Re: Alignments of the Newport Tower



On Jan 29, 1:56 pm, "IE_Json" <inger_e.johans...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Jack,
how many times over do I have to tell you that I know it's what you call
fieldstones! Can't you read?????? But you have to know a bit more than you
obviously do today in order to understand that fieldstones too have to be
worked on to make such a tower. Stop insulting me! You know nothing about
building with bricks, stone or manmade, or fieldstones. Do you even know
what the type of vault is called and when they were most common?

Inger E

Sorry, Inga fieldstones do not have to be worked. Look at the damn
picture. If you will read the architect's article you will find the
arches are each of different size as are the columns supporting them.
Did you know the Tower was parged inside and out? Now fallen away.
Unlike you and probably every other commenter on this thread I have
been physically at the Tower and walked around inside it. 48 years
ago, but I have been there.

"Though picturesque and oddly out of place among the refined Georgian
homes surrounding the Touro Park, Means tells us "... the distinctive
features of the tower cannot be described even by a friendly critic as
masterpieces of masonry". Modest in size and scale, the outside
diameter is a mere 24'-8", reduced by the thick walls to and interior
diameter of 18'-5". The eight stout straight columns range in height
from 7'-2" to 7'-10" with rough stone arches reaching the crown at
12'. The existing height is 26', but an attempted sabotage by
retreating British soldiers during the revolution blew off the upper
part of the walls. The distinctive features include the randomly
placed double splayed windows, the niches, beam sockets and most
curious of all, the fireplace on the second floor. "


"Columns, Capitals, and Arches

The chunky columns of the Newport Tower are of particular interest
because they have only a stone abacus or impost (upper most member of
a capital) without any suggestion of a capital. In my search for
topless columns, I found very few examples, all from medieval
structures. This anomaly adds to the uniqueness and mystery of
Newport. Newport's bases appear to be more like exposed footings than
proper column bases. All of the examples presented here have some
degree of articulated capitals and bases.

Greek order and architecture was one of post and beam. It was left to
the Romans to develop the arch as the workhorse of building elements.
In the western world, the arch has been employed in the construction
of every thing from sewers to grand basilicas, from Roman times on.
The round Roman arch shrank and expanded in its proportions to match
changing styles; the horseshoe-shape was favored in the Islamic world.
Gothic architects stretched the arch heavenward into the pointed form
that is the mark of gothic architecture. In addition to reviving the
round arch, the Renaissance introduced new refinements of form, with
circle segments of varying length combined to create complex profiles.
The Newport arches are a common sort of rude stone construction made
up of flat stone slabs on end, without a defined keystone and without
any tell-tale signs of style or period. We can say only what they are
not, but not what they are."

another interesting feature from another cite which I gave in my first
posting on this subject is the irregularity of the design.

""Interestingly, the Newport Tower was not built around a perfectly
circular plan. From southeast to northwest the diameter measures 22
feet, 2 inches, but when measured from east to west, the diameter
lengthens to 23 feet, 3 inches.1 This thirteen-inch differential is
only one of many strange design aspects and may be an important clue
towards determining the purpose of the structure."

.