May 2023
Introduction
World’s Fairs, or International Expositions, have long been appreciated for their large impact on society. According to historian James Gilbert, “they were extravaganzas of optimism, showcases of the present, and predictions of the future, as well as peaceful environments for competition and display of goods and ideas in the edgy years of the early twentieth century.” [1] Expositions have been some of the most significant global events to occur, as a platform to not only display the host country’s advancements and power but also to classify and organize the world’s progress. These fairs had a profound impact on American society through their diverse exhibits, shows, and attractions.
Held to celebrate the one hundredth anniversary of the Louisiana Purchase, the 1904 Saint Louis World’s Fair showcased many new products and cultural items to the world on an incredibly large scale. The Louisiana Purchase Exposition, the Fair’s official name, was an especially significant event, drawing crowds of thousands and totaling around twenty-nine million in attendance through its duration from April 30th to December 1st, 1904. [2] With sixty-two countries participating, this Exposition held a conglomerate of worldwide cultural, technical, and industrial contributions that exposed many brand-new aspects of the world to millions of attendees. Exhibits in the LPE displayed a wide arrangement of different topics and attractions, from a horse named Jim Key, who could spell words, to reenactments of the Boer War, as well as an anthropology section that resembled little more than a human zoo. These displays revolved around sharing cultural artifacts, new industrial processes, and the arts, as well as demonstrating the dominance, progress, and superiority of the United States.
For most, this Exposition is known for its location in Forest Park, the inclusion of Geronimo, as well as being the birthplace of the ice cream cone and sweet tea. However, to historians, the LPE is a tantalizing source for revealing the semantics of the turn-of-the-century paradigm shift in American society. During this part of the Progressive Era, many aspects of day-to-day life were changing at a rapid pace. The United States was fresh off the Spanish-American War, attempting to popularize the newly controlled territories of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines. Imperialism was reaching its high point, and society was transforming exponentially in countless ways. Industry was evolving with new machinery, new aspects of humanist study were being founded, and electricity was well on the path to mainstream. With all these societal, industrial, and political evolutions taking place, this Exposition provides a wealth of sources pertaining to American society during the period.
Twentieth-century historians analyzed the Fair’s explicit purposes outlined by the organizers, paying little attention to the experiences and perceptions of attendees. [3] The works of this era analyze each American fair’s contribution to the general process of American leaders framing their notion of “progress as racial dominance and economic growth” [4], arguing that the fair organizers used the LPE to give “utopian aspects to American imperialism”. [5] This group of authors highlight a few aspects of the fair to prove their point, such as the anthropological exhibits, which essentially force-fed the public W.J. McGee’s theory of racial hierarchy. [6] Their analyses of the Fair’s organization, substance, and legacies lead one to believe that the Louisiana Purchase Exposition was little more than a soapbox for cries of racial hierarchy.
Though early historians focused on the explicit purposes outlined by the Exposition’s organizers, historians of the twenty-first century have shifted their focus towards the experience of those that attended the LPE. [7] They explore the Fair’s impact on visitors, particularly in terms of representation and exploitation of marginalized groups, in contradiction with the explicit purpose of fair organizers. James Gilbert argues that “we do not see them [the visitors] as a mute block of observers, ready and willing to accept and absorb the various messages and lessons intended by the designers of the Fair”, claiming that visitors did not pick up on the racialized and imperialist themes of the anthropological displays. [8] Other arguments made by this group pertain to the portrayal of Native Americans and other indigenous peoples at the Fair. They delve into the complex power dynamics between white Americans and Native Americans, alongside highlighting how the Fair’s instances of transnational indigenous exchange could have potentially been a precursor to future pro-indigenous movements. Overall, these scholars offer a more nuanced and complex understanding of the Exposition’s significance beyond its surface-level historical narrative compared to previous works.
While the work of present-century historians has brought a deeper level of visitor experience into play, much of their focus remains on the anthropological aspects of the Exposition. Through their analyses, we know that the anthropological exhibits promoted a racial hierarchy and superiority that the Exposition’s visitors did not embrace, or even notice. However, this was a time rife with imperialism, racism, and notions of American or white superiority, yet is it something that visitors experienced in other exhibits? This leads to the questions of what was the intended impact of non-anthropological exhibits, such as the United States Government Building? Do the explicitly stated purpose and motivations of fair officials match the implicit purpose and motivations? Does this match the experience of those who attended the Exposition’s Government Building, and what does this mean in a broader sense?
This research, following the model of analysis that Gilbert utilized, reveals both the explicit purposes and intended impact of the United States Government Building, as well as its impact on attendees. Despite the work of recent historians shedding light on the dichotomy between visitor experience and imposed themes of racism and imperialism within the Anthropology Department’s exhibits, this was not the case for the exhibits within the United States Government Building. Through analyzing primary sources produced by Exposition officials, it is revealed that the U.S. Government Building was used as a showcase for American societal progress and military prowess, which is quite different than in the anthropological displays. This was carried out through the physical characteristics of the Government Building itself, as well as the exhibits inside, by imposing themes of superiority and dominance. Through investigation of the experience of visitors that attended the LPE, one can conclude that they readily picked up on and accepted these messages of American dominance and were overall generally impressed by the Government’s vast displays.
The United States Government at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition
The U.S. Government Building, placed on the south-western side of Forest Park, was a magnificent structure that housed various displays curated by the U.S. Government. Within, there was a working post office, a Navy Department exhibit, a War Department exhibit, an observatory, and an education display, among various others. [9] The focus of this analysis is narrowed to the War Department and the Navy Department’s exhibits, for they conveyed the intended impositions of the building most effectively and visibly. The War Department, led by John C. Scofield, was placed on the right side of the Government Building, and the Navy Department, organized by Benjamin F. Peters, was situated directly across the hall. [10] These exhibits, more so than the others in the building, provide a wealth of information regarding the U.S. Government’s aims in their representation at the Fair.
The setting of the Government Building and its characteristics are important to consider, for they reveal how the Exposition organizers and government officials intended visitors to feel when viewing the building. Leading up to the gargantuan structure was the Sunken Garden, a beautiful flower bed “750 feet long and 100 feet wide” that served as a massive walkway to the front steps. [11] The building, placed in between the Palace of Liberal Arts and the Mines and Metallurgy Building, had classical Ionic columns and an immense dome perched atop the front apex of the roof. On the rear side there were “colossal female figures each 11 feet high, representing Music, Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, Manufactures, Transportation, and Agriculture, typifying the strength and virility of the Republic”. [12] The Souvenir Guide for the Government Building explains that “an effort was made to treat it [the building] in a dignified way, as being thus more properly representative of the United States government and not unpleasingly in contrast to the more frivolous designs of various other buildings.” [13]
The U.S. Government imposed quite a powerful presence with their building – its grand scale and classical façade sticking out of the skyline of the Exposition was certainly a spectacle. Officials described it as “… perched high on a hill stands the United States Government Building, with its huge dome towering far above the previous largest building that ‘Uncle Sam’ ever built for exhibit purposes.” [14] To the Exposition officials, this building was “the most magnificent, most original and sublime piece of architecture which was ever created for exposition purposes.” [15] Photographs of the Government Building, however, speak better for its beauty and scale. [16] This was a gargantuan white structure that looked as if it was inspired by the White House, or at least belonged on the U.S. National Mall in Washington, D.C. With American flags posted at intervals of around ten feet atop the roof, among its many other symbolic aspects, the Government Building surely was made to speak for American greatness.
Thus, one can conclude that the Government building itself was intended to impose a message of the United States’ superiority, intelligence, and innovation. The sheer size of this structure, and especially its location on top of “Government Hill”, speaks to the notions of grandeur that America presented to the world during the Exposition. The addition of Ionic columns can be viewed to represent the democratic principles of the United States, for the Ionic order of architecture hails from Athens, the birthplace of democracy. Furthermore, this building was the gateway to the Plateau of States. Therefore, anyone who wanted to see their state’s building had to enter through the Government Building, or at least walk within view of it; this leads one to assume that most American visitors to the Exposition visited this building. Thus, the grand structure was clearly intended to speak for the greatness of the American Republic and was placed where thousands would receive the message.
The Government Building’s War and Navy Departments
Inside the Government Building, the War Department’s extensive display took up a total of 15,061 square feet. [17] It had been “planned to adequately represent the military service of the United States” and did so by encompassing the Ordinance Department of the Army, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Artillery Corps, and the U.S. Military Academy (West Point). [18] The Ordinance Department’s display was the largest of the bunch, consisting of countless firearms, including a Colt Automatic Machine Gun, a Maxim gun, and two gatling guns. [19] Furthermore, there were two cabinets displaying the evolution of portable guns and rifles, starting from the early days of America. [20] The other displays included the progression of American Military uniforms, models of memorial parks and monuments, as well as models of dams on the Mississippi River.
Stationed outside the Government Building, yet still part of the War Department’s display, was the Heavy Ordinance section, also regarded as the Big Gun Exhibit. This display officially “intended to represent the armaments employed in siege and seacoast fortifications.” [21] The focal point of this section was a twelve-inch mortar used for seacoast fortification, surrounded by a large, steep mortar pit. Alongside the twelve-inch mortar, three aiming devices used with cannons and mortars were displayed and demonstrated to visitors. These included the Swasey Depression Range Finder, the Whistler Plotting Board, and the Pratt Ballistic Board. [22]
Less popular than the other displays by the War Department, though equally revealing of intended impact on visitors, was the section of Army Transportation. Also located outside of the Government Building, it consisted of a “collection of United States Army Wagons”, including General Thomas’ old wagon, a six-mule wagon used by General Sherman’s army in the Civil War, and a then-modern six-mule wagon, escort, and Dougherty Spring Wagon. [23] This section gave visitors a showcase of the evolution of army transportation used by the military throughout the ages. The selection of sub-departments displayed by the War Department shows that the organizers fully intended to exhibit the fighting power, infrastructure and transportation efficacy, and high-level training that the Army utilizes. In essence, these exhibits showcased the United States’ means, modes, and evolution of warfighting to impose American dominance, promote patriotism, and strengthen American sentiment regarding the military to those that visited.
The sheer number of rifles, pistols, machine guns, cannons, and mortars, heavily outnumbering other inclusions in the War Department’s exhibit, leads one to believe that this was a soapbox to promote the notion of American military might. Additionally, the display of the evolution of American firepower shows that the United States had been the front-runner in arms production and use in the past and has always remained ahead of the rest of the world – all tucked into two display cabinets. This notion is strengthened by the Heavy Ordinance section, which exhibited the biggest and most powerful weapons the military utilized. In this display, visitors were able to closely interact with the best of American firepower, while also being instructed on its aiming capabilities and use. Thus, this part of the War Department’s arrangement allowed visitors to be up-close and personal with these items, further strengthening the overall intended message of American dominance in war.
Though the rest of the War Department’s exhibit is less compelling, the other displays reveal the intended impact on Exposition visitors regarding other aspects of the Army, thus giving them a well-rounded image of American power. The section allocated to the Army Corps of Engineers was an effective demonstration of the infrastructure that the Army utilizes in wartime, as well as at home in the United States. The models of dams on the Mississippi River seem to have been intended to display the strength of transportation infrastructure the government provides, thus furthering notions of American excellence. West Point’s inclusion in the U.S. Military Academy’s display showcased how officers are trained for service in the Army. This was a showcase of the high-level training and education that Army decision-makers achieve in their training, thus strengthening trust in the military, as well as perhaps working as a recruiting tool. Given the intended influence of the War and Navy Departments’ exhibits, it would seem that at least several young men would have been interested in attending the Academy.
The Navy Department’s exhibit took up the same square footage as the War Department and was situated directly across from it within the U.S. Government Building. [24] The officially stated purpose of this display was “to present an intelligent idea of the internal and external features of the United States men-of-war, of the weapons of the Navy and their uses, of the great docks in which the fighting vessels are placed for repairs, of the actual life and duties of the officers and enlisted men of the Navy and Marine Corps, afloat and onshore, in war and in peace…” [25] Thus, Commissioner Benjamin F. Peters aimed to accurately portray the U.S. Navy’s power and might through this exhibit.
Aligning with the Navy Department’s explicit purpose, its focus was on the weapons, vessels, and members of the United States’ Navy. This display’s central figure was “an exact and full-sized reproduction of a portion of a United States man-of-war”; the portion that was being exhibited was the bow of the ship. [26] Perched atop the bow was “the original figurehead of the Olympia, the flagship of Admiral Dewey in the memorable battle of Manila Bay on May 1, 1898.” [27] Attached on the main deck were several large cannons and guns, namely two ten-inch guns, a six-pounder Hotchkiss, a thirty-caliber Colt, and a gatling field piece. [28] On the bottom deck was displayed a torpedo firing tube, several torpedoes, a five-inch rapid-fire gun, and two three-inch rapid-fire guns. [29] Visitors were encouraged to walk around and within the vessel, as well as man the guns and explore the different machinery inside. Naval officers were at hand to instruct the visitors on the various aspects of the vessel, including the weaponry.
Though the model man-of-war was the focal point of the Navy’s display, the most “instructive exhibit of the Department is [was] a large map of the world, 20 feet long and 8 feet wide.” [30] Upon this map were placed “307 miniature lead models”, each representing the various types of naval vessels in use of the American Navy. [31] The placement of these models indicated “the whereabouts of the corresponding vessel of the Navy each day”, thus giving visitors real-time knowledge of where the Navy’s ships were in the world. [32] It seems that this was an important part of the display’s intended impact on visitors, for the organizers claim that a glance at this “gives [gave] an accurate idea of the number and whereabouts of the vessels of the Navy”, thus it exhibited the reach and extent of this branch of American military. [33]
Situated close to the mortar pit outside of the Government Building was a display showing the effect of American armor piercing and explosive rounds on naval vessel plate armor. This is best depicted by a photograph taken by photographer F.J. Koster, entitled “1904 World’s Fair U.S. Government Gun Exhibit”, in which one can clearly see the ravaging firepower of the Navy that was being displayed. [34] The plate, inscribed “Carnegie-Krupp Face Hardened” is torn in half horizontally, with three large impact holes running down the middle of the break. [35] On the top half of the plate is a description of the projectiles used, consisting of explosive and armor-piercing rounds. [36] The left side is completely decimated from the projectile with the largest amount of explosive power, complete with ripples in the hardened steel from the impact’s shockwave. To further display the Navy’s capabilities to visitors, Commissioner Peters developed a model camp of United States Marines to represent their participation “in all of the glorious victories of American arms on the seas and ashore”. [37] While this was located in a different part of the Exposition, it was used as a barracks for the two-hundred enlisted men throughout the duration of the fair, who either guarded the Government Building or participated in countless military parades throughout the fair.
The Navy Department’s exhibit was intended to present the efficacy, superiority, and numbers of American vessels and the Marine Corps. The full-sized portion of a man-of-war was open for visitors to explore and walk around in, therefore allowing their full immersion in the display. This is much more powerful of a message than simply displaying a model ship – people could man the weapons and explore the magazine below deck filled with ammunition, thus attaining a highly personalized experience. The amount and types of weapons attached to the vessel are not to be taken lightly; torpedoes were new technology with devastating effects, and one must keep in mind that the two ten-inch guns attached to the main deck were only two inches smaller in diameter than the twelve-inch mortar in the mortar pit. The firepower on this man-of-war is hard to imagine in modernity, yet visitors were enabled a first-hand look and experience of it.
The most compelling aspect of the Navy’s exhibit is the display of the effects of explosive projectiles on vessel plate armor. The hardened metal of this Carnegie steel plate was completely destroyed and torn in half; the fact of it being claimed by Carnegie, a highly respected steel producer, in large letters shows that the Navy intended visitors to be awed by the immense power of their projectiles. Their munitions not only pierced Carnegie steel, but it was torn to shreds. This display gave a stark example of the tremendous firepower of the Navy, thus further representing the intended message of superiority and efficacy.
Though the starkest example of the U.S. Navy’s firepower was in the previously mentioned display, the map of the world showing the location of American vessels was highly representative of the exhibit’s overall intended impact. This was a blatant showcase of the extreme reach of the Navy, with vessels all around the world, moving from day to day. Visitors were able to see exactly where these vessels were – this, combined with the intended impact of the explosive projectile display and the full-sized man-of-war, creates the notion of the Navy being anywhere and everywhere, able to decimate any opponent that may cross the path of one of its warships.
An important thing to note is the many occurrences of interaction between visitors and the displays in the Government Building. Not only was instruction given on handling the weapons and vessel, but there are photographs that depict both men and women engaging in this activity. [38] In most cases, there was an artilleryman posted at the display that appeared to have been instructing the visitors on the specific display. [39] With this evidence, one can conclude that visitors not only handled the cannons and mortars, but the artillerymen allowed them to do so while instructing them on their use. Therefore, the Government must have intended to display their firepower in a way that showed they were not a military that relied on clandestine weapons and means to be the best. There was nothing to hide about the military’s biggest and best weapons, and they were so simple that anyone could learn how to use them – even women.
Given the size, scope, and contents of the War Department and Navy Department’s displays, one can conclude that their implicit intended purpose was to give Exposition visitors a first-hand experience of the power of the American military, thus strengthening patriotic feelings as well as the sentiment of American dominance and superiority. Furthermore, one can see the instruction and demonstration on the use of the weaponry as an extension of this showcase of power. Not only was the U.S. displaying their military prowess, but they displayed a power so strong that did not need to hide behind secrecy.
Visitor Experience of the US Government Building
To determine if the United States Government was successful in their attempts to impose American military might and overall superiority, one must engage the written accounts of those that visited the Exposition. There are three diarists who heavily mention or dedicate entire sections to the U.S. Government Building throughout their accounts – Adele Quinette Phelps, Edward V.P. Schneiderhahn, and Edmund Philibert. These accounts paint a detailed picture of how people at the World’s Fair may have been impacted by the Government Building and its War and Navy Department exhibits. While this is a small sample size, the accounts of visitors are enriched by the addition of newspaper articles that speak on the broader reception of the building and its exhibits, thus enabling a better representation of visitor impact.
The U.S. Government Building, in general, visibly fascinated Exposition visitors. Edward Schneiderhahn, born in the mid-1870’s and legal advisor to Cardinals Glennon and Ritter, was especially impressed with the contents of the exhibits, stating that “The exhibits were wonderfully rich and complete. Certainly in rarity of items and subjects covered and in the manner of display this was the first building of the fair.” [40] [41] He was so fond of the Government’s work that he considered the building the best of the entire Exposition. Though it was only given two full pages in his twenty-six-page memoir, the Government Building made a strong impression on Schneiderhahn. Similarly, Adele Quinette Phelps, a teen-aged daughter to a high-ranking man, devoted an entire chapter of her World’s Fair memoir to the Government Building. [42] She detailed the building and its contents in a highly descriptive manner, supporting the notion that the building generally interested the young girl. While these two visitors were surely impressed by the building, Edmund Philibert was by far the most impressed. During his twenty-eight visits to the LPE, he used the Government Entrance nine times, passing through the building on each occasion. [43] His many returns to the building and his time spent inside it speak to how much this aspect of the Fair had a hold on Philibert’s attention.
The physical characteristics of the U.S. Government Building struck visitors with its dominance and beauty. Edward Schneiderhahn thought that the design was rather remarkable, describing it as “well-suited to give the building a combination of attractive and imposing qualities all which were strengthened by the eminence on which the building stood.” [44] Schneiderhahn saw the attractiveness and power demonstrated through the building itself, especially due to the hill it was constructed on. Newspapers also noted the location of the building being of importance, making similar remarks about it being “situated on a commanding eminence”. [45] Schneiderhahn clearly picked up on the imposing style of the building, especially commenting on the fact that it was “a large and graceful and well-proportioned building” [46]. Phelps echoes these sentiments regarding the Government Building, however she seems less impressed, as her comments regarding it are brief. She did, however, describe it as “the most interesting building on the grounds”. [47] Given that she was a teenager at the time, she may not have been as impressed by the architectural design of the structure as the contents within, however her comment gives insight to how powerful this building must have been. It is also important to note that Phelps may have seen this building multiple times – her father, Stephen Quinette, was an important figure and thus his family was invited to the Dedication Ceremony, as well as several other high-profile events at the LPE. [48] Phelps’ remark shows that while she may not have been stricken by the building in a dramatic manner, it was nonetheless still impressive to her, so much so that she found it the most interesting one in the Exposition. Clearly, both Schneiderhahn and Phelps seem to have readily acknowledged and accepted the intended message of American superiority through the Government Building’s physical characteristics.
Despite the interest shown by Schneiderhahn and Phelps, Edmund Philibert made no mention of the Government Building’s grand scale and design through his diary. However, with two out of the three people who mention the Government Building in their diary remarking on its style and size, one can assume the intended greatness of the building was generally received by many visitors. However, Philibert neglecting to mention the physical characteristics of the building could perhaps result from his expectations of the Government. With so many buildings on Exposition Grounds, it possibly made sense to him that the Government had the biggest and best, and thus did not require remarking on. Despite his lack of comments on this aspect of the building, several newspapers echo the sentiments of the latter authors, with one explaining that “The United States Government Building at the St. Louis World’s Fair is the largest exposition structure ever erected by Uncle Sam. It is distinguished among the other exhibition structures by the durability of its construction.” [49] Considering these notions, especially Schneiderhahn’s comment regarding the imposing qualities of the Government Building, one can see that the building’s physical characteristics levied notions of American superiority and greatness on those that visited the Exposition. This was, in fact, the biggest and best building, and those that visited the LPE could plainly see this. Furthermore, the visitors received this message with open arms, thoroughly impressed by the Government’s showing in the Exposition.
Inside the Government Building, the War Department’s displays of the means and modes of waging war fascinated the LPE’s visitors. Phelps, Schneiderhahn, and Philibert all reference the uniform display, with Schneiderhahn commenting that “It was also curious to note what changes had been brought about in the uniforms in our Army since the Spanish War, owing to tropical conditions which American soldiers must now encounter.” [50] It seems that he almost felt sorry for the soldiers having to experience tropical conditions and was intrigued to see the Army’s ingenuity and capacity to adapt to their environment. Phelps and Philibert also remark on their interest in this display; Philibert even mentions on his second visit that the wax figurines wearing the uniforms “looked natural enough to be alive.” [51] Though their interest was less than Schneiderhahn’s, this display certainly caught the attention of all three diarists, contributing to the notion that this may have been one of the more popular displays in the War Department.
The gun displays of the War Department appear to have been a focal point of the Government Building’s exhibits, according to visitor account. These seem to have been a popular sight, for there are photographs depicting plenty of admirers around it throughout the several month-long span of the Exposition. [52] Edmund Philibert went to see the guns two different times during his twenty-eight visits to the fair and mentioned that the large cannons were “impressive” upon his first sight of them. [53] He must have been interested in these displays, for he chose to double-up on this experience rather than spend time at other concessions or exhibits. On his second visit, he commented that he “visited the Army exhibit [display] and saw any amount of curious guns, cannons, pistols, daggers, and swords.” [54] It seems that the exact number of firearms was lost on Philibert, perhaps because there were so many. This display raised a strong reaction from Adele Quinette Phelps, explaining that it “almost made the blood quiver to think of the horrors of war. But if we would stop to think of the old saying, ‘Without War, There is No Peace’, we would all be glad in spite of fear that there is such a horrible thing as war.” [55] To teenaged-Phelps, the array of weaponry clearly roused some intense emotions regarding war, however she seemed to have been comforted by the notion of America’s ability to fight. Given the rest of the displays, as well as other visitor reactions, it appears that though she was horrified at the thought of war, she was assured that the United States could protect her from it. This draws back to the idea of Schneiderhahn being intrigued by the Army’s capacity to evolve and adapt; Phelps had been shown that throughout the ages, America was on top and always will be, which seems to have comforted her fear of the horrible aspects of war.
Though the War Department’s displays thoroughly captured the interest of the visitors of the Exposition, the Navy Department proved to be the most personal experience of the U.S. Government Building’s entire collection. On Edmund Philibert’s second visit to the fair, he stayed in the Navy Department’s display room until the building closed, remarking that it “had a large model of a warship with wax officers in full uniform, and some real guns mounted on the lower deck.” [56] Once again, his interest was captured by the inclusion of real guns in the exhibit, representing the power of the displays. Furthermore, on a separate visit to the Exposition, Philibert yet again chose to view the Navy’s display, going “onboard the battleship” to get a closer view of the weaponry attached to the vessel. [57] If these weapons drew Philibert’s attention on more than one occasion, it can be safe to assume that they interested many other visitors.
Additionally, Philibert visited the display of pierced naval vessel plate armor, describing it as “a plate of steel about eight in. [inches] thick with projectiles sticking in it and one clean hole about eight inches in diameter where the projectile went clean through.” [58] This is different than what F.J. Koster’s photograph depicts, for it does not display projectiles sticking in the armor plate. [59] This discrepancy can be observed in a few different ways – perhaps Philibert misremembered the display, and fully thought that there were projectiles sticking in the steel. Since the photograph is not dated, he may have attended this display before the projectiles might have been placed in the steel, or after they were possibly removed. Otherwise, one could consider the possibility of Philibert embellishing his description of this display. He possibly was so interested in it, that he may have exaggerated the characteristics to make it more fascinating. While this can certainly be debated, it seems that the most plausible explanation is that the projectiles were either removed from the plate or simply fell out before the photograph was taken.
Edmund Philibert was not the only visitor highly interested in the Navy Department’s display, for it fascinated Edward Schneiderhahn as well. He mentioned that it “had a particularly elaborate display. The large model of [a] United States cruiser provided an opportunity to actually become acquainted with the real conditions onboard.” [60] He took the liberty of walking through the large vessel, and clearly found the experience worthwhile to mention in his memoir. The ability to physically inspect different aspects of the large man-of-war appears to have struck a chord with Schneiderhahn, almost in a similar manner that the guns of the Army Department did to Adele Quinette Phelps. He remarked that “the torpedoes with their clockwork and self-propelling device are certainly a devilish contrivance”. [61] The overwhelming display of American firepower appeared so strong to Schneiderhahn that he referred to them as devilish. When taking his words into consideration, one can see that the torpedoes on the man-of-war model made Schniederhahn have a rather strong reaction, one that stuck with him long enough to mention in his memoir. Adele Quinette Phelps made little mention of the Navy Department’s display; however, she did find it interesting, especially the model mines, warships, and torpedo boats. [62]
The written accounts of visitors and various newspaper articles show that those who attended the LPE and visited the Government Building were generally highly impressed. They spent a large amount of time in the presence of the beautiful structure and took the liberty to freely interact with the exhibits. According to these accounts, this was the best building in the fairgrounds, and for good reason. The War and Navy Departments especially attracted the interest and attention of visitors with their displays of weapons and technology, so much so that it roused intense emotions in some regarding the atrocities of war. Nevertheless, the exhibits comforted those feelings by promoting confidence in the power of the military.
Conclusion
By investigating official documents, bulletins, and programs from the LPE Company, it is concluded that the U.S. Government Building was used as a showcase of American superiority and military dominance. This was carried out through the physical characteristics of the building, with its massive scale and elegant style, as well as the hill it was placed on. The placement of this structure as the gateway to the Plateau of States means that thousands, if not millions, of visitors received this message. Within the building, the War Department’s vast exhibit consisting of countless weapons was a showcase of militaristic power and means of engaging in war. The Navy Department carried out the same message and purpose through its model man-of-war and other weapon displays. Furthermore, this notion of military dominance was extended to show visitors that the military did not rely on secrecy or complexity to exact their power on the battlefield by the operational instruction of the large cannons and mortars.
Analysis of memoirs, diaries, and newspapers show that the visitors of the LPE who attended the Government Building’s War and Navy Department exhibits were thoroughly impressed by the U.S.’s representation. The building’s placement and characteristics inspired many to claim it as the best structure in the Exposition. The exhibits containing weapons and the model naval vessel were most impactful to those who composed written accounts of the Fair – some became rather emotional over their destructive power. Despite feelings surrounding the horrors of then-modern war, visitors were comforted by and confident of the protective power of the United States. The visitors who witnessed this building its underlying messages readily accepted the themes of superiority and dominance that the U.S. was pushing.
Given the impact of the U.S. Government Building on LPE visitors, it is clear that the Government was successful in its explicit and implicit aims. The official purpose of this building and the exhibits were to display different aspects of the Government and educate visitors on them. This is seen in various photographs and accounts of those that were there; however, deeper investigation reveals that there were underlying themes and messages regarding American superiority that visitors received with open arms. Some visitors even picked up on these subliminal messages, noting the imposing qualities of the displays and building. Furthermore, given the interaction between visitors and military firepower, the Government was successful in its aim to portray the military as superior through its lack of reliance on secrecy.
This research is an addition to the wealth of scholarly literature regarding World’s Fairs. By revealing the impact of the LPE’s U.S. Government Building on visitors, one exposes key differences from other aspects of the Exposition. Historians such as James Gilbert have exposed the racialized themes and messages pushed by other Exposition organizers, while revealing that visitors were not largely impacted by the Anthropological exhibits, and nor did they accept these messages. However, this discussion proves that this is not the case with the Government Building. Thus, through deeper investigation of the LPE, historians can paint a more accurate, detailed picture of this significant historical event.
These conclusions contextualize American society during the turn-of-the-century, thus providing a deeper notion of the period. It is important to understand how the United States Government utilized opportunities such as World’s Fairs to promote certain messages or sentiments to the population. Furthermore, it is equally important to reveal how people were impacted by these messages, and if they were accepted or rejected. By historically analyzing government participation in World’s Fairs, historians can come to more richly nuanced conclusions regarding this transformative time.
Bibliography
- Primary Sources
- Archival Collections
Missouri Historical Society Archives, Saint Louis, Missouri
Adele Quinette Phelps World’s Fair Chronicle, 1903-1904
Edward V.P. Schneiderhahn Diaries, 1890-1913
Louisiana Purchase Exposition Collection
Louisiana Purchase Company Records
Philibert Family Papers
Prints and Photographs, Missouri Historical Society, Saint Louis
Louisiana Purchase Exposition Collection: Original 8×10 GPNs of World’s Fair: Plates 180-239
Vertical Files, Missouri Historical Society, Saint Louis
Bulletin of the Missouri Historical Society
Missouri Digital Heritage, Saint Louis (digitized)
Louisiana Purchase Exposition – The 1904 St. Louis Exposition and World’s Fair
Smithsonian Institution Archives, Washington, D.C.
Exposition Records of the Smithsonian Institution and the United States National Museum
- Newspapers and Periodicals
The Caldwell Tribune, 1904.
The Evening Star, 1903.
The Hocking Sentinel, 1904.
The Omaha Daily Bee, 1903.
The Vinita Weekly Chieftain, 1904
World’s Fair Bulletin, 1902-04.
- Secondary Sources
Gilbert, James. Whose Fair?: Experience, Memory, and the History of the Great St. Louis Exposition. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 2009.
Medak-Saltzman, Danika. “Transnational Indigenous Exchange: Rethinking Global Interactions of Indigenous Peoples at the 1904 St. Louis Exposition.” American Quarterly 62, no. 3 (2010): 591–615. https://doi.org/10.1353/aq.2010.0010
Parezo, Nancy, and Don Fowler. Anthropology Goes to the Fair: the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition. University of Nebraska Press, 2007.
Rydell, Robert W. All the World’s a Fair: America’s International Expositions, 1876-1916. Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 1984.
Rydell, Robert W., John E. Findling, and Kimberly D. Pelle. Fair America: World’s Fairs in the United States. Smithsonian Institution Press, 2000.
Swensen, James. “Bound for the Fair: Chief Joseph, Quanah Parker, and Geronimo and the 1904 St. Louis World’s Fair.” American Indian Quarterly 43, no. 4 (2019): 439–70. https://doi.org/10.5250/amerindiquar.43.4.0439
Young, Patrick. “From the Eiffel Tower to the Javanese Dancer: Envisioning Cultural Globalization at the 1889 Paris Exhibition.” The History Teacher 41, no. 3 (2008): 339–62. https://doi.org/http://www.jstor.org/stable/30036916
[1] Gilbert, James. Whose Fair?: Experience, Memory, and the History of the Great St. Louis Exposition. (Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 2009.) P.13
[2] The Louisiana Purchase Exposition will hereby be regarded as the LPE.
[3] Rydell, Robert W. All the World’s a Fair: America’s International Expositions, 1876-1916. (Chicago, Illinois: University of Chicago Press, 1984.)
Rydell, Robert W., John E. Findling, and Kimberly D. Pelle. Fair America: World’s Fairs in the United States. (Smithsonian Institution Press, 2000.)
Parezo, Nancy, and Don Fowler. Anthropology Goes to the Fair: the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition. (University of Nebraska Press, 2007.)
[4] Rydell. All the World’s a Fair: America’s International Expositions, 1876-1916. P. 8.
[5] Rydell. All the World’s a Fair: America’s International Expositions, 1876-1916. P. 183.
[6] Parezo and Fowler. Anthropology Goes to the Fair: the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition.
Rydell, Findling, and Pell. Fair America: World’s Fairs in the United States. P.54.
[7] Gilbert. Whose Fair?: Experience, Memory, and the History of the Great St. Louis Exposition.
Swensen, James. “Bound for the Fair: Chief Joseph, Quanah Parker, and Geronimo and the 1904 St. Louis World’s Fair.” American Indian Quarterly 43, no. 4 (2019): 439–70.
Young, Patrick. “From the Eiffel Tower to the Javanese Dancer: Envisioning Cultural Globalization at the 1889 Paris Exhibition.” The History Teacher 41, no. 3 (2008): 339–62.
Medak-Saltzman, Danika. “Transnational Indigenous Exchange: Rethinking Global Interactions of Indigenous Peoples at the 1904 St. Louis Exposition.” American Quarterly 62, no. 3 (2010): 591–615.
[8] Gilbert. Whose Fair?: Experience, Memory, and the History of the Great St. Louis Exposition. P.16.
[9] “U.S. Observatory for the Weather on World’s Fair Grounds”, World’s Fair Bulletin, Vol.5, No.9. (July, 1904) P. 81
[10] Secretary of the LPE, Official Directory of the Louisiana Purchase Exposition. P. 34
[11] McCarthy, W.C. “Nature’s Beauty Spots and Art’s Triumph” World’s Fair Bulletin Vol.5, No. 8. (June,1904) P.40
[12] Teepell, Elsie May. “Souvenir Guide to the United States Government Buildings and Exhibits at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition (World’s Fair)”. 1904. Folder 1, Box 73A. Exposition Records of the Smithsonian Institution and the United States National Museum 1867-1940, Smithsonian Institution Archives, Washington, D.C. P.6
[13] Teepell, “Souvenir Guide to the United States Government Buildings and Exhibits at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition (World’s Fair)”. P.6
[14] McCarthy, “Nature’s Beauty Spots and Art’s Triumph” P.40
[15] Executive Commissioners Association, “A Statement Regarding the Louisiana Purchase Exposition, ‘World’s Fair’” World’s Fair Bulletin Vol.5, No.11. (September, 1904) p.27
[16] Boehl, Emil “1904 World’s Fair United States Government Building” 1904. Louisiana Purchase Exposition Collection: Original 8×10 GPNs of World’s Fair: Plates 116-149, Missouri Historical Society Archives, Saint Louis, Missouri
Photograph of U.S. Government Building, 1904. World’s Fair Bulletin Vol.5, No.10. (September, 1904) p.11
[17] Teepell, “Souvenir Guide to the United States Government Buildings and Exhibits at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition (World’s Fair)”. P.7
[18] Ibid, P.9
[19] Ibid, P.9
[20] Ibid, P.9
[21] Ibid, P.30
[22] Teepell, “Souvenir Guide to the United States Government Buildings and Exhibits at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition (World’s Fair)”. P.30
[23] Ibid, P.31
[24] Ibid, P.7
[25] Ibid, P.11
[26] Ibid, P.11
[27] Ibid, P.11
[28] Ibid, P.11
[29] Ibid, P.11
[30] Ibid, P.11
[31] Ibid, P.11
[32] Ibid, P.11
[33] Ibid, P.11
[34] Koster, F.J. “1904 World’s Fair U.S. Government Gun Exhibit” (Naval Projectile Display) 1904. Louisiana Purchase Exposition Collection: Original 8×10 GPNs of World’s Fair: Plates 180-239, Missouri Historical Society Archives, Saint Louis, Missouri.
[35] Koster, F.J. “1904 World’s Fair U.S. Government Gun Exhibit” (Naval Projectile Display)
[36] Ibid
[37] Teepell, “Souvenir Guide to the United States Government Buildings and Exhibits at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition (World’s Fair)”. P.31
[38] Koster, F.J. “1904 World’s Fair U.S. Government Gun Exhibit” (Men Looking at Gun Display) 1904. Louisiana Purchase Exposition Collection: Original 8×10 GPNs of World’s Fair: Plates 180-239, Missouri Historical Society Archives, Saint Louis, Missouri.
Official Photographic Company “1904 World’s Fair U.S. Government Gun Exhibit” (Women Interacting with Mortar) 1904. Louisiana Purchase Exposition Collection: Original 8×10 GPNs of World’s Fair: Plates 180-239, Missouri Historical Society Archives, Saint Louis, Missouri.
Koster, F.J. “1904 World’s Fair U.S. Government Gun Exhibit” (Naval Projectile Display)
Koster, F.J. “1904 World’s Fair U.S. Government Gun Exhibit With Visitors at Mortar Pit” 1904. Louisiana Purchase Exposition Collection: Original 8×10 GPNs of World’s Fair: Plates 180-239, Missouri Historical Society Archives, Saint Louis, Missouri.
[39] Official Photographic Company “1904 World’s Fair U.S. Government Gun Exhibit” (Women Interacting with Mortar)
[40] Schneiderhahn, Edward V.P. “Diary of Edward V.P. Schneiderhahn October 10, 1903-October 7, 1911”. 1911. Vol. 6, Edward V.P. Schneiderhahn Diaries, 1890-1913 Collection, Missouri Historical Society Archives, Saint Louis, Missouri. P.73
[41] “Maximillian Schniederhahn Obituary, November 25, 1923. Bulletin of the Missouri Historical Society Vol. 18. Missouri Historical Society Vertical Files, Saint Louis, Missouri. P.71
[42] Phelps, Adele Quinette. “Adele Quinette Phelps World’s Fair Chronicle, 1903-1904”, 1904. Adele Quinette Phelps World’s Fair Chronicle Collection, Missouri Historical Society Archives, Saint Louis, Missouri
[43] Philibert, Edmund. Edmund Philibert’s Account of 28 Visits to the St. Louis World’s Fair. 1904. Folder 3, Philibert Family Papers Collection, Missouri Historical Society Archives, Saint Louis, Missouri.
[44] Edward V.P. Schneiderhahn Diaries, Vol.6. P.73
[45] “One Mile of the St. Louis Exposition” The Omaha Daily Bee, November 29, 1903. P.33
[46] Ibid, P.73
[47] Phelps, “Adele Quinette Phelps World’s Fair Chronicle, 1903-1904” P.13
[48] Phelps, Adele Quinette. “Adele Quinette Phelps World’s Fair Chronicle, 1903-1904”, 1904. Adele Quinette Phelps World’s Fair Chronicle Collection, Missouri Historical Society Archives, Saint Louis, Missouri
[49] “Great Government Building at the St. Louis Fair” The Caldwell Tribune. P.3
[50] Edward V.P. Schneiderhahn Diaries, Vol.6. P.73
[51] Philibert, 28 Visits to the World’s Fair. P. 5-6
[52] Koster, F.J. “1904 World’s Fair U.S. Government Gun Exhibit With Visitors at Mortar Pit”
Koster, F.J. “1904 World’s Fair U.S. Government Gun Exhibit” (Men Looking at Gun Display)
Official Photographic Company “1904 World’s Fair U.S. Government Gun Exhibit” (Women Interacting with Mortar)
[53] Ibid, P. 7
[54] Ibid, P. 32
[55] Phelps, “Adele Quinette Phelps World’s Fair Chronicle, 1903-1904” P. 19
[56] Philibert, 28 Visits to the World’s Fair. P. 6
[57] Ibid, P.24
[58] Ibid, P.28
[59] Koster, F.J. “1904 World’s Fair U.S. Government Gun Exhibit” (Naval Projectile Display)
[60] Edward V.P. Schneiderhahn Diaries, Vol.6. P.73,74
[61] Edward V.P. Schneiderhahn Diaries, Vol.6. P.74
[62] Phelps, “Adele Quinette Phelps World’s Fair Chronicle, 1903-1904” P.19
Dalton G. King 