If I understand you rightly, you had formed a surmise of such horror as I have hardly words to — Dear Miss Morland, consider the dreadful nature of the suspicions you have entertained. What have you been judging from? Remember the country and the age in which we live. Remember that we are English, that we are Christians. Consult your own understanding, your own sense of the probable, your own observation of what is passing around you. Does our education prepare us for such atrocities? Do our laws connive at them? Could they be perpetrated without being known, in a country like this, where social and literary intercourse is on such a footing, where every man is surrounded by a neighbourhood of voluntary spies, and where roads and newspapers lay everything open? Dearest Miss Morland, what ideas have you been admitting?

Northanger Abbey, Chapter 24

(The fateful moment in Chapter  24 as illustrated by Joan Hassell for the

Folio Society’s edition of the Complete Works of Jane Austen)

And so with words of wisdom and not a little exasperation Henry Tilney neatly skewers Catherine Morland’s fervid imaginings, the result  of letting her imagination run wild, fueled as it was with the influence of the Gothic romances of the time:

Oh! I would not tell you what is behind the black veil for the world! Are not you wild to know?”

“Oh! Yes, quite; what can it be? But do not tell me — I would not be told upon any account. I know it must be a skeleton, I am sure it is Laurentina’s skeleton. Oh! I am delighted with the book! I should like to spend my whole life in reading it. I assure you, if it had not been to meet you, I would not have come away from it for all the world.”

“Dear creature! How much I am obliged to you; and when you have finished Udolpho, we will read the Italian together; and I have made out a list of ten or twelve more of the same kind for you.”

“Have you, indeed! How glad I am! What are they all?”

“I will read you their names directly; here they are, in my pocketbook. Castle of Wolfenbach, Clermont, Mysterious Warnings, Necromancer of the Black Forest, Midnight Bell, Orphan of the Rhine, and Horrid Mysteries. Those will last us some time.”

“Yes, pretty well; but are they all horrid, are you sure they are all horrid?”

Northanger Abbey, Chapter 6

The craze for gothic literature, as depicted rather affectionately but ultimately scornfully by Jane Austen in Northanger Abbey was of course only one side of that particular coin.

The craze was reflected in art of the period too.

Today we really find it difficult I think to realise why the reaction to the Gothic then was so extreme. I think it might be helpful to look at one picture which is representative of the genre and its story , for it helps explain some of the attitudes of the late 18th early 19th century towards these  novels/pictures.

One of the most shocking of all the Gothic images was this picture by Henry Fuseli, The Nightmare,

which was exhibited at the Royal Academy Summer Show of 1782.

Henry Fuseli – portrayed below by James Northcote in 1778-  was an artist who had no formal art education.

Born in Zürich in 1741 and originally destined for a career in the church he took Holy Orders in 1761  He then  travelled to England in 1765 and on the advice of Sir Joshua Reynolds decided to make art his career. He made a tour of Italy to study the art and classical ruins  and returned to England in 1778.

Among the usual fare of the exhibition-  landscapes and portraits- this picture certainly stood out from the others,     even those with a Gothic tinge like this one by Phillip de Loutherberg, the artist and theatrical designer,

The Nightmare ,as you can clearly see above,  portrays a young girl sleeping  with an incubus squatting down on her abdomen, looking out of the painting towards the viewer, together with a spectral horse’s head, complete with bulging white eyes.

Horace Walpole, author of the first  gothic novel The Castel of Otranto( more on this later) summed up his feeling on this picture quite succinctly by adding this word alongside the description of the picture in his copy of the  catalogue of the exhibition

Shocking.

Debate began as to what exactly Fuseli was actually painting: a scene from literature? Something inspired by a scene from Shakespeare- Queen Mab/Romeo and Juliet? Or, horrors, something from his own imagination meant to provoke feelings of revulsion  in the audience ?

The  proper view to then taken upon artistic subjects was  that  it was acceptable to paint and create works of art  that evoked extremes of feeling-such as terror, for example- but not to create works of art that evoked feelings of horror or disgust. There the line was drawn in the sand. This picture to the late 18th century eye, crossed that particular line.

The debate about the merits of the picture  was carried out in the press, notably the Morning Chronicle and of course this fuelled interest in this uneasy picture.

After  the debate began , visitors figures to the Royal Academy show rose.  The first pieces about the painting appeared in the Morning Chronicle on May 8th.

On May 9th, the day after the first of the Morning Chronicles pieces about the painting  2 713 people were recorded as having visited the exhibition (the average daily intake of people was 1782.) The final day attracted 5085 crowding to see it.

There is no doubt that this  picture created a sensation.

It became very popular as a print. It is thought that over 2000 engravings were made initially of the painting in 1783,and sold for  five shillings each. A pirate edition as issued in Paris.  New authorised editions  were issued  from 1803 onwards, and eventually its fame  spread,via the distribution of the prints  across Europe and into America, far and wide.

Attacks  were made on it, especially after the connection between the picture and its probable subject matter -sex- was made.

The Reverend Robert Bromley  Rector of St Mildred’s in the Poultry, raised the moral standard and set to to attack a picture, which appeared to him to vary from the norm most spectacularly because it appeared to have no moral, instructive or educational foundation :

The dignity of  moral instruction is degraded whenever the pencil is employed on frivolous whimsical and unmeaning subjects…The Nightmare…or any dream that is not marked in authentic history as combined with the inspiring dispensations of Providence and many other pieces of  a visionary and fanciful nature, are speculators…if it be right to follow Nature, there is nothing of her here, all that is presented is a reverie of the brain…mere waking dreams as wild as the conceits of a madman

( See: A Philosophical and Critical History of the Fine Arts Painting Sculpture and Architecture, 1793).

Fuseli tried to defend himself  and devoted a whole Royal Academy lecture on painting to the theme of invented subjects, asking the audience  to question why it was not considered acceptable to paint subjects coined from the imagination, and not from reference to nature, or literature:

Why not if the subject be within the limits of art and the combinations of nature, though it should have escaped observation? Shall the immediate avenues of the mind, open to all observers from the poet to the novelist be shut only to the artist…for if these images so pursue us when  our minds are in a kind of waking dream and all this with an air of unreality why , should we not turn to use this vice of the mind?

The debate surrounding this picture still continued into the 20th and 21st centuries.

And of course, all this debate around art, explains some of the  responses to the Gothic literature of the time. It was different (and possibly thought of as dangerous by morlalists) because it evoked feelings  in the reader that are not associated with the Classics, with Shakespeare etc.

It was( and is, in some ways ) slightly daring to read these books and to contemplate this type of art……Which makes this type of literature perfect fodder for impressionable teenagers. Which Jane Austen knew well. Or as in this print by James Gillray shows, has attractions for  mature ladies who should know better than to give themselves thrills by reading The Monk late at night by candlelight

No wonder Jane Austen  wrote her cautionary tale ;-) If you would like to read more on this subject, then I can reccommend looking at the catalogue to a Tate Gallery exhibition about it entitled Gothic Nightmares


Sadly, it appears now to be out of print and the few copies available are consequently ferociously expensive.

A much cheaper alternative is  to view the on-line exhibit that accompanied the original exhibition, which was held at Tate Brtiain in 20o6 and  is still -praise be- available at the Tate’s website here..

Do you dare do it?

I was lucky enough to receive a Kindle for Christmas.

It has transformed my reading habits. Small and light enough to be carried in my handbag wherever I go, as a result of owning it I’ve read far more than I ever did before. Its long battery life and the addition of a rather spiffy case with an integrated reading light have made me a very happy woman.

I downladed the complete works of  Jane  Austen (naturally, and within the first five minutes of owning it) for a song, but am terribly excited by the news, related to me by my dear friend Karen of Bookish NYC,  that the British Library is going to make lots of 19th century fiction available as free downloads for Kindle users.

I cannot ever contemplate buying a first edition of a Jane Austen novel (I’d rather keep the roof above my head in good order instead ) but I do own a facsimile copy of the first edition of Pride and Prejudice which was produced by the British Library in a  limited edition(and is still available to buy).

If the new e- books are of the same quality I will be happy.

And I really do look forward to the paperback facsimiles of the first editions too .

Brava British Library!

As the most recent adaptation of  Emma ends its current screening on PBS tonight, this marks the end of the AustenOnly Emma season of posts. I do hope you have enjoyed them.

From tomorrow we shall begin a short Northanger Abbey season, for as I understand it, the next Austen production to be screened by PBS will be the  ITV adaptation of Northanger Abbey starring Felicity Jones and JJ Feild.

I do hope you will join me for some Gothically inspired posts….don’t be afriad now, will you?

This is a very interesting book, written by Doctor SusannaWade Martins of the University of East Anglia.

Throughout  her career she has studied the Holkham estate in some detail, and therefor it is highly appropriate that she  has written the first biography of Thomas Coke-Coke of Norfolk-in over a hundred years.

And it is of interest to anyone who has read Jane Austen’s books and has wondered what exactly did Mr knightly do? How would Elizabeth and Darcy have spent their time at Pemberley? What was Darcy’s life like before he met Elizabeth? What should Henry Crawford have been doing at this estate at Everingham?

I know from my experience in the past ten years with online Austen communities that  speculation about these pressing questions continues apace amongst those of us who are interested in these characters and their lives.

Reading this book will , in my opinion give you one of the best impressions of the  type of life they might have led, in one single, very  readable, affordable volume.

Now, do note, I am certainly not arguing that Coke of Norfolk was the basis for any of Jane Austen’s landowning charcters.What I am saying is that  reading this book will give a good over view of the type of life these characters may have led on their estates in the English countryside,and instead of trawling though many varied books to try an understand  just what that life was like , you can now purchase this one volume as a starting point and be very well served by it.

Thomas Coke inherited, in 1776,  the great Holkham estate with as its magnificent centre piece of this Palladian mansion, designed by Matthew Brettingham

It was in wonderful heart.  He continued to improve it and  the conditions of his tenant farms, wanting to encourage gentlemen into the profession to raise standards of his tenantry and consequently of his farms and stock. The detail of how this improvement was achieved- by buildings, lease terms etc- is chronicled in a clear and very readable manner by Doctor Matins,

Prior to inheriting, Coke he  lived the life of  an upper class gentleman, being educated on a Grand Tour

Here he is, above, as depicted by Pompeo Batoni while in Rome.

And then he entered politics. He was a Whig supporter all his life and was vociferously opposed to  the war with America ,talking the side of the colonists. He also supported  the abolition of the slave trade, the emancipation of Catholics and parliamentary reform.

Here is his political map of Norfolk drawn up for Coke by Humphrey Repton-also from Norfolk- who was a parliamentary agent  prior to gaining fame-and mentions in Mansfield Park- as the first “landscape designer’.It was designed and commissioned to show the extent of political interest of both the Tory and Whig parties in Norfolk:

This book covers his personal life as well as his political life and there it is of great  interest to those of us who wonder how Darcy and Elizabeth would have organised their domestic life at Pemberley. Family life for the Cokes was concentrated mainly around Holkham and the orgnaisiation of the domestic life of the house was firmly in the hands of many capable women-namely Cokes first wife and his daughter who took over the domestic reigns on her mother’s death. Doctor Martins  gives a detailed account of estate life from the point of view of the women in the family and it makes for very interesting  reading.

I can highly recommend it for anyone interested in the lives of the upper classes of this period.

For a more detailed examination of the organisation and development of such a large estate, then  I can recommend anther book by Doctor Martins:

A Great Estate at Work is a fascinating book, the result of Doctor Martin’s work for her Phd thesis.She was granted access to the Holkham Archive and the result is a fabulously detailed book  chronicling the development of the estate from 1776-1860. Obvoiulsy  this covers more than the period about which Jane Austen wrote, but it is a great help to read it in order to set in context the  improvements of the agrarian revolution and how they panned  out later in the 19th century.

In the same vein this book,above,  The English Model Farm again by Doctor Martins is rather  on the specialised side , but is fascinating, showing how landlord were able to develop the ideal farming conditions, if they were sufficiently interested and motivated during the period 1700-1914. I am afriad it now appears to be out of print,but for anyone seriously interested in the development of farm bulings etc during this period I can highly reccommend it.

For those of you interested in the social effects of the agrarian revolution, for example,  the social distress caused by enclosing the land , then I can recommend this book by another member of staff at the University of East Anglia: Professor Tom Wilkinson.

The Transformation of Rural England is a fascinating book for  in great detail, it chronicles the impact of the improvements in  agriculture and  the changes in the usage of the land as a result. In addition it deals with  the physical effect on the landscape  and the social consequences of these improvements.  I highly recommend it,but it is rather technical and detailed, and I would only recommend purchasing it  to those of us who are serious students of the subject.

But  for a good and comprehensive view of the type of improvements that someone  like Mr Knightley might have made and the type of life  he and Darcy might have lead I can think of no better introduction than Susanna Wade Martins book on Thomas Coke. And as it is soon to be released in paperback form at a very reasonable price :got to it,say I !

“It is a very simple story. He went to town on business three days ago, and I got him to take charge of some papers which I was wanting to send to John. He delivered these papers to John, at his chambers, and was asked by him to join their party the same evening to Astley’s. They were going to take the two eldest boys to Astley’s. The party was to be our brother and sister, Henry, John — and Miss Smith. My friend Robert could not resist… However, I must say that Robert Martin’s heart seemed for him, and to me, very overflowing; and that he did mention, without its being much to the purpose, that on quitting their box at Astley’s, my brother took charge of Mrs. John Knightley and little John, and he followed with Miss Smith and Henry; and that at one time they were in such a crowd, as to make Miss Smith rather uneasy.”

Emma, Chapter 54

and

“Harriet was most happy to give every particular of the evening at Astley’s, and the dinner the next day; she could dwell on it all with the utmost delight”

Emma, Chapter 55.

So all is well: Harrriet and her lover are reunited at Astleys.

But what exactly was Astley’s? And it may interest you to know that there was more than one in London…so which one is referred to here?

Let’s attempt to find out, shall we?

The most famous of Astley’s  theatres was Astley’s Amphitheatre which is pictured above. This print is by Rowlandson and Pugin, and is from my copy of  the Microcosm of London published by Rudolph Ackermann.

This theatre was built on the south side of the river Thames in London over Westminster Bridge,  opposite the houses of parliament. It was the property of the theatrical entrepreneur, Phillip Astley . Hopefully you can clearly see the position of the theatre in this  section from my copy of Smith’s New Map of London 1809:

Do remember – you can enlarge all these illustrations by clicking on them.

It was first opened in 1770 and  was originally merely an open air circus ring, surrounded by seats for the audience (which were mercifully covered to protect them from the elements). It became famous for its equestrian performances. By 1780 it boasted a compete roof and became known as The Amphitheatre Riding House. In 1794 the amphitheatre burnt down-a common hazard for early 19th century theatres.  It was rebuilt and when in 1796 Jane Austen visited it, it was performing elaborate spectacles, on a scale unknown in England before:

We  are to be at Astley’s tonight,which I am glad of...

(see: Letter to Cassandra Austen dated 23rd August 1796)

It was an unpatented theatre, which meant that it could only stay within the confines of the law regarding theatrical performances in the 18th/ early 19th centuries if it had a license  for performance, and also performed anything but plays. The 1737 Licensing Act (which was in effect a piece of legislation sponsored by the Walpole government to control and  censor the content of stage performances) confined  the professional , paid, performance of legitimate, spoken word theatrical performances ( plays, in short) to the two patent theatres in London: Covent Garden and the Theatre Royal,Drury Lane .They were the only theatres that had licenses to perform plays on a permanent basis in London.

The establishment – more by accident than design-  of Samuel Foote’s Little Theatre in the Hay ( as mentioned in Pride and Prejudice) did not  provide open competition to the two existing drama houses. Foote’s theatre was licensed to stage plays but they could only be performed in the summer,when the two other main houses were closed. As Drury Lane and Covent Garden concentrated on performing during the autumn, winter and spring, the Little Theatre in the Hay did not really compromise their monopoly of serious theatrical performance.

As one of the un-patented theatres Astleys was not therefore supposed to perform plays- performances of the spoken word. But it –along with the growing number of other “illegitimate” theatres in London-often tried to circumvent the law by adding straight plays in among the permitted equestrian exhibits and burlettas. Astley’s Amphitheatre operated only on a summer license obtained from the Lord Chamberlain, as is clear from this description of the theatre taken from my copy of  A New Picture of London 1803, one of the first tourist guides to London:

This Theatre is situated in the Westminster-road near the bridge, and is built on the very ground on which Mr. Astley, sen. formerly exhibited feats of horsemanship and other amusements in the open air; the success and profits of which enabled him afterwards to extend his plan and erect a building, which, from the rural cast of the internal decorations he called the ROYAL GROVE.

In this theatric structure, stage exhibitions were given, while, in a circular area, similar to that in the present theatre, horsemanship, and other feats of strength and agility, were continued. About seven or eight years ago, it was accidentally burnt down, after which the present theatre was erected under the appellation of the AMPITHEATRE of ARTS.

The interior of the building, though for a summer theatre somewhat heavy in its style, has been rendered truly elegant by its late additional decorations; and the stage and scenery are also greatly improved. The horsemanship, for which a circular ride is provided, is still continued, though it forms a much smaller portion of the evening’s entertainment than formerly.

This theatre always opens on Easter Monday; and its amusements continue till October or November. There are two tiers of boxes, a pit, and gallery.

To get a taste of the type of performances which were staged at Astleys, do  look at this description of a visit to Astley’s by one of my favourite diarists of this period, Joseph Ballard,  an American -a Bostonian-who visited England in 1815.

This extract from his diary  gives a vivid impression of  the type of entertainment Astley’s offered:

April 22nd:

This evening went to Astleys Amphitheatre near Westminster Bridge.

The interior is very pretty lighted by a splendid chandelier, which descends through the ceiling and when coming down makes a beautiful appearance.

The performances were of the pantomime and equestrian kind, the subject being the Life and Death of the high-mettle racer. During this piece there was a correct representation of a horse race. The pit was railed through the centre and the horses started from the back of the stage at a long distance from the audience and passed through the pit.

A fox chase was also admirably done, from the starting of the fox till his death, the dogs and horses in full speed after the little animal.

This was so illustrative that  the audience heartily joined in  the tally–ho of the huntsmen etc.

In the course of the harlequinade a curious transformation set the house in a roar.

A barber as carrying a wig box whereupon was written “Judge Wisdom’s Wig” The clown desiring to see it, he set it own and opened it, when a large wig (such as the judges in this country wear upon the bench) appeared. Harlequin struck it with his word and out marched a venerable owl who majestically stalked across the stage and made his exit. Such success has this piece met with that tonight was the one hundredth night of its representation.

There were in fact two Astleys theatres. And the second Astleys also tried to circumvent the law regarding spoken performances.

Astley opened another theatre on Wych Street near Newcastle Street , just off the Strand,  in London in 1806.

Besides the Amphitheatre, Messrs. Astleys have a very elegant Pavilion, for exhibiting amusements of a similar description, which they have lately erected, and fitted out in a most complete style, in Newcastle-street in the Strand, and named ASTLEY’S PAVILION. At this place the horses have displayed some feats of so wonderful a description, as could not easily be conceived unless they were seen. In this place eight horses have lately performed country dances, &c. in a manner that has astonished all the spectators. To this have been added divers horsemanships, the twelve wonderful voltigers, &c.

(See The Microcosm of London etc )

This was called the Olympic Pavilion, but it was as can be seen from the above quotation, known as Astley’s Pavilion, the Pavilion Theatre the Olympic Saloon, or simply, and confusingly,  Astley’s.

Phillip Astley staged equestrian performances here, and through the influence of Queen Charlotte,  managed to botain a license from the Lord Chamberlain also to perform musical perforamces, burlettas, including dance.

This buiding itself was very interesting as it as built from the  reclaimed timbers of naval ships– prizes -that Astley had bought. The deck of a ship was used to make the stage and the floors. The new theare was built just like a traditional playhouse compete with stage orchestra side boxes galleries and a pit  surrounding the ring:

One of Jane Austen’s favourite actors, Robert Elliston bought the license from Astley in 1812. He decided to make a concerted effort to break the monopoly on spoken drama held by the two patent theatres: initially he tried to rename Astley’s,  The Little Drury Lane Theatre.

Of course, objections to this name were made from the  legitimate parent holders, and he had to close. But he re-opened again simply as Astleys and introduced a programme of

“farce, melodramas, and pantomine-burlettas”

He also  managed to again circumvent the prohibition on licensed theatres from performing the spoken word by continuing to add plays to the programme of events. Obviously, what made it daring of Elliston to do this was the closeness of his theatre in the Strand to the patent theatres, Covent Garden and especially, Drury Lane.(You can see how close he was from the map above of the area)

Paula Byrne in her book, Jane Austen and the Theatre argues that Jane Austen probably approved of Elliston’s stance against the two patent theatres. She may be right – we will never know for sure, but we do know that the Austen family were not afraid to patronise the illegitimate theatres and often went to others apart from Astley’s : Henry Austen, Jane’s brother, in particular patronized illegitimate theatres. He had a box at the Pantheon on Oxford Street, which from 1812 also staged a mixed bill of burlettas and ballet to try to circumvent the law on  performing plays.

Paula Byrne is of the opinion that Jane Austen chose to reconcile Robert and Harriet at Astleys, because it was an illegitimate theatre, where performances were not of the most rarefied nature, and it was exactly the type of place where a yeoman farmer and a girl carrying the “stain of illegitimacy” could meet with and be seen in the company of  the gentry (the Knightley family) without raising adverse comment.  Perhaps.

But what is interesting to me is that  cannot be exactly certain at which of the two theatre Harriet and Robert Martin reconciled their differences.

The Amphitheatre on the south bank of the Thames was, as we have noted , a summer theatre, but also ,as we have seen, it could stage performances into September, October and sometimes even in November. The Astleys of  the Strand was not a summer theatre but began its season in September.

Though Jane Austen does not tell us exactly when Harriet’s fateful  trip to the theatre took place, it appears to  have been in late summer , possibly early September: it could not be late September as that was when Harriet was married to Robert Martin:

Before the end of September, Emma attended Harriet to church, and saw her hand bestowed on Robert Martin

Emma, Chapter 55.

Paula Byrne argues that it is the crowds that frighten Harriet which give the game away:

Given that the Austens patronized the Lambeth Amphitheatre Jane may well have intended the same theatre. On the other hand the genteel John Knightley’s visit Astley’s as a treat for their boys and Harriet on quitting their box is made uneasy by the size of the crowds. This suggest the superior Olympic Pavilion. The Lambeth Amphitheatre had its own  separate entrance for the  boxes and the pit with the gallery entrance fifty yards down the road, so it would be more likely that Harriet encountered large crowds  at the Olympic.

(Page 43)

I suppose it doesn’t really matter in the end , given the similarities between the two theatre, but its good to know I think,  that there were two different Astley’s. Given that there were two and that one fits the bill a little better than the other we can’t necessarily assume that the Westminster Bridge Astleys was The One. And fun to speculate which one was the location for  Harriet and Robert’s  romantic evening  of low comedy, equestrianism and burletta. And yes, its just this type of conundrum that keeps me awake at night…..

You were both talking of other things; of business, shows of cattle, or new drills;

Emma Chapter 54

Mr Knightly is portrayed by Jane Austen as a very concerned landlord, eager to share with his tenant new developments in agricultural practices.

And well he might for the late 18th /early 19th century was a time of great improvement in and change in the British countryside. Let see why Our Hero is so concerned with innovations in Agriculture and what it says about him and his character.

Prior to the 18th century Britain was farmed mainly on the strip field system, a system that had prevailed since the medieval period. More than half the countryside was in fact uncultivated- being open commons, moorland and heaths.

The introduction of the Enclosure Acts in the early 18th century began to change this rapidly, and the change became even more pronounced after 1760,and the beginning of the reign of George III.

As a result of enclosures, large areas of land could be cultivated by a single landowner, and this led to the emphasis being on achieving higher and better yields of crops. The introduction of the seed drill by Jethro Tull and crop rotation system and fodder crops  -wheat, barley, turnips and clover -by Charles “Turnip” Townshend, the second Viscount Townshend of Norfolk improved the efficiency of sowing crops. The improvements and ready availability of fodder crops meant that animals could now survive winter in a far healthier state than previously.

Robert Bakewell a Leicestershire farmer also began to improve livestock through selective breeding. His aim was to provide enough meat to feed every household in the kingdom with meat. The population of Britain over the course of the 18rhy century rose to 10 million so this was  a timely intervention. The outbreak of war with France in 1803 added further serious impetus to agricultural improvements: home production of food became ever and vitally important, and this led to a massive expansion of British farming until the defeat of Napoleon in 1815.

The encouragement to improve all matters agricultural was lead from the highest levels in society. George III had serious examples of model farms at Windsor, Kew and Mortlake and contributed  articles to the Annals of Agriculture under the non de plume of Ralph Richardson. As Arthur Young the journalist and proprietor of the Annals of Agriculture, wrote

We are all farmers now from the Duke to the apprentice.

And indeed as is shown in Emma the common interest in improving agricultural mater was a great social  leveler: Robert Martin is thought of as a friend by the great landowner in the  area, Mr Knightley.

This serious involvement of the great and the good was on public display at the great sheep-shearing events held in the summer  on the great estates around the country, the most famous being those held by Thomas Coke of Norfolk (seen here with his prized Southdown sheep on his estate at Holkham)

and the 5th duke of Bedford at Woburn.

The sheep shearings were held over a period of 3-4 days and  combined an opportunity for framers, grand and small, to meet “on common ground” in order  share new methods of husbandry of both animals and  crops.

This is a picture of the Woburn Sheepshearing by George Garrad circa 1804. The range of social classes present and participating in these events is sown by some sketches made by the artists of individuals attending the event:

Arthur Young

Lord Winchelsea

Samuel Whitbread, the fabulously rich brewing heir and M.P.

Sir Joseph Banks, of Kew gardens

And Holland, the Shepherd.

These sheep shearings were the forerunners of the great agricultural shows that are still held today during the summer in Britain. The American Ambassador to Britain, William Rush, attending the shearing at Holkham in 1819  was impressed by the informal atmosphere and how  Thomas Coke  led the

Informal discussion and explanation on everything connected with agriculture in the broadest sense on his grounds at the dinner table and even more impressively on horseback…he plays the part of the old English country gentleman as he rides  from field to field  attended by friends who are also mounted

At the same time as a result of the interest in matters agricultural , agricultural societies were also formed on nearly every county as forum where interested parties could meet and discuss innovations in this sphere. These societies were also encouraged by the highest in society:

Thomas Coke encouraged improvements in land by giving a piece of silver plate to the value of five guineas  to the  Norfolk Agricultural Society, to be awarded

To such person as shall convert the greatest area of waste or unimproved meadows in the most complete manner

Sometimes the sheep shearings were not to everyone’s tastes. Arthur Young eventually gave up attending them In 1806 he wrote to Thomas Coke refusing an invitation to attend a follows:

There is not one feature that would carry a Christian there for pleasure, but a thousand to repel him and this is so much the case with all public meetings that are odious. The Norfolk farmer are rich and profligate; coarse oaths and profanities salute the ear at every turn; and the gentlemen and great when they are without ladies are too apt to be as bad as the mob and many of them much worse…much as I love agriculture I can renounce it with more pleasure than I can partake of it thus contaminated

Seems to me that he and the unreconstructed Emma might get on…….

Back to why this was all connected for the good with Mr Knightley. As Susanna Wade Martins writes in her fabulous biography of Thomas Coke( more on that later) :

One of the first duties of a patriot was the improvement of his estate, seen as a moral obligation by the middle of the eighteenth century….By the time Thomas Coke inherited (Holkham in 1776-jfw) the roles of landlord and tenant in the business of commercial farming had become established. It was the duty of the landlord to provide the fixed capital in the form of fields, farm roads and buildings and the tenant the working capital such as seed, stock and implements for the farm. In times of farming prosperity when prospective tenants were numerous the landowner could try and pass on to the tenant some responsibilities such as the hedging of fields …Similarly in times of agricultural depression when tenants were more difficult to find and retain the landlord might have to take some of  these responsibilities back…The responsibilities of the landlord had been fully understood by Cokes predecessors and were ones that they had taken very seriously.

So, Mr Knightley, portrayed as  concerned about his tenants welfare and well-being and being interested in all matters agricultural was being also portrayed as a great patriot, not only caring for those immediately around him but for the prosperity and survival of the country as a whole in time of war.

Jane Austen clearly viewed absentee landlords with contempt: see her portrayal of another Norfolk man, Henry Crawford in Mansfield Park who is content to let his agent  run his estate there even though he knows he is not of the highest character. Pity his poor tenants in that case.

Mr Kinightley’s tenants have no such fears.

As Lord Kames wrote in The Gentleman Farmer (1787):

Every gentleman farmer must of course be a patriot…in fact if there be any remaining patriotism in the nation it is to be found among that class of men.

No wonder  Emma adores him…..


A new month- a new site…..

I would like to introduce you all to a new project, one I have been working on for years- a Jane Austen Gazetteer.

The aim of the site is to allow you  to virtually visit all the places associated with Jane Austen and her family. Though we can still visit many of those places to day, they have changed irrevocably in the intervening 200 years. Looking at them via the medium of  maps, engravings and descriptions all contemporary with Jane Austen brings us closer to the places as she knew them.

At present only the main locations associated with Jane Austen have been completed, but in time I hope the site will grow to become a comprehensive guide to Jane Austen’s world as she would have known it.

Each page on the site gives details of a one particular location, and will usually  contain a contemporary description, a map and possibly an engraving. In addition external links to current websites are provided where appropriate, together with details of all Jane Austen’s references to those places, for example details of  all her letters which document that particular place,etc.

I do hope you will enjoy exploring the site, a glimpse into Jane Austen’s world .

Enjoy!

Inevitable I suppose, given Mr Woodhouse’s preference for plain cooking….and Emma’s charitable impulses, but let’s delve into this subject today, shall we?

First, food for invalids.

For a good indicator of the type of food recommended for weak stomachs in this era we can do little better than to look to the advice our old friend Mrs Rundell for her wise advice.

In her book, A New System of Domestic Cookery formed upon Principals of Economy and adapted to the use of Private Families by a Lady a whole chapter is devoted to this type of cooking:

Cookery for the Sick and for the Poor.

In her introduction to the chapter, she sets out her sensible approach to this subject:

The following pages will contain cookery for the sick; it being of more consequence to support those whose bad appetite will not allow them to take the necessary nourishment , thus to stimulate that of persons in health.

It may not be necessary to advise, that a choice be made of the things most likely to agree with the patient; that a change be provided; that some one at least be always ready; that not too much of those be made at once, which are not likely to keep ,as invalids require variety; and that they should succeed each other in forms and flavours.

Jane Austen was obviously very familiar with this type of food for the advice doled out by Emma and Mr Woodhouse in the book neatly coincides with that given by Mrs Rundell.

Here is her recipe for Water Gruel:

Put a large spoonful of oatmeal by degrees into a pint of water, and when smooth boil it.

Another way- Rub smooth a large spoonful of oatmeal, with two of water and our it quick; but take care it does not boil over. In a quarter of an hour strain it off: and add salt and a bit of butter when eaten. Stir until the butter be incorporated.

And here are her recipes for preparing eggs:

Mr Woodhouse would no doubt approve:

“Mrs. Bates, let me propose your venturing on one of these eggs. An egg boiled very soft is not unwholesome. Serle understands boiling an egg better than any body. I would not recommend an egg boiled by any body else — but you need not be afraid — they are very small, you see — one of our small eggs will not hurt you…

Emma, Chapter 3

She makes this point about cooks, proving what a treasure Mr Woodhouse has in Serle:

..in many houses a good sick cook is rarely met with: and many who possess all the goods of fortune have attributed the first return of health to an appetite excited by good kitchen psychics as it is called.

Her remaks on providing food for the poor as also very revealing:

Emma, to give her her due, clearly knows a lot about the practicalities of food, and her knowledge is demonstrated in her gift of pork to the Bates.

Emma is often thought of  as a spoiled little rich girl with an empty head and list of unread books. But, in her defence, Emma knew exactly how the different cuts of pork should be cooked and what woud be of use  to the less prosperous  characters in Highbury:

“It is a great pity that their circumstances should be so confined! a great pity indeed! and I have often wished — but it is so little one can venture to do — small, trifling presents, of any thing uncommon — Now we have killed a porker, and Emma thinks of sending them a loin or a leg; it is very small and delicate — Hartfield pork is not like any other pork — but still it is pork — and, my dear Emma, unless one could be sure of their making it into steaks, nicely fried, as our’s are fried, without the smallest grease, and not roast it, for no stomach can bear roast pork — I think we had better send the leg — do not you think so, my dear?”

“My dear papa, I sent the whole hind-quarter. I knew you would wish it. There will be the leg to be salted, you know, which is so very nice, and the loin to be dressed directly in any manner they like.”

Emma, Chapter 21

(Diagram showing the cuts of Mutton, Veal and Pork from the 1819 edition of Mrs Rundell’s book)

Mrs Rundell’s advice on porkers is pertinent:

Porkers are not so old as hogs; their flesh is whiter and less rich, but it is not so tender. It is divided into four quarters. The fore-quarter has the spring or fore-leg. the fore-loin or neck , the spare rib and griskin. The hind has the leg and loin.

Her advice regarding the Loin is:

Loin and Neck of Pork: Roast them.

But as regards the leg……

To boil a leg of Pork

Salt it eight or ten days; when it is to be dressed, weight it; let it lie half an hour in cold water to make it white: allow a quarter of an hour for every pound and half an hour over ,from the time it boils up; skim it as soon as it boils, and frequently after. Allow water enough .Save some of it to make peas-soup. Some boil it in a very nice cloth, floured; which gives a very delicate look .It should be small and of a fine grain. Serve peas-pudding and turnips with it.

Mr Woodhouse  would surely have approved of Mrs Rundell’s style, I think:

“That’s right, my dear, very right. I had not thought of it before, but that was the best way. They must not over-salt the leg; and then, if it is not over-salted, and if it is very thoroughly boiled, just as Serle boils our’s, and eaten very moderately of, with a boiled turnip, and a little carrot or parsnip, I do not consider it unwholesome.”

Emma, Chapter 21

Here are a few pieces of sensible advice from Mrs Rundell’s General Remarks and Hints on Providing Food for the Poor:

I promised a few hints, to enable every family to assist the poor of their neighbourhood at a very trivial expense; and these may be varied or amended at the discretion of the mistress…

When the oven is hot, a large pudding maybe baked and given to the sick or young family; and thus made the trouble is little;…

Shades of Miss Bate’s  twice baked apples…

I found in the time of scarcity ten or fifteen gallons of soup could be dealt out weekly at an expense not worth mentioning even though the vegetables were brought .If in the villages about London abounding with opulent families the quantity of ten gallons were made in ten gentlemen’s houses there would be a hundred gallons of wholesome agreeable food given weekly for the supply of forty poor families, at the rate of two gallons and a half each.

What a relief to a labouring husband, instead of bread and cheese, to have a warm comfortable meal! To the sick ,aged and infant branches how important and advantage! More less to the industrious mother whose forbearance may have a larger share frequently reduces that strength upon which the welfare of ah family essentially provides.

It rarely happens that servants object to seconding the kindness of their superiors to the poor: but should the cook in any family think the adoption of this plan too troublesome ,a gratuity at the end of the winter might repay her if the love of her fellow creatures failed of doing it a hundred fold….

If you are at all interested in the domestic food as described in Emma, then I can think of no better book to read than Mrs Rundells cookery book. And luckily for us, Persephone Books have recently issued a very reasonably priced and beautifully produced edition of the 1816 edition of this book. It’s not very often I really do urge you to buy a book (Really !?!) but I would  urge everyone to  buy this ;-)

The conversation was here interrupted. They were called on to share in the awkwardness of a rather long interval between the courses, and obliged to be as formal and as orderly as the others; but when the table was again safely covered, when every corner dish was placed exactly right, and occupation and ease were generally restored…

Emma, Chapter 26.





Dear,dear….what would Mr Conset say about the Cole’s staff ,who are not doing a very accomplished job at the dinner party in front of the assembled Great and Good of Highbury?

He was a chef who wrote The Footman’s Directory and Butler’s Remberancer, published in 1823, and in it gave strict and minutely detailed  instructions for the correct setting of the dinner table and how to manage it all with style.

The first two courses would have seen the table laid with a green baize cloth put underneath a white damask linen one, to prevent the table from becoming marked with heat marks from the hot dishes served in the first and second courses.

There was, or so it seems to me, ample opportunity for the staff to make mistakes and appear clumsy.

Here is an example of a grand first course from The Housewife’s Instructor by Henderson.

And here is an examle of the types of dishes that would follow in a grand second course:

Let’s look at Mr Consett’s directions for laying the cloth:

In putting on the cloth, let the table be dusted ,and the green one put on first.. then take the linen one , observing to have it the right side outermost ; this you may easily tell by the hemming and the fold of it: be likewise particular in having the bottom of the cloth face the bottom of the table, as in most families they have some sign woven in their table-linen, such as their crests or coats of arms. If the pattern be baskets of flowers, the bottom of the basket must be towards the person who sits at the bottom as the design ought likewise to go exactly down the middle of the table.

This is what he has to say about the removal of the first course:

As soon as you receive the signal for removing the first course, take the small knife tray with a clean knife-cloth in it, and take all the carving knives, forks and spoons which have been used, form off all the dishes, before you attempt to take the dishes. Observe when you take off the knives forks and dishes  to begin at the bottom of the table and take the knives etc from the left-hand side of the dish, and go regularly round, removing from the sides as you go down the table; then when you come to the bottom where you began, put down your tray and begin  removing the dishes form off the table in the same way you did the knives, forks etc.; remove the bottom dish first , then the side, top and the other side: as you must consider in taking off an putting on, you should lose no time, nor be running  backwards and forwards anymore than you can help; let your dishes be taken off and put on in a systematic order so that you make no bustle and confusion in the room;br quick but quiet in your movements; as you take off the dishes put them in a large tray which of course you have ready and if ther is no one to take them downstairs for you do it yourself; empty your tray as quick as possible and but the second course on it; but be not in  too great a hurry  as you may spill the gravy or break the dishes but be no longer than you can help in carrying the things up and down.

It sometimes happens  when there have been but four dishes for the first course  there have been six for the second;be particular in putting them on; have the bill of fare in the tray  on the sideboard then you will be able to look at tit and prevent making mistakes as it is reasonable to think that ladies and gentlemen  like to have the dishes put on the same way which they  have contrived for the things to answer each other.

If you were to pay attention in settling the dishes in the tray  you could place them in it as they are to go onto the table;this certinaly would be an advantage to you and you may esily do so when you have all the dishes up; begin to put them on in the same order as you took the others off, the bottom dish first , then the left side, and top etc. ; be very particular to have them in a proper line with each other and at equal distances from the sides and ends of the table.

When you have put them all on, take the covers from off those which are covered then be ready to wait on the company: when you see they are finishing the second course  let the cheese plates be put before them as you change the others, a small knife and if there is a salad a fork also should be put in the plate.

He then makes these remarks about the removing of the cloth:

After the first and second courses have been removed, and the cheese eaten-  and surely there would be cheese at the Cole’s dinner  party,for we know they served it to Mr Elton at one of their “experimental” men-only dinners-  the dessert could then be served :

…as soon as the company have done with the cheese, remove it from the table; then take all the things quite off, both dirty and clean; have a spoon( if there is not a proper table–brush) with a plate, and take off all the bits of bread, then with a clean glass-cloth and another plate, brush all the crumbs off the cloth; as soon as this is done put round the finger –glasses, one to each person. If you have not got the desert ready before you put the finger–glasses on, you had better get it while they are using; during that time, likewise, remove as many of the things as you possibly can out of the room. As soon as the finger –glasses are done with , remove them; then take off the cloth with the green one also ,and put them out of the room at once, other wise it is very likely in your haste you may fall over them; when you have removed the cloths, if the hot dishes have drawn out the damp, take a cloth and wipe it off ,but do not do it with a dirty cloth as this will not be pleasant for the company to see…As soon as you have wiped the table , put the desert on; put the dessert dishes nearer the middle of the table as you did with the meat etc., etc., as they are smaller.

(Illustration of a winter and summer dessert from Duncan Macdonald’s NewLondon Family Cook Book)

Observe the same rule in putting on the dessert as the other courses, unless there are more dishes in the dessert then in the other courses; in this case , you may put on the dessert dishes top, middle and bottom before you put on the sides; when they are all put on then put on the sugar basin and the water jug, between the top and bottom dishes and middle one in the same line; then put the cut-glass rummers between the two side dishes and the middle two on each side; then put the wine decanters on at the bottom of the table, next to the gentlemen, but if there be none but ladies, put the wine near the one who sits at the top. Let four table spoons be laid to serve the dessert with and if there be a cake, let a knife be put with it; next put on the dessert plates and two wine glasses to each person; and when the dessert is all set out be as quick as you possibly can in removing everything out of the room except the clean glasses in the side board, the cruet stand and the clean plate ;the clean knives forks and plates on the side table may also be left; but remove all the dirty plates, knives , forks, beer, toast and water etc.etc. All things of the eating and drinking kind should be removed before you leave the dining room; but let it be done quickly and with as little noise as possible as not to appear all in a bustle and confusion when leaving the room, for a good servant is to have everything in the room ready when called for ….The sooner you leave the room after the dessert is put on the better; never loiter about the room when the company are drinking their wine; some servants that I know will be rattling the knives and forks and removing all the clean glasses etc etc from the dining rooms before they leave it, but this is quite unnecessary. You may leave the sideboard and side table to look ornamental without much trouble or loss of time.



I could imagine that staff unused to such formalities would be a little awkward in performing these tasks seamlessly. We know that the staff are very inexperinced for not only is the dining room a new addition to the Cole’s house but they have never attempted to entertain on this scale before:

The Coles had been settled some years in Highbury, and were very good sort of people — friendly, liberal, and unpretending; but, on the other hand, they were of low origin, in trade, and only moderately genteel. On their first coming into the country, they had lived in proportion to their income, quietly, keeping little company, and that little unexpensively; but the last year or two had brought them a considerable increase of means — the house in town had yielded greater profits, and fortune in general had smiled on them. With their wealth, their views increased; their want of a larger house, their inclination for more company. They added to their house, to their number of servants, to their expenses of every sort; and by this time were, in fortune and style of living, second only to the family at Hartfield. Their love of society, and their new dining-room, prepared every body for their keeping dinner-company; and a few parties, chiefly among the single men, had already taken place.

Emma,Chapter 25

I know Id hate to try it…..and I feel for those poor inexperienced staff…..

Mrs. Weston proposed having no regular supper; merely sandwiches, &c. set out in the little room; but that was scouted as a wretched suggestion. A private dance, without sitting down to supper, was pronounced an infamous fraud upon the rights of men and women; and Mrs. Weston must not speak of it again.

Emma, Chapter 29

(Rowlandson’s view of an assembly at Scarborough circa 1813.  Can you spot the Bingleys?)

An infamous fraud indeed! After the exertions of a ball , refreshment had to be provided, surely ;-)

Jane Austen does not really give us many details of the supper served at the Ball at the Crown .What little we do know is related by our ever important informant, Miss Bates:

This is meeting quite in fairy-land! Such a transformation…..Upon my word, this is charming to be standing about among such friends! And such a noble fire! I am quite roasted. No coffee, I thank you, for me — never take coffee. A little tea if you please, sir, by and bye, — no hurry — Oh! here it comes. Everything so good!”

and

I never saw any thing equal to the comfort and style — Candles every where. ..Well, this is brilliant! I am all amazement! could not have supposed any thing! Such elegance and profusion! — I have seen nothing like it since — Well, where shall we sit? where shall we sit? ..Dear Jane, how shall we ever recollect half the dishes for grandmamma? Soup too! Bless me! I should not be helped so soon, but it smells most excellent, and I cannot help beginning.”

Emma, Chapter 38

To find out what was served at balls in the early 19th century we cannot turn to homely cookery books like Mrs Rundell’s New System of Domestic Cookery. No, we have to turn to far more fancier selections.

The Housewife’s Instructor was first written by William Henderson. It was a best seller and appeared in many editions. The revision overseen by Jacob Christopher Schnebblie contained his suggestions for a ball supper suitable for twenty people.

Jacob Christopher Schnebbelie had been the principal cook at Melun’s Hotel in Bath and Martelli’s Restaurant at The Albany, in Piccadilly, London.

This is his portrait from the frontispiece to his edition of The Housewife’s Instructor. The entrance to the  Albany is shown below him.

This place is still in existence :here is another view of it taken from inside the courtyard. The Albany has a connection with Jane Austen, in that Henry Austen’s bank’s offices and headquarters  were at Number 1, the Courtyard at The Albany between the years 1804-1807.

The building was divided into a series of apartments  which were inhabited by officers, professional men and unmarried members of the aristocracy and the gentry. It was (and still is )a  fearsomely smart address.

Here are his suggestions for the first course:

Do  note the repetition of the dishes: the male diners would have served themselves and their female partners without the need to pass dishes over the table. And do remember that all these illustrations can be enlarged merely by clicking on them: it helps to see the detail.

We know from Miss Bates speech, above,  that soup was served at the Crown supper , so it seems the redoubtable Mrs Stokes made an even grander effort than these smart metropolitan suggestions in rural Surrey. Little wonder Miss Bates thought herself blessed to be there.

Here are his suggestions for the dessert:

The Pines mentioned above are, of course, pineapples: a very special, expensive and rare fruit.

I am so glad that Mrs Weston was rightly prevailed upon by Emma and Frank to provide a grand repast for their friends and neighbours at that ball. Perhaps, after all,  it did resemble this one …..

Visit our sister site: A Jane Austen Gazetteer

Visit our sister site: A Jane Austen Gazetteer

Click on the image above to visit our Sister Site: A Jane Austen Gazetteer

Categories

Join Austen Only on Twitter

Twitter Updates

Currently Reading

Coke of Norfolk 1754-1843: A Biography

Coke of Norfolk 1754-1843: A Biography by Susanna Wade Martins

Recently Read

Georgian Jewellery 1714-1830

Georgian Jewellery 1714-1830 by Ginny Redington Dawes and Olivia Collings

Paul Sandby: Picturing Britain

Paul Sandby: Picturing Britain Edited by John Bonehill and Stephen Daniels

Silhouette: The Art of Shadow by Emma Rutherford

Silhouette: The Art of Shadow by Emma Rutherford

Behind Closed Doors by Amanda Vickery

Behind Closed Doors by Amanda Vickery

 

February 2010
M T W T F S S
« Jan    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
Protected by Copyscape plagiarism checker - duplicate content and unique article detection software.

Join Austen Only at Facebook

Creative Commons License
This work is licenced under a Creative Commons Licence.
UK Blog Directory