-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Jim Choate wrote:

Then you should go back and read them some more. In fact, if you still have the originals they include in the header the URL where I got the data from. Take the 10 minutes and go over and take a look at them. All three were related to religous revivalism in one form or another. The 1st (which itself some consider to be the second occurance of a previous movement as indicated in the title) did not occur in the 1800's which was the original precis that somebody threw out

Bob Hettinga said it was in the 1800's. You said you thought it started in the 1500's, going no later than the early 1700's. Bob retorted that he thought you were confusing the Renaissance with the Great Awakening. I chimed in by quoting Norton's Anthology which stated that the period was in the early 18th century. Take 10 minutes to "check the archives."

I did some looking around as well and other then Norton, yourself, and whoever it was that made the original claim all references I can find to the Great Awakening refer to the 1700-1750 event(s) as the first one to occur in the America's. If I can find my Norton Anthology I'll take a look at it, though it is 15+ years old.

If you look back at my post, you will see that this is what I (and Norton) were claiming. The early eighteenth century = the early 1700's! Read my first post which included the quote from Norton's Anthology. In other words, we both agree that the Great Awakening ended by the middle of the eighteenth century (a.k.a., 1700's), not the middle of the nineteenth century (a.k.a., 1800's) as Bob was claiming.

...

...

Subject: 1st Great Awakening [...] X-within-URL: http://www.fourthturning.com/html/great_awakening.html

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

...

...

The Great Awakening (Second Turning, 1727-1746) began as a spiritual ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

"Second Turning" has to due with the cyclical theory that the authors of the web page you cited have written about. The fact is that they refer to that time period (early 1700's/18th c.) as the Great Awakening, not the Second Great Awakening. If you read the other pages at the site *more carefully* you will see that they were stuffing the Great Awakening into their theory under the category named the Second Turning (out of four, thus the site's name: fourthturning.com). Notice your Subject: line says 1st Great Awakening, but that you're using the parenthetically referenced Second Turning as a justification to contradict what I (and you) have been saying all along. What's going on here? How can we have any meaningful discussion on this list when we don't pay any attention to what we are writing or what others wrote? Nerthus -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNHTymeFWwZe05jcJAQGyswf+PhJIbFZlR7om8rWF6dogcsJf25bz9mHo OHj5k0j7RuEzx0s2j17Ico2ZckWOAdVhwg1fv9AWo4om1lUmysxpqTUHineJk3M2 A2Mw+Y9ogMps1V9nrrVsGmDswKulmBMA222XT8v6Si0X3r4D19qgSRqgH4rs8qs2 as51/AqxEeayx+Yphskys0HsU8ZjY/4w76dZP/TbakwWT+R5V4Yx3yQkcnsxh+iR Rk0D0q13SIk0xnc2+Ao3jkD0Og+t/QXFNLAjhXmlNHhvGvC8dcDHZuA7Lf3SAPcw Yp5qCyrTGBH1Gi0OEABHapg18Yo5WlwHx0nStKN3nl1z2vPJQdEbLQ== =GaMe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ^^^^ Dig that!