'Justices of the Peace and others in authority were much vexed by the extravagant and irritating proceedings of the new sect of Quakers. It is difficult to recognise in the conduct of some of these fanatics any resemblance to the dignified and orderly lives of their successors which secured for them the confidence of their fellow-citizens, and made them pre-eminently the bankers of the community. It bore some likeness to that of the more lawless advocates of "Women‘s Rights" in our own day.'

C T Stanford wrote that in 1910 in his book Sussex in the Great Civil War. When one reads of Quakers his harsh verdict may seem to be justified. What is there to explain the strange contrast between their contradictory reputations for bizarre excesses and for pedantic, boring honesty? To answer this situation we have to look at the historical situation which gave birth to the Quaker movement, and then it will become clear that their apparently strange actions were quite logical responses to the situations in which they found themselves.

Quakers have always documented their business meetings by minutes prepared during the meeting, read to the members and immediately signed. The Quaker concern for truth ensures the meticulous accuracy of these records, but the range of subjects minuted is often so narrow that it is impossible to get any feeling for the personalities of the participants. Fortunately many Friends kept diaries, were prolific letter writers and kept detailed business records. Of course their concern with accuracy was not inconsistent with a biased viewpoint. Outsiders sometimes saw events differently, but as few of their records have survived this story is told almost entirely from the Quaker point of view.

Genealogists know how much care went into the compilation of Quaker records, and other historians have found much of value in them. during the periods of persecution the legal battles were recorded in a detail which will interest not only the legal historian, but anyone with a taste for court-room drama. For 200 years many of the Lewes tradesmen were Quakers, and a commercial history of Lewes which ignored them would be incomplete. The lists of fines which they incurred, goods which were taken from them and the possessions noted when they applied for assistance from Quaker funds, all provide valuable information about household goods and tradesmen's tools. The professional historian or the dedicated amateur who needs detailed information will go back to the original records.

Other readers should be aware that many of the passages quoted have been paraphrased. Some of the original documents are written in archaic English which does not make easy reading. This account retains the original words as far as possible, but spelling and phrasing have been modernised and much repetition has been removed. A few passages have been left unchanged to give a flavour of the originals.

Readers should also be aware that not all references are necessarily to the town of Lewes; the term 'Lewes Meeting' refers not only to the Quakers who attend the Meeting House in Lewes, but also to the 'Monthly Meeting', the group of meetings over an area which at times included much of East Sussex and some of West Sussex. The records do not always clearly state which business related to which local meeting. When specific information has been lacking about the local meeting the gaps have been filled with information drawn from the other meetings, since the practice in each was quite uniform.

Writing a history like this is like trying to do a jigsaw puzzle which has many pieces missing. Some pieces have been joined together and seem to fit, but one or two may be in the wrong place. Where gaps exist we can guess what the pattern might be, and if the pieces are found our guesses might be proved right or wrong. Even if sufficient documents still exist for a thorough history of Lewes Quakers they might never be entirely gathered together from the meeting house libraries, record offices and family archives where they are kept. There is still much work to be done, and I welcome the efforts of anyone who can correct or add to what I have written.

David Hitchin