As this Volume contains drawings and descriptions of the examples of the First Pointed and Middle Pointed Periods in Scotland, and, therefore, illustrates the finest of our mediÆval edifices, it may be convenient at this stage to consider the position these buildings occupy in relation to the general system of Gothic architecture in other countries. There can scarcely be any question as to the Gothic style having been imported into, and not being native to, this country. We have already seen that the Norman style was gradually introduced from England, and was afterwards superseded by the transition style. The buildings of the first pointed period also show unmistakable indications of their design having been brought from England,[1] while those of the middle pointed period, although clearly allied in style to English examples, exhibit in their details a few signs of other influences. Although many of our Scottish edifices contain much beautiful work, and all are full of interest, it must be admitted that even the best examples of Gothic in this country cannot claim to give full expression to the fundamental principles of the Gothic style as developed in its native home, the Royal Domain of France.

The style being here an exotic, and being carried out rather as imitative than as original, it is naturally to be expected that it should disclose symptoms of departure from the spirit which animated those by whom it was wrought out and developed. And that is, in fact, the case.

Notwithstanding the beauty of many of our larger and finer edifices, such as Holyrood and Melrose Abbeys, and Glasgow, Dunblane, and Elgin Cathedrals, evidence is wanting in the design of these edifices of a full appreciation of the leading principles which inspired and guided the architects of the Ile de France. The Scottish buildings represent the echo rather than the original voice of the genius of Gothic architecture.

The principal aim of the French architects of the latter half of the twelfth century and during the thirteenth century was to produce structures in which the arcuated or vaulted system of building should be developed to its fullest extent. With these architects the vaulted construction of the roof thus became the ruling element in the design, all the other features being wrought out so as to be supplementary to, and indicative of, the principles of the arcuated style. Every detail was designed so as to fulfil its structural function in subordination to that general idea. Thus the ribs of the vaults formed the framework on which the vaulting panels rested, and conveyed the pressures created by the weight of the roof to the points where these pressures were all concentrated on the capitals of the wall shafts. From that point the forces so concentrated were distributed, the vertical pressure being conveyed downwards by the wall shafts to the foundations, and the horizontal thrusts being counterbalanced by buttresses and flying buttresses, which performed their share of the work by carrying these forces obliquely to the ground. These primary features were the skeleton which constituted the main elements of the building. They formed a structure in stable equilibrium, which was independent of the filling in of the walls, with windows, doors, and other details. The latter were but the clothing and ornamentation of the main structural framework, and in the completed style (as at Amiens Cathedral), all superfluous masonry is abolished, and the spaces between the main structural elements are enclosed with screens of tracery. The Gothic structure was thus a composition in complete contrast with the Romanesque or Norman edifices which preceded it. In the latter, although arching and even vaulting were employed, the arched system of construction was in an elementary state, and the inert mass of the walls was chiefly relied on as a counterpoise to the thrusts of the arches.

It was not till the end of the twelfth and during the thirteenth century that the Gothic system had been fully worked out by the French architects. The arcuated principle had then been developed in a complete and logical manner, and had entirely freed itself from the heavy and unnecessary mass of the earlier Romanesque. Nothing was preserved except the lightest framework required for stability, enclosed with screens of tracery filled with stained glass. Every detail of the fully developed Gothic style was designed on the same logical principles as the leading structural features, and gave expression in its design to the function it was required to fulfil,[2] while the whole building was so ornamented as to be in complete harmony with the general idea.[3]

In England the details of the perfected Gothic, especially as regards decorative features, were carried out somewhat in the same spirit as in France, but the leading elements in the general design do not seem to have been so fully understood or carried out. The adherence to wooden roofs—a common and general practice in England—alone shows the difference in the guiding principles which operated in the two countries. The wooden roof is a complete departure from the leading element of the arcuated style. It shows an inclination to fall back on the ancient trabeate or horizontal beam system, from which it had been the great object of the earlier mediÆval architects to free their designs. The wooden roof ignores the leading idea of a vaulted fireproof covering, and abandons the principle of the concentration of the roof pressures on particular points, as is the case in groined vaulting. No doubt a wooden roof may be designed so as to throw a greater amount of its pressure on some points than on others, but the principle of the wooden roof is that of the tie beam and the distribution of the weight over the side walls.

The actuating motive of Gothic design in the main feature of the vaulting being thus lost sight of in England, it is not surprising to find it inactive in other directions. The Romanesque element of massive walls, with small windows, is likewise partially adhered to, and in details also the guiding principle of French design is in some respects abandoned. The round form of the abacus—so universally employed in England—may be cited as a characteristic example of departure from the Gothic principle.

In France the abacus of the columns is invariably shaped so as to receive each shaft or rib which it is its function to carry; whereas the round abacus adopted in England receives indiscriminately all the members which descend upon it, and their loads are often carried by shafts not having any distinct or structural relation to the members which rest on the abacus above them.

Notwithstanding these and similar defections from the leading principles of Gothic, the architecture of England is (as has already been pointed out)[4] in many respects very charming, and, in point of variety and picturesqueness, possibly sometimes surpasses French examples.

What is here attempted to be pointed out is not so much that English Gothic is defective in the above respects, as that certain logical principles, inseparable from a genuine arcuated system, are less weakly developed in England than in the Ile de France. If between the architecture of the two countries there is not much to choose as regards picturesque details and ornamental features, there can be little question but that the logical spirit which apprehended and followed out the principles of the arcuated style to their full limits is more clearly apparent in the one than in the other.

The position of Gothic in England being as described, it is only natural to find in the structures of the leading periods of the style in Scotland, which shine by a light borrowed from England, a similar and even greater departure from the main ideas which actuated the architects of France. The same defects occur here as in England—the frequent use of the wooden roof for wide spans being common to both countries, and producing similar results in each. The wooden roof led, from the principles of its structure, to changes and peculiarities in the design throughout. In some cases the wall shafts which divide the bays are entirely omitted, and give place to a large expanse of plain wall over the main arcade. Instances of this occur at Sweetheart Abbey and Dunblane Cathedral (see Figs. 758, 510). In other examples a continuous arcade is carried along at the triforium level, without any strengthening of the walls over the main piers, thus carrying out the principle of the wooden roof, which implies an equal pressure all along the side walls. This is a very marked feature at Kelso Abbey and Dunblane Cathedral.

In some buildings, although vaulted, the wall shafts are of such slight dimensions as to be scarcely of any value (even to the eye) in conveying the weight of the vaults to the ground, and these shafts frequently do not descend to the base, or even to the caps of the main piers, but are carried on corbels inserted in the side walls at a considerable height above the caps of the piers. The functional use of the wall shafts is thus disregarded, and they become mere ornaments.

Slight wall shafts of this description, carried on corbels, occur in the nave of Glasgow Cathedral, in the choir of St. Giles’, Edinburgh; in St. Michael’s, Linlithgow; Crosraguel Abbey, &c.; while in the choir of Glasgow Cathedral and in Haddington Church the small wall shafts spring from the caps of the main piers.

In Elgin Cathedral the vaulting shafts, which are mere beads, descend to the ground, and the clerestory arcade is almost continuous.

In Lincluden College the vaulting shafts, which are heavier than usual, all rest on corbels in the side walls, not far above the floor, so that none of their loads are conveyed to the foundation.

Vaulting is very generally adopted in the side aisles, but in these, too, the Gothic idea is often lost sight of, the wall responds having frequently their bases supported on side benches or seats, instead of being carried to the ground.

Externally, as well as internally, our Scottish Gothic is somewhat defective in its mode of carrying out the arcuated principles. The wooden roofs so frequently employed really require no buttresses, and, therefore, our buildings are in so far right where in such cases only very slight pilaster-buttresses are used in the triforium, as is the case in Glasgow, Elgin, and Dunblane Cathedrals. In the side aisles, which are vaulted, the buttresses are sometimes heavier, but these features are insignificant as compared with the great flying buttresses and piers of the genuine arcuated or Gothic style of Northern France.

In many other respects there may be traced in Scotland a certain absence of the Gothic spirit, which discarded every element not essential to the carrying out of the arcuated principle. Even in our finest structures the Romanesque or Norman influence continues to prevail. A large expanse of heavy walling, with small openings, is not unusual. In almost no building are the solid side walls omitted and light tracery substituted between the main supporting piers, as is the case in the best Gothic in France. The broad masses of masonry in the triforium and clerestory of the churches at Linlithgow and Haddington may be cited as examples of the absence of the Gothic spirit. The continued adherence to solid walls with narrow lancet-formed windows is a marked feature of both English and Scottish architecture.

Moulded caps, with round abaci, are usual here, as in England, and have the same defects, both in principle and practice. In the later examples the relation between the shafts or mouldings, which carry the caps, and the arch-mouldings above them is abandoned, and that genuine Gothic principle is entirely ignored.

Many of the above defections from pure Gothic arise from, or owe their origin (as we have seen) to, the use of wooden roofs.

It may be argued that there is no necessity for the above principles being adhered to, and that English and Scottish architects were quite at liberty, when required, either from want of skill or absence of funds, to cover their naves with wooden roofs.

That argument is at once conceded; but, then, they should have frankly acknowledged that they departed from the arcuate and adopted the trabeate system. That, however, was never done; hence the imperfect carrying out of the arcuate system, as practised in France, which we find in most of our churches, and which shows that the style was here not original, but imitative.

What we desire to insist on is not that good architecture is incompatible with structures roofed with timber, or any other material, but that the fundamental principles of Gothic spring from the development of an arcuated style, and that that principle has been only fully and logically carried out in Northern France. In other countries in which Gothic architecture was adopted, much of its spirit was caught and developed; but when the vaulting or dominating feature of the style was absent, the manifestations of the Gothic spirit were comparatively weak and imperfect. These weaknesses and imperfections appear to prove the derivative nature of the architecture in those countries, and especially in Scotland.

But the fact of the Gothic of Scotland being of borrowed origin does not prevent much of it here, as in England, from being beautiful and instructive, as, it is hoped, the following pages will show.

Probably one of the Scottish edifices in which Gothic principles are best exemplified is Melrose Abbey. The whole building was vaulted with stone, and the vaulting was chiefly groined. The ribs (see Fig. 767) descend on the caps of vaulting shafts of trefoil section, the central division of which rests on a corbel at the level of the main pier caps, while the other two divisions of the trefoil shaft descend without interruption to the base of the piers. That at least was the design, although it was in some of the piers interfered with by the introduction of a screen. In the south aisle also the vaulting ribs are carried on wall shafts or responds, which descend to the bases; but there is an unnecessary amount of wall on each side of these shafts and over the longitudinal arches, which lead into the outer chapels.

The vaults are counterpoised with suitable flying arches (see Fig. 766) abutting on solid buttresses, loaded with lofty pinnacles, which give them due resistance to the thrusts brought to bear on them. The windows in the south chapel walls (and clerestory of choir) are larger than usual, and are filled with tracery; but there is here also an unnecessary amount of plain wall between the bays, especially in the nave clerestory.

There is, however, at Melrose an entire absence of the heavy blank wall so often introduced over the main arcade, although the absence of any triforium makes the building seem somewhat low and squat. The large amount of solid masonry over the exterior of the great east window of the choir and south window of the transept is likewise a defect. The round abacus is almost always used at Melrose, but the shafts of the piers are simple and distinct, and each member carries a clearly defined series of mouldings.

The authors beg again to tender their acknowledgment of the assistance they have received from many quarters. They have especially to thank Mr. T. S. Robertson, Architect, Dundee; Mr. William Galloway, Architect, Wigton; and Mr. R. Bruce Armstrong, for the drawings and descriptions they have kindly contributed, and which are referred to in the text. To Mr. John Honeyman and Mr. T. L. Watson, Architects, Glasgow, they are also indebted for assistance in connection with Glasgow Cathedral.

Since the description of St. Andrews Cathedral in this Volume was written, considerable progress has been made with the works referred to in the text, as being carried on for Lord Bute by Mr. Kinross, Architect, and several new points have been disclosed.

The west doorway from the cloister into the nave (which is in a modern vinery) has been opened up on the south side, and its massive first pointed architecture has been shown. The arch is pointed, and the details (including dog-tooth enrichments) correspond in style with the entrance to the chapter house (see Fig. 452).

The whole of the crypt of the refectory (see Fig. 454) has been excavated and the pillars uncovered, showing that there were two rows of pillars and three vaults in the width of the building. The pillars, which are round, have been restored so far as they were incomplete, and so have the groined arches, the new work being executed in red sandstone, so that it may be easily distinguishable from the old work, which is of a light coloured freestone. The masonry of the old pillars being considerably shattered, it has been found necessary, in restoring the crypt, to insert an iron column in the heart of each pillar, in order to give them sufficient strength to carry the weight of the vault. It is not known to what use this crypt was applied.

In the east range of buildings running south from the chapter house, the excavations have been continued, and the pillars of a vaulted chamber below the dormitory have been revealed. As this chamber contains a fireplace, it may possibly have been the day room or calefactory of the canons, as only one fireplace (and that in the calefactory) was allowed in the monasteries. There is, however, some doubt as to whether this fireplace is original. At the south end of this chamber a deep drain or water channel, carefully built with ashlar, has been found. This was, doubtless, the main sewer of the monastery, through which there flowed a constant stream of water. The stream which fed the mill race (see Fig. 457) is not far distant. The latrines were, without doubt, situated above this sewer.

In the grounds of the existing school of St. Leonard’s, which lie on the south side of the road leading from the “pends” to the harbour, was formerly situated St. Leonard’s Hospitium, or Guests’ Hall, for the reception of pilgrims and strangers visiting St. Andrews. This Hospitium was an ancient foundation, but according to Martine it was rebuilt by Prior John White in the middle of the thirteenth century. Of this structure there still survive the ruins of the east wall, and by recent excavations made to the westwards, it has been discovered that the building consisted of a large hall, having a central nave and two side aisles. The foundations disclosed show that there were four bays in the length of the hall.

The following translations from Bower’s continuation of Fordun’s Scotichronicon,[5] which Lord Bute has been good enough to send us, together with his own valuable notes, throw some light on the dates of parts of the cathedral and other matters connected with it, especially the work done by Prior Halderston, 1418-1443, viz.:—

In connection with above, Lord Bute mentions that Bower (p. 366) states that Bishop Henry Wardlaw, who died April 6th, 1440, “was buried in the Church of St. Andrew, with greater pomp than his predecessors, in the wall between the choir and the Chapel of our Lady,” thus making it evident that the Chapel of our Lady was the chapel on the north side of the choir.

Lord Bute thinks that “the revestiarium is evidently the east end of the church behind the high altar, sometimes wrongly called the Lady Chapel,” and refers for the use of this term to the contemporary accounts of the death of the Red Comyn, in which he is sometimes stated to have been dragged by the friars into the vestry, and sometimes behind the altar, thus showing the space behind the altar to have been the vestry.

The following note on the above passage is subjoined by Lord Bute:—

With regard to the work of William Bower, Lord Bute says:—

From the above quotations from Bower, and Lord Bute’s remarks thereon, attention is drawn to a number of interesting points connected with the cathedral and priory, and the names and dates of the priors to whom certain parts of the structure are due. We gather from them—

1. That the Lady Chapel was situated on the north side of the choir.

2. That the nave was, to a large extent, rebuilt and roofed by Prior James Bisset, about the beginning of the fifteenth century, but remained an “empty synagogue” till completed and furnished with glazed windows, altars, and decorations by his successor, Prior Halderston.

This corresponds with the period assigned in the text (pp. 18 and 28) for the rebuilding of the upper portion of the west end.

3. Numerous other works were carried out by Prior Halderston. He it was who altered the east end, and introduced the single large window in place of several smaller ones. He also executed the pavement of the choir, transept, and cloister walk, and rebuilt the prior’s palace. He likewise carried out other works, the sites of which are indefinite; and he obtained for the priory the pastoral insignia.

According to Lord Bute’s view, a single great arch was thrown across the nave, between the second pillars from the crossing, above which was a gallery, where stood the royal throne, surmounted by a baldaquin, having the altar of the crucifix behind it; while above the canopy towered the great rood, together with numerous figures. Lord Bute points, in support of this view, to the example at Frankfort, where an arch of a single span supported the rood loft and imperial and royal thrones.

As regards the Commissioner’s or royal throne at St. Giles’, Edinburgh, it no doubt occupied the centre of the gallery at the west end of the choir, or “High Church,” when the building was divided into three churches, and it had a canopy over it. It thus stood in the position where a rood loft might have been, but the gallery it occupied was an erection of this century, and did not rest on an ancient base.

Edinburgh, October 1896.