A Debate about the Genre and Authorship of an Eighteenth-Century Document

Abstract

A Debate about the Genre and Authorship of an Eighteenth-Century Document Julie L. Holcomb (bio) The Quaker and Special Collections at Haverford College holds in its collections a 44-page document whose genre and authorship have been the subject of debate in the pages of Quaker History. The Haverford catalog record ascribes to the document the title "Abner Woolman's Journal" and lists Abner Woolman as the creator and John Woolman as contributor. The document is described as: "Manuscript bound together made up of two smaller manuscripts loosely sewn together. Much of the document is in John Woolman's hand, and some is in his brother Abner's. The document is Abner Woolman's diary which John Woolman finished after Abner's death. It also has information about Woolman submitting work to the Committee for approval before publication in August 1772."1 In 1968, Quaker historian Henry J. Cadbury, having found the Woolman manuscript "among the boxes of loose papers preserved by Philadelphia Yearly Meeting pertaining to its Meeting for Sufferings," wrote about the discovery in the "Notes & Documents" section of Quaker History.2 Woolman biographers Thomas P. Slaughter and Geoffrey Plank reference the document in their respective books: The Beautiful Soul of John Woolman, Apostle of Abolition and John Woolman's Path to the Peaceable Kingdom: A Quaker in the British Empire.3 In 2010, James Proud, a retired lawyer and clergyman, included a full transcription of the Woolman [End Page 25] Click for larger view View full resolution Page 1 of "Abner Woolman's Journal," courtesy of the Quaker and Special Collections, Haverford College, Haverford, PA. Here and throughout this series of articles, image captions will use the title given to the document by the Haverford archivist. [End Page 26] document in his book, John Woolman and the Affairs of Truth.4 In 2018, Quaker History published the article "Abner Woolman's Colonial World: Quaker Politics and Literature Before the American Revolution," written by Daniel Gorman, Jr., who was at the time a Ph.D. candidate in history at the University of Rochester. In his article, Gorman noted how little attention Abner Woolman had received from scholars despite his relationship with his well-known brother John. Engaging with the work of Cadbury, Proud, Slaughter, and Plank, Gorman argues, alongside Slaughter and Plank, that "Abner Woolman's Journal" was authored by Abner. As such, Gorman notes, the journal "should be studied on its own merits." The journal, according to Gorman, revealed how "an ordinary Quaker from New Jersey, applied his interpretation of the divine to daily colonial life."5 In 2019, Quaker History published "Abner Woolman's Written 'Legacy' to His Children: A Reply to Daniel Gorman Jr.'s 'Abner Woolman's Colonial World,'" written by James Proud in response to Gorman's article. Proud identified two key points of disagreement between the two scholars: the literary category or genre of the document and its authorship. In his article, Proud reiterated the argument he first made in John Woolman and the Affairs of Truth that the document was "a private communication at death to Abner's children which John, as he says in his letter to the Meeting for Sufferings, 'collected the substance of sundry short chapters, part from a stitched book [of Abner's], and part from loose papers I found in such book,' and then applied, to an unknown extent, his editorial hand to Abner's material, thus fulfilling Abner's expressed intention or desire for the creation of a memorial gift or 'legacy' to his children."6 What are we to make of this debate between Gorman and Proud? Historian Sarah Maza describes historical debate "as the motor that drives research and interpretation." As she explains, "the ambition of every scholar, undergraduate to emeritus, is to enter the conversation by saying something new. In most cases, the questions historians ask drive the search for sources (rather than the source creating the project)." In the case of the Woolman document, it is the source—its form and its authorship—that has created the project. "History toggles between description and explanation, the latter often shaped by debate," Maza writes. Historical writing, even popular historical writing, she continues...