Play Things: Children’s Racialized Mechanical Banks and Toys, 1880–1930
The reproduction of racism and class-based oppression are taught to children through various cultural media, including toys and games. Between 1880 and 1930, the popularity of racialized toys and banks were fear-based responses to the perceived encroachment by “foreign and exotic” migrations of African American, Chinese, Irish and Native Americans into the cultural landscape of white middle-class America. This article analyzes how artifacts associated with children, such as mechanical banks, clockwork figures, and other toys are part of a larger cultural structure that viewed race and class as inseparable, and that these objects were essential in the development of a learned habitus that exposed white middle class children in the Victorian era to a racially and class oriented world. We argue that these objects reflect both the times in which they were made, and illuminate the relationship between adults and a newfound emphasis on children and childhood, in which toys serves as symbolic mediators of culture.
KeywordsToys Racism Racialization Victorian America
Play objects are not merely items for fun, but function directly and indirectly to maintain existing beliefs and behavioral systems. They are not material trivialities…Both games and toys provide a looking-glass reflection of the larger society; and one cannot offer a meaningful commentary on these cultural artifacts without evaluating them in the broader network of the systems in which they were constructed and in which they were played.
The Roots of Modern Racism
American constructions of racism solidified during the Victorian period (1837–1901), defined by years of the reign of Britain’s Queen Victoria (Howe 1977). These decades were a time in which the wonders and promises of technological progress coexisted with the very real social problems associated with capitalism, industrialization and urbanization. Within the United States, the vast numbers of immigrants flooding into American cities resulted in a new awareness of the differences between middle class practices and values, and those of the new immigrant populations. The construction of the “white” race within American society was based on such migrations of people who were phenotypically and cultural perceived as different from the white middle class. In a world that was becoming less concerned with identifying people as being either “Christian” or “Non-Christian” the application of labels such as Red, Black, Yellow, or Irish were used to perpetuate inferiority in contrast to the “White” race in America (Paynter 2001, pp. 134–135). This awareness, or “cultural self-consciousness”, as Howe (1977) terms it, is ultimately reflected in the toys depicting racial stereotypes that were produced during this time. Howe (1977, p. 24) further suggests that Victorian racism was a “tragic contradiction,” an amalgam of “traditional ethnocentric habits” combined with nationalism and racism. This “tragic contradiction” inherent in white Victorian culture manifested itself in hostility towards outsiders: that is to say, all those peoples and cultures that did not fit easily into the tightly ordered (white, middle-class) Victorian cosmology. In addition, the development of Darwinism and eugenics based scientific perceptions of racially defined categorizations perpetuated widely held ideologies of white racial and cultural superiority. The ability of social structures, such as racism, to reproduce over time is based on the recreation of designed responses through subsequent generations (Orser 2007, p. 57–58).
Exposing children to racialized toys is but one facet of the white, middle-class Anglo-American habitus (Bourdieu 1977), intended to make children of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries maintain both unspoken and explicitly held beliefs on the superiority of their biologically defined “white race,” enabling children to identify practices, beliefs and behaviors that were considered to be outside of white middle-class America. When situations change, the responses and reactions to other “races” would continue to be products of the habitus of children who have been socialized within the structures of racism. Further work is needed in uncovering how such oppressive structures are reproduced and modified through time and space. In the following sections we show how the mass production of racialized toys is part of a large epochal structure reacting to migrations and perceived threats to “White,” middle class America.
There are a few points we wish to clarify before going further. Although we will suggest that the high cost of these toys would have made them available predominantly only to people with disposable incomes, that is to say, the white middle class, these objects lack a firm archaeological context, which precludes clear statements of gender or class association and possession of the toys mentioned here. This includes their ownership by the very groups which the toys presume to depict. Meaning is dependent on context, and because these objects have been pulled out of their contexts of their original child owners, if they ever had a child owner at all, make it extremely difficult to examine the role these toys played in dialogues of the (re)formation of identity between adults and children. That said, we believe that the “salvage principle” (Wylie 1996), wherein artifacts taken out of context can still be excellent sources of information about past beliefs and practices, is a suitable defense for both of these stipulations, and a defense whose suitability will become self-evident throughout the course of this paper.
Methodology and Data
Toys, in the modern sense of mass-produced objects made specifically for and used exclusively by children, are products of the Industrial Revolution. The mass manufacture of toys in the United States began during the mid-nineteenth century, piggybacking upon technological innovations in other areas of industry. Sheet metal stamping, cast iron manufacture, improved ceramic molding techniques, lithographic printing and cardboard making enabled the cheap and efficient mass production of a large variety of toys such as dolls, trains, books and board games (Chudacoff 2007). Toy manufacture quickly became big business in both Europe (Ganaway 2007), and the United States: for example, in 1850, the number of toy manufacturers in the United States was 47. By 1880, that number had nearly quadrupled to 173, and included now-familiar names such as Milton Bradley and Parker Brothers (Chudacoff 2007, p. 74).
Toys serve as medium of communication between children and adults, and suggest and reinforce norms of behavior (Wilkie 2000, p. 105). Victorian toys were profoundly didactic objects, meant to reinforce notions of gender roles, moral values, and a strong sense of nationalistic pride (Somerville in press), and virtually all toys from this time were intended for children of one sex or the other (Calvert 1992, p.110–111). Ganaway (2007) suggests that mechanical toys symbolized middle-class notions of order and, for mechanical banks in particular, the public sphere and commerce; that is to say, very masculine ideals. As such, these toys were likely made explicitly for, and marketed towards, boys rather than girls.
As noted above, it is difficult to know precisely how these toys were collected and displayed by children in the past because they lack the controlled provenience of traditional archaeological finds. To be sure, they have entered a new stage in their lives from children’s playthings to relics coveted by adult collectors. Presumably, however, parents purchased these toys, especially mechanical toys, for special occasions. Parents would have discovered these objects in advertisements in popular magazines, trade publications, and catalogs put out by merchants and manufacturers. The Shepard Hardware Company, discussed in greater detail below, even created full-color trade cards to promote their mechanical banks, a practice which other manufacturers later copied (Norman 1982).
How these toys were played with, curated and displayed by a child owner is also difficult to discern. Board and target games were of course used by groups of individuals, but the use of mechanical toys are more difficult to distinguish, especially since most Victorian children preferred toys of their own creation over more formal, manufactured toys (see Calvert 1992; Chudacoff 2007; Croswell 1898; Mergen 1982). It is reasonable to assume, then, that because they were fairly expensive objects, they would be highly curated objects as well. They perhaps would have been received at special occasions and given a prominent place in the child’s room as a visual reminder of the prosperity of the child’s family, and would not have been brought outside where they might be damaged. A high degree of curation may therefore explain why so many of these objects exist today and why so few end up in traditional archaeological contexts.
A sample database of 103 toys exhibiting racial caricatures or stereotypes was compiled using data acquired from antique dealer and collectors’ websites, period advertising and catalogs, patent papers, and museum collections. From these sources, the data collected included toy type (i.e. mechanical bank), description of the toy from period advertising if applicable, name of the manufacturer (or distributor if the manufacturer is unknown), date of first manufacture/appearance in advertising, and price. This data established the approximate temporal boundaries of the study, which in turn enabled an examination of the sociocultural contexts in which these objects were manufactured and used.
This is perhaps a nontraditional way of conducting a material culture study and, of course, the reliance on auction and collectors’ sites necessitates the recognition that the objects found within were likely to have had multiple owners over the years, and tracing such a path back to its original child owner would have been impossible. However, the use of these sources was necessary for a number of reasons. Because many of these objects are collectors’ items, their value is contingent on their physical condition. As such, gaining permission for physical examinations was largely out of the question. However, the documentary evidence, in the form of the large number and high quality of photographs present on these sources, was sufficient to analyze these objects. In addition, collector and auction websites bring together a large number of toys into a single place. This greatly facilitated data collection, and many of these objects would not have been found otherwise as neither patent information nor were period advertisements readily available.
The breakdown of this 103 toy sample is as follows: 48 mechanical banks (46.6%) (three of which are mechanical/clockwork hybrids), four still (non-mechanical) banks (3.8%), 32 clockwork (windup) toys (31%), three mechanical push/pull toys (2.9%), four target shooting games (3.8%), five cap pistols (4.8%), three dolls/doll sets (2.9%), two costumes (1.9%), and two board games (1.9%). All of these toys range in date from 1879 to 1934.
Based on the number of styles and their variants, the mechanical bank appears to be the most common form of the racialized toy, and “is a peculiarly American phenomenon” (Lederer 1940). Although James Serrill is commonly credited with patenting the first mechanical bank for a wooden bank with a “disappearing coin action,” (Morphy 2007) it appears the very first patent for a mechanical bank was granted to Kellis Horde in 1867 (Horde 1867). The toy bank, a didactic object in itself used to teach the virtue of thrift (Somerville in press), was an incredibly popular toy with over 600 different varieties and 280 mechanical variants produced between 1875 and 1910 (Emerine 1941), with a minimum of 10,000 individual toys produced from a single mold (Lederer 1940).
As noted above, the mechanical bank is a product of nineteenth-century industrialism, commonly made of cast iron which was a relatively new technology and comparatively inexpensive to manufacture in large quantities, although other materials such as wood, papier maché, tin, and lead were also used (Morphy 2002). The vast majority of mechanical banks were patented and produced by just three companies: the Shepard Hardware Company of Buffalo, New York, Connecticut, the J. & E. Stevens Company of Cromwell, Connecticut, and the Kyser and Rex Company of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. According to Griffith (1963a), the J. & E. Stevens Company was the most prolific of these manufacturers, responsible for approximately one third of all known mechanical bank designs. However, the most prolific inventor of mechanical banks was Charles Bailey, a toymaker who designed or patented at least 29 different banks, 10% of all known examples, including several banks with racial themes including “Darkey Fisherman,” “Chinaman in Boat,” “Dentist,” “Darky and Watermelon,” and “Bad Accident,” and who also worked at J. & E. Stevens for nearly 25 years (Griffith 1963b).
Toy manufacture was a comparatively late enterprise for these companies, who were engaged in the manufacture of tools, steam engines and industrial machinery (Once a Month Advertiser1866). Shepard Hardware, in particular, did not begin making banks until 1882, prior to which they were makers of industrial machinery and steam engines. The company sold its bank line to other manufacturers, most notably J. & E. Stevens, in 1892, and that company continued to produce Shepard banks for several more years, including the popular “Jolly Nigger” bank (Norman 1982). Similarly, clockwork toys were produced by a comparatively small number of manufacturers, including the Ives Corporation of Bridgeport, Connecticut, the Jerome B. Secor Manufacturing Company, also of Bridgeport, and the Ferdinand Strauss Corporation of New York City.
Despite their apparently large numbers, mechanical toys of all kinds were expensive (Cross 1997; Ganaway 2007; Museum of American Heritage 1998). Most mechanical banks cost between $.45 and $1.15, excluding postage, and averaged approximately $.85 and up. Indeed, the prices for these objects were considered “rather steep” for the times (The Antiques Journal1961), making them available only to relatively affluent customers. (Briefly to compare, between October 1901 and September 1904, the foundry workers at the J. & E. Stevens factory earned, on average, $1.92 a day for piecework based upon the weight of usable parts each worker produced each month [J. & E. Stevens Ledger, 1901–04]. On the other hand, between January 1874 and August 1875, the eight female workers at the J. & E. Stevens factory who painted the banks earned $.97 while working between two and ten hours per day [J. & E. Stevens Ledger, 1874–75].)
Interestingly, it was rare for the outward appearance of the bank to be patented. Almost always, it was the mechanism itself or any technical improvements to the actual mechanism of the bank which were patented. In fact, several patents of toys with racial themes actually suggest other ways in which the outward appearance of the mechanism might be presented. For example, in Alfred C. Rex’s 1884 patent application for the “Baby Mine” bank, which depicted a seated black woman spoon feeding a grotesque caricature of a small black child, Rex noted that “If desired, the figures may be animals in place of human beings, the essential feature being the feeding [action]” (Rex 1884). Similarly, James Bowen’s 1882 patent for his “Two Frogs” bank, in which a reclining frog threw a coin backwards into a larger frog’s mouth, shared its mechanism with the “Paddy and the Pig” bank, also introduced in 1882 (Bowen 1882). Likewise, the “Jolly Nigger” bank, one of the most popular banks, shared the same mechanism with the “Humpty Dumpty” bank, which depicted a circus clown (Griffith 1975). Clockwork toys, those using gearing mechanisms to produce some form of movement or action without any further input from the child, were also popular. For example, 1921’s “Alabama Coon Jigger,” a black man doing a funny dance, sold 8 million units (Cross 1997, p. 99). As might be expected, clockwork toys were even more expensive than banks, costing upwards of $4.25 for the “Freedman’s Mechanical Savings Bank,” a hybrid mechanical/clockwork bank.
The toys discussed in this article vividly illustrate the divide between what Baxter (2005, p. 46) terms the “imperial practices of adults” and the “native practices of children.” Adults perceive toys much differently than children do. Children are much more fluid than adults in what they consider to be toys, and a stick found in the yard quickly and easily becomes a sword or a magic wand. On the other hand, adults usually think of toys as a rigid class of object which is made exclusively for and given to children (Calvert 1992). Although Wilkie (2000, p. 100) is correct when she states that oftentimes “children’s artifacts are discussed as byproducts of parents’ attempts to instill values into their children, not as statements made by children,” the practice of marketing directly towards children did not emerge until the twentieth century (Cook 2004, p. 71; Jacobson 2008, p. 4). Therefore, these racialized toys are much more reflective of adult views and values, and were made to appeal to adults who would purchase them.
On a deeper level, however, Victorian toys “reflected a culture that respected the past, mechanical innovation and utilitarian objects” (Cross 1997, pp. 25–26), and, consequently, adult conceptions of what was fun and what a toy should be. Racialized toys are no exception, and the preponderance of mechanical objects as a medium for racism deserves closer scrutiny. While mechanical figures date to antiquity (see Asimov 1984; Bedini 2002), their transformation into toys, that is to say, objects made exclusively for children, and their eventual ubiquity reflects both a fascination with novelty and mechanical innovation (Cross 1997, pp. 25–26) and “the desire to simulate life by mechanical means” (Bedini 2002, p. 1). This is reflected in period advertisements, which stressed the “lifelike” nature of the mechanical movements. Furthermore, toys with racial themes can be said to “deanimate a stereotype, to arrest [it], to render it in three-dimensional stasis, [and] fix a demeaning and/or romanticizing racism with the fortitude of solid form” (Brown 2006, p. 185). The form of the mechanical toy, including banks, cap guns and clockwork toys, ensured that there could be no room for alternative forms of play facilitated by the child’s imagination. The mechanism of these toys was such that the mechanical parts create a rigidity of function, as each part of the mechanism fit together in a precise and specific way to produce a desired action, and no other action or output besides that intended by the manufacturer was possible. Put another way, the fixed mechanical systems of these toys produced a fixed outcome: the “Jolly Coon Jigger” could ever only do a gangly jig, “Paddy” could only ever take a penny off a pig’s nose, and the “Reclining Chinaman” could only ever grin mischievously and flash five aces. The mechanical toy, therefore, was a contradictory object: it arrested the stereotype which it depicted, while simultaneously bringing it to life in a mechanical form, and served a utilitarian purpose (conveying stereotypes about “outsiders”) while also retaining a sense of novelty. In short, the Victorian fascination with the mechanical, along with the Victorian fascination with children and childhood (see Calvert 1992; Cook 2004), came to join with the Victorian fascination with “The Other,” those peoples and cultures who did not fit into Anglo-American conceptions of social order.
In industrial capitalism, manufacturers are quick to capitalize on popular issues, and as objects of mass manufacture, toys are often highly topical, and can serve as temporal markers of the obsessions of popular culture (Strong Museum of Play 2010). In this regard, toys are a sort of barometer and it is not coincidental that racial toys were popular during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, a time in which white culture was on the offensive against the intrusion of the “exotic other” onto the American landscape. Hence, racial toys also serve as temporal markers, reflecting undercurrents of popular attitudes towards immigrants and non-whites. For the projection of racialized images onto toys and mechanical banks the manufacturer must be able to reproduce a stereotyped representation of the group being depicted that the audience can easily identify. In doing so the manufacturer of toys recreates perceived phenotypic stereotypes as to how an Irishman, Chinaman, Negro, or Indian should look and act, and were “designed to prompt negative emotions, feelings of power at abusing an outcast character, which was pictured as uncivilized, insignificant, and foolish” (Cross 1997, pp. 98–99). The racialization of these groups, therefore, followed similar trajectories such as competition for employment, phenotypic inferiority based on science, differences in religions and finally, differences in social organization contrary to that of white middle class America.
Native Americans also became emblematic of the imagery of the Wild West, a largely mythical construct of a open landscape free from the overpopulation, urbanization and restrictions on personal liberties that came to characterize late nineteenth and early twentieth century America. Rather than violent obstacles to America’s progress, Native Americans became a reminder of an unattainable past (Yellow Bird 2004). The Noble Savage was in tune with Nature and free to live life in accordance with the rules of the natural world. Hence, this imagery manifests onto children’s toys and other artifacts as reminders of a lost age of innocence and freedom. In the “Game of the Wild West,” the iconic images of Native Americans and Cowboys on horseback in the open plains followed the theories of cultural evolution put forth by Lewis Henry Morgan and E. B. Tylor. Here, Native Americans were relics of a simpler time before the overburdens of industrialism had taken its lethal grasp on the Great American continent. Consequently, the production of Native American iconic representation in “Game of the Wild West” was based not only in Orientalist ideologies of “Us vs. Them” but also a fictitious view of the past.
A single toy, the “Paddy and the Pig/Shamrock Bank” mechanical bank, (.9% of the total sample) portray a stereotyped depiction of the Irish (see Appendix). The racialization of the Irish is largely based on British constructions of the Irish being an inferior, uncivilized horde (Brighton 2008; Orser 2007; Shackel 2003). Within the United States, Nativist attention on the Irish as a threat to White American was rooted in employment competition, biological evolution, and religious concerns over Catholicism. Following the Great Hunger (Great Famine) beginning in 1843, almost 2 million Irish migrants came to the United States in search of a new home. The majority of Irish immigrants were poor rural farm workers with limited economic and social capital. Without industrial occupational skills, the Irish in America served mainly as cheap labor or domestic servants. Such low paying jobs resulted in the Irish being forced into poor ghettos that subsequently became synonymous with crime and unsanitary living conditions (Yamin 2002; Orser 2007; Shackel 2009).
In the mid-nineteenth century, it was widely held that economic and social hardships were the results of individual failings (see Howe 1977). Irish cultural practices of communalism and lack of individual desire for progression were viewed by “White” America as contrary to American values (Orser 2007, pp. 89–92). Given that so many of the Irish individuals were categorized as being poor because of perceived laziness and the willingness to work cheap, the Irish as a collective were viewed as inherently linked to a lower race. In racializing the Irish as inferior, the process of confining them to the “lowest-paying, dirtiest jobs available” was made easier (Orser 2007, p. 92). In the middle of the nineteenth century, the Irish comprised 87% of the free unskilled labor force in the U.S. (Brighton 2005, p. 109). As a result, during this period of economic depression that plagued the middle of the nineteenth century, the Irish were viewed as the scapegoats for the nation’s economic problems (Brighton 2008, p. 142). Because the Irish were denied admission into higher paying jobs they were perceived by White America as willing to work for wages on which no white man could maintain a high standard of living. During depressions and job shortages, anti-Irish sentiment by Nativists centered on the perception that the Irish would work for next to nothing and was, accordingly, a threat to white middle class America (Orser 2007; Brighton 2005, 2008).
Finally, the last threat that the Irish signified for White America was their wide spread practice of Catholicism. As proclaimed in the Congregationalist Pacific in 1867, “The Roman Catholic element in our population is certainly an element of trouble and danger. A Class of people largely ignorant, degraded, and vicious is a burdensome class and demands care, patience, and watching,” (quoted in Paddison 2009, p. 512). Given the United States’ Protestant origins, the mass migration of Irish Catholics represented an ever growing population that was viewed as being idolatrous, superstitious and, most importantly, incapable of surrendering their loyalty from the Pope to the President (Brighton 2008; Orser 2007; Paddison 2009). In sum, “Irish Catholics were thought to be part of a priest-controlled machine,” incapable of individual thought or action without the direction of the Catholic Church (Brighton 2008, p. 42). Protestant America became so engorged with Anti-Catholicism and Anti-Irish sentiment that “‘everything Irish’ was repugnant to Protestant Americans” (Orser 2007, p. 111).
In closing, a rumor from some years ago that still persists here and there today about Paddy and the Pig…has to do with the period in which the bank was made. Supposedly some Irish Society members felt that the bank was somewhat insulting to the Irish race and requested that production be stopped…It is a very attractive, clever savings device and it would take some stretch of the imagination to find it in poor taste or any way derogatory toward the Irish (Griffith 1975).
The lack of toys depicting the Irish appears to coincide with the greater political and social clout achieved by the Irish through their support of the Democratic Party. The anti-“new” immigrant rhetoric of the Democratic focusing on groups from eastern and southern Europe, and the migration of African Americans helped to shift attention away from the non-white status of the “Irish” race (Orser 2007, p. 90).
A total of ten toys (9.7% of the total sample) depict Chinese stereotypes (see Appendix). Following the 1849 California Gold Rush, the migration of Chinese into the United States aroused steadying ire until Nativist legislation through the Chinese Exclusionary Act halted legal immigration. The vast majority of the Chinese population living in the U.S. was economically oppressed males who had fled China following the Opium Wars (Orser 2007). As a result of such hardships many of these Chinese immigrants were employed as unskilled laborers working in mining camps or on railroads. At first, the Chinese were welcomed as a source of labor for the sparsely populated West. However, as the United States continued to fulfill its Manifest Destiny by populating the continent; the Chinese became viewed as a threat, embodied in the popular rallying cry of “The Chinese Must Go” (Farmer 1889, p. 138; see also Griffith 1955).
Like that against the Irish, the racialization of the Chinese in the nineteenth century by “white” America was largely based upon three key factors: phenotypic stereotypes, religious difference, and employment competition. A recurring element that was used by toy manufacturers to make the consumer identify that the toy was of a “Chinaman” was the presence of the queue, the distinctive long “pigtail” worn by Chinese men as a symbol of masculinity. Even though the practice of wearing the queue was not a true phenotypic expression, it was a cultural practice that Americans viewed as a consistent marker of Chinese male immigrants. This is reflected in our data sample as well: of the ten toys depicting Chinese stereotypes, eight (80%) of them are of men with queues. Anglo-American culture so strongly stereotyped and objected to the queue that in the 1870–80s several petitions by Nativist groups demanded that the United States government to outlaw the Chinese queue (Paddison 2009, pp. 541–542). The unwillingness of male Chinese immigrants to conform to white America’s views on hair length resulted in the widespread belief that the Chinese were unable to ever become “true” Americans.
No racial group was depicted more frequently on Victorian children’s toys than African Americans, a fact reflected by our data sample: of the 103 toys, 83 (80.5%) depict African Americans (see Appendix). Indeed, “Of all the American popular genres using African-American imagery, children’s games have been among the most uniformly negative” (Mercier n.d.). The process of African American racialization has been discussed at length elsewhere (see, for example, Berlin 1998; Orser 1998, 2004, 2007). While phenotypic differences played a major role in the racialization of African Americans, issues of stereotyped culture and class were also vital in the formation of the “Black” race.
The Jolly Coon Jigger exemplifies the intersection of economic and social habitus among white, middle-class America at the time. Children were taught not only the value of economic capital in a capitalist society but also the reproducing stereotype of the jovial dancing African American-a race to be viewed by white children as their social inferior. Much of the habitus of socialized racism manifested on children’s toys and banks was meant to poke fun at the different racial groups being represented. In making African Americans appear as dancing fools with over-exaggerated physical features, a semiotic connection between the middle-class white children, the toy and African Americans was created. Thus, the inferiority of African Americans was not only based on class oppression but a socially constructed ideology of concrete racial differences.
As Baxter (2005, p. 40) notes, “The link between the social and material is inextricable, and material items do not constitute a separate superstructure to social worlds.” Toys are not simply objects for play, but are also a medium of communication between children and adult. For Victorian America, ideologies of race and class were inseparable (Roediger 1991). This juxtaposition of social constructs reproduced perceptions of white dominance within white Victorian America, of which their remnants are visible today. The learned habitus of such oppressive ideologies are recreated through time and space. We have discussed how the habitus of white, Victorian America was represented in the form of artifacts associated with children. Toys and mechanical banks are but one way to observe how children became socialization in to race/class based oppression, and such a medium of racism and its reproducing socialization can be readily observed within the archaeological recorded. The mass production of toys and banks depicting racialized imagery shows that in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, there existed not only a demand for such products but that the people were well versed in the stereotyped representations of the depicted racial groups. These toys and banks were reactions to perceived threats envisioned by white America in the form of migration movements, ideologies of racial purity, and employment competition from a distinct “Other.”
Wilkie (2000, p.101) observes that, “Within historical archaeology toys and children are a constant and recognizable component of the material record…therefore we must ensure that we see these artifacts as more than playthings.” Racialized toys say much more about the deeper cultural composition of late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century America in which these toys were created, and the adults who purchased them, than the children who received them. Constructions of race and class social constructs reproduce ideologies of white superiority which contrast with “inferior races.” Such ideologies can still be easily observed today. Historical archaeologists, in particular, are in an excellent position to uncover how such ideologies are reproduced and altered over time and space. Although Victorian racialized toys are only one specific cultural medium of socialization, it is through this work that we can create discourse to see how such ideologies of racism persist in the present. In doing so, we hope to promote a better understanding of the development, reproduction, and alteration of the construction of race and identity in the United States.
Chris thanks David G. Orr, the anthropology department at Temple, and my loving wife Jess. Kyle thanks Sissie Pipes and Güner Coşkunsu. We jointly thank Robert L. Schuyler for his guidance and support throughout our careers. Lastly, we give our sincere gratitude to Chris Fennell, Chris Matthews, Charles Orser, and two anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful comments on various drafts of this paper.
- The Antiques Journal (1961). Mechanical Banks: A Survey. <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/1960s/pages/1961_antiques.htm>
- Asimov, I. (1984). How did we find out about robots? Walker, New York.Google Scholar
- Barlow, R. S. (1998). The great American antique toy bazaar: 5,000 old engravings from original trade catalogs, 1879–1946, Windmill, Windmill, California.Google Scholar
- Barrett, T. (2003). Interpreting visual culture. Art Education 56(2): 6–12.Google Scholar
- Baxter, J. E. (2005). The archaeology of childhood: children, gender, and material culture, AltaMira, Walnut Creek.Google Scholar
- Bedini, S.A. (2002). The role of automata in the history of technology. < http://web.mit.edu/lira/www/fall02_indStudy/b_edini_historyAutomata.pdf>
- Berlin, I. (1998). Many thousands gone: the first two centuries of slavery in North America, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Belknap.Google Scholar
- Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
- Bowen, J. H. (1882). Toy Savings Bank. U.S. patent 262,361, filed June 23rd, 1882, and awarded August 8th, 1882. <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/patents/2-252607-677601/262361.pdf>
- Brighton, S. A. (2005). An Historical Archaeology of the Irish Proletarian Diaspora: Material Manifestations of Irish Identity in America, 1850–1910. Doctoral dissertation. Boston University, Boston.Google Scholar
- Brighton, S. A. (2008). Degrees of alienation: the material evidence of the Irish and Irish American experience, 1850–1910. Historical Archaeology 42(4): 132–153.Google Scholar
- Calvert, K. L. F. (1992). Children in the house: the material culture of early childhood, 1600–1900, Northeastern University Press, Boston.Google Scholar
- Chudacoff, H. (2007). Children at play: an American history, New York University Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Cook, D. T. (2004). The commodification of childhood: the children’s clothing industry and the rise of the child consumer, Duke University Press, Durham.Google Scholar
- Cross, G. (1997). Kid’s stuff: toys and the changing world of American childhood, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
- Croswell, T. R. (1898). Amusements of worcester school children. Pedagogical Seminary 6: 314–371.Google Scholar
- Dommasnes, L. H., and Wrigglesworth, M. (2008). Children identity and the past, Cambridge Scholars, Newcastle.Google Scholar
- Emerine, A. (1941). What is the Worth of an Old Penny Bank or even an Old Rusty Cap Pistol? <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/1940s/pages/1941_emerine.htm>
- Engmann, R. (2007). Ceramic dolls and figurines, citizenship and consumer culture in Market Street Chinatown, San Jose. Unpublished archaeological report, Market Street China Town Archaeological Project, Stanford University, San Jose.Google Scholar
- Farmer, J. S. (1889). Americanisms, Old and New: A Dictionary of Words, Phrases, and Colloquialisms Peculiar to the United States, British America, the West Indies &c. &c. Their Derivation, Meaning, and Application, Together with Numerous Anecdotal, Historical, Explanatory, and Folk-Lore Notes. Thomas Poulter and Sons, London.Google Scholar
- Griffith, F. H. (1955). Chinaman in Boat with Rat on Tray. Hobbies Magazine, May. <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/1950s/griffith_pages/55-05-griffith.htm>
- Griffith, F. H. (1959). Reclining Chinaman Bank. Hobbies Magazine, December. <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/1950s/griffith_pages/59-12-griffith.htm>
- Griffith, F. H. (1963a). The J. & E. Stevens Co. Hobbies Magazine, March. <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/1960s/griffith_pages/63-03-griffith.htm>
- Griffith, F. H. (1963b). Bailey’s Banks. Hobbies Magazine, February. <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/1960s/griffith_pages/63-02-griffith.htm>
- Griffith, F.H. (1975). Humpty Dumpty Bank. Hobbies Magazine, <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/1970s/griffith_pages/75-01-griffith.htm>
- Horde, K. (1867). Alligator in Trough. U.S. patent 70,569, filed 1867, and issued November 5th, 1867. <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/patents/1-70569-244646/070569.pdf>
- Howe, D. W. (1977). Victorian culture in America. In Howe, D. W. (ed.), Victorian America, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp. 3–28.Google Scholar
- Ignatiev, N. (1995). How the Irish became white, Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
- Jacobson, L. (2008). Children and consumer culture in american society: a historical handbook and guide, Praeger, Westport.Google Scholar
- Lederer, R. M. (1940). Mechanical Bank manuscripts. <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/1940s/pages/1940s_lederer.htm>
- Mechanical Bank Collectors of America (2010). Scrapbook. <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook.htm, accessed 24 June 2010>
- Mercier, D. (n.d.). From hostility to reverence: 100 years of African-American imagery in games. <http://www.ferris.edu/jimcrow/links/games/>
- Mergen, B. (1982). Play and playthings: a reference guide, Greenwood, Westport.Google Scholar
- Morphy, D. (2002). Mechanical Banks. <http://www.mechanicalbanksonline.com/>
- Morphy, D. (2007). The official price guide to mechanical banks, House of Collectibles, New York.Google Scholar
- Mullins, P. R. (2000). Race and affluence: an archaeology of african america and consumer culture, Springer, New York.Google Scholar
- Museum of American Heritage (1998). Toys and More. <http://www.moah.org/exhibits/archives/toysnmore/toys.html>
- Norman, B. (1982). Old mechanical banks of the shepard hardware company. Collectors’ Showcase 1(4): 27–34.Google Scholar
- Once a Month Advertiser (1866). Shepard Iron Works advertisement. < http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/misc/pages/1866-shepard-iron-works_adv.htm >
- Orser Jr., C. E. (2004). Race and the practice of archaeological interpretation, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
- Orser Jr., C. E. (2007). The archaeology of race and racialization in historic America, University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
- Paynter, R. (2001). The Cult of Whiteness in western New England. In Orser Jr., C. E. (ed.), Race and the archaeology of identity, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 125–142.Google Scholar
- Rex, A. C. (1884). Toy Money-Box. U.S. patent 306,775, filed April 26th, 1884, and issued October 21st, 1884. <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/patents/2-252607-677601/306775.pdf>
- Roediger, D. R. (1991). The wages of whiteness: race and the making of the American working class, Verso, London.Google Scholar
- Shackel, P. A. (2003). Memory in black and white: race, commemoration, and the post-bellum landscape, AltaMira, Walnut Creek.Google Scholar
- Shackel, P. A. (2009). The archaeology of American labor and working class life, University Press of Florida, Gainesville.Google Scholar
- Spero, J. (1988). Collectible toys and games of the twenties and thirties from sears, Roebuck and Co. Catalogs, Dover.Google Scholar
- Sofaer Derevenski, J. (2000). Children and material culture, Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
- Somerville, K. (in press). A place for everything and everything in its place”: The cultural context of late Victorian toys. In Coşkunsu, G. (ed.), Proceedings of the institute for european and mediterranean archaeology third annual visiting scholar conference: children as archaeological enigma, State University of New York Press, Albany.Google Scholar
- Stevens, J. & E., Company. (1874–75). Paint shop earnings ledger. Cromwell, CT. <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/stevens/pages/1874-1875-jes-paint-shop-wages.htm>
- Stevens, J. & E., Company. (1901–04). Foundry employee earnings ledger. Cromwell, CT. <http://www.mechanicalbanks.org/scrapbook/stevens/pages/1901-1904-jes-foundry-wages.htm>
- Strong Museum of Play (2010). Online Collections. <http://www.museumofplay.org/collections/online>
- Wilkie, L. A. (2000). Not merely child’s play: creating a historical archaeology of children and childhood. In Derevenski, J. S. (ed.), Children and material culture, Routledge, New York, pp. 100–113.Google Scholar
- Wilkinson, D. Y. (1974). Racial socialization through children’s toys: a sociohistorical examination. Journal of Black Studies 5: 96–109.Google Scholar
- Wylie, A. (1996). Ethical dilemmas in archaeological practice: the (trans)formation of disciplinary identity issues of accountability. Perspectives on Science 4: 154–194.Google Scholar