Late 12th and early 13th century aisled buildings: a comparison (Part 2)
John Walker
From: Vernacular Architecture 30 (1999), 21-53
DETAILS OF EIGHT BUILDINGS WITH TIMBERS FELLED 1167-1230
The Bishop's Palace, Hereford (timbers felled 1179)
(Figs. 2a, 4a, 6, 12, 13)
Map ref: SO 515396
This is a large aisled palace, not a domestic hall, with timbers felled in
1179 (Footnote
38). Like Leicester Castle, but unlike the other buildings discussed here,
it originally had a clerestorey. Interpretations of the building are given by
John Blair 1987, Radford, Jope and Tonkin 1973, and Jones & Smith 1960. It
was probably built by Bishop Robert Foliot (1173-86). However it is just
possible it was his successor, William de Vere (1186-98). He was familiar with
the latest architectural fashion, coming to Hereford from supervising Henry II's
grandiose building project at Waltham Abbey, Essex between 1177-1184 (Footnote
39).
Plan
The open hall is of four equal bays running north to south with a clerestorey
above the nave, and John Blair has suggested it may have been built with a
three-storeyed crosswing at the south end. It is thought there was nothing
beyond the north end of the hall, but there was a detached great chamber block
to the east. The position of the hall's entrance is uncertain, but the present
entrance is into the second bay from the north.
Open Hall
This is some 105ft long by 24ft wide between the arcade plates (32x7.3m),
with a total internal width of at least 55ft (16.8m) including the aisles. The
top of the clerestorey plates (Footnote
40) is 27ft (8.2m) above the present ground level. The clerestorey has been
removed but Radford, Jope and Tonkin proved that one originally existed. Of the
four bays, nothing survives of the northmost bay, nor the arcade posts at the
south end of the hall. The other 6 oak arcade posts survive, cut off 10in above
the clerestorey plate, along with the clerestorey plate and some of the arcade
braces.
Fig. 12. Outline of Bishop's Palace, Hereford
Features
Figure 12 shows the main structure. Its main features
are:
- The arcade braces form a semicircle (Fig. 13), the distance between the top
of the moulded capitals on the arcade posts and the soffit of the clerestorey
plate being half the length of the bay.
Fig. 13. Arcade braces at Bishop's Palace, Hereford
- The arcade braces are lap jointed both to the arcade plate and arcade posts
( Fig. 6).
The arches are moulded - a roll flanked by hollow chamfers - and there is a
widely spaced nail head decoration nailed round the arch. The spandrels were
infilled with wattle and daub.
- The arcade posts were cut from timber 4½ft (1.4m) square (Jones & Smith
1960, 70), and have round attached shafts on each face, each topped with a
trumpet-scalloped capital with a square abacus ( Fig. 4a).
- None of the braces across the nave survive, having been removed when the
roof was lowered. It is not known if passing braces were used across the
clerestorey, but it is possible: Burmington Hall, discussed below, which had
similar lap jointed semicircular arcade braces ( Fig. 6), had
notched lapped passing braces on all three hall trusses.
- The clerestorey plate is tenoned into the arcade post, as is the aisle
rafter. These are the only mortises and tenons now in the building.
- The nave braces simply sat on the capital, face pegged to the arcade plate.
- Little is known of the aisle structure. The reconstructions in Figs. 2a& 12 are based on those by
Radford, Jope and Tonkin. If correct, this gives a very shallow roof pitch over
the aisles, and one that was probably considerably shallower than over the nave.
However this assumes the aisle walls were around 16-17ft (5m) high. These could
have been lower. If they had been around 10-11ft (3-3.3m), the roof pitch of the
aisles would have been around 500. The aisles are very wide when compared with
most of the other buildings considered, nearly half that of the nave (Table 2).
Burmington Manor, Warwickshire (timbers felled after 1159)
(Figs. 2b, 4b, & 14)
Map ref: SP 253379
This is a manor house, aisled with a timber arcade within stone walls. It has
features similar to the Bishop's Palace, suggesting a late 12th/early 13th
century, but it has no clerestorey. Dendrochronology showed it was built after
1159; no dateable timbers had any sapwood. The manor was held in fee by the
Grenville family from at least 1232 to just after 1346, and it was probably
their principal manor. The roof has gone, but the reconstruction in Figs 2b & 14
is based on rafters reused in the present roof. These figures and much below are
based mainly on the excellent survey drawings by RCHME and a detailed report by
N Cooper (1985) (Footnote
41).
Fig. 14. Reconstruction of Burmington Manor, Warwickshire (based on
drawings by RCHME (Cooper 1985))
Plan
The house runs east to west. It is not known if there was a room beyond the
west end of the open hall. At the east end there was a crosswing if the present
walls are original, since in the north front wall there is a window some 9ft
(2.7m) above the ground with two arched lights beneath an overall tympanum (Fig.
14). Today an ashlar segmental headed door with chamfered jambs leads from the
south aisle into the wing, suggesting it was a solar with undercroft below. It
is not known how far this wing extended to the south. However as Cooper points
out (p. 27), the north wall of the solar is not precisely aligned with the hall
( Fig.
2b), and thus may not be contemporary. The open hall may have been entered
at the west end, where today there is a doorway in the north wall. However,
there is another blocked doorway about 6ft (1.8m) to the east in the back of a
16th or 17th century fireplace, though it is possible this part of the wall has
been rebuilt.
Open Hall
This is of two equal bays, each 14ft (4.2m)long between tie-beams by 14ft
(4.2m) wide between arcade plates, the tops of which are 18½ft (5.6m) above the
present ground level. The four end timber arcade posts rested on stone corbels
with foliated capitals about 10ft (3m) up on the end walls ( Fig. 14). The timber posts
in the central truss were full height. In the east bay, both arcade plates and
three of the semicircular arcade braces survive. Interestingly the surviving
eastern pair of braces do not meet in the middle of the bay, but 9in (0.225m) to
east of the centre (Footnote
42). In the central truss, the north arcade post survives up to the arcade
plate, though truncated on the ground floor, while part of the south post
survives up to the top of the square scalloped capital which has crockets on
each corner (
Fig. 4b). The capital on the south central post is more fragmentary and
appears to have stiff leaf carving. Of the three surviving stone corbels, the
only one which is more or less intact is half-octagonal, with stiff leaf foliage
and a deep trumpet. None of the tie-beams survive in situ, but dovetails are
visible at the west end of the arcade plates. There are now tie-beams across the
middle of each bay, and it is not known if these replace original floating
tie-beams.
Features
Fig. 14 illustrates the
form of the building. Its main features are:
- It has semicircular timber arcade braces, lap-jointed to posts and plate
( Fig. 6)
with the spandrels originally infilled with wattle and daub, like the Bishop's
Palace and probably Leicester Castle, which had similar capitals and lap-jointed
arcade braces. This was built of timber felled after 1137 (Footnote
43).
- The passing braces in the end trusses did not continue across the aisles.
They were fixed to the arcade posts just above the arcade braces by open
unrefined entry notched lap joints.
- The central truss probably had semicircular braces with infilled spandrels
across the nave, with passing braces above. Unfortunately, the north arcade post
is covered on the nave side, but an infill groove can be felt on the face. A
substantial reused timber in the first floor ceiling has a trench for a passing
brace and a line of peg holes followed by the start of a long lap-joint (Footnote
44). This is probably the central tie-beam - it cannot be one of the end
tie-beams as these had no semicircular braces.
- The collar rafter roof was pitched at about 600, the collars held by open
unrefined notched laps. In the central and end trusses, passing braces rose
parallel with the rafters and had 'ashlar' struts. The rafters did not have
soulaces. This reconstruction is based on nine smoke blackened rafters with open
unrefined notched lap joints which have been reused in the present roof (Footnote
45). All have been shortened. One continues for 6ft 9in (2.1m) above the
collar lap joint, and another for 6ft 6in (2m) below, giving a minimum original
rafter length of 13ft 3in (4m), which in turn implies a minimum slope of 590
over the nave. One has a housed dovetail 4ft 4in (1.3m) above the collar,
suggesting the passing braces were parallel to main rafters. This rafter only
survives for 3ft 3in (1m) below the collar, but another has a second notched lap
just 3ft 6in (1.07m) below the collar for an 'ashlar' strut. As none of the
other rafters have this, this strut probably occurred only over the tie- beams.
The notched lap joint seatings in the end posts could suggest the passing braces
rose at 37- 38 degrees (Footnote
46). however, as Fig. 5 shows
the angle of the joint is not necessarily a guide to the slope of the brace.
- In the central truss, the north post has a very substantial groove on the
aisle side, suggesting the aisles had boarded infill above the aisle tie.
- There was probably a dormer window over at least the north-west aisle as
there is a small mortise in the arcade plate on the aisle side in the middle of
the bay. It is not known if there were similar mortises in the south aisle or in
the east bay.
- The only other mortise-and- tenon joints used in the building appear to be
those where the tops of the arcade posts meet the arcade plates.
- Little is known about the aisles. The north wall of the hall is now
two-storeyed, and consists of masonry up to the present first floor with 16th
century timber-framing above. If the masonry is that of the original aisle wall,
then the roof pitch over the aisle is 520, slightly shallower than over the
nave. It is of course possible that the wall has been heightened in the medieval
period. Nothing survives of the north aisle.
Fyfield Hall, Fyfield, Essex (timbers felled 1167-1185)
(Figs. 2b, 4c, 15, 16, 17)
Map ref: TL 572069
This is a timber-framed manor house which has been much discussed in the past
and was thought to be 13th century (Footnote
47). The earliest phase has been tree-ring dated to 1167 to 1185, with a
major rebuilding 1391- 1416. The arcade braces formed a pointed arch.
Fig. 15. Reconstruction of Fyfield hall as built 1167-1185 (form of hip
is uncertain - may have always been as in fig 16)
> 
Fig. 16. Reconstruction of Fyfield Hall after rebuild 1391-1416
Dendrochronology has shown that the roof, central tie-beam (which has notched
lap joint seatings and passing brace slots), and the north-east arcade post
(Post E, Fig. 17, and by implication Post A) were felled between 1167 and 1185
(Footnote
48). Major repairs were carried out with timbers felled between 1391 and
1416, when the arcade braces, central arcade posts, arcade plates and aisles
were replaced (Fig. 17). The c1400 central arcade post on the north side, which
is earthfast, had previously been dated (on the basis of its mouldings) to the
13th century. It would appear that the hall was rebuilt c1400 in an archaic
style with passing braces as shown in Fig. 16. However, it may not have been
that unique as the belfry at Navestock, Essex was built with notched lapped
passing braces from timbers felled 1352-1380 (Footnote
49).
Fig. 17. Dated timbers of Fyfield Hall
One can reject the hypothesis that the whole building was erected c1400
partly with reused timber. This is because Post A is earthfast, leaning slightly
to the south, and was clearly leaning like this circa 1400 when the lower part
was cut back so that new post (B) could be erected flush with its upper part.
Equally the tree-ring dating could be wrong. As a Statistician, I am very aware
that tree-ring dating is a statistical exercise, and by definition some
significant matches will be produced which are totally erroneous. The 't'
statistic only indicates the degree of match between the sampled timber and the
master curve. It does not tell us if it is the correct match. However I accept
Fyfield's late 12th century date because, as discussed here, other building with
similar features are also dated to this period. For the later work, my measured
survey of the north arcade showed that the arcade braces, central arcade Post C,
arcade plate and Posts B and D were a complete set with no indication of re-use
(Fig. 17). While this does not verify the late 14th/early 15th century date, the
fact that the tree-ring analysis independently supported this grouping gives
support to the date. A fuller discussion of this building is in Walker (2000)
(Footnote
50).
Plan
The open hall is of two equal bays, and originally had rooms beyond both ends
of the hall. Posts A and E are grooved for planking, showing these formed parts
of closed trusses. Other planking grooves show the north aisle was partitioned
off from the nave in the bays beyond both ends of the open hall. These were in
return aisles, or end aisles, but their exact size is uncertain. The surviving
roof is relatively complete and clearly was hipped at both ends. It may have
been hipped from the top of the end rafters as shown in Fig. 15 - there are
extra pegs in the top of the rafters as shown in the drawing. Alternatively it
may have been hipped from lower down, as shown in Fig. 16. Either way it
definitely took this form after c1400. The two end rafters each have, or had,
two additional collars. The middle one in both end rafters were found to be made
from timber felled some time after 1138 and 1143 respectively - neither have any
sapwood. I suggest, however, these two extra collars are reused timber as they
have completely different lap joints (see Fig. 16). Some timber was clearly
reused at this time - the north central aisle tie, which is tenoned to the c1400
north central Post D, is of reused timber felled in the late 12th century (Fig.
17).
Open Hall
Each bay was 18½ft (5.6m) long between the tie-beams, by almost 16ft (4.88m)
wide between arcade plates, the tops of which are 17ft (5.2m) above the present
ground level. The surviving roof has rafter bracing - a diagonal timber trenched
across the outside of the rafters - which proves the roof retains a complete set
of rafters, apart from the two removed for the inserted chimney stack, and that
the rafters occupy their original positions. The two bays form mirror images of
each other; the west has its collars lap jointed to the west side of the
rafters, while in the east they are jointed to the east face. The central truss
is clasped by two rafters trenched across the ends of the tie-beam. Rafters a
& s (Fig. 15) are clearly the original end rafters as, unlike the other
rafters, both have an additional apex peg running north to south (Fig. 15) as
well as two pegs in the face near the apex.
The original entrance position is not known. The entrance to the c1400 hall
was at the east end and the roof is more heavily smoke blackened in the west
bay.
Features
- The arcade braces, like their c1400 replacements, must have formed a curved
pointed arch. This is because firstly, Post A has the remains of a slightly
curving roll moulding which would have continued up along the inner edge of the
arcade brace. Secondly, the capital is 10¼ft (3.1m) below the arcade plate with
a bay length of 18½ft (5.6m). Semicircular braces require a bay length about
double the distance between the capital and the plate. Grooves show the brace
spandrels were planked on the nave side.
- Arcade Post A has a square plain capital, decorated below with a
combination of 'V' and semicircular mouldings (Figs. 4c, & 15). Post E seems similar,
but is mostly covered.
- Arcade Post A is earthfast, as is the c1400 central Post C.
- Arcade Post D has a rear upstand. The top of A has broken away.
- Passing braces were used in the central truss. They are probably not used
in the end trusses, though the upper faces of Posts A and D are not visible on
the nave side. Post A has a square cut pegged mortises near the top on the aisle
side which could have been for a brace descending across the aisle (see Fig. 15 and inset). More
likely it was for an oriel window, as Post D at the east end does not have a
similar pegged mortise.
- The passing braces in the central truss may have continued into the aisles
as shown in Fig. 15,. In
the c1400 rebuild, the upper set of braces rise only from the arcade posts with
a lower set passing from tie-beam to aisles, parallel with the newly raised
aisle roof (
Fig. 2b). This lower set reused the notched lap joint seatings in the late
12th century tie-beam. As originally built, the braces may have been parallel to
the nave rafters. Each set of braces consisted of two blades clasping the arcade
post and tie-beam.
- The c1400 rebuild had floating tie-beams across each bay, for which only
the empty dovetails seatings remain. The late 12th century hall probably also
had these floating tie-beams, as the dovetails are of the housed barefaced type
with square entrant shoulders, a form used in other early aisled halls (Footnote
51), and the type used for the late 12th century central tie-beam (see Fig. 7a,).
- The end trusses had planking infill which rose behind the nave braces.
Grooves show the spandrels of these braces were also infilled with planking on
the hall side.
- No 'V' mortises are used in Post A, and the arcade and nave braces were
chase-tenoned and pegged.
- Open unrefined entry notched laps are used in the central tie-beam ( Fig. 5).
- The collars are lap jointed to rafters with a housed bareface dovetail ( Fig. 15,).
- The size of the aisles is uncertain. The ends of the rafters are splayed
off for aisle rafters, suggesting these continued down at the same pitch as over
the nave. If the aisle wall plate was level with the top of the capital as
suggested in Fig. 15, then
the aisle width would have been nearly half that of the nave. However this is
much greater than for any of the other timber aisled halls considered, where the
width is around 35-40% of the nave (Table 2).
The Knights Templar Hall, Temple Balsall, West Midlands
(Figs. 2b, 18, 19)
Map ref: SP 207759
This is the preceptory hall of the Knights Templar. It was a fully
timber-framed building, and the timbers for the arcade posts were felled
1176-1221 (Footnote
52). The manor was fully developed by 1185, and Nat Alcock in his analysis,
from which most of the description below is taken, suggests it must have
included a manor house (Footnote
53).
Fig. 18. Temple Balsall, West Midlands - Partial reconstruction as
originally built (Based mainly on drawings by N W Alcock (Med Arch 1982, 157))
Fig. 19. Temple Balsall, West Midlands - Partial
reconstruction after aisles rebuilt (Based mainly on drawings by N W Alcock (Med
Arch 1982, 157))
Plan
The building consists of a two bay open hall running south-west to north-east
(called here south to north); with another bay beyond the hall to the south
which survives along with its original roof. The open hall's original roof has
gone. There was probably another room to the north formerly as the finished face
of the open hall's north truss is towards the hall, not flush with the exterior.
All was in-line under a single roof. All three surviving bays are of equal size.
The open hall is 31ft long by 17ft between the arcade plates (9.45x5.18m), the
tops of which are 19½ft (5.9m) above the ground. The building was gabled at the
south end, not hipped. The position of the entrance and internal doors is not
known. The southern most arcade posts have been removed but all six in the open
hall survive.
Features
Figures 18 & 19 shows the main features and the 14th century
developments:
- The arcade braces are straight and square-sectioned, 9in (0.22m), rising at
450, and 'V' mortised to both post and plate.
- The central arcade posts and those at the south end of the hall (those to
the north are not fully visible), stand on stone pads, taper from 1½ft (0.44m)
square at the base to 1ft 2in (0.35m) at the top, and lean-in towards the nave.
- The posts have an upstand behind the plate (see scarf inset in Fig. 18).
They have no capitals.
- Each truss has a strainer beam plus a tie-beam above. The strainer beam in
the north truss (CC') is original, but those in the other two trusses are not
smoke blackened and must be 17th century replacements. Because all the
tie-beams, and the roof over the hall, are 17th century, it is not certain that
any of the trusses originally had tie-beams. There is, however, a precedent for
the combination of tie-beams and strainer beams: Foulbridge, North Yorkshire,
another Templar's aisled hall built of timbers felled in 1288, has both
tie-beams and strainer beams on each truss (Footnote
54).
- The passing braces are notched lapped to the posts with a refined entry
open joint. They did not continue across the aisles, and consisted of a single
blade, halved across one side of the strainer beam. In addition a brace, 'V'
tenoned to the arcade post, rose below the passing braces to the strainer beam.
This and the bottom of the passing braces up to the top of the strainer beam,
survive only in the north truss.
- There were floating tie-beams across the middle of each bay, for which
empty 'V' barefaced lap dovetails (Fig. 19) remain in the arcade plates.
Dovetails at the end of the south bay may have been for angle corner, or
'dragon', ties at the corners. Another set of dovetails just south of the
central truss (Fig. 18) could have been for either angle-ties or another
floating tie-beam.
- Eight common rafters couples survive over the south bay. They have a collar
with queen struts (see Fig. 18), and the roof had 'rafter' braces. The collars
and the top of the struts have open refined-entry notched-lap joints, while a
barefaced dovetail (Fig. 18) was used for the bottom of struts. The bottom of
the rafters is not visible.
- The closed truss at the south end of the open hall (BB' in Fig. 2b) was
infilled with planking below the strainer beam and across the aisles. Slots
exist on both sides of the two arcade posts (see the scarf inset in Fig. 18) and
a short length of plank survives in the outer edge of Post B (Footnote
55). Possibly there was no infill above the tie-beam as all the rafters in
the south bay are heavily smoke blackened, but this could be due to later
alterations (see below). The surviving arcade posts are also smoke blackened.
- The scarf joints in the arcade plates are short, through edge-splayed and
tabled scarfs with three vertical pegs, splayed at a 400 slope, not around 300
as found in mid-13th and 14th century aisled halls. Those in the east plate
slope down from south to north, those in west plate from north to south, showing
the east plate was laid south to north, and the west north to south.
- The aisles were rebuilt in the 14th century with a slightly shallower roof
pitch than over the nave ( Fig 2b).
The 14th century aisle posts are jowled, and have thin braces forming a pointed
arch across the aisle. These braces on posts A & B (Fig. 2b) have
quarter-round mouldings, but those on A' & B' have a simple chamfer (Footnote
56). The lower part of the north truss is not visible. The style, mouldings
and the fact that the braces cover a planking groove in AA', suggests that the
aisles are later. These braces are tenoned to the aisle post by numerous pegs,
but by a single peg to the arcade post (Fig. 19). The chamfers on the nave side
of the arcade posts finish in a run-out stop, but on the aisle side in a step
stop level with the 14th century aisle tie, suggesting that the aisle chamfer
has been extended. In the reconstruction in Fig. 18, it is suggested the roof
continued in line over the aisles and that the aisle tie was lower, jointed to
the arcade post by the single peg that now holds the 14th century arch brace.
- When the aisles were altered, truss AA' (Fig. 2b) may have been converted
to an open truss, giving a three bay hall, as the new 14th century aisles appear
to be open. This may explain why the surviving roof over the south bay is smoke
blackened.
Footnotes
38. VA20, 46.
39. Blair 1987, 61.
40. This is
the plate from which the clerestorey rose.
41. Cooper
1985, 30.
42. Based on RCHME drawings.
43. For details see Alcock & Buckley 1987.
44. Cooper 1985, 28.
45. Cooper
1985, 29.
46. Cooper 1985, 29.
47. Smith 1955.
48. VA 28,135.
49. VA30, 118.
50. Walker
2000
51. Walker 1994, 136.
52. VA24, 49.
53. Alcock 1982,
157.
54. RCHME 1987, 17.
55. Alcock 1982, 157.
56. Alcock
1982, 157.
Go to:
Part
1: General discussion
Part 3:
More details and Bibliography
