Category Archives: Documenting America

Book Review: John Locke’s Treatises on Government – Part 1

John Locke significantly influenced key leaders of the American Revolution.

Approximately two years ago, when I began reading in earnest as research for Documenting America: Making The Constitution Edition, I read something, not in a source document, about the Founding Fathers being interested in the writings of John Locke, particularly his two Treatises on Government, published anonymously in 1689.  I figured I’d better read them, as background for my other research. So, I found a good quality electronic copy (for free), downloaded it, and began reading.

Let me say two things to start. My reading of this was probably not in an optimum way. I read in fits and starts wherever I had a few moments of waiting with my phone, the device I read the whole thing on; and I probably wasn’t at my best as I read it. I don’t know that I retained much about the two treatises, and will someday have to read them again.

This post will be only on Locke’s Part 1. Part 2 will follow in another post in the not-too-distant future.

Filmer is less well known that Lock. Perhaps Locke’s debunking of him was effective, or so history has judged.

Part 1 was…strange. Somehow the Preface didn’t stick with me. I got into the book, and Locke is referring to “Sir Robert”, giving quotes and page numbers. I had no idea who he was referring to. At some point I had to go back and re-read the preface. Locke referred to Sir Robert Filmer, who had written a book named Patriarcha: On the Natural Power of Kings, published in 1680. In this, Filmer laid out the case for the divine right of kings and an absolute monarchy. He got some of his material from Thomas Hobbes in a 1651 book named Leviathan.

Locke said his purpose in writing his Part 1 was “to establish the throne of our greater restorer, or present King William; to make good his title…” Locke liked William, taking note that he came to the throne in what is called the Glorious Revolution of 1688. His mother was the daughter of King Charles 1st of England, so he had some place in the royal order of succession. He married his cousin, Mary, daughter of the Duke of York. William and Mary came to the throne as joint monarchs, and after Mary died in 1694 William reigned alone until his death in 1702. Some thought him to be an illegitimate king.

It’s not my purpose to go into this history, but a little of it is essential background for Locke’s Part 1. From the wording of the Preface, it’s as if Locke had a foregone conclusion and was trying to justify it with this book. However, I don’t think that’s the case. He looked at Filmer’s work, was horrified by it, and decided to refute it. That also had the result of justifying William’s reign.

As I said, the book was strange to me. The language and structure, being archaic, made the reading somewhat difficult. It seems Filmer’s argument for the divine right of kings/absolute monarchy came from the Bible. He believed Adam was born king, was thus king of all his progeny, and passed that right through his progeny. Locke gave many arguments against this, using different scenarios to refute Filmer’s different points.

Except, they all sounded the same to me, these different points. Filmer said Adam, by right of being first born of all creation, had an absolute right to rule over first his children, then their children, then that was passed down to them and their children. Locke said no, essentially that was ridiculous. That once a child reached age of majority, or responsibility, the father no longer had any right to rule over him.

One thing I did take away from this Treatise, though which I was had been better developed, is the concept of man is either born a slave (per Filmer) or born free (per Locke). It’s a continuum, with slave on one side and free on the other. I’m assuming Filmer chose the slave side, and hence, as slaves, all mankind is servant to whoever holds the legitimate kingship. Locke rejected that. Maybe he did state the continuum thought clearly, and in my diminished reading capacity I missed it. I’m going to look for that again for sure.

Over and over this went, for 200 pages. Shades of claims by Filmer and counter-claims by Locke. It started to all run together. Perhaps, had I read in better conditions, I would have felt it more informative. No, informative isn’t the right word, but I can’t think of a better one. I didn’t take as much away from it as I’d hoped to.

I believe the framers of our country and government were most interested in Locke’s second treatise, which dealt with government. They were opposed to monarchy, so could probably not have cared less about Locke’s defense of King William in the first treatise.

I have this as an e-book, in my Google Books account, so I’ll keep it. I’ll read it at least one more time. Except, I feel that I ought to read Filmer before re-reading Locke. And, possibly, I’ll have to read Hobbes before I read Filmer. And, I imagine when I read Hobbes I’ll find he relied on someone else and I’ll have to read that.

Where does it end?

Don’t Bash Rhode Island

I had a different post planned for today, but think I’ll go this way instead.

There’s a reason The Independent Man is atop our statehouse: We are independent minded. Or, are we just stubborn?

Yesterday, I thought I was done with my research in Documenting America: Making the Constitution Edition. I had all my chapters lined-out, all my source text found and entered in a Word document. Well, almost all, as the source text for one chapter eluded me. Yesterday I found an alternative (actually, two) and that’s now in the document. I even wrote my commentary on a chapter yesterday. Now up to nine chapters complete out of a probably thirty-one.

I started work on the next chapter, editing the source text. It’s a letter from Thomas Jefferson, while he was in Paris in 1787, to Edward Carrington. TJ made some very good points and I’m happy to have that in my book. I figured writing the chapter around it would be somewhat easy.

But, I wanted to see what Carrington had written to TJ to prompt this letter. I went to the Library of Congress website, which has been my source for so much. It didn’t take too long to learn Carrington hadn’t written to TJ in six years. TJ had re-initiated the correspondence. I decided then to see how Carrington responded.

That was easy to find with the tools on the LOC site. Jefferson wrote Jan 16, 1787; Carrington responded April 24, 1787, a reasonable lag given the time for a letter to sail across the ocean. So last night I began reading the April 24 letter, and enjoyed it until I came to this sentence.

Rhode Island is at all points so anti-federal, and contemptible, that her neglecting the invitation, will probably occasion no demur whatever in the proceedings. 

I kept reading, however, as a good researcher should do. I next went to Carrington’s June 9, 1787 letter to TJ, written before Jefferson had responded. It this letter I found the following.

All the States have elected representatives except Rhode Island, whose apostasy from every moral, as well as political, obligation, has placed her perfectly without the views of her confederates; nor will her absence, or nonconcurrence, occasion the least impediment in any stage of the intended business.

And I though, them’s fightin’ word mister! How dare you bash my home state like that. I suppose, however, he’s correct. He’s talking about choosing and sending delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. This followed the failed Annapolis convention in 1786. Rhode Island didn’t attend that one, though they did appoint delegates who simply didn’t arrive on time.

Now, however, as the Constitutional Convention drew near, Little Rhody was the only State to boycott it. They liked the ineffective Articles of Confederation just fine, thank, and didn’t want them changed. They liked doing things their way, even if they wound up being a tiny, independent nation.

I think it was the word “contemptible” that rankled me. Yes, Rhode Island is a different kind of state. The top of our statehouse has a statue titled the Independent Man.  We have our quirks and love having our quirks.

Then the word “apostasy” also rankled. Carrington didn’t mean this in the religious sense, but rather in terms of politics, that we had fallen away from the sense of cooperation that pervaded during the Revolutionary War. We had ceased looking at ourselves as part of a larger union. Still, the word hurt.

It also hurt that he said it didn’t matter if Rhode Island showed up or not. He said that twice, once in each letter. Was that because of our size and relatively small population? Most likely.

I’ve been away from Rhode Island now for 45 years. I still visit from time to time, and keep in touch with relatives and friends there. I may live in Arkansas, but I still feel like a Rhode Islander.

And I love this research I’m doing for the book. I need to be careful, however. I could research for days and days, enjoying it so much that I’d never get the book written. I need to cut it off and just stick with the writing.

And I will, just as soon as I absorb these Carrington letters.

Religious Freedom Revisited

As I’m working on Documenting America: Making the Constitution Edition, I find that certain topics come back into current American life that have been discussed and, supposedly, settled before. Religious freedom seems to be one of them.

My research suggests that the Founding Fathers did indeed want to keep some degree of separation between religion and government. Their primary focus was preventing the government from regulating religion or restricting who/how/why people could worship.

The latest infringement on the free exercise of religion is US senators asking candidates nominated to various government positions about their religion and how it would affect their performance in office. I first noticed this almost 20 years ago when Chuck Shumer, then a relatively new senator from New York, asked Attorney General nominee John Ashcroft how he could turn off his evangelical Christianity so he could do a proper job as A.G.

I was shocked then and am shocked now when people like Senator Feinstein says to a candidate, “The dogma is strong in this one.” The U.S. Constitution says:

but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

When Shumer asks “How do you turn it off” and Feinstein says “the dogma is strong in this one,” what is that if not a religious test. Shumer is saying you can’t be Attorney General if you’re a practicing evangelical. Feinstein is saying you can’t be a Federal judge if you are a devout Catholic. Shame on these senators!

This was all settled in the Constitution. Thomas Jefferson led the way in his writing the Virginia Declaration of Rights, which was later put into law in that state. Religious freedom came in this form.

Be it enacted by the General Assembly, That no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.

Note that religion should not affect their “civil capacities.” In other words, the law shouldn’t punish someone because of their religion. By the time the Constitution was written, this was applied to Federal officials through the religious test clause.

So here we are, 232 years later, fighting the same battles we did years ago. What will it take for this to end, for us to win the battle again that a person’s religion cannot disqualify them from holding a Federal office? Maybe it will take one nominee to refuse to answer a question about their religion, to tell the senator who asks, politely, where to shove the question, to show that the Constitution means something.

I’m hopeful that will happen next time the situation comes up.

Still Getting Things Done (in Retirement)

When I was a full-time, working engineer, not all that long ago, I used to occasionally post about getting things done. This would be at times of particular busyness, or perhaps when I was able to complete a major writing task in the face of a normal heavy schedule at work.

Now retired, for not quite two months, I find I’m not getting to all my tasks as well as I’d like to. Last Friday, I felt so overwhelmed by needed to do things, I made a to-do list. First on that was “Fix toilet”. The flush valve in the master bathroom had quit working a day or two before. It wouldn’t shut off when the tank filled. I went out on Thursday to get the new works to put in, but didn’t get it in.

Last Friday I was asked to attend a meeting in my consultant roll for my former company, which meant I didn’t get right on that job. I finally did Friday afternoon, but, as inept as I am with plumbing work, I couldn’t get everything right. So we still couldn’t use that bathroom.

I’ll cut this short, because nobody likes to hear stories about toilets. On Saturday I re-did it and managed to get the works properly installed. However, I loosened something on the supply line, and we still had a small leak. It was then the Presidents Day weekend, so I wasn’t able to call our plumber till Tuesday. He came Wednesday and fixed it, a minor adjustment in the tightness of the supply line. No charge. One thing off the list.

Last Friday morning we woke up to frozen precipitation from the night. I started our old van to clear ice from the windshield, giving myself plenty of time to make my appointment. The street appeared to be mostly dry. I came out a few minutes later, hopped in the van, put it in reverse, and promptly rolled forward. I jammed on the breaks in time so that it didn’t hit the garage. Only then did I notice the van had stalled. It has such a quiet engine I didn’t notice that.

Now I had to start the new van, clear the ice from the windshield, and hurry to my meeting. I made it with a little to spare. It was coming home from that that I tackled the toilet job.

I won’t bore you with the rest of my to-do list from last weekend. Taking down the majority of the Christmas decorations that we’d never done was one thing accomplished and checked-off. Many smaller tasks remained. Most of those were checked off as well.

As for writing tasks, I did such things as:

  • read submissions for the new critique group
  • begin beta-reading a friend’s book
  • print a copy of Adam Of Jerusalem and deliver it to my third beta-reader
  • finish the Table of Contents for my next book, Documenting America: Making The Constitution Edition.

That brought me through the holiday (which didn’t feel like a holiday for me except that the stock market was closed). I think it was on Tuesday that I was in The Dungeon. I made some trades when the market opened, read and critiqued another submission for critique group, and sat back. My to-do list had been completed—almost. All I didn’t do was contact the potential cover artist for AoJ. What should I do next?

Almost out of the blue it occurred to me that I could begin my real work on DA:MCE, which is: reading the source documents, editing them down to reasonable length, writing an intro, writing historical context, and writing the current events tie-in. So I indeed did that. As of yesterday, I had completed three chapters, about a tenth of the book.

I can’t tell you how good that felt. I should be able to complete two chapters ever three days, meaning that the first draft of the book could be ready around mid-April, and I could be publishing it in mid-May. Now that’s getting things done.

But, I must report on one more important item. I don’t know if I’ve written before that I still haven’t had my Social Security and Medicare Part B approved and activated. I didn’t realize how long the government took to get this done. Two things that slowed it down was the fact that the IRS had an identity flag on my SS number due to the identity theft attempt from 2017; the other was, perhaps, the government shut down. Also, it seemed I had given them a wrong phone number to reach me at.

They finally contacted me while I was in Texas early this month. They assured me my application was moving and my benefits would be retroactive to January 1st, both Social Security and Medicare Part B. That was good, but I still couldn’t apply for supplemental insurance until all that was settled. While this was mostly out of my hands, it was still something that I felt like was on my to-do list, to get this done.

Yesterday I realized I still hadn’t heard from them that my benefits had started, so I shot the woman I’ve had contact with an e-mail, asking for a status update. Then, last night, I pulled up my on-line banking to make sure the checkbook was up to date. Lo and behold, there was a SS deposit for me, made on Wednesday, for one month’s SS payment. I still haven’t had any paperwork come in the mail, but there was money in my account.

That means that my Medicare part B is also established, which means that today I can call the supplemental insurance company I want to use and get that going. that is on my today list. As are a number of other items, but at least I’m feeling good about getting things done.

Oh, yes, about the van. I finally made arrangements yesterday afternoon  for it to be towed to the nearby Dodge dealership. This morning they called me. The did a normal servicing, but otherwise could find nothing wrong with it. What in the world? I guess I’ll go down and get it, and maybe it really is okay. But at least it’s checked off my to-do list.

Now, what needs to be added?

On to the Next Book

My most recently completed novel, Adam Of Jerusalem, is in the hands of two beta readers. Sunday I will put a print copy in the hands of a third. I received a little feedback from one and a little more feedback from the other. That process is working.

I contacted a cover designer while I was in Texas. She responded that maybe she can help me, though she is busy. I haven’t contacted her again; that’s on the schedule for today, though today looks to be very busy.

So, it’s on to the next book, which is the next in my non-fiction series. Documenting America: Making The Constitution Edition is next. In theory it’s the third book in the series, although since I did a homeschool edition of the first it is in reality the fourth. I can’t remember how much I’ve written about it before, so I think I’ll just plunge in and tell about it and where I am.

I then took the first book and expanded it into a homeschool edition.

The book covers the period from 1783 to 1789. The Revolutionary War is over. During the war, the Articles of Confederation worked as a form of government. Now in peace time, however, it turns out they don’t work. The central government was a little too weak, and the states a little too independent, for government to function. Wise men saw there was a real chance of the confederation breaking apart into thirteen nations, or perhaps into a few regional nations.

In 1787 a convention was held to revise the Articles of Confederation. The delegates saw that was hopeless, and went in a different direction. They devised a whole new system of central government and wrote a document that became the Constitution.

The Civil War edition was published in mid-2017.

From fall of 1787 to late 1788 the states considered this new government. One by one they ratified it. Only nine affirmative votes were needed. They got eleven, with North Carolina and Rhode Island being the only holdouts. Electors met in January-February 1789 and elected Washington to be president. He took the oath of office on April 30, 1789, and the new government was underway.

Here’s the status of the book: I’ve done most of my background reading and have identified the documents I want to use and how to organize them into chapters. I have 30 chapters identified, though some of them are tentative. I have four chapters where I have the source documents identified (The Federalist Papers) but I haven’t read the documents. I plan on starting on that tonight.

Yesterday I took a big step. I created my folder on OneDrive, created the book file, and began to seek out digital copies of my source documents. I found most from the first half of the book—all but one. I copied the full documents and added them to my book file. The fourteen source documents are there, 55 pages and 29496 words. Today (if I have time; if not tomorrow or Sunday) I’ll work on the next fifteen chapters and do the same, all except the four chapters I still have some reading to do on. I hope to have all this done by about Wednesday of next week, including the four lagging chapters.

Then comes the editing/excerpting of the source documents. I have that partly done for about eighteen chapters in my copy of the Annals Of America, where I’ve marked paragraphs to use. That’s far from complete, and some of it was done over a year ago and is thus vague in my memory, but it’s at least started.

I won’t excerpt the documents all at once. I’ll start with Chapter 1, which is a document by Alexander Hamilton about the unfair treatment of loyalists It is 5,221 words. I’ll except this down to around 1,000 (plus of minus 250, at least that’s my target; some documents demand more words be kept), then write my part of the chapter. That process is likely to take two to four days per chapter.

That may be a bit optimistic. Documents from this era are in archaic English, and reading/editing can be a chore. In the book they are all in different formats and will have to be reworked. Four days per chapter to re-read, except, write historical commentary, and tie to a current issue may take longer on average. I don’t really know for sure.

So that’s the plan. Now in retirement, possibly it will all go faster. On days when the stock market is open, and I’m making or watching trades, I plan on doing this work simultaneously. Maybe it will go faster than I think. I’m not ready to look ahead and project a publishing date. Perhaps in two weeks I’ll be ready to take a stab at that.

Oh, one thing I haven’t done yet is create my book journal. That’s another task I hope to get done today.

Back in the Saddle

Last night, around 8:30 p.m., Lynda and I pulled into our driveway, 1318 miles and 11 days after having pulled out. We drove to Big Spring Texas where we spent time with our daughter Sara and her family. We watched the kiddos Friday-Sunday the first weekend and Friday-Saturday the second weekend.

The three older ones are in school, so, with just the 2 yr 4 mo old there in the daytime, and with our daughter there on weekdays, it was sort of vacation for us. Yes, we helped out during those days and times, but I found time to work on stock trading and make a number of trades.

I also found time to make two blog posts, without revealing my whereabouts, and to do significant research on Documenting America: Making the Constitution Edition. I read a lot, and extended my outline to the point where I had 23 of 30 chapters identified. This morning I completed my outline. I still have reading to do, but at least I know my destination now.

I accomplished a number of other, perhaps more important things while in Texas. I took my oldest grandson to his Cross-over Ceremony, where he graduated from Webelo to Boy Scout. That was excellent to see. I also helped him build an A.T.A.T. out of cardboard around his top bunk. We didn’t quite finish, but we got close. And, we had a number of talks—nothing terribly profound or earth-shattering, but simple conversations.

With my next-oldest grandson, we had several times of Bible reading together. He’s seven, and decided he wanted to read the Bible through. He’s currently on Deuteronomy. We read about ten chapters in it, maybe a few more. I also teased him with his portions at meals, something he came to expect and I think enjoy.

With the two youngest, there was playing with blocks and roughhousing and playing runaway blanket.

I didn’t have much time to help with projects around the house, such as hanging pictures or getting a few things put where they should go. I’ll have another trip to do that. I fixed several meals for everyone, and was the founder of a couple of times eating out.

All in all, I declare this to have been a successful trip. Now I’m ready to tackle at-home tasks, the list of which is not being shortened in retirement.

The Cheapest Form of Government

And, perhaps, a fourth to this one? Yes: Making The Constitution Edition, hopefully in 2019.

As I continue my research for the next volume in my Documenting America series, tentatively titled Making The Constitution Edition, I’m finding tons of material, much more than I will ever be able to read, let alone use. I found one such piece this week, from the 1788 pen of Oliver Ellsworth

Those who wish to enjoy the blessings of society must be willing to suffer some restraint on personal liberty, and devote some part of their property to the public that the remainder may be secured and protected. The cheapest form of government is not always best, for parsimony, though it spends little, generally gains nothing. Neither is that the best government which imposes the least restraint on its subjects; for the benefit of having others restrained may be greater than the disadvantage of being restrained ourselves. That is the best form of government which returns the greatest number of advantages in proportion to the disadvantages with which it is attended.

Constitutional convention delegate, US senator, chief justice of the Supreme Court

I must confess to knowing next to nothing about Oliver Ellsworth, except that which I can glean from reading this piece and a brief introductory paragraph in the book I’m reading from. He was from Connecticut, and said to be a constant champion of the Constitution then being debated in the thirteen states. After reading this piece, I assure you I’ll do some study on him.

In March 1788, six states had ratified the Constitution; others were debating. Nine states were needed for it to become the new government of the land. New Hampshire was one of the states still debating, Ellsworth wrote an open letter to the citizens of NH, using an economic argument in favor of the Constitution: it would be advantageous economically for New Hampshire.

Laying that argument aside, I find his opening paragraph (quoted above) to be inspiring, and dead on, though something I don’t know that I’ve thought of. To have a government that protects your rights and  property, you have to give up some of your rights and property that the remainder of each would be defended. I’ve found the same argument in John Locke’s Treatise On Government, which I’m also reading as background understanding of the pre-constitutional era. Man in a state of nature is freer than man in society.

And, perhaps, a fourth to this one? Yes: Making The Constitution Edition, hopefully in 2019.Locke I find difficult to understand. Ellsworth makes sense. Give up some rights enjoy the blessings of society. Devote some of your property to this endeavor. Thank you, Mr. Ellsworth, for saying this clearly. Clearly, you are no Libertarian.

But he goes on. For the government to do this, it needs that money (i.e. some of your property/income/wealth) to function. You can do this on the cheap or on the extravagant. Don’t do it on the cheap, he says. Cheap expenditures gain little. So cheap government will result in little benefit. As I say, makes sense.

What do we do today with Ellsworth’s words? The national debate rages on how much government we should have, how much individual liberty we should cede, and what this should cost us. Republicans lean one way, Democrats another. Both seem at times to be caricatures of their general position. Republicans will have us believe you restrict excessive benefits by reducing the money you collect. Less money results in less spending results in less benefits.

Democrats go the other way, believing more and more restrictions on individual liberty are needed to provide benefits. The restrictions are most often in the form of collecting more revenue (i.e. taxes).

Except neither party wants to collect enough taxes to pay for the benefits, so each keeps borrowing, passing the bill for today’s benefits on to their children and grandchildren.

I think Ellsworth would say to them Enough! You Republicans, stop being so parsimonious that you squeak. You Democrats, stop being so profligate that you steal. Everybody sit down, take a good hard look at each and every government program/benefit. Decide if it’s really needed. If so, how much money is needed to pay for it? Where will you get that money without resorting to stealing it from your grandchildren?

Then do that to the next and the next. At some point you find you can’t fund everything the U.S. government is now doing without taking so much money that it results in stealing someone’s property. At that point, go back and start cutting things until you come to a point of balance.

Kind of what a typical family does at the grocery store. You pick up the premium bacon, realize you can’t buy it and milk, so put it back and take the store brand, or maybe even do without bacon this week.

I think we have a lot to learn from Oliver Ellsworth. Once I get this book put to bed, I’ll do a lot more study of him. Meanwhile, maybe this post will convince a few people (i.e. politicians) to be more fiscally responsible.

I can dream big, can’t I?

Hoping for Some Intense Work Time

I mentioned some time ago, in a couple of different posts, that we—that is, my wife and I—had some major life decisions to make, and that those being left unfinished was weighing down on me. Slowly but surely those life decisions are being made; we are moving beyond them.

So, what that means is I’m about at the point where I can begin to concentrate on writing again.

Last night I was able to spend about an hour on the next volume of Documenting America. I’ll need about two weeks of that kind of research to be able to program the book, knowing how many chapters and what will go in most of the chapters. I won’t write anything on it until I finish my current book.

Which is Adam of Jerusalem, prequel to Doctor Luke’s Assistant, and the first in my church history novel series. It’s been at least a month since I added anything to it. I’d love to get in a pace of at least 7,000 words a week.

All of these life decisions are not yet made. I’m going to be calling on one of them as soon as I post this. But enough has been decided that I now feel good about things.

Researching on Two Tracks

At the moment, I’m not doing any writing, though I might write some over the weekend. While waiting for the proof copy of The Gutter Chronicles, Volume 2 to arrive, and while I do a small amount of marketing on that, I’m researching. And, I’m researching two different things.

My novel-in-progress, Adam of Jerusalem, will be the first in my church history novel series. I already have #2 and #4 written; about time I went backwards and wrote the prequel. It will be about a man named Adam, who is from Jerusalem, who wants badly to be a scribe in Israel. He came to that career choice somewhat late, and is ten years older than his fellow scribes-in-training. He receives an assignment to gather the teachings of the recently crucified Jesus, with the intent of using them to discredit His followers. He does this with diligence.

What Adam is preparing will become what has become known as the source document for the gospels of Matthew and Luke, the so called quelle, or “Q”. Scholars since the 1820s have theorized that there was some kind of written document that both Matthew and Luke relied on, in addition to the earlier gospel of Mark, to write their gospels. The trouble is, no copy of Q has ever been found. That, and for various technical/textural reasons, a large fraction of biblical scholars believe Q never existed. My reading has convinced me that more scholars think it did exist than think it didn’t exist.

I read a lot about this over a year ago, as I was beginning to program the novel. But, that was somewhat long ago. I felt that I needed to re-read some of that, and look at a few other scholarly thoughts about Q. That’s one thing I’m doing now, in preparation of getting back to my writing.

The other thing I’m doing is reading source documents for my next non-fiction book, Documenting America – Making the Constitution Edition. In past years I’ve read some of the Federalist Papers, those wonderful articles by Jay, Hamilton, and Madison defending the then-as-yet not adopted Constitution. I’m sure I’ll be making good use of them in my book, but I wanted to expand from there.

My intent for the book is to cover the period from the adoption of the Articles of Confederation in 1778 (or was it 1781? Gotta lock that down) to 1789 when the Constitution was ratified and became the law of the land. In the appropriate volume of The Annals of America I have found some excellent excerpts of related documents, and lists of additional sources I can track down and use, many of them out of copyright and thus easier for me to find and use.

My problem with research, especially the type I’m doing on DA-MCE, is that it can become a nightmare of over-researching, of trying to find that one more document when I already have four of five, of just reading on for enjoyment instead of stopping when I find what I need.

Yes, research is enjoyable to me. It’s like unfettered learning; improving my mind because I want to, not because I have to.

Tonight, my main task is to document what reading I’ve done in the Annals and begin to plan chapters of the book. I’ve already read six to ten documents, and made decisions on what to use or not; time to get that documented. Then, tomorrow night, I get back to reading.

Unless, of course, I get another case of Sideline Syndrome, and just have to get back to writing again.

My Current Writing Activities

So, with my suspected hacking dealt with (see my addition to my last post), I can get back to other things, such as telling you all about my writing.

I created and made the cover for this one; so, if it doesn’t work, I’ll gladly take the blame.

I published The Gutter Chronicles, Volume 2. It went live on Amazon last Monday, live on Smashwords last Tuesday, live on Barnes & Nobel (via Smashwords) on Wednesday, and will soon be available in print. I submitted it to CreateSpace yesterday. This morning I got the e-mail saying my cover needed to be tweaked. I was able to do that today, and I believe it will be approved. Next, I’ll review it on-line for formatting, while at the same time ordering a proof copy. I don’t want to publish it without going through a physical proof copy. This isn’t a real book release post. I’ll do that when I get the print copy out there.

So far it’s sold: 1 copy, from a faithful reader who liked the first volume. Next, I’m going to send an e-mail to our CEI people in Arkansas, finding out how many people want a print copy. I’ll send out a couple of FB posts with the same message. With those, I’ll also see if anyone wants a copy of Volume 1 at the same time. I’m hoping to get 50 to 60 sales that way, although that’s probably optimistic.

Besides that, I have two main works-in-progress: Adam of Jerusalem, a prequel in my Church History Novels series; and Documenting America: Making the Constitution Edition. Both are begun.

With AoJ, I started writing it. This was back at least three months ago. I completed three chapters, and set it aside to simmer a while. The simmering time is up, and I anticipate getting back into the writing before long, certainly within a week.

With DA–MCE, I’ve been reading for research for the last two weeks, or a little longer. I’m reading in The Annals of America, getting an idea of what source documents are available, and refreshing and expanding my knowledge of the events of those times, 1783 to 1789. I’m learning quite a lot, and enjoying it.

From here on, I’ll work on the two simultaneously. When I feel like writing, it will be AoJ. When I feel like researching and reading, it will be DA–MCE. I think, in a month or two, one of them will prove to be the more enjoyable and will start to get more of my time. Although, my plan is to finish and publish AoJ first.

I have a couple of other things I’m doing as well. I’ve been brainstorming my Bible study Sacred Moments, and may try to expand that for publishing—not right away, but the brainstorming will continue. Then, I’ve been reading for research in one of my Thomas Carlyle projects, the Chronological Composition Bibliography. I have no plans for this except to read a little here and there, just to keep my mind sharp and not lose sight of the project, which I estimate is 60-70 percent complete.

So, there you have it. Hopefully in a week I’ll be able to report the print version of Norman Gutter’s activities is available. In a month or two I’ll let you know how other projects are going.