Article #570-2 | Gutenberg Articles

Excerpt

Excerpt from The Moravians in Georgia, 1735-1740, by Adelaide L. Fries

Preface.

In the life of any individual, association, or nation, there will
probably be one or more occurrences which may be considered as success
or failure according to the dramatic features of the event and the
ultimate results. Of this the Battle of Bunker Hill is a striking
example. On the morning of June 17th, 1775, a force of British soldiers
attacked a small body of raw, ill-equipped American volunteers, who
had fortified a hill near Boston, and quickly drove them from their
position. By whom then was the Bunker Hill Monument erected? By the
victors in that first engagement of the Revolution? No, but by proud
descendants of the vanquished, whose broader view showed them
the incalculable benefits arising from that seeming defeat, which
precipitated the great struggle, forcing every man in the Colonies to
take a position squarely for or against the American Cause, convinced
the timid that only proper equipment would be needed to enable the
American army to hold its own against the foe, and taught the British
that they were dealing, not with hot-headed rebels who would run at
first sight of the dreaded “red coats”, but with patriots who would
stand their ground so long as a charge of powder remained, or gunstocks
could be handled as clubs.

Very much the same line of argument may be applied to the first attempt
of the Moravian Church to establish a settlement on the American
Continent. The story is usually passed over by historians in a few short
paragraphs, and yet without the colony in Georgia, the whole history of
the Renewed Church of the Unitas Fratrum would have been very different.
Without that movement the Moravian Church might never have been
established in England, without it the great Methodist denomination
might never have come into being, without it the American Moravian
provinces, North or South, might not have been planned. Of course
Providence might have provided other means for the accomplishment of
these ends, but certain it is that in the actual development of all
these things the “unsuccessful attempt” in Georgia, 1735 to 1740, played
a most important part.

Explanation

**Detailed Explanation of the Excerpt from The Moravians in Georgia, 1735–1740 by Adelaide L. Fries**

1. Context of the Source

Adelaide L. Fries (1871–1949) was a historian and archivist of the Moravian Church, best known for her work on Moravian history in America. The Moravians in Georgia, 1735–1740 (1905) examines the short-lived but influential Moravian settlement in the British colony of Georgia. The Moravians (or Unitas Fratrum, "Unity of the Brethren") were a Protestant denomination with roots in 15th-century Bohemia, later revived in the 18th century under the leadership of Count Nicolaus Ludwig von Zinzendorf. Their mission to Georgia was part of a broader effort to establish Christian communities in the New World, but it lasted only five years before collapsing due to conflicts with colonial authorities, harsh conditions, and internal disputes.

Fries’ preface sets the stage for her argument: that the Moravians’ "failure" in Georgia was, in reality, a pivotal moment that shaped the future of the church and even influenced broader religious movements, including Methodism.

2. Summary of the Excerpt

The passage begins with a general observation about how history judges success and failure, using the Battle of Bunker Hill (1775) as an illustrative example. Fries argues that what appears as a defeat in the short term (the Americans being driven from their position) was later recognized as a catalytic moment that strengthened the Revolutionary cause. She then applies this same logic to the Moravians’ failed Georgia settlement, suggesting that its apparent failure was actually a necessary precursor to the church’s later expansion in America and Europe.

Key claims:

The Georgia colony, though short-lived, was essential to the Moravian Church’s survival and growth.
Without it, the Moravian Church might not have taken root in England (where it later influenced John Wesley and the Methodist movement).
The American Moravian provinces (in Pennsylvania and North Carolina) might never have been established.
While God (Providence) could have achieved these ends another way, the Georgia experiment was the actual historical turning point.

3. Themes

A. The Paradox of Failure and Success

Fries’ central theme is that historical "failures" can be reinterpreted as long-term successes when viewed through a broader lens. She challenges the reader to look beyond immediate outcomes and consider unintended consequences and indirect influences.

Bunker Hill Analogy: The British "won" the battle tactically, but the Americans’ resistance galvanized the Revolution, proving their resolve. Similarly, the Moravians’ Georgia colony "failed" in its immediate goals, but it set in motion events that ensured the church’s survival.
Providential Perspective: Fries suggests that what seems like a setback may be part of a larger divine plan (Providence), a common theme in religious historiography.

B. The Role of Marginalized Histories

Fries critiques how historians overlook "minor" events that later prove significant. The Georgia settlement is often dismissed in a few paragraphs, yet she argues it was foundational to:

The revival of the Moravian Church (which had nearly died out before Zinzendorf’s leadership).
The spread of Moravianism to England, where it influenced John Wesley and the Methodist movement (Wesley was deeply impacted by Moravian piety during his time in Georgia).
The establishment of Moravian communities in Pennsylvania and North Carolina (e.g., Bethlehem, Salem), which became centers of missionary work and industry.

C. Interconnectedness of Religious Movements

The excerpt highlights how one small event can ripple across denominations and continents. The Moravians’ brief presence in Georgia:

Exposed John Wesley (who arrived in Georgia in 1735) to their pietistic, emotionally expressive faith, which later shaped Methodism.
Created networks that allowed Moravian ideas to spread to England and the American colonies.
Demonstrated resilience, proving that the church could survive even after apparent defeat.

4. Literary Devices and Rhetorical Strategies

Fries employs several techniques to persuade the reader of her argument:

A. Analogy (Bunker Hill Comparison)

She opens with a vivid historical example (Bunker Hill) to frame her argument about the Moravians.
The analogy serves to:
- Engage the reader with a familiar story.
- Establish a pattern: Just as Bunker Hill’s "defeat" led to Revolution, the Moravians’ "failure" led to revival.
- Appeal to patriotism: By linking the Moravians to the American Revolutionary spirit, she elevates their story to one of perseverance and destiny.

B. Rhetorical Questions

"By whom then was the Bunker Hill Monument erected? By the victors...? No..."
- This dramatic questioning forces the reader to reconsider assumptions about victory and defeat.
The structure mirrors her argument about the Moravians: the "victors" (British/colonial opponents) did not write the final story—later generations did.

C. Hypothetical Reasoning ("Without it...")

Fries uses counterfactual history to emphasize the Georgia colony’s importance:
- "Without that movement the Moravian Church might never have been established in England..."
- This speculative approach makes the reader consider how different history might have been, reinforcing the colony’s significance.

D. Providential Language

"Providence might have provided other means..."
- The use of religious determinism (the idea that God guides history) was common in 18th- and 19th-century historiography, especially in denominational histories.
- It softens the blow of failure by suggesting that even setbacks serve a higher purpose.

E. Irony

The irony that a "failed" mission led to greater success is central to her argument.
She subverts expectations: What seems like a footnote in history is actually a keystone event.

5. Significance of the Excerpt

A. Historiographical Contribution

Fries’ work is part of a denominational history tradition, where religious groups reclaim their own narratives from broader (often secular) historical accounts. By centering the Moravians’ story, she:

Challenges the marginalization of their Georgia experiment.
Connects it to larger religious movements, showing that "small" events can have disproportionate impact.

B. Theological Implications

For Moravians, this narrative reinforces the idea of divine guidance in adversity. The Georgia failure was not a dead end but a stepping stone in God’s plan.

C. Influence on Methodist Studies

Fries’ argument about the Moravians’ impact on John Wesley has been corroborated by later scholars. Wesley’s Aldersgate experience (1738), where he felt his heart "strangely warmed," was influenced by Moravian teachings he encountered in Georgia. Thus, the excerpt links two major Protestant movements (Moravianism and Methodism) through a seemingly minor historical event.

D. Broader Historical Lesson

The passage encourages readers to:

Question conventional notions of success/failure.
Look for hidden connections in history.
Value "minor" events that may have unseen consequences.

6. Close Reading of Key Passages

A. Bunker Hill Analogy (First Paragraph)

"By whom then was the Bunker Hill Monument erected? By the victors...? No, but by proud descendants of the vanquished..."
- The monument symbolizes reinterpretation: The losers of the battle became the moral victors of history.
- Similarly, the Moravians’ "defeat" in Georgia was later celebrated as a necessary sacrifice for the church’s growth.
"forcing every man in the Colonies to take a position squarely for or against the American Cause"
- The battle polarized opinions, just as the Moravians’ presence in Georgia forced interactions with other colonists, missionaries, and Native Americans, shaping their future strategies.

B. The Moravians’ "Unsuccessful Attempt" (Second Paragraph)

"the story is usually passed over by historians in a few short paragraphs"
- Fries critiques historical oversight, positioning her work as a corrective.
"without the colony in Georgia, the whole history of the Renewed Church... would have been very different"
- The counterfactual underscores the butterfly effect of the Georgia mission.
"Providence might have provided other means..."
- This theological hedge allows her to argue for the colony’s importance while acknowledging that God’s plans are not always predictable.

7. Conclusion: Why This Excerpt Matters

Adelaide Fries’ preface is not just an introduction to a historical study—it is a manifestation of how history is framed. By reframing failure as a form of success, she:

Elevates the Moravians’ story from obscurity.
Connects it to major religious and political movements (Revolution, Methodism).
Challenges the reader to see history as interconnected and providential.

Her rhetorical strategies (analogy, irony, counterfactuals) make the argument persuasive and memorable, while her theological perspective gives the narrative a sense of destiny. Ultimately, the excerpt serves as a meta-commentary on how we judge historical events—reminding us that what seems like an end may just be a beginning.

Questions

Question 1

The passage’s analogy between the Battle of Bunker Hill and the Moravian settlement in Georgia primarily serves to:

A. illustrate how military and religious histories are fundamentally interconnected in the formation of national identity.
B. demonstrate that both events were ultimately successful because they achieved their immediate tactical objectives.
C. critique the tendency of historians to overemphasize the role of Providence in explaining pivotal historical moments.
D. suggest that the Moravians, like the American revolutionaries, were motivated by a desire for political independence from British rule.
E. reframe apparent failures as catalytic events whose long-term consequences outweigh their immediate setbacks.

Question 2

The author’s claim that “without the colony in Georgia, the whole history of the Renewed Church of the Unitas Fratrum would have been very different” is most strongly supported by which of the following textual strategies?

A. An appeal to emotional resonance, invoking the pride of descendants to validate the colony’s significance.
B. A series of counterfactual assertions that trace the colony’s indirect but critical influence on later religious developments.
C. A reliance on providential language to argue that God’s intervention was necessary for the church’s survival.
D. A comparison to the Methodist movement, implying that the Moravians’ failure was less consequential than Wesley’s successes.
E. A dismissal of alternative historical pathways, insisting that no other events could have produced the same outcomes.

Question 3

The passage’s use of rhetorical questions (e.g., “By whom then was the Bunker Hill Monument erected?”) primarily functions to:

A. disrupt the reader’s assumptions about victory and defeat, compelling a reassessment of how history judges success.
B. highlight the irony that monuments are typically built by the losers of historical conflicts rather than the winners.
C. introduce a theological argument about the role of divine intervention in human affairs.
D. shift the focus from military history to religious history, signaling the passage’s true subject.
E. undermine the credibility of traditional historical narratives by exposing their inherent biases.

Question 4

Which of the following best describes the relationship between the passage’s providential language (“Providence might have provided other means”) and its broader argument?

A. It undermines the author’s claim by suggesting that the Georgia colony was ultimately unnecessary.
B. It reinforces the idea that the Moravians’ failure was a punishment for their lack of faith.
C. It allows the author to acknowledge alternative historical possibilities while still asserting the colony’s actual significance.
D. It implies that the Moravians’ success was inevitable, regardless of their actions in Georgia.
E. It introduces a contradiction by claiming both that the colony was essential and that God could have achieved the same ends without it.

Question 5

The author’s characterization of historians who “pass over” the Moravian settlement in Georgia in “a few short paragraphs” is most accurately described as:

A. a neutral observation about the limitations of historical scholarship in covering minor events.
B. an implicit critique of historiographical oversight, framing the settlement as unjustly marginalized.
C. an admission that the Georgia colony was, in fact, a peripheral episode in Moravian history.
D. a call for future historians to focus exclusively on religious movements rather than political or military events.
E. a rhetorical device to exaggerate the settlement’s importance beyond what the evidence supports.

Solutions and Explanations

1) Correct answer: E

Why E is most correct: The passage explicitly uses the Bunker Hill analogy to argue that what appears to be a failure (the Americans’ tactical loss, the Moravians’ abandoned colony) can be reinterpreted as a catalytic moment with profound long-term benefits. The author’s focus is on reframing these events—not their immediate outcomes, but their subsequent historical ripple effects. This aligns precisely with E’s emphasis on "long-term consequences outweigh[ing] immediate setbacks."