give us some idea of what in the various stages of its growth, "Old Glasgow, the Place, and the People," must have been. And if this mode of constructing what we may term comparative history be sufficiently painstaking and exact; if no opportunity of enweaving local facts and circumstances be lost, and advantage be taken of the various cross lights which both science and archæology have placed at the service of the modern historian; a very reliable picture of the times may be produced.

The principle is specially applicable to a city like Glasgow, which throughout the major portion of its existence was little more than the vassal of and appendage to a great ecclesiastical see, and has only developed a marked individuality of character in times comparatively modern. The little seedcorn was first sown on the banks of the Molendinar, where Kentigern fixed his cell, and exercised the "office of a bishop," and in its "rapid and cold water" was daily accustomed at early morning, despite the "glittering lightning, hail, snow, or storm," to plunge while "in cold and nakedness he chanted on end the whole Psalter." The prescriptive sanctity of the spot, and its connection with Cumbria, induced David, while prince of that province in 1115, to constitute it the seat of a territorial bishopric, with a jurisdiction coterminous with the Cumbrian province, including, it would appear, the wide domain thus quaintly summarized by Wyntoun, when, from Stephen of England, King Dauy wan til his croun"

"All fra the wattyr of Tese of brede
North on til the wattyr of Twede,
And fra the wattyr of Esk be Est

Til of Stanemore the Rere-cors West."

In 1175 the hamlet which had grown up round the ecclesiastical establishment was constituted by William the Lion a bishop's burgh, and the right to hold a fair was added in 1189. Identified in every respect with the fortunes of the see, as the diocese grew in wealth and in importance, so grew the diocesan city, and through many otherwise uneventful centuries Glasgow might have laid claim to the happiness of the people whose annals are uninteresting.

After the Inquisitio of David, which deals chiefly with the outlying possessions of the

Church, the most important and the first really direct materials for the historian of the city are found in Joceline's "Life of S. Kentigern." The very legends with which its pages are crowded, have played a part in civic history second only to that of the saint himself, and have borne his fame, if not his name, to thousands who had no idea that the "tree which never grew," had its origin in the green hazel twig which his breath kindled into flame; "the bird that never sang," in the robin he called back to life; "the fish that never swam," in the obedient salmon that restored the Queen of Cadzow's ring; or "that the bell which never rang," finds its prototype in that veritable tintinnabulum in whose unbroken identity through all the changes which must have taken place from the death of Kentigern in the beginning of the seventh down to the middle of the seventeenth century. All this Mr. Macgeorge, and with him many others, would have us believe.

The various subjects suggested by the history of a city in its origin so thoroughly ecclesiastical as Glasgow, are ably dealt with by Mr. Macgeorge in a series of disquisitions, beginning with "The first bishop," then taking up the "Bell and the miracles," "The name of the city," the early church, inhabitants, language, houses, the tenure of property, and rule of the bishops, down to the "Armorial Insignia and City Seals." It is here that we find the legends above referred to exerting their most enduring influence, and it is in this field of inquiry that Mr. Macgeorge has made the most original contributions, both to the work before us and to the history of the commercial metropolis of the west.

This chapter is of course only an abridgment of the more extensive brochure on the same subject published for private circulation in 1866, and embodying a detailed exposition of Mr. Macgeorge's researches into the heraldic achievements both of the city and the bishops who successively held the see. These seals and insignia, whether episcopal, capitular, or civic, have from the earliest to the latest times one feature in common-viz., that the heraldic charges are

An Enquiry as to the Armorial Insignia of the City of Glasgow. Printed for Private Circulation, 1866.

without exception based upon representations either of S. Kentigern himself or of the legends which have gathered around his name. Down to the close of the thirteenth century, on the various episcopal seals, the saint only is represented without any of the legendary accompaniments, and the earliest common seal of the city is described by Father Hay as bearing "Caput episcopi cum mitra, scilicet S. Kentigern." The first to introduce any further emblem was that patriot-bishop and staunch supporter both of Wallace and the Bruce, Robert Wyschard, on whose seals appear the twig, the bird, and the salmon. On his latest counter seal, indeed, the entire story of the Queen of Cadzow and her lost ring is graphically depicted in a series of tableaux, the requisite point being given to each scene by the marginal legend, "REX FURIT: HÆC PLORAT: PATET AURUM: DUM SACER ORAT."

The City immediately followed suit with the See, and on a common seal, nearly as ancient as that just referred to, and adopted no doubt under the influence of Wyschard, in addition to the head of the saint and his bell, we find all the legends emblematized in their antique form. The salmon hauriant proffers the ring, while on the twig of hazel, not yet transformed into a tree, sits the robin.

Subject to various changes, and occasionally omitted altogether, the salmon and ring being ever the most persistent, these devices continuously appear in their earliest form, down to the Reformation; whether the legends themselves had a basis of truth or not, the representations being at all events true to the legends. In the seal of Archbishop Cairncross, however, a complete revolution is effected. Impaling the cognisances above mentioned with his paternal coat, the bell first appears in a form rotund instead of square, the twig has become magnified into a tree, with a corresponding increase in the dimensions of the bird, while

tained to S. Kentigern, would not in the case of a claimed or disputed title satisfy the Committee on Privileges in the House of Lords; and why should evidence less irrefragable suffice in this case, where the question ought not to be one of local sentiment or predilection, but of strict scientific archæology? In dealing with the past innumerable instances occur where the only decision that can be arrived at is that known in courts of law as an open verdict, or, as in the present case, where a counter assertion is made, by resorting to that safe, though indeterminate, finding customary in Scotland, "Not Proven." While in certain cases "the benefit of the doubt" may be an invaluable privilege in jurisprudence, in matters of science and archæology it is, to say the least, a very doubtful expedient.

These remarks are made not so much with reference to "St. Mungo's bell," as to a general tendency evinced by Mr. Macgeorge toward the unreserved acceptance of views based on very slender evidence. A notable instance of this occurs with reference to certain conjectures advanced by Dr. Moore in his "Ancient Pillar Stones of Scotland, their Significance, and bearing on Ethnology." Edinburgh, 1865.

Whether endorsed by Dr. Stuart or not, these conjectures are, to say the least, extremely hypothetical, and depend upon certain inscriptions on Scottish stones being susceptible of an Oriental interpretation. Of these the stone at Golspie is not mentioned; Dr. Moore's sheet-anchor being the megalith at Newton of Garioch, thus referred to in the preface to his work :-"To this stone and its inscription the especial attention of the reader is invited, since the interest of the whole inquiry, as conducted in this volume, turns upon the significance ascribed to this baffling monument."

With regard to the vexed question of "St. Mungo's Bell," and its assumed survival through all vicissitudes from the seventh to the seventeenth century, without in any way prejudging the matter, we would simply remark that the onus probandi seems to rest rather lightly on the historic shoulders. Remembering especially that during the earlier half of this period the history of the See itself is involved in utter obscurity, and that apart from any idea of personal possession, St. Mungo's name has been attached to almost everything in connection with the cathedral, evidence more reliable than that which is merely titular, or even the persistent representation of a square, and ergo archaic, bell, is a desideratum.

Mr. Macgeorge must know that the evidence forthcoming as to the identity of the bell which disappeared so unceremoniously circa 1640 (Ray's statement, 1661, would be equally applicable to the ordinary "deidbell"), with that Joceline states to have per

Now the fact is, that for the last twelve years there has been before the public an entirely opposite rendering, based on the assumption that this stone," inscribed with characters unlike any found in Europe, and which, though recognized as Oriental, have hitherto defied interpretation," is graven in the Scoto-Saxon tongue. According to the latest emendation of Mr. Ralph Carr-Ellison, author of this view, the stone is dedicated to the memory

of a "Prince-Ruler of the Cumbrian borders," whom he thus assumes to have fallen, or to have died, far to the north of his actual jurisdiction. If this interpretation turned out to be correct, the stone would thus commemorate a predecessor in his princedom of that "sore saint for the crown," to whom, notwithstanding Mr. Macgeorge's deprecatory remarks, more than to any other individual, both de jure et de facto, Glasgow owes its origin. We do not advocate either the one view or the other, but adduce them as an instance of the care that ought to be taken before the author of a responsible historical work commits himself to the advocacy of a merely tentative theory. We know that on his own ground Mr. Macgeorge can do genuine, and, in the history of Glasgow, much needed, work. All the more then is it to be regretted that in evidence carefully sifted, results impartially stated, and the balance struck between contending opinions, every page of the book under review should not have had the benefit of a trained legal mind.

In the succeeding disquisition, although but too incidentally, Mr. Macgeorge broaches no more interesting subject than the architectural history of Glasgow Cathedral. As Rickman has long since pointed out, to be one of the most important and in all its medieval architecture in Scotland, main features most complete remains of this building has been strangely neglected. For the last forty years especially, with the idea, it may be presumed, of exciting some degree of enthusiasm in its restoration, it has been the fashion to drape it in a mass of historic verbiage and fiction. By ante-dating the several parts of the building, and connecting them on imaginary grounds with prominent names, in his Essay, published in 1833, Maclellan instituted what may be considered the generally received and official theory; while Collie, although himself an architect, in his "Illustrations of Glasgow Cathedral," instead of criticizing the building on its own merits, or from an architectural point of view, unreservedly adopted Maclellan's views. To attribute the existing nave to the early part of the twelfth century or the episcopate of Achaius, or the crypt and choir to the close of the same century or the episcopate of Joceline,

as was then done, is to resign every pretence to architectural discrimination; and the climax of absurdity is attained when such unconsidered trifles as the maligned north-west tower, north-west tower, consistory house, and "that nondescript building, which projects its unsightly form northwards from the west end of the choir," for which, according to Maclellan, "no claimants have hitherto appeared," are assigned to Bishop Bondington, or the middle of the thirteenth century, the golden age not only of the First Pointed, but in one sense of medieval art. The truth is that, except in those comparatively late instances where a coat armorial supplies means of identification, the historians have to a great extent attributed the various portions of the cathedral to particular prelates on mere conjecture. Instead, then, of instituting associations for which there may exist no adequate evidence, the first duty of the architectural critic is to divest the history of the building from chronological anachronisms, and to endeavour, as far as possible, satisfactorily to determine the sequence of its several parts.

As referred to by Mr. Macgeorge, the first to raise a protest against the dominant theory was Mr. John Honeyman, architect, in Glasgow, in a pamphlet published in 1854. In this pamphlet the connection of Achaius with the nave, and of Joceline with the crypt and choir, are completely set aside, the erection of the latter being assigned to Bishop Bondington (A.D. 1233-1258). the former it is stated:-" The nave was no doubt erected during a subsequent episcopate, but there is not sufficient evidence to enable us to determine by whom."‡

Of

At this point, before inquiring how far this statement is in accordance with existing facts, we must fall back upon a previous part of the pamphlet. The fragment of a capital still preserved in the crypt under the chapter-house, referred to and delineated by Mr. Honeyman, is undoubtedly transitional in character, and (as stated at p. 10), "no one will pretend" that it has " any connection

* P. 106.

+"The Age of Glasgow Cathedral and of the Effigy in the Crypt." By John Honeyman, jun., architect. Glasgow, 1854. Ibid, p. 17.

with the present church," not even with that "small pillar in the south-west corner of the crypt," which, with its connected vaulting, Mr. Honeyman, whose view is endorsed by Mr. Macgeorge, claims to be part of a transitional building still in situ, and as such "the only portion which remains of the building consecrated in 1197."* Now, the truth is that the carved work adorning the capital of this "small pillar" respond, or wall pier, and forming its most distinctive characteristic, exhibits the long stiff stems and curling foliage of the earliest lancet, presenting a marked contrast to the fragment preserved in the crypt under the chapter-house with its angular volutes, and a square unmoulded abacus instead of a circular group of elaborate First Pointed mouldings. But this respond or wall pier does not stand alone, it is structurally connected with an aisle arch, six feet three inches in width, of a very plain and massive character, the jamb and arch moulds being merely a series of splays, unadorned except by a small capping at the impost, which, curiously enough, runs round the caps not only of this presumably early portion of the crypt, but also of all the later and more florid piers. The northern abutment of this arch has one of these piers built up against it, so as to form with it really one pier, and on the western face one of the arch rings has been cut back so as to admit of being carried on a floriated corbel of First Pointed character, yet perceptibly later in style than the respond already mentioned on the opposite abutment. This southern abutment connects itself directly with the main southern choir wall of the building, extending westwards for at least two bays, until it is concealed by the later constructions of Archbishop Blackadder. This portion of the wall deserves to be studied both externally and internally, exhibiting, as it does, a marked contrast to that extending onward to the east. Internally we find that the bays are divided by vaulting shafts, with caps and bases in their mouldings precisely similar to the respond previously mentioned, and differing in just as marked a manner from those in the major part of the crypt. In section these shafts, with the respond, are ridged or keelshaped, while in the rest of the crypt the "Old Glasgow," p. 106.

fillet is universal both on shafts and mouldings. The same keel-edge, forming the pointed bowtel, appears in the vaulting ribs with a plain roll on either side and no hollows or under-cutting, being the nearest approach to transitional detail this fragment of an aisle presents.*

There are also no bosses, while in the main crypt bosses occur at all the principal intersections. On the north side this vaulting is carried on piers harmonizing in every respect with those in the later part of the crypt, so that we must assume the vault was cradled while they were inserted. It is quite possible that originally this north side of the aisle was closed by a plain wall, so that it would form part of an alley or passage-way to the structure beyond. On the south each bay is occupied by an acutely pointed window of very plain construction, with no mouldings except splays or cavettos at the angles, while all the windows to the eastward have nook shafts and mouldings. Externally the difference is just as marked. A massive buttress indicates the position of the aislearch already mentioned. On this buttress there terminate two entirely distinct bases. That running to the west consists of a series of massive splays only, that running eastwards and continued right round the choir is more ornate and moulded.

All these circumstances point to this fragment of the crypt as being earlier in date and different in design from the major portion. There is a difference of about fifteen inches in floor-level. The sections of all the mouldings, the carved work, the unadorned windows, the massive character of the masonry, the simpler base-mould, and other points of detail, emphasize the contrast. Of the earliest Lancet, it is certainly neither Transitional in style, nor part of a Transitional building. That it was built with a view to further extension towards the east there can be no doubt. Was it so extended then, and the eastern portion removed? and, if so, why was this fragment left? Or is it part of an arrested plan, which never

* Whencesoever they may have come, among the stones preserved in the crypt under the chapterhouse there is a key-stone from an intersection, and a voussoir from a vault rib, wrought with precisely the same mouldings as the above.