A MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECT. Part II. – HIS WORK AT PAISLEY AND GLASGOW., P. MacGregor Chalmers (Feb., 1895), pp.85-94.

“Paisley. – Few buildings have a more fascinating history than the Abbey of Paisley, for, preserved by a strange chance, there can still be seen – it may be only in a few broken fragments – the work of all its many builders. But our field for investigation is narrowed by the Melrose evidence, and John Morow’s work must be sought in the buildings of the end of the fifteenth century.

The Abbey was founded in the year 11631 by Walter the Stewart, but not until after the middle of the fifteenth century, in the time of Abbot Thomas Tervas, was it brought to such a state that it could be described as “ane mychti place.”2 It then became one of the great treasure houses of art in Scotland, and, in that respect, a miniature of the parent-house of Clugny.

In the year 14723 George Shaw was elected abbot. A scholar and a statesman,4 he proved a worthy builder. An early eighteenth century historian wrote of him that “he laid out a great deal of money in inlarging and beautifying the fabrick of the monastery. He built a noble refectory, and all other offices that were necessary for the accomodation of the monks, with a strong and lofty tower pended over the principal gate of the abbey; the church, the precincts of the convent, with the gardens and orchards, and a little park for fallow deer, he inclosed with a wall of aisler work on both sides about a mile in circuit; upon different places of the convent, you’ll see frequently the abbot’s arms, viz. Three covered cups with a crozier behind the shield very finely cut in stone, but not mitred; also upon the middle of the wall to the north side, he caused place in three different shields the royal arms in the middle, the arms of the founder, Walter the great Stewart of Scotland, a fess cheque, on the right side, and his own on the left; there are niches at the angles of the wall of most curious graved work; in one of them there was a statue of St. James the Apostle, the patron of the abbacy, in another an image of the blessed Virgin, with this distich near it, but somewhat more inward –  

Hac ne vade via nisi dixeris Ave Maria. 
Sit semper sine vae, qui tibi dicet Ave.5

To preserve the memory of the founder of this noble wall, and the time the work was completed, the abbot, Mr. Schaw, was so just to himself as to cause put up an inscription upon the north-west corner which is still remaining.6

Only a few fragments now identifiable as portions of this work are preserved to the present day. The “place,” or mansion of Paisley, stands on the site of the refectory and other offices.7 The strong and lofty tower fell immediately after its completion;8 and only a very small portion of the great ashlar wall remains, on the north bank of the river Cart, on each side of the Abbey bridge.9 But here are no adornments of curious graved work in niches, and statues, and sculptured panels. All this rich decoration has disappeared, with the exception of two stones – the one carved with the Royal arms, the other bearing Abbot Shaw’s inscription.10

Mediaeval Architect 1

The panel with the Royal arms, which is figured on page 86, measures 3 feet 1 inch high, by 3 feet 2¾ inches broad. The presence of the thistle is here perhaps the point of greatest interest, as it is probably the earliest illustration of that national badge.11

Mediaeval Architect 2

The inscribed slab measures 5 feet 4½ inches by 2 feet 6¾ inches. The illustration, here reproduced from a large scale drawing, may serve to shew that the tablet is of great excellence in design and execution, and that in this and other particulars it bears a marked resemblance to the inscription at Melrose. The letters are raised above the general surface of the stone, and in many instances tied letters are used. We may regret the absence of the fifth line. If it was erased by the Reformers, as is generally said, then it is of vital importance, as helping in some small measure to a better understanding of one of the greatest epochs in our national history, to note that the most zealous care was taken to preserve all that was historically valuable in the inscription. Aided by tradition, an attempt has been made to complete the text:-12

YA CALLIT YE ABBOT GEORG OF SCHAWE 
ABOUT YIS ABBAY GART MAKE YIS WAV 
A THOUSANDE FOUR HUNDERETH ƷHEYR 
AUTHTY ANDE FYWE THE DATE BUT VEIR 
[PRAY FOR HIS SAULIS SALVACIOUN] 
YAT MADE THYS NOBIL FUNDACIOUN*

Two facts regarding John Morow emerged from the examination of the Melrose inscriptions – one, that he wrought at the end of the fifteenth century; the other, that he carried out work at Paisley. There are no buildings at Melrose later than those erected at the end of the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth century, and as there is no parallel, in that fair shrine, to the debased art-work at Paisley, of the middle of the fifteenth century, attention is confined to the buildings erected for Abbot George Shaw, in the search for the work of John Morow. But the internal evidence of the Paisley inscription is all-important. It has been already noted that the character of the lettering, in design and workmanship, is the same as at Melrose. The references to building operations, the poetical form of the compositions, the manner in which the names are introduced – “callit was I,” and “Ya callit” – and the devout expressions with which they close, make it clear that the inscriptions are the work of the same author. A definite date has now been secured.

In the year 1499 certain works of restoration were required at the Abbey, in St. Mirin’s Chapel.13 As it will be shewn that John Morow was busily engaged at Glasgow at that time, and as this later work at Paisley is of a very simple character, it is probable that, having supplied the design, he only exercised a general supervision. No document has been found which throws any light on his private life. The name is mentioned in the Charter of Erection of the Burgh of Paisley,14 in the year 1490, and this point is the more worthy of investigation if Paisley was one of the earliest places to be honoured by the work of this great artist. 

Glasgow. – When Bishop Robert Blacader came to his See in Glasgow in the year 1484,15 his Cathedral was complete. Founded on very modest lines in 1136,16 it had grown slowly but steadily, by the labours of its long line of bishops, until at the end of the fifteenth century it surpassed all the other cathedral churches of the realm. The King was a Canon of the Cathedral,17 and was not unfrequently within its walls.18 His regard for the church and his love for the bishop were especially shewn in the keen interest he displayed in securing a Bull from Pope Innocent VIII. declaring the See of Glasgow metropolitan.19

Archbishop Blacader, to increase the dignity of his church, and – if I understand the spirit of the time aright – not without the desire to leave behind a monument to perpetuate his own memory, erected the stone Rood Screen which still divides the choir from the nave.20 The work was probably begun in the year 1492,21 and must have been completed by 1497, as a chaplaincy was founded at the altar of the Holy Rood in that year.22 The Screen – of which a photographic representation is given [below]23 – stands on the level of the choir floor between the eastern piers of the central spire. The jambs of the richly-moulded low-arched doorway24 rest on bases at the floor level, but there are no capitals interrupting the mouldings at the springing of the arch. It is greatly to be regretted that the eight statues and carved corbels which adorned the panels on each side of the doorway have disappeared. The parapet at the top of the Screen – its most attractive feature now – is of beautifully designed tabernacle-work and open tracery, resting on a moulded and sculptured cornice. 

Mediaeval Architect 3

The carvings on this cornice have, as yet, received no attention at the hands of the student. As they are striking objects to the casual observer, who has usually a ready answer to every difficult question, it is no matter for surprise that there is a current interpretation. They are commonly believed to illustrate the Seven Deadly Sins. Rarely, however, does the casual observer hit the mark, and he has been very unfortunate here.25 The figures of ecclesiastics, at the ends, are probably portraits. As such they would be known and admired, but as there is no clue to guide us now, identification is impossible. The task of interpreting the meaning of the seven intermediate sculptures has been rendered one of some difficulty by their peculiar arrangement. I can now prove, however, that they illustrate the Seven Ages of Man. Old Age occupies the centre, over the doorway; Infancy, Youth, and Manhood, are on the north side; with the Schoolboy, the Lover, and the Sage, on the south. By this arrangement, I think the artist endeavoured to give point to his story by placing Infancy and Old Age together. But he may have had a still higher purpose in view if, in the death-like visage and shrunken frame of Old Age, he appealed both to the careless and devout, as they passed beneath the shadow of the arch, to behold the end.26 Art is too subtle for the pen to do more, in a few words, than describe the general character given to each age. I. Infancy: a young wife sits with an infant on her knee, with her husband alongside. II. The Schoolboy: the master is behind a pile of books asleep, it may be, and the scholar plucks at his chin. III. Youth: a woman pinches the ear of a youth, whose smiling face, and knee drawn up in pretended agony, reveal the age of frolic and freak. IV. The Lover: he sits with his arm round his mistress’s neck, “sighing like furnace.” V. The Soldier: armed cap-à-pie, he fights with a lion. VI. The elderly Sage: with his wife beside him, he holds a long roll in his hands. VII. Old Age: again a married pair is figured, and again the symbolism is confined to the man. The artist was gallant, and the wife is comely still. These carvings, as now for the first time explained, add a new interest to the Cathedral, in that they anticipated the words of the melancholy Jaques by just one hundred years.27

Of the many altars which adorned the Cathedral in early times, only two have been allowed to remain – one on each side of the doorway in the Rood Screen. They differ in size, in design, and in date. The smaller one, on the north, has an ornamental front of five panels, with straight-lined pediments, and figures bearing scrolls. Its north end, carved with the arms of Archbishop Blacader, and that portion of its base which abuts on the lower wall of the Rood Screen, are of later workmanship than the rest of the structure. This altar was probably first erected about the year 1480. There is no evidence that the south altar was ever reconstructed.28 The archbishop’s arms occur on its north end, close to the steps; the front is divided into six panels, with ogee pediments, and figures bearing scrolls; and on the south end the archbishop’s arms are repeated as illustrated [below].29

Mediaeval Architect 4

In the year 1503 Archbishop Blacader founded chaplaincies at two altars at the entrance to the choir.30 The one on the north side, called the altar of the Name of Jesus, is described in the charter as having been constructed and repaired by him. The other, on the south, called the altar of the blessed Mary of Pity, is described as entirely his own work.31 The charters confirm the evidence of the stones.32

Mediaeval Architect 5

On the completion of the Rood Screen, the archbishop turned his attention to the old Aisle of Car Fergus, the roofless lower story of a great south transept which had been abandoned at the end of the thirteenth century.33 The walls were repaired, and to this work of restoration we owe the two panels on the exterior carved with his arms, and the row of curious sculptured beasts. In these we have one or two pages of a mediaeval bestiary in stone. The sketch given below illustrates three of the more grotesque forms.34 An interior view of the aisle is shewn… The vaulted roof is the finest example of such work in Scotland. There is nothing to compare with it for the richness of its moulded ribs of the beauty of its many carved bosses. These are crowded with arms, with beasts, and birds, and fishes, and foliage, in the richest profusion.

Mediaeval Architect 6

As there are nearly one hundred carvings, and no two of them are alike in subject or in manner of treatment, the natural feeling is one of amazement at the seemingly inexhaustible resources of the artist’s mind.35 The arms of King James IV. and of the archbishop frequently occur. There is a large letter M, under a royal crown, on the capital of the middle pier on the south wall.36 This is the initial letter of the Queen’s name. King James was married to Margaret in the year 1502.37 The name of the aisle is carved on the vaulting, immediately in front of the entrance door.

Mediaeval Architect 7

The sketch shews an open car with the corse of St. Fergus which St. Kentigern brought to this place for burial.38 The scroll is inscribed – 

THIS  +  IS  YE  +  ILE  OF  +  CAR 
FERGUS. 

Archbishop Blacader died in the year 1508.39 

There is no difficulty in discovering John Morow’s work in the beautiful Rood Screen, and in the vaulting of the Aisle of Car Fergus.40 The Melrose inscription states that he wrought at Glasgow. The style of the art at Melrose indicated the end of the fifteenth century, but is marked by the strongest individuality, and, as will be still further shewn in a subsequent chapter of my studies, is distinguished throughout by a special quality and beauty. 

P. MACGREGOR CHALMERS.”

1 Dr. Cameron Lees, Hist. Of Paisley Abbey, p. 28. 
2 Asloane MS. p. 56. 
3 Dr. Lees, Hist. Of Paisley Abbey, appendix A. 
4 Tutor to the King’s second son and Lord High Treasurer. Crawford’s Officers of State, vol. I.
5 “Go not by this way without saying Ace Maria. May he be always without sorrow (literally “alas!”) who to thee shall say Ave.” Dr. Lees copied his text from a later writer – “Go not this way unless you have said Ave Maria. Let him be always a wanderer who will not say Ave to thee,” rendering the second line as – “Sit semper sine Via, qui non tibi dicet Ave.” Hist. Of Paisley Abbey, p. 142. For the accuracy of the early version see verses on the same subject quoted in Bower’s Scotichronicon, book vii. cap. 48, where also “vae” is used as a substantive. It is of peculiar interest to note that the Black Book of Paisley – a transcript of Bower – may have been brought thither before 1459. See Dr. Murray’s Black Book of Paisley, pp. 43-44. 
6 Crawford’s Officers of State, 1726, vol. i. p. 367. For an eloquent description of this wall see Leslie, De Origine etc. Scotorum, 1578, p. 10.  
7 The “place” was built in two portions – one at the beginning of the seventeenth century, the other in 1675. The date is carved on a dormer window. The western side of the cloister was destroyed in 1874. Semple, St. Mirin supplement.  
8 Leslie, De Origine etc. Scot. P. 10. I believe this tower was that of which Abbot Tervas “biggit ane gret porcioun.” Asloane MS. P. 56. Its position was probably at the south corner of the west front. As the building fell because of its defective foundation, the overhanging of the present south corner is interesting, if somewhat alarming. 
9 “Excellent materials for building will be supplied from the house and garden walls of Paisley Abbey.” Lord Dundonald’s advertisement, 22nd January, 1752; Glasgow Herald, 18th August, 1888. The drawing of Paisley Abbey in Grose’s Antiquities of Scotland, 1797, shews a portion of the wall remaining at the north corner of the west front. He quotes Crawford’s description. 
10 These stones are preserved in the open yard in front of the Coats’ Museum. The large slab is beginning to decay in its exposed situation. 
11 Treasurer’s Accounts, p. 85. Inventory of the jewels and money of King James III., 1488. “Item, a couering of variand purpir tartar browdin with thrissillis and a Vnicorne.”* The carving is earlier than this earliest-known written reference by a few years. 
12 For the fifth line see Semple, St. Mirin, pref. P. 4. The second letter of YA, in the first line, may be AE. The shield surmounting the crozier bears the arms of Shaw. A few of the lines are ornamented with scrolls. Wav, in the second line, shews the use of the letter “v” for “w.” Wyntoun has a very close parallel to the terms in which the date [1485] is expressed – 
A thowsand a hundyr foure score and fywe. 
Wyntoun vii. cap. 8, l. 1935. 
“But veir” at the end of the fourth line means “without doubt.” See Jamieson. Semple, who was evidently exceedingly proud of the accuracy of his transcript of this inscription, made three mistakes. Dr. Lees followed him. A steel engraving, of no great merit, appears in Hamilton of Wishaw’s Shires of Renfrew and Lanark. 
13 Semple, St. Mirin supplement, p. 9. 
14 “On the south side of the house of John Murray,” Reg de Passelet, p. 265. The charter is preserved in the Town Clerk’s Office, Paisley. 
15 Reg. Epi. Glasgow. pref. xlix. 16 pref. xx. 17 pref. xlix 18 See Treasurer’s Accounts 
19 Reg. Epi. Glas. 457. The King’s wish was opposed, and the Bull was delayed. Acts Parl. vol. ii. p. 213.
20 I have not found any authority for the current opinion that a timber Rood Screen existed previous to this time. 
21 Referring to the Screen, Mr. John Honeyman said that, “after a good deal of consideration and examination, he was of the opinion that it was much older than Archbishop Blacader’s time. There was pretty good evidence that it was erected before the middle of the fifteenth century. The ornamentation was entirely different from anything done by that Archbishop, and the designs were more refined and more elegant in detail. He was inclined to think that it was done during the time of Bishop Cameron, earlier in the century.” Glasgow Herald, 22nd March, 1889. My comment will be found in the following pages.
22 The altar of the Holy Rood naturally stood on the Rood loft. Archbishop Eyre has fallen into error on one or two points in his paper, “The old arrangements of the Cathedral of Glasgow.” Proc. Glas. Archae. Soc., New Series, vol. i. p. 477. 
23 I am indebted to Mr. John Annan, Glasgow, for this photograph.
24 The outline of this arch gives no indication of the date. Earlier examples will be found in Crossraguel Abbey and in the fourteenth century church of Bothwell. 
25 The sculptured Frieze in Paisley Abbey was supposed to illustrate the Seven Sacraments of the Roman Church, until Dr. Cameron Lees published his discovery (History of Paisley Abbey, p. 211) that it was a pictured life of St. Mirin, in ten panels. 
26 There was probably some desire also to avoid placing the fourth age in the centre. 
27 As You Like It, act ii. Scene 7. Shakespeare omitted “Youth” and introduced “the lean and slipper’d pantaloon.” The division of the life of man into Seven Ages can be traced back to a period earlier than the Christian era. In the fifteenth century the representation of the Seven Ages was a common theme in literature and art. In Arnold’s Chronicle, a famous book of this period, there is a chapter entitled, “the vij ages of man living in the world.” Temple Shakespeare. As You Like It, preface. 
28 The table stones of both altars are modern. 
29 The Cross has been carefully removed. 
30 Reg. Epi. Glas. 486. “Cuilibet capellanorum per ipsum fundatorum ad altaria Nominis Jhesu et B. Marie de Pietate juxta introitum chori.” 
[“Every member of the chaplains of the name of Jesus, and through him, to the altars of the Blessed Mary of the founders of piety at the entrance of the choir.”] 
31 Ibid. 482. “Item vnam capellaniam ad altare Nominis Jhesu in ecclesia metropolitana Glasguensi ex parte boriali introitus ejusdem per ipsum construct. et reparat. Item tertiam capellaniam ad altare gloriose Virginis Marie de Pietate ex parte australi introitus chori per ipsum edificat.”
[“Again, one of the name of Jesus in the Church of the Metropolitan See of Glasgow to the altar of the chapel of the north side of the entrance of the same by the same construct. and repairs. In a third part of the chapel of the south to the entrance of the choir of godliness from the altar of the glorious Virgin Mary, through him, of the to be built.”] 
32 The illustration of [“Glasgow Cathedral: The Rood Screen.”] shews the southern portion of the Rood Screen. It will be seen that the design is greatly impoverished by the removal of the statues. The corbels which supported these projected from the fifth course of masonry above the table of the altar of the Blessed Mary of Pity. The figures in the cornice represent Infancy, Old Age, the Schoolboy, the Lover, and the Sage. The open parapet to the right of the illustration is modern. 
33 It is necessary, in my endeavour to trace John Morow’s work, to draw attention here to the opinion expressed by Mr. Honeyman (Report, Brit. Archae, Assoc. Congress, 1888, p. 13) that the vaulted landings which lead from the nave to the aisles of the choir and the stairs which lead to the lower church were works of Archbishop Blacader’s time, and that for over 200 years the only access to the choir aisles was from the choir itself. When the mouldings of the pillars, arches, and vaulting of these landings are examined and compared with the work in the choir, they are found to be of the same character. They must, therefore, be of thirteenth century workmanship. The carved bosses in the vaulting are beautiful examples of the conventional foliage peculiar to, and characteristic of, this early period. Would the choir stalls not prevent any free passage from the choir to its aisles? I have already endeavoured to controvert the statement, made at the same time, that the walls and pillars of the Aisle of Car Fergus were also works of Archbishop Blacader’s time. Proc. Philosophical Soc. Glas. vol. xxv. p. 192. It is important to note that the pillar and part of the walls of the Chapter-house, founded by Bishop William (as the inscription on the Dean’s seat declares) in the thirteenth century, were roofed over by Bishop Cameron, after the lapse of 200 years. The low walls of an unfinished thirteenth century building to the east of the North Transept were used for the first time, a few years ago, for the existing brick and stone tool-house. 
34 A Unicorn, a Camel, a Leopard, and the Serpent in the Garden also occur, with other figures now undecipherable. Such beasts were the emblems of well-known virtues and equally well-known vices. They served to point a moral. The value and meaning of the sculpture of Cathedral fronts like those of Amiens and Chartres can only be understood when this moral aspect is appreciated. For a good article on this subject see Encyclopaedia Brittanica voce Phyllologus. 
35 Unfortunately this aisle has been almost ruined by shameful neglect in the past. 
36 The carving of the capitals is so unskilful in parts that it cannot be John Morow’s work. 
37 Hill Burton, Hist. Of Scot. vol. iii. p. 56. 
 * I’m surprised this inscription has a “yogh” (Ʒ) in it but has given “Y”s instead of the “thorn” (Þ).  
Ʒ is the defunct letter that makes Menzies, Mingus.  
Þ is in place of “th” and is usually replaced with a “Y”, as in this inscription.  
“Þe” is “ye” or “the” / “Þis” is “yis” or “this” / “Þat” is “yat” or “that” 

One thought on “A MEDIAEVAL ARCHITECT. Part II. – HIS WORK AT PAISLEY AND GLASGOW., P. MacGregor Chalmers (Feb., 1895), pp.85-94.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s