did, Melrose Abbey among the rest. This monarch, as sometimes happens with men who live, as it were, before their time, was much misunderstood, misjudged, and even nicknamed for the provident care of his people's mental condition. But it is to him undoubtedly that the Scottish nation owe the first beginnings of their educational system, which has so much contributed towards making Scotland what it is; and when we consider that in those times it was only in buildings such as Melrose Abbey that the learning of the country could be preserved, and where, therefore, those in search of knowledge had to resort, surely David I. may no longer be styled the "sore saint," but be accorded the honourable place he deserves of being the first great patron of learning in a country which has not failed to render to knowledge many noble services.

It is thought that the ancient inhabitants of Scotland were worshippers of the sun. The circles of stones still to be found on some of the outlying islands in the north are supposed to have been places for worship and the rites of religion. Even yet, it is said, when a highlander meets another on the way to church he does not ask, "Are you going to worship?" but-in Gaelic, of course66 Are you going to the stones ?" The first Christian teachers had to address themselves to these sun-worshippers, and St. Cuthbert, the prior or head of the Abbey of Old Melrose in the seventh century, is related to have been one of the earliest pioneers of the Christian doctrine amongst the villages where sun-worship was prevalent.

The Abbey of Old Melrose, a once celebrated seat of learning and religious zeal, stood on a peninsula formed by the river Tweed, fully two miles eastward from the present well-known ruin; but excepting the missions of its prior, St. Cuthbert, and that the inhabitants were Culdees, comparatively little important matter in its history is recorded.

The building on the site of the present Abbey of Melrose was begun in 1136 under King David I. It was a distinct foundation of a new abbacy, and not a transference from the more ancient monastery at Old Melrose, which latter was carried on for many years * Wilson's Border History.

separately, although it had ultimately to give way to its younger rival. This early edifice has now entirely disappeared.

Amid the general darkness of the nation, bright lights occasionally shone forth. Thomas the Rhymer, the first purely English poet, and Michael Scot, philosopher and reputed wizard, flourished during the thirteenth century, and were intimately connected with Melrose Abbey. It is almost certain that both received a considerable part of their education at some abbey on the Tweed, and that their taste for culture was derived from, and nourished by, monkish teachers in one of those abbeys, most probably Melrose. Both the personages are still regarded by the borderers with peculiar veneration. Michael Scot, to whose traditional story the first two cantos of the "Lay of the Last Minstrel" owe so much of their impressiveness, was a perfectly definite character, and although many imaginative stories are told of him, there is no historical doubt as to his having existed.

The enterprising, yet often unfortunate, Edward II., in his last invasion of Scotland, met with disasters as annoying as they were unforeseen. Having been forced from want of supplies to retire from Edinburgh, his army marched through the valley of the Tweed towards the south. Their supplies having been cut off by the Scotch, neither he nor his soldiers were in a mood to receive, without stern retaliation, any further insults. Near Melrose, where they had anticipated remaining in peace for a short time, the advance-guard were unexpectedly attacked by a band of Scots led by Lord Douglas, who killed a large number of Edward's military and compelled them to retire on the main army. One of the friars of Melrose having rather imprudently joined in the skirmish, the soldiers were incited to sack the abbey, and they did not leave it until most of the valuables had either been demolished or appropriated. The abbot was murdered, and a number of the defenceless old monks, infirm and blind, were also slain. The Southerners continued their way, leaving behind them. blackened walls and sacrileged church property; but the monks not long after bestirred themselves to get their abbey restored. It is considered that the building which was

destroyed at this time was greatly inferior to the one erected immediately after this assault, and whose ruins now adorn the Tweed. The description of the older one is extant, but it is understood to have been a plain building without either style or ornament.

It is to the zeal and energy of King Robert the Bruce that Scotland owes the present buildings of St. Mary's Church at Melrose. Shortly after the destruction of the old abbey, he gave sums of money and made large grants of forfeited lands for the renewal, or, rather, re-erection of the building. As well as this, many presents were made by the surrounding inhabitants; for although, as a rule, the Lowland Scot did not much frequent the Church in these times, still, it was to places such as Melrose that the religiously inclined turned, and it was there where the awful powers of the spiritual world were exercised. The bold borderer, therefore, even though he was often one who had been expelled, either from England or Scotland, for treason or crime, usually respected the quiet dwelling-places of the monks, and occasionally paid them visits to have his sins shrived, when his conscience grew too troublesome; and then he did not fail to bestow handsome presents on the priests. The monks, being possessed of sufficient funds, and being so liberally encouraged by the reigning sovereign, set about the work of re-construction of the abbey; and, as an appreciation of the aesthetic was not deemed by them inconsistent with the love of the Scriptures, they seem to have determined that their new monastery should be worthier of the name and fame of Melrose than either of the former ones were.

When the older monastery was built, such erections in Scotland did not receive the attention they did at the period at which the newer one was projected, but the time was ripe for an abbey to be conceived and carried out which would be magnificent in its design, execution, and artistic effect. The Gothic or Pointed style of architecture, about the origin of which so much has been written, and which is still undetermined, was nearing the commencement of its decay, but was still in its splendour, and realized in this abbey a wonderful degree of charm which age and sacrilege have not been able to destroy, but

have rather enhanced. This was the style in which the monks of Melrose decided to build their abbey, knowing the grand effects it was capable of producing as exemplified in England, but more especially as in France, for they had more communication with the latter country than with the southern part of the island they lived in, even although they had frequently been under English rule.

According to an inscription still decipherable on the wall, the abbey was erected by one John Morvo, or Morow, who is thought either to have been Italian or French. The writing itself says he was born in "Parysse," but as this was probably engraven years after his death, not much reliance should be placed on it. The greatest likelihood is that he was a Scotsman of the name of Murray, and in those days of spelling very much according to pronunciation, it may have been written as even still pronounced by many Scottish people -Morow. It is also conjectured by a recent writer that Melrose Abbey was executed by Scotsmen, who, though they knew something of English and French art, were determined to leave the mark of their own hands and minds on the building. And it is to this throwing the soul into their work-whoever they were does not signify-that helps to make the abbey of such interest to us, for we may still enjoy the shattered result of the work they were happy in the execution of, and gave their best efforts to produce.

No chronicle exists telling the exact length of time that elapsed between the endowment of the abbey by Robert the Bruce and its final completion, but many years must have been spent in its erection. The change of style exhibited between different parts of the building points to the fact that the original design was considerably modified towards the termination of the building work. Whether or not the abbey was ever entirely finished cannot now be ascertained, but it probably was very nearly complete, if not altogether so. The present partly unroofed and bare remains of the building cannot give a good idea of its interior as it existed in its glory, but a lively imagination may fancy it peopled with kneeling worshippers murmuring their petitions as they count their beads, while the priest, clothed in all the grandeur of a high dignitary of the Church of Rome, exalts the

Host for the adoration of the devout assemblage. Or, perhaps, it may still hear the echo of the solemn Te Deum sung on the great feast days, or of the evening hymn chanted forth by the choir in the gathering dusk of the evening, when are

Storied windows richly dight,
Casting a dim religious light.

Then it was that the Abbey of Melrose was a power in the land. The abbot was always the friend and often the special adviser of the king in his difficulties. Then it was also that the result of David I.'s policy in giving so much land to the monks became apparent. It is wellnigh certain that when this king, who was a wise and acute politician as well as a religious monarch, gave these abbots the luxuriant valley of the Tweed and other fertile parts, he perfectly understood that he thereby secured immunity for many of his subjects and much of the best soil from plundering by his own people and from inroads by the enemy. The monks' possessions were respected for centuries, in time of war as well as during peace; and it was, therefore, of importance that as much good land as practicable should be held by those who enjoyed such immunity. The inhabitants of these districts were also quite content to be under the rule of the Under them they had prolonged peace and ample security. If they served a If they served a feudal lord they were liable to be called to fight on every possible occasion, while the servants of the Church, only for exceptional and under extraordinary circumstances, were requested to give their assistance. more peaceable and wealthier class, therefore, considered themselves better to live under a monk than under a secular landlord. Another reason why the fields on the borders were given to the monks was, that large towns could not securely exist near the borders, lying open as they would to the incursions of the enemy. Therefore, in many ways the monks were more able than others to get all possible good out of the land.

The

By the middle of the fourteenth century the abbey was nearly complete; and then it appeared in all the freshness of a newly carved creation, with pillar and font, buttress and niche, vying with each other in variety

and finish. Then the bells rang gladly over the rich valley and up the quiet mountain sides, calling to prayer the pious and to repentance those who had gone astray. Then the hundred inhabitants of the abbey were busy with their charitable deeds and religious exercises, abbot and monk fulfilling their offices with all the zeal of men who laboured not for themseves, but that others might reap what they sowed, and while they were still inspired with the enthusiasm received from dwelling once more in a building not unworthy their professionthe good of their fellow men.

But these prosperous and happy times were not to last. Years rolled on and the abbey was several times attacked and finally almost destroyed by the Southerners. The cause was just a repetition of its former troubles; the English, in 1544 and 1545, first pillaged the abbey and then gave it to the flames. Lords Surrey and Dacre had already attacked Melrose, but it was Lord Hertford and his officers, Sir Ralph Evers and Sir Bryan Latoun, who completed the work of destruction. Henry VIII., in revenge for the opposition made to the espousal of the young and beautiful Mary, Queen of Scots, with his son Edward, sent an army to ravage Scotland. The commanders mentioned received instructions to plunder and lay waste any buildings in the districts through which they passed; and, coming to Melrose, they did not spare the residence of the now worldly monks. The abbey was entered and the church property destroyed; the very tombs were not spared, but fell a common prey with the other portions of the building. At the end of the year these leaders and their soldiers again returned, and though Melrose was so damaged that little more could be done to deface it, they set to work and destroyed the few remaining memorials of the dead, among them the monuments erected over the restingplaces of the Dark Knight of Liddesdale and the Douglas of Otterbourne. structures had been spared before, and it would have been well for the destroyers if they had let them remain, for the descendant of the Douglas, "whose coronet often counterpoised the crown," took a terrible revenge, He gave battle to the English, and wholly defeated and mercilessly slaughtered the

These

men who had ventured to touch the tombs of his ancestors. The defeat only enraged the English king more, and the commanderin-chief, Lord Hertford, was sent the next year to take summary vengeance on the conquerors of the generals. He reached Kelso, about a dozen miles from Melrose, on September 11, 1945, at which date he writes his sovereign that "To-morrowe we intend to send a good bande of horsemen to Melrose and Dryburgh to burne the same, and all the villages in their waye, and so daylie to do some exploytes." Tradition tells that the monks had rung their bells in defiant exultation as the army marched near them, which they thought would not halt to seek vengeance on a religious house, long sacred even to a brutal soldiery. But alas! the day had now gone past for such immunity, and the venerable building was soon a greater heap of ruins than before.

The often too-hasty partisans of the Reformation, bad as they were in destroying architectural beauties, would be unjustly accused if they had the destruction of Melrose added to their list of errors. Some years were still to pass ere John Knox was to begin to preach, and many years before his vehement harangues against Popery took effect by inflaming the people to overturn the altars, burn the pictures, and break in pieces the images. Oliver Cromwell also Oliver Cromwell also has been charged with bombarding the abbey from the hills; but the so-called cannon-ball marks are more like decaying stones than the result of the implements of

war.

The abbey was now completely ruined, but a number of the monks continued to inhabit the monastery until the Reformation. It is a matter of history that sixty renounced Popery at that period. As a consequence, nothing was done to repair the abbey, and it cannot have altered much since that time. Doubtless the surrounding inhabitants utilized the loose stones to build to themselves houses: as a matter of fact, erections are still pointed out which clearly contain pieces of the abbey. Only last year (1880) there died in Newstead an old lady, a descendant of a colony of French masons, who, after the building of Melrose Abbey, settled in Newstead, about a mile away. This Mary Bunyie, or Bunzie,

owned a neat old cottage which was built, it is thought, almost entirely of stones taken from the ruins of Melrose Abbey. Notably the arch over the gate of her cottage is one which was formerly a part of the ruin, and which seems to have been transferred bodily to where it now stands. This old lady, it may be mentioned, had in her possession a few pieces of old tapestry which were taken from the abbey at the Reformation. It is also asserted that great parts of the abbey were taken down to repair a mill, build a prison, and to erect a house, still standing, called the Priory. But we may believe that the loose stones would be first employed, and that not much of the standing portions were removed, although possibly the now entirely demolished western wall was extinguished at this time; and if it were so, we know not how much beauty may be lost; but the main body of the church, and the part on which the architect, builder, and carver spent their utmost united strength, is fortunately still preserved. Here still we may study the evidences of the energy and affection of former times, when workmen laboured for love as well as for pay, and grudged not to give their highest thoughts to their productions and all their mental power on their designs.

The broken beauty of the fair abbey as it now exists, presents almost the same appearance which it did when the rough, unfeeling soldiers had finished their work of destruction; save that the niches want the statues which were taken away by the stern hand of the Protestant. Inside, the Reformers have almost as barbarously left their mark on the building in the huge coarse wall overshadowing the church, and hiding from view the consenting symmetry of the refined pillars which form the nave; but the abbey, though handicapped in the race for beauty by this lamentable piece of masonry, can yet hold its own; for the eye instinctively turns to view the perfect purity of the complete design, to examine more closely the diversity of ornament on the columns, and to discover the entire keeping of the individual details with the breadth and beauty of the undivided whole.

D. C. THOMSON.

Miscellaneous Exchequer

Accounts.

From the "Pipe" and "Audit." HESE are a set of accounts which few persons, perhaps, would care to investigate, as they contain but little personal or local information of importance, except such as can be gathered indirectly from the entries of prices. To the general historian and social economist, however, their value will appear far greater, since, like most other sources of information which are dull and unconnected of themselves, they possess at least the merit of impartial truthfulness.

When these bare extracts have been dressed with the historical significance due to the periods or events to which they refer, it is hoped that they will present attractions to the curious which they certainly did not promise in their original form.

Agents for Special Services.

The accounts under this heading are of a very mixed description, the earlier ones dealing chiefly with the payment of the Sovereign's debts abroad by his resident or special agents. These, in the case of Henry VIII., were chiefly contracted in Germany, and under Elizabeth in Flanders, or, through her Flemish agents, in France.

In 1547, 2,000 "kyntales" of copper were ordered from Flanders by the English Government, the purpose for which the metal was required being hedged round with some mystery, though probably connected with the debasement of the currency.

At home, the expenses of the works at Dover under Elizabeth will interest those who have followed the details of that extraordinary undertaking in contemporary State Papers.

Another account of the same reign refers to the employment of the proceeds, in part, of estates confiscated after the rebellion of 1569. Sir T. Gargrave was deputed to expend these in payment of coat and conduct money, probably for the army under Sussex, which crossed the Scotch Border early in 1570.

Between this time and the Restoration

there is only one account, that of the subsidy sent by Charles I. to his sister, the Queen of Bohemia.

This service was administered from 1673 to 1685 by the notorious William Chiffinch, and was expressly defrayed out of the jointure of the late Queen Dowager.

An inspection of the accounts will show that Charles often put his mother's fortune to no very creditable uses, a large part being absorbed by the expenses of his mistresses.

In 1673, a M. Hennard was paid £500 as the price of two suites of tapestry hangings for the Duchess of Portsmouth. In the following year £780 is set down for a "free gift" to the Duchess of Cleveland. Nell Gwynne is more frequently mentioned. 1674, from the end of May till August, her "diet and other necessaries" whilst at Windsor cost £394 14s. In the same year £280 is also set down for "diet." Curiously enough she seems to have retained a partiality for oranges and lemons, and the sums expended on those fruits would once have set her up handsomely in the trade.

Other charges incurred on her behalf were for the removal of five loads of her goods from the water-side to her house; for twentytwo loads of dung for her new Windsor garden, and as much as £30 for a private pump in the castle.

Amongst Charles's expenses the most important are those incurred in the purchase, at various times, of lands and cottages round Windsor, with payment of the rates due thereon. We also find mention of the planting that was being carried out along the new wall in Windsor gardens, with the salary of the head gardener, £30. £500 was paid for the king's yacht, The Charles, and £290 more for her furniture and fittings.

In 1681 occurs the entry, "To sundry persons, for watering the Ring in Hide Parke from iiij. to xxiij. Aprill"-12 35. 8d.

A hogshead of claret, with twenty-two dozen bottles, corks and hampers, cost £16 125.

Amongst less strictly personal expenses, £4,000 was paid to E. Seymour, part of £6,000 due for his salary as Speaker.

As much as 536 135. was expended on Plate, Prayer-books, Bibles, &c., for "the princess of Auranges chapell."