of the Scandinavian archeologists in solving the problem of their existence and uses, expecting that similar edifices would be found on the hill tops in Norway; but no response has as yet been given to his appeal, from which it may be inferred that no such erections have been discovered in that country. Apart from the peculiarity of their structure, the extreme antiquity of the remains is made apparent by the great depth of the soil accumulated over the walls, even in the most exposed situations. Little more can be affirmed with certainty as to the age to which they belong, than that it must have preceded the period when the use of calcareous mortar was introduced in masonry in Scotland. But if the data be so deficient for forming a conclusive judgment as to the precise method of vitrification and the uses which the structures were intended to serve, there is not even a vestige of evidence upon which a probable conjecture can be founded as to the race by whom they were erected. Whether they are the works of the original Caledonians or of the Scandinavian invaders, is a question upon which the investigations of modern times are incapable of throwing light, or which, at least, antiquarians have ceased for a quarter of a century to discuss with any prospect of reaching a satisfactory issue. The narrower the range of matter-of-fact inquiry, the wider the scope for the imagination; and the baffled antiquary may well be content to resign to the poet the task of creating a history for those venerable relics upon which the traditions of ages are silent, and which call up in the mind of the wanderer in some of the loneliest and loveliest scenes of the Scottish Highlands, images of a past as shadowy and undefined as the gray mists that float around their summits.

NOTE. The writer has been favoured with the following remarks by Mr. James Napier, chemist, whose practical knowledge of the different fusibility of rocks gives weight to his opinion on the subject of the vitrifying process:-"There are a few things I wished to have had time to refer to in your paper on the vitrified forts. I understood you to say that the vitrification extended to a considerable depth in the walls. Now this is an important fact that necessitates certain conditions. The idea which seemed to prevail was that a great body as well as intensity of heat was necessary. If this was the case these forts could not be standing as walls. If, for instance, you take a mass of whinstone, say two feet cube, and apply a strong body of heat to the mass, it does not yield like a piece of lead or other metal under the same circumstances, when the heat would be so

rapidly conducted through the whole that it would vitrify or fuse nearly all at one time; but the whinstone or other stone, is so bad a conductor that long before the vitrification penetrated one foot, all the external portion would be melted and run off. If it were done in a pit, or having a wall round it to prevent its flowing, then the same effect would be produced; at first, namely, before the internal parts of the mass were vitrified, the portion between the centre and walls would be in fusion, so that the outer part would be one homogeneous mass of glass, while the inside portion would be merely vitrified as your samples were. My impression is, from the samples I saw, that the heat has not been so intense as to melt or make the stone flow, but merely to vitrify it, for which a heat of 1400 to 1600 degrees would be sufficient; and all that was required to cause the vitrification to penetrate was not increase of heat, but a constant heat not exceeding what was required to vitrify the outside, keeping it up till it had penetrated to the required depth. Either this, or high heat under pressure, is the only condition I can suppose."

TRANSACTIONS OF THE GLASGOW ARCHEOLOGICAL SOCIETY.

NO. XV.

NOTES ON PARTICK IN OLDEN TIMES:

BY

JAMES NAPIER, Esq.

[Read at a Meeting of the Society held at Glasgow on 24th March, 1862.]

FROM many incidental notices found in charters granted to various parties, it is evident that Partick is a very old town, and has also been a place of considerable importance, not only to its proprietors, but to its more venerable and exalted neighbour, Glasgow, from its favourable position for water power for manufacturing purposes. Nevertheless, except these incidental notices, little or nothing of what may be termed the History of Partick is known.

A few years ago I was in great hopes of seeing it proven that Partick was once a seat of royalty. Chambers in his Caledonia refers to King Roderic, who was contemporaneous with St. Kentigern, having a seat at Pertmet, which the learned author says is "now Partick, a village on the Clyde below Glasgow." But from a series of papers in the Northern Notes and Queries, upon this and other kindred matters, I think it has been satisfactorily shown that the Pertmet where Roderic resided is not what is now called Partick, but a place in the neighbourhood of Rutherglen, which took its name from the same King Rutheric; I am therefore still necessitated to speak of Partick as a plebeian village, depending on its own rural beauties and local capabilities for any notoriety it may have attained.

In early charters and other notices of Partick the name is never spelt as we spell it, but differently, as Perdeye, Perthic, Pertiq, Perthwick, Perdehic, &c. How and when it got the modern spelling I have not been able to ascertain; the nearest to it is in an old session-book of the sixteenth century, where a person the name of Craig belonging to the Walkmill of "Partic" is rebuked for non-attendance at the kirk on the Sabbath-day. In a document dated 1483, disposing of certain lands, it is spelt Perthik; while, in 1555, in a charter granted to John Stewart, fifth Provost

of Glasgow, it is again spelt Perthwick, as in earlier charters; so that it is evident no particular rule was followed until a more frequent use of it was required in titles of land, which after the sixteenth century passed into the hands of many private parties, and which would bring into use a certain rule or mode of spelling the name. Much speculation has been advanced as to the origin and etymology of the name, which the different ways of spelling makes difficult to ascertain; some may be said to be mere guesses or modern inventions, such as the Kelvin being a noted stream for the Par, or young salmon, and that that part of the river from the Clyde to the waterfall at the mills being the best locality for catching these fish, it was consequently named Partake-the old name Perthwick will hardly adapt itself to this fancy. Dr. Leishman in his History of Govan Parish supposes that the name is derived from Particate (Particata), a name for pole or perch, a staff used in mensuration, so that when the Crown granted these lands to the Church it was so many perticates of land; hence the name. If this measure gave a name to Partick, I think we would have a great many Particks in Scotland, as King David was very liberal in his grants. At the same time he granted the lands of Perthic to the Church, he also granted much land throughout the whole of Scotland in the same way, and by a similar mode of measurement, so that this idea, I think, little better than a guess; and the land being named Perthic in the grant, the place must have been previously known as such, which is an internal evidence against it being afterwards named from a term used in the deed. Another supposition which I think more ingenious, and probably more truthful, is, that per in old Latin means through, and thec or theca, a place of safety or deposit. As the ancient Romans had a road or highway from Dumbarton to Glasgow through Partick, it is probable that the Romans fixed upon this portion of the route for a con venient and safe resting place; hence the name Perthic. I may mention that until within these fifty years there existed an old road that came down by the Balgray, through Hyndlands, and Dowan Hill grounds into Partick, by the Byres Road, that was called "The Roman Road" from time immemorial. About sixty years back the late proprietor of the Dowan Hill estate made many endeavours to close up the road, and succeeded so far as the general public was concerned; but a few spirited old men in the town continued to pass over it at short intervals of time for the purpose of maintaining the public right, but at the death of Thomas Douglas of Scotstown Mills,

who took the lead in this matter, this practice was discontinued; and tradition says that a dinner to the neighbouring proprietors and a few pounds to the poor of the village stopped all further opposition and the road was lost to the public; and the fact of such a road ever existing there, is all but lost to memory, there being but few alive now who remember it.

Whether this really had been a road used by the Romans I do not know, nor would the fact prove anything in reference to the origin of the name of Partick from the source referred to; but it is a proof that the Romans had a road into Partick, and the fact that the best and safest ford through the Kelvin existed at Partick, immediately west of the old Bridge, a ford that was used in the oldest times, is a sort of corroboration of Partick being a resting place for the Romans. The earliest notice I have seen of Partick is at the consecration of the Glasgow Cathedral, in 1136, when King David endowed it with a part of the lands of Perdeyc. "Some time before the year 1147," says Cosmo Innes, "King David I., with consent of his son Henry, granted Govan and the See of St. Kentigern of Glasgow in pure alms, and soon afterwards Herbert, the bishop, erected into a prebend, in the Cathedral of Glasgow, the Church of Govan, with all its ecclesiastical rights and pertinents, and with the Islands between Govan and Perthic, together with that part of Perthic which David the King gave to the Church of Glasgow at its dedication, and that other part of Perthic which the same king afterwards gave in pure alms to Bishop John and his successors." Again he says, “It seems probable that before 1152 Govan and Perthic, which were distinct manors, were also distinct parochial territories, the latter lying on the north, and the former on the south side of the Clyde. The islands in the river, then existing between them, have now disappeared and become part of the mainlands."

In reference to these islands between Govan and Partick, mentioned in these grants, it may be remarked that the Clyde in former times was very broad, and in several places had two or more channels extending much further north than at present. These channels were divided by islands, or inches. The first connected with Partick was the Water Inch, which stood immediately after the Kelvin joined the Clyde; then the White Inch, Buck Inch, King's Inch, and Sand Inch, which were the largest; but tradition says there were several smaller inches, the names of which are lost. All these inches have been added to the land on the north side of the Clyde. I have