Built in 1830 ? (was Dating 18th/19th century Details)

[jharkin]

Oh another thing... Fire.

I DID notice that some of the framing around that back chimney is charred. I thought maybe there was a chimney fire that got out of hand one. Maybe the addition burned and was rebuilt? Would that explain the newer looking floor and rafter framing?

[gregV]

Yes, I know, I have nothing better to do today. I'm killing time these next few days before I have to drag my a$$ down to NYC to meet a client. Uggg.. Plus it's nothing but WET outside.

Jeremy, you wrote

And now the BIG mystery!! What ever happened to the original cooking fireplace? The ell opens directly from the old kitchen, however there is NO third fireplace on the central chimney, instead the steam boiler in the basement vents up through the space where one would be. See how the hearth extension in the 2 front halls are supported on the chimney girts? No evidence of anything similar for the kitchen or even such framing having been removed (no mortises from a removed girt) .

I did two quick sketches. First is a "typical" floor joist layout for a cape of our period. Second one is what I believe yours is 'now. NOT TO SCALE

I put red dots on the second one. Are there NO signs f a mortise or joist pocket there? I'm sure the joist I put the red dots on are original as I assume they run from front to back in one piece.?


This picture made me a bit suspicious. I don't know, just looked like that tenon was 'odd' or played with. Is that pocket where the tenon going into a mortise or was it cut out as a pocket so that beam could be dropped in? Just looks light in color. You know where I'm going here.

[jharkin]

Ok, we might have the clincher here. I never thought about it before, but sure enough, there are no marks of removed shingles where the addition meets the main roof.



In the basement I do see some subs of a possible removed beam underneath where the wall is, but there is not much other evidence of changes. All the subfloor boards are continuous across this space. Interestingly though these subfloor boards are almost 20in wide. Seems big for post 1800 I would think? Yet other details are starting to say otherwise...




I will have to sketch out the framing plan... its a bit different than what you have.

[jharkin]

Other details.

The bricks in the center chimney are 7.5x3.75x2. The chimney is rebuilt but they may have reused the old brick... looked too new to me but maybe just cleaned up.

The bricks in the second chimney are 7.5x3.5x2... pretty close. The cooking fireplace in the second chimney is tiny... only 27x28.

Here is a closeup of that paneling. The stiles have a hand planed look to them but the panels themselves are too perfectly flat. I doubt its old. The cabinet to the right is new, the doors are of modern machine cut wood and the inside is drywall.

[gregV]

J. it's the bricks in the hearth of the parlor fireplace you want to measure as those are original and have never been altered, I believe.
Your measurments are about spot on for the period house. Sounds like the bricks in the yellow kitchen are period bricks. Closeup picks of the mortar would be good, maybe.

With what you have found in the ell attic and what you have further explored in the main cellar, I think we are getting pretty safe saying that this house is more original then you may have first thought. Though considerably later. Post 1820 for sure. It could be a VERY important house if in fact all is original. I don't want to jump the gun because I am only going on what we have all discussed here and pictures. So take all of this with many gains of salt. But at the moment I'm putting some cash down on that its original.
If it is then I am not so sure there are that many houses as early as yours that were actually built with the intention of having no, at that time traditional kitchen and instead making space for a modern one.
I enjoy this so you know J. I am always learning and I can't get enough of that when it comes to this stuff

OK, so now it's time to explore if this kitchen had a firebox with beehive at one time and then was either lost due to fire, age or just became obsolete, and what is there now taking it's place,...or is what's there now original or modern. You know what I think.
BY THE WAY, I am only talking about the masonry, not any surrounding work
Is the owner before you that had the masonry done available to talk with? What does he remember?

When you get time to start researching the ownership of the home at your town hall records room, then this may really help. When the first owners died they will most likely have a inventory list of all items in the home upon his death for tax reasons. If he had daughters then there is a chance that many of the kitchen items were given to her prior, if she was married.
I would think that in your town that this job may be not too hard. Just need to work back from you, every step of the way. It gets confusing when you get into the 19th century.

[James]

Ok, don't claim to be an expert, especially on Yankee architecture. But a few observations. If you have cut nails then clearly your house dates to post 1790-1800. If you are in a rural area with less access to cut nails back then, possibly later.
Your floor boards look a lot like my original ones. As for the ell not having a sub floor, none of them likely would have back then
As for your ell, since that has a ridgepole, then it is clearly considerably later than the main house. No ridge pole here in the 18th century gable roofed kitchen/slave quarters or in the mid 19th century replacement kitchen. The main house here had extensive repairs/rebuilding of the top section of the gambrel roof by the PO in the 90's so can't date by that. I would have thought the mid 19th century building was to late for no ridgepole, but there is not one. So your rear ell having one makes me thing mid19 century, or later for that.
20 wide boards would seem to indicate earlier than some of your other features. Thats very wide. My widest are 16, and not many of those.
Do you have exposed ceiling beams? Or did you ever? Lots of them get covered over. Mine were once, by a victorian beaded board ceiling that was taken out by Preservation NC before they sold the house to the PO.
My best guess is main house is likely some bit newer than you originally thought, like Greg said, and the ell is mid or later 19th century.

[gregV]

Hey James.

Yea, agree pretty much on the nails, and also that this house has cast butt hinges. That makes it post 1790 most likely. l also agree that 20" is very wide for sub floors for this period, but I just consider this an anomaly as the house is clearly of the post 1790 period.
I'm sure the main house here has a five sided ridge pole. Ridge poles came in to use here about 1790. I believe the Ell here dates the same as the house and there is evidence that clearly shows it was all built at the same time. The photo Jeremy put up of the pass through to the cape second floor to the Ell attic indicates it was always there. The roofers were never cut into and in fact you can see some of the ends of those roofer boards still have the original axe marks at the butt ends. No signs that there was ever any boards closing off that pass. Also the pine floor there is perfectly worn and looks to have always been in use as a passway.
The evidence of there never having been roofing shingle there is a clincher. This Ell was built WITH the house, no question in my mind. (OK, there will always be questions )

Jeremy. A VERY good book to pick up would be "Big House, Little House, Back House, Barn" by Thomas C Hubka. Good section on the Ell and just how it was used and what pride most had in them. Otherwise it's just a great book that all of us old house guys in New England have in our library . It's somewhat a regional book as it's more about the evolution of these building in northern New England.

Greg

[jharkin]

Ok guys, I sketched out the basement framing plan. The chimney girts run front to back. there are mortises with sub girts under where a fireplace might have been - but they are directly under the wall, not out in front where you figure a hearth extension would be.



And here is the brickwork in the addition and the front parlor




And a closeup of the roof framing of the addition. the ridge pole is odd... its a thin board and I cant see how the rafters are attached other than they must be toenailed from above???



And here is where the main house basement foundation opens into the crawlspace under the addition.

[jharkin]

OK so I manipulated the photo to draw the outline of the original shed (red) and the 20th century renovation (yellow).
I do think the roof framing in hte shed is odd. I almost wonder if they reworked it when the last addition was built on top?

So the trim, mantles, nails, etc all date the house more toward 1820.
The main roof opening dates the shed as original?


But then why do I have 20in subfloors and 12in boards in he main house - seems big for 1820?
And why does the shed have different foundation stones and different flooring?


mysteries!!!

-Jeremy

[jharkin]

One other note on the floors:

Main house upstairs: rough pine boards 12-18 in with no subfloor.
Main house downstairs: finished pine 12" boards on 15-20" subfloor
shed: 3.5 in boards over wide board subfloor (maybe a later renovation?)