British Legion building.

[Wendyf]

Will you go and photograph this one for us Plaques? I think it needs to be added to your collection.

[jscriv]

I have been told a couple of stories about this bldg.
One coming from a previous owner of Cobblers Cottage (the one with the small yard) who said the original bldg. was a working farm and that it was three stories high, with the ground floor now under the road. ( The lower level having Mullion windows. )
The other angle is that it was a Coach house and stables.
Which ever may or may not be true, the bldg. has an interesting look to it and would have commanded a prominent position over the town.
Alan Starkey( Black & White Minstrels and many other TV Drama parts ) lived in one of these houses for many years until he died at his home in France, not that long ago. He was a History buff and could probably have told us about the bldg.
1714 is now over the back door to the garden, which was probably the front of the original house.
I find it interesting that it's position is very close to where Wellhouse Farm would have been just below it on Church Street.
What ever the history of this bldg. I can only think that it was one of our very early town centre dwellings and would love for someone to put a reliable date on it, as I would for all the older bldgs. in Barlic that still stand today. Then we could see how our town grew over the ages.

[PanBiker]

Have we discussed the meaning or origin of Jepp Hill?

[John C Layton]

Very interesting topic this. Just to add an observation for what it's worth it appears that the gable of the Legion building incorporates the gable wall of a demolished bay that would have been another room in front of the cottage, fronting onto the road. Looking at the line of the cottage eves this carries around the Legion gable - the stonework below this line is more of a rubble type than that above.

Also the cottage front is a mish-mash - the door stonework appears to be designed as an internal door and the windows don't appear to be original - this front cottage wall could have been an internal wall between the front and back bays. The original chimney stack appears to have been demolished to the cottage eaves and rebuilt with the new Legion to its present height using the demolition stone from the cottage front bay. The cottage appears 18th century but is the date of 1714 a tad early I wonder ?????

Has anybody been in the cottage to look at the wall/chimney layout?

[Wendyf]

I've just popped inside (on Rightmove) feels a bit intrusive but never mind! We are looking at door out onto King Street with the small window beside it, so the cottage uses that chimney.

[Wendyf]

But that means the chimney takes up the whole wall of the cottage??

[PanBiker]

My Aunt and Uncle used to live at number 17 next door, the one that was a lodging house according to the census record. I only remember it from the late 50's early 60's. I remember low ceilings and beams in that cottage, a lot of nooks and crannies as well. Number 15 where my Grandparents lived at the same time was what I would call more conventional. A front and back room with stairs up the middle, two up two down really, part of one bedroom partitioned for the bathroom. Downstairs back room had steps up to the kitchen, a cosy little property.

[jscriv]

005.jpg

Have we discussed the meaning or origin of Jepp Hill?

[John C Layton]

Wendy - if the cottage was erected on the footprint of an earlier building it might have incorporated the stone chimney stack - the cottage as it stands appears to be the result of a number of building compromises.

There is a Jeppe Knave Grave on the Pendle Hill ridge brow above Sabden. Geap = lofty or steep in landscape settings. Jeppe Knave Grave is a circular stone cairn so we have 'circle on the steep ridge' - the 'grave' having been added much later.

[PanBiker]

I walked back from work and had a look at the back of the row from Phillip Street (Back Lane). The date stone in question is a sandstone slab built into the wall above the back door lintel of number 17, my Aunt's old house. It is weathered but readable and looks to be contemporary with the original build. I could not get a decent photo as I only had my phone with me. You can only see it at an angle as well from the back of number 15 as 17 has a high gate. The cottages stand adjacent to Back Lane of course which as we know is one of the oldest routes through town.

[Stanley]

" But that means the chimney takes up the whole wall of the cottage?"
Not unusual Wendy when a property was being rebuilt. At Hey Farm the chimney pile inside the building was massive with two large fireplaces on each side with surviving beehive ovens. Much older than the 18th century rebuild. The chimney pile in a timber hall was the biggest and most expensive part of the structure and was often retained in the new build. In effect it and its supporting masonry was a complete wall and only needed rebuilding at each end. At its thickest point such a wall could be ten feet through.
The classic book for examples is 'Vernacular Architecture' by R W Brunskill. It is still the bible for the subject.

[plaques]

The date stone in question is a sandstone slab built into the wall above the back door lintel of number 17,

. My golden rules for taking this type of picture are:
Only take images that can easily be seen from a public thoroughfare or is open to the public.
If someone questions what you are doing spend a little time explaining what you are doing. 99.9% of the time they will keep you talking far longer than you expected. All favorable I may add.
Never go into private property unless the owner gives you permission.
I've still a number of pictures that I would like to take but these will require a bit of organizing.

[jscriv]

Hope this works.

DSCN0047.JPG

DSCN0052.JPG

DSCN0051.JPG

2016-02-10-307.jpg

[plaques]

The date stone looks very original. I can't see all the detail but the fact that there is other script rather than just the date is typical of these old date stones. So there you are.. I'm amazed, another Barlick first.

[PanBiker]

A first in what respect Plaques? We have plenty of other original date stones around town.

[plaques]

A first in the sense that for its age it is totally unadulterated, no painting, and what appears to be genuinely weathered. I would have been a bit suspicious if it have been a more exotic stone rather than the local sandstone. Having said all that I've been told of date stones from demolished or abandoned buildings being transported many miles and built into buildings that never had a date stone of their own. Even in this case one could ask why someone would go to the expense of installing what would appear to be a quality / expensive stone on a low cost building? I thought I'd covered all the date stones in the Burnley / Pendle area but If you know of other stones of the same condition I would be very interested in recording them.

[Stanley]

P is right about the problems with date stones. They are notorious for it.
The stone structure below the lower window is the foundation of the original building before the infill/extension was built.
The squint on the small window on the Legion building suggests that the infill/extension was built after the original cottage was built on the Legion site.
Can't immediately think of a reason for the slates in the structure.

[jscriv]

Stanley, your comment is interesting regarding the foundation, do you have a picture or drawing of any kind, showing the original building, as you describe ?
I would be very interested if anyone has conclusive info about the buildings history.

John

[plaques]

I'm getting a little uneasy about the date stone being part of the original building. The stone itself has a vertical line running through it which at first sight looks like a crack but could easily be a joint where the stone has been shortened. This may or may not be of any importance if the full stone could be examined to see if any script was missing and the markings balanced within the panel. Also the door lintel itself has a large crack leading to the suspicion that the date stone is a secondary re-enforcement to prevent further collapse. So at this stage put me down as a don't know!

[PanBiker]

The stone has a border on all four sides. Why would you split it vertically through the middle rather than take some off one or both ends? Also, why use a stone with a joint in it to reinforce above a cracked lintel, it would still be a weak point in the structure.

[Stanley]

No drawing John, the evidence is in the masonry. Typical foundation base construction.

[plaques]

To quantify the 'date' stones found in Barlick here is my list. These are dates which can be found on the various buildings and terrace plaques carved in stone. They do not include Information plaques or metalwork. If anyone knows of other Date stones in Barlick I would be more than happy to add them to my list, please just post the date and location.
The one currently being discussed in King St ref: 1714 is clearly exceptional for its date and quality.

Albert Rd 1914
Albert Rd 1907
Cavendish St 1910
Church St 1817 Painted
Church St 1908
Church St 1816 Painted
Fernlea Ave 1990
Ferlea Ave 1925
Foster Rd 1699 Painted
Foster Rd 1688 painted
Gisburn Rd 1910
Gisburn Rd 1915
Gisburn Rd 1915
Gisburn Rd 1905
Gisburn Rd 1906
Gisburn Rd MDCCCCXIII
Higher Rd 1891
Kelbrook Rd 1970
Manchester Rd 1898
Manchester Rd 2003
Manchester Rd 1911
Manchester Rd 1909
Manchester Rd 1914
Mosley St 1891
Newtown 1906
Park Avenue 1914
Park avenue 1905
Park Avenue 1899
Park Rd 1898
Park Rd 1892
Park Rd 1894
Phillips St 1984
Rainhall Rd 1895
Rainhall Rd 1896
Rainhall Rd 1896
Rainhall Rd 1902
Skipton Rd 1906
Skipton Rd 1958
Skipton Rd 1913
Station Rd 1897
Town Head 1829
Walmsgate 1892
Walmsgate 1910

Back to the King St Date stone. The split , if that's what it is, is about 1/3 along its length with the solid portion over the lintel crack. Since the loading over a door or window only applies to a triangular area over the opening itself the extra large stone would certainly add to the overall strength. Although John's picture is useful to confirm the date without knowing more about the missing lettering I'm still in the 'don't know camp' about whether it was part of the original building.

[Stanley]

I think we are on fairly firm ground if we assume there was an earlier building on the site. It was adjacent to Back Lane (Philip Street) the original main route through the area and the irregular street plan in the area also suggests old settlement.

[jscriv]

2016-02-10-309.jpg

[plaques]

Going over old ground again and leaving no stone unturned. Here's another view of the date stone.
Looks like IE V 1714. I have shown a space between the IE and the V. I'm not sure if there is a letter missing or whether the space was intentional.

P3250156AD.jpg