First use of Houseparties term?

Ques­tion: Can you defin­i­tively doc­u­ment the first use of “House­p­a­r­ties” as a term for the Spring club bac­cha­nal?

Answer:Writ­ing in the Prince­ton Alumni Weekly in 1960, Brown Rol­ston 1910 makes the claim that “It was my sec­tion of the Cot­tage Club and that of Cap and Gown which started House­p­a­r­ties. It took con­sid­er­able argu­ment and per­sua­sion to get the col­lege author­i­ties to con­sent, but under the con­di­tions of strict chap­er­on­age they finally did. The girls stayed at the clubs and each club had a dance to which the girls and mem­bers of the other club were invited and a most enjoy­able and respectable time was had by all. My mother and sev­eral other ladies were on guard but, as I said, the girls were ‘nice’ girls and were quite used to being chaperoned.”

If we take Rol­ston at his word, it would mean that house­p­a­r­ties orig­i­nated with the Class of 1910. It’s worth not­ing how­ever that since he is writ­ing in 1960, Rol­ston is almost cer­tainly using the term retroac­tively. While the events Rol­ston describes may match the def­i­n­i­tion of house­p­a­r­ties (at least by early 20th cen­tury stan­dards) it seems unlikely that they were called that. The first time that the term actu­ally appears in ref­er­ence to a col­lec­tive cel­e­bra­tion at the clubs seems to be a brief men­tion in the Daily Prince­ton­ian in 1916. After this point it quickly enters the Prince­ton ver­nac­u­lar and by 1920 there is a “house­p­a­r­ties” issue of The Tiger.

There are two Prince arti­cles which briefly dis­cuss the ori­gin of house­p­a­r­ties that one can review online, as they explain their evo­lu­tion from smaller “tea parties.”

http://prince-web1.princeton.edu/archives/2003/05/02/news/8153.shtml

http://prince-web1.princeton.edu/archives/2006/05/04/arts/15524.shtml

I hope that this infor­ma­tion helps. I can­not find any­thing in any of our records which would indi­cate that 1908 was the first year of house­p­a­r­ties. Even if Brown Rol­ston was only a junior when the events he describes hap­pened (it’s unclear if he was dis­cussing his junior or senior year), then the date still would have been spring 1909. Let me know if there’s any­thing else I can do; I under­stand that brag­ging rights to a cen­tury of par­ty­ing is on the line here.

Yours sin­cerely,

Daniel Bren­nan