Report on the Condition of

ST MARY THE VIRGIN CHURCH, IFFLEY, OXFORD

(Oxford Diocese)

prepared for Iffley PCC

ANDREW TOWNSEND ARCHITECTS

Report on the Condition of

ST MARY THE VIRGIN CHURCH, IFFLEY, OXFORD

(Oxford Diocese)

prepared for Iffley PCC

Job no 939

February 2014

Andrew Townsend Architects Marlborough House

2 Bromsgrove

Faringdon O x o n S N 7 7 J Q

01367 242639 [email protected]

A N D R E W T O W N S E N D A R C H I T E C T S St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

1.00 INTRODUCTION

The survey of St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley, was carried out by Andrew Townsend on 19 th November 2013 following the instructions of Alan Hughes, acting on behalf of Iffley PCC/Cowley Deanery. Weather conditions at the time of the survey were fine and clear, following a period of relatively heavy rain. All accessible areas of the building were inspected, including the south side of the nave roof externally using ladders. No opening up was carried out during or prior to the inspection and so it is not possible to comment on areas which were unexposed, concealed or otherwise inaccessible at the time of the survey. The last inspection of the building was carried out by Andrew Townsend in November 2008 and the format of this current report follows that of its predecessor, with items noted in bold where change appears to have occurred or items were not previously noted.

2.00 WORKS CARRIED OUT WITHIN THE QUINQUENNIUM

According to the log book provided by the churchwarden, the following works have been carried out during the last five years:

i) Installation of new decorative glass window at west end of north wall of nave, by Roger Wagner assisted by Norgrove Studios(2011)

ii) Lightning conductor inspected (2010)

iii) Re-opening of the north door (2011)

iv) Installation of new aumbry front, designed by Nicholas Mynheer (2011)

v) Minor re-ordering of the chancel area (2010)

vi) Organ repair (2013)

vii) Overhaul of bells (2013)

viii) Report on west front by Sally Strachey Historic Conservation (2011/12)

ix) Patch repairs to stone slates on chancel roof (2009)

Andrew Townsend Architects 1 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

x) New lighting scheme to interior (c2009)

Works to modify the seats in the baptistery and installation of new electrical controls and circuit breakers are to be carried out shortly.

3.00 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS

The condition of St Mary the Virgin Church is generally very good. At the time of the last quinquennial inspection, some concern was expressed about the continuing decay of the magnificent Romanesque decorative masonry to the west elevation and to the doorway surround in the south wall of the nave, particularly at low level. As a consequence, a detailed inspection/report on these areas was commissioned from Sally Strachey Historic Conservation whose report makes a series of recommendations for further conservation work to the decorative masonry.

Minor repairs are required to stone slate roofing and to rainwater goods, which also should be re-decorated during the coming quinquennium.

4.00 SCHEDULE OF DEFECTS – EXTERIOR

4.01 Walls, windows and doors

i) Defects were noted in plain areas of walling formed in flush-pointed rubblework (except for the top stage of the tower which is formed in relatively modern ashlarwork): slight deterioration of the flush pointing at low level to the foot of the south wall of the nave; similar salts-related decay at low level to the two flat ashlar columns flanking the south doorway; slight surface decay to several stones to the parapet section at the head of the south wall of the nave where a number of stones have been faced up in the past with mortar ; general salts- related decay, particularly to mortar at low level to the west wall of the nave; frassy decay/delamination to the modern flush lime-mortar/thin render at about mid-height to the west wall near the south-west corner, has possibly worsened since the last inspection; general slight decay to ashlarwork at high level to the

Andrew Townsend Architects 2 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

stair tower projection on the north side of the tower; general moss growth and other vegetation at low level to the north wall of the tower and chancel, suggesting high levels of moisture where the wall sits in a slightly ‘moated’ area; general slight deterioration of mortar pointing at high level on the left-hand side of the east gable of the chancel; moss and other vegetation growing at low level to the south wall of the chancel and tower; slight deterioration of mortar pointing at low level towards the west end of the south wall of the chancel.

ii) The following defects were noted to areas of dressed and decorative masonry generally formed in limestone ashlar-quality stonework: general slight erosion to the full string course at mid height to the south wall of the tower and the part string course at about one metre below; general slight erosion at low level to the surround to the south door, probably related to salts deposition, although there are also signs (in the pinkish colouring to some of the stones) of past fire damage (apparently the south doorway was previously protected by some form of porch or canopy); vertical fracturing to several of the square block corbels at the base of the parapet at the head of the south wall of the nave; delamination to the face of several merlons to the parapet at the head of the south wall of the nave, particularly at the south-west corner; damage to one stone to the string course immediately above the corbel course at the base of the parapet at the head of the south wall of the nave ; general slight erosion of the decorative surround to the west door due to salts-related decay with slight loss of detail elsewhere to the doorway surround; decay to the dogtooth decorative surround at the base of the central window to the west wall; general slight decay to the surrounds of the three high-level windows to the west wall of the nave; since the last inspection, the west wall has been the subject of a detailed survey/report by Sally Strachey Historic Conservation (see Appendix B); slight decay to the dog-tooth detail surround at the base of the right-hand jamb of the west window in the north wall of the nave ; since the last inspection, making good has been carried out using hydraulic lime mortar to the foot of the jambs of the north door surround ; general slight frassy decay to the head of the window at ground floor level in the north wall of the tower; various mortar repairs to this window carried out in the past; general slight frassy damage to most of the buttresses to the north and east walls of the chancel with some open joints near the foot of the buttresses; moss growth at the head of the shallow square buttress at the north-east corner of the chancel with blistering and spalling decay to the

Andrew Townsend Architects 3 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

attached corner column at high level, all indicative of water running off the roof at the north-east corner of the chancel on to this buttress ( this needs to be observed during rainfall ); damage to the kneeler at the foot of the north side of the east gable of the chancel is also probably related to water ingress into the wall at the same point ; similar but lesser damage near the head of the shallow square buttress at the south-east corner of the chancel; slight damage to several tabling stones at the head of the east gable of the chancel ; frost-related damage near the base of the west buttress to the south wall of the chancel.

iii) No signs of structural movement were noted in external walls, except for slight past outward movement in the north and south walls of the chancel, particularly towards the east end. Although themselves ancient, the buttresses to the north and south walls appear to be later than the original construction and were presumably added in an attempt to counteract the horizontal thrust of the stone-vaulted ceiling on the north and south walls of the chancel.

iv) Slight damage to the stone steps leading up to the door in the north wall of the tower with concrete repairs to the right-hand side of the steps; steel balustrade needs redecorating; previous damage to the side of the steps where the steel fixings for the balustrade have corroded has been made good in cement mortar since the last inspection .

v) Monument on the north wall of the chancel (dating from 1659) with slight damage to the head/base; quite extensive original colouring survives on the monument .

4.02 Roofs and rainwater disposal

i) The nave and chancel are covered with natural stone slates where the following defects were noted: some delaminating slates to the north slope of the chancel; ten missing/damaged stone slates to the south slope of the chancel roof ; approximately six damaged/missing stone slates to the north slope of the nave roof with some delamination ; general slight moss growth to stone slate surfaces.

Andrew Townsend Architects 4 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

ii) Rainwater goods to the north slope of the nave are formed in aluminium with some corrosion of the steel fixings between sections; aluminium downpipes to the north/south sides of the chancel, although the east gutters appear to be formed in cast-iron; some corrosion of gutters and brackets specifically at gutter joints, suggesting that leaks occur at these points; the gutter on the south slope of the chancel appears to be under-sized.

iii) Downpipes discharge over open gullies with cast-iron grilles; the church is surrounded by a ‘moated’ area filled with crushed limestone gravel; there are rodding eyes at regular intervals in the drainage moat giving access to below- ground/french drainage; rodding eyes should be opened up and checked/rodded on an annual basis.

iv) Some delamination of stone slates to the south slope of the nave roof; sapling growing in lead parapet gutter (was removed by the inspecting architect; various bits of stone slate fragments in the gutter; slight rippling of leadwork in the gutter.

v) Copper sheet roof to the tower falling to copper parapet gutters on the north and south sides with standing water in the gutters; corrosion marks to the copper sheeting below the stays bracing the central flagpole fixed through the roof; various areas of localised damage to the copper sheet roofing, particularly on the north side, although the cause of these is not clear; one patch repair to the ridge towards the east; the previous timber flagpole in the centre of the roof has been replaced with a glass fibre pole since the last inspection ; lightning conductor tape runs to the top of the flagpole; access hatch with copper covering; ‘ridging’ in the line of the copper sheeting in various locations, where the underlying boarding is showing through; slight build-up of debris in the parapet gutters.

5.00 SCHEDULE OF DEFECTS – INTERIOR

5.01 Nave

i) Walls of plastered masonry with what appears to be a limewash finish; low level areas are concealed below pew-end panelling; signs of water staining at high

Andrew Townsend Architects 5 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

level in the north-east corner running down from the roof level, although there is no indication of recent water ingress here; very slight damage to decorative finishes in several areas including below the east window in the north wall of the nave; damage to the cill of the east window in the south wall; water staining to the sloping cill below the west window in the south wall (possibly caused by rainwater ingress or condensation?); slight fracturing/damage at the off-set in the line of the west wall towards the left-hand side; spalling of paintwork in several other areas has occurred since the last inspection.

ii) Signs of movement were noted in the walls as follows: opening up of joints between the voussoirs at the head/base of the circular west window with crack running horizontally across the outer reveal at the head of the same window with corresponding cracking to the cill of the window reveal ; very slight cracking at the head of the upper central window in the west wall; very slight cracking running up from the head of the west window in the north wall into the plain area of wall above; very slight cracking running vertically down from the cill of the east window in the north wall ; similar very slight cracking running down from the cill of the east window in the south wall . All signs of structural movement appear to be within reasonable parameters at present.

iii) Windows: deflection in the line of the plain glazing of the east window in the north wall; several cracked quarries to the same window, including to the opening hopper section of the central light; ancient glass in the east windows in the north and south walls; since the last inspection, the west window in the north wall has been re-glazed with a decorative scheme ; some of the painting of the detail to the circular window in the west wall is fugitive.

iv) Floor: stone flags were apparently re-laid in the early 1990s when an electric under-floor heating system was installed; open joints adjacent to the tower arch; general slight erosion and delamination to a number of the stone flags; oak boards below the banks of pews.

v) Roof structure: probably 19 th c (or earlier?) with purlins and arched wind braces running longitudinally supported on trusses with central ‘crown posts’.

Andrew Townsend Architects 6 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

5.02 Tower base

i) Painted plastered walls as in nave; slight damage near the base of the south wall and below the windows in the north and south walls; further flaking of paintwork, particularly at high level to the south wall.

ii) Plain modern stone flag floor; raised oak boarded pew bases.

iii) Small store cupboard in north-west corner below the tower stair.

iv) Timber boarded ceiling with decorative ribs and bosses.

v) Windows: one in each of north and south walls, late 19 th c decorative glass with quite extensive ‘fugitive’ paintwork, particularly to the window in the north wall; general corrosion of saddle bars and other window ironwork (and throughout the church); some spalling of the cement pointing-in of the north window ; cill boards have been added to the windows in the chancel and nave since the last inspection, concealing light fittings mounted on the window cills.

5.03 Chancel

i) Walls as noted elsewhere; some slight damage at low level towards the east end of the south wall, particularly below the piscina where there is loose plaster; the lower sections of the north and south walls of the west part of the chancel were re-plastered following removal of the choir stalls during the quinquennium; one or two small areas of flaking paintwork, particularly at high level.

ii) Signs of movement were noted in the walls as follows: slight vertical cracking in the north-east and south-east corners with signs of earlier movement in the plasterwork and subsequent re-filling in these areas; slight vertical cracking running up from the head of the tower arch; slight cracking running east-west to the ceiling vault web on the east side of the west bay of the chancel; slight opening of joints at high level between voussoirs to the ribs of the ceiling vault, some of which have been filled; crack running between the rib and the head

Andrew Townsend Architects 7 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

of the junction between the east and west bays of the chancel and the adjacent section of plastered web.

iii) Defects in windows were noted as follows: crack to the cill of the west window in the north wall with some fugitive paint to the decorative glazing in this window; this window appears to have ‘settled’ on the west side in the past ; slight opening of joints at the head of the west window in the south wall with some deflection in the line of the glazing to this window; fugitive paintwork to the decorating glazing of the east window in the north wall.

iv) Floor of modern limestone paving with some limestone/marble ledger stones set in the west section of the sanctuary floor; 19 th c encaustic tiles to the upper (east) section of the sanctuary floor; some cracking to the tiles in the sanctuary; since the last inspection, the timber boarded floor area to the former choir stalls in the west section of the chancel has been replaced with limestone paving to match the other areas.

v) Slight damage to the mullion between the two piscine in the south wall; some remains of ancient decorative paintwork to the head and right-hand jamb of the right-hand piscina; since the last inspection, the left-hand piscina has been fitted with a new decorative inner stone surround and a lockable timber door to form an aumbry.

vi) Slight salts-related damage at the base of the painted stone and marble reredos; open joints near the head of the reredos.

5.04 Belfry and stairs

i) Exposed flush-pointed rubblework walls in the belfry, with general slight frassiness to the mortar pointing and some open joints.

ii) Small ‘sounding chamber’ between the belfry and ringing chamber, which could not be inspected as access to this area from the belfry does not appear to be possible.

iii) Making good with cement mortar to the walls of the spiral stair giving access to the belfry; otherwise very ancient mortar/plaster to the walls; some of the stair

Andrew Townsend Architects 8 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

treads have been replaced in concrete; two iron bars provide strengthening to the stair just above the level of the ringing chamber with disruption of the masonry/mortar around the bar ends (where these meet the stair walls) suggesting corrosion of the ironwork.

iv) Timber roof structure of belfry appears to be mainly elm with some beetle attack, probably extinct; the ends of the main beams running north-south and east-west have been splice repaired and supported with arched braces running back to the wall lower down; modern pine board decking on the rafters; some deflection in the roof purlins.

v) Elm or oak boarding to the belfry floor, generally in reasonable condition but with some debris and loose boards; main foundation beams supporting the bell- frame with decay and some ‘shakes’, although these have been strengthened with iron-plates bolted through the timbers; belfry openings with timber louvres and galvanised steel anti-bird mesh; about two thirds of the full height of the belfry openings is filled with concrete blockwork.

5.05 Ringing chamber

No defects noted except ceiling boarding may possibly be asbestos-containing material; slight cracking to the plasterwork above the door giving access to the roof space above the chancel vault.

5.06 Roof void above chancel

i) The head of the stone vaulting above the chancel forms the floor of the roof void; generally in good condition although there is quite a large amount of loose mortar and stone rubble lying on the vault; s ome bat droppings on the top of the vaulting.

ii) Signs of outward movement of both the north and south walls above the line of the vault with opening-up of joints and poor bonding of masonry in the north- east, south-east and, to a lesser extent, the north-west corner; signs of some collapse of rubblework masonry on top of the vault in the area of transverse vaulting nearest the north-east corner.

Andrew Townsend Architects 9 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

iii) Elm roof structure with trusses incorporating collars, ties and arch braces between the collars and principal rafters; various timber struts/collars and iron/steel plates (with some corrosion of the latter) have been added to the original roof structure; elm and oak common rafters with additional softwood rafters; bituminous roofing felt; general beetle damage to timbers although nothing too serious; the timbers appear to have been de-frassed suggesting they may have been subject to chemical treatment in the past; quite severe fracture towards the south end of the tie beam of the second truss from the west end, repaired with stout iron plating; deflection has taken place in the past in the line of the wall plate and purlins.

5.07 Furnishings and fittings

i) Chancel : 17 th c oak bishop’s chair removed ; 19 th c oak communion table; another, probably 19 th c, oak table at the foot of the reredos ; two large 19 th c free-standing brass candle holders; eight wall-mounted brass candle holders, probably 18 th c; modern oak bench on stone base; new timber and bronze communion rail fitted since the last inspection ; oak choir stalls removed since the last inspection; new oak benches provided since the last inspection ; modern oak lectern.

ii) Tower base: 19 th c plain oak benches; modern timber priest’s chair and reading desk; brass wall-mounted candle holder, probably 18 th c; brass pendant candle holder, probably 18 th c, with counter-weight for lowering/raising; timber gate giving access to rood stair; painted steel gate giving access to store in north wall; since the last inspection, a steel handrail has been fitted at the steps between the tower base and the chancel.

iii) Nave: plain 19 th c oak benches with loose foot rests/kneelers; large 19 th c organ with wall-mounted casing against the south wall; large Romanesque slate or black marble font with some fracturing, limestone base with damage and salts- related decay; 19 th c oak font cover with decorative ironwork is due to be replaced in the near future ; the notice board has been removed from the north door and a new notice board fitted to the back of the panelling to the rear of the organ console ; 19 th c oak north door has been modified, including at threshold level since the last inspection to allow access through this

Andrew Townsend Architects 10 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

doorway ; two-leaf 19 th c oak west door; modern oak choir stalls by the west door.

iv) Belfry: six bells, four swinging east-west, two north-south in late 19 th or early 20 th c oak frame; modern wheels, headstocks, bearings; canons retained on all bells; treble and second bells dated 1785, the third was made by Meers and stainbank in 1869; three larger bells are older, of these the fourth is dated 1592; sanctus bell (dated 1709) hung on an oak frame against the north wall; timber ladder running from the belfry floor up to the hatch giving access out to the tower roof with some furniture beetle damage; another smaller timber ladder.

5.08 Monuments and memorials

i) Nave: four plain marble wall-mounted plaques dating from 18 th and 19 th c; 18 th c painted benefactors’ board; modern inscription commemorating the Piper window at the west end of the south wall; painted timber board commemorating the incumbents of the parish; brass plaque commemorating previous organist; bronze and timber plaque commemorating war dead; mounted/framed and painted recording of the coat-of-arms set in the south window; early 19 th c brass plaque on the north wall; staining to the head of the simple wall monument on the north wall (Mrs Eleanor Powell).

ii) Tower base: four plain marble wall monuments, 18 th /early 19 th c, the one to Mary Slatter (1801) on the south wall has some damage to the head and the main part of the plaque is loose; three brass/copper plaques; small brass plaques commemorating work to the bells carried out in 1911 and 2002; stone ledger (?) mounted at high level on the north wall, probably medieval.

iii) Chancel: two plain marble wall monuments on the south wall, both early 19 th c; carved stone medieval roundel on the north wall depicting the Lamb of God, bashed into several pieces and repaired.

Andrew Townsend Architects 11 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

6.00 GENERAL

6.01 Fire precautions

i) Water-type extinguisher in the tower base; water-type extinguisher at the east

end of the nave; CO 2 extinguisher by the organ. All checked in 2012.

ii) Lightning conductor to the tower with a down tape on the north wall.

iii) From October 2006, the PCC has been required under The Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 to carry out a fire risk assessment to focus on the safety of all ‘relevant persons’ in case of fire, paying particular attention to those at special risk, such as the disabled or those with special needs. For further information go to www.communities.gov.uk under the heading Fire Safety Law.

6.02 Service installations

i) Heating: the church is heated with an electric under-floor heating system extended in the chancel area when the work to the floor was carried out ; electric tubular heaters mounted at the base of most of the windows have been removed since the last inspection.

ii) Since the last inspection, a new lighting scheme has been installed in the church.

iii) Electrical distribution board housed in a cabinet in the north-east corner of the nave.

6.03 Churchyard

i) Boundaries: privet hedge to the west with other vegetation growing in it; the north-west corner of the churchyard is marked by the wall of the Old Parsonage; along the north side of the churchyard the outbuildings relating to the Parsonage are located, with some open joints in the rubblework forming these; plain rubblestone walls with mortared joints running along the east boundary and the

Andrew Townsend Architects 12 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

east end of the north boundary, generally with a few areas of slight collapse, open joints and vegetation growth; the wall adjacent to the main entrance of the churchyard at the east end of the north boundary is affected by the roots of a large horse chestnut tree growing close to the outer face of the wall with an area of near-collapse of walling just to the west of the tree; plain timber post but no gate to the churchyard entrance; general outward movement of the south end of the east boundary wall with some quite severe fracturing near the south-east corner ; taller rubblestone wall to the south with ivy growth removed since the last inspection ; general open joints and some vegetation growth near the head of the wall ; buttress projecting out of the wall at about mid-length with some damage to the stones forming the buttress ; cement mortar repairs to the head of the wall towards the west end, which are now starting to fall away; timber door at the west end of the south wall.

ii) Trees: cherry to the south of the church by the west end of the church; two yew trees to the south, one of great antiquity; several self-seeded small trees near the south boundary; holly tree to the east; two yew trees to the north; various shrubs, etc along the north boundary.

iii) Paths: tarmac path running from the main entrance as far as the door in the north wall, then concrete flags round to the west door and slightly beyond; some vegetation growth between the flags; slight cracking to the tarmac path; concrete paving in area approaching north door was re-graded slightly as part of the works carried out recentlyto allow access through this door; new stone flags laid at the foot of the north door.

iv) Tombs and gravestones: 17 th – 20 th c grave markers; many of the gravestones are leaning; ancient low ‘bale’ tomb at the foot of the north wall of the tower with vegetation growth, some listing and fracturing and it appears to have deteriorated since the last inspection; a number of gravestones have been removed and leant up against the south and east walls; large stone preaching cross to the south-east of the main yew tree in the south section of the churchyard, with slight de-lamination near the base of the main shaft .

v) Three timber/steel benches against the west boundary with questionable stability of the timber seats; timber bench by the south boundary next to a

Andrew Townsend Architects 13 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

modern sculpture mounted on a stone cube base; two more timber benches at the west end of the south boundary.

vi) Ancient stone font on the ground near the west door

vii) Electric light mounted on timber post by north doorway

viii) Painted timber notice board on timber frame by the main entrance to the churchyard

6.04 Disabled access

The Equality Act 2010 determines that those responsible for church buildings have a legal duty to take steps to make reasonable adjustments to avoid direct/indirect discrimination including for disabled people, such as providing extra help or making changes to the way they provide services and/or making reasonable adjustments to the physical features of their premises to overcome physical barriers to access. It is recommended that the PCC commission and consider implementing the recommendations of an access audit, if this has not already been undertaken.

6.05 Bats

No signs of bat activity were noted in the church during this inspection, except for droppings in the chancel roof void. Any works to the building which may disturb a bat roost will require a DEFRA licence, following a detailed survey of the bat population and the preparation of a mitigation strategy.

6.06 Deleterious materials

The Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 mean that owners, employers and managers of non-domestic properties have an explicit duty to manage asbestos in premises and are required to assess risks and, where relevant, put in place a managed asbestos survey whether work on the building is planned or not. The object of the Regulations is to enable those carrying out future works or inspections to assess the nature of relevant materials before work is carried out so that damage to asbestos-containing material can be

Andrew Townsend Architects 14 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

minimised. In order to comply with legislation, we recommend that a survey is commissioned from a specialist consultant, if this has not already been carried out. Although we are unable to confirm asbestos-containing materials are not present in the building, no signs of asbestos having been used were detected during the survey, except possibly in the ceiling of the ringing chamber.

7.00 RECOMMENDATIONS

7.01 Works required urgently

i) Check and clear rainwater goods, parapet gutters, gullies and below-ground drainage on an annual basis; check for leaking joints to chancel eaves gutters and carry out remedial works as necessary; report any defects to the inspecting architect.

ii) Carry out patch repairs to stone slate roofs; remove moss growth from stone slates; investigate cause of decay to stonework at high level to north-east and south-east corners of chancel (ie run-off from roof); inspecting architect to attend during patch repairs work to inspect condition of stone slates, battens and fixings.

7.02 Works which are required within twelve months

i) Remedial conservation of decorative masonry to west and south walls of nave as recommendations in SSHC report.

ii) Treat and remove vegetation growing on masonry.

iii) Continue test/inspection of fire extinguishers on an annual basis.

iv) Continue with regular inspection/testing of lightning conductor installation every two-three years.

v) Commission or carry out fire risk assessment for the building and implement the findings of the assessment report.

Andrew Townsend Architects 15 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

vi) Commission test/inspection/report following NICIEC format on the electrical installation if this has not been carried out within the last two-three years; carry out urgent recommendations of the report.

vii) Carry out or commission disability access audit, if this has not been carried out already; consider implementing the recommendations of the audit report.

viii) Commission inspection/test/report on asbestos-based materials used in the building construction and carry out urgent recommendations of the report.

7.03 Works which may be required within five years

i) Redecoration of cast-iron rainwater goods.

ii) Commence repair work to boundary walls.

iii) Commission arboriculturalist to inspect/report on the condition of the trees in the churchyard; carry out urgent recommendations of the report.

7.04 Works which may be required beyond five years or desirable within five years

i) Carry out minor repairs to general areas of external masonry.

ii) Commission conservator’s report on wall monuments on external and internal walls of the church; carry out urgent recommendations of the report.

iii) Fill all movement cracks in internal plasterwork/masonry (including chancel roof void) to allow for basic monitoring; if cracks re-open, consult the architect and possibly a structural engineer.

iv) Remove debris from belfry floor.

v) Repair damaged plaster in south-east corner of chancel.

vi) Consider re-decoration of the interior.

vii) Check for water ingress through windows during heavy rain and commission specialist glazier to carry out remedial works as necessary.

Andrew Townsend Architects 16 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

viii) Remedial work to font masonry.

ix) Consider provision of new gates to the main churchyard entrance.

x) Consider re-siting loose gravestones currently leant against the south and east boundary walls within the main part of the churchyard.

xi) Commission report by architect/conservator on condition of graves and tombs in the churchyard and carry out urgent recommendations of the report, in particular to the bale tomb to the north of the tower.

xii) Review condition of benches in churchyard and repair/replace as necessary.

Notes

The above is not a detailed specification and should not be used for obtaining prices

All repair works should be specified and overseen by an architect with experience of repairing ancient buildings

All works of repair and alteration to the church (except de minimis works) should be the subject of an application for a faculty following approval of the works by the DAC

Andrew Townsend Architects 17 St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

APPENDIX A

Photographs

St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Photographs

Figure 1 General view of west end

Figure 2 South side of nave and central tower

Andrew Townsend Architects i St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Photographs

Figure 3 General view from south- east

Figure 4 Detail of head of buttress at

north-east corner of chancel showing

decay caused by runoff from roof

Andrew Townsend Architects ii St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Photographs

Figure 5 Detail of west

elevation showing

continuing decay to

stonework and render at low

level

Figure 6 Detail of foot of west elevation

Andrew Townsend Architects iii St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Photographs

Figure 7 North door with new stone threshold

Figure 8 General view of nave roof

from tower

Andrew Townsend Architects iv St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Photographs

Figure 9 Build up of moss and slate debris in south parapet gutter to nave

Figure 10 Vegetation growth in

south parapet gutter to nave

Andrew Townsend Architects v St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Photographs

Figure 11 General view of tower roof

Figure 12 Mechanical damage to copper sheeting to tower roof

Andrew Townsend Architects vi St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Photographs

Figure 13 General view of interior looking east

Figure 14 Tower base and chancel

from west

Andrew Townsend Architects vii St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Photographs

Figure 15 West end of nave

Figure 16 Vertical cracking through head of surround to circular window to west wall of nave

Andrew Townsend Architects viii St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Photographs

Figure 17 Surface damage to plasterwork in south-east corner of chancel

Figure 18 Cracking to rib in chancel ceiling vault

Andrew Townsend Architects ix St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Photographs

Figure 19 Chancel roof void

Figure 20 Detail of chancel roof structure

Andrew Townsend Architects x St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Photographs

Figure 21 Churchyard to south east of the church

Figure 22 General view of churchyard to the north of the church

Andrew Townsend Architects xi St Mary the Virgin Church, Iffley – Condition Survey

APPENDIX B

SSHC Report on West Front (October 2011)

Contents

1.0 Summary

2.0 Description, History and Significance of the West Front and South Porch

3.0 Geology

4.00 Environmental Conditions

5.00 Previous Programmes of Alteration and Repair

6.00 The 1982 -1982 Repair Programme

7.00 Site Inspection November 2000

8.00 Condition Survey

9.00 Recommendations for Conservation

10.00 The South Porch

11.00 The Lime Technique- Description of Terms

12.00 Archive review of the 1981-1982 Repair Programme

13.00 The Restoration of Iffley 1975 to 1984

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 1 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 1.0 Summary

The purpose of this survey is to provide a discussion document for the next phase of repair and protection to the west front stonework. The report will consider the overall condition of the stonework alongside the 1981/82 programme of repairs, render and repointing. The decay mechanisms and rates of decay within the repair materials and the stonework will be assessed alongside evidence of stone loss. The conservation recommendations will look at repair mortars, materials and methods of application. The use of sheltercoat mixes, to protect the fine detail of the carving, alongside the re-rendering of the walling and the limewashing of the dressed stone will also be considered in relation to the aesthetic impact on the overall design and visual intent of the west front.

1.1 Condition

The highly decorated Romanesque west front of St Mary’s Church is exhibiting signs of disruption and decay to the 1981/1982 repair programme carried out under the supervision of Professor Robert Baker. The aesthetic intent of this repair programme is also now compromised due to the soiling of elements of the stone surface and the presence of biological growth. It appears from our site monitoring records that the decay to the lime based repair system of the early 1980’s has accelerated over the last five to ten years thereby necessitating a review of the condition of the original stonework. In addition to the west front it was considered advantageous to include the decoration to the south door within this condition survey.

A site inspection including crane access to all parts of the west front was carried out in August 2011 by Anna Deeks and Sally Strachey. The church architect, Andrew Townsend attended site in the afternoon and inspected the stonework from the crane.

The condition survey established that a conservation programme should be given urgent consideration in order to provide ongoing protection to the fabric of the west front. It was confirmed that approximately 75% to 80% of the 1981/1982 repairs had begun to break down resulting in vulnerable areas of original stonework becoming exposed to the elements. The decay and loss of the 1980’s mortars has also diminished their function of drawing soluble salts away from the 12th century carvings resulting in the deposition and crystallisation of salts within the original stonework.

It was also noted that a number of the 12th century decorative elements, such as the capitals on the upper tier of windows, which had not needed repair in the 1980’s, were now showing evidence of accelerated decay and loss of detail.

The survey also recorded that key elements which provide protection to the decorative detail of the west front, such as the coping stones and string courses, were suffering loss of jointing materials and in some cases severe lamination through the beds of the stone. In a number of cases the severity of the laminations indicates imminent loss of substantial sections of stone. The 1980’s render was an integral part of the aesthetic intent of the repair scheme and an early example of Professor Baker using the lime repair system to embrace a The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 2 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 complete elevation. The survey showed that the render had suffered deterioration and loss of surface at lower levels, on exposed outer edges and at the interface with the ashlar. Although the appearance of the render has been diminished over the last thirty years it still resonates with the original aesthetic intent of the west front.

Over the last thirty years the decorative detail has picked up low levels of carbon deposits, particularly in protected areas. However, it appears that the deposits have formed on top of the remains of the 1980’s sheltercoat and therefore can be easily removed. It was noted that at least 95% of the protective sheltercoat had weathered away leaving the open coral like structure of the Headington stone exposed to an increased rate of decay and soiling.

The copings, string courses, ashlar and areas of the render have in places suffered high levels of biological growth which detract from the clarity of the overall design of the west front.

Finally, possible structural movement through the joints above the Victorian window was identified with associated buckling of the upper section of the glass.

The south porch which was included in this survey was found to be in excellent condition apart from isolated areas of decay over the lower surfaces.

1.2 Recommendations

The condition survey clearly establishes a case for the urgent consideration of a conservation programme to the west front of Iffley church. It is critical that the lime based repair system, which has performed well over the last thirty years but is now reaching the end of its life, should be replaced. The development of the use of lime mortars since the 1980’s to consolidate and protect vulnerable stonework will allow us to refine and adapt our approach to increase the performance of the materials and techniques. It will also allow us to improve the overall legibility and aesthetic intent of this iconic west front.

The extensive and time consuming cleaning programme which was required in the 1980’s to remove the heavy black carbon deposits will not be necessary in the next programme of works. The biological growth and isolated areas of black can be removed efficiently and with the minimum amount of water.

As a matter of urgency the decorative detail requires the removal of the failed 1980’s mortars and the application of a new system of lime consolidation, repair and protection based on the evidence gathered within this report.

The biological growth covering the coping stones and string courses should be removed in order to carry out a programme of pinning, pointing and repair. The application of a sheltercoat or limewash to tone these architectural elements into the overall west front scheme should also be considered.

The 1980’s render requires consolidation and repair in order to receive a new limewash to enhance the Romanesque design of this historic elevation. It is also recommended that the render is extended over the ashlar to reduce the possibility of

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 3 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 further decay at the interface with the ashlar and to introduce increased clarity to the overall form and detail of the west front.

It is also recommended that the abrasive gravel at the base of the west front should be removed and returned to turf. This will decrease the possibility of damage to the 12th century stonework at ground level as well as greatly improving the appearance of the west front.

It was noted on site that there are isolated areas on the dexter medallions of the west door where carved detail is in danger of imminent loss. It would be advisable to insert adhesive repairs before the worst of the winter sets in.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 4 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 2.0 Description, History and Significance of the West Front and South Porch

Iffley was built between 1175 and 1182 by Robert de St Remy, the Lord of the Manor. The superb west front and south porch are very similar in style to Stewkley in Buckinghamshire which was built a few years earlier. This close connection could be due the fact that Robert de St Remy’s wife was a relation of the de Clinton family who commissioned Stewkley. However, Iffley is considerably more elaborate in its style of decoration and is considered to approach the pinnacle of late Romanesque carving found in the English parish church.

Under the rule of Henry II from 1154 to 1189 England was part of the vast Plantagenet empire which extended from Scotland down to the Pyrenees. Intellectual and artistic links between England and France were very close and a number of features and details exemplified at Iffley were first developed in France through the l1th and first half of the 12th century. Although Iffley sits on the cusp of the transitional period of late Romanesque to early Gothic, the architectural style throughout the interior and exterior of the church is dominated by Romanesque aesthetics.

Figure 2: Iffley west front after the 1981-9182 programme of repair

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 5 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 The development in French architecture of the screen façade with blind arches, windows and doorway with radiating voussoirs, surmounted by a pair of towers in order to provide a monumental accent to the exterior silhouette, became extremely popular in 12th century England. This style of architecture lent itself to the English love of elaborate decorative small scale forms. The multiple arches, niches and mouldings employed on the screen facades gave an overall effect of great richness. In France the use of narrative sculpture within the overall form of the Romanesque architecture was important in creating the monumental doorways whereas in England figure sculpture was used singly or in pairs. More frequently, as at Iffley, figure sculptures are small and carved in relief within medallions and resemble in scale and detail objects in ivory or metal. The main interest in England was in geometric or floral ornamentation and in grotesques. It seems that the English love of ornament was deeply rooted and the beak head and the chevron decoration employed to decorate windows and doorways continued to be used throughout the 12th century. This appreciation of decorative forms appears to go back to very ancient times and was further reinforced by the Viking Settlers and the influence of Scandinavian art.

Figure 3: Angouelme West Front1105-1128 Figure 4: Stewkley West Front 1165

The elaborate decoration at Iffley would have also been influenced by the Cluniac priories such as Reading Abbey 1125, Lewes and Much Wenlock. Henry I was one of the principal patrons of Cluny and an understanding of Continental Romanesque art and architecture would have transferred to his own foundations. The chevron and the beak -head are one of the main forms of ornament of Romanesque architecture and dominate the decoration at Iffley.

The chevron is an ancient form of three dimensional geometrical architectural ornament, consisting of zigzags formed by rolls most commonly found decorating the orders of an arch such as that at Iffley. This decorative detail was developed through the 11th and 12th century in France and England but was applied more

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 6 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 lavishly from 1150 onwards. The position and direction of chevron ornament can vary but at Iffley they are in the shape of the stepped chevron which is four rows of lateral chevrons stepped on the face of the moulding.

The beak-head is an architectural enrichment which takes the form of a beast, bird or monster where the beak or jaw appears to grip the moulding on which it is carved. It is thought to have its origins in Scandinavian art but was used in western France in the 11th century with the motif of human heads used radially to arches and doorways. The detail spread to Anjou, Normandy and to England where it appeared more often as a bird’s head. It is believed that the motif was first used in England in the cloister of Reading Abbey c. 1125 and spread from there with great rapidity with a particular concentration in Oxfordshire.

Figure 5: 1982 image of the chevron decoration Figure 6: Beakheads from the west door on the sinister side of the west door at Iffley at Iffley

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 7 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 The figurative sculpture found within the medallions and on the capitals and corbels display a more naturalistic and graceful depiction of their subjects, which anticipates the transition to Early Gothic.

Figures 7 and 8: Examples of figurative sculpture from the west door at Iffley

At Iffley the windows and doorway on the exterior stonework are deeply recessed to provide a wide field for carving. The west door is recessed in order to take the four rows of lateral chevrons stepped on the face of the mouldings, the two tiers of beak- heads and an outer course of symbols from the Zodiac and the Apostles. It appears that much of the stonework has been carved in situ. The two corbels which have been carved on the south side of the church are adjacent to the remaining corbels which are in block form waiting to be cut. The chevrons and medallions also would have benefited from being carved in situ to maintain the continuous pattern and line. This is particularly clear on the sinister section of medallions. However, the carving of the beak- heads is a different matter as the carefully observed and executed decoration around the sides of the heads would have to be carved on the ground. On the right hand side of the outer order of beak-heads the barley twist design through the roll moulding stops half way up because it appears that the carvers have not let enough room through the diameter of the stone for the design. Also the barley twist does not have a continuous flow which further supports the view that the beak heads and barley twists rolls were carved on the ground.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 8 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 9: 2000 image of the tiers of decoration on the west door at Iffley

The richness of decoration of decoration at Iffley expresses the emphasis on Romanesque aesthetics of colour, texture and light. The materials used for construction were not intended to be left with their natural finish exposed. The rubble stonework would have been rendered with lime plaster with perhaps a polished finish. The dressed stone most likely would have been covered with a thin polished lime plaster and the carved stonework painted in vibrant colours. Over large areas the painting might be no more than a white limewash with a masonry pattern but over the carved detail there would have been a richer use of colour. The tapestry of painted ornament would have continued inside with wall paintings, glass, ivories, tapestry, tiles, painted sculptures, screens and metalwork. It is possible to capture how these buildings would have looked through the painted decoration and wall paintings surviving at such sites as Kempley Church, St Albans Cathedral, (1080’s) and the Holy Sepulchre Chapel, Winchester,(1178-1185). The decorative detail of the exterior 12th century stonework at Iffley would have been carved for the painter’s brush. A good example of this is the large protruding eyes of the beak heads on the west front which would have responded well to being picked out in colour. This feature can also be identified on the sculptures in the medallions such as the angel and the bull. It is interesting to note that the beak-heads on the south porch lack this feature. In 1981/82 traces of a smooth ground and historic layers of fine limewash were identified in sheltered areas of the west front although during this programme of works no layers of early colour were found.

The whole of St Mary’s church, Iffley, both exterior and interior, resonates with the elaborate detail and textural richness of the Late Romanesque. It is without doubt one of the finest examples of late 12th century architecture in the country and therefore demands our ongoing care and attention to secure its future.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 9 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 3. Geology The dressed and carved stone at Iffely is the Headington Hardstone which is a Late Jurassic Corallian Limestone. This stone was created from the warm seas where coral reefs were abundant. The formation was created by the coral dying off and being buried under successive layers of silt and debris. There is evidence from the built history of Oxford that the Headington quarries were operating from the 11th century and that the stone quarried from the 11th to the 15th century was extremely durable. The Headington stone could be cut easily in any direction but hardened on exposure. This would account for the surprising amount of original 12th century detail surviving at Iffley. The colour of the Headington stone varies in tone from a warm brown to a buff white and has an open shelly texture which weathers back evenly but has a tendency to grip atmospheric dirt and sulphation tightly onto the surface.

The rubble walling is believed to be the hardwearing Coral Rag which is a rubbly, grey shelly limestone from near the top of the Upper Jurassic Corallian Group. It is considered to be relatively hard and resistant to weathering but too irregular and poorly bedded to be used for dressed stone.

Figure 10: Detail from the west door illustrating the variation in tone of the Headington stone

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 10 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 Figure 11: Close up of the pore structure of the Headington stone at Iffley

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 11 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 4. Environmental Conditions

Iffley Church is located on the outskirts of Oxford on the eastern side of the city. The heavily blackened surfaces of the 1980’s would indicate a high level of local industrial pollution throughout the 19th and 20th centuries. It would be beneficial to establish the level of improvements in environmental conditions in the Oxford area over recent years in relation to the performance of the 1981/82 programme of repair as well as future treatment programmes.

The church is in close proximity to the river Isis and therefore will be subject to raised levels of atmospheric moisture and humidity. It was noted during the 1981/82 programme that the lower areas of stonework were often damp on the surface due to the presence of mist and raised levels of atmospheric moisture associated with the river.

Figure 12: 1979 photograph illustrating the blackened surfaces due to an acceleration in industrial pollution in the 19th century and exfoliation of the brittle surfaces at lower level

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 12 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 5. Previous Programmes of Alteration and Repair

There is evidence that the12th century rose window on the west front of Iffley was replaced by a set of perpendicular windows. The remaining decorative features were left intact until the gable was lowered during the middle of the 18th century. We are fortunate in having a pencil drawing of the west front of Iffley, executed by Isaac Taylor in 1751 from Charles Lyttelton’s “Book of Drawings of Saxon Churches. It shows the west front before the 19th restoration with the Perpendicular window blocking the original circular window and the gable lowered. We can see that the line of the gable has cut through the upper side windows destroying the original Romanesque design and carvings. Borlase, the Cornish antiquary, told Lyttelton in a letter of July 1753 that he considered Iffley, “fine” but “sadly mauled” and hoped that a reconstruction of the original design could be drawn ignoring the alterations.

Figure 13: An early 18th century print of Iffley church showing the west front before the gable was lowered in the mid 18th century. The 12th century rose window has been replaced with a perpendicular window. Note there is no evidence of a porch located over the south door

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 13 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 14: Pencil drawing of the west front by Isaac Taylor dated 1751 showing the drastic reduction of the gable resulting in the destruction of the upper side Romanesque windows

It was in the 19th century that a programme of works was carried out to restore the west front to its original design. In 1823 the gable was rebuilt by Robert Bliss and the roof reinstated to its previous pitch by R C Hussey in 1844. In 1856 J C Buckler reinstated the rose window guided by the outline of the blocked in stonework. However, despite following the 12th century stonework the end result is considered to be rather oversized resulting in cutting into the original design and throwing a visual strain on the west door below. Its outer circumference should not have been larger than the continued circle of the top of the central window. It must also be assumed that sections of the upper side windows are also 19th century replacements along with the frieze and blind niche within the apex of the gable.

It has been suggested that the south doorway was protected by a porch until 1820 but there are no visual records of this element and no indication of fixings in the stonework. The existence of this porch is often quoted as the reason as to why the carved detail of the south doorway is in such good condition. It is therefore necessary to carry out more research on the presence of the porch.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 14 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 15: A late 19th century illustration of Iffley Church showing the 19th century programme of reinstatement of the Romanesque design. Note the evidence of plaster over the rag stone walling

Figure 16: An early 20th century card of Iffley Church showing a surprisingly crisp and clean south doorway compared to the west doorway and windows which have suffered rapid soiling and blackening of the stone surface due to high levels of industrial and domestic pollution

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 15 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 17: 2011 image of the south porch. Apart from what appears to be impact damage at the top of the arch where the lead has been inserted there are no obvious signs of earlier fixings for a porch

During the 1981 repair programme it was discovered that the blind arches had been repaired with slips of brick set in a hard grey cement mortar in the style. This repair system was in the style of Pugin and the ecclesiastics. Where this method of repair had been used it had accelerated the deterioration of the surrounding stone and was removed. The same grey cement was also found over the chevrons on the west door and a section of stone at the top of the west door had been set in the same hard mortar.

In 1975 the top stage of the tower of the tower was replaced by the masonry company Joslins with the carvings executed by Michael Groser using both Ancaster and Clipsham stones. This restoration proved to be contentious as it was felt that much of the earlier tower stonework could have been saved. A programme of repair for the west front was already being discussed in the mid 1970’s and it was felt that a different approach should be adopted with the emphasis on conserving as much of the original stonework as possible. The techniques based on lime treatments being developed at Wells Cathedral and further heritage sites including Oxford were considered to be more appropriate. In 1978 Professor Robert Baker was approached to consider a lime based programme of conservation to the west front of Iffley.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 16 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 18: 1979 image of the new stonework to the top of the tower carried out in 1975 behind the rebuilt gable in 1823

Prior to the 1981 repair programme a number of mortars were identified on the west front: 1) The original building mortar of lime and river sand with some evidence of charcoal possibly from the burning of the lime. 2) The mortar associated with the reinstatement of the decorative elements of the west front in the mid 19th century consisting of a lime based mortar with a high percentage of carbon. This mortar was found to be soft and porous and showing no signs of damaging the original stonework. 3) The hard grey cement associated with the brick repairs and repairs to the west door possibly in the last quarter of the 19th century.

It does appear that the west front of Iffley church and possibly the south porch were subject to a series of substantial interventions from the early 16th century through to the last quarter of the 20th century. A certain amount of further detective work is required to identify the original Romanesque stonework from that of the 19th century through analysis of the mortars and different stone types.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 17 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 19: 2011 image of a detail of the beakheads decorating the west door

Figure 20: 2011 image of south door showing stylistic difference to the west door

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 18 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 6. The 1981-1982 Repair Programme

The work to the west front was carried out in two stages; the west doorway in July and August 1981 and the remainder of the west in the summer of 1982. The main objectives of this conservation programme was to clean, consolidate, repair and protect the stonework using lime based techniques developed by Professor Baker .The architect was Mr Milne and the Department of Environment Inspector was Peter Foster.

Figure 21: Image of Iffley West Front taken in 1979

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 19 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 The carved detail of the west front was suffering from heavily blackened and disrupted surfaces caused by the increase in environmental and industrial pollution during the 19th and 20th centuries. The Headington limestone as well as being a porous building material is rich in calcium carbonate. This makes it highly susceptible to atmospheric sulphurous acids from the burning of fossil fuels. The calcium carbonate binder in the stone undergoes a chemical change to calcium sulphate which is the soluble salt closely associated with the decay of the limestone through repeated cycles of salt crystallisation behind the brittle calcium sulphate skin. The result is blistering and exfoliation of the surfaces and disaggregation of the stone beneath. The concentration of surface decay and loss on the west door was over the chevron decoration near ground level.

This accelerated decay had been exacerbated due to the drainage and ground conditions in 1981. It would be characteristic of 12th century construction for the wall to comprise of an inner and outer skin filled with rubble and lime; a highly porous structure. It was clearly evident at Iffley that the first four feet was suffering from serious decay and damp. Following the conservation programme in 1981 it was found in the spring of 1982 that the repairs on the lower chevrons had turned very dark on the surface due to flow of iron and calcium to the surface forming a particularly unattractive brittle dark translucent surface on the surface. A number of the deeper repairs had failed to carbonate and had exploded during the severe winter weather. Green and black biological growth had already re- colonised the base stones nearest the door due to the damp conditions. The fact that salts were already pouring through the mortar repairs and not the stonework was encouraging but the level of salt activity was alarmingly high.

There was an increasing concern for the amount of moisture going straight into the base of the west front stonework from the drains running from the roof on both sides of the west front into shallow cement gutters. Beneath the gratings the joints of the drain were broken and the pipes blocked. The pipes ran in front of the church to a central soakaway which was also found to be blocked resulting in water being held against the base of the west wall and the west door stonework acting a wick to the soluble salts. This situation had been further exacerbated by the inside of the west wall having been plastered with cement and treated with oil paint and concrete slabs having been laid right up to the stonework on the outside. The slabs could also have attributed to the accelerated decay of the lower stonework due to the water splashing back onto the surface of the chevrons.

The following proposals were put forward by Professsor Baker to address the damp problems at the west end of the church: 1) The drainage pipes on the south and north corners of the west front should be redirected away from the west front instead of across the front. The joints to the drains should be regularly repaired and checked and the pipes regularly cleared. 2) As an alternative a French drain should be installed on each side with a run off directed away from the west front. 3) All the concrete should be removed from the base of the west front including the steps in front of the doorway. The ground should be landscaped to a gentle slope away from he west front and turf laid up to the stonework. Gravel was not recommended for both aesthetic and practical reasons. 4) The concrete steps should be replaced with stone steps bedded on lime. The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 20 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 5) The contract for the drainage was to be carried out by Joslins after the lower decorative stonework had been re-repaired and the mortar had had time to set. It appears that gravel was preferred immediately after the contract and then replaced by turf. In recent years the turf has been removed and replaced with gravel.

The conservation of the stonework included the following: 1) Painstaking cleaning of the heavily blackened surfaces with lime putty poultices, ammonium carbonate poultices with a nebulous spray system. 2) A limited programme of limewatering to friable surfaces due to the concern with mobilising soluble salts within the salt laden Headington stone. 3) Consolidation of friable surfaces and vulnerable edges with a fine lime adhesive mix. 4) A repair programme with a range of lime mortars to both protect and enhance the line and form of the carving. 5) A system of sheltercoats to protect the open textured Headington stone and to facilitate easier cleaning of soiled surfaces in the future. 6) The replacement of four stones on the lower sections of the doorway with reclaimed Headington stone with an axed finish in order to avoid any abrupt change in surface and outline.

Figure 22: 1979 image showing blackened Figure 23: 1982 image after conservation Surfaces subject to blistering and loss of Surface detail

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 21 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 Figure 24: 1979 image of the upper section of the west door illustrating the extent of the blackened calcium sulphate surfaces due to historic environmental pollution

Figure 25: 1982 image of the west door after conservation

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 22 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 The conservation of the stonework included attention to strengthening the line of the mouldings by using a number of lime mortars to match the variety of colour in the surrounding stonework. It was considered important to re-introduce clarity to the lines of the main features of the west front so that the interplay and balance between the 12th century detail and the render would be correct. The subtle variation in the colour of the carved stone, from a deep orange to a warm buff necessitated the use of a selection of complex mortar mixes, limewashes and sheltercoats to allow the eye to run easily from one element to the next.

The idea of re-rendering the west front was developed over the first stage of work in 1981. The technical advantages of reinstating the render were agreed by all interested parties. Iffley Church is situated just outside Oxford on the industrial side of the city and of the banks of the river and therefore still subject to high levels of pollution and humidity. However, the aesthetic argument required ongoing discussions through 1981 to 1982. It was argued that the previous restoration programmes had resulted in the Romanesque features of the west front becoming obscured and the overall design and detail becoming increasingly lost against the exposed rubble walling. A contemporary conservation programme at the 12th century Cathedral of Limburg had already begun a polychromatic re-rendering scheme which lent support to a similar approach being adopted at Iffely.

Figure 26: The west front of Limburg Cathedral after the re-rendering programme in the 1970’s

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 23 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 Professor Baker argued for the render to be considerably paler than the Headington stone and the ashlar to be lime washed to a similar tone. The final compromise was to pitch the colour of the render slightly lighter that the decorative stonework and the ashlar to be repaired and shelter coated with stone coloured mixes.

A more detailed account of the 1981/1982 repair programme and mortar mixes is attached at the end of this report as part of the SPAB’S review of lime renders, 1998.

Figure 27: 1982 image. The west front after the conservation programme

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 24 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 7. Site Inspection, November 2000

In November 2000 a site inspection was made at Iffley Church to assess how the repair techniques were performing after eighteen years. For ease of reference to the current condition report the west front has been divided into zones.

Zone A

Zone B

Zone C

Figure 28: The West Front of Iffley in 2000

7.01 Zone A

Zone A had an overall darker appearance than the lower sections due to the presence of biological growth over both the render and ashlar. The frieze had begun to lose its definition and to disappear into the render. The surface of the frieze appeared cohesive but the sheltercoat was diminished. The joints in the copings appeared sound and the surfaces directly beneath well protected. The beak heads and chevrons on the recessed windows were holding their form and definition with The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 25 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 the repairs holding up well. The sheltercoat had faded out on the outside surfaces but appeared to be still present on protected surfaces. The dexter central capital showed that the sheltercoat and small repairs were holding up very well with clear definition of line and form. The sinister central capital was showing some signs of biological growth and on the dexter inside surface paler areas were indicative of recent stone loss. The two outside capitals which are considered to be part of the 19th century repair programme needed very little repair during the 1982 repair programme. The surfaces of both capitals looked more open and weathered with only traces of the sheltercoat remaining in protected areas. The columns to the capitals on all the windows were in a sound condition with the sheltercoat visible on protected areas. It was noted that the sheltercoat to the Purbeck column was still in place even on the outward facing surfaces. The string course at the bottom of Zone A had become heavily soiled with biological growth and to a lesser extent the supporting corbels. There was evidence that the weathering through the bed of the stone had accelerated with cracks appearing particularly below the sinister side of the central window.

Figure 29: 1982 image of the completed conservation programme showing the extent of the sheltercoat on the decorative detail

Figure 30: 2000 image illustrating the biological growth on the render and the loss of the sheltercoat on outward facing surfaces The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 26 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

7.02 Zone B

There was less biological growth over the render than that on Zone A, except immediately beneath the string course. There was evidence of hairline cracking and weathering at the interface of the ashlar and the render. The deterioration of the render was particularly pronounced on the lower dexter side with clear loss of surface. The stonework on the 19th century rose window appeared to show little sign of deterioration. The string course at the bottom of Zone B had suffered heavy soiling from biological growth

Figure 31: 2000 image of Zone B showing some deterioration at the interface of the ashlar and render

Figure 32 : 2000 image of the dexter side of Zone B illustrating the accelerated decay of the render possibly due to the minimal string course above this section of wall

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 27 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 7.03 Zone C

The render across the lower level of Zone C has suffered the most with discolouration, exfoliation, blistering and loss of surface. The high levels of moisture at ground level had caused the surface of the render to calcify forming a hard, dark brittle layer. The moisture and soluble salts had caused considerable damage at the interface between the hard surface and the soft porous substrate of the lime render. The disrupted and darkened patches over much of the lower section of render had begun to detract from the visual impact of the west door.

Figure 34: 2000 image of a disrupted section of render at lower level

Figure 33: 2000 image of the north side of the west front illustrating the discolouration and disruption of the render near ground level.

The condition of the pointing over the whole of Zone C was excellent with no sign of hairline cracking or failure. Over the upper section of the doorway the repair system was holding up well although the sheltercoat had weathered off on exposed surfaces. The overall form and definition of this elaborate decoration had been retained since 1982. On the lower section of the chevron decoration close to ground level the lime repairs were beginning to show signs of disaggregation and a slight discolouration. The mortar was found to have a high level of salts which indicated that the 1982 lime mortar repairs were fulfilling their function as a permanent poultice drawing moisture and soluble salts away from the original stonework and through their more porous structure. The condition of the 12th century surfaces throughout this vulnerable area, were found to be reassuringly sound; the strain was being taken by the mortar repairs. The sheltercoat had weathered off on outward surfaces although it had survived on protected surfaces.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 28 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 35: 2000 image of the upper section of the west door showing the 1981 system of repairs, pointing and sheltercoat to be performing well

Figures 36 and 37 : 2000 images showing discolouration and early signs of surface breakdown of the mortar repairs to the chevrons

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 29 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 8. 2011 Condition Survey

General Comments

Since the site inspection in 2000 the overall surfaces of the render and stonework have increased levels of biological growth and carbon deposits. The definition of the carved stonework against the render and ashlar has been diminished over the last ten years although the upper elements of the west door still retain a high level of visual impact. The condition of the 1981-1982 lime mortar repairs and render near the base of the west front suggests acceleration of the decay rate over the last ten years in comparison to the period between 1982 and 2000. Of particular concern are areas of new decay on the sinister capitals of the upper stage windows. The lime render is continuing to show evidence of hairline cracking and decay at the interface with the ashlar. The areas of disruption and loss identified on the render at higher level in 2000 have continued to deteriorate but at a slower rate than that seen at lower level.

Figure 38: 2011 image of the West Front

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 30 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 8.01 Zone A

Figure 39: 2011 image of the upper section of the west front

8.01.a The render

The surface of the render on this upper stage has suffered a substantial increase in the amount of biological growth now seen on the surface. The immediate and ongoing effect of this form of soiling is that the clarity of the detailed stonework of the niche, frieze and windows is becoming increasingly obscured against this weathered surface. The presence of the biological growth may result in moisture being retained on the surface of the lime render making it more susceptible to both frost damage and a continuing softening and disaggregation of the surface.

Figure 40: The apex of the gable illustrating the high level of soiling over the surface of the render resulting in the detail of the niche and frieze being lost within this complex background

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 31 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 41: Sinister side of the upper gable illustrating the interplay between the 1982 render and the ashlar. There is evidence of weathering through the weak beds of the ashlar and the decorative frieze as well as hairline cracking at the edges of the render

The render around the niche is showing evidence of pulling away from the substrate and suffering hairline cracking at the interface with the ashlar. The interplay between the render and the ashlar is complex in this particular area thereby creating a rather distracting appearance now that the clean surface of the 1982 render has been obscured. It is estimated that 30% of the render is hollow across the apex although the render inside the niche is sound.

The area of render around the upper stage windows shows similar amounts of soiling to the surface and signs of weakening at the interface with the ashlar. Again the structure of the substrate is a combination of rubble walling and ashlar and as above the ashlar has been left exposed. This has created additional points of weakness and possible decay as well as a variation of tone and texture due to the weathering and soiling over the last thirty years. The assessment from the crane access is that 30% to 40% of the render is showing evidence of detaching from the substrate. There are also pockets of more accelerated decay to the lime render with loss of surface.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 32 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 42: Sinister side of the upper stage of the west front illustrating the decay and loss of surface to the render and the ashlar stones appearing throughout he surface. The frieze is also showing evidence of soiling and decay to the carved detail. This image also demonstrates the stylistic difference between the beakheads on the central window and those seen on the sinister window, which could be Victorian replacements.

8.01.b The Stonework

The coping stones are in a sound condition although there are some open joints at the top of the apex. There are also open joints around the arch of the niche. The chevron detail to the niche, which would appear to be part of the 19th restoration programme is in good condition, except for some minor weathering through a small number of weak beds.

The ashlar throughout the gable is showing evidence of weathering through weak beds with minor spalling and loss of surface. The decorative frieze is covered with biological growth obscuring the detail of the carving and facilitating the retention of moisture on the surface. There are clear signs of weathering through the weak beds and loss of surface detail. A number of the joints in the frieze are open with weathering through the outside edge of the stone.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 33 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 Figure 43: Detail of the frieze showing the weathering through the weak beds of the warmer stone and loss of surface detail.

From ground level the three upper windows retain much of their overall form and detail thirty years after the 1981-9182 programme of repair. However, on closer inspection there appears to be an acceleration of decay and loss of surface to some of the carved detail. The history of the west front would suggest that the central window is part of the original 12th century fabric but the side windows could be 19th replacements due to lowering of the gable end during the 17th century. This would appear to be supported by the stylistic differences, particularly in the case of the beakheads and capitals, between the central window and the side windows.

On the whole the chevron detail on all three windows is in good condition with only isolated areas of decay through the weak beds. There are a small number of joints which are beginning to lose their mortar. There is very little evidence of biological growth or carbon deposits over the chevron decoration; small amounts of carbon can be seen on the underside of the arches of the windows but these accumulations are minimal and as yet are not causing damage to the surface of the stone. There is some biological growth on the top mouldings of the capitals and the column bases.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 34 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 44: A side view of the chevron detail on the central and dexter window illustrating the good condition of this decorative element. This image also shows the repairs and the sheltercoat to the grey column holding up well. The Norman capital is also holding its detail very well. Much of the sheltercoat applied in 1982 has now been lost from the surface. Note also that the bedding and jointing material of the slate cills has weakened and is showing signs of failure

The surfaces of the beakheads on all three windows show little evidence of soiling and are also in an overall good condition. However, there is some evidence of isolated surface cracking and distortion through the roll moulding and weathering down the front edges of the beaks. The joints on the roll mouldings are in a sound condition but there is significant weathering and cracking at the interface between the render and window stonework.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 35 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 45: Detail of the top of the central window showing the 12th century beakheads. There is clear evidence of hairline cracking and distortion through the roll moulding which is in imminent danger of losing this section of surface

Figure 46: Detail of the 19th century replacement beakheads on the dexter window showing what appears to be a stress fracture running through the interface of the ashlar and renderand exploiting a weak bed through the outer face of the beakhead resulting in a substantial crack The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 36 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 The capital and columns on the dexter side of the upper stage windows have remained in good condition despite heavy soiling to the column bases and the mouldings at the top of the capitals. There is some evidence of ongoing weathering through the weak beds which could result in loss of surface detail in the future. The repairs and sheltercoat on the grey column have survived particularly well and there is still some evidence of the 1982 sheltercoat in recessed areas. The jointing material in these more exposed elements has weakened and in some areas been lost.

The capitals on the sinister side of the upper stage windows are showing an acceleration of decay and surface loss over the last 10 years. Of particular concern is the 12th century sinister central window capital which has suffered blistering, exfoliation and loss of surface. The carved surfaces are covered with grey lichen which is not present on the adjacent 12th century capital. The original surfaces feel soft and friable and where the surface has been lost the stone beneath has suffered a significant reduction of structural integrity and is severely weakened. We can see from archive images taken during the 1982 programme of works that this capital appears in a sound condition with all its detail intact. The current rapid rate of decay to this particular element must be considered as a high priority.

Figure 47: 1982 image of the sinister capital Figure 48: 2011 image of the sinister showing it in good condition capital illustrating the decay to the intricate carving and loss of detail. Note the cracking through the column

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 37 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 49: Detail of the sinister capital to the central upper stage window showing the blistering and loss of surface detail

There is also concern for the outside capitals on the upper stage windows which appear to be 19th century replacements. The stone used for these carved details has an open textured friable character which could be the inferior Headington quarried from the 18th century. This later Headington stone has a poor reputation compared to the impressive durability of the stone quarried through the Romanesque and Mediaeval centuries. The capital on the sinister side and the associated chevrons are showing signs of weathering over the whole surface with rapid loss of the surface. As with the adjacent 12th century capital the surface of the 19th century capital is covered with grey lichen which is knitted into the friable surface. It is interesting to note that the 12th century capital on the dexter side of the central window is mainly free from biological growth and in far better condition.

The columns on the sinister side of the upper stage windows have a good surface condition. However, there are three substantial cracks through the nearside column to the central window which indicate structural instability through this section of stone. There is a curious repair at the top of the outside column to the sinister side of the central window which cannot be seen on the 1982 records and appears to be more like a plaster repair than a mortar repair.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 38 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 50: The outer sinister capital on the upper stage windows and associated chevrons showing evidence of surface deterioration. This stonework is likely to be part of the 19th century restoration programme and therefore possibly from the inferior quality beds at Headington quarry. This may explain the accelerated level of decay.

Figure 51: Detail of the 19th century capital Figure 52: The dexter 12th century capital which showing the coarse open texture of the shows little evidence of lichen growth and stone and severe decay of the surface. retention of the 1982 sheltercoat. This detail is in good condition compared to the capitals on the sinister side. The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 39 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

The string course at the base of Zone A has a heavy covering of biological growth which detracts from the carved detail above. The stone for this element is showing signs of weakness through the beds with areas beginning to open up and laminate. The pointing beneath the slate cills has a vigorous form of lichen growing over it and is also subject to cracking and detachment.

Figure 53: The slate insertions on the cill of the dexter window showing signs of weathering through the joints.

Figure 54: Detail of the course below the dexter window showing the presence of the beds through the Headington stone and the deteriorated pointing between the cill and the string course.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 40 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 8.02 Zone B

Figure 55: 2011 image of Zone B

8.02.a The Render

The render over this section of the west front is less soiled with biological growth except for immediately below the string course and on the outside edges of the façade. Through the middle section of Zone B there is evidence of hairline cracking at the interface with the ashlar but overall the render presents a cohesive surface. There is evidence of areas ringing hollow particularly at the juncture of the render day works.

Figure 56: Upper section of the render in Zone B showing the interface with the ashlar as well as the line marking the break in the plastering due to the dayworks schedule.

The render on the outer sections of Zone B has suffered more decay and loss of surface particularly over the dexter side. This may be due to the fact that the layer The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 41 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 of plaster topcoat was very thin and was therefore more susceptible to differential weathering due to the trowelled finish. This method of working the topcoat can draw the lime to the surface thereby creating a calcite skin which will have a different thermal expansion coefficient to the more open textured basecoat beneath. This can result in a separation of the basecoat and top coat due to the movement of moisture and soluble salts to the surface in association with the rise and fall of temperature and the wetting and drying of the surface.

Figure 57: The dexter side of Zone B showing an area of decay and disruption on the render surface. Also note the weak beds running through the decorative roll moulding and the ashlar

Figure 58: A detail off the area of render above illustrating the skin of the trowelled finish with the more open porous structure of the base coat beneath

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 42 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 The overall condition of the render in Zone B would suggest that at least 30% is beginning to pull away from the substrate with evidence of hairline cracking at the interface with the ashlar and a 5% disruption of the surface.

Figure 59: The sinister side of Zone B showing the break in the render due to day works and the exposed ashlar. There is also slightly more biological growth on the outside section of the render

Figure 60: An interesting example of where the render coat has been extended to form a repair to the ashlar. The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 43 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 8.02.b The Stonework

The corbels beneath the stringcourse are beginning to weather through the weak beds and in some cases this is beginning to develop into cracking and loss of surface. It is evident from the archive images of 1981- 1982 and 2000 that this decay mechanism was already underway and these elements had been treated with some minor repairs and sheltercoat. There is little evidence of the sheltercoat surviving on the surfaces and we can now also see that carbon deposits are beginning to format the back of the corbels and on the ashlar behind. It is of some concern that a hard calcium sulphate skin is now forming on the back section of these elements, creating and interface, with the more weathered front sections. This may further exacerbate the decay mechanism already occurring through the weak beds.

Figure 61: The sinister side of the upper section of Zone B showing the weathering through the weak beds of the corbels as well as the formation of a calcium sulphate skin on the protected surfaces at the back and on the ashlar behind

There is particular concern for the corbel immediately over the top of the 19th century rose window. It appears to have been adjusted to fit the space available during the insertion of the rose window and is now subject to extensive cracking throughout the whole section of stone. The stone has buckled under pressure with the central section pushing forward. There are associated open joints on the string course above and the rose window below with the top central stone of the window having dropped out of line causing the glass to buckle. This would all suggest that the insertion of such a large element in the 19th century as the rose window has caused a transference of the considerable loads above through this pinch point at the top of the window.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 44 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 62: The corbel at the top of the rose window displaying extensive cracking and movement indicating compression

Figure 63: Detail of the movement through the joints above the rose window. Note also the central stone at the top of the window has dropped out of line and the buckling of the glass beneath

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 45 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 The 19th century rose window is beginning to show signs of weathering and stress which may be associated with the substantial size of this later insertion to the west front. The pointing and ashlar immediately surrounding the outer moulding are in good condition apart from some weathering through the weak beds of the Headington. However the 1982 flaunching to the top of the window has degraded and is now in some places detached from the substrate.

Figure 64: Detail of the ashlar and render next to the upper sinister section of the outer moulding of the rose window. The pointing is in a sound condition although the flaunching to the top of the moulding can be seen to be detaching from the substrate

The stone used for the chevron detail inside the rose window is Headington but it has closely packed beds which are now showing signs of weathering particularly through the bottom section of the window. Here the surface of the chevrons are cracked both horizontally and vertically and are in danger of loss of detail. The concentration of decay in this area may be due to water running over the surfaces and exploiting any weakness in the stone as well as the possibility of compression at the bottom of this sizable element. There is also evidence of a slight opening out of the joints around the area of decay which may also suggest compression and movement within this part of the structure. The bottom section of the chevron detail on the window also has a covering of biological growth which does appear to be associated with the more advanced areas of decay.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 46 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 Figure 65: The lower section of the rose window showing the area of decay through the chevron detail. The surfaces are also covered with biological growth particularly on the inside of the surrounding moulding. Note also the copper staining associated with the run off from the window fixings

Figure 66: Detail of the area of decay shown above illustrating the extent of the cracking and the presence of voids beneath the surface of the stone

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 47 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 The outer moulding of the rose window is showing signs of lamination possibly due to the considerable size of these thin sections. There are some isolated areas where the joints around the windows are beginning to open out, which may be associated with the laminations. Overall the outer moulding has a light covering of biological growth.

Figure 67: The sinister side of the rose window detailing the outer moulding. The laminations through the stonework can be seen alongside an opening out of the adjacent joints. Note the distribution of the biological growth over the lower section of the chevrons as well as evidence of associated decay and loss of surface. The upper section of the chevron detail is free of soiling and in considerably better condition

The stringcourse at the bottom of Zone B is heavily soiled with biological growth. It is surprising just how much biological growth has appeared over the last thirty years. This may be due to the proximity of St Mary’s Church to the river and the high levels of moisture and humidity experienced throughout the year.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 48 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 Zone B is characterised by the delightful detail of the decorative roll mouldings with flattened beakheads running up both sides of the elevation. The stone is a fine grained Headington with fine bed lines which in some areas are being exploited due to their exposed position. There is also some loss of the jointing material from the very fine joints. However, on the whole this decorative feature is holding up very well. On the sinister side there are some interesting 1982 repairs to the moulding and beakhead which have survived very well. It is interesting to note that much of the general repair mortars used in the 1981-1982 programme of repair were made with a larger sized aggregate than would be used today for fine repair work/

Figure 68: Detail of the decorative roll moulding on the sinister side of Zone B. There is some weathering through the fine beds and joints. Note also the pockets of decay on the render at the interface with stonework. The 1982 repairs and pointing to the ashlar are seen to be holding up well.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 49 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 69: The dexter side of Zone B illustrating the weathering through the fine beds of both the decorative detail and the ashlar. Note the join line in the day works plaster towards the top of the image showing signs of opening up

Figure 70: Detail of the sinister side of the roll moulding decoration showing 1982 repairs to the moulding and to the beakhead performing well. Note the open texture of the mortar and size of aggregate The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 50 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 8.03 Zone C

Figure 71: 2011 image of the lower stage of the West Front

8.03.a The Render

The render in Zone C has a particularly complex surface with extensive decay and loss of surface near ground level. The render within the blind arches just skims over the rag stone walling and was applied in one coat flush to the stonework. The surface was burnished up with a trowelled finish. The result after thirty years is that the trowelled finish has drawn the finer aggregates through to the surface accentuating the trowel marks and causing a rather mottled appearance over the much of the render. The trowelled finish has also encouraged, as is found higher up the elevation, the formation of a hard calcite skin over a porous substrate. This has proved particularly problematic near ground level where the high levels of moisture and soluble salts have been drawn to this interface behind the surface of the render. As the salts move in and out of solution behind the surface they cause intolerable stress on the structure on the pore structure of the mortar resulting in disaggregation and loss of surface. The constant movement of moisture through the render near ground level can also result in a constant draw of lime to the surface. This ongoing process can cause the surface layer of the render to become calcified thus contributing to the formation of an extremely hard, impermeable skin. This often can be seen through the discolouration and darkening of the lime mortars. The lower sections of render within the blind arches are displaying discolouration, blistering, exfoliation and loss of surface as a result of the continuing movement of moisture and salts from ground level becoming trapped behind the surface skin.

The render on the outside sections of Zone C has had less working up of the surface and has suffered slightly less from discoloration and loss of surface. However there is more evidence of biological growth.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 51 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 72: The upper section of the sinister blind arch showing the trowel marks and darkening of the surface where the finer aggregates have been drawn to the surface. Note the rag stone walling peeping through the fine coat of render.

Figure 73: Detail of the top of the sinister blind arch showing areas of friable render below the string course to Zone B. The 1981 pointing despite darkening in certain areas is performing extremely well The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 52 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 74: The sinister blind arch illustrating the darkened and patinated hard surface skin over the upper section of render and where it has been lost due to the movement of moisture and salts over the lower section

Figure 76: A detail from the render inside the dexter blind arch showing the hard calcified skin of the 1982 render peeling away from the soft porous substrate The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 53 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 Figure 77: The lower section of the north side of the west front illustrating discolouration of the calcified surfaces and loss of surface

8.03.b Stonework

Over the upper section of Zone C the ashlar and roll moulding of the blind arches are holding up well since the 1981-1982 repair programme The pointing and repair mortars are performing particularly well despite some darkening of the surface.

Figure 78: Detail of the ashlar between the west door and sinister blind arch showing an area of stable but darkened pointing. There is also a paler area of stone repair on the lower block

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 54 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 The condition of the ashlar near ground level has always been a cause for concern due to the high level of moisture and soluble salts and inappropriate materials butting up to the historic stonework. During the 1981-1982 programme of repair extensive repairs were carried out to protect the badly weathered surfaces of the ashlar jambs to the blind arches and west door. Four reclaimed Headington stones were inserted where the original stonework had deteriorated beyond repair. The poor condition of these repairs in 2011 would suggest that they have taken the strain over the last thirty years and have acted as a sacrificial coat to the original stonework. The condition of the 12th century stonework beneath the repairs is showing signs of salt deposition and some flaking and blistering however the overall profile of the stone is the same as thirty years ago.

Figure 79: The ashlar to the dexter jamb of the dexter blind arch illustrating the decay and loss of the 1981-9182 repairs from the 12th century ashlar. A section of the replacement stone can be seen at the bottom of the picture

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 55 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 80: Detail of the picture above showing the 1981 repair being pushed away from the 12th century stonework through the action of moisture and soluble salts. Over the front face of the original stonework there is evidence of salt deposition

The carved detail of the west door is the centrepiece of the west front at Iffley with its tiers of decorative detail. The overall impression in 2011 is that the repairs to the carved stonework over the upper section of the doorway have performed well although there is little left of the sheltercoat. The middle section has also retained much of its detail although there are isolated areas of accelerated decay. Once again it is the lower section near ground level where the mortars have taken a severe beating but they appear to have been successful in protecting the profile of the 12th century stonework which existed in 1981.

Looking at the medallion carvings on the sinister side of the door first, both the condition of the 1981 repairs and the carved detail is encouraging. The detail is sharp and well defined with only one area of lost surface on the sinister wing of St Mathew in the form of an angel, which has the appearance of impact damage. Although there is some evidence of the 1981 sheltercoat on the bottom medallion the open surface of the Headington stone is now unprotected against accumulations of carbon deposits which can be seen to be occurring within the protected areas of the carving. There is however minimal soiling due to biological growth except for the label stops to the west door.

It is possible to still see the detailed patination of the sculpture repairs although in some cases these have turned a tone or two too dark.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 56 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 81: Sinister side of the west door showing the good condition of both the stonework and the repairs. It is possible to see that there is some slight blackening of the beakheads due to ongoing environmental pollution

Figure 82: The medallions and beakheads on the sinister side of the west door

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 57 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 83: Detail of St John the Evangelist showing the 1981 patinated repair down the middle of the eagle. The fine condition of the repair is reassuring

Figure 84: Detail of St Mark the Evangelist with traces of sheltercoat remaining and a 1981 pointing repair in sound condition. Note that the upward protected surfaces are showing evidence of carbon deposits beginning to form over the surface of the stone

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 58 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 85: A detail of St Mathew showing the loss to the top of the wing. Note how The black has already knitted into the coral structure of the Headington stone

The medallions on the dexter side of the west door were found to be in a more fragile condition in 1981. The running figure and the Pisces symbol of two fishes were particularly unstable. This could have been caused by the run off of water over the top of the arch. The 1981 repairs involved detailed micro repairs and adhesive repairs to fill the hairline cracking. The current condition of the repairs, pointing and original stonework of this section of door is fair, except for the two carvings mentioned above which are continuing to show evidence of ongoing decay both to the lime mortar repairs and the original surfaces.

It is also noticeable that the medallions on this side of the door have a darkened surface except for the very bottom one which still retains traces of sheltercoat.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 59 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 86: The dexter medallions illustrating the darkened surfaces of the carvings. Note the bottom medallion retaining much of the 1981 sheltercoat

Figure 87: The upper section of medallions on the dexter side showing the variation in the Headington stone. The 1981 pointing and stone repairs have performed well although there is a slight loss of jointing material

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 60 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 88: A detail of the Pisces carving showing the blistering and breakdown of the surface of the stone

Figure 89: The detail of the figure, thought to be St Christopher, showing signs of surface deterioration. The dexter arm and bucket are detached from the substrate and in danger of imminent loss. This image clearly shows the survival of the sheltercoat on the carving below

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 61 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 90: The top of the west door showing the deteriorated 1981 flaunching detaching from the stone beneath

The two tiers of beakheads have retained a remarkable level of clarity and detail. This has much to do with the durable quality of the Headington stone being quarried during this period. There is little decay over the upper section of beakheads and the condition of both the minor repairs and pointing indicates that the 1981 programme of repairs are performing well. There is however very little evidence of the 1981 sheltercoat except for in some protected areas. The main cause for concern for the beakheads displayed at the top of the door is the noticeable accumulation of carbon deposits knitted into the surface of the Headington stone.

Figure 91: The sinister side of the west door showing the two tiers of beakheads

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 62 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 92: Image of the well preserved beakheads on the west door showing the intricate detail. Note the traces of historic limewash in the punched decoration on the beaks

Figure 93: Detail of the beakhead showing the carbon deposits knitted into the coral pore structure of the Headington stone The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 63 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 94: The dexter side of the west door illustrating the diminishing level of detail on the beakheads as they move towards ground level. The change in surface tone from a warm brown ochre at the top to a paler surface towards ground level would suggest that the lower beakhead are subject to moisture running over the surface in comparison to the well protected beakheads higher up

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 64 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 95: Detail of a beakhead at lower level showing the sound condition of the 1981 modelled repairs to the surface

Figure 96: Detail of a beakhead at lower level showing the loss of a 1981 surface repair. Remnants of the adhesive mortar can be seen inside the cavity

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 65 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 97: Overall view of the west door showing the four tiers of stepped chevrons.

The chevrons decorating the top and middle sections of the doorway are in remarkable condition retaining their complex geometric form. However the condition of the chevrons for the first metre from ground level has been a continuing cause for concern. In 1981 these lower chevrons were covered with a brittle, hard calcium sulphate skin which was subject to hairline cracking, blistering, exfoliation and loss of surface due to the high level of moisture and soluble salts. During the 1981-1982 programmme of repairs this area was treated extensively with adhesive lime mortars to support and protect the fragile profiles and surface repairs to both recreate the geometric forms and to act as a sacrificial surface to the original stonework beneath. These substantial surface repairs were designed to act as a permanent poultice drawing the moisture and salts from the original stonework into the more porous structure of the lime repairs. In this respect the 1981-1982 system of repairs has proved successful in that over a period of thirty years they have protected the original surfaces and profiles as they have taken the strain of the constant movement of moisture and salts. There has been an acceleration of the disaggregation and loss of the mortar repairs in this area over the last ten years resulting in the some of the original profiles and surfaces becoming exposed to the elements and therefore susceptible to loss.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 66 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 98: The lower section of the chevron detail on the sinister side of the door illustrating the deterioration of the 1981-1982 repair system

Figure 99: The dexter side of the west door showing the loss of the 1981-1982 repairs and the broken surfaces of the 12th century stonework exposed to the elements

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 67 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 100: Detail of a 1982 modelled surface repair which is beginning to disaggregate and display hairline cracking at the interface with the original stonework

Figures 101 and 102: Details of the lower chevrons illustrating the loss of the substantial 1982 repairs. Note on the dexter image how the adhesive mortars applied to the inside of the broken edges have held the 1982 profile. On the sinister image it is possible to see the extent of the depth of these repairs The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 68 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 9.00 Recommendations for Conservation

The survey in August 2011 of the west front of St Marys Iffley confirmed that aspects of the render and repair system carried out in 1981 and 1982 had begun to break down resulting in the exposure of vulnerable 12th detail to the elements. The survey also confirmed that for the most part the lime repair programme had fulfilled its purpose of protection and being sacrificial to the original stonework. The aesthetic impact of the lime repair programme had been retained until 2000 when we began to see a slow blurring of the legibility of the architecture due to the discolouration and surface loss of the render, soiling through biological growth and carbon deposits and loss of some of the mortar repairs at ground level. This reduction in the clarity of the overall form and detail of the west front has continued and accelerated.

It is thirty years since the last major programme of repair to this fabulous west front and there is no doubt that the stonework now requires urgent attention to reinstate the correct protection and revive the legibility of the architecture and ornament.

9.01 The Render

The reintroduction of the render to the west front in 1982 did much to improve the clarity of the architecture and to resonate with Romanesque aesthetics. However, n certain areas the surface was overworked creating structural problems within the layers of plaster and with the substrate resulting in a loss of surface and detachment from the substrate. It is also clear that as the render was taken up to the ashlar and not skimmed over it the decay mechanism at the interface of the render and ashlar has proved to be detrimental to the performance of these materials. As the render weathered in it also highlighted the interplay between the render and ashlar which proved distracting to the key architectural elements of the west front.

However, the 1982 render is a unique example of Professor Baker extending the lime technique to treat a whole elevation. It is an important intervention in the built history of the west front of Iffley church. After some consideration I would recommend that the 1982 render is conserved in order to receive a new limewash. In order to achieve this, the following conservation programme should be carried out: Make a photographic record of the existing render. 1. Protect the decorative architectural elements on the west front. 2. Carry out trial areas to grout the hollow areas of plaster including mixes with dispersed lime, lime putty and hydraulic lime. 3. Pack and grout all hollow areas making sure that there is a cohesive bond between the layers of render and the rag stone substrate. 4. Carry out trials for the insertion of adhesive fillet repairs to consolidate exposed and friable edges in order to receive the render repairs. 5. Consolidate all friable areas with adhesive repairs. 6. Carry out trails for the render repairs. 7. Re- render the lost sections taking care that there is a cohesive bond between the new render and the 1982 render. 8. Carry the topcoat of render over the ashlar ensuring that there is an even and well bonded surface. 9. Carry out limewash trials 10. Apply up to four coats of limewash. 11. Record process and submit with final conservation report. The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 69 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 9.02 The Stonework

Although the 1981 -1982 lime mortar repair programme has for the most part fulfilled its original function there can be no doubt that in many areas this critical protection to the 12th and 19th century stonework is now compromised. There are further areas which indicate an acceleration of decay on previously sound surfaces as well as sections of stone which may present a Health and Safety issue.

902.a Cleaning

It is encouraging to see that the carbon deposited on the intricate carved surfaces between 1982 and 2011 is minimal, particularly when we consider the scale of the cleaning programme in 1981. We have noted that there are small areas of black beginning to accumulate on the protected surfaces of the detail which need to be removed before they bond further onto the surface of the Headington stone. Cleaning trials during the survey confirmed that at this stage much of this black can be removed with damp cotton wool, dental brushes and dental tools with the minimum amount of water.

The biological growth on the string courses, corbels and ashlar will have to be removed in order to carry out both a render and lime repair programme. It is possible to remove a considerable amount of this soiling by dry brushing with small soft brushes. However, further methods will have to be considered to remove any surface residue of the lichen or moss in order to achieve an optimum bond between the stone surface and the lime repair system.

Figure 103: 1979 image of the west door illustrating the extent of the carbon deposits on the carved detail

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 70 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 Figure 104: 2011 image of the upper section of the west door showing minimal soiling over since the cleaning programme of 1981

Figure 105: Detail of a west door beakhead showing the carbon deposits beginningto knit into the coral matrix of the Headington stone

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 71 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 9.02.b Conservation

When considering a system of lime repair it is helpful to bear in mind that the primary function for conservation mortars is protection. It is to provide a barrier between the weather, atmospheric pollution and the endangered stonework; whether it is a mortar joint to prevent water penetration into a wall or a repair to a vulnerable piece of sculpture. It is critical that the mortar should be softer than the material it is protecting. It should be porous enough to prevent an interface forming where soluble salts can be deposited and then recrystallize. It should always encourage salts to travel into the mortar so preventing further damage to the stone. A material that is denser causes damage to the surrounding stone by creating an interface through which water-borne salts being carried through the stone cannot pass.

This current survey confirmed that on the whole the mortars applied during the 1981- 19-82 programme have fulfilled their function of providing a system of protection which is ultimately sacrificial to the stonework. However, there are some adjustments that could be considered when preparing a specification for a future conservation programme.

During the repair programme carried out in the 1980’s very little limewatering was carried out due to the high salt content of the stonework. In order to consolidate friable surfaces to receive a repair, a fine lime adhesive slurry was applied in two to three coats. The adhesive mix had a high percentage of HTI, (see attached review), which may have inhibited the penetration of the slurry through an accelerated set resulting in a brittle skin between the original stonework and the repair. I would advise that it may be advantageous to omit the addition of a pozzolanic material when using fine lime mixes as consolidants. I would not advise lime water.

Recent laboratory research has determined that lime of fourteen years has a molecular structure finer that of the new breed of nano limes. Until the current field trials have been completed on this material, which appears to have a great deal of potential, it would be beneficial to consider specifying lime putty which has matured for at least fourteen years. The lime used for the 1981-1982 programme of repair was a nineteen year old lime and it would seem sensible to keep within these same parameters. This is particularly relevant to using fine lime mixes as consolidants as the older lime should have a far greater potential to penetrate friable surfaces. It may also be worth considering the use of dispersed lime for micro repairs, packing cracks and grouting.

The lime mortar repairs applied in 1981-1982 also had a high percentage of tile dust of up to 25%. I would consider a sharp reduction of the percentage of pozzolanic material to between 3% to 5% in order to ensure that the lime repair mortar is both softer and more porous than the stonework it is designed to protect.

The 1980’s lime mortars have a slightly larger aggregate on the surface repairs than may be necessary. It may be advisable to slightly reduce the aggregate size in a future repair system so that the lime mortars can knit more tightly onto the edges of the Headington stone. It may also slow down the weathering process once the protection of the sheltercoat has been diminished. However, it is important to retain

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 72 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 the correct pore structure after the mortar has cured in order to enhance its frost resistance.

The application of the sheltercoat should continue to be an essential part of the protection system taking into consideration the open pore structure of the Headington stone. The sheltercoat should be applied in up to four very fine coats designed to match the variations of colour in the stone. It should never distract from or obscure the detail of the carving. It should be applied as a palette of colours with fine brushes. I would suggest also that the casein should be kept to a minimum and no more than 5%.

Figure 106: An example of sheltercoat trials using a palette of colours and fine brushes at St Stephen’s Church, Bristol, 2011

In order to develop a conservation programme to the stonework I would advise the following: 1. Record in detail the current condition of the west front. 2. Provide a detailed specification on the correct methods of application for lime based materials. 3. Install adhesive mortar repairs to broken and fragile edges and provide protections before the main programme of works begins. 4. Carry out cleaning trials to remove the biological growth and the carbon deposits from all the stonework. Provide risk assessments and method statements for each material to be considered. I would also advise consulting with a cleaning specialist, such as Restorative Techniques, to assist in determining the most effective and safe way to remove surface soiling in order for the stonework to receive the lime mortar repairs and sheltercoat.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 73 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 5. Clean the stonework in one programme and record in detail the performance of materials and results. 6. Secure any larger sections of laminated stone, such as those found on the string courses and corbels with stainless steel threaded bar, set back from the surface and set in resin. 7. Micro pin with 2mm to 4mm stainless steel threaded bar set in adhesive lime mortar with 10% brick dust all minor laminations which have no structural loads within the stonework. 8. Consolidate friable areas of stone with fine lime mixes prepared to the consistency of milk. 9. Grout and pack all voids. 10. Reinforce vulnerable edges with adhesive lime mortars. 11. Prepare mortar samples. 12. Install the lime repairs. 13. Prepare sheltercoat samples. 14. Apply a sheltercoat to all the stonework. 15. Submit a detailed record of the conservation programme.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 74 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 10. The South Porch

Figure 107: 2011 image of the south door

10.01 Condition

The south porch stonework is in very good condition with very little evidence of loss of surface and outline. The reason why this stonework is in such good order has been attributed to the presence of a porch until 1820 but as yet I have found no archive material or obvious archaeology within the fabric around the south to suggest this. I have not made a detailed search in the records office but this may be helpful if it has not already been done. The door has a continuous inner order with a roll moulding recessed on both sides and filled with rosettes, beasts and quatrefoils. The arch is decorated with chevrons, beakheads and a sawtooth decoration which is simplistic in design compared to the west front door. The inner capitals are highly decorated with duelling horsemen, a centaur suckling her young and Sampson with the lion. The outer capitals are the same design as the Victorian capitals on the outer upper tier windows on the west front. After a closer examination of the carved detail decorating the door I feel that the style and cut of the decoration is more likely to be a high quality Victorian replacement. During the 1981-1982 programme of repair the provenance of the south door was discussed with the architect and Robert The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 75 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 Baker who both were of the opinion that the south door was most likely a well crafted 19th century replacement. However, there is evidence of historic layers of limewash on the inner columns, which may indicate that sections of 12th century stonework could have been reused for the 19th century restoration programme. It was also noted during the 1980’s programme that the Victorian mortar used during the 19th century restorations was a lime rich mix with a high percentage of carbon which is similar to that found on the south porch. It will be essential to compare the 19th century mortars on the west front with the mortars used on the south porch to help determine the exact provenance of the south porch

There is a large section of surface missing at the top of the door where a lead insert has been installed in a very tight space to prevent water running off and over the front of the decorative detail. The loss of stone at this point is probably due to this intervention.

Figure 108: The upper section of the south door showing the lead insert with the loss of surface immediately beneath. Also note the stylistic difference with the west door.

The base of the door is showing some signs of salt deposition and loss of detail due to the ongoing presence of moisture and soluble salts. The gravel runs up to the stonework and also may be causing weathering of the surface due to abrasion. On the sinister side of the door at ground level there is a pink staining on the stone which would suggest fire damage in the past. There are minor areas of hairline cracking and blistering associated with this area of staining.

The stonework is on the whole free from biological and carbon deposits except for small areas at the top of the arch and on the inside orders of decoration.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 76 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 10.02 Recommendations for Conservation

The south door needs minimal conservation due to the sound condition of the stonework. I would recommend the following treatment: 1. Record the current condition of the south door. 2. Inspect the drainage adjacent to the south door 3. Test the performance of the lead insert by water flow tests. Check the condition of the stonework around the lead. 4. Clean off the light carbon deposits with soft brushes and the minimum of water. 5. Carry out fine mortar repairs to the vulnerable surfaces at the base of the door and minor repairs to the remaining surfaces. 6. Discuss the possibility of a reinstating the missing section of moulding at the top of the door with a modelled lime repair. 7. Consolidate where necessary any fragments of historic limewash on the inner columns. 8. Consolidate the existing lime pointing and repoint where necessary. 9. Apply a sheltercoat to the stonework which will provide ongoing protection to the finely carved detail. 10. Remove the gravel at the base of the door and replace with turf. 11. Submit a full conservation report.

Figure 109: An overall view from the top of the south door showing the position of the lead and the organisation of the surrounding stonework

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 77 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 110: The sinister side of the door showing the weathering towards the base as well as the pink staining

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 78 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 Figure 111: The sinister capitals illustrating the quality of the carving as well as the similarity of the outer capital to the 19th replacements on the upper tier windows.

Figure 112 and 113: The sinister side of the door at ground level showing the extent of pink staining possibly due to fire damage as well as evidence of blistering and cracking. There is also evidence of historic limewash which may indicate the reuse of sections of 12th century stonework during a renovation programme to the south porch in the 19th century The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 79 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011

Figure 114: Dexter side of the porch illustrating the variation in style to the west door. Note the pale lime mortar used for the pointing as well as evidence of historic cracking. The lime rich mortar is similar to that used in the 19th century restoration work on the west front

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 80 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011 11.00 The Lime Technique – A Description of Terms

11.01The Lime Technique

A method of consolidating, repairing and protecting friable and damaged historic limestone using a refined system of lime based techniques. This method of conservation was developed by Professor Baker from the 1950’s onwards and was based on a study of medieval and Roman materials and methods of construction and decoration. The techniques were further developed from the early 1970’s through to the mid 1980’s on the west fronts of Wells Cathedral, Exeter Cathedral, Crowland Abbey and Iffley.

11.02 Lime Poultice

A method of removing heavy carbon deposits from carved detail using a slaked lime poultice alongside a nebulous spray system. This method of cleaning has been phased out due to the problems of application and visibility of historic surfaces.

11.03 Lime Water

A method of consolidating friable limestone surfaces with multiple applications of calcium hydroxide in suspension designed to increase the structural integrity of the stone through carbonation. This technique has largely been dropped due to concern of mobilising soluble salts through the amount of water deposited on weakened surfaces.

11.04. Lime Mortar Repairs

The development and use of lime mortar as a consolidation, repair and protection medium for limestone. The primary reason for lime mortar repairs is protection; to provide a barrier between the weather, atmospheric pollution and the endangered stonework. The mortar should always be softer than the material it is protecting and be porous enough to prevent an interface forming with the stone where soluble salts can be deposited and recrystallize. It should also encourage residual salts to travel into and through the mortar, so preventing further damage to the original stonework. Lime mortar repairs can be used to add definition to weathered forms where it is considered appropriate. Generally speaking, one is trying to create a surface that will not distract, detract or mislead, especially where large areas have to be covered.

11.05 Lime Sheltercoat

The sheltercoat is the final stage of the technique and consists of a very fine lime mix passed through a 80s micron sieve. The sheltercoat can contain a small percentage of casein to introduce waterproofing qualities. The sheltercoat is applied in three to four thin coats which are worked back into the surface. The purpose of the sheltercoat is to provide a physical barrier against weathering as well as knitting together both physically and visually the original stone surfaces with the lime repairs. The sheltercoat, if correctly applied, can enhance the overall legibility of the treated stonework.

The West Front and South Porch of St Mary’s Church, Iffley 81 Condition survey and recommendations for further conservation works

September 2011