Abstract: Coffee-houses played a major role in Londoners lives. People would go to coffee-houses to discuss business, get and read the newspaper, and everyone was entitled to their own opinion. The first coffee-house opened in 1652 and competed against Ale houses. Soon there were so many coffee-houses that you could not count them. This paper will be touching on the public sphere, women in coffee-houses, the Spectator, and positions and benefits of the coffee-houses and coffee.
Keywords: public sphere; coffee-houses; London; Charles II; Pepys; Pasqua Rosee; Women
Introduction
In 1652, Pasqua Rosee brought coffee to London and opened up the very first coffee-house. Little did Rosee know, the coffee-houses would soon become a big deal in London. Coffee-houses were the center for the public sphere where the people of London created a public opinion. Eventually there was controversy for coffee-houses. Women started to complain, and in 1675, King Charles II wanted to suppress the coffee-houses.
Concept Definition & Literature Review
According to Habermas (1980)(Fig.1), the public sphere is defined as “a realm of our social life in which something approaching public opinion can be formed” (198). The individuals of London get together and form a public opinion. The author points out that it is a space “in which private individuals assemble to form a public body” (Habermas 198).
The definition of the public sphere presupposes also that the public sphere must be separated from the government. The author points out that “although state authority is so to speak the executor of the political public sphere, it is not a part of it” (Habermas 198). The government is allowed to speak about the public sphere; however, the government is not part of the public sphere.
Access is guaranteed to everyone, regardless of their social class, gender, race, age, and religious beliefs. Another precondition of the public sphere is that “access is guaranteed to all citizens” (Habermas 198). The public sphere allows everyone to take a part in the public sphere. According to Habermas (1980), the public sphere works when the people are fostering rational debates, the author claims that “public opinion can by definition only come into existence when a reasoning public can be presupposed” (198).
Habermas states that throughout the public sphere the people of London have to assemble and put aside their private interests. Habermas (1980) points out that “a sphere which mediates between society and the state, in which the public organizes itself as the bearer of public opinion” (198). The author is stating that in order for the public sphere to work, there has to be a bearer between private and public opinions of the people. Although the people are coming together and creating a public opinion, they must not bring in their own opinions.
A public sphere is also where public opinions can be created. Habermas (1980) claims that “with the guarantee of freedom of assembly and association and the freedom to express and publish their opinions – about matters of general interest” (198). The people are given the freedom to express their opinions. Transparent government is also willing to provide information about affairs of state. Habermas (1980) points out that “regulations demanding that certain proceedings be public, for example those providing for open court hearings, are also related to this function of public opinion” (198).
The people involved in the public sphere are able to gain information through the media. The author points out that “today newspapers and magazines, radio and television are the media of the public sphere” (Habermas 198). The public sphere also tolerates that the people can express their opinions. Another prerequisite is that “citizens behave as a public body when they confer in an unrestricted fashion” (Habermas 198). The people of London have the ability to freely express their opinion and the people are guaranteed freedom of opinion.
The main question being ask is, does the public sphere materialize through coffee-houses in London and to what extent did Habermas’ ideal fit with the coffee-house public sphere? The public sphere is materialized through coffee-houses and Habermas’ ideal fits with coffee-houses to an extent.
Women in the Coffee-Houses
Coffee-houses became an essential part of life for the people of London in the 1650s. Coffee-houses consisted of different types of people, mainly different types if men. According to Ellis (2004), “Among the most potent was that which excluded women, a rule so potent it did not even need saying” (66). Although women drank coffee in their private homes, there was no need to formally exclude the women from the coffee-houses because it was assumed that no woman wanted to be seen in a coffee-house. However, the coffee-houses were mainly attended by men and there is an unspoken rule that women were not allowed in coffee-houses.
Women were not entirely excluded from coffee-houses, many of them worked and owned establishments that served coffee. There are few references that list the presence of women in coffee-houses, however, these references only suggest that the women were prostitutes. In 1773, there were four prostitutes who worked at Denmark Coffee-House listed in The Covent Garden Magazine (Ellis 67). Although some women were involved in the coffee-houses, they were only present in order to entertain the men. If a woman wanted to be seen as proper, she would not enter a coffee-house (Ellis 66).
In the eighteenth century the women made their own coffee-house in the town of Bath. Bath had many places where both women and men conversed. However, Bath’s coffee-houses were the only place in the town where women and men are segregated. The coffee-house was just for men, but the women had a social spot which was described by Ellis as “a female coffee-house” (68).
In the Maidens Complaint Against Coffee-Houses (1663)(Fig. 2), women and wives wrote complaints about the coffee-houses. Later, Ellis admits that these pamphlets were actually written by men who pretended to speak as women and maidens. In this pamphlet, the women express that they did not like what coffee-houses were doing to men. The anonymous author of this pamphlet claimed that “this drink called coffee, it is goof to dry the brain (Anonymous 6). Women also claimed that coffee makes a man unkind to his wife and coffee-houses are turning men into women because they just go to coffee-houses to gossip. In the complaint, the anonymous author claims that the drink prepared from coffee would not be so black “except it grew in Hell (6). Women think that coffee and coffee-houses are terrible and believes it comes from Hell.
Positions in Coffee-Houses and Benefits of Coffee
In May 1663, it was found that there were 82 coffee-house keepers in London although a decade before, coffee-houses did not exist. Coffee-houses were a business made up of three positions, the coffee-man, the coffee-women, and the coffee-boys. In order to build a brand around their coffee-houses, the people involved “coordinated a campaign to secure the cultural positioning of their coffee-houses” (Ellis 106).
The first position in coffee-houses is held by the coffee-men. They are usually the owners who run the day-to-day coffee-house operations. “Entering a coffee-house, a customer would have to be greeted by its master,” points out Ellis (106). The next position is the coffee-women. The main reason for the women’s presence in the coffee-house was to flirt and lure customers into coffee-houses because many of the men were attracted to them. However, many women were either owners of the coffee-house or they were the coffee-man’s partner. The third position in the coffee-house is known as the coffee-boys. The job of a Coffee-boy was to serve coffee and they were also “officially registered as apprentices, bound to their employees and their City guild” (Ellis 113).
Coffee is drunk in about a half pint and fasting is required while drinking coffee. Rosee states “fasting an hour before and not eating an hour after” (1). Coffee is also generally taken as hot as possible and will supposedly never burn the skin. The heat from the coffee helps with digestion. Rosee claims that the drink should “be taken about three or four of the clock in the afternoon, as well as in the morning” (1).
Another benefit of coffee is that it will brighten people’s sprits and coffee is also good for the eyes. Rosee stated “if you hold your head over it, and take in the steam that way” then the steam from the coffee will be good for the eyes (1). Coffee prevents dropsy, gout, and miscarriages. However, coffee also prevents drowsiness and should not be drank after dinner unless the person intends to stay awake.
Suppression of Coffee-Houses
King Charles gets notice about the gossip that is going on throughout the coffee houses and tries to suppress them. In the King’s proclamation (1675), Charles R. states that in the coffee-house meetings “divers false, malitious, and scandalous reports are devised and spread abroad” (Royal Proclamation). In return the king states “that the said Coffee-houses be Put down and suppressed” (Royal Proclamation). The king wants to stop the gossip about the government and the monarchy that goes on in the coffee-houses because he does not want anyone speaking bad about him.
Ellis points out that “coffee-houses were functioning as a gauge of public opinion” (104). Coffee-houses are a place for people to talk and express their own opinions. However, the court and the authorities did not want to recognize that the people of London go to the coffee-houses to express their opinions because it is mainly gossip about the court and monarchy. The court believes that the common people of London “did not need to know about the state and its affairs” (Ellis 104). However, the king stated in his proclamation, that coffee-houses “produced very evil and dangerous effects” (Royal Proclamation).
In the king’s proclamation for the suppression of coffee-houses, he commanded coffee-house keepers to stop the selling of their products. Charles commanded that the sale of the keepers “coffee, chocolate, sherbet and tea” must cease on January 10, 1676 which was only 12 days away from when the proclamation came out (Royal Proclamation).
The Spectator
People would attend coffee-houses not only to drink coffee and gossip, but they would also get the daily news from the newspaper. One of the most popular newspapers in the 1700s was “The Spectator" (Fig. 3). This was a daily publication written by Addison and Steele. Issue number 49 was published on April 26, 171. In this publication, Addison and Steele observe the type of men who attend coffee-houses and the men’s status.
It was typical for the men to have meetings and conversations with each other during their time at the coffee-houses. The type of men in coffee-houses differ at certain times. Addison and Steele states that “men differ rather in the time of day in which they make a figure, than in any real greatness above one another” (314).
If a man is known to be of a higher status, then he is in charge while those who are lower status listen to him. Most of the higher status men attend the coffee-houses in the early morning. Addison and Steele go to the coffee-house at six in the morning and mention that they “know that my friend Beaver, the haberdasher, has a levee of more undissembled friends and admires than most of the courtiers or generals of Great Britain” (315). Their friend Beaver is part of the higher class and has many people that admires him, and they meet him at the coffee-houses.
Through Addison and Steele’s time at the coffee-houses they have noticed that the type of clothing the men wear have a reflection on their status. Addison and Steele state that “I have observed that the superiority among these proceeds from an opinion of gallantry and fashion (315). The men who wear more extravagant clothing tend to be part of the higher status and those who do not wear extravagant clothing are typically part of the middle or lower status.
The most common type of men who attend coffee-houses are those who are not as happy as others. Addison and Steele observed that “The persons to whose behavior and discourse I have most regard, are such as are between these two sorts of men; such as have not spirits too active to be happy, and well pleases in a private condition; nor complexions too warm to make them neglect the duties and relations of life” (316). These men are typically not the happiest and they are private people.
Final Analysis
Coffee-houses do materialize Habermas’ ideal of the public sphere partially, but not fully. In the 1600s and 1670s, King Charles II wanted to suppress popular gossip by banning the coffee-houses. We can conclude from this that coffee-houses were a separate part of the public sphere in London that functioned independently from the government. Habermas also states that access is guaranteed to all citizens. However, this is not technically true. Women are excluded from coffee-houses because coffee-houses were a place where men went to get the daily news, and women were not allowed in coffee-houses. It was an unspoken rule that women were not allowed in coffee-houses because if the entered a coffee-house, they would be seen as improper.
Another aspect that the public spheres requires is the ability to gain information through the media. The coffee-houses fulfill this requirement because newspapers, like The Spectator, is available at coffee-houses. In issue number 49 of The Spectator, Addison and Steele observe coffee-houses and the type of men that attend. Addison and Steele state that the people of lower status tend to listen more than those of higher status. After this issue of The Spectator was published, the men that attended coffee-houses gained the information about the type of men that attend coffee-houses. The men that Addison and Steele observe gather together and gossip and attend meetings in the coffee-houses which also helps the people gain information.
The public sphere also tolerates that the people can express their opinions. However, coffee-houses do not fully materialize this aspect of the public sphere. The people of London have the ability to express their opinions freely until 1675 when King Charles II released The Royal Proclamation trying to suppress coffee-houses. The king claims that coffee-house meetings promote false and scandalous information about the government and the king himself and tries to put an end to the gossip by suppressing coffee-houses. Due to the suppression by the king, people cannot express their opinions and therefore coffee-houses do not fully materialize Habermas’ ideal of the public sphere.
Abigail Manns
About the Author
Abigail Manns is a first-year student at St. Lawrence University in Canton, New York. She is plans to major in Government and has not decided on a minor yet. Although she is not involved in on campus clubs, she plans to join the club tennis team in the upcoming semester at St. Lawrence.
Abigail is currently enrolled in London Coffeehouse Culture & Modernity. This course is a first-year seminar that helps students develop more advanced research and improve writing and oral presentation skills. The course explores the role of London coffee-houses in the developments of democracy and the public sphere in the 1700s.
When Abigail is not on campus, she lives in Virginia Beach, VA with her family and three dogs. In her free time she enjoys going to the beach or sitting by the pool with a good book and spending time with her friends.
Bibliography
Addison, J., & Steele, R. The Spectator No. 49 Vol. 1. D. Appleton & Company. New York, 1711.
Anonymous. The Maidens Complaint Against Coffee or the Coffee-House. The Royal Exchange in Cornhill, London, 1663.
Charles II. By the King A Proclamation for the Suppression of Coffee-Houses. Bill & Barker, 1675.
Ellis, Markman. The Coffee House: A Cultural History. Weidenfield & Nicolson, 2004.
Habermas, Jürgen. “The Public Sphere.” Communication and Class Struggle, edited by Armand Mattelart and Seth Sieglaub. International General, 1980, pp. 198-201.
Pasqua Rosee. The Vertue of the Coffee Drink. St. Michaels Alley in Cornhill, 1670.