historic floors ~ care and conservation

Historic Floors: Their Care and Conservation

Butterworth-Heinemann Series in Conservation and Museology

Series Editors: Arts and Archaeology

Andrew OddyBritish Museum, London

Architecture

Derek LinstrumFormerly Institute of Advanced Architectural Studies, University of York

US Executive Editor: Norbert S. BaerNew York University, Conservation Center of the Institute of Fine Arts

Consultants: Sir Bernard Feilden

David BomfordNational Gallery, London

C.V. HorieManchester Museum, University of Manchester

Colin PearsonCanberra College of Advanced Education

Sarah StaniforthNational Trust, London

Published titles: Care and Conservation of Geological Material (Howie)Care and Conservation of Natural History Collections (Carter, Walker)Care and Conservation of Palaeontological Material (Collins)Chemical Principles of Textile Conservation (Tímár-Balázsy, Eastop)Conservation and Restoration of Ceramics (Buys, Oakley)Conservation of Brick (Warren)Conservation of Building and Decorative Stone, Volumes 1 and 2(Ashurst, Dimes)Conservation of Earth Structures (Warren)Conservation of Historic Buildings (Feilden)Conservation of Historic Timber Structures: An Ecological Approach(Larson, Marstein)Historic Floors: their Care and Conservation, paperback edition (Fawcett)A History of Architectural Conservation, paperback edition (Jokilehto)Lacquer: Technology and Conservation (Webb)The Museum Environment, 2nd Edition (Thomson)Radiography of Cultural Material (Lang, Middleton)The Textile Conservator’s Manual, 2nd Edition (Landi)Upholstery Conservation (Gill, Eastop)

Related titles: The Complete Works of Robert and James Adam and Unbuilt Adam (King)Digital Collections (Keene)Edwardian Civic Buildings (Fellows)Lighting Historic Buildings (Phillips)Materials for Conservation (Horie)The Organic Chemistry of Museum Objects, 2nd Edition (Mills, White)Remedial Treatment of Buildings, 2nd edition (Richardson)Restoration of Motion Picture Film (Meyer, Read)Risk Assessment for Object Conservation (Ashley-Smith)Victorian Houses and their Details (Long)

Historic Floors: Their Care and Conservation

Edited by

Jane Fawcett

Published in associationwith ICOMOS UK(International Council onMonuments and Sites)

With the generous assistanceof The Manifold Trustand Historic Scotland

OXFORD AUCKLAND BOSTON JOHANNESBURG MELBOURNE NEW DELHI

Butterworth-HeinemannLinacre House, Jordan Hill, Oxford OX2 8DP225 Wildwood Avenue, Woburn, MA 01801-2041A division of Reed Educational and Professional Publishing Ltd

A member of the Reed Elsevier plc group

First published 1998 as Historic Floors: Their History and ConservationPaperback edition 2001

© Jane Fawcett 1998, 2001Chapter 18 © Parliamentary copyright 1998, 2001

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any material form (including photocopying or storing in any medium by electronic means and whether or not transiently or incidentally to some other use of this publication) without the written permission of the copyright holder except in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 or under the terms of a licence issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London, England W1P 9HE.Applications for the copyright holder’s written permissionto reproduce any part of this publication should be addressed to the publishers

British Library Cataloguing in Publication DataHistoric floors: their history and conservation. –

(Conservation and museology series)1. Floors – Europe – History 2. Floors – Europe –Conservation and restorationI. Fawcett, Jane II. ICOMOS UK721.6'094

Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data

Historic floors: their history and conservation/edited by JaneFawcett.p. cm. – (Butterworth-Heinemann series in conservation andmuseology)Includes bibliographical references and index.ISBN 0 7506 2765 41. Floors – England – History. 2. Floors – England – Conservationand restoration. 3. Historic buildings – England – Conservationand restoration. I. Fawcett, Jane. II. SeriesNA2970.H57 98–10712721'.6'0942–dc21 CIP

ISBN 0 7506 2765 4

Composition by Scribe Design, Gillingham, Kent

Printed and bound in Great Britain by The Bath Press, Bath

To my beloved husband Teddy

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Foreword ix

Series editors’ preface xi

Editor’s introduction xiii

Acknowledgements xv

List of contributors xvii

1 Decorated pavements and floor monuments in European cathedrals and churchesJane Fawcett 1

2 The archaeology of church and cathedral floorsWarwick Rodwell 41

3 The two great marble pavements in the sanctuary and shrine areas ofCanterbury Cathedral and Westminster AbbeyTim Tatton-Brown 53

4 Archaeological research: Canterbury Cathedral nave floorKevin Blockley 63

5 Ledger stones. Documentary sources: York MinsterBernard Barr 69

6 York Minster ledger stones: conservation optionsCharles Brown 79

7 The surveyor’s approach to recording floorsRoss W.A. Dallas 85

8 Photographic recording of floor surfaces and componentsRobert Skingle 94

9 The retrieval of damaged inscriptions through remote sensing techniquesChristopher J. Brooke 101

10 The preservation of the records of historic floorsMark Dorrington 106

Contents

viii Contents

11 Records and computerizationDiana Hale 109

12 Winchester Cathedral: conserving the retrochoir pavementPeter Bird 113

13 Use and abuse: management and good practice in cathedrals and greaterchurchesJane Fawcett 120

14 Secular buildings: tile, mosaic and marble pavements, parquetry floors and carpetsJane Fawcett 129

15 The conservation of the excavated floorDaryl Fowler 164

16 Seventeenth-century and later floors at Ham HouseChristopher Rowell 172

17 Historic floors at risk: Uppark, a case studyIain McLaren 179

18 Encaustic pavements. Conservation, protection and replacement issues: The Palace of WestminsterA.T. Jardine 187

19 Historic floors at risk: St George’s Hall, LiverpoolDonald Insall 194

20 The open house – the management of visitorsChristopher Hanson-Smith 198

Appendix: English cathedral floor studies – historic features and areas at riskJane Fawcett 205

Glossary 223

Reading list 229

Index 237

This book raises the readers’ awareness of aneglected, but important, subject. It must beread by ecclesiastical and conservation archi-tects, as well as surveyors and all thoseresponsible for the maintenance and manage-ment of historic buildings. It draws attentionto areas of floor at risk, and the location ofhistoric features.

The first chapter and final appendix dealwith cathedrals, churches and chapels, review-ing the conservation of tiles, mosaics, Cosmatiwork, marble and stone pavements, togetherwith ledger slabs and brasses. It is full of infor-mation and outlines the history of each floorsurface. Ledger slabs encapsulate the entirehistory of lettering, from earliest Gothic to thefinest Roman script. Besides iconography, theyprovide information on heraldry and genea-logy. Indeed, once one gets into the habit ofreading these ledgers, one finds clues to localand social history. So many women dying inchildbirth – even a whole family wiped out bysome terrible disease, as were three daughters,aged thirteen, eight and six, of the Rector ofStiffkey in one week in 1771 by a malignantfever.

Each specialist contributor makes usefulpoints. Bernard Barr on documentary sourcesavailable to York Minster, followed by DrCharles Brown dealing with recording ledgersand the possible conservation options. RossDallas reviews surveying techniques, togetherwith their application in practice. Jane Fawcettin her chapter on cathedral floors makes many

useful suggestions for minimizing wear andtear from both liturgical and touristic angles.She berates cathedral chairs as one of the mostdestructive of all church furnishings, andsuggests they should be fitted with protectivepads. In my experience, moving chairs is amajor activity in any cathedral. The emphasison cathedrals and churches may seem toogreat, but they are too important, with theirvaluable floors, to be given less attention.

A tremendous amount of historical informa-tion is also given on the various floor materi-als used in palaces and great houses, such asmarquetry, plaster, scagliola, marble and stone.Floors become an integrated component ofarchitectural composition, as practised byRobert Adam at Syon House, where his carpetdesign follows his decorative designs. DonaldInsall in his chapter on St George’s Hall,Liverpool recognizes the same factor in C.R.Cockerell’s floor designs. The wooden floordesigns in most of the rooms at Ham Housemake an important contribution to the toutensemble in the words of Christopher Rowell,who describes their conservation. Curiously,carpets imported from the Orient from theseventeenth century, superseded ever morecomplex marquetry designs, which originatedin the Renaissance from the architect Serlio.

Floors wear out due to foot traffic, much ofwhich is caused by mass tourism. ChristopherHanson-Smith, in the chapter on managementof visitors, offers several different methods ofcontrolling the capacity of a building. Once

Foreword

this critical capacity is exceeded, damageescalates.

I hope I have convinced the potential readerthat this is a useful and valuable book. It hascertainly raised my own consciousness of theissues involved.

This book is overdue: it had to be written,but it needed Jane Fawcett’s energy anddedication to see that this was done. Her

contribution of three chapters and the finalappendix is formidable and crucial. Her co-ordination of so many contributors was essen-tial and effective!

Sir Bernard Feilden CBEDUniv DLit HonFAIA FSA FRIBA AADipl (Hons)

Director Emeritus ICCROMArchitectural Conservation Consultant

x Foreword

The conservation of artefacts and buildings hasa long history, but the positive emergence ofconservation as a profession can be said todate from the foundation of the InternationalInstitute for the Conservation of MuseumObjects (IIC) in 1950 (the last two words ofthe title being later changed to Historic andArtistic Works) and the appearance soon afterin 1952 of its journal Studies in Conservation.The role of the conservator as distinct fromthose of the restorer and the scientist had beenemerging during the 1930s with a focal pointin the Fogg Art Museum, Harvard University,which published the precursor to Studies inConservation, Technical Studies in the Field ofthe Fine Arts (1932–42).

UNESCO, through its Cultural HeritageDivision and its publications, had always takena positive role in conservation and the founda-tion, under its auspices, of the InternationalCentre for the Study of the Preservation andthe Restoration of Cultural Property, in Rome(ICCROM), was a further advance. The Centrewas established in 1959 with the aims of advis-ing internationally on conservation problems,co-ordinating conservation activators andestablishing standards of training courses.

A significant confirmation of professionalprogress was the transformation at New Yorkin 1966 of the two committees of theInternational Council of Museums (ICOM), onecuratorial on the Care of Paintings (founded in1949) and the other mainly scientific (foundedin the mid-1950s) into the ICOM Committeefor Conservation.

Following the Second International Congressof Architects and Technicians of HistoricMonuments, which met in Venice in 1964, theVenice Charter was promulgated as a declara-tion on the fundamental principles of archi-tectural conservation. In the following year,the International Council of Monuments andSites (ICOMOS) was founded to ‘encouragethe adoption and implementation of interna-tional recommendations concerning monu-ments, groups of buildings and sites’. Sincethen, the national committees and internationalscientific committees of ICOMOS havecontributed to the promulgation of severalinternational charters and guidelines on suchsubjects as historic gardens, historic towns andurban areas, archaeological heritage manage-ment, and training. ICOMOS is also one of thebodies delegated to advise the World HeritageCommittee of UNESCO on the inclusion ofproperties on the World Heritage List. A majorconcern of the various organizations, IIC,ICOM, ICOMOS and ICCROM, is not only toadvance the various technical specializations,but also to emphasize the cohesion of conser-vators and their subjects as an interdisciplinaryprofession.

The use of the term Conservation in the titleof this series refers to the whole subject of thecare and treatment of valuable artefacts bothmovable and immovable, but within the disci-pline conservation has a meaning which isdistinct from that of restoration. Conservationused in this specialized sense has two aspects:first, the control of the environment to

Series editors’ preface

minimize the decay of artefacts and materials;and, second, their treatment to arrest decayand to stabilize them where possible againstfurther deterioration. Restoration is the contin-uation of the latter process, when conserva-tion treatment is thought to be insufficient, tothe extent of reinstating an object, withoutfalsification, to a condition in which it can beexhibited.

In the field of conservation conflicts ofvalues on aesthetic, historical, or technicalgrounds are often inevitable. Rival attitudes andmethods inevitably arise in a subject which isstill developing and at the core of these differ-ences there is often a deficiency of technicalknowledge. That is one of the principal raisonsd’être of this series. In most of these mattersethical principles are the subject of muchdiscussion, and generalizations cannot easilycover (say) buildings, furniture, easel paintingsand waterlogged wooden objects.

A rigid, universally agreed principle is thatall treatment should be adequately docu-mented. There is also general agreement thatstructural and decorative falsification shouldbe avoided. In addition there are three otherprinciples which, unless there are overridingobjections, it is generally agreed should befollowed.

The first is the principle of the reversibilityof processes, which states that a treatmentshould normally be such that the artefact can,if desired, be returned to its pre-treatmentcondition even after a long lapse of time. Thisprinciple is impossible to apply in some cases,for example where the survival of an artefactmay depend upon an irreversible process. Thesecond, intrinsic to the whole subject, is thatas far as possible decayed parts of an artefactshould be conserved and not replaced. Thethird is that the consequences of the ageing ofthe original materials (for example ‘patina’)should not normally be disguised or removed.This includes a secondary proviso that lateraccretions should not be retained under thefalse guise of natural patina.

The authors of the volumes in this seriesgive their views on these matters, where

relevant, with reference to the types of mater-ial within their scope. They take into accountthe differences in approach to artefacts ofessentially artistic significance and to those inwhich the interest is primarily historical,archaeological or scientific.

The volumes are unified by a systematicand balanced presentation of theoretical andpractical material with, where necessary, anobjective comparison of different methodsand approaches. A balance has also beenmaintained between the fine (and decorative)arts, archaeology and architecture in thosecases where the respective branches of thesubject have common ground, for examplein the treatment of stone and glass and inthe control of the museum environment.Since the publication of the first volume ithas been decided to include within the seriesrelated monographs and technical studies. Toreflect this enlargement of its scope theseries has been renamed the Butterworth-Heinemann Series in Conservation andMuseology.

Though necessarily different in details oforganization and treatment (to fit the particu-lar requirements of the subject) each volumehas the same general standard. The aim of theseries is to provide authoritative texts foruniversity level courses in conservation and, atthe same time, be standard reference materialfor practising conservators.

The authors have been chosen from amongthe acknowledged experts in each field, but asa result of the wide areas of knowledge andtechnique covered even by the specializedvolumes in this series, in many instances multi-authorship has been necessary.

With the existence of IIC, ICOM, ICOMOSand ICCROM, the principles and practice ofconservation have become as internationalizedas the problems. The collaboration ofConsultant Editors will help to ensure that thepractices discussed in this series will be applic-able throughout the world.

Derek LinstrumAndrew Oddy

xii Series editors’ preface

The protection and study of historic floors isnot a national, or even a European issue, buta neglected subject which deserves worldwiderecognition. I hope that this book, one of thefirst on the subject, will pave the way for manymore and help to save some of the great floorsof the world, and their records, for posterity.

When I was asked by the publishers to writethis book, they wished me to extend my origi-nal studies on ecclesiastical floors to includerepresentative floors of secular buildings.Furthermore, I was asked to expand my briefto give the book a European dimension. As solittle has been written on the subject, this hasproved a difficult task, and it has been impos-sible to do justice to it in the space available.Such a book cannot be comprehensive and Iregret the inevitable omissions. I haveattempted in chapters 1 and 14 to trace brieflythe development of some of the importantfloors in other parts of Europe outside Britain.

More information is available on the marble,mosaic and parquetry floors of country housesand public buildings than on the ancient andparticularly vulnerable floors of cathedrals andchurches. Both are in danger from overuse.But whereas the repair of decorative floors,although expensive and requiring specialistskills, can be undertaken, it is impossible toreplace a vanished inscription for which thereis no record, the eroded surface of a medievaltile or a lost monumental brass. These, oncedestroyed, are lost irrevocably.

Until recently, the importance of recordinghad not been understood and the destruction

caused to outstanding floors throughout Europeby the dramatic increase in tourism has beendisastrous. Without records the loss is perma-nent, and the speed with which the inexorabletramp of feet has obliterated many of our great-est ecclesiastical pavements has been tragic.

Chapter 1 begins with ecclesiastical floors,which are studied from the first early Christianmosaic and marble pavements through theRenaissance to the Victorian Revival. Theintroduction of medieval tiles, ledger stonesand brasses, their destruction by iconoclastsand recreation during the Gothic Revival isdiscussed. The development of secular mosaicpavements from 400 BC, and of decorativemarble, scagliola, tiled, stone and parquetryfloors and of carpets is also briefly outlined.

In successive chapters, leading cathedralarchaeologists, architects and surveyors outlinethe latest methods of recording and repairingsome of the outstanding floors in Britain.Several of the authors featured in this volumegave papers at a seminar on the conservationof ledger stones held in 1991, and organizedjointly by the Dean and Chapter of York andthe Institute of Advanced Architectural Studies,York. The conference was held at The KingsManor, York, chaired by Professor DerekLinstrum and directed by Peter Burman. It wasfrom that conference, and from the workinggroup set up by the Dean and Chapter toconsider the future of ledger stones in theMinster, with Dr Charles Brown as the secre-tary, that much of the activity which followed,originated.

Introduction

The care of country house floors, pioneeredby the National Trust, and the problemscaused by the deterioration of monumentaltiled pavements in the Palace of Westminsterand St George’s Hall, Liverpool, are coveredin chapters by leading architects. The manage-ment of visitors in order to to protect impor-tant floors in heavily visited sites is alsoconsidered.

The book ends with an appendix identify-ing historic floors and areas at risk in BritishCathedrals.

I have attempted to check that the informa-tion included in the book is correct at the timeof writing. If there are inaccuracies, they aremy own. I hope that the difficulty of tacklingsuch a large and little-known subject will serveas an excuse for any shortcomings. The editorand contributors have made every effort totrace owners of copyright material and creditthem where appropriate. We apologize for anyerrors and will ensure they are corrected at thefirst opportunity.

Jane Fawcett

xiv Introduction

My husband, Teddy, has lived with this bookfor several years, suffered from its demands,steered its course and encouraged me tocontinue. To him, above all, I am forevergrateful.

The generosity of John Smith and TheManifold Trust has enabled us to increase thevisual content of the book. I am, as always,in John’s debt. Historic Scotland, throughDavid Breeze, has provided a valuable grantfor the same purpose. I am most grateful forthis support. ICOMOS UK supported my origi-nal Cathedral Floor Damage Surveys, and hasprovided valuable encouragement and supportover the preparation of this book.

To my contributors I owe my deep grati-tude. They have all made time, out of theirbusy lives, to support this book, and the causeof conservation to which we are all commit-ted. Without their kindness the book could nothave been published. All are distinguished andall under pressure. I salute their generosity.

I am grateful to Bernard Feilden for hisencouraging foreword, and to Derek Linstrumfor having read the manuscript of the wholebook. His advice and guidance have beeninvaluable. I am also grateful to James Lomaxof Temple Newsam, Christopher Rowell of theNational Trust and the late Ian Grant, whohave read and improved my Chapter 14.

My thanks also to Richard Gem of theCathedrals Fabric Commission for Englandwho read and offered scholarly advice onchapters 1 and 13. Julian Litton provideduseful material on ledger stones and Jane

Cochrane gave valuable advice on mymedieval tiles section. Ross Dallas, WarwickRodwell and Charles Brown gave excellenteditorial advice.

The information provided by TempleNewsam in the catalogue for their exhibitionCountry House Floors, 1987, (now out ofprint) has given me a useful framework for asubject on which very little has been written.It documented many of the developments indesign, materials and techniques used forCountry House floors in Britain from 1660 to1850.

My grateful thanks are due to all the cathe-dral architects who have been kind enough toread and update my cathedral floor studies.Many cathedral librarians and archivists havealso given valuable information on floor recordsand plans, particularly those at St Pauls,Canterbury, Lincoln, Chichester, York andExeter Cathedrals and at Westminster Abbey.

Dr Nigel Seeley and Helen Lloyd have beengenerous with their help and advice overNational Trust visitor surveys and damagecontrol. Jeff Kelly and Jane Cochrane, formerconservation students from the ArchitecturalAssociation, and Duncan Boddy from theIAAS, York, have prepared excellent theses onhistoric floors and allowed me to use some oftheir material. Anthony Cleminson and RogerFrance have kindly provided photographs forme, so has Axel Griesinger.

Tom Cocke, of the Council for the Care ofChurches sent out a questionnaire, whichprovided valuable information on church

Acknowledgements

floors. Sandra Davison, and Trevor Proundfootof Cliveden Conservation, were generous withtheir expertise. The Monumental Brass Societygave useful guidance, so did the NationalMonuments Record (now English Heritage) theNational Trust and the National Trust forScotland. Ian Gow, formerly of the RoyalCommission on the Ancient HistoricalMonuments of Scotland, and David Breeze andRichard Fawcett of Historic Scotland, wereexceptionally helpful. So was John Fidler ofEnglish Heritage.

Ann Crosthwaite has provided considerablehelp with research and also given much encour-agement. Many others who have supported meover the ten years during which I havecampaigned for the recognition of historic floorsand brought this book, and its predecessor theICOMOS Cathedral Floor Damage Survey, tofruition, are too numerous to mention. Some aremy former students, now in positions of author-ity; to them I acknowledge my affection and mydebt. I wish to acknowledge the help of thestaff of the London Library who have through-out the preparation of this book exceeded whatcould have been expected of them, and givenme support in the highest traditions of libraryservice.

The Dean and Chapter of York, by settingup a working group to investigate methods offloor conservation and recording, gave invalu-able initial help and encouragement.

The Society of Antiquaries made it possiblefor me to photograph their material and facil-itated my research, and Simon Jervis openeddoors for me.

Tim Yates of the Building ResearchEstablishment has carried out research onledger stones and given much practical adviceon conservation.

The information provided by the lateGervaise Jackson-Stops and by Peter Thornton,Margaret Richardson, Mark Girouard, GeoffreyBeard, Anthony Quiney, Kerry Downes and

Caroline Sandwich has helped to create somesense out of many disparate threads.

My debt to Nikolaus Pevsner is undimin-ished. As teacher and friend, his influence andhis books have inspired me to many efforts,including, indirectly, this book.

Overseas, I have had a great deal of helpand advice from many ICOMOS contacts inEurope, and in America, where Ann Webster-Smith was extremely kind in obtaining infor-mation. John Millerchip of Venice in Peril,Wessel Reinink and Arie de Groot of Utrecht,Dirk de Vries of the Rijksdienst voor deMonumentenzorg in Zeist, Netherlands, JukkaJokilehto and the staff of ICCROM in Romehave all sent me useful information, and Jukkahas taken slides of Roman Cosmati pavementsfor which I am immensely indebted. So hasTim Tatton-Brown.

Dr Arnold Wolff of Cologne Cathedral hasbeen a tower of strength; so has ProfessorPetzet of the Bayerische Landesamt fürDenkmalpflege, Munich. Ditta Paolo Medici ofRome and Dr Koller of the Bundesdenk-malamt, Vienna, have also sent useful mater-ial for which I am grateful.

Daryl Fowler, whose chapter on theConservation of the Excavated Floor makesvaluable points about the protection ofarchaeological floors, died suddenly in 2001.His death is a great loss to the profession.

I am thankful for the patience and kindnessof the staff at Butterworth-Heinemann whohave worked so hard in the preparation of thisbook.

And finally, but by no means least, I saluteand give thanks to my dear cousin and secre-tary, Bridget Swithinbank, without whoseresourcefulness, patience, tact and skill, thisbook would never have seen the light of day.While my husband has been the inspiration,and John Smith has provided some of themeans, Bridget has been the midwife, withoutwhom it could never have been born.

xvi Acknowledgements

Jane FawcettMBE Hon FRIBA LRAM ARCM Grad Dipl Cons AAJane Fawcett, with Sir Nikolaus Pevsner, directedthe Victorian Society, and was credited with Savinga Century. Jane was awarded the MBE and HonFRIBA for services to conservation. She was acade-mic tutor and lecturer to the Building ConservationGraduate Course at the Architectural Association,the Secretary and Committee member of theInternational Council on Monuments and Sites UK,architectural consultant to the Yorkshire DalesNational Park and Council member of the CPRE.She re-surveyed the List of Historic Buildings forEnglish Heritage, and was consultant to the EnglishHeritage Tourist Board on Cathedrals and Tourism.She is author and editor of The Future of the Past;Seven Victorian Architects; The Village in History;Cathedral Floor Damage Surveys; and Save the City.She lectures in Europe, America and Canada.

Warwick RodwellDPhil DLitt FSA FRHistSAn archaeologist and architectural historian special-izing in ecclesiastical buildings, Warwick Rodwell hasdirected major excavations and surveys throughoutBritain and the Channel Islands since the late 1960s.Consultant to Bristol, Lichfield and Wells Cathedrals,Glastonbury Abbey and many other buildings, he isthe author of several books and numerous articles,including Church Archaeology (Batsford, 1989),which is the standard textbook on the subject.

Tim Tatton-BrownCurrently consultant archaeologist to Salisbury andRochester Cathedrals and to the ‘Royal Peculiars’ ofSt George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle and West-minster Abbey, Tim Tatton-Brown was previouslyconsultant to Canterbury and Chichester Cathedrals.

He is a graduate of the Institute of Archaeology atUniversity College, London. From 1966–75 heexcavated at various classical period sites in Italy,Libya, Tunisia and Turkey. From 1975–85 he wasthe first director of the Canterbury ArchaeologicalTrust. He has particular interest in the materials andtechniques used to put up large medieval buildingsand has made a special study of building stone andits sources in Southern England.

Kevin Blockley MIFAA full-time field archaeologist since 1976, directingurban excavations in Canterbury and Bristol andrural excavations in Avon, Worcestershire and Wales,Kevin Blockley is principal archaeologist withCambrian Archaeological Projects Ltd. With a specialinterest in ecclesiastical archaeology, he has under-taken excavation at Canterbury Cathedral andPershore Abbey and is Archaeological Consultant toBrecon Cathedral and Archaeological Adviser to theDiocese of Swansea and Brecon.

Bernard BarrMA FSA FLABernard Barr took a degree in classics before train-ing as a librarian and this background was invaluablein his work at York Minster Library since 1961. Heis a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, past chair-man of the Library Association Rare Books Group, acommittee member of the Library Association LibraryHistory Group and of the Yorkshire Architectural andYork Archaeological Society. For a number of yearshe served on the York Diocesan Advisory Committee,to which he is still Diocesan books adviser.

Charles BrownDUniv DipArch FRIBA DipLACharles Brown has served on Coventry DiocesanAdvisory Committee for 28 years and on the

Contributors

Diocesan Advisory Committee of Birmingham for 10years. A partner in a private architectural practice,Dr Brown is also a Liveryman to the CarpentersCompany, a member of the ICOMOS UK WoodCommittee. In addition, he is Architect to a numberof other major parish churches throughout the UK.He was also Consultant Architect to LichfieldCathedral, 1976–83, and Surveyor of the Fabric atYork Minster, 1977–94.

Ross W.A. DallasBSc FRICSA specialist in the survey of historic buildings,monuments and sites, and formerly the head ofthe English Heritage photogrammetry and surveyteam, Ross Dallas is now an independent consul-tant. He has been responsible for the preparationof surveys at many important sites in the UnitedKingdom. A professionally qualified LandSurveyor, he was a member of the ICOMOSInternational Committee for ArchitecturalPhotogrammetry (CIPA) for many years and is amember of the ICOMOS UK Sub-Committee whichprepared the recently adopted ICOMOS ‘Principlesfor the Recording of Monuments, Groups ofBuildings and Sites’.

Bob SkingleBob Skingle has been with the photographic sectionof the Royal Commission on the HistoricalMonuments of England (now part of EnglishHeritage) since 1976. His work with RCHME hasinvolved photographic sites as varied as cathedrals,collieries, textile mills, hospitals, prisons, churchesand country houses. Several years ago he was theRCHME photographer responsible for a photo-graphic survey of all the ledger stones in YorkMinster. He is now the team leader for EnglishHeritage’s northern photographic section, whichcovers the north of England, from its regional officein York

Christopher J. BrookeBSc PhD FSA MIFA MAAIS MRSSoc IHBCDr Christopher J. Brooke is currently Head of theHistoric Buildings Team at Leicestershire CountyCouncil, a Senior Research Fellow at De MontfortUniversity, and a lecturer at Nottingham andLeicester universities. He has developed techniquesof ground-based remote sensing for use in archae-ology at the University of Nottingham whereresearch in this field is continuing.

Mark DorringtonMark Dorrington gained an MA in Medieval Historyfrom the University of St Andrews in 1983 and aDiploma in Archives Administration from theUniversity College of Wales, Aberystwyth in 1984.Assistant Archivist for West Yorkshire ArchiveService from 1984–87, Archivist at York Minsterfrom 1988–93, Archivist-in-Charge at LichfieldRecord Office, 1993–97, he is currently SeniorArchivist for Staffordshire Archive Service. Amember of English Heritage and The CathedralsFabric Commission for England joint working groupon Records and Recording of Cathedral Fabric, heis a part-time lecturer at Keele University.

Diana HaleDiana Hale was formerly responsible for PublicServices in the London office of the RoyalCommission on the Historical Monuments ofEngland. Prior to that, she worked for many yearson developing the computerized cataloguing of theRoyal Commission’s architectural records. A partic-ular interest in data standards and terminologyincluded participation in various European projectsand international working parties as well as workwith the Getty Art History Information Program.

Peter BirdBSc DipArch FSA RIBAA partner in the practice of Caroe & Partners since1983, Peter Bird is Architect to a number of NationalTrust properties in Wessex, Devon and Cornwall,and Church Architect to parish churches in anumber of dioceses throughout the UK. In addition,he is Architect to the Cathedrals of St David’s,Winchester and Wells and Surveyor to the Fabric ofExeter Cathedral. A 1970 Lethaby Scholar, fellow ofthe Society of Antiquaries and corporate member ofthe RIBA, Peter Bird is also a member of the Bath& Wells Diocesan Advisory Committee.

Daryl FowlerDipArch RIBA AIFADaryl Fowler was a Conservation Architect whoadvised on the care, restoration and management ofsome of the country’s most important historic build-ings and monuments. In addition to extensive practi-cal experience in the UK and overseas he lecturedthroughout the UK and abroad. He was VicePresident of the ICOMOS International Committee forHistoric Towns and was a member of the ExecutiveCommittee and the Education Committee of ICOMOS

xviii Contributors

UK. Daryl Fowler founded the Conservation Practicein 1989 and was Director, responsible for the workat Uppark. In 1997 he became the Director of CulturalHeritage at Broadway and Malyan. BMCHC had anextensive network of consultants who were usedwhere relevant to solve clients’ problems with theircultural assets. Current projects included work for theUK Government, the Government of Hungary,London Transport, English Heritage and privateclients. Daryl died in 2001.

Christopher RowellMAIn 1977 Christopher Rowell was appointed to theHistoric Buildings Department of The National Trust.He was Historic Buildings Representative in Walesfrom 1979–86, and has covered the Southern regionsince 1986. He has been concerned with the interiorsand collections of Ham House since the V&A Museumrelinquished its lease in 1990. His other curatorialresponsibilities include Uppark and Petworth in WestSussex and Polesden Lacey in Surrey. He also partic-ipated in the repair of Uppark after the 1989 fire. Heis currently reassessing the interior at Polesden Lacey.Christopher Rowell has written several National Trustguidebooks, articles on the history of the display andexhibition of art, and is the co-author of Treasuresfrom India: the Clive Collection at Powis Castle (1987)and Uppark Restored (1996).

Iain McLarenIain McLaren studied architecture at the BartlettSchool, 1959–64, and first became involved withhistoric buildings in 1975 with a study of ChathamDockyard for the PSA. Other projects included theconversion of the former City of London Boys’School and the reconstruction of Richmond Terrace,Whitehall. He joined The Conservation Practice,Midhurst, in 1989 and was appointed ProjectArchitect for the repair and conservation of Upparkfor the National Trust in 1990. Iain McLaren iscurrently working on Eltham Palace in South EastLondon for English Heritage and on the Old MarketHall, Hove, for the Hanover Band.

A.T. JardineTD DipArch RIBA MIMgtAndrew Tertius Jardine, born in 1938, was educatedat St Paul’s and the School of Architecture, RegentStreet Polytechnic. As a Principal Architect in theDepartment of the Environment he had responsi-bility for major new works as well as for works toListed Buildings including the Palace ofWestminster. Currently Conservation Architect at thePalace of Westminster, he particularly enjoys thechallenge of finding apt solutions to modernrequirements in a living Listed Building. He alsoserved in the Territorial Army with the RoyalEngineers and the Intelligence Corps, attaining therank of Major.

Donald InsallCBE RWA FSA FRIBA FRTPI SPDipDonald Insall is the founder-director of the well-known architectural practice of Donald InsallAssociates, who have wide experience in urbanand building conservation projects and in design-ing new buildings for sensitive situations. ThisPractice has received over 70 international, nationaland local awards for design and craftsmanship.Donald Insall was also a founder-Commissioner ofEnglish Heritage and of the Advisory Committee tothe Getty Grants Program. He serves frequently onthe Expert Committees of the EuropeanCommission and lectures widely at home andoverseas.

Christopher Hanson-SmithMIPRChristopher Hanson-Smith helped to manage manyNational Trust properties during the 28 years heworked for the Trust. His particular discipline wasin public affairs, which included communicatingwith and managing visitors with the aim of recon-ciling public access and the preservation of theproperties. He is now a lecturer and a leader ofcultural tours both in the United Kingdom andoverseas.

Contributors xix

Impartiall reader, seest thou this worke?

Beleeve me it cost me much labour, swett and tiresomenesse,

Through my toilsome travailes, viewing of places and turning

over of bookes. Sitt thou still if thou please and enjoy it.

Farewell

(From the title page of an unpublished translation of about 1630 of Scamozzi’s treatise on architecture of 1615, in Sir John Soane’s Museum.

By courtesy of the Trustees of Sir John Soane’s Museum)

1.1 Introduction

To understand the intentions of medievalbuilders, one must remember that medievalchurches and cathedrals were richly decorated.Vaults, bosses, corbels, capitals, statues,screens, pulpits, choir stalls and organ caseswere often painted. Altars and tombs werehighly decorated. Wall paintings covered thewalls, and all the windows were filled withstained glass. It is in this context that one mustconsider medieval pavements. They weredesigned to provide another dimension to aninterior that, particularly in the chancel, was ariot of colour. In some cases the relationshipbetween the wall paintings, the stained glass,the monuments and the medieval tile designswas very close, and the decorative schemeconceived as a whole.

When one adds the treasures, plate,reliquaries, vestments and manuscripts, oneappreciates what treasure houses cathedralsand many greater churches were in the MiddleAges. Gothic Revival architects attempted toreinstate this medieval richness. Their encaus-tic tiles and Cosmatesque pavements repre-sented an important element in this revival.William Burges, architect of St Finbar’sCathedral, Cork, and of St Mary’s, Studley

Royal, Yorkshire, said that our ancestors ‘hadtheir churches made as beautiful as they couldafford. A great cathedral must have been anencyclopaedia of all the knowledge of thetime . . . It is only by acting in a similarmanner that we shall ever progress and havean art of our own’ (Burges, 1867).

The following sections consider some of thefeatures that make up ecclesiastical floors,dating from the early Middle Ages to thepresent day, covering a period of over 800years. The two main components of churchfloors are the decorated pavements, designedto enrich the interiors, and the floor memori-als, commemorating the dead. Mosaicpavements and ceramic tiles were used todecorate the most significant areas, usually thechancels, chapter houses and libraries. Blackand white chequered marble floors were intro-duced in the sixteenth century, and continuedthrough the nineteenth century. The nave andtransepts were paved, sometimes in contrastedcolours, and occasionally tiled. Incised slabs,ledger stones and monumental brasses oncecovered many of the church floors, creating arich historical jigsaw. Unfortunately the disas-ters of the past 500 years have destroyed manyof these, along with the furnishings to whichthey related. During and after the Reformation,

1

1

Decorated pavements and floormonuments in European cathedralsand churchesJane Fawcett

almost all the furnishings that had been vener-ated were systematically destroyed, in a purgeof all that was considered idolatrous.Monumental brasses were plundered, often forthe value of the brass.

The iconoclasm of the Civil War, whenmany cathedrals were used as barracks orstables, also caused widespread damage tofloors. The neglect of the eighteenth centuryand the restorations of the nineteenth centuryfollowed. It is surprising, after such a turbu-lent history, that any ancient features havesurvived. Furthermore, natural deteriorationhas often caused floors to be repaved, duringwhich many ledger stones were eitherdestroyed, or moved, so that they have beendivorced from the burials to which theyrelated.

The constant disruption to historic floorscaused by the steady increase in under-floorburials up to 1852 also created damage.Liturgical changes, causing the introduction orremoval of screens, pews and other furnish-ings, the wear patterns arising from constantliturgical routines and the regular movementof congregations, also had their effect. Evenmore serious was the reordering and restora-tion by nineteenth-century reformers. Butwhereas most of the glass, furnishings andstatues were destroyed by iconoclasts, or as aresult of liturgical reforms, of the few surviv-ing medieval tile pavements many have hadtheir decorative surface wiped out by tourists.The installation of services, including electricwiring and heating, has also caused seriousdamage to historic floors, and is often carriedout without adequate supervision.

Formerly cathedrals were used predomi-nantly for worship. During the last fewdecades congregations have declined, andcathedrals have been promoted increasingly asvenues for tourists, a use which their delicatefabric cannot withstand. Their many treasuresare increasingly prone to the theft and vandal-ism for which they are natural targets. Evenmedieval floor tiles have been stolen.Increased wear has obliterated many medievaltiles, brasses and ledger stones and most of

those surviving are in a terminal state. Thismakes their protection extremely urgent. Themass tourism of the past 50 years has causedmore damage than that inflicted over theprevious 700 years.

The tragedy is that so little remains. Thealmost total loss of medieval furnishings,including tiles and brasses, stained glass,screens, roods, statues and wall paintings,together forms one of the major art losses ofthe civilized world.

1.2 Tile pavements

Anglo-Saxon polychrome relief tiles, datingfrom the tenth to the eleventh centuries, havebeen identified in a number of ecclesiasticalsites, including Westminster Abbey, in theundercroft, dated before 1065 (Betts et al.,1991). Further examples have been found inSt Edmund’s Abbey, Bury St Edmunds, atWinchester Cathedral in the demolition levelsof the old minster, demolished in 1093, atPeterborough and Coventry Cathedrals, and StAlbans Abbey (Gem and Keen, 1981).Examples have also been found at CanterburyCathedral (see Chapter 4). The great tilepavement of the twelfth century in the chapterhouse at St Albans was excavated by MartinBiddle in 1979. Some of the tiles were re-setin the north transept, and the designs copiedin the chancel during the nineteenth-centuryrestoration. The rest are in storage awaiting adecision about their future.

Anglo-Saxon tiles were made in woodenmoulds, the design in modelled relief wasimpressed with a wooden stamp while theclay was still soft, then glazed and baked.Yellow and brown, the predominant colours,were obtained by the addition of copper andiron to the lead glaze.

Similar relief tiles were found in the earlynineteenth century in the Cistercian convent ofNorth Berwick and are now in the RoyalScottish Museum, Edinburgh and the BritishMuseum, London. The thirteenth-century kiln atNorth Berwick, discovered by workmen in 1908,

2 Historic Floors

is the earliest known floor tile kiln in Britain,predating the Clarendon Palace kiln of c.1240by several years. It was fully documented byJames Richardson, Inspector of AncientMonuments, Ministry of Works, Scotland, in1928 and by Christopher Norton in 1994. Thetiles, which have polychrome patterns in highrelief, are similar to those found in monastic,Cistercian sites in England and are probably latetwelfth century or early thirteenth century indate. Similar tiles have been recorded inCistercian houses in Europe, dating from c.1200.The subjects of dragons with foliate tails, fleurs-de-lys and leaf forms are unusually decorativefor Cistercian foundations, and particularly sofor a Cistercian nunnery; these were usuallypoorly endowed and plainly decorated. NorthBerwick was, however, an important port in the

middle ages, used by pilgrims travelling to StAndrew’s Cathedral, hence the possible conti-nental influence. The unusually high survivalrate of high relief tiles found at Cistercian sitesin Britain and Europe may be the result of theirremote situations, with consequently less proba-bility of disturbance.

Plain ceramic tiles were also imported, inthe late middle ages, and have been found inLinlithgow Palace (chapel floor), Dunfermline,Balmerino and Kinloss Abbeys, St Andrew’sCathedral, Fife, and at Melrose Abbey. Thesetiles, usually dark green or yellow, are identi-cal to Flemish tiles imported into England,particularly along the east coast (see Chapter3). They had a virtual monopoly of the Britishmarket for about 150 years, until their declinein the sixteenth century.

Decorated pavements and floor monuments 3

Figure 1.1 Byland Abbey, Yorkshire. Thirteenth-century opus sectile tile mosaics containing 900 tesserae, southtransept chapel (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Mosaic tiles may have been copied fromopus sectile marble floors, the ceramics beinga substitute for the marble used in Italy (seep.55). They are recorded in France from theearly twelfth century, but one of the earliestknown examples of the use of these tiles inEngland was at Fountains Abbey, between1220 and 1247. There are still some tiles resetnear the high altar. The glaze has almostcompletely gone. The tilers probably camefrom Cistercian monasteries on the Continent,where similar pavements were also laid, at atime when England and France were culturallyvery close. One of the earliest mosaic tilefloors in France is in the Chapel of SteGeneviève at the Abbey of St Denis in Paris.It dates from the second half of the twelfthcentury (Herbert and Huggins, 1995).

Mosaic tiles were made of coloured ceramicsections, cut in segments and arranged to formgeometric patterns. Slabs of clay were rolledout, the mosaic shapes marked with templates,cut, fired and glazed. The glaze was leadbased, but could be coloured by the additionof iron or copper.

The mosaic tile pavements at Byland Abbey,Yorkshire, of the mid-thirteenth century areamong the best examples of their kind inEurope (Figures 1.1 and 1.2). There are stillsufficiently coherent areas in the chancel andin the south transept chapels to enable one toimagine the effect they must once have made,when the abbey was complete. There are 900tiles, comprising over forty designs, and madeup of quatrefoils, circles and curvilinearsegments. The Rievaulx Abbey tiles, of whicha few patches still remain in situ, were of acomparable date and composition.

The Monastic Chronicle records that thechurch at Meaux was paved with mosaic tilesbetween 1249 and 1269, and continued in useuntil the Dissolution. These mosaic pavementswere thought to have been designed by monks,and the templates used to make the tesseraemay have been passed from one monastery toanother, hence the similarity in many designs.

At Ely Cathedral, Prior Crauden’s Chapel of1324 has retained almost intact a floor which

combines mosaic tiles and line impressed tiles,depicting Adam and Eve in front of the altar,with an assortment of animals. Its survival isprobably due to the fact that the chapel wasvery little used. Line impressed tiles weredecorated with linear designs, applied whenthe tiles were still soft. The nave is dividedinto three tile carpets, with lions and mythicaltile beasts at each end.

4 Historic Floors

Figure 1.2 Byland Abbey, Yorkshire. Plan of pavementsin south transept chapels by James Richardson1928–1929 (Photograph, Crown copyright. Reproducedby Courtesy of Historic Scotland)

Opus sectile mosaic tiles were also found atthe Cistercian Abbey of Newbattle, nearEdinburgh (Figure 1.3).

Mosaic tiles were used widely on theContinent from the late twelfth century, andcontinued until the 1230s, when inlaid tileswere developed. These were less labour inten-sive, and rapidly took over from the earliertechnique, until by the late thirteenth centurymosaic tiles had been abandoned.

Many tileries were established in Englandfrom the mid-thirteenth century onwards, eachwith its own recognizable style, producingtwo-tone inlaid tiles. These were made byindenting a white pattern into a square redtile base. The clay was pressed into a woodenmould, and then stamped, while still soft, witha wooden stamp. The imprint was filled with

white clay or slip, smoothed off, glazed andbaked. The master tiler assembled the differ-ent tile designs and arranged them in blocks,strips or panels divided by plain tiles to createthe tile carpet. These tiles were popularthroughout England until the Reformation.Little is known about the origins of thedesigns but some of them, such as the fish,the double headed eagle, and the tree of life,with two birds, are clearly Christian symbolsof Byzantine origin. This process arrived inBritain, as a fully developed method, fromNormandy. Its introduction may have resultedfrom the marriage of Henry III to Eleanor ofProvence in 1236 (Eames, 1992). The earliestknown English example of an inlaid tiled floorwas laid for Henry III in St Stephen’s Chapel,Westminster Palace, in 1237. Tilers startedwith the main area, in front of the altar, anddivided the remaining area into carpets,separated by borders. Each carpet containedgroups of tiles set in panels, varying from 4to 36 tiles, divided by plain strips (Cochrane,1993). Initially, glazed tiles were expensive,and their use was largely confined to royaland monastic buildings. By the late thirteenthcentury commercial tileries had developedand continued until the Dissolution of themonasteries in 1539 brought a virtual end totheir production.

The royal tileries were working for HenryIII at Westminster Abbey, Clarendon Palaceand Winchester Castle. The magnificent tilepavement in the chapter house at Westminsteris known to have been completed by 1258,when Henry III ordered that any surplus tilesshould be used at St Dunstan’s Chapel. Thispavement is one of the finest and mostcomplete medieval tiled floors to survive. Itwas covered, from the time of theReformation, by a timber floor and used as arecord office until it was restored by GilbertScott in 1863 (see Plate 1). The range ofdesigns and the coherence of the tile carpetgive one some idea of the original splendourof many medieval pavements, now so frag-mentary. The designs include scenes fromAesop’s Fables, hunting scenes, foliage


Figure 1.3 Newbattle Abbey, Lothian, Scotland. Mid-thirteenth-century tile mosaics, reconstructed by JamesRichardson, 1928–1929 (Photograph, Crown copyright.Reproduced by courtesy of Historic Scotland)

designs, heraldic beasts, royal coats of arms, aborder design of pike, and the design for arose window, thought to have been the origi-nal rose window in the south transept of theabbey. The tiles were laid in fifteen panels, allof patterned tiles, running from east to westacross the octagonal floor. The octagonal areaof a chapter house required a more complexlayout than rectangular floors. At Salisbury, themedieval chapter house floor tiles weredivided into radiating wedges, coming fromthe central column. This layout was repeatedin the restored pavement of 1856 (see p.10and Plate 4).

Tiles for Chertsey Abbey, which are ofexceptional delicacy, were made c.1350 anddecorated with spirited scenes of mountedknights in armour, scenes from the legend ofTristan and Isolde, and from the life of RichardCoeur de Lion. Both the workmanship and thecomposition were outstanding and in advanceof any other tiles of the period known inEngland or France (Eames, 1992).

The period of activity of the Wessex tileriesstretched from c.1235 to c.1450. Wessex tileshad a distinctive style derived from a numberof tileries in the West Country, including GreatMalvern. They were used to pave Winchester,Wells, Salisbury (see Plates 3 and 4) andGloucester Cathedrals, Great Malvern Prioryand also Hailes, Glastonbury, Muchelney,Cleeve (see Plate 2) and Titchfield Abbeys.The tiles portrayed individual subjects, includ-ing griffons, lions, coats of arms and fleurs-de-lys. Several of these abbeys still containexceptional thirteenth-century medieval pave-ments, some still in situ. The Muchelneypavement has been relaid in the presentchurch. The retrochoir at Winchester Cathedralcontains Wessex tiles of c.1235, and is one ofthe most important remaining spreads ofmedieval tiles in Britain, recently conserved(see Chapter 12).

In Gloucester Cathedral, part of AbbotSeabroke’s pavement of 1455 survives in frontof the high altar. It contains groups of 4, 9and 16 patterned tiles, divided by black strips.The north ambulatory chapel also contains an

important pavement of medieval tiles, somestill in situ. There are also many randommedieval tiles, alternating with ledger stones,in the Lady Chapel. Canon Welander reportsthat the medieval tiled floor still exists belowthe eighteenth-century flagstones in the nave(Welander, 1991).

The tilery near Canterbury, operating from themid-thirteenth to the mid-fourteenth century,made tiles for Rochester and CanterburyCathedrals and for St Augustine’s Abbey. Twolate thirteenth-century tile pavements in thenortheast corner of the Corona at Canterburywere laid c.1285–1290 after a visit by Edward I(Horton and Norton, 1981). The tilers may havecome from France (Eames, 1992).

Muniment rooms have experienced lesswear and less repaving than other areas, anda few important pavements still survive. Forthe tiles used to pave the muniment room atWestminster Abbey in the mid-thirteenthcentury, designs included a mounted knight, abird, fleurs-de-lys and a foliate cross. Thesurface of the tiles is rarely flat, and some ofthe decoration is smudged, owing to faults inmanufacture. Nevertheless, they have remainedin situ.

The very fine tiled floor of the munimentroom at Lichfield was, until recently, coveredwith library bookshelves placed there in 1910(see Plates 19–21). The pavement of c.1300was laid as a series of seven parallel carpetsand has remained intact, despite wear incertain areas. It was wholly unrecorded untilit was rediscovered recently (see Chapter 2).At Salisbury in the muniment room there is asplendid tiled floor of c.1260 of Wessex tilesstill in place and preserved by a wooden floor.The tiles are similar to Henry III’s tilescommissioned for Clarendon Palace, also fromthe Wessex tileries (see Plate 3).

The muniments tower at New College,Oxford, has four vaulted upper rooms, withsplendid tiled floors c.1386, the upper twolargely undamaged. They are approached, asat Salisbury and Lichfield, by narrow spiralstairs, for security reasons. There are also tiledfloors in the Consistory Court at York Minster,

6 Historic Floors

the library at Worcester Cathedral and themuniment rooms at Winchester College(Norton, 1996).

At Tewkesbury Abbey a fine pavement in theFounder’s Chapel is more or less undamagedand there are smaller areas of medieval tiles,resited. Worcester Cathedral once contained anumber of medieval tiled pavements, most ofwhich have been obliterated by wear duringthe last few decades. An inlaid tile pavementof 1377–1380 still survives in the office of theCustos, and on the balcony overlooking thechapter parlour. Neath Abbey, West Glamorgan,contains a few exceptional fourteenth-centurytiles, representing knights on horseback, ahuntsman and a stag pursued by dogs.

The Tile and Architectural Ceramic Societyare compiling inventories of in situ medievaltiles in parish churches, but we still have littleidea of how many exist. There are, however,both medieval and replica tiles in the chancelof Chastleton Church, Oxfordshire, the church

of St Cross Hospital, Winchester c.1390, andsome fourteenth-century line impressed tilesat Icklingham Church, Suffolk. There are alsomedieval tiles surviving in Bangor Cathedral,Wales, Brook Church, Kent and ActonBurnell, Shropshire. St Swithun’s, Launcells,near Bude, Cornwall, contains rare fifteenth-century Barnstaple ware tiles in the chancel.Designs include Tudor roses, lions, passantand rampant, a pelican and fleur-de-lys.

Many monastic tiles were covered by ruinsfor several centuries, and so protected. Somewere, however, sold with other fittings, at theDissolution. Tiles from Rievaulx Abbey weresold to the Earl of Rutland, the first lay owner.During the antiquarian revival of interest inGothic ruins in the late eighteenth and earlynineteenth centuries, many tiles were collectedand found their way into museums. Othermedieval tile pavements were, however,recorded by antiquarians during the 1830s and1840s; these designs were included in the


Figure 1.4 Jervaulx Abbey,North Yorkshire. Thirteenth-century tile setting, made upof 452 curvilinear inlaid tiles,excavated in 1807, recordedby Henry Shaw, andpublished, after totaldestruction by frost, in 1858.Henry Shaw’s Specimens ofTiled Pavements recorded allthe most famous medievaltiled floor layouts known inthe mid-nineteenth century, inorder to provide informationfor the Victorian tilemanufacturers.

catalogues of enterprising tile manufacturers,and so came to the notice of leading GothicRevival architects.

The early thirteenth-century tile pavementfrom Jervaulx Abbey was recorded afterexcavation, and is the only plan to survive ofa complete pavement in an abbey church.Tragically, the floor was excavated in 1807,exposed to the weather, reduced to fragmentsby frost, and by the time the drawing byHenry Shaw was published in 1858, nothingremained (Figure 1.4).

It is also unfortunate that, through failure torecognize the fragility of medieval tiles, somany have been defaced in recent years. Thedesign is rapidly lost when the external glazeis broken down by wear. Repaving in theeighteenth and nineteenth centuries andoveruse in the twentieth century has meantthat a major art form has been more or lessobliterated.

1.2.1 The Victorian revival

It is now relevant to consider the influenceexerted by medieval tiled floors on the archi-tects of the Gothic Revival.

From the 1840s the Oxford Tractarians, ledby Newman, Keble and Pusey, promoted arevival of interest in ritual and liturgy. TheCambridge Camden Society demanded eccle-siologically correct churches, requiring them toconform to the Early English or Middle Pointedstyle which they considered the only accept-able form. They also insisted on the construc-tion of raised, stalled and enclosed choirs,suitably furnished, the enlargement and reseat-ing of churches, and the repaving of floors,which this necessitated.

Church architects, if they wished to succeed,had to conform. In order to construct GothicRevival interiors, they replicated many of therare medieval prototypes, including tiles,brasses and mosaic and marble pavements.This led to the development of whatBeresford-Hope, President of the CambridgeCamden Society, called Art Manufacture.

Hardman, Minton, Farmer and Brindley, andmany others, grasped the opportunity anddeveloped successful businesses, manufactur-ing neo-medieval artefacts to pour into thenew Victorian churches. This movement alsoled, regrettably, to the destruction of manymedieval floors, because the architects trulybelieved that their new products were betterthan the worn originals. Burning with religiouszeal, they were determined to make athorough job of their churches. And so, to acertain extent, they did.

1.2.2 Encaustic tiles

The prosperity of the Victorian economy, thedemand for larger churches owing to agrowing church-going population and thecommitment of leading architects to medievalprecedents, set the stage for the encaustic tilerevival. Encaustic is a term for a glazed,decorated and baked earthenware tile. Theapplication of decoration, which had provedso difficult in the middle ages, also provedtroublesome to the early Victorian manufac-turers, who pioneered a new technique toovercome this problem.

Samuel Wright, a potter from Staffordshire,took out a patent for his process of manufac-

8 Historic Floors

Figure 1.5 Sainte Chapelle, Paris. Nineteenth-centurycopy of thirteenth-century tile (Photograph, DombauArchiv, Cologne)

turing two-tone encaustic tiles in 1830, but theproject failed. In 1835 Herbert Minton boughtWright’s equipment, and his patent, andproceeded to develop his own techniques (seeChapter 14). Minton’s interest in tiles had beenaroused by his discovery, with A.W. Pugin, ofa medieval tilery at King’s Lynn in 1833. Atabout the same time the Great Malvernmedieval tilery had also been discovered andpublicized. Minton’s techniques were foundedon medieval methods, as revealed byfragments found at the King’s Lynn tilery. Theclay was put into square moulds, decoratedwith inlaid or relief patterns, glazed and bakedin kilns. Many medieval tiles had wornunevenly owing to the variable quality of theclays used. Herbert Minton attempted toovercome the irregular contraction of the clay,which caused the inlaid pattern to becomedislodged from the tile. Of him Sir MatthewDigby Wyatt said that ‘notwithstandingrepeated failures . . . he . . . at length succeededin producing tiles very far superior to those ofthe ancients’ (Jones, 1993). It was, however the‘ancients’ who inspired the designs.

Augustus Welby Northmore Pugin wascentral to the Gothic Revival movement. Hecollaborated with Herbert Minton, and togetherthey promoted the use of encaustic tiles, acollaboration which culminated in the pave-ments for the Palace of Westminster, for whichPugin designed many original tile patterns (seeChapters 14 and 18). With the exception ofScarisbrick Hall, most of Pugin’s tiles weredesigned for Roman Catholic churches andcathedrals, many of which have suffered fromreordering. Both at St Chad’s Cathedral inBirmingham and at Killarney Cathedral inIreland, two of his major commissions, theencaustic tiled floors, together with most of theother furnishings, were destroyed in the 1960sand 1970s. Fortunately, St Giles, Cheadle, oneof his most spectacular churches, designed forthe Earl of Shrewsbury, still contains all itsoriginal furnishings, including the floor tiles.

Pugin, who was received into the RomanCatholic church in 1835, became a passionateconvert. His publications, advocating Gothic as

the only true ecclesiastical style, were veryinfluential. So, also, were his designs.Benjamin Ferrey, writing Recollections of A.Welby Pugin in 1861, stated that ‘among thevarious objects occupying Pugin’s attention,not one received a greater share than therevival of the manufacture of encaustic tiles’.

It is unfortunate that Herbert Minton, withwhom Pugin collaborated so closely on theproduction of tiles, was unable to reproducethe delicate colours used by Pugin in his watercolour sketches. There was concern about thecrude colour of many encaustics. Lord AlwyneCompton, Bishop of Ely, who designedpavements for Ely Cathedral and severalchurches, was anxious that Minton’s encaustictiles should reproduce the colours of themedieval originals. He wrote to HerbertMinton, having sent some of his drawings: ‘Iam glad that you have made out . . . the greencolour of the strip tiles . . . I suppose yourexperiments were chemical. I should like toknow the result’ (Jones, 1993).

Pugin and George Gilbert Scott were keenmembers of the Cambridge Camden Society.After reading The Ecclesiologist, the Society’spublication, Scott said ‘Pugin’s articles excitedme almost to fury, and I suddenly foundmyself like a person awakened from a longfeverish dream’. After visiting Pugin he‘became a devoted reader of his writings andvisitor of his erected works’ (Scott, 1879).Pugin tragically became insane and died in1852 at the age of forty.

Interest in medieval tiles was increased bythe discovery of the medieval tiled floor in theChapter House at Westminster Abbey. Thedesigns were used by James Savage andSydney Smirke for their new floors at theTemple Church. ‘Mr Savage was allowed . . .to take up the wooden floor of the ChapterHouse, Westminster, in order that he mightexamine the original tile paving, which, beingof the same date as the Temple Church, wasan example completely in point’ (Burge,1843). The tiles for Temple Church were madeby Minton, who ‘made a series of reproduc-tions, on a smaller scale than the originals, but


excellent in technique, and with these theTemple Church was paved’ (Clayton, 1912).These unfortunately replaced the medievaltiles already in situ, and have themselves beenreplaced.

Minton’s first pattern book of 1835 hadalready contained copies of the Westminstertiles, and the first Minton catalogue of 1842,Old English Tile Designs, was based onmedieval examples. Minton also copied themedieval tiles in the church of the Hospital ofSt Cross at Winchester and patched the origi-nal floor with them.

Gilbert Scott was, he said, ‘wholly unexpect-edly appointed architect to WestminsterAbbey’ in 1849.

This was a great and lasting source of delight.I at once commenced a careful investigation ofits antiquities . . . I also devoted much time tothe investigation of the Chapter House. Thefloor of the Chapter House is probably themost perfect and one of the finest encaustictile pavements now remaining. It is, happily, ina nearly perfect state, having been protectedby a wood floor. I have thoroughly examinedit, and find it to be arranged in parallel stripsfrom east to west, the patterns changing ineach strip, though repeated on the correspond-ing sides. Many of the patterns are most noblein their design, and some of extraordinarydelicacy and refinement. The uniformity of thepavement is in one place disturbed by theinsertion of a number of tiles containingfigures, such as St John giving the ring to theConfessor etc. Many of the patterns have beenpretty correctly copied by Mr Minton for thepavement of the Temple Church, and manyare given by Mr Shaw in his recent work onEncaustic Pavements (Scott, 1863)

Scott restored the pavement in 1863–69 (seePlate 1).

The discovery of the Westminster Abbeypavement aroused considerable interest amongantiquaries, and John Gough Nicholspublished a set of twenty-four facsimiles ofmedieval tiles at Winchester Cathedral andRomsey Abbey in 1841, entitled Examples ofGothic Inlaid Tiles, ‘as a means of directing the

attention of architects to that mode ofpavement for churches . . . which is mostappropriate and accordant with ancientexample’. In 1842 his second publicationentitled Examples of Encaustic Tiles includedfacsimiles of the Westminster Abbey tiles.

This was followed by further publications,as antiquarians recorded the excavation ofmore medieval tiles. Henry Shaw’s Specimensof Tile Pavements, Drawn from ExistingAuthorities was published in 1858, andcontained many examples from recentlyexcavated sites. The Chertsey Abbey tiles,excavated in 1852, and now in the BritishMuseum, were recorded by the antiquarianShurlock who sent copies both to Scott and toMinton (Kelly, 1994). Shurlock finallypublished the designs in 1885, after Scott’sdeath.

The newly founded encaustic tile manufac-turers, Maws, produced a catalogue in 1852which included designs from the medieval tilepavement at Jervaulx Abbey, Abbot Seabroke’spavement at Gloucester Cathedral, and pave-ments at Worcester and Oxford Cathedrals,later retiled by Scott (see Chapter 14, p.133).

The firm of Godwin and Lugwardine wasfounded in 1848. Building News stated thatGodwin:

paid particular attention to the reproduction ofmedieval patterns in their entirety, both as tofacsimile of form and ornament, and antiqueappearance of surface. He thereby attracted theattention of the late Sir Gilbert Scott RA whowas so well satisfied with his productions thathe invariably specified Mr Godwin’s tiles to beused in the many ecclesiastical works withwhich he was connected . . . Mr Godwin’s tileshave been used to pave no less than tenEnglish, one Scotch, three Welsh, and twoColonial Cathedrals, besides many thousands ofchurches and secular buildings. (BuildingNews, 1890)

Minton claimed to have repaved the floors ofnine cathedrals for Scott.

The ecclesiastical workshops, which grewup when it became apparent that there was

10 Historic Floors

an urgent demand for new church furnishings,were condemned by Beresford-Hope, in alecture on the art-workman’s position, in 1864.

We all know that the . . . Gothic movement (ofthe last thirty years) . . . of which the pioneerswere Pugin and Barry . . . created . . . a greatand sudden demand for sculpturesque Art . . .Education towards that result was not forth-coming; capital towards it was ready andabundant and thus has grown up a system of. . . Art on commission, carried out by middle-men under the direction of the architect . . .Now this is what architectural and applied artis rapidly verging to. Do not call it Art-practicebut Art Manufacture – then it is all right.

T.G. Jackson, himself an eminent cathedralrestorer, said in 1873 ‘One man designs thewall, floors, and roofs . . . another man designsthe statues . . . each man knows his branch ofart and is ignorant of that of the others’.Jackson also said of Scott that he ‘had awonderful power of making rapid expressivesketches and from these his men were able toproduce work which . . . did fall intosomething of a consistent style that passed forGilbert Scott’s’.

Gilbert Scott is credited with working onover 870 buildings, many of them ecclesiasti-cal, of which twenty-eight were cathedrals orgreater churches (Cole, 1980). On the subjectof floors, Scott, speaking to the RIBA ‘On theConservation of Ancient ArchitecturalMonuments and Remains’ in 1862, said that‘floors must be levelled and freed from damp,but monumental slabs and old tiles should beleft: one should not be compelled to say thememorials of the dead have perished, and theworks of Mr Minton (to which they have fallenvictims) have scornfully ousted those of histeachers’. In the same paper he declared‘never renew unless essential; never smartenup; keep all old bits’. This is very difficultwithout constant personal supervision which,of course, he was unable to provide. On thewhole Scott, with his dictum of ‘leave wellenough alone’, showed considerable respectfor important earlier burials, and often left

medieval brasses or ledger stones in situ,surrounded by new encaustic pavements. AtEly he retained the slabs to Prior Crauden andBishop Hotham in the chancel. AtTewkesbury, he marked the position ofmedieval burials in the chancel with a brasscross or initials, and retained the ledger stoneto Maud de Burgh.

Ely (Scott’s first cathedral restoration),Worcester (see Plate 5), Lichfield, Chester andChrist Church (Oxford) Cathedrals, andTewkesbury Abbey, contain some of Scott’sfinest encaustic pavements and are describedin more detail in the individual cathedralsurveys (see Appendix, p.205).

Two churches with important encausticpavements by Scott are St Mary, Beverley, ‘oneof the most beautiful parish churches ofEngland’ (Pevsner, 1972), restored in1864–1867, and Holy Trinity, Hull, the largestparish church in England ‘the interior ofoverwhelming length’ (Pevsner, 1972). ExeterCollege Chapel, Oxford, contains what manyregard as Scott’s best interior, including a fineencaustic tile pavement. Scott summed up hisattitude to restoration in 1857. He said

Our churches have come to be cared for . . .the subsidiary arts of architectural sculptureand carving, decorative painting, stained glass,metal work, encaustic tiles and everythingwhich is wanted for decoration of a building,are making advances more or less concurrentlywith architecture itself. We have, so far aschurches are concerned, completely revived alost style (On the Present Position and FutureProspects of the Revival of Gothic Architecture,Scott, 1857)

G.E. Street, another leading Gothic Revival archi-tect, said during a lecture to the EcclesiologicalSociety in 1858 ‘We are medievalists and rejoicein the name; to us it implies a belief in all thatis best, purest, truest in our art, and we denyaltogether that it . . . implies any desire to refuseto this age what its history really entitles it todemand . . . The Pre-Raphaelites have taken theirname . . . because they, as we, see in the namea pledge of resistance to false and modern


systems of thought and practice in art’ (Street,1858). Street removed many earlier floors to clearthe way for his own pavements. At St Patrick’sCathedral, Dublin, Dunster Church in Somerset,and many others he showed considerable insen-sitivity to earlier work. Street favoured Godwin’stiles and used them in his new churches. StJames the Less, Westminster, one of Street’s mostsuccessful churches, has a richly decoratedpolychromatic interior. The floor tiles make aninteresting foil to the impressive murals abovethe chancel arch by G.F. Watts, and to thestained glass by Clayton and Bell.

William Butterfield was selected by theEcclesiologists to design All Saints, MargaretStreet, London (1849–1859), as an exemplar oftheir ideals. It was partly financed and super-vized by Beresford-Hope, their chairman.

Charles Eastlake, author of History of theGothic Revival, 1872, said of the interior, ‘thesecret of knowing where to stop in decorativework had still to be acquired’. Butterfielddesigned an encaustic pavement to completethe sumptuous decorative scheme.

Although the designs of individual encaus-tic tiles often came from medieval tiles, thecomplete pavements could never be mistakenfor the originals. When Gilbert Scott restoredthe choir at Salisbury Cathedral theRestoration Committee ordered a new tiledfloor, with tiles by Godwin, which wascompleted in 1876 (destroyed in c.1963). Thedesigns for the encaustic tiled pavement inthe chapter house were based on recordingsmade of the medieval tiles by John Carter,and, later, by Lord Alwyne Compton. The new

12 Historic Floors

Figure 1.6 Basilica of Theodosius at Aquileia, Italy. Fourth-century AD Paleochristian mosaic pavement (Source:Fotometalgrafica, Bologna)

pavement was laid in 1856 during the restora-tion of the chapter house by Henry Cluttonand William Burges (see Plates 3 and 4). Thedesigns and overall layout were faithfullycopied, but the floor lacks ‘the luminosity andsparkle of the medieval tiles’ (Norton, 1996).The colours are deeper and the glaze harsher.As with brasses, stained glass, sculpture, andother Gothic Revival furnishings, the inspira-tion came from the Middle Ages, but the massproduced replacements were entirely of theirage.

1.3 Mosaic pavements

Mosaic pavements in geometric and pictorialdesigns, were one of the main decorativefeatures of pagan temples and basilicas. Thefigurative designs were adapted by the earlyChristian church to illustrate Christian themes.One of the earliest and finest examples ofthese Paleochristian mosaics is in the Basilicaof Theodosius at Aquileia, Udine. The mosaicpavement, dating from the fourth century AD,portrays Christ with the lamb, surrounded by


Figure 1.7 Basilica of SanMarco, Venice, founded 976.Mosaic pavement, eleventhcentury (Photograph, by kindpermission of ProcuratoriaSan Marco, Venice)

Figure 1.8 Basilica of SanMarco, Venice. Mosaicpavement, cosmatesquedesign (Photograph, by kindpermission of ProcuratoriaSan Marco, Venice)

countless small cherubs, and Jonah emergingfrom the whale, with a sea of fishes andfishing putti (Figure 1.6). The geometricalframework linking this design bears someresemblance to the later Cosmati designs andthe general composition to pagan precedents.

Another Paleochristian mosaic pavement, ofthe sixth century, from the Veneto, is S.Eufemia, Grado. Here the design is entirelygeometric, composed of rectangles interlinkedby borders of circles and lozenges, all inmosaic. The mosaic floor of Sant’Ilario, Veniceof the ninth century, now in the Museo Correr,is composed of symbolic birds, containedwithin linked circles.

Owing to increased trade between Veniceand Byzantium in the ninth century, the Venetobecame one of the centres for Byzantinemosaics, and the use of porphyry and serpen-tine, well-known in the East, probably datesfrom this period. The cathedral, Santa MariaAssunta, Torcello, founded in 639 and rebuiltin 864–67, contains outstanding floors ofmosaic and marble of the eleventh century (seePlate 7). Murano Cathedral, also in the Venicelagoon, has another wonderful Byzantinemosaic pavement (see Plate 8). The Basilica ofSan Marco contains the largest surviving areasof mosaic in the world (see Plate 6 and Figures1.7 and 1.8). The floors are completely coveredin mosaics, dating from the ninth century tothe eleventh. These include areas of Cosmatidesign, some geometrical designs and maydelightful mosaic compositions of biblicalscenes, animals and birds.

Romanesque figural mosaic pavements,similar to Aquileia, are found in Apulia, in theCathedral of Otranto of the eleventh century,where the floor mosaics represent scenes frombiblical history, the Arthurian legend and signsof the zodiac. The Abbazia di Pomposacontains a superb mosaic floor dated 1026,which combines the mosaic figurative motifsof animals, contained within Cosmati motifs ofa central quincunx and interlaced circularbands.

Leo of Ostia, the twelfth-century chroniclerof Monte Cassino, reported that Abbot

Desiderius had brought marble workers fromConstantinople to lay the Cosmati mosaic floorfor the new church at Monte Cassino in 1071,and to train Italian marble workers in a skillthat had been lost to Italy for 500 years. It isclear that the Cosmati pavement at MonteCassino, which was destroyed in 1720, butrecorded, had a wide influence, and that itwas itself influenced by Byzantine Turkish andGreek designs, notably at Bursa in theMausoleum of Orham Gazi, in Hagia Sophiaand St John Studion, both in Istanbul, all ofthe eleventh century. Similar designs are foundin St Nicholas, Olynthus, in the IvironMonastery, Mount Athos, and the Church ofthe Dormition, Nicea. All these examples wereforerunners of the true Roman Cosmati workof the twelfth to the fourteenth centuries.Known as opus Alexandrinum, meaningornamental paving of coloured marblesarranged in geometrical patterns, Cosmatipavements were composed of roundels,arranged in a guilloche or quincunx design.The guilloche consisted of circles of marbleand mosaic, linked by curved bands of whitemarble to form a figure S. The quincunx wasa figure 5, consisting of a central roundelsurrounded by four smaller circles. Within thisframework connected by bands and loops ofwhite marble, a complex design of mosaicrectangles, diamonds, circles and squares wasdeveloped. The whole composition wasarranged longitudinally, in order to lead theeye from the west end towards the high altar,for which it provided a setting. The designoften continued on the altar steps.

The composition was entirely geometrical,of great complexity, and consisted of a largevariety of ancient semi-precious stones. Thecontrast between the glittering many-colouredmosaics, often gilded, the large roundels ofgreen or purple porphyry, and the brillianceof the white marble bands, created a distinc-tive effect. In many churches these preciousmaterials were also applied to columns,pulpits, altar rails, episcopal thrones, tombs,baldachinos and ciboria. When the vaults werealso decorated with mosaics, the effect was

14 Historic Floors

brilliant. In some cases the guilloches andquincunx alternated with areas of rectangles orsquares, themselves linked with white marbleand filled with mosaics and pieces of colouredmarble. A distinguishing feature of the centralroundels was that they were usually sawn offsections of antique marble columns foundlying among the classical Roman ruins. Othermaterials used included giallo antico, rosapersiano, and verde egiziano. Some of thesehad been mined in the Middle East, and camefrom mines closed by the fifth century AD.From these sources, they had been brought todecorate Classical Roman buildings, and sofound their way into medieval churches. Thebeauty of the designs and the great antiquityof the materials gave these pavements aunique quality.

One of the earliest known examples of thistechnique dates from the ninth century AD, S.Prassede, Rome, in the chapel of San Zenone.From this the art of the Cosmati developed,and spread all over Italy and as far as Sicily,Greece, Turkey and Britain. The jewel-likeByzantine floors in the Capella Palatina andthe Martorana in Palermo, Sicily, of the mid-twelfth century, have similarities with Cosmatiwork, but the angular composition also owesmuch to oriental precedents.

The Roman marble workers, or Cosmati,became active in Rome and in many otherregions of Italy from the early twelfth centuryuntil the decline of the Papacy in 1300. Withthe exile of the Pope to Avignon much of theirwork ceased, although a few pavementscontinued to be made during the Renaissance.Some of the Renaissance floors in the Vatican,including the Sistine Chapel, are based onCosmati designs. The craftsmen becameknown as the Marmorani Romani and wereconfined to a few families, of which Paulusand his family were the first. Others wereRanucius, Laurentius and Odoricus, whoworked at Westminster Abbey. Each familydeveloped its own distinctive style.

In Rome there are still many of thesepavements, S. Maria in Cosmedin, S. Giovanniin Laterano, San Clemente, S. Maria in

Aracoeli, S. Lorenzo Fuori le Mura, S. Maria inTrastevere (see Plate 9) and S. Maria Maggioreamongst them. Similar pavements weredesigned for S. Miniato in Florence, S.Francesco in Assisi, the Duomo in Spoleto, S.Martirio in Orvieto, and for churches in theCampagna (Glass, 1980). The cathedral ofAnagni, in which Pope Alexander III canon-ized Edward the Confessor, and received thesubmission of Henry II after the murder ofThomas Becket, contains Cosmati pavementsin the main church (restored) and in the crypt(original) and superb wall paintings on thecrypt vaults. The pavement of S. Maria inCosmedin, which resembles the GreatPavement at Westminster Abbey (see Plates10a and 10b and Chapter 3), was designed byPaulus, founder of the earliest Cosmati family.

Abbot Ware, under whom the rebuilding ofWestminster Abbey for Henry III took place,went to Rome, and to Anagni in 1258 to havehis appointment confirmed by the Pope. Atthis time the Cosmati were at the height oftheir popularity and the Abbot must have seenexamples of their work. He returned to Italyin 1267 and brought back Odoricus, a Cosmaticraftsman to decorate the sanctuary, feretoryand tombs of Edward the Confessor and ofHenry III. The new pavements werecompleted in 1268. The ceremony of dedicat-ing the new shrine of Edward the Confessor,and of installing his remains, took place in1269. The Great Pavement, the most importantCosmati pavement north of the Alps, resem-bles the Roman examples in style, but someof the materials differ, Purbeck being substi-tuted for white marble and glass tesserae forsemi-precious stones. The centre of thequincunx is an immense onyx, marking theposition on which the sovereign was crowned.It is thought to have come from ancient Egyptand resembles that of old St Peter’s in Rome.The Lombardic letters surrounding it, some ofwhich survive, dated the pavement to 1268and recorded its creation by Henry III, AbbotWare and Odoricus, sent from the Papal Courtin Rome. The guilloche design containstesserae of porphyry, giallo antico, and


coloured glass. Many of the materials were re-used from classical buildings in Rome, andsome pre-dated them. The purple porphyrycame from mines in Egypt, near the Red Sea,which were closed in the fifth century AD, andthe green porphyry from Spartan quarries inGreece. The coloured glass is of Islamic origin,possibly made in Venice. The pavement wasdesigned to enrich and frame the high altar.The Purbeck marble matrix provides a visuallyless satisfactory foil to the coloured mosaicsthan the white marble of Rome, and is deteri-orating. The whole pavement was concealedby a modern carpet. It has now beenreinstated as one of the glories of the Abbey,as Henry III intended (see Chapter 3).

The other outstanding thirteenth-centuryCosmatesque pavement in Britain is thepavement in Trinity Chapel, CanterburyCathedral (see Plate 11). This was laid inc.1220 to enrich the shrine of St Thomas

Becket, and was possibly designed by PetrusOdoricus (Hutton, 1950). It consists of ageometrical pattern composed of smallcoloured marble tesserae, arranged indiamonds, squares and quatrefoils. Thetesserae are smaller than at Westminster. Thepavement also contains roundels of ooliticlimestone with incised designs filled with redmastic, once representing virtues and vices,the signs of the zodiac, and the labours of themonths. Some of the original pink marblepaving also survives, near the site of the shrine(see Chapter 3, p.54).

1.3.1 Victorian mosaic pavements

The Victorian Cosmatesque revival centredround Gilbert Scott and John LoughboroughPearson, who knew the twelfth-centuryCosmati floors from their travels in Italy.Pearson sketched Cosmati pavements in San

16 Historic Floors

Figure 1.9 St Augustine’s, Kilburn, London, 1870–80, by J.L. Pearson showing Cosmatesque pavement in the choirand sanctuary, and decoration by Clayton and Bell (Photograph, National Monuments Record)

Lorenzo Fuori le Mura, in Rome, during hisvisit in 1874 and other medieval floors. Scottalso restored the Cosmati pavement atWestminster Abbey. Both revived thistechnique to enrich the cathedrals andchurches on which they worked.

Although their pavements lack the richnessof the ancient stones, the fresh colours of themodern marble and the beauty of the designslend a brightness and distinction to theseinteriors.

They also designed pulpits and baldachinosto complement the pavements, as the Cosmatifamilies had done before them. Scott’s fineCosmatesque pavement in the chancel atDurham Cathedral and in the crossing atChester Cathedral both make an outstandingcontribution. Pearson’s Cosmatesque pavementsin the chancels of Bristol and PeterboroughCathedrals are equally successful as a foil to thesombre colours of the interiors. Although hisintentions for the interior of Truro Cathedralwere never fully implemented, owing to lackof money, his Cosmati pavements in thechancel and baptistery are impressive.

The remarkable church of Garton-in-the-Wolds, East Yorkshire, was restored andenriched by Pearson for Sir Tatton Sykes in1856–1857. The Cosmatesque pavement in the

chancel, and the mosaic floors in the nave,complete the decorative scheme of murals byClayton and Bell. There are similar floors byPearson in St Augustine, Kilburn, 1870–1880,one of his most spectacular and richlydecorated churches (Figure 1.9). The Cosma-tesque work enhances the rich sculpturaldecoration and wall paintings by Clayton andBell. Pearson also designed a fine Cosmatesquepavement for his church St Stephen’s,Bournemouth 1881–1898, regarded by Pevsneras the finest church in Bournemouth.

The Italianate church of St Mary and StNicholas at Wilton, Wiltshire, designed in 1841by T.H. Wyatt and Brandon, has a finenineteenth-century Cosmatesque pavement anddecoration which complements the genuineCosmati work on the medieval twistedcolumns. These were reputedly bought in Italyby Sir William Hamilton in 1768, given toHorace Walpole, and bought by SidneyHerbert for the church in 1842. WilliamButterfield designed, for one of his largest andmost successful churches, Babbacombe inDevon (1867), a fine Cosmatesque pavementand pulpit, the floor tesserae mixed withencaustic tiles.

Westminster Cathedral by J.F. Bentley,1895–1903, also contains Cosmatesquepavements. In the chapel of St Paul is apavement by Edward Hutton, to a designadapted from the Capella Palatina in Palermo,Sicily. Hutton also designed the Cosmatesquepavements in the sanctuary and central cross-ing at Buckfast Abbey, Devon, in 1942–1943.Some of the most extensive nineteenth-centurymosaic pavements are those designed byAuguste Essenwein for Cologne Cathedral,Germany, from 1880 (see Plates 12–14 andFigure 1.10). These floors also contain areaspaved with geometric designs in marble. SeeChapter 13.

1.4 Marble pavements

Marble floors were common in ancient Romeand marble has continued as one of the most


Figure 1.10 Cologne Cathedral, Germany. The nave,looking east, before repaving, by Joseph MariaLaporterie, 1795 (Photograph Dombau Archiv, Cologne)

widespread flooring materials in Italy up to thepresent day. St Peter’s, Rome, has a boldgeometric pavement of contrasted colouredmarble in the nave and aisles, while theRenaissance floors of the Vatican are pavedwith many superb designs including severalCosmati variants. The fictive cube design,

giving a three-dimensional impression, wasused as early as 1566 in the chancel ofPalladio’s San Giorgio Maggiore in Venice, andlater throughout Europe in both churches andsecular buildings. It was also adapted tomarquetry inlay.

Santa Maria della Salute, Venice, byLonghena, 1630–1687, has a fine marble pers-pective pavement under the dome (see Plate15). Siena Cathedral, Tuscany, 1284–1296, byGiovanni Pisano, has some of the finestRenaissance floors in Italy, by artists includingPinturiccio and Beccafumi. It was constructedbetween 1349 and 1547 (see Figure 1.11).

Another fine marble pavement of thefifteenth century can be found in LuccaCathedral, Tuscany (see Figure 1.12). Itcontains panels of geometric patterns, includ-ing fictive cubes.

In northern Europe, imported marble wasexpensive and its use limited. Decorative stonefloors were used in the new east end ofBishop Rodger’s Old Sarum Cathedral in thetwelfth century, where both documentaryevidence, and the survival of a small patch ofchequered stone pavement indicate the origi-nal appearance. St John Hope, excavating thesite in 1913 (St John Hope, 1913), records thatthe new east end was extensively paved withcontrasting blocks of white Chilmark andgreen Hurdcote stone. These colours are stillvisible today. The chapel floor was paved ina pattern of interlacing circles, of differentmaterial. It is now thought that the transeptswere similarly paved (Norton, 1996). St JohnHope also excavated pieces of verde anticoand red porphyry. There is the possibility,therefore, that a Cosmati pavement existedhere as well. If so, it was the first in England,as the Cosmati pavements at WestminsterAbbey, Canterbury Cathedral and StAugustine’s Abbey, Canterbury, were begunafter it was destroyed.

Inigo Jones on his return from Italy in 1614was one of the first to introduce marble floorsinto his classical buildings. One of the earliestwas in the Queen’s House at Greenwich (seePlate 46). Sir Christopher Wren designed the

18 Historic Floors

Figure 1.11 Siena Cathedral, Tuscany, Italy. 1284–1296,by Giovanni Pisano has one of the richest Renaissancefloors in Italy, constructed between 1349 and 1547.Artists include Pinturiccio and Beccafumi. Subjects rangefrom biblical to allegorical themes. Some sgraffitopanels. Above, Romulus and Remus, restored byLeopold Maccari in the nineteenth century (Photograph,Dombau archiv, Cologne)

Figure 1.12 Lucca Cathedral, Tuscany, Italy. Fifteenth-century marble pavement (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

noble black-and-white chequered pavement inSt Paul’s Cathedral as the culmination of thisspectacular classical interior (Figures 1.13 to1.16). Under the dome lies the fine circularpavement divided into quadrants, with a

central star and, at intervals, brass roundelsinscribed with Tudor roses and hearts.

The chancels of many of Wren’s City ofLondon churches also had chequered marblefloors (see Plate 17). The chancel of St Magnusthe Martyr is an example; the nave and aislespaved with freestone flags with many ledgers.St Benet’s, Paul’s Wharf, is another of the fewof Wren’s City Churches in which the floorshave remained intact.

The chequered marble pavement in thechoir at Westminster Abbey was laid c.1690 inmemory of Dr Busby, the famous Headmasterof Westminster School. In the Henry VIIchapel a similar floor was laid in 1699, possi-bly by Wren who was Surveyor to the Fabricfrom 1699–1723. It was altered in the 1760safter the burial of George III in the royal vault.Many Hanoverian burials are commemoratedby inscribed white marble lozenges.


Figure 1.13 St Paul’s Cathedral, London 1675–1711 bySir Christopher Wren. Paving plan, 1708 completed1710. Drawing by Dickinson. From The St Paul’sCathedral Collection of Wren Drawings, on deposit withthe Guildhall Library, Corporation of London(Photograph, Geremy Butler; copyright, GuildhallLibrary.)

Figure 1.14 St Paul’s Cathedral, London. Wren’schequered marble floor today; the Nave from theTriforium (Photograph, Philip Way)

The chequered floor in the choir at StGeorge’s Chapel, Windsor, also containing aroyal burial vault, is of a similar date. Theblack and white marble pavement in theChapel Royal at Hampton Court of 1711 isbased on a design by Serlio, popularized byd’Aviler in his Cours Complet d’Architecture of1691 (see Chapter 14). Nicholas Hawksmoor’ssuperb fictive cube marble pavement in thechoir at Beverley Minster of 1716–1720 givesthe illusion of a three-dimensional pavement(Figure 1.17). This design, already well knownin Italy in the sixteenth century, was publishedby d’Aviler and later, by Batty Langley inAncient Masonry in 1736 (see Chapter 14).

Many medieval floors were destroyed whencathedrals were repaved during the late seven-teenth and eighteenth centuries, work oftennecessitated by damage caused during theCivil War. The nave of York Minster was

20 Historic Floors

Figure 1.17 Beverley Minster Choir showing NicholasHawksmoor’s fine pavement of 1716–1720 (Photograph,Pitkin Guides)

Figure 1.15 St Paul’s Cathedral, London. Designs forthe southeast quarter plan of the crossing, by Wren,showing position of brass grilles. From The St Paul’sCathedral Collection of Wren Drawings, on deposit withthe Guildhall Library, Corporation of London.(Photograph, Geremy Butler; copyright, GuildhallLibrary)

Figure 1.16 St Paul’s Cathedral, London. Brass grillewith marble surround, central feature of Wren’s crossingdesign (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

repaved to designs by William Kent and LordBurlington in c.1730 with contrasted localfreestone and black marble, much of it laterreplaced in slate, in a fine geometric patternof roundels and squares. A new pavement,based on Burlington’s design, has recentlybeen laid in the choir (1991–1995).

As marble was considerably more expensivethan stone its use was usually confined to thechoir. The Builder’s Dictionary of 1734estimates the cost for ‘paving or laying withFree-Stones . . . squared all to a size . . . 12dor 14d a foot . . . but if well polish’d . . . thenthey may be worth 15d or 16d per foot . . .Paving with marble is of all other the mostbeautiful, of which there are several sorts . . .

This sort of pavement is valued from 2s to 3sper square foot and upwards according as ‘tiswell laid and polish’d’.

Throughout the eighteenth centurychequered marble was popular and manyeighteenth-century churches, including StGeorge’s, Hanover Square, by John James of1721, and All Hallows, London Wall, byGeorge Dance of 1765, still retain their marblefloors. James Wyatt laid a marble chequeredfloor at Lichfield Cathedral from 1788, only tobe replaced by Scott’s encaustic tiles. The useof marble was somewhat eclipsed in the mid-nineteenth century by the availability ofencaustic tiles, which were cheaper and, to theVictorian taste, more colourful. Gilbert Scott,however, laid a superb chequered marblepavement alternating with a huge key fretdesign in the nave, aisles and transepts atWorcester Cathedral (Figure 1.18). These leadthe eye up to the richer encaustic pavementsin the chancel.

Many of the floors at Ely Cathedral werereplaced by Gilbert Scott between 1861 and1869. Bacon, Scott’s Clerk of Works, recordedthat formerly ‘the floors between the pierswhich support the twelve arches on each sideof the nave were mostly made up ofmonumental slabs from which the brasses hadlong been removed’. Lord Alwyne Compton,then Bishop of Ely, offered a Cosmatesquescheme based on the Great Pavement atWestminster Abbey, but this was rejected infavour of Scott’s design. This involved level-ling the nave and aisles, and laying apavement composed, according to Bacon, ofImperial red and green Irish marble squares,on a base of Mansfield, Purbeck and Alwalton,with large roundels and a patterned border. Itis still there today. Scott repaved the floorunder the west tower with a labyrinth design,and the southwest transept floor with Purbeckand Mansfield red stone, laid in alternativelines and panels (Boddy, 1994). At WinchesterCathedral, a version of the famous octagonand square design in freestone with blackmarble lozenges was already in the chancel by1817, and remains there today.


Figure 1.18 Worcester Cathedral, Hereford andWorcester. Marble pavement, c.1874, designed by SirGeorge Gilbert Scott. (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Chequered marble pavements also appear inmany of the churches of the Low Countriesand are featured in the fine architectural interi-ors of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.Antwerp Cathedral, painted by P. Neefs theElder (1577–1657), is a good example.

Many of the Spanish cathedrals have decora-tive marble floors. Seville, 1402–1506, the thirdlargest cathedral in the world, has outstandingfloors. The black and white marble floor in thenave contains ledgers, including a largemedieval grave slab in front of the sanctuary,dated 1403. The magnificent treasury is pavedwith a fictive cube perspective design. TheRoyal Chapel, the Chapel of S. Isidoro, theSacristy of the Chalices and the main Sacristyall have fine chequered pavements, of differ-

ent designs. The chapter house floor iscomposed of many coloured marbles in acomplex radiating design under its dome,derived from Michelangelo’s design for theCapitol in Rome. All are small architecturalgems.

In France, at Chartres Cathedral, spanningthe full width of the nave, is a massive circu-lar stone labyrinth of c.1200. The centralroundel, plundered at the Revolution, origi-nally represented Theseus and the Minotaur.The sun strikes this point on 21 June. Pilgrimstraversed the labyrinth on their knees as a finalact of penance, the distance covered reputedlyequalling the length of the Via Dolorosa. Thelabyrinth is of the same diameter as the greatwest rose window above.

22 Historic Floors

Figure 1.19a Hall of San Martino, the Roman labyrinth,Lucca, Italy

Figure 1.19b Amiens Cathedral, Northern France. Finemarble geometric pavement, containing a representationof a labyrinth, destroyed in 1820 and reinstated in 1894(By kind permission of the Direction Régionale desAffaires Culturelles de Picardie)

To the Greco-Roman world the labyrinthrepresented the unrolling of life towards thefinal exit into the kingdom of death. Thispagan symbol was adapted by Christianity, torepresent the course of life leading toparadise. The history of the labyrinth isobscure, and it is not known how the Cretanlegend from Knossos became adapted toChristian use. It was first recorded on a Cretancoin of 67 BC. An ancient slate tablet foundat Pylos, Greece, was engraved with a similardesign. A labyrinth was found in the ruins ofPompeii, with an inscription in Latin. Thereare several at the Roman site of Italica, nearSeville, and one on the Roman pavement atCormerod, Switzerland. At Lucca, in Tuscany,the Hall of San Martino contains a remarkablyintact Roman carving of a labyrinth (Figure1.19a).

Some of these floor labyrinths were squarerather than circular. The earliest Christianexample is in Algeria in the basilica ofReparatus El-Asnam, of 328. San Vitale inRavenna has a sixth-century floor labyrinthmeasuring 6 m across. It also occurs inCremona Cathedral (eleventh century) and S.Maria in Trastevere, Rome (twelfth century).

In France, the cathedrals of Sens, Arras,Reims and Auxerre had stone labyrinths in thenave of similar date and design to Chartres.They were destroyed during the Revolution. In1820 the octagonal labyrinth in the nave atAmiens was destroyed, but reinstated in 1894(Figure 1.19b). The octagonal labyrinth atReims, destroyed in 1778, was reinstated morerecently (Villette, 1984). All were intended, aswith the Cosmati pavements, to lead the eyetowards the high altar.

1.5 Ledger stones and effigies

The term ledger referred, in the Middle Ages,to a large volume which lay flat on a shelf,reading desk or ledge, or, if it was a servicebook, on an altar (see Chapter 5). When usedto refer to ledger stones, it meant slabs lyingflat on the ground, or covering a tomb, ratherthan on a wall.


Figure 1.20 Ely Cathedral, Cambridgeshire. North choiraisle. Tournai marble slab. Possibly Bishop Nigellus,d.1169 (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Figure 1.21 Exeter Cathedral, Devon. Lady Chapel.Purbeck marble slab, possibly Bishop Bartholomeus,d.1184. One of the earliest Purbeck sculptures in thecountry (Photograph, Karen Taylor)

The ancestry of ledger stones can be tracedback to the late eleventh century, when carvedstone coffin lids were sunk into the floor.These were simply decorated with a foliatecross, with a sword for a man at arms, an anvilfor a blacksmith or a sickle for a farmer.During the twelfth century incised coffinshaped slabs in Tournai or Purbeck marbledeveloped, and a few have survived. One ofthe earliest Tournai slabs is to Bishop Nigellus,d.1169, at Ely Cathedral. An angel is depictedcarrying his soul to heaven (Figure 1.20).

The broken Tournai coffin slab, possibly toBishop Remigius, d.1140, at Lincoln Cathedral,is decorated with a tree of Jesse. This is aposthumous monument.

Two magnificent effigial coffin lids, one inTournai and one in Purbeck marble, inSalisbury Cathedral are to Bishop Roger, d.1139,with a fourteenth-century replacement head

24 Historic Floors

Figure 1.22 Exeter Cathedral, Devon. Bishop Quivil,d.1291 who completed the Lady Chapel. Ledger stonewith foliate cross (Photograph, Karen Taylor)

Figure 1.23 Exeter Cathedral, Devon. Ledger stone.Thomas Gayre d.1583 (Photograph, Karen Taylor)

and an unusual leaf border. The other is possi-bly to St Osmund, d.1099, a figure under acanopy with formalized drapery, the effigy andlettering of the twelfth century. Both are veryfine, and both were moved from Old Sarum.

One of the earliest Purbeck effigies is toBishop Bartholomeus, d.1184, in the LadyChapel at Exeter Cathedral (Figure 1.21). Thefigure lies under a trefoiled gable, with angelsin the spandrels. Another to Bishop Simon ofApulia, d.1223, also a life-size figure under acanopy, lies in the next recess. The incisedmarble slab to Bishop Quivil, d.1291, whocompleted the Lady Chapel, lies on the floorcentrally (Figure 1.22). The grave slabs toBishop Brewer, d.1244, Bishop Bitton, d.1307,Bishop Turberville, d.1559 and Bishop Allein,d.1570, also at Exeter, have been identified,but retain no inscriptions. The indent toBishop Berkeley, d.c.1327, contains a circularmatrix for the brass demi-figure.

At Peterborough Cathedral there is a tombslab to Abbot Benedict c.1195, and effigies tofour Abbots c.1195–c.1225.

Equally remarkable, and possibly the earli-est incised slab, is that to Bishop Bitton II,d.1274, at Wells Cathedral, a figure under atrefoiled gable.

At Westminster Abbey, in the cloisters, liethree damaged effigies of abbots, Lawrence,d.1173, Gilbert Crispin, also twelfth century,and William de Humez, d.1222. There are, ofcourse, many further effigies of the period, butthese are on tomb chests, and not on, or near,the floor. Slabs incised with a portrait were theprecursors of memorial brasses rather than ofledger stones.

The nave of Chichester Cathedral has a raresurvival of medieval paving, dating from thetwelfth century and showing medieval andlater ledger stones and indents of brassesinserted into surviving areas of medievallozenge-shaped paving. It is a superb medievaljigsaw (see Plate 18).

The ledger had three purposes; to identifythe place of burial; to close the grave whileproviding access to it; and to record aninscription, which, if carried out with beauti-

ful lettering and accompanied by a coat ofarms, could be a work of art. It could alsocommemorate an entire family, and often didso. It was not in itself a monument, but wassometimes related to a nearby wall monument.

During the late sixteenth century the newmerchant and middle classes copied thearistocracy by paying for intra-mural burialsinside churches. These graves were cappedwith ledger stones. By the early seventeenthcentury ledgers of black marble, about sevenfeet long and three feet wide, capping graves,became widespread. They were usuallyaligned to the east, with an incised inscriptionrecording the name, date and occasionally theoccupation of the deceased. Some alsocontained small pictures in relief.


Figure 1.24 Kilkenny Cathedral, Ireland. Ledger stoneto James Purcell, d.1552, and Johanna Shortals. Blackletter inscription. Sixteenth century (Photograph, JaneFawcett)

The ledger continued to be one of the mostpopular forms of sepulchral monument untilthe sinking of new vaults and graves inchurches ceased with the 1852 Burial Act. Theaesthetic significance of the ledger is depen-dent on the stone, the quality of the lettering,historical interest of the person commemo-rated, the literary value of the inscription orthe heraldic interest.

Ledgers were made of various materials,white, black or variegated marble, or moreoften Purbeck or local stone. Some were inlaidwith brass inscriptions, as at Bath Abbey, orwith white marble lozenges, as at Bristol andChester Cathedrals. They provide valuableevidence of middle-class occupation of theEnglish village or town from the close of earlymodern England to the beginning of Queen

Victoria’s reign. From them we can learn ofthe uses to which churches were put duringthe seventeenth, eighteenth and earlynineteenth centuries, and the occupation andstatus of the deceased. Their importance in thestudy of local history has still to be assessed,as the evidence they provide has been largelyoverlooked.

In cathedrals and abbeys they oftencommemorate leading churchmen andmembers of the local aristocracy, frequentlydecorated with heraldry, coats of arms andelaborate inscriptions. Those in churchesprovide an important record of middle- andworking-class inhabitants.

There is an important incised ledger, afigure framed by a canopy, to Bishop-electWilliam Bell 1332–1342, formerly in St

26 Historic Floors

Figure 1.25 Pershore Abbey, Hereford and Worcester.Ledger stone, damaged during replacement of steps inc.1860 and uncovered during excavations, 1995–1996(Photograph, Kevin Blockley)

Figure 1.26 Thaxted Parish Church, Essex. Armorialledger stone to Charles White, d.1679 (Photograph JaneFawcett)

Andrew’s Cathedral, Fife. It has been movedto the Cathedral museum for safety. There isalso a large Tournai marble matrix in thepresbytery, and other ledgers, all in poorcondition, owing to exposure to the weather.

In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuriesincised slabs included a marginal inscription,giving the name, age and often occupation ofthe deceased, with a chamfered edge. Thereis an unusually fine medieval alabaster ledgerin the Lady Chapel at York Minster to Thomasde Castell, d.1403, Vicar Choral. The ledger inthe south transept of St Mary Redcliffe, Bristol,to William Coke, servant of William Canynge,c.1440–1470, who paid for the building of theclerestory and nave vaults, has a black lettermarginal inscription and is decorated with adagger. Nearby, with a black letter inscription,still filled with lead, is a ledger with an incisedcross to John Blecker, who endowed a chantrychapel in 1434.

Kilkenny Cathedral, Ireland, contains themost important collection of medieval floormonuments in the country (Figure 1.24). Anumber of them are inscribed with the toolsof the trades of the deceased. These includeDonatus Brin, a carpenter, showing adzes, anauger and carpenter’s square, William

Hollechan, weaver, who has a fly-shuttle andRichard Clouan, shoemaker, who has knives,an awl and part of an Irish brogue.

In the Lady Chapel at Rochester Cathedral,the ledger to Frederick Hill, d.1759, containsa picture of himself as the good Samaritan, onhorseback. Hill ‘provided for his majesty’s sickand wounded seamen at this port’.

Many of the seventeenth-century ledgerscapped earth graves. At St John’s, Thaxted,several of those buried in the chancel wereunable to afford a ledger, and their graveswere marked by floor tiles recording theirinitials and the year of death. An unusuallyinteresting range incorporating figures,heraldry, skull and crossbones, putti, foliateborders and rather crude lettering in relief,exists at St Magnus Cathedral, Kirkwall,


Figure 1.27 Westminster Abbey, London. Cloisters, eastwalk. Mrs Aphra Behn, playwright, d.1689, recut in1970s (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Figure 1.28 St Paul’s Cathedral, London. 1675–1711. SirChristopher Wren. Crypt. Tony Webb, Master Carver re-entering inscription to George Dance, d.1825, on wornledger stone, in 1995 (Photograph Philip Way)

Orkney. They mostly date from the seven-teenth century.

Eighteenth-century ledgers were often laiddirectly on top of brick graves, and thisexplains the chips seen round the edges of thestone, where it has been lifted to permitanother burial. When the floor of the churchof St Augustine-the-Less, Bristol, wasexcavated the area beneath the floor wasfound to be covered with brick graves,without an inch between them, and during thenineteenth and early twentieth centuriesservices had taken place above a sea ofcoffins. At Westminster Abbey the under-floorarea was entirely filled with burials, with manymore in the cloister garth.

Occasionally, ledgers were located close tothe individual’s pew, and church wardens’account books confirm this. Ledgers were alsoused as the capping-off stone to the stairwellentrance of subterranean burial vaults.

Ledgers encapsulate the entire developmentof the art of lettering from the earliest Gothicto the finest script designed by craftsmen. Theearliest letter forms, dating from the thirteenthcentury, are in Gothic or black letter, derivedfrom the medieval scribes of Europe. Thereare many versions of Gothic lettering onledgers. The earliest had marginal inscriptions,often in relief. Some of the early Gothic letter-ing is deeply impressed. There are examplesat Exeter Cathedral and at St Mary Redcliffe,Bristol, where the original infill between theletters is still visible.

Gothic lettering was superseded by Italic,derived from Italian writing masters of thesixteenth century. Roman letter forms, alsocommon on ledgers from the seventeenthcentury onwards, came from classical Romanscript dating back to the first century AD.Copper plate was widely used in theeighteenth and nineteenth centuries, and themore austere Clarendon is also found on manyeighteenth- and nineteenth-century ledgers.

The quality of lettering was dependent onthe skill of the letter cutter, and the amountof money spent. John Le Neve, in his seriesof volumes on church monuments, compiled

in the mid-eighteenth century, provided someinformation on the leading sculptors and lettercutters, and on the ledger stones on whichthey had worked. The Stantons of Southwark,a renowned family of sculptors, gave Le Nevea list of their ledger stones and wallmonuments. From this Julian Litten identifiedsix ledgers to the Abdy family in the northaisle at Kelvedon Church, Essex, all providedby the Stantons at the same time. The threefemale Abdys had white marble ledgers, withcoats of arms in lozenge-shaped shields. Thethree males had ledgers of black Tournaimarble, with their coats of arms on squareshields. All six Abdys are commemorated on

28 Historic Floors

Figure 1.29 Campo Santo, Pisa, Italy, often regarded asthe most beautiful cemetery in the world. Effigial ledgerslab (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

a wall monument in the south aisle, notdesigned by the Stantons.

During the eighteenth century, ledgers wereincreasingly associated with wall monuments,and the lettering on both often came from thesame craftsmen. The lettering on the GrinlingGibbons monument to Archbishop Lamplughin York Minster is identical to that on hisledger stone nearby.

The outstanding concentrations of medievalledgers occur at Exeter and Lincoln Cathedrals,many with marginal inscriptions in Latin ormedieval French. These cathedrals also have arich collection of ledgers of other periods.Wells, Salisbury, Gloucester, Canterbury,Winchester and Bristol Cathedrals andTewkesbury Abbey have important ledgers


Figure 1.30a Stenkyrka, Gotland, Sweden. Incised slabto Jacobus et Butuidus d.c.1500. The slab proved tooshort, so the hat was placed in the corner. Stenkyrka,or stone church, c.1030, was the oldest of ninety-threechurches on Gotland, all in use in 1891 (From IncisedSlabs on the Continent of Europe, 1891, by Rev. Creeny.Published privately. Reproduced by courtesy of Societyof Antiquaries, London)

Figure 1.30b St Stefan’s Cathedral, Vienna. Fifteenth-century relief in the north choir aisles, taken from theOld Churchyard (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

dating from the seventeenth century or earlier.Westminster Abbey is outstanding for thenumber of ledgers, the historical importance,and variety of inscriptions to the many royal,ecclesiastical and public figures commemo-rated. Some individual ledgers are identified inthe cathedral floor studies (see Appendix) andmany more are located in Cathedral FloorDamage Survey (Fawcett, 1991), coveringforty-four cathedrals and greater churches.

The development of heraldry on ledgerstones has still to be studied. Many coats ofarms, being in high relief, have been obliter-ated even more catastrophically than carvedinscriptions, and little research has been done.

It is doubtful if any heraldry survives onledgers before the sixteenth century. Its use torecord the coat of arms of the deceased

increased dramatically on the reinstatement ofthe monarchy with Charles II. During the lateseventeenth and eighteenth centuries heraldicledgers were used by the nobility, and in theearly nineteenth century they were verycommon, particularly in cathedrals, wheremany of the nobility were buried.

It is surprising that ledgers have been solittle studied by archaeologists and historians,although they provide a rich source of histor-ical information. The rate of loss of inscrip-tions is alarming. Many that were still legiblewhen the ICOMOS survey was completed in1991 have already disappeared under theremorseless grinding of feet, and many cathe-drals and most churches are still withoutadequate records. As a result of resurfacing,liturgical reforms and wear and tear, it is

30 Historic Floors

Figure 1.31 St John’s Cathedral, Valetta, Malta. Floor entirely covered with ledger stones in coloured marble, mostlydating from the seventeenth century, many to Grand Masters of the Order of the Knights of St John. These fineledgers are being damaged by stiletto heels, and a conservation programme is in progress (Photograph, MarioMintoff, Photocity, Valletta)

estimated that at least one-third of the originalstock of ledgers has been destroyed, leavingan estimated 165 000 in Britain.

On the Continent, there is a rich heritage ofledger stones, effigial slabs and incised slabs,with many regional variations. Ledgers inFrance, Holland and Belgium resemble thosein the UK. In Italy, Germany and Austria,however, ledgers often contain a lifesize effigyin high relief. The inscribed ledger slabsrecorded by the Reverend Creeny in 1891document a remarkably wide range of styles,but many have now disappeared (Figures1.30a and b).

In St John’s Cathedral, Valetta, Malta, aWorld Heritage Site, an unusual floorcomposed of ledgers of coloured marble inhigh relief, commemorates many of the GrandMasters of the Order of St John, dating fromthe seventeenth century (Figures 1.31 andPlate 16). See Chapter 13.

1.6 Monumental brasses

The earliest brasses were made in the latetwelfth or early thirteenth centuries in the areabetween Dinant on the Meuse and Cologne.The material, known as latten, from whichmonumental brasses were made was an alloyof copper and zinc. The copper was mined inthe Hartz Mountains, and the zinc obtainedfrom calamine ore, a form of powdered stone,found near Aachen. Calamine ore, or zinccarbonate, was ground up and mixed withcharcoal and pieces of copper. When heated,the zinc alloyed with the copper and formedbrass. This was melted and poured intoshallow stone moulds and left to set. Until thesixteenth century, when suitable materialswere found in England, all the brass wasimported from the Cologne area. The earliestknown brass in Europe is at Verden, nearBremen. It commemorated Bishop Yso vonWilpe d.1231 and is six feet long, made in onelarge piece.

The making of incised tomb slabs was onthe increase in western Europe from the


Figure 1.32 Hildesheim Cathedral, Germany. BishopOtto de Brunswick, d.1279 (from a Book of Facsimiles ofMonumental Brasses on the Continent, Reverend Creeny,1884. Published privately. Reproduced by courtesy ofthe Society of Antiquaries)

twelfth century, particularly in the Tournaiarea lying between France and Flanders. Bythe mid-thirteenth century a technique haddeveloped for filling the incised figure on theslab with brass, and so the production ofTournai marble slabs with inlaid brasses devel-oped. The marginal inscriptions were alsofilled with brass.

Many brass founders were established in theTournai area by the early fourteenth century.Tournai marble was quarried at Cherq orAntoing nearby throughout the medieval

period. It was black or dark grey. The marbleslabs were prepared, the brass inlay insertedon site, and the finished products sent out. Forlarge brass figures the sheets of brass weresecured on the back of the slab by soldering.Brasses were often made in sections. Theyrepresented full length figures, sometimes withcanopies, saints and marginal inscriptions.

Tournai brass slabs were brought to Britainduring the fourteenth century and a fewexamples survive: in Scotland at DundrennanAbbey (an indent of a man in armour c.1320),

32 Historic Floors

Figure 1.33 Schwerin Cathedral, Mecklenburg,Germany. Bishops Ludolph d.1339 and Henry deBulowe d.1347. Four brothers, all bishops, werecommemorated by double memorial brasses in Schwerin(from a Book of Facsimiles of Monumental Brasses onthe Continent, Reverend Creeny, 1884. Publishedprivately. Reproduced by courtesy of the Society ofAntiquaries)

Figure 1.34 Lübeck Cathedral, Germany. BishopsBurchard de Serken, d.1317, and John de Mul, d.1351,commemorated by a double brass, one of the finestexamples of monumental engraving (from a Book ofFacsimiles of Monumental Brasses on the Continent,Reverend Creeny, 1884. Published privately. Reproducedby courtesy of the Society of Antiquaries)

in St John’s, Perth (man and wife c.1360) andin Whithorn Priory (mitred figure c.1360); inEngland at Winchelsea, Sussex, Boston,Lincolnshire and, best of all, at Higham Ferrers(Lawrence de St Maur, Rector, d.1337). AtDurham Cathedral the Tournai indent ofBishop Louis de Beaumont c.1333 has aborder of saints and angels. It was one of thelargest brasses in the country, thought to havebeen made to silence his critics, because hewas said to be exceedingly unpopular.

During the thirteenth century brassesbecame an increasingly popular form ofmonument, both in Britain and on theContinent. The earliest English brasses datefrom about 1257, developed from incisedcoffin-shaped slabs. They were in the form oflong crosses, sometimes with a Lombardicinscription, and often with a sword or chalice

indicating the occupation of the deceased. Theearliest of these, in the feretory at WestminsterAbbey, commemorates the children of Williamde Valence, Margaret and John, 1276–1277.The inscription is in brass Lombardic letters(Page-Phillips, 1969).

English brasses reached the highest peak,both for quality of design and variety, underthe influence of Flemish craftsmen in the latethirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Regionalstyles were developed in workshops inLondon, Norwich, Bristol and York.

The brass to Bishop Wyville, d.1357, inSalisbury Cathedral is outstanding. The bishoplooks out of Sherborne Castle, which he hadrecovered for the church from the Earl ofSalisbury; rabbits and hares represent BereChase, territory for which the bishop was alsofighting. Another important fourteenth-century


Figure 1.36 Nordhausen Hospital of Chiriaci, NorthGermany. Jacob Capillan, d.1395 (from a Book ofFacsimiles of Monumental Brasses on the Continent,Reverend Creeny, 1884. Published privately. Reproducedby courtesy of the Society of Antiquaries)

Figure 1.35 Lübeck Cathedral, Germany. BishopBertram Cremen, d.1377 (from a Book of Facsimiles ofMonumental Brasses on the Continent, Reverend Creeny,1884. Published privately. Reproduced by courtesy ofthe Society of Antiquaries)

ecclesiastical brass is to Bishop Trillack d.1360at Hereford Cathedral. The bishop lies undera cusped arch with an ogee gable. WilliamErmynd, d.1401, a priest at Castle Ashby,Northamptonshire wears an unusual capeembroidered with portraits of saints.

Ecclesiastical brasses are rare (see p.38), butthere are many early indents; at Ely Cathedral

Bishop William de Luda, d.1298, at WellsCathedral Bishop Walter de Haselshaw, d.1308,at Hereford Cathedral Bishop Thomas deCantilupe, d.1282, who was canonized in 1320,at Peterborough Cathedral Abbot Godfrey deCroyland, d.1329, at St Albans Abbey Abbot Rich,d.1335, and at Canterbury Cathedral ArchbishopStafford, d.1443, and Archbishop Dean, d.1501.

34 Historic Floors

Figure 1.38 Exeter Cathedral, Devon. Bishop Bitton,d.1303, hypothetical reconstruction by John Carter,Antiquary, in the late eighteenth century

Figure 1.37 Carlisle Cathedral, Cumbria. Chancel, brassto Bishop Bell, d.1496

The beautiful indent by the pulpit at WellsCathedral may have commemorated Countess deLisle d.1484. She wears a mitred head-dress andlies beneath a canopy. The row of forty-three

enormous indents in the north and south choiraisles at Lincoln make an overwhelming effect.

During the course of the fourteenth centurythe export of finished brasses from Flanders


Figure 1.39 Sir Roger de Trumpington, Cambridgeshire,d.1289. The second oldest military brass in England (Bycourtesy of the Cambridge Medieval Brass RubbingCentre)

Figure 1.40 Sir George Felbrigg, Playford, Suffolk,d.1400 (By courtesy of the Cambridge Medieval BrassRubbing Centre)

increased, promoted by the Hanseatic League.Brasses were shipped to Scandinavia,Germany, France, Spain and England. Some ofthese were made for merchants working forthe league. The focus for this manufactureappears to have been Ghent or Bruges, usingsupplies of Tournai marble shipped along theriver Scheldt. One of the finest fourteenth-century ecclesiastical Flemish brasses is toAbbot De la Mere, d.1396, in St Albans Abbey.

Some of the most impressive brasses tosurvive are the English military brasses. Theywere usually made in London, set in Purbeckmarble, often with Lombardic lettering. Sir JohnDaubernon c.1272, Stoke D’Abernon, Surrey, isthe oldest brass in England. Sir Roger deTrumpington c.1289, Trumpington, Cambridge-shire (Figure 1.39), Sir Robert de Bures, c.1302,Acton, Suffolk and Sir John de Creke (and hiswife) c.1330, Westley Waterless, Cambridge-shire, are all full-length figures in chain mail,all exceptionally fine. Two of the best Englishfourteenth-century brasses, by the same crafts-men, possibly working for the court atWestminster, are of Sir John de Wautone,d.1347, at Wimbish, Essex, and Sir JohnGifford, d.1348, at Bowers Gifford, Essex. Twoexceptional fifteenth-century military brassesare to Sir Thomas de Beauchamp, Earl ofWarwick, d.1406, a friend of Edward III (andhis wife), in St Mary’s, Warwick, and SirThomas Chaucer, d.1436 and his wife atEwelme, Oxfordshire. He fought at Agincourtand was the son of Geoffrey Chaucer.

It is possible to date many military brassesto within ten years. From the reign of EdwardI to the seventeenth century brasses are animportant source of information on the devel-opment of armour.

Similarly brasses provide an excellent recordof women’s costume. Dame Jane de Cobham,d.1298 in Cobham, Kent, one of a fine groupin that church, is one of the earliest Englishbrasses of a woman. Lady Margaret Camoysd.1310 at Trotton, Sussex wears a dresscovered in heraldic shields. Margaret Cheyne,d.1419 at Hever, Kent, wears a horned head-dress, her head supported on a magnificentembroidered cushion carried by two angels.Margaret Peyton d.1484, Isleham,Cambridgeshire, has a richly embroidereddress and a butterfly head-dress, and SusanKyngeston d.1514 at Childrey, Oxfordshire, hasa pedimental head-dress with a pomander ona cord round her waist.

Although the merchants portrayed onbrasses are not so easily datable, they do,nevertheless, provide a record of civilians’

36 Historic Floors

Figure 1.41 Ghent, Belgium. Jacques and JoosyneSymoens, d.1576 (from a Book of Facsimiles ofMonumental Brasses on the Continent, Reverend Creeny,1884. Published privately. Reproduced by courtesy ofthe Society of Antiquaries)

clothes. There are interesting brasses atNorthleach, Gloucestershire, to an unknownwool merchant c.1400, his woolsack at hisfeet, and to William Scors d.1447, a tailor,whose feet are on a pair of crossed scissors.Northleach also contains seven brasses of

wool merchants with their wives, mostly of thefifteenth century.

Trinity Chapel, St John the Baptist,Cirencester, contains twelve brasses to woolmerchants and their wives. William Prelatted.1462 and his two wives, and Richard Dixton,d.1438, both in armour and both woolmerchants, paid for the building of TrinityChapel. Reginald Spycer, d.1442, also a woolmerchant and also a contributor to the cost ofbuilding the church, lies there with his fourwives. Another remarkable and coherentgroup are the twelve brasses to the deCobham and Brooke families, Lords of theManor, in St Mary Magdalene, Cobham, Kent.These include Joan de Cobham, c.1310, Joan,Lady Cobham. d.1433, with her two husbandsSir Reginald Braybrook, d.1405 and SirNicholas Hawberk, d.1407, both in armour, allframed by canopies. The brasses are lined upin two rows across the chancel.

During the fifteenth century the figuresbecame smaller, children appeared groupedbelow their parents, with inscriptions at thebase. The Tudor period saw more brassesproduced than at any other period, but manywere made to standard designs, and the artisticquality gradually declined. Inscriptions, formerlyin Latin or medieval French were now inEnglish, the figures were on the whole less well-drawn and the composition often crowded.

Heraldry provides useful evidence for thedating and identification of brasses. Heraldicshields were often mounted separately on thecorners of the stone slabs to which the brasseswere fixed. Tabards worn by Tudor knightscarried heraldic devices. The brass to Sir RalphVerney, d.1547, and his wife at Aldbury,Hertfordshire, was decorated with elaborateheraldry.

By the mid-seventeenth century brasses hadalmost disappeared, although there was a briefrenaissance during the Gothic Revival. Thedistribution of brasses in Britain was largelydetermined by the accumulation of wealth.There is a concentration in the south andsoutheast, fewer in the west country and thenorth, and almost none in Wales, Scotland and


Figure 1.42 Lady Katherine Howard, St. Mary, Lambeth,London, d.1535. She is depicted wearing a heraldicmantle (By courtesy of the Cambridge Medieval BrassRubbing Centre)

Ireland. St Albans Abbey, which was one ofthe richest and most influential religiousfoundations in England, contains an excep-tional concentration of brasses, mostly ecclesi-astical, in the chancel and choir aisles.Westminster Abbey, a royal foundation, is also

richly endowed with both secular and ecclesi-astical brasses.

Thousands of brasses were destroyed duringthe iconoclasm that began with theReformation when, as supporters of the oldreligion, bishops and abbots were targets fordestruction. Weaver’s Ancient FuneralMonuments, written in 1631, gives an accountof the iconoclasm set in motion by Henry VIII.‘Marbles which covered the dead were diggedup, tombes hack and hewne apeeces . . .inscriptions or epitaphs, images or representa-tions of the defunct broken, erased, cut ordismembered.’ Of brasses he says ‘for greedi-ness of the brasse, or for that they werethought to bee Anti-christian pulled out fromthe sepulchre and purloined’.

Worse followed. During the Civil War,Cromwell’s Commissioners were sent out topurge the churches of idolatrous furnishings,and very few brasses survived the destruction.Out of many thousands, it has been estimatedthat only about 2000 remain in Britain, and onthe Continent, where the rate of loss has beeneven more catastrophic, it is estimated thateven fewer have survived. A considerablenumber of brass indents still exist, however.These matrices, often of immense size, retainthe imprint of the original brass, sometimesthe studs with which it was fixed, andoccasionally fragments of the brass itself. Theyare the ghosts of medieval brasses, impressiveworks of art that bear witness to our destruc-tive past.

Interest in medieval brasses was aroused inthe early nineteenth century by the writings ofthe antiquaries Richard Gough, John Carterand John Britton, all well-known for theirwork on medieval buildings. Gough andCarter collaborated over SepulchralMonuments, published in 1786. Carter wasalso renowned for his accurate drawings ofcathedrals for the Society of Antiquaries,opposing the restorations of James Wyatt.Britton, through his publication of accuratedrawings of cathedrals, was influential inawakening interest in Gothic buildings. Theyalso published brass rubbings; some of these

38 Historic Floors

Figure 1.43 Westminster Abbey, London. Nave, brass toJohn Loughborough Pearson, d.1897. Surveyor to theFabric, 1878–97. Designed by W.D. Caroe. (Photograph,National Monuments Record)

early impressions are now in the BritishMuseum and the Society of Antiquaries. JohnSell Cotman published engravings of brassesin Norfolk and Suffolk in 1819. HoraceWalpole, always ahead of public opinion,commissioned a memorial brass to BishopWalpole of Ely to give a medieval flavour tothe cloisters at Strawberry Hill where it waslaid in c.1755 (Meara, 1983).

By 1837 brass rubbing had become apopular activity among the cognoscenti. Beforelong, the Ecclesiologists decided to promote,not only the study of brasses, but their repro-duction. They recommended brasses or incisedslabs as suitable memorials, and maintainedthat ‘brasses are the most fitting kind ofmonument that . . . could be adopted’. Theypromoted Pugin and Hardman, and also Wallerof London, who offered a large double brasswith canopies for £60. Most of Waller’s designswere based on medieval examples. TheGentleman’s Magazine of 1848 noted that ‘inthe revivals of Pugin and Waller, ancientexamples had been principally copied’.

Pugin, in his Apology for the Revival ofPointed or Christian Architecture in England(1843) argued in favour of brasses as suitablemonuments. He was also concerned oversuitable costume for his figures. ‘To representpersons of the present century in the costumeof the fourteenth, is little less inconsistent thanto envelope them in the Roman toga.’ He felt,however, that women’s clothes of the periodwere acceptable for brasses and so also werethose of the clergy. He recommended that forprivate gentlemen a figure brass with ‘a longcloak, disposed in severe folds, would producea solemn effect’, while ‘for the humbler classes,a cross, with the instruments of their trades orcrafts . . . would be sufficient’. Pugin became afriend of John Hardman of Birmingham, andtogether they set up a medieval metal-workingbusiness, and produced a wide range of Gothicmetalwork for churches, including brasses.Both Hardman and Pugin were RomanCatholics, and their collaboration, which beganin 1838, was fruitful, both financially and artis-tically, and many brasses were made to Pugin’s

design. Although Pugin died prematurely in1852, Hardmans continued as one of theleading manufacturers of memorial brasses. In1970 the Hardman studios were burnt downand their metal-working business ended. Aswell as new brasses, Hardmans and Wallersmade a lucrative income out of the restorationof medieval brasses, a technique which contin-ues to this day.

Some of Pugin’s designs were of elaboratecrosses with shields of arms, vine scrolls andGothic pinnacles and canopies. The brass atGrafton Underwood, Northamptonshire, toLady Gertrude Fiztpatrick, d.1841, who kneelsunder a cathedral-like structure is remarkable.Others were of life-size figures, of which MrsSophia Sheppard, d.1848 in Holy Trinity,Theale, Berkshire, is an impressive example.The lettering was, of course, always Gothic.

The brass to George Basevi, d.1845, at ElyCathedral is a good example of a colouredVictorian brass designed and made by Wallers.Basevi stands under a canopy, holding hisdesign for the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.The marginal inscription describes his deathfrom a fall from the scaffolding while restor-ing the Cathedral. The fine life-size brass toRobert Stephenson, d.1859, designed byGilbert Scott and made by Hardmans, in thenave at Westminster Abbey, is a similarcomposition though without the canopy. Bothrepresent the bold approach which character-ized many Victorian brasses. Hardmans alsomade the brass to Sir Charles Barry d.1860 inWestminster Abbey. It incorporates the groundplan of the Palace of Westminster and theVictoria Tower. Scott’s own memorial brass,also in the Abbey, designed by G.E. Street,contains the small seated figure of Scott withina more complex composition, including across and allegorical figures.

The impressive brasses in the crypt of StPaul’s Cathedral to Lord Leighton d.1896 andSir John Millais d.1896, both designed byNorman Shaw, contain noble lettering withcoats of arms in high relief on black marbleslabs, while the brass to Sir Arthur Sullivand.1900 has a border of birds in foliage, a spray


of leaves and a lyre. They all make a strongstatement for this new, and relatively short-lived art form, which, while taking its inspira-tion from the traditions established in theMiddle Ages, nevertheless developed tech-niques and styles of their own. One of themost recent brasses was designed byChristopher Ironside to commemorate the Earland Countess of Mountbatten at WestminsterAbbey (1985). The replication of brasses forbrass rubbing has created a new industry, anda new public interest in the subject.

The distribution of brasses is much betterdocumented than ledger stones. TheMonumental Brass Society are carrying out anation-wide survey which will providevaluable new information on condition andsurvival. Some important cathedral brasses aredocumented in ICOMOS Cathedral FloorDamage Survey (Fawcett, 1991) and also in theattached floor studies (see Appendix).

References

BETTS, I., CROWLEY, N. and KEILY, J. (1991). Recent Work onMediaeval and Later Building Materials in London.Museum of London Archaeology Service.

BODDY, D. (1994). Paving, the way forward. Recording,conserving and maintaining the historic pavements ofthe Cathedral Church of the Holy and UndividedTrinity, Ely. M.A. Thesis in Building Conservation,University of York (unpublished).

Building News (1890). LVIII.BURGE, W. (1843). The Temple Church: An account of its

restoration and repairs. London. Pickering.BURGES, W. (1867). Our Future Architecture. The Builder,

XXV, 386.CLAYTON, P.B. (1912). The Inlaid Tiles of Westminster

Abbey. Archaeological Journal, 69.COLE, D. (1980). The Work of Sir George Gilbert Scott. The

Architectural Press.CREENY, REV. (1884). A Book of Facsimiles of Monumental

Brasses on the Continent. Published by the Author.CREENY, REV. (1891). Incised Slabs on the Continent of

Europe. Published by the Author.CRUDEN, S. (1952). Glenluce Abbey: Finds recovered during

excavations. Part I. XXIX. 1951. pp. 177–94. Part II.XXX. 1951–2. pp. 179–90. Transactions of theDumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History andAntiquarian Society.

EAMES, E. (1992). English Tilers. Medieval Craftsmen Series.British Museum Press.

EASTLAKE, C. (1872). History of the Gothic Revival.FAWCETT, J. (1991). Cathedral Floor Damage Survey.

ICOMOS UK.

FOSTER, R. (1991) Patterns of Thought: The Hidden Meaningof the Great Pavement of Westminster Abbey. JonathanCape.

GEM, R. and KEEN, L. (1981). Late Anglo-Saxon finds fromthe site of St Edmund’s Abbey. Proceedings Suffolk Inst.Arch., 30.

GLASS, D. (1980). Studies on Cosmatesque pavements. B.A.R.International Series, No. 82.

HERBERT, A. and HUGGINS, K. (1995). The Decorative Tile inArchitecture and Interiors. Phaidon.

HORTON, M.C. and NORTON, E.C. (1981). A Parisian workshopat Canterbury, a late thirteenth century tile pavement inthe Corona Chapel, and the origins of Tyler Hill.Journal of the British Archaeological Association, 134.

HUTTON, E. (1950) The Cosmati. Routledge & Kegan Paul.JONES, J. (1993). Minton – The First 200 Years of Design

and Production. Swan Hill.KELLY, J. (1994). The encaustic pavements of George Gilbert

Scott. Architectural Association. Graduate Diploma inBuilding Conservation, Thesis (unpublished).

MEARA, D. (1983). Victorian Memorial Brasses. Routledge &Kegan Paul.

METCALFE, P. and PEVSNER, N. (1995). The Cathedrals ofEngland (vols 1 and 2), Viking.

NICHOLS, J.G. (1841). Examples of Gothic Inlaid Tiles.NICHOLS, J.G. (1842). Examples of Encaustic Tiles.NORTON, C. (1994). Medieval Floor Tiles in Scotland:

Medieval art and architecture in the Diocese of StAndrews. BAA Conference Proceedings for 1986, Leeds.

NORTON, C. (1996). The decorative pavements of SalisburyCathedral and Old Sarum. In Medieval art and archi-tecture at Salisbury Cathedral. L. KEEN and T. COCKE eds.British Archaeological Association ConferenceTransactions XVII, 90–105.

PAGE-PHILLIPS, J. (1969). Macklin’s Monumental Brasses(1913). Allen & Unwin.

PEVSNER, N. (1972). Buildings of England. Yorkshire: Yorkand the East Riding. Penguin Books.

PUGIN, A.W. (1843). Apology for the Revival of Pointed orChristian Architecture in England.

RICHARDSON, J. (1928–29). A Tile Kiln and Scottish MedievalOrnamented Floor Tiles. Proceedings of the Society ofAntiquaries, Scotland. 63. pp. 281–310.

SCOTT, G.G. (1857). On the present position and futureprospects of the Revival of Gothic Architecture.Associated Architectural Societies’ Reports and Papers,IV, pp. 76, 77, 80. Lincoln.

SCOTT, G.G. (1863). Gleanings from Westminster Abbey.Parker.

SCOTT, G.G. (1879). Personal and Professional Recollections.SHAW, H. (1858). Specimens of Tile Pavements, Drawn from

Existing Authorities.ST JOHN HOPE, W.H. (1913). Report on the excavation of the

Cathedral Church of Old Sarum in 1913. ProceedingsSociety of Antiquarians of London 2nd Series, 26.

STREET, G.E. (1858). A Paper read at the AnniversaryMeeting of the Ecclesiological Society. The EcclesiologistVol. XIX. (Victorian Church Art 1971) HMSO.

VILLETTE, J. (1984). L’Enigme du Labyrinth. Notre Dame deChartres. Revue Trimestrielle.

WELANDER, D. (1991). The History of the Art andArchitecture of Gloucester Cathedral. Alan Sutton.

WELANDER, D. and VEREY, D. (1989). Gloucester Cathedral.Alan Sutton.

40 Historic Floors

Church floors differ greatly from those ofsecular buildings in two principal ways. First,in a secular building – whether public orprivate – a floor of unified construction andfinish is the desired norm, at least within theconfines of a single space. A dais or otherspecial feature may provide the exception.This unified approach is, however, seldomfound in medieval and later ecclesiasticalbuildings, where a variety of materials, finishesand levels is common. Secondly, a secularfloor, once laid, tends to remain more-or-lessundisturbed throughout its lifespan (or did,prior to the advent of modern under-floorservices). By contrast, church floors have beenconstantly tampered with in response tonatural wear and tear, changes in liturgicalfashion, and the demands of indoor burial.Consequently, ecclesiastical floors can displaya bewildering complexity and, in the majorityof instances, their histories are only inter-pretable through systematic archaeologicalinvestigation.

2.1 The church floor: a developingstructure

2.1.1 Materials and laying techniques

The earliest floors tended, except in buildingsof outstanding quality, to be of simple, locallyavailable materials, such as clay, gravel or

chalk: they are loosely termed ‘earth’ floors. InAnglo-Saxon and Norman churches a singlelayer of flooring material, 5–10 cm in thick-ness, could cover the entire building, and aunified approach was therefore usual at thisearly date. However, there was more to layingan earth floor than simply dumping cartloadsof raw material and spreading it about. In thecase of clay, the material was first puddled,then spread and tamped down. Gravel wasnot laid loose, but mixed with brickearth, clay,or another binding agent, and laid damp.Chalk floors often consisted of two mergedlayers, the lower comprising small rubble, andthe upper a slurry of pulverized chalk whichcemented the whole together and provided adense surface.

A few early churches were floored with ascreed of weak concrete, after the Romanfashion, the ingredients being lime mortar andcrushed brick (opus signinum). Remnants ofsuch floors have been uncovered at Reculver(Kent) and elsewhere. There are also a fewrecorded instances of an in situ concrete ortessellated floor of Roman date being reused,where a church was built on the site of a moreancient structure (e.g. St Helen-on-the-Walls,York). Lime concrete, containing gravel, chalk,ironstone or other stone chips as an aggregate,was also used for flooring in a few late Saxonand Norman churches. Although little evidenceremains, it seems that concrete flooring wasselectively used in the more important parts of

41

2

The archaeology of church andcathedral floorsWarwick Rodwell

churches that were themselves of higher-than-average parochial status.

Concrete should not be confused withmortar. The common ‘mortar’ floor waswidespread in late Saxon and medievalchurches. Its creation was partly adventitiousand partly deliberate. Huge quantities of limemortar were employed in the construction ofmedieval churches, both as a matrix and forrendering. Mixing was often carried out withinthe building, and materials stockpiled there.Consequently, by the time the walls werecomplete, and rendered, significant deposits oflime mortar and aggregate had usuallyaccumulated over the working area, fillingground hollows and spreading across theinterior as a series of interleaved and discon-tinuous layers. Uniformity was then achievedby spreading a thin layer of mortar over thewhole, thus deliberately forming a floorsurface. The remains of these compositemortar floors are frequently encountered inchurch excavations, and are invariably of irreg-ular thickness. They may be as little as 1 cmbut, where underlying irregularities have beenfilled, the thickness may be 10 cm, or more.

The occasional appearance of gypsum as amedieval flooring material was largelyconfined to special purpose uses, principallythe construction of masons’ tracing floors, asat Wells and York (Colchester and Harvey,1974; Harvey, 1969). Gypsum does not farewell in damp conditions, and thus tended tobe used at a high level. The same applies tolime-ash and other forms of post-medieval‘plaster’ flooring. A few examples still survivein churches, in belfries and upper chambers,as in Bristol and Lichfield Cathedrals.

Extensive use of dressed stone paving wasrare in churches before the thirteenth century,and was then found only in the major build-ings. The case of Canterbury Cathedral isprobably exceptional: there the eleventh-century nave was floored with thick limestoneblocks embedded in a prodigious quantity ofmortar (p. 64). The case of Kellington (NorthYorkshire) is more likely to be typical of stoneflooring of that date. The single-celled church

was built on a rough pavement of pitchedlimestone rubble, with weak mortar usedsparingly to fill the interstices (Atkins et al.,1991; Mytum, 1993).

Good stone paving was in use in majorchurches in the twelfth century, and from themiddle of the thirteenth century onwarddecorative ceramic tiles became increasinglypopular in ecclesiastical structures of all typesand sizes. These tiles varied from c.10 cm to20 cm square, were mostly glazed and werelaid on a bed of lime mortar. Where theground was uneven it might be levelled witha layer of gravel or small rubble, beforescreeding with coarse lime mortar; the tileswould then be set in a finer mortar, as asecond operation. Alternatively, if the existingfloor was fairly even, a tile pavement could belaid on a thin bed, without the need for apreparatory layer. A reasonably fine grade ofmortar had to be used for fixing tiles becausethe same material also filled the vertical jointsbetween them. Narrow jointing is impossiblewith coarse mortar.

Their relatively light weight meant that claytiles were suitable for flooring upper chambersin churches and monastic buildings, and somenotable examples survive in these locations.Mostly, tiles were laid over the rubble-filledpockets of stone vaults, as at WestminsterAbbey (Muniment Room), or LichfieldCathedral (Library) (see Plates 20 and 21), butthey could also be laid on suspended timberfloors. The Muniment Room at SalisburyCathedral has a thirteenth-century tile pave-ment laid on top of a boarded timber floor, thewhole being above the sacristy (Norton, 1996).

The vogue for decorated floor tiles wanedin the sixteenth century, and plain tilepaviours became fashionable. These generallyfell within the size-bracket of c.20–30 cmsquare, and many were plain red; others weregrey or buff in colour. Their popularity contin-ued into the nineteenth century, particularly inpoorer churches. Paviours were frequently laidon a single bed of medium-coarse lime mortar,and the visible joints were consequently oftenwide. In the seventeenth and eighteenth

42 Historic Floors

centuries many of the more affluent churcheswere floored with neatly cut and finely jointedstone paviours, 30 cm square, or larger. Thepaviours were often laid diagonally, and ablack and white chequered arrangement waspreferred. Imported marbles were employed inthe best work, but local alternatives werenumerous. Thus, at Lichfield Cathedral in thelate seventeenth century alabaster and ‘cannelcoal’ were used to simulate a black-and-whiteeffect (Figure 2.1). Invariably, a graded rubblebed was carefully prepared and screeded toreceive pavements of this type, and fine limeputty was used for jointing. Similar, or moremeticulous, preparation was necessary fornineteenth-century Cosmati, opus sectile andmosaic work, as seen at Peterborough, Bristoland Truro Cathedrals.

2.1.2 Layers and levels

Floors wear out with the passage of time,especially where soft materials have beenused, and periodic replacement is inevitable.Moreover, most ancient churches have beenrebuilt, enlarged, or internally reordered. Insome cases such changes have been bothfrequent and drastic, and these processes allgive rise to alterations in the materials, layoutor levels of floors. In the Middle Ages areasof worn flooring were often repaired bysimply laying a new surface on top of the old,be it puddled clay or a glazed tile pavement.The introduction of unevennesses, inclines andsmall steps was not, in the average churchfloor, of serious concern. Where a step orincline inconvenienced the placement of furni-ture, a localized levelling operation might takeplace.

The natural corollary of these processes wasa gradual rise in floor levels inside buildings.Pier bases of arcades diminished visibly inheight, plinths disappeared from view, thresh-olds were raised and doors trimmed in sympa-thy. In many a medieval church floor levelshad risen by between 15 and 50 cm(sometimes more) by the mid-nineteenth

century. Where a total rebuild occurred, as inLondon after the Great Fire of 1666, 1.5 m ormore may separate the earliest from the latestfloors. Older rebuilds could have the sameeffect: in Bath Abbey the thirteenth-century tilepavement of the nave lies 1.8 m below thepresent (mid-sixteenth century) floor.

Nowadays we tend to think of floors asbeing truly level, with vertical changes neatlyaccommodated by the introduction of steps.But this concept stems substantially fromVictorian attitudes to architectural precisionand tidiness. In medieval churches, minorchanges in level were not generally punctu-ated, and floors were simply ramped accord-ing to need. Excavation commonly reveals thatthe primary floor in a church closely mirroredthe natural lie of the land: a slope in anydirection could be acceptable (Rodwell, 1989a,114–16). Thus in the Saxo-Norman nave atHadstock (Essex) an incline of nearly 50 cmfrom east to west was recorded, while acrossthe transepts there was a fall of c. 75 cm fromsouth to north (Rodwell, 1976). St Peter’sChurch at Barton-upon-Humber (Lincolnshire)was also built on ground which fell away tothe north. While the effect might just havebeen noticeable in the Norman aisle-lesschurch, it became much more apparent whenaisles were added. The bases of the northarcade piers were constructed 60 cm lowerthan their counterparts on the south, and theoverall floor slope across the width of the highmedieval church approached 1 m. Even inchurches of the first rank an unlevelled interiorcould be tolerated. Thus the floor of the latetwelfth-century choir at Lichfield Cathedralsloped from north to south by 30 cm, a reflec-tion of the underlying natural topography. Ina large building differences in level of thisorder are imperceptible to the eye, but arerevealed through survey.

In many cases, sloping floors have been‘corrected’ during restoration, but somedramatic examples still remain: thus at StPeter-in-the-Wood, Guernsey, the rise from thewest door to the altar is at least 1.5 m. It wasthe installation of large timber furniture that

Archaeology of church and cathedral floors 43

needed to stand upright – choir stalls andpews – that usually occasioned the levellingof floors. The choir floor at Lichfield waslevelled in the fourteenth century, presumablyto accommodate the new Gothic stalls(Rodwell, 1993).

2.2 Burial beneath the floor

Undoubtedly the most major disruptionsustained by church floors was through thepractice of internal burial; this effectivelyceased in the mid-nineteenth century. UnderAnglo-Saxon Canon Law burial was forbiddenwithin the body of a church, and was thusconfined to side-chambers (porticus), but thecentury following the Norman conquest saw agradual increase in both clerical and lay inter-ments in nave and chancel. At first they werefew in number and unpretentious in aspect.Early indoor burials tended to be marked byflat stone slabs, incised with a cross and setflush with the existing floor. Graves wereneither deep (average 50–60 cm) nor intendedfor multiple occupancy, and thus the distur-bance to the interior of a church occasionedby burial was both physically limited andinfrequent. In the thirteenth century the rapidrise in the popularity of the chantry led to theproliferation of indoor burial, including burialof whole families.

The effect on floors was dramatic. First, itmeant that they were continually being dugup, especially in urban churches. That, in turn,introduced instability and surface irregularitiesin floors, as well as a patchwork of materialsused to make good the damage and to markthe burial. Practically, it is impossible toexcavate a grave, inter a corpse, backfill withloose soil, and reinstate a floor surface as itwas previously: however well this is done, thewhole will subside, and the floor will distort.The only effective way to counter this is toline the grave shaft with masonry or brick andto cap it with stone at floor level. Althoughthis structural treatment of graves was initiatedin the sixteenth century, it did not become

common until the eighteenth century. A fewmedieval interments were housed in stoneconstructions, and more were in stone coffins.The coffin might be covered with a slab thatwas itself set at floor level, thereby obviatingsubsidence. Most of the decorated pre-Reformation grave-covers surviving inchurches today were originally floor-levelcoffin lids. Many brass matrices may havebeen likewise.

The desire to provide graves with perma-nent markers led progressively to more elabo-rate floor slabs, upstanding monuments andfunerary enclosures. These all had profoundeffects on flooring arrangements. Flat gravecovers, whether plain, incised or inlaid withbrass, could be walked over and thus they didnot necessarily alter the circulation patternwithin a church. The same applies to gravesmarked only by a rectangle of distinctive tiling,or a small commemorative plaque.

Medieval grave covers with moulded edgesstood proud of the floor and thus introducedminor circulation obstacles, even if they wereraised by only 15 cm. By contrast, chest tombsand all other types of monument which stoodon the floor were fundamental obstructionsand, if several were grouped together, theycould effectively define a space with a specificrelated function, e.g. a family chapel. That, inturn, tended to give rise to piecemeal flooringarrangements.

After the Reformation, indoor burialincreased in popularity, not just for clergy anddistinguished patrons, but for whole families.The effect on floors was catastrophic. Richfamilies caused crypts and burial vaults to beconstructed under churches, and in so doinglarge areas of ancient flooring were torn up,destroying all the hidden archaeology beneath.Neat paving of stone or clay-tile was substi-tuted, and massive slabs were laid down tocover the entrances to vaults. These slabs hadto be lifted every time a family interment tookplace (Litten, 1991, ch. 8).

In the eighteenth century the alleys betweenblocks of box pews became progressivelymore restricted, as the ground beneath the

44 Historic Floors

church filled to capacity. These alleys werecoveted as burial places for yeomen,merchants and the emergent professionalclasses, so that gradually the paving wasreplaced by ledger stones. At the same timegraves became deeper (1.5 to 2 m), to allowfor the vertical stacking of coffins.Consequently, church floors were disruptedmore seriously, and more often.

Some cathedrals and the parish churches incities were subject to intense burial pressuresin the seventeenth, eighteenth and earlynineteenth centuries, so much so that theirfloors were almost always in a state ofupheaval. The stench of corporeal decaybecame a notable urban feature. Stone andbrick-lined grave shafts and vaulted chambersoccupied every available space, and in sodoing brought about the total or near-totaldestruction of all earlier floors. WestminsterAbbey, London City churches, Bath Abbey andthe eastern arm of Bristol Cathedral provideexamples of saturation burial. With that camea near-total carpet of post-medieval ledgerslabs. In some cases these have survived insitu, while elsewhere they have been partiallyor wholly cleared to make way for new pavingschemes of Georgian or Victorian date.

Although a section of floor was destroyedevery time an interment took place, crucialevidence was often concealed in the backfillof graves. Medieval tiles and their beddingmortars, lumps of concrete flooring, brokenpaving stones and fragments of older ledgersall turn up in grave fills and, although ex situ,these can tell us much about the floors thathave been lost. Graves, especially when theyare closely datable and stratigraphically relatedto floors, can be of great assistance in datingboth the creation and the demise of thosefloors.

2.3 Ritual and secular activities andtheir impact on floors

The progressive compartmentation of churchinteriors in the Middle Ages, and the increas-

ing architectural elaboration applied to certainareas, especially the sanctuary, led naturally todiffering emphases being placed on particularparts of the floor. Indeed, many a church floorceased to be a single entity, but became aseries of discrete units, each with its ownhistory. The most obvious division lay at thechancel arch, where a screen, and perhaps astep, physically divided the two main cells ofa parish church, encouraging separate treat-ment of their respective floors. While in ruralchurches the nave often retained an essentially‘earth’ floor down to the eighteenth century,the chancel was usually paved in the laterMiddle Ages. To some extent paving occurredincidentally as a result of burial: the desire tobe interred in the sanctuary, and especially infront of the altar, led to a proliferation of floorslabs in most chancels. Alternatively, thechancel might be given a decorative tilepavement, although that would quickly havebecome fragmented as the pressure for burialhere gained momentum.

The fashionable introduction of timberscreens in the fourteenth, fifteenth and earlysixteenth centuries – often associated with thecreation of family chapels and chantries – ledto the compartmentation of larger churches.Eastern chapels were usually screened off,both laterally from the chancel, and from theaisles; transepts were similarly separated fromthe body of the church, and may also havebeen subdivided into chapels. In most casesthe division was achieved either by resting atimber screen directly on the surface of theexisting floor, or by digging a shallow trenchand embedding a sill-beam in it. The old floormight, for a while, remain unaltered on bothsides of the screen. Thus at Barton-upon-Humber the Perpendicular chancel screen wasplaced on top of a fourteenth-centurychequered tile pavement, which continued inservice.

In many cases, however, the screened areawas soon refloored as a discrete entity, toenhance the setting of the chapel. The newfloor was often laid on top of the old, thusintroducing a step at the point of entry. In


other cases, piecemeal reflooring came aboutas a result of burial. As the lower parts oftimber screens became submerged by risingfloor levels, they began to rot and were theneither underbuilt in masonry, or were physi-cally jacked up (as scars on piers andresponds reveal). Either way, the process ledto more emphatic divisions within floor struc-tures.

Points of restricted access, such as doorwaysinto churches and openings through screens,concentrated wear on floors and it is thuscommon to find renewed paving in thoseareas, or large stone slabs laid to one or bothsides of the threshold. Thoroughfares, proces-sional routes, and zones of intense activity(e.g. around an altar) likewise led to concen-trated wear on floors. In the case of earthfloors, a hollow-way could quickly be worn,necessitating frequent patching and periodicrenewal of the entire surface. A fine exampleof this was found in the north transept atHadstock, where an external doorway hadexisted prior to the fourteenth century(Rodwell, 1976). A north–south hollow hadbeen worn across the centre of the transeptthrough successive earth and chalk floors.

Wear patterns on solid floors made of softstone, tile or brick can be equally striking,whether on the level or in the form of flightsof steps. The wear on the limestone stairleading to the chapter house at WellsCathedral is a dramatic and often citedexample (although now partly renewed).Stairways to towers and rood lofts, and inparticular their threshold stones, provideinnumerable examples on a small scale. Areasof intense circulation, or repeated movementback and forth, produce distinctive wearpatterns on floors. Amongst the commonestare the spaces in front of altars, around fontsand alongside shrines. A notable example ofliturgical movement patterns was recorded atSt Mary Tanner Street, Winchester, by contour-planning the worn earth floors during theexcavation of the Anglo-Saxon church.

While defined routes concentrate wear oncertain parts of floors, they also relieve the

pressure on other areas. The introduction ofscreens and monuments assists with the latter:people do not generally walk close to walls,or circulate in tight corners, and these areastherefore enjoy a high degree of naturalprotection. Glazed medieval tiles in pristinecondition often survive in the corners ofchapels and vestries, under altars and behindtombs, whereas those in doorways may beworn down to half their original thickness.

From the fourteenth century onward therewas a gradual increase in the quantity ofwooden furniture in churches, notably stalls,benches and, later, pews. At first confined tothe chancel, these soon spread into the nave.By the sixteenth century most parish churcheswere probably well-cluttered with furniture,much of which was fixed to the floor.Excavations sometimes reveal shallow slots inearth floors, into which the frames of bencheswere set. The presence of fixed seatingnaturally created alleys or ‘aisles’ within thenave: there was invariably an axial east–westroute and at least one running laterally acrossthe church, to connect the north and southdoorways. In a complex church there wouldbe another cross-route, west of the roodscreen, linking the aisles, transepts or easternchapels. Thus the floor of the church waseffectively divided into rectilinear blockswhich may be unrelated to the architecture.The alleys between the furniture were (andoften still are) paved in a manner that differedfrom the blocks they defined. While the lattermay have had earth floors, or rough stoneflags, the alleys themselves were frequentlyprovided with neat pavements of cut stone orceramic tiles. Total excavation of the interiorof the nave and aisles at Barton-upon-Humberrevealed numerous remnants of the tile-pavedalleys and the late medieval furnishing patternthat they defined.

In the large open spaces of cathedral naves,where there was little if any furniture untilrecent times, processional routes and ‘stations’were sometimes permanently marked in thestone-paved floors. Such was the case atWells, where in the 1780s John Carter

46 Historic Floors

recorded a series of twenty-two stones whichmarked medieval processional positions in thewestern part of the nave. The evidence waslater destroyed by reflooring (Paul, 1891).

The floors in a late medieval church couldbe extremely complex and fragmentary,having evolved over several centuries asfashions changed and burials, tomb structures,altars and seating arrangements proliferated. Inthe later sixteenth century many subsidiaryaltars, chantry chapels and other unfashionablefeatures were stripped out of churches, leavinga pattern of diverse flooring that no longermade sense in relation to its surroundings.New patches of paving were introduced tomake good the scars left by iconoclasm. Theseventeenth century saw yet more destructionof church fittings, when numerous ancienttombs were swept away, or wrecked andremoved later. Again, the impact on floors wasconsiderable.

The Reformation not only destroyed ritualsand the accoutrements associated with them,it also profoundly changed the internal geogra-phy of churches. Processional routes andcirculation spaces in chantries and aroundaltars and shrines ceased to be used, andsometimes the Holy Table was placed in thenave, stripping the chancel of all its formerliturgical functions. The floors that had guidedand reflected the diverse uses associated withthe different parts of a church suddenly lostall meaning. New patterns were imposed onfloors. The nave, aisles and even the chancelcould be filled with box pews, the dispositionof which created fresh circulation patterns.The construction of manorial pew enclosures,family chapels, and nave pulpits all changedthe internal planning of churches. A newgeneration of massive tomb structures was alsoborn, and many of these occupied the sites offormer altars, including sometimes the highaltar.

Increased interest in personal comfort meantthat box pews were often provided withtimber floors, laid down directly upon theremains of their medieval predecessors. Muchdecorative tiling and many fine grave covers

were concealed from view, and unintention-ally protected, by this means.

The mid-nineteenth century saw a return tomedieval ideals in church planning, whichinvolved the destruction of Jacobean andGeorgian interiors, and with them went thecomplementary flooring arrangements. Threecenturies of post-Reformation change anddevelopment could be undone in a single year.The thoroughness with which the Victorianspursued restoration and re-ordering involvedmassive destruction of the archaeologicaldeposits which had accumulated over manycenturies. Floors were reinstated at what wasconsidered to be an appropriate medievallevel. New tile pavements and stone alleyswere laid on deep beds of rubble andconcrete, and pews were installed on raisedtimber platforms. Sometimes these platformswere constructed directly on top of old floors(which were thus preserved), but more oftena ventilated void was created to prevent timberdecay. These sub-floor voids were usually30–50 cm deep, and co-extensive with the pewplatforms. Inevitably, the archaeology of themedieval floors in these areas was destroyed.

Victorian floor restorations were oftensteeped in conscious antiquarianism, and it maynow be difficult to determine whether a partic-ular arrangement, or feature, reflects authenticevidence that was observed and copied, orwhether it was pure invention. Thus extantpatches of medieval tile flooring may begenuinely in situ, relaid following the originaldesign, a combination of both, or a fabricationusing old tiles that came to hand. Many achurch has a ‘museum display’ of medieval tilesthat were found and reset in the floor duringa restoration (Figure 2.1). Some nineteenth-century encaustic tile pavements werecomposed from pattern-book designs, whileothers were at least partially based on archae-ological evidence, and incorporated speciallymade tiles replicating examples found on thesite. Thus, when Scott repaved the choir atLichfield in 1860 (see Plate 19) he used Mintonfacsimiles of many of the tile designs employedin the now-lost fourteenth-century pavements


there. The medieval layout could not be repli-cated, since that had been destroyed in the lateseventeenth century when a chequered stonepavement was laid. The chapter house atSalisbury Cathedral had a complete thirteenth-century tile pavement until 1856, when it wastorn up and replaced with a facsimile (see Plate4). Again, new Minton tiles were made to theoriginal designs (Spring, 1987, p. 155).

The recycling and rearrangement of compo-nents of historic floors occurred frequently,and can cause considerable problems in inter-pretation. Ledger slabs are often not in their

original locations: sometimes they were movedaround more-or-less at random during restora-tions, or they might have been shifted slightlyduring a ‘tidying up’ operation. Moreover, it isnot unknown for a slab to be shunted, ortrimmed, to make space for another burial tobe inserted in a crowded floor. Medievalcanopied tombs and later chest tombs wereoften removed, as obstructions, and their topslabs were sometimes let into the floor, withthe result that a brass or inscription, althoughnot strictly in situ, may nevertheless still markthe site of the interment to which it relates.

48 Historic Floors

Figure 2.1 LichfieldCathedral. Scott’s ‘museum’ oftiles on the floor of theConsistory Court, 1861.Various thirteenth- andfourteenth-century designssurround four pieces ofcannel coal which had beenused for black and whitepaving in the choir in thelate seventeenth century(Photograph, WarwickRodwell)

Figure 2.2 LichfieldCathedral. Unusual brick sub-structure to support Scott’slimestone paving of 1860 inthe north choir aisle(Photograph, WarwickRodwell)

New steps and paving were frequently madefrom parts of older tombs in the eighteenthand nineteenth centuries, and it is the dimen-sions of the slabs that often betray their likelyorigin. A large stone was worth re-dressing toremove an unwanted inscription or the indentthat formerly housed a brass. Tell-tale evidenceof the latter is seen in the form of lead plugsand the stumps of brass rivets, which are nowflush with the surface of the stone but whichwere once in the base of an indent; some goodexamples of re-dressed Purbeck marble matrix-slabs may be seen in Wells Cathedral (Rodwell,1994). Ledger slabs were sometimes inverted,placing the inscription face-down, but this wasnot common practice because the undersidesof these stone were generally too uneven.However, the side panels of dismemberedchest tombs, especially those of easily dress-able limestone, made useful paving slabs whenlaid face-down. Careful archaeological exami-nation may reveal that a complex historic flooris replete with semi-disguised fragments ofsepulchral monuments.

2.4 Assessing, recording andinterpreting a floor

Most pre-Victorian church floors werepalimpsests of archaeological evidence, repre-senting an accumulation of artefacts over somesix centuries. The different materials used,their disposition within the building, theirrelationship to architectural features, the extentof their survival, and the minutiae of wearpatterns on their surfaces are all significant.Together, the floors of a church enshrined thebuilding’s history in microcosm, a history thatcould be read like the folios of a manuscript.Comprehensive repaving schemes werecarried out by the Georgians in some of themore affluent churches, but in a majority ofcases historic floor palimpsests survived wellinto the nineteenth century. Many of thosefloors were swept away or drastically‘improved’ during Victorian restorations, butsome have only been lost in modern times.

Those floors that still remain, howeverdepleted, are precious reservoirs of evidencerelevant to a host of academic disciplines.

The first requirement for any study of a flooris an accurate plan, on which every stone andjoint is shown. A scale of 1 : 20 (or larger) isessential to register the subtleties of a complexhistoric floor, although a tile pavement cannotbe meaningfully recorded at a scale of lessthan 1 : 10. In cases where a floor has beenwholly relaid in Victorian or modern times,using a consistent form of paving – perhapswith the occasional older ledger stone remain-ing – planning at a scale of 1 : 50 suffices.

In the past, records of stone floors havetended to be schematic with too muchconcentration on the major monuments in themistaken belief that genealogy was the onlyserious concern. Tile pavements too havebeen poorly recorded, in this case in the beliefthat the general scheme and a corpus of theindividual tile designs were the only thingsthat mattered. All the subtleties of floor layingtechniques, meaningful misalignments, wear,patching, etc., were missed by this superficialapproach. To measure and draw accuratelyevery element of a large tile pavement is anexcessively time-consuming process, and in1988 a new approach to floor recording waspioneered at Lichfield Cathedral. The Librarypavement (see Plates 20 and 21) was recordedby rectified photography and a completephoto-mosaic prepared at a scale of 1 : 10.This was then reconciled with a measuredplan of the building (Rodwell, 1989b). Thepavements in the eastern arm of WinchesterCathedral have now been similarly recorded.

Once a complete plan has been prepared,separate copies should be coloured andannotated to record materials and surfaceindications on a stone by stone basis. Oneplan will record the geology of the stones.Another will detail general condition, includ-ing localized wear, fracturing, surface damage,discoloration and burning. Depending on thenature of the floor and the materials incorpo-rated, other plans may be required to recorddetails such as mortars and jointing, stone


dressing, scars and shadows left by theremoval of superimposed structures (tombs,screens, stall bases, pulpit steps, etc.), and thepositions of former fixings (dowel holes, leadplugs, iron stumps, and rust stains). Stones ortiles which have sunk indicate subsidence intounderlying archaeological features, while thosewhich stand proud of their surroundings haveusually been lifted in order to conceal services,or to make good a former sinkage. The limitsof disturbed or relaid patches of flooring –perhaps representing several intercuttingphases of activity – may be defined by differ-ent mortar types. All such subtleties should berecorded and interpreted.

The floors of many cathedrals and somechurches were planned by antiquaries in theeighteenth or nineteenth centuries, usually forthe purpose of showing tomb locations. Suchdocuments, even if imprecise by modernstandards, can provide much valuable informa-tion on the archaeology of a floor. The sameapplies to Faculty papers and re-seating plansfor parish churches. Antiquarian descriptionsand perambulations, even when unillustrated,sometimes embody useful observations aboutfloors. It is surprising how much can, with refer-ence to extant floors, be interpolated fromgeneral views of interiors showing tombs,screens and railings that have long gone, stepsthat have been eradicated, pulpits and fonts thathave been moved, and other residual scars priorto ‘tidying’ operations by Victorian restorers.

Numerous old sources of evidence can helpto explain patterns of flooring, as can knowl-edge of relatively recent fixtures and services.Continuous lines of paving of consistent widthoften conceal former hot-air or pipe ducts.Patches of discoloration, fissuring or calciningon ancient floor surfaces point to the sites ofbraziers, or where roof timbers lay burningduring a conflagration. Large slabs, often ofYorkstone, and not of tomb-sized proportions,may have been introduced to support tortoisestoves. Rust stains, lead-filled sockets andfragments of iron embedded in masonry jointspoint to lost tomb railings, pricket stands,screens and gates.

Tomb-sized ledger slabs usually covered theinterments to which they relate, but the inter-pretation of smaller inscribed stones mayrequire more careful consideration. Smallplaques, especially those set in eighteenth-century chequered paving, are sometimesretrospective, being in situ replacements forledgers that had been cleared away or, alter-natively, they may simply commemorate inter-ments that took place outside the building. Agroup of small stones relating to a single familymay overlie a vault, and the configuration ofthe surrounding flooring is all-important indeciphering what lies underneath. A ledgerslab edged by a series of narrow stone slips(15–20 cm wide) usually points to a brick orstone lined shaft; the slab itself rests on thewalls, while the slips cover the backfill of theconstruction trench. Two identically sizedledgers of the same family, set side by side,usually betoken an underlying vault, squarishin plan and of two coffins’ width. A plainuninscribed slab lying to one end of a majorledger may be the removable cover over thesteps or ramp leading down to a family vault.Chips around the edges of such a stone, or onthose immediately adjacent, provide additionalevidence of periodic lifting and replacing.

Partly worn tile pavements were often takenup in antiquity and the best of the tilesrecycled in a new floor (perhaps in a lessimportant part of the church). Consequently,careful study of the surface wear and damageto individual tiles is necessary in order to deter-mine if that could have occurred in the presentlocation, or if it was a legacy of a previous use.Establishing whether tiles are in primary, orsecondary, positions is fundamental to thecorrect dating of a floor. The mortar beds oflost pavements are often encountered inexcavations. Although the tiles may have beenstripped off, tell-tale imprints in the underlyingmortar reveal the dimensions and generalarrangement of the components. Invariably afew broken fragments of tile remain, whileothers may be recovered from the excavationof graves or service trenches that punctured thefloor. Hence, through archaeology, it may be

50 Historic Floors

possible to determine the date, layout andelements of the design of a tile pavement thatwas destroyed several centuries ago.

It is clear from the foregoing examples thatcareful recording and analysis of flooring materi-als can reveal much evidence that has otherwisebeen lost concerning patterns of movementwithin a church, structures and monuments thathave been swept away, and the distribution ofburials. In the mid-1980s there was a proposal(mercifully aborted) to lay a new floor in thesouth choir aisle of Bristol Cathedral, the exist-ing one being regarded as worn out and of nointerest. A survey of the five bays of the floor(Figure 2.3) revealed 101 memorial stones,mostly with legible inscriptions (Rodwell, 1988).In bays 1 and 2 there were commemorativeplaques only, these being embodied in an

eighteenth-century diagonal paving scheme inblack and white marbles. Bay 3 contained recti-linear stone groupings indicative of thirteenburial vaults beneath the floor. It also retainedevidence of a former step across the aisle, which,together with the now-destroyed screen thatstood upon it, is seen in a nineteenth-centuryengraving. Bays 4 and 5 comprised a complexgrouping of paviours, ledgers and commemora-tive stones suggestive of a possible twenty-twovaults and grave shafts, some of which wereintercutting (Figure 2.4). An area of freshnineteenth-century stone paving in front of theentrance to the sacristy was explained by refer-ence to an engraving of 1801, by Samuel Lysons,which showed that a patch of late medievaltiling had survived here. The importance ofmaintaining access to the sacristy evidently


Figure 2.3 Bristol Cathedral. Basic floor survey of the south choir aisle. Eighteenth-century diagonal paving in bays1 and 2; complex paving containing ledgers and memorials of sixteenth to nineteenth centuries in bays 3–5. Theoutlines of thirty-five probable vaults and grave-shafts can be detected in the floor patterning of these three bays

discouraged burial in front of its doorway andthus, more by default than intent, was responsi-ble for the late survival of a portion of medievalpavement. A few specimen tiles were reset in acorner of the aisle, where they still remain.

The first stage in a detailed survey of all thefloors and sepulchral monuments of WellsCathedral, carried out in 1993–1994, revealed avery different but no less complex story(Rodwell, 1994). Here, the historic floors surviveto a large extent in the eastern arm, whereasthose in the nave were heavily depleted andreordered in the 1960s; at the same time thelargely medieval flooring of the cloister wastotally destroyed. The remaining small areas ofmedieval tile paving were recorded andanalysed in detail (Rodwell, 2001, p. 449–81).

The recording and interpretation of historicfloors has at last moved away from amateur

antiquarianism, largely inspired by the pursuitof genealogy. Floors are palimpsests of historicevidence but, unlike documents, they arethree-dimensional rather than two-dimen-sional. Excavations inside parish churches andcathedrals in recent years have revealed thecomplex structure of floors and how these canbe meaningfully related to successive phasesin the history of the building, shedding lighton past ritual and sepulchral activity that waspresumed lost beyond recall. Nevertheless, itis a tragedy that so much was swept awaybefore the value of ‘floor archaeology’ cameto be recognized.

References

ATKINS, C., MORRIS, R. and RODWELL, W. (1991). TheArchaeological Investigation of the Parish Church of StEdmund King and Martyr, Kellington, North Yorkshire.Privately printed, York.

COLCHESTER, L.S. and HARVEY, J.H. (1974). Wells Cathedral.Archaeol. J., 131, 200–14.

HARVEY, J.H. (1969). The tracing floor in York Minster. 40thAnnual Report of the Friends of York Minster for 1968.Friends of York Minster.

LITTEN, J. (1991). The English Way of Death. The CommonFuneral since 1450. Robert Hale.

MYTUM, H. (1993). Kellington Church. Current Archaeol.,12 (133), 15–17.

NORTON, C. (1996). The decorative pavements of SalisburyCathedral and Old Sarum. In Medieval Art andArchitecture at Salisbury Cathedral (L. Keen and T. Cockeeds.), Br. Archaeol. Assoc. Conf. Trans., 17, 90–105.

PAUL, R.W. (1891). Wells Cathedral. The Builder, 60, 352–3.RODWELL, W.J. (1976). The archaeological investigation of

Hadstock Church, Essex: an interim report. Antiq. J., 56,55–71.

RODWELL, W.J. (1988). Bristol Cathedral. An archaeologicalstudy of the floor of the south quire aisle. MS report,Bristol Cathedral Library.

RODWELL, W.J. (1989a). Church Archaeology. English Heritage.RODWELL, W.J. (1989b). Archaeology and the standing fabric:

recent studies at Lichfield Cathedral. Antiquity, 63, 281–94.RODWELL, W.J., (1993). Revealing the history of the cathe-

dral: archaeology in the south quire aisle. Friends ofLichfield Cathedral: Fifty-sixth Annual Report, pp.23–34. Friends of Lichfield Cathedral.

RODWELL, W.J. (1994). Wells Cathedral. A schedule and planof the tombs, memorial slabs, commemorative plaquesand inscriptions attached to the fabric. MS report, WellsCathedral Library.

RODWELL, W.J. (2001). Wells Cathedral: Excavations andStructural Studies 1978–93. English Heritage Archaeol.Report 21.

SPRING, R. (1987). Salisbury Cathedral. New Bell’s CathedralGuides.

52 Historic Floors

Figure 2.4 Bristol Cathedral. View of South Choir aislefloor looking west, with bay 5 in the foreground(Photograph, Warwick Rodwell)

The two most important floors to survive frommedieval England, are also perhaps the twomost splendid pavements ever to have beenmade in the British Isles in the medievalperiod. These floors, as might be expected, arein the most sacred areas of two of the great-est medieval buildings in Britain, CanterburyCathedral and Westminster Abbey. TheCanterbury pavement area is immediatelyadjacent to the now-demolished shrine of StThomas Becket in the Trinity Chapel. It waslaid in c.1182–1184 and c.1213–1220, while theWestminster Abbey pavements, laid in1267–1269, are around the shrine of St Edwardthe Confessor, and in the sanctuary immedi-ately to the west. It has been my privilege tostudy both pavements (at Canterbury in1979–1981 and 1997, and at Westminster in1996–1997), and, though my research has notyet been completed, a brief summary of thehistory and archaeology of both floors will beattempted here.

3.1 The Trinity Chapel pavement inCanterbury Cathedral

The rebuilding of the eastern arm ofCanterbury Cathedral after the devastating fire

of 5 September 1174 is quite exceptionallywell-documented by the monk, Gervase. Hisyear-by-year account of the rebuilding wastranslated and studied by the brilliant scholar,Professor Robert Willis, as long ago as 1844.As a result of this, we know that in theseventh year after the fire (1181) the neweastern crypt was completed, ‘and above thecrypt the exterior walls of the aisles up to theirmarble capitals’ were also completed beforethe winter rains put a stop to the work. In thefollowing year ‘The master erected eightinterior pillars [in fact double pillars], andturned the arches and the vault with thewindows in the circuit. He also raised thetower [i.e. the Corona] up to the bases of thehighest windows under the vault’ (Willis, 1845,pp.61–2). Thus it is that Gervase tells us thatthe interior of the Trinity Chapel, where theshrine of St Thomas Becket was to be placed,was effectively built and completed in 1182.This interior contains many magnificentPurbeck marble bases, column drums andeven some wonderfully carved capitals, butincorporated into these are some columndrums of a rose-pink marble, which untilrecently was not provenanced. This same pinkmarble is also used for six single bases (andsome shaft-rings and capitals) in the outer aisle

53

3

The two great marble pavements inthe sanctuary and shrine areas ofCanterbury Cathedral and WestminsterAbbeyTim Tatton-Brown

walls, as well as for the few survivingfragments of the shrine base itself (Tatton-Brown, 1981). More importantly for ourpurposes here, it is used in the paving of thefloor immediately around the shrine of StThomas Becket, both in a lozenge pattern onthe north and south sides and as strips in thefloor immediately to the east and west of theshrine podium (Figure 3.1). The use of thisrose-pink marble, which almost certainly camefrom the Phillipeville area of modern southernBelgium,1 is confined to the central area of theTrinity Chapel, and it was clearly a scarcematerial that was only used for the shrine

itself, and for its immediate surroundings.2 I donot know of any other medieval use of thispink marble in England, though it wasimported for monuments in the post-medievalperiod.3 It seems highly likely, therefore, thatthe paved area in the centre of the TrinityChapel (including the shrine podium) was laidimmediately after the chapel’s completion in1182–1184. The rest of this floor is made ofPurbeck marble slabs with a few slabs of LargePaludina Limestone (i.e. Wealden, Bethersdenor Sussex marble), and in the ambulatory and

54 Historic Floors

Figure 3.1 Canterbury Cathedral. Plan of the pavements in the Corona and Trinity Chapel (© CanterburyArchaeological Trust)

1 It was supposed to be a Sicilian marble and a giftfrom the Pope (e.g. Woodruff and Danks, 1912, p. 99),but Dr Freda Anderson has recently compared the pinkmarble to a sample she has brought back fromBelgium, and the match is very close.

2 In the two double columns of the apse to the east ofthe shrine, only the lower drums are of the pinkmarble; higher up Purbeck marble is used again,possibly suggesting that the pink marble had run out.3 For example, at Westminster Abbey, where a similarmarble is used in a late seventeenth-century repair tothe Great Pavement (see below).

Corona chapel floors (Horton and Norton,1981) much of the original Purbeck andWealden marble flooring also survives, all ofit probably laid in 1182–1184.4

In an earlier article (Tatton-Brown, 1981) Ihave attempted to show that some time afterthe shrine of Thomas Becket was demolishedin 1538, the three steps of the podium for theshrine were pulled out and laid flat innorth–south rows in the centre of the floor(Figure 3.1). By studying the wear patterns onthese stones, the original three steps of thepodium can be reconstructed (on paper), asalmost all of them are still there in the floor.Below the bottom step of the podium, and stillon the in situ pavement, a hollow was wornby the countless pilgrims who visited theshrine in the 300 or so years that it was inbeing (see stippled line on Figure 3.1). Thiswas the crucial evidence to show the exactsize of the podium. Flanking the north andsouth sides of the shrine, and built on thepavement, are the famous tombs of the BlackPrince (1376), and King Henry IV and QueenJoan of Navarre (c.1437). There is alsoArchbishop Courtenay’s tomb (1396) to thesoutheast and Dean Nicholas Wooton’s earlyRenaissance tomb (1567) to the northeast, aswell as the strange bricked-up and plastered-over coffin of Odet de Coligny, CardinalChatillon (1571) beyond Archbishop Courtenayto the southeast. Thanks to the protection ofthese tombs, the areas on either side of theold shrine pavement have been quite well-preserved, though the east end of thepavement is now suffering quite a lot of wearfrom tourists.

Immediately to the west of the shrine of StThomas was, and still is, the most spectaculararea of floor, the so-called opus Alexandrinumpavement (Plate 11). This remarkable pavementwas heavily restored in the later nineteenthcentury, probably in the 1870s5 under G.G.

Scott, but it has rather surprisingly never beenstudied in detail. The basic form of thepavement is worked out using circles andsquares within squares set diagonally (i.e. AdQuadratum).6 Long thin strips (semicircularand straight) of Purbeck marble are then usedfor borders, and within this are set a wholeseries of different marble patterns using a mixof imported marbles, particularly purpleporphyry, green porphyry (often calledSerpentino or marmo di Lacedæmoni in Italy)and a grey-to-white marble. These materialsmust have come from central or southern Italy(particularly Rome), where new porphyry andmarble inlay (opus sectile) floors in a lateRoman tradition were being created from thelate eleventh century onwards.7 The marblesthat were used were all taken from ruinedRoman buildings, so that material like purpleporphyry (originally from the eastern Egyptiandesert) and green porphyry (originally fromSparta in Greece) would have come toCanterbury from Italy, no doubt accompaniedby skilled marble workers (marmoraniRomani). The name opus Alexandrinumcomes from the name of the early third-century Roman Emperor, Severus Alexander(AD 222–235), who was said by his biogra-pher, Aelius Lampridius, to have been the firstto introduce marble work, using the two

Pavements in Canterbury Cathedral and Westminster Abbey 55

4 Sadly the original Purbeck marble choir aisle flooring(c.1176–1180) was mutilated in the 1870s when theradiator pipes were put in.

5 Documentary evidence for this has not yet beenfound, but the outer parts of the opus sectile work arenow within late Victorian gun-metal borders. I amgrateful to Mrs Margaret Sparks and Miss Anne Oakley,who have searched the Canterbury Cathedral Archivesfor me.6 There is a brief note and drawing to show thegeometry in Dudley (1969, p. 31).7 Probably the earliest example (sadly now destroyed)was the floor of the great Benedictine abbey church atMonte Cassino. The use of opus sectile pavements was are-introduction from the eastern Roman Empire. As wellas the purple and green porphyry and white marble,there are also small amounts of granite (almost certainlygranito del foro from Mons Claudianus in Egypt) in theoriginal mix. The very centre of the Canterburypavement has a square green porphyry piecesurrounded by three semicircles of granite. The fourthsemicircle is of Genoise serpentine, a post-medievalrepair.

materials already mentioned, purple and greenporphyry.8 This suggestion is, however,unlikely to be accurate, though the use ofpurple and green porphyry in Roman imper-ial work increased greatly during the thirdcentury AD.

The patterns in the pavement are clearlyderived from the marble pavements beingmade in Italy in the twelfth century, though nodirect parallel can be cited. The major elementthat is missing in the Canterbury pavement isthe use of spiral designs (a sort of guilloche),which are found in all the classic ‘Cosmati’pavements, including those at WestminsterAbbey (see below). The construction anddesign of the Canterbury pavement still awaitsdetailed analysis, but it is clear that quite a lotof original work still survives in the centre ofthe pavement, while the surrounding outersegments are entirely nineteenth-century recon-structions, using different materials which werecut mechanically.9 There is also an earlierrepair, including the re-laying of large parts ofthe central pavement, which seems to havebeen carried out in the late seventeenth orearly eighteenth century.10 The repaired areasuse ‘touch’ (a form of Tournai marble) and apink Devonian limestone, both of whichmaterials probably came from Belgium.

On the north and south side of the opusAlexandrinum pavement are two other, quitedifferent pavements (see Plate 11). These aremade up of thirty-six encrusted stone roundels(dalles incrusteés in French), which are set infour groups. These roundels were all verycarefully studied in 1929 by N.E. Toke, when

the pavement was undergoing its most recentrestoration, and when a group of five roundelswere returned to the pavement.11 All theroundels, which are exactly two Roman feetin diameter, are made of a fine-grained whitelimestone (perhaps Caen stone), and into thetop surface has been cut a series of pictorialand decorative scenes representing the twelvesigns of the zodiac and twelve labours of themonths, as well as seven (or eight) virtues andvices and a group of ‘fantastic’ monsters. Theincised areas are filled with a reddish mastic,but many of the roundels are very worn.Adjoining the opus Alexandrinum pavementon the east side are two lozenge-shapedpanels, but the southern of these lozengescontains a roundel, probably with a virtue anda vice.12 The two groups of six roundels onthe northeast and southeast sides of the opusAlexandrinum pavement are all set in Purbeckmarble paving and are almost certainly in situ,and, as Toke showed, the roundels here arein pairs. Each has a labour on the east and azodiac sign on the west, and, running fromnorth to south, they must represent January,February, March and October, November,December. Unfortunately the groups ofroundels on the northwest and southwestsides of the central pavement have beenmoved around on several occasions (mostrecently in 1929, as we have seen), and theiroriginal positions cannot be ascertained.Various early plans and engravings (startingwith those of the mid-seventeenth century,engraved by Hollar) show the opusAlexandrinum pavement and the roundels inroughly their present form, but they are notaccurate enough to help. However, a late

56 Historic Floors

8 Alexandrinum opus marmoris de duobus marmoribus,hoc est porphyretico et lacedaemonio primus instituit. Formarble pavements in Italy, generally, see Hutton (1950).9 These materials, mechanically cut, are set much moreclosely, and have very smooth surfaces. All are in metalborders.10 William Gostling in his A Walk in the City ofCanterbury (1777), says ‘the curious and beautifulmosaic’ was ‘some years since repaired’. It is possiblethat Canon John Bargrave (1610–1680) was involved inthis, as he had visited Italy in the Commonwealthperiod, and brought back various ‘antiquarian stonesamples’ (Sturdy and Henig, n.d.).

11 See Toke, 1930, pp. 189–221. The five roundels werein the Henry IV Chantry chapel and before this in thecrypt. The chapter minute book of 1870 (DCc/CA13 p.273) records an order ‘to bring up from the crypt thesimilar stones [roundels] now lying there, and to placethem in Henry IV’s chapel?’.12 These lozenges are certainly in situ, as the wearpattern below the bottom step of the shrine podiumruns across their east sides. See Toke (1930) and Eames(1982).

seventeenth- or early eighteenth-century relay-ing of this part of the pavement does seem tohave taken place. Along the north side can beseen Cancer, Sobriety and Luxury, a purelydecorative roundel (moved further eastwardsin 1929) and Libra. Cancer, the crab, close toan octagonal pillar on the northwest, is thebest preserved, and may be in situ.13 Betweenthe roundels, in the middle, are areas ofmarble-inlay decoration, but these do not use‘Roman’ marbles and are probably late seven-teenth- or eighteenth-century designs. Twotriangular areas on the south side, and one onthe north (shown in outline on Figure 3.2), doseem to contain their original medievaldecorative scheme,14 so it is likely that thearrangement here of a group of twelve tightlypacked roundels is original. The southwestgroup of twelve roundels is more worn anddisturbed, but the Gemini roundel at thesouthwest corner (also near an octagonalpillar) is the least worn, and may be in situ.The two roundels immediately to the north(May and Leo), and their surrounding marbleinlay were restored to here in October 1929,as were the two roundels in the same positionon the north side (Figure 3.2).15

N.E. Toke has shown that the nearest paral-lels to the stone roundels are to be found inthe St Omer area of northwest France, and hegoes on to suggest, very plausibly, that themonks, on account of having spent their exileof 1207–1213 there, on their return in 1213,brought back with them the idea of havingsimilar roundels in the Trinity Chapel. It istherefore likely that the roundels were laidhere between 1213 and the translation in 1220.The opus Alexandrinum pavement, from itsposition, must have been laid before theroundels, but whether this took place in1213–1220 or in 1182–1184 is not known. The

earlier date is, however, perhaps more likelyon stylistic grounds. One other small piece ofevidence that may be relevant comes from thecathedral at Old Sarum. During the 1913season of excavations there, several loosefragments of purple and green porphyry werefound,16 and at about the same time the floorof the three eastern chapels there were uncov-ered. In front of the altar step in the centralchapel, the floor ‘retained the mortar bed of a


13 Being near a pillar, it would have been less walkedon.14 The surface is now dish-shaped, and made of smalltriangles and squares in tile. Roughly similar small tilesof an early thirteenth-century date can be seen in theeastern arm of Rochester Cathedral.

15 See Toke (1930). This figure is reproduced inBabington (1933, p.96). For the original drawing see H.Shaw, Specimens of Tile Pavements (London, 1858).16 See interim report in St John Hope (1914), 116. Sevenfragments of green porphyry (one with a curved edge)and one of purple porphyry can still be seen in theOld Sarum collections at Salisbury and South WiltshireMuseum.

Figure 3.2 Canterbury Cathedral. Roundels from theOpus Alexandrinum pavement. The drawing shows theamount of wear on the tile, and was made in c. 1858.

curious pavement of interlacing circles, but notof the same material as the altar platform, thestones comprising it having been flat and notrough underneath’.17 Though the excavators didnot realize it, this was almost certainly a moreelaborate opus Alexandrinum type floor withpurple and green porphyry in it that was laid inthe late twelfth century, perhaps in conjunctionwith a proposed new shrine for BishopOsmund.18 Another place that has produced alarge number of purple and green porphyryfragments is St Augustine’s Abbey in Canterbury.Once again the records relating to their discov-ery are very poor (Sherlock and Woods, 1988,pp.135–7), but it is worth noting that the easternarm of the Abbey was rebuilt after a fire in 1168,and a new shrine of St Augustine is said to havebeen dedicated in 1221.19 A new marblepavement could have been laid at either of thesedates, but with the destruction of the easterncrypt at the dissolution (and the digging out ofthe crypt in 1900–1901), all evidence for theposition of the pavement will have beendestroyed. There may also have been adecorated marble pavement in the thirteenth-century eastern arm (the New Work) of Old StPaul’s in London. Here there seems to have beena ‘parcel of pavement of black marble spottedwith green similar to some at Westminster,’according to Harrison’s Description of England(quoted in Lethaby, 1906, p.328). This pavementwas apparently near the shrine of St Erkenwald.

3.2 The Sanctuary and Shrinepavements in Westminster Abbey

The eastern arm of Westminster Abbey wasmagnificently rebuilt between 1246 and 1259

by King Henry III, and once the main struc-ture had been completed, new floors were laid(Colvin, 1963, pp.130–57). In the aisles thesewere of Purbeck marble,20 but in the sanctu-ary, and the chapel of St Edward theConfessor, much more elaborate pavementswere conceived from the beginning. In 1259the newly elected abbot of Westminster,Richard Ware, went to Rome to seek confir-mation of his appointment by the Pope. Hehad to go on to Anagni, the papal summerresidence, and there he would have seen amagnificent series of recent Cosmati floors inthe cathedral, and its splendid crypt.21 On hisreturn, Abbot Ware probably told Henry III ofwhat he had seen, and on a second visit, in1267–1268, Italian marble workers must havebeen commissioned to come to England tomake not only the two new pavements, butalso to decorate the new shrine-base of StEdward and Henry III’s own tomb. Much ofthe uniquely splendid Cosmati work on eachof these structures still survives, and, as far asis known, this work in Westminster Abbey isthe only place where Cosmati work was usednorth of the Alps in the Middle Ages. The twopavements are quite different from each other,and since the mid-fifteenth century have beenseparated from each other by the great screenbehind the high altar.22

The sanctuary pavement was until February1998, almost completely covered up,23 but auseful drawing of it was made by the RoyalCommission on Historical Monuments in 1924(Figure 3.4). This shows clearly that thepavement is made up of rows of rectangularslabs of Purbeck marble, into which has beencut a whole series of interlocking circular

58 Historic Floors

17 This is how it is described in the excavationnotebook, quoted in RCHM (1980, p.18).18 For a plan of this pavement, see Clapham (1934, p.160, fig.43). See also T. Tatton-Brown ‘The Burial Placesof St Osmund’. Spire (69th Annual Report of the Friendsof Salisbury Cathedral, 1999) pp. 19–25.19 Thorne’s Chronicle, Col. 1877. See Davis (1934,pp.189–91).20 Some of the original Purbeck marble paving survivesin the ambulatory, but most has been cut out for laterburials and ledger slabs.

21 The main pavements in the cathedral were relaid in1882. The crypt pavement is still in its original form,and it has recently been cleaned and conserved alongwith its magnificent wall-paintings, see Ravasi (1995).22 The high altar dais west of the screen may also havebeen covered in Cosmati work, but this was alldestroyed after the Reformation.23 Only small sections in front of the Coronation Chairand around Bishop John Waltham’s ledger stone andbrass could be seen until the pavement was uncoveredin February 1998.


Figure 3.3 Westminster Abbey.Presbytery pavement plan, 1924(Photograph, NationalMonuments Record)

Figure 3.4 Westminster Abbey.Chapel of Edward the Confessor(Photograph, NationalMonuments Record)

designs (Figure 3.3). The design must havebeen marked out on the pavement once theslabs were in place, and within the cut groovesdesigns of purple and green porphyry andwhite marble were laid, as well as somecoloured-glass inlays. In the centre of thepavement the podium for the shrine of StEdward was made at the same time, c.1268,while around the edge of the pavement theplinths to the later royal tombs of Henry III,Edward I, Edward III and Richard II overlapthe pavement, as do the steps into the HenryV chantry on the east. Two large later tombsfor Bishop John Waltham (1395) and Thomasof Woodstock (1397), on the northwest andsoutheast, respectively, were cut right throughthe pavement (Figure 3.4). To the east,however, the graves of John and Margaret deValence were laid into the pavement in c.1277, and the two grave-covers, though veryworn, still contain, at the east end, brass lettersand fillets, and red, white and gold inlaidmosaic work in a miniature Cosmati style.24

This whole floor, and these graves, have notbeen seen (because of the covering) for abouthalf a century, and only W.R. Lethaby hasmade any study of it.25 The whole pavementhas now been uncovered and will be cleanedand conserved. However, the general publichave been excluded from the chapel of StEdward the Confessor.

The Great Pavement (Figure 3.3) in thesanctuary of Westminster Abbey was until early1998 under a carpet which has now beenremoved permanently. The wonderfulpavement beneath it will now be cleaned,conserved and consolidated, and then perma-nently displayed to the public, who will beable to observe it from the crossing area. Thispavement has also been hidden under itscarpet for many years,26 and is in a very dirtystate.27 Remarkably, however, the pavement isstill in fairly good condition having beenrestored on several occasions in the laterseventeenth and early eighteenth centuries after

damage was inflicted on it during preparationwork for coronations. In 1706 Queen Anne’shuge baroque altar-piece from Whitehall Palacewas re-erected along the west side of thefifteenth-century high altar screen, and this verylarge structure most unfortunately overlappedand badly damaged the eastern three feet of thepavement. This altar-piece was removed in 1820,and the whole pavement was finally restored,and a completely new high altar dais (coveredin marble work) was made by G.G. Scott in1866–1869. Scott also had large holes dug (withDean Stanley’s active involvement) on either sideof the pavement to uncover the buried pier-bases of Edward the Confessor’s mid-eleventh-century sanctuary.28 Scott then restored thepavement very skilfully with new purple andgreen porphyry (and other materials),29 and thisnew work can be easily discerned today because(as at Canterbury Cathedral) all the new marbleinlay is mechanically cut and has very sharpedges, and thin joints.

The history and ‘hidden meaning’ of thepavement has recently been authoritativelystudied by Richard Foster (Foster, 1991), soonly a brief résumé is needed here. A fullcolour photogrammetric survey of the wholepavement has also been made (see Plates 22aand 22b), and a provisional interpretation ofthis has been carried out to show which areoriginal areas of the pavement and which arelater repairs. While the cleaning work takesplace, the survey will be used to record indetail every piece (there are over 30 000pieces in total), and it is already possible todistinguish the different materials and patterns

60 Historic Floors

24 RCHM (1924, p.27). This has survived below thesteps into Henry V’s chantry.

25 His brief conclusions are in Lethaby (1906). See alsoLethaby (1925, pp.225–33 and T. Tatton-Brown, ‘Thepavement in the chapel of St Edward the Confessor,Westminster Abbey’. Journal of the BritishArchaeological Association 153 (2000)).26 But in 1989 a new ‘tradition’ was started ofuncovering it for public display for a few days inFebruary every year.27 It is particularly black because of a perished rubberunderlay to the carpet.28 These pier-bases can still be inspected by lifting threegun-metal covers, made in 1867 to contain portions of anew Purbeck floor that had been cut away.29 The work was actually carried out by Henry Poole,the abbey’s master-mason.

used in the secondary and tertiary repairs ofthe later seventeenth century. The originalpatterns are all set with purple and greenporphyry, while the seventeenth-centuryrepairs use alternative materials; pinkDevonian ‘marble’ (for purple porphyry) andGenoise serpentine (for green porphyry) in therepairs of c.1660–1662, and ‘touch’, Lizardserpentine, and other quite different materialsincluding Cipollino and Carrara marble and ablack corallite limestone in the tertiary repair.The Scott repairs once again use purple andgreen porphyry but, as we have already seen,these were cut mechanically.30

The Great Pavement in Westminster Abbeyis about 25 feet square (see Plate 10a), socompared with the large areas of Cosmatipavement in Anagni Cathedral or Romanchurches such as S. Maria in Cosmedin, S.Clemente, or the great basilica of St JohnLateran, it is quite small. However, thepavement itself is probably the most elaborateCosmati pavement ever laid, and is unique inhaving a whole series of inscriptions in bronze(brass) letters set into the Purbeck marblestrips of the pavement (sadly only elevenletters still survive in situ). These letters arealso the earliest known examples of bronzelettering on any monument or pavement inBritain (Blair, 1987, p.136). Luckily all theinscriptions were documented in the fifteenthcentury, so it is possible to fully reconstructthem and their original positions (Foster, 1991,pp. 80–110). Around the edge the date, 1268,is given (it actually says 1272 less four years),as well as the three principal persons involvedin it: Henry III, the abbot (Richard Ware), andOdoricus from ‘the City’ (i.e. Rome), who weare told ‘put together these porphyry stones’.Around the circles of the central quincunx, theletters form elaborate mystical phrases (all are,of course, in Latin) which have never beenfully understood. They reflect upon the lengthof the ‘primum mobile’ and the pattern of the‘macrocosmos,’ and relate to scholarly ideas

on the universe in the thirteenth century.31 Aswell as this, the geometry and coloured stonesof the central quincunx are exceptionallyelaborate. At the very centre is a magnificentlarge roundel of Egyptian onyx marblesurrounded by a border of red, blue and whiteglass petal-patterns (see Plate 10b).32 Theneach of the four roundels that surround itcontain a stone of a different geometric shape:a circle on the east, a hexagon on the west,a heptagon on the north and an octagon onthe south. Finally on the north and south sidesof the pavement, two six-feet-long Purbeckmarble grave-slabs (themselves covered in


Figure 3.5 Westminster Abbey. Chapel of Edward theConfessor, details of designs (Photograph, NationalMonuments Record)

30 A steam engine was brought into the north transeptof the abbey to cut the materials.

31 Some of the wall paintings in the crypt of AnagniCathedral have diagrammatic schemes of the fourelements, the zodiac and the place of man in the ‘microcosmos,’ see Ravasi (1995).32 The glass is probably Islamic in origin.

elaborate inlaid patterns of glass etc.) wereincorporated into the original pavement, andthese slabs were then lifted, and the spacebeneath used for the burial of Abbot Ware in1283 (on the north), and his successor, AbbotWalter de Wenlock, in 1307.33 Originally therewere also bronze inscriptions around the edgeof the grave-slabs, but they have sadly beenrobbed. However, both inscriptions wererecorded in the fifteenth century, and theyrefer appropriately to Abbot Ware ‘bringingthese stones from the City [of Rome]’ and toAbbot Walter’s burial under a ‘marble cover’.

This wonderful pavement lies in the centreof the presbytery between the high altar onthe east and the crossing on the west, and itis on the centre of this pavement that the chairof St Edward is placed for coronations. For allrecent coronations, however, the pavementhas been covered and completely hidden fromview. It is very much hoped that for the nextcoronation (which will, no doubt, be seen allover the world on colour television), the GreatPavement will have been cleaned and consol-idated, so that it too can play a visible part inthe anointing ceremonies.

References

BABINGTON, M.A. (1933). Canterbury Cathedral. Dent &Sons.

BLAIR, J. (1987). English monumental brasses before 1350:types, patterns and workshops. In The Earliest EnglishBrasses (J. COALES, ed.) Monumental Brass Society.

CLAPHAM, A.W. (1934). English Romanesque Architectureafter the Conquest. Oxford University Press.

COLVIN, H.M. (ed.) (1963). The History of the King’s Works.Vol. I. HMSO.

DAVIS, A.H. (trans.) (1934). William Thorne’s Chronicle of StAugustine’s Abbey, Canterbury. Blackwell.

DUDLEY, C. (1969). Sacred geometry. Canterbury CathedralChronicle, 64, 31. Friends of Canterbury Cathedral.

EAMES, E. (1982). Notes on the decorated stone roundelsin the Corona and Trinity Chapel in CanterburyCathedral. In Medieval Art and Architecture atCanterbury Cathedral before 1220, Edited by N.Coldstream and P. Draper. pp. 59–70. BritishArchaeological Association.

FOSTER, R. (1991). Patterns of Thought, the Hidden Meaningof the Great Pavement of Westminster Abbey. JonathanCape.

GOSTLING, W. (1777). A Walk in the City of Canterbury. W.Blockley, Canterbury.

HORTON, M.C. and NORTON, E.C. (1981). A Parisian workshopat Canterbury, a late 13th century tile pavement in theCorona chapel, and the origins of Tyler Hill. Journal ofthe British Archaeological Association, 134, 58–80.

HUTTON, E. (1950). The Cosmati. Routledge & Kegan Paul.LETHABY, W.R. (1906). Westminster Abbey and the King’s

Craftsmen.LETHABY, W.R. (1925). Westminster Abbey Re-examined.

Duckworth.RAVASI, G. (1995). La Cripta della Cattedrale di Anagni.

Edizione d’Arte Marconi.RCHM (1924). London I. Westminster Abbey.RCHM (1980). City of Salisbury I. HMSO.ST JOHN HOPE, W.H. (1914). Report on the excavation of the

Cathedral Church of Old Sarum in 1913. Proc. Soc. Ants.(Second Series), XXVI, 116. Society of Antiquaries ofLondon.

SHERLOCK, D. and WOODS, H. (1988). St Augustine’s Abbey:Report on Excavations, 1960–78. Kent ArchaeologicalSociety.

STURDY, D. and HENIG, M. (n.d.). The Gentle Traveller, JohnBargrave, Canon of Canterbury and his Collection.Canterbury Cathedral.

TATTON-BROWN, T. (1981). The Trinity Chapel and Coronafloors. Canterbury Cathedral Chronicle, 75, 51–6.

TOKE, N.E. (1930). The opus Alexandrinum and sculpturedstone roundels in the retro-choir of CanterburyCathedral. Arch. Cant., 42, 189–221. KentArchaeological Society.

WILLIS, R. (1845). The Architectural History of CanterburyCathedral.

WOODRUFF, C.E. and DANKS, W. (1912). Memorials ofCanterbury Cathedral.

62 Historic Floors

33 There is a Purbeck marble coffin below each graveslab, and these stone coffins were perhaps put in placein 1268, when the pavement was laid.

4.1 Introduction

Extensive excavations were undertaken in thenave and southwest transept of CanterburyCathedral between 4 January and 20 June1993, prior to an extensive programme ofreflooring (1200 m2), and the replacement ofthe old heating system (Blockley, 1993).Detailed study of the Portland stone floor (laidin 1787), covering an area of around 1100 m2,revealed the layout of the late eighteenth- totwentieth-century liturgical fittings. Afterremoval of the floor, over an area of around600 m2, detailed recording of the beddingmortar for the Norman floor revealed thelayout of the medieval cathedral, and thechanges that it underwent over a period ofmore than 700 years (Plate 23). Beneath theNorman cathedral were four phases of Anglo-Saxon cathedral, and although no floorsurvived in situ, finds from the excavationsenable one to suggest some of the flooringmaterials used.

This case study gives an interpretation of thevarious floors and is organized sequentially bythe main construction phases. A full report isnow in print (Blockley et al., 1997).

4.2 Anglo-Saxon cathedral

Four main phases of Anglo-Saxon cathedralwere excavated beneath the Norman floor

bedding mortar. The final Anglo-Saxon phasewas destroyed by fire in 1067, but demolitionwork was not started until 1071.

No floors were located inside the Anglo-Saxon cathedral, although occasional findsrecovered from the backfill of the 1787 grave-clearance pits provided information on thepossible floors. Numerous fragments of opussigninum (mortar with crushed brick and tileadded) were located. Some of these may havecome from the underlying Romano-Britishbuildings (one of which was located beneaththe cathedral), but other pieces may havecome from floors inside the Anglo-Saxoncathedral. An example of in situ Anglo-Saxonopus signinum was found lining the base andwalls of a small Anglo-Saxon mausoleum, tothe south of the Anglo-Saxon cathedral. Similarfloors have been recorded in other Anglo-Saxon churches, for example the churches ofSt Peter & St Paul, at St Augustine’s Abbey,Canterbury (Saunders, 1978, pp. 44–9),Reculver (Dowker, 1878), and Glastonbury(Radford, 1981, p. 117). A further importantfind was that of Late Anglo-Saxon relief-decorated floor tiles, two of which werelocated (one in a demolition layer of theAnglo-Saxon cathedral, the other in a 1787clearance layer). The complete example,measuring 0.1 m2, can be used to establish thedesign of the floor (Figure 4.1). Both tiles areheavily worn, suggesting they had been sitedin prominent locations.

63

4

Archaeological researchCanterbury Cathedral Nave floor

Kevin Blockley

4.3 Lanfranc’s Norman cathedral

Archbishop Lanfranc’s cathedral was builtbetween 1071 and 1077, after demolition of theAnglo-Saxon cathedral. The floor was made ofslabs of Marquise limestone, laid on a bed ofmortar. The floor slabs were removed in 1787when the burials were cleared from the naveand southwest transept and a Portland stonefloor laid. Small fragments of the Norman floorwere, however, located during the excavations,sealed beneath later medieval pier bases andwalls. Many of the stones removed in 1787 hadbeen used to backfill the clearance pits, thecomplete examples measuring up to 1.2 m by0.8 m in plan and 0.2 m in thickness. Mostwere fairly well squared on the surface, butmore irregular on the underside.

Detailed study of the bedding mortarshowed not only the outlines of the individ-ual floor slabs and their layout, but also thesequence in which they had been laid. Eachslab had been set on its own patch of beddingmortar, frequently with small stones beingplaced under the slab to level it up. Detailedexamination of these individual patches ofmortar showed the relationship with its neigh-bours, and hence the sequence of construc-tion. The floor had evidently been laid fromeast to west, starting along the tops of thearcade foundations, between the piers, andthen in narrow rows across the nave and aisle

spaces between the piers, followed by theinfilling of the compartments with floor slabslaid along the axis of the cathedral. Survivingbedding mortar around the bases of the piersalso showed clearly that the Norman pierbases were cruciform in plan (Figure 4.2).

4.4 Rebuilding of the nave

A complete rebuilding of the nave took placebetween 1377 and 1405 under the directionfirstly of Archbishop Sudbury and later PriorChillenden. This work involved the retention ofLanfranc’s northwest tower, as well as substan-tial parts of the crossing and transepts (thenorthwest transept remained intact because ofits association with Thomas Becket, whilst the

64 Historic Floors

Figure 4.1 Late Anglo-Saxon relief-decorated floor tile,in a layer of Norman demolition rubble (Photograph,Canterbury Archaeological Trust)

Figure 4.2 Norman floor-bedding mortar at the westend of the nave. Note the broken Norman floor slabs inthe backfilled grave (removed during the 1787reflooring), and the pattern of the 1787 floor slabs(scales 2 m) (Photograph, Canterbury ArchaeologicalTrust)

southwest transept was rebuilt soon after 1405).The southwest tower was rebuilt in 1424–1434.Although this work was a major undertaking,the original Norman floor was retained through-out, save in part of the Lady Chapel.

The Lady Chapel, inserted at a late stage inthe rebuilding of the nave c.1405 (on the siteof the Norman Lady Chapel) extended overthree bays at the east end of the north aisle.Here the Norman floor was removed in theeasternmost bay, and the ground level reducedby 0.35 m to provide for easier access from thecloister, via a doorway inserted through thenorth wall. It is unfortunate, once again, thatthis floor was robbed of its stone, although thebedding mortar, and one surviving stoneindicated that the floor was a regular arrange-ment of Purbeck marble slabs measuring 0.3 m2.Two steps must be postulated, providing accessto the western part of the Lady Chapel. Around1455 the Lady Chapel was moved to a new siteon the east side of the northwest transept.

4.5 The Consistory Court

The Consistory Court lay at ground levelbelow Lanfranc’s surviving northwest tower,and is known to have been sited here from1660. The original site is not known forcertain. Only a relatively small part of its floorwas recorded, because of considerabledestruction by a later burial. Enough survived,however, to show that the floor of theConsistory Court was of plain ceramic tiles,0.23 m2, laid on a bed of clay. On the eastside, the floor terminated at a straight edge,0.7 m from the east wall of the tower, perhapsindicating the position of a bench. An adjacenttile, still in place beside the bench setting,indicated the location of a thoroughfare to adoor in the east wall.

4.6 The burials

From c.1405, and until the reflooring in 1787,the Norman floor of Marquise stone was

retained in the nave and southwest transept.Numerous graves, however, were insertedthrough the floor. Comparison between theexcavated plan of the graves that had beencleared in 1787, and a reconstructed plan ofthe Norman floor slabs, shows clearly themethodology for siting the burials. Where acoffin was buried, only a single row of floorslabs along the axis of the cathedral was takenup, and the stones relaid after the grave hadbeen backfilled. For larger burials, such as themedieval stone-lined graves, and brick-linedand vaulted graves, a section of the floor wasremoved (two rows of stones for the former,and three for the latter type of burial), and thefloor relaid afterwards. Most of the burialswere sited in relation to the bay divisions ofthe nave, perhaps partly for ease of insertionof burials in the pattern of the Norman floor,and also (particularly with regard to laterbrick-lined graves) because burial space mayhave been apportioned by bay.

Although it is thought that this regular inser-tion of graves related largely to the pattern ofthe Norman floor slabs, many of the burialswould have had a ledger or indent laid overthem. A plan of the nave floor was drawn byWhite shortly before the 1787 reflooring,recording eighty-seven burials. Of these fifty-two have a name recorded on the plan, anda further thirteen are identified by means of akey; the latter were largely medieval stoneswith indents for brasses. It is evident, there-fore, that this plan does not record all of theburials, but out of twenty-seven brick-linedand vaulted graves, twelve can be identifiedon the plan, and a further seven of those onthe key identified. The clearance of the burialsin 1787 had been thorough and the ledgersand indents broken up and used as hard-corein the backfill of the graves. One of the stoneswith indents for brass was retrieved in theexcavation, broken into four pieces (Figure4.3). This can be identified with certainty bycomparison with burial number 8 on White’splan as the burial of Sir William Lovelace(d.1577). This shows the accuracy of the 1787plan, particularly since all of the brasses had

Archaeological research 65

been removed in the 1640s (Hay, 1991, pp.6–7). Most of the ledger stones were ofPurbeck marble, with the occasional use ofKentish Ragstone. A small number offragments of Marquise stone were also recov-ered with indents for brass. The latter repre-sent stones from the original Norman floorreset over graves, but with the addition ofmemorial brasses having been set into them.Over 100 graves, twenty-seven brick-lined andvaulted graves, and three lead coffins wererecorded during the 1993 excavations (Figure4.4), predominantly clustering at the east endof the nave and in the southwest transept.

4.7 The 1787 reflooring

During the early months of 1787 the Normanfloor and the various ledger stones wereremoved, many of the ledgers being relaid in

the Chapter House (but since dispersed),others being broken up. The burials were thenexhumed, save the brick-lined and vaultedgraves which were left intact, and the gravesbackfilled with layers of stone and soil.Following this the nave was floored withPortland stone and the southwest transeptfloored with the more recent (Tournai marble)ledger slabs that had been retained from thenave. The Portland stones were evidentlydressed on site, to judge from the large quanti-ties of chippings located during excavation.The new floor was laid at an angle to thealignment of the nave. The Portland stones inthe central space of the nave wererhomboidal, laid on the diagonal 13° off theaxis of the cathedral; those in the aisles werea combination of rhomboid- and parallelo-gram-shaped flags, 12.5° off the axis. Narrowlinear slabs were laid down either side of thenave. At the east end of the nave the Altar ofthe Holy Cross was moved, and the platformextended a further 2 m to the west. This areawas refloored with Portland stones set 13.5°off the axis of the cathedral. The extendedplatform was not given a new altar until 1898(this was recorded in Chapter Minutes). Thesouthwest transept was paved with ledgerstones laid along the axis of the cathedral.None of these were in their original position,since they had largely been moved from thenave, so they could not be matched with theburials and brick-lined and vaulted gravesbelow.

4.8 Recent features

Detailed recording of the 1787 floor wasundertaken on a 1 : 100 scale plan of the floorslabs. As each of the stones was lifted thefollowing details were recorded: wear on thesurface, thickness of the stone, type ofbedding mortar, any masons’/tally marks (cutor painted), other surface features. Colour-coded plans were prepared showing thedegree of wear, which stones were broken,and the different types of bedding mortar. This

66 Historic Floors

Figure 4.3 1787 backfill of cleared graves, showingledger slab of Sir William Lovelace, and a completeNorman floor slab (foreground) (scale 2 m) (Photograph,Canterbury Archaeological Trust)

proved invaluable when interpreting thevarious alterations and additions to the navefrom 1787. Some of the main features notedare outlined briefly below.

Insertion of services to the nave comprisedthe lifting of the narrow stone strips along thesides of the nave, or cutting of trenches forlarger features. The gas lighting system, forexample, installed in 1861, was inserted largelybelow the narrow strip of floor slabs alongeither side of the nave, at the foot of the piers.These were then relaid, on a new bed ofmortar. Similarly, where the north and southgas pipes converged and joined together topass along a specially constructed duct cutthrough the west wall of the nave, the floorslabs had been lifted and relaid.

The first heating system was put in in 1870,and comprised cast iron pipes, set in trenchescut through the floor of the aisles and acrossthe east and west ends of the nave. These fed

large cast iron radiators situated at variouspoints around the cathedral. Insertion of thissystem involved cutting through the floorslabs. Although a number of these under-ground pipes had been removed it was possi-ble by studying the mortar bedding below thefloor to establish which of the floor slabs hadbeen relaid in 1870.

Wear patterns on steps were also recordedduring the course of the excavations. At theeast end of the nave, the lower of the pulpi-tum steps (of Portland stone) was seen to haveconsiderable wear in two places, at either endof the step close to the piers. This wasthought, before excavation, to have markedthe location of two doorways in the roodscreen built in 1405 (Dart, 1726, p. 27, for adrawing of the screen; Tatton-Brown, 1990, p.27). Further investigation revealed that thefifteenth-century steps in the nave were all ofPurbeck marble. Further, there were fragments

Archaeological research 67

Figure 4.4 1993 location plan of excavations (Plan, Canterbury Archaeological Trust)

of brick below the step, and the inscribed dateof 1821 on the riser of the worn step, indicat-ing that the pulpitum steps were replaced atthat date. The wear pattern noted on the stepsmust therefore post-date 1821, and mayperhaps best be interpreted as wear generatedby traffic on either side of the Altar of theHoly Cross. Chapter Minutes record that thealtar, removed from the platform in 1787during reflooring work, was not replaced until1898. This narrows down the time that wearcould have taken place to post-1898. A furthercomplication of two holes in the step, cuttingthe wear patterns, are probably related to ironrods that were placed beside an extended altarin more recent times. These rods are visible innumerous photographs of the Altar of theHoly Cross (e.g. Lang-Sims, 1979, p. 33).

Although the pulpit is now situated on thenorth side of the nave, on the second pierwest of the crossing, this is not its original site.Recording the wear marks and dowel holescutting into the 1787 floor, one may see fiveclusters of small holes, two of which aresurrounded by dark octagonal stains (onpatches of unworn floor), adjacent to the thirdnorthern pier. These are identical to the planof the pulpit, as it now stands, but indicatethat in this earlier siting the pulpit faced downthe nave rather than, as today, into the nave.This location is recorded in Chapter Minutesas the original site of the pulpit in 1895.Chapter Minutes also record that the pulpitwas moved in 1927 to the south side of thenave, against the second pier, but no evidenceof this was located during the recording of thefloor. It was placed in its present spot in 1935.

Replacement of the heating system in 1947was extensive, and the system saw theaddition of ‘expansion loops’ to allow for theexpansion and contraction of the new copperpipes. The insertion of this system also lefttraces in the bedding mortar where disturbedfloor slabs were relaid. More recent distur-bance to the floor, which also resulted in therelaying of further floor slabs, was due to theinsertion of electrical ducts, mainly along theside aisles, adjacent to the piers. Two phases

of electricity supply can be seen; an earlierone employing iron duct pipes, and a veryrecent one with plastic ducts. All of these post-1787 disturbances were traced in the plan ofthe floor after the recording of differentbedding mortars. Extensive wear of the floor,resulting from an increase in visitor numbers,and breakage of many of the slabs, was alsorecorded. The latter is thought to have beenthe result of large lorries in the nave in 1939when soil was brought into the nave as ameasure against possible bomb damage.

4.9 Conclusions

The brief outline above, regarding the layoutof Canterbury Cathedral’s Norman floor, thealterations undertaken during the 1377–1405rebuilding of the nave, and the post-1787fixtures and alterations, was only possiblefollowing very detailed recording of theexcavated remains. The 1787 floor wasrecorded at a scale of 1 : 100, and all othersurfaces, such as the bedding mortars, recordedat a scale of 1 : 20. Only after such detailedrecording could the liturgical arrangement ofthe cathedral be mapped and followed over aperiod of more than 900 years.

References

BLOCKLEY, K. (1993). Canterbury Cathedral. CurrentArchaeology, 136, 124–30.

BLOCKLEY, K., SPARKS, M. and TATTON-BROWN, T.W.T. (1997).Canterbury Cathedral Nave: Archaeology, History andArchitecture. Dean and Chapter of Canterbury Cathedraland Canterbury Archaeological Trust.

DART, J. (1726). The History and Antiquities of theCathedral Church of Canterbury.

DOWKER, F.G.S. (1878). Reculver Church. ArchaeologiaCantiana, 12, 248–68.

HAY, T. (1991). The ledger slabs of Canterbury Cathedral.Archaeologia Cantiana, 109, 5–28.

LANG-SIMS, L. (1979). Canterbury Cathedral. Cassell.RADFORD, C.A.R. (1981). The Early Saxon Monastery. In

Medieval Art and Architecture at Wells and Glastonbury.British Archaeological Association, 4, 116–18.

SAUNDERS, A.D. (1978). Excavations in the Church of StAugustine’s Abbey, Canterbury 1955–58. MedievalArchaeology, 22, 25–63.

TATTON-BROWN, T.W.T. (1990). The rood-screen and loft inCanterbury Cathedral. Canterbury Cathedral Chronicle,84, 26–9.

68 Historic Floors

If we need to restore a ledger slab or othermemorial, presumably it is not now in its origi-nal condition. Whether or not it is desirable,practical or economic to restore it to its origi-nal form, we nevertheless need to know whatthat was. Therefore, our first stage is to findout what the memorial was like at as early adate as possible, before decay or damageoccurred or was as serious as it is now. Oursecond stage, the present, is to record, bydrawings, rubbings and photographs as appro-priate, the present condition of the memorialbefore any restoration work is begun. Thethird stage, which lies in the future when thetask of restoration is undertaken, consists ofthe similar recording of the memorial whenrestoration is complete.

The word ‘ledger’ means something that liesdown or is laid down. The term is familiar asa large tome which because of its weight andconstant use spends its active life lying on aDickensian clerk’s sloping desk. In my ownworld as a librarian and a historian of thebook, the word ledger, more often in its alter-native form ‘coucher’, means any large volumewhich in the Middle Ages, or afterwards,regularly lay on a reading desk or a table topor a shelf or a ledge. In this sense, a ledgeror coucher book was most commonly a largeservice book for use on an altar or lectern, ora cartulary recording the documents – charters– on which an institution, religious or secular,based its property, rights and privileges.

Similarly, in terms of memorials to the dead,a ledger slab is one lying down, whether onthe interior floor of a church, or on an exter-nal floor such as a cloister walk, or evenrecumbent in a churchyard. It is thus strictlydistinct from a wall monument inside oroutside a building, or a vertical headstone ina churchyard. There is, however, no naturaldistinction between a horizontal and a verti-cally erected memorial inscription, whether instone or in brass, except that the ledger slabis more liable to be regularly abraded by therepeated action of human feet and by floorcleaning, and consequently more liable to bein need of restoration.

Most of my examples will be taken fromYork Minster. There are now relatively fewledger stones and brasses on the floor of theMinster. In the Middle Ages and early moderntimes, however, there were several hundred ofthem. They disappeared, most of them, in twomain stages. Henry VIII’s minister, ThomasCromwell, was mainly responsible for thedestruction of the monasteries. In non-monas-tic churches such as the Minster he wroughtless damage, but it was in his time as ChiefMinister of the Crown that all the Minster’smany chantries were dissolved. For the secondstage of their disappearance we move on ahundred years to Oliver Cromwell and thedestruction wrought by his supporters in the1640s. After the Civil War and even before theexecution of King Charles I, the episcopal

69

5

Ledger stones Documentary sources: York Minster

Church of England of which he was the headwas abolished in favour of a presbyterianchurch, and York Minster in common with allcathedrals was governed no longer by anarchbishop or a dean and chapter, all ofwhom were abolished, but was run as one ofonly four churches in the city served bypreaching ministers.

Oliver Cromwell’s party did cause somedamage to one large category of funerarymemorials in the Minster, most of themmounted in the floor but a few erected verti-cally on the walls. These were not straight-forward ledger stones in the main sense; theywere stones similar in general character butbrought to a higher degree of costliness andshowiness by the use of brass. The greatmajority were not the overall slab-sizedsheets of brass that one usually thinks of inthe context of brass-rubbing – and of coursebrass conservation – but smaller plates ofbrass recording the names and qualities ofthe deceased and sometimes their coats ofarms. In many cases there were several smallpieces of brass of this kind let into a singlestone slab. Two such wall memorials survive,long stripped of their brass panels so thatonly the empty stone ‘indents’ remain. Butthese are exceptional in position and in styleas well as in the fact of their survival. Thegreat number of floor-mounted brass-ornamented slabs of this general type werestripped of their brass by the puritans duringthe Commonwealth period, and the metalsold on their behalf by one Richard Dossy.Both the stone ledger slabs proper and theothers thus stripped of their brass insetsvanished altogether eighty years later. Theywere removed and destroyed by a combina-tion of the then Dean and Chapter andfashionable and famous architects anddesigners as part of a programme of generaltidying up and beautification after thedamage caused by the two Cromwells,Thomas and Oliver. This was part of thesame general scheme in the 1720s underwhich the high altar was moved a bayeastwards to fill the untidy space left by the

removal of St William’s shrine and to makethe choir look less squat and more elegantlylonger.

The major element of the restoration of the1720s was the beautification of the floor.While the purely stone inscriptions whichcovered so much of the floor were no doubtstill in generally reasonable condition, legiblein so far as anyone other than antiquarianscould then read their mainly black-letter andLatin texts, the many which were indentsempty of their brass were meaningless withouttheir inscription plates and heraldry. Theywere also uncomfortable and even dangerousto walk over. So all were torn up and thrownout, and a new level and artistic pavement waslaid, to the design of William Kent and theEarl of Burlington1. Even though there werethen no chairs filling the nave, one stillwonders how much of the grand design willhave been apparent to a visitor standing at theend of the nave or an aisle. Nevertheless, onpaper it certainly looked good, and up to datein the current architectural and artistic fashion,and it was comfortable and safe to walk on.It is idle to speculate whether nowadays aFabric Advisory Committee and a CathedralsFabric Commission for England would allow aDean and Chapter to do anything of the sort,but the fact remains that it was done. It is,therefore, now the Kent–Burlington pavement,much of it in fact replaced after the fires of1829 and 1840, not to mention the restorationof 1967–72 and further restoration since then,that is here to be preserved, and not themedieval and early post-reformation floorslabs, with or without brass inserts.

Before leaving the Kent–Burlingtonpavement it is interesting to look a little moreclosely at the details of the design. Basically itis of course a simple Greek key-pattern,repeated over and over from natural starting

70 Historic Floors

1 For Burlington see Wittkower in Singleton (1954) andBarnard and Clark (1995) (neither mentioning the YorkMinster pavement), Wilson (1984) and Wilton-Ely (1985)(the last not mentioning the York Minster pavement).

points to natural finishing points, with theneed for ingenuity and care at meeting pointsat corners, and a more original variationcentrally under the crossing. In all probabilityKent and Burlington never worried about thedetails, and all this was left to the masons. Inthe case of the Kent–Burlington pavement, weare unusually fortunate in possessing amongthe Minster archives the original masons’contract, complete with its accompanying planstill present. But let us compare it withcontemporary engravings showing the actualpavement as newly laid. In the early 1960s,before the most recent restoration, the planand engravings and the actual floor werecompared and it was found that no two werealike. This is a reminder of two importantfacts: first, that it is often craftsmen and notarchitects who before the nineteenth centurywere responsible for details of design; andsecondly and more importantly, that if wepossess one piece of evidence such as a pre-construction plan or post-construction drawingor engraving, whatever the artefact, we mustnot automatically believe that every detail isbeing correctly shown to us. Multiplicity ofevidence does not mean uniformity or consis-tency of evidence. An unsettling thought forthe greater number of instances where wehave but one piece of evidence.

Neither the two Cromwells nor Kent–Burlington bring us to the end of the destruc-tion of ledger slabs and similar memorials inthe Minster. The new pavement of the 1720scovered the whole of the nave and thetransepts, the centre of the choir and the choiraisles as far east as a pair of gates immedi-ately east of the doors from the aisles into thechoir. The Lady Chapel and the easternextremities of the choir aisles were not relaid:this area seems to have remained an untidydump, largely unvisited by clergy and public.Here alone remained a number of medievaland post-medieval monuments and ledgerstones, and here future burials were to beallowed without fear of damaging the beauti-ful new pavement. For these another agent ofdestruction was required, and one came in the

form of the religious maniac Jonathan Martin,who on 1 February 1829 set fire to the entireeastern arm of the Minster. Apart from damagecaused by the intense heat of the flames,which melted the surface of large areas oflimestone masonry, falling roof timberssmashed whatever they fell on, and the stonealtar screen collapsed partly or entirelydownwards to the east and smashed a row ofmedieval ledger slabs immediately to its east.Funerary monuments are of course legally theproperty of the descendants of those whoerect them, and the restoration of thosedamaged or destroyed in the fire was no partof the restoration plan of the Dean andChapter or the contributors to the restorationfund.

In 1831 the choir aisles were dug up forarchaeological excavation ‘to examine furtherthe remains of the old crypt’ (Hornby f.131).This explains why the Burlington pavement inthese aisles, no doubt damaged in the fire, hasdisappeared. A year later in 1832 it wasrecorded that ‘In the aisles of the choir themonuments are all in ruins: nothing is restoredbut the interior of the choir’ (Hornby f.239).Two years later in 1834 progress is reportedto the effect that ‘the work of restoring themonuments is going on’ (Hornby f.239). Thisrestoration was largely or exclusively at theexpense of such descendants as chose torepair, restore or replace the memorials oftheir ancestors. Relatively few did so. The navefire of 1840 stimulated more descendants torestore memorials in the eastern arm of theMinster, now restored to glory, but othersremain lost. Surviving fragments of twomemorials long thought lost have recentlybeen discovered in various storage areas andidentified by the Minster’s excellent inventoryofficer, Charles McCarter, and some form ofrepair and re-erection is a possibility for thefuture. In 1910 Dean Purey-Cust arranged ascheme for restoration work on fifteenmemorials in the choir, but this was allrelatively minor work, painting letters andpolishing slabs. In the 1950s Dean Milner-White arranged for some repainting of a few

Ledger stones 71

further monuments. In connection with therestoration of the structure of the east end andthe liturgical re-ordering of the Lady Chapel inthe late 1960s and the 1970s, and as part ofrestoration training schemes, a few additionalmonuments in the Lady Chapel and the choiraisles have been restored or repainted inrecent years, mostly funded by descendants orgrant aid as opportunity has offered. Thepresent scheme is part of this ongoing processof attempting to rescue what needs rescuing,and of seizing opportunities of further restora-tion as they become available.

This survey of the main events, negative andpositive, that have brought York Minster’sledger stones and other funerary memorials tothe state in which they are today is introduc-tory to the main theme of what we should dowith them now. Before embarking on anyrestoration we need to be aware of thisbackground of damage and destruction andoccasional repair and restoration. While theincidents given relate specifically to YorkMinster, a parallel but not identical series ofdestruction and restoration will have takenplace at all cathedrals, and needs to be inves-tigated and taken into account before anyfresh restoration is undertaken.

In respect of one of the York ledger stonesit is important to recognize that what we areproposing to restore is not the original slab of1667 but a post-1829 replacement, presumablyprovided by descendants about 1840. This isthe memorial to Anne Prince, and it forms anexcellent example of how necessary it is toresearch the history of any memorial or otherartefact before attempting any restorationwork. How far, if at all, this affects the treat-ment that this ledger should receive is aninteresting supplementary question thatdeserves further consideration.

The York Minster register of burials, in itsprinted form, records: ‘Anne, wife of PhilipPrince, gent., died 1 March 1667, and wasburied in the south aisle of the choir.’ JamesTorr, writing in 1691, on his plan locates theburial more precisely on the floor at the footof the sixteenth-century wall monument to

Archbishop Matthew Hutton, and in his text(p. 250) gives this description:

‘By the wall side lyes a new spotted marble’– remember that his fair copy is dated only 24years after the burial, and his original noteswere probably taken a decade or two earlier– ‘at the head whereof is engraven thislozenge escocheon – sable an inescocheoninter an orle of 8 owles or – and underneaththis epitaph’. He then reproduces in full thetext of a Latin inscription extending to 47words, and mentioning the proximity toArchbishop Hutton, described as her ancestor.In 1870 another local antiquary (Robert Skaife)wrote that ‘The escocheon and epitaph seenby Torre [sic] have disappeared – no doubt asa result of the 1829 fire – and in their place Ifind the following restoration of the oldinscription’ – and he quotes an abbreviatedLatin text, containing only fifteen wordsinstead of 47, and omitting the reference to itsproximity by blood and location to ArchbishopHutton. It is this abbreviated replacement textof the 1830s or 1840s that we are now prepar-ing to restore.

Anne Prince is far from the only example ofan inscription shortened on restoration.Lettering, of course, costs so much per letter,and statements that seemed desirable to griev-ing relatives or admiring friends immediatelyafter a loved one’s death may seem superflu-ous to later generations. An example fromrelatively modern times is the memorial toWilliam Wilberforce, remembered as championof the slaves. He died in 1833 at London, andwas buried, not at Stoke Newington where hehad asked to be reunited with his sister andelder daughters, but in Westminster Abbey, asbefitted his reputation. While memorials tohim were erected not only in the Abbey butalso in his native city of Hull, in his countytown of York he was long commemoratedonly by the Yorkshire School for the Blindfounded in his honour, and no memorial wasput up in the cathedral at the time. It was onlyon the occasion of the centenary of his deathin 1933 that his admirers remedied this. Bookswhich give any quantity of detail about the

72 Historic Floors

vast number of memorial inscriptions in theMinster were all published before this date,and later books are all too selective in theircoverage to mention this. There is no infor-mation about this inscription in any of thebiographies of Wilberforce, or even in theDean and Chapter archives. Only the localnewspapers record its erection and, in onecase only, the full text of the inscription. Butwhy should we need to hunt like this for atwentieth-century inscription? Because it hasvanished. It was carved not on a separatememorial tablet but directly on to the wall ofthe nave. Little more than twenty years ago,this section of wall was removed for a totallyunrelated purpose, by an outside contractor,and owing to a lack of forethought andcommunication the Wilberforce inscriptionwas simply chiselled out and thrown away. Itstotal disappearance became evident only whenit did not reappear at the end of the opera-tion. Ironically it was not long after this thatWilberforce was included among the worthypersons other than saints commemorated inthe Alternative Service Book of 1980. TheDean and Chapter, when the problem waspointed out to them, were quick to provide areplacement inscription on a slate tablet,which was erected in or shortly after 1983, the150th anniversary year of his death, fifty yearsafter the original unveiling. The result may beseen in the nave, close to the earlier position.Fashions in style and length of inscriptions,however, had changed between 1933 and1983 and the 48 words of the original havebeen replaced by nineteen words. The carvingand erection of the new tablet produced fromthe Works Department the working drawingsfor the earlier inscription, not previouslyknown to have survived. An importantcommemoration to one of Yorkshire’s greatestmen in worldwide reputation thus came closeto being totally lost and forgotten. Thisexample shows why careful attention to thedocumentary aspect of ledger stones and othermemorials and artefacts is of vital importance.

As previously mentioned, before restorationwe must investigate the evidence from the past

of what the memorial was like when it was ingood condition. As we would not be thinkingabout restoration if it were not now damagedor destroyed, the earlier the evidence thebetter.

Some of the earliest memorial inscriptions tobe erected in the Minster were to the archbish-ops of the Saxon and Norman periods. Thesewere in the position of honour at the east endof the cathedral, successively in the Saxon andNorman choirs that preceded the presentchoir. They disappeared long before the fireof 1829, but if evidence for their texts wererequired for restoration it would be found inthe medieval series of lives of the archbishopsof York, and the more detailed biographies ofthe first four Norman archbishops composedin the 1130s by Hugh the Chantor. The lattertext survives in a fourteenth-century manu-script in the Minster Library, along with othercopies in the British Library, as does thechronicle of the archbishops. One example isthe inscription thus recorded from the tomb ofArchbishop Thomas I who died in the year1100. At least his contemporary biographerquotes this as his epitaph, without sayingwhether it was actually erected or a purelyliterary epitaph. Other briefer inscriptions,consisting of not much more than names,more certainly did exist on some of thesetombs. These monuments disappeared toolong ago for any wish to restore them to belikely or practical, but they are the earliestavailable category of evidence.

A second form of evidence which issometimes helpful is heraldic visitations. Theseare records of tours of inspection conductedby heralds from the College of Arms from thefifteenth century until late in the seventeenthcentury. In the main they recorded pedigreesand coats of arms from documentary evidencesupplied by the county families who wishedtheir arms and their right to bear them to beofficially recorded in this way. On occasions,however, the heralds would note incidentalevidence of a related kind as they wentaround on their tours of inspection, andsometimes they thus recorded inscriptions and

Ledger stones 73

coats of arms on memorials or in windows ofYork Minster and other cathedrals andchurches. As an example it is convenient touse descriptions not of the Minster but of thechurch of Brandesburton in East Yorkshire.The herald William Flower in his visitation of1563–4 notes an inscription which hedescribes as ‘graven on a tomb’; actually it wason a brass tablet inlaid in the stone. As in theMinster, the brass inset subsequently disap-peared (though part of it remains), but, unlikeat the Minster, the stone remains.

In 1620 the antiquary Roger Dodsworthvisited the same church of Brandesburton andmade a fuller description. This makes it clearthe Flower’s first text was engraved on thenow partly missing brass, and goes on torecord three more inscriptions on stone. WhenDodsworth made his transcription the openingseven words and two subsequent words hadbecome illegible, but fortunately they hadbeen clear for Flower to transcribe the text infull 56 years earlier. Thus each of the twodescriptions includes some words or featuresnot present in the other. Again we see theimportance of not relying on one piece ofevidence by itself but assembling as manydescriptions as possible.

Most of the earlier visitations give only alittle evidence of this sort, but some later onesare more detailed. An outstanding example isDugdale’s visitation of Yorkshire conducted in1641, which gives the earliest detailedtranscription and description of some of theledger slabs and other memorials in YorkMinster. In the case of the inscriptions onstone they were in a similar state when nextrecorded fifty years later, but for the brasseson the floor this is in some instances our onlyevidence before the brass was removed andmelted down as scrap metal a few years laterin the Commonwealth period. The herald’smanuscript remains in the library of theCollege of Arms in London, where it has notbeen available for general use, though inrecent years the RCHM have been able tomake limited use of it for their research onYork Minster. Fortunately there is an alterna-

tive and more readily accessible source for thetexts destroyed in the Commonwealth, in theform of transcripts by the antiquary RogerDodsworth made in 1618–19. This manuscriptsurvives in the Bodleian Library, and was longago used by Drake, who made its texts anddescriptions readily available from 1736.Drake, like Dodsworth, gives the inscriptionsin their original Latin form, but some of thelater less highly regarded editions of his bookadd to the text of the more important inscrip-tions English translations, which, thoughneither accurate nor elegant, are useful forthose researchers whose Latin is less thancomfortable.

From the heralds who repeatedly surveyedthe whole country over a period of severalcenturies, we come to the individual antiqua-ries who more systematically described whatthey saw in a particular city or county. Theirwork began in the seventeenth century, andhas never completely ceased. As far as YorkMinster is concerned a few monuments wererecorded by Matthew Hutton, a local man whospent most of his later years as a clergymanin Northamptonshire and exchanging informa-tion with antiquarian friends in Oxford andLondon. It was in 1659, when he was a youngman, that he noted down the texts andheraldry of a number of monuments in theMinster and some other churches of York andon his travels further afield. His main YorkMinster notebook is in the Minster Library, andanother copy of this together with furthermanuscripts of his can be found in the BritishLibrary.

More important is James Torr, whom hiscontemporaries describe as a ‘painful’antiquary. ‘Painstaking’ sounds more impres-sive to modern ears. A large part of hisresearch was conducted by going through allthe archiepiscopal and capitular archives thatexisted in the 1660s and 1670s. His achieve-ment in analysing their contents has neverbeen equalled, and is paralleled only by hisown descriptions of all the monumentalinscriptions in the Minster and the parishchurches of York, and many other major

74 Historic Floors

Ledger stones 75

Figure 5.1 ‘The old pavement’ from Eboracum: or the history and antiquities of the city of York (Drake, 1736)

churches in the diocese. For the Minster hisfair copy volume, written in 1691 and inconstant use in the Minster Library, is theprimary source for everything up to his owntime, excepting only the inscriptions andshields on brass destroyed in 1649. For thesewe have to have recourse to the heraldicvisitation of 1641, Dodsworth’s notes of1618–19 and Drake’s not always accurateprinting of them in 1736.

Torr in 1691 marks the end of the seven-teenth century and the end of the great periodof manuscript evidence. From the beginning ofthe eighteenth century we come to mainlyprinted sources. The first dates from 1727 andapplies not only to York but to thirteen otherEnglish and Welsh cathedrals. The author wasBrowne Willis, who in 1727–30 published hisSurvey of the Cathedrals in three volumes,reissued with a redated title page in 1742. With

his wide coverage of so many cathedrals hecould not print all the inscriptions, but hisselection is far from negligible. While thequality as well as the quantity of his informa-tion varies from cathedral to cathedral accord-ing to his sources, in some cases fellowantiquaries who made transcripts especially forhim, he is important in that for many cathe-drals as for York his is the earliest printed andwidely available account of many ledger stonesand other inscriptions. From this date on thereis a confusing wealth of similar information inprint. For York the year 1730 saw the publica-tion of a history of the city written by an eccen-tric printer called Thomas Gent. His book isvery much a popular rather than a learnedaccount, and we can rely on him to be inaccu-rate in almost everything. However, he shouldnot be forgotten or ignored, and we mustremember that in his History of Ripon published

76 Historic Floors

Figure 5.2 ‘The ichnography of the cathedral church of York, with the new pavement’ (Drake, 1736)

in 1733 he included an extensive appendixintended as a supplement to his earlier Yorkvolume, containing descriptions of a number ofMinster monuments, with woodcuts which arethe earliest and the crudest available. Betterknown and more highly regarded is FrancisDrake. His monumental history of York waspublished in 1736 and included the inscriptionsrecorded in 1618 by Dodsworth before thedestruction wrought on the brasses by thepuritans of the Commonwealth period (Figure5.2). Unfortunately, either his amanuenses orhis printers or he himself were deficient in theiraccuracy and reliability in details such as thespelling of names and the digits of dates, butthe inexactitudes of his book do not equalthose of Gent’s. Various of the later editions ofDrake’s text, some complete and some in part,add English translations of the Latin, and newinscriptions for the half century following hisoriginal publication.

There are many later printed books aboutthe Minster, but only three are of regular usefor this subject. These are John Browne’s of1847, which gives detailed accounts of themost important medieval monuments, andadds information about later damage andreconstruction; Dean Purey-Cust’s book of1907, which is the first to include informationabout many of the eighteenth- and especiallythe nineteenth-century memorials; andProfessor Gerald Aylmer’s chapter in the 1977History of York Minster giving useful detailsbut not full inscriptions of the most importantpost-medieval monuments.

There are two more nineteenth-centurysources of different kinds. The first dates from1870, and is a printed version of the Minster’sburial registers. While they do not begin until1634 – the date varies from cathedral to cathe-dral – from that time on they are invaluable.In York’s case we are fortunate that the editor,R.H. Skaife, adds to the bare text of the regis-ter a plan showing the exact position of eachburial and memorial, and extensive notes notonly identifying most of the persons namedbut giving the full text of every inscription. Allare accompanied by invaluable additional

information on such restoration as had beenmade and on removals of memorials from oneplace to another, a feature which has figuredremarkably often in York Minster.

The final source of information dates fromthe 1880s but is primarily a manuscriptdocument. It is a scrapbook compiled by aclergyman named Hornby. In addition to textsand a few actual photographs he includesrelevant extracts from books and fromnewspapers, and engravings or woodcuts ortracings made from them. ‘The HornbyScrapbook’, as it is known, is particularly goodon damage and restoration in and after thetwo great fires of 1829 and 1840.

These are the principal sources which mustbe checked as a necessary first stage whenpreparing for the possible conservation of anyledger slabs or other memorials in YorkMinster. The same is true for any similarconservation projects at other cathedrals. Someof the sources – herald’s visitations, BrowneWillis’s survey published in 1727 – arecommon to most cathedrals, all will have somemanuscript and printed accounts peculiar tothemselves, available either locally or in placessuch as the British Library, or more generally.

The next stage is to record the present stateof a memorial before any work is begun, usingphotography, drawings, rubbings, as appropri-ate.

The final stage is to record both what isproposed to be done and what is actuallydone, in both cases with a description and anillustrative record. Changes of plan thatbecome necessary as work proceeds must berecorded, together with their reason, andrecords should not be kept in the architects’office, which is at best only a temporary placeof record. Very few cathedral architects in thepast have transferred their records of workdone back to their cathedral when they ceaseto work on it. Not keeping proper records ofsuch work is bad enough. Keeping the infor-mation in the first place and then not ensur-ing that it is preserved and available for thefuture is equally reprehensible. One hopes thatin future the necessity for architects to work

Ledger stones 77

in close collaboration with Fabric AdvisoryCommittees and the Cathedrals FabricCommission for England will ensure thatproper documentary research is undertakenand a full illustrative and descriptive recordmade and safely preserved for future consul-tation in the cathedral library or archive office.

References

ADDLESHAW, G.W.O. (1967). Architects, sculptors, painters,craftsmen, 1660–1960, whose work is to be seen in YorkMinster. Architectural History, 10, pp. 89–119. Revisedfrom Four Hundred Years, York, Dean and Chapter(1962).

AYLMER, G.E. and CANT, R. (eds.) (1977). A History of YorkMinster. Clarendon Press. Particularly Chapter X,‘Funeral monuments and other post-medieval sculpture’,by Aylmer, pp.430–86.

BADHAM, S.F. (1979). Brasses from the north-east: a study ofthe brasses made in Yorkshire . . . in the pre-Reformation period. London, Phillips & Page.

BARNARD, T. and CLARK, J. (eds.) (1995). Lord Burlington:Architecture, Art and Life. Hambleton Press.

BERTRAM, J. (1976). Lost Brasses. Newton Abbot, David &Charles.

BROWNE, J. (1847). History of the Metropolitan Church of St.Peter, York. 2 vols. York.

DENDY, F.W. and HUNTER BLAIR, C.H. (eds.) (1912–32). Visitationsof the north, or, some early heraldic visitations of . . . thenorth of England, 4 vols. Surtees Society, vols 122, 133,144, 146. Durham. Vol. 2 includes W. Flower’s visitationof Yorkshire in 1563–4, previously ed. by C.B. Norcliffe in1881 (Harleian Society, Visitation series, vol. 16).

DODSWORTH, R. (1618). ‘Epitaphs out of the metropoliticalchurch and all other . . . churches within the most famousand ancient cittie of Yorke; most faithfully collected . . .1618’. MS in Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Dodsworth161 (27693); microfilm of York Minster section in YorkMinster Library, printed by Drake, pp. 494–518.

DRAKE, F. (1736). Eboracum: or the history and antiquitiesof the city of York . . . together with the history of thecathedral church. London, W. Bowyer. Repr. Wakefield,EP Publishing, 1978. Also later eighteenth-centuryeditions, 1755–90, of all or part, mostly without theauthor‘s name, and some containing additional infor-mation about memorials.

DUGDALE, SIR W. (1641 and 1665–66). ‘Book of Yorkshirearms’. MS at the College of Arms.

DUGDALE, SIR W. (1665–6). The Heraldic Visitation ofYorkshire in 1665 ... ed. by R. Davies. Durham, SurteesSociety, vol. 36, 1859; new edn by J.W. Clay, 3 vols.,Exeter, 1894–1912.

FOSTER, J. (ed.) (1875). The Visitation of Yorkshire, madein . . . 1584/5, by Robert Glover . . . [and] in 1612, byRichard St George, London.

GENT, T. (1730). The antient and modern history of thefamous city of York, and ... of its magnificent cathedral,commonly call’d, York-Minster. York.

GENT, T. (1733). The Antient and Modern History of theLoyal Town of Rippon. York, T. Gent.

HORNBY, R.W.B. (188-). ‘York Minster’. Scrapbook in YorkMinster Library, MS Add. 91.

HUNTER, J. (1838). Three catalogues: The Red Book of theExchequer, Dodsworth’s Manuscripts, and theManuscripts of Lincoln’s Inn. London.

HUTTON, M. MS notes of monuments etc. in York Minster,etc., 1659, etc., in York Minster Library, MS XVI.L.14,and the British Library, MS Lansdowne 919.

JOHNSTON, N. and H. ‘The monumental inscriptions andarmes in the cathedral church of York’, 1665–6. MS inOxford, Bodleian Library, MSS Top. Yorks. c. 13, 14;microfilm of York Minster sections in York MinsterLibrary.

LELAND, J. (1906–10). Itinerary in England and Wales, L.Toulmin Smith (ed.), 5 vols. London, Bell; repr. London,Centaur Press, 1964. York Minster at vol. 5, pp. 134–5.Previously ed. by T. Hearne, 9 vols, Oxford, 1710–12,repr. 1744–45, 1770.

MADAN, F. (1905). A Summary Catalogue of WesternManuscripts in the Bodleian Library, vol. 5. p. 339.Clarendon Press.

MCCARTER, C.B. (1988). Moving monuments. Friends of YorkMinster, Fifty-Ninth Annual Report. pp. 54–60.

PUREY-CUST, A.P. (1907). Walks Around York Minster. Leeds,R. Jackson.

RAINE, J. (ed.) (1886). The Historians of the Church of Yorkand its Archbishops, vol. 2 (Rolls Series, vol. 71). pp.312–445.

ROUTH, P.E.S. (1994). Yorkshire’s royal monuments: PrinceWilliam of Hatfield. Church Monuments, 9, 53–68.

SKAIFE, R.H. (1870). The Register of burials in York Minster,accompanied by monumental inscriptions, and illus-trated with biographical notices. Yorkshire Archaeo-logical (and Topographical) Journal, 1, 226–330.

TORR, J. ‘The Antiquities of York-Minster’, 1690–91.Manuscript in York Minster Library, L 1/7.

WILLIAMS, J.F. (1942–43). The brasses of York Minster.Transactions of the Monumental Brass Society, 7, pp.342–53; 8, pp. 1–8.

WILLIS, B. (1727–30). Survey of the cathedrals of York, etc.3 vols. London. Reissued 1742. Covers 14 cathedrals;York in vol. 1.

WILSON, M.I. (1984). William Kent; Architect, Designer,Painter, Gardener, 1685–1748. p. 156. Routledge.

WILTON-ELY, J. (ed.) (1985). A Tercentenary tribute toWilliam Kent. Hull, Ferens Art Gallery.

WITTKOWER, R. (1954). Burlington and his work in York. InW.A. SINGLETON (ed.) Studies in Architectural History, vol.1. pp. 47–66. York, St Anthony’s Press.

78 Historic Floors

The Dean and Chapter, after an appeal forfunds from the public, gave orders that thevast ancient floor of the whole nave, thetransepts, the crossing and the choir was to betaken up. The ancient floor originally of stoneslabs was now a hotch potch of ledger stones,some with carved inscriptions, some with theindents of long-vanished brasses. The stoneswere all worn and uneven. The Dean andChapter resolved to sweep all the old pavingaway and lay a floor of new paving in a strik-ing black and white pattern inspired by thepaving pattern of Ancient Rome. Some ancientstones were retained but turned over and anew sawn face presented. The bold schemewas executed.

This history is not of today, however. It isdifficult to imagine such a radical schemereceiving approval in our time. The floorsdescribed were laid in York Minster in 1731to a design by William Kent under the patron-age of Lord Burlington, the notable Palladianand a landowner of Yorkshire. Only one areaof the Minster remained in use for burials andthat was east of the High Altar. In that areainterments continued until 1836 and conse-quently the floor now contains many ledgers.Many of these, if they had not been damagedin the great fire of 1829 which destroyed thetimber vault above, are now subject toabrasion from the feet of the 2 million visitorsa year who walk around the Minster. Itbecame markedly difficult to read the inscrip-

tions and in 1989 it was resolved to takeaction.

Inevitably, physical intervention of somesort would be necessary if valuable stoneswere not to be destroyed in time by the feetof those who had come to inspect them! Insome instances it was possible to install ropebarriers and so redirect the ‘traffic’ or to adjustthe position of furniture or soften its points ofcontact with the floor. However, many slabsremain on traffic paths.

The first course of action was to make a fullrecord of the stones. There had been previoussurveys by Torr, in the later seventeenthcentury, by Drake in the early eighteenthcentury and by Skaife in 1890. The importanceand value of documentary sources is describedin the previous chapter. These records, invalu-able for they describe some stones long sincevanished, were incomplete, however. Theinterest of those earlier recorders had beenprimarily in the words of the inscription andany heraldry. The size, exact position, mater-ial or style were not recorded. It was consid-ered now that any record must be as completeas possible.

Considerable discussion was necessary todiscover those features which had to bedescribed before any new record wasattempted. A pro forma was evolved (Figure6.1). One form was to be completed for eachledger and a key grid plan was to show thelocation of each stone. The number of ledger

79

6

York Minster ledger stonesConservation options

Charles Brown

80 Historic Floors

Figure 6.1 Pro forma for the record of ledger stones at York Minster. Survey carried out by NADFAS volunteers,1992

stones in York Minster, because of the historyalready described, is comparatively few. Thereare only sixty-four. Nevertheless to producethe complete record required much work. AtYork most of the labour was supplied volun-tarily, efficiently and enthusiastically by a localbranch of NADFAS.

Not only did the pro forma need to becompleted but further recording is essential,namely photography and rubbings. Thetechnique of photography is described else-where in this volume – in this case the

photographs were taken by the RoyalCommission on Historical Monuments forEngland (see Plates 24 and 25). The rubbingsare achieved in exactly the same manner asbrass rubbings, but great care has to be takenwith deeply cut large letters or similarly cutheraldic devices. Loose dust and grit must belightly brushed away before the rubbing withblack wax is taken. If this is not done, the actof rubbing with trapped grit present couldabrade the ledger stone or any inserted brass.Lastly the paper used should be acid free and

York Minster ledger stones 81

Figure 6.2 Floor plan indicating position of ledger stones, prepared by Charles Brown. An essential tool in thepreparation of floor records

so ensure that the rubbing will be preservedfor some time. Even the sixty-four ledgers ofYork form a considerable bulk of rolled paper(now safely deposited with the MinsterArchives) and provision of adequate storagemust be considered.

Many of the features of the pro forma areself explanatory but amplification of a fewmatters may be helpful.

1. Location. It is necessary, in addition to astraightforward description of location, e.g.south aisle, to produce an accurate plan of thearea of inscribed stones and then to place agrid upon it (Figure 6.2). By this means anexact location can be recorded and depicted.The scale of such a plan must be recordedclearly and the grid adopted should relate tothe form of the building. On occasions, in abuilding where there are changes of level, athree-dimensional grid may be necessary.

2. Inscription. A detailed record must bemade at the inspection showing the exactspelling, spacing, punctuation and spaces if aportion is missing or effaced. The recordshould also show how the inscription isarranged in lines and whether letters are upperor lower case.

The rubbing of the stone will provideindication of the type of letter but it may notshow how the letter is formed. It may beincised or raised. If incised, a descriptionshould be made of the form of the cut, e.g. isit a ‘V’ in section, or rounded, or a rectangu-lar cut where the depth of the cut should bemeasured? If raised, is the lettering square cut,rounded or some other profile? The types oflettering are legion and many examples showintriguing variation from the standard due tothe individuality of the carver. However, it ispossible to give some description. Forexample does the lettering have serifs or not?Is it italic or upright? Is the lettering of aroman form or copperplate? If the inscriptionis in Latin or any other tongue, a translationshould be shown alongside.

Heraldic carving is often found on ledgerstones and very careful note should be made.The rubbing will provide a depiction of the

heraldic device but note should be made ofwhether it is raised or incised. Some detailmay be very worn and a further example ofthe same heraldry may be found on a nearbywall memorial. Despite the existence of therubbing, it is important that a further depic-tion is made, however sketchily. The sketchshould be shaded with the accepted markingsfor colour or metal, and moreover evenrubbing and sketching should be supple-mented further by a written description in theaccepted terminology which can be found inmost books on heraldry. If a motto is depictedthis must be recorded also.

It is possible that a stone may have a non-heraldic device, or some other form of carveddecoration, e.g. a geometric border. If so, acareful description must be made.

3. Size. The size of a ledger is shown withboth imperial and metric measurements. Thisis desirable to enable comparisons to be madewith any earlier records which may haveimperial dimensions.

4. Materials. It is important to identify thematerial from which a ledger stone is made. Thismay not be an easy matter. Dust and greaseimpregnated into the surface of the stone maymake identification very difficult. Neverthelessidentification is not only necessary for thecompleteness of the record but also knowledgeof the nature of the material could well influ-ence the choice of the type of replacement stoneif this is the option to be chosen in due course.

Many stones have inserted brasses, of allperiods, although some brasses are now to befound remounted on walls to ensure theirpreservation. It should be noted if the fixingsof the brass are secure and whether the stonearound the brass is now so worn that the brassis proud of the floor. Such a condition couldlead very rapidly to damage to the brass.

5. Assessment: Historic, aesthetic and associ-ational. This information may not be knownto the recorder and research is often necessaryby others. There should also be reference toany mural monument or other memorial towhich the ledger stone relates. This may ormay not be nearby.

82 Historic Floors

6. Grade. It became evident at York that itwould be helpful to institute a system of grading.Such grading would be similar to that used whenbuildings are listed. Thus some guidance is givenon the significance of the stone.

Grade I stones would be considered of greatimportance for sundry reasons. They may behistorically important, commemorating aperson of known significance or of note in thehistory of the building, for instance a founderof the church. They may be aestheticallyimportant, by a known artist or of a signifi-cant and noteworthy design. Furthermore theymay be of importance because of the mater-ial from which they are made, type of stoneor other material. Grade I stones should bereplaced, removed or copied only after themost painstaking consideration. The presup-position must be that they are not disturbed,but preserved.

Grade II stones are also of significance butpreservation might be achieved by reposition-ing or copying. Grade III stones are those ofleast significance where, after recording, it isaccepted that the inscription or design will indue course disappear through traffic wear, butthey are not to be destroyed or moved.Ungraded stones must not escape the record-ing process but need not be preserved.

7. Condition. In this section, apart fromremarks on present physical condition, thereshould be recorded any knowledge of anyrelocation of the stone during its existence. (Itmust be realized that relocation has sometimesoccurred already to secure preservation or toaccommodate a new floor design.) Also mustbe included an assessment of risk, i.e. thedanger of further deterioration of the ledgerfor whatever reason. Risk may not only befrom traffic wear. It could be from, forinstance, rising damp from the ground belowor from an unsuitable applied finish or polish.

The inescapable task of preparing anadequate record completed, the courses ofaction to preserve the ledger stones fromfurther damage can be considered. Theoptions, some already mentioned, can besummarized as follows:

(a) Remove foot traffic by creating barriersaround the stone.

(b) Reposition the stone in an area wherefoot traffic is less.

(c) Remove stone to a museum.(d) Recut inscription on existing stone.(e) Replace stone altogether with a replica.(f) Renew stone but with a new design.(g) Cover the stone with a protective finish.(h) Leave stone in position and accept that

the inscription will disappear in duecourse.

Option (a) is of course the easiest option butsometimes difficult to achieve. The aestheticeffect of many rope barriers may not beacceptable and moreover the life of the churchor cathedral, and such life includes visitors,cannot be impaired by making it impossibleto move around the building.

Option (b) can be adopted especially if ithas been discovered that the stone is alreadynot in its original position. Such changes inlocation have often occurred in repaving in theeighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries.However, the option should be adopted onlyafter very careful study of the informationgained in the survey.

Even more care must be taken before option(c) is adopted. It cannot be forgotten that theobject of the stone is to mark a place of inter-ment and the adoption of such a course isextreme indeed. However, if this is the onlyway of preservation, the option must be taken.If the stone is removed and it is known thatit does lie over the place of interment, somesmall new plaque or inscription or evencarved number should mark the burial.

To recut the stone (option (d)) is a proposalwhich can prove controversial. Obviously theoriginal inscription is destroyed and the recutletters may not be able to replicate the originalcraft of the creator. However, if the stone is notimportant aesthetically but the importance liesin the person commemorated or an associationwith that person, recutting may be acceptable.

A more extreme alternative to (d) is option(e). Again the creation of a replica may be

York Minster ledger stones 83

difficult to achieve and in some opinionsundesirable. However, if by this means anaesthetic concept of merit is continued theoption must not be dismissed. Furthermore itdoes present the opportunity to preserve theoriginal stone by removing it to a museum orburying it beneath the replica, where it isprotected from further wear.

Again, if replacement is unavoidable option(f) may be looked upon more favourably thanoptions (d) or (e). It can be better to continuethe historic or associated importance with anew stone but with a newly designed inscrip-tion. This option, incidentally, fosters presentday craftsmanship and talent. This option cansecure the preservation of the original stoneas in (e).

Option (g) has obvious disadvantages forthe stones will no longer be visible. It is possi-ble that some form of transparent coating willbe available in the future but at present sucha coating does not exist.

Most liquid coatings are impervious and toseal the upper surface of the stone can leadto disastrous deterioration of the stone.Similarly glass or plastic sheets, besidesinevitably becoming cloudy through scratchingcould seal the stone surface. Certain floormatting can provide protection but care mustbe taken that the fibre itself does not scratchthe stone or that debris falling through the matdoes not become an abrasive between matand stone. Of course, any form of protectivematting with an impervious backing, e.g.rubber, must never be employed.

Finally option (h) may seem to be one ofdespair and may be forced upon those respon-sible because no means can be found to fundthe costs of the other options. However, theoption does secure the historic continuity ofthe floor and lack of intervention will be seenby some to be the correct answer.

If the chosen option involves any movementor removal of existing ledger stones, or indeedthe disturbance of any floor, the archaeologi-cal implications must be faced. An archaeolo-

gist must be informed and must provide areport on any material discovered beneath thestone. Such reports will then be part of thedetailed account of any alterations eventuallymade.

Eight options have been considered, othercourses of action may exist in some circum-stances but no decisions can be taken withoutthe existence of the complete survey andrecord described earlier in this chapter. Theaccount has been primarily of the survey atYork and subsequently the Cathedrals FabricCommission has published a comprehensive‘Code of Good Practice’. At York the survey iscomplete and the record lodged safely withthe Archives. Now the decisions can and mustbe taken. The onslaught of tourism is notlikely to diminish and unless action is takensoon many stones will have become smoothwith only traces left of the original inscrip-tions.

In 1805, the Gentleman’s Magazinepublished an article relating to the pavementof St George’s Chapel, Windsor. It read:

The pavement has been new laid, and in themodern way; that got rid of was remarkable forthe number and variety of sepulchral stones,inlaid with highly-curious and valuable brasses,rendering a choice display of historical andcharacteristic memorials, and at the same timeadmirably accompanying the rising walls onevery side. What became of these relics I shallnot set about to declare; why need I indeedexpress any concern for their loss, other than asan Antiquary? No line of ancestry is broken towhich I am a distant branch. What is it to mewho were the ancient Religious of the pile orhow their robes adorned them; such membersbeing out of recollection, and such vestmentsuseless.

We today may envy the positive quality of theopinions of the antiquaries of the earlynineteenth century but we surely do not sharethem and now must take the decisionsconcerning the preservation of those preciousmemorial stones which still exist.

84 Historic Floors

The land surveyor is nowadays involved inmany areas of measurement. At first sight, thesurveyor’s potential role in measuring andrecording floors may not be particularlyobvious. The areas involved are often quitesmall, and access is generally very good.Nevertheless, the principles behind measuredsurvey can be very important in assisting andexecuting such work. In this chapter, adescription of the more commonly availablemeasured survey techniques will be given,followed by some examples of how thesemethods have helped in specific recordingprojects.

7.1 Producing an accurate survey

Perhaps the first consideration should be toexamine the question of the accuracy of anywork carried out. Many persons preparingmeasured survey or photographic records failto appreciate how important the topic ofaccuracy can be. Yet at the same time, acommon complaint in using older surveymaterial is that the current user has no ideaof the accuracy of the original. Thus itbecomes very difficult to use that material inassociation with a modern survey. Subtleties ofform and construction will often be revealedby accurate measurement. A very small re-alignment in the direction of stone floor slabs

could well reveal a change in build. To aidthe repair and conservation process, forexample if an extensive area has to be liftedand relayed, it will be vital to be able to relyon the plans.

An understanding of accuracy is a complexmatter, and the following is a much simplifiedway of looking at the problem. Textbookslisted in the Suggested reading section explainthe concepts in much greater detail. Havingsaid that the survey should be accurate, thereis a conundrum in that there is no such thingas absolute accuracy. For example, it is rareto deal with stone slabs or blocks of stonewhich have sharp arrises. Inevitably, the edgewill be rounded to a certain extent. The arriscan be considered as an arc (Figure 7.1) andthe degree of rounding or wear of that arcmay vary from 5 mm to 20 mm. Therefore ameasurement taken to the ‘edge’ is immedi-ately subjective. Similarly, no instrumentationis perfect. Electronic distance measurements(EDM) may provide a reading to three decimalplaces, i.e. to the nearest millimetre, but allsuch instruments are subject to certain in-builterrors. The manufacturers always quote theseinstruments as having an accuracy to a certaintolerance.

To account for the above factors, when aland surveyor gives a measurement it is alwaysgiven with some element of tolerance. Thusthe indicated measurement on site might be

85

7

The surveyor’s approach to recordingfloorsRoss W.A. Dallas

8.25 m, but according to the care and method-ology used for the work, this measurementmight be 10 mm shorter or longer. Thus thereading should be expressed more correctly as8.25 m ± 10 mm. In practical terms at 1 : 50scale, accuracies can be represented on paperto no better than ± 10 mm. In theory, at 1 : 20scale, accuracies can be presented accurate to± 4 mm. In practice for most architecturalfeatures, this is an unattainable level ofaccuracy.

7.2 Methods of measured survey

For a general explanation of the principles ofmeasured survey, and for practical descriptionsof how to carry out many processes, there arenumerous textbooks and primers available.Some of these are listed in the Suggestedreading section, as are sources for obtainingsuch textbooks. The best way to learn thetechniques and skills of measured survey is‘on the job’ through practical experiencegained with a skilled person. The purpose ofthis section is to indicate the broad areaswhere certain approaches are most applicable.Measured survey can be considered in threefields: hand survey methods, instrument surveymethods and photographic based methods. Aswill be shown, all these methods can bemixed. Also, it may not always be possible to

use the most appropriate method. Site, person-nel and financial considerations may wellinfluence the matter. In recording an extensivearea of stone floor, work with a total stationtheodolite might be most appropriate.However, limitation of funds could cause thisto be too expensive, thus necessitating the useof much simpler hand survey methods.Similarly, the best method of recording aledger stone will normally be photographic.There could, however, be occasions whenlaying a sheet of drafting film over the stoneand making a one to one trace is most appro-priate.

7.2.1 Hand survey methods

We use this expression to describe a measuredsurvey by no more complicated and sophisti-cated equipment than measuring tapes, plumbbobs and levels. Over a fairly small area,taping methods will often be quite appropri-ate. This work is carried out by triangulationwith the tape, or possibly by setting out a grid.

Typically, a small chapel (Figure 7.2) mightbe surveyed as follows. First of all, an overallaccurate shape would be established. This isbest done with a geometrical figure called abraced quadrilateral – which is not so difficultas it sounds. Four corner points are established,then as well as measuring the distance betweenthese points, measurements are taken across

86 Historic Floors

Figure 7.1 Measuring tostone floor joints. One slabhas a sharp arris, the other ismuch worn, and there is latermortar in the joint. Whereshould the measurement betaken to – point 1, 2, 3 or 4?There is no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’answer, but the readingscould differ by ±20 mm

the area in between. The lengths can then beplotted out with a ruler and compass. Then,detail can be measured in by offsets for thestructural form, and for the flooring by runningtape lines from side to side, noting where thetape crosses the main lines of the survey. Theprecise method does not matter too much, andagain reference should be made to the appro-priate textbooks for an understanding of theprinciples of geometry involved.

Such a method of measurement will bequite restricted in terms of accuracy. Over anarea of say 10m � 10 m accuracies to within ± 15 mm are quite achievable. If the areaextends to much greater than this, it becomesmuch more difficult to ensure a consistentlevel of accuracy. Locally, the measurement ofone detail to another will remain to the samehigh standard, but overall it is difficult tomaintain a consistent standard.

7.2.2 Instrument survey methods

This expression is used to describe a surveycarried out with instruments such as the

theodolite, and nowadays with electronicdistance measurement (EDM) equipment. Thetheodolite has been an instrument available formany years, but in recent years huge strideshave been made with the instrument throughthe application of electronics. Now, instead oflaboriously writing down the angles recordedwith the theodolite, these are recorded at thetouch of a button. The process is not onlyquicker but more reliable, for with the tradi-tional theodolite many errors in survey werecaused simply by wrongly booking readings,for example writing down ‘74’ instead of ‘47’.With the electronic logging of data, suchproblems are largely eliminated.

Similarly, EDM instruments have revolution-ized the way in which distances are measuredfor survey. The device sends out a beam whichis reflected off a prism back to the instrument.This equipment has had a huge influence onmany survey procedures. Errors due toblunders are virtually eliminated and very largenumbers of readings can be made very rapidly.EDM can now be used economically for obser-vations down to a few metres in length.

Surveyor’s approach to recording floors 87

Figure 7.2 Measuring up asmall chapel, by ‘handsurvey’ methods. Theaccurate overall shape isestablished by measuring abraced quadrilateral. Then,by a variety of differentmethods, the detail of thefloor can be measured in

The combination of the electronic theodo-lite and EDM gives the total station theodolite.The readings of angle and distance are down-loaded into the electronic data logging device.Then, this information can be fed into acomputer. The computations are made in thecomputer and the result can be output directlyonto paper or film. Thus the process isspeeded up and many sources of error elimi-nated. Such instrumentation can be used initself to create the totality of a survey.Alternatively, the instrument can be used tocreate a very accurate controlled frameworkfor the survey, with the detail inside this beingsupplied by hand survey methods.

The total station theodolite is not a panaceafor all the problems of surveying. Indeed, itcan be quite the opposite. There is a curiousbelief that the use of this instrument has effec-tively de-skilled measured survey, thus allow-ing untrained persons to carry out surveys aseffectively and quickly as skilled and experi-enced surveyors. This is not the case. Evenwith the best instrumentation, the principlesof survey must be understood and followed.Also, while the processes of manually carry-ing out computations may have beenremoved, computer and computer-aided draft-ing (CAD) skills are needed more than everbefore. The budding surveyor should notattempt to make use of a total station theodo-lite and accompanying computer/CADsoftware without having been on an appro-priate training course.

7.2.3 The survey or co-ordinate grid

An important concept relating to survey withinstruments is the co-ordinate or control grid.Perhaps the easiest way to appreciate this isby comparison with the Ordnance SurveyNational Grid. On all Ordnance Survey maps,a grid which looks like large graph paper issuperimposed. To record a position on themap, an Easting value is read in one directionand a Northing value in the other. We say thatthe point has now been given a co-ordinatereference.

The same grid concept can be applied toany plan or area being surveyed. Particularlywhen data is being manipulated in a CAD orcomputer environment, this method can bevery valuable. The surveyor uses it in any casefor the computations, but it can be adoptedby the user of the plans. For example, on anarea of mosaic, each square of the grid couldbe numbered A, B, C . . . in one direction andI, II, III . . . in the other. Each square can thenbe uniquely identified, and all data concern-ing that square referenced. Particularly whenworking with the data in a computer, thisapproach can be most valuable.

7.2.4 Computer-aided drafting (CAD)

For most small ‘hand surveys’, graphicalmethods of presentation were traditionallyused. That is, using no more than cartridgepaper, scale rules and compasses, the surveywas built up on the sheet before inking in.For a small area of survey produced by handsurvey methods, this remains the methodlikely to be used (although the medium ofdrafting film should be used nowadays).

However, in recent years, computers haveentered and changed this activity as well. A CADsystem is a piece of software which allows justthe same drawing to be built up directly on thecomputer screen. Indeed, it can emulate thetechniques used graphically – a distance can bemarked off, then an arc added and so on. Whenthe drawing is complete, it can be output to aprinter, just as a word processor file is sent tothe laser printer. But a CAD program can domuch more. Scales can be changed in an instant,corrections can be introduced in seconds, lineweights can be adjusted. However, this is onlythe start. If the data comes from a total stationtheodolite, it does not even have to be writtendown – it can be introduced directly into theprogram. Then, complex levels of data can beput into separate layers of information. Thesecan be merged or separated according to the useto which the drawing will be put. Only a partof the drawing may be used or printed out at atime, by ‘windowing’ an area of interest.

88 Historic Floors

CAD has actually been available for quite along time, some programs going back thirtyyears. What has changed is the cheapness ofthe programs, their ‘user-friendliness’ and thecheapness of the computers and plottersthemselves. Programs such as ‘AutoCAD’™Release 13 are still expensive, but there aremany inexpensive CAD programs now avail-able. From the AutoCAD stable, AutoCAD LTwould be more than adequate for many tasks,but there are numerous other programs tochoose from.

The early criticism of CAD programs, thatthey produced very mechanical-lookingdrawings, is really no longer valid. Theappearance of the drawing is a function ofhow detailed the data introduced, and modernprograms can hold far more data than theaverage project would ever generate. Thereare, however, some valid criticisms to bemade. On a CAD system the lines of thesurvey can be enlarged and viewed at anyscale, even at 1 : 1 or greater. However, it isextremely important to appreciate that theaccuracy of CAD generated drawings can beno better than the accuracy of the originalmeasurements made on site.

7.2.5 Photographic surveying methods

In recent years, photographic based methodsof survey have come to be widely accepted inhistoric building work. The main methodsused are rectified photography and stereo-photogrammetry. The first of these produces aphotographic image, the second is normallyused to create a line drawing.

Rectified photographyThe rectified photography process is much thesimpler of the two. Photographs are takenparallel to the surface being recorded, withappropriate scale control included. The result-ing photographic print, being made to anexact scale, has some of the qualities of ameasured survey while at the same timeproviding a photographic image. This process

is extremely valuable in recording manyaspects of floors, since a flat floor does notintroduce any of the geometric problemsexperienced when the technique is used onelevations of buildings. A trace-off can bemade from the photograph to produce linedrawings. The process can also be combinedwith the other survey methods. With thepotential of storing and manipulating imageson computer as described further on, theprocess should prove even more valuable inthe future.

The rectified photography process can becarried out by a competent photographer withstandard photographic equipment. It is best touse a medium format camera if possible, but35 mm SLR can be used if no other camera isavailable. The most important characteristic ofthe camera is whether it introduces lens distor-tion or not. This is an effect of bending of therays of light passing through the lens. If thiseffect is noticeably present on a lens, it is nogood for rectified photography work. All zoomlenses can be ruled out, and most very wide-angle lenses as well. The best way to assessthe distortion in a lens is to take a square-onphotograph of a modern building facade. Ifthe straight lines of the building seem to becurved on the print, then the lens is not satis-factory for this work.

To take the photograph, it is essential thatthe film plane of the camera is parallel to thefloor plane or other feature. Generally, weassume the floor to be flat or nearly so. Thecamera must be mounted on an arm on atripod. Then, a level bubble should be placedon the camera body back and the cameraadjusted until the film plane is level, i.e. paral-lel to the floor plane. A scale bar should alsobe included in the area of photography, butthis should be placed at the edge so that nodetail is obscured. Photographic techniquesare quite straightforward, reference should bemade to Skingle (Chapter 8).

The printing of the negative can be carriedout on a standard photographic enlarger, againsome careful adjustment being made to ensurethat the negative plane is parallel to the easel


plane. Using a scale bar, match the scale inthe image to the scale on the easel. This takesa little while to master, but very accuratelyscaled prints can be made in this way. Thewhole process can be made more sophisti-cated and hence more accurate by improvingthe quality of the camera, the methods ofcontrol etc., but for this further study andprofessional instruction is needed.

Important developments with rectifiedphotography are taking place as a result ofcomputer programs, which allow for digitalmanipulation of the image. The programs andequipment for this are now available, butinevitably it will take time for these method-ologies to become commonly established.With conventional rectified photographymethods, removing the effect of any unwantedtilts can be very difficult, but with the imageheld digitally, it is very easy to ‘square up’ theimage. Also, high quality inexpensive colourprinters allow for direct output, in somesystems utilizing scanning of the negativewithout even producing photographic prints.There are proprietary programs produced byphotogrammetrists for this work, but also goodresults can be had with programs from thedesk-top publishing sector. It is very likely thateven more improvements will take place inthis area, leading to the much morewidespread use of photographic imagery forfloor recording.

A recent example of this comes from theTower of London, The White Tower. Certainareas of floorboards and joists were exposedbefore being covered up again during a refur-bishment programme. The time available andthe quality of the floorboards did not requirea full measured survey to be made of thefloor. Therefore the floor was recorded with aseries of oblique photographs with scale bar,taken in regular strips. This photography wasput into store. If at any stage in the future afull record is to be developed, the obliquephotographs can be computer scanned,manipulated into a parallel plane, then mergedinto one whole image of the floor. (This workwas carried out for Historic Royal Palaces,

Surveyor of the Fabric Department, under thedirection of the author.)

PhotogrammetryThe photogrammetric process is normally usedfor the production of line drawings. It is acomplex and technical process, utilizingspecialist cameras and photogrammetricplotting equipment. It is very valuable indealing with problems such as inaccessibleareas of façades. There is perhaps limitedapplication to floors, since they are generallyvery accessible. It can, however, be a veryrapid way of recording and drawing in somecircumstances. Also, if three-dimensional datais required, such as contours of floors, its useshould be considered.

The photogrammetric process is certainlyone which must be carried out professionally.Nevertheless, some description of the methodmay be helpful. Photography for the processis usually carried out with ‘metric’ cameras.Such cameras are either specially made orcalibrated for the work. This ensures that theirgeometric qualities are exactly known. Then,the photographs themselves are taken instereo. That is, each area of subject must beincluded in two photographs from differentviewpoints. Normally, the cameras are set upparallel to one another, so that the image canbe viewed in three dimensions.

The photography is placed in a specialinstrument known as a photogrammetricplotter. The operator of the machine can thentrace architectural or other detail from thestereo image. Perhaps the most important pointto make is that there is nothing automaticabout the extraction of the data. All the pointsand lines in the drawing must be observed andrecorded by the person operating the machine.For floors, the process is perhaps limited, butbelow an example of recent work atWestminster Abbey is described.

A most important consideration with bothphotographic techniques is the scale of theoriginal negative. For a final product at say1 : 20 scale, the photographic negative shouldnot require enlargement greater than four or

90 Historic Floors

five times. Therefore it should be no smallerthan 1 : 80 scale. Generally speaking, thelarger the scale of the original negative thebetter. The scale of the negative can be calcu-lated by dividing the distance to the object bythe focal length of the lens, or more directlyby measuring a distance on the object andcomparing it to the same distance identifiedon the negative.

7.3 Examples

7.3.1 Lichfield Cathedral – the Libraryfloor

One of the first major examples of floorrecording using modern measured surveytechnologies comes from Lichfield Cathedral.This concerned making a record of the Libraryfloor at the Cathedral. This work was carriedout in 1988 by the Photogrammetric Unit ofEnglish Heritage, then under the direction ofthe author. The purpose of the work was toprepare documentation of the floor, whichwould assist in conservation and archaeologi-cal investigations. The investigations are morefully described by Rodwell (Chapter 2).

Here, the problems of recording werecompounded by the presence of substantialbookcases covering much of the floor. Thismade the photographic technique particularlyimportant for long-term evaluation. A rectifiedphotography technique with a control schemewas utilized, with some forty photographsbeing taken. These were presented individu-ally in black and white at 1 : 5 scale, alongwith grid sheets with control points. A linedrawing at 1 : 5 scale was then traced off bythe archaeological consultant, Dr WarwickRodwell. As well, colour photographs weremosaiced together into one large block, whichwas then re-photographed to show the wholefloor in colour at 1 : 10 scale. A sample areaof the floor is shown in Figure 7.3. This workwas instigated by Dr Rodwell, in associationwith the Cathedral Architect, Mr MartinStancliffe, on behalf of the Dean and Chapterand with financial help from English Heritage.

7.3.2 Winchester Cathedral – retrochoirfloor

The work to record Winchester Cathedralretrochoir floor (Chapter 12, Plate 27) wasspecified by the author, an example of theproduct obtained being illustrated in the abovechapter. Here, the principal method used wasagain rectified photography. Nearly 200photographs were taken with the camerapointed vertically downwards. The layout wasarranged to provide ‘runs’ of photographs ofthe floor tiles, with extra photographs beingtaken specially to record the ledger stones.The negative scale obtained was 1 : 30. Thisenabled prints to be produced at 1 : 10 scale.

All photography was taken in colour and inblack-and-white negative films. In addition, acontrol grid scheme was provided by totalstation theodolite. This provided four co-ordinated points per photograph. This enabledall the photographs subsequently to bemosaiced to provide a record of the wholefloor in nine sheets. The process providedboth a record and practical documentation forthe architect and conservators. The work was


Figure 7.3 A sample of rectified photography fromLichfield Cathedral. The scale bar placed near the edgeof the photograph can be seen. As well, co-ordinatedpoints were measured, which enabled the whole floorto be presented as one accurate photographic mosaic.(Photograph, English Heritage)

procured on behalf of the Dean and Chapterunder the direction of the Cathedral Architect,Mr Peter Bird. The work was carried out by asurvey company specializing in photogram-metric applications, Atkins AMC.

7.3.3 Salisbury Cathedral – MunimentRoom

The medieval tiled floor of the MunimentRoom at Salisbury Cathedral was photo-graphed in colour using a 5” � 4” formatmonorail camera with the film plane set to thehorizontal (Plate 26). A total of forty-fournegatives were exposed of the floor, plus afurther four of the adjacent landings andwindow sills. Owing to the irregular surface ofthe floor, no attempt was made to mosaic thephotographs. Instead, they were printed to1 : 5 scale, trimmed and positioned beforebeing re-photographed and mounted on fourboards forming a 2 m � 2 m display.

Owing to the large amount of furniture inthe Muniment Room, this photographic recordis the only means of ‘seeing’ the entire floor.The photographic record was produced as partof an investigation into the future of the floor,with the photographic boards eventually goingon public display. The work was carried outunder the auspices of Michael Drury, theSurveyor of the Fabric at Salisbury Cathedral,by The Downland Partnership. (Sectioncontributed by Mr David Stevens, TheDownland Partnership.)

7.3.4 Westminster Abbey - The GreatPavement

The Great Pavement at Westminster Abbeywas laid between 1267 and 1269 in theCosmati style, comprising different marblesand glass set into an unusual pattern of circlesand squares connected by a guilloche pattern.The Pavement has remained covered for someconsiderable time in order to protect theCosmati work. In 1996 the Dean and Chapterinstructed the Cathedral archaeologist, TimTatton-Brown, to carry out an investigative

survey of the pavement and make recom-mendations for its future conservation. Aphotogrammetric approach was chosen byTatton-Brown to survey the floor (describedand illustrated in Chapter 3), in order toproduce an accurate line drawing upon whichthe archaeological, geological and historicalstudies could be based.

The photogrammetric drawings wereproduced from metric photography takenusing colour transparency film. The camerawas mounted on a special trolley designed toprevent damage to the uncovered floor. Anetwork of control points was established ona grid aligned with the central axis of theAbbey. The control points were highlightedwith small easily removed coloured markers,which were temporarily left in place to assistwith any subsequent measurement by theinvestigation team.

The photogrammetrist’s task was both toplot the outline of over 50 000 pieces of mater-ial forming the Pavement, as well as to identifythe type of marble or glass by reference tocolour and texture. At the completion of thephotogrammetric stage, the data was trans-ferred to ‘AutoCAD’ format for rendering andfor the inclusion of the evidence resulting fromthe investigation team. The project was carriedout for the Dean and Chapter by TheDownland Partnership. (Section contributed byMr David Stevens, The Downland Partnership.)

7.4 Conclusion

This chapter has set out to demonstrate thatmethods of measured survey and photogram-metry from the land survey sector can havegreat applicability to the recording of floors.Indeed, almost all methods of measuredsurvey may have their place. Some of thesemethods may be used and adopted by archi-tects, archaeologists and conservators – somemust be carried out by professional surveyors.It is important to use the right technique, andto recognize the limitations of non-specialiststaff or the lack of the right equipment for the

92 Historic Floors

job. Finally, a good measured survey productshould have a life measured in decades, notmonths. Such a survey will be an investmentwhose value will be repaid many times over.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank his colleaguesin the field of historic building measuredsurvey, while stating that all views are ofcourse his own. In particular, he would liketo thank the various Cathedral authorities andtheir Architects, all named in the chapter, forpermission to describe and illustrate projects.Also, Mr Colin Briggs of the Surveyor of theFabric Department, Historic Royal Palaces, forpermission to describe the Tower of Londonexample, Mr Paul Bryan of English Heritagefor assistance with the work on LichfieldCathedral, Mr Mike McKay of Atkins AMCreference the Winchester material, and MrDavid Stevens of The Downland Partnershipfor assistance with the examples at Salisburyand Westminster, are all thanked individually.

Suggested reading

Some textbooks are listed which will provide basic andadvanced information on the principles and practice of

land surveying. Please note that there are many otherbooks and booklets on surveying, many of which containrelevant material.

ALLAN, A.L. (1993). Practical Surveying and Computations(2nd Edition). Butterworth-Heinemann.

CLANCY, J. (1991). Site Surveying and Levelling (2ndEdition). Edward Arnold.

ESTOPINAL, S.V. (1993). Guide to Understanding LandSurveys. Wiley.

WHYTE, W.S. and PAUL, R.E. (1985). Basic Metric Surveying.Butterworth.

Although it has been published for some time, Chithamis still a very useful reference to hand survey methods,especially as seen from the architect’s perspective.

CHITHAM, R. (1980). Measured Drawing for Architects.Architectural Press.

For information on rectified photography and photogram-metry, see the following, which also provide many furtherreferences to the field:

DALLAS, R.W.A. (1996). Architectural and archaeologicalapplications. In Close Range Photogrammetry andMachine Vision (K.B. ATKINSON, ed.) pp. 283–302,Whittles Publishing.

STEVENS, D. (1992). Photogrammetry. In MonitoringBuilding Structures. (J.F.A. MOORE, ed.) pp. 32–67,Blackie.

There are a number of small books and chapters onsurveying produced by archaeologists and buildingrecorders. A useful review of survey methods from anarchaeological standpoint is contained in:

ADKINS, L. and ADKINS, R.A. (1989). ArchaeologicalIllustration. Cambridge University Press.

Good sources for the purchase of books on measuredsurvey are The RICS Bookshop, 12 Great George St,London SW1P 3AD, and The Building Centre Bookshop,26 Store St, London WC1E 7BT.


Making a photographic record of floor surfacesor their individual features is desirable for anumber of reasons. A clear image can bemade relatively quickly of what may be a longand complicated inscription needing transla-tion or deciphering. Detail of this nature maybe of low definition, but contain a great dealof important information. A photographprovides a record of the condition of thesubject at a point in time, enabling a futureassessment to be made of the rate of deterio-ration, if any. Using carefully controlled light-ing, worn details may be revealed whichotherwise would be difficult to observe in situ.Mapping techniques can be used to recon-struct complete floor patterns, and rectifiedphotography can provide accurate measure-ments for the preparation of survey drawings.

Indeed, the use of photography may seemso self-evident that further description is notnecessary. However, photography of floors,for example in a dimly lit church, can be atechnically demanding exercise. Even good‘snapshots’ can be difficult to achieve in achurch interior.

Generally, photography can be consideredunder two headings. The first will be all-purpose photographs, to illustrate a report ora lecture, or to be used simply as an aidemémoire. The other will be the more detailedand demanding record photographs, neededas a tool for conservators and architects’ speci-

fications, and to provide a record of conditionand appearance in their own right.

In such a wide-ranging field, there are manypossibilities to consider in terms of who willtake the photographs and what type andstandard of photography might be required. Allphotographic records will be of value, but theusers and takers of photographs must be realis-tic. While many modern cameras designedessentially for the amateur market can producesuperb results, recording floors can still betechnically too demanding for such equipment.

8.1 General photography

For the first category of general photography,the standards and possibilities are so wide-ranging that only the most general commentswill be made. Such photography in showingthe context of a floor is nevertheless impor-tant, so some general views of context shouldalways be taken. Some colour transparencieswill always be of value.

There are numerous excellent photographsof buildings’ interiors in which the floors (andoften the ceilings) are just not readable.Therefore, be sure to instruct the photographerto make sure that the floor is the vital part ofthe photograph. This may involve selecting ahigh viewpoint, or making sure that goodlighting and adequate depth of field are set,

94

8

Photographic recording of floorsurfaces and componentsRobert Skingle

or ensuring that half-a-dozen photographs aretaken, where one would have sufficed for theroom elevation.

8.2 Record photography

This chapter is, however, more concernedwith making record photographs of floors andtheir features. Here, the subject becomestechnically much more demanding. Theamateur with small format 35 mm equipmentcan make a very useful contribution – at thevery least, any record is better than none. Butif a significant area of floor is to be recorded,the skills needed and the time taken shouldnot be underestimated.

Record photographs will usually be to a largescale, that is the photograph will often includeno more than a few square metres of floor areaper photograph at most. For some specialistwork, such as decorated medieval tiles, even aphotograph per tile may be considered.Photographs may be taken as ‘high obliques’ tothe floor, that is at an angle of 70° to 80°.Often, it will be best to ensure that the photo-graph is taken parallel to the subject. This is amore involved method, requiring accuratelining up of the camera. The set-up techniquesare described more fully by Dallas (Chapter 7).

The procurement of photography as arecord must also be carefully considered. Aprofessional photographer specializing inarchitecture and/or scientific photography willoften be ideal. Survey companies alsonowadays often take specialist photography ofthis nature. Materials conservators and otherspecialists such as archaeologists often find itof value to take their own photographs.Agencies involved in conservation, such asEnglish Heritage or the RCHME, often havetheir own photographers.

8.3 Cameras

For the professional photographer presentedwith a wide variety of subject matter, there is

no universal camera. To some extent, everytask defines the equipment which is necessaryto complete it. For the serious photographerof architectural subjects, the most useful toolis the monorail or plate camera, with its provi-sion of movements, such as a rising frontwhich allows compensation to be made forconverging parallels. This is a common faultin architectural photography when a camera istilted backwards to include the top of a tallbuilding. However, these cameras are expen-sive to purchase, quite slow and cumbersometo use and film costs are relatively high. Onthe other hand, a large area can be capturedper photograph, or alternatively a very largenegative scale can be obtained. Working witha monorail camera is, however, not for thefaint-hearted.

The medium format cameras utilizing 120 rollfilm sizes are perhaps the best all-round toolsfor floor photography. With a significantlylarger area of film than a SLR 35 mm camera,both greater coverage and larger negative scalescan be obtained. Such cameras while heavierare nearly as easy to operate as the SLR 35 mmcamera, but have all the up-to-date featuressuch as automatic stop-down of aperture etc.

The SLR 35 mm camera is the smallest typeor format to consider, but generally would notbe recommended. This is because the shortfocal length gives a very small scale to thenegative, or requires a much larger number ofphotographs to be taken. If no other camerais available, or the work is being carried outon a volunteer basis, reasonable results can beobtained. However, if a professional photog-rapher is involved, there is no advantage inspecifying a small format, for labour costs willbe much greater than camera or film costs inany case. Compact cameras are not recom-mended, except for aide mémoire snapshots.

Considering lenses, very wide-angle and zoomlenses should not be used. This is because thesetypes of lens usually exhibit significant distortion– that is, a ‘bending’ of the rays of light throughthe lens, leading to the familiar barrel and pincushion distortion patterns. Zoom lenses areparticularly bad for this, and should be avoided.

Photographic recording of floors and components 95

Some very wide-angle lenses may not showthese characteristics, but they have anotherproblem in that they are very difficult to alignparallel to a surface. Whenever possible, normal-angle lenses should be used.

8.4 Film

There are a number of manufacturers of highquality monochrome and colour films. Beforechoosing a film type, a decision has to bemade about the end-use of the image. Colourprints are more easily examined, included inreports and displayed than colour transparen-cies, although the latter are ideal for lectures.An archivally permanent image can be madeby using black and white film, processed andstored under controlled conditions. All filmsare graded by their sensitivity to light, andgiven an International Standards Organisation(ISO) rating. Medium speed black and whiteor colour films of between 100 and 200 ISOare ideal for most recording purposes.

Colour films are designed either primarilyfor amateur or professional use. Professionalfilm is manufactured to give optimum resultsfrom the moment it leaves the factory, and willremain in this condition only if it is stored ata temperature of 13°C or less. For best resultsthe film should be processed as soon as possi-ble after exposure. In contrast, it is assumedthat amateur films will be stored at roomtemperatures after leaving the factory and thatthe time between exposure and processingwill vary. An average allowance is made forthis in manufacturing. For critical use, filmshould be bought in batches, kept refrigerateduntil needed, and then allowed to warm up toroom temperature for several hours beforeexposure. Colour film especially should beprocessed as soon as possible after exposure.

8.5 Lighting equipment

While normal ambient lighting on the surveysite may be sufficient to allow photography,

the quality of the light is likely to be flat anddull, and some details will not record stronglyenough to be decipherable. The subject maybe lit unevenly with a shaft of sunlight fallingfrom a window, or it may give the impressionof being multi-hued, being illuminated by thesun through stained glass making a sensiblecolour record impossible. To overcomeproblems of this nature, and also to allowphotography in low light conditions, forexample in late autumn and winter afternoons,it will be necessary to introduce some form ofartificial lighting.

For a good quality professional standard ofwork, studio flash equipment is recommended(Figure 8.1). Essentially, this equipment is an

96 Historic Floors

Figure 8.1 Floor slab commemorating Godfrey CopleyArmiger d.1761, in chancel floor of St Mary’s Church,Sprotborough, S. Yorkshire. Lit by electronic flash fromthe right of camera. Note use of graduated scale outsidesubject area (Photograph, RCHME Crown Copyright,1995)

electronic flash, but made more sophisticated,powerful and flexible by virtue of the powersource usually being separated from the flashhead. A wide variety of diffusers and reflec-tors can be used to precisely control the light-ing. Modelling lights around the head enablethe lighting of the subject to be carefullyassessed. Mobile versions of this equipmentcan be run off any power source down to acar battery. The equipment is very safe in use,and can be inexpensively hired.

Hand-held flash guns are of limited use andare generally not advised, except for smalljobs. They produce a point source of light, andeven with diffusers it can be difficult to ensureeven lighting. All electronic flash is colour-balanced to daylight, enabling standard filmsto be used. The intensity and short durationof flash helps avoid camera shake.

Under no circumstances in historic interiorsshould quartz halogen-type flood lights beused. They can be dangerous, as they becomeextremely hot in use, and if knocked over thefilament can explode. Used, say, by film crewsthis equipment is reasonably safe, but therecorder of floors will probably be workingalone, perhaps with the public present. It isnot practical to ‘keep an eye’ on every pieceof equipment.

8.6 Tripods and other supportdevices

When actually taking the photographs, it isimportant that the camera be kept still. Theshutter release should be pressed gently, notstabbed, as this will result in camera shake.The shortest speed at which it is realisticallypossible to hand hold a camera is 1/60th ofa second. To achieve maximum imagesharpness, the camera lens should not beoperated at its widest aperture, but rather atf8 or f11.

With long exposures thus necessary, theuse of a tripod is essential. A substantialtripod will also allow the camera to be raisedby 2–2.5 m off the floor surface, thus increas-ing coverage. To take photographs verticallydownwards without photographing thetripod legs, a bar which will offset thecamera from the tripod is essential (Figure8.2). These can be made up, or proprietarymodels are available. If much work is antic-ipated on a floor, the type of substantialtripod or ‘dolly’ with wheels, as often usedfor television cameras, can be extremelyuseful. If greater height is needed, it may benecessary to use a small scaffold tower, oreven a ‘cherry picker’.


Figure 8.2 A 35 mm SLRcamera attached via a ball-and-socket head to a lateralarm on a tripod. A cablerelease is being used tominimize camera shake(RCHME Crown Copyright,1995)

8.7 Lighting techniques

8.7.1 General

To record inscribed and structural details, it isnecessary to create the illusion of three dimen-sions in a two-dimensional photograph. To dothis, the subject has to be lit in such a way asto give the impression of ‘depth’ by the useof shadows. Lighting the subject from thecamera position will result in flat and feature-less photographs. The light source has to beoff-camera, and at around 45° to the subject,normally coming from the side. This willproduce a clear and crisp photograph, as illus-trated in Figures 8.3 and 8.4.

To reveal very worn details, the light mayhave to be placed even lower than 45°. At lowangles the difference in brightness from oneside of the subject to the other may be suchthat either a second, much weaker, light

source is needed, or a sheet can be used asa reflector. If photographing very deepfeatures, the reflector should be used to makesure that the shadows cast have somediscernible detail in them. If using hand-heldelectronic flash, estimating the effect of thelight can be difficult. The flash gun should befar enough from the subject to produce aneven spread of light, especially when workingwith wider-angle lenses. Some flash guns needto be fitted with a wide-angle diffuser.

8.7.2 Floor brasses

Photographing floor brasses is probably amore environmentally responsible method ofrecording them than making rubbings, whichprocess if repeated frequently could result inpermanent damage to the brass. Manychurches actively discourage brass-rubbing

98 Historic Floors

Figure 8.3 Fourteenth-century floor brass to WilliamFitzwilliam d.1474, set in the chancel floor of St Mary’sChurch, Sprotborough, S. Yorkshire (RCHME CrownCopyright, 1995)

Figure 8.4 As Figure 8.3, but a negative image (RCHMECrown Copyright, 1995)

enthusiasts. The photography of brasses,however, represents a challenge, as the lightreflecting off the hard shiny surface ‘flares’. Itcan be extremely difficult and sometimesimpossible to eliminate this flare completely.Hard or direct lighting should not be used, asany specular reflection from the metal must beavoided, and the surface may be uneven. Asoft light source is better, illuminating thesubject evenly.

8.7.3 Tiles and tiled pavements

Photographing a tiled surface presents similarproblems to those encountered whenphotographing brasses. Care needs to be takento eliminate reflection or flare when position-ing the light. Reflection can be minimized byusing a polarizing filter which is placed infront of the lens, and then rotated until thelight rays which have been polarized by reflec-tion from the polished surface are absorbed.The surface detail is then seen more clearly.This filter has no effect on light reflected froma metal surface, since these rays are not polar-ized.

8.8 Scale and subject preparation

To obtain the maximum information from thephotograph, a graduated scale should beincluded. This could also be combined with acolour scale. This enables a colour print to bemade reproducing the image faithfully. Thisscale must not obscure any subject detail, andshould be parallel to the film plane andsquarely aligned.

Many brasses, ledger stones and otherfeatures accumulate dust and other debris,generated both by their environment andvisitors to it. Before photography, carefulcleaning using a soft-bristled paint brush canlead to a better result, and sometimes worndetails may be more clearly revealed. Thetemptation to dull polished brass surfaces bythe use of sprays or any other medium shouldbe resisted.

8.9 Rectified photography

The method of taking photography with thenegative plane of the camera exactly parallelto the floor plane has much to recommend itin recording floors. The technique has, ofcourse, long been used in photography. It can,however, be graded in its application from afairly approximate method, through to anadvanced survey technique. This is describedmore fully in Dallas (Chapter 7).

For straightforward ‘parallel’ photography,careful levelling of the camera with a levelbubble clipped to the hot shoe of the camerawill usually suffice. From the photographicpoint of view, much care has to be taken withthe lighting – any unevenness in lighting willshow up much more so than with an obliqueview. Otherwise, good photographic practiseas described in this chapter will provide satis-factory results.

8.10 Products

It is most important always to remember thatthe negative material is the primary record,and should always be looked after mostcarefully. For day to day purposes, prints willbe used. If for illustration, these clearly needto be of the highest quality. For day to daywork in the office, ‘machine print-quality’prints may be quite adequate, and are muchcheaper. If taking a series of prints, it is highlydesirable to print onto standard A4 size paper,even if the image is not this shape. Being ableto file the prints along with everything elsecan be invaluable, and ensures that the mater-ial does not become disassociated from thereport.

8.11 Storage of the processed image

This topic is fully dealt with under Chapter 10:The preservation of the records of historic


floors. Perhaps the one point to make here isthe importance of accurately and carefullylabelling each negative and photographicprint, before it leaves the photographer’shands. All material should record the site, thefeature, the date and the photographer. It mayalso be useful to record technical details, suchas the camera type and aperture settings.

Suggested reading

CONLON, V.M. (1973). Camera Techniques in Archaeology.John Baker.

COOKSON, M.B. (1954). Photography for Archaeologists. MaxParrish.

DALLAS, R. (1980). Surveying with a camera–photogramme-try. Architects Journal, 171, No. 5, 245–55.

DALLAS, R. (1980). Surveying with a camera–rectifiedphotography. Architects Journal, 171, No. 8, 395–9.

100 Historic Floors

Ground-based Remote Sensing (GBRS)techniques currently available for the remoteexamination of archaeological features withinhistoric floors, based upon scientific photo-imaging and digital image enhancement, offeran important additional tool for their investi-gation and interpretation. The features whichare best extracted are those which are eitherformed by differing chemical composition orby incision below the normal surface. Whereanomalies are suspected, but not easilydiscerned by eye, then remote sensing offersa valuable series of tools to assist in the properrecording of these features.

These methods comprise a series of special-ized photographic, electronic, and computer-assisted image processing methods capable ofrevealing a variety of archaeological, geologi-cal, chemical, and structural evidence frombuilding fabric. GBRS systems have beendeveloped through the modification of otherscientific imaging processes originallydesigned to monitor the earth’s environment,to investigate the universe, and to assist inmedical research. Advances in these fieldscontinue to provide improvements for adapta-tions in archaeological applications (Brooke,1987, 1989, 1994a).

There are four basic GBRS techniques whichmay be used to assist in the examination ofhistoric floors:

(1) Multispectral Imaging

(2) Contrast/Contour Enhancing Illumination(CEI)

(3) Multiple Angle Surface Saturation (MASS)(4) Laser Surface Profiling (LASP) and Laser

Contour Profiling (LCP)

9.1 Multispectral imaging

In practical terms, for the examination of historicfloors, this process entails the production of aseries of photographic or digital images at differ-ing wavelengths. In this way, a comparison ofthe resultant imagery may reveal any featureswhich, although appearing similar to the nakedeye, have different chemical and/or physicalproperties. Typically, a series of images isproduced which ranges from the near ultravio-let to the near infra-red, and includes ‘control’scenes in both colour and black and white

Features are normally revealed by colour ortonal differences when a direct comparison ismade between the filtered images and thecontrol photographs. Some form of computer-based image processing is often required toextract subtle tonal differences in a formperceivable to the eye and to assist in theremoval of unwanted ‘noise’.

Finally in this section, the use of ultravioletfluorescence should be noted. This technique,normally used in the laboratory for the exami-nation of mineral samples, may be utilized todetect invisible features over larger areas.

101

9

The retrieval of damaged inscriptionsthrough remote sensing techniquesChristopher J. Brooke

9.2 Contrast/contour enhancingillumination (CEI)

The use of raking light to enhance details ofrough surfaces is well known, and well

documented (see Chapter 8). Its use inground-based remote sensing broadly followsthe photographic principles used elsewhere toaccentuate the contours of a three-dimensionalsurface.

102 Historic Floors

Figure 9.1 The floor of thecentral crossing at SouthwellMinster, Nottinghamshire, takenfrom the eastern towerclerestory stage: as it appearsto the naked eye (Photograph,Dr C.J. Brooke)

Figure 9.2 The central crossingfloor illuminated by CEI,rendering the surface profilemore clearly visible andshowing the extent of damageand wear (Photograph, Dr C.J.Brooke)

The technique depends upon the use of anextreme point-source illuminator, typically apowerful electronic flash unit, positioned to oneside of the target area. A camera is then placedin one of three positions, either square on tothe face of the target, angled away from theillumination, or angled towards it; each positionyields different effects as the illuminating beamis scattered from the rough surface.Experimentation is needed to determine theoptimum position to obtain useful archaeolog-ical or physical information from the subject.

Figures 9.1 and 9.2 show the floor of thecentral crossing in Southwell Minster,Nottinghamshire. This floor comprises a seriesof stone paviours combined with re-usedgrave markers and was re-set during therestoration of the cathedral between 1880 and1890 (Brooke, 1997). Figure 9.1 is a normalphotograph, taken from the eastern towerclerestory at a height of approximately 15 m;Figure 9.2 shows the same area illuminated by

CEI from the south side. In the second imagethe apparently flat floor surface can be seento be severely contoured in an irregularpattern; the large rectangular blocks of stoneappear to show greater wear, and some canbe identified as being re-used grave markers.

Using various digital image processingsystems, a three-dimensional profile of thesurface may be obtained. Figure 9.3 illustratesthe area shown in Figures 9.1 and 9.2; theareas which are most strongly illuminatedappear highest and the deepest shadows,where the surface is pitted or indented, appearas dips and valleys, revealing where worn,older stone has been reused.

9.3 Multiple angle surface saturation(MASS)

The MASS technique was developed from theCEI and raking light principles as a means of

Retrieval of inscriptions using GBRS techniques 103

Figure 9.3 A three-dimensional computer rendering of Figure 9.2 illustrating the use of this technique to delineatesurface profiles (Copyright, Dr C.J. Brooke)

more clearly discerning incised inscriptionsand decorative carving. It is based upon theuse of extreme angled illumination, but insteadof using just one angle MASS employs multi-ple angles of incident radiation within thesame image.

A normal photographic camera is set up toface the floor as near perpendicular to thesurface as practicable. In total darkness thecamera shutter is opened and point-sourceillumination from an electronic flashgun isdirected from all four cardinal points at anextremely shallow angle relative to the target;better results may often be achieved by alsoproviding illumination on the diagonals aswell.

The technique works by gradually eliminat-ing all surface anomalies and irregular erosionas each is illuminated from at least one direc-tion; any deliberate artefacts such as carving

or incised lettering remain below the illumi-nated surface and are revealed in the finalimagery as such.

Figure 9.4 shows one of the pre-Conquestcarved crosses at St Bridget’s Church,Beckermet, Cumbria, as seen by the nakedeye. The inscription is heavily worn and partlycovered by lichen and moss growth. Figure 9.5shows the inscribed face using MASS to revealthe majority of elements present in the inscrip-tion.

9.4 Laser surface profiling (LASP)

The technique of Laser Surface Profiling is anextension of the ideas embodied in the MASSmethod. Here, a laser replaces the pointsource flashgun and instead of being used atdiscrete angles relative to the object surface,

104 Historic Floors

Figure 9.4 Carved cross face at St Bridget’s Church,Beckermet, Cumbria, showing the heavily eroded andlargely illegible inscription (Photograph, Dr C.J. Brooke)

Figure 9.5 Beckermet cross face using MASS imagery toproduce an enhanced image of the inscription(Photograph, Dr C.J. Brooke)

the beam is swept through 360 degrees acrossthe face of the target.

There are distinct advantages to using thismethod over the pulsed light source as thelaser beam produces a better photographicend-product. The disadvantages are that thetechnique is more difficult to perfect, and itrequires stringent safety procedures to be inplace.

Despite the operational difficulties of theLASP method, results have provided excep-tional image quality in the examination ofgrave markers and monuments (Rodwell, 1989,pp. 174–5; Brooke, 1994b).

References

BROOKE, C.J. (1987). Ground-based remote sensing forarchaeological information recovery in historic buildings.International Journal of Remote Sensing, 8(7), 1039–48.

BROOKE, C.J. (1989). Ground-Based Remote Sensing.Technical Paper No 7. Birmingham: The Institute ofField Archaeologists.

BROOKE, C.J. (1994a). Ground-based remote sensing ofbuildings and archaeological sites: ten years research tooperation. Archaeological Prospection, 1(2), 105–19.

BROOKE, C.J. (1994b). ‘Their Name Liveth’: a remote sensingsurvey to decipher the illegible inscriptions on St Mary’sWar Memorial, Nottingham. Industrial ArchaeologyReview, 17(1), 75–8.

BROOKE, H. (1997). Closed for Business: Ewan Christian’sRestoration of Southwell Minster 1848–1888, Southwell:Southwell Minster Cathedral Council.

RODWELL, W. (1989). Church Archaeology. 2nd edition,London: B.T. Batsford/ English Heritage.

Retrieval of inscriptions using GBRS techniques 105

10.1 The creation of records

Records created in the recording of historicfloors have a variety of formats. These mightinclude record sheets and cards, plans,drawings, rubbings and photographs. Eachrecord type presents differing preservation andstorage problems, requiring different solutions.

In order to ensure their long-term preserva-tion, records should be created using the bestquality archival materials. Paper and cardshould be lignin free with an alkaline buffer,meeting the requirements of ISO 9706: 1994(E). Drawings should be made on polyesterdraughting film, linen or archival qualitypaper, using permanent black ink and not dry-transfer lettering which can easily becomedetached, adhere to other drawings and causedamage to the paper on which it is stuck.1

Photographs should be taken using a suitablefilm, and if colour the slowest possible filmspeed, and processed to archival qualitystandards with a double final wash.2 Owing tothe impermanence of colour film, black andwhite photographs should always be producedas an additional record of greater longevity.

10.2 The storage of records

The storage of record cards and sheets,provided they are produced on good qualitypaper, should not present any significant diffi-culties.3 Plans, drawings, rubbings andphotographs, however, because of their differ-ent formats and sizes, present a more complexproblem.

10.2.1 The storage of plans, drawingsand rubbings

The comparative size of many of these recordsmakes their storage more problematic anddamage from mishandling much easier. Flat,unrolled and unfolded storage is recom-mended.4 This will prevent the risk of strainand distortion which is particularly importantwith plans and drawings of accurate scale. Planchests or shelves fitted with drawers should beused but the drawers should be of a shallowdepth of no more than 40 mm and notoverfilled. Metal cabinets with baked-on paintare preferable to wooden ones which, if used,should be lined with archival quality paper.

106

10

The preservation of the records ofhistoric floorsMark Dorrington

1 The preparation and storage of working drawings isdiscussed by Brown (1995, Appendix 1).2 Procedures for the archival processing of photographsare given in Appendix C of Collings (1983).

3 Standard practice is provided in BS 5454 (1989).4 The storage of outsize documents is discussed inBS5454, 9.8 and Brown (1995, Appendix 1).

If there is no alternative to vertical cabinets,hanging plans, drawings or rubbings shouldbe supported for their whole width to preventdistortion. This can be done by having themmounted on guards by a conservator andattaching supports to the guards, but neverdirectly to the document. Alternatively individ-ual items can be stored in suspension sleeves.Although hanging cabinets can accommodatea large number of documents and allowrelatively easy reference and retrieval, becauseof the problems of distortion and the fact thatsupports can become detached anddocuments crushed and damaged at thebottom of the cabinet, flat storage is alwayspreferable.

For very large plans, drawings or rubbings,rolled storage is probably the only solution butthe shelving should be designed to allow thesupport of the full length of the rolleddocument. This can be facilitated by placingthe rolls in single rows, on double-sided shelv-ing, at right angles to the gangway or onspecially designed cantilevered shelves.Documents should be rolled around acid-freecardboard or polypropylene cylinders andwrapped in archival cloth with flaps of suffi-cient length to tuck into the ends of the cylin-der to exclude dust. Alternatively they can beplaced in rectangular tubular boxes.

In order to reduce damage from unneces-sary handling it is recommended that refer-ences be placed on plans, rubbings anddrawings, in pencil, on diametrically oppositecorners of the reverse of the document, ontags where stored rolled and on both lids andboxes where boxed. It is also preferable, forease of handling, to store these outsizedocuments as near as possible to the areawhere they are to be consulted.

10.2.2 The storage of photographs

The environmental requirements for thestorage of photographs are far more stringentthan for paper records. However, recommen-dations on temperature and relative humidity

in the current literature vary widely (seeClark; Collings, 1983; Edwards; Kodak, 1985;Rempel, 1987). In general terms the lower thetemperature the slower the rate of chemicaldeterioration. Stable conditions between 15°and 20°C and between 30 and 50 per centrelative humidity are regarded as acceptablein the British Standards (British StandardsInstitution, 1996). However, added protectionwould be achieved at lower temperaturestorage and the British Standard recommendsa temperature of below 2°C for colourphotographs due to the impermanence oftheir dyes. To achieve this, colour printsshould be conditioned to the recommendedrelative humidity, placed in hermeticallysealed enclosures in a deep-freeze unit or ina storage room controlled at 2°C. The lattersolution, however, would require extremelyexpensive equipment and low relative humid-ity is difficult to maintain at low temperature.In general archive repositories some sort ofcompromise will usually be necessary and,although not ideal, if a deep-freeze unitcannot be used a constant temperature ofbetween 8° and 12°C will usefully extend thelife of colour photographic materials.However, where photographs are required forfrequent consultation extreme low tempera-tures should be avoided as rapid changes oftemperature when transferred from repositoryto reading room will produce condensation.To prevent moisture condensing on the printthe temperature and relative humidity ofphotographic enclosures should be raisedgradually prior to opening and lowered againbefore return to storage.

Pollutants in the atmosphere such as perox-ides, ozones, sulphur dioxide, hydrogensulphide, nitrogen oxide, ammonia and acidicfumes which are harmful to photographs canonly successfully be filtered out by an airconditioning system, although storage insealed enclosures will afford some protection.

The provision of a small photographic storewithin an archive repository with environmen-tal conditions suitable for a mix of photo-graphic materials should be possible if a

Preservation of records of historic floors 107

compromise of the various environmentalconditions is accepted, even if deep-freezeunits, portable dehumidifiers and room airconditioners are used.

Where environmental conditions are lessthan perfect the quality of the storage materi-als used becomes even more significant.Photographic materials should be stored onmetal shelves or in filing cabinets or drawerswith a baked enamel finish, as some woodsand new paint emit harmful peroxides.Original photographic enclosures such as printboxes and glassine envelopes should bediscarded and replaced with materials ofarchive photographic quality. Photographicboxes and boards should be sulphur andlignin free with a neutral pH and consequentlyfree from the alkaline buffer usually present inacid free materials. Plastic sleeves should bemade from polyester or polypropylene andnever PVC. Prints should be stored flat inarchival photographic boxes and can be givenfurther protection from external climaticchange by storage in polyester sleeves andadditional support by inserting a piece ofphotographic archival board behind the print.Prints provided with this additional supportcan be hung vertically in polyester orpolypropylene sleeves in filing cabinets.Negatives and transparencies should never bestored flat but vertically in polyester orpolypropylene sleeves in filing cabinets orphotographic archival boxes.

Consideration should be given to providinga copy for use as a reference print. Cottongloves should also be worn when handlingany original photographic material to preventcontamination of absorbent emulsions by dirtand grease present on even the cleanest ofhands. The surfaces of negatives and trans-parencies should not be touched as this willdegrade the image. Repeated or prolongedexposure to bright light will cause colour dyesto fade and should consequently be avoided.This is particularly so with the frequent projec-tion of transparencies and considerationshould be given to providing duplicates ofimportant images.

10.3 The deposit of records

The records of historic floors should be trans-ferred as soon as possible after their creationto a repository which can meet the environ-mental and custodial standards of BritishStandard 5454 and The Royal Commission onHistorical Manuscripts (1990). Ideally thisshould be the same repository which holdsother archives relating to the building or of itsgoverning institution. The repository should beable to provide the storage conditions andmaterials outlined above, produce cataloguesand indexes to the records and facilitate super-vized public access. If appropriate, securitycopies should be made of essential documentsfor storage elsewhere as a precaution againstdisaster. In this way the records of historicfloors will be permanently preserved for thebenefit of future researchers.

Acknowledgements

Grateful acknowledgement is made to RichardNichols and Anthony Oliver of the Stafford-shire Archive Service Conservation Section fortechnical advice, but any errors are my own.

References

BROWN, S. (1995). Appendix 1. In Cathedral Fabric Records.A Report of the Joint Working Group on Records andRecording of Cathedral Fabric. English Heritage/TheCathedrals Fabric Commission for England.

BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION (1996). Implementation of ISO6051:1992, photography – processed photographic paperprints – storage practices.

BS 5454 (1989). British Standard Recommendations forStorage and Exhibition of Archival Documents.

CLARK, S. Photographic Conservation. National PreservationOffice Leaflet.

COLLINGS, T.J. (1983). Archival Care of Still Photographs.Society of Archivists Information Leaflet 2.

EDWARDS, E. The Care and Storage of Photographs. AreaMuseum Service for South Eastern England.

ISO 9706: 1994(E). Information and documentation – paperfor documents – requirements for permanence.

KODAK. (1985). Conservation of Photographs. EastmanKodak Company.

REMPEL, S. (1987). The Care of Photographs.THE ROYAL COMMISSION ON HISTORICAL MANUSCRIPTS (1990). A

Standard for Record Repositories. HMSO.

108 Historic Floors

The main objectives in computerizing recordsare to provide rapid and flexible means ofaccessing and delivering information on theone hand and to aid conservation of recordson the other. Computerized records can bemanipulated and linked in ways not possibleor not practicable with conventional paper-based forms. Copying of records, whether forsecurity or for dissemination, is made easierand may be done more economically. Savingsmay be made in archive storage space andoriginal material will not need to be handledas much. It is important to determine particu-lar objectives to ensure the most effectivemethodology is adopted.

Computerization of records relating tohistoric floors may include both informationoriginally created in another form and trans-ferred, that is retrospective digital data capture,and records in which the computer record isthe only form existing. The latter may resultfrom the use of digital technology in thesurvey process, whether digital cameras,computer aided drafting or text input.Computerized records may just consist of textbut may also include visual material, that isphotographic images and drawings, andvarious combinations of media if in the formof electronic publications such as CD ROMS.

The possible range of formats and media isnow extensive and their use becomingwidespread. This requires careful considera-tion to ensure continuing availability of, or

access to, information and its archival preser-vation in the long term.

As yet there is little readily availableguidance in the form of generally applicablestandards and recommendations (BritishLibrary and British Academy, 1993; Robinson,1993; Cathedrals Fabric Commission, 1995).Some conclusions for best practice can bedrawn from a consideration of the issuesinvolved and how these may be resolved.

11.1 Content of computerizedrecords

It is important to consider the amount of infor-mation or level of detail that needs to be incomputerized form. This should be kept to aminimum. There may be a difference betweenwhat is required during the course of a record-ing project and what is kept in the longerterm, or held in a place of deposit.

11.1.1 Site or monument information

This must include identification of a site andits location, and will usually include datingand typology in some form, as well as archi-tect or craftsman, if known, and constructionmaterials. The sub-location of a floor within abuilding and of any separate elementsrecorded, such as ledger stones, should beincluded. Most computer systems can then be

109

11

Records and computerizationDiana Hale

searched by typing e.g. ‘Octagon’ to find allentries recorded as that location.

11.1.2 Archive information

This should include archive details such asnumeric identification, e.g. negative ordrawing number, and formats and contentinformation such as captions or titles forindividual photographs or drawings (Porterand Thornes, 1994).

Cross references to other records or biblio-graphic information may be included. Thelocation or source of records should be given,particularly any drawings or photographs. Themany earlier records on the ledger stones ofExeter Cathedral made by Hope are crossreferenced in the recent ICOMOS survey,which records the floor position as well asmuch other new information on each ledgerstone.

11.2 Standardization of data

The long-term value of computerized recordshas suffered as a result of a lack of nationallyor internationally acceptable standards forways of organizing and presenting data. Thisis changing as various user communities seean increasing need in times of limitedresources to make maximum use of workdone for one specific purpose, throughmaking data available for other purposes forexchange or re-use and are working towardsagreeing standards (Council of Europe, 1995;International Council of Museums, 1995). AtYork Minster archivists created notes to astandard format and language for eachdrawing which were then copied onto adatabase. Guidelines from a variety of sourceshelped create a dictionary of terms. Manylibrary, archive and museum organizations areable to advise on standards they themselvesmay use or recommend for particular areas,where there are not specific BS or ISOstandards. These may apply to areas of textcontent such as address, vocabulary controls

such as subject thesauri or formats for dataexchange (RCHME with the Association ofCounty Archaeological Officers, 1993).

The Thesaurus of Monument Typesproduced by RCHME and English Heritage(RCHME with English Heritage, 1995) providespreferred terms for describing the function ofbuildings and archaeological sites. Work isalso being done on building material termi-nology, as well as terminology for archaeo-logical objects.

11.3 Forms of computerized recordsand issues related to each

Computerized records may be held aselectronic signals on magnetic or opticalmedia. Any digital data requires specialconsideration if it is to be kept after beingused on its current system. Many archiverepositories other than those specializing indigital archives are not yet able to ensure long-term maintenance of digital data, and may bereluctant to take data in this form. Thisincludes many local authority record offices. Itseems likely that this situation will have tochange fairly rapidly though. If the eventualplace of deposit is decided as early as possi-ble during a project requirements can bediscussed before work is carried out, ensuringpotential problems over the form of recordsare identified and solutions agreed. The infor-mation needed by the repository to accom-pany the records, such as formats andstandards used, can be established.

All working records should be backed upregularly while still in use or kept on-line.Once records are deemed archived copies maybe used for working purposes.

11.3.1 Written information

This may take the form of word processed textor structured data held in separate fields ortables in a database form. These are compar-atively easy to handle as output files which

110 Historic Floors

may be kept in the digital form if using awidely acceptable word processing packagesuch as WordPerfect, or if output to ASCIIformat, the closest equivalent to a transferstandard. Hard copy output of word processedtext is straightforward and most databasepackages have report formats to provide struc-tured hard copy. The printed report on thefabric archives of Ely Cathedral and College,produced under the English Heritage grant-aided scheme to record the fabric archives oftwenty-two of the English cathedrals (Collins,1994), shows the form a report from thecomputerized inventory can take. It includesan index of plans and elevations, topographi-cal views, drawings, photographs and archae-ological surveys, listed by the holdinginstitution and giving all the necessary archivalinformation. For the Exeter Cathedral ledgerstones survey a database was used duringrecording but the data is only to be kept inhard copy form, on archival quality paper.

11.3.2 Graphics and digital surveys

Drawn surveys are increasingly carried outusing CAD (Computer Aided Drafting)systems. Several different packages are avail-able which produce different results.Microstation™ and AutoCAD™ are widelyused. In some cases it may be necessary touse such drawings in their electronic form tomake sense of them. This is particularly trueof three-dimensional surveys, but also whereoverlays are used.

As with other electronic records standardprocedures for labelling must be in place, inthis case for numbering or naming the file.Different versions of drawings need to beidentified by numerical sequence and date oflatest update, a process known as revisionstatus.

11.3.3 Electronic images

These may include both images originating inelectronic form, such as from digital photog-raphy or video, and those transferred to

electronic form from a conventional original,such as through scanning of conventionalphotographic prints or slides. Electronicimages can be created using many differentsystem and data formats and to manystandards. They can be held on a variety ofmedia and, significantly, require considerablymore computer space than do text or graph-ics (Besser and Trant, 1995).

The quality of a conventional photographicimage is likely to be greater than that of ascanned electronic version, particularly asviewing screens and printers impose furtherlimitations on quality, unless expensivehardware is available. Electronic photographicprocessing can sometimes enhance information,for example in improving the legibility ofinscriptions. Video or mobile digital camerascannot at present produce high resolutionimages. They may be considered to have advan-tages of ease of use and, in the case of video,cheapness and widespread user acceptability.

Image resolution is a combination of thenumber of pixels across and down an image.A high resolution image may be necessary toproduce a publication quality image, butcreates a large computer file. Low resolutionimages can be retrieved quickly and browsedthrough or displayed a number at a time, butthey may not provide sufficient detail for usersand would be inadequate for publicationpurposes. The number of colours availablealso affects the picture quality as does anycompression method used to reduce file size.

As the cost of some methods of electronicimaging falls their use may be consideredworthwhile. Kodak Photo CD conversion of35 mm film images by a bureau, is now possi-ble at a very reasonable cost. One hundredphotographic quality images can be stored onone CD which can be viewed on a monitoror on a standard TV screen using a CD player.One disc could alternatively store 800 imagesat TV resolution, or up to 6000 small, lowresolution images.

While there may be space-saving advantagesover conventional paper or film forms, there maybe considerable cost in terms of maintenance of

Records and computerization 111

electronic images as the longevity of electronicstorage media is unproven at present. If it isnecessary or advisable to also maintain recordsin a conventional form then any benefits of usingelectronic media will inevitably be at extra costand may not be justifiable.

11.4 Access

The place of deposit will determine theultimate form of records held and will haveresponsibility for providing continuing accessto those records accepted. York Minster’scomputerized inventory of drawings can bequeried for users of the archive requiringdrawings selected by e.g., architect, date orpart of building (Daly, 1995). Data and imagesmay be made available on demand via anetwork such as the Internet, but will need tobe maintained on a host machine and givenan electronic address.

Copyright and data protection issues mustbe clarified and conditions or agreementsshould make specific reference to computer-ized forms of data. Licences for continuing useor reproduction may be necessary and allagreements should be written.

Decisions on on-line or off-line storage willdepend on retrieval requirements. Frequencyand speed of retrieval will affect the methodschosen. For on-line storage where rapid accessis important hard disk storage is preferable tofloppy disks. WORM (write once, read manytimes) or rewritable optical disks (which canbe updated or added to) are an alternative.They have a large capacity and may be consid-ered as an alternative to microfilm for imagestorage, or for data as an alternative tomagnetic tape or disk. If records are to bestored off-line WORM disks have a longer lifethan rewritable disks and magnetic tape. Theyalso provide data security as they cannot beaccidentally erased or damaged. Optical disksdo not need such careful maintenance orenvironmental control as magnetic tapes. Allelectronic data will need migrating to newgenerations of hardware and software for it to

continue to be readable in the original form.Records kept on-line with adequate protocolsare more likely to be migrated to newhardware and software than those onlyretained off-line. However, most records arenot likely to be kept on-line permanently dueto operational overheads.

Computerized records offer many advan-tages for capturing, storing, manipulating anddisseminating information. However, from apurely archival perspective there are limita-tions which still have to be overcome. Themedia must be actively refreshed to minimizethe danger of corruption and obsolescence.

References

BESSER, H. and TRANT, J. (1995). Introduction to Imaging:Issues in Constructing an Image Database. Getty ArtHistory Information Program.

BRITISH LIBRARY AND BRITISH ACADEMY (1993). InformationTechnology in Humanities Scholarship. Published onbehalf of The British Library and The British Academyby the Office for Humanities Communication.

THE CATHEDRALS FABRIC COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND AND ENGLISH

HERITAGE (1995). Cathedral Fabric Records. A Report ofthe Joint Working Group on Records and Recording ofCathedral Fabric.

COLLINS, D.M. (1994). The Fabric Archives of Ely Cathedraland College from the Commonwealth to 1993.Unpublished manuscript available from NationalMonuments Record Centre (reference only).

COUNCIL OF EUROPE (1995). Core Data Index to HistoricBuildings and Monuments of the ArchitecturalHeritage.

DALY, A.E. (1995). An Introduction to the Archive ofArchitectural Drawings of York Minster in the MinsterLibrary. York Historian, 12, 28–39.

INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF MUSEUMS, INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE

FOR DOCUMENTATION (CIDOC) (1995). Draft InternationalCore Data Standard for Archaeological Sites andMonuments.

PORTER, V. and THORNES, R. (1994). A Guide to theDescription of Architectural Drawings. Published onbehalf of the Getty Art History Information Programby G.K. Hall.

ROBINSON, P. (1993). The Digitization of Primary TextualSources. Office for Humanities Communication.

ROYAL COMMISSION ON THE HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF ENGLAND

WITH ENGLISH HERITAGE (1995). Thesaurus of MonumentTypes: a Data Standard for Use in Archaeological andArchitectural Records. RCHME.

ROYAL COMMISSION ON THE HISTORICAL MONUMENTS OF ENGLAND

WITH THE ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY ARCHAEOLOGICAL

OFFICERS (1993). Recording England’s Past: a DataStandard for the Extended National ArchaeologicalRecord. RCHME.

112 Historic Floors

The floor of the retrochoir at WinchesterCathedral contains perhaps the most substan-tial and important area of medieval encaustictiles, indoors, in the country. A large propor-tion of the tiles are in situ, undisturbed sincethey were first laid.

The tiled floor was laid in the thirteenthcentury, in carpet patterns, using seventeendifferent type styles of tiles. The history of thefloor, and details of the design inlaid in theencaustic tiles is set out in detail inChristopher Norton’s study of the floorcontained in Winchester Cathedral – 900 Yearsedited by John Crook, who is the CathedralArchaeological Consultant (Crook, 1993).

The condition of the tiles has been a sourceof concern for many years; increasing visitornumbers have laid greater pressure on thefloor, here, as in the rest of the Cathedral.Even as early as the immediate post-War years,Wilfred Carpenter Turner, the then CathedralArchitect, arranged for a series of recordphotographs to be taken by C.J.P. Cave, usingan ingenious trolley upon which Cavebalanced, to ensure that the record be takenfrom a consistent distance. That recorddemonstrates the degree of wear which hasoccurred since the War; for many years a largearea of the retrochoir has been roped off toprevent access by the public.

By 1990, the floor was grubby, the detailand the delight of the tiles concealed by a

layer of grime, and many of the tiles even inthose areas protected from normal wear andtraffic were breaking up, and loose bedded.The task of conservation of the floor wasincluded in the programme of repair embod-ied in an appeal launched in that year, and sothe process of recording and planning for amajor programme of repair and conservationwas possible.

The recording of the floor in its then statewas the first priority. Using techniques beingdeveloped by English Heritage, and tried withgreat success on the Library floor at LichfieldCathedral by Martin Stancliffe and Paul Drury,a series of rectified photographs were taken ofthe whole floor (see Plate 27). Ross Dallas wasengaged by the Dean and Chapter as a consul-tant for this important survey. The technique,executed by Atkins AMC Ltd, employed a largeformat camera fitted by means of a long boomto a conventional tripod. The use of the boom,which was counterbalanced, meant that thecamera could be kept clear of the legs of thetripod, and avoided the use of complicatedscaffolds or other devices to maintain aconstant height. The tiles were wetted, toemphasize the colour, and the whole floorwas then photographed in black and white,and in colour. The resultant prints weremosaiced, and stuck together to form nineseparate sheets at A1 size showing plans to ascale of 1 : 20 of the whole floor. This record

113

12

Winchester CathedralConserving the retrochoir pavement

Peter Bird

forms a permanent basis for future work, andis kept in the Cathedral archive. It was usedto produce record drawings of the floor, whichcould then be adapted for use for planningand recording of the repairs which were totake place.

The approach to the conservation and repairof the tiles was under consideration at thesame time. Some similar work had alreadybeen carried out under the direction of MartinCaroe, in a small area of medieval tiles inRochester Cathedral. That approach, employ-ing repair using lime mortar, with somesurface consolidation of the tiles was felt likelyto be an appropriate solution. A small workingparty established by the Dean and Chapter,consisting of myself as the Cathedral Architect,John Crook the Cathedral ArchaeologicalConsultant, John Hardacre the CathedralCurator, and Christopher Norton from YorkUniversity, an acknowledged expert onmedieval tiles and the tiles of Winchester inparticular, began to consider this, and thealternatives for repair.

One of the particular perceived problems inthe floor at Winchester was the pointing andgrouting of quite substantial areas of the floorin a very hard red matrix. These areas wereconfined largely to the aisles, and were lessextensive in the central vessel of the retro-choir, perhaps fortunately since it is the central

vessel which contains the largest areas of insitu tiles in the floor (Figure 12.1). It wasconsidered that the red mastic – such it wasassumed to be – posed a threat to the survivalof the floor because of the preferential drying,and salt crystallization it was felt it wouldpromote. Several areas of inserted modern tiles(dating from the eighteenth century and later)in the floor in these areas were alreadyshowing signs of decay as a result of suchpreferential crystallization. It was consideredthat the removal of this material ought to bean essential part of the repair programme.

At this stage Trevor Proudfoot and SueBaumbach of Cliveden Conservation Ltd, theconsultant conservation body of the NationalTrust, were asked to carry out trials on theremoval of this mastic, and to advise upon theformulation of a specification for the repair ofthe pavement. This they undertook with theassistance of Sandra Davidson from theConservation Studio. Working in two small 1 m2

areas in the south aisle Cliveden then began aprogramme of investigation of the matrix, anda trial for cleaning and conservation.

The matrix proved entirely intractable.Removal by mechanical means was just possi-ble, but resulted frequently in mechanicaldamage to the tile – it adhered so well – andwas resistant to chemical, or even thermalmethods of removal. One small area of thematerial around twentieth-century tiles wassubjected to high temperature which still failedto make any impression upon the surface.

There is no record in the Cathedral archiveof when the work to point the tiles in thismaterial was carried out, nor of itsconstituency. Analysis by Cliveden suggestedthat it is a mixture of Portland cement and redbrick dust. It was at this stage that a decisionwas taken to leave the material in place, sinceits removal would probably occasion moredamage to the tiles than simply leaving italone. It is perhaps encouraging that the decayof tiles occasioned by this material appears tobe confined to eighteenth-century and moderntiles, and the medieval tiles which it surroundsappear to remain in sound condition.

114 Historic Floors

Figure 12.1 Tiles in the central vessel of the retrochoirbefore cleaning and conservation (Photograph, ClivedenConservation Workshop Ltd)

Cleaning tests were carried out usingacetone, deionized water, and deionized waterwith a wetting agent. The work at Rochesterhad used water with a wetting agent, withsome success; but at Winchester it was foundthat clean water served equally well, andavoided the introduction of any additive to thesurface of the tiles. Trials were also carried outon the same basis on surface consolidants, anda solution of 10 per cent Paraloid B72 wasfound after analysis to be effective, and topermit the tiles to breathe.

With the completion of these small trials, aprogramme was established for the repair ofthe whole floor. The first stage of thatprogramme was to be the treatment of a smallbut now significant area of tile as a continu-ing trial. The area selected for this was a stripof tile perhaps 1m wide, outside the LangtonChapel, in the southeast corner of the retro-choir. This area contained a variety of tiles,some pointed in the red mastic, some pointedin cement, some repointed in recent years andrelaid following the introduction of ducting,and contained both rebedded medieval tiles,and later tiles. The area, therefore, gave aselection of the problems which would belater encountered over the whole of the floor.

Throughout the whole of the process of theformulation of the specification, and of thephilosophy of the repair of the tiles, consulta-tions were held with English Heritage and withthe Cathedrals Fabric Commission for England;at several stages other bodies were drawn intothe discussion, including the Society for theProtection of Ancient Buildings (SPAB). Theconsultation produced some change in theoriginal philosophy, but surprisingly little varia-tion in the approach to the repair.

The first policy for the repair producedseveral different aims and assumptions:

• The central vessel of the retrochoir shouldremain protected from traffic.

• Sound original tiles in the aisles, in areaswhich would be subject to wear, wouldtherefore be taken up and rebedded asrepairs in the central vessel.

• In general in the central vessel tiles wouldbe left in situ as far as possible; wherecracked or broken and capable of repair insitu then this would be the coursefollowed. Only where the tiles had sufferedsuch damage that repair could only beeffected by taking them up, would this beundertaken; in that case the tiles would belifted, the fragments reassembled withadhesive, and rebedded.

• Good tiles removed from the aisles to thecentral vessel would be replaced by repli-cas of the original work, glazed orunglazed.

• Repairs to cracked or broken tiles wouldbe carried out by lime mortar repair, repli-cating in mortar the pattern of thebackground and inlay.

• Tiles would be grouted and pointed in limemortar.

• Tiles would be cleaned before repair, andconsolidated after repair using Paraloid B72in a 10 per cent solution.

After discussion, it was felt inappropriatethat any tiles should be removed from theirpresent or original positions; even though infollowing this philosophy some tiles in situ,and which are good examples of their kindand now in sound condition, would remainsubject to wear. One such area is that immedi-ately to the south side of the Beaufort Chantry,where a small area of in situ tiles remain, andwhere many of the tiles are in any case ofmedieval origin. This area is subject to excep-tional visitor pressure, because of the numberswho stand outside the Chantry to look at theeffigy, and the interior of the Chantry. Themodification meant that all tiles would remainin their present position. Only tiles severelyworn, or cracked beyond repair – in otherwords entirely fragmented – would bereplaced, but they would still be replaced withreplicas. In certain areas at this stage it wasfelt desirable that quite large areas of tilesshould be replaced by replicas; for example,to the east of the Beaufort Chantry a strip oftiling relaid in the 1970s over new electrical

Winchester Cathedral: retrochoir pavement 115

ducts was felt to be one such candidate,because of its sheer ugliness. In another area,in the north aisle, a further area of modern tilewas considered as a candidate for thisapproach, in an area where the earlier carpetpattern of the tiles could be restored becauseof the evidence of in situ tiles which remainedon one side of the aisle.

Diana Hall was approached to research, andproduce the replica tiles. An earlier attempt hadbeen made to reproduce tiles in the northpresbytery aisle, to the immediate northwest ofthe retrochoir, in 1969 by Professor Baker andEve Baker. Although some research had beencarried out at that time to reproduce the clay,the tiles produced in that repaving work wereall slightly domed and by the time the work inthe retrochoir was underway the wear on thesurface of the presbytery aisle tiles was verysevere. Over most of the area of that floor theoriginal glaze had been worn off completely.

The Cathedral Curator, John Hardacre, wasable to provide samples of tiles taken up fromthe presbytery aisle in that campaign of workfor Diana Hall to analyse. By this method itwas possible to reproduce the exact mix ofclay of the original work, and a number oftrial samples were produced. Their match ofthe original tiles was very successful. The firstsamples produced indeed a finish with a verydark glaze; and initial misgivings about thecolour were overcome when, by a coinci-dence, a fragment of thirteenth-century tilewas discovered in the core of the West Front,where stonework repair was in progress at thesame time, and the glaze on that fragmentmatched exactly the colour of the tilesproduced by Diana.

Perhaps unfortunately, it was felt that forpurposes of repair – where new tiles were tobe introduced in a background of existingearlier tiles from which the glaze had entirelyworn – the dark glaze would provide too greata contrast; in the final batches for repair, theglaze was modified so that it would producea lighter, redder colour.

Selected deeply worn tiles were replacedwith the first sample replica tiles in the first

stage repair area outside the Langton Chapel.The appearance of single replicas in a field ofexisting repaired tiles could then be assessed.This first stage area underwent the full rangeof treatment which had emerged from theconsultation process – cleaning with deionizedwater and cotton wool; pecking out loose andcement joints but leaving the sound red masticjoints alone; cleaning out cement fill in brokentiles and grouting and repair in situ usingcoloured hydraulic lime mortar, repointing andgrouting in hydraulic lime; and surface consol-idation using a 10 per cent solution of ParaloidB72. Small areas of surface finish were alsotried at this stage, including microcrystallinewax intended as a surface protection againstwear of the Paraloid coating. With the comple-tion of this stage of the work, further work

116 Historic Floors

Figure 12.2 Conserved tiles, many of which are in situ,completed in the first stage of work. Isolated replicatiles are visible (Photograph, Peter Bird)

was suspended for six months so that theresults of the repair could be assessed (Figure12.2).

It immediately became clear that the weak 10per cent solution of Paraloid was vulnerable toattrition. Furthermore the tiles treated withmicrocrystalline wax showed evidence of abloom developing between the wax and theParaloid coating, possibly as a result of inher-ent damp drying through the surface of thetiles. It was decided at that stage to abandonthe use of microcrystalline wax as a surfaceprotection and to apply the Paraloid in twocoats, first at a 10 per cent solution, and secondat a 20 per cent solution. It was also felt desir-able that further trials of different surfacecoatings would be tried as the work proceededbut the decision as to whether, and how, toprovide surface protection would be deferreduntil the completion of the whole project.

The consequences of using fully glazedreplica tiles was also reassessed at this period.The use of unglazed replicas was considered,on the basis that they would blend into thebackground more satisfactorily. However,especially following the results of trials whichsuggested that the new tiles unglazed had agreater surface porosity, and might therefore bemore vulnerable to wear than their unglazedbut aged neighbours, it was considered thatglazed tiles should be used for repair despite

the possible contrast with the surroundingwork (Figure 12.3). This was felt philosophi-cally to be more acceptable, since they wouldrepresent honest repair in material as near aspossible to the original work, and that theyshould be allowed to wear naturally – adopt-ing much the same philosophy as that beingapplied in the stonework repair in progress atthe same time on the West Front.

With these early trials and decisionscomplete, it was possible to formulate aprogramme to proceed with the repair of thewhole floor. The floor was divided into areaswhich would be worked on one at a time –this would mean that the retrochoir couldremain open to the public, and that the publicwould also be able to see the work inprogress. Funds also became available at thistime to ensure that the whole project could becompleted, as the result of success in 1995 inobtaining a European Union Grant for thework.1 This complemented grants from theMonument Trust, and from English Heritage,which together have funded the whole project.The work progressed steadily through tocompletion in June 1996. Such was the skill of


Figure 12.3 Contrasting areas of conserved tiles andreplicas and tiles awaiting cleaning (Photograph, PeterBird)

1 The project has won an accompanying Awardfor Conservation of the European ArchitecturalHeritage.

Figure 12.4 Completed mortar repairs and pointingconservation (Photograph, Cliveden ConservationWorkshop Ltd)

Vanessa Simeoni, the lead conservator, andher colleagues in saving and repairing quiteseverely damaged tiles, that it proved neces-sary to use many fewer replicas in the repairthan had originally been expected; in thecentral vessel, where most of the in situ tilesremain, no replicas were used at all, and thelargest area of replicas, as had originally beenhoped, was confined to the restoration of thecarpet pattern in the north aisle (Figure 12.4).

The original proposals had included themaintenance of the barriers within the retro-choir, to keep the public out of the centralvessel. As the work progressed, and as itbecame clear that the surface consolidationand repair of the tiles appeared to be verysuccessful, this policy has been under review.

Part of the project included the removal ofthe effigy of Arnaud de Gaveston, which stoodin the middle of the north aisle, in such aposition that it created a funnel of traffic overa vulnerable corner of the tile pavement. Theeffigy had been moved to this position earlierthis century from the North Transept; and nowthe tomb chest was moved once again, but

only sideways to a new position against thenorth wall of the aisle, so that the ‘narrows’ ithad created would be relieved and so reducethe concentration of wear at this particularpoint.

Extending this philosophy to the wholefloor, it was considered that the creation ofany narrows or funnels by the use of barriersfor traffic could only exaggerate wear in thoseareas. It is not possible to exclude people fromthe retrochoir; this is a living building andcontinues to be used for the purpose forwhich it was built. We can only hope tomitigate the effects of that use. Barriers mayonly preserve parts of the floor at the expenseof accelerated wear on other areas. During thecourse of the repair and conservation work,when barriers were removed and people werefree to spread over the whole floor area, it didappear that dilution of traffic could help tominimize wear on the floor as a whole. Thistrial, of leaving the floor open, is now underway, and the results of this free access willneed to be carefully reviewed from time totime so that a decision can be made as to

118 Historic Floors

Figure 12.5 Detail of floorplan of retrochoir

whether to barricade the retrochoir in futurefor the protection of the tiles. At the momentthe glorious quality of the uncluttered spaceremains visible (Figure 12.5).

The project has been successful in restoringthe colour and quality of the tiles, and clari-fying the design of the in situ tiles where itsurvives. The surface consolidation of the tilesappears to have provided a good wearingsurface as well as its primary purpose, and amaintenance regime is being establishedwhich will include regular careful cleaning, aprogramme of careful monitoring and repoint-ing of joints, and resurfacing probably atbiennial intervals. Trials into the provision offurther surface coatings are under way; notonly in the use of microcrystalline wax, whichappears to be more successful in providing asurface finish without bloom after a suitableperiod to allow the conservation interventionsto dry out; but also in proprietary finishes suchas Aquatex, and in one small area on moderntiles a combination of Bourneseal and turpen-

tine. As already noted, the approach to accessis under active consideration and will bereassessed; the options lie between barricad-ing certain areas and increasing the load onothers, or leaving the space free to spread theload of tourists. The extent of carpet andmatting to clean feet before they walk uponthe tiles has also been increased, and mattingbarriers are now provided at each entrance tothe retrochoir, as well as those which lie ateach main entrance to the Cathedral.

The success of the project lies not only inthe exciting restoration of the floor, and conse-quently of the space; but also in the recogni-tion that successful conservation relies asmuch upon continuing maintenance and careas in the original more glamorous projectitself.

ReferencesCROOK, J. (1993). Winchester Cathedral – 900 Years. Dean

& Chapter/Phillimore & Co.


As so little thought has, until recently, beengiven to floor damage, many practices havearisen which can be avoided. One of the mostfundamental difficulties when consideringfloor protection is the conflicting patterns ofuse. There are the liturgical requirements ofthe Dean and Chapter, essential in order tofulfil the primary role of the cathedral;secondly, the needs of the choir, including theprovision of pianos, rehearsal and changingrooms; thirdly, the functions which form anintegral part of the life of the cathedrals,including concerts, flower festivals, plays andtelevision programmes. Then, there are thevisitors, and the shops, signs, collecting boxes,information centres, restaurants, lavatories,brass rubbing centres and exhibitions whichcathedrals and churches increasingly wish toprovide, and from which they derive valuableincome. Finally, there is the maintenance andcleaning of the building partly necessitated bythese uses.

All of this has an impact on the historicfabric of the building, and more particularlyon the floors. In order to minimize this, it isnecessary to consider how and where damageis inflicted, by whom, and to what extent itcan be controlled or modified. In many casesmuch of it could be avoided if greater care

were taken and better instructions given to allpersonnel.

13.1 Worship, liturgical needs andfunctions

Nave altars are usually surrounded by stalls,chairs, candelabra, lecterns, carpets and flowerstands. Care should be taken in placing suchfurnishings, in view of the damaging effectthat they often have on historic floors. Thesiting of all furniture should be evaluated sinceincreased use accelerates floor damage. Thereare a number of examples, includingWinchester Cathedral (see Plate 28) and StGeorge’s Chapel, Windsor, where nave altarsand associated furniture have been sited overimportant ledgers.

The placing of lecterns, carpets and othermovable objects in chancels should also beconsidered in the context of the valuable floorsurfaces which are usually found, particularlyin such areas.

Pianos needed for choir practice and forconcerts often have to be moved regularlyover delicate surfaces. Music stands, if they arefrequently moved, can also scratch floors.Pianos and stools hired for special concerts

120

13

Use and abuseManagement and good practice in cathedralsand greater churches

Jane Fawcett

and moved by outside contractors are a partic-ular hazard. The placing of chairs on impor-tant brasses and ledgers should bereconsidered, and protective pads fitted toprevent scratching. At Westminster Abbey thechairs are placed on top of nineteenth-centurybrasses in the nave, which have becomeseriously worn. At St Albans Abbey chairs areplaced over brasses in the chancel. Movablechairs are one of the most destructive furnish-ings in ecclesiastical buildings. The old fixedpews did far less damage.

Functions can be destructive, since theyinvolve the frequent moving of heavy stands,seats, lights, platforms and other equipment,much of which is dragged from some distanceand placed in position, often causing seriousdamage to floors. Great care must be taken inmoving heavy objects, including scaffolding. Staffshould be instructed wherever possible to lift allequipment rather than drag it. The use of sacktrucks or trolleys with rubber wheels and ofsmall electric fork-lift trucks with rubber wheels,to move stacking chairs and other smallerobjects, would also help. Where heavy platformsrequire moving, staff should be provided withrollers to minimize scratching. The bases ofstands and platforms should be padded, and allchairs fitted with protective pads.

Film and television crews need carefulsupervision to avoid causing unnecessarydamage when fixing lights, cameras, platformsor scaffolding. It is important to have full anddetailed contracts signed by both parties speci-fying precisely what may and may not bedone, and the penalties that will be incurredin case of infringement. In all cases, withoutthe most careful supervision ignorant opera-tors can and do inflict serious damage, oftenunknowingly.

As all cathedrals are increasingly used forpublic functions, the dangers of adaptingdelicate medieval fabric, designed implicitlyfor the celebration of worship, for use as apublic auditorium and concert hall becomemore serious. Floor protection is only oneaspect of a grave threat to the character andintegrity of these vulnerable buildings.

The wish of the Dean and Chapter toimprove standards of comfort has beenpartially responsible for the installation ofunder-floor heating in the naves of Canterburyand Chester Cathedrals and Pershore Abbeyrecently. Others may follow. When dealingwith floors largely undisturbed since theMiddle Ages, the archaeological damageinflicted and the loss of ledger stones,medieval tiles and ancient paving is unaccept-able (see Appendix). There are also attemptsto create a centrally planned auditorium in acathedral expressly designed with a stalledchoir. Changes in ritual, liturgy and fashionhave, over the years, destroyed many ancientfurnishings and floors. But the present trendfor greater public comfort and access is poten-tially just as damaging.

In 1993 the Building Research Establishmentinstalled monitoring floor studs at pressurepoints in Westminster Abbey and St Paul’sCathedral to measure the rate of deterioration.The interim findings indicate that the averagerate of surface wear in such heavily used areasis approximately 1 mm per decade. Whenconsidering floor memorials with delicateinscriptions or relief decoration, medieval tilesor brasses, this represents a very rapid rate ofobliteration.

Ruskin, in The Lamp of Memory, refers to‘surfaces that have been worn half an inchdown. The whole finish of the work was inthe half inch that is gone’. Recording whatremains is thus a race against time.

13.2 Management of visitors

More attention has been paid to providingfacilities for visitors than to controlling thedamage they inflict, largely by their feet. Manyinstallations have been introduced withoutregard for the floor surfaces on which theyhave been placed, and lessons have beenlearnt too late, when damage has already beeninflicted.

Shops should be sited, wherever possible,outside the main building, since they are

Management and good practice: cathedrals and churches 121

disruptive and increase the risk of damage.Shops which are now placed over importantsurfaces should be moved to less vulnerableareas. Damage has been caused to historicledgers at Westminster Abbey as a result ofinstalling the brass rubbing centre and shop inthe north walk of the cloisters. Better locationshave been sought outside the Abbey, but noalternative solution has materialized.

Many cathedrals now have a shop, a refec-tory, an exhibition and a treasury. All thesefacilities add immeasurably to the experienceof the visitor and generate valuable income,but when lodged within the main body ofthe cathedral, represent an insidious increasein commercialism, and a threat to the fabric,and to the religious atmosphere.Unfortunately many chapters sold property inthe Cathedral Close to raise funds, only tofind that, with the expansion of tourism,such adjacent property was what theyneeded.

The new shop and restaurant at WinchesterCathedral have been sited in a new buildingto the southwest of the cathedral. At Norwichan interpretation centre will be housed in anew building, designed by Michael Hopkins,near the cloisters. Durham is planning toinstall more visitor facilities in the Close. AtCanterbury William Whitfield has designed anew education centre for the Close. The shopat St Paul’s Cathedral has joined the treasuryand an exhibition in the crypt. By movingsome of the larger statues, an opportunity forexcellent design has been provided in thissuperb setting.

At St George’s Chapel, Windsor, however,the shop in the Bray Chantry chapel, with itsaccretia of postcard stands, book cases andcash boxes has been visually unfortunate,and physically damaging. The floor, contain-ing many historic ledgers was, before theinstallation of the shop, in excellent condi-tion. A protective floor has now been laid,but not before considerable damage hadoccurred. The balance between providing forvisitors and damaging the fabric is a delicateone.

Unless an entrance charge is levied,donations are important, but the siting ofcollecting boxes, to minimize damage, shouldbe reviewed.

Although the intrusion of signs and regula-tions is regrettable, there is today a greaterawareness of the need for a coherent housestyle, and for siting which is not unduly disrup-tive. Signs and instructions are necessary toolsin the control of the public. Information panelsshould not, however, be placed over importantfloors, as they attract crowds and wear.

Many cathedrals now restrict the entry ofdogs, and of children with chewing gum orice-creams. None forbid shopping trolleyswhich damage both floor surfaces and delicatescreens and piers. They have no place inreligious buildings. Rucksacks should also beprohibited in small chapels containing impor-tant monuments. The provision of cloakroomscould prevent these intrusions.

Suitably placed mats at all external doorscan remove up to 95 per cent of foot-bornedirt. Door mats must therefore be consideredobligatory if the protection of floors is takenseriously. Surprisingly, very few cathedrals andchurches have installed them. This needsurgent attention. The Advisory Note on GoodPractice for the Care of Ledger Stones andOther Floor Memorials in Cathedrals issued bythe Cathedrals Fabric Commission for England(1997) recommends a conservation plan, tobalance the legitimate requirements for the useof the building with the preservation of floormemorials. This should cover management,maintenance and conservation, and be imple-mented by all cathedral personnel.

No cathedrals have controlled the entry ofthose wearing unsuitable footwear. TheNational Trust prohibits the entry of visitorswearing shoes with stiletto heels and offersslippers instead. Gibside Chapel, North-umberland, is a case in point. Much damagecould be avoided if cathedrals did the same.Overshoes were supplied to protect the tilesin the Chapter House at Westminster Abbey.The coir perimeter matting, provided byEnglish Heritage as a substitute has failed as

122 Historic Floors

it stretched, was abrasive, and created dust(see Appendix p.219). Furthermore the micro-crystalline wax applied to the tiles as a protec-tive coat discoloured the tiles. Its recentremoval with solvents may have damaged thetiles. Overshoes are once again being consid-ered. The obligatory use of overshoes iscommon in many heavily visited Europeanbuildings, and it is also a means by which thenumber of visitors can be regulated.

The best way to see an important floor isnot to stand on it, but to view it, preferablyfrom above. This has been recommended forthe medieval floor of the Martyrdom Chapel atCanterbury (see Appendix, p.207) and theprinciple should be applied to all exceptionalfloors. The medieval tile pavement recentlyrestored in the Library at Lichfield Cathedral isbeing left uncovered and public access is beingrestricted to a viewing platform at the entrance.

Covering sensitive areas seems to be theonly sensible way to protect them. However,many forms of protective covering do moreharm than good. The attempt to protectindividual brasses by covering them hasfrequently inflicted greater damage than theimpact of the feet which they were attemptingto exclude, owing to the abrasive effect of gritbeneath the mats. At Westminster Abbey thebrass to Bishop Monk in the north choir aislehas been seriously corroded by efforts toprotect it with a sheet of lead. An electro-chemical reaction was set up, rising damp wastrapped under the lead, and a process of bi-metallic corrosion developed, causing the brassto break up. At Lincoln Cathedral an importantbrass was also damaged by a lead protectivecovering, since removed. Many brasses havebeen covered with mats, often placed over arubberized underlay, which traps rising damp.Invariably mats collect dust and grit, and unlessfixed in position, scratching occurs.

Moving important brasses to protectedpositions is one answer. The other is to coverthem with a large mat with a thick felt under-lay, regularly cleaned. It is also essential tocarry out frequent inspection to ensure thatbrasses are not loose, or in danger of break-

ing up. Occasional cleaning with white spiritor a paraffin-soaked rag is recommended, butnever with metal polish, which containsabrasives and ammonia, both damaging to thesurface (William Lack, the well-knownmonumental brass conservator).

The Great Pavement at Westminster Abbey(see p.60) has for many years been coveredby a floral carpet with a rubberized underlay.This has caused more damage than wouldhave been inflicted by the feet of the clergy.This pavement, one of the glories of theAbbey, was designed to complement the highaltar. There is a strong case for leaving ituncovered, since there is no public access.Following the archaeological survey, carriedout in 1996, there is a strong possibility thatit will now be conserved, and left uncovered(see Chapter 3).

Protective wooden floors are probably theonly satisfactory method of conserving floorsof such fragility and importance. The disad-vantage is that the public are deprived of oneof the major experiences that the buildingshave to offer. Our responsibilities as conser-vators must outweigh the demands of tourism,and when a whole tiled pavement is at risk,as at Winchester, Westminster, Lichfield,Canterbury, Gloucester and SalisburyCathedrals (see Plate 29), only the exclusionof the public from the whole area can providea solution. So few medieval tiles remain thatthey cannot be regarded as expendable.

The simplest and cheapest method ofcontrol is to rope off fragile areas. Manybrasses are protected in this way. There is,however, a danger that by protecting oneimportant feature, the damage may bedeflected to another. The damage inflicted onthe pavements in Canterbury’s Trinity Chapeland Corona Chapel, including the opusAlexandrinum pavement and the pink marblepavement laid to frame the shrine of StThomas Becket in the Trinity Chapel, led totheir being roped off, but the medieval tiledfloor in the Corona Chapel is still unprotected,as are many medieval tiles elsewhere.Although the retrochoir at Winchester has


undergone a sensitive restoration, the publicare once again allowed to walk on the tiles.Stiletto heels and shopping trolleys have beenobserved since the repairs were completed.

13.3 Conclusions andrecommendations

The first requirement in protecting historicfloors is one of recognition; this has, until now,been almost entirely missing. The second, is toidentify areas of particular importance, and thethird to devise ways of controlling the overusewhich is causing the damage. Muchovercrowding could be avoided by introducingrigorous booking systems for coach parties.Too many people in confined spaces destroysthe experience for others, quite apart from thedamage it causes. It should be recognized thatlarge crowds and small chapels are incompat-ible, and that access to confined spaces shouldbe firmly controlled.

Much damage could be avoided at West-minster Abbey if entry to some of the RoyalChapels were restricted. Access to the shrinearea has recently been stopped, to preventfurther damage, and the Cosmati pavementuncovered (see Chapter 3). At Canterburyseveral chapels have been closed for protec-tion. Unfortunately, the most delicate andbeautiful decorated floors are to be found inchoir aisles, chancels and chapels, and theseare particularly vulnerable. In many housesopen to the public, small rooms are roped offfor protection. The same treatment should beapplied in ecclesiastical buildings.

In developing suitable routes for visitors,floor damage is seldom considered. At LincolnCathedral the spread of massive medievalindents in the north and south choir aisles aredirectly on the tourist route, and have noprotection (see Appendix, p.212). The floorsin the north and south choir aisles at Exeterand Ely Cathedrals contain a vulnerablemixture of medieval ledger stones and brasses.

Another requirement in the struggle toconserve floors, is to keep them clean. Crowds

create dirt, and dirt destroys. Heavy industrialcleaning equipment, often used in cathedralsand churches, can seriously damage floors andmonuments. Only domestic-sized vacuumcleaners should be used to remove dust andgrit. Strong abrasives, detergents, bleaches andpolishes should be avoided. If absolutelynecessary, a little water is preferable to the useof any cleaning agents. Water-based varnish,as has been applied to the encaustic tiles atTewkesbury Abbey and to the ledgers inKilkenny Cathedral, Ireland, and microcrys-talline wax, as used in the chapter house atWestminster Abbey, should be avoided.

The second requirement is to control unsuit-able behaviour and noise; to prevent unsuper-vised groups of school children from running,sliding and shouting; to prohibit the wearingof unsuitable shoes; and to control the entryof visitors carrying unwieldy baggage orpushing trolleys. Such practices would not bepermitted in historic houses open to thepublic, and should be rigorously monitored incathedrals, as they adversely affect visitors’perception of ecclesiastical buildings as placesapart. Silence has become such a rarecommodity, cathedrals should cherish it; itencourages respect, seemly behaviour andworship.

Above all, since floors were made to walkon and deterioration is inevitable, it is our dutyto record all the elements that make up ahistoric floor, so that important evidence is notirrevocably lost, and conservation, repair andeven replacement become possible. It is alsoimportant that, wherever practicable, wear andtear should be minimized. Recording is ofparticular importance in the case of ledgerstones, where the inscription is the principalinterest. As this is only surface deep, it is easilyobliterated. When ledgers are of exceptionalquality, owing to their age, materials, orassociations, special protection is required.Otherwise wear has to be accepted, butrecording, and occasional recutting canminimize the loss.

The repairs to the chapter house floor atWestminster Abbey by Gilbert Scott in the

124 Historic Floors

1860s, when replica tiles were introduced,were reasonably well documented. The sameis true of the Cosmati pavement atWestminster Abbey, repaired in the seven-teenth century, and again by Gilbert Scott inthe nineteenth century. A further programmeof conservation is under discussion now. Theopus Alexandrinum pavement at CanterburyCathedral was also heavily restored in thenineteenth century, and reasonable recordsexist. So long as these conservation pro-grammes are fully recorded, and carried out ina scholarly manner, there can be no criticism.The outstandingly important factor is record-ing, in order to establish what is there, beforeit is taken apart and evidence destroyed.

Regular recording at all levels, archaeologi-cal, historical, physical and environmental isincreasingly recognized as playing a key rolein the continuing life of the great buildings ofthe world. This must be the single most impor-tant message, if our outstanding historic floorsare to survive.

13.4 Experience from other countries

The restoration of some of the most famousfloors in Europe has continued throughouttheir history. Unfortunately, many of theserepairs were inadequately documented.

Many of the great mosaic pavements in Italywere moved into museums in the nineteenthcentury.

Many French medieval tiled floors werereplaced by Viollet-le-Duc. At Sainte Chapellein Paris some of the important medieval tileswere replaced with encaustic replicas in thenineteenth century.

The ecclesiastical floors of many Europeancountries have problems similar to ours, oneof escalating damage caused by intensificationof use. There are, however, few recognizedmethods of protection, little accepted policyand no concerted action.

The situation is critical, few have addressedit seriously, such solutions as have beenadopted are at best random, and there is little

co-ordination. The range of decorative floorsis enormous and includes many regional varia-tions. An international survey is urgentlyneeded to investigate the extent of theproblem, to assess the effect of presentpractices, and to collate conservation methodsand techniques. Above all, recording needs tobe encouraged internationally before any morehistorical evidence is destroyed.

13.4.1 Italy

Italy has some of the richest mosaic floors inthe world. One of the most notable, and onemost seriously threatened, is that of theBasilica of San Marco in Venice. Virtually thecomplete floor surface is covered in mosaicsdating from the ninth to the eleventhcenturies. Many have been restored. The greateleventh-century mosaics in the narthex wererelaid in concrete in the 1950s. They areincredibly rich and, owing to subsidence,undulate in remarkable waves, much admiredby Ruskin. Some are figurative, others geomet-ric. They are being damaged both by feet andby sea water penetration. The flooding of thePiazza penetrates into the narthex, floodingthe floor to a depth of 1 m. This occurs aboutforty times each year. The damage inflictedboth by the deposition of salts and by thescourging of sea water affects not only themosaics on the floors and walls, but also thefoundations. Solutions are being sought andthe installation of a combination of valves andpressure pumps to stop the water sluicing infrom the lagoon is being considered by theCity Council’s engineers.

The nave now suffers from unsightlymatting extending in front of the high altar.This appears to offer little protection to themosaics underneath, since it is loosely woven,frequently wet, and allows the passage of grit,which grinds into the mosaics below.

The magnificent Basilica of Aquileia, nearVenice, has the rare distinction of an almostperfectly preserved early Christian fourth-century mosaic pavement (see Chapter 1). Thisfloor underwent a sensitive in situ restoration


in 1983 under a UNESCO/ICCROM pro-gramme. Visitors are now required to walk onduck boards or matting, and to look down onthe floor, rather than walking on it.

Siena Cathedral contains the most famousRenaissance pavement in Italy. It is composedof fifty-six designs in marble inlay, withdesigns by over forty artists, includingPinturiccio and Beccafumi. The roundels,containing biblical scenes, alternate withgeometric borders of great subtlety. LeopoldoMaccari restored several of them in 1864–5.Attempts to protect them have included someareas being roped off, thus increasing the wearon others, and sometimes, as at present, thewhole floor being covered with a protectivewooden structure. This avoids the dangers ofrising damp and condensation, but denies thepublic the visual experience. Dr Jokilehto ofICCROM, Rome, reports that the feasibility ofcovering the entire floor with transparentprotective panels is being considered, but nosuitable material has been found. In Munich atransparent material known as Lexan has beentried. If such a material proved to be effective,many of our problems would be solved. Asthe pavement is one of the main glories of theCathedral, it is self defeating to conceal it, butirresponsible to destroy it through overuse.The usual dilemma.

In Rome, the Cosmati pavements have under-gone various repairs. Santa Sabina was restoredby Fontana in 1586–1587 and Antonio Muñozundertook excavations and repairs between1914 and 1919 which revealed a Cosmatesquepavement in the aisles. The pavement in SantaSaba was relaid in 1900–1901, during excava-tions, and again conserved in 1931 (Glass,1980). The enormous church of Santa MariaMaggiore has had the floors extensivelyconserved, funded by a recent grant from theGetty Foundation. The cathedral of Anagni isthe recipient of an EC grant to fund the currentrestoration of the pavements in the main church(restored extensively in 1880) and in the crypt(largely unrestored) and of the superb wallpaintings commemorating Thomas Becket (seeChapter 1).

13.4.2 Germany

The ledger stones which pave many of thecathedrals frequently contain a life-size effigy inrelief. These are most impressive, and needprotection. Cologne Cathedral is pavedthroughout with a remarkable mosaic floordesigned by Auguste Essenwein from 1885 (seePlates 12–14 and Figure 1.10). The mosaicsrepresent biblical scenes, and, round thechevet, portraits of the Archbishops of Cologne.There are also large areas paved with geomet-ric designs in marble, including a fictive cubedesign behind the high altar, similar to SevilleCathedral. A labyrinth pavement was designedand laid by the steps to the crypt in 1977 byDr Arnold Wolff, architect to the cathedral. DrWolff has been investigating a suitable trans-parent protective material for the mosaics.

Professor Petzet, General Conservator of theBavarian Ancient Monuments Department,reports that many historic floors in Germancathedrals and churches were destroyed, fromthe 1950s until the early 1980s, by the instal-lation of heating. There was also anxiety thatuneven surfaces could be a danger to thepublic. This destruction was carried out againstthe advice of the official conservation organi-zation, the Denkmalpflege. There is now agreater awareness of the importance of record-ing and protection, and a realization thathistoric floors form an integral part of themonument to be conserved. However, nogeneral recommendations for their treatmentexist and there is no inventory of ecclesiasti-cal floors in Germany. The few publicationsare largely concerned with repair techniques.Rolf Wihr’s book on floors, published inMunich in 1985, contains valuable technicalinformation. Marquetry floors have beenexpertly restored, after war-time damage, inmany historic buildings (see Chapter 14).

13.4.3 The Netherlands

The former Cathedral of Utrecht contains manyfine ledgers, all unprotected. Dr Arie de Groot,an authority on the building, states that ‘in the

126 Historic Floors

Netherlands most old church floors for thegreater part consist of ledger stones, many withinscriptions and sculptures. It is nearly impossi-ble to find an acceptable solution that does notdestroy the historical character. In Utrecht onlythe small Emperor stones, small lozenge-shapedinscribed stones dating from the fifteenthcentury, in the high choir, are protected byrailings. The fourteenth-century floor tiles foundin the cathedral during the restorations of 1922and 1924 are now in the Central Museum. In afew other churches there are floor carpets orperspex plates to prevent damage’.

Utrecht was an important centre for tilemaking in the thirteenth and fourteenthcenturies. Some of these tiles, and tile makers,found their way to Britain. The geometricmedieval tiled floors in Deventer Church arenot unlike those at Byland Abbey. There arestill about fifty medieval tiled floors survivingin and around Utrecht, both in churches andin medieval houses. This will be the subjectof an exhibition in Utrecht. Many of the tilepatterns have been preserved.

After 1869 there were no further burials inchurches in the Netherlands, and onlymembers of the Royal family are entitled tochurch burial today.

The official government agency, theRijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg, has nowdeveloped a policy for the repair of historicchurch floors, and recognizes their importanceas a source of information on iconography,genealogy and heraldry. They recommendthat, after recording and documentation, careshould be taken to spread the pressure pointsfrom scaffolding to avoid localized damage;plumbing and wiring should be supervised toprevent damage to graves and grave slabs;public access should be controlled to avoidwear on valuable surfaces. All work nowrequires a licence under the HistoricMonuments Act.

13.4.4 Austria and Switzerland

The historic floors of the cathedrals andabbeys of Austria are justly famous. Innsbruck

Cathedral has important marble floors, and theabbeys of Melk and St Florian contain superbmarquetry and marble floors, some of themprotected by the use of slippers. The Abbeyof St Gallen in Switzerland has, in the library,fine marquetry floors, also protected byslippers.

However, Dr Koller, Head of theGovernment Ancient Monuments ConservationDepartment in Austria, reports that, while insome areas repairs are being carried out todifferent floor types, there is no co-ordinationand no overall exchange of information ontechniques used. There are fifty volumes of theÖsterreichische Kunsttopographïe prepared bythe Bundesdenkmalamt, the official agencyand published by Schroll, which contain usefulmaterial on historic floors.

13.4.5 France

The great labyrinth pavements in Chartres,Amiens and Reims Cathedrals have beenreferred to in Chapter 1.

Many historic floors were replaced, in thenineteenth century, by Viollet-le-Duc, oftenwith encaustic tiles, which are themselveshistoric. However, there are still manyoutstanding medieval stone floors, tiles andledgers remaining. At Tournus Abbey,Provence, some early ledgers have been takenup and stacked against walls at the west end.Many historic church floors are in an appallingcondition.

There are many French publications onmedieval stone and ceramic floors and on theconservation of mosaics, but the problemsremain similar to ours, and the solutionsequally difficult.

13.4.6 Kilkenny Cathedral, Ireland

St Canice’s Cathedral, dating from c.1251,contains the most important collection ofmedieval tombs, effigies and grave slabs inIreland. The dates range from the thirteenthcentury to the late sixteenth century. The earli-est slab, of 1280, is to Jose de Kyteler, with


an inscription in Norman French. The ledgersare of exceptional interest owing to theirremarkable condition, the variety of letteringand decoration, many with black lettermarginal inscriptions. Several are to sixteenth-century craftsmen with the medieval tools ofthe trade, including adzes, an auger and acarpenter’s square; a weaver’s fly, shuttle,loom and a spool of yarn; and a shoemaker’sknives, an awl and slicker, and the sole andupper part of an Irish brogue. Some ledgerscombine a foliate cross with the instrumentsof the Passion, with the sun and moon above.

Much of the floor surface is covered in theseremarkable ledgers. Unfortunately the floormemorials are regularly treated with water-based varnish, which improves their appear-ance, but may lead to rising damp anddeterioration. A sealer is first applied, followedby Lever Brothers industrial Vision 25 polish,with a maintenance coat on top. This lasts forone year. A special remover is applied beforerepolishing. Kilkenny Cathedral had 50 000visitors in 1996.

13.4.7 Malta

The floor of the cathedral of St John in Valetta,is entirely paved with 175 coloured marbleledger stones (see Figure 1.31 on p.30 andPlates 16 and 30), some in high relief, withcoats of arms, inscriptions, trophies andfigures. The oldest ledgers date back to theearly seventeenth century; many of themrepresent the Knights of St John or the GrandMasters. Although there is little documentation,it is thought that some ledgers were designedby a local artist, Romano Carapecchia d.1738,and all were made by local craftsmen. Thereis considerable local concern about the deteri-oration of these remarkable pavements which,owing to the high relief of much of thedecoration, are susceptible to damage bystiletto heels. It was reported that afterconcerts held in the cathedral, marblefragments chipped from the ledgers by stilettoheels had to be swept up. A proposal to seal

the entire floor with a form of perspex wasrejected owing to the dangers of rising damp.Restoration work to the cathedral won aEuropa Nostra award in 1994 and furtherrestoration of the interior is underway.

References

Advisory Note on Good Practice for the Care of LedgerStones and Other Floor Memorials in Cathedrals (1997).Cathedrals Fabric Commission for England.

Care of Cathedrals Measures (1990). HMSO.Care of Churches and Eccelsiastical Jurisdiction Measure

(1991). HMSO.Cathedral Fabric Records: A guide to the care and protec-

tion of records (1995). English Heritage and CathedralsFabric Commission for England.

Cathedrals. Archaeology and Guide to Good Management:Guidance note no. 5 (1994). Cathedrals FabricCommission for England.

Easy Access to Historic Properties (disabled access) (1995).English Heritage.

English Cathedrals and Tourism: Problems and opportuni-ties (1979). English Tourist Board.

English Churches and Visitors: A survey of Anglicanincumbents (1984). English Tourist Board.

English Heritage Monitor (annual). English Tourist Board.FEEHALLY, M. (1986). Helping the Stones to Speak. Society

for the Interpretation of Britain’s Heritage.Fire Precautions Guide, revised (1997). The Churches main

Committee.Fire Safety in Cathedrals (1997). Leaflets 1–4 (including

Fire Safety Management and Evacuation of Visitors).English Heritage and Cathedrals Fabric Commission forEngland.

Heritage and Renewal: Report of the Archbishops’Commission on Cathedrals (1994). Archbishops’Commission on Cathedrals.

Inspection of Churches Measure (1955). HMSO.Joint Grant Scheme for Churches and Other Places of

Worship: Guidance notes for applicants (1996). EnglishHeritage and the National Heritage Lottery Fund.

LEISHMAN, M. Visitors to Cathedrals. A study of visitors andthe role of the staff who receive them. INSITE.

New Work in Historic Churches (in press). EnglishHeritage.

Nicholson’s Guide to English Churches (1984). EnglishTourist Board.

Planning Policy Guidance Note PPG16 (1990). Departmentof the Environment and HMSO.

PPG15: Planning and the Historic Environment (1994).Department of National Heritage and HMSO.

WADE, R. AND JOHNSON, R. (1983) Presenting Cathedrals tothe Visitor: A case study of Lincoln Cathedral. EnglishTourist Board.

WIHR, R. (1985). Füssboden, Stein, Mosaik, Keramik, Estirch- Geschichte, Herstellung, Konservierrung. Munich;Callwey.

WINTER, M. (1993). Surveys of Visitors to Four EnglishCathedrals.

128 Historic Floors

14.1 Floor tiles

The history of ceramic floors can be tracedback to the ancient Egyptians, who, as earlyas the twelfth century BC, covered their brickfloors with stucco, on which designs werepainted. Ceramic turquoise blue tiles wereproduced in Egypt in the fourth millenniumBC and decorated with lines scratched in theclay before glazing. Coloured and glazed relieftiles were made by the Assyrians andBabylonians in Mesopotamia between thethirteenth and fifth centuries BC, and in thefifth century BC in Persia, to decorate thepalaces of the Achemid Kings.

The Islamic tile tradition, dating back toMohammed, spread to Syria, Palestine,Mesopotamia, Persia, Egypt and North Africa asa major decorative element, and reached Spainin 711 AD. Persia was the centre from whichthe techniques used for Islamic tile productionspread all over Europe. Lustre painted tiles, andrelief decorated tiles, were used together tocreate decorative schemes. Tile mosaic,composed of geometric designs cut from glazedslabs, was developed by the Seljuks in Konya,central Turkey (Herbert and Huggins, 1995).

Owing to the lack of marble and colouredstones in north Europe, inlaid ceramic floor tileswere developed in northern France in the mid-thirteenth century, and their use spread toBritain and the Low Countries. The earliestinlaid tiles were made from limestone, found inMarquise, near St Omer. The white limestonewas cut into tiles, polished, the design drawn,the background cut away and filled withcoloured mastic. This technique, known aschamplevé, was later adapted to clay tiles,stamped while still wet with a wooden stamp,the decoration filled with white clay, dried,glazed and fired. The glaze contained leadwhich brought out the colours. The burning inof the coloured clay inlays created the termencaustic (Herbert and Huggins, 1995).

The designs used for medieval tiles includedheraldic animals, foliage, and geometricalforms, huntsmen with stags and hounds, andknights on horseback. Although a fewmedieval domestic pavements have survived,mostly in museums, tiles were used to pavemany larger buildings, from the fourteenth tothe mid-sixteenth centuries. The tiles weresquare and placed in groups of four, nine orsixteen, with plain tiles in between.

129

14

Secular buildingsTile, mosaic and marble pavements, parquetryfloors and carpets

Jane Fawcett

The first tile patron in Britain was KingHenry III who set up a royal tilery atWestminster, from which floor tiles were madefor Westminster Palace in 1237 (see Chapter1). For St Stephen’s Chapel and the Queen’sChapel marble altar steps were ordered, but ‘ifthat marble should not be sufficient for bothworks, then to cause those steps (of theQueen’s Chapel) to be made of painted tile’.In 1241 Henry ordered ‘the whole of our hallat Winchester Castle to be paved, withdecorated tiles on the upper step’. He wenton to pave the ‘King’s chamber and theQueen’s Chamber, and the Chamber ofEdward, the King’s son, with flat tile’ in 1252.At the same time the floors of ClarendonPalace, the King’s favourite residence werepaved with ‘a pavement of tiles in the King’sDemesne chapel and in that of the oriel’, andthe King’s and Queen’s rooms. One of thechapels was paved with a circular design,similar to the Muchelney Abbey pavement(Wood, 1965).

Part of the Queen’s Chamber was excavatedin 1935 and the tiled floor, which pre-datedthe Westminster Abbey chapter house, wasfound in situ, and moved to the BritishMuseum. The Clarendon tiles, which were red,green, yellow and brown, were arranged inpanels, containing heraldic lions and griffins,with a geometric design of lattice work withfoliated crosses. The tiles came from theWessex School and resembled those inWinchester Cathedral (Eames, 1992).

In 1365 Henry Yevele supplied ‘8000 tiles ofFlanders for the paving of floors and otherwork’ in the Palace of Westminster (Salzman,1952). Two-thousand painted tiles were usedto pave Richard II’s bathroom in 1385 atSheen. The survival rate for ecclesiastical tileshas been higher than for domestic, althoughtwo early fourteenth-century tiled pavementswere found recently, in situ, at Clifton House,King’s Lynn.

Flemish tiles were imported into Britain forsecular buildings by the later fourteenthcentury. These included plain tiles (green andyellow) which were imported in their

thousands. By the sixteenth century tileworkshops were established in Rouen andLyons, and in Antwerp and Bruges. InlaidFlemish tiles from Antwerp were brought toBritain by Lord Sandys for the Chapel at TheVyne, Hampshire, c.1520 (see Plate 31). Heacquired these in Boulogne, when he wasTreasurer of Calais. Cardinal Wolsey, a leadingpatron, while Abbot of St Albans (1520–1530),tiled the floor of the hall at The More,Rickmansworth with Flemish tiles (Wood,1965). For Hampton Court, in 1535 ‘Flemyshepaving tyll of greene and jowllo’ (yellow) werebought, at 5s the 1000 (Salzman, 1952).

Christopher Norton has established theexistence of a flourishing trade in the importof plain earthenware tiles covered in yellowand green-black glaze to sites all over Englandand Scotland, particularly along the east coast.These came from the Low Countries from thelate fourteenth century to the sixteenthcentury, and were used in both ecclesiasticaland secular buildings.

In Scotland, Linlithgow Palace had, in thepresence chamber, an ornamental floor ofstone and green tiles in a chequered design.There is a replica floor there today. Some ofthe tiles were inlaid with the initials of JamesIV and his wife Margaret Tudor, and datedbetween 1503, the date of their marriage, and1513 when James died. These may have beenproduced locally (Norton, 1994). There was arevival of interest in patterned tiles during thesixteenth century, often decorated with thearms or heraldry of the owners. This wasevident both in England and in Scotland, andmore or less coincided with the decline in theproduction of ecclesiastical tiles. One of thelast dated uses of inlaid tiles in secular build-ings in England were those made for SirWilliam Sharington in 1550 for his recon-structed Lacock Abbey.

In Scotland, decorated relief tiles have beenfound in Dirleton (see Figure 14.1), Tantallonand Niddry Castles. These tiles, which areclosely linked with Mary Queen of Scotsthrough their owners, the Lords Ruthven andSeton, represent court taste of the 1550s. They

130 Historic Floors

are contemporary with the three splendid tilepavements at the Château of Chenonceaux(see Plates 32 and 33) and those in theChâteau of Blois, owned by Mary Queen ofScot’s father-in-law, Henry II, who died in1559 (Norton, 1994).

During the Renaissance brick and earthen-ware tiles were widely used in Italy. Terracottatiles were used in various shapes and patterns,including the herringbone design, where theywere set on edge. This was later adapted toparquetry.

Polished brick floors were laid by Pope PiusII in his new mansion in Pienza in the 1460sand were, writes Peter Thornton (Thornton,1991), ‘without any uneveness whatsoever’.The Villa Lante at Bagnaia contains a bricktiled floor with the owner’s coat of arms. Two-tone terracotta tiles, arranged in geometricdesigns, were used to pave floors from thefifteenth century until the late eighteenthcentury. A fine example exists in the mid-sixteenth century Palazzo Farnese at Caprarolawhere black marble sections were inserted to

give contrast. The main staircase in thePalazzo Farnese in Rome by Sangallo, 1517,and Michelangelo, 1546, is paved withcontrasted, geometric terracotta tiles. TheAldobrandini, Torlonia, Spada, Sacchetto andMassimo Palaces in Rome are also floored withtwo-toned terracotta pavements.

From the seventeenth century all-overdesigns, imitating marble or carpets, wereproduced in Southern Italy. A flourishing tradi-tion of these hand-made tiles centred onNaples. Owing to the expense of individuallydesigned pavements, the use of these tiles wasconfined to aristocratic patrons, and tochurches. The designs often incorporated thefamily coat of arms, running across severaltiles. There is a fine example in the Palazzoof the Prince of Sangro in Naples, of 1710(Donato). Majolica floor tiles were made inNaples in the fifteenth century and also inFlorence, where polychrome glazed terracottafloor tiles were also made in the Della Robbiaworkshops.

The fashion for Flemish or Dutch tiles,based on Antwerp, Bruges and Delft, led tothe import of Dutch tiles to Britain, mostly forfireplaces, during the sixteenth and seven-teenth centuries, with a revival in thenineteenth century. Dutch potters moved toEngland in the seventeenth century, andEnglish Delftware was made in tile workshopsin Liverpool and Bristol. The interest in Dutchtiles was promoted by William and Mary, whowere familiar with Delft tiles in Holland. Theyappointed Daniel Marot to decorate theQueen’s Dairy at Hampton Court with tilesfrom Delft. This led to the fashion for tileddairies, which continued throughout theeighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Thedairies at Althorp, Northamptonshire, built in1786, and at Endsleigh, Devon, built in 1815for the Duke of Bedford, were decorated withWedgwood tiles, while Mintons tiled PrinceAlbert’s Royal Dairy at Windsor in 1858.

Dutch tiles were not confined to Britain. InFrance, the Chateau of Beauregard on theLoire has, on the floor of the portrait gallery,6000 Delft tiles, laid in 1646. In Germany, the

Secular buildings 131

Figure 14.1 Dirleton Castle, Lothian, Scotland. Floortiles, 1566–1584, showing Ruthven arms, reconstructedby James Richardson, 1928–1929 (Photograph, CrownCopyright. Reproduced by courtesy of Historic Scotland)

whole of the ground floor of theNymphenburg Palace, near Munich, waspaved with Dutch tiles in 1716–1719 (Gilbertet al., 1987).

The rediscovery of a native British traditionof medieval ceramic tiles took place duringexcavations of the nineteenth century. It wassaid that ‘an art lost to us for 500 years isbeing relearned and restored to practicalutility. Under the very feet of our ancestors,unheeded for centuries, lay the patterns fromwhich our most modern ceramic floors arereally derived’ (Furnival, 1904).

In his Encyclopaedia of Cottage, Farm andVilla Architecture and Furniture of 1833 J.C.Loudon included thirteen designs forpavements in different coloured bricks,suitable for the hall and passages. HerbertMinton’s first catalogue of 1835 showeddesigns based on medieval examples. Hereceived many of his earlier designs, however,from Augustus Welby Pugin (see Chapter 1)who, in 1837, was commissioned at the age oftwenty-four, to redesign a house, in the Gothicstyle, for Charles Scarisbrick, a rich Lancashirelandowner (see Plate 34). Between 1837 and1845 the house was remodelled, and Minton’stiles were used to pave the great hall and themain corridor. Pugin also produced floor tiledesigns, decorated with the Talbot crest, forthe remodelling of Alton Towers, commis-sioned by the Earl of Shrewsbury, one ofPugin’s leading patrons.

Their next collaboration concerned thePalace of Westminster, between 1847 and 1852(see Chapter 18). Pugin wrote to HerbertMinton enclosing sketches: ‘I am now makingout the drawings for an immense quantity oftile floors for the Palace of Westminster askingthat you will submit an estimate. If these arecarried out they will be a grand work for you,for never was tiling used on such a scale’.Pugin said in 1852 ‘they are the best tiles inthe world, and I think my patterns and yourworkmanship go ahead of anything’ (Ferrey,1861).

Sir Charles Barry installed Minton pavementsat Trentham Hall, Staffordshire and at Cliveden

House, Buckinghamshire, both rebuilt for the2nd Duke of Sutherland. Neither has survived.The pavement at Cliveden had a border ofwhite cherubs, with Corinthian columnssupporting allegorical figures and a head ofMedusa in the centre. Barry’s Neo-classicalReform Club, London, of 1840 contains in thesaloon a tiled floor with designs based onEtruscan vase motifs with a key fret border. Inthe four corners are the initials of CharlesBarry and his craftsmen.

Prince Albert’s interest in floor tiles wasaroused at a meeting of the British Associationin 1843, at which Minton exhibited his newprocess. This led to Minton’s commission totile the main corridors at Osborne House in1845 (see Plates 35 and 36). Sir Matthew DigbyWyatt, who had a business association withMinton, designed the floor tiles, probably withadvice from Prince Albert. The tiled floorsblended with the pastel coloured plasterworkand fabrics.

Mintons provided a remarkable array of tilesfor Prince Albert’s Royal Dairy of 1858 atFrogmore, Windsor, designed by JohnThomas. The floors, walls, columns, andfriezes are all spectacularly tiled, using Mintonsnew majolica glaze. The attractive floor tileshave a non-slip surface. Mintons were subse-quently commissioned to supply floor tiles forboth Windsor Castle and Sandringham in the1880s.

The growth of interest in encaustic tilesgrew rapidly during the 1840s, fuelled byRoyal patronage, and in 1847 the Society ofArts drew attention, in an exhibition of‘Mosaics, Encaustics and other Tiles, to a modeof decoration which all ages and countrieshave employed, and which has only fallen intoneglect within the last two centuries’ (Jones,1993).

Owen Jones (1809–1874) was a primemover in the development of tile design. HisDesigns for Mosaic Pavements, published in1842 and Encaustic Pavements (1843) had aconsiderable influence, and illustrated ancienttiles. These were followed by his famousGrammar of Ornament published in 1856 (see

132 Historic Floors

Plates 38, 39 and 40). This drew its inspirationfrom a wide range of design sources, includ-ing Moorish and Pompeian examples. SirMatthew Digby Wyatt, with Owen Jones,supervised the fine arts section of the GreatExhibition in 1851, and designed the Mintontiled pavement of the Pompeian House. Bothworked for Herbert Minton.

Digby Wyatt collaborated with Gilbert Scottover the designs for the encaustic tiles in theForeign Office (see Figures 14.2, 14.3 andPlate 41) and the India Office. Wyatt alsodeveloped an interest in Moorish tiles and hisMoorish majolica tiles were displayed in theGreat Exhibition of 1862. He also advisedHenry Cole on the tiles used extensively at theSouth Kensington Museum (the Victoria andAlbert Museum). The tiles in the CentralRefreshment Room, 1868–1870, were by Maws,those on the remarkable ceramic staircase

were by Minton, designed by F.W. Moody.Each riser of the staircase is tiled. The wholeis a triumph in ceramics.

The Maw brothers, who eventually estab-lished their factory at Broseley, in theIronbridge Gorge, became interested inmedieval tiles found in a local church, anddecided to copy them. A clay tile was made,and while still moist, impressed with a designin white pipe clay, which, when fired, showedsome resemblance to the medieval tile,although the pipe clay had shrunk away fromthe background, and pieces had fallen out.The differential shrinking of the infill and thedifficulty of obtaining an even surface tooksome time to resolve. The making, decoratingand firing of tiles often took place in differentbut adjacent buildings within one factory. Theinput of raw materials, and the output of thefinished product, were closely co-ordinated.


Figure 14.2 The Foreign Office, London, 1861. SirGeorge Gilbert Scott. Grand Staircase in 1896(Photograph, Bedford Lemere. National MonumentsRecord)

Figure 14.3 The Foreign Office, London, 1861. SirGeorge Gilbert Scott. Grand Staircase. Detail ofencaustic tile floor panel in staircase hall. Minton(Photograph, National Monuments Record)

George and Arthur Maw were not onlypioneers in the successful manufacture ofencaustic tiles, but also pioneered the study ofmedieval prototypes, both in England andabroad. George Maw was an avid traveller,and a keen botanist. He drew medieval floorsin Italy, and flowers found on an expeditionto the High Atlas Mountains in Morocco withSir Joseph Hooker. He was an authority oncrocuses, many of which he grew in hisgarden at Benthall, Salop, now owned by theNational Trust. Arthur Maw developed thetechniques of production, took out twentypatents for the company, and wrote an author-itative account of tile making for theEncyclopaedia Britannica. By 1870 Maws hadbecome the largest tile manufacturer in theworld (Herbert and Huggins, 1995).

Encaustic tile making in France centred, in1848, near Beauvais, where a firm was estab-lished by Jean-Baptiste Boulenger. Boulengersmade encaustic tiles for Viollet-le-Duc, theFrench Gothic Revival architect.

An interest in Moorish tiles was aroused byvolumes of colour lithographs, Encyclopaedie

des Arts Decoratifs de l’Orient, published inFrance between 1871 and 1883. These alsohad repercussions in Italy.

The fashion for tiled entrance halls grewrapidly during the mid-nineteenth century, andmany leading country house architectsemployed Mintons or Maws. At Wimpole Hall,Cambridgeshire, H.E. Kendall remodelled theseventeenth-century entrance hall for the 4thEarl of Hardwicke, in the 1840s. The encaus-tic tiled floor incorporates the Hardwicke mottoand monogram and the welcome, Salve (Figure14.4). A key fret border completes the scheme.The entrance hall at Somerleyton Hall, Suffolk,designed by John Thomas for Sir Morgan Peto,the contractor in 1844–1851, was also tiled.Even more exotic, grandiose, and out of itsperiod, was the 3rd Marquis of Bute’s CardiffCastle, remodelled by the neo-medievalistWilliam Burges from 1865. Tiles were used inmany of the rooms. In the summer smokingroom, a map of the ancient world issurrounded by circles of ships and whales onthe floor. The walls are decorated with paintedtile patterns, and with the signs of the zodiac.

Gilbert Scott decorated the floors of manyof his buildings with encaustic tiles; theybecame a key note of his work. After KelhamHall, Nottinghamshire, was destroyed by fireScott’s instructions were to build a fire-proofhouse. Encaustic pavements fitted excellentlyinto this requirement and Scott paved thecorridors, the carriage court, and the northstaircase pavement with Minton tiles in 1857.Some of his designs show a distinct resem-blance to the Great Pavement at WestminsterAbbey, which he restored in 1863–69 (seeChapter 1).

Tiles also provided a cheap and colourfulflooring for many public buildings. Scott’slavish pavements for the Foreign Office andIndia Office add an important dimension tothe interiors. The staircase hall for the opulentAmbassador’s Staircase, for which Clayton andBell supplied the mural decoration, is pavedwith mosaic tiles in a plaited design with acentral roundel, inscribed with QueenVictoria’s coat of arms (see Figures 14.2 and

134 Historic Floors

Figure 14.4 Wimpole Hall, Cambridgeshire, c.1793,Soane, and c.1840, Kendall. Encaustic tiled pavement.Entrance hall, c.1840. Kendall (Photograph, JaneFawcett)

14.3). Many of the corridors are paved withgeometric tiles.

Scott also designed tiled pavements for theMidland Grand Hotel at St Pancras. In thereception lobby he used an elaborate mixtureof encaustic and geometric tiles, connectedwith mosaic bands. A similar mixture, althoughless elaborate, is found in the corridors. Thepaved floors were designed to complementthe mosaic panels and painted and stencilleddecoration on the walls.

The entrance halls and corridors of count-less banks, town halls, clubs, museums, shopsand public houses all over Britain were alsopaved with encaustic tiles.

Bunning’s London Coal Exchange of1846–1849 had a tiled floor, accompanied byhand-painted wall tiles. For William Tite’sRoyal Exchange, London, 1841–1844, HenryPether designed a tiled pavement based on theCosmati pavement at Westminster Abbey (seePlate 37). Cuthbert Brodrick’s Town Hall of1853–1858 in Leeds has a tiled floor in theentrance hall composed of ‘civic encaustics’.The Rochdale town hall by Crossland, 1871,contained Minton floor tiles decorated with theRoyal arms, the whole design by HeatonButler and Bayne. Local insignia and coats ofarms were a popular theme for town halls.

Charles Eastlake said in Hints on HouseholdTaste (Eastlake, 1868) published in Britain andin America: ‘The best mode of treating a hall-floor . . . is to pave it with encaustic tiles. Thisbranch of art-manufacture has not onlyreached great technical perfection . . . butaided by the designs supplied by many archi-tects . . . it has gradually become a means ofdecoration which for beauty of effect, durabil-ity, and cheapness, has scarcely a parallel’.

Between 1870 and c.1900 over one hundredfirms were manufacturing floor tiles, many ofthem based in the Staffordshire pottery towns,including Wedgwoods, who specialized intransfer printing. The Pilkington Tile andPottery Company employed Walter Crane andCharles Voysey to design hand-coloured tiles.

William De Morgan, from 1863, designedtiles for Morris, Marshall and Faulkner. From

the 1870s De Morgan set up his own studioin Chelsea where he specialized in hand-made, hand-coloured tiles. He developed over300 designs, some of them based on fifteenth-and sixteenth-century traditions, and took aspecial interest in lustre decoration. One of hismost famous commissions was for the ArabHall in Lord Leighton’s house in Holland ParkRoad, of 1879. Many of the tiles were fromLord Leighton’s Middle Eastern collection. Thefloor mosaics imitated Roman precedents. DeMorgan moved to the Fulham pottery wherehe went into partnership, first with HalseyRicardo, with whom he collaborated over theremarkable Debenham House, No. 8 AddisonRoad, much of which was tiled and, in the1890s, with Charles and Fred Passenger andFrank Iles.

As the nineteenth century progressed, manyleading artists designed tiles, includingChristopher Dresser, Walter Crane, Sir EdwardPoynter and John Moyr Smith. These wereexported all over the world.

In 1902 the tiled meat hall of Harrods wascompleted to designs by W.J. Neatby. Thefloor is paved with a black and white octagonand square design, the famous carreauxoctagones. J. Sainsbury continued to pavemany of their stores with Minton tiles, oftenin mosaic and geometric designs, until theSecond World War.

14.2 Mosaic and scagliola

Black and white mosaic floors existed inGreece and Sicily from the fourth century BC.One of the finest examples is in the palace ofPhilip II of Macedon, father of Alexander theGreat, at Pella, near Thessalonika (see Plate42). The palace was decorated with superbmosaic floors, dating from the end of thefourth century BC. The main courtyard has amagnificent mosaic floor of white andblue/grey lozenges, still in situ. The house ofDionysus contained a lion hunt pavement, anda portrait of Dionysus riding a panther. TheHouse of the Abduction of Helen contained a


wonderful deer hunt, surrounded by a delicateborder of leaves and flowers. Helen’s abduc-tion, in a chariot pulled by several horses, isalso dramatically portrayed. The sophisticationof these floors, now in the Pella archaeologi-cal museum, and the freshness of the colours,is quite astonishing. The site, reported byChrystostom in the second century AD asreduced to a quantity of broken roof tiles, andused for many years as a source of buildingmaterials, was first excavated in 1914.

Mosaic floors were composed of a mortarbase, laid on gravel, into which colouredtesserae, or marble cubes, were set while themortar was still wet. Alternatively the patternor cartoon was drawn on a linen base towhich the tesserae then were glued, facedownwards, and subsequently set in mortar asbefore. The linen was soaked off when themortar had set. This method dates back to theHellenistic period. The original cartoon panelsare known as ‘emblemata’.

Mosaic tesserae were made of small squarescut or knapped from large slabs of marble orstone. The sizes of the tesserae varied from 4to 12.5 mm. Some were of coloured glass, andsome gilded. Softer material, chalk for example,was sawn into bars, which were then struckwith a hammer and chisel. Pincers were usedto place the tesserae in position. The musivar-ius, or mosaic worker, was not normally thedesigner, and remained anonymous. Cato,writing in the first century BC, said that theclient paid for the materials, and paid the crafts-man only for his labour. Diocletian in 302 ADwrote that a wall painter was paid three timesmore than a mosaic worker. The professionalmosaic designer may have been working frompattern books; each mosaic ‘officina’ had itsown repertory of designs with guidelines tohelp its mosaicists (Johnson, 1995).

It is impossible here to do justice to thevariety and quality of the many survivingRoman mosaic floors in Italy and Sicily. A fewexamples will have to suffice. There areoutstanding polychromatic floors of the fourthcentury AD at Casale, near Piazza Armerina,Sicily. This was the hunting villa of a Roman

governor of the third or fourth century BC. Thevilla was discovered and excavated from the1950s and contains an astonishing range ofmosaics. The great hunting scene shows thegovernor, standing between two shield bearers,wearing an embroidered cape reaching to theankles, a tradition later adapted by theChristian church. This enormous compositionincludes riders, beaters, oxen carts, pullingcages for wild animals, lions, tigers, gazelles,buffaloes and hippopotami. In the centre is alake with boats and bridges. The hunters weartunics and capes. In another room are tenspirited female athletes wearing the Romanequivalent of bikinis, in another winged puttipicking grapes, and, in a lunette, an allegori-cal figure, between elephants and tigers,holding a cornucopia and an elephant’s tusk.

Bernard Berenson believed that the crafts-men came from Carthage and that the mosaicsresemble North African examples. One of thegreatest early polychrome mosaics, the ‘Battleof Alexander and Darius’ of the first centuryAD, is now in the Naples Museum (Berenson,1960). There is a fine Nile mosaic in theBarberini Palace at Praeneste, Palestrina.

In Cologne, Germany, the superb RomanDionysian floor mosaic, once in a house oftwenty rooms lying to the south of the cathe-dral, was excavated in 1941. After deteriora-tion, owing to rising damp, the whole floorwas rolled up and removed, new foundationswere provided, and the mosaic reinstated onits original site (Figure 14.5). Spain is also richin Roman mosaics. Cordoba, Merida, and Italo,near Seville, all have good Roman mosaicpavements.

Many of the beautiful black-and-whiteRoman mosaics so common in central Italyhave now been excavated. A notable exampleis at Hadrian’s Villa, Tivoli, where a numberof mosaic floors, mostly with black-and-whitegeometric designs, have been uncovered(Figure 14.6). There are several mosaic floorsat Pompeii, one recently excavated.

In Rome classical floor mosaics werefrequently found, buried beneath rubble.These were incorporated into later floors,

136 Historic Floors

within the new buildings constructed on thesite. The fashion for mosaic floors was revivedduring the Renaissance, and many of theearlier designs copied. A combination of

geometric marble floors with mosaics alsobecame popular at this period (Donato).

Terrazzo, or opus signinum, another tradi-tional Italian floor, was often employed by


Figure 14.5 Cologne, Germany. Second century AD. Roman villa. Dionysius mosaic floors. Details. (a) Basket ofplants (b) Peacock (Photographs, by kind permission of Römisch-Germanisches Museum der Stadt, GrevenBechthold, Cologne)

(a) (b)

Figure 14.6 Tivoli, near Rome, Italy. Hadrian’s Villa, 120 AD. Floor mosaic (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Palladio. Terrazzo floors were composed ofsmall fragments of marble and stone mixedwith stucco or mortar and laid on a screed ofweak concrete. When set, the surface wasground and polished. They were frequentlydecorated with patterned borders, andoccasionally embellished with coronets. Thesefloors, known as Palladiana or Veneziana, arestill made today. In Friuli, the area betweenVenice and Trieste framed by the mountainsand the sea, the charming classical villascontain some terrazzo floors and someparquet. The Villa Manin at Passariano, builtfor the Manin family between 1652 and 1659,is one of the grandest. Napoleon, who stayedthere in 1797 said it was fit for a doge. Thevilla faces an immense semi-circular courtyard,surrounded by arcaded loggias. Many of therooms are floored with terrazzo, the salon withthe Manin coronet in the centre. The chapelhas an unusually splendid marble floor andthe stables are paved with mosaics.

More elaborate floors are in the CastelloReale di Raconigi near Turin, altered andredecorated for King Carlo Alberto by PelagioPalagi in 1834. The Etruscan room has asuperb mosaic pavement, depicting dolphinsand sea gods, with an anthemion and palmettemotif repeated on the walls, decorated withEtruscan scenes. The composition is a tour deforce. The Raconigi contains several otherimportant marble and scagliola floors (Grant,1967).

Pebble mosaics, made by setting pebbles ofcontrasted colours in mortar, were usedexternally in courtyards, stables and gardens,often laid in attractive patterns (see Plate 44).The technique goes back to Classical Greece.It was widespread in Italy during thesixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenthcenturies. There are many examples in thevillas of the Veneto and in Rome. The stepsof the orangery in the Villa Medici aredecorated with a pebble mosaic of the 1580sportraying fish and birds in contrastedcolours (see Plate 45).

In Britain, the more homespun Romano-British mosaics were made from local materi-

als providing the basic colours of red, whiteand blue. Brick and tiles, chalk, limestone andblue lias were cut into cubes, and set intopatterns. Variants were obtained by the use ofgreensand or Purbeck marble for green,Pennant sandstone for purple and grey,ironstone for brown, and shale for black.Imported marble was occasionally used, andalso glass tesserae, cut from blue or greenbottles, used to highlight birds’ tails or gladi-ators’ costumes (Johnson, 1995).

At the Palace of Fishbourne, nearChichester, discovered in the 1960s, only asmall part has been excavated; as at Pompeiiand Herculaneum much of it still lies undermodern housing developments. The earliestfloors of this Flavian palace, dating from thefirst century AD are among the finest Romanmosaics in Britain. Some contain geometriclozenge designs giving a false perspective, ofa type seen in seventeenth-century floors inBritain. Later mosaics, depicting cherubs ridingon dolphins and other sea monsters, arecontained in roundels with guilloche borders,alternating with wine cups or Cantherusmotifs. They are remarkably spirited, and insome ways reminiscent of Piazza Armerina.Out of over sixty mosaics originally laid, onlyeighteen survive in part.

The Roman villa at Chedworth, Gloucester-shire, was discovered by a gamekeeper, in1864. Excavation of much of the site tookplace within the next two years, funded by theEarl of Eldon, the owner. It passed to theNational Trust in 1924. The villa dates fromthe early second century AD and wasoccupied until the late fourth century. Themosaic floors were composed of red tilechippings, white limestone, Forest of Deanpurple sandstone, and liassic blue and greylimestone (see Plate 43). The dining roomcontained mosaics of Bacchus with drunkensatyrs. Other rooms are decorated withgeometric designs including key fret,guilloche, and scroll leaf patterns. Over fortymosaics have been attributed to the craftsmenwho designed this pavement, all from the westcountry, and all laid during the late third and

138 Historic Floors

early fourth centuries AD. Several includeOrpheus with his lute.

The figure mosaics at Bignor, Sussex ofc.300 AD include Medusa, Diana with cupidsas gladiators, and a delightful dolphin panel,by the master mosaicist Terentius (Johnson,1995). Littlecote Park, Wiltshire, has a famousOrpheus mosaic, discovered in 1727 andrestored in 1979, a restoration made possibleowing to the remarkably detailed recordingsmade by Samuel Lysons when the floor wasfirst discovered (Neal, 1981).

Of the 1500 mosaics recorded in Britainsince the seventeenth century, most are nowlost (Johnson, 1995). Antiquarians, from thelate seventeenth century onwards, delighted inuncovering mosaic floors, recording them, andoften leaving them to deteriorate. The destruc-tive effects of rain and frost on exposedpavements was not fully understood.

Stuart Piggott, in Antiquity Depicted (Piggott,1978), states that while many eighteenth-century archaeological records were inaccu-rate, Roman mosaic pavements in a Classicalidiom that could be understood were oftenaccurately portrayed. For example, GeorgeVertue recorded the Littlecote, Wiltshire,mosaic in 1730 with considerable accuracy.Vandergucht’s engraving of 1723 of thepavement at Ridge, Wiltshire, and BattyLangley’s of Stainsfield near Woodstock,Oxfordshire, in 1736, are some of the earliestmosaics to be recorded. Monumenta,published in 1737, illustrated pavements atCotterstock, Northamptonshire, and Wellow,near Bath. George Vertue, in 1747, madeengravings of a pavement at Hovingham,Yorkshire, for the Earl of Burlington.Pavements in Colchester were published inVetusta Monumenta in 1794. TheWoodchester, Gloucestershire, pavement wasdrawn by Richard Bradley in 1722, recordedby the Comte de Caylus in his Receuild’Antiquités in 1756, and engraved by Lysonsin 1787 (Gilbert et al., 1987).

Samuel Lysons (1763–1819) and WilliamFowler (1761–1832) published very fine hand-tinted engravings, which are often the only

recording that exists today of the mosaics.Fowler, an architect and antiquary, recordedRoman and early medieval mosaic pavements,some of which he had discovered himself inLincolnshire, where he lived. His engravings,which also included medieval tiled pavementsand monumental brasses, were publishedbetween 1796 and 1823. He recorded thethirteenth-century pavement in St ThomasBecket’s chapel at Canterbury, and the Romanmosaic pavements at Woodchester, Glouc-estershire, Littlecote, Wiltshire, Winterton,Roxby and Stonesfield, Lincolnshire, andCastle Howard, Yorkshire. This publicationfollowed the series of engraved plates ofmosaic pavements and wall paintings atPompeii, issued by the Neapolitan govern-ment. The accuracy of these engravings andthe remarkable quality of the hand colouringattracted widespread interest.

Various attempts were made to promote theuse of mosaic floors. Sir Henry Wooton, in1624, in The Elements of Architecture, haddescribed mosaic as ‘an ornament in trueth ofmuch beauty, and long life, but of most usein pavements and floorings’.

Chambers’ Cyclopaedia in 1738, recom-mended ‘mosaic work’ for ‘The fine effect anduse of pavements, composed of pieces ofmarble so well joined together, as that whendried they might be polished, and the wholemake a very beautiful and solid body, whichcontinually trodden upon, and washed withwater, was not at all damaged’.

The Penny Cyclopaedia in 1839 stated ‘Thefloor of the Rotunda of the Bank of Englandis now ornamented in black and white withcompartments radiating from the centre; andsuch pavements certainly recommend them-selves for conservatories, terraces, etc.Although mosaic itself is by far too expensivefor any but very rare occasions, the effect ofit may be obtained, and the beauty of itspatterns produced in stain-cloth flooring’(Gilbert et al., 1987).

Owen Jones, in Designs for Mosaic andTesselated Pavements, 1842, outlined thepractical difficulties:


About forty years ago, a patent was obtainedby Mr C. Wyatt for a mode of imitatingTesselated Pavement by inlaying stone withcoloured cement. Floors thus constructed,however, were found liable to become unevenin use, in consequence of the unequalhardness of the materials; which defectprevented their general adoption. Terra cotta,inlaid with coloured cements has also beentried and found liable to the same objection.During the last ten years, cements colouredwith metallic oxides have been used by MrBlashfield to produce imitations of the ancientTesselated Pavements; and for work protectedfrom the weather, the material appears to haveanswered tolerably well . . . Three years ago,Mr Blashfield succeeded in constructing anextensive and elaborate inlaid pavement, onthe plan of the Venetian Pise floors. It wasmade after designs finished by H.S. Hope Esqat whose country-seat (Deepdene) in Surrey(now demolished), it was laid down.

Blashfield, who imported Italian marble for histesserae, also collaborated with Mintons toproduce a patent porcelain mosaic tile.

Roman mosaic pavements excavated in the

City of London, including the Bank ofEngland, 1805, followed by pavements inThreadneedle Street, 1841, Fenchurch Street,1857 and Bucklersbury, 1869, influenced tilemanufacturers, including Minton and Maw.

George Maw was involved in 1857 with theexcavations of the mosaic pavements inVivoconium, Shropshire, and shortly after-wards, in 1860, started the production ofmosaic tiles, at Broseley, the family worksnearby. George Maw’s interest in tiles andmosaics increased after his travels in Italy in1861. He sketched a number of mosaic floors,including the pavement in St Mark’s, Venice(see Chapter 1). Italian marble pavements alsoinspired many of Maw’s geometric tiles, andthe range was extended when he visited themedieval tiled floors of Rievaulx and BylandAbbey (Herbert and Huggins, 1995).

In 1864 Maws patented a form of tile mosaicwhich was subsequently used by othermanufacturers. The tiles were made of pressedclay dust. The face was then indented withlines representing the joints between thetesserae. When the tiles were laid on the floor,

140 Historic Floors

Figure 14.7 The NationalGallery, London. The mainstaircase 1885–1887, Sir JohnTaylor. West vestibulemosaics by Boris Anrep, from1928, ‘Defiance’, c.1942(Photograph, National GalleryPhotographic Library)

these lines were filled with cement, creating theimpression of a real mosaic. Mintons also madeblock-printed tiles to simulate mosaics, many ofwhich are recorded in their pattern books.

The lifting of many Roman mosaicpavements led the Duke of Wellington toremove a mosaic floor from Silchester nearbyand to re-lay it in the entrance hall at StratfieldSaye House, Hampshire, given to him byParliament in 1817. The mosaic is set into ablack and white marble pavement and is stillthere today.

By the late nineteenth century terrazzo mosaicfloors were used in some commercial buildings,and a remarkable example is in the hall of theMichelin building in Fulham Road, London,1911, designed by Francois Epinasse. The entirebuilding is decorated with tiles, inside and out.The mosaic hall floor contains a central featurewith the motto Nunc Est Bibendum showing afigure composed of tyres raising a glass.

The National Gallery, London, has mosaicfloor on the landings of the central staircase,designed by Boris Anrep, from 1926. Themosaics represent allegorical scenes and havebeen cleaned and repaired recently (Figure14.7). The Bank of England also containsextensive mosaic floors by Boris Anrep.

14.2.1 Scagliola

Scagliola is a composition made with amixture of gypsum, glue, colouring and chipsof marble. It probably originated in Italy in theseventeenth century, and was popular as arelatively cheap substitute for marble.Chambers’ Cyclopaedia of 1738 (secondedition) outlines the process.

Manner of making MOSAIC work of gypsum, akind of coarse talc, or shining transparentstone, found in the quarries of Montmartrenear Paris, among the stones thence dug tomake the plaister of Paris. – It is differentfrom the plaister, but retains the name whichthe Romans gave the plaister, viz. gypsum . . .Of this stone, calcined in a kiln, beaten in amortar, and passed through a sieve, they makea kind of artificial marbles, imitating precious

stones, and of these compose a kind ofmosaic work, which comes little short either ofthe durableness or vivacity of the naturalstones; and which has this advantage, that itadmits of continued pieces, or paintings ofentire compartiments, without any joiningvisible.

Some make the ground of plaister of Paris,others of freestone . . . Now to prepare thesifted gypsum to be applied on this ground,they dissolve and boil it in the best Englishglue, and after mixing with it the colour it isto bear, the whole is worked up together intothe ordinary consistence of plaister; and thentaken and spread on the ground, five or sixinches thick. It must be observed, that if thework be such, as that mouldings are required,they are formed with gouges and other instru-ments.

‘Tis on this plaister, thus coloured likemarble or precious stone, and which is toserve as a ground to a work either of lapis,agat, alabaster, or the like, that the design tobe represented is drawn; having been firstpounced or calqued. To hollow or impress thedesign, they use the same instruments with thesculptors; the ground whereon they are towork, not being much less hard than marbleitself. The cavities thus made in the ground,are filled up with the same gypsum boiled inglue, only differently coloured; and thus arethe several colours of the original represented.To have the necessary colours and teints athand, they temper quantities of the gypsumwith the several colours, in little pots. Whenthe design is thus filled, and rendered visible,by half polishing it with brick or soft stone;they do over it again, cutting such places asare either to be weaker, or more shadowed,and filling them with gypsum; which isrepeated till all the colours, added one afteranother, represent the original to the life. Thework being finished is scowered with softstone, sand and water; then with pumicestone, and lastly, polished with a woodenrubber and emery. Lastly, a lustre is given it,by smeering it over with oil, and rubbing it along time with the palm of the hand; whichgives it a gloss nothing inferior to that ofnatural marble.

If it be only required to make a variegatedtable, or other work of several colours,


without mosaic figures; the process issomewhat different. – To this end, they onlyprepare separately, in large bowls, as manydifferent colours as nature shews in the marbleto be imitated, and after incorporating themwith the gypsum and glue-water, they take atruel-full of each, and dispose them in atrough, without any order; then withoutmingling them, and only by cutting or crossingthe gypsum of each truel once or twice witheach of the rest, they given then that beautifulconfusion, for which natural marbles are somuch valued: Of these they can make theirtables, or lay a mold, according to the work tobe done.

Isaac Ware wrote in 1756, in his CompleteBody of Architecture

In elegant houses the floors of this nature[composition] are made of stucco, that is, ofplaister of Paris beaten and sifted, and mixedwith other ingredients. This may be colouredto any hue by the additional matter, and whenwell worked and laid makes a very beautifulfloor, some of it looking like porphiry.

He continues

. . . they are best made in the beginning ofsummer, for the sake of their drying. We seethese miserably executed in the country, partlythrough ignorance, and partly through careless-ness: and in good houses in London, wherethere are stucco floors it is too common to seefrightful cracks across them. In this theworkmen are generally to be censured: stuccofloors are very common in many parts ofEurope, particularly at Venice, where it is rareto see a crack among a thousand of them.This is more owing to the thorough temperingand working of the material, than to anysecret in the composition.

While scagliola was widely used for makingcolumns and table tops, for larger areas it wasnot always satisfactory in Britain, although asuperb example is on the hearth and chimney-piece of the Queen’s Closet at Ham House,dating from 1673–1675, inlaid with contrastedcolours (see Chapter 16). In Italy it was anothermatter. James Adam, in his Italian diary for

1760, noted: ‘The scagliola is curious, andcould be used to answer different purposes, forinstance for columns resembling differentmarbles, for tables resembling mosaic work,and for most elegant floors for baths and lowapartments . . .’ Sir William Chambers in a letterof 1773 to William Hey, who built a house forSir Lawrence Dundas in St Andrew’s Square,Edinburgh, makes a good case for it: ‘The talkyour Proprietor mentions is probably theScagliola which is an imitation of Marblecomposed of talk, ising Glass and mineralColours of different Sorts. It is when well donenearly as hard as marble & as beautiful inevery respect. The Price is from five or six to12 shill pr. foot superficial & the best makersof It in England are Messrs Ritter & Bartoli,Newport Street, near Newport Market, London,who imitate almost any Sort of marble Youplease & also make very beautiful Ornamentsof It.’ The Bartolis provided scagliola for bothAdam and Wyatt, which was also used forfloors.

By 1833, J.C Loudon, in his Encyclopaediaof Cottage, Farm and Villa Architecture andFurniture, says ‘The permanent Covering ofthe Floors of Rooms is, for the most part, ofboards; though scagliola, and various imita-tions of marble and stone, are common on theContinent, and especially in the villas of Italy’.And ‘Various descriptions of plaster floors arein use for villas, which may either be paintedin imitation of marble, or kept covered bycarpeting. In some cases the preferable modeis to paint the margin of the floor round theroom in imitation of marble or other stone, orof oak, or of some other dark wood; or tofinish this margin with scagliola, and cover theinterior with carpeting’.

Although many scagliola floors must oncehave existed, owing to the many references tothem, very few have survived. Adam’s ante-room at Syon (see p.147) and the floor of theSaloon at Wilbury Park, Wiltshire, a classicaldesign, are two of the few important knownexamples. Adam’s drawing for the pavementof the sculpture gallery at Newby Hall, neverexecuted, was probably intended for scagliola.

142 Historic Floors

14.3 Composition and plaster floors

Hardwick Hall, built in the 1590s, had, accord-ing to Davies’s View of Derbyshire written in1805, floors of stone or plaster in every room.‘On the whole it is an ill-contrived, and veryinconvenient domestic residence’. Anothercomplaint was about the cold, recommending‘an allotment of £300 for carpets and grates’(Gilbert et al., 1987).

Plaster floors were laid in passages, andupper rooms of many houses in the eighteenthcentury. The Builder’s Dictionary of 1734 givesfull details for the preparation of a composi-tion floor:

Take Two Thirds of Lime, and one of CoalAshes well-fitted, with a small Quantity ofloamy Clay; mix the Whole that you intend touse together, and temper it well with Water;making it up into a Heap, let it lie a Week orten Days, in which Time it will mellow anddigest: Then temper it well over again, and besure that your Quantity of Water does notexceed, but rather that it may obtain a mellowSoftness and Toughness from Labour: Thenheap it up again for three or four Days, andrepeat the Tempering very high, till it becomessmooth and yielding tough and glewy.

Then the Ground being levelled, lay yourFloor therewith about two and a half or threeInches thick, making it smooth with a Trowel:The hotter the Season is, the better; and whenit thoroughly dry’d it will continue Time out ofMind.

This makes the best Floors for Houses,especially for Malt-Houses; but as for thosewho cannot get these Materials, or go to theCharge of them, they may take of clayey Loamand new soft Horse-Dung one Third, with asmall Quantity of Coal Ashes, if they can behad, and temper there after the aforementionedManner and lay the Floor with the Stuff threeor four Inches thick, smooth and even, whichwill cement, become hard, strong and durable,being done in a hot and dry season; good forCottages, Barns, and other small Houses.

But if any would have more beautiful Floorsthan these, they must lay their Floors even,smooth, and fine, either with the first or lastmentioned Flooring; then take Lime made of

Rag-Stones, and temper it with a little Whitesof Eggs, the more Eggs the better, to a veryhigh pitch, with which cover your Floor abouta quarter or half an Inch thick, before theunder Flooring be too dry, that they may wellincorporate together: This being well done,and thoroughly dry, if sometimes rubbed overwith Mops or Cloths, with a little Oil thereon,it will very beautiful and transparent, as if itwere pollished Metal or Glass, provided theEggs and Lime were thoroughly tempered, andotherwise well performed. Sir Hugh Platt givesus a Receipt for making an artificialComposition where with to make smooth,glittering, and hard Floors; and which may alsoserve for plastering of Walls.

‘Ox Blood and fine Clay tempered together’,he says, ‘makes the finest Floor in the World;and that this Mixture laid in any Floor or Wall,will become a very strong and bindingSubstance.’

Isaac Ware said that ‘boards and plaster arein general the kinds to be used in upperstories’ and many have survived, at HardwickHall, Temple Newsam, Calke Abbey, HamptonCourt and Grimsthorpe Castle. At Newby Hallthe attic floor is of red plaster (Gilbert et al.,1987).

14.4 Marble and stone pavements

Marble was widely used to create decorativepavements from the early Renaissanceonwards. Vitruvius’s ten books of architecture,circulated in illustrated editions in thesixteenth century, promoted Renaissance ideasof design and proportion. The interest inpattern books was introduced by Serlio, whosetreatises were first published in 1537, and byPalladio’s I Quattro Libri del’Architetturapublished in 1570. Both represent the rebirthof classical ideas, and both were circulated inFrance, Germany, Holland and Britain, a circu-lation made possible by the invention of print-ing. Serlio’s designs were used, not only inItaly, but in France at Fontainebleau, fromwhence they spread, as did other Renaissance


designs, to Germany, Holland and England.Later translations made these books morewidely accessible.

The revival of interest in Renaissance designbrought about by Serlio and Palladiomanifested itself in a new enthusiasm forpatterned floors throughout Europe. Evenbefore the first floor pattern books werepublished, certain simple designs, based onRenaissance examples were well known.

In Britain, black-and-white chequeredmarble was the most popular floor pattern inthe seventeenth century, particularly forentrance halls. An early example, dating from1612–1621, is the marble hall at BolsoverCastle, Derbyshire. Built by Sir CharlesCavendish, son of Bess of Hardwick, the castlekeep, possibly designed by Smythson, isstrongly influenced by Serlio.

The portrait by Mytens of Thomas Howard,Earl of Arundel, c.1618, portrays him in thesculpture gallery at Arundel House, TheStrand, floored with black and whitechequered marble and decorated with hisnewly imported antique statues. At HamHouse, Richmond, the great hall, 1610,contains the original black-and-whitechequered marble floor (see Chapter 16 andPlate 64). The hall floors at Belton House,Lincolnshire, and at Powis Castle, Wales, bothof the late seventeenth century, are also ofchequered marble, that at Powis acting as afoil to the spectacular staircase attributed toWilliam Winde, in which the treads are inlaidwith holly.

A more elaborate floor was the fictive cubedesign, composed of perspective cubes, givingthe illusion of three dimensions. It was intro-duced into Britain by Walter Gedde in 1615,in his Booke of Sundry Draughtes, widely usedin Europe, in the seventeenth and eighteenthcenturies.

A radiating design of marble chequers wasincorporated in the mid-sixteenth-centurycircular chapel of the Château of Anet byPhilibert de l’Orme, in the entrance hall of theQueen’s House, Greenwich, by Inigo Jones in1635 (see Plate 46), and in the marble hall of

Wentworth Woodhouse, by John Carr of Yorkin the eighteenth century (Gilbert et al., 1987).

One of the most comprehensive patternbooks for historic floors was published by C.A.d’Aviler in France in 1691. After spending fiveyears in Rome, he settled in Montpelier. HisCours Complet d’Architecture contained manyRoman floor designs and also practical adviceon construction (see Figure 14.8). He recom-mended Dutch tiles for bathrooms, ‘cabinet’rooms and grottoes. Coloured plaster andscagliola floors were only suitable for areasprotected from wear, parquetry for bedrooms,plain stone flags for churches, kitchens andrefectories, flags in hexagonal or octagonalshapes for halls, galleries and dining rooms.D’Aviler’s carreaux octagones pattern, origi-nating in classical Rome, became popular forpaved entrance halls throughout Europe.Several of his patterns could be used for bothmarble and parquet floors. He includeddesigns to complement domed, apsidal orcompartmental ceilings. Where contrastedcolours were used he advised that marbles ofequal hardness should be chosen, to avoiddifferential wear. One of Serlio’s designs wasadapted by d’Aviler for marble floors, andused in the marble hall at Petworth and in thehalls of Crowcombe Court and Bowood(Gilbert et al., 1987).

Petworth was rebuilt from c.1688 for the 6thDuke of Somerset, possibly by Daniel Marot.The baroque marble hall (see Plate 47),showing strong Dutch influence, has a marblefloor of 1692 by the mason James Sayers,paved in white squares and black diamonds,a variant of the octagon and square designwith the colours reversed. The hall survivedboth the fire of 1714 and the nineteenth-century alterations carried out by the 3rd Earlof Egremont. It was completed in time for thevisit of King William III in 1693, and hasremained virtually the same ever since.

Dyrham Park, Avon, was adapted from theTudor house for William Blathwayt from 1692,first by the architect Hauduroy, and then, from1698, by Talman. Blathwayt, having started hisdiplomatic career in The Hague, knew the latest

144 Historic Floors

Dutch and French styles. In the west hall hechose the carreaux octagones pattern,composed of white stone squares cornered withblack marble lozenges. It is still there today.The black-and-white chequered marble floor inthe ante hall may also be original, but relaid.

Celia Fiennes, in her Rides Through Englandon a Side Saddle (1685–1703) (Morris, 1947)thought it worth mentioning the marble floors.At Coleshill and Burghley she found the hallfloors ‘paved with black and whyte marble’,while at Chatsworth the floor of the chapelwas of black and white marble, the ‘batheingroome . . . the pavement mixed one stonewhyte, another black, another of the red rancemarble.’ All were quarried on the estate. Thepresent black and white chequered marblefloor in the hall was laid by John Carr of Yorkin 1779 (Gilbert et al., 1987). Celia Fiennesvisited Chippenham Park in Norfolk, in 1698,and remarked on the hall ‘paved withfreestone (octagons) a square of black marbleat each corner’.

The eighteenth century saw an increasinginterest in patterned marble floors, and thepublication of floor designs. Batty Langley, inAncient Masonry published in 1736, refers to apavement of ‘White, Black and Dove Colour’d

Marble . . . The Angles of the Cubes . . . whichin the Dusk of an evening appear as so manysolid bodies not to be walked on’. He alsodescribes a pavement ‘where the Cubes arelying on their Bases, and appear as Steps,which makes this Disception very agreeable’.

Ancient Masonry was followed by Langley’sCity and Country Builders’ and Workmans’Treasury of Designs published in 1740 contain-ing ‘Twenty-seven designs of MarbledPavements for Halls, Baths, etc. the last nineof which, are envision’d with thirty-six Varietiesof Frets, Guillochi’s and Borders’. Some ofthese designs derive from Serlio. J. Carwitham,an engraver formerly working with BattyLangley, brought out his own set of floordesigns in 1739, entitled ‘Various Kinds ofFloor Decorations represented both in Plan andPerspective Being useful Designs forOrnamenting the Floors of Halls, Rooms,Summer Houses etc. Whether in pavements ofStone or Marble, or with Painted Floor Cloths’(see Figure 14.9). Many of these patterns areidentical to those published by Langley, butthey have the addition of perspective viewsenlivened with figures. James Gibbs, whocopied some of d’Aviler’s designs in his Bookof Architecture, published in 1728, paved the


Figure 14.8 C.A. d’AvilerCours Complet d’Architecture,1691. Designs suitable formarble or parquet decorativefloors, some derived fromSerlio. Widely circulated inEurope

Radcliffe Library in Oxford with ‘PortlandStone, intermixed with red Swedish or Bremenstone’ as being preferable to marble owing tocondensation. He felt that marble was ‘fitter forchurches, Porticos, Common Halls, andPassages, than a Library because the Air,condensing upon it, occasioned by itsHardness . . . makes the place Damp, especiallywhere no fire is kept’ (Gilbert et al., 1987).

Castle Howard in Yorkshire has magnificentfloors in the Temple of the Four Winds, byVanbrugh (1724–1726) and in the mausoleum,where the circular pavement has a Greek key-fret brass inlay probably designed byHawksmoor himself (1728–1729).

The hall pavement at West Wycombe Parkby Borgnis of 1754–1755 laid over ahypocaust, has chequers of coloured marbleand stone, laid as lozenges and surroundedwith a large key-fret border. The floor wasrelaid in 1964 with Portland stone and Forestof Dean sandstone.

Berrington Hall, Herefordshire (1778–1881)by Henry Holland, a simple Neo-classicalhouse, has surprisingly rich interiors. Thesquare marble hall is enhanced by a floor ofblack, white and grey marble in an octagonand square design reflecting the ceiling. Thestaircase hall, another brilliant spatial compo-sition, contains a black and white chequeredmarble floor.

Robert Adam, inspired by the magnificentpavements of Rome, designed interiors, inwhich the floors were an essential componentof an integrated architectural composition.Two of his finest rooms are at Syon House,Isleworth, designed in 1761. The chaste blackand white chequered marble floor of the greathall (see Figure 14.10) has bands of key-fret,corresponding with the ceiling panels, whilethe alcove has a coffered ceiling reflected ina radiating floor pattern. The ante-room has,to complement its superbly rich Neo-classicalinterior, a scagliola floor, the design derivedfrom Serlio’s Book IV, Folio 68. It consists ofoctagons and circles embellished with floralmotifs in red, yellow, blue, green, brown andred. The floor we see today was relaid in1831–1832, replicating the original design, for£900 (Gilbert et al., 1987).

Adam designed floors to complement hisdistinguished entrance halls at Osterley Park,Middlesex, Kedleston, Derbyshire and NewbyHall, Yorkshire. At Osterley (see Plate 48), thefine entrance hall of 1767 decorated with giantpilasters, intersecting panels of plaster trophiesand semi-circular alcoves, has a grey and

146 Historic Floors

Figure 14.9 John Carwitham. Various Kinds of FloorDecorations, 1739. Influenced by Batty Langley, withwhom he worked, and by d’Aviler. All his designs wereenlivened by perspective scenes, with figures (TempleNewsam)

white patterned stone floor with a central oval,answering the coffered ceiling design. Adamreferred to ‘compartment ceilings’ – ‘a namegiven to all ceilings that are divided intovarious panels, surrounded with mouldings’, ofwhich this is a fine example. The marble hallat Kedleston (see Plate 49) of 1763 isdominated by twenty giant fluted marbleCorinthian columns. The floor of HoptonWood stone inlaid with white Italian marble,has an elliptical central feature of curvilinearbracts, providing a severe foil to the elaborateplaster-work.

James Wyatt designed a superb floor for theentrance hall at Heveningham, Suffolk,completed in 1784 (Figure 14.11). The centralsection of red and black marble on a stonebase is composed of circular motifs, contrastedwith fictive cube panels.

The guard room at Belvoir Castle,Leicestershire, of the early nineteenth century,has a marble floor with a plaited designderived from Batty Langley. The staircase hallat Ickworth, Suffolk, has a traditionalchequered marble floor designed by SirReginald Blomfield in 1909 to complement hisnew staircase.


Figure 14.10 Syon House,Isleworth, 1761. Robert Adam.The Great Hall. A superbNeo-classical interior, leadingto Adam’s ante-room with itsmagnificent coloured scagliolapavement (Photograph,National Monuments Record)

Figure 14.11 Heveningham Hall, Suffolk, Sir RobertTaylor 1787. James Wyatt. Entrance hall, 1784. Finemarble floor, combining fictive cube design andgeometric elements (Photograph, Christopher Hanson-Smith)

Highclere Castle, Hampshire, was recreatedin sumptuous Italianate Gothic by Sir CharlesBarry for the Earl of Carnarvon in 1839–1842.For the entrance hall, William Butterfield in1864 designed a brilliant multi-colouredmarble geometric floor, with the initials CC forCarnarvon and Chesterfield (Girouard, 1979).

The splendid Classical and Baroque palacesof Italy, with their decorated marble floors,make our British examples appear ratherhomespun. The hot dry climate, and the avail-ability of a wide variety of colours and typesof marble created a tradition, started by theRomans, and still continuing today. During theearly fifteenth century marble floors werecomposed of small sections, made up ofcircles, squares, oblongs and triangles. Theindividual pieces gradually increased in size by

the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Inthe seventeenth century Rome was trans-formed by the monumental Classical buildingsof Bernini and Borromini. Much of their workwas in the form of ecclesiastical commissionsfrom three successive Popes, but a few of theirpalazzi, designed for noble families, havesurvived. Notable is the Palazzo Barberini(1631–1650) by Bernini with assistance fromBorromini. The huge Gran Salone on thepiano nobile, or first floor, still retains its origi-nal painted decorations, offset by fine marblefloors.

Another grand palazzo, the PalazzoColonna, by Antonio del Grande (begun 1654)and Girolamo Fontana, completed 1670, alsohas a great gallery or Gran Sala on the firstfloor, with a monumental coloured marble

148 Historic Floors

Figure 14.13 The Royal Courts of Justice, London,1874. G.E. Street. The great hall, decorative pavement(Photograph, National Monuments Record)

Figure 14.12 Chatsworth, Derbyshire. North corridor,1841. Sir Jeffrey Wyatville. Marble floor by Leonardi, aRoman craftsman, working on the Forum (Photograph,Jane Fawcett)

pavement of circles, octagons and squares tocomplement the gorgeous classical decoration,the heroic ceiling paintings and the greatfamily collection of pictures. The developmentof an enfilade of principal rooms on the firstfloor led to the design of magnificent formalstaircases, to create a suitably grand approach.

Many of the villas of the Veneto haveterrazzo floors in the main rooms and, outside,elaborately paved courtyards. The Villa Garzoniat Ponte Casale, near Padua, by Sansovino(1537–1550) has a courtyard paved in a designof squares, crosses and roundels, in contrastedstone, with a well-head in the centre. The Villada Porto Colleoni, near Vicenza, has excep-tional eighteenth-century stables attributed toFrancesco Muttoni. The stone floors are pavedwith cobbles, intersected by stone roundelswith large stone paviours in an intricate designof squares, rectangles, octagons and circles.The stalls are separated by marble columnssurmounted by putti.

Fischer Von Erlach trained in Rome. Thebuildings he designed in Austria were mostlyecclesiastical, and restrained in comparisonwith Italian Baroque. The royal palace ofSchönbrunn, one of the most notable, hasbeen substantially altered, but the WinterPalace of Prince Eugene in Vienna of 1695,with its superb entrance hall and monumentalstone staircase, supported by life-sizecaryatids, is a triumph of Austrian Baroque.

In Germany the arrival of Baroque was laterthan in Italy. An exceptional example is theNeues Schloss Schleissheim near Munich (seePlate 50), built for the Elector Max Emmanueland designed by Effner and Zucalli. Started in1701, the magnificent lower hall is paved witha chequered marble design, while theKaisersaal of 1725 contains a pink and creamchequered floor, with an octagon and squarepavement on the landings traceable to Serlio.The Schloss was damaged during the last war,and restored.

More elaborate is the marble floor in theoval cupola room of the Sans Souci Palace,Potsdam (see Plate 51) completed forFrederick the Great in 1745–47. The floor is

composed of radiating panels, each containinga Rococo flower or leaf motif, while thesumptuous marble hall has another finemarble floor. Schloss Benrath near Düsseldorfwas begun in 1756 for the Elector PalatineCharles Theodore, and the interiors completedin 1771. The circular Kuppelsaal has a radiat-ing chequered pavement with a central starmotif.

In France, decorated stone and marblefloors were usual in the entrance halls andstaircase halls, while the upper rooms oftenhad parquetry. However, some of the granderchâteaux also had marble floors to the princi-pal rooms upstairs. The Château du Champsde Bataille near Le Neubourg, built in1606–1701, has, in the grand vestibule on thefirst floor, an impressive octagon and squareblack and white marble pavement. FrançoisMansart’s famous Château de Maisons, nearParis, completed in 1651, contains, in theentrance hall and staircase hall, splendidchequered marble floors to enhance this grandClassical interior. The hall and stairway areornamented with groups of putti by Philippede Buyster. The Château de Vaux-le-Vicomtenear Melun by Le Vau, of 1657–1661, has oneof the most magnificent interiors in France.The king’s bedroom, intended by Fouquet forLouis XIV’s visit, is one of the most spectacu-lar rooms of the château, with an elaboratefloor reflecting the sumptuous ceilings oflunettes and roundels painted by Lebrun.

The charming Pavillon de Musique deMadame at Versailles of 1781, a small rotundain the park of Versailles, has a carreauxoctagones marble floor design. The panels ofthe rotunda are decorated with delightfulsylvan scenes.

In Holland, the seventeenth century wasknown as the Great Century. Handsome brickhouses grew up along the canals ofAmsterdam, Utrecht and Leiden, built by richburghers. The Mauritshuis in The Hague, of1633, is one of the finest of them. The interi-ors were plain, with beamed ceilings, longlattice windows, tables covered with a rug,and, invariably, chequered marble floors.


These were often in contrasted colours of redor black and white, with, in the granderhouses, key-fret borders. They are portrayed,in minute detail, in the domestic interiorspainted by Vermeer, Jan Steen and Pieter deHooch.

14.5 Parquet and marquetry floors

The term parquet originated in France in theearly seventeenth century, and was first usedto describe the raised area behind abalustrade, then laid with a more elaboratefloor. The term was later applied to the wholefloor. The definition of parquet is flooring ofthin hardwood laid in patterns on a woodensub-floor. The design of the famous Parquetde Versailles was derived from Serlio andPalladio (see Figure 14.16) and copied byd’Aviler in his Cours Complet d’Architecture of1691. It became the standard floor for theformal rooms of French châteaux in theseventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Thedesign is of interlaced diagonals, set withinsquares. The Galerie d’Hercule of the HôtelLambert, Paris, by Le Vau, completed inc.1650, decorated with the labours ofHercules, is floored with Parquet deVersailles. So is the rococo Salon de M. lePrince in the Château de Chantilly, near Parisof 1722. The lovely Salon Ovale at the HôtelSoubise in Paris of 1738–1740, decorated byGermain Boffrand for the Princesse deSoubise in a flowing rococo style, has Parquetde Versailles. An early example survives at theChâteau de Mormatin near Tournus, Burgundy(Gilbert et al., 1987).

Herringbone parquetry, a common variant,consists of parallel rows of diagonals. Thespectacular Salle des Gardes de la Reine at theChâteau de Versailles, by Le Vau c.1670, withits marble wall panelling, painted ceiling,carved woodwork and herringbone parquetryis one of the finest rooms in the Palace.

In Britain, floor boards of plain oak weremore common than decorative parquet floors.

Thomas Sheraton, in The Cabinet Dictionary of1803, outlines methods of laying boarded floors:

There are three methods by which floors arelaid. First, with plain jointed edges, and naileddown. Second, jointing and ploughing theedges to receive a winscot tongue about aninch broad, and a bare quarter thick, by whichthe dust is prevent from falling through, incases where there is no ceiling. These may benailed at every set board at the edge, so thatno nails be seen. Third, when they are laidwith douwells of oak-board into the edge, andevery one set as they are laid. In this methodthe pieces of wainscot, let in half an inch ontothe edge of the board, and rather more intojoists. This is a troublesome but most effectualmethod, and by a little practice may be donewith greater facility, than is at first appre-hended. The ancient floors of a good quality,were generally made of oak boards, and verycuriously laid, by forking the end together inlarge floors, where more than one length waswanted.

150 Historic Floors

Figure 14.14 Serlio, Book IV, Folio 68, English Edition,1611. Design adapted for parquetry and marble (TempleNewsam)

There was no standard width for floor boardsin the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries,and variations in width can often be found inone room. Early floors, usually of oak, weremade of wider boards, but by the nineteenthcentury, boards became narrower and by 1904Chambers’ Cyclopaedia recommended that‘flooring boards should not be more than 6inches broad and in the best floors they donot exceed 3 or 4 inches’. The thickness alsovaried considerably, and in 1833 Loudonreferred to boards being ‘sometimes laid downin large houses three inches thick’ to preventwarping, and ‘to lessen the risk of their beingburnt through by fire’.

The Builder’s Dictionary of 1734 gives thecost of ‘boarding floors in and about London’,with considerable variations according to thetype of wood used, and the type of construc-tion.

Decorated floors were immensely moreexpensive. Sir William Craven, in 1686, wroteto Lord Craven about floors at Combe Abbey,

‘The flooreing of the Cedar Closset with oakeboards, which are already provided for it, willcost workmanship about 03 00 00. If donewith an inlayd Floore, what Captin Winde canagree with Mr. Syms, for doeing of it, andcarriage from London, I can give noe estimateof the charge’. Williame Winde also worked atChirk Castle 1673–1678, Cliveden 1674–1677,and Powis c.1685, where he designed thegrand staircase (p.144).

The earliest use of geometrical parquetry inEngland was in the mid-seventeenth century,probably introduced by Queen Henrietta Mariaon her return from France at the Restoration.John Evelyn, in his Account of Architects andArchitecture said ‘not to be forgotten are theFloorings of Wood which Her Majesty theQueen Mother has just brought into use in


Figure 14.15 Walter Gedde, Book of Sundry Draughtse,1615. Designs for parquet (Temple Newsam)

Figure 14.16 Richards’ translation of le Muet’s Palladio.Parquetry design used for Queen Henrietta Maria’srooms at Somerset House, London, 1661–62. Possiblythe earliest use of parquetry in England (TempleNewsam)

England at her Palace of Somerset House, thelike whereof I directed to be made in a Bed-Chamber at Berkeley House. The French callit Parquetage, a kind of segmentatum opus,and which has some resemblance to thesemagnificencies’ (Fowler and Cornforth, 1974).Godfrey Richards translated Le Muet’sPalladio, illustrating the parquetry used atSomerset House in 1683 (Figure 14.16), whichhe describes as ‘a curiosity never practised inEngland’. Shortly after Somerset House, veryfine marquetry floors, inlaid with the ciphersof the Duke and Duchess of Lauderdale, werelaid at Ham House, London, in 1673 (seep.175).

The term marquetry refers to an area ofwooden flooring inlaid with wood of contrast-ing colours to create patterns or ciphers. CeliaFiennes, in 1694, visited Stowe where ‘someof the floors are inlaid fine pictures’, and theChamber of State at Nottingham Castle ‘inlay’dwith Cyphers and the Coronet’. At Burghley,Lincolnshire, ‘the floores were Inlaid in sever-all roomes’, and at Chatsworth, Derbyshire,she found ‘the floores of the roomes are allfinely inlaid’. Many of the seventeenth-centuryparquet floors on the first floor are still there.At Ashtead Park in Surrey she saw ‘someclosets with inlaid floores’ and also remarkedon the staircases with inlay on the treads andlandings. At Durdans, the staircase was ‘nobleand lofty, all plain wanscoate only the half

paces inlaid’, while at Mr Rooth’s house inEpsom ‘the half paces are strip’d, the woodput with the grain, the next slip against thegraine, which makes it look pretty as if inlaid.’At Broadlands, Hampshire, ‘the halfe paces areinlaid with yew wood, which lookes a yellow-ish red, in squaires; they laid on the nextstorey with a space of this inlaid worke of agood bigness the whole compass of theStaircase’.

Staircases were also decorated with inlaidtreads and risers, often with marquetry on thehalf landings. The Great Staircase at PowisCastle, Montgomeryshire, of c.1674–1685, risesfrom a black and white chequered marble hall,with inlaid treads, and an octagonal motif onthe landing. The staircase at Longnor Hall,Shropshire, of c.1670, also has inlaid treadsand risers, superb carved balusters, with SirUvedale Corbett’s cipher on the secondlanding. The walnut (west) staircase of 1694 atDyrham Park, Avon, is cantilevered, andsimilar in design and date to those at HamptonCourt and Petworth. It is constructed ofVirginian walnut, with French parquetry on thehalf landings. Mr Blathwayt, the owner, hadseen such stairs in France. The handsomecedar east stair by Talman, of 1698, alsocantilevered, has treads of Virginian walnutand risers of American cedar, with, on the halflandings, a marquetry design of radiating stars.

Boughton House, Northamptonshire, regar-ded by Nikolaus Pevsner as ‘the most Frenchlooking seventeenth century building inEngland’ (Pevsner, 1961), was remodelled forthe first Duke of Montagu from 1683. Havingbeen Ambassador in Paris he was aware of thelatest French fashions, and introducedparquetry floors and stairs, possibly copiedfrom Versailles. Some are still there today.Thorpe Hall, Peterborough, also has inlaidstairs of the same period.

Horace Walpole visited Drayton House,Northamptonshire, and remarked on ‘theDuchess of Norfolk’s closet, the floor inlaidwith her and Sir John’s cyphers and lookingglass in the ceiling’ (Fowler and Cornforth,1974). This floor, also decorated with

152 Historic Floors

Figure 14.17 Patterns for parquetry, c.1691. Used inroyal palaces and other important buildings (fromThornton, 1978)

marquetry birds and flowers, was laid, after1697, by the Duchess of Norfolk and Sir JohnGermaine. It is still there. At Beningbrough,Yorkshire, the half landing is inlaid with thecoat of arms of John and Mary Bourchier,1716. The superb marquetry floor of thelanding from 22 Hanover Square, now in theVictoria and Albert Museum, is inlaid with thearms of Lord Carpenter.

Mawley Hall, Shropshire, has geometricinlay on the risers, and a grid pattern of stars,circles and diamonds inlaid on the landings,of c.1730. There is also an unusual marquetryfloor in the drawing room, with a centraloctagonal design.

As the eighteenth century progressed, inlaybecame more sophisticated. One of the grand-est staircases is at Claydon, Buckinghamshire,of 1768 (see Plate 74). The mahogany risers andtreads are inlaid with marquetry, the landingsinlaid with the Verney arms and crest, and thesoffits are decorated with plaster stars. Box,mahogany, ebony and ivory combine toproduce a remarkable ensemble, completed bythe superb gilded ironwork balustrade. One ofthe elaborate marquetry floors at Mereworth,Kent, resembles a design in d’Aviler’s Foyerspour les Grandes Cheminées, while at Mersham-le-Hatch, in Kent, the hall, of the 1760s, has aparquetry pattern derived from Serlio (Gilbertet al., 1987). The saloon at Russborough,County Wicklow, Ireland, by Richard Casselsand Francis Bindon completed in 1750, has afine marquetry floor with a central star motif.

George Dance designed inlaid Neo-classicalfloors at Cranbury Park, Hampshire, c.1780,and for the music room at Mount Stewart, Co.Down, 1782–85 (see Plate 52). The delicateinlaid floor in the Temple of the Winds,1782–1783, by Athenian Stuart (see Figure14.18), combines mahogany, American walnut,sycamore and bog oak, to create a subtleoctagonal design to enhance this charmingroom, with views over Strangford Lough. TheCasino at Marino, Dublin, by WilliamChambers, also contains fine marquetry floors,recently restored (see Figure 14.19). Thelibrary floor at Sledmere, Yorkshire, originally

of c.1780, is also of exceptional delicacy,echoing the fine plasterwork on the vaultedceiling. Ballyfin, in Co. Leix, Ireland, hasremarkable marquetry floors in the rotunda,and, even more elaborate, in the saloon,carried out for Sir Charles Coote in the 1820s(Fowler and Cornforth, 1974).

By the mid-eighteenth century, large carpetsbecame more readily available and the use ofinlay and parquetry declined. Isaac Ware in ADescription of Bath said, in 1756 ‘the use ofcarpeting . . . has set aside the ornamenting offloors . . . It is the custom . . . to cover a roomentirely; so that there is no necessity of anybeauty or workmanship underneath’ (Fowlerand Cornforth, 1974). However, by the end of


Figure 14.18 Mount Stewart House, Co. Down,Northern Ireland, 1782–1785. James (Athenian) Stuart.Temple of the Winds. Marquetry floor (Photograph, JaneFawcett)

the eighteenth century, inlaid and parquetryborders were introduced. There are examplesat Apsley House, in the Waterloo Gallery andin the Gallery at Attingham Park, of 1806.

Queen Charlotte visited Ham House inPetersham in 1809. In a letter she wrote that‘even under the Tattered State of Hangingsand Chairs, one must admire the good Tasteof our forefathers and their Magnificence. TheParquete Floors have been taken up with greatCare, Cleaned and relaid, and in order topreserve them the Present Lord has put downCarpets over them, but of Course not naileddown’ (Pritchard, 1995).

By the early nineteenth century completeparquetry floors were once again becomingfashionable. By 1823 Peter Nicholson wrote inThe New and Improved Practical Builder ‘thefashion for laying floors with various colouredwoods, disposed in patterns, seems now tobecome more general in this country’ (seeFigure 14.20). Maria Edgeworth wrote, in 1821

‘we shall leave Wycombe Abbey WednesdaySennight . . . provided we do not . . . break ourlimbs . . . on these horribly slippery beautifulfloors and stairs’ (Parissien, 1992).

L’Art du Menuisier (Art of the Carpenter) byAndré Roubo was published in 1769–1775 andcirculated in Germany. It contains diagrams onthe layout of parquetry, including Parquet deVersailles, with a breakdown of constructionaldetails and the tools required.

Interest in parquetry was also stimulated inGermany by the publication of Der BürgelicheBaumeister (The Town Builder), 1799, bySchmidt, Decorationen Innerer Raume(Interior Decoration), 1834 by J.A. Roberg, andVorlageblatter für Maurer, Tischler undZimmerleute (Pattern Book for Bricklayers,Joiners and Interior Decorators), by GustavStier, 1827.

Some of the finest marquetry floors inGermany are in the magnificent SchlossWeissenstein near Pommersfelden (see Plate53), the Prince-Bishop von Schönborn’sresidence, by Dientzenhofer. The gem-likeSpiegel Kabinett of 1714 has sophisticatedcoloured marquetry, containing several differ-ent types of wood, including ebony. TheGetäfeltes Zimmer has a boarded floor with aninlaid central motif.

The Residenz at Würzburg by BalthazarNeumann of c.1750, also built for the Prince-

154 Historic Floors

Figure 14.19 Casino, Marino, Dublin, Ireland,1758–1776. Sir William Chambers. Marquetry floor,restored in the 1980s (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Figure 14.20 Timber floor construction from PeterNicholson, The New and Improved Practical Builder andWorkman’s Companion, 1823

Bishop von Schönborn, is a building ofoutstanding magnificence, now a WorldHeritage Site. It has, to complement its superbinteriors, exceptionally ornate marquetryfloors, particularly in the Grün Lackiertes-zimmer. Schloss Ellingen near Nuremberg alsocontains fine eighteenth-century marquetryfloors (see Plate 54).

The mid-eighteenth-century Neues Schlossat Bayreuth contains a series of parquetryfloors, including a variant on the Parquet deVersailles, and one based on the fictive cubedesign of d’Aviler, in the Palmenzimmer. ThePagoden Kabinett has an unusual floor ofoctagons, inlaid with small flowers. AtPotsdam the Neues Palais of Frederick IIcontains many rooms of parquetry dating from1767–1768, some imitating marble floors. Inthe Konzertzimmer the inlaid floor of1765–1768 has a fictive cube design, embell-ished with a central marquetry feature. Mostremarkable of all, is the GrunboisiertesEckkabinett, with elaborate marquetry,portraying vases of flowers and leaves.Frederick II’s Sans Souci Palace has similarparquetry of 1746, and the charming circularlibrary has a radiating inlaid floor with adelicate rococo central design.

In Munich, the Residenz also containsspectacular coloured marquetry floors,restored after war damage. The Badenburg, abathing pavilion designed for the Elector MaxEmmanuel by Effner in 1718–1721, in thegrounds of the Nymphenburg Palace nearMunich, has a Parquet de Versailles floor toaccompany the profusion of rococo decoration(Nickl, 1995).

Parquetry floors were used so widely duringthe eighteenth century that only a few otherEuropean examples can be mentioned. TheGold Salon by Fischer von Erlach of 1704, inPrince Eugene’s Winter Palace in Vienna, hasa wonderfully rich interior with gold leaf andarabesque paintings on the woodwork, andParquet de Versailles floors. In similar style,but with more elaborate geometric parquetry,is the tea room in the Palace of Queluz, nearLisbon, Portugal of 1758. Very different in

style, but again with geometric parquet floorsis the Gallery of the Palazzo Doria in Romeby Gabriele Valvassori, of 1731–1734. Here theparquet provides a good foil to the gildeddecoration and classical statues. The LazienkiPalace, on an island in a park in Warsaw, wasoriginally built by Domenico Merlini andextended by King Stanislaus Poniatowski in1772. The ballroom, beautifully restored afterthe war, has a splendid geometric marquetryfloor of contrasted woods. Several of the otherrooms have elaborate parquetry and there arealso fine marble floors (see Plate 55). WilanowPalace, also in Warsaw, was built in 1679–1731as a royal palace for King Sobieski andcontains spectacular interiors, some restoredfrom 1955–65 after destruction during the Nazioccupation (see Plate 56). The Royal Castle,Warsaw, built 1569–1619, was razed to theground by the Nazis. It was reconstructed aftera long period of neglect, between 1971 and1984. It contains most of the original paintingsand furniture and superb marquetry floors inrooms of spectacular grandeur (see Plate 57).

The palaces of St Petersburg, Russia, manybeautifully restored since the last war, arefamous for their fine inlaid floors. ThePeterhof is a magnificent example. One of thegrandest is the Maryinsky Palace of the GrandDuchess Maria (1819–1876) built for her byher father, Czar Nicholas. The gala receptionroom has a superb marquetry floor composedof acanthus leaves, palmettes, chequers and acentral rosette. The rotunda, the Pompeianroom, the study and even the octagonalbathroom all have beautiful marquetry floorswhich complete these very grand Neo-classi-cal interiors. The Summer Palace of EmpressElizabeth, and of Catherine the Great, TsarskoeSelo, has outstanding marquetry floors,recently restored (see Plates 58 and 59).

14.6 Carpets

Floors of rammed earth, chalk or clay wereused for the great halls and other ground floorrooms throughout the medieval and Tudor


period. These were often strewn with rushesor scented herbs, to sweeten the smells.Erasmus graphically described them in a letterwritten to Francis, Cardinal Wolsey’s physicianbefore 1530. ‘The floors [of English houses] arecommonly of clay strewed with rushes, underwhich lies unmollested [sic] an ancient collec-tion of beer, grease, fragments, bones, spittle,excrements of dogs and cats, and everythingthat is nasty’ (Wood, 1965). The raised dais inthe great hall, or parlour, used by the family,was usually floored with wood or stone,which could be cleaned.

The first oriental carpets were probablybrought to England during the Crusades.Henry III, in 1246, ordered ‘mats to put uponthe forms and under foot in the King’s Chapelof Winchester’. Eleanor of Castile, after hermarriage to Edward I in 1254, was reputed tohave brought rugs for use in her apartmentsat Westminster. Matthew Paris, in hisChronicles of England (1259), reported thatSpanish potentates were ‘covering the veryfloors with expensive carpets’. Oriental carpetswere brought back by the crusaders, many tobe used on tables (Wood, 1965).

Cardinal Wolsey obtained carpets, describedas Cairene and Damascene, from Venice in1520, after long negotiations with the VenetianAmbassador and the Signoria. Over sixtycarpets arrived via Antwerp, at a cost of 600ducats. Wolsey used them both for tables andfor floor coverings. Within eight years he wasdisgraced, and they were seized by the Crown.By 1547, on the death of Henry VIII, 400Turkish carpets were recorded in the royalinventories. Some of these are illustrated inportraits of Henry VIII and Edward VI (seeFigures 14.21 and 14.22). It is thought thatthey remained in the royal palaces until theywere sold off during the Commonwealth(Gilbert et al., 1987).

By the mid-sixteenth century many of theEnglish nobility possessed ‘foote carpets’ ofTurkish origin, to designs known as Lotto,Holbein or Ushak. The Countess of Shrewsburyat Hardwick Hall had fourteen ‘Turkie’ carpets,some possibly obtained by her husband

William Cavendish during his travels in theeast. An inventory taken at Sheffield Manorduring the residence of Mary Queen of Scotsincluded eight long ‘Turkye carpetts’, and twoshort ones, probably used for tables. By theearly seventeenth century English copies ofTurkish carpets were being made. Many ofWilliam Larkin’s portraits show Turkish carpets.Lord Sackville, 3rd Earl of Dorset, was paintedby Larkin in 1613 standing on a Lotto Turkishcarpet (see Figure 14.23).

156 Historic Floors

Figure 14.21 Henry VIII by Holbein, second quarter ofsixteenth century, standing on a star Ushak carpet(Photograph, John Mills. By kind permission of theBoard of Trustees of the National Museums andGalleries on Merseyside, Walker Art Gallery, Liverpool)

Persian carpets had begun to arrive by theend of Queen Elizabeth’s reign. By 1618,Mytens’ portrait of Lord and Lady Arundelshowed a Mughal or Herat carpet, and by 1623Van Dyck was painting the Royal family stand-ing on Persian carpets.

Floral designs from eastern Persia replacedthe medallion designs of the Turkish carpets.Some of these superb silk pile carpets from

Isfahan and Kashan, with gold and silverthread, survive at Hardwick Hall, BoughtonHouse, Knole and Hatfield House. Others,from Knole and Belvoir Castle are now in theMetropolitan Museum, New York, and theNational Gallery of Art, Washington. With theformation of the Levant Company in 1580, andthe East India Company in 1600, the import ofPersian and Mughal carpets increased, andSmyrna merchants were busily exportingTurkish rugs to England. By the earlyeighteenth century the middle classes werebuying oriental carpets.


Figure 14.22 Edward VI, c.1550. Unknown artist.Stranding on a Holbein carpet (Photograph, NationalPortrait Gallery)

Figure 14.23 Richard Sackville, 3rd Earl of Dorset,1613, by William Larkin, standing on a Lotto carpet(Ranger’s House, Greenwich) (Photograph, EnglishHeritage)

Several enterprising entrepreneurs importeddirect from Turkey, and advertised their goodsin London. The Daily Post of April 1724 carriedan advertisement ‘Imported by the last shipsfrom Turkey, a large parcel of Turkey andMuskat carpets for Floors, Tables, Firesides

etc.’. In 1740 the Country Journal of theCraftsman announced ‘to be sold at CarpentersHall near Little Moorgate. A . . . Parcel ofSmyrna and Segiadya, and other choice TurkeyCarpets . . . from six to seven yards long . . .extremely useful for Dining Rooms etc. withHearth and Bedside Carpets of excellentPatterns and Fitness’. The word Muskat comesfrom Mosque while in Arabic segiadya derivesfrom sajjada, to prostrate oneself. All thesewere therefore probably prayer rugs frommosques (Gilbert et al., 1987).

John Wood of Bath reflected this trend whenhe said in 1749, in his ‘Essay Towards aDescription of Bath’ that ‘as the new buildingadvanced, carpets were introduced to cover thefloors’. The use of oriental carpets in the earlyeighteenth century was illustrated in contem-porary conversation pieces. Hogarth in ‘AnAssembly at Wanstead 1731’, Zoffany’s portraitof Sir Lawrence Dundas and his family, 1769,and of Lord Willoughby de Broke and hisfamily, 1770, show grand Turkish carpets andrugs in strong blues and reds with palmette orfloral designs. By the 1770s a Turkey carpetwas considered de rigueur in polite society.

As the century progressed the production ofmanufactured Brussels, Wilton andKidderminster carpets, made to measure andcovering the entire room, took over from theoriental hand-worked carpets. From 1761 untilthe end of the century Moorfields andAxminster engaged the entire market forknotted carpets in Britain. Horace Walpole, in1765, paid £87 for a knotted carpet in Gothicstyle for Strawberry Hill (Thornton, 1984).

Thomas Moore of Moorfields won, in 1757,an award from the Society of Arts for a carpet‘in many respects equal, and in some respects,superior to those imported from Persia andTurkey’. He provided carpets for Robert Adamat Croome Court (1768), Syon (1769), OsterleyPark (c.1773), and 20 St James’s Square (1774)to a design by Antonio Zucchi, for theWilliams-Wynn family (Beard, 1981).

Robert Adam recognized the importance offloor treatment to co-ordinate his classicalinteriors. The halls contained marble

158 Historic Floors

Figure 14.24 The ‘Kinghorne’ carpet, c.1618–1640.English make, imitating contemporary Mughal floralcarpets. A rare survival. (Photograph, by kindpermission of The Trustees of the National Museums ofScotland)

pavements, while for the main rooms hedesigned superb carpets, often laid to exposea border of parquet on which the furniturecould be placed, coinciding with the fashionfor placing furniture against the walls. Heproduced superb carpets for at least twelvecountry houses and eleven London houses.Those at Syon, Harewood House, OsterleyPark, Newby Hall and Saltram survive.

The development of Adam’s carpet designsfollows the general trend of his architecturalstyle. The bold florid ornament for Kedlestonmoved towards the more delicate two-dimen-sional treatment of his later years. One of theearliest to recognize his talents was LordCoventry, for whom Adam worked at CroomeCourt, Worcestershire, from 1760 until 1781.He designed several carpets, made by Moorein 1768, none of which has survived. Asurprising chinoiserie ceiling, with a spectacu-lar carpet decorated with four small ovalChinese scenes, were designed by Adam forMrs Montagu’s drawing room in her house inHill Street, c.1766. This is an example ofAdam’s skill in drawing the different compo-nents in a room into a stylistic relationship,with dramatic colour contrasts between thebold lapis blue and Chinese yellow andPompeian red of the carpet, and the mutedyellow, white and ochre of the ceiling.

Adam also designed a fine architecturalcarpet for the music room at HarewoodHouse, 1765–1771, where ‘Edwin Lascelles,after work on decorating the house hadbegun, bought yellow silk for the walls, andAdam was obliged to change his colourscheme for the ceiling’. In September 1769,painting a specimen of colours for Mr Adam’sapprobation is mentioned. The colouring ofthe carpet, as originally designed by Adamwas of soft pinks and browns, and presum-ably the walls and ceiling would have beensimilar. The ceiling paintings are by BiagioRebecca, and the chimney piece lyre motif isreflected in the carpet design (Beard, 1981).

Adam’s floors at Syon are outstanding. Thedining room carpet, the design based onRoman pavements, was made by Thomas

Moore, signed and dated 1769. It was intendedfor this strictly classical room, and repeated thedelicate ceiling pattern. It was later moved tothe red drawing room, where it no longer suitsthe character of the room, with its covedceiling and walls hung with red damask. Thelong gallery, converted from the Jacobeangallery in 1764 was, according to Sir JohnSummerson, the place where the Adam stylewas born. Adam said of this room that it ‘wasfinished in a style to afford great variety andamusement’. His carpet completed a brilliantcomposition, with plasterwork by Joseph Roseand furniture, much of it still there, alsodesigned for the room. It is sad that the origi-nal carpet has gone.

At Saltram, Devon, the drawing room wasdesigned by Adam in 1768–1769, and theAxminster carpet made by Thomas Whitty wasdelivered in 1770 (see Plate 60). The ceilingcontains roundels by Antonio Zucchi,surrounded by intricate plasterwork, reflectedin the carpet design.

At Osterley Park, Adam’s carpet for thedrawing room copies the sunburst ceilingadapted from a drawing of Palmyra, publishedby Robert Wood in 1753. The tapestry roomwith its sumptuous Gobelin tapestries todesigns by Boucher has a related carpet,designed in 1775 and made by Thomas Moore.The carpet repeats the ceiling medallions, andalso contains copies of the flower vases fromthe tapestries. The furniture was also designedby Adam. Both carpets are still in situ.

Adam worked at Culzean Castle, Ayrshire,for the Earl of Cassilis from 1777. The circularfirst-floor saloon (see Plate 61) contains arange of windows overlooking the sea, withviews of the mountains of Arran beyond. Thisis one of Adam’s finest rooms, for which hedesigned a spectacular carpet in 1790, madeby Moore. Zucchi is said to have providedMoore with a pattern of the ceiling to copyfor the carpet design (Beard, 1981). The origi-nal is now in store, but has been replaced bya copy.

After Adam, there are few examples ofarchitect-designed carpets. James Wyatt


supplied a design for Sir Thomas Egerton ofHeaton Hall for his first-floor room, decoratedwith grotesques and Etruscan ornament. Healso designed a carpet for the boudoir atBelton, Lincolnshire, to correspond with theceiling (see Plate 63).

Samuel Wyatt designed the knotted pilecarpet supplied by Axminster for the Peter theGreat room at Blickling in 1780, also linked tothe ceiling design. At Tatton Park Wyattdesigned a carpet for the library in 1806. Thecarpet, recorded in a watercolour by Bucklerof 1820, included the signs of the zodiac.

Two years later Sir John Soane designed aGrecian interior for the drawing room atTaymouth, Perthshire, including a carpetwhich complemented the ceiling design withits three roundels. It is sad that it was nevercarried out. The flamboyant Gothic Revivalinteriors carried out for Queen Victoria’s visitin 1842, by Gillespie Graham and Crace, wereof a very different character.

By the early nineteenth century close-fittedWilton and Brussels carpets, often of floraldesigns, had become relatively cheap andpopular. They were machine woven, cut instrips, with borders that could be added. ThePrince Regent ordered carpets for both CarltonHouse and the Brighton Pavilion. At CarltonHouse the floors were close covered with abrilliant blue carpet, scattered with goldenfleurs-de-lys. In 1785 he had a magnificentPersian carpet made in imitation of marble forCarlton House, illustrated in Pyne’s RoyalResidences (1819).

At Ickworth the 1st Marquis of Bristol laidWilton floral carpets in the library and drawingroom in the 1820s. One of the largest andmost comprehensive schemes was for fittedcarpets to all the principal rooms in Pordon’sEaton Hall, Cheshire, carried out by Gillows inthe early nineteenth century for the Duke ofWestminster (Fowler and Cornforth, 1974).

J.C. Loudon in his Encyclopaedia of Cottage,Farm and Villa Architecture and Furniture(1833) stipulated for the saloon, that ‘modernideas of comfort make a carpet and curtainsindispensable. The carpet should be of thin

material, covering a great part of the room, butshowing about a yard all round it of polishedoak boards. It should of course be a borderedcarpet; the colour of the ground a shade offawn; the pattern chiefly shades of crimson’.In the library he recommended ‘a large Turkeycarpet, or an Axminster carpet, with a marooncoloured ground’.

There is evidence that Augustus WelbyPugin designed carpets for Lismore Castle, Co.Waterford, on which he worked with Crace in1850 for the 6th Duke of Devonshire, and forthe Palace of Westminster. He said to Crace,after working on wallpaper patterns ‘we musthave a turn at carpets next. Let us reform themaltogether’. He sent Crace some carpet designsin 1848, one of them a bold design for thePalace of Westminster (Aldrich, 1990).

The carpets for Buckingham Palace,Windsor Castle, Osborne House and Balmoral

160 Historic Floors

Figure 14.25 Carlton Towers, Yorkshire. Brusselscarpet, 1844. Beaumont heraldic shields on a purpleground with red lozenges (Photograph, TempleNewsam)

are illustrated in Queen Victoria’s SouvenirAlbums. At Balmoral, several of the rooms,including Queen Victoria’s bedroom, dressingroom and drawing room had tartan carpets. In1844 Lord Beaumont of Carlton Towers,recently ennobled, covered his library floorwith a Brussels carpet in crimson with blueshields each containing a fleur-de-lys and alion rampart (his crest). It is still there today(Figure 14.25). Heraldic carpets were popularin the mid-nineteenth century for families withantiquarian interests, such as the Fairfax-Lucysat Charlecote (Gilbert et al., 1987).

By the 1870s Beeton’s Housewife’s Treasuryadvised against comfortable close-carpeting ofrooms, and said that ‘The old style is nowgiving place to the far more healthy andcleanly mode of laying down a square ofcarpet in the centre of the room’. Thisheralded the return to fashion of the orientalrug.

Contemporary with Mrs Beeton was WilliamMorris who also believed in plain floors withrugs, many of which were designed for himby J.H. Earle. A fine surviving example is atStanden, East Grinstead, by Philip Webb of1894. Although the flowered drawing roomcarpet is not original to the house, nonethe-less it completes an important Arts and Craftsinterior and is one of the best surviving Morriscarpets. It was designed by J.H. Earle atMerton Abbey for Morris.

14.7 Floor cloths

The use of painted canvas floor cloths was firstrecorded in the early eighteenth century. Theyoffered a cheap substitute for carpets ormarble pavements. Although few exampleshave survived, they were very popular, partic-ularly in entrance halls, where they werepainted to resemble marble pavements. Theywere also used in passages, on stairs andround sideboards, to protect the floors fromstaining. As they were made from wideseamless sheets of canvas, the manufacturers

often established themselves in ports, wherelarge looms, used for weaving sails, wereavailable. Nairns of Kirkcaldy, Hare of Bristol,Nathan Smith of Knightsbridge, London arerecorded as suppliers. The canvas wasstretched on a frame, and then painted onboth sides with up to twelve coats of paintmixed with linseed oil, each laid on with atrowel. Finally the designs were stencilled, orhand painted. The finished cloths, which tookseveral months to dry, were extremely heavy,weighing as much as 41⁄2 pounds a squareyard.

Pattern books were produced, to advertisethe variety of designs available, some of whichhave survived. Robert Barnes’s scrapbook ofthe 1850s contained an account of his familybusiness, in Moorfields, London, and a rangeof colours and patterns. John Carwitham’sdesigns, although intended for stone andmarble pavements, were also adapted forpainted floor cloths.

At Attingham Park, Shropshire, a floor clothin the library is recorded in the sale catalogueof 1827, a ‘handsome slate and stone colouroctagon-panel roset-pattern Floor-Cloth toclose fit room round carpet’. The dining roomcontained ‘Turkey-pattern Floor-Cloth’. AtHarewood House the painting of oil cloths forthe sideboard area in the dining room wasrecorded by Chippendale in 1771, while in1818 Sir Walter Scott was given an oil cloth toprotect the floor under his sideboard (Gilbertet al., 1987).

By the early nineteenth century, when blockprinting was developed, Roman mosaics couldbe reproduced, and some of the recentlyexcavated pavements were copied. Hare andCo. of Bristol exhibited a floor cloth repro-ducing one of the Woodchester Romanpavements, excavated in 1849, at the GreatExhibition in 1851. Three rare examplessurvive at Calke Abbey, one of which is basedon William Fowler’s engraving of the Romanpavement at Storton, Lincolnshire.

Floor cloths were widely used in America inthe eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, andare well documented. Two fragments survive


in the Winterthur Museum (Fowler andCornforth, 1974).

Linoleum, patented by F. Walton in 1860,was found to be more durable, cheaper andeasier to manufacture, and rapidly took overthe market.

14.8 Ingrain carpets

These reversible carpets, woven without pile,were usually referred to as Scotch orKidderminster carpets. They were also madein the woollen districts of Yorkshire andLancashire. Ingrain carpets originated in theeighteenth century as a home cottage indus-try. However, the fashion spread, and by thelate eighteenth century Kidderminster had 200looms manufacturing flat patterned carpets.The carpets were reversible, cheap andhardwearing. In Scotland the centre of carpetmanufacture was, by the late eighteenthcentury, in Kilmarnock. Ingrain carpets werealso made in Stirling, Glasgow, Kelso andHawick. Their use in country houses bothnorth and south of the border, in the lateeighteenth and early nineteenth century, waswidespread, although there is little documen-tary evidence.

14.9 Matting

The use of rush matting in country housesfrom the Elizabethan period until this centuryis well recorded and illustrated in many Tudorand Stuart portraits. After the Restoration in1660 imported rush mats, often woven withpatterns, became popular and were known asAfrica, Barbary or Portugal mats. They weregenerally used in halls and passages. Their useis recorded at Hampton Court, Windsor Castleand Kensington Palace. Matting was used inthe Regency period, and during the lateVictorian and Edwardian era when cheapOriental matting flooded the European market(Gilbert et al.,1987).

14.10 Painted floors

Although the painting of floors was welldocumented from the seventeenth centuryonwards, very few have survived. It has beensuggested that the brief fashion for painted floorsto simulate marquetry may have come fromHolland, where many of the English aristocracywere exiled during the Commonwealth. AtCrowcombe Court, Somerset, the dining roomfloor was painted in c.1760 with a border foliagedesign with the Carew arms in the centre. AtBelton House, Lincolnshire (see Plate 62), theTyrconnel Room has a design of anthemionmotifs, with the Brownlow arms in a centralroundel, in black, brown and red. It may datefrom the building of the house in 1685(Thornton, 1978). Hanbury Hall, Worcestershire,also contains two painted borders, one in thedrawing room and another in an upper room.

An interesting painted mosaic pavement wasdesigned by John Yenn in 1792 for the guardchamber floor at Windsor Castle. The designwas partly derived from the Roman pavementexcavated at Saintsfield near Woodstock(Gilbert et al., 1987).

Painted floors in Scotland were morecommon than in England. Ian Gow (Gow,1981) records the existence of painted floorsin Edinburgh’s New Town, where bothstencilled and painted floors have beendiscovered recently, at 28 Marlborough Street,Portobello (1823) and at 3 Mansfield Place, anelaborate stencilled design in a bold red andochre painted fret design.

Flagged stone hall floors were painted toresemble black and white marble, inEdinburgh, at Balfour Castle in Orkney, and atAbbotsford, for Sir Walter Scott.

References

ALDRICH, M. (ed.) (1990). The Craces. Royal Decorators1768–1899. Royal Pavilion, Art Gallery and Museums.

BEARD, G. (1981). Craftsmen and Interior Decoration inEngland 1660–1820. John Bartholomew & Son.

BERENSON, B. (1960). The Passionate Sightseer. Thames &Hudson.

162 Historic Floors

DONATO, M. DI. Historical Floors. Farnese.EAMES, E. (1992). English Tilers. Medieval Craftsmen Series,

British Museum Press.EASTLAKE, C. (1868). Hints on Household Taste. Longmans

Green.FERREY, B. (1861). Recollections of A.N. Welby Pugin and

his father Augustus Pugin. H. Bolin.FOWLER, J. and CORNFORTH, J. (1974). English Decoration in

the Eighteenth Century. Barrie & Jenkins.FURNIVAL, W.J. (1904). Leadless Decorative Tiles, Faience and

Mosaic. Published by the author.GILBERT, C., WELLS-COLE, A. and LOMAX, J. (1987). Country

House Floors 1660–1850. Temple Newsam CountryHouse Studies, 3.

GIROUARD, M. (1979). The Victorian Country House. YaleUniversity Press.

GOW, I. (1981). Edinburgh New Town Painted Floors.Scottish Georgian Society Annual Report Bulletin, 8.

GRANT, I. (ed.) (1967). Great Interiors. Weidenfeld &Nicholson.

HERBERT, A. and HUGGINS, K. (1995). The Decorative Tile inArchitecture and Interiors. Phaidon.

JOHNSON, P. (1995). Romano-British Mosaics. 2nd edn.Shire.

JONES, J. (1993). Minton – The first two hundred years ofdesign and production. Swan Hill.

MORRIS, C. (ed.) (1947). The Journeys of Celia Fiennesc.1685–c.1703. The Cresset Press.

NEAL, D.S. (1981). Roman Mosaics in Britain. Britannia

Monograph Series No 1. Society for the Promotion ofRoman Studies.

NICKL, P. (1995). Parkett. Historische Holzfussböden undZeitenösische Parkett Kultur. Munich: Klinkhardt &Biermann.

NORTON, C. (1994). Medieval Floor Tiles in Scotland.Medieval Art and Architecture in the Diocese of StAndrew’s. BAA Conference Proceedings for 1986.

PARISSIEN, S. (1992). Regency Style. Phaidon.PEVSNER, N. (1961). Buildings of England,

Northamptonshire, Penguin, p. 112.PIGGOTT, S. (1978). Antiquity Depicted; Aspects of

Archaeological Illustration. Thames & Hudson.PRITCHARD, E. (1995). Ham House and its Owners Through

Four Centuries 1610–1948. (Privately published).SALZMAN, L.F. (1952). Building in England down to 1540.

Clarendon.THORNTON, P. (1984). Seventeenth Century Interior

Decoration in England, France and Holland. YaleUniversity Press.

THORNTON, P. (1978). Authentic Decor; The DomesticInterior 1620–1920. Weidenfeld & Nicholson.

THORNTON, P. (1991). The Italian Renaissance Interior.Weidenfeld & Nicholson.

WIHR, R. (1985). Füssboden, Stein, Mosaik, Keramik, Estirch– Geschichte, Herstellung, Konservierrung. Munich;Callwey.

WOOD, M. (1965). The English Medieval House. PhoenixHouse.


This chapter will concentrate on the issuesinvolved in the conservation of historic floorsexposed as a result of excavation, usuallywithin an archaeological context. Many of theissues and techniques involved will be famil-iar from other areas in the care of historicbuildings and monuments although, as isfrequently the case in conservation, the appli-cation may be slightly different from that origi-nally intended.

15.1 Preplanning

Archaeological excavations, either within build-ings or on open sites, like all aspects of thecare of built cultural heritage, require carefulpreplanning. Normally the archaeologist knowswhat he expects to find. However, in the pastthe archaeologist was less concerned with thelong-term care or preservation of the site oncehe had removed the intellectual informationand the portable finds from it. TheMediterranean and Near East is littered witharchaeological sites where no considerationhas been given to the problems of long-termpreservation of the exposed remains.

15.2 Recording

Elsewhere in this volume are contributions onthe various techniques of recording floors. But

the key aspect is to understand why they arebeing recorded. There are three key reasonsto record, each one requiring a different sortof record.

(1) During excavation the archaeologist willbe concerned with physical form,decoration, style, and the stratigraphicrelationship of the floor with the rest ofthe site.

(2) For conservation. The conservator will beconcerned with the physical condition ofthe floor and its component parts, thedecay cycles it will be subjected to, theneed to record any intervention, thecreation of a sustainable environment,and any modern intervention in thehistoric material.

(3) For maintenance. The maintenance of anexcavated floor will need a record thatcombines that of the archaeologist andthat of the conservator. It will often becritically important to monitor anychange to the condition of the floor orthe surrounding environment. This canoften only be done from the basis ofsound documentation.

15.3 Key decisions

Having located or exposed the floor thearchaeologist will have obtained the necessary

164

15

The conservation of the excavatedfloorDaryl Fowler

information from it and the surrounding layers.There is then a need to make the keydecisions:

(1) Should it be retained either on a tempo-rary basis or as a more permanentmeasure?

(2) Should it be preserved in situ, and if sowhat are the necessary environmentalconditions?

(3) Should it be preserved somewhere elseother than in situ?

(4) Does it need to be removed, to enablethe excavation to continue, or for otherreasons?

15.4 Threats

Having made these decisions it is necessary toexamine the implications and, in particular, thevariety of threats to which the floor is nowexposed.

It is possible to identify the main areas ofrisk and produce an analysis of the risks toeach area:

chemical destabilizationbiological attackanimal damageclimatic exposurevandalismtheft

Under normal circumstances the mostsuccessful approach to a conservation problemis likely to be ensuring a regime of environ-mental mitigation.

15.5 Long-term exposure

If a floor is to be exposed for a long periodof time then some sort of protection is essen-tial. Shelters come in various shapes and sizes.At their simplest they can be just an agricul-tural cover building. At the other end of thescale they can become substantial pieces of

architecture often rivalling the remains for thevisitor’s attention.

The most critical factor with a cover buildingis to understand that it will alter the localmovement of moisture across a site, not alwaysfor the long-term good of the floor. There havebeen a number of published studies on coverbuildings, but these all need to be applied toindividual sites with great care! (Agnew andCoffman) Rainwater disposal and the interfacewith groundwater movement are critical. Evenwhen a modern building completely spans a sitethe historic, unlifted floor which it is trying toprotect may be the only area left inside able torespond to varying climatic conditions whichwill inevitably result in increased moisturemovement and subsequent decay.

Around pavement areas modern drains canbe installed incorporating various techniquesto allow the ground moisture to evaporate. Butthese must all be tempered with a sensitiveanalysis of site conditions.

Frequently temporary shelters are essential,for protection in wintertime when it may bevital to keep the frost out of the ground. Infact, often the best way to protect, even in theshort term, is to rebury. However, even herea decision is not straightforward, as explainedlater in this chapter.

The presentation and interpretation can onlybe considered on a site-by-site analysis. Theguidance that can be given within this shortchapter must be kept to basic principles.

As a general rule it is essential to keep thepublic off the floor at all times. Even mainte-nance staff need to have an establishedroutine and method of access to ensure thatfoot damage is avoided.

There is often a desire to display a particu-lar floor by the application of a surface finishthat allows colours to be better appreciated.All we can do is counsel caution. Is theproduct reversible? Is the action really neces-sary? Has it been done anywhere else? Ageneral rule of thumb is not to do it and notto believe sales literature. Most conservationdisasters have involved the use of modern,often untested, materials.

Conservation of excavated floors 165

A proper maintenance routine is essential forthe long-term well-being of a floor, excavatedor modern. The excavated floor by its verynature is likely to be more fragile, so themaintenance specification must start with theoperatives themselves. How do they obtainaccess to the floors? What footwear is appro-priate? What cleaning methods are acceptableor unacceptable? These need to be specified.In some cases recording or re-recording a floormay become an essential part of a maintenanceplan and needs to be done on a regular basis.

15.6 Lifting floors

The techniques used to lift floors will varydepending on the size of pieces and the areainvolved. First of all it is necessary to questionthe intention of lifting the floor. Stone and claytiles can be dealt with by careful recorddrawings and subsequent packing andnumbering of the pieces, followed by later

relaying. It must be remembered in relayingthat the width of the joints will be critical toavoid the overall dimensions of the floorexpanding or contracting, especially if adesign is to fit back into an existing space.With this situation it is often best to reset thefloor and lay key parts of the design first andthen infill the plain panels.

15.6.1 Mosaics

Major issues need to be considered with thelifting of mosaics. There are museum stores allover the western world with pieces of mosaicfloor. These are either large, buckling andalmost impossible to move, or in some casesdecaying heaps of loose tesserae that havebecome detached from their ‘temporarysupport’. Before lifting a mosaic it is critical toestablish what will happen to it next: whereand what are the storage conditions? Loss instore is not uncommon, especially with thefailure of animal glues. Charts 15.1 to 15.3

166 Historic Floors

Chart 15.1 Introductory design matrix (based on a design matrix by Roberto Nardi)

show the main areas of concern for the treat-ment of mosaic floors. These are based onpreviously published papers of Roberto Nardibut have been expanded slightly.

If lifting is accepted then it is necessary todecide if the mosaic is to be lifted in one pieceor cut up into panels. Often the site constraintswill dictate this. Rolling and single-sheet liftingof mosaics requires good access for heavyequipment and unrestricted access to theedges of the mosaic. Lifting in small areasassumes that the panel or design can be subdi-vided into sensible units. In the past thedecorative borders and emblemata of mosaicswere the only pieces kept, but today theamount lifted probably would be a reflectionof how well the excavation was funded.

Before lifting it is essential to record andexamine the mosaic accurately. It is then consol-idated as necessary to withstand the strain oflifting. Local conservation issues of individualtesserae must be dealt with. The faces are thencovered with a protective surface. This is ofteninitially done with Japanese tissue set in ParaloidB72 in Chlorothene, loose tesserae being resetin a weak mortar (such as one part lime to fourparts stone dust). The whole is then surfacedwith two layers of cotton gauze or hemp clothwith suitable tails left for fixing to the rollers. Itis essential that the cloth is first washed, ironed,and edged to ensure it lies flat and true withoutcrinkles.

A timber drum or roller is made, on whichthe mosaic is to be rolled. This is usually


Chart 15.2 Design matrix for environments below 65% RH (based on a design matrix by Roberto Nardi)

purpose-made with guide rails set up along theedge of the mosaic. Using levers in holes in theedge of the drum, the mosaic can now becarefully undercut and, supported by the facing,the whole top surface can be rolled on to thedrum. It should be noted that the mosaic itself,without the drum, is likely to weigh in excessof 250 kg/m2. Heavy lifting gear will be essen-tial to transfer the drum and rolled mosaic.Before starting it is important to have plannedthe full programme of work to the floor, includ-ing its final resting place. In the past the mosaicwould have been rolled out on to a bed ofconcrete and brick aggregate in a museum, theresult being an immovable panel of great weightand with the concrete possibly contributing tothe long-term decay problem of the mosaic.

There are now various, currently fashion-able, techniques for the consolidation of therear of mosaic panels. It is important to stressthat it is very much a question of fashion andavailable materials. Perhaps the most success-ful technique involves the new generation oflightweight panels of aluminium honeycomb(Aero web) surrounded by a plastic skin andreinforced with glass fibre. These are set inaluminium T frames to form the basis of thenew mounting system.

First the mortar needs to be cleaned off therear of the mosaic, so it must be unrolled facedown onto a separating medium between themosaic and a prepared, level slab (such as1000-gauge polythene sheet). Then aftermechanical cleaning a new backing mortar can

168 Historic Floors

Chart 15.3 Design matrix for environments above 65% RH (based on a design matrix by Roberto Nardi)

be applied. Once this is set it can be grounddown to form a thin flexible layer, capable ofbeing re-rolled without mechanical failure. Themosaic on its new support could then be re-laid back at the original site, as was carriedout at the Paphos excavation in Cyprus by theGetty team.1

15.7 Earth floors

For the vast majority of buildings the rammedearth floor was the most common. The mixwill have varied from a chalk or soft limestonemix pounded into a clay-based floor that effec-tively sets. Once dry and with a suitable mixthis would have given years of wear. Thesurvival of these floors within the archaeolog-ical record is good, although once exposedthey are quite fragile. They are frequentlyfound both inside and outside extant build-ings.

In order to preserve the original floor it iscritical to keep people off the surface.However, in many situations the concept ofthe earth floor is more important than theoriginal material, and so maintenance isrequired to make up losses and decayed areas.In some cases excavators have decided toreplicate the floor, such as at the medievaltown house in French Street, Southampton.Here an earth–lime mix was laid in the build-ing and allowed to dry out naturally. It wasprotected from the subsequent building workon the monument and became too dry anddusty on the top surface; however, a lightwatering helped the lime to reactivate. Risingdamp is probably an essential ingredient in agood earth floor and the restoration of themedieval undercroft at French Street had keptthe floor too dry to ensure its full integrity.

At Fountains Abbey the twelfth-centuryearth floor of the west claustral range is stillregularly walked upon, and the maintenanceregime is largely filling up holes and depres-

sions – themselves mainly the results of poorbackfilling after archaeological investigations.The surface is a hard mixture of clay-basedsoil and lime. Elsewhere at Fountains Abbeythe earth originally had a thin plaster skin togive a more attractive surface, although thiswas obviously more vulnerable to wear.

15.8 Paved floors – stone

The excavated stone floor is usually a durablehardwearing surface, whether stone flags orpitched cobbles. However, it is rare that acomplete area of surface is available with asufficiently complete integrity to reuse itwithout repairs if the surface is to be walkedupon. This raises all the normal issues relatedto stone repairs and matching old and newsurfaces; decisions which I believe are besttackled site by site. In some places it is thecultural significance of the paving that matters.For example, at the Via Dolorosa in Jerusalemthe exposure of the Roman street pavementon which Christ may have trod is emotive totoday’s pilgrim.

Preservation issues are closely related tovisitor erosion, moisture movement or vegeta-tion. The stone flags, once exposed by excava-tion, will no longer be in a ‘stable’environment. The top surface of porous slabswill suffer from salt crystallization. The slightdifference in moisture levels may well encour-age biological growth, producing green algaeand more sophisticated plant growth inextreme conditions. Keeping visitors off thehistoric floor is a common theme throughoutthis volume, but in some cases this may beimpractical. The edge to the pool of theRoman Temple of Aqua Sulis at Bath is anexample of the balance required betweenvisitor access and conservation management.

15.9 Fired clay

Excavated clay-tile floors feature elsewhere inthis book. The physical problem of their


1 Conservation of the Orpheus Mosaic at Paphos,Cyprus, GC1.

conservation has much to do with themoisture movement pattern and the thermalstresses they will be subjected to, as well asphysical wear. Even very subtle changes maybe sufficient to tip a stable environmentalcondition into a destructive one. A spotlight 2or 3 m away from a tile surface can, inextreme conditions, cause the crystallization ofsoluble salts in the surface of the tiles andtheir subsequent destruction.

15.10 Materials for maintenance andrepair

Throughout this chapter reference has beenmade to the need for maintenance of theexcavated floor. It is vitally important for thewell-being of the floor, not to use Portlandcement for patch repairs. In some circum-stances concrete under slabs may be necessaryto provide support, but this needs to be donein the clear understanding that the Portlandcement is unlikely to be incompatible with thehistoric floor material. Joints and edges arecritical for the long-term welfare of the floorno matter of what material the floor is made.It is here that the breakdown of the key occursand the decay processes start.

15.11 Backfilling

Frequently the best decision is to rebury theexcavated floor, either as a temporary measurewhilst a conservation strategy is worked out,or as a more permanent solution for long-termpreservation. Some research has been under-taken on preservation by backfilling by EnglishHeritage (English Heritage ConservationBulletin, October 1989) and the GettyConservation Institute (Corfield, forthcoming)

In many ways the decision to leave a floorwhere it is raises more complex preservationissues than lifting it. Although low in capitalcosts the long-term monitoring of a backfilledsite is important if the well-being of the flooris critical.

Normally when a site is backfilled the soilis put back with little consideration for anyother matters, except perhaps for long-termsettlement and compaction. This method will,however, promote an aerated fill which willencourage plant growth and subsequent rootdamage. The reduced insulation of the loosesoil would also expose the floor to greaterthermal stresses, more equivalent to leavingthe floor exposed.

So the backfill needs to be specificallydesigned to carry out its task of protection.Consideration would need to be given to: thephysical properties of the backfill; the chemi-cal properties of the backfill; the morphologi-cal characteristics; the mineralogical contentand its stability; and the biological and organiccontent of the soil. All of these factors willcontribute to the performance of the overbur-den. It must never be forgotten that the abilityof an historic structure to ‘breathe’ is equallyessential for the buried floor. The requirementto transport groundwater and water vapourupwards to the surface is important. It may benecessary to create drainage layers of loosegravel such as the construction of land drainsto remove excess or unwanted groundwater.Man-made materials must be examined verycritically. Will anything leach out that could bedeposited on the buried floor? Plastic sheetinghas often been used as a marker horizon butmany types of sheet are quite unsuitable.Other factors that need to be consideredwould include weight, erosion resistance,organic and inorganic contamination. But itshould be recognized that a perfect material isunlikely to be immediately to hand, soinformed compromises might have to bemade.

The Getty Conservation Institute has beenexamining these issues; the conclusion of theirresearch has stressed the need for an intimatecontact between the floor surface and the fillso that no air pockets are created that wouldencourage salt crystallization. Geotextile sheetsoffer some potential to structure backfills, butthey must be selected with care (Podnery etal., 1993).

170 Historic Floors

Monitoring the condition of the floor can bedone by physical examination at a regularpreset interval, say every year or every fiveyears. This could be complemented withremote monitoring of subsoil condition. Thisis a very complex subject. In the city of York,it has been noted that since the constructionof a concrete slab on one site during the 1960sthe buried historic ground surface has actuallydropped by 300 mm during the interveningthirty years. This was probably due to thecomplex change within the subsoil hydrologyin the city. Indeed in a waterlogged subsoilthe chemistry of the water has a critical effecton the preservation of the archaeologicalrecord. There is still a great deal of work to

be done on the whole subject of backfillingand monitoring of archaeological levels. Asarchaeological investigating becomes moresophisticated, in situ preservation and non-destructive monitoring will undoubtedlybecome more important in the future.

References

AGNEW, N and COFFMAN, R. Development Evaluation of theHexashelter. GC1.

CORFIELD, M. (forthcoming). University of British Columbia,Hidden Dimension, the Cultural Significance of WetlandArchaeology. English Heritage.

PODNERY, AGNEW and DEMAS (1993). Preservation ofExcavated Mosaics by Backfilling. Papers of the VthConference of the ICCM at Conimbriga 1994, GC1.


Ham House, Richmond, is one of the bestpreserved, and certainly one of the bestdocumented seventeenth-century houses inEurope.1 In several rooms the panelling retainsits original wood graining in trompe l’oeil,Parisian furniture of the 1670s still stands inthe positions recorded at the time, paintingsin frames as early as c.1630 hang in the roomsfor which they were acquired. Most remark-able are the silk-damask-embroidered wall-hangings, faded but corresponding exactly totheir detailed descriptions in the seventeenth-century inventories. Ham was already redolentof another age when Horace Walpoledescribed its furniture in 1770 as ‘magnificentlyancient, dreary and decayed’ within a house‘so blocked up and barricaded with walls, vasttrees and gates, that you think of yourself anhundred miles off and an hundred years back’(Walpole, 1927–1928).

Despite the longevity of its reputation as anunaltered seventeenth-century locus classicus,Ham has not been immune from later alter-ations. Its subsequent owners may have beenmore antiquarian than their peers, but this didnot prevent them from bringing their house upto date. The three main periods of alteration

were in the 1730s and 1740s, about 1800, andin the late 1880s and 1890s, by the 4th, 6th and9th Earls of Dysart. Recent research has illumi-nated their contributions, and has revealed thatat Ham the seventeenth century cannot be fullyunderstood in isolation, but must be consideredin relation to what came afterwards. This iscertainly true of the floors, of both wood andmarble, which have been altered (not surpris-ingly) to a far greater extent than any otherelement of the woodwork. Thus, while thepanelled and carved woodwork provided bythe craftsmen named in the accounts of the1630s, 1670s and 1680s2 still survives intact,much of the flooring has undergone consider-able alterations, initially in the mid-eighteenthcentury, but most radically in the latenineteenth century. The National Trust’s refur-bishment of Ham, begun in 1990 when theVictoria & Albert Museum relinquished its lease,has revealed much about this process, and hasprovided opportunities to undertake repairs, toimprove the appearance of the floors and tobring seventeenth-century parquetry out ofstore and to replace it in its original position.

Ham House was built in c.1610, and wasthe home from 1626 of William Murray

172

16

Seventeenth-century and later floors atHam HouseChristopher Rowell

1 For the most recent general account of Ham House,its architecture, collection, garden and family history,see Moore et al. (1995).

2 The seventeenth-century Tollemache and Lauderdaleaccounts are published with a commentary in Thorntonand Tomlin, 1980a.

(c.1600–1655)3 a close friend of Charles I, whocreated him 1st Earl of Dysart in 1643. Likethe King, Murray was a connoisseur andcollector who, between c.1637 and 1639,employed royal craftsmen to create a first-floorstate apartment reached by an elaboratelycarved staircase. This was probably under thedirection of Franz Cleyn (1582–1658), aGerman, who had previously worked for theDanish Court. Cleyn worked under InigoJones, Surveyor of the King’s Works, on theroyal palaces, and Jones may have been theéminence grise behind the Ham improve-ments, which reflect the influence of Italianand French design constituting a rare survivalof Jones’s court style. The wooden floors ofMurray’s state apartment: the Hall Gallery(then the Dining Room), North DrawingRoom, Long Gallery and Green Closet, werefirst altered later in the seventeenth century,and were subsequently almost completelyreplaced in the late nineteenth century. Theplain boards of the Great Staircase must bealmost entirely nineteenth-century replace-ments, given that the staircase was extensivelyrestored, either at the beginning of thenineteenth century by the 6th Earl of Dysart,or at the end by the 9th Earl. The only floorthat definitely survives from the early seven-teenth century is that of the Great Hall.4 Amason’s bill of 1672 mentions ‘mending ye oldpaving in ye old Hall’, and therefore the blackand white chequered marble floor must dateeither from c.1610, when Sir Thomas Vavasourbuilt the house, or from the late 1630s whenhis successor, William Murray, was engaged inhis remodelling. At this time, the dais at theeast end was created when the Great Hall (seePlate 64) was extended and a round-headed

arch was constructed to lead into the GreatStaircase. The marquetry and parquetry daisfloor of walnut and cedar,5 which must alwayshave sat rather oddly with the black and whitemarble floor of the Hall proper, was clearlydesigned to link with the wooden floorbeyond the arch, and acts as a prelude to theelaborate, if somewhat crude, carving ofmartial trophies on the staircase balustrade. Itsgeometrical design indicates that it was laidduring the Duke and Duchess of Lauderdale’smajor campaign of interior redecoration in the1670s and early 1680s when the Great Hallmay have been repanelled, and the GreatStaircase was redecorated. The dais floor wastaken up and put into store some time before1954, and has recently been relaid by Mr JohnHart, the Trust’s local adviser on furnitureconservation, who also carefully replaced themissing sections (about 30 per cent) in theappropriate woods, toned to match the well-preserved original parquetry. The repairedfloors of the Inner Hall and Staircase nowcorrespond to the colour of the dais, havingbeen divested of thick layers of modern polishby Mr Hart.

All the floors of Murray’s first-floor rooms(i.e. between the Staircase and the LongGallery) were renewed in the 1890s by the 9thEarl of Dysart. Their oak parquetry, of geomet-ric design, is copied from the surviving floorof 1673 in the Queen’s Bedchamber, then theclimax of the State Apartment, which wasextended by the Duke and Duchess ofLauderdale after their marriage in 1672. TheDuchess, Countess of Dysart in her own right,was the daughter and heiress of WilliamMurray. Beautiful, intelligent and extravagant,her marriage to the Duke gave her the meansto aggrandize her family home with royalsplendour. John Evelyn described Ham in 1678as ‘furnish’d like a Great Prince’s’ and ‘inferiorto few of the best Villas in Italy itself’. The

Floors at Ham House 173

3 For William Murray as patron and collector, seeThornton and Tomlin, 1980b and Rowell, 1996.

4 Bill presented by the mason, John Lampen, in 1672(Buckminster Mss; quoted in Thornton and Tomlin,1980a, note 3, p. 38). Lampen also laid the matchingmarble floor of the Marble Dining Room (replaced byparquet in about 1756) and the existing black and whitemarble flooring in the Chapel.

5 For a detailed analysis of the woods used in thisfloor and in the Marble Dining Room, see the report byRowena Gale in the National Trust’s archive at PolesdenLacey, Surrey (unpublished).

Queen’s Bedchamber was completed in 1673for a state visit by Queen Catherine ofBraganza. The room is still named after her,despite being converted into a drawing roomin c.1744 by the 4th Earl of Dysart. For thispurpose, the four-inch high dais for the statebed was an inconvenience, but despite beingrelaid at the same level as the rest of the floor,its superb marquetry was retained (see Plate65). The resulting asymmetry of the drawingroom floor, with marquetry at one end only,clearly mattered less to the 4th Earl than thepreservation of one of the two finest floors inthe house.

The original configuration of the Queen’sBedchamber is best appreciated by referenceto the model commissioned by the Victoria &Albert Museum. Below the dais, the floor wascovered with oak ‘parquetting at 16s ye yard’.Geometric parquet was apparently first intro-duced to England by Charles I’s widow,

Queen Henrietta Maria, in her apartment atSomerset House in 1661–1662. The styleoriginated in late fifteenth-century Italy, butcame to England via France (where it hadbeen in use since at least the 1620s), andHolland.6 Its pattern, of alternating criss-crossand diagonal motifs within square fields, isvery similar to the floor depicted in a 1680sFrench engraving (Figure 16.1), and similarflooring of 1656–1657 is still in situ at theHôtel Lauzun, Paris.7 Both French and Dutchcraftsmen are recorded in the Lauderdaleaccounts (e.g. ‘Hendrick Mommers the DutchJoyner’) but this floor is known to have been

174 Historic Floors

Figure 16.1 A FrenchBedchamber of the1680s, engraving byJ.D. de St Jean(BibliothèqueNationale, Paris). Theparquet floor isidentical in pattern tothe floors of theQueen’s Apartmentlaid by Henry Harlowin 1673 (Copyright,BibliothèqueNationale)

6 For the history of such floors in Northern Europe,see Thornton, 1990, pp. 85–92, and Gilbert et al., 1987;for their origins in Italy, see Thornton, 1991, pp. 60–64.

7 For a colour photograph of the flooring at the HôtelLauzun, see Thornton, 1990, Plate IV.

laid by Henry Harlow, who also describedhimself as a joiner and who worked inpartnership in this room and in the adjoiningcloset with John Bullimore who carved thedecorative elements of the wall-panelling.Harlow billed for ‘wood given the Carver’ andfor ‘fitting his work in place’. Harlow’s ownmasterpieces are the elaborate marquetryfloor behind the balustrade of the dais, andthe similar floor in the Queen’s Closetbeyond (see Plate 66). On either side and infront of where the bed once stood are themonograms and coronets of the Duke andDuchess of Lauderdale in ‘Cedar inlaid wth

wallnutt tree’8 for which Harlow was paid 35sa square yard, more than twice the rate forthe parquetry elsewhere in the room. Thetechnique was similar to the inlaying of furni-ture with decorative woods cut in patterns.As well as cedar and walnut (in the Queen’sCloset a straight and cross-grained walnut iscontrasted), holly was used for the coronetsand ciphers, with box-stringing around theedges of the strapwork. The holly was stainedgreen for leaves, or in red and green toindicate the jewels set into the ducalcoronets. Shading was achieved by ‘scorch-ing’ (the selective charring of woods to givethree-dimensional relief to the marquetry). InFrance, this was called parquet marqueté orparquet de marqueterie, and was oftenexecuted by the finest cabinetmakers (Harlowsupplied furniture for the Ham library in1672–1673). For example, a drawing exists ofa more elaborate, but not dissimilar, floor,incorporating a cipher and crown, which waslaid in 1683 by Pierre Gole, the ébéniste du

roi, in the Cabinet Doré of the GrandDauphin at Versailles.9

Harlow’s floor in the Queen’s Closet, aprivate room beyond the dais, is the moreimpressive because it survives intact in a roomthat retains most of its original furnishings andfurniture, as described in the Lauderdaleinventories (see Plate 67). Here, there is alsoa dais, this time within an alcove, for theQueen to relax in private seated on one oftwo surviving ‘sleeping chayres’, throne-likebut comfortable upholstered chairs withadjustable backs. These must have faced eachother across the dais, revealing in betweenanother ducal coronet set into the floor.Harlow was paid £1 18s. 9d. for ‘cross-flooring’55 sq. ft. of floor to provide a firm support forthe ‘parquetting’ for which he charged£13. 4s. 0d. for 161⁄2 yards in 1673. The follow-ing year he had to spend nine days taking upand relaying the floor, perhaps as a result ofthe use it had received during the Queen’svisit. Floors of this kind were (and are) veryprone to the lifting of their inlay and were aconsiderable technical accomplishment, partic-ularly on the grand scale of the Queen’sBedchamber. The marquetry armorials workedinto Harlow’s floor in the Queen’s Closet areechoed in the hearth, fireplace surround andwindow-sill which were made in scagliola(here, in imitation of pietra dura) by a Romancraftsman Baldassare Artima, who was paid £5‘in Part for a Counter fitt marbleChimneypiece’ on 24 June 1673.10 The scagli-ola is in remarkably good condition, whichsuggests that the Queen’s Closet was rarelyused after Catherine of Braganza’s briefsojourn at Ham.

Another factor in the excellent state ofpreservation of the floors in the Queen’s apart-ment (which also included the room still called


8 Buckminster Mss., quoted in Thornton and Tomlin,1980a, p. 143. Celia Fiennes saw a similar floor in theState Bedchamber at Nottingham Castle in 1697: ‘ . . .thebed was rail’d in . . . the floore of the roome wasinlay’d with Cyphers and the Corronet . . .’ Morris, 1947,p. 73). A panel of marquetry flooring, similar to theHam examples, incorporating the cipher (post-1692) ofthe 1st Duke of Montagu and his second Duchess, nowserves as a table top at Boughton House,Northamptonshire (see Murdoch, 1992, Plate 9 and p.214).

9 Reproduced in Thornton, 1990 Plate 90.10 Buckminster Mss., no. 413. The discovery that thescagliola is Italian was made by my colleague, MissNino Strachey. Previously, it was thought to be Dutch(cf. Thornton and Tomlin, 1980a, p. 149).

the Queen’s Ante-Chamber, whose parquetfloor is en suite with the adjacent bedcham-ber) was their (at least partial) protection bycovers when the rooms were not in use.Among the ‘Winter furniture’ of the Queen’sBedchamber in 1677 were ‘Two Leathers tocover ye inlaid floore’ which were listed againin 1679 as ‘Two leather Covers for the Stepp’.11

This obviously refers to Harlow’s marquetry onthe raised dais floor where two covers wouldindeed have been required, one for each sideof the Queen’s bed. Several eighteenth-centurypieces of furniture at Ham retain similarleather protective covers which were providedby their makers as part of the original order.The Lauderdale inventories are full of refer-ences to covers for upholstery and wall-hangings, but this is a unique record of floorprotection. Only two rooms had decorativefloor-coverings – the Long Gallery, describedas ‘The Matted Gallery’ in 1679, and presum-ably laid with rush matting; and the NorthDrawing Room, provided with ‘One silkCarpet’ in 1683 – so it is not surprising that aconsiderable amount of floor repairs isrecorded in the Lauderdale accounts. It isinteresting that many more floor carpets andrugs (as well as table carpets) are listed in theinventory of 1655 (see Thornton and Tomlin,1980, pp. 6–33), taken on William Murray’sdeath, and several of these, described as‘Turkie’ or ‘Persiane’, must have beenextremely expensive. Given that theLauderdales were noted for their conspicuousexpenditure at Ham and elsewhere in the1670s, the absence of carpets in their inven-tories suggests that the new parquetry floorswere sufficiently novel in England to warrantno floor coverings, other than those requiredfor protection when the house was shut up.

The protection of the finest floors at Ham hasrecently re-emerged as an important issue, giventhe degree of public access that is now givento rooms that were intended to be private andexclusive. Fading and warping is minimized by

the use of blinds, sun-curtains, the applicationof anti-ultraviolet film to window glass and bythe installation (in 1991–1993) of a computer-ized environment control system that maintainsthe relative humidity at a conservation level.However, in certain rooms, physical protectionhas to be provided to allow visitors to see therooms at all. In the Queen’s Bedchamber andCloset, sections of the marquetry floors havebeen overlaid first with plastazoate foam, thenwith oil-tempered hardboard and finally withMDF boarding painted to match the marquetryby Miss Penny Wools. This has achieved theminimum visual disruption, and provided muchmore protection than a drugget. The sameapproach has been followed downstairs in theMarble Dining Room, where the painted board-ing has had to be laid in the shape of a ‘T’ toallow for the inevitable three-way traffic in thisroom.

The Marble Dining Room, at the centre ofthe ground-floor enfilade, takes its name fromthe black and white chequered marble floorthat was laid in 1673 to match the adjoiningGreat Hall floor. Only the threshold stepsurvives, given that the floor was replaced inparquetry by the 4th Earl of Dysart, perhapsin 1756 when he hung the walls with the exist-ing ‘Gilt Leather Hangings, Mosaic Pattern’which were provided by ‘John Sutton, LeatherGilder’. Like the leather hangings, the wooden

176 Historic Floors

11 Buckminster Mss., quoted in Thornton and Tomlin,1980a, p. 147.

Figure 16.2 The Marble Dining Room: cleaning themarquetry floor of c.1744 in about 1992 (Photograph,F.R. Latham)

floor inlaid with squares, diamonds andlozenges of walnut, cedar, ebony, rosewoodand poplar,12 is entirely in sympathy with theoak carved panelling of the 1670s, and thissuggests a consciously antiquarian approachby the 4th Earl. Much darkened by dirt andnumerous thick layers of polish, the floor hasbeen greatly improved by Mr John Hart’srecent repair and restoration (Figure 16.2).Originally, the decorative woods were gluedonto oak or deal support panels three feetsquare which were tongue and groovedtogether. The panels are fixed to the joists atthe corners by screws and nails – there is nocross-flooring to support the panels as in theseventeenth-century floors upstairs. They aretherefore more prone to damage, but the floorhas survived remarkably well, apart from theusual lifting and separation of the marquetry.This has now been fixed in place, with largergaps filled with slivers of stained balsa wood,thus allowing lateral movement.

The nineteenth-century plain boarded floorsin the apartments of 1672–1674 on either sideof the Marble Dining Room await similar treat-ment. Mr Hart has, however, already repairedand repolished all the parquet of the first floor,whether of the 1670s as in the Queen’sApartment, or of the 1890s as elsewhere. Inmost cases, its appearance was marred byexcessive dirt and clogging with polish. Oakfloors of this kind were traditionally waxed. Inthe Galerie des Glaces at Versailles, forexample, the floor was rubbed with ‘a littleyellow wax . . . so that the oak wood keepsits natural colour, or perhaps the wax willmake it a little yellower’ and ‘une brosse àfrotter le parquet’ (a brush to polish theparquet) was then employed.13 Mr Hart’s

approach has been similar, but the finalappearance remains darker than it would havebeen originally, due to subsequent wear andtear but also to a conscious decision that thefloors should marry with darkened panellingand faded furniture. Flooring, especially whenit is uncarpeted as in most rooms at Ham,makes an important contribution to the toutensemble of a house, and the improvement inthe look of the floors has been a significant,though a hitherto unsung, element of Ham’scurrent restoration.

Acknowledgement

No-one can write about Ham without acknowl-edging the generosity of Sir LyonelTollemache, Bt., in allowing the publication ofdocuments in the family archive at BuckminsterPark, Lincolnshire. All studies of Ham Houseand its contents also depend upon the publi-cations of Mr Peter Thornton and Mr MauriceTomlin, both formerly of the Victoria & AlbertMuseum. In compiling information for thisarticle, I owe a particular debt of gratitude toMr John Hart, one of the National Trust’sAdvisers on Furniture Conservation, whoserepair and restoration of the woodwork at Hamhas made a significant contribution to theTrust’s continuing improvement of the house.

References

GILBERT, C., WELLS-COLE, A and LOMAX, J. (1987). CountryHouse Floors 1660–1850 (exh. cat.) Temple NewsamCountry House Studies, 3, 29–33.

MOORE, C., ROWELL, C. and STRACHEY, N. (1995). Ham House.The National Trust.

MORRIS, C. (ed.) (1947). The Journeys of Celia Fiennes. TheCresset Press.

MURDOCH, T. (ed.) (1992). Boughton House: the EnglishVersailles. Faber & Faber.

ROWELL, C. (1996). A seventeenth-century ‘cabinet’ restored:the Green Closet at Ham House. Apollo, CXLIII, April,pp. 18–23.

THORNTON, P. (1990). Seventeenth-century InteriorDecoration in England, France and Holland (Originallypublished 1978). Yale University Press.

THORNTON, P. (1991). The Italian Renaissance Interior1400–1600.


12 For an analysis of these woods, see the report byRowena Gale in the National Trust’s Archive at PolesdenLacey, Surrey (unpublished).13 Daniel Cronström to Nicodemus Tessin the younger;see Les Relations artistiques entre France et Suède,1693–1718. Extraits d’une correspondance entrel’architecte Nicodème Tessin le Jeune et DanielCronström, R.A. Weigert and C. Hernmarck (eds.),Stockholm, 1964; quoted in Thornton, 1990, p. 89.

THORNTON, P. and TOMLIN, M. (1980a). The furnishing anddecoration of Ham House. Furniture History, XVI.

THORNTON, P. and TOMLIN, M. (1980b) Franz Cleyn at HamHouse. National Trust Studies, pp. 21–34.

WALPOLE, H. (1927–1928). Journal of visits to country seats.Walpole Society, XVI, p.67.

178 Historic Floors

17.1 Introduction

In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries,floors seem to have been seldom polished. AnAmerican visitor to England in 1772 describedthem being ‘washed and rubbed almost daily’,so that they ‘have a whitish appearance, andan air of freshness and cleanliness, which thefinest inlaid floor has not always’. Small beerwas sometimes used to scrub floors, and sowas vinegar. But washing, because it made aroom damp and could damage pieces of furni-ture and skirtings, was not as popular inpractice as dry scrubbing. Susannah What-man’s manuscript housekeeping book of 1776advises the use of ‘as little soap as possible (ifany) in scouring rooms, Fullers earth and finesand preserves the colour of the boards, anddoes not leave a white appearance as soapdoes. All the rooms to be dry scrubbed withdamp sand’.

Hannah Glasse in her ‘Servants Directory’,published in 1760, also recommends thismethod: ‘take some sand, pretty damp, but nottoo wet, and strew all over the Room, throw-ing it out of your hand hard, and it will flyabout the Floor and lick up all the Dust andFlew . . . sope is not proper for boards, andsand and water shews the grain, which is thebeauty of a Board’. An alternative was tosweep the floor with herbs: ‘take Tanzy, Mint,and Balm; first sweep the Room, then strew

the Herbs on the Floor, and with a long hardBrush rub them well all over the Boards, tillyou have scrubb’d the Floor clean. When theBoards are quite dry, sweep off the greens,and with a dry Rubbing brush dry-rub themwell, and they will look like mahogany, of afine brown, and never want any otherwashing, and give a sweet smell to the Room’.

Without a large labour-force at hand to cleara room of furniture and to wash or dry-rubfloors almost daily, it is hardly practicable toemploy such methods today, particularly inhouses open to the public, where floors gener-ally need the protection of polish. On theother hand, it should never be forgotten thatthe dry, silvery look of old boards (in a roomlike the Saloon at Uppark) is infinitely prefer-able to the high polish too often seen ineighteenth century interiors today. (Manual ofHousekeeping: published by Penguin Books inassociation with The National Trust.)

Uppark, a late seventeenth-century countryhouse on the South Downs overlooking theEnglish Channel, altered twice in theeighteenth century and again at the beginningof the nineteenth century, was severelydamaged by fire in August 1989. During thefire, which destroyed the upper floors androof, nearly all of the historic contents fromthe principal ground-floor rooms were rescuedand, despite the intensity of the blaze whicheventually enveloped these ground-floor

179

17

Historic floors at riskUppark, a case study

Iain McLaren

rooms, nearly half of the architectural fittingsand finishes from these rooms survived,undamaged, so that they could be reinstatedwith little more than superficial cleaning.

The National Trust had acquired theproperty in 1954 and opened the ground floorand basement rooms to the public; its chiefattraction was the interior, largely untouchedsince the 1850s, with only the minimum neces-sary care and maintenance since then. TheNational Trust decided to repair Uppark tomatch its appearance on ‘the day before thefire’ using as many salvaged components aspossible and employing traditional materialsand methods because:

(1) The rescued contents had a long andintimate connection with the house andneeded to be returned to an appropriateand familiar setting.

(2) Sufficient of the fabric had survived tomake an authentic repair possiblewithout resort to invention or specula-tion.

(3) The National Trust, as custodian of amajor part of the nation’s heritage, wascommitted to the promotion of conser-vation craft skills.

(4) The Trust was fully insured for repair,and funds, which could not be divertedelsewhere, were available. Neverthelessthe insurers would insist on a soundcommercial approach; sentiment alonewould not justify conservation, it had tobe no more expensive or cheaper thanreplacement with new of equivalentquality.

The four-year repair and conservation contractcommenced on site in June 1990 and,precisely one year after the fire, the first brickswere laid on the wall tops ready to receivethe massive new oak roof beams and trusses.By this time the task of removing the ash anddebris from the house was complete and themajor operation of retrieving the remnants andassessing the damage to the floors was welladvanced.

17.2 Construction of the floors, andextent of the damage

On the upper two floors, the structural floorsconsisted of oak beams and joists coveredwith plain softwood boards, approximately25 mm thick and varying in width between150 and 225 mm. This structure had beendestroyed in the fire.

At ground-floor level the floorboards were,in the main, plain oak boards of roughly thesame dimensions. Two rooms, on the eastflank, had softwood floors of presumablynineteenth-century origin. Despite the appar-ent intensity of the blaze, all of these timberfloors at ground-floor level, with the exceptionof one destroyed by falling masonry, survivedwith remarkably little damage. It becameevident, as the salvage operation progressed,that the blanket of ash and debris from above,made soggy by firefighting water, had effec-tively insulated the surface of the floors(Figure 17.1).

In the Stone Hall, the original easternentrance to the house, the Purbeck stone floorwas unaffected by fire but suffered impactdamage from falling debris.

At basement level the floors were mainlystone slabs laid directly on the chalk below,but only in two or three rooms did the origi-nal historic floors remain untouched bymodern repairs and reconstruction. Althoughflooded by firefighting water none of thesefloors suffered lasting damage from the fire.

17.3 The salvage operation

The bulky debris and ash was carefullyremoved, with the ash being then sieved forrecovery of usable remnants. This exposed thefloors where each board was first numberedand recorded before being lifted and trans-ferred to an environmentally controlled storenearby. It was discovered, during this opera-tion, that each board was fixed to its neigh-bour by means of irregularly sized and spacedhand-made dowels, and fixed to the joist

180 Historic Floors

below with a nail driven at an angle throughits edge. It proved impossible to remove thesesecret fixings without damaging the boards,usually immediately below the nail. It was alsodiscovered that the boards were finished onthe top face and edges only, the undersidebeing planed only where it sat on the joistsbelow.

The variety in width and length of eachboard, coupled with the pattern of dowels andjoist bearings, meant that no two boards werethe same.

17.4 Archaeological finds

The floorboards themselves revealed nothingmemorable or important but in The RedDrawing Room it was discovered that one partof the suspended floor structure had beenrepaired with old window frames carved outof the solid. It was known from other sourcesthat the window sills at Uppark had beenlowered, possibly during the first majorremodelling of the 1750s (although a date of1771 was found on one extended jamb) andit seems likely that these recycled joists were

the original window frames. Although muchcut about and mutilated, the dimensions corre-sponded. These joists were repaired andstrengthened where necessary but otherwisenot altered during the repair operation.

In the Stone Hall, where the Purbeck flagswere damaged by falling debris, suspicionswere raised by a severe outbreak of dry rot inbasement lintels nearby. It seemed likely thatfirefighting water, and later rain water, hadpercolated through the floor and had found itsway to these lintels, thereby creating idealconditions for dry rot fungus to flourish. Inorder to avoid the cost of an abortive removalof the stone slabs, a radar survey was firstcarried out, which indicated that a series ofvoids probably existed under the stone slabs.This examination was sufficient to persuadethe insurers that removal of the entire floor fora full examination was justified and indeedwhen this was done the remains of an earliertimber beam and joist floor was found embed-ded in the rubble fill over the brick support-ing vaults. These timber remains hadundoubtedly encouraged the development ofthe dry rot fungus adjacent. It became appar-ent that the stone floor was not part of the

Uppark, a case study 181

Figure 17.1 Uppark. Ash anddebris being removed fromthe Red Drawing Room,revealing the floorboardsintact (Photograph, TheNational Trust)

original construction of the house, but hadbeen inserted in place of a timber suspendedfloor. The inventory of 1705 refers to a ‘StoneHall’ and the context suggests that it could bethis room, which would indicate that the alter-ation took place soon after the house wasbuilt.

After removal of timber debris and therubble fill the brick vaults were sterilized byprolonged ventilation and fungicidal sprays;the slabs, having been numbered on removal,were put back on a new bedding in theirprevious positions, including about a dozenbroken and cracked slabs, where fractureswere simply filled with mortar, no attemptbeing made to disguise the extent of thedamage.

It was also discovered that one of the stonefloor slabs was carved on its underside with alion’s head, now mutilated to fit in the spaceavailable over the brick vault. The stylesuggested that it had been part of a sixteenth-century decorative panel, probably from agateway or a chimneypiece but no actualsource has been identified. A plaster cast wasmade before the slab was returned to its origi-nal position.

17.5 The philosophy of repair

Of the eight timber floors in the principalground-floor rooms, it proved possible tosubstantially reinstate five with relatively minorand peripheral repairs; one, in The LittleDrawing Room, needed about 50 per centreplacement, and those in The Little Parlourand The Flower Room were renewed entirely.

The key elements of the repair philosophyfollowed the principles established at theoutset and applied to the work as a whole.

Structurally sound boards were alwaysreplaced in exactly their previous positions(see Figure 17.2): repairs to significant scorch-ing and charring were carried out by piecingin with the same timber, done in such afashion as to appear almost invisible on firstentry to the room but always discoverable

under close examination. Boards damagedbeyond repair or missing altogether werereplaced with timber of matching species andgrain. This repair and replacement materialcame from salvaged stock, none was boughtin. Some, especially softwood, came from firstfloor boards found in the rubble. Oak wastaken from places normally hidden, such as ina cupboard under the main stair. The decisionto replace the radiators in the window embra-sures with floor trench heaters meant that auseful source of original material becameavailable where these trenches were cut.

Where substantial or total replacement wasnecessary, new boards were purchased andartificially finished to impersonate an agedfinish.

There was considerable debate on the desir-ability of importing genuinely aged boardsfrom architectural salvage merchants. On theone hand, an authentic appearance could beobtained without resort to subterfuge (whichwas in any event never particularly convinc-ing) but on the other hand there was the riskthat old boards could have been improperly,or even illegally, stripped from a historic build-ing despite the vendor’s assurances to thecontrary. The Trust, and its professional advis-ers, were determined to avoid the charge ofbeing involved, however remotely, in thedestruction or spoiling of other historic build-ings. This rule need not be slavishly applied,however. The origin of anonymous items suchas floorboards cannot be easily proved, if atall, whereas identifiable items such as, forexample, complete staircases may perhaps belegitimately transported from one building toanother if the circumstances are known andapproved by the statutory authorities.

At Uppark the wisdom of the decision notto import salvaged boards was furtherreinforced when it emerged that the cost of sodoing was substantially more than startingafresh with new, and then applying an artifi-cially aged finish.

Where boards suffered surface scorchingwithout serious loss of structural capacity, thescorch marks were left visible. Many are

182 Historic Floors

Uppa

rk, a ca

se stud

y183Figure 17.2 Uppark. Ground floor repairs – the Red Drawing Room (The Conservation Practice)

visible today, with carpets and other furnish-ings in place. Although it had been The Trust’sintention not to display evidence of the fire inthe house, it became obvious, as the boardswent down, that some token of the catastro-phe was a legitimate expression of the historyof the house, in much the same way as thefaded paintwork and gilding had been leftunimproved, to demonstrate the passage oftime.

Refixing of the boards, where one edge wasbadly splintered on removal, proved to beeasily accomplished simply by starting againon the other side. The original dowel holes –and sometimes original dowels – were re-usedand replacement dowels cut by hand whereneeded (see Plate 68).

No attempt was made to take out uneven-ness in the floor, not only because it wouldhave been inappropriate in the context of anaged building, but also because surviving andreinstated panelling already incorporated theundulating contours of the original floor alongits bottom edge.

17.6 Fire resistance

The fire at Uppark gained hold quickly,passing through unprotected floors with ease.In the reconstruction the new upper floorswere built to provide one-hour fire resistance,not only to comply with statutory requirementsto protect residential accommodation (underSection B of the Building Regulations) but alsoto protect the property and its contents.

This was accomplished, on the upper floors,by underdrawing the joists with silicate boardand filling between the joists with mineralwool, an entirely modern practice. The newsoftwood boards were tongued and grooved toprovide the requisite barrier against smokepenetration. There was sufficient room, withinthe new structure, to make these changeswithout reducing the original room heights andthereby the need to adjust the dimensions ofsalvaged components at ground floor level wasavoided.

At ground floor level the situation wasdifferent, particularly in those rooms – themajority – where the original floor structureremained. The basement ceilings had allsuffered substantial damage and had to bereplaced; access for fixing linings to the under-side of the joists and for inserting mineralwool was made available by the removal ofthe ceiling remnants. But it was with the provi-sion of the smoke seal on floor level that diffi-culties were encountered. It would have beenunthinkable to have jettisoned these boardsmerely to have complied with the BuildingRegulations; it was important also not to inter-fere with the historic, albeit awkward, fixingmethod. The solution adopted was to layintumescent cord in the joints, just prior todriving the boards home on their dowels, butit has not been entirely successful. A year aftercompletion, the cord is prone to being suckedout by vacuum cleaners and then has to betediously encouraged back into the joint:sometimes the cord breaks and then a sectionis lost and cannot be replaced on the spot. Amastic intumescent sealant had been consid-ered and rejected as being too difficult – orinconvenient – to replace in the event of theboards being lifted for necessary maintenance.It might have been better, perhaps, to haveaccepted that the boards were nearly impossi-ble to lift without the risk of dislodging thesmoke barrier and to have acknowledged thatin the unlikely circumstances of the floorbeing disturbed a convenient means of replac-ing the smoke seal was not warranted.

17.7 Structural loading

It hardly needed calculations to be done toknow that the repaired ground floor atUppark would not comply with the modernBuilding Regulations standard of 4 kN/m2 forPublic Assembly. However, what is oftenperceived to be a major obstacle to thesuccessful repair of a historic building provedto be a triviality at Uppark. For when thevisitor route was plotted on the floor plan it

184 Historic Floors

was found that the routes invariably felloutside the middle third of the span, wherethey might have been critical. This, coupledwith the restrictions placed on visitor numbersas a management policy, meant that nowheredid the actual loading exceed the capacity ofthe floor structure as calculated by theBuilding Regulations.

On the upper floors, in residential use only,the regulation standard of 1.5 kN/m2 wascomfortably met without a fundamental depar-ture from the pre-fire arrangement.

17.8 Finishing techniques

The National Trust desired that the floors inthe principal rooms at Uppark, should bewashed only and not given any other form ofsurface treatment, in accordance with tradi-tional practice for floors of this type and asdescribed in the Trust’s own Manual ofHousekeeping (compiled by Penguin Books inassociation with The National Trust): an extractfrom ch. 5, dealing with surface treatmentsused in the past, is reproduced at the begin-ning of this chapter.

The salvaged floors, repaired and refixed,were still grubby from the fire. The first clean-ing operation was carried out by scrubbing thefloors with damp sand applied with a bristlebrush. The debris was then removed with asilicone sponge. This process proved to beremarkably successful in transforming theappearance of the floors although in theDining Room, the one softwood floor to betreated in this manner, there was a tendencyto soften the grain, producing many splinters.At a later stage the floors were washed withclean water which removed further quantitiesof ingrained dirt from some rooms. In theSaloon, where the boards were narrow andtight grained, most of the dirt came out duringthe first scrubbing operation.

A number of experiments were conductedto ascertain the best method of artificiallyageing new boards, which were fitted in TheSmall Drawing Room (oak, about half), in The

Little Parlour (pine, all new) and in TheFlower Room (oak, all new). These experi-ments ranged from applying various dilutionsof lime water to bathing a sample board inammonia fumes, but none was found to beeither controllable or successful. In the end,water-based colour stains were used, whichcertainly gave an impression of age, but thereis clearly no effective substitute for thegenuine passage of time, particularly onsoftwood floors where the alternating bands ofsummer and winter growth become clearlydifferentiated by foot traffic over time.

In The Little Parlour, where the pine floorwas entirely renewed, the initial effect of thestain was certainly not convincing but after justtwo seasons of visitor traffic the boards havebeen sufficiently abraded to create a moreacceptable aged appearance.

In practice, with carpets and druggets inplace, the shortcomings of the new work arenot readily noticeable. Conversely, the charac-ter of the repaired old boards is an importantaspect of those rooms where they havesurvived.

In the Staircase Hall, where a high percent-age of old oak floorboards survived butwhere the oak staircase was almost entirelynew, the surface of the staircase was finishedwith a traditional beeswax polish as it hadbeen before the fire. Whilst it was relativelyeasy to achieve a convincing aged colour inthe wax, no attempt was made to injure thesurface of the new wood to simulate naturalwear and tear. It was felt that the subtledistinction of texture between old and newwas an appropriate testimony to the catastro-phe, whereas to have expressed the differ-ence more vividly would have distracted theeye from an appreciation of the room as awhole.

17.9 Records

An essential ingredient of the Uppark repairproject has been the assembly of a detailedrecord of the work, both for academic inter-

Uppark, a case study 185

est and for monitoring the performance of thevarious techniques employed.

Each floorboard had, at the outset, beengiven a ‘small find’ number and these haveformed the basis of the drawn record of thereconstruction, together with an account of thematerials and methods used by the contractor.

17.10 Stone floors in the basement

These floors survived the fire and subsequentflooding with relatively little damage andmight not have been disturbed at all had it notbeen necessary to introduce several newdrainage lines under the floor slabs.

There was considerable evidence of earlierdisturbances and in several rooms the originalstone slabs had been replaced by modernconcrete, sometimes overlaid by mastic asphalt.Only in the Beer Cellar and in some of thecorridors did the original stone floor remain,and in all of these the tight joints of the firstconstruction, still visible in many places, hadbeen lost to the depredation of later genera-tions who evidently cared little about thesefloors and who were content to put backscarred and chipped slabs with broad mortarjoints, often with a high cement content.

Nevertheless it was felt that these admit-tedly ugly interventions were as important atestament to the building’s history as themuch more significant and important finishesin the principal rooms above. These slabs had

to be lifted and they were replaced exactlyas found, but substituting hydraulic lime forthe Portland cement previously used forpointing. Drainage inspection covers have, inthe main, been concealed under slabs andtheir location carefully marked on thedrawings.

17.11 Conclusion

The repair and conservation of Uppark wasimportant for many notable achievements,amongst them the revival of defuncteighteenth-century plastering skills, also thedevelopment of special decorative finishes andtechniques.

So far as the floors were concerned thework proved that it was possible to success-fully rescue and restore these humble yetimportant features of the building’s interior, atno more cost than total replacement, and inthe context of a rigidly controlled contractprogramme.

Had the fire occurred twenty years earlier,the whole project might not have been under-taken; ten years earlier and the floors mighthave been completely renewed. But there canbe no doubt that the reinstatement of theseold floors, however patched and scarred,makes an immensely valuable contribution tothe quality and character of the restoredrooms, confirming that the decision to repairand conserve, rather than replace, was thecorrect one.

186 Historic Floors

18.1 Background

Although there are floors of other materials inthe Palace of Westminster, only the coloured,patterned encaustic floor tiles found in theprincipal circulation areas of the building areconsidered here. The concept of the encaus-tic tiles, that of impressing a decorative shapeinto the top surface of a plain tile and thenfilling the depression with a clay slip of adifferent colour before firing, goes back tomedieval times and has its beginnings in thethirteenth century.

The craft died out in the sixteenth centurypartly as a consequence of the dissolution ofthe monasteries but the process was revivedduring the nineteenth century when it waspatented by Samuel Wright in 1830 and devel-oped and brought to perfection by HerbertMinton, greatly encouraged by the interest ofthe energetic Augustus Welby NorthmorePugin in his enthusiasm to promote medievaldesigns.

18.2 General

Retiling of the floor of Temple Church in 1841with tiles made by Minton focused attention

on the success and potential of the newprocess and in a paper dated 22 February 1843addressed to His Royal Highness Prince Albert,K.G. in his capacity as ‘President of HerMajestey’s (sic) Commissioners for encourag-ing the Fine Arts in connexion (sic) with therebuilding of the New Houses of Parliament’,Charles Barry suggested, amongst many otherthings, ‘That the floors of the several halls,galleries, and corridors should be formed ofencaustic tiles, bearing heraldic decorationsand other enrichments in colours, laid inmargins and compartments, in combinationwith polished British marbles’.

The suggestion was apparently acceptedand as a result there are many areas of encaus-tic tile pavement in the Palace. They range insize from under 1 m2 to the largest, the RoyalGallery, which has a floor area of 478 m2 (seeFigures 18.4a and 18.4b).

The earliest example is in the Peers’ Lobby(Figures 18.1a and 18.1b). It was laid in 1847and by early 1852 the Central Lobby (see Plate69) and St Stephen’s Hall were completed andin use. According to Benjamin Ferrey’sRecollections of Augustus N. Welby Puginpublished in 1861, Pugin wrote to HerbertMinton in January 1852 saying ‘I declare yourSt Stephen’s tiles the very finest done in the

187

18

Encaustic pavements. Conservation,protection and replacement issuesThe Palace of Westminster

A.T. Jardine

© Parliamentary copyright 1998

tile way; vastly superior to any ancient work;in fact they are the best tiles in the world, andI think my patterns and your workmanship goahead of anything’.

The tiled floor areas do not consist entirelyof encaustic tiles. They are divided into panelsof various shapes bordered generally witheither slate, marble or other stone, and thepanels are themselves often further sub-divided by the inclusion of small slabs of slate,

or black or chocolate brown tiles to relieve theeffects of the colour in the encaustic areas.The principle of panelling, compartmentingand relieving with monochrome was estab-lished by the medieval pavement designers.

There are various shades of slate laid inconjunction with the tiled areas and they rangefrom blue-black to grey-green. Despite manyenquiries it has not been possible to ascertainthe sources of the original slates, or to matchall of the colours. The Builder magazine of1845 stated that ‘An immense quantity of theslate from the quarries on the estate of theKnight of Kerry, Valentia Island, has beenordered for the New Houses of Parliament’.

The areas of white stone associated with thetiles are of Hopton Wood, a DerbyshireLimestone.

Apart from the Peers’ Lobby, where the tilesrun parallel with the walls, and Central Lobbywhich has a unique octagonal layout, the tilesin most other areas are laid diagonally.

So far as the tiles themselves areconcerned, the majority were designed byPugin. Except for the large tiles used in thePeers’ Lobby which are about twelve inches(305 mm) square, and the centre of CentralLobby which is composed of concentric ringsand some circular tiles (Figures 18.2a and18.2b), most of the tiles are six inches(152 mm) square.

188 Historic Floors

Figure 18.1a Peers’ Lobby, Palace of Westminster(Photograph, George Garbutt)

Figure 18.1b Tiles from Peers’ Lobby, Palace ofWestminster (Photograph, George Garbutt)

Figure 18.1c Tiles from Peers’ Entrance, Palace ofWestminster (Photograph, George Garbutt)

Normally the original tiles are one inch(25 mm) thick and consist of a top and bottomlayer of fine clay separated by a rougher mixof red grog. The undersides are impressedwith holes to assist drying out and keying andthe words, MINTON & Co PATENT STOKE ONTRENT, and a number, thought to identify theperson who made them. No date stamp hasbeen found on any of the tiles lifted so far.

There are two main types of patternconstruction in the tiles: those in which thedecorative colours are separated from oneanother by the background colour, and thosein which at least two of the decorative colourstouch one another without separation by thebackground colour. Colours used areharvest/cane, terracotta, red, blue, black, white,chocolate brown and, in the Central Lobbycentre-piece only, green. The greatest numberof colours found in any one tile is five.

Tile patterns include gothic lettering, heraldiclions, shields, and foliated designs some ofwhich can stand alone whilst others arecombined in sets to produce a complete pattern.Some patterns are produced in different colourcombinations. The coats of arms on the tiles inSt Stephen’s Hall include those of knights whofought at the battle of Crecy (Figure 18.3).

It is of interest to note that not all of thetile arrangements read as a complete design,

being disrupted in some cases by the lack of continuity of the pattern across adjacenttiles.

Public buildings – encaustic pavements 189

Figure 18.2a Tiles from Central Lobby, Palace ofWestminster (Photograph, George Garbutt)

Figure 18.2b Tiles from Central Lobby, Palace ofWestminster (Photograph, George Garbutt)

Figure 18.3 Tiles from St Stephen’s Hall, Palace ofWestminster (Photographs, George Garbutt)

18.3 Records and recording

Old guide books, magazine articles, photographsand other illustrations record the existence of anencaustic pavement at a particular time.Definitive pattern detail is not usually givenalthough a guide book may provide details ofany wording. Areas of tiling are visible in theblack and white photographs of the interior ofthe Palace taken by Sir Benjamin Stone in thelate 1800s and early 1900s but the specificpatterns are not usually clearly discernible.

Black and white photographic surveys havebeen made of the major pavements in thePalace and these are presented as rectifiedphoto-mosaics showing the whole pavement.

The tiled floor to the Members’ Lobby of theHouse of Commons was lost as the result ofSecond World War bomb damage and unfor-tunately its specific details appear to beunrecorded.

As more and more wear takes place, it isvery important to ensure that a good record iskept of the pattern and colours of everyindividual tile design. This is being done bytaking high quality colour photographs.Fortunately, in most areas, wear is not uniformand the pattern repeats into less worn areasso that sample tiles should also be available.This may not always be the case and, in theabsence of a good tile sample, any futurereplacement will have to rely on good photo-graphic records for the correct details.

18.4 Monitoring wear

Wear can either be monitored by takingregular accurate level measurements at strate-gic points, or by comparing the loss of patternshown on photographs taken at intervals. Thelatter method is only applicable if a part of thepattern is already completely worn away. Theheaviest wear follows the heaviest traffic butis accentuated where pedestrians changedirection and where softer stone adjacent tothe tiles has worn down more quickly, puttingextra stress on the harder tile surface.

18.5 Consequences of wear in aheavily used ‘live’ historic building

It is inevitable that in a very busy ‘live’ historicbuilding still being used every day for thepurpose for which it was originally built thefloor surfaces will eventually become badlyworn. Daily records are not kept of thenumber of people entering the building but itis believed that on one day as many as 20 000people did pass along the Line of Route, afixed path followed by authorized visitorsthrough the principal spaces of the Palace.

In addition, daily users of the buildinginclude the Peers, Members of Parliament,Officials and Staff, and visitors to the Strangers’Galleries of both Houses, to Committees, tofunctions, on Parliamentary business, or tolobby their Member of Parliament.

Parts of the most heavily used floors havebecome very worn. They are getting progres-sively worse and many are nearing the end oftheir practical life-cycle. This has resulted inthe loss of part or all of the pattern from someof the tiles and a slightly undulating profile tothe surface of the floors generally, includingthe stone and slate slabs. Generally the effectof the wear is aesthetic rather than hazardousalthough some of the tiles have sufferedmechanical damage such as cracking andbreakdown of their outer layer revealing theinner core material.

In order to consider the problem as compre-hensively as possible, a Working Group wasset up with the objective of examining all thefactors, both philosophical and practical,affecting the wear, replacement and retentionof the original floor tiles in the Palace. TheGroup included representatives from theParliamentary Works Directorate, EnglishHeritage and a tile manufacturer, advice beingsought from others as required.

There are three main consequences of thewear, historical, aesthetic and safety.Historically, the wear represents the significantloss of an important part of the original fabricof the building which once gone cannot berecovered. Aesthetically, the architect’s original

190 Historic Floors

concept for the appearance of the tiled floorsis degenerating and the appearance of theinterior of the Palace is that much poorer asa result. The full pattern and colours of thetiles are an integral part of the architecturalcharacter of the interiors of the building andare there to be enjoyed as such. It is a regret-table fact that in their present state of wear,many of the tiles no longer radiate their origi-nal vitality and with people walking on themthey will continue to deteriorate.

Because the colour which is left is, in manyareas, very thin indeed now, it is anticipatedthat the rate of loss of the remaining colourin those areas will accelerate, making amarked change to the appearance of the floorsin a relatively short time.

From the safety point of view, the gentleundulations are probably not too great ahazard. Holes caused by the breakdown of thestructure of a tile and in which narrow heelsmay catch are potentially a greater hazard.

18.6 Protection and day-to-day care

The Palace is a highly used, living, workingbuilding, not a museum piece and to preventpeople from walking directly on the tileswould be to deny the building its properfunction. The reality of the situation is that thetiled floors of the Palace are neither everlast-ing nor indestructible. However attractive theymay be in their own right, they were madefor walking on, and it is inevitable that theywill wear out. The process is not reversible.

Regular cleaning of the tiles to remove dirtis carried out using a dry or slightly damp mopand clean water. No cleaning agents are used.

In such a busy building as the Palace it isnot considered that there is any real benefit inapplying polish as it would soon wear off theheavily used areas and build up in anunsightly way on adjacent lightly used parts,causing a maintenance involvement.

To introduce a protective layer, e.g. acarpet, between the walker and the tileswould be to destroy the aesthetic effect of the

tiles, although it can prolong their life. Indeedsome tiled floors in the more private areas ofthe building have been carpeted over toreduce noise and to improve comfort. Stripsof regularly maintained barrier matting areprovided at the main visitor entrances toreduce the amount of grit and dirt carried ontothe floors.

As well as being subject to wear from foottraffic, the floors are potentially at risk fromheavy objects being dragged over them, bypreparations for the State Opening ofParliament, and by works to the adjacentfabric of the building. Every effort is made toavoid damage by the use of soft-wheeledtrolleys, briefing operatives on the care whichneeds to be taken, and by the use of physi-cal protection such as boarding or sheeting asappropriate.

18.7 Assessment of wear/condition

Because many of the tiles have quite busydesigns on them, loss of pattern is not alwaysvery obvious to the casual glance. However, aclose visual inspection of a pavement doesreveal the amount of loss of pattern and physi-cal damage which has been suffered. In orderto quantify and record this, a more compre-hensive assessment was made of some of thetiled areas and colour-coded drawings pro-duced. This assessment involved first drawinga plan of each bay of each pavement to alloweach tile to be clearly identified. By using asimple three-colour code, the condition andstate of the pattern of each tile was recordedon the drawing and an overview of the generalstate of the pavement obtained. The systemcan be further developed to evolve a strategyfor remedial work and to assess the number oftiles of each pattern needing replacement.

The colours used were:

green: for tiles in good condition and withno loss of pattern. Very slight damage,such as edge chipping was accepted;

yellow: for tiles which had begun to lose their


pattern but not so badly as to detractfrom the overall appearance of thefloor. Such tiles might give a furtherfifteen or twenty years or more ofuseful life;

red: for tiles which were badly damaged,had completely lost their pattern, orhad lost so much pattern that theirvisual value was impaired anddetracted from the overall appearanceof the floor.

Tiles in the yellow category occurring in apredominantly red area would be consideredfor replacement, but would probably be left ina predominantly green area.

Because the system demands that each tilebe examined, this was a most revealingexercise. Hitherto unnoticed repairs, wronglysubstituted tiles and previously replaced areaswere detected. Slight changes in the generalcolours showed up replacement tiles, as didsubtle changes in the colours used to infillparts of the pattern. Some of these changesappear to be deliberate but not too obvious.Were they made to identify the replacements?Bearing in mind that encaustic tiles were stillbeing produced at the beginning of the twenti-eth century, replacements could have beenproduced up to that time without any diffi-culty, and possibly as a matter of course,without raising any particular interest.

18.8 What can be done?/What shouldbe done?

It is a key principle of conservation that mater-ial constituting original fabric of the buildingis maintained in use for as long as possible.In the case of the tiles, therefore, they shouldnot be replaced until they are either a dangeror so much of their original pattern has beenlost through wear as to seriously detract fromtheir intended visual impact.

Possible action ranges from doing nothingat all, through various degrees and combina-tions of leaving, repairing or replacing individ-

ual tiles, or replacing groups of tiles.Wholesale replacement of completepavements is not considered to be either desir-able or necessary.

There is only one way to allow the build-ing to be fully seen and used as it wasintended, and to allow the interiors to reflectthe character with which they were conceived,and that is to replace areas of badly worn tileswith new ones at such time as the original tilesare judged to be aesthetically unacceptableand/or unsafe, having kept them in situ for aslong as possible.

18.8.1 Replacement tiles

It is a prerequisite for the replacement of anyencaustic tile that a satisfactory replacement iseither available or can be manufactured. Otherthan a few held in storage, the specificpatterns which are associated with the Palaceof Westminster are not available ‘off the shelf’and each one has to be purpose made. This,in itself, is a lengthy process demanding closeliaison with the tile manufacturer and includesselecting a good example as a model, produc-ing an accurate computer image of the pattern,making an accurate mould, developing areplacement of acceptable quality andmanufacturing replacements for use.

As in Victorian times, much of the tile-making process is manual and highly skilled.Although there is now much greater controlover the firing, the outcome from the kiln isnot always entirely predictable and this maymake it necessary to undertake some devel-opment and experimental work which candiffer from pattern to pattern.

The modern replacements are only half thethickness of the original Minton tiles. This hasno affect on their appearance or performancebut saves material and assists manufacture.

In 1979 a bay of tiles in the southeast cornerof the Royal Gallery which had been damagedduring the Second World War was replaced.This was followed in 1980 and 1981 by twocorridors off Central Lobby. In each case totalreplacement was undertaken.

192 Historic Floors

An area of about 3 m2 of new tiles was laidat the west side of the Lower Waiting Hall in1994, as a pilot scheme. This demonstratedthat new tiles of an acceptable quality for thearea concerned could be manufactured, andalso showed that the existing tiles in the areahad once been lifted and relaid in a strongcement mortar which prevented their removalwithout damage.

18.8.2 Practical considerations

In order to confine replacement to minimumareas, it may be necessary to remove smallareas of worn tiles from within larger areas oftiles in good condition. The skill and ability toremove worn tiles without damaging adjacentgood ones is most important, as is the abilityto lift existing tiles in good condition withoutdamaging them. If tiles in good condition canbe lifted undamaged, they can be re-used ordisplayed. In the case of the Palace it is theintention to retain one good example of eachoriginal tile pattern for record purposes.

Of particular concern in this respect is thecentral design in the Central Lobby floor. It is

in poor condition and shows several repairswith incorrect substitute tiles. If removed, itshould ideally be retained but this is onlyfeasible if the tiles can be released undam-aged.

18.9 Conclusion

It is clear that apart from the relatively fewtiles which are suffering from mechanicaldamage and breakdown, the effect of the wearis generally aesthetic rather than hazardous. Itis also evident that over the years there hasbeen a process of replacement and repairtaking place, including coloured resin repairsto small localized areas of damage to individ-ual tiles.

Full consideration must now be given toretaining as many of the original tiles for aslong as possible whilst recognizing safety,aesthetic, and practical factors. This will leadto defining in detail the extent to which tilesneed to be replaced and the development ofa comprehensive conservation regime.


Figure 18.4a Tiles from the Royal Gallery, Palace ofWestminster (Photograph, George Garbutt)

Figure 18.4b Tiles from the Royal Gallery, Palace ofWestminster (Photograph, George Garbutt)

St George’s Hall, Liverpool, stands as an extra-ordinary architectural triumph of its period.The brilliant concept of a young Classicalarchitect, Harvey Lonsdale Elmes, who died atonly thirty-three years of age, the building wasfinally completed by his greatly seniorcountryman, Charles Robert Cockerell, andincorporated both the highest engineeringskills and the finest craftsmanship of theVictorian era in Britain.

The Hall was designed to serve multiplefunctions, including those of law courts; withthe vicissitudes of history, and the withdrawalin 1984 of this element of its use, a period ofneglect ensued. Only more recently has therestoration of this great monument beenundertaken, and a phased programme ofrepairs commenced, with the intention ofbringing it back into early use.

The commanding feature of the magnificentcentral space at the heart of this building – theGreat Hall – is immediately its decorative floor,patterned throughout and principally inencaustic tiles (see Plate 70). The medievalcraft of making these resulted, between thetwelfth and sixteenth centuries, in their exten-sive use in ecclesiastical buildings all overEurope. But in Britain, with the Reformationand the closing of the monasteries between1540 and 1560, this skill had virtually died; forsome three centuries, encaustic tiling hadbecome a forgotten art.

In the mid-nineteenth century, when thenew wave of archaeology swept the country,enthusiasts began to discover the sites of theold kilns, and to examine and record thedesigns of surviving medieval tiles in cathe-drals and churches. Furthermore, in 1843Prince Albert was present at a soirée at thehome of the Marquis of Northampton, atwhich a revival of the technique was demon-strated. Soon afterwards its author, HerbertMinton, was commissioned to exercise hisskills in tiling floors at Osborne, Isle of Wight,the summer residence of Queen Victoria. Bornin 1793, Herbert was the son of ThomasMinton, whose business he had joined in 1817;by 1828 he had become interested in revivingthis lost craft: the company were soonforemost in producing large quantities of tiles,and for a rapidly growing market furtherstimulated by the work of the most prominentarchitects, among them Augustus W.N. Pugin.The magnificent Hall floor at Liverpool,executed in 1853, immediately followed hissuccesses at Osborne and the Palace ofWestminster, but exceeds them in grandeur asone of the finest examples of its kind.

The overall design of the resulting floor, byCockerell and Gruner, is contained within aframework of diagonal panels, in turnsupporting a celebration of great overlaidcirclets, set very much like lilies in a pool,and each surrounded by multiple margins of

194

19

Historic floors at riskSt George’s Hall, Liverpool

Donald Insall

elaborate concentric design. Four curvingbands of figures designed by Alfred Stevensrepresent the sea, supervised by Neptunewith his trident and accompanied bydolphins, sea-nymphs, mermaids and mermenand enclosed by a Greek key-pattern frieze(see Plate 71). The central feature is a Royalcoat-of-arms; flanking it are the arms ofLiverpool, the star of St George of England,the Rose of Lancaster, the Thistle of Scotlandand the Irish Shamrock. Against the organ isthe Prince of Wales’ feathers motif, later tobe repeated in the Parliament buildings atMelbourne; other designs recur in therecently repaired floors of the Capitol build-ing in Washington, USA. Lettered inscriptionsaround the perimeter of the design refer tothe bas-reliefs in the ceiling panels above,and include the themes of Temperance,Prudence, Art, Science, Justice and Fortitude.Their borders in turn are set in Portlandstone, laid flush with the tiling.

The decorative central area of the floor isrecessed by five steps below its outer border;the upper level serving as an extended plinthto the ground-floor wall supporting a galleryabove: this device also permitted the inclusionof input grilles for warmed and conditionedair. From an early date, however, and as apractical expedient both to level and protectthe central floor, it has been covered by aremovable wooden decking (see Plate 72).This was rarely removed, so that the fulldesign of the stepped floor was only occasion-ally to be seen.

A detailed study of the fine architecturalinteriors and features at St George’s Hall wascommissioned by the City of Liverpool in 1991with the support of the J. Paul Getty GrantProgramme and was executed by DonaldInsall and Associates, Architects. Their reportrecommended that more practical alternativesto this heavy emergency decking should nowbe considered; a suggestion was made thatthis might be formed of thin plywood sheet-ing on a polystyrene cushioning layer, andmight carry a patterned carpet repeating thedesign of the decorative floor beneath.

In the event, a modern version of the earlierwooden floor-decking was constructed and isnow in use. But the significance of this tempo-rary protection of both dates is that even after140 years of life, the central area of the tilingremains in remarkably good condition.

It is the surrounding raised sections of thefloor around the perimeters which now showthe effects of most wear; this is particularlymarked around the principal entrancedoorways. The effect has been that the stoneborders have become dished and show differ-ential wear, while the patterned surface of thetiling itself has in many instances simplybecome degraded and worn.

The tiles in turn now display with greatclarity by their varied ageing the two ways inwhich they were made, and which result intheir entirely different wearing characteristics.

The ‘geometric’ tiles forming the backgroundof the design are of fired clay, consistent incolour and texture throughout their thickness.Their general colour is, as a result, virtuallyunaffected by wear and erosion which havehad little effect upon their appearance andhere become relatively less noticeable.

The ‘encaustic’ tiles, on the other hand, therevival of whose manufacture had been soenergetically encouraged by the young PrinceConsort, reflect the medieval technique. Theclay is mixed, sieved and compressed, thende-watered and forced into moulds. Within thebody of each tile the pattern is built up incoloured clays, taking care to scrape back thesurface to an exact level, and fused with thebase in a single firing. The resulting tile carriesdecorative designs of different coloured clays,laid upon and set into the plain clay body andfired with it as one.

The differential wear which has resulted istoday quite marked. In terms of surface erosionand tangible loss of thickness, it is thesurrounding stone margins which have becomeabraded and out-of-line, particularly wherethey abut the harder tiling. The tiled areas onlyreally show their wear in panels of the encaus-tic variety, where the multi-coloured patterninghas begun to fail, and the sharpness, clarity

St George’s Hall, Liverpool 195

and detail upon which the design depends hasin turn become blurred, so that a great floornow shows its age.

The repair of this damaged floor immedi-ately introduces the age-old philosophicalproblems in terms of the acceptable degree ofrenewal, and of the relative importance of thedesign and of its original materials andworkmanship. In addition, it may well be saidthat the mellowing effects of time arethemselves one of the attractions of an oldbuilding, and that the texture and pattern ofage can have a subtle value of their own.

Very similar problems have of course beenencountered in the case of other encaustic tilessuch as those of the flooring at the Capitol inWashington, where a few purist visitors havesuggested that the sense of age and of historyhas in part been sacrificed. There is, perhapsfortunately, no argument in relation to thesefloors about any significance of individualvariations and of human artistry in the actualcraftsmanly execution of the design, as apartfrom its concept. As ever, it is a decision reallybetween the relative claims of originality, ofdesign survival and of the marks of time, andof the relative values of each. And on this,there is inevitably room for differences ofassessment; of subjective value and of sheeropinion.

Firstly perhaps, one asks how damaged isthe design, and how far its unity and detailcan now be saved and its life extended forcontinuing enjoyment. Some of this has beenlost in the case of the roundels, but somesurvives, as no doubt do both deliberatehistorical records and much accidentalevidence such as old photographs. It seemslikely that missing elements could be recreatedwithout undue intervention or hypothesis.

The question arises, however, that althoughthe process of manufacture fortunately is notlost, and is being actively practised again andwith considerable skill and care, new tileshave initially and inevitably a sharper colourthan the old ones – unless, that is, a new andsoftened set of colours is introduced. In turn,one cannot forecast how differently these

might age, and how apparent with increasingtime might be the intrusions of modern repair.

H. & R. Johnson Tiles Ltd have given usefuldetailed recommendations for repairs. Theypoint out that the very accuracy and tightjointing of the original tiling may produceproblems of their own, since it is difficult tobreak out and extract an individual damagedspecimen without danger to adjoining tiles, letalone to shape and rub to exact dimensions anewly fired tile and replace it with minimaltolerances into an existing, finely jointedpattern.

The replacement of individual tiles will, theystress, be labour-intensive, and of course morecostly per tile than in whole panels, but it maybe appropriate where there is a localized fault,such as a deteriorating crack or chip. Theconsultants have, therefore, suggested thatlimited local areas might now be lifted, partic-ularly in areas of marked or excessive wear,any salvaged tiles being grouped for re-usetogether elsewhere. In this way, any contrastof newly introduced replacement tiles mightbe accommodated within the design in a lessdisruptive and patchy way, and the new panelwill possess a more acceptable unity withinitself. As it happens that the maximum wearhas occurred at the main entrances, which area focal and symmetrical element within thedesign of the Hall, the symmetry and balanceof the whole floor design may in this way notbe unduly compromised. In practical terms,the difficulties of laying new tiles among, andpossibly damaging, the existing ones will bereduced. The intention will thus be to keepareas of physical replacement to a minimumcompatible with restoring missing anddamaged areas of the original design.

Perimeter zones bring two particularproblems. A scrolled edging pattern to themain panels has lost some of its detail: but theplain terracotta-coloured base thus revealedseems not inappropriate and could well bemaintained at this point, sacrificing here thecompleteness of the pattern to the moreacceptable claims of age. This solution willalso provide acceptably for the way the

196 Historic Floors

leading edge of some tiles has now becomeexposed by the wearing of the adjacent stone,and where a marriage of wear-levels thusremains possible.

The long lettered panels present another,different question: the rear edge-tiles retaintheir form, although worn, but the front onesare quite worn away. In this case either thefront ‘letter’ tiles only can be renewed, accept-ing their worn partners, or else both may bereplaced, releasing salvaged ones for similaruse elsewhere.

Whilst there can be no definitive solution inadvance and on every detail, these proposalsaim to be conservative in restoring to the Hallsomething of the splendour of the originalfloor, from which the worn areas now somuch detract. It is recognized that individualdecisions on detail must still be taken as thework proceeds and as the skills of replace-

ment are worked out, in the conservation ofany fine work of art.

Lastly, the question of continuing mainte-nance deserves special consideration and care.The British Ceramic Tile Council and theBritish Institute of Cleaning Science point outthat ceramic floor finishes are easily kept cleanby regular sweeping, afterwards washing withwarm water to which a little soapless deter-gent has been added. Cleaning agents such ashousehold soap may react with very hardwater, producing a scum which has in turn tobe removed; thorough final rinsing is againvital. But normal usage must be constantlywell-monitored to avoid physical damage ormisuse. A fine decorative feature such as thisdecorative tiling is at the same time a practi-cal floor finish, and also a work of art in itsown right, and worthy of every continuingcare.

St George’s Hall, Liverpool 197

The term ‘sheer weight of numbers’ is appliedto a varied range of situations but when usedin the context of floors, the literal truth ismeant.

The abiding nightmare of all owners ofbuildings where the public congregate is thecollapsing floor, with the danger of peoplebeing hurled into the void beneath. Staircasescan be even more hazardous than floors; eventhe best managed properties are not immuneto potential disasters.

At Woolsthorpe Manor, near Grantham, thesupporting beams under the parlour floor ofthis modest Jacobean manor house suddenlygave way in 1974 and six visiting Americansended up in the cellar below. Fortunately theysuffered no serious injury and afterwards atleast two were able to dine out on theirmishap.

At Dyrham Park, near Bath, the main stair-case of this late seventeenth-century mansionand an adjacent floor were found to havesagged due to the weight of visitors.Fortunately the damage was spotted beforeanyone was put at risk and the staircase isnow closed. This danger does underline,however, the need for each property to haveeffective and comprehensive public liabilityinsurance.

Common sense dictates that a structuredesigned for use by a family and its servantsmust suffer when subjected to an influx of

visitors that in many instances can numberover a million during one decade. In theextreme case of Chartwell in Kent, a Victoriancountry house rebuilt in the early 1920s forthe Churchill family, the number of visitors in2000 was 144,300 and, even worse, these wereconcentrated into one season of seven months.Double that number and you have the alarm-ing total of 288,600 shod feet shuffling overthe floors in just one year.

In National Trust properties regularly opento the public the number of visitors rose from3 million in 1970 to more than 10.5 million in2000. The most popular house in terms ofnumbers was Polesden Lacey in Sussex. Thesame trend applies to properties managedprivately, the most popular of which attractmany more visitors than any National Trusthouse.

When fashion dictated that women shouldwear stiletto heels the damage these lethalshoes did to floor surfaces was immediatelyapparent. It is calculated that the averagesharp heel with a tip one-sixteenth of an inchsquare exerts a concentrated pressure of 960lbs. Two heels resting on a few square inchesof floor can therefore exert nearly a ton ofpressure between them, causing irreversibledamage to wooden floors in particular. This iswell illustrated at Dyrham Park in Avon wherestair treads and the landing floor have beenseriously scarred and pitted (see Plate 73). No

198

20

The open house – the management ofvisitorsChristopher Hanson-Smith

wonder, therefore, that visitors’ shoes withstiletto heels must either be covered in anexpendable plastic overshoe or the wearers beasked to remove them. Plastic slippers are socheap at under 10p a pair that there is noneed to recycle them.

A visitor to the great summer palaces of theRussian Tsars or the evocative Polish Warmuseum in Warsaw will experience theshuffling lines of bemused visitors floppingaround in felt overshoes. These seldom fit,easily fall off and make it impossible toclamber up stairs or cross carpets. They do,however, prevent damage to the exquisiteinlaid floors and give them a high polish. Thedisadvantages of these overshoes make themimpracticable for all but a very few houses thathappen to have uniform floor surfaces withoutcarpets or druggets. An added advantage is thatvisitor numbers can be controlled more easily.

Help will soon be forthcoming, however, inthe shape of overshoes with crepe rubber non-slip soles; the whole shoe being easilywashable. They evolved in response to thedemand for shoes that could be easily wornby visitors with access to wooden-deckedmarinas and the polished decks of expensivecruisers moored alongside. The cost of thesemore sophisticated overshoes is at least £6 apair; surely a perfect candidate for enterpris-ing sponsorship?

Such measures, however well they preventthe damage inflicted by ill-shod visitors, do not

address the root causes of overcrowding inhouses and subsequent long-term damage tofloors. Ways must first be found to monitorthe wear-and-tear and then to determine thesustainable visitor capacity for each property.

The National Trust has already identifiedtwenty-five of its houses where overcrowdingat peak periods must inevitably result in formsof restricted entry. The damage caused tofurniture, textiles, wall coverings and skirtingboards is more noticeable than the potentiallymore serious but obscured damage to thefloors beneath the visitors’ feet. The means ofmonitoring such damage are equally asrelevant to floors as they are to artefacts. Theremedies also remain the same.

Management of visitors 199

Figure 20.1 Themeasurement of peak particlevelocity (PPV) made on 30August 1993, in theExhibition Room at Bateman’sin Sussex (Courtesy of theNational Trust and HelenLloyd and Paul Thomas)

Figure 20.2 Sign warning against use of stilettoes –Temple of the Winds, Mount Stewart House, Co. Down,Northern Ireland

Each room or area on the visitor routecommands a desirable capacity at a level thatcreates optimum viewing conditions withoutprejudicing the prime need for conservation.Estimates are then made of the maximum safecapacity for each room, followed by the desir-able capacity sustainable over a season. Thereis usually a 30 per cent difference between thetwo estimates. Staircases, hallways and corri-dors must be allotted similar capacities thesum total of which, when added to those ofthe connecting rooms, give two figures thatenable the property managers to manipulatethe numbers and concentration of visitors.

Such a survey points to pressure points ina house where unacceptable levels of usageneed to be avoided. Examples are cul-de-sacsthat cause double the levels of circulation.

The insidious and cumulative wear-and-tearcan best be recorded by regular monitoringover a season with the findings entered onrecord sheets, one for each item at risk in eachroom. The same work is required for floors inorder to spot not only visible damage by scuff-ing and stamping but any underlyingmovement within the structure.

Floors can be timely pointers to structuraldamage that may not otherwise show itself;loosened parquet surfaces with gaps appear-ing between the blocks are a ready guide tostructural stresses. The effects are even morepronounced when the floor has already beenweakened by damp or worm infestation.

It is now scientifically possible to assess theforces that have the potential for damagingbuildings thanks to practical research inNational Trust buildings by Helen Lloyd andTim Mullany, the initiative having first beentaken by ICOMOS. Their method was to applythe indicator of peak particle velocity (PPV) asthe velocity of particles set in motion by adisturbance, whether man-made or throughthe ground. Structural fatigue can easily beinduced by high levels of vibration over shortperiods and also by lower levels for longerperiods.

Thus the duration of vibration levels has adirect effect on structural response. Research

in houses that attract high visitation hasalready identified PPV levels on a range offloors which exceed international guide levels.A geophone transducer is used for these tests,placed on the floor and as near to the visitorroute as possible.

The natural frequency of a particular floorcan be defined by using a simple ‘single heeldrop’ technique in an empty room. The resultsof this impact test, coupled with the PPVreading for that particular floor, give an excel-lent indication as to the level of risk andpotential damage. This is obviously not aremedy in itself but triggers action to preventfurther damage; the most important decision isthat of determining the optimum visitor levelfor the property at risk.

The one possible measure that conserva-tionists all agree should not be tried is that ofextending the hours of visiting in order toeven out the flow of visitors. Experienceshows that the essential cleaning regimen iscurtailed and excessive exposure to light alsoresults. Many properties impose a limit of 600hours per annum of public access to roomswith a further 400 hours allowed for cleaningand maintenance. The total of c.1000 hours isregarded as a safe maximum limit. A simpleformula is for each room to be maintained forone hour for each day it is opened to view.

Light bleaches all wooden objects and floorsthat are inlaid or painted are particularly atrisk. More obvious still is the insidious damageby excessive light to carpets, rugs and runnerswhich are often only there to protect the floorsbeneath them. The best protection is a closelywoven, woollen carpet of Wilton quality asrecommended by the International WoolSecretariat – and the thicker the better.

Beneath any carpet an underlay will prolongits life and below both should be a thickcarpet paper that acts as a barrier to risingdamp and prevents an underlay from markinga wooden floor.

Carpets woven from the coarse wool of theCumbrian Herdwick sheep have been tried inhouses that experience great visitor pressure.Such tough covering works well provided that

200 Historic Floors

the carpet remains dry; it is very hard to dryout in situ. For small rooms ‘Felt Lux’ isadequate but it is only produced in a narrowrange of colours and is inclined to ‘walk’unless an underlay is attached to it. Plasticdruggets are not a sensible option as conden-sation beneath them can cause mildew in thecarpet protected and those with raised bubblesto produce a non-slip surface can causepermanent pitting in the carpets as well.

Sisal matting is a cheaper alternative to thethick rush matting which can cost more thanthe best Wilton carpet. The drawback to sisalis that it can mark the wooden floors it issupposed to protect so carpet paper is againnecessary. It is well suited, however, to brickand stone floors.

At entrance doors coir matting, preferablyfitted into a shallow well, is essential and, likethe Wilton carpet, the thicker the better butnot so heavy that it cannot be beaten orshaken. To be certain of removing dirt fromshoes not less than three yards of matting arerequired in a continuous length leading fromthe entrance. Even with this barrier there is noguarantee that the deep clefts in ribbed rubbersoles will yield all their hidden gravel and grit.

Retained sharp stones can cause greatdamage to bare floors and stair treads so it iswise not to have any loose surface immedi-ately outside the entrance to the house. Pea-sized washed gravel embedded in eitherfibreglass or tarmac is both practical and looksgood.

Oak floors stand up to constant heavy wearbetter than any other wooden floor incommon use. They will last much longer ifcovered by a permanent layer of wax, such as‘Traffic’ wax, which needs to be appliedweekly. Another recommended coating is‘Premier Clean and Buff’. Any such barriershould be non-slip as the safety of visitorsmust be of prime consideration, and nowherein the building is this more important than onstaircases.

Some of the more elderly visitors are notused to stairs as their homes are often retire-ment bungalows so staircases must be

equipped with bannisters or handrails andproperly lit; often difficult to achieve in listedbuildings.

Distractions on stairs such as windows onhalf-landings giving spectacular views orpictures hung on the walls of stair wells canoften cause people to trip and fall. Carpets onsteep stairs can be dangerous on the descent.The incidence of scuffed treads and risers isgreater as stairs are mounted so visitors shouldideally be led up carpeted stairs and downuncarpeted provided that they have a non-slipsurface. Marble treads can be treated with aPlatinum Emulsion polish which is dilutedwith water as required.

The most effective way of containingdamage is to manipulate the frequency, theflow and the absolute numbers of visitors.People are amenable to control and evenmore so if the reasons for it are spelt out.

Instruction begins with the literature publi-cizing the particular property at risk. Tellingintending visitors that they are about to entera building which is sensitive to excessive wearwill either put them off altogether or heightentheir anticipation and awareness of it. A morefragile environment will evoke greater sympa-thy which, in turn, makes the visitor morereceptive to instructions.

Before the entrance is reached discreetnotices should announce the need for visitorsto keep to demarcated routes and heed the


Figure 20.3 Many properties now use timed tickets

advice of the staff on duty. The guides,stewards, room wardens, attendants, docents –whatever their title – must be firm, sympa-thetic and well-informed about the measuresnecessary for preserving the structure andcontents of the building. Many will be volun-teers and deserving of as much training as thepermanent staff – how else can they beexpected to inform effectively? They are at the‘sharp end’ in direct contact, very occasionallyin conflict, with the public and have the bestopportunity to explain, cajole and politelyremonstrate with wayward visitors.

John Bailey, who was chairman of theNational Trust in the late 1920s, stated then thatpreservation may always permit access, whilewithout preservation access becomes foreverimpossible. This stark message must encouragevisitors to think of the long-term futureprospects of the house they happen to be in.

Membership of organizations dedicated topreserving buildings and their contents shouldnot just be seen as a seasonal visiting card; thereare responsibilities as well. It is in this frame ofmind that visitors should be ‘sold’ the conceptof the rationing of access by timed entry. Thesustainable capacity of the house having beenset, the number of tickets distributed will ensurethat the safe maximum at peak periods will notbe exceeded. Thus the property, floors in partic-ular, will not suffer; the quality of visit will beenhanced – no overcrowding, no jostling onstairs and in doorways.

There must be advance warning in literatureand on notice boards of the operation of atimed-entry system. Visitors’ reception areasact as efficient and friendly collection pointswhere policies can be explained and ticketsissued. Because many visitors at peak periodsmay have to wait for admission there shouldbe a tearoom, garden and playground at handto make the time pass pleasantly – andprofitably for the management. The mainconcern outside the house is to eliminatequeues of impatient and disgruntled visitors(Figure 20.3).

The informal system of controlled entrydoes not involve the issue of special tickets; it

does depend, however, on the ability to knowfrom minute to minute how many people arein the house and the public rooms. This thenallows only a ‘safe’ number to enter. Infraredcounters at entry and exit points can providean instant read-out to the person controllingthe entrance. Long experience of the visitorflow-pattern can enable the setting of an entryrate which will give the required densities. Agood example is Hill Top in Cumbria, a much-visited seventeenth-century four-bedroomedfarmhouse that is now the Beatrix Pottermuseum. Ten people are allowed in every fiveminutes which ensures that never more thanfifty are in the house at any one time. On wetdays and holidays when hold-ups can occur,communication between the ticket office andcustodian is vital so that people can be heldin the shop and reception. Any increasedspending results in more funds for the benefitof the property.

Because Hill Top is now one of the housesfor which a safe upper limit has been set fromthe start of the 2000 season – 800 per openday – a more formal timed-entry system hasbeen introduced. The time of arrival of eachvisitor is deemed to be the moment when heor she arrives at the head of the queue at theticket kiosk. Tickets, showing the time ofissue, are given out at the rate of ten everyfive minutes. Ticket holders are allowed fiveminutes to reach the house and can then stayfor as long as they please. When the totalnumber of tickets issued in any one dayreaches 800 the house is then closed after thelast visitor has departed. The garden and shopremain open until the advertised time forclosure.

At Chartwell, where the visitor pressuregrows annually and the house is larger, theflow of visitors is set at sixty every fifteenminutes. This system is of greatest benefit atthe start of a day when queues form beforethe gate is opened.

An alternative method to formal timed entryinvolves the use of re-usable colour-codedplastic tokens. A set number of tokens isissued in each fifteen-minute period and

202 Historic Floors

visitors are asked to return them as they leavethe building.

For either system to be effective the rulemust be that the sustainable limit includesparties, whether of school children or adults,special visitors, and those who come for aspecial function such as a concert or recep-tion. Only by adhering to a well-proven policythat leaves no room for exceptions can aproperty hope to survive unscathed well intothe next century.

One aim of the timed entry is to even outthe flow of visitors who arrive independently;up to 98 per cent use their own cars. This veryhigh percentage will inevitably fall as privatemotoring becomes more expensive and lessenjoyable. Dedicated cycle routes are to befinanced by lottery grants and many of thesewill eventually link up with popular places tovisit. The integration of public transport mustalso encourage more people to leave their carsbehind and join parties who come by coachand rail. The pre-booked coach party makesit simpler to forecast visitor flows and frequen-cies; the trend is to reserve more open daysexclusively for parties. Connoisseurs days are

for people who are prepared to pay over theodds for the opportunity to appreciate a houseat greater leisure. The income from suchspecial visits is particularly welcome as seldomis more than a third of the outgoings on ahistoric property covered by visitor income.

Visitors with physical and sensory disabili-ties are finding properties increasingly moreaccessible and welcoming. Wheelchairs posemuch less of a threat to floors than to furni-ture and the decor but scuff marks fromrubber tyres are unsightly. The installation ofa lift can be a help to all visitors and reducesthe need to use vulnerable stairs.

Access to any property can be tolerated justas long as it does not generate irreversibledamage.

The hard decision may have to be taken toclose a house at risk, or at least parts of it. Analternative may be to create a faithful copy;this has happened at Lascaux in France wherevisitors are diverted to a modern facsimile ofthe limestone caves to admire copies of thepre-historic wall paintings. Increasingly visitorsmay expect to be confronted with noticesoutside historic properties that bear the starkmessage:

FOR POSTERITY’S SAKE PLEASE KEEP OUT

Acknowledgement

The author is indebted to the staff at manyNational Trust properties for their advice andhelp, and in particular to Helen Lloyd,Housekeeper to the Trust, for taking suchtrouble in offering constructive criticism.

Materials and suppliers

Carpet paper Your local carpet shopCoir fibre mats Norfolk Industries for the

Blind95 Oak StreetNorwich NR3 3BP

Felt Lux Your local carpet shop


Figure 20.4 The front Hall, designed by James Wyatt,of Heveningham Hall, the Palladian mansion in Suffolk.The fine, inlaid stone floor deserves the most carefulconservation. (Photograph, Christopher Hanson-Smith)

Bury and Masco IndustriesLtd

Infrared visitor Colebrook Consulting Ltdcounter Diamonds

Bells Yew GreenEast Sussex TN3 9AX

Plastic Rexam Medical Packagesovershoes 1–3 Dixon Road

Brislington BS4 5QUPremier floor Premier Floor Productspolish Oakley Gardens

Bouncers LaneCheltenham GL52 5JD

Traffic wax Johnson’s Wax LtdFrimley GreenCamberley GU16 5AJ

Underfelt Your local carpet shopGaskell & Co. (Bacup) LtdPO Box 10

Lee MillBacup OL13 0DJ

Wire scraping Weetman & Co.mats 124 Ashley Road

Hale

Suggested reading

LLOYD, H and MULLANY, T. (1994). The Impact of Overvisitingand Methods of Assessing the Substainable Capacity ofHistoric Houses. The National Trust. Preprints of 11COttawa Congress, Preventive Conservation; Practice,Theory and Research. London, 11C.

SANDWITH, H and STAINTON, S. (1992). The National TrustManual of Housekeeping, Revised edition. VikingPenguin.

THOMAS, P., SEELEY, N. and O’SULLIVAN, P. (1997). Theprocesses of visitor impact assessment. The Journal ofArchitectural Conservation. March.

WATKINS, F. (1996). Harlaxton Manor Enterprises.Grantham.

204 Historic Floors

Since the ICOMOS Cathedral Floor DamageSurvey was printed (Fawcett, 1991), theCathedrals Fabric Commission and EnglishHeritage have issued Cathedral Fabric Records;a guide to the care and preparation of records,and the Commission has also issued an AdvisoryNote on Good Practice for the Care of LedgerStones and other Floor Memorials in Cathedrals.The York Minster Working Group have formu-lated guidelines for recording ledgers (seeChapter 6) and many cathedrals have recordedtheir own floor inscriptions, some with

photographs, for which NADFAS Volunteershave provided valuable help. These cathedralsinclude Bristol, Canterbury, Ely, Exeter,Gloucester, Lincoln, Norwich, Salisbury, StPaul’s, Wells and Worcester Cathedrals, PershoreAbbey, and York and Southwell Minsters.

This is encouraging. However, very littleactive conservation has taken place, and manycathedrals still have inadequate floor records.The following entries include brief descrip-tions identifying some significant floors incathedrals and greater churches in Britain.

205

AppendixCathedral floor studies – historic features andareas at risk

Jane Fawcett

Contents

Bath Abbey 206Bristol Cathedral 206Canterbury Cathedral 206Carlisle Cathedral 207Chester Cathedral 207Chichester Cathedral 207Christ Church Cathedral, Oxford 208Durham Cathedral 208Ely Cathedral 208Exeter Cathedral 209Gloucester Cathedral 210Hereford Cathedral 210Hexham Abbey 211Kirkwell Cathedral, Orkney 211Lichfield Cathedral 211Lincoln Cathedral 211Norwich Cathedral 212

Pershore Abbey, Worcestershire 213Peterborough Cathedral 213Rochester Cathedral 213St Albans Abbey 214St George’s Chapel, Windsor 214St Mary Redcliffe, Bristol 215St Paul’s Cathedral, London 215Salisbury Cathedral 216Southwark Cathedral 216Southwell Minster 217Tewkesbury Abbey 217Truro Cathedral 217Wells Cathedral 218Westminster Abbey 218Winchester Cathedral 220Worcester Cathedral 221York Minster 221

A.1 Bath Abbey

During the restoration by Gilbert Scott, manyledgers were broken and relaid. The nave,west end and both aisles are paved withledgers, many fragmentary, with white marbleinserts, and brass inscriptions. None are excep-tional; there are a few brasses, mostlynineteenth century, along the nave and cast-iron heating grilles in the aisles.

A detailed floor record, made by JamesIrvine, Scott’s Clerk of Works, is lodged in theReference Library.

A.2 Bristol Cathedral

In a private letter Warwick Rodwell writes: ‘Theeastern arm is a palimpsest of important histor-ical evidence: there are hundreds of individ-ual stones, medieval, early post-medieval,indents, eighteenth- and nineteenth-centurytablets and vault markers, medieval tiles, etc.’.After the archaeological survey the floor of thesouth choir aisle was carefully taken up byNimbus Conservation and nearly all the exist-ing paving levelled and reset under the super-vision of Alan Rome, Surveyor to the Fabric.Similar treatment is planned for the ambula-tory, north choir aisle and north transept. Thisrepair has created a precedent for sensitiveconservation treatment (see Chapter 2).

The very fine marble pavement in thechancel and the magnificent Cosmatesquefloor in front of the high altar, both designedby J.L. Pearson between 1899 and 1904, are insuperb condition. The whole ensemble is oneof Pearson’s most successful creations (seeChapter 1, p.17).

There is a group of medieval tiles in thenortheast chapel. A fourteenth-century indentof an Austin canon lies at the northwestentrance to the Lady Chapel. It is beingseriously damaged by feet. The Pennantchequers in the nave were laid by G.E. Streetwhen the Cathedral was extended in thenineteenth century.

A.2.1 Floor records

Dr Michael Smith of Bristol University,Department of History of Art, has recentlycompleted a survey of all inscriptions, usingBarrett’s History of Bristol (1789) and CathedralRegisters 1699–1837 (1933) to provide infor-mation on some of the lost inscriptions.

A.3 Canterbury Cathedral

The fame of Canterbury has brought with itgreat riches, including magnificent floorswhich have, in their turn, suffered to anunusual degree from iconoclasm and overuse.Although the shrine of St Thomas Becket inthe Trinity Chapel was destroyed by icono-clasts, the fine opus Alexandrinum or Cosmatipavement, composed of small marble tesseraearranged in square and quatrefoils, was not.

The pavements of Trinity Chapel and theCorona, laid before 1220 to enrich the shrine,contain sculptured stone roundels, all proba-bly laid by Italian craftsmen. Some paviours ofa rare rose pink marble survive in the pave-ment originally surrounding the shrine. Thesteps, and probably the shrine itself, were alsomade of this material (Tatton-Brown, 1981).The position of the shrine is marked by a slabwith lettering designed by Simon Verity. In thenortheast corner of the Corona lies a geomet-ric tile mosaic, and some inlaid decorated tileslaid around 1285–1290 after a visit to theshrine by King Edward I (Horton and Norton,1981). These are unprotected. Trinity Chapelitself is now roped off for protection.

Much of the original Purbeck marble pavingsurvives in the choir aisles. They were,however, cut through by central-heating ductsin the 1870s and given concrete covers. Theother medieval floor still in situ is in theMartyrdom or northwest transept around the‘altar of the swordpoint’. Here the immenselate medieval Purbeck marble grave slabs,from which the brasses have been plundered,lie in their original positions. They commem-orate Archbishop Stafford d.1443, ArchbishopDean d.1501 and Priors Finch and Selling.

206 Historic Floors

There are also nine seventeenth- andeighteenth-century ledgers, much worn. Thisarea should be roped off, leaving a passagealong the southern side for access to the crypt.‘The best way to look at the site of the martyr-dom is not to stand on it, but to observe itfrom above (near the entrance to the northchoir aisle)’ (Tatton-Brown, 1981). I agree.

The nave was repaved in 1787, and all theledger stones moved to the southwest transept,or to the chapter house. In the late nineteenthcentury the chapter house was repaved, andmost of the ledgers were again moved, thistime to the cloisters. In 1970 twenty-four of theheraldic ledger stones in the southwest transeptwere moved to safer positions along the naveaisles, due to damage from overuse, while thetransept was temporarily paved with concreteslabs. Finally in 1993 the nave and southwesttransept were again repaved (Chapter 4), andall the ledgers have been reset outside to theeast of the northeastern transept.

A.3.1 Floor records

The Trinity Chapel and Corona floors fromCanterbury Cathedral Chronicle 75 (1981) byTatton-Brown (1981). The opus Alexandrinumand sculptured stone roundels in the retro-choir of Canterbury Cathedral by N.E. Toke(1930). A Parisian workshop at Canterbury, alate 13th century tile pavement in the CoronaChapel, and the origins of Tyler Hill by M.C.Horton and E.C. Norton (1981). J.M. Cowper’sRecord of Inscriptions (1897); S.G.A. Freeth’sEssay on Brasses (1970); A.G. Sadler’s Mono-graph on Brass Indents (1980).

A survey of all floor inscriptions withlocations was made by Captain Tempest Hayin 1992 with help from NADFAS volunteers.There is no photographic floor record, butseveral floor plans (see Chapter 4).

A.4 Carlisle Cathedral

The fine brass to Bishop Bell, d.1496, lies inthe middle of the chancel floor. The life-size

figure has a prayer scroll, a triple canopy, amarginal inscription and is remarkably wellpreserved (Figure 1.37). The floor is pavedwith Frosterley ‘marble’ chequers.

A.5 Chester Cathedral

The rich encaustic pavements in the choir andsanctuary, designed by Gilbert Scott and J.R.Clayton in 1876, are composed of encaustictiles, with roundels of saints, biblical scenes,floral and vine leaf motifs. Scott copied someof the medieval tiles found in the choir, andresited some in the north choir aisle (seeChapter 1). His fine Cosmatesque pavement atthe crossing is badly worn in places. In theLady Chapel the brass of 1845 is by Hardman,based on a Pugin design.

The cloisters have been partly repaved.There are very fine thirteenth- and fourteenth-century grave slabs with foliate crosses in thewest and south walks.

When the nave floor was repaved in 1776many ledgers were moved into the aisles ortransepts. The nave and aisles were again re-paved in the mid-1990s amid considerablecontroversy, and many of the ledgers werelost.

A.6 Chichester Cathedral

The nave floor, in spite of a lot of post-medieval repair, retains about 40 per cent of itstwelfth-century paving, altered by the randominsertion of later medieval slabs. It is a raresurvival, and the intention is to carry out repairson the basis of replacement stones as required,so that the ancient character will continue tocome through. There are several large indentsand some ledgers with fine lettering. Animmense matrix with brass indent, between thesecond and third piers from the west end, isthought by the Monumental Brass Society tomark the burial of St Richard.

Most of the ledgers were moved from thechoir after repaving in black and white

Appendix 207

chequers in 1829, and resited in the nave aisles.A few medieval tiles are reset near the altar.

The east end of the Lady Chapel is pavedwith encaustic tiles, while the Cosmatesquepavement in the choir is possibly by JohnOldred Scott.

A.7 Christ Church Cathedral, Oxford

These floors are remarkably rich with inter-esting ledger stones. There are severalbrasses, including two in the Lady Chapel,John Fitzalyn d.1452, and Edward Courtenayd.1462, and one to Henry Dowe of 1578 inthe north transept. A figure brass to JamesCoorthopp d.1557, was recently conservedand resited in a safer position (1994). A brassto Frederick Barnes d.1859, a figure under acanopy, was also repaired and reset in theLatin Chapel.

The beautiful Cosmatesque pavement in thechancel designed by Gilbert Scott in 1871 con-tains roundels of seated virtues. It is reputedlyinspired by designs in the Cathedral of StJohn, Valetta, Malta (see Figure 1.31 and Plate16).

A.7.1 Floor records

Inventory of Historical Monuments in the Cityof Oxford (1939), RCHME, contains somerelevant information. There is no completerecord of floor inscriptions.

A.8 Durham Cathedral

The grave slabs to early Norman bishops inthe chapter house are unprotected and ofgreat importance historically; one includesoriginal filling to its lettering. The immensegrave slab to St Cuthbert, placed behind thehigh altar in 1542 is protected by a curb madefrom green marble, reputedly from the demol-ished shrine. The matrix in front of the sanctu-ary step is to Bishop Beaumont d.1333 (seep.33), the brass a copy of 1951.

There are some eighteenth-century ledgerstones, with good lettering, in the GalileeChapel, subject to heavy wear. The navecontains a few ledgers; in front of the choirscreen is a chequered black and white marblepavement, reused when the choir wasrepaved in 1870. In the south choir aisle areledgers, some with armorial crests, lyingbetween the columns. In the north choir aisleis a ledger to Walter Skirlm, Bishop ofDurham d.1388, a brass of 1639, and severalseventeenth-century ledgers. The Chapel ofthe Nine Altars also contains a few ledgers,particularly in the northwest corner.Outstanding is the splendid Cosmatesquepavement in the choir designed by GilbertScott, and laid in 1870–1875.

A.8.1 Floor records

A list of monumental inscriptions of the cathe-dral, was compiled for C.M. Carlton Ainsley’sMonumental Inscriptions of the Cathedral,Parish Churches and Cemeteries of the City ofDurham (1880); Surtees and Wall MemorialInscriptions in Durham Cathedral (1932)includes the texts of all inscriptions onmonuments and some floor inscriptions. Thereis no complete record of ledger inscriptions,nor a photographic record.

A.9 Ely Cathedral

Much of the Cathedral was repaved by SirGilbert Scott during this, his first cathedralrestoration, commenced in 1847. Under thewest tower is Scott’s labyrinth design in blackmarble and white Mansfield stone and underthe southwest transept lies his pavement ofred Mansfield and black Purbeck chequers(Boddy, 1994).

The nave is paved with Scott’s fine geomet-ric design of red marble roundels, with bandsof Purbeck, and a chequered border. A slabmarks what is said to be the tomb of Alan ofWalsingham, designer of the octagon. Thenorth and south aisles are paved with black

208 Historic Floors

and white chequered stone. In the south aislea number of the blue lias stones haverecently been replaced. There is a finecoloured figure brass by Wallers to Basevi,d.1845, who fell to his death while repairingthe Cathedral, in the north chancel aisle (seeChapter 1, p. 21).

Scott’s first encaustic pavement completedhis refurnishing of the choir and sanctuary,begun in 1847 (see p.20). The brass to PriorCrauden, 1341, was renewed in its originalmatrix and contains the kneeling figure ofthe Prior. The nineteenth-century slab toBishop Hotham, d.1337, marks the site of hisburial.

The north choir aisle contains the Tournaimarble tomb slab, possibly to Bishop Nigellus,1169, one of the first effigial tomb slabs inBritain (Figure 1.20), and many ancient pavingslabs and ledger stones. The south choir aislehas a particularly fine sequence of indents andbrasses, recently surveyed by the MonumentalBrass Society, and an immense black armorialledger to Bishop Petrus. Brasses to BishopGoodrich, d.1554, and Dean HumphreyTyndall, d.1614, are protected by rails. Bothledgers and indents are deteriorating. Thepaving to both choir aisles has recently beenrepointed and some badly worn York stonehas been replaced.

In the south transept are some fourteenth-century tiles, similar to those in PriorCrauden’s chapel in the precinct, whichcontains an important and complete opussectile tile pavement of the fourteenth century(see p.3). Sixteen of the mosaic tiles werestolen recently and have been replicated byDiana Hall (see Chapter 1).

A.9.1. Floor records

A series of floor plans indicate the position ofgraves and ledgers at various dates, and theRecord of Restoration by J. Bacon (1871), Clerkof Works to Gilbert Scott contains detailedaccounts of floor restoration and of themovement of ledgers and brasses. All inscrip-tions were recorded recently and floor plans

marked and updated. Paving, the WayForward, a thesis by Duncan Boddy (1994;unpublished) contains a detailed historicalaccount of the floors.

A.10 Exeter Cathedral

Exeter is remarkably rich in medieval ledgerstones which, together with its medievaleffigies, gives its floors an unusual importance.Some ledgers were moved in 1763 when thechoir was repaved and the Dean and Chapterdecided that ‘the old grave stones that weretaken up in the quire be laid down in thebody and aisles of the church at such placesas may want repair’. Dean Milles recorded in1764 ‘While this old pavement was removing. . on ye removal of ye great stone at foot ofye communion steps on which the effigy of aBishop is cut, and which has always beencalled Bishop Bitton’s monument . . theworkman, putting his hand into the coffin,pulled out a sapphire ring, clumsily set in gold. . at the same time he took out a chalice andpatten . . they are both of silver gilt’. Theyare now in the Cathedral library.

Some of these grave slabs or indents resitedin the north choir aisle, have been identified;To Bishop Bitton d.1307, a brass indent (seeFigure 1.38); Bishop Brewer d.1244, asixteenth-century slab with a black letterinscription, recut in 1961 ‘founder of thechurch, 1244’; and Bishop Allein 1570. In thesouth choir aisle lies the indent to BishopBerkeley d.1327, with, in the centre, the circu-lar matrix for a brass demi-figure in a trefoil.

The chapel of St Andrew and St Catharinecontains four large medieval ledgers, andsome medieval tiles. In the Lady Chapel liesthe coffin-shaped Purbeck marble slab possi-bly to Bishop Bartholomeus d.1184. The effigyis one of the earliest Purbeck sculptures, a life-size figure (Figure 1.21). Next is the Purbeckeffigy to Bishop Simon of Apulia, in higherrelief. An incised marble slab with a foliatecross commemorates Bishop Quivil d.1291,under whom the Lady Chapel was finished.The floor is paved with nineteenth-century

Appendix 209

geometric tiles. Scott repaved this and thechoir in 1870–1877. The handsome encausticpavement commemorates nine bishops withtheir coats of arms.

Much of the nave, nave aisles and choiraisles are paved with ledgers, many medieval,a rare survival. There are two brasses, amilitary brass to Sir Peter Courtenay d.1409 inthe south choir aisle and to Canon Langtond.1413 in the chapel of St John the Evangelist.

A.10.1 Floor records

Exeter Cathedral library contains an unusuallycomplete record of floor monuments, includingJ.W. Hewett, A Complete Monumentarium of theCathedral Church of St Peter, Exeter, Vol. 3 (1849)and the Rev. Vyvyan Hope’s Monumentarium(1956), which records all inscriptions, translatingthose in Latin and describing the heraldry. Arecording team under Dr Payne has updated andcomputerized the Monumentarium, including acomplete photographic record of all ledgers. Afloor plan of 1757 identifies the position of manyof the ledgers.

A.11 Gloucester Cathedral

The Lady Chapel contains many medieval tiles,mixed with ledgers, all recorded in 1890 whenthe entire floor was relaid on concrete. Theintrusive placing of the 1987 font at theentrance is unfortunate. There are alsomedieval tiles in the north ambulatory chapel,unprotected and at risk.

The nave and aisles were repaved in 1740under Bishop Benson. The ledgers thatsurvived this process were lined up betweenthe columns on each side of the nave. Theseare predominantly black Purbeck ledgers datingfrom the eighteenth century, several witharmorials, and many with foliate decoration.

In the north transept lies a large medievalindent with a marginal inscription, and amedieval ledger with a black letter inscription.There are also fifteen armorial ledgers in blackPurbeck.

The fine pavement of marble sgraffittodesigns and encaustic tiles in the choir andpresbytery was designed by Sir Gilbert Scott,1869–1873. In the sanctuary the medieval tiledpavement of Abbot Seabroke, 1455, is stilllargely in situ in front of the high altar.

A line of ledgers, mostly eighteenth century,and damaged, continues all round the centreof the cloister pavement. They were relaid, ona concrete base, in c.1855 (Welander, 1991).


The Lady Chapel ledgers, with inscriptions,decoration and arms, were recorded c.1890.An Original History of the City of Gloucester byT.D. Fosbrooke (1819), contains a complete listof ledgers with inscriptions. The History of theArt and Architecture of Gloucester CathedralDavid Welander (1991), and GloucesterCathedral by David Verey and DavidWelander (1979) both contain information onmedieval tiles. A full list of legible inscriptionsand locations was completed in 1992. There isa floor plan by John Carter in the library.

A.12 Hereford Cathedral

The important collection of brasses includesBishop Frowestours d.1529, and RichardDelamere d.1435, and wife, figures undercanopies, in the north transept. Bishop Trillackd.1360 lies in the chancel, a figure under acusped arch. The encaustic pavements in thechancel and transepts are by Gilbert Scott, andthose in the choir possibly by Cottingham. Thetiles, made by Godwin, are geometric inter-sected with bands of stone.

In the crypt is an incised slab to AndrewJones d.1497 and wife, two large figures undera double canopy, and four defaced stoneeffigies.


Francis T. Havergal, Monumental Inscriptionsin the Cathedral Church of Hereford, 1881; A.J.

210 Historic Floors

Winnington-Ingram, Monumental Brasses inHereford Cathedral, revised by F.C. Morganand P.E. Morgan (1972). There is a detailedfloor plan but no photographs.

A.13 Hexham Abbey

The nave was rebuilt in 1907 by TempleMoore. A fine fourteenth-century effigy of aknight and his wife lies in the north chancelaisle, a large black slab to Sir Thomas ofDelvinstone lies in the centre of the chanceland an early brass in front of the high altar.

Three armorial ledgers lie beside the AccaCross, and more ledgers are lined up verticallyalong the slype wall.

A.14 Kirkwall Cathedral, Orkney

During the Mackie Watson restoration of1913–1930, when much of the floor wasrepaved, all the ledgers were taken up andfixed as wall monuments along the nave aislesand choir aisles. With bold figures in deeprelief, shell and foliage borders and elaborateinscriptions, decorated with skull and cross-bones or putti, they are very fine indeed, asan expression of the local vernacular tradition.There are seventy of them.

The exceptionally fine Norman interior ofKirkwall is largely undecorated. The impact ofthe splendid array of ledgers encircling thewalls is immensely impressive.


A booklet containing drawings of the ledgershas been completed recently (Johnston, 1994).

A.15 Lichfield Cathedral

The remarkable tiled pavement of c.1300 inthe library was rediscovered in 1987 (seeChapter 2 and Plates 20 and 21). The completemedieval design has been recovered andrecorded and a conservation programme has

been completed. There is now a viewingplatform at the west end of the library andvisitors are restricted to this area to avoidfurther damage. There are also thirteenth-century tiles in the consistory court.

The encaustic tile pavements by Minton inthe chancel were designed by Sir Gilbert Scott,based on fragments of medieval tiles foundunder the chancel floor, excavated in 1852.The presbytery floor contains encaustic tileswith medallions representing events connectedwith the cathedral, three of them relating to StChad. The sanctuary floor containing biblicalscenes in two-coloured encaustic panels, withtiled borders, was given by Herbert Mintond.1858 (see Plate 19). The complete decorativescheme is one of Scott’s best. When the navewas repaved with York stone many ledgerswere destroyed.


The library possesses a typescript of Grundy-Newman’s Inscriptions and Heraldry and LostInscriptions and Heraldry in LichfieldCathedral, compiled from Shaw’s Staffordshire(1798), mainly concerned with wall monu-ments. See Chapter 2 for details of the survey.

A.16 Lincoln Cathedral

The remarkable collection of medievalledgers, many with marginal inscriptions, thesequence of enormous brass indents along thenorth and south choir aisles, sixty-four in all,and the array of ledger stones with whichmuch of the angel choir is paved, add animportant dimension to this wonderful build-ing. The medieval ledgers are distributedthroughout the interior and in the cloisters.Many of the inscriptions are in medievalFrench or Latin, recently translated andpublished (Aldritt and Tripp, 1990). The blackTournai grave slab to Bishop Remigius,decorated with a tree of Jesse, dated c.1140,a posthumous monument, is one of the oldestinscribed slabs in England.

Appendix 211

Other medieval ledgers lie in the cloisters,not in good condition, some in the south walkdisplayed on the wall. The finest, to Richardof Gainsborough d.1300 ‘at one time mastermason of this church’ has a black letterinscription and a magnificent figure under atriple canopy with angels. A replica is laidcentrally on the floor. Thomas Loveden’stombstone, d.1400, appeals ‘to Father Giles . . .in you have I trusted; repay my offering soon’.Fine medieval ledgers to the Gilbertineanchorite, John Levison, and Sir WilliamDymoke d.1533, Chaplain of the Chantry of SirNicholas de Cantilupe, have been groupedtogether.

The splendid brass to Bishop Smith d.1513,Chancellor of Oxford University, was vandal-ized in the Civil War, but replaced in 1927 byBrasenose College, which he founded. Thesixty-four immense black brass indents liecentrally along the north and south choiraisles. Those on which the original figures aredistinguishable are noble works of art, anddeserve protection. The great bulk of theledger slabs lie on main pedestrian routes, andare therefore being heavily worn.

The floors of the angel choir and thechantry chapels are virtually covered withledgers, some of which were moved from thenave when it was repaved in 1790. Many havearmorial bearings, with lettering in relief, andmany have interesting inscriptions. A richcollection of all periods which creates asuperb floor pattern. Outstanding is the ledgerbehind the high altar to Dean Honywoodd.1681. ‘Grandchild, and one of the 367persons that Mary, the wife of RobertHonywood Esq., saw before she died.Lawfully descended from her that is 16 of herown body, 114 grandchildren, 228 of the thirdgeneration and the fourth.’ On DeanHonywood’s monument in the south naveaisle it states that, while Dean of Lincoln, he‘built at his own expense, a library’ (the Wrenlibrary) ‘on the side of the cloister of thischurch, which had fallen down, he subse-quently enriched it with books, neither fewnor merely popular’.


Gervaise Hollis Church Notes (1630s). BishopSanderson’s Survey of Cathedral Monuments(1641). Powell’s Survey of CathedralMonuments (1861). Lincoln Cathedral, AncientMonumental Inscriptions, Robert Sanderson(1851), contains many of the inscriptionsrecorded by William Dugdale in 1641.Monumental Incised Slabs in the City of Lincolnby F.A. Greenhill (1986). Latin and FrenchInscriptions of Lincoln Minster, Aldritt andTripp (1990). A group of NADFAS volunteersrecorded all floor inscriptions in 1995–1996.

There are a number of floor plans, includingone from Gough’s Camden, prepared beforerepaving in 1790, and a floor plan prepared byMichael Drury in 1875, based on Dugdale andBrowne Willis, and updated by Robert Godfrey,Surveyor and Clerk of Works, in 1936.

A.17 Norwich Cathedral

Norwich has many Purbeck ledgers and anumber of brass indents, including one toBishop Lyhart d.1422, by the organ screen. Hewished to lie under the vaults that he built. Aninscribed slab to Bishop Herbert de Losingad.1119, ‘founder of this church’, lies in thepresbytery. A small group of medieval tileswithout any surface, and a nineteenth-centurytiled pavement with vine scrolls in thepresbytery, designed in 1890 by Sir ReginaldBlomfield, are of interest. There are forty ledgersin the north transept, many in the south transeptand the ambulatory, chapels and choir aisles.The nave, aisles and cloisters were repaved in1740–1743, when many of the earlier ledgerswere moved or lost. The choir and presbyterywere also repaved in 1766–1768. Some ledgers,with armorials and good lettering, havesurvived, between the nave piers.


Repertorium by Sir Thomas Browne (1712),and The History of Norwich by Bolmefield(1741), both contain some information on the

212 Historic Floors

monuments and floor slabs, with inscriptionsand details of heraldry. A floor survey wascarried out by Keith Darby in 1991 identifyingeighty-five ledgers with legible inscriptions.Cathedral Camps made a partial record of floorinscriptions in 1990.

A.18 Pershore Abbey, Worcestershire

The Norman abbey was dissolved in 1539, andpartially demolished. It was restored by GilbertScott in 1862–1865, by Harold Brakspear in theearly twentieth century, and by F. Andrew in the1920s. There were forty-seven ledgers, mostly ofthe seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, somewith interesting foliage decoration, some witharmorials, many with good lettering.Unfortunately the nave was repaved and under-floor heating installed in 1996, to the detrimentof the small but excellent collection of ledgerstones, whose future appears undecided,although important archaeological evidence wasuncovered. The new paving is of threecontrasted stones, with diagonal quarries andlinear borders. Some fifteenth-century medievaltiles survive in the southeast chapel. There arethree brasses behind the high altar. The ledgersat the west end have remained in situ.


A comprehensive survey of all ledger inscrip-tions was completed by the Rev. Staines in 1996.Evidence for damaged inscriptions was obtainedfrom Nash’s History of Worcestershire (1782) andPrattinson’s manuscript Collection of Parishes,Monuments, Inscriptions etc. in Worcestershire(c.1820), in the Society of Antiquaries Library.The architect F. Andrew recorded the positionand names of all ledgers on the floor plans inthe 1920s, without inscriptions.

A.19 Peterborough Cathedral

The retrochoir is greatly enriched by manyledger stones, some of the seventeenth and

eighteenth centuries, with good lettering.There are a few ledgers in the north nave aisleand chancel aisles, but none in the nave orsouth nave aisle, owing to repaving in the1950s. Outstanding is the Cosmatesquepavement in the sanctuary designed by J.L.Pearson, after his rebuilding of the centraltower of c.1894. Pearson’s rich furnishingsprovide a foil to the monumental Normannave. The cosmatesque floor in the choir hasbeen replaced by a modern marble pavement.

Important early marble tomb slabs to fourabbots, dating from c.1195 (Abbot Benedict) toc.1225 lie in the south presbytery aisle, withanother of similar date in the north presbyteryaisle.


The Rev. W.D. Sweeting published a NewGuide to Peterborough Cathedral in 1893which records all monuments within the cathe-dral, including ledger slabs and brasses, withlocations but without inscriptions. The Historyof Antiquities of Northamptonshire by JohnBridges (1791) includes floor plans of thenave.

A.20 Rochester Cathedral

The medieval tiles in the northeast transepthave recently been cleaned and consolidatedand a small area in the southeast transept isbecoming loose. Part of the northeast transeptand presbytery were repaved with encaustictiles during Gilbert Scott’s restoration. In frontof the high altar lies an exceptionally largematrix of grey marble with an indent of abishop with a mitre, staff and heraldic devices.The Lady Chapel has the best collection ofledgers, including one of 1759 to FrederickHill ‘who provided for his majesty’s sick andwounded seamen at this port’, with a delight-ful relief of the good Samaritan on horseback.The lettering and armorials on many of theeighteenth- and nineteenth-century ledgers inthe nave and aisles are very fine.

Appendix 213

Nine ancient matrices with brass indents liein the north choir aisle. The central indent isvery large, of a bishop with mitre and staff,shields and canopy, and needs protection. Nextlies an indent of a priest, with scrolls, and anindent of two small figures with children. Theylie below the effigy of Bishop Hamo de Hythe,1352, and reputedly on the pilgrims’ route tothe former shrine of William of Perth. Theworn steps leading east from this point havebeen encased in wood for protection.


A complete historical record of repairs andalterations has been completed recently. Arecord of inscriptions is being carried out byvolunteers.

A.21 St Albans Abbey

In the Middle Ages, this was one of the richestreligious foundations in England, and conse-quently very rich in monumental brasses.There are eight brasses and fifteen indents inthe presbytery, several of which still retainbrass inscriptions and fragments. Exceptionalis the indent to Abbot Stone d.1451, by thealtar steps, with a brass tripartite canopy anda black letter inscription. Also by the high altarlies the huge matrix from which the brass toAbbot de la Mare d.1396, was removed andremounted in the north presbytery aisle. Thereis a fine military brass to Sir A. Grey d.1480,two bishops, one with a marginal design ofgriffins and dragons, one with a marginalinscription, two abbots, and a brass to RobertFairfax, doctor of music d.1521, with his wifeand children, renewed 400 years after hisdeath. Many of these are protected by inade-quate mats and have been damaged by chairs.

The north presbytery aisle contains thefamous brass to Abbot de la Mare d.1396,made by Flemish craftsmen. The life-sizefigure is framed by several tiers of saints undercanopies. Above, the abbot’s soul in a cloth issurrounded by angels.

To the east is a brass to a man and his wife,with a black letter inscription. In the RamrygeChantry lies an incised slab with the figure ofan abbot. There are further brasses andindents in the south presbytery aisle, includ-ing a brass of Ralph Rowlatt 1543, merchantof the Staple of Calais.

The great relief tile pavement of c.1165,formerly in the chapter house, was one of theearliest polychrome relief tile pavements inEngland (see Chapter 1). It was excavated byMartin Biddle in 1979, and the tiles are still cratedup, awaiting a decision on their future. The tileswere copied, in the nineteenth century, for theencaustic pavement in the chancel. A small groupof medieval tiles lies in the north transept. Thereare many interesting ledger stones in the nave,nave aisles, transepts and chapels.


There are no records of floor inscriptions. Aconservation study is being prepared by PeterBurman.

A.22 St George’s Chapel, Windsor

The massive royal grave slabs to Edward IVand Henry VI are raised and protected. Not sothe ledger covering the royal burial vault ofGeorge III, nor the slab marking the burialplace of Henry VIII, Jane Seymour, Charles Iand a child of Queen Anne in the choir, whichare badly scratched. The black-and-whitechequered floor also shows signs of wear (seep.20). Some repaving has recently taken placeto the west of the choir screen.

A decision was taken some time ago to recordthe ledgers and to regard them as expendable,but this policy is likely to be reviewed shortly.There are many to Military Knights of Windsor.In 1790 ledgers with armorial crests were linedup along the centre of the north and south aisles,and round the ambulatory, attracting maximumwear, and many are becoming illegible.

The beautiful Bray chantry chapel, contain-ing fine monuments and important ledgers,

214 Historic Floors

has been turned into a shop. After consider-able damage had occurred, a timber floor hasbeen installed, and some monumentsremoved. The overcrowding here is horrific.

The paving in the cloisters is breaking upand some of the brass indents have beenskimmed with cement.


There is a complete record of floor inscriptionsin S.M. Bond Monuments of St George’s Chapel(1958) showing locations. All ledgers werephotographed in 1982. Emlyn’s eighteenth-century floor plan shows the position ofledgers before rearrangement in the lateeighteenth century.

A.23 St Mary Redcliffe, Bristol

Two of the most important brasses to survivein their original position lie to the west of thehigh altar steps. To the north lies John Brook,d.1522 and his wife Johanna, daughter ofRichard Amerique, after whom America mayhave been named. John Brook was Servant-at-Law to Henry VIII, Judge of Assize and ChiefSteward of Glastonbury Abbey. To the southlie John Jay, 1480, and Johanna his wife,wearing a pedimental head-dress.

The choir is paved with black and whitechequered marble. George Godwin laid theencaustic tiles in the nave in the nineteenthcentury. There are many ledgers in the northand south choir aisles, of the seventeenth andeighteenth centuries.

The most important medieval ledgers lie inthe south transept. One, with a marginal blackletter inscription is to John Blecker, whoendowed a chantry chapel in 1434. Into theledger the name Lucas Stritch 1716 has beencarved. The other, also with a marginal blackletter inscription and a dagger and shield, isto William Coke, servant to William Canynge,who paid for building the clerestory andvaults. His effigy lies against the south wall ofthe transept (see Chapter 1).

There is also an armorial ledger to WilliamPenn 1670, father of the founder ofPennsylvania. His armour is on the north wallof the nave.

A.24 St Paul’s Cathedral, London

The magnificent black and white chequeredmarble pavement covering most of the mainfloor area was designed by Sir Christopher Wrenand drawn, in 1708, by Dickinson (Figures 1.13and 1.14). It was completed in 1710 and makesa spectacular contribution to this overwhelminginterior. It includes, under the dome, an impres-sive circular pavement, divided into quadrants,with a central star (see Figures 1.15 and 1.16).This is undergoing a phased programme ofreplacement, panel by panel. The circular brassgrilles encircling this area have almost lost thedelicate incised decoration of hearts and Tudorroses. The whole floor is suffering from overuse,and a dip is now visible along the central walkof the nave.

The important ledger stones, manycommemorating national heroes, are confinedto the crypt, and much damage has beeninflicted here over the past forty years. Mostvisitors wish to see Wren’s tomb in the south-east aisle, where the most important floormonuments lie. These include ledgers toRobert Mylne and C.R. Cockerell, bothSurveyors to the Fabric, John Rennie, GeorgeDance, (lettering recently recut; see Figure1.28), Sir Thomas Lawrence PRA (inscriptionnow obliterated), Sir Joshua Reynolds PRABenjamin West PRA, Sir Edwin Landseer,Henry Fuseli, John Opie, J.M. Turner andHolman-Hunt (lettering by Eric Gill). Aprogramme of recutting simple inscriptions onledgers is progressing slowly. Deterioration ofthe crypt floors is constantly monitored.

The spectacular collection of nineteenth-century brasses commemorate Sir John Millaisand Lord Leighton, both designed by NormanShaw, Sir Lawrence Alma Tadema, Sir EdwardPoynter PRA, Sir Joseph Boehm and Sir ArthurSullivan, all on black marble slabs with noble

Appendix 215

brass lettering and decoration. The mosaicfloor round the Nelson monument wasdesigned by F.C. Penrose, for forty-five yearsSurveyor to the Fabric.

Although entry charges have caused a slightreduction in numbers, there is still seriousovercrowding at times. The Building ResearchEstablishment are monitoring wear to the navefloors (see Chapter 13).


Dugdale’s Memorials of St Paul’s andWestminster Abbey records inscriptions in oldSt Paul’s, before the fire. Some pre-fire ledgersare in the crypt. A partial record of inscrip-tions was made in 1890; Lord Mottistone,when Surveyor to the Fabric, prepared a floorplan of all grave slabs in the crypt. There is afloor plan of the crypt, on which all ledgershave been entered. All inscriptions have beenrecorded and photographed recently.

A.25 Salisbury Cathedral

The octagonal inlaid tiled floor in themuniment room of c.1260 is one of the best-preserved medieval pavements in Europe (seep.6 and Plate 3). The tile carpet is composedof Wessex tiles, in parallel strips radiating fromthe central piers. The individual tile designsinclude lions, griffins, birds and fleurs-de-lys,comprising altogether fifteen different designs.The protective wooden floor was temporarilyremoved in 1995 for recording and repairs.There is also a group of re-set medieval tiles,possibly from the original chapter house floor,flanking the old altar position in the chapel atthe east end of the north presbytery aisle

The exceptional brass to Bishop Wyville isin the northeast transept. The bishop looks outfrom a fortress representing Sherborne Castle,recovered for the cathedral from the Earl ofSalisbury (see p.33). A copy for rubbing liesin the north nave aisle. A brass to BishopEdmund Gheast d.1577, with a black letterinscription, and one to Thomas Whyte d.1588are nearby. All are suffering from wear.

There are many interesting ledger stoneswith fine lettering, some of them armorial, inthe nave aisles and transepts and at the westend of the nave. Wyatt moved many effigiesand tomb chests from the demolishedHungerford and Beauchamp Chapels topositions between the nave piers.

The two remarkable effigies in the southaisle are from Old Sarum. Bishop Rogerd.1139, lies on a Tournai marble slab, with aflat leaf border. He has a crozier and afourteenth-century replacement head. Theother, on a Purbeck marble slab with amarginal inscription, is attributed to StOsmund 1078–1099, although the effigy andlettering date from the twelfth century.

The impressive chapter house pavement,reputedly a copy of the medieval floor,recorded by Shaw, was laid under Clutton andBurges in 1855–1856 (see p.10). It is showingsigns of wear. The encaustic pavement inTrinity Chapel contains patterns based onmedieval precedents. The nave, aisles andnorth porch are paved with a Purbeck andlimestone pattern of lozenges and squares,probably laid in 1890. The ugly chancel flooris a replacement of Scott’s fine encausticpavement, taken up in 1969.


The recent Salisbury volume of the RoyalCommission on Historical Monuments forEngland includes a survey with locations offloor monuments. A photographic record anda list of inscriptions was prepared under theformer Clerk of Works, Roy Spring. JamesHarris’ list of Monumental Inscriptionscompiled in the eighteenth century and T.H.Baker’s Monumental Inscriptions in SalisburyCathedral (Wiltshire Gazette, 1927) bothcontain some floor inscriptions.

A.26 Southwark Cathedral

Despite the fires, the dereliction of the nave,and the rebuilding by Sir Arthur Blomfield in

216 Historic Floors

1890–97, many ledger stones survive in thetransepts, and two patches of Roman mosaic,moved to the north choir aisle from the grave-yard.

The retrochoir, used as a pig sty until 1832,contains most of the ledgers from the naveand chancel. They mostly date from the seven-teenth and eighteenth centuries, and almostcompletely cover the floor. Many commemo-rate interesting characters and provide a goodsource of information on local history.

A.27 Southwell Minster

Much of the floor, including the nave andcentral crossing, was repaired during therestoration by Ewan Christian in 1880–1890.

Some ledgers were reset during this repair(see Chapter 9). There is a sequence of inter-esting ledgers, some with brass inlays, in thesouth transept. The floors have been recordedrecently, and included in the Cathedral inven-tory. All the inscriptions have been recordedand photographed.

A.28 Tewkesbury Abbey

The floors here are wonderfully rich; so arethe monuments. There is hardly any part ofthe floor that is not covered with medievaltiles, ledger stones or encaustic pavements, allof very high quality indeed.

The medieval tiles in the founder’s chantrychapel are in remarkable condition and appearto retain their original tile carpet. There arealso medieval tiles, in the south aisle, theBeauchamp Chapel, and the south choir aisle,resited. The ledgers covering the floors of themain church and many of the chapels haveexcellent lettering, some with armorials andfoliage decoration.

Those in the nave are covered with coirmatting and chairs, and therefore inaccessible.The floors are maintained to a high standardbut matting tends to accumulate grit and needsfrequent cleaning if it is not to become

abrasive. The ledgers have been treated witha water-based polish, since removed, whichhas caused problems of rising damp.

Scott’s spectacular pavements enrich thechoir, presbytery and sanctuary. The coloursare confined to red and cream, intersectedwith bands of black. Designs taken frommedieval tiles include coats of arms of greatfamilies connected with the Abbey. Alsofleurs-de-lys, vine leaves, Tudor roses, bears,eagles and heraldic lions.

In the sanctuary Scott has incorporated brassplaques commemorating the burials of Gilbertde Clare, killed at Bannockburn 1314, HughDespenser d.1327, and his son Hugh d.1348,responsible for much of the remodelling of theabbey, and Sir Edward Despenser d.1375,standard bearer to the Black Prince at thebattle of Poitiers. The huge matrix to Maud deBurgh d.1315, with the brass indent of a life-size figure under a canopy, is incorporated inScott’s sanctuary pavement. Edward Prince ofWales d.1471, is commemorated in the choir,and the Duke of Clarence d.1477, brother ofEdward IV, behind the high altar. The tiles areregularly varnished with a water-basedemulsion, and buffed up with a large floorpolisher, effective in the short term, but notrecommended owing to possible long-termdamage by rising damp. Once a year the flooris washed to strip off the old polish.


Many of the archives are in the CambridgeUniversity library. Tewkesbury by Dr JohnBlunt contains information on the monuments.Incomplete records of some inscriptions werecompiled sixty years ago; a further floorsurvey is proposed.

A.29 Truro Cathedral

Largely designed by John LoughboroughPearson, whose statue stands above the southporch, and built from 1880. Pearson’sCosmatesque marble pavements are in the

Appendix 217

choir and sanctuary. On the baptistery floor isa radiating design in richly contrasted marbles,while the aisle, transept and nave floors are ofpatterned terrazzo.

A.30 Wells Cathedral

One of the earliest incised grave slabs inEngland, to Bishop Bitton d.1274, lies in thesouth choir aisle. The figure, under a trefoiledgable, lies on a coffin shaped slab, and isprotected by a polycarbonate cover. To thenorth of the crossing lies a large and splendidlias indent of a lady beneath a canopy,wearing a high mitred head-dress, probably toJoan de Cheddar, wife of Viscount de Lisled.1464. Another indent of a figure, also framedwith a canopy, is probably to Bishop Walterde Haselshaw, d.1308. Two more brass indentslie near the pulpit, both of priests, and aDoulting slab to Bishop Knight d.1547 markshis burial beneath the superb pulpit that hepaid for. Nearby is a floor slab to Ina Rex686–710, founder of the Cathedral. An indentof Bishop Erghum d.1401 is of a figure witha mitre, crosier and canopy.

The retrochoir, north and south chancelaisles and nave aisles are very rich in ledgers,many of them heraldic, some with the inscrip-tions framed by an arch supported on classicalcolumns, an attractive regional variant. They aremostly of lias or Purbeck and commemoratemany interesting local characters, including theLinley family. Protective mats at all entrances,pads on all chairs, and careful control over theplacing of furniture, would help to mitigate thedamage to these important floors.

The flooring is largely of Doulting slabs,with reconstructed stone in the centre walk ofthe nave. The cloisters were repaved in the1960s, when many burial vaults were filled,and ledgers removed. A few defaced ledgersremain, and further grave slabs are located inthe cloister garth. The deeply worn chapterhouse stairs of 1255–1290, one of the mostrenowned features of the Cathedral, continueto present safety problems (see Chapter 2).


Wells has a record of many of its floor inscrip-tions in A.J. Jewers’ Wells Cathedral: ItsMonumental Inscriptions and Heraldry (1892).A revision by Linzee Colchester d.1990, formerlibrarian, is being completed by the presentlibrarian. It contains inscriptions, heraldry andlocations. Many of the inscriptions recorded byJewers have now been obliterated. There is afloor plan of the cathedral, on which ledgerswill be located - work is in progress.

A.31 Westminster Abbey

These floors are amongst the most importantin Britain. They include one of the finestsurviving thirteenth-century tiled floors; themost outstanding Cosmati pavement north ofthe Alps; an astonishing sequence of effigiesand ledger stones commemorating burialsdating from the Saxon kings to the presentday; and exceptional monumental brasses.These add another dimension to the splen-dours of the building and of its monuments(see Chapter 1).

Odoricus, a Roman Cosmati craftsman, wasresponsible for the great pavements in thesanctuary and the feretory, and for thedecoration on the tombs of Edward theConfessor and Henry III. The materialsincluded green and purple porphyry andgiallo antico, re-used from classical ruins inRome, Islamic coloured glass possibly fromVenice, and a central onyx from ancientEgypt. The Lombardic brass letters stated thedate, 1268 (actually 1272 less 4), the crafts-man Odoricus, the patron Henry III, andAbbot Ware. The composition centres roundthe quincunx, a figure 5, surrounded byguilloches, rectangles and lozenges, infilledwith mosaic, and is composed of over 30 000tesserae. It was designed to lead the eye upto the glories of the high altar.

The matrix, of Purbeck marble, restored inthe later seventeenth century and by Scott inthe nineteenth century, is in poor condition.The floor is also very dirty. Scott laid a new

218 Historic Floors

Cosmatesque pavement in 1868 on the highaltar dais. It includes marbles supplied byDean Stanley’s brother-in-law Lord Elgin,including three large roundels of purpleporphyry sawn from an antique column. In1996 a survey was carried out (see Chapter3) prior to expert conservation, after whichthere is hope that it may be left uncoveredpermanently. Around the shrine tomb ofEdward the Confessor is another Cosmatipavement, also laid in 1268. It is set inPurbeck marble and very worn, has beencompletely covered for many years and wasrecently uncovered and the shrine area closedto the public.

The chapter house retains the magnificentoctagonal tiled pavement, completed for thededication ceremony in 1258. The tiles, madein the royal tileries, are arranged in parallelstrips, the patterns ‘most noble in their designand of extraordinary delicacy and refinement’(Scott, 1863). They include the royal arms, aking, a queen, an abbot, an archer, a horse-man, a border of pike, and a rose, similar tothe design of the thirteenth century rosewindow. There is also a late thirteenth-centurytiled pavement in situ in the muniment room,further medieval tiles in the chapel of St Faithand some thirteenth-century tiles in the shrinearea. The microcrystalline wax applied to thechapter house tiles, and the peripheral carpet,have both failed to protect the tiles. The waxhas been removed (1997) and a new carpet isproposed.

The impressive black and white chequeredmarble pavement in the choir was laid in the1690s to commemorate Dr Busby, headmasterof Westminster School. The chequered marblepavement in the Henry VII chapel was first laidin 1699, possibly under Wren, and the area overthe royal burial vault relaid in 1737 (Cocke,1995). It contains many Hanoverian grave slabs.

There are brass indents in the northambulatory to Sir Thomas Parry d.1560, andto two monks, Robert Humphries d.1509, andThomas Brown d.1513, and brasses to SirJohn Harpenden d.1438, a knight in armour,and to Abbot Easteney d.1498, who

completed the roofing of the nave. He lies, inabbot’s robes, under a tripartite gable. Thefine brass to Eleanor Duchess of Gloucesterd.1399, dressed in widow’s dress under atripartite canopy, and to Robert Waldeby,Archbishop of York d.1397, a figure under asingle canopy, lie in the chapel of St Edmund.He was a friend of the Black Prince. A smallmilitary brass to Sir Humphrey Stanley d.1505,who ‘fought bravely for Henry VII atBosworth Field’, lies in St Nicholas Chapel.There are two immense brass indents in thesouth ambulatory to Abbot RichardHarvendon d.1441, and Sir John Golofred.1396 – a cracked Purbeck slab. Part of thisbrass is in the muniment room. Also to RalphSeby d.1420, a learned monk, and to ThomasBilson d.1616, Bishop of Winchester. KingSebert d.616, founder of the abbey, is reputedto lie under an arched recess in the north-west corner of the south ambulatory. Thedamaged brass to Bishop John de Walthamd.1395, in the shrine chapel of St Edward(beside Edward I’s tomb) is covered by theprotective floor. He was Lord Treasurer toRichard II, and lies in his mass vestments.

A group of important nineteenth-centurybrasses lie centrally in the nave; Sir CharlesBarry, designed by Bodley; Sir George GilbertScott designed by Street; J.L. Pearson designedby W. D. Caroe, all surveyors to the fabric.Caroe also designed the brass to G.E. Street.A splendid figure brass to Robert Stephenson,designed by Scott lies nearby, all damaged bybeing on the main tourist route. The brass toLord and Lady Mountbatten by ChristopherIronside, laid in 1985 near the west door, isalready showing signs of wear.

In the choir aisles some fragments of thethirteenth-century Purbeck marble floor stillsurvive, though much repaired and cutthrough by later burials. The burials, withwhich the Abbey was entirely filled by 1850,are recorded by a range of ledger stonescommemorating public figures over 700 years.The lettering on the medieval ledgers has beenlargely obliterated. Abbot Ware d.1283, and hissuccessor, Abbot Wenlock d.1307 lie under the

Appendix 219

Great Pavement. Other medieval grave slabsare recorded on floor plans. The north andsouth ambulatories are particularly rich inearly ledger stones.

The many outstandingly important royalburials are around the shrine of St Edward theConfessor and in the Henry VII chapel, allwell-documented.

The north transept contains the burials ofmany prime ministers and politicians of theeighteenth and nineteenth centuries withassociated monuments. Leading scientists aregrouped in the north nave aisle; musicians inthe north choir aisle. Poets, authors, actorsand musicians lie in the south transept whilenew ledgers, designed by leading craftsmen,commemorate twentieth-century artists.Architects, clerks of works, carpenters andplumbers of the abbey lie in the south andwest walk of the cloisters, and deans, organ-ists and abbey officials in the north walk.The ledger to Aphra Behn (a seventeenth-century lady playwright) lies at the foot ofthe ramp in the northeast corner of the clois-ter, and is consequently being terribly worn,although recut within the past ten years.Effigies to abbots of the twelfth andthirteenth centuries lie in the south walk ofthe cloisters. One, Abbot Lawrence d.1173,obtained the canonization of King Edward.Abbot Crispin d.1117, is the oldest effigy inthe Abbey. Abbot Humez d.1222, saw thebuilding of the Lady Chapel under Henry III.All are unprotected and in an appallingcondition.

There has been some recutting andreplacement of badly worn ledger stones.Those to Telford and Herschel have beenreplaced in cast iron and brass. The ledgersto Thomas Gayfere and Ben Fidoe, clerks ofworks, were recut in 1995 to commemorateGayfere’s restoration of the Henry VII chapelunder James Wyatt, and the completion ofthe recent programme of repair under DonaldButtress. Further recutting is planned. Thedeterioration of the floors continues,however, accelerated by the pressure ofvisitors.


The History and Antiquities of St Peter, AbbeyChurch of Westminster, Neale and Brayley(1823), records many inscriptions, nowvanished. Lawrence Tanner, Librarian, in the1930s prepared notebooks, never published,updating some of these records. The HistoricalMemorials of Westminster Abbey by DeanStanley (1870) contains detailed informationabout burials, confirmed by opening up someof the graves. The Official Guide to the Abbey(1988), first compiled in 1885 by two daugh-ters of Dean Bradley and inspired by DeanStanley’s publication, has been revised by theformer Keeper of the Muniments, NicholasMacMichael, and former Librarian Enid Nixon.It contains much valuable information on floormonuments, supplemented by the ICOMOSCathedral Floor Damage Survey (Fawcett,1991). Patterns of Thought by Richard Foster(1991) contains a very detailed account of theGreat Pavement. 900 Years; the Restorations ofWestminster Abbey by Thomas Cocke (1995)contains some references to floors.

A.31.2 Floor plans

Dean Stanley, in 1870, commissioned floorplans showing the position of all burials,ledgers and brasses, and these have beenupdated recently.

A.32 Winchester Cathedral

The medieval tiles in the retrochoir of c.1235form one of the most important spreads offloor tiles in the country. Large areas of theoriginal tile carpet have survived and a conser-vation programme has been completed (1996)(see Chapter 12). In the north and south retro-choir aisles medieval tiles are mixed withledgers. The north presbytery aisle was relaidwith replica tiles by Professor Baker in 1969.The surviving medieval tiles were then stored,and some have been re-used in the recentrepair programme in the retrochoir. Some

220 Historic Floors

replicas by Diana Hall have also been intro-duced. It is of some concern that, since therepairs were competed in 1997, the public areonce again permitted to walk on theseoutstanding floors. If this continues the tiles,which are extremely vulnerable, may bedestroyed.

Winchester also contains an importantcollection of heraldic ledger stones, in bothaisles of the nave, in the nave itself, and atthe east end of the retrochoir aisles. Ahandsome group of black marble ledgers liesin the nave, with distinguished lettering andarmorials. The ledger to Jane Austen lies in thenorth nave aisle, and to Izaac Walton in a sidechapel of the south transept.


Medieval tiles were recorded by C.J.P. Cave(c.1940s). A record of ledger inscriptions andlocations was made earlier this century. All theledgers have been recorded by rectifiedphotography; the record is in the cathedrallibrary. An archaeological floor plan was madeby John Crook in 1990.

A.33 Worcester Cathedral

Although some of the rich collection ofmedieval tiles has been obliterated by wearand tear, important areas survive. The balconyabove the cathedral parlour is tiled, as is theold Custos’s office. The new Custos’s office,formerly the old music library, is also tiled.The northwest transept has a group of tiles,and some survive at the bottom of the stairsleading from the north choir aisle to the LadyChapel. Most of these are unprotected.

The nave was repaved in 1756, when manyof the ledger stones were moved to the northand south choir aisles. The nave and aisleswere splendidly repaved by Gilbert Scott, usingKilkenny black and Sicilian white marble, witha bold Greek key fret design, and chequeredborders. Most of the surviving ledgers werethen moved down to the Norman crypt.

There are several medieval effigies, someseventeenth-century ledgers and brasses of theeighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Worcesteris very rich in monuments and tombs. BishopsSampson d.1112 and Theophilus d.1123 arecommemorated by nineteenth-century inscrip-tions by the chancel steps. The coffin-shapedledger to Bishop Henry Wakefield d.1395 wasrenewed in 1910 with a cross, a crozier andarmorial shields. It lies at the west end of thenave. In the sanctuary lies an unusual Gothicblack letter ledger to the Duke of Hamilton,killed at the battle of Worcester in 1651.Miserimus (Thomas Morris), a minor canond.1748, who was deprived of his living forrefusing to take the oath to William and Mary,lies at the entrance to the cloister.

The chancel was completely furnished byGilbert Scott, and the tiled pavements make animportant and suitably rich contribution. Thetiles, laid in 1872, are of geometric and foliagedesigns incorporating shields of the diocese,fleurs-de-lys, leopards, peacocks and fish,divided by bands of marble. The sanctuarycontains tiled roundels portraying seatedprophets.


Many inscriptions were recorded in 1986. Afloor plan with locations was made by HaroldBrakspeare in 1920. A survey of all floorinscriptions was completed by volunteers fromNADFAS in 1993.

A.34 York Minster

The Dean and Chapter generously set up aworking group in 1991 to devise a methodol-ogy for recording and protecting cathedralfloors (see Chapter 6).

Many of the ledger stones were destroyedor moved when the nave, aisles and transeptswere repaved to a classical design by WilliamKent and Lord Burlington, in 1731–1738 (seeChapter 5). The design was repeated in thechoir, repaved between 1991 and 1994. Many

Appendix 221

interesting ledgers survive in the Lady Chapeland north and south choir aisles.

There are also two fine modern slabs, oneunder the central crossing, commemoratingthe repair programme to the central towerunder Sir Bernard Feilden, and one in thesouth transept commemorating the repairsafter the disastrous fire under Dr CharlesBrown.

In the north choir aisle is a brass to the Earlof Carlisle, 1684, and in the south choir aisleto the Earl of Strafford, 1687. There is anineteenth-century tiled pavement in thechapter house.


The RCHME volume on York records allinscriptions of ledgers and brasses in theMinster, with photographs. A NADFAS teamhas completed a detailed record of floorinscriptions with locations. The Minster librarycontains several historical floor plans andextensive records (see Chapter 5).

References

ALDRITT, N. and TRIPP, D. (1990). Latin and FrenchInscriptions of Lincoln Minster. Honeywood Press,Lincoln.

BACON, J. (1871). A record of the restoration and repairsdone in and about Ely Cathedral since 1818.Unpublished manuscript.

BAKER, T.H. (1927). Monumental Inscriptions in SalisburyCathedral. Wiltshire Gazette.

BODDY, D. (1994). Paving, the way forward. Recording,conserving and maintaining the historic pavements ofthe Cathedral Church of the Holy and Undivided Trinity,Ely. MA Thesis in Building Conservation, University ofYork (unpublished).

BOND, S.M. (1958). Monuments of St George’s Chapel.Windsor.

BOWTELL, C. (1849). Monumental Brasses of England.George Bell.

CARLTON AINSLEY, C.M. (1880).The Monumental Inscriptionsof the Cathedral, Parish Churches and Cemeteries of theCity of Durham, Vol. No. 2.

COCKE, T. (1995). 900 Years; the Restoration of WestminsterAbbey. Harvey Miller.

COTMAN (1839). Sepulchral Brasses in Norfolk and Suffolk.

COWPER, J.M. (1897). The Memorial Inscriptions of theCathedral of Canterbury. Privately printed.

DUGDALE, W. (1655–73). Monasticon Angicanum. 3 vols.New edition (1817–18) by John Caley, Henry Ellis andBulkeley Bandinell. 6 vols in 8. Reprinted 1846. JamesBohn.

FAWCETT, J. (1991). Cathedral Floor Damage Survey.ICOMOS UK.

FOSBROOKE, T.D. (1819). An Original History of the City ofGloucester. J. Nichols.

FOSTER, R. (1991). Patterns of Thought, the Hidden Meaningof the Great Pavement of Westminster Abbey. JonathanCape.

FREETH, S.G.H. (1970). Essay on Brasses. CanterburyCathedral. Unpublished.

GOUGH (1746). Sepulchral Monuments.GREENHILL, F.A. (1986). Incised Effigial Slabs (Lincoln). Privately

printed by the Francis Coales Charitable Foundation.GREENHILL, F.A. (1986). Monumental Incised Slabs in the City

of Lincoln. Privately printed by the Francis CoalesCharitable Foundation.

HAINES, H. (1861). Manual of Monumental Brasses.HAVERGAL, F.T. (1881). Monumental Inscriptions in the

Cathedral Church of Hereford.HEWETT, J.W. (1849). A Complete Monumentarium of the

Cathedral Church of St Peter, Exeter, Vol. 3.HOPE, V. REV. (1956). Monumentarium. Exeter Cathedral.HORTON, M.C. AND NORTON, E.C. (1981). A Parisian workshop

at Canterbury, a late 13th century tile pavement in theCorona Chapel, and the origins of Tyler Hill. Journal ofthe British Archaeological Association, 134, 58–80.

IRVINE, J. (c.1860). Floor Survey of Bath Abbey.JEWERS, A.J. (1892). Wells Cathedral: Its Monumental

Inscriptions and Heraldry.JOHNSTON, LIZ (1994). St Magnus Cathedral: Gravestones,

Kirkwall, Orkney. Privately printed.ROYAL COMMISSION ON HISTORICAL MONUMENTS FOR ENGLAND.

Various surveys of Cathedrals.SADLER, A.G. (1980). Monograph on Brass Indents.

Canterbury Cathedral.SCOTT, G.G. (1863). Gleanings from Westminster Abbey.

Parker.STEPHENSON, M. (1926). A List of Monumental Brasses in the

British Isles. Headley Brothers.SURTEES, H. AND WALL, J. (1932). Memorial Inscriptions in

Durham Cathedral. Privately printed.TATTON-BROWN, T. (1981). The Trinity Chapel and Corona

Floors. Canterbury Cathedral Chronicle, 75, 51–6.TOKE, N.E. (1930). The opus Alexandrinum and sculptured

stone roundels in the retrochoir of CanterburyCathedral. Archaeological Cantiana, 42, 189–221.

VEREY, D. AND WELANDER, D. (1979). Gloucester Cathedral.Alan Sutton.

WELANDER, D. (1991). The History of the Art andArchitecture of Gloucester Cathedral. Alan Sutton.

WILLIS, B. (1742). A Survey of the Cathedrals. 3 vols. Printedfor T. Osborne.

WINNINGTON-INGRAM, J. (1974). 3rd ed. Monumental Brassesin Hereford Cathedral. Revised by F.C. Morgan and P.E.Morgan.

222 Historic Floors

Accretia Additions.Ambo A stand raised on steps and used for reading the gospels in

medieval Italian churches. Replaced by the pulpit after thefourteenth century.

Ambulatory Walkway behind the high altar, usually round the apse.Anthemion Classical ornament, an interpretation of a honeysuckle.

Baldachino A canopy above an altar, normally supported on columns.Bimetallic corrosion The interaction of two metals causing a chemical reaction.Byzantine Ecclesiastical style influenced by early Christian buildings from

Byzantium.

Cartouche A tablet in the form of a scroll containing an inscription.Champlevé Enamel work in which different colours are placed in hollows

sunk in the surface of the metal.Chancel The east end of the church where the main altar is placed, often

applied to the continuation of the nave east of the crossing.Chevet The area behind the high altar, encircling the apse, often leading

to apsidal chapels.Chinoiserie Decoration influenced by Chinese motifs.Choir or organ screen Ornamental screen separating the chancel from the western part

of the church.Cipher An heraldic crest, often the coats of arms of the owner inlaid into

marquetry or marble floors.Clerestory The upper gallery of a cathedral or church.Cloister garth The enclosed area in the centre of a cloister.Coffered Applied to ceilings with recessed panels (see Compartmental).Coir Matting made from coconut fibre.Compartmental Divided into compartments. Often applied to ceilings.Cosmati floors Marble and mosaic floors made from materials salvaged from classi-

cal ruins, designed by Roman marble workers known as theCosmati, between the twelfth and fourteenth century, mostly in Italy.

Cosmatesque floors Marble floors resembling Cosmati work but not designed by theoriginal Roman Cosmati families.

Cusp Point formed by the foils within the divisions of gothic windowtracery. Also found as an edging to the gothic arches of tombs.

Custos Head verger.

Denkmalpflege für German state organization for the care of historic buildings, Schlosse, Garten und Seen monuments, parks and gardens.Doge Chief magistrate of the Venetian republic.

223

Glossary

Duomo Cathedral.

Ecclesiological Formed in the 1840s by the Cambridge Camden Society, they Society promoted the restoration and re-ordering of churches to conform

with their precepts of the ideal middle pointed style. Internallythey required raised and stalled choirs and gothic furnishings,which led to the revival and manufacture of encaustic tiles,brasses and ledger stones and the destruction of many medievalfloors.

Effigial Resembling an effigy, often applied to a coffin lid or slabdecorated with a figure in low relief.

Effigy A recumbent sculptured portrait of the deceased, often lying on atomb chest.

Emblemata A term applied to mosaic cartoons painted on canvas to whichthe tesserae were fixed.

Encaustic tiles Nineteenth-century term for glazed and decorated clay tileshardened in a kiln.

Enfilade A series of rooms opening off each other, often leading to themost important room, the throne room or the state bedroom.

Etruscan Pre-Roman civilization established in Etruria, north of Rome, frombefore 600 BC. Famous for their pottery, jewellery and wall paint-ings, they gave their name to a form of classical decorationpopular in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

Europa Nostra European association of conservation organizations.

Felspar A mineral consisting of silica, potash, soda or lime found ingranite and porphyry.

Feretory The area where the principal shrine is situated behind the high altar.Fictive cube A classical design composed of cubes arranged geometrically to

simulate a 3-D effect. There are many variants of this design,popular from the sixteenth century for churches and importantsecular buildings.

Flags Paving stones, laid sometimes in patterns, usually set in mortar tocreate hardwearing floor surfaces.

Fleurs-de-lys Element used in heraldry and in tile design derived from a lily oriris.

Fleuron Carved flower or leaf.Floor cloth Cheap form of floor covering made of painted canvas, imitating

carpet or mosaic designs, popular in the eighteenth andnineteenth centuries.

Foil Lobe formed by the cusping of a circle. Trefoil = three; quatrefoil= four; cincquefoil = five.

Foliated Decorated with leaves.

Giallo antico Ancient yellow stone used in Cosmati pavements.Gobelin Name of royal tapestry factory in Paris.Granite A rock composed of quartz, felspar and mica.Greensand Neutral soil, supporting a wide range of cultivated plants.

224 Historic Floors

Griffon (or griffin) An heraldic beast, a cross between a bird and an animal.Guilloche Two interweaving bands forming the letter S, used as a border in

opus Alexandrinum floor designs.

Herringbone parquetry Strands of thin wood, usually oak, arranged in parallel strips tocreate diagonals in alternating directions. Also used for brick pathsand pavements.

Hypocaust System used by Romans to conduct warm air for underfloorheating.

ICCROM International Centre for the Study of the Preservation andRestoration of Cultural Property, in Rome.

ICOMOS International Council on Monuments and Sites. Headquarters inParis, world-wide professional membership. Dedicated to thepromotion of expertise in conservation, and to the management ofworld heritage sites.

Indent The term used to refer to stone or marble coffin lids or slabs,which still retain the imprint of the monumental brass, sinceremoved.

Ingrain carpet Carpet without a pile, reversible.Intramural burial Burial within the interior of a church. Literally ‘between walls’.Ironstone Sandstone containing, and coloured by, a high proportion of iron.

Jowllo Medieval term for yellow.

Key fret A Greek key geometric design often used for the borders ofmarble and parquetry floors.

Labyrinth A maze.Latten The metal composed of copper and zinc from which monumental

brasses were made.Ledger stone An inscribed stone slab to commemorate the deceased, often used

to close the grave.Lias (blue) Rock strata lying at the base of the oolitic series.Loggia A covered porch or gallery outside a building.Lombardic lettering Medieval letter forms, used for inscriptions on medieval ledger

stones and monuments.Lozenge Diamond shaped floor inserts, often of white marble, containing

inscriptions.

Marmorani Romani Medieval Roman Cosmati craftsmenMarquetry Decorative inlay work of contrasting coloured woods used for

furniture and floors.Matrix The stone or marble base into which a monumental brass was fixed.Microcrystalline wax Transparent wax composed of small crystals.Monumental brass Made from an alloy of copper and zinc, the brass was set into a

stone slab to commemorate the deceased. It often took the formof a portrait.

Glossary 225

Mortar A mixture of lime and/or cement, sand and water, used for joint-ing and bedding stone, brick and marble floors.

Mosaic Floor composed of small tesserae of marble or coloured stonesfixed in mortar and arranged to form geometric patterns orfigured designs.

Mosaicist Mosaic designer.Muniment room For the storage of archives and manuscripts.Musivarius Term applied to a mosaic worker.Muskat Word derived from mosque, applied to imported carpets.

NADFAS National Association of Decorative and Fine Arts Societies.Narthex The enclosed area, often a porch, at the main entrance to a

church.

Octagon and square Used by the Romans to pave streets and floors. Composed ofoctagons of white stone or marble with lozenges of black marble.Later known as carreaux octagones.

Officina Mosaic worker’s studio.Ogee An architectural moulding enclosing an arch with a double bend,

as in an ‘S’.Oolite A granular form of limestone, composed of calcites or shell

fragments.Opus Alexandrinum Marble and mosaic floors of geometric designs composed of

guilloches, roundels and rectangles. Term applied to Cosmatifloors.

Opus sectile Ceramic floors made up of segments or tesserae of differentshapes to form an overall design.

Opus signinum Roman term for terrazzo floors composed of crushed brick andlime mortar.

Oriel A projecting bay window supported on brackets or corbels.

Palazzo Palace.Paleochristian Early Christian.Palmate Decorative classical motif representing a stylized palm.Parquet de Versailles Oak flooring adapted from a design by Serlio and composed of

squares infilled with interwoven diagonals. Originating atVersailles, these floors were first introduced into England byQueen Henrietta Maria at Somerset House in 1661–62.

Parquetry Flooring made of differently coloured woods arranged in geomet-rical patterns.

Paviours Paving stones.Pebble mosaic Arrangement of coloured pebbles in contrasted colours fixed in

mortar to form a geometric or figurative design.Pediment A segmental or triangular head over a classical door opening.Pennant sandstone Dark grey stone.Perspex A transparent acrylic thermoplastic material.Piano nobile Principal or first floor.

226 Historic Floors

Polycarbonate A transparent material composed of salts of carbonic acid, used asa protective floor covering.

Porphyry A hard igneous rock containing crystals of felspar, mined in theMiddle East, including Egypt. Usually red or green.

Presbytery The part of the church east of the choir, in the area of the high altar.Purbeck Cream or grey fossiliferous limestone quarried on the Isle of

Purbeck, Dorset, which takes a polish like marble.Putti Cherubs.

Quartz A silicate found in granite and other rocks, including flint.Quincunx Arrangement of roundels grouped round a central circle to form a

figure five.Quire Alternative to choir – the area in a church where services are sung.

RCHME Royal Commission on Historical Monuments for England.Re-ordering Term used to describe the rearrangement of church furnishings,

often motivated by liturgical or stylistic fashions.Reredos Decorated or carved screen behind and above the altar.Retrochoir Eastern arm of a church, lying between the high altar and the

lady chapel or eastern chapel.Rosa Persiana An ancient stone used in Cosmati pavements.Roundel A circle, often made of sawn sections of columns when used in

Cosmati pavements.

Sacrarium Area in a church reserved for priests, near the high altar.Scagliola Coloured plaster made with fragments of marble and a form of

cement, polished to resemble marble.Segmentatum opus Floor composed of segments.Serpentine A mottled stone containing silicate of magnesium and resembling

a serpent’s skin in appearance.Sgraffito Design scratched on plasterwork.Shale Laminated rocks.Slab A term often used to refer to a gravestone or coffin lid, often in

Tournai or Purbeck marble, sometimes inscribed.Slip A soft white or cream clay, inserted into the red clay base of tiles

in a pattern previously stamped with a mould while the clay issoft.

Slype Covered way in a monastic church leading from the cloisters tothe transept or chapter house.

Soffit Underside of a staircase, often decorated with marquetry.Spandrel Triangular space between the curve of an arch and the rectangu-

lar part enclosing it.

Terracotta A clay based pottery of a reddish colour, also used for architec-tural decoration.

Terrazzo Venetian floor made of chippings of marble laid in mortar andpolished when set. Also known as Palladiana, owing to its use byPalladio in many of his villas in the Veneto.

Glossary 227

Tessellated Floor paved with tiles, laid in geometrical patterns.Tesserae Small cubes of coloured marble or stone, used to make mosaic

designs.Tilery Site used for the manufacture of tiles, often medieval.Tournai A type of black marble quarried in the Tournai area of Belgium

used as a matrix for a monumental brass, or for inscribed ledgerstones or slabs.

Tractarians Applied to a group of nineteenth-century religious reformers,including Pusey and Newman, based at Oxford and committed tohigh church liturgical reform.

Treads and risers The steps in a staircase are each made up of a horizontal treadand a vertical riser, the treads often finishing with a nosing.

UNESCO United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization.

Verde Egyziano Ancient green stone from Egypt used in Cosmati pavements.

228 Historic Floors

ALDRITT, N. and TRIPP, D. (1990). Latin and FrenchInscriptions of Lincoln Minster. Lincoln: Honey-wood Press.

ALDRICH, M. (ed.) (1990). The Craces. RoyalDecorators 1768–1899. Royal Pavilion Art Galleryand Museums. Brighton.

ANDERSON, M. (1951). Looking for History in BritishChurches. John Murray.

ASHURST, J. (1991). Mortars, plasters and renders inconservation. EASA.

ASHURST, J. and DIMES, F.G. (1990). Conservation ofBuilding and Decorative Stone. Vols 1 & 2.Butterworth-Heinemann.

ASLET, C. (1982). The Last Country Houses. YaleUniversity Press.

ASLET, C. and POWERS, A. (1985). The National TrustBook of the English House. Viking.

AUSTWICK, J and AUSTWICK, B. (1980). The DecoratedTile. An Illustrated History of English Tilemakingand Design. London: Pitman.

AYRES, J. (1981). The Home in Britain. Faber & Faber.

BACON, J. (1871). A Record of the Restoration andRepairs done in and about Ely Cathedral since1818. (unpublished manuscript).

BACON, J. (1887). Gleanings from Ely Cathedral(unpublished manuscript).

BAROV, Z. (1985). Recent Developments in MosaicLifting Techniques and New Supports for RemovedFloor Mosaics. Mosaics No.3 Conservation in situ,Aquileia 1983. Rome: ICCROM.

BEARD, G. (1966). Georgian Craftsmen and theirWork. Country Life.

BEARD, G. (1978). The Work of Robert Adam.Bartholomew.

BEARD, G. (1981). Craftsmen and Interior Decorationin England 1660–1820. John Bartholomew andSon.

BERENSDEN, A. (1967). Tiles: A General History. Faber& Faber.

BERESFORD–HOPE, A.J.B. (1864). The Art Workman’sPosition. A Lecture. Victorian Church Art, HMSO(1971).

BETJEMAN, J. (ed.) (1958). Guide to English ParishChurches. Collins.

BEULAH, K. (1987). Church Tiles of the NineteenthCentury. Shire.

BEULAH, K. (1990). Samuel Wright of Shelton and hisTiles. Journal of the Tiles and ArchitecturalCeramics Society, 3.

BEULAH, K. (1991). Fired Earth, 1000 Years of Tiles in Europe. Medieval Paving Tiles. RichardDennis.

BINNEY, M. and BURMAN, P. (1977). Change andDecay. The Future of our Churches. Studio Vista.

BOURKE, J. (1958). Baroque Churches of CentralEurope. Faber & Faber.

BOUTELL, C. (1849). Monumental Brasses of England.London.

BRIGGS, M. (1952). Goths and Vandals. Constable.BROOKS, M. (1989). John Ruskin and Victorian

Architecture. Thames & Hudson.BROWNE WILLIS (1742). A Survey of the Cathedrals of

England and Wales. Vols I & II. London.BRUNSKILL, R.W. (1975). Architectural ceramics.

Timber, Iron, Clay: Five Essays on their Use inBuilding. (Derek Linstrum, ed.), Stafford: WestMidlands Arts.

BUCHANAN, T. (1983). Photographing HistoricBuildings. HMSO.

BURGES, W. (1843). The Temple Church. VictorianChurch Art, HMSO (1971).

BURGES, W. (1867). Our Future Architecture. TheBuilder, XXV, 386.

BURGESS, F. (1963). English Churchyard Memorials.Lutterworth Press.

BURMAN, P. (ed.) (1987). St Paul’s Cathedral. TheNew Bell’s Cathedral Guides. Bell and Hyman.

BURMAN, P. (1994). Treasures on Earth. AGoodhousekeeping Guide to Churches and theirContents. Donhead.

BYNG, J. (1792). Tour to the North. CadoganCHAPMAN, L. (1987). Church Memorial Brasses.

Shire.CLARK, K. (1928). The Gothic Revival: An Essay in the

History of Taste. John Murray.

229

Reading list

CLARKE, B. (1969). Church Builders of the NineteenthCentury. A Study of the Gothic Revival inEngland. David & Charles Reprints.

CLIFTON–TAYLOR, A. (1967). The Cathedrals ofEngland. Victor Gollancz.

CLIFTON–TAYLOR, A. (1972). The Pattern of EnglishBuilding. Faber & Faber.

CLIFTON–TAYLOR, A. (1974). English Parish Churchesas Works of Art. Victor Gollancz.

CLIFTON–TAYLOR, A. and IRESON, A. (1983). EnglishStone Building. Victor Gollancz.

COBB, G. (1980). English Cathedrals. The ForgottenCenturies. Thames & Hudson.

COLBURN, Z. (1865). The manufacture of encaustictiles and ceramic ornamentation by machinery.Journal of the Society of Arts, XIII, No 652,London.

COLE, D. (1963). Sir Gilbert Scott. In: VictorianArchitecture, edited by Peter Ferriday. JonathanCape.

COLE, D. (1980). The Work of Sir George Gilbert Scott.The Architectural Press.

COLVIN, H. (1978). A Biographical Dictionary ofBritish Architects. John Murray.

COOK, O. (1968). The English House Through SevenCenturies. Thomas Nelson.

COOK, O. (1974). The English Country House.Thames & Hudson.

COOK, O. and SMITH, E. (1976). English ParishChurches. Thames & Hudson.

COPPACK, G. (1990). Abbeys and Priories. Batsford.CORNFORTH, J. (1978). English Interiors 1790–1848.

Barrie & Jenkins.CORNFORTH, J. and FOWLER, J. (1966). English Country

Houses: Caroline. Country Life.CORNFORTH, J. and FOWLER, J. (1974). English

Decoration in the Eighteenth Century. Barrie &Jenkins.

COUNCIL FOR THE CARE OF CHURCHES (1962). The Careof Monuments, Brasses and Ledger Slabs inChurches. London: Church Information Office.

COUNCIL FOR THE CARE OF CHURCHES (1970). How toLook After Your Church. London: ChurchInformation Office.

COUNCIL FOR THE CARE OF CHURCHES (1973).Monumental Brasses and Brass Rubbing. London:Church Information Office.

CROOK, J. (1981). William Burges and the HighVictorian Dream. John Murray.

CROOK, J.M. (1995). John Carter and the mind of theGothic Revival. Occasional Papers from theSociety of Antiquaries. 17.

CROOK, J.M. and PORT, M.H. (1973). The History of theKing’s Works. HMSO.

CRUDEN, S. (1951). Glenluce Abbey. Finds recoveredduring excavations, Part II. Transactions of theDumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History andAntiquarian Society, XXX, 179–90.

CRUDEN, S. (1981). The Scottish Castle.CUTTAYER, D. (1989). The History and Works of Art of

St John’s Church, Valetta.CUTTS, E. (1854). Church Furniture and Decoration.DEFOE, D. (1724). A Tour through the Whole Island

of Great Britain.DIRSZTAY, P. (1989). Inside Churches. A Guide to

Church Furnishings. National Association ofDecorative and Fine Arts Societies.

DONATO, M. DI. The Art of Italian Floors through theCenturies. Farnese.

DOWNES, K. (1966). English Baroque Architecture.Zwemmer.

DRURY, P.J. (1981). The production of brick and tilein medieval England. In: Medieval Industry (D.W.Crossley, ed). CBA Research Report No. 40.

DURANT, D.N. (1988). Living in the Past. An Insider’sSocial History of Historic Houses. Auram.

DUTTON, R. (1948). The English Interior 1500–1900.Batsford.

DUTTON, R. (1954). The Victorian House. Batsford.EAMES, E. (1957). A tile pavement from the Queen’s

Bedchamber, Clarendon Palace, dated 1250–1252.Journal of the British Archaeological Association,XX/XXI.

EAMES, E. (1963). A thirteenth century tiled pavementfrom the King’s Chapel, Clarendon Palace.Journal of the British Archaeological Association,XXVI.

EAMES, E. (1975). Medieval pseudo–mosaic tiles.Journal of the British Archaeological Association,XXXVIII.

EAMES, E. (1980). Catalogue of Medieval Lead–glazedEarthenware Tiles in the Department of Medievaland Later Antiquities. British Museum.

EAMES, E. (1983). An investigation of the tile pavementin the north aisle of the presbytery, WinchesterCathedral, in 1969. Medieval Art and Architectureat Winchester Cathedral. No VI. BritishArchaeological Association Transactions for 1980.

EAMES, E. (1985). English Medieval Tiles. BritishMuseum/Harvard University Press.

EAMES, E. (1992). English Tilers. Medieval CraftsmenSeries, British Museum Press.

EASTLAKE, C. (1970). A History of the Gothic Revival.J.M. Crook (ed.), The Victorian Library, Leicester

230 Historic Floors

University Press, New York (first published 1873).

EDWARDS, D.L. (1989). The Cathedrals of Britain.Pitkin Guides.

EMPEY, A. (ed.) (1985). A Worthy Foundation. TheCathedral Church of St Canice, Kilkenny. TheDolman Press.

EVANS, J. (1956). A History of the Society ofAntiquaries. Society of Antiquaries.

FAWCETT, J. (1976). The Future of the Past. Attitudesto Conservation. Thames & Hudson.

FAWCETT, J. (1978). Seven Victorian Architects.Thames & Hudson.

FAWCETT, J. (1984). Greater Churches: Damage byVisitors. ASCHB Transactions, 9.

FAWCETT, J. (1991). Cathedral Floor Damage Survey.ICOMOS UK.

FAWCETT, J. (1994). Floors. Treasures on Earth. P.Burman (ed.). Donhead. 179–89.

FAWCETT, J. and NICHOLSON, G. (1988). The Village inHistory. Weidenfeld & Nicholson.

FEILDEN, B.M. (1994). Conservation of HistoricBuildings. Butterworth-Heinemann.

FERRAGNI, D. (1985). In situ consolidation of wall andfloor mosaics by means of injection groutingtechniques. Mosaics No 3. Conservation in Situ,Aquileia 1983. Rome: ICCROM.

FERREY, B. (1861). Recollections of A.N. Welby Puginand his father Augustus Pugin.

FERRIDAY, P. (ed.) (1963). Victorian Architecture.Jonathan Cape.

FERRIDAY, P. (1964). The Church Restorers.Architectural Review, CXXXVI, 93.

FLEMING, J., HONOUR, H. and PEVSNER, N. (1975).Penguin Dictionary of Architecture. Penguin.

FORMAN, S. (1967). Scottish Country Houses andCastles. Collins.

FOSTER, R. (1981). Discovering English Churches.BBC.

FOSTER, R. (1991). Patterns of Thought, the HiddenMeaning of the Great Pavement of WestminsterAbbey. Jonathan Cape.

FOWLER, D. (1992). Church Floors and FloorCoverings. Church House Publishing.

GEM, R. and KEEN, L. (1981). Late Anglo–Saxon findsfrom the site of St Edmund’s Abbey. ProceedingsSuffolk Inst. Arch, 30.

GIBBS–SMITH, C.H. (1981). The Great Exhibition of1851. London: HMSO.

GILBERT, C., WELLS–COLE, A. and LOMAX, J. (1987).Country House Floors 1660–1850. TempleNewsam Country House Studies, 3.

GILYARD–BEER, R. (1964). Problems connected withthe preservation and display of a medievalpavement in Norfolk. II Monumento per L’Uomo,Atti del 11 Congresso Internationale del Restauro,Venezia.

GIROUARD, M. (1978). Life in the English CountryHouse. Yale University Press.

GIROUARD, M. (1979). The Victorian Country House.Yale University Press.

GITTINGS, C. (1970). Brass and Brass Rubbing.Blandford.

GLASS, D. (1980). Studies on Cosmatesque Pavements.BAR International Series, No. 82.

GODFREY, W.H. (1931). The Story of Architecture inEngland. Batsford.

GOODBURN, R. (1979). The Chedworth Roman Villa.National Trust.

GOUGH, R. (1792). A Mosaic Pavement in the Prior’sChapel at Ely. Archaeologia, 10.

GOUGH, R. and CARTER, J. (1786). SepulchralMonuments.

GOW, I. (1981). A stencilled room and a paintedfloor. The Archaeology of Edinburgh’s NewTown. The Scottish Georgian Society Bulletin, 8.

GRAEF, A. and GRAEF, M. (1992). Das Parkett. Reprintder Ausgabe von 1899. Munich.

GRANT, I. (ed.) (1967). Great Interiors. Weidenfeld &Nicholson.

GREENE, B. (1982). The Godwins of Hereford.Journal of the Tiles & Architectural CeramicsSociety, 1, 8–15.

GREGG, G. (1981). Catalogue of the DrawingsCollection of the Scott Family. London: RIBA.

HAMILTON, D. (1978). The Thames and HudsonManual of Architectural Ceramics. London:Thames & Hudson.

HARRIS, J. (1979). The Artist and the Country House.Sotheby Parke Bernet.

HARRIS, J. and LEVER, J. (1966). Illustrated Glossary ofArchitecture. Faber & Faber.

HARVEY, J. (1950). The Cathedrals of England andWales. Batsford.

HEFFORD, W. (1977). Thomas Moore of Moorfields.Burlington CXIX.

HERBERT, A.T. (1978). The Jackfield Decorative TileIndustry. Ironbridge.

HERBERT, A. and HUGGINS, K. (1995). The DecorativeTile in Architecture and Interiors. Phaidon.

HIGHTON C.D. (1991). Foreign and CommonwealthOffice. HMSO.

HILL, O. and CORNFORTH, J. (1966). English CountryHouses. Caroline 1625–1685. Country Life.

Reading list 231

HORTON, M. and NORTON, E. (1981). A ParisianWorkshop in Canterbury, a late 13th century tilepavement in the Corona Chapel, and the originsof Tyler Hill. Journal of the British ArchaeologicalAssociation, 134, 58–80.

HOWELL, P. and SUTTON, I. (eds.) (1989). The FaberGuide to Victorian Churches. Faber & Faber.

HUSSEY, C. (1965). English Country Houses. CountryLife.

HUTTON, E. (1950). The Cosmati. Routledge & KeganPaul.

HUTTON, G. (1976). English Parish Churches. Thames& Hudson.

INNOCENT, C.F. (1916). The Development of EnglishBuilding Construction.

ICOMOS UK (1990). Guide to Recording HistoricBuildings. Butterworth Architecture.

JACKSON, T.G. (1873). Modern Gothic Architecture.London: H.S. King.

JOHNSON, P. (1980). British Cathedrals. Weidenfeld &Nicholson.

JOHNSON, P. (1995). Romano–British Mosaics. 2ndedn. Shire Archaeology Books.

JOHNSON, H. and JOHNSON, R. (1989). Encaustic andGeometric Unglazed Ceramic Floor Tiles.Stoke–on–Trent.

JOHNSTON, D.E. (1994). Roman Archaeology. ShireArchaeology.

JONES, C. (1988). Roman Mosaics. Museum of London.JONES, J. (1993). Minton. The First 200 Years of

Design and Production. Swan Hil.JONES, O. (1842) Designs for Mosaic and Tesselated

Pavements.JONES, O. (1856). A Grammar of Ornament.JORDAN, W.J. FURNEAUX (1980). Sir George Gilbert

Scott, RA, Surveyor to Westminster Abbey1849–1878. Architectural History, 23.

JOURDAIN, M. (1950). English Interior Decoration1500–1830. Batsford.

KEEN, L. (1975). The medieval decorated tilepavements at Worcester. Medieval Art andArchitecture, 1. Worcester Cathedral.

KEEN, L. (1976). The fourteenth century tiles in PriorCrauden’s Chapel and in the South Transept.Medieval Art and Architecture at Ely Cathedral.The British Archaeological Association.

KEEN, L. (1979). A fourteenth century mosaic tilepavement with line–impressed decoration fromIcklingham. Proc. Suffolk Inst. Arch for 1974, 33.

KEMP, B. (1985). Church Monuments. Shire.KERR, R. (1864). The Gentleman’s House. London.KIDSON, P. (1967). The Medieval World. Hamlyn.

KIER, H. (1970). Der Mittelalterliche Schmuckfuss-boden. Düsseldorf: Rheinland.

KIER, H. (1976). Schmuckfussboden in Renaissanceund Barock. Munich: Deutscher Kunst Verlag.

KING, D. and SYLVESTER, D. (1983). The Eastern Carpetin the Western World (exh. cat). Hayward Gallery.

KRETZSCHMER, F. (1984). Historische Fussboden imWestlichen Rheinland. Denkmalpflege imRheinland 2.

LANDGRAF, E. (1993). Ornamentierte Bodenfliesen desMittelalters in Süd und West Deutschland1150–1550. Stuttgart: Kommissionsverlag KonradTheiss Verland.

LAURITZEN, P. (1988). Villas of the Veneto. Pavilion.LEES MILNE, J. (1970). English Country Houses –

Baroque 1685–1715. Country Life.LETHABY, W.R. (1925). Westminster Abbey

Re–examined. Duckworth.LEWIS, J.M. (1976). Welsh Medieval Paving Tiles.

Cardiff: National Museum of Wales.LITTEN, J. (1991). The English Way of Death. The

Common Funeral since 1450. Robert Hale.LLOYD, N. (1975). A History of the English House.

Architectural Press.LOCKETT, R.B. (1968). George Gilbert Scott, the Joint

Restoration Committee, and the Refurnishing ofWorcester Cathedral: 1863–1874. Transactions ofthe Worcester Archaeological Society, 3rd Series,6, 7–42.

LONSDALE, J.G. (1895). Recollections of Work Done inand Upon Lichfield Cathedral from 1856 to 1894.Lichfield.

LOUDON, J.C. (1833). An Encyclopaedia of Cottage,Farm and Villa Architecture and Furniture.

MACKLIN, H. (1913). Monumental Brasses. Allen &Unwin.

MARTIN, D.G. (1970). Maintenance and repair ofstone buildings. Council for the Care of Churches.

MAW & CO. (1853). Patterns of Maw & Co’s EncausticTile, Geometric Mosaic and Plain Tile Pavements,and Majolica and Enamelled Wall Tiles, WhiteGlazed Tiles etc.

MAW & CO. (1862). Specimens of Encaustic TilePavements. London.

MAW & CO. (1893). Specimens of Encaustic TilePavements. London.

MEARA, D. (1983). Victorian Memorial Brasses.Routledge & Kegan Paul.

MESSENGER, M. (1978). Revival of a medievaltechnique: encaustic tiles in the nineteenthcentury. Country Life, 26 January 1978, pp.214–215.

232 Historic Floors

MINTON, H. (1842). Old English Tile Designs.MUTHESIUS, S. (1972). The High Victorian Movement in

Architecture 1850–1870. Routledge & Kegan Paul.NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL (1982). Conservation of

Historic Stone Buildings and Monuments.Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

NICHOLS, J. (1845). Examples of Decorative Tiles.London.

NICKL, P. (1995). Parkett. Historische Holzfussbödenund Zeitenösische Parkett Kultur. Munich:Klinkhardt & Bierman.

NORTON, C. (1994). Medieval Floor Tiles in Scotland.Medieval Art and Architecture in the Diocese of StAndrew’s, BAA Conference Proceedings for 1986.

NORTON, E.C. (1974). The medieval paving tiles ofWinchester College. Proceedings of the HampshireField Club, 31.

NORTON, E.C. (1992). Carreaux de pavement duMoyen Age et de la Renaissance. MuséeCarnavalet, Paris. University of York.

NOTZON, M. (1988). Stone Flooring (MA Dissertation,York).

PAGE–PHILLIPS, J. (1969). Macklin’s MonumentalBrasses (1913). Allen & Unwin.

PARISSIEN, S. (1992). Regency Style. Phaidon.PARISSIEN, S. (1996). Adam Style. Phaidon.PEVSNER, N. (1943). An Outline of European

Architecture. Pelican.PEVSNER, N. (1976). History of Building Types.

Thames & Hudson.PEVSNER, N. and METCALF, P. (1985). The Cathedrals of

England. 2 vols (Southern England and Midland,Eastern and Northern England). Viking.

PIGGOTT, S. (1950). William Stukeley; an EighteenthCentury Antiquary. Oxford University Press.

PORTER, V. and THORNES, R. (1994). A Guide to theDescription of Architectural Drawings. Publishedon behalf of the Getty Art History InformationProgram. New York: K.G. Hall.

POWYS, A.R. (1929). The Repair of Ancient Buildings.J.M. Dent.

PRITCHARD, E. (1995). Ham House and its OwnersThrough Four Centuries 1610–1948. (privatepublication)

PUGIN, A.W. (1841). Contrasts. Dolman.PUGIN, A.W. (1843). Apology for the Revival of Pointed

or Christian Architecture in England.PUGIN, A.W. (1850). Some Remarks on Articles which

have Recently Appeared in The Rambler 1850, pp.23–24. Victorian Church Art, HMSO. (1971).

QUINEY, A. (1979) John Loughborough Pearson. YaleUniversity Press.

RANDALL, G. (1980). Church Furnishing andDecoration. Batsford.

RICHARDSON, J. (1928). Thirteenth Century Tile Kilnat North Berwick. East Lothian and ScottishMedieval Ornamented Floor Tiles. Proceedings ofthe Scottish Archaeological Soc, 63.

RILEY, N. (1987). Tile Art. A History of DecorativeCeramic Tiles. Quintet.

RODWELL, W. (1989a). Church Archaeology. EnglishHeritage/Batsford.

RODWELL, W. (1989b). The floor of the Library atLichfield Cathedral. Antiquity, 63.

ROTHERY, G. (1994). Concise Encyclopaedia ofHeraldry. Senate, Studio Editions.

SALZMAN, L.F. (1952). Building in England down to1540. Clarendon.

SANDWITH, M. and STAINTON, S. (1984). The NationalTrust Manual of Housekeeping. Penguin in associ-ation with the National Trust.

SCHOFIELD, J. (1984). The Building of London fromthe Conquest to the Great Fire. British MuseumPublications.

SCOTT, G.G. (1850). A Plea for the Faithful Restorationof our Ancient Churches.

SCOTT, G.G. (1857). On the present and futureprospects for the Revival of Gothic Architecture.Associated Architectural Societies’ Reports andPapers, iv, 76, 77, 80.

SCOTT, G.G. (1863). Gleanings from WestminsterAbbey. Parker.

SCOTT, G.G. (1879). Personal and ProfessionalRecollections. London.

SEKERS, D. (1990). The Potteries (first published 1981)Shire.

SERVICE, A. (1979). The Architects of London.Architectural Press.

SHAW, H. (1858). Specimens of Tile Pavements.London: B.M. Pickering.

SHERRILL, S. (1996). Carpets and Rugs of Europe andAmerica. New York: Abbeyville.

SHURLOCK, M. (1885). Tiles from Chertsey Abbey,Surrey, Representing Early Romance Subjects.London. Reprinted as Arthurian and Knightly Artfrom the Middle Ages. D. Bryce (ed.) LlanerchEnterprises (1989).

SIMMONS, J. (1968). St Pancras Station. George Allen& Unwin.

SKINNER, D.S. and VAN LEMMEN, H. (eds.) (1984).Minton Tiles: 1835–1935. Stoke–on–Trent CityMuseum and Art Gallery.

SPRINGER, P. (1991). Das Kölner Dom–Mosaik. VerlagKölner–Dom.

Reading list 233

STAMP, G. and AMERY, C. (1980). Victorian Buildingsof London 1837–1887. Architectural Press.

STEVENS, F. (1935). The Inlaid Paving Tiles ofWiltshire. Wiltshire Archaeological and NaturalHistory Magazine, 47.

STOPFORD, J. (1990). Recording Medieval Floor Tiles.Practical Handbook No 10. London: Council forBritish Archaeology.

STORRY, J.G. (1986). Church Heraldry. Nettlebed.STRATTON, M. (1989). Decorative tiles for churches

and public buildings. In The Decorative Arts inthe Victorian Period. (S.M. Wright ed.), TheSociety of Antiquaries.

STREET, G.E. (1858). A paper read at the AnniversaryMeeting of the Ecclesiological Society in theEcclesiologist, Vol XIX. Victorian Church Art,HMSO (1971).

SYMONS, V. (1968). Church Maintenance. MarshallMorgan & Scott.

TABRAHAM, C. (1986). Scottish Castles andFortifications. HMSO.

TATTON–BROWN, T. (1981). The Trinity Chapel andCorona Floors. Canterbury Cathedral Chronicle,75, 51–6.

THORNTON, P. (1978). Seventeenth Century InteriorDecoration in England, France and Holland.Yale University Press.

THORNTON, P. (1984). Authentic Decor; The DomesticInterior 1620–1920. Weidenfeld & Nicholson.

THORNTON, P. (1991). The Italian RenaissanceInterior 1400–1600.

TINNISWOOD, A. (ed.) (1993). Historic HousesHandbook. National Trust.

TOKE, N.E. (1930). The opus Alexandrinum andsculptured stone roundels in the retrochoir ofCanterbury Cathedral. Archaeologia Cantiana,42, 189–221.

ULMER, C. (1993). Ville Fruilane. Magnus, Udine.V & A (1971). Victorian Church Art. Catalogue for

the Exhibition November 1971–January 1972,Victoria and Albert Museum. HMSO.

VAN LEMMEN, H. (1981). Victorian Tiles. Shire.VAN LEMMEN, H. (1989). Tiles in Architecture.

Laurence King.VICTORIAN SOCIETY (1992). Decorative Tiles. Care for

Victorian Houses, No. Two, London.VON ROSENSTEIN, H. and WINKLER, G. (1988). Floor

Coverings for Historic Buildings. PreservationPress V & A.

WARE, D. (1967). A Short Dictionary of BritishArchitects. Allen & Unwin.

WATKIN, D. (1990). English Architecture. (firstpublished 1979) Thames & Hudson.

WEEVER (1631). Ancient Funeral Monuments.WELANDER, D. (1991). The History of the Art and

Architecture of Gloucester Cathedral. Alan Sutton.

WIGHT, J.A. (1975). Medieval Floor Tiles. John Baker.WIHR, R. (1985). Fussboden, Stein, Mosaik, Keramik,

Estirch – Geschichte, Herstellung, Konservierung.Munich: Callwey.

WILSON, C. (1990). The Gothic Cathedral. Thames &Hudson.

WILSON, C., TUDOR–CRAIG, P., PHYSICK, J. and GEM, R.(1980). Westminster Abbey. The New BellsCathedral Guides. Bell & Hyman.

WOOD, M. (1965). The English Medieval House.Phoenix House.

WRIGHT, S.M. (ed.) (1989). The Decorative Arts in theVictorian Period. The Society of Antiquaries.

WYATT, M.D. (1847). On the Art of Mosaic, Ancientand Modern. Transactions of the Society of Arts,56, 1846–1848.

WYATT, M.D. (1858). On the influence exercised onceramic manufactures by the late Mr HerbertMinton. Journal of the Society of Arts. 28 May, 1858.

YARWOOD, D. (1979). The English Home. Batsford.YOUNG, A. (1770). A Six Month’s Tour Through the

North of England.

General reference

Advisory Note on Good Practice for the Care ofLedger Stones and other Floor Memorials in Cathedrals (1997). Cathedrals Fabric Commis-sion.

Care of Cathedrals Measure (1990). HMSO.Care of Churches and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction

Measure (1991). HMSO.Cathedral Fabric Records. A Guide to the Care and

Protection of Records (1995) Cathedrals FabricCommission and English Heritage.

The Cathedrals, Abbeys and Churches of Scotland(1995). Scotland’s Churches Scheme.

Easy Access to Historic Properties (1995). EnglishHeritage.

English Cathedrals and Tourism: Problems andOpportunities (1979). English Tourist Board.

English Churches and Visitors: a survey of Anglicanincumbents (1984). English Tourist Board.

English Heritage Monitor (annual). English TouristBoard.

Heritage and Renewal. Report of the Archbishop’sCommission on Cathedrals (1994). Church HousePublishing.

234 Historic Floors

HUDSON, N. (1994). Historic Houses and Gardens.Norman Hudson & Co.

PEVSNER, N. et al. (1951– ). The Buildings of England,Ireland, Scotland and Wales. Continuing. Penguin.

Pitkin Cathedral Guides Series. Pitkin Guides.National Trust Guidebooks to individual properties.

National Trust.

Planning Policy Guidance Note PPG16 (1990).Department of the Environment and HMSO.

PPG15 Planning and the Historic Environment(1990). Department of National Heritage andHMSO.

RCHME and RIBA (1987) Architectural records inNational and Local Collections. London.

Reading list 235

This Page Intentionally Left Blank

Abbotsford, painted floor, 162Abdy family, ledger stones, 28–9Acton Burnell Church, tiles, 7Acton Church, brass, 36Adam, James, 142Adam, Robert, 147, 158–9, Pl.48, Pl.49, Pl.60, Pl.61Alan of Walsingham, grave marker, 208–9Albert, Prince Consort, 132, 194Aldbury Church, brass, 37Algeria, basilica of Reparatus El-Asnam, floor labyrinth,

23Allein, Bishop of Exeter, grave slab, 25, 209Alma Tadema, Sir Lawrence, brass, 215Althorp, tiled dairy, 131Alton Towers, tiled floor designs, 132Amiens Cathedral, floor labyrinth, 22, 23Anagni Cathedral, Cosmati pavements, 15, 58

restoration, 126Andrew, F., 213Anet, Château of, marble chapel floor, 144Anglo-Saxon floors, 63Anglo-Saxon tiles, 2, 63, 64Anrep, Boris, 140, 141Antwerp Cathedral, marble pavement, 22Apulia:

Abbazio di Pomposa, mosaic floor, 14Otranto Cathedral, mosaic pavements, 14

Aquileia, Basilica of Theodosius, mosaic pavement, 12,14, 125–6

Archaeology:conservation of excavated floors, 164–71discoveries at Uppark, 181–2ecclesiastical floors, 41–52

assessing, recording and interpreting, 49–52layers and levels, 43–4materials and laying techniques, 41–3rituals, secular activities and their effects, 45–9under-floor burials, 44–5

Arras Cathedral, floor labyrinth, 23Artima, Baldassare, 175Arundel, Thomas Howard, Earl of, 144Ashstead Park, inlaid floors, 152Assisi, S. Francesco, Cosmati floor, 15

Attingham Park:floor cloth, 161inlaid floor border, 154

Austen, Jane, ledger stone, 221Austria, historic floor management, 127Auxerre Cathedral, floor labyrinth, 23Axminster carpets, 158, 160Aylmer, Gerald, 77

Babbacombe Church, Cosmatesque work, 17Backfilling of excavated sites, 170–1Bacon, J., 21, 209Bagnaia, Villa Lante, brick tiled floor, 131Bailey, John, 202Baker, Professor and Eve, 116Balfour Castle, painted floor, 162Ballyfin, Co. Leix, marquetry floors, 153Balmerino Abbey, tiles, 3Balmoral Castle, carpets, 160–1Bangor Cathedral, Wales, tiles, 7Bargrave, Canon John, 56Barnes, Frederick, brass, 208Barnes, Robert, 161Barry, Sir Charles, 132, 187

brass, 39, 219Bartholomew Iscanus, Bishop of Exeter, effigy, 23, 25,

209Barton-upon-Humber, St Peter’s:

alley remnants, 46inclined floor level, 43installation of screen, 45

Basevi, George, brass, 39, 209Bateman’s, PPV measurements, 199Bath, Temple of Aquae Sulis, 169Bath Abbey, 206

burials, 45floor levels, 43ledger stones, 26

Baumann, Joseph, Pl.51Baumbach, Sue, 114Bayreuth, Neues Schloss, parquetry floors, 155Beauchamp, Sir Thomas and Lady de, brass, 36Beaumont, Louis de, Bishop of Durham, brass, 33, 208

237

3

Index

Bold numbers indicate pages where relevant information is given only in a figure or caption. Buildings andmonuments can be found either under individual names or as a sub-entry of a town or city.

Beauregard, Château de, tiled floor, 131Beccafumi, Domenico di Pace, 18, 126Beckermet, St Bridget’s, inscription, 104Beeton’s Housewife’s Treasury, 161Behn, Aphra, ledger stone, 27, 220Bell, Bishop of Carlisle, brass, 34, 207Bell, William, ledger stone, 27Belton House:

carpet, 160, Pl.63marble floor, 144painted floor, 162, Pl.62

Belvoir Castle:carpets, 157marble floor, 147

Benedict, Abbot of Peterborough, tomb slab, 25, 213Beningborough Hall, marquetry floor, 153Bentley, J.F., 17Beresford-Hope, A.J.B., 11, 12Berkeley, Bishop of Exeter, brass indent, 25, 209Berrington Hall, marble floors, 146–7Beverley, St Mary’s, encaustic pavement, 11Beverley Minster, marble pavement, 20Biddle, Martin, 2Bignor, Roman mosaics, 139Bilson, Thomas, Bishop of Winchester, brass indent, 219Bindon, Francis, 153Bird, Peter, 92Birmingham, St Chad’s Cathedral, tiled floor, 9Bitton, Bishop of Exeter, grave slab, 25, 34, 209Bitton II, Bishop of Wells, incised slab, 25, 218Blashfield, 140Blathwayt, William, 145, 152Blecker, John, ledger stone, 27, 215Blickling Hall, carpet, 160Blois, Château de, tile pavement, 131Blomfield, Sir Reginald, 212, 216Boarded floors, 150–1, 180–1, 182, 184

cleaning, 179, 185fire resistance measures, 184recording, 185–6

Bodley, G.F., 219Boehm, Sir Joseph, brass, 215Boffrand, Germain, 150Bolsover Castle, marble hall, 144Borgnis, G., 146Boston Church, brass, 33Boughton House, 152

carpets, 157marquetry table, 175

Boulenger, Jean-Baptiste, 134Bournemouth, St Stephen’s, Cosmatesque pavement, 17Bowers Gifford Church, brass, 36Bowood, marble floor, 145Bradley, Richard, 139Brakspear, Harold, 213Brandesburton Church, inscriptions, 74Brandon, D., in partnership with T. H. Wyatt, 17

Brasses, 31–40damaged by furniture, 121indents, 34–5, 38protective coverings, 123recording, 82, 98–9rubbings, 38–9see also under individual cathedrals and

churchesBraybrook, Sir Reginald, brass, 37Brewer, Bishop of Exeter, grave slab, 25, 209Brick floors, 131, 132Brighton Pavilion, carpets, 160Brin, Donatus, ledger stone, 27Bristol:

St Augustine-the-Less, burials, 28St Mary Redcliffe, 215

ledger stones, 27, 28, 215Bristol Cathedral, 206

burials, 45choir aisle, floor survey, 51–2Cosmatesque pavement, 17, 206ledger stones, 26, 29plaster floor, 42

Britton, John, 38Broadlands, inlaid floors, 152Brodrick, Cuthbert, 135Bronze lettering, 61, 62Brook, John and Johanna, brass, 215Brook Church, tiles, 7Brooke family, brasses, 37Broseley tilery, 133, 140Brown, Charles, 81, 222Brown, Thomas, brass indent, 219Browne, John, 77Brussels carpets, 158, 160Buckfast Abbey, Cosmatesque pavements, 17Bullimore, John, 175Bulowe, Henry de, Bishop of Mecklenburg, 32Bulowe, Ludolph de, Bishop of Mecklenburg, 32Bunning, James Bunstone, 135Bures, Sir Robert de, brass, 36Burges, William, 10, 134, 216, Pl.4Burgh, Maud de, ledger stone, 11, 217Burghley:

inlaid floors, 152marble floor, 145

Burial registers, 77Burials, 25–6, 28, 44–5, 64, 65–6Burlington, Lord, 21, 70–1, 79, 221Bursa, Mausoleum of Orham Gazi, 14Bury St Edmunds, St Edmund’s Abbey, Anglo-Saxon

tiles, 2Butterfield, William, 12, 17Buttress, David, 220Buyster, Philippe de, 149Byland Abbey, tiles, 3, 4, 127Byzantine mosaics, 14

238 Index

CAD, see Computer-aided draftingCalke Abbey, 143Cambridge Camden Society, 8, 9

see also Ecclesiological SocietyCamoys, Lady Margaret, brass, 36Canterbury, St Augustine’s Abbey:

Anglo-Saxon floor, 63remains of marble pavement, 58tiles, 6

Canterbury Cathedral, 206–7brass indent, 35Corona Chapel, 6, 53, 54, 55, 123, 124, 206ledger stones, 29Martyrdom Chapel floor, 123, 139, 206–7nave floor (archaeological study), 63–8, Pl.23stone paving, 42tiles:

Anglo-Saxon, 2, 63, 64medieval, 6protection, 123–4

Trinity Chapel, Cosmatesque pavement, 16, 53–8, 123,125, 206, Pl.11

visitor facilities, 122visitor restriction, 124

Cantilupe, Thomas de, Bishop of Hereford, brass indent,34

Capillan, Jacob, brass, 33Caprarola, Palazzo Farnese, terracotta tiles, 131Carapecchia, Romano, 128Cardiff Castle, tiled floors, 134Carlisle, Earl of, brass, 222Carlisle Cathedral, 207

brass, 34Carlton Towers, carpet, 160, 161Caroe, Martin, 114Caroe, W.D., 38, 219Carpets, 153, 155–61, 176, 200–1Carr, John, 144, 145Carreaux octagones, 135, 145, 149Carter, John, 10, 13, 38, 46–7, 210

brass reconstruction, 34Carwitham, John, 146, 161Casale, mosaics, 136Cassels, Richard, 153Castell, Thomas de, ledger stone, 27Castle Ashby Church, brass, 34Castle Howard:

marble floors, 146pavement record, 139

Cave, C.J.P., 112Cavendish, Sir Charles, 144Cavendish, William, 156Caylus, Comte de, 139CEI, see Contrast/contour enhancing illumination

techniqueChambers, Sir William, 142, 153, 154Chartres Cathedral, floor labyrinth, 22–3

Chartwell, 198, 202Chastleton Church, tiles, 7Chatillon, Cardinal Odet de Coligny, tomb, 55Chatsworth:

inlaid floors, 152marble floors, 145

Chaucer, Sir Thomas and Lady, brass, 36Cheadle, St Giles, 9Chedworth Roman villa, mosaic floors, 138, Pl.43Chenonceaux, Château de, tiles, 131, Pl.32, Pl.33Chertsey Abbey, tiles, 6, 10Chester Cathedral, 207

Cosmatesque pavement, 17, 207encaustic pavements, 11, 207heating installation, 121, 207ledger stones, 26

Cheyne, Margaret, brass, 36Chichester Cathedral, 207–8

nave pavement, 25, 207–8, Pl.18Childrey Church, brass, 36Chillenden, Prior of Canterbury, 64Chippendale, Thomas, 161Chippenham Park, marble floor, 145Chirk Castle, 151Christian, Ewan, 217Cirencester, St John the Baptist, brasses, 37Cistercian foundations, tiles from, 2–3, 4, 5Civil War, 2, 38Clare, Gilbert de, memorial plaque, 217Clarence, Duke of, memorial, 217Clarendon Palace, tiles, 5, 130Claydon, staircase, 153, Pl.74Clayton, J.R., 207Clayton and Bell, 12, 16, 17, 134, Pl.41Cleaning, 124

boarded floors, 185brasses, 123dry scrubbing, 179tiles, 115, 191, 197, 217time to be allowed, 200

Cleeve Abbey, tiles, 6, Pl.2Cleyn, Franz, 173Cliveden House, 151

tiled pavement, 132Clouan, Richard, ledger stone, 27Clutton, Henry, 10, 216, Pl.4Coach parties, 203Cobham, Dame Jane de, brass, 36Cobham, Joan de, brass, 37Cobham Church, brasses, 36, 37Cobham family, brasses, 36, 37Cockerell, Charles Robert, 194

ledger stone, 215Coke, William, ledger stone, 27, 215Colchester, pavement records, 139Coleshill, marble floor, 145Cologne, Roman mosaic floor, 136, 137

Index 239

Cologne Cathedral, mosaic pavements, 17, 126, Pl.12,Pl.13, Pl.14

Combe Abbey, 151Composition floors, 143Compton, Lord Alwyne, Bishop of Ely, 9, 10, 13, 21Computer-aided drafting (CAD), 88–9, 111Computerization of records, 109–12Concrete floors, 41–2Conservation:

excavated floors, 164–71floor memorials (advisory note), 122Winchester Cathedral, retrochoir floor, 112–19York Minster, ledger stones, 79–84

Contrast/contour enhancing illumination technique,102–3

Coorthopp, James, brass, 208Coote, Sir Charles, 153Copley, Godfrey, ledger stone, 96Cosmatesque floors, 13, 16, 17–18, 53–8Cosmati floors, 13, 14–16, 18, 58–62, Pl.9, Pl.10, Pl.11,

Pl.22, Pl.37restoration, 126

Cotman, John Sell, engravings of brasses, 39Cotterstock, Roman pavement, 139Courtenay, Archbishop of Camterbury, tomb, 55Courtenay, Edward, brass, 208Courtenay, Sir Peter, brass, 210Coventry Cathedral, Anglo-Saxon tiles, 2Coverings, see Protective coveringsCrace, John, 160Cranbury Park, inlaid floor, 153Crane, Walter, 135Crauden, Prior of Ely, brass, 209Craven, Sir William, 151Creeny, Rev., 31, 32, 36Creke, Sir John and Lady de, brass, 36Cremen, Bertram, Bishop of Lübeck, brass, 33Cremona Cathedral, floor labyrinth, 23Crispin, Gilbert, Abbot of Westminster, effigy, 25, 220Cromwell, Oliver, 69–70Cromwell, Thomas, 69Crook, John, 113, 114Croombe Court, carpets, 158, 159Crossland, W.H., 135Crowcombe Court:

marble floor, 145painted floor, 162

Croyland, Godfrey de, Abbot of Peterborough, brassindent, 34–5

Cubitt, Thomas, Pl.35Culzean Castle, saloon, 159, Pl.61Cuthbert, St, grave slab, 208

Dairies, tiled, 131Dallas, Ross, 112Dance, George, 21, 153, Pl.52

ledger stone, 27, 215

Data standardization, 110Daubernon, Sir John, brass, 36Davidson, Sandra, 114d’Aviler, C.A., pattern book, 20, 144–5, 150de la Mare, Abbot of St Albans, brass, 214De Morgan, William, 135Dean, Archbishop of Canterbury, brass indent, 35, 206Deepdene, inlaid pavement, 140Delamere, Richard, brass, 210Delft tiles, see Dutch tilesDesiderius, Abbot of Monte Cassino, 14Despenser, Sir Edward, memorial plaque, 217Despenser, Hugh, memorial plaques, 217Deventer Church, tiles, 127Dickinson, William, assistant to Christopher Wren, 19,

215Dientzenhofer, Johann, 154Dirleton Castle, tiles, 130, 131Disabled visitors, 203Dixton, Richard, brass, 37Dodsworth, Roger, 74, 76Dorset, Richard Sackville, 3rd Earl of, portrait, 156, 157Dossy, Richard, 70Dowe, Henry, brass, 208Drake, Francis, 74, 75, 76, 77, 79Drayton House, Duchess’s closet, 152–3Dresser, Christopher, 135Drury, Michael, 92Dublin:

Casino, Marino, marquetry floors, 153, 154St Patrick’s Cathedral, Street restoration, 12

Dugdale, Sir W., 74Dundrennan Abbey, brass, 32Dunfermline Abbey, tiles, 3Dunster Church, street restoration, 12Durdans, staircase, 152Durham Cathedral, 208

brass, 33, 208Cosmatesque pavement, 17, 208new visitor facilities, 122

Düsseldorf, Schloss Benrath, marble pavement, 149Dutch tiles, 131–2Dymoke, Sir William, ledger stone, 212Dyrham Park:

marble floors, 145staircase, 152, 198, Pl.73

Dysart, William Murray, 1st Earl of, 172–3

Earle, J.H., 161Earth floors, 41, 46, 155–6

conservation, 169Easteney, Abbot of Westminster, brass, 219Eastlake, Charles, 12, 135Eaton Hall, carpets, 160Ecclesiastical floors, management and good practice,

120–8Ecclesiological Society, 12, 39

240 Index

Edgeworth, Maria, 154Edinburgh, painted floors, 162Edward Prince of Wales (d.1471), memorial, 217Edward Prince of Wales (‘Black Prince’, d.1376), tomb,

55Edward VI, King, portrait, 156, 157Effner, Joseph, 149, 155, Pl.50Eleanor of Castile, 156Electronic distance measurement equipment, 87–8Elmes, Harvey Lonsdale, 194Ely Cathedral, 208–9

archives database, 111brass, 39brass indent, 34choir aisles, 124encaustic pavement, 11labyrinth, 21, 208ledger stones, 11, 23, 24marble floors, 21Prior Crauden’s Chapel, tiles, 4, 209

Encaustic tiles, see under Tiles (floor)Endsleigh, tiled dairy, 131Epinasse, François, 141Epsom, Mr Rooth’s house, imitation inlaid floors,

152Erasmus, Desiderius, 156Erghum, Bishop of Wells, brass indent, 218Ermynd, William, brass, 34Essenwein, Auguste, 17, 126, Pl.13, Pl.14Evelyn, John, 151–2, 173Ewelme Church, brass, 36Exeter Cathedral, 209–10

brass, 34choir aisles, 124ledger stones, 23, 24, 25, 29, 209, 210

inscriptions, 28records, 110, 111

Facsimile displays, 203Fairfax, Robert, brass, 214Felbrigg, Sir George, brass, 35Fictive cube design, 15, 18, 20, 126, 144, Pl.15Fidoe, Ben, ledger stone, 220Fiennes, Celia, 145, 152, 175Finch, Prior of Canterbury, brass indent, 206Fischer von Erlach, Johann Bernhard, 149, 155Fishbourne Palace, mosaic floors, 138Fitzalyn, John, brass, 208Fitzpatrick, Lady Gertrude, brass, 39Fitzwilliam, William, brass, 98Flemish brasses, 36Flemish tiles, 127, 130, 131, Pl.31, Pl.32Floor cloths, 161–2Floorboards, 126Florence, S. Miniato, Cosmati floor, 15Flower, William, 74Footwear, visitors’, 122–3, 198–9

Fountains Abbey:earth floor, 169tiles, 4

Fowler, William, 139, 161France, historic floor management, 127Frowestours, Bishop of Hereford, brass, 210Furniture, siting, 120–1Fuseli, Henry, ledger stone, 215

Garton-in-the-Wolds Church, 17Gayfere, Thomas, ledger stone, 220Gedde, Walter, floor designs, 144, 151Gent, Thomas, 76–7Germany, historic floor management, 126Gervase of Canterbury, 53Gheast, Edmund, Bishop of Salisbury, brass, 216Ghent, brass manufacture, 36Gibbs, James, 146Gibside Chapel, visitors’ footwear, 122Gifford, Sir John, brass, 36Gill, Eric, 215Glasse, Hannah, 179Glastonbury Abbey:

Anglo-Saxon floor, 63tiles, 6

Gloucester, Eleanor Duchess of, brass, 219Gloucester Cathedral, 210

Lady Chapel, 6, 210ledger stones, 29, 210tiles, 6, 123

Godwin, George, 210, 215Godwin and Lugwardine, 10–11, 12–13Gole, Pierre, 175Golofre, Sir John, brass indent, 219Goodrich, Bishop of Ely, brass, 209Gostling, William, 56Gothic Revival:

brasses, 37, 39interiors at Taymouth, 160tiled floors, 8–13

Gotland, Stenkyrka, incised slab, 29Gough, Richard, 38Gow, Ian, 162Grado, S. Eufemia, mosaic pavement, 14Grafton Underwood Church, brass, 39Grave-covers, 44–5, 50Great Exhibition 1851, 133Great Malvern, tilery, 9Great Malvern Priory, tiles, 6Grey, Sir A., brass, 214Grimsthorpe Castle, 143Gruner, Ludwig, 194Guernsey, St Peter-in-the-Wood, inclined floor,

43Gypsum:

floors, 42in scagliola work, 141–2

Index 241

Hadstock Church:inclined nave floor, 43wear pattern, 46

Hague, The, Mauritshuis, 149–50Hailes Abbey, tiles, 6Hall, Diana, 116, 209, 221Ham House, Richmond, 172–7

marble floors, 144, 173, 176, Pl.64marquetry floors, 152, 173, 174, 175, 177, Pl.64, Pl.66,

Pl.67parquetry floors, 154, 173, 174–5, 176–7, Pl.65scagliola work, 142, 175

Hamilton, Sir William, 17Hamo de Hythe, Bishop of Rochester, effigy, 214Hampton Court Palace, 143

Chapel Royal, marble pavement, 20rush matting, 162tiles, 130, 131

Hanbury Hall, painted floors, 162Hardacre, John, 114, 116Hardman, John, 39, 207Hardwick Hall, 143

carpets, 156, 157Hare of Bristol, floor cloth manufacturers, 161Harewood House:

floor cloths, 161music room, 159

Harlow, Henry, 174, 175Harpenden, Sir John, brass, 219Hart, John, 173, 177Harvendon, Abbot Richard, brass indent, 219Haselshaw, Walter de, Bishop of Wells, brass indent, 34,

218Hatfield House, carpets, 157Hauduroy, Samuel, 145Hawberk, Sir Nicholas, brass, 37Hawksmoor, Nicholas, 20, 146Heaton Hall, 160Henrietta Maria, Queen, 151–2, 174Henry III, King, 5, 16, 61, 130, 156, 218, Pl.1Henry IV, King, tomb, 55Henry VIII, King, portrait, 156Heraldic visitations, 73–4, 76Heraldry:

and brasses, 37and carpets, 160, 161and ledger stones, 30, 82, 221

Herbert, Sidney, 17Hereford Cathedral, 210–11

brass, 34brass indent, 34

Herschel, 220Heveningham Hall, marble floor, 144, 147, 203Hever Church, brass, 36Hexham Abbey, 211Hey, William, 142Higham Ferrers Church, brass, 33

Hildesheim Cathedral, brass, 31Hill, Frederick, ledger stone, 27, 213Hill Top, controlled-entry system, 202Hogarth, William, 158Holland, Henry, 146Hollar, Wenceslaus, 56Hollechan, William, ledger stone, 27Holman-Hunt, William, ledger stone, 215Honywood, Dean of Lincoln, ledger stone, 212Hornby, R.W.B., scrapbook, 77Hotham, Bishop of Ely, grave marker, 209Hovingham, Roman pavement, 139Howard, Lady Katherine, brass, 37Hull, Holy Trinity, encaustic pavement, 11Humez, William de, Abbot of Westminster, effigy, 25,

220Humphries, Robert, brass indent, 219Hutton, Edward, 17Hutton, Matthew, 74

Icklingham Church, tiles, 7Ickworth, carpets, 160Iles, Frank, 135Ina Rex, floor slab, 218Ingrain carpets, 162Innsbruck Cathedral, marble floors, 127Inscriptions:

recording, 82, 96retrieval of damaged, 101–5see also under Ledger stones

Instrumental surveying methods, 87–8Ironside, Christopher, 40, 219Islamic tiles, 129Isleham Church, brass, 36Istanbul:

Hagia Sophia, 14St John Studion, 14

Italy, historic floor management, 125–6

Jackson, T.G., 11James, John, 21Jay, John and Johanna, brass, 215Jerusalem, Via Dolorosa, pavement, 169Jervaulx Abbey, tiled pavement, 7, 8Joan of Navarre, tomb, 55H. & R. Johnson Tiles Ltd, 196Jones, Andrew, incised slab, 210Jones, Inigo, 19, 144, 173, Pl.46Jones, Owen, 132–3, 139–40, Pl.38, Pl.39, Pl.40Jose de Kyteler, grave slab, 127

Kedleston, marble hall, 147, Pl.49Kelham Hall, 134Kellington Church, stone paving, 42Kelvedon Church, Abdy monuments, 28–9Kendall, H.E., 134Kent, William, 21, 70–1, 79, 221

242 Index

Kidderminster carpets, 158, 162Kilkenny Cathedral, floor monuments, 25, 27, 124,

126–7Killarney Cathedral, tiled floor, 9‘Kinghorne’ carpet, 158King’s Lynn:

Clifton House, tiled pavements, 130tilery, 9

Kinloss Abbey, tiles, 3Kirkwall, Orkney, St Magnus Cathedral, 211

grave markers, 27–8Knight, Bishop of Wells, ledger stone, 218Knole, carpets, 157Kyngeston, Susan, brass, 36

Labyrinth designs, 21, 22–3, 126, 208Lack, William, 123Lacock Abbey, tiles, 130Lampen, John, 173Lamplugh, Thomas, Archbishop of York, memorials, 29Landseer, Sir Edwin, ledger stone, 215Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury, 64Langley, Batty, 20, 139, 146, 147Langton, Canon, brass, 210Laporterie, Joseph Maria, 17Larkin, William, 156Lascaux, facsimile display, 203Laser surface profiling technique, 104–5Latten, 31Launcells, St Swithun’s, tiles, 7Laurentius family, marble workers, 15Lawrence, Abbot of Westminster, effigy, 25, 220Lawrence, Sir Thomas, ledger stone, 215Le Muet, Pierre, Palladio, 151, 153Le Neubourg, Château du Champs de Bataille, marble

pavement, 149Le Neve, John, 28Le Vau, Louis, 149, 150Ledger stones, 23–31, 45, 50, 69–78, Pl.16, Pl.18, Pl.24,

Pl.25, Pl.28grading, 83heraldry and, 30, 82, 221inscriptions, 27, 28–9, 62, 72–4, 76–7obscured by furniture, 120recording, 82, 96, 124relocated or reused, 48–9, 83see also Grave-covers and under individual cathedrals

and churchesLeeds, Town Hall, tiled floor, 135Leighton, Lord, brass, 39, 215Leo of Ostia, 14Lethaby, W.R., 60Lettering, 28

bronze, 61, 62Levison, John, ledger stone, 212Lichfield Cathedral, 211

chequered floor, 43, 48

marble floor, 21plaster floor, 42tile ‘museum’, 48tiled floors:

choir, 47–8, Pl.19incline, 43, 44substructure, 48

encaustic pavements, 11, 211library, 6, 42, 211, Pl.20, Pl.21

protection, 123recording, 49, 91

Lifting floors, 166–9Light, protection from, 200Lincoln Cathedral, 211–12

attempted protection of brass, 123brass indents, 35, 124, 211ledger stones, 24, 29, 211

Linlithgow Palace, tiled floors, 3, 130Linoleum, 162Lisbon, Palace of Queluz, parquet floor, 155Lisle, Joan Countess de, brass indent, 35, 218Lismore Castle, carpet designs, 160Litten, Julian, 28Littlecote, mosaic floor, 139Liverpool, St George’s Hall, tiled floor, 194–7, Pl.70,

Pl.71, Pl.72Lloyd, Helen, 200London:

All Hallows, London Wall, marble floor, 21All Saints, Margaret Street, 12Apsley House, inlaid floor border, 154Arundel House, Strand, sculpture gallery, 144Buckingham Palace, carpets, 160Carlton House, carpets, 160Coal Exchange, tiled floor and walls, 135Debenham House, 8 Addison Road, 135Foreign Office, Grand Staircase, 133, 134, Pl.4122 Hanover Square, marquetry floor, 153Harrods, tiled floor, 135Hill Street, Mrs Montagu’s drawing room, 159India Office, 133, 134Kensington Palace, rush matting, 162Leighton House, Holland Park Road, 135Michelin Building, Fulham Road, tiled features, 141Midland Grand Hotel, St Pancras, tiled floors, 135National Gallery, mosaic, 140, 141Old St Paul’s Cathedral, marble pavement, 58Queen’s House, Greenwich, marble floor, 19, 144,

Pl.46Reform Club, tiled floor, 132Roman mosaics, 140Royal Exchange, tiled pavement, 135, Pl.37St Augustine’s, Kilburn, Cosmatesque pavement, 16,

17St Benet’s, Paul’s Wharf, floors, 19St Bride’s, Fleet Street, Pl.17St George’s, Hanover Square, marble floor, 21

Index 243

London (cont.)St James the Less, Westminster, 1220 St James’s Square, carpet, 158St Magnus the Martyr, floors, 19St Mary, Lambeth, brass, 37St Paul’s Cathedral, 215–16

brass grilles, 19, 20brasses, 39–40, 215–16chequered floor, 19ledger stones, 27, 215monitoring floor studs, 121re-siting of shop, 122

Somerset House, parquetry floor, 151, 152, 174South Kensington (Victoria and Albert) Museum, tiles,

133Temple Church, tiled floors, 9–10, 187Tower of London, floor survey, 90Whitehall Palace, altar-piece, 60see also Westminster

Longhena, Baldassare, 18, Pl.15Longnor Hall, staircase, 152Losinga, Herbert de, Bishop of Norwich, grave slab, 212Loudon, J.C., 132, 142, 151, 160Loveden, Thomas, tombstone, 212Lovelace, Sir William, grave, 65, 66Lübeck Cathedral, brasses, 32, 33Lucca, Hall of San Martino, labyrinth, 22, 23Lucca Cathedral, marble pavement, 18Luda, William de, Bishop of Ely, brass indent, 34Lyhart, Bishop of Norwich, brass indents, 212Lysons, Samuel, 51, 139

Maccari, Leonardo, 18, 126McCarter, Charles, 71Maintenance:

excavated floors, 165, 166materials for, 170oak floors, 177, 201see also Cleaning

Majolica tiles, 131Mansart, François, 149Marble floors, 18–23, 42, 53–8, 143–50Marmorani Romani, 15, 55Marot, Daniel, 131, 145, Pl.47Marquetry floors, 152–5, 173, 174

restoration, 126Martin, Jonathan, 71Matting, 162, 201

barrier, 119, 122, 191protective, 123

Mawley Hall, marquetry floors, 153Maws, tile manufacturer, 10, 133–4, 140Meaux Church, tiles, 4Melk Abbey, historic floors, 127Melrose Abbey, tiles, 3Melun, Château de Vaux-le-Vicomte, king’s bedroom, 149Mereworth, marquetry floors, 153

Mersham-le-Hatch, parquetry floor, 153Microcrystalline wax, 116–17, 119, 123, 124, 219Military brasses, 35, 36, 210, 214Millais, Sir John, brass, 39, 215Minton, Herbert, 9–11, 132, 187, 194, 211

tiles produced by, 47, 48, 131, 132, 133, 141, 189,Pl.5, Pl.35, Pl.41

Monte Cassino Abbey, mosaic floor, 14, 55Moody, F.W., 133Moore, Temple, 211Moore, Thomas, 158, 159Moorfields carpets, 158Moorish tiles, 133, 134The More, tiled floor, 130Morris, Thomas, grave, 221Morris, William, 161Mortar floors, 42Mosaic pavements, 1, 3, 4–5, 12, 13–17, 135–1, Pl.6,

Pl.7, Pl.8, Pl.12, Pl.13, Pl.14imitated in floor cloths, 161Italian, 125–6, 136–7lifting, 166–9origin, 129pebble, 138, Pl.44, Pl.45

Mosaic tiles, 3, 4–5, 134, 140–1Mount Athos, Iviron Monastery, 14Mount Stewart, marquetry floors, 153, Pl.52Mountbatten, Earl and Countess, brass, 40, 219Muchelney Abbey, tiles, 6Mulk, John de, Bishop of Lübeck, brass, 32Mullany, Tim, 200Multiple angle surface saturation technique, 103–4Multispectral imaging, 101Munich:

Neues Schloss Schleissheim, marble pavements, 149,Pl.50

Nymphenburg Palace:parquet floor in Badenburg, 155tiled floors, 132

Residenz, marquetry floors, 155Muniment rooms, tiled pavements, 6, 7, 42

see also under Lichfield Cathedral; Salisbury CathedralMuttoni, Francesco, 149Mylne, Robert, ledger stone, 215Mytens, Daniel, 157

NADFAS, 81Nairns of Kirkcaldy, floor cloth manufacturers, 161Naples, Palazzo of Prince of Sangro, tiles, 131Nathan Smith of Knightsbridge, floor cloth

manufacturers, 161National Trust, 172, 180, 198, 199, 200Neatby, W.J., 135Neath Abbey, tiles, 7Netherlands, historic floor management, 126–7Neumann, Balthazar, 154Newbattle Abbey, tiles, 5

244 Index

Newby Hall:carpet, 159hall floor, 147pavement design, 142plaster floor, 143

Nicea, Church of the Dormition, 14Nichols, John Gough, 10Nicholson, Peter, 154Niddry Castle, tiles, 130, 131Nigellus, Bishop of Ely, ledger stone, 23, 24, 209Nordhausen, Hospital of Chiriaci, brass, 33North Berwick:

Cistercian convent, tiles, 2tile kiln, 2–3

Northleach Church, brasses, 37Norton, Christopher, 114, 130Norwich Cathedral, 212–13

new visitor facilities, 122Nottingham Castle, inlaid floors, 152, 175Nuremberg, Schloss Ellingen, marquetry floors, 155, Pl.54

Octagon-and-square design, see Carreaux octagonesOdoricus family, marble workers, 15, 16, 61, 218Old Sarum Cathedral:

coffin lids from, 25, 216opus Alexandrinum remains, 57–8stone floors, 18

Olynthus, St Nicholas, 14Opie, John, ledger stone, 215Opus Alexandrinum, 14–16, 55–8, Pl.11

see also Cosmati floorsOpus sectile, 3, 4–5, 55, 209Opus signinum, 41, 63, 137–8

see also Terrazzo floorsOrme, Philibert de l’, 144Orvieto, S. Martirio, Cosmati floor, 15Osborne House:

carpets, 160tiled floors, 132, 194, Pl.35, Pl.36

Osmund, St, coffin lid, 25, 216Osterley Park:

carpets, 158, 159stone floor, 147, Pl.48

Otto de Brunswick, Bishop of Hildesheim, brass, 31Oxford:

Christ Church Cathedral, 208Scott encaustic pavement, 11

Exeter College Chapel, Scott encaustic pavement, 11New College, tiled floors, muniments tower, 6Radcliffe Library, stone floor, 146

Painted floors, 162Palagi, Pelagio, 138Palermo:

Capella Palatina, mosaic floor, 15, 17Martorana, mosaic floor, 15

Palladio, Andrea, 143, 150

Paraloid B72 (consolidating agent), 115, 116–17, 167Paris:

Abbey of St Denis, Chapel of Ste Geneviève, tiles, 4Château de Chantilly, parquet floor, 150Château de Maisons, marble floors, 149Hôtel Lambert, parquet floor, 150Hôtel Lauzun, parquet floor, 174Hôtel Soubise, parquet floor, 150Sainte Chapelle, tile, 8

Paris, Matthew, 156Parquet de Versailles, 150, 154, 155Parquet floors, 150, 151–2, 154, 155

in Ham House, 173, 174–5, 176–7Parquet marqueté (parquet de marqueterie), 175Parry, Sir Thomas, brass indent, 219Passariano, Villa Manin, 138Passenger, Charles and Fred, 135Paulus family, marble workers, 15Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) measurements, 199, 200Pearson, John Loughborough, 16, 17, 206, 213, 217

brass to, 38, 219Pebble mosaics, 138, Pl.44, Pl.45Pella, Palace of Philip II, mosaic floors, 135–6, Pl.42Penn, William, ledger stone, 215Penrose, F.C., 216Pershore Abbey, 213

heating installation, 121ledger stone, 26

Persian carpets, 157Perth, St John’s, brass, 33Peterborough Cathedral, 213

abbots’ memorials, 25, 213Anglo-Saxon tiles, 2brass indent, 34–5Cosmatesque pavement, 17, 213

Pether, Henry, 135, Pl.37Peto, Sir Morgan, 134Petrus, Bishop of Ely, ledger stone, 209Petworth, marble hall, 145, Pl.47Peyton, Margaret, brass, 36Photographic surveying methods, 89–91, 94–100, 106

cameras, 89, 90, 95–6electronic image processing for, 111–12film, 96lighting equipment, 96–7lighting techniques, 98–9, 102–3photogrammetry, 90–91, 92, Pl.22products, 99record preservation, 99–100, 107–8remote sensing techniques, 101–5scale and subject preparation, 99support devices, 97see also Rectified photography

Pilkington Tile and Pottery Company, 135Pinturiccio (Bernardino di Biagio), 18, 126Pisa, Campo Santo, ledger slab, 28Pisano, Giovanni, 18

Index 245

Pius II, Pope, 131Plans (floor), 49Plaster floors, 42, 142, 143Playford Church, brass, 35Polesden Lacey, 198Pommersfelden, Schloss Weissenstein, marquetry floors,

154, Pl.53Pompeii, mosaic floors, 136, 139Ponte Casale, Villa Garzoni, courtyard pavement, 149Poole, Henry, 61Portland cement, dangers of using, 170Potsdam:

Neues Palais, inlaid floors, 155Sans Souci Palace:

inlaid floors, 155marble floor, 149, Pl.51

Powerscourt, pebble mosaic, Pl.44Powis Castle, 151

Great Staircase, 152marble floor, 144

Poynter, Sir Edward, 135brass, 215

Praeneste, Palestrina, Barberini Palace, mosaic, 136Prelatte, William, brass, 37Prince, Anne, ledger stone, 72Processional routes, 46–7Protective coverings, 123, 126, 165, 176, 191, Pl.29Proudfoot, Trevor, 114Pugin, Augustus Welby Northmore, 9

brasses, 39carpets, 160tiles, 132, 187–8, 194

Purcell, James, ledger stone, 25Purey-Cust, A.P., Dean of York, 71, 77

Quivil, Bishop of Exeter, ledger stone, 24, 25, 209

Ranucius family, marble workers, 15Ravenna, San Vitale, floor labyrinth, 23Rebecca, Biagio, 159Recording floors, 49–52, 124–5

after excavation, 164–5Canterbury Cathedral, nave floor, 66–8eighteenth-century antiquaries, 139Lichfield Cathedral, Library floor, 91Palace of Westminster, 190record computerization, 109–12record preservation, 99–100, 106–8Salisbury Cathedral, Muniment Room, 92surveyor’s approach, 85–93

accuracy, 85–6computer-aided drafting (CAD), 88–9, 111coordinate grid, 88hand methods, 86–7instrumental methods, 87–8photographic methods, see Photographic surveying

methods

Uppark, 185–6Westminster Abbey, Great Pavement, 60, 92Winchester Cathedral, retrochoir floor, 91–2, 113–14

Recording memorials, 77–8York Minster, 79–83

Rectified photography, 49, 89–90, 99use at Lichfield, 49, 89use at Winchester, 91–2, 112, Pl.27

Reculver Church:Anglo-Saxon floor, 63concrete floor, 41

Reformation, 1–2, 38, 47Reims Cathedral, floor labyrinth, 23Remigius, Bishop of Lincoln, grave slab, 24, 211Remote sensing techniques, 101–5

contrast/contour enhancing illumination, 102–3laser surface profiling, 104–5multiple angle surface saturation, 103–4multispectral imaging, 101

Rennie, John, ledger stone, 215Reynolds, Sir Joshua, ledger stone, 215Ricardo, Halsey, 135Rich, Abbot of St Albans, brass indent, 35Richard of Gainsborough, ledger stone, 212Richards, Godfrey, 152Ridge, Roman pavement, 139Rievaulx Abbey, tiles, 4, 7Ritter & Bartoli (scagliola makers), 142Roberg, J.A., 154Robinson, Thomas, Pl.74Rochdale, Town Hall, tiles, 135Rochester Cathedral, 213–14

ledger stones, 27, 213tiles, 6, 57, 114, 115

Roger, Bishop of Salisbury, coffin lid, 25, 216Rome:

mosaic floors, 136–7Palazzo Doria, parquet floors, 155Palazzo Farnese, terracotta tiles, 131S. Giovanni in Laterano, Cosmati floor, 15S. Lorenzo Fuori le Mura, Cosmati floor, 15S. Maria in Aracoeli, Cosmati floor, 15S. Maria in Cosmedin, Cosmati floor, 15S. Maria Maggiore, Cosmati floor, 15, 126S. Maria in Trastavere:

Cosmati floor, 15, Pl.9floor labyrinth, 23

S. Prassede, Cosmati floor, 15St Peter’s, marble floor, 18San Clemente, Cosmati floor, 15Santa Saba, restoration, 126Santa Sabina, restoration, 126Villa Medici, pebble mosaic, 138, Pl.45

Romsey Abbey, tiles, 10Rose, Joseph, 159Rowlatt, Ralph, brass, 214Roxby, pavement record, 139

246 Index

Rubbings:brass, 38–9ledger stones, 81–2storage, 106–7

Rush matting, 162Russborough, marquetry floor, 153

Sainsbury, J., tiled floors in stores, 135St Albans Abbey, 214

Anglo-Saxon tiles, 2, 214brass indent, 35brasses, 36, 38, 214

endangered by furniture, 121St Andrew’s Cathedral, Fife:

ledger stone, 27tiles, 3

St Florian Abbey, historic floors, 127St Gallen Abbey, library floor, 127St Jean, J.D. de, 174St John Hope, W.H., 18St Maur, Lawrence de, brass, 33St Petersburg:

Maryinsky Palace, marquetry floors, 155Peterhof, inlaid floors, 155Summer Palace (Tsarskoe Selo), marquetry floors, 155,

Pl.57, Pl.58Salisbury Cathedral, 216

brasses, 33, 216ledger stones, 25, 29, 216tiled floors:

chapter house, 6, 10, 13, 48, 216, Pl.4restoration, 48

choir, 12–13muniment room, 6, 42, 216, Pl.3, Pl.26, Pl.29

recording, 92protection, 123

Saltram, Devon, drawing room, 159, Pl.60Sampson, Bishop of Worcester, memorial inscription, 221Sanding floors, 179, 185Sandys, Lord, 130, Pl.31Sansovino, Jacopo, 149Savage, James, 9Sayers, James, 145, Pl.47Scagliola work:

at Ham House, 175floors, 141–2

Scarisbrick Hall, tiled floors, 132, Pl.34Schmidt, Der Bürgeliche Baumeister, 154Schwerin Cathedral, brass, 32Scors, William, brass, 37Scotch carpets, 162Scott, Sir George Gilbert, 5, 9

Canterbury Cathedral, 55Chester Cathedral, 207Durham Cathedral, 208Ely Cathedral, 21–2, 209Exeter Cathedral, 210

Foreign Office, 133, 134–5, Pl.41Gloucester Cathedral, 210Hereford Cathedral, 210Kelham Hall, 134Lichfield Cathedral, 47, 211memorial brass to, 39, 219Midland Grand Hotel, St Pancras, 135Pershore Abbey, 213Rochester Cathedral, 213Salisbury Cathedral, 10, 12Worcester Cathedral, 221, Pl.5

Scott, John Oldred, 208Scott, Sir Walter, 161, 162Screens, 45, 46Sebert, King, reputed grave, 219Seby, Ralph, brass indent, 219Selling, Prior of Canterbury, brass indent, 206Sens Cathedral, floor labyrinth, 23Serken, Burchard de, Bishop of Lübeck, brass, 32Serlio, Sebastiano, 143–4, 145, 147, 150Severus Alexander, Emperor of Rome, 55Seville Cathedral, marble pavements, 22Sharington, Sir William, 130Shaw, Henry, 7, 8, 10, Pl.4Shaw, Norman, 39, 215Sheen Palace, 130Sheffield Manor, carpets, 156Sheppard, Mrs Sophia, brass, 39Sheraton, Thomas, 150Shortals, Johanna, ledger stone, 25Shrewsbury, Elizabeth, Countess of, 156Shurlock, 10Siena Cathedral, Tuscany, Renaissance floors, 18, 126Silchester, Roman mosaic removed, 141Simeoni, Vanessa, 118Simon, Bishop of Apulia, effigy, 25, 209Skaife, Robert H., 72, 77, 79Skirlm, Walter, Bishop of Durham, ledger stone, 208Sledmere, library floor, 153Smirke, Sydney, 9Smith, John Moyr, 135Smith, William, Bishop of Lincoln, brass, 212Soane, Sir John, 160Somerleyton Hall, tiled floor, 134Southampton, earth floor in French Street, 169Southwark Cathedral, 216–17Southwell Minster, 217

recording of floor, 102, 103Spoleto, Duomo, Cosmati floor, 15Sprotborough, St Mary’s:

brass, 98ledger stone, 96

Spycer, Reginald, brass, 37Stafford, Archbishop of Canterbury, brass indent, 35, 206Stainsfield, Roman pavement, 139Staircases, 133, 134, 144, 152, 153, 198, Pl.41

safety on, 201

Index 247

Stancliffe, Martin, 91Standen, carpet, 161Stanley, Sir Humphrey, brass, 219Stanton family, sculptors, 28Stephenson, Robert, brass, 39, 219Stevens, Alfred, 195Stier, Gustav, 154Stoke D’Abernon Church, brass, 36Stone, Abbot of St Albans, brass, 214Stone, Sir Benjamin, 190Stone floors, 18–23, 42, 43

conservation, 169, 186measuring, 85, 86records, 49

Stonesfield, pavement record, 139Stowe, inlaid floors, 152Strafford, Lord, brass, 222Stratfield Saye, Roman mosaic, 141Strawberry Hill, Twickenham, brass, 39Street, G.E., 11–12, 39, 206, 219

brass, 219Stritch, Lucas, 215Stuart, James (Athenian), 153Stucco floors, 142Sudbury, Simon, Archbishop of Canterbury, 64Sullivan, Sir Arthur, brass, 39–40, 215Summerson, Sir John, 159Surveying floors, see under Recording floorsSutton, John, 176Switzerland, historic floor management, 127Symoens, Jacques and Joosyne, brass, 36Syon House:

carpets, 158, 159marble floor (Great Hall), 147scagliola floor, 142, 147

Talman, William, 145, 152Tantallon Castle, tiles, 130, 131Tatton Park, carpet, 160Taymouth, drawing room design, 160Telford, Thomas, ledger stone replacement, 220Temple Newsam, 143Terentius (mosaicist), 139Terminology (site functions), 110Terracotta tiles, 131Terrazzo floors, 137–8, 141Tewkesbury Abbey, 217

encaustic pavement, 11, 124ledger stones, 29Scott restoration, 11, 217tiled pavements, Founder’s Chapel, 7

Thaxted:Parish Church, ledger stone, 26St John’s, grave markers, 27

Theale, Holy Trinity, brass, 39Theodolite, 87

total station, 88, 91

Theophilus, Bishop of Worcester, memorial inscription, 221Thomas, Archbishop of York, epitaph, 73Thomas, John, 132, 134Thomas of Delvinstone, ledger stone, 211Thorpe Hall, inlaid stairs, 152Tileries, 5

Canterbury, 6Great Malvern, 9King’s Lynn, 9Maws’ (at Broseley) 133, 140North Berwick, 2–3Westminster, 5, 130

Tiles (floor), 2–13, 42–3, 129–35encaustic, 8–13, 21, 47–8, 129, 132

conserving, 112–19, 169–70, 187–93, 194–204Flemish, 127, 130, 131, Pl.31, Pl.32inlaid, 5, 9, 129, 130interpreting remains of, 50–1lifting, 166mosaic, 3, 4–5, 134, 140–1photographing, 99protecting, 123–4replacing, 192–3, 196

Timber floors, 47protective, 123, 195, Pl.29

Timed-entry system, 201, 202, 203Titchfield Abbey, tiles, 6Tite, William, 135, Pl.37Tivoli, Hadrian’s Villa, mosaic floors, 136, 137Toke, N.E., 56, 57Torr, James, 72, 74, 76, 79Total station theodolite, 88, 91Tournus, Château de Mormatin, parquet floor, 150Tournus Abbey, ledger stones, 127Tractarian Movement, 8Trentham Hall, tiled pavement, 132Trillack, Bishop of Hereford, brass, 34, 210Trotton Church, brass, 36Trumpington Church, brass, 35, 36Truro Cathedral, 217–18

Cosmatesque pavements, 17, 217Turbeville, Bishop of Exeter, grave slab, 25Turin, Castello Reale di Racognigi, 138Turkish carpets, 156, 157–8Turner, J.M., ledger stone, 215Turner, Wilfred Carpenter, 112Tyndall, Humphrey, Dean of Ely, brass, 209

Ultraviolet fluorescence imaging, 101Uppark, restoration, 179–86, Pl.68Utrecht Cathedral:

ledger stones, 126–7tiles, 127

Valence, Margaret and John de, brass, 33Valetta, St John’s Cathedral, ledger stones, 30, 31, 128,

Pl.16, Pl.30

248 Index

Valvassori, Gabriele, 155Van Dyck, Anthony, 157Vanbrugh, Sir John, 146Vandergucht, 139Vatican:

marble floors, 18mosaic floors, 15

Vavasour, Sir Thomas, 173Veneto:

mosaic pavements, 14pebble mosaics, 138terrazzo floors, 149

Venice:Basilica of San Marco, 13, 14, 125, Pl.6carpets obtained by Wolsey from, 156Cathedral of S. Maria Assunta, Torcello, 14, Pl.7Cathedral of S.S. Maria Donato, Murano, mosaic

pavement, 14, Pl.8San Giorgio Maggiore, marble floor, 18Santa Maria della Salute, marble pavement, 18, Pl.15Sant’Ilario, mosaic floor, 14

Verden, brass, 31Verney, Sir Ralph and Lady, brass, 37Versailles:

Cabinet Doré of the Grand Dauphin, 175Galerie des Glaces, 177Pavillon de Musique de Madame, 149Salle des Gardes de la Reine, 150

Vertue, George, 139Vicenza, Villa da Porto Colleoni, stables, 149Vienna:

St Stefan’s Cathedral, relief sculpture, 29Winter Palace, 149, 155

Viollet-le-Duc, Eugène-Emanuel, 125, 127, 134Visitor management:

cathedrals and churches, 121–4properties with public access, 198–204

Vitruvius Pollio, Marcus, 143Voysey, Charles, 135The Vyne, tiles, 130, Pl.31

Wakefield, Henry, Bishop of Worcester, ledger stone,221

Waldeby, Robert, Archbishop of York, brass, 219Waller, brass designs, 39, 209Walpole, Horace, 39, 152, 172Waltham, Bishop John de, brass, 219Walton, F., 162Walton, Isaac, ledger stone, 221Ware, Isaac, 142, 143, 153Ware, Richard, Abbot of Westminster:

grave, 62, 219patron of Cosmati floors, 15, 16, 58, 61, 218

Warsaw:Lazienki Palace, inlaid and marble floors, 155, Pl.55Royal Castle, 155, Pl.59Wilanow Palace, 155, Pl.56

Warwick, St Mary’s, brass, 36Washington, D.C., tiled floor of Capitol, 196Wautone, Sir John de, brass, 36Wear:

monitoring, 121, 190, 200patterns, 46, 55, 67–8

Webb, Philip, 161Webb, Tony, 27Wedgwood tiles, 131, 135Wellington, 1st Duke of, 141Wellow, Roman pavement, 139Wells Cathedral, 218

brass indents, 34, 35, 218chapter house stair, 46, 218gypsum tracing floor, 42ledger stones, 25, 29

re-dressed, 49processional markers, 46–7survey of floors and monuments, 52tiles, 6

Wenlock, Abbot of Westminster, 219Wentworth Woodhouse, marble floor, 144West, Benjamin, ledger stone, 215West Wycombe Park, stone floor, 146Westley Waterless Church, brass, 36Westminster, Palace of:

carpet design, 160encaustic tiles, 9, 130, 132, Pl.69

conservation, protection and replacement, 187–93medieval tiles, 5

Westminster Abbey, 218–20abbots’ effigies, 25brasses, 33, 38, 39, 40, 219

attempted protection, 123damaged by furniture, 121

burials, 28, 45coronations, 62Cosmati floors, 125, Pl.22

sanctuary (Great Pavement), 58, 59, 60–2, 218–19,Pl.10

attempted protection, 123recording, 92

shrine of Edward the Confessor, 15–16, 54, 58, 59,60, 61

restoration, 17crypt pavement, 58ledger stones, 30, 122, 219–20marble floors, 19–20monitoring floor studs, 121tiled floors:

Chapter House, 5–6, 9, 10, 122–3, 124–5, 219, Pl.1muniment room, 6, 42protection, 123undercroft, 2

visitor restriction, 124Westminster Cathedral, Cosmatesque pavements, 17Whatman, Susannah, 179

Index 249

White, 65White, Charles, ledger stone, 26White, Milner, Dean of York, 71–2Whithorn Priory, brass, 33Whitty, Thomas, 159Whyte, Thomas, brass, 216Wihr, Rolf, 126Wilberforce, William, memorial inscription, 73Wilbury Park, scagliola floor, 142Willis, Browne, 76Willis, Robert, 53Wilton, St Mary and St Nicholas, Cosmatesque work, 17Wilton carpets, 158, 160Wimbish Church, brass, 36Wimpole Hall, tiled pavement, 134Winchelsea Church, brass, 33Winchester:

St Cross Hospital, tiles, 7, 10St Mary Tanner Street, floor wear, 46

Winchester Castle Chapel:carpets, 156tiles, 5, 130

Winchester Cathedral, 220–1chancel floor, 22ledger stones, 29

damaged by furniture, 120, Pl.28pavement records, 49retrochoir floor, 6, 220–1

conservation, 112–19recording, 91–2, Pl.27

tiles, 2, 6, 10, 220protection, 123, 124

visitor facilities, 122Winchester College, tiled floors, 7Winde, William, 144, 151, Pl.62Windsor:

Royal Dairy, Frogmore, 131, 132St George’s Chapel, 214–15

choir floor, 20, 214ledgers obscured by furniture, 120loss of memorials, 84visitor facilities, 122, 215

Windsor Castle:carpets, 160painted floor, 162rush matting, 162

Winterton, pavement record, 139Wolff, Arnold, 126Wolsey, Cardinal Thomas, 130, 156Wood, John, 158Woodchester, pavement records, 139Wools, Penny, 176Woolsthorpe Manor, floor collapse, 198Wooton, Dean Nicholas, tomb, 55Wooton, Sir Henry, 139Worcester Cathedral, 221

encaustic pavement, 11, Pl.5marble floor, 21, 221medieval tiles, 7, 221

Wren, Sir Christopher, 19, 20, 215, Pl.17Wright, Samuel, 8–9, 187Würzburg, Residenz, marquetry floors, 154–5Wyatt, James:

Belton House, 160, Pl.62, Pl.63carpet designs, 159–60, Pl.63Heveningham Hall, 144, 147, 203Lichfield Cathedral, marble floor, 21Westminster Abbey restoration, 220

Wyatt, Samuel, 160Wyatt, Sir Matthew Digby, 132, 133Wyatt, T.H., 17Wycombe Abbey, polished floors, 154Wyville, Bishop of Saisbury, brass, 33, 216

Yenn, John, 162Yevele, Henry, 130York, St Helen-on-the-Walls, reused floor, 41York Minster, 221–2

Consistory Court, tiled floor, 6database of drawings, 110, 112gypsum tracing floor, 42Lady Chapel, 27, 71, 72Lamplugh monuments, 29ledger stones, 27, Pl.24, Pl.25

conservation options, 79–84documentation, 69–78

nave, stone floor, 21, 70–71Yso von Wilpe, Bishop of Verden, brass, 31

Zoffany, Johann, 158Zucchi, Antonio, 158, 159Zucelli, Enrico, 149, Pl.50

250 Index

1

Plate 1 Westminster AbbeyChapter House. Tile pavement,1268, restored by Sir GeorgeGilbert Scott, 1866, with somereplica tiles by Minton. Detailof Royal Arms. Henry IIIadded the inscription ‘as therose is among flowers, so isthis house among houses’(Lethaby’s translation) – seepage 5 (Photograph, EnglishHeritage)

Plate 2 Cleeve Abbey, Somerset. The refectory. Thirteenth-century tiled pavement – see page 6 (Photograph, JaneFawcett)

Plate 3 Salisbury Cathedral. Muniment room.Thirteenth-century tiled pavement detail – see page 6(Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 4 Salisbury Cathedral Chapter House. Encaustic tiles by Godwin, laidc.1856 during restoration by Henry Clutton and William Burges, replicatingthirteenth-century tiles, recorded by Henry Shaw in 1858. Note similarities withthirteenth-century muniment room tiles – see page 6 (Photograph, JaneFawcett)

Plate 5 Worcester Cathedral. Encaustic pavement in sanctuary by Sir GeorgeGilbert Scott, 1873. Tiles by Minton – see page 11 (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 6 Basilica of San Marco, Venice, marble and mosaic pavement, eleventh century (restored). SanMarco contains the largest surviving areas of mosaic in existence – see page 14 (Photograph, SarahQuill)

Plate 7 Cathedral of Santa Maria Assunta, Torcello, Venice, founded in 639 and rebuilt in 864–67.Mosaic and marble pavement, eleventh century – see page 14 (Photograph, Anthony Cleminson)

Plate 8 Cathedral of S.S. Maria Donato, Murano, Venice, founded seventh century. Mosaic of peacocksfeeding, 1140 – see page 14 (Photograph, Anthony Cleminson)

Plate 9 S. Maria in Trastevere, Rome. Twelfth-century Cosmati pavement, restored in 1866 byVespigniani – see page 15 (Photograph, Jukka Jokilehto)

� Plate 10a Westminster Abbey, London. The GreatPavement, looking west towards the choir. Completed1268, by Odoricus, Roman Cosmati craftsman – seepages 15 and 61 (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

� Plate 10b Westminster Abbey, London. The GreatPavement. Detail of the Central Onyx in the Sanctuary –see pages 15 and 61 (Photograph, Peter Foster)

Plate 11 Opus Alexandrinum pavement in the Trinity Chapel at Canterbury Cathedral. The shrine of St. Thomas wasto the east (top) in the figure – see page 16 and Chapter 3 (Photograph, Tim Tatton-Brown)

Plate 12 CologneCathedral, Germany.The ambulatory, fromthe triforium, showingmosaic pavements andMaternus Kapelle, withthe tomb of ArchbishopPhilipp von Heinsberg,d.1192 – see page 17(Photograph, DombauArchiv, Cologne)

Plate 13 CologneCathedral, Germany.Floor plan, showingarrangement ofmosaics by AugusteEssenwein, 1885 – seepage 17 (Photograph,Dombau Archiv,Cologne)

Plate 14 Cologne Cathedral,Germany. Detail of mosaicsshowing God creating theRiver Tigris, by Essenwein,1885 – see page 17(Photograph, Dombau Archiv,Cologne)

Plate 15 Santa Maria della Salute, Venice, 1630–87.Longhena. Decorated marble pavement, showing fictivecube design, under the dome – see page 18 (Photograph,Anthony Cleminson)

Plate 16 St John’s Cathedral, Valetta, Malta. Ledgerstones – see page 31 (Photograph, Mario Mintoff,Photocity, Valetta)

Plate 17 St Bride’s Church, Fleet Street, London, 1671–1678. Sir Christopher Wren. Restored after war damage in1955–1957 by Godfrey Allen, Surveyor to the Fabric, St Paul’s Cathedral – see page 19 (Photograph, NationalMonuments Record, RCHME)

Plate 18 Chichester Cathedral, West Sussex. Nave, twelfth-century pavingshowing medieval and later ledger stones and brass indents, inserted intosurviving areas of medieval paving – see page 25 (Photograph, MichaelMoore of Beaver Photography, Chichester. By kind permission of the Deanand Chapter, Chichester Cathedral)

Plate 19 Lichfield Cathedral. Scott’s Minton tile floor in the choir andsanctuary, laid 1860. Many of the designs were replicated from fourteenth-century tile fragments found during excavations for the new heating system –see page 42 (Photograph, Warwick Rodwell)

Plate 20 Lichfield. Late thirteenth-century tile pavement in the octagonal library, which was recordedby rectified photography in 1988. The existence of this pavement was not fully recognized until themid-1980s – see page 42 (Photograph, Warwick Rodwell)

Plate 21 Lichfield. Detail of the central carpet in the library, showing 9-tile and 16-tile settingswithin a lozenge framework – see page 42 (Photograph, Warwick Rodwell)

Plate 22a Photogrammetric survey of the Cosmati Pavement, Westminster Abbey – see page 60(Surveyed by The Downland Partnership, copyright Westminster Abbey)

Plate 22b Detailed section of photogrammetric survey of the Cosmati Pavement,Westminster Abbey – see page 60 (Surveyed by The Downland Partnership, copyrightWestminster Abbey)

Plate 23 CanterburyCathedral. Verticalview of theexcavations at thewest end of thenave, showing LateAnglo-Saxonfoundations,Norman floor-bedding mortar and1377–1405 rebuild –see page 63(Photograph,CanterburyArchaeological Trust)

Plate 24 Black-and-white photographic record of floorledger stone in South Choir Aisle at York Minster – seepage 81 (Photograph, RCHME)

Plate 25 Colour photographic record of floor ledger stonein South Choir Aisle at York Minster for comparison –see page 81 (Photograph, RCHME)

Plate 26 SalisburyCathedral (part). TheMuniment Room. Thejoints betweenphotographs can beseen, this methodbeing necessitated dueto the unevenness ofthe floor – see page92 (Photograph, TheDownland Partner-ship, copyrightSalisbury Cathedral)

Plate 27 WinchesterCathedral, Retrochoir.Part of the rectifiedphotograph of thefloor, prepared inconsultation with RossDallas. Thephotograph is madeup of mosaic sectionstaken over the wholefloor area, whichhave been rectifiedand printed to scale.This enabled theproduction of recorddrawings of the wholefloor area for use inplanning, and inrecording the workundertaken by theconservators – seepage 91 and Chapter12 (Photograph,Atkins AMC, copyrightWinchester Cathedral)

Plate 28 Winchester Cathedral, ledger stones within thenave sanctuary, damaged by furniture, now removed –see page 120 (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 29 Salisbury Cathedral. Muniment room,thirteenth-century tiled pavement, protected by timberfloor – see page 123 (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 30 St John’sCo-Cathedral,Valetta, Malta.Marble ledger stonesto Grand Masters ofthe Order of StJohn, damaged bystiletto heels, underrepair – see page128 (Photograph,Ross Dallas)

Plate 33 Château deChenonceaux, France. Earthenware

tiles, sixteenth century – see page131 (Photograph, Jane Fawcett) �

Plate 32 Château de Chenonceaux, France. Detail, Flemish floor tiles, c.1513.Laid by Catherine de Briconnet and Thomas Bohier, owners – see page 131(Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 31 The Chapel. The Vyne,Hampshire, c.1520. Flemish floor tile ofc.1580 showing an armadillo. Boughtby Lord Sandys in Boulogne – see page130 (Photograph, Derrick E. Witty, TheNational Trust)

Plate 34 Scarisbrick Hall, Lancashire, 1842. A.W. Pugin.Great Hall, encaustic tile floor – see page 132(Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 35 Osborne, Isle of Wight. Encaustic tiles byMinton, detail – see page 132 (Photograph, EnglishHeritage)

Plate 36 Osborne, Isle of Wight, 1845–1846. ThomasCubitt. Grand corridor – see page 132 (Photograph,Crown Copyright)

Plate 37 The Royal Exchange, London, 1841–1844. SirWilliam Tite. Encaustic pavement, based on Cosmatidesigns by Henry Pether – see page 135 (Photograph, JeffKelly)

Plate 38 Owen Jones, The Grammarof Ornament, 1868, adapted for tiledesigns. Persian, No. 2 – see page 132(Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 39 Owen Jones, The Grammarof Ornament, 1868, adapted for tiledesigns. Renaissance, No. 5 – see page132 (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 40 Owen Jones, The Grammarof Ornament, 1868, adapted for tiledesigns. Middle Ages, No. 3 – see page132 (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 41 The Foreign Office, London, 1861. Sir George Gilbert Scott. Grand Staircase in 1996, afterrestoration by Cecil Denny Highton. Integrated decorative scheme. Murals by Clayton and Bell, floor tiles byMinton – see page 133 (Photograph, Adam Woolfit)

Plate 42 Pella, near Thessalonika, Greece. Palace ofPhilip of Macedon, c.400 BC. Floor mosaics, stag hunt –see page 135

Plate 43 Roman Villa,Chedworth, second centuryAD. The dining room. Mosaicof Spring, with a bird in onehand and a basket of fruit inthe other – see page 138(Photograph, National TrustPhotographic Library, IanShaw)

Plate 44 Powerscourt, Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Nineteenth-century pebble mosaic, garden terrace steps – see page 138(Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 45 Villa Medici, Rome, c.1588. Pebble mosaic on orangery stairs – see page 138 (Photograph, JaneFawcett)

Plate 46 Queen’s House,Greenwich, London, 1635.Inigo Jones. Entrance hall.One of the first examples inEngland of a circularcomposition, already famousin Italy in the sixteenthcentury – see page 144(Photograph, NationalMaritime Museum,Greenwich)

Plate 47 Petworth House,West Sussex, 1688. DanielMarot. The marble hall. Laidin 1692 by James Sayers,mason – see page 145(Photograph, National TrustPhotographic Library, Andreasvon Einsiedel)

Plate 48 Osterley Park,Middlesex, 1767. RobertAdam. Entrance hall. Thestone floor reflects the ceilingdesign – see page 147(Photograph, National TrustPhotographic Library, OliverBrown)

Plate 49 Kedleston Hall,Derbyshire, c.1760. RobertAdam. The marble hall,constructed from Derbyshirealabaster. An integratedarchitectural interiordominated by giantCorinthian columns – seepage 147 (Photograph,National Trust PhotographicLibrary, Andrew Haslam)

Plate 50 Neues Schloss Schleissheim, near Munich, Germany. Begun in 1701by Zucalli and decorated in 1715 by Effner, for Max Emmanuel, Elector ofBavaria. The Lower Galley – see page 149 (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 51 Sans Souci Palace, Potsdam, 1745–1747. Joseph Boumann.Circular hall. Rococo marble floor – see page 149 (Photograph, DavidCarnwath, Architectural Association)

Plate 52 Mount Stewart House, Co. Down, NorthernIreland, by George Dance. The Music Room. Detailof marquetry floor – see page 153 (Photograph,National Trust Photographic Library, PeterAprahamian)

Plate 53 Schloss Weissenstein, Pommersfelden, nearBamburg, Germany, 1714–1749. FerdinandPlitzner. Spiegel Kabinett. Marquetry floor – seepage 154 (Photograph, Bayerisches Landesamt fürDenkmalpflege, Seitz und Zöbeley GMBH, Munich)

Plate 54 Schloss Ellingen, near Nuremberg, Germany.Eighteenth-century marquetry floor – see page 155(Photograph, Axel Griesinger)

Plate 55 Lazienki Palace, Warsaw, Poland. Standing onan artificial island, surrounded by a lake, the Palacewas built, in the seventeenth century, as a Bath House.The former bathroom is lined with seventeenth-centuryDutch tiles with a chequered marble floor. The palacewas extended by King Stanislaus Poniatowski in 1772.The superb marquetry floors were skilfully restored aftertotal destruction during the war, in the 1950s and 1960s– see page 155 (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 56 Wilanow Palace, Warsaw, Poland, 1679–1731.A Baroque palace, built for King Jobieski, withspectacular interiors, partially destroyed during the Nazioccupation, restored from 1955–65. Marquetry floor,ante-room, restored after war damage – see page 155(Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plates 58 and 59 Tsarskoe Selo, near St Petersburg,Russia. The eighteenth-century Summer Palace ofEmpress Elizabeth and, from 1762, of Catherine theGreat. The magnificent interiors, destroyed during theNazi occupation, have been lovingly restored. The finemarquetry floors, containing oak, Kalerian birch, ebony,lime, mahogany and pine, also restored, are protected bythe compulsory use of slippers – see page 155(Photographs, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 57 Royal Castle, Warsaw, 1569–1619. Razed to theground by the Nazis, and lovingly reconstructed from1971 to 1984, it contains interiors of outstandingsplendour, and many of the original contents. TheEuropean Monarch’s Portrait Room (used by the King forconfidential meetings on matters of state). Marquetryfloor – see page 155 (Photograph, Jane Fawcett)

Plate 60 Saltram, Devon. The saloon. Carpet design byRobert Adam, 1768–1772 – see page 159 (Photograph,National Trust Photographic Library, Andreas vonEinsiedel)

Plate 61 Culzean Castle, Ayrshire, Scotland, 1779–1792.Saloon carpet, designed by Robert Adam – see page 159(Photograph, National Trust for Scotland)

Plate 62 Belton House,Lincolnshire. William Winde1685–1688 and James Wyatt1770s. Tyrconnel Room,painted floor, showing theBelton greyhounds, andBrownlow Arms, possibly lateseventeenth century – see page162 (Photograph, NationalTrust Photographic Library,Mark Fiennes)

Plate 63 Belton House, Lincolnshire. Design for a carpetby James Wyatt, 1770s – see page 160 (Photograph,Temple Newsam)

Plate 64 The Great Hall, Ham House, showing the dais,with its marquetry floor of c.1672–1682, after its recentrestoration, and the early seventeenth-century chequeredmarble floor – see page 173 (Photograph, The NationalTrust)

Plate 65 The Queen’sBedchamber, Ham House,1673, as remodelled by the4th Earl of Dysart in c.1744 –see page 174 (Photograph,courtesy of the Trustees of theVictoria & Albert Museum)

Plate 66 Ham House. The marquetry of the Queen’sCloset floor, looking towards the dais – see page 175(Photograph, courtesy of the Trustees of the Victoria &Albert Museum)

Plate 67 Ham House. The Queen’s Closet: Harlow’smarquetry floor, 1673 (detail) showing the damagewrought by stiletto heels, presumably in the early years ofpublic visiting after the gift of the house to the NationalTrust in 1947 – see page 175 (Photograph, courtesy ofthe Trustees of the Victoria & Albert Museum)

Plate 68 Uppark. The RedDrawing Room, repaired andconserved – see page 183(Photograph, TheConservation Practice)

Plate 69 Central Lobby, Palace of Westminster. Tiles by Minton – see page 187 (Photograph, George Garbutt)

Plate 70 St George’s Hall, Liverpool. General view of theGreat Hall – see page 194 (Photograph, Donald Insall)

Plate 72 St George’s Hall,Liverpool. View of Great Halltiles, partly exposed, partlycovered by protective woodenfloor – see page 195(Photograph, Donald Insall)

Plate 71 St George’s Hall, Liverpool. The Great Hall.Detail of tile border – see page 195 (Photograph, DonaldInsall)

Plate 74 Claydon House, Buckinghamshire, c.1760.Thomas Robinson, Staircase hall, showing marquetry ontreads and risers, inlaid decoration on the soffits, andmarble chequered floor in the hall. Staircase recentlyrepaired and strengthened, now closed to the public – seepage 153 (Photograph, Vera Collingwood)

Plate 73 At Dyrham Park,near Bath, this main staircasecannot bear the weight of theconstant flow of visitors. Thetreads and the landing alsoshow damage from sharpheels. Now closed to the public– see page 198 (Photograph,National Trust)