Blessington Demesne is located west of the main Blessington-Dublin Road beside the village of Blessington. The significance of the demesne lies in its relative intactness and the identification of relic features dating to the late seventeenth century and early eighteenth century. Many contemporary early demesnes underwent significant changes as part of the mid-eighteenth century change in demesne layout and style. Consequently, relatively few of these early features, such as crows-foot avenues, ponds and canals, are present in demesnes around the country. However, with the burning of Blessington House in the late eighteenth century, the apparent lack of expenditure on its upkeep prior to its destruction and the relatively small-scale transformation into a more 'naturalised' parkland demesne, the imprint and overall view of the early demesne is still visible in the landscape, albeit only in aerial photographs. These original features can be clearly correlated with a remarkable number of historical sources, including early paintings and maps. While some of the features may appear unremarkable individually, taken as an integrated whole, they present a very important picture of a late seventeenth century/early eighteenth century demesne.
History of Blessington Demesne Charles II granted Michael Boyle, archbishop of Dublin and lord chancellor of Ireland, the lands around and including Blessington in 1668-69. The grant lists all the townlands that formed part of the estate and described it as being a reward for loyalty to his father during the war of 1649. Blessington was also given borough status around the same time by the king. An extract from the Blessington Borough Charter, c.1670, reads:
'...that the towns and lands of Blessington, aforesaid, with the appurtenance lying in the county of Wicklow, aforesaid, shall from hence forth for ever be a free borough and Corporation and shall be called by the name of the Borough and Town of Blessington and shall extend into the said County of Wicklow every way from the middle of the said town two hundred or more acres in the whole and that in the said town there should be a body politic and Corporate for ever containing one sovereign, two bailiffs and twelve burgesses the same to continue in succession forever which Sovereign shall like wise be a free burgess of the said Town and Borough...'
Boyle established a town on the forfeited lands he had been granted at Blessington and erected a church in 1683 for the parish, having first built his mansion, Blessington House.
The Building of Blessington House Blessington House was built in 1673-74, as documented in papers found in the Irish Architectural Archive, meticulously deciphered by Brian de Breffny (1989). The most informative entry is the detailed agreement dated February 22, 1671-72, between Archbishop Boyle and the mason in charge of building work, Thomas Browne of Dublin. The remaining documents consist of accounts, receipts and a petition addressed to the archbishop by Browne in 1673. Thomas Browne is noted in Rolf Loeber's A Biographical Dictionary of Architects in Ireland 1600-1720, published in London in 1981 (cited in de Breffny 1989), as 'a bricklayer who was admitted to the Freedom of the City of Dublin in 1655.' The same source mentions Browne's work in the churchyard of St Catherine's, Dublin, in 1659 and 1660, his extensive repairs to St Werburgh's Church, Dublin, in 1662 and his repairs to St Catherine's in 1686 (de Breffny 1989). There is no mention of the architect's name at this point, and in the agreement, Browne is asked to work according to the 'draught drawn' of the front and foundation then in the archbishop's possession.
Unfortunately, this draught does not survive with other papers concerning the building. Three of the other papers, however, indicate that a trained architect, Thomas Lucas, was employed by Archbishop Boyle at Blessington between 1673 and 1674. A Thomas Lucas, architect and carpenter, is mentioned in Loeber's Biographical Dictionary of Irish Architects 1600-1720, which notices his admission as a Freeman of the City of Dublin in 1632 after serving his apprenticeship as an architect. Nothing is written of his early career. He appears as the carpenter Thomas Lucas in 1668, when he agreed to repair the east side of the cathedral and chapter house of St Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin (de Breffny 1989). Although he was called in after Browne had completed the masonry to execute or supervise carpentry works at Blessington (de Breffny 1989), there is a possibility that Lucas was the designer of the 'draught' of the front elevation of the house.
Brian de Breffny transcribed the entire agreement between Archbishop Boyle and Thomas Browne and reproduced it in full in the Irish Arts Review Yearbook (1989), including original spelling mistakes and grammatical errors. The agreement states that the house should be built of lime, stones, brick and sand and should be one hundred and six feet long, 61 feet long at each end and forty-four feet long in the middle. The house would be two storeys high and each storey fourteen feet high, with one cellar sixty feet long and twenty-eight feet wide and one kitchen forty-four feet long and twenty-one feet wide, with the walls of the kitchen at least ten feet high. Architect John O'Connell has used the agreement to reconstruct the front elevation and ground plan of Blessington House. An engraving of the house by John Brooks, c.1745, shows the house from the rear.
Boyle lived at Blessinton for nearly thirty years, dying in Dublin in 1702 at the age of ninety-three. In 1678, he had been promoted to the see of Armagh, becoming primate of all Ireland. In his career, Boyle became a very rich man. The Dictionary of National Biography entry says of him 'little of the wealth accumulated by Boyle was devoted to religious or charitable uses' (de Breffny 1989). According to records of the time, he spent the then considerable sum of £2,300 or more on his mansion at Blessington, excluding the furnishing of the interior.
After his death, the mansion and estate at Blessington passed to his son by his second wife, the Hon Mary O'Brien. This Murragh Boyle (1648-1718) was created Viscount Blessington in 1673. Charles, second Viscount Blessington, Archbishop Boyle's grandson, died in 1732 without leaving an heir. The mansion and estate passed to his sister and her heirs and eventually to the Marquesses of Downshire, who were descendants of a daughter of Archbishop Boyle.
The Demise of Blessington House A series of very informative letters from the Downshire Papers give some insight into the events surrounding the destruction of Blessington House and the aftermath of this event. They are mostly written by a John Patrickson to Lord Downshire during the years 1786, 1798 and 1799. It is not clear who John Patrickson is, but he is possibly Downshire's land agent for the Blessington Estate. He wrote to him daily during 1798 giving him news about the rebellion and its effects on his Blessington property. However, twelve years earlier, it is clear that the house at Blessington was not being well maintained. A letter from a William Greene to Lord Downshire (then known as Lord Hillsborough), dated November 16, 1786, states:
'...I think everything your Lordship directed to be done at Blessington is doing, and what is finished will meet with your Lordship's approbation, as I know, everything that has been done has been execute on the lowest terms. The roof of the dwelling-house is repaired every week, and I think will not stand another winter but by a weekly expense is keeping out the rain, which came down several times in great plenty after every high wind that blew while I was there. The roof and slating of the stables are extremely well executed, and the repair of the park wall going on well and in the cheapest manner...'
It would appear from this account that the house was not lived in regularly and may have been a summer residence only. Some degradation to the parkland walls and the outbuildings had obviously taken place also.
As already stated, John Patrickson kept Lord Downshire informed about the 1798 rebellion and its effects on the property at Blessington in a series of letters exchanged between May 19, 1798, and April 17, 1799. On May 19, Patrickson reported that the house had been broken into and a number of guns and pistols stolen. On the May 21, Patrickson wrote to Lord Downshire stating that'...Blessington is in a dreadful state.' However, it is unclear if he is referring to the town or to the house and demesne. Later, on May 30 or 31, Patrickson wrote that the rebels were '…in force at Blessington…' but that Blessington House was safe. However, the very next day Patrickson sent a letter to Lord Downshire with the news that the rebels had destroyed the house:
'Blessington House and all its appendages and everything appertaining (except the church) are completely destroyed...Many remonstrances were made for assistance to General Dundas, but, as he said, other pressing and necessary occasions prevented him...'
A series of letters then follow during 1799 about a claim for compensation made by Lord Downshire to the Loyalist Board. On March 26, 1799, John Patrickson related that forty-two people in the neighbourhood of Blessington had been arrested and would be sentenced and tried for the burning of Blessington House. Most of the furniture of the house was found in their houses, and many more would be arrested in the future due to information gathered. Unfortunately, no further letters exist within the Downshire Papers to confirm if Lord Downshire ever received compensation from the Loyalist Board. However, from an examination of the historical maps, it is clear that the house was never repaired. On the 1804-07 estate maps, the house still appears relatively intact. By the first edition Ordnance Survey (O.S.) map of 1838, however, it is described as 'Downshire House (in ruins).' The house is almost completely removed by the time of the second edition O.S. map (1886), with only a tiny section of the ruin still standing. This is the same section of ruin that stands today.
The Demesne The 'demesne' concept can be traced to the medieval tenurial system, when a proportion of the lands of an estate were set aside 'in demesne' to produce both goods and profits for the estate. Although demesnes always retained their primary function, i.e. as a home farm, the process of landscape ornamentation, initially in the formal and later the informal styles, dramatically affected their size and layout during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (Reeves-Smyth 1997). Elements of both styles are visible at Blessington.
Geometric Landscapes 1660-1750 The term 'landscape,' derived from the Dutch landskip paintings, came into common usage during the late seventeenth century. Landowners were aware that the countryside around their houses could be 'designed' on a large scale. By organising the demesne fields into regular grid-like patterns and by extending the symmetry of gardens through long perspectives, new houses acquired an impressive setting that reflected their owner's power, status and wealth (Reeves-Smyth 1997).
The remarkable popularity of avenues was the most striking characteristic of the period. By the 1730s, almost every house of consequence boasted at least one tree-lined avenue, while some had complex avenues radiating across the landscape (i.e., 'crows-foot' pattern). Focused on the main façade, the avenues emphasised the centrality of the house in the landscape, while demonstrating ownership over everything it passed (Reeves-Smyth 1997). At Blessington, a 'crows-foot' pattern of avenues is visible in aerial photographs. The main avenue, focused on the church in the village, is still in use today. However, the other avenues are barely discernible at ground level. The full width of the main avenue would have been approximately thirty feet (or multiples of that), which was the norm at this time. The avenue incorporated the path itself, a lawn either side and a line of lime trees either side of the lawn. There would also have been approximately another fifteen feet of space to allow the lime trees to grow to their full potential, and this area was generally delimited, in turn, by a fence. This configuration is clearly visible in a painting of the front lawns of Blessington House from c.1710, attributed to Thomas Bate by Desmond Fitzgerald, The Knight of Glin (Christie's Catalogue 1993).
The engraving by Brooks (1745) also shows this configuration for the main avenue. Rocque's map of 1756 shows the full crows-foot pattern along with the formally laid out gardens at the back of the house. These formal gardens are also visible in aerial photographs, and the crows-foot avenues seem to be contemporary with them, although their exact alignment differs slightly from that illustrated by Rocque.
The construction of ponds and canals was also very much a feature of this period, and historical maps and primary sources indicate that certain of these elements were or are present at Blessington. The large circular pond at the front of the house was part of the original demesne layout. It is shown in the c.1710 painting. The streams that led to the two 'canals' are also just discernible in the painting. One 'canal' is shown in Rocque's map of 1756. It is possible that both canals and the other pond features were all created by this time. The main pond in front of the house is still filled with water, but the two 'canals' to the northeast and the southeast of the house have since dried up. The earthwork of the northwest canal is visible today, and a stream runs along the centre of it (Plate 9).
Landscape Parks 1750-1840 By the mid-eighteenth century, a reaction against formal symmetry in garden and park design led to the adoption of 'naturalised' parklands whose planting and layout reflected the natural world. The new style demanded that flowers, fruit and vegetables be enclosed in walled gardens away from the house and that formal features, such as parterres, straight avenues and canals, be removed and replaced with an idealised conception of 'natural' landscape (Reeve-Smyth 1997).
Some adaptation to the original demesne design was obviously attempted at Blessington in the eighteenth century to conform to the new 'natural' style. The only indication that the avenues were replaced by winding entrances comes from a sketched estate map of 1807 and from John Langfield's estate map of 1804, which show two avenues, one leading from the lodge to the back of the house and the other leading from the village to the offices beside the house. The first one would certainly have lengthened the journey from the road to the house and brought a visitor past one of the pond/canal features and into the house from the north, past the mountain views. This conjecture is difficult to confirm because there is no map dating to the late eighteenth century, before the house went out of use, showing this configuration.
John Langfield's estate map also shows the layout of the demesne at Blessington in 1804. Although the house had gone out of use, the demesne still appeared to be a working home farm. All the fields are named, along with all the features of the demesne, including 'offices,' 'gardens,' 'plantations,' 'ponds' and 'lawns.' The formal gardens have been opened up and are fringed with trees. The main avenue is no longer in use but its original line is shown by the two incomplete rows of trees either side of it. By the time of the first O.S. map in 1838, the demesne appears to have matured into this naturalised form, but this could simply be as a result of neglect. None of the avenues are shown, for example. However, the two incomplete lines of trees that lined the main avenue are still visible. Some neglect is evident, as the buildings called 'offices' are gone and Downshire House is described as 'in ruins.' The gardens at the back of the house are overgrown with trees, as is the bastion, and the northeastern canal appears to have dried up and is covered with trees also. It is possible that the canals were deliberately drained and planted with trees in an attempt to de-formalise the landscape. The haphazard nature of tree growth in the formal gardens area was also probably a result of some deliberate opening up of the landscape.
The construction of ponds and canals was also very much a feature of this period, and historical maps and primary sources indicate that certain of these elements were or are present at Blessington. The large circular pond at the front of the house was part of the original demesne layout. It is shown in the c.1710 painting. The streams that led to the two 'canals' are also just discernible in the painting. One 'canal' is shown in Rocque's map of 1756. It is possible that both canals and the other pond features were all created by this time. The main pond in front of the house is still filled with water, but the two 'canals' to the northeast and the southeast of the house have since dried up. The earthwork of the northwest canal is visible today, and a stream runs along the centre of it (Plate 9). 
John Langfield's estate map also shows the layout of the demesne at Blessington in 1804. Although the house had gone out of use, the demesne still appeared to be a working home farm. All the fields are named, along with all the features of the demesne, including 'offices,' 'gardens,' 'plantations,' 'ponds' and 'lawns.' The formal gardens have been opened up and are fringed with trees. The main avenue is no longer in use but its original line is shown by the two incomplete rows of trees either side of it. By the time of the first O.S. map in 1838, the demesne appears to have matured into this naturalised form, but this could simply be as a result of neglect. None of the avenues are shown, for example. However, the two incomplete lines of trees that lined the main avenue are still visible. Some neglect is evident, as the buildings called 'offices' are gone and Downshire House is described as 'in ruins.' The gardens at the back of the house are overgrown with trees, as is the bastion, and the northeastern canal appears to have dried up and is covered with trees also. It is possible that the canals were deliberately drained and planted with trees in an attempt to de-formalise the landscape. The haphazard nature of tree growth in the formal gardens area was also probably a result of some deliberate opening up of the landscape.