but finding themselves unable to furnish the award within the time specified they elected Sir George Fletcher, Bart., to be umpire. Sir George Fletcher made his award on March 3rd, 1668. The original document, written, signed and sealed with his own hand, is here before us. Its tattered edges prove that it has been frequently referred to. Sir George Fletcher's award was on the whole in favour of the tenants, and especially on the subject of the general fine, which he declared was not payable on the death of the lord. Other important matters were dealt with, including heriots, widows' estates, the use of quarries on the tenements, the use of timber, the mill rent, together with the subject of boons and services. All the tenants acquiesced in the award, and the lord paid the damages for false imprisonment to several of the tenants.In the year 1672 Andrew Hudleston the first died, and Andrew the second, 1637–1706, succeeded to the lordship. He immediately began to encroach. He demanded the general fine in addition to rents and services, contrary to the award. The struggle therefore broke out afresh as fiercely as ever, and both parties returned to the old subject of tenure. The matterbecame a religious one owing to the Restoration and the rigid acts which followed between 1662–1689. An extraordinary incident occurred at this time in the conversion of the lord to the protestant cause, but this did not affect the dispute between him and the tenants. In 1699 the tenants moved again. They requested the court to put into operation the award of Sir George Fletcher. From that year until 1704 the strife was bitterer than ever, and the kist contains more documents relating to this period than to any other. In the year 1704, after several judgments had previously been made against the third Andrew Hudleston and his late father, the former appealed to the House of Lords, and the case was dismissed in favour of the tenants.Although the struggle lasted until the year 1716, the climax was reached in 1704. The historical value of the case is the way in which it illustrates the conditions of tenure in the North-West of England, and at the same time pourtrays the pertinacity in spite of serious obstacles of the yeoman class in asserting its rights.Tithe.The subject of Tithe is one that can only be dealt with in a restricted way and from one point of view. It is well known that, through the influence of George Fox in North Lancashire, Quakerism spread with frenzied force through Westmorland and Cumberland. Many of those who had been previously content with Puritan doctrines seceded to the Quakers. The practice of declining to pay the tithe, in the case which the documents before us illustrate, was of a different character. It occurs in the parish of Greystoke, in which the manor of Hutton John was situated. Five years after the award of Sir George Fletcher on the tenure case, the nonconforming section of the tenants of Hutton John raised another question of a tithe called "Bushel Corn."This had been regularly paid to the Rector of Greystoke from time immemorial. Even the Puritan rectors had received this tithe down to that great Puritan, Richard Gilpin, who was ejected from the Rectory of Greystoke in 1661. The point in dispute was not a deliberate refusal of the tithe, it was a declaration of the parishioners that themeasurewas an unjust one. The contest was carried on by John Noble, of Penruddock, and Thos. Parsons, the steward of the Countess of Arundel and Surrey, Lady of the Barony of Greystoke. Associated with Parsons was John Robson, a servant and proctor of the rector. Parsons and Robson were farmers of the tithe, but the case had the full consent of the rector, the Rev. Allan Smallwood, D.D.The immediate cause of the dispute was the question of the customary measure. It resulted in the settlement of a vexatious subject which was as to the size of abushel. The matter was one of contention throughout the country until standard weights and measures were recognised and adopted. In Cumberland the most acute form was upon the subject of the corn bushel. The deviations in quantity were difficult to suppress, and several law cases upon this matter are on record. In the Parish of Greystoke the case was first begun in 1672. The bushel measure had been gradually increased from sixteen gallons, which amount the parishioners acknowledged and were prepared to pay, until it reached twenty-two gallons. The case passed through the assizes of three counties, being held at Carlisle, Lancaster and Appleby, and a verdict for the parishioners was eventually given.The documents, apart from their intrinsic worth, have thus an inestimable value, in that they shed light upon and give information in regard to the doings in aCumberland manor where hitherto there has been but darkness and silence, as far as the records of the people were concerned. We are able now to follow with interest and satisfaction a story that is equal in courage and persistence with the best traditions of English love of justice and fair play.
Danish Influence on Land Tenure
was originally a military one. In Westmorland the manors were granted round several great baronies or Fees. The barons held their estates "in capite" from the king, upon conditions that were mainly military, while the lords of the manors held of the barons, theirchief duty being, to keep a muster-roll of their tenants for the discharge of the military claims of the barons. The tenants held of the lord by fines and services, the latter being, until the close of the XVIth century, of a military character. This baronial system, perfected by William the Conqueror, gave enormous power into the hands of the barons.
The Hudlestons, of Millum Castle, Lancashire, exercised the prerogative of "jura regalia" for twenty-two generations. They also had the privileges of "wreck of the sea." Some of the barons had the power of capital punishment, others, again, had the right to nominate sheriffs. They held their own courts and could be either friends or rivals of the king, to whom alone they owed homage, with service at home or abroad. The authority thus obtained by the barons was distributed to the knights and lords of the manors, who, in their turn, levied conditions upon their dependants.
This system of devolution of power received from the king was enjoyed also by the church, and kept the counties always ready for war. When the martial spirit began to forsake the land, and peaceful and sporting pleasures arose, we find a new form of tenure. Lands and tenements are given for the apparently trifling conditions of keeping up eyries of hawks for the baron, or of providing a gilt spur, or of producing a rose, sometimes out of season but generally in the time of roses, or of making presents of pepper, ginger, cloves, or some other tasty trifle. A number of these rents require no explanation, as they are only the reflex of the passion of the age. Horses, dogs and hawks for the knight, pepper, ginger and cloves for the monks, are easily understood. The reasons for the rose and stirrup, the spur and the glove are not so apparent. It ispossible that originally they were symbolical of real rent or service. The transition from the actual to the symbolical must have taken place in the XIVth and XVth centuries.
We have hitherto been speaking of the relationship between the barons and the monks, the knights and the lords of the manor. There is no reference to tenants, because there was no such thing as a free individual tenure before the middle of the XVIth century. The soldier-tenants clung round the barony of the manor, and their position was defined as "tenantes ad voluntatem." It was only in Elizabeth's reign that the demands of the tenants began to be formulated, and the unique form of tenure called "tenant right" appeared on the border. It is difficult to discover when and how the movement for freedom on the part of the tenants began, but it certainly is associated with the Reformation, and is seen plainly in those places where protestantism was vigorous.
We shall examine the growth of this form of tenure as it appeared in a Cumberland manor. In the neighbourhood under consideration we find three kinds of tenants. At the one extreme were the Drenges, who were probably Saxon slaves; at the other were tenants by right, who were probably equal in dignity and privilege in the early days to the lord of the manor himself. In Cumberland and Westmoreland traces of the Drengage tenements may be found, and the Bondgate, Appleby, is an illustration of Drengage dwellings. The tenants by right are found in Cumberland, where they are now called yeomen, and in Westmorland, where they are known as statesmen (steadsmen), and in North Lancashire, where, to the regret of the writer in the Victoria County History, the yeomen are gradually disappearing. Mr. J. Brownbill says that tenant right was frequentlyurged all over Furness and Cartmel and in Warton and the northern border of Lancashire. He refers to the particulars in West's "Antiquities of Furness."
We have not been able to ascertain the origin of the tenure as it applies to North Lancashire, but on the borders it is the outcome of an interesting and unique form of service called Cornage. It is still a disputed point as to the origin of the word. Some holding it to from the fact that the lord gave notice of the enemies' approach by winding a horn; others that it was much earlier in its origin, and arises from the horn or cattle tax, still known in Westmorland as neat- or nowt-geld. Whichever origin be taken, it is clear that, from the time of Queen Elizabeth, the keeping of the borders was an important service, and is seen from the fact that the tenant could not hire another to take his place.
In regard to this border service, known as Cornage, the lord had several privileges which included wardship or control over the heir, until he was 21 years of age; marriage, which gave him the right of arranging a marriage if the inheritance had devolved upon a female; and relief, which was the payment of a certain sum by the heir upon taking possession of the inheritance. The chief privilege which the "tenant-by-right" possessed for his border service was that of devising his tenement bywill, a privilege which is much prized until this day. At the Restoration the "Drengage tenure" was raised into a Socage tenure, and it was under this tenure, with that of Cornage, and sometimes with a combination of these forms, that most of the tenements of the manors of Cumberland and Westmorland were held. These holders came to be described as customary tenants. The customary tenant is distinguished from the freeholder, and the copyholder, in that he is not seised of his landin fee simple, as is the freeholder, and is not subject to the disabilities of the copyholder, nor are his customary dues considered derogatory to the nobility of his tenure. The customary tenant is therefore between the freeholder and the copyholder, with a number of well defined privileges. The two most important duties of the average tenant in Cumberland and Westmorland were those of warfare and the watching of the forests. The former depended entirely upon the attitude of the other kingdoms, especially Scotland; the latter was a long and laborious service laid upon the tenant until the middle of the XVIth century. The counties of Cumberland and Westmorland were dense forests until long after the Norman Conquest, and the timber for the royal shipyards was grown in these highlands of England. The forests were full of game, and the regulations in connection with the preservation of game and the upkeep of the forests were most exacting upon the people.
From the middle of the XVIth century, however, these ancient laws and services began to lose their force, and a new set of regulations arose to meet the new environment. Slowly but surely the feudal system had passed away. Here and there a relic remained, but it was impossible to ignore the rights of men who could no longer be bought and sold with a tenement. From the first year of the reign of Elizabeth the border service is well defined and the claims of the tenants became fixed. Several years before, Lord Wharton, as Deputy-General of the West Marches, drew up a series of regulations for the protection of that part of the border. In an interesting article by Mr. Graham, we find how the men of Hayton, near Carlisle, turned out every night with their spears, and remained crouched on the river bank in the black darkness or the pouring rain. It is a typicalexample of borderers engaged upon their regular service. This system had superseded the feudal system. The feudal tenure survived in many instances where a power. Like one of their own tumultuous forces, when once directed into the right stream, they went to form that new product which we call an Englishman. The documents, which were discovered at Penruddock in the township of Hutton Soil—the "kist" is in the possession of Mr. Wm. Kitchen, Town Head, Penruddock—relate to a struggle between the lord and the tenants of Hutton John, Cumberland, on the subject of tenant right. So far as we are aware these documents are unique. The various authorities on Cumberland history give reference to a number of these disputes but no mention is made of the Hutton John case, so that we have here for the first time a full knowledge of what was probably the most important of all these trials. In addition, while there are no documents relating to the other cases, we have here every paper of the Hutton John case preserved. The story of the discovery is that the writer (the Rev. J. Hay Colligan) was searching for material for a history of the Penruddock Presbyterian Meeting House when he came across a kist, or chest, containing these documents. (A calendar of these documents may be found in the Cumberland and Westmorland Transactions for 1908.) The manor of Hutton John had long been in the possession of the Hutton family when it passed in 1564 to a son of Sir John Hudleston of Millum Castle by his marriage with Mary Hutton. Her brother Thomas had burdened the estate on account of his imprisonment lasting about fifty years. It was the son of this marriage, Joseph by name, who became the first lord of the manor, and most of the manorial rights still remain with the Hudleston family. After Joseph Hudlestoncame three Andrews—first, 1603–1672; second, 1637–1706; third, 1669–1724—and it was with these four lords that the tenants carried on their historical dispute. The death of Thomas Hutton took place some time after 1620 and was the occasion for raising a number of questions that agitated the manor for almost a century afterwards. It flung the combustible topic of tenure into an atmosphere that was already charged with religious animosity, and the fire in the manor soon was as fierce as the beacon-flare on their own Skiddaw.
The position of the parties in the manor may be summed up by saying that Joseph Hudleston insisted that the tenants were tenants-at-will, and the tenants on the other hand claimed tenant right. Whatever may have been the origin of cornage, it is clear that by the XVIIth century it was synonymous with tenant right. The details in the dispute cannot here be treated, but the central point was the subject of a general fine. This fine, frequently called gressome, was the entrance fine which the tenant paid to the lord upon admittance. In some manors it was a two years' rent, in others three. An unusual form in the manor of Hutton John was a seven years' gressome, called also a running fine or a town-term. This was the amount of two years' rent at the end of every seven years. The contention of the tenants was, that as this was a running fine, no general fine was due to the lord of the manor on the death of the previous lord. From this position the tenants never wavered, and for over seventy years they fought the claim of the lord. Upon the death of Thomas Hutton the tenants claiming tenant right refused to pay the general fine to Joseph Hudleston. After wrangling with the tenants for a few years, Joseph brought a Bill against them in 1632. He succeeded in obtaining a report fromthe law lord, Baron Trevor, which plays an important part in the case unto the end. He apparently disregarded the portion which applied to himself, and pressed the remainder upon the tenants. The tenants thereupon decided to send three of their number with a petition to Charles I. and it was delivered to the king at Newmarket. He ordered his judges to look into the matter. The civil war, however, had begun, and the whole country was about to be filled with smoke and flame. Needless to say the tenants took the side of Parliament, while the lord of the manor, the first Andrew, was described in the records as a Papist in arms. During the civil war the whole county of Cumberland was in action. The manor of Hutton John was mainly for the Parliament. Greystoke Castle, only two miles from the manor, surrendered to the Parliamentary troops. The termination of the civil war in 1651 was the date for the beginning of litigation between the Hudleston family and the Parliament on the subject of the manor. After this was over the struggle between the lord and the tenants began again. In their distress the tenants sent a letter to Lord Howard of Naworth Castle, whose Puritan sympathies were well known. This is a feature of the case that need not be dwelt upon, but without which there can be no complete explanation of the story. The struggle was in fact a religious one. The occasion of it was the entrance into a Cumberland manor of a Lancashire family, and the consequent resentment on the part of the adherents of the manor, who boasted that they had been there "afore the Hudlestons." The motives which prompted each party were those expressed in the words Puritanv.Papist. The year 1668 was a memorable one in the history of the dispute. In that year the tenants brought a Bill of complaint against thelord at Carlisle Assizes. The judge, at the opening of the court, declared that the differences could be compounded by some gentlemen of the county. All the parties agreed, and the court made an order whereby Sir Philip Musgrave, Kt. and Bart., and Sir John Lowther, Bart., were to settle the case before September 21st. If they could not determine within that time they were to select an umpire within one week, who must make his award before Lady-day. Sir Philip Musgrave and Sir John Lowther accepted the responsibility placed upon them by the court and took great pains to accommodate the differences, but finding themselves unable to furnish the award within the time specified they elected Sir George Fletcher, Bart., to be umpire. Sir George Fletcher made his award on March 3rd, 1668. The original document, written, signed and sealed with his own hand, is here before us. Its tattered edges prove that it has been frequently referred to. Sir George Fletcher's award was on the whole in favour of the tenants, and especially on the subject of the general fine, which he declared was not payable on the death of the lord. Other important matters were dealt with, including heriots, widows' estates, the use of quarries on the tenements, the use of timber, the mill rent, together with the subject of boons and services. All the tenants acquiesced in the award, and the lord paid the damages for false imprisonment to several of the tenants.
In the year 1672 Andrew Hudleston the first died, and Andrew the second, 1637–1706, succeeded to the lordship. He immediately began to encroach. He demanded the general fine in addition to rents and services, contrary to the award. The struggle therefore broke out afresh as fiercely as ever, and both parties returned to the old subject of tenure. The matterbecame a religious one owing to the Restoration and the rigid acts which followed between 1662–1689. An extraordinary incident occurred at this time in the conversion of the lord to the protestant cause, but this did not affect the dispute between him and the tenants. In 1699 the tenants moved again. They requested the court to put into operation the award of Sir George Fletcher. From that year until 1704 the strife was bitterer than ever, and the kist contains more documents relating to this period than to any other. In the year 1704, after several judgments had previously been made against the third Andrew Hudleston and his late father, the former appealed to the House of Lords, and the case was dismissed in favour of the tenants.
Although the struggle lasted until the year 1716, the climax was reached in 1704. The historical value of the case is the way in which it illustrates the conditions of tenure in the North-West of England, and at the same time pourtrays the pertinacity in spite of serious obstacles of the yeoman class in asserting its rights.
Tithe.The subject of Tithe is one that can only be dealt with in a restricted way and from one point of view. It is well known that, through the influence of George Fox in North Lancashire, Quakerism spread with frenzied force through Westmorland and Cumberland. Many of those who had been previously content with Puritan doctrines seceded to the Quakers. The practice of declining to pay the tithe, in the case which the documents before us illustrate, was of a different character. It occurs in the parish of Greystoke, in which the manor of Hutton John was situated. Five years after the award of Sir George Fletcher on the tenure case, the nonconforming section of the tenants of Hutton John raised another question of a tithe called "Bushel Corn."This had been regularly paid to the Rector of Greystoke from time immemorial. Even the Puritan rectors had received this tithe down to that great Puritan, Richard Gilpin, who was ejected from the Rectory of Greystoke in 1661. The point in dispute was not a deliberate refusal of the tithe, it was a declaration of the parishioners that themeasurewas an unjust one. The contest was carried on by John Noble, of Penruddock, and Thos. Parsons, the steward of the Countess of Arundel and Surrey, Lady of the Barony of Greystoke. Associated with Parsons was John Robson, a servant and proctor of the rector. Parsons and Robson were farmers of the tithe, but the case had the full consent of the rector, the Rev. Allan Smallwood, D.D.
The immediate cause of the dispute was the question of the customary measure. It resulted in the settlement of a vexatious subject which was as to the size of abushel. The matter was one of contention throughout the country until standard weights and measures were recognised and adopted. In Cumberland the most acute form was upon the subject of the corn bushel. The deviations in quantity were difficult to suppress, and several law cases upon this matter are on record. In the Parish of Greystoke the case was first begun in 1672. The bushel measure had been gradually increased from sixteen gallons, which amount the parishioners acknowledged and were prepared to pay, until it reached twenty-two gallons. The case passed through the assizes of three counties, being held at Carlisle, Lancaster and Appleby, and a verdict for the parishioners was eventually given.
The documents, apart from their intrinsic worth, have thus an inestimable value, in that they shed light upon and give information in regard to the doings in aCumberland manor where hitherto there has been but darkness and silence, as far as the records of the people were concerned. We are able now to follow with interest and satisfaction a story that is equal in courage and persistence with the best traditions of English love of justice and fair play.
The documents in this case were numerous but small, and were in many cases letters and scraps of paper. As a piece of local history it is not to be compared with the tenure case, but it contains valuable items of parish life in the XVIIth century. Perhaps the best of the letters are those from Sir John Otway, the well-known lawyer. John Noble the yeoman has several letters full of fine touches. The depositions of the witnesses at Cockermouth in 1672 are picturesque. The lawyers' bills, of which there are many, are not so illuminating. There are several letters of Henry Johnes of Lancaster, who was Mayor of that town on two occasions.
Public men regard it as a great honour to represent the northern districts of England in Parliament, merely from the intelligent political character of the voters; and it was certainly through the adherence of the love of freedom in the north that Cobden and Bright were able to struggle so successfully for the promotion of Free Trade and for financial reform. Sir E. Bulwer Lytton, the great English writer, says: "Those portions of the kingdom originally peopled by the Danes are noted for their intoleranceof all oppression, and their resolute independence of character, to wit, Yorkshire, Lancashire, Norfolk, and Cumberland, and large districts in the Scottish lowlands."
Memorials of the Danes are mixed up with England's freest and most liberal institutions; and to the present day the place where the candidate for a seat in Parliament addressed the electors bears throughout England the pure Danish name of the "Husting." When William I. began to conquer England, and to parcel it out among his warriors, it was the old Danish inhabitants who opposed him; who would have joined him, their kinsman the Norman, especially as he gave it out that one of their objects in coming to England was to avenge the Danes and Norwegians who were massacred by Ethelred, but the Normans aimed at nothing less than the abolition of the free tenure of estates and the complete establishment of a feudal constitution. This mode of proceeding was resented, which would rob the previously independent man of his right to house and land, and by transferring it to the powerful nobles shook the foundation of freedom. The Danes turned from them in disgust, and no longer hesitated to join the equally oppressed Anglo-Saxons. The Normans were obliged to build strong fortifications, for fear of the people of Scandinavian descent, who abounded both in the towns and rural districts. What the Normans chiefly apprehended was attacks from the Danes who, therewas good reason to suppose, might come over with their fleets, to the assistance of their countrymen in the North of England.
The Norman kings who succeeded William the Conqueror dwelt in perfect safety in the southern districts, but did not venture north without some fear, and a chronicler who lived at the close of the twelfth century assures us that they never visited this part of the kingdom without being accompanied by a strong army.
In those districts where the Danes exercised complete dominion the custom of slavery was abolished. This fact is established by a comparison of the population of those districts colonised by the Danes with that of the older English districts. The population returns given in Domesday Book prove that no "servi" existed in the counties where Danish influence was greatest. Both in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire at this time there is no record of slavery. In the counties where this influence was less, such as Nottingham, the returns show that one serf existed to every 200 of the population. In Derbyshire 1 per cent., in Norfolk and Suffolk 4 per cent., in Leicestershire 6 per cent., in Northamptonshire 10 per cent., in Cambridge, Hertford and Essex 11 per cent. Outside the influence of the Danelagh the proportion is muchgreater. In Oxfordshire 14 per cent. were slaves, in Worcester, Bucks, Somerset and Wiltshire 15 per cent., in Dorset and Hampshire 16 per cent., in Shropshire 17 per cent., in Devonshire 18 per cent., in Cornwall 21 per cent., and in Gloucestershire 24 per cent., or almost one-fourth of the whole population. These records were not made by Danish surveyors, but Norman officials, and explode the theory of historians like Green who assert that the English settlers were Communities of free men. These conditions of tenure were introduced by the Danes, and became so firmly established that the names given to such freeholders as "statesmen" in Cumberland, "freemen" and "yeomen" in Yorkshire, Westmorland and North Lancashire still exist at the present day.
As we have seen, records of struggles for tenant rights have come to light in recent years which prove that feudal conditions were imposed by successive landlords, and were resisted both before and after the Commonwealth.
The Norse settlement at the mouth of the Dee dated from the year 900 when Ingimund, who had been expelled from Dublin, was given certain waste lands near Chester, by Aethelflaed, Lady of the Mercians. This colony extended from the shore of Flint, over the Wirral peninsula to the Mersey, andit is recorded in Domesday by the name of their Thingwall or Tingvella. Along with the group of Norse names in the Wirral is Thurstaston, or Thors-Stone, or Thorstun-tun. This natural formation of red sandstone has been sometimes mistaken for a Tingmount or Norse monument. Several monuments of the tenth century Norse colony are to be found in the district, such as the Hogback Stone in West Kirby Museum, and the gravestone bearing the wheel-shaped head. A similar monument was found on Hilbre Island, and other remains of cross slabs occur at Neston and Bromborough.
The Norse place-names of Wirral prove that these lands were waste and unoccupied, when names of Danish origin were given, such as Helsby, Frankby, Whitby, Raby, Irby, Greasby and Pensby. Some Wirral names are composed of Celtic and Norse, as the settlers brought both Gælic and Norse names from Ireland. These are found in the Norse Runes in the Isle of Man and north of Lancaster.
Socmen were manorial tenants who were free in status, though their land was not held by charter, like that of a freeholder, but was secured to them by custom. They paid a fixed rent for the virgate, or part of a virgate, which they generally held; and, taking the Peterborough Socmen as examples, they were bound to render farm produce, such as fowls and eggs, at stated seasons; to lend their ploughteams thrice in winter and spring; to mow and carry hay; to thresh and harrow, and do other farm work for one day ... and to help at the harvest for one or two days. Their services contrasted with theweek-workof a villein, were little more than nominal and are comparable to those of the Radmanni. The Peterborough socmen reappear under the "Descriptio Militum" of the abbey, where it is said they were served "cum militibus," but this appears to be exceptional. Socmen were like "liber tenentes" frequently liable to "merchet, heriot and tallage." Their tenure was the origin of free socage, common in the thirteenth century, and now the prevailing tenure of land in England. Socmen held land by a fixed money payment, and by a fixed though trivial amount of base service which would seem to ultimately disappear by commutation." All socmen as customary tenants required the intervention of the steward of the manor in the transfer or sale of their rights. ("Palgrave's Dictionary of Political Economy," p. 439.)
Merchet.Of all the manorial exactions the most odious was the "Merchetum," a fine paid by the villain on giving his daughter in marriage. It was considered as a mark of servile descent, and the man free by blood was supposed to be always exempted from it, however debased his position was in every other respect.
In the status of socmen, developed from the law of Saxon freemen there was usually nothing of thekind. "Heriot" was the fine or tax payable to the lord or abbot on the death of the socman. The true Heriot is akin in name and in character to the Saxon "here-great"—to the surrender of the military outfit supplied by the chief to his follower. In feudal time and among peasants it is not the war-horse and armour that is meant, but the ox and harness take their place. (Vinogradoff, "Mediæval Manors": Political Exactions, Chap. V., 153.)
Mol-men.Etymologically, there is reason to believe that this term is of Danish origin, and the meaning has been kept in practice by the Scotch dialect (vide"Ashley, Economic History," i, pp. 56–87.)
Tallage.The payment of arbitrary tallage is held during the thirteenth century to imply a servile status. Such tallage at will is not very often found in documents, although the lord sometimes retained his prerogative in this respect even when sanctioning the customary form of renders and services. Now and then it is mentioned that tallage is to be levied once a year although the amount remains uncertain. ("Villianage in England," Chap. v, 163, Vinogradoff.)
The influence of the Norse has been felt in terms connected with land. "God speed the plough" has been the toast of many a cup at many a merry meeting for many a century past in this realm. Yet we seem not generally to know by whom the name of the plough was introduced amongst us. The Anglo-Saxon knew nothing of such an implement and its uses ere they settled in the land. This is apparent from their not having a term for it in their own tongue. Even when they were accustomed to the use of the so-called plough of the Romans, which they found in the hands of the British at their settlement in the country, they so confounded the terms of husbandry that they gave the name of "syl" or "suhl" to the Roman-British implement, from the furrow "sulcus," which it drew, without attending in the least to the Roman-British name. The work of one such plough during a season they have called a "sulling" or furrowing.
This so-called plough, from the figures left of it in the Anglo-Saxon MSS., seems to have been but a sorry kind of an article, not fit to be brought intocomparison with the worst form of our plough in the neglected districts of England. We owe both the framework and the origin of the modern plough to the Northerners. We meet with the word in the old Norse "plogr." In Swedish it is "plog"; while in Danish it occurs both as "plov" and "ploug," as in English, and it was in all probability introduced by that people during the eleventh century, at the latter part of their dynasty within the island. There is no root either in the Teutonic or Scandinavian tongues from which it is deducible. The British name for their plough was "aradr," their mode of pronouncing the Latin "aratum," the word for the Roman plough. The sort of agriculture which was known in the very early times must have been extremely simple, if we are to judge it by the terms which have reached our times.
Ulphilas, in his translation of the Greek Testament construes the word for plough with the Gothic word "hôha," the origin of our modern term "hoe." We may therefore surmise that in these primitive times natives hoed the ground for their crops for want of better implements to turn up the soil.
While we owe to the Norse the name for plough, we are also indebted to them for the term "husbandry." Among the Scandinavians, the common name for the peasantry was "bondi," the abstract form of "buondi," dwelling in, or inhabiting a country. As intercourse with more civilised nations began to civilise the inhabitants of these northernclimes, certain favoured "bondi" had houses assigned to them, with plots of ground adjoining for the use of their families. As the culture of such private plots was distinct from the common culture of other land, the person so favoured, separated from the general herd, obtained the name of "husbondi," and the culture of their grounds "husbondri." When such families obtained settlements in England, they brought over with them the habits and names of the North; and from mingling with the Anglo-Saxon natives, with whom adjuncts to introduced terms and titles were common, the suffix of "man" was applied to the name of "husbondi," who thus became "husbandmen," a term still kept up in the northern counties for labourers on farms, who are styled husbandmen to this day.
Names from trades and handicrafts were given to persons employed therein both by Danes and Anglo-Saxons. Such names keep up their distinction to the present day. The general name of artizans of every kind was Smith. Simple "Smiths" are Anglo-Saxon, "Smithies" are Norse. "Millars," from the trade of millers, are Anglo-Saxon. "Milners" for the same reason are Norse. "Ulls," "Woolley" is Anglo-Saxon, "Woolner" is Norse; "Fullers" and "Towers" are Anglo-Saxon; "Kilners" and "Gardners," Norse. Some names derived from offices as "Gotts" from "Gopr," a priest, or one who had charge of a "hof," or heathentemple in the north. "Goods" comes from "Gopa," and "barge" from "bargr."
As further instances we may notice the names of buildings. "Bigging," applied to a building, shows it to be Norse, as in "Newbiggin" and "Dearsbiggin." Such buildings were built of timber, and had an opening for the door and an eyelet for a window. In the Norse this opening was called "vindanga," or windeye, which term we have adopted, and modernised it into our word "window." We have also chosen several Norse names for our domesticated animals. "Bull" we have formed from the Norse "bole." "Gommer," or "Gimmer" we retain in the northern dialect for ewe lamb, from the Norse "Gimber." "Stegg," the name for a gander, is in Norse "Stegger." In the north nicknames were general, and every man had his nickname, particularly if there was aught remarkable in his appearance or character. Some obtained such names from their complexions, as the "Greys," "Whites," "Blacks," "Browns," "Blakes." Short and dwarfish persons took the nicknames of "Stutts," nowadays called "Stotts." Before Christianity found its way among the natives, some bore fanciful names, as may be instanced in "Bjorn," a bear, now "Burns." Prefixes to such fanciful names were also common, as in "Ashbjorn," the bear of the Osir or gods, in modern times spelt "Ashburns"; and "Thorbjorn," the bear of Thor, whence came "Thornber" and "Thorburn." Thename of "Mather" is Norse for Man, and as Norse names are general, we may produce the following: "Agur" from "Ager"; "Rigg" from "Rig"; "Grime" from "Grimr"; "Foster" from "Fostr"; "Harland" from "Arlant"; "Grundy" from "Grunrd"; "Hawkes" from "Hawkr"; and "Frost" from "Frosti," which are of frequent occurrence in the old Norse Sagas.
In the Vale of the Lune the Danes have left numerous traces. North of Lancaster is Halton, properly "Haughton," named from the tumulus or Danish "haugh," within the village. These are the names of the "bojais" or farms belonging to "byes," or residences of their greatmen. Near Hornby we find such places at "Whaitber," "Stainderber," "Threaber," "Scalaber." Within the manor of Hornby are "Santerfell," "Romsfell," "Litherell," or fell of the hillside. The name of fell for mountain bespeaks Norse or Danish influence.
The Raven was the national symbol of the Danes. We have Ravenstonedale and Ravenshore, and we also find the name in Rivington Pike, from Raven-dun-pike. Pike is a common name for a hill or spur standing away from the mountain range, and is derived from the Picts. The derivation of our common pronoun "same" is to be traced through the old Norse "samt," "sama," and "som," and has been selected into our tongue from the definite form "sama," the same. While we mightexpect to meet with this word, in the Lowland Scotch, where the Norse influence was greater, the people use the Anglo-Saxon "ilia" or "ylea," while in the general English, where the influence of the Northmen was less, we have adopted the Norse word "same," to the exclusion of the word we might expect to consider as our own. Many a good word do we owe to the Norsmen, whatever we may think about their deeds.
The Parish Church of St. Peter, Bolton, was rebuilt entirely by Mr. Peter Ormrod, whose surname is Danish, and was consecrated on St. Peter's Day, 1871. Among the pre-Norman stones discovered during the re-building were the broken head of a supposed Irish cross, of circular type, probably of the tenth century; part of the shaft of a cross bearing a representation of Adam and Eve, with the apple between their lips, and an upturned hand; and a stone with carving of a nondescript monster. At this period the Danes were the rulers of Ireland and the Isle of Man, whose Bishops were men bearing Danish names, and therefore we may assume that this memorial was erected under their influence and direction.
Some crosses, says Fosbrooke, in his Dictionary of Antiquities, owe their origin to the early Christians marking the Druid stones with crosses, in order to change the worship without breaking the prejudice. Some of the crosses presumed to be Runic rather belong to the civilised Britons, were erected by many of the Christian kings before a battle or a great enterprise, with prayers and supplication for theassistance of Almighty God. At a later period, not probably earlier than the tenth century, a Scandinavian influence shows itself, and to a very appreciable extent modifies the ornamentation of these monuments. It went even further, and produced a representation of subjects, which, however strange it may appear, are only explained by a reference to the mythology of that part of Europe. The grave covers, to which, on account of their shape, the name of hog-backed stones has been applied, appear to have occurred very rarely beyond the counties of Cumberland, Durham, York, and Lancaster, though some not quite of the ordinary type have been found in Scotland, as, for instance, at Govan, on the Clyde, near Glasgow. They developed ultimately, through a transitional form, into the coped stone with a representation of a covering of tiles, the roof of man's last home, and were a common grave cover of the twelfth century.
In pre-Reformation times there was scarcely a village or hamlet in England which had not its cross; many parishes, indeed, had more than one. We know that at Liverpool there were the High Cross, the White Cross, and St. Patrick's Cross. While many of these crosses are of undoubted Saxon origin, others bear distinct traces of Scandinavian mythology.