Ship's timbers in old buildings, Hit or myth? Options

[David B]

I constantly see descriptions of old houses (particularly pre 18th C) as having "wonderful old ship's timbers" or some such.

Now it is my understanding that a) old ships of the period where not still in use because they sank , and that it is impossible to build a strong house (one that will last centuries) out of non-green oak for structural reasons (i.e. the essential drying/locking process, not to mention the rot issues).

What is the truth here?

[Tim Potts]

I regularly get introduced to a part of a building where the owner supposes that ships timbers have been used - often the anecdotal evidence goes back a long way, but I have seen personally only two examples where the wonderful old ships timbers were likely to be such.
Usually the timber turns out to be a recycled timber from another building. I think that home-owners find this idea more mundane and prefer the romantic association with the sea.
But I have no doubt that many examples must exist - after all, a floor beam from a ship would be just as serviceable in a house
Masts would make excellent stair newels, windows may have been salvaged from the stern of boats and any big useful bit of wood is better used as a lintel or a post than as firewood.
It would be great to try and pull together all the sightings and come up with a list of possible suspects for salvaged ships timbers.
I was talking to a friend from Pembroke dock just two days ago about his conviction that many buildings there incorporate reused ships' timbers. I will check this out and when I do, report to the forum.


As for as your other point, the ease of building with green timber rather than seasoned oak is probably more down to its workability and its lack of previous joints and nails etc. rather than any special locking qualities that shrinking timber has.
I don't think there is anything in principle to stop you framing in recycled wood but with new timbers your design is not dictated by your material in the same way.

[scott]

I don`t know about ship timbers being used in building construction but knowing how valuable the timber would have been, I can`t see why it would not be reused.
In regards to building with dry/seasoned oak as far as I know there are none of the above mentioned problems. In fact historically the better frames seem to have been built with dry timber. If you go into old churches, colleges or other important buildings you will see that the joints have no visible shinkage or checking, but old house frames, barns and hidden roof trusses have very visible shrinkage and checking.
The process of drawboring joints works in green as well as dried timber and this is what will tighten the frame moreso than the shrinking of the wood. The shrinking can introduce more problems than it solves. In regards to its durability dried oak for instance is as durable dry as green, probably more durable because there are less sugars present for insect attack. The tannins in the wood preserve it from rot and they are present forever. I hope this helps. If anyone knows if I am wrong on some of this please tell me as I have not been in this game as long as some.

[David Yeomans]

Come on! Think about it. This is largely a myth.
The reuse of timbers was common and one constantly finds evidence of that. But ships timbers? The cost of a piece of timber includes the transport costs. How far are you going to cart timbers on medieval roads?

[Gary.]

This old classic hey! Yes I would agree that homeowners might get confused with when they see a re-used timber, but I very much doubt it's from a ship:

- Why would a wooden ship be dismantled and carted inland to build a house? Surely it's more likely the timbers we re-used at the ship yard.

- Secondly, we are talking about ships that have been to sea? Those timbers must have been satuared with salt, which in a building would trap moisture and hence rotted exceptionally quilckly.

- I thought the construction of heavy timber frame buildings had slowed up considerably by the time large ships were being built from oak. The price of oak soared and was too valuable material to be building houses from.


On the shrinkage issue, I agree with scott that drier timber was used. I'm not sure it was intentional, just the sourcing/converting process was slower. Maybe they used dead standing, or killed them standing and left them for a while. Could it also be possible that the infill/cladding on historic buildings had some degree of flex, hence allowing the frame to settle down on the shoulders of joints? Dorb would shrink, weather boarding would slide etc... It's seems that with a modern frame they get battened/studded with dry timber and all this secondary framework subsequently holds the frame apart.

[Ken Hume]

Hi,

It might be better to think of references made to ship's timber employed in domestic buuilding as relating more to timber being capable of meeting a quality control standard - i.e. a bit like the old BS kite mark. Certain woodlands were designated as producing ship's timbers even though none of these timbers had yet been to sea so it was most likely that the management of the woodland was recognised to be of a standard capable of producing sufficent quality that could be used in ship building. Pamber Forest near Tadley, Hampshire is one such medieval woodland area. I would not recommend the use of ships timber that has been to sea to be reused in domestic buildings since this might contain shipworm which like land based goat or leopard moth will produce pencil size cavities (Westminster Hall is known to have been affected by goat moth as well as death watch).

Re cartage of timbers and finished frames in medieval times its worth noting that the biggest ever frame - Westminster Hall hammer beam roof was cut "by Farnham, Surrey" and this was then taken apart and transported by cart to Ham on the Thames, thereafter being transported down river by barge to Westminster pier. We know the exact number of loads and weights involved and even the names of the carters and how much they were paid for providing this service. Lead was brought from Derby, stone was obtained from Reigate, Surrey and Doncaster, Yorkshire as was timber from Pettewood, Sussex, Stoke Park, Alice Holt, Hampshire and elsewhere so cartage of very large timbers was possible though maybe not commonplace since the king is also known to have provided his own special wains each pulled by 16 horses to move these loads.

Its only brace material that needs to be ideally dry i.e. where cross grain shrinkage will result in separation along the joint.

Regards

Ken Hume

[Brian Williamson]

Hi Guys,

I think you have probably got it covered here.

Except in times of economic recession, most ships ended their lives being smashed-up on rocky shorelines (rather than far out to sea). Those that did survive were probably laid-up in muddy creeks (whilst their owners decided what to do with them) and mouldered slowly away - you can still see examples of this happening on neglected waterfronts today where the area hasn't been yuppyfied.

I suspect breaking up an old ship was harder work than demolishing an old building and, as has been mentioned previously, the timbers would have been of slighly peculiar shapes and limiting sizes, thus reducing their usefulness. They would most likely have turned up in very utilitarian situations (farm buildings, workshops?) around the coast where the space might have been adapted to them rather than the other way around.

On the subject of salt, it is actually a great preservative, which is why many more sea-going vessels survive than river or lake vessels. Fresh water and wood are not a good combination. And any marine life (toredo worm) would quickly die as the timber dried, so there would be no problem there. Even if an adult managed to survive in the very hert of the timber for a few years it wouldn't be able to breed.

Ships timber as a designation is an interesting one that I've not come across before. Aside from the specialist shapes, which I assume you could find almost anywhere, I imagine that the most important requirement is an absence of knots, either to prevent ingress of water through areas of short grain (or by the knot popping out!) or by inducing cracking where timbers (particularly planking) were bent to shape. Tadley seems an odd place to be growing good oak: from what I remember of it it is all heathland around there, and most of the oak would be shaken (although I do cut hazel on chalk near Basingstoke, so perhaps the geology changes locally).

Anyway, even if it were a totally untrue story it's a very nice one and it lets us impress (or maybe annoy) people by showing them how much we know when we dissallusion them.

Have a good day,

Brian Williamson.

[Bill]

Seen Ships timbers? Re-used in houses? Once possibly over many many years, and even then I'm not sure, they were very nicely double curved and may have been strakes from a hull where the curve tuned back to create the 'tumblehome'. These were used as principal rafters in a lean-to in a house nr Chippenham.

There do seem to be many accounts of wooden ships being broken up for the timber, but usually the words 'for firewood' is in close proximity.

If you think about the construction of a wooden vessel there really are no straight members, they are all curved (with the possible exception of the keel - which is likely to be the most affected by rot) - and obviously the masts and spars - which were made of soft-wood.

[Gary.]

I received an email today from Stephen Gavin, here's his link:

http://lostbrig.net

So I guess, in some instances, ships timbers were used.