FOREWORD
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 THE SCOPE OF THE PLAN
2.2 THE LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
2.3 THE STRUCTURE OF THE CONSERVATION PLAN REPORT
2;4 CURRENT OWNERSHIP, DESIGNATIONS AND STAKEHOLDERS
2.5 THE CONSULTATION PROCESS
2.6 THE CONSERVATION PLAN TEAM
3. UNDERSTANDING THE PROPERTY
3.1 HISTORY AND SETTING OF ROTHE HOUSE
3.2 ROTHE HOUSE: ARCHITECTURE, STRUCTURES AND CONSERVATION
3.3 ROTHE HOUSE: CURRENT USES
3.4 TIME LINE
4. ASSESSMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
4.1 DEFINITIONS AND CRITERIA FOR SIGNIFICANCE
4.2 DEGREE OF SIGNIFICANCE
4.3 URBAN SETTING/CONTEXT OF ROTHE HOUSE
4.4 ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE
4.5 HISTORICAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE
4.6 MUSEUM AND ARCHIVE COLLECTIONS
4.7 TOURISM, EDUCATION AND PRESENTATION
4.8 KILKENNY COMMUNITY/SOCIAL VALUE
4.9 KILKENNY ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY
4.10 SUMMARY OF OVERALL SIGNIFICANCE
5. ISSUES OF VULNERABILITY
5.1 ISSUES AFFECTING URBAN SETTING
5.2 ISSUES AFFECTING ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE
5.3 ISSUES AFFECTING ARCHAEOLOGY: THE BUILDINGS AND THE GARDEN
5.4 ISSUES AFFECTING MUSEUM AND ARCHIVE COLLECTIONS
5.5 ISSUES AFFECTING TOURISM, EDUCATION AND PRESENTATION
5.6 ISSUES AFFECTING MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL STRATEGIES
5.7 ISSUES AFFECTING KAS AND COMMUNITY VALUE
5.8 VISION
6. CONSERVATION POLICIES
6.1 CONSERVATION PHILOSOPHY
6.2 GENERAL CONSERVATION POLICIES
6.3 POLICIES TO PROTECT THE URBAN SETTING
6.4 POLICIES FOR ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE: STRUCTURAL CONSERVATION AND MAINTENANCE
6.5 POLICIES CONCERNING ARCHAEOLOGY: THE BUILDINGS AND THE GARDEN
6.6 POLICIES CONCERNING THE MUSEUM AND ARCHIVE COLLECTIONS
6.7 POLICIES FOR TOURISM, EDUCATION, PRESENTATION
6.8 POLICIES FOR MANAGEMENT AND FINANCES
7. IMPLEMENTATION AND REVIEW
7.1 ADOPTION OF THE CONSERVATION PLAN
7.2 COORDINATION, RESOURCES AND PRIORITIES
7.3 ACTIONS FOR 2003
8. BIBLIOGRAPHY

LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1: CRITERIA FOR CONSIDERING SIGNIFICANCE
TABLE 2: LADDER OF SIGNIFICANCE
TABLE 3: HOUSES IN KILKENNY WHICH SURVIVE FROM THE SAME PERIOD AS ROTHE HOUSE
TABLE 4: BUILDINGS IN KILKENNY BEHIND WHICH EARLIER FACADES MAY SURVIVE
TABLE 5: SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE
TABLE 6: KAS INCOME AND EXPENDITURE

APPENDICES
THIS CONSERVATION PLAN IS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING EXTENSIVE REPORTS WHICH MAY BE EXAMINED BY ARRANGEMENT WITH THE HERITAGE COUNCIL.
APPENDIX 1: RECORD OF CONSULTATIONS
APPENDIX 2: ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF HOUSE 2 AND NORTH WING
APPENDIX 3: ASSESSMENT OF CONDITION ROOF TIMBERS AND TIMBER WINDOWS
APPENDIX 4: SCHEDULE OF WORKS AND SPECIFICATION FOR ROOF OF HOUSE 2
APPENDIX 5: MATRIX OF VULNERABILITIES AND POLICIES
APPENDIX 6: CONTENT AND FORMAT FOR QUINQUENNIAL SURVEYS

FOREWORD
Rothe House is one of the earliest and most important historic places in Kilkenny, and indeed in the entire region. Saved from a very uncertain future by the dedication and tireless voluntary work of the Kilkenny Archaeological Society, Rothe House now looks forward to its sixth century in the heart of Kilkenny's city life. The Heritage Council is pleased to assist the Society in planning that future by commissioning this Conservation Plan.
The Conservation Plan methodology, introduced into Ireland in 1998 by the Heritage Council, provides a framework and a vision for Rothe House and is a strong indication of the Heritage Council's support and commitment to Kilkenny Archaeological Society, to Rothe House and to Kilkenny, the home of the Heritage Council since 1997.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors have appreciated the assistance of many people and organisations in the preparation of this Conservation Plan. While many are mentioned in the report itself, we wish to acknowledge their support here.
For the Heritage Council, Ms Mary Hanna was an exemplary chairperson and 'client', ably supported by Mr Hugh Maguire and Ms Fionnuala Lynch.
From the Kilkenny Archaeological Society, the Reverend Sean O'Doherty and Miss Una Hughes were enthusiastic and patient in equal measure. Many members of the Society's Council offered information and advice (Mr Tom Halpin, Mrs Lex Hyde, Mr Michael O'Dwyer, Mr Edward Law) and attended two sometimes arduous evening consultation sessions. Mr Ben Murtagh made the results of his own research and recording available to us.
We have also benefited from the expertise of other members of our own professional organisations: Mr Michael Drury of Michael Drury Architects; and Mr Eamon Timoney, Mr Tim Strickland and Mrs Michelle Fielden at Fehily Timoney Gifford.

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Standing on Parliament Street in Kilkenny, Rothe House is one of the few examples of late 16th and early 17th century merchant houses still surviving in the Republic of Ireland. Over the last 60 years, the Kilkenny Archaeological Society has, through sustained endeavour, conserved the complex consisting of three houses (dating respectively to 1594, 1604 and 1610) and the original burgage plot. Whilst the conservation works have been heavy-handed by modern standards, the complex today is remarkably faithful to the original and is, uniquely, open to the public.
This Conservation Plan has followed the format and process established by James Semple Kerr. A great deal of information was synthesised in developing an Understanding of the site (Section 3). This was greatly facilitated by the fact that the Kilkenny Archaeological Society had amassed a wealth of information over the last 50 years.
The Significance of Rothe House was derived from the details of its history, evolution and current uses (Section 4). Particular points of significance include:

• The urban setting on Parliament Street and the survival of the original burgage plot.
• The structures of Houses 1 and 2, where, in spite of overly intrusive restoration works, much of the original is legible, including the arcaded frontage.
• Kilkenny Archaeological Society collections housed in Rothe House are highly significant, especially the costumes and textiles, the library and paper archives, and the genealogy records.
• The tourism, education and presentation of the House are potentially of national significance although they require investment to realise their full potential.

Rothe House is beset by a variety of issues of Vulnerability which may threaten its continued survival (Section 5). Amongst these are external threats from future town planning, and inappropriate conservation and maintenance works. The imminent relocation of the Heritage Council to other offices in Kilkenny has brought the long-held aspiration - to re-unite the complete burgage plot into one entity - to reality. With this comes the necessity to take new and vigorous action.
Although the extensive collections acquired by the Kilkenny Archaeological Society are intrinsically valuable, the Society has been unable to provide adequate environmental conditions for their storage and display. The long-term care of these collections must be fundamentally improved.
While the house itself is potentially a hugely important heritage asset, this has not yet been realised, in spite of an EC grant which requires public access. Within the publicly accessible areas, the level of presentation is inadequate and under-resourced.
Finally, and most importantly, management underpins all these issues. Rothe House needs a degree of professional management and care which the Kilkenny Archaeological Society, as it is today, simply cannot supply.
In response to the various issues of Vulnerability, a series of Conservation Policies (Section 6) has been devised. A Conservation Philosophy has been articulated, supported by both general positions and specific policies. Fundamental to all of these is the creation, by the Kilkenny Archaeological Society, of a wholly-owned operating company which will undertake the future management and development of Rothe House on behalf of the Society. Specific policies in this Plan address issues such as urban setting, structural conservation, archaeology, the museum collections, tourism, education and presentation, and management and finances.
The vision for Rothe House involves ensuring the protection, long-term survival and enhancement of the complex, in addition to promoting and interpreting the history of the house to the public.

2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 THE SCOPE OF THE PLAN
This Conservation Plan aims to provide the following:

• A comprehensive understanding of Rothe House
• An understanding of its significance both as a rare structure and a historic place
• A measure of its vulnerability to harmful change
• Management policies and recommendations for related actions which will promote, conserve and enhance the special cultural significance of Rothe House and its immediate setting.

This Plan accords with international practice deriving from the ICOMOS Burra Charter and the principles developed by James Semple Kerr. It reflects the established processes of Conservation Plan preparation and the short, medium and long-term dynamics of a management cycle.
These aims can be defined as a series of objectives which are specifically linked to the requirements of the Plan as identified in the Heritage Council brief:

• Identify and explain why the site - and its various component elements and setting - is significant.
• Provide guidance on the day-to-day operation of the property.
• Serve as a baseline from which to evaluate the impact of new, specific proposals or developments.
• Indicate how that significance is vulnerable to change or damage.
• Set out the management interests of all the stakeholder organisations. Make recommendations for strategic management changes.
• Devise a set of policies for managing and developing the site, insofar as possible, in harmony with its significance.
• Provide full consultation with the stakeholders, with consideration for their concerns and interests.

2.2 THE LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
From the outset, it had been assumed that the preparation of this Plan would not involve in-depth research or survey recording of the structures. Its original objectives were to highlight and explain issues in principle, and to identify factors which will need detailed examination prior to the time of policy implementation. Sufficient work has been done to compile the Bibliography, which also details further available sources. New conclusions have been reached and are summarised in the text and gazetteer (see Appendix 1, Gazetteer). Systematic research and further programmes of study/investigation are also suggested in the Policies section.

2.3 THE STRUCTURE OF THE CONSERVATION PLAN REPORT
The structure of this report follows the model originated by James Semple Kerr and replicated in the Heritage Council brief.
Section 3 endeavours to reach a useful Understanding of the Property from a variety of viewpoints.
The Assessment of Significance in Section 4 considers the many ways in which Rothe House is important.
Section 5 is a concise description of the Issues of Vulnerability which arise from a realisation of the significance of the place, both general and particular. Rather than being too prescriptive, this section simply states the issues.
Finally, Section 6 recommends a series of Conservation Policies for the management in the widest sense - of the site. These Policies are designed to enhance and conserve the significant aspects of the site commensurate with the need to resolve the conflict between visitor management/access issues versus the conservation of an immensely important archaeological resource.

2.4 CURRENT OWNERSHIP, DESIGNATIONS AND STAKEHOLDERS
The Kilkenny Archaeological Society owns the freehold of Rothe House and the major part of the ancient burgage plot which extends back from Parliament Street to the medieval city wall. The rear section of the plot, adjacent to the city wall, has also been in Society ownership for many years but has been leased until recently. The former Office of Public Works (OPW) site has been leased to KAS on the condition that it is turned into gardens. In the 1960s, the Society was instrumental, in the restoration of the first house (fronting onto Parliament Street) and, in the mid 1990s, the complete restoration of the third house. These were major achievements, and the Society can be justly proud of its accomplishments.
Since restoration, the Heritage Council has occupied the third house as offices; they are to move to other premises in the near future. Thus the immediate question of the future use of House 3 arises, simultaneously, with the reacquisition of the rear burgage plot. These in turn create the opportunity to review the current uses and future development of the entire site.
Since the Society has had neither adequate financial resources nor expertise to undertake or commission a comprehensive Conservation Plan which would guide decisions regarding such dramatic changes in use, the Heritage Council has stepped in with funding. This Plan is the result.
The current statutory status of the Rothe House complex is as follows:

• It is listed as an element of the urban area of Kilkenny City in the Record of Monuments, and Places.
• It is listed in the Area of Archaeological Importance - Urban Archaeological Survey County Kilkenny.
• It appears as a nationally significant structure on the Planning Authority Development Plan under List 1 of the Kilkenny City and Environs Development Plan, 1994.
• It is listed as being of national importance in the National Inventory of Architectural Heritage Survey of Kilkenny.

2.5 THE CONSULTATION PROCESS
During 2001, the Conservation Plan team undertook a thorough process of consultation in which stakeholder organisations and individuals were involved. The following individuals and organisations have been consulted to date (see also Appendix 1):

• The Heritage Council. Individuals include: Ms Mary Hanna (Architectural Officer and Steering Group Chair) and Mr Hugh Maguire (Museums and Archives Officer)
• Kilkenny Archaeological Society. Officers and Members at the time of consultation include: Miss Una Hughes (President), Rev. Sean O'Doherty (Chairman), Mr Tom Halpin (Hon. Treasurer), Mr Michael O'Dwyer (Hon. Librarian), Mrs Lex Hyde (Hon. Curator), Ms Ann Tierney (council member), Mr Edward Law (council member), Ms Mary Flood (Administrator)
• Kilkenny Corporation
• Mr john Bradley (University College Maynooth)
• Mr Ben Murtagh
• Bord Failte
• South East Regional Tourism
• The OPW in Dublin made available archive materials from work done in the 1960s by the late Percy Le Clerc.

The organisations and individuals involved were immensely helpful, and the authors would like to extend their appreciation to them all. Without their support, the Plan could not have been completed.
The Plan process began in May 2001 with research, followed by two further periods of research and consultation: from 9-16 July and 22-27 July. A Draft Plan (without Policies) was completed in early October. Analysis and consultation continued through November, with the completion of the Plan in late December 2001.

2.6 THE CONSERVATION PLAN TEAM