FOOTNOTES:
[591] Hist. of Galloway, vol. ii. App. p. 67. New Stat. Acc., Kirkcudbrightshire, vol. iv. p. 103.
[592] This game still survives among the juvenile sports of Scotland, played with cherry stones, or paips, Ang. pips, and called nieves, i.e., fists, from their being held in the closed hand. Some of these games with paips may perhaps claim a classic origin. Ovid alludes to one played with nuts,—Nux Elegia, ver. 72. Hence the phrase nuces relinquere, to put away childish things; to become a man.
[593] Archæologia, vol. xxiv. p. 203.
[594] The account in the text differs as to the number of pieces, as well as in some other and more important points, from that given in the Archæologia, (vol. xxiv. p. 212.) Sir F. Madden, however, only describes those which were acquired by the Trustees of the British Museum. Charles Kirkpatrick Sharp, Esq., to whom I owe these particulars, possesses eleven pieces, consisting of two kings, three queens, three bishops, one knight, and two warders. Ten of these he selected from the whole, previous to their possessor, Mr. Roderick Ririe, offering them to the Trustees. The remaining one was afterwards obtained from a person residing in Lewis. Sir F. Madden is also mistaken in speaking of their having been long subject to the action of salt-water. They were found at some distance from the shore; a sudden and very considerable inroad having been made by the sea. A minute of the Society of Scottish Antiquaries, referring to the exhibition of these chessmen, 11th April 1831, describes them as "found buried fifteen feet under a bank of sand." Mr. Sharp has in his possession the original receipt given to Mr. Ririe by the jeweller in Edinburgh, with whom they were deposited, which describes them as "fifty-eight figures, thirty-four pieces, and a buckle of ivory or bone."
[595] The queen figure, of which a back view is given in the engraving in order to shew the peculiar form of the head-dress, holds in the left hand a horn similar to that which one of the queen figures now in the British Museum bears. In cutting this figure the carver has exposed the core of the tooth, and the side of the chair here seen is formed of another piece of ivory attached to it with pins of the same material. This is so neatly done that Mr. Sharp's attention was called to it for the first time when I was drawing the piece.
[596] Singer's Wayland Smith, p. lxxiii.
[597] "L'Empereur et Roy de France, Sainct Charlemagne, a donné, au Thresor de Sainct Denys un jeu d'eschets, avec le tablier, le tout d'yvoire."—Hist. Abbey of St. Denis, 1625.
[598] Primeval Antiquities of Denmark, p. 148.
[599] Stuart's Costume of the Clans, Introd. p. xxxiv.
[600] Archæologia, vol. xxiii. Plate XXVIII. p. 317.
[601] Glossary of Architecture, fifth edit. vol. ii. Plate LXXIII.
[602] Vide, in addition to figure shewn here, Archæol. vol. xxiv. Pl. XLVIII. figs. 3, 4.
[603] Liber Sancti de Melros, p. 76, No. 88.
[604] Vide Laing's Descriptive Catalogue of Ancient Scottish Seals. Nos. 283, 593, 825, 828, 843. Edin. 1850.
[605] Archæologia, vol. xxviii. p. 290.
[606] It was exhibited at a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland, by the late Captain Campbell of Inistore, in 1833, but I have been unsuccessful in several attempts since to ascertain in whose custody it now is, in order to obtain access to it for the purpose of making a drawing from the original.
[607] Vide Papers relative to the Geographical Description, &c. of Scotland, by John Adair, F.R.S., 1686-1723. Bannatyne Miscellany, vol. ii. p. 347.
[608] Archæol. Journal, vol. iii. pp. 243, 244.
[609] Archæol. Journal, vol. vi. p. 170.
[610] Archæol. Journal, vol. iii. p. 121.
[611] Bibl. Du Roi, No. 7266. Ibid. vol. vi.
[612] Collection of Inventories, p. 49.
CHAPTER VI.
PRIMITIVE ECCLESIOLOGY.
With the introduction of Christianity into Britain an entirely new era of art begins, derivable here, as elsewhere, from the central heart of ancient Christendom, as in the celebrated example of the Candida Casa, built at Whithern, in Galloway, in the Roman style.
We have the authority of Bede for the fact already referred to,—that the first churches of the Britons were constructed of timber. The cathedral of St. Asaph, founded by St. Kentigern in the sixth century, was a wooden church, after the manner of the Britons, and so also we may believe was the first cathedral of Glasgow, the work of the same founder. The first cathedral of the Isles seems not even to have aspired to the dignity of a wooden church, but to have been only a wattled inclosure, not unsuited to the simplicity of the primitive apostle of the Picts. Similar erections were probably employed at a much later period, for the temporary accommodation of the first phalanx of the newly founded monastery. A very curious seal, attached to one of the older charters of Holyrood Abbey, represents a structure so entirely differing from all the usual devices of the earliest ecclesiastical seals, that I am strongly inclined to look upon it as an attempt to represent the original wooden church, reared by the brethren of the Holyrood Abbey, on their first clearance in the forest of Drumselch. It manifestly represents a timber structure. The round tower is also curiously consistent with the older Scottish style, which the Romanesque was then remodelling or superseding, but bears no analogy to that of the Abbey of St. David. The contemporary seal of St. Andrews, which has for its device the venerable metropolitan church of St. Rule, proves that such portraiture was actually attempted and successfully practised at the period.[613] Viewed in this light the old Holyrood seal is one of the most interesting ecclesiological relics we possess, figuring, it may be, the primitive structure first reared on the site which is now associated with so many of the most momentous occurrences both in the ecclesiastical and civil history of Scotland. The earliest charter to which it has yet been found attached is a notification by Alwyn, Abbot of Holyrood, A.D. 1141; but both the style of workmanship and the curiously mixed lettering manifestly belong to an earlier period, when the mos Scotorum was still in use, and perhaps point to the existence of a familia, or Christian community established in the glades of Drumselch Forest, long before the royal foundation of the Holyrood. Amid such primitive structures, the Candida Casa of St. Ninian must have stood forth as a majestic example of Italian art, and have furnished a model which succeeding builders would strive to imitate. Yet as each country of Christian Europe has its own peculiar variations from the theoretical standard, or its provincialisms, as they may be fitly enough called, so Scotland and Ireland, occupying originally a more isolated position than the other kingdoms of Christendom, modified these to a remarkable extent, and produced a style differing so greatly from the Italian model as to confound the speculations of modern ecclesiologists. The masterly essay of Dr. Petrie on "The Round Towers of Ireland," has at length freed this inquiry from the cumbrous theories of older antiquaries, and given consistency to the archæological records of native art.
While England has her Anglo-Saxon ecclesiastical remains, exhibiting more or less of the transition by which the debased Roman passed into the pure Romanesque, or Norman style, Scotland, along with Ireland, possesses examples of an early native style belonging to the same period, anterior to the Norman invasion, and distinguished by more marked and clearly defined characteristics. The peculiarities of the early masonry have generally been selected by judicious ecclesiologists as one of the most unerring guides to genuine Saxon remains, including such constructive features as the varieties of long and short work, whether introduced plainly in the angles of the buildings, or in the form of pilaster-strips, panels, arcades, and other decorations on the surface of the walls, as in the celebrated Earl's Barton Tower, Northamptonshire, and in Stanton Lacy Church, Shropshire. The latter are only modifications of the simpler long and short work, and are obviously introduced for the same purpose, namely, to supply the want of a sufficiency of good building materials, and to bind together the unsubstantial ruble-work between, much in the same way as beams and brick-work are united in a timber-framed house. This difficulty of obtaining a sufficient supply of stone accounts for the introduction of herring-bone work, consisting of courses of bricks or tiles of Roman shape, and not unfrequently the spoils of older Roman buildings, disposed in alternate chevron rows. Such evidence is not of course in itself sufficient to fix a building as undoubtedly belonging to the Anglo-Saxon period, but as it generally occurs along with features more or less markedly distinct from the earliest Romanesque buildings to which an authentic date is assigned, it is a mere disputing about terms to question the existence of many well known examples in England of a style of ecclesiastical building popularly known as Saxon architecture. In addition to these constructive features there are not wanting peculiarities of detail, such as the belfry windows, divided with a rude baluster, or a slender cylindrical shaft carrying a long impost without any capital, and small apertures both in doors and windows, formed by two or more stones laid so as to form a straight slope, and producing a class of pointed openings coeval with the earliest circular arch in our ecclesiastical architecture. Sculptured decoration is rare, and generally extremely rude. The imposts of arches most frequently present imperfect imitations of Roman mouldings, where they are not simple square blocks, though in some instances a modification of the long and short work, consisting of rag-stone regularly disposed in imitation of carved mouldings, serves as an economical substitute for more laboured decorations.
Most of these characteristics of Anglo-Saxon architecture are, in the true sense of the word, provincialisms, not indeed necessarily confined to England, but pertaining to the earliest buildings of districts where good stone is scarce, and not easily procured. They form interesting examples of the legitimate origin of architectural details from the necessities of the locality in which they are found. On this very account, however, they are such as we should not expect to find, either in Scotland or Ireland, where substantial building materials abound. Examples, indeed, of analogous workmanship are not wanting in either country, and some of those of Scotland will be referred to. The celebrated ruin of St. Anthony's Chapel, near Edinburgh, though certainly not earlier than the fourteenth, and more probably belonging to the fifteenth century, affords a curious instance of the adaptation of the rude materials of its immediate site, where others of the best quality were of easy access. This, however, is a solitary example, and no indication of a prevalent custom. Any evidence of such an exotic style as that usually called Saxon in the south of England transplanted to these localities, like the Scoto-Roman masonry already described, would clearly point to a foreign origin, and to builders unfamiliar with the facilities of a stone country.
The peculiar characteristics of the later ecclesiastical revolutions of Scotland, which almost entirely eradicated all veneration for the historical memorials of the ancient Scottish Church, have largely contributed to obliterate the evidences of our primitive Christian architecture. Some few examples of singular value, however, exist to attest the correspondence of the earliest sacred structures with other contemporary works of art. Scotland, as well as Ireland, has still her round towers, among the earliest and most interesting relics of native ecclesiastical architecture. Into the endless controversy of which these have formed the subject it is happily no longer needful to enter. Dr. Petrie's admirable work has sufficed to sweep away the learned dust and cobwebs laboriously accumulated about the inquiry into their origin, and exhibits the value of patient investigation and the logical deductions of a thoroughly informed mind, in contrast to the vague and visionary speculations of the fireside student. The field which the Scottish antiquary has to investigate is narrow indeed when compared with that which Ireland offers; but is on that very account freed from some of the difficulties which beset the explorer into the corresponding Irish examples of the architectural taste and skill of a remote and long unknown period. It is even possible that a closer investigation of the history of the round towers of Scotland may throw some additional light on those of the sister isle.
It is with extreme hesitation that I venture to hint a doubt in regard to any of the conclusions arrived at in the "Ecclesiastical Architecture of Ireland anterior to the Anglo-Norman Invasion," regarding it, as I do, as a nearly perfect model of critical analysis and research. Yet even Dr. Petrie occasionally seems not to have entirely escaped the influence of that temptation to assign the remotest conceivable antiquity to these national monuments, which proved so effectual a stumblingblock to his predecessors. Notwithstanding the evidence adduced for the date assigned to the erection of the Round Tower of Kildare, it is impossible to overlook the fact, that the doorways both of that and of the tower at Timahoe are decorated with ornaments and mouldings, which, though not without their own peculiar details, essentially correspond to those found throughout Europe on works of the eleventh and twelfth centuries. If the record of erection at a particular date, with the absence of any notice of rebuilding, were to be accepted in proof of the date of styles, there is probably no single phase of medieval ecclesiastical architecture which might not be proved on such evidence to be coeval with the earliest. The silence of all authorities as to the re-erection of churches once built is a species of negative proof of the smallest possible value. In the ruined nave of Holyrood Abbey at Edinburgh, the experienced eye may detect work of nearly every period from the twelfth to the seventeenth century; yet in some places the mouldings of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries are so ingeniously engrafted on the original Romanesque work, that it is hardly possible precisely to define the amount of change. The ingenuity with which the old masons have thus remodelled churches to bring them into correspondence with the progressive developments of pointed architecture, completely baffles the attempt to fix from single examples, such as the remarkable doorway of Timahoe, the work of a precise date. The form of arch, the chevron mouldings, decorated capitals, the sculptures on the imposts, are all such as the experienced eye would assign to the era of the Romanesque or Anglo-Norman style; and this idea is rather strengthened than weakened by the finely-jointed character of the ashlar-work, as such well-finished masonry is rarely met with in any English edifice prior to the twelfth century. The well-known details common to the Romanesque style are undoubtedly accompanied, as might be expected, by others peculiar to Ireland; but these examples referred to do not differ more from any twelfth century building in England or Scotland than does the beautiful stone-roofed Church of Cormac, on the Rock of Cashel, to which Dr. Petrie assigns, on indisputable evidence, the date of 1134. I am induced to direct attention to these points—otherwise foreign to the subject in hand—because the few marked characteristics which can be referred to on the round towers of Scotland correspond with those in Ireland which, according to all received ecclesiological analogies, seem to indicate an earlier date than the towers of Timahoe or Kildare, or the presumed contemporary monastery of Rathairn, and can hardly be supposed to be works of a later period. On this point I find it difficult to follow Dr. Petrie, who assigns to these specimens of ecclesiastical architecture, marked by details corresponding with works of the eleventh and twelfth centuries in England and Scotland, a date not later than the close of the eighth century, while the tower of Donaghmore, which bears considerable resemblance to the Scottish round tower at Brechin—though greatly inferior in the amount or richness of ornament—is ascribed to the early part of the tenth century, or fully a century prior to the date of the corresponding Scottish building. Yet there are also points of resemblance of a sufficiently marked character, both in the peculiar masonry and details of the Timahoe and Brechin Towers. The pellet and bead moulding on the soffit of the former also very closely corresponds with the finish of the architrave in the Scottish doorway, though their decorations otherwise greatly differ.
Doorway, Round Tower, Donaghmore.
The well-known round towers of Scotland are those of Abernethy and Brechin; but in addition to these we have the ancient church and tower of St. Magnus, Egilshay, in Orkney, which, though hitherto generally overlooked from its remote and inaccessible position, is no less interesting and worthy of note. The little church of St. Magnus, on the island of Egilshay, still remains in tolerably perfect condition though roofless, consisting of a chancel, nave, and round tower at its west end, which appears, when perfect, to have been between fifty and sixty feet high. It was roofed with an irregular dome-shaped capping, and both the nave and chancel were also protected, at no very distant period, with a roofing of stone. Dr. Hibbert, in his "Description of the Shetland Isles," refers to this little Orkney edifice as a specimen of the ancient Scandinavian Church, corresponding, as he conceives, to others which formerly existed in Shetland. After describing Burra, St. Ronan's, and other localities in the Bay of Scalloway, he goes on to remark,—"On an adjacent promontory, named Ireland, once stood a church which was adorned with a lofty steeple. But of three buildings of this kind situated in Ireland, Burra, and Tingwall, that were said to have been erected by Norwegian sisters, it is unfortunate that not one should now remain."[614] It is in illustration of the presumed appearance of these that the church of Egilshay is referred to as "a small religious edifice in Orkney, which these kirks of Shetland are said to have much resembled."
The date of these churches, which tradition thus assigns to Norwegian builders, is not known. If, however, we were to take the dedication of the one still remaining on the island of Egilshay as a clue to the whole, we should be compelled to assign them to a comparatively recent period, and one later by more than a century than the most modern of the round towers of the mainland.
According to well-known Scandinavian records, the introduction of Christianity into the Orkney Islands was effected by the Norwegian king Olaf Trigvason, better known to us as St. Olaf, on his return from an expedition to Ireland in the year 998, having himself received baptism not long before in the Scilly isles. This important change, however, which the warrior missionary characteristically effected at the edge of the sword, there is good reason for believing only affected the Norwegian jarls. Christianity, as has been already shewn, had long preceded the conquest of these islands by the Northmen. The missionaries of Iona had not been so effectually scared by the intrusion of these fierce invaders as to abandon the numerous scenes of their early labours; and it is entirely consistent, both with the history of the northern islands and the characteristics of the primitive little edifice referred to, to believe that the church which still stands, though in ruin, on the island of Egilshay was the scene of Christian rites, amid "the storm-swept Orcades," when the rude Norse king landed his strange missionary crew on the neighbouring isle.
It can hardly admit of doubt that the simple little church and tower of St. Magnus, Egilshay, were built from Irish models. Even if its origin were satisfactorily traced to Norwegian founders, the frequent expeditions of the Northmen to Ireland would suffice to account for this. St. Olaf visited Ireland before his memorable visit to the Orkneys, on his way to Norway, bent on introducing the new faith into his own country. Sigurd, the Jarl whom he converted by the summary alternative of embracing Christianity or forfeiting his dominions, fell in the great battle of Clontarf, in Ireland, A.D. 1014, in which Danes and Northmen of Northumberland, the Orkneys, Hebrides, and Man, fought along with other foreign auxiliaries, on behalf of the Danish colonists of Ireland, against the famous Irish monarch, Brian Boru, while among his allies were the Scottish Maormors of Lennox and Marr. Gray's celebrated ode of "The Fatal Sisters" is a paraphrase of an ancient poem in the Icelandic Saga, on the battle in which the Northmen suffered so terrible a defeat. In this contemporary poem, Hilda, the Scandinavian goddess of war and victory, is introduced with her weird-sisters, the Valkyries, who attended on the field of slaughter to convey the spirits of the dying heroes to the hall of Odin, and otherwise received in the Scandinavian mythology nearly the same attributes as the Parcæ of the Greeks. These Scandinavian Fates are represented as having been seen at Caithness, in Scotland, by a man named Darraudar, on the very day of the battle of Clontarf. They were on horseback, riding swiftly towards a hill, into which they entered, and on looking through an opening of the rock he saw twelve gigantic females weaving a web at a strange loom. Their shuttles were weapons of war, their warp was weighted with human heads, and they wove with human entrails the ghastly texture of "the loom of hell." As they plied their shuttles they sang a dreadful incantation, on finishing which they tore the web into twelve pieces, and each taking her portion they mounted their black steeds and rode off, six to the north and six to the south. That same day they appeared on the field of Clontarf busied amid the heaps of the slain. Such was the creed of the Norse Jarls sixteen years after the conversion of Sigurd of Orkney by St. Olaf, and the sole fruit of their last visit to Ireland. It is not to them, therefore, that we must look for the introduction of the models of the first Christian churches of Orkney. It is much more probable that the earlier missionaries of St. Columba were themselves the architects of the humble little fane which remains on the island of Egilshay, as well as of many others that once adorned the neighbouring isles. It closely corresponds in general characteristics with Dr. Hibbert's account of the ancient churches of Shetland, of which traces still exist. "All the ecclesiastical buildings," he remarks, "appear to have been devoid of the least show and ornament, the ingenuity of the architect extending little farther than in constructing a round vaulted roof. The pointed arch, the pinnacled buttresses, or rich stone canopy, never dignified the chapels of humble Hialtland. The number of them, however, was remarkably great. The parish of Yell, for instance, boasted twenty chapels, where only two or three are used at the present day."[615] The venerable little Church of Egilshay has fallen into like decay, and the inhabitants are now compelled to seek a place of worship on a neighbouring island.
St. Magnus's Church, Egilshay.
Like other Orkney buildings of very different dates, this primitive church is constructed almost entirely of the unhewn clay-slate of the district. The tower is unsymmetrical, tapering somewhat irregularly towards the top, and bulging considerably on the side attached to the church. It differs from other examples in having no external doorway. It has evidently been built contemporaneously with the church, and is entered from the nave by means of a door through the west wall. The accompanying view from the south-east will help to convey some idea of its external appearance. Since the view engraved in Dr. Hibbert's Plate of Antiquities was drawn, the stone roofs both of the church and tower have disappeared, along with a portion of the walls of the latter, which was taken down from the apprehended danger of its falling. The following are the proportions of the church and tower. The greatest circumference of the tower is forty-eight feet, and its present height about forty-five feet. There is no appearance of any stair having been constructed in it, but two beams of oak near the top, and two lower down, still indicate the arrangement of the floors by which it has at one time been subdivided. Directly above the door on the eastern side, connecting it with the nave, are the only two windows in the tower, one above the other, arched with unhewn stone. The doorway is only four feet in height from the present floor, and two feet four inches broad. The walls of the nave are about three feet thick, and it measures thirty feet long by sixteen feet wide within the walls. It is entered both on the north and south sides by doorways constructed "more Romano," with a plain semicircular arch of unhewn stone. On the north side there is but one small arched window, three feet three inches in height, and only nine inches wide; while on the south side, in addition to a corresponding window of similar size, there are two other plain square-headed windows, measuring respectively two feet eleven inches by one foot two inches, and one foot nine inches by one foot one inch. The chancel is still covered in with a plain semicircular arch, above which has been a chamber, constructed between it and the outer covering of stone, and accessible only by an entrance over the chancel arch, where in all probability was kept the muniment chest of the officiating priest. Such an arrangement is traceable in early Irish churches, as in the original work of the beautiful church at Rathain, in King's county, which Dr. Petrie assigns as the work of St. Fidhairle Ua Suanaigh, who died in 763.[616] The chancel measures within the walls eleven feet by nine feet seven inches, and is lighted only by a small window in the north and south walls, measuring each twenty by eleven inches. But perhaps the most singular feature of this interesting structure is the chancel arch, which, directly contrary to those of corresponding edifices in Ireland, has its sides inclined inward towards the base, so as to present a complete horse-shoe arch. It is scarcely possible to examine the details of this most interesting relic of early Christian art, without recognising its manifest correspondence with the primitive Irish churches of the sixth and seventh centuries, which Dr. Petrie's researches have rendered so familiar to us.
That the little Church of Egilshay existed long prior to the era of St. Magnus cannot, I conceive, admit of doubt. A comparison of it with the stately cathedral of Kirkwall, founded little more than thirty years after the death of the sainted Earl, is alone sufficient to prove its erection at a period essentially differing from the era of the fully developed Romanesque. Its later dedication to that favourite northern saint is abundantly accounted for by the remarkable historical fact that in its immediate neighbourhood, if not indeed, as the Aberdeen Breviary states, within this venerable fane, the gentle Magnus Erlendson was hewn down by his fierce cousin Hacon, A.D. 1106. It affords additional confirmation of the source of the Christianity of the Northern Isles, that we are told in the same venerable Scottish ecclesiastical authority, that Magnus commended his soul to the Redeemer, to St. Mary, and to the old northern apostles, St. Palladius and St. Serf. The fame of the sanctity of the martyred Earl of Orkney was speedily attested, according to the faith of the period, by numerous miracles wrought at his tomb. Pilgrimages were made to his shrine, and saintly honours accorded to him, not in Orkney only, but throughout Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, and the Scottish mainland. Within twenty years after his death the legendary incidents of his life had been woven into an Icelandic Saga, strangely differing from that of Hilda and her attendant Valkyries. Ronald, the nephew of the martyred Earl, obtained a grant from the King of Norway of the possessions which were his by right of succession to his uncle, and on successfully establishing his claims the cathedral of St. Magnus at Kirkwall was begun in or about the year 1138, in fulfilment of a vow he had made while fortune still hung doubtful in the scale.
The reputation of the sainted Earl has outlived that of any other Scottish saint, if we except the good St. Margaret. His name is still spoken with reverence throughout Orkney and Shetland, independently of all idea of saintship or martyrdom, to which indeed his claims are greatly more doubtful than his just title to the character of an upright ruler in a barbarous age. He died in a private quarrel with his own cousin, in which no other questions than those of mutual interest appear to have been involved. But the Church availed itself of the reverence which his virtues had inspired; and to this it is no doubt mainly owing that, notwithstanding the extreme veneration in which his name was held, little trustworthy information is to be found regarding him, even in the authorized records of hagiology. The Aberdeen Breviary styles him "the Apostle of Orkney and the Hebrides." Other old authorities refer to him as a bishop or missionary to the Pagans of the north; and a writer in the first Statistical Accounts[617] winds up a sufficiently amusing attempt at tracing his history, by shewing the great probability that he was a knight templar!
The characteristics of the majestic cathedral of the Northern Isles furnish valuable elements of comparison with other examples of early ecclesiastical architecture in Scotland; while they completely confirm the great antiquity of the simple edifice which was deserted as the see of the Orkney bishops for the stately edifice at Kirkwall dedicated to the sainted Earl of the Orkneys. If we except the one common feature of the rounded arch, no elements of comparison exist. The cathedral is a well-defined example of the late Romanesque style, bearing no traces of the rudeness or imperfection which might be looked for in the transition from an humble and homely fane to one of such pretensions, but distinctly marked as belonging to a later period than Dunfermline, Kelso, and other of the older Scottish abbeys in the same style.
Returning to the consideration of the round towers of the Scottish mainland, the reader will probably be prepared by the previous evidences of the close affinity traceable between the early Irish and Scottish arts to assume that these erections, which find a parallel only in Ireland, are either the work of the Irish Scots or the result of the intimate intercourse with Ireland which was maintained at a well-ascertained period of our history. When we consider the close resemblance between the round towers of Brechin and Abernethy, and many of those of Ireland, amounting to a complete identity of style, it seems strange that Scottish antiquaries should have hesitated in ascribing to the former a Christian origin, after the obscure annals of the Dalriadic Scots had been cleared up. From these, as we have already seen, the Irish Scoti had no footing beyond their little territory in Argyleshire till the middle of the ninth century; and we have unquestionable evidence that the Romanesque or Anglo-Norman style had obtained general acceptance in Scotland in the very beginning of the twelfth century. Between these two periods, therefore, must the precise date of erection of both the round towers of Brechin and Abernethy be sought. But this interval is further greatly limited by the establishment of the third Norwegian kingdom by Thorfinn in 1034. It embraced nearly the whole of the north of Scotland, and was successfully maintained for thirty years, so that we are almost unavoidably compelled to assume their date as prior to this earlier period. The triumph of Thorfinn involved the extinction of the house of Kenneth MacAlpin, and the extermination of the most powerful chiefs of the Scottish race. By this we are limited to a period somewhat short of two centuries, within which it may be assumed that the Scottish round towers were erected; and with this such historical evidence as we possess in some degree accords. Neither of them, however, are the primitive structures reared on these long sacred sites. The tower of Abernethy, which stands solitary and unroofed, with all the ancient ecclesiastical adjuncts of a collegiate foundation utterly effaced, may be very briefly dismissed. Gordon[618] gives its dimensions as follows: Its elevation is seventy-five feet, wanting the conical roof which we may assume to have originally crowned its summit, adding ten or twelve feet to the height. The doorway which faces the north, and is, as usual, elevated several feet from the ground, is eight and a half feet high, by two and a half feet wide, and consists of a plain semicircular-headed opening. The tower now occupies an angle of the inclosed churchyard, and serves both as a belfry and clock-tower for the plain modern church; in addition to which the obsolete iron jougs still attached to it shew that it was also enlisted in older times in the execution of ecclesiastical discipline.
The Pictish Chronicle records the founding of a church at Abernethy, by Necton, King of the Picts, who reigned about the year 455. He dedicated the royal foundation to God and to St. Brigid, and endowed it with lands, usque ad diem judicii, the boundaries of which are minutely specified, "from the stone at Apurfeirt to the stone near Cairfuill," &c.,—an interesting example of the Hoare Stones or landmarks of the fifth century. This is further confirmed by Fordun,[619] who quotes an ancient chronicle of Abernethy in corroboration of the earlier record. Of the precise character of this ecclesia collegiata de Abernethy of the fifth century, it is now vain to speculate, but most probably, even for some centuries later, it was only a wooden church after the manner of the Britons, and so remained until about A.D. 711, when we learn from Bede of a second Naiton or Necton, King of the Picts, who sent messengers to the venerable Ceolfrid, abbot of the historian's own monastery of Jarrow, at the mouth of the Wear, inquiring concerning sundry disputed questions, and praying him to send architects who, according to the manner of the Romans, should make a church of stone among his people. The Pictish monarch qualifies a promise of future obedience to the holy Roman and Apostolic Church thus naively: "In quantum dumtaxat tam longe a Romanorum loquela et natione consegregati hunc ediscere potuissent."[620] At what time the royal foundation of Abernethy was remodelled, according to the fashion indicated by its ancient tower, is not recorded in any authority that I know of, but it may not improbably be found noted by some of the Irish annalists from whom Dr. Petrie has already recovered so large an amount of well-authenticated history. The interest in it has naturally been greatly diminished by the annihilation of every vestige of the collegiate buildings except the tower. Its masonry, however, closely corresponds to that of Brechin, while the character of its upper windows is suggestive of even a more recent period, and it is probable that they are additions of a later date than the original structure.
The ecclesiastical foundation of Brechin, so far as we know, is fully four centuries later than that of Abernethy, and belongs to the era of the kings of the Scottish race. The ancient Pictish Chronicle concludes in the reign of Kenneth, the son of Malcolm, 967-991, and is supposed to have been written at that early period. It sums up the brief record of his reign in these words: "This is he who gave the great city of Brechin to the Lord." It does not perhaps necessarily follow that no earlier church existed at Brechin; but to this period we may assign, on the authority of the ancient Chronicle, the first royal foundation; and in the absence of other evidence, I should have felt little hesitation in fixing it as the period when the present round tower was built. Dr. Petrie, however, assigns a date about thirty years later, and promises more precise information derived from the Irish annalists, from whence we may hope for other valuable additions to the Annales Scotorum. Meanwhile, we have obtained an approximation to the desired date, concerning which the indefatigable investigator of the history of these peculiar structures only remarks, "The round tower of Brechin in Scotland there is every reason to believe was erected about the year 1020, and by Irish ecclesiastics."[621] In dimensions this ancient structure somewhat exceeds that of Abernethy, measuring eighty-five feet to the cornice,[622] above which a roof or spire of later date has been added when the cathedral church was re-erected in the thirteenth century. In every other respect it offers superior attractions to that of Abernethy, surrounded as it is with the more recent yet venerable and characteristic memorials of ancient ecclesiastical art, and adorned with sculptures of a singular and very remarkable character. The masonry of the tower, as will be seen from the drawing of the doorway, is of that kind which has been traced as gradually arising out of the cyclopean work of ancient Greece. The stones are polygonal, carefully hewn, and fitted to each other with the utmost neatness and art; the courses of masonry being mostly horizontal, though with more or less irregularity, and the joints not uniformly vertical. It is the same style of work which characterizes the walls of the ancient cities of Etruria, and is also found in Ireland to have succeeded to the ruder primitive cyclopean masonry. But the peculiar feature of the Brechin Tower is its sculptured doorway. Its dimensions are as follows: The breadth at the spring of the arch is one foot seven and a half inches, and at the base one foot eleven inches. The height of the entrance to the centre of the arch is six feet one and a half inch, and the entire height of the doorway from the base of the external ornament to the summit of the crucifix which surmounts the centre of the arch, is eight feet eleven and a half inches.[623]
Doorway, Round Tower of Brechin.
The sculptured figures cut in relief on the imposts and at the base of the doorway, are unhappily too much defaced to admit of a very distinct idea being now formed of their original appearance. Mr. Gough, who examined and made drawings of them eighty years since, when they may be presumed to have been somewhat more perfect, thus describes this ancient doorway: "On the west front are two arches, one within the other, in relief; on the point of the outermost is a crucifix, and between both, towards the middle, are figures of the Virgin Mary and St. John, the latter holding a cup with a lamb."[624] But it was unhappily too much the fashion with antiquaries of the last century, to see what they desired, and to make their drawings accordingly, so that little value can be attached to this precise description. One of the figures holds a pastoral staff, and the other may perhaps have borne a mitre. They were, not improbably, originally designed to represent St. Serf, St. Columba, or some other of the favourite primitive Scottish saints. The larger of the two measures one foot eleven inches in height, including the pedestal or block of stone on which it stands. The nondescript animals below no less effectually baffle any attempts at description. "If one of them," says Gough, "by his proboscis had not the appearance of an elephant, I should suppose them the supporters of the Scotch arms!" Pennant, undeterred by the proboscis,—which, indeed, even now looks more like a fish in the animal's mouth,—conceives them more probably to be the Caledonian bear and boar. The lapse of eighty years has not added to their distinctness, and little good can be hoped for from such random guessings. But the two upper blocks supply curious and unmistakable evidence of the fact, that the original design of the old sculptor has been abruptly brought to a close. Additional figures—not improbably ministering angels—have manifestly been intended to be introduced on either side of the crucified Redeemer, but from some cause—possibly yet ascertainable from the Irish annalists—the work of decoration has been arrested, and the unshapen blocks have been left to be fashioned by the tooth of time.
To these few examples of ecclesiastical buildings belonging to a period prior to the development of the architecture of Medieval Europe, I have little doubt that further research, particularly in the Hebrides and the neighbouring coasts of the mainland, may still supply some interesting additions. This volume has been delayed in the hope of being able to accomplish a tour sketched out for that purpose, but the plan must be executed at a future time, and most probably by other investigators, who possess all the requisites for its efficient accomplishment. It is exceedingly likely that some of the primitive oratories of the first centuries of Scottish Christianity still exist on the remote sites frequently chosen by the ascetic missionaries of the faith. Martin, for example, after describing the Eird Houses or Weems of the Western Isles, adds,—"There are several little stone-houses built above ground, capable only of one person, and round in form; one of them is to be seen in Portry, another at Linero, and at Culunock. They are called Tey-nin-druinich, i.e., Druid's House."[625] Again, the Old Account of the Parish of Orphir, in Orkney, furnishes the following description:—"In the churchyard are the remains of an ancient building, called the Girth House, to which great antiquity is ascribed. It is a rotundo eighteen feet in diameter, and twenty feet high, open at top; and on the east side is a vaulted concavity, where probably the altar stood, with a slit in the wall to admit the light; two-thirds of it have been taken down to repair the parish church. The walls are thick, and consist of stones, strongly cemented with lime. From its resemblance to the Pantheon, some have ascribed this building to the Romans; but in all probability it has been a chapel, dedicated by the piety of its founder to some favourite saint."[626] These seem, like the more celebrated Arthur's Oon, to answer in description to the small circular structures familiar to Irish antiquaries as bee-hive houses, and which are believed to have been the abodes of ancient ecclesiastics. Even on Arthur Seat, exposed to the restless populace of the neighbouring city, some remains of the simple cell of the Hermit of St. Anthony are still visible, and on the Island of Inchcolm, in the Frith of Forth, a rudely arched little vault, of uncertain age and sufficiently primitive construction, adjoining the ruined monastery over which the historian, Abbot Bowar, presided, is shewn as the cell of the good Hermit of St. Columba, where he entertained King Alexander I. for three days, when driven on the island by a tempest. The adjacent monastic buildings still include remains of various early dates, some of which will come under review in the following chapter; but an interesting memorial of the original monastery has been preserved on the chapter seal, which—like some of those of the metropolitan see figured with the primitive Cathedral of St. Rule—is engraved with a view of the ancient Abbey Church of Inchcolm. In style of art the seal bears considerable resemblance to those of St. Andrews. The church is represented consisting of nave and choir, with a central tower surmounted by a spire, and with plain round-headed windows in the choir. The only impressions yet discovered are very imperfect; but little doubt can be entertained that in these we have a representation of the original structure of the twelfth century, fully as accurate and trustworthy as we are enabled to ascertain the ancient seals of St. Andrews to have been. Thus does wax and parchment outlive the graven brass and the masonry which seemed to bid defiance to time.