Straw, Wood, Fire

Zerf Volunteer Fire Department Garage - 2004










During this snowy winter, I resolved to clean up my office. While the effort was only partially successful, I did find a lot of interesting material I had completely forgotten about. One especially valuable find was of some photocopied pages from a book by Edgar Cristofel, "The History of the Landkreises of Trier-Saarburg from the beginning until the present (Die Geschichte des Landkreises Trier-Saarburg von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart 1815-1992). Herr Cristofel's research into the history of the region was extensive, and I will probably quote his work again in the future. This time what drew my attention was the attempt of the Prussian government to try to avoid one of the most feared disasters of the time - fire.

In past posts I have described the typical Trier/Saarburg Einhaus in which the house and barn were brought together under one roof. These dwellings belonged to land-owning farmers of at least moderate means. But not every resident of a village in Kreis Trier or Saarburg had such dwellings, especially not in the period between the fall of Napoleon in 1814 and the mid-point of the century, when poverty was widespread.




Historic reconstruction of a wall at Rosheiderhof Open-Air Museum


In his book Herr Christofel says that in the early part of the 19th century, many of the houses in a rural village were only one story high and rather small. Such villagers were day workers who did not own land. Instead they worked for the landed farmers as field hands. There were also struggling craftsmen like the broom binders and basket weavers. All of these families lived in very small houses with roofs of straw or thatch. Wood beam construction was used and the walls of the houses were constructed from clay, stone, or sometimes a combination of both. Straw or thatched roofs were the rule, except for the roof of the mayor's house and the roof of the church. Slate or tile might be used on the roof of the schoolhouse but not always. Even most of the farm dwellings still had straw roofs.

The wooden beam construction of the houses, the roofs of straw or thatch, and the crops of hay and straw stored under the one roof that served as both house and barn made for a tinderbox environment in all of the villages of the region. In the year 1822 in the little village of Kenn in Kreis Trier there was a fire that destroyed 122 houses, stables, and other out buildings.

When a fires broke out, a householder would seek help from his neighbors to fight the fire. They used the only method they had to put out the blaze. A bucket brigade would be formed; and if the fire was controlled, the embers were raked apart and stamped out. Little by little villages built up a crew that could be called out for a fire.

Fire Prevention Decree of 1837

Aware of the constant threat of fires burning out of control, in 1824 the Prussian Government decreed that any house built after that time could not be roofed with straw or thatch. One can assume that many the emperor's subjects violated this rule because of the poverty of the times.

In June 1837, a new rule was promulgated by the Prussian government. It was called the "General Rule for Halting Fire Danger". It applied to any place in a city or village where houses stood together and had several requirements.

Roofs: A straw- moss- or wood-type roof was not allowed when the house was less than 2,000 Prussian feet from the other buildings in the village. Where houses stood together, any new roof had to be constructed of slate, metal, or clay. Permission or an exception was only made when the property owner lacked the means to be able to replace a straw or wooden shingle roof with a slate- or clay-type shingle.

Permission to cover a roof with straw, wood, or any other flamable material could only be granted by the Landrat, the head administrator in each Prussian district. Anybody who ignored the regulation and reroofed a dwelling with straw without this permission was fined a penalty of 1-5 Prussian Taler. In the case of a new building constructed with a straw roof and without permission, the violator was "punished." Herr Cristofel did not explain what the punishment might be.

Lanterns: Each house had to have a closed lantern, and only with this kind of lantern was one allowed to walk on wooden floors, in the stalls and stables of the barn or any other places where there was a danger of fire. The lantern had to be available for inspection in each household.

Fire-fighting: In each city or large village, a Brandcorps (fire corps) had to be formed. Residents from the community were chosen by vote of the governing council of the city or village and approved by the Burgermeister. Once the Brandcorps was formed, they voted on which of them would be the fire chief. Some community members were not permitted to be part of the fire corps. People over 60, under 15, priests and religious, teachers, sick and infirm, government officials, and doctors were excluded. The fire corps had to meet twice a year under the guidance of the mayor or his representative in order to practice using their firefighting equipment.

When a fire broke out in the community, the inhabitants were made aware by whatever means possible; the ringing of a bell, a village drummer or the cries and alarms of the night watchman.

In spite of the fire laws and regulations, a good many of the houses in the rural villages were still covered by straw roofs until the last 20 years of the century. The volunteer fire companies with fire-fighting equipment also came into being about that time.


Christoffel, Edgar, Die Geschichte des Landkreises Trier-Saarburg von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart 1815-1992. Der Akademischen Buchhandlung Interbook, Trier, c2000

Living Wall to Wall

Street in Village of Serrig

In my last post, I described the exterior of the Trier Einhaus, also known as the Quereinhaus, the typical farm building in the border regions of Germany, France, and Luxembourg. These all-in-one-style barnhouses sometimes stood alone on a piece of property. But many were built wall to wall, so that the only way to get to the garden behind the house or the fields and meadows was through one's own back door or the door of a neighbor.

It occurred to me that my housing is very much like that of my ancestors in the Trier/Saarburg area. I live in a two-family condo. Like the Einhaus dwellers of the 19th century, my neighbors and I have two story "houses" that are connected (without stable and stalls, however), because we share a wall. Condo and townhouse dwellers can enter their dwellings from front and back just like the families who lived in the wall-to-wall Einhaüser. Obviously there are no windows to the outside on any shared walls. What goes around comes around?

Advantages of Living Wall to Wall

*There were advantages in a wall-to-wall Quereinhaus. Sharing a wall or living wall to wall prevented heat loss in winter and helped keep the rooms cooler in the summer. So comfort was improved for both parties.

*Maximum use was made from available village land.

*For the families in the Einhaüser, there was the protection and availability of very close neighbors in times of trouble.

Disadvantages of Living Wall to Wall

*A major disadvantage of living wall to wall or sharing a wall, especially in the days before fire codes and fire-proof building materials, was the ease with which a blaze could spread quickly from one Quereinhaus to another. Although the picture postcard above is from Irsch's neighboring village of Serrig, the houses in both villages were similar. Thus the village of Irsch must have looked much the same, even in the earlier part of the century when fires broke out and raged through three villages.

Fire Catastrophe: In the summer of 1842 separate fires destroyed Einhaüser in three villages: Irsch, Wasserbillig (54 houses), and Coenen (16 properties). Ewald Meyer, in his book "Irsch/Saar: Geschichte eines Dorfes" says that 34 dwellings and 22 stables in Irsch went up in flames as the fire raged, leaving 500 residents either without a roof over their heads or lacking barn or shed. Certainly the wall-to-wall buildings were in the greatest danger of being completely destroyed as fire spread easily from houses built so very close to one another.

*Another disadvantage of wall-to-wall residences must have been the difficulty of striking an agreement when ones neighbor wanted to change part of the structure or build a new structure. Today we have such things as condo agreements. To my surprise I learned that, as early as 1821, there was an example of a contract that was not so different from the condo-change agreements of today.

New Construction: The document found by Herr Meyer, the author of the book mentioned above, was called a "House Allocation Contract." It was discovered in the Irsch community archives. It clearly addressed the matter of building a new barnhouse in Irsch when two families owned Quereinhauser with walls that were side by side, no space between. I found the detail fascinating. With help by e-mail from Herr Meyer, I think I now have a mostly clear understanding of those details.

The contract was handwritten by the schoolmaster, Herr Romey who, in addition to his position as schoolmaster and sexton for the church, also served the head of the village council and the Burgermeister as document writer. The contract was between Johann Klein and Johann Konter of Irsch. Together, they jointly owned the two wall-to-wall Einhaüser referred to in the contract.

The top of the document has the typical offical stamp with the Prussian Adler (eagle) and shows that the fee for this contract was 1 Groschen 7 Pfennig. It is dated March 13, 1821. The two houses, the barn with its stalls, and the outer garden and Hof (small area of storage space) were owned in common by the family of Johann Konter and Johann Klein.

The first item of agreement was that the hereditary rights for the old house would go to Johann Konter, his wife Helena, and their descendants. Johann Klein and his wife Kathrin would own the new house with barn and stalls. In other words, the two barnhouses would no longer belong to both parties. Klein was required to build his new barnhouse to strict specification so that it would match, width and height, with the gabel side of the Konter dwelling. The agreement spells out the size in detail, using the word Schu as the measure. For instance the wall of the new barn had to be 21 "true" Schu (21 Schu equal 8 meters or a little over 26 feet).

The actual building process was clarified in the contract. It seems that the walls of the adjoining structure owned by Herr Konter would be heavily damaged in order for Herr Klein to build the side wall for his new structure. If Herr Konter helped with labor, which consisted of breaking down the stone walls of Herr Klein, he would not have to pay the cost for any work to fix or rebuild the wall of his own dwelling. However, Klein would receive whatever wood was salvageable, no matter which house it came from. Klein was allowed to use straw as the roofing for his new building, if that was allowed by ordinance. (Because of the increased risk of fire spreading more easily, straw roofs were little by little being outlawed. There was the possibility that this could happen before the new structure's roof was begun. By the middle of the century, Prussia had outlawed straw and shingle roofs in newly constructed buildings, requiring tile of some kind, in all the lands it governed).

The back gardens and Hof, the outdoor work and storage spaces next to the gardens, were at an angle to a Herr Tressel's garden. This had to be taken into consideration in the building project. There had to be a way to get into and out of all the gardens of all parties concerned.

Both husbands and wives "signed" the contract, using their housemark rather than a handwritten signature. (see archived post of Aug 6, 2005 for a full explanation of the Rosenkranz and resultant housemarks). The housemark of the construction master, Herr Michel Brausch, is also on the contract, along with the names of three other men who were probably associated with the construction master. In all, six housemarks appear, not including the two witnesses and the signature of Herr Romey, the writer of the document

If you thought that detailed contract paperwork and condominium living were marks only of our times, think again. Your ancestors who lived in wall-to-wall Einhaüser seem to have known all about it.

Sources:
Meyer, Ewald. Irsch/Saar: Geschichte eines Dorfes, Geminde Irsch, 2002
http://19thcenturyrhinelandlive.blogspot.com/search?q=rosenkranz (Information on housemarks)