Freda Bedi Cont'd (#2)

[admin]

Revolution to ruins: The tragic fall of Bradlaugh Hall
by Aown Ali
Dawn.com
PUBLISHED SEP 26, 2015 05:26PM

For the Bedis, finding a political home in Lahore was not straightforward -- nor was it their immediate priority. 'For the first year and a half, we worked in a very indirect way because it was essential to build up at least a minimum income on which to live,' Freda explained to Olive Chandler in December 1936, 'but for the last nine months we have been doing much more openly socialist work ... among the students and the peasants. Holding study circles, addressing meetings, and P.L. has been holding peasant schools in the villages to instill [sic] a spirit of rebellion into them all (adult schools). We have had inspiring conferences lately ... there is a storm of rebellion in the Sikh peasantry of the Punjab, at present just brewing, but ready for the bursting.'

For both, the introduction to political activity in Lahore was in the lecture hall. When early in 1936, a radical organisation in Lahore organised a series of lectures on 'The Great Contemporaries', Bedi addressed the inaugural session on 'Hitler in the Rebuilding of Germany'. Freda spoke at a later meeting about the Irish nationalist and republican Eamon de Valera, at that time head of government of the Irish Free State -- the comparisons with Indian nationalism were unstated but clear.

It was a big step for Freda to move from talking to relatively small groups much in the fashion of a college lecture to addressing mass meetings on contested political issues. Bedi was a natural orator, with a powerful voice, an ease with words and command of Punjabi as well as English. For Freda this was a skill she needed to develop. She recalled that her first big meeting was a student gathering at one of Lahore's principal nationalist venues, the Bradlaugh Hall:

B.P.L. said oh, you know, they want you to talk -- it's nothing, you just talk as you talk in a debating society at Oxford. And when I got there I was petrified to find that there were 24,000 people waiting, and this crowd of 24,000 had a very definite opinion about what it should listen to and what it shouldn't. And if it didn't like the speaker it would start beating the ground with sticks and the soles of the feet and making a noise so the speaker would have to go down.

Anyway, I decided that the reason they didn't like a number of speakers was that they couldn't hear them and the best thing would be to speak pretty loudly ... So I stood on the platform like a martyr awaiting execution and I suddenly began speaking -- I think it was about the proctorial system in Oxford or something like that, which they'd asked me to speak on -- in a very loud voice, and I can still feel the shock that went through the whole 24,000 heads when this slight western-looking person suddenly bellowed into the microphone, must have been out of sheer fright. And that established me as a speaker. I found I could go on speaking and not be drummed out of existence by the sticks and the feet.

...

Freda was in some demand to address these large meetings. She had a certain novelty value -- a white woman in her mid-twenties -- but she also had a natural authority and the ability to command an audience.

-- The Lives of Freda: The Political, Spiritual and Personal Journeys of Freda Bedi, by Andrew Whitehead

The Bradlaugh Hall, a hallmark of the anti-colonial freedom movement in the subcontinent, is crumbling behind the district courts of Lahore. For almost half a century, the famous hall has served as the exclusive venue of notable political events in Lahore, but the historic building itself has been left to fend for itself against hazards, natural and man-made.

Built in the late 19th century on Rattigan Road Lahore, the Bradlaugh Hall would play host to almost all the notable leadership of India, particularly for political figures in Punjab.

Irrespective of clan, creed or even political ideologies, the hall was a famous rendezvous for Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs alike; they would organise political sessions, give receptions to visiting leaders, and hold literary sittings or mushairas (poetry recitings).

We find that Allama Muhammad Iqbal, Maulana Zafar Ali Khan, Dr Muhammad Ashraf, Mian Ifthikhar uddin and Malik Barkat Ali are among the stalwarts of freedom who frequently visited and gave speeches at the Bradlaugh Hall.

Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah also delivered at least one speech here, on May 24, 1924, in a Khilafat Movement session.


Bradlaugh Hall on Rattigan Road in Lahore.


It was constructed in loving memory of Charles Bradlaugh, a British member of parliament and a great supporter of the Indian freedom movement.


The upper plaque is inscribed with a Quranic verse. The lower one reads 'National Technical Institute' (The hall was used for technical education after the partition).


The building seems to have been designed with British architectural elements but with local climate and requirements in view.


The front facade of the building.


It once used to host everything from theatre shows to political gatherings.

The Bradlaugh Hall was constructed by funds collected from the annual session of Indian National Congress held in Lahore in 1893, and was attributed to Mr Charles Bradlaugh, a British MP, who, for his utmost support of Indian self-rule, was greatly admired in Indian circles.

Actually, it was Sardar Dyal Singh who realised the need for a suitable public place to hold political events in Lahore. At that time, there were only two halls in Lahore, the Town Hall of municipal office and Montgomery Hall in Lawrence Garden (Jinnah Garden). Both were owned by the government and not available for political events.

So the Indian Association, the earliest political organisation in Lahore, used to hold its meetings in the courtyard of The Tribune, a weekly newspaper run by Sardar Dyal Singh. He was a member and patron of the Indian association. No wonder he felt the need for a dedicated site for political purposes.

Singh was also very keen to have a session of the Indian National Congress held in Lahore. In 1888, at the Allahabad session, Punjab’s invitation was accepted and Congress agreed to meet in Lahore in December 1893.

Dyal Singh was elected chairman of the reception committee of the session, which was a great success. All the tickets sold out and after meeting all expenses, the Congress saved Rs10,000, which became the nucleus fund to construct the Bradlaugh Hall in Lahore.

Charles Bradlaugh — the "Member for India"

Charles Bradlaugh was one of the notable liberals and freethinkers of Victorian England, and an early advocate for women's right to vote (a 'radical' stance at that time), birth control, republicanism, social reform and trade unionism. For his deep interest in the Indian freedom movement, Mr Bradlaugh was invited to the 5th annual session of the Congress, held in Bombay in December 1889.

Charles Bradlaugh (26 September 1833 – 30 January 1891) was a political activist and one of the most famous English atheists of the 19th century. In 1866 he co-founded the National Secular Society, in which Annie Besant became his close associate.

The National Secular Society (NSS) is a British campaigning organisation that promotes secularism and the separation of church and state. It holds that no one should gain advantage or disadvantage because of their religion or lack of it. It was founded by Charles Bradlaugh in 1866 and is now a member organisation of Humanists International (formerly the International Humanist and Ethical Union), endorsing the Amsterdam Declaration 2002.

The NSS, whose motto is "Challenging religious privilege", campaigns for a secular state where there is no established state religion; where religion plays no role in state-funded education, does not interfere with the judicial process nor does it restrict freedom of expression; where the state does not intervene in matters of religious doctrine nor does it promote or fund religious activities, guaranteeing every citizen's freedom to believe, not to believe or to change religion.

Although the organisation was explicitly created for those who reject the supernatural, the NSS does not campaign to eradicate or prohibit religion, arguing that freedom of religion, as well as freedom from religion, is a human right and that state sponsorship of selected religions encroaches upon that right. It holds that belief should be a private matter for the home or place of worship and does not belong in the public sphere. In seeking to represent the interests and viewpoints of atheists, the NSS is often critical of what it sees as the damaging effects of religion.

-- National Secular Society, by Wikipedia

In one of his letters to A. P. Sinnett, Master K.H. [Koot Hoomi] wrote:

I am sorry you took the trouble of posting me about Bradlaugh. I know him and his partner well. There is more than one trait in his character I esteem and respect. He is not immoral; nor could anything that might be said against or for him by Mrs. K. [Anna Mary Kingsford] or even yourself, change or even influence my opinion of both himself and Mrs. Besant. Yet the book published by them —"The Fruits of Philosophy" is infamous and highly pernicious in its effects whatever and however beneficent and philanthropic the objects that led to the publication of the work. . . . I have not read the work — nor ever will; but I have its unclean spirit, its brutal aura before me, and I say again in my sight the advices offered in the work are abominable; they are the fruits of Sodom and Gommorah rather than of Philosophy, the very name of which it degrades. The sooner we leave the subject — the better.

-- Charles Bradlaugh, by Theosophy Wiki

Bradlaugh’s daughter Hypatia Bradlaugh Bonner wrote his biography Charles Bradlaugh: A Record of His Life and Work:

“In India, he was joyfully called the "Member for India," and at home, his views on Indian matters were heard with growing respect. He took up the cause of India with no thought or prospect of personal gain; out of sheer zeal for justice and hatred of oppression.”

Charles Bradlaugh. —Wiki Commons

Regarding the said visit of India in 1889, Bradlaugh’s biographer further notes, “

Nothing could be more judicious and restrained than his brief address to the Congress on his brief visit to India after his dangerous illness of 1889.”

Bradlaugh’s speech concluded with following words:

“If I do rightly, you will be generous within your judgment; and that even if I do not always plead with the voice that you would speak with, you will believe that I have done my best. And that I meant my best to be the greater happiness for India's people, greater peace for Britain's rule, greater comfort for the whole of Britain's subjects.”

Annie Besant was a socialist, theosophist and a longtime colleague and partner of Mr Bradlaugh. For her theosophical work, she had travelled to India in the late 19th century, and went on to be elected as president of the Indian National Congress in 1917. Besant relates that the whole speech was punctuated with cheers.

“The speech concluded to tumultuous applause, his first speech in India, and alas his last,” she writes.

Thus, the Bradlaugh Hall, founded under the auspices of Congress, had become an epicentre of political gatherings in Lahore since its inauguration. In its early years, it helped facilitate the labour and peasants’ movement, especially the influential movement of the peasants (known as “Pagri Sambhal Jatta”) of Lyallpur (Faisalabad), in 1905.

National College — where Bhagat Singh turned revolutionary

Later, in 1915, the “Ghadar Party” also had its base in Bradlaugh Hall, Lahore. By the 1920s, it had become well-known across India as a prominent political hub.

That was the time when Lala Lajpat Rai founded the National College here. After the non-cooperation call of Mr Gandhi, the students of Lahore collected funds for setting up this college.

Bhagat Singh had also left his DAV School (now Government Muslim High School No. 2) and joined the National College. Here, he spent almost four years as a student (1922-26), an instrumental period which prepared him for the acts that would eventually make him a national hero.

At the National College, Bhagat Singh found revolutionary companions like Sukhdev, Yesh Pal, Ram Krishna and Bhagwati Charan Vohra. Here, these young patriots formed the “Naujawan Bharat Sabha” in March 1926. The objective was clear: to channelise the nationalist movement on ideological (resistant) lines.


Surendar Nath Banerji – one of the earliest Indian political leaders during the British Raj and a senior leader of the Indian National Congress – laid the plaque on October 30, 1900, at the inauguration of the Hall.


Bradlaugh Hall consists of numerous rooms, a pavilion and a vast area for public gatherings.


The entire building is covered with a metal roofing, like at railway stations.


The historic site is now wasting away in neglect.

Soon after the establishment of Sabha, its members observed the death anniversary of Kartar Singh Sarabha, a young revolutionary and leading luminary of the Ghadar Party who was executed in November 1915 for his role in the Ghadar Conspiracy Case (Lahore conspiracy case of 1914-15).

A portrait of Kartar Singh, covered with a white cloth, was kept in the Bradlaugh Hall. Durgawati Devi (wife of Bhagwati Charan) and Sushila Devi paid homage to the martyr by sprinkling blood from their fingers on to the white cloth.

Sabha did a great deal of work in politicising the middle class youth, students and peasantry. The revolutionary ideas of freedom, equality and economic emancipation stirred them to no end. By the end of 1929, the organisational units of Sabha had established in all major districts of Punjab, as well as in Sindh, UP and even in far-off cities like Bombay.

All these years, the Bradlaugh Hall in Lahore had been the headquarters of Naujawan Bharat Sabha. After the arrest of its founder member, Bhagat Singh, and several others in April 1929, political activities gained more momentum at the Bradlaugh Hall.

But on 7 October 1930, Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru were sentenced to death. As the Naujawan Bharat Sabha was declared illegal in June 1930, it was revived under the cover of “Bhagat Singh Appeal Committees”.

The legal defense for Bhagat was carried out at Sabha’s office in Bradlaugh Hall, as was Sardar Kishan Singh's appeal for his son, Bhagat. But the appeals were rejected, and on 23 March 1931, three young freedom fighters in their early 20s ended up sacrificing their precious lives.

A few leaders of the Sabha then planned to establish memorials for the three. On 28 April 1931, they met at the Bradlaugh Hall and formed a committee named “All India Bhagat Singh, Rajguru and Sukhdev Memorial Committee”, but it could do nothing. Naujawan Bharat Sabha could no longer survive after 1931. Its strength and activities decreased and organisational network disrupted after the death of Bhagat and his companions.

That was also the end of a vibrant decade of the Bradlaugh Hall.


In 1956, the building was was allotted to some engineers who founded the 'Milli Techniki Idara' here.


Under the Milli Techniki Idara (National Technical Institute), land grabbing and illegal encroachments were rampant.


In the late '90s, the Milli Techniki Idara or National Technical Institute (which was allotted the building in 1956) ceased its educational activities and rented the building further to various tenants.


The teachers of nearby government high schools, who had taken possession of this historic property from the Milli Techniki Idara, used it as tuition centres (image taken in March 2008).


But now the Evacuee Trust Property Board has taken over the building and all the entry points are sealed.


Whereas previously, it was encroached upon, the hall is now wasting away in neglect.


Instead of keeping the buildings protected, the Evacuee Trust Board goes for the easier option of keeping it locked.

A forum for arts and literature

Apart from its political role, the Bradlaugh Hall was also a forum for activities related to literature, art and culture. Stage dramas, theatrical performances and mushairas were a common occurrence.

The Parsi Theatrical Companies of Cowasjee and Habib Seth were very popular, and both used to perform at the Bradlaugh Hall. In 1903, Narayan Prasad Betab’s drama Kasauti was played here.

In Abb Woh Lahore Kahan, F.E. Chaudhrya – the celebrated press photographer of Lahore – has discussed many such events in good detail. The book is based on his exclusive interviews with veteran journalist Muneer Ahmad Muneer.

In the preface, Muneer also touches upon the cultural aspects of Lahore and reminds us of the role of Bradlaugh in such activities, particularly the cherished details of the visit of the legendary singer and dancer Gauhar Jaan Kalkattewali, in 1912.

All the tickets sold out rapidly. The performance was held at the Bradlaugh Hall and all the Muslim, Hindu and Sikh upper class; including Nawab Muhammad Ali Khan Qazalbash, Sir Umar Hayat Khan Tiwana, Sir Dia Kishan Kaul, Raja Narider Nath, Faqir Iftkhar uddin and Mian Saraj uddin, were among the audience of that concert.

F.E. Chaudhry also shares the details of a mushaira that was declared the largest mushaira of India. It was organised by the government in 1919 at Bradlaugh Hall as a World War-I victory ceremony. Here, Allama Iqbal recited his poem شعاع آفتاب (Shoa'a-e-Aftab or 'A sun ray').

Ramlila, the dramatic folk enactment of Rama and Ravan was another performing art show which was held every year for over 10 or more consecutive nights at Bradlaugh Hall.

In his book Lahore: A Sentimental Journey, Pran Nevile, an acclaimed author of Indian art, culture and history, says:

“As I was recalling my student days, I was reminded of the famous Bradlaugh Hall, where we used to gather for all kinds of meetings, especially those of a political nature connected with the national freedom movement. I still remember student leaders like Rajbans Krishan, Promod Chandra, Yash Pal, I.K. Gujral and Mazhar Ali addressing the student crowd at Bradlaugh Hall.”

But Nevile was probably talking about the early '40s. In the later years, things began changing rapidly, and the political scenario of the Indian subcontinent too. In the 1946 elections, Muslim League won the majority in Punjab, which marked the end of Congress in this province. Although the League was prevented from forming a coalition government by the Congress and the Unionists, the anti-League coalition collapsed soon.

As an active hub of political activities, Bradlaugh Hall was about to complete half a century. Actually, it had almost become the political epicentre in Lahore.

The handover to 'Milli Techniki Idara' and subsequent neglect

For a decade after independence, Bradlaugh Hall was used for various services; providing shelter to the migrants from Amritsar, as a warehouse for iron merchants and as a grain silo for the food department.

In 1956, Bradlaugh Hall and its adjoining area were flooded with heavy storm water. As the building became useless for food storage, the hall was allotted to “Milli Techniki Idara” (National Technical Institute). This institute of technical education was formed in 1953 by engineering graduates from Aligarh University.

Rafiq Chishti, a trustee of Milli Techniqui Idara, told me the story of this allotment some years ago.

In 1956, Muhammad Kibria, the head of “Milli Techniqui Idara” submitted an application to justice (r) Jamil Hussain Rizvi, the Minister for Law and Rehabilitation, for the allotment of a building. On his approval, secretary Evacuee Trust Property Board allotted Bradlaugh Hall to Kibria for 99 years. It was handed over to the Idara in 1957.

However, in the late '90s, Milli Techniqui Idara ceased its educational activities and the management rented the building to various persons, including the teachers of nearby government schools. Although Bradlaugh Hall housed the Milli Techniki Idara for about four decades, this was also the worst period for this historic building, as it was in this period that all the land grabbings and illegal interventions took place. And the trustees of the Idara can’t negate the fact that the area was being exploited all for personal and monetary interests.


The terrible conditions and signs of deliberate damage all around the hall.


The terrible conditions and signs of deliberate damage all around the hall.


All the windowpanes and doors are cracked and the iron roof is crumbling.


The wrecked state of the podium where the political leadership of the Indian subcontinent used to give out addresses. Below the pavilion, the gallery seats had been modified into rooms through partitions constructed by school teachers.


Another view of the hall interior.

(The above images are from March 2008. Now, the conditions are far worse.)

It was not possible to find an authentic source who covers the details of Bradlaugh Hall, especially ones regarding the designing and construction of this superb piece of architecture. Obviously, the building can be described as an architectural fantasy, and whoever designed it was, of course a trained architect, certainly impressed by British architecture, but fairly well-informed of local requirements and climate too.

The building bears the impression of architectural and ideological characteristics of Leicester Secular Hall, built in 1881 by the Leicester secular society, England. It may be pertinent to mention that Leicester Hall was proposed in 1872 after George Jacob Holyoake – a mentor of Bradlaugh and a secularist – was not allowed to use the public building for his lectures.

Bradlaugh Hall consists of numerous rooms, a pavilion and a vast area for public gatherings. The entire building is covered with an iron roof, like the railway stations. In the eastern side of the hall is a pavilion, which was used as stage and to reach staircases along both sides of the walls.

Since the Evacuee Trust Property Board took over the hall from Milli Techniki Idara a few years ago, all the entry points have been sealed. But I had managed to visit the hall and photograph it from the inside while the hall was still under the control of the tenants.

The interior was terrible damaged all around. The podium, where once, India's leading political figures used to give speeches from, was utterly wrecked. Below the pavilion, the gallery seats had been modified into rooms by constructing partitions. This destruction of property was caused by the teachers of nearby government high schools, who had taken possession of this historic property from Milli Techniki Idara, and used it for various purposes, including tuition centres.

On fantasised histories

Apart from the negligence, Bradlaugh Hall is also a victim of fake narratives and ignorance.

Historical events, personalities and places are routinely fantasised, and described more often than not under the influence of that fantasy. Something similar happened in the case of Bradlaugh Hall.

In dozens of web and newspaper articles and books (mostly in Urdu), authors have presumed that Mr Bradlaugh was awarded the contract for laying down railway tracks in western India, and that when the British government learned about his sympathy for the Indians, they cancelled his contract and ordered him to leave India.

Then, the clever Mr Bradlaugh took a boat and anchored in Ravi, indicating to the government that he was not on Indian land anymore. But the government forced him to leave the country. The story goes on to say that he had purchased some land in Lahore, where Bradlaugh Hall was constructed on his will.

However, none of the writers citing these stories actually bothered to find out who who Bradlaugh was in fact. His extensive biography, written by Hypatia Bradlaugh Bonner, his daughter and ideological successor, should definitely be regarded as an authentic source in this regard.

The biography tells us that Mr Bradlaugh had visited India only in December 1889 and it was also a brief trip as he returned from Bombay at the end of January 1890, mainly due to health issues. Mr. Bradlaugh actually wished to visit India; partially it was also a reason behind his joining the service of East India Company in 1851. But he was destined for home service and stationed in Dublin, Ireland.

Bradlaugh had also never been a railway contractor, after three years of military service almost all his life passed in learning, lecturing and in political struggle. It was really a rigorous life and he died poor and in debt.

But in case of history such assumption and fantasies mean nothing except pushing us away from the facts. And the fact here is simple: a building, a witness of history is crumbling; now the question is what should be our line of action?

Bibliography

Books:

• Charles Bradlaugh: A Record of His Life and Work by Hypatia Bradlaugh Bonner
• Sardar Dyal Singh Majithia as seen by his contemporaries. Edited by Ihsan H. Nadiem
• How India Wrought For Freedom: The Story of The National Congress by Annie Besant
• Pan-Islam in British Indian Politics: A Study of the Khilafat Movement, 1918-1924 by Naeem Qureshi
• Indian Muslims and Partition of India by S.M. Ikram
• Early Aryans to Swaraj (Vol 10, Modern India) by S.R. Bakshi, S.Gajrani, Hari Singh
• Abb Woh Lahore Kahan by Muneer Ahmad Muneer
• Lahore A Sentimental Journey by Pran Nevile
• Stages of Life: Indian Theatre Autobiographies by Kathryn Hansen

News articles and research papers:

• 'Punjab’s first freedom fighter: Remembering Dyal Singh, founder of The Tribune by Madan Gopal The Tribune, Chandigarh India
• 'Towards Independence and Socialist Republic: Naujawan Bharat Sabha' by Irfan Habib and S. K. Mittal. Social Scientist, vol 86, 87, Sept-Oct 1979


Aown Ali is a Lahore based photojournalist, particularly interested in documenting architecture worth historic significant.

The views expressed by this writer and commenters below do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Dawn Media Group.

[admin]

The Fruits of Philosophy (1832), by Charles Knowlton
by Caroline Meek, Claudia Nunez-Eddy
The Embryo Project Encyclopedia
Published: 2017-10-05

In 1832, Charles Knowlton published The Fruits of Philosophy, a pamphlet advocating for controlling reproduction and detailing methods for preventing pregnancy. Originally published anonymously in Massachusetts, The Fruits of Philosophy was an illegal book because United States law prohibited the publishing of immoral and obscene material, which included information about contraception. In The Fruits of Philosophy, Knowlton detailed recipes for contraceptives and advocated for controlling reproduction. In 1877 in Europe, social activists Charles Bradlaugh and Annie Besant republished the pamphlet in London, England. At that time, many governments, including the United Kingdom, still considered the book illegal material due to its discussion of contraception. The Fruits of Philosophy was one of the first publications detailing contraceptive methods for controlling reproduction and activists used it in some of the first attempts at repealing obscenity laws in the United States and Great Britain. Through their efforts, Knowlton and those who later republished the pamphlet increased knowledge of reproduction and awareness of methods of contraception. By challenging anti-obscenity laws, the author and activists also helped with the eventual weakening and dissolution of such law.

Knowlton, a physician practicing in the United States, originally wrote The Fruits of Philosophy, also titled The Private Companion of Young Married People and A Treatise on the Population Question. Knowlton studied medicine at Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire in the 1820s. Following completion of his medical degree Knowlton moved to Ashfield, Massachusetts, where he practiced medicine and wrote the pamphlet. According to his autobiography, Knowlton wrote the short pamphlet-style guide to inform his patients about contraception and sex education. In 1932, Knowlton anonymously printed several copies of The Fruits of Philosophy and circulated them among his patients. That same year, Abner Kneeland, a theologian and social radical, republished The Fruits of Philosophy in Boston, Massachusetts with Knowlton’s name as the author on the cover, largely increasing circulation of the pamphlet. The government then charged Knowlton under the United States obscenity laws, which classified discussion of contraception as obscene. Knowlton was fined and imprisoned for three months in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Following his release, The Fruits of Philosophy was published again and Mason Grosvenor, a minister in Ashfield, found the pamphlet and took legal action to prevent the circulation of the material. Knowlton was tried again on obscenity charges, but the charges were later dropped. The trials increased the book’s publicity and more than one million copies were sold in America.

Following Knowlton’s death in 1850, circulation of The Fruits of Philosophy continued worldwide. In the 1850s, freethought activist James Watson published The Fruits of Philosophy in London, England. For many years, the pamphlet was published and sold throughout London unchallenged. In the 1870s, following the arrest of several publishers associated with publishing obscene materials, social activists Charles Bradlaugh and Annie Besant republished The Fruits of Philosophy, to test the validity of the pamphlet under England’s obscenity laws. Knowlton’s original work, The Fruits of Philosophy, has been republished many times throughout the world, however, the most commonly available edition is that published by Bradlaugh and Besant. In their “Publishers’ Preface,” Bradlaugh and Besant state that there are very few changes made to Knowlton’s original pamphlet and that all changes are clearly marked as deviations from the original. In the “Publisher’s Preface,” Bradlaugh and Besant also detail the history of the publication and the need for controlling reproduction in the wake of fears surrounding overpopulation and poverty.

Knowlton’s pamphlet, The Fruits of Philosophy, begins with a section titled “Philosophical Proem,” in which Knowlton discusses the basis and links between consciousness, sensations, passions, and human nature. He argues that humans have the power to prevent any evils that may arise from gratifying sexual desires, such as unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. He argues that it is unreasonable to solely advocate for abstinence to prevent pregnancy because humans are not likely to easily limit sexual gratification. Knowlton states that it is the duty of physicians to inform their patients of these prevention methods. Following that brief introduction, the pamphlet is organized into four chapters. In chapter one, Knowlton argues that controlling reproduction, the idea of conceiving children intentionally instead of accidentally, can be done without challenging any reproductive instincts. He defines reproductive instincts as the urge people have to have sex and reproduce. In chapter two, Knowlton asserts that every person has the right to information on reproduction and pregnancy prevention. He argues that the average person knows too little about the physiology of conception and reproduction. To educate his patients, Knowlton includes detailed descriptions of the reproductive organs and the physiological method of conception. In chapter three, he discusses several methods of contraception including recipes for chemical vaginal washes. Finally, in chapter four, Knowlton discusses why people have sex and argues that reproductive health includes sexual education, which was not common at the time.

In chapter one, Knowlton first discusses the political aspects of reproduction. He starts by referencing Thomas Malthus’ theory on overpopulation and poverty. Malthus, an economist, observed that population growth was exponential, and that as populations increased the lower class suffered in poverty, famine, and disease. Malthus argued that the only way a society could escape this increasing poverty was to restrict population growth. Knowlton explains the Malthusian idea, and states that war, disease, and famine keep populations in check and prevent overpopulation. He questions whether there can be other means to prevent overpopulation. Malthus argued in his work that the only way to combat population growth was through late marriage and celibacy. However, Knowlton explains that the belief that men and women will remain celibate is foolish. Knowlton argues that promoting celibacy and late marriage would actually increase prostitution, and be destructive to physical and mental health.

Knowlton then addresses the social aspects of reproduction, categorizing individuals as either married or not. He asserts that married couples often have many more children than they desire. Knowlton specifically addresses the health and wellbeing of the woman, stating that often a woman’s health, comfort, happiness, and life are endangered by multiple pregnancies. He also argues that married couples who should not become parents reproduce, specifically citing those with hereditary diseases. Knowlton then addresses the social aspect of population control among unmarried youth. He asserts that young men often oppose early marriage, desiring first to make enough money to support a family. However, he argues that young men are unlikely to resist the temptation of sexual gratification and will instead resort to prostitution. To prevent sexual temptation outside of marriage, Knowlton states individuals should marry young and be provided with the knowledge and means to prevent having children early in marriage. Knowlton uses the first chapter to comment on the importance of having the knowledge and means to prevent pregnancy to live the happiest life.

In chapter two, Knowlton states his belief that all individuals have a human right to receive the knowledge of the facts and discoveries made by science, including those of reproduction. He argues that knowledge about reproduction is important because reproduction is very connected to the happiness of humankind, yet he acknowledges that public discussion and investigation of topics like sex are considered improper. He goes on to discuss how the average person’s understanding of conception is lacking, and he states that that lack motivated him to write The Fruits of Philosophy.

As chapter two continues, Knowlton provides detailed descriptions of the external and internal reproductive organs in both males and females. He uses both layman’s terms and medical terminology in his explanations of anatomy, as he designed the pamphlet to give practical information about reproduction to his patients. Following a discussion of reproductive anatomy, Knowlton addresses the mechanics of the conception, including information on the stages of a woman’s menstrual cycle, ovulation, properties of semen and sperm, fertilization, and pregnancy. He mentions some signs of pregnancy, including a decrease in appetite, vomiting and nausea in the morning, heartburn, and difficulty sleeping. Knowlton notes that pregnancy cannot be confirmed until about six weeks after conception and is done via a pelvic examination that reveals the woman’s uterus has descended lower in her body than it normally sits. He states that pregnancy is typically nine months, during which the fetus grows and develops in the uterus.

In the last part of chapter two, Knowlton states that at the time physicians still did not fully understand how the sperm reached the eggs in the ovaries leading to fertilization. He cites three hypotheses for the mechanism that leads to fertilization and states that he agrees most with physician William Potts Dewees from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Dewees suggested that a set of vessels connected the surface of the vagina to the ovaries. During intercourse, a man’s semen was absorbed by those vessels on the surface of a woman’s vagina and allowed the sperm to flow into the fallopian tube to fertilize the woman’s egg. In a footnote from the publishers, Bradlaugh and Besant state that that view of fertilization is no longer accepted by the scientific community. Rather, they state that it has now been discovered that eggs or ova are discharged from the ovaries into the uterus during the menstrual cycle and independent of intercourse. Bradlaugh and Besant state that if intercourse and ejaculation of semen occurs when the ova is in the uterus, conception can take place.

In the third chapter of The Fruits of Philosophy, Knowlton highlights some methods of controlling and preventing conception. First, Knowlton asserts that conception will be difficult for women who do not menstruate regularly. He states that for a woman to conceive, a physician must first regulate the woman’s menstrual cycle. He then mentions that sterility can occur naturally, which he attributes to physiological inactivity and a weakness of the reproductive system. Knowlton then provides a remedy for that type of sterility: exercising in open air, eating nourishing food, wearing flannel clothing, and drinking a concoction of steel metal shavings and cider. He states that those activities heal the uterine system over the course of a few months. He includes other medical recipes for sterility such as Dewees’ Volatile Tincture of Guaiac, Gum Guaicaum, Spirits of Ammonia, and tincture of Spanish Flies, among others. Knowlton also discusses infertility and impotence among men, and often attributes it to alcohol or tobacco use, and general anxiety. Common treatments for male infertility include cold baths, cheerful company, change of scenery, regular exercise, and medical remedies such as cayenne and tincture of flies.

Knowlton goes on to discuss methods of preventing conception. First, he mentions withdrawal, or a man withdrawing his penis from a woman’s vagina before releasing any sperm. He also discusses the baudruche, also known as a condom, which covers the man’s penis and prevents both conception and venereal diseases. Knowlton argues the baudruche will likely not become popular. Then Knowlton discusses the use of a sponge moistened with water in the vagina to prevent sperm from traveling far enough to fertilize a woman’s egg. However, he argues that the ridges in the vagina could allow sperm to be dislodged when the sponge is removed, thus he does not recommend this method unless paired with some chemical liquid to destroy the sperm. He also adds that using a vaginal wash after sexual intercourse could chemically alter the sperm and prevent fertilization. For a vaginal wash, Knowlton recommends a solution of zinc, aluminum, pearl-ash, and a salt. Knowlton concludes the chapter by stating that it is important to have a safe, effective, and attainable method of contraception.

In the last chapter of the pamphlet, Knowlton discusses the reproductive instinct, which he states is the desire for sexual intercourse. He asserts that no other instinct has a greater impact on human happiness and satisfaction. However, he argues that too often the instinct is not controlled by reason and individuals act on the instinct in an improper manner. He argues that it is the duty of the physician to provide instruction in regards to the reproductive instinct, just as a physician would in regards to desires for eating, drinking, exercise, and more. He states that humans are likely to act on the instinct too early and at the wrong time, resulting in dissatisfaction within the family. He suggests that the proper age to have children is approximately seventeen years old for women and a few years older for men. He provides instances in which individuals should not gratify their sexual desires, including during menstruation because it can produce symptoms similar to syphilis and when a woman is far along in her pregnancy because it might impair the future offspring’s mental capacity. Knowlton also states that the effects of sex are much greater on men than women; he states that the male system is quickly exhausted by intercourse. He suggests that a protein rich diet will help men recover from intercourse, and a cold vegetable and milk diet will calm further sexual desires.

Knowlton concludes with a discussion of possible objections in the last section titled “Appendix.” He states that people may object to the knowledge of contraception as it may increase illegal sexual encounters such as prostitution, adultery, or intercourse outside of marriage. However, Knowlton counters by saying that prostitution occurs because there are so many young unmarried men and women. He continues by saying that young men and women don’t marry not because they don’t wish to marry young, but because they believe that when they marry they will have children and start a family. Knowlton argues that the spread of information on pregnancy prevention will lead to an increase in happy families and fewer poverty-stricken, overpopulated families.

After Besant and Bradlaugh republished Knowlton’s pamphlet, they were arrested for violating the Obscene Publications Act of 1857, which made the sale of obscene literature illegal in England. Bradlaugh and Besant were convicted and sentenced to jail. However, on appeal, their convictions were overturned. The trial of Bradlaugh and Besant was heavily publicized in the media and the number of copies of the pamphlet in circulation increased from 700 to 125,000 in the span of one year.

Sources

Chandrasekhar, Sripati. A Dirty Filthy Book. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1981.
Dewees, William Potts. A Treatise on the Physical and Medical Treatment of Children. Blanchard and Lea, 1858.
Knowlton, Charles. The Fruits of Philosophy: The Private Companion for Young Married People. London: James Watson, 1832.
Knowlton, Charles. “The Late Charles Knowlton, M.D.” The Boston Medical and Surgical Journal 45 (1851): 109–20.
Knowlton, Charles. Fruits of Philosophy: A Treatise on the Population Question. Eds. Charles Bradlaugh and Annie Besant. San Francisco: The Reader’s Library, 1891. https://archive.org/details/fruitsphilosoph00knogoog (Accessed August 17, 2017).
Malthus, Thomas. An Essay on the Principle of Population: Or A View of Its Past and Present Effects on Human Happiness with an Inquiry into our Prospects Respecting the Future Removal or Mitigation of the Evils which it Occasions. London: John Murray. Volume One. Sixth Edition, 1826.
Manvell, Roger. The Trial of Annie Besant and Charles Bradlaugh. New York: Horizon Press, 1976.
Sappol, Michael. “The Odd Case of Charles Knowlton: Anatomical Performance, Medical Narrative, and Identity in Antebellum America.” Bulletin of the History of Medicine 83 (2009): 460–98.
How to cite
Meek, Caroline,, Nunez-Eddy, Claudia, "The Fruits of Philosophy (1832), by Charles Knowlton". Embryo Project Encyclopedia (2017-10-05). ISSN: 1940-5030 http://embryo.asu.edu/handle/10776/12993.
Show full item record

Publisher
Arizona State University. School of Life Sciences. Center for Biology and Society. Embryo Project Encyclopedia.
Rights
Copyright Arizona Board of Regents Licensed as Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/

[admin]

Freethought
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 3/26/20

Not to be confused with freedom of thought or free will.

Freethought (or free thought)[1] is an epistemological viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed only on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a freethinker is "a person who forms their own ideas and opinions rather than accepting those of other people, especially in religious teaching." In some contemporary thought in particular, freethought is strongly tied with rejection of traditional social or religious belief systems.[1][2] The cognitive application of freethought is known as "freethinking", and practitioners of freethought are known as "freethinkers".[1] Modern freethinkers consider freethought as a natural freedom from all negative and illusive thoughts acquired from the society.[3]

The term first came into use in the 17th century in order to indicate people who inquired into the basis of traditional religious beliefs. In practice, freethinking is most closely linked with secularism, atheism, agnosticism, anti-clericalism, and religious critique. The Oxford English Dictionary defines freethinking as, "The free exercise of reason in matters of religious belief, unrestrained by deference to authority; the adoption of the principles of a free-thinker." Freethinkers hold that knowledge should be grounded in facts, scientific inquiry, and logic. The skeptical application of science implies freedom from the intellectually limiting effects of confirmation bias, cognitive bias, conventional wisdom, popular culture, prejudice, or sectarianism.[4]

Definition

Atheist author Adam Lee defines freethought as thinking which is independent of revelation, tradition, established belief, and authority,[5] and considers it as a "broader umbrella" than atheism "that embraces a rainbow of unorthodoxy, religious dissent, skepticism, and unconventional thinking."[6]

The basic summarizing statement of the essay The Ethics of Belief by the 19th-century British mathematician and philosopher William Kingdon Clifford is: "It is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence."[7] The essay became a rallying cry for freethinkers when published in the 1870s, and has been described as a point when freethinkers grabbed the moral high ground.[8] Clifford was himself an organizer of freethought gatherings, the driving force behind the Congress of Liberal Thinkers held in 1878.

Regarding religion, freethinkers typically hold that there is insufficient evidence to support the existence of supernatural phenomena.[9] According to the Freedom from Religion Foundation, "No one can be a freethinker who demands conformity to a bible, creed, or messiah. To the freethinker, revelation and faith are invalid, and orthodoxy is no guarantee of truth." and "Freethinkers are convinced that religious claims have not withstood the tests of reason. Not only is there nothing to be gained by believing an untruth, but there is everything to lose when we sacrifice the indispensable tool of reason on the altar of superstition. Most freethinkers consider religion to be not only untrue, but harmful."[10]

However, philosopher Bertrand Russell wrote the following in his 1944 essay "The Value of Free Thought:"

What makes a freethinker is not his beliefs but the way in which he holds them. If he holds them because his elders told him they were true when he was young, or if he holds them because if he did not he would be unhappy, his thought is not free; but if he holds them because, after careful thought he finds a balance of evidence in their favour, then his thought is free, however odd his conclusions may seem.

— Bertrand Russell, The Value of Free Thought. How to Become a Truth-Seeker and Break the Chains of Mental Slavery, from the first paragraph

The whole first paragraph of the essay makes it clear that a freethinker is not necessarily an atheist or an agnostic, as long as he or she satisfies this definition:

The person who is free in any respect is free from something; what is the free thinker free from? To be worthy of the name, he must be free of two things: the force of tradition, and the tyranny of his own passions. No one is completely free from either, but in the measure of a man's emancipation he deserves to be called a free thinker.

— Bertrand Russell, The Value of Free Thought. How to Become a Truth-Seeker and Break the Chains of Mental Slavery, from the first paragraph

Fred Edwords, former executive of the American Humanist Association, suggests that by Russell's definition, liberal religionists who have challenged established orthodoxies can be considered freethinkers.[11]

On the other hand, according to Bertrand Russell, atheists and/or agnostics are not necessarily freethinkers. As an example, he mentions Stalin, whom he compares to a "pope":

what I am concerned with is the doctrine of the modern Communistic Party, and of the Russian Government to which it owes allegiance. According to this doctrine, the world develops on the lines of a Plan called Dialectical Materialism, first discovered by Karl Marx, embodied in the practice of a great state by Lenin, and now expounded from day to day by a Church of which Stalin is the Pope. […] Free discussion is to be prevented wherever the power to do so exists; […] If this doctrine and this organization prevail, free inquiry will become as impossible as it was in the middle ages, and the world will relapse into bigotry and obscurantism.

— Bertrand Russell, The Value of Free Thought. How to Become a Truth-Seeker and Break the Chains of Mental Slavery

In the 18th and 19th century, many thinkers regarded as freethinkers were deists, arguing that the nature of God can only be known from a study of nature rather than from religious revelation. In the 18th century, "deism" was as much of a 'dirty word' as "atheism", and deists were often stigmatized as either atheists or at least as freethinkers by their Christian opponents.[12][13] Deists today regard themselves as freethinkers, but are now arguably less prominent in the freethought movement than atheists.

Characteristics

Among freethinkers, for a notion to be considered true it must be testable, verifiable, and logical. Many freethinkers tend to be humanists, who base morality on human needs and would find meaning in human compassion, social progress, art, personal happiness, love, and the furtherance of knowledge. Generally, freethinkers like to think for themselves, tend to be skeptical, respect critical thinking and reason, remain open to new concepts, and are sometimes proud of their own individuality. They would determine truth for themselves – based upon knowledge they gain, answers they receive, experiences they have and the balance they thus acquire. Freethinkers reject conformity for the sake of conformity, whereby they create their own beliefs by considering the way the world around them works and would possess the intellectual integrity and courage to think outside of accepted norms, which may or may not lead them to believe in some higher power.[14]

Symbol


The pansy, a symbol of freethought.

The pansy serves as the long-established and enduring symbol of freethought; literature of the American Secular Union inaugurated its usage in the late 1800s. The reasoning behind the pansy as the symbol of freethought lies both in the flower's name and in its appearance. The pansy derives its name from the French word pensée, which means "thought". It allegedly received this name because the flower is perceived by some to bear resemblance to a human face, and in mid-to-late summer it nods forward as if deep in thought.[15] Challenging Religious Dogma: A History of Free Thought, a pamphlet dating from the 1880s had this statement under the title "The Pansy Badge":[16]

There is . . . need of a badge which shall express at first glance, without complexity of detail, that basic principle of freedom of thought for which Liberals of all isms are contending. This need seems to have been met by the Freethinkers of France, Belgium, Spain and Sweden, who have adopted the pansy as their badge. We join with them in recommending this flower as a simple and inexpensive badge of Freethought...Let every patriot who is a Freethinker in this sense, adopt the pansy as his badge, to be worn at all times, as a silent and unobtrusive testimony of his principles. In this way we shall recognize our brethren in the cause, and the enthusiasm will spread; until, before long, the uplifted standard of the pansy, beneath the sheltering folds of the United States flag, shall everywhere thrill men's hearts as the symbol of religious liberty and freedom of conscience."

History

Pre-modern movement

Critical thought has flourished in the Hellenistic Mediterranean, in the repositories of knowledge and wisdom in Ireland and in the Iranian civilizations (for example in the era of Khayyam (1048–1131) and his unorthodox Sufi Rubaiyat poems), and in other civilizations, such as the Chinese (note for example the seafaring renaissance of the Southern Song dynasty of 420–479),[17] and on through heretical thinkers on esoteric alchemy or astrology, to the Renaissance and the Protestant Reformation.

French physician and writer Rabelais celebrated "rabelaisian" freedom as well as good feasting and drinking (an expression and a symbol of freedom of the mind) in defiance of the hypocrisies of conformist orthodoxy in his utopian Thelema Abbey (from θέλημα: free "will"), the device of which was Do What Thou Wilt:

So had Gargantua established it. In all their rule and strictest tie of their order there was but this one clause to be observed, Do What Thou Wilt; because free people ... act virtuously and avoid vice. They call this honor.

When Rabelais's hero Pantagruel journeys to the "Oracle of The Div(in)e Bottle", he learns the lesson of life in one simple word: "Trinch!", Drink! Enjoy the simple life, learn wisdom and knowledge, as a free human. Beyond puns, irony, and satire, Gargantua's prologue-metaphor instructs the reader to "break the bone and suck out the substance-full marrow" ("la substantifique moëlle"), the core of wisdom.

Modern movements


Freethought logo

The year 1600 is considered a landmark in the era of modern freethought. It was the year of the execution in Italy of Giordano Bruno, a former Dominican friar, by the Inquisition.[18][19][20]

England

The term free-thinker emerged towards the end of the 17th century in England to describe those who stood in opposition to the institution of the Church, and the literal belief in the Bible. The beliefs of these individuals were centered on the concept that people could understand the world through consideration of nature. Such positions were formally documented for the first time in 1697 by William Molyneux in a widely publicized letter to John Locke, and more extensively in 1713, when Anthony Collins wrote his Discourse of Free-thinking, which gained substantial popularity. This essay attacks the clergy of all churches and it is a plea for deism.

The Freethinker magazine was first published in Britain in 1881.

France

In France, the concept first appeared in publication in 1765 when Denis Diderot, Jean le Rond d'Alembert, and Voltaire included an article on Liberté de penser in their Encyclopédie.[21] The European freethought concepts spread so widely that even places as remote as the Jotunheimen, in Norway, had well-known freethinkers such as Jo Gjende by the 19th century.[22]

François-Jean Lefebvre de la Barre (1745–1766) was a young French nobleman, famous for having been tortured and beheaded before his body was burnt on a pyre along with Voltaire's Philosophical Dictionary. La Barre is often said to have been executed for not saluting a Roman Catholic religious procession, but the elements of the case were far more complex.[23]

In France, Lefebvre de la Barre is widely regarded a symbol of the victims of Christian religious intolerance; La Barre along with Jean Calas and Pierre-Paul Sirven, was championed by Voltaire. A second replacement statue to de la Barre stands nearby the Basilica of the Sacred Heart of Jesus of Paris at the summit of the butte Montmartre (itself named from the Temple of Mars), the highest point in Paris and an 18th arrondissement street nearby the Sacré-Cœur is also named after Lefebvre de la Barre.

Germany

In Germany, during the period 1815–1848 and before the March Revolution, the resistance of citizens against the dogma of the church increased. In 1844, under the influence of Johannes Ronge and Robert Blum, belief in the rights of man, tolerance among men, and humanism grew, and by 1859 they had established the Bund Freireligiöser Gemeinden Deutschlands (literally Union of Free Religious Communities of Germany), an association of persons who consider themselves to be religious without adhering to any established and institutionalized church or sacerdotal cult. This union still exists today, and is included as a member in the umbrella organization of free humanists. In 1881 in Frankfurt am Main, Ludwig Büchner established the Deutscher Freidenkerbund (German Freethinkers League) as the first German organization for atheists and agnostics. In 1892 the Freidenker-Gesellschaft and in 1906 the Deutscher Monistenbund were formed.[24]

Freethought organizations developed the "Jugendweihe" (literally Youth consecration), a secular "confirmation" ceremony, and atheist funeral rites.[24][25] The Union of Freethinkers for Cremation was founded in 1905, and the Central Union of German Proletariat Freethinker in 1908. The two groups merged in 1927, becoming the German Freethinking Association in 1930.[26]

More "bourgeois" organizations declined after World War I, and "proletarian" Freethought groups proliferated, becoming an organization of socialist parties.[24][27] European socialist freethought groups formed the International of Proletarian Freethinkers (IPF) in 1925.[28] Activists agitated for Germans to disaffiliate from their respective Church and for seculari-zation of elementary schools; between 1919–21 and 1930–32 more than 2.5 million Germans, for the most part supporters of the Social Democratic and Communist parties, gave up church membership.[29] Conflict developed between radical forces including the Soviet League of the Militant Godless and Social Democratic forces in Western Europe led by Theodor Hartwig and Max Sievers.[28] In 1930 the Soviet and allied delegations, following a walk-out, took over the IPF and excluded the former leaders.[28] Following Hitler's rise to power in 1933, most freethought organizations were banned, though some right-wing groups that worked with so-called Völkische Bünde (literally "ethnic" associations with nationalist, xenophobic and very often racist ideology) were tolerated by the Nazis until the mid-1930s.[24][27]

Belgium

Main article: Organized secularism

The Université Libre de Bruxelles and the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, along with the two Circles of Free Inquiry (Dutch and French speaking), defend the freedom of critical thought, lay philosophy and ethics, while rejecting the argument of authority.

Netherlands

In the Netherlands, freethought has existed in organized form since the establishment of De Dageraad (now known as De Vrije Gedachte) in 1856. Among its most notable subscribing 19th century individuals were Johannes van Vloten, Multatuli, Adriaan Gerhard and Domela Nieuwenhuis.

In 2009, Frans van Dongen established the Atheist-Secular Party, which takes a considerably restrictive view of religion and public religious expressions.

Since the 19th century, Freethought in the Netherlands has become more well known as a political phenomenon through at least three currents: liberal freethinking, conservative freethinking, and classical freethinking. In other words, parties which identify as freethinking tend to favor non-doctrinal, rational approaches to their preferred ideologies, and arose as secular alternatives to both clerically aligned parties as well as labor-aligned parties. Common themes among freethinking political parties are "freedom", "liberty", and "individualism".

Switzerland

Main article: Freethinkers Association of Switzerland

With the introduction of cantonal church taxes in the 1870s, anti-clericals began to organise themselves. Around 1870, a "freethinkers club" was founded in Zürich. During the debate on the Zürich church law in 1883, professor Friedrich Salomon Vögelin and city council member Kunz proposed to separate church and state.[30]

Turkey

In the last years of the Ottoman Empire, freethought made its voice heard by the works of distinguished people such as Ahmet Rıza, Tevfik Fikret, Abdullah Cevdet, Kılıçzade Hakkı, and Celal Nuri İleri. These intellectuals affected the early period of the Turkish Republic. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk –field marshal, revolutionary statesman, author, and founder of the secular Turkish nation state, serving as its first President from 1923 until his death in 1938– was the practitioner of their ideas. He made many reforms that modernized the country. Sources point out that Atatürk was a religious skeptic and a freethinker. He was a non-doctrinaire deist[31][32] or an atheist,[33][34][35] who was antireligious and anti-Islamic in general.[36][37] According to Atatürk, the Turkish people do not know what Islam really is and do not read the Quran. People are influenced by Arabic sentences that they do not understand, and because of their customs they go to mosques. When the Turks read the Quran and think about it, they will leave Islam.[38] Atatürk described Islam as the religion of the Arabs in his own work titled Vatandaş için Medeni Bilgiler by his own critical and nationalist views.[39]

Association of Atheism (Ateizm Derneği), the first official atheist organisation in Middle East and Caucasus, was founded in 2014.[40] It serves to support irreligious people and freethinkers in Turkey who are discriminated against based on their views. In 2018 it was reported in some media outlets that the Ateizm Derneği would close down because of the pressure on its members and attacks by pro-government media, but the association itself issued a clarification that this was not the case and that it was still active.[41]

United States

The Free Thought movement first organized itself in the United States as the "Free Press Association" in 1827 in defense of George Houston, publisher of The Correspondent, an early journal of Biblical criticism in an era when blasphemy convictions were still possible. Houston had helped found an Owenite community at Haverstraw, New York in 1826–27. The short-lived Correspondent was superseded by the Free Enquirer, the official organ of Robert Owen's New Harmony community in Indiana, edited by Robert Dale Owen and by Fanny Wright between 1828 and 1832 in New York. During this time Robert Dale Owen sought to introduce the philosophic skepticism of the Free Thought movement into the Workingmen's Party in New York City. The Free Enquirer's annual civic celebrations of Paine's birthday after 1825 finally coalesced in 1836 in the first national Free Thinkers organization, the "United States Moral and Philosophical Society for the General Diffusion of Useful Knowledge". It was founded on August 1, 1836, at a national convention at the Lyceum in Saratoga Springs with Isaac S. Smith of Buffalo, New York, as president. Smith was also the 1836 Equal Rights Party's candidate for Governor of New York and had also been the Workingmen's Party candidate for Lt. Governor of New York in 1830. The Moral and Philosophical Society published The Beacon, edited by Gilbert Vale.[42]


Robert G. Ingersoll[43]

Driven by the revolutions of 1848 in the German states, the 19th century saw an immigration of German freethinkers and anti-clericalists to the United States (see Forty-Eighters). In the United States, they hoped to be able to live by their principles, without interference from government and church authorities.[44]

Many Freethinkers settled in German immigrant strongholds, including St. Louis, Indianapolis, Wisconsin, and Texas, where they founded the town of Comfort, Texas, as well as others.[44]

These groups of German Freethinkers referred to their organizations as Freie Gemeinden, or "free congregations".[44] The first Freie Gemeinde was established in St. Louis in 1850.[45] Others followed in Pennsylvania, California, Washington, D.C., New York, Illinois, Wisconsin, Texas, and other states.[44][45]

Freethinkers tended to be liberal, espousing ideals such as racial, social, and sexual equality, and the abolition of slavery.[44]

The "Golden Age of Freethought" in the US came in the late 1800s. The dominant organization was the National Liberal League which formed in 1876 in Philadelphia. This group re-formed itself in 1885 as the American Secular Union under the leadership of the eminent agnostic orator Robert G. Ingersoll. Following Ingersoll's death in 1899 the organization declined, in part due to lack of effective leadership.[46]

Freethought in the United States declined in the early twentieth century. By the early twentieth century, most Freethought congregations had disbanded or joined other mainstream churches. The longest continuously operating Freethought congregation in America is the Free Congregation of Sauk County, Wisconsin, which was founded in 1852 and is still active as of 2020. It affiliated with the American Unitarian Association (now the Unitarian Universalist Association) in 1955.[47] D. M. Bennett was the founder and publisher of The Truth Seeker in 1873, a radical freethought and reform American periodical.

German Freethinker settlements were located in:

• Burlington, Racine County, Wisconsin[44]
• Belleville, St. Clair County, Illinois
• Castell, Llano County, Texas
• Comfort, Kendall County, Texas
• Davenport, Scott County, Iowa[48]
• Fond du Lac, Fond du Lac County, Wisconsin[44]
• Frelsburg, Colorado County, Texas
• Hermann, Gasconade County, Missouri
• Jefferson, Jefferson County, Wisconsin[44]
• Indianapolis, Indiana[49]
• Latium, Washington County, Texas
• Manitowoc, Manitowoc County, Wisconsin[44]
• Meyersville, DeWitt County, Texas
• Milwaukee, Wisconsin[44]
• Millheim, Austin County, Texas
• Oshkosh, Winnebago County, Wisconsin[44]
• Ratcliffe, DeWitt County, Texas
• Sauk City, Sauk County, Wisconsin[44][47]
• Shelby, Austin County, Texas
• Sisterdale, Kendall County, Texas
• St. Louis, Missouri
• Tusculum, Kendall County, Texas
• Two Rivers, Manitowoc County, Wisconsin[44]
• Watertown, Dodge County, Wisconsin[44]

Canada

In 1873 a handful of secularists founded the earliest known secular organization in English Canada, the Toronto Freethought Association. Reorganized in 1877 and again in 1881, when it was renamed the Toronto Secular Society, the group formed the nucleus of the Canadian Secular Union, established in 1884 to bring together freethinkers from across the country.[50]

A significant number of the early members appear to have come from the educated labour "aristocracy", including Alfred F. Jury, J. Ick Evans and J. I. Livingstone, all of whom were leading labour activists and secularists. The second president of the Toronto association, T. Phillips Thompson, became a central figure in the city's labour and social-reform movements during the 1880s and 1890s and arguably Canada's foremost late nineteenth-century labour intellectual. By the early 1880s scattered freethought organizations operated throughout southern Ontario and parts of Quebec, eliciting both urban and rural support.

The principal organ of the freethought movement in Canada was Secular Thought (Toronto, 1887–1911). Founded and edited during its first several years by English freethinker Charles Watts (1835–1906), it came under the editorship of Toronto printer and publisher James Spencer Ellis in 1891 when Watts returned to England. In 1968 the Humanist Association of Canada (HAC) formed to serve as an umbrella group for humanists, atheists, and freethinkers, and to champion social justice issues and oppose religious influence on public policy—most notably in the fight to make access to abortion free and legal in Canada.

Anarchism

In the United States of America,

"freethought was a basically anti-Christian, anti-clerical movement, whose purpose was to make the individual politically and spiritually free to decide for himself on religious matters. A number of contributors to Liberty were prominent figures in both freethought and anarchism. The individualist anarchist George MacDonald was a co-editor of Freethought and, for a time, The Truth Seeker. E.C. Walker was co-editor of the freethought/free love journal Lucifer, the Light-Bearer."[51]

"Many of the anarchists were ardent freethinkers; reprints from freethought papers such as Lucifer, the Light-Bearer, Freethought and The Truth Seeker appeared in Liberty...The church was viewed as a common ally of the state and as a repressive force in and of itself."[51]

Lucifer was the title of a Theosophist journal published by Helena Blavatsky; the first issue appeared in London in September 1887.

The Light-Bearer is the Morning Star or Lucifer, and "Lucifer is no profane or Satanic title. It is the Latin Luciferus, the Light-Bringer, the Morning Star, Equivalent to the Greek [x] ... The Name of the Pure Pale Herald of Daylight." -- Yonge

-- Lucifer: A Theosophical Magazine Designed to "Bring to Light the Hidden Things of Darkness"

Lucifer the Lightbearer was the title of an individualist-anarchist journal published in the United States around the turn of the twentieth century [1886]. According to its publisher, Moses Harman, the name was chosen because "Lucifer, the ancient name of the Morning Star, now called Venus, seems to us unsurpassed as a cognomen for a journal whose mission is to bring light to the dwellers in darkness" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer_the_Lightbearer; accessed May 30, 2017).

-- Marcel Duchamp and the Art of Life, by Jacquelynn Baas

In Europe, a similar development occurred in French and Spanish individualist anarchist circles:

"Anticlericalism, just as in the rest of the libertarian movement, in another of the frequent elements which will gain relevance related to the measure in which the (French) Republic begins to have conflicts with the church...Anti-clerical discourse, frequently called for by the French individualist André Lorulot, will have its impacts in Estudios (a Spanish individualist anarchist publication). There will be an attack on institutionalized religion for the responsibility that it had in the past on negative developments, for its irrationality which makes it a counterpoint of philosophical and scientific progress. There will be a criticism of proselytism and ideological manipulation which happens on both believers and agnostics".[52]

These tendencies would continue in French individualist anarchism in the work and activism of Charles-Auguste Bontemps (1893-1981) and others. In the Spanish individualist anarchist magazines Ética and Iniciales

"there is a strong interest in publishing scientific news, usually linked to a certain atheist and anti-theist obsession, philosophy which will also work for pointing out the incompatibility between science and religion, faith, and reason. In this way there will be a lot of talk on Darwin's theories or on the negation of the existence of the soul".[53]

In 1901 the Catalan anarchist and freethinker Francesc Ferrer i Guàrdia established "modern" or progressive schools in Barcelona in defiance of an educational system controlled by the Catholic Church.[54] The schools had the stated goal to "educate the working class in a rational, secular and non-coercive setting". Fiercely anti-clerical, Ferrer believed in "freedom in education", education free from the authority of church and state.[55][failed verification] Ferrer's ideas, generally, formed the inspiration for a series of Modern Schools in the United States,[54] Cuba, South America and London. The first of these started in New York City in 1911. Ferrer also inspired the Italian newspaper Università popolare, founded in 1901.[54]

See also

• Brights movement
• Critical rationalism
• Ethical movement
• Secular humanism
• Freedom of thought
• Freethought Association of Canada
• Freethought Day
• Golden Age of Freethought
• Individualism
• Objectivism
• Rationalism
• Religious skepticism
• Scientism
• Secular Thought
• Spiritual but not religious
• The Freethinker (journal)

Notes and references

1. "Freethinker – Definition of freethinker by Merriam-Webster". Retrieved 12 June 2015.
2. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2013-01-17. Retrieved 2012-02-03.
3. "Nontracts". Archived from the original on 4 August 2012. Retrieved 12 June 2015.
4. "who are the Freethinkers?". Freethinkers.com. 2018-02-13. Retrieved 14 February 2018.
5. "What Is Freethought?". Daylight Atheism. 2010-02-26. Retrieved 12 June 2015.
6. Adam Lee (October 2012). "9 Great Freethinkers and Religious Dissenters in History". Big Think. Retrieved 12 June 2015.
7. William Kingdon Clifford, The Ethics of Belief (1879 [1877]).
8. Becker, Lawrence and Charlotte (2013). Encyclopedia of Ethics (article on "agnosticism"). Routledge. p. 44. ISBN 9781135350963.
9. Hastings, James (2003-01-01). Encyclopedia of Religion. ISBN 9780766136830.
10. "What is a Freethinker? - Freedom From Religion Foundation". Retrieved 12 June 2015.
11. "Saga Of Freethought And Its Pioneers". American Humanist Association. Archived from the original on 15 July 2015. Retrieved 12 June 2015.
12. James E. Force, Introduction (1990) to An Account of the Growth of Deism in England (1696) by William Stephens
13. Aveling, Francis, ed. (1908). "Deism". The Catholic Encyclopedia. Retrieved 2012-10-10. The deists were what nowadays would be called freethinkers, a name, indeed, by which they were not infrequently known; and they can only be classed together wholly in the main attitude that they adopted, viz. in agreeing to cast off the trammels of authoritative religious teaching in favour of a free and purely rationalistic speculation.... Deism, in its every manifestation was opposed to the current and traditional teaching of revealed religion.
14. A COMMON PLACE by Ruth Kelly and Liam Byrne
15. A Pansy For Your Thoughts, by Annie Laurie Gaylor, Freethought Today, June/July 1997
16. The Pansy of Freethought - Rediscovering A Forgotten Symbol Of Freethought by Annie Laurie Gaylor
17. Chinese History – Song Dynasty 宋 (http://www.chinaknowledge.de)
18. Gatti, Hilary (2002). Giordano Bruno and Renaissance Science: Broken Lives and Organizational Power. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press. pp. 18–19. ISBN 978-0801487859. Retrieved 21 March 2014. For Bruno was claiming for the philosopher a principle of free thought and inquiry which implied an entirely new concept of authority: that of the individual intellect in its serious and continuing pursuit of an autonomous inquiry… It is impossible to understand the issue involved and to evaluate justly the stand made by Bruno with his life without appreciating the question of free thought and liberty of expression. His insistence on placing this issue at the center of both his work and of his defense is why Bruno remains so much a figure of the modern world. If there is, as many have argued, an intrinsic link between science and liberty of inquiry, then Bruno was among those who guaranteed the future of the newly emerging sciences, as well as claiming in wider terms a general principle of free thought and expression.
19. Montano, Aniello (24 November 2007). Antonio Gargano (ed.). Le deposizioni davanti al tribunale dell'Inquisizione. Napoli: La Città del Sole. p. 71. In Rome, Bruno was imprisoned for seven years and subjected to a difficult trial that analyzed, minutely, all his philosophical ideas. Bruno, who in Venice had been willing to recant some theses, become increasingly resolute and declared on 21 December 1599 that he 'did not wish to repent of having too little to repent, and in fact did not know what to repent.' Declared an unrepentant heretic and excommunicated, he was burned alive in the Campo dei Fiori in Rome on 17 February 1600. On the stake, along with Bruno, burned the hopes of many, including philosophers and scientists of good faith like Galileo, who thought they could reconcile religious faith and scientific research, while belonging to an ecclesiastical organization declaring itself to be the custodian of absolute truth and maintaining a cultural militancy requiring continual commitment and suspicion.
20. Birx, James (11 November 1997). "Giordano Bruno". Mobile Alabama Harbinger. Retrieved 28 April 2014. To me, Bruno is the supreme martyr for both free thought and critical inquiry… Bruno's critical writings, which pointed out the hypocrisy and bigotry within the Church, along with his tempestuous personality and undisciplined behavior, easily made him a victim of the religious and philosophical intolerance of the 16th century. Bruno was excommunicated by the Catholic, Lutheran and Calvinist Churches for his heretical beliefs. The Catholic hierarchy found him guilty of infidelity and many errors, as well as serious crimes of heresy… Bruno was burned to death at the stake for his pantheistic stance and cosmic perspective.
21. "ARTFL Encyclopédie Search Results". 1751–1772. p. 472. Retrieved 12 June 2015.
22. "Gjendesheim". MEMIM. 2016. Archived from the original on 8 August 2016. Retrieved 8 August 2016.
23. Gregory, Mary Efrosini (2008). Evolutionism in Eighteenth-century French Thought. Peter Lang. p. 192. ISBN 9781433103735. Retrieved 1 September 2016.
24. Bock, Heike (2006). "Secularization of the modern conduct of life? Reflections on the religiousness of early modern Europe". In Hanne May (ed.). Religiosität in der säkularisierten Welt. VS Verlag fnr Sozialw. p. 157. ISBN 978-3-8100-4039-8.
25. Reese, Dagmar (2006). Growing up female in Nazi Germany. Ann Arbor, Mich: University of Michigan Press. p. 160. ISBN 978-0-472-06938-5.
26. Reinhalter, Helmut (1999). "Freethinkers". In Bromiley, Geoffrey William; Fahlbusch, Erwin (eds.). The encyclopedia of Christianity. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans. ISBN 978-90-04-11695-5.
27. Kaiser, Jochen-Christoph (2003). Christel Gärtner (ed.). Atheismus und religiöse Indifferenz. Organisierter Atheismus. VS Verlag. ISBN 978-3-8100-3639-1.
28. Peris, Daniel (1998). Storming the heavens: the Soviet League of the Militant Godless. Ithaca, N.Y: Cornell University Press. pp. 110–11. ISBN 978-0-8014-3485-3.
29. Lamberti, Marjorie (2004). Politics Of Education: Teachers and School Reform in Weimar Germany (Monographs in German History). Providence: Berghahn Books. p. 185. ISBN 978-1-57181-299-5.
30. "Geschichte der Freidenker". FAS website (in German). Retrieved 10 May 2016.
31. Reşat Kasaba, "Atatürk", The Cambridge history of Turkey: Volume 4: Turkey in the Modern World, Cambridge University Press, 2008; ISBN 978-0-521-62096-3 p. 163; accessed 27 March 2015.
32. Political Islam in Turkey by Gareth Jenkins, Palgrave Macmillan, 2008, p. 84; ISBN 0230612458
33. Atheism, Brief Insights Series by Julian Baggini, Sterling Publishing Company, Inc., 2009; ISBN 1402768826, p. 106.
34. Islamism: A Documentary and Reference Guide, John Calvert John, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2008; ISBN 0313338566, p. 19.
35. Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the founder of the secular Turkish Republic said: "I have no religion, and at times I wish all religions at the bottom of the sea..." The Antipodean Philosopher: Interviews on Philosophy in Australia and New Zealand, Graham Oppy, Lexington Books, 2011, ISBN 0739167936, p. 146.
36. Phil Zuckerman, John R. Shook, The Oxford Handbook of Secularism, Oxford University Press, 2017, ISBN 0199988455, p. 167.
37. Tariq Ramadan, Islam and the Arab Awakening, Oxford University Press, 2012, ISBN 0199933731, p. 76.
38. Atatürk İslam için ne düşünüyordu?
39.
“ Even before accepting the religion of the Arabs, the Turks were a great nation. After accepting the religion of the Arabs, this religion, didn't effect to combine the Arabs, the Persians and Egyptians with the Turks to constitute a nation. (This religion) rather, loosened the national nexus of Turkish nation, got national excitement numb. This was very natural. Because the purpose of the religion founded by Muhammad, over all nations, was to drag to an including Arab national politics. (Afet İnan, Medenî Bilgiler ve M. Kemal Atatürk'ün El Yazıları, Türk Tarih Kurumu, 1998, p. 364.) ”
40. "The first Atheist Association in Turkey is founded". http://turkishatheist.net. Retrieved 2 April 2017. External link in |website= (help)
41. "Turkey's Atheism Association threatened by hostility and lack of interest | Ahval". Ahval. Retrieved 2018-10-21.
42. Hugins, Walter (1960). Jacksonian Democracy and the Working Class: A Study of the New York Workingmen's Movement 1829–1837. Stanford: Stanford University Press. pp. 36–48.
43. Brandt, Eric T., and Timothy Larsen (2011). "The Old Atheism Revisited: Robert G. Ingersoll and the Bible". Journal of the Historical Society. 11 (2): 211–38. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5923.2011.00330.x.
44. "Freethinkers in Wisconsin". Dictionary of Wisconsin History. 2008. Retrieved 2008-07-27.
45. Demerath, N. J. III and Victor Thiessen, "On Spitting Against the Wind: Organizational Precariousness and American Irreligion," The American Journal of Sociology, 71: 6 (May, 1966), 674–87.
46. "National Liberal League". The Freethought Trail. freethought-trail.org. Retrieved 9 March 2014.
47. "History of the Free Congregation of Sauk County: The "Freethinkers" Story". Free Congregation of Sauk County. April 2009. Archived from the original on 2012-03-26. Retrieved 2012-02-05.
48. William Roba; Fredrick I. Anderson (ed.) (1982). Joined by a River: Quad Cities. Davenport: Lee Enterprises. p. 73.
49. "The Turners, Forty-eighters and Freethinkers". Freedom from Religion Foundation. July 2002. Archived from the originalon 2012-07-12. Retrieved 2008-07-27.
50. *Ramsay Cook, The Regenerators: Social Criticism in Late Victorian English Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985), pp. 46–64.
51. "The Journal of Libertarian Studies" (PDF). Mises Institute. 2014-07-30. Retrieved 12 June 2015.
52. Xavier Diez. El anarquismo individualista en España (1923–1939) Virus Editorial. 2007. p. 143
53. Xavier Diez. El anarquismo individualista en España (1923–1939) Virus Editorial. 2007. p. 152
54. Geoffrey C. Fidler (Spring–Summer 1985). "The Escuela Moderna Movement of Francisco Ferrer: "Por la Verdad y la Justicia"". History of Education Quarterly. 25 (1/2): 103–32. doi:10.2307/368893. JSTOR 368893.
55. * "Francisco Ferrer's Modern School". Flag.blackened.net. Archived from the original on 2010-08-07. Retrieved 2010-09-20.

Further reading

• Alexander, Nathan G. (2019). Race in a Godless World: Atheism, Race, and Civilization, 1850-1914. New York/Manchester: New York University Press/Manchester University Press. ISBN 978-1526142375
• Alexander Nathan G. "Unclasping the Eagle's Talons: Mark Twain, American Freethought, and the Responses to Imperialism." The Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 17, no. 3 (2018): 524–545.
• Bury, John Bagnell. (1913). A History of Freedom of Thought. New York: Henry Holt and Company.
• Jacoby, Susan. (2004). Freethinkers: A History of American Secularism. New York: Metropolitan Books. ISBN 0-8050-7442-2
• Putnam, Samuel Porter. (1894). Four Hundred Years of Freethought. New York: Truth Seeker Company.
• Royle, Edward. (1974). Victorian Infidels: The Origins of the British Secularist Movement, 1791–1866. Manchester: Manchester University Press. ISBN 0-7190-0557-4
• Royle, Edward. (1980). Radicals, Secularists and Republicans: popular freethought in Britain, 1866–1915. Manchester: Manchester University Press. ISBN 0-7190-0783-6
• Tribe, David. (1967). 100 Years of Freethought. London: Elek Books.

External links

• Freethinker Indonesia
• A History of Freethought
• Young Freethought
• "Freethinker" . New International Encyclopedia. 1905.
• Philosophy portal

[admin]

Moses Harman
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 3/26/20

(Redirected from Lucifer, the Light-Bearer)


Moses Harman
Born October 12, 1830
Pendleton County, West Virginia, US
Died January 30, 1910 (aged 79)
Los Angeles, California, US
Nationality American
Occupation Schoolteacher, publisher
Known for Anarchism, women’s rights


Lucifer the Lightbearer cover header

Moses Harman (October 12, 1830 – January 30, 1910) was an American schoolteacher and publisher notable for his staunch support for women's rights. He was prosecuted under the Comstock Law for content published in his anarchist periodical Lucifer the Lightbearer. He was arrested and jailed multiple times for publishing allegedly obscene material. His daughter, Lillian Harman, was also a notable anarchist.

Biography

Moses Harman was born on October 12, 1830 in Pendleton County, West Virginia[1] to Job and Nancy Harman. Their family later moved to Crawford County, Missouri. Harman taught subscription school courses and attended Arcadia College. After completing his schoolwork, Harman worked as a Methodist circuit rider and teacher.[2]

Harman married Susan Scheuck in 1866. Although they had several children, only two survived and Susan died in childbirth in 1877. Harman left the ministry and began his involvement with eugenics and social reform following Susan's death. In 1881, Harman edited the Kansas Liberal newspaper in Valley Falls, Kansas.[2]

Harman has been credited as one of the founders of what became the eugenics movement. "He gave the spur and start to this effort. Through his journals, Lucifer, the Light Bearer, later renamed The Eugenic Magazine, encouraged by a small circle of earnest men and women, he dug down below the surface endeavoring to bring forth a stronger and better type of men".[3]

In 1881, Harman co-edited the Valley Falls Liberal, and eventually became the editor. On August 24, 1883, Harman changed the name of the publication to Lucifer, the Light Bearer. He moved the location of the newspaper several times for financial and philosophical reasons: to Topeka, Kansas in 1890, to Chicago in 1896, and to Los Angeles in 1908. The name of the paper also changed to The American Journal of Eugenics in 1906.[1]

The American Journal of Eugenics was published from 1907-1910 by Moses Harman. 500 Fulton Street, Chicago, IL.

This periodical is made available courtesy of the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.

Due to licensing restrictions from Primary Source Media, the creator and copyright holder of the files that make up this digital collection, this periodical is limited to the Cornell Community, only.

-- The American Journal of Eugenics, by Cornell University Library

Articles published in Lucifer discussed topics such as religion, relationships, and raising children.[2] Through his work, Harman rejected all forms of religion and government, including marriage, and promoted freedom, love, wisdom, and the use of knowledge. Due to the radical nature of his views and publication, Harman constantly dealt with lawsuits, charges of immorality, ridicule, and issues with mailing what was considered obscene material through the United States Postal Service. Consequently, Harman was sentenced and released by courts several times in the 1890s.[1]

Lucifer was the title of a Theosophist journal published by Helena Blavatsky; the first issue appeared in London in September 1887.

The Light-Bearer is the Morning Star or Lucifer, and "Lucifer is no profane or Satanic title. It is the Latin Luciferus, the Light-Bringer, the Morning Star, Equivalent to the Greek [x] ... The Name of the Pure Pale Herald of Daylight." -- Yonge

-- Lucifer: A Theosophical Magazine Designed to "Bring to Light the Hidden Things of Darkness"

Lucifer the Lightbearer was the title of an individualist-anarchist journal published in the United States around the turn of the twentieth century [1886]. According to its publisher, Moses Harman, the name was chosen because "Lucifer, the ancient name of the Morning Star, now called Venus, seems to us unsurpassed as a cognomen for a journal whose mission is to bring light to the dwellers in darkness" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer_the_Lightbearer; accessed May 30, 2017).

-- Marcel Duchamp and the Art of Life, by Jacquelynn Baas

He died on January 30, 1910, aged 79, in Los Angeles.[4]

References

1. "Moses Harman". Kansapedia. Kansas Historical Society. Retrieved 20 November 2013.
2. "C3802 Harman, Moses (1830-1910), Papers, 1858-1984" (PDF). The State Historical Society of Missouri. Retrieved 20 November 2013.
3. The Naturopath and Herald of Health, March 1914
4. "Dagger In heart, Last Will". Chicago Tribune. January 31, 1910. Moses Harman Dies in Los Angeles at the Age of Nearly 80. ... Moses Harman, one of the pioneers of the eugenics movement in America, died yesterday in Los ...

Further reading

• Herrada, Julie (2007). "Harman, Moses". In Dawkins, Richard (ed.). The New Encyclopedia of Unbelief. Prometheus Books. pp. 378–379. ISBN 978-1-61592-280-2.
• West, William Lemore (Spring 1971). "The Moses Harman Story". Kansas History. 37 (1): 41–63.

External links

• Works by or about Moses Harman at Internet Archive
• Moses Harman: A Kansas Portrait from the Kansas State Historical Society
• Moses Harman: The Paradigm of A Male Feminist by Wendy McElroy
• Sex Slavery by Voltairine de Cleyre, an 1890 essay supporting Harman and attacking the institution of marriage

[admin]

Lucifer: The Light-Bearer
Edited by Moses Harman, Edward C. Walker, and occasionally, during Harman's imprisonments, Lillian Harman, Lois Waisbrooker, et al.
1886-1907

Lucifer was the title of a Theosophist journal published by Helena Blavatsky; the first issue appeared in London in September 1887.

The Light-Bearer is the Morning Star or Lucifer, and "Lucifer is no profane or Satanic title. It is the Latin Luciferus, the Light-Bringer, the Morning Star, Equivalent to the Greek [x] ... The Name of the Pure Pale Herald of Daylight." -- Yonge

-- Lucifer: A Theosophical Magazine Designed to "Bring to Light the Hidden Things of Darkness"

Lucifer the Lightbearer was the title of an individualist-anarchist journal published in the United States around the turn of the twentieth century [1886]. According to its publisher, Moses Harman, the name was chosen because "Lucifer, the ancient name of the Morning Star, now called Venus, seems to us unsurpassed as a cognomen for a journal whose mission is to bring light to the dwellers in darkness" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer_the_Lightbearer; accessed May 30, 2017).

-- Marcel Duchamp and the Art of Life, by Jacquelynn Baas

From Pat Deveney's database:

Lucifer. The Light-Bearer. A Journal of Investigation and Reform, Justice and Liberty. Devoted to the Emancipation of Women from Sexual Slavery / Son of the Morning. A Fortnightly of Radical Thought, Devoted Mainly to the Emancipation of Womanhood from Sex Slavery, and to the Rights of the Child to be Born Well.

1883-1907 Weekly Valley Falls, then Topeka, KS, and then Chicago, IL. Editor: Moses Harman, Edward C. Walker, and occasionally, during Harman's imprisonments, Lillian Harman, Lois Waisbrooker, et al.
Succeeds: The Valley Falls Liberal-->The Kansas Liberal (1881-1883) Succeeded by: American Journal of Eugenics 1/1, August 1883-1907. 13 x 20. 4 pp., $1.25 a year.

The issues were dated with the standard month and day but gave the years as "E.M.," the "Era of Man," calculated from the execution of Giordano Bruno in 1600. The journal from the first issue labeled itself as "n.s.," but the reference was to earlier journals under different names. It was put out by Harman and his children and the layout, orthography and condition of the type reflect its origin as a labor of love rather than a commercial venture. A third series was started in 1897 in Chicago.

Harman (1830-1910) was a former teacher and Methodist minister who turned his stubbornness and effort first to abolition and then to free thought, individual sovereignty (anarchy), and marriage reform ("free love," as its more socially acceptable version was then known). Lucifer was one of he cornerstones of American liberalism's long fight against Anthony Comstock and the obscenity laws. It began in 1880 as The Valley Falls (Kansas) Liberal, the organ of the local Liberal League, with Harman as one of the editors, and the next year was transformed into the Kansas Liberal which Harman edited with Annie L. Diggs, a noted populist. The name was changed to Lucifer in 1883. There followed 10 years of arrests, indictments, appeals, and jailings before Harman moved the journal to Chicago in 1896 -- where he was again imprisoned in 1905. On his release he changed the journal's name to The American Journal of Eugenics and turned his attention exclusively to eugenics as the path to social betterment--though for Harman the term eugenics also included elements of libertinism which increasingly alienated Harman from more doctrinaire feminists. On Harman, see Hal D. Sears, The Sex Radicals: Free Love in High Victorian America (Lawrence, KS: Regents' Press, 1977). For a period in the 1890s the journal had as a sister-publication in Wichita Lois Waisbrooker's Foundation Principles, and Waisbrooker helped publish Lucifer during one of Harman's stints in jail, only to be arrested herself for her work on the journal. Lillian Harman, Moses's daughter, split off from Lucifer in 1888 and started Fair Play with her husband. Harman regarded himself as a "tough materialist" but the journal carried regular correspondence on the troubled relationship between spiritualism and free thought mentioned some spiritualists (Moses Hull, Lois Waisbrooker, et al.) who were found acceptable. Kansas Historical Society; Harvard University; University of Wisconsin; etc.

Issues:

• Lucifer V2 2 Apr 27 1888
• Lucifer V3 N40 Jan 1 1886
• Lucifer V3 N41 Jan 8 1886
• Lucifer V3 N42 Jan 15 1886
• Lucifer V3 N42 Jan 15 1886 Ver 2
• Lucifer V3 N43 Jan 22 1886
• Lucifer V3 N44 Jan 29 1886
• Lucifer V3 N45 Feb 5 1886
• Lucifer V3 N46 Feb 12 1886
• Lucifer V3 N47 Feb 19 1886
• Lucifer V3 N48 Feb 26 1886
• Lucifer V3 N51 Mar 19 1886
• Lucifer V3 N52 Mar 26 1886
• Lucifer V4 N2 Apr 9 1886
• Lucifer V4 N3 Apr 16 1886
• Lucifer V4 N4 Apr 26 1886
• Lucifer V4 N5 Apr 30 1886
• Lucifer V4 N6 May 7 1886
• Lucifer V4 N7 May 14 1886
• Lucifer V4 N9 May 29 1886
• Lucifer V4 N10 Jun 4 1886
• Lucifer V4 N11 Jun 11 1886
• Lucifer V4 N13 Jun 25 1886
• Lucifer V4 N14 Jul 2 1886
• Lucifer V4 N15 Jul 9 1886
• Lucifer V4 N17 Jul 23 1886
• Lucifer V4 N19 Aug 6 1886
• Lucifer V4 N20 Aug 13 1886
• Lucifer V4 N21 Aug 20 1886
• Lucifer V4 N22 Aug 27 1886
• Lucifer V4 N23 Sep 3 1886
• Lucifer V4 N24 Sep 10 1886
• Lucifer V4 N25 Sep 17 1886
• Lucifer V4 N26 Sep 21 1886
• Lucifer V4 N27 Oct 1 1886
• Lucifer V4 N29 Oct 15 1886
• Lucifer V4 N30 Oct 22 1886
• Lucifer V4 N31 Oct 29 1886
• Lucifer V4 N32 Nov 5 1886
• Lucifer V4 N36 Dec 10 1886
• Lucifer V4 N37 Dec 17 1886
• Lucifer V4 N38 Dec 24 1886
• Lucifer V4 N39 Dec 31 1886
• Lucifer V4 N40 Jan 14 1887
• Lucifer V4 N41 Jan 28 1887
• Lucifer V4 N42 Feb 4 1887
• Lucifer V4 N43 Feb 11 1887
• Lucifer V4 N44 Feb 18 1887
• Lucifer V4 N46 Mar 4 1887
• Lucifer V4 N47 Mar 11 1887
• Lucifer V4 N48 Mar 18 1887
• Lucifer V4 N49 Mar 25 1887
• Lucifer V4 N50 Apr 1 1887
• Lucifer V4 N51 Apr 8 1887
• Lucifer V4 N52 Apr15 1887
• Lucifer V5 N6 May 27 1887
• Lucifer V5 N7 Jun 3 1887
• Lucifer V5 N8 Jun 10 1887
• Lucifer V5 N9 Jun 17 1887
• Lucifer V5 N11 Jul 1 1887.
• Lucifer V5 N12 Jul 8 1887
• Lucifer V5 N13 Jul 15 1887
• Lucifer V5 N14 Jul 22 1887
• Lucifer V5 N15 Jul 29 1887
• Lucifer V5 N16 Aug 5 1887
• Lucifer V5 N17 Aug 12 1887
• Lucifer V5 N19 Aug 29 1887
• Lucifer V5 N20 Sep 2 1887
• Lucifer V5 N21 Sep 9 1887
• Lucifer V5 N22 Sep 16 1887
• Lucifer V5 N23 Nsep 23 1887
• Lucifer V5 N24 Sep 30 1887
• Lucifer V5 N25 Oct 7 1887
• Lucifer V5 N26 Oct 14 1887
• Lucifer V5 N27 Oct 21 1887
• Lucifer V5 N28 Oct 28 1887
• Lucifer V5 N29 Nov 4 1887
• Lucifer V5 N30 Nov 11 1887
• Lucifer V5 N31 Nov 18 1887
• Lucifer V6 N10 Jun 22 1888
• Lucifer V6 N17 Aug 10 1888
• Lucifer V6 N17 Aug 1888 Ver 2
• Lucifer V6 N21 Sep 14 1888
• Lucifer V6 V34 Dec 14 1888
• Lucifer V6 N35 Dec 21 1888
• Lucifer V6 N36 Dec 28 1888
• Lucifer The Lightbearer 3s V1 1897
• Lucifer The Lightbearer 3s V2 1898
• Lucifer The Lightbearer 3s V3 1899
• Lucifer The Lightbearer 3s V4 1900
• Lucifer The Lightbearer 3s V5 1901
• Lucifer The Lightbearer 3s V6 1902
• Lucifer The Lightbearer 3s V7 1903
• Lucifer The Lightbearer 3s V8 1904
• Lucifer The Lightbearer 3s V9 1905
• Lucifer The Lightbearer 3s V10 1906
• Lucifer The Lightbearer 3s V11 1907

[admin]

Lucifer: A Theosophical Magazine Designed to "Bring to Light the Hidden Things of Darkness"
Edited by H.P. Blavatsky and Mabel Collins and Annie Besant and G.R.S. Mead
1887-1897

The Light-Bearer is the Morning Star or Lucifer, and "Lucifer is no profane or Satanic title. It is the Latin Luciferus, the Light-Bringer, the Morning Star, Equivalent to the Greek [x] ... The Name of the Pure Pale Herald of Daylight."

-- Yonge

Lucifer was the title of a Theosophist journal published by Helena Blavatsky; the first issue appeared in London in September 1887.

The Light-Bearer is the Morning Star or Lucifer, and "Lucifer is no profane or Satanic title. It is the Latin Luciferus, the Light-Bringer, the Morning Star, Equivalent to the Greek [x] ... The Name of the Pure Pale Herald of Daylight." -- Yonge

-- Lucifer: A Theosophical Magazine Designed to "Bring to Light the Hidden Things of Darkness"

Lucifer the Lightbearer was the title of an individualist-anarchist journal published in the United States around the turn of the twentieth century [1886]. According to its publisher, Moses Harman, the name was chosen because "Lucifer, the ancient name of the Morning Star, now called Venus, seems to us unsurpassed as a cognomen for a journal whose mission is to bring light to the dwellers in darkness" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer_the_Lightbearer; accessed May 30, 2017).

-- Marcel Duchamp and the Art of Life, by Jacquelynn Baas

Issues:

• Lucifer V1 Index
• Lucifer V1 N1 September 1887
• Lucifer V1 N2 October 1887
• Lucifer V1 N3 November 1887
• Lucifer V1 N4 December 1887
• Lucifer V1 N5 January 1888
• Lucifer V1 N6 February 1888
• Lucifer V2 Index
• Lucifer V2 N7 March 1888
• Lucifer V2 N8 April 1888
• Lucifer V2 N9 May 1888
• Lucifer V2 N10 June 1888
• Lucifer V2 N11 July 1888
• Lucifer V2 N12 August 1888
• Lucifer V3 Index
• Lucifer V3 N13 September 1888
• Lucifer V3 N14 October 1888
• Lucifer V3 N15 November 1888
• Lucifer V3 N16 December 1888
• Lucifer V3 N17 January 1889
• Lucifer V3 N18 February 1889
• Lucifer V4 N19 March 1889
• Lucifer V4 N20 April 1889
• Lucifer V4 N21 May 1889
• Lucifer V4 N22 June 1889
• Lucifer V4 N23 July 1889
• Lucifer V4 N24 August 1889
• Lucifer V5 Index
• Lucifer V5 N25 September 1889
• Lucifer V5 N26 October 1889
• Lucifer V5 N27 November 1889
• Lucifer V5 N28 December 1889
• Lucifer V5 N29 January 1890
• Lucifer V5 N30 February 1890
• Lucifer V6 Index
• Lucifer V6 N31 March 1890
• Lucifer V6 N32 April 1890
• Lucifer V6 N33 May 1890
• Lucifer V6 N34 June 1890
• Lucifer V6 N35 July 1890
• Lucifer V6 N36 August 1890
• Lucifer V7 Index
• Lucifer V7 N37 September 1890
• Lucifer V7 N38 October 1890
• Lucifer V7 N39 November 1890
• Lucifer V7 N40 December 1890
• Lucifer V7 N41 January 1891
• Lucifer V7 N42 February 1891
• Lucifer V8 Index
• Lucifer V8 N43 March 1891
• Lucifer V8 N44 April 1891
• Lucifer V8 N45 May 1891
• Lucifer V8 N46 June 1891
• Lucifer V8 N47 July 1891
• Lucifer V8 N48 August 1891
• Lucifer V9 Index
• Lucifer V9 N49 September 1891
• Lucifer V9 N50 October 1891
• Lucifer V9 N51 November 1891
• Lucifer V9 N52 December 1891
• Lucifer V9 N53 January 1892
• Lucifer V9 N54 February 1892
• Lucifer V10 Index
• Lucifer V10 N55 March 1892
• Lucifer V10 N56 April 1892
• Lucifer V10 N57 May 1892
• Lucifer V10 N58 June 1892
• Lucifer V10 N59 July 1892
• Lucifer V10 N60 August 1892
• Lucifer V11 Index
• Lucifer V11 N61 September 1892
• Lucifer V11 N62 October 1892
• Lucifer V11 N63 November 1892
• Lucifer V11 N64 December 1892
• Lucifer V11 N65 January 1893
• Lucifer V11 N66 February 1893
• Lucifer V12 Index
• Lucifer V12 N67 Mar 15 1893
• Lucifer V12 N68 Apr 15 1893
• Lucifer V12 N69 May 15 1893
• Lucifer V12 N70 Jun 15 1893
• Lucifer V12 N71 Jul 15 1893
• Lucifer V12 N72 Aug 15 1893
• Lucifer V13 Index
• Lucifer V13 N73 September 1893
• Lucifer V13 N74 October 1893
• Lucifer V13 N75 November 1893
• Lucifer V13 N76 December 1893
• Lucifer V13 N77 January 1894
• Lucifer V13 N78 February 1894
• Lucifer V14 Index
• Lucifer V14 N79 March 1894
• Lucifer V14 N80 April 1894
• Lucifer V14 N81 May 1894
• Lucifer V14 N82 June 1894
• Lucifer V14 N83 July 1894
• Lucifer V14 N84 August 1894
• Lucifer V15 N85 September 1894
• Lucifer V15 N86 October 1894
• Lucifer V15 N87 November 1894
• Lucifer V15 N88 December 1894
• Lucifer V15 N89 January 1895
• Lucifer V16 N91 March 1895
• Lucifer V16 N92 April 1895
• Lucifer V16 N93 May 1895
• Lucifer V16 N94 June 1895
• Lucifer V16 N95 July 1895
• Lucifer V16 N96 August 1895
• Lucifer V17 Index
• Lucifer V17 N100 Dec 15 1895
• Lucifer V17 N101 Jan 15 1896
• Lucifer V17 N102 Feb 15 1896
• Lucifer V17 N97 Sep 15 1895
• Lucifer V17 N98 Oct 15 1895
• Lucifer V17 N99 Nov 15 1895
• Lucifer V18 Index
• Lucifer V18 N103 Mar 15 1896
• Lucifer V18 N104 Apr 15 1896
• Lucifer V18 N105 May 15 1896
• Lucifer V18 N106 Jun 15 1896
• Lucifer V18 N107 Jul 15 1896
• Lucifer V18 N108 Aug 15 1896
• Lucifer V19 N109 Sep 15 1896
• Lucifer V19 N110 Oct 15 1896
• Lucifer V19 N111 Nov 15 1896
• Lucifer V19 N112 Dec 15 1896
• Lucifer V19 N113 Jan 15 1897
• Lucifer V19 N114 Feb 15 1897
• Lucifer V20 N115 March 1897
• Lucifer V20 N116 April 1897
• Lucifer V20 N117 May 1897
• Lucifer V20 N118 June 1897
• Lucifer V20 N119 July 1897
• Lucifer V20 N120 August 1897

**********************************

Lucifer (periodical)
by Theosophy Wiki
Accessed: 9/6/20


HP Blavatsky working on Lucifer, 1888[1]

NOTE: For the Biblical character sometimes identified as Satan, see Lucifer.

Lucifer is a translation of the Latin words lucem ferre (from lux "light" and ferre "carry") meaning the "light-bearer". It was the name given to the morning star, i.e., the planet Venus when seen at dawn. In Christianity this name is usually associated to Satan.

-- Lucifer, by Theosophy Wiki

Several periodicals have been published using the name Lucifer. The earliest, published by H. P. Blavatsky, is the one described in this article.

• Another Lucifer was published by the Theosophical Club at Point Loma during the 1930s.[2]
• In 1979 the Dutch Section of the Theosophical Society Point Loma began publishing a Dutch Lucifer, and in February 2013 its publishers added an English-language edition called Lucifer: the Messenger of Light that is distributed over the Internet.


Cover of HPB's Lucifer

Blavatsky's Lucifer

Lucifer was a monthly journal published from September, 1887, to August, 1897, in London. The first issue was published on September 15, 1887. The names of H. P. Blavatsky and Mabel Collins appear as Editors, with the publisher as George Redway, York Street, Covent Garden, London. Bertram Keightley assisted the editors. The slogan printed on the cover was "To bring to light the hidden things of darkness." Mme. Blavatsky edited it until her death in 1891, followed by Annie Besant. After September 1895 G. R. S. Mead joined the editorial staff.

Besides Mme. Blavatsky and Mabel Collins, other major contributors included Archibald Keightley, Anna Bonus Kingsford, H. S. Olcott, William Scott-Elliot, Constance Wachtmeister, Gerald Massey, William Kingsland and many others. The co-editors contributed substantially, although HPB was usually anonymous in her writings.

A new volume of the journal was started every six months, rather than annually, so that the volumes ran September-February and March-August.

Reason for the name

The first issue of the magazine had an article entitled: "What's in a Name? Why the Magazine is Called 'Lucifer'", in which H. P. Blavatsky explained:

The name of the present magazine--rather equivocal to orthodox Christian ears--is due to no careless selection, but arose in consequence of much thinking over its fitness, and was adopted as the best symbol to express that object and the results in view.

Now, the first and most important, if not the sole object of the magazine, is expressed in the line from the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, on its title page. It is to bring light to "the hidden things of darkness," (iv. 5); to show in their true aspect and their original real meaning things and names, men and their doings and customs; it is finally to fight prejudice, hypocrisy and shams in every nation, in every class of Society, as in every department of life. The task is a laborious one but it is neither impracticable nor useless, if even as an experiment.

Thus, for an attempt of such nature, no better title could ever be found than the one chosen. "Lucifer," is the pale morning-star, the precursor of the full blaze of the noon-day sun. . .[3]

Mme. Blavatsky recognizes that "piously inclined readers may argue that 'Lucifer' is accepted by all the churches as one of the many names of the Devil",[4] but argued that this was due to a misconception:

Deeply rooted, indeed, is this preconception and aversion to the name of Lucifer—meaning no worse than “light-bringer” (from lux, lucis, “light,” and ferre, “to bring”). . . . So absurd and ridiculous is that prejudice, indeed, that no one has seemed to ever ask himself the question, how came Satan to be called a light-bringer.[5]

Although she anticipated that "by adopting it for the title of their magazine the editors have the prospect of a long strife with public prejudice before them", she was willing to face the consequences, adding that "if one would fight prejudice, and brush off the ugly cobwebs of superstition and materialism alike from the noblest ideals of our forefathers, one has to prepare for opposition".[6]

Reactions to the name

At the end of the article "What's in a Name? Why the Magazine is called Lucifer" Mme. Blavatsky wrote about a few of the reactions she encountered before the publication of the first issue:

Hardly had the title been agreed upon, when the first premonitions of what was in store for us, in the matter of the opposition to be encountered owing to the title chosen, appeared on our horizon. One of the editors received and recorded some spicy objections. The scenes that follow are sketches from nature.

I

A Well-known Novelist. Tell me about your new magazine. What class do you propose to appeal to?

Editor. No class in particular: we intend to appeal to the public.

Novelist. I am very glad of that. For once I shall be one of the public, for I don't understand your subject in the least, and I want to. But you must remember that if your public is to understand you, it must necessarily be a very small one. People talk about occultism nowadays as they talk about many other things, without the least idea of what it means. We are so ignorant and--so prejudiced.

Editor. Exactly. That is what calls the new magazine into existence. We propose to educate you, and to tear the mask from every prejudice.

Novelist. That really is good news to me, for I want to be educated. What is your magazine to be called?

Editor. Lucifer.

Novelist. What! Are you going to educate us in vice? We know enough about that. Fallen angels are plentiful. You may find popularity, for soiled doves are in fashion just now, while the white-winged angels are voted a bore, because they are not so amusing. But I doubt your being able to teach us much.

II

A Man of the World (in a careful undertone, for the scene is a dinner-party). I hear you are going to start a magazine, all about occultism. Do you know, I'm very glad. I don't say anything about such matters as a rule, but some queer things have happened in my life which can't be explained in any ordinary manner. I hope you will go in for explanations.

Editor. We shall try, certainly. My impression is, that when occultism is in any measure apprehended, its laws are accepted by everyone as the only intelligible explanation of life.

A M. W. Just so, I want to know all about it, for 'pon my honour, life's a mystery. There are plenty of other people as curious as myself. This is an age which is afflicted with the Yankee disease of "wanting to know." I'll get you lots of subscribers. What's the magazine called?

Editor. Lucifer--and (warned by former experience) don't misunderstand the name. It is typical of the divine spirit which sacrificed itself for humanity--it was Milton's doing that it ever became associated with the devil. We are sworn enemies to popular prejudices, and it is quite appropriate that we should attack such a prejudice as this--Lucifer, you know, is the Morning Star--the Lightbearer, . . . . . .

A M. W. (interrupting). Oh, I know all that--at least don't know, but I take it for granted you've got some good reason for taking such a title. But your first object is to have readers; you want the public to buy your magazine, I suppose. That's in the programme, isn't it?

Editor. Most decidedly.

A M. W. Well, listen to the advice of a man who knows his way about town. Don't mark your magazine with the wrong colour at starting. It's quite evident, when one stays an instant to think of its derivation and meaning, that Lucifer is an excellent word. But the public don't stay to think of derivations and meanings; and the first impression is the most important. Nobody will buy the magazine if you call it Lucifer.

III

A Fashionable Lady Interested in Occultism. I want to hear some more about the new magazine, for I have interested a great many people in it, even with the little you have told me. But I find it difficult to express its actual purpose. What is it?

Editor. To try and give a little light to those that want it.

A F. L. Well, that's a simple way of putting it, and will be very useful to me. What is the magazine to be called?

Editor. Lucifer.

A F. L. (After a pause) You can't mean it.

Editor. Why not?

A F. L. The associations are so dreadful! What can be the object of calling it that? It sounds like some unfortunate sort of joke, made against it by its enemies.

Editor. Oh, but Lucifer, you know, means Light-bearer; it is typical of the Divine Spirit--

A F. L. Never mind all that--I want to do your magazine good and make it known, and you can't expect me to enter into explanations of that sort every time I mention the title? Impossible! Life is too short and too busy. Besides, it would produce such a bad effect; people would think me priggish, and then I couldn't talk at all, for I couldn't bear them to think that. Don't call it Lucifer please don't. Nobody knows what the word is typical of; what it means now is the devil, nothing more or less.

Editor. But then that is quite a mistake, and one of the first prejudices we propose to do battle with. Lucifer is the pale, pure herald of dawn--

Lady (interrupting). I thought you were going to do something more interesting and more important than to whitewash mythological characters. We shall all have to go to school again, or read up Dr. Smith's Classical Dictionary. And what is the use of it when it is done? I thought you were going to tell us things about our own lives and how to make them better. I suppose Milton wrote about Lucifer, didn't he?--but nobody reads Milton now. Do let us have a modern title with some human meaning in it.

IV

A Journalist (thoughtfully, while rolling his cigarette). Yes, it is a good idea, this magazine of yours. We shall all laugh at it, as a matter of course: and we shall cut it up in the papers. But we shall all read it, because secretly everybody hungers after the mysterious. What are you going to call it?

Editor. Lucifer.

Journalist (striking a light). Why not The Fusee? Quite as good a title and not so pretentious.[7]

Index to the periodical

The Union Index of Theosophical Periodicals[1] provides a searchable index to this periodical online, listing article titles and authors in chronological sequence.

Availability online

• The International Association for Preservation of Spiritualist and Occult Periodicals offers searchable PDF files of the entire run of the periodical at IAPSOP website.
• The first ten volumes, the five years from September 1887 to August 1892, have been made available online by the Blavatsky Archives.
• The first eight volumes are available from Universaltheosophy.com.
• Volumes 1-8 (1887-1897)- high-quality PDFs available at UniversalTheosophy.com.

Notes

1. This photo was taken by William Quan Judge using a Kodak camera in her home at No. 17 Lansdowne Road, London. The occasion was described in Volume 1 of Echoes from the Orient, Judge's collected writings on pages 259 and 262-263. Photo courtesy of Will Thackara at International Theosophical Society (Pasadena); restoration of photo by Pavel Malakhov.
2. A sample from August 1933 is available in Box 1 of the Boris de Zirkoff Papers. Records Series 22. Theosophical Society in America Archives.
3. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Collected Writings vol. VIII (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1990), 5.
4. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Collected Writings vol. VIII (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1990), 6.
5. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Collected Writings vol. VIII (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1990), 7.
6. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Collected Writings vol. VIII (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1990), 7.
7. Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, Collected Writings vol. VIII (Wheaton, IL: Theosophical Publishing House, 1990), 8-10. Note: A fusee is a wooden friction match.

[admin]

The Swastika: Magazine of Triumph [New Thought Magazine]
Edited by Dr. Alexander J. McIvor-Tyndall
1907-1911

Victor of Life and Silence I stand Upon the Heights Triumphant.

From Pat Deveney's journal database:

The Swastika. A Magazine of Triumph / Higher Ideals, the New Psychology, and Advanced Thought / Devoted to Psychic and Mental Science and Phenomena, Metaphysics, New Thought, the Enlargement of Individual Consciousness, and the Solution of Personal Problems.
Victor of Life and Silence I Stand / Upon the Heights Triumphant
1907-1911? Monthly
Denver, CO, the Omaha, NB. Publisher: Wahlgreen Publishing Company; Swastika Press. Editor: Dr. Alexander James McIvor-Tyndall; Thomas Z. Magarrell.
1/1, January 1907-1911(?) $1.00 a year. 30 pp. (varies).

After a hiatus in 1910, when McIvor-Tyndall moved to New York, the journal was taken over by Dr. Thomas Z. Magarrell of Omaha, Nebraska, who transformed it into a forum for his Vitapathic Sanatorium. The biography of McIvor-Tyndall ("Ali Nomad," 1860-1940) is full of interesting elements, ranging from his six marriages, to his incest with the daughter of one of his wives, and to yet another wife's arrest for stealing still another lover's jewelry. He was a stage hypnotist, mind reader and chiromancer who moved in the early 1900s into mental healing and courses on Psychic Science (with diplomas). He parlayed his position as New Thought editor of the Denver Post into this journal, which was successful almost from the first. He announced various goals (100,000 subscribers by January 1908, and 500,000 by the next year), but the subscription is unknown, though large. The journal carried 8 pages of advertisements for various items, including McIvor-Tyndall's books, and also ran personal advertisements for the usual material peddled in such magazines: hair removal, swamis, fortune telling, etc. McIvor-Tyndall also founded the International New Thought Fellowship and, in April 1907, Swastika Centers in the United States, Great Britain, Australia and Canada. At some point he had an association with W.P. Phelon's Hermetic Brotherhood of Atlantis, Luxor and Elephanta in San Francisco which is listed as a Swastika Center. The Centers offered their members access to McIvor-Tyndall's lessons at discounted prices and an enormous variety of trinkets (brooches and pins, etc., and even spoons) with a swastika on them. They also encouraged members to write in with their problems to have them included in daily periods of silent well-wishing by other members. McIvor-Tyndall also published in The Mountain Pine and in The Balance.

Issues

• Swastika V1 N1 Jan 1907
• Swastika V1 N2 Feb 1907
• Swastika V1 N3 Mar 1907
• Swastika V1 N4 Apr 1907
• Swastika V2 N1 May 1907
• Swastika V2 N2 Jun 1907
• Swastika V2 N3 Jul 1907
• Swastika V2 N4 Aug 1907
• Swastika V3 N1 Sep 1907
• Swastika V3 N2 Oct 1907
• Swastika V3 N3 Nov 1907
• Swastika V3 N4 Dec 1907
• Swastika V4 N1 Jan 1908
• Swastika V4 N2 Feb 1908
• Swastika V4 N3 Mar 1908
• Swastika V4 N4 Apr 1908
• Swastika V5 N1 May 1908
• Swastika V5 N2 Jun 1908
• Swastika V5 N3-4 Jul-aug 1908
• Swastika V6 N4 Dec 1908
• Swastika V7 N1 Jan 1909
• Swastika V7 N2 Feb 1909
• Swastika V7 N3 Mar 1909
• Swastika V7 N4 Apr 1909
• Swastika V8 N4 Aug 1909
• Swastika V11 N1 May 1910
• Swastika V12 N1 Jan 1911

[admin]

The International Association for the Preservation of Spiritualist and Occult Periodicals
by iapsop.com
Accessed: 3/27/20

The IAPSOP is a US-based private organization focused on the digital preservation of Spiritualist and occult periodicals published between the Congress of Vienna and the start of the Second World War.

Our all-volunteer staff digitizes, indexes and makes available free-of-charge these periodicals, in our archive, for use by students and researchers.

We have a standing want list and will respond promptly to inquiries and offers from sellers.

We accept contributions of material and labor to further this work.

If you want a complete local copy of IAPSOP's holdings, follow these instructions.

If you know what you're looking for, hit the archive index directly.

If you want to explore a particular area of the occult, start with the lists below, prepared by IAPSOP's directors.

If you are interested in practical teachings, browse our Lessons archive.

Notice: Users are reporting, periodically, an inability to access IAPSOP. Our communications provider, Frontier Communications, is on the cusp of bankruptcy, and is having difficulty maintaining reliable network service for IAPSOP and tens of thousands of its customers; we are experiencing periods, each day (typicallby between 11 Am and 1 PM Pacific Time), in which we have no working connection to the Internet. Please bear with us while we work through the transition to a different communications provider.

US Spiritualism

• Univercoelum
• Spirit Messenger
• Spiritual Telegraph
• Banner of Light
• Voice of Angels
• Gallery of Spirit Art
• Religio-Philosophical Journal
• Progressive Thinker

UK Spiritualism

• Yorkshire Spiritual Telegraph
• Community's Journal
• Spiritual Herald
• Medium and Daybreak
• Light
• Spiritualist Newspaper
• Human Nature

French Spiritualism

• Revue Spiritualiste
• Revue Spirite
• Vie Mysterieuse

German Spiritualism

• Magikon
• Psychische Studien

Spanish Spiritualism

• Criterio Espiritista
• Espiritismo

Theosophy

• Theosophist
• Lucifer
• Theosophical Review
• Occult Word
• Revue des Hautes Etudes
• Revue Theosophique
• Zanoni

New Thought

• Nautilus
• Harmony
• Now
• World's Advance Thought
• Swastika
• New Thought (Chicago)
• Mind Cure Journal and Science of Life
• Unity
• Exodus

American Occultism

• Occult Digest
• Rosicrucian Digest
• Initiates
• Morning Star

UK Occultism

• Occultist
• Occult Review
• Occult Magazine

French Occultism

• L'Initiation
• La Gnose
• Voile d'Isis
• Etudes Traditionnelles
• La Fleche

German Occultism

• Ubersinnliche Welt
• Neue Metaphysische Rundschau

Wild and One-of-a-Kind

• Buddhist Ray
• Harmony (Ponca City)
• Prince Immanuel's Journal
• Human Culture
• Kingdom of Heaven
• Primitive Occult Journal

Top 20 Publications (Prior 90 Days)

• Lucifer
• Magicien
• Ubersinnliche Welt
• Voice of the I Am
• Adiramled
• Psychic Science
• A Monthly Letter
• Theosophist
• Banner of Light
• Phalanx
• The Word
• Spiritualist Newspaper
• The Path
• Mystic Light Library Bulletin
• Success Magazine
• L'Initiation
• Occult Review
• Light of India
• Religious Science
• All-Seeing Eye

[admin]

The Eugenics Review
edited by Cora B.S. Hodson, Secty.; Alexander M. Carr-Saunders, Vice-Pres, Pres.; Eldon Moore; Ward Cutler; E.W. MacBride, Vice-Pres.; Maurice Newfield; Richard Titmuss; Dr. Blacker; Cedric Carter; Kathleen Hodson
by The Eugenics Society
Vols. 1 to 60; 1909 to 1968

Editors and Editorial Policy

In its early years the REVIEW was, as has been mentioned, produced by an "executive person" under the direction of the President. These persons are nameless and the word editor does not appear in the REVIEW or in Annual Reports or Minutes until May 1920, when it is minuted that Mr. A. M. Carr-Saunders had agreed to take over the editorial work for one issue "experimentally". Up to this time most of it had, in fact, been done by Mrs. C. B. S. Hodson, then Secretary of the Society, although contributions were to be sent to the Honorary Secretary. Cora Hodson died in 1953 and an obituary notice appeared in Volume 45, pages 78-9.

Carr-Saunders's resignation is noted six months after his appointment, but he was evidently persuaded to reconsider this decision, for it is again minuted (7th November 1922) that he brought up the matter of his resignation "saying he thought it would be wise to have someone resident in London and suggesting that a small honorarium, say £50, might help some young scientist". In the event, he continued his editorial duties until 1927.

Alexander Carr-Saunders, who joined the Society in 1912, was one of the men with an international reputation who have given a great deal of their time and energy to the Eugenics Society. He was elected to the Council in 1920, he was a Vice-President from 1936-39 and 1945-48 and was President of the Society from 1949 to 1953. He gave the Galton Lecture in 1935-Eugenics in the Light of Population Trends-which was among those reprinted in the first number of the REVIEW'S final volume (69, 46), and he was awarded the Galton Medal in 1946. He said with a smile, when Chairman of a Galton Lecture during his Presidency, that his Life Fellowship of the Eugenics Society, taken out when he was a young man, was one of the best bargains he had ever made. His death is recorded in the March 1967 issue of the REVIEW (59, 4) where appreciations from Dr. C. P. Blacker, Mr. D. Caradog Jones and Lady Simey are printed.

It was, apparently, not the policy of the Society to name the editor of its publication in the REVIEW itself and Carr-Saunders's name is not given therein. It was not until April 1928 (20, 1) after Eldon Moore had been appointed, that with the new format the name of the editor for the Society was printed in each issue.

Eldon Moore, who had for some years given considerable help in the production of the REVIEW, was appointed editor in October 1927 under an Honorary Officers Committee. He was to work in collaboration with Ward Cutler (one of the Honorary Secretaries) who was appointed liaison officer between the Committee and the Editor, who would only attend meetings by invitation. The Editor's salary was to be £100 per annum to produce a volume with 320-350 pages. It was suggested that an editorial secretary should be appointed at £75 per annum; this was not agreed to, and the Society's secretary was instructed to arrange for one of the permanent staff to carry out work for the Editor. This Honorary Officers Committee met for the first time in June 1928 when Ward Cutler said that he had read the whole of the REVIEW material in MS and suggested that this arrangement should be adhered to, instead of sending a certain number of MSS to different members of the Committee; the offer was gratefully accepted. In 1929 the Editor was empowered to print all correspondence submitted for publication which he considered to be "relevant and not libellous".

In April 1929 it is minuted that Eldon Moore had left London to take up an appointment as Chief Officer of the Imperial Bureau of Animal Genetics in Edinburgh, and Ward Cutler undertook to give more time to supervising the production of the REVIEW. He stated at this meeting that the position regarding the REVIEW was quite satisfactory, particularly in connection with increased publicity. In July of that year he undertook to take personal charge of the office for one day a week at a fee of 30s.

What might be called the Great Editorial Controversy blew up, in 1930, in the face of the then President, Sir Bernard Mallet who, as Registrar General, had in 1911 been the first to introduce calculating machines for work on the Census. This long-drawn-out argument, which was not resolved until late in the following year, involved Professor E. W. MacBride, who was then a Vice-President and, as we have seen, had had a finger in the REVIEW pie since 1919. He objected violently to the (rather curious) editorial policy of sending certain book reviews to authors for approval thus inviting them to write rejoinders to critical notices which would be printed immediately following the review itself; Mr. Ward Cutler claimed his right to do this. MacBride's slashing review of de Beer's Embryology and Evolution and the author's reply take up more than three pages of Volume 22 (pp. 71-4) and the reviewer counter-claimed his right to a further rejoinder. This "breach of every decent literary convention" had, according to Professor MacBride, already been adopted by a previous editor and a Council resolution had been passed condemning it.

In spite of Sir Bernard Mallet's tact and fairmindedness, a long series of vitriolic letters from Professor MacBride-and apparently acrimonious argument as well-culminated in his exclusion from another newly formed editorial committee on the grounds that it would be impossible for the Editor to work with a Committee member who was so inimical to himself and his policies. The inevitable outcome was MacBride's resignation from the Council and finally from the Society.

His letters reveal him as Past Master of the Home Truth: the last Galton Lecture he had attended had been "a torrent of wearisome platitudes". (Its subject-matter had been chosen in the teeth of his advice.) His two distinguished guests had "declined to take it seriously" (but they had already been inveigled into proposing and seconding the vote of thanks). Lady Askwith had told him that "the Eugenics Society 'cut very little ice', an American expression I was surprised to hear from Lady Askwith".-It was the Americanism and not the comment that shocked. A certain person is utterly condemned as "no gentleman"-another is "an outsider"; the REVIEW editor is a "mere journalist of the Daily Mail type"-doubtless the opinion of one of the 'top people' among newspaper readers. The impression will grow that the Eugenics Society has fallen into the hands of cranks and that therefore serious biologists must shun it. Added to which all those who do not see eye to eye with him are forever offering him snubs and insults.

Professor MacBride in a Memorandum on the subject of THE EUGENICS REVIEW (8th November 1930), in which he states that "formal Mendelism is scientific Calvinism", advocates that the Society should have, as Editor-in-Chief "a man who has received a thorough biological training including under the term biology the medical sciences" and an Assistant Editor "confined to the technicalities of journalism, his functions rigidly limited to proof-reading, advertisements, printing, etc.". An ideal arrangement, but utterly impractical in view of the Society's financial position.

Every effort was made by the Honorary Officers to dissuade him from resigning from the Society. His resignation is recorded with regret in the Annual Report for 1930-31, where it is stated that "it would be difficult to exaggerate the debt which the Eugenics Society owes to Professor MacBride", a tribute which may have been intentionally ambiguous.

Such was the storm that made Sir Bernard Mallet wish that he had never accepted the Presidency and sent Major Leonard Darwin to bed for twenty-four hours with a headache. Let Mr. B. S. Bramwell, then Honorary Treasurer, have the last word: "The subject of eugenics seems fertile in raising rows".

The incomplete file of correspondence between members of the Council covering these years throws a curious sidelight on what might almost be called the formative years of the Society, although it was by now twenty years old. Birth-controller strove against anti-birthcontroller; Mendelists and Lamarckists were at daggers drawn; the subject of eugenic sterilization was a battlefield. Luckily Neo-Malthusianism does not seem to have raised its ugly head at this time. Professor MacBride had presided over the Eugenics Section of the International Neo-Malthusian Conference at the Kingsway Hall in 1922.

Eldon Moore had, in July 1930, been appointed full-time Editor and shortly afterwards Ward Cutler reluctantly resigned from his role as liaison officer. (In a letter to Mallet, Leonard Darwin had written "it would be a disaster if Cutler left us".) Eldon Moore resigned his position in Edinburgh to give more time to developing the REVIEW, a development "naturally conditioned by the funds placed at his disposal for publicity". However, in the Annual Report for 1931-32 it is recorded that, in order to help the Society over a period of financial difficulty, Mr. Moore had resigned his post as paid editor and had undertaken to edit the REVIEW in an honorary capacity. He was elected a Fellow of the Society and appointed Honorary Editor with an expense allowance of £200 per annum. At the meeting of the Executive Committee at which this was agreed, Lady Chambers and Mrs. Grant Duff had dissociated themselves, as they believed this step would be detrimental to the Eugenics Society, but the Council was confident that it was voicing the opinion of Fellows and Members of the Society in recording its keen appreciation of the efficient way in which Mr. Moore had managed the REVIEW.

In May 1933 Eldon Moore resigned his position as Honorary Editor. The Annual Report for 1933-34 records that "The thanks of the Council are due to him for his loyal and painstaking services to the Society".

In an appreciation printed in the first issue of the REVIEW under its new Editor (25, 143) the writer praises Moore's fluent yet scholarly manner and his light touch, which so many scientists lack, combined with an exactness in which journalists tend to be deficient, and commends the freshness and vitality of his work; his abilities as an administrator and organizer were of no mean order. Eugenics was an absorbing interest in his life and he had given a large number of lectures for the Society. He had been the Secretary of the British section of the International Union for the Scientific Investigation of Population Problems and a member of the Commission (on differential fertility, fecundity and sterility) of the Union. The writer of this appreciation is aware that his words have something of the flavour of an obituary notice and it is good to know that they were printed when Moore was still a young man. He died, aged 53, in November 1954 (46, 202). He had been a free-lance journalist writing under many names, edited A Bibliography of Differential Fertility (1933) and wrote Heredity, Mainly Human (1934). In an appreciation, Dr. J. A. Fraser Roberts (47, 15) writes of his "transformation of the REVIEW", his enthusiasm, and the warmth and friendliness of his personality.

The first number to appear under the editorship of Maurice Newfield was that for October 1933. He had been Assistant Editor of the British Medical Journal and had helped Sir Humphry Rolleston in editing the British Encyclopaedia of Medical Practice; as Michael Fielding he had written Parenthood, Design or Accident? which was first published in 1928 and ran to several editions. The differences of opinion in the Council at that time included the subject of birth control and Newfield had to contend with doubt in some quarters as to the suitability of his appointment, but to quote again from Dr. Blacker: "During the fifteen years of his editorship his touch was unfaltering; not once did he take a false step".

When Maurice Newfield became severely ill Richard Titmuss came to the rescue and the Council in the Annual Report records its thanks for his able editing of the January and April 1942 numbers. For the same reason Dr. Blacker and I worked together to produce the October 1947 and January 1948 issues.

October 1948 saw the completion of Newfield's fifteen years with the REVIEW and the Council expressed its appreciation of his capable and tactful editorship over this period. Maurice Newfield died in August 1949. A symposium of appreciation of his personality and of his services to eugenics and to the Eugenics Society appeared in the REVIEW for October 1949 (41, 103) and was separately produced. Lord Horder headed the twenty-two contributors; those with no very definite links with the Eugenics Society included S. Vere Pearson, Robert Graves, Michael Heseltine, Oliver Simon, Andrew Morland, Josep Trueta, Raymond Swing, Abraham Stone, Ernest Raymond and A. L. Bacharach.

Dr. Blacker and I produced the next few issues until Cedric Carter took up office as Editor with the July 1950 number. He at that time held a research post at the Hospital for Sick Children, Great Ormond Street. His appointment ceased with the April 1952 issue, when he succeeded Dr. Blacker as General Secretary of the Society. I had worked with Maurice Newfield since 1935, was appointed Editor with the June 1952 issue and continued to be responsible for the production of the REVIEW until the end of 1967.

-- The Eugenics Review 1909-1968, by Kathleen Hodson

Vols. 1 to 60; 1909 to 1968

Vol. 60
1968
v.60(3): 141–187
1968 Sep
v.60(4): 189–288
1968 Dec

Vol. 59
1967
v.59(1): 1–72
1967 Mar
v.59(2): 73–148
1967 Jun
v.59(3): 149–218
1967 Sep
v.59(4): 219–300
1967 Dec

Vol. 58
1966
v.58(1): 1–56
1966 Mar
v.58(2): 57–116
1966 Jun
v.58(3): 117–172
1966 Sep
v.58(4): 173–240
1966 Dec

Vols. 56 to 57;
1965
v.56(4): 181–234
1965 Jan
v.57(1): 1–48
1965 Mar
v.57(2): 49–98
1965 Jun
v.57(3): 99–154
1965 Sep
v.57(4): 155–209
1965 Dec

Vols. 55 to 56;
1964
v.55(4): 189–255
1964 Jan
v.56(1): 1–57
1964 Apr
v.56(2): 61–124
1964 Jul
v.56(3): 125–179
1964 Oct

Vols. 54 to 55;
1963
v.54(4): 185–232
1963 Jan
v.55(1): 1–56
1963 Apr
v.55(2): 65–130
1963 Jul
v.55(3): 133–183
1963 Oct

Vols. 53 to 54;
1962
v.53(4): 185–237
1962 Jan
v.54(1): 1–52
1962 Apr
v.54(2): 57–108
1962 Jul
v.54(3): 113–179
1962 Oct

Vols. 52 to 53;
1961
v.52(4): 189–251
1961 Jan
v.53(1): 1–65
1961 Apr
v.53(2): 69–122
1961 Jul
v.53(3): 129–181
1961 Oct

Vols. 51 to 52;
1960
v.51(4): 201–243
1960 Jan
v.52(1): 1–61
1960 Apr
v.52(2): 65–128
1960 Jul
v.52(3): 129–185
1960 Oct

Vols. 50 to 51;
1959
v.50(4): 217–279
1959 Jan
v.51(1): 1–63
1959 Apr
v.51(2): 65–134
1959 Jul
v.51(3): 137–198
1959 Oct

Vols. 49 to 50;
1958
v.49(4): 163–212
1958 Jan
v.50(1): 3–81
1958 Apr
v.50(2): 85–151
1958 Jul
v.50(3): 153–214
1958 Oct

Vols. 48 to 49;
1957
v.48(4): 183–252
1957 Jan
v.49(1): 3–48
1957 Apr
v.49(2): 59–96
1957 Jul
v.49(3): 107–150
1957 Oct

Vols. 47 to 48;
1956
v.47(4): 207–267
1956 Jan
v.48(1): 3–63
1956 Apr
v.48(2): 67–121
1956 Jul
v.48(3): 127–178
1956 Oct

Vols. 46 to 47;
1955
v.46(4): 191–264
1955 Jan
v.47(1): 3–67
1955 Apr
v.47(2): 71–135
1955 Jul
v.47(3): 139–202
1955 Oct

Vols. 45 to 46;
1954
v.45(4): 203–268
1954 Jan
v.46(1): 3–67
1954 Apr
v.46(2): 71–134
1954 Jul
v.46(3): 139–183
1954 Oct

Vols. 44 to 45;
1953
v.44(4): 187–246
1953 Jan
v.45(1): 3–68
1953 Apr
v.45(2): 71–119
1953 Jul
v.45(3): 131–192
1953 Oct

Vols. 43 to 44;
1952
v.43(4): 167–203
1952 Jan
v.44(1): 3–59
1952 Apr
v.44(2): 63–115
1952 Jul
v.44(3): 119–183
1952 Oct

Vols. 42 to 43;
1951
v.42(4): 183–237
1951 Jan
v.43(1): 3–64
1951 Apr
v.43(2): 71–110
1951 Jul
v.43(3): 119–164
1951 Oct

Vols. 41 to 42;
1950
v.41(4): 159–206
1950 Jan
v.42(1): 3–59
1950 Apr
v.42(2): 67–112
1950 Jul
v.42(3): 119–179
1950 Oct

Vols. 40 to 41;
1949
v.40(4): 175–231
1949 Jan
v.41(1): 3–58
1949 Apr
v.41(2): 63–98
1949 Jul
v.41(3): 102–155
1949 Oct

Vols. 39 to 40;
1948
v.39(4): 131–179
1948 Jan
v.40(1): 3–52
1948 Apr
v.40(2): 55–112
1948 Jul
v.40(3): 119–169
1948 Oct

Vols. 38 to 39;
1947
v.38(4): 163–204
1947 Jan
v.39(1): 3–38
1947 Apr
v.39(2): 42–79
1947 Jul
v.39(3): 83–128
1947 Oct

Vols. 37 to 38;
1946
v.37(4): 143–188
1946 Jan
v.38(1): 2–60
1946 Apr
v.38(2): 63–106
1946 Jul
v.38(3): 111–158
1946 Oct

Vols. 36 to 37;
1945
v.36(4): 111–137
1945 Jan
v.37(1): 3–36
1945 Apr
v.37(2): 39–84
1945 Jul
v.37(3): 87–140
1945 Oct

Vol. 36
1944
v.36(1): 3–44
1944 Apr
v.36(2): 47–76
1944 Jul
v.36(3): 79–106
1944 Oct

Vols. 34 to 35;
1943
v.34(4): 109–142
1943 Jan
v.35(1): 3–28
1943 Apr
v.35(2): 31–48
1943 Jul
v.35(3-4): 51–96
1943 Oct

Vols. 33 to 34;
1942
v.33(4): 99–138
1942 Jan
v.34(1): 3–44
1942 Apr
v.34(2): 47–77
1942 Jul
v.34(3): 81–105
1942 Oct

Vols. 32 to 33;
1941
v.32(4): 111–146
1941 Jan
v.33(1): 3–34
1941 Apr
v.33(2): 39–59
1941 Jul
v.33(3): 63–95
1941 Oct

Vols. 31 to 32;
1940
v.31(4): 199–234
1940 Jan
v.32(1): 3–38
1940 Apr
v.32(2): 43–70
1940 Jul
v.32(3): 75–105
1940 Oct

Vols. 30 to 31;
1939
v.30(4): 231–311
1939 Jan
v.31(1): 3–77
1939 Apr
v.31(2): 83–147
1939 Jul
v.31(3): 151–195
1939 Oct

Vols. 29 to 30;
1938
v.29(4): 231–296
1938 Jan
v.30(1): 3–78
1938 Apr
v.30(2): 83–156
1938 Jul
v.30(3): 163–227
1938 Oct

Vols. 28 to 29;
1937
v.28(4): 255–345
1937 Jan
v.29(1): 3–82
1937 Apr
v.29(2): 91–155
1937 Jul
v.29(3): 163–225
1937 Oct

Vols. 27 to 28;
1936
v.27(4): 270–352
1936 Jan
v.28(1): 3–88
1936 Apr
v.28(2): 95–165
1936 Jul
v.28(3): 175–247
1936 Oct

Vols. 26 to 27;
1935
v.26(4): 251–312
1935 Jan
v.27(1): 3–77
1935 Apr
v.27(2): 85–173
1935 Jul
v.27(3): 181–260
1935 Oct

Vols. 25 to 26;
1934
v.25(4): 215–289
1934 Jan
v.26(1): 3–91
1934 Apr
v.26(2): 99–167
1934 Jul
v.26(3): 175–243
1934 Oct

Vols. 24 to 25;
1933
v.24(4): 267–347
1933 Jan
v.25(1): 3–64
1933 Apr
v.25(2): 75–135
1933 Jul
v.25(3): 143–209
1933 Oct

Vols. 23 to 24;
1932
v.23(4): 295–382
1932 Jan
v.24(1): 3–73
1932 Apr
v.24(2): 83–165
1932 Jul
v.24(3): 171–261
1932 Oct

Vols. 22 to 23;
1931
v.22(4): 235–326
1931 Jan
v.23(1): 3–95
1931 Apr
v.23(2): 103–191
1931 Jul
v.23(3): 199–288
1931 Oct

Vols. 21 to 22;
1930
v.21(4): 247–324
1930 Jan
v.22(1): 3–84
1930 Apr
v.22(2): 87–158
1930 Jul
v.22(3): 167–227
1930 Oct

Vols. 20 to 21;
1929
v.20(4): 233–305
1929 Jan
v.21(1): 3–66
1929 Apr
v.21(2): 83–161
1929 Jul
v.21(3): 167–239
1929 Oct

Vols. 19 to 20;
1928
v.19(4): 267–345
1928 Jan
v.20(1): 1–72
1928 Apr
v.20(2): 75–144
1928 Jul
v.20(3): 153–224
1928 Oct

Vols. 18 to 19;
1927
v.18(4): 285–375
1927 Jan
v.19(1): 1–60
1927 Apr
v.19(2): 103–143
1927 Jul
v.19(3): 181–258
1927 Oct

Vols. 17 to 18;
1926
v.17(4): 233–332
1926 Jan
v.18(1): 1–55
1926 Apr
v.18(2): 91–181
1926 Jul
v.18(3): 189–257
1926 Oct

Vols. 16 to 17;
1925
v.16(4): 259–320
1925 Jan
v.17(1): 1–51
1925 Apr
v.17(2): 73–124
1925 Jul
v.17(3): 141–222
1925 Oct

Vols. 15 to 16;
1924
v.15(4): 545–641
1924 Jan
v.16(1): 1–73
1924 Apr
v.16(2): 93–171
1924 Jul
v.16(3): 177–239
1924 Oct

Vols. 14 to 15;
1923
v.14(4): 225–300
1923 Jan
v.15(1): 305–375
1923 Apr
v.15(2): 383–453
1923 Jul
v.15(3): 459–532
1923 Oct

Vols. 13 to 14;
1922
v.13(4): 499–559
1922 Jan
v.14(1): 1–60
1922 Apr
v.14(2): 71–135
1922 Jul
v.14(3): 149–214
1922 Oct

Vols. 12 to 13;
1921
v.12(4): 257–318
1921 Jan
v.13(1): 325–375
1921 Apr
v.13(2): 381–424
1921 Jul
v.13(3): 439–494
1921 Oct

Vols. 11 to 12;
1920
v.11(4): 175–248
1920 Jan
v.12(1): 1–73
1920 Apr
v.12(2): 81–130
1920 Jul
v.12(3): 147–251
1920 Oct

Vols. 10 to 11;
1919
v.10(4): 195–239
1919 Jan
v.11(1): 1–50
1919 Apr
v.11(2): 53–109
1919 Jul
v.11(3): 113–157
1919 Oct

Vols. 9 to 10;
1918
v.9(4): 277–355
1918 Jan
v.10(1): 1–54
1918 Apr
v.10(2): 63–114
1918 Jul
v.10(3): 133–176
1918 Oct

Vols. 8 to 9;
1917
v.8(4): 297–373
1917 Jan
v.9(1): 1–70
1917 Apr
v.9(2): 95–155
1917 Jul
v.9(3): 183–259
1917 Oct

Vols. 7 to 8;
1916
v.7(4): 229–303
1916 Jan
v.8(1): 1–75
1916 Apr
v.8(2): 93–176
1916 Jul
v.8(3): 189–276
1916 Oct

Vols. 6 to 7;
1915
v.6(4): 271–327
1915 Jan
v.7(1): 1–68
1915 Apr
v.7(2): 91–140
1915 Jul
v.7(3): 163–214
1915 Oct

Vols. 5 to 6;
1914
v.5(4): 295–373
1914 Jan
v.6(1): 1–72
1914 Apr
v.6(2): 97–174
1914 Jul
v.6(3): 195–252
1914 Oct

Vols. 4 to 5;
1913
v.4(4): 331–412
1913 Jan
v.5(1): 1–79
1913 Apr
v.5(2): 93–179
1913 Jul
v.5(3): 197–282
1913 Oct

Vols. 3 to 4;
1912
v.3(4): 287–365
1912 Jan
v.4(1): 1–106
1912 Apr
v.4(2): 117–212
1912 Jul
v.4(3): 223–320
1912 Oct

Vols. 2 to 3;
1911
v.2(4): 253–329
1911 Jan
v.3(1): 1–71
1911
v.3(2): 83–182
1911 Jul
v.3(3): 187–278
1911 Oct

Vols. 1 to 2;
1910
v.1(4): 221–295
1910 Jan
v.2(1): 1–87
1910
v.2(2): 89–154
1910 Jul
v.2(3): 161–250
1910 Nov

Vol. 1
1909
v.1(1): 1–63
1909 Apr
v.1(2): 65–137
1909 Jul
v.1(3): 141–216
1909 Oct

[admin]

Green Park, Delhi
by Wikipedia
Accessed: 3/27/20

The Young Lamas' Home School opened in a large, detached house in Green Park in south Delhi in October 1961....

Lang-Sims saw at close quarters the setting up of the Home School. The house was newly built with stone floors, standing on raised ground on an 'exceptionally pleasant' site amid an expanse of scrubland. She was invited to stay there but demurred because the plumbing didn't seem to be up-and-running, but she was on hand when the first pupils moved in.

Immediately before the opening of the school two contingents of young Lamas arrived at the [Bedis'] flat. All were refugees and in sore need of the robes with which Freda intended to provide each one as a welcome-present. Several were no more than children; but the behaviour even of these was strangely adult. They sat smiling and talking quietly in Tibetan, accepting everything that was done for them with perfect courtesy and no trace of anxiety or fuss. When the time came for the move they piled into the taxis together with all the furniture, crates, boxes, bedding-rolls and miscellaneous oddments, their gentle gaiety as undisturbed as if they were off on a picnic.

Two days later, Lang-Sims -- feeling guilty that she had abandoned Freda and the young lamas for a hotel -- returned to see how they were settling in. 'I followed Freda into the house and gazed about me in astonishment. The disorder was cleared away; everything was in its place even to the tankas [religious paintings] on the walls; there was an atmosphere of peace. I remembered the plumbing and glanced at a large pool of water in the vicinity of the wash-place. Something had overflowed but at least there was water to flow.' Still more impressive was the shrine that had been constructed in one of the two principal rooms, taking up the whole of a wall, 'a thing of wonder and yet made out of nothing but the simplest oddments, an ordered profusion of colours and shapes seeming as if it had fallen into a pattern of itself. There were a few small images; a number of crude prints and tinted photographs; scarves; ribbons; bits of coloured materials; rows of offering cakes (called 'tormas'); bowls containing water and offerings of seeds, sweets and rice; and, of course, the lighted butter-lamps.' Seated on floor mats, the pupils were chanting their morning office each one crouched over a sacred book and rocking to and fro. 'The boys, on Freda's instructions but left entirely to themselves, had produced this shrine in a day by their own unaided imagination and efforts. They were all working hard; although, of course, they did not expect to be asked to perform "menial" tasks: the actual work of the house was done entirely by Freda's servants and the servant-monks.'

Freda's energy, drive and organisation had established the school and marshalled the young lamas. She was every bit as effective at developing the profile of the new school, which was so important in ensuring continued government support and private fundraising. With an eye perhaps on both goals, Freda took Lois Lang-Sims to meet Nehru, then in his early seventies and increasingly worn-out after fourteen years in office. 'Freda expressed her gratitude for his encouragement and assistance in her school project: suddenly he really smiled, seeming to wake out of his dream, and said teasingly, in a very low, quiet voice: "It was not for you I did it." Then he half closed his eyes and appeared almost to go to sleep.'...

Within a few weeks of the founding of the school, the New York Times came calling -- though they weren't allowed inside. '"We're sorry, but one of our young lamas is in bed with chicken pox,'" their reporter was told. 'Mrs. Bedi treats the seventeen boys at the school as members of her family. She listens patiently to their problems of growing up. "Even lamas have them," she says.' Freda explained that the purpose of the school was to impart traditional education in the context of the modern world. '"It aims," Mrs Bedi said, "at constructing a bridge of understanding between the young lamas and the changing young people of their own generation. It will make them aware of the new world into which they have found their way after the tragic fate of Tibet.'" She estimated that there were in total about seventy-five incarnate lamas under the age of twenty-five in India. Each group would study for six months, then a new intake would take their place. Four such intakes would cover all the tulkus, then the initial group would return. The plan was to give three semesters of instruction to each group of lamas in rotation -- a six-year project. And the school was hoping for financial contributions from abroad, towards which goal sympathetic coverage in one of America's leading daily papers was as good as gold dust.

-- The Lives of Freda: The Political, Spiritual and Personal Journeys of Freda Bedi, by Andrew Whitehead

Green Park Neighbourhood
Location in Delhi, India
Country India
State Delhi
District South Delhi
Metro New Delhi

Green Park is an upscale and affluent locality, in the South Delhi district of Delhi, India. It is among the most posh and popular districts of Delhi. The Locality falls under Category 'A' of residential colonies in Delhi alongside other Category 'A' colonies like Greater Kailash , Defense Colony and Gulmohar Park.The neighbourhood registered a 4.4% growth in residential sales and was recently featured alongside Greater Kailash, Defense Colony, Vasant Vihar and Anand Niketan in the 2019 edition of Knight Frank's quarterly report on prime luxury residential properties in various mega cities around the globe.

The locality is divided into two parts i.e. Main and Extension.

Real Estate

Established in the early 1960's, Green Park today is among the most desired neighborhoods in the capital city. The Locality not only has its very own metro station on the yellow line but also has numerous professionally maintained parks in each block. It has its own prime market which hosts numerous chic salons, boutiques and eating joints. It also borders the famous Deer Park which is known to be among the very few large green spaces left in today's heavily urbanized Delhi.

Hauz Khas Jheel located inside Deer Park


Deer Park, Delhi


Green Park Delhi

The real estate market however has been witnessing a downturn due to the increased circle rates of the colony. This has discouraged fresh purchases of builder floors and independent villas in the colony which now cost anywhere between INR 6-50 crores (US $800,000 - $7,000,000). The plot sizes are plenty and range from 200 sq. yards to 1500 sq.yards. Rental values have however witnessed a constant increase due to the direct metro connectivity and plenty of other facilities which other colonies of New Delhi lack. To address the parking problems in the colony due to the heavy footfall, two multilevel parking towers are being built near the metro station which will accommodate 60-70 cars at a given time.

History

It was established in early 1960's and today has all the amenities of a rich cosmopolitan culture along with large residential and commercial areas and many religious places. Green Park is considered by some as the "lungs" of Delhi, as it is near one of the largest green areas in the city. It is also believed to be an upscale residential area with real estate prices soaring as high as ₹100 crore (US $14.5 million). It is part of the New Delhi (Lok Sabha constituency), and its current electorate member is Meenakshi Lekhi of BJP

It is divided into two parts: Green Park Main and Green Park Extension. The Main hosts a medium-sized market with several restaurants and a shopping complex. The Extension mostly consists of residential areas. It has a number of open and wooded spaces in its vicinity -- Deer Park, District Park and Rose Garden. These are very popular areas with morning walkers and laughter clubs.

The Uphaar Cinema fire, one of the worst fire tragedies in recent Indian history, occurred on Friday, 13 June 1997 at Uphaar Cinema, near Green Park Extension Block A, Delhi, during the premiere screening of Border, a Hindi movie. 59 people died and 103 were seriously injured in the subsequent stampede; most of the victims were trapped on the balcony and were asphyxiated as they tried to reach dimly marked exits to escape the smoke and fire, and found the doors locked.

The fire broke out at 5:10 pm, after the transformer at the parking level burst, and 20 cars in the parking lot caught fire, eventually leading to a large scale fire in the five-storey building which housed the cinema hall and several offices. The cinema hall was situated in one of the busiest areas of South Delhi and the fire services were delayed owing to the heavy evening traffic. At least 48 fire tenders were pressed into service at 5.20 p.m. and it took them over an hour to put out the fire. Later the dead and the injured were rushed to the nearby All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) and Safdarjung Hospital, where scenes of chaos and pandemonium followed, as relatives and family members of the victims scurried around to look for known faces.

The victims of the tragedy and the families of the deceased later formed 'The Association of Victims of Uphaar Fire Tragedy' (AVUT), which filed the landmark Civil compensation case and won Rs 25 crore (Rs 250 million) in civil compensation for the relatives and families of victims, the judgment is now considered a breakthrough in Compensation Law in India; today they meet at every anniversary at 'Smriti Upavan' memorial, outside the hall, where a prayer meeting is held. However the Supreme Court on 13/10/2011, nearly halved the sum of compensation awarded to them by the Delhi high court and slashed punitive damages to be paid by cinema owners Ansal brothers from Rs 2.5 crore to Rs 25 lakh. Contents

Geography

It is bounded on the 4 sides by major avenues: Inner Ring Road, Outer Ring Road, Aurobindo Marg and Africa Avenue. Hauz Khas, Safdarjung Enclave, SDA are adjoining colonies and 2 major hospitals, AIIMS and Safdarjung Hospital touch its boundaries.

[img][img]http://rapeutation.com/newthoughtwik1d.jpg[/img][/img]
Dadi-Poti ka Gumbad (mausoleums), at the edge of Green park, close to the Hauz Khas Complex, Delhi

Historical places

The adjoining areas of Green Park is Hauz Khas, of great historical significance with numerous monuments dating back to the medieval period of the Delhi Sultanate, and the Deer Park, which is a large public space with greenery and also the DLTA Tennis courts. and Uphaar Cinema is in Green Park.

Dining

Green Park market includes various restaurants of various cuisines, ranging from pizzas, kebabs to South Indian delights.[1]

Religious places

Jagannath Temple, New Delhi, Iyappa Temple, Balaji Temple (backside of GP, R K Puram), and Shri Parashnath Digambar Jain Mandir (Green Park Extension) is also situated in the locality.

Shri Sanatan Dharm Mandir

Transportation

The Green Park area is served by the Green Park metro station of the Delhi Metro.

References

1. "Reviews". tripadvisor.in.

External links

• Green Park, Delhi, webpage