BEVERLY | Discovering you are younger than you thought might sound like good news | unless you're a historic house.
In a report long awaited by local historians, two scientists from England have concluded that the Balch House is Beverly was built around 1679, not 1636 as the Beverly Historical Society had claimed.
The evidence refutes the society's long-held contention that the Balch House is the oldest surviving wood-frame house in the United States. In fact, the report suggests the Balch House was not even built by John Balch, but rather by his son and grandson.
When asked if the news was disappointing, Beverly Historical Society director Stephen Hall said, "I'm never disappointed in the truth."
But he did say the Historical Society will probably drop its claim to national status.
"I don't think I'd present it as the oldest wood-frame house in the country anymore," he said, "until we found additional evidence to support that."
The study to determine the exact age of the Balch House was commissioned by the Beverly Historical Society last year. Hall had read a newspaper story in which someone from the Fairbanks House in Dedham questioned the Balch House's status as the oldest wood-frame house in America. The Fairbanks House makes the same claim and has backed it up with scientific evidence.
The Beverly Historical Society sought the same kind of evidence by hiring two scientists from the Oxford Dendrochronology Laboratory in South Oxfordshire, England, for $3,500 to test the age of the Balch House timbers through a method known as tree-ring dating.
Daniel Miles and Michael Worthington traveled to Beverly in February 2006 and spent a day taking samples from the Balch House. They brought the samples back to their lab in England for testing and finally issued their report last month.
According to the report, the northern end of the Balch House was "most likely constructed during 1679," while the southern extension "was constructed during 1721." The oldest piece of wood in the house, an oak rafter, was dated to the "summer/autumn of 1660," but was apparently reused from another structure, according to the report.
John Balch died in 1648, so the report says his son, Benjamin Balch Sr., probably built the northern end, and John Balch's grandson, Benjamin Balch III, put on the southern extension.
Claim based on deeds
The Beverly Historical Society, which owns and operates the Balch House, had based its 1636 date on records that show that John Balch and four other early settlers were granted deeds for 200 acres each in 1635.
Hall said the evidence produced by the Oxford lab is not conclusive. The results are based on a small sampling of the Balch House's wood, he said, because only certain types of wood yield accurate results.
"They took 25 samples in a house that literally has hundreds of pieces of wood in it," he said.
Hall speculated that John Balch could have built his house on the site around 1636, but so many changes were made to the building over the years that little of the original wood is left.
"Does that mean it's not the old Balch House? No," he said. "It might be it's all that remains of the old Balch House."
Hall said he's not sure if the sign in front of the Balch House, which advertises it as being built by John Balch in 1636, will be changed. He said that sign was put up years ago by the state, not by the Historical Society. Hall said the house gets about 300 visitors per year.
The Balch House's competitor for the title of the country's oldest surviving wood house isn't gloating over the news. But according to Alex Service, the curator at the Fairbanks House in Dedham, "it's kind of nice to get some confirmation" that the Fairbanks appears to hold that distinction.
The wood at the Fairbanks House was tested by the same Oxford lab in 2001, and results showed two timbers dating to the winter of 1637-38, Service said. Other timbers date to 1641.
"What we generally tell our tours is that, from the best of our understanding, we believe the house was probably built in or around 1641," Service said.
'Still special'
Tad Baker, chairman of the history department at Salem State College, said he was not surprised that tests showed the Balch House is not as old as some people thought.
Baker said he saw no evidence to back up the 1636 claim when he did an archaeological dig at the Balch House in 1998. Architectural historians have also questioned that date, he said.
"It's likely that the site was occupied by John Balch from the 1630s, but it appears there's nothing left from that original house," Baker said.
Still, he said the new evidence should not detract from the historic significance of the Balch House.
"It's still an incredibly important site," Baker said. "We found prehistoric artifacts on that site. We know people have been living on that site in Beverly for 1,000 years. Where else can you go in Beverly with that kind of occupation?
"It still has a special place in history for Beverly and the North Shore."
These old houses
A look at some of the North Shore's oldest houses and their estimated dates of origin:
Comments from users with registered accounts will post at once. Comments from unregistered accounts will post after being reviewed by a site moderator. Posts that do not meet site standards, which can be found here, will be removed.
