CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Charleston church shooting

2015 mass shooting in South Carolina, U.S.

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 22, 2026
Entity authoritySource title only
Source-derived summary

On June 17, 2015, a terrorist mass shooting and anti-Black hate crime occurred in Charleston, South Carolina. Nine people were killed and another injured during a Bible study at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, the oldest black church in the Southern United States. Among the fatalities was the senior pastor, state senator Clementa C. Pinckney. All ten victims were African Americans. At the time, it was one of the deadliest mass shootings at a place of worship in U.S. history, tied with the Waddell Buddhist temple shooting. Both incidents were surpassed by the Sutherland Springs church shooting in 2017.

Editorial summary

This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Charleston church shooting” as 2015 mass shooting in South Carolina, U.S. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2015, 2017—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. The account is most persuasive where Charleston, church and shooting can be independently traced.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The subject matters to the general reference register because the source frames it as 2015 mass shooting in South Carolina, U.S. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 22, 2026. The first chronological checks are 2015 and 2017.

Critical limits

Overview language is designed for orientation and should not be treated as a substitute for the evidence cited beneath it. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Charleston church shooting”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Charleston church shooting primary sources, Charleston church shooting archive and Charleston research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Charleston church shooting”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Charleston church shooting” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.