December 4, 2012 3:30 pm
Blame Napoleon for Our Addiction to Sugar
Photo: Laurie Andler
Sugar is so interlaced in our snacks, meals and drinks that it’s hard to imagine a world without it. But prior to 1850, this sweet substance was a hot commodity that only society’s most wealthy could afford. Then, mid-nineteenth century, Napoleon changed all of that, flooding the European market with affordable sugar and perhaps inadvertently sparking an epidemic of obesity and diabetes a century and a half down the road.
The University of Nebraska-Lincoln writes:
During the mid-1700’s, the German chemist Andreas Margraff discovered that both white and the red beetroot contained sucrose, which was indistinguishable from that produced from cane. He predicted then that domestic use and manufacture of sugar was possible in temperate climates, but these ideas would not be realized for another 50 years until new ways of extraction could be developed.
During this time, sugar came from plantations in the South Pacific. But the discovery of the sugar beet opened new routes for harvesting the sought-after ingredient.
The BBC explains:
Britain had the monopoly on the sugar cane trade for over a century. During the Napoleonic wars of the early 1800s the British blockaded France’s trade routes with the Caribbean, leaving the country with low supplies of sugar.
The European Food Information Council elaborates:
By 1806, cane sugar had virtually disappeared from the shelves of European shops. In 1811, French scientists presented Napoleon with two loaves of sugar made from sugar beet. Napoleon was so impressed he decreed that 32,000 hectares of beet should be planted and provided assistance to get the factories established.
Within a few years there were more than 40 sugar beet factories, mostly in Northern France but also in Germany, Austria, Russia, and Denmark
Napoleon encouraged new research with sugar beets, the University of Nebraska writes, and by 1815, over 79,000 acres were put into production with more than 300 small factories being built in France.
Soon, sugar beet sugar flooded the British market, and by 1850 sugar was at last affordable for all.
The BBC continues:
The public could not get enough of this cheap and tasty pick-me-up. From sweetened tea in the workplace, to meals on the family table, to the new working class tradition of high tea – sugar soon became indispensable.
It didn’t take long for sugar to become a household staple, and today, about 35 percent of the 130 metric tons of sugar comes from sugar beets. The BBC concludes:
So addicted were we to this new taste, that at the beginning of the 19th century we consumed 12 pounds of sugar per head. By the end of the century that amount had rocketed to 47 pounds per head.
More from Smithsonian.com:
Sugar on Snow
A Field Guide to Sugars
Sign up for our free email newsletter and receive the best stories from Smithsonian.com each week.
4 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
The author writes, “Then, mid-nineteenth century, Napoleon changed all of that, flooding the European market with affordable sugar and perhaps inadvertently sparking an epidemic of obesity and diabetes a century and a half down the road.”
How, pray tell, did Napoleon flood the European market with affordable sugar in the mid-ninetenth century (i.e., 1835-ish to 1865-ish) when he was exiled to St. Helena in the South Atlantic in 1815, and died there in 1821?
Looks like the staff at the Smithsonian responsible for writing, editing and maintaining this website got an ‘F’ grade in their high school world history classes.
Perhaps you are thinking of Napoleon’s nephew, the French emperor who styled himself Napoleon III, and reigned 1852 to 1870?
Either way, somebody needs to re-phrase that sentence after they re-research their grammar school term paper.
Comment by Micheal McLoughlin — December 6, 2012 @ 10:14 pm
I’d alter the phrase, “mid-nineteenth century, Napoleon changed all of that.” Having died in 1821, Napoleon wasn’t around mid-century, and it’s clear from the text that his actions influencing the sugar industry took place early in the century.
Perhaps something like, “Napoleon’s actions in the early 1800s had changed all of that by the mid-nineteenth century.”
It may seem a small point, but I had to read deep into the article to determine that you weren’t talking about Napoleon III, who was indeed troubling world affairs during the “mid-nineteenth century.”
A very interesting article, though! You could have a whole series on substitutes that arose because of wartime shortages. For example, synthetic rubber, alternatives to American cotton during the U.S. Civil War, German synthetic fuel, etc.
Comment by Herb Wills — December 7, 2012 @ 1:04 pm
They also failed geography as well as history – the sugar plantations were in and around the Carribean, which is why there was a large slave trade – they needed cheap labour to work the sugar plantations. The South Pacific was not a major producer & exporter of foodstuff until the later 1800′s and early 1900′s – Australia was still importing wheat from Canada into the 1920′s and later, only exporting wool & tinned and frozen meat like New Zealand.
Cotton only became important in the US when the cotton gin was developed, previously the money was in sugar (& rum).
Comment by bsrlee — December 11, 2012 @ 1:25 am
That photo isn’t sugar; it’s salt! You can tell by how cubic it looks.
Comment by Ellie — January 11, 2013 @ 11:09 am