The letters show that the parents engaged in a regular exchange of gifts with their children. The gifts were given in a range of contexts however there were a number of common practices among the different case studies. For instance, many of the men gave gifts during courtship to the parents of their future spouse and to their young sons, who were studying away at school or university. Since Mauss published his study The Gift in 1925, historians and anthropologists have explored the social and cultural meanings behind gift exchange.444 As Zemon Davis suggests, the context of gifts affected the meaning and expectations of reciprocity for both giver and receiver.445 These letters suggest that exchange of gifts between father and son in particular had a more complex expectation of repayment than the expectation of receiving objects in return. The nature of the gifts and the contexts in which they were given suggest that the gifts were aimed at a specific type of bonding in the familial relationship, between father and son.
444 Maus, The Gift, Ben-Amos, The Culture of Giving.
445 Zemon Davis, The Gift.
Equally, the different types of gifts reflected the men’s different ideas of the masculinity they attempted to perform. Factors such as location, rank and religion all had an effect on the men’s sense of self. This is evident in their domestic material relationship with their sons.
William Rathbone the fourth was a Quaker timber merchant, ship builder and ship owner from Liverpool. He had strong opinions about consumption inspired by his Quaker beliefs. Quakers continued to value ‘plainness’ despite the increase luxury consumption of eighteenth-century British society. Walvin argues that warnings against the temptations of worldliness continued to be issued regularly from the London Meetings at the end of the eighteenth century.446 As Quakers, it might be expected that the Rathbone fathers abstained from material exchange with their children, preferring instead to promote plainness and simplicity as virtues to their children. However, despite verbally advocating such ideals to their sons there is reference to certain types of gifting within the Rathbone letters. In a letter to both William Rathbone V and Thomas Rathbone, (the first and second born sons of William Rathbone IV) Rathbone IV passes on word of gifts purchased for the young men by their grandfather. ‘Your Grandfather has purchased 2 elegant gold seals for you; They are full sized & very handsome. The stones which are very brilliant are unengraved as he wishes this to be done under your direction, & … to be completed at his expense’.447
Despite Rathbone’s usual attitude of aversion towards consumption and the potential moral problems associated with luxury within their religion, valuable objects still changed hands between them. It is interesting that the older generations of
446 James Walvin, “Quakers, Business and Morality” (paper presented at Barnard’s Inn Hall, Gresham College, London, 25 April 2005).
447 ULA, RPII.1.12, Rathbone IV to his sons, Bristol, 7th December 1806.
Rathbone men passed these luxury items to their sons. We can speculate as to why these luxurious items bypassed their moral rules about indulgence. The seals symbolised family lineage. Gifting the boys seals could have been meant to represent the boys’
transition to adulthood. Looking at the middling-sort, Harvey asserts the importance of account taking, letter writing and household management as a symbol of manliness, mentioning the importance of associated objects such as the account book itself as a physical representation or proof of masculinity.448 For an elite man the family seal would have been an important symbol of masculinity. The extravagance of the seals may have been appropriate as a way to mark the significance of the sons growing into adults. By passing these objects on from one son to another, the fathers symbolically passed on paternal authority to their sons.
Hannah Mary Rathbone, the wife of Rathbone IV also sent her son gifts. The different type of gift suggests her motives differed from those of her husband and father-in-law. In May 1804, she wrote to seventeen-year old Rathbone V discussing the pleasant state of the garden at their country house, and principal home, in Greenbank Liverpool, and how therefore his absence was more acutely felt. Later in the letter Hannah Mary wrote, ‘I omitted to tell thee that one of the violets I sent to thee was from Basil’s grave – it was the only one it yielded’.449 Basil was the late son of Hannah Mary who had died earlier that year at the age of two. This exchange of gifts is especially significant for a number of reasons. One of the violets gifted by Hannah held a sentimental value to both mother and son having been selected from the grave of William V’s brother. It is also interesting that she had previously forgotten to mention it, suggesting that it was not abnormal for her to send him flowers without an
448 Harvey, The Little Republic, 86.
449 ULA, RPV.1.11 Hannah Mary Rathbone to her son, 3rd May 1804.
explanation. Although flowers may be considered an effeminate gift, the nature of the present may relate to Rathbone’s religion. There are numerous examples of both parents and other members of the Rathbone family morally criticising luxury objects, fashion and excess.450 It is possible that this type of exchange was considered more acceptable than the exchange of luxury objects. It still contained a kind of sentimental value in being a gift and worked with the same conventions as other gift exchanges in terms of bonding and building relationships however it was not considered as excessive or morally problematic.
Additionally, the parents demonstrated their attachment to their son’s letters as objects. Hannah Rathbone wrote, ‘the sight of thy handwriting yesterday was truly acceptable to us, as lessening that anxiety which we could not help feeling about thee altho the acco.t. from our Richard & J.H. were as favorable as we could reasonably expect’.451 Her description of the relief she felt at receiving the object of the letter is contrasted to the uncertainty, which remained when she received only word of her son’s well being from his brothers. It is interesting that she used a reference to the physical letter to add legitimacy to her desire for him to keep in touch. By describing relief in relation to the physical letter rather than words, she encouraged her son to write more often. This suggests she felt power in the symbolism of sentimental attachment to objects, despite their religious belief otherwise, which her son would respond to.
Pearsall argues that this period saw the development of the culture of sensibility in letter
450 For example: ULA, RPII1.15, Rathbone IV to Richard Reynolds, 10th October 1785.
451 ULA, RPV.1.5, Hannah Mary Rathbone to her son William Rathbone V, Bristol 1st December 1806.
writing which she defines as, ‘the ability to possess and to display a feeling heart’.452 Pearsall demonstrates the both men and women in her case studies used sentimental language in their correspondence to navigate distance and situational difficulties. The letters between Hannah Mary Rathbone and her son suggest that she employed the language of sentimentality in her communications. However, this was not a universal phenomenon between all the family members or members of the other case study families. This suggests that personal differences were more significant than broader cultural trends in these intimate family communications.
Rathbone exchanged books and pamphlets with his son. The regular exchanges occurred throughout the family for both male and female members and Rathbone V often delivered them to other family members for his father. Rathbone IV wrote, ‘we sh.d have been glad to have received Jone’s paper with Roscoe’s speech in it. If one can now be procured I shall still be glad to have it. – Please to put Dr. Pinckard’s Book in the way of T.H.; as he may incline to read them. I think they should be returned to London soon after our return’.453 Perhaps this exchange of information rather than luxury goods was also considered morally acceptable.
For the other families, gift giving was less problematic in some respects. It was used more overtly as a means of bonding between parents and their sons. Presents were given as a symbol of respect, gratitude and emotional attachment.
Many objects changed hands between the parents and their sons in the Breadalbane family. While their sons were abroad on their grand tour, swords,
452 Pearsall, Atlantic Families, 84.
453 ULA, RPV.1.5, Hannah Mary Rathbone to her son William Rathbone V, Bristol 1st December 1806.
carriages, mathematical instruments, sports equipment and other things were sent from the Breadalbane parents to Europe. Young men often thought about personal things in terms of their significance to the family. There are many examples in the letters where the young men expressed their relationships and interests through material culture. One example of an object which was discussed in terms of its emotional significance as a gift from father to son was a watch Breadalbane sent his eldest son John in France. In March 1779 Breadalbane sent John in Saussane a watch from Edinburgh. By September John was robbed in Geneva because he had not locked his door.454 He lost his watch and his belt buckles. His father wrote to him about the robbery telling him he was glad he had lost his watch as it would teach him to be more careful in the future. ‘I am glad of it, because it will teach you more attention, & may prevent the loss of things of more value hereafter, & perhaps of your life… if you had lock’d your door this would not have happen’d. All you can do now is to make your loss turn to advantage by being carefull hereafter, & getting a new Watch & Buckles, & thinking no more of the old ones’.455 He taught his son a life lesson through objects and gifts. He stayed interested and invested in the watch situation writing to John in 1780 to ask for more news about the watch.456
John received letters from multiple sources comforting him on the loss suggesting that he had been upset at the loss in particular because it had belonged to his father. John’s mother, father, brother all consoled John about the loss, as did Captain Archibald Campbell, a family member who was in close contact with John while he
454 NAS, GD 112/39/322/3, Breadalbane to John, Taymouth, 2nd September 1779.
455 NAS, GD 112/39/322/3, Breadalbane to John, Taymouth 2nd September 1779.
456 NAS, GD 112/39/327/1, Breadalbane to John Campbell, Edinburgh, 12th February 1780.
was abroad and at Cambridge. All those who wrote to John were close to him and may have noticed John’s own disappointment about his misfortune. However, it is interesting that there was a strong shared expectation that the loss of the watch would be upsetting. ‘I know you will be sorry for the Loss of your watch, as it was your fathers.
But let that give you no Concern, it was but a bad one, and he has left you many pledges of Remembrance of him more valuable to you and his Friends’.457 He later reassures his mother that Breadalbane is ‘glad I have lost my watch as it will make me more careful for the future and desires me not to trouble myself about it but to turn my loss into an advantage by getting a new one which I will do’.458
Parents often directly discussed consumption decisions and objects were exchanged. John and his mother spoke freely about shopping. While on the Grand Tour John wrote, ‘I have spent already above a hundred guineas on clothes which are the prettiest I ever saw and I dare say they would cost the double at London or any other place’.459 John enjoyed shopping and bonded with his mother over it. The pair exchanged gifts and objects amongst themselves and others on many occasions.460
Objects went both ways with lavish and extensive description. Colin sent his mother a model of a watch he and his brother were buying her from Lausanne with a detailed description. The boys themselves had suggested that she buy one as they
457 NAS, GD112/39/323/4, Taymouth, Archibald Campbell to John Campbell, Taymouth, 16th October 1779.
458 NAS, GD112/39/319/9, John Campbell to Mrs Campbell, Lausanne, 6th October 1779.
459 NAS, GD112/39/329/2, John Campbell to Mrs Campbell, Lyons, 28th May 1781.
460 NAS, GD112/39/325/5, John Campbell to Mrs Campbell, Lausanne, 18th December 1781.
believed them to be cheap in Lausanne compared to elsewhere. Here, the sons act as proxy consumers for the mother, and the family work together to ensure that their money will go further.
the case will be enameled in Blue surrounded with Pearls with a white enamel & with a Golden circle, the hand, the handle of the watch will be in diamonds, & the dial will be surrounded with a circle of diamonds all this for thirty Louis d’or which is very cheap, write if you are pleased with it &
you must send back the model as soon as possible 461
The boys also requested objects from home. While abroad the brothers asked their mother to send particular objects for them from Britain. John wrote to his mother to ask her to buy him a sword. He had clearly accounted for it in his own budget telling his mother she could spend as much as six guineas. Based on the objects the requested, a steel sword and cricket equipment, it was presumably the quality, design or fashion of these objects which they felt were superior from Britain.
I would be much obliged if you would get me a fashionable Steel Sword you may give as much as Six Guineas for a good handsome one. Colin I believe has wrote for some Bats and balls to play at Cricket with I wish you would send them and the Sword the first opportunity. As all these
461 NAS, GD112/39/324/4, Colin Campbell to Mrs Campbell, Lausanne, 14th June 1780. See also NAS, GD112/39/324/3, Colin Campbell to Mrs Campbell, 10th May 1780.
commissions will come rather dear upon you, will you draw upon Drummond 462
The Breadalbanes had a strong interest in consumption. Sending out expensive gifts to parents and requesting expensive things despite appearing to have an underlying constant worry about having a lack of money to afford for instance their mother’s visit to see them in France (although in this instance even their mother suspected this was because they did not want her to join them). Their actions of consuming while worrying privately about money suggest that as elite consumers they were locked into these patterns of spending. The example of the boys suggesting that their mother should buy an extravagant watch while the opportunity arose because of its cheap cost suggests that they wanted the maximum show for minimum spend. The family cooperated in their consumption, purchasing status-enhancing objects and maintaining a budget were joint endeavours between mother and sons.