Page:Archaeological Journal, Volume 5.djvu/323

 ANCTKNT ARCHITECTURK OF SCOTLAND. 239 can account for the endless variations ; and as lialf-a-dozen St. Stephen's or St. Peter's will each have a different orientation, tlie saint can have nothint,' to do with it. A little further observation will convince him that the locality, the nature of the soil, and situation, had much more influence than any other cause. So that the general direction was eastwards, no matter how many points to the north or south, the builders appear to have been satisfied. The author of this work, and many others, are to be pitied for havini^ been led into the waste of much valuable labour and research, which if properly directed might have added considerably to our stock of knowledge in a field which is quite wide enough in itself to aflford ample room for the most active and the most energetic. A more lamentable instance of the mischief which must arise from the intro- duction of the fancies of the Ecclesiologists into use, than is presented by this book, it would be difficult to point out. Much credit is due to the author for the labour he has bestowed upon it, and if he had exerted a little more of the usual shrewdness and common sense of his countrymen, he would have sup- plied a useful hand-bonk for travellers interested in architecture, and have helped to stir up the spirit of those who have the control of the fabrics. But a great part of his book k rendered quite unintelligible to the mass of readers, and almost equally so to those who are really famihar with the subject. It is notorious that the architecture of Scotland bears more resemblance to that of France at the same periods, than to that of England, and the first requisite for a writer on the architecture of Scotland was to make himself familiar with that of France by personal examination on an extensive scale. Yet we should say, judging from the book, that the author has never been in France, and knows nothing whatever of the medieval buildings of that country. He has chosen to adopt the new-fashioned nomenclature of "First, Middle, and Third-Pointed," and most fatal confusion is the result. He forgets that the Perpendicular, or " Third-Pointed" of England, and the Flamboyant, or "Third-Pointed" of France, are two very different styles, and he gives us no clue whatever as to which he means in describing the "Third-Pointed" of Scotland. But worse than this, he evidently does not know the difference between the Decorated, or "Middle-Pointed" of England, and the Flam- boyant, or "Third-Pointed" of France, and as far as we can judge by his de- scriptions and his engravings, the whole of that class of buildings which he has described as " Middle-Pointed" do really belong to the Flamboyant style. Assuredly neither the doorway at Bothwell nor the font at Inver- keithing belong to the Decorated style, though described here as specimens of " Mid'dle-Pointed ; " they are Flamboyant work, or bear a much closer resemblance to that style than to any other ; the same may be said of the pillar and base of St. Giles's, Edinburgh. In the Introduction the author states that from whatever cause, " the practice of church building was in a state of entire suspension" during the whole of the fourteenth century. " With regard to parochial churches. If along with the inferences to be drawn from historical events, it can be shewn that in other parts of the