This summer I had hoped to produce an article length biographical sketch of Joseph Clark, architect of the State House Dome at Annapolis. For a variety of reasons, I am unable to do so at this time but I wanted to briefly outline my interpretation of Clark's life. The title I have chosen for the project demonstrates how I plan to present my inquiry into the questions of what Joseph Clark did during the course of his life time and why historians should be interested in him as an historical figure. Primarily, we come to know of Clark through his enterprises in public building. Clark built his own financial capital on the building of both state and federal Capitals. Analysis of the materials here at the Archives suggests that an interplay exists between Clark's public and private roles: ardent federalist, deputy grandmaster of the Freemasons, architect, builder, surveyor, merchant, vestryman, father, and husband. Analyzing Clark's involvements with Morris, Nicholson, and Greenleaf sheds new light on the creation of Washington DC. Examining Clark's social circles produces a vast array of later business connections. Analyzing the Clark women underscores women's roles and integral involvement in business affairs. What was the role of the architect during the federal period, why did Clark engage in dangerous speculation, how did his wife manage to survive after Clark goes insane and later dies an insolvent debtor, and perhaps most importantly how typical was Clark's experience among the men who engaged in the early buying and selling of America. These are some of the questiosn, I hope to later explore in telling a narrative of Clark's life.

Accomplishments:

This project continues to remain in the construction stage. I am still trying to gather necessary pieces of the Clark narrative. On the otherhand I do feel like I made some rather concrete advanecs this summer. I will now briefly outline my research strategy and results. Using the Clio Note System I organized all pre-existing data into one file system, using both paper and electronic records. In these notes I have links and connections to both finished projects, secondary source materials, and to research work in progress. As a practice, I have focused my research along location lines. What did Clark do in Annapolis, what did Clark do in Washington DC, and what did Clark do in Baltimore City. I then applied this to other members of the Clark story: his wife Isabella, his brother Stephen, Isabella's second husband, and their sole surviving child Mary S. Magee. I have found that my best successes result from continually matching old data against new sources (making the Notetaking system extremely helpful). In addition, I set up a web page at Geocities under Dr. Papenfuse's direction, prepared several books for OCR work, found several samples in the archives probate materials for Dr. Papenfuse of what he belives to be a Jesuit watermark, and imaged 16th century documents for Leigh Bond's reference in England.

Evaluation of Program:

I would now like to present my interpretation of the experience I gained over the course of this summer's internship. From the point of view of an internship, I have truly found the Clark project to be one of the highlights of my academic career. I was provided with excellent equipment, the freedom to incorporate my own creativity and ideas into the subject matter and the opportunity to continue the project. On the whole, I think the intership is very effective at valuing intern work, producing investigations on a limited time frame and budget, and teaching interns basic and advanced research skills. I feel like not only did I gather a lot of information but I also learned about PROCESS.

On the other hand, I would also like to make a few suggestions on how to make the internship an even better experience. First and foremost, I suggest more preparation and discussion between the managemtent in terms of how the archives would like interns to record their data. I think I was made part of management decisions that were far beyond my scope. I fully understand that my project served as a "guinea pig" for a new research note test taking system and I enjoyed learning how to use new equipment and computer programs. I think that was appropriate; I represent the typical user. However, for several weeks of the internship I felt very uncomfortable being included in what I saw as debates over the merits of two very different yet probably compatible systems. I felt like I had to defend the merits of a system I didn't quite fully understand. I only knew my component and couldn't explain the big picture. In the end, everything worked out well. Perhaps I was included because this was not my first summer here. My experience might have been (and in many ways) is exceptional.

I also wish that the archives expectations of my project goal were more clearly delineated. I know what I want to do with my research on Joseph Clark but I am not sure if what I have scheduled to produce is what the archives wants. Last eyar I produced an academic paper for the archives which people seemed to enjoy but I don't even know if Dr. Papenfuse read. What would be most beneficial to you; what is the specific end you would like me to produce. Am I simply supposed to gather information for Dr. Papenfuse's interpretation?