1914.] Connecticut Almanacs, 1709-1860. 93 CHECK LIST OF CONNECTICUT ALMANACS, 1709 ...

124 Pages·2009·5.14 MB·English

1914.] Connecticut Almanacs, 1709-1860. 93
CHECK LIST OF CONNECTICUT
ALMANACS, 1709-1850
WITH INTEODUCTION AND NOTES.
BY ALBERT CÁELOS BATES.
The almanac now occupies but a very humble and
minor position in the economy of the average household.
There are perhaps as many homes today that do not
possess an almanac as there are that do. Its place for
general household reference has been to a large extent
usurped by its now ever present descendant, the calendar.
While, in the absence of either, the information most
frequently sought from an almanac is now usually to
be found at hand in the newspaper.
But in the old days it was very different; a calendar
had not been thought of; there were no newspapers,
either daily or weekly; clocks which often gave the days
of the month were rare, and watches still more so; no
factory gong or fire bell sounded at noon each day; no
regular trip of, say, merchant or peddler announced that
the weekly cycle had again come around.
How then did the people, more particularly those who
were isolated in scattered country homes, keep a correct
reckoning of the passage of time? It must have been
difficult; and there is little question that they now and
then lost the correct reckoning. Who has' not heard
tales of Deacon So-and-So, who once long ago forgot
that it was Sunday and plowed the whole day long
with his oxen; or of Mrs. Somebody, who brought out
her flax wheel and began to spin on a certain Sabbath
morning.
In the entire absence of an almanac or any substitute
94 American Antiquarian Sodety. [April,
for one, it will readily be seen that it would be an easy
matter to make an error in the reckoning of the days,
or to forget the month into which a daily or weekly
reckoning had entered. There was no doubt some
person in almost every town who was able to do so, and
who did purchase an almanac each year. To him ref-
erence could be made in case of doubt as to the day of
either week or month. The "noon-mark," a line cut
in the floor of room or porch on which a shadow fell at
noon, was an accompaniment of many houses. This
served the fortunate owner of clock or watch, in the
absence of an almanac, to regulate his timepiece. But
as the sun was almost always "fast" or "slow," this
mark was absolutely correct on only a few days of the
year. The weekly recurrence of the sabbath day
probably served better than anything else, to those with-
out an almanac, in keeping their reckoning correct. On
that day all the families would meet together at religious
service; and it would be only on infrequent occasions
that a household would fail to correctly note the seventh
day after such meeting as being the day for again gather-
ing together. But as the months (except February)
do not contain an exact number of weeks, the keeping
a reckoning of the day of the month, and even of the
month itself, must have been a more diflScult matter,
and made an almanac almost a necessity for that pur-
pose. For the few who kept a journal the task was
easier. Thomas Minor of Stonington, Conn., whose
journal extends from 1653 to 1684, made certain of his
reckoning by giving at the beginning of each month the
number of days in the month and the day of the week
on which the first of the month fell. For example, he
says: "The sixt month is agust. 31 days tusday the
first," and "The first month is march & hath 31 days
Tusday the first and is the year 1664 an the first year
after the leape yeare." It is to be remembered that
until some years after that time the year began, accord-
ing to ecclesiastical reckoning, on March 25th, and
March was considered as the first month.
1914.] Connecticut Almanacs, 1709-1850. 95
His son Manassah Minor, also of Stonington, pos-
sessed a Tulley's Almanac for 1697. This was bound in a
leather cover with about one hundred blank leaves,
being placed midway in the volume. On these leaves
he began a diary on January 1, 1696-7, which he con-
tinued until the book was filled in 1720. May not this
be taken as an indication that he possessed an almanac
only on occasional years, and that he made one serve
him for perhaps several years in aiding him to keep his
reckoning of the days, weeks and months? The writer
has seen another almanac of about the samé period,
bound up with blank leaves, which belonged to a resident
of Wethersfield. This also had written notes and mem-
oranda (not in the nature of a journal) extending over
several years.
As the years rolled on the number of almanacs in-
creased, and at the same time both the actual and the
proportional number of families possessing almanacs
also increased. It seems certain that this actual and
proportional increase continued and grew throughout
the period covered by the accompanying list. Until
perhaps by, or soon after, the close of the Civil War,
every family, in this part of the country at least, pos-
sessed one or more almanacs each year. In recent years
the more convenient calendar has caused a marked de-
crease in the issue and sale of almanacs. And this
brings up the query, when did the calendar as we now
know it come into use? So far as can be learned by
inquiry of elderly people, the calendar has been in use
less than half a century. It is not remembered previous
to about the year 1870.
The TuUey almanacs, which were issued in Boston
from 1687 to 1702, form the first series whose popularity
in Connecticut appears evident. This popularity was
perhaps due in part to the fact that Tulley himself was
a native and resident of Saybrook, Conn.. It is but
natural that a local pride and curiosity should have
aided their sale in his own Colony. And Connecticut
people may well regret that there was no printing press
96 American Antiquarian Society. [April,
in the Colony, from which the productions of their first
known almanac maker could have been issued.
After the death of Tulley, evidence is lacking for a
time as to what almanacs were most used in Connecticut.
There were issues for several years during the next quar-
ter century printed at or for New London; some of them
of Connecticut authorship, and others reprints of Boston
issues, or Boston issues bearing an imprint for Connec-
ticut. Rev. Joseph Moss of Derby, Conn., issued an
almanac for 1720; and Robert Treat of Müford issued al-
manacs for several years, as early as 1723 and as late as
1727.
Daniel Travis' almanacs, printed in Boston for l707
to 1724, formed a well known series. And as they were
the ones reissued for a few years for or in Connecticut,
it is reasonable to presume that they were the ones most
in favor in the Colony. It is probable that from their
earliest issue almanacs printed in New York were intro-
duced to some extent into the southwestern part of
Connecticut.
It has been a matter of comment and inquiry why no
almanac, so far as is known, was printed in Connecticut
for the years 1728 to 1752, when there was a printing
office at New London during the whole period. Perhaps
the fact is capable of explanation.
Ames' almanac (by Dr. Nathaniel and his son. Dr.
Nathaniel Ames) printed in Boston, the earliest issue
being for 1726, was for more than a generation after its
coinmencement the ahnanac most used in Connecticut.
With scarcely an exception all almanacs picked up in old
Connecticut families or houses for the years from 1728
to 1770, excepting the few issued by Connecticut authors
after 1752, are Ames' almanacs. They are either Boston
editions or Connecticut reprints; at New Haven after
1754, at New London after 1760 (or perhaps 1757), or
at Hartford after 1764. Two Connecticut dealers in
old books who have purchased extensively in various
parts of the state tell me that they have never found a
single ahnanac before 1770 pubHshed out of the State
1914.] Connecticut Almanacs, 1709-1860. 97
excepting Ames'. The same is true in my own library
purchasing experience of more than twenty years. This
shows the universahty of the use of Ames' almanac in
Connecticut, with the probable exception of some New
York issues in the southwestern part of the Colony.
The popularity and wide circulation of Ames' almanac
in Connecticut was no doubt due in part to the accuracy
and reliability of its calculations and to the reasonable
price at which it was sold, "Five Coppers single." But
perhaps it was due still more to the fact that Timothy
Green of New London (father and son) was probably
able to secure a quantity of copies of the almanac at the
lowest published price; and that his facihties, due to his
frequent sending of official prints to all the counties,
enabled him to readily distribute the copies to the book-
sellers throughout the colony. He practically acting
as the distributing agent for Connecticut, and making
a good profit for himself while so doing.
• To explain this statement, and also to show why
Green began, at least as early as 1761, to reprint Ames'
almanac in New London, calls for a somewhat lengthy
account of the methods of publishing the Boston issues
of Ames.
The following is extracted from a broadside address'
"To the Pubhck" from "The Booksellers of the Town
of Boston," dated Dec. 21, 1759, and "Printed for the
Booksellers, of whom any Person may have it gratis":
"And surely the Doctor can't but know that Mr. John
Draper has acted as a Factor in purchasing his Copy for
the Booksellers of Boston, for near Thirty Years past,
and that it ever was in Common till the last Year. That
Mr. Draper acted in the Capacity as above: We can
produce great Numbers of his own Notes to prove,
wherein he charges us with our proportionable Part of
the Copy.—If the Doctor has forgot, we can remind him,
that from the Year 1727, till the Year 1759,2 his Akaan-
acks have been printed for the Booksellers, as the Title
> In library of the Massachusetts Historical Society.
>But not including 1769.—A. C. B.
98 American Antiquarian Society. [April,
Page every Year will prove: And Mr. Draper was so
far from thinking the Copy his, that some Years he don't
so much as mention the Printer's Name.—Let the World
then judge, who has encourag'd the Doctor from Year
to Year, if it be not the Booksellers.— As also let the
World judge, who are of a mercenary Disposition, the
Booksellers who only desire to have it in Common as
it ever has been, or those Printers who have taken
Methods to monopolize the Copy to themselves, much
at the publick Expense, by demanding an extravagant
Price for said Almanacks."
The occasion of this controversy was the action of
three Boston printers and booksellers—Draper, Green
& Russell, and Fleet—in relation to the publishing of
Ames' almanac beginning with the issue for 1759. In-
stead of Draper printing for the other booksellers and
charging each his proportional part of the cost of the
copy and the expense of printing, as had previously been
done, the three named above proceeded to publish the'
almanac themselves, for their own benefit. And one
of the three sheets composing the almanac was printed
by each of the three printers. This action caused bitter
feeling in the ranks of the other booksellers, who were
thus forced to buy their supply of Ames' almanacs from
the three printers. A year later, upon the publication
of the almanac for 1760, the Boston booksellers at once
reprinted it, correcting some errors of the press that had
crept into the authorized edition. This issue they
boldly announced as the "lid Edition, Price 2 Pistareens
per Dozen, 5 Coppers single. Corrected from the Mis-
takes and Blunders of those printed by some of the
Printers of Boston. "
Timothy Green, Jr., was for many years a printer in
Boston. In 1727 he entered into partnership there with
Samuel Kneeland, in the printing and bookselling busi-
ness, under the firm name of Kneeland & Green. In
this capacity as a Boston bookseller, he would have the
right and opportunity to purchase at the original pub-
lication price as many copies as he desired of the Ames'
1914.] Connecticut Almanacs, 1709-1850. 99
almanacs. Besides what were to be retailed by his own
firm, there was nothing to prevent his purchasing at the
same low price and forwarding to his father, Timothy
Green, at New London as many copies as were desired by
him to supply the Connecticut trade. This he undoubt-
edly did; and this would account for no almanac being
printed in that colony, and for the almost universal use
of the Ames' issues. In 1752 Timothy Green removed
from Boston to New London to aid his father in the
printing business, and succeeded to the business there
in 1757. But no doubt his long residence and acquain-
tance in Boston would enable him to continue to secure
the almanacs there at publication price, as if he were
still a Boston bookseller.
Upon the change above described being made in the
manner of publishing Ames' almanacs. Green was, of
course, unable to procure them for his Connecticut
customers at the same low price as formerly. The 1759
issue he must have purchased of the authorized publish-
ers at the advanced price. The following year he may
have purchased of the booksellers, their edition being
lower priced than the authorized issue. But the next
year, for 1761, the booksellers, who had previously com-
plained about the combination of the authorized printers
against them, themselves formed a second combination
and printed an edition;' or rather, a part of them did so,
probably thus entrenching themselves' as to price against
the remaining booksellers in Boston who were not in
either combination, and against any out of town book-
sellers who may previously have been able to secure
their copies at the original published price.
. The two combinations to hold up the price evidently
proved too much for Mr. Green's patience and pocket-
•The imprinta of the two editions read aa followa:
"Boston; Printed by John Draper, in Cornhill; Richard Draper, in Newbury^Street;
Green & Rusaell, & Edea & Gili in Queen-Street: and Thomas & John Fleet, at the
Heart and Crown in Comhill."
"Boaton: Printed by D. and J. Kneeland, for D. Henchman, J. Phillips, J. Edwards,
& T. Leverett, in Cornhill; M. Dennis, near Scarlet's Wharfe; J. Winter, in Union-
Street; S. Webb, in Ann-Street; J. Perkins, near the Mill-Bridge, and W. McAlpine,
in Marlborough-Street. 1761.
100 American Antiquarian Society. [April,
book, and previous to Dec. 12, 1760, he reprinted in
New London the authorized edition of Ames' almanac
for 1761. No copy of this issue has been located; but
the advertisement of it states that it is "Just Publish'd
And Sold by Timo. Green, . . . Sold also by" the Boston
printers whose names appear upon the authorized edi-
tion. Green reprinted the Ames' almanac at New
London each year thereafter down to 1774. But for
the years 1761 (presumably), 1762 and 1763 instead of
using his own imprint he copied in full the Boston im-
print of the authorized edition. Why this was done
I do not hazard a guess.
Dr. Ames was also troubled about this time by the.
publication outside of Boston of unauthorized issues of
his almanac, as witness the following advertisement
which appeared over his name in the Boston Gazette of
Jan. 14, 1760:
In a Connecticut Paper was Advertised Almanacks for
1760, with my Name thereto, to be Sold by some of the Book-
sellers in Boston; and also some to be sold at New Haven, at
the low Price of Two Shillings per Dozen: and having seen some
of them in Boston, it appears that said Almanack is a notorious
Cheat and Imposition: The Chief Design was (as given out
by some who had Honor, Honesty and Ingenuity enough to
assist in Counterfeiting) to destroy the Credit my Almanack
had gained, and prevent its having such Credit for the future:
To which Purpose they have endeavoured to render my Per-
formance as despicable as possible, by omitting the Preface,
Ephemeris, Verses, &c. also what is of Service, Interest Tables,
Value of Coin, the several Roads and Stages; and further to
make me appear still more contemptible omitted AU the Week
Days in the whole Year, and above 50 Days in the Months,
and fixed in some Places the wrong Dominical Letter : Surely
such conduct is to the last Degree, Base!
I therefore advertise again; That those Almanacks printed
in Boston from my Copy have the Printers name thereto, and
none others:—And I hope that the Defence of my Reputation,
in thus advertising, which at this Time seems necessary, will
be a sufficient Apology to my Countrymen, whose Good I
seek, and on whose Good-Will I depend.
The almanac here referred to is undoubtedly the Ames
for 1760 reprinted at New Haven by James Parker and
1914.] Connecticut Almanacs, 1709-1860. 101
Company. That omits "the Preface," &c., as stated
above, which are found in the authorized Boston edition.
It also condenses into one column the two columns
found at the left of each calendar page in the Boston
edition. The first of these columns gives the day of the
month by number; the second the day of the week by
number from two to seven, with the dominical letter
inserted to denote the first day or sabbath. This being
a leap year has two dominical letters; the first, F, during
January and February, the second, E, during the re-
mainder of the year. In the New Haven issue the one
column gives the days of the month by number, but
with the dominical letter inserted in place of the nimi-
ber to denote each sabbath. It also makes the error of
using E instead of F as the dominical letter during the
month of February. So that, as the advertisement
states, it omits "All the Week Days in the whole Year
[by leaving out the weekly column with its repetition
of E, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7], and above 50 Days in the Months
[by insertion of the dominical letter to denote each
sabbath in place of the number showing the day of the
month], and fixed in some Places the wrong Dominical
Letter [on the four sabbaths in February]." Surely we
cannot blame the author for complaining, not only of
the unauthorized reprint, but of "such Conduct" in
the issue of it. Apparently he was not aware that his
almanac had been reprinted in New Haven for the five
years preceding this, and that in the issues of 1758 and
1759 his monthly and weekly columns had been con-
densed into one as in this instance.
Connecticut's most famous almanac author or com-
piler was Rev. Nehemiah Strong. He was born in 1729,
was graduated from Yale College in 1755, was settled
minister at Turkey Hills, Conn., from 1761 to 1767, and
after 1781 resided at Newtown, New Milford and Bridge-
port, supplying various pulpits and teaching up to the
time of his death, Aug. 3, 1807. In 1770 he became
a Professor in Yale, taking the newly established chair
of Mathematics and Natural Philosophy. He resigned
102 American Antiquarian Society. [April,
from this in 1781, owing to a difficulty over the question
of salary. He was the author of a treatise on Astronomy
which won him more than a passing reputation; and
he was the instructor of several younger men who fol-
lowed in his footsteps as authors of almanacs.
His first essay at almanac making was as the anony-
mous author of "Watson's Register" for 1775, printed
at Hartford. This was succeeded in 1778 by "T'he Con-
necticut Almanack," which was stated to be by "the
Professor of Mathematics and natural Philosophy at
Yale College." And this in turn by an almanac over
his own name in 1782 which, with some changes of title,
was issued annually, with the exception of 1805, until
after his death. The last issue, that for 1809, being
"Mostly calculated by Nehemiah Strong. And the
remainder finished by Elijah Middlebrook. " So pop-
ular did this series become that some years it was issued
at Hartford by three different printers.
Strong was also the author of the series issued over
the name of "Hosea Stafford," and printed at New
Haven for the years 1776 to 1804. Likewise he was the
author of the "Middlesex Almanack," issued without
an author's name, and printed in Middletown for the
years 1787 to 1793 and 1795.
One other series which, he never acknowledged, but
of which he was without question the author, is that
issued under the name of "Isaac Bickerstaff, " calculated
for and printed in Hartford for the years 1785 to 1797.
The series of Bickerstaff almanacs first published in
Connecticut at Norwich in 1775, and continued there
until 1798, is believed to be the work of Benjam.in West
of Providence, R. I. They were also published in
Providence and Boston, and reprinted in Hartford for
1782 and 1783.
The following appeared in the Connecticut Journal,
printed in New Haven, for Oct. 27, 1784:
As an opinion has prevailed among some, both within and
without the State, that I am the real Author of a certain
Almanack, which has for some years past appeared under the