The Frontier and the Circus

Introduction

I feel I owe a word of explanation to the historical fraternity concerning the origins and intent of this essay, which combines my interest in the circus and American history in general. For a number of years I have felt we have been studying the circus from a too narrow perspective. Although we have exhausted many topics such as many of the better known parade wagons, and the more important managers and performers. I have long felt that the circus as an institution has been a neglected area of study. In other words, we have not formulated a general theory concerning the paramount question of what caused the rapid growth of the circus, and its subsequent decline, in a period centering around the year 1900. Perhaps if a theory could be worked out, I conjectured, it might shed light on old subjects, and open up many new vistas of study.

It was not until I became a student in Dr. Richard W. Smith’s lectures on the American frontier in the Spring of 1970, that I became at least marginally aware of the effect of a growing frontier on all aspects of the American character - including the circus. I prepared a slightly different form of this essay for his course, and would have presented it to the 1970 CHS convention in Baraboo, had not my left lung taken that inopportune occasion to go on the blink. In many respects it is fortunate that I did not have the opportunity to read this paper at that time because in the interim I have found some new material (more noticeably the 1895 Bailey article), and modified some conjectures.

Two other points need to be made in the way of an introduction. The first is simply that this paper in no way pretends to be a definitive statement on the character of the circus. Right now Stuart Thayer, a critic of this theory, is working on this problem from a different perspective. It is hoped, however, that this essay will be suggestive enough for other historians to follow Thayer’s lead.

The second point to emphasize is that I am not the first writer to speculate on the rise and fall of the tented circus. Although they worked from an incorrect assumption that Ringling fortunes characterized industry fortunes, almost every general history of the circus, from May to Fox and Parkinson, has remarked on the decline of the big-time railroad circus. Marcello Truzzi, a sociologist, was the first writer to concern himself with this question who did not approach it from the traditionalist perspective. Readers are encouraged to read his essay, mentioned in a footnote.

One last note. Richard E. Conover and I discussed the "frontier thesis" on a few occasions, and he was in basic agreement with it. His untimely death last February prevented his reading of the manuscript. I greatly regret that he is not alive to analyze this essay in more depth, and I can only hope it can vindicate the master’s agreement with this radical approach to an old topic.

"The business of history is to arouse an intelligent discontent, a fruitful radicalism." - Carl Becker in The Dial.

It is, then, the premise of this paper that the primary reason for the decline of the circus in American was not the rise of organized labor, higher-corporate taxes, or the advent of television and other diversions, but the fact that between 1900 and 1910 the circus’ frontier ended and with it died an era usually called the golden age, and began its decline. (2) That is, by 1910 the circus had no new territory on this continent in which to expand because of the total depletion of new frontiers. There were no longer enough fresh areas that had not seen a circus in a sufficient number of years to make a show’s journey to the frontier profitable, or an area where competition was minimal enough to make such a venture at least worthwhile.

This frontier thesis has manifest itself on another level during the last few decades in that the urban frontiers of cities, the empty lots and city parks, are rapidly diminishing. This open area, although in urban centers, is nevertheless a frontier in the sense that it is an open area, a frontier that is quickly closing and heralding more bad news for an institution that must eventually alter traditional patterns if it is to survive. (3)

Westward expansion has been a part of American circus history since John Bill Ricketts first took his small troupe into the wilds of Maine and Canada in 1797. (4) Although the performers could not cope with the wilderness of the area which led to the failure of the expedition, it was the first time a showman broke out of the Boston-Philadelphia-New York triangle.

Circus and menagerie men soon became convinced that they could make money by exploiting new areas, and between 1798 and 1810 circuses exhibited in such new areas as Charleston, South Carolina; Albany, New York; and Worcester, Massachusetts. (5) Other men had taken Ricketts’ cue, and decided the economic returns would compensate for the then arduous journey to these early frontiers.

After 1810 the circus and menagerie were well established along the Atlantic coast from Canada to South Carolina, and westward to Buffalo and Pittsburgh. In fact, one of the most historic events in circus history took place in Alfred, Maine, on 28 July 1816, when the elephant Old Bet, the second such animal in this country, was shot by a local farmer who didn’t care for New York showman taking money out of the territory. (6)

In 1815 the old Northwest Territory was reached when a small circus moved by boat to Chillicothe, Ohio, at that time the state capital. In 1819 the people of Cincinnati saw their first elephant, and in 1830 their first circus. (7)

By 1835 circuses had become as common in Ohio, Michigan, and Indiana as they had been in the East twenty years earlier. Due to circumstances outside the scope of this paper, Somers, New York, became the circus center of America from about 1820 to 1855, and its showmen owned nearly all the circuses and menageries in America at that time. A typical route for the 1830's began in late March in some eastern city such as New York, Baltimore; played New England until about the end of May; and then headed west, either to Canada or Ohio. Around 1 August the average show started its trip back to winter quarters in Somers by making a southern swing, sometimes going as far south as Northern Florida. (8) Unfortunately, records of circuses in the ante-bellum South are very incomplete, but enough research has been done to show that a small circus toured Georgia in 1828, and that the huge Grand Menagerie owned by the Somers syndicate reached Florida in January of 1832. (9)

By 1840 the circus and menagerie had penetrated almost every state East of the Mississippi River. The population in nearly all areas of the Eastern and Midwestern United States was large enough to make it worthwhile for a showman to take his company near the swamps of Florida or the fields and forests of Indiana. The show traveling in these frontier areas was assured that it would run into little, or more likely no, competition, quite a difference from Eastern areas where opposition was keen.

Circuses can play only areas which are populated enough to make their visit profitable; therefore, St. Louis and New Orleans were unique cities in the West that could support a circus. Hence, it is not surprising that as in 1823 a circus performed in St. Louis. (10) The few Americans that lived between the Mississippi River and California never saw a circus during this period. However, circus owners were quick to realize that the miners in California thought they had money to spend, and the circus in that state developed rapidly in the late 1840's, and early 1850's.

Joseph Andrew Rowe was the first man to exploit the “49'ers.” Traveling by ship from New York through the straits of Magellan to San Francisco, his circus first played that city on 29 October 1849. (11) Others followed, and by 1860 much of the great Northwest saw a circus. In 1860 the Dan Rice Circus (without the famous jester) ventured into British Columbia, the first circus to do so. (12)

By 1850 the circus and the fast-dying menagerie had traveled in every state east of the ninety-eighth meridian, and the Pacific Coast, and in 1843 another frontier was opened when the United Kingdom, and the old family circuses of England became fair game for enterprising American showmen.

This new frontier was opened by Lewis B. Lent, a Somers showman, when he took his Sands and Lent Circus to England. When this show pitched its tents in England, it was the first time the English ever saw a circus perform in a tent, all previous English shows having played in arenas. (13)

The invasion continued. In 1844 the Van Amburgh Menagerie, also owned by Lent, made the trip and stayed two years. The show’s top feature, Isaac A. Van Amburgh, stunned London by actually going into a cage of lions. (14)

When the Civil War began, circus profits were cut because the territory in which circuses could travel was restricted, the frontier temporarily closed. No circus played in the Confederate states during the four years of hostilities. (15) Showmen felt the influence of this temporary closing of the frontier. On 21 June 1863, Hyatt Frost, then owner of the Van Amburgh Menagerie, wrote a friend: “I am fully of the opinion that our fall business is going to be rather slim as there is (sic) so many companies now traveling and so small a country that we have to use.” (16)

Realizing that fresh money awaited them in the Midwest and Plains states, circus owners began to move their winter-quarters into the area. For example in 1848 the winter quarters of the second unit of the Raymond and Waring Menagerie, the largest such exhibition in the country, moved from Somers to Zanesville, Ohio. (17) This show played a western route along the Great Lakes to Milwaukee, and returned to Zanesville by a long sweep through Missouri, Illinois, and Indiana.

In 1847, the brothers Mabie, Edmund and Jereimah, left Somers and settled their show in Delevan, Wisconsin. (18) Delevan became the major circus city in America for almost fifty years. A total of twenty-seven circuses were based in that city until its decline as a circus center in the 1890's. (19)

The railroad soon revolutionized the circus. By rail shows could play new areas, make longer jumps, enjoy safer conditions, and perhaps most importantly, reach new frontiers in the West.

Experimentation with railroads began in 1853 when the Den Stone Circus made a few unsuccessful jumps by rail. A few other shows also tried traveling by rail in the decade but approximately only 25,000 miles of track existed at this time, almost all of which was located in areas where it was easier for a company to reach by wagon.

However, during the years 1858-1868 railway mileage increased forty-six per cent, and on 10 May 1869, the famous golden spike was driven in Promontory, Utah, where the transcontinental railroad became a reality. On the first passenger train to make the trip was James M. Nixon. His mission was to survey the possibility of taking a circus over the Union Pacific. He found no great complications, and subsequently on 27 May 1869, the Nixon owned Dan Castello Circus hit the rails headed for the rich mining areas of the West. (20)

Starting from Omaha, the show played the Union Pacific line to North Platte, Cheyenne, and then Denver. At Colorado’s capital the show left their train, and made what turned into a dangerous march. Denver’s Rocky Mountain News wrote: "The rain, darkness and excessively muddy roads have delayed the arrival of the circus . . . Mr. Castello, as the weather has turned out, has taken a great risk in venturing so far from the railroad." On 26 July the show reached San Francisco, and the first transcontinental tour by a circus was completed. (21) The era of the railroad circus had arrived.

The circus not only covered much new territory after 1869, but also the number of shows on the road increased. Perhaps this fact can be correlated with the new frontiers the railroad opened. The territory of Arizona is a good example. On 4 July 1887, the last spike of the rail line from Maricopa Junction to Phoenix was driven, which completed the branch line from the Southern Pacific route to Phoenix. Before the railroad only one circus had exhibited in the territory, but after the branch line was completed at least seven circuses played Arizona during the next ten years. (22) The circuses that played Arizona in the 1890's were all shows that usually traveled a Midwestern route. Their departure greatly decreased competition for the companies that remained in the Midwest, and created a void for new circuses to fill by leaving the area. The first shows to perform in virgin western areas found them highly profitable. In 1910, Frank A. Robbins wrote of the success of two circus men who realized the financial advantage of taking their companies into frontier regions:

Mr. Cole (William Washington Cole) . . . succeeded in showing more virgin territory than any other showman. The John Robinson Show was a close second. They made the far west (sic) when it was a dollar admission. Towns like Seattle, Butte, Portland, etc. being good for well up towards $10,000. The first California season netted them over $200,000 in gold. (23)

Robbins, for one, realized the importance of an expanding frontier to the circus. The next sentence of his 1910 article sadly noted that "the same opportunity does not exist today as the increase in mileage is very slight while twenty-five years ago it was enormous."

Perhaps there was no more perceptive observer of this frontier phenomenon than that master-showman, James A. Bailey. Writing of the verge of the apocalyspe in 1895, Bailey noted:

The enterprising showman is always on the lookout for fresh territory, or, as we commonly say, new country. For many decades it has been found within our own borders. The marvelous growth of the West has year after year created new show towns. Towns, cities and states have sprung into existence and been populated with amazing rapidity. The tent show has followed close on the heels of the pathfinders and the pioneers and the wild beasts of the menagerie have set up their roar where the war-whoop of the savage so lately sounded. (24)

The golden age of the circus is usually thought to have begun in 1881 when Barnum and Bailey joined forces, and to have reached its zenith about 1900. That year approximately seventy American circuses toured, headed by the Barnum and Bailey Circus in Europe, and the fast-rising Ringling Bros. World’s Greatest Shows, which played California for the first time. They were followed by the Forepaugh-Sells Circus in the East and South; the Buffalo Bill Wild West in the East, and the John Robinson Show in the Midwest and South. These were all large outfits of forty railroad cars or more. (25)

Every state and territory now saw a circus each year. Although the dozen or so really large shows confined themselves to metropolitan areas from coast to coast; the rural sections of the country saw a two or three car railroad show, or one of the fast-dying wagon circuses. Circuses were wintering in nearly every state in the union with a majority of them inside the borders of Wisconsin and Indiana. The center of gravity of the circus had moved halfway across the continent in a hundred years.

Circuses, are, of course, affected by recessions and depressions, but the institution, not without difficulty, survived those of the nineteenth century, and continued to grow. After each period of economic decline, there was always a new area into which a circus could travel when money was tight back home. The case of the Arizona is a good example of this ever changing frontier into which a circus can go when business is bad in the East.

The ten years from 1900 to 1909 are critical in analyzing the decline of the circus in the context of this frontier thesis. It was in this ten year period that the number of circuses in America diminished by almost one-third, an unprecedented decline. (26) Why?

It is the thesis of this paper that the closing of the circus’ frontier, the opening of which had done so much in the growth of the institution, caused its downfall. It was during these critical ten years that a circus could no longer exhibit in a "frontier" area, confident the customers had not seen a circus in a number of years, and certain that they would encounter little or no competition from other shows. In 1896, Charles E. Cory wrote of the appearance of the Great Wallace Circus in Flagstaff, Arizona:

First big show ever here and everybody wild with enthusiasm. One woman had hysterics at sight of the elephants being led to the lot in the morning, and small boys stood around on the corners with their eyes fairly bulging from their heads at sight of so many strange animals never seen before except in picture books. (27) This statement could never be made after 1905 when almost all the country possessed some type of railroad facilities, which ended the circus’ frontier that began in 1798 when John Ricketts’ Circus went to Canada. After about 1905 no circus agent could have written a statement like Cory’s; too many people had seen a circus; there were no more fresh areas.28 For the first time the entire country was accessible to circuses.

The decline of the circus can be compared to an over-filled balloon that explodes. The balloon can hold increased quantities of air safely, until it reaches a point at which it explodes. The circus functions within the geography of the United States as air does within a balloon. As long as there was an area that could expand when more circuses appeared, there was no problem; but, when the frontier ended, like the balloon filling to capacity, new circuses ran into Much more competition, and old ones no longer found a frontier to exhibit on when new business was needed. During the years 1900-1909, the circus first operated inside a filled balloon, a closed frontier, that could no longer expand; naturally the institution could not either.

The larger circuses reacted quickly. On 1 November 1904, the five brothers Ringling met with James A. Bailey "for the purpose of promoting the mutual interest" of their circuses. (21) They determined the territory where each company could exhibit during the 1905 season. New York City was the exclusive territory of’ the Barnum and Bailey Circus, while Chicago was given to the Ringling Brothers’ World’s Greatest Shows. The Bailey organization was given first rights on areas North of the Ohio River, including the big date in Cincinnati, and East of the Mississippi River. (30) The Ringlings were given preference over all areas West of the Mississippi and South of the Ohio, excepting New Orleans. Each circus could exhibit in the territory of the other, but only after the other show had selected the cities in which it wished to perform. The Ringling Circus was to select its cities on or before 15 December 1904, and the Barnum and Bailey Circus by 1 April 1905. (31)

In this nine point contract the owners also agreed to limit their bill-posting to around 8,000 sheets a day, to stop comparing the size of their circus to the other for publicity reasons, and to abandon the street parade. (32) If either party broke the agreement, a $100 000 fine was to be paid as penalty. Similar contracts were negotiated by Bailey and the Ringlings until 1907 when the Baraboo brothers bought the Barnum and Bailey Circus from Bailey’s estate. (33)

Both these giants evidently realized that they could no longer take their shows into areas without fear of competition from the other. They had to adjust; if they didn’t have any control over the closing frontier, at least they did have some control in limiting the competition.

No longer was it profitable for a circus to go "West" when business was bad back East. A circus in the 1890's, such as the previously mentioned Great Wallace Circus, could travel west and find business excellent in areas that had never seen a show before, but if that same show went west only ten years later, it would find, instead of virgin circus territory, competition from the numerous circuses stationed west of the Rockies. This list was headed by the Sells-Floto show whose owners, the Denver Post, put it on the road on thirty railroad cars. Other new Western circuses were owned by Norris and Rowe, who operated two shows, and Al G. Barnes (Stonehouse). Both these circuses wintered in California, and rarely went east of the Mississippi.

Thus the closing of the frontier ended an era when circuses could exhibit in "western" areas assured that the citizens there were hungry for entertainment, and where the owners were certain of little, or more likely no, competition. The great boom period of the circus symbolically began when the Dan Castello Circus traveled over the Union Pacific in 1869, and ended about 1905 when the Ringlings and James A. Bailey decided for the first time to voluntarily limit each others territory. The temporary phenomenon that Hyatt Frost recognized in 1863 became permanent after 1900; there were too many circuses, and too little territory.

The decline of the urban frontier, open areas in or near cities that are suitable circus sites, has also affected the circus. For the last few decades it has become increasingly difficult, almost impossible at times, for a circus "to obtain a lot close enough to an urban center to make an exhibition economically worthwhile. What were once empty fields are now shopping centers and housing developments. The circus is being pushed farther and farther away from profitable population centers.

Once again the large shows have adjusted to this change. Since 1957 the Ringling Brothers, Barnum and Bailey Circus has played in baseball parks and arenas, alleviating the problem of finding a lot near a city. The $800,000 profit the organization made in 1969 is tribute to the move. (34) No tented circus came close to that figure. Thomas Parkinson, has written of the indoor circus: "Once the threadbare cousins, now they represent the strength in the business." (35)

Thus the frontier has been responsible for both fostering and ending the great boom period of circus history, and in recent years has been the dominant factor in the decline of the tented circus. It can be postulated that if this trend in urban (and suburban) growth continues, it will bring about the demise of the tented circus, and bring the American circus back to its original eighteenth century model of an indoor exhibition. If the circus is to survive, it must realize this situation, and adjust.

Footnotes

1. George L. Chindahl, A History of the Circus in America (Caldwell, Idaho: Caxton Printers, 1959). p. 118, considers 1890-1920 as the golden age. Earl Chapin May, The Circus from Rome to Ringling (New York: Duffield and Green, 1932). pp. 224-235, places the golden age between 1871 and 1920. as do Charles Phillip Fox and Thomas Parkinson, The Circus in America (Waukesha, Wisconsin, Country Beautiful, 1969), pp. 78-92. All estimates revolve around important dates in the growth of the Barnum, Bailey and Ringling circuses. The year 1871 was the first for the P. T. Barnum Circus, 1880 was the year that Barnum and James A. Bailey joined forces, and 1920 was the last year that the Ringling Bros., Barnum and Bailey Circus featured a free street parade. Unfortunately all histories estimate the golden age in terms of the Barnum, Bailey, and Ringling shows, and not the institution as a whole. Although all the histories consider the years 1910-1920 as the last decade of the golden age, the great decline in the institution had already begun.

2. Chindahl, op. cit., pp. 240-272. Charles Gates Sturtevant, Who’s Who in the American Circus, (Rochelle, Illinois; W. H. Hohenadel Printing Co. Inc., 1964), pp. 29-41

3. Marcello Truzzi, "The Decline of the American Circus: The Shrinkage of an Institution," in Sociology in Everyday Life, ed. by Marcello Truzzi (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1968, pp. 314-322. Thomas Parkinson, "1967 Circus Season in Review," Bandwagon, January-February, 1968, pp. 18-19.

4. Alan S. Downer, ed., The Memoir of John Durant (Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1966), pp. 47-93.

5. Chindahl, op. cit., pp. 17-22.

6. John M. Brown, "Famous Elephant Killed when Circus Visited Maine in 1816," Lewiston Journal, Lewiston, Maine, (28 July 1945).

7. Cincinnati Advertiser, 21 December 1819, p. 3. Richard E. Conover, Give ‘Em a John Robinson, (Xenia, Ohio: Author. 1965), p. 14.

8. Chindahl, op. cit., pp. 20-26.

9. Ibid., p. 26.

10. May, op. cit., pp. 28-29.

11. Chindahl, op. cit., p. 71.

12. Ibid., p. 72.

13. Ibid., p. 46.

14. Ibid.

15. Ibid., p. 81.

16. Frost mms. in possession of the late Richard E. Conover, Xenia, Ohio. Conover had a collection of approximately twenty letters written by Frost during the years 1860-1880.

17. The Gazette, Zanesville, Ohio, 11 April 1849, p. 3.

18. Chindahl, op. cit., p. 65.

19. Richard E. Conover. The Circus: Wisconsin’s Unique Heritage (Baraboo, Wisconsin: State Historical Society of Wisconsin, 1967), pp. 17-29.

20. Chindahl, op. cit., p. 90.

21. Ibid.

22. Joseph S. Rettinger, "Arizona Circus Memories," White Tops, (July-August, 1969), p. 3.

23. Billboard, 10 March 1910.

24. James A. Bailey. "The Best Show Country." Dramatic News Circus Special, 1895, p. 17. Copy of magazine in Pfening collection.

25. Conover, op. cit., pp. 10-11: Chindahl, op. cit., p. 97-101,

26. Sturtevant, op. cit., pp. 37-41; Chindahl, op. cit., pp. 240-272.

27. Charles E. Cory, Route Book of the Great Wallace Shows (Columbus, Ohio: Nitschke Bros. Press, 1896), p. 36.

28. The John Grace collection of circus routes substantiates this. Collection now part of that of the late Richard E. Conover, Xenia, Ohio.

29. The original contract is part of the Louis Cooke mms. now owned by Harold Dunn, Sarasota, Florida. The MacCadon mms., Princeton, also has a copy. At the great gathering of showmen at the Forepaugh-Sells auction on 10 January 1905, Bailey, W. W. Cole, the Ringlings and John Robinson met to decide routing questions. Apparently nothing came of this meeting, but it does show that other circus men believed it was time to start creating local monopolies. See "Big Showmen Getting Together," Columbus Dispatch, 10 January 1905, p. 1.

30. Ibid.

31. Ibid.

32. Ibid.

33. Louis Cooke mms. The Circus World Museum, Baraboo, Wisconsin, also has some copies of the contracts.

34. This fact was made public in a pamphlet released by the show this year to the members of the three circus fan groups, The Circus Fans Association, The Circus Model Builders, and the Circus Historical Society.

35. Parkinson, "1967 Season," op. cit., p. 18.

Top