The ecclesiastical architecture of Scotland from the earliest Christian times to the seventeenth century; vol. 1/3

by David MacGibbon; Thomas Ross

ST. BLANE’S CHURCH, Bute.

This interesting ruin stands in a remote valley near the south end of the island of Bute, being about three miles south from the parish church of Kingarth. The site is at a considerable elevation, and commands a fine view of the hills of Arran to the south. A lofty and precipitous wooded hill shelters the valley from the northwards. The building stands on a slightly elevated platform, enclosed with a retaining wall. This enclosure forms an upper churchyard, while another enclosure below it forms a lower churchyard. In former times the upper burial-ground was reserved for men, and the lower one for women.

At first sight the structure at once impresses one as being a Norman building ([Fig. 248]), from the style of the masonry of the lofty central wall and the east end, which stand out prominently from amongst the ruins. On closer inspection, the church is found to consist ([Fig. 249]) of an oblong nave, 50 feet 6 inches in length internally by 16 feet 8 inches in width, and a chancel, 26 feet 3 inches long by 13 feet 11 inches wide, separated by the lofty wall above referred to. The latter contains a chancel arch, 5 feet 3 inches in width.

The masonry of the nave is undoubtedly Norman, being in courses of carefully-dressed freestone, with upright joints all breaking band. The west wall has, on account of the slope of the ground, been brought up from a depth of several feet below the level of the floor, and the lower portion is thickened, and has exterior set-offs about the floor level. A base of peculiar form is carried round the building. (See Figs. [248] and [249].) The side and west walls are now reduced to a few feet in height, and there thus remains no trace of any windows. There have been two entrance doorways, opposite one another, in the north and south walls near the west end, of which only some fragments remain.

The chancel arch ([Fig. 250]) is of good Norman design. On the side next the nave it is in two orders, the inner order having a simple linear or, perhaps, bird’s-beak enrichment, and the outer order is enriched with two series of chevrons, one on the face and the other on the soffit, which leave on the angle a raised lozenge form between them. The arch is enclosed with a label of three-sided section, enriched with a lozenge pattern, and having a small Greek cross in the centre of the arch. Each order rests on the cap of a shaft, the inner shafts being half-rounds, and the outer shafts complete cylinders set in nooks; but these shafts have now disappeared. The caps vary in design, but are of good Norman character.

The bases are much decayed. The abacus of the shafts forms a string course, which was continued round the interior of the nave. It is carved with a saltier-like ornament. A similar string course probably ran round the exterior of the nave. The side of the arch next the chancel is plain, the outer order only having a simple roll on the edge. (See Fig. [248].) The central wall between the nave and chancel is in good preservation, and is carried up with freestone courses resembling the ashlar work of the nave; but the work is coarse, and has probably been rebuilt. Three buttresses, built with whinstone, have been erected at a late period against the south wall of the nave, which seems to have shown signs of weakness.

Fig. 248. St. Blane’s Church. From North-East.

The Norman masonry of the nave extends both on the north and south sides for about 13 feet into the chancel, when it stops suddenly against a whinstone wall. A fragment of the Norman string course is traceable on the exterior of the north wall at the west end, and the same base as that of the nave runs along this Norman part of the chancel. There are the remains of a doorway in the south wall.

The remainder or eastern portions of the side walls of the choir are composed in their lower part of whinstone rubble work (both on the exterior and interior), while the upper portions of the side walls are built with freestone, similar to that used in the nave, but executed with very inferior workmanship, especially as regards the jointing and coursing of

Fig. 249.—St. Blane’s Church. Plan.

the stones. The lower rubble portions of the side walls contain no openings, but the upper freestone portions contain windows. The window in the north wall (see [Fig. 248.]) is a single-pointed light, with freestone ingoings and sconsion arch. There has at one time been a similar one-light window in the south wall, but at a later date a two-light window has been introduced instead of it. The latter being placed at a higher level than the former, part of the older window still remains below the sill of the later one. The older windows in the side walls are moulded on the jambs; the later one is splayed. A piscina has also been inserted in the south wall close to the window.

The eastern wall of the chancel, like the east portions of the side walls, has the lower part built with whinstone rubble, and the upper portion with freestone. As the ground slopes to the east, the east end wall is carried deeper than the side walls. The lower portion (which extends also for a short way along the north and south sides) is brought up with whinstone rubble for about two feet (see [Fig. 248.]), when a

Fig. 250.—St. Blane’s Church. Chancel Arch.

freestone splayed base (quite different from, and at a lower level than, that of the nave) is laid above it. The wall over the base is carried up in the interior with whinstone rubble for nearly four feet (see [Fig. 250.]), and on the exterior with rubble mixed with freestone for two courses. Above this the wall is built in the interior for two courses, and in the exterior for four courses, with carefully-constructed and jointed freestone blocks, similar to those of the nave walls. A set-off occurs on the exterior above these courses. The upper part of the wall and the exterior of the gable are composed of freestone, built irregularly, like the upper portions of the side walls. The upper portion of the interior is of similar work up to the top of the windows, above which it is of rubble work.

In the east wall there are two single-light pointed windows, similar to the window in the north wall. They have the same mouldings, and similar sconsion arches. The inner sills are stepped in three courses. An ambry is inserted in the east wall.

There is some difficulty in explaining the sequence of the construction, and the comparative dates of all the different portions of the chancel.

In a paper by Mr. William Galloway, in the Archæologia Scotica, Vol. V. p. 217, a very interesting and ingenious theory is propounded thereanent. It is there supposed that the whinstone rubble work is actually a portion of an ancient chapel erected at a very early date, and that the Norman work was built around it, in order, so far as possible, to preserve the venerable remains of the primitive structure. This, it is pointed out, would explain the finely coursed work which occurs above the rubble work on the exterior and interior of the east end wall and adjoining portions of the north and south walls. As regards the inferior freestone work of the upper part of the walls, it is assumed that these are the result of an alteration which took place in the thirteenth century.

If this theory were correct, it would enhance very greatly the interest of the structure, not only by the extreme antiquity it would assign to it, but also by proving the great veneration with which it was regarded, and the unusual tenderness with which it was treated by the twelfth century builders.

It must, however, be confessed that an inspection of the building does not tend to confirm the theory. Several points arise which do not appear to be met by it, such as—(1) How does the splayed freestone base of the east end happen to be laid in the middle of the rubble work? Such a base is practically unknown in ancient Celtic structures. (2) On the north wall of the choir a string course and moulded base exist in the Norman portion, and have apparently run along the outside. Would these simply be butted against the supposed ancient rubble work, or how would they be terminated? (3) Is it at all consistent with the usual action of Norman builders to leave small fragments of ancient rubble work and incorporate them in their structures? Or was it not, on the contrary, their invariable practice to remove such early work? Is it not more reasonable to suppose that the different styles of work which are seen here are the result of alterations and repairs? A study of the building itself certainly tends to strengthen that impression. After a careful inspection of the structure, one feels it impossible to believe that the different portions of the work were other than the result of alteration and patching. It is admitted that the matter is rather puzzling; but we venture to make the following suggestions as to the history of the building.

The chancel was probably all built originally in the Norman style of its existing west half. Some accident overtook it, and the east half was demolished. In rebuilding it whinstone rubble work was chiefly used, but a splayed freestone base course was inserted, where it still remains. The Norman-like courses above the rubble work were derived from the old materials of the demolished Norman portion, and were reused without alteration, as nearly as possible, in the same manner as originally.

It is generally supposed that the imperfect work of the upper portions of the walls is of thirteenth century date, but it is more probably much later. The irregular and inferior workmanship alone seems to prove that, and the windows are of a form which might belong to any date. The sconsion arches are not unlike those of the church at Rothesay, which is not earlier than the end of the fifteenth century.