Ursinus College Digital Commons @ Ursinus College

Pennsylvania Folklife Magazine Pennsylvania Folklife Society Collection

Winter 1972 Pennsylvania Folklife Vol. 21, No. 2 Don Yoder

C. Lee Hopple

Friedrich Krebs

Rufus A. Grider

Gabriel Hartmann

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/pafolklifemag Part of the American Art and Architecture Commons, American Material Culture Commons, Christian Denominations and Sects Commons, Cultural History Commons, Ethnic Studies Commons, Fiber, Textile, and Weaving Arts Commons, Folklore Commons, Genealogy Commons, German Language and Literature Commons, Historic Preservation and Conservation Commons, History of Religion Commons, Linguistics Commons, and the Social and Cultural Anthropology Commons Click here to let us know how access to this document benefits oy u.

Recommended Citation Yoder, Don; Hopple, C. Lee; Krebs, Friedrich; Grider, Rufus A.; and Hartmann, Gabriel, "Pennsylvania Folklife Vol. 21, No. 2" (1972). Pennsylvania Folklife Magazine. 47. https://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/pafolklifemag/47

This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Pennsylvania Folklife Society Collection at Digital Commons @ Ursinus College. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pennsylvania Folklife Magazine by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Ursinus College. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WINTER 1971

F'ARM RESI DENCE 155 ACRES. OF" JOSIAH GINGRICH, WALKER TP. JUNIATA CO. Contributors to this Issue

DR. LEE CHARLES HOPPLE, Bloomsburg, Penn­ RUFUS A. GRIDER, a native of Lititz, Pennsylvania, sylvania, is a member of the Department of Geography died at Canajoharie, New York, in 1900. A Moravian, at Bloomsburg State College. His contribution to this he for a time owned the "Philadelphia Cash Store" issue is a section from his doctoral dissertation, Spatial at Emmaus and later managed the historic Sun Inn Development and Internal Spatial Organization of the at Bethlehem. His business affairs did not hinder his S outheastern Pennsylvania Plain Dutch Community, indulgence in his major interest, which was sketching. Ph.D. dissertation in Geography, The Pennsylvania Beginning in 1836 he traveled widely, sketching urban State University, 1971. Dr. Hopple is a native of Potts­ as well as rural landscapes. The Grider Collection in ville and a graduate of Kutztown State College and the the Moravian Archives includes over three hundred Pennsylvania State University, where his dissertation sketches, mostly of Pennsylvania scenes. We are in­ was done under the direction of Professors George F. debted to the Archives for permission to reproduce the Deasy and E. Willard Miller. It represents the first four winter scenes from Emmaus, dated 1847, in our large-scale scientific study of the use of space among "Winter Album". For Grider and his work, see John the plain sects of Southeastern Pennsylvania. F. Morman, "Rufus A. Grider," Pennsylvania Folklife, IX:2 (Spring 1958), 22-27.

GABRIEL HARTMANN of Heidelberg, Germany, In 1926 published an article entitled "Amerikafahrer von DR. FRIEDRICH KREBS, Speyer, West Germany, Dossenheim im 18. Jahrhundert," in the periodical is archivist at the Palatine State Archives in Speyer. Mannheimer Geschichtsblatter, XXVII (1926). Color­ For several decades he has searched the German ar­ fully written and based on his researches in the church chives for documentation on 18th Century emigrants registers of Dossenheim near H eidelberg, the article to the New World. We are happy to make available gives a graphic picture of the conditions which led to to our readers in this issue three short articles by Dr. the migration of eighty-four persons from this one Krebs which have appeared in German genealogical small village on the Bergstrasse in the period 1749- periodicals on emigrants of the 18th Century from (1) 1764. We are pleased to add this contribution to our Odernheim on the Glan, (2) Frankenthal, and (3 ) growing series of articles documenting the 18th Cen­ The District of Wegelnburg in the former Duchy of tury emigration across the Atlantic. Zweibriicken.

STATEMENT OF OWNERSHIP, MANAGEMENT, CIRCULA­ B. Paid Circulation TION REQUIRED BY THE ACT OF CONGRESS OF AUGUST 1. Dealers and carriers, street 12, 1970 (Section 3685, Title 39, United States Code) vendors and counter sales 18,500 18,500 Of Pennsylvania Folklife, published 5 times yearly at Lan­ 2. Mail Subscriptions 9,500 3,500 caster, Pa., for October 1, 1971. C. Total Paid Circulation 28,000 22,000 1. The names and addresses of publisher, editor, business manager are: Publisher- Pennsylvania Folklife Society, Lancaster, D . Free Distribution By Mail, Pa. Editor- Dr. Don Yoder, Philadelphia, Pa. Business Manager Carrier or Other Means - Mark R. Eaby, Jr., Lancaster, Pa. 1. Samples, complimentary, other free copies 1,400 1,400 2. The owner· is : Pennsylvania Folklife Society, Box 1053 or 3 Central Plaza, Lancaster, Pa. 17602 and Ursinus College, Col­ 2. Copies distributed to news legeville, Pa. 19426 agents, but not sold None None 3. The known bondholders, mortgagees and other security E. Total Distribution 29,400 23,400 holders owning or holding one per cent or more of total amount of bonds, mortgages or other securities are: The Ephrata National F. Office Use, Left-over, Bank, 31 E. Main St., Ephrata, Pa. 17522 Unaccounted, Spoiled after Printing 100 100 4. Extent and Nature of Circulation G. Total 29,500 23,500 Average No. Copies Each Single Issue I certify that the statements made by me above are correct and I ssue During Nearest To Preceding Filing Date complete. 12 Months (Signed) MARK R. EASY, JR. A. Total No. Copies Printed 29,500 23,500 Business Manager EDITOR: Dr. Don Yoder WINTER 1971-72, Vol. XXI, No.2 EDITORIAL COMMITTEE: Dr. Mac E. Barrick LeRoy Gensler Dr. Henry Glassie Contents Dr. John A. H ostetler D avid J. Hufford Dr. Phil J ack 2 The Pennsylvania Germans: Dr. Hilda A. Kring A Preliminary Reading List Dr. M aurice A. Mook DON YODER Dr. Earl F . Robacker Dr. Alta Schrock 18 Spatial Development of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Plain Dutch Community to 1970: BUSINESS MANAGER: Part 1 M ark R . Eaby, Jr. C. L EE HOPPLE

SUBSCRI PTION RATES: 41 Palatine Emigrants of the 18th Century $6.00 a year in the United States FRIEDRICH KREBS and Canada. Single copies $1.50.

MSS AN D PHOTOGRAPHS : 44 Winter Album The Editor will be glad to consider RUFUS A. GRIDER MSS and photographs sent with a view to publication. When unsuit­ 46 Emigrants from Dossenheim (Baden) able, and if accompanied by return In the 18th Century postage, every care will be exer­ GABRIEL HARTMANN cised toward their return, although no responsibility for their safety is Farm Layouts and Building Plans: assumed. Folk-Cultural Questionnaire No. 22 PENNSYLV ANIA FOLKLIFE, (Inside Back Cover) Winter 1971-72, Vol. 21 , No.2, pub­ lished quarterly by the Pennsylva­ Contributors to this Issue nia Folklife Society, Inc., Lancaster, (Inside Front Cover) Pennsylvania. Subscriptions and business correspondence : Box 1053, Lancaster, Pennsylvania. Editorial correspondence : Dr. Don Yoder, College Hall, Box 36, Univer­ COVER: sity of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Gingrich farmstead, from Illustrated Atlas of Juniata County, Pennsylvania 19104. Contents copy­ Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1877). Note that this farm, like many in Eastern Pennsylvania, has two houses. The one on the righted. right was the so-called "Grandfather's House," built for the Entered as second class matter parents when a married son, often the youngest, took over at Lancaster, Pennsylvania. the farm. The PENNSYLVANIA GERMANS: A Preliminary Reading List

By DON YODER

Since the publication of our Amish reading list ("What to Read on the Amish," Pennsylvania Folklife, XVIII: 4, Summer 1969, 14-19) we have been asked by many of our correspondents to publish a similar A PICTURE OF THE list on the Pennsylvania Dutch (Pennsylvania Germans ) in general. We do so now, noting for our readers that PENNSYLVANIA this is a selected list, largely for beginners in the fi eld, which covers a selected range of topics in Pennsylvania GERMANS Dutch culture : History, Language and Literature, Genealogy, Religion, Medicine, The Arts, Architecture, Music, Costume, Cookery and Foodways, and The Pennsylvania Dutchman in Fiction. Also, in delimiting the list, we have decided to include, with a few excep­ tions, only English-language and 20th Century materials, and among these, principaIIy materials which are still in print or available in larger reference libraries in the area. The largest and most basic bibliography on the Penn­ sylvania Germans is the massive work by the German scholar Emil Meynen, Bibliography on German S ettle­ m ents in Colonial America, Espe'cially on the Pennsylva­ nia Germans and Their Descendants, 1683-1933 (Leip­ zig: Otto Harrassowitz, 1937) . GENERAL HISTORICAL WORKS The general works on the Pennsylvania Germans can be divided into the historic and the contemporary. Of the historic treatments, two deserve special attention, (1) Dr. Benjamin Rush, An Account of the Manners of the German Inhabitants of Pennsylvania ( 1789), 1 > I \\11 \lil,',111~11'r edited by Theodore E. Schmauk with notes by I. D. II Rupp (Lancaster, Pennsylvania, 1910), Pennsylvania German Society, Volume XIX; and (2) Phebe Earle Gibbons, "Pennsylvania Dutch," and other Essays (Philadelphia: J.' B. Lippincott & Co., 1872, enlarged edition 1882). Phebe Gibbons was a Philadelphia Quakeress who "lived neighbors" to the "Dutch" in Lancaster County for several decades before the Civil War. The book gives an intimate and lively portrait still pleasant reading and provides us with the truest of the customs and attitudes of the Amish, Mennonites, portrait of the Pennsylvania Dutch people achieved in Dunkards, Moravians and Schwenkfelders by a sensitive the 19th Century. wife and mother, who even learned Pennsylvania Dutch Of the 20th Century treatments, Oscar Kuhns, The to converse with her housewife friends. The book is German and Swiss Settlements of Colonial Pennsylvania

2 Best ot the pamphlet introductions to Pennsyl­ vania German history and culture is Russell W. Gilbert's A Picture of the Pennsylvania Germans, published by the Pennsylvania Historical and Mu­ seum Commission. Popular introductions include books by Phebe Gibbons (center) and Ann Hark (right).

"PENNSYLVANIA D TOll,"

OTHER ESSAY,' .

.. .\\":1:'; tbl'l 'up) ~1"IUf'~t('re I \'11.1" flf IIf.. 'f1.... \ I..rrl tlll~ 11\1).,1:" .... l1,:uor oftlwir II I)"

T'nILAOf;LI"III.\:

.1. ll. LfI'PI:VCOTT ,~ ('I'.

1 87~ Of more recent treatments, the best introduction for beginners is Fredric Klees, The Pennsylvania Dutch (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1950), which is a readable secondary account of the Pennsylvania Dutch with all their sub-groups, religious and other divisions. Of general American cultural histories, the work of Thomas J. Wertenbaker, The Founding ot American Civilization: The Middle Colonies ( Ne~ (New York: Henry Holt & Co., 1900, new edition York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1938), is valuable in 1914), which deserves reissue, is still basically sound, that it sets Pennsylvania German culture in the compar­ and has valuable chapters on the European background, ative matrix of regional and ethnic cultures. The best the emigration, the settlement of the German counties, pamphlet-size introduction to the subject is Russell W. language, literature, education, religion, war and peace. Gilbert, A Picture of the Pennsylvania Germans (Gettys­ From the early part of our century comes also the burg, 1947 ), available in revised edition from the Penn­ standard history of the German settlements of the sylvania Historical and Museum Commission, Harris­ United States, Albert Bernhardt Faust's The German burg, Pennsylvania. Element in the United States, 2 volumes (New York: The most important 20th Century symposium on the Houghton Mifflin Co., 1909), which contains the basic culture is Ralph Wood, editor, The Pennsylvania Ger­ emigration and settlement history of the Pennsylvania mans (Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, Germans. 1942 ), which includes the following papers: I. "Penn- sylvania, Colonial Melting Pot" (Arthur D. Graeff ); title The Pennsylvania Dutchman, now published quar­ II. "The Pennsylvania German Farmer" (Walter M. terl y and in its twenty- first volume. In addition to these Kollmorgen); III. "The Sects, Apostles of Peace" periodicals, the two general Pennsylvania historical (G. Paul Musselman ); IV. "Lutheran and R eformed, periodicals are necessary; ( 1) The Pennsylvania M ag­ Pennsylvania German Style" (Ralph Wood ); V. "The azine of H istory and Biography, begun in 1877 as the Pennsylvania Germans and the School" (Clyde S. official organ of the Historical Society of Pennsylvania; Stine); VI. "Journalism, Among the Pennsylvania Ger­ and (2) Pennsylvania H istory, begu n in 1934 as the mans" (Ralph Wood ); VII. "Pennsylvania German organ of the Pennsylvania Historical Association. Literature" (Harry H ess Reichard ) ; VIII. "The Penn­ Local history is also a prime source for the Pennsylva­ sylvania Germans as Soldiers" (Arthur D. Graeff ); nia Germans. H ere there are the county and local IX. "The Pennsylvania Germans as Seen by the His­ histories and periodicals. Pennsylvania has a strong torian" (Richard H. Shryock) ; and an Appendix: "The chain of county historical societies . Of the Dutch Pennsylvania German Dialect" (A. F. Buffin gton). counties, periodicals are issued for Bucks, Montgomery, Detailed monographs on many phases of Pennsylvania Lehigh, Berks, Schuylkill, Northumberland, Lancaster, German history and culture and .a nalys is of many Penn­ and Lebanon Counties. The county histories of these sylvania German cultural items can be found in the areas also contai n chapters on the history and customs long series of publications of ( 1) The Pennsylvania of the Pennsylvania Germans in the a rea, as fo r example, German Society, beginning with Volume I in 1891 Alfred M athews and Austin N. Hungerford, H ist ory of and ending with Volume LXIII in 1966, and (2) the Counties of L ehigh and Carbon, in the Common­ The Pennsylv.ania German Folklore Society, Volumes wealth of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia : Everts & Rich­ I-XXVIII (1936-1967 ), now merged in (3). The (new ) ards, 1884), which contains A. R. H orne. "The Penn­ Pennsylvania German Society, which has published five sylvania Germans. Their History, Character, Customs, yearbooks since 1968. M any university and local libr­ Language, Literature, and Religion" (pp. 23-42 ). aries in the area have these indispensable sets. When T own histories are of value for the researcher as well. the two earlier societies merged, a seventy-fifth an­ Many of these are well researched and provide valuable niversary volume of the Pennsylvania German Society dated materials on Pennsylvania German culture. One was issued, Homer T . Rosenberger, The Pennsylvania particul arl y good example is Professor W. W. Deatrick's Germans, 1891-1965 (Lancaster, Pennsylvania, 1966), The Centennial H istory of Kutztown, Pennsylvania Pennsylvania German Society, Volume LXIII, which (Kutztown, 1915 ) . Of the more recent town histories, discusses both the history of the Pennsylvania Germans Preston A. Barba's They Came to Emmaus (Emmaus, as an ethnic group and the research that has been done 1959 ) is at the front rank. Of "valley" histories, Philip on them since 1891. The book iqcludes a useful if un­ C. Croll's Annals of the Oley Valley (Reading, 1927 ) even "Year-by-Year Representative Bibliography," list­ is an outstanding example, with well researched mate­ ing books, articles, and monographs on Pennsylvania rials on the settlement history, rel igious divisions, and German subjects from 1891 through 1965 (pp. 388-422 ) . genealogy of that Berks County area. Equally readable, In addition to these three basic sets of serials, there if somewhat more journalistic, is the same author's are several sets of periodicals which contain materi.als Ancient and Historic Landmarks of the L ebanon Valley of great value, both on the history, culture, and geneal­ (Philadelphia, 1895 ), which deserves reprinting. ogy of the Pennsylvania Germans. These are (1) The When the Pennsylvania Germans were "discovered" Pennsylvania German, beginning in 1900 and ending in the 20th Century by journalists and essayists and on the unfortunately German-nationalistic note (in 1918 ) as The Penn Germania; (2) The Perkiomen Region, Past and Present, Volumes I-III, 1894-1901, edited by H enry S. Dotterer, and its later namesake, The Perkiomen Region, Volumes I-VIII ( 1922-1930), edited by Thomas R . Brendle; (3) The Goschenhop­ -pen Region, published by Goschenhoppen Historians, Inc., 1965 ff.; (4) The Keystone Folklore Quarterly, published by the Pennsylv.ania Folklore Society, 1956 ff.; (5) 'S Pennsylvaanisch Deitsch E ck, a weekly column of Pennsylvania German studies and collectanea edited by Preston A. Barba and published weekly in the Allentown M orning Call from 1935 to 1969, and available in bound form in many Pennsylvania libraries; Preston A. Barba's "Dutch Corner" in Allentown's Morn­ and (6) Pennsylvania Folklife, published by the Penn­ ing Call ran for three decades and is a mine of information sylvania Folklife SocIety and begun in 1949 under the on every phase of Pennsylvania German life.

4 THE REI H RD COLLE TIos

of EARLY PE PE SYLVA IA GERMA 1 ¥tVA lA GERMA .

LITERAT RE DIALOG E A D PLA Y Clulnlring Trtndl frum 1683 to 194t

B)

URI F ROB\(~e.R

I). n. Ii , i\.\ t~ I', \ \ I It Ullm-rsily 0/ PI'IUlsyivallta Press \ 'olul7\(' ti l Philadc.:)phi,t 1913

Harbaugh's ttHarfe" is the all-time favorite among Pennsylvania Dutch poetry books. Scholarly monographs by Robacker and Buffington ana­ lyze the history of the literature produced by the Pennsylvania Germans.

roving photographers in search of quaint Americana, LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE a different genre of treatment was created than the Each culture of course has its own language. Penn­ "history". Here we have had a veritable stream of sylvania Dutchmen have had to deal with three lan­ books from the pen of the University of Pennsylvania guages, (1) the Pennsylvania German (Pennsylvania professor and essayist, Cornelius Weygandt (The Red Dutch) dialect, which was the language of the fireside Hills, The Blue Hills, The Dutch Country) and Ann and everyday communication; (2) High German, the Hark (H ex Marks the Spot, Blue Hills and Shoo fl y Pie). original language of school and church and newspaper Wallace Nutting led the vanguard of the photographic and formal communication; and (3) English, which essay in his Pennsylvania Beautiful (Framingham, Mas­ graduall y has taken the place of High German in the sachusetts: Old America Company, 1924). These books culture, with the exception of a few " Old Order" helped to entice the tourist into Eastern Pennsylvania. pl ain sects. Weygandt in particular spurred the interest in Penn­ For the overall history of the speech of the Penn­ sylvania Dutch antiques and antiquing. Some of them sylvania Germans, see Earl F. Robacker, Pennsylvania (Nutting in particular) helped to confuse the public German Literature: Changing Trends tram 1683 to on the "meaning" of the "hex signs" found on Penn­ 1942 (Philadelphia : University of Pennsylvania Press, sylvania barns. But all of them are readable and 1943); Albert F. Buffington's appendix to Ralph C. some of them are necessary for an understanding of Wood, The Pennsylvania Germans (Princeton, N. J.: Pennsylvania German culture in the 20th Century. Princeton University Press, 1942 ), pp. 261-281; and In the most recent times, photo albums accenting for the beginner, Klees, op. cit., pp. 277-285. For an the serenity of Pennsylvania Dutch (mostly "plain") historical view, see the earliest treatment of the dialect, culture have been issued by various photographer teams. Professor S. S. Haldeman's Pennsylvania Dutch: A One of the most pleasant of these is Fields of Peace: Dialect of South German with an Infusion of English A Pennsylvania German Album (Garden City, N. Y.: (London : Tri.ibner & Co., 1872 ) . For the bibliography Doubleday & Co., Inc., 1970 ), with text by MiIIen of works on the Pennsylvania dialect with comparative Brand and superb photographs by George A. Tice. notes on the related German dialects, see Otto Springer, 5 "The tu dy of the Penn sylvania German Dialect," The Pohl & Co., 1952), pp. 119-126. Journal of English and German Philology, J anuary 1943. There was, of course, a minimal dialect literature For those who wish to learn Pennsylvania German or produced, much of it either of the sentimental dog­ analyze it, the avail able grammars arc (1) J. William gerel poetry variety or the humorous "Letter to the Frey, Pennsylvania Dutch Grammar (Clinton, S.C.: Editor" genre. Actually there have been only several The J acobs Press, 1942 ), and (2) Albert F. Buffington dozen books published in the di alect, mostly poetry and Preston A. Barba, A Pennsylvania German Gram­ co ll ections and newspaper letters. For as complete a mar (All ntown : Schlechter's, 1954), also printed as list of the individual dialect imprints as we are likely Volume XXVIII of the Pennsylvani a German Folk­ to get, see Alfred L. Shoemaker, "A Checklist of Dialect lore Society. T h Barba-Buffington work provides the Literature," The Pennsylvania Dutchman, IV: 1 (M ay best systemati zation of dialect orthography. The two 1952), 6-7, 10. systems formerl y used were those based on English For those who wish to read samples ot the dialect, sound valu es, and those based on G rman. Actually my three favorite anthologies of dialect writings are every dialect writer had hi s own system, and the (1) H inz Kloss, I ch sc hwetz in der Muttersproc h (I Buffingto n-Barba attempt to standardize spelling ha<; Speak in the Mother Tongue) (Bad Diirkheim, 1936) , been widely a eepted for schol arly work on the dialect. Wiesbadener Volksbiicher No. 266 ; (2) H einz Kloss, Dialec t di tionari s have been many and on variou; ed., L ewendiche S chtimme aus Pennsilveni (Living cultural levels. Among the earlier ones, with curiosity Voices from Pennsylvania) (Stuttgart and New York: valu e, are James C. Lins, A Commonsense Pennsylvania B. Westermann, 1938); and (3) William S. Troxell , German Dictionary (Reading, 1887 ), and A. R. Horne, Aus Pennsylfawnia: An Anthology of Translations into A Pennsylvania German Manual (Kutztown, 1875, and the Pennsylvania German Dialect (Philadelphia : U ni­ later ditions ). Thus far the standard dictionary is versity of Pennsylvania Press, 1938 ). Marcus Bachman Lambert, A Dictionary of the Non­ On the history of the dialect literature, see Earl F. English W ords of the Pennsylvania-German Dialect Robacker, Pennsylvania German Literature (Philadel­ Norristown, 1924), The Pennsylvania German Society, phia, 1942 ), cited in full above, which gives perspective Volume XXX. The most recent scholarly dictionary and discusses individual writers, and H arry H ess Reich­ is the Abridge d Pennsylvania German Dictionary­ ard, Pennsylvania German Dialect Writings and Their Kleines Pennsylvaniadeutsches Worterbuch (Kaisers­ W riters (Lancaster, 1918 ) , Pennsylvania German Soci­ lautern, West Germany, 1970), edited by Professor C. ety, Volume XXVI; and H arry H ess Reichard, Penn­ Richard Beam as No. 8 in the Series Pfalzer in der sylvania German V erse (Norristown, 1940 ), Pennsylva­ weit en W elt sponsored by the H eimatstelle Pfalz, Kai­ nia German Society, Volume XLI. For the newspaper serslautern. It lists over 5000 distinctive words in the columnists and the beginnings of dialect production dialect vo abulary, with d finitions in English, and in the 19th Century, the best analysis thus far is notes by Dr. H einrich Kelz on phonology and ortho­ H einz . Kloss, "Die pennsylvaniadeutsche Literatur," in graphy. Professor B am, of Millersville State College, Mitteilungen der Deutsc hen Akademie, 1931 No. 4 Director of the College's German extension at the (Munich: D eutsche Akademie), 230-272, which will University of Marburg, West Germany, is engaged at be reissued in English in the United States sometime present on a full-scale Pennsylvania German dialect in the next year. dictionary project. For the dialect theatre in Pennsylvania, the "home For the influence of Pennsylvania German on English talent" play put on by churches and grange groups, speech patterns and vocabulary in Pennsylvania and and the radio "drama," see Albert F. Buffington, ed., the other areas settled by Pennsylvania German mi­ The Reichard Collection of Early Pennsylvania German grants, see Hans Kurath, A Word Geography of the Dialogues and Plays (Lancaster, 1962 ) , Pennsylvania Eastern United States (Ann Arbor, Michigan: Univer­ German Society, Volume LXI. sity of Michigan Press, 1956). On the High German literary production in Penn­ Pennsylvania German has remained, as the German sylvania, which was extensive, see the still useful bibliog­ scholar H einz Kloss has put it, a "halfway lan~age," raphy of German imprints, Oswald Seidensticker, The i.e., one which never really made it to the level of First Century of German Printing in America.> 1728- normal written communication. Essentially it has re­ 1830 (Philadelphia: Schaefer & Koradi, 1893). This mained a spoken dialect. For this reason in the 20th volume was greatly enlarged by Professor Wilbur H. Century the average Dutch speaker prefers dialect plays Oda (1892-1953), and at present Dr. Karl J. Arndt and radio programs, i.e., spoken Dutch, to the laborious of Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts, is pre­ and difficult process of reading the few dialect news-· paring a final version for the press. For High German paper columns in the upstate weekly press. For Dr. works produced in Pennsylvania, see Robacker, op. cit.; Kloss' discussion of the arrested development of the also John Joseph Stoudt, Pennsylvania German Poetry, Pennsylvania dialect, see Die Entwicklung neuer ger­ 1685-1840 (Allentown, 1956), Pennsylvania German manischer Kultursprachen von 1800 bis 1950 (Munich: Folklore Society, Volume XX. In addition, there are 6 such monographs as John S. Flory, Literary A ctivity German family history researchers are the Pennsylva­ of the German Baptist Brethren in the Eighteenth Cen­ nia Genealogical Magazine, edited by H annah Benner tury (Elgin, Illinois: Brethren Publishing House, 1908 ) . Roach and published by the Genealogical Society of And for the ubiqui tous German almanac in Pennsylvania Pennsylvania; Our Family Tree, edited and published culture, see Russell W. Gilbert, "The Almanac in Penn­ by Frances Strong H elman in Indiana, Pennsylvania; sylvania German H omes," Susquehanna University and The Genealogical H elper, published in Logan, Studies, March 1944, pp. 360-37 6. Utah, which offers an invaluable nationwide genealog­

G ENEALOGY ical query program. The Pennsylvania Germans created one of the The most important unpublished sources for Penn­ colonial cultures on the Eastern Seaboard. The emi­ sylvania German genealogy arc the church registers grant forefathers arrived on these shores from William and the tombstone inscriptions. The best manuscript Penn's time through the 18th Century, with others collections of typescripts and photostats of church reg­ joining the crowd in the 19th Century. M anuscript isters are in two libraries, again ( 1) the Genealogical genealogies for Pennsylvania German families exist Society of Pennsylvania, Philadelphi a; and (2) the already from the 18th Century, and at least one printed Histori cal ociety of the Evangeli cal and Reformed genealogy is dated 1764. The 19th Century was the Church, housed in the Schaff Library, Lancaster The­ heyday of genealogical research for Pennsylvania. The ological Seminary, Lancaster, Dr. George Bricker, Libr­ printing of family histories was stepped up radicall y arian. In addition to many original Reformed church after th e Civil War, and particularl y after the Centen­ registers, this society owns the William J. Hinke Col­ nial (1876 ), which created a wave of interest in Amer­ lection of typescripts of over one hundred of the 18th ica's past. This in terest swept back into every rural Century Reformed Church registers from Pennsylvania county and produced the first great crop of local and and Western M aryland. In addition, the Luthe:-an county histories and atlases, as well as family histories. seminaries at Mt. Airy (Philadelphia) a nd Gettysburg, Some of these were produced by family associations. Pennsylvania, have some original and some copied Americans, we are told, are a nation of joiners and church registers. soon discovered it pleasant to hold, once a year, a In dealing with the plain sects of Pennsylvania "family reunion" or all-day picnic where the Freind­ (Mennonites, Amish, and Brethren ) we are not so schaft (clan ) could gather from near and far to hear lucky in the area of church registers. Since these sects patriotic, religious, and genealogical addresses, and stressed believers' (adult) baptism rather than infant give prizes to the oldest member present, the youngest baptism, they did not normall y keep extensive baptis­ member present, the most recently married couple, etc., mal registers as did the Lutheran and Reformed etc. The format was general American, but the gusto Churches. H ence for thei r genealogy one has to of the picnics was typically Pennsylvania Dutch. depend on wi lls, deeds, cemetery inscriptions, Bible For the printed genealogies, books and pamphlets, records, and private family registers. For the Amish produced by and about Pennsylvania German families, we have the J ohns Hopkins Index of Amish Genealogy. the best list thus far is in Meynen, op. cit., "Family For this, see John A. and Beulah S. H ostetler, "Amish Histories and Biographies" (pp. 476-591), with the Genealogy : A Progress Report," Pennsylvania Folklife, titles alphabetized. The largest library coll ections for XIX : 1 (Autumn 1969 ), 23-27. This lists all the avail­ public use are to be found at (1) The Historical Soci­ able printed Amish genealogies. ety of Pennsylvania, 1300 Locust Street, Philadelphia, The tombstone inscriptions of the Pennsylvania Ger­ which houses the Genealogical Society of Pennsylva­ man cemeteries are of course not all transcribed. nia Coll ections ; (2) the Genealogical Division of the There are a few printed transcriptions, as for example Pennsylvania State Library, Harrisburg; and (3 ) the the magnificent work by Augustus Schuitz, "The Old Genealogical Collection of Franklin and M arshall Col­ M oravian Cemetery of Bethlehem, Pa., 1742-1897," lege, built up over many years by Frank Reid Diffen­ T ransactions of the M oravian Historical Society, V derffer, former Librarian H erbert B. Anstaett, and (Nazareth, 1899), 99-267, Index 271-294. The only Genealogist Elizabeth Clarke Kieffer. Included in the counties which have a relatively complete transcription co ll ection is the Pennsylvania Genealogical and Bi­ of tombstone inscriptions (vital statistics only) are ographical Index prepared in the 1950's by the Penn­ York and Adams, done under the direction of Henry sylvania Dutch Folklore Center (Pennsylvania Folklife J. Young, former Director of the Historical Society Society) . This is a card catalogue of every name men­ of York County. Most county historical societies have tioned in several of the sets of serials dealing with Penn­ some tombstone transcriptions, and larger collections sylvania German subjects, including the yearbooks of exist at the Genealogical Society of Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania German Society and the Pennsylvania the D .A.R. Library in Washington, D.C. German Folklore Society. The major problem in Pennsylvania German geneal­ Genealogical publications of use to Pennsylvania ogy is determining where the family came from In

7 TilE ffiflennonlte l\egrarcb Journal \ul. \If :FATHE RS \0. is

,., ~-\..-- .. . ::-:. ...-: ' "

EUROPE AND AMERICA.

DV REV. n. IIAnnAUGlJ. D.D.,

" " no" or "'111'11'1'1 0 rrl,lD," .. urA\'I;'fL r U coU !tI'!I O'<," .. Rr;'''L''I' L' 1f".E," H,llLlllor 11.<1: I rs",," "moo," wnll TlU cm."C II,M " lUJI. ur. O, 8C1IU,T!U ," AND "001.»1: ... t l.l!lf .... "

Ll kt'l II." .....,. r (If Thi 'C'ld bu nde,l ro r an . r U\flury. ... h H ('DlI. t lK- re hlf"l Jl' .. IbllUa-lod "!ItkiN., Dll lhl"I..t.llf lU I!,!!>" nu'o~o " O Or SOLO IilOll, I., ".

P.DITIW Ill" REV. D. Y. HEISLER, a~f.

V OL. HI.

J}#" Srt'mlalllfrU' (UP /hl< v nly s'oup, LA)(C.lRT F, R : "O",HlI( /'1}111 ,Iu /lif"r,.,,,, ,,.," Ilf'rlOtI ,11m /111"'" fII(I/(l ­ ,J . ~ 1. WE ' T Jl AEFFEn: ''II'''''' If "'/" /1(1 Jl n~ 'lIIt "It ,J,,. I',r""" \Itt" i" f UnJu 18 7 2. Mennonit:es and Congregat:ional Singing

\V, .!;iIl.1 I.~I,) "I ., " • "I "",,·tn,nj!: tN' 11'""'''''1< 111,,1 ,-I,,,td, ,,,u .r Aln l .• k .. '" II" \1""""HlII' " htilTh In Ih.. :~ ~~:; t'I:';:'t~,~ v.{~.~.,~I!~r:"'~II'\.: .~ ",I( ,.,1 ,:~ },I' f. IIt!t:" 1,1t",.. ~m~ h" I~.n" ~I:II •• I '",Ik th.· " ..,~hlp 1> 1 (.",j t"'p",..ah· "''' .... h1 Iljnlf '~.(h ",..... \1 ...... ( Ih, """","11 funrl'"'' t ,It" , \1 .. 'til 1 I Ilat Old ·[uta" .• ,,\. 1 h. ("" n1.'1"'1 I"" "r ""f.~IHI' th .... ,,'llh .... nJr.,.;i au'" ,It. II... ",1) 11:1''''''' rom"'ll 0'" ur Ih. I., f. rm:a'1 " 11<'0 ~ I -(left) six volum es of biographies of Reformed ,I. I. 1f •• ,,,1 , .. " , ...... , ,I f. II, tI ,. 1t"''''II'k L.I .. rhturh (".m ,h." h8\-" ",,,,,,, .•j,,,',llo,_ {n.", "r .'nl!""G: u I,,, d.,. 11'".""", .. 1 lt'j(lIk h; .. II .. rOlr· .11 .• h,,,, , ""I"",,," {.. ,,<'I.un fro ~11"~~.t /I"": ~",. I • ministers, (right) one of the several Mennonite journals of history.

Europe. The basic work on the emigration, Ralph "world" or "culture" at least in large part, and the Beaver Strassburger and William J. Hinke, Pennsylva­ "sect,'; a protest group, smaller in numbers, which nia German Pioneers (Norristown, Pennsylvania, 1934) , opposes both the larger "churches" and the "world" Pennsylvania German Society, Volumes XLII-XLIV, (surrounding culture), pref erring nonconformity lists the emigrants at the Port of Philadelphia fr0m ("plainness" in dress, speech, pacifism, etc.). For the 1727 to 1808, but with minimal exceptions. mostly after basic distinction between these two major forms of the 1800, gives no indication of European origins. For­ Pennsylvania German culture, see "Plain Dutch and tunately, there is a growing number of 18th Century Gay Dutch : Two Worlds in the Dutch Country," The emigrant lists publi hed in the yearbooks of the Penn­ Pennsylvania Dutchman, VIII: 1 (Summer 1956) . sylvania German Folklore Society (Volumes I, X, XII, Of these two patterns the Church groups (Lutherans XVI ) and in Pennsylvania Folklife. For the most com­ and Reformed ) are much in the majority, representing plete listing of these articles, see Harold Lancour, com­ at least 90% of the entire Pennsylvania German pop­ piler, A Bibliography of Ship Passenger Lists, 1538- ul ation. This is a fact which the tourist and the out­ 1825: Being a Guide to Published Lists of Early Im­ sider often fails to comprehend. For the largest of the migrants to North America, 3d edition, revised and church groups, the Lutherans, see the work of Abdel enlarged by Richard J. Wolfe (New York: New York Ross Wentz, A Basic History of Lutheranism in Amer­ Public Library, 1963 ) . ica (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1955, revised edition RELIGION 1963), and the often very good 19th and 20th Century The Pennsylvania German culture is split down the histories of the various Lutheran synods and conferences middle into two sub-cultures, the "Church People'" in Pennsylvania. These give detailed histories of each (Kaerricheleit, Kirc henleute) or "Gay Dutch" and the individual congregation, lives of pastors, and some de­ "Plain People" or "Plain Dutch" (S ektenleute) or tail on church customs and memorabilia. More local sectarians. The basic criterion is the sociological dis­ than these are the denominational histories. For the tinction between "church," a group which accepts the Lutheran printed histories, one turns to the Libraries

8 Reformed Church, chaff Library, Lancaster Theolog­ ical eminary, Lanca ter, Penn ylvania. Biographical materials on the mini try of the Penn­ sylvania German churc hes are more plentiful and in general more detailed on the Reformed side. The six­ sne~ volume eries initiated by H en ry H arbaugh and com­ ~lUtigcn ~q;,",(~la~Ca pleted by Daniel Y. R ei ler, The Fathers of the German obcr R eformed Church in Europe and A merica (Lanca ter, 1857-1872; R eadin g, 1881 -1 888); and William J. matt»ttt~Bpttgtl~ R inke's M inisters of the German R eformed Congrega­ btr tions in Pennsylvania and Other Colonies in the Eigh­ teenth Century, edited by George W. Richards (Lan­ caster, Penn ylvani a : H istorical Commi ion of the Evangelical and Reformed Church, 1951) are un­ fortunately not matched for Lutheranism. In fact, a biographical index and historical dictionary of Penn­ sylvani a's Lutheran cl ergy is still an urgent and hoped­ for task in Pennsylvania German research. On the specific customs of the year connected with Pennsylvania German religion, there are Alfred L. Shoemaker, Christmas in Pennsylvania: A Folk-Cultural Study (Kutztown: Penn ylvania Folklife Society, 1959 ) ; and Eastertide in Pennsylvania: A Folk Cultural Study obtr (Kutztown: Pennsylvania Folklife Society, 1960). For the Pennsylvania German rural thanksgiving service ~cprlofcn ~~ti ffcnt and its long strugggle with the N ew England celebra­ AltlCl)tC ~bctf. tion, see Don Yoder, "Harvest Home," Pennsylvania mormar~ in .poUdnbifd)er 6prad)e ~eral\~ gtgr6tn, Folklife, IX:4 (Fall 1958 ) , 2-11. On Pennsylvania nnb lIIituidfl1 ~raubn)\jrbigen Urfunben tlermt~rt, nun ubtr nu~ Dmt .!500dnOIf<1lrn In bM j)o<\lltutf<\lc 9ttrtU!t~ "breI German folk religion, see the same author's "Official fC~lt,unOtnlt elltlgm ncutn 9lntl)nd)ttn \)(fmt~rlt . Religion versus Folk Religion," Pennsylvania Folklife, XV:2 (Winter 1965-1966 ), 36-52. For the Amish sect , a full reading list is given in the article cited, "What to Read on the Amish." EPHRATA ill Penfylvanien The best single treatment of the Amish is John A. 5Ilfilb mer raM bet mrllberfd)afft. Anno MDCCxr..IX. Hostetler, Amish Society, revised edition (Baltimore:

I, '''E-' I ,,~!h t'. I ~ ••• t " •• \I .. The Johns Hopkins Press, 1968), now in paperback. )t.t, .... I I For the Mennonites, see the indispensable quarterly, The M ennonite Quarterly R eview, published since 1927, The "Martyrs' Mirror," published in 1748-1749 on the presses of the Ephrata Cloister, was a M ennonite book, covering Mennonite (and Amish ) history, sociology, a chronicle of Christian martyrdom from the first cen­ and education. Also the 4-volume M ennonite Ency­ tury to the seventeenth. clo JJe dia (Scottdale, Pennsylvania: Mennonite Publish­ ing House, 1955-1 959 ) , by far the best denominational encyclopedia dealing with any of the Pennsylvania of the Philadelphia Lutheran Seminary, Mt. Airy, and German religious groups, is full of articles dealing the Gettysburg Lutheran Seminary, Gettysburg. with every aspect of the meshing of Mennonite (and The Reformed Church (after 1934 part of the Evan­ Amish ) life with the larger Pennsylvania German and gelical and Reformed Church and since 1957 merged general American cultures. For M ennonite bibliog­ into the United Church of Christ) produced the same raphy, see also H arold S. Bender, T wo Centuries of range of historical materials. Local church histories American M ennonite Literature: A Bibliography of include William J. Hink e '~ masterful A History of the M ennonitica Americana, 1727-1928 (Goshen, Indiana: T ohickon Union Church, Bedminster Township, Bucks M ennonite Historical Society, 1929) . County, Pennsylvania (Meadville, Pennsylvania, 1925 ), The Church of the Brethren has had a series of Pennsylvania German Society, Volume XXXI, which distinguished historians from Martin Grove Brumbaugh includes both the Reformed and Lutheran church reg­ (governor of Pennsylvania), whose A History of the isters. For the Reformed church literature, the basic German Baptist Brethren in Europe and America (Mt. Library is the Historical Society of the Evangelical and Morris, Illinois: Brethren Publishing House, 1899) laid

9 THE Pennsylvania Magazine O F HIS TORY A N D BIOGRAPHY

\1'",:nI4 "ILl. -\ P ()UT1lAI-I{["I"'I~l,;F ... cr f ()"'". r:.",d p ~q:

"'I;r('.~o I \801l1" Til l [H4IlCOAI. I ko" h OI laYOr SOl HilA fll." J' ... ",VIV",.lA tlIJe u: It ~M

Uf funlOSs or Prs'j Vl\A"!\ TH '"" .( '/I,/ilnl',m -I'

J li b II IS I OR ICAL

the groundwork for all later historical work. The best scholarly research on Brethren history is, however, the work of Dr. Donald F. Durnbaugh, whose documentary series on Brethren history has produced thus far two distinguished volumes, (1) European Origins of the Brethren (Elgin, Illinois: The Brethren Press, 1958); and The Brethren in Colonial America (Elgin, Illinois: The Brethren Press, 1967 ) . Both are sourcebooks re­ vealing a wide variety of material on Brethren life, from personal letters to official church documents. Each sect developes a part-culture of its own. One of the distinctive features of Brethren culture is the "love feast." On the Brethren custom of "love feasts" at communion time, see (1) Clarence Kulp, Jr., "A Dunker Weekend Love Feast of 100 Years Age," Penn- ' @reit?li mOp 1971 sylvania F:olklife, XI: 1 (Spring 1960 ), 2-9 ; and (2) Donald F. Durnbaugh, "The G e rman Journalist and the Dunker Love-Feast," Pennsylvania Folklife, Journals of Pennsylvania History XVIII:2 (Winter 1968-1969), 40-48. and Folk·Cultural Studies. 10 For Brethren bibliography and imprints, see Donald and other even to the cla sical :Mediterranean cultures F. Durnbaugh and Lawrence W. Shultz, "A Brethren the ATOR -formula, for example). Bibliography, 1713-1963: Two Hundred Fifty Years An emigrant named Johann Georg Hohman, who of Brethren Literature," Brethren Life and Thought, arrived in Penn ylvania in 1802, standardized the charm IX : 1-2 (Winter and Spring 1964), 3-177. literature in hi influential book, Der lang verborgene On the history of the Ephrata Cloister, the Prot­ Freund (Reading, 1819-1820). Of this book there are estant monastic establishment in Lancaster County two English translations, The L ong L ost Friend (R ar­ founded by radical Pietists in 1732, much has been ri burg, 1846), the basi of the current pulp edition, written. Earli er works include the chronicle produced and The Long H idden Friend (Carlisle, 1863 ) . For an by the cloister community itself, the so-called Chronicon analy is of the book, see Robert H. Byington, "Powwow­ Ephratense (Ephrata, 1768), translated by J. M ax ing in Pennsylvania," in K eystone Folklore Quarterly, H ark and republished in Lancaster in 1889; and IX :3 (Fall 1964), 111-117. For the sources of H oh­ the antiquated but still valuable works by Julius Fried­ man's vol ume, its relation in particular to the German rich Sachse, The German Sectarians of Pennsylvania, vol ume R omanusbiichlein (1788 ) and the manu cript Volume I : 1708-1 742 (Philadelphia, 1899 ); and Vol­ charm literature both of Germany and Pennsylvani a, ume II: 1742-1 800 (Philadelphia, 1900). The more see the article by Don Yoder, "H ohman and Romanus: recent scholarship on the Cloister includes (1) Eugene The Problem of the Origins of Pennsylvania's Powwow E. Doll and Anneliese M . Gunke, compilers, The Eph­ Charms," schedul ed for publication in W estern Folk­ rata Cloisters, an Annotated Bibliography (Philadel­ lore in 1972. phia: Carl Schurz Memorial Foundation, Inc., 1944); For an analysis of the charms, the folk ailments, (2) Felix Reichmann and Eugene E. Doll, Ephrata As and a discussion of the "laws" of folk healing, see the Seen by Contemporaries, The Pennsylvania German indispensable volume by Thomas R . Brendle and Claude Folklore Society, Volume XVII (1952 ) ; and (3) James W. Unger, Folk M edicine of the Pennsylvania Germans: E. Ernst, Ephrata, A History, Posthumously Edited The Non-Occult Charms, Pennsylvania German Society, with An Introduction by John Joseph Stoudt, The Volume XLV ( 1935). For a brief introduction to pow­ Pennsylvania German Folklore Society, Volume XXV wowing, what it is and why it is, see "Twenty Questions (1961 ) . on Powwowing," Pennsylvania Folklife, XV:4 (Sum­ - On the Moravians (Unitas Fratrum, Moravian Breth­ mer 1966), 38-40, also available as a separate pamphlet. ren, H errnhuter ) much has been published in the For insight into the practitioners of powwowing, see Transactions of the M oravian H istorical Society, along Betty Snellenburg, "Four Interviews with Powwowers," with excell ent denominational and community histories Pennsylvania Folklife, XVIII:4 (Summer 1969 ), 40-45. by T aylor H amilton (A Histor y o f the Church J. On the use of specific remedies in folk healing, see Known as the M oravian Church or the Unitas Fratrum Donald R oan, "Deivels-Dreck (Asafoetida) Yesterday or the Unity of the Brethren, During the Eighteenth and Today," Pennsylvania Folklife, XIV: 2 (D ecember and Nineteenth Centuries, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, 1964 ), 30-33. For the use of snake oil and related 1900), and many works on the relations of the Mor­ remedies in healing, see Phares H. H ertzog, "Snakelore avians to the Indian tribes of North America. Perhaps in Pennsylvania German Folk M edicine," Pennsylvania the best general introduction to the spirit and ethos Folklife, XVII: 2 (Winter 1967-1968 ), 24-26. of Colonial Moravianism is J acob John Sessler, Com­ For herbal medicine, see D avid E. Lick and Thomas munal Pietism Among Early American M oravians (New R. Brendle, Plant Names and Plant L ore Among the York : H enry H olt and Co., 1942); and the best bio­ Pennsylvania Germans, Pennsylvania German Society, graphical introduction to the work of the founder of the Volume XXXIII ( 1923 ) ; and Alan G. K eyser, "Gar­ renewed church is John R. Weinlick, Count Z inzendorf dens and Gardening among the Pennsylvania Germans/' (Nashvi.lle: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1956 ). Pennsylvania Folklife, XX: 3 (Spring 1971 ) . MEDICINE On witchcraft, usuall y thought of as the obverse Of the two "branches" of folk or traditional medicine, (black magic) of powwowing (white magic ), a great it is the magico-religious or occult branch which, quite deal has been written in Pennsylvania, some of it predictably, has attracted the most attention. scholarl y, much of it sensationalistic. A good basic Pennsylvanians know much, even in the 20th Cen­ account of the York County "hex murder" trial of tury, about a strange healing art calIed by the Algon­ 1928, which gave the word "hex" to the American quin Indian word "powwowing". Despite the Indian vocabulary, is given in Arthur H . Lewis' recent paper­ origin of the name, the charms and techniques involved back, H ex (New York: Pocket Books, 1970) . There in powwowing (Pennsylvania German: Brauche, Brau­ are also short popular treatments of H exerei in the cherei) are Continental European and were brought volumes by Klees, Hark, and others. to Pennsylvania by the 18th Century emigration. The For the folktales of witchcraft from Pennsylvania charms are ancient, some traceable to medieval sources German fi eld research, see John A. Burrison, "Penn- 11 ylvania German Folktale: An Annotated Bibliog­ raphy," Pennsylvania Folklife, XV: 1 (Autumn 1965 ), 30-38. For a specific area in South Central P nnsylva­ nia and the repertoire of one informant who beli eved in witche and witchcraft, see " Wit h T ales from Adams County," Pen nsylva nia Folklife, XII:4 (Summer 1962), ear~l(Y p.eoos(yLvar2la which gives the repertoire of tales by Frank Eckert aRts aDD CRa.J=t:s (1871-1 960). Several of these tales were reproduced in the Pennsylvania German chapter of Richard M. Dor­ BY JOHN JOSEPH STOUDT on, Buying the Wind (Chicago: University of Chi ago Press, 1964 ) . On the folk beliefs of the Pennsylvania Germans in general, see E. M. Fogel, Beliefs and SujJ­ erstitions of the Pennsylvania Germans (Philadelphia: Americana Germanica Press, 191 5). For veterinary medicine on the folk level, sec Thomas R. Brendl e and Claude Unger, " Witchcraft in Cow and H or ," The Dutchman, VIII: 1 (Summer 1956), 28- 31; and "Veterin ary and H ousehold Recipes from West Cocali co," Pennsylvania Folklife, XVI: 2 (Winter 1966- 1967), 28-29. THE ARTS For the arts in general among the Pennsylvania Ger­ mans, most work has of course been done on the so­ ca ll ed folk arts. For the higher I vel of the arts, many historie of American art deal with the co ntributions of the German artists and hi ah-I evel furniture makers in Eastern Pennsylvania. A few of the e have achieved separate monographs- for example, the portraiture of John Joseph Stoudt's are indicative of the wide the Lancaster artist, J a ob Eichholtz (1776-1852 ) has American interest in Pennsylvania Dutch arts and crafts. finally been dealt with professionally in Rebecca J. Beal , Jaco b Eic hholtz 1776-1842: Portrait Painter of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia : Historical Society of Penn­ texts plus decoration, sometimes related to the subject sylvania, 1969). matter symbolically, sometimes extraneou if delightful The most representative folk portrayer of the Penn­ deco ration, were produced by the thousands in Penn­ sylvania German culture was the York County artist sylvania from the ' 1750's to mid-19th Century, when Lewis Miller (1796-1882 ) . For examples of his work printed forms took over the fi eld. see the color-plate volume, L ewis Miller: Sketches and Again the discoverer of fraktur was H enry C. Mercer. Chronicles (York, Pennsylvania: Historical Society of The pioneer article on the subject was M ercer's "The York County, 1969), with introduction by Donald A. Survival of the M ediaeval Art of Illuminative Writing Shelley. Among Pennsylvania Germans," Proceedings of the Of the regional arts, the work in iron in the American Philosophical Society, XXXVI: 156 (Decem­ form of decorated stove plates is discussed in H enry ber 1897 ), 424-433. C. Mercer, The Bible in Iron, or Pictured Stoves and The two principal 20th Century scholar who have Stove Plates of the Pennsylvania Germans (Doyles­ analyzed fraktur have been John Joseph Stoudt and town: Bucks County Historical Society, 1914). The Donald A. Shell ey. Stoudt's work, beginning with Con­ pottery, including sgraffito and other forms, is treated sider the L ilies (Pennsylvania German Folklore Society, in Edwin A. Barber, Tulip Ware of the Pennsylvania­ Volume II, 1937 ), reprinted in revised and enlarged German Potters (Philadelphia: Patterson and White, form as Pennsylvania German Folk Art: An Interpreta­ 1903) . tion (Penn ylvania German Folklore Society, Volume The most widespread Pennsylvania German contribu­ XXVIII, 1966 ) is symbolistic, finding the meaning of tion to American art has been the genre called "fraktur," the fraktur decorations in the medieval and pietistic the decorated manuscripts or manuscript art of the mystical movements of Europe, which channeled down church and sect groups. The context of fraktur, out into Pennsylvania German religion in the 18th Century. of which it grew, was the folk community and the His latest book, FJarly Pennsylvania Arts and Crafts individual's relation to it through the rites of passage (New York: A. S. Barnes and Co., Inc., 1964) relates (baptism, parochial schooling, confirmation, marriage, fraktur to all forms of art in Ea tern Pennsylvania, and and death ) . Documents of this sort, involving religious for the first time gives adequate coverage to the relation

12 of Philadelphia (largely Briti h ) forms to the upcountry formerly known only as the "\ eak Arti t," in Prologue: (he calls them "piedmont" ) rural form ~ (dominated The Journal of th e ational Archives, II :2 (Fall 1970), by the Pennsy lvania Germans) . 96-97; and Frederick Weiser's article in Der R eggebooe, The work of Donald A. hell ey, D irector of the H enry the new quarterl y of the (new) Pennsyl ania German Ford Mu. cum at Dearborn, Michigan, is The Fraktur­ Society. W ritings of the Pennsylvania Germans (All entown, The best analy is of the printed fraktur forms, which 1961 ), Pen nsylvania German Folklore ociety, Volume replaced the manuscript ones, is Alfred L. Shoemaker, XXIII ( 1958-1959 ) . For the fi rst time, this book made Check List of Pennsylvania Dutch Printed Tau/scheins two necessary links in the chain of origins of Pennsylva­ (Lancaster: Pennsylvania Dutch Folklore Center, 1952 ). nia's fr aktur art. It looked carefully into European The tombstone decoration of the Pennsylvania Ger­ (German and Swiss ) fraktur and call igraphic tech­ mans has been adequately and beautifully dealt with niques and schools in and before the 17th Century, in Preston A. and El eanor Barba, Pennsylvanza German the period immediately preceding the emigration, and T ombstones: A Study in Folk Art, Pennsylvania German (2) gave detailed attention to analyzin g the various Folklore Society, Volume XVIII ( 1953) . The draw­ "schools" of fraktur production in Penn ylvani a, i.e., ings in this volume, which show up the actu al designs Men nonite, Schwenkfelder, and others. better than most available photographs, were done by For tho e who wish to look at examples of fraktur, Eleanor M. Barba. Apart from the Barbas' work , little there are three principal collections: (1) H enry S. has been done on this important subject, except K laus Borneman, Pennsylvania German I lluminated Man­ Wust's recent pamphl et, Folk Art in Stone: Southwest uscripts (Norristown, 1937) , Pennsylvania Germa n V irginia (Edinburgh, Virginia: Shenandoah H istory, Society, Volu me XLV I ; (2) H enry S. Borneman, 1970) . Pennsylvania German Boo kJJlates (Philadelphia, 1953 ), Bi bliographies of the Pennsylvania German folk arts Pennsylvania German Society, Volume LIV; and (3) incl ude ( 1) Saro John Riccardi, compiler, " Pennsylva­ Pennsylvania German Fraktur and Color D rawings nia Dutch Folk Art and Architecture: A Selecti ve An­ (Lancaster: Pennsylvania Farm Museum of Landis notated Bibliography," N ew Y ork Public L ibrary Bul­ Vall ey, 1969 ) . I n addition there are fraktur plates le tin, XLVI: 6 (1942 ),47 1-483 : and (2) Shelley, op. in ome of the works cited above. Other usefu l volumes cit., pp. 187-2 19. on Pennsylvania German fo lk art are Francis Lichten, O n the so-call ed "hex signs" on Pennsylvania barns, Folk Art of R ural Pennsylvania (New York: Charles there are two opposing schools of though t. T he sym­ Scribner's Sons, 1946), taking up, in turn, the arts bolist approach is that they are apotropaic symbols, wh ich made use of iron, wood, clay, straw, and textiles. li terall y to scare witches away from the barn, and in H enry J. Kauffman's Pennsylvania Dutch American origin are ancient pre-Christian symbols from Europe. Folk Art ( Tew York : H olme Press, 1946) is now avail­ For this viewpoint, see August C. Mahr, "Origin a nd able again, happily, in paperback (Dover Publications, Signifi cance of Pennsylvania Dutch Barn Symbols," in ew York, 1964) . Lastly there is Earl F. Robacker, Al an Dundes, The Study of Folklore (Englewood Cliffs, T ouch of the Dutchland ( ew York : A. S. Barnes N.J . : Prentice-Hall , Inc., 1965), pp. 373-399. For the and Co., 1965 ), which contains chapters on individual opposite view, that they were simply the common designs Pennsylvania German arts. used on other media from tombstone to fraktur, ap­ Monographs and articles on individual fraktur scrive­ plied to the large bare spaces of the supported fore­ ners are fo rtunately increasing in number, so that we bay barns of the Eas tern parts of the Dutch Country, can study the production of fraktur in relation to its see Alfred L. Shoemaker, Three M yths A bo ut the Penn­ produ cers, its geographical spread, and its cultural con­ sylvania Dutch Country (Lancaster : Pennsylvania Dutch tex t. The work of one of the earlies t clerical scriveners, Folklore Center, 1951). Whatever their ultimate origins the Reverend D aniel Schumacher, some of whose work in pre-Christi an Europe or Asia, they had no occult dates from mid-18th Century, appears in Frederick meaning by the time after the Civil War when our first Weiser, "Daniel Schumacher's Ba ptism a l Register," documented barn decorations appear. In this view­ Publications of the Pennsylvania German Society, I point they are decorations and nothing more. Witch­ (1968 ), 185-407. The deep interest of Alfred L. Shoe­ craft beliefs were never paraded before the public, on maker in fraktur and its production is evident in the barns or anywhere else in the Dutch Country. Apo­ series of articles in The Pennsylvania Dutchman (Krebs, tropaic symbols are fo und not outside but inside some Dulheuer, Montelius, Egelmann, Schuller, and others) ; Pennsylvania German barns, in secret symbols formed for the complete list see the detailed bibliography on by nail s driven into the animal troughs or occult in­ fraktur in Shelley, op. cit., pp. 216, 218. Identification scriptions plugged into rafter or lintel. These are the of hitherto unknown frakturists has become fascinating true "hex signs". These are the two scholarly views detective work among the present generation of schol­ of the subject. The current " hex sign" revival with ars. For two articles announcing su ch discoveries, see its fake ymbolism for suburban garages IS something Monroe H . Fabian's recent article on Conrad Trewitz, entirely tangential to the culture. 13 ARCHITECTURE Pennsylvania Folklife has encouraged research in local The regional architecture of Eastern Pennsylvani a architecture. See for example, the articles by Robert produced by the Pennsylvania Germans, and marking C. Bucher, "The Continental Log House," XII:4 by the 19th Century an American combination of (Summer 1962 ), 14-19, and "The Swiss Bank House British Isles and Continental European patterns, was in Penn ylvania," XVIII: 2 (Winter 1968-1969), 32- early remarked upon by the travelers through Penn­ 39; H enry Glassie, "A Central Chimney Continental sylvania, but it has taken scholarship until the 20th Log H ouse," XVIII: 2 (Winter 1968-1969 ), 32-39; Century to do proper justice to it. The best introduc­ William J. Murtagh, "Half-Timbering in American tion to the architecture as well as to other aspects Architecture," IX : l (Winter 1957-1958), 2-11 ; Nancy of the material culture of the Pennsylvania Germans, J. McFall , "Preserving York's Architeetul al H eritage," viewed comparatively along with the other cultures of XVI: 3 (Spring 1967 ) , 20-23.; and "The Pennsylvania the Eastern Seaboard, is H enry Glassie, Pattern in the Sketchbooks of Charl es Lesueur," XVI: 2 (Winter 1966- M at erial Folk Culture of the Eastern United States 1967 ), 30-37. The measurements of the Germanic ar­ (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1968 ), chitecture of Eas tern Pennsylvania have been discussed which includes, by the way, the best bibliography on in Arthur J. Lawton, "The Pre-Metric Foot and Its the subject, arranged unfortunately alphabetically rather Use in Pennsylvania German Architecture," Pennsylva­ than topically. nia Folklife, XIX: 1 (Autumn 1969 ), 37-45. Barn architecture has attracted the attention of Among the basic treatments of religious architecture many scholars. The massive "Pennsylvania" or "Swiss" among the Pennsylvania Germans are William J. or "bank" barn, as it is called here, has been analyzed Murtagh, M oravian Architecture and T own-Planning: in several basic treatments, the best of which are (1) Bethlehem , P en n syl v ania, and Oth er Eighteenth­ Alfred L. Shoemaker, The Pennsylvania Barn (Kutz­ Century American Settlem ents (Chapel Hill: Univer­ town: Pennsylvania Folklife Society, 1959 ), which sity of North Carolina Press, 1967 ) . The only fresh deals with the construction and decoration of the barns, material in recent years on the meetinghouse architec­ with chapters on stone, log, brick, and frame barns, ture of the plain sects is the article by Clarence Kulp, and discussion of the thatching of barns, dialect and Jr., "A Study of the Dialect Terminology of the Plain English barn-building vocabulary, and a typology of Sects of Montgomery County, Pa.," Pennsylvania Folk­ barn decorations; and (2) Charles H. Dornbusch, life, XII:2 (Summer 1961 ), 41-47, which offers the Pennsylvania German Barns (Allentown, 1961), The theory of H olland Dutch influence on the interior Pennsylvania German Folklore Society, Volume XXI. arrangements of the Mennonite meetinghouses of the Dornbusch created the basic typology of the Pennsylva­ area, and provides the scholar with many new dialect nia barn, which is now followed and expanded by other architectural terms not recorded in Lambert. scholars, as for instance, H enry Glassie, in his lengthy The Pennsylvania Germans were influenced by the articles, "The Pennsylvania Barn in the South," Penn­ same general American stylistic influences in architec­ sylvania Folklife, XV:2 (Winter 1965 ) ,8-19, and "The ture as their English and other neighbors. The Victo­ Pennsylvania Barn in the South: Part II," Pennsylva­ rian decoration on the 19th Century homes of the nia Folklife, XV:4 (Summer 1966) , 12-25. Kutztown area has been analyzed, with excellent draw­ The Pennsylvania German farmhouse, the context ings of the principal motifs, in Elizabeth Adams Hur­ of rural life in the culture, has not as yet been re­ witz "Deco rative Elements in the Domestic Architec­ searched in as great detail as the barn. Thus far the ture' of Eastern Pennsylvania," The Dutchman, VII: 2 best treatment is G. Edwin Brumbaugh, Colonial Ar­ (Fall 1955 ), 6-29. chitecture of the Pennsylvania Germans (Lancaster, The smaller outbuildings of the Pennsylvania German 1933 ), Pennsylvania German Society, Volume XLI. farmstead have been analyzed, one after another, by From the architectural standpoint, for detailed photog­ Amos Long, Jr., of Lebanon County. In the 19th Cen­ raphy and architectural drawings of floor plans and tury our farms looked like small villages, what with details, the best treatments are (1) Charles Morse Stotz, barns, tenant houses, carriage houses, wagon sheds, The Early Architecture of Western Pennsylvani·a (Pitts­ smokehouses, springhouses, dryhouses, bakeovens, chick­ burgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1936), dealing en coops, pigpens, and last but not least, privies. A in part with Pennsylvania German buildings in the list of Amos Long's articles on these subjects, both in trans-Allegheny portions of the state; and (2) John Pennsylvania Folklife and other periodicals, appeared K. Heyl, "Architecture of the Lower Jordan Valley," in Glassie, 0 p. cit. The series is being revised at present Proceedings of the Lehigh County Historical Society, for a forthcoming yearbook of the (new) Pennsylvania XVII ( 1950). German Society. Periodical articles help to round out the picture. MUSIC Historical society quarterlies occasionally include ar­ The Pennsylvania German culture produced several ticles on individual structures, oriented mostly, how­ types and levels of music which has attracted the at­ ever, toward the history of their successive owners. tention of musicologists and other scholars. The high- 14 level creations of chamber music and choral productions Bayard' H ill Country Tunes of Southwestern Penn­ by Pennsylvania's colonial Moravians are now general­ sylvania Philadelphia, 1944). The dance tradition ly appreciated through the histories of American music, amonO' the Pennsylvania Germans and its mu ic are and through the series of long-playing discs issued, treated in everal articles in The Pennsylvania Dutch­ among others, by Decca Records, "Music of the Mor­ man: "Pennsylvania Dutch Folk D ancing," II: 5 (July avians in America: Six Quintets by John Frederick 1950) ; "The' trau s Dance' of the Dutch Country" Peter" (DXSA 7197 ). The Early American Moravian and "Three Fiddle Tunes from the Dutch Country," Music Foundation of Winston-Salem, orth Carolina, V: 1, February 1, 1954. ee also "The trouse D ance," is continuing the research in this field and publishing Pennsylvania Fo[klife, IX: 1 (Winter 1957-1958),12- 17. in it. Of the religious folk mu ic or folk hymnody of the The choral hymnody of the Ephrata Cloister has been Pennsylvania Germans, there are two principal varieties: studied by Julius Friedrich Sachse, The Music of the (1) the "slow tunes" of the plain sects, principally the Ephrata Cloister (Lancaster, 1903), Pennsylvania Ger­ hymn of the Ausbund as used among the Old Order man Society, Volume XII. Amish ; and (2) the livelier "Penn ylvania Spirituals," \-\'hile there have been many doctoral dissertations which are the Pennsylvania German ver ions, ranging on the official hymnody of vari ous of the Pennsylvania from broad dialect to adjusted High German, of the German churches and sects (particularly the Lutherans, M ethodi t camp-meeting spirituals ("white spirituals" the Mennonite, and the Brethren ), the only decent or "revival choruses" ) of the econd Awakening around treatment thus far of the German hymnody of the 1800. For the Amish music, see The M ennonite Ency­ colonial Penn ylvani a churches in a general work is clopedia; J oseph W. Yoder's Amische L ieder (Hunt­ Robert tcvenson, Protestant Church Music in America ingdon, Pennsylvania, 1942 ); and the article, "What ( ew York: W. W. Nort.on & Co., 1966), especially to R ead About the Amish," which gives a detailed list Chapter IV, "Pennsylvania Germans." of periodical literature. For the Penn ylvania Spirituals, It is toward the folk levels of music that the most see ( 1) Songs along the M ahantongo, Chapter X , widespread interest in Pennsylvania German music has "Songs from the Camp Ground"; (2 ) D on Yoder, been ori ented. Of the secular folk music, the first col­ Pennsylvania Spirituals (Lancaster : Pennsylvania Folk­ lection published was Thomas R . Brendle and William life Society, 1961 ); and (3) Albert F. Buffington, . Troxell, "Pennsylvania German Songs," in George " Dutchified German" Spirituals (Lancast e r, 1965 ) , K orson, editor, Pennsylvania Songs and L egends (Phil­ Pennsylvania German Society, Volume LXII. adelphia : University of Pennsylvania Press, 1949), pp. Two forthcoming articles will be of help in giving 62 -I 28 ; although the first complete volume of Penn­ overviews of the subject, (1) David]. Hufford, "Bibliog­ sylvania German folksongs was W alter E . Boyer, Al­ raphy of Pennsylvania Folk Music," scheduled for pub­ bert F. Buffington, and Don Yoder, Songs along the lication in Pennsylvania Folklife, Volume XXI (1971 - Mahantongo (Lancaster: Pennsylvania Dutch Folklore 1972 ) ; and Don Yoder, "Die Volkslieder der Penn­ Center, 1951 , 2d ed. , Hatboro, Pennsylvani a: Folk­ sylvanien-Deutschen" (T he Folksongs of the Pennsylva­ lore Associates, 1964) . Both were based on extensive nia Germans), in Lutz Rohrich and Rolf Wilhelm fi eld work in the Dutch Counties. Other unpublished Brednich, H andbuch des D eutschen V olksliedes (Frei­ collections, also based on fi eld work, are those of Robert burg im Breisgau: D eutsches V olksliedarchiv, 1972) , C. Bucher, Clarence Kulp, Jr., and Alan G. K eyser, V olume II. collected from the "Goschenhoppen" area of South­ C OSTUME eastern Pennsylvania; and the separate coll ections of The subject of dress among the Pennsylvania Germans C. Richard Beam, Albert F . Buffington, and D on Yoder. is one that has been approached by scholars only recent­ I t is hoped that these collections will eventuall y all ly. The subject is of great interest, since among the plain be published, to rou nd out our picture of the Penn­ sects there is perhaps a greater variety of living trad­ sylvania German fo lk-musical tradition. itional costume than in any of the relict costume areas Work on the musical instruments of the Dutch of peasant Europe. There are over a dozen "plain" Country has been somewhat more meager. T here are sects all of which wear a garb which d ifferentiates a few articl es on the zi ther, played, believe it or not, themselves both from the outside " world" (which of by M ennonite grandmothers to accompany their ballad­ cou rse wears " f ashio n a ble" dress) and from their singing, in the publications of the Bucks County His­ "plain" neighbor sects. torical Society and the Lehigh Cou nty H istorical Soci­ Early treatments of the subject include ( 1) a series ety. Authorities on the Appalachian folk instruments of articles in The Pennsylvania D utchman (Women's assure me that the two traditions are related. W e have Costume, IV: 13, M arch 1, 1953; M en's Costume, as yet no defini tive articles on the fiddle and its use IV:15 (Easter 1953); (2) M ary J ane H ershey, "A among the Pennsylvani a Germans, but the be t col­ Study of the Dress of the (Old) M ennonites of the lection of Pennsylvania dance tunes is Samuel P. Franconia Conference 1700-1953," Pennsylvania Folk- 15 life, IX :3 (Summer 1958 ) , 24-47 ; (3) John A. Hos­ tetler, "The Amish U sc of Symbols and their Function Black in Bounding the Community," The Journal of the R oyal Anthropological In stitute, Volume XCIV, Part 1 (1963), 11-22 ; and (4) Melvin Gingerich, "Change and Uniformity in M e nnonite Attire," Mennonite Quarterly R eview, October 1966, 243-259. The two most extensive treatments of the subject are Don Yoder, "Sectarian Costume Research in the United States," in Austin and Alta Fife and Henry Glassie, editors, Forms Upon the Frontier: Folklife and Folk Arts in the United States (Logan, Utah: Utah State University Press, 1969 ), pp. 41 -75; and Melvin Ging­ erich, M enno nite Attire Through F our Centuries (Breinigsville, Pennsylvania: P e nnsylvan ia German Society, 1970 ), Pennsylvania German Society, Volume IV (1970 ) . The former' views Pennsylvania German "plain" dress synopticall y alongside other forms of non­ conforming dress (Roman Catholic monastic costume Mining Folklore of and H asidic dress in Judaism). Dr. Gingerich's book the Pennsylvania Dutch is the most detailed, most thorough historically based study of sectarian dress ye t produced on any of the Pennsylvania German plain sects. It is copiously il­ lustrated with drawings and photographs of Anabap­ George Korson's many contributions to the study of tist, }'1ennonite, and Amish dress, and includes chapters Pennsylvania's coal region and its culture include this detailing each separate item of clothing from the "plain" volume on the folklore of the Pennsylvania Dutch miners. cap to "plain" underwear. On the subject of the everyday and festival dress of lec tions in book form are, in order of publication: (1) the "Gay Dutch," there is as yet unfortunately no work George Frederick, The Pennsylvania D utch and Their published. For those interested in contributing to our J. Cookery (New York : The Business Bourse, 1935 ) ; (2) knowledge about rural dress, see the Pennsylvania Folk­ Ruth Hutchison, The Pennsylvania Dutch Cook Book life Questionnaire on "Farm Dress" (Folk-Cultural Questionn a ire No.9 ), in Pennsylvania Folklife, (New York: H arper & Brothers, 1948 ) , avail able in paperback form as The N ew Pennsylvania Dutch Cook XVIII: 1 (Autumn 1968 ) . Book; (3) M ary Emma Showalter, M ennonite Com­ munity Cookbook: Favorite Family R ecipes (Scottdale, COOKERY & FOODWAYS Pennsylvani a: The Mennonite Community Association, In the 20th Century, the regional foods of the Penn­ 1950) ; and (4) Edna Eby H eller, The Art of Penn­ sylvania Germans have attracted n.ationwide attention. sylvania Dutch Cooking (New York: Doubleday, 1968 ). I t is strange therefore that there are still, strictly speak­ Mrs. H eller has contributed a lengthy series of articles ing, no "Pennsylvania Dutch" restaurants in Philadel ­ on Pennsylvania Dutch fo od specialties, with detailed phia or even in the Dutch counties, of the same authen­ recipe instructions, to Pennsylvania Folklife. ticity that we have, for example, in the Mexican­ On three of the staple fo ods of the Pennsylvania American restaurants of T exas and California, or the Germans, sauerkraut, schnitz (dried apples), and corn­ Creole restaurants of Louisiana. It is still true that meal mush, with ethnographic and historical details one of the few places where authentically prepared and analogues in Europe and America, See Don Pennsylvania Dutch rural foods can be sampled in Yoder, "Sauerkraut in the Pennsylvania Folk-Culture," public is the Pennsylvania Dutch Folk Festival, which Pennsylvania Folklife, XII:2 (Summer 1961 ),56-69 ; from its very beginning in 1950 has featured the pro­ "Schnitz in the Pennsylvania Folk-Culture," Permsylva­ duction and sale of local food specialties. nia Folklife, XII:3 (Fall 1961 ), 44-53; and "Penn­ For recipes of the Pennsylvania German H ausfrau, sylvanians Called it Mush," Pennsylvania Folklife, several books are important. The very best, because XIII:2 (Winter 1962-1963), 27 - [49J. of its combination of authentic recipes plus well re­ On the festival foods of the Pennsylvania Germans, searched histories of individual foods, is Ann Hark and see especially Alfred L. Shoemaker, Christmas in Penn­ Preston A. Barba, Pennsylvania German Cookery (Al­ sylvania: A Folk-Cultural Study (Kutztown, 1959), lentown: Schlechter's, 1950), which should be brought which has detailed historical references to Christmas out in paperback. The other representative recipe col- cookies and confections; and Eastertide in Pennsylvania: 16 A Folk Cultural Study (Kutztown, 1960), which does approach to desc ribing Quake r life in Philadelphia the same for the specialties associated with the Easter and the Q uaker counties. cycle of holidays. In the 20th Century, the two principal novelists On the Pennsylvania German kitchen, its layout and who used Pennsylvania Dutch themes were Helen lore, See H enry K. Landis, "Early Kitchens of the Reim ensnydcr ;"[artin and El ie ingma ter. Helen R. Pennsylvania Germans," Pennsylvania German Society, Martin, a Lutheran mini ter's daughter from Lan­ Volume XLVII, Part 2 (1939 ); and George L. Moore, caster, captured the fi eld with her atiric novel of "My Mother's K itchen," Pennsylvania Folklife) XIII : 1 "plain" life, Tillie) A M ennonite Maid: A Story of the (FaJl 1962 ), 9-12. Pennsylvania Dutch ( ew York: Grosset and Dunlap, For the overaJl analysis of problems involved in 1904) . The theme, one way of highlighting plain life, studying Pennsylvania German cookery, see "Historical was to introduce an outsider, in this case a school­ Sources in American Cookery Research," in Pennsylva­ master, who, naturally, falls in love with Pl ain Tillie. nia Folklife) XX : 3 (Spring 1971). This article treats The book wa badly received by some over-sensitive six research problems in Pennsylvania foodways re­ Pennsylvania Germans who were at the time in a search: (1) Determining the Dietary Profile of Penn­ defensive stage in their ethnic development. While sylvania German Culture, (2) The Acculturation of they were afraid to laugh at themselves, the public Ethnic Cuisines of Eastern Pennsylvania, (3) The Diet enjoyed the book, which went through many editions of the Emigrant Generations, (4) General American and even achieved a stage ver ion. Mrs. Martin went Influences on Pennsylvania German Cookery, (5) Penn­ on to write several dozen other books about the Dutch, sylvania German Reactions to Changes in Food T ech­ atirizing their authoritarian fathers (a theme which nology, and (6) The Relation of Urban and Rural was to be central in the Broadway play "Papa is All"), Foods in Eastern Pennsylvania. their conservatism, provincialist outlook, and their awk­ ward English speech. Most of her novels use the THE PENNSYLVANIA D UTC HMAN I N FICTION same device-the outsider among the Dutch farmers The Pennsylvani a Dutchman, like other regional or villagers. figures in American life (the New England Yankee, Elsie Singmaster, another daughter of the Lutheran the Negro, the Southern "poor white," the Appala­ parsonage, wrote many short stories about the Dutch, chian "hillbill y," the cowboy, etc. ) was earl y captured mostly about the "Gay Dutch". My favorite among and stereotyped in regional or local color fiction. her works is The Magic Mirror (New York: Houghton Short stories and sketches, as well as jokes abou t the Mifflin Co., 1934), a story of a year in the life of Dutchman, began to appear in 19th Century newspapers the Hummer family, row-house residents in Allentown and alm anacs. The best coll ection of the jokes a nd jests at the turn of the century. The book contains charming about the 'Dutch" is Alfred L. Shoemaker, M y Off is vignettes of Dutch life and shrewd analyses of the ethnic All (Lancaster: Pennsylvania Dutch Folklore Center, mixture and tensions in Allentown and the rapidly 1952 ) . Several 19th Century short stories about Penn­ industrializing Lehigh Valley at the end of the 19th sylvania Dutch li fe, with notes on authorship by Alfred Century. A classic chapter follows the summer activ­ L. Shoemaker, were reprinted in the 1950's, a century ities of young J esse Hummer, who sells Bibles and The after their original appearance in upstate newspapers, R oyal Path of Life on a memorable bicycl e tour of in The Pennsylvania Dutchman. Lehigh County, where he takes part in the local Sunday For its portrayal of the nuances of Pennsylvania School festivals and meets the Country Dutch. As a Dutch life, incl uding everything from dialect to pow­ fictional portrait of rural Dutch life this chapter is un­ wowing and witchcraft, the best earl y novel is Francis excell ed. My second choice among M rs. Singmaster's T. Hoover's Enemies in the R ear)' or, A Golden Circle works is the short story collection, Bred in the Bone) Squared (Boston: Arena Publishing Company, 1895) . and Other Stories (New York : Houghton Mifflin Co., The scene is laid in Civil War times, when enemies 1925). Here the author shows herself equally expert in the rear (Copperheads) were supposed to have been in the portrayal of the "plain Dutch" ethos in several common among the Democrats of the Dutch counties. stories about the "Shindledecker sisters," saintly but A similar Civil War story about. the Pennsylvania human Mennonite old maids, whose motto emblazoned Dutch, although laid in Western M aryland, is Katy on their show towel on the back stairway door, is of Catoctin; or) The Chain-Breakers ( 1886), by the "Little and Unknown, Loved by God Alone". Delaware journalist George Alfred Townsend, and For a list of the major fictional treatments of the again available (Cambridge, Maryland: Tidewater Pennsylvania Dutch, see Arthur C. Bining, Robert L. Publishers, 1959) . The tension produced by the Civil Brunhouse, and Norman B. Wilkinson, Writings on War in the Dutch Country was, it seems, a favorite Pennsylvania History: A Bibliography (Harrisburg: setting for our early novelists; just as the problems Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission, of Pennsylvania's Quakers during the Revolution pro­ 1946 ), "Pennsylvania Fiction," pp. 485-524; and "Folk­ vided our 19th Century writers with their favorite lore Tales, Legends and Poetry," pp. 525-528. 17 SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT Of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Plain Dutch ComIllunity to 1970: Part I

By C. LEE HOPPLE

German-speaking peoples from northern Switzerland, The Gay Dutch have always been the maJonty and Baden, Wlirttemberg, Al sace, Lorraine, the Palatinate, the Plain Dutch the minority. Thus, the Gay Dutch the Rhineland, and Silesia, as well as from other prov­ set the primary pattern for what is call ed the Pennsylva­ inces in Germanic Europe began migrating to south­ nia Dutch culture. But the Pl ain people created a cul­ eastern Pennsylvania toward the end of the seventeenth ture of their own, which, because of its distinctiveness century. Although these migrations continued into the to the non-Dutch observer, is now the symbol of every­ nineteenth century, most of the ancestors of today's thing Dutch." outhea tern Pennsylvania Dutch were pre-revolutionary Anabaptist forefathers of the Plain Dutch, to escape Americans, colon i a I German-dialect-speaking immi­ European religious intolerance, commenced their mi­ grants.' grations to Pennsylvani a shortly after the colony was These German immigr.ants brought with them their founded in 1682. First the Mennonites began to arrive strong Protestant religious heritage together with many in the 1680's, then the Amish and Dunkards in the other mores. But the culture of southeastern Pennsylva­ 1720's, and fin ally the Schwenkfelders in the 1730's. nia never was a pure German transplant. There was, . By the end of the eighteenth century, between 20,000 from the beginning, an interplay a nd mixing of their a nd 25,000 German-speaking Anabaptists had migrated culture with that of other colonial Pennsylvanians: to southeastern Pennsylyania.' After more than two and a half centuries of such These German immigrants brought thei r very con­ mixing, there can be no possibility of a pure Dutch servative European cultural customs with them. The culture today. core of European Anabaptism was an intensely pro­ Actually, the elements of the American sub-culture found veneration of the Scriptures, particularly St. which is today called Pennsylvania Dutch, developed Paul's in junction to retreat from the world.' This rev­ as two distinctive culture patterns, the main cleavage erence of things biblical caused the European Anabap­ having been along religious lines.' This religiously ' tists and their Pennsylvania Plain Dutch descendants caused cultural division has been between the Gay to become tradition-directed peoples.' Dutch rural-urban and the Plain Dutch rural folk cul­ To preserve their religious identity, and to defend tures. The Gay Dutch, i. e., the Lutheran and Calvinist their traditional societies against ex tinction by persecu­ Reformed' sects, theologically representing the conserv­ tion, the Anabaptists in Europe isolated themselves ative and middle-of-the-road branches of the Protestant from the world culturally and socially. Spatio-economic Reformation, are those who live in what is religiously isolation, however, was not and is not tenet of Ana­ called the world. The Plain Dutch, i.e., the Anabaptist baptism, but emerged only when the movement was sects, theologically representing the radical wings of the banished from the European towns and forced to sur­ Protestant Reformation, are those who prefer to live vive in the hinterlands.'· Since they were accustomed apart from this world: to residing in spatially and culturally isolated rural . farm villages in the Europea T'J. hinterlands, the Ana- 'Don Yoder, "Plain Dutch and Gay Dutch: Two Worlds in the Dutch Country." The Pennsylvania Dutchman, p. 36j VIII :4 (~ummer 1956). "Ibid:, p. 36. 'Ibid., pp. 36-37'. 'C. Henry Smith, The Story of the Mennonites, p. 548. 'Ibid., p . 35. 'Don Yoder, "Religious Patterns of the Dutch Country," 'Ibid., p. 42. Calvinist Reformed and Reformed are used Pennsylvania Folklife, Folk Festival Issue, 1960, p. 27. interchangeably throughout the remainder of this thesis. 'John A. Hostetler, Amish Society, pp. 10-11. 'Ibid., p. 3-4. ,oIbid., p . 18. 18 baptist immigrants avoided the towns and cities In and internal areal organization of the Plain D utch are southeastern Pennsylvania. clearly Pennsylvania types. u But, like their European After arriving in Philadelphia, the Anabaptists dis­ counterpart, they emerged as distinctively religiously persed into the rural territories of all the counties now controlled spatial systems. . comprising the Southeastern Pennsylvania Plain D utch Generally, the entire population of each shipload of Community in search of fertile farm lands. They pre­ Anabapti t immigrants docking at Philadelphia \Va ferred to live adjacent to one another if suitable ag­ comprised of adherents belonging to the ame sect ricultural lands were available." The alternative was being either all Amish, D unkards, Mennonites, or to reside in as close proximity as possible. But, even Schwenkfelders. F requently, choosing to continue their during the early eighteenth century, much of rural close transatlantic relation hip, they left Philadelphia so utheastern Pennsylvania was already somewhat pop­ a a group." U nsuccessful in their endeavor to live ul ated and, in addition, many uninhabited tracts had adjacent to each other, the Plain D utch were at least been surveyed and pur hased. H ence, in most places, able to obtain land and develop farm in sufficiently the Plain Dutch settlers were u nable to obtain lands close proximity so as to produce cl uster of sectarian adjacent to each other, and they could only live in as rural farm residences (Figu re 1). Successive such waves close proximity as the availabili ty of farm land would of immigrants ei ther moved into an area adjacent to permit. a cluster already developed by members of their sect, The Southeastern Pennsylvania Plain Dutch Com ­ thus expanding it, or they organized a new sectari an munity never became a German cultural transplant, rural fa rm cluster (Figure 1). This pattern of migra­ for, despite Pl ain Dutch efforts to the contrary, the tion and settlement, adhered to by most Anabap tist inter persing of Plain Dutch and non-Plain Dutch sects, repeated itself until the southeastern Pennsylvania peoples caused cultural mixing to begin almost im­ Dutch Community landscape was dotted with these mediately." Thus, the patterns of spatial development rural farm clusters . Each Plain Dutch sect's rural cluster were early "Frederic Klees , T he Pennsylvania D utch, pp. 191 -192. " Don Yoder, " Plain D utch and Gay D utch : Two Worlds in organized into congregational districts" (Figure 2). the Dutch Country," Pennsylvania Folkli/e, Summer 1956. D epending upon the number and distributional pattern "Howard Wiegner K ri ebel, The S chwenk/elders in Penn­ sylva nia, A H istorical Sketch , Vol. XIII, Proceedings of the of families comprising a cluster, it might have been I-ennsylvania German Society, L ancaster, Pa., 1904. organized into one or several congregational districts (Figure 3). Considering church buildings worldly,'· the Plain Dutch conducted religious services either in private homes or in meetinghouses. As private homes MODEL OF AN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY SOUTHEASTERN and meetinghouses could only accommodate a small PENNSYLVANIA PLAIN DUTCH number of persons, congregational populations were RURAL FARM CLUSTER SETTLEMENT PATTERN small, being comprised at most of only a few dozen families (Figures 2 and 3). The districts were ter­ ritoriaIIy small, ranging in size from 2 to 30 square .0. ·00. miles (Figures 2 and 3). T heir size was primarily •••••.0· .· EXAMPLE OF A PLAIN ~ •.0. o. DUTCH DISPERSED .0.0. RURAL FARM CLUSTER "C. H enry Smith, The Story 0/ the M ennonites, pp. 544- • 0 •• 0. SETTLEMENT PATTERN 545. J ohn A. Hostetler, Amish Society, pp. 77-79 . CONSISTING OF Io4ANY "Congregations represent the fourth and lowest level of the NON-PLAIN / religious hierarchy, and d istricts represent the fourth and •••o. 0.0. CLOSELY SPACED FARMS DUTCH FARM •• 0 •• 0 lowest level of the spatial hierarchy. Congregational d istrict .0 .0 0 refers collectively to the fourth and lowest level of religious ••0 0 • and spa tial hierarchies. Thus, a congregational district in­ ••• cludes all the sectarians who always assemble with one another ? at a specified place for the purpose of conducting religious PLAIN DUTCH FARM services (congregation ), and all the territory occupied by these sectarians who always worship with one another (district ). When used separately, the word congregation refers to this body of worshippers, and distric t refers to the territory occupied • by them . 0 • " Such terms as church congregation and church district are EXAMPLE OF A PLAIN 0 not used in this study because they do not seem to be synon­ 0 • DUTCH DISPERSED ymous with the term congregational district. Such terms as 0 RURAL FARM CLUSTER • • church congregatio n signify the presence and use of a church 0• 0 0 SETTLEME~T PATTERN building by a group of adherents to the faith. M oreover, it • implies that these adherents, except for religious beliefs, have CONSISTING OF FEWER •• 0 •o • MORE WIDELY SPACED • little else in common. T he Plain Dutch Congregational Dis­ 0 0 FARMS 0 trict concept has an entirely different meaning. T he Plain •0 • Dutch d id not believe in or worship in church buildings. In­ • • stead, Plain Dutch congregations rotated the worship service among the members' homes or utilized a meetinghouse. Fur­ thermore, since Plain Dutch congregations became multi­ bonded, ceremonial, symbolic groups, the territory occupied Figure 1. by a congregation became a socio-culturally isolated district.

19 determined by a combination of three factors: (1) the number of persons that could assemble in the small est RESIDENTIAL MODEL OF AN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY homes and meetinghouses, (2) the spatial distribution SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA PLAIN DUTCH CONGREGATIONAL DISTR ICT of families that comprised a cluster and, (3) the dis­ tance a horse-drawn carriage could transport a person CONGRE GAT ION AL BO UN DAR Y in approximately an hou r. Depending upon the num­ ber, and distributional pattern, of families compri ing a single settlement cluster, it might have been divided into several congregational districts" (Figure 3) . The o broad pattern of spatial development, and territori al organization, of each congregational district practicall y duplicated all others because of the similarity of reli ­ gious and cul tural influences." The econom ic attributes of the congregational dis­ tricts were q ui c kl y orie nte d toward achieving self­ sufficiency. As perceived by the Pl ain Dutchman, this goal was closely associated with, and almos t entirely dependent upon, farming and ancill ary occupations. Farming was not an original tenet of Anabaptism ; it developed as a major value only aft er the move­ ment was banished to the European hinterlands." H ence, to the Plain Dutchman in southeastern Penn­ ~ PLAI N D~TC H FARM sylvania, tilling the soil was looked upon as a Godly endeavor. M ost of the original Plain Dutch land pur­ o NON - PL AI N DUTC H FAR M chases were comprised of extensively forested tracts which ranged from 300 to 700 acres in size." Plain Du tch agriculture has evolved in three stages: ( 1) in­ o NEARBY VILLAGE tensive subsistence farming, (2) intensive subsistence o I MI LE combined with general commercial farming, and (3) ~I------~I intensive subsistence along with specialized commercial farming." Figure 2. Intensive subsistence farming preva iled during most of the eighteenth century. The Pl ain Dutchman began the development of his farm by constructing a m ake­ ricul ture had its beginning during the latter part of the shift log house and barn, and deforesting a plot large eighteenth century and exempli fied Plain Dutch farm­ enough to provide sufficient food ·for the first year's ing throughout the ni neteenth century. Time formerly subsistence. Additional area was cleared each year used during the earlier simple subsistence phase to clear until most of the suitable crop and pasture land was land was now devoted to building a permanent home developed. M ajor crops included wheat, corn, rye, and a substantial barn. As prosperity increased, many oats, barley, buckwheat, potatoes, squash, p umpkins, outbuildings we re constructed such as a windmill. wash­ lima beans, apples, peaches, fl ax, and hemp. Each house, springhouse, bakehouse, tenant house, summer farm contained a small dairy herd, several beef cattle, ki tchen, corn crib, pig pen, chicken house, woodshed , a few hogs, some sheep, and a variety of fowl." and toolshed. In time, the individual Plain D utch When labor time, formerly allocated to d earing land, farm, compri ed of about 15 buildings, took on the was avail abl e for other purposes, and harvests were appearance of a prosperous and diversifie d economic large enough to provide saleable surpluses, the peri od unit.:!3 of simple subsistence farming ended. The earning of General commercial farming was developed for the profit, the construction of farm buildings, and the dive r­ purpose of maximizin CT urplu es, and m inimizing the sifi cation of land-use marked the advent of general poss ibility of economic failure from depending upon commercial farming. Agricultural surpluses were usual­ onl y a few spec ia li zed crops." Agricultural diversifica­ ly a bundant within a few decades after the fi rst land tion was accented by the p roduction of a variety of clearing. H ence, the period of general commercial ag- grains, vegetables, fruits, technical crops, and livestock. The major crops produced during the general farming "John A. H ostetl er, A m ish Society, pp. 70-72. " Frederi c Klees, The Pennsylvania Dutch, pp. 197-198. phase of Plain Dutch agriculture were wheat, corn, "John A. H ostetler, A mish Society, p . 18. rye, oats, barley, buckwheat, hay, potatoes, green veg- 2·Frederic Klees, The Pennsylvania Dutch, p. 194. " Ibid., pp. 192-197. "Ibid., p. 197. " Ibid., pp. 195-197. " Ibid., p . 194. 20 H omegrown rye became the staple bread grain. Veg­ MODEL OF THE ORGAN IZATION OF AN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA PLAIN etables and fruits we re dried and preserved for winter DUTCH RURAL FARM CLUSTER SETTLEMENT u e. om , oats, and hay provided a n abundant supply INTO CONGREGATIONAL DISTRICTS of feed and, in return, farm animals yield ed ample supplie of milk, butter, chee e, beef, pork, ham, poultry, • • • • and eggs. Animals also su pplied fertili zer, and fats for •••••• •• • • making of soap and candles. Each farm had a spinning •• •• • • •••••• • wheel where fl ax, hemp, and wool were spun into cloth ••••••• • • • ••• • for thc making of Pl ain Dutch clothing." Cut-over ••• woodlands furnished building materials, fencing, and • •• ~ CONGREGATIONAL •• • •• DISTR ICT BOUNDARY domestic fuel. ••• • Plain Dutch farming graduall y converted to a spec­ • • • ializcd commercial economy during the twentieth cen­ tury. The farm enterprise is now devoted essentially to the production of feed grains and hay to fatten beef • cattle or sustain dairy herds, and to the production of CONGREGATIONAL • ~ a cash crop or two . DISTRICT BOUNDARY • The clf-sufficiency concept of the Plain Dutchman • • • encompassed more than the economic life, for his 0 I MILE • insistence upon retreating from the world was pre­ I ••• • • • dicated upon a high degree of cultural independence . • • H cnce all spiritual, social , and cultural needs of the • • • individual literally from the cradle to the grave were met and satisfied by the local community. Congrega­ Figure 3. tional districts, therefore, emerged as multibonded, symbolic, self-governing communities. Thc member­ ship of each congregational district was fi rmly bondecl etables, and various deciduous fruits. Pl ain Dutch together sy mbolicall y by its own set of traditions. con­ farmers also increased the size of dairy and beef cattle ventions, and ceremonial functions,'" which found ex­ herds, and the number of hogs, sheep, and fowl, during pression through a formal set of church rules. Since this period.'" Large quantities of wheat, the principal the Plain Dutch tcnd to be pervasively religious," the cash crop, along with other technical crops, were mar­ church'" bccame thc center of authority, and, through keted in the larger cities. Salted and smoked meats, the ironclad leadership of its bishop," the church con­ cheese, poultry, eggs, and other products were sold trolled all aspects of Plain Dutch life. in surrounding. towns. Profi ts from the sale of these As head of the church and leader of the congregation excess commodities were used to purchase farm im­ in his district, the bishop was entrusted with the en­ plements, draft animals, breeder stock to develop herds, forcement of the or rules of the church. and for many other associated purposes. Additional Ordnung," Moreover, the bishop was empowered with the M eid­ purchases included salt, pepper, spices, molasses, tea, ung," which he placed upon all those who violated and shoes. the rules. The above-described farm situation prevail ed through­ out the Southeastern Pennsylvania Plain Dutch Com­ Since, in effect, each congregational district was religiously autonomous, 34 were munity during the nineteenth century. It is only in the R egel und Ordnung production of certain technical crops that several notice­ " Ibid., pp. 193-195. able spatial variations can be observed. Plain Dutch '"D ~m Yoder, "The Horse and Buggy Dutch," Pennsylvania Folkll/e, July, 1963, p. 11. farms in Lancaster County began the production of '"Ibid., p. 11. tobacco, and the tobacco curing shed became one of 3·Although so~e . of the Plain Dutch did not believe in the use of church bUildings, they did believe in the spiritual church. the most conspicuous farm buildings in this section. The word church, when used in this thesis, refers only to the In Bucks and Montgomery Counties, on the other hand, concept of a body of adherents to a religious faith 31 D~m Yoder, "The Horse and Buggy Dutch," Pe~nsylvania flax and hemp became the main technical crops, and Folklt/e, July, 1963, p. 11. the Plain Dutchmen erected drying kilns to process " Ordnung rendered in English means rules of the church Se;3 John A. Hostetler, A~ish Society, pp. 57-62. . them. !or an excellent descfll?ti.on of the enforcement of the Despite the development of general commercial farm­ Me.ldung or Bann, see Wilham A. Schreiber Our Amish Neighbors (The University of Chicago Press Ch'icago IIlI'nol's ing by the nineteenth century Plain Dutch, their own 1962) . ' , , home economy remained essentially self-sufficient.'· "Regel und . Ordnun~ tr.ans.lated into English means rules an? o~ders .. Literally, It Signifies that the individual in his "Ibid., pp. 193-195. dally hfe Will never depart from the rules of the church S '"Ibid., pp. 58-62. John A. Hostetler, Amish Society, p. 57. . ee 21 formul ated independently by each congregation. H ow­ deep suspicion of anything new. Contemporaneous ever, the bishops of all the congregational districts eighteenth-century inventions and changes were re­ comprising a given sec t assembled periodicall y in order jected on the assumption that they were worldy things, to formulate pecifi c church rules which were to be and therefore sinful and ungodly. The major ceremo­ binding on al l the member congregations. Since none nial functions of life-baptism, courtship, marriage, of the Plain Dutch sects possessed a supreme clerical burial- were closely supervised." authority, absolu te unifprmity was not achieved by Conforming to such traditions as wearing plain cloth­ any sect. But, except fo r some minor variations among ing, conversing in the Pennsylvania Dutch dialect, till­ its congregational districts, each sect succeeded in ing the soil , resisting cultural change, perpetuating the developing some common church rules. These rules ceremonial community, and controlling education devel­ had subtl e symbolic significa nce which permitted the oped as conventional practices in the eighteenth cen­ knowledgeable observer to identify the adherents of tury. These conventions became visible or perceptual each Pl ain Dutch sect. symbols which identified the Plain Dutch community, The more specifi c aspects of Ordnung, as well as symbols which served as a constant reminder to the any of its general features which caused variations in Plain Dutchman that sacred tradition was the best way the spatial development and socio-cultural attributes of life. Thus, the eighteenth-century Southeastern Penn­ of the various Plain Dutch sects, will be elaborated sylvania Plain Dutch Community sectarian congrega­ in greater detail in appropriate places in this chapter. tional districts emerged as small, distinctive, cohesive, Rules characterizing eighteenth-century Southeastern static, close-knit, self-sufficient, isolated, rural folk­ Pennsylvania Plain Dutch Community society as a communities ." The extent to which the various Plain whole are reviewed below." Dutch sects have been able to preserve these folk cul- Except for illness, compulsory attendance a t religious "Ibid., Chapters 6, 7, 8. services was demanded. The Plain Dutch believed that " John A. Hostetl er, A mish S ociety, pp. 3-2 2; C. Henry Smith, The Story 0/ th e M ennonites, pp. 535-637; Howard regular church attendance bonded the community to­ Wiegner Kriebel, The S chwenk/elders in Pennsylvania, A His­ gether and cemented family solidarity. The congrega­ torica l Sketch, pp. 35-102; and Don Yoder, "The H orse and tional districts placed great stress upon the wearing Buggy Dutch," Pennsylvania Folkli/e, July, 196 3, pp. 11-17 . of plain clothes,'" for such attire was considered to be religious garb worn to set the wearer apart from the world." Each sect adopted its own particular styles. COMMUNICATIONS MODEL OF AN EIGHTEENTH H ence, the sectarian affiliation of the Plain Dutchman CENTURY SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA could be identified by the type of plain clothing worn." PLAIN DUTCH SUB-REGION The Plain Dutch community became a trilingual speech community. High German was the language required for use in religious services, and in printed materials whose circulation was limited to the Plain Dutch FREQUENT DIRECT world. The Pennsylvania Dutch dialect was expected COMMUNICATIONS in everyday conversation. English was permitted when communicating, in conversation or in print, with non­

Dutch people. H ence, required speech patterns tended \ to bond the community and isolate it socially. Cultiva­ \ \ INFREQUENT INDIRECT tion of the soil w.as considered a moral- directive, and \ COMMUNICATIONS farming and related occupations were strongly en­ \~ \ couraged by the church." Education was rigidly con­ trolled. Formal schooling beyond the el ementary grades \ \ was forbidden on grounds that it was of little practical \ value for farmers.'o Most congregational districts op­ \ \ erated a parochial school which, in addition to teach­ ) \ ing elementary subjects, was entrusted with instilling FREQUENT DIRECT=.;' COMMUNICATIONS \ in the student a profound respect for the past and a \ \ "During the eighteenth century, the Ordnung covered the whole range of human experience. Through time, it has been the single most important factor influencing the spatial devel­ opment of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Dutch Community. 'GJ ohn A. Hostetler, Amish Society, pp. 134-138. " Don Yoder, ·"Pennsylvania's Plain Garb," Pennsylvania FREQUENT DIRECT ~ Folkli/e, Summer, 19.62, p. 2. COMMUNICATIONS " Ibid., p. 2. " Elmer L. Smith, Amish People, pp. 126-127. ,oJohn A. Hostetler, Amish Society, pp. 143-145. Figure 4. 22 ture attributes through time is closely related to the gregational districts belonging to a sect communicated degree of retention of their religious beliefs and practices. among themselves frequently and directly (Figure 4). Respect for tradition was one of the original major Communications became less frequent as distances sep­ values of European Anabaptism," and conformity to arating congregational districts increa ed (Figure 4). tradition caused conservatism and socio-cultural isola­ If congregational districts were quite remote from each tion. Thus, sects adhering to the purest forms of Ana­ other, communications were infrequent and indirect; baptism became much more traditionally oriented than instead information was usually relayed via congrega­ sects adopting more modified types of Anabaptism. tional districts situated at intermediate locations (Fig­ Tradition-directed peoples perpetuate their mores ure 4) . The eighteenth-century spatial organization through attitudes of conservatism and social isolation. of a sectarian sub-regional communication pattern, as Isolation is predicated upon limited and controlled illustrated by Figure 4, with certain modifications con­ communication. The most conservative Plain Dutch tinues to be valid today. sects have attempted to prevent cultural change by Bonds of cultural kinship resulting from related regulating the frequency and direction of their com­ R eformation heritages also existed among the several munication. Spatially, three eighteenth-century Plain eighteenth-century Plain Dutch sects of southeastern Dutch religiously controlled communication links" can Pennsylvania" (Amish, Dunkard, M ennonite, and be recognized, namely: (1) between congregations of chwenkfelder). Frequency of communication among the ;same sect, (2) between different sects, and (3) these sects varied inversely with differences in the de­ between a sect and the outside world. gree of their sectarian religious conservatism (Figure Because of their common Ordnung, and the sub­ 5), but the frequency of communication between each sequent similarity of religious beliefs, ways of thinking sect and the outside world varied directly with the and behaving were similar for all members of a given degree of their religious liberalism (Figure 5). These sect (Amish, Dunkard, Mennonite, or Schwenkfelder) . Plain Dutch religious sect communication patterns H ence, a strong cultural and psychological homogeneity were conditioned by a dualistic view of the world,'" developed among the congregations belonging to the The Plain Dutch concept of reality included an inside same sect," and they communicated as frequently as sectarian view of a virtuous religious culture and possible. However, since the component congregational an outside world view of an impure and evil non­ districts of a sect were exemplified by a high degree religious culture." Moreover, each of these sects per­ of social as well as economic self-sufficiency, commu­ ceived its own inside culture as one of extreme purity nication between congregational districts was generally and goodness, coexisting with, and in continual conflict limited to discussions of religious subjects,'· Nearby con- with, the less virtuous cultures of the other related sects.

" J ohn A. H ostetler, Amish Society, p. 18. The intensity with which each Plain Dutch sect "u nless specifically stated otherwise, the term communica­ valued its culture, perceived the contrasts between its tion as used in this chapter refers exclusively to face to face verbal communication. mores and those of other sects, and feared socio-cultural " J ohn A. H ostetler, Amish Society, p. 15. contact and conflict with the outside world was direct­ 4·0ccasionally, there was some courtship, and subsequently marriage, between persons of different congregational districts ly related to the degree of conservatism in their beliefs. Sects practicing the most original and fun­ damental forms of Anabaptism believed their Plain Dutch cultures were pure and undiluted in comparison

COMMUNICATIONS MODEL OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY to sects practicing more modified types of Anabaptism. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA PLAIN DUTCH GROUP REGION In the eyes of those practicing original Anabaptism, as other sects modified their religious beliefs and cul­ tures, they became increasingly worldly. As the more conservative sects attempted to prevent modification I NFREQUENT CO MMUNIC AT ION of their cultures, and thus rern.ain static in relationship ...... to the changing world, contrasts between the sectarian INFREQUENT ../ COMMUNICATION and outside world cultures became greater' through VE~;I;F~;UE~T) ------time.'" COMMUNICATION The importance assigned by each Plain Dutch sect to its cultural contrasts with other sects, and to cultUral conflicts with the surrounding world, diminished as

"John A. H ostetler, Amish Society, pp. 18, 70 . " Don Yoder, "R eligious Patterns of the Dutch Country" Pe~n sylva nia Folklife, Folk Festival Issue, 1960, pp. 26-28: J ohn A. H os tetler, Amish Society, pp. 47-48. "'D on Yoder, " Plain Dutch and Gay Dutch: Two Worlds in the Dutch Country," Pennsylvania Folklife. Summer 1956 Figure 5. pp. 48; John A. Hostetler, Amish Society, pp. 47-51. ' ,

23 sectarian religious conservatism decreased. H ence, the degree to which each sect valued social isolation as a means of preventing cultural change can be recog­ SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA nized and evaluated according to a scale of relative BASE IN FORMATION MAP communications frequencies. The Amish, practicing the purest form of Anabaptism, became an ultra­ conservative sect." The M ennonites, adhering to a slightly less regid type of Anabaptism, emerged as a conservative sect." The Dunkards, a related sect insist­ ing on adult baptism and stemming more directly out of Pietism than from Anabaptism, developed as a mod­ erately conservative sect." And the Schwenkfelders, adhering to an Inner Light faith akin to but separate from Anabaptism, became a liber.al sect" (Figure 5). The flow of communication between a more conserva­ tive sect and a less co nservati ve sect was nearly always initiated by the former. The frequency of this com­ munication was contingent upon the more conservative o L--1 sect's fear of cultural dilution by the less conservative M sect. Cultural differences became more pronounced, Figure 6. and the frequency of commu nication decreased, as the degree of conservatism separating the sects increased. A counterflow of communication from the less conserva­ rounding world. The Dunkard communication with tive to the more conserv.ative sect followed, and was the world society at large was moderately frequent equal in frequency to the opposite fl ow because it de­ since they were considerably more tolerant of other pended on the more conservative sect's willingness to cultures. H olding to a much more liberal viewpoint, accept contact. the Schwenkfelders communicated frequently with non­ Culturall y, the ultra-conservative Amish considered Plain Dutch society (Figure 5 ) . With one major al­ the mores of the conservative M ennonites to be most teration, several moderately important revisions, and like theirs, those of moderately conservative Dunkards some minor changes, many spatial vestiges of the as less so, and those of the liberal Schwenkfeldcrs as above-described eighteenth-century Plain Dutch reli­ least like their own. Thus, the Amish communicated gious group communications pattern can still be recog­ moderately frequently with the M ennonites, infre­ nized today. quently with the Dunkards, and very infrequently with D espite the intensity of their efforts to the contrary, the Schwenkfelders. The M ennonites, in turn, com­ not even the most ultra-conservative Plain Dutch sect municated moderately frequently with the Dunkards, has been able to remain completely cohesive and static and infrequently with the Schwenkfelders. Both the through time." Each sect has experienced different Dunkards and Schwenkfelders disregarded any cultura l kinds and amounts of social, cultural, and economic differences between them, and they communicated fre­ changes. These changes have occurred both internally quently. The counterflow of communication from the and externally; some have been progressive and others Schwenkfelders and Dunkards to the M ennonites and regressive. The velocity and direction of territorial Amish was controlled by the latter two sects; and adjustments, and internal spatial reorganizations, caused that between the M ennonites and Amish by the last by these changes, has varied considerably among the named (Figure 5). sects. Some continue to survive the impact of the Communication between the various Plain Dutch modern world relatively unshaken, whereas, for other group religious sects and the outside world was pre­ sects, this impact has proven to be a devastatingly dicated on factors similar to those controlling the com­ traumatic experience. munications among the several Plain Dutch sects them­ To most non-Dutch persons, the southeastern Penn­ selves. The Amish, almost completely rejecting non­ sylvania Plain Dutchman is viewed as an ultra-conserv­ Plain Dutch cultures, communicated very infrequently ative, plainly dressed, t ea ~-driving farmer. Therefore, with the outside world. The M ennonites, who were to gradua ll y dispel this stereotype, it seems most ap­ slightly less insistent upon retreating from non-Anabap­ propriate to proceed from the most ultra-conservative tist mores, communicated infrequently with the sur- to the least conservative sect in the following discus­ "John A. Hostetler, Amish Society, pp. 3-23. sions. M oreover, this approach effectively demonstrates ::C. H e ~ry Smith, The Story 01 the Mennonites, pp. 614-624. and emphasizes the ongoing processes of acculturation. Fredenc Klees, The Pennsylvania Dutch, pp. 61-66. " Ibid., p. 68. Howard Wiegner Kriebel, The Schwenk­ "Don Yoder, "Religious Patterns of the Dutch Country," lelders in Pennsylvania, A Historical Sketch, pp. 80-102. Pennsylvania Folklite, Folk Festival Issue, 19.60, p. 27. 24 AM ISH CONGREGATIONAL AMISH EXISTING FRO M 1751 ~" '-\ 5 CONESTOG A 1/ ~ .4. " " I " )-..t \ LEBANON" BER KS I I "- \ CO. 3,..... CO . I " ), " \ ./...... l. "- \- "'S/ ...... "- , -- ..- ,... , .r ./ '\ "- ... /' ( I~...... -~I ..- ' ...... , I /\ \ y \ , I // '( /,' ) " I / (/ '- I ,/ \ I 0 20 \ ~I __~. __~I

~ ______~-'- ____---l MILES

Figure 7. Figure 8.

THE AMI SH SECT tural and economic development are likewise obscure. The exact date when the fi rst Amish came to south­ It is believed that a few Ami h people may have eastern Pennsylvania from Germanic Europe is not arrived in southeastern Pennsylvania as early as 1710 known.'· ea rl y all of the Amish migrations to south­ or 1711." At least one Amish fa mily is definitely known eastern Pennsylvania probably occurred between about to have been in the area by 171 4;" Barbara Yoder, a 1720 and 1Tl 5." The total number of Amish persons widow, settl ed with her children near Oley in Berks who migra ted to southeastern Pennsylva nia is surpris­ County in that year" (Figure 7) . ingly small , the number being estimated at 500." A small Amish congregation was organized about Amish spati al history in Germanic Europe was brief 17 37 along orthkill Creek in Berks County (Figures prior to their migrations to southeastern Pennsylvania . 6 and 7) . The Northkill Amish suffered greatly from The sect was founded in the 1690's, and significant Indian raids, the congregation was soon abandoned, migrations to America commenced about 30 years later. and its members relocated elsewhere where they founded During this brief European experience, the Amish did three congregations: along Tulpehocken Creek in not have time to develop a rura l folk culture of the Lebanon County, along Maiden Creek in Berks County, European farm-village type." Always fl eeing before and in the region around Olel' (Figures 6 and 7) . their persecutors, they never resided in any locality Evidence indicates that these Amish congregations also long enough to establish permanent homes for a sub­ were soon abandoned. Some of their members migrated tained period. Even though they were sectarian, a nd into central and western Pennsylvania, but many of in their economy rural, they were too mobile, too them remained in southeastern Pennsylvania, joining widely dispersed, too persecuted, and too youthful his­ the Conestoga Congregation (Figure 7) . torically to constitute a folk culture."" When the Cones toga Congregational District, the When the Amish came to southeastern Pennsylvania, first permanent Amish community in southeastern Penn­ they were able to establish permanent family farms in sylvania, had its beginning is unknown,·' but it was relatively close proximity to each other, and sometimes probably founded before the middle of the eighteenth even adjacent to a fell ow sectarian. Under these con­ Century by immigrants from Germanic Europe. The ditions, and through time, the Amish su ccessfully de­ original site of this congregation was probably near the veloped a relatively self-sufficient, rural folk culture present-day town of Morgantown in southernmost Berks in the Southeastern Pennsylvania Dutch Community. Countl6 (Figure 7) .

THE PERIOD TO 1750 THE PERIOD 1751-1800 Very little is known of the spatial history of the All of the Amish people who migrated from Germanic Amish during the first half of the eighteenth century. Europe and became permanent residents of the south­ Exactly where the first Amish immigrants located in eastern Pennsylvania Dutc h Community eventually Pennsylvania is not certain, and details of their cul- moved into the Conestoga Amish Congregational Dis- " Calvin George Bachman, The Old Order Amish of Lan­ caster County, pp. 51 -56; and J ohn A. H ostetler, Amish Soci­ "John A. Hostetler, Amish S ociety, p. 44. ety, pp. 43-44. " Ibid. "Calvin George Bachman, The Old Order Amish of Lan- ·'Calvin George Bachman, The Old Order Amish of Lan- caster County, pp. 51-56. caster County, p. 57 . "Ibid. Il4Ibid., p. 51. "Ibid. "Ibid., p. 57. "Ibid. "Ibid., p. 58. 25 trict. It is here that the Amish began developmg their jectives of the Ordnung in future years was to isolate ultra-conservative sectarian folk culture. the Amish community sociall y and culturall y. Given From the original nucleus in southernmost Berks the circumstances of the time, it was relatively easy to County, the Conestoga Congregational District was discover and punish those sectarians who associated, graduall y extended, during the latter half of the eight­ unnecessarily, with non-Amish people and thus failed eenth century, southward into northwestern Chester to foll ow St. Paul's precept to retreat from the world." County and we tward toward Conestoga and Pequea Socio-cultural isolation was partiall y dependent upon Creeks in Lancaster County" (Figures 6, 7, a nd 8 ). economic self-sufficiency. This self-sufficiency was con­ By 1800, therefore, Amish people of the Conestoga tingent upon agriculture. Thus, the early Anabaptists Congregational District were scattered across an area were strongly attracted by the physical environment, extending about 9 miles east-west and 6 miles north­ especially the soil. Anything not coming from the soil south, and embracing a territory of about 50 square was considered worldly and not in keeping with Saint miles" (Figure 8) . Considering probable out-migrations Paul's injunction." Through time, farming became the from · the district, together with births and deaths with­ traditional, almost sacred, occupation of the Amish." in the district, the population of the Conestoga Con­ The driving ambition of every Amish man was, and gregation can be estimated up to 1800 at about 300 still is, to own a farm. As time passed, and the eight­ persons. eenth century came to a close, surplus farm products These Ami sh p eopl e emigrated from Germanic became avail able for sale and the period of subsiste~ce Europe to the Conestoga Congregational District in farming came to an end in the Conestoga Congrega­ small groups:' each of whose adult male members was tional District. relatively successful in purchasing land and starting THE PERIOD 1801-1850 a farm in very close proximity, if not adj acent, to others The period from 1801 to 1850 was characterized in the group. This land purchasing procedure was re­ by ft.:rth er territorial growth of the Amish community peated by each group of Amish migrants from Europe. in so utheastern Pennsylvania, various internal spatial The members of each group, living in close proximity, changes, an increase in population, the formulation of constituted a sectarian rural farm cluster consisting of an Ordnung, .and by changes in the land-use system. some 4 or 5 large-sized families. Thus, with an es­ Between 1801 and 1850, the Amish extended the ear­ timated total population of some 300, the Cones toga lier Conestoga Congregational District boundary several Congregational District was probably comprised of miles farther southward through western Chester Coun­ between 6 and 9 of these clusters in 1800 .10 Since the ty. But the major movement reached about 10 miles Cones toga District embraced some 50 square miles of westward across east-central Lancaster County in the territory, these clusters must have been widely dispersed. area between Pequea and Conestoga Creeks" (Figures As an ultra-conservative sect, the Amish practiced all 6, 8, and 9). Thus, by 1850, the Amish community the original tenents of Anabaptism in unmodified form . had an east-west extent of about 16 miles and a north­ They worshipped only in private homes because they south dimension of some 10 miles, and embraced ap­ denied the necessity of the physical church, i. e., elab­ proximately 160 square miles of territory. orate church buildings." Considering the geographical The Amish population increased to between 500 and dimensions of the Conestoga Congregational District 600 during the period 1801-1850.'" This growth in and the primitive transportation facilities of the times, population, together with increases in the areal extent it was probably difficult, if not impossible, for the entire of the Amish community, caused the Conestoga Con­ congregation to assemble for worship. It is believed, gregational District to be divided into Millcreek and therefore, that each farm cluster was organized into a Pequea Congregational Districts in 1843" (Figure 9). sub-congregational district within the larger Conestoga Millcreek (Figure 6 ), a tributary of the Conestoga was District. selected as the boundary between the two districts, Since the eighteenth-century Amish of the Conestoga which were roughly equal in size. Each district prob­ Congregational District probably lived in comparative ably included about one-half of the Amish population," isolation from non-Amish peoples, a formal Ordnung i.e., between 30 and 35 families totalling from 250 to was probably unnecessary, for one of the major ob- 300 sectarians. " See Footnote 16 . " Ibid., p. 58. "John A. Hostetler, Amish Society, p. 45. " Territorial extent of the Conestoga district is estimated " Ibid. from John A. H ostetler, Amish Society; Calvin George Bach­ " Ibid., pp. 92-93. man, The Old Oraer Amish of Lancaster County; and C. " Calvin George Bachman, The Old Order Amish of Lan­ H enry Smith, The Mennonites of America. Published by the caster County, pp. 57-58. author, Goshen, Indiana, 1909, pp. 210-2 12. '·Estimated from the following sources: John A. Hostetler, ·'C. H enry Smith, The Mennonites of America, pp. 210-215. Amish Society, p. 78 ; Calvin Geo rge Bachman, The Old Order '"The Conestoga District was atypical, for it was consider­ A,m ish of Lancaster County, p. 58 ; and C. H enry Smith, The ably larger in areal extent than the model eighteenth-century Mennonites of America, p . 212. congregational district shown in Figure 17, and the population "John A. Hostetler, Amish Society, p. 78. of the Conestoga Congregation was much larger than that of " Estimated from past and present procedures used in the the model. organization of Amish Congregational Districts. 26 the clergy.·' Each congregational district had a bishop, AMISH CONGREGATIO NAL DISTRICTS minister, and a deacon:' the first-named having final ORGANIZED FROM 1801 authority in all church affairs." Since the ultra­ L, con ervative Ami h church required its adherents to

I. MIL LCRE EK '-'\ conform almost completely to the mores of their 2. PEQUEA I ..... >- ancestors, few cultural changes were adopted and , ' / Amish society changed little from generation to gen­ \' ).,f eration. As the nineteenth century progre sed, the " BERKS I' \ LEBANON;- CO . / ' Ami h congregational district began to emerge as \ CO . ./ " " J. " , \ ...... -- ,,/'...... , distinctive ceremonial communities. A defi nite cer­ emonial calendar regul ated many phases of everyday ----1 LANCASTER eBJ/I. '\ ' h /' '- CO. 2 t."' /" .... '" I / life. Baptism, marriage, and other ceremonies were " . /\.. \ y' \.., I CHESTER / V performed at specific times. Social activities were con­ ...... I CO. / ,/ \.. I / y/ trolled by the Ordnung. Welfare and care for the \ / ~ a aged were more completely provided for by the Amish O '--______.....'_L ___ .J 1.... _-','----'f MILES than by any other Pl ain Du tch sect."' Figure 9, Extreme socio-cultural isolation of the mneteenth­ century Amish Community was contingent upon main­ taining rigidly controlled communications with the sur­ rounding world. Except for economic nece sities, the . The p,ur~ose of the formation of these two congrega­ Amish rarely communicated with the non-Plain Dutch tIOnal dlstncts was to eliminate the large number of community of southeastern Pennsylvania. They also religious services that were being conducted simulta­ attempted to avoid communicating with the Schwenk­ neously in the several sub-congregations of the original felders, and communicated only slightly more frequent­ Conestoga District. All of the families in each of the ly with the Dunkards. Most of their outside contacts two newly organized Congregational districts were able were with the Mennonites because of their clo e reli­ to assemble for the worship services. Since the Amish gious affinities. Communications between the Pequea worshipped every second Sunday," each family hosted and Millcreek districts was unrestricted. the group once in a little more than a year. Since few THE PERIOD 1851-1900 homes could accommodate 30 to 35 families, services The period 1851-1900 in the spatial history of the were conducted outdoors, which was satisfactory in the southeastern Pennsylvania Amish was marked by sev­ warm season but not when the weather turned cold. eral important developments. The community increased In winter, religious services were held in the barns. in territorial extent. More congregations were organized The economic organizations of the Amish congrega­ and new congregational district boundaries were au­ tional districts changed considerably during the period thorized. Amish agriculture was featured by the in­ 1801-1850. Farms were becoming more numerous but creasing rapid sub-division of farms, and these smaller smaller in size. Moreover, they were becoming even farms became self-sufficient more quickly than their more diversified and self-sufficient." larger counterparts of earlier times. Under the control Since several generations had grown to adulthood by of an ultra-conservative church, Amish life became 1850, the sons, grandsons, and great-grandsons of the even more tr.adition-directed by 1900.85 A stronger original Amish immigrants were confronted with the emphasis was placed upon social isolation, and the problem of obtaining a farm, for local farm land was ~ulture became even more static. The visible identify­ becoming scarce. Some descendants of the original im­ I~g symbols of Amish society in southeastern Pennsylva­ migrants were able to purchase nearby developed non­ ma became even more evident than before by the Dutch farms, .and others obtained undeveloped tracts beginning of the twentieth century. from non-Amishmen, but many of the young Amish­ Spatial expansion of the Southeastern Pennsylvania men received a section of their father's farm. Large Amish Sectarian Sub-Region proceeded in the second portions of these farms had not been developed by the half of the nineteenth century, the territory being original owners, and the young Amish farmers received extended about 10 miles westward and approximately the undeveloped parts. 12 miles southward between 1851 and 1900 (Figures 9 The economically relatively self-sufficient Millcreek and 10). Amish settlement by the latter date extended and Pequea Congregational Districts continued, in the socio-cultural and religious sense, as self-governing units 81D~>n Yoder, "The Horse and Buggy Dutch," Pennsylvania Folkllle, July, 1963, pp. 11-17. throughout the period 1801-1850. Authority was cen­ ·'Calvin George Bachman, The Old Order Amish of Lan­ tered in the church, which exercised its power through caster County, pp. 113-115. ·'Ibid., p. 113. ~Joh':l ,:>. Hostetler, Amish Society, p. 85. ~Elmer L. Smith, The ~mish People, Chapter 9. Freaenc Klees, The Pennsylvania Dutch, Chapter 14. John A. Hostetler, AmIsh Society, pp. 48-51.

27 AMISH CONGREGATIONAL DISTRICTS 11 31 . PEQUEA NORTHWEST LOWER NO . 2 ORGANIZED FROM 1901 TO 1970 32.NINE POINTS NO. 2 INOTE:THERE ARE~ 33. RICHLAND UNNAMED DISTRICTS AMISH CONGREGATIONAL DISTRICTS I. MILLCREEK WEST UPPER 124. SOUTH SIDE 134. SCHAEFFERSTOWN ORGANIZED FROM 1851 TO 1900 2. MILLCREEK EAST UPPER NO.3 25. PEQUEA NORTHEAST 35. MYERSTOWN 3. MILLCREEK EAST UPPER LOWER 4. MILLCREEK WEST 126. WHITE HORSE " " 5. MILLCREEK EAST 27. PEQUEA SOUTHEAST " 6. MILLCREEK EAST LOWER LOWER ~" " ' " " 7. MILLCREEK WEST LOWER 128. PEQUEA SOUTHWEST \. " " BERKS / 8 . SOUTH GROFF DALE LOWER "\ /' CO. I 9 . NORTH GROFFDALE 29 KINZER l _ \ "," .1. 10. PEQUEA SOUTHWEST UPPER 130. PEQUEA NORTH- >- II. BEAVER· CREEK WEST L ER NO.1 "/ -IL:~;'::S!J): ' "," " 12. MT. PLEASANT " \", CO. 2. ~~O~ I ..... I" ~ \\..E.~ .. 35~:--' I '{ "" 4. CHE STER 13. MT. PLEASANT \c.O. . " BERKS I" ...... ~ . CO . 14. RONKS 33 e ~ CO. I " " / 15. GREENLAND \ 34. e // " I " \ / 16. PEQUEA NORTH -" - " \ I UPPER MIDDLE -... __\ .....;E.~ 1. . 2~~ // -'-, "" J L UPPER MILL CREEK 17. PEQUEA SOUTH I ~c.1' e e. __~~ 'A " 2. LOWER MI LLCREEK 20 O 32 , ! UPPER MIDDLE \..1' c. · /ge 6. j ·"25. L ;' ""'I /' 3 PEQUEA LOWER " 15. 14e 7. e ee ~27.' ",-~ '" ... PEQUEA MIDDLE MILES 18. PEQUEA MIDDLE " e '8 e 29 31 .e c!,r.;;;26. /"\ \ .Y ~ , PEQUEA UPPER 19. J. K. LAPP " 12 ell.!Jjle ~~ . 2B. / '( '" e Figure 10. 20. NINE POINTS I. "" 1\13 el: r~/ / CHESTER / ,,/ 21. GEORGETOWN ,10 ·~·e ~ CO. / V" Figure 11. 22. EAST GEORGETOWN \ 24. -- 0 20 23. PEQUEA LOWER \ / I , MIDDLE MILES

from southernmost Berks County and westernmost The total population of the southeastern Pennsylva­ Chester County, to west-central Lancaster County, a nia Amish Sectarian Sub-Region is estimated to have distance of about 27 miles, ard southward from Con­ been about 1100 at the beginning of the twentieth estoga Creek across some 23 miles of Lancaster County. century.·s This estimate is not difficult to validate. Thus, the Amish community of southeastern Penn­ Religious services were conducted every second Sun­ sylvania embraced about 400 square miles by 1900·' day:' and each family was expected to host the service (Figure 10 ) . once a year. Therefore, 26 families would constitute As population increased, the Millcreek and Pequea a model Amish congregational district. Thus, the Amish congregations of the early nineteenth Century became community as a whole, with its five districts, was prob­ too large for their members to assemble in private ably comprised of from 90 to 135 families. If the con­ homes or barns for church services. Moreover, distances gregations were about e.qual in size, then between 18 involved in travelling across the enlarging sub-region and 27 families resided in each Amish district. Based required too much time. To permit continued use of on estimates of average size of families (10 persons in private homes for religious services, and to reduce time late nineteenth-century rural America), each congrega­ and distance in travelling to church, the Amish created tion consisted of an average of about 216 persons. Since three additional congregational ,districts between 1851 there were five congregational districts, the 1900 pop­ and 1900. The territorially expanded Pequea Con­ ulation of the southeastern Pennsylvania Amish Sec­ gregational District was divided into Pequea Upper tarian Sub-Region was about 1080." and Pequea Lower Congregational Districts in 1852. After the mid-nineteenth century, it was exceeding­ Later, in 1865, Pequea Upper . was divided into Pequea ly difficult for the southeastern Pennsylvania Amish to Upper and Pequea Middle Congregational Districts. obtain new farm land, particularly in the area of the In 1873, the geographicall y enlarged Millcreek Con­ Millcreek congregational districts where the Mennonites gregational District was reorganized into Upper Mill­ were competing for land. However, some farms were creek and Lower Millcreek Congregational Districts.·' available in southeastern Lancaster County and the A comparison of Figures 23 and 24 indicates that most Amish corrimunity quickly spread southward in this of the territorial growth occurred in the old, pre-1852, direction, thus accounting for the significant territorial Pequea District. If, as is believed to be the case, the expansion of the Pequea congregational districts in the Amish attempted to keep their congregational districts 1850's and 1860's. After the division of the original approximately equal in population, then density of Millcreek District (Figure 9) into two districts of Amish people must have been greatest in the territo­ slightly greater combined extent in 1873 (Figure 10), rially smallest Lower Millcreek District (Figure 10) . no new congregational districts }'Vere organized and no "Calvi n George Bachman, The Old Order Amish of Lan­ ·'Calvin George Bachman, The Old Order Amish of Lan­ caster County, pp. 58-59; and John A. Hostetler, Amish Soci­ caster County, p. 59. ety, p. 73. ·'J ohn A. Hostetler, Amish S ociety, p. 85. ·'J ohn A. Hostetler, Amish Society, p. 78. .oSee Footnote 78. 28 additional territory was added to the Ami hub-Region from the surrounding world in the socio-cultural sense in the nineteenth century, signifying that all available caused the late nineteenth-century Ami h to become local farm lands had been procured by the 1870's. an even more tradition-directed people than they were After 1850, the subdivision of farms became a com­ before. H ence. they placed even tronger empha i upon mon practi c among the Amish. By 1900, many farms the traditional identifying ymbols and ceremonial were already so small that further subdivision would rituals that bonded and unified their society." have made thei r operation economicall y unprofitable. At the end of the nineteenth century, therefore, the THE PERI OD 1901 -1970 size of farms, and the distribution of farms among External territorial boundarie of the outhea tern non-Dutch farms in the Ami h congregational districts, Pennsylvania Amish ectari an Sub-Region ha e not were about the same as shown by the Pennsylvania changed appreciably during the twentieth century Pl ain D utch model (Figure 2 ) . (compare Figures 10 and 11). Internally, however, But there were some important spatial differences this sub-region has been divided into many component between Amish and non-Amish Pl ain D utch congrega­ congregational districts in recent decades . Between tional districts. Amish districts were considerably larger 1901 and the present (1970), only two mall areas in size, and therefore Amish families were more widely have been added to the Amish Sectarian Sub-Region. dispersed. M oreover, unlike the Dunkards, Mennonites, One of these is in Lancaster County and represents a and Schwenkfelders, the Ami h congregational districts slight westward extension of the late nineteenth-century did not have meetinghouses. Under the prevailing set main Amish community (compare Figu res 10 and 11 ) . of circumstances, i. e., the rapid subdivision of farms The other, a small outlier to the northwest (compare and the unava il ability of additional local agricultural Figures 10 and 11 ), is located in eastern Lebanon Coun­ land, the southeastern Pennsylvania Amish were con­ ty, and was organized early in the twentieth century by fronted with the necessity of forced migration a nd, Amish migrants from the main community. This out­ since farming to the Amish was a sacred occupation:' lier, together with the main area, are the only two there was no alternative to migration. M any newly­ territories inhabited by Amish people in the entire married Amish couples had no choice but to migrate Southeastern Pennsylvania Pl ain Dutch Community:' to the Mid-West and other regions. The sectarians re­ An anomaly in the geographical history of the south­ maining behind in the sou theastern Pennsylvania Amish eastern Pennsylvania Amish is the ready availability of congregational districts operated smaller, but progres­ farm land in the twentieth century in contrast to its sively more intensively cultivated, farms. By the latter unavail ability during the nin e t eenth c e ntury. This half of the nineteenth century, the period of subsistence situation accounts for the many congregational dis­ farming had long since ended, and intensive subsistence tricts organized in the twentieth century as compared combined with general commercial agricul ture had with earlier times. Moreover, the organization of many become common throughout the Amish Community. new congregational districts also indicates an exceed­ The most striking feature of Amish land use at the ingly rapid growth in twentieth-century Amish pop­ end of the nineteenth century was the emphasis that ulation, for the availability of additional farmland is was beginning to be placed upon the commercial fat­ essential to the sustained population growth of a rural tening of livestock and the production of tobacco. folk society such as that of the Old Order Amish. Ultimately, in the twentieth century, general com­ Since 1900, more than 30 southeastern Pennsylvania mer~ial farming was to be superseded by specialized Amish congregational districts have been formed from commercial agriculture. the five districts existing prior to that time" (compare The southeastern Pennsylvania Amish congrega­ Figures 10 and 11 ) . The Upper Millcreek Congrega­ tional districts continued to be almost entirely self­ tional District of 1900 (Figure 10 ) was divided into sufficient socially and culturally" during the 1851-1900 Millcreek and Millcreek Upper Congregational Districts period. All of the social needs of the individual were in 1907. In 1931 , the Millereek Upper Congregational provided for by these ultra-conservative congregational District was reorganized as Millcreek West Upper districts. Economic and social self-sufficiency permitted (Figure 11 , No.1 ), and Millcreek Eas t Upper Con­ the Amish to completely control communications with gregational Districts. In 1959, this latter district was other Plain Dutch and non-Plain Dutch groups. Even split into Millcreek Eas t Upper o. 3, and Millcreek the individual congregational districts comprising the Eas t Upper Congregational Districts (Figure 11 , os. Amish sub-region were relatively independent of each 2 and 3) . The Millcreek Congregational District other, and communication between them continued to founded in 1907 was divided into the Millcreek W est be limited to infrequent business transactions, mate " Ibid., pp. 101 , 13l. seeking, and the occa ional discussion of religious con­ " C alvin George Bachman, The Old Order Amish of Lan­ troversies. Closing themselves off almost completely caster County, pp. 59-60. " All information relating to the development of congrega­ " Elmer L.- Smith, The Amish People, p. 127. tional districts during the twentieth century was compiled " John A. Hostetler, Amish Society, p. 19. from J ohn A. H ostetler, Amish Society, pp. 75-85. 29 and Mill reek East Congr gational Distri .ts in 1940 Lower Congregational Districts in 1935. Between 1949 (Figur 11 , Nos. 4 and 5). and 1950, these congregational districts were reorgan­ The Lower Millcreek District of 1900 (Figure 10 ) ized into seven Congr gational Districts: Pequea North­ was divid d into Mill reek Lower and GrofTdal Con­ east Lower, White Horse, Pequea Southeast Lower, gregational Districts in 1903. These two ongregational Pequea Southwest Lower, Kinzer, Pequea Northwest districts were subsequently reorganized, the former as Lower No.1, and Peq uea Northwest Lower No. 2 Miller ek Eas t Lower and Millcreek West Lower in (Figure 11, Nos. 25, 26, 27, 28, 29,30, and 31). The 1931, and the latter as South Groffdalc and North Lebanon County Amish are divided into three Con­ Groffdale in 194·5 (Figure 11 , Nos. 6, 7, 8 and 9). gregational Districts: Richl and, Schaefferstown, and In 1913, the Pequea Upper Congregational District M ye rstown (Figure 11 , Nos. 33, 34, and 35). Lebanon of 1900 (Figure 10 ) was broken up into the Pequea County Amish will probably form two more congrega­ Upp r and the Pequ a Northwest Upper Congrega­ tional districts in the near future. Presently, there are tional Districts. The Pequea Upper Congregational six unnamed Amish congregational districts in south­ Distri t was reorganized in 1943, forming th co ngrega­ eastern Pennsylvania. tional distri ts of P quea Southwest Upper and Pequea Altogeth r, this highly sub-divided Southeastern Penn­ East Upper. In 1955, these latter two congregational sylvania Amish Sectarian Sub-Region embraces a ter­ districts were again divided, with Pequea outhwest ritory of approximately 475 square miles. Am ish people Upp r becoming the present congregational districts are dispersed across an area of about 25 sq uare miles of Pequea Southwest Upper and Beav r Creek, and in Lebanon County. The mu ch larger original Amish Pequea Eas t Upper becoming Mount Pleasant No. I , community encompasses about 450 sq uare miles-be­ a nd Mount Pl easant No. 2 (Figure 11 , Nos. 10, 11 , tween seven and eight in Berks County, from 75 to 12, and 13). In 1951 , the Pequea Northwest Upper 80 in Chester County, and between 360 and 365 in Congregational Distri twas divid d into the present Lancaster County. Of the 41 Amish congregational Ronk and Greenland Congregational Di tricts (F;gu re districts, onl y 16 have definite boundaries on all sides. 11 , Nos. 14 and 15 ) . T he area within these 16 districts ranges from two to The Pequea Middle Congregational Distri ct of 1900 nine square miles each, the average being 4.3 square (Figur 10 ) became two congregational districts in miles. On the other hand, districts along the outer 1905, Pequea Upper Middle and Pequea Lower Mid­ margins of the entire Amish Sectarian Sub-Region have dl e. Th Pequea Upper Middle Congregational Dis­ no di stinct outer boundaries; instead, they reach out trict wa later reorganized, forming the pr sent Pequea to include the most distant Amish famil y. The average North Upp r Middl and Pequ a South Upper Middle such partially unbounded district probably has an area Congregational Districts in 1949 (Figures 11 , Nos. 16 of about 20 square miles. The average size of all Amish and 17 ) . During 1930, Pequea Lower Middle was districts is about 12 square miles (475 square miles split and reo rganized as Pequea Middle and Pequea divided by 41 congregational districts) . The mean size Lower Middle Congregational Districts. The Pequea of distri ts with boundaries approximates that of con­ Middle and J acob K. Lapp Congregational Districts gregational districts of other horse-and-buggy Plain formed in 1957 (Figure 11 , Nos. 18 and 19 ) were Dutch peoples. Partially unbounded districts are larger, formerly th Pequea Middle Congregational District. but future subdivisions to accommodate a growing pop­ In 1944, the Pequ a Lower Middle Congregational ulation will undoubtedly diminish their average size. District was broken into the congregational districts The formation of numerous additional Amish con­ of Nine Points and Pequea Lower Middle. This latter gregational districts in southeastern Pennsylvania after one became the Pequea Lower Middle and South Side 1900 indicates a rapid and sustained growth of popula­ Congregational Districts in 1959 (Figure 11, Nos. 23 tion during the twentieth century. Unfortunately, the and 24 ). Between 1955 and 1959, the Nine Points Amish do not compile accurate census information. Congregational District was slit into the four presently The names of Amish congregational districts and their existing congregational districts of Nine Points No.1, total memberships, when provided at all, appear only Nine Points No.2, Georgetown, and East Georgetown in the M ennonite Yearbook and Directory."" Districts (Figure 11, Nos. 20, 32, 21, and 22) reporting such population figures usually do so in round Seven congregational districts were eventually devel­ numbers. M any districts are uncooperative and do not oped from the 1900 Pequea Lower Congregational Dis­ make official population reports of any sort. Com­ trict (Figure 10 ) . The original district was broken into plicating this problem still further is the reluctance the Pequea Lower District and Pequea West Lower of the Amish to cooperate in general with outsiders, District in 1915. During 1938, the Pequea Lower Con­ which makes it exceedingly difficult for an interested gregational District was reorganizcd into the Pequea person to obtain any kind of census figures for individ­ Southeast Lower and Pequea Northeast Lower Con­ ual districts. greg a tonal Districts. Pequea West Lower was divided into the P eq u ea Southwest and Pequea Northwest OOM ennonite Yearbook and Direct·ory, Annual editions. 30 In 1960, 258 Old Order Amish districts throughout ince currently there are 41 di tricts in the Ami h the United States reported, in the Mennonite Y earbook community of southeastern Penn ylvania, the writer and Directory,'" a total population, including children, estimates the total 1970 Old Order Ami h population of 43,300, giving a mean population per district of of outheastern Pennsylvania at about 8,815. 168. In 1962, the 59 Old Order Amish congregational The author's 1970 population e tirnate would appear districts in all of Pennsylvania reported a total bap­ to be confirmed when one con iders the average lze tized membership of 4,889 in the Mennonite Yearbook of Old Order Amish families and the ideal number and Directory." The number of non-baptized children of families compri ing an Old Order Ami h congrega­ was calculated by the same source" to be 5,085. The tional district. Two dozen families seem to con titute mean population of the 59 Pennsylvania Amish con­ this ideal, but the number of families per congrega­ gregational districts, therefore, can be estimated at tional district ranges from 20 to 24. "" H ence, there 169, which is very close to the national average. Based are probably between 820 (20 families x 41 district ), on a mean of 168 persons per district, the southeastern and 964 (24 families x 41 di tricts) Ami h families Pennsylvania Amish population was estimated in the in southeastern Pennsylvania. Several studies''''' indicate M ennonite Y earb ook and Directory''''' to be 5,712 in that the average number of children per completed 1962, and 6,216 in 1965. These estimates, however, are Old Order Amish family range from seven to nine. for only 34 districts reporting in 1962, and for 37 dis­ Thus, the population would range from a minimum tricts reporting in 1965. I n 1967, after two years of of 7,380 (820 families x nine persons per family) to intensive study, Egeland'o, estimated the population of a maximum of 10,604 (964 families x 11 persons per the southeastern Pennsylvania Amish community, alone, family ) . The mean population would be 8,991 which to be 8,856, and the mean population of the component comes very close to the author's estimate of 8,815. 41 congregational districts was calculated at 216. R apid growth of the southeastern Pennsylvania Amish The author herewith suggests that the estimates of population during the twentieth century can be at­ the M ennonite Y earbook and Directory'O' of 1962 and tributed in large part to the continued sub-division 1965 were too low, whereas that by Egeland of 1967 of pre-1900 farms, and to the purchase and sub equent was probably too high. Census information obtained sub-division of the many additional farms that became by Hostetler'o, in eight Amish congregational districts avail able locall y as non-Amish farmers abandoned the in Lancaster County in 1960 indicates that the true land. Indeed, Amish people who have migrated from population in 1962 was considerably greater than the southeastern Pennsylvania in recent years usuall y have above M ennonte Y earbook and Directory estimate, but done so for non-economic reasons. Diversity of the in 1967 was less than the above Egeland estimate. Amish farm enterprise, and exceedingly intense cul­ Hostetler computed a mean population of 193 per tivation of the soil, permits the typical southeastern district. Since there were 34 congregational districts Pennsylvania Amish farmer to operate profitably with in the county in 1960, the total Ami h population of horse-powered equipment despite recent large-scale southeastern Pennsylvania should have been about mechanization by his non-Plain Dutch competitors. 6,5 62 in that year. The author'" m ade a detailed The Amish have been willing to pay ~ceptionally personal census count in 1970 for one of the districts high prices for farms. They paid more than $1,000 studied by Hostetler, and found a population of 215. an acre before, and over $1,500 an acre after, World War II. Today, farm land is valued at from $1 ,500 " Ibid. to $2,000 an acre in most Amish-occupied parts of " Ibid. the Southeastern Pennsylvania Dutch Community.'o, " Ibid. ,ooIbid. Elsewhere, in the non-Amish portions of the commu­ ,o'Johanna Grimes, "A New Look at our Amish Community," nity, land prices are somewhat lower. Amish farms Lancaster New Era. Metropolitan Edition A, Lancaster, Pa., July 27, 1967. In this article, staff writer Johanna Grimes now average about 50 acres, but many young men do inte.rviews Dr. Janice A. Egeland (Medical Sociology Ph.D. ); not own a farm. Instead, they rent from a relative Jamce A. Egeland, Medical S ociology of the Old Order Amish of Lancaster County. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale or a non-Amish person. Their ambition is to save JJniversity, 1967. enough money to buy a farm if one becomes available. ,o'M ennonite Yearbook and Directory, Annual editions. ,o'John A. Hostetler, Amish S ociety, pp. 79-85. H ostetler Thus, the tenancy rate is higher among Amish than reports census information obtained from eight church districts regional non-Amish farmers.'o, which he examined in detail. These districts constitu.te a 22% sample, sufficient for a valid population estimate. The Old Order Amish society remains today extremely writer studied the population of one of the sample districts cohesive, close-knit, and static in comparison with the during 1970 and verifies Hostetler's earlier study. "'During the summer of 1970, the author su.rveyed the prevailing culture of modern southeastern Pennsylvania. population of an Amish Congregational District previously examined by Hostetler. The Amish refused to cooperate with ,o'John A. Hostetler, Amish Society, pp. 79-85. the writer, but, through informants, the author knew which '''Elmer L. Smith, The Amish Pe ople, p. 85; John A. Hos­ family was hosting the religious service. Thus, on three oc­ tetler, Amish Society, pp. 84-85. casions he parked along the roadside and counted everyone ,o'J?hn A. H os tetler, Amish Society, Revised Edition, Johns who arrived for the worship service. Although the unbaptized HORkms Press, Baltimore, Md., 1968, p. 82. are not members, they must attend worship services. " J ohn A. Hostetler, Amish Society, pp. 92-93. 31 MENNONITE CONGREGATIONAL DISTRICTS ORGANIZED BY 1750

I. GERMANTOWN 15. BALLY 26. PEQUEA 31. LAMPETER 2. SKIPPACK 16 . BOYERTOWN 27. CONESTOGA 32 WEAVERLAND 3 VALLE Y FORGE 17. SAUCON 28. ROCK HILL 33. GRO FFDALE 4. UPPER MILFORD 18 . KULPSVILLE 29. STRAS8URG 5. MAINLAND 19 . SWAMP 30. MANHEIM 6. GOSHE NHOPPEN 20. SELLERSvi, LE 7. OLEY 21. ROCKHILL 8 . PHOENIXVILLE 22. METHACTON 9. POTTSTOWN 23 DEEP RUN 10. 8EDMINSTER 24. WOR CES TER II . TOWAMENCIN 25. GILBERTSVILLE 12 FRANCONIA 13 . TELFORD 14. HEREFORD

DATE OF ORGANIZATION

.- ORGANIZED FROM 20 1683 TO 1750 I

Figure 12 .

Contrastingly, Amish so iety is internall y dynamic, for telephone out of the community. And, by permlttmg socio-cultural changes that conform to the traditional its limited use, tension subsid es and the essence of the society, and do not dilute the ultra-co nservative Amish internally static culture is preserved. Many similar An abaptist beli efs and practices, are often innovated. examples could be cited. As a result, to the outsider, Despite this intern al fl ex ibility, conflict between the Amish society seems to be remarkably uniform and Amish culture and the surrounding American culture static. has produced tension and cri is within the southeastern In circumstances where an Ordnung is absolutely Pennsylvania Amish community in recent years. inflexibl e, sectarian cl eavage may result from a cultural Constantly exposed as they are to influences eman­ contradiction. Such schisms have caused the Amish ating from the large urban centers of southeastern church to move in several directions over the years. Pennsylvania, the Amish are besieged by the pressures One division of the church favored retaining the old of the modern world. A flood of books, pamphl ets, traditions and became known as the Old Order Amish. and a rticles have brought the Amish to the attention A second division adopted a liberal policy a nd favored of the American public")· and they have been sub­ change. A third group favored moderation and took sequently exploited by the tourist industry,"O especiall y a middle-of-the-road position, accepting neither radical along U. S. highway 30. More importantly, the en­ changes nor absolute conformity. Finally, a very pro­ croachment of the large urban and industrial com­ gressive wing of the Amish church, called the Beachy plexes of sou theastern Pennsylvania has forced the Amish, have gone so far as to adopt electricity and Amish to revise their Ordnung. Thus, as anomalous the automobile.'" As a result of all such changes, the as it may seem, in order to resist assimilation into the Southeastern Pennsylvania Amish Sectarian Sub-Region general American culture, the Amish community has has emerged as the largest contiguous ultra-conserv­ affected numerous internal changes. Diffusion of out­ ative Old Order Amish community in North America. side technological devices into the Amish community, The main changes · in old European church precepts for instance, frequently causes temporary tension but have developed outside the Southeastern Pennsylvania is usually reacted to by a change in Ordnung or by Dutch Community, and southeastern Pennsylvania church schism. The introduction of the telephone is Amish people who have become dissatisfied with the one example. Although originally prohibited in the Old Order have quietly migrated to other areas. Thus, Amish home, the use of a non-Amish neighbor's home these church divisions are not discussed in thIs study. phone or a pay phone is now sometimes permitted. As already stated, the Amish congregational districts Or, a congregational district's Ordnung may be revised are self-governing units. H ence they are made delib­ to permit the use of public telephones for emergency erately small in population and territorial extent. The purposes, but what constitutes an emergency is left to church supervises religious, social, and cultural life. of the discretion of the individual.11l This type of reaction the district population. By strict obedience to the rules achieves its purpose, which is in general to keep the of the church, which sometimes seem rather inconsistent to the outsider, the Old Order Amish of southeastern IO'Ibid., p. 326. lI·Bob K oza k, "Is Tourism Destroying Our Amish Culture?" Pennsylvania have developed a multi-bonded, symbolic, Lancaster New Era. Metropolitan Edition A, Lancaster, Pa., ceremonial community which has been able to con­ October 6, 1966. A staff writer interviews Roy C. Buck Pro­ fessor of Sociology, The Pennsylvania State University. ' front, and effectively resist, cultural assimilation. l11John A. Hostetler, Amish Society, Chapters 11 and 12. "'Ibid. 32 TIlE ME 'NO 'ITE SECT in farming. It is e timated that a total of abou~ 25,000 Persecution of the Mennonites prevailed throughout Mennonites moved to southeastern Pennsylvama from Germanic Europe during the sixteenth and seventeenth Germanic Europe, the majority arriving during the first centuries. These persecutions were especially e ere in half of the eighteenth century. The decade, 1717-1727, places where the M ennonites comprised a substantial was a period of exceptionally heavy migration.lIT part of the population, such as in the Germanic can­ The early Mennonite immigrants expected to obtain tons of Switzerl and. large jointly-owned tract of land, and to organize them Indignities suffered by the Mennonites can be traced into the European-type communal agricultural village mainly to a few religious causes. Two of their Anabap­ to which they were accu tomed. ince no uch large tist religious tenets-adult faith baptism, and separation tracts of land were available in sou thea tern Penn ylva­ of church and state-were the major factors causing nia in the early eighteenth century, the mcmber of persecution. Both Lutherans and Roman Catholics at­ each successive group of migrants decided to procure tempted to force the M ennonites into accepting infant small privately-owned tracts in a close proximity to baptism and a state-controlled church. Most other each other as possible. Thus, over the decades, the M ennonite Anabaptist religious concepts were relative­ territorial organization of the southeastern Penn ylvania ly unimportant factors contributing to their persecu­ Mennonite community, like that of the mi h om­ tion.lI3 munity previou Iy described, developed into a pattern Economic sanctions were imposed on the M ennonites of many dispersed farm clusters. Eventuall y, each of to persuade them to denounce their religiou principles. these cluster was organized into one or more congrega­ During the latter years of the seventeenth century, the tional di tricts. By 1750, the M ennonite had organized Mennonites experienced great poverty, particularly in 33 such congregational district in sou thea tern Penn- the Palatinate and the Germanic parts of Switzerl and. ylvania (Figure 12 ), the majority being found in two Special taxes were levied against them. As tenants, major cluster, one north of Germantown in the vicinity they were frequently subjected to extortion at the of Skippack and Perkiomen Creek, and the other to hands of landlords. In many place they we re unable the west near Pequea Creek (Figures 6 and 12 ). to operate a business or even obtain employment. D e­ The Skippack-Perkiomen Creek area con isted of 25 spite these hardships, the M ennonites refused to com­ Mennonite congregational districts in 1750 (Figure promi e their Anabaptist religious beliefs. 12 ). The first to be founded, after the original German­ At about this time, the late seventeenth century, town district, was the Skippack Congregational District William Penn invited the M ennonites to settle in Penn­ in 1702. Subsequently, congregational districts were sylvania where religious freedom was promised for alL'" formed at M ainland, Pottstown, Towamencin, Fran­ conia, Telford, Kulpsvill e, Swamp, M ethacton, W or­ THE PERIOD TO 1750 cester, and Gilbertsville in Montgomery County. Berks The first M ennonite group to set foot on Pennsylva­ County M ennonite congregational districts were foun­ nia soil established a congregation at Germantown ded at Goshenhoppen, Oley, H ereford, Ball y and Boyer­ (Figure 12, No.1 ) on O ctober 6, 1683.115 This group town. The M ennonites developed congregations at consisted of 35 persons and was comprised of 13 fam­ Bedminster, Sellersville, R ockhill, and D eep Run in ilies.'" These were the only M ennonites to migrate to Bucks County. Two congregational districts were foun­ Pennsylvania during the seventeenth century. ded in Lehigh County at Upper Milford and Saucon, The first half of the eighteenth century was char­ and two in Chester County at V alley Forge and Phoe­ acterized by the migration of numerous M ennonite n ixville. '" groups from Germanic Europe and their resettlement The Pequea Creek M ennonite area consisted of eight in southeastern Pennsylvania. Most of the e immigrant congregational districts, all of which were located in groups followed identical procedures. Upon their ar­ Lancaster County.'" Following the founding of the rival in Pennsylvania, they moved directly to German­ Pequea Congregational District about 1710, additional town where they remained temporarily to obtain in­ congregational districts were organized at Conestoga, formation about lands that might be available for settle­ Rock Hill, Strasburg, Manheim, Lampeter, Weaverland, ment and to procure supplies for their journey to the and Groffdale12O (Figure 12 ) . frontier areas of southeastern Penr.sylvania. From Individual M ennonite congregational districts prob­ Germantown, they moved to permanent sites short dis­ ably ranged in size from two to three square miles tances to the north or west, and, after establishing during the early eighteenth century. The congregations permanent homes, organized congregations and engaged each consisted of 10 to 15 farm families, comprising "'C. Henry Smith, The Story of the Mennonites, p. 134. '''Ibid., p. 544. mC. Henry Smith, The Story of the Mennonites, p. 547. 115Ibid., pp. 536-538. "'John C. Wenger, History of the Mennonites of the Fran­ llGJohn C . Wenger, History of the Mennonites of the Fran­ conia Conference, pp. 10-12. conia Conference (Press of the Mennonite Publishing House, "'Ibid. Scottdale. Pa., 1937 ), p. 10. mC. H enry Smith, The Mennonites of America. 33 a population of from 50 to 100 p rsons.'" Since the close-knit, soc io-culturally isolated rural society. M ennonites were not accustomed to constructing church Because of their religious beliefs, and their self­ buildings, most congregations conducted religious ser­ imposed isolation, a strong Mennonite community vices in private homes. H ence, as in the previously p ychology, quite analogous to that of the Amish, described case of the Amish, the population of each seems to have developed. Psychologicall y, they con­ district was limited by the number of persons that ou ld ceived of Anabaptism as the true Christian faith, and assemble in an individual private homc. 122 M oreover, saw the outside world as a sinful place to be avoided. the poor condition of the few roads that were then H en e, contact with the su rrounding world was not available caused the Mennonite distri cts to be small in encouraged and Mennonites communicated as seldom areal extent. as pos ible with the non-Plain Dutch people of south­ Mennonite congregational districts of the New eastern Pennsylvania.'" Frequency of communication World, like those of the Amish, emerged as conservative, with other Pl ain Dutch sects depended upon the sim­ largely self-governing communities during the early il arity of Mennonite tenets to those of the various other eighteenth century. The Mennonite church controlled Anabaptist religious beliefs. Considering the Schwenk­ its congregations through the authority vested in its felders liberal, almost worldly in cultural outlook, the clergy. '" Since Anabaptists did not bclieve in a profes­ Mennonites communicated infrequently with them, but sional ministry, the Men nonite clergy consisted of lay­ communicated somewhat more often with the moder­ men selected by lot. Each congregational district chose ately conservative Dunkards because there were some three cl ergymen-a bishop, a preacher, and a deacon, religious similarities between the two sec ts. The M en­ the bi hop alone possessing complete and fin al authority nonites considered themselves a lmost identical to the in clerical and secular a(f airs of the congregational Amish, religiously, and attempted to stimulate com­ district whi h he implemented through its Ordnung. munications with them. But the ultra-co nservative The purpose of the Ordnung was to assure that Amish believed the Mennonites practiced a diluted church memb e ~s conformed to the mores of their tradi­ form of Anabaptism, and refu sed. to permit an un­ tional European Anabaptist culture. Among the many limited flow of communication (Figure 5 ). Hence, rules of the Mennonite Church, several were most nearly all Mennonite communications occurred between salient to this study, for they bonded each congrega­ the Mennonites themselves, and much of this took place tional district into a cohesive, static community. Except between the congregational districts. Districts located for illness, church attendance was compulsory, which in the Skippack Creek area, for example, communicated produced a strong bond of kinship within the district. with each other very frequently, as did those of the Adherents were expected to speak the di alect when Pequea Creek area. But, because these two areas were conversi ng with one another. The wearing of M en­ territorially widely separated in terms of early eight­ nonite pl ain garb was absolutely required, for it iden­ eenth-century transporta tion facilities (Figure 12), tifi d the wearer as a M ennonite and, ther fore, dis­ communications between these two groups of congrega­ tingui shed him from the surrounding population of tional districts were relatively less frequent (Figure 4) . southeastern Pennsylvania. The M ennonites early estab­ Mennonite congregational districts in southeastern Ii hed paro hi al elementary s hools and utilized sec­ Pennsylvania conferred with each other in regard to tarian lay tea her , who inculeated in youths the tradi­ both clerical and secular matters. Moreover, there tions of Anabaptist religious and secular life and ad­ was a considerable amount of social interaction such vocat d the rejection of contemporaneous things. Final­ as courtship and marriage between members of dif­ ly, although not a tenet of Anabaptism, respect for ferent Mennonite congregations. The effect of the nature emerged as a major value of the Mennonites above-described interaction pattern, of course, was to as of the previously d s ribed Amish. H en e, nearly minimize early eighteenth-century Mennonite depend­ all Mennonites b ecame farmers because non-land ence upon the surrounding world and to intensify the oriented occupations were considered sinful. They conservatism of the Mennonite community. hoped that agricultural self-sufficiency would permit them to b come e onomically, as well as socio-cultura l­ THE PERIOD 1751-1800 ly, independent from the surrounding world. Although The period from 1751 to 1800 was marked by the Mennonites were not nearly self-sufficient econom­ further territorial expansion of the Mennonite sect icall y by the middle of the eighteenth century, they sub-region in southeastern Pennsylvania as new con­ had maintained a sufficient degree of such self-suffi­ gregational districts were established. However, the ciency to assure their continuance as a static, cohesive, rate of geographical expansion decreased from that of "'Ivan 1.eid, personal interview. Area and population of former decades because of the decline in number of eighteenth century Mennonite Congregational Districts are M ennonite migrants coming from Europe after 1750.'" partly estimated from this personal interview. 122C. H enry Smith, The M ennonites of America, p. 174. "'I bid. "'Ivan Leid, personal interview. "'C. Henry Smith, The Story 0/ the Mennonites, pp. 547·548. 34 MENNONITE CONGREGATIONAL DISTRICTS This increa ing geographical size of ~f en n onite con­ ORGANIZED FROM 1751 TO 1800 gregational di tricts, toge ther with their growing pop­ ulations, eventually produced a ituation that precluded 34. LEXINGTON 47 GOODVILLE DATE OF ORGAN IZ ATION o PRE 1 1~ 1 DISTRICTS 3~ BLOOM ING GLEN 48 BARE VILLE the conducting of religious services in M ennonite homes. 36. EAST SWAMP 49 BOWMAN SVILLE . - 17 51 T O 18 00 DISTR IC T S 37 PLAINS 50 ST ON YBR OOK As an alternative to ornate church buil dings, the M en­ 38 DOYLESTOWN 5 1. CODOR US nonites constructed si mple structures call ed meeting­ 39. WEST SWA MP 52 HANOVE R 40 SOUDERTON 53 T ULPEHOC KEN l houses in which to hold religious se rvices."s These 4 1 L IMERICK 54 aUITOPH ILIA , 42 LANDIS VALLEY 55. SWATARA ''\ meetinghouses were built large enough to accommodate 4 3 NEFFSVIL LE 'LEHIG H \...- everal hundred people, and were all architecturally 44 LANDISVILLE ',CO T almost identical. ':" They were invariably situated as : ~ :~~~~=~:~:N:-.. BE~~ S ' ~ 0/ 00 1l~~0~, . 53.' c{?/ '( a close to the geographical center of the congregational '\.E. ca. , 0 7 '0, 3 5. district as possible, for centrali ty minimized the time DAUPHIN \ , / g "'~ 4 CO. \. 54. ./, O,bo O • . • 3B. and distance involved in travelling over very poor roads •55 . \ _ - ./,.49. ,46. /' -~3 0 31'., BUCKS ) -_..,...... ~.... r./ 3:1-0\00 40 h CO / to religious services for persons located near the outer 1< 0 42 0 • / . 0 LM O NT G OMER~ I / ,4",c 4 ~ .'; 0 47 ' CO. (ci" o. y margins of the districts. ,4ol'44 . • I /' I v 'V'~45. 0 48. / / ' ( ",,,"/' Agriculturall y, the Mennonite community of south­ 5~ . ,~c 0 CHESTER / \q+' 0 CO ./ YO RK "P. I V" eastern Pennsylvania, like the previously described 20 CO. 'i>' , 0 Ami h community, experienced considerable change .5 2 . .51. \ / \ MILES / during the period 1751-1800, for districts organized Figure 13. before 1750, while remaining largely self-sufficient, were rapidly developing the commercial facets of their general Some 22 new Mennonite congregations were organ­ farming."o Only those districts founded after 1750 now ized between 1751 and 1800, eight in the Skippack­ depended almost solely upon subsistence farming. Perkiomen Creek area in the east, and 14 in the Pequea Socially, the Mennonite community during the latter Creek section in the west (Figure 13 ) . In the fonner half of the eighteenth century remained a conservative, area, congregational districts were founded at East isol ated, tradition-directed, almost self-sufficient rural Swamp, Plains, West Swamp, Souderton, and Lime­ farm society. However, despite continued economic and rick in M ontgomery County, and at Lexington, Bloom­ territorial growth after 1800, the dawning nineteenth ing Glen, and Doylestown in Bucks County"· (Figure century was destined to become a period of religious 13) . In the latter area, congregations were organized and cultural tension and conflict within the Mennonite at Landis V alley, Neffsville, Landisville, Rohrerstown, community of southeastern Pennsylvania. Goodville, Martindale, Bareville, and Bowmansville in THE P E RIOD 1801-1850 Lancaster County. In addition, districts developed in The territorial expansion of the southeastern Penn­ the west at Stonybrook, Codorus, and H anover in York sylvania Mennonite community continued during the County, at Swatara in D auphin County, at Q uitopahilla period 1801-1850, but growth came more slowly than in Lebanon County, and at Tulpehocken in Berks during the previous century. Seven congregational County121 (Figure 13). At the close of the eighteenth districts are known to have been formed in the eastern, century, therefore, the southeastern Pennsylvania Men­ Skippack-Perkiomen, portion of the Mennonite sub­ nonite sub-region consisted of some 55 congregational region: near Schwenksville in Montgomery County; districts. at Plumstead, Quakertown, and Applebachsville in In gener.al, Mennonite congregations were larger in Bucks County; at Coopersburg and Zionsville in Lehigh population, and districts were more extensive territo­ County; and near H ellertownl31 in orthampton County rially, in 1800 than in 1750. It is estimated that the (Figure 14). Thus, this eastern part of the sub-region population of most congregational districts increased expanded only sl ightly into new territories in northern from between 50 and 100 persons prior to 1750, to Bucks, southern Lehigh, and southern orthampton between 100 and 150 persons by 1800; and each con­ counties. In the western, Pequea, portion of the M en­ gregation grew from between 10 and 15 families in the nonite sub-region, seven additional congregational dis­ earlier period, to between 15 and 20 fann families by tricts were organized: at Churchtown, Adamstown, 1800. In like manner, whereas congregational districts Ephrata, Lititz, Muddy Creek, and New H olland, in organized prior to 1750 ranged in size from two to three Lancaster County; and at Schaefferstown in Lebanon square miles; by 1800, the average size of the 55 Men­ County (Figure 14) . During the period, 1801-1850, nonite districts was about four square miles. mC. Henry Smith, The M ennonites of America, pp. 17 3-176 . mc. Henry Smith, The Story of t~e M enno nit~s, pp. 176- "'Determined from observation of numerous Mennonite 178 ; C. Henry Smith, The M ennonztes of Amenca, p . 173; meetinghouses. and John C. Wenger, History of the Mennonites at the Fran­ 13°F rederic Klees, The Pennsylvania Dutch, pp. 191-202. conia Conference, pp. 12-15. l31John C. Wenger, History of the Mennonites of the Fran­ "'Ibid. conia Conference, p. 16 . 35 therefore, only small sections In northern Lancaster County and southeastern L ebano n County were MAIN-DIVISION MENNONITE CONGREGATIONAL DISTRICTS added.'" Hence, by 1850, the outer configuration of ORGANIZED FROM 1801 TO 1850 the Southeastern Pennsylvania Pl ain Dutch M ennonite

Sectarian Sub-Region, with its now 69 congregational 56. SCHWENKSVILLE 63. CHURCH TOWN districts, was not far different than what it had bee.n 57. PLUMSTE.AD 64. ADAMSTOWN 58. QUAKERTOWN 65. EPHRATA in 1800 (Figure 14 ). 59. COOPERSBURG 66. LITITZ 60. ZIONSVILLE 67. MUDDY CREEK Except for the most recentl y formed districts, the 61. BEL LERTOWN 68. NEW HOLLAND populations of most congregations in the first half of 62. APPLEBACHSVILLE 69. SCHAEFFERSTOWN the nineteenth century were much larger than those of earlier periods, consisting of from 20 to 30 farm DATE OF ORGANIZATION famil cs and comprising between 150 and 250 persons. o - PRE-1801 DISTRICTS • -1801 TO 1850 DISTRICTS M os t of the population increase was attributabl e to the formation of new families within the M ennonite con­ gregational districts, for there were very few M ennonite migrants arriving from Germanic Europe after 1800. M oreover, there was only limited intra-district move­ ment of M ennonites. Farms were becoming increasingly more difficult to obtain since nearly a ll desirabl e local agricultural lands had been developed. Hence, the subdivision of farms

by the older M ennonites among their sons was becom­ YORK ing increasingly common. Consequently, M ennonite CO . o o congregational districts were not much larger territo­ o 20 rially in 1850 than they were in 1800, for, while the I • , number of farms in the districts was increasing, the MILES individual farms were decreasing in acreage. The M en­ Figure 14. nonites remained almost excl usively a farming people during the first half of the nineteenth century. At mid-century, nearly all M ennonite farms had reached a former preacher. H err and his associates, former a relatively high level of self-sufficiency, but were also members of the Strasburg congregational district (Fig­ becoming increasingly commercially oriented and selling ure 12, No. 29 ) in Lancaster County, organized a much produce to nearby towns and cities. Most of new and separate Strasburg congregation (Figure 17, these prosperous agricultural units fitted the pattern o. 1) . Thus was launched what soon became known described earlier in this chapter. as the R eformed M ennonite Church, the members of Unfortunately for the early nineteenth-century M en­ which were call ed H errites by the main M ennonite nonites, economic prosperity did not bring socio-cultural church (Table I ) . The founders of the R eformed and religious tranquility, for some libera ll y-minded ad­ M ennonites became so traditional that many of their herents began to question the inflexibility of the sec­ de ccndants refused to join the movement. H ence, this tarian culture and the consequent rigidity of the M en­ branch of the M ennonite faith has grown very slowly. nonite way of life. On the other hand, more conserva­ T oday, the Reformed M ennonites have congregations tively-minded sectarians thought the church was becom­ only at R ohrerstown, Landisville, and Strasburg (Fig­ ing too lax and worldly. H ence, internal religious ure 17, Nos. 1, 2, and 3). tensions emerged and sometimes mounted to CrISIS Another nineteenth century split from the M ennonite proportions, causing sectarian schisms among the M en­ church, this one pro-liberal in nature, was known as nonites. These religious divisions caused much socio­ the Oberholtzer schism,'" and occurred in 1847. This cultural change within the southeastern Pennsylvania schism affected many of the Mennonites in Mont­ M ennonite community during the 1800's. gomery and nearby counties, who became known as Conservatively-minded dissidents procl a ime d that the East Pennsylvania District M ennonites (Table I ). M e nnonite Anabaptism was becoming diluted and Its originator was J ohn H. Oberholtzer, who was or­ therefore was causing the sectarian society to become dained as preacher of the East Swamp congregation less isolated and the culture more worldly. A schism "'All information appertaining to the Reformed Mennonite subsequently occurred among the Lancaster County Church was obtained from C. Henry Smith, The M en nonites Mennonites in -1812.'" The individual primarily respon­ of America, pp. 134-182; and C. Henry Smith, The Story of the Mennonites, pp. 540-547. sible for the split was John H err, son of Francis H err, "'All information relating to the East Pennsylvania District M ennonite Church was also obtained from the two above­ "'c. Henry Smith, The Mennonites of America, pp. 134-182. named works of C. H enry Smith. 36 in 1842 (Figure 13, o. 36). The original East Penn­ and Boyertown, and, later, congregation were estab­ sylvania District of M ennonites congregational district lished at aucon and Phoenixville (Figure 17, os. was organized at Skippack on O ctober 28, 1847 (Fig­ 4 through 11 ) . ure 17, o. 4 ). The liberal Oberholtzer Mennonites Unfortunately for the ~1 ennonite ,thi was not the relaxed the clothing requirements and, in time, the last schi m; in fact, many more were to occur during wearing of plain garb was no longer requi red. This the next 100-year period. By the middle of the twen­ new Mennonite body was more tolerant of new things tieth century, few American religious bodies would be and permitted mueh more communication with the divided into as many factions as the Mennonites. surrounding world. Because of these rather liberal views, the O berholtzer movement was popular from THE PERIOD 1851 -1900 its beginning and soon claimed about one-third of the Very few congregational di tricts were founded with­ Mennonites of Montgomery and adjacent counties. in, and only small amounts of terri tory were added to Indeed, so many of the Skippack, East Swamp, West the main-division Southeastern Pennsylvani a M ennonite Swamp, and Schwenksville congregations joined the sub-region during the 1851-1900 period (Figure 15), new movement that they took over the existing meeting­ for migration of M ennonites from Germanic Europe houses, and those remaining within the old church were to southeastern Pennsylvania had long since ended and forced to build new ones. Within a few more years, additional local agricultural land were pracllcally un­ Oberholtzer congregations were also formed at Bally obtainable by newly-formed Mennonite families. Only

Dates of Origins , and Termination, o f Mennoni t es Sub-Sects* in So utheastern Pennsylvania, 1812 to 1970

1700 1750 1800 1850 1900 1950 1970

1812 , He rrite Reformed Men nonites -,,

Conservative Divisions 1929 Wenger Old Or der Mennonites of the

Mennonite Church 1893, Martin Mennonites, 1929 Pike later absorbed by / Old Order Mennonites Old Order Mennonites ...... 1929-1 35' er Old Order Mennonites

Main-Division Mennonites . The major body of the Mennonite sect, compr~s~ng that segment of ~ the original European Mennonite Church that has continued unbroken in southeastern Pennsyl- ? vania since the migra tion of 1683 . 'I Original as a liberal 1925 , Hornung sub- sect , which is now 1 .... Mennoni t es moder ately conser vative.

1853 1 Johnson Mennonites Liberal Divisions • I Eas t Pennsylvania 1847 -"- of t he Dis tri ct (Ober holtzer ) Mennoni t e s

Mennonit e Ch urch 1858 , Evangelic Mennonites .... 1851 Huns icker Mennonit es Absor bed by other sect s

*So urces : C. Henry Smi t h , The Story of t he Mennoni t es , ~. Cit.; Don Yo de r, The Ho r se and Bug gy Dutch , Penna. Folklife, Op . Cit. , July 1963; Alfred Shoemaker, Ho r se and Buggy Me nnoni t es , Penna . Fo l klife , 2£. Cit . , 1960 .

Table I 37 MAIN- DIVISION MENNONITE CONGREGATIONAL DISTRICTS MAIN-DIVISION ME NNONI T E CONGR EGATIONAL DI STRICTS ORGANIZED FROM 1901 TO 1970 ORGANIZED FROM 1851 TO 1900 74 MYE RSTOWN 8 1. HO PELAND 70 COLLEGEVILLE 7 5 RE IST VILL E 8 2. HESS DA L E 71 MONTEREY 76 RI CHLAND 8 3 NEW PROVIDEN CE 72. CLAY 7 7. HINKEL TOWN 8 4 SMITH VI LLE 73. MT. AETNA 78 BR OWN STOWN B5 BUC K 79 NE F F SVI L LE B6 BART BO. BR IC KERSV ILLE DATE OF ORG AN IZAT ION

0- PR E-I B ~I DISTRICTS , DATE OF ORGAN IZ ATI ON . -IB51 TO 1900 DISTRI CT S O - PRE - 1901 DISTRICTS

YORK YORK CO . CO . o o o 20 o o o 20 '-' _-'-,_-,I I I MILE S

Figure 15. Figure 16.

four ongr gational districts w r organiz d by the munity we re close. The prospect of never again seeing main-divi ion M ennonit s du ring the second half of family and fri ends be arne a frightening one. Such the nineteenth ntury: at Coll eg ville in M ontgomery fears w re not unfounded for, at that time, the M en­ ounty, at Monterey a nd Clay in Lanca ter County, nonite hurch permitted its adherents the use of only and at Mt. A tna in L -banon County'" (Figure 15) , horse-and-buggy land travel. Therefore, a visit between giving a total of 73 for 1900 in ompari son with 69 M nnoni t r latives in southeastern Pennsylvania and some 50 y ars earlier. those in distant parts of the United States and Canada It was b coming almost imposs ibl to buy a farm was almost impossible.'" In southeastern Pennsylvani a during the latter years During the 1851-1900 period, additional religious of last entury. The period 185 1-1 900, therefor , was divisions occurred among the Mennonites which re­ on of the subdivision of farms throughout the entire sul ted in subsequent changes in the Mennonite way Mennonit community. Indeed, by the latter years of of life. C rtain schisms"" were temporary and soon the entury, many farms had been so subdivid d among disintegrated, whereas others proved permanent. De­ the sons of farmers that any further division was tails of the significant ones are given below. economicall y impractical"· and the surplus population All charter members of the aforementioned liberal was for eel to either emigrate or give up farming. East Pennsylvania District (Oberholtzer ) M ennonite Sin e~ the latter choice was inconceivabl e to the tradi­ movement did not agree on the extent to which this tion-st epeel Mennonit s, they chose to leave south­ liberalizing movement should be carried. To the ultra­ eastern Pennsylvania and s ek new land elsewhere. liberal, Abraham Hunsi ker, the views of John Ober­ Thus, it was that, by 1900, the number of Mennonite holtzer, founder of the East Pennsylvania District move­ families in a typical southeastern Pennsylvania district ment, were not tolerant enough. Hunsicker, together had only increased to b twe n 30 and 35, and the with a small group of sympathizers s attered through­ average population distri t was only about 300.'" Em­ out the various Oberholtzer congregations (Figure 17), igrating newly-married Mennonite couples moved chief­ was expelled from the East Pennsylvania District Men­ ly to the Lower Great Lakes area, the eastern Great nonite Church in 1851, but the Hunsicker faction failed Plains, and Ontario.'" The decision to migrate was to form a congregational district and the membership a frightfully traumatic emotional experien e, for family was ultimately absorbed by other seets (Table I ). ties wt:re intense and kinship bonds within the com- Whereas the Hunsickers found the Oberholtber fac­ tion too conservative, another group under the leader­ '''c. Henry Smith, The Story of the Mennonites, Chapter ship of H enry G. Johnson considered it too liberal. In IX; and C. Henry Smith, The Mennonites of America, Chapter VII. ""See Footnote 137. "·Elam Leid, personal interview. H OAll information relating to all religious divisions occurring "'Personal interviews with numcrow; Mennonites, particular­ between 1851 and 1900 is based upon C. Henry Smith, The ly Ivan Leid, Elam Leid, Ivan Martin, and Bishop Eli Burk­ Story of the Mennonites, pp. 540-547; C. Henry Smith, The holder. Mennonites of America, pp. 134-182; and John C. Wenger, "'C. Henry Smith, The Mennonites of America, Chapters History of the Mennonites of the Franconia Conference, pp. VII and X. 16-20.

38 MENNONITE SUB-SECT OLD ORDER MENNONITES. CONGREGATIONAL DISTRICTS 15. WEAVERLAND 2 1. NEW HOLLAND ORGANIZED FROM 1812 TO 1970 16 GROFFDALE 22. HINKELTOWN 17 . BOWMANSVILLE 23 PENN VALLEY 18 MARTINDALE REFORMED MENNONITES IHORNUNG 0 119 CHURCHTOWN (HER RITES) - MENNONITES 20. MUDDY CREEK I. STRASBURG 24. GROFFDALE I 2 . LANDISVILLE 125. BOWMANSVILLE \." 3. REHRERSTOWN 26. MARTINDALE .... "- EAST PENNA. DISTRICT 27. CHURCHTOWN 'LEHIGH ' MENNONITES (OBERHOLTZER 128. NEW HOLLAND "CO. I MENNONITES) 0 29. WALNUTTOWN .....)' 0_ 23. " 10·12 ./ 4. SKIPPACK '~9. ~ ", 5. EAST SWAMP , 7. 0 /" 6. WEST SWAMP " . I " , "! BALLY \ > , 8.0/6. !i.~13 , 8. BOYERTOWN _./ 1125' .l.. 0d)9. " 9. SCHWENKSVILLE \ - liq,· " ./ - 5. "- 10. SAUCON ...... -- ..... 22 .••~·i.6b"";'/ 'o'f'4. "~/'" II. PHOENIXVILLE 1<: 20•• 16. • 0 19 I 2~ II . LMONTGOMER~ , / ,4",C • 0 .24...... /,CO.\--" Y EVANGELICAL ...23 - - 21.28. 15. I / '( MENNONITES ... ~-4~,~."' ,~ _I . I / / 12. UPPER MILFORD ,-9.... C q I ... / (I' JOHNSON "I _ Vo MENNON ITES t:. \ 20 13. SCHWENKSVILLE \ / / - I MILES I 14. EAST SWAMP

Figure 17.

1853, Johnson and a small number of sympathizers (Table I ), together with three other like-thinking withdrew from the East Pennsylvania District Men­ groups (the Ohio Wislerites, the Ontario Wool wichers, nonite Church and became known as the Johnson and the Virginia Martinites), comprised an extremely Mennonites (Table I ) . The Johnson party, how­ conservative wing of the Mennonite church. The above­ ever, experienced only slow growth and today there described divisions, along with several later schisms, are but two smaIl Johnsonite congregations in south­ were to have a tremendous impact upon the twentieth­ eastern Pennsylvania (Figure 17, Nos. 13 and 14). century Mennonite community of Southeastern Penn­ The end of Mennonite religious division was not sylvania, causing many religious, socio-cultural, and yet in sight. Even the liberal Oberholtzer Mennonites economic changes. did not believe in prayer meetings, but WiIliam Geh­ man , an Oberholtzer Mennonite, began conducting THE PERIOD 1901-1970 such meetings, and he and his foIlowers were excom­ During the present century, the main body of the municated from the Oberholtzer Church in 1858. This Mennonite Church in southeastern Pennsylvania has movement, taking the name Evangelical Mennonites been further splintered by schismatic movements. In (Table I ), soon developed a congregation at Upper 1925, some Mennonites of Lancaster County decided Milford (Figure 17, No. 12 ), but subsequently ex­ to purchase automobiles.'" Since the main body of perienced very slow growth. Later, through amalgama­ Mennonites did not accept this method of transportation tion with similarly-minded groups in other states and until 1929, the automobile-buying Mennonites were Canada, they developed into a body of substantial size. excommunicated and became H orning Mennonites The final nineteenth-century division among the sub-sect (Table I ). Thus, the H orning groups orig­ Mennonites of southeastern Pennsylvania occurred In inated as a liberal sub-sect.'" T oday, however, members the Weaverland congregational district in 1899 (Fig­ of the Hornung division of the Mennonites are classed ure 12, No. 32). Bishop Jonas M artin of the Weaver­ as moderately conservative sectarians, for their religious land congregation attempted to keep the main M en­ practices and mores are almost identical to those of the nonite church within very narrow traditional bounds. main body of Mennonites. There are now six Horning Ultimately, Martin and about one-third of the member­ Mennonite cong regati onal districts in southeastern ship withdrew from the Weaverland congregation and founded their own church in the area (Figure 17, "'Ivan Leid, personal interview. No. 15). These Martin M ennonites of Pennsylvania l<'Ibid.

39 Pennsylvania: Groffdale, Bowmansville, Martindale, removed, and the young are permitted to obtain high Churchtown, and New H oll and in Lancaster County, school and college educations. Tilling the so il is no and Walnuttown in Berks County (Figure 17, Nos. longer consid ered a holy endeavor, so that large num­ 24-29 ) . bers have obtained employment in a wide variety of In 1929, when the main division of the Mennonite non-agricultural occupations. M any sectarians have church in southeastern Pennsylvania decided to follow sold their farms and moved into the towns and cities the example of the then liberal H ornung M ennonites of southeastern Pennsylvania. Others reside in the rural and accept the automobile, a large segment of the areas and commute to work in nearby urban centers. Mennonite population in northeastern Lancaster Coun­ These moderate main-division southeastern Penn­ ty obj ected and seceded from the main M ennonite sylvania Mennonites are receptive to cultural and Church.'" Unfortunately for them, these conservative economic changes. They accept the automobile, but Mennonites could not formulate an Ordnung accept­ some congregations require that the chrome be painted abl e to the entire group. They soon split into three black. The use of them of electricity, refrigeration, groups: the Pikers,'" the 35'ers,1<5 and the Wengerites'" telephone service, radio, and certain household ap­ (T able I ) . From their beginning, these groups have pliances are permissable, and agriculture has been al­ been so similar in religious beliefs and socio-cultura l most completely mechanized and commercialized. They practi ces that it is impossible for the majority of any still reject, however, many contemporaneous social of the three groups to explain their differences. Since mores such as using tobacco, consuming alcoholic they all are so very conservative and have preserved beverages, dancing, gambling, and joining social or­ virtuall y intact all of the traditional features of pre­ ganizations. twentieth century Mennonite religion and culture, these Thus, adherents of the original southeastern Penn­ three groups are collectively referred to as the Old sylvania Mennonite Church are gradually being assim­ Order Mennonites.'" Today, there are nine Old Order il ated into American society. It is becoming increas­ M ennonite c o n g r ega tion a l districts in southeastern ingly difficult to distinguish these sectarians and their Pennsylvania: eight in Lancaster County (Weaver­ cl ose kin, the liberal M ennonites, from the non-Plain land, Groffdale, Bowmansville, Martindale, Church­ Dutch peoples of southeastern Pennsylvania. Only the town, Muddy Creek, New Holland, and Hinkeltown ) , Old Order M ennonites retain much of the flavor of and one, Penn V all ey, in Berks County (Figure 17, bygone days. Nos. 15-23). The Martin Mennonites, organized ill The present-day Mennonite sub-region of south­ the nineteenth century and previously mentioned, have eastern Pennsylvania is comprised of 116 congregational been absorbed by the Old Order Mennonites (T able I ) . districts, 87 of which are a p.art of the main division The overwhelming majority of M ennonites in south­ of the church and 29 of which are associated with the eastern Pennsylvania have remained members of the various sub-sects (Figures 16 and 17 ) . Among the 29 original European Mennonite Church despite all of new congregational districts founded in this century, the internal doctrinal controversies of the nineteenth 14 were organized by Mennonites of the original church: and twentieth centuries, but the nature .of their religion at M ye rstown, Reistville, and Richland in Lebanon and culture has been greatly modified by the schismatic County; and at Hinkeltown, Brownstown, Neffsville, process. These main-division Mennonites (T able I ) Brickersville, Hopeland, Hessdale, New Providence, now occupy a position somewhat intermediate be­ Smithville, Buck, Bart, and Bartville in Lancaster tween the liberal and conservative splinter factions of County (Figure 16, Nos. 74-87 ) . The remainder of the Mennonite faith. They adhere to most of the the 29 new twentieth-century districts include . the nine principles and practices of original European Anabap­ founded by Old Order Mennonites and the six estab­ tism, but the formal Ordnung and M eidung are no lished by Horning Mennonites (Figure 17, Nos. 15-29) . longer in effect. Moreover, they now reject the principle A quick comparison of Figures 16 and 17 will show of socio-cultural isolation. They employ semi-profes­ that most members of all shades of M ennonite faith sional cl ergy and worship in simply designed modern in southeastern Pennsylvania are geographically in­ church buildings. Modern styles ot' clothing generally tricately intermixed. The additional comparison of have been adopted, but men still wear lapelless coats the above two figures with Figure 11, showing the and the women wear prayer caps to religious services. distributional pattern of the southeastern Pennsylvania Educational and occupational limitations have been Amish, reveals the interesting fact that, whereas the Mennonites and Amish coexist in large numbers in the 1<'Ibid. ""Ivan Leid, personal interview. This group is called the Lancaster County portion of the area, mostly M en­ Pike Mennonites because they lived close to U.S. Highway 322. nonites are found in the 11 additional counties that ""Ibid. This group is called the 35'ers because the first congregation consisted of 35 members. comprise the Southeastern Pennsylvania Plain Dutch "'Ibid. Named for their foremost leader. Community. It is evident from this that the reputation "'Alfred L. Shoemaker, "Horse and Buggy Mennonites" Pennsylvania Folklife, Vol. 13, 1963, pp. 36-39; and Iv~n of Lancaster County as the focus of southeastern Penn­ Leid, personal interview. sylvania's Plain Duch culture is indeed merited. 40 Palatine Emigrants of the 18th Century

By FRIEDRICH KREBS Translated and Edited by DO YODER

1. ODERNHEIM ON THE GLAN four weeks ago," therefore probably in July 1769, a [The following article by Dr. Krebs, entitled in son of the first marriage is listed named Christian German "Einige Amerikaauswanderer des 18. J ahr­ Scheib, of whom it is said that he wa married and hunderts aus Odernheim am Glan," appeared in the living in America, whither he had emigrated 23 years Nordpfalzer Geschichtsverein: Beitrage zur H eimatge­ previously as a single man. The emigrant may be iden­ schichte, Volume 49, Number 1 (March 1969), 20-21. tical with the Christian Scheib who landed in Philadel­ The periodical is published at Rockenhausen in the phia in 1751 on the Ship Edinburgh and took the oath Palatinate. The village of Odernheim can be located of allegiance there on September 16, 1751 ( trassburger­ on the map in the vicinity of Kreuznach, directly north Hinke, List 167 C ). of Kaiserslautern.- EDITOR.] 3. In a release of the citizen L eonhard Weydner of 1. In the guardianship accounts of the community ar­ Odernheim and his wife Susanna M argaretha, dated chives of Odernheim emigration to Pennsylvania before J anuary 29, 1763, it is said of the son L eonhard Weyd­ the year 1757 is documented for one Johann H enrich ner, Jr., that he went to America at the end of April Wolfjling, son of David W olfjling, citizen and master 1741 and is 53 years old. Of Johann H enrich Weydner, tailor at Odernheim. In 1757 there appeared at Odern­ a son of the first marriage to Anna Margaretha H of­ heim H enrich M essem er ( Misemer, M iesemer), for­ mann, it is said that he was a shoemaker (Schuhknecht), merly of M andel bei Kreuznach, who was a merchant emigrated to America in 1734, and is 44 years old. To in Philadelphia, with power of attorney from the em­ increase the confusion it is stated that several children igrant Wolffiing, who is said to have been a master of Leonhard Weydner's wife, to her first marriage with shoemaker in the city of Philadelphia, for the purpose Valentin Graf, have moved to Pomerania. From a doc­ of collecting his inheritance for him. Messemer re­ ument dated J anuary 24, 1768, we can gather that ceived from the curators for delivery to his client, Leonhard Weydner, Sr., died about 1765 and that the after deduction of the sextile tax, 210 florins 5 batzen two emigrants to America, H enrich and Leonhard and 10 pennies. H einrich Wolffiing landed in Philadel­ Weydner, Jr., who emigrated in 17 34 and 1741, still phia on the Ship John & Elizabeth in 1754 as H enry had claims on 365 florins and 3 batzen as their inherit­ Wei/ling (Wilflinger) and took the oath of allegiance ance a fter deduction of the sextile tax. In a letter of there on November 7, 1754 (Strassburger-Hinke, Penn­ May 14, 1765, Johann H enrich Weydner of Odernheim sylvania German Pioneers, List 231 A-C). inquired of his brother, Philipp Conrad W eydner, cit­ 2. In an inventory dated August 23 , 1769, of the izen, master cabinetmaker and glazier of Germantown estate of the citizen and master shoemaker Valentin near Philadelphia, for the address of the emigrants for Scheib of Odernheim, who is said to have died "about the purpose of settling their inheritance. Later, in

Bergzabern in the Palatinate - engrav­ ing by Matthaeus Merian, from the Topographia Germaniae (1672).

41 1767-1768, there appeared as attorney for both brothers [welcher dermahlen im N euen Landt in America und Philipp Odenwiilder, who had emigrated to America 18 Jahr alt istJ (Inventory of Jacob Chembenois, No. and ha iled from Weinheim on the Bergstrasse, to whom, 239, dated October 16, 1767 ). The family name was according to an agreement to bring over the inheritance also written Chesnebenoist. A letter from the emigrant to his clients, there was finally turned over the sum of from the year 1779 has been published in the M onats­ 339 florins 2 batzen and 8 pennies (August 22, 1768 ) . schrift des Frankenthaler Altertumsvereins, I: 3 ( 1893 ), The infonnation on the, emigration year of both Weyd­ according to which he had settled in Lancaster County, ners is not free of contradictions. But that they were Pennsylvania, not far from the county seat of Lancaster. certainly in America is proved by a letter of both dated 3. Johann Christoph Hartmann, born August 30, October 19, 1767, which is addressed to Friedrich Graf 1744, at Frankenthal, son of V alentin Hartmann and or Nicolaus W eidner in Odernheim, in which reference his wife Elisabetha Catharin Bayer, married at Frank­ is made to the regulation of the inheritance business en thai April 23, 1767, Maria Susanna Bohmer from and the sending over of Philipp Odenwalder. L eonhard Baumholder. H e is described as "married and living (L enert) W eydner lived at that time at Easton in in the New Land" [verheurathet und in dem neuen Northampton County, Pennsylvania, H enrich W eydner L andt wohnhafft J (Inventory No. 545, of V alentin in Oxford (?) in Sussex County, New J ersey. H artmann, dated October 15, 1767 ) . Strassburger­ Hinke, List 265 C: Christoph Hartmann. 4. Juliana Krick, daughter of the citizen and invalid II. FRANKENTHAL Wilhelm Krick, who must have died at Frankenthal in [Franken thai in the Palatinate can be located on the 1782, was, according to data in his inventory (No. map between Worms and Ludwigshafen, a few miles 768, dated January 31, 1782 ), married to the master northwest of M annheim. In the 17th Century it re­ baker Konrad Bohm and living in North America. A ceived many Huguenot refugees after the revocation brother of Juliana Krick, Jeremias Krick, is, according of the Edict of Nantes in 1685. This article listing seven to data in the inventory, said to have died in Batavia. emigrants of the 18th Century from Frankenthal is 5. Johann Wilhelm L otschberg, born at Frankenthal translated from Friedrich Krebs, "Amerikaauswanderer December 23, 1740, son of the master tailor Johann des 18. Jahrhunderts aus der Stadt Fra nkenthal," Conrad L otschberg ( L otspeich) and his wife Catharina Mitteilungen der W estdeutschen Gesellschaft fur Fam­ Elisabetha Wilhelmina Ladenberger (both married at ilienkunde, XIX (1959 ), columns 577-580.--EDITOR.J Frankenthal, June 3, 1739), had settled in Virginia and married there, according to data in the inventory The few following names of emigrants were taken of Conrad Lotschberg (No. 879, dated October 24, from the Ausfauth eiakten' (inventories, lists of property, 1778 ) . Conrad Lotschberg died September 30, 1778, and wills ) of the City Archives of Frankenthal. As at Frankenthal. But according to data from the above far as possible they have been supplemented through source there had also emigrated to Virginia Johanna genealogical data from the church registers. As far as Friderica L otschberg (born at Frankenthal M arch 25 , the arrival of the said emigrants in the port of Phil­ 1744) and Johann Christoph L otschberg (born at adelphia can be documented in the published ship lists Frankenthal July 11 , 1750 ), sister and brother of Joh­ (Strassburger-Hinke, Pennsylvania German Pionee rs ), ann Wilhelm Lotschberg. In any case it is documented this infonnation is given in parentheses. The list makes of Johann Christoph L otspeich that he landed at the no claim of comprehensiveness. port of Philadelphia in 1772 (Strassburger-Hinke, List 1. H enrich Basler, son of Andreas Basler, citizen and 297 C ). The family name is written sometimes Lotsch­ master cartwright at Frankenthal and his wife Anna berg, sometimes L otspeich. Johann Conrad Lotschberg, Catharina Schubard (Schuppert), "at this time gone the emigrant's father, was the son of Johann Conrad to Pennsylvania and resident there" [dermahlen in die Lotschberg, master shoemaker from the district of Bohnsylvaniam gereisst und sesshaften allda] (Inventory Mahlberg in Baden-Baden, and therefore the first of No. 62, dated D ecember 17, 1735). According to data the name in Frankenthal. The family is of the Lutheran in this inventory Andreas Basler must have died about confession. Perhaps in the case of this family, "Penn­ 1730. sylvania" is meant for "Virginia," since the references 2. Johann Heinrich Chembenois-son of the Frank­ to place in the 18th Century documents are not always en thai citizen Jacob Chembenois (who died probably reliable. ' in 1767 ) and his wife Catharina Gotz-"who is at this 'Evidently they did settle in Virginia, where some of them time in the New Land in America and is 18 years old" were converted to Methodism. An early historian of Meth­ odism tells us of "William Lotspeich, a German, born in 'A usfautheiakten (there is no English equivalent for this Virginia, who, without extraordinary abilities, was a sound, word ) are inheritance and guardianship records. For the studious and useful preacher, and, from 1803 to 1813, trav­ etymology of the word, see footnote 1 in Friedrich Krebs, eled in Tennessee Kentucky and Ohio and died in the lattt!r "Eighteenth-Century Emigrants to America from the Duchy year, saying, 'Teli myoid 'friends all ' is w.ell, all is well'." of ZweibrUcken and the Germersheim District," Pennsylvania (Abel Stevens, History of the Methodist EpIScopal Church In Folklife, XVIII: 3 (Spring 1969 ), 46. the United States of America, IV, 434.-EDITOR.

42 6. Johanna Petri, daughter of Johannes Petri and his (Strassburger-Hinke, List 47 A-C ) . wife Anna Weber, "who has already been absent 19 In 1738 Ulrich Stockel of Hir chtal; Johannes TV ein­ years and from what we hear, is said to be in the ew muller, single, of Rumbach ; and la tly Elisabeth eu­ Land" [welche bereits 19 Jahr ab wesend und dem hard, daughter of Christoph euhard of Rumbach, like­ Vernehmen nach sich in dem neuen Land befinden wise we re permitted to go to Penn ylvania with official soUJ (Inventory No. 1070, of Johannes Petri, dated license. Of these only Johannes Weinmiiller could be J anuary 24, 1782 ) . It is likely that other Petri families located in the ship Ii ts. He landed at Philadelphia on from Frankenthal also emigrated to America. the Ship Thistle in 1738 ( trass burger-Hinke, List 57 7. Johann Nicolaus Romer, son of the deceased cit­ A-C ) . izen and master locksmith Wilhelm R om er (who died In 1751 icolaus Wolff of Hirschtal was permitted at Frankenthal February 26, 1740) and his wife Bar­ to emigrate to America. This could be either ickolas bara. H e is described as "gone to Pennsylvania" [in Wolff (Strassburger-Hinke, List 164 C ) , or Jo. Nicklas Pensylvanien gezogenJ (Inventory No. 1147, of Wil­ Wolff (List 175 C ) . helm Romer, dated April 20, 1758 ) . Johann Nicolaus In 1753 Martin Schneider, Georg Friedrich Schneider, Romer landed at the port of Philadelphia in 1732 on Maria Elisab e th Schneider and H einrich Balthasar the Ship L oyal Judith (Strassburger-Hinke, List 24 Schneider, and Johann Adam Bley, all of Rumbach, A-C ). likewise Magdalena Weber from Schonau, were permit­ ted to emigrate to America. Martin Schneider, aged

III. DISTRICT OF WEGELNBURG, DUCHY 26, arrived at Philadelphia September 24, 1753 (Strass­ OF ZWElBRUECKEN burger-Hinke, List 204 A) . Likewise in 1755 Jacob [The villages referred to in this emigrant list can be Schneider from Nothweiler received permission to located on the Southern border of the Palatinate, South emigrate. of Bergzabern and very near Weissenburg, across the On June 1, 1786, the Zweibriicken Government border in Alsace. The original article by Dr. Krebs is decreed that the property of Michael and of Jacob entitled "Amerikaauswanderer des 18. J ahrhunderts Schneider of Rumbach, who had "already gone to aus dem Gebiet des zweibriickischen Amts Wegeln­ America 20 years ago" [bereits vor 20 Jahren in Amer­ burg," and appeared in the M itteilungen der Westdeut­ icam gezogenJ, as far as the same had been derived schen GeseUsc haft fur Familienkunde, XXIII (1968 ) , from what their parents had acquired, should be handed columns 283-284.- EDITOR.J over to their brothers and sisters. But that part of the legacy which had come from the yielded property of The District of Wegelnburg in the former Duchy of the parents, was to be collected for the treasury. Zweibriicken consisted of the villages of Schonau, Hir­ By decree of April 23, 1765, the property of the schtal, Nothweiler and Rumbach, along with several brothers Wendel and Peter Scheid, Adam Neuhard, outlying farms. The source for the following emigrants' Jacob Schneider (H einrich Schneider's son), H enrich names was the Accounts of the :prefecture (Vogtei) Schaub, Georg Bley and Catharina Bley (children of of Wegelnburg, also Akt Zweibriicken III Nr. 1838/ II the deceased shepherd, Christoph Bley) , all of Rum­ in the Palatine State Archives at Speyer. The year of bach, also that of Catharina Imhoff (daughter of Hans the accounts, in which the emigrants are mentioned, Imhoff of Hirschtal), who was serving in Rumbach as should almost always be identical with the year of a hired girl, was to be collected for the treasury, since emigration. As far as the said emigrants' names could in the past year they had left Rumbach and had be located in the published ship lists (Strassburger­ evidently gone to the "New Land'" without govern­ Hinke, Pennsylvania German Pioneers), this has been mental permission. Of these only H enrich Schaub can noted. be identified, as Joha. H enrich S chaub, passenger on In 1737 the following villagers went to Pennsylvania: the ship Sarah, which landed at Philadelphia in Sep­ Georg Kern of Rumbach; Friedrich N euhard of Rum­ tember, 1764 (Strassburger-Hinke, List 244 C ) . A de­ bach; Michael Neuhard, a tailor, of Rumbach; Hans cree of the government dated June 29, 1769, instructed Georg Neuhard, single, of Rumbach; Christoph the prefect ( V ogt) at Schonau again to confiscate the Schwenck of Rumbach; and finally Georg H efft of property of the following who had secretly emigrated Nothweiler. As date of emigration, May, 1737, is to America: Jacob Neuhard, Henrich and Michael indicated almost throughout. We find Georg Hefft, Schneider (sons of H einrich Schneider ), Georg Bley Christoph Schwenck, George Kern, Michel Neuhard and Catharina Bley (children of Christoph Bley), and (Neihart), Georg Neuhard (Neihart), and also Fried­ H enrich Schaub (son of Balthasar Schaub ), all of Rum­ rich Neuhard (Jerg Friedrich Neihart) listed as pas­ bach. Since in the years 1763-1764 there was emigra­ sengers on the Ship St. Andrew Galley which landed tion from the Palatinate to Cayenne (French Guiana at Philadelphia in September, 1737, where they all in South America), that country could possibly be in­ took the oath of allegiance on September 26, 1737 tended in the documents when "America" is referred to.

43 WINTER ALBUM

We are indebted to Dr. Preston A. Barba, whose Pennsylvania. They were done by Rufus A. Grid! recent death represents great loss to Pennsylvania Ger­ Moravian artist, in February and March, 1847, al man scholarship, for calling to our attention our four appeared in Dr. Barba's They Came to Emmaus: sketches of winter scenes at Emmaus, Lehigh County, History (Emmaus, Pennsylvania: Borough of Emmal

A view in Emmaus done March 26, 1847, showing the arched entrance to God's Acre at the foot of Third Street, with Dr. Christian Fr:derick Schultz's hon:e .on the right (no longer standing) and Sylvester Giering's shop on the left (hzs father, Thomas Gzermg, was a saddler).

This view, done February 22, 1847, shows Daniel Keck's white house (with log house attached on the left) and to the right, Dr. Samuel Wilson's barn and office. - Daniel Keck's house stood on lot no. 26, the second from the N.E. corner of Second and Main Streets, and the log house on the corner lot, present site of the now vacant Neimeyer store.

44 he Rufus A. Grider Sl~etches of Emmaus

959), pp. 187-196. They are used here by permission the Archives. For Rufus A. Crider and other samples f the Moravian Archives, Bethl ehem, Pennsylvania, of his work, see the article by John F. forman, "Rufus in whose collections they are now preserved, and may A.Crider," Pennsylvania Folklife, IX : 2 ( pring 1958), ot be reproduced elsewhere without permission from 22-27.- EDITOR.

A view in Emmaus, done February 25, 1847, as seen from the "Emaus Inn" (with one "m"!) at Second and Main Streets (lat er the site of the Ex­ change Hotel). Opposite is the Road (so the artist designated it in the mar­ gill of the original) to Kline's Mill on the Little Lehigh. The log house in the center is at the N. W. corner of Second and Main, where the Neimey­ er residence, 203 Main Street, now stands. The house to the extreme left ( with log stable to the rear) stands today as the Bowers residence, 209 Main Street.

A view done February 28, 1847 and called "A winter view near Emaus" shows Jacob Tool's farm, no doubt the farm of Jacob Ehrenhardt, in whose log house Co lint Zinzendorf preached in 1742. The build­ ings no doubt date from the early 1800's. The farmhouse is believed to be the fine old stone house on South Keystone ;ust across the Reading Railroad and the road winding up the hill a continuation of Second Street. 45 Emigrants frOln Dossenheim (Baden) In the 18th Century By GABRIEL HARTMANN Translated and Edited by DON YODER

[The following emigrant list, with its intriguing title, of their parents and grandparents from the times under "Amerikafahrer von Dossenheim im 18. Jahrhundert," Karl Ludwig, when work was plentiful and people were by Gabriel H artmann of Heidelberg, was published happy. Then life still seemed to be worth living. The in the series Mannheimer Geschichtsblatter, XXVII despair crept through the poverty-stricken huts of the (1926), columns 55-58. The materials were extracted village and many a one told himself: better an end to from the Family Register of the R eformed congrega­ fear than fear without end. tion of Dossenheim. Dossenheim, Handschuhsheim, Away, away from this hard-hearted abode, which to and Schriesheim belonged in the 18th Century to the most had become a hell, was the watchword of many. Electoral Palatinate. They are located today in Baden, For there was nothing left anymore to life, except hard in the West German state of Baden-Wurttemberg, and compulsory labor. The tax vultures indeed took away can be found on the map a few miles West of Mann­ everything. heim and directly north of H eidelberg.-EDITOR.] I t is characteristic of the conditions of that time and In 1761, when the Reformed pastor Kaiser' of Hand­ place, that the emigration involved not only the young schuhsheim and Dossenheim on the Bergstrasse changed people. There were old people involved too, who had his residence, he wrote the following into the Dossen­ long since passed the zenith of their life. These pre­ heim Church R egister : ferred to die abroad in an unknown land rather than Just as this Dossenheim congregation during my in Karl Theodor's "paradise," and willingly lent their almost 30 year service here has sharply diminished ear to the agents for the "New Land". due to raging illnesses and especially the removal The first report of Dossenheim emigrants to America of many families to America and Jutland, so may the dear Lord through his grace increase it again comes to us from the year 1749. Then came the noto­ in true members in the love of Jesus Christ [Gleich rious "Black Monday" of May 7, 1752, and the emigra­ wie diese Dossenheimer Gem eind seit meiner fast tion of 1757; the last group of emigrants is mentioned 30 jahrigen Bedienung wegen grassierender Krank­ in 1764. heiten und besonders W egziehung vieler Familien It can be .assumed as self understood that these un­ nach Amerika und Juttland sehr vermindert wor­ den, so wolle der Liebe Gatt durch seine Gnade fortunate lower class farmers of a village that was at sie wieder vermehren an wahren Gliedern in der that time small, realized but little for their modest Liebe J esu C hristiJ. properties at the time of this mass flight, and the little These anxious words of the departing minister had that was left could scarcely reach farther than South­ an only too serious and tragic background. Mysterious ampton. There they at once got into a new slavery­ sicknesses had cut very deeply into the core of the the debt slavery of the shipping entrepreneur. The congregation. Beginning with the year 1732 and in ships would certainly, according to our present day accordance with a governmental decree, the sicknesses standards, have been the worst type of soul-destroyer, of the deceased were listed, and the designations con­ for on them only a very questionable maintenance was sumption (Abzehrung), fever ( hitzige K rankheit), dys­ allotted to the redemptioners on their long voyage. The entery and diarrhoea (rate und weisse Ruhr), and ship's sicknesses from that time speak on this question purples (weisse Frieseln) appear very frequently here. -.a ~ery eloquent language. Along with this came bad crop years and a monstrous The shipping entrepreneurs, despite their great in­ tax levy. The Electoral Court' engaged in all sorts of timacy with the Bible, were very smart business men, unprofitable fiscal experiments, like the raising of an­ who did not want to take over too much risk with the gora goats, for which honor Dossenheim was chosen. freighting of their debt slaves. These animals had so to speak a free passport, could According to the data from the aforementioned Fam- gad about at will to feed, wherever it suited them. Nat­ 'Everywhere that Pastor Kaiser was active, for example also urally through all this great damage was done to fields Schriesheim, he started family registers and left instructions and vineyards, against which the peasants were unable on how they were to be continued. These are very carefully set up and give immediate information on when a family first to protect themselves. All of this turned a great part appears at the place concerned and on its further development. of the villagers against the homeland government. With 'From a lecture on local history given at Dossenheim, in January 1924, by the schoolmaster, Peter Reinhard. See also sadness many must perhaps have remembered the tales Mannheimer Ceschichtsbliitter, XXVI (1925), column 8. 46 The Town Hall of Otterberg in the Palatinate. Photograph by Erich Sch1leider, Otterberg, from the Otterberger Kalender of 1955.

ily Register of Dossenheim, we gather that these em­ 4. Johann Michael Casper, born 1708, went to Car­ igrants all arrived safely in the New World. There are olina in 1752 without his wife and children, but came even indications at hand that they were soon relieved back, one person. of their debts. Of one it is reported that he went to 5. Johannes Fontius, born 1700, and his wife Anna Carolina in 1752, but came back. The year of his re­ Catharina, went with all eight children, with the ex­ turn is not indicated, but from this fact we can conclude ception of the oldest, Johann Georg, to Carolina, M ay that he came into some means, and he perhaps brought 9, 1752, ten persons. some along in order to manage, otherwise he would not 6. Johannes Federwolf and his wife Anna Catharina have been able to pay his ship's debts and the return and three girls, went to the ew Land circa 1752, five Journey. persons. The following are the names of these emigra nts to 7 . Johann V alentin H erder and his wife A nna Elisa­ America from Dossenheim, as they are to be found In beth and three children, to Carolina, May 9, 1752, five the documentary source listed above: persons. 1749. 8. J ohann Conrad H ungerbieler and his wife Maria 1. Johann Bar, Johann Georg Bar and his wife Anna Elisabeth and fiv e children, to Carolina, May 9, 1752, Catharina, May 1749, went to the New Land, three seven persons. (The Hungerbielers had gone to the persons. Electoral Palatinate from Thurgau in the second half 2. [ ...... ] R einsperger, born 1718, and of the 17th Century, settling in Schriesheim and Dos­ his wife Anna Catharina, left May 16, 1749, for Penn­ senheim.) sylvania or St. Mary's Land, two persons. 9. Johann Valentin Moll, born 17 31, to Carolina, 1752. May 9, 1752, one person. 3. Johann Georg Bar, born 1706, and [his wife?] 10. Johann H einrich Moll and his wife Maria Cath­ Eva Catharin·a Wedel, born 1706, left May 9, 1752, arina nee W edel, born 1711, with three daughters, to for Carolina, two persons. Carolina, May 9, 1752, five persons. (The Molls, also 47 20. Georg Albrec ht W edel and Eva Catharina) born 1711 , two persons. 21. Johann Peter W ed el and his wife Anna Sybilla) nee H er) went to the New Land, to Maryland, May 7, 1764, two persons, [Petter W edel) with Johannes Trehr (No. 18, above) arrived at Philadelphia on the Ship H ero in October 1764 (Strass burger-Hinke, List 248 C ) .J ( WITHOUT DATE.) 22 . Mayor [Biirgermeister J Valentin and his wife Susanna Elisabeth and seven children, to America, nine persons. Total = 84 persons. Now what became of these 84 homeland-weary em­ igrants on the other side of the big water? No "song, no heroes' book" reports of them. Not even an "Astor" appears to have arisen from among them.' Bu t perhaps somewhere in South Carolina or Pennsylvania the young lads still hold the mock court in the vi ll age meadow The Marketplace of Otterberg in the Palatinate. [BannweidbubengerichtJ before the village festivals, Photograph from the Otterberger Kalender. where they sit in judgment, tongue in cheek, over every sinner who has transgressed the field rules, and consider the atonement money that they rake in as spell ed M ohl, still represented today in Dossenheim, a highly welcome contribution to the common festival settled in Dossenheim at the end of the 17th Century, celebration. Or somewhere in the U nited States per­ stemming from Briisswihl in Canton St. Gall. ) haps the youth still practice the crabapple dance [H olz­ 11. Johann Mich~el K lein and his wife Susanna nee apfeltanzJ , and no one remembers anymore that these Oberle, to Carolina, May 9, 1752, two persons. amusements were brought along from Dossenheim, 12. Johann H einrich Scholl) born 1718, and his sister where they are still practiced" M aria Barbara Scholl) born 1721 , to Caroli na, two In the year 1762 the Reformed pas tor Johann J akob persons. Waltz from H andschuhsheim assumed the Dossenheim 13. A nna M argaretha S tief) born 17 15, Anna Clara congregation also. As answer, so to speak, to those Stief) born 17 18, and A nna C hristine Stief) born 1726, melancholy words of the departing clergyman K aiser, to Caroli na, M.ay 9, 1752, three persons. cited above, he wrote the following in the church 14. A nna Maria Wedel with her child, to Carolina, register : May 9, 1752, two persons. J ehovah grant that as this D ossenheim congrega­ 15. Geo rg W edel and his wife A nna Barbara nee tion has hitherto decreased, it may henceforth again increase and reveal itself indeed as true S chlepp) born 1691, with two children, to Caroli na, members of the congregation of Jesus Christ. M ay 9, 1752, four persons. T he increase of the congregation had to wait, though, 16. Johannes Werner) born 1702, and his wife Anna almost a century. New storms of war, new heavy em­ Elisab eth nee Impfinger) with seven children, to Car­ igrations to the Crimea (or, as it stands in the registers, olina, M ay 9, 1752, nine persons. the "Island of Crimea" [InSul t, G rim Tn ) , and to Rus­ 1757. sian Poland, did not let the congregation prosper. 17. Johann Georg Bar) with wife and fi ve children) In . conclusion I wish to express my thanks to Church to Carolina, seven persons. Councilman K appler of Dossenheim for his friendly 1764. kindness in making the church registers available. 18. Johannes Dreher) born 1722, a nd his wife A nna M argaretha, with fi ve children, went to America 1764 'J ohn J acob Astor was bor!) .in the nearby village of Wall­ (in another citation: "to Philadelphia in the English d orf, south of H eidelberg, in 1763. H e founded the Astor dynasty in the United States and Britain. The name of his territories" I[i~ 1 Englandische nach PhiladelphiaJ , seven home village was preserved for many years in New York's persons. [johannes T re hr arrived at Philadel phia in Waldorf-Astoria H otel, and has come into international cuisine in the form of Waldorf Salad.-EDITOR. October, 1764 on the Ship H ero (Strassburger-Hinke, 'The author was a bit too optimistic about the transplanta­ Pennsylvania German Pioneers) List 248 C ).J tion of specific cultural forms from the small village cultures of Europe to the new world setting. Since the village concept 19. Petronella Dreher) born 1697, nee L oscher) to and its culture was in most cases not transplanted with the Philadelphia 1764 (apparently the mother of J ohannes 18th Century emigrants, there was little or no transplantation of the village festivals that are so much a part of European Dreher ), one person. village life.-EDITOR. 48 FARM LAYOUTS and_BUILDING PLANS: Folk-Cultural Questionnaire No. 22

The University of Pennsylvania Folklore and Folk­ ample, in several of my own ancestral farms there were life Archive needs materials on the use of space in the in my boyhood days traces of earlier houses, on aban­ various ethnic cultures of Pennsylvania. In connection doned roads, at clearings in the woods, or by mountain with our publication in this issue of Dr. Lee Charles springs, representing earlier but now abandoned living Hopple's work on the Amish use of space, from his sites. E ven when all trace of the buildings is gone, dissertation (Spatial Development and Internal Spatial there are telltale signs that certain spots were once Organization of the Southeastern Pennsylvania Plain homesites. List these if relevant to the property you Dutch Community, Ph.D. dissertation in Geography, are describing. The Pennsylvania State University, 1971 ), we hereby 7. Location of the House and its Outbuildings. request our readers to help the further study of spatial Draw a map showing the location of the house in patterns in Pennsylvania by drawing ( 1) approximate relation to its appended gardens, summer kitchen, grape maps of the layouts of the homestead farm where they arbor, well or springhouse, cave or ground cellar, out­ grew up, or where they now reside, and (2) layout house or privy, woodshed, bakeoven, or other structures plans of the house and barn on the farm Involved. that were associated with the house. On these maps and plans please indicate the following : 8. Location of the Barn and its Outbuildings . Draw a map showing the location of the barn in relation to 1. Location. Give the Post Office address, and the its adjoining barnyard, carriage sheds, pig pens, chicken road locations of the farm. houses, corn cribs, additional stabling ( horse barn in 2. Orientation. Indicate the orientation of house some areas) and hay barns. If the barn complex is and barn to the major roads in the area. Road net­ drawn on a separate sheet of paper from the house work: where do these major rO'ads lead? Indicate also complex, please indicate the relationship between the the presence of earlier roads on the farm, once public, two. now private, leading to neighboring farms. Are there 9. Layout of the House. Draw a layout map of also abandoned roads on the farm, in the woods, or both stories of the farmhouse, naming the rooms, and evidence of trails once used that are no longer public describing their use. If your house had two front doors, routes? what was the reason ascribed to this phenomenon? 3. Community Network, 1. Indicate on your layout What sort of cellar did the house have under it and map the approximate distance, and direction to: (a) what use was it put to? W hat sort of attic or garret the church or meetinghouse your family attended, (b) did the house have and what use was it put to? If the country school, (c) the post office, (d) the store, the house had fireplaces (used or unused), please in­ (e) the mill, (f) the blacksmith shop, (g) the railroad dicate them. Did the house have closets for clothing, station, and other trade or social centers of the 19th or were clothes-presses used? Did the house have shut­ Century civilization. ters? If so, were they functional, i.e., were they actual­ 4. Community Network, II. On what socwl basis ly used? was the farm community set up? What relationships 10. Layout of the Barn. Draw a layout map of both did your farm and family have with the neighboring le vels of the barn, naming the sections. W ere other farms and families? With whom did you have the animals besides cows and horses ever kept in the stables? nearest relationships (church contacts, relatives, neigh­ In some areas the barns contained food storage areas, bors)? With which of these did you exchange work, ham closets, stone arched cellars. Indicate these and tools, visits, social occasions? Were there occasions on describe them if relevant. which the entire neighborhood came together in work We realize that putting this data into the form of or leisure? layout maps may be difficult and time-consuming. If 5. Field Layouts. Draw an approximate layout you prefer to describe the layout in written form, that map of the fields on the farm involved, showing relation material will also be quite acceptable. For the best to buildings, streams, woodlots, forests, and roads. Did results both approaches will be necessary. any of the fields have names? Send your replies to: 6. Abandoned Buildings. Old farms with a long Dr. Don Yoder history often show evidence of previous settlements, College Hall Box 36 now abandoned. Were there ever any additional home­ University of Pennsylvania steads on the farm which you are describing. For ex- Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104 duly 1 · 2 ·3 · 4 ·5 · 6 ·7· 8~ 1972

An invitation to become a subscriber to the Society's periodical PENNSYLVANIA FOLKLlFE, now in its twenty-second year, published five times annually, in Fall, Winter, Spring and Summer, plus a colorful Folk Festival supplement. Each issue appears in a colored cover, with 48 pages of text, and is profusely illustrated. Subjects covered include: architecture, cookery, costume, customs of the year, folk art and antiques, folk dancing, folk medicine, folk litera­ ture, folk religion, folk speech, home-making lore, recreation, super­ stitions, traditional farm and craft practices, transportation lore and numerous others. The purpose of the Pennsylvania Folklife Society, a non-profit corporation, is three-fold: collecting and displaying the lore of the Dutch Country and Pennsylvania; studying and archiving it; and making it available to the public.