An interesting stool

[kirkpoore1]

My GF and I took the train up to Chicago for a long weekend last week. One of our stops was at the Art Institute of Chicago, where we went through their medieval and early modern galleries. One of the items on display was this 15th century oak stool which has some interesting features.

First, it's 533 mm/21" tall, which is a little tall for a stool for most medieval people. Next, you'll note the lower bars--these (from the obvious wear) are clearly footrests. I've never seen these on a medieval stool. Here's a direct front shot:


You can see the foot rail wear more clearly here. Also, it seems pretty clear that the right leg is thicker than the left--no dimensional lumber here. The tall pierced rails are very nice, though the layout looks a little squashed.
Here's the link to the web page on the object:https://www.artic.edu/artworks/1095...WXlZ_HYgHsPTKGLpihx4pqSBWS2w3Ib3zzeqc8g7kcOGT
I'm thinking of making something like this the next time I have some free time.

Kirk

 

[Blackswanwood]

Are those metal clips on the bottom rail at the back Kirk?

That’s a brilliant gallery/museum. Well worth a visit (as is Chicago).

 

[SamQ aka Ah! Q!]

Kirk, a long shot: if it is too tall for a foot stool, is it possible it was an individual 'communion' kneeler from a church? The ornamentation certainly suggests that. Gentry and Grandees would emphasise their status (and isolate themselves from the diseases of the Commoners) by this usage.

 

[kirkpoore1]

Kirk, a long shot: if it is too tall for a foot stool, is it possible it was an individual 'communion' kneeler from a church? The ornamentation certainly suggests that. Gentry and Grandees would emphasise their status (and isolate themselves from the diseases of the Commoners) by this usage.

That's an excellent suggestion. However, given that the bottom rails are well under the seat, I don't know if that physically works. I have a similar bench that's 19" tall, and I knelt down next to it (on carpet, not bare wood). If I leaned back on my heels, my knees barely extended below the bench top, and it was really uncomfortable (the latter because I'm not young). If I was upright, my gut hit the top overhang--there's no way my knees would have reached in even if I was skinny. So I think any kneeler would have to sit out in front of the stool. I have seen this in modern churches.
Blackswanwood: I see the clips now that you've pointed them out. I seriously doubt that they're original--maybe they reinforce the old wood.

Kirk

 

[AJB Temple]

Hmm. Are you sure it is a stool?

It does not have clear provenance (they don't even identify the country of origin). I've seen similar things to this in Friesland & northern Saxony, & Schweria, though the carving theme is common in England it is common elsewhere too. The only reason I ask is in northern Europe we have very occasionally seen similar described as priests bible study / prayer rest. (Sorry, I can't think of the German word). The bottom foot rests (if that is what they are) extend further out and are often very worn / broken. The metal straps on that one are odd - in the wrong place for a stool.

 

[SamQ aka Ah! Q!]

Roger, understood, Kirk. Just a thought, reckoned I'd run it past you. Your point about modern kneelers being 'out front' is well made.

Edit: Piggy-backing on AJBT's post, could this be a Bible lectern? In Anglican/Church of Ireland parishes, a brass floor-standing one is evident in many instances, but... there are less-well-off ones, and there, placing 'The Good Book' on an elevated platform would show it reverence? Obviously, the lectern itself would sit on the altar, so its relative lack in height could actually be useful, when considering full height/preist's stature?

Just thinking out loud; don't intend this to be a historical 'rabbit-hole'!

Sam

 

[Mike G]

Surely any sort of lectern or bible stand would have a sloped top, wouldn't it?

It's height is well within the range of "normal" for a modern chair or stool, and many of the ancient examples we have are impossible to measure because the end of the legs have rotten off through being on earth floors........so their original height may have been taller than thought (and that's not me saying that, but Victor Chinnery in "Oak Furniture: The British Tradition" a heavyweight and semi- academic look at the entire gamut of mediaeval oak furniture).

 

[Cabinetman]

Looks a lot like a coffin stool to me, normally in pairs of course to rest the coffin on, but not normally worn away like that. Perhaps it was used as a normal stool afterwards?

 

[AJB Temple]

Could be Ian. Good idea. But the ones I've seen (few) were usually taller and less ornate. Generally Catholic and included a cross. That said, although very interested in ancient furniture, the more I read the more I realise that I am quite ignorant.

Illumination tables (for which this could be a seat?) were not always sloped Mike, because they needed candle stands and ink stands on them.

 

[SamQ aka Ah! Q!]

Good points Mike. Who knows?

 

[Blackswanwood]

The height doesn’t seem to be that unusual perhaps …

AN EXTREMELY RARE EARLY 16TH CENTURY TUDOR OAK BOARDED STOOL. ENGLISH. CIRCA 1520. - SALES ARCHIVE

SALES ARCHIVE - THIS RARE HENRY VIII OAK BOARDED STOOL IS IN GOOD ORIGINAL CONDITION, IT HAS A WARM MELLOW UNTOUCHED SURFACE AND PATINA. UNLIKE SOME EXAMPLES IT HAS THE SYMBOL OF THE PANTOCRATOR MARK OF THE CROSS SURMOUNTING THE ORB ON BOTH FRIEZES AND EACH BOARDED

www.periodoakantiques.co.uk

(#61) A rare Elizabethan oak boarded 16th century stool

www.sothebys.com

 

[GaryR]

What an interesting discussion! I have nothing to add about the stool. But my first "maybe-there-is-something-here" trip with my later-to-be-wife was to the Art Institute of Chicago. About 1987. After that trip I decided I wanted to marry her. We still both have fond memories of that visit.

 

[AndyP]

A shame that only two dimensions are quoted on their web site. Is it possible that the two dimensions quoted are width and depth and not height? Not sure that helps to understand what it was used for though.

 

[AJB Temple]

Looking at the photos again from the sale example the pantocrator mark looks cleaner than the rest and I wonder if it was added later.

 

[SamQ aka Ah! Q!]

The main 'face' and 'lip' of the pantocrator certainly seem to have a similar patina to the rest of the panel it's in, whereas the mark of the cross appears brighter. Chucking this out there to be kicked about, could it just be lighting angles? We'd need to have been in the room with it, for a definitive determination, I suspect.

Quick edit: or, was the mark painted with gold paint ( a la Ukrainian practice) and generations of polishing has worn it down? But not 'out'?

 

[Cabinetman]

Looks a lot like a coffin stool to me, normally in pairs of course to rest the coffin on, but not normally worn away like that. Perhaps it was used as a normal stool afterwards?

Having had a bit of a closer look at coffin stools, I was obviously wrong above. Different method of construction altogether. Also this one doesn’t have the depth/width for stability needed.
Ian

 

[Cabinetman]

Looking at the photos again the maker had thought about wood movement in some depth, the top and sides will move together so no problems caused by Morticing through the top, the carved panels set through the sides in deep slots the way they are are would have caused the panels to split as they shrank, but he got around this with a single nail through the middle. At 5 or 6 hundred years old it’s amazing it’s survived- a testament to his workmanship.
Ian

 

[kirkpoore1]

I agree that 21" is on the high end of normal. But I think the wear patterns on the lower rails are pretty good indications that they were used by feet. The stool is too tall for short people, but with footrests it would be fine. So they make this stool more versatile.

One other thing about the rails being for kneeling: If they had extended out far enough for knees, they would have required some sort of feet under them or the stool would have flipped toward the user once they'd put their weight on it.

Kirk