Letters - 21 November 2014
From war worldwide to support for inmates
The war worldwide
The article ‘From the archive: The impact of war worldwide’ with reference to Syria (7 November) was of great interest to me as Antonius Manasseh was my grandfather.
Grandfather ‘Tanius’ was a medical doctor who had trained in England in the 1890s. During his period of training he lived with the Quaker family of John and Rebecca Whiting and joined the Society as a convinced Friend before returning to Syria to practice medicine in Brummana. He was married at the Friends Meeting house in Brummana to Henrietta Benington, whom he had met while in London. I have their marriage certificate.
In addition to his hospital work, Tanius practised widely in the Lebanese neighbourhood, often travelling all day on a donkey. When war was imminent Henrietta returned to England with their children, George and Dorothy. The extract from the Friend of 25 December 1914 that you have published refers to his whereabouts being unknown at that time. This is unsurprising as in wartime the hospital in Brummana was taken over by the Turks as a military hospital. Tanius was their prisoner. He cared for both Turks and Syrians. For his work there he was awarded a medal by the Turkish government, which I have. The story is best told by Christopher Naish in the biography Antonius Manasseh published by Friends Service Council in 1931.
Tony Manasseh
Pacifists?
It is important to acknowledge, as David Rubinstein points out (7 November), that Friends were not all pacifists in the first world war.
But the estimate that as many as a third of eligible Quakers volunteered for the armed forces must be treated with caution by those calling ourselves Quakers today. Membership was defined rather differently at that time. Any young person whose parents were both members of the Religious Society of Friends was a ‘default’ Quaker (by ‘birthright’) unless they resigned their membership. Figures for ‘active and committed’ membership are therefore even more difficult to estimate than they are today when most members are Quakers by ‘convincement’. It seems at least possible that among the one third who volunteered to fight were a considerable number who were not attenders in any Meeting. So, by current definitions, they would not be ‘counted’ as Quakers.
There were also a fair number of conscientious objectors (COs) who mentioned Quaker beliefs at their tribunal hearings but are missing from the figures for Quaker COs because they did not apply for membership until after the war.
This is not to minimise the very real divisions and soul searching that David refers to and whose course can be quite clearly traced in letters and articles published in the Friend throughout the war and afterwards.
Simon Colbeck
You need to login to read subscriber-only content and/or comment on articles.