Wagon Wheel Pavilion Article???

[Joe Skeesick]

Ok, the thread is long gone (not sure why, but it doesnt matter) there was however an article posted in that thread that goes through some of the reasonings and has constuction details on how to do it yourself. Anyone have that article link? I'm just dumb enough to try to make one of those myself (since I can only afford to "buy" 1 tent and I'm not making a yurt.... thought I might could pull a pavilion off)

Thanks in advance


Janos

[Raymund]

I don't know if it's what you are looking for, but Andy Goddard has an 'work-in-progress' pavilion article on his ca:1265 website: http://www.bumply.com/Medieval/Pavilion/index.htm

This is a wagon wheel pavilion without spokes, so it might be a more 'period' solution.

/Raymund

[Alasdair Mac Roibeirt]

I have debated trying this one.

http://www.adelphi.edu/~sbloch/sca/tents/kuijt.article/

Alasdair

[Le Brassey]

Sorry, I killed the post because it became a critique of Tentsmiths. This is probably a topic that should be treated in its own post.

As for pavilion construction, why not address the topic in a specific post?

Period Pavilion: Need Plans & Suggestions

[Steve S.]

Sorry I missed the thread about Tentsmiths.

I have been talking very extensively with Andy Goddard of Circa:1265 for 9 months or more concerning the construction of a round pavilion utilizing a hoop. I believe in the structure - there are simply too many period illustrations that lead me to believe in it.

I did not want to - ropes and only a centerpole are obviously the simplest solution. However, there are many depictions of round pavilions that either have no guy ropes, or are just too round to be done otherwise.

I have modeled up a round pavilion in CAD, and extracted the flat pattern. I have sent these to Tentsmiths and they should be starting construction at any moment. I believe my design for holding the hoop is both simple and sound. It is a combination of the two designs that Circa:1265 has implemented.

My wood hoop will be made of 8 segments of steam bent wood.

I hope to have it by Pennsic.

Steve

[Cunian]

I was leafing through stuff last night and realized that the way to do the nifty little gables in the tops of the pavillions would be to do spokes off the center pole to hold up the gable ridges. I would infer that at least the idea of spokes was known, if the gables were in fact done that way. I almost want to do one now, even though me with a 15th century pavilion would be awfully hard to explain.

[schreiber]

I make round (not polygonal) 12' wide pavillions with one supporting ring. They set up in about ten minutes with the proper accessories, and two healthy guys that know what they're doing can break, fold, and pack one into a standard size pillowcase (minus one 9' pole) in two minutes or less.

All my math is worked out, and I could write down an article about it if there's enough interest.

Email me at i8emall@home.com (can't figure out how to link it right now, you have to cut and paste) If there's enough interest I'll write something up.

HELMUT

[Le Brassey]

I disaggree that the presence of gables necessarily means the presence of a spoked support. For instance, I imagine that gables could have a self-supporting structure like a box-kite. Certainly there are several possibilities as to how they were supported.

To use the VERY UNCOMMON feature of tent gables to conjecture that the COMMON round pavilion had a spoked support is too much of a reach, in my opinion.

------------------
Henri le Brassey
(mka: Timothy Finkas)

[FrauHirsch]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Le Brassey:
<B>I disaggree that the presence of gables necessarily means the presence of a spoked support. For instance, I imagine that gables could have a self-supporting structure like a box-kite. Certainly there are several possibilities as to how they were supported.

To use the VERY UNCOMMON feature of tent gables to conjecture that the COMMON round pavilion had a spoked support is too much of a reach, in my opinion.
</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rounds that require some support structure are shown in a fair number of period illustrations. Many of the rounds have gathered soft sides and no external ropes, and there are onion topped rounds and dome topped rounds. These would all require "something" in there to support them. Some of the rounds clearly have no external ropes and some do.

I agree that we have no documentation that a spoke structure was used. On the other hand, we can document the materials and some of the engineering concepts that would have been available.

A question that got deleted from the original spoke tent thread was something like this:

If you were doing a re-enactment of a specific 14th c battle, and all the illustrations of the encampment for that battle showed rectangular tents, onion topped rounds or gabled tents, most of which have no external ropes, would people be more accurate to bring "common" rounds of a known historical construction? Or would the re-enactment be more correct with conjecturally constructed tents of the type depicted in the period illustrations?

I don't have a definite answer myself.

Julie

[Le Brassey]

Are the portrayals of tents without ropes in some period illustrations a reliable depiction of "reality"? I believe the absence of ropes in at least some of these cases could be due to artistic license or simplification, and perhaps not necessarily a literal depiction.

Note that one sees varying levels of detail and realistic accuracy (and also fantastic & invented detail & fashion) in medieval illustrations. For instance, if one sees a line of archers shooting lefthanded, it is more likely that the artist illustrated what pleased his eye rather than that he meticulously documented a unit of left-handed archers.

Certainly, round tents existed past the 14th & 15th century. Wouldn't something as interesting and dynamic as a spoked rafter system have been carried forward? Is there any evidence of such an arrangement later in history when there are better records or more proof? I wonder.


Just my opinion.

------------------
Henri le Brassey
(mka: Timothy Finkas)




[This message has been edited by Le Brassey (edited 03-29-2001).]