Comments on: Briffa and Sodankyla Church

By: curious

curious — Sat, 04 Apr 2009 02:36:39 +0000

Is this the same Briffa?

http://users.ictp.it/~smr1972/Briffa_Cook.pdf

(from Kenneth at #23 “Ammann’s April Fool’s Joke” : http://users.ictp.it/~smr1972/ )

By: mrblogge

mrblogge — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 19:11:27 +0000

It looks to my eye like NGC0004 should start 75 years earlier (roughly).

By: Marginalized Action Dinosaur » Briffa 2008 used only one of 9 cores, imagine.

Wed, 07 Jan 2009 23:46:08 +0000

[...] Briffa and Sodankyla Church [...]

By: theduke

theduke — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 17:00:49 +0000

I’ll extend the invitation again: if anyone wants to discuss the particulars of the construction of this building, I’d be interested to know what you know. While I am not a member of the following group

http://www.tfguild.org/ttrag.html

I have built timber structures with several of them. I’ve been to seminars and taken courses from others and read the books of those who are authors, most notably Abbott Lowell Cummings and Jack Sobon.

doug@eatonbuilding.com

By: Håkan B

Håkan B — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:38:08 +0000

I grew up in central Sweden during the fifties where old people still knew how to build with those methods.

One thing I learned was the importance of selecting the right trees. Size and shape weren’t the only criteria to consider when selecting a tree, it was very important to find trees that had been groving slow, those were more resistant to weather. Old folks knew how to select those trees. So my conclusion is that samples from trees used for buildings are not representative the general growing conditions for an area.

Just an idea!

Steve: Nice observation. I’ll pass this on to Rob Wilson.

By: tty

tty — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 14:04:34 +0000

This is getting more and more OT, however this is my take on how the timber would have been procured, based on the church being built in late 1689, and how these things have traditionally been done until quite recently in Sweden and Finland.

The timber would have been felled during the winter 1687/88. This was almost always done in winter for two main reasons, the timber was much easier to get out of the forest by sledge on the snow, and there was less conflict with farming work. Winter is still the preferred season for logging in Scandinavia.

The timber was sledged down to the river during the late winter and put in the river during the spring flood in 1688 and floated down to the building place during the summer.

It was then stacked for drying during the late summer/autumn of 1688. A year later, after the summer season 1689 the timber would have dried, and could be prepared (hewed to shape), ready for building the church in late 1689.

By: Larry Huldén

Larry Huldén — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 07:44:59 +0000

Jeff Norman said:
“How many people here have had or have had a friend who had a contractor promise they “will finished the work by Christmas”. Another historical trend that demonstrates no significant changes.”

In this special case the Swedish king simply offered extra money when the decision about the building place was settled. I think the workers were eager to get the work quickly done.

I was thinking of a possible misinterpretation about when the trees were cut. Trees from “1689″ could have been cut in 1688 (Jan-Febr) and the other accordingly one year earlier than expected. On the other hand they might have made some corrections in 1690 or so (using trees from 1689). We don’t have detailed information to be sure about that.

By: Graeme Rodaughan

Graeme Rodaughan — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 07:28:05 +0000

Reminds me of finding useful car parts from a car wrecking yard, you have to serach for a while to find the actual useful bit that “fits” what your looking for…

Kinda presupposes the result preceding the search.

By: theduke

theduke — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 18:13:50 +0000

Larry, #64: sounds like you have a lot of knowledge of the area and its history. I have some knowledge of old timber structures, although not necessarily of log structures. The link I provided asserts that two of the logs tested were cut down in 1689, which, if accurate, suggests the building needed extra trees during construction in 1689. Jeff Norman also makes a valid point in #65.

Regardless, the subject is not necessarily germane to the topic at hand, so if you or anyone else wants to continue discussing it, you can email me at doug(at)eatonbuilding(dot)com.

By: Jeff Norman

Jeff Norman — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 17:24:58 +0000

Larry Huldén: January 3rd, 2009 at 2:21 pm

According to historical documents the workers (they were specialists on such buildings) promised to start the work in the autumn 1688 and finish the work before Christmas. This is described in the history of Suur-Sodankylä (1995)(in Finnish).

How many people here have had or have had a friend who had a contractor promise they “will finished the work by Christmas”. Another historical trend that demonstrates no significant changes.