The holy grail of 'Brand' - as old as it can get

The oldest etymological association of the word 'Brand' can be found in the epic poem Beowulf meaning 'destruction by fire'. The meaning of the word Brand has changed through the ages. It was used to describe criminalized people, as a disgrace or stigma in the 16th century.

Advertisement for sale of negro slaves

The idea of marking things, people, or animals by burning identifying marks onto them is clearly an ancient one. This was done to identify the ownership of things, people(slaves) [ a close cousin of people branding could be tattooing ] or animals. During the 19th century in primarily the United States, hot irons used for marking livestock and cauterizing wounds were called brands, and later cattle and other livestock were also referred to as brands. Originally the word brand meant anything hot or burning, such as a fire-brand, a burning stick; by the European Middle Ages it commonly identified the process of burning a mark into a stock animal with a thick hide, such as a cow, so as to identify ownership under animus revertendi. In the American West, a branding iron consisted of an iron rod with a seal-like mark which ranchers heated in a fire. A brand blotter was a thief who stole, and removed marks of ownership from, cattle.

The origin of branding livestock dates from 2700 B.C. Paintings in Egyptian tombs document branding oxen with hieroglyphics. Ancient Greeks and Romans marked livestock and slaves with a hot iron. Hernando Cortez introduced branding from Spain to the New World in 1541. He brought cattle stamped with his mark of three crosses. There has never been anything to take the place of a visible brand as a permanent definitive mark of ownership and deterrent to theft. Livestock people say "a brand's something that won't come off in the wash."

- http://www.cowboyshowcase.com/brands.htm

Pears soap was the world first registered Brand in he 19th century. Around 1900, James Walter Thompson taught the first lessons in branding to the world, in an early commercial description of what now is known as 'branding'.

Malboro Friday

April 2, 1993 - this day has historic importance for branders. It was called the death day of brands. It was on this day Philip Morris announced a 20% price cut to their Marlboro cigarettes to fight back against the bargain brand competitors who were increasingly eating into their market share. As a result, Philip Morris's stock took a major dive, along with the share value of other household brands including Heinz, Coca-Cola, and RJR Nabisco. Fortune magazine deemed it "the day the Marlboro Man fell off his horse"

Investors interpreted the price slash as an admission of defeat from the Marlboro brand, that Philip Morris could no longer justify its higher price tag and now had to compete with generic brands. Since the Marlboro man was an image that stood since 1954, it was considered one of the biggest marketing icons, investors reasoned that to see the Marlboro icon give into a price war, the marketing itself must be ineffective. As a result of plummeting stock value in major American brands, 1993 marked a slight decrease in U.S. ad expenditures. Companies began investing in promotions rather than advertising. In 1983 in the U.S, the average expenditure on marketing was 70% advertising and 20% on promotions, by 1993 it had made a complete turn around, to 70% on promotions and 20% on advertising.

It was the only decrease to occur since 1970. At the time, this event was regarded as signifying "the death of a brand" and the advent of a "value-minded" consumer generation who pay more attention to the real value of products and not the brand names. This view soon proved to be incorrect, with the rest of the decade's economy being dominated by brands and driven by high-budget marketing campaigns.

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marlboro_Friday

Apart from all the examples I have given above can there still be an instance of branding that is still older than 16th century. Something that older than the concept of products and yet binds people emotionally. Can you guess it? I am talking about territories, empires, nations, and countries. This is something man started marking the day he was born. Its an animal instinct, every animal does it. If the def of brand is

"A brand is a name, term, design, symbol, or other feature that distinguishes products and services from competitive offerings", as defined by the American Marketing Association.

Humans have been marking their territories through ages. 'Logos' and 'Designs' have been in the name of Flags. 'Symbols' have been as War markings. Doesn't a country's name bind its people emotionally as a brand does? So shouldn't a country be a brand? And all that its culture creates be its brand portfolio? I think this is the oldest instance of branding and yet there is no mention of this in any book of branding, which I have read. This is what lead me to write this post. And yes marketers have started recognizing countries as brands click here to find more.