What is the difference between vernacular architecture and traditional architecture?
Answers
Vernacular is traditional but vice versa may be debatable.
E.g. using materials like bamboo, thatch, mud walls which do not require skilled labour and detailed planning can be attributed to vernacular architecture. Basically, structures on a small scale and in rural locality, constructed by the inhabitants themselves and decorated using organic or home made paints. These do not require professional inputs from architects, engineers or project managers; and do not need any heavy machinery for construction.
On the other hand, traditional architecture would have had (before RC / steel construction came into effect) required some architect/designer/engineer to have conceptualized the design/planning and overseen the construction on employing skilled labour. Here, the materials would have been predominantly brick, stone, stone carvings/claddings, timber, or a combination of these. The traditional part may be attributed by means of stylistic approach as per prevailing period / -isms or re-visualizing the same in later era (neo-…)
On the contrary, traditional buildings built today using present technology and materials wherein the material used may not be true to the architectural element cannot be called traditional architecture.
But, this is debatable if a structure is designed with a finesse and style of previous eras; and with traditional construction practices like load bearing structure and materials in the same context yet current functional requirements. Then it would be a traditional structure (at least in appearance). E.g. the Royal Supreme Court of Bhutan may be considered as traditional architecture due to its design being contextual to the region, but may not be if the construction is with current materials. There will be certain level of ambiguity in classification.