Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
A Tale of Two Towers and Two Holes: Part 1
[?]: Oh, ok. I'd like to thank you for coming here and what I have is a [?] view. This is
actually looking from what's now Camden, looking across at Philadelphia and you can see Christ
Church and what we're going to do now is move to the south, to Independence Hall. The other
great thing about this is you can really see the prominence that these towers played in
the skyline of Philadelphia. I always like to show a picture of Independence
Hall when I'm talking about it, but I also want to reinforce that the Chestnut Street
elevation is the front of the building. A lot of the times we forget this with historic
buildings, so I always want to start with the front of the building. This photograph
is from before, in the 1880's, 1890's, before the Robert Mills business wings were taken
down. The other thing I have to say is, most of
what I know about the tower is due to Nick Giannopoulos and just the multiple times that
we went up, taking tours, and looking at things and one of the first things he always said
is, when they started working on restoring Independence Hall they weren't going to "'White
House" Independence Hall or the tower. I just wanted to give you an idea of what that really
meant. This is a picture of the inside of the White House during the restoration of
the Truman administration. It's not quite the Secretary of the Interior's standards
about reversibility. The earliest known drawings that we have of
Independence Hall is this one in John Dickson's paper attributed to Andrew Hamilton. If you
go up in the attic there is the layering of structure, which I think is important, and
right in here you can see the opening for the cupola that was originally up on the roof.
The other thing, one of the last projects Penny Batcheler did was to actually try and
figure out what Independence Hall looked like before a tower was added. The tower was actually
a building addition and what she did was use photographs, also looking at Wolley who built
the tower at previous buildings, to try and figure out what Independence Hall's south
elevation might have looked like. Here are a whole series of sketches and studies, her
final sort of conjectural study of what it might have appeared like. Then we move to
the good stuff, which is the tower that was commissioned and started being built in 1750
through 1754. Unfortunately, one of the things is these towers are very fragile. They're
up against the weather, the elements, and here's some other graphic images of it.
What happens is by 1790's, the tower's in such bad condition, the wood portion that
it actually has to be taken down. Recently when we removed the windows at the third level
of the tower which is here, what we actually found and it doesn't come across too well,
but are the actual holes where they pegged in the louvers that they put in those window
openings when they moved the bell down. They put in the louvers to actually help the sound
from the ringing of the bell come out. Then by 1828 there's a, Philadelphia's again
very much interested in Independence Hall. They have a competition they have, they hire
William Strickland to come in and build a new wood steeple on the existing brick base.
What I did was, I actually took Keast & Hood's conjectural reconstruction of the original
tower, and you can see it's a series of boxes stacked on top of one another. It has a lot
of joints, very fragile, and as Nick said that the skin is applied directly to the structural
members. When Strickland comes in, he creates these two superstructures that go up. You
can see these are very stable, it's much simpler, and then the dash line actually shows how
the exterior cladding is held away from the interior structure.
The other thing is Strickland is very much of a different age. It's an age of innovation
and he starts doing all sorts of things that are different. One of the major things he
does is he changes the construction technique. As you can see down below in the lower portion
this is the 1750's tower. It's all mortise and tenon construction. This is very expensive,
time consuming, and Strickland comes in for cost savings and also innovation. All of his
joints are all bolted connections so the whole tower, when you get to all of the major structural
framing members, are all bolted. You can sort of see how the knee braces, everything's bolted
together. It's much easier to do. You can lift everything up into place, bolt it, it's
much similar to a steel building. You can also see how the framing, the structural framing,
with the knee braces is back pulled in away from the outer skin of the wall.
This is an axonometric, just showing, of where we're really going to focus, which is Strickland's
levels of four, five, and six. There are both a lot of innovative things going on here and
some things that actually cause problems when we came to actually do the restoration of
the tower. One of the things that he did, and we didn't
know when we started doing the work actually, what purpose the iron rods which are here
imbedded in the center of the cladding. Each cladding piece is two and three quarters inches
thick and it's eastern white pine, old growth and they overlap. We didn't know if this was
a prefabrication technique where they would put panels together then lifted them in the
air, or if these rods somehow were something for shear.
So one of the things we did, oh the other thing that was really great is, he built in
sort of a natural drainage system which was with these beveled joints. The cladding actually
drains itself. So I'd run up there in the middle of a rainstorm with a moisture meter,
poke it around, and get very high readings the next day and the day after I'd go back,
and so what actually happens is when it rains at this joint here, it actually drains out.
The only problem we found is that previously they had gone to thinking weather tightened
these joints had actually caused, had actually installed sealant. We came back during the
work and found that those areas where they installed sealant was actually where we were
getting rot. In sort of wondering where this idea came
from for embedding the iron rods, we started looking at what Strickland had previous experience
in. In 1824 he was sent to England to look at canal building and we think this may have
influenced his building of the tower. He took some of the details that he saw in canal building
and actually translated them into the building of the tower. This is an example of his patent
for a lock. This is an actual aqueduct that's on the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal and here
again you can actually see iron rods that are embedded in the wood to hold things together.
The other thing I did was I dragged my mother on one vacation up to Chittenango Canal Boat
Museum, it's along the Erie Canal, and what they have there are canal boats and canal
boats are basically wood boxes. They have, what they would do is in the winter they would
mill the wood in the, and do iron bars and bolts, the nails, that sort of thing. You
can actually see we have a very similar profile with the beveled siding on the outside. We
have the knee braces and actually sunk in the Erie Canal, you can see where the iron
rods are coming up out of a board. This is a late 19th century canal boat and what I'm
trying to do is find examples now that maybe go earlier into the 19th century. The one
corner picture is actually of Independence Hall and you can see the similarities of the
construction. One thing we did was we tried to figure out
what the water moving in and out of the wood cladding, what was happening to those iron
rods. So we got up there, we did basically x-rays of the cladding at various spots and
what we found was where we didn't have water the iron rods were pretty much intact. Then
when you come up to a joint where you get water infiltration, what you start to see
is the deformation. Here iron is, the rust is actually bleeding into the wood. What that
causes is caused iron sickness. Iron sickness is a term that comes out of railroad construction
actually causes the wood fibers to break apart and will lead to the failure of the wood.
This x-ray here is actually in that very location. So what we did was we decided to actually
start taking the tower apart and so we removed everything. What I have is before shots that
you can actually see. We took all the wreaths off and laid them out on a table and inspected
each piece of wood. There's what the condition of the wreath was after it was stripped and
here on this side is actually the wreath being reinstalled. You have the pilaster capitol
on one side prior to restoration, after restoration, and reinstalled. Down on the 18th century
tower, actually when we got to the wood capitols, we found out that they probably cut corners
because rather than using a single block of wood, what they did was in the shop they took
pieces of wood, varying sizes, and glued them all together and then carved the capitol.
So what happens is, when we started stripping it the wood glue came apart, all of the capitols
completely fell apart. We had to take them into the shop, re-glue them, and reinstall
them. The first thing we did to make sure about
installing the cladding properly, was did shop drawings. Each piece of cladding was
measured, numbered, you can see the rods were all drafted, were all located. This is both
for level six. Level five. Initially we went through and just did an eye survey to see
if there was actually cladding that we could save. The grey are the members that we thought
we couldn't save because of the bowing out and the expansion due to the falling apart
of the wood fibers due to the iron sickness. We then each took each elevation, put it down
on the ground, and surveyed each board. What we, actually this is an example of the iron
sickness, where you can see that the wood fibers have actually become like hair coming
apart. Then what we discovered was in the basin and the tops, we actually got iron jacking. This long crack there is actually
from the expansion of rust and split the boards apart. At one point just to, we did a, got
a sample of the cladding but what we actually uncovered was, this is a typical iron rod
you can see how it's [?] here and then when it gets to this, it's actually has lost its
entire thickness. And this is probably the most spectacular photograph I've taken because
this is the, you are now seeing what was only seen before in 1828, where the cladding is
completely off, the structure is completely exposed, and as Nick said we sacrificed the
outer skin but the structure is actually completely intact. There's some areas where we had to
reinforce with some new structure here and there. You can see some 60's structure, if
it were clearer. It was in to address some problems but this is really great. Actually
when I pointed it out to the carpenters, all of a sudden a myriad of cell phones came out
and they started recording it. I put this in because one of the things that
we were actually insistent on doing was duplicating the construction. So we actually went out
and got old growth eastern white pine, specified the number of rings, and then duplicated the
construction where we overlapped the rods instead of putting them in iron, to relieve
the problem we used stainless steel and put in the bolts. At the corners we duplicated
the construction here, whether it was beveled or butted. Then the one thing we did do at
various locations was install new lead coated flashing to help drainage of water. Finally,
down in this corner, began to work with flashing and how to reinstall the wood wreaths.
The other thing I thought in all of the pictures, it's good to actually see master builders.
These were all carpenters that are working on the scaffolding installing the new cladding.
We even have one carpenter down here, a carpenter's apprentice, who's not only getting trained
on the site but here is actually coming and tightening down one of the screws. We planed
down the wood, sanded it, and prepped it for painting. Finally, this is the stage we're
at now, we're almost complete, the wreaths installed, all of the decorative members that
have been conserved have been reinstalled. Finally, we're pretty much on date. We may
be done a little bit sooner than we thought. I think scaffolding may come down, cross my
heart, in the end of November. That's what I hope. I think we have substantial completion
maybe around the 20th or something of November. And finally, I always like to end with this,
which is, this ad that I found which I think really sort of typifies Philadelphia and what's
going on in the city. Was that too quick? Giannopolis: No that's fine.
[?]: Thanks Nick, and Nick will join us towards the end of this discussion of Franklin Court.
We call this The Evolution of Franklin Court but in a way it's a great case study in the
shifting, or sort of, the evolution of attitudes towards both preservation and interpretation
and in the case of Franklin Court, also commemoration. Franklin Court as it exists today, in 1950
looked like this. This was Orianna Street looking north. Obviously the area had evolved
significantly since Franklin's time. It had become part of the industrial commercial old
city that largely exists today. This is Market Street as we know it today.
This was Market Street as it was in 1950, just before work, actually this is just before
the Park Service gained control of the site in 1948. So this will be a discussion of how
we went from here to there. This is a wonderful print drawing by Frank Taylor done in 1915.
Again, this is a view from Orianna Street looking north. In 1812 Franklin has sold his
property and his and actually his heirs divided the court into thirty house lots, filling
the court and Orianna Street was created. There was a lot known about Franklin Court
primarily through deeds and the wonderful insurance surveys that exist and lots of correspondence.
Much was known about the house and they knew where it was. And as the sesquicentennial
approached in 1940, there was kind of a renewed interest in this idea of commemorating Franklin
and also restoring the house. As Dr. Richard Shryrock, who was the librarian at the American
Philosophical Society, said at the time, "Franklin is a man we cannot leave to the imagination."
That's a great quote. Back to 1950. In 1948, the congressional subcommittee
hearings were taking place to basically to establish the park in Philadelphia. It was
broken into segments and there was a particularly kind of interesting dialog at the congressional
hearings regarding the purchase of this particular piece of the park. I'm going to quote a little
bit from this. Representative Scott says, "I think that this is one site, is it not,
where there is a possibility of reconstruction because they have not only the old wall but
they have enough detail of Franklin's home to reconstruct." Mr. Rockwell says, "What
would be the cost of that for the building and reconstruction? No one is more of an admirer
of Ben Franklin than I, but I wondered if there was not some place to add value other
than just a lot 20x30 and a wall that is more or less fallen down." A little further in
the discussions with this Mr. Scott says, "With historical knowledge that is in the
hands of the Philadelphia Historical Society, I feel that if this area in Project C could
be put to great proper use in giving the people of the country an opportunity to see the environment
in which Ben Franklin lived in his own immediate personal life." Then another representative,
"There is one further consideration that weighed heavily on us, the fact that there is no national
memorial or shrine to Benjamin Franklin in the National Park system and there are to
most, in somewhere great historical figures have been commemorated but Franklin has not
been." So you see this complex idea of memorial of reconstruction. What should we do?
Again, Mr. Rockwell, not to be denied, "He is certainly one of our great Americans and
did a great deal. Still, a vacant lot? Full of weeds? Twenty feet square to spend a half
a million dollars? It seems there might be some better monument we could get. " How right
he was in some ways but then again Mr. Barrett," I think in the end" the chairman says, "The
importance too, of this little house. If you read the dimensions it was not a fabulous
place at all but a little house which eventually found necessary to expand, but in any event
it looks to me like it is a historic site and one if we cannot restore it, at least
it should be preserved properly." Whatever that means. "It seems to me that it is properly
included that I would like to move, Mr. Chairman, that we include Project C."
Shortly thereafter, began a series of archeological excavations to determine, actually let's go
back, to determine really what existed, what might be found to help in this restoration
or recreation or commemoration. In 1953 and 1955, the National Park Service archeologist
Paul Schumacher, was able to undertake very limited excavations. He was not allowed to
dig in Orianna Street. He was able to dig in the sidewalk on some of these empty lots
and in the basements that existed. His excavations concluded that there was no rising wall of
Franklin's house. In fact, the basements on both sides of the houses built by Franklin's
heir had gone deeper than Franklin's house and had obliterated basically all of the remains.
However he did find under the sidewalk, a piece of an east wall foundation.
In 1958, actually the Park Service was able to demolish the houses and in 1960 and 1961,
excavations under the guidance of Bruce Powell, the archeologist, located additional foundations
describing the east, north, and south walls, privies and other appurtenances to Franklin
Court. He also was able to excavate under the, in the basements of some of the Market
Street houses and found again, some evidence that there were remains of the earlier structures
along Market. Those excavations became part of the historic
structures report that was published in 1961. Dennis Kurjack was the acting park superintendent
at that time and issued this report. The work, the archeological discoveries seemed to lend
great optimism to the possibility of actually reconstructing Franklin's house and from his
report a I'll read this to you, "A great deal is already known about the physical history
of the house and there is every expectation that further research will provide us with
a near complete knowledge of the structure. A wealth of archeological data and artifacts
including foundations of the east, north, and south walls and east-west portion which
divided the basement into sections, remains of the circular ice house, the necessary,
and fragments of building materials would permit reconstruction of the house on the
exact site of the original and a high degree of accuracy in the use of construction material."
Well, what did they really know? They had some of the foundations uncovered. This was
the only extant drawing known of the plan of the house, and this is believed to have
been done by Ben Franklin on the backside of a document that existed in the American
Philosophical Society. You can see the house. This was actually the north side, a stairwell,
a large dining room, two parlors and a rough central hallway. There is, I guess these are
considered to be windows, doors, chimney, chimney, chimney, table, and I guess based
on a lot of the descriptions of the house, historians are actually able to glean a lot
from this little sketch. But from this sketch, again in the Kurjack historic structures report,
this again, unbridled optimism. This is the staircase as it could be reconstructed from
the information that we know. This was a very simpler time, this was a preliminary estimate
of cost, five hundred ninety thousand two hundred dollars, and I wonder where the two
hundred dollars came from. Well beginning in, actually after that report,
the site stayed fallow for some time. Then beginning in 1970 through 1973, Barbara Liggett
undertook additional excavations on the site. You can see some of the coverings over the
earlier work that had been done. Barbara Liggett's excavations brought out a lot more detail
about, more about the time of Franklin all of the material that were found in the privies,
but really did not uncover much of real significance in terms of what Franklin's house looked like.
I think a garden wall was uncovered. A lot more information was gleaned about the Market
Street houses, including definite locations of foundation walls and party walls that continued
to exist. So in 1970, what had been discovered? Essentially,
this is a to the left here is Franklin's house and to the north are the Market Street houses.
You can see in the dark these are the fragments of foundations that were found, and you can
see they neatly correspond to where Orianna Street was. Really most of the information
that was found survived only because it was under the street not disturbed by basements.
You can see bits of the garden wall that were found here, then a whole series of test pits,
and many, many, privies and other kind of storage devices.
So the excavation [?] along with descriptions enabled this sort of sketchy reconstruction
of the site. These came from Barbara Liggett's report. Ben Franklin began assembling his
properties in the 1730's to build his house. His house was built or began in 1763 with
Robert Smith as carpenter and Samuel Rhodes as supervisor. Both of those were architects,
as well as builders. It's unclear who actually designed the house but both were involved.
The house was completed in 1766, three years in the making, much to the dissatisfaction
of Franklin. Then between 1763 and 1780's, Franklin acquired the properties along, some
of the properties along Market Street. You can see originally when the house was built,
he actually had a drive that came in to the west and entered the court to the north. He acquired three houses that existed on Market
Street and he never gained ownership of these two abutting properties.
Then in 1886, the print shop was built, a library was added to his house, and he demolished
the three houses on Market Street and built the houses that are reconstructed today and
created the covered passage that currently, that is now there that enters the courtyard.
He then built a third house on the previous site of his driveway. So after all of this,
the bicentennial was approaching and still this question remained, what did Franklin's
house look like? This was from early 1972 I believe. They were desperate to find more
information about what the house looked like. "We're going to make a worldwide search for
anyone having a watercolor or anything else, which will help show us what the house looked
like. For the loan of such picture, the commission will trade an all expenses paid trip to Philadelphia,
a visit to Franklin Court, and a specially designed Franklin medal." Well, I guess that
was not incentive enough to produce any more information. The only real image that seemed
to exist was this advertisement from 1797 for the rental of Franklin's house.
In the meantime, they continued with the process of thinking about how do we, what can we do,
we don't have much, we have no real substantial information about what the house looked like.
We know what his footprint was. We know more, a little more about the Market Street houses.
All the way back in the 50's, actually this was after the preliminary excavations, this
is hard to see, but this is the wonderful Grant Simon idea about how the Franklin might
be memorialized. It's essentially a garden with just the walls of the house brought up
to probably about waist height and a little museum tucked in the niche here. He did about
three or four of these schemes in the late 1960's, Penny Batchelor, who was park historical
architect at the time, came up with her notion of what might, how this site might be interpreted
and not reconstructed. You can see she was a student of Meis, and she has proposed a
sort of a museum box that sits over the remains, very transparent, and allows you to actually
see in. Again, the program was getting larger, the museum now started having, the museum
was accompanied by a lecture hall. The program was obviously growing. This is another, actually
wonderful, sketch by Penny Batchelor that shows the Market Street houses realized in
Cor-Ten Steel.