Tuesday, September 16, 2014

Chocolate and British Politcal History



While The True History of Chocolate as Joseph sees it is how "chocolate spread across the land," the Coes' description of how this took place reveals a number of interesting facets of Europe's political history especially that of Great Britain.   

The distribution of chocolate in England was decidedly different than that of France.  In 1759, Coe writes, "Louis XIV granted a country-wide royal monopoly for 
chocolate . . . pointing up a profound difference between the two nations: England was a land of shopkeepers and enterprising private businessmen, while France was a highly centralized, authoritarian kingdom with vast, tightly regulated state monopolies.  In France, chocolate was strictly for the aristocracy, while in England it was available to all those who had the money to pay for it, and it was on offer to all who patronized coffee-shops.  Chocolate was becoming democratized." (166)

With the mass distribution and availability of chocolate, the British-style coffee house and later "club" emerged which quickly became centers of political activity and discussion.  The coffee house became an important center for the country's political parties (Tories/royalists & Whigs).  Charles II realized the power of the coffee houses and issued a decree to suppress them (1675) which was largely ignored. 
A similar situation occurred in the United States in the late 19th century with the Anti-Saloon league.  While ostensibly its goal was to combat the evils of alcohol ("Demon Rum"), its main purpose was to undercut the power of the Democratic Party whose followers and members like the Whigs conducted considerable political activity in saloons and bars.    

Coe's description of the British economic system in the above passage does contrast with last week's reading of Mintz who spoke about the same time period as the high water mark of British Mercantilism.  Whether British chocolate importation faced similar regulations as sugar might be of research interest.    

Be that as it may, Coe's discussion is valuable for it sheds further light on a feature of British political history. 

No comments:

Post a Comment