Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

This Old Thing?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Lydia Maria Child on economy

    Mrs. Child has an eloquent philosophy of republican virtue and simplicity, and she is one of my favorite 19th century authors. Here are some passages I had already typed in (having included them in papers), though I'm sure Elizabeth will find many more!

    From Child's The American Frugal Housewife, Dedicated to Those Who Are Not Ashamed of Economy, 12th ed. Boston: Carter, Hendee, 1833. Reprint, Worthington, Ohio: Worthington Historical Society. :

    “The true economy of housekeeping is simply the art of gathering up all the fragments, so that nothing be lost. I mean fragments of time, a well as materials [. . . .] Time is money” (3).

    Children should be taught “to save everything,--not for their own use, for that would make them selfish—but for some use” (6).

    “[I}t is always easy to know how to spend riches and always safe to know how to bear poverty” (93).

    “[L]et any reflecting mind inquire how decay has begun in all republics, and let them calmly ask themselves whether we are in no danger, in departing thus rapidly from the simplicity and industry of our forefathers” (99).

    Side note--A fascinating person in many respects, Lydia Maria Child also wrote several powerful anti-slavery works, including An Appeal in Favor of Americans Called Africans in 1836 and Right Way, The Safe Way, Proved by Emancipation in the British West Indies and Elsewhere in 1862. She gives many 'radical' abolitionist arguments and graphic accounts of slavery, but as she wrote in An Appeal, “We must not allow our nerves to be more tender than our consciences” (12).

    Kira Sanscrainte
    "History is not history unless it is the truth."—A. Lincoln

    "Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest."—Mark Twain

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: This Old Thing?

      If we are looking at household goods, like dishes and furniture that would last longer than clothing styles, wouldn't one need to look at "when" they were first acquired? Would it not be feasible to figure about when you would have gotten them.
      Absolutely. When we furnished The Bradford Place, we took all this into consideration. Much of the finer stuff like the old clock, the family Bible, and that sort of thing are early 1840s, which is when our characters were married. One thing about the nineteenth century, they didn't have Corningware so their dishes would break if dropped. So most of our dishes are similar patterns of ironstone, but the manufacturing dates on the back will show that our characters had to replace some of the plates due to breakage. The point is, most things in our homes today weren't purchased in 2004 and most things in homes back then probably weren't purchased between 1861 and 1865.

      If I know about when I got married, then what would I have taken with me when married and what would have been purchased? Would you have moved into an established home or started new? Did you take a lot from your home if a woman?
      I think whether or not one moved into a furnished, or at least partially furnished, home would have depended upon the individual couple and their economic circumstances. My g grandfather was sold a portion of his father's land when he returned from the war {1865}. I have always assumed that he set up housekeeping there at the time, and I know he married a couple years later and lived on that land.

      However, there were other people who rented small homesteads and the like and accepted whatever was in the house. The Bradford Place has a bed with a modern known history at least back to 1813, as well as some old "stuff" that's in the attic. But then this is also a small 'log house' that would have been lived in by the farm hands and such, and was not meant to be a 'keep up with the Jones-type place.

      They didn't move like we do today.
      My 3g grandfather was born and married in Baltimore, moved to Cincinnati to work in the meat packing trade, and went to San Francisco in 1849. He made three trips altogether between California and Ohio in a three year span (twice overland, and once by water) before finally settling down in Dayton, Ohio. Another grandfather went from Dayton, Ohio to Appanoose County, Iowa and back again. And yet another from Dayton to Indiana, to Illinois back to Dayton. Everytime my family tries to move out of Ohio we get pulled back. I tried to escape from Ohio on a few occasions but something keeps pulling me back as well. :wink_smil

      Just some thoughts :-)

      Linda Trent
      Linda Trent
      [email]linda_trent@att.net[/email]

      “It ain’t what you know that gets you into trouble.
      It’s what you know that just ain’t so.” Mark Twain.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re:Some more old things?

        Looking thru some antique books there are numerous pieces of furniture that survived for one reason or another, in very good condition or patched. Looking at some there were a number of homemade items like chests/trunk/boxes used for storage. I seem to remember reading about types of boxes made for a young woman to store the items she would take with her in marriage, a marriage chest? Or boxes that were used by immigrants and passed on through generations.
        What about a family cradle?
        What might be the kinds of items passed from mother to daughter at marriage?
        What kinds of things would a woman pass on at her death, how much would be household things?
        If they were literate what about a hand written book of receipts?
        What was considered "an old thing" might be in the eye of the beholder?

        Susan Armstrong

        Comment

        Working...
        X