Building after the British left

Jellybaby1 · 25-04-2014 7:37pm #1

I don't know if this should be in the Architecture forum. I was born in the fifties and I remember Dublin being very run-down then. I was wondering, after the British left, what were the first buildings ever constructed by our fledgling Irish government? And when building did begin how was it funded, did they use British money left in the kitty? Hope you get my meaning and sorry this is not as academically explained as it should be.

dubhthach · 25-04-2014 8:05pm

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

I don't know if this should be in the Architecture forum. I was born in the fifties and I remember Dublin being very run-down then. I was wondering, after the British left, what were the first buildings ever constructed by our fledgling Irish government? And when building did begin how was it funded, did they use British money left in the kitty? Hope you get my meaning and sorry this is not as academically explained as it should be.

Well prime example of a "mega project" by new Free State Government was Ardnacrusha power station, obviously before this there was alot of rebuilding required for infrastructure given rail bridges destroyed during the civil war.

There was no money left in the kitty. The state if anything owed the British money under the terms of the treaty eg. share of Imperial debt -- unstated amount (abrogated in 1926 I believe) + the annual annuity for the farmers (land act schemes etc.)

Ardnacrusha cost over £5million pounds at the time, the entire state budget for 1925 was £25m !

Jellybaby1 · 25-04-2014 8:45pm

Thanks dubhthach. That's certainly a mega construction all right and very industrial/functional but I suppose what I'm really getting at in my ham-fisted way is Irish design, when I look at buildings in Dublin, they are British in style, Victorian, Georgian etc., and you can see the same style in Belfast and all over Britain, and they're to my mind just gorgeous. I wanted to know what houses/buildings are built in the 'Irish style' after Independence. Is there anything we can say that about? All I can think of at the moment is the ESB building on Fitzwilliam Street. But there must be earlier examples of Irish architectural design.

Judgement Day · 25-04-2014 9:07pm

A distinctive Irish (?) design to be seen in many towns is that of "Technical School Art Deco" - the one in Enniscorthy (below) survives in use as the local library. Not an attractive style in my opinion but unusual

Jellybaby1 · 25-04-2014 9:19pm

No that's not at all attractive. I guess I just have to rely on the old stone cottages and longhouses for something remotely pretty then.

Judgement Day · 25-04-2014 9:24pm

And here's a useless abomination built by the State shortly after the Republic was declared.

http://www.irisharchitectureawards.ie/gold-medal/winner/busaras

doolox · 25-04-2014 9:27pm

This was built in 1940 at Collinstown in North Dublin. The Air Transport system in Ireland used Baldonnel until the new airport was built at Collinstown.

Also I recall that the Hospitals in the likes of Galway, Blanchardstown etc were built by Noel Browne as Minister for Health in 1948 on ideas got from Finland.

There was also some stuff I read that noted that Ballyfermot was the largest public housing project when it was built in the late 40's/early 50's.

Judgement Day · 25-04-2014 9:28pm

Dublin Airport opened in 1940 - not wildly attractive but fit for purpose unlike Bus Aras which was a triumph of design over functionality.

resized_Old_Terminal.sflb.ashx

Judgement Day · 25-04-2014 9:48pm

The Sligo Great Southern Hotel was built after independence but I'm not sure if it was by the State owned (via CIE) GSH Company or by the private Great Southern Railways Company. Impressive in size for a small town like Sligo but not particularly notable otherwise. I had the misfortune to stay one night in it back in the late 1970's - it's part of the Best Western Hotel Group now and has probably greatly improved.

Victor · 25-04-2014 10:07pm

Jellybaby1 · 25-04-2014 11:21pm

Judgement Day wrote: »

Dublin Airport opened in 1940 - not wildly attractive but fit for purpose unlike Bus Aras which was a triumph of design over functionality.

I well remember it like that. Very Art Deco to my ignorant eye. But not Irish in design, French I believe.

Jellybaby1 · 25-04-2014 11:23pm

Judgement Day wrote: »

The Sligo Great Southern Hotel was built after independence but I'm not sure if it was by the State owned (via CIE) GSH Company or by the private Great Southern Railways Company. Impressive in size for a small town like Sligo but not particularly notable otherwise. I had the misfortune to stay one night in it back in the late 1970's - it's part of the Best Western Hotel Group now and has probably greatly improved.

I find this quite an austere look, full of foreboding. (I swear I can hear howling on the moors!)

Jellybaby1 · 26-04-2014 12:02am

You put some effort into that list, Victor, thanks. Had a scan through, most of the buildings don’t attract my eye, but these ones from your list which stand out for me.

O’Connell Street still has some beauty, if you look very hard beyond the tack, its there.
Fairview
Cottages in cul-de-sac, Quarry Road, Cabra
Flats complex in James’ Street
Mount Brown cottages
Richmond Hospital (could easily be the site of a Victorian murder mystery)
Shrewsbury Road
Foxrock (Tudor style building)
Brighton Road Foxrock
Cork Street (I think it’s a Nursing Home? – I was always attracted by the little balcony).

I quite understand when you say that architecture is not country-specific but some of those awful buildings just scream ‘Russia’ to me or ‘Germany’ as mentioned before. Some may appreciate that type of architecture, but its not for me.

After all your work, I can’t say that I have ever seen any building that stands out as being of ‘Irish design’ or ‘typically Irish’ except the country cottages and longhouses but they could be found in Scotland and other places also. It’s different when it comes to the other arts of course, paintings, sculptures, jewellery etc. But Irish design in architecture just does not seem to exist does it?

This began as a history question but is turning into an arts question and I apologise for that. I wanted Ireland to have produced something wonderful but I haven’t found it yet. Someone may yet point me toward it.

chughes · 26-04-2014 5:55am

If you are interested in the development of normal housing I can recommend a book called Dublin 1910-1940, Shaping The City & Suburbs by Ruth McManus.

The book describes the spread of Dublin during those years which, as you can see, includes the early years of the Free State.

KildareFan · 26-04-2014 8:32am

Hi, Archiseek has an incredible archive of 1000s of Irish buildings on its website. You can search by province & city.

Boards won't let me post a link because I'm a new user so all I can say is google

archiseek com buildings ireland buildings

and you should find the website. Click on the drop down menu 'Buildings of Ireland' and then click on the province, then county. There are 1000s of photos which are arranged chronologically. Dublin post 1913 starts at page 80 on the Dublin archive.

Jellybaby1 · 26-04-2014 2:53pm

Will be checking Archiseek as soon as I get a chance. Thanks.

Cedrus · 26-04-2014 3:04pm

Judgement Day wrote: »

And here's a useless abomination built by the State shortly after the Republic was declared.

That is a personal opinion which is not shared universally as evidenced by the title of the photo you quote
www.irisharchitectureawards.ie/images/gold-medal/gold_busaras.jpg

In my opinion, Busaras is a fabulous building with extraordinary detail, the mosaics alone are worthy of awards. Sadly it has not been maintained to anything like the standard it deserves, indeed this is the fate of many buildings whether old or new architecture.

ezra_pound · 26-04-2014 3:09pm

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

I well remember it like that. Very Art Deco to my ignorant eye. But not Irish in design, French I believe.

No. It's Irish in design and influenced airport design worldwide.

Jellybaby1 · 26-04-2014 4:38pm

ezra_pound wrote: »

No. It's Irish in design and influenced airport design worldwide.

As yes, my ignorant eye being the fault, I thought everything Art Deco was French. D'uh!

Judgement Day · 26-04-2014 5:30pm

Cedrus wrote: »

That is a personal opinion which is not shared universally as evidenced by the title of the photo you quote
www.irisharchitectureawards.ie/images/gold-medal/gold_busaras.jpg

In my opinion, Busaras is a fabulous building with extraordinary detail, the mosaics alone are worthy of awards. Sadly it has not been maintained to anything like the standard it deserves, indeed this is the fate of many buildings whether old or new architecture.

Of course it's a personal opinion - but one shared by many. If you examine the bus station itself, it has been shoe horned into the building like it was an afterthought. That's a personal opinion too!

Jellybaby1 · 26-04-2014 9:38pm

Just about everything I wrote here about buildings is my own personal opinion too - I suppose beauty is in the eye of the beholder. And I hate, with a vengeance, the Civic Offices on Wood Quay/Fishamble Street/Winetavern Street. I have yet to find anyone who lives in the area who likes it, but Boards may supply that person now.

pedroeibar1 · 26-04-2014 9:42pm

One must remember that many of the architects of the Independence era were trained in England and were heavily influenced by what was happening there - prior to 1922 the majority of potential clients in Ireland were English or Anglo-Irish; after the 1922 period many of the works commissioned were from the same people, including the re-building of homes burned down. Many of the other works were commercial, e.g. banks, which always took on an air of ‘classical solidity’ to give the right image, so ‘new/modern/different’ is not a good idea.

Boyd Barrett who designed the Art Deco 1930’s Dept. of Industry and Commerce building on Kildare St. was Irish and trained here. However, much of the immediate the post-Independence work was reinstatement or social housing, so design one house and copy it X 100’s – Some of the landlords who were ‘burned out’ were allowed sell their compensation from central government to county/city councils for a percentage of the value. The councils were building 3 up 2 down type houses for the ‘working classes’, so that discount enabled them to build many more and was an important factor in developing the housing stock. Croydon Park in Fairview Dublin 3 is a typical example of that type of housing. Story here

Busarus - I too find it difficult to accept the ‘greatness’ of Michael Scott – perhaps because I’m not a fan of most of his architecture, including Busarus (which some say he had little input on). His firm (eventually Scott Tallon Walker) had some great buildings, e.g. the Carrolls factory in Dundalk, the Goulding house in Enniskerry, the Bank of Ireland on Baggot St., etc. but they were from the Mies-ian influence of the other partners, rather than from Scott himself.

For 20th century Irish architects I’m a big fan of Kevin Roche

I also believe that too many Irish people have no taste or aesthetic sense with regard to housing. Just walk around with your eyes open and see the dross....

Cedrus · 26-04-2014 10:20pm

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

I also believe that too many Irish people have no taste or aesthetic sense with regard to housing. Just walk around with your eyes open and see the dross....

I tend to agree with this, but there is also the fact that developers are scared/ won't risk being different and there are not many opportunities for self build in urban areas, most people are going to have to buy in the mass market schemes. This doesn't excuse the rural blight of bungalow bliss haciendas of the 80s- 90s, or the McMansions of the tiger years.
To my mind, the cardinal sin of estate house owners when they get over the hump of their mortgage, is they add a porch/verandah with a PILLAR. A big white absolutely inappropriate fluted concrete pillar. "It adds a touch of class" they say, NO, it doesn't, the grand house style you think you're emulating takes more than a pillar.

I despair of the people who think that old architecture is wonderful and anything modern is rubbish. The crappy old stuff has long been knocked or just fell down, while we do still have to see all of the crappy modern stuff, it blurs the conception.

Cedrus · 26-04-2014 10:22pm

Judgement Day wrote: »

Of course it's a personal opinion - but one shared by many. If you examine the bus station itself, it has been shoe horned into the building like it was an afterthought. That's a personal opinion too!

On a city centre site, shoehorning is to be expected.

Jellybaby1 · 26-04-2014 10:31pm

I think I'm being left behind at this stage of the thread!

I might have been happy just to see houses or buildings with a wee bit of celtic design. I Googled 'Celtic style house' and found roundhouses, found in Ireland and Wales. A skilled Architect could produce something modern with that design, couldnt he/she? This might be seen as an attempt, but I'm not taken with it myself: http://www.mernagh.ie/pc_ch1_hse.htm though I do like the roundhouses. Still just my opinion mind.

Cedrus · 26-04-2014 10:36pm

Following the burning of Cork in December 1920, the rebuilding was less than impressive, but the business' were likely driven by commercial concerns, the larger shops wanted to look solid and dependable while the smaller ones just wanted cheap and fast to get back into business.

Only Cash & Co and Egans went for an elegant stone finish, Roches went for a wedding cake effect and everyone else went for just walls and roof. There was a vile prefab lashup next to Roches, probably from later that the 20s that always reminded me of that 80s Xmas present (Linkit?) where you made plaster squares that meshed together.

ozmo · 26-04-2014 10:56pm

Judgement Day wrote: »

Of course it's a personal opinion - but one shared by many. If you examine the bus station itself, it has been shoe horned into the building like it was an afterthought. That's a personal opinion too!

It was my opinon also until I took a tour there during the yearly open day events - and for its age its amazing inside- built from the very best the new Ireland had to offer to the highest standards inside. The very best materials inside and out - marble and stone everywhere. Its own custom designed fonts and once off fittings, door handles etc, for that one building. And the art built into the structuctures. Now is probably my favourite post Independence building-

pedroeibar1 · 27-04-2014 9:19am

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

I might have been happy just to see houses or buildings with a wee bit of celtic design. I Googled 'Celtic style house' and found roundhouses, found in Ireland and Wales. A skilled Architect could produce something modern with that design, couldnt he/she? This might be seen as an attempt, but I'm not taken with it myself: http://www.mernagh.ie/pc_ch1_hse.htm though I do like the roundhouses. Still just my opinion mind.

Google images [ Pat McAuliffe stucco work Listowel ] and you should get plenty of Celtic embellishment! Some of his work is in Abbeyfeale also - dates to the late 1800's.
That 'round house' #2 is very like another from the late 1960's - will have to find the reference.

As for skilled architects providing the design - yes, they could, but it would not get past the planners ! 'You want to build a what? A Tower? It's round, like a chimney and HOW HIGH???? WHAT!!?? Go back to your monks and tell them that we have height restrictions here!

Judgement Day · 27-04-2014 9:46am

Cedrus wrote: »

On a city centre site, shoehorning is to be expected.

If you're designing a bus station - you design a bus station with anything else (offices. theatre etc) a secondary consideration but in the case of Bus Aras it seems to have been the other way round. The footprint of the building is large enough for it to have been got right. Anyway, I don't like the building and you do.

pedroeibar1 · 27-04-2014 9:58am

Cedrus wrote: »

........, but there is also the fact that developers are scared/ won't risk being different .......

They are not scared / won’t risk being different – they are greedy, want the most for the least and have no taste – look at what Zoe Developments threw up, look at the unimaginative blight outside most villages, look at the homes where the recent crop of developers lived – bling, in your face tat, unless of course they used a ‘designer’ instead of the latest wife.

Cedrus wrote: »

To my mind, the cardinal sin of estate house owners when they get over the hump of their mortgage, is they add a porch/verandah with a PILLAR. A big white absolutely inappropriate fluted concrete pillar. "It adds a touch of class" they say, NO, it doesn't, the grand house style you think you're emulating takes more than a pillar.

They sin long before that.
Gardens – no idea of what a garden should do or be. Total absence of planting. It is worse in the country, where new houses are built and years later they get around to ‘doing’ a lawn with a row of leylandii around the edges. Straight line driveways, black tarmac, a blueyellowred plastic swing and wendyhouse in a corner, everything in your face ‘look what we have achieved!’

The now ubiquitous ****ty plastic conservatory with a half wall (and usually no exterior door!) is IMO as bad as the pillared porch.

The stupidity (and growing frequency) of the crass exposure of random rubble walls with raised ‘pointing’ highlighted by brick window surrounds.

The insistence of stone cladding in rural Ireland as being ‘traditional’ – no it’s bloody not, never was, even cottier houses were mortared and limewashed.

The worst by far are the omnipresent awful windows – plastic ‘glazing bars’ inserted BETWEEN the panes, horrible clunky PVC frames, windows that ‘flap’ instead of being sliding sash, plastic front doors with bits of coloured glass inset. Not to mention the iron-on lead strips to give that ‘Tudor’ look!

Rant over!

pedroeibar1 · 27-04-2014 12:39pm

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

That 'round house' #2 is very like another from the late 1960's - will have to find the reference.

Morris and Steedman's 1964 house Marchwell in Midlothian.

jonniebgood1 · 27-04-2014 6:52pm

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

The insistence of stone cladding in rural Ireland as being ‘traditional’ – no it’s bloody not, never was, even cottier houses were mortared and limewashed.
.....

Rant over!

Stone as a building material is traditional- think before 1700's.

jonniebgood1 · 27-04-2014 6:57pm

Judgement Day wrote: »

If you're designing a bus station - you design a bus station with anything else (offices. theatre etc) a secondary consideration but in the case of Bus Aras it seems to have been the other way round. The footprint of the building is large enough for it to have been got right. Anyway, I don't like the building and you do.

Regardless of personal opinions Busaras is widely recognised as a successful example of modern Architecture. The fact that it is still in use in the way it is means it has stood the test of time despite the development of this type of travel. The same can be said of Dublin airport which was internationally renowned and widely copied when built both in 1940 and later developments (50's).

Judgement Day · 27-04-2014 7:17pm

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Regardless of personal opinions Busaras is widely recognised as a successful example of modern Architecture. The fact that it is still in use in the way it is means it has stood the test of time despite the development of this type of travel. The same can be said of Dublin airport which was internationally renowned and widely copied when built both in 1940 and later developments (50's).

Widely recognised bythe elite in much the same way as Sean Scully is recognised as an artist.

https://www.google.ie/search?q=sean%20scully&client=opera&oe=UTF-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi

jonniebgood1 · 27-04-2014 7:29pm

Judgement Day wrote: »

Widely recognised bythe elite in much the same way as Sean Scully is recognised as an artist.

I'm going to take a compliment out of that as I would have the opinion that if a building from the 50's is still used for same purpose 60 years later that it deserves enormous credit (i.e. I must be part of the elite!!!!!!)

!!
:pac:

marienbad · 27-04-2014 8:07pm

Judgement Day wrote: »

Widely recognised bythe elite in much the same way as Sean Scully is recognised as an artist.

https://www.google.ie/search?q=sean%20scully&client=opera&oe=UTF-8&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hl=en&tbm=isch&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi

All these things are recognised by an elite , what is your point ? Elites per se are not a bad thing.

Judgement Day · 27-04-2014 8:26pm

marienbad wrote: »

All these things are recognised by an elite , what is your point ? Elites per se are not a bad thing.

That's another personal opinion - i.e. unwelcome in this thread.

robp · 27-04-2014 8:27pm

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Stone as a building material is traditional- think before 1700's.

Stone is a traditional building material but only when its covered over wth plaster. Although exposed stone is visible on castles and tower houses these were originally rendered in a lime plaster. The plaster is needed for weather proofing. So many Irish cottages have had their plaster removed and it has greatly reduced their beauty.

Cedrus · 27-04-2014 8:46pm

robp wrote: »

Stone is traditional building material but only when its covered over in plaster. Although exposed stone is visible on castles and tower houses these were originally rendered in a lime plaster. The plaster is needed for weather proofing. So many Irish cottages have had their plaster removed and it has greatly reduced their beauty.

And their weathering ability, I know several people living in stone cottages who would give their eye teeth to move into a warm dry modern house.

Stone cladding on a modern house is a bit hokey though, but bizarrely, many council planners insist on it as traditional even though our forbears wanted to hide the stone as it looked "poor".

Cedrus · 27-04-2014 8:53pm

Judgement Day wrote: »

That's another personal opinion - i.e. unwelcome in this thread.

Why would a personal opinion be unwelcome on a public discussion board? This is what discussions are for.

Stating an opinion as unmoderated fact will always be open to challenge, if this offends you, don't go out, ever.

Cedrus · 27-04-2014 9:01pm

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Regardless of personal opinions Busaras is widely recognised as a successful example of modern Architecture. The fact that it is still in use in the way it is means it has stood the test of time despite the development of this type of travel. The same can be said of Dublin airport which was internationally renowned and widely copied when built both in 1940 and later developments (50's).

Yes, 61 years of contiguous use lends a lie to the idea that Busaras was "useless" or "not fit for purpose".

I think the original Dublin airport is beautiful even now, but you do have to catch it at the right angle as it is swamped by the later terminal.

Ardnacrusha was also copied, the Hoover dam developers sent over a delegation to find out what was done, strictly speaking that was not an Irish project though, Siemens designed and built it, though it was Irish commissioned.

jonniebgood1 · 27-04-2014 9:08pm

robp wrote: »

Stone is a traditional building material but only when its covered over wth plaster. Although exposed stone is visible on castles and tower houses these were originally rendered in a lime plaster. The plaster is needed for weather proofing. So many Irish cottages have had their plaster removed and it has greatly reduced their beauty.

Do you have any information on stone castles and tower houses being originally rendered, i.e. a source for this- I did not think this was the case.

I do not think that you are correct to say that stone was always covered with plaster. In many cases a lime whitewash was painted directly onto the stone. Also common were outhouse buildings that would never have been rendered but were commonly built in rubble field stone. These can still be seen in abandoned traditional farmsteads where the cottage may still have the remnants of lime render whilst the accompanying sheds have exposed stone. Many examples of what I am talking about are contained in this link http://www.heritagecouncil.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/Architecture/Farm_Buildings.pdf
Reference page 14 & 15 for good examples.

Judgement Day · 27-04-2014 9:19pm

Cedrus wrote: »

Yes, 61 years of contiguous use lends a lie to the idea that Busaras was "useless" or "not fit for purpose".

I think the original Dublin airport is beautiful even now, but you do have to catch it at the right angle as it is swamped by the later terminal.

Ardnacrusha was also copied, the Hoover dam developers sent over a delegation to find out what was done, strictly speaking that was not an Irish project though, Siemens designed and built it, though it was Irish commissioned.

Not really, as the company which uses Bus Aras has been in business for a little longer than the building and is widely regarded as "useless: and "not fit for purpose" yet it continues. The fact that it has continued in use is more down to CIE's inability to develop a new central bus station than the present building's suitability.

Cedrus · 27-04-2014 9:32pm

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Do you have any information on stone castles and tower houses being originally rendered, i.e. a source for this- I did not think this was the case.

I do not think that you are correct to say that stone was always covered with plaster. In many cases a lime whitewash was painted directly onto the stone. Also common were outhouse buildings that would never have been rendered but were commonly built in rubble field stone. These can still be seen in abandoned traditional farmsteads where the cottage may still have the remnants of lime render whilst the accompanying sheds have exposed stone. Many examples of what I am talking about are contained in this link http://www.heritagecouncil.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/Architecture/Farm_Buildings.pdf
Reference page 14 & 15 for good examples.

Castles and Cottages were normally plastered though it was a much cruder effort than we would consider these days and it did not last well, more hand slap than smooth float, there were also poorer places which did not get plastered but poorer again were the sod cabins.

pedroeibar1 · 27-04-2014 9:40pm

Robp and Cedrus have beaten me in responding (thanks); I'll just add that many of the cottages were finished in a type of 'daub' that did not last. Annual limewashing was a feature to help protect it. The feast of Corpus Christi sees many country houses being painted in a +/- continuance of this tradition. The pages 14 and 15 to which you referred above are for farm outbuildings, not habitations.

dubhthach · 27-04-2014 10:22pm

Of course prior to the 18th century the standard would have been what were called "Mud houses" (compressed earth -- basically development from Wattle and Daub!):

On the Improvement of the Habitations of the Poor in Ireland
From the Dublin Penny Journal, Volume 1, Number 40, March 30, 1833
http://www.libraryireland.com/articles/Irish-Mud-Cabins/

If I recall correctly in "Green and Silver" (published 1949 -- trip on Grand and Royal Canal) there's a photo of a then derelict "mud cabin". They are basically what you'd call a "bothán" in Irish.

What's evident obviously before the 1600's is that most housing was of a temporary nature (eg. easy to build, just as easy to abandon) , given the nature of Gaelic society at the time that's hardly surprising

robp · 28-04-2014 7:39am

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Do you have any information on stone castles and tower houses being originally rendered, i.e. a source for this- I did not think this was the case.

I do not think that you are correct to say that stone was always covered with plaster. In many cases a lime whitewash was painted directly onto the stone. Also common were outhouse buildings that would never have been rendered but were commonly built in rubble field stone. These can still be seen in abandoned traditional farmsteads where the cottage may still have the remnants of lime render whilst the accompanying sheds have exposed stone. Many examples of what I am talking about are contained in this link http://www.heritagecouncil.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/Publications/Architecture/Farm_Buildings.pdf
Reference page 14 & 15 for good examples.

I don't have a good citation but perhaps others would. I am not not expert so maybe they weren't always plastered but certainly the popular image of bare stone is incorrect.

Very occasionally you can still see traces on sheltered parts of tower houses. Its sometimes added on restored towerhouses like in the following two.

pedroeibar1 · 28-04-2014 8:31am

Traditional Buildings in Ireland. Published by: Mourne Heritage Trust Walls – The material used depends on what is locally available. The most common walling material is undressed rubble stone and the second most common is earth. Most people are familiar with rubble stone. These load-bearing walls are generally 600mm to 700mm thick and the stones are selected to face up on both sides. When walls are built against a bank, they are sometimes only faced on the one side. The stonework is occasionally exposed but more often it is protected, at least by layers of limewash but usually there is also one coat of plaster or more.
Earth as a building material is generally not so familiar to most of us. Many owners are quite shocked to find their house has earth walls but, in practice, earth is a very reliable building material. It is important to keep it dry. The especially weak points are the head and the foot but the surfaces between must all be protected with lime. There are a great many earth buildings in use today. Some have been standing for two centuries and more. Earth walls have been built in a variety of ways, some by ramming wet clay between shutters, others by using hand formed lumps or unbaked bricks that have been pre-dried under cover. Some earth walls are reinforced with straw, hair or rags. Earth was commonly used as a bedding for rubble stone work, sometimes neat and sometimes it was mixed with lime.

jonniebgood1 · 28-04-2014 11:42am

From Patrick & Maura Shaffreys excellent reference book -'Irish countryside buildings' P.118

"When stone of better quality and more uniform size is used it is laid to a more regular pattern in horizontal courses, and if the weathering characterisations of the stone are considered to be sufficiently good it is pointed with mortar and exposed in its natural state. This technique is known as coursed and pointed stonework."
The underline is inserted by me (obviously)...

Later in same book the author details another type of stonework "ashlar work" that was left exposed. This is quarry worked stone. There are several examples of buildings such as forges or public buildings built with cut stone that would never have been intended to be plastered.

pedroeibar1 · 28-04-2014 6:18pm

JBG, We agree that Shaffreys’ book is excellent, but after that.......
I’m not sure that we are discussing the same thing - in my post I referred to the ubiquitous use of stone cladding in modern rural housing – saying

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

....... The stupidity (and growing frequency) of the crass exposure of random rubble walls with raised ‘pointing’ .........

This is an example of the nonsense I mentioned, where a house that was (and should be) faced with mortar has had it removed. It is one of thousands all around the country - and Co. Dublin is no exception, where the stupidity is also happening, Strand Road, Sandycove, Dalkey to think of just a few horrible examples.

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

....... The insistence of stone cladding in rural Ireland as being ‘traditional’ – no it’s bloody not, never was, even cottier houses were mortared and limewashed.........Rant over!

Here are a few new-builds that commit the sin 1 and 2 3 4

Particularly when they get it wrong, those houses have no need for stonework cladding, other than to satisfy an uninformed owner or worse, planning official.

My comments remain accurate. Rural housing, when it was stone-built, was invariably random rubble which by its nature is very uneven in size and shape, and difficult to lay in straight courses. This unevenness gives rise to a near impossibility to weatherproof an exterior wall – an inward slope on any one stone will funnel water into the space between the interior & exterior walls, a gap usually filled with rammed earth and ‘stuff’ that would retain the damp. That is why rural houses had their stonework mortared and limewashed. Here is an example of what I mean where the mortaring is poor and the house has been limewashed several times. (Note the little guy in the half door). Here is another that also shows an outbuilding that has been pointed with mortar. Another and another.

Ashlar is commonly /incorrectly called ‘cut stone’ and is generally used only on ‘gentrified’ houses – mansions, castles, agents houses, gate lodges, etc.. It is an expensive process as the face and all sides that abut another stone must be dressed (squared). Ashlar was very popular during the ‘gothicisation’ craze in the 1800’s that led to crenulations and the addition of towers, etc, to existing buildings – frequently the ashlar was just a facade overlaid on Georgian stucco.
On the forges you mentioned above it would have been common to have the entrance arch constructed from ashlar or dressed stone and the remaining surfaces built by random rubble overlaid with plaster. As a rule of thumb, the wealthier the estate and the more prominent the building, the more likely one will find dressed stone and sometimes ashlar. Your mention of plastering over ashlar is a red herring - would never happen, it would be like gold-plating an object and then painting over it with enamel paint.

jonniebgood1 · 29-04-2014 8:10am

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Originally Posted by pedroeibar1 View Post

....... The insistence of stone cladding in rural Ireland as being ‘traditional’ – no it’s bloody not, never was, even cottier houses were mortared and limewashed.........Rant over!.

The point I made quoting Shaffrey in previous post above is that finished stone is traditional. Maybe not as cladding but the finish of natural stone when built properly had been a feature of Irish buildings for a long time, which is why planners accept it (rather than insist on it in most cases).

Building after the British left

Comments