The Report on the Social Conditions of the People of Lewis (1902) by the Crofters Commission gives a detailed account of the traditional Lewis blackhouse, which agitated the minds of reformers from Sir James Matheson onward, and the measures taken from about 1880 to improve it, particularly with regard to sanitation.

The old Lewis house, was, as a rule, an oblong structure, varying in length according to the means and requirements of the occupier. It had one door, but frequently it had no windows. Chimneys did not find favour, as any opening for the escape of  smoke tended to reduce the quantity of soot, which was regarded as a valuable manurial product. Accordingly, if there was a hole in the roof to admit light, a pane of glass was fixed into it. It soon had a coating of soot, and admitted little light. All the sunlight in the dwelling was admitted through it and by the doorway when the door happened to be open. The family and the cattle entered by the same door; and the cows’ dung was removed only once a year – in the spring time. If one entered such a house in the month of May, after the crops had been sown and the manure cleared out, he would have to descend a foot of more from the level of the door-step to the floor, thence onward towards the portion occupied by the family, when he would have to step up a foot or so to reach the level of that floor. Later on in the season, the visitor would find that the cow-dung, to which a considerable quantity of sea-ware and earth had been added, was on a level with the door-step. Towards the beginning of spring the manure heap rose considerable above that level, and the visitor would have to get to the top of a plateau, and thereafter descend into the family circle.

When the spring tillage began, the manure was carried away in creels to the arable land, or, if the tenant had a horse and cart, the gable of the house was pulled down, and the cart backed in, loaded and driven away. These operations liberated noxious and poisonous gases from the decomposing mass, which only those accustomed to them from their youth could bear. Even the residents to whom they did not appear offensive sometimes succumbed to the pestilence spread around, for after the spring work was over, “dung fever” not infrequently manifested itself, and claimed its victims.

The walls of this primitive dwelling were generally about five feet thick. They consisted of an outer and an inner wall after the fashion of the old northern brochs; but instead of having an intervening passage as in the case of the brochs, the cavity was filled up with earth. This earth served the purpose of mortar, and prevented the wind from blowing through the open rubble work. The couples and cabers of the roof started from the inner wall, and these in turn were covered with layers of divots and straw. The roof was by no means impervious to rain, which, as it oozed through, became thickened and blackened with soot, and often fell in heavy drops on the inmates. Such of the rain as did not find its way through the roof ran down to the earth forming the centre of the wall and percolated through it to the foundation. The walls were thus kept perpetually damp. The smoke through the open stonework of the inner wall on the one hand, and the rain from the roof on the other, fertilised the earth forming the centre, with the result that it produced a luxuriant crop of green grass. This afforded a tempting bit to a hungry cow or sheep; and it was no uncommon thing to see a quadruped climb up to the sort of balcony at the base of the roof of the older houses and walk along the same, greedily devouring the grass before it.

The roof with all the soot adhering was stripped to the cabers, and the whole mass used as manure, or as a form of top-dressing. Its fertilising properties were considered valuable, and certainly the land to which this material was applied yielded good crops for the soil of Lewis. The process, however, had its disadvantages, for on every occasion on which the old divots forming part of the thatch were used for manure, a new supply had to be got from the hillside. This was highly detrimental to the grazing, large strips of the surface being annually filched, and requiring several years before a new crop of grass or heather appeared. The earth added to the manure during the season was also taken from hillside. In this case all the earth was frequently removed and nothing but the bare stones left. Grass did not grow there again. this is the Lewis equivalent to the Shetland “scalping” – a process which has proved highly injurious to Shetland grazings and which most Shetland landowners have endeavoured to suppress.

It should be added that generally the barn was built against the back wall of the dwelling-house; and frequently a member of the family on getting married hived off from the parental roof, erected a new dwelling against the old one, and settle down there. In this way there might be two or three dwelling-houses built close against each other, adding to the congestion in the township and making sanitation more and more difficult.

Despite – or because of – their ancient and primitive design, these blackhouses were remarkably efficient at keeping the heat in and the weather out; see Mary Beith’s article for a detailed discussion of the architectural merits. There is a latent affection for the blackhouse in the Hebrides, which seems to be based on memories of tidy, papered interiors and hearths whitewashed daily – the later, improved houses, with chimneys, and small deep-set windows offering just a little light, and with the cattle relegated to a separate byre – but these were some decades in coming.

About 1830 Seaforth sought to put an end to this state of matters, and ordered a partition to be erected between human beings and cattle, “and that more light should be admitted into the dark recesses of their habitations.” In several instances reformation then took place, “but sorely against the wishes of the people.”

However a beginning was made, and in course of time minor improvements were generally effected. It became a common thing to find a low stone wall, or partition, separating the part of the building occupied by the family from that occupied by the cattle. A further improvement which followed was the partitioning of a bed-chamber from the “central hall”. In this bed-chamber male and female slept, and so common had been the practice, that one of a series of rules issued by Sir James Matheson for the better management of the estate was specially designed to put an end to it. These rules are 53 in number, are all in Gaelic and bear no date. The 48th rule specified the type of house which the tenants were to build, and one clause ran thus:-

Bithidh mar an ceudna aitean cadail fa leth aig na firionaich o na boirionnaich. 
There shall likewise be sleeping apartments for the men separate from those occupied by the women.

Efforts to improve the state of housing in the islands continued throughout the century, particularly with the coming of officials – School Inspectors, Sanitary Inspectors and Medical Officers – who were particularly concerned with the unsanitary conditions caused by the proximity to livestock and lack of ventilation.

With the view of placing tenants in a better position, improving leases were offered in 1879 to such as were willing to enter into them. The offer was contained in a series of rules and regulations, printed in Gaelic and English. Under the first section of these rules, every tenant who, before Martinmas [November], 1881, should (1) execute improvements on his land by trenching, draining, and putting the same into a proper state of cultivation, etc., and (2) build a dwelling house according to the a specified type, was to get a lease for 12 years (1881-1893). The rule as to the dwellings provided that the improved class of house should consist of at least three apartments; and also stipulated that the that was not to be stripped off or removed for manure; that the byre was to be a separate building, and that the dung was to be regularly removed to the dung-heap.

Any tenant, whether possessing a lease or not, who built such a house as was prescribed, “to the satisfaction of the proprietor or his factor,” was in the event of a removal, or otherwise quitting the holding, to be allowed compensation for the same. (Report on the , 1902)

Changing relations between landowners and tenants, and the passing of the Crofters Holdings Act (1886) complicated the issue; such leases were not taken up in Lewis, and progress in housing was slow, despite the new attentions of a Sanitary Inspector. In 1893 the Lewis District Committee issued notices to the people that full-height, doorless walls must be built between human and cattle ends, with outside doors at both ends, under threat of prosecution. Some sample cases were brought before the Sheriff in the next years. In 1896 there was an appeal by the local authority to the Local Government Board for grants to improve the houses, but these were not forthcoming, and other difficulties, such as the shortage of suitable building sites on crofts, and the absence of tenure for cottars who therefore lacked the incentive, as well as the means, to invest in their houses, also hindered progress.  The Sanitary Inspector’s reports for the last years of the century indicate that while some new and acceptable houses were being erected, old-style ones were also still springing up, and unimproved cottars’ and squatters’ dwellings were still clustered in the townships.  

In October 1912, when evidence on medical matters was being taken in Stornoway by the Dewar Commission, there was still some concern – though not overwhelming – that smoky interiors were contributing to respiratory problems, that the houses were unsuitable places for convalescence, and that after an instance of typhoid, the disinfecting of houses where cattle and people were “all jumbled up” (to quote Lady Tullibardine) was virtually impossible, which contributed to epidemics.

Share

Ross DE Macphee PhD, Curator of Mammals at the AMNH, proposed in a recent paper that further study of the (single-species) walrus may provide insight into the origin of our Chessmen:

Some have argued that the Lewis Chessmen were created in Iceland rather than in present-day Norway. In this regard, the prehistoric distribution of Odobenus rosmarus may be of some interest. During the last ice age, or Wisconsinan glaciation (about 100,000 to 10,000 years ago) the higher latitudes of the northern hemisphere were mostly covered by enormous ice masses. In North America, where Wisconsinan ice extended to the latitude of New York City, walrus fossils have been found as far south as Cape Hatteras, North Carolina. In western Europe, Pleistocene walrus fossils are rare, but they clearly enjoyed a range that extended along the margins of the North Sea at least as far south as the northern British Isles. Although the ice progressively withdrew after the end of glacial times, walrus populations would have remained much longer in favourable areas. The famous 1539 Carta Marina, for example, pictures a ‘rosmarus piscis’ coming ashore on the coast of Finnmark, near present-day Tromsø in Northern Norway.

Why is this relevant? Some scientists consider that O. rosmarus can be subdivided into Pacific, Atlantic and the poorly-known Laptev Sea populations. There are some genetic differences between the first two populations, which suggest a degree of isolation over a reasonably long period. The Laptev population has not yet been adequately characterized genetically, and some authorities do not regard it as sufficiently distinct to warrant a separate designation. It would be interesting to know whether the ivory of the Laptev and Atlantic populations can be distinguished by analysing ancient DNA. (Similar techniques have been used to distinguish North American and Eurasian mammoth populations.) A DNA match to the existing Laptev walrus population – whose range includes the Kola peninsula[in north-western Russia] – might suggest that Scandinavia was the source. On the other hand, if Iceland was the source, any genetic signature recovered from the chessmen should closely conform to that of Atlantic walruses. Thus science may inform art, and vice versa.

This might inform where the ivory was harvested but given the extent of Viking trade, including clearly the provision of walrus ivory (and indeed unicorn horn, aka narwhal tusk) to Western Europe, it would not preclude Icelandic or Western Arctic walrus tusk being worked by a craftsman in Norway, or elsewhere.  It does seem unlikely that ivory harvested in Scandinavia would be traded back to the walrus-rich Viking colonies, walrus to Iceland being as coals to Newcastle, so a European source for the tusk would at least argue against an Icelandic workshop.

However, Graeme Davis, in his comprehensive study Vikings in America (Birlinn 2009), dismisses the idea that walrus ivory could have, in Viking times, come from anywhere other than Baffin Bay, and proposes a new theory on the origin of the Chessmen:

Trade between Greenland and Scotland is magnificently exemplified by the Lewis Chessmen, now acclaimed as one of the greatest treasures of the United Kingdom…The Chessmen are almost all made from walrus ivory, with the remainder being carved from whale tooth. The walrus ivory must be from Greenland. The walrus has a distribution which is circumpolar, living predominantly at the edge of the ice pack and moving north in summer and south in winter as the ice-edge moves. In Europe walrus are found only in Spitsbergen and along the edge of the Arctic Ocean ice. In these areas they were unmolested by man in Viking times as the area was too remote. Populations accessible to hunters are found in Greenland, both north-east and north-west coasts, and in the Arctic archipelago. The walrus ivory of the Lewis Chessmen was either harvested in Greenland or transported via the Greenland colonies. In artistic style the chessmen cannot be precisely attributed to any area; indeed, they are artistically unique. Both Trondheim and Dublin are among the places suggest ed for their production, though without any real evidence for either. The scenario most writers envisage is that the ivory was exported from Greenland to either Norway or Ireland, carved there, then somehow found its way to a west-facing beach on Lewis – a location that in European terms is on the way to nowhere. A far simpler explanation is that the walrus ivory was taken from a Baffin Bay hunting ground to the Greenland settlements, carved there, then brought to Scotland as a luxury good for trade. Uig on Lewis is more or less the closest Scottish landfall to Greenland, and precisely where a ship from Greenland might reasonably have landed. The simplest explanation for the unique style of the Lewis Chessmen and the location of the find is that they are a product of Viking Greenland. Quite how this might be tested is unclear. Perhaps they should be regarded not just as a treasure of Britain, but also as a treasure of Greenland.

The remote island of Rona, 44 miles off the Butt of Lewis, was evidently used in Viking times as a significant direction indicator, particularly, the author suggests, by Viking sailors heading to or from Greenland. If a ship bearing east towards Norway –

passed to the north of Rona, it might make landfall on Orkney, the Fair Isle of Shetland; if it missed to the south the landfall might be Scotland’s north coast around Cape Wrath, or the west coast of Lewis – specifically Lewis, where the Chessmen were found.

Vikings in America is a very thorough and engaging examination of Viking exploration to the West and settlement in Greenland, the Arctic and mainland North America, and provides further detail to support this (and other) theories – highly recommended.

Share

Share

A letter from Dr Macdonald of Gisla and Stornoway to another great Uig historian, Murdo Macleod (Murchadh Chaluim Sheoras, Crowlista and Glasgow). Dolly Doctor was at the time collecting objects and money for a folk museum, which didn’t happen before he died in 1961 but did supply Museum nan Eilean.

24/2/60
22 New Street
Stornoway
Isle of Lewis

Dear Murdo

At last I managed to find the negative of the Castle of the Macleods and have got prints made from it by the people who make my slides. I am sending you one of these prints – you can go into a photographers and get the picture enlarged to any size you fancy but you should ask the price first. You know that Seaforth fortified the castle in support of Charles II about 1962 & in defiance of Cromwell. He sent a company of soldiers from Inverness & they occupied Stornoway & buildt a garrison fort where the Custom House now stands. They left the Macleod Castle but in 1654 before leaving to go back to England under Genl Monk they blew up the castle leaving only a part of the walls & the tower. This was its condition up till 1882 when the stones of the tower & old castle were built into the foundations of No. 1 Pier. Provost Rodk Smith when a boy used to play in the ruins of the Old Castle during the big ebbs at spring tides. There were ‘clachan sinnteag’, a causeway of stepping to get to Castle at low tide but at flood the Castle was completely surrounded by water. The history of Siol Torcuill revolves round the Castle & many gruesome tales are told of what happened through the ages. Since writing you my brother Willie who used to be at Uig Lodge & was living in Stockport Lancashire dropped down dead. It was a terrible shock to his family & to us. I carry on with my Old Folks Association each Wedy. The fund for the Museum is at a standstill £1543 – we will have to do something about getting more funds soon. I am a prisoner upstairs in my room with all this ice & snow. I hope it goes soon for I cannot walk any distance now even with my two sticks. I think your story will appear in the next issue of Gairm. Tha mi an am pian agus ann an cabhaig agus seo e chun a phosta.

Le na beannachdan is gile ghuit fhein.

DD

Share

Work is underway in Reef on a new commemorative landmark commissioned by the Bhaltos Community Trust to mark the impact of land reform in Uig and throughout the island.

The Trust agreed at a public meeting to commission the monument to commemorate the 19th century Lewis land clearances, the 20th century raids by the Reef Raiders, more recent Scottish land reforms, and the creation of the Trust itself.  Marion Leven and Will Maclean, who created the landmark structures around Lewis at Pairc, Aignish and Gress, were commissioned to design the monument.

The Reef monment, Suileachan (‘lesson’),  will be constructed on an elevated, panoramic site in the village, with views over the surrounding land, sea and islands. The proposed structure has been designed with two circles, connected by a walled walkway. The eastern circle has a grey stone circular floor, inscribed with the names of the Reef Raiders. The walkway will lead the visitor through an archway, designed and constructed by Jim Crawford, to the west circle, overlooking the sea and islands of West Loch Roag, symbolically linking the past and the present.  This circle will have integrated seating inside and outside of the drystone walls and there will be an iron fire basket to provide a beacone which will be lit at times of celebration and commemoration. Suileachan will provide a future setting for cultural events as well as being aplace of reflection, contemplation and inspiration as it provides a panoramic view of the local area; it will describe the land struggle and its impact to visitors, and show the importance of working together to improve the future of our 21st century island century communities.

Suileachan has been designed to celebrate island craftsmanship and skills. The land around Bhaltos is defined by distinctive old stone walls, which will be replicated in the monument walls, constructed of stones from blackhouses in the area by an island stonemason.  The iron fire-basket will be made by a Stornoway blacksmith and the seating by a local craftsman from local stone and windblown trees from the Stornoway Trust.

The project has been made possible by funding from Scotland’s Islands, Community Regeneration Fund, Proiseact nan Ealan, Uig Community Council and the Bhaltos Community Trust, with the help of volunteers, the Comann Eachdraidh and Cllr Norman A Macdonald.

A launch ceilidh is now scheduled for Friday, 23 March 2012, from 7.30pm in Uig Community Centre. Music by Dougie Maclean, Maggie Smith, Anna Fraser, Shona Mackenzie and Campbell Scanlan; with a bar and tea/coffee. Admission is free though donations are welcome.

Share

Eric Macdonald and Keith Stringer: Taigh Dhe (filmed in Baile na Cille Church)

Leodhas Macleod: Mac an t-Sronaich (with Iain Baba)

Keith Stringer: Smuantain (with Iain Baba and wee Finlay)

Cristin Mackenzie: Blas Cianalais

Elly Welch: Oidhche Samhach

Share

We’ve been recording the abundant pew graffiti in Baile na Cille church – it’s a common phenomenon, evidently. Here’s John Macleod, Banner in the West (Birlinn 2008, p 283):

Island churches are still immune from vandalism (with some notable lapses in 1900) but there is a venerable tradition of scrawling initials, dates and even little pictures on the church pew, a diversion all the more readily accomplished in the days before electric lighting. The pews of Shawbost Free Church are replete with such memorials from the 1920s and beyond, though the odds of ever identifying an ‘MM 1934′ or a ‘JMcL’ are passingly remote. I had not long occupied my present pew in Stornoway when I noticed the immaculate sketch of an Imperial German officer, over the neatly printed ‘BOSCH 1918′. But who drew it we cannot now know, and it is unlikely he survives.

MacDonald’s take on this is interesting. ‘These graffiti are not very controversial. They do not “adorn in order to desecrate”… rather they are a powerful reminder that the space of worship belongs to the congregation, purchased by their tithes and, in some cases, actually built with their labour. Graffiti must be interpreted as proprietorial statements: this is our space. Accordingly, these are very Presbyterian transgressions, breaches of etiquette which affirm the ultimate authority of pew over pulpit.’

The MacDonald quote is from Towards a Spacial Theory of Worship: Some observances from Presbyterian Scotland, by Fraser MacDonald, Social and Cultural Geography, Vol 3 No 1, 2002.

Clearly this isn’t unique to island churches; if you have other examples, please share them. One of the most famous instances in Scotland is the names of the ‘Wicked Generation’ of Glencalvie, who camped in the churchyard at Croick in Sutherland in 1845 when they were cleared, and scratched their names on the windows.

See more of our graffiti here.

Share

One of the popular schemes of the Congested Districts Board (1898-1912) was the provision of bulls, rams and stallions, on loan, to crofting parishes where the stock was in need of improvement. This wasn’t the first attempt to improve stock with the introduction of bulls: evidently Sir James Matheson spent £1200 doing the same, during his time as Proprietor of the island.  From 1898, the Board issued an annual notice regarding the scheme, of which this is a typical example:

The Congested Districts Board are prepared to supply a limited number of bulls for use in Townships or Districts in Congested Parishes, and Crofters’ Common Grazings Committees desirous of making application for these animals should now do so.

All applications by these Committees must be made on printed forms, of which copies may be obtained on application from the Secretary of the Board.

It is essential that applications be in the hands of the Secretary before 27th January 1901.

It must be distinctly understood that the Committee will be responsible for any damage done by a bull while in their custody; also, that all expenses in connection with the wintering of the bulls shall be paid by the recipients, who must, in every case, make satisfactory arrangements for the keep of bulls during the winter following each service season, until the Board removes the bull in ordinary course of their arragements.

The bulls will remain the property of the Board.

RR MacGregor
Secretary

6 Parliament Square, Edinburgh, 3 Dec 1901

The Board was supplying Highland bulls in the west, Shorthorn or Polled Angus in the north, according to the preference of the crofters. In 1900-01, for instance, 45 bulls were sent out, 34 Highland to Tiree, Skye, the Western Isles, Wester Ross and Sutherland, and 8 Polled Angus and 3 Shorthorn to Caithness, Orkney and Shetland. The demand was greater than the amount the Board could supply and they were obliged to judge where their bulls would be of best use. In 1904, the progress to date was reported, including some Uig dispatches:

Aird: Supplied first in 1899. Cattle small and badly bred. The people have paid some attention to the gets of the bulls and kept a good many of them. Their young cattle are much improved in every respect. They have a second bull now.

Callanish: Supplied in 1902. Cattle very small and badly bred. They have kept very few of the gets of the bull. Those they have are a wonderful improvement on the old stock, having a good coat and good bones.

Haclete: Supplied in 1902. The class of cattle here is small and badly bred. there is not very much improvement to be seen as yet. The people are very thankful for the bull.

Valtos: Supplied in 1900. Cattle small and badly bred. They kept as many as they could of the young cattle, and consequently their stock is much improved. They have a second bull now.

Miavaig (for Kneep): Suplied first in 1899. Cattle a fair class. They kept a good many of the bull’s gets, and took good care of them. They got another bull in May 1903. They have now calves between the second bull and the first bull’s heifers, and they look very well. This is about the best case of improvement I have seen in the Lewis.

Crowlista: Supplied in 1904. Cattle small and a mixed class. They will take time to improve.

Tobson: Supplied first in 1899, and again in 1904. Their cattle were a small, badly-bred class. They are now improving, and beginning to show something Hihgland in coat and bones, but the set of horn is still farm from right.

Breasclete: Supplied first in 1900. Cattle very small and badly bred. They did not keep very many of his gets. Those they have kept are an improvement on the old stock. They have a second bull now, and they promise to look better after his gets.

Dalbeg: Supplied in 1901. The cattle in this district are rather a mixed lot of several breeds, even polleds. Their cattle are not very much improved yet, but some of the young cattle have better hair and better bone.

Tolsta Chaolais: Supplied in 1901. Cattle small and badly bred. They have kept some of the bull’s gets, and they are an improvement on the old stock. They should have kept more of them.

In 1908, a further report shows that the scheme continued at about the same rate.

Up to the beginning of the financial year 1908-9 we had purchased in all [since 1899] 412 bulls, which were lent to Grazing Committees on condition that proper arrangements were made for the care and wintering of the animals. In December 1908 we issued our usual notice [...] for bulls, and the following distribution was made of 48 bulls:- [The majority to Skye, Harris and the Southern Isles; in Lewis, just one Highland, to Barvas.]

We have endeavoured to buy our Highland bulls from breeders as near the districts to be served as possible. We are now in touch with so many of the breeders of the best West Highland bulls that we are able to buy direct from them for delivery in May a considerable number on satisfactory terms. this not only obviates the heavy expense for keep which resulted from purchases at the February sales, but the animals are not so heavily fed as they would in that case be. But purchase at the public sales has considerable advantages, and we have always reverted to them for bulls that can be delivered soon after the sales.

As we have stated before, there is ample evidence that our bulls are doing great good to the cattle of the congested areas. This opinion is shared by the crofters and by authorities on stock conversant with the destricts, who urge us to extend our supply of bulls, and in this year of 1909 we have been able to secure and exceptionally good lot of suitable Highland bulls. If the crofters in the west could combine to reduce their ‘souming’ and give their young stock a chance to grow, the improvement would be large and immediate. Even as it is, they get better prices, and they carry out our conditions as to wintering with, as a rule, admirable fidelity.

The following year, Uig was praised for having made best use of the scheme; Barvas and Lochs were doing less well with it, especially the latter where it seems the cattle were very poor and inbred to begin with:

The Parish of Uig in Lewis has been having the use of CDB bulls since 1899. Some of the townships in this parish have been paying a good deal of attention to their cattle, in teh way of keeping the best beasts to breed from, and the results are very satisfactory. There are some very nice, well-bred young cattle to be seen in some parts of the parish.

In total, 679 bulls were provided to the seven counties; three came to Uig in the last year.  After the CDB ceased to exist, in 1912, a similar scheme was continued by the Department of Agriculture into the 1960s. The bulls were overwintered in sheds around Uig, one of which can be seen below the cemetery in Ardroil, and another by the shore in Crowlista using the walls of the old school.  Some of the bulls were swum out to small islands, which occasioned the loss of the Geshader bull in the 1930s.

Share

Share

Mangersta, like most occupied townships in Lewis, was relotted in 1849, with 15 crofts laid out and tenancies and rents allocated. Most, if not all, of the original tenants were long-standing inhabitants of Mangersta and the immediate vicinity (though Mangersta had been briefly given to sheep) and they included several members of the family of boatbuilding Macleans.

**Croft 14, on the map “Murdo Maclean (Malcolm), Carpenter, formerly No. 7″ and “£ 2.10/0″ are added.

In 1851 the Chamberlain, John Munro Mackenzie, was having the usual difficulty in collecting half-yearly rents. By the time of his spring tour of the island in February, he had devised a scheme for assisted (and to some degree compulsory) emigration for those of his tenants who were unlikely, based on arrears and stock values, ever to clear their debts. Six families of Mangersta (of which two were willing), comprising 34 people, were advised to emigrate in the summer, when James Matheson chartered ships to carry1,772 Lewis folk to Canada. It’s not clear which six families the Chamberlain had in mind but some correspondence with the information below can be expected. Note that the push to emigrate came after the lotting; and some of the accumulated arrears must have been carried forward from the pre-1849 holdings.

Mangersta, like other townships, struggled on. In 1872 the tenants requested that they be moved to better ground as the exposed site was causing them problems. Most of the families removed to new ground at Doune Carloway. The following croft-by-croft account gives the families in the village from about 1849, and their destination after the end of Old Mangersta.  Compare also the lists of tenants in 1824 and 1867.

From 1872 Mangersta was a single farm, occupied by Donald Mackay and family; it was of course resettled, with 13 crofts, in 1911.

The information below is compiled from old Comann Eachdraidh records and the census; if you can add or correct anything, please do.

1 Mangersta

The croft was originally let to John Macaulay but he and Angus Maclean (originally No. 8 ) exchanged.

Angus Maclean born 1804 was known as An t-Saoir Dubh (the boatbuilder). He was the son of Calum Maclean, born 1756, who appears on the Mangersta tenancy lists in 1807, 1819 and 1824. Angus was married to Kirsty (Morrison) 1814, and had children Donald 1834, Calum 1836, Catherine 1838, Peggy 1841, Murdo 1845, John 1848, and Norman1851.

In 1872, these went to Doune Carloway: Angus above, wife Kirsty, children Margaret and John; also son Donald above with his wife Mary and son Angus.

2 Mangersta

The original tenant was Norman Macleod 32 (TarmodDhomhnaill, a fisherman), his wife Catherine 33 (daughter of Norman Macleod pensioner, No. 11), children Betty 6 and Donald 1.Norman gave up the tenancy but Norman (plus later children Murdo, Norman and Peggy) remained in Mangersta as a fisherman and went to Doune in 1872

Before 1861, the croft was taken over by Peter Macleod (1804) from Carnish, his wife Ann 1803, children Jean, John and Donald.

In 1872, Peter and Ann moved to Doune Carloway with children John, Donald, Janet and Ann.

3 Mangersta

The original tenant was Calum Macdonald 1787 (Calum Aonghais Fionnlaidh) and his wife Peggy 1796, children Kenneth, Kirsty, Calum, Finlay.

In 1872, these went to Doune Carloway: Margaret Macdonald, widow of Calum above, son John with wife Betty and children Donald, Calum, Kirsty and Margaret; son Kenneth Macdonald with wife Ann and child Calum; son Donald with wife Catherine and child Mary Ann .

4 Mangersta

The original tenant was Donald Smith but his name was replaced by that of his son-in-law Kenneth – who had originally been intended for No 3. The family was Kenneth Morrison 1814 (a weaver), his wife Margaret 1814 (nee Smith, daughter of Donald below), children Catherine 1840, Angus 1842, John 1844, Marion 1847, Donald 1850.

Also on the croft, the said Donald Smith 1773, wife Ann 1771, daughter Mary 1807.

In 1872, these went to Doune Carloway: Margaret Morrison 1814 (widow of Kenneth, daughter of Donald Smith) with children Angus 1843, Donald 1850, Ann 1853, Margaret 1857, Kirsty 1860 and her sister the above Mary Smith .

5 Mangersta

The original tenant was Angus Maclean 1771(Aonghas ‘ic Dhomhnaill) who appears on Mangersta lists in 1807, 1819 and 1824; his wifeMary 1776, Kenneth 1821.Angus’s son Donald (1819), his wife Ann (1817) and daughter Flora (1850) were also in Mangersta.

In 1872, these went to 15 Crowlista: Ann Maclean (widow of Donald, above), children Flora 1851, Kirsty 1853 and Angus 1855. Also Catherine Maclean (widow of Kenneth above), children Angus 1860 and Mary 1862.

6 Mangersta

The original tenant was John Macleod 1791(Iain Chaluim) and wife Kirsty 1795, children Betsy 1828, Calum 1831, Murdo 1836, John 1839, Donald 1841; also living there, Peggy Macleod 1837 and Betsy Macleod 1831.

In 1872, these went to Doune: Murdo Macleod son of John above, his brother John, Isabella and Catherine.

7 Mangersta

The croft was originally let jointly to two widows.

Widow Mary Macaulay (or Maclean) 1796 and her son Donald 1829.In 1872, Mary Macaulay went to Doune.

Isabella Macleod 1801 (widow of John), sons Donald 1835 and John1838. In 1872, these went to Doune: Isabella Macleod above,and her children Donald above and Ann 1836. There was also a Calum 1832 in the family. Donald later returned to 1 Ungeshader.

8 Mangersta

The original tenant was Angus Maclean, who exchanged with John Macaulay for No 1.

The family was John Macaulay 1806 and his wife Margaret 1806; children Donald 1839, Murdo1843, Malcolm1846.Despite getting the croft, John emigrated to Canada in 1851 and settled in Whitton.

Before 1871 the croft was taken by Murdo Macleod 1811 from ArdBheag (Murchadh na h-Airde), with his wife Jean 1826, Donald 1855, Kirsty 1857, Calum 1859, Angus 1862, Marion 1863.

In 1872, these went to Doune: Murdo Macleod (above), wife Jean, children Donald, Kirsty, Calum, Angus, Marion.

9 Mangersta

The original tenant in 1849 was Calum Maclean 1818 (Calum Beag, brother of Angus No. 1), his sister Peggy 1837, his mother Ann 1779 (widow of Calum Sr), and a John Macdonald 1826.

In 1872, these went to Doune Carloway: Calum, his wife Ann, and children Donald, Catherine, Calum, Kirsty, Betsy and John.

10 Mangersta

The original tenant in 1849 was Donald Macdonald 1797 (Domhnall Aonghais Fionnlaidh), wife Kirsty 1803, son John 1834; also a Kirsty Buchanan 1843.

In 1872, these went to Doune Carloway: John Macdonald (above), wife Catherine, children Ann 1861, Donald 1862, Murdo 1867, Catherine 1869, and his mother the widowed Kirsty (above).

11 Mangersta

The original tenant in 1849 was Norman Macleod 65 (Tarmod Buidhe, a pensioner of the 78th), his wife Margaret 1794, Kirsty 1813, Hugh 1827,Margaret 1829, Mary 1838.

In 1872, these went to Doune: Kirsty Macleod (widow of Norman above), daughter Margaret 1826, grandchildren Catherine 1855, Donald 1857, Mary 1861 (family of Hugh above)

12 Mangersta

The original tenant in 1849 was John Maclean 1828 (Iain IainDeirg) and his wife Ann 1830, son John 1850. Also his brother Angus Maclean 1833, and others, Donald Macleod 1833, Angus Macleod 1833.

1872, these went to Doune: the above John Maclean and wife Ann, children John, Isabella, Donald and Kirsty. Also his brother Calum Maclean (Calum Buidhe) and wife Marion (daughter of Iain Mhurchaidh from Carnish) and their children Donald, Isabella, Murdo, Mary Ann, John, Kirsty  and Peggy.

13 Mangersta

The original tenant in 1849 was Finlay Macdonald (Fionnlaidh Mac Aonghais), but after his death the tenancy was given to his son Alexander Macdonald (see 15A). On the croft were Effy Macdonald 1799 (widow of Finlay), Kirsty 1827, Marion 1833, Angus 1835, Donald 1841, Ann 1843. No notion of where they went before or at the time of clearance in 1872.

Alexander appears not to have remained in the village after the 1850s so the croft may have gone to one of the new arrivals below.

14 Mangersta

The original tenant in 1849 was Angus Macleod 1796, with his wife Kirsty 1786, Margaret 1846, also Rachel Matheson 1836. Angus moved to Carnish by 1851.

When Angus died with no heirs, the croft was taken over by Angus Smith 1816 (Aonghas a’ Ghobha), and his wife Kirsty 1812, children Catherine 1833, Hannah 1835, Catherine 1838, Marion 1842, Ann 1845 and John 1849. They emigrated to Quebec.

The next tenant was Murdo Maclean 1820 (boatbuilder, a son of Calum, brother to Angus No 1 ), with his wife Peggy 1821 and son Calum 1850.

In 1872 these went to Doune: Margaret widow of Murdo (above), children Calum, Margaret, Donald and Flora.

15A Mangersta

The original tenancy in 1849 was shared between Murdo and John Maclean below, sons of Calum Maclean and brother of Angus at No. 1.

On 15A were Murdo Maclean 1803 (Murchadh Ruadh),his sister Mary 1801, also Alexander Macdonald 1830 (tenant of No. 13)

In 1872, Murdo Maclean moved to Doune Carloway, but after the others.

15B Mangersta

John Maclean 1801 (brother of Murdo 15A) and his wife Ann 1815, children Murdo 1836, Donald 1838, Margaret 1840, John 1842, Catherine 1844, Mary 1847, Calum 1851.

John and family emigrated to Quebec in 1851; his share of the croft reverted to Murdo 15A

Landless cottars in Mangersta around 1851

Kirsty Smith 1882

Donald Macaulay 1811 (from Timsgarry), Catherine 1811 (second wife, daughter of Calum Maclean, sister of Angus 1 Mangersta), children Donald 1831, Mary 11834, Ann 11836, Kenneth 1840, Malcolm 1843, Catherine 1845, William 1847 and Ann 1850.They left Mangersta before the lotting and settled in Winslow, Quebec.

Murdo Macaulay (Murachadh Dubh) 1811 and his wife Marion 1814, children Ann 1836, Margaret 1836, Donald 1838, Calum 1841, John 1843, Catherine 1845, Angus 1846, also Norman Macaulay 1818.This family did not get a croft in Mangersta at the lotting. They moved to 1 Islivig before 1851 and emigrated to Quebec from there.

John Maclean 1822 and his wife Kirsty 1822. They appear to have left Uig before 1861, for parts unknown.

New arrivals in Mangersta after 1851 

Angus Buchanan 1840 (Aonghas Mhurachaidh) Kirsty, children Calum and Murdo. From Carnish before 1861.

John Macleod 1821, his wife Janet 1814, also Donald 1788. From Carnish before 1861.

Calum Maclean 1822, Marion 1809, children Donald, Isabella, Murdo, John, Kirsty, Peggy. Moved from Carnish to Mangersta before 1861.

Margaret Macdonald 1826; in Mangersta in 1861.

Hector Morrison 1802,  Schoolmaster from Gairloch, his wife Ann 1804, daughter Margaret 1835, and granddaughter Jane Barnett 1856. They come to Mangersta before 1861.

Mary Macrae 1813, daughter Margaret 1835 – from Ceann Chuisil, they arrived in Mangersta before 1871.

Share