COMMISSIONED REPORT
Commissioned Report No. 002
A historical background of
Flanders Moss
(ROAME No. F02LG22)
For further information on this report please contact:
David Pickett
Scottish Natural Heritage
The Beta Centre, Innovation Park
University of Stirling
STIRLING
FK9 4NF
Telephone: 01786 450362
E-mail: [email protected]
This report should be quoted as:
Harrison, J.G. (2003). A historical background of Flanders Moss. Scottish Natural Heritage
Commissioned Report No. 002 (ROAME No. F02LG22).
This report, or any part of it, should not be reproduced without the permission of Scottish Natural Heritage.
This permission will not be withheld unreasonably. The views expressed by the author(s) of this report should
not be taken as the views and policies of Scottish Natural Heritage.
© Scottish Natural Heritage 2003
COMMISSIONED REPORT
Summary
A historical background of Flanders Moss
Commissioned Report No. 002 (ROAME No. F02LG22)
Contractor: John Harrison
Year of publication: 2003
Background
A certain amount of information is known about the historical land use of the Carse of Stirling but most
of this is centred on the clearance of Blair Drummond Moss. Little is known about the changes in land use
at the western end of the Carse of Stirling especially around Flanders Moss and little is known about the
land use of the peat land areas before they were cleared. This report aims to research the land use of the
Flanders Moss area through time and relate this to management decisions being made on the bog now.
Also information can be used to help in the interpretation of the site to encourage national awareness.
Main findings
●
The report dispels the myth that there was peatlands running the whole length of the Carse of Stirling,
instead there appears to have been a mosaic of peatlands, wetlands and mineral soils.
●
The report dispels the myth that the peat clearances were stopped on the Carse of Stirling by an Act of
Parliament, instead it appears that a downturn in the economics of peat clearances was responsible.
●
The reasons for the changes in the shape of the remaining peat area at Flanders Moss were explained,
along with some of the past land management on the peatland area.
For further information on this project contact:
David Pickett, Scottish Natural Heritage, The Beta Centre, Innovation Park, University of Stirling,
Stirling, FK9 4NF. Tel: 01786 450362
For further information on the SNH Research & Technical Support Programme contact:
The Advisory Services Co-ordination Group, Scottish Natural Heritage, 2 Anderson Place, Edinburgh EH6 5NP.
Tel: 0131–446 2400 or [email protected]
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Contents
List of maps and illustrations
Copyright notice etc
Summar y
Introduction
Acknowledgements
Abbreviations and locations
1
HISTORICAL SOURCES FOR THE STUDY OF FLANDERS MOSS
1.1
Summary
1.2
Introduction
1.3
Maps prior to the Ordnance Survey
1.4
Estate Plans and related items
1.5
Ordnance Survey maps
1.6
Published sources
1.7
Archival sources
1.8
Commonties; an essential digression
1.9
Division of Commonty in Port parish
1.10 Division of Commonty in Kincardine parish
1.11 Charters and other titles
1.12 Testaments
1.13 Estate records
1.14 Travellers’ reports
1.15 Other official records
1.16 Minor sources – newspapers etc
1.17 Oral history
1
1
1
1
7
11
13
15
15
16
17
18
19
19
21
22
23
23
2
THE MYTH OF THE GREAT MORASS
2.1
Summary
2.2
Introduction
2.3
Roy’s Map as evidence
2.4
Early evidence of moss clearance
2.5
Evidence of place names
2.6
Evidence from estate plans
2.7
Geomorphology and settlement on the carse
2.8
The missing archaeological evidence
2.9
Communications and elite settlements
2.10 Conclusions
24
24
24
25
26
28
29
30
31
31
33
3
PROPERTY
3.1
Summary
3.2
Owning the land; the moss and its environs
3.2.1
Medieval to 18th century
3.2.2
Late 18th and early 19th century
3.2.3
Land ownership since the early 19th century
34
34
34
34
39
40
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
4
AGRICULTURE AND MOSS CLEARANCE
4.1
Summary
4.2
Farming in Menteith to early 18th century
4.3
Early signs of change
4.4
Moss clearance c.1750–c.1860
4.4.1
Clayed moss
4.4.2
Spreadfield and moss-manure
4.4.3
Floatation
4.5
The end of flotation and similar schemes
4.6
Other aspects of 19th century agriculture
4.7
Mid 19th century to WWII
4.8
20th century moss clearance
4.9
WWII to the present day
41
41
41
46
49
49
51
53
60
62
64
71
73
5
RIVERS, POWS, POOLS AND DRAINS
5.1
Summary
5.2
The Goodie, High Moss and Pollabay Pows
5.3
The Lochan
5.4
Other pools, dams, drains and lesser Pows
5.5
Lint Holes or Retting Pools, Peat and Cauldron Holes etc
74
74
74
77
78
82
6
HISTORICAL REPORTS OF FLORA AND FAUNA
6.1
Summary
6.2
Trees
6.3
Heather, grass and other herbs
6.4
Gull colony
6.5
Hunting, shooting and grouse
6.6
Fishing
85
85
85
90
92
94
99
7
USING AND VALUING THE MOSS IN THE PAST
7.1
Summary
7.2
Late medieval to early 18th century
7.3
Mid 18th to mid 19th century
7.4
Mid 19th to mid 20th century
7.5
Mid 20th century –
100
100
100
101
108
108
8
MISCELLANEOUS
8.1
Summary
8.2
Roads, tracks and bridges
8.3
Buildings, walls and enclosures
8.4
Settlement and abandonment
8.5
People associated with the moss
8.6
Place names
109
109
109
111
112
113
113
BIBLIOGRAPHY
114
SITE SPECIFIC DOCUMENT (Edited Version)
117
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
List of maps and illustrations
Map 1
Gordon of Straloch
2
Map 2
Upper Forth by John Adair
3
Map 3
Cooper, Upper Forth
4
Map 4
Anon, Stirlingshire, 1777
5
Map 5
Roy
Loose A4
Map 6
Roy
Loose A4
Map 7
Roy
Loose A4
Map 8
Roy
Loose A4
Map 9
Stobie West
6
Map 10
Stobie East
6
Map 11
Cardross Estate 1761
8 by A3 sheets loose
Map 12
‘Gudy Ward’? 1761
1 by A3 sheet loose
Map 13
Wester Moss-side 1803
1 by A3 sheet loose
Map 14
Cardross Estate 1801
Map 15
Division of Port Commonty
Map 16
Division of Kincardine Commonty
Map 17
1” 1st Edition OS of Flanders Moss area
Map 18
6” First Edition OS
Loose rolled
Map 19
6“ First Edition OS
Loose rolled
Map 20
Modern roads and sites overlaid on 1811 plan
27
Map 21
Inchmahome lands from 1” 1st Edition OS
36
Map 22
Pendicles at West Polder 1st Edition OS
59
Map 23
Pendicles at West Polder 2nd Edition OS
62
10 by A3 sheets loose
1 by A3 sheet loose
2 by A3 sheets loose
12
Kemp and Nicholson’s First Reaper, 1856
66
‘Modern’ Self-binder c.1908
68
Map 24
2nd Edition OS – trees at Easter Polder
86
Map 25
2nd Edition OS – trees at Wester Moss-side
87
Map 26
OS sheet 54 – trees mid 20th century
88
Map 27
OS sheet 54 – trees perhaps 20 years later
89
Black-headed gulls on Flanders Moss c.1909
93
Mr Briggs goes shooting in 1850
96
Map 28
Mr Tait’s Plan
4 by A3 sheets loose
For copyright reasons, most of these maps have not been reproduced within this report. However, copies
are held in SNH and may be viewed by appointment. Please contact:
David Pickett, Scottish Natural Heritage, The Beta Centre
Innovation Park, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4NF
Tel: 01786 450362
and quote the following reference: Commissioned Report No. 002 (ROAME No. F02LG22).
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 (ROAME No. F02LG22)
Copyright
This Report is the outcome of original research carried out by the author commissioned by Scottish Natural
Heritage. Archival, published and personal sources of information are acknowledged (mainly as footnotes
referred to catch-numbers in the text).
Maps and Illustrations are from various sources and have been supplied for private study; their inclusion in
the Report does not imply permission for further publication. Copyright owners or their agents are identified
in captions – there is a list of Abbreviations on page xiv.
Although older Ordnance Survey maps are no longer covered by the OS own copyright they are the
copyright National Library of Scotland, Map Room, who supplied the copies.
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Summar y
This Report presents the first attempt at an overview of the historical role and use of East Flanders Moss from
medieval times to the present. Broad conclusions have been reached on a number of important areas. First
and foremost, I start by challenging the widespread view that, prior to the later 18th century, there was a
vast morass which extended more or less continuously from Stirling to Gartmore – a morass which was swept
away by Lord Kames and his ‘imitators’ to create the fertile carselands in more or less the form we now know
them today. Both the historical and the geo-morphological evidence is that the mosses of the western
carselands were always discrete and that, even in the medieval period, they did not reach to the river
margins. There were fringes of settlement present on the carselands, between the mosses and the rivers in
the 15th century and probably long before. The sites, whilst sometimes isolated, had access to good grazing
and meadow ground, on the fertile fringe between moss and stream; the mosses could provide fuel and
hunting, the rivers could provide transport and fishing. There were extensive areas of the carse south of the
Forth (in St Ninians parish, Gargunnock and Kippen) which were never covered by moss. Detailed evidence
is adduced for the presence of substantial farms in the Frew area in the 17th century; there are testamentary
inventories of their production of sheep, cattle, cheese and butter as well as of considerable quantities of
(generally) poor quality grains. Other carse farms probably had a similar pattern of production. Given the
abundance of evidence it is astonishing that the ‘mythic morass’ has ever gained credence and I hope that
it is one ‘moss’ which will now be decisively cleared.
Moss clearance, of course, has been a central concern. The documents indicate a broad trajectory of
change. People must always have cut peat for fuel and that must have cleared some areas of moss, generally
on the fringes close to the settlements; such work is well attested by the second half of the 18th century.
Attempts at systematic clearance were under way on the western carse lands well before the mid 18th
century, however, and slowly gathered pace until about the 1830s. That is, clearance began before Lord
Kames started his project at Blairdrummond and he can hardly have been a role model as his methods
(regarded as wildly extravagant by many of his contemporaries) could not be properly applied in the
conditions of the rest of the western carse, where water supplies were limited and river flows in summer too
low to permit flotation. There were ample models of moss clearance to be found on the eastern carselands
and probably more widely in Scotland and a range of clearance methods were used on East Flanders, each
of which is discussed in some detail.
The prime incentives to systematic moss clearance were high land values and low labour costs and the
background to those involved new agricultural technologies, growing towns, better roads. The opportunity
of clearance with the consequent rich rewards for proprietors also stimulated resolution of previously
confused ownership issues. After earlier, abortive efforts to divide East Flanders resolutions were reached in
two stages between the 1790s and 1820. The evidence in those processes throws a vivid light on use of
the moss around that time, its limited value for grazing and the early clearance methods. In particular,
implicitly at least, they demonstrate that the moss was virtually treeless – indeed, the witnesses had great
difficulty in describing the moss due to the lack of landmarks. Clearance continued at various sites around
the moss until the 1860s. The Earl of Moray was able to bring water a considerable distance to Polder Moss
and to clear several hundred acres there – flushing the peat to the Forth. At South Flanders and Collymoon
and below Thornhill, areas where water was relatively abundant and labour would otherwise be a limiting
factor, small moss settlements (the ‘Pendicles’) were constructed. But work could still only proceed in winter
due to the low river flows and the settlements were small. Progress was slow, giving the characteristic
indented pattern of the moss edge still visible at South Flanders, for example. In less favourable areas,
clearance involved the construction of dams on the moss – to trap water for flotation; at least one can still
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
be identified as a green patch on the moss. And in the least favourable areas, where moss could not be
floated, clearance consisted of little more than systematic peat cutting. Long before 1860, tenants with sufficient
capital to run carse farms would not undertake the huge work of reclamation. Then, as land values began
to collapse and the range of economic options for the landless began to widen, the original logic of moss
clearance was undermined. By the 1860s low land values and high labour costs obtained. Furthermore,
new technologies such as mechanisation and tile drainage, offered a much better and more certain return
on capital. Moss clearance was not abandoned as a result of legislation nor court orders but as a consequence
of the much sterner dictates of economics. It didn’t pay any more. Oh, dear! Another myth gone!!
But meanwhile East Flanders was acquiring a new importance. Grouse shooting had become more popular
with the new, wealthy elites from the later 18th century. Romance, royalty and railways all colluded to
endorse Scotland as the perfect locale for the emergent sport. By the 1850s grouse provided a very
attractive alternative income for estates which were suffering from the agricultural downturn. Cardross moved
with the times – perhaps the more readily as the laird was a minor at the time; the estate could be let out
for shooting and the moss must have provided a considerable part of the sport. Drains constructed for moss
clearance could be maintained; the agricultural tenants were excluded, controlled heather burning was
used; at some stage grouse butts were built, gamekeepers were employed and so on. The First World War
was a watershed for the smaller sporting estates, however; keepering is expensive – and maintenance of
the drains must have fallen on the keepers in the later 19th century. By the 1950s and 1960s the butts were
abandoned and bags so reduced that the shooters just ‘walked over’ the moss. Seen in that light, the
‘mountain hares and grouse’ ecology is likely to have been a relatively short-lived phase extending from the
mid 19th to the mid 20th century, corresponding to an un-typically dry moss.
Another dramatic change of the last century or so has been the extension of tree growth. Even by the 1860s
there was tree growth around the margins and along drains where moss had been disturbed. By 1901 (2nd
Edition OS) trees were beginning to encroach onto the moss itself. And they were widespread by the mid
20th century with birch seedlings even more extensive than scrub. The spread away from the drains and
other disturbed areas may have been encouraged when, in August 1878, a long dry spell combined with
a well drained moss and restriction of heather burning and livestock grazing to produce a major fire which
swept across the moss from end to end. The release of nutrients, creation of large areas clear of heather
and scrub etc could well have provided in ideal niche for birch to become more widely established.
Interwoven with the main threads of the history of the moss which I have just outlined are many minor threads
and subplots … issues which need not be considered here. But it is perhaps worth noting that in the last
20–30 years, a new phase in the life of East Flanders Moss has emerged. It is now primarily important as
a site for conservation and for study. The earliest studies were of the wildlife itself. Palaeo-ecological studies
– with their great time depth but limited spatial detail – have tended to concentrate on the flora of the wider
area and seem, too, to have been more successful in examining the ancient and long term change than the
fluctuations of recent centuries. More recently, issues such as hydrology and geomorphology have emerged
as being of primary importance. Each, in its turn, has reflected new attitudes to the study of the past and
the study of landscape. It is worth emphasising that the study area was not chosen because of the known
wealth of the documentation. Indeed, some of the sources were found only after work began and others,
whilst known to exist, could have yielded little of interest. The archives are a huge and largely untapped
resource for the study of the landscape and environment of the past. The problems of archival sources are
manifest – bias, intermittency, limited time-depth being the most obvious. I hope that this study demonstrates
their richness, their depth and at least something of their potential. Above all, they can provide a fine detail
and a human interest which is available in no other way.
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Introduction
Writing of the wider area of Loch Lomond and Trossachs (but including the Flanders Moss area within their
remit) the Royal Commission states:
There is scope for further research to discover new sites and recover more information from
those already recorded. Field survey, whether from the air or on the ground, excavation,
documentary research and palaeoecology all provide complementary evidence towards an
enhanced understanding of the historical use of the landscape 1.
This Report is an attempt to contribute to that ‘complementary evidence’ by documentary research. Although,
in the last 20 years or so, there has been intensive study of the physical and biological aspects of Flanders
Moss, this is the first large-scale historical study. As there is so little published historical information about the
Moss, the Report has necessarily drawn mainly on manuscript sources – with their strengths and their manifest
weaknesses such as intermittency, partiality and special pleading, poor survival and lack of comparability
of the data from one period to another.
The Report is intended to assist understanding and interpretation of historical land use and of the social
historical background and to assist future management decisions. I have tried to make the Report accessible
to a readership who may have only modest knowledge of history and historical method and who may not
be familiar with the modern historical literature on land use and environmental history. This is a long report
and I have tried to strike a balance between cross reference between chapters (which can involve timewasting fumbling) and duplication – which makes it even longer.
Throughout the Report, an attempt is made to relate the moss to the economic and social background of the
surrounding area, which I hope obviates the need for a distinct discussion on social historical issues.
The Report considers a wide range but archival research can never be fully comprehensive. Documents
related to the Moray estates, Garden Estate and to the Stewartry of Menteith and other sources might all
yield information – though there is a law of diminishing returns on casting the net ever wider. More productive
might be comparison with other mosses in Scotland – and perhaps beyond. That might take in wider
conceptual issues, which have only been considered tangentially here. Coverage of the recent past could
certainly be expanded using both documentary sources and oral history. Archaeology – particularly aerial
surveys and analysis, combined with non-intrusive field survey – would certainly yield useful information both
about features on the moss and in the surrounding carse ground. But it is a protracted and expensive
process; there is an argument for detailed examination of particular features, such as the dams and drains
first. Peat cores have much to tell about the moss and, together with archaeology, are the only means of
going back in time beyond the late medieval period. Can those methods detect the start of systematic
drainage, the fire, the abandonment of the drains – the major documented events of the past 300 years?
The Contents, Chapter headings and the Subheadings should make it fairly easy to navigate. In addition there
is an Index to the main text whilst each chapter starts with a brief summary. There is an important Appendix,
the Site Specific Document, which lists sites on and around the moss and mentioned in associated documents.
1
RCAHMS, 2000, 31.
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 (ROAME No. F02LG22)
It was primarily compiled as an aid to locating obscure sites, but allows a chronological picture of each site
to be located quickly. It is supplied as an abbreviated typescript and as a full-length version on disc and will
probably be most usefully consulted on disc. It includes fuller versions of many documents, such as leases
and rentals, mentioned in the text.
Errors, both of fact and interpretation, are inevitable in a first review of a large and complex subject. As a
historian I have had to grapple with aspects of the earth sciences and other matters where my expertise was
stretched fairly thin. I have been helped by many people, who all have my thanks; errors and omissions are
my own.
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 (ROAME No. F02LG22)
Acknowledgements
Many people have helped in compiling this Report with their time, skills, knowledge and interest; specific
contributions are acknowledged throughout. The following have earned particular thanks:
Mr and Mrs Barker, Torrie, for sharing their knowledge of gulls and rubbish tips! Dr John Brimms, Stirling
Council Archives, for suggestions on sources and for checking the Stirling Observer Index. Mr Mathew
Carrick, Littleward, for his knowledge of farms and the moss and of Littleward in particular. Prof Jim Hansom,
University of Glasgow, for fascinating insights into the geomorphology. Professor Ray Harwood, de Montfort
University, for ideas about retting. Dr Cliff Henty, Bridge of Allan, for consulting the bird records and
suggesting further contacts. Dr Ken McKay, Stirling, for sharing his long and profound knowledge of the
area, for references and for use of his own maps. Dr Frank Mawby (English Nature) for references to retting
pools. Dr John Mitchell, Drymen, for passing on several references and sharing his enthusiasm. Mr Willie
More, Causewayhead, for his knowledge of farms, farming and farming history. Archie and Nicola Orr
Ewing for letting me see their documents – and for lunch and gin! David Pickett, SNH for support and interest
and answering many questions. Dr Marie Robinson, St Andrews, for references and ideas on Retting Pools.
Prof David Smith, Coventry University, for sharing his knowledge of the development of the carse and river
systems. Margery Stirling, Stirling University, for introductions and interest. Dr Richard Tipping, Stirling University,
for sharing his knowledge about bogs, rivers and soils and suggesting others, equally knowledgeable.
In addition the staffs of Stirling Libraries, Edinburgh Central Library, National Library of Scotland, National
Archives of Scotland and Stirling Council Archives have been, as ever, helpful and patient.
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Abbreviations and locations
JGH
Author – private collection
NAS
National Archives of Scotland
NLS
National Library of Scotland
NMRS
National Monument Record of Scotland
NRAS
National Register of Archives for Scotland
OS
Ordnance Survey
RCAHMS
Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland
SCA
Stirling Council Archives
SCRAN
Scottish Cultural Resources Access Network (www.scran.ac.uk)
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 (ROAME No. F02LG22)
1
HISTORICAL SOURCES FOR THE STUDY OF FLANDERS MOSS
1.1
Summar y
Published historical information is limited so the study is necessarily based largely on manuscript sources.
Cartographic evidence is available from the 17th century onwards and provides evidence of increasing
reliability. The Cardross estate commissioned plans which, even though neither shows the moss itself, provide
key evidence for the surrounding area. Two further Plans were produced during the processes for the
Divisions of the two Commonties (in the 1790s and 1800s); both show features of the moss itself. The legal
papers in those processes are the most informative documents of all for the study of the moss itself, they
illuminate many aspects of the contemporary use of the moss and can be compared with the plans. The
Cardross estate papers were invaluable and were particularly useful for the attempts at clearing the area
around South Flanders during the century from about 1760 on. The Rednock records, whilst less generally
useful, provided some key insights, particularly into the canalisation of the Goodie Water. A range of
sources, many of them public and court-generated records, were used to investigate the history of farming
on the carselands around the moss – and thus the reasons why clearance began and was later abandoned.
Other public records – census returns, valuation roles, official reports etc – have a more limited role though
they become more important during the 19th century. Finally, for the more recent past, a few contemporary
publications along with personal recollections, proved invaluable. This outline discussion of the sources is
intended primarily as a guide to any future historical study and could be ignored by a reader interested
primarily in the practical findings of the present study.
1.2
Introduction
There is a wide range of potential sources for the historical study of the area. Watson 1 provided a
preliminary outline of some of them. In practice, not all the records mentioned by Watson were consulted;
specifically, the estate records of Rednock and Cardross were preferred to those of Garden and Gartmore.
A number of sources were consulted but not found useful; they are not further considered here. Nor are
sources which provided only a few items of minor interest. The papers of the Earls of Moray, who owned
land to the east of the study area, will certainly contain relevant material; however, they are in private hands
and did not seem, on the information available, to represent a good use of time. References are provided
as Footnotes throughout the Report; fuller details of published sources are provided in the Bibliography.
1.3
Maps prior to the Ordnance Sur vey
The cartographic evidence starts with Gordon of Straloch’s Manuscript, perhaps based on an earlier (lost)
manuscript by Pont 2.
1
2
Watson, F. 2001.
NLS, Gordon of Straloch, sheet 51.
1
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Map 1 Gordon of Straloch.
West is to the top of this map which shows the Forth catchment but detail is poor.
(Copyright NLS)
The date is probably around the later 1630s or early 1640s. The original is somewhat clearer than the form
given here in which Flanders Moss East is un-named but occupies roughly the centre of the map with the
Goodie to its right ending at the Lake of Menteith.
Adair’s map, again undated but probably from the 1680s, is similarly sketchy though a little more detail can
be seen in the original than here as Map 2 whilst Cooper’s Map of the Forth (1730) is derived from Adair;
two un-named settlements north of the Forth, opposite Meiklewood, appear to correspond to Cambusdrennie
and Chamberston 3.
3
SCA PD16/4.
2
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Map 2
Map of the upper Forth catchment by John Adair, probably dating from the 1680s
and regrettably less detailed than his more finished work.
(Copyright SCRAN)
3
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Map 3
Cooper’s Map of the Forth was published in 1730 but derived largely from Adair.
(SCA PD16/4)
Cooper shows the Forth as far up as Cardross and the Goodie as far as ‘Menteth Loch’. Cardros C is
marked – presumably for Cardross Castle. Blaircessnock is the only other settlement shown between the two
streams and no sites are shown or named between Port K[irk] and Balquhapel – ie not Ruskie, Tarr etc.
Flanders Moss occupies the eastern extremity of the angle between the Forth and Goodie. But the scale is
small and the survey, which was primarily of the rivers as navigations, is not very detailed; here and
elsewhere, many settlements which were certainly present are not show. The very confined area of the moss
on this map is more an artefact of cartography than a serious attempt to show it accurately and for the
present study this map is of little evidential value.
There are several other maps of the mid 18th century, mainly derived from Adair and not considered here.
The sort of problem they present is shown by the following map, first published in 1777, said to be based
on a 1745 map by William Edgar ‘with a few alterations to accommodate it to the present time’. But Edgar’s
map was, itself, largely based on Adair and there is no indication of which features are updated nor of
what cartographic conventions are being applied; so it is not clear what the dotted lines round the mosses
nor the encircled area to the west of East Flanders Moss actually mean. But the presence of West and East
Polder and Frew along the Forth is interesting as is the clear depiction, for the first time, of an area not
covered by moss in the Frew area.
Roy’s Map was a military survey made between 1745 and 1755. It covered the whole of Scotland at around
1:36000 and to a generally higher standard than earlier maps for most areas – though some mountainous
areas were very sketchily covered. As a manuscript map, produced for military purposes and kept in London,
it was not available for consultation in Scotland and so did not influence future mapmakers. Also, as a military
map, it concentrates on features of potential military significance – bridges, castles and roads, for example,
but also on their counterparts, rivers, mountain ranges and marches which represented important barriers.
4
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Map 4
Anon 1777. Largely derived from Adair but with uncertain ‘updates’ it is difficult to interpret.
Whilst there is no characteristic sheet most features of the present extracts are fairly clear. Maps 5–8 are
downloaded from the SCRAN website (www.scran.ac.uk); thumbnails can be viewed free of charge but the
full-scale images (as provided here) are available only to license holders. Unfortunately the website, the only
source of good images of this map, does not have a zoom facility and some names are difficult to read;
most can be supplied from other sources.
The moss extends east almost to Mid Frew. The Goodie meanders through a marshy area below Rednock
but the moss (tinted grey) is generally clear of the riverbanks. Settlements are clearly indicated at sites such
as Easter and Wester Polder and Wester Frew, Moss-side, Ward of Goodie and Mill of Goodie. But the
contrast between the unenclosed arable around the moss with the regular enclosures at sites such as
Boquhan is very obvious.
Our next map is Stobie’s Map of Perthshire and Clackmannanshire (1783) surveyed and printed to a very
high standard (Map 9 and Map 10). Such maps were increasingly common at this time as enclosure and
agricultural ‘improvement’ generated a demand for more and better surveys. Although Stobie labels the Moss
he does not otherwise attempt to represent it as Roy had done. Instead, Stobie concentrates on the halo of
settlements around the moss in a detail not seen on previous small-scale maps, even indicating the general
layout of buildings on individual steadings. He differentiates between the simple blocks of farms and the
carefully delineated mansions – of course, he would hope that the mansion owners would subscribe for
copies of his map! But whilst, for Roy, the moss was delineated as of military significance as a barrier to
easy troop movements, Stobie would understand is as merely an area which might, hopefully, be reclaimed
for arable. Meanwhile, it is a hole in the map, an absence of economic sites worthy of representation.
But surely the most striking feature of Stobie, in contrast with Roy, is the canalised upper course of the
Goodie. Unlike ‘Anon 1777’, which had ignored a dramatic change accomplished in 1771, it is carefully
represented here. Stobie was to be the basis of many maps of Perthshire over the following 80 years. Other
maps of Perthshire prior to the OS show roads and other special features; but none need to be discussed
here; instead we will turn to consideration of Estate Plans before resuming consideration of maps with the
Ordnance Survey of the 1860s.
5
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Map 9
Stobie (west) 1783.
Map 10 Stobie (east). The upper Goodie is now canalised and the farms of Rindaw, Mains etc appear.
The scatter of settlement along the rivers are seen. Note ‘mansion’ houses at West and East Polder and the planting
at East Polder, indicative of a substantial residence.
(Copyright NLS)
6
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1.4
Estate Plans and related items
Estate Plans are rare in Scotland prior to the early 18th century and then spread rapidly. The copies
produced with this Report do not always look very exciting but many of the originals are very attractively
tinted – which also makes them much more legible and suitable for reproduction as illustrations etc. The
present study deals with two main types of Plan. Firstly, plans commissioned by individual estate owners.
These could be used to define the boundaries of fields, farms or entire estates. They were used to calculate
rents, particularly as the surveyors often assessed land quality and potential – and thus the value of individual
parcels of land. They were used as part of general estate management – in laying out regular fields, defining
access routes, for siting plantations and steadings etc. Some plans represent what was already on the
ground; others, what somebody proposed to do at some time in the future, though it is not always clear
which category we are dealing with nor if projects were begun or completed.
The other type was produced as part of the process of resolving boundary disputes between adjacent
landowners. Again, they represent land quality and other features though they are generally less detailed
than the former type, not least because land in dispute was unlikely to have been enclosed, drained or to
have substantial buildings on it. Indeed, as is often the case, the Plans of this type for the area of East
Flanders Moss were created in the hope (indeed, the expectation) that resolution of doubts and disputes
about marches would be the prelude to significant investment in development. The Plans themselves were
expensive – though less so than the court proceedings for which they provided essential evidence. The huge
expense, sometimes extended over many years, is indicative of the huge hopes for the potential rewards.
Maps 11–14 are private estate plans. Map 11 is dated 1761, surveyed by Arch Winter and described
as ‘The Plan of Cardross and Easter Garden’ whilst Map 12, showing ‘Gudy Ward’ [Ward of Goodie] and
described in the catalogue as nineteenth century, is clearly contemporary with Map 11 but was put on a
separate sheet to avoid including a far-flung, detached property on the main map. But neither of these two
shows the Polders to the south nor the moss itself, other than as the margin of the surveyed area. Both are
supplied as loose sheets and will be considered together.
The survey followed the repurchase of the estate by the Erskines from the Earl of Buchan in the 1747 4;
there was a tradition, at least, that the estate had been neglected during the 50 years or so preceding
this purchase and that loss of documents from the Buchan charter chest meant that it was not until 1755 that
the Erskine titles were fully established 5. We can imagine that James Erskine had the Plan made as a
preparation for ‘improvement’ – though some recent work had created the ‘ Policy Parks’ around the house,
which are also shown on Roy. The parks include some ‘landscaping’ such as the ‘sunk fence’ in the south
end of Quarry Park but the overall layout is strictly geometrical, long antedating the taste for the picturesque.
Probably this work was recent or still in progress; to the east of Lochanwan Park, for example, small fields
have been truncated by the work and not yet rationalised; to the west of the road the Fishers Moor has been
marked out by a line of stones but not yet enclosed.
4
5
CS21/Division of Moss Flanders/22/12/1798, Petition by James Erskine, 1791; NAS GD22/1/342, Copy Charter
of Sale and Resignation of the Barony of Cardross, 12 Feb 1747.
CS21/Division of Moss Flanders/22/12/1798 Act and Remit James Erskine v John Campbell etc, 1797, p 11–12.
7
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
But elsewhere on the estate the fields are still very irregular with many gaps between them, corresponding
to small areas of moss, marsh, moor and other rough ground. Particularly interesting are the fringes of fields
fronting the Forth at Collymoon, Parks of Garden and towards Faraway, very reminiscent of Roy a high
proportion have Gaelic names. These areas provide important evidence about early settlement which will
be considered in Chapter 2.
Much of the land around Flanders Hill was the property of Campbell of Lochend and so is not shown. Further
south, the march with the moss consists of poor land with an irregular outline, probably corresponding to the
natural edge of the moss where it met the rising ground. Only south of Ryndaw and Burntide does the moss
margin appear artificial, probably due to a diversion of the Meikle Burn.
There is some moss clearance – most easily seen at Parks of Garden, where it is indicated not just by the
peat cutting but by a field labelled Bruntland; there are also areas of Spreadfield, another term associated
with moss clearing. But the areas are small in scale and disposed for use of the peat, carriage to the
adjacent farm etc rather than for throwing it into the river to be washed away. Clearance at this stage was
probably by little more than traditional peat cutting and paring and burning; the surveyor notes many areas
which are ‘improvable’ but few which have been improved.
Ward of Goody (Map 12) is less than 100 metres deep from the moss to the Goody, except at its extreme
east end. The relative smoothness of the march with the moss and the existence of ‘spreadfield’ at the west
end, encourages the belief that this is an artificial line, created by moss clearance. The line of the Goodie itself
is anomalous suggesting that some canalisation had already taken place by 1761 – a decade before the
main work. But the tiny patch of ‘grass’ on the north bank and an apparent forking of the river downstream
from it to produce a quasi-island are eloquent of uncertain boundaries and still-active meanders; indeed, there
had been dispute and agreements about this march extending back into the early 17th century 6. Ward of
Goodie fits nicely with the next map, Wester Moss-side, part of Wester Boquhapple (Map 13) surveyed
in 1804; the great interest here is the southern end and we will encounter the Goose Dubs and the dam on
John Buchanan’s moss again. This is the earliest cartographic representation of the local method of moss flotation
and in 1810 and 1813 several witnesses in the Division of Commonty would mention the dam and the pools.
Another of this group is an un-catalogued Plan of the Estate of Rednock, dated 1772 and currently in the
Smith Museum, Stirling of which copies have not, so far, been obtained. Its status is particularly doubtful and
it is confined entirely to the north side of the Goodie – which is shown in its newly canalised state. Most of
the fields south of Rednock House are shown as regular, small ‘improved’ enclosures; those adjacent to the
Goodie cannot have been in this form prior to the 1771 canalisation process and this suggests that this may
be a scheme for improvement rather than representing what was actually on the ground in 1772. Similarly
difficult to interpret are descriptions of fields as ‘improved morass’ and ‘improvable moss’ and so on; some
of the ‘moss’ is too far north of the Goodie to have ever been covered with peat and it is not clear what the
surveyor meant by these terms. Nor can the field layout be certainly identified as the forerunner of the
situation depicted on the next reliable map of the Rednock area, the 1st Edition OS 6” map surveyed in
1863. Perhaps the most interesting feature is the recognition that even when enclosed and improved, much
of the land adjacent to the Goodie was ‘meadow’ rather than arable. Given the ambiguities it is best to
confine ourselves to saying simply that ‘improvement’ was projected at Rednock in 1772 and accomplished
either then or at some later time.
6
NAS CC6/12/2 f 127v contract dated 1627 between John Dick and others.
8
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The last Plan to consider in this section is the Cardross plan of 1801 by William Kyle (Map 14 supplied as
10 sheets). Kyle’s office notes also survive in Glasgow City Archives 7. By 1801, any dispute regarding the
Cardross share of Flanders Moss had been resolved and clearance was actively under way. There had been
a Report suggesting a variety of ‘improvements’ on the estate in 1800 8. At first glance Kyle’s Plan shows a
startling contrast with the plan of 1761. He depicts a regular patchwork of fields, most bordered on all sides
by other fields, all equally regular in form, given the obvious need to conform to natural boundaries; the
gaps between the fields, so obvious in 1761, have largely gone. A number of plantations have appeared
and their varied form, from small clumps to substantial blocks, suggests the varied motives for planting –
production, ornament, game cover. The Parks about the house are shown only as an outline; but it is clear
that there has been a substantial new intake, corresponding to Drumnaculloch and Carse Park on Map 11
(See Site Specific, Cardross House and Policies & Drumnaculloch for more details of these changes).
But some of the ‘fields’ are more apparent than real units. Field C at Blaircessnock, for example, nominally
extending to over 58 acres, consisted of no fewer than 21 distinct parts, three areas of ‘croft land’ (the best
type of land) four of ‘outfield’, 11 of pasture, one of moss, two of wood and one of the houses and lanes.
The ‘field’ did not function as a single unit and can hardly have looked like one either. The Report just
mentioned had suggested only the previous year that the proprietor should enclose the farms and charge the
tenants interest on the capital cost and it seems inconceivable that this had all been done in only a year.
At the same time, this Plan has much to tell. Pollabay, now let along with Blaircessnock, consisted entirely
of meadow, pasture and moss; there was no arable. There is now a dam at Parks of Garden and a
considerable area of ‘High Moss’ has been reclaimed. Spreadfield is expanding at Powside/Mains of
Cardross and also at Collymoon – though the suggestion in the Report of the previous year that ‘moss settlers’
should be established there has not been acted on.
And no less interesting than the physical changes is the total disappearance of the Gaelic field names of
1761. How far this reflects the disappearance of Gaelic speaking in this area is unclear. It was certainly
still in use at Aberfoyle and towards Callander and there was continuing immigration to the area from the
Highlands. But the surveyor may well have preferred his ‘modern scientific’ classification to older names in
a language which was widely despised – in so far as it was understood. And even Gaelic speaking
incomers may not have preserved field names indefinitely.
But Kyle, like his predecessor of 1761, depicts only the moss margins and does so only along the Forth;
there is no attempt to show Wards of Goodie, the Polders or any other part of the interior of the moss.
We now turn to Plans produced as aids to the legal processes know as Divisions of Commonty. These
processes and the associated documents will be discussed in more detail below. Here it need only be stated
that the land in question was the common property of several adjacent proprietors whose tenants had the
right to use it. In order to divide the land the court required accurate Plans to act as guides to a rational division.
7
8
GCA T/KF6/1, pp 145–171.
NAS GD15/41 Report regarding the Estate of Cardross, June 1800.
9
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The first 9 was surveyed by Thomas Johnston in 1792 and covers East Flanders Moss within Port of Menteith
parish; Map 15 was derived from the 1792 Plan in 1797 and includes more information at a somewhat
smaller scale. By this time, the Cardross estate owned most of the land to the west, all the northern margin
(Pollabay and Ward of Goodie) and also Faraway and Wester Polder. But Campbell of Kinpunt and
Lochend owned land in the vicinity of Flanders Hill, whilst David Forrester owned Easter Polder. The land to
the east was in Kincardine parish so had no claim over the Commonty. ‘Graeme’s Improvements’ marked at
the extreme north western angle, where previous investment implied a greater degree of property right.
The Plan also shows a number of landmarks, particularly the pows and some trees. Of some interest is the
‘drain cast [cut] to drain the moss’ running south west from the southern dome; it does not appear on later
maps and is no longer visible on aerial photos and this may well be telling us something about how fast
such drains can be filled. The Plan also represents the general character of the various parts of the moss,
the ‘flow moss’ in the centres of the domes and the ‘pasture moss’ round the edges and along the pows.
Most of these features were mentioned by the witnesses or referred to in documents before the court. The
Plan represents the moss as it was or was said to have been in the century or so before 1792. Of course,
what the claimants were concerned about was its potential for the future; their intention was to remove it
entirely and develop it for arable.
The eastern boundary of Port of Menteith parish forms the eastern margin of the area being divided, around
Duck Dubs. Three domes are recognised, divided by the pows, which are streams which cut down to the
clay. Each had a central area of ‘flow moss’ surrounded by firmer ‘pasture moss’. Where clearance was
under way (south of the Goodie Water) there was a further zone of ‘Spread Field’ but this, like the arable
beyond, was already recognised as private property. A single, straight ditch had been cut from the heart of
the southern dome towards Cardross ‘to drain the moss’ and Graham’s Improvements, at the northwest
corner, have already been noted. This Map was produced towards the end of the process when the Sheriff
Depute and the Surveyor visited the site again and, using a copy of the 1792 map, marked out the divisions
of the moss which were to belong to each of the competing proprietors.
The Division of the Moss in Kincardine parish was somewhat later and the primary plan (Map 16) is
dated 1811; derived from that is a printed plan of part of the area 10. The western boundary of the Plans
corresponds to the parish boundary with Port of Menteith – and thus with the eastern margin of the Plan just
discussed. It can be seen to correspond to water courses, draining both north and south; the southern outflow
corresponds to a small pow which still enters the Forth close to Littleward Wester. The northern flow
corresponds to the western march of Wester Moss-side, the Moss-side Pow, a stream also seen on Map 13.
Whilst neither is so straight as to suggest that it was recent and entirely artificial, both receive contributions
from some of the numerous drainage channels which transect this part of the moss on the Plan. Mime Pow
also cuts into the moss; the presence of arable on the eastern side and spread field on the west suggests
that this is a natural pow, cutting right down to the clay, like Pollabay and the High Moss Pow. It is obvious
that much clearance has already taken place around the eastern extremity of the moss. That is also supported
9
10
NAS RHP 3997.
NAS RHP 3965 Plan of that part of Moss Flanders lying in the Parish of Kincardine, surveyed by J Lauder, 1811;
the printed version, not included, is NAS RHP 3966/1. RHP 3966/2 is a series of notes about the plan.
10
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
by earlier Plans such as NAS RHP 13313 (not included as part of this Report) from 1771 which shows
the eastern extremities, beyond the study area, at that time. The Plans thus tend to support Roy and to confirm
that the isolated patch of moss, still surviving south of Mill of Goodie, was at one time joined to the main
body.
These plans of 1811 do not distinguish between Flow Moss and Pasture Moss and to the north and south
the Moss is fringed by Spread Field, though this might be due to a loose use of the terminology. A very
striking feature are the numerous channels and dams, well attested in the evidence in the case; they will be
discussed below, as will the ‘clayed moss’ and other signs of peat clearance. All in all, these are much
‘busier’ plans than those from the 1790s – though that is partly due to the inclusion of the lines of many
disputed marches, as is indicated in the legend to RHP3966, the printed version.
1.5
Ordnance Sur vey maps
The 1st Edition OS for this area was surveyed in 1863. A great advantage is that the OS worked
to a consistent standard and used standard symbols. At the same time, this was a ground-based survey
and that puts limits on what can be expected on inaccessible terrain, such as the surface of the moss.
The 1” is convenient for quick reference but the 6” version of the 1st Edition, on Perthshire Sheets CXXX
(Map 18) and CXXXI (Map 19) are much more detailed with more names and have been adopted as the
‘standard’ for this study. One feature of some importance, however, which is readily appreciated from
the 1” is that the village of Thornhill and the moss to its south, lie in a detached portion of Kincardine in
Menteith parish; the march between Port of Menteith and this detached portion of Kincardine follows two
water courses, the Moss-side Pow running north and an unnamed stream running south to enter the
Forth near Littleward. This explains why there had been two commonties and two legal processes to divide
the moss.
We see the moss very close to the end of serious attempts at clearance and the contrast with Map 16
surveyed 50 years before, shows how dramatic change had been to the east. But progress had been less
dramatic further west. The Pendicles of Wester Polder are long, narrow strips each encroaching to a varying
degree onto the moss, in a manner characteristic of ‘Moss Laird’ settlements; within months of the survey
the settlement was swept away and South Flanders Farm created in this area (see Site Specific Doc and
Moss Clearance/Flotation below).
11
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Map 17
1st Edition OS 1” sheets 38 and 39 show the study area with Cardross at the core.
(Copyright NLS)
12
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The Pendicles are served by a series of channels which have their origin at the dam in Ballangrew Wood
and which is, in turn, fed by the Meikle Burn, flowing through the policies from Keir Hill and by a tributary
stream from the Ballangrew area. There are pows and drains (and the Duck Dubs which had been recorded
in the 1790s) on the moss itself (they will be considered in some detail later); but there are no other ‘features’
on the moss; in particular, there are no trees. A few spot heights are given and the 50 foot contour follows
the edge of the moss and the pow sides; however, in 1920 it was found that the heights were
underestimated, adding to the impression that the surveyors did not do much work on in interior of the moss.
It will later be suggested that this is why the lochan is not marked.
The 2nd Edition OS was published in 1901. The main changes, as compared with the 1st Edition, each of
which will be considered elsewhere are:
●
‘Liable to flooding’ is marked along the canalised part of the Goodie.
●
Rounding of sharp angles where moss clearances have been abandoned.
●
Tree growth round the margins of the moss – mainly where cleared.
●
Pendicles have been replaced by South Flanders Farm.
●
Ballangrew Dam and some associated ditches have gone.
●
Drainage channels cut along the Pow which (in 2002) drains the lochan.
But the changes are actually minimal. At West Moss-side, for example, the field boundary with the moss is
identical in every detail with what it had been 40 years earlier. As we will later see, the changes are minimal
because Britain as a whole was still in the midst of a long period of agricultural decline. The lack of
investment can be seen on the map as enclosures fall into decay; at Flanders Hill and Pollabay, for example,
are fences which just fade out into the moss and no longer enclose anything.
Later editions of the OS through the 20th century are mainly useful for following changes in tree cover and
are discussed in the relevant section of this Report. The appearance of the lochan is another feature which
will be discussed elsewhere.
1.6
Published sources
There has been no general history of Flanders Moss and its environs; indeed, even the published literature
on Port of Menteith and Thornhill is meagre, though some of it is of good quality. Books such as Caddell’s
Story of the Forth concentrate on Blairdrummond Moss and assume that the story of moss clearance was
similar elsewhere on the carselands, an assumption which is only partly supported by the evidence we will
examine later. This discussion considers only the major historical sources; others, including sources of a nonhistorical nature and more general historical works, are fully cited in the text.
William Fraser’s The Red Book of Menteith (1880) brought together many of the primary documents,
particularly for the 16th and 17th centuries; they include charters and other title deeds, formal, lacking
detail, but crucial. Hutchison’s The Lake of Menteith … (1899) draws on Fraser but makes some useful
contributions, particularly in its discussion of landownership and in identifying some obscure place-names.
But both the above are concerned mainly with the larger estates, particularly Cardross as it originated from
13
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
the Inchmahome Priory lands. For a more general view of property ownership, the published Register of the
Great Seal of Scotland and Register of the Privy Seal of Scotland are crucial. But even the Great and Privy
Seal documents do not resolve the ownership of the moss, which remained doubtful until the late 18th or
(for the eastern parts) the early 19th century. Timperley’s A Directory of Landownership in Scotland c.1770
(1976) gives a snapshot of ownership of the surrounding areas in the later 18th century whilst Adam’s
Directory of Former Scottish Commonties (1971) identifies the manuscript sources for the resolution of the
previously confused ownership situation (they will be discussed below).
MacFarlane’s Geographical Collection (Mitchell, 1906, 1907, 1908) provides a few early glimpses,
including a very brief early 18th century overview. The Old Statistical Accounts for the parishes of Port
of Menteith and Kincardine dating from the 1790s, provide the fuller overview of the area, with material
on moss clearance in particular. The New Statistical Accounts of the 1840s are particularly useful
for summarising progress on moss clearance over the previous 50 years. The Third Statistical Accounts bring
the story down to the mid 20th century though they are generally less useful than the earlier material. All the
Statistical Accounts may safely be assumed to be more reliable as sources for their own day than for events
which lay long in the past when they were written.
Apart from these more general works, the later 18th and early 19th centuries produced many works about
the agriculture of the area. Robertson’s General View of the Agriculture in the Southern Districts of the County
of Perth (1794) is vastly useful for a wider area but of limited use for the area under study. John Ramsay of
Ochtertyre in Scotland and Scotsmen in the Eighteenth Century (Allardyce, 1888) is the first writer to contrast
the state of farming along the lower Forth with that prevailing in Menteith in the earlier 18th century.
He knew the area well and has a very useful discussion of the factors inducing change in Menteith and is
interestingly sceptical of Lord Kames as a role model! The 19th century spawned many works based on the
Agricultural Surveys and Statistical Accounts (such as Chalmers (1887–94) Caledonia: or a historical and
topographical account of North Britain, a vast compilation which merely repeats earlier work.
Many later writers also base themselves freely on these earlier accounts and reinforce the idea of ‘the vast
morass’ heroically cleared only in the later 18th century. They are at their best when they consider the
farming methods of their own day eg Drysdale (1909) and, more recently still, several contributors to Timms
(1974). The problem, now well-known to historians, is that the 18th and 19th century ‘Improvers’ did not
resist the temptation to enhance their own achievements by denigrating the previous situation. Whyte (1979)
was a leading proponent of the new view, since significantly amplified by local and by more general studies
(Whyte, 1997; Harrison, 1997; Devine, 1999). But in regard to the situation on the carselands, even
Whyte & Whyte (1987, 172) are not un-influenced by the ‘mythic morass’ view.
But leaving aside the local situation, it is now broadly accepted that whilst the ‘improvers’ increased
productivity hugely, the earlier situation was less backward and more diverse than previously thought. Even
where 17th or early 18th century farming was ‘backward’ it was not due to invincible ‘ignorance’ but to
wider social, technical and economic factors. And more recently still it has been recognised that there were
significant losses involved in ‘improvement’ notably losses of habitat and biodiversity (eg Smout, 2000).
The evolution of the geo-physical setting is a vital aspect of Flanders Moss. The proceedings of the MIRES
conference, including papers by Booth, Bragg, Ellis and Smith and Holloway were published in The Forth
Naturalist and Historian vol 23 (2000); between them they include references to all major work on this
aspect to date.
14
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The re-interpretation of the pre-improvement situation (noted above) has largely emerged from a new willingness
to return to the archival sources and to examine the primary documents. In the case of the carselands, the
primary documents are also the only way to escape from the view that the Blairdrummond experience was
the universal experience of the area. It is to those primary sources that we must now turn our attention.
1.7
Archival sources
The most important series of documents for the study of the Flanders Moss area are those generated by the
legal processes for the Division of the Commonties of Moss Flanders and Polder Moss in the 1790s and
1810s respectively. Before considering them it will be necessary briefly to consider the legal status of Scots
Commonties.
1.8
Commonties; an essential digression
A Commonty was not the same as an English Common. It was land which belonged, in common, to adjoining
landed proprietors who (usually via their tenants) had certain customary rights to use the land. An Act of the
Scottish Parliament of 1695 provided for Commonties to be divided amongst the proprietors though there
were very few divisions recorded before about 1760 11. The proprietors could simply agree to divide the
land, perhaps by arbitration; but any proprietor could raise a Process of Division in the courts and force the
issue, even if the other proprietors resisted. 12 Each proprietor had then to demonstrate to the court what title
they had and also that they had used the traditional rights associated with the commonty, most often grazing
and peat cutting, though a wide range of rights might be mentioned. It was then up to the court to divide
the land; it usually did so with regard to the convenience of the various proprietors, ie each was given a
part adjacent to their own lands. They were then free to fence it, improve it, keep others off it, sell it and so
on. It became their individual property.
Of course, an essential preliminary was to establish that the land was, indeed, a commonty – and it will be
seen below that this was disputed in regard to much of Flanders Moss. If that was established, the other
huge question was the proportion in which it was to be divided amongst the proprietors. Was it to be divided,
for example, according to the proportion of use they had made of it in the past, according to how much of
their property encroached on the periphery or according to the total value of their holding as compared with
that of their rivals for a slice of the cake. The last option (applied to most of East Flanders Moss) meant that
a large estate which made minimal use of the commonty, might grab the lion’s share in the division.
East Flanders Moss was in two parishes and comprised two Commonties, claimed by two distinct sets of
proprietors in two distinct legal processes. Moves to divide had begun by about 1749 and were not completed
until 1820. The many hundreds of pages of evidence fall into a number of distinct types. The evidence itself
will be considered elsewhere; the types of document involved will be considered here.
11
12
Devine, 1999, 136.
Adams, 1971, Introduction.
15
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1.9
Documents in the Division of Flanders Moss in Por t of Menteith Parish
Moves to divide this area began by 1749 and, after a long lapse, were resumed in the early 1790s, the
Process being completed in 1798. The surviving documents are those produced before the Court of Session
between 1789 and 1798 though these include copies of documents generated in the earlier phases.
The documents consist of several bundles 13.
In the later stages of the Process the only dispute was between James Erskine of Cardross on the one side
and Mr Campbell (then proprietor of Blaircessnock) and David Forrester of Easter Polder on the other.
Forrester’s claim was fairly simple. His family had owned Easter Polder since the mid 17th century, at least,
and he was able to produce a long list of titles and other documents, going as far back as 1533 14.
Campbell’s claim to Blaircessnock was more complex and involved several stages of purchase, resale to
others followed by repurchase of parts and sale of other parts of his estate back to the main Cardross estate;
again he produced Inventories of Writs of the various parts to which he laid claim. Erskine’s claim was more
complex still since much of the adjacent land had formed part of the Cardross estate in the 16th century,
had then been feued, but had subsequently been re-purchased in a series of stages, mainly in the course of
the later 18th century. So, Wards of Goodie, Blaircessnock and Wester Polder, which were in other hands
when the process began in 1749, were part of Cardross by the 1790s. An Inventory of Writs was
produced for each of these, showing how it had been feued and repurchased. So the case provides the
most convenient resume of the ownership of the lands over the previous two centuries or so.
Another group of documents shows the legal steps taken by the various proprietors from the mid to late
18th century. Each phase can be seen to correspond to a new approach to the moss and its value.
It becomes clear that the moss had remained undivided for so long because nobody thought it was worth
enough to fight over. By the mid 18th century, people became aware that moss clearance could be used to
create arable and that this could be done on a large enough scale to mean that huge sums were involved.
The notion that the ownership of the peat and of the underlying clay might be separated began to be
considered. Indeed, when Hew Graeme of Arngomery (himself a lawyer) had bought land around
Blaircessnock in about 1749, it was explicit that he bought not just the peat but the underlying clay; he then
embarked on a process of ‘improvement’. At a later stage in the process, Erskine was to claim that Forrester
of Polder owned only the peat and the use of the surface of the moss and did not own the underlying clay!
If Erskine had succeeded in that claim it would have meant that the area was not a commonty at all but was
the real property of the Cardross estate on which the neighbouring proprietors had little more than some
limited grazing and peat-cutting rights which could be cheaply bought.
13
NAS CS21/Division of Moss Flanders/22/12/1798. There are two huge bundles each consisting of a great many
individual documents, some running to 60 or 80 pages, with some duplication; I have attempted to identify the Title of
each document in citing it to facilitate retrieval but have probably not been entirely consistent.
14
CS21/Division of Moss Poldar/22/12/1798, big bundle, item 10, Inventory of writs; see Site Specific, Polder Easter
for abstracts of these documents.
16
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Of great importance were the Plans and associated notes and comments produced to guide the court. There
is a Report by Thomas Johnston, the surveyor, dated 1792 and another by Mr Coldstream, the sheriff
substitute, who had visited the moss with Johnston in August 1797; he provides valuable commentary on the
survey and Plans and also makes reasoned proposals about how the actual division should be carried out 15.
Coldstream’s division, carefully giving each proprietor the land which lay most conveniently to his own,
having regard to areas which had already been improved and so on, was based on the knowledge that
the prime purpose was ‘its improvement into pasture or arable ground’. He recognises that the history was
only the springboard for the future.
Finally, evidence given by witnesses in the mid 1750s about how the moss had been used in the past; some
of these could recall the moss ‘in the last century’ ie in the 1690s 16. This evidence is fairly brief but enough
to make it clear that grazing was effectively confined to the outer areas of the moss and that landmarks
(such as trees) were few and far between.
1.10
Division of the Moss in Kincardine Parish
Much of this moss was cleared in the early 19th century; indeed, a great deal of clearance had taken
place before the legal Process of Division began about 1809 and final agreement was reached in 1820.
Map 16 shows show how much more extensive the contemporary moss was. Indeed, clearance was
continuing actively even whilst the Process was under way.
The initiators of the process were the Home Drummonds, proprietors of the Blairdrummond estate as well of
substantial property adjacent to the moss in question. Their opponents in the early stages were John Paterson
of Easter Moss-side, John McGibbon of Moss-side, John Buchanan, portioner of [West] Moss-side and
David Forrester of Polder 17. But Forrester seems to have established at a fairly early stage of the
proceedings, that much of the land in the vicinity of East Polder was property and not Commonty – so that
part was removed from the Process. By the later stages only John Paterson’s heirs were involved. Other
adjoining proprietors, including the Earl of Moray, did not participate.
There are two main groups of records, firstly, the Home Drummonds’ copies, now amongst the Murray of
Abercairney papers; secondly, documents found amongst the Court of Session Records 18. There is some
overlap within and between the two.
15
ibid, Report by Thomas Johnston; ibid, Report, Account and Remit by Mr Coldstream.
Ibid Act and Remit James Erskine v John Campbell etc, 1797 pp 11–13: ibid Answers for John Campbell to Petition of
James Erskine, 1794 pp 35–46.
17
GD24/1/808A/2, State of the Conjoined Process of Division of Commonty.
18
NAS Abercairney Papers GD24/1/803 A/1; GD24/1/808A; NAS Court of Session CS235/H/22/1. As with the
previous case this is a huge bundle with many documents and again I try to identify specific parts of the bundle by using
titles.
16
17
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
All parties produced their titles, as in the Process discussed above. Forrester of Polder was in a very strong
position since his antecedents had feued land between Little Ward and Myme to Hew Graeme of
Arngomery in the mid 18th century and it had been very much improved before Graeme fled, owing them
enough money for them to reclaim the land in compensation. In effect, it had already become Forrester
property. The legal argument about the method of division was particularly significant and the Patersons
broadly won, as it was established that the march lines would radiate out from a theoretical centre to the
boundaries of each proprietor’s land (the Home Drummonds, of course, wanted a division in proportion to
the size of their land holdings elsewhere).
But the kernel of this case is the evidence of the witnesses who were heard mainly in 1810 and 1813. Even
allowing for some duplication there is a huge volume of evidence, something like 50 pages, some of it
ranging back to the 1740s and offering unrivalled detail. It is particularly striking that some of the elderly
witnesses were recalling times and activities of their childhood and youth; even more strikingly, some of them
are women. The case thus offers great opportunities for interpretation of the social history of the area via the
personal testimony of people who knew and used it some 200–250 years ago.
Ironically, the final agreement in this Division did not emerge until 1820 when an agreement seems to have
been arrived at privately. The two parties instruct Mr Blackadder, land surveyor, Stirling, to mark off the march;
viz, that the march shall run in a line drawn on Mr Lauder’s plan of the Moss from Letter I till
it meet the line D-H-K in a direction towards a point to be found by the intersection of the
lines D-E and L-M produced. D-H produced to be their south march. And further authorising
me to mark off on the grounds the said marches; I did, on the 22 day of August last
perambulate the grounds along with the parties and on a subsequent day mark off by
rectangular pits the above lines of March and found by measurement that the lines D-H
produced to P the point of intersection is sixteen hundred and eighty nine links of the Scotch
chain and certify the same to be correct (signed) A Blackadder 19.
1.11
Char ters and other titles
Charters can be an important source for early property ownership and an extensive search was carried out
for lands adjacent to the moss up to the later 17th century. This was to some extent made redundant when
it emerged that the lands north of the Goodie had no claim on the moss. And the Inventories of Writs,
produced in the Divisions of Commonties provided most of the needful information in a more useful format.
At the same time, the legal arguments in the Divisions showed that even contemporary lawyers disagreed
about what the Charters meant. So, the main use of charters in the report has been as a convenient source
for early records of place names on the carse. Some use has also been made of sasines, the documents by
which title was later given and confirmed; the Sasine Abridgements have generally been sufficient.
19
Agreement between Henry Home Drummond and John, George and Robert Patersons of Easter Moss-side, dated 11 June 1820,
information supplied by Ken McKay.
18
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1.12
Testaments
Seventeenth century testaments often include a list of the moveable assets and liabilities of the deceased
person. For agricultural tenants these might include livestock, grain sown and in the ground, grain harvested
and in store and payments (in cash or in kind) due to the landlord, either as rent or tiends [tithes]. With
caution (and assuming a reasonable number can be located) they can give a general overview of the
agriculture in an area 20.
The available sample of 15 testaments for people who died between 1596 and 1694 is concentrated heavily
on people who lived in the Frew area, the exceptions being two short lists from Calziemuck 21. All were tenant
farmers or their spouses. This is a modest sample so that conclusions must be tentative; it could be expanded
by taking in a substantial number from south of the Forth – but that would be merely to introduce new
uncertainties about the homogeneity of the area. So, whilst admitting that the soil of Frew was better drained
than much of the carse (see Mythic Morass) these people should be fairly typical of those living around the
moss margins; the information is all the more welcome as there are few other sources for the period.
1.13
Estate records
The Cardross Estate, as successor to Inchmahome, has dominated the western part of the moss since the
16th century though it has shrunk, expanded and shrunk again over the centuries. Documents generated by or
relating to the estate turn up in almost every class of record – for example, the Inventories of Writs produced
in the Divisions of Commonty. In addition there are three main caches of Estate Papers relevant to this project:
National Archives of Scotland, GD1/393 (Orr Ewing of Cardross) is a collection of several
hundred documents. There are a few property titles, mostly duplicated elsewhere and there
is a substantial collection of 19th and early 20th century estate records, particularly tacks
[leases] of farms with a few sporting leases as well; many of the farm leases are for remote
parts of the estate and were ignored but this collection provides, for example, the first evidence
of the tenants being excluded from the moss – almost certainly in order to preserve the game.
20
21
Harrison, 1997; RCAHMS, 2001.
All were located in NAS Dunblane Commissary Court Register of Testaments:
CC6/5/3
CC6/5/3
CC6/5/4
CC6/5/5
CC6/5/5
CC6/5/5
CC6/5/6
CC6/5/8
CC6/5/8
CC6/5/8
CC6/5/8
CC6/5/10
CC6/5/12
CC6/5/12
CC6/5/16
Name
Wm Taylor
James Taylor
Janet Harvie
Elpeth Robertson
Barbara Don
Euphan Galbraith
Janet Robertson
James Graham
Grissell Leckie
Agnes Don
Jonet Monteith
Janet Robertson
John Harvie
James Harvie
Archibald Paterson
Location
Frew
Mid Frew
E Frew
Mid Frew
Mid Frew
W Frew
Mid Frew
Calziemuck
Mid Frew
Frew
Calziemuck
Frew
Mid Frew
Mid Frew
E Frew
19
Date
10/4/1599
7/3/1604
21/9/1617
20/4/1620
9/9/1620
20/12/1622
23/2/1630
13/5/1663
13/8/1663
15/6/1665
2/11/1665
29/7/1669
22/3/1677
12/7/1677
5/7/1694
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
National Archives of Scotland, GD15 (Erskine of Cardross) is an even more heterogeneous
collection with a good deal of 18th century material. A very happy find was GD15/41 Report
regarding the Estate of Cardross, June 1800. Even happier was GD15/46 A memorandum
book begun in 1834 and concluded in 1844 in which the then laird set out his aims and
objectives for the estate and ten years later commented on how far they have been
achieved. GD15/266 is a tack [lease] of Easter Polder for 19 years, dated 1533, the
earliest lease found; its existence is noted in the Inventory of Writs produced for the Division
of Commonty but this is the original parchment. GD15/365 Jottings with regard to the tacks
of Cardross 1785 gives some of the first evidence for a concern with moss clearance on
the estate. Again, there are some Inventories of Writs and some more leases, mainly earlier
than those in GD1/393.
National Register of Archives of Scotland Survey 1468. This is another heterogeneous
collection extending from the 16th to the late 19th century and is in private hands. Some of
it duplicates material elsewhere – for example, many of the older documents are titles which
have been published. Other material relates to land elsewhere. About 20 bundles, which
seemed the most likely to yield useful information, were examined. Two bundles 22 included
significant numbers of 18th century tacks but most of the material examined was 19th century,
including numbers of tacks and general administrative notes and Reports. Most of this material
amplified information available from other sources. There are a number of documents which
were very useful for the ‘moss settlements’ both as they were initiated and as they were removed.
For me the most striking single document was a draft lease dated 1831 for one of the Polder
Moss pendicles where, it was specified, the tenant was to build a house, byre and barn of
turf 23 the only firm evidence for turf construction in this area and the obvious explanation for
the absence of archaeological remains. Without it, we are left to conjecture and this alone
would have justified the two days spent searching the documents, which, however, also yielded
useful information about game management, control of the Goodie and a range of other topics.
Graham of Rednock
The Graham of Rednock Papers 24 have some useful information about the farms on the north side of the
moss in the 19th and early 20th century, including building surveys, leases and general Reports. There was
also some useful material about parish administration. The undoubted highlight was a full copy of the details
of the arrangements by which the Goodie was canalised in 1771 25 – parts of this information were
duplicated elsewhere but this was the fullest version found. There was also significant later information about
control of the Goodie down to the 1920s (ibid) and also a copy of Mr Tait’s Scheme, a cost-benefit analysis
of proposals for the industrial clearance of East Flanders in its entirety with an associated Plan 26. The Murray
of Abercairney Papers 27 have material from the Blairdrummond Estate, discussed in relation to the Divisions
of Commonty. A few items found in other estate collections are noted as they are cited.
22
23
24
25
26
27
NRAS 1468/22 and NRAS 47.
NRAS 1468/5 Minute of Tack to Donald McNaughton.
SCA PD160.
PD160/90 Extracts from Submissions and Decreets Arbitral relative to the Water of Goodie 1768, 1774, extracted 1883.
SCA PD160/91 for Mr Tait’s scheme: SCA PD160/88 for the Plan.
NAS GD24.
20
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1.14
Travellers’ repor ts
Travellers have avoided the mosses. Many comment on Lord Kames’s works at Blairdrummond – though they
usually merely repeat stories or views which were clearly the common currency of the area. A few of them
note that there was also clearance at Flanders Moss but none gives any detail. Very few need to be quoted:
Stoddart notes that Gilpin had ‘passed over’ the view west from Stirling as ‘barren and
uninteresting’ though Stoddart notes it for the mountains. He is one of the very few travellers
to notice the carse, but only to dismiss it as ‘a long extent of moorish country beyond the
Forth’, as seen from the Stirling to Dumbarton road 28.
Scotland Delineated notes that Kames ‘improved’ on the floatation process and about
40–50 acres of the mosses of Blairdrummond and Flanders are being recovered every year;
notes a tannery at Thornhill, which now has a population of about 600 29.
Campbell 30 notes extensive clearances at Kincardine and Flanders but has no new concrete
information; notes the former tradition of whisky smuggling at Thornhill but does not notice
the moss itself.
Garnett notes the extensive mosses and lord Kames’s efforts at reclamation but only to deride
them as a waste of the moss as a potentially valuable fertiliser 31.
An Account of the Principal Pleasure Tours in Scotland ‘on the summit of this little hill [at
Aberfoyle] on looking eastward, you see the windings of the Forth, Lake Monteith, the woods
of Rednock, Leitchtown [Blairhoyle], Ruskie, Cardross & the Flanders Moss, Stirling and the
Ochil Hills.’ Also notes the clearance at Blairdrummond; the new proprietor of Rednock has
been recently improving his estate by draining, but does not mention the moss itself.
However, the map at page 280 does show what appears to be the Policies of Cardross and
also ‘Moss Lds’ at Wester Polder, clearly for Moss Lairds 32.
Roger ‘At the distance of nine miles from Stirling and about four miles from Kincardine, we
reach the village of Thornhill, renowned in former times for the number of its stills, but now
enjoying a reputation more creditable from its abundant supply of excellent water. … Shortly
after leaving Thornhill, we have on the left the extensive Flanders Moss, now gradually giving
way to cultivation, and at the north-western extremity of this territory, the remains of a Roman
castellum. More distant on the left, and upon the banks of the Forth, are the princely
residence and grounds of Cardross, the seat of the old family of Erskine. Three miles from
Thornhill, we have immediately on the left, beautifully situated on a wooded bank sloping
towards the south, Leitchtown House [Blairhoyle], the residence of the liberal and enterprising
James Graham, Esq [mentions Loch Rusky, the crannog and the connection with Wallace]
… About two miles on the turnpike from Leitchtown, we have on the left the extensive park
and mansion-house of Rednock, the residence of John Graham Stirling, Esq … 33
28
29
30
31
32
33
Stoddart, nd II p 227–8; ibid, II p 310.
Scotland Delineated 1799, p 159.
Campbell, 1802, vol I, 93–4 and p 98.
Garnett, 1811, p 159.
Anon, An Account of the Principal Pleasure Tours … 1834, p 286; ibid p 226; ibid p 280.
Roger, 1851, p 208. This appears to be the first record of the supposed Roman Camp at Ballangrew; a few years later
it was excluded from the agricultural lease, clearly as a means of protection.
21
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Other, very similar instances could be cited and we had better glance at why they are so disappointing.
Prior to about the mid 18th century, travel writers wrote about what was curious, odd and uniquely ‘Scottish’;
that was what their readers wanted. By the mid 18th century, English readers became more interested in the
economic, political and military aspects of Scotland – all seriously affected by the Union of 1707, the Jacobite
risings and the Scots impact on British political institutions. The late 18th century saw Scotland in the lead
of the international, fashionable market for Romantic Tourism, a lead further stimulated and sustained by
Sir Walter Scott, as his publications emerged from 1810 to the 1830s. This generated a market for expensive
guides for wealthy, educated tourists whose prime interest was in scenery as a backdrop for history. From the
late 1840s or so, private coaches began to give way to the railways and the age of mass travel; publications
for this market were cheaper – mere compilations from other sources rather than accounts of personal travel.
They re-cycle the old themes and add little beyond contemporary reports of the parks and palaces of the
rich, powerful and famous. The mass tourists were no more interested in peat bogs than the earlier ones.
So, travel writers were not concerned with landscape much before the mid 18th century and the focus
changes again by the mid 19th century. Between the mid 18th and mid 19th century the interest focused
first, on economic and later on picturesque aspects. Flanders Moss did not qualify for either except in so far
as it was capable of being cleared; but the writers, inevitably, concentrated on the famous and dramatically
effective clearances at Blairdrummond rather than on the more problematic clearance at Flanders. Rogers,
in the last quote above, exemplifies the genre of the time; a nod to economic improvement before
concentrating on the picturesque, romantic, prestigious landscape of the proprietors.
1.15
Other of ficial records
A few records from the Register of Deeds of the Sheriff and Commissary Courts of Dunblane (mainly leases
for the mid to late 18th century) had been noted from previous work. There will certainly be other material
in the Perth Sheriff Court records which begin in the 16th century; however, relevant material will form only
a tiny fraction of the vast, un-indexed records, making them virtually unusable. The same would be true for
many centrally-held records, such as the General Register of Deeds.
The Hearth Tax returns of 1691 were consulted but the format of the Perthshire returns mean that they are
less useful than many others 34. Censuses were taken every decade from 1801–1901 but prior to 1831
only give parish totals. The returns from 1841 have been consulted on microfilm and were particularly useful
for following the history of the moss settlements at West Polder and the abandonment of a few other sites.
Of course, the returns since 1901 are not yet available.
Valuation Rolls recorded liability for local property-based taxation from 1855 to the 1980s – when Rates
payable on property were replaced by the Poll Tax. Details of the properties are summary but the Valuation
Rolls are useful for some specific subjects, such as the relative value of shootings and also provide a quick
check on changes of ownership, tenancies and use (agricultural/residential etc) 35.
34
35
NAS Hearth Tax Return E69/19/1.
Valuation Rolls were sampled for specific topics rather than comprehensively covered: NAS VR113/1 (1855–6);
NAS VR 113/7 (1861–2); NAS VR113/27 (1881–2); NAS VR 113/47 (1901); NAS VR 113/77 (1931–2).
SCA CR2/1/13 (1985).
22
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Various woodland censuses have been produced. The only one for which results are available was
conducted about 1949 and was consulted though it was rather disappointing 36.
Agricultural Statistics were first collected in 1866 and annual returns have been made since. Early returns
are unreliable and as returns are anonymised parish aggregates they do not yield information about smaller
areas. Another major difficulty is that new categories have been introduced, making comparison over time
difficult – of course, they are produced for contemporary reasons rather than as an historical record 37.
1.16
Minor sources – newspapers etc
The first local newspaper, the Stirling Journal, was published from 1820–1970; the Index is not always
reliable and the entries are often too vague to be useful but it did allow retrieval of several useful items,
in particular the account of the clearance of Thornhill Moss in 1830, which included the added bonus of
a historical overview of clearance over the previous 80 years. Another very interesting find was the report
of a serious fire which seriously damaged the moss. There is a partial index to the Stirling Observer but
it did not yield useful information under the headings checked ( John Brimms, Stirling Council Archivist,
pers comm.).
The Index to the Proceedings of the Stirling Natural History and Archaeological Society was equally
disappointing. A few items were located in various wildlife publications – mainly ones mentioned in other,
more general publications – but a full search was not conducted. Corbett and Dix (1993) provide useful
leads for wildlife and habitat.
1.17
Oral histor y
Ironically, written records for the 20th century are less available and less useful than those for earlier periods.
Several people with a long knowledge of the area have provided information about use of the moss and its
environs during the last 50 years or so, particularly in relation to farming and sport shooting etc. Others have
responded to my enquiries by letter and email or have drawn my attention to facets of the area which I had
not previously considered. Not all the people approached were available and not all wished to be quoted;
those who were willing are acknowledged in the Acknowledgement section and their specific contributions
noted in the text.
36
37
NAS
NAS
NAS
NAS
NAS
FC8/168.
AF39/25/1 (1866) (1877). NAS AF39/25/2 (1886); NAS AF 39/25/5 (1896); NAS AF 39/25/8 (1906);
AF40/5/3 (1916); NAS AF40/15/37 (1926); NAS AF40/25/39 (1936); NAS AF 40/35/4 (1946);
AF40/45 (1956); NAS AF40/55/2 (1966); NAS AF40/65/4 (1976); NAS AF40/69/3 (1980);
AF40/75/7 (1986); NAS AF40/77/7 (1990).
23
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
2
THE MYTH OF THE GREAT MORASS
2.1
Summar y
A key question concerned the extent of the moss before conscious attempts at clearance began in the
18th century. Was there ever a vast morass which extended almost continuously from Stirling to Gartmore?
Or were the mosses discrete and discontinuous? Did Flanders Moss at one time extend to the banks of the
Forth and Goodie or was there always a moss-free fringe? All the historical evidence from place names,
from settlement history and from maps is that the mosses were discontinuous. Furthermore, three distinguished
experts on the geomorphology of the carselands agreed that this was what they would have expected.
There were, undoubtedly, difficulties about traversing the heavy clays of the carse grounds, particularly
in wet weather; and the north-south route at Frew involved crossing a ford. But there is ample evidence
that there was a fringe of settlement between the mosses and the river banks which is likely to extend
back into pre-history. The absence of archaeological evidence, the biggest objection to this view, is
discussed.
2.2
Introduction
Even quite recent accounts of the agricultural history of the Carse of Stirling 38 imply that prior to the early
eighteenth century there was near-continuous moss coverage from Stirling westwards to Gartmore. Change
is seen as coming quite suddenly, following on from Kames’s work at Blairdrummond. In a more general
work, Professor Mitchison says, of the land north and west of Stirling:
this carse land was a bog covered with peat, … To pass in reasonable safety and comfort
from southern to northern Scotland a man must cross the Forth within a mile or two of
Stirling 39.
Even more strikingly, Flanders Moss is described, in a serious academic website as:
An extensive area of reclaimed land in the Carse of Stirling or upper valley of the River Forth,
Flanders Moss was, until the 18th Century uncultivated peat moss. The agricultural improver
Henry Home, Lord Kames (1696–1792), was the first local laird to attempt to remove the
peat which covered a fertile bed of clay beneath. Improvement leases were offered to
crofters from Balquhidder on condition that they worked to improve the land and great
volumes of peat were cut into sections and washed away using water from the River Teith.
Within a few decades most of the former peat moss had been reclaimed and cultivated.
Remnants of the moss north of Buchlyvie have been designated as a Site of Special Scientific
Interest 40.
38
Symon, 1959, 113–4, 142–3; Timms et al, 1974, 179; Whyte and Whyte, 1987, 169 & 172.
Mitchison, 1987, 1.
40
www.geo.ed.ac.uk.htm
39
24
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The key dilemma is summed up by RCAHMS (2000, 28–9). The archaeological evidence for pre-historic
settlement fringes the carse margins, mostly on the northern and southern slopes, though the homestead on
Flanders Hill is more central Medieval sites – all those reported are ‘homes of the elite’ – are concentrated
in similar areas. They continue
but little is known of the pattern of vernacular settlement at this time. Extensive colonisation
of the low ground by the middle of the eighteenth century is suggested by General Roy’s
map (Roy, 1747–55) which depicts and names most of the farms that today occupy the
valley floor, but it is not yet clear when these settlements were first established.
What was the settlement pattern before the mid 18th century? When was it established? Was there ever a
vast, uninhabited morass? And, if there was early settlement in the carse, why are archaeological remains
not reported? The questions are of particular importance for the area of East Flanders Moss. Certainly, if
there was an area of the carse which was difficult of access and difficult to settle it must have been the zone
between the Goodie, the Forth and the Cardross ridge. A full answer must await more detailed research
over a wider area and involve other disciplines. The following elucidation should be regarded as preliminary
and has, even so, involved a much wider geographical area than is considered in the rest of the Report.
2.3
Roy’s Map as evidence
Roy (Maps 5–8) shows several mosses on the western carse lands. Kincardine Moss lies between the Teith
and the Forth. The moss is never less than about 1/2 a mile from the Teith and the distance is often nearer a mile.
West of Cambusdrennie, Kincardine Moss approaches close to the Forth but elsewhere there is an extensive
area close to the river clear of moss, for example around Chalmerston (NS7395). No moss is indicated
south of the Forth between Stirling and Kippen where there are two mosses, un-named on Roy but corresponding
to Killorn (NS6296) and Little Kerse (NS6496), of which the latter, at least, also leaves a gap between moss
and river. East Flanders Moss occupies most of the ground east from the Cardross ridge to about Mid Frew,
which is named as a settlement, as are Wester and Easter Frew, Mill of Goody, Moss-Side, Wards of Goodie
and Wester and Easter Polder. West of Ruskie, at first glance the Goodie appears to meander directly through
the moss and that is how it is transcribed by Dicks 41. But closer inspection shows that the area traversed is
tinted green rather than grey on Roy; it will later be suggested that this corresponds to an area of marsh.
Given the limits of his methods Roy is regarded as generally reliable and is more often accused of sins of
omission than of commission. In this case what he is reporting is not a continuous morass but a series of
discrete mosses, which though more extensive than they are today, generally lie at some distance from the
riverbanks. The west bank of the Teith and the area about Frew are clear of moss. South of the Forth and
west of Stirling is several miles of carse ground which is entirely free of moss. So, the mosses are discrete,
there is a good deal of land free of moss and the mosses rarely touch the river banks, which, as Dicks 42
indicates are covered with the symbols which Roy used to indicate cultivated rigs. Does Roy depict the
situation about 1750 accurately? If so, had the riverbanks in particular been cleared in the recent past?
41
42
Timms, 1974, 176.
Timms, 1974, 176.
25
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
2.4
Early evidence of moss clearance
In 1646 it was noted, of the area to the east of Flanders, that the ‘Kings Moss’ [Kincardine] began a mile
west of Coldoch and stretched to Stirling and that, south of the Goodie, ‘most part is moss except Little
Ward’ 43. And in 1724 it was said:
at the hill called the hill of Gartmore begins that remarkable moss called Moss Flanders
which runs in a tract from thence (but in some places by the industry of the inhabitants is by
casting pareing and burning cut quite through and made arable ground) till within 2 or 3
miles of Stirling on both sides of Forth. The tradition is that all that country where this moss
lies was once under water up to the said hill of Gartmore 44.
So, at least part of Little Ward was not covered by moss in the mid 17th century and there had been some
deliberate clearance by 1724 – though how much is unclear from this source. There can be little doubt that
anyone living on the carselands prior to the later 18th century when alternative fuels became more widely
available, must have cut peat for fuel. Peat was always cut as close to ‘home’ as possible and the preference
must have been for cutting around the margins of the mosses, where the peat was thinnest. This could have
resulted in some clearance of moss and creation of new arable ground; but, with limited population, the
area involved would have been very small. Nor would such clearance have followed the riverbanks in the
pattern seen on Roy; instead it would tend to radiate out from the settlements, encroaching in quite narrow
strips into the moss. That this was the local method of cutting peats is confirmed by local documentation 45.
The Cardross Estate Plan of 1761 (Map 11) which will be discussed below in more detail, shows that these
methods were in use by that time as indicated by field names such as Bruntland (ie Burnt Land) and
Newfoundland and also areas described as ‘spreadfield’.
Recent archival work has shown that moss clearance was proceeding – probably by a combination of
paring and burning and flotation – at Throsk, east of Stirling, by the 1680s 46. But this was within a fertile
zone to the east of Stirling where agriculture was particularly advanced. Ramsay repeatedly contrasts this
fertile zone to the east with pre-improvement practice to the west of Stirling 47. And there is good evidence,
which will be discussed in some detail below, that Hew Graeme of Arngomery undertook extensive
clearance at two sites adjacent to East Flanders Moss about 1750, one close to Flanders Hill and the other
between Myme and Little Ward. But Graeme’s Improvements were noted as something highly visible,
exceptional and curious in the 1790s and in 1810. The clear personal testimony of numerous witnesses
about East Flanders Moss and the adjacent areas, at various dates from the 1690s to the 1810s will be
discussed elsewhere in this Report. None of them mention any other extensive, systematic clearance prior to
the late 18th century. They had every reason to do so if they were aware of it as it would have increased
their property rights over other parts of the moss. Earlier clearance is likely to have been even less dramatic
and so the broad situation shown by Roy looks likely to be of very long standing.
43
McFarlane, II, p 610.
Mitchell (ed) 1906, vol 1, 341.
45
eg NAS Murray of Abercairney Papers, GD24/1/808a, p 2–3.
46
Harrison, 2003 (in press).
47
Harrison, 1997: Allardyce, 1888, II, p 193, 196, 197.
44
26
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Map 20
Modern roads and farm sites overlaid on plan by John Lauder, dated 1809 and 1811 –
Plan drawn by Ken McKay and reproduced by permission.
27
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
2.5
Evidence of place names
The following discussion ignores sites such as Craigforth which are clearly not strictly carseland settlements.
Nor are settlements associated with the Teith considered here. Most of the sites appear on modern OS maps and
are situated between 10 and 15m OD. As Ken McKay has shown, there is a close but not precise fit between
the modern sites and those of the same name shown by Roy (Map 20). Some additional names for sites not
shown by Roy are considered here but the list could be considerably expanded. We will start with a substantial
list of names which are clearly of Gaelic origin. They are likely to have originated by the 12th century and though
specialised study would be needed to confirm their origin so early as that, many are anyway on record from
an early date, for example, Baad and Cambusdrennie in 1472 48 and almost all by the early 17th century.
●
Kincardine Parish on the northern bank of the Forth: Cowden, Baad, Cambusdrennie, Ross, Arnieve.
●
St Ninians Parish, south bank of Forth; Falleninch, Polrogan.
●
Gargunnock Parish, Kepdarroch, Fleuchams, Culmore, Culbeg.
●
Port of Menteith/Norrieston; Offers [Offerance], Collymoon.
Another group of names are of uncertain etymology but are recorded from a fairly early date, the following
again being far from exhaustive and in some cases the dates are just the earliest I had in my notes. There is a
bias towards Stirlingshire sites as the Stirlingshire records are more accessible and have been more fully searched.
●
Chalmerston – family of Chalmers of Chamberston on record before 1638 49.
●
Shaw of Touch – William Steinson’s son dead there by 12 Dec 1615; on record in 1569 50.
●
Patrickston – Christian Johnstone dead at Patrickston of Leckie by 17 June 1612 51.
●
Birkenwood – Robert Geichan dead at Birkenwood of Wester Leckie by 18 Feb 1632 52.
●
Woodyet of Gargunnock – John Gilchrist in Woodyet, dead by 9th July 1652 53.
●
Meiklewood – on record in 1566 and in 1569 54.
●
Westwood – on record in 1472 55.
●
Wards of Goodie – on record in 1452 56.
●
Easter Polder – on record by1533 57.
●
Wester Polder – on record in 1556 58.
●
Frews – ferms of oats and meadow hay 1437, records 1499, 1521–2 59.
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
Stirling Protocol Book, p 12.
NAS, CC6/12/3 f 264.
Stirling Index of Testaments; RMS IV, 1903.
Stirling Index of Testaments.
Stirling Index of Testaments.
Stirling Index of Testaments.
SCA B66/1/5 f 14r; RMS IV, 1903.
Stirling Protocol Book, p 12.
RMS II, 556.
NAS, CS21/Division of Moss Flanders, small bundle, item 9, Inventory of Writs.
RMS IV, 1057.
Exchequer Rolls, V: Privy Seal, I, 495; RMS III, 1123.
28
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
It is worth noting that several of these place names have been subdivided. Wester Polder, named in 1533,
implies that Easter Polder already exists; Easter and Mid Frews are on record by 1528 joined by Wester
Frew in 1580 60. Of course, a place name does not necessarily mean a settlement site; it can, for example,
cover an extensive area, an administrative unit. But teind sheaves do require settlement, the 1533 document
for Wester Polder is a lease and the testaments are of people who died at the named site; there is no real
doubt that most, if not all, of these sites were, indeed, settlements. So we have evidence of quite extensive
settlement of the carselands from long before the period of ‘improvement’. Plotting the named sites shows
that they closely follow the rivers Forth and Goodie in the pattern suggested by Roy.
2.6
Evidence from estate plans
Two Estate Plans support the above view; Map 11 is dated 1761 and shows Cardross Estate; Map 12
shows Ward of Goodie and is undated but almost certainly contemporary with the above. On Map 11 at
Collymoon and around Faraway the farmed land forms a narrow rim, from 50 to around 200 metres wide,
between the moss and the river; there is no hint of any peat clearance area. Collymoon is a particularly
persuasive case; the name is of Gaelic origin and several of the fields have Gaelic names, The Black
Mollan, Dallgoran, Mollan Glas. At Park [ie Parks of Garden] there is a small moss separated from the river
by a band of fields again from about 50 to about 200 metres wide; but the greatest depth of field
corresponds to small areas which have been cleared, the ‘Spread Field’, ‘Bruntland’ ‘The Moss Band Infield’
and the ‘Cast Moss’ At Faraway the general pattern is similar – though in this case the ‘Bruntland’ is to the
landward side, adjacent to the Meikle Burn and there is even a Newfoundland; again, there are Gaelic
field names, Dallchrinoch, The Curroch, Curroch-daan and Coull-dore. Ward of Goodie (Map 12) stretches
along the south bank of the Goodie, ten times longer than it is wide, though that is partly due to the inclusion
of ‘Spreadfield’ and ‘Wet Boggy Pasture’ at the west end, all the better land (‘Infield’) being close to the
farm (‘tofts’) at the east end.
So, the Plans confirm that Roy is not merely conventional in showing a margin of fields between moss and
river and also show that moss clearance has been effected by cutting and by burning by the 1760s. The
Cast Moss at Park [to ‘cast’ peats was to cut them] is beside the Yard and at the place where cut peats
could be readily taken off by road to the other farms, the raggedy edges indicative of small-scale clearance;
the site was chosen for use rather than disposal of the peat. Gaelic field names are difficult to interpret and
may indicate current Gaelic speaking rather than long use but are worth keeping in mind. On these plans,
agricultural land is widest on the inside of the river meanders, suggestive of a near-natural pattern. Infield,
land which would receive all the dung and be used as arable every year, is always close to the farm-steads.
Many other riverside fields are described as meadows or boggy pasture. And the pattern of clearance is
quite different from that seen on the 1st Edition OS 6” a century later (Maps 18 and 19) where the stepped
edge of the moss at Collymoon and South Flanders, indicative of systematic clearance, is so obvious. Given
this historical evidence it seemed probable that the explanation for this settlement pattern was to be found
in the development and morphology of the carselands themselves.
60
RMS III 612 14 July 1528; NAS GD15/356 Grant of Teind sheaves of various lands to Earl of Mar by David Commendator
of Inchmahome.
29
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
2.7
Geomorphology and settlement on the carse
There has been extensive study of the evolution of the carselands and the associated moraines etc 61.
Hansom and Evans 62 note that the newly emerging carselands would have been attractive to Neolithic and
Bronze Age settlers, the peoples most likely to have ‘witnessed the evacuation of the sea from the Carse
of Stirling’. Smith and Holloway
63
outline the sequential development of peat mosses on the former
estuarine muds. A timber structure found at Parks of Garden has been interpreted as a trackway from about
4445 +/– 40 BP constructed as an assembly point for expeditions onto the estuary beyond 64.
But the published geomorphological studies threw little or no light on why settlement in the medieval and
early modern period might be based on the river margins. I therefore approached Dr Richard Tipping
(Stirling University) Professor Jim Hansom (Glasgow University) and Professor David Smith (Coventry
University) and put the historical evidence to them. I am extremely grateful to all of them for their prompt,
interesting and engaged responses, on which what follows is based.
All agreed that the mosses would have been generally discontinuous though adjacent mosses might
become confluent. They agree that mosses would not have reached directly to the river margins and none
questions the probability of early settlement along the river margins. Smith makes the point about the sites
I had named in my letter that ‘their patterns of flow indicate that they were not superimposed from a peat
surface’ ie, he accepts that they were on land which had never been under moss. Tipping describes mineral
floodplains alongside the Goodie and Forth, grading into the peat of the raised moss, though Smith thinks
the floodplain of the Forth is minimal. But Smith points out that drainage is better closer to the river as the
groundwater table slopes down to the river level. Hansom indicates that as floodplains are raised they would
further reduce drainage of mosses on their landward sides. So, whilst there is some slight divergence of
emphasis regarding the mechanism, all are agreed that drainage would be better closer to the rivers than
further away, on the carse clays. Floodplains, says Tipping, provide good grazing and would be attractive
to early settlers. The area around the confluence of the Forth and Goodie (Frew) where the road crossed the
valley corresponds to the confluence of the two rivers and of their floodplains. I am told (More, pers comm.)
that the soil in the Frew area is sandier and freer than that elsewhere on the carse; on modern carse farms,
the best land is that closest to the rivers (Carrick, pers comm.).
Robertson explicitly distinguishes between the carse clays and the ‘haugh’ grounds, beside the rivers, where
floods deposited gravels, sand and silts and specifically mentions that haugh ground ‘abounds’ along the
Goodie 65. In 1771, when the Goodie was canalised, it was specifically in an attempt to control flooding,
though similar direct historical evidence is lacking for the Forth. Flooding would also have increased fertility
and impeded tree growth and moss formation, which was also hindered, on the river margins, by better
drainage (at least, outside of flood events) (Hansom, pers comm.).
61
Smith, 1993, 456–464; Hansom & Evans, 2000, 71–78; Smith & Holloway, 2000, 3–20.
Hansom & Evans, 2000, 75.
63
Smith and Holloway (2000, 14-–15).
64
Ellis, 2000, 57–8.
65
Robertson, 1794, p 18.
62
30
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
At present the outline above is offered as no more than a preliminary proposal. But it appears to fit the
observable evidence better than the ‘mythic morass’ view. A fairly well-drained, moss-free area beside the
rivers would have offered considerable advantages to early settlement. The (admittedly narrow) strip of fertile
land was sandwiched between the moss (a potential source of fuel, game and pasture) and the river, with
its opportunities for transport and fishing. Sites in the angles where tributary burns joined the main rivers
might also have offered some defensive potential.
2.8
The missing archaeological evidence
Several factors may combine to explain the lack of archaeological evidence for medieval settlement in the
areas in question – otherwise the most obvious objection to the above proposal. Firstly, the most successful
sites are likely to have continued in occupation – each phase of settlement overlying or destroying the
previous one. Secondly, buildings and other structures may well have been of turf or clay. Even if they were
not subsequently demolished or ‘quarried’ for re-use, they would be vulnerable to ploughing and other
agricultural activities. Floods would likewise have been destructive, with a potential to cover or wash away
signs of settlement. Some early settlements, further from the riverbanks, may have been subsequently covered
by moss and remain to be found. And archaeologists, persuaded of the validity of the ‘mythic morass’, may
not have looked with the same intensity at the carse lands as they have at its margins; certainly, the searches
which reveal substantial stone-built structures are less likely to reveal clay or earth-build. Any assertion that
the lack of archaeological remains indicates lack of medieval settlement must cope with the fact that there
is at present no archaeological evidence of settlement for the 16th and 17th century either – though the
documentary evidence is then overwhelming!
2.9
Communications and elite settlement
Again, the concentration of communications and elite sites around the carse margins might appear to support
the ‘mythic morass’ view. Undoubtedly, prior to the improvement period, the main lines of communication on
the southern side of the carselands ran via Gargunnock, Kippen and so to Dumbarton, a route of national
importance along which were numerous lairds’ houses. A corresponding route along the northern margin,
from Blairdrummond to Port of Menteith and Aberfoyle can be inferred, passing sites such as Burnbank,
Coldoch, Spittalton, Blairhoyle, Rednock and the key sites, Inchmahome and Inchtalla. What of the three
main north-south routes?
The one via the ferry at Drip (Drip Cobble) and north to Blairdrummond and Doune largely followed the river
terrace of the Teith, not the present route 66 passing Ochtertyre and Blairdrummond, two major elite sites.
The route from Arnprior probably usually reached the Cardross ridge by a ferry at Boatland (Map 11) though
a Cardross Bridge is recorded as early as 1706 67 and Cooper’s Map of 1730 (Map 3) also seems to
indicate a bridge; the modern bridge is dated 1774. Arnprior, Cardross and (again) Inchmahome and
66
67
McKay, 1976.
Sibbald, 76.
31
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Inchtalla are the main elite sites on this route, none being on the carseland. The route via Frew was probably
always less important but a bridge over the Goodie is on record by 1646 68; as the stream is quite narrow
it would not need a very sophisticated structure. There is no suggestion of anything other than a ford over
the Forth on this route prior to the early 19th century. As already indicated, the route crossed the confluence
of the Goodie and Forth, an area always free of moss due to better drainage and sandy soil. The Frews
are on record as growing hay and grains in the 15th century (above).
Communication for some of the riverside sites was undoubtedly difficult. A rather ambiguous agreement of
1627 refers to the access from Tarr to Wards of Goodie by fords across which the stock went to graze and
people went to cut peats 69. Later there are references to access bridges across the Goodie, though they
may have been very simple structures, little more than planks. Bridges at Ruskie and Wards of Goodie are
shown on Map 12 of c.1761 ie prior to the canalisation. Moss-side and the other farms south of the Goodie
also had bridges; loans led from the bridges to the farms further north and to the road itself and these loans
were the route for cattle going to graze the moss as well as for people who cut peats on the moss.
Sites on the south side of the Forth (such as Little Kerse, Killorn and Parks of Garden) could without too much
difficulty gain access to main routes by going round their respective mosses – which lay back from the
tributary streams just as they did from the Forth itself. Sites on the north shore of the Forth (such as Easter and
Wester Polder and Littleward) faced greater difficulties. Some may just have had to make the long walk to
the nearest north-south route. But there was a boat at Wester Polder by 1748 and one at Easter Polder by
1756; they were used and maintained jointly by the tenants 70. The laird regarded the building of the suspension
bridge to Faraway about 1839 as a major improvement to the entire southern part of the Cardross estate 71.
Most of the proprietors of the larger estates lived along the main lines of communication – though Culmore,
Meiklewood and Kepdarroch, for example, were quite substantial estates based mainly if not entirely on the
carse. On a smaller scale, but still substantial, from the later 16th century Wester Polder belonged to the
Forresters of Culmore but in 1650 it passed to Robert Forrester in Wester Polder ie was owner occupied 72.
Easter Polder belonged to the Leckie family as early as 1548 73 and had its own lairds until into the
19th century when it was resorbed into the Cardross estate. There were small lairds’ houses at both these
sites, in spite of the difficulties of communication just looked at though there is evidence that, for some of
their owners, even in the 18th century, these were ‘second homes’ used only occasionally. Dr Stirling of
Wester Polder, for example, had a house in Stirling where his practice was based and a 1769 lease
allowed the tenant to use the mansion house so long as he himself did not want to live there 74.
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
McFarlane’s Geographical Collections, II, p 609–10.
NAS, CC6/12/2 f 127v contract between John Dick and George Graham and others.
NAS, SC67/49/21, p 163–4, tack Dr Stirling to John McKullie: NAS, SC44/59/2 pp 84–87 tack between
James Forrester and James Hay.
NRAS 1468/4 Small leather bound book, ‘expenses of putting in bridge at Killorn’; GD15/46 Memorandum Book,
notes for 1844.
NAS CS21/Division of Moss Poldar/22/12/1798, big bundle, item 23, Inventory of Writs of the Lands of
Wester Polder, 1764.
NAS CS21/Division of Moss Poldar/22/12/1798, big bundle, item 10, Inventory of writs produced for Trustees of
David Forrester of East Polder, 1793.
NAS SC44/59/2 pp 200–202, registered 15 Jan 1773, tack dated 20 Nov 1769.
32
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
2.10
Conclusions
Place names provide the earliest historical evidence for early settlement on the carseland, documentary
evidence becomes increasingly firm from the 15th century and the cartographic evidence of Roy and the
Estate Plans concludes the trail. Three scientists with serious involvement in the study of the carselands agree
that the mosses are always likely to have been discontinuous and that there are several mechanisms which
might keep the riverbanks clear of moss. Such a riparian fringe would provide very attractive sites for
settlement from an early period, each phase of settlement destroying the fragile evidence of its antecedents.
Whilst most of these sites were modest, tenanted farms a few were sufficient to support small estates and
lairds’ houses. Flanders Moss was thus, from an early date, fringed by settlement on all sides.
33
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
3
PROPERTY
3.1
Summar y
Throughout, this discussion of ownership is related to wider social and economic issues, in the wider
landscape of the surrounding estates and across Scotland. During the medieval period, the western part of
the East Flanders moss seems to have belonged to the Abbey of Inchmahome; as the abbey’s estates passed
into private hands at the time of the Reformation about 1560, the moss was reserved, nominally to provide
for the continuing needs of the remnant of the monks. But during the 17th and 18th century it was a
Commonty, jointly owned by the adjacent proprietors. The eastern part, Polder Moss and areas adjacent,
was a Commonty between the medieval Stewartry of Menteith and a number of other, local proprietors. The
greater part was divided in the 1790s and the eastern end (where radical clearance was already
underway) about 1820. Those divisions remain the basis of the property pattern today.
3.2
Owning the land; the moss and its environs
3.2.1 Medieval to 18th centur y
The district of Menteith anciently included much of the parishes of Port of Menteith, Aberfoyle, Callander &
Leny, Kincardine in Menteith, Kilmadock, Lecropt, Dunblane (all in south west Perthshire) and a part of
Kippen in Stirlingshire. By the 12th century it was the kernel of the vast estates of the medieval Earls of
Menteith. In or shortly after 1238 the then Earl of Menteith established a monastery on Inchmahome and
endowed it from his lands, probably mainly those which the monastery still held at the time of the Reformation
in the mid 16th century and which later formed the core of the Cardross estate. These monastic lands
included land north and south of Lake of Menteith, the ridge south from the Lake to Cardross, some lands
south of the Forth in Kippen parish and most of the land between the Forth and the Goodie as far east as
the Port of Menteith parish boundary 75.
The earls also granted lands to others. The estate of Rednock existed by 1213 76; Ruskie probably dates to
about the same period. Boquhapple was divided into Easter and Wester Boquhapple by 1330 77, later
sometimes called Norie’s Boquhapple and Balfours Boquhapple 78; for Wester Boquhapple see Map 13.
And the medieval earls retained some lands in their own hands; in the 16th century, at least, lands around
Port of Menteith were farmed directly by the earls whilst Blairhoyle was stocked with the earl’s livestock,
probably on a profit-sharing basis called bowgang 79.
In 1425 the Earldom of Menteith was forfeited to the Crown in the person of James I. The king retained the
Stewartry of Menteith, centred on Doune but including Ward of Goodie and lands to the east of the moss,
Frew etc. In 1427 the balance of the old lands of the earldom were granted to Malice Graham to form the
75
Fraser, 1880; Fawcett, 1986, p 1.
Hutchison, 1899, p 60.
77
Fraser, 1880, vol 2 item 7.
78
RMS II, 187; RMS III, 286, 763, 1031; 1195; RMS IV, 214, 834; 956.
79
Sanderson, 1982, 23; Rental of the Earl’s Bowgangs, NAS RH9/3/84.
76
34
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
basis of a new earldom. The private estates of Rednock, Rusky and so on stayed in the same hands but were
now held from the Stewartry rather than from the earldom 80. The monastery, of course, retained Cardross
and the moss and their other lands. Rednock, as part of the Stewartry, continued to be held by a family of
Grahams after 1427 but, by 1456, it was divided into two portions, one of which continued in Graham
hands till the 16th century; the other was subdivided, and by the end of 15th century was granted to Home
of Polwarth as part of his lands of Argaty and Lundy (Doune) 81. The smaller properties were dependencies
of the larger. So Calziemuck, east of Blairhoyle, is on record in 1507 and 1509 as part of the larger Ruskie
estate 82. In the mid 16th century, Robert Forrester of Calziemuck was given a receipt for £100 paid for a
hat for the Queen (Mary, Queen of Scots) and in 1556 he was elected Provost of Stirling 83. Around the
same time he claimed that his ancestors had held this small estate (presumably from the lairds of Ruskie) ‘past
memory of man’ – though his title deeds had been lost when the English destroyed Edinburgh 84. But even
Calziemuck may have been divided, for part, with a manor and a garden, was occupied by Duncan
Campbell and his spouse from Thomas Graham 85. Blairhoyle, east of Rednock, was anciently ‘Blairquhoille’
implying a wooded place. As part of the Stewartry it was granted to John Leech in 1517 and was then
sometimes known as Leitchtown till the late 19th century 86.
Most of these properties, small or large, had their main focus on the higher ground. Wards of Goodie is
the first farm on the carse and closely associated with the moss to appear in the records when, in 1452,
the property was granted by James II and Mary of Gueldres to Robert Nory, their servant, in celebration of
the birth of their son – later James III 87. But it remained part of the Stewartry and a serious dispute about
the collection of the rental is recorded about 1528–9 88. It is described, throughout these records, as a
40 shilling (ie £2) land, which was quite a significant holding.
By the mid 16th century the break up of the monastic lands had begun. By the 1530s, at least, a
Commendator had been appointed as secular head of the monastery – in effect a layman or cleric in minor
orders in charge of administration of the lands. The commendators of Inchmahome were all members of the
Erskine family and Erskines were also commendators of Cambuskenneth and Dryburgh Abbeys. The head
of the family was John Erskine, who was to become Earl of Mar and was Regent of Scotland for the year
prior to his death in 1572. There can be little doubt that he took a direct personal interest in the lands and
would have been able to ensure that they were allocated to his family members in return for their support.
Indeed, for a time between 1560 and 1562 he held the lands himself though he and his successors quickly
began to realise capital by selling (the more correct word is feuing) some of the lands. This process of
secularisation, distribution and fragmentation generated a great wave of documents; many survive, others
are recorded only in later Inventories of Writs etc. We will consider first the main body of the estate and
later those components which were feued.
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
Fraser, 1880, xvii–xxi.
Hutchison, 1899, 60–61.
RMS II, number 3142, 3347.
Stirling Extracts, I, p 49; ibid p 69.
RMS IV, 432, 596.
RMS IV, 432.
Hutchison, 1899 p 65.
RMS II, 566.
Fraser, 1880, vol 2, items 97, 101, 103 etc; RMS III, 854, 1123.
35
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
In January 1556 a charter was granted to John Erskine, commendator of Inchmahome and in feu to
Alexander Erskine of Cangnoir, 2nd son of the late John, Lord Erskine of;
The lands of Arnprior, Kep, Wester Polder, Easter Polder, Gartcledynye [ie Hilton of Cardross]
with mill of Arnprior, Arnvicar, Over and Nether Gartur, Lochend, mill of Cardross, lands of
Arnclerich, Druiminamukloch [ie Drumnaculloch, a field on the east side of Cardross Parks
in 1761], Blaircessnock, Ballingrew. Hornhawick [ie Faraway], Ward of Goodie with the
multures [ie payments for use of the mills]. (RMS IV 1027, Edinburgh, 24 January 1556)
[Edited from translation by Fiona Watson].
This gives us a list of most of the monastic lands – which are indicated on Map 21.
Map 21
Lands of Inchmahome north of the Forth; the mosses and fishings were reserved to the monastery until 1604.
Drumnaculloch corresponds to the eastern end of the Policies. Reduced from 1st Edition OS at 1”.
(Copyright NLS)
The charter also makes certain very important reservations, assets which remained the property of the
monastery; we will return to them later. Alexander Erskine later resigned the estate to the Earl of Mar in exchange
for other lands elsewhere and in 1604 the entire monastic lands were granted to Mar who granted them,
in turn, to Henry, the second son of Mar’s second marriage, who was created Lord Cardross in 1610. There
are several versions of these grants 89. The original Act of Parliament refers to [language modernised]:
89
APS IV, p 345; RMS VII, 236; RMS VII, 238: RMS VII, 301; RMS VII, 1613.
36
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The place and mansion of Inchmahome with houses, buildings, orchards, yards and
Doocots of the same and all the other pertinents. All the lands and barony of Cardross; the
lands of Arnprior, Easter Garden, Kep, lands of Wester Polder and Easter Polder, lands of
Gaitleddernie [ie Hilton] and Hilton Mill, the Mill of Arnprior with multures [… etc] Lands of
Arnvicar with Clerkcum, lands of Garturs Over and Nether, lands of Lochend, Mill of
Cardross with multures etc … Lands of Arnclerich, Lands of Drumancloch [Drumnaculloch],
lands of Blaircessnock, lands of Ballingrew, land of Hornhawick [later Faraway], lands of
Ward of Goodie … lands of Mains of Cardross with the cottages and cotlands thereof,
lochs and isles of Inchmahome with the salmon and other fishings on the Forth and Goodie.
The meadow called the Prior’s Meadow, lands of Armavale [the promontory on the south
shore of the lake] etc.
This grant includes the assets specifically excluded in 1556 but it also includes a mill at Hilton, the lands of
Arnvicar and Clerkcum and others which were not mentioned before. It is also anomalous that Ward of
Goodie is included in both grants though it had not belonged to the monastery but had been part of the
Stewartry so recently as 1542 90. The assets specifically excluded in 1556 had been:
the fishings in the waters and rivers of Forth and Goodie and within the lake of Inchmahome;
with certain payments of poultry called Reek Hens [nominally a payment due for each
chimney in use] with freedom to make a profit from the fuel also reserved to the monastery
in all moors and marshes of said lands. And neither Alexander or his subtenants or
villeins/husbandmen, should sell or consume the fuel of the moors and marshes except for
their own use. [Edited from translation by Fiona Watson].
The exclusion of the fuel and the restriction on the use of the ‘fuel of the moors and marshes’ was to be
important later since, in 1562 John, Lord Erskine had feued (ie sold) Easter Polder to Andrew Leckie and his
wife 91. And in 1569 he had feued Wester Polder 92. Indeed, the process of feuing had started even earlier,
perhaps with the sale of Lochend so early as 1548 93. Little Ward and parts of Boquhapple had been feued
during the late 16th or early 17th century. Blaircessnock and the two Garturs had been feued before the
mid 17th century 94 and by the early 18th century both were in the hands of the Graham family.
The main body of the Cardross estate was inherited in turn by various members of the Erskine family through
the 17th century – the various lairds will be briefly considered in the section on People. In the late 17th century,
debts partly accumulated as a result of political/religious persecution meant that the estate passed from the
main line to the Earls of Buchan, who were amongst the creditors. They held it until the 1740s when a
grandson of the former owner repurchased it. During the ensuing decades several farms which had been
feued were repurchased; Blaircessnock probably in 1755, Wester Polder in 1789 and Easter Polder some
time in the early 19th century 95.
90
91
92
93
94
95
RMS III, 2851.
CS21/Division of Moss Poldar/22/12/1798, Inventory of Writs of Easter Polder.
GD15/271 1569, resignation by John Erskine in favour of Duncan Forrester etc.
Fraser, 1880, vol 2, item 77.
Fraser, 1880, vol 2, item 89.
CS21/Division of Moss Flanders/22/12/1798 Petition by James Erskine refers to Erskine’s charter of 1755 in GRS
30 March 1755; GD15/271 1569, disposition by Dr Stirling to James Erskine, item 329.
37
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Timperley provides a table of landownership in Port of Menteith and Kincardine parishes from rolls dated
1771 but updated in some respects up to about 1790. It allows the contrast between large and small
proprietors to be seen at a glance though it should be born in mind that this is the rental value for tax
purposes rather than the ‘sale value’ of the land.
Kincardine Parish
Lord Kames; Blairdrummond
3072
10
0
448
13
4
66
13
04
Mr Graham; part of Boquhapple
193
17
00
Mr Govan; part of Boquhapple
125
10
00
John Drummond; part of Boquhapple
26
13
04
Arch Gourlay
64
00
00
James Marjoribank
19
10
00
229
00
00
John Ramsay; Ochtertyre
Arch Murdoch of Gartincaber
Laird of Craighead; Norrieston
Earl of Moray
unknown
Mill of Goodie
68
13
04
Cuthill
45
00
00
322
16
08
Littleward
51
00
00
Chalmerston
93
13
04
Moss-side
20
13
04
342
13
04
1079
00
00
45
13
04
551
00
00
1156
13
04
Lord Napier
400
00
00
Laird of Lerwick; Rusky [Larwick is local site]
385
00
00
Meiklewood
Coldoch
Port of Menteith Parish
Mr Erskine of Cardross
Forfeited estates Commission for Dullater
Mr Graham of Gartmore; Gartmore, Gartartan
Duke of Montrose
John Campbell of Lochend; Lochend
90
00
00
100
00
00
412
12
00
Wester Rednock
77
04
08
Lichton [Leetchtown]
28
13
04
Culnagreine
18
10
00
Dullater
69
00
00
Drunkie
148
00
00
Glenny
226
13
04
Gartur
193
13
04
Easter Poldar
140
00
00
83
00
00
188
06
08
78
00
00
Robert Drummond of Calziemuck
Easter Rednock
Wester Poldar
Letter; Haughridge
Auchyle
38
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
It is worth noticing that the Cardross estate followed a pattern which was widespread throughout much of
Scotland with a phase of fragmentation, the creation of modest feus, during the 16th and 17th century,
followed by a re-consolidation of bigger estates during the 18th century.
3.2.2 Late 18th and early 19th centur y
By the third quarter of the 18th century the moss was ringed by a number of properties. Cardross fringed
most of the western edge including Blaircessnock and the area around Faraway and also owned Ward of
Goodie. But Flanders Hill had been hived off from Blaircessnock to become part of the small Lochend estate.
The southern margins were the small estates of Wester and Easter Polder. And further east again, parts of
Moss-side had been feued, the Blairdrummond estate had purchased a substantial strip of Easter
Boquhapple and the Earl of Moray owned the residue of the Stewartry, formed in the15th century. Along
the northern margins the estates of Ruskie, Blairhoyle and Boquhapple had a potential interest in the moss
(and probably had residual peat-cutting rights). But they all subscribed to the canalisation of the Goodie
(c. 1761 discussed elsewhere) and one of the pre-conditions of that scheme was that the new course would
become their southern march.
The ownership of the moss itself had not, hitherto, been a matter of any moment. It provided peat for fuel
and a little grazing and hunting; but it was not otherwise of much value. As the potential for reclamation
came to be appreciated – and we will look elsewhere at the factors which led to that – the issue became
urgent. The moss had been reserved to the monastery in the 1550s but included in the Lordship of Cardross,
formed in 1604. But between those two dates, the Erskines had feued Easter and Wester Polder and subsequent
to 1604 had also feued Blaircessnock and land in the vicinity of Flanders Hill. The late 18th century Laird
of Cardross, himself a lawyer, was quick to point out that the late 16th century feus could not have included
the associated areas of moss as they still belonged to the monastery at the time; they were not his ancestor’s
to feu. The moss had thus become part of the Cardross estate in 1604, said, along with the rest of the
formerly reserved rights. The moss was not a Commonty but his own, personal property. At the most, the
purchasers of the feus (and their heirs) might own the peat and some slight grazing rights. The all-important
clay was his and his alone … they were to have the dross whilst he kept the gold!
Even at the time these were recognised to be arguments more ingenious than convincing and they were not
accepted; but they are indicative of the intensity of the struggle over what had once been regarded as of
too little value to divide. The proprietor of Flanders Hill and the Pollabay area had a later feu; but there had
been extensive improvement of the moss around that area, undertaken on the clear understanding that it was
private property, so they were on a firmer footing. From Easter Polder to Myme there were other areas of
improvement and, by the end of the 18th century, there were extensive drains and clearance was
proceeding apace. The smaller proprietors had probably started to encroach systematically onto the moss
adjacent to their own lands some time between 1760 and 1780. The Blairdrummond estate was certainly
encouraging its tenants below Thornhill to do so. The Earl of Moray may have been a late starter but by
1800 or so had a big reclamation scheme underway which would eventually recover 200 acres of Polder
Moss. So, the surviving moss was surrounded by landowners who all wanted as much of a slice of the cake
as possible.
The procedures by which the mosses were divided is discussed elsewhere in this Report. The upshot was
two distinct types of division. The main body of East Flanders, so far as it lay in Port of Menteith parish, was
divided in proportion to the value of the claimant estates, giving the lion’s share to Cardross, a substantial
39
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
wedge of the southern margin to Easter Polder and a modest area around Flanders Hill and Pollabay to
Lochend, partly in recognition of the improvements wrought there. Map 15 shows the divisions of this part
of the moss.
The eastern part, Polder Moss and eastward to Frew, was divided in quite a different way, the final
agreement being reached only about 1820. Forrester of Easter Polder established that he had a property
right over much of the southern fringe, from Easter Polder to Mime, mainly on the basis of the improvements
already wrought there. The basis of the Earl of Moray’s claim is unclear but he certainly gained a substantial
chunk and eventually accomplished the clearance just mentioned. Agreement between the other proprietors,
particularly of Wester Boquhapple and Blairdrummond, divided the residue by a series of more or less
arbitrary lines, running in from their boundaries to a notional centre point.
3.2.3 Land ownership since the early 19th centur y
Following the divisions just discussed the moss has been property of the same legal standing as any other
land. Proprietors continued to encroach on the moss until, in face of rising costs and collapsing land values,
moss clearance schemes on a large scale were abandoned in the 1860s (discussed elsewhere in this
Report); the landowners had struggled hard to gain an asset which was now of no use for the intended
purpose.
Cardross continued to pass down through the Erskine family. The last Erskine laird, David, inherited as a
child in 1844 and it was following his death that Brigadier Sir Norman Orr-Ewing bought Cardross in
1922 96. A few farms have been sold since but most of the estate remains in the hands of the Orr Ewing
family. The Blairdrummond estate was broken up in 1912 but the farms of Littleward, Mill of Goodie and
Moss-side remained unsold as there was no bid; however, thereafter these farms were also sold, mainly to
the sitting tenants 97. Ruskie estate sold a substantial group of farms along the northern fringes of the moss
in about 1930 – again mainly to the sitting tenants. That remains the basis of the present ownership pattern;
the Cardross estate owns most of the core and the smaller farms on the periphery to the east each own
portions. But, anomalously, as an area of scientific and wildlife interest, the moss has regained ‘value’ and
parts are now owned and/or managed by bodies dedicated to its protection.
96
97
PRS, 1922, 211 and 212.
NMRS Ms 265/47; Third Statistical Account, 659.
40
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
4
AGRICULTURE AND MOSS CLEARANCE
4.1
Summar y
This chapter considers agriculture, moss clearance and related issues. During the 17th century, the farms
around Frew, which were probably fairly typical of those on the carselands, had modest herds of cattle and
sheep, made substantial quantities of milk and butter and grew considerable quantities of low-quality grains.
By the early 18th century, as roads improved and agricultural lime became available, productivity rose on
the carselands, better quality grains were grown, new rotations were introduced as precursors to more
revolutionary change about 1800. Rising land prices were the stimulus to attempts at moss clearance –
which is discussed in some detail.
Many methods of moss clearance were tried and each is discussed. The fastest was flotation but on the
western carselands water supplies were limited and low summer river flows meant flotation only worked in
winter. Where water was available and labour was the next limiting factor – as at Wester Polder and
Collymoon – moss colonies were established. But even so, progress was slow and by about 1860 the
returns on investment from clearance were diminishing and the attempts were abandoned. After the mid 19th
century agriculture had a diminishing impact on the moss and the story of local farming is more closely
related to the depressing story of agricultural downturn across Britain until the 1930s.
It will be seen that each phase of agriculture had different implications for the moss – most dramatically,
it was the highly unusual combination of high land values and low wages which created the ‘clearance’
boom during the century from about 1760. By the 1860s, as land values fell and wages rose, moss
clearance was abandoned; farmers and proprietors could gain better returns by tile drainage and
mechanisation – and from sport-shooting for grouse etc.
Here and there, throughout this Chapter, I will refer to the ‘first record’ of some practice, settlement etc; this
does not mean that it did not happen or exist earlier. The flow of surviving documents increases steadily from
a trickle in the 15th century to a pretty steady stream in the 17th; surviving records become more likely with
time until the mid 19th century or so; thereafter, statistical and general information dominates until the very
recent past when personal memory and experience take over.
4.2
Farming in Menteith to the early 18th centur y
Any firm statements about the specifics of farming in Menteith prior to the 16th century must await further
study of the documentary, palinological and other evidence. High rainfall, proximity to the highlands, poor
communications and other general factors, would tend to favour livestock over arable agriculture. On the
other hand, like other great medieval lordships, the Earldom of Menteith would have wanted as big a range
of produce from its lands as possible and perhaps only Kippen was better suited to arable crops than was
(say) Frew; oats and hay meadows are on record at Frew by the 1430s (page ?? above), the earliest direct
evidence found for the area. Probably every farm in medieval Scotland aimed to be self sufficient, at least,
in grains.
41
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
There is a tradition, reported by Hutchison98 that medieval Menteith was famous for cheese. The very slight
16th century evidence supports the importance of pastoralism as about 1567 the lands of Blairhoyle were
divided into three ‘bowgangs’ pertaining to the Earl of Menteith. Bowgangs were primarily dairy farms
where the landlord provided the cattle and the stockmen accounted for them at the end of the year.
Elsewhere in the vicinity the Earl had several Mains farms (farmed directly for provisions for his own
household) and also a stock of brood mares at Port of Menteith 99.
The highland margins and the Menteith carselands continued to produce significant quantities of cheese
in the 17th century. Some turned up in Stirling 100. And many of the farms of the Frew area for which
17th century testaments were noted 101 had to pay cheese and butter as part of their teind duties [tithes];
Janet Harvie, who had 6 milk cows when she died in October 1613, owed 30 stone of cheese and
3 stone of salt butter and Barbara Don, who had 8 new calved cows when she died in May 1618, owed
15 stone cheese and salt butter to the value of £4 10s Scots. This is quite serious production, the 30 stone
of cheese might be as much as 0.25 tonnes, it was worth as much as 3 cows and we can only assume
that she also made cheese for sale.
Prior to the late 18th, century, from the end of harvest until seed time the following spring, many cattle could
graze on stubbles, between fields etc. But in unenclosed country, from April to September, measures had to
be taken to keep the livestock off the arable. One strategy was herding – usually by children and young
people. Another strategy, for which the direct evidence comes from the late 18th or even early 19th century
but can probably be extrapolated back, involved taking the stock to areas well away from crops such as
uplands and muirs. Many witnesses agree that livestock (mainly young cattle) pastured on the mosses, at
least in winter and spring. Meadows beside the rivers appear on the Estate Plans and meadows at Wards
of Goodie are on record as early as 1627 102. Meadows provided hay as well as grazing and James
Steward said that the tenant of Moss-side sent his cattle to the moss to save his pasture on the banks of the
Goodie 103. But Stewart goes on to mention the third option, that since stock summered on the moss were
thought to do badly he preferred to take or send them to ‘the highlands’ for the summer. Margaret Graham’s
uncle’s milk cattle pastured in summer on the low ground (perhaps around the 1770s) but his dry cows were
sent to the highlands to be summered 104. Of course, ‘the highlands’ may have been very close, Callander,
Aberfoyle, even the hills above Port of Menteith; this sort of system optimised use of the summer grass there
and gave the ‘highlanders’ a cash income without having to invest capital in livestock which they could not
feed in winter. The milk cattle grazed close to home but not on the moss where they could become stuck
and the pasture was too poor for them; this meant that they had to be herded. It is not clear how far they
were housed or fed hay in the winter.
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
Hutchison, 1899, p 10.
Sanderson, 1982, p 23.
eg SCA B66/16/16 9 Aug 1678, a ‘great quantity’ of cheese from Menteith; SCA B66/16/16, 27 Aug 1680,
dispute about highland cheese; SCA B66/9/11 f 93, contract to supply highland cheese, 1698.
Testaments cited are all noted in a footnote under Testaments in the Chapter 1; Sources.
NAS, CC6/12/2 f 127v contract between John Dick and others, discussed under High Moss Pow etc.
CS235/H/22/1, State of the Process, Pursuer’s Proof, p 27.
Ibid, p 14.
42
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Testaments suggest that in the 17th century sheep were widespread though numbers were small; Elspeth
Robertson had 12 sheep when she died in February 1620 whilst Barbara Don (who died in spring) had
20 ewes, 10 hoggs (female yearlings) and 10 lambs, the biggest single list of sheep; the absence of wedders
[wethers or castrated males] from the lists suggests that they must have been sold rather than fattened.
Ramsay, writing of Menteith in the 18th century, notes that a lot of livestock were kept on the extensive
outfields and muirs of Menteith ‘but being housed all night in winter and starved in summer, these were soft
and stunted in their growth’. They did, however, produce a lot of dung 105. So early as the 1740s Stirling
of Keir had forbidden his carse tenants to keep sheep and by the 1760s, sheep were abandoned on the
carselands as the tenants realised that they lost more by their taking the spring grass than they gained by
their wool and dung. In consequence, Ramsay thought, there was more and better grass for the milk
cows 106. The observation is an interesting comment on the continuing primary importance of dairying.
But arable was important. The earliest direct evidence of grain production on a farm unequivocally within
the area of interest is for 1542 when the tenants of Wards of Goodie were obliged to use the mill of
Cessintullie to grind their grains 107. All the testaments examined show that the grains were worth more than
the livestock and every farm (even in the least promising upland terrain) would aim to be at least self sufficient
in oats and barley. To the east of Stirling, a fertile zone had been established by the early 17th century,
fringing the tidal river, dependent on ship-born lime to support a sophisticated rotation on substantial
individual holdings, which were protected by sea walls 108.
The present research supports Ramsay’s contention that west of Stirling farming was much less advanced and
retained two characteristic features of traditional agriculture until well into the 18th century, namely an infieldoutfield system and runrig. Infield-outfield, at its simplest, involves putting all the available manure on the
same small part of the potential arable (the infield) every year; the rest of the arable (the outfield) got no
manure but a part was ploughed and sown repeatedly for several years until its fertility was exhausted when
activity was moved to a new part of the outfield. So all the infield was cropped every year but most of the
outfield was not under crops, being used only to provide a little grazing until its fertility recovered. But these
systems were less static than is sometimes thought and so early as 1680 some of the outfield of
MacKeanston [NN687001 – not on the carse but well within the zone of influence] had been converted
to ‘red land’ or infield 109.
Runrig means that the lands of the tenants were interspersed one with another rather than tenants having
compacted, distinct holdings – though the rotation of runrig strips had probably been abandoned well before
the 17th century, even in Menteith.
105
Ramsay II, p 200–1.
Ramsay II, p 250–1.
107
RMS III, 2851, 5 Dec 1542.
108
Ramsay II, 193; Harrison, 1997.
109
NAS CC6/12/5 f 48v–49v, disposition by Paul Dog to Mr Robert Moir.
106
43
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Ramsay says that runrig was abolished in Menteith about the mid 18th century and ‘the townships divided
so that every tenant had his farm separate from the rest’; these commonly consisted of about 50 or 60 acres;
the old infield was only gradually increased in area 110. And Robertson concurs, noting that runrig was
general until about the 1740s and noting in shocked tones that
I have seen outfield carse within these twenty years, in some of the best parts of Monteith.
The outfield lying farthest from the townships, were taithed or dunged, by confining their
cattle on folds at least overnight, during Summer or Autumn, upon that particular spot of the
farm, generally the ninth part of the whole, which was to be ploughed next spring 111.
Ramsay says black and grey oats were the main crops in Menteith prior to improvements and only a modest
quantity of rough bere [4- or 6-rowed barley] was grown, rather than 2-rowed barley (the sort grown today)
and there were very few peas or beans in Menteith even in the mid 18th century when everyone knew their
usefulness; this reduced the size and strength of the horses for which pease straw later became an important
feed. If wheat was grown it was a poor, red-bearded kind and Ramsay implies that even that was confined
to Airthrey 112.
Black and grey oats were very much crops of poor, acid ground (white oats needed more nutrients, less
acidity and better drainage). And the testaments confirm this picture. William Taylor, who died at Frew in
1596, had 5 bolls of small grey oats (that might be about 0.25 tonnes). Janet Harvie had sowed 60 bolls
of oats from which a three-fold return was expected and only 3 bolls bear, expected to yield four-fold. Very
wide ratios of oats to bear, ratios of over 10:1, characterise some of the poorest agricultural areas (Harrison,
1997). Elspeth Robertson had 90 bolls of black oats in the barnyard and only 6 bolls of bear. Barbara
Don’s inventory lightens this picture slightly as she had sown 36 bolls oats (probably grey oats) but a further
4 bolls of white oats and 1 boll of beans. But the high ratio of oats to bere is confirmed with Janet Robertson,
who died in 1630 and had 180 bolls oats and 8 of bear, Grissell Leckie who had sown 20 bolls oats and
2 of bear, Agnes Don who had 30 bolls black oats, 4 bolls white oats and 2 bolls bear. James Harvie,
who died in 1676, had 80 bolls black oats, 12 of white and 8 of bear, which is a rather rosier picture
than most others. Black and grey oats are also much more commonly mentioned than white in the small debt
claims for the area in the early part of the 17th century 113.
But in spite of the predominance of poor varieties and low yields, the total quantities of crops grown and
the rents payable show that some of these were quite substantial holdings. Rents of £20 Scots per year were
not unknown above Falkirk in the 17th century 114. But Janet Harvie owed rent, teind and kane worth £385
for crop 1613 at the time of her death. Elspeth Robertson owed £137 (and had probably already paid
part). Barbara Don owed £428 rent, teind and kane and others owed comparable sums. Several of these
tenants had 4 or more horses and Janet Robertson had 6 adult horses as well as 2 foals. These were capital
assets and it is significant that only horses (no oxen) are recorded as draft animals.
110
Ramsay II, p 207.
Robertson, 1794, p 22.
112
Ramsay II, p 196; ibid 197; ibid 199.
113
NAS RH11/54/1 Court Book of the Stewartry of Menteith 1629–36.
114
Harrison, 1997.
111
44
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
And as Ramsay suggests, the arable and livestock components were not separate. A lot of livestock could
be kept on the extensive outfields and muirs; he thought they were poorly fed and stunted but they produced
a lot of dung 115. And we might note, with a 21st century perspective, that if that dung was the produce of
grazing ‘muirs’, along roadsides and balks between fields, on upland grazings or on the moss itself, then
that was a genuine input to the arable system and not a mere stirring of nutrients already on the ground.
Of course, the area was not homogeneous and the inter-relations of its parts would require a lot more work
to be fully understood. Fertility and drainage must have differed over the carse. Communications would have
favoured some areas rather than others. And each part of the carse must have interacted with the surrounding
dryfield ground in specific ways. Robertson points out that the ridge from Rednock to Blairdrummond
exemplified the best sort of loamy soil of Southern Perthshire which ‘has been long in tillage’ 116 and its
fertility remains obvious today. There is little information about how Boquhapple, Ruskie and Rednock
interacted with the carse and the moss to their south. But oddly enough, about 1750 the occupants of
Blaircessnock and of Milton of Cardross were the only tenants of the Cardross ridge area who made any
use of the moss by cutting their peats and, in the case of the Milton tenant, a little grazing.
The picture of substantial overall production is increased by records such as the Rentals of the Cardross
estate. The earliest rental is for 1646 117 and gives only money values for the feu duties – which do not
relate directly to the real value at the time. The next, from 1702 is more useful 118. Rent was paid in the form
of [oat]meal, bere meal, butter, cheese, straw and money. The grain is expressed as chalders [ch – very
roughly a tonne], bolls [b – 15 per chalder]; money is in £ Scots and £12 Scots equalled £1 Sterling at
this time. The following are the farm closest to the moss:
Meal
bere
butter
cheese
straw
money
Wm McGibbon, Mains of C
2ch 2b
17b
2
40
45
£248 13 04
Geo Morrison, Ballengrew
12b
2b
0
0
0
£21 16 08
Alex Buchanan, Ballengrew
12b
2b
0
0
0
£25
Total for Cardross
15ch 3b
43b
2
40
45
£691 02
3ch 3b
1
0
0
£362
Rental of the lands of Eister Garden
Totals
4ch 8b
Other farms, such as Wards of Goodie, Easter and Wester Polder, had been feued by this time and so pay
only nominal sums. Mains of Cardross, partly a carse farm, pays more grain and more cash than any other
farm on the Cardross estate – and pays all the 40 stone of cheese and the 45 threave of straw payable.
These three units (of a total of 23) pay around 20% of the meal, 50% of the bere and 43% of the cash.
Although Ballangrew was two distinct farms, others such as Arnclerich, Hilton and Lochanwan were joint
tenancies with several tenants sharing the rent (and usually some of the assets) equally between them ie these
were still run-rig holdings in 1702.
115
Ramsay II, 200–1.
Robertson, 1794, 18–19.
117
Reprinted in Fraser, 1880, II item 88.
118
NAS GD15/27 Rental of the Estate of Cardross, 1702.
116
45
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The small estate of Wester Polder yielded a rental dated 1732; there were three tenants and they were to pay
£398 Scots money and 42 bolls 3 firlots meal, 12 hens, 14 pounds of butter and the sowing of 7 lippies of
lintseed [a lippy might have weighted very roughly a Kg], though they seem to have had individual tenancies 119.
So, the carselands around the moss were certainly being farmed and producing crops by the early
17th century – and probably long before. The farms of the carse were substantial though less well capitalised
and smaller than their counterparts fringing the tidal Forth; the main crops, grey and black oats, did not
command good prices, the quantities of bere barley grown must have been mainly used for home brewing
and other domestic use. Livestock rearing was important and that depended partly on grazing on the mosses
though other grazings were also important; the meadows and pastures beside the streams were probably
of particular importance, though some were boggy and liable to flooding. Diary products were important.
Their neighbours of the dryfield farms shared access to the moss for fuel – though some of them had to pay
for this access. Perhaps some of those dryfield farms (on the south-facing ridge from Rednock to
Blairdrummond where sandy soil gave good drainage) were as productive as the carse. But generally these
farms were more acid, wetter and poorer. The profit of one third of Calziemuck in 1533 was given as the
sowing of 20 bolls oats, to give only a two-fold return, the sowing of 1 boll bere, to give a three fold return
and 14 pasture soums with similar figures given for Lenniston. Oats was valued at 26s 8d the boll, bere at
40s and soums at 2s each 120. [A soum is the land required to graze an agreed number of cattle or their
equivalent in sheep.] When James Graham died at Calziemuck in 1662 he had 3 horses, 6 cows, 7 other
cattle and 24 bolls of black oats; his debts exceeded his assets. Throughout the area, joint tenancies, runrig and an infield-outfield system must have been widespread throughout the 17th century; but there were
probably some individual holdings, even in the 16th century.
The faster running streams provided motive power for grain mills; Ruskie Mill is attested from 1507, the grain
mill of Wester Boquhapple from 1536, Mill of Cessintullie from 1542 and Cardross Mill from 1556 121.
My earliest note of Mill of Goodie, which is in a more difficult situation, is only from 1683 122.
4.3
Early signs of change
During the later 18th and early 19th century a series of changes in farming organisation, methods and
technology occurred which came to be know as the ‘Agricultural Revolution’. The changes were, indeed, very
substantial and productivity greatly increased; but it is now well recognised that the participants tended to
exaggerate their achievements, both by darkening the image of what went before and lightening that of what
followed. In particular, in regard to the present study, the changes of the late 18th century were prefigured half
a century and more earlier. A perfect example is to hand. In 1794 Roberson notes that runrig and infieldoutfield had been general except in the vicinity of the towns, at least in the recent past – but we have just seen
that many individual tenancies were well established at Cardross by 1702 (above). It was just one of the
organisational changes which often preceded the more purely technical changes of the century’s end.
119
SCA SB1/11/4/2, Inventory of the lands, means and effects of Walter Stirling, 1733.
RMS V, 627, 2 Nov 1583.
121
RMS II, number 3142, 23 Oct 1507; RMS III 1548, 16 Feb 1535–6; RMS III 2851, 5 Dec 1542; RMS IV 1027.
122
CC6/12/5 part 2 folio 37v to 38r; tack by Laird Norie to Wm Chalmers, James Spittal and James Law.
120
46
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
But Ramsay is broadly right when he says ‘but the circumstance which of all others contributed most to the
improvement of this country, was the practicability of procuring lime to any extent.’ Lime had been available
in the Stirling area from two main sources for centuries prior to 1700; either by ship from Fife or by road
from the middle reaches of the Bannockburn. Its agricultural use along the tidal Forth in the 17th century has
already been noted 123. Ramsay reports the use of lime at Gartur (West Flanders) about 1700 as the ‘first’
use west of Stirling; he reports with amusement that the landlord gave the tenant some lime and had to bring
someone from Campsie to demonstrate how to burn and break it 124. The archival evidence confirms
tentative use of lime in the 1690s. A lease at Easter Mye (Buchlyvie, NS584950) in 1696 states that the
previous tenant has put 5 chalders of lime on the land the previous year, another 5 were to be used this
year and 2 yearly thereafter, so long as it was found to be useful 125. It is difficult to know the exact amounts
involved here but somewhat under a tonne per chalder would not be too far wrong; regrettably, there is no
indication of the source. About the same time, a landlord agreed to supply two boatloads of lime to Inchmoy,
Port of Menteith 126. And thereafter, documented instances of lime use in the western carselands multiply.
When James Thomson, who died at Bottom of Sauchie (probably now under the waters of North Third
Reservoir on the Bannock Burn) in 1737 he was owed £40 Scots for lime by John and James Marjoriebanks
in Wards of Goodie and Boquhapple respectively 127.
Again, Ramsay had rightly identified a big barrier to earlier use of lime in Menteith as transport costs.
As the ‘boat load’ of lime supplied to Inchmoy suggests, the rivers (including the Goodie) might be used
to distribute lime. They were certainly being used to transport other goods throughout the 17th century and
beyond. But probably the roads were more important. The details have still not been fully worked out but an
energetic road programme, in which bridge building was particularly important, was carried on in
Stirlingshire in the period from the 1660s–1680s. Bridges were constructed at Gargunnock, Leckie and so
right to Dumbarton. There was a string of potential lime quarries along the northern face of the TouchCampsie Hills 128. A source at Balgair (Kippen) was in production by 1707, there was lime about Gartmore
and also at Aberfoyle and both were later exploited 129.
By the 1720s local landlords were incorporating a requirement to use lime into leases as a matter of course
and a particularly interesting example is provided by a lease to Thomas and James Marjoriebanks in Wester
Boquhapple, whose purchase of lime in 1737 was noted above. Their 1716 lease allowed a rent rebate
for the first three years to pay for lime to be laid on the land but it also required them to pay, as part of their
rent, 20 bolls of white corn oatmeal and 12 bolls bere, half of the grain to be grown on the carse and half
on the dryfield 130. Black oats was clearly already on the retreat – and the agent of change was lime.
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
Harrison, 1993; Harrison, 1997.
Ramsay, II, 206–7.
NAS, SC67/49/2 p 106, tack to James Yule.
SCA, PD PD86/71.
cited Harrison, 1993, 87.
Mitchell, 1995.
Chrystal, 1903, p 125; Mitchell, 485; Robertson, 1794, p 24.
NAS CC6/12/8 p 42 tack to Thomas Marjoriebanks in Wester Boquhapple as administrator for James Marjoriebanks,
his eldest son.
47
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The first surviving regular batch of leases for the Cardross estate shows that by the 1740s liming was in use
there; for example, Andrew Ure was obliged to lay on 2 chalders of lime every year at Collymoon 131. And
the following year, Dr Stirling the proprietor of Wester Polder, also gave a rent allowance for buying lime
the first few years of a new lease and required continual liming thereafter 132. Significantly, too, both these
and many other leases for the area are for 19 years and are individual tenancies; the spread of longer
leases was an essential if tenants were to invest in long-term change.
Another important stimulus to change was the increase in land values after 1745. Ramsay relates this to an
improvement in the Perthshire roads from about 1747 as well as to wider, legal changes. Of course, we
might also note that this corresponded with a rising Scots population and the first phase of urbanisation.
Demand was increasing and stimulating production. Ramsay thought that lime use doubled after 1760 133.
But more sophisticated rotations were also important. Rye grass and clover mixtures were being grown in
Menteith by 1735 and spread rapidly – the clover, requiring lime, would further enhance soil fertility as
legumes had done on the eastern carselands for a century or more. Turnips, for winter stock feed, were being
raised near Blairdrummond by 1751 or 175 134. The new rotations meant not just greater production on the
infield but accelerated the process of superseding infield-outfield systems; with the new rotations, fertility
could be maintained throughout the cycle – though this was not to happen immediately. The emphasis was
more and more in arable production – though the livestock continued to be vitally important, not least for
their capacity to generate dung.
A lease at Wester Polder, current from 1769, mentions flotation of peat and liming and also required the
tenant to sow rye grass and clover mixtures on any land which had been cropped for three years 135.
Significantly, too, this lease allowed the landlord to ‘improve’ the moss if he wished. But change was neither
smooth nor linear. So late as 1762 a lease of the farm of Offers [NS 717954] begins very progressively
with a demand that the tenant is to use summer fallowing, is to limit the total grain crop and is to apply
10 chalders of lime yearly; but he was still to sow the best ground with one third white oats, one third bear
barley and one third black oats 136.
It was against that background of intermittent and erratic change that systematic moss clearance started.
High land values and high rents, increasing demand and (crucially) an increasing body of cheap labour,
the result of increasing population combined with land hunger as small tenants were squeezed out by the
creation of larger farms.
131
132
133
134
135
136
NAS GD15/359 Tack by Mr John Erskine of Carnock to Andrew Ure.
NAS SC67/49/21 p 163–4.
Ramsay p 252–3.
Ramsay II, 229 and 231.
NAS SC44/59/2 pp 200–202, tack by Dr Walter Stirling to William Miller.
NAS CC6/12/19 f 55 Tack by David Graham to Andrew Wingate.
48
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
4.4
Moss clearance c.1750–c.1860
It was shown above (Mythic Morass, Early Evidence of Clearance) that peat clearance was not new in the
mid 18th century. But much of the early clearance was almost incidental to other activities such as peat
cutting. Systematic clearance would depend on the technologies of clearance and new technologies for
farming the reclaimed land; there also needed to be a demand for increased grain production by accessible
markets. Together, these meant high land values, high rents and, during the period under review here, cheap
labour. It was a specific technology of clearance, the great wheel, which made Lord Kame’s scheme so
famous – though many of his neighbours and contemporaries questioned whether the huge expense was
justified. Elsewhere on the carselands, other technologies of clearance were used and sometimes other
technologies of farming the reclaimed land, too. This review will be confined to the main methods reported
from East Flanders, which I will call, ‘clayed moss’, ‘spreadfield and moss manure’ and flotation 137.
4.4.1 Clayed moss
This method is of particular interest as it does not seem to have been described by any modern historian and
it was the first method to be applied on East Flanders Moss. It was the method applied to those areas labelled
as Grahame’s Improvements on Map 15 and as Clayed Moss on Map 16. In 1749 Hew Graeme of
Arngomery, a local man who was also an Edinburgh lawyer, bought two parcels of land on the fringes of East
Flanders moss, one lot adjacent to Flanders Hill and the other between Easter Polder and Mime, including the
moss of Littleward 138. Both were very unusual agreements. At Blaircessnock Graeme was to continue to make
a substantial annual payment and the whole agreement was tied to an earlier, un-located arrangement dated
1749 regarding moss improvements. A lease of Wards of Goodie to John McKerchar noted that the landlord
was obliged to make 10 acres of the ground available to Graeme – though it is not clear that he ever claimed
it 139. Graeme also bought Littleward and also the mosses of Littleward and of Mime ‘with the ground lying
under the said moss’. In the event, by the mid 1750s, Graeme had run out of money and left Scotland and
the lands reverted to the vendors. It is what had happened meanwhile which is of interest.
He had purchased with the specific intention of ‘improvement’. For his work at Pollabay there is little detail
beyond the fact that the land was recognised as property in the 1790s by virtue of the improvements he
had wrought almost 50 years before. The Division of Commonty cases provide both general comments on
his efforts and specific recollections. In general, it was noted, at the Polder site Graeme worked on the high
or unbroken moss rather than the spreadfield, covering it with clay and working on a ‘large scale’ the effects
being still visible in the 1810s; it was a plan no longer followed as it was too expensive, the fuel could not
be used and the carse clay itself, the most productive of soils, was still not available 140. The clayed moss
was coloured green on the original plans and was mainly now used for pasture for cattle and horses.
137
There are many descriptions of other methods of which Caddel’s description of Kames’s scheme is the best known.
Fenton (1986) discusses ‘Paring and Burning’. It should be noted that practical schemes always combined various methods
and I would be the first to admit that my division is, in many ways, artificial.
138
NAS SC44/59/1 p 246 Articles of Agreement John Campbell and Hugh Graham, registered 8 Sept 1756:
NAS, CS21/Division of Moss Flanders/22/12/1798, Inventory of Writs produced for David Forester.
139
NRAS 1468/22 Tack of Ward of Goodie, 1754.
140
NAS, GD24/1/801a/1 printed Petition by John Paterson et al., Feb 1816 to the Lords of Council.
49
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
But it is the very specific comments of the older witnesses which bring Graeme’s efforts to life. William Chrystal,
for example, was around 74 years old and recalled Graeme overseeing work, cutting drains, ‘ploughing
and burning, spreading ashes and clay upon the high moss amongst the heath’ and noted that the effects
of the work were still visible. Graeme’s men worked with breast ploughs, wrought by men where neither
horses nor cattle could go on the moss but also used ordinary ploughs, drawn by oxen and he also used a
great many wheelbarrows for carrying the clay and ashes and for levelling, he said. Graeme had also cut
a ditch on the line marked N-L on the plan to drain part of the moss and Chrystal could recall kale and
potatoes growing near it; after Graeme left, Forrester of Polder rented the land out for grazing. Hugh Mitchell
was around 81 years old when he gave his evidence and recalled that Graeme had several men working
there, sometimes more and sometimes fewer ‘and did not always pay them properly’; he, too recalled the
men using breast ploughs since the moss ‘would not bear oxen’, and they were
burning moss and carrying clay, and spread it upon it; the place was opposite to but west
from the house of Littleward and he [Graeme] at the same time had a similar work on the
moss of Myme and it was thought his intention was to go on till the two met; but Mr Graeme
disappeared and the work ceased.
John Graham, was about 76 and could recall Graeme working on the moss when he himself was about
16 years old. The improvements involved
tirring the surface of the moss, burning it in heaps, and spreading the ashes with clay, which was
brought to cover the surface; that the ground was then ploughed with what was called breast
ploughs, and continued cropping for about 4 or 5 years, when it was laid down to pasture.
It was pasture when he himself became tenant of parts of Mime and Littleward a few years later 141.
Margaret Thomson said that about 1770 she and her husband were tenants at Littleward and she recalled
the Clay Roads, which then acted as marches. And, she continued, their cattle pastured on a part of the
moss called Little Holland, which had been improved by someone she thought was called Robertson.
Nobody else referred to Robertson nor to Little Holland. But her comment is a reminder that others may have
used the clayed moss method 142.
In addition to this vivid personal testimony there are several later accounts of the method and comments on
it. Ramsay describes a rather similar process carried out by Graham of Meiklewood [who owned land on
the southern edge of Kincardine moss, opposite his own lands in Gargunnock] which he called ‘golling’ 143
and which he required his tenants to employ, though he seems to have worked on the moss edges rather
than the high moss. The local press, noting the completion of the clearance of Lord Moray’s part of the
eastern extremity of East Flanders and Polder Moss by flotation (see below), takes a retrospective glance at
‘clayed moss’ as a method used in the past:
141
NAS GD24/1/808A/2, State of the Conjoined Process of Division of Commonty for William Chrystal, Hugh Mitchell
and John Graham.
142
NAS CS235/H/22/1, Printed State of the Process Feb 6 1813 for Margaret Thomson.
143
Ramsay II, p 237.
50
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
About 80 years ago [ie in about 1750] a plan was put in practice of covering the surface
of the moss with clay six inches deep and on which was reared various sorts of crop,
particularly white clover, which was very scarce at that time … it was ploughed by oxen,
shod with broad pieces of wood to prevent them from sinking, which precaution is still
followed in the shoeing of horses for the first ploughing of the moss land. The undertaking
was superseded by the present improved method of cultivation 144.
Graeme’s scheme depended on paid labour – even if the wages were sometimes in arrears – as did the
Earl of Moray’s flotation scheme, to be discussed shortly. Most other methods, at least until the very closing
phases of moss clearance towards the mid 19th century, depended on tenant labour – or, at least, on tenants
meeting the costs of labour. And it should also be noted that, just as Graeme began his schemes, local
proprietors began to consider the possibility that the moss might be divided. Graeme, a lawyer, had realised
that a crucial legal factor was to have ownership of the whole depth, down to the clay. It is clear from the
descriptions that it combined peat cutting with paring and burning to some degree – the moss was burned
to release the nutrients. And in that sense, like all the other methods, it was a mixture of techniques.
4.4.2 Spreadfield and moss-manure
This method was widespread and is, perhaps, a logical development of traditional peat cutting. Those who
thought that Lord Kames was wasting money and a valuable resource, tended to favour some variant of this
method. Ramsay, for example, writes ‘Every summer … large quantities of the refuse of peat were led out
to the adjacent spreadfield and burnt.’ He thought that an older practice had been to rake the moss into
heaps and burn it down to the clay but from about the mid 18th century, he continues, the peat was laid in
furrows on the field, prior to burning. Big crops followed and many hundreds of acres had been recovered
in this way 145. Robertson notes that moss [ie peat] was a better manure than generally thought and the
tenants at Ochtertyre ‘cast it on their leys’, elsewhere it was mixed with dung and composted before
spreading whilst, by a strange irony, people at Culross were taking the moss floated down the Forth and
using it to make compost with straw and dung. On the other hand, it was particularly beneficial to sandy
soils where it helped water retention 146. Garnett noted Lord Kames’s efforts at reclamation but only to deride
them as a waste of the moss as a potentially valuable fertiliser 147.
The Polder Moss case provides a general description of the relationship of peat cuttings, moss and spreadfield:
Page 8. People have cut peat in such mosses since time immemorial, regardless of whether
their lands lie contiguous; ‘the upper stratum of the moss being unfit even for fuel is thrown
aside, not back upon what is called the high moss, which would increase the labour of next
year, but outwards towards the arable land and into the cavity from which the peat of the
preceding year was taken. When this refuse subsides, it forms a body of moss about half
144
Stirling Journal, 16 Sept 1830, p 1c, Thornhill.
Ramsay II, 193–4.
146
Robertson, 1794, 31–2.
147
Garnett, 1811, p 159.
145
51
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
the thickness of the other, and is called low moss or Spreadfield from being used to dry the
peat. Ditches usually run across the Spreadfield for the purpose of draining it and for letting
off the stagnant water from the peat holes or rooms as they are called, at the margin of the
high moss. Your lordship will observe the Spreadfield marked upon the map and separated
from the high moss by the irregular line, along which are denoted the peat rooms … when
a bad stratum of peat occurs, the regular mode of working is relinquished and peat rooms
are irregularly established in the centre of the moss, as at the letter N.
Page 9 The pursuer, beside cutting peats etc (as above) and pasturage etc, have been ‘for
some years in the practice of improving the surface of certain parts of the spread field next
their arable land, as also of removing it by paring and burning; and more recently, in
imitation of the operation of the respondent on the Moss of Blairdrummond, by floating it
down the different drains and burns into the water of Goody and Forth, in order to obtain
possession of the clay soil below it for purposes of cultivation’ 148.
The edge of the moss was known as the ‘bink’ and the ditches as ‘goats’ and their primary importance as
drains is repeatedly emphasised 149. Tenants take fuel with [the owner’s] permission,
In doing this the upper stratum of moss is dug and thrown towards the arable and solid land,
so as to lay bare the surface of the more solid moss which is dug and carried off to be used
as fuel. Every succeeding year the operation is repeated. The surface moss is cast towards
the arable land, upon the rubbish or surface moss of the preceding year, that the peat earth
or lower moss may be obtained. The refuse or surface moss having subsided, is used in
succeeding years for the purpose of spreading out the fresh peats to be dried, and hence
it is called the spread-field, which is thus itself a kind of moss, of about half the depth of the
original moss. It is upon the Spreadfield that the principal efforts of improvement have been
made. Sometimes the surface is cultivated. … where running water can be obtained, the
moss is cast into the stream, that it may be carried down into the Forth, whereby the stratum
of fertile clay is laid open for improvements.
And, this document goes on to cite a document from as early as 1739 which reserved right to cut peat
‘for manure’ from the lands of Moss-side to the tenants of Boquhapple and Rottenrow, on the higher ground.
And what all these quotations make clear is that this process had gone on for a long time and continued to
the present time, moss being floated off only if water was available. The older, default process, was to create
spreadfield and ‘improve’ it, perhaps by paring and burning (Fenton and above) or by ploughing the
decomposed moss into the clay, with lime etc. Although, by the 1780s, flotation was coming into use on
the Cardross estate the objective was not to remove every scrap of peat. A series of tacks of around 1786
148
149
NAS GD24/1/808A/3, Answers for George Home Drummond to the Petition etc 11 April 1816.
NAS GD24/1/803A/1, Printed Memorial for George Home Drummond to Court of Session, April 1817. And the
process is described again in GD24/1/801a/1 printed Petition by John Paterson, Robert Paterson et al., 20 Feb 1816
(p 2).
52
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
promised a bounty to tenants who cleared ‘3 Scots acres of moss or spreadfield and have made it into
arable by leaving not more than 5 inches of moss above the clay’ 150. Later tacks are less specific but this
was probably as near to total clearance as was either practical or desirable. The residual peat was then
worked into the clay, improving its texture and moisture retention.
Graham gives a very detailed description of the manual flotation method but recognises that, even when a
lot of moss has been floated away in a very elaborate system of ditches:
A thin stratum of nine or twelve inches is left above the clay, consisting partly of black peat
earth, and partly of the remains of wood. This, in the dry season (generally in the month of
August), is burnt, and contributes to the fertilization of the newly acquired soil. The roots of
the oaks, which still stick fast in the clay, are dug out or burnt, … the soil thus recovered is
henceforth a rich arable carse 151.
This process was carried out by the tenants or their farm workers. They were not paid but the use of bounties
was probably widespread – Cardross also had penalties for failure to clear moss. Ramsay notes that it
involved the tenants in about 3 weeks work each year and they reckoned to gain ‘a ridge 12 or 15 feet
wide’ along a third part of their moss front, except in ‘troublesome times’ when little or no progress could
be made 152. The relationship with traditional peat cutting for fuel is well seen on Map 16 in the area of
Littleward where the ‘moss rooms’ leased to people from south of the Forth are being worked, creating
spreadfield but with areas of improved arable to the south.
4.4.3 Flotation
Lord Kames and his wheel excited the imagination and comment of his contemporaries – though not always
their admiration. Garnett (above) and many others thought that it wasted the peat. It was undoubtedly very
expensive. And to justify the capital cost it required a large labour force who, even if they were not paid,
were certainly not otherwise very productive as their holdings were initially so small and they expended a
lot of time clearing the peat. In fact, flotation had been used before Kames. It was probably in use at Throsk
in the late 17th century and was being employed in Kippen parish about 1730 where two proprietors
cooperated to utilise a tributary of the Forth 153. An arbitrated agreement to divide a moss dated 1756
between the proprietors of Kep and Killorn, suggests that the proprietors of Kippen, with its relatively good
water supplies, were quick to realise the potential of flotation 154.
The wheel method could only be applied where there was an adequate water supply and the nearest
approach at East Flanders was the Earl of Moray’s scheme, covering the area of the farms of Murdieston,
the Frews and Powblack, amongst others (see below, this section). In September 1830 the local press
reported the completion of the scheme:
150
NRAS 1468/47 tacks Over Mains, Faraway etc.
Graham, 1812, 236–7.
152
Ramsay II, 194–5.
153
Harrison, 2003; Graham, 1812, 235.
154
NAS CC6/12/13, pp 392–398, submission and decreet arbitral, Kep and Killorn.
151
53
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The moss in the vicinity of Thornhill, Monteith [sic], has of late years undergone considerable
diminution. About 20 years ago the Earl of Moray raised an embankment of three miles in
length to convey water from the dryfield to the level of the moss and which was carried over
the river Guidie [sic] by a wooden trough or what is well known by the name of ‘trows’.
During the winter season between 20 and 30 men were daily employed in putting away
the moss; and in spring of last year the Earl had it all cleared from his estate in that quarter.
There are now about 200 acres of excellent arable land converted from what was formerly
covered with heath 155.
But, since the method was fast and was here successfully applied, there is now no moss left in these areas.
It will be noticed, of course, that this was again being accomplished by paid workers. Further west, at Cardross,
as the Memorialist of 1834 notes:
All the moss on the Estate of Cardross must be cleared gradually and on a limited scale on
account of the small supply of Water and also from the smallness of the River which is only
capable of floating peat during the winter months. The latter circumstance has always
prevented me erecting any wheel or machinery for obtaining a greater supply of water 156.
This restriction on water supply was clearly a crucial difference and greatly influenced the ways in which the
moss was cleared, the speed with which it was cleared and hence, all importantly, its survival, a point which
we will return to later. People used a range of methods for collecting and conducting water to where it was
required. The newspaper report just cited notes that other proprietors in the area were using similar process
but that much clearance was:
carried on by the aid of rain water gathered on more than 250 acres and which is safely
secured in dams. The surface of the moss is divided into ridges 36 yards long and 12 feet
wide; and between each of these ditches from two to three feet in depth cast out and filled
with water. The moss is then cut into large masses on each side of these ditches; and as
they float down the stream the workmen divide them into smaller pieces, till they fall into a
level 20 feet deep, which conveys them into the river Forth, which is a mile distant. Some
large portions of moss, after having been carried 20 miles down the river, have been found
to weigh upwards of a ton. During the summer, the men are engaged in delving and burning
the land which the former winter was covered with moss; and after being wedge-drained,
in a few years it is fit to bear all manner of crops. … The depth of the moss varies from
6–24 feet. Within the last 9 years Mr Blair [has reclaimed 80 acres and it is thought there
are 2000 acres left] 157.
155
Stirling Journal, 16 Sept 1830, p 1c, Thornhill Moss.
NAS GD15/46 Memorandum Book.
157
Stirling Journal, 16 Sept 1830, p 1c, Thornhill Moss.
156
54
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
In this case, flotation is being combined with moss-manure or burning. In 1810 Daniel McLaren described
himself as a Moss Tenant in King’s Boquhapple where his father’s possession went back 27 years. His holding
is indicated on Map 16 in an area where the jagged moss margin is characteristic of this type of settlement.
The ways in which water was collected on the moss will be discussed below (Rivers, Pows and Pools/Lesser
Pows, Dams etc) and Map 16 shows the arrangement of dams and channels on the moss, leading to ‘float
channels’ (the ‘goats’ mentioned above) at the spread field, very much as described in the newspaper
report. It is interesting that, although ‘clayed moss’ had required ‘drains’ the flotation method required that
water should be conserved and the moss kept wet, to act as a natural reservoir, ready to yield its water up
in winter when required.
A lease of Wester Polder in 1769 provides early evidence of flotation in the study area; the tenant was
‘to keep all the moss ditches and drains clear and to cast his peats in a regular manner putting off the light
moss by water every winter before casting them so that no disorderly moss band be ever left’ and to leave
18 dargs of peats on the ground at the end of his tack, stacked as he has received the same [a darg in this
case is the peat which a man could cut and perhaps stack in a day] 158.
At Wester Moss side it can be seen that John Buchanan’s Front consists of the rented peat cuttings of numbers
of named individuals, inhabitants of Thornhill, who were actually paying Buchanan for the privilege of
increasing the area of his arable land! A generous pow to the west provided the water. How far it was
actually conducted along his ‘front’ is not clear. Ward of Goodie encroached more speedily onto the moss
in the vicinity of the main pow than along the rest of its very long front with the moss, concentrating the effort
where rewards were quickest. George Moir, who had been a tenant in Moss-side and whose son was still
there, said that he had been
in practice of bringing water in a drain, as far in the moss as there was a fall to bring it,
for the purpose of clearing away the spreadfield; and he has cleared 11 acres about 6 feet
deep; that he never met with any interruption, as every person took the water as they had
a fall 159.
His claim indicates the prodigious effort involved as 11 acres is 4.455 hectares and 6 feet is 1.82 metres
giving 81,081 cubic metres of peat! Others claimed to have cleared even greater areas – but were less
specific about the depth. Graham describes a small-scale operation:
The first step is to draw a ditch round the whole area, of a depth somewhat greater than
the upper or spongy stratum [of the moss]; then every person who has occasion for fuel from
this moss employs himself for some days during the winter and spring, in throwing the upper
stratum into the ditch, into which the stream is now admitted, and the stuff is carried off into
the Forth 160.
158
NAS SC44/59/2, pp 200–202, tack by Dr Walter Stirling to William Miller.
NAS CS235/H/22/1 Printed State of the Process Feb 6 1813.
160
Graham, 1812, 236.
159
55
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Doubtless there was an endless range of variation in the detailed arrangements. We will just examine two
more, the Ballangrew Dam and the Moss Lairds or Pendicles. The remains of Ballangrew Dam are in the
Ballangrew Wood. It is clearly marked there on the 1st Edition OS 6” map of 1862 (Map 19) as a
U shaped structure with two short, unequal arms. It was supplied by the Meikle Burn, which rises on
Keir Hill, flowed into the Policies where it supplied a narrow ornamental lake within the formal gardens and
thence to the dam. The outflow, regulated by a sluice, was southward to South Flanders and the Pendicles
where a series of complex branches led the water along the moss edge and discharged it to the Forth.
In 1761, however (Map 11) the Meikle Burn, after passing through the north east corner of the Policy Parks,
turned south to Ryndaw and then appears to flow round east of Burntide (probably a mistake for Burnside)
and then back, westward to enter the Forth south of the Carse Park. The situation is less clear in 1800 due
to gaps on Map 14 but there has probably been at least some straightening of the section flowing eastward
to the moss. The dam, or at least an early phase, was constructed about 1765 as leases of Faraway and
Over Mains of Cardross at that time required the two incoming tenants jointly to construct and maintain a
dam on the Meikle Burn within 6 months of their entry, ‘with a lead or drain therefrom to be drawn along
by the moss edge, halfway between the houses of Middle Mains and Faraway in order thereby to carry off
the moss’ 161. The requirement for both to clear moss was continued in the tacks of 1786 162 and though tenants
may not now have been obliged to maintain the dam, a note written in 1785 notes that the tenants of Faraway
and Over Mains were amongst those able to remove moss and, after discussing possible inducements says:
it might be proper to oblige the tenant of Over Mains to communicate the water that he has
from the Meikle Burn when he is not using it himself or if it can be done when he is using it
to the tenant of [Faraway] 163.
So, the tenants are to share the valuable water and this prefigures later penalties for wasting the water and
other schemes to ensure optimum use of it. The Memorandum of 1834 makes several relevant comments:
Faraway Moss was to be cleared in stretches from north to south, to be added to Mains and Faraway …
I have cleaned all the Moss on the Mains farm at the bottom of the Rinjaw road in order to
square the fields and enable me to make a continuation of the road in the direction of the
Polder Moss settlers … The Moss Settlers at Polder are going remarkably well on and have
a good supply of water to which I lately got an addition by bringing the Burn of Blaircessnock
into the Dam 164.
Ten years later, in noting progress, he proposes ‘to plant a considerable extent round the Ballingrew Dam
towards the south and east, which, if it succeed will in time be a great ornament as well as shelter to the
Dam. …’ 165 However, as he died that year it is very doubtful that this ornamental planting was ever done.
161
NRAS 1468/22, tack of Hornhawick; ibid, tack of Over Mains.
NRAS 1868/47, tacks Hornhawick and Mains.
163
GD15/365 Jottings with regard to the tacks of Cardross 1785.
164
GD15/46 Memorandum Book.
165
GD15/46 Memorandum Book.
162
56
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The addition of the water from Blaircessnock and also a division within the dam, designed to make more
efficient use of the water, pre-date 1827 166. The dam continues to be mentioned in leases as late as 1871
though it is very doubtful if any use was being made use of it by then.
The dam thus predates the creation of the Pendicles or Moss Settlement at South Flanders but was utilised to
serve it during its existence. The various pendicles [a pendicle, in this case, is a small but distinct part of an
estate] were first proposed in a ‘Report regarding the Estate of Cardross, June 1800’ signed Alex Low; he
suggests making ‘small possessions’ at Waterside, Park, Collymoon, Whitehill, Offrans and Craggan and
adds that in laying out the larger farms (and the report suggested several amalgamations) ‘there will be
outside corners which may be set apart for accommodating a few Crofters or Tradespeople whom it may
be necessary to retain on the Estate’ 167. The idea was clearly directly derived from Kames’s scheme at
Blairdrummond – though only the settlements at Collymoon and South Flanders were actually created. These
were probably chosen as the areas where labour rather than water supply was the limiting factor to how
much clearance could be achieved. The actual date of creation is unclear though they probably
considerably pre-dated the earliest tenancy on record, at South Flanders in 1827. That tenancy was
renewed in 1831 168. The original lease was for 32 years – as at Blairdrummond – but the landlord was
allowed use of the water supply for three years at any time during the lease; by 1832 this facility had been
used – and from about 1839 access had been provided across the river by the suspension bridge. From
1843 the successor to the original tenant of this plot has
that portion of Flanders Moss not exceeding ten acres, also the arable and pasture land …
formerly part of the farm of Wester Polder … with the privilege and liberty of the water from
the dam of Ballingrew as heretofore for floating away the moss from the said possession …
reserving … to the proprietor … liberty to let as many additional possessions as he shall
provide additional supplies of water for.
The tenant, whose rent was £5 12s p a was ‘to be diligent in putting away the moss that may remain on
the said possession to the clay in a proper manner and shall use the whole proportion of water appropriated
to that purpose to the best advantage’; there were penalties for failure and he was obliged to cooperate with
the other tenants in making efficient use of the water, was to help with maintenance of the dam and with
clearing the water leads from the dam to the division levels on the moss and the tail leads for running the
moss and the barricades for preventing the clay from being run off with the moss, being allowed wood from
the plantations for the purpose. Doubtless the other tenants had very similar agreements; though it is interesting
to note that within a couple of years of this lease (due to run until 1862) that the Memorialist noted that
‘At the end of the Mossmens leases a compact little farm may be made at Polder and the same at Collimon.’
The lease dated 1831 to Donald McNaughton was in broadly similar terms (it granted him 10 acres and
part of the moss for 32 years) but obliged him to build ‘a dwelling house, barns and byre of turf on the moss
hereby set at his own expense’, the proprietor furnishing the wood (buildings will be discussed elsewhere).
166
GD1/393/46/1 Moss Tack of 1844, referring to missive of tack of 1831.
NAS GD15/41.
168
NAS GD1/393/46/1/1 Moss tack by David Erskine to Robert Clark, 1844.
167
57
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
And he undertook to live on the land himself for at least six months every year, from Martinmas to Whitsunday
(11 Nov–15 May) the all important winter months when the moss could be floated off by the river 169.
In 1841 the Census reveals that there were around 15 households in probably 10 houses at the West Polder
settlement, a total of 51 inhabitants, including infants and some elderly people – the census counted people
present on census night and would have excluded tenants who were working elsewhere, as McNaughton
(and presumably others ) were entitled to do in summer. Most of the heads of household are described as
Agricultural Labourers – though Margaret Lumsden’s sons (aged 14–20) seem to be the main breadwinners.
Many other household members were also farm workers, tending to confirm the impression that, for most of
these people, their tiny croft on the moss provided only a part of their income. There were 15 rather similar
households at Collymoon and a note says that the moss settlers were the reason that, in face of a general
fall of population across the parish, this area had maintained its population since the previous count (in
1831 – it gave only parish totals without breakdown).
By 1851 there were only 5 houses and 5 households – several of them clearly the same families who had
been there 10 years before; Margaret Lumsden’s sons John and Archibald are now, for example, both
described as ‘farmer and moss possessor’, living with their mother as housekeeper – there is a resident
female servant aged 13 and a resident 29 year old male farm servant – and it is even possible that they
work for the Lumsden family. If that suggests that they have consolidated themselves, the picture for the
McNab household is more stark. Robert was aged 64 and his wife aged 62; their ‘servant’ was her mother,
aged 86, they had one lodger (an elderly man with a pension) and another, Moses Thornton, who worked
as an agricultural labourer. Margaret Stalker had been widowed since 1841, was now aged 76 and her
household contained her son, a probable daughter, a grandchild and a 20 year old lodger, a gardener.
Only two of the households, in fact, do not have lodgers or family members who may be presumed not to
work elsewhere; taken with the decline in household numbers, it seems that life was a struggle on these farms,
an impression re-inforced by the decline of Collymoon to 11 households. We might surmise that in some cases,
two houses have been knocked into one and families had taken over two or more of the original croft units.
There were still 5 families at West Polder pendicles in 1861 though Collymoon was now down to 7 170.
But offers had been received in 1858 to construct a new farm at South Flanders 171. In 1860 Jean Stalker
agreed to quit her moss possession, formerly occupied by her brother – the family were already there in
1831. And in 1862 the farm of South Flanders ‘as presently possessed in small pendicles by Archibald
Lumsden and other tenants’ was let to David Black, from Mid Calder, with an obligation on the landlord to
build a new farm steading 172. The ‘Pendicle’ experiment was over.
The ragged edges of the moss where individual efforts at clearance have encroached are well seen on the
First Edition OS 6” map, for example south of West Moss Side and, perhaps most dramatically at the Pendicles
of Wester Polder. There, clearly, even the map shows that individual plots have been settled very much in the
manner adopted by Kames at Blairdrummond – where similar angled edges to the wooded moss still survive.
169
NRAS 1468/5.
NAS VR113/7.
171
NRAS 1468/44, offers from Inclosure Office.
172
NRAS 1486/8, obligation by Jean Stalker: NAS GD1/393/46/1/31 tack of South Flanders to David Black, junior.
170
58
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Map 22 1st Edition OS Pendicles of Wester Polder.
The drainage channels and the individual plots of the ‘moss lairds’ are seen with their varied progress in cutting into
the moss. By the 2nd Edition the fringes were tree covered and the angles less sharply defined.
(Copyright NLS)
59
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
4.5
The end of flotation and similar schemes
It is sometimes stated that moss clearance was stopped when throwing the peat into the rivers, where it
fouled fish nets and oyster beds, was ‘declared a public nuisance’ in ‘about 1853’ or in the ‘mid nineteenth
century’ or ‘in 1865’ or ‘in 1873’. It is sometimes also suggested that an Act of Parliament forbad the
flotation on the same grounds 173. The point is of some importance since the supposed Act or declaration is
sometimes credited with saving the mosses of the western carse 174.
No such legislation is recorded in the Index to the Public and General Acts of Parliament. The only relevant
legislation at the right period was the Salmon Fisheries Scotland Act of 1862 (25–6 Vict, c.97). Section 13
provided penalties for avoidably polluting rivers with either solid or soluble material likely to injure fish –
though the exemptions meant that it can have had little effect on even the very worst of pollution. The Act
also set up Fisheries Boards for the major rivers with powers to regulate seasons, net sizes and a range of
other issues for which they could pass bye laws; but their powers did not extend to pollution control.
A passing mention of the Home Drummond Act, as something already in effect in regard to salmon fishing
hints at a Private Act of some sort 175, though there is no local press notice of such an Act, it is difficult to
see how any private Act could have regulated something which affected so many people and such diverse
interests and no such Act was found in the Index of Private and Local Acts for the period. A vehement letter
of complaint about the damage caused by floated peat to the white fish, herring and salmon in the lower
Forth in 1865 refers to ‘hundreds of thousands of tons of moss … annually thrown into the river … from the
estates of Blairdrummond, Cardross and others’ 176.
In fact, the Blairdrummond scheme had come to an end many years earlier – even before the earliest
postulated prohibition of flotation. The Mill of Torr had ceased operations in about 1838 and though, as
we have just seen, the schemes at East Flanders certainly persisted beyond 1853 (when Chrystal would
have them forbidden), they were petering out by the early 1860s. In 1862 David Black was granted a lease
of the former pendicles at Wester Flanders and the new farm of South Flanders was formed from them and
some adjacent lands. A new house and farm were to be built and South Flanders Farm was being paid for
in 1863 177. One of the pendicles was already unroofed at the time of the OS Survey in 1862 and the
others would quickly follow. A similar series of events is recorded at Collymoon. Perhaps even more
ominously, for a long time prior to this, the only tenants engaged on moss clearance were those of the
pendicles. Any clearance on the bigger farms was being done by paid contractors, leaving the tenants only
to do the post-clearance work. For example, so early as 1855, James McGibbon renewed his lease of
123 acres of Faraway and of an additional 4.5 acres formerly occupied by Robert McNab at West Polder
(McNab was a ‘moss possessor in 1851); but the landlord reserved to himself the right to cut levels through
173
Chrystal, 1903, 140; Timms, 1974, 180; Barr, 2000, 129; Whyte & Whyte, 1987, 166.
JA Harvey Brown, Scottish Geographical Magazine, vol 26, 93–4 – information from John Mitchell.
175
Stirling Journal, 9 Sept 1864, 4c.
176
Stirling Journal, 11 Nov 1865, 5c reprinted from The Scotsman, 13 Nov and referring to article in Scotsman of 6 Nov.
177
NAS GD1/393/46/1/31 South Flanders, 1862 to David Black: NRAS 1486/8 South Flanders 1863 specifications
for Building Work.
174
60
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
the lands and to float moss and so on, obliging the tenant to fill the drainage channels and plough in the
last few inches of moss once the contractors had finished 178. And in 1856, when John Sands renewed his
lease at Ward of Goodie he agreed to take over the land which the estate had already reclaimed and also
further land as it became available – but only once the estate had had the needful drains and ditches cut 179.
For some years prior to 1863 Cardross had been spending around £150 pa on moss clearance but there was
a determination to retrench on all aspects of expense and it was reduced with a serious question mark over
whether it was to continue at all. In 1863 the Cardross estate paid £48 for clearing moss, mostly at Polder 180.
Some clearance, perhaps using peat-powered steam engines, may have continued at Killorn (where water
was less of a problem) for some time after this and is the most probable source for the nuisance complained
of in 1865 (above). But it is significant that McGibbon’s lease to Faraway obliged the landlord to introduce
tile drainage on this farm – and field drains were to give a faster return for a lesser outlay than moss
clearance. Here and there, across the carselands, patches of partly-cleared moss survived. At Littleward,
some 20–30 acres of scrub can be seen on the 1940s APs around NS 650 977; most of the peat had
been cleared but it had never been drained and had gradually reverted to scrub (Carrick, pers comm.).
At the same time, the move to contractors – presumably because tenants with sufficient capital to take on
the larger farms were not willing to take on the work and uncertainty of moss clearance – removed one of
the original attractions, the cheap labour. And land values were falling so that the return on capital was
reduced (see Agriculture from Mid 19th century to WWII). Drysdale, writing in 1909, notes the huge
expense of the former clearances and continues ‘It is little wonder, therefore, that in these days of depressed
prices for grain and dear labour, the reclamation of the moss land in these districts has been entirely
suspended.’ 181
This raises again the question of why the western mosses survived when others were removed. In part, as
has been suggested recently, the sheer depth of moss in some areas of East Flanders was huge and made
clearance exceptionally difficult 182. Even where the moss was not so thick, the shortage of water meant that
progress was slow – and the low flows of the Forth, meaning work could proceed only in winter, made it
even slower. Although there was some moss clearance about Faraway and Over Mains by 1765 (above)
the water supply was a problem. Kames, with his good water supply, his machinery and his capital (which
his neighbours thought he squandered) had a 30-year start over the ‘Moss Tenants’ of South Polder and
Collymoon. He could proceed fast and had cleared his moss by the late 1830s, before wider economic
change began to reduce the incentive to clearance and at a time when only a few nibbles had been taken
out of the flanks of the main body of East Flanders. Twenty years of slow progress later, the incentive had
gone altogether; estates with money were fewer and they saw better uses for it than expensive schemes,
with slow returns.
178
GD1/393/46/1/6 Lease to James McGibbon, Faraway, 1855 and others in this bundle.
GD1/393/46/1/12 Tack John Sands, Ward of Goodie, 1856.
180
NRAS 1868/46 Estimated Income and Expenditure on Estate for five years from 1 August 1863 NRAS 1468/28
Miscellaneous estate papers 1861–1924, Accounts for 1863.
181
Drysdale, 1909, p 74.
182
Smith, 1993, 462; Smith and Holloway, 2000, 14–5.
179
61
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Map 23 2nd Edition OS 1901 shows the site of the former pendicles of Wester Polder,
the moss edges still indented but now more rounded; trees are appearing on the moss margins.
(Copyright NLS)
4.6
Other aspects of 19th centur y agriculture
We have seen that agricultural change had slowly crept across the area during the 18th century, manifested
by liming, new crops, individual tenancies, the abandonment of run-rig, flood control and the potential for
moss clearance – with the associated need to define boundaries. It almost comes as a shock to read the
Report on the Cardross Estate of 1800. The Reporter does not flatter, describing Cardross in the first sentence
as an ‘un-improved estate’. And like many other similar estates, he says, the parts in the tenants’ hands are
badly managed on a ‘destructive’ system, ‘which is, of course, ruinous to the tenants themselves’. With great
energy they bring lime from a great distance and with that, and all the dung they can gather
they manure as much of the oldest or longest rested lea of grass as they can and
immediately plough it for crops of grain and when tired of bearing scanty crops of grain it
is again allowed to rest and during all the years of rest the lands pay little or nothing … 183
183
NAS GD15/41 Report regarding the Estate of Cardross, June 1800.
62
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
He recognised that rapid change was difficult as the old tenants would not co-operate, new ones would not
come to an area with a difficult climate, unless the rents were very low ‘and very low rents does not always
excite … a spirit for improvement’. So, he advises, it was necessary to make the best of those of the present
tenants who were most amenable to change, enforced by ‘proper regulations’. Improving leases were a
favoured mechanism of the time and what our Reporter suggests is on a fairly standard model:
1. Leases to be of 19 or 21 years with no subtenants or assigns.
2. Rent to be in money (no longer to include substantial grain and work elements).
3. Steadings to be put in good repair, landlord to furnish materials and tenants the carriage of materials
and to maintain them.
4. Proprietor to reserve power to straighten marches etc.
5. Proprietor reserves power to subdivide and enclose etc and tenant to pay for enclosures at 5% and to
maintain etc.
But item 6 was the kernel of the matter; the tenants were now to use all their arable, every year; infieldoutfield was to go. So, one third of all ground was to be in pasture grass and a fourth in tillage in summer
fallow or turnips, properly manured etc. A rye grass/clover mix was to be used for this; oats or beans to be
first after fallow etc ‘the true intent and meaning of this clause is to insure that the land being laid off to grass
[is] in good heart (in place of being laid off as it now is in an exhausted state) and thereby be prepared
to pay a full rent while it remains in grass and to carry good crops when brought into tillage again …’
And he goes on to suggest a choice of four-course rotations and some other minor clauses.
Along side that, he proposes a radical re-organisation of the farms themselves, new enclosures and a series
of amalgamations to form larger units. Obviously, these units are to go to the most amenable tenants. Fear of
consequent depopulation is, he says, misplaced as the larger farms in tillage will employ more people than
the old, smaller farms – the change is that many people who were formerly farmers will now be ploughmen
and labourers and so on. That was a change easy for him to contemplate, perhaps, but difficult for the
people affected and is the context, as we saw, into which the ‘moss pendicles’ were inserted. He then makes
a series of recommendations about amalgamations – of which quite a number were acted on, either at this
time or later; and, of course, there was to be a general rise in rents. It was consequent on this Report but,
as already noted, before it could have taken effect, that the Plan of 1801 was surveyed by Mr Kyle;
the Report and the Plan both, themselves, direct reflections of the improving urge. And at some time over
the next few years, the outline of the field systems visible on the 1st Edition of the OS (and so the skeleton
the modern systems) was laid out.
During most of the first half of the 19th century the Cardross estate, at least, specified rotations broadly of
the type recommended in 1800 with perhaps a tendency to move to six rather than four courses. How far
they were followed is less certain, particularly on the specific farms on the carse bordering the moss. Cattle
continued to be important – though perhaps with more emphasis on beef than in the past. Menteith was
well-placed, too, to fatten cattle brought, lean, from the Highland. As the century progressed new fertilisers
(imported guano, later manufactured chemicals) slowly became available to supplement dung and lime.
But it is difficult get a detailed picture of change up to the 1860s.
63
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
4.7
Mid 19th centur y to WWII
The classic ‘Improvement’ period was dominated by organisational and ‘soft’ changes, new rotations,
enclosures and new breeds for example. The next phase was ‘hard’ and technological, perhaps ushered in
by threshing mills from the late 18th century, tile drainage from the 1840s, binders and reapers, (below)
steam and later motor power. The entire period from mid 19th century to the 1930s saw British agriculture
in a very depressed state. Highly diversified and relatively efficient Scots agriculture was not too badly hit
by repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846 but land prices were affected. Then poor harvests in the 1870s, quickly
followed by cheap grain imports from North America and later by meat from Australasia, had serious
impacts 184. These imports could be centrally processed and then distributed by railway. Local food production
was no longer essential; the closure of the grain mill at Milton of Cardross between 1851 and 1861 is
indicative of that change 185. Farm rents were forced down and estates, particularly small ones, found
themselves in grave difficulties; lack of investment meant neglected fields and buildings 186. In 1851, 25% of
Scots men and women worked on the land – more than in textiles and mining combined; by the early
20th century that had fallen to 11% 187. The Port of Menteith area followed these national patterns of farm
amalgamations and rural depopulation – mitigated only for a time by the persistence of the moss settlements.
Drysdale, in 1909, writes of carseland rents being reduced by 20% in the recent past; in spite of
mechanisation and cost cutting in the later part of the century ‘Improved means of transit and cheapened
freight have brought the farmers from the ends of the earth into competition with the British farmer on his own
markets’ 188. The Cardross estate continued to commission periodic Reports on the farms though they are of
limited use for the present purpose. In 1850 Mr Dickson concentrated on the arable side of things 189.
Faraway consisted of 110 acres worth 30/– per acre per year ‘this farm is pretty equal in
quality being good carse soil and in a fair state of cultivation’. Mill and Milton of Cardross.
Mill of Cardross and Farm, possessed by William Connal, 70 acres at 18/–; mill rental
£42; mill would be improved by having machinery for making pot barley added and the
low field should be drained, the drains being 3 feet deep and 30 feet apart; this land is in
a very bad state of cultivation.
Blaircessnock Farm, possessed by Mr Henry Dougal, consists of 200 acres of arable at
23/– and 70 acres of bog and muir pasture at 5/– total £247 10/–. The soil on the
arable is a sandy loam of variable quality; about 40 acres requires draining … fair state of
cultivation … about 50 acres of the bog land next to the river is, in my opinion, highly
capable of being improved and made arable. The moss on a large portion of it being only
2–3 feet deep. It should be drained by drains 4 feet deep and 30 feet apart and then
trenched 12 inches deeper than the moss extends. The draining may be estimated to cost
£4 per acre, after which operations the land should be worth 30/– per acre.
184
185
186
187
188
189
Coppock, 1976, 200, 215: Devine, 1999, 453–4.
Census and NAS VR113/7.
Coppock, 1976, 215.
Devine, 1999, 253.
Drysdale, 1909, (p 75); ibid p 86–7; ibid (p 95).
NRAS 1468/1 Additional Report on Several Farms, October 1850.
64
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Ballangrew Farm, possessed by Mr Archibald Dow, consisting of 130 acres; estimated
at 23/– per acre and 53 acres of moor pasture at 6/– per acre; total £165 8/–.
The soil of the arable is sandy loam of medium quality about one half of which should be
drained etc …
General remarks; the measures are in Scots acres, the plans are all old and the fields are
now much altered and it was not possible to value every field. The principle deficiency in
cultivation is growing too few turnips and consequent want of means of properly converting
the straw into good manure and on the carse farms, where the soil is not well adapted for
turnips, by consuming clover and tares in the byres during summer there might be a sufficient
quantity of manure made profitably… rotations are not well observed and new leases should
insist on a six course rotation.
A Note of the Buildings Insured in 1860 can be compared with another Report on the Farms for 1865 190.
Faraway, James McGibbon, dispute regarding new land to be settled by arbitration.
Farm is in good order and approve of proposal to convert half the rent to grain …
Faraway dwelling house, cartshed, 2 byres, milk house
Barn, stable, granary
£180
£160
South Flanders and West Polder, tenant David Black, being farmed on most approved
principles and does not anticipate any change of lease.
West Polder
Dwelling house and milk house
Barn, granary and cartshed
Byre and stable
£80
£120
£30
Ballangrew, David Chalmers, good state of cultivation; the tenant is going to claim for want
of measurement.
Dwelling house, milk house and scullery
Barn, cartshed, granary
Byre, cattle-shed & stable
£100
£100
£120
Blaircessnock and Pollabay, Henry Dougal, a fair state of cultivation, but tenant is to
implement the terms of the lease.
Wards of Goodie, John Sands, tenant, they believe the tenants will implement the lease.
Ward of Goodie
Dwelling house, milk house and scullery
Barn & cartshed
Stable and byre
190
£80
£60
£60
NRAS 1868/46: NRAS 1468/1 note of buildings insured 1860: Draft Report on the Estate of Cardross, 17 May 1865
by John Arthur.
65
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Broadly, these are mixed farms with arable predominant (except, perhaps Ward of Goodie where there is
no granary) and some dairy cattle. They are very likely, still, to have been processing much of the milk for
butter or cheese as there was, as yet, no railway to transport it to the towns. They probably also had
significant stocks of beef cattle (see below) though the breed distinction was not yet as clear as it would
become.
Kemp and Nicholson’s Stirling works was in Stirling.
Designs improved rapidly and mechanised harvesting was faster and cheaper.
(Stirling Council Libraries)
It is against that background that the tenants were excluded from the moss which starts to be managed for
shooting (see below). The moss did not provide the sort of quality pasture now necessary. Attempts at
reclamation had been abandoned for the reasons discussed above. The returns on shooting (and the prestige
of having a shooting reserve) far outweighed any other use.
Leases and the Agricultural Censuses provide rather unsatisfactory checks on how far farming in the Flanders
Moss area reflected national trends. The Agricultural Censuses (sometimes called Ag Stats) are presented as
parish totals and it might be though that the statistics for Port of Menteith would provide a good picture of
individual years, major changes and trends etc. There are, however, a number of difficulties eg:
66
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
●
Data was collected for contemporary use not to create a historical record.
●
Categories varied over time and are much more detailed for later years.
●
Collection was erratic and/or unreliable in earlier years.
●
Data such as acreages & headages do not reflect changes in productivity.
●
Parish totals are most useful for homogeneous areas.
●
Rough grazing, a huge part of Scotland, was not recorded until 1892.
Some of these difficulties are further discussed by Coppock 191. The Port of Menteith data were thus only
sampled 192.
The early returns show that livestock were important with 534 cows in milk recorded in 1866 and 529 in
1876; but how many of these were beef cattle nursing calves rather than dairy cows is not clear. Again,
the total of 4603 sheep over 1 year would in 2002 mainly comprise breeding ewes but at this time would
include significant numbers of wedders (castrated adult males kept for mutton and wool). But probably many
of these sheep were actually on the hill areas rather than on the carse, where leases attempted to forbid
them until well through the century.
Wheat was scarcely grown with only 28 acres in 1866, 15 acres in 1876 and none in 1886; the only year
noted where it exceeded 50 acres was 1946 when it peaked at 65 acres. Even barley was not common
with a peak of 60 acres in 1877. Oats, the great Scots staple, covered 1631 acres in 1866, 1538 in 1876
and 1533 in 1886. And, not surprisingly, hay and turnips for cattle feed were also important. What seems
so surprising is that these figures do not vary very much even over the next 50 years. Wheat scarcely gets into
double figures in any sampled year to 1936. Barley is sometimes absent altogether and rarely touches
20 acres. Turnips fall back to between 300–400 acres; potatoes are between 100 and 150 acres. Timothy
hay, now such an important crop, was probably first introduced locally in the 1880s. Mr Willie More tells me
that it was first grown by Mr Black at South Flanders – and we have just seen that the Blacks took over that
farm when it was first built in 1862 and were regarded as exemplary tenant. Timothy, however, was not a
recorded category in 1906; by 1916 there were 262 acres in Port of Menteith parish. Drysdale recognises
that it was introduced in response to low returns on grains but, writing in 1909, accepts it as a fully-established
part of the carse farming scene and can hardly sing its praises loudly enough 193.
191
Coppock, 1976, 200–201 ff.
Year
NAS ref
1866
AF39/25/1
1876
AF39/25/1
1886
AF39/25/2
1896
AF39/25/5
1906
AF39/25/8
1916
AF40/5/3
1926
AF40/15/37
1946
AF40/35/4
1956
AF40/45
1966
AF40/55/2
1976
AF40/65/4
1980
AF40/69/3
1986
AF40/75/7
1990
AF40/79/7
193
More, pers comm.: Kincardine in Menteith, Third Statistical Account, 659–670. Drysdale, 83–5 and passim.
192
67
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Even overall livestock numbers do not vary much in Port of Menteith – though the vagueness of the categories
makes comparisons difficult. Beef and dairy cattle were not distinguished until the 1930s. There were 410 dairy
cows in milk in 1936 – compared with only 39 beef cows in milk but very large numbers of young stock bring
the totals to 1522 dairy cattle and 565 beef cattle. The figures can only mean that substantial numbers of store
cattle were fed – some perhaps on rented grazings – and then moved on. We cannot say that this was the
proportion in the 1870s, however; total cattle had actually fallen somewhat, from 2229 in 1876–2087 in 1936.
Drysdale’s useful paper of 1909 identifies many significant changes of which the most important, from the
present perspective, was the improved drainage (attributable to sub-soil tile drains, available from about 1850
or a little earlier). It has already been suggested that tile drains soon became a better investment than moss
clearance; they also meant an earlier harvest, generally in better weather and together with mechanisation,
they reduced labour costs. Doubtless they also lowered water tables around the mosses and so influenced at
least the peripheral parts. Morris (1930) attributes the growth of birch and bracken (and the loss of Ledum
palustre) to the drying of Lecropt Moss during the previous 50 years or so; he knew the moss well and attributes
the drying to drainage of the surrounding fields. He would, surely, have noted drainage of the moss if it had
been taking place at the same time. The fall in grain prices in the 1880s forced the local farmer ‘to reflect how
he could modify his system to suit the altered conditions and cut down his working expenses commensurate
with shrinking returns’. Mechanised harvesting (by reaping machines and self-binders) meant that the regular
farm staff could cope without the huge numbers of short-term workers formerly hired and the harvest was earlier
and more speedily accomplished; Drysdale thinks that both the costs and the time required were halved (87).
There was a switch to livestock and dairying (p 96–7) and also the growing of Timothy hay (83–5) and new
rotations which were less labour intensive; artificial manures were increasingly important and were in use at
Ward of Goodie by 1891 194. Even in 1909, motor transport was beginning to have an impact.
Well before the end of the 19th century, Kemp and Nicholson were acting as agents for imported American
self-binders like this model c.1908. (Stirling Council Libraries)
194
Drysdale, 1909, p 98; NAS GD1/393/46/2/28 Tack Wards of Goodie, 1891 to Robert Sands, presently himself
for 18 years; he is already using some artificial manures, ‘dissolved bones’ guano, police manure etc and proprietor is to
subsidise their use according to a schedule at the end of the lease.
68
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The Rednock Estate commissioned a number of Reports during the early 20th century which show something
of the rather dilapidated state of farms at that time. In 1900, Lower Tarr was affected by flooding and bad
drainage, its lower fields and the farm buildings were ‘in a most unsatisfactory state of repair’ and the
hedges and fences were in poor order 195. The details will be found in Site Specific Doc but it is well to
note here that even recent building was considered greatly inadequate, the byre was too small for the
24 cows ‘and would not on that account meet the sanitary requirements of the County Council.’ A wooden
shed, built by the tenant many years ago and used to winter young cattle was ‘a total wreck’. It was
unsatisfactory to have the farm workers sleeping in the attics of the farm house, with the only access through
the kitchen. In sum, the farm was worth only £2000 and even then £400 would need to be allowed for
repairs, 20% of the value.
In 1907 Easter Tarr was only a little better 196. Rats came up into the milk house and scullery through
the broken flags, damp came into the bothy and the access was bad; the wooden fittings in the stable
were ‘done’ as were the byre trevises, there was not enough headroom in the barn and the walls were
too weak to support an adequate roof and various make-shift proposals are made about the turnip feeding
shed for the young cattle; the tenant said he would only go on if he had repairs done and a reduction in
rent.
It is doubtful if much was done – though Mr Fisher was persuaded to stay on and in 1920 as the estate
contemplated sale, another report was commissioned 197. At Tarr of Ruskie the land was in very bad condition,
the arable being particularly foul. On the south the carse or flat land, with the exception of
one enclosure used as a meadow, has practically got out of hand and is very wet and
mainly growing rushes; there must be about 45 acres of this land; the bank land on both
sides of the road is fair but to the north the pasture land is in a poor state.
The buildings, however, were in somewhat better order but the whole was only worth £1500. Easter Tarr
had now been amalgamated with Hogwood and Ruskie Mill lands and was worth up to £5000 though
there were several ‘defects’ in the house and buildings and the lower ground was still wet. The following
Note 198 concludes this sorry tale, the buildings scarcely distinguishable from those of 70 years before apart
from the addition of a number of sheds, corrugated iron buildings and make-shifts. All these reports on farms
tend to show that it was cattle, indeed, which were the main livestock on the carse and its immediate
environs even at this stage. The Ag Stats have confirmed the importance of oats and forage crops as well
as hay and that point is underscored by the presence of turnip sheds, cattle courts (partly for making manure)
and barns, hay sheds etc.
195
SCA PD160/95.
196
SCA PD160/54 again see Site Specific.
SCA PD160/88 and Site Specific Doc.
198
SCA PD160/88 also pasted to Site Specific Doc.
197
69
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Note of the Buildings on the Rednock Estate 1932
Tarr Farm
4 bedrooms, 2 public, milk house, kitchen, scullery and bothy
2 roofed cattle courts corrugated iron will hold about 18 cattle
stable for 6 horses
1 byre for 26 cattle
1 byre for 17 cattle
1 turnip shed
3 loose boxes
cart shed for 6 carts
implement shed
barn and granary
1 old shed
1 weighing machine (up to 3 tons)
small shed used as engine shed is property of Mr Fisher
Inchie Farm
Dwelling house, 4 bedrooms, parlour, kitchen and scullery, milk house
3 byres, two holds 10 cattle and one 15
stable for 4 horses
barn and granary
small dairy
wash house with boiler
Implement shed with corrugated iron roof
Pig house for 2 pigs
Mill ring used as straw house
Cart shed for 4 carts
East Borland
Dwelling house; 4 bedrooms, sitting room, kitchen, scullery (bothy and milk house)
Stable for 4 horses
1 byre for 14 cows
1 byre for 10 cows
barn and hay loft
1 corrugated iron shed used as a loosebox for cattle
mill ring used as straw house
1 hen house
70
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Another very important change was the break up of several of the big estates of the locality. Blairdrummond
was broken up from 1912 onwards and the farms to the east of the moss (Moss-side, Mill of Goodie,
Norrieston and Littleward) were sold, mainly to the sitting tenants, over the following years. A sale brochure
was produced by the auctioneers 199 but it contains little useful information and nothing not available elsewhere.
Rednock was broken up about 1932, the farms again going mainly to the tenants; again, the sale brochure
is singularly uninformative 200. Some the Cardross farms have been sold off during the last 50 years.
During the 1930s, as the government became aware of the danger which such a depressed state of agriculture
would present to food supplies (and thus to national security) in the event of war, remedial action was taken,
including the creation of ‘producer marketing boards’, guaranteed prices, quotas, subsidies and some import
tariffs 201. The available sources, however, throw little light on the impact of these schemes on local farming.
4.8
20th centur y moss clearance
Another feature of the attempt to regenerate 20th century farming was large-scale moss reclamation schemes,
which will be considered here, even though some belong in the post war period. These were different
in scale, methods and objectives from earlier schemes. They were fully industrialised, based on powered
machinery. Land reclamation was generally secondary to other issues, particularly unemployment relief.
Mr Tait’s scheme was a proposal by the Board of Agriculture for Scotland around 1920 and it was combined
with proposals for flood prevention on the Goodie Burn. It is recorded on a Plan and a typescript Report by
Mr Tait found in the Graham of Rednock collection 202. It was part of wider schemes by the Board for assisting
local authorities and landed proprietors in land reclamation and drainage; the Plan is included as Map 28.
Mr Tait’s Report considers several options, starting with the most draconian; it rejects each except the last.
However, all are outlined here as they show the thinking and illustrate various aspects of the condition of the
moss and its environs at that period. The original scheme had been to cut a channel through the High Moss
Pow, on the line A B C on the Plan and to create herring-bone cross-cuts to drain the moss itself; the discovery
that the moss surface stood 5 feet (1.52m) higher than indicated on the OS added to the potential costs.
A suitable level for the cut would allow a northward extension from C to D (on the Goodie, close to the ruins
of Pollabay) such that, when the Goodie was in flood, surplus water would spill into the drain and discharge
to the Forth at Easter Polder (a fall of about 6 feet (1.8m). The total cut (A to D) was about 3130 yards
(2.86km) at a depth of up to 24 feet (7.3m) and with 1300 yards (1.2km) at over 3.6m. After considering
various details, Mr Tait decided that this scheme would cost about £42,000 – and thus was out of the
question.
A lesser scheme, involving working in from the outside to the centre all round the moss (presumably digging
drains) would cost £20,000; but trials were first needed to test the effect and lines such as XX and YY could
not be used until existing flood problems on the Goodie were dealt with.
199
NMRS, Ms 265/47.
Rednock Estate, Sale Brochure, c.1930, Private Collection.
201
Coppock, 1976, 215.
202
SCA, PD160/88; SCA, PD160/91.
200
71
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
He next considered an area of about 880 acres to the west of the moss and enclosed with a blue line on
his Plan (the line passes close to Flanders Hill and east of the High Moss Pow) and drained by cross cuts;
this would cost £6,100, still far too much. Much more modestly, a mere £500 spent extending the
High Moss Pow towards the Goodie, would assist drainage of that area and bring more of the moss into
use. But, of course, it would do nothing about flooding on the Goodie. That might be dealt with by, either
controlling the outflow from Lake of Menteith or by ‘improving the channel … particularly at its lower end’
and he seems to have favoured the former, using sluices to control outflows in times of danger without raising
the Lake level so much as to cause problems on the flatter parts of the shore. The ‘deepening and
straightening’ of the stretch near Lochend are shown on the Plan. Comparison with Second Edition OS and
later maps suggests that nothing was done as a consequence of these proposals.
In 1949 the Ritchie Report (Cmnd 7814) considered that Gartrenich Moss (West Flanders Moss) was the
best-preserved moss on the carse and the only one suggested as worthy of statutory protection as a Nature
Conservation Area. However, plans had been made, as early as 1930, for the drainage and planting of
Gartrenich; the earlier versions of these schemes were primarily aimed at relieving unemployment and
included a proposal for making parts of West Flanders into a huge rubbish dump, bringing domestic and
perhaps industrial refuse from Glasgow, Edinburgh and elsewhere by train. Experiments were conducted into
planting coniferous species before the war as well as experiments by the MacAulay Institute into new
methods of converting peat moss to arable. Hopeful reports were submitted but not acted on until, in 1970,
the Forestry Commission began planting there 203. The Scottish Peat Committee seems to have been
responsible for various schemes in the post WWII period. One scheme involved peat from various sites in
central Scotland being shipped to Caithness where it was to be burned in a generator – it is not clear why
it was abandoned – though that might be easier to explain than how it came to be conceived in the first
place! Another involved establishing a peat-fired generator on East Flanders itself.
More relevant to the present study, the Caledonian Peat Company planned to extract peat for garden use
from the moss north of Littleward. The details have been particularly elusive. McOwan comments on the
desolate appearance and the deep drainage channels; there is little doubt that a prime reason for
overcoming objections from environmentalists was that it would ‘create jobs’ at a time of high unemployment.
Caterpillar tractors and an auger were used to strip the surface layers and dig deep new drainage ditches,
at right angles to the previous ones and to a standard depth and width. It made a dreadful mess, choked
many local ditches and the original plans to process the peat on site were quickly abandoned in favour of
utilising existing plant elsewhere. Little (if any!) peat was actually removed 204. The planning permission was
bought out by SNH, the drains blocked and superficially, the area is now much as it was before the
operation began – apart from being much wetter 205. It is probably significant that the area chosen was
almost the same as that of the original site of Graeme’s Improvements of c.1750 (above); it was an area
which had been drained for 200 years and had better road connections than most other parts of the moss.
It was also, of course, ‘out of sight’ of the public.
203
NAS AF44/85 Flanders Moss 1929–1931; Mitchell, 2001, 200: NAS, RHP6599, plans of proposed reclamation at
Flanders Moss, 1930: notes supplied by John Mitchell on planting, 1970; Various reports in local press.
204
McOwan, 1984, 191; Carrick, pers comm.
205
Pickett, pers comm: Carrick, pers comm.
72
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The post-war period has seen some moss clearance, both at East Flanders Moss and elsewhere. At Little
Kerse, about 20 or 25 years ago, around 20–30 acres of moss were improved, by drainage, liming and
cultivation, no attempt being made to clear what was actually fairly thin moss. It provided good pasture for
many years but the proprietor is reported to feel that he would never embark on such a huge undertaking
again. At Littleward, about 20 acres which had been partly cleared, probably in the 19th century, had
never been drained. Though described as ‘rough pasture’ it was actually very wet, rough scrubland – and
can be seen on the early APs of the area around NS 650 977. The scrub was removed and the area
drained about 40 years ago by Mr Charles Carrick and is now good land 206. A few other small areas
around the moss edges have also been ‘improved’ in the same sort of way; the incentive, in all cases of
late 20th century work, has been the availability of subsidies for drainage.
4.9
WWII to the present day
In the post war world the tractor, herbicides, modern fertilisers and so on have impacted on every farm.
The Third Statistical Account identifies electricity, motor transport and running water as three major changes
of the 1950s and early 1960s and goes on to note that in the 1962 most farms were mixed but, in spite
of milk herds being encouraged by government, there was a swing back to beef
207
.
The emphasis on dairy was also noted by Mathews who follows trends in agricultural provision across the
region over the previous 30 years, allowing comparison with the Port of Menteith figures 208. Perhaps as
telling a series in the Ag Stats for Port of Menteith is the following, for agricultural horses:
1916
176
1936
157
1946
76
1956
43
1966
not recorded
Dairy cows in milk were 410 (1936); 336 (1946); 293 (1956); 281 (1966); 144 (1976): 168 (1986).
Total beef cattle, meanwhile were 856 (1946); 1601 (1956); 2779 (1966) – after which the figures are
not comparable but the seemingly steady climb probably slows, to be overtaken by sheep. And most striking
of all, oats still at 1281 acres in 1946, down to 843 acres in 1966, to 133 hectares in 1976, 100 hectares
in 1980 and 70 in 1986. But the difficulty with all these figures is that we cannot particularise them to the
carseland area and associated sites.
More recently the swing has been back to arable and grassland; Timothy production remains very important,
oats has continued to decline perhaps in favour of barley for stock feed. Set-aside is a sharp reminder that
EC grants are often the driving force. Turnips, once grown for stock feed, are no longer grown on the carse
due to the huge amount of labour involved.
206
Carrick, pers comm.
Crane, 667.
208
Timms, 1974.
207
73
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
5
RIVERS, POWS, POOLS AND DRAINS
5.1
Summar y
Water management has been a key issue and rivers, watercourses, pools and dams and other aquatic
features are considered in this chapter. The canalisation of the Goodie Water was a dramatic and welldocumented event, completed during 1771, turning the Goodie into a well-defined boundary – though the
hopes that it would control flooding proved illusory. There are also some records of the lesser Pows. Drains
and dams were vital to attempts at moss clearance. The lochan is discussed and an attempt made to explain
its absence from earlier maps – even from maps made when it was certainly present! Various abortive
proposals for industrialised clearance of the moss in the 20th century are noted.
5.2
The Goodie, High Moss and Pollabay Pows
Early records mention the ‘stagnum de Goodie’, which would translate as The Pool or Pond or Swamp or
Fen of Goodie 209. One source refers to it as the Stank of Goodie, a phrase which can mean anything from
a marshy area to a boundary stream. The New Statistical Account for Port of Menteith describes it as a lake
and says that it existed until drained in the then fairly recent past
210
. Since the documents refer to the fishing
rights it must have included some open water. Hutchison says that this was situated close to the outflow from
Lake of Menteith but gives no authority
211
. It continues to be mentioned into the late 18th and even early
19th century though it may, by then, be merely conventional 212. It may well have been an oxbow or branch
of the stream on the northern, Rusky, side or it may have been connected with an area labelled as Moss
Puddles on Map 11 of 1761 which lies between Arnclerich and the Goodie [and not to be confused with
the farm of Moss Puddles, south of the Forth!] Apart from the inevitable impact of the two mills along its
length, the first report of engineering works to alter the course of the Goodie is from a later note, in which
Erskine of Cardross reports that:
As long ago as the year 1753 the Duke of Montrose applied to my Grandfather
for permission to make a canal thro the lands of Lochend for the purpose of lowering the
Water in the Loch assuring him that it would be done in such a manner as not to hurt his
mill … but after the work was executed it was found that it injured the mill without answering
the purpose and was abandoned … 213
That work may explain why a straight section of the Goodie appears to bypass the mill on the estate plan
of 1761 (Map 11). Roy’s Map (Maps 5–8) shows the middle reaches of the Goodie much as it must then
have been for centuries and almost on the eve of major efforts to control it. Evidence for the pre-canalisation
period is slight but interesting.
209
RMS II, number 3142 and many later records.
NSA, p 1100.
211
Hutchison, 1899, p 58.
212
SCA, PD160/9, Inventory of Writs of Estate of Ruskie, 1 Lanrick Ruskie, dated 1777 and registered books of session
21 April 1815.
213
NAS GD15/123, 1845, memorandum by David Erskine on the Lake of Menteith and the Mill of Cardross.
210
74
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
A dispute occurred in 1627 between the occupants of Wards of Goodie and some tenants in Tar and Ruskie
about the boundaries of their grazing lands. The resolution allowed the Tar tenants to continue to come
across the fords of the Goodie to cut their peats on the western extremity of the moss and to graze their
cattle on the moss adjacent, an area graphically called the Strife Isles or Isles of Difference and also on
some meadows which were in dispute, adjacent to the stream; but in compensation they were to let Dick
use an area called the Luckess Meadow, on the northern side 214.
The Plan of Wards of Goodie (Map 12 almost certainly from 1761) shows that the course of the Goodie
was still uncertain and that the march still extended onto a small area north of the water. Meadows and
‘wet boggy pasture’ are shown along the riverbank on this plan and further upstream, on the south side, on
Map 11, also from 1761. Indeed, for 200 years or more, complaints of the boggy character of the fields
on the north of the Goodie continue, a consultant in 1900 noting that some were overgrown with rushes,
that it was difficult to find a drainage level and that the area was frequently flooded 215.
The naturally wet character of this land was increased by periodic flooding. In 1747 the Mill of Goodie
was leased, with some pasture on the waterside; but if this was ‘totally overflowed’ with water, alternative
grazing was provided at Boreland Muir 216. A dramatic attempt was made to deal with this flooding by
canalising the upper parts of the stream – I assume that the lower reaches did not flood so badly as there
is more of a fall. There are two copies of the relevant documentation
217
. After discussions beginning in
1768 a number of proprietors of lands on the northern and southern banks of the upper Goodie agreed in
1769 that the damage caused by flooding might be relieved by straightening, widening and deepening
the channel so as to discharge the water more rapidly. John Ramsay of Ochtertyre was asked to act as a
trusted, neutral agent, charged with deciding on the best course of action, resolving differences, entering
into contracts, deciding on the new course of the stream and so on; all this was agreed during 1769, the
work to be done in such a way that, for the future, the river would form a rational march between properties
north and south. The course and adjacent lands were surveyed by James Morrison (sadly, this Plan has not
been found) and once the line was agreed, Ramsay advertised for contractors. The cheapest offer (for £600)
came from Captain John Campbell of Kenpunt, himself one of the interested proprietors and he was appointed
to begin work in June 1770, with arrangements for interim payments by the subscribers. The work was reported
to be complete by November 1771, well within the specified time and though some minor modifications
were called for, the contributors all paid up their shares. To complete the process, Ramsay specified rules to
prevent future damage, a procedure for maintenance, rules for sharing future costs and so on.
The proprietors continued to operate the scheme until about the 1930s. For example there are meetings
recorded in 1804, 1805 and 1806 and evidence of contractors being appointed to clear the stream in
1835, 1890, 1910 and 1911 218. But in spite of that the continued flooding of the Goodie was noted on
the 2nd Edition OS (1901) and later editions. In June 1930 the proprietors met with McMichael an engineer
and Mr Ritchie, the overseer of the Cardross estate; Mr McMichael estimated that it would cost £400 per
214
NAS, CC6/12/2 f 127v contract between John Dick and others.
PD160/95, Report and Valuation Upper and Lower Tarr, 1900: PD160/88, Report and Valuation of certain farms, 1920.
216
GD15/363 Tack of Miln, 1747, to William Wright and John Keir.
217
SCA PD160/90 and NAS SC44/59/2, pp 203–213.
218
NRAS, 1468/18; NRAS 1468/26.
215
75
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
mile to fully clear the river bed and banks, to remove growths and so on; this was far more than was
practical and it was agreed that, with local labour, something might be achieved for £100 219. In 1936 it
was noted, at a similar meeting, that the £100 had been spent but had had no effect in improving the flow,
the £400 per mile remained out of the question and it was decided to approach the Secretary of State to
see if grants might be available 220.
Even before that time, the Board of Agriculture for Scotland had taken an interest. Mr Tait’s scheme
(See Agriculture, 20th century clearance schemes) noted the continued prevalence of flooding on the
Goodie. It would be possible to construct a drain from the Goodie to the High Moss Pow such that water
entered it only as it approached flood levels. The flood water would then discharge, via a new drain dug
through the Pow, into the Forth. The scheme was rejected in grounds of cost
221
. By the post-war period the
Secretary of State undertook the requisite work from time to time reclaiming at least part of the costs from
the proprietors till the fairly recent past 222.
Pollabay Pow runs from Flanders Hill and flows into the Goodie. It divides the main body of the western
moss from the smaller dome below Rednock. It is not shown on the 1761 estate plan since at that time it
belonged to Campbell of Lochend. Map 15, surveyed in 1792, indicates that it was then flanked by pasture
moss on both sides and that a narrow strip either side was not covered by moss ie that it cut down to the
clay. Grahame’s Improvements (they dated from 1749–1750 and are discussed elsewhere) take advantage
of the thinner moss at the northern end as well as the slopes of the moraine at Flanders Hill. It is shown on
Map 14 of 1801. Some straightening appears to have taken place and the diverse character of the pasture
is indicated. At this time – and for much of the 19th century – the Pow provided a link between the two
farms of Blaircessnock and Pollabay, which were usually let as a single unit and Pollabay was probably
really a farm worker’s house; it cannot really have had its own arable, for example, essential for an
independent unit. In 1797 the sheriff depute reported that a road ran beside the pow 223.
The High Moss Pow is a major water-course draining Flanders Hill and the main domes of the moss. It rises
from the moraine at Flanders Hill and debouches into the Forth near Easter Polder. The pasture along its sides
was being grazed in the mid 18th century when the first phase of evidence was given in the Division
of Commonty; witnesses mention the Caldron Holes, a phrase opaquely explained by Walter Buchanan
as meaning ‘holes in the moss known by that name’
224
. Map 15 of 1792 shows that, like Pollabay Pow,
it was flanked by pasture moss and the scatter of trees are mentioned as landmarks. It was claimed by some
witnesses that there had once been some arable along the pow but this notion was dismissed by
Mr Johnston, the surveyor and the sheriff
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
225
.
SCA PD160/90 Minute of Meeting of the Proprietors of lands adjoining the Goodie … 13 June 1930.
ibid, Minute of Meeting of the proprietors interested in the Goodie.
SCA PD160/91 Mr Tait’s scheme.
Crane, 1962; A Orr Ewing, pers comm.
CS21/Division of Moss Flanders/21/12/1798 5 Report, Account and Remit by Coldstream.
CS21/Division of Moss Flanders/22/12/1798 Answers for John Campbell to Petition of James Erskine, 1794 p 40.
ibid, Report by Mr Coldstream, 1798.
76
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The 19th century adds little to the story beyond the note that the Ordnance Survey describe The Pow as ‘a
strip of rough pasture called The Pow within the moss’. In 1920 Mr Tait noted that it might be used as the
basis for draining this part of the moss, either by extending it northward towards the Goodie or by cutting
herring bone channels into the moss on either side or as a means of relieving floods on the Goodie as
discussed above; all were rejected on grounds of cost and nothing was done 226.
An unnamed stream flowing south towards East Polder and Myme Pow, now a deeply cut ditch in the vicinity
of Myme but well clear of the moss itself, may also have had fringes of pasture moss either side and have
cut down to the clay, like Pollabay and High Moss Pow. Both were probably utilised to facilitate moss
clearance (Map 16) presumably since, firstly, the thinner pasture moss was fairly easy to clear and (secondly)
they provided water to float the moss away. Indeed, both areas attracted the attention of Hew Graeme of
Arngomery as he embarked on his ‘clayed moss’ experiment of 1749–50. The High Moss Pow may also
have been utilised to facilitate clearance around Easter Polder.
5.3
The Lochan
The lochan is not shown on Map 15 of 1792 though the stream which it feeds is shown, perhaps only
conventionally, in its northern reaches. It does not appear on OS 6” First or Second Editions; specifically,
it does not appear on OS 1” revised 1954 and published 1971 with revision of major road nor on the
first 1:50,000, published in 1981 but photographically derived from the 1954 and 1963 revisions of the
1” map. But the loch was certainly present in 1945 when it appears on aerial photos.
The most likely reason for the earlier omission is that the ground-based surveys did not cover detail of the
moss surface which could not be seen from the periphery. That view is supported by Tait’s finding that the
OS had under-estimated the surface levels by as much as 5 feet 227. Similarly, only the northern end the
stream which was flowing through the High Moss Pow in 1792, is shown on the 1st Edition 6” – though it
is present again on more recent OS maps. For the 1981–2 1:25,000 OS, on which the lochan is shown,
the contours on the moss were from aerial survey (as indicated by being shown brown rather than black).
It does not appear on the 1:50,000 until 1997–8 but its appearance there indicates that its earlier
absence was not a mere matter of being too small. At the same time, the Map produced with Mr Tait’s
scheme (Map 22) shows the Pow and the drain as the line XX but does not show the lochan itself; nor can
the Pow and the drain on this plan be reconciled with the Aerial Photos. The drain on the 2nd Edition
6” OS is different again and does not correspond to what is seen on the APs.
Even more perplexing, the main lochan is not shown on the Scottish Peat Survey plan (p 15) though they
seem to have examined much of the surface in 1949–1950, note the gull colony and a number of other,
small lochans along the High Moss Pow and south west from East Moss-side. Nonetheless, I conclude that
the lochan appears once it can be surveyed. This does not mean that it was necessarily there all along and
is of natural origin. It could, perhaps, have been constructed as a dam in the late 18th or early 19th century,
to flush away peat (see next section, Other Pools etc); but if that were the case it is difficult to see why there
should be both a drainage channel and a more natural-looking stream-bed on the AP. It is difficult to think
of any reason why it might have been constructed once moss clearance was abandoned. And I would have
thought that if it was fairly new in 1945 then there would be some more definite indication of disturbance
etc visible on the aerial photo. Perhaps only thorough, on-the-ground investigation can resolve the conundrum.
226
227
SCA, Mr Tait’s Report and associated Plan, PD160/88, SCA, PD160/91.
SCA, PD160/91 Mr Tait’s Report.
77
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
5.4
Other pools, dams, drains and lesser Pows
There must always have been minor and superficial channels draining the moss. They are hinted at on
Map 15 and it is one of the frustrations of the Plan that we cannot be sure how far these signs are merely
conventional. It is not possible to tell, on the basis of the historical evidence, whether all the pools shown
on Map 16 and the Duck Dub on RHP 3997 (also called Goose Dubs or Duke Dubs and sometimes singular
sometimes plural) are natural or artificial. In 1834 the laird of Cardross wrote:
All the moss on the Estate of Cardross must be cleared gradually and on a limited scale on
account of the small supply of Water and also from the smallness of the River which is only
capable of floating peat during the winter months. The latter circumstance has always
prevented me erecting any wheel or machinery for obtaining a greater supply of water 228.
Although the Earl of Moray was able to bring a copious water supply on his ground at Norrieston (discussed
elsewhere), by the late 18th century there was a near-desperate search for water elsewhere on East Flanders
and for the means of storing it and conducting it to where it was needed. There could be serious constraints;
for example, our Memorandum writer complains that he cannot use the upper Goodie as a source as this
would interfere with Mill of Goodie, further downstream (presumably both by diverting its supply and
choking its sluices with peat). Water was found both on and off the moss itself, the latter exemplified by the
Dam at Ballangrew (discussed elsewhere). Here we are only concerned with water on the moss. In spite of
the note of a channel cut from the centre of the southern dome towards Ryndaw on Map 15 ‘to drain the
moss’ most of the evidence relates to channels for conducting water for flotation.
In 1797, in another reminder of the constraints imposed by neighbours’ rights, the sheriff depute had noted that
it is, perhaps of the first importance to the Parties that as the advantages to be derived from
a division of the Moss viz, its improvement into pasture or arable ground, cannot be
obtained without a mutual communication of the little Streams of Water flowing through the
several Pows, the sheriff thinks it his duty to suggest … that it seems highly expedient to
adjudge that those streams of water shall continue to run as they presently do, forming a
common level to the adjoining moss and that none of the Parties has the right of stopping
or diverting the same to their own exclusive advantage
229
.
Most of the evidence was given in 1810 in the Process for Division of the Moss in Kincardine Parish 230.
Walter Spittal (page 6) said that within the last few years some of the Norrieston people
had cut Moss Holes in the high Moss between the Letters N and K (a little north of the run
of water K.N.L); he seems to mean, had made peat cuttings directly into the moss, without
working in on a ‘front’ from the outside.
228
NAS GD15/46 Memorandum Book.
CS21/Division of Moss Flanders/22/12/1798 5 Report, Account and Remit by Mr Coldstream.
230
CS235/H/22/1, big bundle, Pursuer’s Proof; the Plans referred to are RHP 3966 and RHP 3965/1.
229
78
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
George Moir, who had known the moss for almost 40 years, never knew of any objection
to people ‘washing and carrying [the moss] away and making the ground below it arable’
(page 8).
Margaret Graham could remember the moss from more than 35 or so years ago:
That as far back as she can recall John Buchanan had a ditch but she did
not understand it to be a march ditch but a drain from a place called the
Dam in the Moss north to his spreadfield for floating away his spreadfield
by water brought from the Dam in the Drain. She is sure this drain was not
a march because the march of the laboured ground between John Buchanan’s
father and her uncle was further to the east than the north of that drain.
This is particularly interesting as the Moss-side Pow forms the western side of Buchanan’s farm of
Wester Moss-side on Map 16 and the dam and associated channels are clearly seen on Map 13 of 1803.
They more or less correspond to a green patch at NS 643986 and James Fisher (evidence given below)
thought it had been first constructed about 50 years before – putting it in the 1760s.
Peter Wright, (ibid, page 20) said that John Paterson or his family made a ditch in the high
moss some 6 years ago but does not know why.
Walter Stewart said that the Moss-side young stock were not allowed to go to the west
[ie not over the parish boundary, probably] but went as far south as the Duck Dubs.
Additional Proof was taken in 1813
231
.
John McCulloch, aged 70 or more, said that when he was a boy, there were no marches
though the herds would say ‘this is mine and that is yours’ and there were ditches which
Mr Forrester had for carrying water to put away his moss.
Alexander Spittal had been on the moss with the surveyor on the case and they had gone
to the Goose Dub or Duck Dub (pages 32–3) and Mr Buchanan called the Duck Dub his
march.
Daniel McIntosh (pages 63–5) said that 40 or 43 years ago when he was a herd, the
northern march of Littleward was:
a little loch and they grazed east of that; he herded for Mrs Forrester of
Polder during summer; there was only one loch and though he never knew
it called Duck Dub it was the only one there was.
231
CS235/H/22/1 Printed State of the Process Feb 6 1813.
79
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
George Moir (page 33–4) said that he himself was in practice of bringing water in a drain,
as far in the moss as there was a fall to bring it, for the purpose of clearing away the spreadfield; and he has cleared 11 acres about 6 feet deep; that he never met with any interruption,
as every person took the water as they had a fall ’. [11 acres is 4.455 hectares and 6 feet
is 1.82 metres so this is 44,550 square metres by 1.82 is 81,081 cubic metres of peat!]
Alexander Moir (pages 34–5) knew the Goose Dub; and he [Moir] and his father, for as
far back as he could remember, had been used to bring water in a small ditch or strand
from the southern part of the moss so far as the level admitted to that place in the northern
part of the moss fronting the spreadfield … and by the assistance of that water, carried
away the surface of the moss casten by them to the Water of Goodie’ and there was no
challenge; he thinks they were not far from the middle of the moss when they began the lead
for the water; water from the south side was also taken south and the height was about the
middle of the moss.
The following evidence in the same dispute was given in 1813 and noted from Murray of Abercairney
Papers
232
.
James Fisher, aged 71 (pages 43–4) thought it was
50 years since Robert Buchanan made a large ditch from north to south of the moss to bring
water from a drain to float away the spread field but does not know if floating is now done
by drain or ditch; there was a dam at the south end of the drain but he has not been on the
moss himself for 20 years; about 20 years ago Robert Buchanan made another ditch in that
moss, to the west of the said drain and near the march pow between Cardross and
W Boquhapple moss and this was to bring water from the Pow to float moss from the
Spreadfield to the Goodie.
William Chrystal, aged 74 (p 45) gives a vivid description of Hew Graeme of Arngomery at work in about
1750 (which will be considered elsewhere); Graeme, too had dug drains, one running east and west along
the line L-N on the Plan, ‘to dry part of the moss’.
Robert Forrester, aged 52 [pp 47–9] knew that Mr Forrester (of Polder) had a number of ditches or drains
on the moss head, to collect water and a dam to retain it and other ditches from the dam to convey the
water to the spread field.
George Galbraith (pp 49–51) was aged about 60 and did not recall Hew Graeme but 40 years ago he
knew ditches and drains on the moss head, called Hew Graham’s ditches and are used yet for collecting
and conveying water to clear Spreadfield to make arable Robert Buchanan, John’s father, put away moss
and made arable 40 years ago and gathered water at Duck Dubs and carried it north by a ditch to float
away the spread field and he and Forrester were like to dispute about water.
232
NAS GD24/1/808a State of the Process.
80
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Samuel McQueen (pp 51–2) said that his queys [heifers] go north to Duck Dubs or east till they meet
marches and there is a march ditch from Duck Dubs to Mime Pow; he lets moss for people to cut peats and
he draws moss mail [rent]; he clears Spreadfield using water from the moss head and floats it to the Forth
and there are drains and dams and he keeps them in repair.
George Graham (pp 52–3) discussed the channels in the moss and noted that there were several ditches
and drains on Polder Mosshead, some of which he had cut himself for Mr Forrester of Polder some 15 years
or so ago and they were to drain the moss-head and for flushing peat.
John Forrester (page 54–5) also noted that Mr Forrester has a lot of ditches, both old and new in different
directions; they convey water to float the Spreadfield and also they dry the moss head. The Park was fenced
partly with ditches which were faced with clay and partly with moss ditches.
A brief re-capitulation of the evidence on behalf of Forrester of Polder
233
states that Mr Forrester made dams
on the moss before he went to Jamaica, about 23 years ago and upward, for collecting water for floating
away moss; and since Mr Forrester returned from Jamaica, about 13 years ago … he has enlarged these
dams a great deal’.
The more general issues of moss clearance will be discussed elsewhere. What these quotes and the associated
Plans suggest is that:
1. There may have been some natural pools (Duck Dubs, Goose Dubs).
2. Artificial Dams date back to the mid 18th century but numbers increased.
3. Channels might function as conduits, drains and marches.
4. Both the plans and the witnesses concentrate drainage in the Littleward area.
5. At least one of these dams can be identified at NS643986.
6. Where possible natural channels were used but new ones were cut by 1750.
The pools and dams are not shown on the 1st Edition OS even at 6” scale except for what must be either
Goose Dub or Duck Dub – which is not named. My surmise is that it was surveyed because it was on the
parish boundary which is shown in full and was an important division with all sorts of legal and fiscal
significances. The 1st Edition does, however, still show a number of artificial channels and, in the case of
the High Moss Pow, hints at deepening of the natural channel. The channels round the periphery, those
originating from the Ballangrew Dam etc will be considered elsewhere. Mr Tait’s survey shows the Moss-side
Pow as YY and the Lochan pow as XX; both are associated with what looks like drainage channels; Tait
noted them only to say that they could not be used for draining the moss northward due to existing flooding
problems on the Goodie. I presume that some of these channels are projected rather than real though one
running east towards Polder Moss from the centre of the north dome also appears on the 1st Edition OS.
233
GD24/1/809 p 21.
81
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
A curious Plan published as part of the Scottish Peat Survey Report (1965, p 15) shows a line of lochans
along the east side of the High Moss Pow and a cluster of lochans around the sharp flexure of the West
Moss Pow, close to the Buchanan’s dam, mentioned above; they do, at least, suggest that the Buchanans
chose their site well.
I am told that there has been no maintenance of the drains on the moss with most people’s memories, with
the obvious exception of those cut for the Caledonian Peat Company clearance scheme
5.5
234
.
Lint Holes or Retting Pools, Peat Holes, Cauldron Holes etc
Dams, just discussed, are well attested. But other features are mentioned in the historical records whilst it
must be admitted that not all green hollows on the moss are necessarily former dams. Two features, Peat
Holes and Cauldron Holes, are mentioned in the historical record. Peat Holes appear to have been areas
where, rather than advancing their peat cutting on a regular front, people cut into the moss surface to create
a pit; it is not clear why they did this, and the problem that water would accumulate in the Peat Hole and
make further work difficult is obvious. One witness said that it improved the moss pasture but recognised that
the more modern tendency was to work on a front; the sites chosen may have had better peat for fuel.
Cauldron Holes are mentioned as landmarks in the Division of the Port of Menteith Commonty and are
marked on Map 15 (1792) on the pasture moss flanking the High Moss Pow, one (‘Caldron Hole’) at
roughly NS628988 and two or more (‘Caldron Holles’) at roughly 632980. They existed in about 1749
and were still present in 1792 but the only explanation is an opaque comment by Walter Morrison that they
were ‘holes on the moss known by that name’ 235.
The issue of Retting Pools (also known as Lint Holes) needs to be discussed a little more fully in spite of the
fact that they are not attested in the historical record for this area. Three sites have been suggested as
possible retting pools: NS 643986, NS 650982 and NS 648984 (D Pickett, pers comm.). Retting is the
first stage in the linen-making process, the steeping of flax stems as part of the process of separating the fibre
from the other material; hemp and other bast-fibres are processed in a similar way. Flax growing was
widespread in Scotland, reaching a peak in the 18th century
236
was described as ‘lately built’ at Milton of Cardross by 1786
1800
238
but had been taken down some years before 1845
. A lint mill (for processing the linen fabric)
237
239
; it seems to have been still current in
. And flax was being grown at Wester
Polder in 1733 and probably much more widely later in the century 240.
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
A Orr Ewing, pers comm.
CS21/Division of Moss Flanders/22/12/1798 Answers for John Campbell to Petition of James Erskine, 1794, p 1;
ibid, Answers for John Campbell, Proof in the Process, 1749, p 40; Map 15.
Durie, 1979.
NRAS 1868/47 Tack Milton Corn and Lint Mills.
GD15/41 Report regarding the Estate of Cardross, June 1800.
GD15/123, 1845, memorandum by David Erskine on the Lake of Menteith and the Mill of Cardross.
SCA SB1/11/4/2 Inventory of the lands means and effects of Walter Stirling, 1733.
82
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Retting was most often done by steeping the stems in a pool or stream. However, the stench has been
compared unfavourably with that of a rotting horse
241
and the effluent is a notorious pollutant. The process
was the subject of some of the earliest environmental protection legislation in Scotland, the Act Against
Steeping Lint in Streams of 1606 being re-enacted in 1685, the objective being to protect fisheries
242
.
In spite of the risk of theft there might be some advantages in steeping lint in fairly remote holes in peat bogs
– apart from avoiding the smell – as it has been tentatively suggested that there might be advantages to
fibre quality
243
. And there is evidence that lint and other fibres were, indeed, steeped in bogs. At Glasson
Moss, Cumbria, archaeological work revealed evidence of medieval hemp retting
244
. There are early
19th century reports from Scotland:
Statistical Account of Carluke, Lanarkshire, 1845, p 574.
The north-east corner of the parish is almost entirely covered with peats… It is common to
find beets (sheaves) of lint and quantities of lint-seed five, six or seven feet below the surface
of the peat, in what no doubt had been steeping pools.
Statistical Account of Yarrow, Selkirkshire, 1845, p 38.
In casting another [moss] close to the dwelling-house of Whitehope, a layer of lint was met
with covered with stones. It has evidently been laid out to steep on the sub-soil and not
removed, and was six feet below the surface.
But these are being recorded as curiosities which cause some wonder; the lint must have been deposited
long before. Apparently more recently in use are lint holes at Bankhead Moss in Fife and a historical
examination of these is currently under way and should be published next year. I am told that there was a
preference for retting in peat holes in Ireland and that it is said to speed up the process. At least two earlymodern writers advocate the use of soft water and one comments approvingly on the use of lint holes 245.
In the operation of watering, care is taken to have soft water, if possible. Sometimes it is put
in moss holes, and sometimes into canals or ponds, into which soft water can be introduced
… Flax ought never, if it can possibly be avoided, be put into water, that has been used for
the same purpose immediately before. If the season be warm, the water soft, and collected
for some time, it will require from eight to ten days … 246
241
242
243
244
245
246
Dáil Éireann – Volume 91 – 17 November, 1943 – Adjournment ...
APS IV, 287; APS VIII, 476.
Harwood, pers comm.
Cox et al. 2000.
Information from Dr M Robinson, St Andrews, who also supplied the following quotations.
Thomson, 1800, 204.
83
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
All mineral and foul waters are improper for Flax. Cold streams and running streams are also
bad, as they are apt to disorder and entangle the Flax and so obstruct its Fermentation.
Still soft clear Pit Water should be chosen, if possible; and the Flax Dresser and
Manufacturers will find, that the Flax so watered will go through all the necessary
Operations with less Trouble and Expense, and be in all respects better, and more valuable.
There is nothing in the Process of Flax Dressing, that requires so much Care and
Watchfulness, as watering … 247
One of the potential retting holes (NS 643986) has been identified above as a dam, constructed by
John Buchanan for floating off the peat and obligingly mentioned by Margaret Graham as well as by
James Fisher and George Galbraith (above); it may first have been constructed during the 1760s. The other
possible lint holes are all within this general area, the part of the moss where drains and dams were most
common.
In conclusion, there is no historical evidence for retting pools on East Flanders Moss. But flax (and perhaps
also hemp) have been grown in the locality. Purpose-built lint holes cannot be ruled out for the period before
the late 18th century though they would surely have been mentioned if they were in use in the late
18th century when they would have been a significant assertion of property right. Retting might have been
a secondary use of the dams and other holes on the moss. But archaeological examination (to find lint stems
or pollen) is the only way that firmer evidence is likely to emerge. Meanwhile, the default assumption must
be that these patches are dams rather than lint holes.
247
Bailey, 1758, 60.
84
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
6
H I S T O R I C A L R E P O R T S O F F L O R A A N D FA U N A O N A N D A B O U T
FLANDERS MOSS
6.1
Summar y
Information about wildlife, plants and trees on the moss is diffuse and episodic. This chapter is an attempt
to bring it together. I suggest that trees were rare on the moss in the 18th and early 19th century; perhaps
they start to spread as grazing was abandoned and heather burning was introduced; a huge fire, alleged
to cover 2000 acres, clearly had a major and long-term impact. Evidence for other herbage is fragmentary.
Sport shooting for grouse was important from the mid 19th century – and was perhaps valuable enough
to ensure continued maintenance of drains until, say, WWI. Records of grouse and mountain hares diminish
in the post WWII period – and it may well be that the decline of grouse and of mountain hares was due
to reducing efficiency of the abandoned drains. Various records of gull colonies – of several species –
are presented.
6.2
Trees
The property disputes of the later 18th century, discussed elsewhere, are the first sources of direct information
about trees which appear to have been almost entirely absent. The exceptions, within the bounds of the moss
itself and all shown on Map 15, are recorded in 1792 and are a Holly bush, on the east side of the
High Pow Burn and some birch trees, to the east of Flanders Hill, around the sources of the High Pow Burn;
one birch, north of the Cauldron Hole and adjacent to Graham’s Improvements, seems to have been
particularly prominent.
The trees were mentioned by witnesses in the Process of Division of the Commonty as landmarks, places to
which or beyond which, livestock were pastured. It cannot be positively asserted that there were no other
trees, elsewhere, which were not mentioned or mapped as they were not relevant to the Process. But it seems
improbable for the following reasons. Firstly, the surveyor did show trees south of the Forth, north of
Blaircessnock, around Cardross and at Easter Polder which were equally irrelevant to the Process. Secondly,
several witnesses mention other types of landmark on the flow moss itself, hollows in the moss, lines of posts
put in as assertions of property boundaries and so on; trees would almost certainly have been mentioned if
they were present. Finally, in the later Process for division of the eastern part of the moss, where the search
for landmarks was even more desperate, no trees are mentioned at all. One witness referred to a fern bush
or bracken plant alleged to indicate a march – though William Harvey denied that anyone had ever showed
it to him
248
. Indeed, the witnesses in both processes seem to have had to resort to waving their arms and
talking of purely theoretical ‘straight lines’ to define what they understood to be the boundaries of their own
farms, so far as they lay on the moss. Why go to such lengths if there were trees, prominent, distinctive
features which could be marked and described and utilised?
248
GD24/1/808A/2 Page 57 Proof adduced for David Forrester of Polder, Stirling 26 Dec 1810, evidence of
William Harvey.
85
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But in this case, with several people mentioning a few
trees and many others desperately trying to find landmarks to refer to, it seems highly unlikely than nobody
would have mentioned trees if they were present. And that impression is re-enforced by the fact that the
estates did not attempt to control or regulate the cutting of trees on the moss, as they did of peat, nor do
any of the witnesses refer to cutting trees, brushwood etc – as they would have done had it been a regular
and legitimate practice as it increased their claim to the property. My conclusion is that, up to the 1810s at
least, the moss itself was almost treeless.
The 1st Edition 6” OS, surveyed in 1862, re-enforces that view as most of the moss is treeless (the two
woods shown adjacent to the moss, at Ballangrew and Hazel Wood are considered elsewhere; see
Site Specific). And, whilst detailed practice varied, there was an attempt by the OS to show individual trees
outside of wooded areas eg hedgerow trees. So the scatter of trees, adjacent to the moss edges at the
extreme north west of the moss on Sheet CXXX is interesting (this entire area, however, is now under forestry
and there is no indication of the species present in 1862). Elsewhere, there are a few hedge trees forming
the moss margins – consistent with the abandonment of attempts at moss clearance mentioned elsewhere.
By the time of the 2nd Edition OS (1901) trees had begun to spread. There are irregular scatters of
trees on the moss margins north west of South Flanders (Map 23) around Easter Polder (Map 24) west of
Moss-side of Boquhapple (Map 25).
Map 24
Second Edition OS of 1901 shows trees spreading close to the moss margins at Easter Polder.
(Copyright NLS)
86
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Map 25
Second Edition OS 1901 trees near Wester Moss-side again on the moss margin.
(Copyright NLS)
87
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
There are also trees spreading to the east of Ballangrew Wood and the earlier scatters associated with
Hazel Wood and south of the Goodie are much more extensive, the latter in spite of the fact that this ground
had been enclosed since the 1st Edition survey. [A similar spread can be seen on West Flanders, with
patches of trees already established far from the moss margins; by 1901 Killorn already has a halo of trees.
Morris (1930) attributes the growth of birch and bracken (and the loss of Ledum palustre) to the drying of
Lecropt Moss during the previous 50 years or so; he knew the moss well and attributes the drying to
drainage of the surrounding fields. He would, surely, have noted drainage of the moss if it had been taking
place at the same time. Of course, Lecropt was a tiny moss compared with East Flanders.]
The 1” sheet 66 (full revision to 1924 and corrected to 1945) shows that the spread has continued around
Ballangrew Wood and Hazel Wood, there are now clusters of trees at several points on the High Moss and
there is ‘wood’ where there were formerly scattered trees, south of the Goodie around NS650998.
Map 26
OS 1” Sheet 54 revised to 1954 shows the gradual spread of trees – and the interest of a previous
owner of this map in Ley Lines …
( JGH/OS)
88
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Following the 2nd World War, in about 1949, the Forestry Commission undertook a Woodland Census 249.
The block south of the Goodie, just referred to, is confirmed as birch scrub of mixed age, as is a part of the growth
outside and around Ballangrew Wood. It is regrettable that the scattered trees elsewhere, particularly on the
High Moss, are not identified in this survey. The first aerial photographs, from about the same period, confirm the
general pattern. All the clusters noted in 1901 are still there and are quite dense in some cases. There is extensive
spread along the moss margins and along drainage channels, particularly along the southern side of the moss.
And there is quite dense growth at several places on the High Moss, particularly east of the High Moss Pow.
The absence of that last, extensive but diffuse growth from Sheet 54 1” (revised 1954, published 1971
Map 27) is probably explained by the difficulty of surveying, using land-based methods on inaccessible
terrain – and throws a slight question mark over earlier absences, too. Of course, by this time, the whole
north western corner of the moss, including the fringes of Hazel Wood and the woodland along the Goodie,
have been lost to forestry; there is a small, regular plantation at East Polder (NS648978).
Sheet NS69/79 at 1:25,000 (Pathfinder) was based on surveys from 1951–76 but, significantly, the latter
at least of these were aerial surveys. A substantial coniferous plantation north of East Polder has joined the
plantation beside the Pollabay Pow. Otherwise, the general pattern is similar to that in the first post-war
AP with the qualification that some of the stands are now larger and scattered trees are indicated on most
parts of the moss, particularly east of the lochan, where they are not seen on the AP.
Map 27 OS 1” Sheet 54 revised to 1954 published 1971 does not show as much tree growth as the aerial
photos of the 1940s but does show the pools reported by the Peat Survey on the High Moss Pow and Moss-side Pow.
( JGH/OS)
249
NAS FC8/168 for the relevant area.
89
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Almost contemporaneously Bannister confirms the spread of scrub since the APs were taken but points out
that birch seedlings were more widespread than the scrub – though he confirms that they were least common
on the eastern periphery and not particularly associated with pre-existing scrub
250
. There were also pine
seedlings along the western margin – and it would be interesting to know if these were associated with Scots
Pines reported in the northern part of Ballangrew Wood, which the Forestry Commission had found to be
40% Douglas Fir, 30% Scots Pine and 30% European Larch with an age range of 40–80 years (they were,
doubtless, the attraction for the Capercailzie which Bannister also reported). Since Bannister’s Report there
have been several studies of the spread of birch scrub on the moss so that the historical approach is less useful.
I understand that there is some alder coppice at the head of the High Moss Pow and on the edge of
Ballangrew Wood at the northern end but the latter may be no more than the natural trees having been felled
when the wood was planted and then allowed to re-grow; the stools are small and do not suggest a long
management history 251.
6.3
Heather, grass and other herbs
Information on other aspects of herbage is limited. There is no information from before 1700 and very little
from after 1800 apart from that concerning trees just presented and the reports of recent scientific studies,
which are not considered here. The Stirling Natural History and Archaeological Society, active from
1878–1939, do not report any visits to the moss [this is not to say that their species lists do not include
items recorded there!]. The 18th century information is provided by the documents and witnesses in the
Divisions of Commonty cases which have already been mentioned.
Thomas Johnston, the surveyor of the moss in 1792 is less than comprehensive in his survey of the vegetation.
‘At no time,’ he says, could
sheep or cattle of any kind pasture further than round the outsides of the moss and Powes
of Polly Bay (sic) and Polder as delineated upon the Plan by a dotted line, that the middle
parts thereof, within the dotted lines being wet flow moss unfit either for the pasturing of
sheep or black cattle of any kind, besides there is no meat [food] were it dry. Even round
the sides where it is dry as marked upon the plan ‘pasture moss’ there is very little meat for
cattle having only heather and broken moss 252.
He is not concerned with what grows on the Flow Moss as the livestock cannot go there anyway; and he
has a very low opinion of the nutritional value of the pasture moss, too. A few witnesses expand on or qualify
this dismissive picture. Broadly, witnesses from the mid to late 18th century agree that livestock pastured
250
Bannister, 1976–7.
D Pickett, pers comm.
252
(NAS CS21/Division of Moss Flanders/22/12/1798, Report by Thomas Johnston, 1792.
251
90
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
round the outside and avoided the flow moss as it was so wet. The pasture extended along the pows and
Patrick Keir, whose memories in the 1750s extended back into the previous century said that in those days
the dry cows pastured along the High Moss Pow and anywhere they wanted round the edge of the moss
but the sheep went in towards the middle 253.
However, it is the witnesses in the Division of the moss in Kincardine parish who give the most interesting
detail, their evidence, given in 1810 and 1813 sometimes relating to several decades earlier. Speaking in
1810, Walter Spittal thought the main use of the moss was for peat as the surface was of very little use for
pasture, though when the peat was dug the surface was good pasture
254
. Several others make similar
remarks about the poor general character of the pasturage on the high moss.
Margaret Graham said that 40 years before, in winter and spring, her uncle’s cattle went of their own
accord to the moss-head, ‘seeking the long grass among the heather’
255
. Archibald Campbell is one of
several who refers to the risk of cattle wandering off the moss onto adjacent corn or onto the improved
pasture in the vicinity of Myme (ibid p 24–5). James Steward makes the important point, to be considered
again elsewhere, that the tenant of Moss-side sent his cattle to the moss 20 years ago as a means of saving
his pasture on the banks of the Goodie but he makes the important point that if stock was summered on the
moss rather than being taken to the Highlands (also to be considered elsewhere) then they did not do well
(ibid p 27). Margaret Thomson is another who notices an area of ‘improved pasture’ called Little Holland,
which must have been near Little Ward and from which stray cattle were carefully kept
256
.
The witnesses in 1813 provide a few more items. William Chrystal could remember Hew Graeme at work
in about 1750, ‘plowing and burning, spreading ashes and clay upon the high parts of the moss amongst
the heath and the effects of that work are still visible’
257
. Robert Graham said that Hew Graeme and
Forrester’s father used to burn the heather on the sides of the ditches when there was fear of lambs falling in
(ibid 47–9).
Forrester of Polder and his witnesses were concerned to emphasise how much improvement there had been
on the southern side as it was their claim that this was property. Archibald Paterson, aged 58, whose father
had been a tenant in Polder said that there was already plenty of pasture on the south side of the moss when
he was a child, so that their cattle did not go to the north side 258.
More recent, scientific surveys of the vegetation have been well reviewed elsewhere and are not considered
here.
253
254
255
256
257
258
ibid, Answers for John Campbell, p 42.
CS235/H/22/1, State of the Process, Pursuer’s Proof, p 6.
CS235/H/22/1, State of the Process, Pursuer’s Proof, p 14.
CS235/H/22/1 includes Printed State of the Process, Additional Proof, p 30–1.
NAS GD24/1/801a/1 printed Petition by John Paterson etc.
GD24/1/808A/2, Proof adduced for David Forrester of Polder, Stirling 26 Dec 1810, p 60–1.
91
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
6.4
Gull colony
A puzzling aspect of the recent wildlife history of Flanders Moss has been the flourishing and then
disappearance of a breeding colony of Lesser Black-backed and Herring gulls, peaking at around 8000
pairs and 500 pairs respectively in about 1980 and then falling rapidly thereafter 259. In 2002 there is no
breeding colony though local farmers recall going to Moss to collect eggs and I have been asked to look
out, specifically, for further information.
Earlier colonies of Black-headed Gulls at Flanders Moss were also intermittent. In 1869 Harvie Brown says
that they used to nest at Flanders Moss until about 30 years previously when they abandoned the site due,
he thought, to moss reclamation; it was his view that they relocated to the islands of Loch Lomond where,
in 1867, the same author had reported a substantial colony on Inch Moin, where there were distinct
breeding colonies of Lesser Black-backed Gulls, Black-headed Gulls and of Terns 260. However, by 1884
the colony at Flanders Moss seems to have revived as it was then thought the largest in Scotland. In 1907
it is said that ‘the sea gulls hover screaming over it as if the moss might change to waves once again’ 261
and there is a photo of Black-headed Gulls at Flanders Moss dated 1909 262. But by 1920 this colony was
thought to have succumbed to persecution by gamekeepers and egg takers 263. Cliff Henty tells me, however,
that Black-headed gull colonies are notoriously ephemeral.
The decline of the Black-backed gull colony is noted by Whitelaw (1987) who states that ‘after more than
a decade as one of Scotland’s largest gulleries’ the colony of Lesser Black-backed Gulls – he makes no
mention of the Herring Gulls – was in decline. He puts the peak in the early 1980s when there were ‘several
thousand’ pairs, reduced to a ‘few hundred’ in 1986. Ringing had been carried out every year since the
1950s by the Clyde Ringers Group and Glasgow University with 1000 chicks readily ringed in 1979,
reduced to 63 in 1985 and 6 in 1986.
Rintoul and Baxter had reported Lesser Black-backed Gulls as non-breeding summer visitor in 1928 but
by 1935 there were 50–100 pairs breeding at West Flanders Moss and 50–75 at East Flanders.
The Scottish Peat Survey looked at the moss in 1949–50 and note an area ‘used as a nesting ground by
large numbers of gulls’ which, they thought, might account for localised hummocks of Polytrichum sp. 264.
Sanderson reported 150 pairs of Lesser Black-backed and 500 were reported by 1968; the peak is given
as 8000 pairs in 1980 (cited Whitelaw).
Whitelaw suggests that egg taking and disturbance were the main reasons for the decline in the 1980s with
culling by conservationists as a possible contributor. On the other hand, he gives no indication of the reasons
why either disturbance or egg collecting should have increased at that period nor does he explain why it
was possible for another colony to establish itself only a few kilometres away.
259
260
261
262
263
264
Corbett and Dix, 1993, 72.
Brown, 1869, 1799; Brown, 1867, 907.
Cunningham Graham, 1907, p 2.
(www.scran.ac.uk).
Evans, Scottish Naturalist, May–June 1920, cited Whitelaw.
Scottish Peat Survey, 1965, 19.
92
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Black-headed Gulls at Flanders Moss.
(Copyright SCRAN)
93
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The late Bill Brackenridge, who knew the colony well, thought that egg collection and associated disturbance
were likely to be major reasons for loss of the colony. Henty thinks the gulls may well have fed as far afield as
rubbish dumps at Stirling or even in the Glasgow area but has no specific data 265. My own enquiries suggest
that small tips at Torrie (off the B8032 Deanston – Callander road) and another in the Balfron area (off the
A875) closed around 1983 and 1987 respectively 266 presumably as part of a wider policy of replacing
smaller, local tips by centralised land-fill, at Fallin. How far the loss of such potential food sources was actually
important is not clear. The decline cannot be ascribed to any obvious change in local agriculture and I gather
that such large colonies are often dependent on tips. Corbett and Dix note that the disappearance of this colony
coincided with the appearance of another, in the Tayside area but leaves open the question of a connection 267.
6.5
Hunting, shooting and grouse
Prior to the 18th century the evidence of hunting and shooting in the area is slight. James III granted a charter
creating Port of Menteith into a Burgh of Barony (ie a small market town) in 1467, to facilitate supplies to
his hunting expeditions in Menteith 268. But how far his hunting impinged on the moss is not clear. A lease
of Easter Polder dated 1533 lists the usual assets involved in an agricultural lease, including the fields, water,
muir, moss and meadow, but the following words, fishing and fowling, have been scored out suggesting
that these were valuable assets already detached from possession of the land itself 269. About 1810
John Forrester said that he had been very seldom on the moss since he was a child, unless it was with
Mr Forrester (of Polder) ‘at hare hunting’ 270. A complaint in 1853 that John Sands, the tenant of Wards of
Goodie, had been involved in night poaching, gives no further details 271. A tantalising note in a
memorandum book, kept by the then laird and dated 1834 states that there was
abundance of game of different kinds and increasing much of late years, particularly
pheasants, for which there is so much dry cover. Rabbits are becoming too numerous and in
some places do much injury to young trees. They ought to be kept under as also the Roe Deer
which do great hurt to the plantations and are now increasing with the extent of the woods
It continues:
Fishing in the Forth is nearly at an end and no salmon now come some far up the River. The
fishing in the Loch of Monteith almost all of which belongs to Cardross property should be
carefully attended to. There is abundance of pike and perch and it might also be stocked
with trout if they were prevented being killed when they go up the small streams to spawn.
The trout in Loch Ard are large & fine, resembling those in Loch Leven and there could be
no difficulty in having the same kind in Monteith. There is a little trout fishing in the Goodie
& in the Forth and some might be put in the burn at the New Garden and a grating at the
outlet of the stream to prevent their escape to the Dam 272.
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
Henty, pers comm.
Barker, pers comm.
Corbett and Dix (eds) 1993, 72.
Gilbert, 1979, 60.
NAS GD15/266 Tack of East Polder, 1533.
NAS Murray of Abercairney Papers, GD24/1/808a, Evidence of John Forrester.
NRAS 1468/20.
NAS GD15/46 Memorandum Book.
94
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
It appears that by this time the commercial possibilities of ‘hunting, shooting and fishing’ are being
considered, though it is interesting that no specific mention is made of grouse, nor of the moss itself.
It seems that it is not until 1856 that the estate began to reserve both the moss and the sporting rights from
the agricultural leases
273
. And later tacks are more explicit in mentioning that hares and rabbits are also
reserved to the landlord and in forbidding tenants to allow dogs to ‘course or range over the fields’
274
.
Rabbits, in particular, became a major issue on many estates throughout Scotland in the later 19th century
as the tenants complained that they inflicted serious damage on their crops whilst being prevented from
killing them themselves; legislation was eventually introduced in the 1880s to control the menace or, as an
alternative, to offer compensation to the tenants.
There was no gamekeeper listed as living at Cardross in the 1841 census; one was living in offices [farm
buildings] with his sister in 1851 and a new one was employed in 1860
275
. In 1863 the gamekeeper
sold the following items:
●
In October sells 14 partridges, 145 pairs rabbits, 4 hares;
●
November 41 pairs rabbits, 36 partridges, 213 hares, 86 cock pheasants, 44 hen pheasants, 2 woodcocks;
●
December 86 pairs rabbits; 39 hares; 12 cock pheasants; 13 hen pheasants; 6 partridges, 1 roe and
3 woodcock 276.
In the same year, 1863, a memorandum suggests efforts to retrench on many aspects of estate management
and game costs were to be cut from £124 to £115 277.
In 1867 the mansion house of Cardross, with the grounds, fishings and the shooting rights were leased to
John Stuart Bolton, residing at Oakleigh, Alderley Edge, Cheshire for a period of five years. The room
occupied by the rabbit catcher was reserved from this lease and he was to continue efforts to control rabbits,
hares and roe deer for the protection of the agricultural tenants. Bolton was to use the shootings and fishings
‘in a fair sportsmanlike manner’ and was to leave a sufficient breeding stock on the land at the end of the
lease. And, most significantly, the heather was not to be burned without first informing the gamekeeper
278
.
This last provision makes it clear that grouse were now a major concern.
The total payment of £400 per year for the mansion, gardens and shootings was fairly modest compared
with large Highland estates. But this flurry of activity, the appointment of a gamekeeper, the retrenchment
and the lease, all suggest that the agricultural depression of the later 19th century was beginning to bite
and that, like so many others, the estate was turning to alternative sources of finance. The gradual extension
of railways into Scotland (to Stirling by 1849) and the creation of a new class of wealthy manufacturers and
so on, meant that sporting rights became a valuable asset.
273
274
275
276
277
278
NAS GD1/393/46/1/12, Tack of Ward of Goodie dated 1856; GD1/393/46/1/31 tack of South Flanders, 1862
to David Black, junior and many other items in this bundle.
NAS GD1/393/46/72, tack Wards of Goodie to John Sands, 1871 and other items in this bundle.
NRAS 1486/8 Appointment of Peter Alison.
NRAS 1468/4 Notebook for sale of game etc 1863.
NRAS 1468/46.
NAS GD1/393/46/1/59 Lease Erskine to Bolton.
95
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
‘Punch’ was ever alert to the changing social scene. Mr Briggs, the nouveau riche Victorian gent who did everything
fashionable – and did it badly – went grouse shooting in 1850.
( JGH)
In spite of the 5 year term of the above lease, in the following year the rights were set to Colonel the
Honourable Luke White from 18 August 1868 to 1st March 1869, this time for only £300, the terms
otherwise being similar; this must have been a more satisfactory arrangement as White renewed the lease
for £500 from 1st July 1869 for a year 279. The starting date of the lease, just after 12 August, suggest that
White was looking around for a last minute bargain but was primarily concerned with grouse and the terms
of all these leases make it clear that heather burning for grouse was now a routine part of the management
of the moss from which livestock had now been excluded for 15 years or more.
279
NRAS, 1468/25 Minute of Tack and Tack of shootings etc.
96
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The importance of grouse is further underscored by the following incident. A huge fire, in early August 1878,
was reported in the local press, extending from across the whole area of ‘Flanders or Cardross Moss’.
It was thought to have begun about Moss-side, following a long spell of dry weather and, after smouldering
for some days, was fanned into ferocity by a strong easterly wind, which swept it across the moss. It burned
for three days and was eventually put out by the efforts of estate workers from Blairhoyle, Rednock and
Cardross, assisted by a fall of rain.
No damage to farm stock, we believe, occurred but almost the whole of the valuable cover
for grouse and other shooting in that part of the Cardross estate has been for this season at
least, irreparably destroyed; while over an extent of country probably amounting to two
thousand acres, the scene of the conflagration presents a blackened and desolate appearance.
The same day, another fire was reported at Blairdrummond ‘between Robertson’s Lane and Westwood’;
this was less damaging at least to the ground game though a great deal of cut peat is said to have been
destroyed, one of the last references to peat cutting in the locality
280
.
Apart from highlighting the combustible nature of the moss at this period and its importance for grouse, this
event should have left a clear line of charcoal and other particulates in the moss and so provide a clear
dating point. Such a big fire is likely to have been more intense than the routine, controlled fires of heather
burning and have penetrated below the surface. It must have released huge quantities of nutrients into the
surface layers and have had a significant impact on the herbage. Whilst it would, presumably, destroy any
trees already established on the moss surface, it could also have prepared the way for the establishment of
birch seedlings on previously undisturbed parts of the moss. It is likely to have been the single most important
event in the development of the moss in the 19th century.
The mansion, estate and shooting may well have been leased more often than these few records suggest.
In 1851 the mansion was occupied by Lt Col James Buller Elphinstone, his wife and family) and a
gamekeeper was being employed: In 1901 they were let to Francis Smith, whose primary address was in
Surrey 281. Some of the other local shootings were let from time to time, including those of Rednock and Polder.
Grouse shooting was still important enough in 1920–1 for Sir Norman Orr Ewing to take a lease of the
mansion house, grounds etc for a year, including the sole right of trapping, shooting and snaring, paying
£1100 282; this was to include pike and perch but not trout if the lake were stocked. The details of
gamekeeper’s and underkeeper’s wages and conditions were considered, though the tenant (who was to
control rabbits) had to provide his own ferrets! He was to leave a breeding stock and not to shoot more than
450 pheasants or 250 brace of grouse or 150 brace of partridges; all expense in rearing pheasants and
upkeep of game to fall on the tenant, but the proprietor to provide ground for pheasant rearing if required;
and at the end of the season the proprietor may take steps such as collecting eggs for the next season. The
proprietor, on the other hand, would so far as possible supply estate workers to act as beaters when required.
280
Stirling Journal, 9 August 1878, p 5 column C, Moss on Fire.
Census Return; NAS VR 113/47.
282
GD1/393/46/2/40 Minute of Lease, Sir HD Erskine to Brigadier Sir Norman Orr Ewing.
281
97
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
This lease and the others extended over the whole estate, a far wider area than East Flanders and a comparison
with Rednock, which had no access to the moss, provides a cautionary note about where the grouse were
being shot. A Rednock lease of 1913 required that the following game should be supplied to Rednock House:
●
2 rabbits per week with more at harvest and Xmas; they were for the servants!
●
20 hares
●
16 brace pheasants
●
16 brace partridges
●
12 wild ducks
●
22 woodcock (11 brace)
●
8 capercailzie
●
10 brace grouse
The tenant was forbidden to shoot black game, deer, roe deer, owls, herons and jays but was obliged to
control rabbits to prevent damage to woods and crops 283. Indeed, the Rednock ‘gamekeeper’ was more
really a rabbit catcher 284.
Another Rednock record, the only approach to a game-bag for the area, dates from season 1913–4 Nov 1914:
1913
1914
107
58
12
28
Partridge
183
119
Pheasants
140
98
Woodcock
11
3
Snipe
17
12
Ducks
5
5
Sundries
7
4
92
55
Grouse
Black grouse
Hares
Rabbits
288
147285
And when Rednock was offered for sale in 1929/1930 the sale brochure declared:
The estate offers good mixed shootings. Pheasants, partridges, hares, rabbits and ducks provide
a good mixed bag. In addition, a few brace of grouse are got on the high ground 286.
283
SCA PD160/103 Note of Game to be supplied to Rednock House.
SCA PD160/108, 1912, appointment of John Lines as rabbiter and gamekeeper.
285
SCA PD160/11.
286
Sale Brochure in Private collection, p 5.
284
98
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Grouse were still being shot on the moss in the 1950s and 1960s. Prior to that there had been grouse butts
but there were none by that time and the shooters just walked over the moss. This was at least partly as
numbers were declining already, despite keepering and heather burning continuing; bags of a couple of
dozen were known. There were also snipe and some black game and capercailzie and Bannister (1976–7)
reports evidence of recent heather burning and the presence of capercailzie. About that time the shooting
was still being leased, at one time to Rio Stakis, the hotelier
287
. However, whilst the rateable value of the
Cardross shootings was given as £1,400 (over the entire estate) in 1985, the value of the South Flanders
shootings was only £35 – which tends to suggest that very little of the sport was now in the East Flanders
area 288.
None of the written records of hares noted so far mention the species and no indication has been found of
whether mountain hares have always been present or are recent arrivals. The continued presence of
mountain hares on Flanders Moss is noted so recently as 1993 where the link with heather and grouse and
the periodic population fluctuations are noted
289
. There used to be an annual hare shoot on the arable
around the moss in February, continued till about the 1970s as numbers declined and the shoot was
abandoned. So many as 100 hares might be shot – they were sold to Baxters for game soup; these were
all brown hares 290. Mountain or Blue Hares were found on the moss and shot on the way home from grouse
shoots – so as not to have to carry them too far on the rough terrain. The numbers declined in parallel with
the grouse and the local view is that they were indigenous 291.
6.6
Fishing
Various 16th century charters and acts refer to fishing in the area. For example, an Act of the Scottish
Parliament of 1581 appointed the town of Stirling to act as stewards to regulate fishings in the head waters
of the Forth, the Goodie and other tributaries. It seems that they mainly exercised this by attempts to control
net fisheries, weirs and fish traps. Their main concern was with salmon – they had an important salmon
fishery of their own – and there is no evidence that they attempted to regulate any activity above Frew 292.
The right to fishings in the ‘stagnum de Goodie’ has been mentioned [See Rivers, Pows and Pools] but what
was caught there is not clear. The fishings in the Loch of Menteith are mentioned in 1646 and intermittently
thereafter 293. By the 19th century the Lake (as it became) was intermittently stocked and the Memorialist
of 1844 proposed that trout from Loch Chon should be introduced as they were similar to the famous fish
of Loch Leven. It is not clear if this was done. The Memorialist also noted that salmon did not normally come
up the river so far as Cardross and pike and other course fish seem to have been the quarry in the Lake.
If there were, for example eels in the lochan, there are no records of anyone trying to catch them.
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
A Orr Ewing, pers comm.; VR 1976.
SCA CR2/1/13.
Corbett and Dix, 1993, pp 78, 109.
Carrick, pers comm.; Orr Ewing, pers comm.
Orr Ewing, pers comm.
Charters and other documents relating to the Burgh of Stirling, 104.
Fraser, 1880 vol 2, item 89.
99
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
7
THE USE AND VALUE OF THE MOSS IN THE PAST
7.1
Summar y
Use of the moss has changed radically over time and a number of useful if essential arbitrary periods can
be identified:
●
Late Medieval to early 18th century
●
c.1750–c.1860
●
c.1860–mid 20th century
●
1980–
For centuries its primary importance was as a source of peat though grazing (and perhaps sport) were also
significant. The best documented period, the later 18th and early 19th century, corresponds to a period of
potentially pivotal change as the possibility moss clearance radically changed perceptions. As we have
seen, sport shooting became important from about the mid 19th century and the agricultural tenants were
excluded from the moss. Peat cutting continued into the 20th century. Management for wildlife in the last
few decades, reflects modern concerns and an awareness that management rather than mere abandonment
is required if biodiversity is to be maintained.
7.2
Late medieval to early 18th centur y
The historical sources are fragmentary. It is clear that there was settlement round the fringes from an early
date as discussed under the Mythic Morass heading. There is good reason to believe that the moss margins
were being cultivated or farmed as meadows by the 15th century – and that is not likely to have been an
innovation. The inhabitants must have cut peat on the moss and it would be surprising if they did not hunt
and perhaps pull heather and rushes for thatch. It is likely they used parts for grazing. But we have no
positive evidence for any of these beyond the fact that, at the time of the Reformation, the right to the peat
was reserved to the Abbey of Inchmahome and the residue of its community of monks; so the new owners
could neither cut nor sell the peat without permission and, presumably, payment. But the agreement did not
impede the local inhabitants from cutting peats for their own use and doubtless they did so. The methods
they may have used cannot have differed much from those described in Mythic Morass/Early Evidence of
Moss Clearance. An early 17th century agreement shows that there were ‘moss rooms’ or recognised and
assigned places for cutting peats by that time 294. A lease of land at McOrriston [NS679988] required the
tenant to provide two horses for carrying the landlord’s peats home to Ballingrew in 1636 295 – this is the
other Ballingrew [NS692990]; there are other examples to show that peat cutting was widespread and no
reason to believe that the methods were radically different from those of the late 18th century.
294
295
CC6/12/2 f 127v contract dated at Borland 14 May 1627.
NAS CC6/12/3 f 316 tack by David Dog to David Robison.
100
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The earliest attempt to divide East Flanders, between 1749 and 1756, collected a small body of evidence
from witnesses about its use 296. The area in contention was only the stretch between Blaircessnock and
Easter Polder, from Pollabay to Easter Polder. None of the witnesses, some of whose memories extended
back into the late 17th century, recalled any use except grazing until the very recent past. Even the grazing
was confined to the margins, the sides of the Pow or ‘pasture moss’ as marked on Map 15. The inner part
of the moss was dismissed as ‘a mere flow’; William Morrison (p 38–9) said that there were no marches
within the moss though each proprietor possessed the part opposite his lands by pasturing cattle as far in
towards the inside as they can by reason of the flow or wetness. It was claimed (page 38) that a march
had been fixed between Cardross and Blaircessnock in about 1736 or 1738 by drawing a straight line
through the moss and a fence or physical boundary may have been constructed (p 44). Patrick Keir took a
rather rosier view than some of the grazing potential of the inner part, claiming that 70 years before the
‘yeld cattle’ [dry cows] had pastured where they wanted on the moss edges and the sheep towards the
middle. John Graham and William Wright (p 43) claimed that at one time the Blaircessnock cattle crossed
right across the moss if they could by reason of wetness and his father rented a piece of grass and the bog
adjacent to the tenants of Bigram (on the Rednock side). The lawyers sound rather desperate as they claim
that, although the flow moss was ‘incapable of possession as not being fit for pasture, yet in time of frost it
can be accessed and though this may not be very lucrative, yet that possession is all that is needed in a
question of prescription’ [Prescription is ownership exercised by use of land rather than demonstrated by
written title; if you have used it without protest by your neighbours it can become yours].
Such evidence is not very satisfactory but, at the same time, there is no serious dispute that the pasture was
not of great account even on the outer fringes; the claims for some pasturing on the ‘flow moss’ are surely
mere tokens. The witnesses do not mention the outer edges as they were not in dispute. Where ‘improvements’
had been wrought at Pollabay and Littleward and so on, there was no serious attempt to wrest ownership
from the present proprietors; it was no longer part of the moss but of the surrounding agricultural lands.
7.3
Mid 18th to mid 19th centur y
Peat cutting probably continued unabated until quite late in this period and was not abandoned until about
the 1920s. Indeed, it probably accelerated as the village of Thornhill was established in the 1690s as a
small centre for local trade and manufacture 297. By the 1730s the farms along the northern edge of the
moss were leasing out peat cutting rights to their village neighbours who had no other source of fuel and at
the same time, some of the purchasers of plots in Thornhill purchased peat cutting rights as part of their
feus 298 and a few Moss Tenancies were created below Thornhill as well as those at Wester Polder and
Pendicles of Collymoon which are discussed elsewhere.
The early 19th century witnesses in the Division of Boquhapple and Polder Moss agreed that the main value
of the moss was for peats. Walter Spittal, for example, was asked what its chief use was and answered that
it was for peats. One of the lawyers, probing for an opening, presses to know if he is referring to the main
use of the surface or of the substance or deeper layers and Spittal is clear that he includes the substance;
296
CS21/Division of Moss Flanders/22/12/1798 Answers for John Campbell to Petition of James Erskine, 1794.
Dixon, 1995.
298
NAS CC6/12/10 pp 192–195, tack dated 1735 by James Drummond to Alexander Wright.
297
101
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
asked if the surface is not good for pasture he replied that it was of very little use except where peat had
been dug when it provided pasture until it was cut again 299. George Moir agreed that peat was the main
use (p 9) as do many others but makes the interesting point that cutting was now carried on more regularly
on a front than in the past – something which was clearly necessary for clearance but a method which would
produce less disturbance of the surface and so less of the better sort of pasture, if Moir was correct.
The limited value of the pasturage on the mosses has been discussed (Wildlife/Heather, Grass and Herbage).
In general, at least by the early 19th century, people thought that it was better to send cattle to the ‘highlands’
than to the moss. But the witnesses do provide some evidence of how it was grazed. The evidence, given at
Thornhill, is considered in outline here; a fuller version is included below. It is worth emphasising that the
moss which they describe was not a pristine wilderness. Quite apart from the ancient tree loss described by
Turner and the peat cutting which had been going on for centuries (or even for millennia) we have also seen
that drains had been cut across the moss since at least the mid 18th century and that these drains were
widespread in the area the witnesses describe, broadly the area east of Ward of Goodie and Easter Polder.
Most of the stock went on a daily basis and returned home at night so they represent a drain of nutrients
from the moss or – seen from another perspective – an input of nutrients to their home farms as they drop
the dung overnight. They did not just graze the moss on these journeys but also pastured along the loans
[lanes] and other access routes, quite apart from the chance that they wandered onto the fields surrounding
the moss, in spite of the vigilance of their herds and the neighbours. In spite of some ambiguity about how
closely they were herded there is little doubt that they were generally accompanied – or at least supervised.
Only one witness suggests that some stock may sometimes have spent the night on the moss. It was mainly
heifers and dry cows which grazed the moss and even for them it was seen as inferior to some of the
alternatives. Milk cows and in-calf cows rarely grazed the moss due to the danger of getting bogged down.
Some witnesses said that stock might go to the moss at any time of year but most agree that spring and early
summer was the main season. That was probably the time when the grazing was best and William Maxwell
says that his father might send the milk cows in spring – partly to keep them off the better pasture and
perhaps aware that dry weather would leave the moss firmer – but that in summer only the dry cows went.
Numbers were small and few of the witnesses mention more than low single figures per farm; one man notes
that it was not worth hiring a herd for two or three heifers. But most of the herds were unpaid children and
some families sent only two heifers. It is unlikely that the total exceeded a few dozen. One witnesses
mentions a horse grazing the moss and a few mention sheep but they were clearly less significant.
But there were areas of the moss, around Mime and elsewhere, that had been improved though they were
still unenclosed. William Harvey had some such grazing, emphasises that it was good enough for milk cows
and that he would certainly drive his neighbours stock off it; he needed two herds, one for the milk cows
and one for the queys. James Murdoch came from the same area and speaks of his father sometimes having
fewer than a dozen cattle on the moss-head and sometimes 22 or 23, including some horses. John Graham,
another tenant of the improved southern fringes was adamant that they kept others jealously off it, his
exception ‘he once allowed a neighbour’s sheep to come south when asked as there was lying snow and
they needed pasture’ proves his more usual rule that ‘they kept herds to keep the stock from harm and to
prevent trespasses, particularly on the improved ground.’
299
CS235/H/22/1 p 6–7.
102
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
So, the economic value of the pasture was limited; but the exercise of the rights of pasturage had other roles.
The idea of ‘prescription’ mentioned above was an important part of property and if estates did not use the
moss they lost their claim to own part; that usage was exercised by the tenants in the way we have just seen
and the evidence of their usage is the evidence of the landowners’ ownership. That is why the court heard
their evidence!
Another value was more social. Most of the herds were children and young people – as they were on other
commonties. The work provides a series of graded social and economic responsibilities for the children.
What they are guarding – as millions of children continue to do worldwide – is the family’s wealth. In a
similar case concerning the Sheriffmuir, in the Ochil Hills, one man says that he started by herding the sheep
and when he was a little older he took the cattle.
The witnesses speak at a moment when attitudes to bogs were changing. Indeed, it is interesting that many
of them are actually speaking of the moss as it was when they were children and it is not always clear that
the same practices continued as they had 40 or 50 years before. For generations before them the moss was
a source of peat and of grazing; probably also of rushes and heather for thatch. Graham makes the point,
as do many others, that the trees buried in mosses, were a significant source of fuel; wood was otherwise
not readily available in much of Scotland and it has, of course, very different qualities as a fuel than does
peat, with a fiercer heat and it could be used for building, too. All these materials and activities would
ultimately contribute to the middens; as dung, ash, rotted thatch. The moss, thus, supplied materials whose
analogues are now purchased from the gas company, the builders merchant and, most importantly, the
fertilizer supplier. It was a source of inputs to settlements which had limited access to markets and very few
other sources of inputs. For such people bogs were ‘a bounty of a merciful providence’ and in the
17th century Scots were glad to have a good peat bog and rarely, if ever, comment on the possibility of
removing it. But to the ‘Improvers’ a bog was ‘useless waste’ or ‘immense deserts, … a blot upon the beauty
and a derision to the agriculture of the British Isles’ on which, according to that commentator, the only
animals to be found were ‘a few grouse, lizards and serpents’
300
. The two Statistical Accounts for Port of
Menteith give a nice illustration of change. In the 1790s, we are told that the southern parts of the parish
are level and consist of moss, meadow, dryfield and carse. ‘The moss is very extensive, and affords plenty
of fuel, which is, however, obtained with considerable trouble and expense.’
By the 1840s we are told ‘about half the parish is mountainous moor and level peat moss; and the
productive surface is further diminished by lakes …’ It is an interesting irony that before very long the grouse
would become very valuable; and that a couple of centuries later, the lizards and serpents are having their
day, too.
300
Cited Smout, 2000, p 20.
103
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Synopsis of the evidence on grazing from CS235/H/22/1, Pursuer’s Proof, evidence given at Thornhill
14 May 1810:
George Moir: About 30 years ago he paid grass mail [rent] to Mr Forrester of Polder for
pasturing queys [heifers] as he had nobody to look after them himself that year and it was
not worth hiring someone to look after three queys. These queys also went on the green
ground of Mr Forrester’s corn edge (p 9–10).
Janet Adams, aged 53, spouse of George Moir (above) (p 11) has know the moss for
46 years and lived locally all her life; for the first 7 years she herded cattle on the roads
leading to the moss and at times upon the moss; that when the cattle were on the moss they
were allowed to go where they pleased if they did not destroy the corn; they never met with
any interruption on the High Moss and she never knew any marches there. Starting 33 years
ago and for 20 years she herded her cattle daily on the moss and never met any
interruption; she lived in the neighbourhood since she left the moss about 10 years ago and
during that period her son pastured his cattle the same way; at some periods her husband’s
cattle were in use to lie out in the night time upon part of the moss opposite [p 12]
John Buchanan’s land and no fault was found; at times they might go south, through the
Moss to Poldar without interruption unless they went into the corn; and likewise the Poldar
cattle would be turned if they came to the Boquhapple corn: Asked if the Moss Head is
capable of pasturing cattle at all seasons or if it is so springy and wet as that it cannot bear
cattle during the greater part of the year, depones that ‘her husband’s cattle went into the
moss summer and winter and in wet and dry weather and they were often laired [got stuck
or bogged down]. That the Cattle she herded to her father as [p 13] aforesaid never
exceeded two at a time, sent some of the neighbours who had acres [small holdings],
also herded their cattle along with her on the roads and the moss and these roads were all
upon the pursuers grounds’.
Peter McCulloch, quarrier in Kippen, widower aged 50 or 55 or 56 Has known the Moss
for 40 years and lived with his father in Norrieston from his infancy till he was fit for service
which was about 40 years ago. During that time he herded his father’s cow and horse upon
the north side of the river Goody. That sometimes while he stayed with his father he was
upon the spreadfields of the moss in question with James McNees herds and his father when
the father was casting and winning his peats; he does not remember any march on the
mosshead nor any cattle pasturing there.
Margaret Graham, spouse William Graham, weaver in Kippen, aged 50 years and
upwards; was born and lived till her marriage on the lands now belonging to John Paterson
and was married about 36 years ago … William Dounie, her uncle, with whom she stayed
before her marriage, was tenant to the defender. Her uncle’s milk cattle pastured in summer
on the low ground and his yeld cattle were sent to the Highland hills to be summered; that
in winter and Lenthron [Lent] her Uncle’s cattle went of their own accord to the moss-head,
seeking the long grass among the heather and were allowed to traverse where they liked
without interruption.
104
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Daniel McLaren, Moss tenant in King’s Boquhapple, married aged 38, … Deponent’s father
usually had two cows and some queys usually which he put on the Moss in Winter and
Lenthron [Lent] but deponent is not sure if they were put there in summer or not; when the
cattle were on the moss there was nobody with them …his own cattle still pasture in the
same way, except that about three years ago, when they were challenged, he agreed that
for the future they would observe the march on the spreadfield but would go as usual on the
high moss.
Peter Wright, moss tenant in King’s Boquhapple, married aged 56 … deponent has two
cows and put them to the moss head for pasture in winter and summer when he pleases ;
the cows go where they like on the moss head except for about 6 years past then
John Paterson does not let them go west upon the moss above his lands; he has seen
Mr McGibbon’s tenants’ cattle [20], that is their yeld queys come west on the moss head
sometimes as far as opposite to the deponent’s ground and never interrupted them and never
saw any marches on the moss head. …
Archibald Campbell, feuer in Thornhill, married aged 60 has known King’s Boquhapple
moss since he remembers anything … and all the cattle might pasture together on the moss
head without interruption except when they went over to the grass on the Mime Moss and
then ‘Thomas Murdoch, tenant of Mime under Mr Forrester of Poldar hunted them off with
dogs’ This pasturage he frequently saw at the time of peats casting and leading but had
little occasion to be in the moss at other times. …
Paul Doig, tenant in Moss side of Kings Boquhapple, married aged 33; he possesses land
belonging to Drummond next the moss and succeeded his own father in that about 3 years
ago; he herded his father’s cows when he was young and then went to service but came
and visited his father once or twice a year… all the tenants herded their beasts on the moss
together though he does not recollect that John Buchanan had beasts there; he herded for
two or three years for his father; asked if the cattle which pastured the moss had other
pasture in the low ground belonging to the owners’ individually depones that it was just as
the people chose to allot it for them, that it was the yeld cattle [dry cows] that were pastured
on the moss and the milk cows on the low grounds and when he herded as aforesaid some
of the tenants had one or two sheep that went to the moss with the yeld queys; asked if the
pasture on the moss is of any value he said that it is certainly of some value but he is not a
judge of its value [26]; that in wet weather there are some parts in the moss in which cattle
are apt to lare [get bogged down]; that the chief use that is made of the moss is for peats
for elding [fuel].
Margaret Paterson, widow John Doig at Moss Side aged about 60 years … she knew the
moss for 30 years and lived with her husband (father of last witness); her husband put his
yeld queys to the moss when he had any and they went over the moss above the parties
[to the Process] till John Paterson, one of the defenders, came to Moss Side these last
20 years; she knows no marches on the moss.
105
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
James Stewart, tanner in Thornhill, unmarried about 40 years; he served Peter Mitchell,
tenant of the land now belonging to John Paterson, defender, for 4 years ending about
21 years ago. Peter Mitchell was in use to drive all his cows up to the moss in the Month
of April and beginning of May to save his grass on the banks of the Goody; the cows got
leave to go where they liked on the moss; that John Buchanan did not wish to let them go
west on the Moss head but they could go as far east as they liked; and the Moss-side and
Mitchell’s cattle mixed on the Mosshead; one year Mitchell kept his queys at home on the
moss all summer and one herd herded them and John Doig’s queys together, Doig being one
of the pursuers tenants on the moss side … Mitchell more usually sent his queys to the
Highlands to pasture in summer except for the year mentioned and he thought they were ill
summered that year and therefore did not continue; in view of this he [the deponent] did not
think the pasturage of great value; the pasturage of the whole moss is certainly worth 20s
per year but he is not a judge of the value and he has not been on the moss head since he
served Mitchell.
Walter, shoemaker in Thornhill, aged 31 had been servant to Peter Mitchell, then tenant in
Moss Side then the tenant of the defender John Paterson’s lands from Lenthron to Martinmas
about 15 years ago; he tended Mitchell’s queys on the moss in the summer time and they
mixed with the cattle of George Moir … Duncan McKerracher had a few sheep beside his
queys; the Mitchell and McKerracher milk cows did not go on the moss but on the low
ground …
William Maxwell, smith in Norrieston, married aged 36 … his father was tenant and left
about 21 years ago; he herded his father’s cattle there some years; and his father also had
Nethertown farm from the pursuer, part of Boquhapple lands; ‘and for a fortnight in April or
May every year his father put part of his milk cows and his yeld cows to pasture on the moss
to hain his milk cows gang but they would not put a cow heavy with calf or soon after her
calving upon the moss owing to its softness; the queys continued on the moss all summer;
and were not interrupted if they kept of the Earl of Murray’s Moss and Thomas Murdoch’s
green parks’ … ‘and Doig’s family noticed his queys from their house without a person to
herd them’ …
Alexander Moir, tenant in Moss side, aged 30, married; lived there all his life and his father
left there and went to Ballochneck about 11 years ago; he used to herd his father’s beasts
and work on the farm and he has since been tenant himself; his father and he have always
grazed the queys on the moss in summer and sometimes in winter; mixed with others etc
[p 34] he has taken his father’s herds from among Murdoch’s [and other’s] at night to take
them home …
106
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Synopsis of Evidence GD24/1/808A/2 Proof adduced for David Forrester of Polder, Stirling
26 Dec 1810.
William Harvey aged 53, married, tenant in Byreburn of Gargunnock; was tenant in
Littleward for 16 years on a lease of 16 years which ended 9 years ago. He pastured his
cattle on the moss-head of Littleward but not in common with his neighbours and would have
been sorry if it was in common as ‘much was improved and was good grass, even for milch
cows’; he would not allow his neighbours’ cattle to come on his part; no visible marches but
he could point out where they were known to be; he went through the moss with George
McCulloch, the previous tenant, and got him to point out the marches and George Moir
pointed out a similar line ‘there was neither stob nor stone but there was a sort of hollow’:
he kept a herd with his milk cows and also one with his queys which he sent to the moss
head, the quey herd would come home for his breakfast and return; the herds were to keep
the stock from any injury whatsoever; ‘His herds generally came from the Highlands, and went
back to it after the herding season was over; and he does not know any of them now’ …
Archibald Paterson aged 58, married, tenant in Little Kerse; his father, Walter was tenant in
Polder for 19 years and deponent was 11 years old when they went there and stayed there
with his father during the whole 19 years; On going errands to Thornhill or to church they
would go through the mosses of Littleward and Myme and also had occasion to go through
Boquhapple moss and he herded part of a summer on the moss head further north than the
corn-head of Littleward; by the corn head he means a part of a high moss which had been
laid over with clay for the purpose of making land of it, upon which the milch cows of Little
Ward pastured; he did not pasture on the moss of Boquhapple as there was pasture enough
on the south side; the only march he knew of was pointed out by the late Polder who said
one ran from the Cross Pow to the head of the Mime and he pastured his cattle to the south
of that. But there was nobody wanted to interrupt him in those days [when he was a herd
– there is clearly a tone of contrast with the present here!!!] The Cross Pow was a little north
and west of Duck Dubs;
James Murdoch tenant in Glenrig on the estate of Callander, aged 30, married [p 62–3]
lived at Mime from infancy till 4 years past and herded his fathers cattle on the moss from
the time he was able till he was about 14 or 15 years old and saw them on the moss
afterwards: sometimes his father did not have more than a dozen cattle on the moss head,
sometimes two or three and twenty, including horses: they never joined with other tenant’s
cattle and if others came on Mime moss they were hunted off, sometimes violently:
John Graham, aged 76, married, at Greenock was tenant of Littleward and Mime with the
moss for 5 years and it is 52 years last Martinmas since he entered to possession … they
pastured the moss with cattle, horses and sheep but they did not mix with those from the
opposite side and for this purpose they kept herds; … he once allowed a neighbour’s sheep
to come south when asked as there was lying snow and they needed pasture; they kept
herds to keep the stock from harm and to prevent trespasses, particularly on the improved
ground.
107
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
From 1810 to the mid century there is again little or no evidence about usage of the moss apart from the
continuing effort at clearance of peat and creation of arable around the edges, discussed elsewhere. Dams
must have been maintained for this purpose. It is quite possible that more and better pastures and the spread
of enclosures on the carse generally had rendered the moss pasture redundant even before peat clearance
was abandoned.
7.4
Mid 19th to mid 20th centur y
By the 1850s, as we have seen (see Wildlife/Hunting, Grouse etc) the moss and the sporting rights were
reserved from the agricultural leases on the Cardross estate. Grazing the moss may well already have been
in decline – in any case there were more and better alternatives – clover and rye grass rather than a few
mouthfuls of grass between the heather, proper hedges to divide pasture from arable, more productive
grassland as drainage and manures improved, stone and slate quarries and a builders’ merchant and, as
time went on, schooling which provided an alternative way of structuring the children’s time.
Meanwhile, as we have seen, agriculture was in an increasingly parlous state, rents were actually falling
and the estates were struggling as well as the tenants. Grouse shooting, in a Scotland newly accessible by
rail, was an attractive proposition. Heather burning is recorded on the Cardross estate by the 1860s and
it would be surprising if the other estates did not attempt to cash in as well. Leases excluded the tenants from
the moss and forbade them to have dogs which roamed free over the fields, clearly with a view to prevent
them hunting themselves or scaring the game. There is no positive evidence for continued drainage work but
it would be surprising if it was not one of the gamekeeper’s jobs. When, in 1878, after an extended spell
of hot weather, the fire struck the moss in August, the heather burned fiercely and there was major damage.
It was the loss of game cover which the newspapers bemoaned – rather than of pasture. How far drainage,
heather burning and lack of grazing had prepared the moss for that disaster it is impossible to say on the
basis of the historical evidence.
That the heather and game recovered to some degree is attested by indirect evidence that shooting for grouse
was still important in the 1920s and perhaps even later. Grouse butts were still in use in the pre WWII period;
but bags had declined significantly by the 1950s and 1960s when there does not seem to have been any
other major use being made of the moss. The drains have not been maintained for a long time – perhaps
WWI was the watershed for this as for so many other activities 301. Peat cutting seems to have continued so
late as about the 1920s, mainly by people in Thornhill who had peat cutting rights with their feus.
7.5
Mid 20th centur y –
Some pasturage may have continued on parts of the moss, at least on peripheral areas, into the fairly recent
past. A small fenced area north of Littleward was being grazed by the previous owner, Mr Moir, before he
sold it to the Carricks. The detached area of moss south of Mill of Goodie has been used to graze sheep
in winter quite recently; but it is quite thin and has been well drained. It provides a firmer footing for the
stock than does carse clay and also prevents them puddling the spring pasture. But ‘most farmers now have
no reason to go on the moss’ and Mr Carrick regards the small area which they own as ‘useless’ 302.
Peat cutting by the Caledonian Peat Company has been considered elsewhere.
301
302
Orr Ewing, pers comm.
Carrick, pers comm.
108
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
8
MISCELLANEOUS
8.1
Summar y
This is a collection of topics which, whilst important, are not well covered by the available sources. Building
and building methods are only touched on where significant information relevant to the moss has emerged
or can be inferred. Roads, bridges, communications and access are touched on throughout the Report but
some core information is brought together here. People, some of whom have been mentioned in the Report,
are a key element in interpreting the site for the general public and some hopeful ‘characters’ are mentioned
but not in any detail. Information on Place Names is mentioned.
8.2
Roads, tracks and bridges
There was a road along the northern side of the moss, more or less following the line of the present Blairdrummond
– Port of Menteith road from an early date. It is in that context that the commentator of 1646 notes
Diverse distances, 14 Januarie 1646. The Strath of Monteith and all upon the Northsyd of
Gudy – upon the south thereof most part is moss except little Ward … Blairchoill a myl be
east Rednock, half a myl be east that upon the moss is Kailly muck, then Rowiskich … and
these thrie are upon the moss marching with Gudy River 303.
Indeed, without a road of some sort the founding of Thornhill in the 1690s would have been fairly
meaningless! But Stobie is the first map to show a road and perhaps it had been improved about the mid
18th century, as many roads in Perthshire were, following the ’45.
Cooper’s Map of the Forth in 1730 does not show roads but at Cardross the words ‘Forth is Passable here’
are written along roughly the line of the present road/bridge and two short parallel lines cut across the river,
close to the initial C of Cardross; elsewhere, as at Stirling or Doune, this means a Bridge. The first
(ie uppermost) bridge across the Forth, according to Sibbald is Cardross Bridge 304. But other sources suggest
that a ferry was the more usual manner of crossing at Cardross prior to the modern bridge in 1774 305.
The major east-west route of course, was the Stirling – Dumbarton route, not along the line of the modern
A road but higher up the slope, passing via Touch, Gargunnock Kirk, Kippen Kirk and so on. The Ford at
Frew was only superseded by a bridge in the early 19th century and a new route was probably constructed
to Thornhill at that time. Prior to that the route had passed across the lands of Frew to Bridge of Goodie,
on record by 1646 306, apparently replaced some time in the 18th century and again since the mid
20th century. It is thus not true that there were no roads on the carse prior to modern times – though it is true
that the land presented peculiar difficulties until the period of modern road building methods. The heavy
carse clays were quickly reduced to deep, sticky mud in wet weather – and froze into rigid ruts in dry –
both equally difficult to negotiate for heavy, horse-drawn vehicles 307.
303
McFarlane’s Geographical Collections, II, p 610.
Sibbald, 1707, 76.
305
Canmore Website of NMRS.
306
McFarlane’s Geographical Collection, II, p 610.
307
Old Statistical Account, Gargunnock, p 355 for roads on carse.
304
109
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Access to the farms on the north side – such as Ward of Goodie and Moss-side – seems to have been by
either fords or bridges across the Goodie 308. The loans [lanes] which accessed the farms were everywhere
a significant site for foraging livestock as they were driven by their herds to and from the moss and other
unfenced grazings, their fertility enhanced by the diurnal deposits.
To the south, East Polder (with its social pretensions as a laird’s house) had road access by 1783 (Stobie,
Map 9 and Map 10); it is interesting that this corresponds to the best-drained, most intensively reclaimed
part of the moss though no direct causal relationship can be shown. But West Polder and Faraway were
accessed by boat
19th century
310
309
. That was a situation which increasingly irritated the laird of Cardross in the early
. In 1834 he noted that the tenant of Park was to have a boat for going to and fro across
the river to facilitate work at Faraway; he already projected bringing the road from the Polder Moss
settlement to Ryndaw. And, he noted, the purchase of Killorn was valuable as it gave an option for ‘opening
a communication across the Forth with the Turnpike road’, continuing that
A Bridge thrown across the River at this place would be a great improvement to the estate
but it requires much consideration and it would require to be restricted. It would be more
desirable after more of the moss in that direction is cleaned. Many people would subscribe
to it and there are a number of stones suitable for the purpose lying near the best site.
A simple iron bridge of one span might answer the purpose.
The house of Ladyland has been let for an inn and in a short time sufficient land for a small
farm might be reclaimed to let along with it. There are also some patches of land in the
neighbourhood which might be feued to advantage and a village formed if thought
desirable.
If forming a village at Killorn was an over-ambitious idea, the bridge was not and by 1839 an offer had
been received from James Smith of Deanston, proposing to build the bridge, enclosing a choice of plans
and quotations 311. This seems to have been built almost immediately, tenants, however, being required to
pay for using it and forbidden to circumvent the charges by continuing to use their boats! In 1844 the bridge
was one of the achievements the Memorialist looked back on with most satisfaction – though he had still not
completed the project of bringing the road round from Polder to link all the way to Faraway and Ryndaw.
Made access routes to all farms had been established by the time of the 1st Edition OS. And there have
been few major road changes since that time.
308
Map 12, Map 13, Map 14.
NAS, SC67/49/21, p 163–4, tack Dr Stirling to John McKullie: NAS, SC44/59/2 pp 84–87 tack between
James Forrester and James Hay.
310
GD15/46 memorandum book.
311
NRAS 1468/24 Item 1 Letter dated 17 June 1839 from James Smith of Deanston with draft Plans.
309
110
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
8.3
Buildings, walls and enclosures
This section comprises little more than a few fragments of information on a potentially important subject.
Until the 18th century, at least, most buildings and built structures necessarily consisted of the cheapest
materials and those were necessarily those which were locally obtainable. Since stones are not available
on the carse other materials had to be used – for enclosures as well as for buildings. It is very striking, looking
down from the Thornhill-Port of Menteith road, even today, that towards the bottom of the slope a drystane
dyke will suddenly become a hedge on an earth bank as it joins the carse!
The most readily available building material in the world is earth, used in many forms. It can be astonishingly
durable. However, it is not usually the most prestigious building material and the availability of stone was
probably one reason for most landowners houses being round the moss edges, on the dryfield. However,
Easter (and perhaps Wester) Polder were of stone from an early date. But prior to the late 18th or early
19th century most buildings on the carse were of earth, probably mainly either turf of clay 312. The tradition
in Scotland was that the landlord supplied the timber and the tenants did the work; where the tenants
supplied the timber, the crucial supports, then they were entitled to remove them at the end of their leases.
Ramsay is just one of those to comment generally:
in most of the carses, the tenants’ houses were mostly built of fail or divot [forms of turf],
which in a few years had the appearance of a wall of clay. Yet, when properly thatched
they were warmer and freer from damp that what was built of stone and clay … the chief
objection to this form of building was its uncovering so much ground 313. [he refers to the
need to strip huge areas of turf around the houses].
And again:
Fifty or sixty years ago [ie in the 3rd quarter of the 18th century], a tenant beginning a
19 year lease, would have built a complete steading for 100 merks [a little over £5 sterling],
beside the great timber. The materials were cheap and all the neighbours helped with the
work and carriages 314.
We would expect many of these buildings to be of one or two rooms with little more than a partition between
them. The hearth tax records confirm that even the lesser lairds had often only one or two hearths in the late
17th century. John Don, proprietor of Littleward had only one hearth. Henry Dow of Easter Polder and
Robert Hardie there had 3 between them; James Forrester of Wester Polder had 2 315.The older records give
no descriptions of the buildings and it is fortuitous that a passing mention in a lease to one of the
Moss Pendicles at Wester Polder indicates that the incoming tenant was to build a dwelling house, barns
and byre of turf at his own expense, the proprietor furnishing the wood. It is the only definite record for our
area – but presupposes that the tenant will know how to do it and be able to find materials to hand etc 316.
312
313
314
315
316
Caddell’s claim that houses were carved out of peat at Blairdrummond is not supported by any contemporary evidence
and is highly improbable. Old Statistical Account, Gargunnock p 356 for description of houses of stone and clay.
Ramsay, II, p 200.
Ramsay, II, 208.
NAS E69/19/1 Hearth Tax Returns for Kincardine and Port parishes.
NRAS 1468/5 Minute of tack to Minute of tack to Donald McNaughton dated October 1831.
111
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
The ‘Improvement’ period was associated with the building of more substantial farms and improving roads
and bridges facilitated that. Again, the Gargunnock Old Statistical Account gives a good indication that
change was already under way there. But there are no accounts or descriptions of the older buildings and
none for the new from before the mid 19th century. Certainly, by the 1840s, with the possible exception of
the Moss Settlers, we would expect all new structures to be of stone. That is clearly the case with the sort
of buildings listed for insurance purposes in 1860s (See above page ???). Various accounts
317
tend to
confirm that impression. In 1864 a boiler and engine house were added at South Flanders and total
building expenditure was estimated at over £1300
318
. By the mid 19th century all the more substantial
farms had a range of buildings of specialised function and substantially built; many houses from that period
survive across the carselands and surrounding area today and most of the farm buildings have been in use
until the recent past as farm amalgamations, mechanisation and the scale of modern machinery render
them redundant.
8.4
Settlement and abandonment
The pattern of settlement in the vicinity of East Flanders moss has been remarkably constant. Most names
recorded in the 15th and 16th centuries are still settled sites. And most of the presently settled sites are on
record from the 15th and 16th centuries. In some cases, as can be seen from the Site Specific document,
lost names can be accounted for by a change of name; thus Hornhawick of the 16th century became
Faraway of the 18th century – with the caution that it may not correspond exactly to the same site. For other
sites named in the 16th century the correlations are less clear; Drumnaculloch and Ryndaw may or may not
have been settled sites in the 16th century but are merely field names by the 18th century, when they can
be located on the estate plans. No name can be associated with the medieval homestead which has
probably survived only because it was thought to be a Roman Camp and was thus protected during the
19th century (see Site Specific doc under Ballangrew for details).
Sites which have been abandoned include the two Mains of Cardross, which were amalgamated into
Faraway and the Policy Parks in the early 19th century and Pollabay, always a subsidiary of Blaircessnock,
abandoned in the late 19th century. Elsewhere, too, some farm cottages have been abandoned and the
case of the Pendicles or Moss Settlers has been discussed in some detail (Chapter 4). There has been some
movement of sites from their original locations; see Map 20. Mr Carrick at Littleward points out that
the present site is now several hundred yards from the original, which he is aware of from ploughing
the land (Carrick, pers comm.). Easter Polder is clearly not the laird’s house of the early 18th century.
But Ward of Goodie, Wester Moss-side and others are at or very close to their oldest recorded sites so that
the chances of archaeological remains surviving are very slight, particularly given the probability of turf or
clay construction.
317
318
1843, NRAS 1468/5, wright work at Ballangrew; 1858, NRAS 1468/44 new farm of South Flanders; etc.
1868/46 Costs of South Flanders Steading 1864.
112
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
8.5
People associated with the moss
People have clearly owned, occupied and used the moss for centuries and some of those since the medieval
period are identifiable. This is not the place to consider detailed biographies but we might note some
categories of interest and the sort of information we likely to be available:
Abbots and monks of Inchmahome – a few names, seals of the priory, daily monastic routine and the
economy of monasteries in general.
Earls of Menteith – names from the 12th–17th century, seals, domestic arrangements, power and politics,
castles and other residences etc.
Monarchs of Scotland – who owned the Stewartry and exercised their rights through their stewards –
Ward of Goodie, it will be recalled, was given to the Norie family in celebration of the birth of the future
James III. James IV hunted at or around Port of Menteith and Mary was sheltered on Inchmahome for a few
days as a child. Portraits, copious detail.
Cardross [and other] owners – names from 16th century, power and politics (including Mary, queen of
Scots), Mar as Regent of Scotland, several prominent in politics and religion, and later in the legal
profession; David Erskine was an official of the House of Commons and the Orr Ewings have military
connections. Portraits for many of the Cardross people; other owners (for Polder etc) will provide less detail.
Tenants and users – the details provided by the witnesses could be amplified in some cases, using standard
local historical methods. We are fortunate, from that perspective, that they include a number of women and
older people but that most are referring to their presence on the moss when they were children; they are
clearly the ideal vehicles for interpretation of the moss as a place to use. For the mid to late 19th century
the census records allow some reconstruction of households and more could be done – as was seen in
considering the Pendicles in Chapter 4. Other users would include the grouse shooters, gamekeepers,
poachers etc; some of those who rented Cardross would be researchable.
8.6
Place names
Little new has emerged on the derivation of local place names – largely due to a lack of early forms. Most names
appear to be either of Gaelic or Scots origin and the Gaelic ones are likely to be pre-13th century.
Flanders Moss – often referred to as Moss Flanders prior to the 19th century. This may mean that it is of
Gaelic origin since the adjective comes after the noun in Gaelic. But without early forms it gets us no nearer
to knowing which adjective was originally intended. Any connection with Flanders is purely fanciful.
Pow – pow is a common name for streams on the carse around Stirling – and we have Powblack near Frew,
the Pow Burn and many others. Some of the witnesses seem to apply the term to the rough grazing either
side of what is now called the High Moss Pow as well as to the stream itself.
Polder – any confusion with the Dutch ‘polder’ should be resisted. Both Poldar and Polder are found,
the earliest being Polder in 1533; Poldure in 1636 (Retours, Perth, 466) seems anomalous especially
as the corresponding charters had Polder. The assumption that it is from Gaelic ‘poll dhu’ – black pow –
is reasonable but unconfirmed.
113
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adams, I.H. Directory of Former Scottish Commonties, Scottish Record Society, 1971.
Bailey, Wm. A Treatise on the better employment and more comfortable support of the poor in Workhouses.
Together with some observations on the growth and culture of flax. London, MDCCLVIII.
Bragg, O. ‘Conservation and Trees at Flanders Moss’ Forth Naturalist and Historian, 23, 37–49.
Booth, A. ‘A Vegetation Survey of East Flanders Moss, Northern Section and a comparison with the
southern’ Forth Naturalist and Historian, 23, 21–35.
Harvey Brown, J.A. (1867). ‘Collected Observations on the Birds of Stirlingshire’, The Zoologist, (2nd Series)
2, 884–908.
Harvey Brown, J.A. (1869). ‘Ornithological Notes on Stirlingshire’ in The Zoologist, (2nd Series) 4, p 1788.
Chalmers, G. Caledonia: or a historical and topographical account of North Britain, 7 vols + index,
Paisley, Vol. 1, 93 (1887–94).
Cooper, R. [Map of] The River and Firth of Forth, Edinburgh, 1730.
Coppock, J.T. An Agricultural Atlas of Scotland, John Donald, Edinburgh, 1976.
Corbett L. and Dix N.J. (eds) Central Scotland: Land, Wildlife, People, Forth Naturalist and Historian, 1993.
Cox, M. et al. ‘Early-Medieval hemp retting at Glasson Moss, Cumbria in the context of the use of
Cannabis sativa during the historic period’, Transactions of the Cumberland & Westmorland Antiquarian
& Archaeological Society, vol 100, 2000.
Crane, M.S. (1962). ‘The Parish of Port of Menteith’ in The Third Statistical Account of Scotland;
Perthshire and Kinross, 1979.
Cunningham Graham, R.B. Notes on the District of Menteith … Second Edition, Stirling, 1907.
Chrystal, W. The Kingdom of Kippen: its History and Traditions, Stirling, 1903.
Devine, T. The Scottish Nation, 1700–2000, Penguin Press, 1999.
Dixon, G.A. ‘The Founding of Thornhill, 1696,’ Forth Naturalist and Historian, 18, 1995, 75–82.
Drysdale, J. ‘Carse Farming in Stirlingshire’ in Transactions of the Highland and Agricultural Society of
Scotland, 5th series, 1909, vol 21, 74–101.
Dundas, J.C. & Hutchison, A.S. ‘The Parish of Kincardine’ in The Third Statistical Account of Scotland:
Perthshire and Kinross, Edinburgh, 1979.
Durie, Alastair J. The Scottish Linen Industry in the Eighteenth Century, Edinburgh, 1979.
Ellis, C. ‘The Palaeoenvironmental and Archaeological Potential of Flanders Moss East’, Forth Naturalist and
Historian, 23 (2000) 51–66.
Erskine, S. (ed) Memoir of Sir D Erskine of Cardross, London, 1926.
114
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Fawcett, R. Inchmahome Priory, Historic Scotland, 1986.
Fenton, A. ‘Paring and Burning’ in The Shape of the Past 2: Essays in Scottish Ethnology, John Donald, 1986.
Fraser, William (ed) The Red Book of Menteith, vol 2 (1880).
Graham, P. A General View of the Agriculture of Stirlingshire, Edinburgh, 1812.
Garnett, T. Observations on a Tour through the Highlands …, 1811.
Haldane, A.R.B. The Drove Roads of Scotland, Newton Abbot, 1973.
Hansom, J.D. & Evans, D.J.A. ‘The Carse of Stirling’ Scottish Landform Example 23, Scottish Geographical
Journal, 116(1) 2000, pp 71–78.
Hansom J.D. & Evans D.J.A. (2000) Scottish Landform Example – 23: The Carse of Stirling. Scottish
Geographical Journal, 116: 71–78.
Harrison, J.G. ‘Lime Supply in the Stirling Area from the 14th to the 18th Centuries’ Forth Naturalist and
Historian 16, 1993.
Harrison, J.G. Between Carron and Avon: The Grangemouth Area since 1600, in Forth Naturalist and
Historian, 20, 1997.
Harrison, John G. ‘The Pottery at Throsk, Stirlingshire c.1600–c.1800’, Proceedings of the Society of
Antiquaries of Scotland (forthcoming, 2003).
Hutchison, A.F. The Lake of Menteith: its islands and vicinity with historical accounts of the Priory of
Inchmahome and the Earldom of Menteith, Stirling, 1899.
McFarlane’s Geographical Collections, II, p 610 ‘Diverse distances, 14 Januarie 16.’ Geographical
Collections, vol 1 p 248 for 17th century positive view of bogs].
McKay, K.J.H. ‘In Search of a Vanished Highway’ in Papers on Blairdrummond and Ochtertyre, reprinted
from the Newletters of Stirling Field and Archaeological Society, 1972–6.
McOwan, R. ‘A Walk Through the Moss’, Scots Magazine, 121(2) May 1984.
Mitchell, John. ‘Old Cornstone Workings in Dumbartonshire and West Stirlingshire with Notes on their
Associated Flora’, Glasgow Naturalist, 22(5), 1995, 485–494.
Mitchell, John. Loch Lomondside, HarperCollins, London, 2001.
Mitchison, R. A History of Scotland, 2nd Edition, Methuen, 1987.
Morris, D.B. ‘Ledum palustre (Labrador Tea)’, Transactions of the Stirling Natural History and Archaeological
Society, 51, 1930, 129–139.
Ramsay, J. Scotland and Scotsmen in the Eighteenth Century, (ed. A. Allardyce), Edinburgh, 1888.
RCAHMS, The Archaeological Sites and Monuments of Stirling District, Central Region, Edinburgh, 1979.
RCAHMS, The Historic Landscape of Loch Lomond and the Trossachs, Edinburgh, 2000.
RCAHMS, ‘Well Sheltered and Watered’ Menstrie Glen, a farming landscape near Stirling, 2001.
Robertson, J. General View of the Agriculture in the Southern Districts of the County of Perth, London, 1794.
115
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Roger, C. A Week at Bridge of Allan, Edinburgh, 1851.
Sanderson, M.H.B. Scottish Rural Society in the Sixteenth Century, Edinburgh, 1982.
Sibbald, Sir Robert. History and Description of Stirlingshire, 1707, Stirling, 1892.
Smith, D.E. ‘Western Forth Valley’ pp 456–465 in J.E. Gordon & D.G. Sutherland (eds) Quaternary of
Scotland, Nature Conservation Committee/Chapman & Hall, 1993.
Smith, D.E. & Holloway, L.K. ‘The Geomorphological Setting of Flanders Moss’, Forth Naturalist and
Historian, 23 (2000) 3–20.
Steele, A. The natural and Agricultural History of Peat-moss or Turf-bog (Edinburgh, 1826).
Stirling McGregor, W. Notes, Historical and Descriptive on the Priory of Inchmahome … Edinburgh, 1815.
Stirling McGregor, W., et al, The New Statistical Account, Parish of Port of Menteith, c.1842.
Symon, J.A. Scottish Farming Past and Present, Edinburgh, 1959.
Thomson, J. General View of the Agriculture of the County of Fife with Observations on the means of
its improvement. Drawn up for the consideration of the Board of Agriculture and Internal Improvement,
Edinburgh, 1800.
Timms, D.W.G. (ed) The Stirling Region, University of Stirling, 1974.
Timperley, Loretta R. (ed) A Directory of Landownership in Scotland c.1770, Scottish Record Society,
1976 Noted to Property Doc.
Whitelaw, A. (1987) The Lesser Black-backed Gulls of Flanders Moss, Scottish Bird News, 5, 7.
Whyte I.D. and Whyte K. Exploring Scotland’s Historic Landscapes, Edinburgh, 1987.
Repor ts Etc
Bannister, J. 1976–7. Flanders Moss, Report for Nature Conservancy.
Department of Agriculture and Fisheries for Scotland, Scottish Peat Surveys, Volume 3: Central
Scotland, HMSO, 1965.
Sheehan, K. An Investigation into the recent management history of Flanders Moss using palaeo-ecological
data, Stirling University M Sc Dissertation, 1996.
Watson, F. Flanders Moss – The Historical Background A Report for Scottish Natural Heritage, 2001.
Websites
www.rcahms.gov.uk – CANMORE.
www.scran.ac.uk – SCRAN – Note that whilst thumbnails can be freely viewed, full-sized images can only
be accessed by users with a password from a subscribing institution.
www.geo.ed.ac.uk.htm – Scottish Geographical Site.
116
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
SITE SPECIFIC DOCUMENT (Edited Version)
Introduction
This is an edited version of the original Site Specific Document, prepared as an aid to the research project.
The fuller version is available on disc as Site Specific Doc in the Appendix folder.
In creating files of this sort I have two main purposes:
1. to identify sites named in documents but not marked on modern maps.
2. to provide an ‘at a glance’ chronology for major events at each named site.
The arrangement is generally alphabetical. But related sites are sometimes grouped together thus:
Boquhapple – Mollan of
Boquhapple – Mains of
Boquhapple – Rottenraw of
Boquhapple – etc
Goodie – Bridge of
Goodie – Mill of
Goodie – Ward of
Polder – Easter
Polder – Wester
The preferred spelling, used in the Header, is generally that used on the modern OS 1:25,000 or 1:50,000
where applicable.
Entries from Maps appear first in order, under the header; documentary references follow, chronologically
so far as possible.
In the case of archaeological sites and ancient monuments I have included information from the CANMORE
Website of National Monument Record of Scotland in the fuller version but only refer to it in this edited version.
Many documents, particularly title deeds, charters etc, list a great many sites and this means that some
duplication is inevitable – though I have tried to reduce that in this edited version. This also means, of
course, that not all the places named in an entry are close to the primary site in the header.
Arnclerich
1783, Stobie shows Arnchlerich as an L shaped block with detached single unit.
1st Edition OS has Arnchlerich (sic) as a single roofed building with a small enclosed garden.
1:50,000 NS601991
1526–1608 GD15/48/1 Inventory of Writs of lands of Drummamikloch and Ardinclerich: – nd 17th
century and last date is 1608.
1556 – RMS – Ardenclerich amongst lands granted to John, commendator of Inchmahome and to
Alexander Erskine of Cangnoir.
117
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
GD124/1/967
5 October 1560
Alexander Erskine in favour of John, Lord Erskine, his brother of lands of Arnprior, Garden, Kepe, Wester Polder,
Easter Polder, Gartclydyng, Arnevicar, Gaytours Over and Nether, Lochend, Ardinclerich, Drummanikloch,
Blairsessnoch, Ballingrew, Hornahaic, and Waird of Guddy.
1785 GD15/365 Jottings with regard to the tacks of Cardross.
John McGibbon to have Arnclerich with some little alteration of the marches for thirty one pounds
eight shillings, eight bolls of meal, twelve carriages, fifteen hens and three dargs of peats, by
Mr Ramsay’s decreet carrying off Moss by the canal of Gudie is discharged if it shall be found to
hurt the canal.
Arnvicar (alias Whitehill)
1747 GD15/65 tack by John Erskine of Carnock to Robert Sands of lands of Nether Arnvicker alias
Whitehill for 18 years.
Ballangrew [note that there is another site, Ballingrew, at NS692990]
1783, Stobie shows Balingrew on the northern edge of the Cardross policies.
1st Edition OS 6” shows Ballingrue (sic) as a U shaped steading with two associated wells and an ancillary
small building.
1:50,000 NS611986
See electronic version for information from CANMORE Website of NMRS.
Type of Site: Defence/Homestead Moat; Roman Coins; Bronze Cauldron.
NMRS Number: NS69NW 5
This site, formerly thought to be a Roman Camp, is now regarded as of medieval origin, perhaps a hunting
lodge, though there is no firm documentary information.
1556 – RMS – Ballingrew amongst lands granted to John, commendator of Inchmahome and to Alexander
Erskine of Cangnoir.
1556/7 GD15/71 1556/7 Feb 12 Tack by Alexander Erskine of Cangoir to Sir James Archibald of lands
of Ballingrew for 5 years.
On parchment, in Scots, sets, ‘all and haill my fourty shilling and fourty penny worth of my landis of Cardross
callit Ballingrew with ye pertinentis lyand in ye said barony of Cardross …’ for five years from Whit next
1567; in houses, biggings, toftis, croftis, outfields, infields, mure, moss, medowis, pastures … he may input
and output tenants, cottars, subtenants, mailers and occupiers; he is to pay 40 merks which is the old rent
and a further 4 merks of augmentation.
GD124/1/967 5 October 1560
Alexander Erskine in favour of John, Lord Erskine, his brother of lands of Arnprior, Garden, Kepe, Wester
Polder, Easter Polder, Gartclydyng, Arnevicar, Gaytours Over and Nether, Lochend, Ardinclerich, Drummanikloch,
Blairsessnoch, Ballingrew, Hornahaic, and Waird of Guddy.
118
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1702 GD15/27 Rental of the Estate of Cardross, 1702
Rental of the Lordship of Cardrois and Eister Garden
Meal
bere
butter
cheese
straw
money
Geo Morrison, Ballengrew
12b
2b
0
0
0
£21 16 08
Alex Buchanan, Ballengrew
12b
2b
0
0
0
£25
1764 NRAS 1468/22 Tacks etc, 1754–1771.
North Ballingrew 1764 – to Andrew McFarlane –
South Ballingrew to George Taylor 1764, with privilege of watering his cattle at the well at the foot
of Rindaw; notes the muir to be divided with North Ballingrew.
1767, GD15/34
Rental of lands of Cardross, Blaircessnock and Ward of Gudie Crop 1767
1
2
3
4
5
6
N Ballingrew
12
2
7
3
0
£18 18 9
S Ballingrew
12
2
7
3
0
£18 11 4
1785 GD15/365 Jottings with regard to the tacks of Cardross 1785.
John Hervy portioner of Wester Boquhapple to have South and North Ballingrew as presently
possessed by himself and formerly by John Taylor & Andrew McFarlane with some little alterations
for forty nine pounds four sh and nine pence twenty four carriages and twenty hens; no occasion
for mentioning the privilege of watering his cattle at Ryndaw.
1786 NRAS 1868/47
Tack Ballengrew to John Hervey 1786 no reservation of roman camp; other general clauses, no
demand to reclaim moss etc.
1800 GD15/41 Report regarding the Estate of Cardross, June 1800.
South and North Ballingrew now in one farm to John Harvey for £56 13s 2.
Has been under-measured and is actually 191 acres and should be let for £116.
This is a tolerable sized farm and the ‘articles of management’ should apply to the arable.
1843 NRAS 1468/5 Miscellaneous estate papers, 1812–1858.
Estimate for wright work for a new house at Ballingrew 1843.
Offer for painting for ditto.
1850 NRAS 1468/1 Additional Report on Several Farms … by John Dickson, Saughton Mains, 14 Oct 1850;
Ballingrew Farm, possessed by Mr Archibald Dow, consisting of 130 acres; estimated at 23/–
per acre and 53 acres of moor pasture at 6/– per acre; total £165 8/–.
The soil of the arable is sandy loam of medium quality about one half of which should be drained
etc …
119
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1851 Roger, 1851, mentions the existence of a Roman Camp in this area, perhaps the first record?
1856; GD1/393/46/1/22 tack to David Chalmers, of the farm of Ballengrue, 1856. For 18 years,
presently possessed by himself; reserving old Roman Camp and 12 yards round, and the water leads and
Ballengrue dam below and also reserves game, pays £165 pa; peats to the office houses at Cardross;
also coal to mansion house etc; to maintain buildings etc, other than the landlords leads for carrying water
to the moss; tile drainage; rotations; lime;
1860 NRAS 1868/46 Miscellaneous 1850–1865 – includes drainage and moss levels.
Costs of South Flanders Steading 1864 Estimates for £1310 including boiler, engine house and
joiner work but little detail.
Particulars of Farm Buildings insured in 1860.
Ballingrue
Dwelling house, milhouse and scullery
£100
Barn, cartshed, granaery
£100
Byre, cattleshed & stable
£120
1865 NRAS 1468/1 Draft Report on the Estate of Cardross, 17 May 1865 by John Arthur …
Ballangrew, David Chalmers, good state of cultivation; the tenant is going to claim for want of
measurement.
1871 GD1/393/46/1/73 Lease Ballengrew to David Chalmers 1871 for 19 years; presently possessed
by him (reservations as above ‘and also reserving the old Roman Camp situated on the said Lands and a
space of ground of twelve yards in breadth outside and around the same; as also reserving the water leads
passing through the said lands and a space of ground of four feet in breadth along each side of the said
leads, with liberty to the Proprietor to take water by the said leads from the high ground to Ballangrue Dam
without compensation; and lastly reserving the game including hares and rabbits’; tenant may keep only one
dog etc; to pay £180 pa; clauses about drainage etc as above, no sheep unless they are properly enclosed
with hurdles and fences and to keep no winter hoggs and to be fined £2 for each loose sheep; and to use
lime;
1903 GD1/393/46/2/38 Lease 1903 Ballangrew to Richard Robb, presently Peter Chalmers, rent £160;
reserves minerals, resumption etc, the Old Roman Camp and 12 yards round; the water lead through the
lands and 4 feet either side with liberty to take water by it from the high ground to Ballangrew and reserving
the game etc; other conditions as before; no sheep unless enclosed and then only ewes and lambs and no
hoggs, whether his own or for wintering; schedule for bought manures; follows a renunciation of this tack
by Robb from 1904.
Ballangrew Wood [includes the Dam]
1st Edition OS is not named and is confined to the northern part of the modern woodland; a spur linking to
the Cardross policies is present, however. Within the wood is a substantial reservoir with a sluice. A burn,
arising near East Lodge and flowing through the Cardross policies via a long narrow ornamental pool,
provides the water supply. The outflow goes south and is fed around the margins of the Moss close to
Pendicles of Wester Poldar.
120
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1:25,000 wood on western edge of moss, the eastern side is irregular and ignores other features; the
western side respects field boundaries and ditches. A wooded spur links this wood to the Cardross policies
and the whole wood has extended southward. The bunding within the wood is not shown but the drainage
channels can be seen and have been linked up with other channels, coming from the Flanders Hill area.
1827–1862
GD1/393/46/1/1 Moss tack by David Erskine to Robert Clark, 1844, [copy in file]
By missive of tack dated 1831 and 1832, Erskine had let to Duncan McNaughton, late tenant in
Cardross, part of Flanders Moss and also the arable and pasture between the moss and the water
of Forth [see South Flanders and Pendicles of Wester Polder] for 32 years from 1827; by that tack,
the tenant had use of the water from the Dam of Ballingrew, though the landlord was to be allowed
exclusive use of the water for three years. The water for the dam came from Glen of Cardross, across
the lands of Rinjaw and Ballingrew, the dam was divided by a bank, which the tenants had to
maintain and which allowed water to be divided and directed to different areas for clearing the
moss; other aspects of the water management are discussed elsewhere.
1834–1844 GD15/46 Memorandum Book … ‘The Moss Settlers at Polder are going remarkably
well on & have a good supply of water to which I lately got an addition by bringing the Burn of
Blaircessnock into the Dam.
… I have accordingly drained and planted a field to eastward of Rindaw and propose to plant a
considerable extent round the Ballingrew Dam towards the south and east, which, if it succeed will
in time be a great ornament as well as shelter to the Dam. …
1834 ‘Walks and rides should be made thro the plantations particularly Keir Hill and something
very pretty might be made of the Dam by dressing the banks and clearing away the decayed
wood, a path leading from it to a terrace walk or drive looking over Lochend to the Lake and Hills,
running out towards Tamavoid, which would be a beautiful situation for a cottage.’
1856; GD1/393/46/1/22 tack to David Chalmers, of the farm of Ballengrue, 1856. For 18 years,
presently possessed by himself; reserving old Roman Camp and 12 yards round, and the water leads and
Ballengrue dam below and also reserves game, pays £165 pa; peats to the office houses at Cardross;
also coal to mansion house etc; to maintain buildings etc, other than the landlords leads for carrying water
to the moss; tile drainage; rotations; lime;
1871, GD1/393/46/1/73 Lease of Ballengrew to David Chalmers 1871 for 19 years; presently
possessed by him (reservations as above ‘and also reserving the old Roman Camp situated on the said Lands
and a space of ground of twelve yards in breadth outside and around the same; as also reserving the water
leads passing through the said lands and a space of ground of four feet in breadth along each side of the
said leads, with liberty to the Proprietor to take water by the said leads from the high ground to Ballangrue
Dam without compensation;
Balverist
1783, Stobie shows E Balverist and W Balverist, both east of the main Cardross-Port Road.
Not on 1:25,000
121
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Blaircessnock
1730 – shown on Cooper’s Map of the River of Forth – perhaps an indication of its relative importance as
Cardross is the only other site named in the area.
1783, Stobie shows Blarsesnoch south of a line between Arnclerich and Flandershill; there are two L shaped
blocks.
1st Edition OS 6” shows Blaircessnock as a complex of a U shaped steading with ancillary buildings and
two enclosures to the south.
1:50,000 NS609991
1556 – RMS – Blairsessnoch amongst lands granted to John, commendator of Inchmahome and to
Alexander Erskine of Cangnoir.
1619 NAS GD22/3/10 31 May 1619, petition to the Lords of Council by John Graham of Polder and
his brother and others, all accused of the slaughter of Jaspert Graham of Blaircessnock, requesting that they
be allowed to find security to appear. NAS
GD22/3/12 – relaxation of letters of horning in the above case regarding the slaughter.
1646, lands of Blaircessnock and Over and Nether Garturris pay £7 feu duty as part of the temporal lands
of the Prior of Inchmahome (Fraser, 1880 vol 2, item 89); ie have already been feued.
1750 SC44/59/1 p 246 Articles of Agreement John Campbell and Hugh Graham, registered 8 Sept 1756.
Dated 11 Oct 1750 John Campbell of Kilpunt and Hugh Graeme of Arngomery, writer in Edinburgh
agree;
Campbell agrees to sell and dispone in feu ferm to Graeme, ‘all and haill the Powe of Blaircessnock
called Pollabea, together with the Meadows upon the Water of Goodie belonging to the said town
of Blaircessnock east to the March Ditch of the Wards and west to the March of Cardross. And
sicklike all and haill the lands called the Hill of Flanders with the meadows on the west end thereof
with the little dry hill extending to an aiker or thereby upon the north west of the head of he said
pow of Pollabea as the same is now marked out with little pitts and to be enclosed by the said Hugh
Graeme, together with the common Muir belonging to the towns of Blaircessnock and Ballingrew in
so far as the same belongs to the said town of Blaircessnock … ‘to be holden in fee simple for
payment of feu duty etc.
Graeme is to pay 300 merks Scots yearly from 1752; Graeme may give up the bargain but if he
gives up the former bargain about the moss, dated 29 May 1749, then this bargain will lapse too.
1755 NRAS 1868/47
Tack Blaircessnock to William Ure 1755, presently John Graham and Duncan McArthur, with access
by roads to moss and excepting Campbell and Graham’s feued lands; no exclusion of roman
Camp; £143 Scots pa plus carriages etc and 8 bolls meal:
1785 GD15/365 Jottings with regard to the tacks of Cardross.
William Ure to have Blaircessnock for eighteen pounds, sixteen bolls meal, twelve carriages and
twenty hens and three dargs of peats; no horses or cattle whatsoever should be allowed to go in
the wood for 4 years after it is cut.
122
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1800 GD15/41 Report regarding the Estate of Cardross, June 1800
Blairsesnock, John Ure pays £35 2s
Acres
14
25/–
£17 10s
27
17/–
£22 14s
Moss & moor
22
5/–
£5 10s
Wood
8
Total
71
Value
£45 14s
1850 1468/1 Miscellaneous estate papers including reports on farms, 1841–1865.
Additional Report on Several Farms … by John Dickson, Saughton Mains, 14 Oct 1850
Blaircessnock Farm, possessed by Mr Henry Dougal, consists of 200 acres of arable at 23/– and
70 acres of bog and muir pasture at 5/– total £247 10/–.
The soil on the arable is a sandy loam of variable quality; about 40 acres requires draining …
fair state of cultivation … about 50 acres of the bog land next to the river is, in my opinion,
highly capable of being improved and made arable. The moss on a large portion of it being only
2–3 feet deep. It should be drained by drains 4 feet deep and 30 feet apart and then trenched
12 inches deeper than the moss extends. The draining may be estimated to cost £4 per acre,
after which operations the land should be worth 30/– per acre.
1865 NRAS 1468/1 Draft Report on the Estate of Cardross, 17 May 1865 by John Arthur …
Blaircessnock and Polabay, Henry Dougal, a fair state of cultivation, but tenant is to implement the
terms of the lease.
1878 GD1/393/46/1/84 lease Blaircessnock and Polabay to James and Duncan Dougal, 1878 for
19 years at £389 pa; includes farms of Blaircessnock and Polabay presently possessed by them but excludes
the house and garden at Arnclerich and the land attached ‘and all the high moss on the south side of the
footpath leading from Flanders Hill to Polabay Bridge and also the sand and gravel pit at Flanders Hill’ …
1897 GD1/393/46/2/34 lease farms of Blaircessnock and Polabay (sic) 1897 to James Dougall,
excepts house and garden at Arnclerich and roads etc, all the high moss on the south side of the footpath
from Flanders Hill to Polabay Bridge and the sand and gravel pit at Flanders Hill; …
No date but c.1900 GD1/393/46/2/44 note relating to building insurance includes:
Blaircessnock
£1150
‘buildings all stone or brick and slated or tiled unless as mentioned’ nd but early 20th century?
Boquhapple [the following are all considered under the heading of Boquhapple; Boquhapple/
Mollan, Chapel of Boquhapple, Mains of Boquhapple, Middleton of Boquhapple, Carse of Boquhapple,
Moss-side of Boquhapple, Easter Moss-side or Graham’s Boquhapple, Wester Moss-side or Wester
Boquhapple, Netherton (part of) King’s Boquhapple, Rottenrow]
123
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1730 – Cooper’s Map of the Forth shows ‘Balquhapel’.
Circa 1750 Roy’s Map [Roy 4] has Boquhapple with planting in the angle where Boquhapple Burn flows
into Goodie.
1:50,000 NN655002
Canmore Website notes Broch at NN659020
1482, 15 May, James Menteith of Rednoch receives from James Nory of Tarbarty a sum of money for
redemption of the lands of Buthquhopil (Stirling Protocol Book, p 53).
1625, 16 August, Robert Neaper of Baquhaple (and Napier of Merchiston and two other Napiers) made
honorary burgesses of Stirling (Extracts, I, 160).
Boquhapple (Chapel of)
Circa 1750 Roy’s Map shows Chappel
1:25,000 site at NN65655705
Information from CANMORE Website of NMRS:
NN60SE 30 6552 0050
Notes Farmstead with description.
Boquhapple (Mains of)
1st Edition OS, a large farm, with buildings round two courtyards, access from Thornhill-Port Road and the
village of Thornhill encroaching onto its eastern side.
1729 CC6/12/8 p 42 registered 21 August 1729 tack dated at Boquhapple, 14 August 1716 between
George and James Drummonds of Blairdrummond and Thomas Marjoriebanks in Wester Boquhapple as
administrator for James Marjoriebanks, his eldest son, all the Wester Mains of Bowhaple [sic] with the
crofts lying be-east the house and the parks beneath the house with privilege of casting dargs of peats for
his own and families use but no other, with houses, biggings and yards, lately possessed by Thomas Harvie,
parish Kincardine and Barony of King’s Bowhaple [sic] for 19 years; [requires tenant to apply lime and part
of rent payable as white oats].
Moss-side (Easter) [or Graham’s Boquhapple]
1st Edition OS 6” East Moss-side, E shaped steading, all roofed; fields to south encroach onto Moss with
clear steps marking cutting. Access is across the Goodie, via Rottenrow to the Thornhill-Port road; the Goodie
has not been canalised in this section.
2nd Edition OS is marked as Moss-side.
1:50,000 NS655992
1811, Map 16 shows that Easter Moss-side is also known as Graham’s Boquhapple.
124
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Moss-side (Wester) [or Wester Boquhapple]
1st Edition OS 6” West Moss-side, complex, small farm, roofed with small garden and fields to the south
showing clear signs of encroachment onto moss with stepped cuttings. The northern march is presumably the
Goodie Water, which has here been canalised; there is access across the Goodie, via Carse of Boquhapple
and to the Thornhill-Port road.
1:50,000 south of Goodie at NS644996.
1803 RHP 70 Plan and Measurement of Wester Boquhapple by Gilbert McEwan [Map 13] shows that
Wester Boquhapple then included 8 farms and extended from the moss in the south to the march with Wester
Torrie on the ridge to the north. The farm of Moss-side is shown south of the Goodie with an area of arable,
the ‘cast moss or spread field’ at the moss margin and the ‘uncast moss’ beyond, extending as far as Goose
Dubs and the march with Easter Polder.
1811, Map 16 shows that Wester Boquhapple is also know as Wester Moss-side.
Nether ton (of Boquhapple) [par t of] King’s Boquhapple
Circa 1750 shown on Roy’s Map as Netherton [Roy 5].
1783, Stobie shows Netherton as or at the west end of Thornhill village.
1811, Map 16 shows Netherton as part of King’s Boquhapple.
1st Edition OS 6” Netherton consists of three ranges of roofed buildings adjacent to the Thornhill-Frew Road,
much further south than on Stobie.
1:50,000 Netherton 662990.
Boquhapple (West Kerse of)
1:25,000 site at NS651999.
Rottenrow – alias Balfour’s Boquhapple
1783, Stobie shows Rottenrow south of Port-Thornhill road in Kincardine parish enclave.
1st Edition OS, fairly substantial steading with two ranges of buildings, garden etc to the west of Mains of
Boquhapple. It is approached via a track (which continues to East Moss-side) from the Thornhill-Port road.
2nd Edition OS Rottenrow has disappeared and the site is occupied by a small enclosure of marshy ground.
1680 CC6/12/5 f 42v to 43r Minute of Agreement between My Lady Cardross and McLean and Stewart;
Dated at Cardross, 16 Oct 1680; Lady Cardross agrees with John McLean [sic] in Boquhapple and
David Stewart in Auchinsalt to set to them ‘that pairt of ye Rottinraw of Boqll formerlie possessed be the
deceast Walter Jonstoune’ for 15 years; …
1681 NRAS 0888/47/6 Declaration by Lord Cardross to Laird of Hopeton, concerning the 2.5 merklands
of Balfour’s Boquhapple, otherwise Rottinraw, the 5 merks of Brae of Cessintullie and the 10 merks of Wester
Boquapple with the mill built thereon.
125
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Borland – [Borland is a common name in Scotland and usually refers to the demesne lands of an estate
or monastery; I remain uncertain whether Borland was close to Milton of Cardross or was closer to
Mains of Cardross; there is another Borland close to Thornhill for which see below, Borland, Easter
Borland, Mid Borland and Wester Borland].
25 February 1563 GD124/1/977
Charter by John, Lord Erskine, to Annabella Murray, his wife, and John Erskine, his son and heir, in fee of
lands of Bordland called demesne lands of Cardross and of lands of Ballingrew.
1604 – GD124/1/1001 lands of Bordland called mains of Cardross form part of the Barony of Cardross.
1646, lands of Garledenye alias Hiltoun; lands of Arnclerich, lands called Harniehaicke and the Bordland
together pay £10 feu duty as parts of the temporal lands of the Prior of Inchmahome (Fraser, 1880 vol 2,
item 89).
1747 GD15/363 Tack of Miln, 1747, to William Wright and John Keir;
Sets the town and lands of Milltown and Miln of Cardross to them equally … and if their pasture is
‘totally overflowed with water to drive their cattle to the Borland Mure for pasture, there to remain
while absolutely necessary and until the water is assuaged but no longer’.
Borland [see unedited doc for Easter Borland, Mid Borland & Wester Borland]
Circa 1750 Roy’s Map shows one site for Borland – seemingly on quite high ground.
1783, Stobie shows only one Borland south of the Port-Thornhill road and corresponding, if anything, to
Mid Borland.
Borland (Mid)
1783, Stobie shows Borland at or close to this site.
1st Edition OS 6” shows a
1:50,000 NN646005.
A mound at Wester Borland, once considered of archaeological interest, was more recently (1968)
said to be a natural mound surmounted by a water tank (CANMORE Website, NN60SW 14 637 006.
PD160/88
Report on and valuation of certain farms on Rednock estate the sale of which is contemplated
December 1920 …
Brier ylands
1:25,000 nothing at this site.
Circa 1750, Roy’s Map [Roy 5] has an unnamed settlement close to this site.
1783, Stobie shows Brierylands as a U shaped block on the north side of the Forth between E and W Polder.
1st Edition 6” nothing marked at this site.
1841 Census shows Brierylands as a single house, occupied by James Harvey, farmer and his 4 farm servants;
at that time East Polder House is still occupied by James Forrester, independent gentleman and his family.
126
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1861–2 Valuation Roll refers to Farm of Brierylands and Polder, property of James Brodie, Dunkeld,
occupied by Robert McFarlane, Brierylands. Brierylands was probably a cottage or farm house built to
preserve the social distinction of the ‘mansion house’ at Polder and gradually abandoned.
Calziemuck (note that the Z in this name as in many other Scots place names was originally the obsolete
letter ‘yoch’ and is pronounced more like y that z; older writers, in fact, often use y as is seen in the examples
below).
1:50,000 NN623007
Not on Roy’s Map [Roy 3]
Not on Stobie
1st Edition Os 6” Calziemuck, small house with some planting and garden ground to the west of Lower Tarr
and Ruskie Mill etc.
1547, 10 June, Robert Forrester ‘of Kileymuk’ discharged of £100 given in security for a hat for the queen
(Stirling Extracts I, 49).
1556, 5 Oct, Robert Forrester ‘of Calyemwk’ elected Provost of Stirling (Stirling Burgh Extracts, I, 69).
McFarlane’s Geographical Collections, II, p 610 ‘Diverse distances, 14 Januarie 1646. Blairchoill a myl
be east Rednock, half a myl be east that upon the moss is Kailly muck, then Rowiskich … and these thrie
are upon the moss marching with Gudy River.’
PD160/88
Report on and valuation of certain farms on Rednock estate the sale of which is contemplated
December 1920 …
Cardross House and Policies
1730 shown on Cooper’s Map of 1730 as Cardros C – presumably C is for Castle as the map also names
Drummond C. at Crieff and Campbel C at Dollar.
Circa 1750 House and Policies show on Roy’s Map [Roy 5].
1761 Cardross Estate Plan (Map 11) shows mansion house, offices etc with a series of rectangular and
sub-rectangular fields or Parks. A straight, wide avenue runs northwards and another south towards a line
of trees fronting the river. There is a formal garden to the south west and a straight walkway runs east.
The whole effect is symmetrical and formal – in spite of the curving ‘sunk fence’ [a ha-ha] to the south of the
entrance drive. It is not clear how far this represents what was actually ‘on the ground’ at the time.
1783, Stobie shows Cardross as a mansion with policies. There is also a U-shaped block to the north of
the house also shown roughly here on 1:25,000.
1801 Plan of the Estate of Cardross leaves the Mansion and Policies blank. However, it is clear that the
policies have been extended to the south east into Drumnaculloch and Carse Park etc (see 1765 below and
Drumnaculloch site).
1862 1st Edition OS; it appears that the northward extension of the policies, Lochanwan Park, has ceased
to be part of the policies and there has been some retreat to the south east as well. The margins have been
127
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
rounded, the offices moved to the north east, and beyond them are the new formal gardens and an
ornamental pool on the Meikle Burn (which now drains to the dam in Ballangrew Wood). Clumps of trees,
the intrusion of Brucehill into the grounds, the lodges (west and north) etc all indicate that the policies have
been redesigned in a more ‘romantic’ or picturesque style [see 1834–44 below].
1:50,000 NS605976
NSA p 1099, suggests that Cardross gifted to Priors of Inchmahome by Sir Malcolm Drummond of that Ilk,
hero of Bannockburn and used as their seat – there is no support for this statement.
CANMORE Website of NMRS:
NS69NW 1.00 6048 9766
Cardross House appears to date from three periods. Constructed as a comparatively small L-planned
tower-house probably dating from the early 16th century, an eastern extension of three storeys was
added in the same century, and the original building heightened. Corner turrets were then added
to tower and extension.
In the 18th century an entirely new N front was added together with a modern domestic building
to the west. The windows were probably enlarged at this period and the entire roof line renewed.
Lintels over windows on the S. front are inscribed: ‘DE and MH 1598’ and IE and AJ 1747.
N Tranter 1963
As described and illustrated by Tranter. It is now almost impossible to trace the outline of the original
L-shaped tower-house.
Visited by OS (WDJ) 17 October 1968.
Memoir of Sir D Erskine of Cardross edited by Mrs S Erskine 1926, pp 26–34 – description and
photograph of Cardross House.
NMRS REFERENCE
Plans of Cardross House, 1922, Dick Peddie & MacKay, Edinburgh, 13 Young Street
Attic 2, Bin 35, Bag 1
Plans, alterations to Cardross House, Lake of Menteith, 1922, Dick Peddie & MacKay, Edinburgh,
Sydnew Mitchell & Wilson, 13 Young Street
Attic 2, Bin 4, Bag 1
Date stone DE MH 1598 [David Erskine Margaret Haldane]
1587, charter by David, Commendator of Inchmahome, dated at Cardross, 20 April; (Fraser, 1880, vol 2
item 88). The lands granted are those of Gartincaber, Wester Spittalton, Murdochston, Ballinton and
McCorranstoun, which are off target in Kilmadock parish, but the context suggests that there was already a
significant building here, suitable for conducting official business.
1645 for Montrose’s rendezvous at Cardross (Henry Guthrie, Memoirs, 145).
1690, Payment for baggage horses sent to Cardross with Kenmuir’s regiment (Extracts II, 336)
1693, Stirling Council Archives, Stirling Burgh Court Records, B66/16/19 f 156, July 1693, John Strang,
gardener at Cardross, admits he threw stones at Mr James Hunter in Argyll’s Garden ie the garden of
Argyll’s Lodging, Stirling.
1680s–1690s many references to garrisons etc in Register of the Privy Council of Scotland.
128
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1765 1468/22 Tack to William McGibbon 1765 of farm of Overmains excepting the lands of
Drummaculloch with the houses built thereon and to be divided from Overmains by a fence running near
the foot of the brae as the same has already been settled by Mr John Erskine and William McGibbon, and
also the lands of Middle Mains of Cardross, with tiends etc and the houses and buildings, as presently
possessed by John McGibbon … divided from the rest of Middle Mains by a straight line … which parts of
Over and Middle Mains are henceforth to be known as Overmains but part of Drummaculloch is to be
added to the Parks of Cardross …
1808–c.1880 There are a large numbers of records of the Grass Parks which clearly correspond to
the policy parks; the earliest noted (GD15/42/2 Measurement of Lawn of Cardross 1808). Others include
NRAS 1468/5, Articles of roup of lands to be let for a tillage, the property of David Erskine … 15 Jan 1833;
ibid, Articles of roup of grass parks 1833: ibid Articles roup land to be let for tillage 1832; ibid, Ditto
1832; man other similar items in this bundle; ibid Roup of grass parks 1856; ibid, Roup grass parks 1840;
ibid, Roup grass parks 1842. NRAS 1468/9, Conditions of set of Lawn Parks, Cardross, 1862; NRAS,
1468/44, Articles of roup of grass parks 1829; ibid, Articles Roup of Back Green Park 1807.
Finally and or particular interest, in NRAS 1468/44 is the terms of letting the Lawn Park in 1822 where it
is specified that it is to be used for sheep and highland cattle only and only black cattle may be put in the
other parks. So, only pretty livestock are to be grazed here, so close to the house! These documents were
not fully noted and some, at least, name the parks to be let etc; so a fuller picture could certainly be built
up. The various shooting leases, discussed elsewhere, all refer to use of the grounds, to a gardener and
pleasure grounds etc.
1834–1844; NAS GD15/46 is a Memorandum Book clearly kept by the laird, begun in 1834 with an
outline of current projects and completed in 1844 – the two can sometimes only be distinguished by the
writing as not all entries are dated; the many entries relating to the Policies (for which see the fuller version)
show the importance then given to landscape and amenity:
Charles Roger, A Week at Bridge of Allan, Edinburgh, 1851.
P 208, ‘…. More distant on the left, and upon the banks of the Forth, are the princely residence and grounds
of Cardross, the seat of the old family of Erskine.’
Cardross (Mains of) [Burntide, 1761; Powside, 1801]
1783, Stobie shows Mains south east of Cardross as an L shaped block; it is on the west bank of a small
stream flowing into the Forth. Nether Mains is an L shaped block in a tight loop of the Forth and
corresponding to Faraway on 1:50,000 at NS614965 GD15/27.
1702 Rental of the Estate of Cardross
Rental of the Lordship of Cardrois and Eister Garden
Wm McGibbon, Mains of C
Meal
bere
butter
cheese
straw
money
2ch 2b
17b
2
40
45
248 13 04
1761; the farm on this site is marked as Burntide on RHP 30799.
129
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1765 NRAS 1468/22 Tacks etc, 1754–1771.
Overmains Tack to William McGibbon 1765. Overmains of Cardross with tiends, presently
possessed by said William and his brother, excepting Ryndaw being the whole lands east of the
Meikle Burn now set to James Ure and also excepting the lands of Drummaculloch with the houses
built thereon and to be divided from Overmains by a fence running near the foot of the brae as the
same has already been settled by Mr John Erskine and William McGibbon [more details in unedited
version; takes part of Drumnaculloch (qv) to be integrated into Policies] … and within six months of
his entry he is to make a good and sufficient DAM on the Meikle Burn with a lead or drain therefrom
to be drawn along by the moss edge, halfway between the houses of Middle Mains and Faraway
in order thereby to carry off the moss, for which the said William McGibbon and the tenant of
Faraway are to have an allowance of £5 Sterling equally between them and they are then to keep
it in good order; and if he does not work the moss satisfactorily then the landlord can employ others
and charge him costs;
1786 NRAS 1868/47 Tack of Over Mains with part of Hornahawick and of Middle Mains to Archibald
McGibbon for 19 years 1786; and once they have cleared 3 Scots Acres of Moss or spreadfield and have
made the same arable by leaving not more than 5 inches of moss above the clay, then Erskine will pay them
£5 Sterling for each acre of moss or spreadfield so cleared and they will then accept an additional rent for
that land; but if they do not work the moss satisfactorily, then Erskine may do it and charge them the costs
etc; and he may make dams for that purpose and drains;
1767 GD15/34
Rental of lands of Cardross, Blaircessnock and Ward of Gudie Crop 1767
1
2
3
4
5
6
North Mains
12
3
10
0
16
£15 10
South Mains
12
3
10
0
16
£14 10
1785 GD15/365 Jottings with regard to the tacks of Cardross 1785.
John McGibbon to have Hornahawick, presently himself, excepting a small piece of ground given
off to Overmains for twenty six pounds eleven shillings three pence, sixteen carriages and twelve hens.
William McGibbon and Archibald his son to have Overmains with the small piece of Hornahawick
[above] for thirty three pounds nine shillings and ten pence, sixteen carriages and twelve hens.
There is no occasion in these two cash tacks for keeping up the obligation about the Dam on the
Meikle Burn as formerly.
Memorandum – notes that tenants of Overmains and Hornhawick are amongst those who are able
to remove moss, discusses possible inducements to greater efforts at clearance by tenants and
suggests. ‘it might be proper to oblige the tenant of Overmains to communicate the water that he
has from the Meikle Burn when he is not using it himself or if it can be done when he is using it to
the tenant of Hornhawick.’
1786 NRAS 1868/47
Tack of Over Mains with part of Hornahawick and of Middle Mains to Archibald McGibbon for
19 years from 1786; terms similar to above; details in unedited version.
130
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1800 GD15/41 Report regarding the Estate of Cardross, June 1800
Overmains Arch McGibbon, tenant rent
£37 1 10
Faraway (supposed Hornhauick in rental to John McGibbon)
£29 13 5
£66 15 3
has been undermeasured and real acreage is 120 and is worth £123.
The two farms ought to go into one being just the proper size for 4 horses and being carse land the
best mode of management will be to have one third in pasture grass, and the tillage land to be kept
in 4 divisions, 1 oats, 2 fallow or drilled peas and beans, 3 barley or oats with grass seed, 4 clover
for soiling or May [sic???].
1801 the farm on this site is marked as Powside on RHP 35451.
1834–1844 GD15/46 Memorandum Book
Clearance of the moss at Faraway is ‘a great object’, it is to be done in stretches from north to south
and added to the farm of Mains & Faraway. In 1834 he thinks a boat is needed …‘ I have cleaned
all the Moss on the Mains farm at the bottom of the Rinlaw road in order to square the fields and
enable me to make a continuation of the road in the direction of the Polder Moss settlers. There is
a front of moss jutting into the farm of Polder which it would be desirable to get cleaned as it would
be a valuable addition to the farm and I shall make an agreement with John Graham to have it done.’
1863 NRAS 1868/46 Miscellaneous 1850–1865 – includes drainage and moss levels.
Home Farm to be reduced to 60 acres.
Dr umnaculloch
RHP 30799 appears as a field name, east of the Cardross Parks; in 1765 (below) the area was to be
enclosed in the Parks and RHP 35451 shows that this had been done by 1800).
1526–1596 GD15/48/1 Inventory of Writs of lands of Drummamikloch and Ardinclerich: – nd 17th century
and last date is 1608.
Imprimis, a tack set by Andrew, prior of Inchmahome to Andrew Stewart and his spouse of
Arnclerich and Drumamukloch dated 16 April 1526.
More detail in unedited version.
1556 – RMS – Druiminamukloch amongst lands granted to John, commendator of Inchmahome and
Alexander Erskine of Cangnoir.
1646, Drummanikloche pays feu duty as part of the temporal lands of the Prior of Inchmahome (Fraser, 1880
vol 2, item 89).
1765 1468/22 Tack to William McGibbon 1765 of farm of Overmains excepting the lands of
Drummaculloch with the houses built thereon and to be divided from Overmains by a fence running near
the foot of the brae as the same has already been settled by Mr John Erskine and William McGibbon, and
also the lands of Middle Mains of Cardross, with tiends etc and the houses and buildings, as presently
possessed by John McGibbon … divided from the rest of Middle Mains by a straight line … which parts of
Over and Middle Mains are henceforth to be known as Overmains but part of Drummaculloch is to be
added to the Parks of Cardross (see RHP 1801 for integration of this land into the policies).
131
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Faraway – also called Hornhawick.
1:50,000 NS614965 and the 1:25,000 also shows Faraway Cottage.
Circa 1750 Roy’s Map [Roy 5] shows an unnamed site in this vicinity.
1783 Stobie shows Nether Mains at or close to this site.
1st Edition OS 6” shows a substantial U shaped steading with garden enclosures.
2nd Edition OS shows Faraway and Faraway Cottage.
1765 NRAS 1468/22 Tacks etc, 1754–1771.
Tack Hornhawick ‘otherwise called Faraway’ 1765 to John McGibbon with some parts of
Middle Mains added to it by a new division in a straight line; for 19 years; pays 16 bolls oatmeal
and £14 10s Sterling etc; and within six months of his entry he is to make a good and sufficient
DAM on the Meikle Burn with a lead or drain therefrom to be drawn along by the moss edge,
halfway between the houses of Middle Mains and Faraway in order thereby to carry off the moss,
for which the said John McGibbon and the tenant of Overmains are to have an allowance of
£5 Sterling equally between them and they are then to keep it in good order;
1786 NRAS 1868/47
Tack Faraway otherwise Hornahawick, 1786 to John McGibbon excepting a small piece of ground
now part of Over Mains etc: to clear moss as at Over Mains:
1800 GD15/41 Report regarding the Estate of Cardross, June 1800
Overmains Arch McGibbon, tenant rent
£37 1 10
Faraway (supposed Hornhauick in rental to John McGibbon)
£29 13 5
£66 15 3
has been undermeasured and real acreage is 120 and is worth £123.
The two farms ought to go into one … more details in full version.
1834–1844 GD15/46 Memorandum Book
‘The great object is to clear the Parks moss as fast as possible being so much in the view of the
Place & also to add to the farm. For this purpose I have built a house for John Short & have
contracted with him for cleaning it and also the Faraway Moss on the opposite side of the River,
which is to be done in stretches from North to South to be added to the farm of Mains & Faraway
– he is to have a boat at a convenient station to carry him across from one to the other as he has
water to work with.’ … I have cleaned all the Moss on the Mains farm at the bottom of the Rinlaw
road in order to square the fields and enable me to make a continuation of the road in the direction
of the Polder Moss settlers. … The acquisition of Killorn was a valuable one to the Estate of Cardross
as the means of opening a communication across the Forth with the Turnpike road and as the moss
upon that property is very conspicuous and covers the finest rich clay land, it was most desirable to
have it removed as fast as possible on which account I made reservoirs and brought water in pipes
from the high Moss which has succeeded and I have agreed with a contractor to clear it away, an
operation that has been going on for several years.
132
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
… The Moss Settlers at Polder are going remarkably well on & have a good supply of water to
which I lately got an addition by bringing the Burn of Blaircessnock into the Dam. …
1844
‘Most of my intentions have been carried successfully into execution & the clearing of the moss gone
on rapidly. At the end of the Mossmens leases a compact little farm may be made at Polder and the
same at Collimon.
A great addition has been made to the Polder and Faraway farm, a Bridge made over the river &
preparation now making for a road through the possession to be continued northwards in due time ….’
1850 NRAS 1468/1 Miscellaneous estate papers including reports on farms, 1841–1865.
Additional Report on Several Farms … by John Dickson, Saughton Mains, 14 Oct 1850
Faraway possessed by Mr James McGibbon and consists of 110 acres estimated at 30/– per acre;
this farm is pretty equal in quality being good carse soil and in a fair state of cultivation.
1855 GD1/393/46/1/6 Lease to James McGibbon, Faraway, 1855, for 19 years; presently occupied
by McGibbon and extending to 123.5 acres and also the land presently possessed by Robert McNabb, at
West Polder, extending to 4.5 acres; reserves minerals, reserves right to cut levels through the lands to float
moss to the Forth and giving him old levels in lieu and power to alter the road at Rindah road or loan [sic];
proprietor will make a new road from the Polder possessions to the house at Faraway and prop will supply
5000 tiles for drainage of land presently possessed by McNab and wood for a cattle shed and will supply
30000 tiles for drainage of the new reclaimed land but tenant to pay interest on the 30,000; to pay £256
sterling yearly; he is obliged to accept adjacent reclaimed land but pays no rent for the first 10 acres for 4 years
and none for the next 10 for three years free after taken off the contractors hands ‘for his trouble in removing
the moss, filling the levels and taking the stocks off the land’. But then pays £1 per acre; carriage of lime, coal
etc but peat from the moss is to the farm offices at Cardross; lime to be laid on and proper rotations etc.
1860 1868/46 Miscellaneous 1850–1865 – includes drainage and moss levels.
Particulars of Farm Buildings insured in 1860.
Faraway dwelling house, cartshed, 2 byres, milkhouse –
Barn, stable, granary
£180
£160
1865 NRAS 1468/1 Draft Report on the Estate of Cardross, 17 May 1865 by John Arthur …
11 Faraway, James McGibbon, dispute regarding new land to be settled by arbitration. Farm is in
good order and approve of proposal to convert half the rent to grain …
1874 GD1/393/46/1/74 lease to James McGibbon of the farm of Faraway, 1874–1893; presently
himself; details in unedited version.
Flanders Hill
1:25,000 shows small hill, rising to 30m but no settlement.
1783, Stobie shows Flandershill as a U-shaped block, west of Arnclerich.
1792 Flanders Hill is labelled on Map 15; there are two buildings, at right angles to each other close to
the modern gravel pit and a third building a short distance to the north west. It is also labelled on RHP 3998
(dated 1797) and the two buildings are shown as above but not the isolated building.
133
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1st Edition OS 6” Flanders Hill. The field boundaries surrounding this site are clearly those still seen on
1:25,000. A sand pit, on the western margin, does NOT correspond to the small pool seen on 1:25,000
which is not present. For the archaeological site see below: see also Ballangrew for the Homestead Moat.
Information from CANMORE Website of NMRS:
NS69NW 10 619 990. Reports of roughly circular Homestead …
By the early 17th century Flanders Hill had been feud to the Grahams of Gartur as part of Blaircessnock; it
later passed to the Campbells of Kinpunt and Lochend and was repurchased by the Cardross estate shortly
before 1800. It was usually treated as part of Blaircessnock and Pollabay.
1750 SC44/59/1 p 246 Articles of Agreement John Campbell and Hugh Graham, registered 8 Sept 1756.
Dated 11 Oct 1750 John Campbell of Kilpunt and Hugh Graeme of Arngomery, writer in
Edinburgh agree;
Details under Blaircessnock above or in unedited version of this Doc.
1800 GD15/41 Report regarding the Estate of Cardross, June 1800.
Flanders Hill no measure
Value of infield is 25s and of outfield 15s. this is fine turnip land but exceedingly wore out and poor.
If a turnip crop was raised on and eat off the land with sheep the nature of the soil would be quite
altered. It should be kept in view to join this Farm to Blaircessnock and perhaps both to south and
north Ballingrew.
Flanders Moss
1:50,000
The origin of the name remains unclear. Older documents, up to the 19th century, refer to it often as Moss
Flanders. Since, in Gaelic, the adjective follows the noun, this might indicate that the name was of Gaelic
origin and there are various suggestions as to the adjective which Flanders might reflect. On the other hand,
as there are no early forms and no records from before the 17th century, there is no basis on which a
judgement can be made.
Very few records actually consider the moss as a whole but as parts of a wider property or properties.
Nor do its parts have individual names.
1556 – RMS – the profits of the fuel of the moors and marshes of the lands are reserved to the monastery
when the lands themselves are granted to John, commendator of Inchmahome and Alexander Erskine. And
the Erskines and their subtenants or villains/husbandmen are to use the fuel for their own use only and are
not to sell it. [note that this record does not name the moss].
Charles Roger, A Week at Bridge of Allan, Edinburgh, 1851.
P 208, ‘. … Shortly after leaving Thornhill, we have on the left the extensive Flanders Moss, now gradually
giving way to cultivation, and at the north-western extremity of this territory, the remains of a Roman
castellum.
134
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Flanders (South) – appears on 1st Edition OS 6” as Pendicles of Wester Polder
1783, Stobie has nothing at this site.
Information from CANMORE Website of NMRS:
NS69NW 20 centred on 6240 9690 refers to the Pendicles; details in unedited version.
1:50,000 NS 625969 South Flanders appears as a single site, north of the Forth but approached from the
south via Poldar Bridge, with track on to Faraway.
1832–1862 GD1/393/46/1/1 Moss tack by David Erskine to Robert Clark, 1844
By missive of tack dated 1831 and 1832, Erskine had let to Duncan McNaughton, late tenant in
Cardross, part of Flanders Moss after mentioned and also the arable and pasture between the moss
and the water of Forth for 32 years from 1827;
This lease is now transferred to Robert Clark, who has use of water from the Dam of Ballingrew for
clearing moss as in the original lease to McNaughton; the rent of £5 12s per year indicates that
this is a very small possession and it is explicit that it was formerly part of the lands of Wester Polder.
1831 1468/5 Miscellaneous estate papers, 1812–1858.
Minute of tack to Donald McNaughton dated October 1831; lease of that part of Flanders Moss
not exceeding 10 acres and also the arable and pasture between the moss and the river, being
formerly part of Wester Polder for 32 years from Martinmas 1827, as at present occupied by
him; … McNaughton is to built a dwelling house, barns and byre of turf on the moss hereby set at
his own expense, the proprietor furnishing the wood, and is to be diligent in putting away the moss
and is to use the water for that purpose to the best advantage and if he does not do so the proprietor
may use the water, clear the moss and charge him the costs; the water coming from the dam at
Ballingrew via Rindaw and Ballingrew, half being reserved to the proprietor and is to maintain the
dam bank at Ballingrew; to clear the drains and keep the barriers for preventing clay being washed
to the Forth clear along with the other tenants; to observe the levels; to reside on the possession for
one half of the year at least viz from Martinmas to Whitsunday yearly and at all times to keep in
good order; and may cross the Forth by the Polder Boat with horses and carts.
1858 NRAS 1468/44 Includes:
New Farm of South Flanders, 1858 offers by Inclosure Office and Land Improvement Company
gives specs, floors of Caithness pavement, thickness of walls etc.
1860 1486/8 Miscellaneous estate papers, 1853–81.
1860 obligation by Jean Stalker to quit her moss possession at Polder Moss formerly possessed by
her brother.
1862 GD1/393/46/1/31 South Flanders, 1862 to David Black, junior; residing at New Year Field,
Mid Calder; as presently possessed in small pendicles by Archibald Lumsden and other tenants, all for 19 years;
reserving minerals, resumption, game, pays £130 Sterling, insurance; to pay 6.5% on money spent by prop
on drainage and filling old moss levels and cuts and perform carriage of tiles and to take over any land
reclaimed and to improve it, with usual rent remissions once received from the contractor; the proprietor has
agreed to erect a suitable dwelling house and steading at an expense not exceeding £1000 and will divide
the lands by fences into suitable fields [note says to delete this clause;] and tenant is to help maintain the
private road to Polder bridge; rotations etc;
135
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1863 1486/8 Miscellaneous estate papers, 1853–81.
South Flanders 1863 specifications for Building Work – clearly a new steading.
1864 NRAS 1868/46 Miscellaneous 1850–1865 – includes drainage and moss levels.
Costs of South Flanders Steading 1864 Estimates for £1310 including boiler, engine house and
joiner work but little detail.
1860 NRAS 1868/46 Miscellaneous 1850–1865 – includes drainage and moss levels.
Particulars of Farm Buildings insured in 1860
West Polder [ie South Flanders]
Dwelling house and milk house
£80
Barn, granary and cartshed
£120
Byre and stable
£30
1865 NRAS 1468/1 Draft Report on the Estate of Cardross, 17 May 1865 by John Arthur …
South Flanders and West Polder, tenant David Black, being farmed on most approved principles and does
not anticipate any change of lease.
1868 GD1/393/46/1/62 Minute of Agreement farms of South Flanders and West Polder, December
1868; to David Black, tenant of the said farm, rent to be £280 pa in full as rent and interest on improvements
but excluding interest on money spent on bringing water from the Forth to the steading and for any rent for
any new reclaiming of the moss since the tenant entered or which may yet be reclaimed; the proprietor was
bound to erect some fences on South Flanders and this has not been done and they are now to be erected
next season.
No date but c.1900 GD1/393/46/2/44 note relating to building insurance includes:
South Flanders and West Polder.
Frew
1531–2 RMS III 1123 Ward of Gudy
2 Feb 1531–2, to James Stewart, brother german etc (various lands including) 40s land of Ward of Gudy
as well as the custody of the castle of Doune etc, the £10 land of Frews, as well as the fishings of the lake
and waters of Teith and Gudy viz Lochbanequhair and Lupnoch, for the said castle etc … [first record in RMS].
1580 GD15/356 Grant of Tiend sheaves of various lands to Earl of Mar by David Commendator
including: Easter Wester and Middle Frews, Witston, Broche, Earn, Sanchinchtouny, Spittletoun, Newtoun,
St Phillanees Chappell callit Arnetiscrofte, Wester Row, part of Easter Row, with the temple lands of Row,
all in the parish of Kilmadock, etc, all part of the rents of the abbacy, dated at Cardross 28 March 1580.
Has seal attached.
1783 Ford at Frew in frequent use by drovers, particularly in dry weather, as they try to avoid tolls on the
Bridge at Stirling (Haldane, 1973, 83 citing Old Session Papers, Signet Library, 351:6).
136
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Gar tlclydyng – alias Hilton (see 1646)
1556 – RMS – Gartledynye with the mill of Arnprior amongst lands granted to John, Commendator of
Inchmahome and to Alexander Erskine of Cangnoir.
GD124/1/967
Details in unedited document.
Goodie (Bridge of)
1783, Stobie shows Goodie Bridge.
1646 McFarlane’s Geographical Collections, II, p 609–10, Seats upon the Bounds of [Endrick, Blane and
Forth] Rivers, 1646 ‘Heir is the river of Gudye with a bridge. Item, easter and wester Balintons both stone
slated houses. Item Polder bewest that. Item, Coldoch. Nixt is Balingrow and not far therefra the great moss
cald the Kings Moss beginning a myl bewest Coldoch and reaching east to Craigorth.
Goodie (Loch of)
Was just below the entrance to the Goodie (Hutchison, 1899, p.58).
Note that, in the various documents which refer to it, all in Latin, the word used is stagnum whilst the word
used for Lake of Menteith is lacus; stagnum can mean a standing pool, a pond, swamp or fen whilst lacus
can be translated as lake or loch. Given that the charters convey the right to fishing in the stagnum it must
include open water. Its exact relationship to the Goodie is unclear.
It is not shown on Roy – though whether this is because it had already been drained is not certain.
Goodie (Wards of) [for Littleward see Littleward]
Circa 1750 Roy’s Map shows Ward of Goodie on south side of the Goodie Water.
1783, Stobie shows Ward south of the Goodie, in Port parish; Little Ward is south of the Moss, on the Forth.
1st Edition OS 6” Ward of Goodie, complex steading south of Goodie Water, with garden ground. There
is encroachment into the moss to the south east but these fields are probably part of Mid Borland, whence
the access approaches this site.
1:50,000 site at NS644999.
1452 RMS II number 566
1 June 1452 charter by James II and Maria, his queen in favour of Robert Norry, his servant and
his heirs, in celebration of the birth of his [the king’s] son, James, of lands of Wards of Goody, in
the lordship of Menteith, between the waters of Goody and Forth as well as the lands of
Queenshaugh, Stirling.
1529 Red Book of Menteith Item 97 dispute about payments of the rents of Menteith reserved to Queen
Margaret [Tudor] and not paid to her includes rent of Ward of Gwdy [Wards of Goodie] and others
elsewhere (6 August 1528) In 1529 (Item 103) the bailie is ordered to remove from these lands including
Ward of Gudy; and by item 101, dated 1 Feb 1531 he is to resign the lands (including the 40s land of
Ward of Goody) in the king’s hands.
137
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1556 – RMS – Hornahic, lie Warde of Guddy, amongst lands granted to John, commendator of
Inchmahome and to Alexander Erskine of Cangnoir.
1604 – GD124/1/1001 Ward of Goodie forms part of Barony of Cardross.
CC6/12/2 f 127v contract dated 14 May 1627 between John Dick of Ward of Goodie and four tenants
in Tar of Ruskie. The Ruskie tenants have a peat cutting on the moss and are given right to graze from that
cutting, west to the Blaircessnock march, there is record of fords and places where they cross and the Illes
of Difference are the main area of grazing; Dick is granted use of a meadow, seemingly on the northern
side of the river. It is possible that this dispute had arisen due to the Goodie changing its course.
1754 NRAS 1468/22 Tacks etc, 1754–1771.
Tack, Ward of Gudie by Campbell of Kinpunt to John McKercher 1754 – John Campbell of Kinpunt
sets Ward of Goodie (presently John and William Ure) to John McKerracher, reserving the mosses
belonging to the toun as also the moss mails payable and reserving to Campbell the right to sell
peats if he has occasion to people in the neighbourhood and also reserving the use of the moss
roads presently leading through the toun to the moss of Ward for carrying peats, allowing 15sh per
acre for the roads; all for 15 years from Martinmas 1757;
He is to pay £366 5s Scots with a rough wether with carriages of 12 loads coals, 12 hens and a
calf and with the burdens etc, thirled to Cardross; and as Campbell is obliged to give Hugh Graham
10 acres of ground of the said land or £9 Scots this is to be allowed.
1767 GD15/34
Rental of lands of Cardross, Blaircessnock and Ward of Gudie Crop 1767
Ward of Gudie
1
2
3
4
5
6
12
0
12
0
0
£30 17 11
1771 NRAS 1468/22 Tacks etc, 1754–1771.Tack Ward of Goodie 1771 to John and George McKerchers;
as the marches shall be regulated by a decreet arbitral by John Ramsay of Ochtertyre in the submission
about Water of Goodie for 19 years; to pay £52 10s Sterling money pa etc; adjustments if he gains
by Water of Goodie work; and to have £20 the first year to lime the said lands: consent to registration etc;
no other improvement or clearance clauses! [NRAS 1868/47 includes a duplicate of this tack]
1795 NRAS 1868/47
Tack Ward of Guidie to John Cullens 1795, lately possessed by James Erskine himself; for 19 years,
paying £80 Sterling (no grain etc) no sheep; no moss clearance mentioned!
1834–1844 GD15/46 Memorandum Book – dated 1834 on back of cover but first entry is dated
Moss 1834.
‘…
All attempts to clear the moss and spreadfields at Ward of Goodie is at present abandoned on
account of the difficulty of getting a level through the ground of the neighbouring tenant, but this may
be obtained sometime or other and should be kept in view as a great advantage to the farm. There
is a difficulty too from a mill belonging to Lord Moray being in the way.
138
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1856 GD1/393/46/1/12 Tack John Sands, Ward of Goodie, 1856; as presently possessed by himself,
for 19 years, reserving the moss, high and low adjacent to it, [reserves minerals, right of resumption, trees
etc] reserves game; to insure the buildings etc; and whereas the trustees have reclaimed from the moss and
given over to the said John Sands certain portions of ground lying into and adjoining the lands hereby let
and they are in the course of reclaiming other portions of ground which they intend to give over to him as
it is reclaimed – and he is to improve the ground already reclaimed and by filling up old levels, taking off
stocks and draining the land – the proprietors to cut drains at least three feet deep and arrangement for rent
increases for new ground; lime, rotations etc;
1860 NRAS 1868/46 Miscellaneous 1850–1865 – includes drainage and moss levels.
1871 GD1/393/46/1/72 tack, Wards of Goodie to John Sands, 1871, as presently possessed by him
for 19 years, reserving the moss high and low to the landlord [and the minerals etc].
1891 GD1/393/46/2/28 Wards of Goodie, parish of Port of Menteith, 1891 to Robert Sands,
presently himself for 18 years; reserving the moss, high and low, the minerals etc, resumption, woods and
drains, game and tenant is to deter poachers and protect the game and to stop stray dogs and keep only
one dog himself which is to be kept at home; …
Goodie (Water of)
Circa 1750 Roy’s Map [Roy 3 and 4] as still sinuous and uncanalised throughout.
1783, Stobie shows the western end as canalised between Inchie and Moss-side with the lower, eastern
end irregular and sinuous.
1:50,000 very similar in general to 1783.
1556 – RMS – fishings of Water of Goodie reserved to the monastery when lands are granted to John,
Commendator of Inchmahome and Alexander Erskine.
1604 GD124/1/1001 fishings of Water of Goodie are an asset of the Barony of Cardross.
1753 GD15/123, 1845, memorandum by David Erskine on the Lake of Menteith and the Mill of Cardross.
‘As long ago as the year 1753 the Duke of Montrose applied to my Grandfather for permission to
make a canal thro the lands of Lochend for the purpose of lowering the Water in the Loch assuring
him that it would be done in such a manner as not to hurt his mill, upon which condition Mr Erskine
gave his consent but after the work was executed it was found that it injured the mill without
answering the purpose’. More detail in fuller version.
1761 for scheme to canalise the Goodie see Rivers, Pows etc.
1922, W.A. Tait reports to Board of Agriculture about schemes for flood prevention on Goodie using
drainage via High Moss Pow as part of a wider moss drainage scheme [discussed in more detail elsewhere]
(SAC, PD160/88 for Plan and PD160/91 for Tait’s Report).
1962 ‘Today the dredging of the Goodie is carried out under a scheme introduced by the Secretary of State
for Scotland in terms of the Land Drainage (Scotland) Act 1941 and the cost is shared among all the owners
and tenants who benefit from it. The dredging is necessary because of the flatness of the land which it drains
and the need for ensuring that neither the river nor the drains are silted up’ (Crane, 1979, 667).
139
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Hilton – alias Gar tledenye – see 1646 below
1:25,000 off site west of Arnprior-Port road at 595971.
1604 – GD124/1/1001 Hiltoun named as part of Barony of Cardross.
1646, lands of Garledenye alias Hiltoun; lands of Arnclerich, lands called Harniehaicke and the Bordland
together pay £10 feu duty as parts of the temporal lands of the Prior of Inchmahome (Fraser, 1880 vol 2,
item 89).
Hornahaik – see below (1765) for Hornhawick other wise Faraway
See Faraway for Details.
Littleward
1783, Stobie shows Lit Ward as an L shaped block, approach is from Frew and track continues to E Polder.
1st Edition OS 6” shows Littleward as a modest sized courtyard farm with a small garden enclosure.
1:50,000 NS657975
1567–1751 GD15/185 to GD15/198 relate to Little Ward of Goody, and Blaircessnock, barony of Cardross.
Little Ward to James Chisholm (1567, item 185) then to William Muschet (1571, item 186) then to Mushet
of Burnbank (1615, item 191) then to James Dick by 1692 item 195; then to Graham in 1751.
1646, on the south side of Gudie ‘most part is moss except Litle Ward’ (McFarlane, Geographical
Collections, II, 610).
1646, little wairde of Guddie pays 23s 4d feu duty as part of the temporal lands of the Prior of Inchmahome
(Fraser, 1880 vol 2, item 89).
GD1/393/13 Aug 18 1692, disposition by James Dick of Littlewaird of Goodie, grandson and heir of
late John Dick thereof to Walter Graham of Gartur of lands of Littlewaird of Goodie, barony of Cardross.
GD1/393/14 Jan 4 1696, disposition by Walter Graham of Gartur to James Graham, fiar of Gartur, his
eldest son, of Littlewaird of Goodie.
GD1/393/15 July 15 1696, sasine on above.
GD1/393/17 Jan 1 1720 sasine on disposition by Graham of Gartur to John Graham of Mceanstoun of
Little Waird of Goodie.
19 and 20 show that the son also gets Garturs and Over and Nether Blaircessnock, reserving the
father’s life rent.
1783 SC44/59/3 pp 15–24 Disposition by David Forrester to his trustees as he is to go abroad to clear
the heritage of debts and burdens and the liabilities to his mother and brothers etc. He dispones to the trustees
1. the lands of Easter Polder with the mansion houses, houses and yards and pertinents:
2. the 20d land of old extent called Littleward with houses biggings, yards, mosses, muirs and pertinents
He will get himself served heir in the lands and then infeft them in them. And they are to lift the rents etc
from this year on, 1783.
140
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Littleward Wester
1:50,000 NS651971
Lochan
Corbett and Dix (eds) p 92–3 regarded as being natural.
See Rivers, Pows etc for discussion of the Lochan.
Mill of Cardross
1783, Stobie shows Milltown on south side of the Goodie shortly below the outflow from the Loch. There is
a ‘mill’ symbol and a small U-shaped block.
1st Edition OS 6” shows Milton of Cardross as Corn Mill, associated lade and sluices etc.
2nd Edition, not described as Corn Mill and sluices not indicated; probably no longer a working mill.
1:25,000 Milton of Cardross, NS598996 where a single block is shown.
1556 – RMS – Mill of Cardross amongst assets granted to John Commendator of Inchmahome and to
Alexander Erskine of Cangnoir.
1562–1573 GD15/122 writs of Mill and Mill Lands of Cardross, in 1562 Lord Erskine grants a charter
to David Brydett and his spouse (item 1) in 1573 Brydett of Castleton resigns the mill etc in favour of Lord
Dryburgh; the Earl of Mar is named as the superior (items 2–6).
1702 GD15/27 Rental of the Estate of Cardross, 1702
Rental of the Lordship of Cardrois and Eister Garden
Two millers at Cardrois
Meal
bere
butter
cheese
straw
money
1ch 14b
0
0
0
0
£63 6 8
1753–1842 GD15/123, 1845, memorandum by David Erskine on the Lake of Menteith and the Mill of
Cardross.
‘As long ago as the year 1753 the Duke of Montrose applied to my Grandfather for permission to
make a canal thro the lands of Lochend for the purpose of lowering the Water in the Loch assuring
him that it would be done in such a manner as not to hurt his mill, upon which condition Mr Erskine
gave his consent but after the work was executed it was found that it injured the mill without
answering the purpose’ [and was abandoned;]
more detail in Unedited doc.
1747 GD15/363 Tack of Miln, 1747, to William Wright and John Keir; detail in unedited doc.
1786 NRAS 1868/47
Tack Milton Corn and Lint Mills, to Andrew Wright, 1786 with mill lands, as last possessed by
Thomas Duncanson with multures etc but excepting the part of Flanders Moss feued to the late Captain
John Campbell of Kinpunt and to the late Hugh Graham of Arngomery; (but Ward of Goodie is not
thirled to this mill) the lint mill is ‘lately built between the said mill and the loch of Menteith’ for 19
years; not to keep sheep …
141
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1850 1468/1 Miscellaneous estate papers including reports on farms, 1841–1865.
Additional Report on Several Farms… by John Dickson, Saughton Mains, 14 Oct 1850.
Mill of Cardross and Farm, possessed by William Connal, 70 acres at 18/–; mill rental £42; mill
would be improved by having machinery for making pot barley added and the low field should be
drained, the drains being 3 feet deep and 30 feet apart; this land is in a very bad state of cultivation.
1861 Census shows Mill to be Unlet; this was the time of the abandonment of rural grain mills as railways
allowed for cheap distribution of industrially milled meal and flour, increasingly often imported from Canada
and the US.
Mill of Goodie
Circa 1750 Mill of Gudie shown [Roy 5].
1783, shown on Stobie as a mill sign and a cluster of buildings in Kincardine parish, on the north side of
the Goodie.
1st Edition OS 6” shows two clusters of roofed buildings, one north and one south of the Goodie Water;
but the mill itself is unroofed, a little further upstream and fed by a lade.
2nd Edition OS 6” the site is named, there is only one cluster of buildings and the mill has vanished.
NS69NE 39 6661 9850 CANMORE for some detail – see unedited doc.
1683 CC6/12/5 part 2 folio 37v to 38r; tack by Laird Norie to Wm Chalmers, James Spittal and
James Law, dated Jan 1683;
detail in unedited doc.
Moss-side
see under Boquhapple.
Poldar (Easter) – also Poldar House
Circa 1750 shown on Roy’s Map [Roy 5] with some planting.
1783, Stobie shows E Polder as a mansion with a little planting on the north side of the Forth, approached
by a track from Frew which continues to W Polder.
1st Edition OS 6” this site is now named as Poldar House and Easter Poldar [Farm] is further east with
an unnamed ‘cottage’ close by. Poldar House is a substantial building with a rectangle of trees (?orchard)
attached and substantial garden and planting. As on Stobie, it is approached from Frew, but the connection
to Wester Poldar has now gone.
2nd Edition OS Poldar House is show as two roofed buildings with enclosure but Easter Poldar now appears
much more substantial.
1:25,000 a single, unroofed structure is shown at the site of Poldar House, the gardens have gone but
Easter Poldar remains as a substantial site.
142
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1533 first record of Easter Poldar (see below) Inventory of Writs
CS21/Division of Moss Poldar/22/12/1798, big bundle, item 10, Inventory of writs produced
for Trustees of David Forrester of East Polder, 1793, firstly, tack of Easter Polder and pertinents by
Robert, Commendator of Inchmahome to Alex Wardlaw, burgess of Stirling, for 19 years from,
23 Oct 1533, for payment of £1 6s 8d yearly. Inventory up to late 18th century in unedited doc.
1533 GD15/266 Tack of East Polder for 19 years, 1533.
Granted by Robert, commendator of Inchmahome, with consent of the convent, for the common work
and reparation of the place, set to Alexander Wardlaw, burgess of Stirling and Margaret Schaw
his spouse and Elizabeth Wardlaw their daughter, longest liver of them, their assigns and subtenants
one or more, all the lands of ‘Ester Poldor’ with the pertinents, for 19 years, from Martinmas next,
in ‘houss, biggingis, toftis, croftis, infields, outfields, girss, wattir, mure, moss, medow, frie ishe &
entrie and with common pasturage, togidder with all and sundrie freedoms …
They are to pay 26s 8d yearly with four long carriages yearly with due service aucht and wont.
1548, tack Easter Polder by John, commendator to Christian Douglas, relict John Leckie and to their children,
of lands and steadings of E Polder for 19 years from 1548 for £1 6s 8d (noted in Inventory of Writs cited
above but the original has not been found).
1604 – GD124/1/1001 Easter Poldar forms part of lands Barony of Cardross.
1619 NAS GD22/3/10 31 May 1619, petition to the Lords of Council by John Graham of Polder and
his brother and others, all accused of the slaughter of Jaspert Graham of Blaircessnock, requesting that they
be allowed to find security to appear. NAS
GD22/3/12 – relaxation of letters of horning in the above case regarding the slaughter.
1702 GD15/27 Rental of the Estate of Cardross, 1702
Rental of the feu duties payable to Lady Cardross:
Easter Pollder
Wester Pollder
£1 18s
£1 18s
1762 SC44/59/2 pp 84–87 registered 23 Nov 1762. Tack, dated at Easter Polder, 12 April 1756,
James Forrester of Polder sets to James Hay, tenant in Norrieston, all the mailing of land on the east side of
Polder as the same was lately possessed by Henry Graham, together with the piece of ground called the
Ross Fold, as presently stobbed off and a ditch to be cast by the said stobbs, together also with the east
side of the Pow of Polder from the march of the said Henry Graham’s late possession up to the new dyke
next to the head of the corn land … for 19 years … more detail in unedited doc.
1767 GD15/34
Rental of lands of Cardross, Blaircessnock and Ward of Gudie Crop 1767
Rental of feus and tiend meal 1765 [noted as part of above]
Mr Forrester for E Polder
Dr Stirling for W Polder
3s 2d
3s 2d
1783 SC44/59/3 pp 15–24 Disposition by David Forrester to his trustees as he is to go abroad to clear
the heritage of debts and burdens and the liabilities to his mother and brothers etc. detail under Little Ward.
143
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
Poldar (West)
Circa 1750 shown on Roy’s Map [Roy 5] as site.
1783, Stobie shows W Polder as a mansion without planting served by the track from Frew and E Polder.
1st Edition OS shows Wester Polder as a courtyard steading with probably garden enclosure. It is
approached by a road crossing the Suspension Bridge across the river from Killorn.
1:25,000 nothing here at the site which would correspond to NS628963
1556 – RMS – Wester and Easter Poldar amongst lands granted to John, Commendator of Inchmahome
and Alexander Erskine of Cagnoir, 2nd son of late John, Lord Erskine.
1569–1789
GD15/271 1569, resignation by John Erskine of Gogar of lands of W Poldar in hands of
John earl of mar, in favour of Duncan Forrester of Easter Culmore and spouse. Includes other writs;
details in unedited doc.
1604 GD124/1/1001 Wester Poldar forms part of the Barony of Cardross.
1702 GD15/27 Rental of the Estate of Cardross, 1702
Rental of the feu duties payable to Lady Cardross:
Easter Pollder
Wester Pollder
£1 18s
£1 18s
1731 CC6/12/13 pp 144–146 Letter Will and Testament Henry Dow to his spouse and children. Dated
at Wester Poldar 28 Jan 1731 before Samuel McGibbon and Allan [Ure] the tenants in the Polder. He is
in ‘decaying condition’ but sound in memory and judgement and senses and wishes now to be ‘ready to
abide the good Will of almighty God when it shall please him to call me out of this world’ etc. His loving
wife is provided for by contract of marriage; he has sold all his goods to Mr William Stirling, chirurgeon in
Stirling who still has in his hands a bond for 12,000 merks dated 25 day of August 1730 which is to
answer his wife’s liferent and to his children; From it, when the liferenter is dead, he leaves the capital to his
children after meeting costs etc: and he leaves to his wife all his movables at Polder, to wit corns, horse,
nowt, sheep and household plenishing;
1732 SB1/11/4/2 Inventory of the lands means and effects of Walter Stirling, 1733:
Imprimis, all and whole the lands of Wester Polder, with houses, biggings, yards, mosses, muirs, meadows,
tofts, crofts, parts and pendicles and whole pertinents etc extending yearly to the particular sums of victual
and money after mentioned.
.…
The whole rent of the estate of Wester Polder conform to a Rental is £398 Scots of money and 42 bolls,
3 firlots meal, 12 hens, 14 pounds of butter and the sowing of 7 lippies of lintseed; rests owed by the tenants
of Polder for crop 1732 and preceding:
John Keir for crop 1732 and preceding
Allan Ure for foresaid crop
Patrick McLaine for 10 bolls 3 firlots 1732
£157
£60
£53
144
3s 4d
6s
15s
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1764 Inventory of Writs of W Poldar CS21/Division of Moss Poldar/22/12/1798 – big bundle, item 23.
1 Charter of lands of W Poldar by John Earl of Mar to Duncan Forrester of Culmore, 15 June 1569.
details in unedited doc.
1773 SC44/59/2 pp 200–202, registered 15 Jan 1773, tack dated 20 Nov 1769 by Dr Walter
Stirling, physician in Stirling to William Miller, tenant in Inch of Leckie (excluding assigns) all the lands of
Wester Polder, with houses, biggings, yards and pertinents … for 19 years;
To pay £83 6s 8d Sterling plus 4 bolls oatmeal to the minister and other dues for schoolmaster etc;
‘to keep all the moss ditches and drains clear and to cast his peats in a regular manner putting off
the light moss by water every winter before casting them so that no disorderly moss band be ever
left’ and to leave 18 dargs of peats on the ground at the end of his tack, stacked as he has received
the same;
to labour yearly one third of the lands at a time and when a third is broken up it is to be laboured
for 3 years successively and the last year to be laid down in grass seeds with barley or corn at a
rate of 3 bushels rye grass and 20 lb white clover per acre and that is to stay in grass for six years.
He is to uphold the house, barn, ‘shade’ and ferry boat with the chain in proper order; and if Stirling
should incline to live at Polder during the tenancy then he will have the mansion house and Lady
Haugh with a part of the barn and barn yard and a deduction of £12 Sterling to be made and a
suitable house built for the tenant.
And if Stirling should incline to make any improvement to the
moss he may do so but is to compensate the tenants damages.
1834–1844 GD15/46 Memorandum Book Discusses bridge, integration of Polders into estate, creation
and abandonment of pendicles etc – details in Unedited doc.
1846 GD1/393/46/1/3 Minute of Agreement, Robert Clark at Wester Polder, 1846, Clark holds a
lease of possession number two at Wester Polder, formerly occupied by [–] McNaughton and agrees to
accept £51 sterling from Erskine and will continue to occupy the farm for 3 years but will then give it up but
if they agree at the end of the three years, he may resume the lease on repaying the £51 and to leave in
good heart and the moss to be wrought through the three years as provided in the tack.
1855 GD1/393/46/1/6 Lease James McGibbon, Faraway, 1855, for 19 years; presently occupied
by McGibbon and extending to 123.5 acres and also the land presently possessed by Robert McNabb,
at West Polder, extending to 4.5 acres; to build a new farm etc, tile drains etc, detail in unedited doc.
1856 GD1/393/46/1/13 Tack to George Lang, West Polder, 1856, formerly John Graham and now
possessed by himself; reservations etc as above; pays £105 pa; reclaimed ground as in other tacks; prop
will furnish tiles for drainage and tenant obliged to drain; he is to have right to use the suspension bridge
at Killorn for himself, cattle and produce etc and is not to cross the river elsewhere either by carts of boats
without permission; he has right to cut peats as pointed out to him by the factor for his own use or in draining
the farm but shall not allow others to cast peats or make roads for carting them and is to prevent trespass;
rotations etc as usual;
1868 GD1/393/46/1/62 Minute of Agreement farms of South Flanders and West Polder, December
1868; to David Black, tenant of the said farm, rent to be £280 pa in full as rent and interest on improvements
145
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
but excluding interest on money spent on bringing water from the Forth to the steading and for any rent for
any new reclaiming of the moss since the tenant entered or which may yet be reclaimed; the proprietor was
bound to erect some fences on South Flanders and this has not been done and they are now to be erected
next season.
Poldar (Pendicles of Wester) – see South Flanders
Poldar Moss
Circa 1750 although Roy’s Map does not name Poldar Moss it does indicate that moss penetrates fairly
continuously from the main body of Flanders Moss to the confluence of the Forth and the Goody.
1783 Stobie does not name or indicate moss here.
1st Edition OS 6” shows Poldar Moss as contiguous with Flanders. The parish boundary, marked by trees
and (in part) by an unnamed pow, separates them for part of their way. The irregular margins indicate
vigorous clearance and there is a detached portion, west of Mill of Goodie. There is a small pool close to
the boundary with Flanders Moss.
1:50,000 and 1:25,000 forms the eastern part of the moss, close to the Thornhill-Frew road.
Pollabay [‘farm’ of Pollabay united with Blaircessnock by mid 19th centur y]
1st Edition OS, a single roofed block, south of the Goody and below Lower Tarr from where the access
comes. There is some very small-scale encroachment into the Moss at this area. It is close to the confluence
of the Pollabay Pow with the Goodie.
2nd Edition OS is still named but unroofed.
1:25,000 might correspond to an unroofed block just within the forestry at 65002.
1750 SC44/59/1 p 246 Articles of Agreement John Campbell and Hugh Graham, registered 8 Sept 1756.
Noted under Blaircessnock; fuller version in Unedited doc.
1865 NRAS 1468/1 Draft Report on the Estate of Cardross, 17 May 1865 by John Arthur …
Blaircessnock and Polabay, Henry Dougal, a fair state of cultivation, but tenant is to implement the
terms of the lease.
Pollabay Pow
1:25,000 stream tributary of Goodie Water, canalised and forming eastern boundary of woodland around
6299.
Rindaw – correctly pronounced Rynjaw (A Orr Ewing, pers comm.).
1761 Map 11 shows Rhyn daw as a part of a field north of Burntide on the Meikle Burn.
1783, Stobie shows Rindaw on the north east of the Cardross policies.
1801 Plan of the Estate of Cardross, Ryandaw appears as a field, said to be about 15 acres, at
the south eastern corner of the policies.
146
Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 002 ( ROAME No. F02LG22)
1764 1468/22 Tacks etc, 1754–1771.
Tack Ryndaw to James Ure 1764 ‘being the whole lands lying be-east the Meikle burn presently
possessed by William and John McGibbons, tenants in North Mains … reserving liberty to tenant
of south Ballingrew to water at the well at Rindaw and the use of the loan; pays £8 sterling and
carriages etc …
1785 GD15/365 Jottings with regard to the tacks of Cardross.
Robert Ure to have Ryndaw for ten pounds, six carriages and ten hens.
1786 NRAS 1468/48
Tack Ryndaw to Robert Ure 1786; no moss clearance! For 19 years, pays £10 Sterling with
10 hens etc;
1800 GD15/41 Report regarding the Estate of Cardross, June 1800 gives the area as 15 acres.
Tarr
Circa 1750 Roy’s Map [Roy 3] shows E Tarr on high ground and W Tarr close to Mill which is just south of
Ruskie.
1783, Stobie shows W & E Tarr as a series of perhaps 4 blocks, variously L and U shaped, all south of the
Thornhill road.
Tarr (Easter)
1st Edition OS 6” shows as a complex steading of courtyard format and access from the Thornhill-Port Road.
Details of reports on Farms of Easter Tarr in unedited Doc.
Tarr (Lower)
1st Edition OS 6” shows a complex small settlement of Lower Tarr and Ruskie Mill and with Hogwood
(in ruins) to the west.
1:25,000 south of Ruskie
Details of reports on farm of Lower Tarr in unedited doc.
Tarr (Upper)
1:50,000
Thornhill
Sometimes said to have been founded to house Highlanders after the ’45 who were then set to work to clear
the Moss. However, it had been established in 1694 and after a short burst of initial growth did not show
any remarkable spurt which would support this theory (Dixon, 1995).
Charles Roger, A Week at Bridge of Allan, Edinburgh, 1851.
P 208, ‘At the distance of nine miles from Stirling and about four miles from Kincardine, we reach the village
of Thornhill, renowned in former times for the number of its stills, but now enjoying a reputation more
creditable from its abundant supply of excellent water. …
147