“I’ve been reading the Trimontium Trumpet. Trimontium, as readers will know, is the Roman fort at Newstead in the Borders, named after the three Eildon hills. It was founded in 79 AD, the year that Vesuvius started....... Trimontium is celebrated at the Roman Heritage Centre in the merry little town of Melrose .....It’s a splendid place, and this must have been my third or fourth visit over the years.
The Trumpet tootles out news of lectures and walks and local doings and, in it, I was delighted to discover AD Godley’s Motor Bus, which cleverly illustrates the Latin endings for words........
.....a further report carried distressing news about the life-sized Roman soldier who stands guard at the exhibition door. He’d been nicked. Fortunately he was found in a Bus full of squiffy golfers.... The dishevelled squaddie was soon rescued from the bibulous niblick-fondlers and returned to his thankless task on the door. Poor Romans: they never could subdue the northern natives.” Many thanks, Robert!

Last July, the ‘Herald’ Diary ran a short item concerning the Venus Rising exhibition at Glasgow’s Burrell Gallery, where the centrepiece was the Titian painting of the mythological scene of Venus rising naked from the sea. One visitor had summarised his impression of this masterpiece by writing in the comments book: “ Great tits ”.

Reading that report prompted me to think, not so much of mammaries, but rather of the visitors’ books which the Trust has carefully maintained ever since the opening of the first exhibition in Melrose Station in May 1989. Would any of our visitors have made such a succinct and incisive comment? I decided to re-visit our visitors’ books and comment on the comments. To reduce the scale of the task, however, I limited myself to the fifteen seasons since the opening of the professional exhibition in the Ormiston in 1991.

Not everyone likes to use a visitors’ book: in 2005, for example we had 3,722 admissions but 686 people only chose to record their names and views. Nevertheless it seems reasonable to assume that our books represent a fair cross-section of our visitors and their impressions.

The first thing that struck me as I worked through the books was the rich variety of places from which our visitors come: every corner of the UK is represented, as well as all the continents. From 1991 to 2005, names are recorded from the following nations:-

USA 363; Canada 200; Australia 187; Germany 105; Netherlands 99; New Zealand 76; Italy 38; France 36; Sweden 35; Ireland 34; South Africa 29; Denmark 23; Norway 21; Spain 16; Austria 15; Belgium 14; Switzerland 12; plus 1-10 names from each of 34 other countries, ranging from Azerbaijan to Zimbabwe. Most of these are from lands never trodden by a Roman sandal! I’m proud that our little museum has such international appeal..

What do all these people have to say about us? Well, unquestionably, the vast majority of comments are extremely positive: during 2005 there was not one single critical or unfavourable remark, the two least enthusiastic being “OK” and “Research should continue”. By far the most common comment is “interesting”, often with the addition of “most” or “very”. A wide range of other adjectives is employed: “amazing”, “astonishing”,“awesome”, “educational”,“enlightening”, “enthralling”,“informative”, “magnificent” and “ rewarding” are just a few. Younger visitors often plump for “super”, “mega”, “cool” or “brill”. Perhaps it’s not only children who show up the deficiences of our educational systems with such as “fantastick”, “exelant”, “admirabile”, “intristing” and “exiting” (presumably written on the way out).

Less kindly remarks range from “mildly interesting”, “alright” (sic) and “good(ish)” to “boring” and “rubbish”. But I’m not sure in which category to place “Great potential”, “Not my everyday viewing”, “Nice way to escape rain”, “What can I say?” and “!!!”. “Not so impressive, but OK” is definitely a case of being damned with faint praise.

It’s encouraging when visitors appreciate the immense effort which has gone into creating this resource -“Excellent. Much hard work has gone into this. Thank you!”; “Well done, Mr Gordon!” - and the contribution of our volunteers:
“ Good looking staff ” (surely not!) [but why not? Ed] and “Extremely helpful and knowledgeable staff ”.

“Brings back memories of Latin” notes one visitor. Too true! Many people take the opportunity to show off their classical credentials: “Bonum est!”, “Maximus Pictii! Vale!”, “Maximus educationalist”, “Nemo mortalium omnibus horis sapit” (that’ll test you!), and, with startling originality, “Veni, vidi, vici” or a variation such as “Veni, vidi, liked!”. Others just want to mention the ones who spoke Latin: “ Roman in the Gloamin” writes one, rather irrelevantly, and, more prosaically, “Romans kick butt!”. (Yes, this last from one of our transatlantic friends).

We have tried to make the exhibition attractive to all ages and this is often appreciated : “Lovely - especially the immense effort to make it accessible to children”; “An excellent display, well geared for both adult and child”. One little girl likes “felling and toching”, and the horse, sword and costumes all get plus marks, as do the displays of children’s work. Several schools visit regularly: “Great school outing. Learned lots and enjoyed by all!” (St Mary’s, Melrose) and, after a Perth High School excursion to the area one student wrote : “Highlight of the trip. Thoroughly brilliant”.

Certainly, children are often delightfully enthusiastic - “I realy enjoyed it hear, its brilliant” - but we shouldn’t let them write in the book unless the heavy hand of authority is nearby (sorry, I know that’s politically incorrect). [That’s Heidie-speak, Ed]. Donald manages to erase most of the rudest scribbles, but can’t delete entries such as James Dean, Bob Dylan (from Tenusse), Julius Caesar, Adolf Hitler, Sadam Husain (sic) and “Granny Smith” from “The Big Apple” who found the place “Delicious”.

We do invite suggestions for improvements but, in truth, these are rarely helpful. We know that our exhibition space “could be bigger”, but are just glad of what we have and make the most of it: “So much in such a small space. Excellent!” The observation “Too many errors!” doesn’t help us much either - experts often disagree about the dim and distant period of history we are trying to throw some light on. “It would be a good idea to relocate the exhibition at the fort itself ” is another suggestion but, apart from the horrendous practicalities of such a move, it’s doubtful if it would help us at all, since many visitors are “ just passing” in the heart of Melrose.

In reading through the comments, I was struck by the fact that criticisms are often flatly contradicted by other patrons soon after, in an obvious desire to ‘set the record straight’. There are several examples of this: “Curle was a treasure hunter!”, followed by “3 cheers for Curle”; “The banging [from the forge] doesn’t half get on your nerves when you’re trying to be interested”, followed by “Good sound effects”; “ Stick to rugby, Bill” and “What a wonderful commentary!”; “Needs to be a lot more interesting because at the moment it’s a bit boring” followed immediately by “A lovely combination of information and displays/activities”. “I wish I’d been a Roman” sighs one ; “Glad I wasn’t a Roman” grunts another.

Reading the reactions of all these visitors through the years gave me a glow of satisfaction and achievement, albeit my contribution is a lot later and a lot less than many others. As readers of “The Trimontium Trumpet” and, therefore, supporters like myself, I’m sure you’ll enjoy the same warm feeling of accomplishment as you scan a few last quotations: “Exactly what a local exhibition should be” ...”A comprehensive and well targeted effort on a fascinating local subject”.... “This is a standard that many larger museums would do well to emulate” “.. Delightful little museum”... “Excellent, Melrose’s little treasure”... “Lots of neat old things”... “Excellent. Do the Walk too, it’s just as good!” “ Lovely introduction to the friendly, helpful Scottish people, too. Thanks so much!”... “Thank you for a wonderful day”.

Clearly, our ‘Three Hills Heritage Centre’ is very well received and demonstrably promotes the town of Melrose, and the Scottish Borders as a whole, as a tourist destination - and we all know the significant part played by tourism in the local economy. So why do we find it so difficult to staff the exhibition?

Finally, has this been a worthwhile exercise ? Do visitors’ books serve any useful purpose? I’d like to hear your views! 6 February, 2006

We also received via Ian Dalton an article entitled ‘The Curles and the Antiquaries Dining Club’ for which we are grateful to Charles J Burnett, Ross Herald of Arms, and it seemed equally appropriate to attach it to the supplement for its own antiquarian interest .

‘rekindling a fuller appreciation’

There has been in recent years a surge of interest in the work of archaeologists of the early 20th century and in turn why and how the work of that time happened. The work of the Trimontium Trust has been significant in rekindling a fuller appreciation of Curle and his work. The letters are another contribution to our understanding of this important period in the history of British archaeology. For not only do they reveal something about what happened behind the scenes of the published version of one set of excavations, they also go some way to explaining why Curle’s work should be appreciated by a wider audience.”

Fellows of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland held to this tradition and the Annual meeting of the Society was followed by a meal for the Fellows. This may have been the practice since the Founding Year of 1780, but by 1831 a formal billet giving notice of the St. Andrew’s Day meeting stated that, following the meeting at three o’clock afternoon, dinner would be served in the British Hotel, Queen Street at half-past five precisely. The practice of dining on St. Andrew’s Day then continued, as, in 1849, under the presidency of the Marquess of Breadalbane, the Society dined in the Archers’ Hall at 6pm. However, by the end of the nineteenth century Annual Dinners ceased, possibly because the Society membership had grown too large.

Obviously the lack of fellowship round a dining table was felt by one section of the membership, because in the winter of 1900 James Curle junior invited a number of Fellows, those who took most interest in the Society’s affairs, to a dinner at the University Club before one of the Society’s regular evening meetings. There he proposed the formation of a small social dining club composed of Fellows from the Society. His suggestion met with unanimous approval, an excellent dinner was consumed, and apparently certain notable Fellows fell asleep and snored during the progress of the subsequent Society meeting! This dinner was followed in its turn by one or two others at the homes of other Fellows while the proposal was considered more fully. A.O.Curle, the younger brother of James and at that time one of the Secretaries of the Society, was invited to be Honorary Secretary of the Club and a small Committee was appointed to draw up rules and to approach 40 Fellows to persuade them to join. One member of the Committee strongly urged that there should be no subscription but Alexander Curle argued that there should be, otherwise there would be less inducement for members to attend.

This view was accepted, the result being that with only about half the members attending at any one time, and some not attending more than twice a session, funds accumulated at a rapid rate. The subscription was set at one guinea and for this sum members enjoyed four ordinary dinners before evening meetings of the Society and one banquet on St. Andrew’s Day.The first meeting of the Antiquaries Club, as it was then named, took place in 1901. By restricting the membership to 40 the Club was rather exclusive. There were three Baronets, two Knights, three Honourables, two colonels, two professors, two doctors of medicine, several lawyers and two architects of note, Sir Rowand Anderson, responsible for the Queen Street museum building and Thomas Ross, who, along with McGibbon, produced the famous series of volumes on Scottish Architecture. The first members of the Club are listed in the Appendix and they include men who were at the forefront of Scottish antiquarianism at that time. Members were asked to sign a Roll of the Club, a practice which lasted till the 1920s when, for some reason, it was discontinued.

Alexander Curle resigned as Secretary at the end of the 1916 session and was presented with a silver salver for acting in that capacity for fifteen years. The fact that he handed over nearly £100 in Club revenue to his successor meant that there was money available for this kind of gesture! As the years passed members resigned and were replaced but the maximum of 40 was strictly kept. Gentlemen historians and professional men with time to pursue cultural interests were being replaced by men who were professional historians, teachers and administrators with a strong University representation. The Society of Antiquaries also started to meet at 5.30pm so that the Club met after the lecture, not before. In 1979 the name of the association was changed to that in use today, The Antiquaries Dining Club. Thus has the Club survived and progressed for over a hundred years, thanks to the initiative of James Curle and the services of Alexander Curle in its early years.

Charles J Burnett Esq Ross Herald of Arms

Acknowledgements: Although it appears that a Minute Book was originally used by the Club Secretary, this is now missing and the above account has been drawn from the private diary of A.O.Curle, the original Roll Book of Members, from those Club papers still in existence and from the reminiscences of members. Appendix: The following were the first 40 members:-

The Hon John Abercromby 1901-06; Sir Robert Rowand Anderson 1901-03; Walter B Blaikie 1901-28; Alexander J S Brook 1901-08; James Curle Jnr (Founder) 1901- ?; The Hon. Hew A Dalrymple 1901-13; William K Dickson 1901-25; William T Dickson 1901-07; N. Kennedy Cochran-Patrick 1901-07; Robert Cross 1901-38; James H Cunningham 1901-23; Alexander O Curle 1901-16; Prof. G. Baldwin Brown 1901-32; Prof. P. Hume Brown 1901-32; Lt. Col. John Campbell 1901-07; Sir Thomas D G Carmichael Bt. 1901-09; Dr David Christison 1901-09; Sir George Douglas Bt. 1901-15; John Findlay 1901-05; William Garson 1901-15; Gilbert Goudie 1901-17; The Hon. Morton G S Gray 1901- ?; Charles J Guthrie 1901-20; John G Kirkpatrick 1901- ?; Lt. Col. A B McHardy 1901-11; Thomas G Leadbetter 1901-05; James Macdonald 1901-18; William R Macdonald 1901-18; David MacRitchie 1901-24; Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert E Maxwell Bt. 1901-02; Dr. Robert Munro 1901-06; Patrick Murray 1901-26; David Murray 1901-28; John Notman 1901-22; Lord Lyon Sir James Balfour Paul 1901-25; George M Paul 1901-03; James R Reid 1901-06; Thomas Ross 1901-28; John H F K Scott 1901-09; John H Stevenson 1901-16.