Post-medieval Edinburgh
By Richard Thomson
The topography and urban development of Edinburgh, Scotland's capital, are closely intertwined. The city is not located on a river or directly by the sea. Instead, its initial form sat atop a ridge surrounded by marshland and shallow lochs. The plan of the medieval city focused initially on a spine-like High Street lined with buildings, with long ‘tofts’ on either side (approximately 8 by 150 metres). From this initial plan, the city grew and expanded, and by the 17th century included an additional major throughway and numerous side streets and buildings. This layout was advantageous for agricultural purposes during the Middle Ages, but also offered a defensive and administrative enclosure for the city.
Edinburgh had grown to prominence in the 14th century through international trade via Leith, which became Edinburgh’s principal port. The connection was strengthened by a road between the two settlements known as the Burgess Close, allowing Edinburgh to thrive despite its inland location. Edinburgh and Leith guarded the estuary from English invasion, thus maintaining the waterway for trade with mainland Europe.
The natural constraints that had first attracted settlers to Edinburgh were proving problematic as the medieval period came to an end. The 17th-century traveller Thomas Morer noted that the “little lanes of communication [between the Cowgate and the High Street] but very steepy and troublesome, and withal so nasty… that Edinburgh is by some liken’d to an ivory comb, whose teeth on both sides are very foul, though the space between them is clean and slightly.”’ Economic development on the Royal Mile was also suffering with constricted access to the site.
Yet, the city was reasonably hygienic for the period. Edinburgh was not situated on a major waterway, and for much of its medieval history had struggled to source drinking water. This problem was greatly alleviated by the diverting of potable water from the Pentland Hills to the south in 1675. The need to source drinking water far from the polluted city inadvertently prevented the contamination of water supplies, with the result that ‘Edinburgh rarely suffered waterborne infectious diseases- unlike London, where water was drawn from wells beneath burial grounds’ - or the polluted Thames. Whereas many cities ultimately sought to purge much of their dirty, disease -ridden medieval structures, Edinburgh was considered clean by 17th century standards, if smelly.
Fire posed the greatest risk to the city. In fact, fire threatened many rapidly-densifying 17th-century cities. As early as 1621, slates or roof tiles were required on Edinburgh’s roofs in place of thatch, and by 1674, a committee was appointed to replace the façades of many timber structures with stone. Thus, while the late medieval heritage in cities such as London and Glasgow was ravished by fire in the 17th century, Edinburgh escaped unscathed. On the one hand, this was due to the abundance of stone. On the other hand, the lack of easily accessible drinking water at the site had inadvertently helped prevent the city from water-borne diseases and so improvement efforts focused on the fire risk.
The development of medieval Edinburgh is the topic of an article in issue 20 of Medieval World: Culture & Conflict, authored by Richard Thomson - an illustrator, designer, and sailor from Scotland. It is part of a new series on 'medieval cities' that we will feature in the magazine.
Richard Thomson, "Medieval Edinburgh: The principal burgh of our kingdom," 8-13 (MWCC.20).
