Featured

Cover of Remarks on the Importance of the Study of Political Pamphlets, Weekly Papers, Periodical Papers, Daily Papers, Political Music, &c. — Reading Notes

Remarks on the Importance of the Study of Political Pamphlets, Weekly Papers, Periodical Papers, Daily Papers, Political Music, &c. — Reading Notes

(0 User reviews) 781

In Category - Government

Authors: Barrow, Thomas [Dubious author] Digital Source: Project Gutenberg Gutenberg Release Year: 2022 First Publication Year: Not confirmed

Key Word: Great Britain -- Politics and government -- 1760-1820 -- Early works to 1800 Target Reader: Readers of public-domain and historical texts

Book Edition: Project Gutenberg digital edition Book Language: en

Edition facts

Words 11,997

Reading time 53 min

Text sections 3

Before opening Remarks on the Importance of the Study of Political Pamphlets, Weekly Papers, Periodical Papers, Daily Papers, Political Music, &c. — Reading Notes, the edition data offers a quick orientation: 11,997 words, 53 min estimated reading time, and 3 detected text sections.

The text analysis averages about 42.5 words per sentence, while the detected sections provide another way to judge how the source is divided.

Project Gutenberg metadata also associates the work with “Great Britain -- Politics and government -- 1760-1820 -- Early works to 1800,” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.

Source: Project Gutenberg record #67836

An anonymous 1765 pamphlet arguing that political pamphlets, newspapers, and even political music are essential reading for citizens, using satirical contrasts between learned pedantry and the plain voice of the public.

Editorial Edition Score 4.5/5

★★★★★ ★★★★★

Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.

How this score is calculated

Description quality20 pts
Title & short description10 pts
Source metadata20 pts
Text length15 pts
Chapters / structure15 pts
EPUB file integrity20 pts

Total of 100 points, scaled to a 2.5-5.0 range. Editions with an empty description or a missing EPUB file are not scored.

Edition quality

File: pg67836

Read the Text

IMPORTANCE of the STUDY

POLITICAL PAMPHLETS, WEEKLY PAPERS, PERIODICAL PAPERS, DAILY PAPERS, POLITICAL MUSIC, &C.

Libertas, et speciosa nomina prætexuntur; nec quisquam, alienum servitium, et dominationem sibi concupivit, ut non eadem ista vocabula usurparet.

Printed for W. NICOLL, in St. Paul’s Church-yard, M DCC LXV.

On the Importance of the Study of

POLITICAL PAMPHLETS, &c.

There cannot be a surer proof of ignorance and folly than impertinence, whether it betrays itself in the pertness of a coxcomb, or in the solemnity of a fop; provokes with the petulance of wit; stupifies with the dullness of narration; insults with the arrogance of superior birth, fortune, or learning; fatigues with frothy declamation, or stuns with the clamour of dispute; in private and in public, over a dish of tea, or over a bottle; from the pulpit, or the bar, or in the senate, it is always offensive and ridiculous.

The humble and obscure writer of a Pamphlet cannot, however, if he happens to mistake his talents, be justly blamed for impertinence. He may be pitied for his misfortune; but for his faults as an author, he is answerable to no man: for there is scarce any man, who has dealt in this sort of reading, that has not had fair warning; it being more than an hundred to one, that he has bought an impertinent Pamphlet, some time, or other, in the course of his studies. He cannot well fail of knowing that such things are sometimes published; neither the writer nor the bookseller compels him to buy; and if he suffers himself to be imposed on by a title-page, he can have no good reason to complain of either. Besides, no Pamphlet can fairly be said to be wholly useless: it may be always made to serve, at least, some purpose; whereas I believe there is hardly any body but may remember to have been present, perhaps once in their lives, at a conversation, or a pleading, or a speech, or a sermon, that could serve no manner of purpose but to tire the audience, and make the speaker ridiculous: and this must be allowed to be a very unpardonable sort of impertinence; for a man may throw aside a Pamphlet, if he pleases, at the first page, or the first line; but he cannot decently get out of a company, or out of the senate, or out of a church, whenever he may have a mind.

I do not mean this, as an apology for authors in general: the accidental writer of a Pamphlet, or a Paper, hardly deserves so respectable an appellation. On the contrary, every man who wantonly and vainly usurps that sacred profession, without being possessed of a moderate share at least, either of genius, or wit, or learning, or knowledge, besides the indispensable qualifications and ingredients of common honesty, sincerity, and benevolence, is guilty, in my opinion, of the highest degree of impertinence.

But in this land of liberty, of general wealth, curiosity, and idleness, where there is scarce a human creature so poor that it cannot afford to buy or hire a Paper or a Pamphlet, or so busy that it cannot find leisure to read it; where every man, woman, and child, is, by instinct, birth, and inheritance, a politician; where the ordinary subjects of common conversation turn not, as in most countries, upon the impertinent trivial occurrences of the week or the day, nor on the small concerns, offices, and duties of private and social life; but on the greater and the more important objects of war, negociations, peace, laws, and the public and general weal; where men are more solicitous about the integrity and abilities of a lord commissioner of the treasury, or of a secretary of state, than the fidelity of their own wives, the chastity of their daughters, their sons, or their own honour and virtue; and where, like the virtuous citizens of Rome and Sparta, they unreluctantly offer up all the slenderer ties of blood, the endearments of love, the connexions of friendship, and the obligations of private gratitude, daily sacrifices and victims to the commonwealth; in such a country, the dullest Pamphlet may have a fair chance of gaining some readers, provided it be a political Pamphlet; whilst a treatise on religion or philosophy, unless the writer of it should happen to be thoroughly master of his subject, and know how to treat it with uncommon genius and learning, would meet with the fate it deserved, and be received with universal neglect.

Continue Reading →

The anonymous author of this 1765 pamphlet opens with a sweeping condemnation of 'impertinence' in conversation, pulpit, bar, and senate, then pivots to defend the humble pamphlet writer. The tone is ironic: the writer claims pamphlets can never be wholly useless, since a reader may toss one aside at the first line—unlike a tedious sermon or speech. This self-deprecating posture sets up a sustained argument that the study of political ephemera—weekly papers, daily papers, even 'Political Music'—is vital for a free people. The author draws on classical examples (Rome's fall) and recent conspiracies (Jesuits in France and Portugal) to warn against credulity, while simultaneously praising the 'generous and noble calls of liberty' found in the press. The work is as much a performance of rhetorical irony as a political treatise.

The Rhetoric of Impertinence and Utility

The pamphlet begins by defining 'impertinence' in social settings—the pert coxcomb, the solemn fop, the frothy declaimer—before exempting the pamphlet writer from this charge. The author argues that a pamphlet buyer is never compelled to purchase; if deceived by a title page, he has no right to complain. This legalistic framing subtly defends the genre against accusations of triviality. The writer then claims that no pamphlet is wholly useless, as it can always serve some purpose, unlike a conversation or sermon that merely tires the audience. This contrast between printed ephemera and live speech is a key structural device: the pamphlet is portable, dismissible, and therefore less offensive than the bore who monopolizes a room.

Historical Warnings and the Credulity of Nations

The author marshals examples from Roman history—Marius, Sylla, Catiline, Pompey, Caesar—to show how secret machinations of patricians and plebeians ruined the republic. These conspirators were all Romans, just as the Jesuits in France and Portugal were Frenchmen and Portuguese, and the plotters under Charles I, Charles II, and James II were Englishmen (with a few Scots). The point is that credulity, the 'daughter of Stupidity and Ignorance,' has destroyed many nations. The author urges readers not to shut their ears to 'the cries of the streets' nor turn away from 'the lamentations of the news-papers.' The press is presented as a corrective to the outward appearances of loyalty and virtue that mask conspiracy.

The New Political Art: Learning Discarded

The author claims to have read almost every pamphlet and paper published in the last five years on political subjects, with 'equal delight and astonishment' at their wit and spirit. He then announces a recent discovery: the study of history, laws, treaties, and political systems is 'mere loss of time, and downright pedantry.' This is illustrated by a story about Montesquieu, who allegedly spent twenty-five years on two small volumes, dashed them against a wall, and only published because the wall returned them. The modern politician, by contrast, needs no learned dust; the direct road to political composition has been found. This satirical swipe at erudition serves to elevate the plain, immediate voice of the pamphlet over systematic knowledge.

The Voice of the Multitude vs. Hired Mourners

The author warns against dismissing popular outcry as the 'counterfeit tears' or 'hired mourners' of faction. The groans and wailings in newspapers are not the snarling of ravenous faction or the braying of a deluded mob; they are 'the genuine voice of the venerable and sacred multitude,' neither provoked by private resentment nor bribed nor awed. This personification of the public as a single, noble entity contrasts with the earlier catalogue of impertinent speakers. The pamphlet thus oscillates between defending the common reader's judgment and satirizing the pretensions of learned politicians. The final appeal is to listen to the streets and papers—a democratic epistemology embedded in an ironic, learned frame.

Readers should approach this pamphlet as a layered performance: its surface argument for studying ephemera is undercut by its own learned allusions and ironic self-deprecation. The author's voice shifts between the humble scribbler and the erudite critic, making the work a specimen of the very genre it defends. Pay attention to how the writer uses classical and contemporary examples not as straightforward evidence but as rhetorical moves in a game of persuasion. The pamphlet rewards those who read it as both a political argument and a satire of political argument itself.

That 1765 pamphlet, with its quiet insistence on the plain voice of citizens, stayed with me through the dripping eaves. It made me think of how arguments echo down the years. Later, shelves yielded a Saratoga reply—a countersuit, really. Its patient unraveling felt familiar, like finding the other side of a conversation I'd started alone. A Review and Exposition, of the Falsehoods and Misrepresentations, of a Pamphlet Addressed to the Republicans of the County of Saratoga, Signed, "A Citizen" — A Closer Reading became that afternoon's quiet counterpart.