Tuesday, September 19, 2017

17C British Woman by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677)

We have few depictions of women in the 17C British American colonies, but the prints by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) allow us to see the hairstyles & fashions being worn on the other side of the Atlantic during the early years of the English colonization of America. 
 Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) Theatrum Mulierum And Aula Veneris 

The artist Hollar was born in 1607, the son of an upper middle-class civic official. He left his native Prague at age 20. He was almost blind in one eye but became a skilled artist. His 1st book of etchings was published in 1635, in Cologne, when Hollar was 28. The following year his work caught they eye of English art collector the Earl of Arundel who was visiting the continent. 

The English Earl convinced Hollar to become a part of his household, settling in England early in 1637. Hollar left London for Antwerp in 1642, where he continued to work on a variety of projects for 10 years.  In 1652, he returned to England, working on a number of large images for the publishers John Ogilby & William Dugdale. Hollar died in London in 1677. By his life's end, he had produced nearly 3000 separate etchings.


Monday, September 18, 2017

Fleeing to America - Protestant John Rogers by England's Catholic Queen Mary

The Burning of Master John Rogers. Engraving from John Fox, The Third Volume of the Ecclesiastical History containing the Acts and Monuments of Martyrs...

Martyrdom of John Rogers

The execution in 1555 of John Rogers (1500-1555) is portrayed here in the 9th edition of the famous Protestant martyrology, Fox's Book of Martyrs. Rogers was a Catholic priest who converted to Protestantism in the 1530s under the influence of William Tyndale and assisted in the publication of Tyndale's English translations of the Bible. Burned alive at Smithfield on February 4, 1555, Rogers became the "first Protestant martyr" executed by England's Catholic Queen Mary. He was charged with heresy, including denial of the real presence of Christ in the sacrament of communion.

Two centuries after John Rogers's execution, his ordeal, with depictions of his wife and ten children added to increase the pathos, became a staple of The New England Primer. The Primer supplemented the picture of Rogers' immolation with a long, versified speech, said to be the dying martyr's advice to his children, which urged them to "Keep always God before your Eyes" and to "Abhor the arrant Whore of Rome, and all her Blasphemies." This recommendation, read by generations of young New Englanders, doubtless helped to fuel the anti-Catholic prejudice that flourished in that region well into the nineteenth century.
Mr. John Rogers. Woodblock print from The New-England Primer Improved Boston: A. Ellison, 1773. Rare Book and Special Collections Division, Library of Congress

From The Library of Congress.

Sunday, September 17, 2017

17C British Woman by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677)

We have few depictions of women in the 17C British American colonies, but the prints by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) allow us to see the hairstyles & fashions being worn on the other side of the Atlantic during the early years of the English colonization of America. 
Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) Theatrum Mulierum And Aula Veneris 

The artist Hollar was born in 1607, the son of an upper middle-class civic official. He left his native Prague at age 20. He was almost blind in one eye but became a skilled artist. His 1st book of etchings was published in 1635, in Cologne, when Hollar was 28. The following year his work caught they eye of English art collector the Earl of Arundel who was visiting the continent. The English Earl convinced Hollar to become a part of his household, settling in England early in 1637. Hollar left London for Antwerp in 1642, where he continued to work on a variety of projects for 10 years.  In 1652, he returned to England, working on a number of large images for the publishers John Ogilby & William Dugdale. Hollar died in London in 1677. By his life's end, he had produced nearly 3000 separate etchings.

Saturday, September 16, 2017

Fleeing to America - Persecution - German & Polish Schwenkfelders

The first group of Germans to settle in Pennsylvania arrived in Philadelphia in 1683, from Krefeld, Germany, & included Mennonites and possibly some Dutch Quakers. During the early years of German emigration to Pennsylvania, most of the emigrants were members of small sects that shared Quaker principles--Mennonites, Dunkers, Schwenkfelders, Moravians, & some German Baptist groups--and were fleeing religious persecution. William Penn & his agents encouraged German & European emigration to Pennsylvania by circulating promotional literature touting the economic advantages of Pennsylvania as well as the religious liberty available there.
Caspar Schwenkfeld von Ossig (1489–1561).

The Schwenkfelder Church is a small American Christian body rooted in the 16th century Protestant Reformation teachings of Caspar Schwenkfeld von Ossig (1489–1561).  A contemporary of Martin Luther, he engaged in many debates on religion with Luther. Gradually, he came to have a considerable following of men & women who believed as he did. This belief centered upon an Inner Light, which was to guide their conduct, & later was embodied in books that came into possession of George Fox of England, who adopted the ideas into his philosophy which emerged as Quakerism. In fact, some books call the Schwenkfelders German Quakers.  He was an aristocrat, writer, thinker, and courtier of the German states. By the middle of the 16th century, there were thousands of followers of his "Reformation by the Middle Way."  His ideas appear to be a middle ground between the ways of the Reformation of Martin Luther, John Calvin, & Huldrych Zwingli, + the Radical Reformation of the Anabaptists.
Caspar Schwenkfeld von Ossig (1489–1561).

Originally calling themselves Confessors of the Glory of Christ, Schwenkfeld's followers later became known as Schwenkfelders. These Christians often suffered persecution like slavery, prison, & fines at the hands of the government & state churches in Europe. Most of them lived in southern Germany & Lower Silesia (Poland). During the early 1700s, current Roman ruler Frederic Augustus II issued a mandate that the Schwenkfelder community choose between the Lutheran and Catholic churches. When they refused, he placed sanctions on burials and marriages, and refused to acknowledge Schwenkfelders as citizens of the state. By the beginning of the 18th century, the remaining Schwenkfelders lived around Harpersdorf. As the persecution intensified around 1719–1725, they were given refuge in 1726, by Nicolaus Ludwig von Zinzendorf in Saxony. When the Elector of Saxony died in 1733, Jesuits sought the new ruler to return the Schwenkfelders to Harpersdorf.  With their freedom in jeopardy, they decided to look to the New World.  Although they were forbidden to emigrate, on Tuesday, April 20, 1734, a band of 176 persons deserted their homes, sailed down the Elbe River, and found refuge in Holland. Dutch Mennonites gave them food and shelter and paid for passage on the ship St. Andrew bound for Philadelphia, PA.
 Landing of the Schwenckfelders from the St. Andrew by Adolf Pannash 1934

Six groups of Exiles, totaling 209 persons and 52 families, arrived in Philadelphia, 1731 to 1737, but the largest — the third — contained 44 families and 170 persons. The day after they arrived, the able-bodied men affirmed allegiance to the British King, George II, and the following day, perhaps in the nearby Friends meeting house, all of the group held a thanksgiving service for their safe arrival in a land of religious tolerance. Every year thereafter on the anniversary, a similar service has been held in one of the Schwenkfelder Churches. The immigrant members of these Churches brought saffron to the Americas; Schwenkfelders may have grown saffron in Europe—there is some record that at least one member of the group traded in the spice. A group came to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in 1731, and several migrations continued until 1737. The largest group, 180 Schwenkfelders, arrived in 1734. The offer of religious tolerance in Pennsylvania was extraordinary. Fifteen year old 15-year-old Christopher Schultz documented the 1731 voyage in his journal. Schultz wrote, upon landing in Philadelphia: “People mingle like fish in the sea.” In Europe, Schwenkfelders and Jesuits were at odds. Once settled in Pennsylvania, the first Schwenkfelder settlers actually helped to build a Jesuit chapel.
Caspar Schwenkfeld von Ossig (1489–1561). Erste Amerikanische Ausgabe. 1859 frontispiece portrait of Schwenckfeld

Schwenkfelders inhabited in the Philadelphia area from Chestnut Hill to Lehigh County and did not extend further. One family only is known to have moved to Virginia. For the first 50 years (1731-1781) it was hard to keep all of the Schwenkfelders together and practicing religion. Lay pastors acted as circuit riders during this time. In 1782, the Society of Schwenkfelders was formed. The Schwenkfelder Church has remained small: as of 2009 there were 5 congregations with about 2,500 members in southeastern Pennsylvania. All of these bodies are within a 50-mile radius of Philadelphia.

They teach that the Bible is the source of Christian theology, but also believe it is dead without the inner work of the Holy Spirit. They also continue to believe, that the divinity of Jesus was progressive, and that the Lord's supper is a mystical spiritual partaking of the body of Christ in open communion. Adult baptism and both infant baptism and consecration of infants is practiced depending on the church. Adult members are also received into church membership through transfer of memberships from other churches and denominations. Their ecclesiastical tradition is congregational with a strong oecumenical focus. The Schwenkfelder churches recognize the right of the individual in decisions such as public service, & armed combat.

Friday, September 15, 2017

17C British Woman by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677)

We have few depictions of women in the 17C British American colonies, but the prints by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) allow us to see the hairstyles & fashions being worn on the other side of the Atlantic during the early years of the English colonization of America. 
Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) Theatrum Mulierum And Aula Veneris 

The artist Hollar was born in 1607, the son of an upper middle-class civic official. He left his native Prague at age 20. He was almost blind in one eye but became a skilled artist. His 1st book of etchings was published in 1635, in Cologne, when Hollar was 28. The following year his work caught they eye of English art collector the Earl of Arundel who was visiting the continent. The English Earl convinced Hollar to become a part of his household, settling in England early in 1637. Hollar left London for Antwerp in 1642, where he continued to work on a variety of projects for 10 years.  In 1652, he returned to England, working on a number of large images for the publishers John Ogilby & William Dugdale. Hollar died in London in 1677. By his life's end, he had produced nearly 3000 separate etchings.

Thursday, September 14, 2017

Fleeing to America - Persecution of Jesuits by English Protestants


Persecution of Jesuits in England

In the image above is Brian Cansfield (1581-1643), a Jesuit priest seized while at prayer by English Protestant authorities in Yorkshire. Cansfield was beaten and imprisoned under harsh conditions. He died on August 3, 1643 from the effects of his ordeal. The picture below another Jesuit priest, Ralph Corbington (Corby) (ca. 1599-1644), who was hanged by the English government in London, September 17, 1644, for professing his faith.
Images are from Die Societas Jesu in Europa, 1643-1644 from Mathias Tanner, Die Gesellshafft Jesu biss zur vergiessung ihres Blutes wider den Gotzendienst Unglauben und Laster...Prague: Carlo Ferdinandeischen Universitat Buchdruckeren, 1683. Rare Book and Special Collections Division, Library of Congress
From The Library of Congress..

Wednesday, September 13, 2017

17C British Woman by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677)

We have few depictions of women in the 17C British American colonies, but the prints by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) allow us to see the hairstyles & fashions being worn on the other side of the Atlantic during the early years of the English colonization of America. 
Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) Theatrum Mulierum And Aula Veneris 

The artist Hollar was born in 1607, the son of an upper middle-class civic official. He left his native Prague at age 20. He was almost blind in one eye but became a skilled artist. His 1st book of etchings was published in 1635, in Cologne, when Hollar was 28. The following year his work caught they eye of English art collector the Earl of Arundel who was visiting the continent. The English Earl convinced Hollar to become a part of his household, settling in England early in 1637. Hollar left London for Antwerp in 1642, where he continued to work on a variety of projects for 10 years.  In 1652, he returned to England, working on a number of large images for the publishers John Ogilby & William Dugdale. Hollar died in London in 1677. By his life's end, he had produced nearly 3000 separate etchings.

Tuesday, September 12, 2017

Fleeing to America - Persecution - Hugenots by Catholics

Massacre Fait a Sens en Bourgogne par la Populace au Mois d'Avril 1562 . . .Lithograph in A. Challe, Histoire des Guerres du Calvinisme et de la Ligue dans l'Auxerrois, le Sénonais et le autres contrées qui forment aujourd'hui le département de l'Yonne Auxerre: Perriquet et Rouille, 1863.
Persecution of Huguenots by Catholics

The slaughter of Huguenots (French Protestants) by Catholics at Sens, Burgundy in 1562 occurred at the beginning of more than thirty years of religious strife between French Protestants and Catholics. These wars produced numerous atrocities. The worst was the notorious St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre in Paris, August 24, 1572. Thousands of Huguenots were butchered by Roman Catholic mobs. Although an accommodation between the two sides was sealed in 1598 by the Edict of Nantes, religious privileges of Huguenots eroded during the seventeenth century and were extinguished in 1685 by the revocation of the Edict. Perhaps as many as 400,000 French Protestants emigrated to various parts of the world, including the British North American colonies.

In 1562 French naval officer Jean Ribault led an expedition to the New World that founded Fort Caroline as a haven for Huguenots in what is now Jacksonville, Florida. Trying to keep control of La Florida, Spanish soldiers killed Ribault and many of his followers near St. Augustine in 1565.

Barred by the government from settling in New France, Huguenots led by Jessé de Forest, sailed to North America and settled instead in the Dutch colony of New Netherland (later incorporated into New York and New Jersey); as well as Great Britain's colonies, including Nova Scotia. A number of New Amsterdam's families were of Huguenot origin, often having emigrated as refugees to the Netherlands in the previous century. In 1628 the Huguenots established a congregation as L'Église française à la Nouvelle-Amsterdam (the French church in New Amsterdam). This parish continues today as L'Eglise du Saint-Esprit, part of the Episcopal (Anglican) communion, and welcomes Francophone New Yorkers from all over the world. Services are conducted in French for a Francophone parish community, and members of the Huguenot Society of America. The liturgy and doctrines have nothing to do with Huguenot practices and polity, as it is Episcopal in character. Upon their arrival in New Amsterdam, Huguenots were offered land directly across from Manhattan on Long Island for a permanent settlement and chose the harbor at the end of Newtown Creek, becoming the first Europeans to live in Brooklyn, then known as Boschwick, and today the neighborhood known as Bushwick.
Jean Hasbrouck House (1721) on Huguenot Street in New Paltz, New York

Huguenot immigrants founded New Paltz, New York. They built what is now the oldest street in the current United States of America with the original stone houses, which is a National Historic Landmark District. They also founded New Rochelle (named after La Rochelle in France), New York. Louis DuBois, son of Chretien DuBois, was one of the original Huguenot settlers in this area,[42] along with the Daniel Perrin family. In 1692 Huguenots settled on the south shore of Staten Island, New York. The present-day neighbourhood of Huguenot was named for those early settlers. A town near Port Jervis, New York is named Huguenot.

Some Huguenot immigrants settled in Central Pennsylvania. They assimilated with the predominately Pennsylvania German settlers of the area.

In 1700 several hundred French Huguenots migrated from England to the colony of Virginia, where the English Crown had promised them land grants in Lower Norfolk County. When they arrived, colonial authorities offered them instead land 20 miles above the falls of the James River, at the abandoned Monacan village known as Manakin Town, now in Powhatan County. Some settlers landed in present-day Chesterfield County. On 12 May 1705, the Virginia General Assembly passed an act to naturalise the 148 Huguenots still resident at Manakintown. Of the original 390 settlers in the isolated settlement, many had died; others lived outside town on farms in the English style; and others moved to different areas.[43] Gradually they intermarried with their English neighbors. Through the 18th and 19th centuries, descendants of the French migrated west into the Piedmont, and across the Appalachian Mountains into the West of what became Kentucky, Tennessee, Missouri, and other states. In the Manakintown area, the Huguenot Memorial Bridge across the James River and Huguenot Road were named in their honor, as were many local features, including several schools, including Huguenot High School.
French Protestant (Huguenot) Church, downtown Charleston, South Carolina,

In the early years, many Huguenots also settled in the area of present-day Charleston, South Carolina. In 1685, Rev. Elie Prioleau from the town of Pons in France, was among the first to settle there. He became pastor of the first Huguenot church in North America in that city. After the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, several Huguenot families of Norman and Carolingian nobility and descent, including Edmund Bohun of Suffolk England from the Humphrey de Bohun line of French royalty descended from Charlemange, Jean Postell of Dieppe France, Alexander Pepin, Antoine Poitevin of Orsement France, and Jacques de Bordeaux of Grenoble, immigrated to the Charleston Orange district. They were very successful at marriage and property speculation. After petitioning the British Crown in 1697 for the right to own land in the Baronies, they prospered as gentlemen planters on the Goose, Ashpoo, Ashley and Santee River plantations they purchased from the British Landgrave Edmund Bellinger. Some of their descendants moved into the Deep South and Texas, where they developed new plantations. The French Huguenot Church of Charleston, which remains independent, is the oldest continuously active Huguenot congregation in the United States. Founded in 1628, L'Eglise du Saint-Esprit in New York is older, but it left the French Reformed movement in 1804 to become part of the Episcopal Church.

Most of the Huguenot congregations (or individuals) in North America eventually affiliated with other Protestant denominations with more numerous members. The Huguenots adapted quickly and often began to marry outside their immediate French communities fairly rapidly, which led to their assimilation.[44] Their descendants in many families continued to use French first names and surnames for their children well into the nineteenth century, as they tried to keep some connection to their heritage. Assimilated, the French made numerous contributions to United States economic life, especially as merchants and artisans in the late Colonial and early Federal periods. For example, E.I. du Pont, a former student of Lavoisier, established the Eleutherian gunpowder mills, which produced material for the American Revolutionary War.

Paul Revere was descended from Huguenot refugees, as was Henry Laurens, who signed the Articles of Confederation for South Carolina; Jack Jouett, who made the ride from Cuckoo Tavern to warn Thomas Jefferson and others that Tarleton and his men were on their way to arrest him for crimes against the king; Francis Marion, and a number of other leaders of the American Revolution and later statesmen. The last active Huguenot congregation in North America worships in Charleston, South Carolina, at a church that dates from 1844. The Huguenot Society of America maintains Manakin Episcopal Church in Virginia as an historic shrine with occasional services.

Monday, September 11, 2017

17C British Woman by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677)

We have few depictions of women in the 17C British American colonies, but the prints by Wenceslaus Hollar (1607-1677) allow us to see the hairstyles & fashions being worn on the other side of the Atlantic during the early years of the English colonization of America. 
The artist Hollar was born in 1607, the son of an upper middle-class civic official. He left his native Prague at age 20. He was almost blind in one eye but became a skilled artist. His 1st book of etchings was published in 1635, in Cologne, when Hollar was 28. The following year his work caught they eye of English art collector the Earl of Arundel who was visiting the continent. The English Earl convinced Hollar to become a part of his household, settling in England early in 1637. Hollar left London for Antwerp in 1642, where he continued to work on a variety of projects for 10 years.  In 1652, he returned to England, working on a number of large images for the publishers John Ogilby & William Dugdale. Hollar died in London in 1677. By his life's end, he had produced nearly 3000 separate etchings.

Sunday, September 10, 2017

Fleeing to America - Persecution - Irish Protestants by Catholics

Massacre of the Protestant Martyrs at the Bridge over the River Bann in Ireland, 1641. Engraving from Matthew Taylor, England's Bloody Tribunal: Or, Popish Cruelty Displayed ...London: J. Cooke, 1772. Rare Book and Special Collections Division, Library of Congress

Drowning of Irish Protestants by Catholics

This image is a depiction of the murder by Irish Catholics of approximately one hundred Protestants from Loughgall Parish, County Armagh, at the bridge over the River Bann near Portadown, Ulster. This atrocity occurred at the beginning of the Irish Rebellion of 1641. Having held the Protestants as prisoners and tortured them, the Catholics drove them "like hogs" to the bridge, where they were stripped naked and forced into the water below at swordspoint. Survivors of the plunge were shot.

The first British involvement in Ireland began in 1169, when Anglo-Norman troops arrived at Bannow Bay in County Wexford. During the next half millenium, successive English rulers attempted to colonize the island, pitching battles to increase their holdings – moves that sparked periodic rebellions by the Irish.

As the English gradually expanded their reach over the island by the 16th century, religious persecution of Catholic Irish grew – in particular after the accession of Elizabeth I, a Protestant, to the throne in 1558. Oliver Cromwell's subsequent siege of Ireland in 1649 ended with massacres of Catholics at Drogheda and Wexford and forced the resettlement of thousands, many of whom lost their homes in the struggle. By 1691, with the victory of Protestant English King William III over the Catholic forces of James II, Protestant supremacy in Ireland had become complete.

Catholics in Ireland suffered greatly in the subsequent period of British occupation, enduring laws that prevented them from bearing arms, holding public office and restricting their rights to an education. While many of those rights were eventually restored, the animosity between Catholics and Protestants remained..

Saturday, September 9, 2017

17C British Woman by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677)

We have few depictions of women in the 17C British American colonies, but the prints by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) allow us to see the hairstyles & fashions being worn on the other side of the Atlantic during the early years of the English colonization of America. 
Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) Theatrum Mulierum And Aula Veneris

The artist Hollar was born in 1607, the son of an upper middle-class civic official. He left his native Prague at age 20. He was almost blind in one eye but became a skilled artist. His 1st book of etchings was published in 1635, in Cologne, when Hollar was 28. The following year his work caught they eye of English art collector the Earl of Arundel who was visiting the continent. The English Earl convinced Hollar to become a part of his household, settling in England early in 1637. Hollar left London for Antwerp in 1642, where he continued to work on a variety of projects for 10 years.  In 1652, he returned to England, working on a number of large images for the publishers John Ogilby & William Dugdale. Hollar died in London in 1677. By his life's end, he had produced nearly 3000 separate etchings.

Friday, September 8, 2017

Fleeing to America - Persecution - Catholics by Hugenots

Frightful Outrages perpetrated by the Huguenots in France. Engraving from Richard Verstegen, Théâtre des Cruautez des Hérétiques de notre temps Antwerp: Adrien Hubert, 1607.

Persecution of Catholics by Huguenots

Huguenots became known for their harsh criticisms of doctrine and worship in the Catholic Church from which they had broken away. In particular they criticised the sacramental rituals of the Church and what they viewed as an obsession with death and the dead. They believed that the ritual, images, saints, pilgrimages, prayers, and hierarchy of the Catholic Church did not help anyone toward redemption. They saw Christian life as something to be expressed as a life of simple faith in God, relying upon God for salvation, and not upon the Church's sacraments or rituals, while obeying Biblical law.

Like other religious reformers of the time, they felt that the Catholic Church needed radical cleansing of its impurities. They thought the Pope ruled the Church as if it was a worldly kingdom, and was ultimately doomed. Rhetoric like this became fiercer as events unfolded, and eventually stirred up a reaction in the Catholic establishment.

The Catholic Church in France and many of its members opposed the Huguenots. Some Huguenot preachers and congregants were attacked as they attempted to meet for worship. The height of this persecution was the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre when 5,000 to 30,000 were killed, although there were also underlying political reasons for this as well, as some of the Huguenots were nobles trying to establish separate centers of power in southern France. Retaliating against the French Catholics, the Huguenots had their own militia.

In the areas of France they controlled, Huguenots at least matched the harshness of the persecutions of their Catholic opponents. In the above image, Atrocities A, B, and C, depictions that are possibly exaggerated for use as propaganda, are located by the author in St. Macaire, Gascony. In scene A, a priest is disemboweled, his entrails wound up on a stick until they are torn out. In illustration B a priest is buried alive, and in C Catholic children are hacked to pieces. Scene D, alleged to have occurred in the village of Mans, was "too loathsome" for 19C commentator to translate from the French. It shows a priest whose genitalia were cut off and grilled. Forced to eat his roasted private parts, the priest was then dissected by his torturers, so they could observe him digesting his meal.

Thursday, September 7, 2017

17C British Woman by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677)

We have few depictions of women in the 17C British American colonies, but the prints by Wenceslaus Hollar (1607-1677) allow us to see the hairstyles & fashions being worn on the other side of the Atlantic during the early years of the English colonization of America. 
Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) Portrait of a Woman 1642 

The artist Hollar was born in 1607, the son of an upper middle-class civic official. He left his native Prague at age 20. He was almost blind in one eye but became a skilled artist. His 1st book of etchings was published in 1635, in Cologne, when Hollar was 28. The following year his work caught they eye of English art collector the Earl of Arundel who was visiting the continent. The English Earl convinced Hollar to become a part of his household, settling in England early in 1637. Hollar left London for Antwerp in 1642, where he continued to work on a variety of projects for 10 years.  In 1652, he returned to England, working on a number of large images for the publishers John Ogilby & William Dugdale. Hollar died in London in 1677. By his life's end, he had produced nearly 3000 separate etchings.

Wednesday, September 6, 2017

Fleeing to America - Persecution - German Dunkers, New Baptists, Brethern

The first group of Germans to settle in Pennsylvania arrived in Philadelphia in 1683 from Krefeld, Germany, and included Mennonites and possibly some Dutch Quakers. During the early years of German emigration to Pennsylvania, most of the emigrants were members of small sects that shared Quaker principles--Mennonites, Dunkers, Schwenkfelders, Moravians, and some German Baptist groups--and were fleeing religious persecution. William Penn and his agents encouraged German and European emigration to Pennsylvania by circulating promotional literature touting the economic advantages of Pennsylvania as well as the religious liberty available there.
'Dunker' Meeting House in Maryland was probably built in the 1750's
The Dunker movement was an offshoot of the German Pietist movement of the late 17th century. The movement began in Germany in 1708 as part of the spiritual awakening called Pietism. In that year a small group led by Alexander Mack (1679 - 1735) baptized one another by immersion, face down, in a flowing stream: this form of Baptism became a distinctive practice. The Neue Täufer, or “New Baptists,” as they initially called themselves, believe in trine baptism, which involves fully immersing someone three times, representing the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. This led to widespread mockery, and the nickname “Dunkers” for adherents to this sect.

Mack and his followers migrated to Pennsylvania from Germany in 1719. Persecuted by the state church in Germany, other Dunkers immigrated to America from 1719 to 1729. Their first church in what is now the United States was organized in 1723. The Dunkers are most numerous in Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Missouri, Nebraska, Kansas, and North Dakota.
German Baptist Meeting House in Pennsylvania

Dunkers were more commonly known as the German Baptist Brethren. The term Brethren identifies several Christian groups of common origin, at an earlier date frequently called "Dunkers," of which the Church of the Brethren is today the largest. The Church of the Brethren is one of the historic "peace churches" in the United States. In doctrine the Brethren adhere to the New Testament and accept no creeds. They hold the Bible to be the inspired and infallible word of God and accept the New Testament as their only rule of faith and practice. They believe in the Trinity, in the divinity of Christ, in the Holy Spirit, and in future rewards and punishments. Faith, repentance, and baptism are held to be the conditions of salvation. In practice the Brethren closely follow the teachings of the Bible and observe the primitive simplicity of the Apostolic church.

At the basis of their belief is a commitment to peace. They enjoin plainness of dress, settle difficulties among themselves without civil law, affirm instead of taking oath, oppose secret societies, and advise against the use of tobacco and the manufacture, sale, and use of intoxicants. As early as 1782 the Brethren prohibited slavery and vehemently denounced the slave trade. A traditional ban on participation in politics has been relaxed somewhat in recent years.The Eucharist is celebrated in the evening, after the serving of a simple common meal. Before this meal the ordinance of foot washing is observed, and afterward the members extend the right hand of fellowship and exchange the kiss of peace. Bishops (or elders), ministers, and deacons are elected by the congregations. Congregations are organized into state districts; both units elect delegates to the annual conference.
Dunker Love Feast 1883

The appearance in Pennsylvania of so many different religious groups made the province resemble "an asylum for banished sects." Beginning in the 1720s significantly larger numbers of German Lutherans and German Reformed arrived in Pennsylvania. Many were motivated by economic considerations.

Tuesday, September 5, 2017

17C British Woman by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677)

Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) Portrait of a Woman 1642 


The artist Hollar was born in 1607, the son of an upper middle-class civic official. He left his native Prague at age 20. He was almost blind in one eye but became a skilled artist. His 1st book of etchings was published in 1635, in Cologne, when Hollar was 28. The following year his work caught they eye of English art collector the Earl of Arundel who was visiting the continent. The English Earl convinced Hollar to become a part of his household, settling in England early in 1637. Hollar left London for Antwerp in 1642, where he continued to work on a variety of projects for 10 years.  In 1652, he returned to England, working on a number of large images for the publishers John Ogilby & William Dugdale. Hollar died in London in 1677. By his life's end, he had produced nearly 3000 separate etchings.

Monday, September 4, 2017

Fleeing to America - Jews & their early settlements

For some decades Jews had flourished in Dutch-held areas of Brazil; but a Portuguese conquest of the area in 1654, confronted them with the prospect of the Inquisition, which had already burned a Brazilian Jew at the stake in 1647.  A shipload of 23 Jewish refugees from Dutch Brazil arrived in New Amsterdam (soon to become New York) in 1654. By the next year, this small community had established religious services in the city.
Luis de Carabajal y Cueva, a Spanish conquistador and converso first set foot in what is now Texas in 1570. The 1st recorded Jewish-born person to arrive on American soil was Joachim Gans in 1584. 

Elias Legarde was a Sephardic Jew who arrived at James City, Virginia, on the Abigail in 1621. According to one historian, Elias was from Languedoc, France and was hired to go to the Colony to teach people how to grow grapes for wine. Elias Legarde was living in Buckroe in Elizabeth City in February of 1624. Elias was employed by Anthonie Bonall. Anthonie Bonall was a French silk maker and vigneron (cultivates vineyards for winemaking), one of the men from Languedoc sent to the colony by John Bonall, keeper of the silkworms of King James I.  In 1628 Elias leased 100 acres on the west side of Harris Creek in Elizabeth City, Virginia. 


Josef Mosse and Rebecca Isaake are documented in Elizabeth City in 1624. John Levy patented 200 acres of land on the main branch of Powell’s Creek, Virginia, around 1648, Albino Lupo who traded with his brother, Amaso de Tores, in London. Two brothers named Silvedo and Manuel Rodriguez are documented to be in Lancaster County, Virginia, around 1650. None of the Jews in Virginia were forced to leave under any conditions.


Solomon Franco, a Sephardic Jew from Holland who is believed to have settled in the city of Boston in the Massachusetts Bay Colonyin 1649. Franco was a scholar & agent for Immanuel Perada, a Dutch merchant. He delivered supplies to Edward Gibbons, a major general in the Massachusetts militia. After a dispute over who should pay Franco (Gibbons or Perada) the Massachusetts General Court ruled on May 6, 1649, that Franco was to be expelled from the colony, and granted him "six shillings per week out of the Treasury for ten weeks, for sustenance, till he can get his passage to Holland."

On July 8, 1654, Jacob Barsimson left Holland and arrived aboard the Peartree on August 22 in the port of New Amsterdam (in lower Manhattan, where Wall Street is today). Barsimson was employed by the Dutch East India Company and had fled the Portuguese.


In September 1654, 23 Jews from the Sephardic community in the Brazil, arrived in New Amsterdam (New York City).  Barsimson is said to have met them at The Battery upon their arrival. This group was made up of 23 Dutch Jews (4 couples, 2 widows, and 13 children). Like Barsimson, they had fled from a former Dutch settlement; the group had emigrated from Pernambuco in Dutch Brazil (now called Recife), after the settlement was conquered by the Portuguese. Fearing the Inquisition, the Jews left Recife. They originally docked in Jamaica and Cuba, but the Spanish did not allow them to remain there. Their ship, Ste. Catherine, went to New Amsterdam instead, settling against the wishes of local merchants and the local Dutch Reformed Church. 

Colonial governor Peter Stuyvesant, upon complaint from his local church groups, attempted to have the Jews expelled. He wrote a letter to the directors of the Dutch West India Company dated September 22, 1654: "The Jews who have arrived would nearly all like to remain here, but learning that they (with their customary usury and deceitful trading with the Christians) were very repugnant to the inferior magistrates, as also to the people having the most affection for you; the Deaconry also fearing that owing to their present indigence they might become a charge in the coming winter, we have, for the benefit of this weak and newly developing place and the land in general, deemed it useful to require them in a friendly way to depart, praying also most seriously in this connection, for ourselves as also for the general community of your worships, that the deceitful race—such hateful enemies and blasphemers of the name of Christ—be not allowed to further infect and trouble this new colony to the detraction of your worships and the dissatisfaction of your worships' most affectionate subjects." 


However, among the directors of the Dutch West India Company included several influential Jews, who interceded on the refugees' behalf. Company officials rebuffed Stuyvesant and ordered him in a letter dated April 26, 1655, to let the Jews remain in New Amsterdam, "provided the poor among them shall not become a burden to the company or to the community, but be supported by their own nation..."We would have liked to effectuate and fulfill your wishes and request that the new territories should no more be allowed to be infected by people of the Jewish nation, for we foresee therefrom the same difficulties which you fear, but after having further weighed and considered the matter, we observe that this would be somewhat unreasonable and unfair, especially because of the considerable loss sustained by this nation, with others, in the taking of Brazil, as also because of the large amount of capital which they still have invested in the shares of this company. Therefore after many deliberations we have finally decided and resolved to apostille [annotate] upon a certain petition presented by said Portuguese Jews that these people may travel and trade to and in New Netherland and live and remain there, provided the poor among them shall not become a burden to the company or to the community, but be supported by their own nation. You will now govern yourself accordingly." 


Upon the capture of the colony by the English in 1664, the rights enjoyed by the Jews were not interfered with, and for twenty years they appear to have lived much as before the British occupation, though with slight increase in their numbers. 
Solomon Pietersen was a merchant from Amsterdam who came to town in 1654. In 1656, Pietersen became the first known American Jew to intermarry with a Christian; though there are no records showing Pietersen formally converted, his daughter Anna was baptized in childhood.

Asser Levy (Van Swellem) is first mentioned in public records in New Amsterdam in 1654 in connection with the group of 23 Jews who arrived as refugees from Brazil. It is likely he preceded their arrival. Levy was the (kosher) butcher for the small Jewish community. He fought for Jewish rights in the Dutch colony and is famous for having secured the right of Jews to be admitted as Burghers and to serve guard duty for the colony.
In New York City, Shearith Israel Congregation is the oldest continuous congregation started in 1687, having their first synagogue erected in 1728, & its current building still houses some of the original pieces of that first.

Jews had previously been barred from settling in English colonies, as they had been banned from all English lands for 400 years. Oliver Cromwell (British Protector from 1649 through 1660, through his son Richard) lifted this prohibition. 


Religious tolerance was also established elsewhere in the colonies; the colony of South Carolina, for example, was originally governed under an elaborate charter drawn up in 1669, by the English philosopher John Locke. This charter granted liberty of conscience to all settlers, expressly mentioning "Jews, heathens, and dissenters."  As a result, Charleston, South Carolina has a particularly long history of Sephardic settlement, which in 1816, numbered over 600, then the largest Jewish population of any city in the United States.


By 1658, Jews had arrived in Newport, Rhode Island, seeking religious liberty. Sephardic Dutch Jews were among the early settlers of Newport (where Touro Synagogue, the country's oldest surviving synagogue building, stands).  Small numbers of Jews continued to come to the British North American colonies, settling mainly in the seaport towns like Savannah, Philadelphia, & Baltimore. By the time of American Revolution, the Jewish population in America was very small, with only 1,000-2000, in a colonial population of about 2.5 million.

Sunday, September 3, 2017

Quakers in America 17C-18C

Hugh Barbour and J. William Frost, The Quakers (1988). History.com  

The Society of Friends, or Quakers, began at the tail end of Europe’s Protestant Reformation in the 17th century. The missionary efforts of the earliest Friends took them to North America, where they became heavily involved in Pennsylvania politics before reversing their views on government participation in the mid-1750s. The Society became the first organization in history to ban slaveholding, and in the 1800s Quakers populated the abolitionist movement in numbers far exceeding their proportion of all Americans. 

Because the Protestant reformers of the 16C attempted to eliminate intermediaries between God and people, the Society of Friends, or Quakers, may be regarded as the fullest expression of the Reformation. Most reformers rejected some sacraments and priestly offices of the Roman Catholic church, but the Quakers omitted them all, including baptism, the Lord’s Supper, and any ordained, paid clergy. Quakers instead relied upon the direction of what they called “Christ within” or the Inner Light. Their worship consisted of waiting in silence until the Inner Light led members to share their religious concerns with the brethren.

To most Protestants, this primary reliance on inward inspiration depreciated the authority of the Bible, the centrality of the historical Jesus and the Atonement, and hierarchy within church, state, and family. The earliest Quakers (in England, 1651-1660) seemed to confirm the worst suspicions of their critics by proselytizing with abandon and adding thousands to their numbers. Then and later, they were persecuted as “ranters” or anarchists. Even within the Society of Friends the significance of the Atonement and the Bible remained an unsettling question, causing schisms, especially in the nineteenth century. But Quakers enjoyed a complementary freedom from biblicism that permitted the Society uniquely to innovate and change radically over the centuries. Quaker abolitionism was one such innovation.

The missionary efforts of the earliest Friends, including founder George Fox, took them to North America where, as in England, they were persecuted. Massachusetts Bay Colony executed four. Quaker colonization of America, however, offered the prospect of a refuge and more. In contrast to other radical offspring of the Reformation, such as the Amish, Quakers believed that government was divinely instituted and virtuous men and women must help make it operate as God intended. No Quaker did more to enlist his brethren into public service than William Penn. In Pennsylvania, a responsive government of virtuous men would encourage peace, justice, charity, spiritual equality, and liberty for the benefit not just of Quakers but also of Native Americans and non-English refugees from Europe. It was to be a “Holy Experiment” and, in its way, as much a “City on a Hill” as New England.

Although the reality fell short of Penn’s utopian hopes, it still succeeded mightily in the opinion of immigrants and posterity. Ambition, envy, and avarice produced thirty years of tumultuous politics in the new province and left Penn convinced that his experiment had failed. But at the same time, Pennsylvania gained a reputation as the “best poor man’s country,” free of feudal elites, established churches, tithes, discriminatory oaths, high taxes, compulsory military service, and war. While Pennsylvania prospered, Quakers prospered more than others. They always composed the majority of the elite merchants of colonial Philadelphia as well as the most prosperous farmers of the eastern counties.

Although at odds with each other politically, Quakers nevertheless dominated the government of Pennsylvania. By 1740 Quaker politicians had become sufficiently anxious about their ever-declining proportion of the population and their more aggressive political enemies that they closed ranks and formed possibly the most formidable Whig political organization in colonial America, the Quaker party.

Ironically, political hegemony and social and economic preeminence raised dissenting voices among Friends, and in the 1750s they determined to reverse the direction the Society had taken since 1682. They believed that Quaker participation in government had brought with it intolerable compromises in such Quaker beliefs as pacifism and that many Friends, especially wealthy ones, had assimilated “worldly” secular behavior. After another generation there would be nothing left of Quakerism but the name, lamented one dissenter. To restore the integrity of the Society, reformers insisted on strict enforcement of all its mores, especially endogamy, and in the violence brought to Pennsylvania by the French and Indian War, they demanded that Quakers resign from public office rather than become bellicose. On the social front they moved quickly against deviancy, expelling more than one in five Friends by 1775, but not until the more intense public crisis of the Revolution did all Friends leave public office and the Holy Experiment completely end.

This sectarian revival in the Society brought with it an outburst of philanthropy and testimonies that have become synonymous with Quakerism. From 1755 to 1776, the Society became the first organization in history to ban slaveholding, and Quakers created abolition societies to promote emancipation. In the next century, Quakers populated the abolitionist movement in numbers far exceeding their proportion of all Americans. Some labored for such gradual solutions as the colonization of freedmen, while more conspicuous Quaker abolitionists espoused immediate emancipation. The latter were critically important to organizations like the American Anti-Slavery Society, the Philadelphia Anti-Slavery Society, and the Female Antislavery Society, and to active resistance such as the “underground railway” in Pennsylvania and the Midwest. Following the example of eighteenth-century abolitionist Anthony Benezet, Friends showed an interest in the education and social progress of blacks. During Reconstruction, American and English Quakers raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for freedmen’s relief and established scores of schools for freedmen.

Penn’s legendary friendship with Native Americans partly underlay Quakers’ renewed pacifism during the French and Indian War and their concurrent departure from government. Thereafter they continued to pursue justice and charity for Native Americans and in the post-Civil War era lobbied and cooperated with the federal government in the administration of Indian affairs in the trans-Mississippi West.

Women Friends shared in all these testimonies and philanthropies. Since the 1650s when Margaret Fell invaluably aided George Fox, whom she later married, women’s role and status in the Society of Friends more closely approached equality with men’s than in any other Christian church. Preaching and ministering to mixed audiences, traveling extensively unaccompanied by men, regulating the lives of fellow Quaker women without men’s assistance (such as in church discipline and marriage arrangements), Quaker women knew a sphere of activity and attained a range of skills that surpassed those of their non-Quaker cohorts. Not surprisingly, historian Mary Maples Dunn found that in nineteenth-century America Quaker women comprised 40 percent of female abolitionists, 19 percent of feminists born before 1830, and 15 percent of suffragists born before 1830.

Although Quakers never returned to public office in any great number after 1776, they never retreated from politics. They believed that out of office, immune to the verdict of the ballot box, they could serve as democracy’s conscience better than ever before.

Although a more regimented Society emerged from the 18C reformation, the Society almost never disciplined a Friend over theology. That tolerance ended in the nineteenth century, however. In 1827 the venerable Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of Friends split into an evangelical group (called the “orthodox”) and a liberal group (called “Hicksite”). In succeeding years, divisions increased, spreading to other areas and yearly meetings of America and also subdividing already fractured meetings. Anxiety over Unitarian theology, languishing membership, industrialization, and the disciplinary powers of meetings, among other things, contributed to the splits. Quaker energies and voices, which had been better focused since the 1750s, became dissipated in intramural recriminations. Quakers continued to practice antislavery, pacifism, and their traditional philanthropies, but not as one body.

17C British Woman by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677)

We have few depictions of women in the 17C British American colonies, but the prints by Wenceslaus Hollar (1607-1677) allow us to see the hairstyles & fashions being worn on the other side of the Atlantic during the early years of the English colonization of America. 
Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) Portrait of a Woman 1642 


Saturday, September 2, 2017

Fleeing to America - Persecution - Quakers from England

Early Quaker Meeting where men & women + dogs & cats are not separated. 
The Quakers (or Religious Society of Friends) formed in England in 1652 around a charismatic leader, George Fox (1624-1691).
George Fox (1624-1691) wrote a letter of caution "To Friends beyond sea, that have Blacks and Indian slaves" in 1657. In 1671 he visited Barbados and urged Friends to treat their slaves better; his preaching in Barbados was subsequently published in London in 1676 as "Gospel Family-Order." This provided the beginnings of Quaker opposition to slavery. Following Fox, other Quakers became concerned over the treatment of slaves & formed the first abolition committee. Quakers remained instrumental in the anti-slavery campaign.
1700s English woodcut of a Quaker. Many scholars today consider Quakers as radical Puritans, because the Quakers carried to extremes many Puritan convictions. They stretched the sober deportment of the Puritans into a glorification of "plainness."
Quaker Meeting
Theologically, they expanded the Puritan concept of a church of individuals regenerated by the Holy Spirit to the idea of the indwelling of the Spirit or the "Light of Christ" in every person. Such teaching struck many of the Quakers' contemporaries as dangerous heresy. Quakers were severely persecuted in England for daring to deviate so far from orthodox Christianity.
Gracechurch Street Meeting, London ca.1779.
By 1680, 10,000 Quakers had been imprisoned in England, and 243 had died of torture and mistreatment in the King's jails. This reign of terror impelled Friends to seek refuge in New Jersey in the 1670s, where they soon became well entrenched.
English punishment 1656-Quaker whipped behind wagon
When Quaker leader William Penn (1644-1718) parlayed a 1681 debt owed by Charles II to his father into a charter for the province of Pennsylvania, many more Quakers were prepared to grasp the opportunity to live in a land where they might worship freely.
Quaker Synod
By 1685, as many as 8,000 Quakers had come to Pennsylvania. Although the Quakers may have resembled the Puritans in some religious beliefs and practices, they differed with them over the necessity of compelling religious uniformity in society.
Penn’s Treaty by the Pennsylvania Quaker folk artist Edward Hicks (1780–1849)
"One Almighty and eternal God . . . shall in no wayes be molested or prejudiced for their Religious Perswasion or Practice in matters of Faith and Worship, nor shall they be compelled at any time to frequent or maintain any Religious Worship, Place or Ministry whatever."
Quaker Meeting
Pennsylvania became a reference point a century later for Americans opposing plans for government-supported religion. "Witness the state of Pennsylvania," a group of Virginians urged its House of Delegates in 1785, "wherein no such [religious] Establishment hath taken place; their Government stands firm and which of the neighbouring States has Members of brighter Morals and more upright Characters."

Friday, September 1, 2017

17C British Woman by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677)

Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) Portrait of a Woman 1642

We have few depictions of women in the 17C British American colonies, but the prints by Wenceslaus Hollar (1607-1677) allow us to see the hairstyles & fashions being worn on the other side of the Atlantic during the early years of the English colonization of America.

Thursday, August 31, 2017

The Dangerous Quaker Lady Deborah Moody - Only Women to Found a Colony on the Atlantic Coast

Lady Deborah Moody (1586-1659), founder of a colony on Long Island, was born at Avebury in Wiltshire County, England. Her parents, Walter Dunch and Deborah, daughter of James Pilkington, Bishop of Durham, who had been a radical Protestant in the time of Queen Elizabeth, were married on July 27, 1581, and had four daughters and one son. Dunch died in 1594, leaving arrangements for the dowries of the four girls.

Deborah, the eldest, was married to Henry Moody of the manor of Garesdon in Wiltshire on Jan. 20, 1605/06. Her husband was knighted on March 18, 1606,, and made a baronet by James I on March 11, 1621/22. He served in Parliament in 1625, 1626, and from 1628 until his death on April 23, 1629.

Lady Deborah then moved to London, but having overstayed her permit to remain away from home she was in 1635, ordered by the Court of the Star Chamber to return to Garesdon. Her family had a long tradition of devotion to civil liberties, and this order, together with her Nonconformist religious views, made her determined to leave England. Although in her mid-fifties, she sailed for Massachusetts in 1639.

Lady Moore, as she was called in America, first settled in the later town of Lynn, then part of Saugus, and was granted four hundred acres of land by the Massachusetts General Court. In 1641, she purchased a large farm called Swampscott on the Essex County coast; she was “almost undone” by the price she paid.

As early as April 1640 she was a member of the church in neighboring Salem, where she later built a house. But her church, though Nonconformist, failed to give her freedom of conscience. Attracted to Anabaptism, as were others in her community, she clung to her unorthodox views.

In July 1643, John Winthrop, Governor of Massachusetts Bay Colony, wrote of the dangerous widow Deborah Dunch Moody in his journal  (Journal, II, 126) "The Lady Moody, a wise and anciently religious woman, being taken with error of denying baptism to infants, was dealt withal by many of the elders and others, and admonished by the Church of Salem (where she was a member), but persisting still, and to avoid further trouble, etc., she removed to the Dutch against the advice of her friends. Many others, infected with Anabaptism, removed thither also. She was after excommunicated. With the exception of her troubling the church with her religious opinions, she appears to have been a lady of great worth."

Deputy-Governor John Endecott wrote of Deborah Moody in a letter to Governor Winthrop, "Shee is a dangerous woeman."

As a believer in Anabaptism, a sect that rebelled against baptism of infants because a child cannot commit to religious faith, she was admonished in 1643, by the Puritan leaders for failing to conform to their religious beliefs. Many others with the same religious beliefs banded with her.

In 1643, she led a group of religious dissenters fleeing Puritan persecution to the Dutch colony of New Netherland. The Dutch directed her to Gravesend, on the southwest corner of Long Island, and here she brought her followers.

Today the area is part of Brooklyn in New York City, with the original town square still evident in the street layout. The people from Gravesend were granted religious freedom, unusual for that period.  Hers was the first English settlement in what is now Kings County (Brooklyn) and the first colonial enterprise to be headed by a woman.

Shortly after her arrival, an Indian uprising forced Lady Moody and her group to take refuge with the Dutch. She thought then of returning to Massachusetts, but received little encouragement; John Endecott in 1644 advised Gov. John Winthrop that she should be permitted to resettle thee only if “shee will acknowledge her euill in opposing the Churches, and leave her opinions behinde her, For shee is a dangerous woeman” (Winthrop Papers, IV, 456).


Anabaptists were definitely not welcome in Puritan New England, and Lady Moody had been fined, excommunicated from the First Church of Salem and eventually evicted from the colony altogether. Dutch New Netherland, famously tolerant in matters of religion, beckoned, and in 1645 she became the first female founder of a settlement in the Americas, receiving over 7000 acres encompassing present-day Gravesend in Brooklyn and Coney Island.

The Gravesend settlement received a Dutch patent on Dec. 19, 1645, granting freedom of worship and self-government. Under Lady Moody’s guidance the colonists made a notable beginning: a plan for a growing town was drawn; town meetings were instituted; the Indians were paid for their lands; liquor was not to be sold to the Indians; habitable dwellings were required of all settlers.

In the years that followed, Lady Moody, the only woman of rank to settle in New Netherland, enjoyed the confidence and respect of the Dutch director generals Williams Kieft and Petrus Stuyvesant .

When in 1654 popular discontent arose over Stuyvesant’s removal of two Gravesend magistrates accused of pro-English activities, the Director General visited the settlement and held a meeting with the colonists at Lady Moody’s house to settle the differences.

With the arrival of Quaker missionaries in New Netherland in 1657, three of the group went over to Long Island, where they began their ministry with a meeting in Lady Moody’s home. According to the Dutch historian Gerard Croese, writing in 1695, she and many of her followers were convinced at this time and “turned Quaker.” Though later authorities have questioned her conversion, it is likely that Lady Moody would have been attracted to the place of equality given to women in the new religious movement.

Her home contained what was probably the largest library in the Dutch province, and she had undoubtedly studied religious writings for a truth she could accept. In any event, Quakers visiting Gravesend in 1658 found that the message had taken root, and the settlement soon became a center of Quakerism on Long Island. This “wise and anciently religious woman,” as Governor Winthrop wrote of her, died between November 1658 and May 1659.

There is no indication that she had more than one child. Her son, Henry, who inherited his father’s title in 1629, was one of the signers of the Gravesend patent and was certainly with his mother during some of the twenty years she spent in America. After her death, he went to Virginia as ambassador from New Netherland; he died there, unmarried, in 1661.

Much of the information in this posting is from Notable American Women edited by Edward T James, Janet Wilson James, Paul S Boyer, The Belknap Press of Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. 1971

Wednesday, August 30, 2017

17C British Woman by Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677)

Wenceslaus Hollar (European-born English artist, 1607-1677) Portrait of a Woman 1642

We have few depictions of women in the 17C British American colonies, but the prints by Wenceslaus Hollar (1607-1677) allow us to see the hairstyles & fashions being worn on the other side of the Atlantic during the early years of the English colonization of America. 

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

Over There - Puritans & The Divine Right of Kings

"A Trew Law of Free Monarchs"
 James I Stuart 
 The "Divine Right of Kings."

James I. (1566-1625) King of Scotland (as James VI., 1567-1625) First Stuart King of England (as James I., 1603-1625)

This oppressive political theory contributed to the exodus of the Puritans to America in 1630, and resistance to it was the ultimate goal of three revolutions: 1) the Puritan Revolution of the 1640s, 2) the Glorious Revolution, and 3) the American Revolution.

THE TREW LAW OF FREE MONARCHIES: or The Reciprock and mutuall duetie betwixt a free King and his naturall Subiects.


AS there is not a thing so necessarie to be knowne by the people of any land, next the knowledge of their God, as the right knowledge of their alleageance, according to the forme of gouernement established among them, especially in a Monarchic (which forme of government, as resembling the Diuinitie, approcheth nearest to perfection, as allthe learned and wise men from the beginning haue agreed vpon; Vnitie being the perfection of all things,) So hath the ignorance, and (which is worse) the seduced opinion of the multitude blinded by them, who thinke themselues able to teach and instruct the ignorants, procured the wracke and overthrow of sundry flourishing Common wealths; and heaped heauy calamities, threatning vtter destruction vpon others. And the smiling successe, that vnlawfull rebellions haue oftentimes had against Princes in sages past (such hath bene the misery, and iniquitie of the time) hath by way of practice strengthened many in their errour: albeit there cannot be a more deceiueable argument; then to judge ay the iustnesse of the cause by the euent thereof; as hereafter shalbe proued more at length. And among others, no Commonwealth, that euer hath bene since the beginning, hath had greater need of the trew knowledge of this ground, then this our so long disordered, and distracted Common-wealth hath: the misknowledge hereof being the onely spring, from whence haue flowed so many endlesse calamities, miseries, and confusions, as is better felt by many, then the cause thereof well knowne, and deepely considered. The naturall zeale therefore, that I beare to this my natiue countrie, with the great pittie I haue to see the so-long disturbance thereof for lacke of the trew knowledge of this ground (as I haue said before) hath compelled me at last to breake silence, to discharge my conscience to you my deare country men herein, that knowing the ground from whence these your many endlesse troubles haue proceeded, as well as ye haue already too-long tasted the bitter fruites thereof, ye may by knowledge, and eschewing of the cause escape, and diuert the lamentable effects that euer necessarily follow there upon. I haue chosen then onely to set downe in this short Treatise, the trew grounds of the mutuall duetie, and alleageance betwixt a free and absolute Monarche, and his people; not to trouble your patience with answering the contrary propositions, which some haue not bene ashamed to set downe in writ, to the poysoning of infinite number of simple soules, and their owne perpetuall, and well deserued infamie: For by answering them, I could not haue eschewed whiles to pick, and byte wel saltly their persons; which would rather haue bred contentiousnesse among the readers (as they had liked or misliked) then sound instruction of the trewth: Which I protest to him that is the searcher of all hearts, is the onely marke that I shoot at herein.


First then, I will set downe the trew grounds, whereupon I am to build, out of the Scriptures, since Monarchie is the trew paterne of Diuinitie, as I haue already said: next, from the fundamental Lawes of our owne Kingdome, which nearest must concerne vs: thirdly, from the law of Nature, by diuers similitudes drawne out of the same: and will conclude syne by answering the most weighty and appearing incommodities that can be obiected.


The Princes duetie to his Subiects is so clearely set downe in many places of the Scriptures, and so openly confessed by all the good Princes, according to their oath in their Coronation, as not needing to be long therein, I shall as shortly as I can runne through it.


Kings are called Gods by the prophetical King Dauid, because they sit vpon GOD his Throne in the earth, and haue the count of their administration to giue vnto him. Their office is, To minister Iustice and Iudgement to the people, as the same Dauid saith: To aduance thegood, ar~d punish the euill, as he likewise saith: To establish good Lawes to his people, and procure obedience to the same as diuers good Kings of Iudah did: To procure the peace of the people, as the same Dauid saith: To decide all controuersies that can arise among them, as Salomon did: To be the Minister of God for the weale of them that doe well, and as the minister of God, to take vengeance vpon them that doe evill, as S. Paul saith. And finally, As a good Pastour, to goe out and in before his people as is said in the first of Samuel: That through the Princes prosperitie, the peoples peace may be procured, as Ieremie saith.


And therefore in the Coronation of our owne Kings, as well as of euery Christian Monarche, they giue their Oath, first to maintaine the Religion presently professed within their countrie, according to their lawes, whereby it is established, and to punish all those that should presse to alter, or disturbe the profession thereof; And next to maintaine all the lowable and good Lawes made by their predecessours: to see them put in execution, and the breakers and violaters thereof, to be punished, according to the tenour of the same: And lastly, to maintaine the whole countrey, and euery state therein, in all their ancient Priuiledges and Liberties, as well against all forreine enemies, as among themselues: And shortly to procure the weale and flourishing of his people, not onely in maintaining and putting to execution the olde lowable lawes of the countrey, and by establishing of new (as necessitie and euill maners will require) but by all other meanes possible to fore-see and preuent all dangers, that are likely to fall vpon them, and to maintaine concord, wealth, and ciuilitie among them, as a louing Father, and careful watchman, caring for them more then for himselfe, knowing himselfe to be ordained for them, and they not for him; and therefore countable to that great God, who placed him as his lieutenant ouer them, vpon the perill of his soule to procure the weale of both soules and bodies, as farre as in him lieth, of all them that are committed to his charge. And this oath in the Coronation is the clearest, ciuill, and fundamentall Law, whereby the Kings office is properly defined.


By the Law of Nature the King becomes a naturall Father to all his Lieges at his Coronation: And as the Father of his fatherly duty is bound to care for the nourishing, education, and vertuous gouernment of his children; euen so is the king bound to care for all his subiects. As all the toile and paine that the father can take for his children, will be thought light and well bestowed by him, so that the effect thereof redound to their profite and weale; so ought the Prince to doe towards his people. As the kindly father ought to foresee all inconuenients and dangers that may arise towards his children, and though with the hazard of his owne person presse to preuent the same; so ought the King towards his people. As the fathers wrath and correction vpon any of his children that offendeth, ought to be by a fatherly chastisement seasoned with pitie, as long as there is any hope of amendment in them; so ought the King towards any of his Lieges that offend in that measure. And shortly, as the Fathers chiefe ioy ought to be in procuring his childrens welfare, reioycing at their weale, sorrowing and pitying at their euill, to hazard for their safetie, trauellfor their rest, wake for their sleepe; and in a word, to thinke that his earthly felicitie and life standeth and liueth more in them, nor in himselfe; so ought a good Prince thinke of his people.


As to the other branch of this mutuall and reciprock band, is the duety and alleageance that the Lieges owe to their King: the ground whereof, I take out of the words of Samuel, cited by Gods Spirit, when God had giuen him commandement to heare the peoples voice in choosing and annointing them a King. And because that place of Scripture being well understood, is so pertinent for our purpose, I haue insert herein the very words of the Text.


9 Now therefore hearken to their voice: howbeit yet testifie unto them, and shew them the maner of the King, that shall raigne ouer them.
10 So Samuel tolde all the wordes of the Lord vnto the people that asked a King of him.
11 And he said, This shall be the maner of the King that shall raigne ouer you: he will take your sonnes, and appoint them to his Charets, and to be his horsemen, and some shall runne before his Charet.
12 Also, hee will make them his captaines ouer thousands, and captaines ouer fifties and to eare his ground, and to reape his haruest, and to make instruments of warre and the things that serue for his charets:
13 Hee will also take your daughters, and make them Apothicaries, and Cookes, and Bakers.
14 And hee will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your best Olive hees, and give them to his servants.
15 And he rvill take the tenth of your seed, and of your Vineyards, and give it to his Eunuches, and to his servants.
16 And he will take your men-seruants, and your maid-seruants, and the chief of your yong men, and your asses, and put them to his worke.
17 He wil take the tenth of your sheepe: and ye shall be his servants.
18 And ye shall cry out at that day, because of your King, whom ye haue chosen you: and the Lord God will not heare you at that day.
19 But the people would not heare the voice of Samuel, but did say: Nay, but there shalbe a King ouer vs.
20 And we also will be like all other Nations, and our King shall iudge vs. and goe out before vs. and fight our battels.


That these words, and discourses of Samuel were dited by Gods Spirit, it needs no further probation, but that it is a place of Scripture; since the whole Scripture is dited by that inspiration, as Paul saith: which ground no good Christian will, or dare denie. Whereupon it must necessarily follow, that these speeches proceeded not from any ambition in Samuel, as one loath to quite the reines that he so long had ruled, and therefore desirous, by making odious the government of a King, to disswade the people from their farther importunate crauing of one: For, as the text proueth it plainly, he then conueened them to giue them a resolute grant of their demand, as God by his owne mouth commanded him, saying,


Hearken to the voice of the people.


And to presse to disswade them from that, which he then came to grant vnto them, were a thing very impertinent in a wise man; much more in the Prophet of the most high God. And likewise, it well appeared in all the course of his life after, that his so long refusing of their sute before came not of any ambition in him: which he well proued in praying, & as it were importuning God for the weale of Saul. Yea, after God had declared his reprobation vnto him, yet he desisted not, while God himselfe was wrath at his praying, and discharged his fathers suit in that errand. And that these words of Samuel were not vttered as a prophecie of Saul their first Kings defection, it well appeareth, as well because we heare no mention made in the Scripture of any his tyrannic and oppression, (which, if it had beene, would not haue been left unpainted out therein, as well as his other faults were, as in a trew mirrour of all the Kings behauiours, whom it describeth) as likewise in respect that Saul was chosen by God for his vertue, and meet qualities to gouerne his people: whereas his defection sprung after-hand from the corruption of his owne nature, & not through any default in God, whom they that thinke so, would make as a step-father to his people, in making wilfully a chaise of the vnmeetest for governing them, since the election of that King lay absolutely and immediatly in Gods hand. But by the contrary it is plaine, and euident, that this speech of Samuel to the people, was to prepare their hearts before the hand to the due obedience of that King, which God was to giue vnto them; and therefore opened vp vnto them, what might be the intollerable qualities that might fall in some of their kings, thereby preparing them to patience, not to resist to Gods ordinance: but as he would haue said; Since God hath granted your importunate suit in giuing you a king, as yeehaue else committed an errour in shaking off Gods yoke, and ouer-hastie seeking of a King; so beware yee fall not into the next, in casting off also rashly that yoke, which God at your earnest suite hath laid vpon you, how hard that euer it seeme to be: For as ye could not haue obtained one without the permission and ordinance of God, so may yee no more, for hee be once set ouer you, shake him off without the same warrant. And therefore in time arme your selues with patience and humilitie, since he that hath the only power to make him, hath the onely power to vnmake him; and ye onely to obey, bearing with these straits that I now foreshow you, as with the finger of God, which lieth not in you to take off.


And will ye consider the very wordes of the text in order, as they are set downe, it shall plainely declare the obedience that the people owe to their King in all respects.


First, God commandeth Samuel to doe two things: the one, to grant the people their suit in giuing them a king; the other, to forewarne them, what some kings will doe vnto them, that they may not thereafter in their grudging and murmuring say, when they shal feele the snares here fore-spoken; We would neuer haue had a king of God, in case when we craued him, hee had let vs know how wee would haue beene vsed by him, as now we finde but ouer-late. And this is meant by these words:


Now therefore hearken vnto their voice: howbeit yet testifie vnto them, and shew them the maner of the King that shall rule otter them.


And next, Samuel in execution of this commandement of God, hee likewise doeth two things.


First, hee declares vnto them, what points of justice and equitie their king will breake in his behauiour vnto them: And next he putteth them out of hope, that wearie as they will, they shall not haue leaue to shake off that yoke, which God through their importunitie hath laide vpon them. The points of equitie that the King shall breake vnto them, are expressed in these words:


11 He will take your sonnes, and appoint them to his Charets, and to be his horsemen, and some shall run before his Charet.
12 Also he will make them his captaines ouer thousands, and captaines ouer fillies, and to care his ground, and to reape his haruest, and to make instruments of warre, and the things that serue for his charets.
13 He will also take your daughters, and make them Apothecaries, and Cookes, and Bakers.


The points of Justice, that hee shall breake vnto them, are expressed in these wordes:


14 Hee will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your best Olive hees, and give them to his servants.
15 And he will take the tenth of your seede, and of your vineyards, and give it to his Eunuches and to his servants: and also the tenth of your sheepe.


As if he would say; The best and noblest of your blood shall be compelled in slauish and seruile offices to serue him: And not content of his owne patrimonie, will make vp a rent to his owne vse out of your best lands, vineyards, orchards, and store of cattell: So as inuerting the Law of nature, and office of a King, your persons and the persons of your posteritie, together with your lands, and all that ye possesse shal serue his priuate vse, and inordinate appetite.


And as vnto the next point (which is his fore-warning them, that, weary as they will, they shall not haue leaue to shake off the yoke, which God thorow their importunity hath laid vpon them) it is expressed in these words:


18 And yee shall crie out at that day, because of your King whom yee haue chosen you: and the Lord will not heare you at that day.


As he would say; When ye shall finde these things in proofe that now I fore-warne you of, although you shall grudge and murmure, yet it shal not be lawful to you to cast it off, in respect it is not only the ordinance of God, but also your selues haue chosen him vnto you, thereby renouncing for euer all priuiledges, by your willing consent out of your hands, whereby in any time hereafter ye would claime, and call backe vnto your selues againe that power, which God shall not permit you to doe. And for further taking away of all excuse, and retraction of this their contract, after their consent to vnder-lie this yoke with all the burthens that hee hath declared vnto them, he cranes their answere, and consent to his proposition: which appeareth by their answere, as it is expressed in these words:


19 Nay, but there shall be a King otter vs.
20 And we also will be like all other nations: and our king shall iudge vs. and goe out before vs and fight our battels.


As if they would haue said; All your speeches and hard conditions shall not skarre vs. but we will take the good and euill of it vpon vs. and we will be content to beare whatsoever burthen it shal please our King to lay vpon vs. aswell as other nations doe. And for the good we will get of him in fighting our battels, we will more patiently beare any burthen that shall please him to lay on vs.


Now then, since the erection of this Kingdome and Monarchic among the Iewes, and the law thereof may, and ought to bee a paterne to all Christian and well founded Monarchies, as beeing founded by God himselfe, who by his Oracle, and out of his owne mouth gaue the law thereof: what liberty can broiling spirits, and rebellious minds claime justly to against any Christian Monarchic; since they can claime to no greater libertie on their part, nor the people of God might haue done, and no greater tyranny was euer executed by any Prince or tyrant, whom they can object, nor was here fore-warned to the people of God, (and yet all rebellion countermanded vnto them) if tyrannizing ouer mens persons, sonnes, daughters and servants; redacting noble houses, and men, and women of noble blood, to slauish and seruile offices; and extortion, and spoile of their lands and goods to the princes owne priuate vse and commoditie, and of his courteours, and seruants, may be called a tyrannic? ...



And the agreement of the Law of nature in this our ground with the Lawes and constitutions of God, and man, already alledged, will by two similitudes easily appeare. The King towards his people is rightly compared to a father of children, and to a head of a body composed of diners members: For as fathers, the good Princes, and Magistrates of the people of God acknowledged themselues to their subjects. And for all other well ruled Common-wealths, the stile of Pater patriae was euer, and is commonly vsed to Kings. And the proper office of a King towards his Subiects, agrees very wel with the office of the head towards the body, and all members thereof: For from the head, being the seate of Iudgement, proceedeth the care and foresight of guiding, and preventing all euill that may come to the body or any part thereof. The head cares for the body, so doeth the King for his people. As the discourse and direction flowes from the head, and the execution according "hereunto belongs to the rest of the members, euery one according to their office: so is it betwixt a wise Prince, and his people. As the lodgement comming from the head may not onely imploy the members, euery one in their owne office as long as they are able for it; but likewise in case any of them be affected with any infirmitie must care and prouide for their remedy, in-case it be curable, and if otherwise, gar cut them off for feare of infecting of the rest: euen so is it betwixt the Prince, and his people. And as there is euer hope of curing any diseased member by the direction of the head, as long as it is whole; but by the contrary, if it be troubled, all the members are partakers of that Paine, so is it betwixt the Prince and his people.


And now first for the fathers part (whose naturall loue to his children I described in the first part of this my discourse, speaking of the dutie that Kings owe to their Subiects) consider, I pray you what duetie his children owe to him, & whether vpon any pretext whatsoeuer, it wil not be thought monstrous and vnnaturall to his sons, to rise vp against him, to control him at their appetite, and when they thinke good to sley him, or cut him off, and adopt to themselues any other they please in his roome: Or can any presence of wickednes or rigor on his part be a iust excuse for his children to put hand into him? And although wee see by the course of nature, that loue vseth to descend more then to ascend, in case it were trew, that the father hated and wronged the children neuer so much, will any man, endued with the least sponke of reason, thinke it lawfull for them to meet him with the line? Yea, suppose the father were furiously following his sonnes with a drawen sword, is it lawfull for them to turne and strike againe, or make any resistance but by flight? I thinke surely, if there were no more but the example of bruit beasts & unreasonable creatures, it may serue well enough to qualifie and proue this my argument. We reade often the pietie that the Storkes haue to their olde and decayed parents: And generally wee know, that there are many sorts of beasts and fowles, that with violence and many bloody strokes will beat and banish their yong ones from them, how soone they perceive them to be able to fend themselves; but wee neuer read or heard of any resistance on their part, except among the vipers; which prooues such persons, as ought to be reasonable creatures, and yet unnaturally follow this example, to be endued with their viperous nature.


And for the similitude of the head and the body, it may very well fall out that the head will be forced to garre cut off some rotten member (as I haue already said) to keepe the rest of the body in integritie: but what state the body can be in, if the head, for any infirmitie that can fall to it, be cut off, I leaue it to the readers iudgement.


So as (to conclude this part) if the children may vpon any pretext that can be imagined, lawfully rise vp against their Father, cut him off, & choose any other whom they please in his roome; and if the body for the weale of it, may for any infirmitie that can be in the head, strike it off, then I cannot deny that the people may rebell, controll, and displace, or cut off their king at their owne pleasure, and vpon respects moouing them. And whether these similitudes represent better the office of a King, or the offices of Masters or Deacons of crafts, or Doctors in Physicke (which iolly comparisons are vsed by such writers as maintaine the contrary proposition) I leaue it also to the readers discretion.


And in case any doubts might arise in any part of this treatise, I wil (according to my promise) with the solution of foure principall and most weightie doubts, that the adversaries may object, conclude this discourse. And first it is casten vp by diners, that employ their pennes vpon Apologies for rebellions and treasons, that euery man is borne to carry such a naturall zeale and duety to his commonwealth, as to his mother; that seeing it so rent and deadly wounded, as whiles it will be by wicked and tyrannous Kings, good Citizens will be forced, for the naturall zeale and duety they owe to their owne natiue countrey, to put their hand to worke for freeing their common-wealth from such a pest.


Whereunto I giue two answeres: First, it is a sure Axiome in Theologie, that euill should not be done, that good may come of it: The wickednesse therefore of the King can neuer make them that are ordained to be judged by him, to become his Iudges. And if it be not lawfull to a priuate man to reuenge his priuate injury vpon his priuate aduersary (since God hath onely giuen the sword to the Magistrate) how much lesse is it lawfull to the people, or any part of them (who all are but priuate men, the authoritie being alwayes with the Magistrate, as I haue already proued) to take vpon them the vse of the sword, whom to it belongs not, against the publicke Magistrate, whom to onely it belongeth.


Next, in place of relieving the common-wealth out of distresse (which is their onely excuse and colour) they shall heape double distresse and desolation vpon it; and so their rebellion shall procure the contrary effects that they pretend it for: For a king cannot be imagined to be so vnruly and tyrannous, but the common-wealth will be kept in better order, notwithstanding thereof, by him, then it can be by his way-taking. ...


And next, it is certaine that a king can neuer be so monstrously vicious, but hee will generally fauour justice, and maintaine some order, except in the particulars, wherein his inordinate lustes and passions cary him away; where by the contrary, no King being, nothing is vnlawfull to none: And so the olde opinion ofthe Philosophers prooues trew, That better it is to line in a Common-wealth, where nothing is lawfull, then where all things are lawfull to all men; the Common-wealth at that time resembling an vndanted young horse that hath casten his rider: For as the diuine Poet Dv BARTAS sayth, Better it were to stiffer some disorder in the estate, arid some spots in the Commor' wealth, then in pretending to reforme, vtterly to overthrow the Republicke.


The second objection they ground vpon the curse that hangs ouer the common-wealth, where a wicked king reigneth: and, say they, there cannot be a more acceptable deed in the sight of God, nor more dutiful to their common-weale, then to free the countrey of such a curse, and vindicate to them their libertie, which is naturall to all creatures to crane.


Whereunto for answere, I grant indeed, that a wicked king is sent by God for a curse to his people, and a plague for their sinnes: but that it is lawfull to them to shake off that curse at their owne hand, which God hath laid on them, that I deny, and may so do justly. Will any deny that the king of Babel was a curse to the people of God, as was plainly fore-spoken and threatned vnto them in the prophecie of their captiuitie? And what was Nero to the Christian Church in his time? And yet Ieremy and Paul (as yee haue else heard) commanded them not onely to obey them, but heartily to pray for their welfare.


It is certaine then (as I haue already by the Law of God sufficiently proued) that patience, earnest prayers to God, and amendment of their lines, are the onely lawful meanes to moue God to relieue them of that heauie curse. As for vindicating to themselues their owne libertie, what lawfull power haue they to reuoke to themselues againe those priuiledges, which by their owne consent before were so fully put out of their hands? for if a Prince cannot justly bring backe againe to himself the priuiledges once bestowed by him or his predecessors vpon any state or ranke of his subjects; how much lesse may the subjects reaue out of the princes hand that superioritie, which he and his Predecessors haue so long brooked ouer them?


But the vnhappy iniquitie of the time, which hath oft times giuen ouer good successe to their treasonable attempts, furnisheth them the ground of their third objection: For, say they, the fortunate successe that God hath so oft giuen to such enterprises, prooueth plainely by the practice, that God fauoured the iustnesse of their quarrell.


To the which I answere, that it is trew indeed, that all the successe of battels, as well as other worldly things, lyeeth onely in Gods hand: And therefore it is that in the Scripture he takes to himselfe the style of God of Hosts. But vpon that generall to conclude, that hee euer giues victory to the iust quarrell, would prooue the Philistins, and diuers other neighbour enemies of the people of God to haue oft times had the iust quarrel against the people of God, in respect of the many victories they obtained against them. And by that same argument they had also iust quarrell against the Arke of God: For they wan it in the field, and kept it long prisoner in their countrey. As likewise by all good Writers, as well Theologues, as other, the Duels and singular combats are disallowed; which are onely made vpon presence, that GOD will kith thereby the justice of the quarrell: For wee must consider that the innocent partie is not innocent before God: And therefore God will make oft times them that haue the wrong side reuenge justly his quarrell; and when he hath done, cast his scourge in the fire; as he oft times did to his owne people, stirring vp and strengthening their enemies, while they were humbled in his sight, and then deliuered them in their hands. So God, as the great Iudge may justly punish his Deputie, and for his rebellion against him, stir vp his rebels to meet him with the like: And when it is done, the part of the instrument is no better then the diuels part is in tempting and torturing such as God committeth to him as his hangman to doe: Therefore, as I said in the beginning, it is oft times a very deceiueable argument, to iudge of the cause by the euent.


And the last objection is grounded vpon the mutuall paction and adstipulation (as they call it) betwixt the King and his people, at the time of his coronation: For there, say they, there is a mutuall paction, and contract bound vp, and sworne betwixt the king, and the people: Whereupon it followeth, that if the one part of the contract or the Indent bee broken vpon the Kings side, the people are no longer bound to keepe their part of it, but are thereby freed of their oath: For (say they) a contract betwixt two parties, of all Law frees the one partie, if the other breake vnto him.


As to this contract alledged made at the coronation of a King, although I deny any such contract to bee made then, especially containing such a clause irritant as they alledge; yet I confesse, that a king at his coronation, or at the entry to his kingdome, willingly promiseth to his people, to discharge honorably and trewly the office giuen him by God ouer them: But presuming that thereafter he breake his promise vnto them neuer so inexcusable; the question is, who should bee iudge of the breake, giuing vnto them, this contract were made vnto them neuer so sicker, according to their alleageance. I thinke no man that hath but the smallest entrance into the ciuill Law, will doubt that of all Law, either ciuil or municipal of any nation, a contract cannot be thought broken by the one partie, and so the other likewise to be freed therefro, except that first a lawfull triall and cognition be had by the ordinary Iudge of the breakers thereof: Or else euery man may be both party and Iudge in his owne cause; which is absurd once to be thought. Now in this contract (I say) betwixt the king and his people, God is doubtles the only Iudge, both because to him onely the king must make count of his administration (as is oft said before) as likewise by the oath in the coronation, God is made iudge and reuenger of the breakers: For in his presence, as only iudge of oaths, all oaths ought to be made. Then since God is the onely Iudge betwixt the two parties contractors, the cognition and reuenge must onely appertaine to him: It followes therefore of necessitie, that God must first giue sentence vpon the King that breaketh, before the people can thinke themselues freed of their oath. What justice then is it, that the partie shall be both iudge and partie, vsurping vpon himselfe the office of God, may by this argument easily appeare: And shall it lie in the hands of headlesse multitude, when they please to weary off subjection, to cast off the yoake of gouernement that God ath laid vpon them, to iudge and punish him, whom-by they should be judged and punished; and in that case, wherein by their violence they kythe themselues to be most passionate parties, to vse the office of an ungracious Iudge or Arbiter? Nay, to speake trewly of that case, as it stands betwixt the king and his people, none of them ought to judge of the others breake: For considering rightly the two parties at the time of their mutuall promise, the king is the one party, and the whole people in one body are the other party. And therfore since it is certaine, that a king, in case so it should fal out, that his people in one body had rebelled against him, hee should not in that case, as thinking himselfe free of his promise and oath, become an vtter enemy, and practice the wreake of his whole people and natiue country: although he ought justly to punish the principall authours and bellowes of that vniuersall rebellion: how much lesse then ought the people (that are alwaies subject vnto him, and naked of all authoritie on their part) presse to judge and ouerthrow him? otherwise the people, as the one partie contractors, shall no sooner challenge the king as breaker, but hee as soone shall judge them as breakers: so as the victors making the tyners the traitors (as our prouerbe is) the partie shall aye become both judge and partie in his owne particular, as I haue alreadie said.


And it is here likewise to be noted, that the duty and alleageance, which the people sweareth to their prince, is not only bound to themselues, but likewise to their lawfull heires and posterity, the lineall succession of crowns being begun among the people of God, and happily continued in diners Christian common-wealths: So as no objection either of heresie, or whatsoever priuate statute or law may free the people from their oath-gluing to their king, and his succession, established by the old fundamentall lawes of the kingdome: For, as hee is their heritable ouer-lord, and so by birth; not by any right in the coronation, commeth to his crowne; it is a like unlawful (the crowne euer standing full) to displace him that succeedeth thereto, as to elect the former: For at the very moment of the expiring of the king reigning, the nearest and lawful heire entreth in his place: And so to refuse him, or intrude another, is not to horde out vncomming in, but to expell and put out their righteous King. And I trust at this time whole France acknowledgeth the superstitious rebellion of the liguers, who vpon presence of heresie, by force of armes held so long out, to the great desolation of their whole countrey, their natiue and righteous king from possessing of his owne crowne and naturall kingdome.


Not that by all this former discourse of mine, and Apologie for kings, I meane that whatsoever errors and intollerable abominations a souereigne prince commit, hee ought to escape all punishment, as if thereby the world were only ordained for kings, & they without controlment to turne it vpside down at their pleasure: but by the contrary, by remitting them to God (who is their onely ordinary Iudge) I remit them to the sorest and sharpest schoolemaster that can be deuised for them: for the further a king is preferred by God aboue all other ranks & degrees of men, and the higher that his seat is aboue theirs, the greater is his obligation to his maker. And therfore in case he forget himselfe (his vnthankfulnes being in the same measure of height) the sadder and sharper will his correction be; and according to the greatnes of the height he is in, the weight of his fall wil recompense the same: for the further that any person is obliged to God, his offence becomes and growes so much the greater, then it would be in any other. Ioues thunder-claps light oftner and sorer vpon the high & stately cakes, then on the low and supple willow hees: and the highest bench is sliddriest to sit vpon. Neither is it euer heard that any king forgets himselfe towards God, or in his vocation; but God with the greatnesse of the plague reuengeth the greatnes of his ingratitude: Neither thinke I by the force and argument of this my discourse so to perswade the people, that none will hereafter be raised vp, and rebell against wicked Princes. But remitting to the justice and providence of God to stirre vp such scourges as pleaseth him, for punishment of wicked kings (who made the very vermine and filthy dust of the earth to bridle the insolencie of proud Pharaoh) my onely purpose and intention in this treatise is to perswade, as farre as lieth in me, by these sure and infallible grounds, all such good Christian readers, as beare not onely the naked name of a Christian, but kith the fruites thereof in their daily forme of life, to keepe their hearts and hands free from such monstrous and vnnaturall rebellions, whensoeuer the wickednesse of a Prince shall procure the same at Gods hands: that, when it shall please God to cast such scourges of princes, and instruments of his fury in the fire, ye may stand vp with cleane handes, and unspotted consciences, hauing prooued your selues in all your actions trew Christians toward God, and dutifull subjects towards your King, hauing remitted the iudgement and punishment of all his wrongs to him, whom to onely of right it appertaineth.


But crauing at God, and hoping that God shall continue his blessing with vs. in not sending such fearefull desolation, I heartily wish our kings behauiour so to be, and continue among vs, as our God in earth, and louing Father, endued with such properties as I described a King in the first part of this Treatise. And that ye (my deare countreymen, and charitable readers) may presse by all meanes to procure the prosperitie and welfare of your King; that as hee must on the one part thinke all his earthly felicitie and happinesse grounded vpon your weale, caring more for himselfe for your sake then for his owne, thinking himselfe onely ordained for your weale; such holy and happy emulation may arise betwixt him and you, as his care for your quietnes, and your care for his honour and preseruation, may in all your actions daily striue together, that the Land may thinke themselues blessed with such a King, and the king may thinke himselfe most happy in ruling ouer so louing and obedient subjects. FINIS.