[Note this extended essay was given by the Author (firstname.lastname@example.org) for inclusion on this site - some reformatting has been necessary to convert to HTML - footnotes are removed to end. ]
By Conal F. Carswell
With grateful thanks to Jane Hamby, Helen Moss, Roger Sims & the staff at the Manx Museum
The Religious Society of Friends, or Quakers as they became known, 1 were one of many movements that arose in search of fresh revelation, responding to the millennial uncertainty fuelled by rapid social change, war, class antagonism, absolutist philosophies and rigid practices of religious orthodoxy in the 1640s and 50s. During this time, lay itinerant ministers or Publishers of Truth, like James Naylor, George Fox, Richard Farnworth, William Dewsbury and Thomas Aldam moved independently,...through rural areas of northern England, linking together advanced Protestant separatists with a developing code of ethics. 2 In essence, they believed in an Inner Light - the immediate sense of God's presence and his will through them - informing conscience and redirecting reason, which could spontaneously reveal itself at any time without creeds, ordinance or ceremony. 3 Having been in communion with many radical congregations throughout their religious wanderings, it was inevitable that many of their convictions were shared, even anticipated by Anabaptists, General Baptists, Antinomians, Seekers, Ranters, The Family of Love and Grindletonians.4 Thus, their emphasis on personal salvation and the belief in an Inner Light would have been familiar to Familists and Anabaptists writing in the 1530s and General Baptists, who emerged in the first two decades of the 1600s.5 In fact, many of early Quaker converts came from Seeker and General Baptist congregations, partly as the latter were filled with fears about the validity of their baptisms and divided by the necessity of particular ceremonies.6 Consequently, despite many bitter disputes between separatist groups, there remained a great fluidity in religious movements and beliefs .7 For example, the term 'Anabaptist' was used to disparage diverse sects, who likewise rejected infant baptism, believing only in the validity of adult baptism when a person had made a conscious choice to adhere to their faith. 8 Anabaptists also renounced Holy Communion as a Sacrament, observing it only as a memorial and testament to fellowship. Quakers disregarded any philosophical caveats, rejecting all Sacraments. In this, it has been claimed, Quakerism was the final expression of Anabaptist creeds in their purest form. 9
Belief in the Inner Light demanded spiritual equality before God and denied any man's right to interfere in matters of conscience. Accordingly, Quakers denounced education or rank as measure of man's fitness to be ministers of Christ and gave limited recognition to Church or State, pointedly refusing to take oaths or pay taxes. Specifically, they argued that oaths were contrary to the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles and were essentially meaningless because they were often politically opportunistic. This was typically reflected in the use of thee and thou rather than the more deferential you and a refusal to 'doff their hat' to those commonly regarded as socially superior. For instance, William Callow, a Manx Quaker, 'expressed as much respects and reverence towards your lordship [the Eighth Earl of Derby] as his profession will give him leave.' 10 Moreover, though the will of God might be manifest in silence or ecstatic paroxysm during the spontaneous gathering of the like-minded and genuinely pious, potential salvation derived from within and so was not beholden in any particular place. The Church was, '...but a House of Lime, Wood & Stone, & therefore not a true Church, for the Church is God."' Hence, Quaker lay women and men were encouraged to preach in private houses, on street corners or in fields with no ordered liturgy, openly discussing religious issues and re-interpreting scriptures using plain speech and drawing from everyday experience, often interrupting Anglican services with condemnatory exclamations. 11 The Inner Light also impelled opposition to the Calvinist doctrine of pre-destination, i.e. that the destinies of all individuals have been foreordained by Divine degree, which negated the importance of human action. Instead, Quakers preached that salvation could be attained on earth by careful spiritual observance and exemplary works.
The flouting of hierarchy and opposition to religious certainties was regarded with apoplexy by many of the aristocracy and clergy. The increasing number of Quaker converts and dissenters spurred aristocratic fears of rebellion in the 1650s, partly realised in the uprising of the Fifth Monarchy Men, a millennial sect that believed in the abolition of existing political structures, in 1661. This led to the enactment of further punitive statutes and measures in England. 12 The Corporation Act (1661) forbade municipal office to those that did not take oaths of loyalty or receive the sacraments at parish churches. The Act of Conformity (1662) excluded dissenters from church offices, sought unconditional consent to Common Book of Prayer and an oath of Canonical obedience. The Conventicle Act of 1664 and 1670 fined those attending meetings not in accordance with Anglican worship. The latter levied fines of 5 shillings for a first offence and 10 shillings for all subsequent offences. Fines of £20 were imposed on the owners of meeting houses for a first offence with a £40 penalty for ensuing offences. These fines could be levied on the sale of goods and chattels of all members or specifically that of the wealthiest members of a meeting. A third of these fines were to be paid to informers. In lieu of these fines, there was three months imprisonment for a first offence, six months for the second offence and the possibility of transportation for seven years in the case of a third. Under this act, magistrates that neglected their duties could be fined £100. The Five-Mile Act (1665) forbade non-conformist ministers to take pastoral responsibility, in the absence of many clergy from plague swept London, unless they took an oath not to alter the government, either Church or State. Otherwise, they could not live within five miles of a Church where they had previously preached. 14
These acts did not specifically apply in Man, as in practice and precedent it was established that the Isle of Man was not part of the realm of England. 15 However, the penalties within them, in addition to statutes originally intended for Catholic recusants from the reigns of Elizabeth and James, were upheld and quoted as authority. 16 Consequently, Manx Quakers were penalised for not attending church or paying church dues, publicly declaring against the Church, holding meetings under 'pretence of worship' and teaching without the Bishop's license. Punishment ranged from being placed in stocks, imprisonment from days to many months, fines, confiscation of goods and land, Excommunication and transportation. The circumstances that informed English sanctions also influenced Manx politics. Significantly, Governor Chaloner, as representative for Aldborough in Yorkshire endorsed the Long Parliament's repressive stance on non-conformists.17 In 1659, he wrote that, 'Many [Quakers] travell up and down the [said] country - especially on the Lords day in numbers to the great terror and amazement of the people of the country.18, At this time, there were no more than 60 Quakers in the Isle of Man when the population was between 9,000 and 11,000. 19 This description, whilst clearly reflecting his personal distaste and determination to rid the island of Quakers, had more akin with events in England, which experienced an exponential increase in the number of Quaker converts and thus lay preachers who travelled throughout the counties in the 1650s.20 The influence of English polity, as the regionally dominant fiscal, military and political power, was particularly pervasive because the Stanley heirs, who were Lords of Man, had been prominent in Lancashire and national English politics, serving the Crown in both civil and military capacities since the fourteenth century. 21 As a result, they acquired a considerable amount of property from grateful English sovereigns and hence an abiding concern with English affairs .22 Thus, natives who adopted the diet, customs and language of Lancashire gentry facilitated their pre-eminence in local politics. 23 Particularly so, because Manx Governors throughout the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth century were chiefly Lancashire and Yorkshire gentry, as well as a few native gentry, that likewise held accompanying estates or political ties to these counties and the English Court. For instance, Edward Christian, prior to becoming Governor and leader of the insular forces in the 1630s, courted the sponsorship of the Duke of Buckingham, in doing so securing his appointment to the frigate Bonaventure.24 William Christian, his distant cousin, the first Manx Governor to imprison and banish Quakers, was a trusted protégé of the Stanley family and held interest in estates in Lancashire and Cumberland. 25 Similarly, the aforementioned James Chaloner, who was appointed Governor of Man in 1658, was kinsman to Lord Thomas Fairfax, Commander and Chief of the Parliamentary Army during the Civil Wars, whose family estates were also in Yorkshire.
Despite punitive statutes, the Quaker movement was successful, particularly in the north and south west of England, as well as in London, and within a decade established between 20,000 to 60,000 converts. 26 One of the main centres of Quakerism in England was Swarthmoor in Ulverston, Lancashire, home to one of the most prominent English Quakers, Margaret Fell. It is from her family's accounts we learn of some of the first Quakers to come to the island in mid 1655.27 It was in this year, or when there were further expeditions early the next year, that the first Manx converts were made. 28 In this latter year, we see Manx converts imprisoned in Peel Castle, along with several itinerant preachers; namely, Katherine Evans and James Lancaster of North Scale .29 These converts were then exiled, but the natural born inhabitants were eventually allowed to return. 30 English Quakers tried to reach the island in December of 1657, but due to poor weather and the reluctance of the sailors to carry them, were unsuccessful. However, a man from Belfast who had travelled from Whitehaven, told these English Quakers that he had sailed with four Quakers who had landed safely on the island.31
One of the principal Maughold Quakers, William Callow, is first named in Joseph Besse's account of his imprisonment in Peel Castle, 'for publicly reproving a priest who had heard abusing the Quakers in his sermon to the people. '32 Further evidence of the date for conversion of Maughold inhabitants comes from examining the parish register, which reveals that 1657 was the last year when those who were later recognised as Quakers, e.g. William Callow, James Colleash and Robert Coonilt, had their children baptised .33 From then on, Maughold and Ramsey Town, the old boundaries of which fell within the parish, appears to have been the main residence of Manx Quakers.
Before we can delve further into Manx Quakerism, we must examine the main source for the account of events between 1656 and 1685 in order to ascertain its reliability. Though Joseph Besse's Collection of the Sufferings of the People Called Quakers was printed in the early 1750s, the author claims to have used original seventeenth century sources, quoting letters in their entirety written by William Callow and Ewan Christian, in addition to official court records. The author's claim is supported by the fact that between 1746 and 1748 he was the recording clerk of the London yearly Quaker meetings. 35 In this capacity he would have had access to historical records collected following a conference in the autumn of 1675 that established a constant series of meetings about Quaker sufferings, for which purpose they had a network of country correspondents to inform them of their treatment.36 He was also privy to the records written in the 1650s and 60s by Ellis Hookes, the first recording clerk and his successors, who gathered information that was sent to London, copying letters or making summaries of accounts.37 None of the letters written by William Callow or Evan Christian as collected in the Swarthmore Manuscripts are quoted in Besse, which supports the idea of his reliance on these centrally gathered records.
Notably, the names of Manx administrators, Quakers and English magistrates all coincide with existing authenticated records and in relation to the right offices in the corresponding years. In addition, the words and actions of the three principals, Bishop Barrow, William Callow and Charles, Eighth Earl of Derby, as presented in Besse, are consistent with what is known of their convictions from the many verified accounts that survive. More specifically, Besse's copy of letters purportedly from William Callow to the Eighth Earl of Derby are similar in style and diction to those in the Swarthmore Manuscripts and the petitions to King's Council. 39 However, documents relating to Manx Quakers meetings with English and Irish magistrates are not extant and we must rely on circumstantial evidence. For instance, Besse records William Kirby and Matthew Richardson's scathing criticism of Manx authorities' treatment of Quakers. In fact, the former two magistrates did commit Quakers to prison that refused to obey the oath of obedience but there are only six recorded cases against non-conformists under their direction between 1661 and 1665. This does not appear to be a particularly significant attack on dissenters as the law warranted; though it appears that magistrates sometimes dealt with process unofficially and could cover a wider jurisdiction than was formally recognised, so this may not be a particularly accurate reflection of cases.40
One of the few definite discrepancies in Besse's history can be found in the case of John Lamplugh, tentatively identified as the John Lamplugh who was born in 1618 and died in 1690. Besse records that he was a Justice of the Peace in Cumbria from 1665, though other records note he did not take office until 1668. This might be explained either by the scarcity of records, that mistakenly failed to record the earlier date of appointment or that there was another John Lamplugh who held that office. As there were several prominent Lamplugh Families in Cumbria this is possible. However, it is more likely that there was some confusion over the office he held, as the same John Lamplugh was the High Sheriff from 1663.40 Another case of note is Besse's account of William Christian, 'Deputy under the Lord Fairfax, [who]...falling afterward under his Displeasure for some Misdemeanour, was shot to Death on the island. In his last speech he mentioned with much Regret what he had done to the Quakers.' 41 Unfortunately, the only contemporary account opaquely records that Christian, '...died most penitently, and most curragiously [,] made a good end [,] prayed earnestly mad[e] an excellent speech.' 42 An alleged copy of his last speech survives, but it makes no mention of the Quakers. However, though it is said to be based on accounts by those present it was published over a hundred years later and was probably a political broadside as Christian's cause was celebrated as political martyrdom." In truth, Christian was executed for treason after a dubious trial conducted under the auspices of Charles, Eighth Earl of Derby. 43 During the attempted coup of 1659, Christian and his fellow conspirators appeared to have been in accord with the Parliamentary faction of army hard-liners who believed that England's freedoms were best guaranteed by the sword, rather than more moderate Parliamentarians like Fairfax. Nevertheless, Parliamentary and Royal representatives did try to prevent Christian's execution .45 Evidently, Christian was broadly favoured by Parliamentarians, on whose behalf he had seized Manx forts in the uprising of 1651 and subsequently surrendered to in return for the restoration of former rights. That Manx informants were apparently unaware of the actual reason or culprit behind Christian's execution is surprising, since it had been a major event in island life, popularly commemorated by a mournful ballad, at least part of which was likely to have been contemporary. 46 This was especially curious as Quakers were sensitive to a changing political circumstance to see whether this would result in further persecution. Perhaps the Quakers misled their correspondents, withholding the fact that Christian was actually executed for treason not a 'misdemeanour' in-keeping with his reinvention as a martyr for Manx rights. According to this notion of Christian as noble patriot, he would therefore regret his behaviour towards the Quakers. Another explanation could be that the Quakers omitted the role of the Eighth Earl of Derby to whom Callow seems to have remained loyal, believing his punishment stemmed from Bishop Barrow, at least until the late 1660s.47 However, the term 'misdemeanour' is more consistent with an accusation of personal impropriety such as the one which came before the courts in 1658, the most serious charge being that Christian made his illegitimate daughter pregnant. A Deemster and jury investigated the accusation, but were inclined to defame the integrity of the accuser. However, Governor Chaloner considered these claims worthy of further scrutiny, as presumably did John Christian, who petitioned that William Christian should not be appointed guardian of the late David Christian of Ballakilley's underage daughter as he doubted it would benefit the child. 48 Christian unexpectedly left the island shortly afterwards, without permission from the relevant authorities, aided by his brother who was later arrested for his part. It is therefore feasible that because of the serious and memorable nature of these charges, Quaker informants believed that this was the cause for his removal from office and subsequent trial - though, in the first instance, the stated grounds were discrepancies in his accounts. In another seeming disparity Besse wrote that, '...after the King's return [James Chaloner] had been sent for in London, in order, as was thought, to be tried among the regicides. The day he was to go he took something under pretext of physick [illness], which killed him in a short time.' 49 In reality, he was arrested because of his pro-parliament, rather than pro-army faction or anti- monarchical sympathies. Perhaps Quakers wished or were lead to believe that because he had been their 'violent persecutor' he had a more wretched death. 50 Alternatively, this rumour may have been popularised by Royalist sympathisers due to Chaloner's role in the execution of King Charles the first. Most likely he died of illnesses related to his confinement in Peel Castle." In essence, though events transpired for differing reasons than are generally acknowledged, Besse's accounts are broadly correct. Discrepancies arise partly because the correspondents on whom Besse probably relied were not direct witnesses to these events. However, the overwhelming majority of Besse's accounts are drawn from primary sources.
In this respect, we are fortunate to have detailed comparative sources for events in 1664-'65, 1668 and 1683-'84. For example, documents that record the committal of Manx Quakers to prison in March 1664 are strikingly similar to that quoted in Besse. The former reads:
'...they continued meetings and refractories to all government of the church, censured to be committed to St German's Prison to orders given to the contrary Parr and Harrison Vicar Gen. If they refuse to be committed by you, call for the assistance of a soldier from Captain Ascoe.'52
,...and forasmuch as they refuse, after several Charges and refractoriness to all Government of the Church, and are therefore censured to be committed into St. German's Prison, and there let them remain till orders to be given to the contrary, and for so doing shall be your discharge. Robert Parr John Harrison
P.S. If they refuse to be committed to you, call for the assistance of a soldier from Captain Ascough. Let the Sumner put this into Execution immediately. 53
There are differences in the two texts, but the language and the meaning, particularly in the last couple of sentences, are in exact correspondence. Likewise, Besse records Bishop Barrow pronouncing, 'The devil is cunning. He will not appear in his own shape to deceive people. '54 This echoes his letter to the Quakers in 1664 which warns, '...beware of the devil's devises, for he can transfer himself into an angel of light, yet his is the devil still.' 55
In August 1664 Callow wrote that he had been in prison for three months, confirming Besse's assertion that Quakers were committed to prison in May. 56 Besse's account agrees to the exact day when he notes that Anne Callow and Bessy Christian had been imprisoned since 18th of October 1664. 57 Besse recounts that,
'A few Days after their commitment William Callow's Wife fell sick of a fever, and was thought to be at the point of death ... As he [the Sumner] was conveying them to Prison, William Callow's Wife was found unable to ride, wherefore the Sumner, having represented the case to the Bishop [Barrow] was ordered to let her home again.'58
Callow appears to be describing the same event when he wrote to his Swathmoor Friends. He says that his wife, '...had been sicke for months, so that they brought her to ye [the] Bishop, and because she was able neither to goe nor ride ... yet [unable to] abide impresonm [in prison], the Bishop sent her backe agayn.' 59 Contemporary and Besse's accounts also concur that the Quakers were banished in September 1665.60
By comparing a petition in the Calendar of State Papers and Manx Presentments with Besse, it is agreed that on the 13th April 1668 Jane Christian, Anne Callow, Alice Coward or Cord and some of their children were banished from the island. 61 Besse's account reads as follows:
'...the Constable of the Castle [Peel] came the next Day with an Order from the Bishop to send them back again to Ramsey...who delivered them to Captain Ascough, where they were detained several weeks, till George Pickering's Vessel was ready, and Alice Coward being there before them to be banished with them, although her husband was and is a conformable Man... '62
A letter amongst the Manx records to Captain Thomas Ascough from Bishop Isaac Barrow can be found dated 28th May 1668. The latter says that,
'...Mr Pickerin owner, who is now at Ramsey, brought in Rich Coard's wife and others of the like to wit, quakers, into the island, that were formerly banished and was nowe late brought in by him the said Pickerin, you are hereby to ca[u]s[e] him to carry them with him for the out of the Isle when so goeth...' 63
The petition states that Rich Coard was, 'a conformable man.' 64 Besse records that, 'the said Ascough searched her, and took her 40s. [shillings] in Money, and gave her 10s. back.' 65 A letter dated 31 st May 1668 from Thomas Allen, Vicar of Maughold to Captain Ascough confirms this financial arrangement when he advises Ascough that Alice Coward was to be searched to see, '...whether shee hath any gold or silver, & their be any found you are to secure it save only item[s] [of cloth?]ings & not above [my emphasis] she is to have towards their charges... '66 Besse continues his account: '...when the Vessel was ready, Captain Ascough brought them to the Boat, and the Children being with them weeping, thy [your] Wife, would have taken her Children with her, but the said Captain took them by Violence from her... so the Boat being ashore, he forced them all on Board, and put to Sea, and so left the four children weeping and mourning on the sea-shore, only let thy Wife take her youngest Child with her, and left the other four without father and Mother...' 67
This description compares favourably with the petition that states:
'Anne [Callow] his [William's] Wife w[i]th a little Childe in her armes about three quarters of a yeare ould, & shee would faine have taken ye [the]rest of ye children with her; but they by whome shee was banished tooke them by violence from her, & soe left her 4 small Children weeping on ye shoare side, without ffather or Mother, their father being banished about two yeares and a half before.' 68
The Callow Family Bible documents that William and Ann Callow had a child, presumably 'the little Childe in her armes,' who was born in March 1667 .69 Besse notes that Jane Christen [Christian] had a 'suckling child'.70 The petition of 1668 likewise states that Jane Christian's offspring was, 'a little Childe not a yeare ould.'71
Lastly, if one examines the events of 1683-'84 we can see a similar correspondence. Besse's account begins in 1682 when Eleanor Stockdale, 'being concerned to exhort the Inhabitants of Douglas to repent of the Evil of their Ways, was put into the Stocks, and after many Abuses cast into the Dungeon, and kept Prisoner eight days. '72 In a Presentment from 1683-'84 the Vicar-Generals write that, 'Ellinor Stockdaile of Workington Quaker came into the island above two yeares agoe and in the most irreverand manner came into the chappell of Douglas. '73 Besse goes on to say that, 'Robert Callow, and the said Eleanor, then his Wife, were prosecuted in the Bishop's Court for being married without a Priest.... '74 A Presentment of 1683 records that, 'Robert Callow Balla:fayle & Eleanor Stockdall of ye like faction [were presented] for havinge mutual fellowshipe at Bed & boord as man & wife...' 75 During subsequent incidents the Presentments record that,
,...ye [the] wors[hi]p[fu]ll Governor [Robert Heywood]...thereunto caused her ... be lately transported by the Boate of Martin Calthorpe, into her s[ai]d Country [Cumbria]; where the s[ai]d Ellinor, upon some surmise and misinformation had prevailed with the Justice of the Peace in that Country, to be carried back againe into their island by the return of the said Calthorpe.' 76
Besse notes that she was carried, 'to the ship of Martin Coltrup...and [eventually] carried to England. '77 As described by Besse:
'Richard Lamplugh, a Justice of the Peace in Cumberland taking Notice of the illegality of the Proceeding against her, obliged the said Caltrup at the next Return of the Vessel, to carry her back to the island, where she continued at Home with her Husband twelve Weeks...' 78
Though specific dates are not given for comparison, the fall of the events in these years is consistent and all the details coincide, only with varying layers of fact and from differing perspectives. Significantly, prior to these events, the gap in official records between 1670 and 1680 also accords with Besse's account.
In regards to transportation, we can compare the chronology of Besse with that of the Water Bailiff's Accounts, which note the merchant's names, their cargo and the amounts conveyed through the four Manx ports from the fifteenth century onwards. Notably, there is no record of William Crosthwaite from Whitehaven and his ship Elizabeth with which to confirm Besse's account between September and December 1665 79 Although there is a ship called the Elizabeth from Whitehaven recorded on the 20th August 1666 in Castletown it is to do with the claims of George Pickering. 80 Notwithstanding, Besse's account generally appears accurate. According to Besse, on the 14th September 1665 Manx Quakers were on board the ship of Thomas Brittain at Douglas and he is recorded in the Douglas 'outgates' on the 17th September. Similarly, John Christian is recorded in the Ramsey 'outgates' on the 10th June 1669 and in Besse as transporting the Quakers from Ramsey on the 13th June. The other dates are not so precise. However, they are not irreconcilable. For instance, Anthony Nicolson is recorded in the Castletown 'ingates' for 8th August 1665 and Besse observes that Nicolson and the Quakers left Douglas on the 18th September. Nevertheless, one should use these customs records only as a guide, not for rigid comparisons. Dr Dickinson commented that, 'Water Bailiff's records were essentially a record of revenue collected by the chief custom officers deputies, not as a register of movement of shipping in the island's port.' 81 Therefore, the most salient point is that these records confirm that all but one of these merchants existed and that they were working between these ports within this short time frame.
In summary, it is clear that Besse and the official records have an extremely high compatibility of detail and their comparative chronologies are always satisfactorily, but often exemplary.
Quakerism was attractive because it provided spiritual solace in a society snared in fear and uncertainty, driven by a century of turbulent religious and political change.82 For example, George Rofe was, 'smot [struck] by the hand of God into many fears of what should become of him hereafter, and have wept exceedingly secretly in bed.83 Similarly, John Crook, '...was so possessed with fear that he looked behind me lest the Devil stood there to take me. '84 To explain comparable disquiet, we must examine the relationship between the Manx Church and their parishioners. During the formative years of the majority of Manx Quakers, the Bishop of Sodor and Man was continually absent from the island, pursuing livings in English diocese. Partly for this reason, the Earl of Derby decided not to appoint a Bishop between 1644 and 1661.85 Although discipline, on a parochial level, carried on much as before, the lack of centralised leadership, combined with the clergies poor pay seems to have inclined the latter towards some measure of disillusionment and contributed to a sustained lack of diligence. 86 Thus, Bishop Barrow repeatedly complained about their ill discipline and in consequence that of the people throughout the 1660s.87 Certainly the behaviour of Thomas Allen, Vicar of Maughold, in this earlier period, illustrates a catalogue of neglect. The Churchwardens complained that, '...there is no Manx sermon; for not so much as a year, for the edification of the people, who understand no other language; the want of thereof is a great grief to the people. There is no catechising, or any little at lent; the sick are not visited; the parties dying without prayers; exhortations and holy communion, though much desired by the sick. Children weak and strong have to be taken to other parishes for their christening and to pay for it."88
This laxity struck at the core of the Church's popularity since people were denied the rituals and customs that soothed a life of subsistence and fears surrounding economic and spiritual uncertainty. William Callow hints at this in his meeting with Bishop Barrow in 1666. The Bishop argues that the Quakers will corrupt their neighbours and Callow replies that, '...if Any be good as they ought to be ... what need they fear of us, who are but two men.' He goes on to say, '...the People are their hearers, & ought to follow the best Examples, whether it be us or them.89 Quakers believed that they would ultimately prevail because the clergy were less concerned with their parishioners' soul than with their own income, which appeared to maintain their idleness. Quakers argued that tithes, a yearly levy on crops and produce such as herring, butter, corn and other staple goods that went to the Church, were no longer legitimate since the new covenant established when Christ came to earth. Therefore, 'their subsequent re-imposition was viewed as an act of apostasy, brought about by the popish church."' Quakers maintained that, as the priesthood did not merit respect, partly because they lacked spiritual authority, they should not receive funding from the laity. 90
The most obvious division between the clergy and the people was that of language. Gaelic speech arrived in Man around 500AD and was in continuous use, despite four centuries of Scandinavian rule between the 9th century and 1266.92 Manx Gaelic, one of the Goidelic Insular-Celtic languages, (comprising Irish, Scottish Gaelic and Manx), and derived from Old Irish, continued in parallel with Irish until the thirteenth century and with Scottish Gaelic until the fifteenth century, since then developing more distinct features, while preserving archaisms from the Old Irish period.93 At the time of the first Manx Quakers James Chaloner noted 'few people speak the English tongue."' A more incisive observer commented that ',...very few but understand our English, especially all the gentry, all in the towns, and such of the country as frequent their town market, and fairs, but these speak it as a foreign and different language from their own, or as the vulgar Welsh speak English.'94
Common practice decreed that ministers, if they could understand or would speak Manx, translated from the English as they read. 96 This limited spiritual gratification, as the sense of a parable or proverb could be lost in ad hoc translation, if parishioners could understand what was being spoken at all, depending on the accent and pronunciation. Thus, in 1658, Governor Chaloner rewarded Sir Hugh Cannell for reading Scriptures that he had already translated into Manx. 97 For although the Welsh Bishop, John Phillips, had translated the Prayer Book into Manx in the early seventeenth century, it had fallen into early disuse, remaining unpublished due to the reservations of the Manx clergy. 98 In the 1660s, Bishop Barrow's solution, partly dictated by the fact that he was not aware of any printed material in Manx and reinforced by general prejudice against Celtic tongues, was to set up schools in every parish to teach English. 99 However, this meant there was little creative stimulus for the language in which the laity naturally thought, the provision of which coincided with a spiritual renaissance in the eighteenth century. 100
Many parishioners may also have felt uncomfortable and intimidated when attending church services with their more wealthy neighbours, particularly as seating space was increasingly delineated and dependent on land-holdings. On the other hand, early Quaker preachers, like their converts, were tradesman and farmers who worked with their hands, which must also have facilitated a measure of empathy.
Furthermore, meetings in small cottages or fields, where there was no ordered form of liturgy and people spoke only when inspired and in their own idiom might have been received more favourably. Certainly it was more gratifying than Anglican services that made, '...Confession with their Lips of other men's Lines."101 In William Callow's view, presumably shared by other Manx converts, religious simplicity negated hypocrisy, whereby attendance of Church was merely an obligatory, outward sign of false piety and the only time when parishioners respected Christ's teachings.'102 Consequently, a contemporary noted that parishioners, '...admitted of preaching in private houses by strangers ... where they made their assemblyes and had their private meetings.' 103 That any man or woman could become a preacher also gave more independence than society permitted, allowing converts to relinquish the dictation and almost reverential obedience to their fathers in what was sometimes a brutally patriarchal society. 104 Therefore, spiritual solace was sought in Quakerism because it implied increasing societal freedom and more flexible inter-action between social equals, their neighbours and locals, not between parishioners and the aloof clergy.
Anti-clerical sentiment was sympathetic with resentment stimulated by burdens placed upon the people by Church and State. Tithes had always been unpopular. Dues were paid grudgingly and sometimes, 'somewhat slowly because of their [the parishioners] povertie.' 105 The Curate of Rushen observed that parishioners concealed and surreptitiously divided their fish before landing their boats. 106 Similarly, a petition of 1665 complained about parishioners' efforts to defraud ministers and encourage others in these actions. 107 Notably, poor parishioners refused to take confiscated Quaker goods pointedly declaring that, '... it had been a greater Charity to have given his own Goods to the Poor than other Mens.' 108 There was also agitation against weighty feudal obligations. These arose in consequence of James, Seventh Earl of Derby's efforts to finance his Civil War campaign in the 1640s that required one year's rent in advance, the free quartering of troops, levies on corn for the troops and a 'gunpowder tax.' Generally, parishioners were to provide free corn, herring, beef and turf as well as repairing the Lord's property. Watch duties on the island's coastline and training for service in the militia were compulsory. There were taxes on herring fishing and the movement of goods. Farmers were instructed to use particular mills with strict penalties for those who dealt with another miller. 109 Servants, a handful were to be found amongst the early Quakers, could also be 'yarded', i.e. taken into the lord's service compulsorily for a nominal wage, which annulled all previous engagements. They had minimum safeguards against ill treatment or exploitation and were subject to stringent regulations. Not only were their wages relatively pitiful, but they could be forcibly put to work or suffer whipping and couldn't get married until a year after their servitude had expired. If a servant could not be employed, then the man with the smallest landowner would be called upon. As the majority of the Quakers were poor farmers owning property of 40 shillings or less this possibility or actuality may have led to further resentment. 110
As in England, abnormal taxation fell hardest on the poor. The typical rural Manx family lived in a cottage made of stone and clay walls, thatched with broom or straw, usually with one room, rarely two, one floor, smoky huts, which they cohabited with geese, ducks, hens, cows.111 Their diet consisted of salt butter, herring, oatcakes and milk - the latter sometimes mixed with water. Clothes were simple and functional, usually made of wool and linen, with the women wearing dyed skirts and field workers adopting carranes, a plain type of leather shoe made from salted rawhide.112 Even in prosperous years, Manx parishioners were hardly above subsistence. Consequently, when the harvest was especially poor in 1647 there was emigration to the potentially more prosperous Barbados and St. Kitts. Similarly, corn had to be imported from France because of a great scarcity in 1649. 113 During attempts to gather surplus grain in this year it was said that Maughold had 'many needy persons.' 114 Accordingly, those who could afford it were ordered to, 'spare and forbear the meat proportion of victuals for one meal upon Wednesdays and Ffridays to go to those in need."115 The situation echoed that of England, where incessant rain and poor harvest contributed to a massive increase in the cost of living, forcing the government to introduce a bill to enforce three meatless days a week. Despite this provision, neighbouring populations in Lancashire and Westmoreland remained in dire need of relief as they could not afford bread and many were in imminent danger of starvation. However, it is not clear if Manx parishioners suffered to the same extent. 116
In 1643, matters came to a head when a crowd rose-up to free a man arrested for refusing to pay his tithes. This was followed by more riots against the tithes in Douglas. On meeting the Governor, who tried to put off resolution of the matter to another day, William Carret from Sulby said in a loud voice, 'the people would fight & die first before they agreed to pay tithes,' which was seconded by those assembled. However, with the help of returning soldiers, the Earl of Derby was able to help quell potential revolt with a mixture of cajolery, threats, temporary imprisonment, fines, deployment of informers and placement of loyal men in key positions. Although these disturbances were blamed on the machinations of Edward Christian, a charming and perhaps piratical man who was the Governor and head of the native militia, some of them were undoubtedly spontaneous stemming from long held grievances."'
Conflict over land was motive for further rebellion in 1651. The furore arose from the fact that the tenants began to consider farms to be their own, to dispose of accordingly, though truly they held the land in return for paying goods, money and services to the Earl, only while he saw fit. In an effort to reconcile this apparent anomaly, the Earl introduced fixed leases, but they remained far less common. Consequently, the Earl proposed a commission whose findings were legalised in 1643. The arrangement was that tenants would hold a lease for three lives or twenty- one years, on condition of fines and double rent and end for laborious duties and some legislative protection. Specifically, farms could not be immediately confiscated for non-payment of rent. Instead, to make up the difference in rent, goods would be confiscated first. Though the number of leases increased, many still considered that it did not affect the nature of their ancestral holding. '118 Doubt was placed in the mind of the tenants when in 1650 and '51 various officials relinquished their leases by means of a fine. This implied that the leases were not advantageous and that the tenants had been misled. Accordingly, with three-quarters of the Earl's forces having left the island in March 1651, the people were ready for rebellion. With the inducement of well-placed ringleaders, some 800 people gathered and went on to capture all the forts, except Peel and Castletown, which were held unsuccessfully, but later surrendered. The leader of this uprising William Christian or Illiam Dhone, the Receiver-General of the island, then relinquished the island to the approaching Parliamentary Forces under the condition, 'that they might enjoy their law's and liberties as formerly they had.' 119 As all males between the ages of 18 and 60 served in the Manx militia, the majority of future male Quakers, as part of Maughold Company, would have marched on Ramsey and Andreas forts and then on to capture Peel Castle." The events of the 1640s and 50s would have been fresh in parishioners' memories when they were converted in 1655-'57. Perhaps initial religious dissent was an unconscious political statement, an echo of recent willingness to oppose authority, fermented under the strictures and hardships imposed on them by the Church and government. For, if the Anglican Church could not provide comfort in times of distress, indeed, in tandem with the wants of state, worsened the situation, people would explore religious alternatives, particularly those that objected to excess. Frustrations will have increased since expectations of greater freedom were probably raised then dashed under the subsequent rule of Parliamentarian officials that did little to change the stagnating infrastructure and primitive rights of feudal Man. After the Derby's restoration in 1661, these oppressive precedents were continued and forcibly highlighted, '...by the execution of William Christian for his part in the rebellion in an act of ill-concealed revenge by Charles Stanley, the Eighth Earl.120
Maughold, jutting out towards the then Quakers strongholds of Cumberland and Lancashire on the north east of Man, was more likely to receive lay preachers because of it's relative proximity. Accessibility to these counties was facilitated by Ramsey's large protective bay and to a lesser degree, Lewaigue and Port Cornea. Because of the flow of legitimate or illegal foreign trade, Maughold and particularly Ramsey had been open to the sway of England's spiralling radicalism and bitter philosophical clashes in the 1640s and 50s, as well as more direct incursions throughout it's history. This is reflected in the fact that 'strangers' were often looked on with suspicion by authorities. The presence of merchant strangers was to be reported immediately and they had to swear oaths of loyalty; yet, as regards legal status and privileges they were at a significant loss to natives.'121 However, due to troublesome north-easterly winds and recent devastation by the sea, Ramsey did not engage in as great a trade as Douglas or Castletown and therefore was not subject to the same degree of ecclesiastical or governmental supervision as there was in these more established towns.' 122 Furthermore, hills to the south of Maughold leant greater protection from intervention by garrisons or officials from Castletown and Peel, than say Douglas, which in some ways had similar conditions. 124 This relative isolation may be indicated by the fact that the exiled Quakers chose covertly to return to and reside in Ramsey during the 1660s and 70s.125
For Ramsey residents, the nearest place of worship was Ballure Chapel, which was not rebuilt until the late 1630s.126 With no resident minister to tacitly encourage attendance, having already been in the habit of non-attendance, parishioners may have been accustomed to being without orthodox religious guidance and so inclined to seek guidance elsewhere. The threat of penalties resulting from transgressions observed by Churchwardens or a local minister also diminished. To a lesser degree, this may have affected Maughold in the 1640s, because Thomas Allen, Vicar of Maughold, was regularly absent from the parish, perhaps because he was engaged as the Earl's emissary in respect to the state of land tenure on the island." Attendance at Maughold Church was also discouraged by the inconvenience, even danger, of crossing the sands to Port Lewaigue or fording Ballure Burn, which was a tempestuous flood during seasonable floods and spring tides. "128 Moreover, like other parish churches, 'every quarterland farm had a sitting place ... with other places, usually in the gallery, allotted to intack holders and cottages.' 129 In the appointment of seats in Maughold Church in 1717, '...most likely based in previous patterns, no space was allotted to Ramsey. Accordingly, unless Ramsey people had access to their farms of origin, they had no seat.'130 Therefore, attendance may not have been noticed or noted. In a period when the pulpit was incomparably the most effective means of propagating conservative influence and Church and secular authorities were already estranged from parishioners, this absence was significant in the social and religious attitudes of the people. Thus, we can infer ministers' sway on opinion with the imprisonment of the first Quaker converts and itinerant preachers after they were said to have industriously misrepresented their creeds.'131 In part, non-compliance may have been due to the apparent sympathy or at least apathy of the Captain of Ramsey Fort. The effect on non-conformity is born out by the statement of Reverend Richard Fox who complained, 'Wee finde no other people or parish on the island more, averse, refractory, and disobedient to such wholesome [church laws] ...especially ye [the] parish of K[irk] K[rist] Maughold, but especially the town of Ramsey.' 132 In latter years, this may explain why Cumbrian Quakers were not inspired to hold a meeting in Douglas, where they had landed, but in Ramsey, which was well received by the many people that attended. 133
The personal strength of its early adherents also influenced Quakerism's hold on Maughold. Five of the initial converts - William Callow, 134 Ewan Christian, John Cotteam, John Christian and Alice Cord, were people of financial substance owning or married into property valued between £20 and £40 annual rent. In comparison, the majority of Quakers and their neighbours generally owned land that was valued in shillings and pence, with the emphasis on the lower end of the scale. 131 This relative prosperity is reflected in their wills, wherein Cord, Callow and the Christians had inventories valuing from £10 to £30, whereas Jane Cannell, Robert Callow and Alice Coonilt have sums ranging between 45 shillings and £3.136 Relative solvency allowed the former to resist the fines and the obstacles posed by imprisonment that prevented or hindered farming and fishing. The majority of Manx Quakers also had relative youth on their side and thus the particular vigour and enthusiasm to attract converts of a similar age with speeches and meetings. 137 By the standards of the day they were considered educated. John Christian, being the son of a Deemster, a position in some ways comparable to a High Court Judge, will have had a reasonable education as his status demanded and family's means allowed. Similarly, his son Ewan will likewise have been endowed. Perhaps his wife Ann, whose father was the parish clerk, and certainly their daughters Bessy and Ann, (the latter, whose letter to her husband is mentioned in Besse131), had access to some form of education. Alice Cord may also have been literate as she signed her own name to her husband's Will. 131 William Callow, considering his family was of yeoman stock, will have been subject to a more modest education, most probably learning to read and write the scriptures at Maughold's parochial school. 140 Nevertheless, Callow's letters illustrate his dignified eloquence, with astute use of emotive imagery that was used to win over his immediate neighbours and petition for relief from the Earl. 141 This is more impressive when one considers he was writing in his second language, English, which the few instances of Anglo-Manx dialect in his letters highlight. Thus, it seems that education gave the Manx Quakers the knowledge and with that the surety to resist authority.
Paradoxically, in view of anti-authoritarian Quakers beliefs, the respect that John Christian 142 and his wife may have gained from their neighbours because of their minor-gentry status may have attracted converts to the movement. Perhaps this was because Manx Quakerism's anti-hierarchical ideologies were never that clear cut, reflecting early English Quakers acceptance of the fact that those 'great to the outward' were important in fostering the movement's survival. 143 Wealth could also be considered a sign of God's favour in the seventeenth century. 144 The elder Christians decision to covert to Quakerism in their mid seventies, continuing to hold to these beliefs in the face of fines and imprisonment, illustrates their strength in embracing fundamental change when denial or suppression would have been easier. Generally, leading Manx Quakers showed considerable resolve and adherence to principal, whilst suffering harsh penalties, particularly as they had the most to lose when we consider their relative wealth and in the Christian's case, previous ties to authority
According to the Calendar of State Papers, court records, Presentments and wills, it appears that the initial movement in Maughold first peaked in 1662 at approximately 40 men, women and children, reaching similar perhaps more converts in the early 1670s of between 40-50, until it rapidly declined after 1700. Quakerism never converted many outside Maughold, with less than thirty followers between all other parishes. This is perhaps why, even in its early inception, rarely did Manx Quakers marry within the movement and if they did marry Quakers they were not Manx residents. 145 It is likely that there were Quaker meetings in Malew and the town of Ramsey, but if there were any records they do not appear to have been delivered to Quaker clerks by their Manx correspondents.
Difficulty in determining numbers arises from the fact that Quakers were not baptised in the parish register and without other sources, it is problematic to determine how many children were born into the movement. It is also troublesome to distinguish between Quakers and other 'sinners' in the Presentments, because they are often listed together for the same transgressions. The accepted practice that there need only be one representative of every household in attendance at Church likewise considerably disguised the level or actuality of non-conformity. There was also a reluctance by fellow parishioners to report Quaker activities, combined with the fact that Quakers were astute in not displaying their faith openly and only conforming to the extent strictly necessary. For example, Bishop Barrow complained in July 1664 that, 'upon obligation under penalty to come to church were dismissed and set at liberty, but here also dealt deceitfully coming once and no more to preserve them from penalty.' 146 In fact, on the basis of Presentments, it appears that most of the Quakers must have irregularly attended church to preserve them from censure, as had long been the practice of religious heretics like Muggletonians and Familists. Generally, the practises of several Manx dissenters were more comparable with these groups who outwardly conformed whilst effectively disregarding the church's demands, making public recantation when necessary and continuing as before." Indeed, it was a tactic suggested to them by Archdeacon Fletcher in 1666.148 Accordingly, we receive hints that John Christian and Alice Coonil may not have relinquished their non-conformist habits so readily with their Presentment alongside another known Quaker in 1666. 149 Similarly, John Callow, James Colleash and John Cotteam were deemed to have conformed in 1664, though they were reprimanded for their involvement with Quaker meetings and practices in the 1670s and mid 1680s.150 Hence, Manx Quakers continued to use and be buried in the parochial Church, presumably in a habitual and pragmatic sense. 151 For instance, John Preston, a Castletown Quaker, was buried in his parochial churchyard in 1659. 152 In 1662, John Christian was presented for not bringing his child to be baptised and then afterwards burying his child in the churchyard. 153 In 1667, an entry tells of Bessy Christian, '...a quaker for absenting herself from the Church, th[ou] gh she came there to be maryed...154 In 1731, Jane Fell alias Peell, '...a Quaker was buried on St Michael's Chapel at Derby Fort.155 Thus it appears that, partly due to their relative isolation, Manx Quakers remained in the fluxing state of early non-conformity, that did not adhere to any clear philosophy, but was based on passive resistance and rejection of other's ideas.
For the most part, it appears that Manx parishioners were sympathetic to local Quakers. Seldom did they report on Quaker meetings, despite Governor Chaloner's order to the contrary, with sources suggesting some kindness towards Manx Quakers and non-co-operation with authorities. For example, the poor of Maughold were encouraged to take Ewan Christian and William Callow's confiscated oats. With the exception of one man, they twice refused, chastising officials for their uncharitable behaviour, disregarding the ominous disapproval of Governor Christian. 156 In 1662, Quakers were imprisoned for refusing to pay for tithes and communion bread and wine. Their neighbours, 'out of meer pity, unknown to them, paid the money,' thus securing their release from prison. 157 In another instance, three neighbours suffered imprisonment in consequence of their refusal to carry out Bishop Barrow's order to assist in the transportation of the pregnant Ann Callow. 158 This type of response sprang from the fact that Manx Quakers were part of a close tied parish community, where those outside the movement would have been familiar with them socially and may well have been related. Therefore, the Quakers were not strangers coming into the parish that often caused friction in England. The response to their fate was what one would expect from relatives, friends and neighbours.
There are sundry examples of sailors refusing to assist in the transportation of Quakers with government soldiers resorting to impounding their ship, though the sailors frequently remained defiant. 159 In 1665, during the attempted exile of Manx Quakers we are told that,
'As the prisoners entered on one side of the ship, the seaman went out on the other side into a boat, telling the Master, Thomas Brittain, that, they were not hired to carry people out of their native country against their wills, neither would they go with he who carried them, and so went ashore leaving him a boy or two.160
When William Callow was to be transported on the ship of Anthony Nicolson the Captain said to Ann Callow, 'fear not, your husband is an honest man. We will live & die together, & he will shall want for nothing that I have or can do for him.' 161 He firmly opposed the transportation of the Quakers saying that, '...If they were such dangerous Persons as were unworthy to live in their own Country, he would not trust them on Board, lest perhaps they should overpower him and take away his vessel. This he spake [spoke] ironically.' 162 He continued his obstruction by demanding a guard of soldiers and money to maintain the prisoners and a document signifying the nature of the crime laid to their charge. Refusal to carry Quakers out of the island may also have stemmed from superstition. One man who had been active in transporting Quakers,
'...Lost his Lading and Money, and his ship much damaged in Ramsey Haven; and that Richard Bell, the Owner, who had joined with the Bishop in transporting Alice Coward, had been cast away on the Coast of Wales, and that the vessel, Men, and Lading, had been all lost.' 163
Besse duly commented that, '...Disasters administered Occasion to the Sufferers, conscious of their own Innocence, to make such Observations respecting the Divine Justice on Persecutors and the Agents, as probably any other Persons in their Circumstances would have made.' 164 Thus, although kind to William Callow, one group of sailors refused to carry them saying, '...they never heard of a Ship that carried Quakers against their will, that ever prospered.' 165 This idea seems to have been encouraged by Quakers and reinforced by a belief in their righteousness to guard against transportation and misdeeds against them. Generally, it appears to have been symptomatic of the age's thirst for superstition, prophecy, visions and sensationalistic pamphlets. 166 For example, George Fox, the most prominent Quaker by the 1660s, with his hypnotic eyes and thunderous voice, claimed visions, premonitions and the ability to cure the sick by the placing of hands. 167 It may also have been a result of efforts to discredit Quakers with claims of their involvement in black magic. 168 To prevent transportation to Virginia, William Callow appeals to Captain Harwood's sense of divine retribution, declaring that God will reward him according to his works, when the cry of Callow's wife and six small children will be heard. The Governor interrupts, 'Thou [you] threatenest the Captain,' to which Callow replies, 'I do not threaten him: There is one that will reward him according to his Works, as he has in his just Judgments done to others before him; for, Cursed is he that parts Man and Wife.' 169
Relations between Quakers and their neighbours may have become strained once the former was Ex-communicated. This meant that orthodox Christians were not allowed to communicate with them except in emergencies. As such, they could not help prevent the deterioration of Callow's farm during or after his long spells in prison; though as Manx farmers generally lived by subsistence, all their energies may have been consumed in their own economic survival. Their neighbours also informed on them and assisted soldiers who came to arrest them. This may have been because of the indoctrination of the pulpit, possibly because Barrow's discipline may have had the desired effect in stemming clerical in-discipline and hence some of their unpopularity. Certainly, parishioners would have been more receptive to the Maughold Curate, Richard Fox, who was described by his Churchwardens as, ,...sobor as becometh, and his apparel is fitting according to his abilities; which himselfe in that kind wee cannot say anything by him but good.' 170 Thomas Allen followed Fox's temporary tenure in Maughold as the parish Vicar between 1666 and 1726. Having been born and raised in the parish he appears to have knowledgeable and diligent in attending to spiritual and everyday parochial affairs and so was well regarded. 171 Similarly, in Ayrshire and Galloway in Scotland, the profound effect of sermons and skilful ministrations by William Guthrie and Samuel Rutherford nullified the efforts of Quaker preachers. 172 Hardening attitudes may equally have been due to social resentment. To this effect, Callow complained, '...they are envious Againgst Me Because there are none other man in ye [the] island that hath Any Land or hould in it... soe as to the outward I can hardly subsist Amongst them.' 173 It is also true that Quaker creeds fostered divisive attitudes. For example, Callow told Bishop Barrow he would not attend church, thus precluding himself from the focal point of parochial life, because his neighbours were, 'swearers, liars; whoremongers, are corrupted,' describing them as 'wicked men.' 174 Callow also observed of his fellow parishioners that, '...as soon as they have done [with worship], they fight and quarrel, cheat and deceive one another, these are not the true Church of Christ.' 175 As Quakers considered rituals or religious proxies to be a corruption of spiritual endeavours they disrupted services or implicitly snubbed fellow parishioners by excluding themselves from baptism, burial and marriage ceremonies. 176 This was significant since baptism was observed as a rite of passage, whereby the community formally acknowledged a child. Similarly, feasting, drinking and exchange of gifts that sometimes followed burial, alleviated distress and re-established familial and community bonds. Hence, the popularity and spectacle of social gatherings to celebrate these events. 177 For the most part, however, neighbours apparently unfriendly attitudes probably resulted from justifiable fear of the authorities, as witnessed by the fines and imprisonment of conformable men and women who associated with Quakers.
Attitudes could be displayed more clearly in the 1680s, when Robert Callow and Ellinor Stockdale were married in the Quaker manner. 178 The Churchwardens complained that there were those, '...w[hi]ch ought not to have been pr[e]sent at such an unlawful Act; Much less to have given their Consent, as will appear by their subscription to a certaine Instrument; w[hi]ch was then & there p[ro]duced by ye [the] Quakers & signed by these prodestant neighbours and friends... ' 179
Their presence at the ceremony and signature on the marriage certificate belies an expression of fellowship, but perhaps some tacit recognition of Quaker practice. There was never a popular campaign against the Quakers in the Isle of Man or more specifically Maughold, partly because they were never particularly isolated from orthodox society. Evidence indicates that a belief in divine justice, a measure of sympathy induced by their harsh treatment, in addition to disillusionment with established intuitions, may have inclined parishioners towards the Quaker predicament.
Man shared some of the circumstances that led to dissent elsewhere such as recent conflict with landowners, the absence or neglect of the Church of England and economic fluctuations which resulted in increased hardship. 180 That non-conformist creeds did not prosper in the same way is seemingly remarkable as English Quakerism, although influential in Bristol and London was most persuasive in rural areas and Man was overwhelmingly rural in land-use and mode of living. However, the unpredictable sea may have deprived the Manx movement of lay preachers who otherwise travelled frequently and with relative ease, in large numbers, stimulating already existent regional movements and gaining further converts in Cumberland, Northumberland, Yorkshire and Lancashire."' Accordingly, William Callow remarked to English Friends in 1664 that, '...we Are some tyimyre [time] troubled yt [yet] in All this time wee have scene nonne of your faices nor heard from you.' 182 Similarly, William Dixon, during his visit with two other Cumberland Quakers, noted the isolation of the only Friend in Douglas, 'who was not much aquainted with our waise [ways] and manner of meeting.""
The fines that ranged from two to twenty pence, though mostly over seven pence, must also have been a heavy burden on the majority of Quakers who owned property of not much more value. Conditions in the prisons, where Quakers were held from between two days to two and a half years without fire, having only straw to lie on and hardly getting enough food for their subsistence, likewise negatively impacted on Quakers health. 184 For example, Ann Callow had life threatening fevers in 1664 and 1667 after periods of confinement. 185 Confinement may too have contributed to the deaths of Thomas Nicolson in 1662, John Christian in 1663, Thomas Coonill in 1664 and several of William Callow's servants. Imprisonment also appears to have taken a toll on William Callow who died within months of his father. 186 Notably, after consistent imprisonment in St. Germans many of the Maughold Quakers strove to perform penance towards their return to conformity in 1664.187 They did so partly because imprisonment disrupted the harvesting of corn, mending of nets and general upkeep and repair. The importance of fishing to economic survival, as well as the diet, is reflected in civil and ecclesiastic authorities re-occurring efforts to ensure a share of tithes and indirectly rent. They issued regulations to help ensure a good harvest and punished those who tried to avoid payment or attempted to steal others supplies.188 Authorities used this economic reality for coercion by imprisoning Quakers during the height of harvesting or the herring season. Consequently, in 1664, William Callow asked Bishop Barrow if he might briefly be released in order to tend to his farm and thus pay his rent and fines, the latter being the proffered reason why he was arrested. Barrow replied that the Lords rent would be secured, as it actually was, by confiscation of the Quaker goods and land."' Authorities also used transportation as a means of coercion, as well as preventing further conversions. Thus, in 1665 the most prominent Quakers were exiled to Whitehaven and then on to Dublin and London. 190 This austere treatment may have appeared as a pertinent reminder to their fellow parishioners to conform and without the focal point of these literate, prominent Quakers potential interest and faith in the movement dwindled.
Nevertheless, the Manx Quakers treatment is generally comparable, though perhaps singularly less severe, than Quakers from other communities that remained strong. For example, English Friends suffered heavy fines, confiscation of goods and land, transportation, forced marches, stoning, beating and whipping. Under the Commonwealth in England, Quakers claimed that there were 21,000 imprisonments, 32 resulting in death. There was even some equivocation over inheritance since Quaker children were conceived outside officially sanctified marriage.191 However, persecution in England was local and spasmodic. The absence of centralised government based on the French model made implementation of the penal code in its entirety practically impossible. In Cumbria, Durham, London and Bristol, Friends preached largely unobstructed with persecution by a local magistrate frequently moderated by the central authority. There were also many instances of magisterial mercy and fines had to be imposed on those that declined to enforce the law.192 The public frustrated magistrates that were more conformable and informers were discouraged by the fact that they were universally despised. On the other hand, Manx Quakers never had notable local sympathisers or converts to alleviate persecution. The only Quaker to hold a prominent position was John Christian, who was at various times Parish Clerk, Coroner and Sumner-General. He relinquished the latter post in 1659 on grounds of declining health after twice being censured for neglecting his duties. Though, as this role involved delivery of summonses from the Bishop and Vicar-Generals and escorting prisoners to Castle Rushen, for which he received a portion of his fees from tithes, ultimately it was irreconcilable with his new-found religious sensibilities and possibly why he disregarded his duties in the first place.193 In addition, Manx Quakers were negatively effected by the pragmatic relationship between the Earl of Derby and the Manx Church. Penalties against Manx Quakers were imposed by ecclesiastical courts or orders instituted under Spiritual Laws. Spiritual Laws, a code of guidance written down from memory in 1609, were not incorporated into Civil Law until the early 1700s. Furthermore, as observed at the time, 'many practices and censures in our Spiritual Courts are contrary to ye [the] ancient written statutes."" Partly for this reason Manx Quakers, '...weer [were] never brought before any judge, or Justice in any open Court, or Sessions to shew [show] us ye [the] Reason wherefore they soe acted."194 Nevertheless, sentences had the tacit and sometimes overt approval of the Earl, as ultimate civil authority and de facto sovereign. Dickinson states:
'The Lord of Man possessed and exercised powers ... almost identical to those of the king of England. He appointed principal officials of the island's government, who together constituted the Lord's Council. He summoned the Council and the twenty-four Keys to attend the Tynwald Court, at which ordinances and statutes were promulgated, none of which had the full force of law without his prior consent. The courts of law were held in the Lord's name and the right of appeal from which lay ultimately to him as the supreme legal authority in the island. In this capacity, he had the power to impose the death penalty, to banish offenders from the island, to mitigate their punishment or to pardon them.' 196
He also held myriad coincident rights, the most salient being that he was the landholder from whom practically all inhabitants held their land. In reality, therefore, the Earl allowed Spiritual Laws to take precedence, at least on a parochial level, as if they were equal if not superior to Civil Law, because they were more yielding to his purposes. Other secular authorities, such as the House of Keys, though more combative in the 1670s, were typically summoned to deliberate on matters of legal contention - in a judicial and advisory capacity - and were not established as part of the legislative process until the latter end of that century. As such, they were vulnerable and pliant to the Earl's threats, who forged verdicts by the removal of their members and pressure on juries, reflected in measures proposed by the Keys in 1673 to prevent this kind of tampering and emphasising the ascendancy of Statute Law. 197 However, in the 1660s, ecclesiastical authority became more pronounced when the Earl appointed the disciplinarian Bishop Barrow to the office of Governor, the chief officer in the island that wielded the power of the Lord in the Earl's customary absence. It would have been of little comfort to the Quakers that, in his own words, he acted the part of Governor only in outward appearance, yet did not cease to pray daily for them.198, Executive strength was also more concentrated in Man because the island was without the barriers of significant distance or mountains, lakes, forests, large marshes and wide rivers to hinder reports by informers and a rapid response by officials. Significantly, the rebellions of 1643 and 1651 occurred when most of the Seventh Earl's troops had left the island. In 1643, rebellion was averted when they returned, which gave the Earl confidence to imprison and impose heavy fines on its ringleaders. 199 Although the Earl's rule was partly upheld by tradition and feudal loyalty, parishioners were perhaps more obedient or at least circumspect due to fear incurred by their obvious vulnerability. 200
Conversely, England saw flourishing political dissent throughout the seventeenth century. Puritans were interested in new forms of non-hierarchical Church structure and this inevitably informed their views on state. Their strengthening parliamentary voice hastened disputes with the monarchy from the late 1620s onwards. In 1628, a formal petition was delivered to King Charles the first, by which the English Parliament sought to delimit royal prerogative. The King's circumvention of the need to call up parliament to finance naval construction only brought another legal challenge. In 1640, the so-called Roots and Branch Petition drew the connection between religious and constitutional dissent, demanding the abolition of episcopacy and listing twenty-eight grievances from the proliferation of indecent clergy, licentious books and Sunday sports to the increasing influence of popery. Subsequent concessions by the King could not stem this caustic torrent of acts to defend, if not promote, parliamentary interest. Consequently, the Triennial Act (1641) affirmed that Parliament should automatically be reassembled after three years, if not summoned by the King. This was followed by an act against dissolving Parliament without its consent. In May, Parliament called for the impeachment of the King's ministers, for their tyrannical imposition of repugnant religious reform. With the refusal of the King to dismiss the Bishops, Parliament brought an act to abolish the Court of High Commission, the principal agent of religious uniformity. Among the 204 grievances of the Grand Remonstrance on the State of the Kingdom were calls for the dismissal of Bishops from Parliament and the King's Council and for the selection of ministers from parliamentary leaders.201 Thus by the 1660s, the English Crown realised that raising tax through parliament, amongst other contentious matters, involved making substantial political concessions .202 Accordingly, an outraged Parliament refused to vote subsidies for the Dutch War until the Declaration of Indulgence - that suspended penal laws against Catholic recusants and Protestant non-conformists - was rescinded and replaced by the ferocious religious intolerance of the Test Acts. 203
Nevertheless, this turbulent philosophical context and the essential commonality of expression in Protestant beliefs were crucial in providing for the rise of dissenting religious movements in England during subsequent decades. Hence, biographies of early English dissenters highlight the shared experience of a Puritan upbringing. Though it should be emphasised that Puritanism was not a movement nor did it have a universally agreed creed, certain broad tenets can be identified. Thus, Quakers, like their Puritan forbears, placed emphasis on preaching in a straightforward, forthright manner understandable to the commonality. Many Puritans also considered that learning did not equate with religious devotion or the ability to inspire piety. The absence of the spirit, they likewise conceived, negated the validity of Sacraments. 204 Like Puritans, Quakers subscribed to the belief that absolute authority could not be attributed to one human being, '...neither King in the state, the father in a family, not the minister in the church.205 Both adherents cherished Gospel law over secular law. Moreover, Puritans agreed that obedience was not due to ministers who deviated from Christ's words. 206 They too believed that private devotion safeguarded against hypocrisy, whereas kneeling and superstitious ceremony could supplant genuine humility and inner piety. 207 However, armed with the revelation of the Inner Light, Quakers removed many of the conservative qualifying statements from Puritanism, so taking these beliefs to their more separatist end. For example, whereas Presbyterians emphasised that ceremonies and preaching were ineffective without the presence of the spirit, they did not advocate lay preachers, as did Quakers. In the same way, although some Puritans encouraged private devotion, they argued this was in addition to regular Church attendance, not segregated from congregations as Quakers ascertained. However, perhaps the most influential factor in the religious formation of prospective separatists was the Puritan emphasis on exacting religious observance. Miss Rutherford's account of her experience in the 1620s and 30s echoes the fears and hopes of those who were to convert to more radical groups like George Rofe and John Crook. She was brought up in the fear of God and was taught to pray twice daily. However, she was troubled by a continual fear of the devil coming to take her away and began to long for death. She found comfort in sermon, but her fears were renewed with nights of despair and guilt over backsliding such as playing with other children on the Sabbath, doubting there was a God even thinking she might be a witch. She prayed three times a day, more on the Sabbath, but became distracted and considered staying away from Church. She was filled with self-loathing and an insatiable desire for faith and repentance, but found none in her soul, constantly looking for evidence she was among the Elect. 208 Puritan preachers further undermined surety of salvation, emphasising journey rather than attainment. They decreed that one must never cease to be introspective and reach an inevitably self- damning evaluation of the inner person. Thus, in their constant emotional turmoil and religious searching many were receptive perhaps desperate for a religious salve.
However, emotional release from the terrors and anxiety surrounding Predestination, which Quaker preachers so richly harvested in England, was limited in Man due to the nominal effects of civil war and a less dogmatic approach to religion. For many in England, religious fears, heightened by personal and societal upheavals, were catalysed by the experiences of war. Though Manx parishioners suffered from the impositions of the Earl and were aware of unfolding events in neighbouring countries, only 300 Manx soldiers were directly involved in battles with Parliamentarians. 209 In England, Civil War led to 100,000 being killed in a population of some five millions and cost Ireland 40% of its population. 210 In fact, English radical instincts were honed in military conflicts and the Quaker vernacular was suffused with military imagery. 211 The apparent insulation from conflict was connected to the relative tranquillity of Man's recent religious history. Blundell writes that,
'They [the Manx] somewhat unwillingly at first left the practise of the primitive church, yet at last they complyed to banish the Pope, but with him most willingly they retayned the old six Articles. In King Edward the 6 his reigne they admitted of the Book of Comon Prayer. After, in Queen Marye's reigne, they easily admitted of the mass and its concomitants, as being their ancient religion, which they had lately left off. '212
This implies a change of form rather than deep-bedded beliefs, which were readily reversed, partly because there was no religious literature in Manx Gaelic to entrench and reflect this religious change. The Manx were initially reluctant Protestants, perhaps due to the influence of neighbouring areas such as the Lakes, the rural parishes of Lancashire and Borders, which remained largely Catholic and the Catholic sympathies of the Third Earl of Derby. 213 Hence, John Christian was said to be the first Protestant Minister in Man when he succeeded as Vicar of Maughold in 1580. Moreover, over the next sixty years, Man did not experience the recurrent turnover of ecclesiastical incumbents to reflect religious antagonism in England. Therefore, it is of no surprise that in 1639 Bishop Parre found parishioners on St. John Baptist's day in a chapel dedicated to that Saint, '...in a practise of gross superstitions,' which he caused to be cried down. 214 In 1688, Bishop Levinz complained that penitent prayers at the graveside and other relics of Popish superstition survived in Man, supposedly for no other reason than their fathers' had done so before them. 215 However, this was not strictly correct, as toleration and sympathy with Catholics was evident in the early 1700s and survived in some measure into the 1740s.216 Consequently, fear of Catholic intrigue or beliefs do not appear to have been a feature of Manx life between 1580 and 1700. 217 In contrast, 'five or six generations of English Protestants had been brought up to believe that popery was the work of the Devil and that religious pluralism was a recipe for sinful strife.' 218 In order to try and enlist the sympathy of the ordinary citizen in their arguments against episcopacy in England and Scotland, Puritan proselytisers utilised this widespread hatred of Popery. 219 Consequently, increasing separatism and Puritan demands for reform often came in reaction to what was perceived as Catholic threats and conspiracies, something they were not furnished with in Man even had there been a history of Puritan dissent. 220
Similarly, the Manx Church, supposedly Presbyterian in the 1630s and 40s, remained Episcopalian i.e. a hierarchical church of parish priests, Vicar-Generals and Bishop, with ultimate authority resting in the Archbishop of York, though the appointment of a Bishop actually lay with the Lord. It is possible to infer some passive opposition to Episcopalian authority in parishioners holding their own assemblies, but this did not seem to imply withdrawal from parish churches. Disruption or opposition to this structure came not from the laity, but from the Lord, who, as noted, decided not to appoint a Bishop in the 1640s and 50s. However, this was specifically for practical and fiscal not religious reasons. In contrast, William Laud, the Archbishop of Canterbury and Charles the first fought tenaciously to impose Episcopalian authority in England and Scotland during the 1630s and 40s, insisting on ordination of Bishops and common assent to the Common Book of Prayer .221 Laud's Church, sympathetic to pre-reformation practices, also reintroduced kneeling at communion: wearing of surplices; railing off of the communion table and placing it at the east end of the chancel; bowing at the name of Jesus; setting of stained glass windows and use of crucifixes and glorifying of church Music. 222 These measures were viewed with dismay and contempt by Puritans, resulting in violent protest, withdrawal from congregations, separate convocations and clamour for reform, ultimately leading to war in Scotland and contributing significantly to rebellion in England .223 From what can be gleaned from the Presentments, court records and the characterisation of the Manx, outbreaks of Puritan zeal in opposition to these ceremonies are notable only by their curiosity in Manx records, though there were elements of Puritan ideas in regards to the adherence to the Sabbath.224 Thus, there simply wasn't the continuity of Puritan beliefs and shared religious history to provoke such a fervent response under the yoke of uniformity. Most likely, therefore, the Protestant reformer John Calvin's doctrine of predestination or Election and the more extreme statements of Calvinism did not hold sway in Man and emphasis was laid upon lifelong effort and spiritual deeds. 225
Continuity and the aberrance of violent upheaval appear to have been a popular refrain in Manx history. Hence, the celebrated Manx proverb of uncertain antiquity that says, 'mannagh vow cliaghtey cliaghtey, nee cliaghtey coe,' which translates as, 'unless custom is indulged by custom, custom will weep. '226 A typically discerning contemporary also believed that the Manx were, '...not apt or prompt suddenly to be set on fire, not prompt to complain of pressures or desire innovations.' 227 This temperament is reflected in Man's cautious verdicts in regards to charges of witchcraft, which in marked contrast to the hysteria and violent deaths in England and the Continent, resulted in only three executions in modern Manx history. 228 Considering the violence of the period, the Manx rebellions are also notable for their lack of bloodshed. Furthermore, despite calls for democratisation by the leaders of the 1643 rebellion, the strongest motivating force amongst the people was that of tithes and land. Similarly, the Rebellion of 1651 was principally for the preservation of feudal land rights. More pressingly, it was to prevent the island being ruined by holding out against the inevitable victory of the Parliamentarians; possibly informed by Cromwell's massacre of all male combatants who refused to yield during the uprisings in Drogheda and Wexford two years previously. 229 The conservative trends in Manx history may help explain why the relatively conventional creeds, if not effects, of Methodism were to infuse Manx political and spiritual life in the later eighteenth and nineteenth century. Though reminiscent of Quakerism in some its beliefs and practices, Methodism claimed to be a movement within the Church of England .230 Early Methodists were careful to maintain and emphasise this connection and the continuity in their practices, notably by retaining the Sacraments .231 That this influenced likely converts is attested to by the many examples of people much affected in their religious formation by the Lord's Supper, the comforting effects of prayer and the fellowship and reinforcement of internal piety in Communion and Baptism, which was highly valued for it's purification of sin. 232 The retention of baptism was also sympathetic with the superstition that unbaptised children would be condemned to hell, reflected in parents attempts to have baptised as soon as possible .233 This resonates with Manx folklore in the rites and charms used to protect new born children involving salt, soot and fire irons. 234 This constancy meant that attendance of parish church and Methodist Chapel usually went together, despite some opposition from the established church in the early days of the movement .235 Thus, it was only under the revelation of it's own tenets that Methodism reluctantly, and even then sporadically, separated from the Church. In contrast, the separatist creeds of early Manx Quakers determined, '-declaiming .declaiming ag[ain] st it [i.e. the Church of England], & ye [the] minister of ye church & all that as did come to hear them. '236 Though the evangelists of Methodism were critical of Anglicanism, this more patient approach meant that, in the countryside and generally after the 1780s they were left largely unscathed in their preaching because of the espoused connection to the Church, toleration of many clergy and the protection of Governor Dawson.237 Following this cautious path was crucial to its success in Man where no separatist religious movement had ever gained influence. Even when the political and religious currents were more favourable, the missionary tours of Quaker preachers from Liverpool and Cumbria in the latter eighteenth and mid nineteenth century, of which we have report of a handful, drew some interest but no support amongst the islanders. 238 Consequently, the names of Quakers residing in the island in the latter eighteenth and mid-nineteenth century: Bassford, Curran, Greaves, McMickan, Robinson, Stephenson and Townsend are all of recent immigrants. 239
Differing structural and procedural responses to persecution may also explain the chasm between English Quaker success and Manx failure. After 1660, under the guidance of the Fells and George Fox, English Quakers began to fortify themselves against the encroachment of authority. This was necessary, as at times during the 1650s and 60s the Quakers were the only group to worship in public and felt the brunt of persecution." Meetings became formalised with quarterly and monthly meetings, which considered members concerns. Fox encouraged more contact between Quakers, so that any Friend could travel and attend any meeting. Funds were collected to alleviate the financial burden of imprisoned Friends. Similar to orthodox churches, children were subject to inculcation, with prescribed spiritual and behavioural predestination and preaching that sins could be purged by careful observance. In fact, spiritual awakenings under the influence of Methodism led to conversions for Quaker, Baptist and Congregationalist meetings. questions and responses. There were also guides on mode of dress and language, as well as rules governing marriage that if not followed could lead to censure."' For example, Edward Callow, grandson of William Callow, who was a practising Quaker in Dublin in the 1720s, censored himself, as he would have been by his meeting, for discussing marriage with a woman before consulting her parents."' These codes allowed Quakers to easily recognise the extent of their community and maintain discipline, preventing religious excess that had encouraged persecution in the early days of the movement. In fact, the ambiguity that arose from the central tenet of Quakerism obliged Friends, in order to avoid perilous division, to evoke this external authority and guidance. Otherwise, if two Christians of equal piety, education and sincerity claimed infallible guidance in the Inner Light, what was to decide between them?" However, in the Isle of Man, partly due to its small numbers, there was never this type of formalisation.
Quakers also demanded that converts more readily ignore social factors in settling on marriage, such as mutual affection and parity of wealth and age, towards same denominational pairings. However, the opportunities for marriage in the small Manx movement were few, which were further depleted by their voluntary removal from social activities, especially those related to the Church .244 Equally, doubts over the legitimacy of Quaker marriage may have deterred converts in Man, where the material point of marriage was to secure heir-ship of land, which could not be disposed of by will.245 Women right's, as regards their share of her husbands property and estate, were also superior to those of women in England, where they were merely appendages to their man's estate.246 Therefore, they may not have felt compelled to express such a fervent religious and in some ways political freedom, which can be seen as a strong undercurrent in the early English movement.
There may too have been economic reasons for the failure of Manx Quakers. Studies of English Quakers have noted that few converts belonged to the labouring poor. Typically, they were of the 'middling sort': wholesale and retail traders, artisans, husbandmen and yeomanry. 247 However, Man's unfavourable climate and primitive farming techniques, meant that, before 1643, the island's economy was mainly conducted by barter. Even after the introduction of money and a more active trade between 1638 and 1660, '...economic activity in the Isle of Man was generally conducted at a level only slightly above that of subsistence.' 248 Although there were small-scale tradesmen like brewers, millers, coopers and weavers, they were often occupied in several, often unrelated, lines of work. For instance, William Chisnell of Castletown was a brewer, merchant and shoemaker." Their efforts were necessarily complementary to their principal earnings from pastoral farming and directed towards immediate local needs. Hence, the importance, frequency and high number of local fairs. In England, social and economic changes brought about by the rise in population and Dissolution of the Monasteries in the century after 1540 contributed to the sudden cleavage of peasantry between thriving yeoman and land-less destitute, thereby galvanising actual and potential dissent.250 These factors seem to have had little effect in the Isle of Man, though were perhaps reflected in Manx authorities concerns with refractory servants and vagrants in the 1660s.251 In Man, when Rushen Abbey was dissolved in 1540, '...it's lands were not sold off to speculators, eager to make a profit from the increasing demand for food in England or from wool. Instead, the abbey lands were ultimately leased en bloc... '252 Essentially, the Isle of Man relied on exports of primary goods such as grain, fish or skins, in return for goods produced by skilled craftsmen in more industrially advanced areas. 253 Where one would expect the highest concentration of industry in the island it was said that, '...a cat's skin so extended would treble encompass the greatest of these 4 towns. ...'254 The modest level of industry resulted in the absence of any form of craft gilds in the island and that government remained sole regulator of trade. Thus, Man was much less likely to have fiscally and culturally independent residents more able to resist strictures, directly, as a consequence of guilds or indirectly due to prospering trade, as there were in places like Bristol, London and Lancashire. This may partly explain why areas of leading industry in Lancashire - Bolton, Blackburn, Oldham and Rochdale - had staunchly resisted the Royalist forces that had rallied round the Earl of Derby. 255 After 1676, the importance of wealth was especially evident in England, when a new generation of Quakers, whose interests were more commercial and less agricultural, generated the political and financial weight to protect their interests more systematically and effectively.256 These associations also leant a measure of respectability. Hence, in the latter eighteenth and the middle nineteenth century the efforts of Quaker preachers in the Isle of Man solicited favourable comment from the conservative and reforming Victorian newspapers alike, which can be contrasted with their views on the roughly contemporary arrival of Mormons on the island. 257
Education was vital in crossing the barrier between poor and relatively prosperous craftsman, merchant or tenant farmer. However, poor parishioners could not afford to lose the labour of their children and so would not send them to school.258 Even in attendance, the scant provision of education in the Isle of Man of the 1630s, further delineated between parishioners income with distinct levels of payment for reading on the one hand and reading and writing on the other .259 The evidence of wills, court records and statutes suggests that the majority of Manx parishioners had little or no access to education in the 1620s and 1630s. The principal of compulsory education and level of diligence expected and enforced by Bishop Barrow, although appreciated by some parishioners, only began in the 1660s and it's effects were negligible .260 This had unfortunate implications for the potential resolve of early Quaker converts. For example, when William Callow and Ewan Christian were imprisoned church officials, ,...went to fricken [frighten] the women and children with it, to them that cannot reade nor know what it is but what they say.' 261 Insufficient education not only inhibited a confident response to such authorities that could speak Manx, but the ability to comprehend English, the language of privilege and authority. Accordingly, there could be little or no dialogue with English neighbours or principals. Inversely, the bilingualism of early Methodist preachers was one of the factors that allowed it to prosper in Man. 262 Actual or relative illiteracy also negated the point of disseminating radical pamphlets, which had been effective in stimulating dissent in England and Scotland throughout the middle to latter seventeenth century. 263
Without frequent contact with English Friends the essence of Quaker creeds appears to have been lost on all but a few natives and the hiding or subjugation of their dissenting beliefs blurred the lines with orthodox religion. More significantly, the absence of religious conflict or dissent in Manx history, Man's ingrained conservatism, a primitive and governmentally controlled economy and meagre provision of education combined to nullify non-conformists initial and potential attempts to gain converts. Therefore, Manx Quakerism, '...rapidly dwindled as a political force, and survived rather as a subjective fact in the personal life of individuals.' 264 Thus, though continuing to sue for their relief, Callow wearily wrote after a lengthy period of imprisonment that, 'I doe not desire the riches of the worlde, but that I might be debt less and have livelihood among them.' 265 Therefore, rejection of a neutered Manx nonconformity seemed like the natural course to the majority of parishioners.
Manx Ecclesiastics response to Quakerism was partly shaped by their concern for parishioners souls. Bishop Barrow warned that, '...by not bringing them [dissenters] to correction ... it would lead to their inevitable and eternal ruin.' 266 He claimed, '...1 am not willing to engage in such ungrateful business as, but my place requires me, and my care to preserve others from that slavery enforceth me to use these strictures.' 267 Their collective failures were constantly reinforced by visitations of pestilence and poor harvests, which were viewed as the judgement of God's contempt and a spur to greater efforts.268 More pertinently, Barrow was a devout disciple of William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury and an efficient politician and disciplinarian opposed to relaxing regulations against dissenters and equally hostile to toleration of sects outside the Church. 269 Quaker creeds, emphasising simplicity and internal revelation were in antithesis to Laud and thus Barrow's belief that '...the external worship of God and His Church is the great witness to the world, that our heart stands right in the Service of the God. '270 Hence, soon after his inauguration, Barrow decided it was time to put a stop to, 'the overflowing of ungodliness.9 271 Significantly for the Quakers, he considered, '...there was noe speedier remedie ... than execution of severe punishments against notorious offenders. '272
Antagonistic and protective sentiments prevailed because of the poor state of the Manx Church, which in the absence of an appointed Bishop in the 1640s and 50s, had the Bishopric's revenues used for the Earl's own purposes.273 Despite Bishop Barrow's subsequent attempts to increase the clergies stripend by partially successful efforts to recover tithes and acquire a Royal Bounty parish ministers were paid very poorly and several pursued other livings.274 The main source of this income came from the tithes, which Quakers refused to pay. Similarly, Quakers denied the fees that ministers claimed for baptism, marriage and burial, as they did not require these ceremonies. Neither did they acquiesce to the Church's exclusive claim on education, wherein an approved parishioner had to pay the Church in order to hold a license to teach. Hence, Reverend Richard Fox and Captain Thomas Ascough were reprimanded for letting a Quaker, Richard Cunnard's niece, teach in Ramsey.275 Similarly, in 1681, Will Casement, Patrick Kneale, and Thomas Frier and wife were fined 10 pence, 'for keeping schoole and not having licenses and professing another religion that the church does not allow.' 276
More specifically, the Church was slighted by its declining role in the interpretation of The Bible. In Tudor England, The Bible was the textbook of monarchy and social subordination, the province of Latin and Hebrew reading clergy. Once translated into English, it permeated society to women, yeomen, artisans and heresy seekers. All found comfort and support for radical interpretations about their current suffering under persecution, scepticism about establishment, poor against rich, younger against older brother. 277 Thus, Bishop Barrow considered it dangerous that, 'ignorant unlearned men ...interprett Scriptures according to ...[their] own fancies forsaking ye [the] doctrine of the church.' 278 Barrow's contempt of anything less than a classical education can be seen in his scathing indictment of Manx Clergy seemingly because they had been educated on the island.279 Barrow's displeasure is particularly evident when William Callow and Ewan Christian, both yeoman farmers, matched the Bishop's scriptural quotations with contrary proverb S.281 To the further chagrin of the clergy, Quakers claimed that scripture was of secondary importance when the Inward Light could bring enlightenment through living testimony.
Churchwardens' opposition to nonconformists derived from prosaic motives. The four Churchwardens, elected from their particular parish every four years, were charged with presenting transgressors to the courts, whose punishment was determined by sitting ecclesiastics. If Churchwardens failed to report enough trespasses, it might seem to their Minister that they were disregarding their duties, which could result in censure, though more often this was for neglecting the repair of the Church. Vicar-General Robert Parre stated to this effect that it was his duty to submit matters that were not presented by Churchwardens.281 This impacted on the Quakers as their small group provided an obvious source of 'sinners' with which to satisfy their superiors, particularly in the 1660s and 1680s. In this way, Churchwardens were also shielded from the wider unpopularity to which they will have been exposed, despite some element of communally agreed morality expressed in the Presentments.282 However, Radcliffe notes that, 'If we bear in mind the distances to be travelled [to Maughold Church], when most parishioners went on foot, and small amount of accommodation in the church, the total [of Presentments] seems very small.283 This infers that, generally, Churchwardens were not particularly active in presenting neighbours, perhaps inferring the existence and preference of informal parochial coercion and an element of complicity against the higher echelons of the Church. 284
The Eighth Earl of Derby's conviction, manifest in his leading role in a loyalist uprising during the first years of the Restoration, was that Anglicanism was the true faith of all good Christian subjects .285 However, his opposition to reform of the Church of England on Puritan lines gave rise to accusations that he was in secret alliance with the Papists. To give credence to this notion his enemies pointed to the fact that his estates were in the traditional Catholic strongholds of Lancashire. 286 Ironically, early Quakerism suffered from the same charge and partly for the same reason, though some went further claiming they were 'Jesuits in disguise. '287 This gave incentive to those of questionable religious loyalty to prove their allegiance or spurred punitive actions if this accusation was genuinely believed. However, Derby, like others of the ruling classes, feared separatists more for social than religious reasons. Seventeenth century separatism, '...was a movement of the lower classes, and generally under lower-class leadership.' 288 Manning explains: 'The act of separatists following a mechanic preacher, whether recognised or not by those that did it, was an assertion of independence from their superiors in church, state and society, and an act of class defiance.' 289 Derby would have been personally familiar with the consequences of these misgivings as there were elements of a peasant revolt and anti- Strange (the then Earl's title) rather than pro-Parliament sentiment in Lancashire, leading up to civil war. 290 Indeed, Quaker creeds were particularly feared for their apparent licence to social disorder. In a conference between Bishop Barrow and two Manx Quakers the latter asserts, '... the Grace of God hath appeared unto all Men to profit withall, by which Salvation is witnessed.' Barrow replies, '...Then Thieves may say, they have the Spirit of God, and cry out for Liberty of Conscience, as you do.' 291 In this vein, contemporary writers accused Quakers of having, 'no Christ but within, no Scripture to be rule, no ordinances, no law but their lusts ... no sin but what men fancied to be so, no condemnation for sin but in the consciences of ignorant ones.' 292 Furthermore, many Royalists believed that during the Civil Wars, dissenters had constituted a large portion of the Parliamentary forces or that being pacifists they had declined to fight to save the Monarchy. Parliamentarians were dubbed 'Roundheads,' evoking the image of the close-cropped hair preferred by pre-war Puritans, thus implying that all Parliamentarians were Puritans or dominated by them. Although all regions and social classes in England and Wales were split between Royal allegiance and Parliament, it is true to say that very few Puritans were Royalists and very few Catholics were Parliamentarians.293 Notably, Prince Rupert assured Charles, Eighth Earl of Derby that William Callow was a peaceable person as testified, '...by another of that profession whom I know to be a faithful & loyal subject to His Majesty [Charles I] in the time of the late war. '294 This was significant because the Earl's father, who was also a fervent Royalist, had been executed by parliamentary edict. His bitterness towards dissenters, at least in the political sense, was magnified by the humiliation of his substantially depleted inheritance by the seizure of estates and sequestering of goods by Parliament, which he made great efforts to re-claim in the 1660s and 70s.295 Consequently, 'Dissent is sedition' was a powerful and slogan at the Restoration to men such as the Earl of Derby. 296 Although Quakers like George Fox testified that they were against plots and bids to overthrow the King, these denials were not generally accepted .297 This was partly because, although in many ways a conservative, George Fox did not have unrivalled prominence in the movement of the 1650s, particularly whilst a faction of wealthier Quakers rejected many of Fox's tenets .298 The Quakers case was further hindered by the fact that Ranters, a sect widely condemned as sexual libertines and denounced by Puritan leaders in the 1650s for their rejection of the rule of law, became influential Quaker converts.299 Many Levellers, a republican and democratic faction, also became Quakers in the 1660s and 70s.301 Whether Quakers were the biggest threat to social order in the late 1650s was of less consequence than the fact many believed them to be."' As restoration of monarchy was threatened, many Quakers rejoined the army from which they had been expelled because of their reluctance to accept military discipline. Consequently, there was considerable trepidation at 'arming the Quakers'.302 In fact, it has been argued that fear of Quakers was a major factor for the rapidity with which Charles II was restored to the English throne.303
However, the social elite was not uniform in their response to Quakerism. As noted, Prince Rupert was sympathetic to William Callow's plight and wrote a letter on his behalf to Charles, Eighth Earl of Derby. Countess Derby, wife to the Eighth Earl, also seemed receptive to Callow and Christian's arguments. 304 Cumberland, Lancashire and Dublin magistrates that met the Quakers during their repeated exiles were all critical of the lack of legal proceedings in the island, although some were concerned with the financial burden they might bring to their jurisdiction and in one case the possible unrest they might instigate. 305 However, Lancashire Magistrates, Richardson and Kirby, show some measure of moral outrage when they decried that the Quakers, 'have been turned out as vagabonds to the wide world to the scandal of the laws and his majesty.306 Official sympathy may also be illustrated by the in-action of Thomas Ascough, Captain of the Ramsey Town garrison. Though he was the Captain who prised four of William Callow's children from their mother's arms to facilitate her transportation to England in May 1668, it seems more can be revealed by examining three letters leading up to this event. These letters order Ascough that if Rich Coord [Coward] alias Slash and his exiled Quaker wife Alice landed at Ramsey he was to escort them to Castle Rushen. In the letter from Vicar Thomas Allen he is informed that, 'the Bishop [Barrow] has promised to see you aforesaid, hoping you will not fayle [fail]."' Vicar-General Norris orders him, 'to ensure [a] fee for escorting the Quakers, if not to secure it himself.' He is told he, 'will answer the contrary at your per[i]307.' Although this latter quote appears to be an oft-used communique on ecclesiastic orders, we can see that Ascough was repeatedly ordered, offered inducement and threatened in order that he carried out his duties, implying some reluctance on his part. In fact, he was again reprimanded for failing to punish Quakers who lived and taught in the town in 1670.308 His views may have been grounded in the fact that, despite repeated purges of officers with radical sympathies, the army retained those who had been at the vanguard of democratic reform in the 1640s, when it accommodated a diverse range of opinion, practising free discussion of religious and political issues. This was partly due to the high number of Anabaptists and Levellers in its ranks and later those officers and 'rank and file' who turned Quaker, notably amongst the garrisons stationed in Ireland.309 Agitators, the elected spokesman of the Levellers, also remained in the ranks, with some having risen to commissioned posts by the end of the 1650s.310 Even in the Isle of Man, there were non-conformists in the garrisons of the 1660s.311 Furthermore, as most soldiers were of a similarly poor background to the Quakers they may have shared some of their frustrations.'312 The fact that many within the Manx garrisons pursued other livings in parallel to soldiering during the 1640s and 50s implies they were poorly and this probably remained the case.313 Ascough's separation of mother and children might also have derived from the judgment that it was undesirable to allow five young children to accompany their parent with only basic supplies with daily survival at a time when many ships were lost on the Manx Coast. Sympathy arising from this kind of humane response can be seen when the soldiers of Castle Rushen represented to Governor Heywood the weakness of the pregnant Quaker, Ellinor Stockdale's condition, so that he interposed his authority and overruled the Ecclesiastics to effect her release.314 This may also imply an increasing distinction between dogmatic ecclesiastical law and more pragmatic secular authority. However, a latter-day Manx Bishop, Thomas Wilson, who was inaugurated in 1698, likewise showed leniency towards Quakers. According to one of his biographers, 'the few Quakers who resided on the island visited, loved, and respected him.' 315 Wilson personally baptised Kath Toren, who had been brought up by Baptists in 1717, as well as William Callow of the Ballafayle Quaker family in 1716. 316 Moreover, 'dissenters too attended even the Communion Service as he [Wilson] had allowed them a liberty to sit or stand, which, however they did not make use, but behaved like those of the established church.' 317 Certainly, an atmosphere of inclusiveness reminded dissenters of the Church's pivotal role in parochial life. Where strictures failed, toleration made it easier for Quakers to conform, whom otherwise refused, having become stubborn and emotionally callused by imprisonment and censure. In regards to his approach, it may also be significant that Wilson was born in the early 1660s and so did not have his views polarised against non-conformists by Civil War. Perhaps he was also influenced by his time studying at Trinity College, Dublin between 1681 and 1686 .318 At this time, Dublin had a large Quaker community of over 200 families, among them many prominent merchants .319 It is conceivable that Wilson may therefore have been familiar with Quakers and their doctrines of non-conformity in everyday practice. This may have allayed fears that society would fragment under the radical implications of religious dissent, which was supported by the relative continuity of Church and State in the forty or so years since the movement's birth. Since the 1670s, though Quakers' fortunes had fluctuated, the political landscape in England had also changed in their favour. The necessity of domestic harmony inclined the King towards a Declaration of Indulgence in 1671. This suspension of penal laws against non-conformists, albeit that it was rescinded 12 months later, may have indicated to the Manx authorities the future lay of English politics. Certainly, there was no punishment of Manx Quakers between 1671 and 1676 with governmental disapproval limited to threats of transportation. 320 This was partly due to the death of Charles, Earl of Derby in 1672 and the absence of Bishop Barrow, who was translated to the see of St. Asaph in 1669, continuing to hold the see of Sodor and Man in absentia until 1671. Henry Bridgman, the subsequent Bishop, only visited the island twice during his nine-year tenure and his successor, John Lake, only once. Therefore, until 1698, there was not the strength and consistency of executive leadership, as there had been under Barrow, that enabled forceful implementation of concerted censures, had they been so predisposed.321 The importance of executive pressure can be seen in Bishop Barrow's letter to Captain Aiscough, in which he says, '...I cannot see my Lord Derby till I have obeyed his commands. '322 Thus, although Barrow effectively orders him to carry out his duties, he appeals to him as fellow subordinate under the Lord and therefore equally subject to orders. Under Barrow's tenure, Vicar-General Harrison was also concerned to be seen as conscientious by his Bishop. He told Reverend Fox to ensure John Quaile and family went to church or were imprisoned, '...according to the Lord Bishop's positive direction for I will not lye under the blame any longer - keep this on record.' 333 Nevertheless, Manx authorities too illustrated reforming tendencies. A document dated 1673, apparently written by Members of the House of Keys, the Manx parliament, shows a proposed list of reforms. These include the provision that the custom of imprisoning Excommunicated persons and confiscating goods by the Spiritual Court was to be altered to a fine of £3 and 3 months imprisonment .324 English authorities went farther with a general pardon of dissenters in 1686, whereby 1200 Quakers were freed from prison. In 1687, the Declaration of Indulgence suspended penal laws and the Test Acts gave toleration a legal basis, dispensing with the required oaths of supremacy, followed in 1689 by the Toleration Act, which gave limited freedom of worship. Though it did not confer civil equality, it gave Protestant dissenters exception from the act of 1593, Conventicle Act of 1670, Act of Uniformity and Five Mile Act .325 King James ordered the Bishops to circulate the proclamation of clemency through their dioceses and in every parish. When seven Bishops refused, one was imprisoned in the Tower and stood trial for sedition. However, in declaring their opposition, the Bishops had had prior consultation with Dissenting Ministers in London, who were likewise distrustful of the King's motives, who they believed, wished to alleviate the position of Catholic recusants as a prelude to their resurgence. Archbishop Sanscroft further declared that their opposition to this measure did not come from any want of tenderness towards Protestant Dissenters and so ordered that Bishops were to visit dissenters houses and receive them kindly at their own. 326 Vicar- General John Harrison, like Wilson, was aware of this emerging milieu when he wrote on the back of a Presentment that ordered the imprisonment of two Manx Quakers: 'I doe not consent y[e]t to the order touching ye [the] Quakers to be put into execution unless ye Worsh[ipful] Governor & my Lord Bishop approve it.' 327 However, because of the circumscribed nature of these English acts and presumably the ambiguous legal status of Man in the early 1680s, John Scanfield, an English Quaker, asked Countess Derby to promise he would not be penalised for his faith, as long as her lived peacably under the government. Despite Scanfields doubts, it appears there were no significant measures against Manx Quakers after 1685. 329 Indeed, Scanfield must have received positive assurances, as his family appear to have settled on the island. This reality was confirmed in 1735 when the reforms suggested by the House of Keys in 1673 finally came into legal force. Significantly, imprisonment of dissenters could only take place after successful application to the Governor and the House of Keys, whose authority was increasingly distinct and superior to that of the Church. 330 Even these diluted provisos were never used against dissenters, despite the contrary after-thought that this did not negate previous ecclesiastical or customary statutes. Manx Quakers had at last some measure of legal protection, which, critically, coincided with the political will to use them.
Baly, Ann nee Callow (alive 1661)
Callow, Ann (alive 1745)
Callow, Ann nee Christian (d.1708)
Callow, Bessy nee Christian (d.1716)
Callow, Daniel (d.1678)
Callow, Daniel (alive 1689)
Callow, Ellinor nee Stockdale (d.1725)
Callow, Isabel (d.1684, Dublin)
Callow, Isabel (alive 1689)
Callow, Jane (alive 1678)
Callow, Joney (d.1743)
Callow, John (d.1689)
Callow, John (alive 1689)
Callow, Mary (d.1731)
Callow, Mary (alive 1668)
Callow, Robert (alive 1689)
Callow, Robert (d.1689)
Callow, Robert (d.1755)
Callow, Robert (d.1731)
Callow, William (d.1676)
Callow, William (b. circa 1690)
Callow, William (d.1742)
Cannell, Richard (alive 1676)
Cannell, Mrs (alive 1668)
Casement, Edmund (d.1706)
Casement, William (alive 1681)
Christian, Alice nee Coard nee Chisnell (d.1683)
Christian, Ann nee Christian (d.1685)
Christian, Ewan (d.1681)
Christian, Isabel (alive 1663)
Christian, James (d.1681)
Christian, Jane (d.1668?)
Christian, Jane (d.1694?)
Christian, John (d.1663)
Christian, John (alive 1666)
Christian, John (alive 1745)
Christian, Mally (alive 1682)
Christian, Margaret nee Callow (alive 1664)
Christian, Margery (d.1699?)
Christian, Margery nee Callow (d.1744, Lezayre)
Christian, Rachel (b. circa 1675)
Christian, Thomas (d.1684)
Colleash, James, (d.1685)
Colleash, William (d.1743)
Coonilt, Alice nee Christian (d.1680)
Coonilt, Robert (d.1705)
Coonilt, Thomas (d.1664)
Corteen, Margaret (d.1698)
Cotteam, Jane nee Cannell (d.1668)
Cotteam, John (d.1694)
Cowle, Ann nee Cotteam (d.1708)
Crosier, Margaret nee Callow (d.1729)
Cottier, Ann (d.1672) (? possible confusion with Ann Cottiam)
Crow, Ann (alive 1659)
Crow, William (d.1707?)
Curphey, Ellin (d.1663)
Fletcher, Robert & wife (alive 1681)
Freer, Thomas (d.1682)
Graves, Abigail nee Callow (d.1765)
Kerruish, Ewan & wife
Kneale, Patrick (d.1720?)
Mcleyreah, William (alive 1664)
Nicholson, Thomas (d.1662)
Ottiwell, Kath nee Coard (alive 1683)
Quarke, John (alive 1664)
Quayle, John & family (d.1680s?)
Rayley, Ann (alive 1659)
Richard Cunnard's niece (alive 1670)
Stoddart, Mary nee Christian (d.1707, Dublin)
Thwing, Mr (alive 1668)
Ecclesiastical records are sometimes ambiguous as regards the religious denomination of an individual. Therefore, I have included the following as possible details of Manx Quakers. In 1676, Robert Callow, a weaver, Jony Corlett nee Cowle and Margaret Corkill nee Cowle, all of Maughold, were presented and imprisoned, '...for not receiving the blessed Sacrament of the Lords Su[pper]..' Being summoned to the Court, '...some ...disobeyed and those who appeared seemed rather to despise that holy ordinance...."331 There were nine persons named in this Presentment, but it is these three, along with known Quakers, John Quayle and family who did not appear to answer the charges. In circa 1705, John Callow and Jony Kerruish, John Costeen and Jony Kerruish, Katherine Christian and William Quay were presented, '...for cohabiting as persons in holy wedlock since Trinity Munday last past w[hi]ch said p[er]sons has not been marryed by me; nor to my knowled[ge] by any other Minister in Church or Chappell, by Lycence or Banns published... ' 332 One could assume that this was an example of several couples, who had decided to live together at different times being presented at once. However, it seems poignant that the Vicar had a very specific date from which all three couples had been living together. If they believed themselves married, this may imply some joint marital proclamation and as this was not performed by any Minister or at a Church, a dissenting practice. To support this idea, it is of note that Jony Cotteam was the daughter of John Cotteam, a Quaker.
However, another possibility is that these 'marriages,' as well that of Thomas Curghey and Mary Kneale who were 'unlawfully married' but subsequently legally married then separated in 1665,333 were a relic of the pagan custom of handfasting. This involved, '...pledging by word and hand - by which an unmarried man and woman made a trial-contract to live together for a year, after they might separate at the option of either party, or recognise the union by formal marriage.334 Though not acceptable in the ecclesiastic courts, it was permissible in statute law, which stated that if a maid became pregnant, as long as she married the father within a year or two, the child was considered the legitimate heir. 335 Their decision to cohabit was nevertheless unusual at a time when it was in the communities interest to ensure that marriage was kept within the domain of the Church, which otherwise could result in a burden for the parish due to illegitimacy or future controversy surrounding land transfers. 336 It was therefore highly probable that one would expect Presentment and possible imprisonment for disregarding these practices. Furthermore, it seems odd there is no record of any of their subsequent legitimate marriages.
1 So called because they made men tremble at the word of God. They were also known as The Children of Light, People of God, Friends of the Truth or just Friends.
2 Reay 1985, 8.
3 Braithwaite 1919, 17, Gregg 1961, 34 & Davies 2000, 16.
4 watts 1978, pp.187-193.
5 Watts 1978, ibid. & Davies 2000, 16.
6 watts 1978, 204.
7 Hill 1996, 186.
8 Hubbard 1974, pp.22-33 & Hill 1993, pp.35-36 9 Hill 1976, pp.32-33
10 Besse 1753, 279.
11 Besse 1753, 274.
12 Reay 1984, 13 & Davies 2000, 16.
13 Vipont 1954, 80.
14 Brittain 1950, pp.228-229 & watts 1978, pp.224-227
15 Coward 1983, 101 &Dickinson 1997, 18.
16 Blundell 1659, (Manx Society, vol. 1), 55 Bird 1995, 17 & Dickinson 1997, pp.347-355.
17 Besse 1753, 270.
18 Libri Scaccard, 1659
19 This crude estimate has been based on the average number of burials between 1656-1665, on the suggested basis that one burial equals thirty-two times this number of persons alive in the seventeenth century. The total number of these burials can also be compared to the burial rates between 1722-1731, i.e. an estimate of the population for the year 1726, when a `census' of the population was taken to see if this ratio is broadly relevant to the Isle of Man. As only six parishes cover this earlier period out of total seventeen and three of these contain towns, which therefore will not having typical burial rates on which to base mean figures for other parishes, a more specific, reliable figure can not be deducted. If a proportional method is adopted i.e. these parishes constituted approximately 41% of the population in 1726, a percentage which can then applied to the figures from 1660, this gives us a figure at the lower end of this scale. But, as there is no data on which to base adjustments for the fact that far fewer people lived in the towns seventy years previously, no dependable total can be assumed. That the population figure was a low one may be indicated by the difficulty of finding tenants for the farms at this time. Moore 1900, 875 & 887 & Dickinson 1997, 10.
20 Manning 1976, 38.
21 Davies 1999, 565.
22 Dickinson 1997, pp. 25-26.
23 Blundell 1659 (Manx Society,
24 Moore 1901, 60.
25 Craine 1955, 97.
vol. I), 55 & Dickinson 1997, pp.347-355
26 Reay 1984, 11, pp.26-27 & Davies 2000, 156.
27 Swarthmore MSS, vol. 1253 & vol. 111552
28 We know this because in 1656 two Manx Quakers, possibly Peter Cosnock and son, visited George Fox during his imprisonment in Launcenton Gaol. Fox said of them that they, `...used to speake in the high places in ye [the] steeple houses in ye Isle of Man before ye were convinced.' Swarthmore MSS nol. IV 208, nol. 1253 & 1'ol. 111 552.
29 Quarter Sessions Order Book Easter, 1661 (QSO 2/34)
30 Besse 1753, 269 & Swarthmore MSS Vol. 1141.
31 Swarthmore MSS vol. 1306, 369 & vol. 111132.
32 Besse 1752, 269.
33 Robert Coonilt had another child baptised in 1664, the year in which he conformed.
34 There were also a few Quakers in Lezayre, Malew and perhaps Kirk Michael. Those in Malew were the Coard Family, Isable Kissage, John Balifeses wife, Peter Cosnock & son, the wife of John Lace, Thomas Bridsons wife, Thomas Norriss (a soldiers) wife, Will Fauts wife, William & John Preston (soldiers) & William Chisnell & wife. Malew Parish Register, 1657, 1667 & Presentments, 1665-1670, Malew.
35 Friends Hist. Lib., Swarthmore, pa., BX7615, 7676
36 valvin 1997,13 & pp.22-26.
37 Swarthmore MSS vol. 144 & 48.
38 Besse 1753, pp.273-275 & Swarthmore MSS vol. 1115 & 117.
39 Lancaster Sessions 1661, 1662 & 1663
40A List of the Appointments of High Sheriffs and Justices of Cumberland, Q
41 Besse 1753, 269.
42 Malew Parish Register, 1662.
43 Manx Society, vol. XXVI, pp.35-40.
44 Manx Society, vol. XXVI, p.8.
45 William and Edward Christian arrested Governor Chaloner
with the assistance of John Hawthorne, who was
Deputy Governor and possibly a non-conformist. Interestingly, several Quakers are mentioned in his will. John
Hawthorne, Episcopal, 1660, Malew, Parish Register, 1664 & Caine 1936, pp.29-30.
46 Manx Society, vol. XXVI, pp. 107-110.
47 Besse 1753, 274, 276, 278, 280 & 281
48 Lib. Scac, 1658 & 1659.
49 Besse 1753, 270.
50Besse 1753, 270.
51 Moore 1900, 279.
52 Presentments, 1664, Maughold.
53 Besse 1753, 271.
54 Besse ibid.
55 Presentments, 1664, Maughold.
56 Besse 1753, 271 & Swarthmore MSS vol. III 117.
57Besse, 1753, 270, Swarthmore MSS vol. III 115 & Calendar of State Papers, SPD CCXXXVII. 138 Cal. 1667-'68 p.318
58 Besse 1753, 271.
59 Swarthmore MSS vol. 1H 115.
60 Besse 1753, pp.271-273, Callow Family Bible & C.S.P., SPD CCXXXVII. 138 Cal. 1667-8 p.318
61 Calendar of State Papers, SPD CCXXXVII. 138 Cal. 1667-8
p.318, Presentments, 1668, Maughold & Besse
62 Besse 1753, 281.
63 Presentments, 1668, Maughold
64 C.S.P., SPD CCXXXVII. 138 Cal. 1667-8 p.318
65 Besse 1753, 281.
66 Besse, Ibid
67 Besse 1753, 282.
68 Calendar of State Papers, SPD CCXXXV11. 138 Cal. 1667-8 p.318.
69 C.S.P. ibid. & Callow Family Bible
70Besse 1753, 282.
71 C.S.P., SPD CCXXXVII. 138 Cal. 1667-8 p.318.
72 Besse 1753, 287.
73 Besse ibid.
74 Besse 1753, 287.
75 Besse 1753, pp.286-287 & Presentments, 1683/4, Maughold.
76 Besse 1753, 287.
78 Besse 1753, 288.
79 Water Bailiff's Accounts, 1660-71.
80 Presentments, 1668, Maughold & Besse 1753, 273.
81 Dickinson 1997, 234.
82 Hughes 1991, pp. 126-127 & valvin 1997, 9.
83 Reay 1985, 126.
85 Moore 1900, pp.365-366.
86 Presentments, 1668, Maughold.
87 Presentments, 1665 & 1668, Maughold, Loose Papers, Roll Office & Moore 1900, pp.463-466.
88 Presentments, 1641, Maughold.
89Besse 1753, 273.
90 Davies 2000, 31.
91 Davies 2000, pp.38-41.
92 Broderick 1999, 13.
93 Broderick 1999, 76.
94 Chaloner 1656, 10.
95 Blundell 1659 (Manx Society, vol. 1), 61.
96 Chaloner 1656, 15.
97 Lib. Scac, 1658.
98 Craine 1943, pp.540-554.
99 Moore 1900, 364 &Bird 1995, 10.
100 Kissack 1983, pp.239-249.
101 Besse 1753, 274.
102 Besse 1753, 274.
103 Blundell 1659 (Manx Society, vol. R), 166
104 Hill 1976, pp.44-46 & Manning 1992, pp.147-200.
105 Visitation, 1665, Maughold.
106 Presentments, 1668, Maughold.
107 Presentments, 1665, non-specific.
108 Besse 1753, 269.
109 Robinson 1990, 135.
110 Robinson ibid.
111 Blundell 1659 (Manx Society, vol.
112 Blundell ibid & Chaloner 1656, 6.
113 Lib. Scac, 1649
114 Lib. Scac, 1649.
115 Lib. Scac, ibid.
116 Hill 1976, pp.466-467, Manning 1992, 79 & Dickinson 1997, 98.
117 Moore 1900, 235.
118 Calendar of State Papers, SPD CCXXXVH. 138 Cal. 1667-8 p.318.
119 Manx Society, vo1..XXVI, p.6
120 Manx Society, vol. XXVI, pp.13-14.
121 Caine 1936, pp.33-34 & Freke 1990, 122.
122 Moore, 1900, pp.307-308, pp.335-337, Robinson 1990,136 & Roscow
123 Lib. Scac, 1648 & 1650.
124 Ramsey had a fort, built in the 1640s, but it appeared to be rather small, consisting of a few mounted guns. Radcliffe, 1986, 95.
125 Lib. Scac., 1670.
126 Radcliffe 1986, 86.
127 Radcliffe 1979, pp.92-93.
128 Radcliffe 1986, 86.
129 Radcliffe 1986, 87.
130 Radcliffe ibid.
131 Besse 1752, 269.
132 Presentments, 1669, Maughold.
133 Journal of William Dixon (1725).
134 William Callow b.1629, Maughold - d.1676, Maughold. One of the four children of Robert Callow (d.1676) and Elizabeth nee Fletcher (d.1661). In 1653, William married Ann Christian of Lewaigue by whom he had five daughters and three sons. His brother, Robert, was to marry Ann's sister, Bessy Christian. From 1657 he was repeatedly fined and suffered imprisonment numerous times and between 1665 and 1671 was exiled from the island. In 1661, he inherited Ballafayle, the ancestral farm of the Callow's. In 1676, he was buried in a plot away from the Church, in which his wife and his children were later to be buried. Up to eight Quakers may have been buried there: William Callow d.1676; Ann Callow nee Christian d.1705; Margaret Crosier nee Callow d.1729; Robert Callow d.1731; Mary Callow d.1731; William Callow d.1742; Jony Callow d.1743; and Margaret Christian alias Callow d.1744.
135 Manorial Role, 1650-1703, Maughold.
136 The following wills were declared in Maughold: John Christian 1663 & 4, Archdiaconal, Jane Cotteam alias Cannel 1668, Archdiaconal, Ann Christian nee Christian 1674, Archdiaconal, William Callow 1676, 2nd, Episcopal, Alice Coonilt 1680, Archdiaconal, Ewan Christian 1681, Archdiaconal, Alice Christian nee Coward nee Chisnell 1684, Episcopal, James Quillease 1684/5, Archdiaconal, Robert Callow, 1689, Episcopal, Ann Callow 1708, 35, Archdiaconal.
137 As the Maughold Parish Register only began in 1647 the births of the majority of Quakers are not recorded. However, from the Callow Family Bible, Dublin Birth registers, the Calendar of State papers and the official Christian Family Tree one has the birth of five Quakers: William Callow b.1629; Ann Callow nee Christian b.1633; John Christian b.1583; Ann Christian nee Christian b.1587; Mary Christian b.1637. The two births in the 16th century are anomalous. An examination of the wills of Quakers, their years of marriage and when they had children and the year in which they inherited land all indicate that the first Manx Quakers were almost exclusively born in the 1620s and 30s. Thus, as Quakerism came to Maughold around 1655, the age of converts ranges from 16 and 35, with the principal Quakers in their mid-twenties.
138 Besse 1753, 280.
139 Ewan Christian, Archdiaconal, 1681, Maughold.
140 Blunden 1659 (Manx Society 1) 67 & Crompton 1954 pp484498 , vol.,,.-.
141 Calendar of State Papers, SPD CCXXXVH. Cal. 1667-8 114 & 318 & Swarthmore MSS vol. 1 115 & 117
142 John Christian b.1583, Lezayre - d.1663, Maughold. Son of Deemster Robert Christian and Jony Christian nee Standish, descendant of the Ellenbane and Ormskirk Standishs. The Christian Family was one of only a few Manx Families to have a crest and motto. They held a large estate in Lezayre, known as Milntown and substantial tracts in Malew and Maughold. The position of Deemster appeared to been practically hereditary, for John's father, great grandfather and great, great grandfather all held the office. Other relatives and ancestors were members of the Manx Parliament, the House of Keys and also held positions such as Governor, Deputy-Governor, Receiver- General and that of Sergeant-Major of the insular forces in the 1640s and 50s. James, Seventh Earl of Derby observed their pervasive influence and fine property in the 1640s and so courted their favour accordingly. Christian of Miltown and Maughold Family Pedigrees & Stanley 1651, pp.49-50.
143 Reay 1984, 13.
144 Hill 1976, 29.
145 For example, Ann Baly nee Callow, Mary Stoddart nee Christian, Abigail Greaves nee Callow, Margaret Crosier nee Callow and Edward Callow.
146 Lib. Scac, 1664
147 Hill 1996, 185.
148 Besse 1753, 277.
149 Presentments, 1666, Maughold.
150 Presentments, 1664 & 1680, Maughold.
151 Burnet 1952, pp. 102-106.
152 Malew Parish Register, 1659.
153 Presentments, 1662, Maughold.
154 Presentments, 1667, Maughold.
155 Malew Parish Register, 1731.
156 Besse 1753, 269.
157 Besse 1753, 271.
158 Besse 1753, 284.
159 Besse 1753, 272, 287
160 Besse 1753, pp.271-272.
161 Besse 1753, 278.
162 Besse 1753, 272.
163 Besse 1753, 273.
164 Besse 1753, 285.
165 Besse 1753, 287.
166 Capp 1972, pp. 18-19
167 watts 1978, 196.
168 Burnet 1952, 19.
169 Besse 1753, 269.
170 Visitation, 1665, Maughold.
171 Radcliffe 1979, pp.93-94.
172 Burnet 1952, pp.25-26.
173 Swarthmore MSS vol. III 115.
174 Besse 1753, 275.
175 Besse 1753, 274.
176 Burnet 1952, 190.
177 Waldron 1731, 60 & Davies 2000, pp.36-40
178 This entailed standing in front of a meeting, holding hands
and promising to be loving and faithful to each other
until death. 5218C (1683) & Davies 2000, 95.
179 Presentments, 1683, Maughold.
180 Barbour 1964, pp.76-80 & Reay 1984, pp.9-11.
181 watts 1978, 196.
182 Swarthmore MSS vol. III 115.
183 Journal of William Dixon, 1725, p.6.
184 Presentments, 1668, Maughold.
185 Swarthmore MSS vol. III 117.
186 Maughold Parish Register, 1676.
187 Lib. Scac., 1664
188 Dickinson 1997, pp.110-126.
189 Swarthmore MSS vol. 111117.
190 During their exile, Callow and the other Quakers probably resided near the centre of Quaker activities in Swathmoor Hall. This may be assumed from the warm letters to and from its residents - the Fells, in which they send regards to Cumberland Quakers such as John Stubbs, Robert Salthouse, and Reginald Walker. Moreover, Callow's daughter, Mary, was born in nearby Lorton in the late 1660s. However, Manx Quakerism's longest standing association was with those from the Pardshaw Meetings in Cumberland. In 1681, Ewan Christian of Ramsey, entrusted the welfare of his daughter and a sizeable conditional bequest to the meeting of his Cumbrian Friends, Jon Tiffin, Rich Head, Christopher Wilson and Jon Banks. In 1725, William Dixon, John Burnyeat and Daniel Conan, also from this Quaker community, visited the island and held meetings at Robert Callow's farm, Ballafayle, as well as Ramsey. Between 1667-'68 Ewan Christian, Alice Cord and William Callow were in London where they wrote two petitions to the King for relief. For some of this time, Callow lived at Robert Bridge's House in Hozier Lane in the ward of Farrington Without and the Parish of St. Sepulchre. Quaker meetings were generally quiet in London, (although not free from verbal harassment), in the wake of the decimation and exodus following the Great Fire of 1666. Besse 1753, 408 & Swarthmore MSS nol. 1103, 104, 105 & 128, nol. 111117, Presentment, 1680, Maughold, Ewan Christian, Archdiaconal, 1681, Maughold & Journal of William Dixon (1725), 6.
191 Capp 1972, 125, Watts 1978, 199, pp.232-234 & 336.
192 Watts 1978, 199 & pp. 244-247.
193 Presentments, 1658 & 1659, Maughold & Craine 1955, pp. 131-132.
194 Lib. Scac, 1667
195 Calendar of State Papers, SPD CCXXXVII. 138 Cal. 1667-'8 p.318
196 Dickinson 1997, pp. 19-20.
197 Derby Papers, Correspondence 1660-1681, 1673, Moore 1900, pp.884-997 & Dickinson 1997, pp.56-59.
198 Lib. Scac., 1664.
199 Stanley 1651, pp.25-39 & Moore 1900, pp.236-251.
200 Blundell 1659 (Manx Society, vol. 1), pp.45-46, (Manx Society, vol. R), 167 & Gel] 1883, 94.
201 Davies, 1999, pp.571-579.
202 Davies 1999, 575.
203 Davies 1999, 604.
204 Mullan 2000, pp.55-63.
205 Hill 1996, pp.180-183 & Mullan 2000, pp.72-73.
206 Hill 1996, 182 & Mullan 2000, pp.72-73 & pp.91-92.
207 Mullan 2000, pp. 112-114 & pp.228-231.
208 Mullan 2000, pp.92-98.
209 Moore 1900, 256.
210 Hill 1976, 1
211 valvin 1997, pp. 13-30
212 Blundell 1659 (Manx Society, vol. H), 166.
213 Hill 1976,7.
214 Moore 1900, 360.
215 Moore 1900, pp.475-476 & Stenning 1945, 290.
216 Waldron 1731, 18 & Kelly 1996, 165.
217 Kelly 1996, 165.
218 Davies 1999, 611.
219 Davies 1999, 73.
220 watts 1978, pp.258-260, Manning 1976, pp. 186-207 & Davies 1999, pp.578-579.
221 Chadwick 1964, 227.
222 Dickens, 1964, 227 & Davies 1999, pp.563-565
223 Reay 1984 13 & Davies 1999, pp.563-565
224 Craine 1955, 108.
225 Dickens 1964, 227.
226 Craine 1955, 109.
227 Blundell 1659 (Manx Society, vol. I), 59
228 Craine 1955, pp.14-17.
229 Davies 1999, 590.
230 For example, Methodism's 'love feasts' - the spontaneous declarations of faith and testimonies, reminds us of the divinely inspired exclamations of religious passion in Quaker meetings. There was also the practice of itinerant preaching in more informal surroundings, which emphasised the lay nature of the movements. Both brought comfort and release from the legal religious system - the celebration of outward ceremonies - rejecting
76 & Watts 1978, 407.
231 Davies 1963, pp.114-115 & Harrison 2000, 358.
232 Mullan 2000, 112.
233 Mullan 2000, pp.62-67.
234 Killip 1975, pp.69-70.
235 Chapman 1971, 4.
236 Lib. Scac, 1664
237 Moore 1900, pp.675-677 & Chapman 1971, pp.4-7 & Harrison 2000, 358.
238 Manx Sun, 250' April 1849, p.4.
239 The Diary of Isaac Fletcher (1759) pp.69-70 & 404, George Robinson 1763 (3), Episcopal, Maughold, William Robinson 1764 (2), Episcopal, Maughold, Maughold Parish Register, Burials 1764 & 1765, Manx Sun, 14th' September 1824, p.5; 28th' June 1831, p.5; 1' April 1834, p.4 & 80' February 1841, p.5.
240 Vipont 1954, 122.
241 Walvin 1997, 25 & Davies 2000, pp.48-49.
242 One of the witnesses for the marriage was another grandchild of William Callow, Abigail Greaves nee Callow. Disownments, Circa 1701, MM 11 M2, location 7D, f.212-213, Box 75A & B shelf 32C-120, MM 11 A5.
243 Burnet 1952, 190.
244 Davies 2000, 95.
245 Roscow 1991, 6.
246 Roscow 1991, 52.
247 Davies 2000 pp.20-25.
248 Moore 1900, pp.316-319 & Dickinson 1997, 76.
249 Dickinson 1997, 131.
250 Hill 1996, 30.
251 Lib. Scac, 1664.
252 Dickinson 1997, 81.
253 Dickinson 1997, 76.
254 Blundell 1659, (Manx Society, vol. 1), 67.
255 Dickinson 1997, 130 & Davies 1999, 587.
256 Hill 1996, 304.
257 Manks Mercury, 15'x' October 1793, p.3, Rising Sun, 7"' September 1824, p.3, Manx Sun, 150' July 1834, p.4, 300' April 1841, p.4, 170' May 1842, p.5, 2nd March 1844, p.4, 200' November 1847, p.4 & Mona's Herald, 248' November 1847, p.3.
258 Gill 1883, 158 & Hill 1996, 60.
259 Blundell 1659, (Manx Society vol. 1), 67 & Crompton 1954, pp.484-498.
260 Craine 1955, 117 & Bird 1991, pp.8-10.
261 Swarthmore MSS vol. H1 117.
262 Kissack 1983, pp.243-247.
263 Burnet 1952, 17.
264 Hill 1976, 9.
265 Swarthmore MSS vol. HI 117
266 Presentments, 1668, Maughold.
267 Presentments, ibid.
268 Mullan 2000, pp.87-88.
269 Bird 1995, 9.
270 Gregg 1961, 342.
271 Presentments, 1667, Maughold.
272 Presentments, ibid.
273 Moore 1900, pp.365-366.
274 Radcliffe 1979, pp.122-123.
275 Lib. Scac, 1670
276 Presentments, 1681, Maughold.
277 Hill 1993, 4, 155.
278 Presentments, 1663, Maughold.
279 Bird 1995, 10.
280 Besse 1753, pp.273-275.
281 Presentments, 1667, Maughold.
282 Platten 1999, 74.
283 Radcliffe 1975, 75.
284 Platten 1999, pp.74-76.
285 Hodgkin 1908, 457 & Coward 1983, pp. 178-179.
286 Manning 1976, pp. 186-207.
287 Burnet 1952, 132.
288 Manning 1976, 44.
289 Manning ibid.
290 Manning 1976, pp. 186-207.
291 Besse 1753, 275.
292 Hill 1996, 218.
293 Davies 1999, 585
294 Besse 1753, 279.
295 Coward 1983, pp.67-70.
296 Aylmer 1963, 95.
297 Roots 1966, 204 & Vipont 1954, 79.
298 Roots 1966, pp.204-206, Aylmer 1986, 177 & Hill 1993, 35
299 Hill 1996, 218.
300 Notably, John Lilburne, publicly professed his Quaker beliefs shortly before his death. 1976, 9, 15 & 32-33 & Aylmer 1986, 161.
301 Aylmer 1986, 195.
302 Hill 2996, pp. 188-189.
303 Reay 1984, 39.
304 Besse 1753, 278.
305 Besse 1753, 272, 273, 282, pp.283-284, 285, pp.287-288.
Gregg 1961, 343, Hill
306 Besse 1753, 285.
307 Presentments, 1668, Maughold.
308 Presentments, 1670 & 1681, Maughold.
309 Hill 1976, 35, 166 & 638.
310 Aylmer 1986, 193.
311 E.g. John Preston, William Chisnell and John Hawthorne.
312 Moore 1900, 256.
313 Dickinson 1997, 131.
314 Besse 1753, 288.
315 Crutwell 1784, 204.
316 Maughold Parish Register, 1716 & 1717.
317 Crutwell 1784, 204.
318 Gelling 1998, 1.
319 Braithwaite 1912, pp.219-222
320 Swarthmore MSS vol. 1 128
321 Dickinson 1997, 345.
322 Presentments 1668, Maughold.
323 Presentments, ibid.
324 Derby Papers, Correspondence 1660-1681, 1673
325 Roots 1966, 179, watts 1978, pp.259-260 & Milligan & Thomas 1983, 3-5
326 watts 1978, 259.
327 Presentments, 1683, Maughold.
328 Derby Manuscripts 1719/7, 1719/20, 1719/21a, 1719/24
329 Swarthmore MSS vol. III 552 & 665 & watts 1978, pp.253-257
330 Gell 1883, 222.
331 Presentments, 1676, Maughold.
332 Libri Causarum, 1705?, Maughold
333 Visitation, 1665, Maughold
334 Craine 1955, 140 & Hill 1996, 190.
335 Gill 1883, 68.
336 Hill 1996, 202.
Rawlinson Manuscripts A 139a - King James the Second's Proposed Repeal of Penal Laws & Test Acts in 1688: His questions to the magistrates of Cumberland, and their answers thereto.
Calendar of State Papers - Domestic, Charles 11, SPD ccxxv.265 Cal. 1667-8 p.114 Calendar of State Papers -Domestic, Charles II, SPD ccxxxvii. 138 Cal. 1667-8 p.318
Court Minutes, CQ1/1, 1660-1670.
A List of the Appointments of High Sheriffs and Justices, Quarter Sessions, Q.
Yearly Meetings & Epistles 1668 - 1741
Lancashire Sufferings, Seventeenth & Eighteenth century Yearly Meetings Epistles, c.1672 - 1770
Lancashire Quarterly Meetings Minute Book, 1669-1681 Lancashire Women's Quarterly Meetings Minutes, 1675 - 1681 Lancaster Monthly Meetings Minute Books, 1675 - 1681
Derby Papers DDK, Vol 6 Bundles 1451-2118 & Miscelanous Letters. Bundles 1683 to 1687 Quarterly Sessions Order Book, Easter 1661, 1662 & 1663, QSO 2/34, QSO 2/35 & 2/36
Dublin City and Quaker register of Baptism, Marriage and Burial, 1637 -1700
Disownments family lists (circa 1701), MM II M2 location 7D, f.212-213, Box 75A & B shelf 32C-120, MM II A5
Journal of William Dixon 10195 Temp MSS 972/1-2 Swarthmore Manuscripts Vol I, II, 111, IV Swarthmore, pa., BX7615, 7676
Archdiaconal Wills (on microfilm), RB516 - 584
Callow Family Bible, 5091A
Christian of Miltown and Maughold Family Pedigrees, MDL/37-1-11, MD20, MD10036
Derby Manuscripts, MD 401: 1719/7, 1719,20, 1719/21a, 1719/24
Episcopal Wills (on microfilm) 1650 -1750, EW6 - 37 & GL 699 - 716
Libri Causarum 1659-1713, MS 10194, Book 1
Libri Scaccarii (on microfilm) 1640 - 1720, RB443 - RB449a, RC7a - RC 11
Manorial Role (on microfilm) 1507 -1720, RN595 - RB602
Marriage Certificate of Robert Callow. Ballifaile, Maughold, and Ellinor Stockdale, Workington, Cumberland, 5218C (1683)
Newspapers (on microfilm) Manks Mercury, MN727, The Manx Sun, N51-N57 & The Mona's Herald, N80-N87
Parish Registers (on microfilm) Andreas PR1, Ballaugh PR3 & PR4, Braddan PR5, Jurby PR15, Malew PR19 & Maughold PR22 & PR23
Presentments (on microfilm) 1650 -1750, PRE 1- PRE 11
Water Bailiff's Accounts 1660 -1670, MS 10058
Blundell, W. (1659), A History of the Isle of Man, Manx Society, Vol. XXVII (in two volumes), pp.1-169.
Chaloner, J. (1656), A Short Treatise on the Isle of Man, Manx Society, Vol. X, pp. 1-57.
Corteen, T.C. & C.K. Radcliffe (1993) Maughold Burials: 1647 -1849, Private Publication.
Harrison W. (ed.) (1877), Illiam Dhone and the Manx Rebellion 1651, Manx Society Vol. XXVI, pp.1-112.
Stanley J. (1651), History and Antiquities of the Isle of Man, Manx Society, W. Mackenzie (ed.), Manx Society, Vol. III, pp.5-65.
Waldron, G. (1731), A Description of the Isle of Man, Manx Society, Vol. XI, pp. 1-77.
Winchester, A J L (ed.) (1985) The Diary of Isaac Fletcher of Underwood, Cumberland 1756 -1781, Cumberland & Westmoreland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society, Extra Series XXVII.
Aylmer, G.E. (1963) The Struggle for the Constitution, Chaucer Press.
Aylmer, G.E. (1986) Rebellion or Revolution? England 1640-1660, Oxford University Press.
Barbour, H. (1964) The Quakers In Puritan England, Yale University Press.
Besse, J. (1753) A Collection of the Sufferings of the People Called Quakers, For the testimony of a Good Conscience, From 1650-1689, London.
Bird, H. (1995) An Island the Led - The History of Manx Education (in two volumes), Manx Heritage Foundation.
Braithwaite, W. C. (1912) The First Period of Quakerism, Macmillan.
Braithwaite, W.C. (1919) The Second Period of Quakerism, Cambridge University Press.
Brittain V (1950) In the Steps of John John Bunyan - An Excursion into Puritan England, Rich & Cowan.
Broderick G. (1999) Language Death in the Isle of Man, Niemayer.
Burnet, G.B. (1952) The Story of Quakerism in Scotland 1650-1850, James Clarke & Co Ltd.
Caine, P.C. (1936) The Second Episode of Illiam Dhone, Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol IV No.2, pp. 136-145.
Caine, P.C. (1936) Illiam Dhone's Petition To the King In Council and It's Aftermath: Some New Light, Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol. 26, pp.576-601.
Capp, B. S. (1972) The Fifth Monarchy Men: A Study of Seventeenth Century English Millenarianism, Faber & Faber.
Chadwick, O. (1964) The Reformation, Penguin.
Chapman, E.V. (1971) The Story of Methodism in the Isle of Man-Interim Report, Manx Methodist Historical Society.
Coward, B. (1983) The Stanleys, Lord Stanleys And Earls of Derby: 1385-1672: The Rights, Wealth and Power of a Landowning Family, Chetham Society.
Craine D. (1943) The Bible in Manx, Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol. V No2, pp.540- 554.
Craine D. (1945) The Dungeon of St. Germans, Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol. V., No 1, pp. 161-188.
Craine D. (1945) Manx Clerical Life, Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol. IV, Nol, pp.368- 384.
Craine, D. (1955) Manannan's Isle: A Collection of Manx Historical Essays, Manx Museum and National Trust.
Crompton N.V. (1954) Schools In Man, Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol. V, No V, pp.484-498.
Crutwell, C. (1784) The Life of Thomas Wilson, London.
Davies A. (2000) The Quakers in English Society, 1655-1725, Oxford University Press.
Davies, N, (1999) The Isles - A History, Macmillan.
Davies, R. (1963) Methodism, Epworth Press.
Dickens, A.G. (1964) The English Reformation, B. T. Batsford Ltd.
Dickinson, J.R. (1997) The Lordship of Man Under the Stanleys: Government and Economy in the Isle of Man, 1580-1704, Centre for Manx Studies.
Freke, D. (1990) History in The Isle of Man: Celebrating A Sense of Place, McCarroll, D. & V. Robinson (ed.), Liverpool University Press.
Gelling, J. (1998) A History of the Manx Church 1698 -1911, Manx Heritage Foundation.
Gill, J.F. (1883) The Statutes of the Isle of Man 1417-1824, Eyre & Spottiswoode.
Gorman, G.H. (1969) Introducing Quakers, Quaker Home Service.
Gregg, P (1961) Freeborn John, George G Harrop.
Harrison, A. (2000) Religion in the Nineteenth Century in A New Manx History, Volume V The Modern Period 1830-1999, J Belchem (ed.), Liverpool University Press.
Hill, C, (1976) The Levellers and the English Revolution, H N Brailford (Ed), Spokesman.
Hill, C (1993) The English Bible and the Seventeenth Century Revolution, Penguin.
Hill, C. (1996) Liberty Against Law -Some Seventeenth Century Controversies, Penguin Press.
Hubbard, G (1974) Quaker By Convincement, Quaker Home Service.
Hughes, A. (1991) The Causes of the English Civil War, Macmillan.
Hodgkin, T.D.C.L. (1908) The Rhullick-ny-Quakeryn, Friends Quarterly Examiner, Vol. 42, pp.457-495.
Johnson, P. (1972) The Offshore Islanders - A History of the English People, Phoenix.
Kelly, B.H. (1960) Some Reflections on Church and State Relations in the time of Bishop Wilson, Isle of Man, Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol. VI, No.3, pp.324-351.
Kelly, I.M. (1996) "Strangers Coming Amongst Them": Jacobites, Farmers and Merchants in the Isle of Man, 1745 -1775, Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol. X, No3, pp.161-179.
Killip, M. (1975) The Folklore of the Isle of Man, B. T. Batsford Ltd.
Kissack, R. (1983) Presidential Address 1983 -1984, Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol. IX, pp.239-249.
Kissack, R. (1988) John Wesley and the Coming of Methodism in the Isle of Man, Isle of Man Methodist Historical Society.
Manning, B (1976) The English People & the English Revolution, Heinnemen.
Manning, B (1992) 1649: The Crisis of the English Revolution, Bookmarks.
Moore, A.W. (1894) Quakers in the Isle of Man, Yn Lioar Manninagh, Vol. I, No.2, pp.281-287.
Moore, A.W. (1900) A History of the Isle of Man (in two volumes), Fisher Unwin.
Moore, A.W. (1901) Manx Worthies, S.K. Broadbent & Co.
Mullan, D.G. (2000) Scottish Puritanism 1590 -1638, Oxford University Press.
Platten, J.A. (1999) Mid-Seventeenth Century Church Court Presentments in the Isle of Man: Social Control or Salvation for Sinners? (Unpublished MA Dissertation), The University of Liverpool.
Punshon, J. (1984) Portrait in Grey, Quaker Home Service.
Robinson, V. (1990) Social Demographics in The Isle of Man: Celebrating A Sense of Place, McCarroll, D. & V. Robinson (ed.), Liverpool University Press.
Radcliffe, C.K. (1974) The Maughold Quakers, Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol. VII, No.2, pp. 116-129.
Radcliffe, C.K. (1986) A History of Ramsey, Manx Museum And National Trust.
Radcliffe, J.W. & C.K. (1979) A History of Maughold, Manx Museum And National Trust.
Reay, B. (1985) The Quakers and the English Revolution, Temple Smith.
Roots, I (1966), The Great Rebellion 1642-1660, B T Batsford.
Roscow, J.R. (1991) Manx Marriage Contracts 1600-1736, Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol. X, No2, pp.3-16.
Roscow, J.R. (1991) The Development of Women's Rights in the Isle of Man up to 1777, Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol. X, No2, pp.41-54
Smith-Jabez, A.R. (1984) Anthony Pearson, An Early Cumbrian Quaker, Cumberland and Westmoreland Antiquarian Archaeological Society, Vol. LXXXXXV, pp.219-222.
Stenning, E.H. (1945) Manx Spiritual Laws, Isle of Man Natural History and Antiquarian Society, Vol. V., No. 1, pp.287-295.
Vipont, E. (1954) The Story of Quakerism 1652 -1952, Bannisdale Press. Walvin J. (1997) The Quakers: Money & Morals, John Murrey.
Watts, M (1978) The Dissenters -From the Reform to the French Revolution, Clarendon Press. Williams, W.R. (1962) The Rich Heritage of Quakerism, Barclay Press.