Well, this weekend produced some heavy activity on this topic. Thanks Housewright for getting Tedd Benson to chime in. He has great points indeed.

The Royal Navy in the 1300s is pretty funny. So is 14,000 years of timber framing in North America. Stone broadaxes, no doubt...

HWright: As far as the origins of CG you (and I) are still seeking, I thought we got that answered in large part by Will Truax. Ken Hume has found/ thinks there to be no evidence of an English carry-over, like I had originally surmised.

Mr. Truax said CG is a largely New England phenomenon, and northern NE at that. I remember him saying something to the effect of this style becoming popular "once the forests had been denuded of large timber.."

And it's nice to hear that Mr. Benson also sees a few advantages to the CG construction method. No doubt the early builders who "thought out of the box" did as well.

What is interesting, and Mr. Truax said this before, is why CG did not disseminate on a wider scale. I mean, if CG does have advantages, such as utilizing short timber, parts cutting efficency (girts and purlins same size, etc), and easier to erect than its long-plated contemporary... why do we see it only in these small pockets of Maine and New Hampshire?

Perhaps it was un-proven and too risky... perhaps we'll never know. I can live w/ that, but it's really pretty facinating to consider. How neat that it is being studied here today.

may the education continue...

Don

I heard back from Jan Lewandowski about connecting girt barns and with his permission here is his email response:
"Dear All,
Bent style barns are very common in the entire state of Vermont. I usually date them from about 1830 -1870, they are usually gable entry, on a banked basement, and the tie beams sit on tenons atop the posts. The plate is segmental , tenoning into the sides of the tie beam and sometimes it is merely a flying, or eaves plate or eaves purlin. There are certainly hundreds of them.
Sometimes there is a girt that tenons into the posts a little below where a plate would be, and the rafters bear only on the segmental flying plate, or tenon as principals onto the tie beam end, or have an intermediate principal (so called) that bears on the flying plate and is sometimes blocked off the segmental girt.
While this sort of frame gets along with the square rule tendency to mass produce short frame elements, and the gable entry tendency towards modular bays of equal spacing rather than spacing based upon function (though the aisle widths may reflect this), it definitely predates square ruling. In our truss book look at the 1799 Rindge Church (queenpost) and you will see a scribed frame with tie beams tenoned onto post tops and giant segmental plates (12x 24) tenoned into the sides of the ties.
Jan"

I am thinking they must extend into New York, too. Interesting to have evidence of scribed cg frames.

Jim

Hey All:

Jan Lewandowski's comments are a good addition to our little CG conundrum, which appears to be slowly becoming less of one. Thanks Housewright for digging around for some answers!!

Too bad more folks like Tedd B. and Jan L. are unaware or uninterested in the forum. I mean this thread has been viewed over 5,000 times now and we're just getting folks to speak at length on CG typology. ?!?!

If there are hundreds of CGs in Vermont, why did we not here from anyone earlier? Are Vermont timber enthusiasts few and far between? I doubt it.

Oh well, I knew when I encountered that first barn in Gray, Maine that it was built differently. I thought all barns had top plates tying bents together. It appears many others here did too.

Out of 5,000 views only a few have had anything substantial to add. Perhaps we should put bumperstickers on our vehicles: like barns? check out www.tfguild.org/forums ...maybe then more folks would find us!

Don

Hi Don,

Your comments above re Vermont are a blinding glimpse of the obvious.

The TFG has their own building research group - The TTRAG and possibly they should be afforded their own forum / topic / threads where serious researchers can pose questions and maybe even help formulate answers just as we have started to do here.

Unfortunately the current forum moderators rarely show up to assist and possibly its time for the executives to review the workings of the whole TFG forums.

Regards

Ken Hume

Indeed, Ken.

I almost emailed moderator Christian directly a few weeks ago in an attempt to "go right to the source" so to speak. I was getting little info... Thankfully, Mr. Truax piped in and that got the wheels turning.

Perhaps I should solicit the moderator anyway.

I agree. The forum could benefit from some changes.

Don

I agree as well.

I know the Guild is open to improving the forum. I started the following thread as a place for all of us to share ideas about how to make this place better. http://www.tfguild.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=15589&page=0#Post15589

I hope anyone with some good ideas will chime in.

thanks

Well, it looks like our visit to the GC barns will be this saturday the 14th. Send me a private email if you'd like details on time and place, etc.

Don,

I'm looking forward to the full report -- photos, too!

Ya'll have fun.

Gabel

Thanks Gabel ! but it seems the meeting is on hold for now .

Please diregard my last post. A new date is being set up. Details to follow...

If one were to plot the locations of these CG barns on a map where would they start and end? Are they located in a central location and spread out from there? And what is the central location?

I see Jim has only to travel 1.5 hrs to view the barns on Dons tour and has contact with 4 states. I, on the other hand can stay in the same state and travel 3.5 hrs to the same point.

It is my conclusion that barn typology doesn't follow state borders. I think it is more population density. Barns without Borders. There is always exceptions. Tim