 |
The Preservation of Historic
Barns
Michael J. Auer
From the days when Thomas
Jefferson envisioned the new republic as a nation dependent
on citizen farmers for its stability and its freedom, the
family farm has been a vital image in the American
consciousness.
As the main structures of
farms, barns evoke a sense of tradition and security, of
closeness to the land and community with the people who built
them. Even today the rural barn raising presents a forceful
image of community spirit. Just as many farmers built their
barns before they built their houses, so too many farm
families look to their old barns as links with their past.
Old barns, furthermore, are often community landmarks and
make the past present. Such buildings embody ethnic
traditions and local customs; they reflect changing farming
practices and advances in building technology. In the
imagination they represent a whole way of life (Fig.
1).
Unfortunately, historic
barns are threatened by many factors. On farmland near
cities, barns are often seen only in decay, as land is
removed from active agricultural use. In some regions, barns
are dismantled for lumber, their beams sold for reuse in
living rooms. Barn raisings have given way to barn razings.
Further threats to historic barns and other farm structures
are posed by changes in farm technology, involving much
larger machines and production facilities, and changes in the
overall farm economy, including increasing farm size and
declining rural populations.(1)
Yet historic barns can be
refitted for continued use in agriculture, often at great
savings over the cost of new buildings. This Brief encourages
the preservation of historic barns and other agricultural
structures by encouraging their maintenance and use as
agricultural buildings, and by advancing their sensitive
rehabilitation for new uses when their historic use is no
longer feasible.
Historic Barn Types
Dutch Barns
The first great barns
built in this country were those of the Dutch settlers of the
Hudson, Mohawk, and Schoharie valleys in New York State and
scattered sections of New Jersey.(2) On the exterior, the
most notable feature of the Dutch barn is the broad gable
roof, which in early examples (now extremely rare), extended
very low to the ground. On the narrow end the Dutch barn
features center doors for wagons and a door to the stock
aisles on one or both of the side ends. A pent roof (or
pentice) over the center doors gave some slight protection
from the elements. The siding is typically horizontal, the
detailing simple. Few openings other than doors and
traditional holes for martins puncture the external walls.(3)
The appearance is of massiveness and simplicity, with the
result that Dutch barns seem larger than they actually
are.
To many observers the
heavy interior structural system is the most distinctive
aspect of the Dutch barn. Mortised, tenoned and pegged beams
are arranged in "H"shaped units that recall church interiors,
with columned aisles alongside a central space (here used for
threshing). This interior arrangement, more than any other
characteristic, links the Dutch barn with its Old World
forebears. The ends of cross beams projecting through the
columns are often rounded to form "tongues," a distinctive
feature found only in the Dutch barn.
Relatively few Dutch
barns survive. Most of these date from the late 18th century.
Fewer yet survive in good condition, and almost none
unaltered. Yet the remaining examples of this barn type still
impress with the functional simplicity of their design and
the evident pride the builders took in their work.
Bank Barns
The bank barn gets its
name from a simple but clever construction technique: the
barn is built into the side of a hill, thus permitting two
levels to be entered from the ground. The lower level housed
animals, the upper levels served as threshing floor and
storage. The hillside entrance gave easy access to wagons
bearing wheat or hay. (Fodder could also be dropped through
openings in the floor to the stabling floor below.) The
general form of the bank barn remained the same whether it
was built into a hillside or not. Where a hill was lacking, a
"bank" was often created by building up an earthen ramp to
the second level.
Bank barns were
ordinarily constructed with their long side, or axis,
parallel to the hill, and on the south side of it. This
placement gave animals a sunny spot in which to gather during
the winter. To take further advantage of the protection its
location afforded, the second floor was extended, or
cantilevered, over the first. The overhang sheltered animals
from inclement weather. The extended forebay thus created is
one of the most characteristic features of these barns. In
some bank barns, the projecting beams were not large enough
to bear the entire weight of the barn above. In these cases,
columns or posts were added beneath the overhang for
structural support.
In the earliest examples
of bank barns narrow-end side walls are frequently stone or
brick, with openings for ventilation. (Since "curing" green
hay can generate enough heat to start a fire through
spontaneous combustion, adequate ventilation in barns is
vital.)
Crib Barns
Crib barns form another
barn type significant in American agriculture. Found
throughout the South and Southeast, crib barns are especially
numerous in the Appalachian and Ozark Mountain States of
North Carolina, Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee and Arkansas.
Composed simply of one, two, four or sometimes six cribs that
served as storage for fodder or pens for cattle or pigs, crib
barns may or may not have a hayloft above. Crib barns were
typically built of unchinked logs, although they were
sometimes covered with vertical wood siding. Unaltered
examples of early crib barns normally have roofs of undressed
wood shingles. In time, shingle roofs were usually replaced
with tin or asphalt. The rustic appearance of crib barns is
one of their most striking features.
The cribs sometimes face
a covered gallery or aisle running across the front. In
another arrangement, the cribs are separated by a central
driveway running through the building. This latter
arrangement defines the double
crib barn.
In double crib barns the
second story hayloft is sometimes cantilevered over the
ground floor, resulting in a barn of striking
appearance.
Round Barns
George Washington owned a
round barn. And in 1826 the Shaker community at Hancock,
Massachusetts, built a round barn that attracted considerable
publicity.(4) Despite these early examples, however, round
barns were not built in numbers until the 1880s, when
agricultural colleges and experiment stations taught
progressive farming methods based on models of industrial
efficiency. From this time until well into the 1920s, round
barns appeared on farms throughout the country, flourishing
especially in the Midwest.(5)
Round barns were promoted
for a number of reasons. The circular form has a greater
volume-to-surface ratio than the rectangular or square form.
For any given size, therefore, a circular building will use
fewer materials than other shapes, thus saving on material
costs. Such barns also offer greater structural stability
than rectangular barns. And because they can be built with
self-supporting roofs, their interiors can remain free of
structural supporting elements, thereby providing vast
storage capabilities. The circular interior layout was also
seen as more efficient, since the farmer could work in a
continuous direction.
In general, multi-sided
barns--frequently of 12 or 16 sides--are earlier than "true
round" barns. Earlier examples also tend to be wood sided,
while later ones tend to be brick or glazed tile. Interior
layouts also underwent an evolution. Early round barns placed
cattle stanchions on the first floor, with the full volume of
the floor above used for hay storage. In later barns, the
central space rose from the ground floor through the entire
building. Cattle stanchions arranged around a circular manger
occupied the lower level; the circular wagon drive on the
level above permitted hay to be unloaded into the central mow
as the wagon drove around the perimeter. In the last stage of
round barn development, a center silo was added when silos
became regular features on the farm (in the last decades of
the nineteenth century). In some cases, the silo projected
through the roof.
The claims for the
efficiency of the round barn were overstated, and it never
became the standard barn, as its proponents had hoped.
Nevertheless, a great number were built, and many remain
today the most distinctive farm structures in the communities
in which they stand.
Prairie Barns
A peak roof projecting
above a hayloft opening is one of the most familiar images
associated with barns. The feature belongs to the prairie
barn, also known as the Western barn. The larger herds
associated with agriculture in the West and Southwest
required great storage space for hay and feed. Accordingly,
prairie barns are on average much larger than the other barns
discussed in this brief.(6) Long, sweeping roofs, sometimes
coming near the ground, mark the prairie barn; the extended
roof created great storage space. (Late in the nineteenth
century, the adoption of the gambrel roof enlarged the
storage capacity of the haymow even more.)
Affinities of this barn
type with the Dutch barn are striking: the long, low roof
lines, the door in the gable end, and the internal
arrangement of stalls in aisles on either side of the central
space are all in the tradition of the Dutch barn.
Others
The barn types discussed
here are only some of the barns that have figured in the
history of American agriculture. As with Dutch barns, some
reflect the traditions of the people who built them: Finnish
log barns in Idaho, Czech and German-Russian house barns in
South Dakota, and "threebay" English barns in the northeast.
Some, like the New England connected barn, stem from regional
or local building traditions. Others reflect the availability
of local building materials: lava rock (basalt) in
south-central Idaho, logs in the southeast, adobe in
California and the southwest. Others are best characterized
by the specialized uses to which they were put: dairy barns
in the upper midwest, tobacco barns in the east and
southeast, hop-drying barns in the northwest, and rice barns
in South Carolina. Other historic barns were built to
patterns developed and popularized by land-grant
universities, or sold by Sears, Roebuck and Company and other
mail-order firms. And others fit no category at all: these
barns attest to the owner's tastes, wealth, or unorthodox
ideas about agriculture. All of these barns are also part of
the heritage of historic barns found throughout the
country.
Preservation of Historic
Barns
Understanding Barns and
Their History
Historic barns are
preserved for a number of reasons. Some are so well built
that they remain useful even after a hundred years or more.
Many others are intimately connected with the families who
built them and the surrounding communities. Others reflect
developments in agricultural science or regional building
types.
Before restoring a
historic barn or rehabilitating it for a new use, an owner
should study the building thoroughly. This process involves
finding out when the barn was built, who built it, and why.
It means understanding how the building was changed through
the years. It means assessing the condition of the barn, and
understanding its components. This process has as its end an
appreciation of the building's historic character, that is,
the sense of time and place associated with it. It is this
physical presence of the past that gives historic buildings
their significance.
To assess the historic
character of a barn, an owner should study old photographs,
family records, deeds, insurance papers, and other documents
that might reveal the building's appearance and history.
Neighbors and former owners are often important sources of
information. Local libraries, historical societies and
preservation organizations are additional sources of
help.
As part of this overall
evaluation, the following elements should be assessed for
their contributions to the property. They are the principal
tangible aspects of a barn's historic character, and should
be respected in any work done on it.
Setting. Setting is one
of the primary factors contributing to the historic character
of a barn (see Fig. 2). Farmers built barns in order to help
them work the land; barns belong on farms, where they can be
seen in relation to the surrounding fields and other
structures in the farm complex. A barn crowded by suburbs is
not a barn in the same sense as is a barn clustered with
other farm buildings, or standing alone against a backdrop of
cornfields. Hence, the preservation of barns should not be
divorced from the preservation of the setting: farms and
farmland, ranches and range, orchards, ponds, fields, streams
and country roads.
Other important elements
of setting include fences, stone walls, roads, paths,
barnyards, corrals, and ancillary structures such as
windmills and silos. (Silos, indeed, have become so closely
associated with barns as nearly to have lost their "separate"
identities.) These features help place the building in the
larger agricultural context, relating it to its purpose in
the overall rural setting.
Form. The shape of barns,
as with other buildings, is great importance in conveying
their character. (For round barns, the shape is the defining
feature of the type.) Often the form of a barn is visible
from a distance. Often, too, more than one side can be seen
at the same time, and from several different approaches. As a
general rule, the rear and sides of a barn are not as
differentiated from the front, or as subordinated to it, as
in other buildings.
The roof is among the
most important elements of building form. Barns are no
exception. The gable roof on Dutch and Prairie barns, the
cone-shaped, dome-shaped, eight or twelve-sided roof of round
barns, and the gambrel roof of the "typical" barn are among
the most prominent features on these buildings. A barn roof
can often be seen from a distance, and for this reason must
be considered a major feature.
Materials. Among the
major impressions given by well-maintained historic barns are
those of strength, solidity and permanence (see Fig. 3).
These impressions largely result from the durability and
ruggedness of the materials used in them. Weathered wood
siding, irregularly shaped stones, or roughhewn logs on the
exterior; dressed beams, posts scarred by years of use, and
plank flooring on the interior all contribute to the special
character of barns.
Openings. Unlike historic
residential, industrial and commercial buildings, barns
generally have few openings for windows and doors. Yet the
openings found in barns are important both to their
functioning and to their appearance. Typically, large wagon
doorways and openings to the hayloft are among the most
striking features on barns. Not as prominent as these large
openings, but important from a functional perspective, are
the ventilator slits found on many barns. With important
exceptions (dairy barns, for example), windows are few, and
are normally small. The relative absence of openings for
windows and doors adds to the overall impression of
massiveness and solidity conveyed by many historic barns, and
is one of the reasons why they often appear to be larger than
they are.
Interior Spaces. The
impression received upon stepping into many historic barns is
that of space (see Fig. 4). Not infrequently, the entire
building appears as a single large space. To enter these
buildings is sometimes to experience the entire expanse of
the building at once. Even when haylofts and animal stalls
"consume" part of the building, they often do not keep the
full expanse of the interior from being seen. In large barns,
this can be an imposing sight. More commonly, the barn is a
combination of confined spaces on the lower floor and a large
open space above; in this case, the contrast between the
confined and open spaces is also striking. The openness of
the interior, furthermore, often contrasts with the
"blankness" typical of many barn exteriors, with their
relatively few openings.
Structural Framework. The
exposed structural framework is a major component of the
character of most historic barns (see Fig. 5). Typically,
barns were built for strictly utilitarian purposes.
Accordingly, barn builders made no effort to conceal the
structural system. Yet for that very reason, barns achieve an
authenticity that accounts for much of their appeal.
In some barns, the
load-bearing members are of enormous dimensions, and the
complex system of beams, braces, posts, rafters and other
elements of the revealed framework create an imposing sight.
Yet even in small barns, the structural system can be an
important feature, helping to determine the historic
character of the building.
Decorative Features.
Historic barns, like modern ones, are structures built for
use. Nevertheless, decorative elements are not lacking on
barns. Foremost among these is color (red being most common).
Dutch barns traditionally sported distinctively shaped martin
holes in the upper reaches of the building. Traditional hex
signs on Pennsylvania barns are so well known as to have
entered the mainstream of popular culture and taken on a life
of their own (see Fig. 6). Decorative paint schemes,
including contrasting colors to "pick out" cross members of
the external framework, are common (these most frequently
take the form of diamonds or "X's" on the main doors). Sign
painters often took advantage of the size and visibility of
barns in an age before billboards. "Mail Pouch Tobacco" signs
were nearly as numerous in the first quarter of the 20th
century as patent medicine ads were in the last quarter of
the 19th. Another decorative motif on historic barns is the
arrangement of spacings between bricks to form decorative
patterns (as well as to ventilate the barn).
In addition to these
elements, arched window hoods, patterned slate roofs,
fanciful cupolas, weathervanes, lightning rods and ornamented
metal ventilator hoods can be found on historic barns.
Finally, individual farmers and barn builders sometimes added
personal touches, as when they carved or painted their names
on anchor beams, or painted their names and the date over the
entrance.
The elements discussed
here are major components of historic barns. Yet no list can
convey the full historic character of an individual building.
It is very important, therefore, to study each structure
carefully before undertaking any project to restore it or to
adapt it to new uses.
Maintenance
If a building is to be
kept in good repair, periodic maintenance is essential. Barns
should be routinely inspected for signs of damage and decay,
and problems corrected as soon as possible. Water is the
single greatest cause of building materials deterioration.
The repair of roof leaks is therefore of foremost importance.
Broken or missing panes of glass in windows or cupolas are
also sources of moisture penetration, and should be replaced,
as should broken ventilation louvers. Gutters and downspouts
should be cleaned once or twice a year. Proper drainage and
grading should be ensured, particularly in low spots around
the foundation where water can collect.
Moisture is one major
threat to historic buildings. Insects, especially termites,
carpenter ants and powder post beetles, are another. Regular
examinations for infestations are essential.
Additional periodic
maintenance measures include repair or replacement of loose
or missing clapboards, and inspections of foundations for
cracks and settlements. Vegetation growing on the barn should
be removed, and shrubs or trees near it should be cleared if
they obstruct access, or, more serious, if roots and other
growths threaten the foundation. Soil and manure buildups
against the foundation should be removed. Such buildups hold
water and snow against wooden elements, and promote rot. They
also promote insect infestations. Door hardware should be
checked for proper fitting and lubricated yearly. Lightning
rods should be kept in proper working order, or added, if
missing.
Repair
Many historic barns
require more serious repairs than those normally classed as
"routine maintenance" (see Fig. 7). Damaged or deteriorated
features should be repaired rather than replaced wherever
possible. If replacement is necessary, the new material
should match the historic material in design, color, texture,
and other visual qualities and, where possible, material. The
design of replacements for missing features (for example,
cupolas and dormers) should be based on historic, physical,
or pictorial evidence.
Many barn owners have
substantial experience in the care of farm structures. Where
expertise is lacking, it will be necessary to consult
structural engineers, masons, carpenters, and architects, as
appropriate. In addition, for many repairs, a knowledge of
historic building techniques may be necessary.
Structural Repairs.
Ensuring the structural soundness of a historic barn is vital
both to its continued usefulness and to the safety of its
occupants. The following signs of structural settlements may
require the services of a structural engineer to evaluate:
major cracks in masonry walls, visible bowing, leaning and
misalignment of walls, sagging windows and doors, separation
of cladding from structural frames, trusses pulling away from
seating points at support walls, sagging joists and rafters,
and noticeable dips in the roof between rafters. To correct
these problems, masonry foundations may have to be reset or
partially rebuilt. Sills and plates may need to be repaired
or replaced. Walls may have to be straightened and tied into
the structural system more securely. Individual structural
members may need bracing or splicing.
Roofing. Moisture can
damage historic materials severely, and, in extreme cases,
jeopardize the structural integrity of a building. Every
effort must be made to secure a weathertight roof. This may
require merely patching a few missing shingles on a roof that
is otherwise sound. In more severe cases, it may require
repairing or replacing failing rafters and damaged sheathing.
Such extreme intervention, however, is not usual. More
typical is the need to furnish "a new roof," that is, to
replace the wooden shingles, asphalt shingles, slate shingles
or metal covering the roof. Replacing one type of roofing
with another can produce a drastic change in the appearance
of historic buildings. Great care should be taken, therefore,
to assess the contribution of the roof to the appearance and
character of the barn before replacing one type of roofing
material with another. While some substitute materials (such
as synthetic slate shingles) can be considered, the highest
priority should be to replace in-kind, and to match the
visual qualities of the historic roof. Gutters and downspouts
should be replaced if damaged or missing. Finally, dormers,
cupolas, metal ventilators and other rooftop
"ornaments" provide needed
ventilation, and should be repaired if necessary.
Exterior. In addition to
the roof and the foundation, other exterior elements may need
repair, including siding, brick and stonework, dormers and
cupolas, windows and doors. Shutters may be falling off,
doors may need to be rehung, and missing louvers replaced.
The exterior may need repainting. (Unpainted brick or stone
barns, however, should never be painted.) In the case of
masonry barns, repointing may be necessary. If so, mortar
that is compatible in appearance and composition with the
historic mortar must be used. Using mortar high in portland
cement can damage historic brick or stone. Masonry cleaning
should be undertaken only when necessary to halt
deterioration or to remove heavy dirt, and using the gentlest
means possible. Sandblasting and other physical or chemical
treatments that damage historic materials should not be used.
Likewise, power washing under high pressure can also damage
building material.
Interior. Typical
interior repairs may include removing and replacing rotten
floorboards, and repair or replacement of partitions, storage
bins, gutters and stalls. Concrete floors may be cracked and
in need of repair. Wiring and plumbing may need major
overhaul.
Rehabilitation
Some barns have served
the same uses for generations, and need only periodic repairs
and routine maintenance. Others have become obsolete and need
extensive updating for modern farming methods. (To house
livestock, for example, a barn may need new feeding,
watering, waste removal, electrical, plumbing and ventilation
systems.) Similarly, barns that can no longer be used for
agriculture at all normally require changes to adapt them for
commercial, office, or residential use. In such cases barns
need more extensive work than the maintenance and repair
treatments outlined above. However, when rehabilitating a
historic barn for a new farming operation or a new use
entirely, care must be taken to preserve its historic
character while making needed changes (see Figs. 8, 9 and
10).
A successful
rehabilitation project is best guaranteed when a work plan is
drawn up by someone familiar with the evaluation of historic
structures, and when it is carried out by contractors and
workmen experienced with the building type and committed to
the goal of retaining the historic character of the property.
Help in formulating rehabilitation plans and in locating
experienced professionals is normally available from the
State Historic Preservation Office and local preservation
groups.
The following approaches
should be observed when carrying out rehabilitation projects
on historic barns:
1. Preserve the historic
setting of the barn as much as possible. Modern farming
practices do not require the great number of outbuildings,
lots, fences, hedges, walls and other elements typical of
historic farms. Yet
such features, together
with fields, woods, ponds, and other aspects of the farm
setting can be important to the character of historic barns.
The functional relationship between the barn and silo is
particularly significant and should also be
maintained.
2. Repair and repaint
historic siding rather than cover barns with artificial
siding. Siding applied over the entire surface of a building
can give it an entirely different appearance, obscure craft
details, and mask ongoing deterioration of historic materials
underneath. The resurfacing of historic farm buildings with
any new material that does not duplicate the historic
material is never a recommended treatment.
3. Repair rather than
replace historic windows whenever possible, and avoid
"blocking them down" or covering them up. Avoid the insertion
of numerous new window openings. They can give a building a
domestic appearance, radically altering a barn's character.
However, if additional light is needed, add new windows
carefully, respecting the size and scale of existing window
openings.
4. Avoid changing the
size of door openings whenever possible. Increasing the
height of door openings to accommodate new farm machinery can
dramatically alter the historic character of a barn. If
larger doors are needed, minimize the visual change. Use new
track-hung doors rather than oversized rolled steel doors,
which give an industrial appearance incompatible with most
historic barns. If the barn has wood siding, the new doors
should match it. If historic doors are no longer needed, fix
them shut instead of removing them and filling in the
openings.
5. Consider a new
exterior addition only if it is essential to the continued
use of a historic barn. A new addition can damage or destroy
historic features and materials and alter the overall form of
the historic building. If an addition is required, it should
be built in a way that minimizes damage to external walls and
internal plan. It should also be compatible with the historic
barn, but sufficiently differentiated from it so that the new
work is not confused with what is genuinely part of the
past.
6. Retain interior spaces
and features as much as possible. The internal volume of a
barn is often a major character-defining feature, and the
insertion of new floors, partitions, and structures within
the barn can drastically impair the overall character of the
space. Similarly, interior features should also be retained
to the extent possible.
7. Retain as much of the
historic internal structural system as possible. Even in
cases where it is impractical to keep all of the exposed
structural system, it may be possible to keep sufficiently
extensive portions of it to convey a strong sense of the
interior character. Wholesale replacement of the historic
structural system with a different system should be
avoided.
Housing: A Special
Concern
The conversion of barns
to housing is not new, but has become increasingly popular in
recent years. Yet the changes involved in converting most
barns to housing are so great that such conversions rarely
preserve the historic character of the resource. Ordinarily,
numerous windows are inserted, walls are heavily insulated
and refinished, the interior volume is greatly reduced,
chimneys and other fixtures normally lacking in barns are
added, and site changes, such as close-in parking and
residential landscaping are made, giving the building a
greatly altered site. Many other barns are "converted" to
houses by dismantling them, discarding the exterior, and
reusing the internal structural system in a new building. The
beams are saved, but the barn is lost.
In cases where the
conversion from barns to houses has been successful, the
positive outcome results in large measure from the careful
choice of the barn: A modest-sized barn with a sufficient
number of existing residential-scale windows, in which nearly
the whole internal volume can be used as is, without building
numerous new partitions or extending a new floor across the
open space (haylofts in such cases serving as loft-space for
"second story" bedrooms).
Summary
Historic barns form a
vital part of our Nation's heritage. Not every historic barn
can be saved from encroaching development, or easily brought
back into productive use. Yet thousands of such structures
can be repaired or rehabilitated for continued agricultural
use or for new functions without destroying the very
qualities that make them worth saving. By carefully examining
the historic significance of each structure, owners of
historic barns can draw up plans that preserve and reuse
these historic structures while maintaining their historic
character.
NOTES
(1) Nore V. Winter,
"Design on the Farm: A Rural Preservation Forum," Unpublished
proceedings from a Conference sponsored by the National Trust
for Historic Preservation, Denver, Colorado, January 13-14,
1986.
(2) Descriptions of the
primary barn types featured in this section are heavily
indebted to Eric Arthur and Dudley Witney, The Barn: A
Vanishing Landmark in North America. Greenwich, CT: New York
Graphic Society, Ltd., 1972.
(3) John Fitchen, The New
World Dutch Barn: A Study of Its Characteristics, Its
Structural System, and Its Probable Erectional Procedures.
Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1968, p 136.
(4) Washington's "round"
barn, actually a 16-sided barn, is shown in Lowell J. Soike,
Without Right Angles: The Round Barns of Iowa. Des Moines:
Iowa State Historical Department, 1983. Round, octagonal and
other polygonal barns are normally all classed as "round
barns." When it is necessary to be more precise, the term
"true round" is used to distinguish round barns from
hexagonal, octagonal, or other polygonal barns. The Shaker
Round Barn is a true round barn. Gutted by fire in 1864, the
barn was rebuilt shortly thereafter. See Polly Matherly and
John D. McDermott, Hancock Shaker Village National Historic
Landmark study, History Division, National Park Service,
Washington, D.C.
(5) In addition to the
sources mentioned above, the following studies were important
sources for this section: Mark L. Peckham, "Central Plan
Dairy Barns of New York Thematic Resources," Albany: New York
State Division for Historic Preservation, 1984; and James E.
Jacobsen and Cheryl Peterson, "Iowa Round Barns: The Sixty
Year Experiment Thematic Resources," Des Moines: Iowa State
Historical Department, 1986. These thematic studies document
barns listed in the National Register of Historic
Places.
(6) Charles Klamkin,
Barns: Their History, Preservation, and Restoration. New
York: Hawthorn, 1973, p 57.
Selected Reading
Arthur, Eric and Dudley
Witney. The Barn: A Vanishing Landmark in North America.
Greenwich, CT: New York Graphic Society Ltd., 1972.
Fitchen, John. The New
World Dutch Barn: A Study of Its Characteristics, Its
Structural System, and Its Probable Erectional Procedures.
Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 1968.
Halsted, Byron D., ed.
Barns, Sheds and Outbuildings. New York: O. Judd Co., 1881.
Rpt.: Brattleboro, VT: Stephen Greene Press, 1977.
Humstone, Mary. Barn
Again! A Guide to Rehabilitation of Older Farm Buildings. Des
Moines, IA: Meredith Corporation and the National Trust for
Historic Preservation, 1988.
Klamkin, Charles. Barns:
Their History, Preservation and Restoration. New York:
Hawthorn, 1973.
Schuler, Stanley.
American Barns: In a Class by Themselves. Exton, PA: Schiffer
Publishing Ltd., 1984.
Schultz, LeRoy G., comp.
Barns, Stables and Outbuildings: A World Bibliography in
English, 17001983. Jefferson, NC, and London: McFarland &
Co., 1986.
Stokes, Samuel N., et al.
Saving America's Countryside: A Guide to Rural Conservation.
Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press,
1989.
Cover photograph: Prairie
barn with monitor roof, North Dakota. Photo: Mary
Humstone.
Acknowledgements
The author gratefully
acknowledges the invaluable assistance of Mary Humstone,
National Trust for Historic Preservation, Mountains/Plains
Regional Office, and Sharon C. Park, Kay D. Weeks, and Robert
Powers of the National Park Service. Significant
contributions were also made by Stan Graves, Texas Historical
Commission, on behalf of the National Conference of State
Historic Preservation Officers; Shirley Dunn, Dutch Barn
Preservation Society, Rensselaer, NY; Janis King, Knoxville,
IL; Marilyn Fedelchak, National Trust for Historic
Preservation; Fred Swader, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
and Linda McClelland, National Register of Historic Places.
In addition, useful comments and technical assistance were
provided by the staff of the Technical Preservation Services
Branch, directed by H. Ward Jandl, by the cultural resources
staff of National Park Service Regional Offices, by Jack
Boucher, Catherine Lavoie and Ellen Minnich of the Historic
American Buildings Survey, and by Alicia Weber of the Park
Historic Architecture Division.
Washington, D.C. October
1989
|
