| Title: | Guest Contribution: Report on Tree Ring Dating of the Kings Arms, Michaelchurch Escley |
| Date: | 2007 |
Oxford Dendrochronology Laboratory
Interim Report 2007/XX
The Tree-Ring Dating of the Kings Arms,
Michaelchurch Escley, Herefordshire
M J Worthington & D W H Miles
Summary:
MICHAELCHURCH ESCLEY, KINGS ARMS (SU 922989)
Hall Felling dates: Winter 1535/6
Cruck 1535/6(37C); Crucks (3/3) 1532-1540, 1508-1538, 1505-1535; Rafter 1510-1540. Site Masters 1444-1535 MEKA13 (t = 6.73 NORTH; 6.18 SINAI; 6.11 DINMORE1); 1370-1497 MEKA25 (t = 7.58 ABERGVNY; 6.64 WVT9; 6.27 HEREFC) 1439-1502 MEKA4 (5.41 CGFE, 5.16 HABBERLY, 5.16 WALES97).
Kings Arms
A single storey stone building with first floor dormers that respecting the footprint of the original hall house/longhouse. The building is aligned approximately north-south with three main ground floor elements – northern and southern areas of fairly modern construction with in between an area retaining two pairs of cruck frames with associated purlins and rafters.
A mediaeval hall house; one cruck was smoke blackened and the crucks are at the upper end of the building which was probably stone walled from the start. The pattern of cruck joints show that the best faced inward to the hall.
Date sampled: 3rd July 2006
Owner & Commissioner: Mr & Mrs Hortin
Historical Research: Tony Gray and Richard Suggett
Summary published: Miles, D H, Worthington, M J, and Bridge, M C, 2007 Tree-ring dates, Vernacular Architecture 37, (forthcoming)
Oxford Dendrochronology Laboratory
Mill Farm, Mapledurham, South Oxfordshire, RG4 7TX
daniel.miles@rlaha.ox.ac.uk & michael.worthington@rlaha.ox.ac.uk
www.dendrochronology.com
April 2007
How Dendrochronology Works
Dendrochronology has over the past 20 years become one of the leading and most accurate scientific dating methods. Whilst not always successful, when it does work, it is precise, often to the season of the year. Tree-ring dating is well known for its use in dating historic buildings and archaeological timbers to this degree of precision. However more ancillary objects such as doors, furniture, panel paintings, and wooden boards in medieval book-bindings can sometimes be successfully dated.
The science of dendrochronology is based on a combination of biology and statistics. Fundamental to understanding how dendrochronology works is the phenomenon of tree growth. Essentially, trees grow through the addition of both elongation and radial increments. The elongation takes place at the terminal portions of the shoots, branches, and roots, while the radial increment is added by the cambium, the zone of living cells between the wood and the bark. In general terms, a tree can be best simplified by describing it as a cone, with a new layer being added to the outside each year in temperate zones, making it wider and taller.
An annual ring is composed of the growth which takes place during the spring and summer until about November when the leaves are shed and the tree becomes dormant for the winter period. For the European oak (Quercus robur and Q. petraea), as well as many other species, the annual ring is composed of two distinct parts - the spring growth or early wood, and the summer growth, or late wood. Early wood is composed of large vessels formed during the period of shoot growth which takes place between March and May, which is before the establishment of any significant leaf growth, and is produced by using most of the energy and raw materials laid down the previous year. Then, there is an abrupt change at the time of leaf expansion around May or June when hormonal activity dictates a change in the quality of the xylem and the summer, or late wood is formed. Here the wood becomes increasingly fibrous and contains much smaller vessels. Trees with this type of growth pattern are known as ring-porous, and are distinctive in the contrasting open, light-coloured early wood vessels compared to the dense, darker-coloured late wood.
Dendrochronology utilises the variation in the width of the annual rings as influenced by climatic conditions common to a large area, as opposed to other more local factors such as woodland competition and insect attack. It is through the comparison of these climate-induced variations in ring widths that allows calendar dates to be ascribed from a firmly-dated sequence to one which is not. If a tree section is complete to the bark edge, then when dated a precise date of felling can be determined, precise to the season of the year, depending on the degree of formation of the outermost ring. Therefore, a tree with bark which has the spring vessels formed but no summer growth can be said to be felled in the spring, although it is not possible to say in which particular month the tree was felled.
Section of tree with conversion methods showing three types of sapwood retention resulting in A terminus post quem, B a felling date range, and C a precise felling date. Enlarged area D shows the outermost rings of the sapwood with growing seasons (Miles 1997, 42)
Another important dimension to dendrochronological studies is the presence of sapwood. This is the band of growth rings immediately beneath the bark and comprises the living growth rings which transport the sap from the roots to the leaves. This sapwood band is distinguished from the heartwood by the prominent features of colour change and the blocking of the spring vessels with tyloses, the waste products of the tree’s growth. The heartwood is generally darker in colour, and the spring vessels are blocked with tyloses. The heartwood is dead tissue, whereas the sapwood is living, although the only really living, growing, cells are in the cambium, immediately beneath the bark. In European oak (Quercus robur sp), the difference in colour is generally matched by the change in the spring vessels. Generally the sapwood retains stored food and is therefore attractive to insect and fungal attack once the tree is felled and therefore is often removed during conversion.
Sapwood in European oaks tends to be of a relatively constant width and/or number of rings. By determining what this range is with an empirically or statistically-derived estimate is a valuable aspect in the interpretation of tree-ring dates where the bark edge is not present (Miles 1997). The narrower this range of sapwood rings, the more precise the estimated felling date range will be.
Methodology: The Dating Process
All timbers sampled were of oak (Quercus spp.) from what appeared to be primary first-use timbers, or any timbers which might have been re-used from an early phase. Those timbers which looked most suitable for dendrochronological purposes with complete sapwood or reasonably long ring sequences were selected. In situ timbers were sampled through coring, using a 16mm hollow auger. Details and locations of the samples are detailed in the summary table.
The dry samples were sanded on a linisher, or bench-mounted belt sander, using 60 to 1200 grit abrasive paper, and were cleaned with compressed air to allow the ring boundaries to be clearly distinguished. They were then measured under a x10/x30 microscope using a travelling stage electronically displaying displacement to a precision of 0.01mm. Thus each ring or year is represented by its measurement which is arranged as a series of ring-width indices within a data set, with the earliest ring being placed at the beginning of the series, and the latest or outermost ring concluding the data set.
The principle behind tree-ring dating is a simple one: the seasonal variations in climate-induced growth as reflected in the varying width of a series of measured annual rings is compared with other, previously dated ring sequences to allow precise dates to be ascribed to each ring. When an undated sample or site sequence is compared against a dated sequence, known as a reference chronology, an indication of how good the match is must be determined. Although it is almost impossible to define a visual match, computer comparisons can be accurately quantified. Whilst it may not be the best statistical indicator, Student’s (a pseudonym for W S Gosset) t-value has been widely used amongst British dendrochronologists. The cross-correlation algorithms most commonly used and published are derived from Baillie and Pilcher’s CROS programme (Baillie and Pilcher 1973), although a faster version (Munro 1984) giving slightly different t-values is sometimes used for indicative purposes.
Generally, t-values over 3.5 should be considered to be significant, although in reality it is common to find demonstrably spurious t-values of 4 and 5 because more than one matching position is indicated. For this reason, dendrochronologists prefer to see some t-value ranges of 5, 6, or higher, and for these to be well replicated from different, independent chronologies with local and regional chronologies well represented. Users of dates also need to assess their validity critically. They should not have great faith in a date supported by a handful of t-values of 3’s with one or two 4’s, nor should they be entirely satisfied with a single high match of 5 or 6. Examples of spurious t-values in excess of 7 have been noted, so it is essential that matches with reference chronologies be well replicated, and that this is confirmed with visual matches between the two graphs. Matches with t-values of 10 or more between individual sequences usually signify having originated from the same parent tree.
In reality, the probability of a particular date being valid is itself a statistical measure depending on the t-values. Consideration must also be given to the length of the sequence being dated as well as those of the reference chronologies. A sample with 30 or 40 years growth is likely to match with high t-values at varying positions, whereas a sample with 100 consecutive rings is much more likely to match significantly at only one unique position. Samples with ring counts as low as 50 may occasionally be dated, but only if the matches are very strong, clear and well replicated, with no other significant matching positions. This is essential for intra-site matching when dealing with such short sequences. Consideration should also be given to evaluating the reference chronology against which the samples have been matched: those with well-replicated components which are geographically near to the sampling site are given more weight than an individual site or sample from the opposite end of the country.
It is general practice to cross-match samples from within the same phase to each other first, combining them into a site master, before comparing with the reference chronologies. This has the advantage of averaging out the ‘noise’ of individual trees and is much more likely to obtain higher t-values and stronger visual matches. After measurement, the ring-width series for each sample is plotted as a graph of width against year on log-linear graph paper. The graphs of each of the samples in the phase under study are then compared visually at the positions indicated by the computer matching and, if found satisfactory and consistent, are averaged to form a mean curve for the site or phase. This mean curve and any unmatched individual sequences are compared against dated reference chronologies to obtain an absolute calendar date for each sequence. Sometimes, especially in urban situations, timbers may have come from different sources and fail to match each other, thus making the compilation of a site master difficult. In this situation samples must then be compared individually with the reference chronologies.
Therefore, when cross-matching samples with each other, or against reference chronologies, a combination of both visual matching and a process of qualified statistical comparison by computer is used. The ring-width series were compared on an IBM compatible computer for statistical cross-matching using a variant of the Belfast CROS program (Baillie and Pilcher 1973). A version of this and other programmes were written in BASIC by D Haddon-Reece, and re-written in Microsoft Visual Basic by M R Allwright and P A Parker.
Ascribing and Interpreting Felling Dates
Once a tree-ring sequence has been firmly dated in time, a felling date, or date range, is ascribed where possible. For samples which have sapwood complete to the underside of, or including bark, this process is relatively straight forward. Depending on the completeness of the final ring, i.e. if it has only the early-wood formed, or the latewood, a precise felling date and season can be given. If the sapwood is partially missing, or if only a heartwood/sapwood transition boundary survives, then an estimated felling date range can be given for each sample. The number of sapwood rings can be estimated by using a statistically derived sapwood estimate with a given confidence limit. A review of the geographical distribution of dated sapwood data from historic building timbers has shown that a 95% range of 11-41 rings is most appropriate for the Wales and border counties (Miles 1997), which will be used here. If no sapwood or heartwood/sapwood boundary survives, then the minimum number of sapwood rings from the appropriate sapwood estimate is added to the last measured ring to give a terminus post quem (tpq) or felled after date.
Some caution must be used in interpreting solitary precise felling dates. Many instances have been noted where timbers used in the same structural phase have been felled one, two, or more years apart. Whenever possible, a group of precise felling dates should be used as a more reliable indication of the construction period. It must be emphasised that dendrochronology can only date when a tree has been felled, not when the timber was used to construct the structure under study. However, it is common practice to build timber-framed structures with green or unseasoned timber and that construction usually took place within twelve months of felling (Miles 1997).
Details of Dendrochronological Analysis
The results of the dendrochronological analysis for the building under study are presented in a number of detailed tables. The most useful of these is the summary Table 1. This gives most of the salient results of the dendrochronological process, and includes details for each sample, its location, and its felling date or date range, if successfully tree-ring dated. This last column is of particular interest to the end user, as it gives the actual year and season when the tree was felled, if bark is present, or an estimated felling date range if the sapwood is incomplete. Occasionally it will be noted that the felling date ranges may coincide with the precise felling date ranges. This is nothing to be overly concerned about so long as these are not too far apart. It must be remembered that the estimated felling date ranges are calculated at a 95% confidence level, which means that statistically one sample in 20 will have felling dates which actually fall outside the predicted range.
It will also be noticed that often the precise felling dates will vary within several years of each other. Unless there is supporting archaeological evidence suggesting different phases, all this would indicate is either stockpiling of timber, or of trees which have been felled or died at varying times but not cut up until the commencement of the particular building operations in question. When presented with varying precise felling dates, one should always take the latest date for the structure under study, and it is likely that construction will have been completed for ordinary vernacular buildings within twelve or eighteen months from this latest felling date (Miles 1997).
Table 2 shows the degree with which the multiple radii have cross-matched with each other to form same-timber means. This shows the t-value over the number of years overlap for each combination of samples in a matrix table. It should be born in mind that t-values with less than 80 rings overlap may not truly reflect the same degree of match and that spurious matches may produce similar values. Once the individual multiple samples from the same timber have been combined, then these are compared with other samples from the site and any which are found to have originated from the same parent tree are again similarly combined, and the matches shown with a matrix table of t-values and overlaps.
Finally, all samples, including all same timber and same tree means are combined to form one or more site masters. Again, the cross-matching is shown as a matrix table. Reference should always be made to Table 1 to clearly identify which components have been combined.
Table 3 shows the degree of cross-matching between the site master(s) with a selection of reference chronologies. This shows the county or region from which the reference chronology originated, the common chronology name together with who compiled the chronology with publication reference and the years covered by the reference chronology. The years overlap of the reference chronology and the site master being compared are also shown together with the resulting t-value. It should be appreciated that well replicated regional reference chronologies, which are shown in bold, will often produce better matches then with individual site masters or indeed individual sample sequences.
Figures include a bar diagram which shows the chronological relationship between two or more dated samples from a phase of building. The site sample record sheets are also appended, together with any plans showing sample locations, if available.
Publication of all dated sites are published in Vernacular Architecture annually, and the entry, if available, is shown on the summary page of the report. This does not give as much technical data for the samples dated, but does give the t-value matches against the relevant chronologies, provide a short descriptive paragraph for each building or phase dated, and gives a useful short summary of samples dated. These summaries are also listed on the web-site maintained by the Laboratory, which can be accessed at www.dendrochronology.com. The Oxford Dendrochronology Laboratory retains copyright of this report, but the commissioner of the report has the right to use the report for his/her own use so long as the authorship is quoted. Primary data and the resulting site master(s) used in the analysis is available from the Laboratory on request by the commissioner and bona fide researchers. The samples form part of the Laboratory archives.
Summary of Dating
Five samples were taken from the primary cruck phase of the Kings Arms, Michaelchurch, Escley Hereford, four cruck blades and a rafter from the west side of the roof. During sampling, two of the initial cores fragmented so additional cores were taken from the same timber in order to maximise the dating potential. Mean individual timber sequences were produced for meka4, and meka5 by combining, where appropriate, the multiple series produced from fragmented and duplicate cores (Tables 2). These mean individual timber sequences were used in the remaining analyses.
During the timber assessment it was noted that the two crucks making up the north truss and were both from the same tree. Also the two crucks making up the south truss were from the sample tree. The sequences produced from each pair were compare and combined to form the new sequences meka13 for the north cruck, and meka25 for south truss. These mean individual timber sequences were used in the remaining analyses.
The three sequences were compared but the master chronologies, all three dated. See Table1. Sample meka3 was the only sample with complete sapwood and dated to the winter of 1535/6, all the dated samples are consistent with this date.
References
Baillie, M G L, and Pilcher, J R, 1973 A simple cross-dating program for tree-ring research, Tree-Ring Bulletin, 33, 7-14
Baillie, M G L, and Pilcher, J R, 1982 unpubl A Master tree-ring chronology for England, unpubl computer file ENGLAND, Queens Univ, Belfast
Hillam, J, 1983 Tree-ring dates, Vernacular Architect, 15, 69
Hillam, J, and Groves, C, 1994 Compilation of master chronologies from the North, unpubl computer file NORTH, Sheffield Dendrochronology Laboratory
Miles, D H, 1995 Working compilation of 71 reference chronologies centred around Shropshire by various researchers, unpubl computer file SALOP95, Oxford Dendrochronology Laboratory
Miles, D H, 1997 The interpretation, presentation, and use of tree-ring dates, Vernacular Architecture, 28, 40-56
Miles, D H, 1997 Working compilation of 58 reference chronologies centred around Wales by various researchers, unpubl computer file WALES97, Oxford Dendrochronology Laboratory
Miles, D H, and Haddon-Reece, D, 1993 List 54 - Tree-ring dates, Vernacular Architect, 24, 54–60
Miles, D H, and Haddon-Reece, D, 1995 List 64 - Tree-ring dates, Vernacular Architect 26, 62–72 Part II (General list), Part III (Shropshire Dendrochronology Project - Phase 3)
Miles, D H, and Haddon-Reece, D 1996 List 72 - Tree-ring dates, Vernacular Architect, 27, 97–102
Miles, D H, and Worthington, M J, 1997 Tree-ring dates, Vernacular Architect 28, 159–81
Miles, D H, and Worthington, M J, 1998 Tree-ring dates, Vernacular Architect 29, 111–29
Miles, D H, and Worthington, M J, 1999 Tree-ring dates, Vernacular Architect 30, 98–113
Miles, D H, and Worthington, M J, 2000 Tree-ring dates, Vernacular Architect 31, 90–113
Miles, D H, and Worthington, M J, 2002 Tree-ring dates, Vernacular Architect 33, 81–102
Miles, D H, Worthington, M J, and Bridge, M C, 2003 Tree-ring dates, Vernacular Architect 34, 109–121
Miles, D H, Worthington, M J, and Bridge, M C, 2004 Tree-ring dates, Vernacular Architect 35, 95–113
Munro, M A R, 1984 An improved algorithm for cross tree-dating, Tree Ring Bulletin, 44, 17-27.
Nayling, N, 1999 Tree-ring analysis of oak timbers from Shrewsbury Abbey Church, Anc Mon Lab Rep, 39/99
Nayling, N, 2000 Tree-ring analysis of timbers from The White House, Vowchurch, Herefordshire, Anc Mon Lab Rep, 73/99
Siebenlist-Kerner, V, 1978 ‘The Chronology, 1341–1636, for certain hillside oaks from Western England and Wales’, in Dendrochronology in Europe (ed J M Fletcher), BAR, 51, 157–61
Tyers, I, 1996 Tree-ring analysis of timbers from All Saints Church, Hereford, Hereford and Worcester, Anc Mon Lab Rep, 16/96
Tyers, I, 1997 Tree-ring analysis of Timbers from Sinai Park, Staffordshire, Anc Mon Lab Rep, 80/97
Tyers, I, and Boswijk, G, 1998 Tree-ring analysis of oak timbers from Dore Abbey, Abbey Dore, Herefordshire, Anc Mon Lab Rep, 18/98
Table 1: Summary of Tree-Ring Dating
KINGS ARMS, MICHAELCHURCH ESCLEY, HEREFORDSHIRE
| Sample number & type |
| Timber and position | Dates AD spanning | H/S bdry | Sapwood complement | No of rings | Mean width mm
| Std devn mm
| Mean sens mm | Felling seasons and dates/date ranges (AD) | |
| *meka1 | c | West cruck north truss | 1444-1499 | 1496 | 3+33nm | 56 | 1.73 | 0.68 | 0.160 | AD 1532-1540 |
|
| †meka2. | c | West cruck south truss | 1370-1497 | 1497 | h/s bry | 128 | 1.33 | 0.49 | 0.160 | AD 1508-1538 |
|
| *meka3 | c | East cruck north truss | 1458-1535 | 1498 | 37C | 78 | 1.82 | 0.89 | 0.207 | Winter AD 1535/6 |
|
| meka4a | c | Rafter 3rd from south truss | 1449-1502 | 1502 | h/s bry | 54 | 0.90 | 0.17 | 0.157 |
|
|
| meka4b | c | ditto | 1439-1498 | 1496 | 2 | 60 | 0.91 | 0.17 | 0.154 |
|
|
| meka4 |
| Mean of meka4a+4b | 1439-1502 | 1499 | 3 | 64 | 0.91 | 0.17 | 0.147 | AD 1510-1540 |
|
| meka5a | c | East cruck south truss | 1380-1490 |
| h/w only | 111 | 1.63 | 0.48 | 0.186 |
|
|
| meka5b | c | ditto | 1475-1496 | 1494 | 2 | 22 | 1.59 | 0.45 | 0.262 |
|
|
| †meka5 |
| mean of meka5a+5b | 1380-1496 | 1494 | 2 | 117 | 1.64 | 0.49 | 0.195 | AD 1505-1535 |
|
| * = MEKA13 Site Master | 1444-1535 |
|
| 92 | 1.72 | 0.68 | 0.177 |
|
| ||
| † = MEKA25 Site Master | 1370-1497 |
|
| 128 | 1.51 | 0.48 | 0.164 |
|
| ||
Key: *, †, § = sample included in site-master; c = core; mc = micro-core; s = slice/section; g = graticule; p = photograph; ¼C, ½C, C = bark edge present, partial or complete ring: ¼C = spring (last partial ring not measured), ½C = summer/autumn (last partial ring not measured), or C = winter felling (ring measured); H/S bdry = heartwood/sapwood boundary - last heartwood ring date; std devn = standard deviation; mean sens = mean sensitivity. Sapwood estimate 11-41 years (Miles 1997)
Explanation of terms used in Table 1
The summary table gives most of the salient results of the dendrochronological process. For ease in quickly referring to various types of information, these have all been presented in Table 1. The information includes the following categories:
Sample number: Generally, each site is given a two or three letter identifying prefix code, after which each timber is given an individual number. If a timber is sampled twice, or if two timbers were noted at time of sampling as having clearly originated from the same tree, then they are given suffixes ‘a’, ‘b’, etc. Where a core sample has broken, with no clear overlap between segments, these are differentiated by a further suffix ‘1’, ‘2’, etc.
Type shows whether the sample was from a core ‘c’, or a section or slice from a timber‘s’. Sometimes photographs are used ‘p’, or timbers measured in situ with a graticule ‘g’.
Timber and position column details each timber sampled along with a location reference. This will usually refer to a bay or truss number, or relate to compass points or to a reference drawing.
Dates AD spanning gives the first and last measured ring dates of the sequence (if dated),
H/S bdry is the date of the heartwood/sapwood transition or boundary (if present). This date is critical in determining an estimated felling date range if the sapwood is not complete to the bark edge.
Sapwood complement gives the number of sapwood rings. The tree starts growing in the spring during which time the earlywood is produced, also known also as spring growth. This consists of between one and three decreasing spring vessels and is noted as Spring felling and is indicated by a ¼ C after the number of sapwood ring count. Sometimes this can be more accurately pin-pointed to very early spring when just a few spring vessels are visible. After the spring growing season, the latewood or summer growth commences, and is differentiated from the proceeding spring growth by the dense band of tissue. This summer growth continues until just before the leaves drop, in about October. Trees felled during this period are noted as summer felled (½ C), but it is difficult to be too precise, as the width of the latewood can be variable, and it can be difficult to distinguish whether a tree stopped growing in autumn or winter. When the summer growth band is clearly complete, then the tree would have been felled during the dormant winter period, as shown by a single C. Sometimes a sample will clearly have complete sapwood, but due either to slight abrasion at the point of coring, or extremely narrow growth rings, it is impossible to determine the season of felling.
Number of rings: The total number of measured rings on the samples analysed. If the pith is included or near to the beginning of the sequence, this is indicated by a Θ symbol if the pith is included in sample; Φ if within 5 rings of centre; and Ω if within 10 rings of centre.
Mean ring width: This, simply put, is the sum total of all the individual ring widths, divided by the number of rings, giving an average ring width for the series.
Mean sensitivity: A statistic measuring the mean percentage, or relative, change from each measured yearly ring value to the next; that is, the average relative difference from one ring width to the next, calculated by dividing the absolute value of the differences between each pair of measurements by the average of the paired measurements, then averaging the quotients for all pairs in the tree-ring series (Fritts 1976). Sensitivity is a dendrochronological term referring to the presence of ring-width variability in the radial direction within a tree which indicates the growth response of a particular tree is “sensitive” to variations in climate, as opposed to complacency.
Standard deviation: The mean scatter of a population of numbers from the population mean. The square root of the variance, which is itself the square of the mean scatter of a statistical population of numbers from the population mean. (Fritts 1976).
Felling seasons and dates/date ranges is probably the most important column of the summary table. Here the actual felling dates and seasons are given for each dated sample (if complete sapwood is present). Sometimes it will be noticed that often the precise felling dates will vary within several years of each other. Unless there is supporting archaeological evidence suggesting different phases, all this would indicate is either stockpiling of timber, or of trees which have been felled or died at varying times but not cut up until the commencement of the particular building operations in question. When presented with varying precise felling dates, one should always take the latest date for the structure under study, and it is likely that construction will have been completed for ordinary vernacular buildings within twelve or eighteen months from this latest felling date (Miles 1997).
Table 2: Matrix of t-values and overlaps for same-timber means and site masters
Components of timber meka4 Components of timber meka5
| Sample: | meka4b |
|
|
| Sample: | meka5b |
|
| Last ring date AD: | 1498 |
|
|
| Last ring date AD: | 1496 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| meka4b | 9.97 |
|
|
| meka5a | 4.29 |
|
| 1502 | 50 |
|
|
| 1490 | 16 |
|
Components timber meka13 Components of timber meka25
| Sample: | Meka3 |
|
|
| Sample: | meka5 |
|
| Last ring date AD: | 1535 |
|
|
| Last ring date AD: | 1496 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Meka1 | 4.64 |
|
|
| Meka2 | 7.14 |
|
| 1499 | 42 |
|
|
| 1497 | 117 |
|
Table 3a: Dating of site master meka13 (1444-1535) against reference chronologies at 1535
|
| County or region: | Chronology name: | Short publication reference: | File name: | Spanning: | Overlap: | t-value: |
|
| Herefordshire | Hergest Court, Kington | (Miles and Worthington 1997) | HERGEST4 | 1451-1665 | 85 | 5.75 |
|
| Yorkshire | Elland Old Hall | (Hillam 1983) | ELLAND | 1374-1574 | 92 | 5.87 |
| †
| Shropshire
| Wolverton Manor
| (Miles and Haddon-Reece 1993) | WOLVERTN | 1325-1580 | 92 | 5.87 |
| † | Wales/borders
| Hillside oaks
| (Siebenlist-Kerner 1978)
| GIERTZ | 1341-1636 | 92 | 5.98 |
|
| Wales | Welsh Master Chronology | (Miles 1997) | WALES97 | 404-1981 | 92 | 6.01 |
|
| England | England Master Chronology | (Baillie and Pilcher 1982) | ENGLAND | 404-1981 | 92 | 6.10 |
|
| Shropshire | Shropshire Master Chronology | (Miles 1995)
| SALOP95 | 881-1745 | 92 | 6.11 |
|
| Herefordshire | Dinmore Manor | (Miles and Worthington 2000) | DINMORE1 | 1371-1603 | 92 | 6.11 |
|
| Staffordshire | Sinai Park | (Tyers 1997) | SINAI | 1227-1750 | 92 | 6.18 |
|
| North | Northern England Master | (Hillam and Groves 1994) | NORTH | 440-1742 | 92 | 6.73 |
Chronologies shown in bold are composite chronologies † = Component of SALOP95
Table 3b: Dating of site master meka25 (1370-1497) against reference chronologies at 1497
|
| County or region: | Chronology name: | Short publication reference: | File name: | Spanning: | Overlap: | t-value: |
|
| Herefordshire | Dore Abbey | (Tyers and Boswijk 1998) | DORE2 | 1363-1612 | 128 | 5.63 |
|
| Hampshire | Dairy Cottage Mottisfont | (Miles et al 2003) | DAIRYCT2 | 1351-1499 | 128 | 5.69 |
| § | Herefordshire | Church Street, Hereford | (Tyers 1996) | HERE14C | 1335-1595 | 128 | 5.74 |
|
| Somerset | Lodge Farm, Norton St Philip | (Miles and Worthington 2000) | LDGFMNSP | 1350-1487 | 118 | 5.82 |
|
| Somerset | Somerset Master Chronology | ?????? | SOMRST04 | 770-1979 | 128 | 5.83 |
|
| Montgomeryshire
| The Parliament House, Machylleth | (Miles, Worthington & Bridge 2004) | PARLMNT1 | 1306-1451 | 82 | 5.85 |
|
| Wales | Welsh Master Chronology | (Miles 1997) | WALES97 | 404-1981 | 128 | 6.04 |
| § | Herefordshire | Farmer's Club, Hereford | (Tyers 1996) | HEREFC | 1313-1617 | 128 | 6.27 |
|
| Herefordshire | White House, Vowchurch | (Nayling 2000) | WVT9 | 1364-1602 | 128 | 6.64 |
|
| Wales | St Mary's, Abergeveny | (Miles and Worthington 1999) | ABERGVNY | 1364-1482 | 128 | 7.58 |
Chronologies shown in bold are composite chronologies § = Component of WALES97
Table 3c: Dating of site master MEKA4 (1439-1502) against reference chronologies at 1502
|
| County or region: | Chronology name: | Short publication reference: | File name: | Spanning: | Overlap: | t-value: |
|
| Wales | Plas Mawr House | (Miles and Haddon-Reece 1996) | PLASMWR2 | 1360-1578 | 64 | 4.66 |
|
| Shropshire | Whittington Castle, Whittington | (Miles, Worthington & Bridge 2004) | WHITNGTN | 1351-1628 | 64 | 4.70 |
|
| Shropshire | Clive House, Shrewsbury | (Miles and Worthington 2002) | CLIVEHS | 1385-1590 | 64 | 4.70 |
|
| Shropshire | Clungunford Farm | (Miles and Worthington 2002) | CGFB | 1273-1628 | 64 | 4.73 |
|
| Shropshire | Shrewsbury Abbey Church | (Nayling 1999) | SACM2 | 1375-1493 | 55 | 4.83 |
|
| Somerset | George Inn, Norton St Philip | (Miles and Worthington 1998) | gi35 | 1438-1530 | 64 | 4.93 |
| *† | Shropshire | Brookgate Farm | (Miles and Haddon-Reece 1993) | BROOKGT | 1438-1530 | 64 | 4.93 |
|
| Wales | Welsh Master Chronology | (Miles 1997) | WALES97 | 404-1981 | 64 | 5.16 |
| *§ | Shropshire | Habberley Hall | (Miles and Haddon-Reece 1995) | HABBERLY | 1386-1981 | 64 | 5.16 |
|
| Shropshire | Rowton Grange, Clungunford | (Miles and Worthington 2002) | CGFE | 1407-1597 | 64 | 5.41 |
Chronologies shown in bold are composite chronologies § = Component of WALES97
Bar diagram showing dated timbers in chronological position
Ref: tg_mic_0158