Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạmNội dung chi tiết: Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
The English Medieval First-Floor Hall:Part 2 - The Evidence from the Eleventh to Early Thirteenth CenturyNick Hill and Mark GardinerThe concept of the Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereese first-floor hall was introduced in 1935, but Blair's paper of 1993 cast doubt on many of those buildings which had been identified as such. Following the recognition of Scotland's Hall, Richmond Castle as an example of a hall at first-floor level, the evidence for buildings of this type is reviewe Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesd (excluding town houses and halls in the great towers of castles, where other issues apply). While undoubtedly a number of buildings have been mistakHill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
enly identified as halls, there is a significant group of structures for which there are very strong grounds to classify' as first- floor halls. The gThe English Medieval First-Floor Hall:Part 2 - The Evidence from the Eleventh to Early Thirteenth CenturyNick Hill and Mark GardinerThe concept of the Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesThe key features of these are identified and the reasons for constructing the hall at this level -prestige and security - are recognized. The study of these buildings allows two further modifications to the Blair thesis: in some houses, halls and chambers were integrated in a single block at an earl Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesy date, and the basic idea of the medieval domestic plan was already present by the late eleventh century.It was argued in an earlier paper (hat ScollHill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
and’s Hall in Richmond Castle was an eleventh-century example of a first-floor hall. It had an attached chamber, garderobe tower and viewing balcony. The English Medieval First-Floor Hall:Part 2 - The Evidence from the Eleventh to Early Thirteenth CenturyNick Hill and Mark GardinerThe concept of the Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesus halls. The position of the hall at first-floor level was widely considered to be an exceptional feature. The plan of the hall with its entrance at one end and the chamber at the other, in conformity with the late medieval domestic arrangements more widely known in the thirteenth century, seemed u Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesnusually early. The integration of the chamber with the hall, at a period when the two were often set apart, was also a surprise. This second articleHill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
explores the wider context and comparanda for1Scolland’s Hall, and in so doing also explores the development of the domestic plan. It will be argued hThe English Medieval First-Floor Hall:Part 2 - The Evidence from the Eleventh to Early Thirteenth CenturyNick Hill and Mark GardinerThe concept of the Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesate.The first-floor hall debateThe term ‘first-floor hair was introduced in 1935 by Margaret Wood in her study of domestic Norman architecture, and the subject was given a whole chapter in her major book of 1965 on the medieval house (Wood 1935: Wood 1965,16-34). Wood maintained that a major reason Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesfor locating the hall on the first floor was for defence: ‘...it was safer to have the living-rooms raised to first-floor level’, and the issue of defHill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
ence has been an important element in the debate about first-floor halls ever since (Wood 1935, 213; Wood 1965,16). Her catalogue of 1965 gave twenty-The English Medieval First-Floor Hall:Part 2 - The Evidence from the Eleventh to Early Thirteenth CenturyNick Hill and Mark GardinerThe concept of the Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesin castle great towers were excluded, as belonging ‘to military rather than to domestic architecture* (Wood 1935, 170). She also gave over twenty later examples, dating from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. Patrick Faulkner continued with the same concept in his important study of 1958, but Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesused the term ‘upper hall’ rather than first-floor hall. For Faulkner, the first floor of the ‘Upper Hall House’ constituted a complete residential unHill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
it, with a ‘greater upper chamber or "hall”’ divided from a ‘lesser upper chamber’. He proposed that the ground floor, rather than being for storage, The English Medieval First-Floor Hall:Part 2 - The Evidence from the Eleventh to Early Thirteenth CenturyNick Hill and Mark GardinerThe concept of the Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesIn emphasizing the widespread adoption of the ‘Upper Hall House’ type in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, Faulkner extended the range of buildings to which the type applied, to include tower keeps and great gatehouses in castles, and also monastic establishments. Faulkner contrasted the ‘Upper Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesHall House’ with the ‘End Hall House’, which had a dominant ground-floor hall and an attached, storeyed chamber block.With growing evidence to the conHill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
trary (e.g. Baker et al. 1993, 77-78), this by then well-established position was overturned in 1993 by John Blair in a seminal article (Blair 1993). The English Medieval First-Floor Hall:Part 2 - The Evidence from the Eleventh to Early Thirteenth CenturyNick Hill and Mark GardinerThe concept of the Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees-floor halls are in fact chamber-blocks which were once accompanied by2detached ground-floor halls of the normal kind’ (Blair 1993, 2). Blair traced archival and literary references to define the two main components of any substantial residence:one communal, public and official, used for activities Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereessuch as the holding of courts and the eating of formal meals, and the other private and residential: in Latin aula and camera (or thalamus), in Old EnHill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
glish heal I and bur, in modern English hall and chamber.Blair then cited detailed documentary and archaeological evidence which pointed to the concluThe English Medieval First-Floor Hall:Part 2 - The Evidence from the Eleventh to Early Thirteenth CenturyNick Hill and Mark GardinerThe concept of the Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereese development of the two-storeyed chamber block only occurred in the later twelfth century. The chamber block generally remained an independent, separate structure until the early thirteenth century, when chamber blocks began to be attached directly to the upper end of the hall.Blair’s argument was Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereessupported by Edward Impey’s work on seigneurial houses in Normandy (Impey 1993; Impey 1999). A weakness of Blair’s thesis, as he acknowledged, was theHill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
lack of sites on which substantial, unambiguous evidence survived for both hall and independent chamber block. Impey identified five sites in NormandThe English Medieval First-Floor Hall:Part 2 - The Evidence from the Eleventh to Early Thirteenth CenturyNick Hill and Mark GardinerThe concept of the Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesBoothby Pagnell (Lincolnshire), one of the archetypal examples of the ‘first-floor hall’, Impey and Harris (2002) found the probable foundations of a large ground-floor hall, indicating that the surviving building was a chamber block.Vociferous support for the traditional position continued to be ma Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesde by Michael Thompson in his books on the medieval hall and on medieval bishops’ houses (1995, 34-49; 1998, 31-33, 68-69,125). Thompson traced the liHill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
neage of first-floor halls as an independent building type back to Carolingian sources, which was introduced to England after the Norman Conquest (199The English Medieval First-Floor Hall:Part 2 - The Evidence from the Eleventh to Early Thirteenth CenturyNick Hill and Mark GardinerThe concept of the Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesoriginal hall, also drawing on French models, was often at first-floor level and that in such cases ground-floor halls were a later development. The evidence for some of these bishops’ houses, which is often complex, is considered further below. Thompson’s arguments have not found much support, and Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesin some cases his interpretation conflicts with the detailed archaeological analysis (see3Table 2).Jane Grenville (1997, 67-78, 86-88) included a veryHill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
useful summary of the first-floor hall debate in her overview of medieval houses in 1997. While recognizing the problems of the Wood-Faulkner positioThe English Medieval First-Floor Hall:Part 2 - The Evidence from the Eleventh to Early Thirteenth CenturyNick Hill and Mark GardinerThe concept of the Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesers of assuming that medieval scribes felt the need to use the words with the same precision as modern scholars’. The French evidence examined by Barthélemy suggested that there was in factlittle to choose, in terms of function, between the hall and chamber, other than size. Both were used for the r Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereeseception of visitors, but the small size of the chamber dictated that it served for more intimate, semi-public occasions, or for secondary ceremonies.Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
.. (Grenville 1997, 86).The debate also registered in Ireland, albeit in a rather different historical context. A growing number of structures were idThe English Medieval First-Floor Hall:Part 2 - The Evidence from the Eleventh to Early Thirteenth CenturyNick Hill and Mark GardinerThe concept of the Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesthirteenth century, these have been held to contain first-floor halls. This inteipretation has however been challenged by O'Keeffe (2013-14), who argues that these first-floor spaces were more private than public in nature, and so have more affinity with the English chamber block.In 1999 Anthony Qui Hill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after refereesney (1999) directly challenged the emerging new consensus. Like Grenville, he was concerned that the distinction made in documents between aula and caHill and Gardiner - FFH 2 final after referees
mera may not be so clear-cut and ‘may be no more reliable than (he classification of rooms offered by house agents today. It is the occupier who decidGọi ngay
Chat zalo
Facebook