This Side of the Grave - Swarthmore College

ThiNavigand P

Patrici

For observthe Quakfrugalitywere carrchoices saexpectatio

I N TTolphi

and Couhow theterial cuthetic cbased pobjectsterial cugroupsder to ewas manLapsansky and Anne Verpterial culture of Friends froDelaware Valley in more d

Patricia C. O’Donnell is archivSwarthmore College.

The author would like to acknownificant editorial suggestions ofWinMilroy and Amy Earls. ChristopheHistorical Library, read over the essasuggestions. And last, but definitelycolleagues and family, including SAaron Wunsch, Jerry Frost, Barbara

1 Frederick Barnes Tolles, “‘OQuaker Esthetic,” American Quarte

2 Emma Jones Lapsansky andAesthetics: Reflections on a Quaker Esumption (Philadelphia: University

B 2015 by The Henry FranciInc. All rights reserved. 0084-041

All use subj

s Side of the Grave
ating the Quaker Plainness Testimony in London hiladelphia in the Eighteenth Century
a C. O’Donnell

ant members of the Society of Friends in greater London and Philadelphia during the eighteenth century, navigatinger plainness testimony involved material culture choices that might be viewed by non-Quakers as concealing motives ofor blurring class lines or as violating standards of decency and propriety. This was particularly true of coffins, which

amily and friends. On this public stage, Quaker coffinthey demonstrated family values and fulfilled societal

ualuouceatia bnsneuaheneo

s st

ied through the streets from home to burial ground followed by ftisfied the requirements for plainness while at the same timens.

HE SIXTY-FIVE YEARS since Frederick B.les published his seminal work on Philadel-a’s Quaker mercantile elites, Meeting Housenting House, scholars continue to exploreplainness testimony was manifested in ma-lture. Tolles’s thesis—that the Quaker aes-onsisted of “the best sort, but plain”—wasrimarily on the written record, not on thethemselves.1 Scholars studying Quaker ma-lture since Tolles have struggled to findof objects with adequate provenance in or-xplore the ways in which Quaker plain styleifested. Quaker Aesthetics, edited by Emma

that Qtory vprecion expreciwithdictioplain

Qsearcplainceremmily’

lanck, examined the ma-m Philadelphia and theepth.2 Lapsansky wrote

Quakertion froprocesssubjectsof whicAestheticHermancannotductionat leastcan be l

ist at Friends Historical Library,

ledge the professionalism and sig-terthur Portfolio editors Elizabethr Densmore, Curator of Friendsy several times andmadehelpfulnot least, she is indebted to herusanna Morikawa, Ann Upton,Chapin, and Chas O’Donnell.

f the Best Sort but Plain’: Therly 11, no. 4 (1959): 499.Anne A. Verplanck, eds., Quakerthic in American Design and Con-of Pennsylvania Press, 2003).

s du Pont Winterthur Museum,6/2015/4901-0002$10.00

3 Emmin Lapsan

4 Bernthe DelawGarfinkel,considere

This content downloaded from 130.058.065.0ect to University of Chicago Press Terms and Con

akerism contains “a number of contradic-es: equality and separateness; intellectualsness and anti-intellectualism; an emphasisllence and a focus on humility; and an ap-on for high quality workmanship coupledan on ostentation.”3 Clearly these contra-complicate any discussion of the Quakerss testimony.ker-owned coffins offer potential for re-rs to understand Friends’ conceptions ofss. At funerals, societal expectations for any and accoutrements honoring the fa-atus came into potential conflict with theplainness testimony. The coffin drew atten-m observers at eighteenth-century funeralions. As public artifacts, coffins were theof contemporary comment, some evidenceh survives in archives today. In Quakers, both Susan Garfinkel and Bernard L.emphasized the fact that the plain object

be viewed apart from the context of its pro-
and use.4 Coffins tend to have provenance,in terms of place. This provenance in turninked to practices that could vary from one
a Jones Lapsansky, “Past Plainness to Present Simplicity,”sky and Verplanck, Quaker Aesthetics, 3.ard L. Herman, “Eighteenth-Century Quaker Houses inare Valley and the Aesthetics of Practice,” 188; and Susan“Quakers and High Chests: The Plainness Problem Re-d,” 50, both in Lapsansky andVerplanck,Quaker Aesthetics.

13 on June 29, 2017 08:56:15 AMditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/action/showLinks?crossref=10.2307%2F2710311

monthlfunerarof accom

ConDavid CFriendsat them1783. Hhavior tin theirfour femone of wpowderepowderwere exAlthougwas a yoboth asmourni

Respectecent chilbelieve ener of caness andnot remipeople,foolish fidle andought tosense ofin whichanythingdid thinkat the grhoweverwhich pmannerand dutyconversa

Thisconstitucentury

chganthelaQuwaredy fnsdsthat members of these yearly meetings navi-t

tat

ecei

glebeclab

sevofthessareriglowtanrsilyrtewass. A

5 PhilMarriages,yearly meepistles toing of Wo1729. It iAgainst prterly Meetto Mainta[sic] Black

6 Lettscribed in( July 12,tions reguQuakers.

30

y or yearly meeting to another. This is whyy objects provide good material evidencemodation to Friends’ testimonies.

sider, for example, the letter written byooper, an overseer and elder of WoodburyMeeting, on the occasion of a child’s burialeeting house in New Jersey on February 16,e was so concerned about indecorous be-hat he wrote to scold the child’s parents evenbereavement. Cooper was shocked to seeale bearers in the funeral procession, onlyhom was a Quaker, dressed in white withd hair and without bonnets. Friends avoideded hair as superfluous, and Quaker womenpected to cover their heads modestly.h non-Friends wore white if the deceasedung, unmarried girl, Quakers avoided itcontemporary fashion and as specific

ng attire.5 He went on to say:

d Friends,—I attended the burial of your inno-d on Sixth-day last, and was much affected, as Ivery solid Friend present also was, with the man-rrying it to the grave; so different from the plain-simplicity into which our principles lead. I neednd you that we profess to be a plain self-denyingcalled to bear a testimony against the vain andashions of the world. These never appear moreinexcusable than at funerals, when our mindsbe impressed with a most solemn and awful

our own mortality, and the sense of uncertaintywe exist. This would leave us carefully to avoidlike pride, pomp or show on these occasions. Ithe occasion called for some remarks of this sort

ave, but was fearful it could not well be borne. Asit is a subject of conversation among Friends, anderhaps none may be kind enough in a properto acquaint you with, I thought both friendshiprequired it from me, and in this way, as verbaltion is sometimes misapprehended.6

by ardurinturevidethe pfromDeladifferdenccoffiFrienwaysgatedand s

A “Dand M

DurinMidddeathwithstoodhadtionsion,this eall wethe obeential toate. Sundea famdepaplaystatu

essay presents archival evidence on whatted a “decent” funeral among eighteenth-British andMid-Atlantic Protestants, followed

was preCon

vate, givful. ForCarolinabout th“Yet theshe wasthe manolute, aand evedecent,handleshis age

lis Cunnington and Catherine Lucas, Costume for Births,and Deaths (London: A. and C. Black, 1972), 192. Theetings continued to warn against pride in the form ofconstituent meetings. “The Minutes of the Yearly Meet-men friends held at Philadelphia ye 24th of ye 7th Months the desire of this Meeting that our Epistle in 1726ide be frequently Read in our Severall Monthly & Quar-ings of Women friends & all friends are desired Carefullyin the Testimony of our Ancient friends Against Wareingor Black & White Cloaths at Burialls.”er from D. C. to ___ and wife, February 16, 1783, tran-“Notices of David Cooper,” Friends’ Review 15, no. 451862): 707. Friends’ Review and other Quaker publica-larly published the memoirs and writings of exemplary

7 City

This content downloaded from 130.058.065.013 All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditi

ival and archaeological evidence on coffinsthis time period. The organizational struc-d beliefs of the Society of Friends pro-necessary background for understanding

inness testimony. Further documentationaker coffins made in the London area ande Valley demonstrates how Friends’ coffinsfrom those of other Protestants. The ten-

or London-area Friends to select polishedwith few fittings and for Delaware Valleyto select gable-lidded coffins shows two

Winterthur Portfolio 49:1

he potential conflicts between plainnessus.

nt Funeral”: Eighteenth-Century Britishd-Atlantic Protestant Funerals

the eighteenth century in England and itsAtlantic colonies, the final journey fromd to grave was structured and correlatedss and status. The collective ritual as under-y Protestants on both sides of the Atlanticeral distinct elements, including prepara-the body in the home, the funeral proces-religious service, and interment. Althoughy deals primarily with the second element,essential to a so-called decent funeral. Whileins of the symbolic aspects of the ritual hadng forgotten, they were nonetheless essen-hat was perceived as proper and appropri-dards of propriety and respectability were

tood by all in the wider community, andwas judged by its ability to do right by itsd member. For all classes of society, the dis-expected to be appropriate to the family’snything less was shameful; anything moretentious and prideful.temporary sources, both published and pri-e a sense of what was considered overly pride-example, in 1797 in Charleston, Southa, theCity Gazettepublished a cautionary talee poor widow of a day laborer in England.worst thing they had to say of her, was thatproud; which they said, was manifested byner in which she buried her husband. Res-s she owned she was, to have the funeral,ry thing that related to it, what she called
nothing could dissuade her from havingto his coffin, and a plate on it, mentioning.”7 In 1807 Philadelphia diarist Elizabeth
Gazette and Daily Advertiser (Charleston, SC),May 17, 1797, 2.

on June 29, 2017 08:56:15 AMons (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).

Sandwitsion offuneralthe 8 ca[sic] ma& age &sumed tand chi

Yet csolve surefreshmly givenfreshmburial. Atisan mnerals f£10.9 WIn 1753flector inin exceson a “prmuchmtendanton Monded theMethodthe Remfused thneedles“We hopfortunequire ththe authGazette imuch thare fonthoughlong waso foolismity to

y thn,Engbssiounedh aalsn,An

Ththth

d)Ster.y snefterest

eascipcofcoldd.de ccalss Aalts ts thco

8 ElizaDiary of E1991), 20

9 Ralp1480–175and the Cified 2013

10 “OJune 14, 1McIntyre,the LargeMary Quar

11 ReNovember15, [1764

12 Pen

Navigati ry

hmade note of the overly elaborate proces-Michael Callahan to Christ Church: “MCsbespoke something grand; two parsons,rriers presented with gloves; the Coffenhogany with guilt [sic] handles, his namec. on the top.”8 Callahan’s funeral con-he last of his fortune and left his young wifeldren destitute.oncerns about prideful display did not ab-rvivors from providing ceremonial gifts andent. Pallbearers and relatives were typical-mementos such as gloves and scarves. Re-ents were served to all guests after thet a time when an independent London ar-ight earn upwards of £100 per annum, fu-or the middling sort could cost more thanealthier citizens spent considerably more.the author of a letter to the Independent Re-New York claimed thatmany families spents of one-quarter of the value of their estatesoper” funeral.10 By the 1760s in Boston sooney was lavished on funerals that some at-s declined gifts. “He was decently interredday last: a great number of Persons atten-Funeral, which was in the new established… those who have been chosen Bearers toains of the Deceased to the Grave, have re-e usual Presents of Gloves, to prevent as Expense to the Surviving Relatives.”11

e those inhabitants of Philadelphia, whoses will admit, and whose stations seem to re-is expense, will begin this custom,” wroteor of a letter published in the Pennsylvanian 1765, “especially when they consider howeir example will affect their inferiors, whod of supporting this outside grandeur,conscious, at the same time, they will ere

BBritaiclassdatinproceSomebe foprintteentitorsMissoclass

Everyber’dwhomlearn’a longof Silvny’d bwalksjust athe gu

The blationpartiTheThemineceasecarrieto thsatiriof Mifunerresenin lesican

ng Quaker Plainness Testimony in the Eighteenth Centu

nt those seventy or hundred pounds theyhly lavish away, in this unnecessary confor-fashion.”12

(pseudoto Londleads thlowed bgeneralsenting

If thprocess

beth Sandwith Drinker and Elaine Forman Crane, Thelizabeth Drinker (Boston: Northeastern University Press,31.h Houlbrooke, Death, Religion, and the Family in England,0 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1998), 285; “Currency, Coinageost of Living,” The Old Bailey Proceedings Online, last mod-, http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/static/Coinage.jsp.f the Extravagance,” Independent Reflector (New York),753, 16; as referenced in Stephen C. Bullock and Sheila“The Handsome Tokens of a Funeral: Glove-Giving andFuneral in Eighteenth-Century New England,”William andterly 69, no. 2 (April 2012): 305.published in the Pennsylvania Gazette (Philadelphia),29, 1764, [2]. The letter was dated Boston, November].nsylvania Gazette (Philadelphia), May 23, 1765, [3].

13 Julisince 1450

14 Claern Englan

15 As16 Th

to make thIt was so punattribut

This content downloaded from 130.058.065.0All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Con

e turn of the eighteenth century in Greatnonheraldic funeral processions for middle-glishmen were fairly standardized.With rootsack to at least the sixteenth century, the streeton had evolved into a largely secular ritual.13

f the evidence for its form and practice mayd in the small woodcuts that are found onfuneral invitations during the late seven-nd eighteenth centuries.14 But foreign vis-o made reference to English custom. Henria Swiss traveler, described a typical middle-glican procession:

ing being ready to move (it must be remem-at I always speak of middling People, amonge Custom of a Nation are most truly to beone or more Beadles march first, each carryingaff, at the end of which is a great Apple or KnobThe Minister of the Parish, generally accompa-ome other Minister, and attended by the Clerk,xt; and the Body carry’d as I said before, comehim. The Relations in close Mourning, and alls two by two,make up the rest of the Procession.15

dle, a parish official, invited friends and re-to assemble at the house of the deceased;ants wore customary mourning clothing.fin was covered with a cloth called a pall.or of clothing and coffin cover was deter-by the age and marital status of the de-Heralded by tolling bells, six to eight menthe coffin through the public streets and in-hurch where services were held. A popularprint, The Repeal, or the Funeral Procession,meric-Stamp, likely shows another Anglicancavalcade (fig. 1).16 The child’s coffin rep-he remains of the 1765 StampAct, repealedan a year after antitaxation protests by Amer-lonists. The Reverend “Mr. Anti-Sejanus”nym used by Reverend W. Scott in letterson’s Public Advertiser supporting the act)e procession as officiating minister, fol-y other supporters, including the attorneyand solicitor general bearing flags repre-

31

the stamp design.e Anglican priest did not walk in the funeralion—a more common practice after the

an Litten, The English Way of Death: The Common Funeral(London: R. Hale, 1991), 155.re Gittings, Death, Burial, and the Individual in Early Mod-d (London: Croom Helm, 1984), 131.quoted in Litten, The English Way of Death, 143.e artist Benjamin Wilson (1721–88) was commissionedis print to convince Parliament to repeal the Stamp Act.opular that other print makers pirated it. This copy ised.


http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/action/showLinks?crossref=10.5309%2Fwillmaryquar.69.2.0305

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/action/showLinks?crossref=10.5309%2Fwillmaryquar.69.2.0305

Reformtrance tvice prewould bsentersofficialsgravingprocessgroup ogan to ain themA growiconspiccenturytically rbody toopportu

stveonoctiohurotrice foap91rys i

Fig. 1. T 66

17 GitEngland, 1

18 Lit19 Jul

Death in EClare Gitt222–23.

32

ation—he would meet the corpse at the en-o the churchyard where the religious ser-scribed in the Book of Common Prayeregin.17 Funeral processions for some dis-would not have included clergy or parishat all. During the Commonwealth an en-in a tract on the plague shows a Puritanion where the coffin and its bearers lead af mourners in day dress.18 Undertakers be-ssume the business of conducting a funeralid-seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.19

ng middle class expanded the market foruous public display. An early twentieth-historian of British funeral customs sarcas-

and oThe ationtheseattenthe c

PAmedenc“Epitin 17porament

he Repeal, or the Funeral Procession, of Miss Americ-Stamp, ca. 17

emarked: “The procession conducting thethe grave has always offered a welcomednity for the display of pomp, circumstance

For hNo cNo mThreNo cTo gNo cHe b

tings, Death, Burial and the Individual in Early Modern36; Litten, The English Way of Death, 150.ten, The English Way of Death, 159.ie Rugg, “From Reason to Regulation, 1760–1850,” inngland, an Ilustrated History, ed. Peter C. Gittings andings (New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2000), 20 Ber

ment (Lon


entatious grief, so prized by vulgar minds.rage man or woman can claim public atten-ly at marriage and burial, and on each ofcasions a nonentity becomes the center ofn in a ceremonial procession to and fromrch.”20

estant funeral processions in the Middlean colonies before and just after indepen-llowedmuch the samepattern. In the poemh,” published in New York’s Daily Advertiser, its anonymous author referenced contem-conventions in describing the missing ele-n the funeral of a poor but honest man:

im no hearse with sorrow’s weeds was hung,oach was hir’d, no parish bells were rung;ultitude of mourners fill’d the road,e sons alone sustain’d their lonely load!hristian brethren ventur’d to convene,

. ( John Carter Brown Library, Brown University.)


race the humble solitary scene;urate came through hackney’d forms to rave,arely got what must be had—a grave!

tram S. Puckle, Funeral Customs, Their Origin and Develop-don: T. W. Laurie, 1926), 112.


No fThePerhAndBut nHe wWe wNor

The pofarewell

Ameto sect,tolling bphia thatheir grconformled by tticipateon onenoted that our hstop’d aBishopWaccompconcludprocessiburyingorder frthe Cofaloud, pdant voI take th

Excetendedwealthyand somof theirwere dethose whsisted ofreportedRhode Itendedand a latown, wChurch

e Rvery mark of decent and solemn respect.”26 Aicaof

eetl

ptcs,ineasith

21 “Ep22 Dri23 Ibid24 Ibid25 Th

a Quakershows thainto the n

. Invitation for William Thorn and family to theal o, caCo

Navigati ry

ace assumed the fashionable mask,very sexton seem’d to scorn his task.aps, you guess, he spurned the gospel schemefear’d man’s fall—a venerable dream.ot for this we decent rites deny’d—as not worth a penny when he died;ere not proffered a funeral feast,could his heirs have paid the prudent priest!21

or suffered the indignity of an inadequate, lacking even clergy.rican funeral processions varied accordingbut as in London, most were heralded byells. Elizabeth Drinker noted in Philadel-t “the bell is tolling for some one going toave.”22 American Protestant processionsing to Church of England precedents werehe officiating minister. The Drinkers par-d in non-Quaker processions and at leastoccasion it began at their doorstep, as sheat “the invitation to his funeral, was tomeetouse; the relations &c. with the Corpes [sic],t our door, at the time appointed, whenhite and the few others that were inwaiting

anyd them to the burying ground.”23 Sheed that members of an African Americanon in 1798 were nonconformists: “A Negropast our door going up town, in differentomany I have ever seen, sixmenwent beforefin, one with a book in his hand, they sangsalms I suppose, in a very loud and discor-ice: a large concourse follow’d. Methodists,em to be.”24

pt for immediate family, participants at-by invitation (fig. 2).25 By the 1780s–90sfamilies might hire a horse-drawn hearse,e churches purchased their own for the usemembers. Hearses then, like those today,signed so that the coffin could be seen. Foro could afford it, a decent procession con-a set of acceptable behaviors such as thosefor Mrs. Susannah Mumford of Newport,

sland, who died in 1792: “Her remains, at-by a numerous train of relatives and friends,

by thwith esignifcator

EightMid-A

Excedemithe nfin wand w

Fig. 2funervaniamore


rge concourse of the inhabitants of theere yesterday evening carried to Trinity, and after the funeral rites were performed

were sebran orof the dfrom 16hexagodouble,

itaph,” Daily Advertiser (New York), February 12, 1791, 2.nker and Crane, Diary of Elizabeth Drinker, 1194.., 463.., 1043.e note in fig. 2 inviting William Thorn and family tofuneral in Bristol Township across from Trenton, NJ,t the practice of requiring funeral invitations continuedineteenth century.

26 “Ne(Providen

27 Litt28 Ibid


ev. Mr. Smith, interred under the church,

f Edward Simmons, Bristol Township, Pennsyl-. 1800. (Friends Historical Library of Swarth-llege.)

nt turnout of invited mourners was an indi-Mrs. Mumford’s status.

nth-Century British andantic Coffins

in extreme circumstances such as epi-coffins were always made to order untilteenth century. The traditional British cof-made of English elm, which is waterproofa grain not prone to split.27 Internal joints

aled with pitch, and the bottom filled withsawdust to absorb bodily fluids. Almost allocumented English types in the period

33

50 to 1830 are variations of the flat-toppednal box with single, double-lidded single,and triple cases.28 The single type—just

wport, August 13,” Providence Gazette and Country Journalce, RI), August 25, 1792, 3.en, The English Way of Death, 90.., 100.


the onemon forwooden—was ushell mcase, sin(upholsin a widStamp”of thepthe edgcoffin pname o

By 1mon heshoulde1675 froles trapetaperingthe intefin withsevente

Thedertakeaccessomonerscontracwho supdic painsolder,joinersDarnleydic workcame inCarpentainers,orders i

d—ftefoStenneillt,nlrchndha. Achontutod tcthonaslat. Itittieionainanats.outo mwo

29 Ibi30 Th

about 165boards thapl. 11). Amay haveshire andStirling An93; repr.,Hundred (orized thaoriginally—to bettelated to thon the groroom for

31 Mrcounts, 17Manuscripundertake

34

box called the coffin—was the most com-m for earthen burial. The triple—an innercoffin, a lead shell, and outer wooden casesually mandated for vault burial, as the leadasked unpleasant odors. The outermostgle or triple, was usually covered with fabrictered) and decorated with elaborate fittingse variety of patterns and styles. “Miss Americ-(see fig. 1) pictures a high-end child’s coffineriod: covered in cloth anddecorated aroundes with upholstery nails, it is topped with alate that would have been engravedwith thef the deceased.700most Londoners were buried in the com-xagonal container, angled or “kerfed” at thers and flat-lidded, a form that evolved bym a four-sided box in the shape of an isosce-zoid with an A-shaped or gabled lid, its sidestoward the feet.29 In some areas of Englandrmediate form comprising a hexagonal cof-a gabled lid may have coexisted in the mid-enth century with the flat-lidded one.30

purchase ledger of Richard Carpender, un-r of London, reveals the range of styles andries available to aristocrats and wealthy com-alike.31 Between 1746 and 1747Carpenderted with twenty-eight different craftsmenplied gloves, cloth, coffin plate, nails, heral-tings, sheet and manufactured lead andostrich feathers, engraving, and—with twoat the same time—coffins. The Earl of’s estate paid Carpender over £60 for heral-alone in the summer of 1747. Coffin platea wide variety of gilt, silvered, brass, or lead.

closeit—avoicefromCarpdic fuThe bIn facwas o

AgrouyearstypesChurLondfurnioneservecloth(onlythreedle wtive pitselfdle fcutchoccastive nlid orlid oras se“Althfreethey

der offered single- or double-lidded con-many including an additional case. Somencorporated a lead shell that was soldered

coffin wSmall tafore therative nrows, shmatelythe coffmonly wstatus ochildren

d., 99.e Parish coffin of Easingwold in Yorkshire dates from0 and is hexagonal in shape; its top is made up of twot come together in the center forming a low gable (ibid.,ntiquarian literature in England suggests that this formpersisted into the nineteenth century in parts of Devon-in the north among the “farmers and poorer classes.” Thetiquary (reprint from The Stirling Sentinel ), vol. 2 (1888–Stirling, Scotland: Cook & Wylie, 1900), 290. In Martin’sNew York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1982), Ivor Noël Hume the-t the use of the gabled lid in England may have beenintended to display the pall—with its heraldic imageryr advantage, but Litten contends that it is most likely re-e fact that the arms of the corpse were traditionally foldedin—and in the early, tapered coffin, the raised lid providedthe hands (The English Way of Death, 90).. Richard Carpender, Purchase ledger and sundry ac-46–47/1761–63, and 1778, MS 5871, Guildhall Library,ts Section, London. Carpender (ca. 1725–78) was anr with a shop in Fleet Market in London.

32 Ibi33 M.

the Private a1985, [15/archiveD.pdf.

34 Ibi35 Ibi36 Ma

(York: Co


by the plumber or lead worker who mader the body had been placed inside. An in-r the 1764 funeral of Mrs. Mary Hasmore. Dunstan’s West in Fleet Street, copied inder’s account book, reveals that nonheral-rals were nonetheless elaborate (fig. 3).32

for £26.16.7 included feathers and velvets.the cost of the coffin with plate and handlesy about one-fourth of the total.aeological investigations of Anglican burials in England conducted in the past thirtyve provided further information on coffinmid-1980s excavation in the vaults of ChristSpitalfields, an Anglican church in East, reveals that the “full complement of coffinre for an 18th century coffin consisted ofthree rows of domed-headed nails, thato form a decorative adornment on an outer-overing; four pairs of handles and gripsree pairs were generally used for a child)each side and one at each end. Each han-

complemented by the addition of a decora-e (grip plate) that fitted behind the handlewas pierced and held in position by the han-ngs.”33 Additional decoration included es-ons (drops), nail lace (fine metal trim,ally preferred to the double row of decora-

ls), breastplate (with inscription), and twoments (supplied in pairs). The breastplate,ments, and grip plates were normally soldThe Spitalfields report also indicates thatgh the handles were fixed so that they wereove in these mountings, it is unlikely that

uld have been used to take the weight as theas carried on the shoulders of bearers.”34

cks secured fabric to the outermost case be-coffin was assembled, and afterward deco-ails “were generally applied in two to threeoulder to shoulder ‘close drove’ approxi-2,000 per adult coffin along the edges ofin lid and sides.”35 The fabric itself was com-


ool, and its color varied according to thef the deceased, from white or light gray forto black for adults.36

d., n.p.L. Bowis, Complementary Historical Report for the Excavation ofndParochial Vaults at Christ Church andAll Saints, Spitalfields,], http://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/archiveDSownload?t=arch-345-1/dissemination/pdf/hist_report

d., [22].d., [30].rgaret Cox, Life and Death in Spitalfields, 1700 to 1850uncil for British Archaeology, 1996), 102.


AmoAnglicaLondonburialsas well aLocatedwatchmdated prfrom 17triple-shcluding

fouae

180o feotoheo

disA, gniahol, wseesathgl173dingonhebalal.ecticut, used between 1757 and the early nine-h century, all of the adult burials were in hex-al coffins.44

37 AngArchaeololington,” p13. The eof an aban

38 AnBurial Grocal Experi

39 Ceriwden Boston and Angela Boyle, “Burial Practice andal Culture,” in Boyle, Boston, and Witkin, “The Archaeolog-perience at St. Luke’s Church,” 82–101.See Hume, Martin’s Hundred, 308–12.“A Highly Unusual Case,” Smithsonian National Museumural History, Anthropology.si.edu/writteninbone/unusualtml.An excellent discussion of coffin construction and typesthe Middle Atlantic area is found in Timothy B. Riordan,Me to Yon Kirk Yard”: An Investigation of Changing Buriales in the Seventeenth Century Cemetery at St. Mary’s City,nd,” Historical Archaeology 43, no. 1 (2009): 81–92. For otherenth- and early nineteenth-century cemetery excavations inited States, see Charles H. LeeDecker, “The Coffin Maker’sTreatment of the Dead in Rural Eighteenth-Century Dela-

Fig. 3. Invoice for 1764 funeral of Mrs. Mary Hasmore[HazmorCarpendMetropo

Navigati ry

re recent excavation on the site of anothern church, St. Luke’s, north of the City ofin Islington, unearthed a total of 1,053

in the northern and southern churchyardss in the crypt under the main structure.37

in an area dominated by the Londonaking trade in the eighteenth century, burialsimarily between 1755 and 1848 and peaked

Materiical Ex

40

41

of Nat_case.h

42

used in“CarryPracticMarylaeightethe UnCraft:

], London, copied in Account Book of Richarder, 1764. (CLC/B/227/MS05871, Londonlitan Archive, City of London.)

90 to 1820.38 Coffin types ranged fromell constructions, heavily adorned and in-a case, to simple wooden coffins; the latter

ela Boyle, Ceridwen Boston, and Annsofie Witkin, “Thegical Experience at St. Luke’s Church, Old Street, Is-roject report, Oxford Archaeological Unit, Ltd., 2005,xcavation was conducted preceding the refurbishmentdoned church.

gela Boyle, “The Documented History of the Parish andund,” in Boyle, Boston, and Witkin, “The Archaeologi-ence at St. Luke’s Church,” 25–54.

ware,” Jou“Preparintuary Behnational HD. Gaimst

43 Rio44 Nic

“Rescue,Griswold,ed. DavidBergin &in rectangcoffin, nodence is in


nd more frequently in the least desirable lo-t the back of the yard. Lead shells were foundvault and earthen interments dating frombe-0. Coffin fittings recovered included fromour individual coffin plates, lid motifs, es-ns, grips, and grip plates.Metal studs were ap-the outermost case in decorative patterns.39

four-sided, trapezoid-shaped coffin that wasn in England until the 1670s appears toappeared from America at about the samerchaeologist Noël Hume discovered four-able-lidded coffins at Martin’s Hundred,, dating from the first quarter of the seven-century.40 The isolated grave of Captainomew Gosnold, who died in 1607 in James-as also in the earlier style.41 But by the endventeenth century, the hexagonal formwaspread use in the colonies.42 In his excavationolic cemetery at St. Mary’s City that was usedish immigrants from approximately 16380, TimothyRiordan found sevencoffin types,g three with gabled lids: tapered (trapezoid),al with a straight gabled lid (two boards),xagonal with a diamondback gabled lidoards).43 Although it is a small sample, byl of the coffin types at St. Mary’s were hex-In the Walton burial ground in Griswold,

35

werecationin somforeone tcutchplied

Tcommhavetime.sidedVirgiteentBarthtownof thein widof a Cby Enuntilincluhexaand(four1700agonConnteentagon


rnal of Middle Atlantic Archaeology 17 (2001): 1–14, andg for an Afterlife on Earth: The Transformation of Mor-avior in Nineteenth-Century North America,” in Inter-andbook of Historical Archaeology, ed. T. Majewski ander (New York: Springer, 2009).rdan, “Carry Me to Yon Kirk Yard,” 87.holas F. Bellantoni, Paul S. Sledzik, and David A. Poirier,Research, and Reburial: Walton Family Cemetery,Connecticut,” in In Remembrance: Archaeology and Death,A. Poirier and Nicholas F. Bellantoni (Westport, CT:Garvey, 1997), 137. Many of the children were buriedular coffins. Placement of nails in one older adult male. 15, may indicate a ridged hexagonal form, but the evi-conclusive.


PictEnglandnal formReverewith brthe victsame yecoffin ocover of(fig. 5).escutcha high-e

wplathngrds foferer

45 PauDaily JournBoston Minitials of

Fig. 4. Paul Revere, engraver, “the unhappy victims who fell inthe bloody [Boston] Massacre,” 1770. Woodcut. From Boston

17n, L

36

orial and archival evidence from Newand New York also references the hexago-in the eighteenth century. In 1770 Paul

engraved four flat-topped hexagonal coffinseastplates and lid ornaments to symbolizeims that fell at Bunker Hill (fig. 4).45 Thatar Ezekiel Russell printed an image of thef the Reverend George Whitefield on the“APoem, by Phillis, aNegroGirl, in Boston”

of NeDelatratemakiin haotherand cthis pQuak

Gazette and Daily Journal, March 12,45586, Prints and Photographs Divisio

This print shows the double row of nails,eon, handles, and breastplate that adornednd coffin in Boston. Entries in the daybook

The bulfins, priand fiv

l Revere often did woodcuts for the Boston Gazette andal. For its account of the funeral for the victims of theassacre, he supplied this image of four coffins with thethe dead men atop each one.

46 Jos1815–17,New-YorkWinterthu


York Quaker joiner and merchant Joshuaine (1690–1771) from 1753 to 1756 illus-e scope of a business that included coffin.46 Like many merchant-craftsmen, he dealtware and raw materials, contracted withor labor and supplies, and made furniturefins. At least one-quarter of his work duringiod was of the latter and for a primarily non-clientele at a wide range of income levels.

70, 1. (LC-USZ62-ibrary of Congress.)


k of the orders were simply described as cof-ced consistently at eleven shillings for adultse for children. More expensive models

hua Delaplaine Daybook and Business Papers, 1720–79,in Delaplaine Family Papers, 1721–1810, original inHistorical Society, microfilm Joseph Downs Collection,r Library.


were ofcost frotrimmedid notregularthoughearly asrial. Lewto const“I wouldered, buthe coffiLetters

8 Lrophestd dn ar wlessser,solvedehahothhis wofevom.50

rnrelblrdiedut.sibe.5th

incorpoe cdraws nigh,” an emblem published in Quakerlmaster Benjamin Sands’s 1787 puzzle book,orphosis (fig. 6).52

Fig. 5. COn the Death of the Reverend George Whitefield,” ca.1770. PBoyles,Universi

47 “Thno monthto a cofinSasinet £5

A. L. S., Lewis Morris to Mr. Joshua Delaplaine, March 30,Delaplaine Family Papers, 1721–1810, original in New-Yorkcal Society, microfilm Joseph Downs Collection, Winterthur. A note on the top of the letter indicates that it is a copy, thel given to Lewis G. Morris, Morrisiana, n.d.Bradford L. Rauschenberg, “Coffin Making and Undertakingrleston and Its Environs, 1705–1820,” Journal of Early Southernive Arts 16 (May 1990): 35.John Head Account Book, 1718–53, George Vaux Papers,can Philosophical Society, Philadelphia. See also Jay Robert

Navigati ry

sweet gum (“bilstel”), the adults’ ranging inm £1.5.0 for “plaine” to £5 for “coverd fulld and lined with Sasinet [sarcenet].”47 Hebill separately for coffin plate but recordedpurchases of handles from suppliers. Al-he made chairs and tables of mahogany as1753, none of his coffins were of that mate-is Morris of Morrisiana commissioned himruct a walnut coffin for his mother, Isabella:have it made of Black walnut but Not cov-

as thdeathschooMetam

rinted and sold by Ezekiel Russell and JohnBoston. ( John Carter Brown Library, Brownty.)

48

1752,HistoriLibraryorigina

49

in ChaDecorat

50

Ameri
t Lined with white calico, upon the Top ofn should be putt in whiteNailes the followingIM Dyed the 30th Day of March 1752 aged
omas Pope to a plaine bilstid coffin for his mother,”/day, 1753, n.p., Delaplaine Daybook; “Abraham Lodgefor his wife being covered full trimmed & lined with–,” [ January 17?], 1754, n.p., Delaplaine Daybook.

Stiefel, “PThe AccoPhilosophic.org/bulle

51 Joh[pairs] offor goods

52 SanPennsylva


ike his counterparts in London, Delaplaineduced upholstered cases for wealthy clients.olstered cases and coffins were also sold inon, SouthCarolina. BradfordL.Rauschenbergocumentation of a “black cov’d cedar cof-ccount books there before 1775.49 Nativeas the most common coffin wood in

ton until the end of the eighteenth century;was more frequently used for slaves. Theresistant to rot, decay, and insects, did notid stains well, and the use of fabric and dec-nailing in the English style undoubtedlyd a more elegant appearance. Black paintve provided a more affordable alternativelstery.e first half of the eighteenth century, Phil-a area carpenters and joiners advertisedith both flat and gabled tops. The accountJohn Head, Philadelphia joiner, providesidence of the construction of coffins in thatthe year after his emigration in 1717 untilHead made more than 65 coffins as welliture and engaged in a wide variety ofated mercantile activities. His coffins weree in a wide variety of materials and pricedngly, from pine or “Pine Cofin Blact,”—black—to at least six of themore expensive51 Among the most expensive of Head’sin the 1720s was a peculiar constructiond as “ridg’d,” with those for adults priced.0. These were undoubtedly hexagonal,e context and cost of construction, but alsorated the earlier ridged or gabled top, suchoffin depicted in “Sickness is come and

37

79.”4

also pU

Charlfounfin” icedaCharcypreformtakeoratiprovimayto up

Inadelpcoffinbookearlycity fr1743as fuinteravailaaccopaintwalncoffindescrat £2givenover, “A Poem, by Phillis, a Negro Girl, in Boston,


hiladelphia Cabinetmaking and Commerce, 1718–53:unt Book of John Head, Joiner,” Bulletin of the Americanal Society Library 1 (Winter 2001), http://www.amphilsoctin/20011/head.htm.nHeadAccount Book, n.p.Headbought and sold “payers”coffin handles and coffin screws, sometimes in exchangeand services.ds was a Quaker schoolmaster from Bucks County,

nia.


Thetively exconstrutised “rTops, apriced Darea joiducingIn his g

, intys bwlesin.10hutwmli

.”5

terhet bk WsiWr.ftegabhiasym-toah-M95er

weDde

inent lachles & case” for £175.61 By 1792 Colonelard Fullerton’s family laid him to rest in thePresbyterian Church burial ground in a coffin

53 “JOPhiladelph[3].

54 JohHistoricalSmedley Aety, West C

Fig. 6. Jadeath dMetamorphosis or A Transformation of Pictures with PoeticalExplanatSamuelLibrary o

Taylor’s account book includes entries for a variety of join-d carpenter’s work. Most of his clients lived in Nether Prov-, Pennsylvania, but he also worked in Caln and Thornbury.John Taylor, His Book of Acoumpts, [April 22], 1758.Ibid., n.d.

38

se gabled hexagonal coffins were compara-pensive because they were more difficult toct. In 1760 John Hill of Philadelphia adver-eady-made Coffins, with Ridged or Flatnd Silvered or plain Furniture—Also lowitto.”53 Until this time other Philadelphia

ChurhandRichFirst

ions for the Amusement of Young Persons (New York:Wood & Sons, 1827), n.p. (Friends Historicalf Swarthmore College.)

55

ery anidence

56

57

ners and general carpenters were still pro-ridged black walnut and poplar coffins.54

eneral carpentry work from at least 1746 to

HN HILL, Joiner, Near JOSEPH TROTTER, in Second street,ia,” Pennsylvania Gazette (Philadelphia), June 12, 1760:

n Taylor, His Book of Acoumpts [sic], 1746–72, FriendsLibrary of SwarthmoreCollege, Swarthmore, PA;Williamccount Book, 1728–66, Chester County Historical Soci-hester, PA.

58 Wiling a Black2-5-0.” Almcoffin at t

59 AmCounty H

60 ThePrices (Ph

61 “EMaker, Phand Biograin Contin


cluding “joyner work” and repairs, Chestercarpenter John Taylor debited thirty-oneetween 1747 and 1758.55 Among the mostas a “Black Walnut Ridg Coffin” with fourat £1.14.0 for James Sharpless’s daughter1758.56 Walnut ridged coffins for adults.0 cost more than flat (fig. 7). From twoandles added one shilling each to the finalmost of his coffins did not have handles.

alnut coffins were usually about fifteen shil-ore than similar ones in the less expensiveke the “flat poplar coffin for another poor7 William Smedley, who also worked inCounty, produced fewer ridged coffins,

y were his most expensive models. His ac-ook dates from 1728 to 1766, but the lastalnut Ridg Coffin” he made was in 1760;

x handles, and he billed the estate of widowharbutton for £2.5.0.58 Neither Head nornor Smedley billed their clients for coffin

r 1760, however, I have not been able tole-topped coffins advertised in the Phila-area. Amos Darlington of West Chester,

lvania, working between 1764 and 1828,any coffins, but none of these was listed aspped or “ridged”; his most expensive wereogany.59 When The Journeymen Cabinet andakers Philadelphia Book of Prices was published, size, choice of wood, and exterior decora-e the only determinants of cost, and ridgedre not mentioned as an option.60 In July ofavid Evans, a cabinetmaker who worked inlphia until 1811, debited the estate of prom-wyerGeorge Ross, who was interred at Christ, for a “Mahogany Coffin, inscription plate,


1772CouncoffincostlyhandMaryat £1to sixbill, bBlacklingswoodmanChesbut tcoun“Blacit hadRuthTaylocases

AfinddelpPennmadegableof mChairin 17tion wtops1779Phila

mes Poupard, engraver, “Sickness is come andraws nigh,” ca. 1787. From Benjamin Sands,

liam Smedley Account Book, [December 9], 1760, “tomak-Walnut Ridg Coffin with Six handles for Ruth Wharbuttonost a year earlier, Ruth Wharbutton had ordered a similarhe same price for her husband.os Darlington Account Book, 1764–1828, Chesteristorical Society, West Chester, PA.Journeymen Cabinet and Chair-Makers Philadelphia Book of

iladelphia: Ormrod & Conrad, 1795), 78–79.xcerpts from the Day-Books of David Evans, Cabinet-iladelphia, 1774–1811,” Pennsylvania Magazine of Historyphy 27, no. 1 (1903): 49. Payment was presumably madeental currency.


“coveredles,”whdescriptelites in

The Me

The Socmid-seva reactiGeorgepublicly

ex

62 Ibid63 Hu

Greenwoo

Fig. 7. P an(center l 74College.)

Navigati

d in cloth, lined, inscription plates and han- is the

age showing price for walnut ridged coffin (top left), 1758,eft), 1747. From John Taylor, His Book of Acoumpts [sic], 1

ichEvans provided for a price of £14.62 This living aitoveeveneithizassegat

ion was similar to the type provided to theLondon, New York, and Charleston.

eting House and the World

iety of Friends originated in England in theenteenth century as “a culmination to and

Monbeliethe sordai

Worganthis anual

on against the Protestant Reformation.”63

Fox (1624–91), its founder, began topreachin 1647. Central to the Society of Friends

issued ebehavioThe firs

., 52.gh Barbour and J. W. Frost, The Quakers (New York:d, 1988), 4.

64 J. WQuaker IdQuaker Aes


perience of the Inward Light of Christ, ands a Quaker means following one’s Inwardr, rather than external rules.64 Friendsin the “priesthood of all believers” and innteenth and eighteenth centuries had nod clergy, creed, or formal set of beliefs.in the Society of Friends, the highest level oftion is the yearly meeting. The structure ofmbly began to take shape in the 1660s. An-herings convened in London and thereafter

d for a flat poplar coffin for “another poor man”6–72. (Friends Historical Library of Swarthmore

ng Quaker Plainness Testimony in the Eighteenth Century 39

pistles that contained advices concerningr of members of the Society of Friends.t General Meeting of Friends in America

illiam Frost, “From Plainness to Simplicity: Changingeals for Material Culture,” in Lapsansky and Verplanck,thetics, 17.


was helYearlyBurlingYearly Mfluenceministevocal minsight,familiespreacheinteriorGracechbonds bAtlanticSharplespeak, w1813) aeled toMonthlreserved

Befoand recgathere(fig. 9).uscriptand forwas reising chameetingthe locaamong

Begimeetingthat werto refleherencedelphiafriends cNurturefrom Vto plain

Butguidelin

exowrearsteplminot thdbd pe,antha mat texaasleaasthyinted bd rofnms oontyalher lapbe50le,00igFr

65 Wohouse wa1821. SamMonthlynot travelihehad appwas in Eng

66 Hehave circunext majo

67 Phifor the yeMeeting’s

40

d in Rhode Island in 1661. PhiladelphiaMeeting opened its annual meeting atton, New Jersey, in 1681. Though Londoneeting clearly exerted considerable in-

, each body operated independently. Layrs, officially acknowledged for their gift ofinistry and the soundness of their spiritualtraveled among the yearly meetings, visited, facilitated communication at all levels, andd at meetings for worship. A rare circa 1765view of a meeting for worship in London’surch Street meeting house shows the closeetween Friends in the home country andcolonies (fig. 8). English minister Isaac

s (1702?–84) stands at center preparing tohile Philadelphians Nicholas Waln (1742–nd Samuel Emlen (1730–99), who had trav-Britain with certificates from Philadelphiay Meeting, sit in the facing benches typicallyfor ministers and elders.65

re the mid-eighteenth century the advicesommendations of each yearly meeting wered into what was referred to as its “discipline”66 This document was cumulative, first man-and then printed, differing little in contentm from yearly meeting to yearly meeting. Itsued about every twenty years, and interven-nges were added as approved by the yearly. Copies of the discipline were available inl meeting house and would have circulatedits members.nning in the seventeenth century, each yearlyalso approved a set of “queries,” questionse read in meetings to encourage membersct on their own and their community’s ad-to the Light. In 1747, for instance, Phila-Yearly Meeting’s sixth query inquired: “Arearefull [sic] to train up their Children, in theand fear of the Lord, and to Restrain themice and Evil Company, and to keep them

weretheirbers’nies vminiexambecotheir

AWooreaveabovvisitsfromwithwithto reber wwas csuchuponmarrthe inviewewoulmentdisowmentthe hSociescand

TneveeragememBy 17doubto 30to emety of

ness of speech and apparriel [sic].”67

the disciplines and queries contained broades, not detailed, specific rules. Individuals

tion inand Gedrawn mcentury

rship was scheduled here twice a week. This meetings largely rebuilt in 1774 and was destroyed by fire inuel Emlen was given a certificate by the Philadelphia

Meeting to Friends at Bristol in April of 1764; whileng as aminister, it was noted in the recommendation thateared inpublic testimony andhadbeenwell received.Walnland on business.nry Reynolds acquired this volume in 1764. It wouldlated among local meeting members at least until ther revision, also in manuscript form, in 1747.ladelphia Yearly Meeting, [Discipline], 1719. The queriesar 1747 were copied at the back of Chesterfield Monthlysuperseded discipline.

68 Na(New Yorkmon exprconcern tvariety of rmonthly bin several

69 HaKegan Pau

70 RodA Statisticno. 1 (Spr


pected to take personal responsibility forn spiritual development. Individual mem-sponses and adherence to Quaker testimo-ied over a fairly wide spectrum, from that ofrs and elders, who were expected to set ane, to that of members whose behavior wasng almost indistinguishable from that ofn-Quaker neighbors.e local level, elders like David Cooper ofury Meeting, whose scolding letter to be-arents about their child’s funeral is quotedguided behavior through regular familyd conversations “out of doors.”68 Deviationse plainness testimony when not associatedore serious offense would have been dealthis level, andQuakers would be encouragedmine their actions. However, when a mem-reported to have committed an offense thatrly contrary to the good order of Friends—debt or fornication, which brought shamee reputation of the Society of Friends, org outside of the faith, which threatenedgrity of the meeting—that person was inter-y a committee of the monthly meeting thatecommend either a written acknowledg-his or her transgression to the meeting orent. Common to many disownment docu-f the eighteenth century was the phrase “forour of Truth and the reputation of our.” Letters of disownment involving publicwere posted or read openly.Quaker population of Great Britain wasrge. Between 1663 and 1700, when the av-opulation of the country was over 5million,rs of the Society of Friends numbered40,000., when the general population had nearlyd, the numbers of Quakers had declined0, roughly .3percent.69 This was due in partration. In Pennsylvania members of the Soci-iends constituted 15.3 percent of the popula-1776, third in number behind Presbyterian


rman Reform church members.70 A hand-ap shows that by the end of the eighteenththere were many Quaker meeting houses

thaniel Luff, Journal of the Life of Nathaniel Luff, M.D.: Clark & Sickels, 1848), 169. “Out of doors” was a com-ession among Friends referring to matters of disciplinaryhat were not considered by meeting for business—for aeasons—but were handled more informally by elders. Theusiness meetings were made up of Friends who worshippeddifferent meeting houses in a given geographic area.nbury Hankin, Common Sense and Its Cultivation (London:l, Trench, Trubner, 1926), 266.ney Stark and Roger Finke, “American Religion in 1776:

al Portrait in Sociological Analysis,” Sociology of Religion 49,ing 1988), table 3.


in the agion, PbyNew Jcent).72

Rhodepopulat

A coto the twere erful grouin Philaformersagainsting and

priin,s oe batuen1)idecou

uakers in the Middle Atlantic Colonies saw a

71 Thiing houses

72 Sta73 Jac

1748–178Press, 200

Fig. 8. G Re

Navigati

rea (fig. 10).71 In the Middle Atlantic re-ennsylvania was proportionally surpassedersey (15.5percent) andDelaware (19.4per-Elsewhere North Carolina, Georgia, andIsland had statistically significant Quakerions on the eve of the Revolution.ncern that overall standards and adherenceestimonies within the Society of Friendsoding led to the rise of a small but power-p of reformers within the Society of Friendsdelphia and London after 1755. These re-

for “Britaphasihedgcaricat Fri(fig. 1left ssolidnon-Q

Q

racechurch Street Meeting, London, ca.1765. Oil on board. (©

attempted to create a sectarian buttressthe temptations of the world by strengthen-reinforcing distinctiveness.73 They called

declinecial het

s mapmarks the distance between individual Quaker meet-and may have been drawn for use by a traveling minister.rk and Finke, “American Religion in 1776,” 47.k D. Marietta, The Reformation of American Quakerism,3 (1984; repr. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania7), xi.

74 ThColumbia

75 Ibid76 Isaa

caturist whcollaboratknown for


mitive purity” and collective witness.74 Inone element of the former was a reem-n plain dress and speech, heightening theetween themselves and the “world.”75 There, A Sailor at a Quaker’s Funeral, poked funds’ sober demeanor “this side of the Grave”.76 The clothing worn by theQuakers on theof the image contrasts starkly in its drab

lors and lack of accessories with that of theakers on the right.

ligious Society of Friends [Quakers] in Britain.)


in their political power and increasing so-erogeneity. By 1760, Philadelphia Yearly

omas D. Hamm, The Quakers in America (New York:University Press, 2003), 32.., 33.c Cruikshank (1764–1811) was a Scottish artist and cari-o worked in London formost of his career and frequentlyed with George M. Woodward, a printmaker; both weresocial and political satire.


Meetingattemptguish itsnon-Qunumberwho seltently mthe Socon the p

e idinse and Academy at the southeast corner ofth and Chestnut Streets in Philadelphia in thes (fig. 12).78 The Quaker men’s long coats and

scror

77 Ma

42

had become extremely self-conscious anded “by discipline and publications to distin-elf” both from apostates and from the wideraker population.77 A sharp increase in theof disownments called attention to those

f-identified as Quakers but did not consis-

hedgshielHouFour1780

Fig. 9. “Moderation & Plainness,” 1719. From a manuMeeting, 1719. (Friends Historical Library of Swarthm

aintain their values, bringing discredit toiety. The colonies as well saw a reemphasiseculiar dress and speech of Quakers. This

rietta, The Reformation of American Quakerism, 225.

78 ThW.Waringand Thomrazed in 1in the litho(fig. 8).


s symbolically manifested in the brick wallg from public view the Friends Meeting

ipt discipline of Philadelphia Yearlye College.)


e Library Company’s copy identifies J. P[emberton?],, J. Evans, Robert Proud, [ Jam?]es Pemberton, NickWaln,as Morris. This meeting house was built in 1764 and

859. Nicholas Waln is the same Quaker minister picturedgraph of theGracechurch FriendsMeetingHouse, London


wide-brifrom ththeprinagainstindigo)style clonet cardBenjamciety oftaking aobjectedthe fact

Implem

The funness, eq

needbseion“Frualystcea

79 BeMeeting ooath as a

Fig. 10. A ylvaSussex on rie

Navigati

mmed hats likewise mark them as differente other figures. In the lower right corner oft aQuaker in undyed coat andhat (in protestthe use of slave-produced goods such ascomes face-to-face with a man in very high-thing. In a later version published as a cabi-by Isaac G. Tyson, the latter is identified as

in Chew (1722–1810), a member of the So-Friends at birth who had been disowned for

plainmarkthe afunctthatLangYearagainservi

Map of the Meeting Houses of Friends in the Provinces of PennsDelaware and Part of Maryland, late eighteenth century. (F

nd administering an oath in1744.79Quakers fashiony aerilat,ing

to oaths for a number of reasons, includingthat they were clearly forbidden in Scripture.

enting the Quaker Plainness Testimony

costlQuakin Phumenmeet

damental Quaker testimonies are truthful-uality, peace, and simplicity. The practice of

with theBelieverpression

njamin Chew was disowned by Nottingham Monthlyn October 15, 1744, for taking and administering anjustice of the peace.

80 GeLondon, MLibrary, S


ss, historically related to simplicity, wasby both moderation and utility—not merelynce of ornament but also the presence of. London YearlyMeeting of 1691 cautionediends take care to keep to plainness in yege and Habbits.”80 In 1719, the LondonMeeting issued “An Epistle of CautionPride” that contrasted Quakers’ useful andble objects with vain and foolish worldlys, such as extravagant wigs and gaudy andpparel and accessories adopted by non-s (fig. 13). That same year Andrew Bradforddelphia reprinted this comprehensive doc-and copies were distributed to all Quakers in the region. Quakers struggled inwardly

nia, New Jersey, the Counties of Newcastle, Kent, andnds Historical Library of Swarthmore College.)


public manifestation of their testimonies.s were led by the Inner Light to a public ex-of the testimony of plainness. However,

nerall Yearly Meeting of Friends at Devonshirehouseinutes, April 1, 1691, microfilm at Friends Historical

warthmore College.


they wevirtue o

In MTolles uto descrthis wasof plainical mana “prachis Quaety.”81 Mthat incenturieness brotype ofcould ktheoryvidual bextent

sedt te dthlw

iniendUncecc

e eulamghen

81 To499.

82 Fro

Fig. 11. A enHistorica

44

re not to succumb to pride in their superiorr to be self-righteously pious.eeting House and Counting House, Fredericksed the phrase “of the best sort but plain”ibe the Quaker “esthetic” and argued thatan accommodation between the testimonyness and the need to maintain the phys-ifestation of one’s station in the world, ortical resolution of the conflict betweenker instincts and his sense of status in soci-ore recently, J. William Frost has observed

the late seventeenth and early eighteenths, Quakers “believed that requiring plain-ught a self-mortification conducive to the‘tenderness’—or openness—in which onenow God.”82 He asserts that although “in

impo… noor thmonmadetion

Frinwarnity.by ecous. Aof th“singor frothoupend

fter George M. Woodward, A Sailor at a Quaker’s Funeral,l Library of Swarthmore College.)

meetings had enormous power over indi-ehavior, evidence suggests that to a largethe implementation of plainness was self-

der to rattentioclosely g

lles, “‘Of the Best Sort but Plain’: The Quaker Esthetic,”

st, “From Plainness to Simplicity,” 24.

83 Ibi84 Ibi85 Ox


.”83 Frost also cautions that it is “importanto assume a uniformity in either the practiceiscipline of plainness, even within a giveny meeting.”84 The choices that Quakershen they purchased coffins show this varia-behavior.ds had to balance their behavior based on

leadings with the practices of their commu-conventionality or “singularity”manifestedntric or extreme behavior could be danger-ording to the Oxford English Dictionary, oneighteenth-century definitions of the wordrity”was “differing or dissenting fromotherswhat is generally accepted, esp[ecially] int or religion; personal, individual, or inde-t action, judgment, etc. esp[ecially] in or-

graved by Isaac Cruikshank, ca. 1807. (Friends


ender one’s self conspicuous or to attractn or notice.”85 Friends believed that, unlessoverned, pride was a natural by-product of

d., 28.d., 29.ford English Dictionary, 2nd ed., s.v. “singularity.”


singularministeundyedassociatsive thatacting inthat he

This singat this timof followFriends wshy of mwhich Inew onemy wearand suchinformednot in m

ficFrvid

reingonsky has noted that there was a concern thatnals could at times be “a distraction from—ora substitute for—piety.”87

Phillips P. Moulton, ed., The Journal and Major Essays of Johnn (New York: Oxford University Press, 1971), 121.Lapsansky, “Past Plainness to Present Simplicity: A Searchaker Identity,” 2. For a concise discussion of plainness in

Fig. 12. etin1829. Li ra

Navigati

ity. In 1761, for instance, prominent Quakerr John Woolman felt a leading to wear anhat due to his opposition to slavery and itsion with the indigo trade. He was apprehen-others would censure him because he wasa singularmanner even thoughhebelievedwas being spiritually called to do so:

ularity was a trial upon me, and more especiallye, as being in use among some who were fond

ing the changeable modes of dress; and as someho knew not on what motives I wore it carriede. … I had several dyed garments fit for use,believed it best to wear till I had occasion ofs, and some Friends were apprehensive thating such a hat savored of an affected singularity,

supermanya pro

AdheongotestimLapsaextereven

86

Woolma87

for Qu

William A. Breton, A Monday Morning View of Friends Methograph by Kennedy and Lucas. (Friends Historical Lib

who spoke with me in a friendly way I generallyin a few words that I believedmy wearing it wasy own will. I had at times been sensible that a

the contexness andThe OxfordPress, 201


ial friendship had been dangerous to me, andiends being now uneasy with me I found to beential kindness.86

nce to Quaker testimonies necessitated aninternal dialogue. Taking the plainness

ny to its extreme could fuel pride. Emma

g House and Academy, Philada., Forty Years Ago,ry of Swarthmore College.)


t of Quaker history, see also Emma J. Lapsansky, “Plain-Simplicity,” in Stephen W. Angell and Pink Dandelion,Handbook of Quaker Studies (Oxford: Oxford University3), 335–46.


http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1093%2Foxfordhb%2F9780199608676.013.0227

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1093%2Foxfordhb%2F9780199608676.013.0227

Theplainneministephia informatheadge

It has beQuakerstationswas plention andFriends

silkednsihainentifferently appareled.

h’s argument that the silk bonnets were lessrfluous and expensive than the beaver hats

sto

46

relevance of function to the practice ofss cannot be overestimated. When Englishr Martha Routh visited Friends in Philadel-the 1790s, she effected a remarkable trans-ion in the style and material of Quakerar over a very short period of time:

en the practice for a long time for the Elderlywomen, and especially such as fill the superiorin the church, to wear beaver hats; when fur

woreemptto comereour mfrequistry d

Routsupe

Fig. 13. Epistle of Caution against Pride, 1719. (Friends Hi

ty… it became a pretty certain badge of distinc-respect. Not many years hence, a Friend or

from London, on a religious visit to America, 88 Jou


bonnets, which before would have been ex-against, but on examination were found actuallyst of less superfluity and expense; and as thebit cannot in itself add to, or diminish from (onlyds incline thereto), the beaver hat is now lessly worn, andmany appear in the line of themin-

88

rical Library of Swarthmore College.)


rnal of the Life of Nathaniel Luff, M.D., 61.


changedtypes fo

“We haupon ou

The chFriendsacutelymunityFox, inwrote inlike Doneedlesblack cBlack, aScarfs oand havring thePeopleafter thThe facsecratedgroundAnglicaniting theFox’s reshockin

In heven mFriendswithoutlookingPomp…or unfaof thingno morserve wihappenvain Worejectio

89 GeWho Hath… (Londo

90 “16cannot burelations phouse yarat ShipstoHistorical S

91 WiDivers Dispof His FaitJournal (L

Navigati ry
he1

s ooEonbuanlywhr.peP

a cithatitioond tedbengin, pniia

ontoosealsscrnca

t in

d ader.ove

the relative acceptability of these two hatr members of the Philadelphia community.

ve not superfluous and needless thingsr coffin”: Quaker Funerary Practices

oice of a coffin was a public statement of’ testimony of plainness. Quakers wereaware of the perceptions of the wider com-and were also sensitive to criticism. GeorgeAn Encouragement for All to Trust in the Lord,1682: “And all you that say, That we Bury

gs, because we have not superfluous ands things upon our Coffin, and white andloth with Scutcheons, and do not go innd hang Scarfs upon our Hats, and whitever our shoulders, and give gold Rings,e sprigs of Rosemary in our hands, andBells. How dare you say that we Bury ourlike Dogs, because we cannot Bury theme vain Pomps and Glory of the World.”89

t that Friends buried their dead in uncon-ground—because they believed that all

was God’s—was scandalous; contemporarys believed that this practice was akin to depos-body of a pet in a hole in the back orchard.90

jection of contemporary practice was clearlyg.is preface to Fox’s journal, William Penn isore specific in his description of early’ burials: “TheCorps being in a plain Coffin,any Covering or Furniture upon it … theyupon it as aWorldly Ceremony and piece ofWhichConduct of theirs, thoughunmodish

shionable, leaves nothing of the Substances neglected or undone; and as they aim ate, so that simplicity of Life is what they ob-th great Satisfaction, though it sometimes

Ting inmarkdeathmereand cdoeswiseacuteicismhavioor ap

Inweretics wticipinvitaand ntainechasmemfor loturedTysonearlydelphfor ncoffin

Inconfufuneras deA FreThomStree

I founof theappeaany c

s not to be without the Mockeries of therld they live in.”91 Penn echoed Fox in hisn of the unnecessary trappings of coffins.

[four] wtives andthem wetimony osilence, t

orge Fox, An Encouragement for All to Trust in the Lordthe Breath of All Mankind, and Their Souls, in His Handn: John Bringhurst, 1682), 12.95[6] March 15. John Waring for his honestly living It mention among ye Christian dead, who was by hisut ith [sic] ground lik [sic] a dog in ye Quakers meetingd. Rogues,” an entry in the Church of England registern-on-Stour, Worcestershire, cited in Journal of the Friendsociety 14, no. 1 (1917): 43.lliam Penn, The Preface, Being a Summary Account of theensations of God to Men … by the Ministry and Testimonyhful Servant George Fox, as an Introduction to the Ensuingondon: T. Sowle, 1694), ix.

92 “AFriends HStock, Anmouth Un

93 IsaKennedy,belonging65 years otons, andAnd Mr. Fnostalgic c


printed epistle from London Yearly Meet-751 cautioned Friends to avoid “externalf sorrow” on the occasion of the prematuref the Prince of Wales: “for a conformity inxternals, not agreeable to our Principles,trary to the Practice of our worthy Ancients,t expose us to the observation and pity ofd discerning Men.”92 Again, Friends wereaware that their distinctiveness invited crit-en they were not consistent in their own be-This was particularly true of how one actedared in public.hiladelphia Quaker funeral processionsommon sight and shared some characteris-those of the non-Quaker population. Par-on in the procession and interment byn only (see fig. 2) was true for Quakers-Quakers alike. Most local meetings main-heir own burial grounds, and some pur-a simple bier for the convenience ofrs, particularly if the coffin was to be carrieddistances. The Quakers’ “old hearse,” pic-this cabinet card published by Isaac G.robably dates from the late eighteenth orneteenth century and was used in Phila-(fig. 14).93 This hearse, like those used-Quakers, had open sides that exposed thepublic view.

ther respects undiscerning outsiders mightthe simplicity of Delaware Valley Quakerwith inadequate or indecent ceremoniesibed above in the 1791 poem, “Epitaph.”h visitor described a typical cortege fors Hallowell to the burial ground at Arch1788:

number of Friends assembled about the houseceased, and waiting in silence for the body toIt … was in a coffin of black walnut, withoutring or ornament, bourne by four Friends;omen followed, who … were the nearest rela-grand-children of the deceased* [* None of

47

re drest in black. The Quakers regard this tes-f grief as childish.] All his friends followed inwo by two.… There were no places designated;

n Epistle from the Yearly-Meeting held in London,”istorical Library of Swarthmore College. Also GwynneEvaluation of Quaker Burial Practices (Poole: Bourne-iversity, 1997), 20.ac G. Tyson photographed a watercolor by David J.1864; the latter later labeled the image “Old Hearseto, & kept at Friends Western Burial Ground. Aboutld, used by Levi and his son Orphlia Hopper while sex-now in 1872, by Geo. Reed, who left on March 31, 1875.ogg now has charge in 1880.” Tyson sold a number ofabinet cards to Quakers.


http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1017%2FCBO9781139164566.001




young anair of gra

FriendsEnglanda pall; mtional mthey didbeforefaithfulworld, htheir fam

Coffins

Richardintriguiclients.the custcontainQuakermost ofIt was dMoldinlid, Poli

lstst tasiltouth. Tve

94 “T1788 by JCelebratedMavor (Lo

Tysge

48

d old mingled together; but all bore the samevity and attention.94

in America—like their coreligionists in—did not ring bells or cover the coffin withourners were cautioned against conven-ourning attire. Except on rare occasions,not carry the coffin into themeeting houseinterment. Friends found ways to remain

uphoalmoand cHamthe Qin clofinishdisco

Fig. 14. Cabinet card after David J. Kennedy, Isaac G.1880. (Friends Historical Library of Swarthmore Colle

to their testimonies and distinct from the vationsedHaal

heuaest, aarhedososera

owever, while at the same time upholdingilies’ status through their choice of coffins.

for Quakers in the Greater London Area

Carpender’s purchase ledger providesng clues about customs among his LondonMost of his accounts were labeled withomers’ names, but an extraordinary burialer was ordered in December 1747 “for a” (fig. 15). Thismodel differed sharply fromthe other coffins recorded in this ledger.

chargison,ditionanotfor Qof Wof 56on Mpolisand c

CQuakwrote

escribed as a “6 ft. 14 double lid Elm Coffings on the Sides, Ogees & 2d. round on theshed with beeswax” with no cloth exterior

1793: “the shroto the cuis there

ravels in the United States of America, performed in. P. Brissot de Warville,” in Historical Account of the MostVoyages, Travels, and Discoveries, ed. William Fordycendon: E. Newberry, 1797), 198.

95 Mrcounts, M


ery or decorative nailing. But it was alsohree times more expensive than the coffine ordered from Mr. Gladman for Jonathann, Esq., on the same date. Presumably sinceaker coffin was polished and not covered, it required greater skill to construct andhere were no waxed and polished coffinsred at the Christ Church Spitalfields exca-dating to this period. No coffin plate wasto the Quaker’s account, but, in compar-milton’s estate ordered a full set for an ad-charge. A month earlier Carpender mader unusual polished coffin with moldingsker Cecilia Bingham. She was a memberminster Meeting, died in 1747 at the agend was interred at Long Acre burial groundch 24.95 Both atypical examples, they werebut lacked upholstery, plate, and handles,

t more than others from the same shop.t was clearly an important element fordiarist James Jenkins (1753–1831), whobout the burial of his son in Berkshire inI buried him at Newbury, with a piece of

on, The Old Hearse, Philadelphia, ca..)


ud hanging outside of the coffin, agreeablystomof theplace, andwhich (I understood)done by way of proof that the penury of the

. Richard Carpender, Purchase ledger and sundry ac-ay 23, 1747.


relativeclude thJenkinsily in thof fund

TheKingstoveals difuse andQuakercludedthat thewere to

gsialreededsponot inrapdtole-n tanw

le-cratmeans of attaching fabric to the exterior ofoffid

ns

mmede DaroJoge’d.”ediveienseofthe group dominated the ranks of the eliteiladelphia in the first half of the eighteenthry. After the American Revolution, however,

96 JamJames Jenki

97 LouBurial GrArchaeolog

In the Bathford burial ground in Somerset, nonmembersted for at least 11.6 percent of registered interments. Seee Stock, “The 18th and Early 19th Century Quaker Buriald at Bathford, Bath and North-East Somerset,” in Grave Con-eath and Burial in England, 1700 to 1850, ed. Margaret CoxCouncil for British Archaeology, 1998), 144–53.Bashford and Sibun, “Excavations,” 142.Ibid., 130.

Fig. 15. Coffin for a Quaker (at bottom of page),Account227/MSLondon.

Navigati ry

s of the deceased is not so great as to pre-is burying for the dead the needful attire.”96

was able to fulfill his perceived duty to fam-e greater society by a demonstrable outlays.excavation of the Quaker burial ground atn-upon-Thames, near London, further re-ferences as well as some similarities in coffinconstruction between Quaker and non-practices. The investigators ultimately con-

pensof Frrepresive ccausein Phcentu

98

accounGwynnGrouncerns: D(York:

99

100

Book of Richard Carpender, 1747. (CLC/B/05871, London Metropolitan Archives, City of)

that the “archaeological evidence suggestssimplicity and plainness of Quaker lifestylea large extent reflected in burial.”97 Friends

es Jenkins and J. W. Frost, The Records and Recollections ofns (New York: E. Mellen Press, 1984), 342.ise Bashford and Lucy Sibun, “Excavations at theQuakeround, Kingston-upon-Thames, London,” Post-Medievaly 41 (2007): 100.

101 Joterred at Fthe sectionwere memeither wit“An Accoin PhiladeHistoricalmembersof the eigh


ton had purchased a garden and orchard asground, using it from 1664 to 1814. Fourd and ninety-seven burials have been docu-, but it is clear that not all burials were re-because some initials and dates did notnd to the registers; Quaker burial groundst generally “select” or limited to Friends andclude a few nonmembers with familial orhic ties to the meeting.98 Except for one ex-family of wealthy linen drapers, Quakers atn appear to have been a “thriving, generallyclass mercantile community.”99 Apart fromriple-case coffins (innerwooden coffin, leadd outer wooden case) that were mostly asso-ith the former, the remaining coffins werease, single-break, flat-lidded types ofmodestive appearance.”100 Studs, one of the pri-

49

n, were present in only a little over one-sixthocumented examples from Kingston.

for Quakers in the Delaware Valley

odation to the plainness testimony as evi-in coffin design in theQuaker communitieselaware Valley differed from that in theund London during the same period. Inhn Head debited the account of QuakerArman [Harmer] £2 for “his Sons Cofin101 Six of his coffins were specifically de-as ridged, which was one of Head’s most ex-types. Of the six, members of the Societyds commissioned at least five. This highntation of Quakers as purchasers of expen-fins should not be viewed as atypical, be-

at Kina burhundmentcordcorreweremighgeogtendeKingsmiddsixteeshell,ciated“singdecomarythe cof the

Coffi

Accodencin tharea1724Georredgscrib


hn Head Account Book, 1724. Jacob Harmer was in-riends Burial Ground on July 16, 1724, and is listed in“Account of Deceased Friends.”Many of Head’s clientsbers of the Society of Friends. Names can be correlatedh the minutes of Philadelphia Monthly Meeting orunt of the deceased Buried in the Buring [sic] groundlphia, 1688–1807,” manuscript deposited in FriendsLibrary. Separate lists of interred members and non-were kept by the sextant in the latter until the middleteenth century.


http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1179%2F174581307X236210

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/action/showLinks?crossref=10.1179%2F174581307X236210

their inber of mas disow

In 1still prowealthysigned asilversmriged co£4.10.0Philadecosts is£8 in 17plate ancoveredhandlesIn genesamplebled cowealthyat the epearanclic, withmade aby signito the te

For dsibilitiesIn the cto inmarect carSavery ffor hisMonthlbursedwithoutsame ye

wahnpoe Manedidurecaure Mathuessawec9196e

s se

ascthenplango hodolipaanrldices

n agle

102 WMeeting wWilliam Smittee ofcoffins forFor examshow thatPenrose. Cexpenses—

103 R1784–88,

104 “E105 Sa

ative ValuWorth (20

106 Ac1767–185

107 Ph26, 1785,

50

fluence had begun to erode, and the num-embers of the Society of Friends declinednments increased.784 Philadelphia joiner William Savery wasducing walnut gable-topped coffins forQuakers even as fashion changed.102 Saveryreceipt for the estate of deceased Quakerith JosephRichardson: “ToMaking a walnutffin with tinned handles for said Richardson.”103 Given the inflationary environment oflphia in the period, direct comparison ofinconclusive; however, non-Quakers paid88 for a mahogany coffin with inscriptiond handles and £14 in 1792 for a cloth-, lined coffin with inscription plate and, based on David Evans’s account book.104

ral the costs appear comparable, but theis small.105 By the mid-1780s the walnut ga-ffin was certainly a much older style. Not allPhiladelphia Quakers chose gabled coffinsnd of the eighteenth century, but the ap-e of a traditional yet expensive form in pub-out a pall or other covering, would havepublic statement, confirming family statusficant outlay of funds but also conformingstimony of plainness.evout Friends, familial and societal respon-extended to one’s servants and dependents.ase of a monthly meeting, this would extendtes of hospitals and almshouses under its di-e. In 1775 Joseph Pemberton paid the sameor “a walnut Ridg’d Coffin Silver’d handlesNegro £3.0.0.”106 In 1785, Philadelphiay Meeting’s Committee of Twelve reim-

ing afor Jowereby thof cleboardindivwerewerethe bof th

Nuniqprocea Delbut bin 17in 17commof hi

She wrespebut wexammeetiable tof wothe pmuchpompof wopract

Whestrug

the joiner £4.10.0 for a “riged walnut coffinhandles for Mary Deal” (fig. 16).107 Thatar the committee paid him £5.0.0 for “mak-

contain

There wtions, fornerals; apolish ofquestedout polisnot procbut, as Iman mamade ofas is pretlighter abroughtfended,might haappeare

illiam Savery was a member of Philadelphia Monthlyho died in 1787 at the age of 65; his son, also namedavery, became a renowned Quaker minister. The Com-Twelve contracted with a number of Quaker joiners forthe poor, but most of the receipts have not survived.

ple, 1785 accounts with Jacob Shoemaker, Treasurer,they paid John Townsend £3 for a coffin for Rebeccaosts of caring for the poor—wood, board, and funeralwere drawn from designated funds and subscriptions.

eceipt, October 5, 1784, Richardson Family Papers,Winterthur Library.xcerpts from the Day-Books of David Evans,” 49–51.muel H. Williamson, “Seven Ways to Compute the Rel-e of a U.S. Dollar Amount, 1774 to present,” Measuring-15), http://www.measuringworth.com/uscompare/.count (copy), February 20, 1775, Savery Family Papers,8, Winterthur Library.iladelphia Monthly Meeting, Miscellaneous Papers, JulyHaverford College Quaker Collection, Haverford, PA.

108 Ph12, 1785,

109 Jou


lnut riged coffin with Best Silvered handlesBurdin” (fig. 17).108 BothDeal and Burdinor Friends and were financially supportedeeting. The latter had been given the jobing themeeting house; the former, a widow,with S[amuel?] Shoemaker. Despite theseals’marginal economic status, both coffinscognizably costly but not high style. As theyrried through the streets of Philadelphia toial ground, they demonstrated the concerneeting to the end.aniel Luff’s published journal provides ainsight into one Quaker’s decision-makingin respect to the choice of a coffin. Luff wasare physician who was raised as an Anglicaname a member of the Society of Friends. When his first wife, Elizabeth Fisher, died, he chose a mahogany coffin but recallednts made by a Quaker elder at the burialven-year-old daughter in 1793:

a valuable woman, and I was willing to show ato her memory. I directed a mahogany coffin,my child died, it was intimated to me by a very

ry [sic] elder, Caleb Seal, and member of our, that the polish on coffins appeared exception-im, and that he should choose a particular kindfor his coffin, oak; it appeared reasonable thatsh and costly wood with large silver plate, andins taken to invite to funerals, has too much ofd pride, and that the love of the world and fearliness often gives rise and continues us in these.109

three-year-old son died in 1803, Luff againd with his decision respecting the burialer:

ere but few at the burial, being but few invita-I felt a repugnance in my mind at parade in fu-nd being somewhat exercised respecting thecoffins and ridging as things unnecessary, I re-the cabinet maker to have the lid flat, and with-h, reminding him, at the same time, that it dideed from fancy, or a desire of being singular,apprehended, from motives of duty. This samede a cradle for this child, and I directed it to bepoplar or pine, not of walnut, and without a top,ty customary;my reasons were, it would bemuchnd easily moved about … [but] when it wasto my father-in-law’s [house] … he seemed of-


and asked why we did not get a walnut one—or itve been painted he said; so that when this dutyd to be presented to my mind… that if [he] saw

iladelphiaMonthlyMeeting,MiscellaneousPapers, FebruaryHaverford College Quaker Collection, Haverford, PA.rnal of the Life of Nathaniel Luff, M.D., 46.


it in thisbute it toto considbelieved&c. … Ichild was

Thus, infor his wing onedispleaschoice osingularworry thin 1761group.

Luffwere cocommufor somechosenQuakerescheweof WilliWoodstcontainthe eighLinn, athe shouand thecovers wcase was

SuffFriends

atero cnomedniaadsylte18s wB

ertminbgao

sixnlyrchhaintlite and rural populations with historic ties todelphia. John Janney, the grandson of Friendshad moved from Bucks County to Goose

110 Ib111 Wi

Manuscrip1858, conSociety of Fporation otopped codecade of

The only other vaguely relevant Quaker burial ground ex-n of which I am aware is that of Damascus in Ohio. How-e site was not opened as a burial ground until 1807, when

Fig. 16. Ha

Navigati

unusual form, he would be displeased, and attri-whim or singularity… but when I began deeplyer the source fromwhence this duty sprung, as I, and the cross, fearing to be accounted singular,felt easy at the direction I had given, and theinterred in the coffin according as I directed.110

choosing a coffin of polished costly woodife Luff displeased an elder, and in choos-without polish and ridging for his child heed his father-in-law and worried that hisf flat-topped coffin would be perceived as. His internal dialogue echoed Woolman’sat the singularity of wearing an undyed hatcould fuel pride and set him apart from the

’s journal entries imply that ridged coffinsmmon in his southern Delaware Quakernity. They also demonstrate that at leastQuakers in this country, the polished wood

by London Friends was exceptionable. Buts on both sides of the Atlantic mostlyd an external wooden case. The journalam Adams, a Quaker schoolmaster fromown, New Jersey, described a typical burialer used in his neighborhood at the end ofteenth century. “The coffin was made ofwalnut, with a ridged top, and hinges atlders, so that the lid could be screwed on,face be exposed, by laying back the twohich were over it. A[n external wooden]

evaluQuaktion tfins isdocuUniteVirgiing hPennthe sitil thementto thepropdeterflat; ocouldsegrethosesixty-was o

Acate tstylenon-ePhilawho

112

cavatioever, th

Receipt for ridged walnut coffin, William Savery, 1785. (

seldom used.”111

icient archaeological evidence from’ burial sites in the Philadelphia region to

id., 196–97.lliam Adams, “Reminiscences No. 19 [Extracts from thet Biography or Diary of William Adams, from 1779 totinued],” The Journal: A Paper Devoted to the Interests of theriends 1, no. 44 (December 3, 1873): 348. The incor-f hinges as an option in the design of high-fashion flat-ffins took place at roughly the same time, in the lastthe eighteenth century.

Friends frCounty. Ittified, at leArchaeolGround #

113 Thcommonfor a consformer onwas shippethat the BCarolina iHusband”


e the hypothesis that eighteenth-centurys were more likely than the general popula-hoose old-fashioned, gabled hexagonal cof-t yet available.112Oneof themost extensivelynted Quaker archaeological sites in theStates is the burial ground in Alexandria,. Many of the original members of theMeet-migrated to the area from Bucks County,vania, in the mid-eighteenth century, andhad served as a burial ground from 1784 un-90s. Between 1993 and 1995 sixty-six inter-ere excavated in preparation for an additionarrett Library and reburied elsewhere on they. One-quarter (sixteen) of the coffins werened to have had gabled lids, and nine werely three of the former had hardware thate dated to after 1850. It was not possible tote the eighteenth-century interments fromf the nineteenth century. Nineteen of thewere enclosed within coffin boxes, but thereone iron coffin, dated after 1854.113

aeological and documentary sources indi-t the gable-lid form evolved as a vernacularo the first half of the nineteenth century in

verford College Quaker Collection.)


om Pennsylvania and Virginia migrated to Columbianawas used until 1843. Of the 118 coffins that were iden-ast nineteen were gabled. See John Robert White, “Theogical Exhumation of Damascus Friends Burying17,” Ohio Archaeologist 53, no. 2 (Spring 2003): 26–31.e use of lead liners did not appear to have been veryin Philadelphia, either, except when burial was delayediderable time. Elizabeth Drinker makes mention of thely once in connection with an acquaintance whose bodyd to Philadelphia for interment. “My husband informsody of Mary de Brahm has arrived here from S[ou]thn a lead coffin. … It was her desire to be buried by her(Diary of Elizabeth Drinker, 1907).


Creek, VLoudonthe earby the sand wamade otop wasHe alsoApparePhiladeMilner’Churchrevealedin woodonly thrcontrast

l ger,t slarheoutnirumely’sasovee

114 W(McLean,reminiscecroft Libroriginal athe hexag

115 MRedevelopFirst AfricaAcculturatiphia: John

Fig. 17. , WCollectio

52

irginia, in about 1750, reported that in hisCounty, Virginia, Quaker community in

ly nineteenth century, coffins were madeame cabinetmaker who provided furnituregons and built houses. Plain coffins weref cherry and polished with beeswax: “thenot flat but like the roof of a house.”114

recalled that burial cases were not used.ntly the gable-lid coffin also persisted inlphia’s African American community. Johns investigation of the first African Baptistyard—used between 1810 and 1822—that many of the eighty-nine burials were

buriaMilnat thanacu

Tablyrecogconstcustofamiwellto preight

Receipt for ridged walnut coffin with best silvered handlesn.)

en hexagonal coffins with gabled lids, andee of these had decorative hardware.115 In, an archaeological excavation of the African

to “vainthat bugroundriousmwho wisElizabetpicion,to save e

erner L. Janney and Asa Moore, John Jay Janney’s VirginiaVA: EPM Publications, 1978), 97. The original of thisnce, “A Sketch of My Earlier Biography,” is in the Ban-ary of the University of California, Berkeley. Both thend the published version contain Janney’s sketches ofonal ridged coffin.ichael Parrington, Jennifer Olsen Kelley, Philadelphiament Authority, and First African Baptist Church, Then Baptist Church Cemetery: Bioarcheology, Demography, andon of Early Nineteenth Century Philadelphia Blacks (Philadel-Milner Associates, 1989).

116 JeYork Afric2006, cha/Archaeo

117 Di


round in New York City, also conducted bydid not discover any gable-lidded coffinsite.116 These differences imply that the ver-style was local to the Philadelphia area.fact that the gable-lid coffin was consider--of-date by the late eighteenth century andzably more expensive than other forms toct would have appealed to AmericanQuakerrs. Here was a form that demonstrated theadherence to the plainness testimony asmet familial and societal responsibilitieside a decent funeral. By the middle of thenth century it could in no way be ascribedfashion.” It also deflected the perception

rial in one of Philadelphia’s Quaker burials, such as the one at Arch Street, had a penu-otive (fig. 18). In writing about nonmembershed to be interred at Arch Street, diarist

illiam Savery, 1785. (Haverford College Quaker


h Sandwith Drinker voiced a common sus-namely, “some are desereous [sic] I believexpenses.”117 Even after theMeeting required

an Howson and Leonard G. Bianchi, “Coffins,” in Newan Burial Ground Archaeology Final Report, Februaryp. 10, 255, www.africanburialground.gov/FinalReportslogy/ABG_Ch10FEB.pdf.ary of Elizabeth Drinker, 1120.


four sigmembeonly feewho bill

Navigat

Membeown indof speci

o

Strge

Navigati

natures (instead of the requisite two for testim

Fig. 18. Plan of the Norris Family Burial Section, Arch1770. (Friends Historical Library of Swarthmore Colle

rs) for nonmembers’ burial permits, the over a ws tusQuedanaki

charged to either was that of the sextant,ed according to the size of the opening.

ing the Unmarked Road

eldertenuovantas a hcietyBut t

rs of the Society of Friends followed theirividual spiritual leadings, rather than a setfic external rules. Response to the plainness

singularself-pridlocal re


ny and testimonies in general could varyide spectrum, from that of ministers ando those whose connection to Friends was. Among the former and the more obser-akers the fundamental testimonies servedge against the temptations of the larger so-d also affirmed ties to family and meeting.ng the plainness testimony to extremes—

eet Burial Ground, Philadelphia, ca..)


ity—was also to be avoided, as it could fuele to the detriment of community. Thereforesponses tended toward uniformity. When


AmericEnglandare mosare usuWoolmthe samthe Qupractice

WhacenturyQuakerstructiobut neitcoffins tfurniturcal findEnglish

lstryd wtedadh,athphritreofy vdon

118 JoEssays of Jocorporateletter fromwith Woolare mostlwrapped,willing toeasy theydered mewithout anflannel, thas also thecoffin maother pur

119 W

54

an John Woolman lay on his deathbed inin 1772, he asked, “What kind of coffinstly used by Friends here? How the corpseally wrapped, &c. and the expense?”118

an had no expectation that customs weree as in New Jersey, only a conviction thatakers of York had developed a standard.t exactly was a plain coffin in the eighteenth? The answer, like the form, is not simple.s could read Fox’s and Penn’s written in-ns about how to conduct a Quaker funeral,her man said anything more specific abouthan that these should have no “covering or

uphocentulishementheirspeecforefthe uing cthantivesfamiltinuefashi

e.”119 And we learn from the archaeologi-ings as well as archival records that mostand American Friends avoided cases and

—may hence forreferencand socalthougison witcompareCoffin,end, theeighteethe abs“this sid

hn Woolman and Amelia M. Gummere, The Journal andhn Woolman (New York: Macmillan, 1922), 324–25. In-d into the published Woolman journal is an extract of aWilliam Tuke referencing a conversation that he had

man prior to his decease in 1772: “What kind of coffinsy used by Friends here? How the corpse are usually&c. and the expense? I told him Friends would be verybear those charges, in case of his decease; but he was notshould, and therefore, after some consideration, or-to write the inclosed [sic]: ‘An ash coffin made plainy manner of superfluities, the corpse wrapped in cheape expense of which I leave my wearing clothes to defray,digging of the grave.’ … He was not willing to have the

de of oak, because it is a wood more useful than ash forposes.”illiam Penn, “Preface,” ix.

120 ExFriends He

121 “E


ered coffins popular in the mid-eighteenth. Thus, some London Quakers ordered po-ood coffins from Richard Carpender orna-only with moldings so as to demonstrateherence to “exemplary plainness of habit,and deportment, which distinguished ourers.”120 These coffins were no cheaper thanolstered variety, however, thereby deflect-icism that the choice was anything otherligious expression. It did not conceal mo-miserliness or lack of regard for “decent”alues. In Philadelphia after 1760 the con-use of a well-crafted older and no longerable style—walnut coffins with gabled lidsave achieved the same end. But the prefer-a form that reflected the past alsomay haveed a time whenQuakers dominated politicalial life in the Delaware Valley. And ridging—h itmight seem superfluous to us in compar-h a simple pine box—was relatively simpledwith non-QuakerGeorgeRoss’s “Mahoganyinscription plate, handles & case.”121 In thepractice of the plainness testimony in the

nth century was more complex than merely


ence of ornament, the simplicity of Truthe of the grave.”

tracts from the Minutes and Advices of the Yearly Meeting ofld in London ([London]: James Phillips, 1783), 189.xcerpts from the Day-Books of David Evans,” 49.


Documents

This Side of the Grave - Swarthmore College