British Identity

April 9

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , ,

What was advertised in a revolutionary American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Pennsylvania Evening Post (April 9, 1776).

“Making application to BENJAMIN CROFTS, recruiting Serjeant in Capt. LLOYD’s company.”

A recruiting notice ran in the April 9, 1776, edition of the Pennsylvania Evening Post.  It called on “ALL able-bodied freemen, willing to enter into the Provincial service, in the battalion of MUSQUETRY now raising for the immediate defence of this province.”  It was not the only news of that sort that appeared in that issue.  In the column to the left of that advertisement, a news update informed readers that “[a]t a meeting of the battalion of riflemen held yesterday at Carpenters-hall in this city, the following officers were chosen by ballot, viz. Timothy Matlack, Esq; Colonel – Daniel Clymer, Esq; Lieutenant-Colonel – Lawrence Herbert, First Major – George Miller, Second Major.”  Both news articles and advertisements relayed information about the companies forming as the war that started at Lexington and Concord nearly a year earlier continued and moved into a new phase following the British evacuation of Boston in the middle of March.

Those who enlisted in the “battalion of MUSQUETRY” would receive one month’s pay in advance, amounting to “Five Dollars per man.”  They would also “enter into present good quarters, with an allowance of Ten Shillings per week to each for subsistence.”  The notice instructed “able-bodied freemen” interested in enlisting to “mak[e] application to BENJAMIN CROFTS, recruiting Serjeant in Capt. LLOYD’s company, at said Croft’s quarters, the sign of the Britannia, in Front-street.”  That “the sign of the Britannia,” the personification of the British Empire, marked the location for recruits to enlist to defend the colony against British troops was an interesting juxtaposition.  When the war started, the colonies desired a redress of their grievance by Parliament.  In April 1776, they had not yet declared independence, though public opinion seemed to be moving in that direction rather than continuing to seek reforms within the imperial system.  In an extract of “a letter from a gentleman in Virginia to his friend” in Philadelphia immediately to the left of the recruiting notice, the correspondent stated, “I have read COMMON SENSE with much pleasure.  …  He has made many converts here.  Indeed every man of sense and candor, with whom I have had an opportunity of conversing, with whom I have had an opportunity of conversing, acknowledges the necessity of setting up for ourselves, having already tried in vain every reasonable mode of accommodation.”  Symbols of British identity, such as “the sign of the Britannia,” were part of everyday life in the colonies, but they did not hold the same power as they did throughout most of the eighteenth century.  For many colonizers, they lost their meaning.  For “able-bodied freemen, willing to enter into the Provincial service,” Britannia merely marked the location of the recruiting office.  The sign was no longer an expression of pride in being part of the British Empire.

May 22

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a revolutionary American newspaper 250 years ago today?

New-York Gazette and Weekly Mercury (May 22, 1775).

“Shop-keepers and traders, who are under disadvantages by reason of the non-importation.”

The Continental Association, a nonimportation agreement devised by the First Continental Congress in response to the Coercive Acts, created an opportunity for Jeremiah Andrews, a jeweler in New York, to market his services in the spring of 1775.  In the May 22 edition of the New-York Gazette and Weekly Mercury, he announced that he “CONTINU[ED] his business still in the same place” and “thinks it proper to acquaint shop-keepers and traders, who are under disadvantages by reason of the non-importation, that he is willing chearfully to bear his part.”  How would Andrews help them with that burden?  By supplying retailers with items that they could not import while the Continental Association remained in effect!

He explained that he could “make every article … pertaining to his branch,” jewelry, “as cheap as they could be imported from London, and materials as good.”  Andrews expected that he offered an attractive alternative.  After all, he used quality materials in crafting his jewelry and set prices comparable to those previously charged for imported items.  His appeals resonated with various articles of the Continental Association, including the eighth article that called for “promot[ing] Agriculture, Arts, and the Manufactures of this Country” and the ninth article that prohibited “tak[ing] Advantage of the Scarcity of Goods” by increasing prices for those “Goods or Merchandise” available for sale.

Andrews also informed both retailers and the public that “he hath a great variety of patterns of the newest fashions, which he received from London since his last advertisement.”  Assessing the situation, he realized that consumers still valued connections to the largest and most cosmopolitan city in the empire.  The Continental Association made importing textiles, accessories (including jewelry), housewares, and other goods from there off limits, but it did not proscribe replicating the styles currently in fashion.  Andrews presented retailers and consumers with a means of keeping up with the latest trends for jewelry without sacrificing support for the American cause.  After all, most colonizers still valued being part of the British Empire, despite the imperial crisis and the battles between regulars and colonial militia in Massachusetts in April and the ongoing siege of Boston.  They thought of themselves as British and hoped for a redress of grievances.  Andrews provided a means for minimizing the disruptions that consumers experienced, his way “chearfully to bear his part” while expanding his business.

September 11

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago this week?

Rivington’s New-York Gazetteer (September 8, 1774).

“Celebrate The Battle of Quebec, And the Memory of The late General Wolfe.”

Even as turmoil brewed in the wake of colonizers learning of the Coercive Acts and the Quebec Act in the spring and summer of 1774, most continued to embrace their British identity while condemning Parliament for its treatment of the colonies.  As the First Continental Congress commenced its meetings in Philadelphia at the beginning of September, a notice in the September 8 edition of Rivington’s New-York Gazetteer advised “Military Gentlemen” of an upcoming dinner to celebrate “The Battle of Quebec, And the Memory of The late General Wolfe.”  The event would take place at Hull’s Tavern on September 13, marking the fifteenth anniversary of the death of General James Wolfe on the Plains of Abraham outside the walled city of Quebec during the Seven Years War.  Although Wolfe perished, the battle resulted in a British victory that ended the siege of Quebec, one of the most decisive moments of the war in North America.

At the end of the war, the French withdrew from the continent.  The British Empire gained the territory France had claimed in Canada.  English colonizers in America joined in memorializing Wolfe and celebrating such an important victory, emphasizing their own contributions throughout the war.  In 1770, Benjamin West, an influential American painter who had migrated to England and settled in London in the 1760s, memorialized the battle and celebrated the British Empire in The Death of General Wolfe.  It became his most famous history painting, frequently reproduced.  In the colonies, Americans honored Wolfe in other ways.  In Boston, for instance, William Murray marked the location of the shop where he sold an “Assortment of English Goods” with the “Sign of General WOLFE.”  In New York, veterans of the war and others participated in commemorative dinners, no doubt making toasts in memory of Wolfe and in honor of the British Empire.

On the fifteenth anniversary of Wolfe’s death, most colonizers had not yet determined to separate from the British Empire.  Instead, they sought a redress of their grievances against Parliament, many hoping that the king would intervene on their behalf.  The conversations and the toasts at the dinner celebrating the battle likely included references to English liberties that colonizers believed they were entitled to enjoy as members of the British Empire.  In remembering the Battle of Quebec and memorializing Wolfe, they demonstrated their continued attachment to the British Empire.  As the First Continental Congress began its deliberations in September 1774, the rupture was not yet so significant that declaring independence was inevitable.

March 9

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Essex Gazette (March 9, 1773).

“Rendered conspicuous by an elegant Sign of KING GEORGE THE THIRD.”

In March 1773, Abraham Safford took to the pages of the Essex Gazette to inform the public that he recently opened a tavern in a “commodious House” in Salem.  He pledged that “Gentlemen and Ladies may be entertained in the best Manner, and on the most reasonable Terms.”  To aid patrons in making their way to his new establishment, Safford advised that it was “rendered conspicuous by an elegant Sign of KING GEORGE THE THIRD.”  In another advertisement in the Essex Gazette, Stephen Higginson gave his location as the “Shop opposite the King’s Arms Tavern, in SALEM.”  Both advertisements appeared in the same issue that reprinted a lengthy account of commemorations that took place in Boston on the third anniversary of the “horrid Massacre perpetrated by a Party of the 29th Regiment,” including an oration on the danger of standing armies in cities by Dr. Benjamin Church, the lighting of a lantern with panes painted to depict the Boston Massacre, and the tolling of bells.

How did Safford happen to choose the “Sign of KING GEORGE THE THIRD” to mark his location and represent his business?  Why did the proprietor of the King’s Arms Tavern continue to use that device?  Did deploying those images suggest loyalist sympathies?  Would colonizers who considered themselves patriots hesitate or even refuse to gather at those taverns?  Not necessarily.  As the imperial crisis unfolded, colonizers tended to critique Parliament and the soldiers that Parliament stationed in American cities while simultaneously embracing their British identity and the benefits of being part of such a powerful empire.  That identify included participating in a transatlantic consumer revolution and adopting fashions popular in London.  Many looked to the king to correct the excesses of Parliament, such as the Stamp Act and the Townshend Acts.  As late as July 1775, the Second Continental Congress sent the Olive Branch Petition to George III in hopes of avoiding war, though by that time John Adams and others considered it a futile gesture.  The king rejected the petition, demonstrating to colonizers that he had little interest in addressing their grievances.  In January 1776, Thomas Paine published Common Sense, a political pamphlet that advocated for independence.  His arguments included critiques “Of Monarchy and Hereditary Succession.”

Colonizers eventually identified George III as responsible for the problems within the empire, but they did not do so throughout the imperial crisis.  Instead, shifting blame from Parliament to the king was a process that occurred over a decade.  That Safford opened a tavern at the “Sign of KING GEORGE THE THIRD” in 1773 may have been a signal that he hoped the monarch would protect the liberties of the colonizers against the abuses perpetrated by Parliament, not necessarily an indication that the proprietor (or his patrons) supported loyalists over patriots.

January 15

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

Jan 15 - 1:15:1768 New-Hampshire Gazette
New-Hampshire Gazette (January 15, 1768).

“Mein and Fleeming’s REGISTER … With all the BRITISH LISTS.”

John Mein and John Fleeming marketed “Mein and Fleeming’s REGISTER FOR NEW ENGLALD [sic] AND NOVA SCOTIA, With all the BRITISH LISTS, AND AN Almanack for 1768” in several newspapers in New England in late 1767 and early 1768. Their advertisement in the January 15, 1768, edition of the New-Hampshire Gazette indicated that readers could purchase copies directly from Mein at his “London Book Store, in Kingstreet Boston” or from local vendors, either William Appleton, a bookseller, or Daniel Fowle and Robert Fowle, the printers of the colony’s only newspaper.

Their advertisement, which extended an entire column, also elaborated on the contents. Despite the length, the advertisement placed relatively little emphasis on many of the standard items included in almanacs, such as “Sun’s rising and setting” and other astronomical details. Instead, Mein and Fleeming devoted much more space to the various “BRITISH LISTS” in their Register, including “Marriages and Issues of the Royal Family,” “Summary of the house of Commons,” and “Officers of His Majesty’s houshold.” The Register also contained lists of colonial officials in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Rhode Island, and Nova Scotia.

Both the contents and the advertisement distinguished “Mein & Fleeming’s REGISTER” from all other almanacs for 1768 advertised anywhere in the colonies. Though useful, the astronomical calculations seemed secondary to content that positioned the American colonies within an expansive and powerful British empire. Mein and Fleeming, both Tories, began publishing the Boston Chronicle, near the end of December 1767. Although that publication only ran until 1770, it qualifies as a Loyalist newspaper based on the editorial position of the printers. Mein and Fleeming pursued a single purpose in simultaneously publishing the Boston Chronicle and their Register: deploying print culture to celebrate their identity as Britons at a time that the imperial crisis intensified as a result of an ongoing trade imbalance between colonies and mother country, the imposition of new duties when the Townshend Act went into effect in November 1767, and renewed nonimportation agreements that commenced at the beginning of 1768.

Even if readers of the New-Hampshire Gazette and other newspapers that carried Mein and Fleeming’s advertisements did not purchase or peruse the Register, the extensive notice reminded them that they shared a common culture with king, nobles, and commoners on the other side of the Atlantic. Lengthy lists of officials that served the empire and colonies on both sides of the Atlantic suggested good order and the benefits of being British, a system that many colonists did not wish to disrupt unnecessarily in the process of seeking redress of grievances from Parliamentary overreach. Mein and Fleeming may not have been able to make such arguments explicitly among the news items in newspapers published by others, but they could advance that perspective implicitly in the advertisements they paid to place in those publications.

March 8

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago this week?

mar-8-381767-part-1-south-carolina-and-american-general-gazette

mar-8-381767-part-2-south-carolina-and-american-general-gazette
South-Carolina and American General Gazette (March 6, 1767).

“A DISSERTATION ON THE RECIPROCAL ADVANTAGES OF A PERPETUAL UNION BETWEEN GREAT BRITAIN and her AMERICAN COLONIES.”

 

Robert Wells stocked a variety of items at “the great Stationary and Book Shop on the Bay” in Charleston. Among the wares he imported from England, he first listed “LARGE and elegant prints of Mr. PITT and LORD CAMDEN,” members of Parliament considered friendly to the American cause during the Stamp Act crisis. Wells concluded this advertisement by devoting significant space to a book printed in Philadelphia, a volume which included four “DISSERTATIONS” on the “RECIPROCAL ADVANTAGES OF A PERPETUAL UNION BETWEEN GREAT-BRITAIN and her AMERICAN COLONIES.” The first, authored by John Morgan, won “Mr. Sargent’s Prize Medal,” awarded at commencement exercises for the College of Philadelphia (now the University of Pennsylvania).

This advertisement provides valuable insight concerning how most colonists interpreted their relationship with Great Britain in the first months of 1767, still fairly early in the imperial crisis that eventually – over the course of more than a decade – led to the colonies declaring independence. One of the challenges of teaching about the American Revolution lies in helping students understand that it was not an instantaneous event but rather a long process that involved a transition from resistance to Parliamentary overreach while seeking redress of grievances to, eventually, revolutionary rhetoric and actions when Americans determined that they had exhausted all other options.

In early 1767 continued to underscore the “RECIPROCAL ADVANTAGES” of being part of the British Empire. In his “DISSERTATION,” Morgan ranked commerce and trade among some of the most significant advantages. By this time the Stamp Act had been passed and repealed, in large part due to the protests and petitions of the colonists but also thanks to advocacy by merchants and politicians, like Pitt and Camden, in England. The Americans had discovered means for having their grievances addressed, though they did not particularly care for the Declaratory Act that accompanied repeal of the Stamp Act. Still, the rupture in relations did not seem insurmountable. Indeed, most Americans believed it foolish not to attempt to make amends.

The “DISSERTATIONS” written and published in Philadelphia served to cement colonists’ understanding of their place and privileges within the British Empire, but they also reminded English observers of the benefits of amicable relations between parent country and colonies. This publication simultaneously shored up British identity among colonists while alerting those in England that it was not in anyone’s best interest to attempt to take advantage of the colonies, a warning that Parliament did not heed when it promulgated the Townshend Acts later in 1767.

Return once again to the prints of Pitt and Camden that led the list of goods Wells stocked. They set the tone for the rest of the advertisement, especially the “DISSERTATIONS” that appeared at the end. Colonists considered themselves Britons, so much so that Wells expected consumers would display images of English politicians – especially those who understood and advocated for the proper sort of relationship between Great Britain and the American colonies – in public and private spaces. Most Americans had not yet been radicalized in favor of independence in early 1767, at least not according to the merchandise Robert Wells expected to sell at his shop in Charleston.

January 20

Carl Robert Keyes Daily Advert Update , , , , , ,

What was advertised in a colonial American newspaper 250 years ago today?

jan-20-1201767-south-carolina-gazette-and-country-journal-supplement
Supplement to the South-Carolina and Country Journal (January 20, 1767).

“A great Variety of handsome Pictures … amongst which are several of their Majesties.”

George Parker advertised “a general Assortment of EUROPEAN and EAST-INDIA GOODS” recently imported on “Vessels from LONDON and BRISTOL.” His merchandise included “a great Variety of handsome Pictures … amongst which are their Majesties, both plain and in Colours.” Not only did Parker stock goods from the metropolitan center of the British Empire, he also promoted memorabilia that celebrated George III, the ruler and personification of Britain.

In preparation for the work they will be doing on the Adverts 250 Project, yesterday the students in my Revolutionary class read and discussed T.H. Breen’s landmark article, “Baubles of Britain,” and my own chapter, “A Revolution in Advertising.”[1] (Based on the quality of that conversation, I have high expectations for their contributions to this project.) In its consideration of both the consumer revolution of the eighteenth century and the political revolution that began in the 1760s, Breen’s article provided a foundation for consumer culture studies that will be one of the main themes throughout the semester. Drawing on Breen’s narrative, students articulated the close connections between England and the colonies created by consumption practices as well as the politicization of decisions about what to import and purchase (or not import and purchase).

Any time I teach a course that covers the American Revolution, whether an introductory survey or an upper-level seminar, I have a responsibility to emphasize change over time. Many students, like many Americans more generally, think of the events of the revolutionary era as happening simultaneously rather than as a process that unfolded over years. This advertisement helps me to demonstrate that point. Published after the Stamp Act controversy, boycotts of imported British goods, and the repeal of the despised legislation, this advertisement demonstrates an “ASSORTMENT of GOODS” from London found their way to the colonies once again, including “Pictures … of their Majesties” intended to be displayed in public and private spaces.

The goods offered for sale in this advertisement suggest that throughout the 1760s shopkeepers and their customers engaged in resistance to British policies, but they had not yet moved to outright revolution and determination to sever political ties with Britain. Transitioning from resistance to revolution was a long and complicated process. Elsewhere on the same page as Parker’s advertisement, Charles Crouch, the printer of the South-Carolina Gazette and Country Journal, advertised several items he sold, including “Dr. FRANKLIN’s Examination before an August Assembly, relating to the American Stamp-Act.” Advertisements that celebrated colonists’ British identity and others that critiqued Parliament’s overbearing regulation of the colonies appeared side by side.

Americans had not yet made the decision to declare independence – and would not do so for almost another decade. After making that transition, as I argued in my own chapter that my students read and discussed yesterday, American merchandisers offered new sorts of memorabilia that celebrated the new nation, its leaders and heroes of the Revolution, and important events in achieving independence. No longer did advertisements hawk “Pictures … of their Majesties” but instead promoted a variety of prints and medals depicting George Washington and other patriots. Advertisers encouraged a new sort of veneration intended to unite citizens throughout the nation, just as veneration of “their Majesties” via purchasing and displaying prints had been intended to strengthen British identity and unity throughout the British Atlantic world a few decades earlier.

**********

[1] T.H. Breen, “‘Baubles of Britain’: The American and Consumer Revolutions of the Eighteenth Century,” Past and Present 119 (May 1988): 73-104.

Carl Robert Keyes, “A Revolution in Advertising: ‘Buy American’ Campaigns in the Late Eighteenth Century,” in Danielle Coombs and Bob Batchelor, eds., Creating Advertising Culture: Beginnings to the 1930s, vol. 1, We Are What We Sell: How Advertising Shapes American Life … And Always Has (New York: Praeger, 2013), 1-25.