Ken, I can not. I am such a dub when it comes to this stuff. I can just make it here. I think Housewright might? Jim, are you out there? Ken, I did order one of the 5 books on your list, Have not received it yet. I only looked through it on the table at TTRAG. There is 2 more I would like,#2&#3, but cash is low at this time. Tim

This frame typology (connecting girt frames) is ubiquitous to Most of NH and much of Maine -

The only mystery is how it was that English Tieing was abandoned (after two hundred years as the dominant system) and seemingly almost overnight, (I've been in but one frame I would call transitional - haveing both jowled posts and CG's) a totally new frameing scheme was in use over a relativly wide area. The only detail to survive the transition seems to be common purlins (in use from the end of the first period on ) and the two systems seem to share the same relative borders as to use and geographical dominance (Tim you and I discussed this at TTRAG) I'd love to hear from anyone who knows of such bldg's outside the area or see a discussion open up as to exactly where the lines of demarkation exactly lie.

This transition seems to have happened in the 1820's and was perhaps driven by a shrinking availability of long timber (the agrarian society having by this point largly denuded the region) Or maybe Square Rule it'self may have been a driving factor, (could the concept of the production of universal pieces have driven a change towards a framing scheme which has many more universal pieces ?) it also seemingly coming into full dominance in the same decade (I have never seen a scribed CG bldg) the answer is probably unknowable, though fun to wonder about.

Conversion and milling aren't necessarily reliable ways to determine probable building dates - The term Yankee Frugality was well earned and millers were and are by nature good at repair and keeping things running - a few up & down mills were known to still be running up through the 1950's

As a for instance as to how conversion can seem out of time - I was involved in the restoration of a CG barn a few years back, which town records showed to have been built in 1826 - every stick in it but the 5 X 5 horizontal nailers and the 3 X 5 braces was beautifully hewn (this in a town with multiple rivers and which had a number of sawmills and in which hewn members in other frames are usually limited to long plates and ties) the sawn pieces were from an up & down mill, but the braces were mass produced on some kind of dual bladed table saw - which simultaneously cut both sides of the tenon - both the shoulder side cheeks and the slight barefaced side reductions - This barely a decade after the invention of the circular saw and the advent of the "overnight success" of Square Rule - It was as if someone was choosing to use contradictory methodologies to goof on future timber geeks.

Hi Will,

Excellent discourse. I wish I could join you all on the TTRAG visits.

The answer about the conversion of timbers by hewing rather than sawing might lie in the saw power consumption i.e. maybe the local saws could handle up to 5 x 5 timbers but would have struggled beyond this size.

Northern Hewer,

Can you advise us with your experience of the Mulay saw as to what dimensions this type of water powered vertical reciprocating saw could process please.

Will T.,

Can you answer the question about the archives or is this a closely guarded secret ?

Regards

Ken Hume

The conspirator in me thinks...closely guarded secret. Xxx

I've seen plenty of full sized timber milled on an up & down - it is the norm - as is hewing being limited to long sticks - Mills were often some of the first buildings built in any town...

I think in this case it was simply that hewing tiny stock that won't hold still, is a bummer.

Can't answer the archive question - I'm not a made member. but as I understand it the surveys have not been digitized. I'm guessing, but there is probably not enough of them to show any emerging pattern - and there are huge regional variations in framing, usually driven by settlement pattern.

Out of the blue comes someone else who has seen this type of construction as a common practice. Thank you Mr. Truax.

I thought it had something to do with shortage of long timber. And Mr. Hume had mentioned that this "connected girt" (CG as Truax calls it), as a step toward modularization... All good information and entirely sensible.

Thank you for shedding light on my little conundrum. Yet it seems there is still plenty of mystery in regards to square/scribed rule and methods/dates of milled lumber, etc.

Incidentally, there is a sash-saw mill (up and down) not far from here that operated till 1969. Folks are trying to restore it, even replacing the dam in the river so they can have waterpower again... but folks are not about to let them dam the river and harm fish populations. It's a battle at the moment.

Again, thank you Truax and Ken, and all of you, for your help here. The forum is a great resource. I'm glad to have found it.

Don

In Loudon, NH, is a sawmill that is being restored.
TTRAG had a tour of the site once.

Here is a link to the site:

http://smf.websterridge.com/

And lots more pictures here:

http://www.pbase.com/ejohnw/sanborn_mills_farm

Jim Rogers

Mr. Truax,

Do you know if this "CG" style caught on in other areas of the US, or is it a New England thing? And would/do timber framers construct in this manner today?

I believe Ken Hume said it is not widespread there in his country, which is where I guessed it'd first started (because of shorter timbers, etc). Do you think it began here in New England?

Don

Hi everyone:

Just located this thread and after reading evey entry it seems that on has opened up a little mystery.

I have did much investigation in my time --in my area of the world, and I thoroughly agree that no one item will determine age.

Age is very hard to determine when it comes to building styles,
In my area (settled about 1784, by UEL's from the New England States) The original buildings were quite crude, and used only vertical sawn lumber to clad buildings, and sparingly!

There was quite an overlapping of the use of vertical sawn lumber and circular sawn lumber used on buildings. What I did was to determine at what time the first circular saw mill was located in an area, from the census records, and went from there.

before I leave sawing remember that both mills worked side by side for quite anumber of years, in the case of the 1846 MUlEY MIll at Upper Canada Village it was still operating into the 1900's when it finally gave away to technology and the circular saw. Another factor was the power source to drive the circular blades up to and keeping them at 7 to 800 revolutions under a load. Steam was required for that in our area the first steam saw mill within a driving distance of a particular building that needs dating was quite a factor.

Now nails were another factor, we have catalogues listing cut nails for sale years before they arrived in upper Canada, and even then if one could not afford them the black smith kept hammering out forged nails. There again nails could not be used to give close dating just rough dates.

If you ran acros a building exhibitng Hewn material along with vertical sawn lumber, hewn braces and hand made nails, you had a good find and probably could date it around here to 1784 and be close

The same type building with all timbers hewn, vertical sawn boarding, and cut nails, a bit later say 1840 or so,

The same type building with hewn plates and sawn short posts and cut nails a bit later yet about 1880.

Circular saws did not arrive here until noted in the first census in 1867, and then just a sprinkling, many (hundreds) of vertical saw mills were still in operation then.

From my research Circular saws were invented in England about 1800--maybe ken you could comment on this

All buildings that I surveyed in this area had the long plates I never witnessed any like the ones that Don seems to have uncovered, what a great find.

I could go on butI need to get going nice thread thanks don for sharing and all for jumping in-dating building is great fun and I thoroughly enjoyed my years in that role at UCV, and I wish that I had the imput from you all when I was piking around.

NH

Hi NH et all,

My good friend Chris How MSc. from Victoria, Australia sent me the following email extract this week which rather nicely helps put circular saw dating criteria into perspective -

"Thanks for the news Ken, and the reference from the Timber Framers Guild. The US probably mimics Australian experience with respect to having constantly moving frontiers. There is a claim by the Shakers in America that Sister Tabitha Babbitt invented the circular saw in 1810 at Harvard. The first British Patent was in 1777 by Samuel Miller in Southampton and it was perfected by Sir Marc Brunel and Bentham for use in Portsmouth Dockyard in 1809, however it is believed that Robert Hooke invented a small circular saw for the manufacture of scientific instruments in the 1670s.

The real problem was one of portable power, which was not solved till the advent of steam engines in 1805, but these were not widely available until the 1840s. In Australia, the ideas were known but there were no roads & very little infrastructure, so the engines that were imported came in by sea to places like Port Fairy, where they could be lifted onto a wharf. Last week I measured an 1849 Port Fairy cottage floor joist which had been conversted using a 2 feet dia circ saw. Table 4 on p46 of my dissertation is not as conclusive as I had previously thought, but that more powerful engines could drive larger dia blades, however these could not be moved far. The 16 inch blades that I previously found must have still been in use for some time after, and like the item says, used for making laths & battens. You may be interested to note that Scotsmen were the most advanced or far sighted in respect of employing portable engines here in Victoria. Labour was difficult & expensive up to the 1880 depression. Roger Champion (Weald & Downland museum carpenter - now retired) told me that pit sawing was still practiced in Sussex in 1930, & this practice is also mentioned in "The Village Carpenter" of course. So to get early circ saws marks you need expensive labour and good infrastructure. It varies obviously from place to place in Australia and so there may be no hard and fast rule."

The Australian experience might not be exactly the same as New England but Chris raises many good points especially with respect to Power / saw blade diameter / infrastructure / and rather surprisingly Scotsmen of which I am one ! Having been brought up and attended university in Glasgow near the birth place of the modern steam engine I am not surprised by Chris How's proposal that the link between that country and New England building practice might lie more with timber conversion related issues.

This forum thread has demonstrated the value of taking advantage of international joined up thinking to help solve local problems.

Regards

Ken Hume