The Emperor Norton Trust

TO HONOR THE LIFE + ADVANCE THE LEGACY OF JOSHUA ABRAHAM NORTON

RESEARCH • EDUCATION • ADVOCACY

Filtering by Tag: John Norton

Norton Sibling Exodus, 1838–1851

Published accounts of the young Joshua Norton living in South Africa in his 20s — including the accounts presented by Norton’s major biographers — more or less universally treat Joshua as though he were a romantic hero (or a loner) forging both (a) his views on religion and (b) his desire to leave South Africa within an hermetically sealed vacuum occupied by him, his parents and possibly his two nearest siblings, Louis and Philip.

In this interpretation, Joshua is the only sibling who is asked to answer for apparently having rejected the Jewish faith of his childhood as a young man. Louis, Philip and other siblings are given a pass, because they are regarded as having had an alibi: marrying a “Gentile” in a place where there were few Jews to choose from.

But, who’s to say that these siblings didn’t entitle themselves to marry outside the faith, in part because they, like Joshua, already were pulling away? Norton biographer Bill Drury even goes so far as to say that Joshua’s young adult mockery of Judaism was the first sign of his “madness.” But Drury doesn’t brand Joshua’s fraternal siblings, Louis and Philip, as “mad” for not marrying “a nice Jewish girl” and for getting baptized to boot.

In the following generation, most (all?) of the siblings’ children — presumably with the encouragement and blessing of their parents — were baptized and married by the Anglican Church. So, even if Joshua’s Jewish siblings initially “went Anglican” as “a marriage thing,” their assimilation into the Anglican tradition doesn’t appear to have ended there.

Too: In the prevailing interpretation, Joshua’s primary motivation for leaving South Africa is that his parents and his brothers, Louis and Philip, had died between 1846 and 1848, leaving unmarried Joshua to collect a big inheritance check and catch the first ship to San Francisco.

This wishful version of events falls apart, as soon as one realizes that Joshua’s father, John, was declared insolvent as early as 1844 — and that Joshua actually left Cape Town in late 1845, before his parents and brothers had died.

So, one has to look to other sources to help explain Joshua’s “moves” during this period.

One option — and where existing accounts fail — is to recognize that Joshua was one of a dozen siblings — several of whom, in the late 1830s and early 1840s, were hammering out their own attitudes and actions on “religion and travel” at the same time that Joshua was.

It stands to reason that Joshua was influenced by the choices his siblings were making in these areas. Perhaps Joshua and one or two of these siblings confided to one another about all this. A fully realized narrative of Joshua’s life during this period has to position him within this sibling dynamic.

The truth is that Joshua Norton was not the only one of his siblings who put some distance between themselves and the Jewish faith of their childhood — and who also got it together to leave South Africa.

He wasn’t even the first — or the last.

Read More

Joshua Norton First Set Foot in the United States in 1846 — in Boston

In the United States, the prevailing narrative about Joshua Norton, for 80 years and more, has been that

  • Joshua did not leave Cape Town until late 1848 or early 1849 — prompted by the deaths of both parents and his two nearest siblings between May 1846 and August 1848, and possibly also by news of the California Gold Rush.

  • He sailed directly from Cape Town to Rio de Janeiro, arriving in Rio early to mid 1849, and from Rio to San Francisco.

  • He may have spent a few months in South America between his arrivals in Rio and San Francisco.

  • His introduction to the United States was his arrival in San Francisco in late 1849.

But a persuasive body of evidence — including a passenger list, a disembarkation ticket and two newspaper arrivals notices — points to a different reality: Joshua Norton initially sailed from Liverpool to Boston, arriving in Boston in March 1846.

This means that Joshua probably left Cape Town no later than November 1845 — and that the reasons for his departure had nothing to do with family deaths or the Gold Rush.

Read More

Joshua Norton, Auctioneer

Did you know that, when Joshua Norton was living in Port Elizabeth, South Africa, in the early 1840s, he did a stint as an auctioneer? We didn’t!

Every new dot makes the picture a little sharper.

Read More

What Did Andrew Smith Hallidie Know About Joshua Norton's Original Funding?

The conventional “wisdom” is that Joshua Norton arrived in San Francisco in 1849 with a $40,000 bequest from the estate of his father, John Norton, who had died in 1848.

But, if Norton arrived with $40,000, he almost certainly didn’t get it from his father — who had died insolvent and broke.

So, what was the source of Joshua Norton’s original funding — $40,000 or otherwise?

Andrew Smith Hallidie, the “father of the cable car,” knew Joshua Norton as Emperor — and probably before that as well.

In 1888, Hallidie published an article suggesting that Norton had arrived in San Francisco as a “representative and confidant” of English backers.

This is quite different from the account one often hears.

Read More

OPEN QUESTION No. 2: Did Joshua Norton Really Arrive in San Francisco With a $40,000 Inheritance That He Built Into a Quarter-Million-Dollar Fortune in 3 Years?

According to the "received" version of the Emperor Norton story: Joshua Norton inherited $40,000 from his father's estate. At around the same time, news of the Gold Rush reached South Africa. Joshua sailed west to seek his fortune in San Francisco, where he arrived in November 1849 with the $40,000 — a nest egg that he parlayed into $250,000 within three years.

But is this how it really went down? Not likely, according to the available evidence.

Read More

© 2024 The Emperor Norton Trust  |  Site design: Alisha Lumea  |  Background: Original image courtesy of Eric Fischer