John Bennett Photo discussion (moved thread)

[Stephen Thomas]

Yes, there would have to have been, by necessity, an internal half landing at the internal front of George Yard Buildings unless the staircase was curved a la 29 Hanbury Street which I believe wasn't the case here. There are only two possibilities for stairwells in buildings of over two storeys, curved or with half landings. Staircases have to turn back on themselves dontcha know.

[Chris]

An interesting observation, Chris! But, from this angle, we cannot be at all certain, as to the depth of the stairway (i.e. 'full-flight' depth vs. 'half-flight' depth). And either way; I simply cannot fathom the presence of any additional hallways in that particular edifice.

Yes, I agree that we can't tell whether the staircase ascends the full height in the full width of the building - with a passageway on the other side leading back to the gallery - or half the height in half the width, leaving an intermediate landing halfway between floors. Either way there would be some kind of internal landing/passageway where Tabram's body might have been found, as an alternative to the gallery.

But on reflection I think your suggestion is correct that access to the flats must have been via further passages behind the visible doorways from the galleries, similar to those shown in the plan of St George's House. I think there were twelve flats on each floor, not ten, weren't there?

And I think that whatever the arrangement of the staircase the first stage would probably have been a single flight running from the front of the building up to the gallery at the back (though I'm still not quite sure about Rob's handrail).

[Cap'n Jack]

As a post of mine has been deleted, without warning, or consultation, I shall be withdrawing my membership of this site at 10 pm GMT, and not returning.

[Septic Blue]

... I think that whatever the arrangement of the staircase the first stage would probably have been a single flight running from the front of the building up to the gallery at the back (though I'm still not quite sure about Rob's handrail).

Perceived Stairway-Ascension Sequence of Landings:

- 'Ground-Floor' Landing: Exterior - Outdoor*
--- 'Half-Floor' Landing: Interior of floor-plan, but not fully enclosed - Indoor/Outdoor

...


* This landing was obviously enclosed within the post-1888 ground-floor addition, which can be seen in the left-hand portion of John's photograph.

I am inclined to believe that the "first stage" of stairway ascension began just inside the color-shaded doorway (post-1888).

[Chris]

I am inclined to believe that the "first stage" of stairway ascension began just inside the color-shaded doorway (post-1888).

But wouldn't that imply a landing at the front of the building halfway between the ground floor and the first floor, obstructing the front entrance?

[Stephen Thomas]

As a post of mine has been deleted, without warning, or consultation, I shall be withdrawing my membership of this site at 10 pm GMT, and not returning.

Hi AP

(and I'm speaking as a big fan here)

Maybe you should apologise to Philip for calling him a crook before you go.

[Tom_Wescott]

Relax, Stephen, AP's not going anywhere. He knows he'll be blaring drunk by 10pm, which is why he picked that time.

And by the way, if you post something that requires removal, why would you expect to be 'consulted'?

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

[Monty]

Fascinating thread guys....my thanks to all who have contributed.

Even AP, in such a positive way too.

Monty

[Hunter]

But wouldn't that imply a landing at the front of the building halfway between the ground floor and the first floor, obstructing the front entrance?

Hi Chris,
If you follow the sequence of steps, begining on the ground floor and ascending on the right, there would have to be a half landing to connect the descending steps on the left which would not block the front entrance.

[Chris]

If you follow the sequence of steps, begining on the ground floor and ascending on the right, there would have to be a half landing to connect the descending steps on the left which would not block the front entrance.

Sorry, don't follow that at all. The trouble is, as Colin pointed out, we can't tell from that photo what the sequence of steps is. For the upper stories, I'm inclining to his view of half-flights with intermediate landings at the front of the building, but I don't see how that would work on the lowest level because:
(1) the upper half of the front entrance would be obstructed and
(2) the foot of the stairs would be at the back of the building, rather than the front, which seems most natural.

[Rob Clack]

This is Dunstan House in Stepney Green. The house is quite different from George Yard Buildings but I wonder if the stair case is similar layout to this one which goes up halfway between floors and then turns. From experience this type of layout does seem the norm to me.



And here is the Goads map of George Yard Buildings, the date is May 1890



My own opinion is that the murder spot was just at the top of the steps leading to the balcony. There might have been a flat area between the top step and the start of the balcony, say about two feet. Just a guess though.

Rob

[Hunter]

Sorry, don't follow that at all. The trouble is, as Colin pointed out, we can't tell from that photo what the sequence of steps is. For the upper stories, I'm inclining to his view of half-flights with intermediate landings at the front of the building, but I don't see how that would work on the lowest level because:
(1) the upper half of the front entrance would be obstructed and
(2) the foot of the stairs would be at the back of the building, rather than the front, which seems most natural.

Hi Chris,

I understand your point. If you walked into the right ground floor entrance, you would meet the half-floor landing. The right ground floor entrance shows a shadow that to me inplicates a lower level ( a basement?).

[silverstealth]

As a post of mine has been deleted, without warning, or consultation, I shall be withdrawing my membership of this site at 10 pm GMT, and not returning.

This is terrible news.. How will we cope with the loss, I suppose at some point time will heal the scars and people will learn to live again..

Or in my case, post in an Ap free zone.

[Septic Blue]

But wouldn't that imply a landing at the front of the building halfway between the ground floor and the first floor, obstructing the front entrance?

I would think that what I have termed a 'half-floor' landing (i.e. an intermediate landing), would be situated approximately eight-to-twelve lineal feet into the structure. But, either way; the presence of such a landing, between the 'ground-floor' and 'first-floor' levels, would most certainly impede traffic within the building's front-to-rear passage.

This makes a very strong case for the plausibility of the stairway consisting of 'full-flight' depth (i.e. single-ascension flights); ... at least between the 'ground-floor' and 'first-floor' levels.

A keen observation, Chris!

[robhouse]

"...we can't tell from that photo what the sequence of steps is. For the upper stories, I'm inclining to his view of half-flights with intermediate landings at the front of the building, but I don't see how that would work on the lowest level because:
(1) the upper half of the front entrance would be obstructed and
(2) the foot of the stairs would be at the back of the building, rather than the front, which seems most natural."

So if I understand correctly, you are suggesting that the upper floors had the intermediate landings, as suggested, but that the stairs to the first floor went straight up from the ground floor entrance in front. This sounds reasonable to me, and I admit, I am unfamiliar with the architecture of these types of buildings.

As Rob C said, "There might have been a flat area between the top step and the start of the balcony, say about two feet."

I think that the idea then is that the stairs led from the front of the building straight up to the first floor, then there might have been a flat area (i.e. a landing) before the opening to the balcony in back. Is this correct? I think someone could do the math here, based on the rise angle of the steps, the distance between floors, the depth of the building, etc.. and figure out approximately how large such a landing would be. In any case, it seems entirely possible to me that there was a "landing" that was indoors (i.e not on the balcony). This would square with the assertion that Tabram was found on the stone landing, and that people commonly slept there, presumably sheltered from the weather, etc.

In summary, this assumes that the black diagonal line in the photo is NOT a railing to a stairway, and that the arched entrance on the first floor right side had a sort of indoor landing for some way before the stairs started down. So Tabram would have been found inside this arched entrance as depicted in the photo, a few feet in (or more?) on a "landing".

??

Rob H