A new volume of essays called The Slave in European Art: from Renaissance Trophy to abolitionist Emblem (2012) has been published by the Warburg Institute - edited by Professors Elizabeth McGrath and Jean Michel Massing - and includes my research essay revising the history and interpretation of this print by George Cruikshank, called The New Union Club (1819).
In a nutshell, the print is a satirical representation of an actual meeting of a philanthropic group called the African and Asiatic Society, which took place in 1816. The meeting was chaired by William Wilberforce and included a number of prominent abolitionists, as well as two African American guests, and representatives from London's poor African and Asian community.
Alongside well known and documented Black street personalities from London's urban life (such as Billy Waters and Charles McGee), the print also represents two free African American freemasons - Prince Saunders and Thomas Paul - who attended the meeting as representatives for King Henri Christophe of Haiti. Christophe was at the time realising his vision for the first free Black republic.
My research laid to rest some myths about this complex image. Firstly I was able find archival evidence for the dinner represented, which actually took place in 1816 - three years before this print was made. In doing so I could more clearly delineate the intentions for the meeting and find out rare evidence pertaining to the philanthropic society who held the event.
Secondly having found the correct citations for the event, I solved the riddle of the man represented at the centre of the scene, who has so often been referred to as the English Black radical Robert Wedderburn. This man is in fact Thomas Paul, an African American Baptist preacher from Boston who was also a freemason.
Thirdly, by treating the image as a historical text, I was able to decipher all but one of the written references in the print - which can be seen in speech bubbles, labels, open books, and random pieces of paper.
This was certainly a huge scholarly feat, which clearly demonstrated just how much is often overlooked in historical sources, particularly when the evidence is presented is such an irreverent way. Ultimately, however, what I have found here is some very serious comedy.