Russian house of five walls Central Russia. Typical gable roof with light. Five-wall with a cut along the house

These examples, I think, are quite enough to prove that this type of house really exists and is widespread in traditionally Russian regions. It was somewhat unexpected for me that this type of house prevailed until recently on the White Sea coast. Even if we admit that I am wrong, and this style of houses came to the north from the central regions of Russia, and not vice versa, it turns out that the Slovenes from Lake Ilmen have nothing to do with the colonization of the White Sea coast. There are no houses of this type in the Novgorod region and along the Volkhov River. Strange, isn't it? And what kind of houses did the Novgorod Slovenes build from time immemorial? Below I give examples of such houses.

Slovenian type of houses

In my opinion, these examples of Slovenian-type houses are enough. Those interested in this issue can find a lot more evidence of this hypothesis. The essence of the hypothesis is that real Slovenian houses (huts) differed from Russian izbas in a number of ways. It’s probably stupid to talk about which type is better and which is worse. The main thing is that they are different from each other. The rafters are placed differently, there is no cut along the house near the five-walls, the houses, as a rule, are narrower - 3 or 4 windows in the front, the platbands and linings of Slovenian-type houses, as a rule, are not sawn (not openwork) and therefore do not look like lace . Of course, there are houses of a mixed type of construction, somewhat similar to Russian-style houses in the arrangement of the rafters and the presence of cornices. The most important thing is that both Russian and Slovenian types of houses have their own areas. Houses of the Russian type are not found or practically never found in the Novgorod region and the west of the Tver region. I didn't find them there.

Finno-Ugric type of houses

There are probably enough examples of houses of the Finno-Ugric type. Of course, nowadays the traditions of building houses have been largely lost, and in modern villages and towns houses are built that differ from the ancient traditional types. Everywhere in the vicinity of our cities today we see ridiculous cottage developments, indicating the complete loss of our national and ethnic traditions. As you can understand from these photographs, which I borrowed from many dozens of sites, our ancestors lived unconstrained, in ecologically clean, spacious, beautiful and comfortable homes. They worked joyfully, with songs and jokes, they were friendly and not greedy, there are no blank fences near houses anywhere in the Russian North. If someone's house in the village burned down, then everyone would build it for him. new house. Let me note once again that there were and still are no high fences near Russian and Finno-Ugric houses, and this says a lot.

Polovtsian (Kypchak) type of houses

I hope that these examples of houses built in the Polovtsian (Kypchak) style are quite enough to prove that such a style really exists and has a certain distribution area, including not only the south of Russia, but also a significant part of Ukraine. I think that each type of house is adapted to certain climatic conditions. There are a lot of forests in the north, it’s cold there, so the residents build huge houses in the Russian or Finno-Ugric style, in which people live, livestock, and belongings are stored. There is enough wood for both walls and firewood. In the steppe there is no forest, in the forest-steppe there is little of it, which is why the residents have to make small adobe houses. Big house not needed here. Livestock can be kept in a pen in summer and winter, equipment can also be stored outside under a canopy. A person in the steppe zone spends more time outdoors in the open air than in the house. That’s how it is, but in the floodplain of the Don, and especially Khopra, there is a forest from which it would be possible to build a stronger and larger hut, and make a roof with a horse, and build a light in the attic. But no, the roof is made in traditional style- hipped, it’s more familiar to the eye. Why? And such a roof is more resistant to winds, and the winds in the steppe are much stronger. The roof here could easily be blown away by the next snowstorm. In addition, it is more convenient to cover a hipped roof with straw, and straw in the south of Russia and Ukraine is traditional and inexpensive roofing material. True, poor people covered their houses with straw in central Russia, even in the north of the Yaroslavl region in my homeland. As a child, I also saw old thatched houses in Vsekhsvyatskoye. But those who were richer roofed their houses with shingles or planks, and the richest - with roofing iron. I myself had the opportunity, under the guidance of my father, to cover our new house and the house of an old neighbor with shingles. Today, this technology is no longer used in villages; everyone has switched to slate, ondulin, metal tiles and other new technologies.

By analyzing the traditional types of houses that were common in Russia quite recently, I was able to identify four main ethno-cultural roots from which the Great Russian ethnic group grew. There were probably more daughter ethnic groups that merged into the Great Russian ethnic group, since we see that the same type of houses was characteristic of two, and sometimes three related ethnic groups living in similar natural conditions. Surely, in each type of traditional house, subtypes can be identified and associated with specific ethnic groups. Houses in Karelia, for example, are somewhat different from houses in Komi. And houses of the Russian type in the Yaroslavl region were built a little differently than houses of the same type on the Northern Dvina. People have always strived to express their individuality, including in the arrangement and decoration of their homes. At all times there were those who tried to change or improve traditions. But exceptions only emphasize the rules - this is well known to everyone.

I will consider that I wrote this article not in vain if in Russia fewer ridiculous cottages will be built in any style, if someone wants to build their new house in one of the traditional styles: Russian, Slovenian, Finno-Ugric or Polovtsian. All of them have today become nationwide, and we are obliged to preserve them. Ethno-cultural invariant is the basis of any ethnic group, perhaps more important than language. If we destroy it, our ethnic group will degrade and disappear. I saw how our compatriots who emigrated to the USA cling to ethno-cultural traditions. For them, even making cutlets turns into a kind of ritual, which helps them feel that they are Russians. Patriots are not only those who lie down under tanks with bunches of grenades, but also those who prefer the Russian style of houses, Russian felt boots, cabbage soup and borscht, kvass, etc.

In the book by a team of authors edited by I.V. Vlasov and V.A. Tishkov's "Russians: History and Ethnography", published in 1997 by the Nauka publishing house, has a very interesting chapter on rural residential and economic development in Russia in the 12th - 17th centuries. But the authors of the chapter L.N. Chizhikova and O.R. For some reason, Rudin paid very little attention to Russian-style houses with a gable roof and a light in the attic. They consider them in the same group with Slovenian-type houses with a gable roof overhanging the side walls.

However, it is impossible to explain how Russian-type houses appeared on the shores of the White Sea and why they are not in the vicinity of Novgorod on the Ilmen, based on the traditional concept (stating that the White Sea was controlled by the Novgorodians from Ilmen). This is probably why historians and ethnographers do not pay attention to Russian-style houses - they are not in Novgorod. In M. Semenova’s book “We are Slavs!”, published in 2008 in St. Petersburg by the ABC-Classics publishing house, there is good material about the evolution of the Slovenian-type house.

Basic elements of buildings. The main types of modern peasant households and huts. Their structural and artistic details. Peasant huts based on written monuments and their comparison with existing types. Interior view of the hut.

The walls of a log building can be cut in two ways: from logs located vertically, or from logs located horizontally. In the first case, the length of the wall can be arbitrary without the danger of its collapse; in the second case, the length of the wall cannot exceed 4-5 fathoms, unless it is supported by any buttresses. However, the advantage of the first method, practiced by the peoples of Western and Northern Europe (in Sweden and Norway), is significantly weakened by the fact that when the tree dries out, cracks form between the logs in which the caulk does not hold well, while with the second method, practiced by the Slavs, the logs When drying, they are lowered one on top of the other (the wall gives sediment), which allows the wall to be tightly caulked. The Slavs did not know the splicing of logs, that is, connecting them to each other using a lock, which appeared relatively late among us, therefore the log houses of Slavic dwellings could not exceed the natural average length of logs in length and width; the latter, for the reasons mentioned above, were unlikely to be longer than three or four fathoms.

Thus, an essential part of Slavic housing, its initial form, from which its further development proceeded, was a frame, square in plan and arbitrary in height, from horizontal rows (“crowns”) of logs, connected in the corners by notches with the remainder (“in the oblo”). or without a trace (“in the paw”, “in the hat”).

Such a log house was called a cage, and the latter, depending on its purpose or position in relation to other cages, was called: “hut” or “firebox,” if it was intended for housing and there was a stove in it; “upper room” if it was located above the lower cage, which in this case was called the “basement” or “cut.” Several cages standing side by side and connected into one whole were called, depending on their number, “twins”, “triplets”, etc., or “house”; the same name was given to a set of two cages placed one on top of the other. Khoromina, of course, appeared later, and initially the Slavs were content with one cell - a firebox, which probably differed very little from the modern peasant hut, which, although it is now built in different areas the details are different, but, in essence, its structure is the same everywhere.

Let us consider some types of housing that exist now and are most different from each other in terms of their degree of development, and we note that the Finnish tribes over time adopted from the Slavs a lot of customs and methods of constructing housing and settled on them, which is why we can in some cases find among They are something that among the Russians has already completely disappeared or has significantly changed its previous form.

Let's start with the most primitive type, namely, the hut of a Baltic peasant. As can be seen from Figure 2, his housing consists of two log cabins: a large one - a warm one (the hut itself) and a smaller one - a cold cage, connected to each other by a vestibule without a ceiling, and the canopy is usually arranged not as deep as the hut and the cage, as a result of which there is a it turns out to be something like a porch, covered with an overhang of a thatched roof, common over the entire building. The hearth is made of stones and does not have a chimney (smoking hut), which is why it is placed as close to the door as possible, so that the smoke exits through it into the hallway through the shortest route; from the entryway, smoke rises to the attic and comes out through holes in the roof, located under its ridge. Near the stove and along the entire back wall of the hut, bunks are made for sleeping. The cage is used to place household belongings in it that may be damaged by smoke, for example, chests with clothes, and also for sleeping in it in the summer. Both the hut and the cage are illuminated by small “volokova”, that is, retractable, windows, and the entryway is left dark. The entire building is made “underground” (“on the ground”), that is, it is placed directly on the ground without a foundation, which is why the floors are usually made of compacted earth or clay.

The building faces the street with its narrow side (* put “exact”), thus, two windows of the hut face it, and the entrance door in the vestibule opens into the courtyard.

The Lithuanian hut (Fig. 3) differs from the one considered mainly in that it is “five-walled,” that is, the main frame is divided by a chopped wall into two almost equal parts, and the cage is separated from the entryway by a partition.

Most of Little Russia is treeless; therefore, the walls of her huts in most cases are not chopped, but made of mud. We will not dwell on the structure of the hut, we will only note that in comparison with the housing of the Baltic Sea and Lithuanians, in terms of details it is the next stage of development, while remaining at the same time the same as the previous one in terms of the placement of the main parts; this clearly speaks of the commonality of the original way of life and the fact that the ancestors of the Little Russians built their homes from wood, which they had to replace with brushwood and clay after they were forced out into the treeless steppe. This is also confirmed by the fact that the huts of the more wooded provinces, such as Volyn, are very similar in type to the dwellings already discussed. Indeed, the hut of the Volyn province consists of a five-walled log house, most of which is reserved for warm housing (Fig. 4), and the smaller part, divided in turn by a wall, forms a vestibule and a closet; adjacent to the latter is a cage made of pillars, the spaces between which are covered with boards, and covered independent roof. The stove, although equipped with a chimney, remains by old memory at the door; adjacent to the stove is a bunk (bunk), which turns into benches for sitting at the other two walls. In the red corner, under the images, there is a table, its legs dug into the earthen floor. Outside the hut, near its warm part, a pile is arranged, something like an earthen bench, which also serves to retain heat in the hut, which is why, on those sides where there are no windows, the pile sometimes rises almost to the very roof. For the same purpose, that is, to preserve heat, the entire housing is somewhat dug into the ground, so that in the canopy you have to go down several steps.

The Little Russian hut is not placed right next to the street, but somewhat retreating, behind the garden, windows and door, oriented to the south and an embankment is made under it to drain rainwater; outbuildings and premises for livestock are never adjacent to the dwelling, but are placed in no particular order, as is more convenient in each individual case, throughout the yard, surrounded by fences.

Old huts in the region of the Don Army have a more developed character; the main frame is made here low and is divided by a longitudinal main wall into two equal parts, which, in turn, are divided by partitions into a canopy (A), a pantry (B), a clean room (C), a bedroom (D) and a kitchen (E). The last three rooms are heated by one stove, in addition to which there is a fireplace for cooking in the kitchen (Fig. 5). To avoid flooding during river floods, along the banks of which houses are usually built, the latter are built on high basements, which necessitates the construction of stairs (“steps”) leading to porches that merge with galleries that enclose the housing on three sides. These galleries are supported either by pillars or brackets made of exhaust logs (Fig. 6). In the older huts, the galleries were made with canopies on carved pillars, thanks to this being a homogeneous form with those “opasaniyas” (galleries) that often surround Little Russian and Carpathian churches. The window openings are bordered on the outside with platbands and equipped with shutters for protection from the burning rays of the southern sun; The outside walls are lined, like those of Little Russian huts, with a thick layer of clay and whitened with lime. The roofs are either thatched or planked.

The most primitive Great Russian hut, found mainly in areas poor in forests, has almost the same structure; it consists of two log buildings connected by a vestibule (Fig. 7). The front log house, facing the street, serves as a living space, and the rear one, facing the courtyard, the so-called cage, or side wall, serves as a storage room and summer bedroom. Both log houses have ceilings, while the vestibule is covered only by a roof common to the entire building. The front door leads from the yard to the vestibule, from which one enters the hut and the cage. Such huts are usually underground, surrounded by rubble for warmth, and until very recently most of them were made into chicken houses ( * “black”, “ore” (“toil” - to get dirty, to get dirty), therefore the stove was turned with the opening (“hail”) not towards the windows, but towards the door, like among the Chukhons of the Baltic region.

The next most developed type of hut is the one in which the entire building is placed on a basement; This is done to facilitate access to the hut during winter, when there is a thick layer of snow on the street and piles of manure accumulate in the yard. In addition, the basement is not useless as an extra room for storing various less valuable property, for storing food and, finally, for small livestock. In the presence of a basement, it became necessary to external staircase to the entrance door of the hallway; the staircase almost always runs along the courtyard wall towards the street and, together with both of its platforms, is covered with a common roof that reaches the street. Such staircases are called porches, and their appearance in Russian architecture must be attributed to deep antiquity, since the word “porch”, and moreover in this meaning, is found in the chronicle legend about the murder of the Varangians Theodore and John (the first) in Kyiv Christian martyrs in Rus'). Initially, the porches were made open on the sides, as is found in churches (Fig. 8), and then they sometimes began to be covered with boards, and then it was necessary to abandon the installation of windows in the wall along which the porch runs. As a result, it became necessary to turn the furnace high towards street windows, since otherwise it would be dark for the cooks to work. If the hut was arranged as a smokehouse, then with such a rotation of the stove, the smoke would hardly escape from it into the vestibule, and therefore there were huts in which the stove was pulled out by the hail into the vestibule and thus cut through the wall of the hut. However, in most cases, the stoves in such huts have pipes and this makes it possible to fence off a special room in the hut with a bulkhead - the cooking room, which is exclusively a woman’s domain (Fig. 9).

Otherwise, the internal layout of the housing remains almost the same: there are benches around the hut, but the bunk moved from the stove to the opposite wall; in the “red” corner (right, farthest from the door) under the images there is a table; Near the stove, near the door to the cook's room, there is a cupboard, and two other cabinets are built: the first is on the other side of the stove hill, and the second is near the cook's window, but with the door to the hut. The cook's room has its own tables and bench. To make it warmer to sleep, they put up a bed - a boardwalk, which is a continuation of the upper surface of the stove and occupies half the area of ​​​​the hut (not counting the cooking area). They climb onto the floor using two steps attached to the wall of the oven.

Sometimes the cage of such huts turns into a clean room - a “side room”, and storage rooms for various goods are closets arranged in the entryway and illuminated by small windows. In the side wall they make bunks, benches and place a table in the red corner.

The type of hut that emerged in this way fully satisfied the very simple personal needs of the Russian peasant and his family, but for economic needs one hut is not enough: premises are needed for carts, sleighs, agricultural implements and, finally, for livestock, that is, various sheds, barns, barns ( * in the north they are called “rigachi”), scammers ( * warm, moss-lined premises for livestock), barn, etc. All these independent buildings they are molded partly to the hut, partly to each other and form the “yard” of the Great Russian peasant (Fig. 7 and 10). Part of the yard is made covered, but in the old days the entire yard was paved with logs, as it turned out during excavations in Staraya Ladoga ( * not only courtyards, but even village streets, like city streets, were paved with logs).

Sometimes only part of the building is placed on the basement: the front hut or the side hut, or both of them together, and the canopy is made much lower, several steps, as, for example, it was built in one of the huts in the village of Murashkina ( * Knyagininsky district, Nizhny Novgorod province) (Fig. 11).

With further development, the side hut becomes warm, a stove is placed in it, and then it receives the name “back hut”; at the same time, the canopy and the back hut are sometimes made somewhat smaller in area than the front hut (Fig. 12), and sometimes both the back and the front hut are made equal in the area they occupy and, moreover, five-walled, that is, divided by an internal main (cut) wall into two parts (Fig. 17 a).

Finally, with a very large family and with a certain prosperity, there is a need for a separate room for hired workers, so a separate hut is built for them, on the other side of the gate, but under the same roof with the main hut, which makes it possible to build a “upper room” above the gate, then There is cold room with small windows and a floor raised above the floor of the main hut (Fig. 13); the upper room is connected directly to the cook and, like her, is given full possession to the women.

All types of huts considered are one-story, but two-story “double-fat” huts are also often found ( * they were probably previously called “two-core”, i.e. huts with two dwellings.), especially in the northern provinces, where there is still a lot of forest. Such huts, in their plan, essentially repeat the techniques of one-story huts, since their basement is replaced by the first floor; but the purpose of individual rooms changes. Thus, the basement of the front hut, becoming higher than in one-story ones, ceases to be a storage room and, along with the top, serves as a living space; the lower tier of the rear hut turns into a stable and a barn, and its upper tier serves as a barn and partly a hayloft, and for the entry of carts and sleighs into it, a special “carriage” is arranged, that is, a log inclined platform (Fig. 14).

In the attic of the front hut there is sometimes a living room called a svetelka, in front of which there is usually a balcony. However, these balconies are, apparently, a relatively later phenomenon, as well as small balconies on pillars like the one shown in Figure 14. The latter, obviously, are nothing more than transformed porches.

Let's consider another similar example of a northern hut located in the village of Vorobyovskoye ( Kladnikovsky district, Vologda province. * This hut was built more than a hundred years ago). This hut is two-story (Fig. 15). The middle of the first floor is occupied by a passage ("understory"), to the left of which there is a "basement" ( * the basement sometimes serves as housing, and sometimes small livestock are placed in it) and “cabbage cabbage”, that is, a pantry for provisions; to the right of the passage there is a “moshnik”, that is, a warm pantry for cereals and flour, and a “flock”, that is, a stall for small livestock. On the second floor above the basement there is a canopy, above the basement and above the cabbage roll there is a hut, the stove of which is placed in the far corner, and not at the door, although the hut is a smokehouse; Near the stove there is a staircase leading to the cabbage roll. On the other side of the entryway there are: a side room (* upper room), the window of which faces the street, and a semi-dark pantry. All these rooms are located in one six-walled frame, with one of its long walls facing the street so that the porch also faces the latter (Fig. 16). Adjacent to the opposite wall are two more log houses, located under the same roof as the first. In the lower floor of the middle log house there is a “large hay barn” - a room for horses, above which there is a “large hay shed”; in the latter there is hay, there are carts, sleighs, household tools and harnesses are stored. A carriage covered with an independent pitched roof leads to the hay barn. Finally, in the lower floor of the rear log house there are two “flocks” and a vast barn, above which there are “butts” or “altars” that serve as a warehouse for oats, and a “small hay barn”, which, due to its relative cleanliness, is a place for sleeping in summer time and also a place in which household work is carried out.

Sometimes in two-story huts there is only one external porch, and for internal communication a staircase is installed in the entryway (Fig. 17 and 18).

These are the main types of huts in the northern and central provinces; As for the huts in the southern provinces, they are essentially the same, although they differ in that they are placed towards the street not with the short side, but with the long side, so that the entire porch faces the street, and also in that the stove is often not placed near doors, but in the opposite corner, despite the fact that the huts are in most cases smoke-houses.

Of course, in those provinces where there is little forest, the huts are cramped, low and very often do not have basements (Fig. 19); in richer provinces, peasant households are sometimes no less complex than in the north (Fig. 20).

Indeed, in the last example, a number of various outbuildings are adjacent to the hut, of which the most interesting are the barns, as they have still retained their ancient type, as is clearly evidenced by their simple and logical design, which is used everywhere with only slight variations, that is, they are made usually either with a covered gallery or with a deep ledge at the bottom of the frame, which serves as protection from rain at the entrance to the barn. In places that are damp or flooded with spring water, barns are placed on high basements or on pillars (Fig. 21, 22 and 23). Let us now consider some details of the hut design. As noted above, the walls are cut from horizontal rows of logs connected at the corners by notches; grooves along the logs are now always selected in their lower part, however, about 60 years ago, there were cuttings with reverse grooves, which, according to academician L.V. Dahl, was considered a sign of the antiquity of the building, but, in our opinion, such cutting of walls, very illogical ( * With this method of cutting, rainwater penetrates into the grooves much more easily and, therefore, rotting of the logs should occur much earlier than with the now usual method of constructing grooves.), could have been used only due to some misunderstanding, or for buildings whose durability for some reason was not expected.

Internal walls dividing the frame into separate rooms, are made either of planks (partitions), sometimes not reaching the ceiling, or logs (chopped), and in two-story huts even the latter sometimes do not lie directly above one another, but are shifted to the side, depending on need, so that the upper walls are on weight So, for example, the right walls of the basement and hallway in the hut in the village of Vorobyovskoye (see Figures 15 and 16) do not represent one continuation of the other.

In simple one-story huts, the walls of the hallway are not usually cut into the walls of the log cabins of the hut and cage itself, but are climbed with horizontal logs, the ends of which fit into the grooves vertical racks, attached to the log houses. In more complex types, such as, for example, in the hut in the village of Vorobievsky (Fig. 15 and 16), sometimes a very original method is used, which dates back to the time when our carpenters did not yet know how to splice logs and thus make them of arbitrary length. It consists of the following: one of the walls connecting the two main log buildings, in in this example- the left wall of the hay and hay shed is a continuation of the wall of the rear log house and the ends of its logs touch the ends of the logs of the front hut; six inches from the free-standing end of this wall, a short transverse wall is cut into it, something like a buttress facing the inside of the building, ensuring the stability of the first. The right wall of the hay barn and saddle shed is completely unconnected with the walls of the front and rear log houses, which is why the transverse short walls are cut in at both ends; thus, this wall would be completely free-standing if it were not connected to the log houses by the ceiling beams of the first floor.

The floors of living quarters on the ground floor are made of either stuffed floors (made of earth or clay) or made of boards over joists (“paving over the floors”); in the upper ones living rooms the floors are laid along beams (“on matits”), and only in large huts are there two of the latter; Usually, one mat is laid, the ends of which are always cut into the walls in such a way that its ends are not visible from outside the walls. The direction of the mother is always parallel to the entrance door to the hut; in the middle, and sometimes in two places, the matrices are supported by racks. The floorboards are drawn in quarters ("in a hewn pattern") or simply squared down. The floors of such rooms as a large hay barn are made not from boards, but from thin logs (“round timber”), simply hewn together. The ceilings of the upper rooms are made in the same way, and in living rooms, round timber is sometimes cut into a groove, caulked, and a lubricant is always applied on top of them, consisting of a lower layer of clay and an upper, thicker layer of sand.

To support the plank flooring of the floors, a horizontal beam called a “voronets” is cut into the rack; it is located in the direction perpendicular to the matrix. If there is a plank partition in the hut, separating, for example, the cook, then its boards are also nailed to the roof.

There are two types of windows: “volokova” and “red”.

The first ones have a very small clearance and are closed not by bindings, but by sliding panels moving either horizontally or vertically; such windows have survived to this day even in some churches, such as those of St. John the Theologian in the village of Ishna near Rostov-Yaroslavl (see Chapter 8).

“Red” windows are those whose opening is covered not by a shield, but by a frame; Initially, the sashes of such windows rose upward, like the shields of portico windows, and only (* such red windows can still often be found in the huts of the Ryazan and Arkhangelsk provinces (Fig. 24), probably relatively recently, sashes on hinges became widespread. Window glass, as is known , became not uncommon in Rus' only after Peter, and before him their place was replaced by bull bladder, or at best, mica, the high price of which, of course, excluded the possibility of using it in peasant huts.

Concerning artistic treatment windows, namely plank frames, decorated with cuts and external shutters (Fig. 9, 16, 25 and 26), then they could get wide application again, only in the post-Petrine era, when planks began to quickly be replaced by boards made by sawing logs and, therefore, much cheaper than planks; Until this time, the window frame (“block”) was usually not covered with a platband, and cuts were made directly on it, as, for example, this is the case in a very old barn in the village of Shungi, Olonets province (Fig. 27), with the upper and lower ties of the frame sometimes they were not independent parts, but hewn from the crowns of the walls. Of course, decks of this type could only be installed in utility buildings; in residential buildings, both their horizontal and vertical parts were made from separate beams, which made it possible to leave a gap above the deck, eliminating the possibility of the deck breaking or warping when the wall settled. The gap from the outside was closed with a block or wide plank decorated with cuts, which formed the crowning part of the external window treatment. The doors were decorated in the same way.

As for the gates, during their construction they avoided decorative parts that were not determined by the logic of the design, and the whole beauty of the gate, this one of the few formal parts of the hut, lay in its general shape, and in a few cuts, as can be seen in the examples given ( Fig. 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32).

The most interesting and preserved its ancient technique is the construction of roofs, especially in the north, where straw has not yet replaced the plank, as is observed in provinces that have lost forests. The base of the roof is formed by rafter legs (“bulls”) (Fig. 33-11), the lower ends of which are cut into the “podkuretniki”, that is, into the upper crowns of the log house, and the upper ends into the “prince’s foot” (33-6). This base is lined with “trays” (“slegs” or “podtechins”), that is, thin poles to which “hens” are attached - beams made from tree rhizomes; the latter are given the appearance of various figures decorated with cuts (33-10). A rain gutter is placed on the curved ends of the hens - a “water tank” (33-19), which is a log hollowed out in the form of a trough, the ends of which have bells and are often decorated with cuts.

The roof is made of two layers of plank, between which wood bark, usually birch (“rock”), is laid between them to eliminate leaks, which is why the bottom layer of plank is called a roof lining. The lower ends of the ledges rest against the watercourses, and the upper ends are clamped along the ridge with a “cool” (33-1), that is, a thick hollowed out log ending on the façade with a root processed in the shape of a horse, a deer’s head, a bird, etc. Along the upper edge of the ohlupnya they sometimes place either a grate or a row of “stams” (33-12); the first, as L.V. Dal quite rightly noted, does not fit well with the pedimental figure of the okhlupnya and is, apparently, a rather later phenomenon; the latter probably have ancient origins, which is partly indicated by the fact that schismatics loved to decorate their prayer rooms with them ( * During the persecution of schismatics, their secret prayer houses were very often recognized by the police precisely by their stamikas, which is why they often avoided organizing them at that time, and now stamikas have almost completely fallen out of use.).

Since the idiot alone cannot keep the roof boards from tearing them off strong wind, then it is necessary to arrange “oppressions” (33-4), that is, thick logs, the ends of which are grabbed on both gables by carved boards called “flints” (33-2). Sometimes, instead of one oppression, several thinner logs or poles are placed on each roof slope; in the latter case, the legs should have ends bent in the form of hooks, behind which the poles are laid (right side of Figure 33).

If the legs do not have curved ends, then boards are nailed to them, very often richly decorated with cuts. These boards are called “rails” or “liners” (33-3 and 34) and protect the ends from rotting. L.V. Dal believes that the prichelins originate from thatched roofs, where they protect the straw from sliding onto the gable, and therefore are laid lightly behind the hooks (Fig. 35). The junction of the two piers, located at the end of the prince's leg, is covered with a board, which is usually also richly decorated with carvings and is called “anemone” (Fig. 14).

In order for the roof overhang over the gable to be greater, the ends of the logs of the upper crowns are gradually hung one above the other; these ends protruding forward are called “povals” (Fig. 33-8) and are sometimes sewn up together with the poloval sleg (33-7) “small liners” - carved boards that protect the ends of the fells and slegs from rotting (Fig. 36). If the end of the blanket is very thick and cannot be covered with one small flap, then next to the latter a special board is attached, which is given the appearance of some kind of figure, mostly a horse or a bird (Fig. 36).

The gables themselves are almost always made not of planks, but of chopped logs, which are called “male” here.

Wooden chimneys are still installed in chicken huts to this day ( * "smoke", "smoke"), removing smoke from under the roof of the entryway. These pipes are made from boards and sometimes have a very picturesque appearance, as they are decorated with cuts and stamics (Fig. 37).

The methods of composition of porches are very diverse, but they can still be divided into three main types: porches without stairs or with two or three steps, porches with stairs and porches with stairs and lockers, that is, with covered lower platforms preceding the flight of stairs .

The first ones are usually arranged in such a way that their side free from the railing is directly opposite the door, and are covered with a single-pitched roof (Fig. 38) or a gable roof, usually supported by two columns.

Flights of stairs that do not have lower platforms are usually left without roofs (Fig. 39, 40 and 41), although, of course, there are exceptions (Fig. 42 and 43).

Stairs with lower platforms (“lockers”) always have roofs that are pitched, often with a break above the first step of the flight (Fig. 44, 45, 45a and 8). The upper platform (upper locker) is covered with one, two or three slopes (Fig. 44), and it is supported either by beams coming out of the wall ("rows") (Fig. 40), or by racks - one or two (Fig. 46) . The porches on single pillars are especially picturesque, as can be seen in the examples given (Fig. 44 and 45).

As a special type of porch, very elegant and leading, apparently, from the porches of churches or mansions, we need to point out the porches with two flights converging to one top platform. It is obvious that the two marches are not caused by utilitarian considerations, but purely aesthetic ones, and this is probably why such porches are relatively rare.

As for the artistic treatment of the porches, we will not dwell on it, since it is clearly visible in Figures 38-46; Let us only note that, just as on other parts of the huts, boards with rich cuts, that is, purely decorative parts, could appear on the porches only in the post-Petrine era, and before that they were satisfied exclusively with constructive parts, giving them certain artistic forms.

In many places, stoves are still made not of brick, but of adobe (“broken”), as they were in the past, probably everywhere, since brick and tiles (“samples”), due to their high price, were inaccessible to peasants, and, in addition, tiles were used only for stoves intended exclusively for heating; Even today, stoves in huts are always arranged in such a way that they serve mainly for cooking food, although at the same time they are the only sources of heat, since there are no separate stoves for heating living quarters in the hut.

We looked at the main types of modern huts; the same in their essential parts are those very few huts late XVII century and first half of the XVIII, which have survived to this day or were sketched in the second half of the last century by academician L.V. Dahlem and other researchers of Russian architecture.

It is obvious that the evolution of the basic forms in this area of ​​our construction is taking place very slowly, and even the rapidly growing network of railways affects our village, so to speak, superficially, without shaking the centuries-old way of life, which depends mainly on economic conditions. Kerosene and factory-produced materials are now known in our most remote corners, but along with them, splinters and homespun canvas continue to exist, as objects that require only time, but not money. If in our country folk costumes only in the recent past began to be replaced relatively quickly by ugly imitations of urban fashions, while usually costumes, especially women's ones, change their shape before anything else under the influence of external reasons, then it is natural that the methods of arranging a village hut should change even more slowly in our country, and the changes that took place should have affected only the details, both constructive and artistic, but not the main forms, the roots of which are nourished by the juices produced in the depths of the body of the people, but not at its outer covers.

We will try to find confirmation of what has been said in the results of excavations and in written monuments, finding in them forms that are homogeneous or similar to the current ones. Very valuable information regarding residential wooden structures the beginning of the grand ducal period were excavated in the estate of M.M. Petrovsky in Kyiv and in the village of Belgorodka (Kyiv district). According to archaeologist V.V. Khvoyka, these buildings, which were semi-dugouts, were made in a quadrangular excavation, about one and a half meters deep, brought to the mainland clay, which served as the floor of living quarters and premises for other purposes. These dwellings were not large (area 6.75 x 4.5 m) and, judging by the remains, were built from pine material; Their walls, somewhat elevated above the surface of the earth, were cut down from thick logs, but the lower logs, which formed the basis of the walls and were always laid in grooves specially dug for this purpose, were particularly strong. The internal walls, which usually did not reach the ceiling and divided the main frame into two equal parts, were made of horizontal or vertical rows of logs, sometimes hewn on both sides, or of boards. Both external and internal walls were coated on both sides with a thick layer of clay, which was lined with pottery tiles inside rich dwellings; the latter had different shapes and were decorated with a layer of glaze in yellow, brown, black or green. An extension was often adjacent to one of the short walls of the main frame, which was a kind of covered entryway, and its floor was higher than the floor of the dwelling itself, to which 3-4 earthen steps led from the floor of the entryway, but at the same time it itself was below ground level by 5-6 steps. In one of the interior rooms of these dwellings there was a stove made of logs or boards coated on both sides with a thick layer of clay; the outside of the stove was carefully smoothed and often painted with patterns in two or three colors. Near the stove, in the clay floor, a cauldron-shaped pit was made for kitchen waste, the walls of which were carefully smoothed. Unfortunately, it remains unknown how the ceilings, roofs, windows and doors were constructed; information about such structural parts could not be obtained through excavations, since most of the described dwellings were destroyed by fire, which, of course, primarily destroyed the roofs, windows and doors.

We find information about residential buildings of a later time from foreigners in the descriptions of their travels to “Muscovy”.

Adam Olearius added to the description of his journey to Moscow State images almost exclusively of cities. True, some folk scenes, such as, for example, wandering buffoons and amusements of women, apparently do not take place in the city, but all the artist’s attention was paid in them mainly to the images of figures, and the landscape and images of buildings were probably drawn later, from memory, and therefore it is hardly possible to particularly trust these images. But on the map of the Volga, Olearius has a drawing of a hut of meadow Cheremis, which in its essential parts differs little from the current huts of the most primitive design (Fig. 47). Indeed, two of her log cabins made from horizontal crowns, chopped with remainder; Between the log houses you can see the gate leading to the covered courtyard (in the canopy). The front log house represents the residential part of the building - the hut itself, since through open door it shows people sitting on the floor; the rear log house, probably representing a cage, is under a common roof with a hut and a vestibule; no windows are visible in the walls of the rear frame, while in the front there is a small recumbent window without a frame - probably a fiberglass one. The roof is made of planks, and the planks are covered. This hut does not have a chimney, but the other two huts located behind it have chimneys, and on one of the roofs there are even depictions of the oppressions that were mentioned above. Unusual, in comparison with today's huts, in Olearius's drawing is the arrangement of a plank pediment and the placement of the entrance door not from the entryway, but from the street. The latter, however, was done, very likely, for the sole purpose of showing that the front frame is the residential part of the building, which would not have been guessed if instead of doors through which people were visible, windows had been depicted.

In contrast to Olearius, Meyerberg (* Meyerberg's Album. Views and everyday paintings of Russia in the 17th century) gives in his travel album a lot of images of villages and villages, which with their outskirts with gates, churches, wells and general type residential and commercial buildings are completely similar to modern villages and villages. Unfortunately, in an effort to capture the general character of a particular village, the author of these drawings obviously did not pursue details, and could not do so due to the relatively small scale of these drawings. However, among the huts he depicted, one can find huts of the same type as the above-described hut at Olearius, for example, in the village of Rakhine (Fig. 48), as well as five-walled huts (Fig. 49), and all the huts are depicted as chopped , roofed on two slopes, with chopped pediments. Particularly interesting is one hut in the village of Vyshnyago Volochka and a hut near Torzhok, on the opposite bank of the Tverda River (Fig. 50 and 51); both of them have porches leading to the second floor or to the living quarters above the basements, and one porch is built on pillars, and the other is made hanging and its staircase is covered with a roof, that is, each of them is suitable in its design to one of the types of porches that were encountered us when reviewing modern huts.

Now let's move on to considering Russian sources, of which the above-mentioned plan of the Tikhvin Monastery is especially interesting for our purpose. The huts depicted on it can be divided into four groups. The first of them is formed by huts, consisting of one log house, covered with two slopes, with three windows located in the form of a triangle and raised high above the ground (Fig. 52).

The second group includes huts consisting of two log houses - front and rear, covered with independent gable roofs, since the front log house is slightly higher than the rear one (Fig. 53). In both log houses there are windows located both on the front (short) side and on the side, and the first form, as in the previous case, the shape of a triangle. In this type of hut, the front frame is apparently the residential part of the building, and the rear is the service part, that is, the cage. This is confirmed by the fact that in some huts of this type their rear parts are drawn not as logs, but as planks (covered in pillars), and they show gates that are not in the middle of the wall, but significantly moved towards the front frame. Obviously, this gate leads to a covered courtyard or vestibule, to the left of which there is a cage. These huts face the street with the pediment of the front frame and, thus, not only in their general layout, but also in their position relative to the street, they are very similar to modern double-timbered huts, since they differ from them only in that their log houses are not the same height (Fig. 54) .

The third group splits into two subgroups; The first includes huts consisting of two independent log houses, connected on the facade by a gate, and at the back by a fence forming an open courtyard (Fig. 55), and each of the log houses is designed in exactly the same way as the log huts of the first group. The second subgroup differs from the first in that behind the gate connecting the two log houses there is not an open courtyard, as in the previous case, but a covered one (canopy), and its height is significantly lower than the height of log houses of the same height (Fig. 56). In both the first and second subgroups, the huts have their pediments facing the street, and on their front walls are depicted the same windows arranged in a triangle as in the huts of the previous groups.

Finally, the fourth group includes those huts that, like the previous ones, consist of two log cabins, but the canopy connecting these log cabins is adjacent not to the long, but to the short sides of the latter, so that only one log cabin faces the street. its pediment side, in which three windows are again visible (Fig. 57). The front one shown in Fig. 57 huts are especially interesting in the sense that Bottom part its vestibule is depicted as made of logs, and the upper one, in which a large, apparently red window is visible, is depicted as made of boards set into a jamb. This circumstance clearly shows that the middle part of the hut is precisely the canopy, which was always made cold and, therefore, could be made of planks. In most cases, the canopies of such huts are depicted lower than the log houses, but in one case (Fig. 58), namely at the hut standing in the fence of the Tikhvin monastery, both log houses and the canopy have the same height. This hut is obviously two-tiered, since the carriage leading to the gates of the upper vestibule is visible, and under the carriage platform the gates of the lower vestibule are visible. To the left of this hut is another one, which has a porch leading to a special entrance, the perspective of which is greatly distorted by the planner. The porch consists of a flight of stairs and an upper locker (the porch itself), the pillars of which are outlined very vaguely, with a few strokes.

The porch of the hut, located outside the fence of the same monastery, across the river, is depicted in much more detail (Fig. 59). This hut consists of two buildings: the left one is low (single-tier) and the right one is high (two-tier); the buildings are connected to each other by gates, behind which there is an open courtyard. The porch leads to the second tier of the right building and consists of a staircase and an upper locker supported by two pillars and covered with a pitched roof; along the left wall of the right building another one is visible pitched roof, belonging to a gallery that probably opens onto the porch locker. This drawing, like most of the other images of buildings located on the plan of the Tikhvin Monastery, has to be corrected and supplemented, but still it gives a complete picture of the general character of the building.

But perhaps the compiler of the Tikhvin plan was fantasizing, like icon painters who depicted buildings on icons that were very far from nature, and drew on his drawing what he wanted to depict, and not what existed in reality? This is contradicted by the nature of the plan images, which clearly have a portrait, so to speak, similarity, which can be judged by comparing the plan drawings with what still exists in the Tikhvin Monastery, for example, with the cathedral of the Big (monastery) monastery, with its bell tower and the cathedral of the Small (nunnery) monastery. Finally, perhaps the author of the plan copied from life only such important stone buildings as those just listed, and drew less important ones, that is, wooden ones, from memory? Unfortunately, none of wooden buildings, depicted on the plan, have not survived to this day and therefore it is impossible to answer the question posed by direct comparison. But we have every right to compare the drawings of the plan in question with similar buildings preserved in other places, and this comparison will fully convince us that the draftsman of the Tikhvin plan meticulously copied nature. Indeed, one has only to compare his depictions of roadside chapels over large crosses (Fig. 60) with photographs of the same chapels built in the 18th century (Figs. 61 and 62) to pay a fair tribute of surprise to the loving attention and conscientiousness with which The author of the plan responded to the task entrusted to him.

The author of the icon of St. is no less punctual in depicting nature. Alexander Svirsky ( * this icon is in the Museum of Alexander III in Petrograd.).

Indeed, drawn by him chimneys on the roofs of the residential buildings of the monastery have exactly the same character as those “smokers” that are used in the north to this day and with which we became acquainted above (Fig. 63).

Comparing all the above images of rural buildings with the peasant huts that exist now, or with the peasant huts that existed in the recent past, we are convinced of the correctness of our a priori assumption that not only the basic methods of rural construction, but also most of its details have still remained the same as they were in XVII century and earlier. In fact, in the considered drawings of foreigners and our draftsmen (“banners,” as they were called in the old days), we saw huts with cages separated from them by vestibules, with hanging porches or with porches on pillars, with carriages and chopped gables. They saw that in relation to the streets, the huts were located in the same way as now, and the huts themselves were made either small, then five-walled, then single-tiered, then, finally, two-tiered. We observed the same thing with regard to details; for example, the warm parts of the huts are depicted as chopped, and the cold cages as planks; then, among the small, obviously drag-and-drop windows, we saw large red windows and, finally, above the roofs of the chicken huts we found exactly the same chimneys as on the existing huts in the north.

Thus, complementing what now exists with images of the ancient past, we have the opportunity to recreate an almost complete picture of those essentially simple construction techniques that have been developed for a long time and continued to satisfy the peasants until the present day, when, finally, little by little new techniques worth due to the increasing level of culture.

Somewhat harder to imagine internal view peasant huts of former times, because even in the huts of the north, where ancient customs are held much stronger than in the central provinces, now everywhere where the rich live, there are samovars, lamps, bottles, etc., the presence of which instantly dispels the illusion of antiquity (Fig. 64). However, along with these products of the city market, you can still find items of the previous furniture and utensils: in some places you can still find old-style benches (Fig. 65), tables, cabinets (Fig. 64) and shelves for icons (shrines), decorated with cuttings and paintings . If we supplement this with samples of peasant utensils stored in our museums - various looms, spinning wheels, rollers, lights, cups, crusts, ladles, etc. ( * For examples of old peasant utensils, see Count A.A. Bobrinsky "Folk Russian wooden products"), then we can come quite close to what the interior of peasant huts was like in the old days, which was, apparently, far from being as wretched as is usually thought when deriving an idea from the present-day huts of the now poorer central provinces.

Wooden buildings differ not only in the type of wood used, but also in their design. Interesting solution is a five-walled log house, which has not four, but five load-bearing walls. In plan it is an ordinary classic quadrangle, but inside it there is full wall, dividing a house or bathhouse into two parts. As a result, the box is more stable, and the sound insulation between rooms is improved. In addition, it becomes possible to create an independent entrance, which means that two independent families using separate living space can live under one roof.

Characteristic features of a five-wall log house

An additional transverse wall allows you to increase the length of the house. It gives additional rigidity to the structure due to its connection with the longitudinal walls. A foundation must be built under it, so it is functionally ready to accept loads from the floor beams and roof. The joining of the crowns is done traditionally for log houses - using connecting bowls. The ends of the logs of the fifth wall go out, and therefore the five-wall structure is easily identified visually from the street.

The fifth wall prevents the longitudinal walls from moving apart and strengthens the log houses more than six meters high. With its help, living rooms are separated from the entryway, or entryway, which serves as a vestibule, hallway, storage room, as well as a thermal barrier between the street and the interior. In addition, a permanent transverse fence is placed at the border of the dressing room and the washing compartment. In these cases, the building area is divided into unequal parts. When building a house for two families, the internal wall is erected in the middle, without cutting any openings in it. To go outside, separate door blocks are installed.

The fifth wall of a log house is also called a cross-cut.

A typical log has a length of up to six meters, but it is often necessary to install a larger log frame. A five-wall log house helps solve the problem, in which the cut simultaneously becomes both a stiffening rib and a connecting node. The high soundproofing properties of the logs allow you to get rid of the noise occurring in the adjacent room and create comfort in the recreation area. The back room will be much more effective in retaining heat in winter and keeping it cool in winter. Washing in a bath will keep the necessary longer temperature regime, which is unlikely to happen with a light partition.

Regarding the topic of design, we can say with confidence that a log as an internal wall looks much more interesting, more aesthetically pleasing and more solid compared to other materials. Classic Russian or rustic style internal space is provided without additional efforts to decorate the walls with clapboard or wooden panels. Inside the house will reign:

• favorable atmosphere;
• home comfort;
• healthy microclimate;
• aromas of natural nature;
• comfort.

But not everything turns out to be as rosy as it seems at first glance. The five-wall log house also has its disadvantages, some of which are so important that they force the future owner to give up the dream of building big house in favor of more modest options. Let's try to figure it out.

Disadvantages of a five-wall log house

First of all, it should be noted that building a log house with an internal load-bearing wall is not an easy task. Only experienced carpenters, who are difficult to find nowadays, can deliver such a log house with high quality. Of course, the profession is being revived due to the increased demand for wooden house construction, but experience is no longer passed on from generation to generation, and therefore many of the secrets of real masters, unfortunately, have been lost.

The next significant disadvantage relates to high cost five-wall log house. Firstly, the volume of logs for construction is significantly added due to the expanded dimensions of the house and the presence of an additional main wall. Secondly, for the work of real professionals, who are difficult to do without, you will have to pay a tidy sum.

Next, it is necessary to note the complexity of the layout of the internal space. You will have to adapt to the location of the fifth wall, but this is familiar to owners of other houses, especially apartments in high-rise buildings. The downside is that the timber takes up part of the usable area much larger than the thin partition. But you just have to come to terms with this drawback.

The issue of improved thermal insulation of the interior of a five-wall structure is controversial. Opponents argue that heat may well escape through additional crown connections. In fact, joining logs into a bowl initially implies reliable protection of the joints from wind and moisture, and careful caulking only enhances the heat-insulating effect. Each side presents its own arguments, so it is not yet possible to come to a common opinion. Probably, a lot depends, however, on the quality of construction of the five-wall log house.

A cross is a four-walled frame structure, inside of which there are a fifth transverse and a sixth longitudinal wall. The two internal main walls are called recuts. They divide the log house into four equal parts and form several separate rooms that communicate with each other using doors or doorways(arches can be used). Sometimes one of the four parts is allocated to a terrace, veranda or vestibule, and only three are used as living quarters.

Advantages of a cross log house

• Increases the thermal efficiency of the building. Due to two additional main walls, heat is retained in the house longer;
• Suitable for construction in the northern cold regions of the country and for living in a house all year round;
• Two internal walls are additional stiffeners. They strengthen and strengthen the structure, making the house strong and reliable;
• Durability. If the norms and rules of construction are followed, five-wall buildings will easily last 100 years;
• Evenly distributes the weight of the roof and does not put a strong load on;
• Does not require the installation of a deep massive foundation, which simplifies construction and reduces the cost of work;
• Good soundproofing characteristics. Two full-fledged solid walls retain sounds well and do not allow extraneous noise into the house;
• Convenient for designing and interior planning of a house. Allows you to rationally and practically arrange rooms for various purposes;
• The interior walls can be moved to create rooms of any size. The main thing is that they are located at right angles;
• Overcuts prevent deformation of the walls of the log house, which is possible due to shrinkage of the log house;
• Aesthetic and attractive appearance of the building.

Design and construction of the cross hut

Cross log frame is perfect for residential construction country cottage or a spacious and functional country house. The kitchen, bedrooms and living room can be conveniently located inside. In addition, the MariSrub architect can add other premises to the project. This could be an office, wardrobe, pantry, Gym and even a swimming pool. Are in great demand country houses with attic, terrace and balcony. You will find many interesting projects.

If you didn't like any of them ready-made option, You can order individual design wooden house! The firm's architect will rationally plan the space of the future house, develop a project taking into account the client's wishes, the specifics of the soil on the land plot, further construction and commissioning utility networks.

For the construction of a cross house with an area of ​​over 100 square meters optimal fit strip foundation and traditional gable roof. It is less common to install a roof with three or four slopes. For a compact, lightweight house, you can use a columnar or screw foundation.

The construction company “MariSrub” performs a full range of works on the construction and finishing of houses made of timber or logs. You can order from us wooden house“turnkey” from the manufacturer. We carry out the design and production of lumber for the project, installation of the foundation and roof, assembly of the log house, installation and commissioning of utility networks, external and external finishing. We guarantee timely and reliable work!

A five-wall is a wooden volume in the form of a rectangle, the living area of ​​which is divided into two parts by a transverse wall. In the old days, these were an upper room and a vestibule, where the upper room was the clean rooms of the hut, and the vestibule was the space between the porch and the living rooms. A stove was installed in the living room, which heated the house. This is where the food was prepared.

Characteristics of the five-wall

The internal fifth wall or cut is made simultaneously with the main frame and is cut in with the rest. The wall starts from the base of the building and goes to the ceiling. And the transverse sections go outside and divide the façade into two parts. Initially, the hut was divided into different parts, but then the division became the same.

Such a log house looks original and aesthetically pleasing. Wherein interior wall Retains heat in living rooms longer and protects against cold and wind. Therefore, a five-wall log house is perfect for year-round residence. Note that the internal fifth main wall can be moved, and the two parts of the building can be made of any parameters.

Today, the five-wall structure is the most popular type of log house, despite the high cost and complexity of installation. After all, the result is a durable and reliable, strong and warm house. It evenly distributes the weight of the roof and does not put a strong load on the foundation.

Advantages of a five-wall log house

• Increases the thermal efficiency of the building;
• Suitable for construction in the northern cold regions of the country and for living in a house all year round;
• The fifth wall is an additional stiffening rib that strengthens and strengthens the structure, making the house strong and reliable;
• Durability. If the norms and rules of construction are followed, five-wall buildings will easily last 100 years;
• A log house with five walls can have any size and provides the opportunity to use different design solutions and interior layout options;
• High sound insulation properties. A solid wooden wall blocks sounds and does not allow extraneous noise into the house;
• The five-wall structure is convenient for construction and planning. It allows you to effectively separate the washing room and steam room from the rest room;
• The overcut or fifth wall is permanent, due to which it prevents deformation of the long walls of the log house, which is possible due to shrinkage of the log house;
• Aesthetic and attractive appearance of the building.

Layout of a five-wall log house

IN modern houses A vestibule is a hall, hallway, corridor or vestibule. In addition, here you can arrange a terrace or add a veranda. Additional rooms will increase the usable area and make your stay comfortable. They will increase thermal insulation properties log house, insulate the house and decorate the facade. As a result, you will not get an old wooden hut, but a cozy, sophisticated and elegant cottage.

The upper room in a modern hut is the living quarters. There can be a living room or hall, kitchen and dining room, office, bedroom, wardrobe and other rooms. If it is a two-story house, experts still recommend having one bedroom on the first floor. It is suitable for older people who find it difficult to constantly go up and down stairs. In addition, this bedroom can become a guest room.

At the MariSrub company you can order a wooden house of any design and layout. Choose the project you like in , and the architect will make the necessary changes. When designing, they take into account not only the customer’s wishes for functionality, but also for the interior, appearance and house layout.

To create a high-quality and reliable project, it is important to correctly calculate the foundation and roof, it is important to take into account the specifics of the soil and groundwater on the land plot, location of utility networks. The MariSrub expert takes into account every factor and draws up high-quality projects. When ordering turnkey construction, we carry out the design for free!