Rock of Cashel stone conservation restoration

The Cathedral;

Recent work on the stone.
[ATTACH]4989[/ATTACH]
I do not know what neccessitated this work. This is an honest question- I’m not trying to be critical; Is this done to the best standards? It strikes me as looking very white and lacking that limestone shine that such ancient rubblework usually has. Is this just temporary? Will it look different after a bit of rain or even a few winters?

Ake!

Am I getting this correctly? Are you saying that this piece of crude jobbery has been bunged into the wall of Cormac’s chapel?

@Praxiteles wrote:

Ake!

Am I getting this correctly? Are you saying that this piece of crude jobbery has been bunged into the wall of Cormac’s chapel?

Yes! You think it’s crude? I thought it was ok. I mean what was the alternatve-Previously, I don’t know when, there was just a square hole/window- that I know because I have an old picture of it in a book, maybe I’ll scan that in.

Crude? that’s an understatement – that is a brutal insertion into the old fabric of the building.

They’re making amends for the NRA missing the site with the Cashel Bypass!!!

Doe not that awful door just sum it all up? What is a think like that doing in sopt as sacred as Cormac’s chapel? Does anybody in the Board of Works have the slightest clue as to what theya re about? Can you imagine the Italians installing something like that in the Pantheon? For Cormac’s chapel to have survived the ravages of time and history only to succumb to the Board of Works….it is just too, too tragic or perhaps fatal to bear thinking.

The thought strikes me that if the Boar of Works does not know how to look after buildings such as this, then perhaps they might try at little inter-European outsourcing and hire the Italian Beni Culturali to the job for them. Even imaginationless Cobh Town Council copped on to that one when they got themselves an Italian architect – and signs on things seem to be improving a bit since they brought in a competent Italian.

Will you just look at the size of those blocks and the dullard regularity with which they have been heaped on top of each other by a know-nothing. This is something that I would expect to see in Disneyland! One thing is sure: faux romanesque is a million time worse than faux georgian.

That stinks of newness. What was wrong exactly with the window that was there? It was part of the history of the building and they had no right to alter it, unless it was literally falling apart.

Why is there a tacky PVC door in the chapel?

Its just brutal. It reminds me of the time that they sandblasted the whole of Ross castle, and removed hundreds of years of litchens and growth. Are the Board of works out of control?

I hope some journalist is looking at this thread and will do something to highlight the plight of Cormac’s chapel at the hands of the lunatics in the Board of Works – or what ever they call it now. This is so crazy that it defies belief – the Board of Works playing at Humty-Dumty.

Have you ever in all your life seen anything more bathetic than this!! Can you imagine sight like this against the muenster wall in Speyer?

Really that does sum up all that is wrong with modern Ireland 🙁

@Praxiteles wrote:

Ake!

Am I getting this correctly? Are you saying that this piece of crude jobbery has been bunged into the wall of Cormac’s chapel?

Trying to figure out if that wall thingy is merely a trompe-l’oeil….
Silvio Berlusconi would like this; I seem to remember him having plans to rebuild those parts of the Colosseum that lie in ruin!;)

Alright, I was trying to be positive but I’ll throw in the towel. Whatever they have done to the exterior, Ireland has plenty of romanesque exteriors left- the inside is virtually unique in the country as an intact romanesque interior with it’s roof still on it- how on earth can it be allowed to remain in the leaking, slimy, filthy state it’s in?! Here’s the chapel in the tower of london;
[ATTACH]5016[/ATTACH]

Cormac’s chapel should look more like this, preferably without the furniture. Just compare the wall surface here with the pictures above.

Ake!

Take a look at this link on the Jakobuskirche in Regensburg -with which Cashel had close connections. You will agree that th conservation approach of the Regensburger Denkmalsamt is somewhat different to that of the Board of Works. I am suggesting, that in relation to Cormac’s chapel, the Board of Works be decommissioned and replaced by a pro-consul from regensburger Denkmsalamt.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scots_Monastery,_Regensburg

P.S. I heard recently that the Board of Work are also happily converting Ardfert Cathedral into western Disneyland. Does nayone know anything of their “restoration” efforts there?

Ake!

This is what one would expect to find in Cormac’s chapel were it properly cared for!

@ake wrote:

Whatever they have done to the exterior, Ireland has plenty of romanesque exteriors left.

Thats not the right attitude to take. You can’t say that its OK to knock a street of Georgian buildings in Dublin, just because there’s miles of similar street left. We must preserve all of what we have. Anyway this is one of the best examples of Romanesque architecture in Ireland. And I’m not all that sure if there is plenty of the stuff lying around either.

Of course we must preserve all of what we have- which we emphatically DON’T, but the relative importance of the chapel interior must be underlined.

@Praxiteles wrote:

Ake!

P.S. I heard recently that the Board of Work are also happily converting Ardfert Cathedral into western Disneyland. Does nayone know anything of their “restoration” efforts there?

Here’s a picture I found on flickr from september 2006
[ATTACH]5018[/ATTACH]

But getting back to Cashel- would you have been at all in favour of the refilling of the holes in the south wall of the chapel under any circumstances?

@Praxiteles wrote:

The thought strikes me that if the Boar of Works does not know how to look after buildings such as this, then perhaps they might try at little inter-European outsourcing and hire the Italian Beni Culturali to the job for them.

Trim castle won a Europa Nostra ‘diploma’ award for ‘the well-researched and excellent restoration of an important 12th century castle ruin, including imaginative new installations’. I’ve been to Trim castle and as far as I can judge the conservation is excellent (leaving aside the hotel..). The architects were ‘Willy Cumming / Kevin O’Brien (Dúchas) with Cloonan O’Donnell Architects’ with ‘Dúchas Works Depot, Trim & J.V.Ledwith Ltd.’ building contractors, according to the EN site.

I’m inclined to think that there are simply not enough quality conservators to go round for all the heritage sites in Ireland. The number of sites is huge, and of course conservation is a perpetual process. Since our small population cannot supply enough workers of the required standard we should definitely be importing other European experts- there must be a surplus in the bloated populations of England, France and Germany.

@ake wrote:

Here’s a picture I found on flickr from september 2006
[ATTACH]5018[/ATTACH]

But getting back to Cashel- would you have been at all in favour of the refilling of the holes in the south wall of the chapel under any circumstances?

There are ways f filling holes and ways of filling holes and this was not the way to fill that hole!!

@ake wrote:

Trim castle won a Europa Nostra ‘diploma’ award for ‘the well-researched and excellent restoration of an important 12th century castle ruin, including imaginative new installations’. I’ve been to Trim castle and as far as I can judge the conservation is excellent (leaving aside the hotel..). The architects were ‘Willy Cumming / Kevin O’Brien (Dúchas) with Cloonan O’Donnell Architects’ with ‘Dúchas Works Depot, Trim & J.V.Ledwith Ltd.’ building contractors, according to the EN site.

I’m inclined to think that there are simply not enough quality conservators to go round for all the heritage sites in Ireland. The number of sites is huge, and of course conservation is a perpetual process. Since our small population cannot supply enough workers of the required standard we should definitely be importing other European experts- there must be a surplus in the bloated populations of England, France and Germany.

Do not forget the Italians!!! They are excellent when they get going. Just look at Cobh since they imported an architect who seems to know something about conservation – at least he recognises that the paint is peeling off the door of the Cathedral and the floor is coming up and the Baptistery has been vandalised. All this is a huge quantum leap in comnparison to the previous incumbent, D. Deasey, who did not think there was anythingtoo wrong with walking into the building in the middle of the night and digging holes in the floor of the sanctuary -simpley because they were in places where you could not see them. But the, he had had things “explained” to him by the great soothsayer of the Cathedral wreckage plan: Brian McCutcheon!!

Recent Ardfert photos
http://riai.ie/index.html?id=7236

“The restoration of Ardfert is an outstanding example of a collaborative professional approach by those, over a considerable period, using the great skill, learning, and respect for one of our most interesting monuments”

I wonder where was all this when it came to Cormac’s chapel?.

They’d wanna be very careful as this is beginning to look more like a rebuild than a conservation.. I take particular offence to the PVC door (why not an authentic thick native wooden one?) and that pokey little window. As for the interior, I agree that some of the weathering could be removed, but maintain the brick work, stem the deteroation and leave it showing it’s age, gracefully.

Thanks God we’ve got a Green Government now 😮

Shocking – they may as well stick on a conservatory on the front of Newgrange after this

@Punchbowl wrote:

They’d wanna be very careful as this is beginning to look more like a rebuild than a conservation.. I take particular offence to the PVC door (why not an authentic thick native wooden one?) and that pokey little window. As for the interior, I agree that some of the weathering could be removed, but maintain the brick work, stem the deteroation and leave it showing it’s age, gracefully.

Thanks God we’ve got a Green Government now 😮

I think the information panel in the chapel mentioned that the doors were there as a measure to halt the deterioration of the paintings. Of course they’re not beautiful, but the doors are the very last thing to think about, after the actual fabric has been properly secured. I’m just puzzled as to why there is still a problem that they’re trying to overcome; it’s a very small little chapel; hasn’t the science of conservation/preservation advanced far enough to make this a quite feasible job by now? Surely all the issues should long have been dealt with definitively.

Hi there everyone

I am from the UK and am impartial on such matters. I have visited several of the sites in the care of the OPW including the Rock of Cashel and in general I thought that they had done a good job.

Here in the UK, I have worked as a specialist restoration contractor, have visited countless monuments in the care of
English Heritage and, being qualified as a geologist, have particular interests in building stones.

I came across the Archiseek whilst researching an article that I intend to write for the Australian Stone Trade journal called Discovering Stone, for whom I work as the Contributing European Editor.

Unless something really drastic has been done to the Rock of Cashel since I visited in October 2004, I have always considered it to be the best monument that I have visited in Ireland (I have also been to Newgrange).

It is interesting to see the various comments on this thread but there is a time when masonry is beyond conservation and some thoughtful restoration has to take place. It is not right for me to enter into the debate over the rights or wrongs.

I would just like some help in highlighting the best aspects of the Rock of Cashel and if anyone can provide some information on where the original building materials came from and what stone was used for repairs, I would be grateful. Or perhaps some history of the restoration?

If you can’t access an E-mail link, I am at scott@glowingedges.co.uk

I look forward to some constructive comments.

Thanks

Scott Engering

@scottengering wrote:

Hi there everyone

I am from the UK and am impartial on such matters. I have visited several of the sites in the care of the OPW including the Rock of Cashel and in general I thought that they had done a good job.

Here in the UK, I have worked as a specialist restoration contractor, have visited countless monuments in the care of
English Heritage and, being qualified as a geologist, have particular interests in building stones.

I came across the Archiseek whilst researching an article that I intend to write for the Australian Stone Trade journal called Discovering Stone, for whom I work as the Contributing European Editor.

Unless something really drastic has been done to the Rock of Cashel since I visited in October 2004, I have always considered it to be the best monument that I have visited in Ireland (I have also been to Newgrange).

It is interesting to see the various comments on this thread but there is a time when masonry is beyond conservation and some thoughtful restoration has to take place. It is not right for me to enter into the debate over the rights or wrongs.

I would just like some help in highlighting the best aspects of the Rock of Cashel and if anyone can provide some information on where the original building materials came from and what stone was used for repairs, I would be grateful. Or perhaps some history of the restoration?

If you can’t access an E-mail link, I am at scott@glowingedges.co.uk

I look forward to some constructive comments.

Thanks

Scott Engering

I would love to hear your opinion on the following]5132[/ATTACH]

Is this conservation work below standard or acceptable?
[ATTACH]5133[/ATTACH]

I have interviewed the OPW in some detail about their work at the Rock of Cashel, and they have defended their approach to the restoration against criticisms made in this thread. I am planning to write a piece in The Sunday Times this weekend.

If anyone who has expressed criticisms would care to be quoted, you can contact me at john.burns@sunday-times.ie over the next 24 hours

Thanks

Well John, thanks for starting off an interesting public debate about the OPW and their deplorable vandalism on Corma`’s Chapel. I am afraid that the defence put up by the OPW in today’s Sunday Times just does not wash and reveals an appaling attitude to the preservation of a monment of such importance and cultural significance – just keep in mind that the coronation rites used in Cashel lie beneath those of the coronation rites of teh kings of France and of England. This chapel is on a cultyral par with the Cappella Palatina in Monreale, the Sixtine in Rome, the Papal Chapel in Avignon and the Sainte Chapelle in Paris. I am afraid that the “hit and miss” approach of the OPW to its restoration simply will nlt do. This is not the place for trialand error. Nothing should be done here unless and until there is all certainty as to its effects and outcome.

It is also clear from the insular attitude of teh OPW that they have neither the experience nor the expertise to tackle a restoration such as that of Cormac’s Chapel and they seem tolack the intelligence to realise that. Lest us take an example of a more professional and serious approach to restoration. The Pauline chapel min the Palazzo Apostolico in Rome is currently under restoration. Those in charge of the retoration could simply have adopted the hit and miss approach of the OPW but they did not. They have agreater sense of responsibility both to the cultural patrimony which they administer and to the artistic integrity of Michelangelo’s two great frescos in this chapel. What did they do before moving? They formed an international commission of recognised experts to study and discuss an integrated project from various aspects and according to the latest and most up to date shcolarship. This was not a job for a piddly firm of private consultants. Only after this proces had been gone through and a lot of rational reflection -in contrast to the OPW’s emoting over brokenheartedness – did work begin. There are no blue barrelle or gutters in the Pauline Chapel. There are no vulgar aluminium doors there -and micro climates can be accomplished without such crudities.

What I would like to know is: Has the OPW formed a similar commission of international expets before going near Cormac’s Chapel? Has the OPW drawn on the considerable experience ofthe Batiments de France when approaching the restoration of this chapel? Has anyone in the OPW thought, for instance, of asking the conservateur des monuments responsible for St Sernin and and teh Basilique des Jacobins in Toulouse for his advice and experience? What about the Dombauverein responsible for the conservation of Speyer catherdral or the romanesque Jakobuskircke in Regensburg (which had such close links with Cashel)? I suspect the answer to all of these questions is probably that it never crossed what the OPW is pleased to call its mind.

As for Mr Gormley, well I hope that he is not faced with a preexisting signed ministeral order beloning to a predecessor on this subject hanging around conveniently in a bottom drawer in the ministry. I would suggest that he start looking for the international expertise and experience so desperately needed to ensure that what is left of Cormac’s Chapel will not be further plundered by the bogtrotters in the OPW. Here we have a case of quod non fecerunt barbari fecit OPW.

Can you imagine ramming a few neat wimdows into the Papal Chapel in Avignon or the Capella Palatina in Monreale. I think some peoplein the OPW should start writing their letters of resignation!!!!

Can anyone find the article on the times’ web site?

it’s not published on the online edition for some reason

Anyone know of a good, free, text capture program? This is the best I can do without one.
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=695421561&size=l

Nice scan Ake…. the OPW comes across as a little defensive in it, doesn’t it? Suggests thats there’s some merit in the complaints.

I have to laugh with the plea to wait a few years and judge the end product. By the time we see that and what OPW is likely to come up with, we shall be facing a Disneyland reconstruction that would be better situated in Florida, Given the hit and miss approach, and greater amount of miss than hit, and the seeming lack of expertise and consultation involved in the Cashel initiative, in four years time all that will be left of Cormac’s Chapel will be a VIRTUAL reality conserved in photographs.

@Paul Clerkin wrote:

Nice scan Ake…. the OPW comes across as a little defensive in it, doesn’t it? Suggests thats there’s some merit in the complaints.

Oh ye of little faith!!!

It was an interesting article alright. I just think it’s terrible that we have to rely on a newspaper article for this information. Why aren’t these plans and reports disclosed to the general public online, or at the very least in a dedicated periodical? There are just as many questions about dozens of other heritage sites around the country and little to no information accessible to the general layman (and it is the general laymen who own the sites after all) unless he has the time and is granted the opportunity to interview an expert .

“The OPW is awaiting a report from independent expert John Beecham…” will there be a PDF on the Duchas website? These people are working for us, on our property.

All the problems inside are caused by water getting in. This is understandably a difficult problem in the chapel which, after all, has it’s original 12th century roof.

But is it as difficult as the OPW make it out to be in the article? It could be without sufficient funds. You still have to pay into the Rock of Cashel, on top of your taxes. Why does the OPW feel the need to source such revenue? Is lack of funding creating a situation where there are simply not enough professionals on board with enough resources to implement a speedy solution to the chapel’s problems?

I wouldn’t be surprised, even if nobody in the OPW wants to admit it, for whatever reasons. Obviously heritage is not a priority for this Government.

Why indeed is the OPW not more transparent about what itt does to nationalmonuments?

What do you think of the restoration of Vincennes?

[ATTACH]5444[/ATTACH]

Apparently, about a third of the masonry will have to be replaced or materially restored or it already has been. Is this what we want for Ireland?

At that rate it would be just as well to take the train down to Eurodisney! After all, that is what the OPW is turninh the Rock of Cashel into.

Muckross Abbey, currently under conservation

[attach]5507[/attach]

Look at the stone face in the foreground, then the conserved face in the background behind the scaffold. Is it an optical illusion?

Tell me this is temporary.

How temporary?

Temporary as in however long it takes for the stone to weather to its previous state. How long it takes for this to happen, I’m not sure.

What do you all make of this? The video is critical of the OPW’s ‘restoration’ and touristification of Skellig Michael;

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=GpXgBveqnjY

I wonder does this explain the mess that the OPW is making of the Rocak of Cashel and elsewhere?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/6904194.stm

great article prax thanks. The most relevant part perhaps;

“Contractors have to open their doors to trainees and customers need to demand it. At the moment, the cheapest quote wins and the cheapest contractors are the ones who don’t spend money on training.

“Gradually, this lowers the skill level across the board until the historic fabric starts to suffer.”

The problem must be much worse here than in England, for obvious reasons. I wonder are the same solutions being pursued?

Here you’ll find a very detailed extensive article on excavations on the Rock of Cashel, focusing on Cormac’s Chapel,with much interesting information.

http://homepage.tinet.ie/~dunamase/Dunamase.html

Also, quite a bit of info on excavations around the country is found here on the heritage council’s site, ;

http://www.heritagecouncil.ie/archaeology/unpublished_excavations/section2.html

This should give the new stone a bit of weathering;

[ATTACH]7109[/ATTACH] [ATTACH]7110[/ATTACH]

Just put in search for cashel in flickr.com and choose most recent- there are pages and pages of great shots of the Cashel Skyfest event.

Fascinating thread; my one visit to Cashel left me in a real quandary.
(1) The cathedral was deliberately unroofed in the 18th C and was subsequently affected by weathering (leading to the partial collapse of the east gable). Is it appropriate to treat the vandalism of the 18th C as the terminal defined state of the building?
(2) Cormac’s Chapel was a grave disappointment; it is a gem, but a sadly neglected one and all the pictures amply demonstrate this.
(3) In the same vein, the illustrations of Ardfert beg one very important question: why is it not reroofed and brought back into use (as a communal building if not a church, though the latter would be the obvious use)?
What is the resistance to restoration and re-use? Is the Venice protocol (or whatever it’s called) simply a form of PC usage for conservators? Isn’t the best preservative of a building its being in use and maintained? AWN Pugin (no less) could not understand why he was being asked to build new churches in Co. Wexford when there were so many historic buildings waiting to be brought back into use. Better an imperfect (though not Disney-esque) restoration than an absolutely PC ‘conservation’ that amounts to decay and neglect (or the abortion posing as one wall of Limerick castle!).

johnglas, I’m with you for once on this (except Cashel which makes a great ruin). The Venice Charter, the Burra Charter etc., these international declarations on conservation are really aimed at middle east dictators rebuilding ziggurats. When you apply them to more ordinary examples of our heritage, are you not detaching us from the heritage that we’re trying to connect to?

I think it’s the Burra Charter that has this huge contradiction in it, that modification and alterations to a monument, over centuries, becomes the monument and should not be stripped back to reveal a pristine ‘original’, but further modification, from our time, that’s out of order!

That line of logic, in my opinion, draws an artificial line between the past and the present. The present, after all, is just a transient notation between the past and more of the past.

Wasn’t there a good old Scottish rumpus about the re-rendering of the great hall at Sterling Castle, a fews years back, is this over now, or is it still rumbling on?

wow cashel looks amazing there….there was a pretty cool light show on too…parts of it look like a bit like trailing christmas lights….but there’s some amazing silhouette shots http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKX3xOGUzYw

Gunter: thanks for that; aye, there was indeed a great stooshie (rumpus) over Stirling Castle, mainly because the Great Hall was fully restored and paintedbright yellow (!) – to say that it acts like a beacon over the floodplain of the Forth is putting it mildly. Stirling Castle, magnificent as it is, glowers over its surroundings; it is not a bright building, so painful thumbs come to mind. Still, it’s done and I’ve not heard much about it recently.
These various charters and protocols strike me as dogma masquerading as good practice; the agenda is normally hijacked by a few enthusuaists who lay down the rules and then cry foul when they are not adhered to.
Still, all fashion passes and who knows what will be the convention in a few years’ time.