CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Places & Architecture

Frazier Bridge

historic Double arched bridge over the La Chute River at Ticonderoga, New York, United States

Architectural plans, a scale model, maps and brass measuring instruments
Places and architectureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 5, 2026
Entity authorityQ5494086 ↗
Source-derived summary

Frazier Bridge is a historic Double arched bridge over the La Chute River at Ticonderoga in Essex County, New York. It was built in 1894 and is a double-arched masonry bridge, 23 feet wide and spanning 50 feet at roughly 10 feet above water level.

It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1998.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Frazier Bridge” is historic Double arched bridge over the La Chute River at Ticonderoga, New York, United States. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Frazier, Bridge and historic, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA strong orientation record where physical form, institutional use and historical geography need to be read together. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1894, 1998—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Frazier, Bridge and historic is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “historic Double arched bridge over the La Chute River at Ticonderoga, New York, United States” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Maps, plans, fabric surveys and administrative records can establish how the site’s name, extent and function changed over time. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 5, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5494086. The first chronological checks are 1894 and 1998.

Critical limits

Architectural summaries often privilege surviving fabric and can understate demolished phases, contested use or displaced communities. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.

Best used for
  • Historic place names
  • Jurisdictional context
  • Routes into maps and plans
Verify next

Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Frazier Bridge”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Frazier Bridge primary sources, Frazier Bridge archive and Frazier research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Frazier Bridge”?
  2. Which earlier names or jurisdictions may reveal additional records?
  3. Which authority defined the place, boundary or structure at the relevant date?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Frazier Bridge” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.