Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8kt4b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-30T09:17:58.756Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Peter Hartwig, 1804-1808: Sociological Perspectives in Marginality and Alienation1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 May 2014

Nancy Fox Mouser
Nancy Fox Mouser*
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin-La Crosse
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

All social groups make rules and attempt, at some times and under some circumstances, to enforce them. Social rules define situations and the kinds of behavior appropriate to them, specifying some actions as “right” and forbidding others as “wrong.” When a rule is enforced, the person who is supposed to have broken it may be seen as a special kind of person, one who cannot be trusted to live by the rules agreed on by the group. He is regarded as an outsider.

But the person who is thus labeled an outsider may have a different view of the matter. He may not accept the rule by which he is being judged and may not regard those who judge him as either competent or legitimately entitled to do so. Hence, a second meaning of the term emerges: the rule-breaker may feel his judges are outsiders.

Peter Hartwig was a German seminarian recruited by the Church Missionary Society in 1803 to serve as one of its first two missionaries in Africa. He was sent to Freetown, a settlement established for Africans and people of African descent who had returned to Africa from Britain and the Americas. Hartwig was to reside at Freetown temporarily and to be supervised while there by a locally-based Corresponding Committee composed of Sierra Leone Company officials. The Society directed that, after a year's residence in Sierra Leone, Hartwig and his fellow recruit Melchior Renner would establish a mission among Susu peoples north of Freetown, where they were to convert indigenous Africans to Christianity. Hartwig, however, failed to meet the Society's expectations, violated the norms of the Corresponding Committee that the Society had established at Freetown to guide mission progress, and left the Society's service within three years of reaching the coast. He seemingly had become unable to adjust to changing realities, a wrongdoer and a moral example to other missionaries of what to avoid becoming.3 How are we to interpret his failure from a sociological perspective?

Type
Research Article
Information
History in Africa , Volume 31 , 2004 , pp. 263 - 302
Copyright
Copyright © African Studies Association 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

1

Sections of this paper have been excerpted and appear in “Conclusions and Other Thoughts,” Bruce L. Mouser with Nancy Fox Mouser, Case of the Reverend Peter Hartwig: Slave Trader or Misunderstood Idealist? Clash of Church Missionary Society/Imperial Objectives in Sierra Leone, 1804-1815 (Madison, 2003). Many letters and journals found in the Church Missionary Society archive's CA1/E1 series and cited below are printed in Bruce L. Mouser with Nancy Fox Mouser, eds., The Reverend Peter Hartwig, 1804-1815: A Sourcebook of Correspondence from the Church Missionary Society Archive (Madison, 2003).

References

2 Becker, Howard S., Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance (New York, 1963), 1–2Google Scholar.

3 Groups tend not to forget ex-members immediately. Instead, groups such as the Church Missionary Society, and more specifically Hartwig's fellow missionaries in Sierra Leone, tend to reminisce about the ex-member, to review his entry, contributions, actions, and reasons behind his exit, and to reflect on current activities outside the group. If the group agrees on an interpretation, this retrospective evaluation is passed down as a part of the group's history. When the departure involves antagonism or when the ex-member contributes little of lasting value to group goals, the collective interpretation tends to be negative. Negative responses surface because the ex-member may be a threatening living symbol that the group lacks power and control over members, that loyalties among members are fragile and tenuous, or that the validity of group norms and values is questionable. Over time, some details about the person are forgotten and others retold and highlighted; a former member's true identity may be forgotten, and his character may be used as “a role model of inappropriate behavior,” such as that of a missionary who became a slave trader. Moreland, Richard L. and Levine, John M., “Socialization in Small Groups: Temporal Changes in Individual-Group Relations,” Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 15(1982), 179Google Scholar.

4 Henricks, Thomas S., “Toward a General Theory of Alienation,” Sociological Inquiry 52(1982), 200–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 Spitzer, Leo, Lives in Between: Assimilation and Marginality in Austria, Brazil, West Africa 1870-1945 (New York, 1989), 21-27, 29, 53, 109-10, 125-26, 132–33Google Scholar, noted several of these in his analyses of three families with three different types of marginality over several generations and listed several components of cultural adjustment. See also Abraham, Margaret, “Ethnic Identity and Marginality Among Indian Jews in Contemporary India,” Ethnic Groups 9(1991), 33–60Google Scholar; Henricks, , “General Theory,” 205–07Google Scholar; Stonequist, Everett V., The Marginal Man: A Study in Personality and Culture Conflict (New York, 1961), 1–2Google Scholar.

6 Anderson, Linda E., “A New Look at an Old Construct: Cross-Cultural Adaptation,” International Journal of Intercultural Relations 18(1994), 300CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

7 Stonequist, , Marginal Man, 1–2Google Scholar. Much of Henricks' theoretical model and Hartwig's experience interweave well with the “stranger” and “marginal man” literature. Pertinent ideas from that literature will be used and cited in this analysis, without specifying which type of “stranger” or “marginal man” Hartwig represented with respect to Germany, the London-based Society, the Freetown-based Corresponding Committee, and Africans. The “marginal man” literature correctly recognizes that individuals' subjective interpretations and experiences in any set of cultural and social conditions may differ and change over time, that conditions may change, and that behaviors also may vary and change over time. Henricks' limited subjective stages provide specificity which seem to apply in Hartwig's case. All this is said, given that the only extant primary sources thus far found regarding Hartwig's missionary experience in Africa are the Church Missionary Society's minutes, records, journals, and letters written between 1804 and 1815. For a review of the different and confused meanings of the terms “stranger” and “marginal man,” see Levine, Donald N., “Useful Confusions: Simmel's Stranger and His Followers” in Levine, Donald N., The Plight from Ambiguity (Chicago, 1985), 73–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See Mouser/Mouser, Case, for an extended literature review.

8 Stonequist, , Marginal Man, 7Google Scholar.

9 Lee, Raymond L.M., “The Paradox of Belonging: Sino-Indian Marginality in Malaysia,” Ethnic Groups 8(1990), 119–21Google Scholar.

10 CA1/E1/16, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 16 August 1805.

11 CA1/E116b, Diary, P. Hartwig's Journal, 25 November to 29 December 1805, entries for 7, 13,14, 20-21, 23-24, 28 December 1805.

12 Spitzer, , Lives in Between, 29, 41–42Google Scholar.

13 CA1/E1/4, Pratt to Missionaries, 22 January 1805.

14 G/C1 (CMS General Committee Minutes), Committee Minutes, 2 June 1806, 7 July 1806; CA1/E1/91, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806. Despite these difficulties, his achievements should be noted. By January 1807, Nyländer, CA1/E1/94, Nyländer to Pratt, 27 January 1807, explained that “He speaks better English, than his mother tongue.” Pratt, CA1/E1/21, Pratt to Renner and Hartwig, 14 January 1806, thought his English skills hindered his writing and volunteered permission to write his daily journal entries in German with a quarterly abstract in English, but Hartwig, CA1/E1/91, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806, said that it was easier for him to write in English. Transcriptions of his journals and letters testified to his having gained a significant level of written proficiency, assuming that letters and reports in the official record are actually the originals and not translations or copies of originals.

15 Abraham, , “Ethnic Identity,” 36–38Google Scholar. See Spitzer, , Lives in Between, 52-53, 61-63, 90Google Scholar, for examples of the importance of language acquisition in other cases of marginality.

16 Abraham, , “Ethnic Identity,” 36–37Google Scholar; Henricks, , “General Theory,” 205–07Google Scholar; Stonequist, , Marginal Man, 1–2Google Scholar; Spitzer, , Lives in Between, 29, 53Google Scholar.

17 Cohen, Erik, “The Missionary as Stranger: A Phenomenological Analysis of Christian Missionaries' Encounter with the Folk Religions of Thailand,” Review of Religious Research 31(1990), 338–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar, helpfully points out that the missionary role involves cognitively understanding the host culture without internalizing the hosts' values, norms, and meanings. The “missionary who converts to the religion of those whom he has sought to proselytize” is an example of failure.

18 Abraham, , “Ethnic Identity,” 34-36, 39–48Google Scholar; Lee, , “Paradox of Belonging,” 119, 123–24Google Scholar; Spitzer, , Lives in Between, 63-67, 93, 167, 177Google Scholar, regarding the impact of religious thinking on behavior and interaction in other marginal situations.

19 Piggin, F. Stuart, Making Evangelical Missionaries 1789-1858: The Social Background, Motives and Training of British Protestant Missionaries to India (Abingdon, 1984), 79–99Google Scholar, chapter entitled “The Moderation of Calvinism in the Churches.” See also Hennell, Michael, Sons of the Prophets: Evangelical Leaders of the Victorian Church (London, 1979), 1–15Google Scholar.

20 CA1/E1/4, Pratt to Missionaries, 22 January 1805.

21 CA1/E1/11, Renner to Pratt, 26 April 1805. In a later letter that Renner enclosed in his journal (CA1/E1/115b, Renner's Journal from 5 March to 28 October 1805), dated 26 July 1805, Renner explained to Pratt that he was still trying but not succeeding in meeting the Society's expectations because he was unfamiliar with that style of reporting.

22 CA1/E1/4, Pratt to Missionaries, 22 January 1805.

23 While Fyfe's, Christopher, A History of Sierra Leone (London, 1962)Google Scholar, remains the best survey of the settlement's development, Jakobsson, Stiv, Am I Not a Man and a Brother? (Uppsala, 1972)Google Scholar, has provided a superb review of missionary activities and objectives in or near Freetown before 1804, and Wilson's, Ellen Gibson, The Loyal Blacks (New York, 1976)Google Scholar, treatment of circumstances surrounding disputes between Company administrators and Nova Scotian settlers also is excellent. These authors, whether they intended to do so or not, clearly show that those placed in charge of the settlement had developed certain norms that any newcomer, and especially Europeans and missionaries, were expected to follow. Four of these related to politics. These included obedience to the established political order, maintenance of a strict distinction between political and religious thinking and action, avoidance of involvement in settler issues or their complaints against the ruling authority, and expression of disagreement with authorities in a polite, courteous, tactful, and quiet fashion. Cooperation was the key for missionary success, and most missionary societies specifically instructed those they sent to Freetown to give proper respect and obedience due the Governor. A fifth norm required that all decisions be made through a structured chain-of-command. Hierarchy, whether within the Company, the settlement, or a missionary society, was to be respected and unquestioningly adhered to. A sixth norm, whether missionaries would have preferred it or not, was an understanding that the Company would exploit them when possible to fill the chaplaincy for which the Company, through repeated attempts, had failed to find candidates. This meant, effectively, that missionaries were expected to be useful to the settlement firstly. Schemes for sending and protecting missionaries beyond the settlement would be considered of less importance, and their implementation would depend on a multitude of factors that effected the Company directly. A seventh norm was a Company expectation, especially as the anti-slave trade movement gained momentum in England, that missions outside the settlement would fail as long as the slave trade remained legal and continued along the coast. Commerce in commodities and Company success would lead, if not precede, missionaries to their stations. An eighth norm was an understanding that the Company neither could nor would support missionaries with its own funds. Missionaries were not employees of the Company, except when they served as chaplain, and were to be self-supporting either through their own labor or through Societies' support. A ninth norm was the belief that missions, in any case, were risky and would involve the Company's attention, support, protection, resources, and advice, all scarce within a settlement where administrators were already overworked, frequently ill, confronted by adversaries from all sides, and underappreciated. A tenth norm was the belief that missionaries would need to spend at least one rainy season within Freetown and close to Company resources for acclimation to the climate and culture. Otherwise, they would likely and voluntarily return to England, would perish, or would need to be rescued from their circumstances, all results that would represent a cost to the Company or reflect badly upon the Company and its idealistic objectives on the coast. A final norm was an understanding that missionaries could not succeed without friendly protectors, hosts, or landlords and could not venture singularly to establish a mission station. The instance of a lone missionary in the Rio Pongo had resulted in the missionary's murder, a consequence the Company was not willing to repeat. The settlement's administration had enormous responsibilities. It held the reins of power within a small group of individuals, but only to the extent that it was willing to reward those who adhered to its norms and was willing to administer punishments to those who questioned its authority.

24 While social ties and culturalities are intertwined in reality, the terms are analytically distinguishable. “Culture” generally referrs to mental or symbolic dimensions such as values, rules for behavior, knowledge, language and beliefs, etc., while “social world” designates the positions, bonds, and relationships among individuals or groups. See Calhoun, Craig, Light, Donald, and Keller, Suzanne, Sociology (7th ed.: New York, 1997), 93Google Scholar; Charon, Joel M., Ten Questions: A Sociological Perspective (2d ed.: Belmont, California, 1995) 28Google Scholar; Dictionary of Sociology, ed. Fairchild, Henry P. (Paterson, 1961) 80-81, 275Google Scholar; Henricks, , “General Theory,” 200–21Google Scholar. Anderson, , “New Look,” 297Google Scholar, and Stonequest, , Marginal Man, 84, 88, 95Google Scholar, address how immigration affects social relationships.

25 Anderson, , “New Look,” 313Google Scholar, claims that “securing or carving out a supportive environment by a steady concentration on expanding social interactions is the central task of outsiders working their way in. Lack of [social] environmental support may be the chief curse of the intercultural sojourner.” See as well Moreland and Levine, , “Socialization in Small Groups,” 137–92Google Scholar, and Forsyth, Donelson R., Group Dynamics (Belmont CA, 1999), 63, 107-15, 196–97Google Scholar.

26 Groups try to correct the aberrant behavior of marginal and deviant members. During this time, pressures to conform may become acute, particularly when the errant member is not motivated to change. If repeated efforts are unsuccessful, the group may end the relationship by publically humiliating and expelling the nonconformist. See Baron, Robert S.et al., Group Process, Group Decision, Group Fiction (Pacific Grove, 1992), 61-62, 91Google Scholar; Forsyth, , Group Dynamics, 112-15, 196–97Google Scholar; Hare, A. Paul, Handbook of Small Group Research (2d. ed.: New York, 1976), 52Google Scholar; Moreland/Levine, “Socialization in Small Groups”; Phillips, Gerald M. and Erickson, Eugene C., Interpersonal Dynamics in the Small Group (New York, 1970), 102, 166Google Scholar.

27 CA1/E1/16, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 16 August 1805; CA1/E1/17, Renner to Pratt, 18 October 1805; CA1/E1/22, Renner to Pratt, 16 January 1806.

28 CA1/E1/9, Sarah Hartwig to Secretary, 23 March 1805, explained that they had to hire a person to sit up with them several nights when both were ill.

29 CA1/E1/6, Renner to Pratt, 29 January 1805. CA1/E1/115a, Renner's Journal, entry dated 23 December 1804, Renner noted that both Hartwigs had attended church “after a long confinement at home. She was absent for more than 5 months.” William Dawes was Governor of the Sierra Leone settlement from 1801 to 1803.

30 In his journals (CA1/E1/115a and CA1/E1/115b)and in CA1/E1/6, Renner to Pratt, 29 January 1805, Renner indicated that he had agreed to conduct regular services, baptize children, minister to the sick, perform weddings, lead daily prayers in Governor Day's home, preach funerals not only for his own parishioners but for those of other churches as well, participate in government functions, and meet with condemned men prior to their executions. On 17 September 1806, at Alexander Smith's personal request, Renner struggled from his sick bed to conduct services, even though the doctor had explained to the Governor that he was too ill to perform such services. In return for such dedication, Renner enjoyed regular contact with Company officials who could provide valuable information, resources, and advice. Such resources included “good bark” that was particularly scarce within the settlement and regular meals with the Governor.

31 CA1/E1/9, Sarah Hartwig to Secretary, 23 March 1805.

32 CA1/E1/116a, P. Hartwig [Rio Pongo Journal], 22 February 1805 to 4 May 1805.

33 CA1/E1/30, Rev. P. Hartwig's Journal, 17 February 1806. Macmillan was among the earliest members of the Corresponding Committee.

34 CA1/E1/22, Renner to Pratt, 1 January 1806.

35 CA1/E1/41, Gov. Ludlam to J[ohn] Venn, 20 March 1806.

36 CA1/E1/16, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 16 August 1805; CA1/E1/17, Renner to Pratt, 18 October 1805; CA1/E1/22, Renner to Pratt, 16 January 1806. Forsyth, , Group Dynamics, 195–199Google Scholar; Shaw, Marvin E., Group Dynamics: The Psychology of Small Group Behavior (New York, 1981), 432Google Scholar; Hare, , Handbook, 52, 58Google Scholar, discuss conditions under which new members who are dissimilar may be tolerated or accepted by the group. In the sense that Renner was dissimilar by being an ordained minister, he represented a greater expertise than then existed in the group, sought support from others in the group, contributed in positive ways to the settlement, had a history of conforming to authority, shared certain values and general views with the group respecting slave traders, showed a readiness to be influenced by others in the group, and was quiet and nonaggressive in his demeanor. Forsyth, , Group Dynamics, 126–28Google Scholar, in particular notes that contributors and compromisers have better chances of social acceptance than do those who are viewed as aggressive and unnecessarily opposing the group.

37 CA1/E1/1, Z. Macaulay to Corresponding Committee, 10 June 1803.

38 CA1/E1/9, Sarah Hartwig to Secretary, 23 March 1805.

39 CA1/E1/8, Renner to Pratt 21 March 1805.

40 CA12/E1/30, Rev. P. Hartwig's Journal, 17 February 1806; CA1/E1/116a, P. Hartwig [Rio Pongo Journal], 22 February 1805 to 4 May 1805. In CA1/E1/115a, Renner's Journal, entry dated 22 February 1805, Renner commented that the Corresponding Committee had reservations about any mission site within the Rio Pongo, even though Hartwig had left for the Pongo the previous day. Whether Renner conveyed or shared this information with Hartwig is unclear. But it does suggest that Renner, at an early date, was aware that some members of the Corresponding Committee opposed missions in Susu Country, noting that “Our Committee here gives us little prospect to that Country; and they cannot perceive why Missionaries are positively destined to that place.”

41 CA1/E1/16, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 16 August 1805, indicated that supplies were better, cheaper, and easier to obtain outside of Freetown. He preferred to be outside the settlement and would move to Bullom Shore, but his assignment was to be among the Susu. CA1/E116b, Diary, P. Hartwig's Journal, 25 November to 29 December 1805, entry dated 1 December, noted that he took a day trip to work on Susu language skills. CA1/E1/19, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 14 January 1806, he was still in Freetown; neither thought nor preparation had been given for leaving. CA1/E1/30, Rev. P. Hartwig's Journal, 17 February 1806, entry for 17 February 1806, indicated he had expected to leave Freetown after Christmas but was still in Freetown, “I am now weary to wait at a place where no missionary ever could prosper.” CA1/E1/85, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 12 December 1806, Hartwig wrote that he and the three newly arrived “hope that we shall leave the Colony directly after Christmas which is our desire all.”

42 CA1/E1/111, Renner to Secretary, 18 July 1807.

43 CA1/E1/57, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 10 May 1806. He spent three days at Dala Modu's village, eight days with Susu speakers, one day with African boys returning from England, and one day with a settler/informant. Despite reports that Hartwig provided little assistance as chaplain in Freetown, his journal indicated that on ten of the 35 days, he wrote sermons primarily; five days he preached, and three days he ministered to the sick. One day he wrote to Pratt; three were used for recreation; and three he was sick. In CA1/E1/91, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806, Hartwig indicated that he had written and preached 36 sermons.

44 CA1/E1/21, Pratt to Renner and Hartwig, 14 January 1806; CA1/E1/91, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806.

45 CA1/E1/116a, P. Hartwig Journal [Rio Pongo Journal], 22 February 1805 to 4 May 1805; CA1/E1/46, Corresponding Committee to Hartwig, 9 April 1806; CA1E1/116c, P. Hartwig Journal, Susu Country, 9 April 1806 to 24 May 1806; CA1/E1|116d, Extract of Journal 1816, P. Hartwig's Journal, Mandingo Country, July 1806 to 7 December 1806; CA1/E1/85, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 12 December 1806.

46 CA1/E1/92, Nyländer to Pratt, 20 January 1807. Forsyth, , Group Dynamics, 103–04Google Scholar, particularly noted that proximity is a strong determinant of interaction. Prolonged exposure increases chances of interaction, of attraction, and of development of ties, although the reverse may occur if differences build.

47 Stonequist, , Marginal Man, 84, 88–95Google Scholar, and Lee, , “Paradox of Belonging,” 117-18, 122–23Google Scholar.

48 CA1/E1/9, Sarah Hartwig to Secretary, 23 March 1805.

49 CA1/E1/41, Gov. Ludlam to J[ohn] Venn, 20 March 1806.

50 Later when he reread and reflected upon his 36 sermons, Hartwig, CA1/E1/91, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806, wrote, “I do not wonder Br Renner thought some outlines of them a hard doctrine. Howbeit as long as I feel myself directed so to speak, & find it not against the word of God, I have no business to incline to another mode, but as with aspect to the fear of man, this what troubles me very little, nor have their favours much influence upon me. I believe Br. R. has had to suffer much on that topic, but I must say to his credit, he has still preserved the pure doctrine of mans Salvation with only that addition, that he carefully avoids any expression that might have the slightest appearance of being hard, &c in order not to offend Gov. & Council.” In CA1/E2/131, Renner to Secretary [January 1812], “Short Account of the Missions and Missionaries in Africa,” Renner corroborated that Hartwig's “discourses were rather too severe concerning the conduct of the Europeans.” In contrast, Renner's responses to imperfections among parishioners and Europeans seemed less critical and even matter of fact. In CA1/E1/115a, Renner's Journal, entry dated 29 December 1804, Renner mentioned that he had dinned with the Governor and “a large party. Eating, drinking, dancing &c. is their business.” Forsyth, , Group Dynamics, 103-07, 195–97Google Scholar, notes that no group, whether being asked to accept another into its membership or to tolerate criticism directed toward it or its members, can be expected to welcome those who dislike them or who pose a threat or openly challenge their views.

51 CA1/E1/41, Gov. Ludlam to J[ohn] Venn, 20 March 1806. “We shall be less embarrassed in our judgements concerning him when Mrs. Hartwig is away. He is weak and indolent, and merely laughed at by those who are indifferent or who are Enemies to the cause. The weakest of our Black Settlers have eyes sufficient to discern his failings. I dare not suffer him to officiate much in our Church, least it should be more deserted than it is. This detains Mr. Renner here; for, on much consideration, I do not think it right to leave our pulpit wholly vacant and the service of the Church wholly unperformed.”

52 G/C1, Committee Minutes, 2 June 1806. CA1/E1/82, Nyländer to Pratt, 28 October 1806, four to five months later, Nyländer concurred that Renner was esteemed as chaplain to the colony. Groups expect members to contribute more than they take, and troublemakers are considered as costly to the group. The socially sensitive member will note group responses and possibly adjust his behavior to maintain acceptance. The marginal member may not understand how extensively he deviates from the group and therefore be unable to correct his behavior on his own. See Forsyth, , Group Dynamics, 63, 107-12, 196–97Google Scholar; Phillips, /Erickson, , Interpersonal Dynamics, 166Google Scholar; Shaw, , Group Dynamics, 115-16, 194-95, 207Google Scholar.

53 G/C1, Committee Minutes, 7 July 1806.

54 G/AC, 27 February 1807.

55 Ibid., “Ah Peetee Hattywicky have very bad head.”

56 CA1/E1/41, Gov. Ludlam to J[ohn] Venn, 20 March 1806; G/Cl, Committee Minutes, 7 July 1806.

57 CA1/E1/41, Gov. Ludlam to J[ohn] Venn, 20 March 1806.

58 Henricks, , “General Theory,” 210Google Scholar; Lee, , “Paradox of Belonging,” 120Google Scholar; Spitzer, , Lives in Between, 7Google Scholar; Stonequist, , Marginal Man, 5–6Google Scholar.

59 CA1/E1/1, Zachary Macaulay to Corresponding Committee, 10 June 1803; CA1/E1/9, S. Hartwig to Secretary, 23 March 1805; CA1/E1/12, S. Hartwig to Pratt, 26 April 1805; CA1/E1/19, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 14 January 1806; CA1/E1/60, Renner to Pratt, 23 June 1806; CA1/E2/131, Renner to Secretary, n.d. [January 1812], “Short Account of the Missions and Missionaries in Africa.”

60 Hole, Charles, The Early History of the Church Missionary Society for Africa and the East (London, 1896), 127–28Google Scholar; CA1/E1/9, S. Hartwig to Secretary, 23 March 1805; CA1/E1/12, S. Hartwig to Pratt, 26 April 1805; CA1/E1/21, Pratt to Renner and Hartwig, 14 January 1806; CA1/E1/60, Renner to Pratt, 30 May 1806; CA1/E2/131, Renner to Secretary, n.d. [January 1812], “Short Account of the Missions and Missionaries in Africa.”

61 CA1/E1/41, Gov. Ludlam to J[ohn] Venn, 20 March 1806; CA1/E1/60, Renner to Pratt, 30 May 1806; CA1/E1/71, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 21 July 1806; CA1/E1/75, Henry Odium to Pratt, 20 August 1806.

62 CA1/E1/46, Corresponding Committee to Hartwig, 9 April 1806, “You will observe a rigid compliance with the instructions of the Society respecting your Journal, as expected and even insisted on. We think it right also that not only the more material transactions should be entered therein, but that some account should be given of the occupation of every day unless prevented by sickness; your continuance in Africa (supposing no particular instructions are received from home) will very much depend on your punctual obedience to these instructions.” Renner apparently was apprized of the severity of this letter for in CA1/E1/60, Renner to Pratt, 30 May 1806, he wrote that Hartwig “received very strict orders from the Committee here respecting keeping a Diary. If he is wise, he will follow directions. His future lot will depend upon being obedient in his charge.”

63 CA1/E1/92, Nyländer to Pratt, 20 January 1807.

64 Ibid.

65 CA1/E1/94, Nyländer to Pratt, 27 January 1807.

66 CA1/E1/105, Nyländer to Pratt, 29 April 1807.

67 CA1/E1/14, Secretary to Missionaries, 8 August 1805.

68 CA1/E1/4, Pratt to Missionaries, 22 January 1805; CA1/E1/5, Pratt to Corresponding Committee, 22 January 1805.

69 CA1/E1/41, Gov. Ludlam to J[ohn] Venn, 20 March 1806. Twenty months earlier, Renner had noted, in CA1/E1/115a, Renner's Journal, entry dated 22 February 1805, that the Corresponding Committee opposed missions in the Rio Pongo, and in CA1/E1/115b, Renner's Journal, entry dated 2 December 1805, that there was then a “controversy” at Freetown concerning which ethnic group should receive the first mission. None of Hartwig's writings indicated that he was privy to such information or discussion.

70 CA1/E1/83, Gov. Ludlam to Pratt, 28 October 1806.

71 CA1/E1/89, Gov. Ludlam to Pratt, 20 December 1806.

72 Ibid.

73 CA1/E1/19, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 14 January 1806; CA1/E1/21, Pratt to Renner and Hartwig, 14 January 1806; CA1/E1/30, P. Hartwig's Journal, 17 February 1806; CA1/E1/38, P. Hartwig to Smith, 16 March 1806; CA1/E1/39, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 18 March 1806; CA1/E1/116c, P. Hartwig's Journal, 9 April 1806 to 24 May 1806; CA1/E1/68, Pratt to Renner and Hartwig, 23 June 1806; CA1/E1/81, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 16 October 1806; CA1/E1/89, Ludlam to Pratt, 20 December 1806; CA1/E1/91, Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806.

74 The story of Balaam and his donkey is found in Numbers, ch. 22-24. Renner compared himself to Balaam's horse in CA1/E1/40, Renner to Pratt, Sierra Leone, 18 March 1806.

75 CA1/E1/19, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 14 January 1806; CA1/E1/40, Renner to Pratt, 18 March 1806; CA1/E1/41, Gov. Ludlam to J. Venn, 20 March 1806; CA1/E1/60, Renner to Pratt, 30 May 1806; CA1/E1/71, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 21 July 1806; CA1/E1/82, Nyländer to Pratt, 28 October 1806; CA1/E1/89, Ludlam to Pratt, 22 December 1806; CA1/E1/91, Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806; CA1/E1/92, Nyländer to Pratt, 20 January 1807; CA1/E2/131, Renner to Secretary, n.d. [January 1812], “Short Account of the Missions and Missionaries in Africa”; G/Cl, Committee Minutes 2 June 1806 and 7 July 1806.

76 CA1/E1/46, Corresponding Committee to Hartwig, 9 April 1806.

77 Even Ludlam, CA1/E1/41, Gov. Ludlam to J[ohn] Venn, 20 March 1806, pointed out that those who preached in Europe probably had no idea how much more difficult the African situation was for a missionary.

78 CA1/E1/30, Rev. P. Hartwig's Journal, 17 February 1806. This was a full year before he removed himself from under the control of the Corresponding Committee.

79 Anderson, “New Look;” Buono, Anthony F. and Kamm, Judith B., “Marginality and the Organizational Socialization of Female Managers,” Human Relations 36(1983), 1125–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

80 Ibid. See Meryl Reis Louis, “Surprise and Sense Making: What Newcomers Experience in Entering Unfamiliar Organizational Settings,” Administrative Science Quarterly 25(1980), 226-51.

81 CA1/E1/9, Sarah Hartwig to Secretary, 23 March 1805; CA1/E1/12, S. Hartwig to Pratt, 26 April 1805; CA1/E1/17, Renner to Pratt, 18 October 1805; CA1/E1/21, Pratt to Renner and Hartwig, 14 January 1806; CA1/E1/68, Pratt to Renner and Hartwig, 23 June 1806.

82 CA1/E1/75, Renner to Pratt, 18 August 1806.

83 A calendar of letters was later produced in typescript and listed letters then present in the archive. This calendar may not have included letters lost or misplaced. CA1/E1/4, Pratt to Missionaries, 22 January 1805; CA1/E1/13, Pratt to Missionaries, 8 August 1805; CA1/E1/15, Pratt to Renner, 8 August 1805; CA1/E1/21, Pratt to Renner and Hartwig, 14 January 1806; CA1/E1/68, Pratt to Renner and Hartwig, 23 June 1806; CA1/E1/72, Pratt to Renner, 16 August 1806; CA1/E1/101, Pratt to P. Hartwig, 27 April 1807; CA1/E1/102, Pratt to Renner, 27 April 1807; CA1/E1/103, Pratt to Missionaries, 27 April 1807; CA1/E1/114, Pratt to Missionaries, 27 August 1808.

84 CA1/E116b, Diary, P. Hartwig's Journal, 25 November to 29 December 1805.

85 CA1/E1/116c, P. Hartwig's Journal, Susu Country, 9 April 1806 to 24 May 1806

86 CA1/E1/86, Butscher to Pratt, 12 December 1806.

87 CA1/E1/68, Pratt to Renner and Hartwig, 23 June 1806.

88 CA1/E1/12, S. Hartwig to Pratt, 26 April 1805; CA1/E1/30, Rev. P. Hartwig's Journal, 17 February 1806.

89 CA1/E1/116b, P. Hartwig's Journal, Freetown, 25 November to 29 December 1805. Hartwig's journals (CA1/E1/116a, P. Hartwig [Rio Pongo Journal], 22 February 1805 to 4 May 1805; CA1/E1/116c, P. Hartwig's Journal, Susu Country, 9 April 1806 to 24 May 1806) do not reveal that his contacts were in fact adversaries to the administration, but there is reason to believe that malcontents tend to find each other. See Phillips, and Erickson, , Interpersonal Dynamics, 95Google Scholar. In G/AC 3/3/42, S. Hartwig to Pratt, 2 December 1806, Sarah noted that Peter had weaknesses of which he was not fully aware: “He has labored under many disadvantages. He was young in years, & young in grace; having had litde knowledge of the World; & not much of the depravity of his own heart.” After Peter had left Freetown, Sarah (G/AC 3/3, S. Hartwig to Pratt, 7 July 1807) wrote that Peter was especially likely to chose his associates unwisely: “I know his temper & disposition is such, that he needs encouragement. He needs a wise discreet & kind counsellor to direct him in all his steps. Want of experience, both of the World & of his own heart; frequently exposes him, till he nearly becomes a prey to the false friendship of designing & worldly minded men. Against such I warned him when I left, & feared, lest for want of some one to lead him, he w.d be tempted to make companions of those who w.d in the end do him serious harm.” This is consistent with descriptions of other people. See also CA1/E1/41, Gov. Ludlam to J[ohn] Venn, 20 March 1806; CA1/E1/102, Pratt to Renner, 27 April 1807; CA1/E1/105, Nyländer to Pratt, 29 April 1807.

90 CA1/E2/131, Renner to Secretary [January 1812], “Short Account of the Missions and Missionaries in Africa.”

91 CA1/E1/91, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806.

92 CA1/E1/41, Gov. Ludlam to J[ohn] Venn, 20 March 1806.

93 CA1/E1/40, Renner to Pratt, 18 March 1806.

94 CA1/E1/60, Renner to Pratt, 30 May 1806; CA1/E1/71, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 21 July 1806; CA1/E1/89, Gov. Ludlam to Pratt, 20 December 1806; CA1/E1/96b, P. Hartwig to Ludlam, 29 January 1807; CA1/E1/105, Nyländer to Pratt, 29 April 1807; G/Cl, Committee Minutes, 7 July 1806; CA1/E1/111, Renner to Secretary, 18 July 1807; CA1/E2/131, Renner to Secretary [January 1812], “Short Account of the Missions and Missionaries in Africa.”

95 In G/AC, 3/3/42 S. Hartwig to Pratt 2 December 1806, Sarah noted that Hartwig and Renner were very different and that “where the two dispositions so diametrically opposite to each other meet, it needs great grace to enable them to agree in all things.”

96 Anatonovsky, Aaron, “Toward a Refinement of the ‘Marginal Man’ Concept,” Social Forces 35(1956), 57–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Anderson, “New Look;” Enoch, Yael, “Change of Values During Socialization for a Profession: An Application of the Marginal Man Thoery,” Human Relations 42(1989), 219–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Meneses, Eloise H., “Traders and Marginality in a Complex Social System,” Ethnology 26(1987), 231–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Spitzer, , Lives in Between, 129-37, 143-45, 150–97Google Scholar; Stonequist, , Marginal Man, 5-9, 93, 111-22, 139-51, 159-60, 201–02Google Scholar.

97 Spitzer, , Lives in Between, 132-37, 143-45, 150–97Google Scholar.

98 Abraham, “Ethnic Identity;” Antonovsky, “Toward a Refinement;” Enoch, “Change of Values,” 221; Lee, , “Paradox of Belonging,” 123–24Google Scholar; Meneses, “Traders and Marginality;” Spitzer, , Lives in Between, 4Google Scholar; Stonequist, , Marginal Man, 57, 156-59, 177-83, 201-09, 220–21Google Scholar.

99 Anderson, “New Look;” Enoch, “Change of Values;” Lee, , “Paradox of Belonging,” 121–24Google Scholar; Stonequist, , Marginal Man, 221Google Scholar.

100 Henricks, “Toward a General Theory;” CA1/E1/19, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 14 January 1806; CA1/E1/30, P. Hartwig's Journal, 17 February 1806; CA1/E1/38, P. Hartwig to Smith, 16 March 1806; CA1/E1/39, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 18 March 1806; CA1/E1/116c, P. Hartwig's Journal, 9 April 1806 to 24 May 1806; CA1/E1/71, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 21 July 1806; CA1/E1/81, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 16 October 1806; CA!/E1/116e, P. Hartwig's Journal, 6 April to December 1806; CA1/E1/85, Hartwig to Pratt, 12 December 1806; CA1/E1/86, Butscher to Pratt, 12 December 1806; CA1/E1/91, Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806; CA1/E1/93, Hartwig to Pratt, 27 January 1807; CA1/E1/95, Hartwig to Pratt, 29 January 1807.

101 Jakobsson, , Am I Not a Man and a Brother? 123Google Scholar. Jakobsson noted that at the 1802 annual conference of the General Committee “[r]eference was also made to the vain attempts the Sierra Leone Committee had made for five years to find a minister willing to go to Sierra Leone as Chaplain.”

102 CA1/E1/9, Sarah Hartwig to Secretary, 23 March 1805.

103 CA1/E2/131, Renner to Secretary [January 1812], “Short Account of the Missions and Missionaries in Africa.” CA1/E1/9, Sarah Hartwig to Secretary, 23 March 1805; CA1/E2/8, Renner to Pratt, 21 March 1805. CA1/E1/91, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806; CA1/E2/131, Renner to Secretary [January 1812], “Short Account of the Missions and Missionaries in Africa.”

104 CA1/E1/6, Renner to Pratt, 29 January 1805.

105 CA1/E2/8, Renner to Pratt, 21 March 1805. In CA1/E1/71, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 21 July 1806, Hartwig agreed with Renner's analysis.

106 CA1/E1/16, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 16 August 1805.

107 CA1/E1/19, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 14 January 1806, “You see we are still at S.L. Do not know when we are to go. It was proposed after Christmas, but there is neither thought nor preparation seemingly for leaving this miserable place. I said to Br. R[enner] of late that it was not right of us being in perfect health to stay here at such an expensive place and throw the Society's money away. He thought it perfectly right but what can you do, he replied if these people come not forward in it. Upon the whole I perceived that he was afraid to say anything of getting a cross answer. I am very uneasy to stay here at S. L. longer, as this clime is impairing the constitutions daily, and therefore I think one should not lose one hour on this very account.”

108 CA1/E1/19, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 14 January 1806. 109CA1/E1/30, Rev. P. Hartwig's Journal, 17 February 1806.

110 CA1/E1/30, Rev. P. Hartwig's Journal, 17 February 1806, “In your last annual report it saith, xx has been able to proceed into the Susoo country, which it was the intention of the corresponding committee at S. L. that he should do. accompanied bv one of the gentlemen of the colony in order to fix on a suitable status. I am very sorry to see our honorable Society be impressed upon. My going into the Rio Pongas was chiefly occasioned by my long and severe illness. It was dear Mr. Macmillan, and Dr. Leedham who took pitty upon me, and procured me a passage to the R.P. in a slave trader's schooner, in order to reestablish my health, if possible. The corresponding committee at S.L. had never such things under consideration, as they informed you; that they would send me into the country, and so much less to find one of the companies servants with me. If they ever had had such thoughts, we would by this have ascended a step higher.” Underlining in original.

111 CA1/E1/30, Rev. P. Hartwig's Journal, 17 February 1806

112 Ibid.

113 CA1/E1/39, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 18 March 1806.

114 Ibid.; CA1/E1/41, Gov. Ludlam to J. Venn, 20 March 1806; CA1/E1/94, Nyländer to Pratt, 27 January 1807; G/Cl, Committee Minutes, 2 June 1806, 7 July 1806.

115 CA1/E1/40, Renner to Pratt, 18 March 1806.

116 CA1/E1/39, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 18 March 1806.

117 Henricks, , “Toward a General Theory,” 200–21Google Scholar.

118 Anderson, “New Look.”

119 Geschwender, James A., “Status Consistency and Cognitive Dissonance,” Social Forces 46(1967), 160–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See as well Hughes, Everett C., “Social Change and Status Protest; An Essay on the Marginal Man,” Phylon 10(1949), 58–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Dickie-Clarke, H. F., “The Marginal Situation: A Contribution to Marginality Theory,” Social Forces 44(1966), 363–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar, for discussion of marginal man and marginal situation in terms of statuses and status inconsistency.

120 Geschwender's, “Status Consistency,” order of individual responses is similar to the generational responses that Spitzer, identifies in Lives in Between, 150–97Google Scholar. Henricks, Anderson, and Geschwender consider expressions of hostility toward others as attempts to change ones social environment. Anderson, “New Look,” 312, recognizes attacks and retaliation as potentially helpful for reducing the individual's stress but considers long-term adaptation as involving more productive attempts at environmental change. Geschwender treats expressions of hostility toward individuals and groups as relatively simple and as early attempts to change one's environment, with participation in political or social movements as more complex and later attempts to restore harmony between individuals and their social environments. Official CMS documents from Hartwig make it difficult to document that he responded hostilely toward Renner, Ludlam, and the Corresponding Committee before he sought other forms of social change. He may have been aggressive toward them in person. In his official correspondence destined for London, however, his hostility and more instrumental attempts at social change appear about the same time. This paper cannot effectively address the chronological timing of his different types of hostility.

121 CA1/E1/46, Corresponding Committee to Hartwig, 9 April 1806

122 CA1/E1/116c, P. Hartwig's Journal, Susu Country, 9 April 1806 to 24 May 1806; CA1/E1/85, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 12 December 1806.

123 CA1/E1/92, Nyländer to Pratt, 20 January 1807. In CA1/E1/95, Hartwig to Pratt, Sierra Leone, 29 January 1807, Hartwig characterized his eight months in Moria as his “banishment.”

124 CA1/E1/116c, P. Hartwig's Journal, Susu Country, 9 April 1806 to 24 May 1806; CA1/E1/57, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 10 May 1806.

125 CA1/E1/57, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 10 May 1806, “having a sufficient knowledge of the different tribes of Sosoos, I determined not to proceed, [action] as it would be but very slightly interesting to the Society at home, which object is far from that of the African Association; & to gratify curiosity my time & health is at present moment too precious [evaluation and integration].”

126 CA1/E1/71, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 21 July 1806, “Commands and instructions I only obey from at home.”

127 CA1/E1/116c, P. Hartwig's Journal, Susu Country, 9 April 1806 to 24 May 1806.

128 CA1/E1/71, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 21 July 1806; CA1/E1/7J, Henry Odium to Pratt, 20 August 1806.

129 CA1/E1/71, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 21 July 1806.

130 CA1/E1/116d, P. Hartwig's Journal, Mandingo Country, July 1806 to 7 Dec 1806; CA1/E1/81, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 16 October 1806, “But I keep my mind much concealed when writing to S.L. because their way of thinking pleases me not.” CA1/E1/71, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 21 July 1806.

131 CA1/E1/81, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 16 October 1806.

132 CA1/E1/108, Butscher to Pratt, 30 June 1807.

133 CA1/E1/96, A[lexander] Smith of the Corresponding Committee to Pratt, 16 February 1807. CA1/E1/91, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806; CA1/E1/92, NylÑnder to Pratt, 20 January 1807.

134 CA1/E1/96, A[lexander] Smith of the Corresponding Committee to Pratt, 16 February 1807; CA1/E1/96b, P. Hartwig to Ludlam, 29 January 1807; CA1/E2/131, Renner to Secretary [January 1812], “Short Account of the Missions and Missionaries in Africa.”

135 CA1/E1/91, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806.

136 CA1/E1/96b, P. Hartwig to Ludlam, 29 January 1807. The “P.S.” in this letter to Ludlam apparently was attached to the version sent to the Society.

137 CA1/E1/91, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806.

138 Ibid.

139 Zajonc, Robert B., “Aggressive Attitudes of the ‘Stranger’ as a Function of Conformity Pressures,” Human Relations 5(1952), 205–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

140 CA1/D1/116e, P. Hartwig's Journal, 6 April to Dec 1806 (Answers to questions); CA1/E1/91, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 22 December 1806.

141 CA1/D1/116e, P. Hartwig's Journal, 6 April to Dec 1806 (Answers to questions); CA1/E1/96b, P. Hartwig to Ludlam, 29 January 1807; CA1/E1/105, Nyländer to Pratt, 29 April 1807; CA1/E2/131, Renner to Secretary [January 1812], “Short Account of the Missions and Missionaries in Africa.” Nyländer's letter of 29 April 1807 indicated that he believed Hartwig sent the answers to Ludlam, but Hartwig's postscripts to CA1/D1/116e, P. Hartwig's Journal, 6 April to Dec 1806 (Answers to questions) and to CA1/E1/96b, P. Hartwig to Ludlam, 29 January 1807 and Renner's later account CA1/E2/131, Renner to Secretary [January 1812], “Short Account of the Missions and Missionaries in Africa” suggest that the Corresponding Committee may not have received the answers. If the Freetown based Committee had, in fact, received these answers, would the two sets of answers and journals for that eight month period have been judged deficient enough to justify serious reprimands from Ludlam?

142 CA1/E1/85, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 12 December 1806.

143 CA1/E1/93, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 27 January 1807; CA1/E1/94, Nyländer to Pratt, 27 January 1807; CA1/E1/96, A[lexander] Smith of the Corresponding Committee to Pratt, 16 February 1807.

144 CA1/E1/89, Gov. Ludlam to Pratt, 20 December 1806. For details of Fantimani in London see Mouser, Bruce L., “African Academy—Clapham, 1799-1806,” History of Education 33(2004), 87–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

145 CA1/E1/93, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 27 January 1807; CA1/E1/94, Nyländer to Pratt, 27 January 1807.

146 CA1/E1/96, A[lexander] Smith of the Corresponding Committee to Pratt, 16 February 1807.

147 CA1/E1/93, Hartwig to Pratt, 27 January 1807; CA1/E1/95, Hartwg to Pratt, 29 January 1807.

148 CA1/E1/96, A[lexander] Smith of the Corresponding Committee to Pratt, 16 February 1807.

149 CA1/E1/95, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 29 January 1807.

150 Ibid.

151 CA1/E1/96, A[lexander] Smith of the Corresponding Committee to Pratt, 16 February 1807.

152 CA1/E1/93, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 27 January 1807; CA1/E1/95, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 29 January 1807; CA1/E1/98, P. Hartwig to Pratt, 24 March 1807.