How long is a rod?
Again working on transcription of the account books for the building of a stately home I find myself wondering how much digging Francis, William and Thomas have been doing this week, as it is measured in rods and I have no idea how long a rod is. That’s easy enough to find out, I thought, I’ll just have a quick look on the internet. But as with kilderkins and hogsheads, where the sizes of the various barrels differ according to the nature of the contents (see my earlier blog on this subject), a rod is not a straighforward thing.
Looking at Wikipedia (yes, I am aware that it isn’t always a completely reliable resource, but useful nonetheless) I find to my surprise that there is actually a table included in the description with 55 entries detailing the different lenghts of this measurement from place to place. The rod as a surveying measure in England was not standardised until 1607, and only phased out as a legal length of measurement in 1965. If the table is to be believed the length of a rod could vary between 1.5 metres and 5.9 metres. That would make a significant difference in the labour required by my Francis, William and Thomas, who were being paid 2d a rod.
Fortunately the digging they were doing dates from shortly after the rod as a survey measure was standardized by Edmund Gunter in England in 1607 as one-fourth of a chain (of 66 feet (20.12 m)), or 16 1⁄2 feet (5.03 m) long. Fields were measured in acres, which were one chain (four rods) by one furlong (in the United Kingdom, ten chains).
Although the account book doesn’t specify how deep was the trench that they were so busy digging, it does tell me that Francis was paid for digging 30 rods in one week, or about 150 metres. Work that would keep him warm in the cold winds of January, but it is to be hoped the ground wasn’t frozen hard.
We are currently working on transcribing account books associated with the building of a stately home in the 17th century. This amazing resource gives week by week expenditure, detailing everything that was needed, including labour, for the building of a new country residence for one of the nobility.
As I sit here transcribing once again I find myself transported back in time, I am given a window into the past through which I happily gaze. I see before me the labourers digging, and digging, and digging. A vast amount of soil was dug up and moved to make way for the foundations, and to landscape the gardens. I have visited several stately houses but never before have I given any thought to the people who actually laboured in their construction. I now find myself thinking how welcome the regular income must have been to those engaged in the building and gardening work. Week after week the same men, and a few women, were engaged to prepare the ground, transport everything from here to there, plant and weed.
The owner of this house bought a huge number of plants. His orchard was filled with crab apple, apple, plum and cherry trees. I can only imagine what an amazing spectacle that must have been in the spring, when they were all laden with blossom. His gardens were full of damask roses and briar roses, surely the scent must have been heady in the summer’s warmth. He established a well stocked kitchen garden and filled his grounds with vast numbers of oak trees, ash and beech, buying acorns by the bushel.
When I next go visiting one of these mansions I shall look with fresh eyes at the building and the grounds, and think back to the men and women who created these glorious dwellings.
In a previous post (How many kilderkins in a hogshead) it states:
“The standardised measurements continued to be the subject of later statutes. In 1423 an Act of Parliament first standardised the hogshead, though the volume varied by locality and content. By 28 Henry VIII, cap. 14 it is re-enacted that the tun of wine should contain 252 gallons, a butt of Malmsey 126 gallons, a pipe 126 gallons, a tercian or puncheon 84 gallons, a hogshead 63 gallons, a tierce 41 gallons, a barrel 31.5 gallons, a rundlet 18.5 gallons.
So half a tun is a butt, or perhaps a pipe; a third of a tun is a tercian, or puncheon; quarter of a tun is a hogshead; a barrel is an eighth. Who knows how a tierce (at just a little more than a sixth) or a rundlet (at nearly a thirteenth) came to be decided on.”
Today, while working on transcription of a book of accounts of 1619 I found the following:
“It[em] For a Rinlett of Clarett wyne containing vj  gallons v  pintes at ijs [2s] the gallon”
And a quick search online led me to : Rinlett, runlet — a cask or vessel of varying capacity (N.E.D.)
So is a ‘rinlett’ not the same as a ‘rundlet’ or was the barrel was only 1/3 full?
Given that in the same set of accounts the Clerk of Kensington was paid 4 shillings for a quarter of a year’s wages, it is to be hoped that the claret wine at 2s the gallon was good quality stuff.
Although I had started a blog about things historical, I seem to have lost access to it. So rather than waste the posts, which I think are interesting, I have reposted them into this new blog. I hope you enjoy them, and sign up for emails letting you know when a new post is written. I welcome all constructive criticism and comments.
It’s always nice when a client is pleased with our work at Transcription Services Ltd, and even more pleasing when they tell other people about us. Last month I was contacted by Atlas Obscura telling me that someone mentioned the help we had provided with reading old manuscripts. This online magazine was interested, and they got in touch with me to ask if I would do a telephone interview. I agreed, and shortly afterwards spent an hour chatting on the phone. They published an article on the 8th February which can be read here:
To my amazement this article generated a huge increase in visitors to the webpage, almost a thousand visitors within a couple of days. It was picked up by a local BBC reporter, and even more amazingly led to a short slot about me and my work being shown on the regional news programme this week.
Should I start my memoirs now?
Frequently inventories, particularly those of merchants, have lists of those owing money to the deceased. These are sometimes divided into ‘sperate’ and ‘desperate’ debts. Prior to transcribing these inventories I had never come across the word ‘sperate’, but once seen it is clearly the opposite of ‘desperate’, so I have a new word that means ‘hopeful’, which must be a welcome addition to a vocabulary.
But today I am transcribing an inventory, and had to smile, for in among the ‘Bad and Dubious Debts’ is one of 1 shilling and 8 pence owed to the grocer by
“Woman in a Green Gown”
I can see why the executors might conceive this to be a desperate bill. I wonder if the grocer himself extended this credit, or was it an underling, completely overcome by the elegance of the lady in the green gown, who later repented his action.
Another 18th century inventory that came my way recently made mention of
“Six Burnt China Plates, One Burnt China Tea Pott”
This was a term I hadn’t come across before, and puzzled me. To burn a plate might be careless, but to burn six plates and a tea pot? The items were also of some value, included in a list of the ‘China’ owned by the deceased.
So a little internet searching and I discover that:
“Burnt china” was another term used in the 18th century to differentiate porcelain from pottery.
Good to know.
During the course of my search online I came across the V&A ‘A to Z of Ceramics’ which makes for fascinating and very informative reading (see https://goo.gl/6aaOG4).
Also those interested in tea might be interested to read the publication “Tea Drinking in 18th-Century America: Its Etiquette and Equipage, by Rodris Roth” available through Project Gutenberg at https://goo.gl/TMJztJ