Download vaulted cellars, yorkersgate

VAULTED CELLAR, 29 YORKERSGATE
MALTON, NORTH YORKSHIRE
The cellars at 29, Yorkersgate were investigated during the course of
refurbishment works to the building above. The cellars are to be used as the
beer cellar for a restaurant above. The floor of the cellar had been disturbed
and some of it removed to facilitate the laying of floor-joists and chipboard
sheeting. The debris as heaped outside appeared to be a mixture of earth and
rubble stone, some of the stones being quite large, but not flagstones.
looking east
The cellar comprises a single, segmental barrel-vault, running east to west,
parallel with the road. The vault springs as a segmental arch from low stone
walls, and is divided into two main rooms, with a smaller room within the
westernmost of these, on the south (river) side. This small space is formed on
two sides by relatively modern brick walls, otherwise by original stone walls and
vaulting. The doorway between the two main sections has a robust timber
frame, with timber lintols above and stone infill to the soffit of the vault.
The walls and the vault are built of oolitic limestone of a relatively coarse
texture, whitish beige in colour. The stone voussoirs of the vault are tightly
jointed, bed-heights being typically 3 inches, with some courses 2 and 4
inches. The stone of the side and end and dividing wall is more irregular and of
a wider variety of bed-height. The stones were selected for purpose, therefore.
The bedding medium of the walls would appear to be earth, not lime, but the
vault is bedded in a soft lime mortar rich in lime and stone dust, without any
apparent sand content. It is very difficult to distinguish the lime from the stone
visually. There is a fair amount of lime mortar on the underside of the vault.
These are patches of bedding mortar that fell during the setting of the vault
stones upon the timber centring; they were compressed between the soffit of
the stone and the centring and were never removed when the centring was
struck. These have set hard for a lime mortar, suggesting considerable age. ( A
lime mortar that is not subject to decay mechanisms and was initially wellcured will continue to harden over the centuries; a very old lime mortar will
ultimately approach the hardness of a cement-based mortar).
One stone was removed by the contractor to allow pipes to be passed through
the vault. This has allowed a partial inspection through the thickness of the
vault. On the basis of this, the depth of the stones in the vault is 12 inches.
These stones are wider at the top than the bottom, having been dressed to fit.
Above the vault is a thick layer that possibly formed the floor of the house
above, as well as back-fill above the vault. Floor joists of the existing building
have been laid onto this layer. It is made up of chips of limestone (consequent
upon the dressing of the vault stones), and an orange-brown clay/earth. At the
point of the limited excavation, this layer is some 10 inches thick. The joists of
the floor above probably touch the highest point of the arch (see attached
measured drawings).
There are remnants of earth plaster on some sections of the side walls.
Earth plaster speaks of antiquity, but would also have had a function, helping to
regulate the relative humidity of the air within the cellar, maintaining it at
around 40%. The cellar is currently much damper than this. The internal doorframe is saturated.
There are a large number of circular holes in the walls of the cellar. These may
be the anchorage for wooden pegs. Their distribution suggests that these pegs
were associated with timber panelling that may have lined the cellar walls at
one time, superceding earth plaster as the wall finish. They may have been
hangers.
In the west wall of the second chamber, there are sockets that would probably
have held the ends of timber or even stone shelving. On this wall, towards the
door between the chambers, a stone projects at low level which may have had a
similar purpose.
shelving sockets
The cellar is evenly 220 inches wide between the side walls. The west chamber
is 220 inches long. The wall between the two chambers is 25 inches thick, and
the east chamber 128 inches long. The height of the vault at its centre, to the
top of the threshold of the doorway between the chambers is 82.5 inches. The
early floor level was probably 5 inches below this. The arc of the semi-circular
vault is interrupted at the sides by low walls. These are 49 inches high from
estimated floor level. The span of the arch from this level is also 49 inches. The
centre of this arch is 176 inches.
north-west
To the north (road) side, one in each room of the cellar, are two blocked
window openings, each with wide splays and thin sandstone cills.
The north-west window is centred in the wall, below a semi-circular sub-vault
74 inches wide at the cill level and springing line. Splays take the opening back
to the actual window, which is 35 inches wide, 38 inches high. The splays are
stepped and have been reduced in angle since the vault was built (unlike on the
other window). There was most likely a timber window-frame within this
opening, the depth of which was 9 inches as evidenced by a remnant plaster
line to the stone jambs. The timber window frame may not be contemporary
with the construction of the stone opening. The wall beneath is 25 inches thick.
The opening is blocked for 16 inches above cill-level by infill, which would
seem to be in distinct layers. 6 inches up there is a layer of oolitic limestone,
with crushed stone and dust layers above and below. There is some soil mixed
into the layer above. Above this infill, the opening is blocked by two sandstone
slabs on edge. They are rounded on one edge and would appear to be old
steps.
The north east window opening is not centred in the wall. It is blockedwith
coursed limestone rubble, but also with very wet and wet-rotted timber that
were most likely an old timber window frame. The opening is 36 inches wide,
38 inches high. The splays are 26 inches long. The span of the sub-vault is 74
inches. Their radius is 37 inches. The depth of the wall to the blocking is 19
inches. It is safe to assume the full wall depth is 25 inches.
These windows are contemporary with the walls and vaulting of the cellar The
head-height required to approach them is formed by semi-circular arches that
cut into the semi-circular vault and fade to a point at the mitre with the main
vault, as would be dictated by the geometry of the vaulting. These spring from
the low walls. The current pavement level of Yorkersgate is above the level of
the top of these windows. However, their design suggests very strongly that
these were originally window openings, and not chutes. The implication is that
the ground level when the cellar was built was somewhere around the cill level
of the window openings, and that the low walls only were underground, if,
indeed, they were at all. If so, the ground would have helped to absorb the
outward thrust of the vault. There has been no deflection at all of the vault, no
spreading of the arch or subsequent subsidence. To all intents and purposes, it
is as good as the day it was built.
north-east
The cills are between 50 and 60 inches below pavement level (there is a
gradient). Excavations in Yorkersgate during the nineteenth century found the
Norman layers to be some 4.5 feet below then ground level near Butchers
Corner.
At the west end, the wall of the cellar is below the ground of the former
passageway (currently blocked). The brick wall of the floors above sits upon the
vault. The bricks of this wall are 10 inches long, 2.5 inches high. It is
approximately 13 inches thick. There is a blocked doorway or window from the
house to the passageway, the timber lintol over remaining. This could not have
been there when the chimney breast existed at this level. The west wall of the
house is built of brick and rises from the vault itself. This is unlike the walls
elsewhere in the house, which rise from the full-depth of the cellar walls. The
bricks are of an unusual size
( 9 ¾” x 4 ½” x 2 ½”). The brick wall is 13” thick and rises the full height of the
main body of the building, but is absent at the attic level. It is very likely that
this wall dates from a widening of the passageway to the side of the house, the
outside wall-line of which would previously have been some 28” further west.
The passageway lintol has a small bead moulding on its underside. This
moulding is repeated on the joists above the current ground-floor of the main
house, suggesting that these were installed at a similar time, and that the
rebuilding of the west wall occurred at the same time also. For the passageway
to have been useable, the level of Yorkersgate would have had to have been not
much lower than it is now, since had it been any lower, the structure of the
vaulted cellar would have been seriously disrupted. It is likely that the widening
of the passageway was associated with increasing volumes of river traffic,
suggesting that the alterations hereabouts occurred around 1700. The main
port area was immediately south of 29 Yorkersgate. However, the joists in the
first floor are probably not in their original location, having previously been the
beams of a typically Elizabethan ceiling (see below). The widening of the
passageway may have occurred earlier than 1700, therefore, perhaps as early
as 1600.
There is a stone stair , with brick chutes to either side, to the north side of the
western room of the cellar. The vault is carried above the door opening at the
foot of these stairs by a robust lintol that passes some five feet into the
masonry on either side of the 5 foot door opening. It is 15’ long, as seen, with
one end built into the west wall. It is 8 inches square in section.
The underside of this timber has been chamfered to form a simple, shallow
arch the width of the stone stair, and has rebates cut into either side that may
have held earlier door jambs.
However, there are similar rebates evident along the length of this timber,
including in sections embedded in the masonry, suggesting that it was recycled
from an earlier timber-framed building. The crudely chamfered arch is likely to
date from this earlier use, but was deliberately centred over the current stair (it
is slightly off-centre within the overall opening, the brick chutes being of
different width).
It would seem certain that this doorway was formed later than the construction
of the vault. The timber has been inserted into the stone work of the vault and
was likely recycled from a demolished earlier structure. The side walls of the
stone stair also. These are almost certainly built using stone removed from the
side wall of the cellar, as well as with stones recycled from the vault. These
latter are smaller in bed-height and have been dressed. The necessity to give
adequate headroom determined the location of the beam/lintol. So deep into
the room, this created a problem passing through the vault and the thickness of
the wall of the house wall above. This was solved pragmatically with the use of
multiple timbers stacked and load-bearing in two wide and 36 inch high steps.
These were lime washed and areas of finish plaster over suggest strongly that
the stair was previously enclosed in some way. It is very likely that when the
vaulted cellar was built, a doorway existed at this point that led out to ground
level, at the same level as the cellar floor. Such an egress remains in the vaulted
stone cellar beneath the George Hotel, further down Yorkersgate. The groundlevels were lower behind than in front of the houses. However, the passageway
to the west necessitated the building up of the ground to the back of the house,
leading to the need for steps down into the cellar and resulting in the
complicated transition through the building to make this possible.
south-east doorway
chamfered doorway arch
The pragmatism of this opening is at odds with the consummate and calculated
craftsmanship of the main body of the cellar. The perfectgeometry of the cellar,
whilst necessary for the long-term success of the structure, is nonetheless
notable. The vault has not shifted or deformed at all since it was constructed.
The equivalence in the window opening dimensions; the ‘roundness’ of the
relative dimensions throughout suggest a careful setting out; they suggest that
plans and drawings preceded its construction. The vault was built by highly
skilled stonemasons, presumably under the charge of a master mason who
would have been responsible for the design, fully conversant with the geometry
and engineering experience of their craft.
Moreover, the construction of the vault would have required like skills of
carpenters. The accuracy of the built vault would have depended upon the
manufacture of custom-built and accurate timber centring of a robust nature,
probably framed. The dead-weight of the arch during construction, and until
the locking up of it with the final course of key-stones at the top of the arch
would have been immense.
The relative complexity of the task, and the employment of highly skilled
masons and carpenters would have been expensive in any age, and the client
would have had to have been not only wealthy but to have had particular need
of a stone vaulted basement.
There is a timber-framed door surround in the opening through the dividing
wall of the vault. This has oak-pegged mortice and tenon jointing. This doorframe also would appear, therefore to have been recycled, possibly from an
original timber-framed super-structure above the vault.
There is a second, narrow stone stair in the south-east corner of the cellar,
which rises to a blocked doorway into the building above. This stair is original.
It turns from east to south, and has complicated joisting of short timber beams.
Some of these are of a sawn finish; others unreduced. The turning of the stair is
accommodated by the use of a forked timber in the round. The timbers appear
to carry flagstones, or fragments of flagstones, which are somewhat below the
current first floor level. The width of the door opening is 31 inches, narrowing
to 27 inches at the head of the stair. Built into each jamb are three sections of
timber,
the largest of which measures 12 inches by 7 inches in section, 13
inches long. These would seem to be contemporary with the build, and
presumably provided fixing-points for a wooden door of some kind. The
largest of these might be removed and dated using dendrochronology; it is
heartwood.
looking towards lower access
looking upwards, note curvature of walls
The stone of the walls is limestone laid as coursed random rubble, to the north;
stone and 2 inch high brick to the south. The west wall of the stair is earthrendered. The section in brick suggests the possibility of some reduction in
width at some point. The vault is constructed of similar stone, and in similar
style. The cellar has been painted throughout with lime wash, which has
decayed only minimally except where there is significant damp in the masonry.
The dampness is most pronounced on the walls of the north-east corner. This
would seem more likely to be penetrating damp than rising damp. Rising damp
elsewhere in the cellar is probably occurring, but is evaporating into the
atmosphere of the cellar without inducing decay in the lime wash or the mortar.
In the north-east corner, the moisture and salt levels have led to a significant
degradation of the mud mortar of the walls. Mortar is missing to a depth of
about an inch; the mortar that remains is wet and lime wash on the surface of
the stones is sludge-like. It would seem likely that this excess of moisture in
the wall is penetrating from outside. There is a down-pipe from the adjoining
NatWest Bank building at this corner, which has no hopper and which sends
rainwater onto the pavement and on to a drain in the gutter. This drain is
blocked with silt to the cover. It may be that water is collecting behind this
blockage and seeping into the ground beneath the pavement; the drain itself
may have leaks in this area. There were mosquitoes roosting in numbers on the
vault in this area, suggesting the presence of sitting water hereabouts. The only
egress for water collecting or leaking in this area will be through the masonry
of the cellar wall.
The existing lime wash of the walls and vault of the cellar were gently defrassed
as necessary, with a stiff bristle brush. The damp wall was repointed with a soft
hydraulic lime mortar ( a putty lime gauged 50% with hl2 from Tout Quarry,
Somerset), because a pure lime putty would be unlikely to set in the presence of
such moisture. The vault was then lime washed in two coats with a matured
putty lime wash, the damper areas in the walls having first been washed with a
hydraulic lime wash, using lime as above. Any larger holes or open joints were
repointed with lime mortar, but left off the pointing iron and not beaten back
before lime washing. This to allow easy identification of repointed areas in the
future.
It would seem very likely that the vaulted cellar beneath 29, Yorkersgate is of
considerable antiquity.
The rise in the level of the road since the construction of the vault; the location
of the building, close to the river, within the medieval town wall, the antiquity
of Yorkersgate, which was one of the roman (andsubsequent) roads out of
Malton, and headed towards York, all suggest strongly that the vault dates from
the mediaeval period.
Malton was an important Roman settlement, and its importance was maintained
throughout the mediaeval period.
Typically, the burning of largely timber-framed medieval towns was followed by
their reconstruction in masonry. In Malton this happened earlier than
elsewhere: the town was was burned by Archbishop Thurstan of York in
retribution for its having sided with King David of Scotland in 1137. The utility
of stone buildings thereafter would not have been lost on local merchants.
tas-de-charge, groined vault beneath Cross Keys pub
There are other mediaeval vaults in Malton, most notably beneath the Cross
Keys pub and beneath an outbuilding of Abbey House in Old Malton. These two
were monastic in their provenance.
There are cellars beneath the two houses above number 29, numbers 31 and
33 Yorkersgate. Their walls are built of similar limestone, but have no vaulting,
nor evidence of having had vaulting. There are blocked windows to the north
side, however. The floors above are carried on substantial beams. There is a
small brick barrel vault running south from the cellar beneath the house two
doors up the hill, at a right-angle to Yorkersgate, beneath the first of a range of
buildings that run towards the river. This vault is built of 2 inch thick bricks.
There is another brick vault at 90 degrees to the road further up Yorkersgate,
adjoining the access into the old Travis Perkins site.
Bricks were manufactured in East Yorkshire from the 13th century, at least,
earlier than anywhere else in England. Records exist from 1303 of a municipal
brickyard in Hull. When Beverley North Bar was built in 1409, bricks were
supplied by 21 separate and independent brick-makers, suggesting that the
industry thereabouts was by then well-established. Bricks were expensive to
transport and were typically manufactured within 5 miles radius of a project, if
not on-site, in clamp kilns.
The Romans had made bricks and pottery in Malton, and there is every reason
to suppose that bricks were manufactured in Malton and Norton from an early
date. The raw materials were readily available on the south banks of the
Derwent river; there were brick makers active in Norton until recent times. That
there are not more early brick buildings in the town will not be because there
were no brick-makers, but because of readily available and relatively easily won
limestone and sandstone on the outskirts of the town.
The utility of bricks for the construction of barrel-vaults is very high, however,
and would deliver a large saving in the labour cost of selecting and shaping
stone vault voussoirs. As soon as they became available, bricks would have
been the material of choice for this purpose.
brick vault, rear of 33, Yorkersgate
There is also a brick-vaulted cellar beneath the west wing of York House. This
runs the length of the wing, has blocked windows below ground level, and is
interrupted half-way along by a stone staircase that seems unlikely, but may be
original and which is entered from without the building. To the north of the
stair, the vault is lime plastered to a good finish. There is a chuted opening in
the north wall. To the south of the stair, the bricks of the vault are lime-washed
and are slightly stepped one course to another. This is unusual, and suggests
the use of untapered bricks
south vault, York House
The cleanness of the soffits of other brick vaults in the town suggests that the
bricks were manufactured for purpose, with a slight taper to accommodate the
geometry of the vault (and made to a specification worked out from drawings).
The walls of the cellar are built of random coursed limestone rubble, 27 inches
thick, and rise from the bed-rock, ten inches or so of which is visible.
south wall, York House vault, rising from bedrock
south-west window, adapted over time, York House vault
south, plastered vault, York House
The putative date for York House is 1684. My sense is that the footprint and
probably much of the fabric of the house is somewhat older. Huddlestone
quotes a document of 1560 in which Yorkersgate is called Yorkhousegate.
Existing windows have been inserted, the openings in the limestone of the walls
made good around them with sandstone. There are significant areas of the
south-east and west elevations that have been repaired/rebuilt using
sandstone. Beneath the existing staircase there are the vestiges of timberframing, with stave holes for wattle and daub panels, which may well date from
1600, but could be of an earlier date. It is highly likely that there are
‘lost’cellars elsewhere beneath the flag-stoned ground floor of the house.The
west wall at ground floor level is built of stone bedded in mud mortar; the
plaster on the wall is daub.
There is a barrel-vaulted limestone cellar beneath the George Hotel, lower
down Yorkersgate. This runs parallel to the road, but is accessed from the
south via a brick barrel vault at 90 degrees to the stone one. This brick vault is
the most westerly of a pair, the other being a storeroom. Access to the stone
cellar is at floor level. The cellar has a blocked window onto Yorkersgate (now
completely below ground) of similar design to the windows in 29 Yorkersgate.
The span of the vault is 181 inches. It is longer.
northwest window, stone vault, George Hotel
original exit at floor level of vault, George Hotel, exit
passes into brick vault at right angle (below)
brick-vaulted passageway from stone cellar, George Hotel
stair from brick vault, George Hotel
George Hotel, Yorkersgate; second floor a later addition
The stone-vaulted cellars in Malton are almost certain to pre-date the brick
vaulted cellars. It is as likely, however, that the brick vaults in Malton are of
mediaeval origin, albeit later mediaeval than the stone vaults.
Immediately to the west of 29, Yorkersgate is a blocked passage/roadway
comparable to the still existing passageway towards the town centre, Water
Lane. There is a second such blocked passageway beyond the next building to
the west. This building projects south at a right-angle to Yorkersgate. It would
seem very likely that these were the entrances from Yorkersgate into two lanes
that ran down towards the river (the ‘Boat-house’ is a remnant of these
wharves). To the east of number 29, there is an alleyway contained within the
façade of the Nat West Bank. It is likely that houses ran the length of these
lanes, some of which remain to either side. The high wall of the building
between these lanes has blocked windows higher up, suggesting that the now
missing continuation of the row was lower. It would seem likely that hereabouts
(the old Travis Perkins site) was once a bustling commercial area. The alleyways
demarcate mediaeval burgage plots.
It is possible that the original burgage plot of 29 Yorkersgate included the
building next door, crossing the probably narrower passage way between,
which may have been access to a courtyard. The original stone gable of this
building (it has been raised in brick twice since then) is at the same level as the
east off-shoot of number 29. It projects a little further to the south, and is a
little narrower. The original house may have been a C-shape; two wings with a
central open hall above the stone vaulted cellar, not unlike the possible earliest
plan of York House. Alternatively, this house may simply have occupied a
narrower burgage plot. The first floor levels of these buildings are today
contiguous, but this need not always have been so.
Stair to basement of stone building
“Stone basements or ‘cellars’ in the mediaeval ground- or semi-ground-floor
sense remain in many of our towns and cities, such as Canterbury, Chester,
Guildford and Southampton. They formed the lower floor of merchants’ houses,
of which the upper storey, sometimes timber-framed, has been rebuilt. They
may have combined the function of workroom and shop, or a safe storage place
to booth or stall in the street in front, the family and apprentices living in the
rooms above. These basements are sunk some six to ten feet below street level,
though that street level tends to rise as the roads are made up through the
centuries. They were accessible from the street by steps down from a doorway
or hinged flap. The small windows would also be at ground level, placed high in
the cellar wall, and splayed within sideways and doorwards. Often a second
staircase remains, leading to the destroyed or transformed upper floor. There
were three main types of vault or stone ceiling: the barrel vault like a tunnel,
semi-circular in the 12th century, developing into the pointed form in the 13th
century; the groined vault formed by the intersection of two barrel vaults; and
the ribbed vault, where the weak groin intersections were strengthened by
stone arches, these taking the place of temporary wooden centering for the
vaulting cells.” (Margaret Wood, The English Mediaeval House, 1965, p 81;
Phoenix House, London).
It is seductive to conclude that the vaulted cellar beneath 29 Yorkersgate is the
remnant of a 12th century merchants house, possibly timber-framed above, and
that the brick-vaulted cellars elsewhere in Yorkersgate are similarly associated
with later medieval merchants’ houses.
However, a preliminary visual inspection of the masonry structure at least
suggests that some, if not most of the building above may be contemporary
with the vault. The ground floor has been much molested over time, but was
probably a shop-front of some description throughout its history. A large
archway has been introduced to the rear, immediately alongside the blocked
doorway from the cellar. Modern shop windows have been added to the front,
leaving only pillars of earlier wall. All older walls, however, are 25 inches thick
wherever this may be measured. This is the thickness of the basement walls.
The ground floor is longer than the vault internally by a little more than the
width of the stone staircase, which passes without the vaulted area at the east
end. This is because the west wall is thinner than other walls in the building. It
is built of brick (9 ¾“ brick) and rises from the stone vault. The west wall forms
the wall of the passage way to the west. The building contains no fireplace at
this level. There is the remnant of a very shallow chimney breast at the west
end, which was removed in the past and supported just below ceiling level.
There is a 17th century fireplace above and a chimney breast some 65” wide.
The wall does not continue at attic level, there being only the chimney stack,
which measures 40” x 18”. The brick gable wall at the west was built later than
the remainder of the house (see above), and the chimney stack is contemporary
with this rebuild. It is possible that there was an older fireplace at the west end,
which would make sense of the huge wall thickness at cellar level alongside the
stair. However, there is no soot staining to the stone walls above. If the original
house is as old as is at least possible, then there would have been no hooded
hearth, and no masonry chimney until the rebuilding of the west wall.
The 1854 Ordnance Survey map shows a gap behind the off-shoot before the
range of buildings to which it is now joined. The range alongside to the west
continued to the same point as the range behind number 31. This gap had been
built up by 1892. The building on the site of the present NatWest bank was
large in 1854 and extended well beyond the off-shoot of number 29. By 1892,
it had been reduced to its current footprint.
The first floors of 29 to 33 Yorkersgate have been divided up in the past for
offices, and are access extends throughout. There are run plaster cornices that
predate this division and are probably 17th century in date. A corridor has been
formed that runs to the offshoot of number 29.
A small area of plaster was removed from the east wall. This wall was of stone
ashlar, chisel-faced, 10” in bed height and laid with 1/8th of an inch joints. The
wall was plastered with a 1” thick coat of daub; mud with significant amounts of
straw. Over this was a 2/8ths layer of lime plaster. The mud plaster is soundly
attached and was left with a smooth and even finish.
The reveal of one of the windows had loose plaster which was removed in part,
revealing a formed limestone rubble reveal behind the ashlars of the front face,
which was bedded in a mud mortar. The stone had been plastered with daub to
a fine face which had then been lime washed. Lime plaster has been laid over
this in later years. However, the earliest decorative finish would appear to have
been lime wash over daub.
West reveal, 2nd window, first floor, north elevation
More recent sash windows have been installed in what would appear to be
original openings. The earlier openings are deeper than the current ones. The
most westerly opening extended almost to floor level and seems in all
likelihood to have been a doorway. (See drawings for dimensions and
locations).
Above the middle window, plaster has fallen away from rotted lath that was
attached to a large timber, 13” deep, its inside face in line with the inside wall.
Stone heads of more recent windows are in front of this timber, the top of the
sash windows also. It is almost certainly the underside of the original wallplate, on top of which has been built a brick wall associated with the later
raising of the roof. It is much larger and of a different character to any one
might expect to find over a window of the Victorian period, from which periods
the existing windows might be expected to date. Drawing the house in section,
after a measured survey, the line of the earlier roof sits exactly onto this timber
in this location, reinforcing the notion that it is the original wall-plate.
old wall-plate
Floorboards to the first floor have been lifted in the course of wiring works,
exposing the joists. These joists are of sawn timber, 6” high and
5 ½” wide with a wany edge to the top, but with small beaded mouldings to
their underside, which was clearly intended to be seen at the time of their first
use. The few surviving floorboards are 10” wide, 1” thick oak boards. There are
old joints on the joists which strongly suggest that they were originally not
joists at all, but the beams of a typically Elizabethan, or slightly later ceiling.
The joints were typical of ceilings in which the joists and floorboards ran
parallel to one another, the joists being scribed to fit around the wany edge at
the top of the beams, which strengthened the joint. I would suggest that these
joists are in fact beams recycled from the ceiling (and attic floor) above and that
they date from the closing down of an earlier first floor hall at this time. The
timber-framed doorway in the attic (and probably the one in the cellar) likely
date from this period also. The original Elizabethan innovation was to facilitate
the introduction of a decorated plaster ceiling, the undersides of beams and
joists being in the same plane. In 29 Yorkersgate, the underside of the beams
were intended to be seen. This, coupled with the design of the earlier roof
truss, may suggest a date of around 1600. Utilitarian roof- trusses of sawn
timber became common after 1600, the emphasis being upon storage (Charles,
p.89)
They may have been recycled at the time of the rebuilding of the west wall, or
when the second roofing took place, or when the roof was raised. None of these
events occurred at the same time: the rebuild of the west wall predates the
raising of the roof, and the rebuilding of the south off-shoot gable in brick.
north elevation, 29 Yorkersgate (centre of picture)
Externally the elevation has been much interfered with at ground floor level by
the introduction of shop windows along most of its length. Very little earlier
masonry remains at this level on this elevation. Above this, however, the
elevation is of coursed and dressed stone. This is limestone. It is dressed in
similar fashion to the stone of the cellar vault, with a blade of about 1”, most
likely of a chisel. A little above the likely top of the original wall plate line,
there is a moulded cornice, which is simple and projects very little from the wall
line. It is unlikely that this cornice detail is contemporary with the main body of
the house, and may date from the 1600s or 1700s. The windows in this
elevation are of 19th century proportion, with heads of three stones with a
projecting keystone. These have been introduced, replacing earlier windows of
unknown design. It is possible that earlier windows (and a door) were of stone,
with semi-circular arches above. This might be established by more detailed
(but invasive) investigation. The elevation has not been rendered, but has been
painted with a modern paint. The arrangement of window openings in the south
elevation is more random. The apparently more symmetrical arrangement of
the windows to the north is a more modern deception of course.
east gable, truss pattern post-1600
ashlar, east gable, attic level
The second, attic floor is accessed today from the building next door. The roof
has been raised in the past, the increase in wall-height and the change of pitch
constructed of brick and stone rubble on the south side. The floor level has
been raised 5 ½”, probably when the roof was raised.
However, the east gable of the older structure is visible and is clearly defined by
plaster applied before the roof was raised. The wall of the gable is built of
hand-masoned, high quality limestone ashlar blocks to a point 104“ below the
apex of the older roof-line. These blocks are 8 ½” in the bed, with 1/8 inch
joints, probably of putty lime mortar. The gable above this is built of bricks.
These are the same dimension as those of the roof-raising (9 ¼” x3”) but were
clearly laid up at an earlier time. The pattern of the timbers of an earlier roof is
evident on the plaster of the gable, where paint has been applied around them.
The framing of this earlier roof is not untypical of the early 1600s, although it
may easily be later. There are traces of earth plaster beneath the lime plaster on
the limestone, but none on the bricks. This roof must have been installed after
the rebuild of the gable, and was therefore a replacement of the earliest,
original roof. The second roof was probably installed to the same pitch. This
was 45 degrees.
limestone ashlar
It is most unusual for the inner leaf of a gable end to be built of such highquality stone, even where the outer face might be. It is quite possible that this
stone was reclaimed from the gate-houses of the Roman fort. If the house is of
an early date, then this possibility becomes more likely.
At this level, there is a stair down into the attic of an off-shoot building. This
also has been re-roofed, but to its original pitch. The floor level has been
lowered. This was previously an attic storeroom. The purlin of this roof rests
upon a stone corbel. There is a large stone keystone at the apex of the roof.
These are unusual details, which are unlikely except in the context of the
masons who rebuilt the gable reinstating/reusing details they found during the
dismantlement of the previous decayed gable.
south gable, off-shoot
The south gable wall of the off-shoot is 19” thick, built of 9 ¼” x4 ½” X 2 ½”
bricks, and are similar to those of the east gable rebuild. It is probable that this
gable was rebuilt with bricks above the limestone wall below. Although the floor
of the off-shoot is currently lower than the attic floor, this floor has been
lowered in the past (timbers above this stair have the same bead moulding as
joists/beams in the first floor, and will be of the same provenance, and likely
recycled) There is a timber-framed doorway between the two attics. The floors
were previously at the same level. This is the level of the top of the east wall of
the off-shoot. There is a remnant joist end of the earlier floor in the north wall.
A staircase has been introduced. At the level of the likely early wall-plate line of
the core house, the wall has been raised with 2” bricks to accommodate the
raised roof.
east wall, off-shoot, lowered floor, old window of room below
The lowering of the floor level turned a storage space in the off-shoot roof into
a habitable room. The drop in floor-level is reflected down through the offshoot, meaning that floors at all levels cut across windows.
Access, south off-shoot
The plaster within this offshoot attic, against the wall of the core building is
daubed mud. This has a bare minimum of lime content, but a lot ofstraw. It has
a finish coat of lime plaster over. The wall is limestone rubble.
south wall, core building
The west gable of the building is also the wall of the building above the
passage way. The chimney stack of the core building remains, but is solitary in
the room. The east gable has been raised also, but was previously consistent
with the older line of the east gable, a line marked by mud plaster, without
straw, but haired. The bricks of the earlier gable are 9 ¾” x 4 ½” x 2 ½”; those
of the raising 8 ¼” x 4 ¼” x 2 ½”. There is a second chimney breast against this
gable. The bricks are more recent than those of the gable.
All of these signs raise the intriguing possibility that the vault and house are
contemporary, are very old and would seem to confirm the high status of this
building. The use of limestone throughout may also be significant. The earliest
buildings in Malton and Old Malton are built of limestone, not sandstone. It is
at least possible that this building as a whole is a mediaeval stone house of
considerable antiquity. It has been subject to changes and to a gradual
evolution, but holds the clues of this within its fabric. It would be possible to
construct a good case for a careful and considered investigation of the building
in selected areas, subject to a like for like reinstatement of removed surfaces
(mainly plaster). This possibility merits closer consideration. What is certain is
that the house is very much older than the listing, which registers it as 18th
century.
“In the ancient core of a typical city or market town the burgage plots or
building sites were long and narrow, stretching from the street back towards
the river, the walls, or some other part of town. Every foot of frontage was
commercially valuable, every foot of depth provided building land, to be used
as population increase or commercial expansion demanded. Usually it was
necessary to provide access within each plot to its own backland. There were
various arrangements of hall and kitchen, workshop and sales area, but the
tendency was for the front of the plot to be built up higher and higher and the
depth to be built up deeper and deeper, either with a succession of transverse
buildings separated by courts or light wells or with a line of buildings fronting
onto a passage or alleyway. During the past 200 years or so there have been
layers of fashionable elevation applied to the frontage but buildings hidden in
the depths have been little altered” ( RW Brunskill, Traditional Buildings of
Britain, An Introduction to Vernacular Architecture, Victor Gollancz, London
1992).
burgage plot, rear of Yorkersgate
This describes very well the pattern of architecture and layout of the area
previously occupied by Travis Perkins, 29 Yorkersgate and Yorkersgate as a
whole up to York House. It is notable, however, that 29 Yorkersgate and the
George Hotel run parallel to the road, occupying quite wide burgage plots. The
range that runs south from 29 left a sizeable yard. The implication is that these
two houses were built early; that the pressure on the land was less intensive at
the time they were built. Later brick cellars and plots in Yorkersgate are at 90
degrees to the road and occupy narrower plots between the alleyways.
A 1728 painting of Malton owned by the Fitzwilliam Estate shows the east gable
and south wall of the off-shoot very clearly. There is a small dormered attic
window in the east roof slope of the off-shoot. Tantalisingly, the painting also
shows a tower behind and to the south of the house, probably on the adjoining
burgage plot to the west, below the existing house next door. The tower has is
open at the top beneath the hipped roof, with a row of mullioned openings on
each of the two illustrated sides. This could be a church tower; it could be the
dovecot Hudleston records as having existed in Yorkersgate. It is a significant
structure, the foundations of which are likely to remain beneath the asphalt
yard. The ground levels are raised within the former burgage plot, falling away
quite steeply to the concreted area of the former wharves to the north of the
boat-house. If the tower existed, then this is its most likely location. The
ordnance survey map of 1892 shows two buildings below 33 Yorkersgate, the
first long, the lowest square on plan. It seems remarkable that such a structure
seems to have fallen from the record.
southernmost gable, old Travis Perkins site
Any redevelopment of the old Travis Perkins site is certain to encounter
extensive and significant archaeology.
Any work should be undertaken with the presumption that the existing
buildings and archaeology of the site will be mediaeval. This presumption in
favour of mediaeval fabric might reasonably be applied throughout the town of
New Malton, within the bounds of the Old Town Wall.
brick vault to north of this range
west windows, same range
Bibliography
Margaret Wood, The English Mediaeval House, 1965, Phoenix House, London;
R W Brunskill, Traditional Buildings of Britain, An Introduction to Vernacular
Architecture, 1992, Victor Gollancz, London;
F W B Charles, Conservation of Timber Buildings, 1984, Donhead, Shaftesbury;
J A Wright, Brick Building in England from the Middle Ages to 1550, 1972, John
Baker, London;
John Blair, Nigel Ramsey, editors, English Medieval Industries, 1991, Hambledon
Press, London;
R W Brunskill, Brick Building in Britain, 1990, Victor Gollancz, London;
Gerard Lynch, Brickwork, history, technology, practice, Vol. 1, 1994, Donhead,
Shaftesbury;
N A Hudleston, History of Malton and Norton, 1962, G A Pindar & Son,
Scarborough;
R K Morriss, The Archaeology of Buildings, 2000, Tempus, Stroud.