Dating Paintwork

[Captain P]

Is it possible to date part of a property structure through old paintwork, either stylistically or by scientific analysis of the material?
Tree ring dating has failed to yield a result so I am reliant on architectural features and decoration.
The early structure is open hall cruck with smoke from a central hearth escaping through a thatched roof. Probably 16th century. A chimney was inserted, the roof raised and ceilings introduced above the ground floor rooms probably during the 17th century. Ceilings were not introduced above the bedrooms until a later date. Possibly not before the 20th century. This can be inferred because dividing walls inside the modern day (very small) loft spaces have been painted blue, and some rafters painted white, which indicates the bedroom remained open to the roof after the 17th century improvements - no sane person paints their loft.
The first photo shows the cruck frame in the bedroom. The floor, the dividing partition and the ceiling did not exist in the original building. The second photo is taken through the loft hatch. Blue paint can be seen above as well as below the cruck blade, as well as some exposed plaster work. I could not get the angle to show white painted rafters.
Does anyone have any suggestions about the time period when this painting was carried out? This might confirm or contradict my theories about construction dates.

 

[Cubist]

Duck egg blue paint has been in use for centuries and is still widely available - check out Farrow and Balls Cooks Blue - so almost impossible unless a chemical analysis could be conducted for presence of say lead, plastics, etc. Frankly I think you're on a hiding to nothing with that avenue of investigation. Any way, why are you interested? Most thatched properties are listed so I'm assuming this one either is not or its listing does not provide a proximal build date.

 

[Captain P]

Is it possible to date part of a property structure through old paintwork, either stylistically or by scientific analysis of the material?
Tree ring dating has failed to yield a result so I am reliant on architectural features and decoration.
The early structure is open hall cruck with smoke from a central hearth escaping through a thatched roof. Probably 16th century. A chimney was inserted, the roof raised and ceilings introduced above the ground floor rooms probably during the 17th century. Ceilings were not introduced above the bedrooms until a later date. Possibly not before the 20th century. This can be inferred because dividing walls inside the modern day (very small) loft spaces have been painted blue, and some rafters painted white, which indicates the bedroom remained open to the roof after the 17th century improvements - no sane person paints their loft.
The first photo shows the cruck frame in the bedroom. The floor, the dividing partition and the ceiling did not exist in the original building. The second photo is taken through the loft hatch. Blue paint can be seen above as well as below the cruck blade, as well as some exposed plaster work. I could not get the angle to show white painted rafters.
Does anyone have any suggestions about the time period when View attachment 18020View attachment 18021this painting was carried out? This might confirm or contradict my theories about construction dates.

It’s not listed, and I am undecided whether listing would add to or detract from its value. Painting in the lofts must post date raising of the roof but predate insertion of ceilings in bedrooms. It would be nice to get a fix on the date in the absence of tree ring results. I don’t know when white rafters with blue walls was the fashion. I don’t know who could do chemical analysis of the paint. Hence the question.

 

[Cubist]

You may find a Forensics lab that is capable of that kind of analysis but I'd suggest it would be expensive and frankly unlikely to produce conclusive results. Nevertheless, a google search on 'Forensic Labs near me' will produce some results you can use for some initial enquiries.

 

[Captain P]

You may find a Forensics lab that is capable of that kind of analysis but I'd suggest it would be expensive and frankly unlikely to produce conclusive results. Nevertheless, a google search on 'Forensic Labs near me' will produce some results you can use for some initial enquiries.

Thanks. That’s a great suggestion. The local university used to have a forensic science department. I may contact them, if they haven’t been closed down to save costs.

 

[Kearn]

That shade of pigment won’t be anywhere near the age of the property.

There are historic paint schemes literature which would give you guidance as to when certain colours were popular, mostly driven by availability of the pigments. I forget when this shade of blue became common, but it wasn’t early.

However, if you’re looking to understand when the ceilings were inserted, you’d easier find out by seeing how they’re constructed.

Most thatched properties are listed so I'm assuming this one either is not or its listing does not provide a proximal build date.

… that depends, most drive bys were complete stabs in the dark and varied by at least a century or so… only likely to be vaguely ballpark if it was a proper survey including internal features.

 

[Flyfisher]

Painting in the lofts must post date raising of the roof but predate insertion of ceilings in bedrooms. It would be nice to get a fix on the date in the absence of tree ring results. I don’t know when white rafters with blue walls was the fashion. I don’t know who could do chemical analysis of the paint. Hence the question.

Testing kits for lead paint are widely available and very cheap. I've used a 'pen' type tester to check for lead paint, more for safety when removing it than for dating. A crude test for dating but might help.

For a more detailed analysis of paint (or anything really), most university physics/chemistry labs should have the necessary equipment and if you can find a student of these subjects they might be able to assist, depending on their and their tutor's interest. As a student many years ago, I spent a few weeks of my summer holiday doing some chemical analyses of an old artifact I found while metal detecting. My chemistry tutor was as interested as I was in the 'mini-project' and was very helpful showing me the best techniques and interpreting the results (I even had the results published, but that's just showing off! ).

As for dating the beams, I've often wondered about carbon dating for our beams but am not sure if there's a minimum age for it to work. I seem to recall it works for items a few hundred years old, so should be applicable for many period properties. Of course, it will only give a date for when the tree was cut down, not when the wood was actually used to build the house. Might be worth investigating?

 

[Cubist]

As for dating the beams, I've often wondered about carbon dating for our beams but am not sure if there's a minimum age for it to work. I seem to recall it works for items a few hundred years old, so should be applicable for many period properties. Of course, it will only give a date for when the tree was cut down, not when the wood was actually used to build the house. Might be worth investigating?

I too considered that possibility until I remembered the tales about timbers being scavenged from older buildings, even boats and ships, and re-used perhaps again and again down the centuries. Some puzzles will passively seek to defeat you.

 

[Kearn]

Testing kits for lead paint are widely available and very cheap. I've used a 'pen' type tester to check for lead paint, more for safety when removing it than for dating. A crude test for dating but might help.

they by all accounts seem to be widely inaccurate also…!

 

[Kearn]

I too considered that possibility until I remembered the tales about timbers being scavenged from older buildings, even boats and ships, and re-used perhaps again and again down the centuries. Some puzzles will passively seek to defeat you.

Timbers would have been used within the first year since felling. So yes they can indeed accurately estimate the build of the structure.

Re-used timbers are pretty easy to identify vs first use when the frame is assessed and timbers are selected.

However, dendro dating isn’t cheap sadly, up to a grand a pop, and I’ve got at least three build phases in our place that I would like to confirm ages on, but there’s no way I’m spending to scratch that curiosity… and there no guarantee that they will get enough decent cores, or even if they do, a date will be confidently returned. It’s a stage as it’s a database that needs to be extended, yet extending it is a costly thing to do a customer.

 

[Flyfisher]

Fair point about timber frames being built from 'green' timber, so within the year of felling, but I just wanted to clarify that carbon dating is based on the date of felling (or 'death' when applied to other organic materials).

We also have three distinct build phases, easily identifiable because of the different contruction materials - an original oak timber frame with rubble wall and chalk block additions. The listing states 1550 for the timber frame and 16th and 17th century for the two additions, but I've never seen any hard evidence for this so I'm pretty sure it's a guesstimate by whoever compile the listing in the late 1980's. I've also read that there was something of a 'housing boom' in the mid-1500's so that '1550' is a reasonable guess at a date for such buildings. Interestingly, our '17th century addition' is built around a large carved beam that is believed to have been reused, possibly originally used in a priory, so even if it could be accurately dated it wouldn't be the whole story. All very fascinating but I do wonder how many honest guesses end up becoming accepted as factual, depending on the 'expert' who came up with the guesses.

 

[Kearn]

Fair point about timber frames being built from 'green' timber, so within the year of felling, but I just wanted to clarify that carbon dating is based on the date of felling (or 'death' when applied to other organic materials).

We also have three distinct build phases, easily identifiable because of the different contruction materials - an original oak timber frame with rubble wall and chalk block additions. The listing states 1550 for the timber frame and 16th and 17th century for the two additions, but I've never seen any hard evidence for this so I'm pretty sure it's a guesstimate by whoever compile the listing in the late 1980's. I've also read that there was something of a 'housing boom' in the mid-1500's so that '1550' is a reasonable guess at a date for such buildings. Interestingly, our '17th century addition' is built around a large carved beam that is believed to have been reused, possibly originally used in a priory, so even if it could be accurately dated it wouldn't be the whole story. All very fascinating but I do wonder how many honest guesses end up becoming accepted as factual, depending on the 'expert' who came up with the guesses.

It’s all guesswork really when it comes to dating, even joint styles and techniques weren’t ubiquitous across the country or indeed building types at the same time, with old techniques lingering in ‘less developed’ areas or ‘lesser’ buildings. We have some really quirky and inventive joints where floors were reverse engineered into our barn in the 1600s.

Can’t even trust the ‘experts’ - ours was surveyed in the 80s by the local group who record Wiltshire’s built history, a great resource. However, they claimed it was a farmhouse built for a yeoman around 1600, but missed the glaringly obvious fact it started as a utilitarian barn without any first floors and was converted to a dwelling around that time. The problem with getting focussed on the wrong features to date the actual structure!

 

[Kearn]

I don’t know when white rafters with blue walls was the fashion. I don’t know who could do chemical analysis of the paint. Hence the question.

I believe the pale blue distemper was a Victorian popularity, it’s pigment derived from more complex sources than the earth pigments usually found in the medieval and shoulder periods (ochre, dark red…) and the ease/cost became more approachable for use.

I highly doubt the colour to be original to a cruck framed open hall, which would be up to the 1600s as a broad estimate. Expect to find many layers of limewash underneath, and possibly some other colours of distemper below the blue. It is feasible as kings blue was a 17C thing, but the pigments required were not cheap or readily available.

The rafters were commonly limewashed along with wall timbers and panels. It wasn’t a fashion, more a practicality and health thing. A couple of extra coats every year or so, hence the very thick build ups you will find in some areas from centuries of application! Timbers less so than plaster.

What was the issue with the dendro? Not enough suitable timber to get adequate cores, or a non conclusive match of the charts? It’s a frustratingly expensive non event!

I’d spend my money on a good building archaeologist. But there are also many good historic framing books out there which will give you broad brush ageing and the clues to look for as you investigate.

 

[Flyfisher]

Can’t even trust the ‘experts’ - ours was surveyed in the 80s by the local group who record Wiltshire’s built history, a great resource. However, they claimed it was a farmhouse built for a yeoman around 1600, but missed the glaringly obvious fact it started as a utilitarian barn without any first floors and was converted to a dwelling around that time. The problem with getting focussed on the wrong features to date the actual structure!

About 10 years ago, we were contacted by someone who had recently moved into the village and was researching its history with a view to publishing a book all about it, for which he had obtained a small grant from the parish council. Apparently he had done the same thing for the village where he previously lived and had published a book all about it. Being one of the oldest houses in the village, he was naturally interested in its history and we duly told him everything we knew about it, including a previous owner who had well-documented connections with the royal family.

Some months later, we were given a copy of the parts relevant to our house to proof read prior to publication. There were many mistakes concerning previous owners and dates, which we duly corrected and returned. When the book was finally published, none of our corrections had been included! It wasn't as if he had to take our word for the royal connections as they were fully documented in Debretts and therefore easily verified.

Although it was only a minor annoyance to us, it made me wonder about the accuracy of the rest of the book. Worse still, in 50, 100 years time when all living memory of such things has gone, this factually inaccurate book will remain as a 'documented history' of the village to mislead future generations. Beware amateur historians!!

 

[Kearn]

About 10 years ago, we were contacted by someone who had recently moved into the village and was researching its history with a view to publishing a book all about it, for which he had obtained a small grant from the parish council. Apparently he had done the same thing for the village where he previously lived and had published a book all about it. Being one of the oldest houses in the village, he was naturally interested in its history and we duly told him everything we knew about it, including a previous owner who had well-documented connections with the royal family.

Some months later, we were given a copy of the parts relevant to our house to proof read prior to publication. There were many mistakes concerning previous owners and dates, which we duly corrected and returned. When the book was finally published, none of our corrections had been included! It wasn't as if he had to take our word for the royal connections as they were fully documented in Debretts and therefore easily verified.

Although it was only a minor annoyance to us, it made me wonder about the accuracy of the rest of the book. Worse still, in 50, 100 years time when all living memory of such things has gone, this factually inaccurate book will remain as a 'documented history' of the village to mislead future generations. Beware amateur historians!!

Hold my beer…!

Our place is an old wool barn, timber framed originally sat up on staddle stones. It could be 15/16C unlikely much earlier. It was sensibly built on a seam of limestone bedrock, only 300mm beneath ground. (This bit matters…!)

It has a connection to the manorial family through marriage on an old 1700s map, but has never been part of the manorial estate and one of a few private dwellings. I’ve yet to trace back records in Gloucestershire for the Hicks family who married into the manor here, but there are boxes of records on their estate here and I’m hopeful of some needles hidden within…anyway, I digress.

in the early 1600s a trailblazer decided to take on a very early barn conversion, and turned it into a dwelling, with serious money and effort. Oddly, it was all for internal benefit, no real change externally to show their wealth as was common with the competing rich. Why this happened is again another curiosity for another day…

It’s one of the smaller villages in Wiltshire, full of the old guard, a bit of a Hot Fuzz vibe.

The month after we bought the old girl, the parish mag duly landed and on the front cover, an old hand drawing of our place with a very authoritatively written, and pointed, piece on its history.

There was a lot of usual inaccuracies, but the bit that struck me, was that apparently, we are built on the ruined site of a three asped Saxon chapel, which protrudes from the front of the building into the garden and the ancient graveyard runs under the building and into our back garden and the field behind. You can see the undulations in the field apparently (ignore the ridge and furrow farming that clearly was once employed there).

As I was still in research mode, piecing together our Statement of Historical Significance, I had scoured the usual archaeology databases but come up with nothing.
Eventually I tracked down the person responsible for the font of all monthly knowledge, keen to speak to the author or person who had the research findings that had been used so I could find out more.

Sadly he was dead. But I was reliably informed that he had been a local, well respected dowser and came to the house one day with his pair of sticks and discovered all of this.

My pickaxe, spade and digger tend to disagree somewhat having been down the short distance to bedrock in many spots in the site inside and out.

But why let that ruin a great tale.

I’ve lost track of the number of old folks who have regurgitated this story to me with real honesty in their voices. I did worry when we submitted our LBC that some of the local mob would start submitting comments about the Saxon chapel and graveyard though and I’d be footing the bills and mega delays for an archaeological watch!

The odd sisters, daughters of the previous owners for 40 years knocked on the door the other day, wanting to be nosey.
They also told me in no uncertain terms that there is an old graveyard in the back garden. Equally, they also told me we are haunted, but it’s not nasty, and there are fairies and gnomes living in the garden.

I’m not sure living memories are much better!

 

[Flyfisher]

Dowsing rods eh, well what more proof do you need?