Blue Bridge Lane
&
Fishergate House
Printed from the APC web site: navigation and non-essential images removed.
Please view on-line for full content (URL at end of document).
A total of forty-eight fragments of architectural stone were recovered from the Blue Bridge Lane site with a further three from excavation at Fishergate House. Almost all represented fragments of architectural limestone; however, no complete pieces were recovered. Most exhibited a high degree of erosion and extensive damage, resulting in the loss of diagnostic surface treatment such as tooling, mortar and limewash. This poor survival has made identification difficult; further damage also resulted from reuse.
Of the fifty-one fragments, twenty-seven can be grouped together as facing stone, employed in mass wall construction. In addition, a single fragment from Fishergate House (Find number 318) was identified as core fabric, due to the absence of worked surfaces. It had subsequently been re-used as part of a composite coffin.
Mortar adhered to a number of dressed and damaged surfaces. Find number 335, for example, has much of its moulding concealed by a hard lime mortar, with additional rubble core still attached (conjoining Find numbers 334-335).
ARCHITECTURAL PIECES
Nineteen of the remaining fragments exhibited evidence for moulding or decoration. The simplest of these were fragments of a plain chamfered base or plinth. Five such blocks survive within the assemblage, with short chamfers on one face only, suggesting bases. Find number 339, however, had the much steeper chamfered face of a plinth. A similar profile was identified on Find numbers 346 and 361, but these stones were too fragmentary to allow any definite conclusions to be drawn.
A further five pieces appeared to have come from columns, with three different types represented. Find numbers 343 and 370 had gently curved dressed faces, with angled sides, suggesting that they formed sections of much larger feature (Find number 343, Face B). These are easily mistaken for fragments of voussoir, which can also have curved faces. However, these are roughly cut, with the dressed surface reserved for the visible face. Two such pieces were found in the Blue Bridge Lane assemblage. The second column type was more angular in design, and formed part of a continuous design, probably within an open arcade. A more ornate form of column was identified from Find numbers 4403 and 906. These represent complete sections of smaller columns, 0.11m in diameter. These are likely to have been decorative rather than structural, probably adorning an arched opening.
The most decorative pieces represented sections of stringcourse, with two different designs present. Find number 348 represents a plain chamfer, fillet, hollow chamfer design (Find number 348, Face B). Both Find numbers 334 and 335 exhibited a more complicated profile with chamfer, fillet, hollow and quarter roll (Plate 19). This arrangement is of an earlier date, suggesting that more than one building is represented by the assemblage.
The remaining fragments were tentatively identified as sections of doorway, due to the presence of rebates. Find number 336 represents part of a jamb, with engaged column decoration (Find number 336, Face C; Plate 20). Find number 376 had a more simplified chamfer design; however, the curvature of the chamfer suggests that it formed part of the arched head of the opening (Find number 376, Face D).
 |
 |
| Plate 19 | Plate 20 |
TOOLING
There were two types of tooling presented by the assemblage, with most fragments exhibiting some evidence for dressing.
The most common technique was 'striated tooling', left by axes, adzes or straight bladed chisels. The resulting pattern is identified by parallel marks on the surface of the stone, vertical, horizontal or diagonal, and was used for both rough working and fine decorative designs. The Blue Bridge Lane fragments exhibited two grades of striated tooling. There was a predominance of fine, diagonal tooling employed on the worked faces of sixteen fragments, with a further two having vertical markings. Coarser, diagonal cuts were also visible on the unworked surfaces of seven stones. In addition, broad chisel tooling was identified on a further four fragments. Both of these techniques were used on those surfaces engaged within the wall, where fine working was unnecessary.
The second technique identified in the assemblage was 'claw tooling'. This is produced by a toothed chisel which leaves a row of small indentations on the surface of the stone. Coarse tooling was present on eight fragments, with only two examples of fine claw tooling on a sculpted surface (Find numbers 348 and 376). Two fragments had claw tooling as a secondary dressing, with the more common striated tooling visible beneath (Find numbers 349 and 376). This suggests some re-use of the stones prior to their inclusion in the boundary wall. Claw tooling has been identified by Graves (1996, 227) as appearing in York c.1200, an idea supported by Stocker (quoted in Peacock 1998, 23). If correct, it is possible that these stones originate from the original priory foundation in the late 12th century; however, the dating of tooling is an inexact science. While claw working may appear at a later date, striated tooling was not abandoned, and continued in use throughout the medieval period.
SURFACE TREATMENT
A total of four fragments exhibited some evidence of surface treatment (Find numbers 339, 343, 354, and 361). Limewash was present on all four, while traces of red pigment were recorded on three fragments. Where present, this was reserved for dressed faces, suggesting that it related to their original function, rather than any subsequent re-use.
Mason's marks were identified on only two of the fragments, although more may have been lost due to damage and erosion. Find number 353 had a simple incised cross on its upper surface. In contrast, Find number 370 had an 'M' carved into its dressed face, suggesting that the stone was partly concealed (Find number 370, Face C).
Although a high percentage of the surviving fragments represent simple facing stone, a number of more interesting fragments have survived. The quality of this stonework suggests that much of it came from a high-status medieval building. Of particular note are the large fragments of column and voussoirs, which originated from large arched arcades. There is also evidence for more precise decorative features such as the moulded stringcourse fragments and decorative column pieces.
Most of the stonework from Blue Bridge Lane falls into a late period of reuse. Stratigraphically, the finds are associated with Period 9 (late 16th century onwards), which is unsurprising since all fragments displayed clear evidence for reuse, sometimes more than once. Subsequent re-use was evidenced by the presence of mortar on a number of dressed surfaces, thus obscuring some diagnostic information. However, much of the damage to this stonework appears to have been caused prior to its re-use, as suggested by the presence of mortar on a number of broken surfaces. Since the priory was dissolved in 1538, with the church falling into disuse soon after (Burton 1996, 64), much of the damage probably dates to this period, when the site would have yielded a large quantity of valuable building stone. Nonetheless, the stonework can be associated with the Gilbertine Priory constructed c.1195. This is supported by the fragments where moulding profiles can be discerned (Find numbers 334, 335, 348), which also suggest a medieval date. The single fragment of stone from Period 7 had been reused as part of a composite stone coffin and may reflect the re-use of wall core fragments from an earlier phase of building nearby.
Dating is more varied in the fragments from Fishergate House. Find number 906 comes from a Period 5 feature and is therefore associated with the use of the area before the Gilbertine Priory. Fragments of a similar period found in other excavations nearby have been associated with an earlier church on the site, which was possibly re-built in stone c1080-1120 (Graves 1996, 227). Much of this stone was taken from Roman remains, and therefore it is possible that this example is also a piece of Roman stone which was re-used in the later church, either architecturally or as part of a rubble core. This find also conjoined the Period 7 grave fragment from Blue Bridge Lane suggesting that the latter fragment had been re-used and re-deposited from the same Period 5 feature. Other fragments from Period 6, also seem to have been adopted from earlier sources, particularly the core fragment used in a composite stone coffin (Find number 1473). The fragments from Fishergate House therefore largely reflect earlier structures than the stonework from Blue Bridge Lane which is dominated by elements from the Gilbertine priory of Period 6.
Find no 334,Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Fragmentary block of sculpted limestone, badly damaged. Large amounts of lime mortar adhering to the worked surfaces indicates re-use. Profile of moulding flat, ½ roll, ½ hollow roll, flat, chamfer. Conjoins Find 335. Dimensions 0.21m x 0.14m x 0.15m
Find no 335, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Fragmentary block of sculpted limestone, badly damaged. Large amounts of lime mortar with charcoal and pebble inclusions adhered to the worked surfaces, indicating re-use. Profile partially obscured by mortar, but consists of flat, ½ roll, ½ hollow roll, flat, chamfer. Conjoins Find 334. Dimensions 0.3m x 0.13m x 0.15m
Find no 336, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Large sculpted block of limestone, dressed on all four faces. Rear face has diagonal coarse tooling. Mortar adhering to all dressed faces but not rear face, indicates re-use. Profile of moulding roll, keel, flat with a possible rebate cut back at one end, suggesting the fragment is part of a door jamb. Dimensions 0.29m x 0.16m x 0.17m
Find no 337, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Block of dressed limestone, with some wearing. Four dressed surfaces, one with a badly worn 0.05m chamfer at one edge. Rear surfaces only roughly dressed. Lime mortar adhering to all surfaces, except the front. Dimensions 0.18m x 0.21m x 0.19m
Find no 339, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Large limestone block, all surfaces dressed. One face has a 0.17m chamfer at one edge. Three surfaces finely dressed with limewash and flecks of red pigment. Lime mortar present on all surfaces, indicating re-use. Steep chamfer suggests use as a plinth. Dimensions 0.29m x 0.22m x 0.19m
Find no 340, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Rectangular block of dressed limestone. Front face dressed but heavily worn with a square depression 0.045m x 0.045m, 0.0.25m deep. All other faces roughly dressed with some remnants of diagonal tooling. Large amounts of lime mortar adhering to all surfaces except the front. Re-used in a boundary wall. Dimensions 0.29m x 0.20m x 0.15m
Find no 341, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Dressed limestone ashlar block. Lime mortar adhering to all surfaces. Most surfaces broken, but two surfaces tooled with a broad chisel. Quarter hollow chamfer on one edge suggests it formed part of an arch. Dimensions around edge 0.35m x 0.10m x 0.20m x 0.15m x 0.12m x 0.08m
Find no 342, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Large rectangular block of limestone. One surface finely dressed, two roughly dressed, one broken. Tooling varies; diagonal tooling on the finely dressed surface, broad chisel tooling on one side, broad chisel with toothing on another side. Possible 0.04m chamfer on the corner between the finely dressed side and the broken side. Lime mortar adhering to all surfaces except the finely dressed face. Fine face has four recently drilled holes, one containing a rawl plug. Dimensions 0.41m x 0.32m x 0.12m
Find no 343, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Large block of dressed limestone. One very finely worked surface with a convex profile. Three other surfaces with diagonal tooling and limestone mortar adhering. Further surfaces broken or undressed. Front surface appears to retain a thin layer of limewash. Part of a larger architectural feature, probably a column. Dimensions 0.33m x 0.27m x 0.19m
Find no 344, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Large block of partially dressed limestone. Four dressed surfaces; one chamfered face with diagonal tooling. Another flat surface also has diagonal tooling. Lime mortar adheres to all surfaces. Possible facing stone from opening, for example, the splay of a door or window. Dimensions 0.29m x 0.17m x 0.21m
Find no 345, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Dressed ashlar block. Diagonal tooling visible on the main surface. The same surface also has channels for metal jointing. There is a 0.16m chamfer at the edge of one of the surfaces. Mortar adheres to all surfaces. Dimensions 0.38m x 0.29m x 0.32m
Find no 346, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Large block of dressed limestone. Originally half of an octagon but with one side broken away. All faces dressed with diagonal tooling and covered in lime mortar. Possibly part of a plinth or column. Dimensions 0.34m x 0.26m x 0.24m
Find no 347, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Block of dressed limestone. Broad chisel tooling to the lower surface. Chamfer of 0.04m on one edge. Lime mortar adhering to upper, lower and rear surfaces. Dimensions 0.50m x 0.32m x 0.21m
Find no 348, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Large block of dressed limestone. Finely dressed surfaces retain evidence of comb tooling. Side, top, bottom and rear faces more roughly dressed. Small return (0.01m) on one edge of the front surface. Mortar adhering to all surfaces suggests re-use. Probably originally part of a plinth or stringcourse. Dimensions 0.55m x 0.36m x 0.28m
Find no 349, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Thin block of white, heavily worn, limestone. Some evidence of comb tooling on the upper surface and 1 side. Traces of a return 0.07m from the bottom of the main surface, although heavily worn. Tooling on a broken surface indicates secondary finishing. Dimensions 0.23m x 0.20m x 0.07m
Find no 350, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Small roughly dressed block of limestone. Front face shows evidence of comb tooling, apparently secondary as it cuts through erosion on the stone. Two other faces roughly dressed, further surfaces undressed or broken. Small amounts of lime mortar on all surfaces. A facing stone. 0.19m x 0.18m x 0.11m
Find no 351, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Small square block of dressed limestone. Front face retains crisp diagonal tooling. Remaining faces roughly squared off but otherwise uncut. Small amount of lime mortar adhering to sides. A facing stone. Dimensions 0.17m x 0.16m x 0.19m
Find no 352, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Small block of finely dressed, heavily worn, sandstone. Some diagonal tooling on 3 chamfered faces. All other surfaces worn or broken. A possible mullion fragment. Dimensions 0.20m x 0.15m x 0.14m
Find no 353, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Small dressed block of limestone with sharp diagonal tooling. One face has a possible masons mark in the form of a cross, two other faces roughly dressed. A facing stone. Dimensions 0.15m x 0.14m x 0.09m
Find no 354, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Large block of finely dressed limestone, with two chamfered faces. Close, diagonal scratch tooling on four faces with little wear. Upper (concealed) surface also dressed. Remainder rough or broken. Some limewash and possible red pigment adhering to one exposed face. A possible mullion fragment. Dimensions 0.26m x 0.23m x 0.14m
Find no 355, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Fragment of a large ashlar block of limestone, three dressed faces with some vertical tooling surviving on the main face. Large amounts of mortar adhering to all faces apart from the main one. Mortar has also been used to square up the stone at one corner. Concrete appears to have been added to the mortar on one face. Dimensions 0.20m x 018m x 0.18m
Find no 356, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Very damaged angular fragment of dressed limestone. Remains of two dressed faces with close comb tooling. One further face has been roughly redressed with broader comb tooling on the broken surface. Lime mortar adhering to one surface. Dimensions approx. 0.30m x 0.22m x 0.17m
Find no 357, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Large block of broken dressed limestone. Front face is worn, although it retains some evidence of broad diagonal tooling. Other faces very rough or undressed. Large amounts of mortar adhering to top and bottom faces. Dimensions 0.27m x 0.24m x 0.26m
Find no 359, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Squared block of roughly dressed limestone. Front face worn and pitted. Rear undressed. Small amounts of lime mortar adhering to sides and rear. A facing stone. Dimensions 0.25m x 0.22m x 0.14m
Find no 360, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Large ashlar limestone block. Three dressed surfaces with heavily worn diagonal tooling, remainder uncut. Small amounts of lime mortar adhering to all surfaces. Dimensions 0.47m x 0.21m x 0.21m
Find no 361, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Large ashlar limestone block. Two front faces with the remains of fine diagonal tooling, although surfaces are slightly pitted. Upper and lower surfaces are with broader tooling, three further broken or rough faces. The front faces retain some evidence of limewash and some possible red pigment. The remaining faces have some mortar adhering. Possibly part of a plinth. Dimensions approx. 0.40m x 0.20m x 0.14m
Find no 363, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Fragment of a large rectangular block of limestone. Four remaining dressed surfaces with comb tooling in 0.02m bands. The rear face is roughly dressed and the remainder is broken. There is mortar adhering to all surfaces, including the broken side. Dimensions 0.34m x 0.29m x 0.20m
Find no 364, Period 9, F66B, C1200B. Large limestone, roughly rectangular, ashlar block. One dressed surface with rough diagonal tooling, although there were probably more that cannot be distinguished. Rear face completely undressed but worn. Small amounts of lime mortar adhering to all surfaces except the main face. Dimensions 0.37m x 0.29m x 0.33m
Find no 365, Period 6, F267B, C1630B. Small block of worn, dressed limestone. Front face has evidence deep diagonal comb tooling despite wear. Remaining faces only roughly squared. Small amounts of lime mortar adhering to all surfaces, indicating re-use. Dimensions 0.23m x 0.15m x 0.22m
Find no 366, Period 6, F267B, C1630B. Large block of angular limestone. Three dressed surfaces, the front and sides with traces of faint tooling visible on the front face. The remainder is only rough cut. Large amounts of mortar adhering to sides and some to the front surface. Dimensions 0.30m x 0.24m x 0.19m
Find no 367, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Large block of angular broken limestone. No diagnostic markings. Dimensions 0.30m x 0.18m x 0.21m
Find no 368, Period 6, F267B, C1630B. Fragment of a block of limestone. Some fine dressing on three surfaces with comb tooling. Possible chamfer forming one tooled face. Lime mortar adhering to all surfaces indicates re-use. Dimensions 0.41m x 0.23m x 0.22m
Find no 369, Period 6, F267B, C1630B. Small block of dressed limestone. Front surface heavily eroded, but sides retain some crisp diagonal tooling. Rear surface undressed. Mortar adhering to side faces. A facing stone. Dimensions 0.25m x 0.17m x 0.19m
Find no 370, Period 9, F64B, C1264B. Large curved block of limestone. Main curved face finely tooled with vertical scratches. Masons mark in the shape of an 'M'. One edge of the dressed face is broken. Mortar adhered to all surfaces except the front face. Part of a larger architectural feature, probably a column. Dimensions 0.58m x 0.22m x 0.23m
Find no 371, Period 6, F267B, C1630B. Small rectangular block of limestone. Front face heavily worn, no visible signs of tooling. Sides only partially dressed, with some comb tooling visible. The rear surface is undressed. Dimensions 0.30m x 0.18m x 0.17m
Find no 372, Period 6, F267B, C1630B. Large rectangular block of limestone. Front and one side roughly tooled, with a mixture of diagonal and broad chisel tooling. The other side, rear, top and bottom are all roughly dressed. Small amounts of mortar on all surfaces except the front. Slight chamfer in the side suggests it is part of a splay for a door or a window. Dimensions 0.29m x 0.21m x 0.21m
Find no 373, Period 6, F267B, C1630B. Large rectangular block of limestone. Front surface retains diagonal tooling. Sides, top and bottom roughly squared. The rear surface is undressed. Lime mortar adhered to all surfaces except the front. A facing stone. Dimensions 0.32m x 0.19m x 0.17m
Find no 374, Period 6, F267B, C1630B. Large rectangular block of limestone. Front face retains diagonal tooling. Sides, top and bottom partially dressed, with some tooling. The rear face is undressed. Lime mortar adhering to all surfaces, suggests re-use. Originally a facing stone. Dimensions 0.34m x 0.25m x 0.28m
Find no 375, Period 6, F267B, C1630B. Large rectangular block of limestone. Front face worn, no visible tooling. Top and bottom faces have diagonal and broad comb tooling. The rear face is uncut. Lime mortar adhering to all surfaces except the front face. Dimensions 0.34m x 0.28m x 0.21m
Find no 376, Period 6, F267B, C1630B. Fragment of large block of limestone. Dressed on three surfaces, forming an arch shape. Mix of diagonal tooling underlying comb tooling. Other surfaces broken or roughly dressed. Large amounts of lime mortar adhering to surfaces particularly along the rebate behind the dressed arch faces. The voussoir from the head of an arched doorway. Dimensions 0.29m x 0.30m x 0.30m
Find no 377, Period 6, F267B, C1630B. Large squared block of limestone. Front face worn, but retains some evidence of diagonal tooling. Broken corner also shows evidence of wear. The sides of the stone are roughly dressed and the rear is uncut. Lime mortar adhering to all surfaces except the front. A facing stone. Dimensions 0.29m x 0.23m x 0.18m
Find no 378, Period 6, F267B, C1630B. Large block of limestone. Stone dressed on five surfaces with diagonal tooling. Irregularly shaped with surfaces angled to the front face. Rear face broken or uncut. Lime mortar adhering to all surfaces. Facing stone of an unknown feature. Dimensions 0.37m x 0.27m x 0.17m
Find no 379, Period 6, F44B, C1164B. Small block of limestone. Four dressed surfaces with some evidence of diagonal tooling, despite heavily worn surfaces. Lime mortar on the undressed surfaces. A facing stone. Dimensions 0.17m x 0.15m x 0.14m
Find no 4403, Period 7, F252B, C1562B. Small block of limestone with a circular section. Vertical striated tooling marks over the front face. Top and bottom surfaces broken. Fragment of a small decorative column shaft. Conjoins Find 906 from YFH01. Dimensions 0.1m (diameter) x 0.7m
Find no 4408, Period, F220B, C1482B. Small fragment of limestone. All surfaces except the front appear broken or uncut. Front face has vertical striated tooling. Dimensions 0.09m x 0.05m x 0.1m
Find no 6290, Period 6, F44B, C1162B. Large block of yellow limestone. All surfaces except the rear retain crisp diagonal tooling. The rear face is undressed. Lime mortar adhering to all surfaces indicates re-use. A facing stone. Dimensions 0.26m x 0.16m x 0.18m
Find no 6304, Period, F220B, C1482B. Small fragment of limestone. Top, bottom and one side appear uncut. Front and side faces have diagonal tooling. Lime mortar adhering to all surfaces. Dimensions 0.06m x 0.05m x 0.06m
Find no 906,Period 5, F241F, C1450F. Small fragment of curved limestone. Top, side and bottom are broken off. Evidence of burning across the stone with pink discolouration. Evidence of metal fittings along the broken side and bottom, these have caused some cracking. Conjoins Find 4403 from YBB01. Dimensions 0.11m (diameter) x 0.14m
Find no 1473, Period 6, F318F, C1599F. Large limestone block. No worked surfaces suggest it was part of the rubble core in mass wall construction. Lime mortar on all surfaces. Re-used as part of a composite dry stone coffin. Dimensions 0.30m x 0.23m x 0.14m
Find no 1474,Period 6, F288F, C1543F. Small limestone block. Worked surfaces with diagonal tooling to the front and top with a short chamfer at the top of the front surface suggesting a use as a base of some sort. Top damaged and the sides are broken. Deep axe diagonal tooling to the bottom. Dimensions 0.29m x 0.15m x 0.14m
apc > monographs > blue bridge lane & fishergate house > artefacts & environmental > building materials
