Pacifism in British North America to 1765
Persecution in England was a significant contributing factor to the formation and settlement of Pennsylvania. Offered the opportunity to create a haven for Quakers, William Penn seized the opportunity. Penn’s colony quickly developed a reputation as a haven for religious dissenters and this toleration was written into its governing documents. Toleration, in turn, served as a magnet for dissenting religious groups in Europe: Mennonites, Amish, Brethren, and other anabaptist groups settled in the colony.
One other Protestant group—the Moravians—also settled in Pennsylvania in the middle of the eighteenth century. The Moravian idea of pacifism was complex. Their initial document of brotherhood forbade military service. But, by 1748, the key Moravian leader, Nicolaus Zinzendorf concluded that military service was up to individual conscience – although he did not believe that the authorities could compel military service. The Moravians had first settled in Georgia where an interesting expression of their pacifism took place in 1737. That year they were approached to commit men to a planned preemptive expedition against the Spanish settlements to the south. Uncertain as to what they should do, the Moravians employed the casting of the Lot (see Section XXVIII in the linked document), and determined that God did not want them to participate. In 1740, most of the Moravians began a move to Pennsylvania which became their main location in British North America – although a small settlement was also established in North Carolina.
The original decades of settlement in Pennsylvania provided little to test the pacifist commitments of the Quakers, Moravians or the various anabaptist groups. Most of the immigrants were farmers and so settled away from the colonial towns which attracted the press gangs. Furthermore, apart from the Quakers, most peace church adherents arrived after about 1710 during a period known as the Long Peace (c. 1714-1740) from the end of Queen Anne’s War to the outbreak of King George’s War. Furthermore, the Quaker attitude toward Indians meant that Pennsylvania avoided most of the violence of the latter conflict.
Edward Hicks: The Peaceable Kingdom 1820. (Pennsylvania)
The Quaker government of Pennsylvania did find itself in some disagreement with royal officials in the colony. As early as 1689, one officer of the crown declared of Pennsylvania that, “Hosts of mosquitoes are worse than of armed men, yet the men without arms worse than they.” By 1693, the Quakers and the crown had forged a symbolic compromise. That year, the assembly finally voted funds for the war effort, with the governor assuring them that money contributed by those opposed to war “shall not be dipt in blood.” In theory, this meant that such money would not be used to buy weapons and ammunition. There is no reason to believe the Quakers were not aware of the fungibility of money, but they had won a form of moral victory.
Pennsylvania’s Long Peace perished in the fire and bloodshed of the French & Indian War which forced decisions on all the pacifist groups. Members of peace churches rendered aid, provided food, and opened their homes to victims of the violence. Some Moravian missionaries even stayed in their isolated villages seeking to continue their ministry. But, in 1755, Indians allied with the French attacked the mission village of Gnadenhutten (present-day Lehighton, PA), destroying the buildings and killing 11 (both Indian and European) of the 15 residents. This led to a general flight from the frontier towns and more refugees to be cared for. Moravian leader August Spangenberg ordered defenses to be constructed at the principal Moravian settlements of Nazareth and Bethlehem. The residents bore arms, ready to defend themselves. Many Pennsylvanians, including Benjamin Franklin, were surprised by these preparations, having misunderstood the Moravian commitment to pacifism. Spangenberg explained that the Moravians were not absolute pacifists. He also pointed out that Bethlehem had become a refuge for those fleeing the fighting and he was preventing bloodshed by protecting the settlement. Spangenberg further argued that the Quaker-dominated assembly had failed in its duty to protect citizens. Finally, Spangenberg also took lessons from the Joe Biden school of self-defense, suggesting the first shot should go in the air – to warn residents to get inside the walls. If an attack came, the defenders were instructed to aim at the legs then bring the wounded inside the palisades to nurse them to health.
Mennonites, Amish, and other pacifists living in Pennsylvania were exempted from military service during the war. Some Mennonites individually abandoned the peace testimony and joined militia units, but they were the exception. Amish and Mennonite non-resistance did lead to fatalities in some backcountry regions. In September, 1756, the farm of Amish Jacob Hochstetler was attacked and burned. Jacob’s wife and two of his children were killed while he and the remaining children were taken into captivity for a number of years.
The war had a greater affect on Pennsylvania’s Quaker community. At the time the war broke out, Quakers throughout the British world were caught up in a broader reforming movement within the group. There was renewed scrutiny on slave-owning, conspicuous wealth, alcohol and other issues. It was within this context that Quakers attempted to deal with the renewed demands for their military involvement. The results were complex. Some Quakers actually endorsed defensive war. Some Quakers sought to, again, fund non-military needs. But the reforming Quakers insisted on a return to the complete “peace testimony.” These men and women essentially argued that money was fungible, observing that raising taxes for non-military purposes was not possible because “they were…so mixed that we cannot in the manner proposed show our hearty concurrence therewith without at the same time assenting to…practices which we apprehend contrary to the testimony which the Lord has given us to bear for his name and Truth’s sake.” As the bloodshed continued, pressure grew on Quaker legislators. A London Quaker leader, John Fothergill, argued that, if the Pennsylvania Quakers did not fund defensive war, then “Will not all the blood that is spilt be at your doors?” Anglicans, backcountry settlers, and others raged at the Quaker legislators for abandoning them. In the end, some kind of deal was done: many Quakers did not stand for reelection allowing pro-war non-Quakers to take office with the understanding that the Quaker legislators would return to the chamber when the war was over.
In addition to these more institutional arguments, individual Quakers grappled with their own understanding of the “peace testimony.” Some Quakers declared they could not stand watch during the war or even pay for a substitute. Chester County Justice Aaron Ashburdge apparently tried to persuade men brought to him for the purpose of swearing oaths of military service from going ahead with their plans. On the other side, there was a trickle of Quakers who abandoned the peace testimony during the war and were subsequently disciplined by their local meetings. Few, if any, of them gave up their service. One man who was confronted for both taking oaths and bearing arms, informed the visitation committee that “he was not convinced of the unlawfulness of oathes.” The committee laconically concluded that it was “most safe to disown him.” Interestingly, near the end of the war, a group of Quakers in Pennsylvania did take up arms – to defend Indians from whites rather than whites from Indians. When the Paxton Boys marched on Philadelphia with the declared aim of massacring a group of Indians being held in protective custody, a number of younger Quakers took up arms to defend their lives. One older Quaker called these actions a “sorrowful defection from our religious testimony.”
The Paxton Expedition, Henry Dawson, 1764.
Virginia was another major front in the war and in some parts of this colony, militia service was required. Since Mennonites had never held the same concern as Quakers over paying militia fines, in parts of Virginia where militia service was required, Mennonites simply paid the fine and were exempted. As in Pennsylvania, some Mennonites paid the ultimate price for their pacifism. In 1764, Mennonite preacher John Rhodes, his wife, and six of their thirteen children were killed in a raid.
In Virginia, Quakers too, had long been generally exempted from military service although they were expected to pay for a substitute (something that caused a moral dilemma for many Friends). The war, however, brought renewed pressure on Quakers to serve in the military. In Frederick County, for example, eight Quakers were jailed for refusing to serve. In 1756, Colonel George Washington, in charge of the defense of the Shenandoah, had a written exchange with Governor Dinwiddie seeking advice on six Quakers who steadfastly refused to serve—in any capacity—in the militia. Despite Dinwiddie’s advice to “compel” the Friends to build fortifications, even the threat of severe whippings did not bring the recalcitrant Quakers to heel. Eventually, Washington released them from prison. The movement of the war away from Virginia meant little more pressure was put upon Friends in Virginia.
Pacifism and the American Revolution
The outbreak of the American Revolution led to renewed pressure on pacifist groups in a number of colonies. Mennonites and Brethren continued to affirm both their refusal to serve and their willingness to pay fines in lieu of service and taxes to support the war. The revolutionary governments in both Maryland and Virginia allowed Mennonites to purchase exemptions from military service. In some colonies Mennonites were happy to supply wagons and horses to the Continental Army and even worked as teamsters on occasion. They did, however, refuse to be paid in Continental money, insisting on hard currency.
Nonetheless, the Revolution did create complications for Mennonites in America. The Mennonite churches, generally, concluded that the various revolutionary governments (at the state and federal level) were illegitimate as they were a rebellion against the British government which, they believed, had been put in place by God (this was a standard view toward any government which these groups held. See Romans 13: 1,2 for context). For this reason, they refused to take loyalty oaths to revolutionary governments and also refused to pay the special taxes levied by those revolutionary governments. That this refusal was based in theology not politics was made clear at the conclusion of revolution when the Treaty of Paris recognized the legitimacy of the American (and by default) the state governments. At that time, Mennonites happily took oaths of loyalty to the new governments.
However, during the revolutionary years, what the Mennonites saw as political neutrality was dangerous in a time of war. A number of those who refused to take oaths suffered imprisonment, fines, and confiscation of property at the hands of revolutionary forces. A group of farmers in Upper Saucon, Pennsylvania reported that the local sheriff had seized beds, linens, bibles, books, and stoves. A number of Amish in Reading were imprisoned for refusing to take a loyalty oath. The Brethren publisher Christopher Sower (or Saur) had his Germantown press destroyed and was arrested for refusing to take the oath. In 1783, Brethren elder Martin Urner welcomed three travelers into his home. Over dinner they informed him that they were escaped British prisoners. Urner urged them to give themselves up but did not report them to the revolutionary authorities. The next day they left Urner’s house but returned a few weeks later in the company of American troops. The three men were spies, sent to find out British loyalists. Urner was sentence to 117 lashes, later commuted to a fine.
Pacifism cost at least one pacifist group more than a fine. Sometime between 1777 and 1780, the small Brethren settlement at in Morrison’s Cove Pennsylvania was attacked by Indians. The Brethren refused to either flee or fight and were, apparently, killed to the last person.
Officially the Moravians held a position of non-involvement during the Revolution. The key argument made by Moravian leaders to their churches was that the British government had provided a place of refuge for Moravians when they were being persecuted. How, then, could the sect now rebel against that government? Unofficially, many Moravians chose one side or the other during the Revolution.
For the most part, Quakers resisted calls to become involved in the Revolution, a mark of how successful the Quaker reformers had been in previous decades. Quakers argued that overturning kings was God’s business not men’s. Indeed, as a group, the Quaker commitment to peace became more acute during the revolution. Quakers refused to take oaths to the revolutionary governments. Although Quakers had always refused to take oaths (and, indeed, British law carved out an exemption for them in this regard), they fell under the same suspicions as did the Mennonites and Brethren. Quakers also continued their refusal to pay war taxes. Quaker meetings began to discipline members who paid a fine for refusing to serve in the militia rather than going to prison as Quaker rules required. Some Quakers did refuse to pay the fine and were imprisoned for this measure of resistance. One such instance in Salem, New Jersey, caused consternation when two Quakers who had been imprisoned were released on payment of the fines. Local leaders investigated the case, preparing to discipline the two men. However, the local meeting learned that the fines had been paid by a non-Quaker who was concerned for the prisoners’ well-being.
An even more fascinating incident took place in Trenton, New Jersey in 1776. The Quaker meeting house there had been used for both the New Jersey Convention, which met in the wake of the Continental Congress, and as a barracks by revolutionary troops. Although the local Quakers had not supported these uses, they had either given the meeting house key to local officials or unlocked the meeting house themselves “to prevent the breaking of the doors.” A Quaker committee which reviewed these actions criticized the decision to hand over the key suggesting it would have been better for the doors to be broken down and the leaders arrested for refusing to assist the revolutionaries.
In Virginia, some Quakers were forcibly recruited into the military and marched off to army camps with their hands bound. In response, they refused to take any food or water. After a day in camp, all were discharged by George Washington (who had perhaps learned from his experiences during the French and Indian Wars). In general, these acts of passive resistance prevented further impositions on Virginia Quakers.
But, while Quaker meetings and leaders were generally moving more strongly into pacifist positions, the Revolution also saw widespread defections from the Quaker faith over the issue of military service. Page after page of Quaker records from congregations in places such as Pennsylvania and New Jersey record the names of young men who came under discipline for “going off to war” or “practicing military arts” or “drilling with the militia” or similar offenses. Occasionally, one of these men repented. Anthony Woodward, for example, condemned himself for “being so far in the spirit of War as to carry Arms in shew of defence.” But, men like Woodward were the exception rather than the norm. The vast majority of Quakers who faced discipline for joining up had never been in trouble with the Friends before on any matter. The decision to go off to war represented a change in thinking for these men: a decision to abandon the “peace witness” of the Quakers, was a decision to leave the Friends completely. Many of them joined other churches.
~
One of the cornerstones of libertarianism—the non-aggression principle—can be explained as a refusal to engage in offensive violence while retaining the right to resist personal threats vigorously, even to the point of using lethal force. Under this principle, most libertarians would probably see themselves as having more in common with the Quakers who left their faith to serve in the Revolution than with the Quakers, Mennonites, Brethren, and others who held fast to their principles of pacifism. I’ve never been faced with that kind of choice, but my philosophical commitment would be to resist threats against me or my family with the minimal appropriate level of force. Nonetheless, I hold nothing but admiration for those who refuse to take the life of one of their fellow men on principle. For me this stems not from a lack of courage, but from the possession of courage of a different kind.
Pacifism seems evolutionary strange though…
six of their thirteen children were killed in a raid. – I mean this is one way to do it plenty of spares
I really need to get off of my ass and finish writing my article on technology and its influence on barbaric vs civil societies.
It seems strange because the natural state of the world is shortage, every living thing living at the expense of other living things and the fierce competition that breeds. Technology has advanced to the point that that can be overcome yet culturally we just cant seem to get that through our heads.
Really? You think technology has a solution to scarcity?
Yes, in a sense. Demand will always be greater than supply but that is different from scarcity.
The only true scarcity we have now in the US is artificially imposed by government. We have an obesity problem for crying out loud. The problem in my grandfather’s day was not having enough food.
Thanks for the history lesson. One branch of the family came to Germantown, PA about 1687, recruited away from their Mennonite roots in Germany by Daniel Pastorius. Apparently they were Quakers while in Germantown but by early 1700s had moved to Montgomery County and reverted to Mennonite. I’ve never been able to discern their stance during the Revolution but one eventually served in the Union Army.
Queen Anne’s War – I doubt Annie did much fighting so why is it her war
King George’s War – which one?
Also looking at Wikipedia those are names Americans gave to other wars to make it seem they were relevant
Furthermore, the Quaker attitude toward Indians – I am still confused whether it is okay to say “indians”
“Hosts of mosquitoes are worse than of armed men, yet the men without arms worse than they.” – thats a nasty thing to say of the disabled
I think there is a joke to be made about Moravians, fines and check/Czech but it escapes me.
Also about oats or something.
Anyhoo good post. If I ever meet a true pacifist I will attempt to steal their wallet
As an Oklahoman, and thus a decendant (like Lizzie Warren) from a Cherokee princess, I give you permission to use the term.
More seriously, among the Indians I grew up with, “Native American” was an effete affectation, analogous to modern “latinx.” However, I believe up in North Dakota, they prefer “Native American.”
A few years ago we had a casual friend who was Northern Cheyenne. When I once asked her if she preferred “Native American,” she said, “You know only white people call us that, right? I’m an Indian. Call me an Indian.”
I heard someone once say they preferred “American Indian” because they were an American first.
an American first
Well that’s problematic!!! /progtard
The Indians I grew up with all say Indian. Sometimes American Indian. But mostly they go by their tribal designation, not the collective term.
The ones I know all use tribal identity.
Excellent series, RN!
Thanks KK. I’d been meaning to shoot you an e-mail but what I was going to tell you is in my reply to Dr. Fronkensteen (no. 8) below. You may already know about that source but wanted to let you know.
Oh yes – been using that for a while (it’s an OG genealogy site). I use Ancestry mainly, but sometimes I have to go afield to other sources. Family Search is one of my go-tos. As is the Niedersachsen Archive and the British National Archives. Both have pretty good online searches. I found a reference to my 4x great grandfather in the Niedersachsen Archives, bought the book (how it was in print and available on Amazon is a minor miracle), and subsequently had a correspondence with an historian in the UK regarding my 4x great grandfather’s military service.
BTW, I’ve been reading these articles with my genealogy brain, just to see if there are any tidbits I can pick up. My Pa’s family all come from Missouri, Indiana & Virginia. My Ma’s family were all Ohio (they were more recent immigrants than my Pa’s side)
I agree 100%.
This is great. I’m really enjoying it.
From what we can gather we were just protestants, specifically Presbyterians and by some accounts the chief rabble rousers.
Yeah, there were a lot of Presbyterian pastors who preached sermons in favor of various wars. Pre-revolution they aligned with the British state in something historians call “the Protestant Interest.” Revolutionary period: a lot of them were pro-revolution and reimagined America as God’s chosen kingdom.
Prof CJ talks about that in his Civil war series. He calls it the civic religion. He reads several sermons from prominent protestant ministers that are all pro-war propaganda with a strong religious bent.
OT update from my buddy: (t/w facebook because that’s the only site he really uses). https://www.facebook.com/gourmeltz/videos/166639035072758/?ref=tahoe ) – some good support messages further down the feed too. Heard he’s been getting support DMs from some surprising folks but he doesn’t want to put out any names in public yet.
Will probably get one of these Glib-minded shirts too. https://gourmeltz.org/
I am planning on heading out there Saturday.
If anyone is there around 1230 and you see a man in a hoodie open carrying a pistol, accompanied by a short Japanese Lady, say hi.
Got the ‘Day Drinking for ‘Merica” shirt. I’m glad he got an online store set up, the last time you mentioned this I couldn’t find a way to offer support from afar.
Very interesting series.
This article in particular, as it pertains to the region I live in.
Interesting. One of my ancestors served under Washington as a waggoneer, I always assumed he fought but now I’m wondering if he was one of those teamster pacifists. Not sure how to investigate this.
Get a hold of the Sons of Revolution society and have them help dig up information. I would assume you would need proof and join to get them to help though.
My sister was a member of the Daughters of the Revolution for awhile. I’m not sure if she kept her membership active but I’ll ask her.
I joined up. The first meeting was about china patterns. I just couldn’t even.
The DAR would have even lapsed memberships listed on their web resources. I found memberships from my family going back to the early-mid 20th century. Generally, the DAR (and I assume SAR) would let you base your membership on an already-approved membership if you can prove you are directly related to the person with the approved membership.
Of course, the DAR told me that the memberships I found in my family were so old, that I would have to do the research all over again on my own. Fuck that noise.
Try the Sons and Daughters of the Mayflower…that was a pain in the ass.
SAR will let you join if you can prove lineage to a current or past member.
WebDom is eligible from both sides of her family, and I am from my paternal side. We seriously considered joining since the units where we would both be located are mainly concerned with historic preservation and running some local history sites, which both of us love.
The genealogy documentation was simple, since I already had it all, but the silly membership fees put us off.
I am eligible. I know because I applied for a scholarship back in the day. No dice.
Hop in the TARDIS.
One place that can be helpful, if you have general dates and a location are these folk: https://www.familysearch.org/en/
It’s the genealogical arm of the LDS. In the 20th century they microfilmed a TON of records all across the country: church records, town records, county records etc. You can get the microfilm shipped to the nearest LDS library (usually located in one of their church buildings) for a nominal fee (used to be $5, not sure if its gone up). They have microfilm readers in their reading rooms. You’ll need to check right now which ones are open.
^^ That was the other one I couldn’t pin down in my memory.
Which using that…I can go to the 1300s and see where part of my family went from Denmark to Norway. I feel vindicated for my Norse tattoos now.
I have a genealogy 101 article coming out next week…I offer my research services for free if you have a) a name & &some approx dates and b) an interesting story to research. My main expertise is tracking lineage, but I can take a stab if you like. You can email me at ronswansonsbeyotch at gmail dot com if you like. Or, if you want to DIY, I think SP scheduled my article for midday on the 25th
Look forward to it. One other thing – and you probably know about this too – is that the mid- to late-19th century saw the publication of a lot of “Histories” of various towns and counties across the US. Most of them tend to be very triumphalist/whiggish, but there is often a chunk of genealogy in them. Sometimes the genealogy is along the lines of “I met Mr. John Smith, then 89 years old and with a perfect memory who told me the history of his family.” But there’s also times when the authors transcribe records that are either really hard to find or which have since been lost.
AND, a LOT of those histories are available for free either through google books or archive(.)org
I think I have used a few of those – one for Kane County, IL and one from Fountain County, IN for sure.
Nice! I’ve tried digging up information on a great grandfather who “disappeared” in Eastern Europe around WW2 and just haven’t gotten anywhere. Unfortunately I don’t even know his full name but I’m inspired to restart the search.
Thanks Raven. This was an interesting read. It’s a good series.
“If I ever meet a true pacifist I will attempt to steal their wallet”
Story: Many years ago, I went to a “Peace Fair” at the Quaker George School in Newtown, PA (Coretta King was speaking). Anyway, I got talking to a Quaker pacifist and asked him “what would you do if on First Day you came to the Meetinghouse and found it had been taken over by the Warlocks (local motorcycle gang)?” He said, that as a pacifist he would do nothing but, with a wink, ” we have non-Quaker neighbors we can rely on to call the police if necessary.” Had the same type of opportunity to talk to a Quaker pacifist recently and he acknowledged that every Meeting can be relied on to have at least one Quaker who isn’t so ready to turn the other cheek.
Hmm… That strikes me as one of those snarky work-arounds that would be more irritating than placating to God as he is described (like the various Jewish inventions that allow you to do forbidden activities on the Sabbath without technically doing them).
Old Quaker joke:
A farmer hears someone break into his home in the middle of the night. He picks up his shotgun and runs downstairs to confront the intruder.
The intruder says, “What are you doing with that gun? Aren’t Quakers pacifists?”
The farmer replies, “Friend, I would not hurt thee for the world, but…thee is standing where I am about to shoot.”
This is a philosophically sound position, but maybe not a realistic one?
How are we to know what the “appropriate level of force” is when in the midst of vigorously defending oneself and family?
I mean, I suppose having 3 people simultaneously unload their weapon towards a lone enemy might be considered more than necessary, but then again, it may not be enough.
proportionality in the use of force against an aggressor seems to me to be the only moral path to dealing with aggressors. I’d grant the aggressed upon a slightly higher level of violence in response to the aggresse, since its not his fault.
Fair point and, TBH, that was just a concluding thought to set up the last two sentences. The easy way out is to say that I wouldn’t fire a million rounds for someone at my door. In general, I’d want to encourage them to go away and would only use lethal force if I felt me or mine were under threat. Even in the case of someone breaking into our house, I would look to get out before taking a life.
But then, who knows what I’d do if that ever happened.
In the age of firearms, the appropriate level of force is pretty binary – you either shoot or don’t, and if you shoot are employing lethal force. I mean, I guess you square up for a fist fight if you wanted to, but that strikes me as nuts if you have a gun. Trying to modulate to some intermediate level of force (a baseball bat? a knife?) based on some fine-grained analysis of the threat in front of you seems . . . unrealistic.
Exactly. One’s “plan” should be simply to stop the attack, whatever the attack looks like, and whatever it takes to stop it.
And however serious one is about being prepared, train accordingly.
“One’s “plan”…”
A great philosopher once said, “Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.”
Mike Tyson.
That’s the joke!
No fight ever goes like you think it will. There is always something you won’t see coming. I was having a decent time keeping that tyrannosaurus off of me last year until while backing up the heel of my boot caught on something and I fell. Once I was on the ground I realized I was in deep shit.
What seems proportional beforehand may turn out to be woefully inadequate and you may suddenly find yourself in serious trouble.
More advice: Never leave your pistol on the counter in the kitchen and walk around outside without it.
RN, if you haven’t seen the Zoey Deschanel episode of Who Do You Think You Are?, you might find it interesting in the context of this article.
Thanks.
Here’s a clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GO336f7ZtI
Question: do these pacifist groups ever physically punish their children?
Good question. Been a while since I read that kind of detail, but my recollection is that the Quakers generally didn’t. The others I don’t know.
I’m not being facetious here, but your question prompted me to ask Google if Jesus was ever violent. This link came up:
https://baptistnews.com/article/jesus-the-man-of-violence/#.YC6v3OhKgxs
Insert CS Lewis quote here.
*insert Herbert Marcuse here*
Not often, no.
My family were early settlers in Salem. Proudest artifact is the petition created, signed, and distributed by the patriarch of the clan protesting the arrest and persecution of John Proctor. The English roots go back to the fellow who came along with William the Conquerer. The uncle of the branch that came to what would become the US was one of the translators of the King James Bible, a Bishop of Ely Cathedral. I don’t think pacifism played much of a role in the family over the centuries ;-\ Lots of third-tier knights, and later historical personages, no notable peace-mongers. We seem to be a ‘keep your head down and keep on keeping on’ family.
Do you have the original document?
That would be an amazing heirloom.
I’ve done some reading on the witch trials and watched a Smithsonian channel documentary about them.
That’s a crazy thing to look back on, can’t imagine what it would be like to live through it.
I don’t, but the family historical society does. I have a photo of it in the genealogy my grandfather did.
Thank you for this series, Raven Nation. Very well done! (Not a surprise.)
As many of you know, I am a serious genealogy geek along with KK. The Religious Society of Friends kept very detailed records and they are fairly easily accessed.
Thanks for this wonderful scholarly article.
I’d like to think I’m more of a shock and awe kind of guy.
Courtesy of Malice
https://twitter.com/dollyparton/status/1362431803391377409?s=21
Whatever you think of her music, Dolly is a national treasure.
(P.S. If you ever catch Tom Teriffic during one of his occasional commando raids here, ask him to tell his Dolly story.)
I’ve heard some people don’t like her voice. How?
She has an absolutely classic bluegrass voice. Ralph Stanley also had a high pitch.
I would take a bullet for Dolly. She can do no wrong. https://youtu.be/ex1Px8a8qWY
Voicewise, she’s right up there with Wilma Lee Cooper – https://youtu.be/iEmihpFo96k
Just because you mentioned what might be my favorite genre of music and sent me into tizzy of high-lonesome wailing; please to enjoy some Meat Purveyors – https://youtu.be/huwuTnVHZUM
and some Texas Rubies – https://youtu.be/YhnzIE8glGI
Fuck yeah!!
“I’ve heard some people don’t like her voice.”
*raises hand*
Dead to me!
I think her music is great!
I admire what she has done. She even writes some good lyrics.
But her voice…
“I don’t mind if someone calls me a dumb blonde. I know I’m not dumb and I know I’m not blonde.”
Dolly Parton
I believe she’s also been quoted as saying, “It takes an awful lot of money to make me look this cheap.”
Huh.
Meanwhile, in Dallas.
OT: In the background I have video of the Mars rover landing playing…they did a segment on how the rover team worked through pandemic stuff. At the very end of it, they showed a composite shot of a bunch of people all sitting down for interviews–they all put masks on as they were sitting down in front of the camera. What is the point of that? If they were in the room with an interviewer or camera operator, why didn’t they have the masks on already? Why show that they just put the masks on for the interviews? Was the intent to show an example of a bunch of people “masking up?” If so, they didn’t do a good job.
These are not serious people.
Every time I think I’ve reached the bottom of contempt for those people, they prove me wrong.
Depends on how you look at it. Trump Now the Most Acquitted President in History
Out of the park…every time.
If this passes, and the Republicans win in 2022 they should impeach Biden twice. Maybe Obama too. If they did I might die laughing.
This
Oh, they’re serious alright. About getting paid by taxpayers, yet spending all their time on nothing.
Come to think of it, they should stay preoccupied with silly stuff like that so they won’t have time to do all the truly destructive shit why want to do.
^This
Plus they’re giving us endless derp-fodder. Win-win!
Well, until they get back to the serious business of wrecking the country.
The Republicans should agree, but only if it applies to any number of impeachments.
The Democrats might throw ole’ Bill under the bus, but at least it would make some of them squirm.
And no one cares about Andrew Johnson anyway.
He’s buried in Tennessee apparently. I don’t think there’s much besides his grave named after him, since he was the Trump of his own day.
“twice impeached presidents”
Let the R’s impeach him again. make him a thrice impeached president. Legislative one upsmanship could be entertaining.
Let me add my applause here. Super interesting and thought provoking.
Thanks for all the kind words.
For me this stems not from a lack of courage, but from the possession of courage of a different kind.
Word.
Thanks, Raven. I am beyond impressed and grateful for these lessons.
Good grief. We are still iced in badly but tomorrow it should get up to 40 degrees and sunny. One of my former professors who now lives about 20 miles north of where we are called earlier to let me know it is snowing at his house. Don’t let it snow here don’t let it snow here don’t let it snow here……
The road conditions are beyond dangerous right now. My nearest neighbor, not the sharpest tool, crept down her driveway, could not stop, slid sideways and bang, down in the ditch she went. Her SUV left a hell of a divot. Thankfully she was not injured.
By tomorrow afternoon I should be able to drive a little bit. Here is well wishes for all Glibs suffering this awful shit. May you thaw out soon.
it is 34 here right now. first time above freezing this week. its starting to melt but its going to be 12 tonight. i have been able to make my 30 minute commute in about an hour all week. A melt and refreeze may make my drive not possible in the morning.
The first pic is the hwy I live off of. The county doesn’t salt or plow out this far.
Work https://imgur.com/gallery/XWh8EZC
That is what happened to us…slight thaw then refreeze. It looked like snow on the ground but it was hard as concrete and slicker than owl shit. My thermometer says 29 right now.
We dont really have any salt or snow clearing equipment here in Louisiana. We just hunker down. There is a highway a couple of miles from here. Normally I can hear vehicles passing but for three days now it has been as quiet as a tomb.
You are further north than I am and at a much higher altitude. It may take you longer than us to thaw out.
Great article! I have lived in and around the groups mentioned here, but I never had much knowledge of this aspect of their religions
FTFY.
Also… GFY.
I thought it was three masks now. Three times zero is still zero.
Fauci is the Krugman of microbial science. Good lord that guy gives me the creeps.
Not true, Krugman was once good at his job.
Back then, Fauci was saying AIDS was spread by casual contact.
So, to go OT for a second, I am hoping that California Glibs can help me. Is there a good website that shows the current state of Californias covid restrictions? I am possibly going to be passing through part of the state for one night, going from Reno to Redding, and then home to Oregon. Can I do this? Will I be able to get a hotel and then do I have to eat drive-through? Inquiring minds want to know!
What is the What?
(I will also post this in later threads as I feel this is close to thread death)
JPL folks are damn amazing.
Success!
yep, very cool. Can’t wait to see the landing location coords and the first high res pics.
Thanks all for the kind words.
Thanks for writing these. It’s very thought-provoking.