References That Could Aid Text History And Tradition

[Blacksmith101]

I happened upon a reference that could be helpful in the Text, History and Tradition standard that Heller established and Bruen affirmed while doing some genealogical research. I don't remember seeing this particular reference cited so I thought I would put it here where someone could find it. If it is widely known just delete the thread.

In August 1643 in the Plymouth Colony a list of all males aged 16 to 60 who were able to bear arms was compiled. This list is well documented. So prior to the militia act of 1792 which specified the minimum age to be 18 it was assumed, in at least one colony, the age to bear arms was 16.

Link to the list as published in a book published in 1855 (starts on page 167):

Records of the colony of New Plymouth, in New England : New Plymouth Colony : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Vols. 1-8, edited by N.B. Shurtleff; v. 9-12, by David Pulsifer

archive.org

Link to a modern PDF copy of the list that is easier to read (it contains the names of several of my ancestors):

https://pageofmystery.com/history/Plymouth/BearArms.pdf

Link to "History of Taunton, Massachusetts: From Its Settlement to the Present Time" By Samuel Hopkins Emery pub. 1893; page 328; has the list of their eligible residents:

History of Taunton, Massachusetts

books.google.com

Starting at the bottom of page 329 of the "History of Taunton Massachusetts" they also mention the bringing of arms by militia members to church on Sundays (this is April 8, 1682) and on page 330 it even specifies the minimum amount of ammunition they should carry.

 

[kshaw]

I noticed that the list of males eligible to carry arms had a cut-off of 60 years old. Hope the gun control zealots do not notice that.

 

[rambling_one]

Life expectancy was much lower. A 60 year old must have seemed ancient back then.

 

[Fedora]

I seem to recall something about Bruen limiting the historical dates appropriate for THT analysis to the period between the ratification of the 2nd (1791) and the 14th (1868) Amendments.

If I've got that wrong, somebody will be along shortly to issue a correction. <Smile>

 

[Allen65]

I seem to recall something about Bruen limiting the historical dates appropriate for THT analysis to the period between the ratification of the 2nd (1791) and the 14th (1868) Amendments.

If I've got that wrong, somebody will be along shortly to issue a correction. <Smile>

It's narrower than that. IIRC several Justices have mentioned in speeches and papers that the founding era ended with the death of the last Founding Father, James Madison, in 1836.

 

[MJD438]

Limited to two periods identified, not the entire context of time between the two ratification events.

 

[lazarus]

It's narrower than that. IIRC several Justices have mentioned in speeches and papers that the founding era ended with the death of the last Founding Father, James Madison, in 1836.

Nope. Just the founding era is more relevant. Bruen specifically does mention when the 14th was ratified can count.

Basically for any THT you’d need to look at everything from the time an amendment was adopted going back to the founding. So early amendments you have to go back really far. The 17th for example you’d be looking at stuff at about 1913 and earlier (direct voting for US senators). The text has the greatest weight. History and tradition are secondary and history and tradition can only matter up to that point.