I was wandering around on the web the other day looking at stuff on that late 17th century mystical sect in Pennsylvania – Society of the women in the wilderness – led by Kelpius and came across this paper by Jon Butler called “Magic, Astrology, and the Early American Religious Heritage, 1600-1760.” It was published in 1979 in The American Historical Review. Essentially what it says is that historians have “always treated America’s earliest colonists as especially religious people” but that they weren’t, or at least not in the pious Christian way history tends to teach. Citizens had to be, more or less, brow beaten into the churches; people preferred their astrological almanacs and what Butler calls “noninstitutional religious practices.”
Butler talks about the relationship between Christianity and occult practices and how the literate English compatriots of the Puritans turned on a regular basis to mystical writings “in the cabala to complement both their Christianity and their astrology.”
While these practices came with immigrants to North America, and certainly occult practices were no stranger to the early Americas, the last portion of the paper seeks to begin an explanation as to why these practices declined in popularity. He gives two reasons. The first is that the literary tastes in England changed and occult reading materials became harder to get. The second was that the churches were often also the governing authority and they pushed for legal and civic penalties for practices in contravention of their particular doctrine. I mean did you know that “on the eve of the American Revolution only about 15 percent of all of the colonists probably belonged to any church.”
Cool. Too bad it didn’t last.
Anyway, it turns out Butler went into it further and wrote a book called Awash in a Sea of Faith, Christianizing the American People published in 1992. I got it today, so I am looking forward to some happy reading.
May 28th, 2010
My odd brain: Brahms and race hatred
In late October of 1885 Johannes Brahms, in a town in central Germany, introduced his deeply allusive Symphony No. 4 to the world for the first time. At the same time, the Mayor of Tacoma, Jacob Robert Weisbach, his police force, and the Noble and Holy Knights of Labor decided that all the Chinese in town had to go. These European immigrants (the mayor had recently immigrated from Germany, according to The Ledger) said “the Chinese must go.”
So there I was, driving south late on this rainy Friday night. I was about 8 miles north of Tacoma when, flipping the radio, Brahms’ 3rd movement of his 4th symphony comes belting out. My head slipped sideways; the juxtaposition of what was here that fall of 1885 and what Brahms was trying to do with his 4th set off a sort of interior historical image and sensation slide that feels a bit like having multiple theaters running different films simultaneously from inside my head. I know where I am, but when is here exactly?
Of course part of my response was because I was really pretty tired my then and my imaginative filters begin to degrade under certain circumstances. It was dark, and the river of red light running up ahead of me felt, in that moment, as if it were organic, a huge powerful living thing – living in such a way that my requiem might be sung sooner than planned.
I don’t suppose a river of receding cars counts as a mob but I suppose it could feel that way if your life was threated by the power of its current and I did feel threatened. I was tired enough to know I had to stop driving soon. I wonder what the Chinese of late fall 1885 felt being herded out and forced to leave for Portland? (And what the people in Portland felt upon receiving them.) There was talk of just killing them and thereby ending “the Chinese problem” and I suppose there were many unsolved Chinese murders during those years.
I found myself wandering through the historical and cultural landscapes so oddly intertwined by the advent of Brahms on the road past Tacoma. I was wondering if the Mayor had ever heard Brahms. Perhaps seen him at the market one day? Did he come from the same region in Germany? Wasn’t Albert Einstein already born then? Do beauty and civilized behaviour ever join hands? Wasn’t that the time Germany was colonizing Africa? How many people in Arizona want to end “the Mexican problem”? Did the anyone in Tacoma get the irony that their expulsion of unwanted immigrants came only a few years after the then president decided to deal with the “Indian problem” by the Indian Appropriations Act? Did they ever get that they were uninvited, unwanted immigrants? Is Starbucks still open?
Then there was this bad accident, slow traffic and Brahms ended. Starbucks was not open, my head returned to more or less normal-tired, and once past the accident scene, I drove the last 15 minutes to my friend’s house, and, in just a few minutes, will crash on her couch.
Night.
May 14th, 2010
Dorion Woman and her interpreters
The last two days in the archives have furnished me with several treasures. One of them is a book published in 1930 called Red Heroines of the Northwest by Byron Defenbach. The second of three parts is dedicated to “The Dorion Woman.” Otherwise known as Marie Dorion, she was a 25 year old woman that traveled with 2 children from Oklahoma to Missouri to northern Wyoming all the way to the Pacific. Along the way she had another child – he died 2 days into his life. Madame Dorion ended up near Salem Oregon where she died in 1850 at the age of about 67.
If you read about this woman on the net and in the texts produced about her, what you get is often the bones of the Astoria trek to the mouth of the Columbia, and a lot about her apparently abusive husband, and the stuff about her bearing her third son on the trail, but mostly what you get is the author’s view of what all this means. “Marie” makes a perfect canvas for our views about women and the qualities we assign them because so little is known about who she, in fact, was. I mean we don’t even know her actual name. She is called Dorion Woman because her husband’s paternal name was “Dorion” and she was his woman.
We know this, at least in part, because of Washington Irving and his “Tragical Story Told by the Squaw of Pierre Dorion.” Much emphasis is given in Irving’s account to her “presence of mind and force of character” and certainly her survival seems, from the story, due in part to her attention to her household duties. This is why, for example, she had all the supplies that she would need in the near future if she and her children were to survive the winter. The story she tells, and that Irving would relay, about the fate of the Astoria party is what made her memorable to the public but no one, it seems, thought to ask her name.
Time tells much about women’s interpreters. Irving published his story in 1836. Defenbach published his in 1929 0r 30. Both accounts pay attention to Pierre Dorion, Irving calling him the “hybrid interpreter” as a way of describing his bi-racial heritage. Irving doesn’t mention the drunkenness as far as I know. There is a section when he is describing the French boatmen and how they lift their flagging spirits – by song, nary a drop of spirit is mentioned. But at that time alcohol might have been seen as a problem with respect to trading with Indians (their abode being the destination of the boatmen, trade goods being the cargo) and granted as a necessity to those water-haulers whose spirits needed lifting, but no one had come up with the idea of denying it to civilized white folk yet.
But by Defenbach’s time prohibition and its ideas had taken its toll on the interpretive mind of writers. In his story much attention is paid to Pierre Dorion’s use of alcohol. However, there is still a touch of admiration: “When sober,” Defenbach says “the stalwart young half-breed was a fellow of recognized ability as a trapper and trader. He had worked for Choteau and other Americans who were beginning to resist the monopoly of the fur trade by the Hudson’s Bay and other British concerns.” A drunk, yes, but he could hunt, trap, shoot and, on top of that, was on the right side politically. But when it comes to Marie…
(Pierre’s) proved himself faithful and serviceable. His occupation called for almost constant travel up and down the Big River, and in these journeyings he usually dragged the squaw with him. Nor was this his only encumbrance. The couple’s first son, the sturdy Baptiste, was born in 1806, and two or thee years later another lad arrived at the tepee. This latter was a frailer type of boy, with snake-like eyes and a mouth that extended from ear to ear; they named him “Paul.”
To these two children the Woman clung with the savage devotion of a mother-wolf, bringing them up after the Indian fashion. There was no discipline, the few instructions given having to do only with the children’s physical requirements. The only virtues inculcated were those of fortitude and courage, and even these traits were warped into ferocity and thirst for blood. Such ideals as those of morality, gratitude, truthfulness, unselfishness and honesty were not sought to be conveyed by the Woman to her children, primarily because she had no such ideals herself or any conception of them. The first precepts she instilled into those young hearts were those of cruelty, murder, and rapine.
Jeez.
Shortly after this little exploration of the Woman’s character and moral rectitude (compare Irving’s and Defenbach’s ideas about the ideal woman), he talks about Pierre’s accidental fall into the trip to the Pacific, which he would not survive but his wife and children would. This fall, the story leads us to believe, came because of alcohol.
The processes of evolution have never produced anything more averse to solitude than is whiskey, even a quart of it…Pierre found himself surrounded by, or perhaps one might better say surrounding, a whole flock of quarts. He passed through alternating stages of hilarity, amiability, deep melancholy, and extreme irritability. Several days and nights passed in the enjoyment or suffering of these various emotions.
(Aside: the use of the word “evolution” adds a nice little sparkle from the conceptual bounty that is Social Darwinism – also something alive and well during Defenbach’s time. I wonder if he was a eugenicist?)
What follows is a rendition of what Defenbach thinks happened when a drunk, angry and now without the salary due him by the Spaniard, Manuel Lisa, and includes an almost jovial boxing match between husband and wife. The outcome is that Pierre Dorion finds himself working for Lisa and having to cart his wife and two sons along for the ride.
Ultimately, Defenbach (nor Irving for that matter) doesn’t say much about Marie Dorion but what he inadvertently says about how he sees the world is enormous. Apart from the idea of what women are, there is the purchase place for blame. It’s not surprising that in the late 1920s when Defenbach was probably writing this text, that alcohol got much of it. Poor old Pierre, a noble sort with his rustic trade, but reduced to dragging his baggage around, getting hobbled by a treacherous Spaniard, a snake-eyed son and by that morally bankrupt Woman. Think what he could have made of himself if wasn’t for that demon rum!
meh
Would that there was someone who would haunt Oregon’s historical archives for a more accurate view of the woman. I haven’t had time for that yet, so perhaps it already exists. I’ll have to check into it.
May 13th, 2010
More quiet
I woke at 4AM. I did some online research (Indian trade routes in the Pacific Northwest and the movement of alcohol along them). I went out for coffee and returned to the motel for more research. I went to the archives at 11AM and browsed through ephemeral material relating to my interest. It is bloody amazing to me what archives like this one have stored away in their cabinets. I went out for a bite at the museum cafe around 2PM and found a Jordanian woman who made me a kick-ass Greek salad and Turkish coffee. Talk about a kick. What a delight she was. She brought me honey cake because it tastes so good with the bitter coffee. Then I went back to the archives until it closed at 5PM.
I spoke with the wonderfully competent archivist who just went and got stuff she thought I would want to see and the young cook who wanted me to really enjoy her coffee and found that they added to my calm. I sat at the table with my coffee and honey cake and looked out over the little outdoor theatre and realized I would love to spend the rest of my life doing this – hunting for treasures, both historical and human.
September 28th, 2009
National Parks, PBS new series
There is a new PBS special that began last night. The episodes will be available online for a short while, starting tonight. I am really looking forward to it.
It’s about the origin and nature of the National Parks. Having read some stuff on this topic in years past I know that it’s a complicated but illuminating history. It speaks to both horrors and wonders and to the American mind which is something fascinating to me.
For example, in the clip “How Yosemite Got Its Name” shows the deep ironies that are available to us just in the names of things.
In 1851, armed white men reached a valley in the Sierra Nevada mountains they called Yosemite, thinking – mistakenly — it was the name of the local Indian tribe.
The “armed white men,” called themselves “The Mariposa Battalion” – the butterfly brigade. They were searching for Indians “intent on driving them from their homeland.” The Mariposa guys named the valley Yosemite, thinking it was the name of the Indians they had come to boot out. Irony enough one would think: the butterfly guys naming a beautiful valley after the people they burned out in early March in a cold climate. Still, it goes one further, “yosemite” actually means “people who should be feared – they are killers.” How’s that for an enlightening name.
History is such an interesting thing and I bet this series is going to be full of interesting moments.

