North Fig. 3: 20/26A East St Helens, Abfngdon of proposals for conversion to two dwellings. They had two particular features of interest. First, their site on the edge of the former priory precinct, adjacent to one of the former gates, gave rise to the possibility that they might incorporate earlier fabric or trenches for services might disturb deposits or foundations relating to earlier monastic buildings. Secondly, they retained their original internal fittings. These included not only the wooden stalls and troughs, but a cottage at one encl, presumably for a groom, a coach house, tack room and even the remains of a forge. Acombined building record and small-scale watching brief was therefore funded by the applicant to ensure that the necessary recording could be undertaken. However, recording may also be appropriate once works are in progress. In this case, "if there is any likelihood that hidden features will be revealed, the local planning authority should attach an appropriate condition to the listed building consent to ensure their proper retention or recording" (3.24). The stables at Cornbury Park (Grade II*) are a good illustration of what can be uncovered during the course of works. When they were converted recently into office accommodation by the Cornbury Estate, the consent was subject to a condition requiring a watching brief to be undertaken. The building dates from the 1660s, being generally regarded as one of the few surviving buildings by Hugh May. Surprisingly little is known about May, despite the fact that he was a courtier to Charles II and an accomplished architect, undertaking many prestigious commissions, including the remodelling of Windsor 22 South I I ' I h Crou \\mg Castle. His work at Cornbury has previously been identified as one of the earliest stable buildings to be designed in a classical style. One of the first discoveries to be made was that in their present form the stables were far from being an unaltered design. In fact, they had lost the whole of the upper storey between the wings and the roof had been substantially remodelled. As the montage shows (Fig.2), the impact of these alterations on the design was considerable. The significance of this was to confirm the evidence of a sketch in John Evelyn's diaries. Evelyn visited Cornbury in 1664 to produce a design for a chapel; the page from his notebook also includes a drawing of a stables. What the watching brief established was that rather than being a design idea, his sketch of the stables represented a record drawing of the newly completed building. As already noted in connection with the stables at Bicester, in some cases, consideration will need to be given to whether the watching brief should include provision for any below-ground deposits which could be disturbed. For example, by service trenches running near or through the building(s), by excavation required beneath floors or for the construction of foundation trenches for extensions. A case in point involved the refurbishment of a medieval town house in Abingclon (Fig.3). Although the building had been the subject of much interest in the past, recent repair works provided the opportunity for the first systematic study of the construction and elating of the timber frame. Although the building had been much altered in the 18th and 19th centuries when a carriage entrance was punched through its centre, not only did investigative work reveal that this was a hall house with jettiecl wings of a weal clen type unusual in this part of the country, but tree ring elating provided a date of c.1430, at least 50 years earlier than had previously been thought. More specifically, excavations for a service trench through the carriage access confirmed it as the site of the former open hall, identifying the foundations of the rear wall, the return for the cross-passage door and fragments of 15th century floor tiles. Meanwhile, detailed examination of the roof had identified the site of the original louvre. This particular case is a good illustration of the importance of relating both above- and below-ground investigation. Buildings do not exist in a vacuum but the split between the disciplines of building conservation working from the foundations upwards, and the traditional view of archaeology as being concerned with the ground level downwards, often fragment what ought to be an integrated approach. What is needed is a more holistic approach, based on greater cooperation and understanding between the various disciplines involved in recording and conservation, a concern which is echoed in the consistent crossreferencing between PPG 15 and PPGJ6. The purpose of this article has been to highlight the kind of information which can be gleaned from recording either as a precursor or as a condition of planning consent. Far from recording being an academic exercise, the evidence which can be derived from it, has an immediate practical application, in improving our ability to conserve for the future. The increasing use of specialised techniques, such as tree ting dating or mortar analysis, combined with the detailed study of traditional materials and less understood building types are helping to transform our understanding of architectural design and construction methods. Sensitive analysis can help guard against overspecification in repair schedules and ensure greater retention of original fabric by the use of more sympathetic repair techniques. Recording is not a luxury; it is essential if we are endeavouring to understand the buildings we are trying to conserve. Only by taking the opportunity to investigate them can we improve our understanding and by so doing, our conservation practice. (To be continued) Carol Rosier is Deputy County Archaeologist (His torte Buildings), Oxf ordsbire County Council. CONTEXT 52
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=