Is there a staircase inside the Wellington Monument in the Phoenix Park?

Stripey Cat

I asked this on another part of the board, but got sent here.

I think I remember being told about a staircase when I was a child, but maybe it was just a story.


Anyone know?

F5MWG

A Dublin legend suggests that a fund-raising dinner was held in the vault under the pillar in 1820, after which the vault was sealed up, leaving the dining tables and chairs behind. Several weeks later it was noticed that a butler had not been seen since the dinner, and it was assumed that he had drunk too much wine and remained unconscious and unnoticed behind a screen while the room was being sealed.

Stripey Cat

On the wikipedia discussion page, a door is mentioned. So I am not the only one.

Victor

I strongly think not. Where would this stairs lead? http://www.bing.com/maps/?v=2&cp=swrc76gg785p&lvl=19.159524646442893&dir=91.3590438615547&sty=b&form=LMLTCC

There was a stairs and viewing platform in Nelson's Pillar.

Gavin "shels"

Weird fact, it's actually called the Wellington Testimonial because it was bulit when he was still alive therefore not a Monument as such. It got me bonus points in a table quiz once!:D

Stripey Cat

Victor wrote: »

Where would this stairs lead?

I think I had in mind some sort of staircase leading to the top, with small holes to look out of.

A Disgrace

I have heard that it is hollow, and could well have an inner room. I also heard that an entrance (via tunnel) exists somewhere within 100 metres.. then again it could just be a monument. Opening it up to find out shouldn't be a big deal, and if urban legend is correct and there's a body down there, surely it would have been checked by now?

evolving_doors

Gavin shels wrote: »

Weird fact, it's actually called the Wellington Testimonial because it was bulit when he was still alive therefore not a Monument as such. It got me bonus points in a table quiz once!:D

It was built when he was alive but was it completed before his death?
I think there was a debate about the Wellington Monument/Testimonial on another boards thread somewhere...someone said they ran out of money when he was alive so it couldn't be completed till after his death.... I wouldn't even bother contesting that one at a table quiz though...

Flukey

Gavin shels wrote: »

Weird fact, it's actually called the Wellington Testimonial because it was bulit when he was still alive therefore not a Monument as such. It got me bonus points in a table quiz once!:D

It got me a bit of abuse for setting that question in a table quiz once. Most people will tell you it is the "Monument" and when they find out it is the "Testimonial" they will argue fervently against, so it is one of those great questions. So, seeing as there is no Wellington Monument in Dublin, then the answer to the opening question has to be no.

Stripey Cat

Flukey wrote: »

So, seeing as there is no Wellington Monument in Dublin, then the answer to the opening question has to be no.

Good Point, well made.

HellFireClub

I remember hearing many times that the IRA many years ago attempted to blow up the Wellington Monument by placing a large amount of explosives in the railway tunnel that runs directly under the monument. There is a railway tunnel running directly under the monument/testimonial, and I recall being told that the IRA were intercepted while trying to blow up the structure years ago, by placing explosives in the railway tunnel (this tunnel is still used today by Irish Rail), in an attempt to undermine the structure and cause it to collapse.

FreudianSlippers

Armelodie wrote: »

It was built when he was alive but was it completed before his death?
I think there was a debate about the Wellington Monument/Testimonial on another boards thread somewhere...someone said they ran out of money when he was alive so it couldn't be completed till after his death.... I wouldn't even bother contesting that one at a table quiz though...

I would have to agree with you there. It is technically both a monument and a testimonial since it was started before and completed after his death.

Stripey Cat

A railway underneath it? Still in use? The hey what now?

ANXIOUS

Stripey Cat wrote: »

A railway underneath it? Still in use? The hey what now?

Yeah, there is a working railroad that runs underneath the park. It connects it up to connelly. Look at an os map. I cant link it on my phone.

FreudianSlippers

Stripey Cat wrote: »

A railway underneath it? Still in use? The hey what now?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liffey_Bridge_(Phoenix_Park_Tunnel)

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67104730&postcount=156 (pics)

Stripey Cat

Well, if there is a tunnel underneath it, surely it's not too far fetched to imagine a staircase inside it?

I mean, is it supposed to be hollow inside it? It can't be solid stone can it?

Sunnyisland

Forgot about that tunnel, went through it once going to Galway :-)

Victor

The tunnel doesn't go under the monument: http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,712946,734566,7,10

Stripey Cat wrote: »

It can't be solid stone can it?

Of course it can. Remember it dates from before the widespread use of iron in buildings and from before the steel came into common use.

A Disgrace

Victor wrote: »

The tunnel doesn't go under the monument: http://maps.osi.ie/publicviewer/#V1,712946,734566,7,10Of course it can. Remember it dates from before the widespread use of iron in buildings and from before the steel came into common use.

So if it was hollow, it would have needed iron supports?

I would have imagined it would be cheaper to have a hollow base, but the pre-steel agrgument could convince me otherwise..

I think the fact that they didn't even leave a service door or whatever, but went to the lengths of building an interior (with staircase) would convince me there's nothing under there...

Unless it was built as a secret bunker, accessed only by some even more secret tunnels!!

Stripey Cat

A Disgrace wrote: »

I think the fact that they didn't even leave a service door or whatever, but went to the lengths of building an interior (with staircase) would convince me there's nothing under there...

There are some strange markings on the base, that might be the remains of a balustrade or something being removed.

On the ledge above the bronze reliefs there is an area which doesn't seem to have weathered in the same way as the rest, and has a long light coloured stone above it. It certainly looks like the shape of a doorway.

Sunnyisland

A Disgrace wrote: »

Unless it was built as a secret bunker, accessed only by some even more secret tunnels!!

;) Which are connected up to the now American ambassador's residence,which was formerly the prominent Chief Secretaries house and one of its former occupiers was Sir Arthur Wellesley, later to become the Duke of Wellington.;):rolleyes:

Which brings me back to my other post in this forum about mobile phones in the phoeno,there are dark & strange things going on over there,i tell you not;)

fryup

to be honest with you, i'm surprised that it was never blown up

Esel

I know for a FACT that a couple of guys planned to climb it in the seventies and plant a wellie on top of the lightning rod. Never got off the ground....

Mellor

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I would have to agree with you there. It is technically both a monument and a testimonial since it was started before and completed after his death.

It was concieved, designed and building as a tribute to a living Wellington, and is therefore a strictly speaking a testimonial. But monument its all that wrong. I always felt Obelisk was a far better name as its the tallest Obelisk in europe.


As for the hidden staircase, I think I can resolve that debate.
There is another Wellington Monument, located in Somerset - England, built to celebrate the victory at Waterloo. It was started in the same year as the Dublin Obelisk, 1917, and finished 7 years earlier in 1854.
It is over 9m shorter, built of rougher stone, has a smaller base, and is basically less impressive. But the Somerset monument has an internal stairs, one that rises up to a viewing platform. Which is obviously where the myth regarding the Dublin obelisk originated.

The hole from which you look out can be view in this photo.

Tabnabs

Victor wrote: »

]Of course it can. Remember it dates from before the widespread use of iron in buildings and from before the steel came into common use.

it also pre-dates the invention of tower cranes and sky hooks...

When you consider the construction method and the cost of cut stone, it must beyond doubt be a hollow structure to reduce cost, labour and weight on the foundations. Even if they were just workman's stairs, roughly hewn or timber, it would have had some sort of access for the labourers and craftsmen to raise the structure.

Hollow towers in Ireland have been around since the Viking times after all.

BeerNut

Tabnabs wrote: »

it would have had some sort of access for the labourers and craftsmen to raise the structure.

Scaffolding?

Tabnabs

According to these guys, not invented (in the UK) yet...

BeerNut

Tabnabs wrote: »

According to these guys, not invented (in the UK) yet...

I'm not seeing where they say that.

How do you think they got the gargoyles onto those medieval cathedrals? Scaffolding.

Mellor

Tabnabs wrote: »

it also pre-dates the invention of tower cranes and sky hooks...

When you consider the construction method and the cost of cut stone, it must beyond doubt be a hollow structure to reduce cost, labour and weight on the foundations. Even if they were just workman's stairs, roughly hewn or timber, it would have had some sort of access for the labourers and craftsmen to raise the structure.

Hollow towers in Ireland have been around since the Viking times after all.

Don't be ridiculous. It my no means HAS to be hollow. Solid Obelisks have been built since ancient Egyptian and roman times.
There is a solid obelisk 45m tall originally erected c.3,500 years ago that is still standing today. In fact, a solid structure would be considerable easier to build.

Erecting the Obelisk in the pheonix park was not a challenge for builders of the 19th century.

Tabnabs wrote: »

According to these guys, not invented (in the UK) yet...

Again, I have no clue what you are talking about here. In fact the first picture is labelled as scaffolding in the victorian era, which is exactly when the obelisk was erected.
Timber scaffolding has existed for thousands of years. Again, back to the romans, greeks and egyptians
I don't see what makes you think it didn't yet exist. If you are referring to the 1909 date mentioned, that was the patent of a particular device patented for scaffolding, not the invention of scaffolding.

I thought my post above clarified where the stairs myth came from.

Hermy

Mellor wrote: »

It was started in the same year as the Dublin Obelisk, 1917, and finished 7 years earlier in 1854.

BeerNut

Mellor wrote: »

Solid Obelisks have been built since ancient Egyptian and roman times.
There is a solid obelisk 45m tall originally erected c.3,500 years ago that is still standing today.

In fairness, the Egyptians carved them in one piece and then just hiked them up. But yeah, scaffolding is one of those obvious inventions that's been around forever.

Good find on the Somerset obelisk, btw. Very interesting.

Dancor

Mellor wrote: »

The hole from which you look out can be view in this photo.

The state of that one.

Tabnabs

Mellor wrote: »

Don't be ridiculous. It my no means HAS to be hollow. Solid Obelisks have been built since ancient Egyptian and roman times.
There is a solid obelisk 45m tall originally erected c.3,500 years ago that is still standing today. In fact, a solid structure would be considerable easier to build.

Erecting the Obelisk in the pheonix park was not a challenge for builders of the 19th century.

And yet, it most probably is hollow.

Let's put a little scale on this object

http://viviendoendublin.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/450px-ireland_-_dublin_-_phoenix_park_-_wellington_monument_2.jpg

Why on earth would they build this cut stone monument as a solid structure? The practicalities of construction of a structure this large would suggest it is built vertically from the inside, similar projects were carried out by contemporary engineers such as Robert Stevenson.

Or is your sole evidence 5,000 year old technology? <insert double confused smiley here for dramatic affect>

Mellor wrote: »

Again, I have no clue what you are talking about here. In fact the first picture is labelled as scaffolding in the victorian era, which is exactly when the obelisk was erected.
Timber scaffolding has existed for thousands of years. Again, back to the romans, greeks and egyptians
I don't see what makes you think it didn't yet exist. If you are referring to the 1909 date mentioned, that was the patent of a particular device patented for scaffolding, not the invention of scaffolding.

Again, take a look at the size of the structure, do you genuinely think they erected scaffolding around it?

The medieval example cited gives no details about height restrictions or what the scaffolding was used for. But if anyone thinks that they carried the gargoyles up (tucked under their left arm maybe?) the scaffolding, they need to show more evidence on that theory.

Mellor wrote: »

I thought my post above clarified where the stairs myth came from.

If anything it shows the opposite, that similar sized obelisks at this time did indeed have stairways inside them.

trellheim

had a look at the PRO website and nothing there.

A Disgrace

The more I look at it, the more I think it might me hollow.. that's a hell of a base for a start.. but if it is, why the big secret? Surely it would have been explioted by now

Mellor

Hermy wrote: »

Obviously a typo, 1817

Tabnabs wrote: »

And yet, it most probably is hollow.

Why on earth would they build this cut stone monument as a solid structure? The practicalities of construction of a structure this large would suggest it is built vertically from the inside, similar projects were carried out by contemporary engineers such as Robert Stevenson.

Again, take a look at the size of the structure, do you genuinely think they erected scaffolding around it?

I never said it was solid, or that it was built in any paticular way. I never offered any opinion on it.
I was simply pointing that you were wrong in some of your statements. Not with the idea that it hollow.

I haven't yet offered an opinion on it, so I suppose I might as well now.
I believe its hollow, purely down cost and not construction. Solid is no more difficult, nor is the option on building it hollow from the outside.

It was most definately scaffolded. A scaffold is much easier to work from than a stairs. Either externally or internally I don't know. Internal is cheaper, but then there's the tricky external platform that needs to be built to finish it. if i had to guess, I'd say internal as i know cost was a issue with the project.

Or is your sole evidence 5,000 year old technology? <insert double confused smiley here for dramatic affect>

No, that was a reply to you ridiculous notion that scaffolding didn't exist

The medieval example cited gives no details about height restrictions or what the scaffolding was used for. But if anyone thinks that they carried the gargoyles up (tucked under their left arm maybe?) the scaffolding, they need to show more evidence on that theory.

What medieval example? I said Victorian.
I don't see any gargoyles either??? But regardless. Carrying them up saffolding presents the same problems as would carrying them up the stairs.

If anything it shows the opposite, that similar sized obelisks at this time did indeed have stairways inside them.

There is a huge different between a scaffold for building it (which i never disagreed with) and a purpose built stairs to a viewing platform, which was the question notion discussed. Also the idea of a "secret" tunnel.

BeerNut

Mellor wrote: »

What medieval example? I said Victorian.
I don't see any gargoyles either?

I think Tabnabs is responding to me there.

This guy seems more interested in his flowery hagiography of Wellington than architectural detail, but still:

A subscription was opened in the city of Dublin, for the purpose of erecting a testimonial to perpetuate the glories of Wellington, and in the space of a few weeks the sum of sixteen thousand pounds was collected. This munificent contribution was expended in the erection of a pyramidal granite column, designed by Robert Smirke, rising to a height of two hundred and ten feet, and placed on a well-chosen site in Phoenix Park, where formerly a salute battery stood, commanding the whole range of the city quays from the park to Essex bridge. The first stone of this stupendous column was laid on the eighteenth of June, 1818, the anniversary of the battle of Waterloo, and the scaffolding was not struck until the third year from that day had expired

G. N. Wright, Life and campaigns of Arthur, Duke of Wellington, 1840.

I've been looking at contemporary descriptions of the design and construction of the monument and there's no mention of stairs inside in any I've seen. It was definitely never intended for people to go inside, whatever about the mechanics of building it.

Hermy

Mellor wrote: »

Obviously a typo, 1817

Obviously.:rolleyes:

Victor

While the exterior may be of cut / dressed stone, the interior stone could obviously be somewhat rough cut.

Stripey Cat

It would seem strange to not have stairs inside, seeing as other similar structures did have internal stairs.

Was anyone else ever told of a staircase by their parents?

BeerNut

Stripey Cat wrote: »

It would seem strange to not have stairs inside, seeing as other similar structures did have internal stairs.

It seems far far stranger to me that some would write, in 1820:

The testimonial is in the form of an obelisk, or truncated pyramid, 205 feet high. A platform accessible by four flights of steps supports a pedestal 56 feet square, and 24 feet high; the pannels of which are ornamented with bas-relief medallions, representing different victories won by his Grace: in front of the pedestal, on an insulated pedestal, is an equestrian statue of the Duke in his military habit. From the pedestal rises the obelisk, having the names of all the victories won by the Duke of Wek lington, from his entrance into military life to the battle of Waterloo, inscribed on the four facades.

In the view of the Law Courts, drawn for this work, this monument is seen in the distance, on an elevated situation in the Phoenix Park, formerly occupied by the salute battery, and commanding a view of the whole city.

(G. N. Wright [again!], An historical guide to ancient and modern Dublin)

and neglect to mention internal stairs, if they existed.

The previous section, for instance, describes Nelson's Pillar and says

From the gallery is a commanding view of the city and bay. The balcony, to which the ascent is by 168 steps, is 108 feet from the ground, and the entire height to the top of the statue 131 ft. 3 in.

If there were stairs in the obelisk, he'd have said.

Mellor

Stripey Cat wrote: »

It would seem strange to not have stairs inside, seeing as other similar structures did have internal stairs.

Was anyone else ever told of a staircase by their parents?

Most similar obelisks wouldn't have stairs.
It would be strange to have a stairs and not have a viewing platform as any ones I know of with a stairs has a viewing platform. (I know of two)

trellheim

Somewhere in one of the weblinks it refers to the Royal British Architects Institute library or some such. The plans should be on file there, if anyone knows anybody over there.

Stripey Cat

in front of the pedestal, on an insulated pedestal, is an equestrian statue of the Duke in his military habit.

Er, the hey what now?

BeerNut

Stripey Cat wrote: »

Er, the hey what now?

They still haven't built it. Any day now, I'm sure.

Stripey Cat

So the description above is being taken as evidence that no staircase existed, because the writer would have, we assume, mentioned a staircase if it was there.

The writer does however mention a large equestrian statue.

Which was never built.

Hmm...

Mellor

trellheim wrote: »

Somewhere in one of the weblinks it refers to the Royal British Architects Institute library or some such. The plans should be on file there, if anyone knows anybody over there.

They would more likely be in the RIAI library than the RIBA (irish verses british), but may not be in either seeing as the start of construction predates both.

Stripey Cat wrote: »

So the description above is being taken as evidence that no staircase existed, because the writer would have, we assume, mentioned a staircase if it was there.

The writer does however mention a large equestrian statue.

Which was never built.

Hmm...

The description was written during construction, the writer would of been familiar with the proposed plans/design. The smaller statue was part of the design.
But by the time it approached completion, Wellington had fallen out of favour with the people, and funds were tight, and the statue was aborted. Wellington actually died just before it as finished, so he never seen it complete, and was prob never aware they didn't bother with his statue.

trellheim

http://www.dia.ie/architects/view/5006

(3) Margaret Richardson, ed., Catalogue of the Drawings Collection of the Royal Institute of British Architects S (1976), 64.

More info :

http://books.google.ie/books?id=AQzYxvX_U8MC&lpg=PA308&ots=KUG1co5oGz&dq=robert%20smirke%20wellington&pg=PA308#v=onepage&q=robert%20smirke%20wellington&f=false



there is 3 or 4 pages in http://www.yalebooks.co.uk/pdf/9780300159097.pdf on the design ( Page 8 onwards )

BeerNut

Stripey Cat wrote: »

So the description above is being taken as evidence that no staircase existed, because the writer would have, we assume, mentioned a staircase if it was there.

The writer does however mention a large equestrian statue.

Which was never built.

Hmm...

Hmm, yes, they could have excavated a staircase into the granite after the obelisk was finished. A big bendy corkscrew would do it.

Stripey Cat

BeerNut wrote: »

Hmm, yes, they could have excavated a staircase into the granite after the obelisk was finished. A big bendy corkscrew would do it.

Or maybe the writer wasn't such an authority on this as he appears.

BeerNut

Perhaps. I had only meant it as illustrative of the contemporary descriptions of the monument. You could also have this, from Dublin Delineated in 26 Views of the Principal Public Buildings (1830):

Of all the public monuments hitherto raised in honor of the Duke Of Wellington, that of the Citizens of Dublin is, if not the most graceful, at least the most colossal and magnificent.

It stands on very elevated ground in the Phoenix Park, and consists of an unadorned Obelisk, resting on a pedestal 56 feet square and 24 feet high, which is accessible by a pyramidal flight of steps, making a total height of 205 feet. The pedestal is intended to be ornamented with bas-relief medallions, representing the chief battles won by His Grace, and an insulated pedestal on the east side, is intended also to support an equestrian statue of the Hero of Waterloo. For these embellishments, the requisite funds are as yet wanting. The sides of the Obelisk are inscribed with the names of the several victories gained by the Duke.

The whole monument is of cut granite, and was raised at an expense of about £20,000. The design was furnished by Mr. Smirke, jun.

Again, no mention of a staircase where one would expect it to be mentioned.

Or this, rather less complimentary, from The History of the County of Dublin by John D'Alton (1838):

The Wellington testimonial next engages attention —an ill-proportioned structure, of plain unornamented mountain granite. On the summit platform of a flight of steep steps, a simple square pedestal is erected, designed to present pannels at the sides, commemorating the Duke's achievements, but they have never been put up. In front of this pedestal is a much smaller pediment, resting partly on the steps, and partly on the main platform, and which was intended to support an equestrian statue of his Grace, also unaccomplished. From the main platform a massive obelisk rises truncated, and of thick and heavy proportions. On its four facades are inscribed the names of all the victories gained by the Duke, from his first career in India to the battle of Waterloo. Its total height is 205 feet. The site, forming the highest ground in the park, is that formerly occupied by the Salute battery, and was given by the Board of Ordnance to the Wellington Committee, with a view to the erection of this trophy. A square, dry ditch, fronted with stone, surrounds the whole.