Britain Under a Microscope: Industry, Class, Race, and Empire on Display at the Great
Exhibition of 1851
Bram Hubbell
Friends Seminary
History Department
New York, NY
NEH Seminar 2004
On 1 May 1851, the Great Exhibition opened. During the next six months, over 6 million
people visited the Great Exhibition before it closed in October. It took two years to organize,
showcased exhibits from all types of British businesses and thirty-four different nations, and was
attended by peoples of various nations and social classes. These facts alone mark the Great
Exhibition as a high point in nineteenth century British history. But the Great Exhibition is also
important in our understanding of the history of Great Britain and its relationships with the rest
of the world in the mid-nineteenth century. In the mid-nineteenth century, Britons were
struggling with recent political, economic, and social changes. By looking more closely at the
Great Exhibition, it is possible to understand how the organizers of the exhibition chose to see
Great Britain and the rest of the world, and how the organizers wanted British national identity to
be understood by Britons and the rest of the world. Images from and writings about the Great
Exhibition suggest how Britons thought about industrialization, free trade, social class,
foreigners, empire, and consumerism.
The organization of the Great Exhibition of 1851 began during a discussion between
Henry Cole and Prince Albert in 1849. Cole was affiliated with the Royal Society of Arts, and
Albert was interested in finding a way to help British industries after an economically and
politically turbulent 1840s. They wanted to expand on the tradition of regional fairs that had
been held in Britain for the past 200 years. There had also been a series of national exhibitions
in France during the early nineteenth century that served as a model for Cole and Albert.i The
difference between these earlier fairs and the one that Albert and Cole envisioned was that that
their fair would be international. Both envisioned the exhibition as providing a stimulus to
British industry. Although Britain manufactured more goods than any other country in the
world, Cole and the Royal Society of the Arts thought that British goods were inferior in terms of
design to French goods. Prince Albert also believed that there was minimal technical education
2
in Britain at the time. Many workers did not know the latest innovations in design. The two of
them hoped that the Exhibition would help to alleviate these problems.ii
As they began to plan the exhibition, Albert and Cole were committed to including
manufacturers from countries other than Great Britain. Both were committed to the principles of
free trade. The plan for the exhibition was brought before Parliament, which set up a Royal
Commission to oversee the organization of the exhibition. All of the members of the
commission were committed to
the principles of free trade, and
they pushed the exhibition in
this direction. They believed
that by inviting other countries
to the exhibition, British
manufacturers, designers, and
workers could learn from the
goods of others. As the Royal
Figure 1: Royal Commission
Commission began promoting
and soliciting subscriptions for the Great Exhibition, they faced a variety of organizational
challenges. Local committees outside of London initially had a difficult time convincing people
in other parts of Britain to fund an exhibition in London. Their reluctance reflects a tension
between London and the rest of Britain. It also highlights the reality that many Britons did not
automatically see themselves as part of a British national community. They still thought of
themselves more as Mancunians, Liverpudlians, and Geordies than Britons. The local
committees insured people that exhibits would showcase all regions of Britain and their
contributions to the glory of British industry. In this way, the local committees convinced
locally minded people that their communities were an integral part of a larger nation and played
a significant role in constructing a more inclusive British national identity.
The local committees also were instrumental in shaping middle class identity in their
fundraising for the Great Exhibition. Each local committee maintained a red book that listed
those who had subscribed. These books circulated within the community and around Britain, so
that everyone in the community began to know who had subscribed. The upper class was often
the first to subscribe. As a few members of the middle class began to subscribe, a sort of
3
competition emerged. It became a sign of middle class prosperity to subscribe and insure that
your name was in the red book. The middle class saw it a way to emulate the upper class and to
fulfill their civic duty.iii
The last challenge facing the organizers of the Great Exhibition was assuaging many
people’s fears of free trade. Although Britain had moved towards an official policy of free trade
during the 1840s, many politicians and manufacturers were still uneasy about free trade. They
still doubted that free trade was more profitable than tariffs. They also worried about the
potential for industrial espionage at the exhibition. In order to assuage these concerns, the
organizers of the Great Exhibition often presented it as an opportunity to showcase the strength
and progress of British industry to the rest of the world. They also advertised the Great
Exhibition as an opportunity to glorify the overseas empire and the power of workers. Even
though the organizers of the Great Exhibition had originally conceived of it as an encouragement
of free trade, they often promoted it as a glorification of Britain and its industrial might.iv
Besides the organizational challenges, the Royal Commission also had to settle on a
design for the exhibition hall itself. The hall presented numerous architectural challenges. The
building had to be built in a relatively short amount and
for as little money as possible. It would only be standing
for one year and had to be architecturally striking. The
Royal Commission solicited designs for the hall from
various architects. They eventually settled on a design by
Joseph Paxton. His design stood out architecturally and
had the advantage of being one of the least expensive
designs. Paxton’s Crystal Palace was a uniquely modern
building. It was built entirely from prefabricated,
identical sections of steel and glass. This arrangement
kept costs low and allowed for rapid assembly as seen in
Figure 2: Construction of
Crystal Palace
figure two. As the building was being assembled, the
building’s original design was unable to accommodate some old trees in Hyde Park. Instead of
reworking the whole structure, Paxton was able to insert a large domed transept in the middle of
the building to accommodate the trees.v
4
Crystal Palace’s unique architectural design was widely praised and can be considered
one of the first pieces of modern architecture. It was a significant break from earlier public
buildings that had been built from either wood or stone. It used materials such as steel and glass
that were closely associated with the industrial process, as opposed to the traditional building
materials of stone and wood. Paxton’s design also set a precedent for later world’s fairs and
exhibitions. Many later exhibitions included a central building that pushed the boundaries of
contemporary architecture. The irony of Crystal Palace is that outside of the exhibitions and
fairs, British public continued to use a more neoclassical style.vi
After two years of planning, the Great Exhibition opened on 1 May 1851 with exhibits
from thirty-four different countries. For the first week, only those individuals that had purchased
a season pass could visit. Nevertheless the first day was a celebratory event in London. Queen
Victoria, Prince Albert, and many members of the aristocracy attended the opening. From its
first day, the Great Exhibition looked to be a success.
Inside Crystal Palace, the Royal Commission had organized the exhibits into four general
categories: Raw Materials, Machinery, Manufactures, and Fine Arts. Within these categories
there were thirty subcategories. The classification scheme reflected Enlightenment ideas of
organization, such as Linnaeus’ taxonomy, but it was the first classification system to be based
on commercial, as opposed to scientific, categories. Visitors would begin by viewing the raw
materials of the production process. They would then be able to learn about the production
process itself, before
seeing the final goods.
The items in the Fine Arts
category were understood
to be distinct from the rest
of the exhibits, so they
were placed in a separate
category. The organizers
of the Great Exhibition
intended the arrangement
to provide a
comprehensive education
Figure 3: Main Hall of the Great Exhibition
5
in the manufacturing process. By grouping items in categories based on the production process,
it would also have been easier for people to make comparisons between items.vii
Despite the meticulous ordering of the exhibits, practical considerations made it nearly
impossible to view the Exhibition in its intended sequence. Many of the exhibitors insisted on
their items being grouped together regardless of where the items fit in the production process.
The other consideration was that power sources were only available on the north side of Crystal
Palace, so any item that needed to be powered had to be placed there. The visitor to the Great
Exhibition was left either wandering through exhibits out of their intended order, or he was
scrambling from one side of the building to the other trying to follow the catalog of items in their
proper sequence. The final arrangement of the items made it extremely difficult for viewers to
follow the items in their proper and intended order. It also detracted from visitors’ ability to
learn about the different stages of the manufacturing process.viii
As visitors explored the Great Exhibition, they were able to experience the full spectrum
of items associated with British industry. There were exhibits for various home goods, home
furniture, steamship furniture,
agricultural machines, and
even a model of Prince
Albert’s prefabricated houses
for the working classes.
There were exhibits that
focused only on products for
women. Almost all of the
goods were items that
simplified middle class
people’s lives or made
expensive items previously
reserved for the upper class
available to the middle class.
Figure 4: Furniture Exhibit
In many of the exhibits, the
finished products took precedence over the manufacturing process. The machines that made the
goods were almost never on display near the goods themselves. If they were in Crystal Palace,
6
they were tucked away on the north side with all the other machines needing power. The
workers who helped assemble and make the goods were also not included in the display. The
goods themselves made up the bulk of the exhibits. Many visitors who left the Great Exhibition
came away with a distinct impression of industrialization as a social and economic benefit.
Industrialization was not associated with the large, noisy machines or a movement radically
altering the lives of workers. Visitors came away from the Great Exhibition seeing
industrialization as a means to provide people with goods previously reserved only for the richest
Britons.ix
Figure 5: Exhibit of Women's Goods
Both British and foreign visitors to Crystal Palace viewed this assortment of goods and came
away with an impression of what it meant to be British. Britain was not depicted as a nation full
of farmers or artisans producing goods in small shops. Britain was a nation clearly associated
with large-scale industry and machine manufactured goods. To be British meant you had access
to a wide variety of goods that had previously been unavailable to
7
many. The Great Exhibition was a crucial first step in remaking Britain’s national identity into
one associated with industry and consumer culture.x
26 May was the first day that admission to Crystal Palace was only a shilling. This was
the first opportunity for many of the working class and artisans to visit the Great Exhibition. It is
important to recognize that one shilling was still a substantial amount of money in 1851. For
many workers it represented a full day’s wage. Given this qualification the shilling days were
still quite popular, but most of the visitors were workers with higher pay jobs or artisans. The
poorest workers still could not afford to visit the Great Exhibition. Those who did attend were
often in awe of the
exhibits. In most
illustrations of workers
at Crystal Palace, they
are depicted as staring
at the exhibits with
wide eyes, as seen in
figure six. Many of the
workers are looking
upwards at the exhibits.
Figure 6: Workers Visiting the Great Exhibition
The workers were
clearly most impressed
by what was on display at the Great Exhibition. For them, the Great Exhibition was an
opportunity to see the achievements of British industry.xi
Not all visitors to the Crystal Palace came to see the exhibits. For the middle and upper
classes, a visit to the Great Exhibition was as much a social event as an educational experience.
The front page of the illustrated newspapers had shown images of Queen Victoria, the Duke of
Wellington, and numerous other aristocrats attending the opening day of the Great Exhibition.
Like modern days sports fans that wait outside an arena or stadium, middle class visitors to the
Great Exhibition hoped to catch a glimpse of some of these individuals. Middle and upper class
visitors also wore some of their best clothes when they visited Crystal Palace. They came to see
other people and to be seen. For them the Great Exhibition was a social spectacle.
8
Although the working, middle, and upper classes visited for different reasons, the Great
Exhibition was also one of the first occasions where people from all classes interacted in a closed
environment. This interaction and the way it was represented in the media provide us with a
snapshot of British notions of class in the Victorian era. One of the most well known images
associated with social class at the Great Exhibition is the Punch cartoon “The Pound and the
Shilling.” In this cartoon a group of workers on the left side of the image encounters a group of
aristocrats on the right side of the image. The main male figure on the right is most likely the
Duke Wellington, and he
accompanies his daughter-inlaw the Marchioness of Douro.
There had been a front-page
image in the Illustrated London
News depicting the two of them
together at the Great
Exhibition. They are
encountering a navvy and a
carpenter. There is some empty
space between the groups that
divides the image in two. This
empty space makes it clear that
even though workers and
aristocrats might be visiting the
same places, there are still
distinctions between them. The
woman on the far right who is
watching the encounter with a
look of apprehension highlights
this sense of separation. The
Great Exhibition was an
Figure 7: Social Class at the Great Exhibition
9
opportunity for Victorian Britain to break down some of the barriers between workers and the
aristocrats, but it is also clear that certain barriers still separated classes.xii
Despite the separation between the two groups, the children at the bottom of the image
suggest another message about social class in Victorian Britain. Unlike the adults, both the
working and upper class children are much closer together and interacting more. The proximity
of the children might suggest that children at this time were seen as more innocent and unaware
of the distinctions of class. The children might also be seen as a sign of the future in which
people hoped that there would be less separation of social classes.xiii
The caption of the cartoon reads “Whoever Thought of Meeting You Here!” None of the
figures in the main part of the image look as if they are speaking. Given the readership of
Punch, the caption should be seen as a remark from the middle class visitors in the balcony
watching the encounter. They were the class that visited the Great Exhibition in the largest
numbers, and the Great Exhibition became a middle class event. They might also be the ones
most likely expressing surprise at the presence of either workers or aristocrats at Crystal
Palace.xiv
The Great Exhibition was a first for Victorian Britain. It was an opportunity for people
Fig. 8 African & Russian Visitors to the Great Exhibition
10
from different classes to participate in the same activity in the same place. People from different
classes could, and often did, interact in a way that had not occurred previously. This interaction
suggests that Victorian Britain was becoming more socially integrated. At the same time, there
was still distinct class segregation. People from different class backgrounds visited the Great
Exhibition for different reasons. While they were inside the Crystal Palace, workers tended to
look at different exhibits than middle or upper class visitors. And as the Punch image suggests,
visitors from different class backgrounds maintained some boundaries themselves when
interacting. The Great Exhibition helps us understand that class relations were changing, but
Victorian Britain was still a society with deep class divisions.xv
By the middle of the
nineteenth century, Britain had
more connections with different
parts of the world than at any
point in its previous history.
Despite these connections, there
were
still relatively few foreigners in
London itself. There were a
significant number of European
and American visitors to Crystal
Palace, but there were few
visitors from other parts of the
world. Even though foreigners
were a relatively small group of
visitors to London, images of the
Great Exhibition show a
disproportionately large number
Figure 9: Chinese Commission to the Great
Exhibition
11
of foreigners. These images suggest how Britons viewed foreigners and understood race in the
Victorian era.
Figures eight, nine, and ten depict foreign visitors to the Great Exhibition. Most foreign
visitors, especially from Asia or Africa, to London in 1851 would have been wealthy aristocrats
or government officials. Instead of wearing their native clothing, they would be more likely
Figure 10: Pacific Islanders at the Great Exhibition
Trying to fit in and wearing a British three-piece suit. But when the British chose to depict
foreigners, they dressed them in their native clothes. In all three images, the visitors’ features are
drawn in an exaggerated manner, and they are wearing clothing that clearly identifies their ethnic
origins. In figure nine, the Chinese Commission is depicted in highly exaggerated Manchu style
clothing. All the men have a Fu Manchu style mustache and a Manchu queue. Even the young
boy in the foreground has a queue. The women are also dressed in traditional Chinese clothing.
The woman on the right has rather small feet that suggest foot binding. There is even a
traditional Chinese dog in the foreground. In figure eight, the Russian is wearing traditional
12
Russian pants and hat. He also has spurs on his boots and is carrying a sword. The foreigners in
these images are easily distinguished from the well-dressed Britons in the images. This choice of
clothing makes the otherness and exoticness of the foreigners stand out. The foreigners become
the ones who are out of place in the images. It also reinforces notions about how Britons are
supposed to dress. They are the ones wearing three-piece suits and dresses.xvi
The images of foreigners also conveyed distinct ethnic stereotypes. In figure eight, the
Africans, according to the caption, “exhibit their ivories to little Johnny.” According to this
image, Africans were simply people with big lips and large, white teeth that take great pleasure
in showing off this attribute. In figure ten, a group of Pacific Islanders has sat down for lunch at
the Great Exhibition. Instead of choosing a meal from the list of items hanging on the tree, they
offer a price for little Johnny. One of the Islanders even has a large knife. This image suggests
that all Pacific Islanders are cannibals. The exhibits themselves also perpetuated these
stereotypes. In the descriptions of the exhibits, Indians are “poor and simple,” while Turks are
“sensible, except when they are angry, when they grow raging and furious.” These
representations of foreigners reflect the British fear of and fascination with foreigners. The
representations also made foreigners seem exotic with radically different customs and culture
than Britons. When these images were placed in contrast to numerous exhibits of the
achievements of British industry, the average Briton left the Great Exhibition with the sense that
foreigners were inferior races. The Great Exhibition began a pattern in world’s fairs and
exhibitions that fostered ideas about British racial superiority.
British racism was also reflected in many of the exhibits related to British colonies and
imperial possessions. Colonies actually did not exist at the Great Exhibition. All colonies were
referred to as “possessions,” which suggests a sense of British ownership of these parts of the
world. The organizers of the Great Exhibition classified almost all the exhibits from the
possessions as raw materials. Only some of the items from the British East India Company’s
India exhibit were placed into the Fine Arts category. This classification of imperial and colonial
goods as raw materials conveyed a sense that empire exists to supply Britain with its
manufacturing needs. Figure eleven is a depiction of raw materials outside Crystal Palace, and
the main item in the center is an ancient Egyptian obelisk. The exhibit from Canada included a
large selection of the different types of lumber available in Canada. The raw materials were
13
even listed with both their scientific names and their commercial names. Empire, according to
the Great Exhibition, was a source of British profit.xvii
Figure 11: Raw Materials at the Great Exhibition
If the organizers and exhibitors at the Great Exhibition saw empire as a source of profit
for British industry, they also wanted Britons to see empire in the same way. It was important
not to depict the violence that often accompanied empire. This might have suggested risks for
British soldiers in these places. Even Australia was not depicted as a penal colony, but as a
source of various goods that Britain needed. If the average Briton understood imperial
possessions as valuable and important, they were something that needed to be defended and
expanded. The imperial exhibits at the Great Exhibition and later exhibitions made it easier to
convince people that empire was a positive and good thing.xviii
The most extensive imperial exhibit was the East India Company’s India exhibit. This
exhibit was one of the largest exhibits in the entire Great Exhibition. It was also one of the most
popular exhibits, so it strongly influenced how Britons understood one of their largest imperial
possessions. Almost the whole of the Indian exhibit was made up of extremely valuable
weapons, jewels, and furniture. This collection had two effects on visitors. All of the gold,
silver, and gems dazzled people and gave them the impression that India was a vast source of
wealth. It reinforced the notion that empire was profitable. The luxury of India was also
14
contrasted with
the idea that it
had all been
captured from a
few rulers. India
was made to
seem to be a land
of despotic rulers
who live in
luxury while
millions of
people labor
away to provide
this luxury. This
Figure 12: Indian Exhibit
characterization
of an India full of despots helped to justify British control of India. It was easier to justify
seizing territories from despots, and Britain became the liberator of these millions of
impoverished peasants.xix
The India exhibit also had another effect on visitors. It took a vast number of exotic
items from a distant land and made India manageable. Instead of seeming wild or distant, India
was scaled down to a few rooms in a neat and organized display that any Briton could visit.
India was domesticated and turned into a possession. India seemed like a place that could be
contained and managed, and this was an important quality. Every Briton who saw the Great
Exhibition understood India as a land full of wealth that could be utilized by the British in an
organized manner. It did not matter that real people lived in India, or that those people had
different views about India. The Great Exhibition contributed to a British sense that they should
and could control India. This domestication and cultivation of Indian empire became an integral
component of all imperial exhibits at later exhibitions and world’s fairs.xx
When the Great Exhibition closed in November 1851, almost everyone concluded that it
had been a great success. Crystal Palace was taken down, but it was rebuilt in Syndenham. It
became a popular leisure spot for Londoners until it burned down in 1936. The Great Exhibition
15
of 1851 highlighted many themes in mid-nineteenth century Britain. It drew attention to the
rising middle class in Victorian Britain. It showcased the strength (and deficiencies in design) of
British industry and British support for free trade and empire. It revealed the deep divisions that
existed between classes and between London and the rest of Britain. At the same time, the Great
Exhibition helped to foster a stronger sense of British national identity that helped to bridge
some of these divisions. The Great Exhibition also became a model for all later world’s fairs and
exhibitions, which alone makes it an important historical event.
Acknowledgments:
I would like to thank Gerard Koot for organizing and leading the NEH seminar. I would also
like to thank the other participants in the seminar. Their comments and questions about my
presentation on the Great Exhibition of 1851 helped me to organize this essay.
i
Greenhalgh, Paul, Ephemeral Vistas: The Exhibitions Universelles, Great Exhibitions, and
World’s Fairs 1851-1939 (Manchester, 1988), 4-6.
ii
Auerbach, Jeffrey A, The Great Exhibition of 1851: A Nation on Display (New Haven, 1999),
27-31.
iii
Ibid, 70-81.
iv
Ibid, 63-65.
v
Ibid, 47-53.
vi
Greenhalgh, 142.
vii
Auerbach, 92-98.
viii
Ibid, 95.
ix
Ibid, 108-118.
x
Ibid, 122-127.
xi
Ibid, 147-151.
xii
Edwards, Steve, “The accumulation of knowledge or, William Whewell’s eye” in Louise
Purbrick, ed. The Great Exhibition of 1851: New Interdisciplinary essays (Manchester, 2001),
28-30.
xiii
Ibid, 30-33.
xiv
Ibid, 33-34.
xv
Auerbach, 151-158.
xvi
Ibid, 165-187.
xvii
Ibid, 98-104.
xviii
Greenhalgh, 52-58.
xix
Kriegel, Lara, “Narrating the subcontinent in 1851: India at the Crystal Palace” in Louise
Purbrick, ed. The Great Exhibition of 1851: New Interdisciplinary essays (Manchester, 2001),
150-152.
xx
Ibid, 169-170.