Tom MacWood,
Not only do you raise an interesting question here, but one of some intrigue as well ?
Primarily, I can’t answer your initial question – and I don’t think ANYONE can ! So my belated contribution to this thread is pure opinion and guess-timation.
The “Crossing Holes” syndrome in early golf architecture (say, pre 1890) could be put down to several factors ;
Health & Safety was not a consideration !
Space and location (for the course) was often restricted !
Golfing traffic on the courses was sparse !
Analysis of course architecture just didn’t come into it !
Of course, golf course architects DID exist and here’s a small sample of their names ;
Wullie, Peter, Tam, Jimmy, Sandy, Angus, Hamish, Fergus, etc……
I suppose we should address Space & Location first ? Obviously, the exploitation of the “Inland” game had barely begun (even though a few inland courses did exist) and therefore, golf, was somewhat restricted to the finer natural fescue’s of the seaside links. Many of these area’s were also under the umbrella of “common ground” and could be easily accessed by those who wished to play golf. The laying out of the actual course involved finding 3 – 12 different locations to cut and site – a hole ! Voila ! You have a golf course ! Thereafter, the locals muck in and gradually tidy up the weeds (thistles & nettles) en route to each hole.
Once we progress into the 90’s and the great expansion of golf, things become a bit better organised and methodical. 9 or 18 hole layouts have become fashionable (almost STANDARDISED) and inland courses are now a practical consideration ! Location is now far more commodious thanks to the mowing machines and rail transport, whereas space, is still at a premium for many new courses of the day !
sketch circa 1895. loadsa hazards
?
The health & safety aspect of these crossing holes became clearly evident around the start of the 20th century when the sport was in lift off mode. The courses were getting busier and busier, and it soon became evident that crossing over was hazardous to life and limb ! Many accidents were occurring and “slow play” was becoming a nuisance and distraction for the modern golfer. Huh, they had accidents back then – now ‘we’ have litigation !
Naturally, with fewer golfers on the course, there were fewer chances of hitting a fellow golfer at a crossing hole, or anywhere else for that matter !
Analysis of architecture came through common sense ! People then had a tendency to look back and learn from their mistakes. This was identifiable through the insurgence of the golf course architect during the booming 90’s who became a recognised figure for the laying out and improvement of golf courses ! Wullie, Peter, Tam etc.. fell into near extinction !
And the relevance of all this compared to modern standards ? SPACE !
Maybe the cross over hole is the future of golf course architecture ? That wouldn’t surprise me at all !
Anyway, that’s MY understanding of early golf….. in abbreviated fashion.
Best regards,
Alfie