Talk:Ephraim Hawley House

message: I've cut the length and changed the layout of the article to match other articles on 1680s architectureTomticker5 15:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice job with this article!  I like how it was in 4 towns without moving. doncram (talk) 17:54, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Regarding size as an indication of age. Didn't Isham feel that the Hyland House in Guilford, CT couldn't date before 1720 due to its large size and tall ceiling heights? The Hyland House has summer beams but only on the 1st floor and they're concealed by plaster. Tree-ring analysis now dates that house to 1713, which is 53 years newer than given for the last 100 years, and almost 40 years before the drop-dead date of 1750 when summer beams were supposedly just starting to be phased out. When Kelly ascertained that plaster as an interior finish brought about the end of the summer, he was referring to a house just like this. As more private homes are studied in Fairfield County, where plaster ceilings appeared much earlier than elsewhere, you'll find houses with plaster ceilings and no summer beams with dates of construction before 1713. BTW, the Hawley House originally had a wood shingled façade and riven oak clapboards on the remaining sides as seen in the earliest image. Architectural historians believe shingle siding first appeared in New York (Long Island) invented by Dutch housewrights and then was brought to Fairfield County, Connecticut then to Boston by the late 1670s. There was a Dutch influence on architecture in Fairfield County that cannot be ignored.Tomticker5 (talk) 23:25, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: What is known is that the Dutch used wood shingles for exterior siding first and they didn't use summer beams and small joists spaced close together at all, like the English did. The Dutch built with large joists spaced farther apart, thicker floor boards and plaster ceilings. Since, the Dutch were the first Europeans to settle Connecticut, and controlled New York City as late as 1673, until fur prices tumbled, they must have had an influence on English carpenters in Fairfield County. As a matter of fact, last year during railroad bridge repair, the CT DOT uncovered a 500 year old Indian Fort at Norwalk, CT containing Dutch artifacts which proves they were trading with the Indians as far east as Norwalk until the mid 1600s. Since, Norwalk is only 17 miles from Stratford, we can presume that Dutch building methods influenced the English here. As a matter of fact, since the English in the rest of New England stopped using summer beams altogether after (insert a date), and started building with larger joists spread farther apart and plaster ceilings, I'd say Dutch architectural methods prevailed.Tomticker5 (talk) 14:25, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  The English were capable of building a plaster ceiling like this in 1620 (on riven lath).  Tomticker5 (talk) 13:29, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: If dendrochronology dates this house to 1740, which I doubt, then someone will have to figure out who built it. In the Colony of Connecticut, men were propownded as freemen once they owned real property (not land).Tomticker5 (talk) 12:30, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  A normal title search will tell you who built it once you get a date.  Dendrochronology is making it really clear that searchable events like marriage and death just aren't good predictors of date of construction.  Obviously non-freemen built houses, and freemen moved, built new houses, dismantled houses and re-built, etc. I have no doubt about the Feake and Royce houses; they just aren't 17th century.  I'd say Royce 1730, Hawley 1740-60, Feake 1740-1770.Old houses (talk) 02:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

text: I love old houses; I love history.  The fairy tale presented by the Greenwich Point Conservancy is offensive.
At any rate, the first period is defined by features. I'd say 1750 is more like the real end date; pretty unlikely a house would have exposed framing after 1750, but who knows.  These dendro results that are kept private would really help the field of architectural history. Old houses (talk) 01:12, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Cummings, when the granddaughter inherited the Whipple House in Ipswich, MA in 1710, she said the exposed ceilings meant "low class", and then had them plastered over. So, I think by this time it pretty much was the norm to have flat plastered ceilings and cased framing if the homeowner could afford it. The MacPheadris–Warner House built in Portsmouth, NH in 1716 is another good example of what was being built at that time by people of wealth. I understand that they were still building log cabins somewhere. I came across this website which attempts to list all of the known First Period Houses in New England but mostly are in MA. They don't mention Stratford, CT which was the largest town in Fairfield County and 5th largest in the state during the Revolution. They use 1730 as the end of the First Period. I'd use 1714 as the end of the First Period, because it's the beginning of the reign of the four King Georges.Tomticker5 (talk) 15:58, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

text: That 'First Period New England' website is a waste of time; dates of construction based on title and deeds are completely unreliable, literally of no value if there's no info on building detailsOld houses (talk) 20:49, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say the advent of full-blown paneling is the beginning of the end of First Period; around 1720.  Decorated framing lasted until the 1740s, but seems like it mostly phased out around 1730s.  Of course it's always possible, as Cummings writes in his book, that totally undecorated framing might be found in the first period, since it cost so much more to carve beams than just square them. Those sequestered dendro reports would really help date untested structures.Old houses (talk) 22:56, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Georgian house; same age as the Webb in Wethersfield.Old houses (talk) 01:22, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Houses scientifically dated to 1700 or earlier have all had exposed framing.Old houses (talk) 00:30, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

text: That statement about Cape Cod (cottages) is just plain old hogwash. Here's one Hoyt-Barnum House.Tomticker5 (talk) 12:37, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Hoyt-Barnum has nothing indicating a date of construction before 1740.  No first period features; that 1699 date is baseless.Old houses (talk) 18:47, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Russell House didn't start as a Cape, did it? And I don't believe the dendro report has been published, but it appears it was built ca. 1745 with many re-used beams.  I'd say Hoyt-Barnum is like Hawley- ca. 1740-1760. No First Period features. Hoyt has been heavily restored, so it's not clear what it looked like originally.  Even the report on the Hoyt-Barnum website says recent scholarship says it's not 1699. Are you saying Hoyt-Barnum is comparable to Buttolph-Williams House, for example?Old houses (talk) 03:05, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

text: I see some images of exposed framing in this house, so that casts doubt on your opinion.  And comparing a mansion in Maryland to a house in Connecticut is a stretch.Old houses (talk) 19:32, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Cloverfields looks like a Georgian house; 1705 would be a very early date for a fully Georgian house.  I'd be curious to see if dendrochronology dated the Georgian paneling.  It seems what you're implying is that Hawley House was built in 1683 as a Georgian Cape.Old houses (talk) 21:22, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm following your logic in using dendrochronology as the final arbiter which has now confirmed another house with an original flat plaster ceiling built in 1703-1705. In time, I'm sure that more houses will date to the decade or two before 1700 and have flat plaster ceilings.Tomticker5 (talk) 19:08, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see anything that says Cloverfields was built in 1705 without exposed framing.  However, it is possible; this is obviously an extremely high end house.  I have no doubt there are houses built during the First Period that have minimal First Period features, but Hawley has no first period features.  Did the Hawley have a bake oven at the back of the fireplace originally?  If so, a case could be made for ca. 1730-1750. Hawley is not similar to any house of proven 17th century construction; if you know of one, anywhere in the Northeast, please cite.  The owners should get it tested, and allow the lab to make the results public. No wonder you support the impossible claims by the Greenwich Point Conservancy; it helps your case with the Hawley House.Old houses (talk) 20:20, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

text: What does high end mean?  Architect designed, huge, expensive.  Warner House in Portsmouth, same thing. Again, if Hawley has an oven in the back of the fireplace, then you could make a case for 1730-1750.  Find me a similar house dated anywhere near 1683 and I'll change my tune. You're saying Hawley was built at the same time as Hempstead, Parson Capen, Boardman Saugus, Williams Wethersfield, Whipple Ipswich- totally ridiculous; you are in dreamland.Old houses (talk) 04:14, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Dendro is expensive; but an Architectural Historian would do a survey for $500.  The owners should do it and publish the report.  The house has never been seen by anyone qualified to assess it.Old houses (talk) 04:19, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of construction 

message: A Cape Cod cottage that dates to 1672 .Tomticker5 (talk) 18:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: No dendro, no architectural survey, no way.  Date based purely on title/deeds.  Another swing and a miss.Old houses (talk) 20:48, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vincent House (Cape Cod cottage) in Martha’s Vineyard built in 1672 

message: Here's another 17th century Cape Cod cottage  built before 1672.Tomticker5 (talk) 14:46, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: At least this one allegedly has first period features, which if not re-used from an earlier building, which was very common, would mean a pre-1740 date of construction.Old houses (talk) 17:23, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: "Experts disagree about the age of the main house, with recent estimates ranging from 1656 to 1740"https://vineyardgazette.com/news/2017/05/18/cover-comes-light-shines-hancock-mitchell.  Put me down for 1740.Old houses (talk) 22:30, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Suspicions justified- house dates to ca. 1760. https://www.vernaculararchitectureforum.org/VAN-Winter-2018/5682270. I assume the chamfered beam in this house is re-used.Old houses (talk) 22:41, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hancock-Mitchell House (Cape Cod cottage) in Martha's Vineyard built in 1760 

message: Neither of the cites referring to Hawley's family and background say anything about his being a slave owner. While it would not have been unusual for the time, the claim needs to be sourced.Parkwells (talk) 21:27, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ephraim Hawley as slave owner