What kind of information is particularly needed Dates of founding and construction, and dates for additions or changes to the building Dating an eighteenth- or nineteenth-century congregation or building is not as easy as it may seem. I have learned that more than a few people want to claim as much antiquity for their church as possible. I have often been told a building is 125 years old when that date was the year when the congregation was organized. Similarly, some congregations quote the first time an itinerant preacher visited the area and may have conducted services in a private home as the founding date for the church. I sympathesize with those intentions but I often reject the date. Here's why: When attempting to explain why a church looks the way it does it is essential to date it properly. An obviously Greek Revival portico on a modest wooden-frame church that is dated by the congregation to 1789 would require a wholesale revision of the history of American architecture. All similar buildings (in New Jersey as well as areas closer to the centers of architectural style and innovation) were erected between, say, 1839 and 1856. If we were to accept the congregation's date of construction, any explanation of why the congregation adopted that style in 1789 would be farcical. Disagreements in the printed sources over dates is not uncommon, but are usually simply a matter of a couple of years, and so normally are not significant. I do not spend much time worrying about whether 1876 or 1879 is the correct date, but I may note in my book that different sources assert different dates. Names of architects, contractors, builders, carpenters and masons Until the time of the Civil War there were very few individuals in this country who identified themselves as architects. Most were builders, perhaps even master builders or master masons, although those medieval terms had largely died out in this country. Although the members of the congregation's building committee are occasionally named, it is unusual to find the name of an architect or builder in the congregation's commemorative book issued on the 100th or 150th anniversay celebration, or in a source such as Franklin Ellis' History of Monmouth County, published in 1885. The architect or designer of the building was not regarded as important. I have found several churches that claim they are "mail order" buildings, not realizing that the preparer of those plans ordered by mail was Richard Upjohn, who regularly provided plans for impecunious Episcopal congregations for a nominal sum. Often a careful examination of the church minutes will reveal a contract with a builder or architect. When I had no intention to write about anything but a couple dozen churches in Hunterdon County I could spend the time going through the hand-written church minutes (which were preserved in a surprising number of cases); when the task evolved into one of documenting what will probably prove to be 1,500 eighteenth- and nineteenth-century buildings, that level of research is not possible except in the case of a few buildings I consider exceptional, or intriguing. Anytime I can persuade a minister or a member of the congregation to do that research for me I am especially grateful. It doesn't happen more than a few times in each county, but I remember every one of the people who made that effort with considerable affection. Notes or minutes of the congregation relating to the construction of the building Sometimes the conclusions of the building committee are simply expressed as a charge to the [unnamed] builder for "a proper church of the Gothic style, 40' x 60'." Rarely there is a note saying that members visited other churches, advertised for bids, or engaged an architect. That information is all the more treasured because it may help us understand why the building looks as it does. Changes in the name of the congregation, or a transfer of ownership Almost 20 percent of the old churches have passed into other hands—usually a newer congregations succeeding the original Reformed or Lutheran or Presbyterian one that built the church, but sometimes it has been reworked as a residence, or senior center, or a restaurant. The date of such sale or "adaptive reuse" as it is called is important. How to challenge a fact or date you believe is in error My attention is often called to an erroneous date on my NJChurchscape website by a member of the congregation. I readily acknowledge such errors. I sometimes make a mistake in typing a date, or I may have had trouble reading a note scribbled hastily during my library research. I rely heavily on the dates from the several county historys, published in the 1880s. The authors of the individual articles in those books were not historians and were not always careful, it appears, in establishing dates for events that happened 30 or 50 years before their time. Where there is a reason for accepting a different date from those sources we are pleased to do so. Website readers occasionally inform me that the date I have cited is wrong—that a different date is the right one—but they rarely tell me why I should prefer their date to the one I have obtained from Ellis, Snell or Salter. I am uncertain about using an e-mail note that says, "Your date is wrong. It was built in 1889." The acceptability of that statement in my mind depends upon the credibility of the author of that e-mail. There are people I trust implicitly, but most people who correspond with me about this topic are unknown to me. If the author had added that he was the congregation's historian and he had checked the church records to verify the date, we would readily accept it. But without that information we would probably stick to the date in the printed record. Here's how to challenge a factual statement or interpretation: Tell us what you believe is the correct fact or a preferable interpretation. Tell us why you think so (you have personally checked the record, you have written extensively on that issue, etc.). If there is a printed source for your interpretation or information, please cite that source. Citing sources A citation is a line of text that uniquely identifies a source. For example:
It allows a reader to find the source and verify that it supports the information or interpretation presented. When to use. Sources should be cited when adding or correcting a date or a name, or for any new material
that is likely to be challenged, or when quoting someone. The source preferably has been published, but we recognize that much local history has never seen print. It is found in hand-written diaries, minutes, even conversations that are recalled. This is entirely legitimate history for our purposes. But it should be attested to by someone. Thus, a contributor to this wiki might write, "I examined the minutes of the congregation that are in the possession of the church secretary and saw XYZ in the notes of January 25, 1837." That is verifiable. Similarly, a contributor to my NJChurchscape website once sent an e-mail that he had visited the meetinghouse in question and saw the date 1818 inscribed on the cornerstone. That, too, is verifiable, and most useful. How to format. While you should attempt to format a citation as described below, it is more important that material is verifiable. Add your source even if you are unsure of how to properly format the citation—provide enough information to identify the source, and others will improve the formatting. |
|
|
|
Home >
Editing |