When Was Bunyan Elected Pastor? Fixing a Date in the Bedford Church Book

• Published in: Bunyan studies no. 18; p. 7
• Main Author: Davies, Michael
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Newcastle Upon Tyne Northumbria University, Department of Humanities, Faculty of Arts, Design and Social Sciences 01.01.2014
• Subjects: British & Irish literature; Bunyan, John (1628-1688); Bunyan, John (1628-88); English literature
• ISSN: 0954-0970

In the records of the Goswell Street (Barbican) congregation in London, for example, the entry for the meeting of 'this 10th of ye 7th month [1688]' falls directly between the two meetings dated more recognisably to modern eyes 'Augst ye 6th' and 'the 8th of October 1688', allowing us to see that the '7th month' is (quite clearly, and as its name literally suggests) September.49 One of the (relatively early) gatherings of the congregation at Broughton, Hampshire, is dated in its church book too as 'Jan the 10th 1657'. Because this entry is preceded by minutes for a meeting on '30th day of the 10 month' and followed by another held just a week later on '17th of the 11 month 1657', these numbers must indicate December ('10 month') and January ('11 month') respectively - pointing once again, of course, to month number one as March.50 Examples such as these, taken from numerous early Nonconformist church books and records extant in both England and New England, could be multiplied many times over to show that, almost without exception, godly congregations that embraced a Scripture-based calendar numbered the months uniformly, starting with March as the first, May as the third, November as the ninth, January as the eleventh, and so on - with, of course, December appearing as the tenth month.51 It is important to note, moreover, that March was considered the 'first month' not just on or after the 'Old Style' New Year date of 25 March: any date within March appears to have been considered of the 'first month', including any of the twenty-four days leading up to Lady Day. [...]the 6th day of the first month' would have indicated 6 March, just as the 17th and the 28th of 'the first month' would have meant 17 and 28 March.52 Of course, there are some exceptional cases where not only the style of dating is mixed (Scriptural numbers sitting alongside English month names) but also where contradictory views as to what constitutes the first month can be found. Contextually and practically, such a calendar would not make sense. [...]Tibbutt, who had a great deal of experience in researching and transcribing seventeenthcentury church books, evidently knew that counting March as the first month was indeed the right thing to do. Nigel Smith (London: Junction Books, 1983), pp. 156-57, and for other examples pp. 41, 63, 132. [...]Coppe did not reject the traditional almanac calendar as much as adapt it to his own prophetic purposes: the 'Dominical' or 'red letter', which signalled 'Sunday' within seventeenth-century English calendars, could be seen by Coppe as possessing 'supernatural powers, signifying and assuring the presence of the supreme will': see A Collection of Ranter Writings, pp. 32, 100-01 (and on almanac calendars in seventeenth-century England and New England, see further below).