publisher colophon

359NOTES

Introduction

1. As Kathleen Wilson argues in The Island Race: Englishness, Empire and Gender in the Eighteenth Century (New York: Routledge, 2003), this lack of accommodation is evident in the compensatory proliferation of texts that depict Britain as an island: “Indeed, at the precise moment when England was less an island than ever before—when the reach of British trade, arms, colonies and claims transected several seas in an increasingly global grasp; when an explosion of travel literature disseminated images of tropical island paradises to force a re-thinking of Britain’s own pasts; when voyaging and exploration took on new psychological significance as mental and moral as well as political and commercial activities; and when the labor, movement, commodities and cultures of foreign and colonial peoples were underwriting English prosperity and ‘character’—English people were most eager to stress the ways in which their nation was unique, culturally as well as topographically” (5). These arguments for cultural exceptionalism were most often mounted on the figure of British liberty and the Constitution that sprung from it. Both were frequently affiliated with Britain’s topographical status as an island.

2. Michel Foucault, “Governmentality,” in Power: Essential Works of Foucault, 1954–1984, vol. 3, ed. James D. Faubion (New York: New Press, 1994), 219–20.

3. This is largely because Foucault himself left much of this work undone. Ann Laura Stoler, Race and the Education of Desire: Foucault’s History of Sexuality and the Colonial Order of Things (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1995), is the most extensive argument for the importance of Foucault’s limited work on race and the necessity of its integration with postcolonial inquiries into the metropole-colony relationship. See also David Scott, “Colonial Governmentality,” Social Text 43 (Fall 1995): 191–220, and Anupama Rao and Steven Pierce, “Discipline and the Other Body,” interventions 3.2 (2001): 159–68.

4. J. G. A. Pocock, “Political Thought in the English-Speaking Atlantic, 1760–1790, Part 1: The Imperial Crisis,” in The Varieties of British Political Thought, 1500–1800, ed. J. G. A Pocock, Gordon J. Schochet, and Lois Schwoeror (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1993), 257.

5. Pocock, “Political Thought,” 260.

6. This partiality extends to much recent work on eighteenth-century imperialism except those explicitly focused on Indian problematics. Roxann Wheeler’s The Complexion of Race: Categories of Difference in Eighteenth-Century British Culture (Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 2000), Laura Brown’s The Ends of Empire: Women and Ideology in Early Eighteenth-Century English Literature (Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press, 1993), Felicity Nussbaum’s Torrid Zones: Maternity, Sexuality, and Empire in Eighteenth-Century English Narratives (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1995), and Srinivas Aravamudan’s Tropicopolitans: Colonialism and Agency, 1688–1804 (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1999) are notable exceptions in that they discuss the interrelationships between various colonial locales.

7. See J.G. A. Pocock, “1776, The Revolution against Parliament,” in Virtue, Commerce, and History: Essays on Political Thought and History, Chiefly in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1985), 73–88.

8. The notion of the state as company has a significant history in Whig discourse. As Nicholas Phillipson argues, Cato’s Letters demonstrates the effect commerce was having on Whig analyses of the relationship between property and the figure of the constitution when it models the relationship between a ministry and parliament on that of a board and its shareholders. See “Politeness and Politics in the Reigns of Anne and the Early Hanoverians,” in The Varieties of British Political Thought, 1500–1800, ed. J. G.A. Pocock (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1993), 230, and Cato’s Letters, no. 60, 6 January 1721.

9. Edmund Burke, 18 December 1772, Parliamentary History, 17:672–73. Quoted in Nancy F. Koehn, The Power of Commerce: Economy and Governance in the First British Empire (Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press, 1994), 213.

10. Pocock, Virtue, Commerce, and History, 48.

11. I concur with Graham Burchell’s sense of the complementarity of Foucault and Pocock’s thinking on political subjectivity and governmental practices. See “Peculiar Interests: Civil Society and Governing ‘the System of Natural Liberty,’” in The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, ed. Graham Burchell, Colin Gordon, and Peter Miller (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1991), 119–50.

12. See Dror Wahrman, Imagining the Middle Class: The Political Representation of Class in Britain, c. 1780–1840 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995). As Wahrman notes, the emergence of the social middle has been the topic of intense historical revision; see Wahrman, 1–18, for an overview of the scholarly debate.

13. See E. P. Thompson, “The Patricians and the Plebs,” in Customs in Common: Studies in Traditional Popular Culture (New York: New Press, 1993), 16–96.

14. For an exhaustive account of the complex consolidation of middle-class life, see Leonore Davidoff and Catherine Hall, Family Fortunes: Men and Women of the English Middle Class, 1780–1850 (New York: Routledge, 2002).

15. See Étienne Balibar, “Foucault and Marx: The Question of Nominalism,” in Michel Foucault Philosopher, ed. and trans. Timothy J. Armstrong (New York: Routledge, 1992), 54–56.

16. Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, vol. 1, trans. Robert Hurley (New York: Vintage, 1980).

17. I am echoing Foucault’s closing remarks from “What Is Enlightenment?” in The Foucault Reader, ed. Paul Rabinow (New York: Pantheon, 1984): “The critical ontology of ourselves has to be considered not, certainly, as a theory, a doctrine, nor even as a permanent body of knowledge that is accumulating; it has to be conceived as an attitude, an ethos, a philosophical life in which the critique of what we are is at one and the same time the historical analysis of the limits that are imposed upon us and an experiment with the possibility of going beyond them. . . . I continue to think that this task requires work on our limits, that is, a patient labor giving form to our impatience for liberty” (50).

18. Wilson, 23.

19. London Magazine, February 1772, 70.

20. See Wheeler, 15, for a sense of the ubiquity of theories of degeneration that accompanied monogenetic models of human variety.

21. Ronald Meek, Social Science and the Ignoble Savage (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1976), offers the most thorough account of four-stage theory. See Wheeler, 177–92, for a convincing discussion of how four-stage theory became the dominant racial discourse in Britain in the 1780s and 1790s.

22. See Greg Dening, Mr. Bligh’s Bad Language: Passion, Power and Theatre on the Bounty (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1992), 269–76.

23. For a thorough discussion of this issue, see Jane Moody, Illegitimate Theatre in London, 1770–1840 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2000), 10–33.

24. Ellen Donkin, Getting into the Act: Women Playwrights in London, 1776–1829 (New York: Routledge, 1995), 110–19.

25. See Susan Staves, Players’ Sceptres: Fictions of Authority in the Restoration (Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska Press, 1979), 113. This issue has recently been reengaged by Paula Backscheider in “Endless Aversion Rooted in the Soul: Divorce in the 1690–1730 Theater,” Eighteenth Century 37.2 (1996): 99–135. For an earlier discussion of the analogy between state and family, see Gordon Schochet, “Patriarchalism, Politics, and Mass Attitudes in Stuart England,” Historical Journal 12 (1969): 413–31.

26. See Foucault, The History of Sexuality, 1:106.

27. Foucault, “Governmentality,” 216.

28. See my “Scissors and Needles: Inchbald’s Wives as They Were, Maids as They Are and the Governance of Sexual Exchange,” Theatre Journal 51 (Summer 1999): 105–25, for a detailed discussion of this issues in relation to one of Inchbald’s later plays.

29. See Judith Butler, “Imitation and Gender Insubordination,” in inside/out: Lesbian Theories, Gay Theories, ed. Diana Fuss (New York: Routledge, 1991), 20.

30. Elizabeth Inchbald, The Mogul Tale; or, The Descent of the Balloon, in The Plays of Elizabeth Inchbald, ed. Paula Backscheider (New York: Garland Publishing, 1980), 7. All subsequent page references will be included in the text. Backscheider’s edition is a collection of facsimile reprints, so the citations are also applicable to the 1788 London edition.

31. See Mita Choudhury, “Gazing at His Seraglio: Late Eighteenth-Century Women Playwrights as Orientalists,” Theatre Journal 47 (1995): 481–502, and Betsy Bolton, Women, Nationalism and the Romantic Stage: Theatre and Politics in Britain, 1780–1800 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001), 204–6, for contrasting views on the politics of this ballooning incident. For a helpful survey of the aesthetics of Orientalist representations of the despot, see Aravamudan, 190–229.

32. See Peter A. Tasch, The Dramatic Cobbler: The Life and Works of Isaac Bickerstaff (Lewisburg: Bucknell Univ. Press, 1971), 246.

33. Kristina Straub, Sexual Suspects: Eighteenth-Players and Sexual Ideology (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1992), 258.

34. The poems included “Love in the Suds” by Kenrick, “Sodom and Onan” by the Reverend William Jackson—otherwise known as “Doctor Viper”—and the anonymous “Leap Frog.” For a full account of the scandal and the paper war that ensued from it, see Tasch, 221–42.

35. Tasch, 241.

36. For an extended discussion of Inchbald’s struggle to get The Mogul Tale staged and the play’s importance in Inchbald’s transition from actress to playwright, see Donkin, 115–22.

37. Quoted in Roger Manvell, Elizabeth Inchbald: A Biographical Study (Lanham: Univ. Press of America, 1987), 30.

38. See Donkin, 209 n. 15, for a discussion of the Selima/Irena confusion in the printed editions.

39. See Tasch, 206. The published text of The Mogul Tale retains the single “b” spelling of “cobler” used by Gentleman in his review of Bickerstaff.

40. I would also contend that the translation of setting from Arabia to India is bound up in the same transition.

41. See Bolton, 204, for a discussion of the play’s political resonances. The prints, all in the Department of Prints and Drawings, The British Museum, include the anonymous work, The Political Balloon; or, The Fall of East India Stock, of 4 December 1783 (BM 6275); the anonymous work, The Aerostatick Stage Balloon of 23 December 1783 (BM 6284; fig.I.1); the seventh panel of Rowlandson’s Two New Sliders for the State Magic Lanthern of 29 December 1783 (BM 6287); Original Air Balloon of 29 December 1783 (BM 6288); Dent’s The East India Air Balloon of 30 December 1783 (BM 6289); and The Times or the Downfall of Magna Far—ta by Carlo Cromwell Esq. (BM 6290).

42. Mary Dorothy George, Catalogue of Political and Personal Satires, vol. 5 (London: British Museum Press, 1935), 744.

43. See Bolton, 204, for an explication of this topical reference.

44. Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism (London: Verso, 1991), 35–36. In The Politics of Aesthetics: Nationalism, Gender, Romanticism (Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 2003), Marc Redfield gives some sense of this volatility when he emphasizes that “imagination and nation [are] figures inextricable from aesthetic discourse, which is another way of saying that they are fictions possessed of great referential force and chronic referential instability” (49).

45. See Koehn, 22–23, 183–84.

46. See Koehn, 105–47.

47. For a sense of the extremity of Burke’s racist rhetoric during the debate on the Quebec Bill, see his fulminations regarding race war in the West Indies as recorded in the Morning Chronicle, 7 May 1791.

48. See John Barrell, “An Entire Change of Performances” Lumen 17 (1998): 11–50, for an illuminating discussion of the theatricalization of politics and politicization of theatre in the 1790s.

49. P. J. Marshall, The Impeachment of Warren Hastings (London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1965), 68.

50. Anonymous, The History of the Trial of Warren Hastings, Esq. Late Governor-General of Bengal, before the High Court of Parliament in Westminster-Hall, on an Impeachment by the Commons of Great-Britain for High Crimes and Misdemeanours (London: Debrett, Vernor and Hood, 1796), 11.

51. The dissenting opinion of the lords who did not concur with this decision is even more blunt, for it argues that it will not only “tend to the degradation of both Houses of Parliament” but also “to subvert the fundamental principles of the constitution.” History, 11.

52. See History, 8 and 91 respectively.

53. History, 12.

54. See Jean François Lyotard, The Differend: Phrases in Dispute (Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press, 1988), 164–65, for a discussion of Kant’s notion of a “sign of history.”

55. Michel Foucault, “Society Must Be Defended” : Lectures at the Collège de France, 1975–76, trans. David Macey (New York: Picador, 2003), 239–63, and Paul Gilroy, Against Race: Imagining Political Culture beyond the Color Line (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press, 2000).

56. Both Catherine Hall and Charlotte Sussman have argued that “scientific racism” does not cohere until after 1838. See Hall, “William Knibb and the Constitution of the New Black Subject,” in Empire and Others: British Encounters with Indigenous Peoples, ed. Martin Daunton and Rick Halpern (Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 1999), 303–24, and Sussman, Consuming Anxieties: Consumer Protest, Gender and British Slavery, 1713–1833 (Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 2000), 188–205.

57. See Wheeler, 38–45, for a stimulating discussion of the methodological implication of this multiplicity of coexistent racial significations.

58. See Wilson, 11. As she states, “The idea of ‘nation’ once referred to a breed, stock or race; and, although the idea of nation as a political entity was gaining ascendancy, the more restrictive racial sense remained embedded in its use” (7).

59. Foucault, Society, 242.

60. See Karl Marx, Capital, vol. 1, trans. Ben Fowkes (London: Penguin, 1976), 439–54, and Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish (New York: Vintage, 1979), 156.

61. Marx, 447.

62. Foucault, Society, 242.

63. Foucault, Society, 251–52.

Part I. Ethnographic Acts

1. The notion of “audience-oriented privacy” is discussed in relation to letters, diaries, and the epistolary novel in Jürgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, trans. Thomas Burger and Frederick Lawrence (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1989), 48–51. The “codification of intimacy” defines Niklas Luhmann’s approach to similar issues in Love as Passion: The Codification of Intimacy, trans. Jeremy Gaines and Doris L. Jones (Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 1986), 17. For significant interventions in these arguments for the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, see Mary Favret, Romantic Correspondence: Women, Politics, and the Fiction of Letters (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1993); Jon P. Klancher, The Making of English Reading Audiences, 1790–1832 (Madison: Univ. of Wisconsin Press, 1987); Paul Magnuson, Reading Public Romanticism (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1998); Michael Warner, The Letters of the Republic: Publication and the Public Sphere in Eighteenth-Century America (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1990); Clifford Siskin, The Work of Writing: Literature and Social Change in Britain (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1998); Nancy Armstrong, Desire and Domestic Fiction: A Political History of the Novel (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1987); and “Romanticism and Its Publics: A Forum Organized and Introduced by Jon Klaneher,” Studies in Romanticism 33 (1994): 523–88.

2. Gillian Russell and Clara Tuite, “Introducing Romantic Sociability,” in Romantic Sociability: Social Networks and Literary Culture in Britain, 1770–1840 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002), 10.

3. This is most influentially articulated in Georg Simmel, “Sociability,” in The Sociology of Georg Simmel, trans. Kurt H. Wolff (Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1950), 40–57. See Russell and Tuite’s discussion (10) of this argument. For an example of a more historically sound analysis of social interaction in the late eighteenth century, see David S. Shields, Civil Tongues and Polite Letters in British America (Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina Press, 1997).

4. Judith Butler, Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex” (New York: Routledge, 1993), 95.

5. Joseph Roach, Cities of the Dead: Circum-Atlantic Performance (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1996).

6. See Roxann Wheeler, The Complexion of Race: Categories of Difference in Eighteenth-Century British Culture (Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 2000). Wheeler’s analysis of how certain forms of racialization achieved social purchase and how others did not is the most sustained attempt for the eighteenth century to follow Stuart Hall’s crucial suggestion that racisms and racial discourses have different historical specificities in “Gramsci’s Relevance for the Study of Race and Ethnicity,” in Stuart Hall: Critical Dialogues in Cultural Studies, ed. David Morley, Kuan-Hsing Chen, and Stuart Hall (London: Routledge, 1996), 411–40.

7. Peter Clark, British Clubs and Societies, 1580–1800: The Origins of an Associational World (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 2000), 192, 39, 451. My adumbration of Clark’s complex argument is indebted to Russell and Tuite, 5.

8. Russell and Tuite, 5.

9. See John Dwyer, “Enlightened Spectators and Classical Moralists: Sympathetic Relations in Eighteenth-Century Scotland,” in Sociability and Society in Eighteenth-Century Scotland, ed. John Dwyer and Richard B. Sher (Edinburgh: Mercat Press, 1993), 96–118, and “The Imperative of Sociability: Moral Culture in the Late Scottish Enlightenment,” British Journal for Eighteenth-Century Studies 13 (1990): 169–84.

10. See Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, ed. D. D. Raphael and A. L. Macfie (Indianapolis: Liberty Press, 1982), 147. See section III.3 for a full discussion of this model of spectatorship. For the importance of this ethics for colonial legislation, see C. A. Bayly, Imperial Meridian: The British Empire and the World, 1780–1830 (London: Longman, 1989), 151–52.

11. Kathleen Wilson, The Island Race: Englishness, Empire and Gender in the Eighteenth Century (New York: Routledge, 2003), 7.

12. See Wilson, 70–80, for a discussion of the deformation and adequation of Cook’s voyages to existing theories of the progress of nations.

13. For strikingly different examples of how to engage with this issue, see Johannes Fabian, Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes It Object (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1983); P. J. Marshall and Glyndwr Williams, The Great Map of Mankind: British Perceptions of the World in the Age of Enlightenment (London: J. M. Dent, 1982).

14. For a succinct account of these theories, see Sudipta Sen, Distant Sovereignty: National Imperialism and the Origins of British India (New York: Routledge, 2002), 120–21. Wheeler, 177–92, has argued for the centrality of Scottish Enlightenment thinking on human variety. See Ronald Meek, Social Science and the Ignoble Savage (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1976) not only for the most exhaustive discussion of Scottish four-stages theory, but also for his persuasive argument that four-stages theory became the orthodox view of human variety in the 1780s and 1790s (195). Among the most influential attempts to categorize human societies and beings in the eighteenth century were George Louis Leclerc, comte de Buffon, Natural History: General and Particular (1749), trans. William Smellie, vol. 3 (London: T. Cadell and W. Davies, 1812); Oliver Goldsmith, “A Comparative View of the Races and Nations” (1760), in Collected Works of Oliver Goldsmith, ed. Arthur Friedman (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1966), 3:66–71; David Hume, “Of National Characters,” in Essays Moral, Political and Literary, ed. Eugene F. Miller (Indianapolis: Liberty Classics, 1985), 197–215; Henry Home, Lord Kames, Sketches of the History of Man (London: W. Strahan and T. Cadell, 1778); Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, On the Natural Variety of Mankind (1775), in The Anthropological Treatises of Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, trans. and ed. Thomas Bendyshe (Boston: Milford House, 1973), 145–276. In addition to these canonical texts, there are myriad travel accounts, natural histories, and treatises that attempt to rationalize national and racial distinction.

15. See Arthur O. Lovejoy, The Great Chain of Being (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1966), 244, and Richard H. Popkin, “The Philosophical Bases of Modern Racism,” in Philosophy and the Civilizing Arts: Essays Presented to Herbert W. Schneider, ed. Craig Walton and John P. Anton (Athens: Ohio Univ. Press, 1974), 132.

16. Sen, 13–14.

17. Thomas Pownall, The Right, Interest, and Duty of the State as Concerned in the Affairs of the East Indies (London: S. Bladdon, 1773), 44–45. Quoted in Sen, 25.

18. See Sen’s account of the veiling of British power behind the nominal power of the Moghul emperor and the subsequent unraveling of this relationship, xi–xiii.

19. Sen, 101.

20. Sen, 104.

21. Uday Singh Mehta, Liberalism and Empire: A Study in Nineteenth Century British Liberal Thought (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1999), 159.

22. Sen, 13.

23. See, for example, William Dalrymple, White Mughals: Love and Betrayal in Eighteenth-Century India (London: Harper Collins, 2003); Sen, 85–149; L.M. Collingham, Imperial Bodies: The Physical Experience of the Raj, 1800–1947 (Cam-bridge: Polity, 2001), 13–49; Beth Fowkes Tobin, Picturing Imperial Power: Colonial Subjects in Eighteenth-Century British Painting (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1999), 110–38; Kenneth Ballhatchet, Race, Sex and Class under the Raj: Imperial Attitudes and Policies and Their Critics, 1793–1905 (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1980).

24. The Permanent Settlement describes a series of experiments in revenue acquisition that effectively attempted to reform rents according to standardized notions of land tenure endemic to Britain. As Sen summarizes, “Ushered in during the period of Lord Cornwallis as governor-general, this was an effort to improve the collection of land revenue by creating a society of landed estates in the Bengal countryside. Historians have seen this decision, which included an appeal to physiocracy, as instrumental in severing the feudal ties of Indian society in order to inculcate a new sense of enterprise in landed property” (94). Ranajit Guha’s analysis of this incursion on Indian society emphasizes the way in which the English regard for the “sanctity of private property” was literally and phantasmatically exported to Bengal with catastrophic effects. See Guha, A Rule of Property for Bengal: An Essay on the Idea of Permanent Settlement (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1996).

25. John Brewer, Sinews of Power (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1989), 199.

26. Kristina Straub, Sexual Suspects: Eighteenth-Century Players and Sexual Ideology (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1992).

27. Foucault, “Governmentality,” in Power: Essential Works of Foucault, 1954–1984, ed. James D. Faubion, vol. 3 (New York: New Press, 1994), 208.

Chapter 1. Empire’s Vicious Expenses

1. See Nancy F. Koehn, The Power of Commerce: Economy and Governance in the First British Empire (Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press, 1994), for an in-depth analysis of this problem.

2. Edmund Burke, Commons debate, 27 February 1769. Quoted in Koehn, 205.

3. As Koehn notes, 134–35, Chatham, Charles Townshend, and George III all subscribed to this ambitious solution to the American problem.

4. For an example of the former position, see Thomas Pownall, The Right, Interest, and Duty, of the State, as Concerned in the Affairs of the East Indies (London, 1773), 5–6. The latter concern was expressed frequently in the papers. Koehn’s citation of Grenville’s remarks before Parliament on 28 February 1769 are typical of this financial anxiety: “What condition will you be in, when a war [in India] breaks out! [Some] have seen East India stock fall before, but never from such a height to nothing. This [stock] is an object of 11 millions of money. If, in the commencement of that war, the whole 11 million should be blown into the air at once—if that misfortune should befall you—do you believe that the City of London would lose 11 million without threatening the [entire stock market] at once. This is, perhaps the last stake of our finances” (203).

5. Koehn, 22–23, 182–83, makes precisely this point with regard to the popularity of Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.

6. See Andrew Jackson O’Shaughnessy, An Empire Divided: The American Revolution and the British Caribbean (Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 2000), for a discussion of the rupture in the Atlantic empire.

7. Koehn, 111, uses the rhetoric of trauma.

8. See, for example, the London Evening Post, 20 and 25 August 1772; the stories literally flow into one another.

9. Koehn, 208–9.

10. For a brief account of this complex series of events and of the scholarly debate surrounding them, see P. J. Marshall, “The British in Asia: Trade to Dominion, 1700–65,” in The Oxford History of the British Empire, vol. 2, The Eighteenth Century, ed. P. J. Marshall (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998), 487–507.

11. Marshall, 506.

12. For an exhaustive account of the place of the East India Company in eighteenth-century British politics, see Dame Lucy Sutherland, East India Company in Eighteenth-Century Politics (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1952).

13. See William Bolts, Considerations on Indian Affairs, Particularly Respecting the Present State of Bengal and Its Dependencies, and Alexander Dow, The History of Hindostan, 3 vols. (London: S. A. Bechert and P. A. De Hontd, 1768–72). Excerpts from Bolts’s book appeared in the London Magazine, May 1772, under the title “The Nature and Defects of the Constitution of the East India Company” and in the London Evening Post for 2 April 1772.

14. Koehn, 110–11.

15. See Koehn, 212–14, for a succinct account of Burke and the Rockingham Whigs’ constitutional objections to the act.

16. See H. V. Bowen, “British India, 1765–1813: The Metropolitan Context,” in The Oxford History of the British Empire, vol. 2, The Eighteenth Century, ed. P. J. Marshall (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998), 537–41, for a succinct account of the genesis and effect of the Regulating Act. See also Koehn, 200–17, for an illuminating discussion of the relationship between economic and constitutional issues in the Regulating Act.

17. The speech was widely excerpted in the popular press.

18. Gazetteer and New Daily Advertiser, 4 April 1772.

19. Gazetteer and New Daily Advertiser, 4 April 1772.

20. The Secret Committee was composed entirely of parliamentarians, and unlike the Select Committee none of its members had direct interests in the East India Company. For a precise discussion of the two committees’ differing mandates, see H. V. Bowen, Revenue and Reform: The Indian Problem in British Politics, 1757–1773 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1991), 134–36 and143–47.

21. “To Mann, 9 April 1772,” in Horace Walpole’s Correspondence with Sir Horace Mann, ed. W. S. Lewis, Warren Hunting Smith, and George L. Lam, vol. 7 (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1967), 400.

22. See Susan Staves, “A Few Kind Words for the Fop,” Studies in English Literature, 1500–1900 22.3 (Summer 1982): 413–28.

23. This print was one a series, Macaronies, Characters, Caricatures, published by Darly in 1772; see also fig. 1.2. For an illuminating discussion of these prints, see Shearer West, “The Darly Macaroni Prints and the Politics of Private Man,” Eighteenth-Century Life 25.2 (2001): 170–82.

24. London Evening Post, 27 August 1772.

25. For a discussion of the wide-ranging impact of Fordyce’s activities and of the decisiveness of the ensuing financial collapse on colonial policy, see Bowen, Revenue, 122–30. The classical account of the collapse of the Ayr Bank is, of course, provided by Adam Smith in book 2 of The Wealth of Nations (London: Penguin, 1986), 381–429.

26. See J. H. Clapham, The Bank of England, A History (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1945), 245. See Donna Andrew and Randall McGowen, The Perreaus and Mrs. Rudd: Love and Betrayal in 18th Century London (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 2001), 154–57, for a discussion of the anti-Jewish and anti-Scots sentiments precipitated by the crash.

27. See Koehn, 209, and Bowen, Revenue, 127–30.

28. Gentleman’s Magazine 42 (June 1772): 293.

29. Andrew and McGowen, 138–39.

30. Gentleman’s Magazine 42 (May 1772): 213.

31. London Chronicle, 9 July 1772.

32. Fordyce was speculating on British attempts to establish a base in the Falklands and hence on an entrance into commerce in the Pacific. These speculations came to naught when Britain was forced to concede the Falklands as one of the conditions for ending the Anglo-Spanish conflict over the islands in 1770–71. See Andrew and McGowan, 148, and Glyndwr Williams, “The Pacific: Exploration and Exploitation,” in The Oxford History of the British Empire, vol. 2, The Eighteenth Century, ed. P. J. Marshall (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998), 561.

33. “To Mann, 1 July 1772,” in Horace Walpole’s Correspondence, 7:418–19.

34. Gentleman’s Magazine 42 (July 1772): 311.

35. W. K. Wimsatt, “Foote and a Friend of Boswell’s: A Note on The Nabob,” Modern Language Notes 57.5 (May 1942): 326–27.

36. Morning Chronicle, 24 June 1772.

37. See, for example, Renu Juneja, “The Native and the Nabob: Representations of the Indian Experience in Eighteenth-Century English Literature,” Journal of Commonwealth Literature 27.1 (1992): 183–98, and Jyotsna G. Singh, Colonial Narratives/Cultural Dialogues (New York: Routledge, 1996), 60–76.

38. Samuel Foote, The Nabob (London: T. Cadell, 1778), 7–9. All references are cited in the text hereafter.

39. See Mary Megie Belden, The Dramatic Work of Samuel Foote (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1929), 148–50, for a discussion of this joke.

40. See E. J. Hobsbawm, The Invention of Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1992), for a discussion of this phrase.

41. Simon Trefman, Sam. Foote, Comedian, 1720–1777 (New York: New York Univ. Press, 1971), recognizes this structural feature of the play, but argues that the story of the marriage proposal is effectively disconnected from “the various swindles, machinations, and social climbing efforts of Sir Matthew Mite, and it is in these scenes that we find the farcical humour and topical satire that were celebrated by Foote’s audience” (204). I would argue that the play’s satirical force lies precisely in how one reads the bracketing effect of act 1, scene 1 and act 3, scene 3.

42. London Magazine, July 1772, 309.

43. According to Koehn, 109, political elites were increasingly courting commercial or moneyed interest in the late 1760s and early 1770s.

44. See the Gazetteer, 1 July 1772; London Evening Post, 30 June 1772; and London Chronicle, 2 July 1772.

45. This latter group included Rockingham Whigs and most notably Edmund Burke. See Koehn, 212–13.

46. London Magazine, July 1772, 308.

47. See Kristina Straub, Sexual Suspects: Eighteenth-Century Players and Sexual Ideology (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1992), 47–68, for an extensive discussion of Cibber and Garrick’s differing deployments of the fop.

48. See Bowen, Revenue, 122–23, and Koehn, 206.

49. See L. M. Collingham, Imperial Bodies: The Physical Experience of the Raj, c. 1800–1947 (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2001), 34–35, for a discussion of this fear of creolization.

50. This parallel has significant implications because it ties Mite’s and Match’em’s corruption of femininity to a similar corruption of Sir John’s masculinity. In both cases, financial embarrassments are the precursors to gender impropriety. This helps to explain why Foote constructs the Oldham household as one that is dominated by the quasi-Amazonian Lady Oldham.

Chapter 2. “As Much as Science Can Approach Barbarity”

1. Omai; or, A Trip round the World was first performed on 20 December 1785 under Harris’s management at Covent Garden. The pantomime was largely designed and planned by Philippe Jacques de Loutherbourg with songs written by John O’Keefe and music by William Shields. Because Omai was significantly altered in almost every subsequent production, it is necessary to consult John O’Keefe, Songs for the New Pantomime of Omai, Larpent Collection, MS 713, Huntington Library, San Marino, California; the descriptions of the pantomime in the newspapers; and the print version of airs entitled A Short Account of the New Pantomime called Omai; or, A Trip round the World of 1785 to get a full sense of the production. In general, the detailed descriptions of the pantomime are far more informative than the skeletal account offered in the print version or in the Larpent text. In general, I rely on the published text and on Larpent for spoken dialogue and libretto, and on the newspapers for both the mechanical and improvised action. Of the newspaper sources, I use the December 1785 edition of the Town and Country most frequently because it is the most detailed. An almost identical account is available in the Universal Magazine for December 1785.

2. Greg Dening, Mr. Bligh’s Bad Language (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1992), 271.

3. Johannes Fabian, Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes Its Object (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1983), 11–12.

4. Kathleen Wilson, The Island Race: Englishness, Empire and Gender in the Eighteenth Century (New York: Routledge, 2003), 72–73. See Wilson, 70–80, for a review of the variations in these accounts.

5. London Chronicle, 22 December 1785.

6. European Magazine and London Review, December 1785.

7. See Rudiger Joppien, “Philippe Jacques de Loutherbourg’s Pantomime ‘Omai, or, a Trip round the World’ and the Artists of Captain Cook’s Voyages,” in The British Museum Yearbook: Captain Cook and the South Pacific, ed. T. C. Mitchell, vol. 3 (London: British Museum Publications, 1975), 81–137, and Ralph G. Allen, “De Loutherbourg and Captain Cook,” Theatre Research/Recherches Theatrales 4.3 (1962): 195–213.

8. For recent analyses of the role played by narratives of Pacific exploration in metropolitan European culture, see Jonathan Lamb, Preserving the Self in the South Seas (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 2001); Alex Calder, Jonathan Lamb, and Bridget Orr, Voyages and Beaches: Pacific Encounters, 1769–1840 (Honolulu: Univ. of Hawai’i Press, 1999); and Pamela Cheek, Enlightenment Globalization and the Placing of Sex (Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 2003), 123–63.

9. See Gananath Obeyesekere, The Apotheosis of Captain Cook: European Mythmaking in the Pacific (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1992), and Marshall Salins, How “Natives” Think: About Captain Cook, for Example (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1996), for a debate on the European deification of Cook. The first edition of Hawkesworth’s epic of British exploration was published under the title An Account of the Vovages Undertaken by the Order of His Present Majesty for Making Discoveries in the Southern Hemisphere (London, 1773).

10. See Greg Dening, Performances (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1996), 147–67, for a detailed discussion of the European treatments of Pūrea. Throughout this chapter I use the European spelling of her name, Oberea, when I am referring to the character in European representations.

11. See Hawkesworth, Account 2:108 and 128 respectively, for the source scenes. For some sense of the complexity of interpreting these scenes, see Nicholas Thomas’s discussion of public sex acts in Cook: The Extraordinary Voyages of Captain James Cook (Toronto: Penguin, 2003), 154–59.

12. Anonymous, “An Epistle from Mr. Banks, Voyager, Monster-Hunter, and Amoroso, to Oberea, Queen of Otaheite” (London, 1773), 12–13, lines 136–45.

13. For a discussion of this poem and the scene it is based on, see Dening, 154–55.

14. Anonymous, “An Epistle from Mr. Banks, 13, lines 146–57.

15. I use Omai when referring to European representations and Mai when referring to the historical person.

16. See E. H. McCormick, Omai: Pacific Envoy (Auckland: Auckland Univ. Press, 1977), for a detailed history of Mai’s life, travels, and reception in England. McCormick’s text, 73–93, also offers an insightful discussion on the critiques of Hawksworth’s Account and of the cycle of satires on Joseph Banks and Pūrea.

17. Joppien, 82.

18. London Chronicle, 6 August 1774.

19. London Chronicle, 3 September 1774.

20. London Chronicle, 27 September 1774.

21. Hawkesworth, 206–9. For illuminating discussions of the Arioi, see Alfred Gell, Wrapping in Images: Tattooing and Polynesia (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993), 146–62, and Douglas Oliver, Ancient Tahitian Society, vol. 2 (Honolulu: Univ. of Hawai’i Press, 1974), 913–64.

22. Hawkesworth, 207.

23. London Chronicle, 27 September 1774.

24. This equation extends to other ethnically distinct populations as well. The satirical insinuations of sexual desire between the Begams of Oude and Edmund Burke during the trial of Warren Hastings are a notable case in point.

25. An advertisement in the Public Advertiser, 24 December 1785, for an abridged account of Cook’s voyages for children argues that the product is a natural outgrowth of the pedagogical effect of Loutherbourg’s pantomime.

26. See Joppien, 89–90, for a discussion of the complex problem of attribution surrounding this image. The Morning Post, 21 December 1785, indicates that the image was designed by Loutherbourg and “generously executed” by Mr. Peters.

27. “Account of the New Pantomime, Omai,” Town and Country Magazine, December 1785, 614. This account of the pantomime is the most comprehensive; however, it was compiled prior to the excision of D’Elpini’s airs in the second part and the introduction of Edwin’s songs.

28. Public Advertiser, 24 December 1785.

29. Public Advertiser, 24 December 1785.

30. Times, 22 December 1785.

31. Larpent 713. The air is not presented in the printed text but is widely circulated in the press. See, for example, Times, 22 December 1785.

32. Cook records his own meetings with Pūrea in his journal and was witness to many of the sexual scenes described in Hawkesworth. See The Journals of Captain Cook, ed. Philip Edwards (New York: Penguin, 1999), 47–65, for Cook’s account of Tahiti.

33. Larpent 713.

34. Wilson, 69.

35. Ann Laura Stoler, Race and the Education of Desire: Foucault’s History of Sexuality and the Colonial Order of Things (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1995), 93.

36. See Michel Foucault, “Society Must Be Defended” : Lectures at the Collège de France, 1975–76, trans. David Macey (New York: Picador, 2003), 253–63.

37. Sudipta Sen, Distant Sovereignty: National Imperialism and Origins of British India (New York: Routledge, 2002), 2.

38. Foucault, 252.

39. Morning Post, 26 December 1785.

40. When Richard Altick discusses Omai in The Shows of London (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press, 1978), 120–21, he focuses on the sheer visual excess of the production—one scene depicting the Kamchatkan coast presents moving ice floes with forty-two separate and simultaneously moving flats—and on the lighting technology for which Loutherbourg was famous.

41. Joppien gives an exhaustive account of the correlations.

42. Morning Post, 22 December 1785.

43. See Roxann Wheeler, The Complexion of Race: Categories of Difference in Eighteenth-Century British Culture (Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 2000), 17–21.

44. See Dening, 272, for an illuminating discussion regarding the fictionalization of historical Pacific islanders.

45. Town and Country Magazine, December 1785.

46. Town and Country Magazine, December 1785.

47. Adrienne L. Kaeppler, “Tracing the History of Hawaiian Cook Voyage Arte-facts in the Museum of Mankind,” in Captain Cook and the South Pacific, ed. T. C. Mitchell (London: British Museum Publications, 1979), 167–83, especially 167–76. See also Nicholas Thomas, “Licensed Curiosity: Cook’s Pacific Voyages,” in The Cultures of Collecting, ed. John Elsner and Roger Cardinal (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1994), 116–36.

48. Morning Chronicle, 22 December 1785.

49. Morning Chronicle, 23 December 1785.

50. Morning Chronicle, 24 December 1785.

51. A Short Account of the New Pantomime Called Omai; or, A Trip round the World, i.

52. I am indebted to Jeffrey Cox, who in response to an oral version of this chapter generously offered these observations regarding the structure of the pantomime.

53. Morning Chronicle, 29 December 29 1785.

54. Times, 26 December 1785.

55. Town and Country Magazine, December 1785.

56. Morning Post, 21 December 1785.

57. See Robert Nicole’s informative chapter on Bougainville in his The Word, the Pen, and the Pistol: Literature and Power in Tahiti (Albany: SUNY Press, 2001), 35–63, for discussions of the attribution of fantasies of sexual license and for a careful account of the function of clothing in the narrative.

58. See Marcel Hénaff’s introduction to Diderot’s Supplement to Bougainville’s Voyage entitled “Supplement to Diderot’s Dream,” in The Libertine Reader (New York: Zone Books, 1997), 52–75, for a thorough account of the political and philosophical parameters of Diderot’s libertinism.

59. In eighteenth-century harlequinade, Harlequin conventionally carries a device of leather and wood, which is used much like a magic wand to effect sudden transformations of costumes or props.

60. London Chronicle, 11 August 1774.

61. As Wilson notes, Johann Reinhold Forster’s Observations Made during a Voyage round the World (London, 1778), 73, classified various “nations” in the South Pacific into two “races.”

62. In Harlequin Britain: Pantomime and Entertainment, 1690–1760 (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 2004), John O’Brien has recently argued that by the end of the eighteenth century “African identity was clearly available as a referent for Harlequin’s black mask” (136). These remarks resonate with reports of Omai’s ostensible “negritude.”

63. This is in keeping with Lee Wallace’s recent analysis in Sexual Encounters: Pacific Texts, Modern Sexualities (Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press, 2003), which demonstrates that much of the European representation of Pacific encounters downplays the Pacific as a zone of homoerotic fantasy or refigures it as a space of heterosexual freedom.

64. See Kristina Straub, Sexual Suspects: Eighteenth-Century Players and Sexual Ideology (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1992), 47–68, for a detailed history of the vicissitudes of the fop figure during this period.

65. Town and Country, December 1785, 613.

66. Town and Country, December 1785, 614.

67. See Nicholas Thomas, Entangled Objects: Exchange, Material Culture, and Colonialism in the Pacific (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1991), for a discussion of the complex interpretation of value in these exchanges.

68. A Short Account of the New Pantomime Called Omai; or, A Trip round the World, 12.

69. Town and Country, December 1785, 612.

70. Larpent 713.

71. See Straub, 61, for a discussion of Daffodil in Garrick’s The Male Coquette.

72. Larpent 713.

73. Larpent 713.

74. Times, 29 December 1785.

75. Morning Chronicle, 23 December 1785. The text of the song is here published before its initial performance as a kind of a teaser. The song itself is incorporated into the final printed version of the pantomime (16).

76. Times, 9 January 1786.

Part II. Women and the Trials of Imperial Masculinity

1. Both the impeachment and Lady Wallace’s visit are reported in the Times, 5 March 1788.

2. Times, 12 March 1788.

3. See my introduction to The Ton on the British Women Playwrights around 1800 website: http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bnp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_intro.html.

4. One could make a similar argument regarding the trial of the Duchess of Kingston for bigamy.

5. See Anne K. Mellor, Mothers of the Nation: Women’s Political Writing in England, 1780–1830 (Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press, 2000).

6. Dror Wahrman, “The English Problem of Identity in the American Revolution,” American Historical Review 106.4 (October 2001): 1236–62. See also James E. Bradley, Popular Politics and the American Revolution in England: Petitions, the Crown, and Public Opinion (Macon: Univ. of Georgia Press, 1986); Linda Colley, Britons: Forging the Nation, 1707–1837 (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1992); Jonathan C. D. Clark, The Language of Liberty, 1660–1832: Political Discourse and Social Dynamics in the Anglo-American World (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1994); Peter N. Miller, Defining the Common Good: Empire, Religion and Philosophy in Eighteenth-Century Britain (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1994); Kathleen Wilson, The Sense of the People: Politics, Culture and Imperialism in England, 1715–1785 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995); Eliga H. Gould, The Persistence of Empire: British Political Culture in the Age of the American Revolution (Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina Press, 2000); and J. G. A. Pocock, Virtue, Commerce and History: Essays on Political Thought and History, Chiefly in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1985), and “Political Thought in the English-Speaking Atlantic, 1760–1790: (i) The Imperial Crisis,” in The Varieties of British Political Thought, 1500–1800, ed. J. G. A. Pocock, Gordon J. Schochet, and Lois Schwoeror (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1993), 246–82.

7. Nancy F. Koehn, The Power of Commerce: Economy and Governance in the First British Empire (Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press, 1994), 107.

8. See, for example, James Sayers’s A Reverie of Prince Demetrius Cantemir, Ospidar of Moldavia (BM 7307; fig. 4.14) or The Princess’s Bow Alias the Bow Begum (BM 7309; fig. 4.15). For Wollstonecraft’s attack on Burke’s deployment of these tropes, see The Vindications of the Rights of Men in a Letter to the Right Honourable Edmund Burke, ed. David L. Macdonald and Kathleen Scherf (Peterborough: Broadview Press, 1997). Perhaps the most incisive attack on Burke’s sexualization of foreign affairs can be found in Hannah Cowley’s A Day in Turkey (London: G. G. J. and J. Robinson, 1792), 86. See my “Hannah Cowley’s A Day in Turkey and the Political Efficacy of Charles James Fox,” European Romantic Review 14 (2003): 18–20, for a discussion of this issue.

9. Fox makes precisely this insinuation in his famous response to Burke’s attack during the debate on the Quebec Bill on 6 May 1791. See Morning Chronicle, 7 May 1791.

10. Saree Makdisi is trenchant on this point. See Romantic Imperialism (Cam-bridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1998), 9.

11. The key exception here is H. V. Bowen, Revenue and Reform: The Indian Problem in British Politics, 1757–1773 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1991). For an important discussion of the South Sea Bubble’s impact on British literary culture, see Patrick Brantlinger, Fictions of State (Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press, 1996).

12. See Linda Colley, Captives (New York: Pantheon, 2002), 269–95, and Kate Teltscher, India Inscribed: European and British Writing on India, 1600–1800 (Delhi: Oxford Univ. Press, 1995), 229–46.

13. See Koehn, 105–47, 185–217, for illuminating discussions of the interrelationship between American and Indian political and economic policy in the 1760s and 1770s.

14. Colley makes a similar argument with regard to narratives of captivity in the eighteenth century in Captives, 15–17.

15. H. V. Bowen, “A Question of Sovereignty? The Bengal Land Revenue Issue, 1765–7,” Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History 16 (1988): 155–76, and Sudipta Sen, Distant Sovereignty: National Imperialism and Origins of British India (New York: Routledge, 2002), 20.

16. Koehn, 147.

17. Sen, 20.

18. Edmund Burke, 18 December 1772, Parliamentary History, 17:671. Quoted in Koehn, 213. For an illuminating discussion of the feminization of India in late eighteenth-century novelistic discourse, see Balachandra Rajan, Under Western Eyes: India from Milton to Macaulay (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1999), 118–38.

19. See Ranajit Guha, A Rule of Property for Bengal: An Essay on the Idea of Permanent Settlement (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1996), for an extended discussion of this issue, and Nicholas B. Dirks, Colonialism and the Making of Modern India (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 2001), 109–16, for a succinct account of the Permanent Settlement.

Chapter 3. Inchbald’s Indies

1. Major John Taylor, Travels from England to India, in the Year 1789, 2 vols. (London, 1799), 1:21–22. Taylor’s text is quoted in Felicity Nussbaum’s Torrid Zones: Maternity, Sexuality, and Empire in Eighteenth-Century English Narratives (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1995), 17.

2. All of Inchbald’s published plays are included in The Plays of Elizabeth Inchbald, ed. Paula R. Backscheider (New York: Garland Publishing, 1980), a collection of facsimile reprints of the 1797 London edition.

3. This was a significant reversal of Burke’s earlier resistance to the Regulating Act’s incursion on property. As with so many debates on imperial governance during this period, Burke found himself arguing against a position that he had formerly held.

4. Nicholas K. Robinson, Edmund Burke: A Life in Caricature (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1996), 53.

5. See Susan Staves, “The Construction of the Public Interest in the Debates over Fox’s India Bills,” in The Intersections of the Public and Private Spheres in Early Modern England, ed. Paula Backscheider and Timothy Dystal (London: Frank Cass, 1996), 175–98, for a detailed account of the bill’s reception.

6. T. Orde to Lord Shelburne, 16 December 1783, Bowood MSS, Bodleian Library, Oxford. Quoted in Leslie G. Mitchell, Charles James Fox (London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1992), 65.

7. Orde was a Shelburnite who had a long-standing antipathy to Fox’s leadership of the party.

8. Bridget Orr, Empire on the English Stage, 1660–1714 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001), 195.

9. For a detailed discussion of the rumors in the print media about a relationship between Fox and the duchess, see Amanda Foreman, Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire (New York: Harper Collins, 1999), 130.

10. As Robinson notes, Fox called this print the most effective blow at the India Bill (53).

11. See John Brewer, Party Ideology and Popular Politics at the Accession of George III (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1976), 129–34, for an analysis of the problem faced by political parties during the early part of George III’s reign.

12. For an extended account of this influence, see F. T. H. Fletcher, Montesquieu and English Politics, 1750–1800 (London: Edwin Arnold, 1939).

13. The Parliamentary History of England, from the Earliest Period to the Year 1803, vol. 23 (London: Hansard, 1814), 136. The text here is reproduced verbatim from the Morning Chronicle, 16 December 1783. The newspaper account would have been the primary source for political observers, but for reasons of convenience I henceforth provide page references to The Parliamentary History directly in the body of the text.

14. Montesquieu, The Spirit of the Laws, trans. Anne M. Cohler, Basia Carolyn Miller, and Harold Samuel Stone (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1989), 18. All subsequent references to this work are included parenthetically in the text.

15. Louis Althusser, Montesquieu, Rousseau, Marx, trans. Ben Brewster (London: Verso, 1982), 88. All subsequent references to this text are presented parenthetically in the text.

16. As Nancy F. Koehn argues, the Whig elite was actively cultivating relations with moneyed and commercial interests all through the decade immediately following the end of the Seven Years’ War. See The Power of Commerce: Economy and Government in the First British Empire (Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press, 1994), 109.

17. The Duke of Portland was the primary spokesperson for the coalition in the House of Lords.

18. Foreman, 138. The letter is from Lord Frederick Cavendish to LS and GD, December 1783, Althorp F121, British Library, London.

19. Alain Grosrichard, The Sultan’s Court: European Fantasies of the East, trans. Liz Heron (London: Verso, 1998), 56.

20. Although the cited passage does not correspond verbatim to any known newspaper publication, it is very similar to much of the coverage of the letter. This is most likely due to the way parliamentary debate was recorded at this time. The recorder would most likely have been working from memory.

21. Morning Chronicle, 18 December 1783.

22. Morning Chronicle, 18 December 1783.

23. Grosrichard, 73.

24. Althusser, 84–85.

25. Grosrichard, 73.

26. See Edmund Burke, “Appeal from the New to the Old Whigs,” in The Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, vol. 4 (Toronto: George Morang, 1901), 211–12.

27. See Althusser, 96–106, for an elaboration of this insight.

28. See F. T. H. Fletcher, Montesquieu and English Politics (London: Edwin Arnold, 1939), 214–27, for a detailed account of how Burke’s position on colonial governance in India is thoroughly imbued with Montesquieu’s view of conquest, monarchy, and despotism.

29. Montesquieu, 119.

30. As Katherine Green has argued in “‘You Should be My Master’: Imperial Recognition Politics in Elizabeth Inchbald’s Such Things Are,” Clio 27.3 (1998): 397–99, Inchbald’s knowledge of Sumatra was most likely gleaned from William Marsden’s The History of Sumatra, Containing an Account of the Government, Laws, Customs, and Manner of the Native Inhabitants, with a Description of the Natural Productions, and a Relation of the Ancient Political State of that Island (London, 1783; reprint, New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1966) or from extracts published in the Annual Register 1783.

31. Elizabeth Inchbald, Such Things Are (London: Robinson, 1788), 2. All references to this play are included parenthetically in the text. The manuscript of Such Things Are and the submission text feature prominently in the following argument and are referred to accordingly.

32. Montesquieu, 28.

33. See Green, 407, and Betsy Bolton, Women, Nationalism and the Romantic Stage: Theatre and Politics in Britain, 1780–1800 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001), 204–6.

34. Jane Moody, “Romantic Theatre, Contemporary Legacies (Unpublished essay), 7.

35. Such Things Are 1.1, manuscript, Add 27, 575, British Library, London.

36. Elizabeth Inchbald, Such Things Are, Larpent Collection, MS 761, Huntington Library, San Marino, California, and manuscript Add 27, 575, British Library.

37. See Bolton, 211–12. In the 1808 printing of the play, Inchbald asserts that Twineall is a caricature of Lord Chesterfield. Bolton recognizes that Twineall and Flint have a great deal in common, and I believe that both figures can also be associated with Lord Temple. The suppression of the Flint/Chesterfield connection in Inchbald’s preface and the even more subterranean connection between both figures and Temple may be a function of the political danger of such an insinuation, for Twineall is laughable whereas Flint is manifestly dangerous.

38. One could read this a prophetic account of the fate of the London Corresponding Society under Pitt’s administration.

39. Italicized material appears in the manuscript and in the Larpent text.

40. Grosrichard, 73–74.

41. Elizabeth Inchbald, Such Things Are, in The British Theatre; or, A Collection of Plays, ed. Elizabeth Inchbald, vol. 23 (London: Longman, Hurst, Rees, and Orme, 1808), 2.

42. Inchbald’s 1808 “Remarks” to the play explicitly make the connection to Howard: “When this play was written, in 1786, the hero of the piece, under the name of Haswell, was on his philanthropic travels through Europe and parts of Asia, to mitigate the sufferings of the prisoner. His fame, the anxiety of his countrymen for the success of his labours, and their pride in his beneficent character, suggested to the author a subject for the following pages” (4).

43. I am grateful to Mark Stephen for pointing out the architectural similarity of the prison and the typical British jail described by Howard.

44. See Green, 405–10, for a discussion of Howard’s place in the play.

45. Inchbald’s republican tendencies at this stage in her career can be corroborated by her social intercourse with various radicals, including Godwin, and by her own theatrical meditation on the French Revolution titled The Massacre. For a brief discussion of the political implications of this unperformed tragedy, see O’Quinn, “Elizabeth Inchbald’s The Massacre: Tragedy, Violence, and the Networks of Political Fantasy,” British Women Playwrights around 1800 (June 1999), at http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bnp1800/essays/oquinn_massacre.html.

46. See chapter 4 for a discussion of the early satirical prints from the impeachment for a sense of the longevity of this argument.

47. Edmund Burke, On Empire, Liberty, and Reform: Speeches and Letters, ed. David Bromwich (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 2000), 212. All references to the Guildhall speech are included parenthetically within the text.

48. See chapter 4 for a detailed discussion of this issue.

Chapter 4. The Raree Show of Impeachment

1. Rajat Kanta Ray, “Indian Society and British Supremacy,” in The Oxford History of the British Empire, vol. 2, The Eighteenth Century, ed. P. J. Marshall (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998), 513.

2. H. V. Bowen, “British India, 1765–1813: The Metropolitan Context,” in The Oxford History of the British Empire, vol. 2, The Eighteenth Century, ed. P. J. Marshall (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998), 541. Dundas’s remarks are recorded in the Parliamentary Register, vol. 8 (1782), 32, and in Reports from Committees of the House of Commons (1783), 6:54–56.

3. Francis was Hastings’s chief rival while in India and is widely believed to have been the author of influential letters of Junius. For a discussion of Francis’s role in Burke’s pursuit of Hastings, see P. J. Marshall, The Impeachment of Warren Hastings (London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1965), 14–17.

4. Bowen, 541.

5. P. J. Marshall, introduction to The Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, vol. 6, India: The Launching of the Hastings Impeachment, 1786–1788, ed. P. J. Marshall (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991), 6.

6. See Marshall, The Impeachment, for a detailed account of the specific charges and their consolidation.

7. Marshall, The Impeachment, 70–71.

8. When speaking of historical persons I have followed Marshall’s spelling of Indian names as presented in Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, but have retained eighteenth-century spellings in the citations. For reasons of consistency, I have retained the word Oudh throughout when referring to the region of Awadh.

9. Sara Suleri, The Rhetoric of English India (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1992), 53.

10. Times, 14 February 1788.

11. See, for example, Times, 8 May 1788, and Morning Post, 14 and 19 February 1788.

12. See Suleri, 57, for a reading of this image.

13. The prints figuring the king, queen, and Thurlow taking bribes are legion.

14. Mary Dorothy George, Catalogue of Political and Personal Satires Preserved in the Department of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum, vol. 6 (London: British Museum, 1938), 470–71.

15. George, 462.

16. Anonymous, The History of the Trial of Warren Hastings, Esq. Late Governor-General of Bengal, before the High Court of Parliament in Westminster-Hall, on an Impeachment by the Commons of Great-Britain for High Crimes and Misdemeanours (London: Debrett, Vernor and Hood, 1796), 16. During the summation of the Benares charge, Grey also makes a similar distinction between the two Alexanders. See History, 19.

17. Jane Moody, Illegitimate Theatre in London, 1770–1840 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2000), 16.

18. Moody, 17.

19. Moody, 18.

20. For a discussion of this passage, see Suleri, 29.

21. Edmund Burke, A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and the Beautiful, ed. James T. Boulton (Notre Dame: Univ. of Notre Dame Press, 1968), 82.

22. The image of Burke, Sheridan, and Fox on the terrace bears a remarkable resemblance to a “turn-up” advertisement for a Punch show at Bartholomew Fair. Close scrutiny of The Raree Show can generate a fairly complete image of a Punch show. With Fox as Punch, Thurlow is cast as the Devil, and the Prince of Wales can be construed as the Baby. Significantly, in the eighteenth century Punch almost always gets embroiled in a fight with the devil and frequently comes out the winner.

23. History, 17.

24. See History, 11.

25. History, 11.

26. Suleri, 28–29.

27. Burke, Philosophical Enquiry, 38.

28. Paul Hindson and Tim Gray, Burke’s Dramatic Theory of Politics (Avebury: Aldershot, 1988).

29. Burke, Philosophical Enquiry, 40.

30. Burke, Philosophical Enquiry, 82.

31. Peter Linebaugh, London’s Hanged: Crime and Civil Society in the Eighteenth Century (London: Penguin Books, 1993).

32. Burke, Philosophical Enquiry, 47.

33. Edmund Burke, “Speech on Fox’s India Bill 1 December 1783,” in Edmund Burke, The Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, vol. 5, ed. P. J. Marshall (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981), 389.

34. Speech, 18 February 1788, in Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, 6:420–21.

35. Public Advertiser, 27 February 1788. The same story appears verbatim in the Times, 26 February 1788. See also Morning Chronicle, 20 February 1788, for an account of Hastings’s impassiveness.

36. For a forceful discussion of the relationship between Burke’s deployment of sympathy in the impeachment speeches and in the Reflections, see Andrew McCann, Cultural Politics in the 1790s: Literature, Radicalism and the Public Sphere (Houndmills: Macmillan, 1999), 33–58.

37. Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France, ed. Conor Cruise O’Brien (New York: Penguin, 1986), 175.

38. Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, 6:421.

39. Frances Ferguson, Solitude and the Sublime: Romanticism and the Aesthetics of Individuation (New York: Routledge, 1992), 50–53. The relevant passage in Burke’s A Philosophical Enquiry makes the breast the prime example of the beautiful (115). For an extended discussion of Burke’s complex deployment of maternal figures in his political writings, see Deidre Lynch, “Domesticating Fictions and Nationalizing Women: Edmund Burke, Property, and the Reproduction of Englishness,” in Romanticism, Race, and Imperial Culture, 1780–1834, ed. Alan Richardson and Sonia Hofkosh (Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press, 1996), 40–71.

40. Nicholas K. Robinson, Edmund Burke: A Life in Caricature (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1996), 98.

41. Dent had used glasses as a device in an earlier satire on Burke, see Impeachment (BM 6926).

42. See Robinson, 111.

43. The citation is multilayered because the lines “Black spirits and white, red spirits and grey, / mingle, mingle, mingle, you that may” are from William Davenant’s The Witch 5.2, but they also drifted into eighteenth-century versions of Macbeth via Davenant’s preparation of the play for the King’s Men in 1674. The song was usually introduced during Hecate’s prophecy in Macbeth 3.5.

44. History, 4.

45. Anna Clark, Scandal: The Sexual Politics of the British Constitution (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 2003), 98. Sheridan’s remarks are from the Public Advertiser, 10 June 1788.

46. Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, 5:390.

47. For an illuminating reading of this print and its relation to the Burkean sublime, see Srinivas Aravamudan, Tropicopolitans: Colonialism and Agency, 1688–1804 (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1999), 223–29.

48. George, 484–85.

49. George, 485.

50. William Shakespeare, Hamlet, in The Complete Works, ed. Alfred Harbage (New York: Viking Press, 1969), 3.2.359–69.

51. See Clark, 98. For a useful discussion of the convergence between Burke’s rhetoric and the conventions of Gothic romance, see Frans De Bruyn, “Edmund Burke’s Gothic Romance: The Portrayal of Warren Hastings in Burke’s Writings and Speeches on India,” Criticism 29.4 (1987): 415–38.

52. Speeches of the Late Right Honourable Richard Brinsley Sheridan, 2 vols. (London: Patrick Martin, 1816), 1:291. The record of Sheridan’s great oration is quite incomplete even by late eighteenth-century standards. For a brief historical account of Bahu Begam’s political power and her conflicts with the East India Company, see Clark, 89–92.

53. Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, 5:411.

54. The quotation is from Tacitus, Agricola, 45: “The flight and exile of most honorable women.”

55. Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, 5:419.

56. Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, 5:402–3.

57. Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, 5:403.

58. Speeches of Sheridan, 1:272.

59. Speeches of Sheridan, 1:271.

60. See Julie Carlson, “Trying Sheridan’s Pizarro,” Texas Studies in Literature and Language 38.3–4 (Fall–Winter 1996): 366.

61. See Marshall, The Impeachment, 120–21, for a discussion of the collapse of Hastings’s first defense against the Begams charge.

62. Speeches of Sheridan, 2:112–13. See Speeches, 1:291, for another reinscription of the birds-of-prey image.

63. Clark, 98.

64. Speeches of Sheridan, 2:116.

65. Speeches of Sheridan, 2:116.

66. Carlson, 368.

67. Marshall, Impeachment, 109.

68. Speeches of Sheridan, 2:117.

69. Laura Brown, The Ends of Empire: Women and Ideology in Early Eighteenth-Century English Literature (Ithaca: Cornell Univ. Press., 1993), 64–102, for a discussion of this dramatic mode.

70. Speeches of Sheridan, 2:65.

71. Carlson, 368.

72. As Clark notes, “the impeachment was the only political event extensively covered in the Ladies Magazine during the 1780s (96).

73. Speeches of Sheridan, 2:64.

74. Carlson, 368.

75. History, 40.

76. Morning Post, 23 April 1788.

77. Morning Post, 23 April 1788. The degree to which the crowd reaction to this reading is reported varies from paper to paper. For example, Morning Chronicle does not record Burke’s remarks, but the Times, 23 April 1788, exhibits a certain level of censorship by not expatiating on the reaction of the women in the audience: “[T]he clerk read several extracts [from Cantemir’s History of the Turks] to show the sacred manner with which their customs were observed. This was to point out the severity with which the mother of the Begums had been treated. Every mother among those of rank, is treated with the highest respect, and is consulted on all occasions, and among other customs, it is usual on every Biram for the mother to present a beautiful virgin for her son’s use.”

78. Times, 13 May 1788.

79. The story of Daniel and Susanna is one of the earliest detective stories, and various elements of the narrative resonate with elements of the Hastings trial. Divided into two sections, the story tells of the failed seduction of Joakim’s wife Susanna by two elder judges and her successful and unconventional defense by the divinely inspired Daniel. In the seduction scene, the lusting elders watch Susanna preparing to bathe and immediately corner her when she is left alone in her garden. They demand that she yield to them or they will give evidence against her that she was committing adultery with an unidentified man and dismissed her maids in order to be with him. Although she is entrapped, Susanna refuses to yield; the judges bring false evidence against her, and she is condemned until Daniel questions the two men separately and demonstrates that their evidence is fundamentally contradictory. Daniel’s successful defense of Susanna restores her innocence and leads to the execution of the judges.

80. Times, 13 May 1788.

81. For an illuminating account of the place of Mrs. Armstead in Fox’s public and private life, see I. M. Davis, The Harlot and the Statesman (London: Kensall Press, 1986).

Chapter 5. Molière’s Old Woman

1. Sara Suleri, The Rhetoric of English India (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1992), 62. All subsequent references are presented parenthetically in the text.

2. Frances Burney, The Diary and Letters of Madame D’Arblay, vol. 4 (London: Colburn, 1854), 39. All subsequent references to this work are made parenthetically within the text.

3. William Shakespeare, Merchant of Venice, in The Complete Works, ed. Alfred Harbage (New York: Viking Press, 1969), 4.1.182–90.

4. As we will see later in this chapter, Evelina is a helpful intertext because much of its attention is focused on the difficulties associated with Miss Mirvan’s limited social purview.

5. William Windham would later become secretary of war. I have retained Burney’s spelling of his name to avoid confusion.

6. For an extended analysis of the double bind faced by women writers in relation to the public sphere of politics, see Mary Poovey, The Proper Lady and the Woman Writer: The Ideology of Style in Mary Wollstonecraft, Jane Austen and Mary Shelley (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1984).

7. Peter de Bolla, The Discourse of the Sublime: History, Aesthetics and the Subject (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1989), 151.

8. The Peers decided that evidence against Hastings relating to all the charges would be heard in their entirety before he would be called on to defend himself. This decision meant that the rules of evidence would follow those of civil rather than parliamentary procedure and all but guaranteed Hastings’s acquittal.

9. Times, 23 February 1788.

10. Anonymous, The History of the Trial of Warren Hastings, Esq. Late Governor-General of Bengal, before the High Court of Parliament in Westminster-Hall, on an Impeachment by the Commons of Great-Britain for High Crimes and Misdemeanours (London: Debrett, Vernor and Hood, 1796), 4.

11. History, 4–5.

12. History, 13.

13. History, 13.

14. See John Barrell, English Literature in History, 1730–1800: An Equal Wide Survey (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1983), 111, and de Bolla, 164.

15. Roxann Wheeler, The Complexion of Race: Categories of Difference in Eighteenth-Century British Culture (Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 2000), 197–98. See also Nicholas Hudson, Writing and European Thought, 1600–1830 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1994), 102, and Michèle Cohen, Fashioning Masculinity: National Identity and Language in the Eighteenth Century (London: Routledge, 1996), 53, for further discussion of Johnson’s views regarding the coterminality of national identity, language, and appropriate masculinity.

16. Thomas Sheridan, A Dissertation on the causes of the difficulties which occur in learning the English tongue. With a scheme for publishing an English gram-

mar and dictionary upon a plan entirely new (London, 1762), 36. Quoted in de Bolla,164.

17. De Bolla, 164.

18. De Bolla, 165.

19. De Bolla, 166.

20. De Bolla 167.

21. Wyndham was one of Johnson’s closest associates in his later years.

22. Burney was not present for the third day of the opening speech in which Burke narrated the atrocities at Rangpur.

23. History, 4.

24. See Elizabeth D. Samet, “A Prosecutor and a Gentleman: Edmund Burke’s Idiom of Impeachment,” ELH 68 (2001): 397–418, for an illuminating discussion of the Ciceronian qualities of Burke’s oratory. Burney’s disapprobation of Burke’s violence is a sign of her impatience with the “boldness” of Burke’s idiom.

25. Morning Chronicle, 20 February 1788, for an account of Hastings’s impassiveness.

26. Public Advertiser, 27 February 1788. The same story appears verbatim in the Times, 26 February 1788.

27. Gina Campbell, “How to Read Like a Gentleman: Burney’s Instructions to Her Critics in Evelina,” ELH 57 (1990): 557–84.

Part III. A Theatre of Perpetual War

1. T. C. Hansard, ed., The Parliamentary Debates, from the Year 1803 to the Present Time, vol. 4 (London: Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, Brown, 1805), 251. Quoted in Sudipta Sen, Distant Sovereignty: National Imperialism and the Origins of the British India (New York: Routledge, 2002), 25.

2. William Shakespeare, Macbeth, in The Complete Works, ed. Alfred Harbage (New York: Viking Press, 1969), 3.4.136–40.

3. Joseph Roach, Cities of the Dead: Circum-Atlantic Performance (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1996), 2.

4. John Brewer, Sinews of Power: War, Money and the English State, 1688–1783 (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1989).

5. Ann Laura Stoler, Race and the Education of Desire: Foucault’s History of Sexuality and the Colonial Order of Things (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1995), 49.

6. Michel Foucault, History of Sexuality, vol. 1, trans. Robert Hurley (New York: Vintage, 1980), 149.

7. Stoler, 64–65.

8. Michel Foucault, “Society Must Be Defended” : Lectures at the Collège de France, 1975–76, trans. David Macey (New York: Picador, 2003), 60–61.

9. Foucault, Society, 62.

10. As Joseph Lew argues in “The Necessary Orientalist? The Giaour and Nineteenth-Century Imperialist Misogyny,” in Romanticism, Race, and Imperial Culture, 1780–1834, ed. Alan Richardson and Sonia Hofkosh (Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press, 1996), “Miscegenation became a problem when the British abandoned the rather clear-headed thinking of Warren Hastings and many of his contemporaries, who realized that the British had conquered and ruled parts of India because of temporary technological and organizational advantages” (196).

11. See my “Mercantile Deformities: George Colman’s Inkle and Yarico and the Racialization of Class Relations,” Theatre Journal 54.3 (October 2002): 389–410.

12. Stoler, 99.

13. See Nicholas B. Dirks, Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 2001), 111, for a succinct statement of this policy of erasure.

Chapter 6. Starke Reforms

1. Bruce P. Lenman, “Colonial Wars and Imperial Instability, 1688–1793,” in The Oxford History of the British Empire, vol. 2, The Eighteenth Century, ed. P. J. Marshall (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998), 165–66.

2. Linda Colley, Captives (New York: Pantheon, 2002), 270.

3. The printed version most easily available if not easily read is a Dublin edition of 1790. The title page records that the play was “First Performed at The Theatre Royal, in the Hay-Market, On Saturday, August the 5th, 1788,” and indicates that “The Lines in inverted Commas, are ommitted in Representation.” The document therefore simultaneously records the public performance script and provides a longer version suited to the private act of reading. All references to the play are to this second edition.

4. See E. M. Collingham, Imperial Bodies: The Physical Experience of the Raj, c. 1800–1947 (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2001), 13–49, for an account of Indianization in the late eighteenth century, and William Dalrymple, White Mughals: Love and Betrayal in Eighteenth-Century India (London: Harper Collins, 2002), 3–54, for some sense of the high degree of integration between Company officials and Indian merchants and servants.

5. See Michael Duffy, “World-Wide War and British Expansion, 1793–1815,” in The Oxford History of the British Empire, vol. 2, The Eighteenth Century, ed. P. J. Marshall (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998), 202, for an account of the expansion of the East India Company army during this period.

6. See Franklin Wickwire and Mary Wickwire, Cornwallis: The Imperial Years (Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina Press, 1980), 107–16, for an account of Cornwallis’s military reforms in India.

7. Correspondence of Charles, First Marquis Cornwallis, vol. 1, ed. Charles Ross (London: John Murray, 1859), 523–24. This is part of a letter to the court of directors of the East India Company. One of the key problems was that soldiers working for the Company were paid and promoted differently than soldiers working for the Crown; see Correspondence, 229–31.

8. Correspondence, 225.

9. As C. A. Bayly argues, there were similar “campaigns against the ‘hydra of dubashism’ and the corruption of the banians. . . . Cornwallis moved heavily against European revenue officers involved in Indian trade and tried to create a wall of regulations to separate the Indian and European worlds” (149). See Imperial Meridian: The British Empire and the World, 1780–1830 (London: Long-man, 1989), 133–62, for a wide-ranging account of the consolidation of racial and social hierarchies from the governor-generalship of Cornwallis.

10. Cited in Wickwire and Wickwire, 110.

11. As emphasized in Bayly, 149, and Beth Fowkes Tobin, Picturing Imperial Power: Colonial Subjects in Eighteenth-Century British Painting (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1999), 117–18. Cornwallis’s reforms were designed not only to minimize the amount of intermingling between British and Indian subjects in the realms of commerce and civil administration, but also to avert miscegenation.

12. See Collingham, 51–89, for a detailed account the segregation policies that infused nineteenth-century Anglo-Indian relations. See also Sudipta Sen, Distant Sovereignty: National Imperialism and the Origins of British India (New York: Routledge, 2002), 119–49, for a discussion of “the decline of intimacy” promulgated during the Raj.

13. William Mackintosh’s satirical portrait of the indolence and extravagance of the British in Calcutta had wide circulation in the early 1780s. See William Mackintosh, Travels in Europe, Asia, and Africa, 2 vols. (London, 1782), 2:214–16, and Kate Teltscher’s analysis of the scene in India Inscribed: European and British Writing on India, 1600–1800 (Delhi: Oxford Univ. Press, 1995), 160–61.

14. Teltscher, 160.

15. Cornwallis is I believe the most obvious alter ego, but Northcote’s character also incorporates some of the qualities of Augustus Cleveland and his namesake Lord North. All three figures circulate as sober examples of civilized British governance. During the trial of Clive, Lord North was portrayed as the rat catcher who was responsible for cleaning up the Company. See Percival Spear, Master of Bengal: Clive and His India (London: Thames and Hudson, 1975), 187. As Teltscher argues (121–24), Augustus Cleveland operated as the figure for the myth of benevolent British rule throughout the 1780s and 1790s. During the trial of Warren Hastings, Hastings’s defense frequently invoked the figure of Cleveland and the narrative of civilizing rule in an exculpatory fashion through a series of Indian testimonials (Teltscher,181). Cornwallis was frequently celebrated as a corrective to the excesses of previous colonial administrators. For an explicit discussion of the parallels between Northcote and Cornwallis, see Jeanne Moskal, “English National Identity in Mariana Starke’s The Sword of Peace: India, Abolition and the Rights of Women,” in Women in British Romantic Theatre: Drama, Performance, and Society, 1790–1840, ed. Catherine Burroughs (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2000), 102–31.

16. For detailed accounts of these texts, see Allen Edwardes, The Rape of India: A Biography of Lord Clive and a Sexual History of the Conquest of Hindustan (New York: Julian Press, 1966). Edwardes’s analysis should be treated with some skepticism, but unlike other biographers of Clive, he provides copious examples of the sexual discourse surrounding Clive.

17. For a detailed analysis of the place of sexual violence in Burke’s opening charge, see Sara Suleri, The Rhetoric of English India (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1992), 60–64.

18. Morning Chronicle and London Advertiser, 11 August 1788.

19. See Moskal, 102–32, for a sustained discussion of the play’s abolitionist rhetoric. Jeffrey Cox also includes the play in his volume of abolitionist drama collected in Peter J. Kitson and Debbie Lee, eds., Slavery, Abolition and Emancipation: Writings in the British Romantic Period, vol. 5 (London: Pickering and Chatto, 1999).

20. Rajat Kanta Ray, “Indian Society and the Establishment of British Supremacy, 1765–1818,” in The Oxford History of the British Empire, vol. 2, The Eighteenth Century, ed. P. J. Marshall (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1998), 512.

21. See Kathleen Wilson, The Sense of the People: Politics, Culture and Imperialism in England, 1715–1785 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995), 185–205, for an illuminating discussion of the feminization of the body politic and imperial degeneracy.

22. Teltscher, 172. Marshall makes this point in The Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, vol. 6, ed. P. J. Marshall (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1991), 5.

23. See O’Quinn, “Mercantile Deformities: George Colman’s Inkle and Yarico and the Racialization of Class Relations,” Theatre Journal 54.3 (October 2002): 389–410.

24. Morning Chronicle and London Advertiser, 11 August 1788.

25. Deidre Lynch, The Economy of Character: Novels, Market Culture, and the Business of Inner Meaning (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1999), 38.

26. See Roxann Wheeler, The Complexion of Race: Categories of Difference in Eighteenth-Century British Culture (Philadelphia: Univ. of Pennsylvania Press, 2000), 17–21, for the mutually supporting roles played by complexion and costume at this historical juncture.

27. See Mackintosh, 214–16.

28. For the use of the term country born, see Anonymous [Phoebe Gibbes], Hartly House Calcutta (London: Pluto Press, 1989), and Felicity Nussbaum’s discussion of the novel in Torrid Zones: Maternity, Sexuality, and Empire in Eighteenth-Century English Narratives (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1995), 167–91.

29. David Kunzle, The Early Comic Strip: Narrative Strips and Picture Stories in the European Broadsheet from c. 1450–1825 (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1973), 360–61.

30. Morning Chronicle and London Advertiser, 11 August 1788.

31. See O’Quinn, 398.

32. Morning Chronicle and London Advertiser, 11 August 1788.

33. This is nowhere more evident than in the repeated assertion of Mrs. Tartar’s indolence.

34. In her response to an earlier version of this chapter, Marjean Purinton examines the masculinization of Eliza and Louisa at the level of the play’s narrative specifically around their mission to acquire Clairville’s sword. See “Response to Daniel J. O’Quinn’s Essay: Dancing and Duelling in Mariana Starke’s Sword of Peace,” British Women Playwrights around 1800, at http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/purinton_sword.html. She argues that both women don the mask of masculinity in relation to an overtly feminized and idealized India. Her analysis resonates with Balachandra Rajan’s discussion in “Feminizing the Feminine: Early Women Writers on India” of the feminization of Indian space in late eighteenth-century narrative representations of India and constitutes an important area of consideration that lies beyond the scope of this chapter. See Rajan, Under Western Eyes: India from Milton to Macauley (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1999), 118–38.

35. Donna Andrew, “The Code of Honour and Its Critics: The Opposition to Duelling in England, 1700–1850,” Social History 5 (1980): 411.

36. Andrew, 429.

37. In Reading the East India Company, 1720–1840: Colonial Currencies of Gender (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 2004), Betty Joseph has recently demonstrated how gendered rhetoric and the cult of domesticity were incorporated not only into representations of colonial life but also into the articulation of colonial policy. See especially 61–122.

38. St. James Chronicle, 13 January 1791.

39. Nicholas B. Dirks, Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India (Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 2001), 123.

40. Dirks, 111.

41. E. P. Thompson identifies this misrecognition as a form of nostalgia for Whig oligarchy in Customs in Common: Studies in Traditional Popular Culture (New York: New Press, 1993), 167–75.

42. Bayly, 186.

43. Sen, 93.

44. Quoted in Sen, 93.

45. The Widow of Malabar was performed for Miss Brunton’s benefit on 6 May 1790 and revived for a successful run the following winter with performances on 12, 14, 19, and 26 January and 2, 9, 16, and 23 February 1791. Starke’s play is an adaptation of Le Mierre’s La veuve du Malabar, ou L’empire des coutumes. All references are to Mariana Starke, The Widow of Malabar (London: William Lane, 1791) and are included parenthetically in the text.

46. As Dirks states, “All the talk of improvement notwithstanding, no Indian public was recruited by (or to) the contradictory logic of colonial sovereignty. Colonial governmentality consisted of a bureaucracy without sovereignty, or rather a form of sovereignty abstracted from even the most minimal conceits of political representation” (123).

47. European Magazine and London Review, May 1790, 388.

48. Dorothy M. Figueira, “Die Flambierte Frau: Sati in European Culture,” in Sati, the Blessing and the Curse, ed. John Stratton Hawley (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1994), 61. See Paul B. Courtwright, “The Iconographies of Sati,” in Sati, the Blessing and the Curse, ed. John Stratton Hawley (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1994), 27–49; Lata Mani, Contentious Traditions: The Debate on Sati in Colonial India (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1998); Nussbaum, Torrid Zones, 182–88; and Monika Fludernik, “Suttee Revisited: From the Iconography of Martyrdom to the Burkean Sublime,” New Literary History 30 (1999): 411–37, for discussions of the representation of suttee in the late eighteenth century.

49. Figueira, 62.

50. For a discussion of these parodies, see Figueira, 62.

51. For a history of private theatricals in the period, see Sybil Marion Rosenfeld, Temples of Thespis: Some Private Theatres and Theatricals in England and Wales, 1700–1820 (London: Society for Theatre Research, 1978).

52. The St. James Chronicle, 6 May 1790, states that “Miss Brunton last night produced for her benefit a new Tragedy under the title of The Widow of Malabar.”

53. Starke wrote an address for Miss Brunton which is included in the Larpent text. See Mariana Starke, The Widow of Malabar, Larpent Collection, MS 869, Huntington Library, San Marino, California.

54. See Jon Mee, “‘Reciprocal Expressions of Kindness’: Robert Merry, Della Cruscanism and the Limits of Sociability,” in Romantic Sociability: Social Networks and Literary Culture in Britain, 1770–1840, ed. Gillian Russell and Clara Tuite (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002), 104–22, for a discussion of Merry’s radical activities. The Morning Chronicle, 5 February 1791, described her engagement at the end of the run as follows: “Miss Brunton, it is said, is soon to be married. Is it from her charming representation of a Widow, that she has recommended herself to appear in this new character.”

55. Lucyle Werkmeister, A Newspaper History of England, 1792–3 (Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska Press, 1967), 39, identifies Merry as one of the preeminent opposition journalists practicing in 1792.

56. New Lady’s Magazine, May 1790, 262.

57. English Review, May 1791, 387.

58. Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France, ed. Conor Cruise O’Brien (New York: Penguin, 1986), 92–93.

59. See John Zephaniah Holwell, Interesting Historical Events Relative to the Provinces of Bengal and the Empire of Indostan, vol. 2 (London, 1767), and Alexander Dow, The History of Hindostan, vol. 1 (London, 1768). Both accounts of suttee are reprinted in P. J. Marshall, The British Discovery of Hinduism in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1970), 91–97 and 116, respectively. Aside from these widely read sources, there are accounts of suttee published in the Gentleman’s Magazine during the thirty years leading up to the production of the play. The most extensive version appears in a letter in volume 47 (1777) and, unlike some earlier accounts, adamantly argues that “it was intirely a voluntary act” (591).

60. The mirror and the dagger are ritual accessories of the sati that rarely appear in eighteenth-century accounts. The former object signifies her devotion to her husband because it is part of both female puberty rites and marriage ritual. The dagger signifies ritual sacrifice and is often accompanied by a lemon. For a discussion of the iconographic qualities of these objects, see Catherine Weinberger-Thomas, Ashes of Immortality: Widow Burning in India, trans. Jeffrey Mehlman and David Gordon White (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1999), 52–84.

61. Gazetteer and Daily Advertiser, January 12, 1791.

62. Gazetteer and Daily Advertiser, January 14, 1791.

63. See my introduction to the edition of The Ton on British Women Playwrights around 1800 website for a more detailed discussion of the politics of vice in this play: http://www.etang.umontreal.ca/bwp1800/essays/oquinn_ton_intro.html.

64. Morning Chronicle, 15 January 1791.

65. Morning Chronicle, 19 January 1791. The poem also appears in the Public Advertiser, 20 January 1791.

66. Morning Chronicle, 17 January 1791.

67. See the World, 13 January 1791, and Star, 13 January 1791.

68. St. James Chronicle, 20 January 1791.

69. New London Magazine, January 1791, 46.

70. Public Advertiser, 14 January 1791.

71. See Dror Wahrman, Imagining the Middle Class: The Political Representation of Class in Britain, c. 1780–1840 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995), 24.

72. See Wahrman, 31–63.

73. I am working from the epilogue printed in the World and the Whitehall Evening Post on 6 May 1790 and the Public Advertiser on 8 May 1790 and not from the epilogue printed with the play. The latter version is missing a key passage where Mrs. Mattocks addresses the ladies in the audience that was in the epilogue submitted to Larpent. The short version of the epilogue makes its first appearance in the newspapers following the plays revival in January 1791. See the Gazetteer and Daily Advertiser for 19 January 1791, and the General Evening Post, Public Advertiser, and Star for 20 January 1791.

74. R. J. Starke, “Epilogue to The Widow of Malabar,” World, 6 May 1790, lines 37–46.

75. “Epilogue,” lines 47–57.

76. For a succinct account of the emergence of the ryotwari system and the displacement of Cornwallis rules, see Dirks, 111–16. For a more extended discussion of this issue, see Burton Stein, Thomas Munro: The Origins of the Colonial State and His Vision of Empire (Delhi: Oxford Univ. Press, 1989).

Chapter 7. War and Precinema

1. Jane Moody’s Illegitimate Theatre in London, 1770–1840 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2000) and Richard Altick’s The Shows of London (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1978) offer exhaustive accounts of this transformation.

2. For overviews of these developments at Astley’s, see Marius Kwint, “The Legitimation of the Circus in Late Georgian England,” Past and Present 174 (February 2002): 72–115.

3. Orrin Wang has recently suggested that romanticism is already a precinematic age in his extraordinary reading of “Lamia.” See “Coming Attractions: Lamia and Cinematic Sensation,” Studies in Romanticism 42.4 (Winter 2003): 461–500.

4. Michel Foucault, “Society Must Be Defended” : Lectures at the Collège de France, 1975–76, trans. David Macey (New York: Picador, 2003), 249–51.

5. The canonical treatment of this misadventure remains Ranajit Guha, A Rule of Property for Bengal: An Essay on the Idea of Permanent Settlement (Durham: Duke Univ. Press, 1996).

6. Joseph Roach, Cities of the Dead: Circum-Atlantic Performance (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1996), 2.

7. After this highly topical array of productions, Tipu does not return to the stage until the 1820s. The most notable productions are J. H. Amherst’s Tippoo Saib; or, The Storming of Seringapatam, which was produced at the Royal Coburg Theatre on 20 January 1823 and The Storming of Seringapatam; or, The Death of Tippoo Saib, which was produced at Astley’s in the spring of 1829. See Denys Forrest, Tiger of Mysore: The Life and Death of Tipu Sultan (London: Chatto and Windus, 1970), 318–21, for descriptions of these plays.

8. See Kate Teltscher, India Inscribed: European and British Writings on India, 1600–1800 (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1995), 230–31, for a discussion of Burke’s often mercurial appraisal of Hyder Ali as an able statesman in the Annual Register.

9. Teltscher, 238. Teltscher’s argument here is indebted to C. A. Bayly discussion of this issue in Imperial Meridian: The British Empire and the World, 1780–1830 (London: Longman, 1989), 59–60, and resonates with much of Homi Bhabha’s discussion of colonial ambivalence in “Of Mimicry and Man,” and “Sly Civility,” in The Location of Culture (New York: Routledge, 1994), 85–101.

10. See Franklin Wickwire and Mary Wickwire, Cornwallis: The Imperial Years (Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina Press, 1980), for a detailed account of the place of prior American experience in Cornwallis’s correspondence on Medows’s failures in Mysore in 1790.

11. See also Dent’s Rare News from India; or, Things Going On Swimmingly in the East, also in the Department of Prints and Drawings, The British Museum

(BM 7928), and Mary Dorothy George’s discussion of these prints in Catalogue of Political and Personal Satires Preserved in the Department of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum, vol. 6 (London: British Museum, 1938), 819–20.

12. One of these narratives was printed concurrently with the reporting on Fox’s speech on the Benares charge in the first season of the Hastings impeachment. See Morning Chronicle, 20 February 1788. The same extract from William Thomson’s Memoirs of the Late War in Asia. With a Narrative of the imprisonment and suffering of our officers and soldiers: By an Officer of Colonel Baillie’s Detachment, 2 vols. (London, 1788) appeared in the Public Advertiser, 23 February 1788.

13. Teltscher, 240.

14. Teltscher, 243.

15. Teltscher, 243.

16. For a thorough account of the theatricalization of the war with France, see Gillian Russell, The Theatres of War: Performance, Politics, and Society, 1793–1815 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), and Moody, 27.

17. See Forrest, 152–56, and Wickwire and Wickwire, 119–78, for descriptions of the campaign. It is not difficult to imagine the attraction of a conflict involving elephants and extraordinary colonial armies for Astley’s viewers.

18. Morning Chronicle, 14 April 1792.

19. Oracle, 11 April 1792.

20. Star and Daily Advertiser, 17 May 1792.

21. Astley’s drew an extremely diverse crowd. On this issue, see Kwint, 109.

22. Oracle, 20 April 1792.

23. Moody, 27.

24. Manuel De Landa, War in the Age of Intelligent Machines (New York: Swerve Editions, 1994), 68.

25. For a discussion of this development, see De Landa, 65–67.

26. Quoted in Teltscher, 241.

27. Mark Wilks, Historical Sketches of the South of India in an Attempt to Trace the History of Mysore, vol. 3 (London, 1810–17), 135–36. Quoted in Forrest, 158.

28. De Landa, 65.

29. See Altick, 50–76, for a discussion of clockwork entertainments and exhibitions of mechanical ingenuity.

30. Quoted in Forrest, 317–18. Forrest also cites descriptions of “Tippoo’s palace in the cypress garden” in the second act, which state that it was in “the first style of Grecian architecture, with this happy difference that the chimneys rise in the form of minarets . . . and give a magnificent effect to the whole” (318).

31. Tippoo Saib; or, East-India Campaigning opened on April 30, 1792. The play is likely based on A Genuine Narrative of the Sufferings of the British Prisoners of War, Taken by His Son, Tippoo Saib, which Francis Robson published as an appendix to his Life of Hyder Ally (London, 1786). This supposition is based on the order of events in the plot.

32. Public Advertiser, 14 May 1792.

33. Public Advertiser, 14 May 1792.

34. Teltscher, 245.

35. Public Advertiser, 14 May 1792.

36. Gazetteer/New Daily Advertiser, 2 May 1792. There is a distinct possibility that this part of the narrative is based on the much-celebrated sepoy Sayyad Ibrahim, who was imprisoned with the British officers at Seringapatam and who was celebrated for his loyalty in Thomson’s Memoirs of the Late War and in Wilks’s Historical Sketches. See Teltscher, 245, for a discussion of the Company’s celebration of him as an exemplary figure.

37. This anticipation was also enacted in the realm of public affairs when Parliament opened in January 1792. Pitt, Dundas, and others reported that Seringapatam had fallen, East India Company stocks jumped, and all was proved to be inaccurate. As one might expect, the print satirists were quick to capitalize on what was perceived to be an attempt to falsely boost credit. For a discussion of the prints, see George, 886–87, 906–9.

38. See Wickwire and Wickwire, 170–71, and Forrest, for descriptions of this event.

39. Both the World and Madras Courier indicate that there were too many illuminations to describe within the confines of their extensive coverage of the event.

40. Wickwire and Wickwire, 173. This description is derived from the Calcutta Gazette, 26 April 1792.

41. See Jill H. Casid, “‘His Master’s Obi’: Machine Magic, Colonial Violence, and Transculturation,” in Visual Culture Reader, ed. Nicholas Mirzoeff (New York: Routledge, 2002), 533–45.

42. P. J. Marshall, “‘Cornwallis Triumphant’: War in India and the British Public in the Late Eighteenth Century,” in War, Strategy and International Politics, ed. Lawrence Freedman, Paul Hayes, and Robert O’Neill (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1992), 71–72.

43. World (Calcutta), 28 April 1792. A similarly detailed account of the illuminations can be found in the Madras Courier, 17 May 1792.

44. Madras Courier, 17 May 1792.

45. Madras Courier, 17 May 1792.

46. Madras Courier, 17 May 1792.

47. See Marshall, 62–63, for a sampling of the verse.

48. See Marshall, 64. The transparencies were arranged for Cornwallis’s arrival in London in early April 1794. According to the General Evening Post, 5–8 April 1794, the scene of Cornwallis accepting the hostages was projected onto Mansion House, whereas a more insidious transparency was projected outside Orme’s print shop in Old Bond Street: “On the one side India presenting the bust of Lord Cornwallis to Britannia who receives him in full suit of armour, with sentiments of reverence and respect; at the top the figure of fame, with a crown of laurel, and a motto of the eastern conqueror. On the side of India, in the distance an elephant and an Indian pagoda, or place of worship; on the side of Britannia, a lion and St. Paul’s Cathedral.” See Teltscher, 248–52; Forrest, 347–50; and Marshall, 71–72, for discussions of the discursive and pictorial construction of Cornwallis’s victory as an act of paternal benevolence.

49. This account was first published in the Madras Courier and reprinted in Gentleman’s Magazine 72 (1792): 760. For thorough accounts of the discursive construction of this event and its significance for popular acceptance of British policy in India, see Marshall, “‘Cornwallis Triumphant,’” and Teltscher, 248–51.

50. Oracle, 20 August 1792.

51. The Public Advertiser, 25 August 1792, reports that Sadler’s Wells plans to present the deliverance of the hostage sons to Cornwallis as part of “an ornamental Picture of the Times” during an evening of various entertainments.

52. Oracle, 21 August 1792.

53. Oracle, 24 August 1792.

54. It is unlikely that Tipu’s cannibalism refers to the remarkable automaton Tipu commissioned from French craftsmen in the 1780s popularly known as “Tippoo’s Tiger.” The automaton presents the viewer with an English red-coat being consumed by a tiger. For a detailed analysis of the automaton’s provenance, see Mildred Archer, Tippoo’s Tiger (London: Victoria and Albert Museum, 1959).

55. Oracle, 24 August 1792.

56. See Moody’s exhaustive account of this process of disintegration.

57. All references to James Cobb’s Ramah Droog embedded in the text are to the version reprinted in volume 6 of Elizabeth Inchbald’s The Modern Theatre: A Collection of Successful Modern Plays, 10 vols. (London: Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme and Brown, 1811), 138–91. The coincidence of Bluebeard and Ramah Droog on the same evening provides a particularly condensed entry point for a discussion of the supersession of “legitimate” theatre by various forms of spectacular entertainment. The following is John Genest’s appraisal of Cobb’s opera in Some Account of the English Stage, from the Restoration in 1660 to 1830, 10 vols. (Bath: H. E. Carrington, 1832): “[T]he comic scenes are farcical—the serious scenes are dull to the last degree—yet this piece was acted 35 times—Cumberland, in his Passive Husband, makes Starling say—I write professedly rank nonsense—Runic. Why do you so?—Starling. Because I write to live, and ’tis the readiest money at the market” (7:430). Genest’s invocation of Cumberland resonates with the latter’s assessment of the London stage at the turn of the century: “I have stood firm for the corps into which I enrolled myself, and never disgraced my colours by abandoning the cause of legitimate comedy, to whose service I am sworn, and in whose defence I have kept the field for nearly half a century, till at last I have survived all true national taste, and lived to see buffoonery, spectacle and puerility so effectually triumph, that now to be repulsed from the stage is to be recommended to the closet, and to be applauded by the theatre is little else than a passport to the puppet-show” (Memoirs, quoted in Barry Sutcliffe, Plays by George Colman the Younger and Thomas Morton [Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1983], 3). For a useful discussion of the volatile critical climate for spectacles such as Bluebeard and Ramah Droog, see Sutcliffe, 1–13.

58. Morning Herald, 13 November 1798.

59. Morning Herald, 13 November 1798. As Mita Choudhury argues in “Gazing at His Seraglio: Late Eighteenth-Century Women Playwrights as Orientalists,” Theatre Journal 47 (1995): 483, scenes like this “guarantee for the play a comfortable niche in a theatrical marketplace which was conducive for Oriental gazing and, in most cases, lucrative for those who staged the Oriental gaze.”

60. Morning Herald, 13 November 1798.

61. Morning Herald, 13 November 1798.

62. Liffey was played by Mr. Johnstone and there is an interesting disjunction between the published version of his speeches and the reports of his performance. Despite the newspaper’s approbation of his “Irish pleasantries,” the printed text does not render Liffey’s speeches in stage Irish. One could argue that this “rectification” of his speech is a further sign of his ideological incorporation into a model of British subjectivity based on normative Englishness. See Morning Herald, 13 November 1798.

63. As Captain Bellew, looking back in 1843 wrote, “Long before the period of my departure arrived—I may say almost from infancy—I had been inoculated by my mother, my great uncles, and sundry parchment-faced gentlemen who frequented our house, with a sort of Indomania. . . . What respect did the sonorous names Bangalore and Cuddalore, and Nundy Droog and Severn Droog and Hookahburdars and Soontaburdars, and a host of others, excite in our young minds.” Quoted in Mildred Archer, Early Views of India: The Picturesque Journeys of Thomas and William Daniell, 1786–1794 (London: Thames and Hudson, 1980), note for plate 105.

64. For an account of the publication of the Daniell engravings, see Archer, 234.

65. Morning Chronicle, 13 November 1798.

66. Morning Herald, 13 November 1798.

67. These cross-dressed characters pose an important problem for Dror Wahrman’s argument regarding the shift from gender play to gender panic on the London stage throughout the 1790s—that the female knight effectively disappears from the stage in the last ten years of the eighteenth century. See Dror Wahrman, “Percy’s Prologue: From Gender Play to Gender Panic in Eighteenth-Century England,” Past and Present 159 (May 1998): 113–60.

68. Barney is also elevated to the rank of chief physician, the commander of the armies, grand judge in both civil and criminal courts, chief of elephants, purveyor of buffaloes, and principle hunter of tigers (171).

69. Gentleman’s Magazine 84 (July 1798): 716.

70. For an account of the paucity of knowledge in the metropole of the Indian subcontinent and of the East India Company’s activities, see H. V. Bowen, “British India, 1765–1813: The Metropolitan Context,” in The Oxford History of the British Empire vol. 2, The Eighteenth Century, ed. P. J. Marshall (Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1999), 533–37. For an account of British rule that is signaled by the phrase “dominance without hegemony,” see Ranajit Guha, Dominance without Hegemony: History and Power in Colonial India (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1997).

71. Forrest, 347–50, lists eighteen paintings and engravings of the scene by more than nine artists including Mather Brown, George Carter, Arthur William Davis, Robert Home, James Northcote, Henry Singleton, John Smart, and John Zoffany. James Gillray’s The Coming on of the Monsoons (BM 7929; fig. 7.1), shows Tipu pissing on the British forces.

72. Alexander Beatson, A View of the Origin and Conduct of the War with Tippoo Sultan; comprising a Narrative of the Operations of the Army under the command of Lt. General George Harris; and of the Siege of Seringapatam (London: W. Bulmer, 1800).

73. See Forrest, 350–52, for a catalog of these images.

74. Beatson, appendix XXXV, ciii–iv.

75. Russell, 77.

76. Russell, 78.

77. Morning Post/Gazetteer, 30 April 1800.

78. Anonymous, Narrative Sketches of the Conquest of Mysore (London: Justins, 1800), 2. This guidebook to the panorama was sold at the Lyceum and gives both a detailed description of the painting and identifies the portraits.

79. Thomas Frognall Dibdin, Reminiscences of a Literary Life (London, 1836), 1:146–48. Quoted in Altick, 135. For a discussion of the composition of Porter’s panorama, see Altick, 134–35.

80. Russell, 78.

81. Narrative Sketches of the Conquest of Mysore, 2.

82. Dibdin, Reminiscences of a Literary Life, 1:146–48.

83. See Morning Post/Gazetteer, 1 September 1800, for a description of the pantomime and the place of Porter’s panorama in it. According to the same paper for 10 November 1800, Porter’s image was on display through at least November.

84. Morning Post/Gazetteer, 5 May 1800. The Siege was accompanied by the obligatory display of horsemanship, feats of strength by “The Flemish Hercules,” and concluded with “A Serio-Comic Pantomime” titled The Daemon’s Tribunal, or Harlequin’s Enterprizes.

85. As Kwint suggests (104), there is a certain panoptic quality to the architectural design of Astley’s theatre that would have maximized the disciplinary effects on the audience.

86. Mark Seltzer, Bodies and Machines (New York: Routledge, 1990), 162–64.

87. Moody, 28.

88. Linda Colley has offered a persuasive account of the shedding of ethnic specificity in the formation of an amalgamated British subjectivity in the early nineteenth century in Britons: Forging the Nation, 1707–1837 (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1992).

89. Morning Post/Gazetteer, 30 April 1800.

90. All accounts of the Astley’s show indicate that it generated extraordinary receipts.

Afterword

1. I am following the example of Manuel De Landa’s War in the Age of Intelligent Machines (New York: Zone Books, 1991), which lucidly follows the history of warfare as the emergence of an inorganic life-form. His brief account of bifurcations and attractors is both illuminating and careful to point out the limitations of applying these theories to human history. See especially 13–25, 234–37.

2. Marshall Brown’s Preromanticism (Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 1991) is an instructive exception.

3. For an exhaustive discussion of these genocidal fantasies, see John Barrell, The Infection of Thomas DeQuincey: A Psychopathology of Imperialism (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1991). For a discussion of De Quincey’s cognizance of imperial complicity, see my “Murder, Hospitality, Philosophy: De Quincey and the Complicitous Grounds of National Identity, “Studies in Romanticism 38 (Summer 1999): 135–70.

4. See P. J. Marshall, The Impeachment of Warren Hastings (London: Oxford Univ. Press, 1965), 188–89.

5. The emergence of the illegitimate theatre is documented by Jane Moody, Illegitimate Theatre in London, 1770–1840 (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 2000).

6. William Hazlitt, “The Indian Jugglers,” in Table Talk (London: John Warren, 1821), 181.

7. Hazlitt, 184.

8. John Whale, “Indian Jugglers: Hazlitt, Romantic Orientalism and the Difference of View,” in Romanticism and Colonialism: Writing and Empire, 1780–1830, ed. Tim Fulford and Peter J. Kitson (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1998), 207–8.

9. David Bromwich, William Hazlitt: The Mind of the Critic (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1983), 354.

10. In an objection to the “superiority” of the Indian jugglers, a letter to the Examiner, 17 December 1815, argues that “who the parties to the comparison intended by the word superior may be, is a point by no means easy to determine” and goes on to state that “I could, Mr. Examiner, multiply examples of jugglers now in full exercise of their art, whose acquirements are far beyond those on the ‘superior’ gentlemen now in London” (813).

11. Hazlitt, 182.

12. Description of the Performance of those Superior Indian Jugglers lately arrived from Seringapatam and Now Performing at the Public Room No. 23, New Bond Street

(London, 1816), 6–7. This pamphlet is essentially an extended advertisement for the jugglers’ performance.

13. De Landa, 69. For an in-depth discussion of these tactical issues, see Rory Muir’s discussion of light infantry in Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napoleon (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1998), 51–67.

14. Battles during the Napoleonic Wars were not decided by moments of utter annihilation or the total number of casualties. As Muir argues, “What mattered in deciding a battle, as in the individual combatants of which it was composed, was not the body count, but the destruction of the enemy army’s cohesion and will to fight” (239).

15. Hazlitt was devastated by the news of Waterloo, and it is important to recognize the spectral presence of the Napoleonic Wars in Table Talk. In “On the Pleasure in Painting”—the essay most thematically connected to “The Indian Jugglers”—Austerlitz plays a transformative role in how Hazlitt regards not only his artistic practice, but also his genealogy. See Table Talk, 21.

16. For an excellent discussion of the state-sanctioned hyperbole following Waterloo and various liberal responses to it, see Philip Shaw, “Leigh Hunt and the Aesthetics of Post-War Liberalism,” in Romantic Wars: Studies in Culture and Conflict, 1793–1822 (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1995), 185–200.

17. Description, 11.

18. Gentleman’s Magazine 86 (March 1816): 272.

Next Chapter

Index

Additional Information

ISBN
9781421427737
Related ISBN
9781421429205
MARC Record
OCLC
1048221188
Pages
359-400
Launched on MUSE
2018-08-15
Language
English
Open Access
Yes
Creative Commons
CC-BY-NC-ND
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.