36 Old Maltongate, Malton North

“…the little grey weatherbeaten building, built by ignorant men, torn by violent ones, patched by blunderers, that has outlived so many hopes and fears of mankind, will look friendly and familiar and will be of no offence to the beauty and majesty of the streets. Rather, I believe it will be honoured the more for the many minds and hands of men and women that have dealt with it, and that they will guard it as a symbol of all the triumphs and tribulations of art, the constant companion and expression of the life and aspirations of the world.”

William Morris Number 36 Old Maltongate is situated close to St Leonard’s Church and within the bounds of the lost Norman town wall. There were once buildings behind the house which have been demolished in the past. These were most likely built against the town wall. The road, Church Hill follows the line of the Norman wall. The majority of buildings in Malton within the site of old town wall retain extensive medieval fabric, albeit often disguised by later alteration works, especially by the later introduction of sash windows and/or brick facades.

Number 36 is one of two cottages into which a larger house was divided in the past.

The ground floors of both were shops within living memory. Number 38 retains its shop-front window. That of number 36 has been blocked relatively recently and has a smaller sash window. The blocking is of brick laid in sand and cement. The inside walls of the ground floor had been rendered in the same in recent years, as had the exterior of the rear elevation. This procedure has had a detrimental effect upon both the historic character and the historic fabric of the building. All ordinary Portland cement renders were removed and lime mortar or earth renders reinstated. In places, the stonework was left exposed, pointed with lime mortar. There is compelling evidence that the earliest decorative finish of this house was lime-washed stone. Earth-based daub renders with thin haired lime mortar finish coat were a later addition.

Daub render to chimney, attic level Recycled earth plaster, attic

The cottages are separated by a passageway which was probably an earlier front entrance when the house was a single dwelling. The doors to either side are likely to date from the time at which the house was divided. The stone doorjamb to the east of the present front door of no. 36 shows every sign of having been broken through: the jamb has not been ’built’; there are facing stones and rubble fill between visible. The inner quoin is not true, dipping in and out of plumb where walling stones were removed to form the opening. Door jamb during making good, loose rubble fill removed

The exterior of the house is of squared, coursed Malton Oolite limestone, with some local calcareous sandstone, although the distribution of the latter would suggest that it was introduced during repair works over time, as well as for infilling the former shop-front. The limestone blocks are of relatively uniform dimension, between 7-8 inches in the bed. The east end has rusticated sandstone quoins which were probably an addition during an 18th or 19th century smartening up of the building. The west end does not, but might have had. A portion of this end has been absorbed into the fabric of the public house adjoining, presumably during the rebuilding of this during the 19th century.

That this occurred is demonstrated by the existence of some 2/3 of a doorway at the west end of no. 36, only visible from inside, beneath a substantial oak lintol. This was almost certainly the original doorway into the house, being a ‘heck’ entry onto the side of the inglenook fireplace.

Furthermore, there is a window in the west gable beneath oak lintols, which has been blocked by the adjoining pub, the roof of which is now higher than that of number 36.

New stone has been installed during recent repair works over a new treated softwood lintol. This would preferably have been of oak and less regular.

Earth mortar; earth render, west gable, attic level

The inside walls are of coursed limestone rubble, bedded in mud mortar. This is composed of crushed limestone, sand, silt and about 5% clay. The walls were originally, and in large areas remain, plastered with earth, 1 to 2” thick, with straw but also small twigs, stones and ceramic fragments included. This daub base was subsequently plastered with haired lime plaster, around ¼” thick. These materials remain generally sound and entirely fit for purpose. There are areas where plaster has failed. These areas were repaired using the daub plaster that was removed. This was ‘knocked-up’ with water and reused. Sharp sand and mineralised hemp was added to reduce the shrinkage that had been a feature of the original recipe. A finish coat of yak-haired lime mortar was applied over. Wherever original lime surfaces were basically sound but a little worse for wear and had been patched up over the years, a thin finish coat was applied over. Limewash was applied to these and directly to some early earth rendered surfaces.

The ground floor of no 36 is one room. It has a large inglenook fireplace beneath a 10” x 10” bressummer that spans the depth of the room, some 174”. The bressummer carries a larger chimney breast built of limestone rubble, laid in mud mortar.

There is a 30 x 37 inch fireplace within this on the first floor. It has a flat brick arch with limestone key-stone and a brick back. These bricks are 2 ¼” high and date probably from the early 17th century, although they may well be earlier.

The jambs of the inglenook were formed at the front, beneath the bressummer, by two circular columns. These are of local, fine-grained limestone from quarries at Hildenley, and are made up of 8 (seen) drums each. (Stone from the Hildenley quarries was used to build Old Malton Priory, at Kirkham Abbey and the original church in Norton. It was later used extensively in Malton on Strickland family projects). Removal of damaging sand and cement render to the sides of these revealed the whole stones of the columns, which are keyed into the brick return wall and have a rebate to their inside edges, the outer arc of the circle fading into the wall-line. This strongly suggests that if the columns were not made for this location, they form the jambs of a doorway or window. Their section is typically Norman. They were almost certainly recycled from Old Malton Priory after the dissolution, which is to say, after 1538-40. Indeed, very similar columns remain inside the Priory church, as part of clustered attached columns within the surviving south west tower, against the west wall. The north tower was demolished, and it is likely that the columns in 36 Old Maltongate were removed from the lost tower. The inglenook was probably installed some time after this date, therefore. However, it is at least possible that they were removed from the Priory church before its suppression in 1539. The north west section of the Priory nave was remodelled in the late C15 or early C16. The west bays of the nave of the north arcade “ were remodelled (at this time), after a fire. It was probably also in connection with that fire that the NW tower was allowed to decay and disappear. The third pier from the west is panelled in two tiers and has on the abacus an inscription and rebuses referring to Prior Roger Bolton, who ruled the priory about 1500” ( Pevsner, The Buildings of , Yorkshire, the North Riding, p233). If the columns were recycled before 1539, this would make it likely that the house belonged at that time to the Gilbertine Priory. Attached columns, Old Malton Priory Church

The fire opening has been reduced in several phases. Initially, it was made smaller by the introduction of two brick piers which were surmounted each by half of a semi-circular Hildenley limestone door arch (see scale drawing attached). These spring from simple moulded corbels which have been built into the back wall of the chimney, and are surmounted by what appear to be two complementary arch springer

stones. They are large, suggesting that the arch that sprung from them was of a significant span. The width of the doorway that would have been formed by the arch stones was wide, 53”. Both arch and corbels are most likely Norman and would have been taken from the Gilbertine Priory in Old Malton, probably from ancillary buildings long demolished. Half of door arch, corbel at springing line

Stone returns to columns These recycled stones were used in a utilitarian manner to screen otherwise exposed floorboards and joists from the heat of the fire. This was necessary at this time because of a general raising of the ceiling level by 10”, the joists of which had previously rested upon the top of the bressummer. It is unlikely that in their intended manifestation these stones ever formed part of the house. It is not impossible, however.

This first size reduction is difficult to date, the bricks being the only indicator. They are, however, bedded in lime mortar. The earlier brick returns behind the columns are bedded in mud mortar.

In the Victorian period, a further reduction took place, probably associated with the introduction of a cooking range. A second pillar of brick was added to the north; a bread oven was probably destroyed, a section of the domed chamber of which survives, although a smoke chamber remained behind and within the inglenook to the north. Later still, a further reduction saw the introduction of a cast iron fire surround with small coal grate. This is not centred on the chimney stack and is backed up with sand and cement-bedded bricks, including modern Brick. It is likely that this surround was reclaimed or even reproduction and that it was introduced at the same time as a general (and inappropriate) renovation of the ground floor, during which a probable flag-stoned floor was concreted over a plastic dpm, and the walls sand and cement rendered, early daub plaster having been removed. Inside of chimney, daub-parged

Removal of the cast iron surround and the infill behind revealed considerable erosion of the back wall of the chimney. The heat of centuries had caused significant disintegration of the limestone wall, as far back as the inside of the facing stones without in places. This decay had been patched over the years with bricks of various dimensions (and periods of manufacture). The degree of damage that the wall had sustained, and this before any infilling or repair, supports the notion that the house is of considerable age.

There was evidence that a brick fireback had once existed, tied to the brick walls to each side. Several bricks protruded at right-angles to these at low level. A new brick fireback was built to this line, which was a brick’s width within the original wall-line of the stone wall of the cottage/chimney. The new bricks were recycled 2” clamp bricks. The inner hearth was excavated to find a sound footing for this wall. This revealed remnants of a succession of brick hearths amongst the loose sooty debris. A firm surface was found 10 ¾” below current floor level. This was of earth and crushed limestone, clearly compacted and with still a smooth surface in places. It is very likely that this constitutes the rammed earth floor of the earliest dwelling, quite possibly pre-dating the introduction of the stone fireplace and chimney. Probable rammed earth floor within hearth

Several bricks of an earlier hearth remained in place 7” below current floor level.

The base of the brick walls that return from the stone columns, as well as of a largely intact (although subsided) brick hearth is 3” below existing floor level.

It was decided to retain the recycled early stone arch-stones in their current orientation. They have been damaged, they perform a necessary function of fire prevention and remain at least within the building as an indicator of their former purpose. Practically, to reopen the inglenook to its full original width would create a huge draught problem for the owner. Furthermore, the room is now considerably smaller in volume than that which the inglenook was originally designed to heat, having been reduced by the later introduction (C18) of a central passageway, as well, in all likelihood, by the introduction of a first floor. The heat that would be produced by such a fire would be excessive. It was considered desirable, however, to recapture some of the quiet majesty of this fireplace; and to allow of a better appreciation of the grandeur of the chimney than is currently available.

To this end, a new Portland stone fire surround was introduced. Portland stone is geologically similar to the finer grained of the limestones local to Malton, and of similar character and appearance.

The fire surround design is intended to echo typical, simple surrounds of the early 17th century.

The stone and brick chimney stack that rises from the bressummer is, along with a surviving roof truss, the outstanding architectural feature of the house. Its sides are initially supported by two oak beams that pass from bressummer at front, to west wall at rear. The original seat of the fire is demonstrated by a 27 ½” x 4” recess in the house wall. The stack is of considerable volume. In the attic, the stone stack becomes brick at 55” above floor level and is joined by a brick flue from the adjoining building. The bricks are of early date and are, like the stone, bedded in earth mortar. As throughout the building, the quality of the masonry is high, and reflects the originally high status of the building, which was likely a merchant’s house. There is a high probability of there being an abandoned, although not necessarily in-filled cellar/undercroft beneath.

To the first floor, there is a smaller fireplace, with a flat brick arch, the keystone being of limestone. First-floor fireplace; new oak mantle and brickwork

As referred to above, to the north of the chimney stack there is a large cupboard space, its floor at the earliest first floor level. The room-side wall of the cupboard was of oak stud and plaster panel construction. Removal of modern plasterboard revealed the remains of a daub plaster with haired lime plaster finish-coat within. The original laths had been removed, however, before the application of plasterboard. There was no practical way of rescuing this. New oak laths were nailed to the original stud wall, the few surviving early laths retained. These were rendered with a coarse lime mortar, which was finished with a sponge float and lime-washed. The back wall of the cupboard had modern matchboard against it at higher level. This was removed to expose a daub and lime plastered wall. The lower rear wall was recessed below a plaster boarded wall projection, the thickness of the end wall of the house. Removal of the plasterboard revealed a substantial oak beam, with smaller beam behind and an unreduced oak beam resting on an early brick infill wall. The wall above the beams was of limestone rubble, laid in earth. Plainly, this was formerly an opening that predates the reconstruction of the public house next door. It would seem rather wide for a window, and was most likely access to rooms in an adjoining building, or part of what was at the time the same building. The truncated former doorway below this cupboard on the ground floor already suggests that the house extended further to the west at one point in its history. The discovery of this former opening would add further weight to this idea.

Stud wall, lime plastered on lath, original hearth bricks reused

It would seem at least possible that the inglenook and chimney stack is an introduction subsequent to the construction of the house. The mud mortar differs somewhat in character to that of the walls, being paler and with perhaps a small amount of lime included, certainly with the inclusion of finely crushed limestone. The laying of the stonework might be considered less accomplished. The chimney is parged throughout with daub, of similar character to that on the walls. The return walls of the ingle are built of 2 ¼” brick, and are early, but they are only minimally tied in to the rear wall--they butt up against it.

There is strong evidence that the earliest interior decoration of the house was lime washed stone. There are remains of a white, blue and even a black lime wash to numerous stones in the south-west corner of the ground floor. There is also a blocked window in the south wall at the junction of this wall with the west gable wall. Early daub and haired lime plaster pass behind the incoming stone of the south wall, which is tied in to the west wall below the window. This window (as also the blocked door to the north-west) may well predate the introduction of the inglenook and chimney stack, suggesting an original construction date for what might have been an open hall during the 15th or 16th centuries. That said, a heck entry hall, with window at the other end of the inglenook is a not untypical C17 building plan in the north of England.

It would seem at least possible, however, that the inglenook and the surviving daub plaster (with finish coat of haired lime plaster) date from a general refurbishment of an earlier open hall house during the early 1600s. At a later date, all floor levels were raised.

The west end of the house may have been an open hall, or smoke room, the east end forming the service end of the building. The floor joists of the first floor carry on over the central passageway. The wall that divides the passage from the west end is of C18 brick and is only one brick thick. The wall to the other side of the passage is thicker and older and supports a beam that runs east/west.

The structural walls are generally 23” thick, excluding plaster. A section of the rear wall on ground and first floors is considerably thinner. This section of wall is bridged by 7”x7” oak beams over the ground floor, a 7” x 5” beam, laid flat, over the first floor. The larger beam over the former ground floor opening is clearly a recycled principal rafter from a robust roof truss. This suggests that there was once an ell extension at this point.

There remains a heavy central oak roof truss, and purlins visible in the attic. There is a robust oak collar at the apex of the truss. There are joints in the truss blades/principal rafters, now disused, that held braces. The bracing was most probably removed to allow passage along the length of the building in the attic space at the time that this was incorporated as living space. Typically, this occurred during the 17th century. If so, however, this arrangement was later changed again, the stud wall that currently divides the roof space being of an early date. Oak studs carry broad oak laths which are daub plastered to both sides, a finish coat of haired plaster being laid over this. A section which may have been a narrow doorway has sawn Victorian lath with haired plaster only. The original truss design adds weight to the possibility that this house was originally an open hall. Truss, collar, loose daub plaster within studs

Truss and stud wall during earth and clay plastering of lath Detail of roof truss and collar, after earth and lime plastering

chimney stack and blocked window before conservation, attic Same, after conservation, earth plaster retained to side of chimney

Truss and stud wall after repair and conservation Chimney stack, attic level, lime pointed Chimney before repointing, earth mortar

Earth mortar as found (and left)

To the north of the chimney stack, at attic level, there is a former window, now blocked by the public house adjoining, which was much altered in the 19th century. This was heavily painted with gloss paint. Removal of this revealed a series of oak lintols, one at least of which has a mortice joint to its face, demonstrating its reuse from a timber frame. The window had been blocked with haired lime plaster over brick. The top three treads of the staircase to the attic would seem to be early. A later ladder stair has been attached. The original staircase was probably a half-round stair that passed into the room below.

This surviving truss is of architectural significance, particularly as so feworiginal roof trusses remain in Malton.

The early roof covering was likely to have been thatch.

The ground floor was earlier some 10” lower than now. The ceiling/first floor also was about this much lower, the joists resting upon the Bressummer. The existing joists are some 3”x 6” in section. The majority have a small bead moulding on at least one underside edge, a joist section found throughout early stone buildings in New Malton.

These may or not be the same joists as were previously lower. There is a cupboard to the right of the chimney breast on the first floor, walled with mud and lime plaster (previously on lath, the remnants of which are unusually wide and irregular split chestnut) between oak uprights. The floor of this is at the earlier overall first floor level.

To the south east side of the cottage, there is a window which was previously a doorway. This would have been accessed via a stone or wooden staircase and was quite possibly the access to first floor sleeping quarters when the west end of the house was still an open hall.

The existing first floor window opening to the north is likely original, having well-built reveals, but it was originally deeper than now. It was essential that the materials used in the repair and conservation of this building were compatible with the original structure. The builders of this house intended it to be a flexible, breathing structure. The introduction of materials appropriate only within the context of modern building would have compromised, and have already compromised the ability of this structure to perform as its builders intended.

The application of hard cement mortars to the inside and outside of the south elevation at ground floor level had led to excessive moisture retention within the fabric of this wall: the mud mortar was wet and over moist to the full height and depth of the wall. Elsewhere in the building, where original plasters and finishes remain, this was not the case. There had been significant mobilisation and subsequent crystallisation of ground salts behind the cement renders, leading to the fragmentation of stones even on the inside of the building. The ill-advised introduction of an electrolosis damp-proofing system had only concentrated and accelerated the dampness in particular areas. It was important to re- establish the breathability of all walls, requiring the reintroduction of lime (and earth) mortars. Whilst lime mortars would have been sufficient for this purpose, it was considered important to use earth mortars as well, where possible and appropriate, in keeping with their previous (and successful) use within the building in its past. new travertine floor, new brickwork to thicken exterior wall, recycled bricks Column cleaned and repointed; brickwork lime plastered

All breathable surfaces were painted with lime wash; white or pigmented. Modern surfaces were painted with white emulsion.

The fundamental principle in the approach to this building was the retention and conservation of the maximum historic fabric and detail.

My estimation is that this house was built around 1500, possibly before; that it was originally an open hall, with rammed earth floor and lime- washed stone walls. Access to first floor rooms to the east of the hall was via a stair way at the back of the house. It had no built fireplace at this time. At a later date, sometime after 1540, the stone fireplace was built, as well as an off-shoot to the south side and possibly one to the west. Floors were introduced at this time over the hall. Earth plaster was applied to the stone walls and lime finish plaster over this. At a later date, probably in the 17th century, the floors were raised and a door was formed in the centre of the house on the north side. Later still, probably in the 18th century, the house was divided to include two shops. The central doorway became access to a central passageway; new doorways were formed to either side of this.

New Portland chimney piece; recycled C16/C17 bricks

The dominant character of this house is, however, of an early Seventeenth Century town-house, and this will be appropriately reflected in the use of materials and finishes.

Mortar mixes:

Lime wash : matured Chalk Hill putty lime and potable water, supplied by Conservation Supplies;

Pointing and bedding mortar: 6 parts sharp sand: 4 parts crushed limestone, 5mm to dust; 4 parts NHL 2.0 ( Singleton Birch); Plaster: Basecoat: 10 parts sharp sand: 2 parts NHL 2.0: 2 parts putty lime;

Finish coat: 10 parts kiln-dried fine silica sand; 2 parts NHL 2.0; 2 parts putty lime;

Earth mortars: daub from house walls reused: 20% by volume sharp sand added, as well as chopped hemp ‘straw’.

A new Travertine Marble floor was laid ( on lime mortar) to the ground floor. This was Travertine ‘Opus Romana’ supplied by Lapicida, of .

A Note on Timber Decay

A significant number of historic timber lintols that bridged former openings, as well as the central roof truss and purlins in the attic room have been exposed during the course of the works. These were previously concealed, either boxed with modern planking or rendered with sand and cement mortar. Whilst some of these timbers would previously have been rendered with daub and plaster, the decision was taken to leave them exposed. The majority of these timbers show signs of insect attack, mainly woodworm, with some death watch beetle flight holes also. It is probable that this insect attack is historic, rather than ongoing. However, even if woodworm, or even deathwatch beetle remains active, this should not be a cause for concern. Treatment with insecticides is not recommended: such treatments are hazardous for other animals, including people.

Woodworm and death watch beetle thrive in conditions of excessive dampness; in the absence of high moisture levels, their ability to attack the heartwood of oak, or first growth pine (from which the joists will have been cut) is extremely limited. Even the purlins in the attic, which show the greatest level of insect induced decay retain more than sufficient heartwood to perform the job required of them. Their replacement would be unnecessary as well as ethically undesirable.

The conditions in which beetle or worms might thrive have been removed along with the impermeable coverings to the beams; condensation ought not to be a problem within the house as now designed: breathability has been re-established throughout and moisture will pass in and out of the building by way of gentle diffusion.

It is strongly recommended that cement-based renders are removed from the rear elevation as soon as possible to fully re-establish the building’s ability to perform as its builders intended.

You must either make a tool of the creature, or a man of him. You cannot make both. Men were not intended to work with the accuracy of tools, to be precise and perfect in all their actions. If you will have that precision out of them, and make their fingers measure degrees like cog-wheels, and their arms strike curves like compasses, you must unhumanize them. All the energy of their spirits must be given to make cogs and compasses of themselves. All their attention and strength must go to the accomplishment of the mean act. The eye of the soul must be bent upon the fingerpoint, and the soul’s force must fill all the invisible nerves that guide it, ten hours a day, that it may not err from its steely precision, and so soul and sight be worn away, and the whole human being be lost at last--a heap of sawdust, so far as intellectual work in this world is concerned: saved only by its Heart, which cannot go into the form of cogs and compasses, but expands, after the ten hours are over, into fireside humanity. On the other hand, if you will make a man of the working creature, you cannot make a tool. Let him but begin to imagine, to think, to try to do anything worth doing; and the engine-turned precision is lost at once. Out come all his roughness, all his dullness, all his incapability; shame upon shame, failure upon failure, pause after pause: but out comes the whole majesty of him also; and we know the height of it only when we see the clouds settling upon him. And whether the clouds be bright or dark, there will be transfiguration behind and within them.

John Ruskin, ‘The Nature of Gothic’, The Stones of Venice.