Opothleyahola

Page contents not supported in other languages.

Amazing Grace

According to his book "Bury The Chains," Adam Hochschild states that John Newton wrote the hymn "Amazing Grace" while he was still involved in the slave trade and actually was a captin on a Trans-Atlantic slave ship twice. It wasn't until ill health, preventing him from continuing his slave trade involvement, and external pressures from progressive forces that led him to change his position on the issue of slavery. Please amend the introductory paragraph to reflect this truth.

Actually I don't think "Bury the chains" claim that Newton still was involved in the slave trade when he wrote "Amazing Grace". He certainly was not an opponent though.
You have condensed more than thirty years of Newton's life into three lines. What Hochschild actually says in the book is that the fallacy of Newton's alleged 'sudden revelation' of the evils of the slave trade has often been perpetuated in print. In fact, it took more than thirty years after he left the trade for him to make any comment about it at all. The hymn Amazing Grace was actually written about 1772, at the time he was collaborating with Cowper, but it was long after even this that he first publicly criticised slavery – Agendum 01:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ALL these mistakes and misunderstandings in chronology can be cleared up if one will simply consult Newton himself. His autobiography, Out of the Depths, has been available for nearly 200 years, and is still in print (Kregel Publishers). Tjamespaul 17:21, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An article by Todd Parkhurst "The Story of Amazing Grace" gives the date of writing Amazing Grace as 1772, long after he left the slave trade in 1754. He adds that the 1858 "Southern Harmony and Musical Companion" containing the hymn and (new) melody sold more than 600,000 copies in America. This article is also a useful source of further details regarding his contact with William Wilberforce and his mother Hannah. Philatstoneypath 09:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

iirc although Newton retired as a slave captain before writing Amazing Grace, he continued to invest heavily in slaving and slave ships until long afterwards. I'll try to dig out my copy of Bury the Chains to get more details. -Giford 80.177.173.100 (talk) 09:10, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked BtC and here's the timeline:
1748 - Conversion to Evangelicalism
1749 - takes position as first mate on slaver
1750 - takes position as slave-ship captain, marries, becomes a 'full convert'
1754 - retires due to ill health
1764 - ordained after many years applying
1766 - Manesty goes bankrupt, breaking Newton's financial support for slavery
1772 - writes Amazing Grace
1781 - lists the 'sins of Britain' in a sermon - slavery is not among them, although blasphemy and the national debt are
1788 - speaks against slavery for the first time
So AG was written after Newton ceased investing in slaving but apparently while he still approved of it. However, in my opinion, the article gives the misleading impressions that Newton's conversion came towards the end of his career as a slaver (it came before his first captaincy); and that he was opposed to slavery at the time he wrote Amazing Grace. There also seems to be an implied link between Newton urging Wilberforce to remain in politics and Wilberforce's later abolitionism.
Here are the changes I would suggest; I haven't edited a Wikipedia article before, so perhaps someone would like to comment?
Manesty is mis-spelt twice.
'By the time he reached Britain, he had accepted the doctrines of Christianity.' - should be 'Evangelical Christianity' - he had long been a 'mainstream' Christian.
'He only gave up seafaring and his slave-trading activities in 1754' - I would say this in incorrect, he continued to invest in slave-ships until 1766, which I would regard as 'slave-trading activity'.
'However, during his early years as a slave trader he did not consider himself to be a true Christian: 'I was greatly deficient in many respects... I cannot consider myself to have been a believer in the full sense of the word, until a considerable time later."' - if I understand this correctly, Newton is referring to the period between his initial conversion (1748) and his 'full' conversion in 1748, as per the 'Spiritual Conversion' section of this article. If that's correct, it has no bearing on his role as a slave captain (starting 1750) and this line should be altered or removed.
'It is true, after what he felt was his true conversion to Christianity, he continued working the slave routes for a few years' - this is at best highly misleading. His 'true conversion' came before he took his first captaincy - not towards the end of his slaving career, as implied here.
There is also a misleading impression that Newton encouraged Wilberforce to remain in politics *because* Wilberforce was an abolitionist. In fact, abolition was not the priority for either man (and not an issue at all for Newton at this point), although both would go on to be prominent abolitionists.
The 'Early Life' section could also be significantly expanded.
References are Breaking the Chains by Adam Hochschild and
http://www.johnnewton.org/Publisher/Article.aspx?ID=105307 (for date of Manesty's bankruptcy)
http://home.clara.net/mawer/chester.html (gives date of 1764 for Manesty's bankruptcy)
-Giford 80.177.173.100 (talk) 08:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I've gone ahead and made the changes I suggested (and got a Wikipedia account!) - all except the last one, which would require an extensive rewrite. Giford (talk) 17:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Newton's advice for Wilberforce

A very interesting and illuminating piece of information about Wilberforce's call - thanks for adding this. Do you have a source for this quotation? - I would be interested to know. – Agendum 22:51, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I removed the link to Thornton because it led to someone else (a football player, I believe). - Triviaa 02:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Slave trader

The point about John Newton's time as a slave trader, and the reason that I have reverted edits by 71.226.193.19 is that these are important stages in his journey from an 'infidel and libertine' to a Christian preacher. This has been researched, the sources being the article by D. Bruce Hindmarsh in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography and Bury the Chains by Adam Hochschild. It is especially important that he is accurately quoted (according to his own epitaph) as having been a 'servant of slaves in Africa' – Agendum 21:23, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great Awakening

I just changed the link for "Evanglical revival" in the section about his conversion to Christianity to link to the First Great Awakening article instead of the Revivalism article, because the Revivalism article doesn't have very much information in it about the Great Awakening. I could see an argument for leaving it linked to Revivalism, though, if Revivalism were expanded and cleaned up. I don't have the expertise to do so, though. Just thought I'd leave a note in case someone wanted to change the link here back at some point. faithx5 15:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

conversion?

So, if he was previously not a Christian, what was he? — coelacan talk — 22:02, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A an 'evangelical' Christian, Newton believed that you cannot be born into the Christian religion, but had to come to faith following a conviction of sin and repentance. In his autobiograpy "Out of the Depths" he interleaves his accounts of events such as the storm and near shipwreck with his internal spiritual struggle that ended with his resolution to turn to God for help. As he put it: "About this time I began to know that there is a God who hears and answers prayer". For those who want to find out more detail about Newton's spirituality, I would recommend "Letters of John Newton" (Banner of Truth) and a critical analysis in "John Newton and the Evangelical Tradition by D. Bruce Hindmarsh" (Eerdmans) Philatstoneypath 09:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Christian minister

I think the term 'Christian minister' would be more appropriate to an evangelical clergyman of Newton's persuasion than 'Christian priest', and have changed the sub-heading back again – Agendum 13:05, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think "Christian minister" is more appropriate as well, but for a different reason. The term "Christian priest" is non-idiomatic and perhaps even somewhat redundant. As for the use of the term "priest," it should be noted that the Church of England does have priests, and that Newton was ordained as a priest of the Church of England, as the article indicates.

John Paul Parks (talk) 19:33, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality disputed

By whom? – Agendum 22:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ive not been able to find any biased POV accounts in this article Tired of people tagging NPOV without expressing reasoning behind it--Csodennc 18:48, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Then, we remove it - alright? Does anyone disagree? – Agendum 22:03, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Went ahead and did it. If someone wants to tag again, please state your concerns with the article. Thanks --Csodennc 23:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Potential copyright violation

The last paragraph under Anglican priest appears to be oddly un-Wikipedia like in content and placement and has the distinct feel of an encyclopedia or book opening paragraph. This paragraph begins with the sentence “John Newton (1725–1807) captained two Liverpool slave ships in his twenties and kept detailed logs of his voyages.” This wording was added 15:56, 14 January 2008 by 81.1.123.107. The use of birth-death dates in parentheses and describing in summary highlights of his life already covered are at odds with the balance of the article. I performed several searches using common search engines and could NOT find an exact match from another resource at this time, however I would like to get others opinion whether this paragraph should be left as-is, edited to flow better with the rest of the article, or deleted as a suspected copyright violation. Thank you. Civilengtiger (talk) 20:07, 26 February 2008 (UTC) John Paul Parks (talk) 03:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Final years

I have deleted the section "final years" as all it contained was the false statement that John Newton never married. In fact he was very happily married to Mary nee Catlett (known as Polly) from 1750 until her death in 1790. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.51.159.237 (talk) 21:56, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The vandal blanked previous content before pasting his/her POV. I've restored the original content. It's not sourced, but at least it's a place to start. --Robert Keiden (talk) 01:20, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I'm not sure that "Portrayals in literature, movies and other media" is a suitable section for a serious article. It may be better under a "Trivia" subhead. What do others think? – Agendum (talk) 20:46, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the content there, and in the "Commemoration" section above should be massively revised and/or elimanted. See WP:TRIVIA. There is good room to write a section on later views of Newton, if an editor takes the time to find sources about later views of Newton, rather than engage in original research by analyzing themselves such later views. GRBerry 17:39, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the slave trade is bad and it always will be! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.155.24.241 (talk) 15:56, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Punishment aboard HMS Harwich

Could the text be more accurate? What Newton said in his autobiography was that he was “kept a while in irons, then publicly stripped and whipped, after which I was degraded from my office, and all my former companions forbidden to shew me the least favour, or even to speak to me”(1). His punishment for desertion in wartime was therefore (a) close imprisonment (b) public removal of clothing (c) public flogging (d) demotion from the rank of midshipman and (e) sent to Coventry. What evidence is there for the number of lashes or the number of spectators? The Lawless One (talk) 10:48, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This question is now over 13 years old and still unanswered. The points made in 2010 are still valid.
The claim that Newton received eight dozen lashes and had 350 witnesses to his punishment is unsubstantiated by original source documents. These numbers are claimed in some biographies but they are disputed in others.
It is true that he was flogged (this you can find in his autobiography) and that the crew witnessed the punishment (also in the autobiography) but the exact numbers of eight dozen and 350 cannot be found there. These numbers are disputed - see for example John Newton by Jonathan Aitken where he specifically states that the number of lashes was unknown, although the punishment was no doubt severe.
There is a lot of myth about John Newton, and these counts are part of the myth but are not fact. Thank goodness that Wikipedia is not spreading the "harpooned" myth, which has several variations, all involving Newton going overboard and being rescued by being harpooned - also false but unfortunately sometimes spread via pulpits. 98.53.149.206 (talk) 17:43, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the source is questionable, I have deleted the claims as too dubious to stand. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 18:59, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Two further thoughts on this, as it may not be as clear-cut as it first appeared.
  1. At Cat o' nine tails#Naval types and use, there is an uncited claim that (unspecified) "Royal Navy records reflecting some standard penalties of two hundred lashes for desertion, three hundred for mutiny, and up to five hundred for theft". If that is true then eight dozen must be considered credible. Though how such wounding in the age before antibiotics could be survivable stretches credulity.
  2. The source cited in the article (Dunn 1994, p. 7. is a wp:SELFPUBLISHed article by a non-notable author and so fails WP:RS. Further, the author cites Grace Irwin, Servant of Slaves, Oliphants, 1965, pp. 84–85., which is "a biographical novel", so definitely not an RS.
Without a more reliable source, I believe that my deletion should stand unless more reliable evidence emerges. Agree? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 22:48, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Concur 2601:281:D480:3624:C89C:CDA:64DE:A2C4 (talk) 06:31, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A mysterious sentence?

The text says “Clowe took Newton to the coast of and gave him to his wife Princess Peye, an African duchess.” Where is the evidence for these statements? If we look at Newton’s autobiography (i), we find on page 64 that Clowe took Newton to an island off present-day Sierra Leone. There he left him in the charge of his unnamed African mistress, who was a “person of some consequence in her own country”. How, if Newton is silent about them, do we know (a) her name of Peye (b) her title of princess (c) her rank of duchess and (d) her marital status of wife? The Lawless One (talk) 17:16, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(i) An Authentic Narrative, 3rd edition, London, 1765

This story must be regarded as fanciful, if only because there are no duchesses in African society.Royalcourtier (talk) 23:01, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well unless they spoke a language derived from Latin there wouldn't be a literal "Duchess"! The narrative is attempting to convey the equivalent position to an English speaking audience, a pretty standard thing to do up until the late 20C. I doubt that she was called "Princess" in her own language either, but most people understand the analogy easily enough. It in no way invalidates the story or renders it "fanciful", merely politically incorrect. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:29, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

abolitionism

there is NO proof of John Newton having anymore than simple regret concerning the career choice that he had for the most of his working life. The idea that he was a prominent abolitionist is absurd as it has no factual backing. It should be completely edited out and perhaps a section regarding Newton's memoirs of personal regret could be applied. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.136.74.193 (talk) 07:47, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Newton published a work in opposition to the slave trade. Simple regret doesn't move you to publish a work in your own name, sell the whole printing, and reprint and sell some more. Publishing opposition to a commercially viable and valuable practice was shocking at the time, and he had to defend that position for 25 years. That qualifies him as a prominent abolitionist of his time. Kevwp (talk) 02:50, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Slave Trade Years

I enjoyed the article in general, but I see a glaring hole: John Newton was, at one point and for several years, a slave trader. It is mentioned in other categories, but not addressed directly. The other categories are all appropriate, of course.

According to comments on this talk page, Newton spent 6-9 years trading slaves. I believe he mentioned regret for trading over 20,000 individuals - whether directly or also those who were traded due to his investing in slave trading.

Currently, I see sections on Early Life, Spiritual Conversion, Anglican Priest, Abolitionist, Writer and Hymnist.

Shouldn't this period of Newton's life, which occupied up to a quarter of his 82 years, have a separate section?

It would only take a couple of paragraphs for a basic treatment of this large part of his life.

Kevwp (talk) 02:42, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is a serious omission. There is some useful information in Zong by James Walvin (Yale UP, 2011), but I'm it is available elsewhere. NotFromUtrecht (talk) 19:20, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]


The following is perhaps not worded correctly: "Newton later came to believe that, during the first five of his nine years as a slave trader, he had not been a Christian in the full sense of the term: "I was greatly deficient in many respects ... I cannot consider myself to have been a believer in the full sense of the word, until a considerable time later." I think this implies that Newton, in the latter four years as a slave trader, was a "Christian in the full sense of the term." I think his primary conversion (or the beginning of his conversion - depending on your point of view) began somewhere in the middle of his career as a slave trader. So his quote would be a reference to his "fully" becoming a Christian sometime after his slave trading activities.

184.78.168.124 (talk) 08:11, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

@KalebGiraya and 20.133.0.13: Please stop your edit warring at once. You are both guilty of breaking the WP:3RR rule. If you wish to discuss the two quotations come here to the talk page and leave the main page alone until consensus has been achieved. You are both running the risk of admin action which might include blocking. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 17:10, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One of the sources is not WP:RS. My third edit was merely a tidy up, trimming the URL. I have actually supported the addition by suggesting formatting improvements. WP:RS is a policy, so please don't warn me for enforcing that. If it is to remain, this quote still needs some kind of context/ explanation. Thanks. 20.133.0.13 (talk) 17:19, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(Replied to on IP user's talk page) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 17:30, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Opposition to slavery

Why write "Newton did not however immediately renounce working in the slave trade". What is the purpose of this sentence? Newton was actively involved in the slave trade for many years. The sentence appears in the middle of accounts of his career. There is no reason for even suggesting that he would renounce the work he was doing. The sentence, particularly the "however" implies some reason why he would do so, but none is givenRoyalcourtier (talk) 23:03, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

@Softlavender:@Pittman440: You have both made 3 or more reverts this evening in direct contravention of WP:3RR. Before this gets unpleasant, please come here to this talk page and argue it out here. Pittman440: you need to provide a citation or else the claim about Newton's disbelief in African souls will continue to be reverted. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 22:03, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Newton. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:13, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On his Writing legacy, can you add Bunyan´s Pilgrims Progress

I know he wrote a preface on Bunyan´s Pilgrim Progress(1776). So Can anyone add it to his writing carrer, it seems to be missing. TYTerrorwatcher (talk) 00:11, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:29, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Newton's Grace

This movie is also about John Newton, but it isn't mentioned here, nor is there a link from the "Newton's Grace" wiki page to here. I don't know enough to do it. NotAtlas (talk) 02:43, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@NotAtlas: There have been many books and films about or concerning Newton: it is not obvious that this film is so particularly notable that it should be mentioned anywhere in the body of the article. Did you have a particular reason or did you just want to know how to do it if you did? The normal way to do it is to add it the "See also" list at the end of most articles: in this case, John Newton#See also. Right now, no books or films are listed there – I suspect because nobody has done the work to find them rather than out of any great principle. So you have just volunteered!
So you would need to trawl through the list of articles at Special:WhatLinksHere/John Newton and pick out the ones that look most relevant. Feel free to drop a message at my talk page if you need any help getting started. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 10:05, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Racism

Should the article talk more about his profits off of like a decade of the buying and selling of people of color? Yea he changed later in life but still...... 174.47.44.231 (talk) 17:32, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anachronistic statement? (section Anglican priest)

During this period, he also applied to the Methodists, Independents and Presbyterians. However in the period concerned (between 1755-1765) the Methodists were a movement within the Church of England, not becoming a separate, Nonconformist, denomination until after the deaths of the Wesley brothers in the 1790s, so no machinery for taking applicants for its ministry. I have therefore deleted "Methodists" from the sentence.Cloptonson (talk) 12:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:John_Newton