edinburgh-1951/-03_073

Transcription

HISTORICAL MONUMENTS (SCOTLAND) COMMISSION
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ownership; but in 1478 we find their revenue being drawn upon to provide a pension for the Provost of the church of St.Giles, and in the same year it is
recorded that they were released to tacksmen. But both millers and tacksmen had dubious reputations, and in the later 16th century questions were being raised about the management of the mills. Accordingly in 1596 the magistrates themselves took over their direction, appointing on terms an overseer who was also to have the Ports watched "that the toun be nocht defrawdet of the multures ather of ry, malt or quheitt."1 This arrangement was not a success, and in less than two years a return was made to the old system of tacksmen, a provision being made that, to safeguard the Town's interest, there should be periodical investigations by a bailie, the Dean of Guild, the Treasurer, two councillors and the Deacon of the Baxters 2 (bakers).

The number of the Town's mills was increased by the acquisition of the Canongate and Broughton properties, including Canon Mills, and of the Bonnington mills, which were bought from the Logans of Restalrig in 1617.3 In 1659 "ane unhard and unkoth storme of wind and weit" and "great diludges of watteris" destroyed eleven mills belonging to Edinburgh and five belonging to Heriot's Hospital, all upon the Water of Leith, with their dams, wheels, and other equipment.4 By 1710 the city owned no fewer than sixteen mills, when it raised a suit against the bakers and brewers for "abstracted multures," basing its case upon the charters of 1329, 1603, and 1636, while the defenders alleged high prices and dishonest dealing. The Court of Session held that the charters constituted a thirlage on all brewers and bakers in the royalty, that is in respect of malt-mills and grain-mills, and decided in favour of the Town.5

In the eighteenth century the Village of Dean, or Water of Leith, consisted of a single short street with two or three lanes leading off it, the inhabitants including not only those employed about the mill but also agricultural labourers on the adjoining farms and quarrymen at Craigleith.

3. THE TOWN WALLS
Reference has already been made to the walls of the city as they appear on record, and the possible or more definite course that each followed in succession is indicated in Fig.35. Of the line followed by the earlier walls, however, there is no direct evidence, and that attributed to them must rest in the main on such general considerations as the configurations of the site or on inferences drawn from a very few scraps of material. The Nether Bow (arcus inferior) and West Port (janua occidentalis) of the earliest notice 6 may well mark the eastern and western limits of the burgh, but, lacking knowledge of what these were, one is not in a position to be more precise in their location. This enclosure, too, it may be accepted from analogy with other cases, 7 was probably a palisaded mound, the fact that the steep sides of the ridge, on which the city stood, dropped to ground which was swampy for the most part making the usual ditch unnecessary.

A fragmentary relic marks the substitution for the palisaded mound of a mortared stone wall. In 1833 an excavation at the foot of the slope south of Parliament Square disclosed portions of two walls, one running along the north side of the Old Meal-Market, and the other of similar construction parallel to it and some five or six feet farther in.8 The former can perhaps be identified with the "King's Wall" first mentioned as murgus regius in 1427, 9 when it is referred to as forming the boundary of burgess properties, and is thereafter frequently mentioned in the 15th century. The inner wall is then of an earlier date, but there is no further evidence as to the line that it followed. The town had been expanding, as in 1335-6 we have notice of a "new street" (novus vicus),10 and this may have to be allowed for.

The "King's Wall" is so named because its erection was begun in response to a license by James II in 1450 to the provost and community of Edinburgh enabling them to "fosse, bulwark, wall, toure, turate, and uther wais to strengthen oure foresaid

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. B.R., v (1589-1603), pp.166 f. "Multures" were the payments in kind for the grinding of grain.
2. Ibid., p.232.
3. B.R., vi (1604-1626), pp. 164 f.
4. Nicoll, Diary, p.249.
5. Fountainhall, Decisions of the Lords of Council and Session, ii, p.610; Morison, Decisions, No.8902.
6. See p.xl.
7. Inverness for example with its palisade mound and ditch and the towns "with good ditches and palisades" mentioned as captured in 1333, in the 14th century Chronique pf Jean le Bel (ed. Societe de l'histoire de France), i. p.110.
8. The Scotsman, April 13th, 1833; C.Maclaren, Select Writings, i, p.387.
9. Reg. Cart. St.Egid., p.50.
10.Calendar, iii p.346. Cf.here p.xli

lxii