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.