Acceptable Activities for a Victorian Sunday?

Fishing; playing with one of those simple, "old timey" toys; climbing trees; stealing a watermelon; taking a swim in the local swimming hole (a creek); picking blackberries; playing with the family dogs; having running and jumping contests with his brothers and/or friends; drawing; sitting around listening to the men tell lies; chasing the chickens; hunting; riding a horse; walking the in woods; catching crayfish in the creek; playing horseshoes . . .

Hey, this is beginning to sound like MY childhood.

Father reading the Good Book to his family?

Card games, checkers, chess have all been around for a while.

Um, playing cards? Stealing watermelons? In a strict Methodist family? Only unless he's completely out of control and that's the point.

In addition to Bible reading, he could do other kinds of reading, make toys to give to the poor, play quietly with things he enjoys--puzzles, pets, drawing, etc.

The following is from The Mother's Book by Lydia Child, 1831. Though I don't know if she was Methodist, the suggestions seem to fit within the ideals of a Methodist family. Like other writers of the period, she also mentions families who are too strict and teach their children a dread of the Sabbath. So depending on how you want the family and the boy's relationship to appear, you could spin this kind of influence as positive or negative

Quiet is the first idea which a young child can receive of the Sabbath; therefore I would take no notice of his playing with his kitten, or his blocks, so long as he kept still. If he grew noisy, I should then say to him, 'You must not make a noise to-day; for it is the Sabbath day, and I wish to be quiet, and read good books. If you run about, it disturbs me.'

I make these remarks with regard to very young children. As soon as they are old enough to read and take an interest in religious instruction, I would have playthings put away; but I would not compel them to refrain from play, before I gave them something else to interest their minds. I would make a difference in their playthings. The noisy rattle and the cart which have amused them during the week, should give place to picture-books, the kitten, little blocks, or any quiet amusement.

If the heads of a family keep the Sabbath with sobriety and stillness, the spirit of the day enters into the hearts of the children. I have seen children of three and four years old, who were habitually more quiet on Sunday than on any other day, merely from the soothing influence of example....

While I endeavored to make Sunday a very cheerful day, I would as far as possible give a religious character to all its conversation and employments. Very young children will become strongly interested in the Bible, if it is read to them, or they are suffered to talk about it. They will want to hear, for the hundredth time, about the little boy who said to his father, 'My head! My head!' They will tell over to each other with a great deal of delight, how he died, and was laid on his little bed, and how the prophet lay down with him, and restored him to life; and how the little boy sneezed seven times...

In order to relieve the tediousness of too much reading and studying, it is a good plan for parents to walk with children on Sabbath afternoon, for the purpose of drawing their attention to the works of God, and explaining how his goodness extends over all thigns. The structure of a bird's nest may be made to convey religious instruction, and inspired religious feeling, as well as a hymn. For this reason, books which treat of the wonderful mechanism of the eye and the ear, the provisions for the comfort of animals, and the preservation of plants--in a word, all that leads the mind to dwell upon the goodness and power of God,--are appropriate books for Sunday, and may be read, or studied, to great advantage, when children are old enough to understand them.

Click to expand...

Fly a kite?

Play with marbles?

Riding bicycles was possible. And I don't know about "absolutely no work", especially if they have animals to be fed, watered, milked, eggs gathered, well water pumped.

Activities: Take a walk; rope swing; tag; whittle; lassoing stuff...there were a lot of things boys did (just not video games, television, radio, phone, skateboard, etc).

Memorizing bible texts. Yup.

Anything remotely fun would not be allowed on a Sunday. Things like playing cards were considered the work of the devil.

"Farmer Boy"

In Laura Ingalls Wilder's Farmer Boy, there is a bit about Sundays. The girls helped the mother wash the dishes, but the boys were just supposed to sit still. I can't remember all the details. It might be a reference for you.

More details...

please, Evaine. Is this the UK or USA?

In the 1860s UK with a strict Methodist family there would be nothing!

Check out 'The Victorian House' details in Resources by Era under Victorian Britain about half way down the page. Get the book. The author gives a lovely set of extracts from various people about Sundays and what they could not do. But she also gives you the whole ethos of Victorians. It's a must read if you're writing that era.

Your patchwork and embroideries are out.

If the parents were a little relaxed there would be a set of Sunday toys, chiefly a Noah's Ark, Bible puzzles and Bible story books. I have my great aunts' box of Sunday toys but then their family was not strict primitive Methodists.

If the parents were totally strict primitive methies then there would be prayers before breakfast, a text to learn for church at 10.30, cold lunch and Sunday school things to learn for the afternoon, a hymn or text to learn before evening prayed and readings and recitations of what they'd learned again at bedtime prayers

pdr said:

please, Evaine. Is this the UK or USA?
In the 1860s UK with a strict Methodist family there would be nothing!

Click to expand...

I agree with pdr, and I'm reading the question not as "what did boys do for fun in the old days," but "what did boys do on Sunday in a strict Methodist household"--a whole different and much more specific question.

Just noticed the British spelling in the original post, and my previous answer was based on the US, but from what pdr says, things weren't significantly different in the UK.

I'd be really really surprised at children riding anything resembling bicycles at all circa 1860, as Inarticulate Babbler mentioned--very rare, very obscure, not playthings. But yes, necessary work would be done, which might not be much in the city, and even the getting of meals was reduced to a minimum.

From the question, I think Evaine realizes this, but just speaking in general, the idea of what was acceptable on Sunday was a big deal among strict Methodists: "Who that sees idle and vagrant boys wandering upon the sabbath, and listens to their foolish mirth, but must tremble for the consequences in their character and conduct of future life!" (from a sermon printed in The Methodist Preacher, published 1859, New York)

Another anecdote:

After being in the village a year or two, I was prevailed on by some of the village boys one Sabbath to join in a company of bird-nest hunting. My parents knew nothing of the circumstance. It was customary with my father at family prayer, at night, to call upon some one of the children to read a chapter. This night (Sunday night) he turned round to me, and said, "Joseph, you will read for us." The request went like a dagger to my poor sin-smitten soul. What, I! who have been breaking the Sabbath in hunting birds' nests, now to read in family worship!--it would be the height of hypocrsy; and to disobey my father would be a heinous sin... [He finally obeys his father, but...] My guilty conscience haunted me like a ghost. I kept silent until about midnight, when I could no longer restrain my feelings. My groans and cries awoke my parents. My father called to know what was the matter. I made no reply; but continued my incessant groaning and weeping... That was the first and last bird's nest that I ever hunted on the Sabbath day. Should any child read this my sad story of Sabbath-breaking, let him take heed, and avoid the rock on which I had so unfortunately split. Or if, like me, he has already been guilty of the act, then should he with repentant tears and deep groans return unto the Lord, and beg forgiveness. And parents! you who may read it, permit me to say, Teach your children early and betimes the fear of the Lord--teach them to pray, to keep holy the Sabbath day;...(Autobiography of the Rev. Joseph Travis, [Methodist Episcopal Church South], by Joseph Travis and Thomas Osmond Summers, 1856)

Click to expand...

That's the kind of social pressure that was applied, so noisy outdoor boisterous play would bring down some embarrassment on the family, if certain kind of people notice, and some guilt to the boy, depending on what he's like. How an individual boy and his family would deal with the social pressure would, of course, vary according to their own personalities. But it would be the elephant in the room, something to deal with, for better or worse.

Ah!

Nice quotes, Pup. Yes, that was it. And even if your family was not very, strictly or regular church going, the pressure was there in the community to hold Sunday sacred and that meant either special Sunday toys for the most relaxed or the Bible and religious books.

I think...

that anything that was hand work was work and therefore verboten in a Prim Meth or any strictly 'stick to the Bible' religious group.


However an Anglican was allowed to do charity work on Sunday like making Mother Hubbards or quilts for the poor.

And...

even a gentle stroll, unless to Sunday School, or chapel, would get him into strife. Everything done on a Sunday had to be with a religious purpose. If he's a bit of a pain his family would be heavily on him to mend his ways. I bet he'd have to learn chapters of the Bible!

Funny, everyone makes that seem so droll.

1) It was a different world then. If you were raised a certain way, it's conceivable it wouldn't be a chore to uphold your beliefs.

2) They had less distractions. No television, radio, and not as many friends to swing by and tempt you.

3) There were other biblical activities (playing biblical charades, telling parables or stories from the bible, etc.).

4) I can't see going for a walk and taking note of all the beautiful things God's created being looked down upon.

Please read...

post number 5, Pup's long quote from the Mother's Book. And note that this, Babbler, is not a strict Methodist writer talking. A walk must be with parents, who are pointing out God's work.

If Evaine's family is strict Prim Meth then it's the quiet and still part of Sunday they enforce along with no work on the Lord's day.

It's possible, too, that the Sabbath would begin at sunset Saturday and continue until sunset Sunday. "Daily" chores, like feeding the livestock, milking the cows, and doing the dishes could be done, but not much else.

In the Laura Ingalls Wilder book that Melia mentions, Almanzo had been working on whittling a chain that week. On Sunday, all he could do was hold it and finger it while he waited for sunset and chore time.

Now, YOU reaqd it...without a biased down-on-bible-thumpers view

pdr said:

post number 5, Pup's long quote from the Mother's Book. And note that this, Babbler, is not a strict Methodist writer talking. A walk must be with parents, who are pointing out God's work.

If Evaine's family is strict Prim Meth then it's the quiet and still part of Sunday they enforce along with no work on the Lord's day.

Click to expand...

You speak in absolutes: "A walk must be with parents." I didn't read "must". I read a method of instructing children (from an early age) to play (play in "quiet amusement") with kittens or blocks. "As soon as they are old enough to read and take an interest in religious instruction, I would have playthings put away; but I would not compel them to refrain from play, before I gave them something else to interest their minds. I would make a difference in their playthings."

I see no absolutes. As a matter of fact, it doesn't appear unloving.


"In order to relieve the tediousness of too much reading and studying, it is a good plan for parents to walk with children on Sabbath afternoon, for the purpose of drawing their attention to the works of God, and explaining how his goodness extends over all thi[ng]s."

Again, I don't see a "must", I see advice for relieving the tediousness.

"For this reason, books which treat of the wonderful mechanism of the eye and the ear, the provisions for the comfort of animals, and the preservation of plants--in a word, all that leads the mind to dwell upon the goodness and power of God,--are appropriate books for Sunday, and may be read, or studied, to great advantage, when children are old enough to understand them. "

There's a novel suggestion...read a book.

Ah me!

Sigh!

Inarticulate Babbler said:

Now, YOU reaqd it...without a biased down-on-bible-thumpers view

Click to expand...

I didn't see where pdr's interpretation had anything to do with being down on bible thumpers, nor that observation of the Sabbath was being portrayed as odd or droll.

To a religious person, limiting activities to what's proper is a way of raising one's children not only to be good in this life but to put them on a path toward eternal salvation. To a person with different views, the restrictions may seem arbitrary, pointless, rigid and cold-hearted, but that's a difference in viewpoint and not a difference in fact.

I posted the quotation from Lydia Child because her book was just behind me on the bookshelf, and I remembered she had a long passage on the subject which gave positive ideas for children to observe the Sabbath, and it was a close-to-period description that roughly coincided with Methodist views, though as I said, I didn't know if she was a Methodist herself. I'm writing about a couple of strict Methodist families myself in the 1850s U.S. right now, so am dealing with similar issues.

But before we rely on that quote too much, I looked up the religion of Lydia Child just now and, as I suspected, she wasn't a Methodist herself. She was raised Calvinist and Congregationalist and was influenced in adulthood by Unitarians and Swedenborgians, though never seemed to have found a religion she could truly embrace.

So her quote can only be used as a general idea of typical observation of the Sabbath for children in the 19th century, but no more than that.

I'd guess the reason that a walk should be with parents or someone responsible is, that if a boy goes out alone, how can one be sure he's not out bird-nesting or worse? Even if he's entirely trustworthy and the parents know it, why would he need to go alone, and wouldn't neighbors wonder what he's up to, seeing him wandering aimlessly about by himself? It would be like letting a boy and a girl go out alone--they may know they're doing nothing wrong, their parents may trust them, but why give the wrong appearance and why risk temptation?

A boy in such a family would know that, and so if he decided to go wandering out on his own, even if perfectly innocently, he'd realize he was being disobedient, and it would be for the willful disobedience that he'd be punished, not just for the activity of taking a stroll.

I think the quote I posted about the Methodist preacher recalling his guilt for breaking the Sabbath is an example of the positive result of this kind of raising--at least "positive" from his viewpoint. His guilt was so great that he didn't need to be punished; he punished himself and resolved not to do it again, and stayed with his religion long enough to become a preacher himself.

It's certainly not what would be advised in a typical modern book on parenting, but it works within the context of the social situation and the period.

Babbler, I fail to see the need for the 'tude. This thread is not discussing modern views on religion or there is no need to include modern political undercurrents in your responses to the topic. The topic is simply how a strict, Victorian-era child would have been required to observe the Sabbath by his/her parents and society.

Nowhere did I see Pup use the word "must" in the post you are referencing. The quote was only reference material from a source Pup had available.

Apologetic explanation

Birol said:

Babbler, I fail to see the need for the 'tude. This thread is not discussing modern views on religion or there is no need to include modern political undercurrents in your responses to the topic. The topic is simply how a strict, Victorian-era child would have been required to observe the Sabbath by his/her parents and society.

Click to expand...

I apologize to all (especially pdr) who thought I was just showing an attitude. That was not my intent. I was answering a direct "accusation" of not reading a specific post. It being late (here), my fingers hit two keys--which I concede could makie it appear I was typing angrily. It wasn't "anger", but "passion" (which constantly gets me into trouble).

Birol said:

Nowhere did I see Pup use the word "must" in the post you are referencing. The quote was only reference material from a source Pup had available.

Click to expand...

That's what I was saying.

I tried to emphasize the parts that (I feel) contradicted pdr's comment. I, however, wasn't accusing any one specific person when I made the "Funny, everyone makes that seem so droll." comment. I was talking about the overall feel, and the fact that--as I believe Pup's example showed--those times were much different and it wasn't necessarily looked at as torture to kids. They didn't have what we do to relate to missing anything.

Again, I apologize for any implied insult. My emphasis was to show evidence to support a different point of view.

The orignial statement by Evaine: "I'm writing about a fairly strict Methodist family, around 1860 - the sort who go to chapel twice on Sundays and do absolutely no work on that day." Left something of interpretation open...Can you still be strict to the tenets of your belief without creating a dictatorship environment?