scaffolding techniques - Castle Quest

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!

Castle Quest

Building Blocks

scaffolding techniques

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: scaffolding techniques
rebelyell Member	posted 11-28-2000 12:30 AM Hi I found some small round holes in a XIII century wall -part of a tower-, they are about the same size as the putlog holes, is it possible that they were used for scaffolding? the tower has been in ruins since the 14-15th century and may have been partly renovated later to stop it falling but never used as accomodation again, ( it is a tower that belonged to a wall surrounding a small village). I don't think they have anything to do with drainage eather. Any suggestions? I'm writting a dissertation about a castle in switzerland, I have many questions I would like to discuss with someone.Particulary about finding out how the oldest part of the casle looked and was arranged.I have many detailed fotos and plans dating back to the 18th century. Please is somebody interested? Many thanks emy
Levan Moderator	posted 11-28-2000 05:44 AM How are the holes distributed on the wall? Without knowing exactly where the holes are placed I'm only guessing: If they're near the top of the wall-head they might be supports for 'hoardings', which were covered wooden defensive galleries affixed to the top of the outside of a tower or curtain wall. These provided a good vantage point for defending against attacks to the wall. Some apparently had holes in the floor in order to enable objects to be dropped upon attackers. Another possibility might also be supports for garderobes, which were sometimes precariously constructed as wooden cabins - obviously with a direct route for detris to fall without obstruction to the moat or wall base. And finally, for the time-being, in more fashionable eras, it was not unknown for more comfortable tudor-style solar accomodation to be constructed upon towers (see Stokesay Castle for an example). As for scaffolding - perhaps others might be able to enlighten you! Levan
duncan Senior Member	posted 11-28-2000 06:08 AM Welcome back Levan, hope things are going better.
Merlin Senior Member	posted 11-28-2000 07:52 AM Please give me the name of the castle or town, and I may be able to help. Merlin
rebelyell Member	posted 11-28-2000 04:43 PM It is le Chateau de Surpierre. I only saw two holes on the outer part of the wall, one on top of the other about 60 cm appart,they are located at base of the tower. Another question is also that the remains of the towers are of a square shape(presumably the foundations which are built against a rock slope) but apparently they were round and wooden towers, is that possible? emy
Merlin Senior Member	posted 12-01-2000 01:55 AM Holes from scaffolding can very often be seen on the outside-walls of towers and other castle-buildings from the 12th/13th century, at least in Switzerland. A good example is the Palas of Riom (GR), where a regular pattern of such holes can be seen, the rows always in a vertical distance of a man's height. I haven't been at Surpierre yet, but I think that the holes you found had another function. If they where for scaffolding, they wouldn't be at the base of the wall and you certainly would have found more than just two... Are you sure about the round wooden towers? I never heard of such a thing (for Switzerland) and I think it would be very difficult to construct. Wooden towers normaly had a square shape, and round towers (of stone) in that area are the style of 13th century castles of the counts of Savoy. Sure, Surpierre belonged to them in that time, but as the base of the tower you're talking about is at least from that time, I don't think that there was a round tower before. Is there any archeological evidence for your presumption? Merlin
Philip Davis unregistered	posted 12-01-2000 03:29 PM Round stone towers with square bases are well known. See the photo's of Goodrich castle at http://www.castlewales.com/goodrich.html ------------------ And as I rode by Dalton-Hall Beneath the turrets high, A maiden on the castle-wall Was singing merrily: The Outlaw by Sir Walter Scott http://www.castlesontheweb.com/members/philipdavis/index.html
rebelyell Member	posted 12-01-2000 04:42 PM Thank you Philip for the Goodrich sample of round towers! hi Merlin I was reading 'la valle de la Broye: Ric Berger, Pully 1985, pag.182' The three towers outside the castle were round and stone as you said, but looking at their square base...were the towers at the Goodrich castle a standard way of building round towers with a square base all over europe?? Also, what remains of the surrounding wall between these towers is already massive! min. 2 metres left over at some parts, do you think the upper part of this wall now non-existing was also made of stone or maybe wood? I'm just surprised that all the three towers and the wall surrounding the little village were so well demolished ( in 1477), they mention a fire at that time too. About the holes; the base of the tower is void inside, it has a little side entrance at one side. The two holes were more than 60cm appart, about 1.30m. Could I actually send you a photo and a diagram image of the positioning to your e-mail?, it may be easier to understand instead of words. I also have a very interesting photo of how the castle was entered. thanxs emy
wurdsmiff unregistered	posted 12-01-2000 05:34 PM The use of round towers upon square plinths was not a standard arrangement, although the introduction of round towers came from necessity. Following the initial crusades, the western Europeans had learned about siege engines, and had discovered that the sharp corners presented by square keeps were weaker structurally, and defensively, offering little in the way of flanking cover in defense against miners etc. There was therefore from 1150 or so, a general move toward the construction of round towers and variants, which offered a sounder defence. ------------------ Demeure par la verite Visit my web-site at www.castlesontheweb.com/members/wurdsmiff/castles.htm Gordon.
rebelyell Member	posted 12-01-2000 05:46 PM yes, I thought that the stone may have been used to rebuild the castle or other buildings at the nearby village, but did castles at any stage have walls of a stone base with a wooden upper level?
wurdsmiff unregistered	posted 12-02-2000 03:23 AM Many castles had wooden structures built around the battlements, these overhung or were built out from the wall, or on top of it. However there was a move away from wooden hoardings around the same time as the introduction of siege engines since they were vulnerable to fire and fragile when attacked by stone throwing devices. Unfortunately wood does not survive as well as stone, and so what remains now are only the sockets into which these structures were built, however the stone corbels which superceded them do survive, often with the structure they supported when built in stone. ------------------ Demeure par la verite Visit my web-site at www.castlesontheweb.com/members/wurdsmiff/castles.htm Gordon.
wurdsmiff unregistered	posted 12-02-2000 06:47 AM A passing thought, how far above the ground are the holes which began this discussion? Could they be blocked or still open gunloops guarding the wall base or an entrance? They may have been added later than the 13th c before the Chateau became ruinous.
rebelyell Member	posted 12-02-2000 07:30 AM I hope these two mysterious holes don't turn out to be modern! The holes are bloqued. The first one is about 0.5m above ground level and the next one about 1.30m from the first. It is very possible they were guarding the wall as there is a void space inside ( I didn't enter it as you have to squeze through a small opening) that would maybe solve the mystery! I will try and get someone to look inside. But i have to remind you that these holes are round, a bit bigger then a tennis ball, did they have round gunloops? emy
rebelyell Member	posted 12-02-2000 07:44 AM correction!! I'm just checking if the holes are on the bit of wall built against the stone mountain slope as foundations or a little higher at the same level as the void inside the tower. sorry for all this confusion, I was using a close-up photo as reference. emy
Merlin Senior Member	posted 12-04-2000 10:36 AM Emy, just go ahead and send me your material, I'm realy curious about those holes now... A note to the round towers with square base: I know of one castle in Switzerland that had such a tower, but it didn't look like the towers of Goodrich. The castle in question is Liebberg at M�nchaltorf near Zurich and the ruin of that tower disappeared some 150 years ago. The first two meters above the ground had a square shape, but from there on it was round. It's possible that the square-shaped tower fell down in the 13th century and was rebuilt in the 'new fashion' of round towers on the old base. Which tower of Surpierre is the one with the holes in it's wall? Maybe you could refer to the pictures on http://www.burgen.ch or on http://www.swisscastles.ch . Merlin
rebelyell Member	posted 12-04-2000 03:29 PM Thank you Merlin the tower with the holes is the one closest to the entrance of the castle but unfortunately you can't see it at all on the photos seen on the web. I will e-mail you some plans emy
Merlin Senior Member	posted 12-11-2000 08:33 AM Emy, besides the very good pictures and plans you've mailed me, I've consulted the following books: � REINERS, Heribert. Die Burgen und Schl�sser des Kantons Freiburg, 2nd part [Die Burgen und Schl�sser der Schweiz, vol. 14]. Basel 1937. P. 80 - 86. � HAUSWIRTH, Fritz. Burgen und Schl�sser der Schweiz, vol. 11: Bern 2 (Oberaargau, Seeland, Jura), Neuenburg, Freiburg. Kreuzlingen 1975. P. 154 - 156. � DE VEVEY, Bernard. Ch�teaux et maisons fortes du canton de Fribourg [Archives de la soci�t� d'histoire du canton de Fribourg, vol. 24]. Fribourg 1978. P. 296 - 300. � SCHWABE, Erich. Burgen der Schweiz, vol. 9: Kantone Bern und Freiburg. Red. Werner Meyer. Z�rich 1983. P. 90. 1) I now have the impression that medieval SUPRAPETRAM was a much bigger and lager castle than todays Surpierre. But I think that the outer wall with the 3 (round?) towers was an addition of the late 14th or 15th century, when Surpierre was in the posession of the Earl of Savoy, and may've been destroyed 1539 - 1544. 2) This gives no explanation for the two holes you detected. Their order and their shape do not make much sense if they're used as gunloops (too small for such a thick wall - you could only shoot straight ahead) but they also do not seem to be from scaffolding either. Maybe they're indeed modern or have been made when the stones of the tower were taken to build something else with them... 3) Your theory about the ground level of the terrace makes sense to me. The common way to build an outer wall was to fortifiy the border of a flat area and not to construct them on a lower level on the side of a hill. But I know of more then one example where the space behind the outer wall was filled up at a later period to get a higher (and very flat) ground level or terrace as a base for some new construction. I think this is exactly what they did at Surpierre before building the new main building. 4) My theory is that the space where the old groundfloor-plans mark the 'vieux ch�taux' or 'ancien ch�teaux' was the placement of the medieval Palas, the main building of the Cossonay-Period: Maybe rectangular in shape, with the long side as part of the outer wall, right beside the chapel-tower. It would've been the logical place: � Seen from the entrance, it was on the opposite of the inner court. The inner court of the Cossonay-period was where todays main building stands (proof: the cistern that has been found under the 'salon' during the last renovation). � The chapel used to be near the Palas, and I don't think that Surpierre was an exeption at this point. � In most swiss castles of the 12th/13th century, the strong building of the Palas was used for stronger fortification of a part of the outer wall that was exposed to an attack. In Surpierre, the Bergfried (strongest tower) guarded the entrance, and the chapel-tower with the Palas the opposite corner of the terrace, with the 'small tower' as additional point of forification between them. You can see the same conception at the castle of Rue (also in the Ct. Freiburg). 5) With that conception, the cave-like entrance from the outside of the terrace to the side of the small tower can't be older than the construction of the outer wall (the fortification of the village). Sure, these are highly hypothetical ideas. Please let me know if you've find out something new! Merlin
rebelyell Member	posted 12-11-2000 01:20 PM Thank you so much Merlin! Your hypothesis are extreamly useful, in particular the one concerning the original ground level, it resolves part of the mystery. 1)the village of Surpierre is already mentioned in la Grosse of 1380 as a 'burgum' or fortified village, and at that time it still belonged to the Cossonay family and not to the counts/earls of Savoy, I believe it was more likely to be destroyed in 1475 when Surpierre was occupied by Fribourg and Bernese.( I think you posted this same suggestion in an earlier message as well)Savoy only had the place for three years before it got destroyed, unlucky. In 1539, only the castle is mentioned to have been set to fire by a rich influent man (the castle was already a bailiff administrative centre belonging to Fribourg)You may like to read 'Les Premiers seigneurs de Surpierre et leurs sujets' by Erica Burki 1991 Estavayer-le-Lac 2)About the holes, I'm also begining to think they are more modern. The land under the castle and around this tower was still being farmed until at least 1767, year when the land was sold, this land under the castle is also terraced. So perhaps the remains of the tower were used as a shed or something to do with agriculture. 3)The hypothesis about the ground level is great,it explains a lot of questions. I am now stuck trying to find out when the stair tower was built. My theory (based on the fact that this stair tower goes underground connecting to the cellar) is that it was built just before the (current) ground/earth was added to build the 'new' chateau in 1544, the only problem is that the plan cadastrale of 1707 doesn't show this tower. ( I e-mailed it to you last time, can e-mail it again if you want) In fact it shows a strange square on the west side of the 'vieux' chateau with what I believe is an 'f' written on it, was it a fountain or an oven? and was this stair tower simply included into the vieux chateau drawing? 4) I agree that the medieval palace or the main hall must have been next to the chapel, I also think that the chapel must have been used as a keep/donjon; as a last defensive resource when the castle was under siege. Do you think that the Bergfried was the donjon? The hall must have been quite big but obviuosly weaker since it was destroyed. 5)I had a theory that the cave entrance under the small tower could be older then the village wall and that it may have been used as a secondary postern; offering little access for an attacking force but allowing the exit of the defenders in emergencies. I have another theory about the chapel door and how it was linked to the hall, but it is complicated to explain in detail, I will confirm it first and post it later. 5) many thanxs again Merlin! emy
Merlin Senior Member	posted 12-12-2000 08:45 AM Yes, you're right: I think that the destruction of the village took place in 1475 - and it's possible that they used some of the material of the village-forifications to lift the ground level behind the terrace-wall or to build the new main building. I connected the village-fortifications to the Earls of Savoy because of the round shape of the towers. To rebuild or enlarge a castle with a strong round tower in every corner would've been a typical savoyard type of construction in that time and area. But I think the theory that those 3 towers where indeed round on a square base is a bit weak. I don't have access to the text of Berger at the moment - is his argumentation conclusive? If the village of Surpierre was founded and fortified in the late 12th or 13th century, a look at comparable places in the same region (small towns founded by the Earls of Z�hringen, the counts of Kyburg and Habsburg) would show that square-shaped towers were the most common type. I saw that small field with an 'f' on the plan of 1707 - Sorry, but I found no explanation. About point 4: A Donjon and a 'Bergfried' are not the same thing! A Bergfried is the last line of defence in case of a siege and therefore has very thick walls but not much room inside. I never saw a Bergfried with a chapel on ground level or on the 1st floor. I think if Surpierre ever had something like a Bergfried, it was the tower beside the main entrance to the castle. If the chapel-tower should be called a Donjon (=defendable tower and main living quarter) is a debated question in the literature about Surpierre (see Hauswirth or Reiners). The connection of chapel & tower is unique in that area (you can find something comparable in the much bigger and older tower of the M�rsburg near Winterthur). > Was the chapel already there in the 13th century? Or was the 1st floor of that tower changed to a chapel after the lifting of the terrace, when it became the new ground level? > The pictures you've mailed to me yesterday (with the stones sticking out on one side of that tower) do indeed suggest that there once was a garderobe. But a garderobe just above the chapel? This also points towards the conclusion that this tower had other functions in earlier times... Merlin
rebelyell Member	posted 12-12-2000 09:30 AM Is Bergfried a german terminology? Thanks for the explanation, I didn't realize the difference. In any case, now I don't think the chapel tower could have been the donjon, it seems relatively too small, also the remains of what could be the garderobes were not on this tower but on the wall next to it were we thought the main hall/palas would have been built facing the entrance. I think the chapel was there before lifting the floor of the terrace, because it has a gothic window, and when the terrace was lifted the new chateau was built with renaissance windows. Was it generally a common element to have a chapel in a tower? I was told that this chapel was surveyed and that the conclusion was that it was a chapel because it had the typical dimensions as other chapels, I don't have any references to this remark. About the garderobes, I saw no elements to suggest a garderobe on the chapel tower, but yes on the small tower next to it. Another question; when did they stop using garderobes overhanging from the walls? emy
rebelyell Member	posted 12-12-2000 11:39 AM It's ok I found the definition Bergfried: (1) A single defensive tower characteristic of German speaking lands, the chief function of which was as a watch tower and as a final refuge, rarely were they used as permanent living quarters. The entrance was situated on the first floor. (2) A watch tower which was used to cover the main lines of approach to a castle, normally associated with a hohenburg.
rebelyell Member	posted 12-13-2000 01:44 AM thanks Savoy But don't you think they may be too small to be gunloops ? they are only 10cm diameter. Though I think you are probably right, when I visited the castle I didn't look for more holes as the land is currently quite unaccesible with forest and on a steep slope. However, the tower seems to have a long arrow sort of loop, do you think it was added later or were they common types of loops at that time? I can't get behind the wall as it covered with earth which must have accumulated as it is on a sloping hill. emy
Savoy Senior Member	posted 12-13-2000 05:54 AM Unfortunately, it's all just speculation at this point without seeing it and doing some investigation.
Merlin Senior Member	posted 12-13-2000 09:34 AM Well, I sure would like to have a closer look at Surpierrre. But although Switzerland is a small country, the Broye-valley is not just around the corner from Zurich... Chapels in towers were a rare thing. Beside the M�rsburg I do not know of any other case. At some castles (examples:castle Hegi, also near Winterthur / the royal castle in Zurich, destroyed in the 13th century), the chapel had the shape and strong walls of a tower and therefore some defensive functions.
rebelyell Member	posted 12-16-2000 07:57 AM Merlin Could you give me an example of a castle were a new ground level was added later? emy
Philip Davis unregistered	posted 12-16-2000 04:15 PM I know I'm not Merlin but regarding new ground levels. There are serveral reasons whilst ground levels in a castle may have changed. New building invariably means some spoil being generated and this is often just spread around within the castle walls. (Farnham castle in Surrey UK appears to be an example of this). When gunpowder artillery became effective the stopping power of soil was fairly soon learned and castle walls where reinforced by having banks of earth built up inside them (Chepstow is a fine example.) Also many stone castle where built with earthworks (or on older earthworks) and these earthworks erode and change the ground level (Castle Rising in Norfolk is an example, although some of the infilling of this ringwork may have been deliberate.) ------------------ And as I rode by Dalton-Hall Beneath the turrets high, A maiden on the castle-wall Was singing merrily: The Outlaw by Sir Walter Scott http://www.castlesontheweb.com/members/philipdavis/index.html
Peter Member	posted 12-17-2000 05:15 AM Phew! What an excellent topic. I wont ask why the picture of Fossano I posted has hundreds of holes all over it. The only one I've seen in Piemonte (up to now) like it. Ground levels .. off the top of my head, I think excavations at Stafford found the current castle walls had been built on top of other walls (not unusual I know), and the ground leveled off. Also at Oystermouth (Wales), clearing the site revealed unknown steps etc. But then again, Oystermouth is a strange one, with much debate over those missing gatetowers ! Peter
Merlin Senior Member	posted 12-23-2000 03:38 AM Emy, sorry that I didn't answer earlier. The best example I know of is the old royal 'palatium' and castle in Zurich. In the center of the city, near St.Peters, is a hill called 'Lindenhof'. There once stood a roman castellum of about 50 x 70m with 10 towers and fortified the top of the hill. The romans didn't flatten the area between the walls, and so didn't the royal castlebuilders in medieval times. They just lifted the ground level by filling up the space behind the roman walls (1 - 2 meters) to get a flat terrace for new buildings. Merlin