Matt Conclusion

While at first glance looking at images of Coffee-houses from the late 17th  and early 18th century these establishments seem to be very positive spots, not everyone during this time thought of these places as having positive influence. Some people saw the new form of political conversation as a precursor to rebellion, as “History’s greatest rebels were said to have imbibed coffee before committing their heinous crimes” (Pincus, 826). Others thought that these Coffee-houses had an emasculating effect on their patrons and saw this as negative to society (Pincus, 825). Many more thought that the ideas spread in these houses often lacked substance and many times spread conspiracies (Pincus, 827). On top of this, there was a sentiment that the manner in which debates were handled in Coffee-houses was unproductive and illogical. These reasons, in my opinion are all part of a bigger reasoning for why these authors did not approve of Coffee-houses. Most of all, I believe that the people behind these texts were afraid of losing their power in society. In being able to afford a printing press to produce pamphlets for the public required wealth during this time period. Also, through the language and the way their pamphlets are written, you can tell the authors were well educated. As Coffee-houses were a place of equality, where no man presided over another. As seen through King Charles II proclamation for the ban of Coffee-houses, people of power felt their influence beginning to fade. 

These are concepts that cannot be deciphered through simply looking at an image, but require deeper reading into the words of citizens during the time period. However, when you do look at the pamphlets written in the era, it is clear that many people shared these ideas.