Unusual Transformations of Iecava Manor Barn

Architecture and Urban Planning 2022, Vol. 18, Issue 1, pp. 76–87 https://doi.org/10.2478/aup-2022-0008 https://content.sciendo.com Online ISSN 2255-8764 Unusual Transformations of Iecava Manor Barn Ilmārs Dirveiks* Riga Technical University, Riga, Latvia Received 2022-03-17; accepted 2022-09-13 Keywords Abstract Barn, half hipped gable, Iecava, log building, polychromy, porch, timber frame construction. The article offers a study of the oldest building of Iecava manor – a stone barn that has survived after the devastating wars of the 20th century. The history and architecture of the construction of the barn until 2020 seemed to be known. The stone building has a weathercock dated 1797, and the construction time of the building is related to it. The architectural composition of the main façade and some carefully designed details allowed to hypothesize that the architect of the Duke of Courland S. Jensen is the author of the building. A building research study in 2021 found that in the second half of the 18th century, a wooden farmhouse with a basement (or on an existing basement) was built, having a gable roof with pitched ends and timber framed gables. The main façade had a roof overhang, and perhaps this façade was painted red, imitating a brick wall with grey seams. The current appearance of the stone barn was obtained after the exterior walls of the wooden building were replaced by masonry walls. It happened in the first decades of the 19 th century. The building was transformed into a masonry structure, leaving the floor beams, ceiling beams, pediments and roof structure of the old wooden building, and expanded by moving the main façade wall ~ 1 m further apart. The function of the wooden building is not clear. Previous hypotheses about a malt in the 18th century are neither denied nor confirmed. The assumption that the brewery was the only brick building in the 1786 inventory is erroneous, as the building was originally made of wood. Today, the barn is the oldest existing building in Iecava manor. This study is an example of the importance of structural thinking and knowledge of structures in architectural research. This knowledge is provided by architecture education that is different from formal analysis practiced in the art sciences. Introduction Iecava is a town located in the southern part of Latvia 40 km from Riga. Until the beginning of the 20 th century it was known by its German name – Gross Eckau. In European history, Iecava is better known for the “battle near Eckau” on July 19, 1812, during Napoleon’s invasion of Russia. The battle resulted in a victory of Prussian troops over Russian forces. After the Battle of Eckau, Prussian troops commanded by French Marshal Macdonald took over the Gross-Eckau manor. The centre of the manor was almost completely destroyed during World War II. There are only two historical buildings in the immediate vicinity of the former manor house: a stable and a barn. Built in the 18th century, the barn is the oldest building in the centre of the manor and thus is historically linked to the earlier structure of the manor. Fig. 1. General view of the Iecava barn building from the East side. At the entrance there is a door sign of a household goods store established in 1995/1996 [3, 6]. * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] © 2022 Author(s). This is an open access article licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 76 Architecture and Urban Planning 2022 / 18 The barn building is located in the west corner of the Count’s Square, near the former Iecava manor house library wing and the former stable building located to the south-east of the barn (Fig. 1). The barn is an architectural monument of local significance and its weathercock is an art monument of national significance. An architectural and artistic study of the barn involving site investigation and analysis of the archive sources was carried out in 2021. The research also includes recommendations for the planned renovation of the building. I. A Brief Historical Overview A rough idea of the Iecava manor building arrangement in the 17th century is depicted in the drawing by Johann Rūdolfs Šturns ( Johan Rudolph Sturn) made in 1661 (Fig. 2) [1, 54]. Based on that drawing one can assume that in the 17th century the manor was built on the left bank of the Iecava river and, most likely, on the spot of the current manor centre [3], [4]. There is no extensive and detailed information about the structure of manor centre construction in the territory of Latvia in the 17th century. However, manor construction in the 17th and 18th centuries has common features and one of them is the arrangement of buildings around a unifying territory – the courtyard. The arrangement of manor buildings in most cases is symmetrical. Judging by the drawing of the manor house’s location, the relative “axis” of the manor building arrangement is oriented parallel to the river, which contrasts with the manor building arrangement of the early 19 th century. The drawing made in 1661 depicts a garden behind the manor house. A group of wooden buildings in front of Fig. 2. View of Iecava manor in 1661. Hypothetically, the location of the wooden building in the 18th century, if it was built on the basement of the buildings shown in the picture. The structure on the left is close to a masonry chimney, possibly connected to a vodka incinerator [1]. Ilmārs Dirveiks Unusual Transformations of Iecava Manor Barn the garden form a courtyard. After roughly comparing this manor depiction with the two plans of the manor drawn later, one can form a hypothesis in which the building that was built in the 18th century is located on the spot of one of the agricultural buildings shown in the drawing of 1661. Of course, this is only a theoretical assumption, but such reflections on the succession of manor construction are prompted by an important fact – there was a large well-built basement under the barn. It had a special value in the construction of the 17th and 18 th century manors. Basements are usually mentioned in manor inventories. In the 18 th century, the manor building ensemble consisted of a dwelling house, a barn, a stable, a servants’ dwelling house, and a brewery. However, the first half of the century was not financially the best time for the Duke of Courland to build the Iecava manor. Written sources indicate the gradual demise of the manor house [3], [5]. In the 1730s, this building completely collapsed. Of course, life in the manor went on. The building arrangement of the manor, along with the new wooden buildings, including constructions with a cellar, is described in several inventories. In 1739, there was a twin (German: doppelte) barn with 4 doors, a thatched roof and a vaulted cellar [6]. The same building is also marked in the inventories dated 1752 and 1756 [7]. Another building mentioned in the inventories is a vaulted cellar in the middle of the yard with a small log-built structure above it and a thatched roof. This cellar with a structure above it is no longer mentioned in future inventories. The inventory dated 1786 is important in the context of the old barn construction history, as it somewhat coincides with year 1779 on the weathercock [6]. Until now, art researcher Imants Lancmanis has tried to decipher the construction history of the old barn. In the description of Iecava manor’s history and architecture published in 2001, Lancmanis draws attention to the fact that in the inventory of November 26, 1786, the only stone building is “the newly mortared vodka burner (or vodka burning house)”. It was thus concluded that the old barn (as a stone building) was originally an alcohol brewery and was transformed into a barn in the 1820s when the new separate brewery was built [3], [5], [19], [20]. Lancmanis admits that the assumption is too speculative and based on uncertain information (Correspondence with I. Lancmanis in March 2021), however, one would have to agree that the building was indeed rebuilt in the early 19th century and has existed as a barn since then. It is just not the masonry vodka distillery mentioned in the inventory. The 1786 description states: “A barn with a tiled roof, built out of logs five years ago. It has the necessary stalls, keys and other necessary metal products”. The cellar is not mentioned. This might be explained by the fact that the new building was built on the already existing basement. 77 Architecture and Urban Planning 2022 / 18 However, the barn’s construction period does not match the year on the weathercock. There is only one other building mentioned in the 1786 description, which can possibly be identified as a building existing to this day. The inventory mentions: “A brewery and a malt house with a tiled roof and one chimney protruding above the roof, on a good foundation, built out of logs 6 years ago”. The construction time of this building matches the year 1779 on the weathercock. Thus, the wooden building built on a “good foundation” as well as the “guten Fundament” mentioned in the text do not mean the basement, but indeed just a foundation. However, the cellar is not mentioned in the text and there are no signs of a chimney on the building’s roof. The malt house may not have had a chimney [8, 220]. Accidents such as the inventory author’s mistake – mixing the construction years of two buildings or relocation of the weathercock to its current location from a demolished adjacent building, cannot be ruled out either. It is clear that new agricultural buildings were built in Iecava manor in the 1770s and 1780s. Although the 1786 inventory is a very important document for the barn’s construction history, it does not have all the answers and leaves a number of questions unanswered. The main mystery is related to the fact that it is not possible to unambiguously link the building existing nowadays to any of the buildings mentioned in the earlier inventory descriptions. Therefore, mentions of the function of the 18th century building should be avoided. Only at the end of the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th century wooden agricultural buildings were being increasingly more often replaced by masonry buildings in manor construction. To build the buildings, the nobles resorted to a strategy of employing the local farmers who have acquired certain craft skills, which was much cheaper than to import craftsmen from Germany [9, 145, 148]. However, the manor development for wealthier owners was different – they hired the renowned architects of their time. A building as important as a barn was usually masoned for safety reasons. The process of constructing new farm buildings in Iecava began rapidly at the very end of the 18 th century with the new Count Peter der Palen’s (1745–1826) plans to build a new manor. After the annexation of Kurzeme to Russia, Iecava became a crown manor. If the barn building is related to year 1779 on the weathercock installed on its roof ridge, then it was built during the six years when Lieutenant Colonel Peter von der Palen of the Russian army had been renting Iecava. New buildings mentioned in the inventories are proof of the new tenant’s activities. In 1795, the Russian Empress Catherine II (Екатерина II Великая, 1729–1796) donated the previously leased Lieliecava manor to the Palen ancestral estate. In the extensive land map of Iecava and Gaiļi manor dated 1797, the centre of Iecava manor with the main Ilmārs Dirveiks Unusual Transformations of Iecava Manor Barn Fig. 3. Land map of Iecava manor (1797–1801) and fragments of Iecava manor building centre. The existing old building is sketched with a pencil and is only partially visible, but the contours of several buildings help identify the needle stitches made to make a copy. Arrows indicate the location of the barn. The old manor house is not marked because it has already been demolished, gradually preparing the place for the new castle built by Count Palen [2]. building was marked as an unoccupied square due to the beginning of old building demolition process to make room for the new ones at the time the map was drawn [2]. The barn’s approximate location can be identified due to a barely visible outline of erased pencil lines and two needle stitches in the corners of the main façade of the building in the map, made during the copying of the map (Fig. 3). The new centre of the manor was developed in the first quarter of the 19 th century with an arrangement of masonry buildings, which gradually replaced the old wooden farm buildings. The beginning of the 19th century is the time period which can be considered a construction period of the stone building which resembles the present barn. Lancmanis has highlighted the features of the Iecava barn which differed from the usual architecture features of such manor houses at that time by stating that the barn has ‘an unusual and carefully made front façade’ [3, 19]. This allowed the researcher to hypothesise the possible participation of Severin Jensen (1723 – after 1809), the architect working for the former Duke of Courland, in the construction of the building. It is only the main façade of the building with a gable and rusticated arches that has been adapted to the new manor design, whereas indoors the former barn stalls are still evident due to the columns with grooves made for wooden board insertion. It should be noted that Lancmanis applied this characterization to 78 Architecture and Urban Planning 2022 / 18 Ilmārs Dirveiks Unusual Transformations of Iecava Manor Barn Fig. 4. Map of Iecava manor centre. Beginning of the 20th century. Fragment. At the end of the barn there is a stone entrance to the basement. The main entrance is shown with a red circle. At the end of the SE there is a small wooden extension. Fences are connected to the North and South corners [10]. Fig. 5. View of the final SE façade of the barn in 1980: A – masonry fence connection place built in the second half of the 19th century; B – the roof contour of basement entrance; C, D – doors in the pediment and breakthrough masonry with doors built in the second half of the 20th century [5]. a building built in the 1970s. At the beginning of the 19th century, such a façade solution would not seem so unusual. There are no reports of any significant alterations of the barn during the 19th century. Apparently, the façades have been repainted and repaired from time to time. At the beginning of the 20th century, a building plan for the centre of Lieliecava manor was drawn (Fig. 4). It is the only historical cartographic material of such detail made during that time period. The barn plan depicts small annexes which existed at that time – entrance porches and an entrance to the basement [5]. Stone entrances to the basement at the sides of the barn and the extension to the main entrance are marked in the plan. There is a small wooden annex construction at the sounth-eastern side of the barn. Fences are connected to the northern and southern corners of the building. The development of Iecava manor continued until World War I. For two years the front line was located close to Iecava and the town suffered greatly as a result of the war. In 1915, when the Russian army withdrew from Riga, Count Palen’s castle was destroyed. The castle library building, the horse stable, three guard houses and the barn designed by architect L. Reinir were the only remaining buildings of the castle building complex. After the agrarian reform in 1920, the territory of 17 000 ha of Lieliecava manor was divided into 400 building plots. The Iecava Singing Society and the Greenwald Agricultural Society became the owners of the manor centre and managers of the barn. Immediately after the war, from 1945 to 1950, the barn was used as a grain collection point by the executive committee of the Iecava Workers Council [Information about the work done at that time was provided by Kārlis Sinka]. From February 1950 to June 1958, the building was the warehouse of Iecava MTS (machine technical station). From then on, the old barn was used as a warehouse by the Soviet state-owned farm “Dartija” first, and “Progress” after 1970. The photos made in 1980 show the building in a rather dilapidated condition. Its roof was covered with corrugated asbestos cement sheets instead of the original tiles. The main façade of the gable still had a square window made in the second half of the 20th century. The façade plaster had soaked up moisture and the ledges were significantly damaged (Fig. 5) [5]. A concrete floor was poured in the southern side of the basement and an extension of the basement hatch shaft was built adjacent to the main façade. In the early 1990s, “Progress” became the owner and user of the barn. The building was taken over by the Iecava production and trade company “Smiltaiņi” Ltd. as a result of the building liquidation. The changes began in 1995, when on January 23, the then State Inspection for the Protection of Cultural Monuments issued a permit to the production and trade company “Smiltaiņi” Ltd for repair and reconstruction works: “1) for the repair of plaster in façades; 2) for painting of façades” [5]. On April 7 of the same year, “Smiltaiņi” Ltd issued a permit for repair and reconstruction works: “1) replacement of window blocks, increase of vertical dimensions of windows with thumbnail windows according to the attached plan; 2) installation of internal partitions; 3) installation of a water supply and sewerage network” [5]. 79 Architecture and Urban Planning 2022 / 18 Over the next few years, the barn repairs were carried out. The façades were repaired with plaster and painted twice. Room T17 (see section B. Planning) incorporated a steel bar – a vertical wall clamp – at the northern side of the building. Shop premises were built on the southeastern side. An approximately 7 cm thick layer of concrete was poured on the pre-existing wooden floor. Light wooden partitions, doors, a fireplace and a metal chimney protruding next to the ridge on the southern side were installed in the corner of room T16 (see section B. Planning). Building material store “Smiltaiņi” Ltd operated in the building from 1997 to 2007 [Information about the work done at that time was provided by Igors Černovs, construction manager of “Smiltaiņi” Ltd]. Since the end of 2011, the barn premises have been used by the Iecava Sports and County History Association “Arhīvs” which has arranged a county history exposition on the barn premises. In 2012, a local fire broke out from the chimney of the fireplace. The fire was quickly extinguished, but approximately 6 m² of room T15 (see section B. Planning) ceiling boards were damaged by the fire. The fireplace has been demolished since then, but the chimney remains to this day. On December 9, 2020, the municipality took over the barn. II. Results of the Research The barn is a one-storey building, and its plinth has been covered by the increased ground level over time. There is a basement under the barn and its 1st floor is currently divided into several rooms. The building has a spacious attic and a gable roof with half-sloping roof ends. The aesthetic qualities of the barn’s architecture are achieved by using the sculpted decoration of the main façade. The other façades with lattice gables correspond to innumerable simple analogous examples in the architecture of Latvian manors. The main north-eastern façade of the barn is the most architecturally expressive, since its composition consists of an 11-section arcade imitation in plaster. It is similar to common analogues with real arches, however each blind “hole” is a 15 cm recess in the wall plane. Ribbonlike rustication in plaster consists of 11 stones reaching the ledge. The main entrance and the adjacent niches in the centre of the façade are accentuated by the triangular gable above them. The barn level has a simple ledge, but the ledge on the barn’s gable is carefully refined. The aforementioned central part of the barn has 5 arcade niches on each side. On the right side, every second niche apex has a segmented window. On the left the original windows installed in 1995–1996 were transformed into larger ones. The underfloor vents were installed at the bottom of the wall in the niches with windows. A square Ilmārs Dirveiks Unusual Transformations of Iecava Manor Barn window was made in the gable in the second half of the 20th century and walled up in 1995–1996. The barn façade of the north-western side has a basement entrance and a narrow barn window. The entrance to the basement was built in the first quarter of the 19th century, when the original entrances on the northeastern side were removed. This extension can be seen in the early 20th century barn plan. The extension has a gable roof, renovated in 2017. The façade has retained a semiauthentic look with a timber frame gable. Current windows in the gable were created in the 20th century. The south-eastern façade of the barn was initially analogous to its noth-western façade. There is an entrance to the basement, one window, and a timber frame gable. There is also an entrance to the basement with a retaining wall and a raised concrete porch built at the same time with a wide doorway in the second half of the 20th century. There has previously been a wooden extension (depicted in the plan of the manor centre at the beginning of the 20th century) at the very same spot. A photo made in the 1980s shows a gable with two inward-opening leaves. The construction in the attic suggests that there was once a pulley used to lift grain bags and place them in the attic. At the end of the 20th century, a window was built into this opening. The entrance to the basement was built in the first quarter of the 19th century when the original entrances on the north-eastern side were removed. The basement entry steps and the upper parts of the retaining walls were repaired in the second half of the 20th century. A historical photograph shows that at the end of the 19th century or the beginning of the 20th century, the final southeastern façade was remodeled with new plaster and a tiled gable roof. There was a decorative brick fence between the stable and the barn. During the transformation, the timber frame of the gable was covered with plaster and a board was nailed to the lower edge of the frame, thus creating a sub-ledge dividing the gable. The construction of the south-eastern timber frame is slightly different from the north-western frame. The plaster on the attic side of both gables is also different, which indicates that they have been reconstructed. The south-western façade has two narrow windows, one of which was walled up in the second half of the 20th century. The nort-western and south-western façades seem to have not been repainted since the beginning of the 20th century at least. The paint on the façades is monochrome, no highlighting of any architectural details, except for the 5th layer of paint (in chronological order). Chronologically the oldest (initial) finish on the original plaster was monochromatic, painted with light pink lime paint. The second layer was whitewashing, the third – light monochrome yellow, and the fourth layer – monochrome ocher. The fifth layer of paint is a colour of 80 Architecture and Urban Planning 2022 / 18 rust. The grooves between the stones were painted dark red. This was found in the 1st layer of paint on a newer layer of plaster on the north-western façade. This layer of plaster has a stone imitation similar to the original. This layer of paint most likely dates back to the end of the 19th century or the beginning of the 20th century. In historical photographs of the 20th century, the façades are painted monochromatically. It is possible that the retrospective polychromatic painting with a prominent rustication can be linked to the time period in the early 20th century, when a library building was built next to the manor house. Next layers of paint on the façade are two layers of pink, painted in the second half of the 20th century over extensive plaster repairs with a cement additive. The main façade, the original windows and the north-eastern and south-eastern final façade were painted white during the last 2 repairs in the mid-1990s and later on. No signs of initial staining were observed on the north-western timber frame gable. This fact supports the assumption that there was no paint on the 3 façades of the original wooden building. Only the main façade is painted red, possibly creating a brick pattern with gray lines, as is done on some of the edges built into the barn. Some parts of the lattice masonry are plastered and painted white. During the reconstructions at the beginning of the 19th century, the wooden frame of the gable was also repainted pale pink. At the end of the 19th century, another layer of thin plaster was applied to the parts of the lattice masonry. The main entrance door has only 1 coat of paint – the current brown, applied in the mid-1990s. A. Characteristics of Materials and Constructions The foundations and walls of the building are made of whole and broken boulders and dolomite. The gaps are filled with smaller stone chips. Red clay bricks (6.5– 7 × 13.5–14 (14.5) × 28.5; 29; 29.5 cm) were used in the masonry of building corners, orifice edges and arches, as well as in gable framing. The gable wall on the northeastern side has been masoned up with bricks of different sizes (6.5 × 13.5 × 27 cm). The barn basement rooms have vaults with brick masonry (6.5–7 × 14–14.5 × (29) 29.5 (30) cm). The foundation of the eastern side of the basement (main façade) is approximately 2 times thicker than the rest of the building. A seam separating the results of two construction periods is visible in the orifices of the basement. The existence of this seam proves that the northern wall of the building has been rebuilt thicker. South-eastern part of the building contains partitions built in 1995–1996 using a wooden frame and boards. The exterior walls are plastered with lime/gravel mortar. The floor on the ground floor was made in the first half of the 19th century using floorboards and has been repaired in some places since. The floorboards are Ilmārs Dirveiks Unusual Transformations of Iecava Manor Barn placed on 25 cm tall slats (floor beams). The boards are attached with forged nails with square heads. Floorboard thickness is 6.5 cm and the width reaches up to 27–29 cm. The floorboards are interconnected using a tongue-andgroove technique. Subfloor ventilation is provided by the channels in the outer walls. The openings of those channels are visible on the façades. Four square channel openings of ~ 10 × 10 cm have been found in the north-eastern and south-western façades. In the rear façade and the north-western side façade, the wall plane protrudes beyond the lattice plane and the underside of the ledgeboard. It forms an architecturally illogical connection with the gap between the ledges, the gable, and the wall plaster where rainwater collects, which indicates that this is not the original building design. The gables of the end façades are built into the lattice (timber frame) constructions. The lattice filling is plastered on both sides. There was originally a board deck above the ceiling beams of the ground floor, however, the deck did not last. Those boards served as the attic floor. The current boards are fastened with factory manufactured nails, presumably in the second half of the 20th century. On the south-western side, ends of the beams were wrapped in birch bark and covered by masonry at the top of the wall. The ends of some beams of room T01 (see section B. Planning) were repaired, for example, by nailing the prosthesis and then masoning them up in the wall. This points to the fact that pre-existing older beams were used before the wall was constructed. On the south-western side, the ends of the beams are bewelled and covered up with a wooden board. Even more information was obtained about the opposite side of the beams in the north-eastern outer wall. All the beams have special notches approximately 100–105 cm away from the outer wall (Figs. 6 and 7). Fig. 6. At the bottom of the overhanging log there is a notch for binding the longitudinal wall log [photo by the author, 2020]. 81 Ilmārs Dirveiks Architecture and Urban Planning 2022 / 18 Fig. 7. In the final façade, the upper wooden wall log is part of the timber frame construction. The notch is in the original corner of the building [photo by the author, 2020]. These grooves are pointing to a previous use in a durable connection to the edge of the upper crown of the log house. It can be assumed that the beams were supported by a wooden log wall along that ‘line’. There are fragments of red paint on the ends of the beams in the outer masonry wall. The ends of these beams were originally visible on the outside, in the building façade (Fig. 8). There are signs of deformation on the floor, where there had been an old wooden exterior wall. The floor beams were extended during the reconstruction there. It Unusual Transformations of Iecava Manor Barn is evident by the characteristic cracks in the final façades – the later-built main façade wall split due to the different foundations. The floor beams of the wooden building have been preserved and the ends of these beams have notches for binding external wall logs. The short end of the beam protruding beyond the former outer wall was painted red. The building has a gable roof with half-sloping roof ends. There is a weather-vane, dated 1779, located above the roof ridge. The roof construction was built at the same time as the north-western gabble lattice and was linked to a wooden building built in the 18th century. The elements of the roof construction are massive, smoothed rafter beams. The average distance between the roof rafters is 131 cm. The roof consists of 17 rafter pairs. The rafters (14 × 23 cm) are connected by a hidden lap-joint on the ridge. The rafters are connected at two levels: closer to the ridge with bundled reinforcement and at the level of the roof frame. The bundles are attached to the rafters with a hidden lap-joint. The rafters were marked on the north side of each beam and at the level of the lower bundle reinforcement. Roman numerals were chiseled out with a straight chisel on the left, but the numbering on the right was done with a wedge. Dual numbering on rafts is mixed after number VIII. It is followed by X and only then IX. After IX, the numbering continues in order, but the markup is now on the opposite, southern, side of the structure. Two types of markings are also visible on the edges of the north-western façade’s grid. This could be a result of a large reconstruction of the roof’s southern part by replacing pairs of rafters, partially rebuilding the south-eastern lattice gable and adding a weather-vane. This may have happened in the first quarter of the 19th century, during a major reconstruction of the building. However, these are just assumptions. The rafters are supported by the roof frame and hidden rakes on the beams. The structure of the barn roof was originally constructed for a tiled deck. In the second half of the 20th century, corrugated asbestos cement slabs were used in roof reconstruction. Between the 9th and 10th rafter pair above the reinforcement bundles, a slab with an iron clamp on one side and a vertical log was attached using large forged nails to be used as a spool. Similar devices have been used in the process of building and assembling roof structures in historical roofs. B. Planning Fig. 8. The northern corner constructions of the wooden building in the 18th century. In the 1st quarter of the 19 th century, the wooden walls were replaced by masonry [figure by the author]. The basement consists of two long north-eastern and south-western rooms, each divided into two parts with a partition. Thus, two basement parts N (north) and S (south) are formed, with separate entrances from the side façades of the building. The two rooms in each of the basement parts are interconnected (Fig. 9). The S side of the basement consists of 2 rooms: T01 and T02. The floors of these rooms were covered in concrete 82 Architecture and Urban Planning 2022 / 18 Fig. 9. Barn basement plan. Research results [drawing by I. Liepa]. in the second half of the 20th century. The entrance with a double-leaf door is in the south-eastern façade. Northeastern outer wall of T01 has a single window. A shaft (100 × 150 cm) built of silicate bricks in the second half of the 20th century is opposite that window. There is a small masoned up opening next to an orifice, which might have been a small window or a hatch. The south-western wall has a doorway to the adjacent room T02. Judging by the hook location, the door leaf was on the T02 side. Two pre-existing windows in this room – in the south-eastern wall and in the outer south-western wall – were walled up in the second half of the 20th century. The window openings are located below the street asphalt level and the windows are not visible from the outside. The northern part of the basement also consists of 2 rooms: T03 and T04. The entrance with a double-leaf door is in the north-western façade. The T03 south-western exterior wall has one walled up window with a 20th century lattice. The window opening was located below the street asphalt level and is not visible from the outside. The T02/ T03 partition shows signs of masonry reparation done in the second half of the 20th century. The doorway to the adjacent room T04 is located in the north-eastern wall. Judging by the hook location, the door leaf was on the T03 side. The T03/T04 partition has two ventilation ducts. The interior of T04 is different from other rooms. There is one walled up window in the north-western wall. A total of 3 niches (~ 90 cm wide and ~ 52 cm deep) are located in the north-eastern outer wall, about 20 cm above the assumed basement floor level. There is a window in the north-eastern corner. A masonry seam marking a wall expansion is visible 70 cm deep into the window opening. The window opening is below ground level outside and is partially filled. There is an ~ 1.56 m wide opening with brick edges next to it. The boulder masonry at the bottom and a wider opening suggest that this was originally a doorway. After the extension of the wall in the first half of the 19th century, a new window was created, but walled up from the outside later. Ilmārs Dirveiks Unusual Transformations of Iecava Manor Barn Fig. 10. In the 1st quarter of the 19 th century, wooden walls were replaced by masonry. Two construction periods of the exterior wall of the basement north-eastern part are shown in Fig. 10. The wall with two windows and two entrances is the oldest construction. Later, the structure was completed with a parallel wall which forms the current masonry façade’s base. The original entrances to the basement were converted into windows. New basement entrances were added to the final façades. The original layout of the wooden building’s first floor is unknown. The entrance (or entrances) were in the northwestern façade. It is possible that there was at least one partition on the spot of the current T12/T17 partition (Fig. 11). The barn room was expanded by moving the norhteastern exterior wall ~1m further (marked with red) [drawing by the author]. A stone barn room was built in the beginning of the 19th century. It is possible that the wooden partition has remained in the aforementioned T11 room, on the spot of the partition of rooms T12/T17. The barn layout has been partially preserved on the north-western side of room T17. The logs from the external walls of the demolished wooden building have been repeatedly used as barn stall wall posts with grooves for board insertion. The logs contain fragments Fig. 11. Barn ground floor plan. Research results [drawing by I. Liepa]. 83 Ilmārs Dirveiks Architecture and Urban Planning 2022 / 18 of dowels indicating the initial use of these logs in the wall construction. Judging by the grooves in the corner posts, the stall walls connect to a wall between rooms T17 and T11/T12. Two out of the three posts are supported by sections of four logs stacked horizontally on top of one another. According to eyewitnesses, another low log wall similar to this one was located between rooms T17 and T11 and demolished in 1996. The log sections have a masonry base. This suggests that these fragments are remnants of a wooden partition (and, hypothetically, a wooden building). A similar layout with separate stalls has most likely been used for the south-eastern part of the building. A new entrance was added to the final south-eastern façade in the second half of the 20th century. There was also a small room in the north-western corner of room T13 in the 1970s and 1980s. The current building’s structure was developed when the building was converted into a store in 1995–1996. The changes affected the south-eastern side of the building, where partitions were built to accommodate the store. The attic floor consists of a thick floor board deck placed on the beams. This same deck acts as the ceiling of the 1st floor. The current floorboards were installed in the 20th century. The entrance staircase door leaves were made in the same time period. C. Doors The barn building has one main entrance in the northeastern façade, which has retained its early 19th century doors. The main entrance door is made of pine wood, has a door frame and a segmented transom, corresponding to the other two original windows of the building. The door leaf is made of a double board construction with a protective layer on its façade. The door used to be closed with a box lock that has not been preserved. Both door leaves used to be latched with hooks, but in the second part of the 20th century lever latches were installed on the top and bottom of one of the leaves. The doors and the transom were painted dark brown in 1995–1996. The doors in the final south-eastern façade were created in the second half of the 20th century. The entrance to the basement has double-leaf doors made during the same time period as the entrance door on the 1st floor and have analogous construction. The doors have a box lock and handle. New entrance doors have been installed in the northwestern side of the basement after 2016. In 1995–1996, 5 double-leaf interior doors with asymmetrical leaves and glass elements at the top were made. D. Windows The barn room has 4 narrow openings – “hatches for light and ventilation”. The main façade has 5 segmented windows (including the transom on top of the entrance Unusual Transformations of Iecava Manor Barn door). Windows in this case are very narrow casement windows with their jambs built into the surface of the façade. There used to be 2 window openings in the southeastern (rear) façade. There also used to be one hatch in each of the building façades, but only one of them has remained: the one in the south-western façade. The 4 windows in the main north-eastern façade are have glass casements built directly into the masonry orifice. The transom above the entrance door in the centre of the façade has an analogous frame. Two windows on the southern side of the building were removed in the mid-1990s and replaced with the new doubled casement wooden windows after the expanding of window openings. Segmented windows are a typical manifestation of architectural classicism in manor building architecture. In Iecava, windows are symmetrically divided into 2 parts simulating double-frame windows. There are 10 panes of different shapes and sizes on each side of the window. It is likely that window frames were secured into the masonry walls with masonry nails. On the inside of the window, a strip of iron is nailed to each vertical piece, but it is not embedded in the mason wall. The window glazing is only on the door transom. The jambs of the narrow hatches were built into the wall during the masonry stage of construction. The window frames of the hatches were not preserved. There were no initial windows in the timber frame gable of the final northwestern façade. The middle window, out of the initial 3, was installed after dismantling the lattice board and raising it higher. The current windows with lattice were built in the 20th century. The current window layout of the final southeastern façade was created in the early 19th century. III. Discussion and Conclusions Iecava manor barn is the oldest building in the manor building arrangement, which has survived the Napoleonic war and devastating warfare of the 20th century. The barn building is a historical link to the manor which existed in the 17th and 18th centuries. It is believed that the location of the building is directly linked to the location of the old manor centre. The spacious and well-built basement of the agricultural building in the 18th century has a special value and raises the question of the building’s initial function. There is also a possibility of inheritance, since the new building was built on an older pre-existing basement. The architectural and artistic research conducted in 2021 required a critical re-examination of the building’s construction history. The building acquired its current ‘old barn’ appearance after the exterior walls of the wooden building were replaced with masonry walls in the first decades of the 19th century. The building has been rebuilt into a stone barn, leaving the floor beams, ceiling beams, gables and roof structure of the previous wooden building. 84 Architecture and Urban Planning 2022 / 18 Ilmārs Dirveiks Unusual Transformations of Iecava Manor Barn Fig. 12. Building in Riga, 28 Daugavgrīvas Street (18th century). Log building in dovetail joints. At the bottom of the overhanging log there is a notch for binding the longitudinal wall log [Author’s photo, 2020]. Fig. 14. Presumably, a barn facade log with an imitation of brick masonry in paint. The log is built into the barn room [photo by the author]. The barn walls were initially built out of smooth logs, and the overhang on the main façade was painted red with gray lines imitating masonry (Figs. 12–14). At the time when the wooden exterior walls of the building were replaced by the masonry walls, the barn room was expanded by moving the north-eastern exterior wall ~ 1 m further, securing the ceiling beams on the bearing beam into the new masonry wall (Fig. 10) [10]. The function of the wooden building remains unclear. The previous hypotheses about it being used for malting in the 18 th century, are neither denied nor confirmed. The assumption that the brewery was the only masonry building mentioned in the 1786 inventory is erroneous, as it was initially made of wood. Until the last third of the 18 th century, agricultural manor buildings were mostly built of wood, as it was both cheaper and easier. There are many examples of barns with roof overhang on the main façade [10]. There is either a porch along the entire length of the building, stair steps or a ramp at the entrance below the overhang. The overhang has additional support. In the second half of the 18th century and in the 19th century, a similar principle was used in stone agricultural manor building construction – the arcade on their main façade served that purpose. The two cellars mentioned in the description dated 1739 are no longer mentioned in further inventories. Even if the wooden building became unusable and was demolished at some point, the former vaulted cellar remained. If the cellar was still in use and covered properly, then it was possible to build another building on top of it later. It is possible that the wooden building was built in the 1970s on top of an older basement left from the previous building. The agricultural manor buildings built in the second half of the 18th century were built at the time when the old building centre of Iecava manor has already been demolished (in 1738 the old manor house was already in ruins) but the new one was not even being planned yet. Therefore, the reasoning behind the wooden building’s location was not clear, although this may indirectly indicate the location of the previous building. The Count’s Square might be the former manor yard of the 17th and 18th centuries, and the main façade of the barn was initially facing it. However, it seems more likely that the building was built in that specific place because there already was a good stone basement left from the previous building. One might assume that the archaic wooden building standing on top of the masonry basement at the beginning of the 19th century had served its time and, being located very close to the count’s residence, did not meet the requirements of the new era. Nowadays the barn is the oldest Iecava manor building in existence. The building arrangement in the new manor centre built at the beginning of the 19 th century had higher architectural requirements. The manor buildings were supposed to match the late classicism style of the stone building. Usually the old wooden buildings would be demolished, but an exception has been made in the case Fig. 13. Pigeon (Bonaventura) manor barn (Second half of the 18th century), Garkalne region. Log house in struts [G. Pāvils’ photo, 2007], [11]. 85 Ilmārs Dirveiks Architecture and Urban Planning Unusual Transformations of Iecava Manor Barn 2022 / 18 REFERENCES 1. Fig. 15. The wooden building of Iecava manor built in the second half of the 18th century – probably a barn or a freezer. Theoretical reconstruction based on research results of 2021. There is no information about door and window openings. In the first decades of the 19 th century, the log walls were replaced with a wall and the front wall was built further, removing the roof overhangs [drawing by the author]. of Iecava manor. The old wooden building is partially preserved by transforming it into a better-quality building with better fire safety and more space, as well as more artistically expressive following current stylistic trends. The arrangement of the main façade, imitating the familiar arcades, the plaster rustication, the carefully refined ledge of the gable – all these details point to a possible participation of a professional architect (in this case S. Jensen) in the transformation of the small building [3, 19]. The study reveals that in the second half of the 18th century a wooden agricultural manor building with a gable roof, half-sloped roof ends and lattice gables was built with a basement (or on an already existing basement) (Fig. 15). The main façade had a roof overhang and might have possibly been painted red, imitating brickwork with gray seams. The building acquired its current stone barn appearance after the exterior walls of the wooden building were replaced with masonry walls in the first decades of the 19th century. The building has been remodeled with masonry walls and expanded by moving the main façade ~1m further, leaving the old floor and ceiling beams, gables and roof structure of the old wooden building. The study also showcases the importance of structural thinking provided by architectural education in architecture research. Albom Mejerberga. Vidy i bytovyja kartiny Rossii XVII veka: Risunki Drezdenskago alboma, vosproizvedennye s podlinnika v naturalnuju velichinu s prilozheniem karty puti cesarskago posolstva 1661–1662 gg. Izdanie A. S. Suvorina, 1903. 214 c. [Meyerberg’s album. Types and household paintings of Russia in the 17th century. Drawings of the Dresden Album, reproduced from the original in full size with the attachment of the map of the route of the Caesar’s embassy 1661–1662. 1903. 214 p.]. 2. National Library of Latvia Archives (LNB R-K+-1/12/I). Special Karte von der Gütern Grosse Eckau und Gailhof. Aufgekommen in den Jahren 1797, 1798, 1799, 1800 und 1801 von P.C.F. Krüger. 3. Lancmanis, I. Iecavas muiža: Gross - Eckau. Pilsrundāle: Rundāles pils muzejs, 2001. 72 p. 4. Latvia National Cultural Heritage Administration Archive (NKMP PDC arhīvs). Archive Nr. 5607. 5. Latvia National Cultural Heritage Administration Archive (NKMP PDC arhīvs). Archive Nr. 5608. 6. Rundale Castle Archive. LVVA 6999. f., 44. a., 229. l. Noraksts RPM arhīvā (RPM). MG_3133 (RPM arhīvs). 7. Rundale Castle Archive. LVVA 472. f., 11. a., 301. l. Noraksts RPM arhīvā (RPM). Identification Nr.: MG_3133 (RPM arhīvs). 8. Hupel, A. W. Oekonomisches Handbuch fűr Lief- und Ehstländische Guthsherren. Riga: I. Riga, 1796. 220 S. 9. Zandbergs, A., Zandberga, R. Vidzemes Vidienas muižu saimniecības ēku architektura XVIII gs. beigās un XIX gs. pirmajā pusē. // Latvijas PSR Architekturas mantojums. Riga: I. Riga, 1958. 148. lpp. 10. Rundale Castle Archive (RPM). Identification Nr.: MG_3133 (RPM arhīvs). 11. Internet Archive [online]. Panoramio [cited 01.12.2021]. https://web.archive.org/web/20161031202517/http:// www.panoramio.com/photo/118173429 86 Architecture and Urban Planning 2022 / 18 Ilmārs Dirveiks Unusual Transformations of Iecava Manor Barn Ilmārs Dirveiks, architect, historian. Received the degree of Doctor of Architectural Sciences in 2010 from Riga Technical University (RTU). He is currently an Assistant Professor at the Department of History and Theory of Architecture at RTU. He is a restauration artist of a rchitec t ura lly a r t is t ic research. He is working at research and architectural office “Arhitektoniskās izpētes grupā” and is a lecturer at the Latvian Academy of Arts. His lectures are covering such topics as philosophy of historical building renovation, renovation methodology, practice, materials and structural framework of historical buildings. He is the author of various research articles about architectural heritage, has participated in seminars and conferences in Latvia and abroad, is a member of various cultural heritage expert committees. I. Dirveiks has participated on various architectural research and design projects. Among the most important projects are renovation of Riga Dome Cathedral, Riga’s St. Jacob’s Cathedral, Alūksne, Tukums and other churches, Rīga, Cēsis, Ventspils and Lielstraupes medieval castles, various manors, historical residential and household buildings. Contact Data Ilmārs Dirveiks E-mail: [email protected] 87