"As for me, I believe that Wilson built/constructed Merion"To be more specific, I think Pickering oversaw the building/construction of Merion under the Merion committee chaired by Hugh Wilson. The real question is, built/constructed according to whose plans? I suppose, if these endless threads have any purpose, some new evidence is going to be presented that allegedly will alter our notions of that. Bring it on. If there is truth to it, it is worth knowing no matter what traditions are upset by it.
Honestly, if hole drawings in Macdonald's hand shows that all the original holes were designed by CBM, that would be fascinating and welcome knowledge. We're not trying to protect myths and legends. Though I doubt that is going to happen. But if it did, so what? Philadelphians aren't going to be crying in the streets about it. Most of our differences have been rooted in different analytical results and not, as some would believe, due to a Philadelphia Syndrome to protect our heroes. If new information is found and passes scrutiny, it will be seen for what it is, important information on the founding of one of the most significant golf courses in the world. But it is also a course that was dramatically altered from the start. The original golf course was at best a transition course that still clung to many older design styles than natural ones. Is this due to the preference of the Merion committee, Macdonald's influence, Pickering's experience or other factors? That will be difficult to answer. But perhaps David has found something that will help bridge the knowledge gap. We'll see one of these days.
Again, whatever accounted for the initial design iteration, it was soon abandoned for a new and improved look and design including the iconic bunkering we are familiar with. I for one imagine that the rejection was mostly due to the collaborations between Wilson and Flynn and later the work of Flynn upon Wilson's early passing. The rejection of past efforts is an important story in the design evolution of Merion, which took its course over a period of some 22 years and then some.
Pat,
You say there is a massive amount of missing material relating to the earliest activities associated with the development of Merion. What makes you think clubs of that era routinely retained such information? What sort of information exists documenting the travels and studies of Crump and Macdonald or anyone else of that era? It has nothing to do with the current significance of Merion, Pine Valley or NGLA. Or even the earliest views of these and other courses. The architecture was never seriously documented anywhere nor were the architects, either professional or amateur.
If you are wondering about the sketches being Wilson or Macdonald, it stands to reason you are also questioning every detail ever presented regarding the development of Merion and everywhere else.
What do we know about who did what and when about Myopia Hunt? About NGLA? About Chicago GC? About Shinnecock? About St. Andrews GC? Will you next question everything about everything? If so, you and your cohorts have an awful lot of work to do. You'd better get a move on
"NO, a manifest, an official document is NOT to be confused with a reporter writing an article or opinion piec e. Surely you understand the difference."We know they are different, Pat. However, they can both be right at times and they can both be wrong at times. Are you saying just because one is an "official document" that it has to be entirely accurate?