England, Toleration, and Revolution: Enlightened Companions
Bailey Bettencourt
Toleration can take many forms. It can be an action, an adjective, a request, a plea, a maxim even. Toleration was an enlightened value for which philosophes, theologians, and perhaps more than a few accused heretics advocated. Still, the advocacy of toleration by intellectuals is quite different than its practice by ordinary people. Examining the use of the word “toleration” in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century England illuminates if and how enlightened virtues were promoted not just as a theoretical concept but in action. Examining their use in particular revolutions — times of extreme stress, violence, and often polarity — further illuminates the connection between religion and enlightened values in England.
Despite appeals for toleration, freedom of conscience, liberty, and sovereignty, the years between 1750-1850 were filled with global conflict, uprisings, revolution, and warfare. Examining British newspapers and periodicals both complements and challenges scholarship on the Enlightenment by illuminating how reports of specific revolutions discussed toleration. This project focuses on British newspapers primarily obtained through the British Library Newspapers, Burney Newspapers, and the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Collections. The newspapers were selected by searching for articles on four different revolutions — the American Revolution (1775–1783), the French Revolution (1789–1799), the Latin American Revolutions (1808–1826), and the Greek Revolution (1821–1829) — five years before the conflicts began, during the conflict, and five years after they ended. The search term “toleration” was used to identify articles that linked revolution and toleration. The resulting data was processed through a tool that analyzed the data in two ways. The first, keyword analysis, highlighted and displayed TF-IDF keywords associated with various keywords related to the idea and practice of toleration. The second, sentiment analysis, evaluated how the newspapers used these words—in positive or negative contexts.
When examining the keywords used in each revolution, it becomes clear that, while conversations may not have changed dramatically during periods of violence, English newspapers did transform how they conceptualized and wrote about the revolutions between 1750-1850. Newspapers discussed the American and French Revolutions using secular, often civic and political, terms. Newspapers used “war” more frequently than any other term. Though they also emphasized “religion,” other words like “rebellion,” “independence,” and “revolution” were common.
In contrast, religious language was much more prevalent in the Irish Uprising and the Greek and Latin American Revolutions. The use of the word “war” was significantly less frequent, and in comparison, newspapers utilized many more words one might associate with spirituality. Terms like “Catholic,” “Dissenters,” “religion,” “religious,” and “church” were all used frequently by newspapers in reports on these revolutions.
The change in the language British newspapers were using to discuss these revolutions is significant. It may illustrate a shift in their perspectives on revolutions as a whole, as bloody conflicts or more connected to religion. This data can provide scholars a nuanced look at the scholarly debate between a religious and secular Enlightenment. Traditionally, scholars view the religious wars of previous centuries as an impetus for the less religious, more rational debates of the Enlightenment. Yet, examining the newspapers from this era reveals the opposite—newspapers were still discussing some revolutions in a distinctly religious manner.
Examining English newspapers’ use of “toleration” during revolutions illustrates that not only were conflicts spoken about differently but that individual words could be used in a dramatically different way. Sentiment analysis allows scholars to examine how “toleration” was used in the 17th and 18th centuries. In the American and French Revolutions, newspapers used the word “tolerance” negatively; its sentiment analysis score is -.55.
In contrast, in the Irish Uprising and Greek and Latin American Revolutions, conflicts that were viewed more religiously, “tolerance” in all its forms was used overwhelmingly positively, with scores from .81 – .91.
This could indicate that after the violent and historic American and French Revolutions, Britons were more likely to advocate for toleration in lieu of war. It could also signify a stronger willingness to call for toleration in religious rather than political conflicts.
Another word that fluctuated in sentiment throughout these revolutions was “radical.” During the American and French Revolutions, British newspapers used the word “radical” mostly in negative contexts, receiving a sentiment analysis score of -.15.
Further insight from this change can be gleaned by looking at the TF-IDF keywords. In the American and French Revolutions, “radical” found close correlations with words like “blood,” “govern,” “impaired,” and “quarrel.” In the other three conflicts where “radical” and higher sentiment score, words like “graced,” “artisan,” “taught,” “sagacity,” and “Whig” appeared around the term. In the American and French Revolutions, then, “radical” appears to have been associated with conflict, whereas, in the Irish Uprising, Greek and Latin American Revolutions, it corresponded to notions of learning, creativity, and liberalism. Critically, this positive connection between Whiggism and radicalism in the Irish, Greek, and Latin American conflicts seemingly would contrast with the more religious discussions surrounding these rebellions. The fact that newspapers spoke about these revolutions and uprisings in both a religious manner and a liberal one suggests a closer relationship between Enlightened ideals and religion.
Aside from illustrating the differences in how these revolutions may have been understood and spoken about, these contrasting linguistic environments also raise important questions. Were newspapers advocating for more toleration in conflicts they viewed as religiously based? Did they speak of religious radicals more positively than political ones? Was war a boundary that British people felt toleration could not breach?
Further examining the boundaries of toleration in revolutions reveals that these newspaper reports discussed some religions and confessions more positively than others. Surprisingly, British newspapers used the term “Catholic” positively in every revolution. Unsurprisingly, “atheists,” “pagans,” and “Jews” appeared more frequently in very negative contexts. These fluctuations can reveal who Britons were willing to extend toleration to and perhaps who they held culpable for the violence they were discussing.
In all revolutions except one, the words “Jew,” “Jewish,” and “Jews” received negative sentiment scores. However, in the Latin American Revolutions, “Jew” was given a positive score of .97. Additionally, the TF-IDF keywords identified along with “Jew” included words like “friend,” “favourable,” “kind,” and “truth.”
Historically, in times of strife, the Jewish populace has often been mired in conspiracy and used as a scapegoat, which would account for their negative sentiment analysis scores. However, in the Latin American Revolution, their positive score opens the door to future research. The TF-IDF would suggest that instead of being wrapped in suspicion and contempt, at least for a brief period in the 19th century, Jews were viewed as helpful friends instead of conspiratorial enemies.
This research illustrates that toleration was not just a word extolled by philosophes. It was a word frequently used in British newspapers, even during periods of extreme conflict. Alongside “toleration,” British newspapers discussed religion in every conflict.
This emphasizes that even if the Enlightenment is considered a secular, rational period, British newspapers still saw religion as central to it, at times even more than rebellion and war. The change in how newspapers discussed these revolutions hints at the importance and influence of toleration of religion and revolution in the Enlightenment era. The research also suggests that newspapers advocated for the extension of this toleration to different groups: Jews, Catholics, and radicals.
Revolutions and toleration are possibly more similar than initially thought. Using the Digital Humanities to examine trends in rhetoric throughout a century of dramatic revolution gives scholars a look into how these conflicts were discussed and advocated for in a public forum. It moves scholars away from Enlightened philosophes and pulls them a little closer to reception history, the examination of how these Enlightened ideals were received and promoted by more ordinary Britons.