The Origin and Legacy of The Shakers

The story of the Shakers is one that is similar to that of most Utopian communities. The origins begin with one woman, and their story continues today. Although the Shakers come from relatively nothing, they built a successful life for themselves. A woman named Ann Lee is singlehandedly responsible for building the Shaker foundation. She had a rough life before she founded this community. Lee suffered from several of her children dying, and a failed marriage, although she was supposed to live a life of celibacy. She went through a lot of physical and mental pain. When she decided to create a new way of life for herself, she had followers who thought the same way as her. But, they were not taken seriously in England. The citizens were ruthless. Edward Andrews, author of Work and Worship Among the Shakers, said that they were “ridiculing their form of worship, accusing them of delusions, denunciation of non-believing relatives, ignorance, witchcraft, naked dancing, Catholicism (belief in celibacy, confession, perfection, miracles, obedience, etc.), the exploiting of common members,” (18). Ann eventually got arrested because she and her followers participated in riots. According to Edward Purcell, author of The Shakers, “When Ann emerged from her cell, she told her companions of a wonderful visitation by Jesus himself…She also announced a set of precepts that would free adherents from sin forever: confession, celibacy, and perfection of life,” (7). Her beliefs gained the followers that created the Shaker following that carried the sect all the way to America. This belief included the idea that “God was both male and female – and in a dual-messiahship – Christ, on of the superior spirits, appeared in both Jesus, representing the male principle as the son of a carpenter, and in Mother Ann, the female principle, the daughter of a blacksmith. Thus the quaternity of Father-Son-Holy Mother Wisdom-Daughter was formed,” (Purcell 24). The people who followed Lee came from several different backgrounds. The Shakers welcomed everyone. In fact, Purcell speculated that “people drawn into the movement came from no fixed social class or economic stratum, no particular religious affiliation…There was a scattering of professional men, doctors, ministers, and teachers, and many artisans, mechanics, tanners, tailors, blacksmiths, coopers, weavers, millers, and practitioners of other trades,” (43). The Shakers made the voyage to America in the late 1700’s. They settled in New Lebanon, New York, and this location became a sort of headquarters. Eventually, the communities spread out to “hill country regions of Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Maine,” (Perry). Over the years, communities could also be found in Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana. The development would continue to rapidly grow from there.

The Shakers lived in community dwellings together. They stayed with their families, but the term meant something different for them. According to Andrews, “The term ‘family,’ in Shaker usage, referred to a group of brethren and sisters living in the same dwelling, autonomous as regards their industrial pursuits, and organized under the dual leadership of elders and eldresses (usually two of each sex), deacons (or trustees) and deaconesses, who had charge of the ‘temporalities,’ and ‘caretakers’ of children, also of each sex,” (26). These families were extremely important and vital to their society. The number of people in each family could range from twenty-five to one hundred and fifty. Men and women were separated, since sexual relations were not prohibited. Andrews describes the way that the Shaker women dressed as follows:

Many persons wore short gowns with short sleeves (over their dresses)…of light-colored striped cotton. The stripes went around the sleeves, but lengthwise on the body of the dress. The waist extended to the hips, while the dress reached a few inches below the knees. For more common use the short gowns reached only some eight or ten inches below the waist. Over the dress in front, was worn a checked apron, about one and one-half yards wide, cut circling at the top and gathered to above two feet in width. A white binding of an inch went across the upper edge which terminated in white tape-strings that were tied in front with a double bow. These aprons were an inch shorter than the dress or about two inches from the floor…On the head the sisters wore a fine lawn or linen cap,” (118-122).

When it was summer, they woke up at five am, and when it was winter, they woke up at five-thirty am. They had ten minutes to be out of their bedrooms. The women made all of the beds and tidied up the rooms. The men went straight to work. Then at seven am, they would head back for breakfast, when the bell was sounded. After, they went back to work until the bell sounded again at twelve noon for lunch. Then, they worked until dinner bell. Work ended at eight. Families would attend a Union meeting and went to bed at nine pm (Andrews 199-200). Andrews also stated that they were quite modern for their time. They were using herbs as medicine, and even having electric currents in some communities (73). They lived very structured and planned out lives. However, it worked for them and did not create many problems, so they were happy. Purcell states, “For the truly committed Shaker, it was a satisfying life, limited perhaps in the perspective of outsiders, but without the tension and anxiety that goes with the need to make daily choices,” (11). The guidelines that the Shakers lived by provided them with simplicity for several years.

Since there was a lot of structure, there were rules and leaders in the Shaker communities. Of course, Ann Lee dictated all of these rules. After she died, she left several people behind who had the exact way of thinking that she possessed to adapt to any changes that may have arisen. Andrews said, “The roots of Shaker culture – the principles by which the Believers lived and the practice of those principles – lay not only in the unusual personality and teaching of Ann Lee, the founder of the society, but also in the interpretation of her testimony by her immediate successors,” (12). As previously stated, the elders and eldresses were in charge for the most part. There were also deacons and deaconesses that played important roles in the communities. Perhaps the most important of these was handling trade. Edward Andrews said, “All trade and traffic, buying and selling, changing and swapping, must be done by them or by their immediate knowledge or consent,” (41). One of the rules that the Shakers were required to follow was that they could only socialize with each other. Andrews stated that “they should as far as possibly consistent, all eat at one tavern, and lodge in one room, and when you walk in the streets, you should keep so close together that there would not be room for even so much as a dog to run between you and your companion,” (42). Another rule was that the Shakers remember the importance of prayer at all times. Even if they were out and about, they had to pray. Andrews also stated, “All who go out among the world, should observe as far as possible, the order of kneeling, and should always kneel in prayer twice each day, if they have to do it by the road side, or in the wagon, while driving along,” (42). These rules kept everything in order, and the Shakes were happy with them. Their religion and family were the two most important things to them.

The Shaker women served as valuable members of their communities. They were not seen as less than anyone else, which was not common for their time. In fact, “from the first, women were coequal with men in all the privileges and responsibilities of leadership and labor,” (Andrews 110). They had several responsibilities that took up a lot of their time. Without them, the communities would not have thrived as they did. Andrews describes it in this way:

Much of the time of the Shaker sisters was occupied by such domestic tasks as washing, ironing, cooking, cleaning, mending, “schooling” and taking care of the many girls who were placed in the care of the society. When one considers the size of the dwellings, the number of men, women, and children living the communal life, and the almost religious emphasis placed on order and cleanliness, it can be seen that household occupations represented no small undertaking (111).

They provided services for everyone around them as well as for themselves. What may sound like simple tasks today was rather difficult and time consuming for them because they did not have the technology and tools that can be used now. Purcell said, “Washing clothes consumed a great deal of labor in early Shaker times, but the same doctrines that impelled Shaker sisters to sweep and dust every room everyday also instructed them to replace soiled cloths and linens immediately with freshly laundered goods,” (121). Women were necessary to the survival of the Shakers.

Children were an interesting part of the Shaker communities. They were obviously not born as Shakers because members were not allowed to have sexual relations. Instead, “they were brought in by new members, left with the Shakers by indignant parents or guardians, or adopted from orphanages,” (“Sects and Communitarianism”). As with the rest of the Shakers, the boy and girl children were kept separately. They went through schooling at different times of the year to avoid having interactions. Andrews listed the subjects that the children studied as follows: “Spelling, Reading, Writing, Composition, English Grammar, Arithmetic, Mensuration, The Science of Agriculture, Agricultural Chemistry, a small portion of History and Geography, Architecture, Moral Science, Good Manners, and True Religion.” (113). The Shakers were not always perceived as a good place for children to grow. In fact, there was a law passed that forced children of men who joined the Shakers to live with the non-Shaker wife (Andrews 166). However, it seems as though the Shakers provided an excellent home for every member of the community. Purcell stated, “The Shakers provided a good general education in addition to religious instruction, but all children were allowed to choose between the Shakers and the world when they reached maturity,” (88). Whether the children chose the Shaker lifestyle for their own, or left to try something else, they grew up with an education unlike one in any other school.

Several contributions to society were made by the Shakers. They took pride in their appearance as a community and the inventions that they produced. Andrews speculates, “Few have ever visited a Shaker community without being impressed by such industry, such order and cleanliness,” (141). The things that they created were nothing short of spectacular. They took time and effort in every product, making sure that they had work to be proud of. Andrews said, “A high standard – one is almost tempted to say a religious, and certainly an ethical standard of merit – was set and nothing less praiseworthy was allowed to go forth as representative of Shaker workmanship,” (145). Their communities and dwellings always looked nice. They wanted to appear orderly. Purcell said, “Shakers seem to have been particularly sensitive to the effect of space and the relationship between buildings,” (75). Their chairs were the most recognizable product made by the Shakers. There was so much effort put into each chair. They “varied slightly from maker to maker and village to village, but they shared a distinctive and immediately recognizable design. As usual with Shaker-made objects, the chairs were unadorned, strong, practical, and elegant in simple concept,” (Purcell 124). If one were to look at a picture of nearly any room in a Shaker building, these chairs can be seen. Though they made a lot of profit from the chairs, it certainly was not the only thing that brought money into the community. Purcell stated, “One of the profitable Shaker activities was the manufacture of brooms. An eastern Shaker brother had invented the flat broom, and efficient improvement on the traditional round style, and Shaker communities everywhere grew broom corn,” (54). They often made adaptions such as this. They understood that things could always be improved. Lighting is another prime example. Their buildings “were lit by candles until the mid-1800s, when they switched over to oil lanterns. Eventually most of the buildings were electrified,” (123). Also according to Purcell, the Shakers found stoves to be more efficient heaters than other methods so they built stoves to heat their rooms (31). They actually invented a lot of things. They are credible for hair caps for bald men (1816), an improved sun dial (1836), the bee hive (1837), a washing machine (1858), and the fence post (1859) (Andrews 153-1580. Along with the production of objects, the Shakers spent a lot of time on agriculture. They produced excellent crops for themselves and to trade. Andrews stated, “What made the Shaker agriculture distinctive was its diversity, the neatness of the tillage, the experimental attitude toward farming methods, the democratic manner in which labor was allocated, and the spirit pervading all farm operations,” (48). They grew a lot of things in a variety of ways over the years. Of course, each community had its differences. However, they all had some similarities. Andrews said, “Potatoes were an important crop from the beginning. Flax was grown both for seed and for fiber. Barley, rye, wheat, and oats were cultivated for domestic needs, although the society often had to buy flour and grain (especially wheat) to fulfill its requirements,” (47). Overall, the seed industry gained the most profit for the Shakers. Their dedication and hard work produced remarkable products that influenced people far past their communities.

Though while it was thriving, the Shakers were happy and successful, it did not last forever. According to Purcell, “By the beginning of the 20th century, it was clear that the end of a meaningful Shaker presence was at hand. One by one, the villages began to shut down,” (13). Though the amount of Shakers has certainly dwindled down, the impact that they left is still visible today. The sites of former Shaker communities are able to be visited now. Nearly every one contains “at least a museum, displaying the images and artifacts of the believers. So it is that after two centuries that we are able to glimpse at least part of the heritage of Shaker harmony,” (Purcell 13). Hundreds of thousands of people visit these sites every year to get a taste of the Shaker lifestyle. The reason for decline is not clearly defined. There are several possibilities, though. The most popular one is “the doctrine of celibacy, which prevented any renewal of members from within,” (Andrews 207). As time passed, less and less people converted to the Shaker way of living. The statistics speak for themselves, “After peaking at about 6,000 in the 1840s, membership declined steadily to about 855 in 1900, 40 in 1950, and 8 in 2000,” (Perry). This year, the Shaker community suffered a loss. With this loss, the population of Shakers has reached only a couple. According to Jess Bidgood, a writer for the New York Times, “Sister Frances’ death at the village, which was announced by the Shakers, leaves two surviving Shakers: Brother Arnold Hadd, 60, and Sister June Carpenter, 78.” Though only two Shakers remain, the legacy of the once successful Utopian community will live on for years to come.