Protecting Michigan State's Material Culture
BOOKS Goldstein, Lynne, Lisa Bright, and Jeffrey Painter2017 Sherds of Spartans Past: Ceramics from the Michigan State University Campus Archaeology Program. In Innovative Approaches and Explorations in Ceramic Studies, Sandra L. López Varela, editor, pp. 107-117. Archaeopress, Inc., Oxford. Skowronek, Russell and Kenneth E. Lewis …
Here at CAP, we find artifacts of the past that are generally not meant to have been found (e.g. items from trash pits or ruined buildings or privies). In contrast, the scrapbooks curated by MSU Archives contain elements that students found so important that they …
In my last blog, I shared a portion of the draft that I’m working on about gendered spaces on campus. The most challenging part of the project thus far has been isolating documents, folders, or ephemera in the University Archives that can inform the research goal. This is a truly piecemeal endeavor: a pamphlet outlining a women’s course filed away in a binder about an old building, a receipt detailing the funds raised for a women’s club, a stack of old photos documenting female students gathered for a social event, and so on.
This week, I decided to focus on the scrapbooks compiled by female students during and after their terms at Michigan Agricultural College. Scrapbooks are probably one of the most direct examples of how memories are constructed and reinforced in later years; that is, some scraps are worth saving while others go the way of the landfill. A number of the scrapbooks have similar themes – dance cards, tickets to fancy parties, letters from prominent persons, and photos of friends were obviously deemed worth saving, documenting, and revering for future descendants or university alumni (depending on the intended audience for the scrapbooks!). I was struck by some omissions that I thought would be quite common: grade reports, written assignments, awards. Perhaps these materials were saved separately and never made it to the University Archives. Or, maybe these items were considered simply part and parcel of the college experience and not thought special enough to enter into a scrapbook.
Of the scrapbooks I viewed this week, I noted that “literary clubs” were popular among female students at the turn of the century. There were many invitations and announcements for literary club events that led me to some obvious questions: How many literary clubs were there? Were any of the clubs co-ed? What benefit did the clubs have for participants?
I have a few answers, though I believe these clubs (and others that are restricted to females only) are worth pursuing in greater detail for my project. In the 1905 Gluck Auf, a compendium of class rosters, clubs, faculty sketches, poems, messages from alumni, etc., there are 11 literary societies listed with four of these being female societies (there were no co-ed literary societies). I found some of the missions of the societies quite interesting, so I will reproduce brief descriptions below:
Feronian Society – The first society to be organized by two female students in 1893. The “purpose in view was to advance the intellectual, social, and moral standing of its members, to train mind, heart, and soul.” In 1901, rooms in the Women’s Building were given to the society for club use.
Themian Society – The society was organized in 1898 by female students who saw the need for another club. Irma Thompson is credited as being the driving force behind the creation of the Themians (I’ve written about Ms. Thompson in a previous CAP blog post – she’s one of my personal heroines!). This club aligned itself with the Oratorical Association and took home first place in 1905. The “constitutional object of the society is to promote the literary and social culture of its members, but the world Themian stands for more than this. We, its members, interpret its meaning as true loyalty to each other, and justice and friendship to all.”
Sororian Society – This club was initiated in 1902 by women who noted that attendance in the Women’s Course had increased such that only a small percentage of students could enter existing societies. “The aim of the Sororian Society is to perfect the intellectual and social faculties and thus develop that well rounded character which is the best product of college life.”
Ero Alphian Society – Formed in 1904, this club name means “love of the first, the highest, the best. “So, through the course in our college, we meet and pass one another, scarcely realizing the depth of character of those about us, until closer ties of friendship bind one to another. Knowing the importance of this, and the need of another society to promoste the growth of friendship and the development of literary and social talents, the Ero Alphian Society was formed.”
Author: Amy Michael
This past summer has been one of the busiest, if not the busiest, summers of my time as director of the MSU Campus Archaeology Program. While we did not have a field school as we generally run them every other year, a remarkable discovery was …
Greetings! This is Dr. Stacey Camp, Director of the MSU Campus Archaeology Program. This past year has been one of constant change for our program. We have a new Campus Archaeologist, Ben Akey, after saying goodbye to our last Campus Archaeology, Jeff Burnett. We have …
A Salty Tale
I wanted this blog to be about patents, not Ruth Van Tellingen. Or should I call her Ruth Bendel? Or Ruth Elizabeth Thompson? I’m getting ahead of myself. Before we delve into Ruth’s life, let’s review the concept of patents as they pertain to archaeology.
As many know, a patent refers to a legally-recognized title on intellectual property that allows an individual or group to control the production and sale of specific designs. In the U.S. patents, as a legal concept, extend back to the late 1600s when some individual states would grant legal rights to an idea or invention. Federal interventions on designs and innovations were not introduced until The Patent Act of 1790. The registration number associated with a granted patent is often printed on items that become artifacts. These numbers provide a multi-tool for archaeological interpretations. With them, we can often identify a purpose or maker of an artifact and a period for the use and production of an item. Sometimes, patents allow us to discover unexpected insights into our social pasts.
The CAP Patent that Gave Paws
About a year ago, I was sitting in the CAP lab researching a ceramic bear. The item was uncovered during our 2020 Service Road Construction Project (read more here). We had plans to use the artifact in a conference presentation covering Children’s lives on MSU’s campus (read more here).
When searching the patent for the bear I found that it is not merely a decorative item, but rather a clever and original design for two interlocking condiment dispensers (salt, pepper, oil, etc.) (read more here). Something else caught my attention– something other than the unconventional nickname, “Huggers”. It was the title associated with the patent, filed on May 6th, 1947… The name belonged to… a woman?
Ruth Van Tellingen Bendel. Let me be clear. I was not surprised a woman had invented a new design or kindled an original concept. My eyebrows were raised because the idea was documented and credited to her. Archeologists, like anyone looking into the past, generally struggle to find and verify diversity in the past, especially when it comes to historically marginalized or oppressed groups. Without identifiers like patents, it can be difficult, if not impossible, to identify who created something. Objects themselves do not have social identities– humans assign them. And because restricted and privileged groups have historically held the pen that writes the Western narrative, many historical accounts overestimate the contributions of certain individuals to society. In the same stroke, the experiences of people outside of the most privileged circles have been silenced or ignored (1).
Woman with a Peppered Past
So what can we know about the creator of this patent? Ruth Elizabeth Thompson was born in Hinsdale, Illinois, in 1910. Census records tell us she married Oscar Van Tellingen, a salesman from Iowa, and assumed the role of a “Housewife and commercial artist” by the age of 30 (see census data below).
Her artistry, including several children’s books, received mixed reviews (2). While active in illustration, she also commissioned figurines created for the Chicago Royal China and Novelty Company (3), including the multiple Huggers in different animal forms. Her interlocking bear design was conceived in 1947, but not submitted for a patent until 1949. Our bear lacks the name “Bendel,” which Ruth added after her second marriage to Victor T. Bendel, in 1948. It is therefore likely one of the first bears off the production line.
Ruth’s shaker patent, granted in 1951, preceded the women’s liberation movement (4) in the United States by more than a decade. Women first patented a product in the U.S. in 1809, but as of 2020, the percentage of self-identified women contributing to annual patents remains less than 22% (5; 6). By the time she died in 1986, Ruth had acquired at least two more patents, several copyrights, and was listed as an author on multiple books. Between two CAP fellows, we found seven names associated with Ruth’s life. Even by today’s standards, her intellectual capital and enigmatic flair for unique titles would be considered remarkable.
Time to Shake It Up
Want to explore patents yourself? Here are two possible methods:
https://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm
In the “Query” box type in the patent number.
For example, Ruth’s patent no. 2,560,755.
The landing page should provide a patent number and issue date. To view the scanned file, click “Images” at the bottom. Have in mind that most patents are a few pages long, so you’ll want to download more than the landing page of the PDF. It is also worthwhile to note that some patents may have a number in front of them, which indicates the type of patent represented.
Type in the name or number and anything affiliated with an individual should show. Between patents and copyrights, we found the following names associated with our Ruth to stamp her intellectual and artistic endeavors. Give ‘er a go and see what you find.
Ruth Elizabeth Thompson.
Ruth E. Van Tellingen.
Ruth Thompson Van Tellingen.
Ruth Van Tellingen Bendel.
Ruth V. Bendel.
Ruth Bendel.
Ruth Thompson Bendel.
References
Cosmetic and hygiene-related products, perhaps due to the personal and often somewhat private nature of their use, are a deeply compelling class of artifacts. As commodities through which we tailor our appearance (or odor) and in turn shape our relationships and encounters with others, objects …
In this blog post CAP fellows share our reflections on an anti-racism, anti-bias training we took on Friday October 30th . The training was sponsored by the Society for Historical Archaeology and dozens of archaeologists, educators, and heritage professionals participated in the four hour session. …
Welcome back to our blog series on research and historical laboratories on MSU’s campus! In our last blog, we outlined how the university gained its start with an emphasis on scientific research and its uses for agriculture. Although the College used as much of its limited funds as possible to provide students with a state-of-the-art chemistry laboratory, it was located within College Hall with all of the other classrooms and offices. Thus, in spite of the College’s efforts to engage students in actual chemical experimentation, dangerous fumes turned the laboratory into a hazard for others in the building. As the chemistry laboratory was quickly becoming a model for other scientific courses in the College that still relied on book learning, the question was not whether to shut down the laboratory – but how to continue to offer chemistry courses in a safer manner.
An opportunity to overhaul the chemistry laboratory arose in 1869 when the College was granted $10,000 from the State Legislature (Beal 1915:268). With the new funds, the College would be able to provide the chemistry laboratory with its own building and could fix some of the historic problems of the old laboratory in College Hall.
Left: Chemical Laboratory, dated to 1896. Image courtesy of MSU Archives and Historical Collections. Right: 1899 Campus Map with Chemical Laboratory indicated by red square (Lautner 1978).
Under a new professor of chemistry, Dr. Robert C. Kedzie, the new Chemistry building was constructed with the subject matter in mind and revolutionized the way that laboratory space should be built for hands-on research. Learning from the problems with the College Hall laboratory space, Kedzie designed the new building so that work tables sat at windows rather than between them to provide better lighting (Beal 1915:268). Additionally, hoods were provided along the walls with ventilation pipes that led up to a chimney – the first ventilation system of its kind in the United States (Forsyth 2020). This chimney and its rather boxy structure earned the building the nickname “Chemical Fort.” The laboratory was finished in 1871 and was located on a lot southeast of College Hall, where the fountain in front of the main campus library stands today.
However, even with a building all to itself, the Chemistry Department appealed for even more space! And this clearly continued to be the case, as the Chemical Fort acquired two separate additions over the next few decades, with the first built in 1882 and the second built in 1911. This extra space also allowed for the creation of Physics and Electrical Engineering courses, which were soon taught alongside chemistry in the Fort (Forsyth 2020).
By 1927, both Electrical Engineering and Chemistry vacated the Fort upon the completion of new customized buildings, leaving just Physics, who stayed in the Fort for additional two decades. Following the departure of Physics, the Fort was used as a library annex until the Main Library was finished in 1955. At this point, without any departments or books to house, the Fort was demolished.
As chemistry clearly contributed to agricultural research, the field would have been extremely valuable to the early College, which likely made its requests for space a priority. Thus, the creation of the Chemistry Laboratory, as well as its two additions, clearly demonstrate chemistry’s importance and the College’s efforts to address their ever present need for more space.
The original Botanical Laboratory, also known as Beal’s Laboratory, may seem like one of MSU’s wonders of the world, as William J. Beal is often recognized for his Botanical Garden that still exists on campus today and because some spooky legends surround the original laboratory site. While previous blog posts discuss Beal and the laboratory, it is important to highlight how this Laboratory fits into MSU’s history as a research focused university!
In comparison to chemistry, early botanical instruction at the College followed the more traditional path at the time and was confined to textbook learning (Beal 1915:61). Although the first instructor of Botany, Professor Henry Goadby, brought the first microscopes to the college, students used it primarily for identification rather than to understand the structures of plant varieties (Beal 1915:61; Kuhn 1955:29). This attitude around botany changed when William J. Beal took over as Professor of Botany, as he aimed to break away from book learning and provide students with actual specimens to examine. In fact, upon his arrival at the university, Beal argued that a proper laboratory space was necessarily to further botanical studies – just as one was needed for chemistry.
Once the College was able to secure the necessary funds for construction in 1880, Beal helped design the space so that it was fitted with a laboratory, lecture rooms, offices, and a museum for Botanical specimens – which included one of the largest collections of corn varieties (Kuhn 1955:111)! Furthermore, its close proximity to the Botanical Gardens allowed students to get hands-on experience setting plants according to species – by the time Beal retired in 1910, over 2,100 species were represented in the garden (Kuhn 1955:111).
Botanical Gardens, undated photograph. Image courtesy of MSU Archives and Historical Collections.
Left: Beal and his students in the Botanical Laboratory. Right: 1880 Michigan Agricultural College campus map (“U” indicates location of the original Botanical Laboratory). Images courtesy of MSU Archives and Historical Collections.
Unfortunately, likely because the laboratory had been built on a budget of $6,000 and was not constructed with bricks, it burned down in 1890, destroying much of the material kept inside (Beal 1915:61). However, even with such a short time as a laboratory based discipline, it clearly made a big impact on the College as plans were made immediately to rebuild the laboratory. While a new laboratory was built to replace it, the new laboratory was located in a different location of campus – as a part of Laboratory Row.
As no building has ever replaced this plot after the first Botanical Laboratory burned down, CAP has been able to conduct some excavation work in this location as an effort to learn more about the original building. In 2016, CAP uncovered a portion of the foundation and burned soils, as well as associated artifacts, including melted glass and windows. It has been recommended that any construction in this region be closely monitored, as the likelihood for discovery of relevant historical material is high.
Image of Unit 2 from an excavation of the original Botanical Laboratory, dated to 2016 (CAP Report No. 64).
Join us for our next post in the Blog Series to learn more about the historic laboratories on campus and how Laboratory Row played a part!
Since March 2020, our world here in Michigan and in the United States has come undone. Inequities invisible to some but known and repeatedly experienced by people of color, particularly Black Michiganders, in the past and present have been laid bare before our feet. To …