The Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh mentioned in the last entry was begun in 1872 by the architect David Bryce, and finished in 1879. Bryce was an architect from Edinburgh and worked in the Scottish Baronial Style, which is evident by the use of historicism. Large towers and robust facades are features much used. It was seen as the most modern hospital building in Europe at the time, and was based on a pavillion model favoured by Florence Nightingale. This meant that several wings stretched out from the mid part of the building and several free standing buildings around these to accommodate different specialisations of medicine.

The hospital was at the time built in the outskirts of Edinburgh, with the vast park landscape, the Meadows, a former loch, bordering to it. With the awareness of hygiene it was perfectly situated.

It was remodelled and adapted to the new technologies of medicine for a long time, but in 2002 it was closed. Many of the smaller buildings, and later additions have now been demolished and between the main building and the free standing buildings near the Meadows, large glass complexes have been erected, and the old hospital being transformed into luxury apartments (with glass balconies!!!). Fortunately as they are luxury apartments, the room heights have been kept and it being a historically important building, no interference of the facade have been made, except the glass balconies, which as a matter of fact replaced ugly storage rooms incerted, yes in the main facade, in the 1960s, still there on the unfinished north facades.

Edinburgh is famous and became famous for its university in the 18th century, and especially its medical school. As I wrote some time ago the the Old College housed the medical school in the 18th and 19th century, but in the 19th century it was obvious it was too small to accommodate everything. As a new hospital had been built in Edinburgh, the Royal Infirmary the university bought the land next to it and set up a competition for the new medical school.

Sir Robert Rowand Anderson won the competition, and he is also the architect behind the dome of the Old College. A problem with the Old College was that it was more adapted to the symbolic function of the university, rather than the actual function of being a medical school. The rooms were either long and narrow or too small and high. The new medical school was designed to house all the different functions of a medical school and had an anatomy theatre and big lecture theatres. Anderson went on a journey through Europe to look at hospital architecture and decided to build it in the Italian renissance style, as this period had promoted science and could be well adapted to function while at the same time looking beautiful.

The building is arranged around two large courts, one very grand, and one more to function as a place to give light to the different parts of the building complex, especially the anatomy theatre (and to discretely sneak in bodies).

Today half of the building is used by the Department of History, Classics and Archaeology and is harshly remodelled inside, with original stories divided into two, but much of the interior is still saved, and not thrown away, it is just looking very absurd.

The building is very asymmetrical in plan. It is evident that this building was built to be used, as the asymmetry is used to accommodate the function. In many classical looking buildings asymmetry can create unrest, but both the style, look and knowledge behind what the building is used for creates a sense of coherency, where coherency was not the primary intention.

By 1884 the building was finished, but the Graduation Hall was omitted because of lack of finance. Here is a picture of the museum which is now used as a study place.

Andrew Carnegie was a man who had made his fortune in the steel industry that flourished in the late 19th century. Coming from a humble background in the scottish countryside, he invested his money in less fortunate people. He is most famous for donating money to build libraries around the U.S and U.K. This is the Edinburgh Central Library.

Mr. Carnegie wanted the architecture of the libraries to reflect the surrounding, that people felt comfortable with, and not making poor people guinea pigs of new ideas. The city of edinburgh was granted a library of his and it was built in the middle of edinburgh’s old town, for the poor and uneducated children and adults. He thought that in order for people to get out of poverty, or whatever it was, you had to give them the opportunity to advance and not push them into something they did not believe in.

The french style that the edinburgh library was built in fits in with the scottish baronial style and many of the other renaissance revival styles popular in the city. The building looks like being two full stories, but as its main entrance is situated on a bridge, four large stories are actually hidden beneath it. As the bridge goes from the old town out to the suburbs, with the former slums beneath the bridge, the building is unadorned on its four first stories, adapting to the harsh looking slum areas. everything to invite people, and make the library a safe place.

At the time when many of these libraries were built they were often divided in different parts for different people. Women, men, children, and in the US, black people had its own part of the library. The reading room in this library was divided with a women and mens area, and no one could just browse through the rows of books, but had to find the card of the book they wanted to borrow, and give it to the counter where librarians fetched it for them.

The first North Bridge was begun when in the end of the 18th century the Town Council decided to build the New Town of Edinburgh. It consisted of three arches and the draining of the lake, Nor Loch, had begun several years earlier. The ground was still marshy and the tons of earth that had been dumped where the North Bridge began in the Old Town (left) proved very unstable. The bridge collapsed and many died.

Since it had collapsed once the Town Council decided not to have covered balusters as railing because it would be both far more expensive than calculated, and would add to the weight of the bridge, maybe making it unstable again.

In 1772 pedestrians crossing the North Bridge complained to the Town Council about the horrible view beneath the bridge. Had the Nor Loch been drained in vain? The lake had been said to be drained because a grand garden was to be constructed on the site (between the New Town in construction, and the Old Town). The view for the pedestrians crossing the bridge was that of a mélange of buildings – slaughter-yards and butcher houses. They wondered how this bridge could lead to the “respectable part of Edinburgh”, and so the Town Council had to cover the balusters.

Between 1894 and 1897 a new North Bridge was constructed by the famous engineers Sir William Arrol & Co. It is a perfect example of architecture not built by architects and not intended as architecture, as it was a necessity, but with modern materials like steel and with bright decorations.

Its new bright coat of paint is the first thing I see and say “Victorian”. It reminds me of American Victorian Queen Anne architecture and the Painted Ladies of not only San Francisco but buildings all around the U.S. 

As I have mentioned earlier, bridges were built from Edinburgh New Town, the 18^th century suburb, crossing the Old Town in order to get to the new 19^th century suburbs south of the city. As these bridges were being built they left the slums of the Old Town 15 meters below. These bridges were built vaulted so that people in the slums could walk around as before.

In order to get to the main market of the Old Town, Grassmarket, just below the castle, people from the slums walked down a street called Cowgate (gate formerly meaning street). On this street people took their cows in to Edinburgh to sell in the Grassmarket.

Note that the vaults now are closed, except the ones leading through streets. In 2002 a fire spread through the Old Town, mainly through the closed vaults that were not marked on the modern city-plans.

A building which looks like it has stayed the same since 1820 is the Canongate Tolbooth with its special clock. It is part of the late 16^th century building built for the same reason as its name tells you, to collect toll from the east side visitors of Edinburgh, and to occasionally imprison people.

Canongate which is not more than 10 minutes by foot from the castle, and 2 minutes to the earliest parts of the medieval town was when it was built, almost like another city. Living in Canongate was not living in Edinburgh; it did not even have the same status as an 18^th century- or a modern suburb. Not even Holyrood Palace or the ruins of Holyrood Abbey, which also is within a 10 minutes’ walk (if you walk slowly) was a part of Edinburgh. It was The Countryside.

There are loads of Scottish renaissance buildings in Edinburgh, and if they are not original renaissance, they are 19^th century Scots Baronial buildings looking older than they are. 

I have found many old photographs I have never used before.

During the middle of the 19th century Victorian escapists saw this house and one of them immediately thought of a famous protestant reformer, and ever since the house has been known as his name. The fact that this man never had lived here did not really matter, the point was that it looked like a house in which a protestant reformer during the 16^th century would have lived.

Here is a photograph from c. 1865:

And here is one from today:

I do not know which I like the most, probably the first one, because I feel like how it looks today is too perfect. Even though someone most likely restored the house in order to get it look like it did sometime around 1600, I think the Victorian kind of “let’s repair what is necessary and then use it till it falls apart”-feeling is much more inviting than being historically correct. Time changes everything, but I must say I am very much against restoration done after the Industrial Revolution; conservation is always to prefer if it is not about buildings that have been changed after 1890. 

This is Teviot Row House, the student union building, also known as just Teviot or Harry Potter-house. As you can see by the big drum towers, the Gothic traceried windows, the crow-stepped gables and the pinnacled gables, this is Victorian.

It was built in the late 19^th century by the architects Sydney Mitchell and George Wilson, which both favored the Scots Baronial Style. The principle building is four stories high, plus basement and attic. The well-liked 16^th century drum towers are stairways, and most of the turrets in this building are.

When the principle building was finished, the plan was to extend it to the left and right in two symmetrical wings. Only one wing was built in 1902. The east side looks very much like a cathedral, and a smaller crenellated part of the building, fittingly placed like a chapter house to the east, breaks this side of the building’s symmetry.

Something really common in the late 19^th century is that the trim between the floors changes depending on where on the building it is. It can go over or under windows or run like steps on the stairway towers. This was used to give the building a picturesque feeling, showing asymmetry, but at the same time tie the whole building together. Like here:

In the 1960s, when most parts of 19^th century Europe were being demolished, including some of Edinburgh’s, a modernistic extension was added to this building. But I will not show it, because it is too ugly to acknowledge. 

In my second post on this blog I talked about the New Town of Edinburgh. After its main construction in the end of the 18^th century, it was enlarged in stages. One architect who had the opportunity to make contributions to the New Town in the 19^th century was John Lessles. He worked in particular with the western parts of the New Town. If you look on a map, this place is the more “innovative” parts of the district consisting of circles and the parts across the river.

John Lessles didn’t have any particular style in which he worked in. But as many others during the 19^th century, he drew buildings in Gothic revival, both with Venetian Gothic influences, French and British Gothic. And the maybe most specific style for Edinburgh as he drew buildings was the Scots Baronial Style. This style is a part of the Gothic Revival, and mixes elements from Romanesque, Gothic, Renaissance and Baroque architecture.

And this style - actually - epitomizes the Victorian architecture of the 19^th century!

This picture above is St Leonard’s Hall, built for Thomas Nelson in 1870. And it is buildings like these I cannot take my eyes off!

On the left side of the main entrance there’s this massive, five storey tower, and the small windows very much enhances this in a kind of romantic-Romanesque way. The three rows of dentals under the castellated roof-balcony with turrets, or bartizans in each corner really give a medieval feeling, and make me think of Henry Hobson Richardson’s architecture style: Richardsonian Romanesque! All these different kinds of windows, window sizes, gables, towers, different levels of storey dividers, bay windows, oriels, really make a picturesque impression, not to mention asymmetrical. 

If we then focus on the backside, the bays with many windows are very 17^th century Jacobean. Let’s say, Felbrigg Hall or Bank Hall, late renaissance. The extraordinary thing is that the building looks like it has, through the span of 600 years, been rebuilt and added too consistently – but this wouldn’t be any fun! How did the architect actually think when he drew the house?

Architect -“… a new roof on this part, and let’s put a bigger tower here but save the little turret anyway, and let’s build a new dining room here, smack up some windows there…”

-“But I want a balcony!”

Architect -“the balcony we can fit in here, and then we can put another one over there – without a door because no one will use it. And then we have to keep in mind that the sun raises over there, so a window is needed here, and if we have a library there the drawing room where you sit and read all day has to be next to it, with two bay windows so that there will always be enough light…”

Architect -“the kitchen we can place here!

-“But I don’t want the servants running through here!”

Architect -“the kitchen… the kitchen… I have to put it in the outskirts of the building, because otherwise everything will smell of raw meat… a third staircase for the servants to go from the attic, where they live, to the kitchen cupboard. And from this room to this room we put a door for ventilation and from the landing on the stairs half way up to the first floor we put a door and build another smaller storey…”

Greece was for many in the 18th century a dangerous country. Not even the rich individuals on their Grand Tour visited Athens. It was a part of the Ottoman Empire, what is now Turkey, with provinces in Asia, Africa etc. So Rome was for many, the highlight. In the latter part of the 18^th century, some archeologists/architects had the courage to visit Athens and its surroundings. They found for example this, the Temple of Hephaestus and Athena Ergane.

Some architects had started building in what is now known as the neo-classical style. In the beginning, this mainly consisted of Roman models. But later on, archeologists and architects found that the true source of ancient architecture actually came from Greece.

In Scotland, Greek revival as it is called was very long-lived and a big part of the Victorian architecture. Thomas Hamilton designed a building, erected in 1826, inspired by the peripteral temple Hephaisteion (above), in a Greek Doric style. The building was for the Royal High School, and is situated on Calton Hill, northeast of the city-centre, and also overlooking the city. I might add that this building actually is more of a prostyle temple, and not peripteral like its model. (Peripteral – columns all around. Prostyle – columns in the front and down the sides to the wall.)

You can see a level surface on top of the pediment, on the roof, the acroter; I think it’s sad that the acroteria or sculptures are missing.

I have to say it is really nice how the architect have included the guttae both above and below the triglyphs separated by the metops. And also how the anthemions, or palmettes traditionally hides the tiles on the roof, even though this is less common on Doric temples.