<<Matt, beg to differ about dayworks. A couple of years ago I contacted the list about a survey that measured in acres, roods, dayworks and perches. The investigation I did then indicated that a daywork was definitely a measure used in Kent, if not elsewhere in England, and it was very definitely 4 perches. A perch is a fortieth of an acre, so a daywork was a tenth of an acre.>> I think we're in agreement, actually. A perch is one fortieth of a rood, not of an acre, and there are four roods in an acre, so a daywork which equals 4 perches is also equal to one fortieth of an acre. I do remember our past discussion on the list about dayworks - at the time I printed your post about the Long Melford survey and put it in my file on areal measurements, and this morning I had a look at it to refresh my memory. My file also notes other examples of daywork as an areal measure, including a 1318 Extent of Wellingborough in Northamptonshire, which measures several holdings by acres and dayworks, and also contains an explicit statement (in Latin) that 'It should be known that 10 Daywerks make one quarter part of an acre and 4 perches make one Daywerk'. It does seem to have been used outside Kent, though it only infrequently. <<The survey I was working on comes from Long Melford in Suffolk but was done by a surveyor from Kent, who also used dayworks in a survey from somewhere in Yorkshire, which is in print, can't remember where offhand. The survey by this Kentish man is the only occasion in Melford when dayworks are used, it's not a medieval hangover in this part of Suffolk, earlier surveys are all in acres roods and perches. Barbara, when I was researching dayworks I couldn't find any link between the term as a measure of land and anything to do with how much work you could do in a day, although you would think there ought to be a link deep back in the medieval period. I asked a couple of academics I know who work on medieval agriculture but they didn't come up with anything. I just tried to find the correspondence from then on the OEL list archives, but the Rootsweb site seems to be down.>> Some time ago, when I first came across dayworks, I put the same question to Chris Dyer (an authority on medieval agriculture if ever there was one), but he couldn't explain it either. I think it was he who suggested it might have been the area a man could dig up with a spade in a day. Matt

Hi All I have been watching this discussion with interest, but no time to join in...however "aftermath" is the term still used in farming circles to describe the grass which grows after it has been cut for hay, so math must have something to do with the verb to mow ( a mow, a math, a mat springs to mind - sorry :-(!), and I would guess that two days math, would indeed be the area of grass that could be mown by a man in two days. However draggin my trusty "The Local Historian's Encyclopedia" (John Richardson, Historical Publications, 1974, 1977 reprint) down off the shelf, he says: Day-math = A Cheshire term for approximately twice a statute acre, or a day's mowing for one man. Day-work = In some areas in Yorks, Lancs and Lincs, 3 roods of land. Math = Approximately 1 acre, or the amount of land that one man could mow in a day. A Herefordshire term. A lot of the terms given in this section on land measurement were originally based on what could be done in a day or a year, or how in some cases, such as the hop-acre which was "the area occupied by a 1000 hop plants - about half an acre"! But as what could be done in a day (or other term) would depend very much on things like the nature of the land (heavy/light, wet/dry, etc) it was obvious that the area would vary from place to place. The amout of grass that you could mow in a day would vary with the type of grass, and how heavy the crop was. So hay in a water meadow (which would have been "drowned" in the winter to both fertilise the ground and protect the crop from frost damage) would probably be thicker than that on a Candlemas meadow (which had been grazed during the winter) and you would be able to cut less of it in a day. In some ways this measurement was more equitable (when used in a common/open field situation) than a precise area, which would yeild a varying crop and require a different labour input. Incidentally the Lugg Meadows just outside of Hereford, are one of the few places where grass is still managed in this way. Polly

When you consider the variations in the size of the acre around the country, perhaps the measure of what a man could be expected to mow in a day would be more consistent? The Cheshire large measure extends beyond the borders of the county but it's hard to tell where it actually ends and that is around two and a quarter statute acres to one Cheshire acre! Audrey ----- Original Message ----- From: "Polly Rubery" <polly@rowberry.org> To: <old-english@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 10:14 PM Subject: [OEL] Dayworks and maths > Hi All > > I have been watching this discussion with interest, but no time to join > in...however "aftermath" is the term still used in farming circles to > describe the grass which grows after it has been cut for hay, so math must > have something to do with the verb to mow ( a mow, a math, a mat springs > to > mind - sorry :-(!), and I would guess that two days math, would indeed be > the area of grass that could be mown by a man in two days. > > However draggin my trusty "The Local Historian's Encyclopedia" (John > Richardson, Historical Publications, 1974, 1977 reprint) down off the > shelf, > he says: > > Day-math = A Cheshire term for approximately twice a statute acre, or a > day's mowing for one man. > > Day-work = In some areas in Yorks, Lancs and Lincs, 3 roods of land. > > Math = Approximately 1 acre, or the amount of land that one man could mow > in > a day. A Herefordshire term. > > A lot of the terms given in this section on land measurement were > originally > based on what could be done in a day or a year, or how in some cases, such > as the hop-acre which was "the area occupied by a 1000 hop plants - about > half an acre"! > > But as what could be done in a day (or other term) would depend very much > on > things like the nature of the land (heavy/light, wet/dry, etc) it was > obvious that the area would vary from place to place. The amout of grass > that you could mow in a day would vary with the type of grass, and how > heavy > the crop was. So hay in a water meadow (which would have been "drowned" > in > the winter to both fertilise the ground and protect the crop from frost > damage) would probably be thicker than that on a Candlemas meadow (which > had > been grazed during the winter) and you would be able to cut less of it in > a > day. > > In some ways this measurement was more equitable (when used in a > common/open > field situation) than a precise area, which would yeild a varying crop and > require a different labour input. > > Incidentally the Lugg Meadows just outside of Hereford, are one of the few > places where grass is still managed in this way. > Polly > > > > ==================================== > WEB PAGE: http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~oel/ > ARCHIVES: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index?list=OLD-ENGLISH > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > OLD-ENGLISH-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.8.2/1739 - Release Date: 22/10/2008 07:23