All posts by jwbaker

James Baker is Director of Digital Humanities at the University of Southampton. James is a Software Sustainability Institute Fellow, a Fellow of the Royal Historical Society, and holds degrees from the University of Southampton and latterly the University of Kent, where in 2010 he completed his doctoral research on the late-Georgian artist-engraver Isaac Cruikshank. James works at the intersection of history, cultural heritage, and digital technologies. He is currently working on a history of knowledge organisation in twentieth century Britain. In 2021, I begin a major new Arts and Humanities Research Council funded project 'Beyond Notability: Re-evaluating Women’s Work in Archaeology, History and Heritage, 1870 – 1950'. Previous externally funded research projects have focused on legacy descriptions of art objects ('Legacies of Catalogue Descriptions and Curatorial Voice: Opportunities for Digital Scholarship', Arts and Humanities Research Council), the preservation of intangible cultural heritage ('Coptic Culture Conservation Collective', British Council, and 'Heritage Repertoires for inclusive and sustainable development', British Academy), the born digital archival record ('Digital Forensics in the Historical Humanities', European Commission), and decolonial futures for museum collections ('Making African Connections: Decolonial Futures for Colonial Collections', Arts and Humanities Research Council). Prior to joining Southampton, James held positions of Senior Lecturer in Digital History and Archives at the University of Sussex and Director of the Sussex Humanities Lab, Digital Curator at the British Library, and Postdoctoral Fellow with the Paul Mellon Centre for Studies in British Art. He is a member of the Arts and Humanities Research Council Peer Review College, a convenor of the Institute of Historical Research Digital History seminar, a member of The Programming Historian Editorial Board and a Director of ProgHist Ltd (Company Number 12192946), and an International Advisory Board Member of British Art Studies.
Caricature

Some research into satirical print publishers

2 Comments

Recently I’ve been trying to find out more about the satirical print publishers active during the career of Isaac Cruikshank (c. 1783-1811). These men are notoriously elusive, leaving as they did very few business records. But this hasn’t deterred me. And some recent scratching around has uncovered some interesting lines of inquiry.

Using the recently launched Records of London’s Livery Companies Online some interesting details have emerged. Samuel Fores, for example, was a member of The Drapers’ Company from 1784, when he left the apprenticeship of his father a vellum binder and himself a member of the Drapers’. In 1788 the younger Fores is listed as a ‘copperplate printer and vellum binder’ when he took on his first apprentice, Samuel John Allgar, the son of a clockmaker. Allgar left the apprenticeship of Fores in 1799, to establish himself as a copper plate printer and member of the Drapers’. Fores took a total of seven apprentices registered by the Drapers’, four of whom were his own children.

Records of the Stationer’s company contain mention of John Johnston, a figure on whom we know very little. Johnston published in excess of 15 Cruikshank prints in 1809 and went on to work with Isaac’s sons upon his death. It appears the Johnston was apprenticed to a printer and bookseller (one Thomas Chapman) in 1793 for seven years, perhaps explaining the apparently diverse trade he had established by 1810. More well known associations are also confirmed by the lists. Robert Laurie appears as an apprentice to Robert Sayer between 1770 and 1777. Less well known is that prior to taking over Sayer’s business in 1794 with James Whittle, Laurie became a master of the Stationer’s and worked as an engraver from Gray’s Inn Lane. At the establishment of his business he took on Joseph Grozer as his apprentice, son of an ‘Innholder’ from Wakefield, Yorkshire. I presume Joseph was not living in Yorkshire at the time of his apprenticeship, but some further digging around will be needed to ascertain this.

The point of this work is to put satirical prints into their economic, business, and spatial context. And these resources in particular shed some intriguing light on the networks of association print publishers established in this period. Which is all rather exciting.