It is stated in Wade’s _History of Melrose Abbey_[135] that the arcade
of the cloister formerly extended 150 feet each way. The wall of the
cloister is now reduced to the portions which abut against the nave and
transept, being 50 feet on the east side and 80 feet on the south side.
The former side contains a wall arcade of seven arches (see Fig. 795).
These are of the form called drop arches, with crocketed ogee hood
moulding, and have plain spandrils above, over which there runs a
straight cornice, enriched with flowers and shells of all descriptions,
very beautifully carved. It is of these Sir Walter truly says--
“Nor herb nor floweret glistened there
But was carved in the cloister arches as fair.”
Of the tower (see Fig. 766) over the crossing, which is 84 feet high,
only the western wall, with small portions of the north and south walls,
now exists. It rises one story in height above the nave roof, and is
[Illustration: FIG. 795.--Melrose Abbey. Wall Arcades and North Doorway
in Cloister.]
crowned with a parapet filled in with quatrefoils, and resting on an
enriched and corbelled cornice. At each angle is a shaft rising from a
corbel. The three windows are simple, with pointed arch and cusped
trefoil, similar to those of the clerestory of the nave and north
transept. The tower has, doubtless, been erected about the same time as
the transept.
The above description of the various portions of the abbey suffices to
show how full of interest it is to the student of architecture as well
as to the artist.
We have drawn attention to the more prominent features, but it is
impossible for us here to enter fully into all the multiplicity of
details which such an elaborate structure offers for observation and
study.
No building in Scotland affords such an extensive and almost
inexhaustible field for minute investigation and enjoyment of detail as
this. Whether we consider the great variety of the beautifully
sculptured figures of monks and angels playing on musical instruments
(Fig. 796), or displaying “the scrolls which teach us to live and die,”
or turn to the elaborate canopies and beautiful pinnacles of the
buttresses (see Figs. 769 and 778), or examine the rich variety of
foliage and other sculptures on the capitals of the nave and the doorway
and arches of the cloisters; or if, again, we take a more general view
of the different parts of the edifice from the numerous fine standpoints
from which it can be so advantageously contemplated, we know of no
Scottish building which surpasses Melrose either in the picturesqueness
of its general aspect, or in the profusion or value of its details.
[Illustration: FIG. 796.--Melrose Abbey. Figures of Monks and Angels.]
It occupies an important position also historically, as it in part
supplies an admirable example of that decorated architecture the
existence of which in this country has been so often denied, but of
which, we trust, a sufficient number of examples are now provided to
render that reproach to Scottish architecture no longer justifiable.
We have to thank the fine red sandstone of the district, of which the
church is built, for the perfect preservation of all the details of the
structure. These remain, even in the minutest carving, as perfect and
complete as the day they were executed.
In the south transept (see Fig. 784) are two remarkable inscriptions,
which have given rise to much speculation. One of these is carved over
the doorway in the west wall which gives access to the wheel stair, and
part of the inscription is carried down one side for want of room. It
runs as follows:--
Sa ye Cumpas gays evyn about
Sua trouth and laute sall do but diute
Behalde to ye hende q. Johne Morvo.
The other inscription is carved on a tablet in the wall on the south
side of the same door, viz.:--
John Morow sum tym callit was I
and born in Parysse certainly
And had in keeping al masoun werk
Of Santandroys ye hye kyrk
Of Glasgw Melros and Paslay
Of Nyddysdayll and of Galway
I pray to God and Mari bath
And sweet S. John kep this haly kirk frae skaith.
In the centre of the former inscription is a sunk panel containing a
shield with two masons’ compasses, arranged somewhat like a saltier, and
beneath a figure resembling a fleur-de-lys.
The late Dr. John Smith, in the _Proceedings of the Antiquarian Society
of Scotland_, considers these inscriptions as applying to one man, who
may have been the master mason of the building. But Mr. Pinches, in his
account of the abbey, mentions that John Murdo, or Morow, was engaged in
building a church in Galloway in 1508. It thus seems likely that these
inscriptions are not earlier than that date, and have been added to the
building after its completion.
Since the foregoing description of Melrose Abbey was written, we have
had the pleasure of reading the very interesting work by Mr. Peter
M‘Gregor Chalmers, called _A Scots Mediæval Architect_, in which an
attempt is made to identify the JOHN MOROW of the inscription in the
south transept, and to trace his work in the various localities where he
is stated to have “all mason work in keeping.”
This book shows a great amount of careful investigation and intelligent
observation in connection with a number of our ecclesiastical
structures, especially Melrose Abbey; and we have to acknowledge our
indebtedness to Mr. Chalmers for some valuable hints, which are duly
noted in their places as they occur.
The inscription on John Morow’s tablet states that he “had in keeping
all mason work of St. Andrews, the High Kirk of Glasgow, Melrose and
Paisley, of Niddisdale and of Galloway.”
From this statement it is generally assumed by Mr. Chalmers and other
writers on the subject that John Morow was the architect engaged to
carry out all the architectural work required at the above places during
the term of his official appointment.
Mr. Chalmers conducts the reader to the various places which John Morow
“had in keeping;” and wherever he finds a fine specimen of somewhat
late work, he confidently attributes its design to that “Scots Mediæval
Architect.”
At Paisley he thinks he can trace his handiwork in a panel which
formerly stood in the abbey wall, built by Abbot Shaw in 1485, from a
certain resemblance in the form of the letters and phraseology employed
to those of the Melrose tablet.
At Glasgow Cathedral and Lincluden College the design of the rood screen
at each and the chief part of “Blackadder’s Aisle,” and of other details
in the former, is assigned to John Morow.
At St. Andrews he believes him to be traceable in the carving of certain
coats of arms; and at Melrose Abbey a great part of the later work is
attributed to him.
At Whithorn Priory and Glenluce Abbey, which are within John Morow’s
province, some work is pointed out which might be of his date; but as it
is somewhat poor in character, that “Mediæval Architect” is presumed to
have been busy elsewhere, and to have left the job to inferior hands.
It is admitted by Mr. Chalmers that the work at Melrose Abbey must have,
undoubtedly, extended over more than half a century, and would, in all
likelihood, exceed the compass of one man’s lifetime. But as there are
two inscriptions at Melrose to “John Morow,” or Morvo, Mr. Chalmers has
no difficulty in deciding that they are to two members of the same
family, both architects, who, he believes, carried on the works at the
abbey from before the middle of the fifteenth century till some time in
the sixteenth century.
The inscription on the lintel of the doorway is, therefore, supposed to
be in memory of John Morvo, the assumed grandfather of the John Morow
whose tablet is inserted in the west wall adjoining--the earlier parts
of the work having been carried out by the former, and the later parts
by the latter.
But Mr. Chalmers’ fancy is not limited to the invention of these great
architects as illustrious members of the family of the Morows. He would
also fain attribute to them other honours and distinctions.
He therefore assumes that John Morow the younger was identical with John
Murray, of Faulohill, a favourite at the Court of James IV., from whom
he received many gifts, which favours he requited by rebellion, and by
finally appearing on the scene as the chief actor in the ballad of the
outlaw Murray; of which ballad he is further believed to have been the
author! And, to crown this strange eventful history, we are told that
the success of this architect so excited the jealousy of the nobles that
he was waylaid and assassinated by them.
Here we have disclosed, if not a history, at least a fiction of the most
thrilling interest in the life and death of the “Mediæval Architect,”
John Morow; and so full of invention is this flight of fancy, that we
trust its introduction here will be excused as a relief to the dry
details of prosaic architectural descriptions.
We have no desire to disturb this touching romance; but we feel called
upon to indicate some points which may be regarded as worthy of
consideration before it is accepted as historically or architecturally
consistent with fact.
However beautiful this dream may be, and much as the author is entitled
to praise for his careful study of the buildings he describes (which, we
gladly acknowledge, is considerable), we fear that his theory will be
found, on examination, to rest on a very weak and unreliable foundation.