1

The CHSNewsletter is

published by theChartered Institute

of Building onbehalf of theConstruction

History Society

No. 63 June 2002

CHS CONSTRUCTION HISTORY SOCIETY

NewsletterISSN 0951 9203

Editor: Malcolm Dunkeld, 147 Leslie Road, London N2 8BH, to whom all copy should be sent. All other correspondence should be addressed to The Secretary, Construction History Society, c/o Library & Information

Services Manager, The Chartered Institute of Building, Englemere, Kings Ride, Ascot, Berkshire SL5 7TBE-mail: michael.tutton@virgin.net

EDITORS NOTE

Malcolm Dunkeld (CHS Committee member) has been appointed thenew editor of the Newsletter. All articles for publication should besent to:

Address: 147, Leslie Road, London N2 8BH

Email: dunkelm@sbu.ac.uk or malcolmdunkeld@onetel.net.uk

Tel. No.: 0208 883 7003 / 0207 815 7292

NEWS FROM THE CHS SECRETARY,MICHAEL TUTTON

Please note two important brochures come with this issue of theNewsletter – the Society’s new brochure and the SPAB 125thAnniversary Conference Brochure. If you are able to distribute eitherof these brochures please let me know (contact details at the end ofthe Newsletter). Also, please support your Society by doing your bestto recruit new members and by attending the Conference.

THE STRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENTOF MASONRY DOMES IN INDIA

Introduction

This article researches the origins, structural development andconstruction of masonry domes in India. Surprisingly little has beenpublished on the structure or methods of construction of the buildingsthat make such an important contribution to India’s built heritage.The published material seldom makes mention of how the structurewas created, either in terms of its design or how the materials werephysically placed. The intention here is to investigate where thestructural engineering knowledge of the original builders came fromand how successfully the knowledge was applied. I will also considerthe choices they had to make with materials and methods ofconstruction.

The period under review covers Islamic rule over northern andcentral India from the end of the 12th century to the mid 18th century.New types of buildings came with the new rulers, in particular for thisarticle the tomb. In Islamic buildings the dome, together with the archand, to a lesser extent, the vault are an integral part of the structure.How Hindu masons responded to these new structural forms isalready covered in books on Islamic architecture in India, as arequestions of decoration, symbolism and patronage. These issues aretherefore not repeated here; the bibliography at the end providessources for further reading on these topics.

The choice of a particular building has been made on the basis of itmarking an important structural development, or a ‘milestone’ interms of form, scale and technical achievement. Many of the key

buildings in the evolution and development of domes are in the Delhiarea and I have concentrated on these.

The bulk of the fieldwork is based on two visits to Delhi in 1997 and2000. Elsewhere, the monuments in Agra were visited in 1997 andBijapur in 2001. Apart from the buildings themselves, the othersources of information used here are contemporary paintings, mainlyfrom the 16th century, 20th century publications and discussions witha number of people involved in the built environment in India. It wasnot unexpected that the majority of these are architects rather thanengineers.

Where no information is available, such as for the ways that domeswere actually built, I have made assumptions. These are based oncomparisons with modern methods of building masonry structures inIndia, building practice in Europe during the period under study, anda general structural engineering understanding of how buildings areconstructed. Some commonly observed structural problems arenoted, with a summary of the likely causes. I have deliberately notincluded ‘solutions’ to these problems since a structure needs to befully understood in order to develop repairs that are both sympatheticand appropriate.

Background to the Structure of Domes

The major buildings in pre-Islamic India used trabeate methods ofconstruction. This can be referred to as beam and post construction toreflect its most simple form. Here balanced forces within eachelement of the structure carry the self-weight of the horizontalmember, together with any imposed loads. The internal balance offorces means that the loads transferred to the supports are all vertical.

In pre-modern construction the main materials were timber, brick andstone. The size of opening an individual beam can span is clearlylimited by the available length and cross-section of stone or timberand the ability to transport and erect large, heavy elements.

An alternative to a single beam is to use smaller elements of brick orstone that corbel beyond the edge of the stone below. One benefit ofthis method is that, providing the projection is less than half of thetotal length (for a uniform cross-section), the blocks can be laidwithout the need for temporary support. Larger corbels will needtemporary propping during their construction, and when the openingis enclosed the two corbels ‘lean’ on each other to create a form ofarch. The dead loads from the self-weight of the structure aretransferred by the resistance to slippage along the horizontal joints.Any imposed loads on the top of the corbel will be relatively smalland limited to what can be resisted by the vertical joints and localarching of the blocks.

The structural problem with corbelling is that it relies on tensileforces within the individual elements and across the joints betweenthe elements. This does not take advantage of the basic structural

property of masonry, that it works best compression. As an example,it would be theoretically possible to build a one square metre columnof Portland stone over 2000 metres high before crushing of the stoneat the base occurred. By contrast the tension force that can begenerated between two blocks will be small, and for the purposes ofstructural analysis it is considered to be zero.

A masonry arch has the individual elements arranged so that thepredominant forces, up to the point of failure, are all compressive,thereby taking advantage of the natural properties of the material.The blocks can be rectangular with mortar used to form the taperedjoints. Alternatively the blocks can be shaped into voussoirs, whichallows the use of regular width joints. It also means that any smallslippage of individual elements within an arch will tend to wedge thevoussoirs in position.

An important difference from trabeate construction is that an archimposes horizontal as well as vertical loads on the supports. It isfundamental to the stability of the arch that these horizontal loads canbe resisted. This is usually achieved by providing supports withsufficient mass, or by external buttressing. The other method is to tieacross the base of the arch.

A dome can be considered as an arch that is rotated 90° on plan. Itcan be constructed with roughly shaped stone bound in mortar or cutstones. These will need to be carefully cut to form a wedge shapedblock, with any exposed face profiled to the curvature of the dome. Ithas the same radial lines of force as if it were a series of arches, pluscircumferential forces. Depending on the shape of the dome thissecond group of forces may be wholly compressive, or includetensile ‘hoops’ towards the base. If this is the case the dome willrequire reinforcement ties between the stones at the critical points toprevent cracks and possibly collapse. This need to restrainmovements becomes particularly critical where a dome is raised on acylindrical masonry ‘drum’.

For the building designer the structural requirements can besummarised as strength, stiffness and stability. Modern structuralengineering analysis tends to break a building down into a series ofelements and concentrates on the first of these criteria; is the elementsufficiently sized to take its own self weight, plus the weight of anyother parts of the building it is supporting and the designed imposedloads (people, wind, dynamic loads from earthquakes, etc)? If theelement passes this test it is then checked for stiffness, is thedeflection under load within acceptable limits? Finally the elementsare put together to ensure that it can stand up, that all the loads canbe transferred to the foundations and it does not sway unduly.

As noted above, arches and domes work in compression where themasonry is able to withstand very high forces and therefore strengthis rarely an issue. Similarly, the deflection of a masonry arch will benegligible and need not be considered. What is important is the localstability of individual elements and of the overall structure. This canbe appraised by overlaying, on drawings, the shape of the structureand the lines of resultant forces. The design therefore relies ondeveloping the geometry and proportion of the structure rather thanapplying a numerical analysis.

The Origins of Arcuate Construction

To put the use of domes in India into a broader context we need to lookbriefly at the early origins and developments of this from ofconstruction. Examples of true arches can be found in Egypt in theseventh century BC. A brick gateway at the Tomb of Mentuement, ElAsaisif, Thebes, uses six semi-circular rings of rectangular bricks tospan over 4 metres. Three centuries later, voussoir arches were beingbuilt, again spanning relatively small distances, in Greece and Rome.Early dome-shaped structures, using corbelled stonework, can be seenat Mycenae in the ‘Tomb of Agamemnon’, dating from about 1300BC.

The full benefits of arcuate construction were realised during theRoman period, so that by 19BC spans of up to 6.5m were used in theconstruction of the Pont du Gard aqueduct near Nimes in southernFrance. As confidence in the understanding and use of materialsgrew, a number of innovations followed. One change was thebonding of the voussoirs to the masonry above to improve the overallrobustness of the arch. Second was the introduction of the flat archwhich was generally used instead of large, heavy lintels to frameopenings. On problem with flat arches is that small differentialmovements of the supports will cause slippage between adjacentvoussoirs. To overcome this joggle joints, or steps in the sides of theblocks, were introduced. The fourth innovation took the arch-formand extended it lengthways to create a barrel vault, or rotated it toform a dome. The other innovation related to a material, concrete.Roman concrete is a conglomerate of brick, either whole or broken,bound in a mixture of lime mortar and pozzolanas that help themixture to set more rapidly, attain a higher strength and increase itsdurability.

The free-flowing property of concrete was used of to construct anumber of domed and vaulted buildings in Rome. By far the mostambitious was The Pantheon. Built c. A.D. 128, the internal diameterof the dome is 43.3m. It is constructed in concrete, cast in layers withvolcanic tufa added in the upper section to reduce the self-weight.The inside is coffered, also to reduce the weight and to provide aninclined support to the formwork needed to support the next layerwhile it was being constructed.

In other parts of the Roman Empire the tradition to build withmasonry continued and brick or stone was used to create similarbuildings to those in the capital. Examples from the 3rd century A.D.include the brick dome to the Mausoleum of Galerius in Salonika andthe stone dome to the Baths at Jerash, Syria.

The use of materials that had be carefully cut and placed, rather thanformed, as is the case with concrete, meant that other ways ofsupporting the circular base of the dome on a square or octagonalstructure had to be found. The most straightforward solution is to useof stone lintels to span across corners. Where stone was not availablein the necessary lengths a series of arches, called squinch arches,could be used. The alternative to this is pendentives that probablyevolved from the superimposition of a circular dome onto a smaller,square base. These last two methods both act in compression totransfer the load from the dome to the wall below. Maidstone givesthe 5th century as the first definitive use of the squinch, with thependentive a century later.

Islamic Prototypes

In Syria the Roman temples and mausolea became the model forByzantine builders who created churches or memorials to house thebody or relics of Christian saints or biblical character, or to mark aparticular event. These were generally small in scale and used avariety of plan-forms; square, cruciform, polygonal or circular. Thesmall size meant that the structural stability of the dome could beachieved by copying existing buildings.

At the centre of Byzantine, in Istanbul, the understanding ofstructures continued to develop and led to buildings such as theChurch of Hagia Sophia, Built between 532 and 537, this has ashallow brick dome, approximately 32 metres in diameter. Itsbuilders understood the need to resist the outward thrusts from thedome and used iron cramps between the marble blocks that form thecornice to create a continuous tension ring at the springing point ofthe dome. One potential source of this understanding was thecontinuation of the tradition of building masonry domes that hadexisted under the Romans. The other reference was translations of thescientific writings of Euclid, Ptolemy and others, and the Romanarchitect Vitruvius. These, along with Arabic works on geometry and

2

algebra, were later translated into Latin in the 11th and 12th centuriesto form part of the basis of knowledge of the Middle Age cathedralbuilders in Europe.

The symbolic importance of the dome in Islam was established in thebuilding of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. Completed in 691, thedome is about 20 metres in diameter, and consists of two hemi-sphericalwooden frames. This is supported on a circular colonnade of masonrypiers and columns surrounded by two octagonal ambulatories.

With the spread of Islam by nomadic tribes in central and west Asia,these Christian prototypes became mixed with their own indigenousportable structures to produce new building types. The pre-Islamicburial practices of these tribes probably developed out of traditionalcustoms where the deceased was covered with a tent. Once they hadadopted Islam the burial practices could be developed to producemasonry mausolea, in line with passages from The Koran, such asSutha 18, The Cave. This tells of seven youths who ‘had faith in theLord’ and are guided by God, or Allah, away from a city to a refugein a cave. After their death the people argued among themselves,“and those that were to win said: ‘Let us build a place of worshipover them.’” The symbolism of the domed temples and churches ofthe Romans and Christians were obvious models for Islamic tombs.The dome also had Islamic references with the description in Sutha21:25 of The Koran of heaven spread “like a canopy”.

The earliest surviving Islamic tomb is that of Qubbat-al Sulaibiya atSamarra, built c. 892. This is octagonal on plan with a double-heightcentral chamber that was originally covered with a dome raised on adrum, see plan1. This formed one of the models for tombs in India;the other being the early 10th century Tomb of Isma’il the Samanidin Bukhara. It is square on plan with slightly tapering brick wallswith a 7 metre diameter dome supported across each of the cornersby brick squinch arches buttressed by a radial half-arch.

A structural device that was to have a significant influence in India isthe double-dome. We have already seen that the Dome of the Rockhas two layers of structure to form the dome. In that case the form, inpart, reflects the structural properties of the material, timber, used inits construction. There are practical limitations on the size of timberthat can be obtained and the extent to which it can be bent to therequired shape that meant the dome could not be formed by singlepieces of timber. The design of timber structures is determined, to alarge extent, by how the elements are joined together, with the totalload capacity being determined by the connections. By having theroof finishes and ceiling finishes carried on separate domes the loadsin each are reduced. This means that smaller size sections of timbercan be used with less-highly loaded connections.

In Iran the emphasis on height led to tomb towers that at Gunbad-iQabus in 1007 reached over 51 metres above the ground. The internaldome at the top of the tower is capped with a conical roof, a likelyreflection of the tents used by the nomadic Seljuks then ruling fromIran to the eastern Mediterranean. The earliest known masonrydouble domes are a pair of 11th century tombs at Kharraqan. In Iranthe double dome reached its apogee in the Mausoleum of Oljeitu atSultaniya. Built between 1304 and 1315, the inner of the twointerconnected brick domes has an internal diameter of 26 metres.

In 14th and 15th century Samarkand the ‘competition’ among therulers and noblemen to build higher tombs for themselves led todomes on the top of elongated, cylindrical, masonry drums thatneeded separate domes internally and externally to maintainproportions. The Gur-i Amir was built c. 1404 for Timur, adescendent of the Mongol chieftain Genghis Khan. This used aframework of timber built off the internal dome that served to helpconstruct and provide permanent support to the outer, bulbous dome.

In structural terms the raising of the outer dome on an elongated

drum increases the risk of movements at the base of the drum. Toprevent these outward forces from causing cracks that may lead to acollapse required the introduction of a material capable of resistingtensile forces. There are references to the use of timber reinforcementrings at the base of the dome, or iron cramps set into stones so that acontinuous ring, or reinforced stone chain is formed. For the Gur-iAmir, Cresswell shows a cross section through the two domes, withradial tie bars built into the wall at the base of the outer dome. Thisis a sophisticated use of materials, but this system is not mentionedin any reference to double domes in India.

The Dome in IndiaWho were the designers?

Many centuries after these masonry domed buildings were built, andin many cases despite longstanding neglect, they are still standing.We can see that they were built with durable materials, and candeduce that the designers and builders knew how to use thesematerials and had some knowledge of the importance of proportionand geometry to produce a structure that could support all the loads.

The titles of people involved in the design and construction have beenhave been given a number of different translations. As an example,Qaisar says “darogha ‘imarat” is chief architect, whereas Begley, inrelation to Mir Abd Al-Karim at the Taj Mahal, calls it Superintendentof Buildings. Qaisar consider the roles of people involved in theconstruction of a building. From his description the architect/engineer(me’mar/muhandis) was involved in choosing the site, then preparinga tarah, or plan of the proposed building for the client. More than onedesign could be presented. For part of Lahore Fort, after a tarah,prepared by the me’mar, had been chosen by Shah Jahan it “washanded over to muhandis to carry out the work accordingly”.

The building of the Taj Mahal offers some guide to these roles. Theson of Ustad Ahmad describes his father as “Chief Architect in thiscourt” (i.e. of the emperor Shah Jahan) who “constructed the edificeof the tomb of Mumtaz Mahal”. As well as being an architect, Ahmadwas recognised as an outstanding astronomer, engineer andmathematician. It may be that Ustad Ahmad drew the tarah that waspresented to Shah Jahan, but to realise the construction of a buildingof this scale would have involved others of a similar degree ofexpertise. Mukarramat Khan is referred to as “Minister of RoyalWorks” to Shah Jahan. He is described as an administrator, not anarchitect, but it is likely that his understanding of mathematics andpractical matters would have led him to be involved in aspects of thedesign and construction. Mir Abdul Karim had been chief architectfor Shah Jahan’s father, Jahangir. Within a few months of MumtazMahal’s death he was transferred from Lahore to Agra to becomeSuperintendent of Buildings. This suggests a specific role as theequivalent of a modern-day project manager appointed by the clientto oversee the works which Tavernier said involved twenty thousandmen over 22 years.

There are no original drawings of the Taj Mahal or any otherbuildings from the period covered here. In Europe at this time thedrawings of proposed buildings were generally little more than asimple plan that showed the layout of the main rooms and anidealised picture of the main elevation. We can assume that the samewas true in India. Once the final choice of the facing material for theelevations had been agreed between the architect and master masonit would have been the job of the mason and his team to decide howto structure the building and prepare any detailed drawings. It wasonly on large or complex structures that the architect-engineer had adetailed involvement in the structural design. An example is thedesign of St. Paul’s Cathedral where Wren produced detailed designsfor the dome and the iron chains needed to restrain the horizontalforces. Setting aside that Wren, like Ustad Ahmad, had anunderstanding of mathematics and astronomy, it is reasonable tosuppose that a similar system of was used in India.

3

Building Materials

The basic materials used in the construction of the structure of thedomes were stone, brick and mortar, with ironwork for dowels andcramps. Timber or bamboo was used for the access scaffolding andthe centering that provided the temporary support to the dome as itwas being built.

Stone – The first building at the Qutb site in Delhi made extensiveuse of cut stone from the remains of the twenty-seven demolishedHindu and Jain temples. A few years’ later new stone was used for theextension to the mosque. These were shaped into rectangular blockswith the corbelled edge cut back to the line of the intrados of the arch.

A masonry building could be constructed more quickly and for lessmoney if undressed stonework was used on one or both faces. Thewalls, arches and half-domes that remain at late 13th century Tombof Balban use coarsely cut stones that would have needed a layer ofapplied finishes. Two centuries later the prolific building of tombsduring the Lodi dynasty would have put great demands on both theavailability of skilled masons and good quality stone. Instead, manyof the tombs from the mid-15th century to the early 16th century arebuilt from roughly dressed stonework with a rendered finishinternally and externally.

Dressed stonework was used externally and internally for most of theimportant buildings, such as the surviving walls of Iltutmish’s tomb,built c. 1235. Brown and Rani both talk about the use of a stone outerand inner faces of the walls being bonded together, with a core ofroughly cut stones or broken bricks. This was common buildingpractice in European masonry buildings and allows the use cheapermaterials and labour for the unseen parts of the structure. Laterevidence of this type of construction in India can be seen in a 16thcentury painting from the Akbarnama.

Where the stonework forms the exposed faces of a dome, it needs tobe carefully cut in all three dimensions to form the voussoir blocks.This requires an understanding of three-dimensional geometry by themasons, with the sides and exposed face(s) cut to the correct profilefor the size of the dome. The first use of a dressed stone dome in Indiais for the Alai Dawarza in 1311. It is likely that the masons who hadthis knowledge came from the break up of the Seljuk empire to thewest caused by the ‘total war’ raged by Genghis Khan and hisdecedents in the 13th century.

Brick – The use of brickwork is mentioned during the 14th centurybuilding works at Hauz Khas. Where bricks for arches and domeshave been used, such as at Humayun’s Tomb or Safdar Jang’s Tomb,they look to be made from baked clay and sand. They are allrectangular in shape with variations in the thickness of the mortarjoints used to form the required curvature.

The clay and sand would be brought to the site where they would bemixed, shaped and then baked in specially made kilns. These kilnswere fairly rudimentary as can be seem on 16th Century paintings ofbuilding works.

Three types of bricks are mentioned in the 16th century, baked, half-baked and unbaked. The lesser quality bricks may have been used forthe temporary centering seen in illustrations from the Akbarnama.Nath refers to a standard Mughal brick size of 8” x 71⁄2” x 13⁄4” and thatthe Taj Mahal was built using a thinner size, 7” x 41⁄2” x 1” “…toallow the mortar to occupy a greater part of the volume”. It is notclear where this comment comes from; structurally the greater use ofmortar increases the risk of cracks developing as the mortar dries andshrinks and for these cracks to propagate through the structure. Nathalso mentions that the bricks for the foundations, which extend wellbelow the level of the adjacent River Yamuna, were dipped intoliquid fat to ‘make them waterproof’.

Mortar – The stonework in the first building at Qutb is dry bedded,relying on the contact between faces of the stone blocks. As thesewere built by the local masons this is in line with the quotes in Qaisarthat “Hindu architecture of the pre-Muhammadan period appears tohave used mortar as little as possible”. By the time of SultanIltutmish in the early 13th century the buildings made use of rekhta,meaning mortar or plaster, in the construction.

Bedding mortars made use of lime mixed with a range of additives toimprove its workability, durability and setting properties. Theseincluded jaggery, a fermented nut whose use has been revived inrecent years for conservation work, and surkhi, or crushed brick. Thislast ingredient is an artificial equivalent of pozzolanas used in Romanconstruction.

The ingredients were dry mixed on the ground before adding water.

Iron – The structural use of iron in masonry has received littleattention in previous studies, but as we have seen above its use isfundamental in restraining the outward forces that are generated inthe larger domes. The use of iron cramps between stones was alreadyknown in pre-Muslim India. Iron dowels were also used to connectvertical elements such as the individual stones within columns, forexample at roof level on Isa Khan’s Tomb. Ironwork was also used tosecure the facing stones back to the core of the wall, such as atHumayun’s Tomb and the Taj Mahal.

Timber – This was used to form access ramps from ground level to thelevel of construction, and to provide temporary support to the centering;I have not seen timber used as part of the permanent structure.

Methods of Construction

One of the best sources of information about how domes were builtis paintings from the Mughal period. The Akbarnama, paintings fromthe late 16th century that chronicle the life of the Mughal emperorAkbar, include a number that show building works. Although theAkbarnama and other contemporary paintings do not relate tobuildings that have been subsequently identified they do show theorganisation of the site, the works of different trades and theirmethods of working. The validity of these paintings as reliablereferences can therefore be tested against what we can see byobserving the actual buildings.

One thing that can be seen is that there is little in the way of off-sitepre-fabrication. Large sections of stone are brought to site where theyare split using driven iron wedges to the required size. This methodworks well with sedimentary rocks such as sandstone, which readilyseparates along the bedding planes. The larger stones were thensecured with rope and manhandled using temporary timber ramps towhere the masons were working. This method is clearly limited bywhat it is physically possible to carry.

The illustration below tells us about actual methods of construction.The arch to the gateway is shown with two piers of blocks (bakedclay?) and a timber lintel to form the centering needed to constructthe structural arch. The lintel allows access through the gate while itis being built. There is no structural reason for the timbers at 90° tothe lintel, but may have been considered helpful to tie together thestack bonded blocks below. Above the gate a small brick dome isbeing constructed. The dome is one brick thick and the bricks arebeing laid in concentric rings that eliminate the need for centering. (Acertain amount of ‘sticktion’ in newly laid mortar can be relied on tohold individual bricks in place before a complete ring is laid.) Oncethe mortar has set the bricks are anchored in place by compressionforces within the ring as shown on the same painting.

For larger domes, where the thickness of the structure is greater adifferent approach is required. The dome of the Gol Gumbad in

4

Bijapur has an internal diameter of 41.15m, and at the base of thedome the masonry, measured through one of the openings, is 2.6metres thick. The eight intersecting arches that span across the cornersof the square to support the dome are about 2.17m wide and rise toabout 37m above the crypt floor level. (It is reasonable to assume thatthe vaulted ground floor was installed once the dome was constructedso that the temporary supports bear onto the underlying bedrock).

There are no large forests around Bijapur, so the large quantity oftimber required for the centering to support the arches during theconstruction would have been difficult and expensive to procure. Analternative is to use brick centering as the temporary support to thearches. Once the permanent arches and pendentives were in place thevertical base of the brick and mortar ‘concrete’ dome was formed.This then provided the dead load to the top of the walls to resist theoutward thrusts from the arches, which meant that the brick centeringcould be removed. It is possible that this removed material wasincorporated into the upper part of the dome. This would haverequired some temporary formwork could be supported off thebalcony around the base of the dome.

Qaisar refers to, and questions, Tavernier’s report that “It is said thatthe scaffolding… (for the Taj Mahal)… for the want of wood… hadto be made of brick”. Scaffolding is used for a variety of purposesthen and today. Timber or bamboo scaffolding would have been usedexternally to provide access to place the marble that clads thestructure. It can also provide temporary support to the structureduring construction and it may be that a combination of brick piersand wooden scaffolding was used. Given the scale of the outer domeit is very unlikely that brick alone was used for temporary supportduring the construction. Once the inner dome was formed it could beused to help support the wooden framework needed to create theouter dome.

In Bijapur the ruler built his own tomb. The partially built tomb ofAli Adil Shah II, who died in 1672 before the building was finished,provides useful information of the sequence of construction. Thetomb is about 65m square on plan and built of local stone. Themassive base and all the piers and stonewalls around the centralchamber have been built up to the level of the springing of the arches.The arches appear to have been built by separate teams of masonsworking in each corner, rather than by a single team thatsystematically worked its way around the plan of the tomb.

Masonry Domes in India

The first key buildings date from the end of the 12th century with thecapture of Delhi in 1192 by the forces of the Afghan Turk,Muhammad of Ghor. The head of the invaders, Qutb-ud-Din Aybak,was placed in charge of the conquered areas and established Delhi ashis capital. In the same year a mosque was built, later to be called theQuwwat-al-Islam or Might of Islam. This used stonework fromdestroyed Hindu and Jain temples; re-laid by indigenous masonsfollowing their traditional technique of beam and post construction,with corbelled domes.

Once the mosque was established new structures and buildings, usingnew stone, were added including the 16m high the screen completedin 1198, and the tomb of Iltutmish, built c. 1235. These have theexposed corner of the corbelled stones dressed to form the shape ofIslamic arches.

About eight kilometres from the mosque is Sultan Ghari’s tomb. Thisis the first major tomb in India, built by Iltutmish for his son and heirNasir-ud-Din who died in 1229. This is set within a walled enclosurewith the tomb chamber in the centre of the compound below anoctagonal plinth. The original roof to the chamber has been replacedby a flat surface, but it may have been similar in form to the trabeateconstruction of the square pyramidal roofs on the outer walls.

The first use of true arches is at tomb of Sultan Balban, who died in1287, and two smaller adjacent tombs, about 500m south-east of themosque. The main tomb is about 11.5m square with its wallsconstructed in roughly coursed stone bound in a mortar. The archesare either made in the same roughly cut blocks or with dressedstonework. On the west wall of the main building, facing towardsMecca, is the remains of a half-domed prayer niche. The roof to thisbuilding no longer exists. The tomb to the south, known as that ofKhan Shahid, still has its roof, which is similar in outline to the roofson the tomb of Sultan Ghari. Its structural form however relies onarching action to create a small dome with the external finish built upin render. These structures stand apart from the general developmentsin arcuate construction. Similarities in the three buildings suggestthat the same masons used employed, and perhaps after their patrondied they moved elsewhere. As the tombs lie outside of the mosquecomplex and the structures, when completed, were covered with arendered finish the use of arcuate construction was not adopted by thelocal masons.

The Alai Darwaza, completed in 1311 as the south gate to theQuwwat-al-Islam mosque is the first building to express thestructural use of true arches and the central dome, photo sheet 6. Thearches are formed from stone voussoirs and similar arches are usedinternally to form the transition from a square to an octagonal plan.The final transition to a 16-sided polygon at the base of the dome isby small, corbelled brackets. The dome, seen from the inside, is builtwith horizontal rings of stonework of a uniform depth. It sits wellwithin the thick masonry walls.

By contrast, the dome for the tomb that Ghiyas-ud-Din Tughluq builtfor himself before his death in 1325 rises clear above the massivesloping walls. Internally the dome has alternate rings of shallow anddeep stones, with the shallow layers bonded into the core of the dometo produce a more robust structure. Within the same compound is thetomb of Zafar Khan, built by his father Ghiyas-ud-Din. This has asimilar marble-clad dome over an octagonal chamber surrounded byan enclosed octagonal ambulatory.

Ghiyas-ud-Din was succeeded by his son, Muhammad Tughluq whoin 1328–29 moved his capital to Daulatabad, 960 kms to the south ofDelhi, to consolidate his authority in the Deccan, only to return soonafter. One consequence of this move was the dispersal from the Delhiregion of the skilled masons and artisans. This loss of skilled masons

5

Building Agra fort – temporary support to an arched opening

had an impact on the construction of buildings under the next ruler,Firoz Shah Tughluq. In place of carefully cut stones that formed boththe structure and finishes, the buildings from the late 14th centuryused roughly shaped stones for the arches and the domes, which werethen covered internally and externally with render. This can be seenat the Khirki Masjid, built c. 1375. The tomb of Firoz Shah, who diedin 1388, is built in the same way. The exposed pendentives of roughlycoursed stones in an adjacent building show how the transitionbetween the square walls and octagonal base to the tomb wasconstructed.

The reduction in masonry skills would have been accompanied by aloss in the understanding of how to structure the buildings. In placeof this structural understanding it is likely that the builders simplycopied what had been built before. As structures they have surviveddue to the massiveness of the walls that support and resist the loadsfrom the dome.

One building that is stylistically important is the tomb of Khan-i-Jahan Tilangani, the prime minister of Firoz Shah. Built circa 1368,this is generally referred to as the first octagonal tomb in Delhi withthe domed central chamber surrounded by an ambulatory verandahwith three arched openings on each facet.

Whatever skills were re-learnt during the second half of the 14thcentury were lost again following the invasion of Delhi in 1398 bythe army of Timur. A grandson of Genghis Khan, he sacked Delhi andtook artists and craftsmen back to build in his capital, Samarkand.The Tughluq dynasty ended soon after and was followed in 1414 bythe Sayyids, and from 1451 to 1526 by the Lodis.

There are no significant differences, or major structuraldevelopments in the buildings of these two dynasties. Instead, therewas a great proliferation of tomb building that reflected the Lodi’sAfghan origins where a brotherhood of nobles was commonplace andthe king was first among equals rather than the absolute ruler. Therewas however a hierarchy in terms of form; octagonal for royal tombs,square for nobles and others of high rank. Examples include the tombof Muhammad Sayyid who died in 1444 and the Bara Gumbad builtin 1494.

One structural question from this period concerns the introduction ofthe double dome. The tomb of Sikander Lodi, built 1517–18 isreferred to as the first double-dome in India, but the section throughthe building from Tadgell reproduced at the end of the study showsonly a single dome. The interior of the tomb is dimly lit (some doorshave been infilled with brick) but the dome does spring from a levelwhere externally the side of the dome is vertical. There is also whatappears to be a partly blocked opening on this vertical face that is notapparent internally. Presumably this opening provides access to thesmall void between the two domes.

The question of whether Sikander Lodi’s tomb was the first doubledome in India is less certain. The tomb built by Zain-ul-Abidinc.1465 for his mother at Zaina Kadal in Srinigar, Kashmir is a brickstructure with double domes over the central and perimeterchambers. In Delhi, Sabz Burj has a shallow inner dome and an outerdome raised on an extended drum in the style of the early 15thcentury tombs at Samarkand. Written sources place this in the earlyMughal period of 1530–40, but it may be over one century earlier.

The Lodi period ended when they were defeated by Babur, adescendent through his father from Timur and through his motherfrom Genghis Khan. Babur died in 1531 and was buried in a simplegrave in Kabul. His son, Humayun, ruled between 1531–40 and1545–56, with the Afghan Sher Shah Sur ruling during theintervening period. Sher Shah Sur built tombs at Sasaram for himself,his father and grandfather (a horse trader) that elevated his owngenealogy as a means of legitimising his authority. His own

octagonal tomb, built in sandstone, was the largest in India at the timewith a 22 metre diameter dome over the central chamber.

Humayun’s tomb is the first major Mughal memorial. It was builtbetween 1562 and 1571 early in the reign of his son, Akbar to adesign by Mirak Mirza Ghiyas an architect from Persia. This has adouble dome above an octagonal central chamber that is about 15mfrom side to side. At roof level the small domed kiosks, or ‘chattri’,are constructed in brick that was then clad externally in stone andrendered on the underside. The base of the domes uses a stretcher-header bonding pattern where the bricks are laid longitudinally andtransversely. The small dome above is built from thinner bricks laidin stretcher bond in circular rings. Unfortunately there was no accessto reach the opening close to the top of the drum that leads into thevoid between the two domes.

It is likely that the main structure of the tomb was also built frombrickwork that was then clad with sandstone and marble. The outersurface of the dome has alternate layers of wide and narrow blocks ofmarble to help bond the cladding to the structural core. The use ofiron cramps to tie the facing stone to the core of the wall can bededuced from the damage to the corner of a number of stones abovethe entrance portal. This is common defect where the iron crampbehind has corroded and the expansion of the metal has fractured thestone. There must also be a system of ties around the base of the outerdome to resist the outward forces acting on the top of the drum. Itmay be that the stones in the horizontal band of marble at the top ofthe drum are connected by iron cramps to form a continuous tensionring.

In the same part of Delhi is the tomb of Khan-i-Khanan who died in1627, the same year as the following emperor, Jahangir. The strippingof large amounts of the sandstone and marble cladding in the 18thcentury for Safdar Jang’s tomb has helped reveal that this is a brickstructure with a brick double-dome (see below).

The Taj Mahal at Agra is also a brick structure clad mainly in marble,with sandstone to the half-hidden areas at roof level. Work began in1632, the year after the death of Mumtaz Mahal. Much of the tombwas complete four years later and by 1643 the entire complex ofbuildings and gardens was virtually finished. It is founded on a seriesof brick wells that were filled with rubble bound in a lime mortar. Theareas between the wells were then dug out and filled with stone andmortar. The footings pass through approximately 19m of soft alluvialdeposits to bear onto a 7m thick layer of sandstone. Below this layeris clay before reaching bedrock some 134 m below ground level. Theinternal diameter of the dome and drum is 22 metres. The inner domeis 32 m above floor level and about 3 m thick. Above this the 5 mthick walls to the drum support the outer dome that encloses a voidover 30 m high. A summary of how the Taj Mahal works as astructure is shown below.

6

Safdar Jang’s tomb – east elevation

In Bijapur, the tomb Muhammad Adil Shah built for himself before hedied in 1656 is generally referred to as the Gol Gumbad, or RoundDome. The monumental size is well documented. The dome has aninternal diameter of 135 feet, or 41.15 metres, and it rises to 54.25 m.above the ground floor. There are a number of door openings throughlotus leaf moulding the base of the dome. The total thickness of thedome at this level was measured on site at 2.9m, including a 300mmprojection of the leaf moulding. This gives a structural thickness ofapproximately 2.6 metres, compared to 10 feet, or 3.05 m from Reuben.At the crown the dome is said by Reuben to be 9’, or 2.74 m thick.

The dome is rendered on both faces and the structure is not visible.Reuben says he saw it was constructed in brickwork “laid flat in limemortar… joints (that vary) from 1” to 2” thick… The bricks are ofvarying size and do not appear to be very systematically laid”. Browntalks of the dome being “constructed in horizontal courses of brickwith a substantial layer of mortar between each course, in other wordsit is a homogeneous shell or monobloc (sic) of concrete reinforcedwith bricks…”. Here the term concrete is used in the same way as forRoman concrete where the structure contains as much mortar asroughly coursed brick or stone. It is unlikely that the bricks are laidhorizontally throughout the dome, since this would produce astructure that acts more as a series of corbels. Presumably, what bothBrown and Reuben saw was towards the base of the dome and thathigher up the brick courses are inclined to the inside face so that thelayers acted as self-stable compression rings during the construction.

The use of squinch arches or pendentives to support the base of thedome across the corner of the square would have resulted either anirregular octagon at the base of the dome or an uneven verticaldivision of the walls. Instead the dome is supported on eightintersecting brick arches that provide an octagonal support to thedome and divide the walls into equally into thirds.

Safdar Jang’s tomb in Delhi built 1753–54 is the last major Islamictomb to have been built in India. It is a brick structure that is cladexternally in sandstone and marble, and internally in render. Theshallow domes to the chambers around the perimeter of the plinthfollow the traditional form of concentric brick rings. The centraldome is described as a triple dome, with two ‘flattish’ inner brickdomes and an outer bulbous marble dome. No drawings have beenfound to verify this. Triple domes do exist; Wren’s St Paul’sCathedral is one where the outer dome is a lead clad timber structuresupported from the middle brick cone. It is improbable that the

marble acts alone as a thin shell, its geometry suggests it wouldcollapse under its self-weight. Instead it may be that the marble issupported on the outer of two domes, with a small void below themarble lotus leaf finial.

Some Common Structural Problems

The proliferation of dome building from the mid-15th century wouldhave required an increase in the number of masons to build thestructures. Inevitably this led to domes being built by masons whocopied the form of existing buildings without understanding thestructural principles. A common problem with the Lodi tombs is anoutward spreading of the octagonal verandah at eaves level. This iscaused by the horizontal forces in the arches and vaults that form theverandah roof. These movements can be seen in a circumferentialcrack at the mid-point of the ceiling and rotation of the outer piers ofthe tomb of Isa Khan built in1547. This movement probably occurredearly in the life of the building as part of an adjustment of thestructure to reach a state of equilibrium from the forces generated byits self-weight.

There are generally few signs of structural problems resulting fromthe horizontal forces in the central dome. This is because on the earlysquare domes the walls are sufficiently massive to resist these loads.For the octagonal tombs the verandah will act as a partial buttress tothe central dome and for larger structures like Humayun’s Tomb thewalls of the surrounding chambers resist the forces from the innerdome. The need to resist the forces generated when a dome is raisedonto a drum, such as at the Taj Mahal, seems to have been understoodand I did not see any significant vertical cracks at the top of the drum,or radial cracks in the lower part of the dome.

The use of iron ties, cramps and dowels in masonry can lead toproblems when the iron corrodes. Long-term water ingress will resultin the iron laminating and expanding by up to seven to eight times itsoriginal thickness. When the iron is constrained, such as by beingbuilt into mortar joints, the large forces generated by this expansioncan cause the stone to spall. This increases the likelihood of waterentering the structure and, if left unrepaired, sets up a cycle of decay.

Masonry, like all materials will expand and contract with changes inits temperature. A structure composed of small elements of stone orbrick in a lime mortar will move as a result of thermal changes, butgenerally the cracks that result will be spread evenly over the wholeof the structure and consequently small in size. A large monolithicstructure will tend to produce larger cracks that concentrate alonglines of weakness. This seems to have been the cause of the radialcracks to the dome of the Gol Gumbad. It was repaired in 1936–37by adding a reinforced concrete to the outside to help tie the crackedsegments of the dome together.

BibliographyBooks and Articles

Agrawal, R. C., Kashmir and its Monumental Glory. Aryan Books,Delhi, 1998.

Asher, Catherine, The New Cambridge History of India, 1:4Architecture of Mughal India. Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Beglar, J. D., Delhi. Archaeological Survey of India. Report for theYear 1871–72. Office of the Superintendent of Government Printing,Calcutta, 1874.

Begley, W. E. & Desai Z. A., Eds. Taj Mahal, The Illumined Tomb.The University of Washington Press, 1989.

Brown, Percy, Indian Architecture (Islamic Period). D. B.Taraporevala Sons & Co., Mumbai, 1997.

Cresswell, K. A. C., The Origin of the Persian Double Dome. TheBurlington Magazine, London. Vol. XXIV, October 1913 – March1914, p 9 –99 & 152–156.

7

Taj Mahal – cross section

Cresswell. K. A. C., Short Account of Early Muslim Architecture.Penguin, London, 1958.

Cuneo, Paolo, About Double Domes in Timurid Architecture. Paper15 from ‘Domes From Antiquity to the Present’. Proceedings of theIASS-MSU International Symposium, 1988. Pub. Mimar SinanUniversity, Istanbul

Davies, Philip, The Penguin Guide to the Monuments of India.Volume II: Islamic, Rajput, European. Penguin, London, 1989.

Dawood, N. J., Translation of The Koran. Penguin, London, 1997.

Dickie, James, ‘Allah and Eternity: Mosques, Madrasas and Tombs’,in George Michell, ed., Architecture of the Islamic World. Thamesand Hudson, London, 1996.

Dikshit, Rao Bahadur K. J., Ed. Annual Report of the ArchaeologicalSurvey of India 1936–37. Manager of Publications, Delhi, 1940.

Eltinghausen, Robert & Grabar, Oleg, The Art and Architecture ofIslam 650 – 1250. Penguin, London, 1987.

Gimpel, Jean, The Cathedral Builders. Pimlico, London. 1993

King, Ross, Brunelleschi’s Dome; The Story of the Great Cathedralin Florence. Chatto & Windus, London, 2000.

Koch, Ebba, Mughal Architecture. Prestel, Munich, 1991.

Harle, J. C., The Art and Architecture of the Indian Subcontinent.Yale University Press, 1994.

Heyman, Jacques, The Stone Skeleton: Structural Engineering ofMasonry Architecture. Cambridge University Press, 1995.

Hillenbrand, Robert, Islamic Architecture: Form, Function andMeaning. Edinburgh University Press, 1984.

Hillenbrand, Robert, Islamic Art and Architecture. Thames andHudson, London, 1999.

Lewcock, Ronald, Architects, ‘Craftsmen and Builders: Materialsand Techniques’ in George Michell, ed., Architecture of the IslamicWorld. Thames and Hudson, London, 1996.

Mainstone, Rowland J., Developments in Structural Form.Architectural Press. Oxford, 1998.

Mark, Robert, Ed., Architectural Technology up to the ScientificRevolution. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Cambridge,Mass., USA , 1995.

Nath, R. History of Mughal Architecture, Volume I. Abhinar, NewDelhi, 1982.

Nath, R. History of Mughal Architecture, Volume III. Abhinar, NewDelhi, 1994.

Nath, R., The Immortal Taj Mahal: The Evolution of the tomb inMughal Architecture. Taraporevala & Sons, Bombay, 1972.

Qaisar, Ashan Jan, Building Construction in Mughal India. TheEvidence from Paintings. Oxford University Press, Delhi, 1988.

Rahman, Hafizur, Domes in the Muslim Architecture of the Indo-PakSubcontinent. . Paper 16 from ‘Domes From Antiquity to thePresent’. Proceedings of the IASS-MSU International Symposium,1988. Pub. Mimar Sinan University, Istanbul

Rajan, K. V. Soundara, Islam Builds in India (Cultural Studies ofIslamic Architecture). Agam Kala Prakashan, Delhi, 1983.

Rani, Abha, Tughluq Architecture of Delhi. Bharati Prakashan,Varanasi, 1991.

Sharma, Y. D., Delhi and its Neighbourhood. Archaeological Surveyof India, New Delhi, 1990.

Tadgell, Christopher, The History of Architecture in India. Phaidon,London, 1990.

Journals

Gye, D.H., Arches and Domes in Iranian Islamic Buildings: AnEngineer’s Perspective. Iran: Journal of the British Institute ofPersian Studies. Vol. XXVI, p. 129–144. 1988. London.

Reuben, S. S., The Architecture of Bijapur. Journal of the IndianInstitute of Architects, January 1947, p39 – 47.

Illustrations

Akbarnama; Building Agra Fort. V&A accession 1896/46/117

Other Sources

Asher, Catherine, Visions in Marble. Recording of a talk at the V&AMuseum, London 1997(?)

Tillotson, Giles, Beyond Stately Pleasure: the Iconography of theDome in India. Paper for The Annual Symposium of the Society ofArchitectural Historians of Great Britain, 2000.

Stuart TappinCorrespondence to: Faber Maunsell, 23 Middle Street, London,EC1A 7JD Tel: 020 7645 2000

CONSTRUCTION HISTORY SOCIETYANNUAL GENERAL MEETING

The Society’s Annual General Meeting will be held on Saturday, 19thOctober 2002 at the Building of Bath Museum (one of the bestconstruction museums in the UK). An outstanding itinerary has beenarranged, that includes:-

2.45 – 3.00 p.m. Arrive Building of Bath Museum

3.00 – 4.00 p.m. Guided tour of Building of Bath Museum

4.00 – 4.15 p.m. Tea/Coffee/Biscuits

4.15 – 5.15 p.m. Guided tour of Bath (walking)

5.15 – 5.45 p.m. Drinks and Buffet (Building of Bath Museum)

5.45 – 6.45 p.m. CHS Annual General Meeting

6.45 – 7.45 p.m. Annual General Lecture – Dr. Janet DeLaine,The Baths of Caracalla: Design, Construction,Economics

8.00 – 9.00 p.m. Guided tour of the Roman Baths – Dr. JanetDeLaine

9.00 p.m. Depart (optional CHS dinner in local restaurant)

A dinner for CHS members will be arranged in a local restaurant ifthere is sufficient demand (Bath has some excellent restaurants).Overnight accommodation can be arranged at the local YMCA –rooms are cheap, but reasonably comfortable and the price willinclude breakfast. Alternatively, members can make their ownaccommodation arrangements.

The Building of Bath Museum is located at the Countess ofHuntingdon’s Chapel, The Vineyards, Bath BA1 5NA (Tel: 01225333 895) .

Getting to Bath:-By Road – take the M4 junction 18 to Bath (A46)

By Rail – Bath Spa Station

By Coach – National Express (Tel: 01990 808080 orhttp://www.nationalexpress.co.uk)

To reserve a place at the AGM and book accommodation in theYMCA, please contact Malcolm Dunkeld at the address shown in thefront of the Newsletter.

8

THE HISTORICAL TREASURES OF THE INSTITUTION OFCIVIL ENGINEERS

Introduction

The Institution of Civil Engineers has collections of internationalsignificance relating to the development of civil engineering. Thisresource is not only one for the scholastic community interested inthe history of the profession, but very much part of an activeinformation centre serving an international community of civilengineers involved in the maintenance and reuse of this heritage.Some time ago I wrote an article for ‘Construction History’ aboutthese collections. Over the last decade important developments havetaken place in the services available and the collections themselvesand it seems appropriate to update that piece, while remindingreaders of the basic strengths of the collections. The LibraryCatalogue is now accessible via the ICE website(http://www.ice.org.uk/library), and all ICE papers from 1836 to dateare available as pdf’s in the ‘Virtual Library’ for £5.00 to ICEmembers. Details of major manuscript holdings can also be tracedthrough the A2A Project with which ICE has been involved:http://www.a2a.pro.gov.uk

The Institution of Civil Engineers has been a forum for the collectionand dissemination of engineering information since 1818. Membershave been actively encouraged to present books papers, models andother artefacts to the Institution since the first regulations were drawnup. From the first there has been no restriction of language ordiscipline, the objective has always been to collect all significantinformation of interest to the engineering profession regardless oforigin. In the early years, in the absence of published civilengineering journals and textbooks, the collection was largelycomprised of maps, drawings and models. From the 1830s, whencivil engineering journals began to appear, the focus rapidly switchedto the publication and exchange of periodicals, a process that hascontinued to this day. In the early nineteenth century ICE was theonly, and throughout the nineteenth century it was the leading,engineering institution in the British Empire. For much of that periodthere was little in the way of tertiary engineering education in theBritish Empire, and national (government) library provision in thefield was sketchy. By 1900 the Institution held the largest collectionof engineering literature of all disciplines in the country, and thiscollection remains the core of the Institution’s historical holdings tothis day.

The Institution recognised, however, that there was a great civilengineering heritage, which had preceded its foundation, and activelysought to acquire through purchase and, whenever possible donation,records of earlier engineers. Thomas Telford presented the Institutionwith many foreign engineering works of the eighteenth century. Onhis death he left the Institution his entire collection of papers, reportsand drawings. Through the nineteenth century this nucleus was addedto and an outstanding collection of manuscripts of John Smeaton, thefirst British engineer to be described as a civil engineer, was one of anumber of notable acquisitions. In recent years the Library hasacquired manuscripts by Smeaton, Robert Stephenson, AlexanderMackenzie Ross, Marc Isambard Brunel and Henry Swinburne toname but a few.

Since 1975 the Institution’s historical collections have been in thecare of the Archives Panel established on the advice of Professor SirAlfred Pugsley. Today the Chairman is Lawrance Hurst, recentlyretired from Hurst, Peirce and Malcolm, consulting engineers. ThePanel provides advice on both the Institution’s own archives, andhistorical engineering archives. After an initial assessment of theexisting collections it was decided that the objective should be to

provide a representative selection of civil engineering ‘archives’. ThePanel has also sought to encourage use of the archives by promotingexhibitions and guides to the collections. The Exhibition in 2002 willcelebrate the centenary of the first Aswan Dam.

Published material

With printed books dating back to 1476 the ICE have an importantcollection of printed material. One hundred and thirty pre-1900 serialtitles are held, including sets of the Philosophical transactions of theRoyal Society of London and early Memoirs of the Academie dessciences. The emphasis is on the proceedings of engineering societiesfrom the United Kingdom and overseas. Aside from the Institution’sown publications, the most heavily used resources are the sets of theBuilder, Engineer, Engineering, and the Civil Engineer andArchitects Journal.

The ‘Tract’ collection is the richest historical resource in the Library.It has grown to more than 1,500 volumes of reports, pamphlets andreprints. The trade literature is kept by the Library, generally found inthese volumes, including catalogues from firms such as J H Porter,exporters of prefabricated iron buildings.

The most famous parts of the collection are the early engineeringreports, based upon the bequest of Thomas Telford, and gifts from theStevenson and Chapman families and the Smeatonian Society.Recently the daughters of Professor Sir Alec Skempton presented anumber of early reports including Vermuyden’s drainage of the Fens.The collection also includes famous papers by leading foreignengineers and scientists such as Laplace and Mohr. The collection ofcanal pamphlets is possibly the largest in the country, and thosedating from the railway age include material on the commercial andpolitical development of the world’s railway system, and not just itsengineering aspects. Although engineering reports are no longerdisseminated as before, the Library has reports on major projectssuch as the Thames Barrier and Channel Tunnel Rail Link.

The Library contains a large collection of government reports, mostlyrelating to the United Kingdom and its former colonies, dating backto the sixteenth century. Of particular interest are the Minutes ofEvidence for various Bills and Commissions, which containincidental biographical information on the witnesses, as well as aninsight into what leading engineers of the time thought.

Archive collections

The main source of biographical information is the Institution’s ownarchives. Information can be gleaned from the members’ApplicationForms, which are shortly to be commercially available on microfilmfor the nineteenth century. There are large collections of photographsof members and the Institution also houses possibly the largestcollection of oil portraits of civil engineers in the world.

The Institution’s archives include a complete set of Council Minutes,and Manuscript Minutes of Meetings and Annual General Meetings.Minutes of most of the Institution’s various committees since c.1890have survived.

The largest group of engineering archives are the generallyunpublished ‘original communications’, c.2,000 papers presentedfrom 1818 onwards. However, it is the collections of engineers’papers which attract most researchers. Foremost amongst the papersare those of Telford. Recent acquisitions include the Provisnotebooks relating to the Menai Suspension Bridge.

The Telford material is complemented by the Report Books of JohnRennie and his sons George and Sir John which give an insight intohow Telford’s contemporaries organised their work.

9

By the time of Telford and Rennie, civil engineering had emerged asa profession, and to a large extent this was due to the work of JohnSmeaton. The Institution has the largest surviving collection ofSmeaton’s papers, including microfilms and transcripts of those notheld in the original. Many of the manuscripts are difficult to read, andare far less attractive than the Report Book of his near contemporaryJohn Grundy junior. This contains interesting drawings of some ofthe country’s earliest earth dams. They are complemented by thediaries of engineers from the eighteenth century onwards. Theearliest are those of James Brindley, the most famous probably SirMarc Brunel’s Thames Tunnel Diaries, and the most recentlyresearched those of William Mackenzie, now published (by ThomasTelford Limited) in full. There are still many volumes awaitinganalysis.

Brunel’s diaries are only part of the largest collection of material theLibrary has relating to a single project – the Thames Tunnel scheme.This collection includes drawings, report books, diaries,correspondence and scrapbooks. There are a several other projectswhere large volumes of material are held: the main drainage ofLondon, the Forth Railway Bridge, Sydney Harbour Bridge,Waterloo Bridge and the Channel Tunnel Rail Link. Pride of placegoes to the Mackenzie collection, an enormous collection ofdrawings, diaries, account books and correspondence relating to theactivities of William Mackenzie, and his brother Edward, railwaycontractors across western Europe in partnership with ThomasBrassey in the 1840’s.

Engineering drawings

The ICE Drawings collection is relatively small. The most famousdrawings are those of Telford, and John Rennie. Apart from thesemajor donations, and the Mackenzie collection noted above, otherdrawings held by the Institution include sets relating to the SevernRailway Tunnel and the High Level Bridge at Newcastle-upon-Tyne.Recent acquisitions include drawings for the M1 motorway, theSnowdon Aviary and the Cunard Building in Liverpool.

Photographic and other research material

The railway age was also the first era of construction history to berecorded in photographs. The photographs in the Institution date backto the 1850s and include more than 50 albums relating to specificprojects, such as the Manchester Ship Canal, individual prints, and alarge number of glass slides dating from the late nineteenth centuryonwards including many of early reinforced concrete structures. Thecollection has been enriched by the gift of the late J G James whogave the Institution thousands of slides and photographs, chiefly ofbridges and iron structures.

The role of the Archives Panel

Since the establishment of the Archives Panel in 1975 it has playedan active part in encouraging firms and other relevant bodies topreserve engineering drawings and documents. The Archives Panel isnot just interested in old material, and have, in co-operation with theConcrete Society and the Institution of Highways and Transportationbeen involved in the establishment of a ‘concrete archive’ and‘motorway archive’. The former is based at ICE, the latter is more ofa virtual archive or finding tool, although material is being depositedat ICE.

The Panel has taken the view that it should be proactive andencourage the use of the collections. The overwhelming majority ofusers are members involved in the maintenance of buildings. Fewvisit the archives, relying on staff to identify relevant material.Contemporary relevance is constantly displayed, for example tracingan article on the original design of the Entro os rios bridge over theDouro in Portugal which failed in March 2001.

The Panel has taken the lead in producing a biographical dictionaryof civil engineers of the British Isles; a volume covering the years1500–1830 was published in March 2002.

Michael ChrimesCorrespondence to: Library, The Institution of Civil Engineers, OneGreat George Street, Westminster, London SW1P 3AA; Tel: 0207222 7722; email: mike.chrimes@ice.org.uk

JOURNEY INTO ISLAMIC AND CLASSICAL TURKEY

Students in the Faculty of the Built Environment at South BankUniversity (London) undertake an annual overseas field trip to aplace of architectural and building interest. The trip is associated witha unit in the Faculty that considers 4,000 years of building history.The trip is offered to members of the Construction History Society,some of whom have previously visited Israel and Egypt. This yearthe trip was to Turkey to study Islamic and Graeco-Romanarchitecture and building.

Turkey is a wonderful place to visit for people interested in buildinghistory. Due to its location (connecting Europe and Asia), the countryhas witnessed a progression of kingdoms and empires some of whichfostered great cultures including Hittite, Hellenic, Hellenistic,Roman, Byzantine, Seljuk and Ottoman. Each successive culturebuilt on and from the ruins of those that proceeded it, so that modernTurkey has a range of extant monuments representative of some ofthe most important periods in architectural and building history.

The trip began with 4 days in Istanbul (former Constantinople),which is located on the Bosphorus – the strait that separates Europefrom Asia. A busy schedule included visits to the Hagia Sophia, theChristian church commissioned by Justinian in 537 AD that is one ofthe great buildings of the world with its stunning interior space andspectacular dome; a morning visit to the Sultan Ahmet Mosque calledthe Blue Mosque because of magnificent blue/green Iznik tiles;exploration of the Hippodrome and Underground Cisterns(constructed in the 5th century and supported by 224 columns); anda visit to the Topkapi Palace, the home of the Ottoman sultans and thelargest monument in Turkish civil architecture occupying 700,000 sq.metres.

Part of the stay in Istanbul also included a Bosphorus cruise toexplore the Ottoman houses/Yalis and historical forts by the water(including the Bosphorus Pasha and Fuat Pasha). Students also had afree day in Istanbul and many visited the Grand Bazaar (one of themost famous markets in the world) and the Spice Market built in1660 by Hatice Sultan.

The group then travelled to the archaeological site of Troy in WesternAnatolia, the legendary city of King Priam that was destroyed by theAchaeans in the Trojan War. Troy was rediscovered and excavated byHeinrich Shliemann in the late 19th century and there have sincebeen many other excavations. The site is complex since Troy wassettled from 3000 BC to 400 AD in nine different layers, eachestablished on the previous layer. Students (and some staff!) enjoyedclimbing into the large replica wooden horse set up for visitors.

The final part of the trip involved visiting the ancient Graeco-Romancities in Anatolia (the subcontinent more generally known as AsiaMinor). Most of the sites visited lie on or near the Aegean andMediterranean coasts of Turkey. The first visit was to Pergamon – themagnificent Hellenistic city – to view the great theatre and theTemple of Trajan, the Acropolis and the temple of Athena. Visitswere also made to the Asclepion and the temple of Telesphor. Perhapsthe highlight of the trip was a visit to Ephesus – the largest Romanruin in the world and one of the world’s finest archaeological sites.

10

Other visits included a trip to Miletus and my own favourite thesouthern Ionian city of Priene, which is magnificently situated highabove the Maeander plain on the south-eastern slope of MountMycale, one of whose sheer rock peaks looms directly above theancient city.

The group then returned to Istanbul and en route stayed overnight inBursa to visit the Green tomb and the Green Mosque, a 15th centuryOttoman masterpiece.

Overall the trip was busy (many 6.00 a.m. starts!) but fascinating; thearchaeological sites were outstanding and full of interest, the groupwere excellent company and contained both the young and what thestudents euphemistically referred to as the SAGA group! The onlycomplaint was the weather – a cold, wet wind was constantlyblowing from Russia. The overall cost of the trip was less than £400.

Next years field trip – in April 2003 – will be to India to considerMogul architecture (including a visit to the Taj Mahal) and Victorianconquest architecture and building. Further details are available fromMalcolm Dunkeld (CHS Newsletter Editor).

OBITUARYPROFESSOR SIR ALEC WESTLEYSKEMPTON, F.R.S. 1914–2001

Skem, as he was known to his family, friends and colleagues, was arare combination of world-class civil engineer and prominenthistorian of his subject. Alec Skempton was brought up inNorthampton and read civil engineering at Imperial College. His post-graduate study was in reinforced concrete, and he joined the BuildingResearch Station in 1936 to continue his work in this field. However,he soon became fascinated by the Soil Mechanics laboratory, in partbecause he had developed a love of Geology during his undergraduatedays, and he got himself transferred to that section. His remarkableaptitude for this new subject was immediately apparent when hecorrectly analysed the reason for the failure under construction of theChingford dam. Alec’s work on concrete was useful for his War work,as he was charged with supervising the construction of concrete air-raid shelters in the South West of England. (He later wrote a paper onthe early development of Portland cements.)

After the war Skempton returned to Imperial College to set up theSoil Mechanics courses. IC soon became a leading internationalcentre for this subject, and he went on to become the leading figurein British soil mechanics. He was Head of the Civil EngineeringDepartment for 19 years. He was elected a Fellow of the RoyalSociety in 1961, became a founder Fellow of the Royal Academy ofEngineering in 1976, and was knighted in the millennium New Year’sHonours list. Skempton’s work in the 1950’s on the settlement ofbuildings and their tolerance to foundation distortion is ofoutstanding importance and is still widely used in foundation design.In the 1960’s Alec was a member of the Cathedrals Advisory Board,which gave him the opportunity to study and make recommendationson the stability of, among others, the tower of Salisbury Cathedral.He had a passion for engineering and construction history. He gavememorable lectures to the Newcomen Society, notably on theconstruction of the early nineteenth century docks in the Port ofLondon, and the Boat Store, Sheerness. His work on the developmentof metal-framed structures established an accurate chronology for thefirst time for more than a century.

Alec’s bibliography of early civil engineering literature is definitive.In his 80th birthday lecture at the Institution of Civil Engineers in1993 he reviewed Marc Brunel’s historical achievements in theconstruction of the Thames Tunnel at Rotherhithe in the light of thegeology of the site. He had a beautiful lecturing style, expounding his

subject quietly and with absolute clarity, without notes. He haddiscovered that the Albion Mills in Southwark were constructed bySamuel Wyatt, architect and engineer, and the discovery of apreviously unknown iron bridge to Wyatt’s design at Culford, Suffolkinspired his last lecture, to the Institute of Structural Engineers’History Group in 1999. He could be intolerant of small-mindedness.Professor Skempton’s own working habits were meticulous, and heaccepted nothing until he had assembled, plotted and analysed thedata himself. Construction history has benefited enormously over theyears from Alec’s formidable intellect, high scholarly standards andpowerful historical imagination.

John Burland, Richard Chandler, Julia Elton and Judith NiechcialA Biographical Dictionary of Civil Engineers in Great Britain1500–1830, to which Skempton was an major contributor, waspublished by Thomas Telford in March 2002. A Biography ofSkempton by his daughter Judith will be published by Whittles laterthis year.

HALTDALEN STAVE CHURCH:FORM AND FUNCTIONContinued from the previous Newsletter:

Haltdalen Stave Church

The rate of change in church-building was slow, and consequently wefind that younger stave churches display few new features comparedto older buildings. To building archaeologists, these and other factorssuggest that the stave churches were built according to a relativelyfixed set of rules and principles. Lacking any kind of writteninformation, the only real way for us to determine what these mayhave been is to carry out precise surveys of the buildings. The ideathat every stave church will have been drawn from top to bottom in1:20 scale by the end of the surveying programme, and the resultingbody of documentation will be of great value to a number of fields,not least historic buildings management and research. Surveying isstill carried out much as it has been for centuries, using plumb linesand measuring tapes to make plans, profiles, sections and elevations.Every irregularity, every bit of damage, and every piece of repairwork is recorded on the drawings, along with descriptions of theoriginal materials. Various details, such as concealed joints, aredrawn in 1:5 scale. This kind of documentation is vital when studyingchurches and their history.

In the course of surveying the remaining stave churches, we havecome across incised lines, notches and other marks that may havebeen put on the prefabricated timbers to guide the builders during thesubsequent assembly work. Attention to measurements andproportions was essential to ensuring a sound construction – and asound building is a rule also a beautiful one: aesthetic norms oftenhave a practical origin.

The nave and chancel of Haltdalen stave church are rectangular inshape, and since the building’s principal structural elements are eitherperpendicular or level, with right-angled corners, these too combine toform various quadrangles. If we wish to speculate, it is entirelypossible to draw all manner of complicated geometric figures –circles, arcs, triangles. My own feeling, however, is that theunderlying mathematical principles must have been relativelyuncomplicated, and my analysis of the building is therefore based onsimple measurements of length and height. One is, of course, awarethat there are sources of error. The present building may well deviatefrom the original , due to its having been pulled down and rebuilt; itmay have sagged and subsided; original timbers may have beenreplaced with timbers that were not identical; and the timbers mayhave contracted as the wood dried out. As a result, we cannot be surethat the measurements we obtain today are necessarily the same as theoriginal measurements. To complicate things even more, we cannot

11

even be sure that the original building corresponded in all respects tothe plan inside the builder’s head: small deviations, intentional orotherwise, were almost inevitable. Nevertheless, since all we have togo on is the standing building, it is here that we must seek the answers.

As mentioned above, my approach is based on simple measurements.Analysis indicates that the church’s construction involved the use ofsimple ratios, as shown in the accompanying illustration, and whatwe find is that all of these ratios are based on Pythagoras’ theorem: inother words, we end up with right-angled triangles with sides in theratio of 3:4:5. One advantage of this method is that it would havemade it relatively easy for the builder to draw the church’s outline on

the ground prior to construction. We are, however, unable to saywhether this method was purely a native development resulting fromgenerations of “trial and error”, or whether it was introduced fromabroad, perhaps by builders from Northern Europe.

Conclusion

Haltdalen stave church was a quite ordinary rural church serving asmall community in one of Norway’s many valleys, and many of itsfeatures are indubitably of local origin. In a wider perspective,however, it is part of the timber-church building tradition thatevolved in northern Europe in the second half of the FirstMillennium, and its design conforms to ideals developed by the earlyChurch in southern Europe and the eastern Mediterranean.Historically and architecturally, Haltdalen stave church is by nomeans a simple building.

Jorgen H JenseniusCorrespondence to: NIKU Hovedkontor, Dronningens gt. 13,Postboks 736 Sentrum, 0105 Oslo, NORWAY

FIRST INTERNATIONAL CONGRESSON CONSTRUCTION HISTORY –CHS DELEGATION ANDSPONSORSHIP

The CHS is sending a delegation to the 1st International Congress onConstruction History due to take place in Madrid between the20–24th January 2003. Apart from the intellectual interest generatedby the papers given at the conference, the event offers the opportunityof making contact with construction historians from around world,possibly leading to exciting joint ventures in the form of symposia,conferences, summer schools, exchange visits etc.

The conference fee has attracted some criticism (see “Letters to theEditor”) which may have discouraged people from attending. TheCHS Committee has therefore decided to pay the full conference feeof £275 for one person to attend in Madrid. That person shouldpreferably, though not necessarily, be a member of the Society andshould be able to demonstrate an interest in some aspect ofconstruction history. For example, they might be undertaking a PhDin the area of construction history, or have submitted a paper for theMadrid conference, or be engaged in research associated withconstruction history, or be involved in some other project that wouldbenefit from attendance in Madrid. If these criteria apply to you,please send details of your project to Malcolm Dunkeld (CHSNewsletter Editor). All proposals should be submitted by Friday, 26thJuly 2002 and will be assessed by the CHS Committee.

CIRCA TRUST

The Construction History Society’s archive and library, formerlyhoused at the Chartered Institute of Building at Englemere, is now inthe care of the CIRCA Trust at Kimmins Mill, Stroud.

As members will be aware, the Society’s collection divides into fourmain categories:-1. Library books containing information on the history of the

construction industry at home and abroad2. Company/practice histories of designers, contractors, merchants

and manufacturers often issued on the anniversary of the theirfounding or in connection with major projects

3. A unique set of nearly two hundred invoices issued by suppliersto Prestige & Co Ltd, Cambridge Wharf, 149 Grosvenor Road,Pimlico/Westminster, London SW between 1910 and 1912

4. A small collection of past society papers

12

Haltdalen stave church – plan

West facade East facade

Cross section of the chancel, Cross section of the nave,looking west looking east

These complement very well the existing CIRCA collections. Theyand the remaining material in the archive at Stroud are nowaccessible there to CHS members for research purposes (see belowfor contact details).

The Trust has come a long way in the last six years, further than anyof us would ever have dreamed. We have had our adventures,including two moves, and we have amassed more valuable material ofa wider range of types than we ever envisaged at the start. Indeed, itis difficult to believe that there can be any large class of constructionindustry information which are not now well represented in thecollections. And we have built up a circle of invaluable friends.

Now the task is to consolidate what we have, and build a firmfinancial foundation. It is no secret that what we have achieved so farhas been done on the slenderest of shoestrings, and has relied heavilyon the dedication of a few people who spend a great deal of theirtime, processing the material we have in the archives At times theextent of the material to be handled has almost overwhelmed us.Donations of large amounts of shelving have been a godsend, but ithas all had to be dismantled, transported, unloaded and moved intoand up the building before the considerable task of assembling it inits final position can even start. And until that stage is complete it isalmost impossible to get on with the main tasks of sorting, classifyingand cataloguing.

But there are also bills to pay: electricity, rent, conservationmaterials, transport etc. This requires a regular income and donationsof time. We believe that the best way of ensuring this to build a strongnetwork of members whose annual subscriptions will give themaccess to the facilities at the archives while enabling the regularvolunteers to continue with the work.

The CIRCA Trust and the CHS collections are housed in a mid 19thcentury listed mill, Kimmins Mill, Dudbridge, Stroud. The mill,which is administered by the Stroud Mills Heritage Centre (LBG),also houses a building conservation display (Western IndustrialCollection of Conservation Artifacts and Documentation) and localheritage displays, education suite and reading rooms for use bysimilarly minded organisations (Stroud Heritage Forum).Membership of the Centre allows organisations to promote andparticipate in special displays of their work and to keep archives atthe mill, where the conditions are governed by the need of thedocuments not the users.

Additional specialist displays and library sectors are either inprogress or planned for architectural ironmongery, building materialsand tools. Manufacturers and specialist conservation contractors canalso demonstrate their skills in the Mill’s restoration trials.

Kimmins Mill (New Dudbridge Flour Mill), is of considerablehistoric interest. In 2001 students from the University of Bristolcarried out industrial archaeology investigations, which it is hopedwill continue during 2002 to uncover the adjacent old harbour fromthe Stroudwater Navigation and investigate the missing space on the1840s Tithe Maps. The mill is an appropriate building for aconstruction based archive and located close to rail and the M4 & M5motorways. Built in 1849 it demonstrates the height of traditionalbuilding technology and the use of timber engineering with:-

• Cotswold stone masonry walls and slate roof• Imported timber beams with local cast iron columns to provide a

29ft span• Trussed floor structure for the bin floors

Earlier flour mill structures in the area were smaller and developedpiecemeal. Later mills tended to be operate roller mills in moreindustrial buildings of brick and iron/steel structures. The millproduced flour and animal feed from 1849 until 1931, since when the

building has been used for storage and suffered from severe waterpenetration. The exterior was restored by J Sainsbury as part of theconditions for planning permission for its new store, with acommitment for a community based purpose.

It is leased by the Stroud Mills Heritage Centre at a low rental oncondition that the Centre carries out further restoration work. Theseinclude reinstatement of the shooting stage in the attic and repairs tothe damaged floors, during which time the stairs will be moved to afire protected shaft. However, the basic structure of the mill is soundand as a flour mill it was designed to carry very heavy floor loadings.

The CHS collection is now stored alongside the CIRCA Trust maincollection of construction documentation. This consists of two libraryfloors and three archive floors covering:-

• Materials library in conjunction with the conservation displays• Book library, research positions and rest areas in conjunction

with the Stroud Heritage Forums reading rooms• Project documentation: specifications, bills of quantities,

drawings and images as well as film, video, site photographicalbums and surveying equipment

• Educational, design and guidance documents: books,government publications, standards, technical documents byprofessional and trade bodies, university and research reports,and journals;

• Company / product based documents: trade literature andcompany publications, some of which are now considered moreas textbooks than sales ephemera, and product selectors.

The work of the CIRCA Trust can be summarised under thefollowing objectives:-

• to rescue the knowledge of the industry• to accommodate all materials in conditions suitable for

prolonging the life of the relevant media• to promote and index its availability to researchers• to research the collection and provide access to the collections in

the Trusts care for researchers• to use the collections for educational purposes. These objectives

fit well with those of CHS.

CIRCA was formed in 1996 when it was realised that manyorganisations in the construction industry were shedding archivesand libraries, on the assumption that the information would beavailable elsewhere or in electronic format if it were ever needed.Unfortunately, much of the older material is not widely available andthe scope of electronic information systems is limited.

At the start it was envisaged that a couple of double garage size storeswould be required for the collection, based on the average library ofsome thirty 3 ft-wide bays each of six shelves. The reality wasshelves by the mile not yard and by tons not boxes. Amongst thecontributors so far, donations have come from large corporate and ex-central government departments. Individuals were first considered tobe the main source; however they have proved to be the sources tothe older/specialist material. The main collections rescued / donatedhave been:-

• George Wimpey archive of publications, staff news sheet and theassociated photographic, film and video library, plus someproject information;

• TBV/TPS Consult library (part of the former PSA HQ library)• Wimpey Testing/Wimtec Environmental library of books and

reports• DOE Eastcote reserve library surplus, on its disbanding• Fitzroy Robinson library (architectural practice)• Construction Confederation (NFBTE/BEC): National Builder

Archive 1921–92 and other newsletters and publications

13

• Manchester University: Architectural pamphlet library• Morris Singer archives 1948 to 1970: details of the estimates and

costings for many of the country’s memorials and works of art byDame Barbara Hepworth and Henry Moore, as well as metalworkfor major projects including London University and the Bank ofChina

• Highways Agency: Models of bridges and road schemes(cancelled) which together with others illustrate the skills ofmodel makers

• W S Atkins library (consulting engineers)• Rofe, Kennard & Lapworth (Arup RKL): Library of site

photographs and drawings prepared for parliamentary approvalsfor water conservation and supply schemes circa 1895 to 1985.

Donations have also been received from the BRE, RIBA, CharteredInstitution of Building Services Engineers, Barbour Index and othersimilar organisations and their members. Amongst these donationshave been found some special items:-

• Poor Law Commission documents from 1835• Prizes presented by the Institution of Civil Engineers – Telford

Premium and the Surveyors Institution• Personal text books of the engineers:

William Sydney Albert Atkins (W S Atkins) and Herbert WRafferty (Arup RKL)

• Authors’ own copies of text books and their press cuttings

Amongst some of the smaller donations have been found corecollections which have been used to build upon and form displays:-

• Bruce Martin: Collection of 1970s standards used in a BR /BSIproject on design information sources

• Malcolm Burrows: Trent Polytechnic survey of quantitysurveying documents carried out in the 1970s providingexamples of bills of quantities from the late 19th century

• Eric Corker: Work on metrication of drawings and productinformation card indexing

• Geoffrey Booth (CHS): Timber engineering – Education(Imperial College), standards and international reports

• Gordon Reed (Transport director for UBM MAC): builders’merchants, specialist library on transport requirements forconstruction materials

• George Atkinson (CHS): Housing design (I 920–1960) andresearch

Plus many others who have donated catalogues and other items forincorporation into the main archives

Several professional practices have archived their spent technicalmaterial, so that it may be retrieved at a later date. Archive space canalso be made available to member practices for special collectionssubject to the collection being available to researchers (onapplication) and by prior arrangement, for example the WimpeyGrove Projects seismic library

Some very useful information has also been made available byphotocopying some the older books of members, thus making theknowledge available without the associated problems of archiving.

Ex display items have also proved very useful in adding information,an example being the display prepared for the retirement of PatrickBarbour from Barbour Index which now rests alongside a Barbourlibrary from 1986 rescued from the basement of Wimpeys and thecurrent set of Barbour Fiche which is maintained in the archive.

The Trust has made arrangements to act as custodians for anycollection in order that public access can be achieved – pleaseconsider donating your library/collection to the Trust when it is nolonger of use to you. The Trust is there to preserve knowledge for the

future, not necessarily to own it. Library listings are also useful inrecording the knowledge which was available at any given time – ifyou can help in providing journal indexes on disc to integrate withthe CIRCA Index please talk to the Curator.

No document or material is beyond our scope, if we know it is at riskof the skip.

Jonathan David, Trustee, CIRCA Trust(To offer a donation, join the Trust or offer practical assistance,please contact the curator, John Keenan, on 17966 227575 or e-mailus at circatrust@hotmail.com)

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

From Professor Richard Rodger, Director and Professor of UrbanHistory, University of Leicester:-“I was pleased to receive and read my CHS Newsletter. It is alwaysof interest. I was immediately tempted to attend the FirstInternational Congress on Construction History in Madrid. Thisseems an excellent opportunity to develop construction historyinterests across a European platform. However, I believe that this istoo expensive for me to justify and I imagine that it eliminates mostPhD students and others who might benefit. I hope you will relay mydisappointment (and I am sure that of many others) at a level ofpricing that is too unrealistic to bring together those genuinelyinterested in Construction History. I would be grateful if you wouldrelay this view to the Madrid organisers”.

(Professor Rodger has recently published a book entitled TheTransformation of Edinburgh: Land, Property and Trust in theNineteenth Century, Cambridge University Press, 2001)

From Ian and Thalia Campbell:-“We are retired and in the process of moving into a smaller home, andare to sell Glangors, a detached house/bungalow. From the outside itappears to be in the Trinity House style, with four double bedrooms,large siting room, dining room, kitchen, bathroom, utility rooms,tower room with windows on four sides, and a second toilet. It has alarge garden/grounds, double garage and stable. We are contactingyou because we thought it is a house of interest to historical andarchitectural organisations.

Glangors, built in 1882 of poured concrete within shutters cast as amonobloc with a solid roof of railway lines at 3 foot centres (as in therelevant factory regulations of the time) is one of the only remainingcomplete examples of this type of construction in North Wales. Formany years it was almost derelict. We have restored it to its originalcondition and consider that it should now be protected by listing asof architectural and social interest. Telford on his canals built housesin a similar technique. There is a connection in the design to earlyTrinity House lighthouse design, but they used a different technique.I can send photographs if you are interested”.

(Ian and Thalia D. Campbell, By the Marsh, Blue Island, Borth,Cardiganshire. Glangors, Ynyslas, Borth, Ceredigion, SY24 5JU.Tel: 01970 871360 Mobile: 079681 59684. Email:greenhamsculpture@hotmail.com or oldlabour@hotmail.com)

CONSTRUCTION HISTORYSOCIETY EVENTS AND VISITSORGANISER

The Society has organised a regular series of events and visits toplaces of historic interest. Previous organisers of these visits haveincluded Jack Smale and Alan Palmer. Currently the position of visitsorganiser is vacant and the CHS Committee is looking for a volunteer

14

to take on this role. Key skills include a wide knowledge ofconstruction history, good connections and creative ideas forinteresting visits. If you feel able to fill this role, please contact theCHS Secretary, Mike Tutton, whose address is given at the end of theNewsletter.

POT-POURRI

Peter Longley writes:Records of James Longley & Co Ltd 1863 – 2000 have beendeposited in West Sussex Record Office. Papers relating to SirNorman Longley (1900 – 1994) have also been placed in WestSussex Record Office. However, those concerning his chairmanshipof the Construction Industry Training Board (1964 – 1970) have beenarchived by the Board. Sir Norman was President of the NationalFederation of Building Trades Employers 1949 – 1950 and theInternational Federation of Building and Public Works Contractors1955 – 1957.

Sussex Industrial History 2001. The Journal of the Sussex IndustrialArchaeology Society contains an article on Longley’s patent WoodBlock Flooring based on an article written by Sir Norman Longley in1984 with additional notes by Peter Longley. Also included is afacsimile copy of a sales brochure c. 1928.

SIHC Journal 2002 will include the history of Crawley and DistrictWater Company (1897 – 1926) by Charles Longley (1862 – 1931)with additional notes by Peter Longley.

SIHC Journal. A future issue will include an article on the building ofChrist’s Hospital, Horsham 1897 – 1902.

Horsham (West Sussex) Museum will be mounting an exhibition onbrick making in September which will include material given by theWhitehouse family. Three generations of Whitehouses wereconnected with the Sussex Brick Company and its successors forvirtually the whole of the 20th century.

HELP!

The Editor has received the following request for help:

Mike Heaton – “My request for help arises from a survey I preparedof a site at Falmouth last year. The building is Lamella Hanger,designed by Junkers in Germany and manufactured in the UK underlicence by Horsley Eng Co Ltd immediately before the Second WorldWar. Several have survived in the UK, mainly at TA centres wherethey were used as drill halls, but there are larger versions at airfields.

I am appealing to the CHS to help me with what is possibly a wildgoose chase, but one that I am obliged to pursue. The pedigree of thestructures as far back as Horsley Eng Co Ltd. and Junkers isdocumented. I am trying to establish whether, given the similarity ofdesign to the fuselage of Wellington bombers and R101 airships,there is a possible link to Barnes Wallis. I know it is a long one, butwe know the Nazis acquired technical details of early jet enginesfrom the UK, so it is not improbable that they also stole the conceptsof Geodetic construction from us.

Despite anecdotal evidence that Barnes Wallis was engaged indesigning geodetic buildings between the wars, I have so far drawn ablank. Do we have any links with German historians studying thehistory of the Junkers company, or could anyone point me in the rightdirection for German sources. This is potentially very important sincethese buildings are the precursors of Buckminster Fuller’s Geodesics,not to mention Cullnam’s current Geodesic tunnel at The Weald andDownland Museum. It would be nice to prove a British origin”.

Replies to Mike Heaton, Archaeological Site Investigations, FurlongHouse, 61 East Street, Warminster, Wiltshire BA12 9BZ Tel: 01985847791 email: name@asi-heritageconsultants.co.uk or www.asi-heritageconsultants.co.uk

A GUIDE TO ARCHIVE SOURCES

The Business Archives Council’s recent Newsletter has the followingarticle:

“Well done the authors – Janet Foster and Julia Sheppard – on theircompilation of the 4th edition of British Archives: A Guide to ArchiveResources in the UK which is hot from the press. With its 1,200entries contained in 864 pages, the volume is as impressive as it islong. It is packed with well structured information and continues tobe a prime resource for archivists and historians alike”.

PAST CHS NEWSLETTERS

If you require past copies of the CHS Newsletter (in Xerox format),please send details to Malcolm Dunkeld (CHS Newsletter Editor),enclosing a payment of £1 per copy.

15

FUTURE EVENTS

4th July 2002 Images of the Grand Tour – daytime lecture atthe National Portrait Gallery, St Martin’s Place,London, WC2H OHE. 1.10 p.m. Free.

9th July 2002 Christ Church, Streatham and Streatham Hillwalk – Wild’s 1840s church with its campanile isa significant landmark on the South Circular.Inside, its decoration has been recently restored.Father Ivory, with Daniel Golberg or architectsThomas Ford & Partners, will explain the historyand conservation work. Meet 6.30 p.m. at ChristChurch, Streatham, near junction of ChristchurchRoad and Brixton Hill (Brixton Tube, then bus or15 min. walk; Streatham Hill, train fromVictoria, then bus). Pay on the day.

16th July 2002 A walk around St. Marylebone – this walkfocuses on the area west of Regent’s Park andnorth of the Marylebone Road, focusingparticularly on the Victorian development of thearea. The walk will be led by Dr. Mike Wood ofthe St. Marylebone Society. Meet 6.30 p.m. atBaker Street Tube station, the Baker Streetentrance. Pay on the day.

23rd July 2002 The Dome of St Peter’s: Its design andconstruction and responses to later concerns forstability. Dr. Roland Mainstone. The Institutionof Civil Engineers, 1 Great George Street,London SW1P 3AA. Booking contact PaulParkes Tel: 020 7665 2258; email:paul.parkes@ice.org.uk. Start 5.00 p.m.

13th – 16th Heritage Open Day – England’s biggest and most September popular voluntary cultural event. The four day

event opens the doors to nearly 2000 fascinatingproperties or activities, many of which are notnormally open or accessible. The Heritage OpenDays Events Directory will be published onlinein August 2002.

5th October 2002 The Chapels Society – visit to Mid-Wharfedale:this area is centred on the contrasting towns ofOtley and Ilkley, but begins with a visit to the17th century chapel of Bramhope, a rare examplebuilt during the Commonwealth, as a privatechapel of worship. Otley, an ancient market townaround which industry developed, is an earlyMethodist centre and Congregationalism is alsolong established. The Wesleyan chapel (1828)long replaced, has survived demolition threats tobecome flats. High tea will be taken atChristchurch. The coach leaves Leeds CityRailway Station at 10.45 a.m. and returns there at6.00 p.m. Cost £20. Details from Dr. Mary EdeTel: 01225 422362

22nd November Historic Failure of Dams – Godfrey Mitchell 2002 Theatre, The Institution of Civil Engineers, 1

Great George Street, London SW1P 3AA.Booking contact Tim Fuller Tel: 020 7665 2234;email: tim.fuller@ice.org.uk. Start 5.30 p.m.

To help homeowners make informed decisions about the repair oftheir property the SPAB runs a “Introduction to the Repair of OldBuildings” courses. Dates for 2002 include:-

13th – 14th July 2002 Haughley Barn, Bury St Edmunds,Suffolk

10th – 11th August 2002 The Scottish Lime Centre, Fife

19th – 20th October 2002 Nostell Priory, NR. Wakefield, WestYorkshire

Details of prices and availability from SPAB

CHS GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE

Please note that all other correspondence not relating to theNewsletter should be addressed to The Secretary, ConstructionHistory Society, c/o Library and Information Services Manager, TheChartered Institute of Building, Englemere, Kings Ride, Ascot,Berkshire SL5 7TB e-mail: michael.tutton@virgin.net

16