Page images
[ocr errors][ocr errors]

and the other, a dilapidation survey of 1577 which furnishes some additional particulars. The earlier survey is invaluable for its explanation of the arrangement of the buildings. Canon Raine's paper is illustrated by a plan compiled from these surveys by Mr. Charles T. Newstead, architect, of York, which gives a good idea of the disposition of the buildings, though it takes no account of the precise configuration of the site, and it has apparently been drawn without any reference the evidence which still exists on the spot. It shows the court as rectangular, which it was not, and this involves some inaccuracies, as will be seen by comparing it with the plan here reproduced.

The most obvious of the existing remains (and indeed all that our two writers believed to be mediæval, except the fruithouse) are bishop Skirlaw's building (now used as a dairy) attached to the western part of the north side of Mr. Kettlewell's house, and cardinal Langley's gateway immediately west of the vicarage house. Of these existing remains, Canon Raine wrote thus:

"The greater part of the gateway towards the north may still be seen. It is made of brick, and bears the arms of Cardinal Langley. One bay, also, of the vaulting under the bishop's lodging is in existence, now used as a dairy, and bearing the arms of the munificent Bishop Skirlaw, who erected it. The fruit-house is the only other portion of the palace that has been preserved. It stands on a little bridge crossing the moat, but it has been much tampered with. On the west side of the gate-house there is a building with a somewhat ancient air; but it cannot be ascribed to a period earlier than the reign of Charles II. Of course some old materials have been used up in it; and they may also be traced in the modern parsonage house which is at a short distance from it.”1

The Rev. W. Hutchinson followed Canon Raine, with some amplifications, in making the existing gateway to be the north gateway, but, recognizing that the present dairy was obviously a porch, he made it to be the porch at the west end of the bishop's lodging, which was the northernmost building on the east side of the court. If these attributions were correct, the northern side of the court must have been on the line of the present vicarage house and of the house to the east of it, and the western side must have extended into the present churchyard 1 1 Op. cit., p. 302.


considerably to the west of the old wall which bounds the vicarage garden on the west. Testing this view by the relative positions of the buildings as described in the survey of 1561, the actual distance between the west side of the porch and the east side of the gateway opening is about 117 feet, whereas the distance from the north gateway to the porch at the west end of the bishop's lodging (which Mr. Hutchinson suggested) cannot, according to the survey, have been as much as half this length. Even if the porch were a bay of the vault beneath the bishop's lodging, as Canon Raine suggested, the same objection would apply in less degree. Moreover the existing porch was obviously entered from the north, and was disengaged on three of its sides, east, north, and west. This would be impossible for any part of a vault under the bishop's lodging, and the porch at the west end of the bishop's lodging must certainly have been engaged on the east, and almost certainly entered from the west. Nor could this porch have been further to the north than the gateway, as it actually is. It is evident therefore that these attributions must be rejected.

The true explanation is that the present dairy is the porch of the great hall built by bishop Skirlaw, and the existing house to which it is attached represents the structure of the hall itself. The existing gateway is the western gate recorded as having been built by cardinal Langley, and it led from the south-western corner of the court to the close and orchard. The court lay to the north of these buildings, and the lines of the buildings around its west, north, and east sides are fixed by the existing walls on the west and north sides of the vicarage garden, and by that on the east side of the garden in front of Mr. Kettlewell's house.

I will now proceed to show, with the aid of the accompanying plan1 (fig. 1), how this explanation fits the existing facts and the description of the buildings in the survey of 1561. This plan is simply intended to illustrate the relation of the existing remains to the general plan of the house, and makes no attempt to show in detail any of the buildings which have been destroyed. For a conjectural plan of these, I must refer the reader to Mr. Newstead's plan.

1 The plan (fig. 1) has been drawn from my own measurements. The destroyed western building has been added from the ordnance survey map of Howden of 1847 (sheet 2), scale 5 feet to one mile.

On my plan, existing walls

The building which this map shows as then standing on the site of the present vicarage house had nothing to do with the mediaval plan.

which are either of mediæval construction or represent mediæval walls are shown black; mediæval buildings, either existing or known to have existed, are distinguished by a red tint, and modern buildings by dotted shading. It will be convenient to deal with each side of the court in the order of the descriptions in the survey of 1561, and to quote so much of these descriptions as is necessary to an understanding of the plan.


"The gate entring into the manor house is towerds the towne on the northe side of ye courting; & the howseng buyldid on the said syde of the quadrant dothe conteyne, accomptinge the gatehouse, and all from the entring in, to ye westwarde, cxxv (fote) in lenketh, and in wydenes xviij fote, all this storye througheoute. There are severall rowmes benethe, fyve on this northe syde; and, over the same, alofte, vj rowmes, wherin iiij chymneys. The utter side of this quadrant to the townewarde is bulded uppon a broke-wall to the upper roufe; and the ynner side wt tymber & bryke walls betweene The utter syde of all this storye is imbattled wt freestone. Frome the entringe in of the said gate towards th'est is no buylding of the B. house, but is inclosed wt a bryck wall, weh cont. from the gate to th'estwards in lenkth xlviij foote."3

All this northern range has disappeared, except its northern wall which extends as far eastward as E (see plan, fig. 1). The ordnance map of 1847 shows that the building on the west side of the court extended through to the north wall, and the northern range described in the survey would therefore begin on the west at A. This map also shows that the western part of the northern range, ABCD, was then standing, and this was apparently destroyed when the western range was demolished. The dotted lines EFGC on my plan show the remainder of the northern range, set out so as to give the whole range the mean internal length of 125 feet which the survey gives as its length including the gateway,5 and this leaves a

1 The walls in many places have been much altered or rebuilt, and in some places they are so much covered with creepers that it is almost impossible to see their construction. Nevertheless there are indications to show that all the walls shown black on the plan represent mediæval walls.

2 Except the vicarage house, which is indicated in outline, without shading. On the plan, Mr. Kettlewell's outbuild

ings and the modern wall between his
garden and the vicarage garden are

3 Raine, op. cit., p. 298.
4 See infra.

5 Mr. Newstead's plan figures the length of the northern range as 125 feet excluding the gateway, but the survey clearly states that this length included the gateway.

« PreviousContinue »