• introduce you to the context in which the Great Exhibition was established and developed; • explore the ways in which the Great Exhibition made use of, and how it brought together, art and science; • give you a sense of how debates about the Great Exhibition relate to broader historiographical discussions about the nature of Victorian Britain’s place in the world, its relationship with its Colonies, and with Europe and the Americas; • reconstruct the Crystal Palace and the Great Exhibition through the use of contemporary images and descriptions, developing your skills in working with a range of visual and written source material
Knowledge and Understanding
Having successfully completed this module, you will be able to demonstrate knowledge and understanding of:
- the chronology of, and personalities involved with, the Great Exhibition, alongside current historiographical debates surrounding its interpretation;
- the wider context of industrial change, including global technological advancement, new manufacturing techniques and new approaches to art and design;
- key primary sources and literature, charting the development of the Exhibition, contemporary experiences of it, and reactions to it;
- key examples from the Exhibition itself which you can use to explore a range of phenomena, including the creation of new taxonomies and the Victorian love of commodification
Having successfully completed this module you will be able to:
- participate fully and constructively in group discussion, arguing your case by drawing on your reading, knowledge and understanding
- analyse critically a variety of textual, visual and material culture sources
- structure your ideas and research findings into well-ordered presentations and essays
- understand and contextualise primary source material and express this in the ‘gobbet' examination
- engage with secondary literature on the Great Exhibition, and contribute to the debates relating to the historiography of Victorian Britain and its relationship to the wider world
Transferable and Generic Skills
Having successfully completed this module you will be able to:
- utilise and develop your time-management skills
- develop and improve your presentation skills
- participate effectively in group discussion
- locate and use effective textual, visual and material culture sources in the library and on-line, synthesising this material in order to develop cogent arguments
- research historical questions and communicate your findings convincingly and concisely in written essays and reports
In this module we will explore the genesis of the Great Exhibition. We will consider: the climate in which it was established and the exhibitions across Europe which inspired its conception; the work of Prince Albert, husband of Queen Victoria, and The Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce; the foundation of the Royal Commission; and the technological and artistic advances which the Exhibition aimed to celebrate. We will engage in an analysis of the Exhibition building, nicknamed the Crystal Palace by Punch magazine, exploring its creation, humble beginnings and design innovation. We will experience travelling to the Exhibition, taking advantage of a new travel innovation, the Thomas Cook Tour, and utilising the burgeoning rail network. Finally, we will venture inside the exhibition itself, assessing how the objects on display – ranging from an eighty-blade penknife to a stuffed elephant – incorporated the twin values of science and art. Examining public reaction to the Exhibition through published accounts, newspaper articles, letters, diaries, drawings and prints, we will determine the role played by the Great Exhibition in shaping the world view of Victorian Britain. An indicative list of seminar topics would include • Exposition: the International Exhibition trend • Prince Albert and The Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce • Greenhouses and Water lilies: Building the Crystal Palace • Travelling to the Exhibition: Thomas Cook Tours and trains • Visiting the Exhibition: Opening Day, 1st May 1851 • Inside the Crystal Palace 1: Nation and Empire • Inside the Crystal Palace 2: Foreign Countries • Inside the Crystal Palace 3: Refreshments and souvenirs • Commodity Fetishism: establishing a world view of Victorian Britain?
Teaching and learning methods
Teaching methods include: • short presentations by students • group discussions including feedback from the tutor • detailed reading and analysis of the module texts Learning activities include: • preparatory reading, individual research and study prior to each class • preparing and delivering short presentations relating to specific aspects of the module • studying textual and visual primary sources • participation in group and class discussion In this module learning and teaching activities focus on helping you to explore and investigate the ideas and themes outlined above. Throughout the module you will also engage in directed and self-directed study, for example through pre-seminar reading and through library research. The presentations (by you and your fellow students) and your reading will provide you with a broad overview of the secondary literature, using the bibliography provided at the start of the module. The discussion generated by these presentations will provide you with the opportunity to explore the relevant major historical debates on a weekly basis. In addition, you will study in depth a range of primary written and visual sources, as well as surviving material culture. These sessions will allow you to prepare for the essay and examination exercises. Feedback on your progress and development will be given via seminars and group discussions. Responses from tutor and your fellow students to your presentation will also give you formative feedback.
|Completion of assessment task||90|
|Wider reading or practice||77|
|Preparation for scheduled sessions||90|
|Total study time||300|
Resources & Reading list
Young, Paul (2009). Globalization and the Great Exhibition: The Victorian New World Order.
Hoffenberg, Peter H. (2001). An Empire on Display: English, Indian and Australian Exhibitions from the Crystal Palace to the Great War.
Babbage, Charles (1851). The exposition of 1851: or, views of the industry, the science, and the government, of England.
Wesemael, Pieter van (2001). Architecture of instruction and delight: a socio-historical analysis of World Exhibitions as a didactic phenomenon (1798-1851-1970).
Purbrick, Louise (2001). The Great Exhibition of 1851: new interdisciplinary essays.
Leapman, Michael (2001). The World for a Shilling: How the Great Exhibition of 1851 Shaped a Nation.
Gold, John R. and Margaret M. (2005). Cities of culture: Staging international festivals and the urban agenda, 1851-2000.
Gibbs-Smith, C. H. (1951). The Great Exhibition of 1851.
Greenhalgh, Paul. (1990). Ephemeral Vistas: History of the Expositions Universelles, Great Exhibitions and the World’s Fairs.
Auerbach, Jeffrey A and Peter H Hoffenberg (eds) (2008). Britain, the Empire, and the World at the Great Exhibition of 1851.
|Essay (4000 words)||50%|
Repeat type: Internal & External
On 15 April 1848, the following paragraphs appeared in Punch under the title “To the R.A.’s [Royal Academicians] in General and Artists in Particular.” They gave recommendations for the subject matter of paintings destined for the annual exhibition at the Royal Academy:
We beg, as a special favor, that there will be no pictures of the French Revolution in the next exhibition. We are already saturated with takings of the Tullieries [sic], and the avalanche of furniture from the windows of the Palais Royal, and gentlemen with fancy whiskers and classic blouses doing duty as Garde Mobiles. . . Artists . . . should prohibit their brushes from mixing in scenes of fire, and smoke, and bloodshed. . . . There is Gil Blas, and the Vicar of Wakefield, and many other subjects which have not yet been sufficiently explored. All politics should be thrown into the shade, … that is to say, they should not be seen at the Royal Academy at all. (161)
Apparently light-hearted, it is worth weighing these words carefully as in several important ways they shed light on the historical and methodological problem of exploring 1848 in relation to British art. They were published five days after the Chartist rally on Kennington Common, which had intended to deliver a petition to Parliament calling for the recognition of the six points of the People’s Charter. The Charter demanded an extension of franchise to all men and electoral and Parliamentary reform, because Chartists believed that once the working man was properly represented government would be responsive to their plight. As the Chartist leader James Bonterre O’Brien put it, “Knaves will tell you that it is because you have no property, you are unrepresented. I tell you on the contrary, it is because you are unrepresented that you have no property. . . your poverty is the result not the cause of your being unrepresented” (qtd. in Jones 109).
In the aftermath of revolutions across Europe, in spring 1848 there was real fear among policy makers and real hope for some Chartists that the mass demonstration planned for 10 April would spark a revolution in Britain. For safety, the Royal Family moved to the Isle of White, the Bank of England and other key locations were fortified with sandbags, and troops were surreptitiously deployed in the capital. Although estimates vary, somewhere in the region of 25,000 people attended the Kennington Common meeting, while 85,000 were sworn in as special constables to assist the police with maintaining order and protecting property. Ultimately, the government dealt easily with the would-be revolt: the police broke up the marchers by keeping them contained on the south side of the Thames, away from key landmarks and the center of government. Order was preserved and three years later Queen Victoria and Prince Albert were perhaps the first British monarchs to walk freely among their subjects at the opening of the Great Exhibition of the Work of Industry of All Nations on May Day 1851.
The scholarship on British visual culture in the mid-nineteenth century has to date focused on the impact of the Great Exhibition far more than the impact of revolutions abroad or the threat of revolution at home in 1848. A key reason for this is implied by the quotation from Punch. Although the author could hardly claim credit for it, no works at the Royal Academy depicted the momentous events of 1848. The lack of art dealing with the politics and events of this year has for a long time rendered British painting incompatible with the major trajectories of modern art and modernism as defined most notably by T.J. Clark in The Absolute Bourgeois (1973) and Image of the People (1973). In this model of art history, art “worth looking at” aligns itself and is deeply concerned with radical politics to the extent that this engagement becomes a prerequisite for formal innovation and avant-gardism (4). The situation in Britain is therefore problematic: there is no revolution, so it follows no formal innovation in art; equally no formal innovation in art is a sign of retrograde politics.
British painting has been seen as more concerned with literary genre scenes and revivalism than radical politics, as the author in Punch attests when he directs artists to take subjects from Alain-René Lesage and Oliver Goldsmith. Yet, historians of British art have successfully countered the perception of conservatism in at least some work which falls under these categories, with groundbreaking research on the Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood and their circle, and more recently on Walter Crane and Edward Burne-Jones. Work by these artists has been shown to be formally complex as well as politically engaged. This is a stimulating vein of enquiry that can be pursued further through somewhat different means with a turn to visual culture.
Despite the lack of paintings at the Royal Academy depicting recent revolutions, as Punch pointed out, the illustrated press in Britain had produced “more barricades on paper than we shall be able to get over during the remainder of our lives” (161). Images of revolutionaries and Chartists were ubiquitous (including, somewhat ironically, in Punch). Indeed, if visual culture produced in Britain is surveyed across the boundaries of “high” and “low” art, far from being ignored, revolution was a dominant theme in 1848. For example, from the outbreak of unrest in France in February to the end of the year and beyond, the pages of the Illustrated London News were filled with images and text detailing revolution and counter-revolution across Europe and further afield. Based on the sketches of foreign “special” artists, who were often on the spot, the coverage was dramatic, even lurid, and in many cases designed deliberately to shock the viewer. Satires of revolutionaries, special constables, Chartists and exiled kings appeared on stage and in song, as well as in images. A broader definition of art through the turn to visual culture, encompassing prints, advertisements, and other popular and seemingly more ephemeral forms of visual production as a serious area of study, has therefore opened the way for a reexamination of 1848 and British culture.
Yet beyond the numerical abundance of images of revolt and revolution in Britain, all of potential interest to historians of visual culture, a focus on a different set of sources challenges scholars to break away from some of the methodological restrictions of current approaches to the artistic impact of revolutionary events. Replicating that approach, risks repeating arguments about formal innovation and political content. Rather than attempting to find some essence of the revolutionary, either in one work or the oeuvre of one particular artist or group of artists, an alternative way to approach British culture in 1848 is to reject this canonical focus, clearing the way for a consideration of the plurality of revolutionary effects located in and dispersed through popular and visual culture.
This approach also invites a reflection on the received chronologies of mid-Victorian Britain. The Great Exhibition has been read as propaganda aimed at the artisan and working classes, as argued by Francis D. Klingender and John Golby, for example. More generally, scholars have briefly touched on the exhibition’s role as a response to or a tool for overwriting the tensions of 1848. The two events have been placed within a more complex framework by John Saville, Jeffery Auerbach, Kylie Message and Ewan Johnston. However, a still richer understanding of this period can be envisaged. Although the fact that, almost exactly three years after the Kennington Common meeting, Queen Victoria walked among the crowds at the opening of the exhibition appears to be a remarkable reversal, it is a misrepresentation to single out these two events as representative or symptomatic of the mid-nineteenth century, or the changes occurring at this time. Clearly, the Great Exhibition cannot be explained as simply a reaction to the unrest which occurred both in London and across Europe in 1848, nor can it be argued that the revolutions of 1848 were forgotten by the spring of 1851 or negated by the widespread perception of the exhibition’s success. Many other issues lent continuity to this era: the woman question, slavery in the United States, the repeal movement and increasing violence in Ireland, sanitary reforms, the regulation of work hours, Catholicism and religious tolerance, India and the colonies, to name a few. But what, then, is the significance of the relative proximity in time of the moment that Britain came nearest a revolution in Queen Victoria’s reign and the moment when the country appeared to many to have taken its place as the world leader in industrial development and the global economy?
Rethinking chronology helps with this question. The chronologies of Chartism, revolution and the Great Exhibition are complex and overlapping. Auerbach traces the origins of the Great Exhibition back to the highly successful exhibition held by the Society of the Arts in 1847, which around 70,000 people visited. In January 1848, Henry Cole sent a prospectus to Prince Albert outlining the Society’s plans for a national exhibition. At this point, Cole also began to solicit government backing for the scheme. Then, at a meeting in Paris in the summer of 1849, Cole and Herbert Milton, with Matthew Digby Wyatt, decided to make the planned exhibition international in scope. Thus, the Great Exhibition has a history that stretches back through the revolutions of 1848. Equally, Chartism and the revolution of that year threw a long shadow, much longer than the twelve months of a single year. The Chartist movement did not end (or begin) in 1848, although it suffered a heavy set back with the perceived failure of the presentation of the petition and the subsequent arrest of many of the movement’s leaders in the months that followed. After 1848, the movement entered a new phase, focused on Feargus O’Connor’s Land Plan, and, from around 1851, converged with socialist ideas from the continent. Equally, revolutions in Europe continued to fill the columns of the periodical press over an extended period. For example, in December 1851 after the Great Exhibition had closed, Louis Napoleon dissolved the National Assembly and took the title of emperor, an act that brought the Second Republic to an end and began the period known as the Second Empire. Equally, it was in April 1849 that the title of emperor was given to King Frederick Wilhelm IV, an event which was followed by the disintegration of the German National Assembly. The historian W.L. Burn in The Age of Equipoise (1964) goes further, writing that “For two or three generations the English mind was vitally affected by the idea of revolution (whether as the ultimate hope or the ultimate terror), by the prevalence of the revolutionary mystique” (66).
Figure 1: Albert Smith, _The Natural History of the Idler Upon Town_, 1848. Courtesy of Yale University.
Jo Briggs is Assistant Curator of Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Art at the Walters Art Museum in Baltimore. She completed her PhD in the History of Art at Yale University in 2008 and is currently working on a book project for Manchester University Press on revolutionary and exhibitionary visualities in mid nineteenth-century Britain.
HOW TO CITE THIS BRANCH ENTRY (MLA format)
Briggs, Jo. “1848 and 1851: A Reconsideration of the Historical Narrative.” BRANCH: Britain, Representation and Nineteenth-Century History. Ed. Dino Franco Felluga. Extension of Romanticism and Victorianism on the Net. Web. [Here, add your last date of access to BRANCH].
Anon. “To the R.A.’s in General and Artists in Particular.” Punch 14 (15 April 1848): 161. Print.
Aldershot, Hants, and Burlington. Britain, the Empire, and the World at the Great Exhibition of 1851. Ed. Jeffrey A. Auerbach and Peter H. Hoffenberg. VT: Ashgate, 2008. Print.
Auerbach, Jeffrey A. Great Exhibition of 1851: A Nation on Display. New Haven: Yale UP, 1999. Print.
Barringer, Tim. Men at Work: Art and Labour in Victorian Britain. New Haven: Yale UP, 2005. Print.
Burn, W. L. The Age of Equipoise: A Study of the Mid-Victorian Generation. London: Unwin University Books, 1968. Print.
Clark, T.J. Image of the People: Gustave Courbet and the 1848 Revolution. Berkeley: U of California P, 1973. Print.
Clark, T.J. The Absolute Bourgeois: Artists and Politics in France, 1848-1851. Berkeley: U of California P, 1973. Print.
Gurney, Peter. “‘A Palace for the People’? The Crystal Palace and Consumer Culture in Victorian England.” Victorian Prism: Refractions of the Crystal Palace. Ed. James Buzard, Joseph W. Childers and Eileen Gillooly. Charlottesville: U of Virginia P, 2007. 138-150. Print.
Jones, Gareth Steadman. Languages of Class: Studies in English Working Class History, 1832-1982. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1985. Print.
Message, Kylie and Ewan Johnson. “The World within the City: The Great Exhibition, Race, Class and Social Reform.” Britain, the Empire, and the World at the Great Exhibition of 1851. Ed. Jeffrey A. Auerbach and Peter H. Hoffenberg. Burlington: Ashgate, 2008. 27-46. Print.
O’Neill, Morna. Walter Crane: The Arts and Crafts, Painting, and Politics, 1875-1890. New Haven: Yale UP, 2010. Print.
Prettejohn, Elizabeth. The Art of the Pre-Raphaelites. London: Tate Publishing, 2000. Print.
Purbrick, Louise. “Introduction.” The Great Exhibition of 1851: New Interdisciplinary Essays. Ed. Louise Purbrick. Manchester: Manchester UP, 2001. Print.
Rager, Andrea Wolk. “‘Smite this Sleeping World Awake’: Edward Burne-Jones and The Legend of the Briar Rose.” Victorian Studies 51.3 (2009): 438-450. Print
Saville, John. 1848: The British State and the Chartist Movement. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1990. Print.
Short, Audrey. “Workers under Glass in 1851.” Victorian Studies 10.2 (1966): 193-202. Print.
Taylor, Thomas and Albert Smith. Novelty Fair; Or, Hints for 1851. An Exceedingly Premature, and Thoroughly Apropos Revue. London: T.H. Lacy, 1850. Print.
 Two days after the Kennington Common demonstration, a journalist for the Times wrote, “It cannot be denied that the public mind, stunned and confounded by the events on the Continent, had become, as the ancients would have expressed it, meteoric, unsteady, open to strange impressions and diffident of its own most habitual beliefs” (qtd. in Saville 107).
 Saville writes that the “outstanding feature of 1848 was the mass response to the call for special constables to assist the professional forces of state security. This was the significance of 1848: the closing of ranks among all those with a property stake in the country, however small that stake was” (227).
 As Saville points out, the British government was well placed to suppress the Chartists having honed their skills on colonial subjects in Ireland (27-51).
 Louise Purbrick warns in relation to the literature on 1851 more broadly, “Histories which begin by using 1851 to summarize the mid-nineteenth century cannot help but continue to diminish the significance of 1848.” She elaborates, “Historical interest in the Exhibition has not. . . attempted to avoid a discussion of state power and class structure, but using 1851 rather than 1848 to address the issues of the mid-nineteenth century has reflected a significant shift in the disciplines of history about what count as a key historical event” (4-5).
 This is Clark’s off-the-cuff, but nevertheless significant comment from the preface of Image of the People about the art he writes about in The Absolute Bourgeois.
 See for example Prettejohn, Barringer, O’Neill, and Rager.
 See Short, Gurney, and Chapters 1 to 4 in The Great Exhibition of 1851, edited by Louise Pubrick.
 See Saville 202 and 205; Auerbach 128-158; and Kylie Message and Ewan Johnson.