This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on List of the oldest buildings in Connecticut. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:23, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
The ca. 1670 date of construction for the Dr. Turner House in Norwich needs citation. National Registry form does not include any evidence for that early date. Photographs of the interior, available on real estate sites, show what appears to be a late 18th century structure. Old houses ( talk) 17:28, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
need to add some oldest residences which are located in southport, ct e.g. in very center of sopt, is the robinson home ab 1650 and also in sopt, going up harbor road hill from corner of main st andharbor about the 5th house on the west side is again a res ab 1650, though it was moved there from another location, it is still the original res from that earlier time 69.121.189.159 ( talk) 08:11, 12 July 2020 (UTC) nautonier and harbormaster no. 1 f.n. both these homes have on their sides markers for the info given here and im approx. correct but don't recall exact dates of res
Feake Ferris House date of construction lacks proper citation; a claim made by the owner is not a reliable source. I have removed the entry from this list.
There's a lot of editing to the list of the oldest buildings in Connecticut. It appears that User:Old Houses has been reverting edits of several users here and on the respective linked articles. There's a lot of socking going on. A dendrochronology study was completed on the Feake-Ferris House according to a credible neutral source which User talk: Old Houses removed and deemed unreliable. It's irrelevant, in my opinion, if a tree-ring analysis arrives at a date that makes a building the first, second, third, fourth or fiftieth oldest house in Connecticut. As more buildings are dated using dendrochronology, there is the potential for an earlier known dated building to lose its bragging rights as the oldest building somewhere. The introduction of the dendrochronology report to the Feake-Ferris House page as a primary source is unnecessary, because we have a credible secondary source for it. Wikipedia discourages the use of original research or primary sources. Regarding dendrochronology, I was told by a dendrochronologist once, that the oldest buildings are still to be discovered. He thinks they're entombed as the core of Victorian looking houses situated somewhere between Maine and Virginia... The dating of buildings only using dendrochronology as the sole arbiter is totally flawed due to the fact that only about 40% of tree samples are successfully dated. You must rely on a combination of sources; land tax and probate records, architectural studies, genealogy, radio carbon dating and dendrochronology. Tomticker5 ( talk) 20:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
I believe that you are vandalizing the page. The Columbia University dendrochronology report information (date of construction) were released to the press in 2018 and articles were published about the Feake-Ferris House. Are you questioning the integrity of the Greenwich Free Press, Greenwich Sentinel, Greenwich Point Conservancy or Columbia University? If you're disputing the credibility of the sources, please provide sources to support your accusations before removing the sources cited here that support the construction date of 1645 for the house. Tomticker5 ( talk) 13:13, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
The Feake-Ferris House article is written in a way that the reader can understand the house went through three phases of development between 1645 and 1689. The land and probate records, dendrochronology, and surviving original architectural evidence, support the stone cellar was built in 1640, the one over one house was built on it in 1645, the lean-to was added to that in 1660, and the two over two expansion was made in 1689. Tomticker5 ( talk) 21:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Quoting from the Greenwich Free Press September 2, 2016, citation 4 in the article: "Excellent wood-bore samples were obtained from multiple posts and beams on each floor of the Ferris House, and amazingly the entire structure has been determined to be an intact post and beam structure that is dated by Lamont-Doherty to 1688/1689." You are cherry-picking, elevating one source over another for no defensible reason. Old houses ( talk) 22:07, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Dendrochronology is not the final arbiter, because 40% of tree rings cannot be dated. The Greenwich Sentinel article from 7/13/18 provides the answers to your questions about the Feake-Ferris House. The NRHP nomination form for the Pratt House (Essex, Connecticut) mentions the oldest ell dating to 1648. The article for this house has listed 1648 as the date of construction since 2011 when User talk:Doncram created it. The house was moved in 1701. Tomticker5 ( talk) 21:16, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Only a few of these houses have reliable dates; most have dates based on genealogy or title records, or dates given by the two main books on CT houses, by Kelly and Isham/Brown, both of which are around 100 years old, and not reliable; add twenty or thirty years to dates from these books to get a ballpark date. CT is due for a major survey of old houses. Old houses ( talk) 18:50, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Isham dated the Hyland House to 1720 and dendrochronology came back with 1713. Is that what you mean by being unreliable? Tomticker5 ( talk) 20:01, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
“Clearly built by a person of means and fashionable taste, the Hyland House was notable particularly for its unusual chamfered overhangs and a high-style chamber chimneypiece. Yet in 1916 the house barely escaped demolition for a garage. Instead, it was bought by the Dorothy Whitfield Historic Society, a women’s group named for the wife of Guilford’s first minister. Unlike earlier preservation efforts, this one was motivated not by the house’s association with a historic event or person but rather by its architecture.
Over the years the Hyland House had undergone many alterations. These included an added lean-to, new doors and windows, and new mantels, trim, and partitions. To restore the house, the Dorothies (as later generations called them) hired Providence architect Norman Morrison Isham (1864-1943), an expert in early Connecticut and Rhode Island architecture and a pioneer in professional restoration. Isham’s work at the Hyland House reveals patterns that would characterize later restoration projects.
Much of the planned restoration depended on when the house was built. Relying on written records, the Dorothies had arrived at a date of 1660. From his examination of the structure, Isham dated it to about 1720 and based many of his design decisions on that conclusion. The matter wasn’t settled until 2015, when dendrochronology (analysis of tree rings) determined that the trees for the frame had been cut in 1712 and 1713. Since frames typically were constructed of green wood, 1713 is now the accepted date.” Another story about a dilapidated saltbox house saved from demolition and turned into a museum. Tomticker5 ( talk) 20:13, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Isham dated Whitman to 1660, actual date 1720; Hempstead 1647, actually 1678; Baldwin 1650, actually 1724. Not even close on what they considered the oldest houses in CT. For this wikipedia list, adding a minimum of twenty years to every house not yet dendro-dated would get us closer to the actual date of construction; in some case like the Feake and Turner, probably more like eighty years. Old houses ( talk) 20:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
LMAO! I was told by a dendrochronologist that Cummings dates in Massachusetts were off by 20-30 years! Focus on that for a minute and start there! Now, you say Connecticut houses should be lumped in with western Massachusetts. Why not they were both settled in the early 1630s by the Connecticut Colony. Stratford was settled in 1639 and was the largest town in Fairfield County at the time of the Revolution, had 1,000 houses probably standing at that time, because Bridgeport, Trumbull, and Shelton were still a part of it. Never burned by the British or over developed. Tomticker5 ( talk) 22:40, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Found three more first period houses in Putney village of Stratford today. Tomticker5 ( talk) 23:25, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Greenwich Preservation Trust owns this building, and two dates of construction are listed on their website, 1695 based on title/genealogy/architectural details, and 1739, based on dendrochronology. This article has 1670 as the date, based purely on title research. If the Preservation Trust feels the tree-ring study was flawed, then that should be cited. What's very clear is there is no possible justification for a 1670 date. Old houses ( talk) 02:23, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Other than dendrochronology, which objectively removes guesswork, the only way to date an old house is to look at its details and compare those details to buildings of known date. Dating in this article too often relies on cherrypicking, finding the oldest possible date from any source, usually title and genealogy, and going with that. In the case of the Feake, a date based on a possible tree-ring date (dendro report has not been released) of re-used lumber is deliberate cherrypicking. A widespread survey of Connecticut First Period houses has never been done, and dating still relies primarily on National Register forms, and the very old books by Kelly and Isham, and unless those sources indicate known First Period details, they are not reliable. Old houses ( talk) 18:47, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
J. Frederick Kelly dated this house to late 17th century before 1700. Tomticker5 ( talk) 18:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
Entries without their own separate article are acceptable, as long as they are properly cited Old houses ( talk) 20:12, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
This continues to be a really flawed list. None of the ten oldest buildings on this list has had dendrochronology, and at least two of them, Feake-Ferris and Dr. Turner, have no first period features, and likely date to the late 18th century. Old houses ( talk) 03:06, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Only houses with first period features should be included in this list. Many of these house date to the late 18th century. Old houses ( talk) 23:35, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
Parker House- Gambrel roof is an 18th century feature; there is no proven gambrel-roofed house before 1720. Elmer Keith's dating of this house was done too long ago to be reliable. Elmer Keith himself would be embarrassed to have his name associated with a date of 1679. This house likely dates to ca. 1740+ Old houses ( talk) 22:41, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Please help expand this list by adding buildings that have already gone through the vetting process to have their own articles. Please do not remove any listings here, your edits will be reverted. If you wish to add a building here that does not have its own article, please create one on the building first. If you dispute any of the construction dates used here, which come directly from the individual articles, please upload your published NPOV source that contradicts the dates here on the talk page. Tomticker5 ( talk) 01:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
For those who think this house has no architectural details to support a 17th century date, please view these images: Historic New England. Tomticker5 ( talk) 11:34, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
At least half of these houses have no First Period features, so the parameters should be changed to just "pre-1725" maybe. First Period is by definition dependent on details, not date.03:49, 22 March 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Old houses ( talk • contribs)
Buckingham House cited source says "likely dates to the 18th century." Royce House has been tested by dendrochronology and the owner has decided to not release the report, for obvious reasons. Other editors are cherrypicking very old sources to get the earliest possible date. When something is unlikley to be true, editing is warranted. Old houses ( talk) 18:25, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
My two cents on the Buckingham House is that there are two sources listed that describe it in-depth. One is self-published by "Dan" and should be discarded. The other is the NRHP nomination, which throws in some doubt about the age. So for a case like this table, it's normal and fine to put a range or approximation for the year entry, and/or add an explanatory note in the listing or as a footnote, detailing the facts and specifics that the NRHP nomination mentions. Unless other reliable sources are available now, anything else at this stage is OR. ɱ (talk) 20:20, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
The tax records of Milford, CT list a construction date for Thomas Buckingham House of 1640. [4] The earliest published source that I can find is J. Frederick Kelly, Early Domestic Architecture of Connecticut, (1924), pgs. 73, 83, 145. Kelly states the house is said to have been built in 1639. Kelly notes the size of the hall fireplace, among the largest in the state, oak clapboards, and the butternut (hardwood) wainscot on the 2nd floor. WPA Architectural Survey field card; [5]. The house is also mentioned in the Federal Writer's Project, Federal Writer's Project, (Conn), (1938), p. 215. Here, it is stated that it has a traditional date of 1640. As the building stands, however, it is almost a mid-18th century house with many restorations in harmony with an earlier date. Bruce Clouette, a Hartford based consultant, prepared the NRHP nomination form in 1976 and states that supposedly the frame and stack date from the 17th century but in his opinion the frame dates to 1725. IMHO, the house has all the architectural details of an early house in CT; partial dirt cellar, massive stone chimney (16' square at the base), 8' wide fireplaces, brick ovens in rear of firebox, heavy oak framing and oak clapboard. I would state the core dates to 1640 with later modifications in 18th century. Tomticker5 ( talk) 10:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
The two current sources for that 1640 date on the Buckingham House are not reliable. The "Historic Houses CT" is a self-publish site, which is explicitly unreliable per wikipedia editing guidelines. And the source from the 1930s is too old; "age matters" according to wikipedia, and the NRHP form is forty years newer. So, the NRHP survey clearly says early 18th century, so that should be the source. Either that 1640 date needs a reliable source, or the entry needs to be updated with the NRHP source. Old houses ( talk) 16:30, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
The Milford tax records state the Eells-Stow House was built in 1669. [6]. Clouette states in the NRHP nomination form that the house was built 1679-1689. The Milford Historical Society states on their website that tradition had the date of the house late in the 17th century coinciding with the arrival of the Eells family in Milford. Investigation of the revealed framing put the date a little later, possibly as late as c. 1720. So, are we using NRHP dates here, or are we using the Historical Society website dates? For Buckingham House, we ignore the Historical Society date of 1650 and use the NRHP form date of 1725. However, for Eells-Stowe we use the Historical Society date of c. 1700? Makes no sense to me. Tomticker5 ( talk) 23:40, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
The North Branford Tax Records (grand list) has a 1680 date of construction. [7] The NRHP nomination form actually states it was built in 1705. Tomticker5 ( talk) 09:56, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on List of the oldest buildings in Connecticut. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:23, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
The ca. 1670 date of construction for the Dr. Turner House in Norwich needs citation. National Registry form does not include any evidence for that early date. Photographs of the interior, available on real estate sites, show what appears to be a late 18th century structure. Old houses ( talk) 17:28, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
need to add some oldest residences which are located in southport, ct e.g. in very center of sopt, is the robinson home ab 1650 and also in sopt, going up harbor road hill from corner of main st andharbor about the 5th house on the west side is again a res ab 1650, though it was moved there from another location, it is still the original res from that earlier time 69.121.189.159 ( talk) 08:11, 12 July 2020 (UTC) nautonier and harbormaster no. 1 f.n. both these homes have on their sides markers for the info given here and im approx. correct but don't recall exact dates of res
Feake Ferris House date of construction lacks proper citation; a claim made by the owner is not a reliable source. I have removed the entry from this list.
There's a lot of editing to the list of the oldest buildings in Connecticut. It appears that User:Old Houses has been reverting edits of several users here and on the respective linked articles. There's a lot of socking going on. A dendrochronology study was completed on the Feake-Ferris House according to a credible neutral source which User talk: Old Houses removed and deemed unreliable. It's irrelevant, in my opinion, if a tree-ring analysis arrives at a date that makes a building the first, second, third, fourth or fiftieth oldest house in Connecticut. As more buildings are dated using dendrochronology, there is the potential for an earlier known dated building to lose its bragging rights as the oldest building somewhere. The introduction of the dendrochronology report to the Feake-Ferris House page as a primary source is unnecessary, because we have a credible secondary source for it. Wikipedia discourages the use of original research or primary sources. Regarding dendrochronology, I was told by a dendrochronologist once, that the oldest buildings are still to be discovered. He thinks they're entombed as the core of Victorian looking houses situated somewhere between Maine and Virginia... The dating of buildings only using dendrochronology as the sole arbiter is totally flawed due to the fact that only about 40% of tree samples are successfully dated. You must rely on a combination of sources; land tax and probate records, architectural studies, genealogy, radio carbon dating and dendrochronology. Tomticker5 ( talk) 20:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
I believe that you are vandalizing the page. The Columbia University dendrochronology report information (date of construction) were released to the press in 2018 and articles were published about the Feake-Ferris House. Are you questioning the integrity of the Greenwich Free Press, Greenwich Sentinel, Greenwich Point Conservancy or Columbia University? If you're disputing the credibility of the sources, please provide sources to support your accusations before removing the sources cited here that support the construction date of 1645 for the house. Tomticker5 ( talk) 13:13, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
The Feake-Ferris House article is written in a way that the reader can understand the house went through three phases of development between 1645 and 1689. The land and probate records, dendrochronology, and surviving original architectural evidence, support the stone cellar was built in 1640, the one over one house was built on it in 1645, the lean-to was added to that in 1660, and the two over two expansion was made in 1689. Tomticker5 ( talk) 21:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Quoting from the Greenwich Free Press September 2, 2016, citation 4 in the article: "Excellent wood-bore samples were obtained from multiple posts and beams on each floor of the Ferris House, and amazingly the entire structure has been determined to be an intact post and beam structure that is dated by Lamont-Doherty to 1688/1689." You are cherry-picking, elevating one source over another for no defensible reason. Old houses ( talk) 22:07, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
Dendrochronology is not the final arbiter, because 40% of tree rings cannot be dated. The Greenwich Sentinel article from 7/13/18 provides the answers to your questions about the Feake-Ferris House. The NRHP nomination form for the Pratt House (Essex, Connecticut) mentions the oldest ell dating to 1648. The article for this house has listed 1648 as the date of construction since 2011 when User talk:Doncram created it. The house was moved in 1701. Tomticker5 ( talk) 21:16, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Only a few of these houses have reliable dates; most have dates based on genealogy or title records, or dates given by the two main books on CT houses, by Kelly and Isham/Brown, both of which are around 100 years old, and not reliable; add twenty or thirty years to dates from these books to get a ballpark date. CT is due for a major survey of old houses. Old houses ( talk) 18:50, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Isham dated the Hyland House to 1720 and dendrochronology came back with 1713. Is that what you mean by being unreliable? Tomticker5 ( talk) 20:01, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
“Clearly built by a person of means and fashionable taste, the Hyland House was notable particularly for its unusual chamfered overhangs and a high-style chamber chimneypiece. Yet in 1916 the house barely escaped demolition for a garage. Instead, it was bought by the Dorothy Whitfield Historic Society, a women’s group named for the wife of Guilford’s first minister. Unlike earlier preservation efforts, this one was motivated not by the house’s association with a historic event or person but rather by its architecture.
Over the years the Hyland House had undergone many alterations. These included an added lean-to, new doors and windows, and new mantels, trim, and partitions. To restore the house, the Dorothies (as later generations called them) hired Providence architect Norman Morrison Isham (1864-1943), an expert in early Connecticut and Rhode Island architecture and a pioneer in professional restoration. Isham’s work at the Hyland House reveals patterns that would characterize later restoration projects.
Much of the planned restoration depended on when the house was built. Relying on written records, the Dorothies had arrived at a date of 1660. From his examination of the structure, Isham dated it to about 1720 and based many of his design decisions on that conclusion. The matter wasn’t settled until 2015, when dendrochronology (analysis of tree rings) determined that the trees for the frame had been cut in 1712 and 1713. Since frames typically were constructed of green wood, 1713 is now the accepted date.” Another story about a dilapidated saltbox house saved from demolition and turned into a museum. Tomticker5 ( talk) 20:13, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Isham dated Whitman to 1660, actual date 1720; Hempstead 1647, actually 1678; Baldwin 1650, actually 1724. Not even close on what they considered the oldest houses in CT. For this wikipedia list, adding a minimum of twenty years to every house not yet dendro-dated would get us closer to the actual date of construction; in some case like the Feake and Turner, probably more like eighty years. Old houses ( talk) 20:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
LMAO! I was told by a dendrochronologist that Cummings dates in Massachusetts were off by 20-30 years! Focus on that for a minute and start there! Now, you say Connecticut houses should be lumped in with western Massachusetts. Why not they were both settled in the early 1630s by the Connecticut Colony. Stratford was settled in 1639 and was the largest town in Fairfield County at the time of the Revolution, had 1,000 houses probably standing at that time, because Bridgeport, Trumbull, and Shelton were still a part of it. Never burned by the British or over developed. Tomticker5 ( talk) 22:40, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Found three more first period houses in Putney village of Stratford today. Tomticker5 ( talk) 23:25, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Greenwich Preservation Trust owns this building, and two dates of construction are listed on their website, 1695 based on title/genealogy/architectural details, and 1739, based on dendrochronology. This article has 1670 as the date, based purely on title research. If the Preservation Trust feels the tree-ring study was flawed, then that should be cited. What's very clear is there is no possible justification for a 1670 date. Old houses ( talk) 02:23, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Other than dendrochronology, which objectively removes guesswork, the only way to date an old house is to look at its details and compare those details to buildings of known date. Dating in this article too often relies on cherrypicking, finding the oldest possible date from any source, usually title and genealogy, and going with that. In the case of the Feake, a date based on a possible tree-ring date (dendro report has not been released) of re-used lumber is deliberate cherrypicking. A widespread survey of Connecticut First Period houses has never been done, and dating still relies primarily on National Register forms, and the very old books by Kelly and Isham, and unless those sources indicate known First Period details, they are not reliable. Old houses ( talk) 18:47, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
J. Frederick Kelly dated this house to late 17th century before 1700. Tomticker5 ( talk) 18:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
Entries without their own separate article are acceptable, as long as they are properly cited Old houses ( talk) 20:12, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
This continues to be a really flawed list. None of the ten oldest buildings on this list has had dendrochronology, and at least two of them, Feake-Ferris and Dr. Turner, have no first period features, and likely date to the late 18th century. Old houses ( talk) 03:06, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Only houses with first period features should be included in this list. Many of these house date to the late 18th century. Old houses ( talk) 23:35, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
Parker House- Gambrel roof is an 18th century feature; there is no proven gambrel-roofed house before 1720. Elmer Keith's dating of this house was done too long ago to be reliable. Elmer Keith himself would be embarrassed to have his name associated with a date of 1679. This house likely dates to ca. 1740+ Old houses ( talk) 22:41, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
Please help expand this list by adding buildings that have already gone through the vetting process to have their own articles. Please do not remove any listings here, your edits will be reverted. If you wish to add a building here that does not have its own article, please create one on the building first. If you dispute any of the construction dates used here, which come directly from the individual articles, please upload your published NPOV source that contradicts the dates here on the talk page. Tomticker5 ( talk) 01:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
For those who think this house has no architectural details to support a 17th century date, please view these images: Historic New England. Tomticker5 ( talk) 11:34, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
At least half of these houses have no First Period features, so the parameters should be changed to just "pre-1725" maybe. First Period is by definition dependent on details, not date.03:49, 22 March 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Old houses ( talk • contribs)
Buckingham House cited source says "likely dates to the 18th century." Royce House has been tested by dendrochronology and the owner has decided to not release the report, for obvious reasons. Other editors are cherrypicking very old sources to get the earliest possible date. When something is unlikley to be true, editing is warranted. Old houses ( talk) 18:25, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
My two cents on the Buckingham House is that there are two sources listed that describe it in-depth. One is self-published by "Dan" and should be discarded. The other is the NRHP nomination, which throws in some doubt about the age. So for a case like this table, it's normal and fine to put a range or approximation for the year entry, and/or add an explanatory note in the listing or as a footnote, detailing the facts and specifics that the NRHP nomination mentions. Unless other reliable sources are available now, anything else at this stage is OR. ɱ (talk) 20:20, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
The tax records of Milford, CT list a construction date for Thomas Buckingham House of 1640. [4] The earliest published source that I can find is J. Frederick Kelly, Early Domestic Architecture of Connecticut, (1924), pgs. 73, 83, 145. Kelly states the house is said to have been built in 1639. Kelly notes the size of the hall fireplace, among the largest in the state, oak clapboards, and the butternut (hardwood) wainscot on the 2nd floor. WPA Architectural Survey field card; [5]. The house is also mentioned in the Federal Writer's Project, Federal Writer's Project, (Conn), (1938), p. 215. Here, it is stated that it has a traditional date of 1640. As the building stands, however, it is almost a mid-18th century house with many restorations in harmony with an earlier date. Bruce Clouette, a Hartford based consultant, prepared the NRHP nomination form in 1976 and states that supposedly the frame and stack date from the 17th century but in his opinion the frame dates to 1725. IMHO, the house has all the architectural details of an early house in CT; partial dirt cellar, massive stone chimney (16' square at the base), 8' wide fireplaces, brick ovens in rear of firebox, heavy oak framing and oak clapboard. I would state the core dates to 1640 with later modifications in 18th century. Tomticker5 ( talk) 10:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
The two current sources for that 1640 date on the Buckingham House are not reliable. The "Historic Houses CT" is a self-publish site, which is explicitly unreliable per wikipedia editing guidelines. And the source from the 1930s is too old; "age matters" according to wikipedia, and the NRHP form is forty years newer. So, the NRHP survey clearly says early 18th century, so that should be the source. Either that 1640 date needs a reliable source, or the entry needs to be updated with the NRHP source. Old houses ( talk) 16:30, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
The Milford tax records state the Eells-Stow House was built in 1669. [6]. Clouette states in the NRHP nomination form that the house was built 1679-1689. The Milford Historical Society states on their website that tradition had the date of the house late in the 17th century coinciding with the arrival of the Eells family in Milford. Investigation of the revealed framing put the date a little later, possibly as late as c. 1720. So, are we using NRHP dates here, or are we using the Historical Society website dates? For Buckingham House, we ignore the Historical Society date of 1650 and use the NRHP form date of 1725. However, for Eells-Stowe we use the Historical Society date of c. 1700? Makes no sense to me. Tomticker5 ( talk) 23:40, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
The North Branford Tax Records (grand list) has a 1680 date of construction. [7] The NRHP nomination form actually states it was built in 1705. Tomticker5 ( talk) 09:56, 28 March 2023 (UTC)