From Margaret:
My survey of the fifty-five boxes composing the Morris Family Papers at Independence Historical Park has certainly proved to be an interesting project! I was initially struck by the diversity of formats and genres including land deeds, greeting cards, incomplete tax records, almanacs, and pocket diaries. My second reaction, closely related to the first, was that family members retained much of what their parents created. The Morrises were definitely a group of keepers and collectors!
Samuel Buckley Morris (1791-1859) was the first member of the Morris family to live at the residence later referred to as the Deshler-Morris House and now known as the Germantown White House located at 5442 Germantown Avenue, Philadelphia. His son, Elliston Perot Morris (1831-1914) who inherited the house, kept his father’s letters, receipts, and estate documents. Martha Canby Morris (1836-1919), his wife, kept her father’s almanacs. Their children, in turn, retained their parents’ records so, when another Elliston Perot Morris (1899-1980), the first Elliston’s grandson, donated the house and grounds to the National Park Service after his father’s 1948 death, he could also offer documents from generations of the house’s inhabitants.
Photographs taken by family members and professional photographers document the house and grounds. A contract specifies the construction of the two-story brick barn and carriage house built around 1891. Inventories of Elliston’s and Martha’s possessions indicate the house’s contents. The family actively collected literature describing the house’s history celebrating George Washington’s stay such as the article “Historic Germantown” in the February 1884 issue of Lippincott’s:
From the door-way of this respectable dwelling it was the President’s habit to issue regularly twice a day during his residence in Germantown, once for a walk and again for a ride, or, when the roads were sufficiently good, an airing with Mrs. Washington in her phaeton. (p. 122)
The Morris home featured in Lippincott's Magazine.
It does not surprise me that the Morrises would keep letters and diaries of their eighteenth-century ancestors because many families were becoming involved in their colonial heritage in post-Centennial United States. What intrigues me is the special emphasis in the Quaker tradition of “filial piety.” Elliston wrote a memorial of his father to be published in a Quaker journal out of his “filial affection” and belief that broadcasting such a good life benefits others in their “feeble endeavors after holiness of life.” Is it possible that the respect for parents contributed to the high retention of documents?
The documents the Morris family collected and created have informed the rehabilitation of the Germantown White House and grounds, and NPS staff and contractors have and will continue to study this collection for that specific purpose. The papers, incorporating extensive local photography, may hold interest for those researching nineteenth- and early twentieth-century material culture and the visual imagery of the Philadelphia region. For example, someone might solve the apparent mystery of Martha Canby Morris owning eleven cream pitchers noted in the inventory of her silverware!
Silverware Inventory
From Dana:
The Morrises certainly were keepers! I made some inquiries at several Philadelphia museums and archives, and it turns out that six other area repositories, including the Historical Society of Pennsylvania and the Germantown Historical Society, also hold Morris family information. Much of the information overlaps with what is in the Park Service’s collection. As the years passed, family members from different generations made donations to archives or museums of their choosing, spreading family materials amongst several collections. Clearly, the Morris family had a long history of preserving their family records and memorabilia.
Margaret, I found your point about Quaker filial piety fascinating and decided to look a little further into the subject. After doing a little digging, most of the references I found for the term “filial piety” in fact referred to Chinese subjects. The concept of filial piety seems to have originated in ancient China and remains one of the highest ideal of Confucianism. Loosely understood, filial piety was defined as a veneration and respect of one’s ancestors, but could also provide a link to the spiritual world. In a 1998 article called “The Place of Filial Piety in Ancient China,” Donald Holzman wrote that “the worship of the supreme diety…could only be carried out through the worship of one’s own ancestors,” (Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 118, page 186).
While the Quaker ideal of filial piety certainly invoked the idea of respect for one’s ancestors, Quakers did not adhere to the ancient idea of reaching God through family intercessors. Instead, they believed in the idea of an “Inner Light,” which taught that there was a part of God in every human soul. I wonder if this idea of Inner Light may have also contributed to the high retention of documents? If every individual soul is Godly in some way, might that be a reason to revere and preserve their memory? We may never know!
