What kind of effect did the introduction of tobacco have on Europe socially and economically in the 1500s-1600s?

Assess the contribution that coffee and tobacco made to European creativity in the early modern period.

The early modern period was one of great social change and was marked by the enlightenment movement that set a precedent for European creativity. Coffee was popularised in the middle of the seventeenth century and had a both a direct and indirect influence on the creativity of its consumers. Primarily drunk publically in coffeehouses, these institutions provided an open forum for creativity and led to the creation of a collective public sphere. Tobacco, introduced in the 1560s, did not contribute to creativity to the same extent as coffee, yet tobacco was synonymous with coffeehouses and the literacy culture of the eighteenth century.

Jürgen Habermas argues for the creation of a bourgeois public sphere in the seventeenth century, incorporating the growing merchant class and existing ruling elite, as an area between the private household and the public realm of the state. Central to Habermas’ theory of public sphere is the process of the erosion of court culture as it is replaced by a greater public involvement in daily political life, focused on the emergence of the city of London. Habermas’ public sphere allows an open forum of political debate but it rests on three assumptions: firstly, reason must take precedence over status, in effect establishing the authority of education over that of birth; secondly, that nothing should be immune from criticism; and thirdly; secrecy should be treated with hostility. The public sphere must be seen as a creative entity as it allowed the dissemination of new ideas throughout a previously politically apathetic society. This model can successfully be applied to coffeehouse culture as they provided customers an open forum of debate, with the only barrier of entry being the price of coffee, and the presence of newspapers in these institutions allowed participants to be informed of political events.

Coffeehouses contributed to Peter Boursay’s idea of a seventeenth and eighteenth century urban renaissance. This phenomenon unified the upper and middling classes creating an unique urban consciousness centred around increasing social fluidity whilst stimulating the growth of the public sphere for political and cultural debate. The only theoretical restriction on entry into coffeehouse culture was the price of a cup of coffee, which allowed patrons of different social groups to socialise together, and thus coffeehouses created an environment that encouraged and stimulated debate and discussion. This urban renaissance theory relates back to Habermas’ public sphere, as coffeehouses contributed to the creation of an open forum of informed debate.

The introduction of tobacco and chocolate heralded a new phase of European sobriety. Alcohol held a central place in society before the introduction of coffee, as beer offered a more hygienic alternative to water, and aside from bread, beer was the primary source of nourishment for Europeans, with an average of three litres being consumed daily. As a result, society was in a permanent state of semi-inebriation. Coffee stimulated mental activity without leading to any subsequent depression and must be regarded as the defining beverage of the bourgeois age. Associated with rationality and a strong work ethic, coffee was known for it’s (perceived) ability to sober up drunks: Sylvestre Dufour, a French seventeenth century merchant, remarked that ‘Coffee sobers you up instantaneously, or in any event it sobers up those who are not fully intoxicated’. The business efficiency displayed by coffee drinkers was contrasted with the inebriation, incompetence and laziness of those who drank alcohol. This sobriety encouraged the creation of new business institutions as it offered rational thought that was necessary for a correct work ethic. The sobering effect of coffee was disputed by the Women’s petition against Coffee, but this was refuted by the male reply to this pamphlet, and was most likely written ironically by a male author to generate controversy and to increase pamphlet circulation. The relationship between sobriety and coffee raises the question of whether or not a society that revolves around alcohol necessarily means a lack of creativity? One can hardly call the renaissance, a period that was before the sobering effects of coffee, an uncreative one. Relative to its relationship to the creativity of society, sobriety must be judged in conjunction with the rise of coffeehouse culture, the other key factor in coffee’s contribution to creativity. Due to their distinct properties, coffee and tobacco were often considered suitable tools for intellectual thought. Coffee acted as a stimulant for the brain while tobacco was associated with calmness, contemplations and clarity of expression. These seemingly opposite characteristics were believed to work in tandem with one another, as coffee functioned positively by arousing and nourishing the mind, while tobacco relaxed the rest of the body (which was deemed surplus to requirement) during ‘mental labour.’ This allowed tobacco and coffee to simultaneously calm and relax the consumer, while at the same time maintaining and improving concentration. These features led to coffee and tobacco to be associated with intellectualism, both due to their prominence in coffeehouse culture, but also because of the mental stimulation they offered. Writers who smokeed were portrayed as pensive and deep in thought, often gazing off into the distance, which demonstrates the perceived centrality of tobacco to literary culture. The popularity of tobacco is undeniable, and the eighteenth century saw European consumption rise from 50 million pounds to 125 million pounds over the course of the century. The impact of tobacco on European creativity is certainly second to that of coffee. Although a permanent feature in taverns and coffeehouses, smoking and snuffing cannot be seen to have had the same influence as its Arabian counterpart. The primary use of tobacco was maintaining a humoral equilibrium, and was described as a ‘dry drunkenness’ that helped to remove phlegm from the body. It was also used as an aid for studying. The Dutch physician Beintema von Palma wrote, ‘One who studies mist needs smoke much tobacco, lest the spirits fade and falter.’ Friedrich I and Friedrich Wilhelm I were both keen smokers and held ‘tobacco parliaments’ where in excess of thirty pipes were consumed over the course of a night. Edward Gibbon was dependant on tobacco for inspiration, a reliance he described as ‘snuff lust.’ This creative stimulus of tobacco is undeniable, but must be seen as less important than coffee because of coffee’s direct influence on coffeehouses.

The coffeehouse was a primary factor behind European creativity, and understandably, it owed its existence to coffee. Coffeehouses became incubators of liberal and revolutionary ideas, as shown by the frequent attempts by governments to regulate them. Fearful of their puritan association and the ideas they helped to circulate, Charles II attempted unsuccessfully to suppress coffeehouses in 1675.

‘[Coffeehouses] have produced very evil and dangerous effects… but also for that in such houses divers, false, malitious [sic], and scandalous reports are devised and spread abroad to the Defamation of His Majesty’s Government, and to the disturbance of the Peace and Quiet of the Realm; his Majesty hath though it fit and necessary, that the said Coffee Houses be (for the Future) put down and suppressed…’