I thought you would all be very interested in Sotheby’s English Literature,History,Children’s Books and Illustrations sale which will be held in London on the 10th July. The reason? There are quite a few items related to Jane Austen..so, get your cheque books ready…
There is almost a complete set of first editions for sale, all from the collection of Bridget Mary Owen:
Lot 57, Pride and Prejudice
has a pre-sale estimate of £20,000-30,000
Lot 55, Mansfield Park
has a pre-sale estimate of £3,000 – 5,000
Lot 58, Emma
has a pre-sale estimate of £10,000-15,000, and Lot 56, Northanger Abbey and Persuasion
Has a pre-sale estimate of £2,500-3,500.
Continuing the navel themes of Persuasion, Lot 20, is a sea chest owned by George Lewis Browne who served on H.M.S. Victory, Nelson’s flagship, during the Battle of Trafalgar:
This has a pre-sale estimate of £15,000-20,000 And finally, Lot 59: a piece to make every Janeite’s heart leap, Jane Austen’s Ring:
This has a pre-sale estimate of £20,000-30,000. It has a rather touching history, which is contained in the note that accompanies the ring, shown below:
The ring was Jane Austen’s and on her death it became to property of her sister, Cassandra. Three years after Jane died, in 1820, Henry Austen, her brother, married for the second time, Eleanor Jackson. She was well known to the Austen family, and was a niece of Mr. Papillon, the Rector of Chawton(who was in turn the subject of a joke: Mrs Knight the adoptive mother of Edward Austen, often wished Jane Austen had married him).
Deirdre Le Faye in the Jane Austen Society’s Report of 1989 wrote about Eleanor and Henry:
The last of the nine sisters-in-law was Eleanor Jackson, Henry’s second wife. Jane had always expected that Henry would marry again, and before his bankruptcy in 1816 there had been several ladies in his circle of wealthy London friends to whom he seemed equally attracted and on whom he sought Jane’s sisterly opinions. However, his sudden reduction to near-poverty meant that any thoughts of re-marriage had to be indefinitely postponed, and it was only his succession to the Steventon living in 1819, following James’ (Austen’s jfw) death, which enabled him to support a wife once more. Not much is known about Eleanor, save that she was the niece of the Reverend John Papillon, Rector of Chawton at the time the Austens were living there; her home was in Chelsea, so Henry could have met her in either place. It is not certain whether Jane ever knew her, but it seems probable she is the ”Eleanor” mentioned in Letter no. 75 in January 1813. In 1819 she was referred to in family correspondence as having ‘a very good pair of Eyes” but no other description or picture of her is known. Persumably she was intelligent- one cannot imagine Henry choosing a dull, stupid woman-and they were married in 1820. Despite her ill-health, (by the 1830s she had developed a semi-crippling ailment, probably something rheumatic,) Henry was devoted to Eleanor:”one dearer to me than life and for whose comfort I am solicitous beyond my own existence “. Cassandra was happy to think that he had found such an excellent wife to support him in his last role in life and an impoverished country clergyman. It is thanks to Eleanor that the miniature of Mrs Hancock, now on display at the Cottage survives; after Henry’s death in 1850 one of Frank’s granddaughters came to live with Eleanor and was in turn bequeathed the little picture( see below- jaw). It descended in that branch of the family until Mr Edward Carptenter was able to acquire it on behalf of the Jane Austen Society.
(pp.161-162)
According to the note in Eleanor’s hand, when Cassandra learnt that Henry was to marry Eleanor, she gave her Jane’s ring. Eleanor in turn gave it to Caroline Austen, Jane’s niece, as the note explains. It has since descended through the family: Caroline left it to her niece, James Edward Austen Leigh’s daughter, Mary, who gave it in turn to her sister, Winifred Jenkyns,and it has since descended though that branch of the family .
The ring looks as if it’s stone is of turquoise, but in fact it is odontolite, which was commonly known as Bone Turquoise.It is, in fact a fossilised tooth, that was heat-treated to turn blue, so that it could be used in imitation of the more expensive semi precious stone, fashionable in the Regency period.
I have then feeling that this ring will make far more than its estimate: I will, of course, watch out for the results of the sale for you, and report back. I confess, this is one item I would love to own.
UPDATE: Deirdre Le Faye has contacted me to correct the information given by Sotheby’s in their catalogue about the date in Eleanor Jackson’s note which accompanies Jane Austen’s Ring:
Eleanor Jackson’s note CANNOT be dated November 1869 (NINE), because she died on 3rd May 1864 (FOUR) and probate of her Will was granted 27th June 1864 (FOUR) – no doubt about that, therefore. The note must be ‘November 1863 (THREE) – with the final figure being written in a very tight, cramped fashion. I have written to Sotheboys to tell them this – too late now that the catalogue is printed, but I trust they will make an announcement in the room when the lot comes up. Best wishes to all interested readers, Deirdre Le Faye







































































20 comments
June 21, 2012 at 12:45 pm
Sansanee
I adore that ring – such a pretty, serene, mystical blue. And the simple setting is perfect. I would love to try it on! But perhaps I can find something close to it in spirit that’s a little more affordable. ;)
I do wish there was a supersized version of the photo of the ring and the letter. I’d love to make that my desktop wallpaper!
Do you know the purpose of the band of metal at the bottom of the ring?
June 21, 2012 at 12:48 pm
jfwakefield
You could always ask Sotheby’s for a hi -res print of the picture- they might be amenable ;)
As for the purpose of the metal band inside the ring, in my opinion it is a ring sizer, used to allow someone with a smaller ring finger to be able to wear the ring, without having to alter the original. Does that help?
June 21, 2012 at 12:53 pm
Sansanee
Yes, that makes perfect sense. I very nearly answered my own question, as I was thinking it must be there for stability, to keep it from rolling on the finger. The size is tiny too – I read elsewhere that it’s about a 5 1/2 which is about the size of my ring finger. (IN CASE ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO BUY JANE’S RING FOR ME.) ;)
June 21, 2012 at 12:55 pm
jfwakefield
Get to the back of the queue;) It would fit my ring finger perfectly too ( for I am a K1/2). I informed my husband about this item over lunch…he went quite pale.
June 21, 2012 at 1:01 pm
Sansanee
I think there’s an untapped market here for a reproduction!
I wish this would end up on display at the house in Chawton instead of potentially disappearing into private ownership.
June 21, 2012 at 1:04 pm
jfwakefield
I can only agree, Sansanee. I would love it to be on show at the Museum.
June 28, 2012 at 2:17 pm
imogen88
LOL! ;-)
June 21, 2012 at 5:04 pm
Vic
Sigh. I spent my allowance already.
June 21, 2012 at 6:16 pm
jfwakefield
I sympathise and commiserate. I too know that feeling…my poor husband is still shaken by the amount quoted for the sale estimate. I dare not tell him what I really think the ring will fetch (in excess of £100,000)
June 21, 2012 at 11:48 pm
cathyallen
Well, I’m sorry you already know about the ring, as I have my agent lined up to out-bid everyone so I can give it to you! Anticipation is good, too. :-)
(If anyone deserves it, my dear Julie, it’s YOU!)
June 23, 2012 at 9:51 am
10 Julio 2012. Subasta de un anillo perteneciente a Jane Austen, y de algunas primeras ediciones de sus libros en Sotheby’s « Hablando de Jane
[...] http://austenonly.com/2012/06/21/first-editions-and-jane-austens-ring-a-bumper-austen-sale-at-sotheb… [...]
June 23, 2012 at 10:03 am
hablandodejane
Dear Julie:
Thanks so much for your beautiful entry on the auction. I have already linked to it and translated part of it into spanish. I’ll try to follow the auction “live”, just as I did last year’s with The Watsons, and hope we can share joy and tears (literally), and hope too that the Jane Austen Society (or similar) can finally take care of it.
Congratulations for your beautiful work which, as you know, I follow almost religiously, and is a great source of information for us, Jane Austen followers all over the world.
All the best!!
June 23, 2012 at 10:09 am
jfwakefield
Thank you so much! That is really touching, and very kind of you. I think I too maybe able to follow the auction live,as hopefully summer term will have ended and I will be comparatively free of time restraints ;)
I do wonder who will buy it…lets hope it is someone who will allow it to be on show, somewhere at some time. Fingers crossed.
June 25, 2012 at 9:23 pm
Nicola
Fascinating post – as always – the ring is beautiful. Is it mentioned in any of her letters do you know?
June 25, 2012 at 10:15 pm
jfwakefield
Thank you, Nicola. No, this ring appears to be completely unknown to scholars until the moment it surfaced for this sale, so it’s all new and fascinating.
June 27, 2012 at 10:53 am
Dody Jane
I would like the ring box! Isn’t it dear? As always, love your great posts.
June 27, 2012 at 11:22 am
jfwakefield
You know, I might be able to scrape enough money together to buy that, if it was for sale separately ;)
Thanks for commenting, Dody ;)
June 28, 2012 at 2:15 pm
imogen88
So it is true, it was her ring! I always come here when I need something verified, and good to know it’s real and the real story behind the “stone”. I do believe it will fetch a great deal for uniqueness alone. Will be very keen to hear outcomes on these, Julie. Thanks for this post.
July 3, 2012 at 8:44 am
jfwakefield
Yse,Jane Austen’s Ring it is, indeed. I think it will fetch over £100,000….I’ve put the sale date in my diary and will be watching it online ;)
July 3, 2012 at 12:03 pm
imogen88
My goodness, keen to hear your updates!