WHERE WAS WAPPING STREET?

[Stanley]

WHERE WAS WAPPING STREET?
[Early in 2006 one of the members on One Guy, Sue, asked this question and here are the responses to the topic.]
Sue, it’s always confused me slightly.  In practice it nowadays refers to a locality rather than a street.  If you think of Walmsgate as the old name for the beginning of Colne Road from Lamb Hill to the end of Calf Hall Road, Wapping is the old name for the piece of Colne Road from there to Town Head.  The most usually accepted root of ‘Wapping’ is from the Old English personal name ‘Waeppa’ and ‘ing’ which is OE for place, stream, meadow or ‘associated with’ or ‘named after’.  So, if we follow this route, Waeppa had a meadow, small farm or homestead and it became the name for that piece of land which became part of Colne Road.  As I always say about the interpretation of place names, if you don’t like it, dig another meaning out.  One thing is certain there will be plenty there but this one seems the most obvious.
Herb, one thing is certain, it isn’t a precise location and the sense I have picked up over the years is that there is a distinction between Lamb Hill, Walmsgate and Colne Road up to Townhead.  I am sure that there are people who have a different understanding and include Lamb Hill and Walmsgate in the term.  I think that the only thing everyone would agree on is that Wapping finishes at Townhead. In the LTP, Ernie Roberts, who lived at John Street opposite Clough Mill, said that as lads they had a gang called ‘the Wapping Shin Crackers’, a small thing but indicative of what they thought the name of their area was.
An older name for Colne Road at Bancroft where it branches off Manchester Road (Barnoldswick Lane, Tubber Hill) is Gillians Lane.  Then there is the new property from Bancroft Mill to Townhead. 
Here’s the 1892 map of the area.  The steep slope from Church Street/Manchester Road is known as Lamb Hill.  Walmsgate is still the name for the next length marked on the map.  Westgate runs from Calf Hall Lane up to Townhead which is unmarked on this map but is on the extreme left.  Gillians is beyond Townhead to the left.  Wapping on this map denotes the general area which is always how I have understood it.  One thing which might explain Wapping Street is that all the streets and houses on the lower side of Westgate in this orientation have been demolished and there were street names for the ginnels.  I can’t remember the name [Hartley Street?] but there was one which puzzled me for years and I later found it had been demolished.  So, there is the possibility that Wapping Street did exist and was somewhere in the houses that were demolished in the 1950s for road widening.
Peter Thompson put forward his theory; ‘Wapping, derived from Wapentake or Saxon encampment, I understand that such an encampment existed in the Esp lane area.’




My reply to Peter; ‘wapentake’ is a term used in the Danelaw counties (York was one of them) to denote a ‘hundred’ which is an archaic description for a division of a county which became extinct with the 1894 Local Government Act which set up District Councils. Barnoldswick was part of the wapentake of East Staincliffe which was roughly bounded by Kettlewell in the North, Bolton Abbey in the East, and Oakworth in the South. The moot would be held at or near the main town of the area which at that time would be Skipton. I can find no evidence in any of the authorities I have for Wapentake being used as a place name element. The later hangover from this was the fact that before the BUDC was formed, Barnoldswick was administered as part of the Skipton Rural District Council.
Question from Richard Broughton:
Stanley, it always intrigues me as to why Barnoldswick was in the Wapentake of East Staincliffe.  Does this refer to the Staincliffe near Settle?  Is this the centre of the area?  There a much bigger towns in this area.  And when do you think these areas were designated?  Thanks for your answers.
Well Nigel, that blew away three hours of my Saturday morning but I’m grateful to you and Peter because you have made me dig further into the subject.  I have always accepted the name but never questioned the origins beyond knowing it was a Danelaw alternative to the more usual ‘hundred’.  Right!  Here is what I’ve dug out......
 
 
 
 
 
Here is the map from EPNS Place Names of the West Riding, VI.  Which gives you the extent of the wapentakes.  The large Roman numerals refer to the nomenclature used in the EPNS series.
Here’s what I gleaned from the sources:
WAPENTAKES AND HUNDREDS

The division of England into shires, used for the raising of taxes, was established by the Anglo Saxons on the basis of Celtic clan lands and refined into the county system of the Normans and Plantagenet Angevins. Wapentake is a local division of a shire or county in old English law; the term is used north of the Trent River [the Danelaw] for the territory called a Hundred in other parts of England. The name wapentake comes from weapon and take, an indication that it referred to an area organized primarily for military purposes.

Besides being divided into three Ridings, East, North and West (a Riding being derived from the Norse word “thriding,” meaning a third part) Yorkshire was further sub-divided into administrative areas called Wapentakes, the Danelaw equivalent of an Anglo-Saxon Hundred in most other counties. The word derived from an assembly or meeting place, usually at a cross-roads or near a river, where literally one’s presence or a vote was taken by a show of weapons.

STAINCLIFFE WAPENTAKE

The following is taken from ‘The Place Names of the West Riding of Yorkshire. Part VI’ Published by the English Place Names Society [EPNS]. It’s fairly dense text but this is because it is written by academics who are experts in the field. Their criteria is that the evidence must be found in the documents. This leaves aside any speculation and means that what is written is as near as possible good evidence taken from prime sources. It can be trusted implicitly.

“Steinclif Uap’ 1166 P, -wap’ 1195, 1196 P, 1231 Ass 14d, Stainclive e. 13 Puds, (wap’ de) Stainclif(f), -y- 13 Font, 1228 Rip, 1230 P, 1276 RH, 13o3 Aid, Pat et freq to 1471 Fount Pres, -cl’ i26o Y1, -Clyf(f)e, -i- 1285 KI, 1303 KF, 1323 Ass 3, -clyve, -i- 1274 Puds, 1105 Y1, 1316 Pat, Staynil 1293 Y1, Stainhill 1295 Ipm.

The wapentake is named from a lost Staincliffe in Bank Newton 55 infra; in the twelfth century the wapentake met at Flasby (48 infra) which is some distance from Staincliffe (12 Font 376). The eastern division of the wapentake includes the upper parts of the valleys of the R. Aire (Airedale iv, 89 supra) and the R. Wharfe (Wharfedale v, 2 supra); this region is very hilly, largely characterised by the green hills and fells of the mountain limestone. There is extensive moor land on the higher ground of the Millstone Grit area which lies to the south and a certain amount of woodland in the valleys. The chief towns in this division are Keighley, Barnoldswick and Skipton. The wapentakes of East and West Staincliffe, lying in the north-west of the Riding on the Lancashire border, together form the district of Craven (infra), which was the name of a wapentake at the time of the DB survey, and East Staincliffe itself included the Honour of Skipton (Honor de Sciptone 1191 RBE, Honore de Skypton in Craven 1285 KI, etc., cf. Skipton 71 infra).


CRAVEN
Cravescire, Crave’ 1086 DB, Crau-, Craven(a) 1134-52 Furn, a. 1152 YCh vii, 1154 Selby, c. 1187 Dugd v, 1198 Fount, 1214 CIR, 1218 Percy et passim to 1590 Camd, Cravana 1154 YCh 480, 1175 ib 359, Crau-, Cravene 1166 P, c. 1175 Font, 1202 FF et freq to c. 1416 Fount, Crafna c. 116o Richard of Hexham, Crawyn 1421 Y1, Cravyn 1457 FountBurs, Crayffyn 1537 Test vi. The name was that of a DB wapentake: apart from a group of four or five places in Lonsdale, including Melling, Hornby and Wennington in Lancashire and Thornton in Lonsdale, it corresponded approximately to the later wapentake of Staincliffe, at least to those parts east of the R. Ribble. It was also the name of an archdeaconry and a general regional name which at times formed an affix in many place names like Stainton 55, Bolton 63, Skipton 71, and many other township names in East and West Staincliffe, but none west of the R. Ribble; Sawley 182 is the most westerly township so described. The exact limits of the area are not easy to determine but the eastern boundary between Great Whernside (V, 2 18 supra), Craven Well and Appletreewick Pasture (in Appletreewick vi, 78-9 infra), the R. Washburn (presumably near its source) and Addingham (57 infra) is detailed in 1307 Y1. Several other place names containing the name Craven (Craven Sike v, 219 supra, Craven Wood 8, Craven Cross and Craven Moor 78 infra, Craven Laithe in Middop 172 infra, (Craven Bank & Ridge in Giggleswick 145, Cravenegate in Gisburn Forest 170, Cravens Wath f.n. in Ingleton 248, Craven’s Way in Dent 255 infra, etc. and possibly Cranoe Hill 40 infra) are on or near the boundaries of this district. There is no evidence later than DB to show that it extended westward of the R. Ribble or north into Ewecross Wapentake.

The name is usually assumed to be of Celtic origin; in ‘English Place Names’ p.129 Ekwall suggests that it may be connected with Welsh craf ‘garlic’ and be similar to the Italian place name Cremona, which Holder 1158 associates also with Welsh craf, Irish creamh. [SG note: I’ve looked the reference up in my copy and Ekwall doesn’t mention the Italian or Welsh connections. Wild garlic does grow well in the area.] The theory implies the lenition [I looked this word up and eventually found it in Webster’s unabridged dictionary. ‘Lenition’; ‘A phonological process that weakens consonant articulation at the ends of syllables or between vowels causing the consonant to be voiced, spirantised or deleted. In linguistics a type of Celtic mutation that derives historically from phonological lenition. Obsolete sense, 1535/1545 ‘mitigating or messuaging’.] of Brit cram- to craf-, but there is no difficulty in this (cf. Jackson 488 ff).”

So, what can we glean from this splendid evidence? First, that Craven was an earlier Saxon wapentake but by the time of DB [Domesday] the present division of East and West Staincliffe was introduced. The most usual reason for a revision like this is that the original area was too unwieldy and was split into two to make it more easily administered. As for Staincliffe. I am intrigued by the suggestion that this is named after a lost name in the Bank Newton/Stainton area. [There is a group of farm names between Bank Newton and West Marton; Little Stainton, Stainton Hall and Stainton House. The etymology of the name is almost certainly ‘steinn’ or ‘stain’ (stone) and ‘ton’ (farmstead) – stony farmstead (the land is in a valley bottom and on boulder clay and does contain a lot of erratics) and nothing to do with the personal name ‘Stain’ which was the name of a person who is mentioned in DB as holding three carucates.]

The evidence for Staincliffe at Bank Newton is from Yorkshire charters, 1208, vii, p. 150. According to the same deed it was near Stainton. Etymology of the place name is most likely ‘steinn’ and ‘clif’ - Rock cliff’. This explanation makes sense as the location of the lost Staincliffe is almost central to the two later wapentakes.

If Flasby was the original meeting point for east Staincliffe it was almost certainly the moot place for the earlier Craven. It seems strange to us nowadays to find that such an obscure place was so important but we must remember that the factors that dictated the location; distribution of population, ease of access dictated by topography, existing roads and tracks and defensible considerations, were totally different 1500 years ago when these divisions were put in place.

We can therefore place Barnoldswick firmly in the early wapentake of Craven and the later divisions of East and West Staincliffe. Indeed, if the lost Staincliffe at Bank Newton/Stainton was important enough to be used as the administrative name for the areas then Barnoldswick was very close to both the centre and the meeting place at Flasby.

Doc and I were talking about this yesterday and it struck me that one possible reason for holding the moot for a wapentake in a small village with easy access instead of in the main administrative town could be the danger of having a lot of people with weapons gathered together in times of dispute.  Less chance of insurrection and take over if they are in a field out in the open rather than milling around in the middle of Skipton.  No evidence for this, but a reasonable suggestion I think.

Response from Colin: ‘Comrade, I think you have something there. I’ve read somewhere that the Norsemen used to hold their judicial and legal meetings out in the open in special places away from the towns and villages with no weapons allowed. Nolic’
It makes sense doesn’t it.  Bit like swords being prohibited in the House of Commons.  If I was in charge of such a meeting I would want it to be held in a place capable of being controlled by my militia.  Think good over-view, open country, ease of encirclement etc.  It seems to me that in times of unrest, holding a meeting where everyone was required to carry a weapon is a high risk strategy.  Flasby [SD945564] is overlooked by a fell to the east [Between the moot and Skipton and therefore overlooking the route of any move towards the town] it is bounded to the south by what would then be marshy ground and the River Aire and is within easy reach of Skipton.  Although there was an ancient settlement at Flasby I know of no administrative function such as a court being held there.  It looks as though the wapentake or hundred moot was a separate function from the Manorial court at Skipton.  It may well be, as suggested above, more to do with the military or defensive structure of the region.  I suppose that what I’d really like to know is what subjects were actually decided at the moot.  More digging needed I think......
Later....  This is a massive subject.  However, I went to one of my old mentors; John Campbell-Kease, in his wonderfully informative, ‘A Companion to Local History Research’  Here’s one section of his guidance on the subject.  [pp. 74-76].
“LATER SAXON LAWS.
The later Saxon laws, spread over the years 950 to 1042, regulated a number of issues, and the majority appear in translation in Robertson and Thorpe. ‘A Handbook to the Land Charters and Other Saxonic Documents’ edited by J. Earle (Oxford 1888) is also of value, especially for the reign of Cnut. The secular group of King Edgar’s codes drafted at Andover 959-63 confirm the meeting of the hundred court, and laws 5.1 and 5.2 laid down that the borough court was ‘to be held thrice a year and the shire court twice ... and at the shire meeting the bishop and the ealdorman [were] to be present, there to expound both the ecclesiastical and the secular law. Rules were laid down regarding sureties, and the hunting down of criminals that they be taken ‘dead or alive’. Coinage was standardised, as was the system of measurement ‘observed in Winchester’.

King Ethelred’s code issued at Wantage, probably in 997, is valuable in that it gives important information on the administration of the Danelaw, and in ‘the peace which the ealdorman and the king’s reeve give in the meeting of the five boroughs’ - that is to say Lincoln, Stamford, Nottingham, Derby and Leicester. The laws held for hundreds and wapentakes. The code dealt with a variety of matters such as trial by ‘ordeal of fire or of iron’; issuing false coinage; the slaughtering of animals; and much broader matters of civil disturbance and well-being. King Ethelred’s code of 1008 dealt with all manner of moral issues - ‘shameful frauds’, ‘horrible perjuries’, ‘devilish deeds’, ‘deeds of murder and manslaughter’, over-eating, over-drinking, breaches of the marriage law and ‘evil deeds of many kinds’. It dealt too with the defensive works of boroughs, and with military service.

About the year 1020, Cnut, last of the Danish kings of England, developed the code which is much the longest to survive from the Old English era. It was, to a large extent, made up from the appropriate pieces of the laws of earlier monarchs, but there were new elements which this outstanding sovereign wished to be observed ‘all over England’. A few extracts will illustrate a little of the range of the code. ‘And he who wishes to purify the country rightly ... must diligently restrain and shun such things as…. ‘hypocrisy, lies, robbery and plundering’; ‘and let us take thought very earnestly about the improvement of the peace and the improvement of the coinage ... about the improvement of the peace in such a way as may be best for the [law-abiding] subject and most grievous for the thief .. and about the improvement of the coinage [so that there is nothing] false and no man is to refuse it.’ ‘It is a heathen practice [to worship] the sun or the moon, or fire or flood, wells or stones or any kind of forest trees ... or to take part in such delusions.’ The laws dealt with the rights of reeves and freemen, with buying and selling, with observing the hue and cry, the payment of wergild (‘man tribute) -the price set upon a man according to his rank, and paid in compensation (or fine) in cases of homicide and certain other crimes to free the offender from further obligation or punishment. They also covered the treatment of slaves, working on feast days, incest, adultery, arson and much more.

To end this section brief consideration will be given to the ‘law of the Northumberland priests’, committed to writing around the time of Cnut’s laws, that is 1020-23. As Dr Whitelock points out in EHD1 [English Historical Documents] p.471, ‘Evidence relating to the north of England in the later Saxon period is scanty. This code shows us that heathen practices had still to be reckoned with, and it reveals a three-fold division of society for certain purposes, giving a unique term to describe the lowest free class, for it seems to talk indiscriminately of a ceorl, a tunesman [’villager], and a mysterious faerbena [possibly a freeman who was not a landholder]. It reveals also the organisation of the priests of York into a community with common obligations and a common chest, the existence of the office of archdeacon in the northern province, and the toleration of the marriage of the clergy in this area.’”

SG conclusions….
My reading of this is that the moot associated with a wapentake or hundred was the mechanism used by the Crown to communicate a unified code [the Common Law] to the hundreds and shires, as opposed to local law set and administered by the Manorial Courts.  I am surprised to see the frequency of four weeks mentioned.  It also seems to have been a mechanism for making general lines of governance plain to the common people as opposed to rigid law.  I suppose the nearest we have to this nowadays are devolved assemblies.  What is certain is that until better means of communication from the centre became available, the moot was a very important element of the Crown’s control over far-flung and inaccessible areas of the kingdom.
‘Walmsgate’. I was digging through my Latin dictionary today and it struck me that there might be a connection between the Latin ‘vallum’ for fence or palisade and Walmsgate.  The Latin V is sounded as a W so Vallumgate looks possible.  Only a thought, but I have never seen any really convincing analysis of the name.
I was triggered off into dragging all this information together by the question posed on the One Guy site about whether Barnoldswick should be known as ‘Barlick in Pendle’. My initial response went like this:
‘You raise a very complicated subject.  My take on it is that it doesn’t really matter what administrative area the powers that be slot us into as long as it works.  The crucial point about the admin is that whatever authority we were linked with we would still be an outlier and in that respect Pendle is probably the most efficient.  I am absolutely against us being taken over by Blackburn.   Geographically, there is a good case for Barlick being a separate area as it lies on the watershed between the Ribble and Aire systems.  Roughly speaking, anything west of the canal flows to the Ribble, anything to the east goes to the Aire.  The big exception to this is County Brook which starts on the Weets and flows through Earby to the Aire apart from what is diverted into the canal.  In terms of trade, Barlick traded mostly with Colne in the days of the wool trade, very little with Yorkshire.  When cotton started to become the major fibre round about 1800 this trade with Lancashire totally dominated.  Geologically Barlick is on the cusp, the Craven Fault runs through the town and half is limestone extending up into the Dales to the North and to the south it is sandstone extending into Lancashire.  In terms of religion Barlick was one of the first and strongest centres of non-Conformism so we don’t get a differentiation there.  Genetically I would guess we swing more to Yorkshire than Lancashire but I have no proof.  The early tribal allegiances are murky but the evidence suggests we were part of the Brigantes to the North.  If there is one status that has predominated more than any other over the millennia it is independence. 
So, if you force me to make a choice it would be the historic linkage of Barnoldswick in Craven.’
I have to report that having re-visited the original research on the search for Wapping Street and the byways of wapentakes and place names, I can see nothing that alters my view. Indeed the above makes pretty good evidence for anyone who wants to object to any administrative changes that move us further towards Lancashire. Feel free to use any of the above in any way you desire.
SCG/22 October 2006