Castles, Customs, and Kings: True Tales by English Historical Fiction Authors

by English Historical Fiction Authors

  Then he takes down his braces, first one, then the other.

  And finally, he undoes the small Dorset buttons at his neck and cuffs. But being not a little impatient, he pulls the shirt off over his head without unbuttoning it all the way.

  But the removal of the shirt only happens when she wishes it to happen. For all the time, his removal of his clothes is secondary to touching her, kissing her, telling her in every wordless way that her beauty blocks out the sky and the stars and is all that he sees.

  And that’s how he did it.

  “To teach thee, I am naked first...”

  —John Donne

  Unrequited Love: Jane Austen and America

  by Lauren Gilbert

  Jane Austen had little to say about America, and that little was not good. In her letter to Martha Lloyd on September 2, 1814, she did not reflect a positive view of the new United States, writing “…I place my hope of better things on a claim to the protection of Heaven, as a Religious Nation, a Nation in spite of much Evil improving in Religion, which I cannot believe the Americans to possess.”

  The ideals of democracy espoused by America, and later in the French Revolution, were a more direct and positive influence on earlier authors with whom Jane was familiar such as Edmund Burke and Charlotte Turner Smith, but suffered an eclipse when, in France, the Terror erupted and the King and Queen were executed.

  Park Honan wrote that, in The Loiterer, Jane’s brother James printed a story reflecting the Tory view of France and America, in which a Scottish soldier fighting against Washington becomes a democratic fool, loses his values, marries a rich, vicious, mean-born widow, and becomes miserable, ruined by the American Revolution. There is a strong probability that Jane would have read the story.

  Austen’s novels reflect a more prudent Tory approach to advancement than the Scottish soldier in question pursued: her heroines who made advantageous marriages and the men who advanced clearly have worth of their own in terms of character—but also in terms of birth. In Pride and Prejudice, Elizabeth Bennet was a “gentleman’s daughter”, so her marriage to Mr. Darcy was not totally inappropriate. In Mansfield Park, Fanny and William Price’s mother was Lady Bertram’s sister, so there was good blood there (however diluted) to supplement their individual merits. In spite of Emma’s improvements, Harriet (born, as we come to discover, the illegitimate daughter of a tradesman) was matched appropriately with the farmer Mr. Martin, and her friendship with Emma evolved into a more suitable relationship.

  The War of 1812 (the circumstance under discussion in the letter previously cited) would have been a concern but does not make an appearance in her novels (as with so many other politically-charged events of her time). But it seems clear that America was a negative influence in the world, in Austen’s view. She tended to uphold the more traditional values and structures currently in place in England, even while she makes her concerns about women’s role and place in those structures apparent.

  In considering the West Indies as part of the Americas, the situation and viewpoint are somewhat different but not more favorable. The combination of the West Indies and trade were directly allied to slavery. Her aunt Leigh-Perrot brought a plantation in Barbados with her when she married Jane’s uncle. Austen’s father, George Austen, was a trustee for a plantation owned by James Nibbs, a former classmate. Austen’s brother Charles’ naval career included five years in the North American Station, searching ships and interfering with trade between France and the United States. Charles married Fanny Palmer, the daughter of an official in Bermuda while stationed in the West Indies.

  The issues of slavery and income mentioned in Mansfield Park would have had a great deal of immediacy for her family, as discussions of plantation business matters, including slavery, would have been fairly common. Austen’s disgust for slavery was made apparent, however discreetly, by the references in Mansfield Park, previously mentioned, as well as in Emma.

  In Emma, Austen’s character Jane Fairfax referred to her role as a governess as a form of slavery of the mind, if not the body, and was extremely reluctant to embark on her career. Even the reference to Mrs. Elton’s family in Bristol with wealth coming from trade has a dark connotation, due to Bristol having been a significant port involved with the slave trade. (The slave trade was outlawed in 1807, but slave ownership in the British Empire was still legal, during Austen’s lifetime.)

  I was unable to find any positive references to the Americas in Jane Austen’s letters or novels. Even though Austen’s novels carry a subtle undertone of the injustices to women in the current English system, the democratic ideals that led to the American and French revolutions clearly did not resonate with her. There is no indication she espoused the radical transformation of her society.

  While bearing in mind that the letters remaining are a fraction of what she had written, available information indicates that Austen viewed the Americas as a dangerously radical, unreligious place where people of low birth and poor character could be advanced socially and materially, in spite of their unworthiness. Given the fairly recent loss of the colonies and subsequent revolution and Terror in France, a jaundiced view of America by Austen and her contemporaries would not be unreasonable or surprising. One can only hope that subsequent developments would have found favor with her, especially in view of the continuing popularity of her novels here.

  Sources

  Ellwood, Gracia Fay. “‘Such a Dead Silence’: Cultural Evil, Challenge, Deliberate Evil and Metanoia in Mansfield Park.” Persuasions On-Line, vol. 24, no. 1 (2003). http://www.jasna.org/persuasions/on-line/vol24no1/ellwood.html.

  Honan, Park. Jane Austen: Her Life. New York: Ballantine Books Edition, 1989.

  Hubback, J. H. and Edith C. Jane Austen’s Sailor Brothers. http://www.tilneysandtrapdoors.com/mollands/etexts/jasb/jasb7.html.

  LeFaye, Deirdre. Jane Austen: The World of Her Novels. London: Frances Lincoln Ltd, 2002.

  _________, ed. Jane Austen’s Letters, Third Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.

  MacDonagh, Oliver. Jane Austen: Real and Imagined Worlds. Avon, UK: 1991.

  Mitton, G. E. Jane Austen and Her Times, 1775-1817. New York: Barnes & Noble, Inc., 2007.

  Ray, Joan Kilingel, PhD. Jane Austen for Dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishing, Inc., 2006.

  Sheehan, Colleen A. “To Govern the Winds: Dangerous Acquaintances at Mansfield Park.” Persuasions On-Line, vol. 25, no. 1 (2004). http://www.jasna.org/persuasions/on-line/vol25no1/sheehan.html.

  Tomalin, Claire. Jane Austen: A Life. New York: First Vintage Books Edition, division of Random House, 1999.

  Class Distinctions in Regency England

  By Philippa Jane Keyworth

  Today I want to write about a well-known primary source, The Mirror of Graces, by A Lady of Distinction. This book was first published in London in 1811, and, presumably due to its popularity, it was subsequently re-printed in New York in 1813 and 1815, in Edinburgh in 1830 and then again in Boston in 1831.

  The copy that I own is an enlarged photo-reprint and spans some 239 pages or more. At such a length, I can hardly say that this article will cover the entirety of the book or will be a full analysis of the source. However, I wanted to share a little something about this captivating text which I am currently studying.

  Specifically, I have been drawn to the passage entitled “On the Peculiarities of Dress, with Reference to the Station of the Wearer”. It strikes me that when reading a Regency romance and even when writing one, we tend to focus on the positives of class divides. Who can resist a classic Pride and Prejudice-esque storyline that follows the romantic attachment of a man and woman divided by class who eventually overcome it?

  What we sometimes fail to see is, as John Tosh describes it, “The gulf between past and present.” We don’t give complete gravity to the social divides of the time and instead w
e romanticize them. In truth, while reading this passage from The Mirror of Graces, I wasn’t sure whether to laugh or to frown in comprehension. The peculiarities of dress A Lady of Distinction refers to are the fashions of the time, and she sets us straight from the beginning by describing the danger of lower and middle classes dressing fashionably:

  It is not from a proud wish to confine elegance to persons of quality that I contend for less extravagant habits in the middle and lower orders of people: it is a conviction of the evil which their vanity produces that impels me to condemn in toto the present levelling and expensive mode.

  And before this statement of her conviction she declares the propriety of corresponding your dress with not only your season of life, character, and figure but also with your station. She speaks of this matter so: “This is the subject not less of moral concern than it is a matter of taste.”

  Yes, that’s right, you’ve got it. She believes that dressing for your station is not just about taste but actually your moral obligation. Well, doesn’t this just put a new spin on the classical fashions of the Regency!

  She differentiates between tradesmen and those with “fortunes of princes”. Of course, for those with “fortunes of princes” it is different. They are allowed to array their “fair partner”‘ in “rich produce”, but not so for the tradesmen: “...but I animadvert on our retail shopkeepers, our linen drapers, upholsterers, &c. who, not content with gold and silver baubles, trick out their dames in jewels!”

  Shocking! She even uses an exclamation mark!

  And what, pray tell, does she think of the morality of these tradesmen she so heartily attacks for their expensive tastes? “No wonder that these men load their consciences with dishonest profits, or make their last appearance in the newspaper as insolvent or felo de se!” Incompetent both in business and morals.

  Just wait until she gets onto the working-class women....

  If the brazier’s daughter is taught to sing, dance and play like the heiress to an earldom, we must not be surprised that she will also emulate the decorations of her rival...not able to have hers of gems, foil-stones produce a similar affect...

  So, these women are like those of today who shop in Primark to emulate the fashions of Chanel and D & G.

  Is this successful in attracting men (which is one of the purposes of such finery)? The section goes on to say: “...and when she is thus arrayed, she plays away the wanton and the fool, till some libertine of fortune buys her either for a wife or a mistress.” Harsh words!

  So, having devoted four pages to these working-class tradesmen and women, A Lady of Distinction moves swiftly, and unsurprisingly, back to the class she is from:

  After having drawn this agreeable picture of her who has well-chosen, I will leave this modern daughter of industry to her discreet and virtuous simplicity; and once more turn to her whose fortune and station render greater changes and expence in apparel not only admissible but commendable.

  I found this passage, as I have said, quite humorous, but it was also very enlightening. There is a lot to be learned here.

  The author is, as she describes herself, “a woman of virtue and a Christian” who does not feel it beneath her dignity to lift her pen on these subjects, so I will therefore assume her to be from the upper echelons of society. It’s important to count this information when making any deductions from what has been said above.

  What I will deduce from the above extracts are:

  The importance of dress to some women in Regency Society;

  The industrial revolution allowing for the rise of rich tradesmen (note the term she uses, “this modern daughter of industry”);

  The ability of the middle and lower classes to buy finer clothing;

  Tradesmen becoming bad businessmen when they buy fine clothing for their female relatives—oh, I love this woman’s logic!

  The availability of “mimmick” clothing, jewels, etc.;

  Dress being a clear factor denoting status;

  The status line being questioned and blurred by trade and affluence;

  The “truth” that tradesmen’s daughters dressing above their station leads to wantonness and becoming a libertine’s wife or mistress;

  Following the fashions and spending money on fashion for women “of fortune” is commendable.

  Again, I want to stress that this is a tiny section of this text which I have analysed and there are far more diverse subjects within it which should not be discounted. However, it does provide a valuable window through a contemporary text into opinions advocated by one woman, at least, and embraced by more, most probably, as evidenced by the multiple re-printings of this book.

  It is an interesting text, especially as it is written almost twenty years after Mary Wollstonecraft’s controversial text, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, which declares the need for women to receive an equal education to men, whereas The Mirror of Graces implies the opposite. To gain some insight into the differing views on women and their roles between the years 1792 and 1811, I would highly recommend reading these two contemporary texts. They could not be more different, and yet both contain insights into the mindset of women toward other women and toward their role within society itself.

  Which mindset was more prevalent? It would have been amazingly helpful if the rest of the women in Regency England had written a volume cataloging their responses to the views put forth in these two texts—if only!

  Vicars and Curates and Livings…Oh My!

  by Maria Grace

  In the 1800s the English laws of primogeniture, intended to preserve the integrity of large landed estates, made it a challenge for younger sons of the landed gentry to establish themselves in life. If their family did not possess an additional estate for them to inherit or they lacked some other relative to provide an inheritance, younger sons had little choice but to make their own way in the world. The question was how.

  Traditional “learned” professions—the church, the law, and medicine—had a respectable character as “liberal professions” befitting gentlemen. So these, together with the armed forces, formed the primary options for gentlemen’s younger sons. The church was a particularly attractive option if a family had a living they could bestow as they chose. A living meant a guaranteed income and home for the lifetime of the clergyman lucky enough to be appointed to it.

  Ordination

  To qualify for a living, a man had to be ordained. The process started with a standard honors degree from Cambridge or Oxford. Afterwards, the candidate needed a testimonial from his college vouching for his fitness for ordination. He then presented the testimonial to a bishop and made arrangements for an examination to prove his competency in Latin, knowledge of the Scripture, and familiarity with the liturgy and church doctrine as written in the Thirty-Nine Articles. Many bishops made only a cursory examination in these areas; only a few took their responsibilities more seriously.

  After Japanning (slang for ordination referring to putting on black cloth, from the color of black japanware), a man was qualified to administer the sacraments of the church. His career would begin at age twenty-three, as a deacon, assisting an ordained priest. At twenty-four, he could be fully ordained and eligible to be in charge of a parish and obtain a living.

  Obtaining a Living

  For all but the luckiest young men, the real challenge began at this point. The surest way of procuring a benefice was to be related to the patron. A well-placed relative might mean a young man could walk into a living immediately after ordination. Less well-connected individuals could wait ten or twenty years for the opportunity.

  The right to appoint a clergyman to a living was called an advowson and considered a form of property to be bought, sold, and inherited. Typically an advowson sold for five to seven times the annual value of the living. Instead of selling an entire advowson
, a gentleman strapped for cash might sell just the “right of next presentation” as did Sir Thomas Bertram in Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park. An extremely fortunate clergyman could own an advowson and appoint himself to a living.

  Approximately 11,500 benefices or livings existed in England and Wales at the end of the 18th century. This sounds like a sufficient number; however, over half the ordained clergy never received a living.

  Oxford and Cambridge colleges controlled nearly 5% of benefices, presenting them as gifts to fellows and masters who wished to marry and leave academic pursuits. Another 10% or so belonged to the Crown, to be presented to government supporters. Bishops and cathedral chapters possessed about 20%. The gentry and aristocracy held the largest share, on the order of 60%. Most great families had at least one or two livings at their disposal.

  The Value of a Living

  Still, having a living did not guarantee the holder a life of wealth and ease. An 1802 figure suggests a third of the benefices brought in less than £150 a year and some 1,000 of those less than £100. (£50 a year was more or less equivalent to our minimum wage.) A clergyman needed an income of £300-400 per annum to be on the level with the lesser gentry.

  Incomes might be increased by serving more than one parish, but this seldom resulted in real wealth. Only a third of all clergy acquired more than one living. Slightly more than one in twenty held more than two benefices and of these, few had as many as four or five.

  Additional income might also be found through teaching or cultivating gardens and the glebe (acreage provided by the parish). The amount of land varied by parish; some only had a field, others fifty acres or more. The incumbent might choose to farm it himself or rent it out to a tenant farmer.