Seven Myths About Bousillage: How Creole Buildings Were Really Made

Original newspaper submission, September 10, 2009. Historical reporting is retained; the newspaper issue date not recorded here. Natchitoches Preservation Network links now use its revived Ning address.

Last week I talked a little about what bousillage is. This time we’re investigating what it isn’t. Specifically, there are seven commonly held misconceptions associated with bousillage. This information comes out of podcasts on the topic I recently recorded with Marcy Frantom and Max Turner of Quality Finish, Inc. To hear the complete audio interview, visit natchitochespreservation.ning.com or search for “Natchitoches” on iTunes.

Ingredients and Techniques

Bousillage contains animal hair–deer hair in particular. This is an honest mistake. One of the ways people used to keep bousillage from dusting off into their formal rooms was to cover it with lime plaster. One common component of this plaster was horse hair. The moss mixed into the bousillage often resembles curly black hair, as well.

There is a consistent “master” recipe for bousillage. There are two actually two types of bousillage that were used in Natchitoches Parish. There’s the clay/moss mix, and then there’s an adobe variant that includes dried brick and straw or another similar binding material. The Cook’s cabin at Oakland plantation contains this adobe material. Additionally, south Louisiana moss may have been imported at times to make bousillage since it is longer and may have been perceived as a better quality binding agent.

Children made the bousillage. Making this historic building material was long, hard work, and somewhat dangerous. It certainly wasn’t a child’s activity. Where children were able to help was in the patch work, which was required each year to keep the material from cracking and falling out. This was especially critical for the chimneys, which could quickly degrade into a fire hazard if not maintained. Because the bousillage building tradition ended by about WWII, people probably remember repairs rather than the building process.

Misconceptions About Safety

Bousillage houses could be built in a day. Mud of any sort requires time to dry completely. Walls of it could take up to a year to cure completely. Bousillage required several days to mix and mellow before it was ready for use. Even then, walls could reliably be built two to three feet at a time. Each new section would be allowed to firm up (about a week) before another was built on top of it.

As an “Earth plaster,” bousillage is naturally safe and clean. Any material that comes out of dirt will have micro-organisms and allergens throughout. Bacteria and any number of fungi could flourish in its environment. That’s why limewash, which has natural antiseptic properties, was often used to cover it.

Because it’s dirt, bousillage is inherently unsafe and primitive. This is not quite the case either. In addition to being a terrific insulator, bousillage was the most efficient and freely available building material for this area. Some of these structures still exist in our area as a testament to its sturdiness. And, using lime or wood, it could be dressed up.

Fire was used to dry bousillage faster. Some folks have taken scorching on older bousillage to mean it was kiln dried or fires were built close to the structure to speed up the drying process. Taking into account the possibility of cracking due to uneven drying, and the danger of burning down the wood part of the structure, fire was probably not employed for this use. The scorch marks on early bousillage were more like due to oil lamps hung near the walls over the years.

What Remains

The buildings discussed in this 2009 column still provide opportunities to test claims about bousillage against surviving fabric. The National Park Service identifies historic examples at Oakland Plantation, Magnolia’s blacksmith shop, and the Badin-Roque House; the latter received a preservation plan and a community repair workshop. Conservation work also continues to teach how earthen infill should be handled rather than treated like modern masonry. These examples preserve both historic material and the practical knowledge needed to care for it. National Park Service: Bousillage · Badin-Roque preservation plan.

Updated October 2026

Supporting Documents & SourcesView related reporting & supporting materials
Article Catalog CardView the manuscript record, provenance & surviving materials
ArtifactNewspaper manuscript on bousillage construction misconceptions.
InstitutionNatchitoches Times; Natchitoches Preservation Network.
PeriodSeptember 2009.
RoleColumnist, interviewer and digital heritage practitioner.
EvidenceSeptember 10, 2009, email submission discussing podcast interviews with Marcy Frantom and Max Turner.
What survivesManuscript and correspondence; historical podcast references.
StatusArchival republication; newspaper edition and linked audio require verification.

Critical Questions + Add to the Record

Application here: Interviews with people experienced in bousillage correct misconceptions about traditional Creole building practices. The distinction between circulating information and conveying situated craft expertise remains essential.

ADD TO THE RECORD →

Know something that adds context, documentation, correction, or firsthand knowledge to this record? Keep this page open and copy its URL into the contribution form.


Discover more from Voices of the Past

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Comments

2 responses to “Seven Myths About Bousillage: How Creole Buildings Were Really Made”

  1. […] Seven Myths About Bousillage: How Creole Buildings Were Really Made […]

  2. […] Seven Myths About Bousillage: How Creole Buildings Were Really Made […]

Leave a Reply