Thank you, Dwayne, for your understanding so well the structure and building of the Brethren Encyclopedia. One has only to know how difficult it was to locate information about any of the Brethren groups previous to the publication of the BE to realize the scope and the dream of those who envisioned an encyclopedia of most of the Brethren groups in one encyclopedia. There are inconsistencies in the information provided. True. Yet I find inconsistencies even with this website. My own messages have been returned to me without posting when they exceed 300 words. My two most recent postings were returned, one--twice, one--once, before posted. Is there a limit to the length of our postings on this website, or it selective? > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 11:40:05 -0400 > Subject: [BRE] In Defense of the BE > > In history, including church history and genealogy, we always have to > consider the source. The BRETHREN ENCYLOPEDIA is not a source in and of > itself, but, rather, a collection of writings of hundreds of sources. The > articles in Volumes 1 and 2 were written by hundreds of "authors" listed in > pp. xiii - xxxv at the beginning of Volume 1. Each written article refers > to that article's author at the end of the text of the article. When I use > the BE I always look up the author as a part of reading the article. If the > author is not a historian or a known expert on the subject, I read it with > great reservation. > > > > Almost all of the authors in the BE were untrained as historians. An > article on a church was often written by someone who was a minister at that > church at the time the BE was put together. Articles on families were often > written by family members. In all cases, each article has to be judged by > its author. Errors and omissions happen in all encyclopedias. The BE > should not be judged too harshly given that the Brethren did not keep > complete and consistent records of baptisms, marriages, deaths, callings, > ordinations, ministerial appointments, individual church histories, etc. > > > > The way I look at it is that the BE is only a starting point and unavoidably > incomplete. We should not expect to find more than what was possible at the > time it was published. > > > > Dwayne Wrightsman > > > ------------------------ > Search the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/BRETHREN > ------------------------ > Support Our Sponsoring Agency > The Fellowship Of Brethren Genealogists (FOBG) > For further information contact Ron McAdams mailto:[email protected] > ------------------------ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thank you, Wayne, for all you do.  Where would we be without you? Jane Eisenbise Summers ----- Original Message ----- From: "A. Wayne Webb" <[email protected]> To: [email protected], "Miami County, Ohio Rootsweb" <[email protected]>, "montgomery co oh" <[email protected]>, [email protected] Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 11:17:50 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central Subject: [BRE] The Gospel Messenger - Offering #108 For your reading please I have prepared a new Offering.  It may be viewed at http://offering.brethrenarchives.com/index.php?option=com_content <http://offering.brethrenarchives.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=arti cle&id=734:the-gospel-messenger-offering-108&catid=38:2011&Itemid=57> &view=article&id=734:the-gospel-messenger-offering-108&catid=38:2011&Itemid= 57.  If you have trouble with the URL then visit the site at http://offering.brethrenarchives.com <http://offering.brethrenarchives.com/> and navigate to the last Offering of 2011.   My thanks again to Donna for her assistance in indexing the marriage index pages of the 4th marriage docket of Montgomery county, Ohio.  To date she has up to the letter E of the grooms indexed.  There is no index for the females in case you had not caught on to that but of trivia.   On that note I am taking a week off from my labors to rest as I have been working some long hours of late.  Just after I finalize my digital archiving of the Minutes of Annual Meeting of which I am about a quarter of the way through.  And after scanning some photographs, my way, of the Brethren Church.   Cordially, A. Wayne Webb                                  ------------------------ Search the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/BRETHREN                                ------------------------                         Support Our Sponsoring Agency             The Fellowship Of Brethren Genealogists (FOBG) For further information contact Ron McAdams mailto:[email protected]                                ------------------------ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Interesting how things turn out in the final printed page.  When one is dealing with human authorship, we might well expect that there will be some "problems".    I have to chuckle when I read in a community history book where diffn't people sent in their family stories to see I was born in 61 and my parents were married in 62.  I had long assumed I was their legitimate child!! My grandmother had sent the information to the editor.  She just "knew" she'd sent in the right information to the editor.  "That editor" had screwed it up. When I went to visit the editor, there lay my grandmother's letter.   Guess who had put down the wrong dates?      I laughed about it but my poor parents were horrified, especially when I told them Grandma was the one who'd made the mistake. So we find mistakes.    Life is full of them.   Don't get too bent out of shape.    I just heard a song on the Christian radio station that puts things well whenever we're about to get upset about something it goes: "Sometimes Jesus calms the storm, sometimes he just calms me!"    Dan -----Original Message----- From: "gale honeyman" <[email protected]> Sent 4/10/2011 12:21:24 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BRE] In Defense of the BEI am in awe that such a fete was accomplished in such a few short years. Yes there are errors and omissions, but I have yet to see a work of genealogical or historical nature complete to the last dotted 'i' and crossed 't'. Overall, we would be much less informed about our rich Brethren heritage without its existence. However I must take a bit of exception to your statement Dwayne. I am the author of the Spitler family article. I submitted it air tight with the prescribed number of words. It was edited to include a completely different Spitler family that had no connection to the one of the article. Unfortunately, it was not passed back to me for review, so it is incorrectly printed. I also submitted the Flora (Flory) Family article which the family history editor added to and changed. The one fact that should have been included, but was deleted is there are in excess of 500 ministers and missionaries of which I have in my records that descend from the 1733 emigrants, Joseph & Mary (Bugh) Flory. Nearly all represented various branches of the Brethren. Even those of us who strive are not always accurately quoted in the printed word. Gale Honeyman ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dwayne Wrightsman" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2011 11:40 AM Subject: [BRE] In Defense of the BE When I use the BE I always look up the author as a part of reading the article. If the author is not a historian or a known expert on the subject, I read it with great reservation. ------------------------ Search the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/BRETHREN ------------------------ Support Our Sponsoring Agency The Fellowship Of Brethren Genealogists (FOBG) For further information contact Ron McAdams mailto:[email protected] ------------------------ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

For your reading please I have prepared a new Offering. It may be viewed at http://offering.brethrenarchives.com/index.php?option=com_content <http://offering.brethrenarchives.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=arti cle&id=734:the-gospel-messenger-offering-108&catid=38:2011&Itemid=57> &view=article&id=734:the-gospel-messenger-offering-108&catid=38:2011&Itemid= 57. If you have trouble with the URL then visit the site at http://offering.brethrenarchives.com <http://offering.brethrenarchives.com/> and navigate to the last Offering of 2011. My thanks again to Donna for her assistance in indexing the marriage index pages of the 4th marriage docket of Montgomery county, Ohio. To date she has up to the letter E of the grooms indexed. There is no index for the females in case you had not caught on to that but of trivia. On that note I am taking a week off from my labors to rest as I have been working some long hours of late. Just after I finalize my digital archiving of the Minutes of Annual Meeting of which I am about a quarter of the way through. And after scanning some photographs, my way, of the Brethren Church. Cordially, A. Wayne Webb

I don't comment a whole lot on this board, just gather information...intelligence! When I found my birth family in 1993, I was adopted in 1960, I turned to the BE as a resource for my genealogy. I was not raised Brethren, knew no one who was Brethren, and had no Brethren church closely available to answer my questions. The BE was it. Yes, I found quite a few mistakes, but, with further research I was able to reconcile those errors and cite them as well. To me, this compendium of information was invaluable. If there is time and resources available to correct this massive research before the next printing, I would like to see it done. However, it will be a monumental task for any group of volunteers to do. I wish whomever does it many blessings in this task. I have but two wishes for the BE: 1) that it continue in publication (hopefully with errors corrected), and 2) that it go digital (CD format). Although I love to have a book in my hand, a CD format would be so much more practical, and more portable, for some of us (especially at reunions). Just my quarter's worth, Blessings all, Janet Rogers

I would love to read the article you wrote about the Brethren in SW Virginia. Thank you, Marcia Salvatore ----- Original Message ----- From: "A. Wayne Webb" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 8:30 AM Subject: [BRE] The Brethren Encyclopedia of 1982 - #2 > This is a long e-mail so if you want to "tune out" than I recommend you do > so. > > > > Thank you one and all for your responses. Each and every point about how > things were done in compiling The Brethren Encyclopedia of 1983 were all > applicable and valid. It was not that the original editorial staff were > incompetent nor that the material they were pulling from was in error that > I > was commenting on. It was that they did not check the sources right in > front of them. > > > > As many of you are aware one of the projects which I undertook was to > digitally archive the various almanacs and annuals of the church. The > annuals were begun by the German Baptist Brethren and continued thus by > what > we term today the Church of the Brethren after the splits of the early > 1880s. It was this publication that continued until 1918 when it became > The > Yearbook of the Church of the Brethren. The Progressive Brethren, > Ashland, > began their own similar publication, The Annual, in 1884. I don't recall, > and it is not germane to the discussion at hand, if perhaps I am off by a > year in that regard and they in fact started their publication in 1883. I > have to date digitally archived the various almanacs and at present have > in > excess of 80 of them processed with others I could do if there were more > hours in a day. I am missing some of the earlier ones as well as some of > the pre-1900 volumes. > > > > My point was that at least in regard to the almanacs, that these resources > were utilized in an ad hoc fashion. As I stated earlier, they would pick > up > John Smith in 1918 and disregard earlier issues which had him living in a > different town and state. While at the same time, in the printings of the > early 1910s or so, it might list John Smith as being the minister at a > particular congregation. When compiling this information, five different > residences and the Podunk congregation, they would miss the target let > alone > the bull's eye. And if it a hundred such I would have understood, but it > is > far more than just that number. And as I pointed out in my earlier > e-mail, > how in tarnation could John Smith be shown in the BE as living in Podunk > when he actually lived in Smithville as reported in the almanac. > > > > Here is how I would have handled it. Have one individual be in charge of > the almanacs who would report directly to the editorial bigwigs. That > almanac editor would gather together a small group of people who would > work > under him or her. The almanac editor would compile a list of the almanacs > and annuals and have their staff compile a list of such publications at > the > local repository. This individual would dole out a particular set of > publications to each person. They would go through the almanacs available > at their local repository and pull each minister or elder and record them > on > index cards. Once an almanac was so completed, either on paper or on > cards, > the information would be passed up stream and compiled appropriately. > Without the aid of a computer the almanac editor would compile the > information into ledgers like we used to do our accounting on. > > > > Managing the project in such a manner could easily have been completed in > a > year. If the almanac editor had half a brain that individual would have > picked up the errors in name usage within the almanac and referenced it > against other material to rectify the usage of initials versus full names. > They would seemingly have picked up the times within the almanacs that an > individual was listed in two locations within a year, it did happen, while > at a same time those individuals were list as J. Smith for several years > while being listed as John Smith in others. And this happened as well. > > > > How to rectify John Smith of the almanacs with John Smythe in a district > history would have been another matter. Case in point if the Meyer(s) > family of Somerset county. Within the Western Pennsylvania district > history > the Meyers family is listed invariably as Myers. Meanwhile within the > Northern Illinois book they are listed as, if I recall correctly, as > Meyers > which also applies to the Kansas history. To repair this would have been > a > different matter and would have required differing techniques. And it > would > not have required access to anything other than a selection of histories > which the editor would have required a small regional collection with ad > hoc > access to other material. Again, it could have been done. > > > > Many of you commented on errors within your particular family. And yes > you > are correct there are errors that have crept into your family, especially > with the advent of the Internet. Many, many people on the Internet are > using the Brethren Encyclopedia as primary source material which any > dedicated historian and researcher is aware should not be treated as such. > You are quite correct in that this worthy volume, errors or not, is not a > primary source but should be treated as referencing other secondary > resources. Yes, some of the material so referenced by the BE can be > treated > as primary material as pertaining to secular data, but when it comes to > family information the references should not be treated as such. It all > depends on what the BE referenced source is and a case-by-case instance. > The Internet has been great for gaining access to others, but has been a > curse in spreading errors. A true double edged sword by all accounts! > > > > Unfortunately I cannot comment on how your articles so submitted to the > Brethren Encyclopedia were handled. I think, and this is my observation > only, that the editorial staff figured that they were the judge and jury > on > what would be included and what would not and that there was no > discussion. > If they wanted to merge data from other sources and exclude other > information then it was their choice and option with no discussion on the > matter. This is how a likely good portion of the errors now spread across > the Internet came into existence. Any of you who worked with me while I > was > editor of Brethren Roots are well aware that I could at times be a tyrant, > but in the matter of discussing an article and its merits and editorial > consideration I was at all times considerate of the author's requests. My > phone bills can account for this. > > > > I am constantly amazed at what is available in the various district > histories that did not make it into the BE. Whomever was responsible, and > I > ponder the question of whether any one was assigned it, for Winger's > Indiana > history struck out each time they came up to bat. There are huge gaps in > the > BE in regard to Winger's worthy book. Did Winger get it right, no he did > not, but we must give a nod to his monumental undertaking and recognize it > for what it is; an invaluable secondary or tertiary reference book. We > are > not hear to discuss the errors within its pages, but that there are huge > gaps in the BE in regard to Winger's book. There are ministers and elders > within it that never made it into the BE. > > > > The Brethren Church, perhaps Ashland to some of you, is by and large a > totally different matter. Some of the ministers made it into the BE while > some did not. I will not go into any detail other than what my just made > statement alludes to, but there is more out there. We have discovered > quite > a few congregations just from the meager resources we have. > > > > One or two of you commented on updates to the BE and I would be remiss if > I > did not state that my reception with the present editorial staff was > similar. Years ago when I started getting really hot and heavy into my > German Baptist Brethren research I was dutifully passing along new-found > information to Bridgewater, to remain unnamed, in the hopes that it would > be > recorded as such. After over a hundred, documented by Brethren sources, > bits of information were passed along I came to the realization that the > present staff have no method in place to record such information. Nether > are their plans to release an addendum such as we are discussing. I > planned > on purchasing the fourth volume, if for no reason other than to complete > the > set, but decided to pass after caught of its contents. I stopped passing > this information along and to be honest I had no method in place to record > it myself. Once I turned it over to Bridgewater the "buck got passed." > Fortunately I passed along to that great repository, Gale Honeyman, as > well. > <g> > > > > I know just in the short time I have been involved in my efforts I and > several others have come up with enough information to rewrite some > historical aspects of the BE. Just how you would go about incorporating > it > I cannot say as I will wholeheartedly agree that it would be a monumental > undertaking. I am having enough trouble doing the research and recording > it > for posterity. I am trying to say that yes, efforts are underway to > recompile the ministers. Will it be correct? Unlikely! But does that > mean > that it should not be attempted. Assuredly not! And as one naysayer said > to me recently, what happens when I leave this 'Ol World. I don't know. > But yet again, that does not mean I should not try. The thought was > recently discussed that once we got near the end of our project, likely to > take another two years, to publish a book with our findings. It is > unlikely > that the newer stuff, ministers after the 1940s or so would be correct and > complete, but to not to do so would be a travesty. > > > > All I can state about the errors that you may have found within the BE is > that if you like you may wish to pass them along to either myself or one > of > my two compatriots. We will try to accommodate your wishes. I must > forewarn you though that if it is not to be found in a documented source > special considerations might be needed. Since we are trying to adhere to > the same typesetting and documentation standards used for the original BE > due credit for the originator is difficult to put in place when > appertaining > to the ministers and elders. If you have a set of the Brethren > Encyclopedias then you know what I am referring to and will recognize that > using Mrs. Smith's name within each entry is not usable. > > > > So, is the BE infallible? No it is not! But that does not mean that we > should not give a nod of thanks to the staff!!! They understood that > history was becoming lost and that due honor had not been properly paid to > those who came before. This does not mean the effort should have stopped > in > 1983. Someone else needs to take up the mantle, and so what if it comes > from outside of a society. If you as a society are not willing to accept > history as it was written because the material is not originated from a > differing class, then you are missing the value of what you are shunning > and > are dying as a society. And I am sure that in thirty years or so someone > will be iterating the same comments I have made in regard to the work I > have > done or hope to do in the future. > > > > I have a "little treat" for you. If you would like to read a little > article > I wrote that never made into the BE send me a PRIVATE e-mail and I will > direct you to a little article discussing the White Shoals congregation of > south-western Virginia. It differs from the available history. IF the > article had appeared in the BE it is likely that it would have been > truncated to something totally unrecognizable, but I am writing it to > historical standards without regard to how many words it should contain. > > > > Lastly, I apologize if one of my phrases within my previous e-mail > contained > words offensive to some. Perhaps, upon reflection and discussion, the > phrase should have been something along the lines of; "Upon Heaven High, > What did they do?" Even then perhaps that is a cuss word also. <g> My > apologies to those whom this e-mail may be too lengthy, but there was a > lot > to discuss. > > > > Cordially, > > A. Wayne Webb > > > > P.S. And I am of that differing class of society. Yes, I descend from > some > of the earliest elders, one of the very earliest, but my particular branch > of the family went another way. When there is no Brethren church in the > region, but there is another with similar religious beliefs, you go that > way. Religion of Opportunity! Though there were quite a few Brethren in > western German township, Montgomery county, Ohio, they were never formed > into a congregation we know of today. The physical congregation I am > alluding to appears to at its founding to perhaps have been a Christian > church or perhaps a union congregation. We know of several Brethren > families, the Frantzes, Murrays, Arnolds, Moyers, and a lot of families > from > the Carolinas, who were Brethren who lived very close to the house of > worship built in 1825. Later these families moved into more recognizable > Brethren communities except for my Moyer family. > > > > And yes, I agree it was a slap in the face. > > > > > ------------------------ > Search the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/BRETHREN > ------------------------ > Support Our Sponsoring Agency > The Fellowship Of Brethren Genealogists (FOBG) > For further information contact Ron McAdams mailto:[email protected] > ------------------------ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

In your case, Gale, the editor you were working with violated the primary protocol of the editor-author relationship, which is not to send copy to press without obtaining the author's consent. Authors and editors are meant to work together so that the final draft is agreeable to all parties. Since you were not given that opportunity, your editor's behavior was indefensible. Was your experience with BE a common experience? If so, then BE's "Editorial Staff" bears the responsibility for creating the problems which you mention. It seems that the BE violated its own policy as spelled out on page viii: "Edited articles were submitted to authors for their approval and final checking." I have written books and articles since 1964 and not once have I been left out of the loop by an editor on what was eventually published. It is true that not all editors are equal in terms of making demands on their authors, but no editor has the right to change the final content without the author's consent. Dwayne Wrightsman -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of gale honeyman Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 1:21 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BRE] In Defense of the BE I am in awe that such a fete was accomplished in such a few short years. Yes there are errors and omissions, but I have yet to see a work of genealogical or historical nature complete to the last dotted 'i' and crossed 't'. Overall, we would be much less informed about our rich Brethren heritage without its existence. However I must take a bit of exception to your statement Dwayne. I am the author of the Spitler family article. I submitted it air tight with the prescribed number of words. It was edited to include a completely different Spitler family that had no connection to the one of the article. Unfortunately, it was not passed back to me for review, so it is incorrectly printed. I also submitted the Flora (Flory) Family article which the family history editor added to and changed. The one fact that should have been included, but was deleted is there are in excess of 500 ministers and missionaries of which I have in my records that descend from the 1733 emigrants, Joseph & Mary (Bugh) Flory. Nearly all represented various branches of the Brethren. Even those of us who strive are not always accurately quoted in the printed word. Gale Honeyman ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dwayne Wrightsman" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2011 11:40 AM Subject: [BRE] In Defense of the BE When I use the BE I always look up the author as a part of reading the article. If the author is not a historian or a known expert on the subject, I read it with great reservation.

This is a long e-mail so if you want to "tune out" than I recommend you do so. Thank you one and all for your responses. Each and every point about how things were done in compiling The Brethren Encyclopedia of 1983 were all applicable and valid. It was not that the original editorial staff were incompetent nor that the material they were pulling from was in error that I was commenting on. It was that they did not check the sources right in front of them. As many of you are aware one of the projects which I undertook was to digitally archive the various almanacs and annuals of the church. The annuals were begun by the German Baptist Brethren and continued thus by what we term today the Church of the Brethren after the splits of the early 1880s. It was this publication that continued until 1918 when it became The Yearbook of the Church of the Brethren. The Progressive Brethren, Ashland, began their own similar publication, The Annual, in 1884. I don't recall, and it is not germane to the discussion at hand, if perhaps I am off by a year in that regard and they in fact started their publication in 1883. I have to date digitally archived the various almanacs and at present have in excess of 80 of them processed with others I could do if there were more hours in a day. I am missing some of the earlier ones as well as some of the pre-1900 volumes. My point was that at least in regard to the almanacs, that these resources were utilized in an ad hoc fashion. As I stated earlier, they would pick up John Smith in 1918 and disregard earlier issues which had him living in a different town and state. While at the same time, in the printings of the early 1910s or so, it might list John Smith as being the minister at a particular congregation. When compiling this information, five different residences and the Podunk congregation, they would miss the target let alone the bull's eye. And if it a hundred such I would have understood, but it is far more than just that number. And as I pointed out in my earlier e-mail, how in tarnation could John Smith be shown in the BE as living in Podunk when he actually lived in Smithville as reported in the almanac. Here is how I would have handled it. Have one individual be in charge of the almanacs who would report directly to the editorial bigwigs. That almanac editor would gather together a small group of people who would work under him or her. The almanac editor would compile a list of the almanacs and annuals and have their staff compile a list of such publications at the local repository. This individual would dole out a particular set of publications to each person. They would go through the almanacs available at their local repository and pull each minister or elder and record them on index cards. Once an almanac was so completed, either on paper or on cards, the information would be passed up stream and compiled appropriately. Without the aid of a computer the almanac editor would compile the information into ledgers like we used to do our accounting on. Managing the project in such a manner could easily have been completed in a year. If the almanac editor had half a brain that individual would have picked up the errors in name usage within the almanac and referenced it against other material to rectify the usage of initials versus full names. They would seemingly have picked up the times within the almanacs that an individual was listed in two locations within a year, it did happen, while at a same time those individuals were list as J. Smith for several years while being listed as John Smith in others. And this happened as well. How to rectify John Smith of the almanacs with John Smythe in a district history would have been another matter. Case in point if the Meyer(s) family of Somerset county. Within the Western Pennsylvania district history the Meyers family is listed invariably as Myers. Meanwhile within the Northern Illinois book they are listed as, if I recall correctly, as Meyers which also applies to the Kansas history. To repair this would have been a different matter and would have required differing techniques. And it would not have required access to anything other than a selection of histories which the editor would have required a small regional collection with ad hoc access to other material. Again, it could have been done. Many of you commented on errors within your particular family. And yes you are correct there are errors that have crept into your family, especially with the advent of the Internet. Many, many people on the Internet are using the Brethren Encyclopedia as primary source material which any dedicated historian and researcher is aware should not be treated as such. You are quite correct in that this worthy volume, errors or not, is not a primary source but should be treated as referencing other secondary resources. Yes, some of the material so referenced by the BE can be treated as primary material as pertaining to secular data, but when it comes to family information the references should not be treated as such. It all depends on what the BE referenced source is and a case-by-case instance. The Internet has been great for gaining access to others, but has been a curse in spreading errors. A true double edged sword by all accounts! Unfortunately I cannot comment on how your articles so submitted to the Brethren Encyclopedia were handled. I think, and this is my observation only, that the editorial staff figured that they were the judge and jury on what would be included and what would not and that there was no discussion. If they wanted to merge data from other sources and exclude other information then it was their choice and option with no discussion on the matter. This is how a likely good portion of the errors now spread across the Internet came into existence. Any of you who worked with me while I was editor of Brethren Roots are well aware that I could at times be a tyrant, but in the matter of discussing an article and its merits and editorial consideration I was at all times considerate of the author's requests. My phone bills can account for this. I am constantly amazed at what is available in the various district histories that did not make it into the BE. Whomever was responsible, and I ponder the question of whether any one was assigned it, for Winger's Indiana history struck out each time they came up to bat. There are huge gaps in the BE in regard to Winger's worthy book. Did Winger get it right, no he did not, but we must give a nod to his monumental undertaking and recognize it for what it is; an invaluable secondary or tertiary reference book. We are not hear to discuss the errors within its pages, but that there are huge gaps in the BE in regard to Winger's book. There are ministers and elders within it that never made it into the BE. The Brethren Church, perhaps Ashland to some of you, is by and large a totally different matter. Some of the ministers made it into the BE while some did not. I will not go into any detail other than what my just made statement alludes to, but there is more out there. We have discovered quite a few congregations just from the meager resources we have. One or two of you commented on updates to the BE and I would be remiss if I did not state that my reception with the present editorial staff was similar. Years ago when I started getting really hot and heavy into my German Baptist Brethren research I was dutifully passing along new-found information to Bridgewater, to remain unnamed, in the hopes that it would be recorded as such. After over a hundred, documented by Brethren sources, bits of information were passed along I came to the realization that the present staff have no method in place to record such information. Nether are their plans to release an addendum such as we are discussing. I planned on purchasing the fourth volume, if for no reason other than to complete the set, but decided to pass after caught of its contents. I stopped passing this information along and to be honest I had no method in place to record it myself. Once I turned it over to Bridgewater the "buck got passed." Fortunately I passed along to that great repository, Gale Honeyman, as well. <g> I know just in the short time I have been involved in my efforts I and several others have come up with enough information to rewrite some historical aspects of the BE. Just how you would go about incorporating it I cannot say as I will wholeheartedly agree that it would be a monumental undertaking. I am having enough trouble doing the research and recording it for posterity. I am trying to say that yes, efforts are underway to recompile the ministers. Will it be correct? Unlikely! But does that mean that it should not be attempted. Assuredly not! And as one naysayer said to me recently, what happens when I leave this 'Ol World. I don't know. But yet again, that does not mean I should not try. The thought was recently discussed that once we got near the end of our project, likely to take another two years, to publish a book with our findings. It is unlikely that the newer stuff, ministers after the 1940s or so would be correct and complete, but to not to do so would be a travesty. All I can state about the errors that you may have found within the BE is that if you like you may wish to pass them along to either myself or one of my two compatriots. We will try to accommodate your wishes. I must forewarn you though that if it is not to be found in a documented source special considerations might be needed. Since we are trying to adhere to the same typesetting and documentation standards used for the original BE due credit for the originator is difficult to put in place when appertaining to the ministers and elders. If you have a set of the Brethren Encyclopedias then you know what I am referring to and will recognize that using Mrs. Smith's name within each entry is not usable. So, is the BE infallible? No it is not! But that does not mean that we should not give a nod of thanks to the staff!!! They understood that history was becoming lost and that due honor had not been properly paid to those who came before. This does not mean the effort should have stopped in 1983. Someone else needs to take up the mantle, and so what if it comes from outside of a society. If you as a society are not willing to accept history as it was written because the material is not originated from a differing class, then you are missing the value of what you are shunning and are dying as a society. And I am sure that in thirty years or so someone will be iterating the same comments I have made in regard to the work I have done or hope to do in the future. I have a "little treat" for you. If you would like to read a little article I wrote that never made into the BE send me a PRIVATE e-mail and I will direct you to a little article discussing the White Shoals congregation of south-western Virginia. It differs from the available history. IF the article had appeared in the BE it is likely that it would have been truncated to something totally unrecognizable, but I am writing it to historical standards without regard to how many words it should contain. Lastly, I apologize if one of my phrases within my previous e-mail contained words offensive to some. Perhaps, upon reflection and discussion, the phrase should have been something along the lines of; "Upon Heaven High, What did they do?" Even then perhaps that is a cuss word also. <g> My apologies to those whom this e-mail may be too lengthy, but there was a lot to discuss. Cordially, A. Wayne Webb P.S. And I am of that differing class of society. Yes, I descend from some of the earliest elders, one of the very earliest, but my particular branch of the family went another way. When there is no Brethren church in the region, but there is another with similar religious beliefs, you go that way. Religion of Opportunity! Though there were quite a few Brethren in western German township, Montgomery county, Ohio, they were never formed into a congregation we know of today. The physical congregation I am alluding to appears to at its founding to perhaps have been a Christian church or perhaps a union congregation. We know of several Brethren families, the Frantzes, Murrays, Arnolds, Moyers, and a lot of families from the Carolinas, who were Brethren who lived very close to the house of worship built in 1825. Later these families moved into more recognizable Brethren communities except for my Moyer family. And yes, I agree it was a slap in the face.

I am in awe that such a fete was accomplished in such a few short years. Yes there are errors and omissions, but I have yet to see a work of genealogical or historical nature complete to the last dotted 'i' and crossed 't'. Overall, we would be much less informed about our rich Brethren heritage without its existence. However I must take a bit of exception to your statement Dwayne. I am the author of the Spitler family article. I submitted it air tight with the prescribed number of words. It was edited to include a completely different Spitler family that had no connection to the one of the article. Unfortunately, it was not passed back to me for review, so it is incorrectly printed. I also submitted the Flora (Flory) Family article which the family history editor added to and changed. The one fact that should have been included, but was deleted is there are in excess of 500 ministers and missionaries of which I have in my records that descend from the 1733 emigrants, Joseph & Mary (Bugh) Flory. Nearly all represented various branches of the Brethren. Even those of us who strive are not always accurately quoted in the printed word. Gale Honeyman ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dwayne Wrightsman" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2011 11:40 AM Subject: [BRE] In Defense of the BE When I use the BE I always look up the author as a part of reading the article. If the author is not a historian or a known expert on the subject, I read it with great reservation.

Valuable information ranging from accurate facts to subjective yet useful insights can be obtained from all kinds of sources, however it is important to understand the nature of the source (in particular whether it is a primary source, i.e. an original document, or a secondary source, i.e. a compilation of information assembled by intermediaries). One of the beauties of historical study is approaching and evaluating the historical record itself, such as it is, in all of its omissions and imperfections. The process of clarifying references is ongoing and can be very interesting, -- and often reveals interesting biases and points of view that are enlightening as a part of the larger cultural context. Deborah Thomas

I don't think any of us meant to be critical in a mean way, just pointing out that true, it is a starting point for some people and always check facts on anything you research. There are errors in it. The people who compiled it certainly did not have access to all the archives we have access to. Good advice on the author index, and good advice on where to get your advice. Thanks, Dwayne, you have done a great deal of help for many people on and off this list. Ruth -----Original Message----- From: Dwayne Wrightsman Sent: Saturday, April 09, 2011 10:40 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [BRE] In Defense of the BE In history, including church history and genealogy, we always have to consider the source. The BRETHREN ENCYLOPEDIA is not a source in and of itself, but, rather, a collection of writings of hundreds of sources. The articles in Volumes 1 and 2 were written by hundreds of "authors" listed in pp. xiii - xxxv at the beginning of Volume 1. Each written article refers to that article's author at the end of the text of the article. When I use the BE I always look up the author as a part of reading the article. If the author is not a historian or a known expert on the subject, I read it with great reservation. Almost all of the authors in the BE were untrained as historians. An article on a church was often written by someone who was a minister at that church at the time the BE was put together. Articles on families were often written by family members. In all cases, each article has to be judged by its author. Errors and omissions happen in all encyclopedias. The BE should not be judged too harshly given that the Brethren did not keep complete and consistent records of baptisms, marriages, deaths, callings, ordinations, ministerial appointments, individual church histories, etc. The way I look at it is that the BE is only a starting point and unavoidably incomplete. We should not expect to find more than what was possible at the time it was published. Dwayne Wrightsman ------------------------ Search the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/BRETHREN ------------------------ Support Our Sponsoring Agency The Fellowship Of Brethren Genealogists (FOBG) For further information contact Ron McAdams mailto:[email protected] ------------------------ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

http://www.ancestry.org/primary-secondary-genealogy-sources/ remember there is a difference in primary verses secondary sources -----Original Message----- From: Craig Alan Myers <[email protected]> To: brethren <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, Apr 9, 2011 12:47 pm Subject: Re: [BRE] The Brethren Encycopedia of 1983 Thanks to those who spoke up for the Brethren Encyclopedia. Several things about works like this: 1. This was produced in the early 1980s--before computing was cheap and ubiquitous. The details were checked by hand, and always errors creep in. 2. The BE was produced with time and financial constraints. If you want a near-perfect book, then it will never come out, and will almost immediately be out of date (plenty of practical experience here with local church directories). BE is an amazing work, for what it is. 3. BE pleaded for materials from local churches, Districts, and the like. The BE editors worked with what they had. They depended on local church and family historians. They assumed that most of the material was fairly accurate. I suspect that the smaller Brethren denominations looked askance at the project, perhaps thinking it would be another "liberal" work. Also, when published, the BE specifically requested updates, corrections, and additions that would be published in a fourth volume. That volume came out several years ago. 4. The District Histories are not infallible either. There are numerous errors of fact and spelling that could have been corrected in Winger's 1917 Indiana History, and there are mistakes in the magisterial Two Centuries of the Church of the Brethren in Western Pennsylvania. 5. Even with carefully-researched family genealogies, there are mistakes galore. For example, "Christian Fike and His Descendants" has many errors of dates and names. 6. Finally, source materials are often erroneous. Church membership books have much information, but that is supplied by the members themselves who have faulty memories, or who supply (sometimes intentionally) wrong information. The business of historiography is one that is carried out with human judgments and concerns. To that extent, it is filled with errors of fact and judgment, and even as to process, procedure, and the like. Discernment is always necessary in studying such materials. Craig Alan Myers ------------------------ Search the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/BRETHREN ------------------------ Support Our Sponsoring Agency The Fellowship Of Brethren Genealogists (FOBG) For further information contact Ron McAdams mailto:[email protected] ------------------------ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thanks to those who spoke up for the Brethren Encyclopedia. Several things about works like this: 1. This was produced in the early 1980s--before computing was cheap and ubiquitous. The details were checked by hand, and always errors creep in. 2. The BE was produced with time and financial constraints. If you want a near-perfect book, then it will never come out, and will almost immediately be out of date (plenty of practical experience here with local church directories). BE is an amazing work, for what it is. 3. BE pleaded for materials from local churches, Districts, and the like. The BE editors worked with what they had. They depended on local church and family historians. They assumed that most of the material was fairly accurate. I suspect that the smaller Brethren denominations looked askance at the project, perhaps thinking it would be another "liberal" work. Also, when published, the BE specifically requested updates, corrections, and additions that would be published in a fourth volume. That volume came out several years ago. 4. The District Histories are not infallible either. There are numerous errors of fact and spelling that could have been corrected in Winger's 1917 Indiana History, and there are mistakes in the magisterial Two Centuries of the Church of the Brethren in Western Pennsylvania. 5. Even with carefully-researched family genealogies, there are mistakes galore. For example, "Christian Fike and His Descendants" has many errors of dates and names. 6. Finally, source materials are often erroneous. Church membership books have much information, but that is supplied by the members themselves who have faulty memories, or who supply (sometimes intentionally) wrong information. The business of historiography is one that is carried out with human judgments and concerns. To that extent, it is filled with errors of fact and judgment, and even as to process, procedure, and the like. Discernment is always necessary in studying such materials. Craig Alan Myers

Living here in BC I have very little genealogical information available other than what I can order through the FHL films and what I can find on online. Many years ago I received a page from the BE from Elgin IL on the Glück/Glick/Click family and am still very grateful for the information. The BE page is just one small part of my overall understanding of my family history. I would like to thank anyone who takes the time to contribute their information! Right or wrong the time and effort taken is much appreciated!! Robin Poeschek Kamloops BC On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Dwayne Wrightsman <[email protected]>wrote: > In history, including church history and genealogy, we always have to > consider the source. The BRETHREN ENCYLOPEDIA is not a source in and of > itself, but, rather, a collection of writings of hundreds of sources. The > articles in Volumes 1 and 2 were written by hundreds of "authors" listed in > pp. xiii - xxxv at the beginning of Volume 1. Each written article refers > to that article's author at the end of the text of the article. When I use > the BE I always look up the author as a part of reading the article. If > the > author is not a historian or a known expert on the subject, I read it with > great reservation. > > > > Almost all of the authors in the BE were untrained as historians. An > article on a church was often written by someone who was a minister at that > church at the time the BE was put together. Articles on families were > often > written by family members. In all cases, each article has to be judged by > its author. Errors and omissions happen in all encyclopedias. The BE > should not be judged too harshly given that the Brethren did not keep > complete and consistent records of baptisms, marriages, deaths, callings, > ordinations, ministerial appointments, individual church histories, etc. > > > > The way I look at it is that the BE is only a starting point and > unavoidably > incomplete. We should not expect to find more than what was possible at > the > time it was published. > > > > Dwayne Wrightsman > > > ------------------------ > Search the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/BRETHREN > ------------------------ > Support Our Sponsoring Agency > The Fellowship Of Brethren Genealogists (FOBG) > For further information contact Ron McAdams mailto:[email protected] > ------------------------ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

In history, including church history and genealogy, we always have to consider the source. The BRETHREN ENCYLOPEDIA is not a source in and of itself, but, rather, a collection of writings of hundreds of sources. The articles in Volumes 1 and 2 were written by hundreds of "authors" listed in pp. xiii - xxxv at the beginning of Volume 1. Each written article refers to that article's author at the end of the text of the article. When I use the BE I always look up the author as a part of reading the article. If the author is not a historian or a known expert on the subject, I read it with great reservation. Almost all of the authors in the BE were untrained as historians. An article on a church was often written by someone who was a minister at that church at the time the BE was put together. Articles on families were often written by family members. In all cases, each article has to be judged by its author. Errors and omissions happen in all encyclopedias. The BE should not be judged too harshly given that the Brethren did not keep complete and consistent records of baptisms, marriages, deaths, callings, ordinations, ministerial appointments, individual church histories, etc. The way I look at it is that the BE is only a starting point and unavoidably incomplete. We should not expect to find more than what was possible at the time it was published. Dwayne Wrightsman

Wayne: The Br. Encyclopedia also contains some errors on the Thomas family, since the sources they used for their information didn't do very good job research. That being said, any work of that volume is going to contain some errors. There is no such thing as an infallible history book. One should avoid 'hanging their hat' on a single source for information.....to quote Ronald Reagan.....trust but verify! Bill Thomas -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of A. Wayne Webb Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 9:29 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [BRE] The Brethren Encycopedia of 1983

Wayne, I too know there are many mistakes in the BE since I've been doing research on the Dunkard Brethren for the past 16 years. I was very saddened when I received my copies of the first three BE books. I would say that a good 2/3 of the history on biographies, autobiographies and churches of the Dunkard Brethren, were never searched out and therefore never recorded. According to family heirs and added resources, some info. listed is not correct either.   Still plugging away at research, Shirley (Stump) Frick     > Wayne, > I know there are mistakes in my ancestors in the BE.  I haven't looked > anything up for years, but have discounted some info because I know of > errors and to tell the truth I cannot even remember what they were. I am > such small potatoes in genealogy research that if I find them I figure there > must be many, many more so I have taken some things with a grain of salt > when that is the source.  Am I the only one, I guess not.  Thanks for > speaking up. > Ruth Hoese > > P.S.  The number of elders and ministers who have obituaries that clearly > state as such within The Gospel Messenger and The Brethren Evangelist is > truly astounding.  Why was Winger's 1917 Indiana history missed for the most > part?  There are ministers and elders, with elections and ordinations, > within that worthy volume who did not make it into the BE.  Take a look at > J. C. Murray, James C. Murray and John Clinton Murray.  An interesting > conundrum and having a large Brethren library and access to the Internet is > a blessing! > > Wayne, > There are mistakes in my ancestors in the BE also.  I called one of the > editors in Bridgewater but he did not plan to add an addendum about these. I > also do not put much stock in what I read there.  I realize such information > is difficult to find but it seems more attention could have been paid to > more sources and some of the descendants where known.  I am glad to learn I > am not by myself in this regard. > Ilene Smith  

ANY book is NOT a first authoritative source, any book is derived from sources other than the compiled work. Some books are compilations of compilations, adding transcription error upon transcription error. CONTEXT is often skewed as well. ANY quality genealogist, or historian knows that to get to the source takes more work, but is much more enlightening than reading ABOUT the source. The Internet and genealogy on a platter websites are destroying "good' sourcing. Use any Genealogy book or compilation as a guide to the source, and inconsistencies are best combed out at the root. the contemporary first authority source. __ Jeffery G. Scism, IBSSG Survival is the knowledge, willingness, and readiness to act immediately, in avoidance, when the biological contamination is impelled in a lateral pathway to a catastrophic interface with the helical centrifugal aerodynamic oscillator impeller, and is non-systematically allocated in an accelerated radial dispersion arc of universal non-uniform bio-toxic distribution, which results in a non-recoverable situational status. (WTSHTF)

Wayne, There are mistakes in my ancestors in the BE also. I called one of the editors in Bridgewater but he did not plan to add an addendum about these. I also do not put much stock in what I read there. I realize such information is difficult to find but it seems more attention could have been paid to more sources and some of the descendants where known. I am glad to learn I am not by myself in this regard. Ilene Smith ---Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ruth Hoese Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 10:47 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BRE] The Brethren Encycopedia of 1983 Wayne, I know there are mistakes in my ancestors in the BE. I haven't looked anything up for years, but have discounted some info because I know of errors and to tell the truth I cannot even remember what they were. I am such small potatoes in genealogy research that if I find them I figure there must be many, many more so I have taken some things with a grain of salt when that is the source. Am I the only one, I guess not. Thanks for speaking up. Ruth Hoese -----Original Message----- From: A. Wayne Webb Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 8:28 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [BRE] The Brethren Encycopedia of 1983 I just had to pipe in on something that is disturbing, at least to me, in regard to our much vaunted Brethren Encyclopedia. For some time now there have been efforts underway to update the ministerial and congregational information. The amount of work has been daunting to say the least even with the Internet resources and those in the possession of my compatriots in the project. But hopefully later generations will appreciate the worthiness of the project. But the other day was the last straw of being silent. While working on a minister, Conway Tyson, I noted that the BE states that in 1914 he lived in, and I quote, Vannoy, SC. The source given was the 1914 almanac on page 62. Yet when you view the actual page you find that Conway Tyson lived in McBain, Michigan. Looking at other almanacs they all list him in the same place. I think the error is referenced in the aforementioned source wherein the minister George Washington Tucker lived in Vannoy, South Carolina. G. W. Tucker is listed five lines above that of Conway Tyson. And why for God's sake would you list a minister by his almanac source in lets say, 1918, and miss the 20 or so before that and the later ones??? They have some ministers living in Podunk, Iowa, and missed the other four or five places where he lived and served in the ministry! Did these people check anything? If it had been a hundred or so similar errors I would have chalked it up to simple errors. After hundreds and hundreds of such errors there is only one comment that can be made-poorly researched and even shoddier work. Some of the editorial staff are recognized as authoritative authors, and rightly so. Yet these same authors and staff did not check their own published books and made statements within the BE contradicted by those same published works! In Frustration, Wayne Webb P.S. The number of elders and ministers who have obituaries that clearly state as such within The Gospel Messenger and The Brethren Evangelist is truly astounding. Why was Winger's 1917 Indiana history missed for the most part? There are ministers and elders, with elections and ordinations, within that worthy volume who did not make it into the BE. Take a look at J. C. Murray, James C. Murray and John Clinton Murray. An interesting conundrum and having a large Brethren library and access to the Internet is a blessing! ------------------------ Search the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/BRETHREN ------------------------ Support Our Sponsoring Agency The Fellowship Of Brethren Genealogists (FOBG) For further information contact Ron McAdams mailto:[email protected] ------------------------ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------ Search the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/BRETHREN ------------------------ Support Our Sponsoring Agency The Fellowship Of Brethren Genealogists (FOBG) For further information contact Ron McAdams mailto:[email protected] ------------------------ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Wayne, I know there are mistakes in my ancestors in the BE. I haven't looked anything up for years, but have discounted some info because I know of errors and to tell the truth I cannot even remember what they were. I am such small potatoes in genealogy research that if I find them I figure there must be many, many more so I have taken some things with a grain of salt when that is the source. Am I the only one, I guess not. Thanks for speaking up. Ruth Hoese -----Original Message----- From: A. Wayne Webb Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 8:28 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [BRE] The Brethren Encycopedia of 1983 I just had to pipe in on something that is disturbing, at least to me, in regard to our much vaunted Brethren Encyclopedia. For some time now there have been efforts underway to update the ministerial and congregational information. The amount of work has been daunting to say the least even with the Internet resources and those in the possession of my compatriots in the project. But hopefully later generations will appreciate the worthiness of the project. But the other day was the last straw of being silent. While working on a minister, Conway Tyson, I noted that the BE states that in 1914 he lived in, and I quote, Vannoy, SC. The source given was the 1914 almanac on page 62. Yet when you view the actual page you find that Conway Tyson lived in McBain, Michigan. Looking at other almanacs they all list him in the same place. I think the error is referenced in the aforementioned source wherein the minister George Washington Tucker lived in Vannoy, South Carolina. G. W. Tucker is listed five lines above that of Conway Tyson. And why for God's sake would you list a minister by his almanac source in lets say, 1918, and miss the 20 or so before that and the later ones??? They have some ministers living in Podunk, Iowa, and missed the other four or five places where he lived and served in the ministry! Did these people check anything? If it had been a hundred or so similar errors I would have chalked it up to simple errors. After hundreds and hundreds of such errors there is only one comment that can be made-poorly researched and even shoddier work. Some of the editorial staff are recognized as authoritative authors, and rightly so. Yet these same authors and staff did not check their own published books and made statements within the BE contradicted by those same published works! In Frustration, Wayne Webb P.S. The number of elders and ministers who have obituaries that clearly state as such within The Gospel Messenger and The Brethren Evangelist is truly astounding. Why was Winger's 1917 Indiana history missed for the most part? There are ministers and elders, with elections and ordinations, within that worthy volume who did not make it into the BE. Take a look at J. C. Murray, James C. Murray and John Clinton Murray. An interesting conundrum and having a large Brethren library and access to the Internet is a blessing! ------------------------ Search the Archives at http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/BRETHREN ------------------------ Support Our Sponsoring Agency The Fellowship Of Brethren Genealogists (FOBG) For further information contact Ron McAdams mailto:[email protected] ------------------------ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message