18. Evidence against this argument comes from the Old Order Mennonites, who use tractors in the field and continue to drive a horse and carriage on the road. They have maintained the horse infrastructure even though they have only driving horses.
19. At first, tractors were restricted to belt power. In the 1990s, power take off (PTO) attachments were permitted as well.
20. The hay baler brought the first widespread use of gasoline engines. However, some Amish farmers had used “open hopper” engines without radiators on potato diggers before balers came into use.
21. The bishops forbade the use of six mechanical items: combine, forage harvester, barn cleaner, power unit, generator for lights and power, and deep freezer. This list was confirmed by several informants and is explicitly documented in Sam Kauffman’s (1962) minutes of the special Ministers’ Meeting held 19 December 1962.
22. Hay balers are not self-propelled. This may have contributed to the ease with which they slipped into practice among Amish farmers. The use of any self-propelled equipment would, in the long run, remove the horse from the field and lead to the car.
23. The technology used to farm and harvest tobacco has changed very little since the early twentieth century. Tobacco production is difficult to mechanize and remains labor intensive. Tobacco farming is on the decline largely because of low tobacco prices and because there are other more profitable sources of farm and nonfarm income. In spring 2001 a tobacco company was signing up Amish farmers to grow a new strain of nicotene-free tobacco. If this venture is successful, tobacco growing may rise again.
24. S. Kauffman (1962).
25. A systematic account of this division has not been written. The best documentary source is the minutes of the special Ministers’ Meeting, 19 December 1962, recorded by S. Kauffman (1962). Renno (1985:6–9) has written a brief description of the division, but many of his details are challenged by oral historians.
A brief history from the New Order perspective is available in New Order (1999). Abner Beiler (n.d.) has written a short description of the different groups that evolved from the division. See also E. Yoder (1987:354–56) for a description of the offshoot congregations that eventually affiliated with the Beachy Amish. Although six ordained leaders dissented from the bishops’ ruling on the six articles, only two ministers actually left the Old Order Amish. The formal separation occurred on 5 June 1966 at a special Ministers’ Meeting. One of the ministers eventually rejoined the Old Order Amish. Members of the Old Order Amish were given several months to decide if they wanted to join the New Order group. Members who chose to transfer during this grace period are not shunned. However, members who joined the progressive group after the time of grace are shunned by the Old Order Amish today.
10 | The Transformation of Amish Work
1. For example, Ericksen, Ericksen, and Hostetler (1980:49) argue that “the Old Order Amish culture is largely maintained by the ability of the individual Amish families to establish their children on farms.” Meyers (1994), in a study of the impact of nonfarm work in Indiana, concludes that nonfarm work will not bring the demise of their culture.
2. See Reschly (2000) for a discussion of how the Amish developed outstanding farming methods in Europe before they came to North America.
3. Standards (1981:49).
4. Directory (1977:3).
5. An early history of the evolution of shops written by an Amish historian can be found in Directory (1977). An excellent more recent overview of the growth of the businesses was authored by Sam Stoltzfus in the booklet 17th Annual Woodworkers Get Together, 6 June 1998, Lancaster County. See Kraybill and Nolt (1994, 1995) for an article and a book-length history and analysis of the rise of Amish businesses in the Lancaster settlement.
6. For the history of the expansion into southern Lancaster County, see Kauffman, Petersheim, and Beiler (1992).
7. Kollmorgen (1942:29).
8. Directory (1977:3).
9. Martineau and MacQueen (1977:384).
10. Kollmorgen (1942:27).
11. These numbers are provided by the Lancaster County Agricultural Preserve Board. For an excellent discussion of development issues and pressures in Lancaster County, see the six-day series by Ed Klimuska in New Era (27 June–2 July 1988). By 2000 some farms were selling for $10,000 per acre; however, the countywide average was not that high.
12. Kollmorgen (1942:23).
13. Intelligencer (7 April 1975).
14. Scholarly articles by Martineau and MacQueen (1977) and Ericksen, Ericksen, and Hostetler (1980) discuss the impact of nonfarm occupations on the Amish of Lancaster County. Two series in local newspapers also charted the trend toward nonfarm work (Intelligencer, 7 and 8 April 1975, and New Era, 30 and 31 July 1987).
15. Schwieder and Schwieder (1975:53).
16. The movement into Lebanon County to the north is told by D. King (1993).
17. A history of the Amish migrations to Centre and Clinton counties (Pennsylvania) as well as a directory of those settlements has been compiled (Directory, 1973).
18. Directory (1977).
19. In an informal survey of one Lancaster district in 1987, a member reported that among the married men who had not retired, 37 percent were day workers, 19 percent owned their own businesses, 11 percent farmed and had a shop, and 33 percent were full-time farmers (Die Botschaft, 15 September 1987).
20. A correspondent for The Diary reported in September 2000 that as few as 8 percent of the men were farming in one district and as many as 90 percent in another one.
21. Ed Klimuska’s excellent five-part series on the dramatic growth of the quilting industry in Lancaster County appeared in New Era (9–13 March 1987) and was reprinted in 1987 in a booklet entitled Lancaster County: Quilt Capital USA. See also Kraybill and Nolt (1995:45–57).
22. For an extended discussion of the roles of Amish women in small businesses, see Kraybill and Nolt (1995:45–47, 240–44). The 17 percent level of female ownership is based on data from the Settlement Profile 2000.
23. Meyers (1983b:177) argues that the presence of ethnic support and network systems in occupational settings—more than the type of work per se—is the critical factor in determining whether the shift away from farming will lead to the collapse of Amish society.
24. Several Indiana settlements provide interesting comparisons with Lancaster because many of the Indiana Amish work in large factories owned by non-Amish. In some of the settlements, more than 50 percent of the men work in large factories. Meyers (1983b) conducted a study of stress related to nonfarm occupations in Indiana. He found few stress-related differences between Amish farmers and Amish factory workers. In a more recent article, Meyers (1994) discusses the impact of factory work in several Indiana settlements and concludes that the Amish have adapted in ways that will preserve their culture.
25. The estimates of farms owned and purchased by the Amish are based on a study conducted by Conrad L. Kanagy titled, “Comprehensive Study of Farms Owned by Plain Groups in Lancaster County, PA, 1999.” The unpublished report is available from the author. The estimate of 1,500 farms is based on the Settlement Profile 2000, which found an average of twelve farms per district (12 × 114 in Lancaster County = 1,368).
26. Information regarding the numbers of Amish farms preserved was provided by representatives of the Agricultural Preserve Board and the Lancaster Farmland Trust. Funk (1998) tells the story of land preservation in Lancaster County.
27. For a comparison of Amish businesses in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, and Indiana County, Pennsylvania, see Kraybill and Kanagy (1996).
28. New Era (30 July 1987).
29. For coverage of the zoning problems related to the Amish, see Intelligencer (15 and 18 August 1987, 3 March 1988).
30. The hay turner is an advancement over the older hay tedders because it breaks fewer leaves and turns the hay completely upside down. Many farmers now bale high-moisture hay and wrap the bales in plastic to make haylage, which reduces the need for the t
urner.
31. Sam Stoltzfus, 17th Annual Woodworkers Get Together, 6 June 1998, 6, 26.
32. Lancaster Settlement Profile (Appendix A). Twelve per district (131) yields a settlement-wide total of 1,572.
33. These estimates were given by knowledgeable non-Amish professionals who work very closely with the Amish in financial matters.
34. The sources of success are explored in depth by Kraybill and Nolt (1995: 218–35).
35. Marc Olshan (1994a) develops this theme in a chapter on Amish cottage industries in New York state.
36. Olshan (1994a:139).
37. On the discrepancy of practices between shops and farms, as well as numerous reader responses, see Family Life (April 1987:31–32; June 1987:16–25).
38. Fortune 500 magazine did a special feature on Amish millionaires in the June 1995 issue.
39. A new bank formed in 1998 in order to provide financial services to the Plain communities of Lancaster County. Home Town Heritage Bank began through conversations with several Amish leaders and financial experts in the larger community. A few Amish people sit on the board of directors, but board members are primarily non-Amish. Not all of its clients are Amish, but Hometown Heritage emphasizes “a simpler way of banking,” which appeals to Amish customers. Bank officials, sensitive to Amish culture, have adjusted some of their policies to dovetail with Amish values.
11 | Managing Public Relations
1. Amishman Isaac Glick served as postmaster in the village of Smoketown in the second decade of the twentieth century. See Glick (1994:33) for an account of the Glick family written by Isaac’s son Aaron.
2. For the best historical synopsis of the Amish view of the state and participation in government, see Paton Yoder (1993). A volume of essays on conflicts between the Amish and the state was edited by Kraybill (1993).
3. The exemption from Worker’s Compensation varies from state to state. The Amish in Pennsylvania are exempt.
4. This intriguing twist is reported by the scribe from Gordonville in The Diary, September 2000.
5. Steering Committee (1986:76).
6. Keim (1993:43–66) tells the story of Amish involvements in alternative service during conscription.
7. Steering Committee (1966:1).
8. Olshan (1993:67–68; 1994b:199–214) describes the evolution and role of the National Steering Committee. The minutes of the committee, which are printed periodically, provide a record of the committee’s activities. Andrew S. Kinsinger (1997), the first chairman of the Steering Committee, provides an Amish perspective of its development.
9. Amish views of Social Security and a history of their response to it are described by Ferrara (1993:125–44).
10. Kinsinger (1983:596).
11. For a thorough history of the Amish struggle with Social Security, see Ferrara (1993).
12. Cline (1968:145). My discussion of Social Security is heavily indebted to Cline’s work and to an Amish informant involved in negotiations with government officials.
13. Cline (1968:164).
14. For a lengthy description of this case and subsequent legal action surrounding it, see Cline (1968:148–55).
15. In some cases, heads of large families with low incomes have inadvertently received “unearned income” checks from the government, but Amish leaders urge members to return them.
16. In recent years some Amish have opened Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs). The IRS position on this issue was unclear at first, but presently the IRS permits the Amish to have them.
17. For an extended discussion of the Amish reaction to this film as well as a chronology of events, see Hostetler and Kraybill (1988).
18. The agreement was formalized in a letter from Secretary of Commerce Pickard on 12 September 1984.
19. Intelligencer (26 January 1985).
20. Intelligencer (28 February 1985).
21. “Amish at the Heart of ‘Puppy Mill’ Debate,” New York Times, 20 September 1993, A12.
22. Intelligencer (14 August 2000).
23. Some of the extensive Lancaster newspaper coverage can be found in Sunday News (16 April 2000), Intelligencer (12 June 2000), New Era (27 June 2000), Intelligencer (28 June and 6 July 2000), New Era (13 July 2000), Sunday Patriot News (23 July 2000), Sunday News (23 July 2000), and Intelligencer (26 July, and 9, 14, and 16 August 2000).
24. Intelligencer (28 June 2000).
25. Intelligencer (9 August 2000).
26. Sunday Patriot News (8 November 1998). Other accounts of the controversy can be found in New Era (21 April 1998), Intelligencer (22 April and 17 July), Sunday News (2 August 1998), and Intelligencer (29 September, 10 October, and 16 November 1998).
27. Hannah B. Lapp, “Labor Department vs. Amish Ways,” Wall Street Journal, 10 April 1997.
28. The proposed bill, HR 4257, was designed to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 so that “certain youth could perform certain work with wood products.”
29. Written comments to the House Committee on Education and the Workforce by the chairman of the Old Order Amish Steering Committee, 21 April 1998.
30. Luthy (1994b) tells the story of the growth of tourism from an Amish perspective in several of the larger settlements. L. Stoltzfus (2000) chronicles the historical growth of tourism in Lancaster County.
31. For a history of Amish tourism in Lancaster County, see excellent articles by Luthy (1980, 1994b). The booklet was Steinfeldt’s (1937) The Amish of Lancaster County. Fisher (1988) describes the rise of tourism from a local Amishman’s view. For a creative interpretation of the Amish in the American imagination, see Weaver-Zercher (2001).
32. Estimates from the Pennsylvania Dutch Convention and Visitors Bureau in Lancaster. My estimates of expenditures per Amish person are based on an Amish population of 22,000 (children and adults).
33. Intelligencer (28 January 1988).
34. G. Fisher (1978:365).
35. J. Beiler (1976b:482).
36. J. Beiler (1976b:482).
37. Vogue magazine, August 1993. For a thorough discussion of the commodification of Amish images in the American culture market, see Weaver-Zercher (2001).
12 | Regulating Social Change
1. Gordonville area scribe in The Diary, September 2000.
2. For a structural analysis of social change, see Gallagher’s (1981) study of the Lancaster Amish settlement. Other discussions of social change among the Amish in a variety of settlements can be found in Foster (1984a), J. A. Hostetler (1993:387–99), Huntington (1956:1045–55), Meyers (1983b), Nagata (1968), and Olshan (1980). Kraybill and Olshan (1994) provide a number of essays dealing with social change among the Amish of North America. See Kraybill (1994c) for an extended discussion of social change.
3. S. Kauffman (1962:7).
4. My approach to the study of the Amish entrepreneurship is grounded in the growing sociological tradition of cultural analysis that stresses the bona fide role of culture in shaping and regulating social organization.
5. The members of an ethnic group share a common religious, racial, or national background, a sense of peoplehood, and a memory of a common past. Their social symbols and membership boundaries give them a visible public identity recognized by insiders and outsiders alike. The bulk of the literature on ethnic businesses underscores the important role of cultural resources. The Amish story is unique in that cultural restraints have obstructed and regulated business activity. The formation of business enterprises in this particular ethnic context is a negotiated outcome produced by these two countervailing cultural forces.
6. Howard Rheingold discusses the growing use of cell phones among the Amish in an article in Wired magazine, January 1999.
7. This question is addressed at length by Kraybill and Bowman (2001) in their comparative study of four Old Order communities.
8. For additional discussions of Amish survival strategies, see Foster (1984b), J. A. Hostetler (1993), V. Stoltzfus (1973), and Thompson (1981).
13 | Exploring Our Commo
n Riddles
1. Bellah et al. (1985:viii). Other analysts concerned about the debilitating effects of radical individualism include Fukuyama (1995, 1999), Myers (2000), and Putnam (2000).
2. Berger, Berger, and Kellner (1973) develop this theme in The Homeless Mind.
3. Hunter’s essay “The Modern Malaise” offers a superb review of the social criticism of modernity since 1930 (Hunter and Ainlay 1986). See also Lane (2000) and Myers (2000).
4. Olshan (1981:297) notes that many social scientists ritualistically label the Amish a folk society—a small isolated and traditional group—and thus assume that the Amish are not modern. Berger (1977, 1979), Foster (1984b), and Olshan (1981) contend that choice is central to the modern experience. Olshan (1980, 1981) argues that the Amish are not a folk society because they engage in rational decision making. However, he focuses on their collective decisions and disregards individual choice, which is central to Berger’s definition of modernity.
5. The Amish National Steering Committee serves as a quasi–lobby group that intercedes with government officials on behalf of Amish interests. For a record of this group’s activities, see Steering Committee (1966–2000) and Olshan (1993, 1994b).
6. This type of rationality corresponds to what Max Weber (1947:115) called Wert-rational, rational decisions that are made to uphold or promote absolute religious values.
7. Olshan (1979, 1980) points to the Amish as a model for social development. Berry (1977); Foster (1980, 1981, 1982); and Johnson, Stoltzfus, and Craumer (1977) have described the energy efficiency of Amish culture.
8. In their comprehensive study of mental illness in the Lancaster settlement, Egeland and Hostetter (1983:59) report that major affective mental disorders among the Amish are about half the rate of such disorders in other groups. A study of Amish suicide in the Lancaster area found that the Amish rate was half that of other religious groups and one-third the rate of nonreligious populations (Kraybill, Hostetler, and Shaw 1986:256–57).
9. In severe cases of psychiatric disorder, Amish people are hospitalized. People with mild psychiatric disorders, retardation, and physical disabilities are cared for by the extended family whenever possible.
The Riddle of Amish Culture Page 41
