The archaeology

GLIMPSES IN THE GROUND

So far, the first recorded archaeological evidence for the hall was mentioned by Marjorie Mack in her book, the ‘Educated Pin’.

So indeed we doted on asparagus; nevertheless, when the emergence of a little fragment of tiled floor beneath the asparagus bed in the flint walled kitchen garden coincided with the arrival of a party of young guests for a long Easter week-end, the temptation to tear this old secret out of the earth was too great. Coats were flung off, asparagus roots and earth were flung aside, and the shovelling proceeded feverishly till a whole perfect little tiled hexagonal chamber stood revealed to the April sun.

The asparagus bed was within the kitchen garden running north-south and somewhere slightly west of centre. Just where the hexagonal chamber was found remains unknown at present, but at least we can be sure of an approximate location for the mansion.

In May 2012, several test pit were dug within the kitchen garden as part of the ‘Dig and Sow’ event. Nothing of significance was found within these pits, although it seems likely that they may have only scratched the surface.

In April 2013, a small exploratory trench was opened against the kitchen garden wall in order to try and

establish a possible date for the older part of the wall. The construction trenches for both walls cut into a layer containing 16th century stoneware. The older phase contained re-used stone to form a foundation for the flint and brick wall, it was suggested by Stephen Heyward that this stone would have come from Bromholme Priory.

The same stone can be seen re-used on the southern side of the wall immediately south

of the church. The later phase which clearly butts ups

against the older wall, may have been built around the same time that the ruins were

finally pulled down and the new house built.

The wall can be seen on the 1812 Enclosure Map, which suggests that this was the case, rather than John Mack building it after he acquired the estate in 1824.

A further test pit was opened for the Paston Open Day event in April 2014. The pit was located a flower bed next to the coach house conservatory, following the report by owner that she had dug up some mortar whilst planting.

The broken tiles from the first make-up layer, seem to be typical peg tiles from the Tudor period. Some of these tiles are pointed and could have been used to create an alternating pattern. These tiles would have been readily accessible and ideal to use as a make-up layer. It is difficult to imagine another scenario which would argue against these tiles being from the ordinal Hall or associated buildings.

Although the excavated agricultural building clearly post dates the Hall, it seems likely that the bricks used for the floor are from the Hall itself. The dimensions and fabric appear consistent with a Tudor brick, but the most compelling evidence is that these bricks have been re-used. Traces of mortar were found on all sides of these bricks which suggests that they were originally bonded in another structure before being re-used in the floor of the agricultural building.

During the underpinning of the south eastern corner of the Coach House, a large foundation was seen running east west within the trench dug for the underpinning. Also, another large area of mortar was reportedly found in the Coach House garden when a palm was planted.

It is apparent then, that traces of the old hall complex can still be found, although it is unclear at present just how extensive these traces are. These isolated finds are just pick pricks of light in the darkness and just offer an occasional tantalising glimpse of what remains.

GROUND PENETRATING RADAR

There is enough evidence to make a best guess at how the hall complex would have looked before it’s abandonment, but there are so many unanswered questions. Luckily the offer of a Ground

Penetrating Radar (GPR) survey was made by Michael de Bootman and Jason Gibbons.

Could two days of surveying, 183 depth slices and 400 depth profiles begin to answer the following questions?

• Can the GPR pinpoint anything seen on Boydells watercolour?

• What is the orientation and position of the complex?

• Did the complex have two courtyards?

• How did the complex relate with the road to the church?

• Can anything be seen of the east and southern ranges?

• Is there a relationship between the new house and the old?

Surveying in the Kitchen Garden was problematical because of various obstacles and inaccessible areas, however, the going was better in front of the house and within the lawned areas surrounding it.

Initially, it was thought that the GPR survey was relatively unsuccessful, however, close scrutiny of the results enables us to draw important conclusions and offers indications of how the layout may have been.

At first glance, the Interim Interpretation (below) suggests a fragmentary response from solid masonry and rubble, combined with possible drainage features that post date the Hall.

In response to whether it is possible to ‘get a fix’ for the Boydell painting, I think we can identify the low wall and the well seen in the painting. We know the wall is mapped on both the Enclosure and Tithe map, and the well is indicated on the 1885 map, although, by this time the wall had gone.

The lowest depth slice (above left), at just over 3 meters, suggests 3 potential wells that can be traced consistently through the profile, however, the larger response is likely to be the septic tank for the current hall. I have indicated what I believe could be the well and the wall in the Boydell painting which appear at a higher slice (above right) .

If the well and the wall are those in the Boydell sketch, then it confirms the previous assumption that Boydell was painting from the south west corner of the present day courtyard and gives us a useful fix.

The GPR results have also confirmed that the orientation of the Hall is the same as the barn and surrounding buildings which seem to have respected the old orientation. It is obvious that the new hall is on a completely different alignment and adds weight to the argument that the cellars within the new hall are contemporary rather than Tudor.

I also believe that the GPR results reinforces Blomefield’s assertion that there were two courts and that Norris’ description of the Hall resembling a college makes much more sense now.

The image above maps out what I believe to be the likely layout of the hall based on the available evidence. The road to the church heads out from the northern side of the inner court and one can now easily imagine why the Pastons fought so hard to change the route!

Unfortunately, the eastern range of the hall is less well defined, and although there is a lot of ‘building noise’ in the GPR results, no definitive edge could be discerned as the noise continued beyond the GPR survey limits. However, the southern range is much more interesting and suggestive. A long ‘block’ is seen running west-east forming the southern range. At the centre of this block, two parallel short lengths of wall are seen extruding to the south from what is likely to be the centre of the range (Figure 16).

However, the southern range is much more interesting and suggestive. A long ‘block’ is seen running west-east forming the southern range.

At the centre of this block, two parallel short lengths of wall are seen extruding to the south from what is likely to be the centre of the range.

My feeling is that this range could be the related to the part of the Hall seen in the William Paston portrait. The two parallel walls seem to enclose a path heading south - maybe a path to the gardens with the walls defining some steps leading up to the southern wing?

CONCLUSIONS

At the very beginning of the project, there was very little known in terms of what Paston Hall looked like. We could draw inspiration from contemporary buildings, we had pin pricks of light in the darkness from various chance discoveries, but an overall impression based on anything other than guesswork was seemingly unobtainable.

Now, using the GPR and bringing together all the disparate snapshots, I think we can at least attempt to build a picture with a little more confidence.

We know where the hall is - that in itself is a major step forward. We know that the modern hall bears no relation to the Paston Hall in both alignment and age. We know the likely physical extents of the hall and that the literary references can be trusted to a large degree. Although Boydell is somewhat liberal with his interpretation, he does provide crucial evidence in terms of architectural detail. We also know why the Dig and Sow test pits did not find anything - they simply did not dig deep enough, although the placement was spot on!