Definition - a highly skilled and refined method of pointing brickwork whereby the overall mortar joint is coloured to match the brick and grooved while still 'green' to receive a carefully placed lime-putty : silver sand joint, which is then carefully trimmed to form a precise ribbon-like profile. Its intention, in England, was to create an illusion of gauged ashlared brickwork on walling constructed of standard, often irregular, handmade bricks.

Today, tuck pointing is rarely specified on newly constructed brickwork, being mainly reserved for re-pointing to old brickwork which is known to have had it as the original, or earlier, joint finish. All to often when it is used few, if any, modern tuck pointers employ the tools, materials and techniques of their historical counterparts - traditional styled jointers etc, carefully blended and prepared slaked limes and ochres, etc, or set-out and execute their work according to the rules of historical precedent. Most modern tuck pointing lacks the subtlety and precision of historic work revealing a basic knowledge and skill base.

Historic overview of English tuck pointing

Tuck pointing begins to be seen in England seen towards the end of the 17^th century, such as on a remaining original area of 'The Well House', Church Street, Ewell, Surrey, dated 1688. As could be expected, it really begins proliferating in the City of London during the 18^th century such as the work on 13 Elder Street, Spitalfields, dated 1726.

It is common to see writers state that tuck pointing dates from the middle of the seventeenth century but this is incorrect. This is simply because it is from 1747 that Batty Langley¹ publishes his 'London Prices' and provides, perhaps, the earliest reference in England to what was then termed 'Tuck -and -Pat'. He ruminates 'of tuck-and-pat fronts, clearly by then a well-established practice in cautious terms:

"Before I proceed farther, I think 'tis reasonable to observe, that many Bricklayers charge their Labour of tuck-and-pat Course, at 9d. per superficial Foot, extra, which alone of itself, exclusive of Materials and common Work, amounts to 10£. 4s.and, together with materials and common work, 17£.4s. 6d. per Rod.

Surely nothing in other Trades can come up this monstrous imposition; for even at the cheapest, viz 6d. per Foot for the Labour of the Tuck-and-pat Courses only, the Amount thereof is but 4s.6¹/₄d. less than the who Expence of all the Materials and common Work when taken together; so that I think, no person who knows this (unless mad) will go to such an Expence; and especially, when after all that the best Bricklayer can do, it has an ill Effect, and looks as if the Mortar had no Union with the Bricks, and was forced from them: Neither is it so Strong, or so beautiful, as when worked in their Courses jointed in the common Manner, as all the rubbed Red-stock Fronts, &c. are done, of His Grace the Duke of Marlborough's House n St James Park, built by that great Architect Sir Christopher Wren; which would have cost double the Money, had the Courses been worked in tuck-and-pat.

Nay, in Brick-and-Half Garden Party-Walls, faced on both Sides as there are some about Marlborough House, had their Courses been worked on Tuck-and-pat, they would have cost three times the Money they did; for the Courses so worked on both sides, exclusive of all Materials and common Work, would have cost above 13£ per Rod more than they did and would not have been one farthing the better."

Shellenbarger ² puts forward his theory on the use of the term 'Tuck-and-pat', stating that the 'pat' :

"apparently described the process of shaping the mortar into small pats and tucking them into a narrow groove in the flush joint stopping. 'Pat' may also have referred to the small strokes with a tool called a jointer which shaped the tuck joint"

This is not correct, however as Lynch ³ suggests:

"The 'pat' was the small knob of lime putty lifted off the feather-edge and used for pointing."

Likewise the 'tuck', Shellenbarger⁴ interpretates as 'the groove', when it is the action that locates the putty joint across and into the groove.

The historical origins and geographical use of tuck pointing is in need of detailed research. It is certainly not restricted to brickwork, with examples in England and abroad of its use with historic stonework; indeed it is quite possible that it is with the latter that the joint finish evolved. The author certainly has seen tuck pointing on historic buildings that combine stone and brick, or flint and brick in the Normandy region of France, where the joint is known as 'Joint Anglais', or 'English Jointing'. Certainly, from a brickwork perspective, the author has seen historic tuck pointing in the Flemish regions of Belgium and France and also in the Netherlands, where on an early 18^th century building in Limburg he noted it was executed to the degree of sophistication normally associated with English work. The17^th Century Dutch could finish their brick joints with a very high degree of skill and precision. One particular profile, that could be viewed as a harbinger of tuck pointing, involved jointing with the 'daage', or jointer, then cutting and trimming to size and line guided by a timber rule, or 'doorsnede houten rei' in a process known as 'geknipt voegen', meaning 'cut joints'. This

produced what is termed a 'lintvoeg', or 'ribbon-joint'. English brickwork was undoubtedly greatly influenced by Netherlandish ideas, materials and skills at that time, and particularly so after the Restoration of 1660.

With the immigration of craftsmen, first to the New World - the colonies of America - from the seventeenth century, tuck pointing begins to be seen there and in Australia, New Zealand and even Hong Kong, from the eighteenth century.

"Tuck pointing, or as it used generally to be called tuck-and-pat,.... with the addition of a raised joint of plaster only. This raised joint has certainly a good effect when neatly executed."

Of course one must remember by the use of the term 'plaster; Dearne means a mortar of lime putty and fine silver sand - 'fine-stuff' - used by the plasterers for their skim coats, but to a stiffer body for the pointing ribbon.

In essence tuck pointing is a deceit, and disliked by some for exactly that, John Seddon⁶ writing in America in 1863, said it was:

"the lowest depth of the abomination into which modern practice has fallen."

And others⁷ suspicious of its fakery felt it should be relegated:

"to the limbo of shams"

These remarks would be based on the dramatic change in the true aesthetics of the facade from its as-laid finish. This was due to the use of 'colour washing' and the application of some of the ribbons - usually the 'perpends' - onto the faces of bricks, which had wandered out of bond, to create the ilussion of perfectly bonded brickwork. 'Colour washing', a mixture of ochre, water and - to set the pigment - a 'fixative' of size etc, applied to even-up and regularise the tone of the individual bricks of a premier facade prior to tuck pointing, had been an almost ubiquitous practice from the medieval period. The coloured joints being then picked-out to a less dramatic scale by 'pencilling' with a thin-haired brush - a 'pencil' using a whiting and size 'distemper'; generally white but sometimes coloured black. In many respects tuck pointing could also be viewed as a refinement and progression of the pencilling technique, particularly where it was applied as a thin stripe, especially into the groove of a 'ruled joint'.

Shellenbarger⁸ is more understanding, however, and correctly suggests that:

"Preservationists today, of course, have a respectful attitude about the restoration of building practices in which one material imitates another, such as faux marble and wood graining."

This joint finish was an illusion created to disguise the irregularities of stock bricks and bonding. By colouring the joints the same as the bricks, and then forming a thin lime putty joint, it was possible to convince the observer that he was looking at accurate gauged brickwork. Tuck pointing, like gauged brickwork, became fashionable in England during the seventeenth century, and remained a popular pointing style into the twentieth century. In sheltered and warmer city and town environments tuck pointing well executed, lasts well, but elsewhere it can fail after a relatively short time.

Today tuck pointing is almost exclusively reserved for use on old brickwork which is being restored to its original joint finish. The techniques and materials used have changed little down the centuries, but it is important to know how it would have been executed traditionally, and to relate this to the methods employed today.

The brickwork was always cleaned and then colour washed as previously described. The 'stopping' was then prepared to ‘blind out’ the joints in readiness for the tucking mortar. 'Stopping', which was always mixed beforehand for the whole job, came in three colours:

· Red. This was for red stocks and was composed of one part grey lime to three parts of fine washed sand (red sand being preferred). This was then coloured with Venetian red and a little vegetable black. Proportions varied with the tone of the red bricks. Red was always given a second colour wash after it was stopped.

· Yellow. This was made with grey lime putty and fine washed sand in the proportions of one bushel of the former to three of the latter. (A bushel is a dry measure of eight gallons.) These ingredients were mixed together dry and then sifted. It was then added to clean water with about two pounds of yellow ochre to each hodfull of stopping. Colouring would be adjusted to match the tone of the gaults or London stocks. It was considered best to have the stopping a shade darker than the brick when dry, to give the putty joint a better appearance when laid on. A colour wash was never used to colour this stopping.

· Black. Black was not as common, but was employed to blacken light-coloured bricks (such as those at 10 Downing Street, London). It consisted of one bushel of grey lime thoroughly slaked and mixed with three bushels of foundry sand, and sieved. This was added to clean water and, if not dark enough, gauged with a small proportion of lamp or vegetable black.

The 'stopping, when originally applied to a new property was rarely placed into raked-out joints, but only pushed, or 'wiped', over the still green bedding mortar.

The white lime putty tucking joint was made with chalk lime (only because it dried much whiter than grey lime) slaked to a powder and sieved; silver sand or marble dust. The latter was preferred if it could be obtained as it gave the joint a beautiful glaze, but silver sand was more usual.

Marble dust was obtained by heating pieces of marble until they fell to a powder. This was screened before mixing with the lime. The lime was slaked and sifted through a fine sieve. Sometimes oil was added to enable it to work better and to give greater adhesive properties, but this had to be done while the lime was hot and dry. One pint to a half-bushel of lime was standard measure. A retardant was also preferred, to slow up the setting action of both stopping and tucking ribbon, and thereby to allow them to unite more successfully. The most commonly used additives were tartar, size, beeswax or other sugary materials.

In the days of cheaper labour, it was normal for four to six men to work as a pointing team. Two or three would stop and groove the joints and the others would apply the tuck joint. Six to eight square yards was considered a fair day’s work.

The traditional procedure for tuck pointing is well explained in The Rudiments of Practical Bricklaying by Adam Hammond (1875, pp. 49—50).

"It is usual to do this in lengths of about 8 feet; this is about the length that two men will work when laying on the fine stuff; and if this is taken for the length and 5 feet for the height it will be quite enough at one time.

From the nineteenth century sometimes black or, more rarely, red putty tucking joints were preferred to emphasize the joint further, sometimes the joint was not finished flat but was given a convex curve.  This was known as 'reeded' tuck pointing. Black putty required a half-bushel of grey lime, slaked and finely sifted; one and a half bushels of very fine washed, or silver sand; and twelve pounds of lamp or vegetable black, the latter being much easier to mix with the lime and sand. If possible the putty joint in all tuck pointing should not exceed 5mm in thickness. Arches of all kinds except those that were gauged were generally tuck pointed as normal brickwork, except that the joints would be smaller, 2-3 mm.

Tuck pointing like so many of the more refined skills associated with the craft of bricklaying, declined rapidly in use after the changing conditions after the first World War. Although tuck pointing could be seen in use with colour matched and machine-cut and precise sized bricks, which eliminated the need for colour washing, Its application was no longer as vital. Gradually one begins to read of it less and less in technical books from the 1920's onwards as a pointing finish and references to it as are a re-pointing finish to older work and it fell from the syllabus for the apprentice by the 1950's.

This joint consists of two materials — the original bedding, and the 'stopping' mortar. The stopping is laid into the original joint as in tuck pointing, the difference being the absence of the white putty joint, the ribbon being created using the same mortar. This is not a common joint profile, as it is difficult to execute and produces a fragile finish.

Modern tuck pointing

In modern practice tuck-pointing is only used on renovation work where it has deteriorated and when it can be shown to be an original, or at least an earlier, joint finish. It is important however that one should not rush to re tuck point a whole elevation without considering the full historical impact of such an action. So often a wall with 50% or more of good quality tuck pointing where the remainder is in varying stages of natural weathering, not necessarily severe, are removed for wholesale repointing, which at stroke removes the historical integrity of the facade. One should always seek to exercise a minimum of interference on a historic building to retain as much of the original work that gives the building its historical character and integrity as possible. Tuck pointing can not be patch repaired, it is an all or nothing joint finish. Therefore repointing a wall must be carefully considered and all factors taken into account structural, historical and aesthetic, especially on a listed property or one within a conservation area, before applying to undertake this work. Always ensure that craftsmen employed to undertake tuck pointing have proven ability to execute the work and that their work seeks to replicate the original tuck pointing.

When tuck pointing is undertaken today it is usual for two craftsmen to work together, professional pointers call this a ‘man and wife’ team. One does the ‘stopping and grooving’, the other ‘tucking and trimming’ the ribbons. An experienced team can achieve about 4-6m² daily, although reveals, architrave's and pilasters can slow this time considerably. The work to be pointed is raked out to a minimum depth of 18mm, and brushed clean or blown out with an air line, and dampened. If one man is working, an area of 1 metre square is normally worked on at any one time, and double that for two men, starting from the top of the house and working down as the scaffold is dropped. Colour washing can still be done, but with a public no longer used to its somewhat garish effect it can become controversial so it is often not repeated today.

The joints are stopped with a coloured mortar to match the bricks upon drying out. If possible this colour should be wholly or partly obtained by the choice of sand. Today patent colourings are sold in powder forms. They are added to the dry mortar mix before the addition of water, and one should be able to match virtually all the bricks by testing and recording various strengths of colourings. If one does not wish to use modern pigments, it is still possible to buy organic colourings from some manufacturers of limes and historic mortars. When all is dry and the level of powder has been recorded and the ratio decided, mix enough dry for all the work, store and cover.

The blinding mortar for the 'stopping' is usually mixed with a colouring powder on a trial basis to achieve the correct shade required. Two or more colours might be mixed to get the right tone. All the dry ingredients must be carefully volume batched and passed through a fine-meshed sieve to ensure full integration of mix. It is obviously important to have a test panel to assess the correct colour match, although traditionally it was preferred to have the 'stopping' a little darker to help emphasise the ribbon. Test panels should always face the same way as the facade to be re-pointed.

Tuck jointers - to apply ribbons - difficult to obtain Feather-edge or ‘pointing-rule’ - to guide grooving, placing and trimming ribbons

Frenchman - knife with a nib to groove and trim joints- made by bricklayer.

Other standard tools play there part as in all pointing profiles, trowels raking tools, brushes, water spray bottles etc.

The 'Stopping' - A mortar of hydraulic lime : washed sand

The 'Ribbon' - A mixture of fine silver sand and lime mixed and stored in closed container as a putty.

Set out gauge and perpendiculars

Brush and wet wall

Colour wash - not always done today

Apply stopping

Flush ‘stopping

Groove with Frenchman

Brush

Apply bed ribbons with jointer from the rule - feather edge.

Trim ribbons, to size

Apply perpends as above.

Trim ribbons to size.

A very succinct description of ' Tuck Pointing in Practice' by Jonathan Carey, Architect, Donald Insall and Associates is available from the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings. (SPAB)