Bob Mannix wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:

URL:http://arch.ced.berkeley.edu/courses/arch140/2006/Documents/Lectures/PDFs/2006%20pdfs/04Lect_ThermalMass_GB_2006%20-%20slides.pdf#search=%22climate%20data%20guadix%22

Now there are examples of semi-subternnaean homes used in northern
climes: Viking Farmhouses in Iceland, pre-celtic stone houses in the
Orkneys; and even in modern times the Norwegians and Swedes do have
turf-roof houses, but subterranean houses where it is cool and damp
don't work well without a lot of expensive work to prevent water
penetration.

The Viking farmhouses in Iceland were not underground at all and they
were built of timber, the later turf houses were also not underground
in any sense either.

Góðan dag sigvald. Coming from .is, you ought to know.

However, as I understand it, there is/was little timber in Iceland, so
as little as possible was used in construction. The method, as far as I
know, was to find a low hill and dig into it, or failing that, just dig
a hole in the ground. This was lined with stone. The above ground
walls were made of turf, as was the roof, minimising the use of timber.
The house was not fully underground - more like half, and as the wall
and roof were made of turf, it would look almost as though the house
were just a small hillock. Possibly I'm confusing farmhouses, built if
timber was more plentiful, with pit-houses, but the principle of a
half-sunk (semi-subterranean) house holds. I'm certainly not trying to
say that long-houses were half-sunk.

If I'm wrong, please do say.

About housebuilding in Iceland you are very wrong, houses were never
built into hills or in a hole in the ground. Houses were always built
above ground to get rid of the rainwater.
The houses were built with wood in framework and the fronts were of
timber but the outer walls were of stone and/or turf and turf was used
in the roof.
Timber was abundant in Iceland when the country was settled (ca 25%
tree cover) and there was a usable timber supply until the 19th century
(augmented by driftwood) to enable buildings to be built partly of
timber though longer beams would have to be imported in the later
centuries.



some reconstructions showing the building methods at:

http://www.hurstwic.org/history/arti...urf_Houses.htm


--
Bob Mannix
(anti-spam is as easy as 1-2-3 - not)

Thank-you very much Sigvald and Bob - and that link is very
interesting.

The vikings certainly did construct pit-houses, as well as the type
shown in such beautiful detail in the link. A little Googling tells me
that they were possibly primarily used for textile making, rather than
as dwelling-houses. I guess I must have seen reconstructed ones at
either Ribe or Leira (both in Denmark).

Here's a (boring) picture of a reconstructed Viking pit-house (perhaps
better called a pit-workshop).

URL:http://www-staff.it.uts.edu.au/~jenny/photos/ausden/slides/repro%20grassed%20Viking%20pit%20house.html

And pit-houses were used in other cultures - see:

URL:http://www.civilization.ca/cmc/archeo/cvh/bc/v77-26.htm
URL:http://www.spoerlein.f2s.com/pithouse.html
URL:http://www.primtech.net/kiva/kiva.html

Sigvald is quite right about water ingress - the last paragraph of
Bob's link is telling:

"During a visit in 2005, I noticed water running out from under the
turf walls on the outside of the foundation. Water from the roof is
supposed to run in the channel between the outer and inner turf walls
and from there, directly into the ground, so finding water running on
the outside was an unexpected surprise."

Cheers,

Sid