Architecture

Every architect that has commented on the Newport Tower has described it as  medieval and, regardless of its original purpose, clearly pre-Columbian  in design. Historical architect Sue Carlson said, “To all trained architects and architectural historians, the style of the tower is unquestionably medieval, as indicated by the quality of the rough stone  masonry with its round stone columns supporting stone arches awkwardly making a transition to the superstructure above.” And since the mid 19th century, other architects have agreed. Why the disconnect between the disciplines of archeology and historical architecture? We think it can only be explained by the bias of archeology as they seek to find what fits with preconceived notions while architects more objectively seek  similarity between design, style and construction methods.

Comparative Architecture

Two researchers have made such a dominant contribution to knowledge of the architecture of the Newport Tower that the reader is best served if we  simply review the work of each of them here and quote from them extensively. The two are James P. Whittal and Sue Carlson.

The Architecture of the Newport Stone Tower
by James P. Whittal, 1997

 The Newport Stone Tower in Touro Park in Newport, Rhode Island was constructed in the style of Norman-Romanesque
 architecture, inspired by the architecture of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem brought back to Europe by returning
 Crusaders. In its own unique  style, the tower was further influenced by a combination of the architecture of temples
 of the Templars, the round  churches of Scandinavia, and local architectural traditions from whence the builders came.
 Architectural features found  within the construction of the tower would date it within the broad range of 1150 to 1400 A.D.
 However, some specific  features limit it to a period in the late 1300s. In the course of six years of research I have found the
 best parallels in the tower’s architectural features exist in the Northern Isles of  Scotland which were under Norse control
 during the time frame mentioned.

 The following are some of my conclusions to date:

 1. The architecture of the tower was pre planned. The concept was not conceived on site and built in haste.

 2. The architecture is completely involved with sacred geometry.

 3. The masons were completely familiar with the materials on hand with which to construct the tower.

 4. The tower was aligned to east and each pillar (8) was placed on a  cardinal point in the manner after the Templars.
 It  was not constructed using a magnetic compass. Today designated pillar 1 is 3 degrees west of the North Pole star

 5. The tool marks created in the dressing out of the stone can directly be related to tools manufactured before
 1400. These marks are unique and unknown when compared to tool marks noted in colonial stonework.

 6. After extensive comparison with ancient units of measurement, we have found that the unit of measurement for
 the construction of the tower is best suited to the Scottish Ell or the Norwegian short Men. A photogrammetric
 survey made in 1991 showed that the unit of measurement for the tower was 23.35 cm, which supports the idea
 that either the Scottish Ell or the Alen was used in constructing the tower. The English foot wasn’t used.

 7. The single and double splay windows have prototypes in Medieval Europe and the Northern Isles of Scotland in the
 1300s in churches and the Bishop’s Palace in Orkney.

 8. The arch and lintel design noted in the tower is to be found in Orkney, Shetland, and Scandinavia round church
 architecture before 1400.

 9. I have found in extensive research, that the triangle keystone feature of the arches in the tower only seemed to have
 been  found in the buildings in Orkney, Shetland, Greenland (1 example), and  to a very limited degree in other buildings
 in the Scottish Isles (3) and in Ireland (2).

 10. Built-in niches in the tower have parallel examples in Medieval construction in Orkney and Shetland. It is basically unknown in New England architecture except in some post 1700 stone chambers.

 11. The plinth, pillar, capital, arch architecture of the tower has no  prototype in New England colonial architecture, yet
 is found in Kirkwall Cathedral in Orkney.

 12. The design of the fireplace with its double flues dates to the 1300s  and was out of fashion by the 1400s. There are
 prototypes of this design in Scotland. Research has indicated the probability that the fireplace and its relationship to
 the west facing window was used as a lighthouse and probably signal station. The same can be said for the windows
 on the third level.

 13. The walls were covered with a plaster stucco finish both interior and exterior. Stucco finishing started in the 1200s
 and is a feature known in Orkney and Shetland.

 14. The probable layout and design of the floor joists with corbels has parallels in medieval Scotland.

 15. Probably first floor entry by ladder through the window/entry 3. A  trait found in the round churches of Scandinavia.

 16. Some architectural features in the tower have been organised to utilise astronomical alignments as a calendar
 event. Some of the alignments fall on Holy days of the Norse and Knights  Templar. There are prototypes in Northern Europe.

 17. Probability of an ambulatory around the tower (planned for but not  necessarily built). Examples in Templar construction and round churches.

 18. The tower is located approximately the same latitude as Rome. This would make it an ideal reference point for
 exploration and mapping.

 19. There is no architectural parallel in Colonial New England for the  Newport Tower and its specific architectural features.

 20. I suggest that the tower was built as a church, observatory,  lighthouse, a datum zero point for future exploration
 in The new World.

Units of Measure

James Whittal also took some painstaking measurements of various tower dimensions. They are:

1. The diameter of the pillars = 3 feet, 1 inch
2. The width of the wall at the first arch keystone = 3 feet, 1 inch
3. The interior diameter of the tower, pillar to pillar = 18 feet, 6 inches
4. The exterior diameter of the tower at pillars = 24 feet, 8 inches
5. The width of the wall at arch keystones 2-8 = 2 feet, 3 3/4 inches
6. The distance from the south side of the fireplace to the first niche = 1 foot, 6 1/2 inches
7. The distance across the inside of the capital = 3 feet, 10 1/4 inches
8. The distance across the outside of the capital = 2 feet, 3 3/4 inches

These dimensions presented a serious problem for the supporters of the colonial theory since a colonial builder would have used the English  foot. They have tried in vain to find other units of measure that would fit and make sense but none do. Except for one - the medieval Scottish  “el”€� which is 37 inches. When applying the el to the above dimensions one sees the round numbers for each as follows:

1. pillar diameter = 1 Scottish el (SE)
2. width of wall at first keystone = 1 SE
3. interior pillar to pillar diameter = 6 SE
4. exterior diameter at pillars = 8 SE
5. width of wall at keystones 2-8 = 3/4 SE
6. distance from south side of fireplace to first niche = 1/2 SE
7. distance across inside of capital = 1 1/4 SE
8. distance across outside of capital = 3/4 SE

This uniformity with the Scottish el cannot be an accident. It is self evident not only that the foot was not used, as any colonial builder without doubt would have done, but also that the Scottish el “was” used. This is one of many findings that in itself is devastating to the  viability of the colonial theory.

Suzanne Carlson

In addition to Jim Whittal, architect/historian Suzanne Carlson has made a great contribution to our understanding of the architecture of the Newport Tower. Her article, “Loose Threads in a Tapestry of Stone: Architecture of The Newport Tower” is a must read for anyone wishing to delve deeper into the study of the tower than this website’s overview. The article in its entirety is available here. A summary is offered below.

As an historian/architect, Sue approached the tower recognizing that it  had similarities with structures around Europe, but there was no clear prototype that embodied all, or even most, of the characteristics of the Newport Tower. These tantalizing leads are frustrating for those  seeking to answer when the tower was built and by whom. While they  provide many clues, it falls short of being conclusive. Fortunately our  mission here is not to conclude who did but who didn’t. And Sue’s study in comparative architecture does much to help us conclude that the  colonials did not build the Newport Tower. For starters here are a few  sketches that show uncanny similarities in size and features -

All that remains of the early Norse round church at Ophir in the Orkney  Islands of present-day Scotland is the rough stone apse which is about 20 feet in diameter. Carlson says about this church, “My firsthand study of the construction techniques still visible in Ophir and masonry techniques of other Orkney buildings of the period, show a remarkable similarity to the methods of our Newport masons. This suggests to me a common construction tradition derived from North  Atlantic Medieval standards.”

The Apse of the Round Church at Ophir, Mainland, Orkney Islands

Ritual cleansing was part of the daily life for the Cistercian religious order that was founded in the 12th century. The water sources for these cleansings were regarded as sacred and enclosed by a small, open-arcaded structure either round or octagonal. These lavabos were usually two floors. The similarity to the Newport Tower is striking, and without suggesting that the tower was built as a Cistercian Lavabo, we find it hard to believe the style was copied by a colonial stonemason for a mill to grind corn.

Newport Tower Compared to the Mellifont and Valmagne Lavabos

The Tower of the Monastery of Saint Bavo, Ghent,Belgium (we quote Sue Carlson directly on this one) 

“This austere octagon rises unceremoniously from the cloister yard, each face pierced by a simple unornamented arched opening, with  sills approximately 18 inches above ground. An interior stone trench follows the outside wall, presumably filled with water and used for ritual ablutions, There are no capitals on the exterior of the piers, but the rib brackets on the inside have primitive Romanesque floral and  grotesque carvings. The ceiling is a ribbed vault. Access to the second story is by an attached stair tower constructed partially of brick and of a much later design. The wood door set in masonry infill in one of  the arches is obviously a later addition, leaving us to ponder the  original means of access to the upper story. Each face of the second story has a central round arched window with stained glass sash. The front face window has a trefoil shaped upper sash. Only roof flashing is visible today, and again the original roof configuration remains a matter for speculation. A deep well, which fed water into the trough, sits in front and to the right of the entrance in the cloister yard. We can only muse about possible astronomical significance of the  upper floor at this point in the study. The construction in its geometric features offers a viable prototype for Newport Tower.”

Newport Tower Compared to Saint Bavo’s Tower

Templar Round Churches

The Newport Tower is often compared to the small round churches built  across Europe by the Knights Templar. Most famous is London Temple Church shown compared to the Newport Tower below. The inner cylinder or  apse, is 41 feet in diameter (no Scottish Els here) and again, supported by eight pillars. It is therefore larger than the tower, but of the same scale and proportion. Note again that in the picture below you are  seeing the entire church as modified in more recent times. The part that compares well is the center of which you see only the top.

The Templar round church that is most compelling by comparison is the one at Lanleff in France.

It is also larger than the Newport Tower, but has the same scale and proportions. Most interesting are its oddly placed windows and its many obvious  astronomical alignments. It is unknown who built this church, but there are many candidates with the Templars a prime possibility.

Needed Skill Sets and Materials

What did it actually take to build the Newport Tower? This is another area where we owe much insight to Sue Carlson who made an in-depth study of what materials and skills and manpower were needed to build the tower? Briefly, it took about 450 tons of stone and six tons of clamshells for mortar. And another 45 tons of sand. The builders also needed a couple thousand gallons of good water and a number of strong oaks for lumber. A master mason and an apprentice would have been needed and a couple  skilled carpenters as well. Other tasks like mortar making could have been overseen by the mason but taught and done by general laborers.

The materials were readily available around Newport whenever the tower was built. But the master masons were not. There were no stone structures anywhere in the area during Arnold’s time that would have required the masonry skills. They would have to have been imported from some distance and brought in - for a windmill to grind corn. In order to believe that Gov. Arnold built the tower from the ground as a windmill you have to accept all the following:

1. That he was willing to incur at least ten times the cost of a wooden mill
2. That he imported a master mason who was willing to build a stone windmill on eight pedestals
3. That this same master mason designed the pillars to be offset to the outside and failed to make the tower perfectly round

We will delve further into the Illogic of this in another section. For now the point is simply that building the tower was a major undertaking that dwarfed the job of building an ordinary wooden windmill. And if one did want to build a stone windmill one would make it solid to the  ground to withstand the stresses and strains of a windmill. And one would make it round since, as we will discuss later, it could not possibly function as a windmill being as out of round as it is. And finally, since almanacs were readily available at the time, one would not have bothered to build in astronomical alignments.

Astronomical Alignments

It has long been recognized that the eight pillars of the Newport  Tower are aligned with the cardinal points of the compass. This alone suggests a builder other than a colonial who would have had no motive  for such an orientation in a windmill. But that’s just the beginning. The tower clearly contains a host of astronomical alignments and no doubt many are still waiting to be discovered.

In thinking about the alignments remember that the tower stands on a hill that was open pasture and with a clear view of Jamestown Island to the  west, and Miantonomi Hill to the precise due north. One can sight the alignment from the south window of the tower through the small north  window and see the top of Miantonomi Hill, and directly above it the north star. The highest point on Jamestown Island is (ironically enough) Windmill Hill. And on one day a year, the summer solstice, one can sight from the south window of the tower through the west window which  at that angle is a narrow slit and see the sun set directly above Windmill Hill.

Obviously the builders used these two sightings from the summer solstice setting sun and the north star over two points on the earth to determine the  tower’s location. And it is equally clear they then designed the windows to be able to observe and mark the solstice. Yet, some would still claim this is due to coincidence.

The above diagram is from Chronognostic.org who did the research at the tower in 2006 and 2007. The odds of a structure being built by coincidence at the intersection of those two lines is very small and the design of the tower and the detail of its windows, niches and splays can only have been done, and with great effort, to create a functionality as an observatory. This evidence alone seems entirely sufficient to dismiss the colonial theory. We know of no colonial advocate who argues  that the alignments were designed by colonial builders.

The above diagram, again from Chronognostic, shows the window design and location and how precise the sighting had to be. This was how the location for the tower was chosen. Once this was accomplished other  sorts of alignments could be built in as well. Why would “any”� builder bother to do this? Because in an age before almanacs, one needed to be able to make these sightings to know when to plant and harvest, and when certain days of religious significance would fall. The colonial founders of Newport had no need for such an ability since they had almanacs for over a hundred years. In fact, there is no evidence of any building in the area in colonial times having such a range of  astronomical alignments. It is difficult to believe that Gov. Arnold opted for it in a windmill that was already costing him ten times more  than a typical wooden one.

Another graphic from Chronognostic illustrates the view from inside the tower  of both the northern alignment and the solstice sunset. Think for a minute how the builder had to have approached this. He would have  started with Polaris, only visible at night. Then he would need a landmark for daytime location of due north which was the crest of Miantonomi Hill. Those two points define a north/south line, and the builder’s next task was to bisect that line with an east/west line which allows him to identify the vernal and autumnal equinox because on those two days the sun rises and sets due east and west. Next, our builder  needs another set of celestial and land points to establish the solstice line. The point at which that line crosses the north/south line is the location for his tower. He begins with the location of the setting sun on the summer solstice. He aligns it with the highest peak to the west,  the crest of what is now Windmill Hill. The point at which he can stand on his north/south line and see the setting sun on the summer solstice over the crest of Windmill Hill is the location of the tower. Now he “merely” has to build the tower and carefully locate the windows and the exact angles of their splays so that through the tiny north window he sees the north star directly over Miantonomi Hill and through the  narrow west window he sees the setting solstice sun directly over the peak of Windmill Hill.

This intelligence and effort was not put into a windmill for grinding corn,  and obviously it is virtually impossible for it to have happened by accident. While it is not our mission to speculate who built the Newport Tower or why, we are compelled to conclude that one of the reasons was  for celestial observation. Other reasons may have included service as a church and as a lighthouse for ships entering the bay, but the enormity  of effort that went into the tower makes clear the astronomical  alignments were a major goal.

But wait, there’s more! Astronomer William Penhallow who has done extensive research on the tower’s alignments commented that they aren’t as tight today as in the past because stars and the earth move slightly in relation to other other long periods of time. Penhallow said the  alignments were most precise between 1200 and 1600 AD. When  Chronognostic did their work they noted that they used the sun’s  location at that time and it aligned directly over the old windmill on Windmill Hill. But, that windmill is off by 200 feet from the exact  highpoint of the hill. When they used the astronomy software Starry Night, the alignment was perfect over the crest of the hill - in 1125 AD! What are the implications of this? Even if one wanted to give some credence to the possibility that colonial builders incorporated the alignments, the dates are all wrong. Had they built the tower and created the alignments in the 1670s, not only would they have had more modern instruments, we would today be able to see a best fit date of 1675 rather than much earlier as is the case. Even more evidence that a  colonial build is not a viable explanation for the Newport Tower.

next - Colonial Theory

webmaster@newporttower.org

[Home] [Dispute History] [Archeology] [Architecture] [Colonial Theory] [Conclusion] [Sitemap] [Untitled10]