After Dark: Myths, Misdeeds & the Paranormal - The Dark History of the Quakers

Episode Date: June 15, 2026

17th century England was a world turned upside down.A civil war resulted in King Charles I being executed, and from this moment a religious movement called the Quakers grew rapidly.Far from the pacifists we think of them as today, Quaker leaders shocked the country with their radical approach, including attempts to resurrect the dead.Taking us back to the 17th century today is Dr Erica Canela, historian and author of Zealous: A Darker Side of the Early Quakers.Edited by Hannah Feodorov. Produced by Stuart Beckwith. Senior Producer is Freddy Chick.Sign up to History Hit for hundreds of hours of original documentaries, with a new release every week and ad-free podcasts. Sign up at https://www.historyhit.com/subscribe.  You can take part in our listener survey here.All music from Epidemic Sounds. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

An executioner takes a red-hot iron and bores it through a man's tongue. The smell of burning flesh fills the air as the letter B for blasphemer is seared into his forehead. Hundreds are watching. It's 1656 and the man punished is a Quaker named James Naler. Today, Quakers are remembered as peaceful and gentle. But when they first emerged in the English Civil War, they were a wild and terrifying. sect. So, from Radical 17th Century England, this is After Dark. Hello and welcome to After Dark. Now, I saw this episode that we're going to record today on the production sheet and I thought to myself, this is an unusual title. I hadn't expected to see the dark side of the Quakers because

growing up in Ireland, the Quakers have a very positive reputation, mostly just. I think probably to the charitable acts that were carried out in the Great Irish Famine. But this was a history that I wasn't very aware of and that I was really intrigued to find out more about. So today we are joined by Dr. Erica Canella, a historian and author of Zealous, a darker side of the early Quakers. Erica, welcome to After Dark. Thank you so much. What an absolute pleasure to be here. I'm so delighted that you've come into. Enlighten us about the darker side of the Quakers.

Before we get into the nitty gritty of this and the exact specificities of these darker, earlier sites, what was it that drew you to this? Because, I mean, you know, it takes a lot of efforts and time and years to do a book. Where did this enter into your livelihood as going, this is something I'm interested in? I'm going to pursue this. This is an area I feel like I can unravel a little bit more. I mean, I can quite confidently say that this was not my dream as a little girl. It was, I was very, oh, go ahead.

It would be amazing if this was your dream. If you were a six-year-old that was obsessed with Quakers, that's iconic. Yeah. I mean, I was a weird kid growing up for sure and had bizarre interests like the Weather Channel and American politics. But I think all historians have. There's something back there that's odd. For me, it was very much when I sort of went back into postgraduate education and I did a master's degree that really looked at tutor history. and social, like social history and sort of what you can find out from reading wills.

And so that was my master's project. I wanted to do a PhD. I wanted to stick with social history because I find everyday people super duper fascinating. And so it was suggested to me. It was my PhD supervisor. I was like, well, why don't you have a look at the early Quakers? And my initial thought was, why? Oh, no.

Like that sounds super duper. Like, it just sounds boring, right? And he's like, no, just do a little bit of reading. And I did. And I was like, what? Guess what? It's not boring. It is not boring at all.

Like, I just, they were not, they challenged all of my expectations. And so, and that's what I enjoy, that's what I enjoy most about this work. And sort of talking, you know, talking to you is that people have this idea of what a Quaker is. And they've had this tremendous, tremendous glow up. Yeah, yeah, yeah. The PR machine has done a good job. Really, really good job. And so, you know, today, you know, we do think of them as being very progressive.

Yeah. And broadly speaking, just on the correct side of history. Yeah, talk to me a little bit more about that because we will rewind, of course, this is a history podcast. But talk to me about their place in society today a little bit more. You talk about being progressive. You talk generally being in the right side of history. Is there a large Quaker community in the world, across the world still today? what position do they hold now?

I mean, there is certainly still, I mean, a very sizable Quaker community. Again, sort of you'll find, you know, again, they're going to be sort of campaigning for for progressive issues. That gives us a modern overview of where we are. There's still Quakers. It's still practicing religion. If we want to go back and see the origins of this, though, we are rewinding ourselves to the 17th century.

And more specifically, we're starting to sit. ourselves in the upheaval that is the Civil War. Is that correct? Is that the time period we're landing ourselves in? That's absolutely where we're going. So we're going back. Quakerism really, it starts in the 1650s, but the ideas start to gather steam in the 1640s in the Civil Wars.

They're a radical religious movement. It really sort of takes flight and right after the Civil Wars. So we're saying that it's a Protestant, excuse my use of word here, I'm thinking in 17th century terms, but Protestant sect is that the way that they would have couched it at that moment in time? Absolutely. Definitely not Puritan. Yes. And obviously not Catholic. So they are sort of in the in between space.

What is separating them from Puritans then? Because we do associate the Civil War with the Puritan, right? and it aligns with Cromwell and ideas that Cromwell and the men or the regicides around him might have had at the senior level at the very least. And actually, it's not always the case, but when we think Puyerson, we go there, what are the Quakers believing that the Pyrton's are not or vice versa? So the Quakers, so their big idea is this idea of direct revelation. Okay. that anybody can have a direct connection with God at any place and at any time. Okay.

So this means they are rejecting the clergy. They are rejecting, you know, basically you don't need these ostentatious churches. Like, you don't need that. They are, they're also sort of probably more radically is that they are, they believe in equality. across gender. Between men and women. So if women are sort of compelled to become a Quaker minister, they can do so. If they want to speak in a Quaker meeting, crack on, gal.

It's quite radical. It is very radical. It is very radical. But the other thing is that there is this equality in society. And this is going to be what ruffles feathers. because I think it's certainly more controversial because the things that they are not doing is they are not tipping their hats to their social superiors. They are not using honorifics to speak to their social superiors. They're using weird words like thee and thou to talk about themselves, about other people.

Again, sort of this equal plain. The other thing that they're not doing is they're refusing to swear oaths. And in England, we have either a king in the 40s, as you're talking about or not for a little a little while. And then in the 50s, we've got essentially a king, but Lord Protector, whatever he ends up being, king and all but name, essentially. There's still an idea of obedience, and they're not buying into this. No, they're not. So they're basically, their argument against odes is that, like, if you're always honest, you don't need to do that. Oh, hilarious. And so it's like, you know what it does actually. I see the logic. It's like, oh, yeah, that

but you can see how, okay, this is, this is, this is radical. These are ideas. And in the wrong hands, they could be quite dangerous. Yeah. And so, so in the 1650s at the onset, you know, they are, you know, they are preaching in marketplaces. They are disrupting church services, which we'll go into in a bit. They're flooding the country with pamphlets because obviously sort of during the wars, print is massive. They are, the early Quakers were spiritual insurgents.

Ooh, spiritual insurgents. That's a great way to frame of, especially in terms of what's going on in the wider country, in England specifically, but also into Scotland at this time. Now, you said in the wrong hands, this ideology could be dangerous. And there is a pair of hands at the base of this. And this is, of course, the founder of Quakerism. Tell me a little bit about, well, first of all, is it appropriate to call him a founder? I'm talking about George Fox specifically. Tell us a little bit about him. I think that,

I think that for all intents and purposes, he is the founder of Quakerism. So George Fox is, it's a good story, right? So he was born in the village of Drayton in Leicester, which is now known as Fennie Drayden. He was the son of a prosperous weaver. And when his father left him a quite substantial legacy. And so this allowed him to essentially sort of go out and find himself when he was a teenager. So George Fox wrote that he was plagued by the temptations of sin and despair and found no solution in any of the religious options of the day. And so when early Quakers, they write their sort of spiritual autobiographies. And when they do, most of the time, they sound like absolute, just miserable children. Like just like they're always moping. They're never happy. They're wandering in the woods with

their Bibles. Like there's a theme here with the early Quakers and when they're talking about how they grew up. And if there's this common thread of that, you know, they're just not, they're not satisfied with any of the options available to them. Because the world and the religious organizations around them are not good enough for them. Is that a common thread you think? Yeah, it just doesn't speak to them. It just, it's just like, No, this just, I'm not, I'm not feeling this. Something's missing for me. Exactly.

Exactly. And so when George Fox was 19, so this is, this will be 1643. Okay. So it's during the civil war. We're right in the middle of it. Right. So he leaves his family and sort of begins a period that he calls his time in the wilderness. Now I call it George Fox's gap year.

Okay. Because he's 19 years old. And he's 19. He's 19. It's the Civil War's. that's fine. That's fine. So what does he do? So he travels sort of around sort of parliamentarian armies. In the army or around? No, no, no, no. He's just, he's just chilling. He's just chilling. He's not fighting. That's insane. He's not fighting. And so he's, he visits his Baptist uncle and visits

army camps during the wars. And, and so, you know, as we sort of just mentioned earlier, you know, the civil wars, it's a hotbed of radical ideas, particularly within the new model army, parliamentarian armies, like, it's a treasure trove, really, of, of, of, of, of, of new ideas. And George Fox is paying attention. And he's like, oh, okay, I like this idea. I like this. So in the late 1640s, still civil wars going on, right? Is Charles dead now or is it that late or is not quite that late? It's, he's not quite dead yet. Okay. He's, he's heading for the block. He's well on his way, right? He's not coming back from this, yeah. So he has these. sort of religious experiences that sort of prompt his, basically his public ministry.

And so fast forwarding a little bit, Charles First is dead now, in 1652, right? He is sort of, obviously he's been traveling and preaching and he sort of ends up preaching in a place called Furbank Fell in Cumbria. Really beautiful, really picturesque. It's, you know, It's just real green. It's so green, so hilly. So he is preaching to a rather massive audience of a thousand seekers. Seekers. Seekers, right?

So this is another group. This is another one of the radical groups that sort of pops up. Oh, it's another group. Yeah. And so with seekers, essentially, they are doing what they say on the tin. They are basically sort of looking. Exactly. They're looking.

So essentially, George Fox is looking for a congregation. to preach to, the seekers are looking for that. George Fox. They're looking for a George Fox. It's like, it's amazing. Right, right, right. It's amazing. So does he become the focal point for what they've been seeking?

Is it as simple as that? You know, it's him. He's a very charismatic, very, very talented preacher. It's also this message that he is, you know, that that is, it's resonating with people. Within sort of the seeker community, he finds. some really important key converts. One we will talk about a little bit later named James Naler. Yeah.

But yeah, this is 1652, Furbank Fell. For me, this is where the movement truly, truly begins. It kicks off. One of the things that I love about the term seekers is it, does anything else embody a mindset of the mid-17th century? than the word the seekers, because we have, again, I know it's a cliche, but it's a cliche for a reason. We have the world turned upside down in the middle of the 17th century. And we have, it's so turned on its head. But people don't necessarily even know what they're looking for or where they're going or what they're searching for. They just know it needs to be different.

Absolutely. The questions are outweighing the answers in some aspects, in terms of religion, in terms of faith, in terms of, now it's not a, as you said earlier, it's not a Catholic Protestant thing in that sense. It's not that much of a variance. But it's about what we would now term fanaticism or radicalism and all that kind of jazz. And I want to know, in terms of the seekers and now with Fox at the head of them, what we now understand as the Quakers, how fanatical are they? What are they doing that people are going, that's a bit much? Yeah, with the Quakers. So people are either very compelled by this message.

and when I say very compelled by the end of the 1680s, like we're looking at about 60,000 members. Yeah, that's a lot, right? So they're either compelled and obviously compelled because they are still here today or they are repelled by this message. And I think that there is, there's a real difference between the message and how it's delivered. And so this is where things get a little bit spicy at the onset. Why, what are they doing? So basically they are, this message is being spread with real urgency. Yeah.

There is an idea in this period that the world is coming to an end, that Jesus is a common. Everything is sort of pointing to it, the civil wars, you know, certainly once Charles, is executed, that's kind of like leaving the pathway open. And so they are urgent in how they're spreading it. They're not quietly sort of handing somebody a pamphlet on a street corner. They are barging into churches. They are telling, they come up with some really great insults for parish ministers, right? Because anybody who is paid to, anyone who's paid to preach,

Quakers see them as hireling, essentially hireling whores. So they're not looking for money for this. Oh, man. They're just looking to save souls. Because George Fox has an inheritance, so he's good. Yeah, he's all right. He's all right.

But yeah, so they are, you know, they're disrupting the peace in a big way. But I do want to sort of go back to some of the really great insults. Please, yeah, yeah. So when the, you know, the Quakers are, they're barging into, they're barging into church services, during services. They're basically telling the congregations, like, y'all are going to hell if you're following this hireling, hireling priest, basically, and then calling, you know, in print in person.

So they call, you know, they like to sort of call, they call the print ministers, greedy dogs, devil dogs, vile serpent. Like, all there are all these sort of really great. great insults. I mean, that's the thing is that sort of, you know, British people have always had the best insults. Like always. Like I just, I, and you know, someone who's lived here for a while, like I do find it endlessly fascinating, the things that British people say that are insults. But yeah, but Devil Dog is my favorite. Devil Dog is my absolute favorite. Anyway, so they're going in and they're sort of launching, hurling all these insults, barging into churches,

as I've said. They are attacking, attacking the state church in pamphlet form, in person. They're holding meetings in marketplaces. And they are essentially, the meetings that they're holding are unlawful. They're breaking the law. And so they are frequently arrested and thrown into prison. So one of the pictures that I'm getting here is that they are disruptors in the broadest sense legally, religiously, socially. I think there's some accounts that they're running through towns naked.

Am I making that up? Is that a thing? No, there is, yeah, there is definitely that. There is some, there's some performative nudity sort of basically sort of showing that like, nothing is, you know, nothing's between me and God. Oh, really? That's what's behind it. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, yeah. They're not just getting their kid off for fun. Yeah. Or maybe they are.

I mean, to be fair. Like, once I said that, I was like, oh, you know what? Get through life. Whatever way you need to do. It's like, yeah. Yeah, don't hurt anybody and just take a close on. It's like, yeah, that's probably better. But they're definitely causing a little bit of chaos or quite a bit of chaos depending on where they are. What's missing from this equation, and when I saw this term, I was giggling to myself slightly, and that is Quaker Jesus.

And we are going to discuss Quaker Jesus after this short break. Erica, your phrase, I believe, is your phrase Quaker Jesus. I think I can't take claim. But you will. You know what? You know what? I should do. But no, others have used this term as well.

Okay. Okay. Quaker Jesus, James Naylor, tell me everything. Okay. So before we get into this little bit of the story, which is where, you know, this is why I'm here, right? We've got to talk about the dark stuff. I want us to sort of think about the people on the ground, right?

There's communities where these Quaker ministers are sort of going to. So these are people, you know, in the 1650s, they're still really. rebuilding after the Civil Wars. Like, you know, the Civil Wars were in a lot of communities. They were total. You know, families destroyed, livelihoods destroyed, like actual infrastructure destroyed. They're still rebuilding. They're still trying to sort of make sense of everything that had happened.

And these rabble-rousers are sort of, they're disrupting the balance and the peace in a way that is uncomfortable and unsettling. And so we're going to sort of move forward to the year 1656. Okay, so we still have Cromwell. Yeah, Cromwell's got another year left. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. He's still kicking about. He's still kicking about. He features in this story as well.

Oh, you know. You're pulling out all the big names. Well, I know, yeah, yeah, yeah, name dropping here. So James Naylor, the Quaker Jesus. So he is, so he has a very interesting, he's got an interesting, he's got an interesting backstory. So he is born in 1618 in Ardsley, in Yorkshire, near Wakefield. Right. He is a farmer's son with a modest education. And he served as a parliamentarian soldier in civil wars under General Fairfax. He left the army in the mid-1640s, struggling with spiritual unrest. Again, again, another one of these. Another one of these Quakers just, you know, just bringing the drama.

So he goes back home, after he sort of leaves the army, he goes back home to Yorkshire, lives as a farmer, cracks on that. He is, you know, he thinks he defines himself as a spiritual seeker. Okay. And so he met George Fox in 1652, and it was like a meeting of the minds. Now, this is a real stretch, but I feel comfortable saying it to you. So the way I sort of see the relationship between George Fox and James Naler, this is a stretch. I love the way you're like, I'm going to say it, but I'm also going to be like, please don't come from me with this. I'm intrigued with what you're going to say next.

It kind of reminds me of Paul McCartney and John Lennon. Now, okay, so I know nothing about the Beatles apart from the fact that they existed. So hold on, I do know about like, so what? So it's a bit like, a bit fractious. They're both a bit brilliant. So they get like at the start. It's like fireworks. It's like, oh, it's like, oh, it's like.

Yes. But then by the end, they're not even on speaking terms. Right. That's a bit of a spoiler. But that's okay. No, it's fine. Yeah, yeah, yeah. They can Google this if they need to.

I mean, you know, it's fine. So, yeah. So when I think of George Fox and James Naylor, like, that's when they come together first, it's fireworks. They're like, God, we love each other. And now, and then it goes. But we'll say, like, despite the fact that this is going, okay, we've come together.

there's a few mad naked stuff going on. There's, you know, people are a bit disrupted, blah, blah, blah. I am now confronted with an image that my producers have provided me with Eric. And this is very after dark tradition. And it says the text below the image says this. And then I'll tell you what's in the image. It says James Naylor, Quaker for two hours on the pillory at Westminster, whipped by the hangman to the old exchange London. Some days after, stood two hours more on the pillory at the exchange.

and there had his tongue bored through with a hot iron, stigmatized on the forehead with the letter B for blasphemer, I presume. December 17th, 1656. How do we get from Quaker Jesus? I'm in love with George Fox. Not actually in love. Don't come from me for that. But they're having fine times.

To now, this man in this image, as I describe it here, he's in a pillory. His hands are behind his back. He's dressed modestly enough. He's got very small feet. And that's neither here and there, actually, but I just noticed. What an option rich. He's got really small, cloggy looking feet. It's very strange.

But there is a man. The real part of this image is not that. It is that a man is putting a rod through his tongue in this image. So that, and then, oh, in the other image, there's a cat of nine tails that somebody's being whipped with. So how do we get from? I'm in love slash not in love with George Fox and we're both going around the place saying we can talk directly to Jesus to that. Where does that come from? I mean, oh, how the mighty have fallen, right?

So after James and George meet, you know, James becomes a very, he becomes a very talented charismatic preacher in his own right. His preaching draws large crowds. He's known for his very powerful voice, not his small feet. No, I'm sorry to have discovered a new thing about Quaker Jesus that he has small feet. But now the scholarship has changed forever. Sorry. He has, I guess, is what's described as like a mystical intensity. Okay.

And the inability to inspire deep devotion. Can I just say, I'm so sorry to interrupt you, but at the same time you're talking about this mystical intensity, do you know what I probably would have described him as absolutely un-fucking bearable? That's also what you think is. Oh, my gosh. Like, sorry, I know. Oh, no, no. No, you're right.

You're absolutely right. Like he does, he has this really, like, like, it is kind of like a rock star. Yeah. But like, a little like. A bit of a problematic one. Yes. Yeah. He reads poetry performatively.

He's, I mean, James doesn't, don't get me wrong about it. I'm just talking metaphorically here. But yeah, he's. This is a guy who comes, who goes to the party and has, always has a goddamn guitar. Oh my God. Have I said that on here before? That is, if I see that, I'm leaving. If I see anybody arriving anywhere with the guitar, I'm like, sorry now, that's been great.

Please do not ask him to sing. Don't do it. Yeah, yeah. Because there's always one, right? That was certainly my university experience. Oh, my God. Oh, Brian's singing again. Oh, God, shut up, Brian.

Right, so. Anyway, wow. James Naylor, how does he end up getting a spike through his tongue? So anyway, so he, like I said, like he's got a following. And he's kind of being elevated by his following of mostly ladies as like kind of a Christ-like figure. This is going to, this is essentially, this is his downfall really. Okay. So, so this following that Naylor is developing, it is sort of causing some concern amongst Quakers.

Oh, even amongst Quakers. Oh, yeah, because they're just kind of like, ooh, we're kind of losing the message and kind of looking at more of the hero worship now. Which is the whole knot point. Exactly. Exactly. So Nailor is sort of becoming increasingly overenthusiastic. He's believing his own hype. I see.

Right? In October 1656. Naylor had been imprisoned in Exeter and on his way back, like, well, on his travels after leaving prison, Naylor, in his infinite wisdom, I mean, he and his followers, reenacted Christ's arrival in Jerusalem in the city of Bristol. So Naylor rides in on horseback and he's with his, you know, his followers who are singing, right? They're not subtle, man. They're singing, holy, holy, holy, Lord God of Israel. They are sort of putting their garments on the muddy path ahead of him like real Jesus like. Like, come on,

folks. And so, I don't know, you might find this crazy, but he was charged with blasphemy. Right. Because he's saying his jeep, well, he's comparing himself to Jesus. So he's saying, like, he's like, no, I wasn't impersonating Jesus. That probably wasn't what he sounded like. Yeah, no, I think it was. Okay. We established just now. So, but he said, no, no, no, Christ is within me. Yes, right. He doesn't explain his actions. And, you know, his followers are, like, you know, they have drunk the proverbial Kool-Aid. And so immediately he is arrested. And he is, it's an opportunity, right? It's an opportunity for MPs to make an example of James Taylor and to really put all of Quakers on trial. It's like, this is our chance to show how

dangerous these people are. So even though this is something that happened to Bristol, James was called to London for trial. Bring him on down. Bring him on down. So he's on trial and the testimony of his followers, right, as we've established, like, they, you know, they are. Just because this is a podcast, I'm just going to say, she did a twirly finger to the temple of the head.

Just so, you know. We all know what that means. We all know what that means. We all know what that means. Robust research there going on. Right. So the testimony of some of his followers is deeply, deeply damaging to his case. And the MPs and anyone who sort of wanted to take advantage of the situation, they're like, oh, yes.

Right. This is what we need. Thank you. Thank you. So there's a woman. She is one of my favorites in this period of history. Her name is Dorcas Urbary. Love the name Dorcas, by the way.

It's good, right? World's worst character witness. Perfect. Good for her. I mean, if you can think of another one, I would love to know. But this girl, she testified. testified that Naylor was the only begone son of God. No, perfect, good.

Yeah, that she knew no other Jesus. No. And no other Savior. He is on trial for blasphemy, right? She continues his testimony and claimed that Naylor had raised her from the dead. He had raised her from the dead. Yes. Yes.

And I'm like, girl, do you not realize what he is on trial for? Also, it's Wednesday afternoon. Calm down, Dorcas. I know. Like, they need to calm down. All of these early Quakers need to calm down. I know, calm down. Like, calm down.

I don't know if you want to put that in your book. Just they all need to calm down. Yeah, yeah. Exactly. Exactly. So, yeah. So, yeah. So obviously, you know, as we've established, like, this is an opportunity to make an example of him.

And they're like, yeah, let's do it. The trial lasted 13 days. I don't know why it lasted so long. That's long. That is long, right? That's long. So in the end, he was. found guilty of horrid blasphemy. And that he was a, they said he was a grand imposter and great

seducer of the people. And so they wanted, they wanted him to be executed. They wanted him to be stoned because that was the biblical punishment for blasphemy. But that was voted down. And so he instead had this really harsh sentence, which he just sort of described in beautiful detail, really. So yeah, so he was pilloried and whipped through the streets of London. Pillaried again. He's got that branding on forehead branding with the B, his tongue bored through. And then, and then he's sent back to Bristol. Oh, the worst of all punishments to be sent back to Bristol. No, I'm joking. Bristol's very nice. So he's taken back. So basically to retrace his steps and like what he had done. So he is

taken back on horseback, but his face is facing backwards. He's publicly whipped. then he sent back to London and where he was essentially meant to sort of go back to prison under hard labor and essentially kind of rot for a while. The first round of punishment saw him so badly injured from 310 lashes that petitions were presented to sort of postpone the second round. I mean, you think like, that's a lot. I do not want to think about what his back looked like after that. Just one is enough. It's like, okay, I'll stop. 310 did you say?

Yeah, 310. And so, okay, so then, you know, his fans, like his fan girls, like, oh, come on, ladies. At his second pilloring, three women group themselves around him in a way that sort of invokes pictures of the three marries at the cross. Like, they're not helping. They're not helping. So, yeah. So basically, Nailers used as an example.

and he's basically made a scapegoat of like this is this is why quakerism is dangerous like don't follow these people you'll end up like this so to the quaker leadership you know this was deeply damaging and they needed to distance themselves like as far as possible um it it really made it made a huge impact do they go he's not one of us because now he's the poster voice like lightly for Quakerism. And they're not seeing that that tallies with them. So how do they go about making that distance? So it takes a while, right?

Because basically this is a movement that started quite radically, quite disruptively. And so it's going to take a while to sort of rain it back in. So basically to sort of put a nice little bow on James Naylor's story is that, you know, he's kind of outcast. At the end, in 1660, like, he's allowed to sort of, he's allowed to sort of go back and start preaching again. He's on his way home to Yorkshire when he is robbed and brutally attacked near Huntington. And he was like so brutally attacked that he dies the next day. Oh, wow. Yeah.

So in 1660, he's gone. He is dead. So that's kind of like the bow of James Naylor's story. but the trouble in 1656, it didn't stop with Naylor. And this, this is the real story that I wanted to share with you. Well, before Erica continues, we're going to leave you hanging on that for just a moment. And we'll be back with a very bizarre story right after this break. We talked about the raising of the dead.

We talked about James Naylor, Quaker Jesus, purportedly raising. this woman from the dead and she testifies that that's what she did. Now, if you think that that's enough raising of the dead, you'd be wrong in terms of Quaker history because I want, oh, it's 1657, in and around the same kind of time as Nailer. It is just a few months later. I'm going to ask you to introduce us to Susanna Pearson. Yeah, so we've got some more Quaker Jesusing happening, like the lady version of Quaker Jesus. So James Naylor, his trial, his punishment, that's all taking place in December 1656. Right.

On Friday, here's, this is where we would dim the lights and I would hold like a torch under my chin, right? So on Friday, the 20th of February, 1657, William Poole, a young apprentice took clothier, left his master's house in Worcester telling his master, Christ had taken him by the hand that he must go unto him. Because that's what you say when you leave work on a Friday. That's normal, right? That's normal, okay?

So we don't see William Poole again. It's obviously the behavior is out of character. Okay. And so his boss, his name's George Knight, he grows concerned, right? And so nobody can find William Poole. On Sunday morning, William Poole's clothes are found on the the banks of the Severn River. Okay.

And William Poole is found floating later, in the river later that day. So Poole was very quickly buried the next day in Claims, which was just north of the city center. Now, has he taken his own life here? Do we know? We don't know. Seems like it. It seems like it. So Poole and Knight are known Quakers, but there's no evidence that suggests that they were

disruptive or radical at all. They're just kind of your bog standard, sort of just, you know, keeping to themselves. Yeah, yeah. I'm just getting on with life. Yep. But Poole's Quakerism is immediately seized on by the press. I mean, again, sort of it's just after Naylor. It's like, oh, you know, any opportunity to get these people.

So, you know, his actions, his reported actions on the day, basically his parting words, it does suggest that he's having something of a spiritual epiphany. And so the coroner immediately announced a verdict of suicide. And it was quoted that he, the coroner, was so full of pity as to exempt the dead body from that sentence to which those who do destroy themselves are liable. For he was not buried in the highway. He had no stake placed with iron thrust through his body to terrify all passengers from committing such a black and desperate act. But on the Monday following, about 4 o'clock in the morning, he was civilly buried in the parish of claims. So even though the coroner is full of pity, a suicide is still a suicide.

And in the early modern period, like this is the worst, this is a worst sort of death. You know, it's signifying that you have given up on God and taking matters into your own hands and just desperate. The soul is irredeemable now in the context of the times that we're talking. talking in, and you just alluded to there in that lovely, well, lovely, but in that interesting quote about you could be buried at a crossroads, there might be some kind of like, it really is, this is new to me to hear somebody giving some form of sympathy to somebody who has died by suicide at this time. So that's interesting even in itself. I think when the press sort of jump on this story, they immediately write that his mother was an honest and godly woman, which obviously

suggests that she was not a Quaker. Oh, I see. And also he's buried in the churchyard, which Quakers would not allow. So basically, this suggests that, you know, his parents. Where are the craters? They had their own, they had their own burial yards. Another burial ground, but just for Quakers. Yeah, okay.

Just for them. And so, so, yeah, so it suggested his family were able to pull some strings to allow this to happen. It still had to happen in the cover of darkness. Oh, did it. But, you know, he was still given the privilege, I suppose. And so I think it says a lot about his family that that was a lot to happen. It was a standing within that community.

And so this is where, you know, that's a very sad story. Yeah. But this is where it gets weird, right? Okay. Right. This is Susanna. Enter Susanna. Now, can I just ask before we go in.

Does Susanna know him when he's alive? I don't think so. Okay. There's no link there. I don't think so. I don't think so. Right. So she approaches William Poole's grieving mother.

and says, I can bring your son back to life. In the midst of this intense, horrible grief, his mother consents. And Susanna's a Quaker. Susanna is a Quaker. But yeah, she's offering to bring her son back to life. So. Go on. They go to the graveyard of the zoo.

Yeah. So it's under the cover of darkness again, right? Because this is shady stuff. It's so shady. So Susanna has help, right? She's got some accomplices, unnamed accomplices. And so they dig up William's body. And he's freshly done.

No, she's not there. She's not there. But she's given consent for her to go in and do this. You crack on. You crack on. And so then basically they dig up the body. Susanna undoes the shroud. Now let's have a little sensory journey here.

Brilliant. Okay. So we don't have modern burial practices. Yep. This is a drowned body. This is thankfully, mercifully, I think for us, really as readers and listeners, it's not the heat of summer. It's not the dead of summer. So when a body is in the water, like in February, it's going to be very cold. And so this is going to slow down sort of like the decomposition process.

But it's potentially been a couple of days before it was even discovered, right? But as soon as you take that body out of the water, that's when the whole putrefaction process really accelerates. So what does Susanna do? So she's unwrapped this body. And she sort of starts rubbing his body. She rubs his body. And then she rubs her face against his face. She's on to go home.

And it's like, girl, get a hobby. Like read some books or something. Like this is not normal. No. This is not. I couldn't imagine sort of seeing a putrid body and thinking, also, I'm going to Jesus this.

Rubbing that is, is taking a risk that things already, because they've potentially been in water before this. Anyway, go on. It's not great. I know. It's not,

it's not painting a pretty picture. So she is, you know, rubbing her face, rubbing her hands on his body. She's commanding him to rise. Erica, does, does he listen to her?

No. No, because he's dead. He stays dead. Yeah. Fancy d'Arts. Right? And so it's kind of like, oh, shit.

And so what do they do? They just bury him again? Yeah. They wrap him up. Oh, well. And so the explanation, right, is that, you know, Jesus, he waited four days. Oh, no. He waited four days before he brought Lazarus back from the dead.

I didn't wait long enough. Yeah. Oh, well. That was it. Scheduled. Yeah, exactly. Like, she didn't, she didn't schedule that diary well. And so, yeah, so that is the disgusting.

Like, I mean, she, she, she. So do you think, like, what? Why? Yeah. Like, why? All of the, all of the questions, one of which being, if this is happening under the cover of night, right? And the, the, his mother gives permission and it's, it's probably private.

We're probably not writing. She's probably been approached by Susanna or Susanna's representatives or whatever, taking place under the cover of night. How do we know that this happened? Who tells us, how do they find out? Does Susanna go and say, actually, I can't imagine she promotes it herself because she failed. So how do we find out about this? So we find out about it basically through the news. It is reported in the news and then it's sort of, sort of used.

There are pamphlets printed about this incident. And Word gets back to George Fox. So one of his administrators writes like, hey, this is what's happening in Worcester. Like, can you believe it? And again, it's like, oh, this is really not. This is bad PR. Like, come on, man. And so the only inclination of any response that we have from George Fox or any quaker, really, of this, is that on the margin of this letter that was written to him, it says on the edge in the margin, mad whimsy.

Oh, wow. So this can be interpreted in a whole host of ways. Susanna, mad. She took a mad whim. The press. This is fake news. Oh. Okay.

I was thinking in terms of Susanna that it had happened and he's like, oh, sorry, she's an outlier. But no, it may not even have happened. And so Susanna is not, so Quakers are very quick to disown disorderly members. Fair enough. And Susanna stays in the picture. Okay. So if we fast forward. So she's definitely a real person.

She's a real person. Yeah, yeah. So if we fast forward to 1669, she is present at George Fox's wedding and signs his marriage certificate. George Fox gets married in Bristol as well. Big up Bristol. Yeah. You're the tourist information board. Hey.

But yeah. So she doesn't, like she's not disowned. And so she just kind of, she kind of. she kind of sticks around. So it does. It's like, did they, did the Quakers, did they refuse to believe that this happened? And just kind of like, it's almost like, it's almost like damage control. Like after everything that happened with Naylor, it's kind of like, you know what, y'all,

if we ignore this, it'll go away. And come here. How prominent do we know, we probably don't know, how prominent is Susanna prior to her signing that way? Like, is there a way that the press such that it was, the pamphlets that are being printed? Was her name circulating in Quaker? So because we don't know. No, it's not really.

I mean, she's not someone, she's not someone sort of in the research that I've done in desperately trying to find a backstory for this woman is, like, you know, I've just not really not been able to find anything. Like, she just kind of appears, but she is a real person. Yes, yeah. She is absolutely a real person. But yeah. Just whether or not the resurrection is real.

Yeah. So that's kind of how that sort of weird. story ends. It's also interesting though, right? Because it's like whether or not the actual, she actually tried to resurrect somebody, the idea percolated around the country is that she did. Yes. And it's more important for whoever's producing these pamphlets to have wider English,

Scottish, British society believe that this is what Quakers are doing than whether or not we know for a fact that it did. So what is the reaction around the country to this? Again, I presume it's just outrage. It's absolute outrage because they're seen as they're they're sort of seen as as dangerous now, like very dangerous, diabolical. Like this is this is this is witchcraft territory. And so so what, but what is she?

So essentially, if the story is to be believed, to be believed, what is she trying to do? Well, she's trying to perform a miracle. Yeah. Like that's what she's trying to do. Like she is taking on the role of Jesus and she is trying to perform a miracle because, in the 1650s, when you're trying to convince somebody to join your religion, they're like, yeah, prove it. And so Quakers felt that they needed to have sort of a catalog of miracles.

And so if we believe this story, that is what Susanna was trying to do. She was trying to help and trying to legitimize the Quaker movement. But instead, you know, the press jumped on it. And, you know, people were very much not impressed. I can well imagine I'm not impressed myself in many ways. Again, I'll come back to what I said at the very start of this episode as a way to finish. What I knew about Quakers growing up was that they were very charitable and helpful and present during the Great Irish Famine. At a time when other Protestant arms of religion were not viewed in very positive terms in Ireland,

The Quakers came out of it with really good PR. And even to this day, if I meet a Quaker as an Irish person, I'd be like, the first thing I will think is great Irish famine in a really positive, positive sense. So what changes? How does this, what PR machine kicks in to play over the next 200 odd years to change this around? So a lot really changes, obviously, when Charles I second is restored to the throne, things change. So he, you know, he wants, Charles wants to be tolerant. of people like Quakers. He wants to be.

But the Fifth Monarchist Revolt in 1661, it kind of ruins it for everybody, really. So when Thomas Benner's uprising, in the immediate aftermath of that, George Fox was like, I've got an idea. So he basically, he drafted a declaration to Charles II, which basically said, we utterly deny all outward wars and strife and fighting with outward weapons. And so this becomes known as the Quaker peace testimony. And this is a, this is a transformational movement for the Quakers. Now, let's not pretend that they give Charles' declaration and everything changes. No, because you've got to reign in the members, right? They are still, you know, they're still being,

disrupted, their meetings are still being raided, their leaders are being thrown in prison. And at the onset of sort of when Charles II, after Vener's Revolt, there is a lot of legislation put into place to sort of curtail any of this tomfoolery. In 1662, I mean, it gets personal, right? Because in 1662, the Quaker Act is passed, which basically criminalizes the refusal to swear, are oaths and attend Quaker meetings. So that's just... And so these become... Quakers become part of a group of people...

Correct me if I'm wrong here. I think this is the case. A group of people known as dissenters. They're part of the dissenters. Yeah, they're going to be part of the dissenters. And so they keep going to prisons in the thousands. So by 1664, over 4,000 Quakers are imprisoned across England, Wales, Scotland, and Ireland. Some, but many die in jail. Some, they lose their homes, their livelihoods.

But it's really in the 1660s that they sort of, you sort of start to see a change. You start to see a change, particularly after 1666. So we've had the plague. We've had the Great Fire. We have this continued war with the Dutch. And it seems like, okay, if there was going to be an apocalypse, it's going happen now. And it passed. And then it's kind of like, okay, the world is coming to an end. So we need to actually, if we want to survive, we have to be able to live with the wider world. Rebrand. Exactly. It is very much a rebrand. And so they are trying, they're trying, this is where sort of in local meetings, they bring in a lot of discipline, right? So if somebody in the local Quaker meeting who belongs to the meeting, if they are spending extravagantly, a kind of, a kind of

couple members of the meeting will be sent to go speak to that person about that, if they're being unkind to their wives. You know, basically they are very aware of how they're being perceived and that they kind of, they need to get it together. But then I think that the other big thing that happens is that Quakers get an editorial board. So, right? So Quakers are very active in print.

Yeah. Like they are constantly printing out pamphlets. And essentially that's how that's that's one of the main ways that they are conveying their message. And so in 1673, the second day morning meeting is, it commences in London. And so this is basically, this is basically an editorial board where, you know, if somebody wants to print something, it goes to the board. They, you know, no, don't say that. Don't say they're being cast into a lake of fire. Don't say they're going to hell.

Don't call them a devil dog. We're done with that language. And so it is sort of just, you know, tidying up and sort of making the message a little bit less aggressive, right? It's a softer touch. Yeah. It feels less chaotic. Yeah. It feels like it's less frenetic.

Yeah. And so from then on, it's a gradual shift to the Quakers that we know and love today who are all about pacifism, you know, being, you know, and certainly in the 18th, 19th century, become renowned for honesty and business. And, yeah, and obviously, like being heroes during the famine. And I presume 1689 Toleration Act is a turning point where this is post-glorious revolution. William and Mary, they decide, listen, the factionalism amongst the Protestant religions is causing too much. Oh, people here, let's welcome people in with wider arms. And the Quakers probably benefit from this as well. They will benefit from that.

And so then as we sort of go. into the 18th century, the period is known as quietism. Quietest Quakerism. God, I could get on bored with quietism. I've just moved to the countryside. So like, I don't know what that means in religious terms, but in general, everyday terms, I like it to be quiet. But they sort of, you know, they were able to sort of close that chapter. Their radical, their radical origin story. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And then, you know, historians like me are just like, nah, let's publicize. I'm going on a podcast. This is good history. Like, this is sexy history. I never ever would have I would never would have imagined it from the early Quakers.

Thank you to that PhD supervisor who said, take a look at this early Quaker's stuff because there's stuff in there. I know. And like mad props to me for being open-minded, right? Let's give credit where it's due, right? Sorry, not the VHD supervisor, you. Thanks. Erica, where can people find you if they want to learn more about this history

or general histories that you're covering from the 17th century? Yeah, 17th century. So yeah, I am chronically online. So yeah, so you can find me on Instagram, on Facebook, on Blue Sky. I'm still, I'm still on X. I only have Instagram now. That's all I have. Okay.

So that's the only one. But yeah, so you're there. And what's your handle on all of those places? So it's basically, it's my first name and my surname, smushed together. So it's E-R-I-C-A-N-E-L-A. So Eryka-N-E-L-A. There you go. And that's me.

Right. That is another episode of AfterDark. Come to a conclusion. Erica, thank you so much for that. Like, it's, I always say this after these types of episodes. There are some episodes that you go in knowing a little bit more about the subject matter than others. This is not one that I knew a great deal about, but actually it gives a whole new foundation to what I understand about the 19th century Quakers that I do know a little bit more about. And that's always a useful thing.

Continue the conversation, of course, over on our YouTube channel. We have our own place where you can view the episode as well as just listen. So that's if you are just listening on podcast platforms. Leave us a five-star view as ever wherever you get your podcast because why it helps other people. to discover us. And if you have any other topics that you would like us to cover on After Dark, then you can get in touch at After Dark at Historyhit.com. Until next time, happy listening.