It was 870 years ago this week that Dryburgh Abbey, often described as the most beautiful abbey in Scotland, was founded, with the start of construction traditionally held to be the eve of Martinmas, November 11, in the year 1150.
Standing on an elevated site formed by a loop of the River Tweed about five miles from Melrose, Dryburgh Abbey’s seclusion is part of its undoubted charms that have captivated many souls down the ages. There is little of the original Abbey church left, but the remains of the sacristy and cloisters have survived and the building is well looked after now as it is in the care of Historic Environment Scotland.
At the time of its foundation Scotland was ruled over by the man who many people, including myself, consider to be Scotland’s greatest king, David I, son of Malcolm Canmore and St Margaret of Scotland. He both ordered and funded the construction of several abbeys and monasteries as part of his Davidian Revolution which transformed the face of Scotland, but Dryburgh was not one of them.
There had been some sort of clerical institution at Dryburgh as far back as the early seventh century as ancient writings show that St Modan, a follower of St Columba, was described as being the abbot of Dryburgh in 622. As with all Scottish history from the Dark Ages and early mediaeval period, almost all records as existed about buildings and personalities have long been lost, and there is no physical evidence of the older establishment whatsoever.
Though approved by King David, Dryburgh Abbey was the foundation of Hugh de Morville or Moreville, a Norman knight who came over from Cotentin to northern England after King Henry I gave that part of northern France to David. He was almost certainly one of the French knights who helped David retain most of southern Scotland on behalf of his brother King Alexander I, known as the Fierce.
David was both the Earl of Huntingdon and the Prince of the Cumbrians which took in the area formerly occupied by the Kings of Strathclyde. David gave de Morville lands in Huntingdon and Westmoreland, so it would make sense that Hugh de Morville came into Scotland and took possession of lands given to him by David. He was also made Constable of Scotland after his predecessor was killed in battle in 1138.
Being allowed to build his own abbey shows how much he was appreciated by David. De Morville took a personal interest in the construction and shrewdly did not make it either as large or as powerful as those abbeys founded by David such as Holyrood and Melrose. With its location by the Tweed and the obviously intricate stonework that still survives, Dryburgh Abbey was outstandingly beautiful. It was built quite quickly after de Morville was able to attract Premonstratien canons regular – not monks confirmed to a monastery but an order of preachers and pastors.
The White Canons, as they were known from their robes, arrived from Alnwick Abbey at Dryburgh in 1152, and were soon joined by a prominent local lord, none other than Hugh de Morville who became a canon and died in the Abbey in 1162. His son, also Hugh, inherited his father’s lands in northern England and became infamous as one of the four knights who assassinated St Thomas a Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, in 1170.
Dryburgh Abbey seems to have thrived until the Wars of Independence when it was burned down by the English army on their humiliating retreat from their 1322 invasion of Scotland under Edward II, loser of Bannockburn. They burned Holyrood and Melrose, too, and an enraged Robert the Bruce was appalled at the actions of supposed Christians, so much so that he gathered an army and charged deep into England in what was known as the Great Raid of 1322, routing the English army at the Battle of Old Byland to further humiliate Edward II who barely escaped with his life.
In 1385, another English army burned Dryburgh again, destroying the western frontage of the Abbey church. This was rebuilt, however, but by the time of King James IV, there was no longer sufficient canons in the Abbey which was handed over to a commendator – an administrator of church buildings appointed by the monarch.
Dryburgh was sacked twice more by the English in 1544, and when the Reformation took place in 1560 there were just 10 canons left, and they were all gone within a few decades. The Abbey was allowed to become a ruin, and passed into the control of various people until it was acquired in 1786 by David Erskine, 11th Earl of Buchan, founder of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. He re-created the ruin, added monuments and generally made the Abbey beautiful again .
Buchan died in 1829 and was buried in the Abbey. At one time the ruin was owned by the Haliburton family and they retained the right of burial within its walls. That is why the graves and memorial stones of Sir Walter Scott and Field-Marshal Earl Haig, both descendants of the Haliburtons, are there along with various members of their family.
Historic Environment Scotland says this about Dryburgh Abbey: “While a greater part of the abbey church is now gone, what does remain – principally the two transepts and west front – is of great architectural interest. The cloister buildings, particularly the east range, are among the best preserved in Scotland. The chapter house is important as containing rare evidence for medieval painted decoration. The whole site, tree-clad and nestling in a loop of the River Tweed, is spectacularly beautiful and tranquil.”
Dryburgh Abbey has become a place of pilgrimage for lovers of Scott in particular, but deserves to be better known because of its history and sheer beauty.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here