Shopsmith Forums

judaspre1982 wrote:If you ever get the chance to see this on Public television, it's worth watching.
http://www.indiana.edu/~radiotv/wtiu/bridges/

I was amazed at the engineering and craftsmanship that went in to building these bridges. Underneath the modest exteriors lies some incredible designs.

Dave

Interesting, if you take the "photos" link the Forsythe bridge in Rush County Indiana sits about a mile upstream (Big Flatrock River) from our mini farm in the next county. The Forsythe's are my ancestors...
There is also a longer covered bridge over our place there.
http://www.moscowbridge.com/
If you take the bottom link to the reconstruction page where the remains of the bridge are laying in the river they are laying on our land. Most of the shots of the river valley are our place there.
If you watch the video about the destruction and rebuild the guy talking is a life long friend of mine. His grandparents and my grandparents sat up houskeeping at the same time next door to each other in that village. They were best friends for life and his father and my father were lifetime best friends.


.

Just curious but why did people do the extra work of building a covered bridge?

jm51 wrote:Just curious but why did people do the extra work of building a covered bridge?

To protect the wooden structure from the elements perhaps?;)

My first guess too but now I've thought about it, is the name of the state a clue? All of those bridges look defend-able.

Yes, the bridges documentary looks very similar to the barns documentary that I saw on MPT. And now that you mention bridges, I seem to recall a documentary about covered bridges in this part of the country also. I don't remember the name of it though. But, I do seem to remember mention for reasoning for the covered design. One was due to the design of the support structures. The timbers and support along the sides were necessary for the entire support structure of the bridge. Therefore since the side structures were already in place, the addition of a roof was a relatively easy addition. Second reasoning was to create a covered retreat during frequent summer thunder storms. The most available means of travel at that time was either by foot, horse or horse and buggy. Therefore while traveling from place to place your chances of getting caught out in the open during these frequent thunder storms with the possibility of a lightning strick was a lot greater. The covered bridge could be used as a sanctuary. That is why often time you would see covered bridges outfitted with lighting rods similar to those seen on barns during the latter part of that era.

Yes, protection from the elements. In the old days they didn't have much in the way of wood treatments. An uncovered wooden bridge might start needing a lot of work in maybe 5 years especially in contact areas. On the other hand a well enclosed bridge decently maintained (especially the roof) can easily last 300 years... Big difference. Some areas have returned to the covered wooden bridge concept but make them wider and use treated wood. Even an all concrete bridge in a heavy freeze / thaw area is only really expected to last 20 or 30 years while the new covered wooden bridges are assumed to last hundreds of years if maintained.
One huge enemy to wooden bridges is vandals, especially arsonist. The new / old bridge at Moscow Indiana was heavily treated to be fire "resistant".

We have not had any Indian problems in Indiana since about the 1830's or before. This area was a heavily populated by the first Americans from the very earliest days and they had a well formed society here. A good hunting / fishing area. There are some huge ancient earth-works in the state. Some of the bloodiest Indian battles in history took place here and many of them made the western skirmishes look like a minor bar room brawl. Once peace came here they mostly just blended in. Unlike the areas where there were reservations where you can tell them from white folks, here you usually can't tell who is Indian and who is not. We are all just folks here. My friend who was talking in the bridge video is part Indian. I forget which base tribe, I should ask him some time. I know that he has done his genealogy as did his dad. His grandmother was I believe half Indian. Her mother was Indian and her father was a french trapper / trader who settled in the area to live near his wife's people. My friend's father and my father both spent most of their lives trying to find some way that they were related but the closest they ever came was that at one time they each had cats that were sisters...

We are quite a mix of people here and that is the way I like it. My paternal line is mostly old family line southern planters largely from Virginia (came in 1666). They didn't always mix well early on. They were among the mega-rich of their time and for generations only married cousins because to marry anyone else was to marry below their station. My mothers family was a cross of mostly Pennsylvania Dutch and old line North Carolina planters.
My wife's line on the other hand until recent years has been of all German linage. Some from the days of the American revolution but one set of great grandparents were born in Germany. My wife was one of the first to marry a non German but then again I also have some German in me.
Today we have those all mixed in the family along with French, Hispanic, Black and Asians.
Just call us mutts.
Time to quit rambling and go to work...

===============================

Wow! What a history.

For a country supposedly steeped in history, not many of us Brits know much family history beyond our grandparents.

We have (had) lots of old exposed wooden bridges here, a swing bridge close to where I used to live got replaced in 1970, been there since the canal was built ~1780 but no way was it local timber, probably Greenheart shipped in from Africa.

jm51 wrote:Wow! What a history. For a country supposedly steeped in history, not many of us Brits know much family history beyond our grandparents.

My paternal Robinson's came to the new world from Cleasby in Yorkshire England where they lived for generations. Before that they lived for a long time in the Scottish Highlands. Before that they were Norse Vikings, part of Clan Gunn. Maybe the Viking bit is why I like hatchets...
My 6th great grandfather Christopher who came in 1666 had a brother John who was the Bishop of London.

Here is a link to the story of my Clan Gunn and their 500 year feud with Clan Keith which was finally settled about 1978.
http://www.sconemac.com/gkfeud.html

Kind of funny and ironic, I have only known about the genealogy stuff about 6 years. I always got along great with all of my teachers in school including the ones I never had in class. I only had one teacher I despised... Yep, an old maid algebra teacher, last name of Keith.


.


.