I have a few pics and video clips to share from the recent TTRAG conf. in York, Maine. Will get them up soon. Others must have some to post as well.
It was a great conference: I worked up a sweat hewing, AND sat on my butt listening to a diverse group of speakers... even got to meet the venerable Jack-- even shook his hand (I didn't wash my hand for many, many hours!)
As far as "virtual before actual," it was pretty refreshing to actually experience being a member of the TFG !!
I do have a question to pose: some video includes our most venerable, Mr. Sobon, talking over a log w/ other attendees about the finer points of hewing. A neat exchange. But I don't want to offend Jack. I guess I'm wondering if he would object to that getting put up on youtube.
I think that it might prove diplomatic to simply send him a copy of the video to play on his computer so that he can see what you are proposing. Keep in mind that he makes his living providing classes and if your video is well made then this could just make Jack obsolete.
I recently attended a wedding reception and noted that there were a number of people aiming digital video recorders at our family group and this felt a bit like being under surveilance by the Stazi - not nice !
Now that you are a fully paid up member of the TFG please note under the TTRAG web pages that "The archive will be open to all Guild members for their study purposes. Not only will it be a record of historic structures, but it will aid in the advancement of the crafts practiced today." I hope that you can share with us whether this actually works in practice.
I had the opportunity, once I hope, to work in a house with a camera monitoring system, very awkward. Now with modern technology advancing rapidly it is more common for such thing to happen, especially in open public demonstrations such as the hewing demo. I wonder, legally, if there is any way to protect ones self from unwanted use of such a video? Or, if when speaking to someone in a particular environment, so be it. What about the demonstrator, Mike Beaudry? Does he have any say in the issue?
I did like the light medieval T-axe Mike had on display and use/trial.
Its worth taking a look at the Bayeaux tapestry where you will see embroidered illustrations of tee hewing axes in use by the Normans as they prepared planks for their invasion ships. One has to take care about interpretation of such historic artefacts because they reckon that this tapestry was actually put together by the English (its their story after all) and so they would have used images about which they were familiar and therefore these illustrations might not necessarily have been Norman axe illustrations but more English axes. There is one in Winchester city museum. Do you have a digi pic of Mike's Tee axe ?
I'll try to reach Jack about posting the video. As Tim pointed out, Jack did not lead the demonstration...my suggestion that Jack was going over the finer points of hewing may be exaggerated. He didn't actually hew anything. But he did have some neat recollections and suggestions, etc. And he was a bit miffed by the medieval "t-axe."
I left Jack a voice mail today and am waiting for a reply. Meanwhile, Mike Beaudry has given the "all clear" for me to post these clips where he instructs me in the art of hewing.
This log was huge; not something to learn on really. I can sympathize w/ paying someone else to hew! I got bloody knuckles...
When the axe price goes over $600 I draw the line. Maybe I will have to try to make one.
I had to click on some of the other hewing videos and a almost disturbing seen arose, a fellow hewing with bare feet! I can say he was most efficient though.
Don the handle on the scoring axe was short for the job. The one I use, I can stand up right and still reach the bottom of the log. You did well.
Its interesting that the Tee axe was made by Gransfors and that they based their version on an early 11th century Danish shipbuilding axe. That means that this shape of axe was in use in England / France / Denmark at the same time and thus it is very likely that this was a long established and widely used pattern. Can someone with experience using this axe give us their impressions please.
Don I agree with Tim that the scoring axe was far too short for you. The log is very big and really way beyond the optimal size for hewing and especially the resultant log face was very deep. To reduce wastage it would have been much better to square a log like this using hewing and then halve it by sawing. History is revealing that timbers employed in early buildings were generally small and fit for purpose (just) and thus the amount of wood being removed was fairly minimal.
We talked about the size of the log while helping Mike set up, and ended up with the same results you did, Ken. The fellow doing the hewing should be selecting the logs needed and the resulting size would be "just right". The log was not selected by the hewer, he had to work with it though.
I only pealed off a couple of feet and found the T-axe to be rather light, which I liked, it is used with the blade parallel to the log not angled, with other axes I find you have some freedom of angle, this one liked to be parallel. I would use it to clean up the last 1/4" of thickness for its light weight would prevent heavy wood removal. Mike jokingly commented it would be his axe he will use in his retirement years, it is not one of his primary axes. That is my limited impression, about 2', but enough to make me want to try it a lot more. It is a single bevel axe.
I had to click on some of the other hewing videos and a almost disturbing seen arose, a fellow hewing with bare feet! I can say he was most efficient though.
Tim
That Japanese hewer w/ the bare feet is hard to watch! He could loose a toe (or all of them) and not even realize it. But it must be a neat sensation to "feel the log" through the soles of your feet as you hew...
Here's what Mr. Beaudry wears on his feet:
As well as Tim, Gabel also tried the Tee axe. any comments Gabel? (If I'm allowed to post the video of Jack, you'll see Gabel using the Tee axe).
I'll try to get Mike Beaudry to join us and comment on the t-axe further. He said he visits the forum once in a blue moon.
Ken --that's a good point. To all of us who were there, it was immediately apparent that Mr. Beaudry had his hands full demonstrating with the log that was provided. (No offense meant to Dan who in the midst of organizing the conference found a free log for Mike to hew).
As for my impressions of the T axe -- I would love to have one (but I am a bit of an axe collector). Gransfor's replica is extremely well made and nice to use. It is super light weight. I think it would be easy to leave a nice finish with it by making a final pass. It would not be my main axe, but something fun to pick up occasionally.
It was a bear, Dave. Or should I say an elephant. It felt like trying to slay an elephant w/ a slingshot.
Watching that Japanese hewer again got me thinking: he's letting the axe do the work. You always hear "let the saw do the work..." Well, he's letting the axe just fall into the log...just guiding it. He also had a nice long handled axe.
At TTRAG, I, on the other hand, was beating that poor log senseless; it took bites out of me too!
I've learned that there is an art to swinging things. It's important for a couple of reasons. When forging iron, there is no point in driving the hammer into the iron as hard as you can, you will just get hurt. Put some force into the swing, then just guide the hammer home. Hewing, as taught to me by Jack Sobon, is much the same. I haven't hung my smaller broad axe head yet. I tried hewing with a coopers broad axe, but it is too light, and not shaped properly. I tried several different axes at the workshop, and I found the one I liked the most was 7". I turns out that I had 7" and 9" broad axe heads in my shed. I've got a 40' plate to hew out for my barn repair project, so I need to start practicing.
While chatting, in line for lunch, with J. Sobon I learned a number of things which I am keeping in mind as I survey old barns. Another tidbit of info I picked up on was Jack is contemplating e-mail, he is realizing he is missing out with the speed at which things are progressing and feels he will need to keep up to stay sharp with the rest of the world. Where will this lead? Asked if he would use CAD to draw with, "Definitely not, I can draw faster with pencil and paper".
I would have cleaned the log before the axe work. As I looked and handled Mike's axes I noticed they were not recently sharpened and the one which had been used for juggling was too dull to hew with. I am not nit picking at Mike, it would be my understanding that a number of the axes presented were not used on a regular basis and the ones used regularly simply needed a quick touch up, as any working tool requires. With peace and quiet I am sure Mike will be tuning his axe as needed.
Another tidbit of info I picked up on was Jack is contemplating e-mail, he is realizing he is missing out with the speed at which things are progressing and feels he will need to keep up to stay sharp with the rest of the world.
Tim
That's interesting. Perhaps even a natural progression, albeit a slow one for Jack, I guess.
One would think he's almost embarrassed when asked by his peers how they might share info w/ him. The phone and U.S. Mail are not really what professionals are using today.
I raise my glass at the prospect of "jack@timbermaster.com"
This is a great thread with great feedback of the TTRAG event.
Early in this discussion about the use of pictures and video shot by others, I would like to add my comment:
I demonstrated for many years the traditional hewing of timber to many hundreds of thousands of tourists and students from one end of this country to another, and I never questioned what or where my image ended up. It was though improper for my employer to use my image to sell a product like a post card without my authorization and consent.
Having said that I do not believe that a casual video shot by an interested party warrants scruitiny, yet also having said that I also know that the world is changing rapidly and one has to be careful.
Those are great shots of axes and The hewing video is great.
I used a scoring axe that had a fairly long (hand made) handle which would reach below my feet as I bent slightly. This of course would depend on the size of the log that needed to be hewn. I sympathize with I believe Our barns who said about the type of log because I have visited and hewn at events where the logs were donated and they were usually monsters to work with!!!.
I personally never met Jack Sobon and maybe never will, I would like sometime to just spend some time chattng with him over a cup of tea and compare notes.
Anyway this is a great topic and one that runs close to my heart.
If anyone has any questions feel free to fire away
Don, really nothing new more confirmation of things, reminders of what to look for. On a previous thread, I started, on square rule questions and the different possibility of the approach to square rule, gains, reductions, housings, and how they were done. I am still working on it, I just need the right building, one that is coming apart to find the lack of marriage marks. This may lead me to change, in a slight way, how I cut my joints. I am always looking for accurate short cuts.
I also wanted to comment on the other speakers at TTRAG, I enjoyed them all. The fellow from Canada and his summation of the settling of Eastern Canada had a particular interest to my area of the world. Although we are separated by a present day boundary does not mean that was the way it always was. The French and Indian Wars or 100 Year Wars destroyed a lot of history while creating it at the same time. The bit of information on dikes and the French Acadians use of them, for agricultural use struck home for there are dikes built here and all along the Maine coast in the tidal rivers. He had commented that they were exclusive to Nova Scotia, well they actually are present here in Machias and in Scarborough, just south of Portland, it was settlers from Scarborough that settled Machias. These settlers were the folks replacing the displacement of the Acadians in the mid 1700s. It was not a virgin settlement. Jack commented he wanted to hear more about the barns, the speaker was more of a historian than barnoligst and he ran out of time.
I demonstrated for many years the traditional hewing of timber to many hundreds of thousands of tourists and students from one end of this country to another, and I never questioned what or where my image ended up. It was though improper for my employer to use my image to sell a product like a post card without my authorization and consent.
Having said that I do not believe that a casual video shot by an interested party warrants scruitiny, yet also having said that I also know that the world is changing rapidly and one has to be careful.
NH
Thanks for the comments, NH.
Regarding the request to post the video, I haven't heard jack from Jack.
I was thinking about it the other day...he probably had only an inkling of what I was saying on that voice mail. I mean he may have no idea what youtube even is. He could have thought I was drunk, slurring my words. He either dismissed my message as that of a crazy man, or he's simply too busy to respond.
What I have is a 6-minute clip of him, Gabel, Mike Beaudry and a handfull of other attendees simply shooting the bull on hewing. I like it b/c it's informal and shows Jack in a relaxed "time off" mode. He's just commenting (with his hand in his pockets at times) and sharing recollections of his own hewing history. He picked up the Tee axe, gave it a look-see and commented. Gabel is shown hewing w/ that axe a bit, too.
I guess I asked Jack whether he objected to my posting the video b/c he is a celebrity in the TF world and I want to show some respect-- especially given the seemingly reclusive profile he has w/in TFG.
I'm sure he saw me "filming." I was just feet from him holding my camera kind of low.
Funny how one can publish a book and want that promoted, but pictures and video can be another matter. Most likely b/c books are edited by those involved in the process.
At any rate, I never wanted to profit from that video, just share it w/ our community as many of us respect and are curious about this man they call Jack. But as NH also pointed out, the world is changing rapidly and one has to be careful...
Perhaps I should write him a letter w/ a copy of that video enclosed and explain, if I can, what youtube is.
I also wanted to comment on the other speakers at TTRAG,...The bit of information on dikes and the French Acadians use of them, for agricultural use struck home for there are dikes built here and all along the Maine coast in the tidal rivers. He had commented that they were exclusive to Nova Scotia, well they actually are present here in Machias and in Scarborough, just south of Portland, it was settlers from Scarborough that settled Machias.
Tim
Tim,
That's neat. I was in Scarborough this weekend and remember driving by "Tide Mill Lane" near the Scarborough Marsh. There were also tidal mills (saw mills) in the town of Phippsburg, near Bath Iron Works.
I really enjoyed the film we saw: "The Heart of the Farm." I bought a copy of that. It was amazing to see the old barn raising footage with the men sitting on bents, riding them as they rose, pushed by pike poles. That must have been quite a sensation.
If someone knew the "reason" why they rode those bents as they went up, it would be nice to share with us, who don't.....
Jim --
I imagine they rode the bents because it was easier and faster than shimmying up a post. They had to connect several girts before the bent would stand there on its own, so they rode up it in place in order to be in position to make the connections, rather than bothering with ladders or scaffolding or any of that sissy stuff.
Back in the day they didn't go down hill skiing, para sailing or even bungee jumping so they rode bents into the sky and broke green horses for the needed adrenaline fix.
Dave, interesting synchronicity. I decided to mail him a copy today...was at the post office this afternoon. Jack should have it tomorrow or friday, latest.
Thanks for the legwork. Did Jack mention he'd received my voice mail?
I also took Ken's advice and emailed Will Beemer about asking Jack, etc.
Glad to hear TTRAG was a success, wish I hadn’t had to miss it.
Been off the board for awhile but thought I’d weigh in on the Tee Ax as I had a chance to play with one at the Clumps event. I liked it enough that I found myself hankering for one, though I have yet to fulfill that desire.
Despite an immediate liking for it, It was, like all Gränsfors axes, a little light for me. I prefer to spend my energy lifting an ax, then letting its own heft carry it though the slice, rather than having to power it down through the cut.
That aside, I found it a exceptionally controllable ax and one I would use regularly.
To quote Richard Harris - "Where there's a doormat there's usually a door".
The Bayeux tapestry is that doormat and it might well be that what we are seeing being hewed with a tee axe are planks and not beams i.e. this axe is being used as a finishing axe rather than a wood removal tool.
Will, you have the experience of using one of these axes - does this make any sense ?
It pictures and refers to the Bayeux Tapestry, and under their own description of this ax they characterize its use as that of smoothing planks for house and boat construction.
What you ask does make sense, especially for light axes, but I may not be the right hewer to ask, I remove ninety percent of waste with a heavy Jersey pattern felling Ax, and have always seen broad axes as finishing tools.
I only own one Gränsfors, a used single bevel that belonged to DEW another lefty. I had an abundance of axes by the time they came onto the scene.
"We build too many walls and not enough bridges" - Isaac Newton
I went to see the Bayeux tapestry in Bayeux, France with Tom Musco a few years ago and this is displayed in a horse shoe shaped artificially lit glass case which is located inside a dimly lit room. The last 5 - 10 meters of this tapestry is now missing and is thought to have been deliberatlely cut off and destroyed because it was thought to contain scenes that did not please the Normans. It contains surprising scenes of pre battle naked encounters between soldiers and lusty wenches leaving little to the imagination and along with Piers the Ploughman is one of the few visual record sources of early medieval life (and death). Just incase Will missed it I did post a relevant extract from the tapestry on page 1 of this thread.
That's interesting Ken. Axes and nudity, who'd have guessed
But seriously, the tapestry must be quite a sight. Glad you thought of it to further our discussion on the T-axe. Very interesting.
That T-axe is kind of a hybrid between an axe and a knife, like a machete. I wonder why it fell out of favor (into obscurity)? Most of us who have used and/or seen it like its design.
I received a call from Jack this morning. He has given the green light for this video clip to appear on YouTube.
Unfortunately, the resolution is poor on YouTube. My camera took very clear footage. If you'd like a copy, I can mail one for you to play at home on your DVD player. PM me for details.
I much enjoyed your video and noted with interest how most people including Jack made a bee line for the Tee axe. The guy who took a few swings at the log with the tee axe pulled a chunk out of the cheek so I don't think that this axe was as sharp as needed to put a fine finish on the log.
There is no doubt that this kind of video is both informative and instructive and a little bit of fun as well.
Ken, that was Gabel who was trying the tee axe.... he has posted in this thread.... Also seen in this video was Jim Derby who posts here as Housewright. I'll have to watch closely again to see if Timbeal was there then or not.... He was there a lot but may have walked off to tour other nearby structures.... as part of our tour...
I much enjoyed your video and noted with interest how most people including Jack made a bee line for the Tee axe.
Regards
Ken Hume
Hi Ken:
Yes, the Tee Axe was an oddity and drew many onlookers (including Gabel who wanted to try some hewing).
This interest is just what I was refering to back a couple posts about why this axe fell into obscurity. I mean if we're drawn to it and folks like Will T. and Gabel like using it, why did it "disappear?" Perhaps something replaced it (hand planes?) for smoothing planks, etc...
Anyway, glad we could all see the video at last. I should have listed those who appeared. I thought most everone knew who Gabel was from previous conferences, etc...
My take on the T axe after using it is that is a smoothing tool -- to be used as much for planks and other scantlings as anything else. It's really cool, but not much use for the kind of hewing I do.
I still want one badly, though, as it is such a well made tool and I'm sure I can find a use for it...
Re Jack's observations about exact 18" separations on scoring marks this rang a bell inside me. A few years back when I was doing recording work in the Bishop's Camera roof at Farnham Castle I noted that the 6" wide x 5" deep rafters were set exactly on 18" centres. This means that there is a gap of only 12" between each rafter. I frequently have arguments with aspiring old building recorders about using feet and inches rather than metres and centimeters to measure and record old buildings. English Heritage insists on using metres but 2.4384 metres just doesn't mean as much to me as 8ft, nor can one derive much sense from it. But I digress, the rafters in the Camera roof were beautifully smooth and so I examined the surface finish in the somewhat dim light to try and establish whether this was a planed, hewn, adzed or sawn finish and I never did manage to arrive at a conclusion. Now the rafters on this roof have been dendro dated to about 1380 ( http://www.dbrg.org.uk/DENDRO/dendrolist4FC.html ) and I am now wondering if what I was seeing was a tee axe finish. We know for sure that this axe was around in 1066 and from other reports its use was widespread over Europe so as Don asks above when did its use expire and why ?
Anyone wanting to make a virtual tour of this roof can drop me an email and I will send them a naviagable *.mov file that permits full 360 degree (spherical) rotation and zoom in and out. I will also try and figure out how this can be posted on this forum for download (about 2.5mb).
Do you have to download Win Live ID ? I opened it in Miro and something ain't right.
As a sidenote - I thought it was bad enough that we built the NMT building in that base ten nonsense, but to record historical structures built in Imperial with it seems absurd.
One of the coolest things I've ever held in my hands was at Frame '02 when I saw you last, Mr Goodburn's pieces of Roman wharf constructions from deep in the mud of the Thames at Lundinium, chunks of joined timber two millennia old, with measureable 2" M&T's and 1" pegholes. Are they perhaps recorded in Mils somewhere in the dark halls of academia ?
"We build too many walls and not enough bridges" - Isaac Newton
That "Camera Roof" virtual tour is neat. It took some figuring in order to get it to "play," but after reading Ken's comment:
Shift key to zoom in, Control key to zoom out Look around - Use your mouse to circle around the roof.
I was able to view the interior of the roof, which can make you dizzy!!
That rafter spacing is very tight; the building's a fortress of timber. Must have had a very strict (or paranoid) code enforcment officer back in the day!!
And feet and inches makes the most sense to me. But then again, I'm an American born and raised on the "foot and inch."
As an aside, that's great news about being able to upload small files here. Kudos to Joel, (bow).
.MOV files can be a bit problematic for non-Mac users. I'm guessing Will had a problem viewing Ken's link because of this. .MOV is a "Quicktime" or Apple-based format. Windows Media Player will not play these files b/c Windows and Apple are arch enemies.
.MOV files will open and play just fine on "RealPlayer" or "QuickTime" (both free to download from the web.
Re Jack's observations about exact 18" separations on scoring marks this rang a bell inside me. A few years back when I was doing recording work in the Bishop's Camera roof at Farnham Castle I noted that the 6" wide x 5" deep rafters were set exactly on 18" centres. Regards
Ken Hume
Ken, this is an aside, but in the video, Jack stated the juggles were 16" not 18" apart... "16 inches on-center" was his comment.
I am sorry - that mistake was a result of a case of early morning Stanley rule dyslexia. I should of course stated 16".
The Bishop's Camera roof rafter spacing is also 16" as well and very conveniently this works out at 3 x 16 = 48 i.e. 4 ft spacing every 3rd rafter. That means that the nominal space between the rafters is now only 10". A skinny man (not me) can climb through the gap between the collars and into the space above between the scissor braces - just!
I think that I have managed to get it right this time - I hope!
I almost would bet the key figure is 48" and this is split into the 3 segments. Does this fit into the daisy wheel layout system? 12 is an important number now and much more so in the past, 12 signs of the zodiac, 12 apostles, and the measuring system in base 12. When did the metric system come into wide use in Europe? We do have 10 fingers but that is too easy.
Gabel, can you shed some light on the daisy wheel and its relation, if any?
My understanding of the 16" framing system is that the size of a brick was established by royal decree.(A roman "brick" took 2 men to handle, the English realized that a better way was to hold a smaller brick in one hand and a trowel in the other) Later it was decreed that a fireplace would be a minimum of 2 bricks wide. This made firewood typically 16" long. Owner builders having moved into their home's shell would while away the winter splitting and applying lath, the easiest source was the woodpile and so they studded accordingly. This came from David Lyle's "The Book of Masonry Stoves". It's the only place I've seen that story.
I burn wood, get it delivered cut & split in standard 16" length, and never considered the origin of this dimension. Fascinating.
Tim, daisy wheel / base-12, etc, would be an excellent new topic. That upcoming geometry workshop w/ Laurie Smith has me drooling. The roots of it all...
Perhaps Gabel can advise, but as I understand it, won't any dimension fit in the daisy-wheel system provided you base your wheel on that particular length to start with? I mean, there's no set wheel diameter, correct? We can use the wheel whether it's a foot wide or 15 feet wide, yes?
I think that you will find that Laurie will talk about proportions and not dimensions. What is interesting about the 16" centre to centre is that this is clearly a measured dimension that corresponds with todays unit of measure. The metric system of measurement was introduced in the UK in the late 60's early 70's but I think that this has been the standard way of measurement on mainland Europe for centuries. England had a bit of an aversion to the use of bricks after the Roman occupation and it wasn't until the late 1500's / early 1600's that building with brick really took off. Prior to this it would more likely have been stone or wattle & daub with no fireplaces so the 2 bricks wide fireplace theory is liable to flounder. In any event fuel wood was brought home in bundles [faggots] and this was more like brushwood (lop & top) than split logs.
Ken is right -- the daisy wheel and other geometric design schemes are independent of any unit of measure.
However, it is quite easy to add that "dimension" (pardon the pun) to the method by making the radius of the wheel in your design drawings a known division of the radius in the actual building layout.
eg, your building's real size may be based on using a radius of 12 feet to draw the daisy wheel. If you make your drawings with a radius of 1 foot, you would have scale drawings -- 12 to 1 scale. Of course any scale can be used. At that point any dimension can be scaled off your drawings by setting the dividers to the two points in the drawing and stepping off 12 times.
You can certainly build using geometrical systems without using any standard unit of measure -- you can just draw it out using any arbitrary setting and say that the building will be 10 times this big and set your dividers and step off 10 times and make your own story pole or "rod". then use that rod to swing the arcs to lay it out full size on the ground, etc.
But more commonly, I would think, the builder was working with a commonly held unit of measurement in order to communicate with clients, suppliers, and tradesmen. My understanding is that the rod was a commonly used standard measurement for building.
There is something in your hypothesis. Most old timber framed buildings and especially cottages that I check out are about 16 - 18 ft wide. The room that I am sitting in right now is 16.5ft wide [of/of] and this is the old medieval measurement called the rod, pole or perch. Heresay has it that this is the length of the shaft between 2 oxen and that this shaft was used to measure and buck trees in the woodland.
The answer to this question must lie in fact based observations and thus a quantitative survey of building widths would establish whether or not a standard unit of building width measurement was employed. Though I have not done this study I have examined records for about 1500 buildings and found that there is a statistical distribution curve of building widths and therefore this would appear to rule out the concept of standard measurements being employed so what then could drive the establishment of building layout dimensions? The answer might lie with the trees themselves in that in most buildings the longest timbers are the tie beams, cross beams and cross sills. Wall plates, girding rails, purlins and long sills are generally composites i.e. scarfed and so do not require the longest timbers. Thus it might make sense for the builder to examine the logs to hand and then optimise building width based on the mix and then as Gabel suggests simply use a string and pegs to layout the footprint of the building. The one place where this practice might be more constrained is when building in a town on a medieval burgage plot of fixed dimensions. I have checked out the design of a building in Farnham, Surrey with Laurie and we found that it was laid out and cross frames spaced using overlapping circles i.e. string & peg.
From experience in my own woodland I know that I can easily prune most trees with the aid of an extending pole saw to about 16 ft. By the time the pole is extended to the range 18 - 22 ft it becomes much more difficult to clean the trunk becuase the pole becomes more vertical and the amount of bend or whip in the pole begins to make sawing difficult and the saw becomes trapped in the kerf as branches droop before they fall. In medieval times commoners were free to take branch wood for faggots (by hook or by crook) from woodlands and probably most landowners would have encouraged this practice since it would have provided them with good clean standing trees thus woodland management practice might play a larger part in building layout than we might currently credit today especially since most people tend to be well divorced from the origins of timber (Home Depot).
This might prove to be an interesting dissertation topic for a bright student to pursue.
As the originator of this TTRAG thread, I suggest that all Daisy Wheel and related posts dealing w/ proportions be entered here where Tim Beal has already begun a thread:
