Next in my #Castlereagh200 series: What structural factors in govt contributed to the chronic stress on #ViscountCastlereagh while he was Foreign Secretary and Leader of the House of Commons? 1/
Reminder: chronic stress is a key factor in poor #MentalHealth, so structural factors that are organizationally ingrained and exacerbate stress are particularly problematic. 2/
One important structural factor was that there was no equivalent to a modern-day Chief Whip. The functions were dispersed between the patronage secretary to the Treasury (Charles Arbuthnot, L), the Treasury Whip (William Holmes, R), and the Leader of the House (Castlereagh). 3/
This meant that Castlereagh was not only responsible for managing the govt’s legislative strategy (+ the Foreign Office), but also for performing some of the duties of a whip, such as sending treasury notes, estimating voting strength, or influencing backbenchers. 4/
Maintaining MP discipline was hard work; Castlereagh could not count on the loyalty of backbenchers. At the conclusion of vote on the 1816 Army Estimates, he noted: “altho we carried our Establishments, the Opposition were supported by not less than 25 of our usual friends.”5/
Another structural factor was the disparity between departmental resources and the complexity of govt business. The War Dept numbered only ~20 employees, but supported 3 major amphibious operations in as many years (1807 Copenhagen, 1808 Spain, and 1809 Walcheren). 6/
The same disparity between scale of responsibilities and available resources existed while Castlereagh was at the Foreign Office. Through 10 yrs of busy diplomacy that spanned the breadth of Britain’s global interests, Castlereagh’s Foreign Office staff numbered less than 40. 7/
In fact, accounts presented to Parliament indicate that as the demands of summit diplomacy were growing in the post-war period, fiscal retrenchment meant that the staffing of the Foreign Office HQ fell from 36 in 1815 to 24 in 1820--a whopping 33% reduction over 5yrs. 8/
These factors were linked by a common underlying trend: institutions struggling to keep up with change. Individuals willing to put in more hrs made up the difference, but meeting more demand through perseverance alone meant more stress and, hence, more risk to #mentalhealth. 9/9
Image: Richard Dighton, @britishmuseum (BM), 1852,1116.559
Between roughly 1818-1828, Richard Dighton did a series of profile portraits of men in Regency London's high society. Most were etchings, and the BM has digitized many prints held in its collection--they are worth your time if you're interested in Regency society, style, and art.
The earlier prints of this particular portrait, published individually by Dighton himself, are clearly dated to July 1821. Copies show up in the collections of the @britishmuseum, @NPGLondon, and @RCT.
(details shown here are from prints in the BM and RCT collections)
The late-Renaissance building with an inner courtyard surrounded by arcades was multi-functional: it housed the royal stables, guest apartments, the royal art collection, and an armoury. In fact, the ground floor is still used as the stables for the vaunted Lipizzaner Stallions.
Around 1711 the Stallburg also became the home of the Ziffernkanzlei--the 'Number Office.'
A name both suggestive and vague (and one of many used throughout the organization's existence), it was really the secret office for mail interception and decryption.
Castlereagh Creeping the House of Lords, or the Story of a Misidentified Portrait.
A 🧵
2 artists captured the proceedings against Queen Caroline in the #HouseofLords in 1820, and both include #ViscountCastlereagh. Let's start with James Stephanoff.
Stephanoff shows Castlereagh perched on a staircase, watching from a small window. The 1823 key for Stephanoff's work identifies this figure as "The Marquis of Londonderry [Castlereagh], who usually took his station on the stairs leading to the gallery during the investigation."
The other portrayal of the trial is, of course, George Hayter's monumental painting. Hayter, however, shows Castlereagh positioned in the box of the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, on the bottom right corner.
I was at a loss for how to mark the day after spending the last 2 years writing the research article on which all these tweets are based.
Maybe something more reflective is fitting.
I had always been interested in Castlereagh from a diplomatic and political standpoint...
2/
...and became increasingly interested in exploring the mental health aspect of his story because it was a challenging area that would combine history, politics, psychology, medicine, and other disciplines.
In the last few months of #Castlereagh200 threads we've covered a lot of ground, looking at many stressors that put Castlereagh's #MentalHealth at risk.
Now that we're only days from the bicentenary of his death, let's look at some conclusions.
First, the stress on Castlereagh was cumulative and pervasive. The downward spiral that he experienced in the weeks preceding his suicide was only the final chapter in a story that had been developing for yrs. The overlap between the professional and the social made it worse.
2/
Castlereagh was arguably a successful policymaker. But what did that require? He had to be a strategist, a tactician, a courtier, a whip, an orator, a master of protocol, an ambassador, a traveller, a negotiator, a socialite, and a political campaigner.
3/
As we turn the corner into the week of August 12, I want to focus this #Castlereagh200 🧵 on a final area of #MentalHealth risk connected to the workplace: job insecurity.
If you've been following these #Castlereagh200 threads, you may call that I'm drawing from a risk framework that forms the basis for my upcoming article on Castlereagh and mental health. See the attached table, adapted from Boini, 2020 and Gollac et al, 2011.
2/14
Job insecurity has long been recognized as a mental health risk. But was Castlereagh's job insecure? No.
Electorally he was in safe seats, only losing his home seat briefly in 1805. His position in Cabinet after 1812 was arguably more secure than Liverpool's.