You are currently browsing jfwakefield’s articles.
A dear friend of mine, who loves the story of Captain Wentworth and Anne Elliot in Persuasion , cherishes the notion that, after they are married, they took one of the lovely villas overlooking Lyme, set in the hills leading back from the sea front overlooking the Cobb, and live happily ever after there in sight of the sea and at the place where Wentworth’s admiration for all Anne’s admirable qualities (and not a little jealousy) was first revived. One such house is the subject of a restoration project and I thought you all might be interested to hear of it, and may even want to help out by giving donations.
Belmont, shown above, is a fascinating house on the hills that surround Lyme, overlooking the Cobb, where Louisa Musgrove took her unfortunate tumble.
It has intriguing historic and literary connections and the Landmark Trust , who now own the building, are trying to raise £2.1 million to restore it so that it can be used by the public as a rather special holiday let, and the adjoining stable block can be used as an exhibition space with full public access. The Landmark Trust is one of my favourite organisations. It saves and restores threatened historic buildings and gives them a new life and purpose. I’ve stayed in two of their lets: The East Banqueting House in Chipping Camden in the Cotswolds and Auchinleck House in Scotland.
The house was, until very recently, the home of the author, John Fowles , shown above, who loved Lyme with a passion, and who was also the curator of the Philpott Museum. He wanted the house to be saved for public use, and this wife has generously allowed the Landmark Trust to take on the building so that it can be renovated and re-opened. However it was the home a very famous woman of teh late 18th century, Eleanor Coade, who is famous for her “secret” formula used for creating a form of artificial stone which was more durable than natural stone and which took her name, Coade Stone.
The Coades were a West Country family, and Eleanor’s uncle built the house sometime before 1784 which was the date when it was transferred into her ownership. She embellished the house with her stone ornaments. Her business,based in Kings Arms Stairs, Narrow Walk, Lambeth, produced some of the most accurate and detailed stone ornaments and they were famed for their strength and durability,and of course, for their cheapness in comparison with stone which had been individually quarried and sculpted.
The ornaments,- made from moulds, were used by many of the most famous architects of the 18th and early 19th centuries. They included Robert Adam, James and Samuel Wyatt, Sir William Chambers, John Nash, and John Soane. Some of her most famous and quirky designs are to be found on the entrance to Twinnings tea shop and museum in The Strand in London.
(©Victor Grigas via Wilkepdia Commons)
©Robert Freidus via The Victorian Web,
The Chinese figures atop the pediment are made from Eleanor’s stone. Jane Austen know this place for she obtained tea from this long-established firm of tea merchants here and wrote to her sister, Cassandra of it in her letter, written from her brother Henry’s house in Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, which is just a little further along the Strand:
I am sorry to hear that there has been a rise in tea. I do not mean to pay Twining till later in the day, when we may order a fresh supply.
(See letter dated March 5th 1814)
In her next letter to Cassandra of the 9th March she is annoyed with her mother for forgetting to reimburse her this extra cost:
I suppose my mother recollects that she gave me no money for paying Brecknell and Twining, and my funds will not supply enough.
Back to Belmont…Eleanor was a talented modeller in her own right and she exhibited at the Society of Artists between 1773 and 1780. As her mother’s name was the same as her own, it has for a long time been mistakenly assumed that Mrs Coade, her mother, ran the factory until her death in 1796, but , in fact,‘Mrs’ was a courtesy title given to any unmarried woman in business at that time, recent research by Alison Kelly ,who has written Mrs Coades biography, into bills in the firm’s archive show that Eleanor Coade , and not her mother, was in charge of the firm from 1771. Her “stone” has recently been analyzed and has been shown to be a ceramic material,which is why it has been more durable than stone, even though it has the appearance of it.
Belmont boasts many examples of her stoneware, and as her works are no longer in existence, it would seem that this house, where she lived, could be one of the main monuments to her taste, art and skill. These include the rusticated ornament around the entrance, below…
The swagged frieze around the parapet…
and the masks on the key stones around the building…
including this very appropriately nautical example which depicts Neptune, the god of the sea, which is to be found on the main entrance to the house:
The house was in existence when Jane Austen visited Lyme, in 1804, so it is very probable that she saw it when walking about the lower part of the town, on looking up towards the surrounding hills, and she may even has passed by it on one of her walks around the area.
The Landmark Trust’s plans for the house can be seen here, below, in a video of their house and its history. If you can help with any donations I am sure they will all be gratefully received.
Like this:
Yes,…this *is* the final post I am going to write on heraldry and the Austen family. However in view of all the interest in my posts on heraldry, liveries and the Austens earlier this year, I thought you might like to see some examples of the Austen crest and seal which are on show at the Jane Austen’s House Museum at Chawton.
Above is a wax imprint of the Austen Crest made from a seal. Below is a close up of the wax imprint and you can see, very clearly, that the crest is, as we know, a stag atop a cornet or crown made from bricks…
This is the same device that George Austen, Jane’s father used on his bookplate, below .
Correclty, using heraldic terms, it should be described as:
On a mural crown or, a stag sejant argent, attired or.
Above is an example of an intaglio seal , made from a hard stone, possibly cornelian, engraved with the Austen coat of arms. The blazon( or strict heraldic description ) is as follows:
Or, a chevron gules between three lions gambs erect, erased sable armed of the second.
Which was, as we know from looking at a coloured version of the arms (as shown below on the memorial to James Austen’s first wife, Anne, in Steventon parish church) consisted of
a gold background, upon which is a red chevron, and three lions paws cut off at the middle joint , which are coloured black.
The Austen family motto is inscribed on a ribbon or banner underneath the arms. It is in latin and reads:
Qui Invidit Minor Est
which roughly translated into English means:
Who envies me is smaller than I
Having bourne with all my long meanderings on this subject I thought you all might be interested in seeing some more examples. And I will end this obsession with all things heraldic now, I promise. Well, I will for the time being….;)
As many of you know, recently research, most notably and most diligently undertaken by Janet Clark of the Jane Austen Society, has shown that Worthing in Sussex is most probably Jane Austen’s inspiration for the setting of Sanditon, her last, alas incomplete, work.
Jane Austen stayed in Worthing during the late summer, autumn and possibly winter of 1805, along with her mother, sister, Cassandra and Martha Lloyd, plus her brother, Edward Austen Knight and his wife, Elizabeth, their daughter Fanny, and her governess Anne Sharp. The cottage where she stayed, Stanford Cottage is now a branch of a nation-wide, well- known pizza chain and recently the Worthing Civic Society has erected a plaque there to commemorate Jane Austen’s happy and productive stay in the town.
While she was there Jane Austen seems to have soaked up the atmosphere and the personalities of the locals who were striving to promote a new, bustling watering-place, with an eye to profits . If you go here you can read some more of Janet Clarke’s discoveries,which I find fascinating. I took a trip round Worthing a couple of years ago to see the Austen sites, and while it is no longer the Regency resort of Jane Austen’s day, there are still a few places that she would have known and recognised.
How sad it is to hear, therefore, that one of these places is threatened, and public access to it may permanently cease.
Above is the space under discussion. It is, to use the old Sussex dialect term for it, a Twitten, that is, a small passageway between two walls, examples of which can still be found in some English towns. It is owned by Stagecoach, the nation-wide coaching company, and, as you can see, above, one end of the Twitten is accessed through their property, the local Stagecoach bus station. The other end of the Twitten leads to Library Place, where the circulating library that Jane Austen used in Worthing was situated. It is highly probable that she used this Twitten to visit it, as Stanford Cottage can be accessed via this Twitten and the station, and it is , in fact, a short cut.
This has been the subject of much dispute, and a planning meeting is to be held at the end of March to discuss it.
As Janet Clarke has told me recently, the Twitten
would have been a delightful short cut from her (Jane Austen’s-jfw) residence, in the autumn of 1805, through open land to the seafront and circulating library. It is wonderful for visitors today, to walk in Jane’s footsteps , especially as Stanford Cottage and part of the circulating library are still standing ( the pathway directly links the two as it has done for over 200 years ). Permanently stopping up the pathway would be very detrimental to the Jane Austen trail in Worthing, damaging our heritage and tourism, and diminishing the overall appreciation of Jane Austen’s Worthing for present and future generations.
I really do think that losing any part of our Austen heritage, however small, is just unthinkable. At a time when new discoveries about Jane Austen-related buildings are being made -see the Steventon rectory project- why on earth would a local council want to stop public access to a charming relic of Worthing that Jane Austen would have known and used ? And I would have thought that in these difficult financial times that any direct link to our greatest novelist should be preserved for the public to use and to attract tourism to the town. We are, after all, only five years from the bicentenary of her death in 1817, and interest in all things Jane has never been higher.
I am appalled to be frank, and am considering my response to the council. What do you think about this?
Like this:
Charlotte Bronte’s criticism of Jane Austen continued two years later, in 1850, in her correspondence with William Smith Williams who was the literary adviser to Charlotte’s publisher’s, Smith, Elder and Co. George Smith, the owner of the firm had sent a parcel of books to Charlotte. The twenty books included the first three volumes of Cuthbert Southey’s life of his father, the poet, Robert Southey, the letters of Charles Lamb, and G H Lewes’ play,The Noble Heart. (Ahem….) Also included in the parcel were copies of Sense and Sensibility, Emma and Pride and Prejudice.
In her letter to Williams of the 12th April 1850 Charlotte, wherein she commented on these book, she again addressed her dissatisfaction with Jane Austen’s style, but I think in this letter, as opposed to the ones written to Lewes, there is less anger:
I have likewise read one of Miss Austen’s works, “Emma”- read it with interest and just the degree of admiration which Mis Austen herself would ache thought sensible and suitable- anything like warmth or enthusiasm; anything energetic, poignant, heart-felt is utterly out of place in commending these works: all such demonstration the authoress would ache met with a well-bred sneer, would have clammy scorned as outré and extravagant. She does her business of delineating peole seriously well; there is a Chinese fidelity , a miniature delicacy in the painting: she ruffles her reader by nothing vehement, disturbs him by nothing profound: the Passions are perfectly unknown to her; she rejects even a speaking acquaintance with that stormy Sisterhood; even to the Feelings she vouchsafes no more than an occasionally graceful but distant recognition; too frequent converse with them would ruffle the smooth elegance of her progress. Her business is not half so much with the human heart as with the human eyes, mouth, hands and feet; what sees keenly, speaks aptly, moves flexibly, it suits her to study, but what throbs fast and full, though hidden, what the blood rushes through, what is the unseen seat of Life and the sentient target of Death- this Miss Austen ignores; she no more, with her mind’s eye, beholds the heart of her race than each man, with bodily vision sees the heart in his heaving breast. Jane Austen was a complete and most sensible lady, but a very incomplete, and rather insensible ( not senseless) woman; if this is heresy- I cannot help it.If I said it to some people(Lewes form instance) they would directly accuse me of advocating exaggerated heroics,but I not afraid of you falling into any such vulgar error.
It seems a pity to me that Smith failed to send her copies Mansfield Park and Persuasion. But…and do not beat me…I often wonder if there was some semblance of inverted snobbery at work here. Charlotte Bronte was criticised for delineating very poorly and with little accuracy the scenes in Jane Eyre where the local gentry were disporting themselves at Thornfield Hall. I wonder if she realised that Jane Austen could write these scenes-at Pemberley or Hartfield for example- with ease because she hailed from that same social sphere?
The only grudging compliment made by Charlotte to Jane Austen that I could find was contained in her letter to G. H. Lewes of 18th January of 1848. Lewes again irritated Charlotte by suggesting she should admire the style of Eliza Lynn Linton, shown below. Eliza’s novel, Azeth the Egyptian was described by H. F Chorley as overwrought, tedious and florid in the Atheneum of January 23rd, 1847.
Charlotte fumed:
You mention the authoress of ‘Azeth the Egyptian’; you say you think I should sympathise ” with her daring imagination and pictorial fancy”. Permit me to undeceive you; with infinitely more relish can I sympathise with Miss Austen’s clear common sense and subtle shrewdness. If you find no inspiration in Miss Austen’s page, neither do you find mere windy wordiness; to use your words over again, she exquisitely adapts her means to her end; both are very subdued, a little contracted, but never absurd.
So there you have it: sadly, it is faint praise indeed.
In response to my post about the Haworth parsonage, some of you have asked me to explain what I meant by Charlotte Bronte’s criticism of Jane Austen.
Many of Charlotte’s quotes about Jane Austen are available on the internet, but they are rarely quoted in full and are very rarely explained. The bald truth is that Charlotte Bronte, as a romantic writer, seems to have had very little true sympathy or appreciation of Jane Austen’s novels. But her antipathy seems to have stemmed from her introduction to Jane Austen, which took place in a correspondence between herself- writing as “Currer Bell” – and the literary critic, George Henry Lewes and I will quote from her letters here for you to consider.
G.H. Lewes, above, known best today mostly for being the lover of George Elliot, was an influential journalist, author and literary critic of the mid 19th century. He incurred Charlotte Bronte’s wrath by intimating, after the publication of Jane Eyre, that she might profit by writing less melodramatically, and gave her Jane Austen as an exemplar and inspiration. Lewes was fond of Jane Austen and had written in Frazer’s Magazine that
“Fielding and Miss Austen are the greatest novelists in our language”
In the Westminster Review, in an article entitled The Lady Novelists, he wrote that Jane Austen was
“the greatest artist that has ever written, using the term to signify the most perfect mastery over the means to her end. and To read one of her books is like an actual experience of life.
Sadly his work did not come up to the standards of Jane Austen’s, or even of Charlotte Bronte’s novels. They were very melodramatic. For example, I have read his second work of fiction, Rose, Blanche and Violet, published in 1848,as it was part of my grandmother’s collection of books. It is quite poor, in my very humble opinion and is neatly summed up, in the words of Margaret Smith, the editor of Charlotte Bronte’s Selected Letters (OUP, 2007) as
A complicated and incredible plot, and a melodramatic villaness-an adulterous stepmother with “tiger eyes”
Charlotte’s reply, dated 12th January 1848, is very angry, in my opinion. I’m so pleased she had time to consider her reply. Imagine if she had been able to dash off an angry email! She was outraged by Lewes’ suggestions, and this was probably not the best introduction she could have to Jane Austen’s works, for it would seem she had not read any prior to that point. She seethes with scorn, and while her words pretend, in parts, to be meek and submissive, the tone of this letter is anything but, in my opinion:
If I ever do write another book, I think I will have nothing of what you call “melodrama”; I think so, but I am not sure. I think too I will endeavour to follow the counsel which shines out of Miss Austen’s “mild eyes”; “to finish more and be more subdued”; but neither am I sure of that. When authors write best, or at least, when they wrote most fluently, an influence seems to waken in them which becomes their master, which will have its own way, putting out of view all behests but its own, dictating words, and insisting on their being used, whether vehement or measured in their nature; new moulding characters, giving unthought- of turns to incidents, rejecting carefully elaborated old ideas, and suddenly creating and adopting new ones. Is this not so? And should we try to counteract this influence? Can we indeed counteract it?…
Why do you like Miss Austen so very much? I am puzzled on that point. What induced you to say you would rather have written “Pride and Prejudice” or “Tom Jones’” than any of the Waverly Novels? I had not seen “Pride and Prejudice” till I read that sentence of yours, and then I got the book and studied it. And what did I find? An accurate daguerrotyped portrait of a common-place face; a carefully-fenced, highly cultivated garden with near borders and delicate flowers- but no glance of a bright vivid physiognomy- no open country- no fresh air- no blue hill- no bonny beck. I should hardly like to live with her ladies and gentlemen in they elegant but confined houses.These observations will probably irritate you, but I shall run the risk.
Now I can understand admiration fo George Sand- for though I never saw any of her works which I admired throughout(…yet she has a grasp of mind which if I cannot fully comprehend I very deeply respect; she is sagacious and profound; MIss Austen is only shrewd and observant. Am I wrong – or were you hasty in what you said?
Lewes replied and Charlotte again took umbrage. In her letter to him of the 18th January 1848 she wrote:
What a strange sentence comes next in your letter! You say I must familiarise my mind with the fact that “Miss Austen is not a poetess, has no “sentiment”( you scornfully enclose the word in inverted commas) no eloquence none of the ravishing enthusiasm of poetry- and then you add I must “learn to acknowledge her as one of the greatest artist of the greatest painters of human character, and one of the writers with the nicest sense of means to an end that ever lived”
The last point only will I ever acknowledge. Can there be a great Artist without poetry?What I call-what I will bend to as a great Artist, there cannot be destitute of the divine gift. But by poetry I am sure you understand something different to what I do- as you do by ‘sentiment” .It is poetry, as I comprehend the word which elevates that masculine George Sand and makes out of something coarse, something godlike…Miss Austen being as you say without “sentiment” without poetry, may be – is sensible, real ( or real than true) but she cannot be great.
I submit to your anger which I have now excited( for have I not questioned the perfection of your darling?) the storm may pass over me.Neertheless I will, when I can( I do not know when that will be as I have no access to a circulating library) diligently peruse all Miss Austen’s works as you recommend.
Lewes was one of the people who spread the rumour that Currer Bell was not a man but a woman, yet he was aware that Charlotte wanted to remain anonymous for her reputation’s sake. He did this at the same time that he was fiercely criticising Charlotte’s book, Shirley in his review in the Edinburgh Review. Charlotte had written to him, still as Currer Bell, intimating that should her real persona and sex become known she would
pass away from the public and trouble it no more. Out of obscurity I came, to obscurity I can easily return.
As Juliet Barker wrote in her biography of the Bronte Sisters:
In the light of this letter Lewes subsequent treatment of Currer Bell in the Edinburgh Review was little short of disgraceful. What was almost worse, throughout the review Lewes took every opportunity to gloat over the fact that he was privy to the secret of Currer Bell and suggested that he was on intimate terms with her.
In fact Lewes had just discovered Charlotte’s true identity. Either by persistent enquiry or by pure accident he had met a former schoolfellow of hers who had recognised the Clergy Daughters School in ‘Lowood” and Charlotte Brotne in ‘Currer Bell’…whoever this mysterious informant was Lewes not only made use of his newly acquired knowledge but positively boasted of it.
Poor Charlotte wrote to her publisher that the piece in the Edinburgh Review
…is very brutal and savage. I am not angry with Lewes-but I wish in future he would let me alone-and not write again what makes me feel so cold and sick as I am feeling now
She then wrote Lewes the shortest of notes
I can be on guard against my enemies but God deliver me from my friends.
(See The Brontes, Juliet Barker, pages 724-5)
Eventually Lewes redeemed himself by his review of Villette, but I hardly think this exchange and his actions cover him in any sort of glory. I when I first read about this and Charlotte Bronte’s eventually excursions into society, I wondered how Jane Austen would have fared had she lived and her secret had been well publicised? Perhaps Sir Walter Scott would have protected her from such outrages. Who knows?
And so, it is really no surprise, in my very humble opinion, why Charlotte Bronte disliked Jane Austen’s works so very much. There are more examples of her dislike, but I’ve already written too long on this subject. Stylistically the two authors are worlds apart, but the moral truths running through both writer’s books might have united rather than alienated them. The manner in which they were recommend to Charlotte, in an almost insulting way by a rather pompous and self-important man who was himself, a very poor writer of fiction, meant that Jane Austen was doomed to fail in Charlotte’s eyes. I think, however, that Jane Austen, whatever she thought of Charlotte disliking her works, might have applauded Charlotte’s vigorous defence of her own style, especially as she was under attack from such a pompous fellow as Lewes (and I’m certain she would have disapproved of his morals) 
Like this:
Charlotte Bronte made the headlines again last week, with news of a recently rediscovered piece of homework she wrote while at school in Brussels, and so I thought you might like to see some photographs I took last summer when I visited the Bronte Parsonage Museum in Howarth in Yorkshire.
I though you also might like the chance to compare and contrast the homes of these two writers, as we concentrated so much on Steventon Rectory last week. Haworth Parsonage was built circa 1778-9. It was the home of the Bronte family from 1820, when Mr Bronte was appointed to be Perpetual Curate of the parish.
The gabled addition, which you can see to the right of this picture, above, was added in 1878 by the Reverend John Wade who succeeded Patrick Bronte.
The original plan of the house ,as it would have been when the Bronte family lived there, was of a typical double fronted Georgian house: two rooms separated by an entrance passage which leads to a staircase hall at the rear of the ground floor. There was also a kitchen and a small storage room behind these rooms at the back of the house. This is Elizabeth Gaskell’s drawing of how it looked when the Brontes lived there:
This is Mr Bronte’s study, below,
which was to the right of the entrance and the dining room-where the Bronte sister did most of their writing and revising, walking round and round the table in the centre as they discussed their plots, below, was to the left.
The kitchen and small fuel room,which later became Charlotte’s husbands study,were to the back of the house. The comfortable interiors are often something of a surprise to visitors: two of my companions expected to see some windswept farmhouse with little in the way of creature comforts;) The position of the parsonage, directly next to the graveyard and on the shadows of many, now mature trees, is very different from the scene in Mrs Gaskell’s drawing, above.
It is very atmospheric however…
and a stone set into the wall of the garden marks the spot where a gate once stood
and where they all, apart from Anne who died in Scarborough, were carried to their graves.
Haworth village runs down the hill -the rather steep hill- from the Parsonage
Apart from the cars it is easy to imagine how it was when the Brontes were living there…with the apothecaries shop in the centre of the village
The view down the steep main street is rather beautiful with the hills rising beyond it
But I admit to begin too scared of slipping to take the route, up or down…
I remained, as it is reported that Bramwell Bronte often did, in the confines of the Black Bull public house taking refreshment.
Charlotte Bronte’s comments about Jane Austen have always troubled me. I’ve loved both authors since my early teenage years, and if often seems as if Charlotte thought they came from two different planets,so different did she consider was their approach to their work. But, like many of the homes of authors I love, it is possible to see parallels,perhaps you don’t agree?
Here finally is a very short video of the garden parsonage and church.
Like this:
You were very interested in yesterday’s post, and rightly so because it is I think a fascinating project. It really will be fascinating to read of the discoveries being made on the site of Jane Austen’s birthplace,and what it reveals to us about the Austen family’s life style at Steventon. Apparently, interesting “finds” have been made every day of the dig
So, I’ve dug around ( groan!) and found some more information, which clears up some of the questions you raised in the comments, yesterday.
The work is being carried out by a Hampshire based firm, Archaeo Briton. They are a group of experienced archeologists, who have formed their own firm to undertake individual archaeological projects. The Steventon Rectory project is, according to their website, not only going to lead to an exhibition at the Willis Museum in Basingstoke, but also to a publication, Archaeology Greets Jane Austen.
“The Rectory Project will research the home of the authoress Jane Austen to explore the factual lifestyle of the Austen family. Jane Austen was born at Steventon on 16th December 1775 and lived there with her family for 25 years. The “Rectory” was demolished to the ground during the 1820s and very little is factually known about the building or its contents. The project will use archaeological research methods to discover the material culture of the Rectory and the Austen family.
The project has been made possible financially by a grant of £10,000 from the Heritage Lottery Fund and also support from the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Community Foundation. Maureen Stiller of the Jane Austen Society has been closely involved in the project. As have lots of volunteers from the locality, which is wonderful.
If you go through this link, here, you can see a short BBC Hampshire film on the project. I am so looking forward to the results of this research. And you can be assured I will keep you all informed of any developments.
Like this:
I came across the on-going archeological dig at Steventon last week, and I thought you might like to see my pictures of it. As I’ve reported before, the dig is being undertaken to try and discover more about the rectory where Jane Austen was born and which was demolished in the early 1820s by Edward Knight, Jane Austen’s brother, who had inherited the Steventon and Chawton estates from his adoptive parents, the Knights.
This is a fascinating project for, like so much information surrounding Jane Austen, hard facts are difficult to come by. We know very little concrete information about the Rectory where she was born. The images we have are, in fact, only three and only two of them were made while it was still extant.
This, below, showing the view of the rectory’s main facade, was drawn by Anna Austen, later Lefroy, Jane’s niece, in 1814. She lived in the rectory with the Austen’s when her father James Austen was widowed, and then from 1801 until her marriage to Benjamin Lefroy in 1814, during which time James Austen was either curate or, from 1805, rector of the parish, succeeding his father,George Austen in the position:
This image, below, again possibly by Anna, shows the rear of the Rectory:
This final image, below, was draw by Anna’s second daughter Julia, for inclusion in the Memoir of Jane Austen written by Jane’s nephew, James Edward Austen Leigh. This was published in 1869:
Anna described this as:
A little drawing of Julia’s made from my description of the Parsonage; more pretty than true: yet, some thing perhaps may be made of it
(See Le Faye, Jane Austen : A Family Record, page 280)
We do have some written descriptions of the rectory, both outside and in. In Jane Austen: A Family Record Dierdre Le Faye collated them for us: we learn from a set of note compiled by Catherine-Anne Austen that it
consisted of three rooms in front on the ground floor-the best parlour, the common parlour and the kitchen; behind these wr Mr Austen’s study, the back kitchen and the stairs; above are seven bedrooms and three attics.The rooms were low -pitched ,but not otherwise bad and compared with the usual stile (sic) of such buildings, it might be considered a very good house
and, then in the Memoir, James Edward Austen-Leigh thought that:
It was sufficiently commodious to hold pupils in addition to a growing family, and was in those ties considered tone above the average of parsonages; but the rooms were furnished with less elegance than would be now found in the most ordinary dwellings.No cornice marked the junction of wall and ceiling; while the beams which supported the upper floors projected into the rooms below in all their naked simplicity, covered only by a coat of paint or whitewash
There is also this more detailed version, from a Lefroy manuscript detailing the Austen family history, also written by Anna Austen:
The lower bow windows looking so cheerfully into the sunny garden, up the middle grass walk bordered with strawberry beds, to the sundial, belonged to my Grandfather’s study; his own exclusive property and safe from the bustle of all household cares. The Dining or common sitting room looked to the front and was lighted by two casement windows; on the same side, the principal door of the house opened into a parlour of smaller size. Visitors it maybe presumed were few and rare; but not a whit the less welcome would they have been to my Grand Mother on account of their finding her seated in this very entrance parlour, busily engaged with her needle, in making or repairing.
There is also this description of the garden: Anna Lefroy wrote to James Edward Austen-Leigh,while he was compiling the Memoir that there was
a well between the house and the Wood Walk…in the square walled-in cucumber garden. The walls of this inner garden are covered with cherry and other fruit trees. On the west side was a garden tool house. On the south a door communicated with the back yard – not far from the granary- another door opened into the larger garden, in the east wall I think. I remember this sunny cucumber garden well-its frames and also its abundance of pot herbs, marigolds etc-Oh! me! we never saw the like again
And this one, also written by Anna Austen:
Behind on the sunny side of the house was an enclosed garden bounded by a straight row of spruce firs and terrace walk of turf. At one end this terrace communicated by a small gate with what was termed ‘the Wood Walk” which winding through clumps of underwood and overhung by tall elm trees, skirted the upper side of the Home Meadow. At the other end of the terrace a door in the garden wall opened to a lane that climbed the hill, and led through a field or hedgerow to the Church…near the Wood Walk gate, and garden bench adjoining, was place a tall white pole surmounted by a weathercock. How pleasant to childish ears was the scrooping sound of that weathercock, moved by the summer breeze! how tall its stem! and yet how more stupendous was the height of the solitary sliver fir that grew at the opposite end of the terrace and near the church road door! How exquisitely sweet too the honeysuckle, which climbed a little way up its lofty stem!
Here is a section of the Glebe Map made in 1821 which shows the position of the Rectory and the surrounding gardens, and which I have annotated:
Number 1 shows the position of the Rectory, which faced the lane leading into Steventon. Number 2 shows the direction of the lane which leads to the centre of Steventon. Number 3 shows the field which rises up from the valley and is where the new rectory was built by Edward Knight for his son William, after he had had the old rectory demolished. Number 4 show the lane that leads up the valley, in the opposite direction, to St Nicholas’ church. Numbers 5 and 6 show the points where I took the following photographs. The original Glebe map is on show at the Jane Austen’s House Museum, and you can see a photograph of it below:
If you want to see it in more detail then go here to see a full colour digital version.
I took this photograph from the gate near number 5 on the glebe map. There was a lot of activity going on when I happened to pass by, and I didn’t like to disturb the people working there as they seemed terribly busy.
In the background, you can see the land rising towards Steventon church, and the hedge that runs along the lane.
The old pump-which is no longer there, sadly, and which was the only remnant of the old rectory, used to be in the enclosure, marked “Keep Out” : you can see it in the photographs, behind the chap in blue with a wheelbarrow.
I took these photographs, below, from the gate marked 6 on the glebe map. This was probably the entrance for the old carriage “sweep” in front of the rectory.
This shows the archeologists working on the site from the sweep gate . You can see how the ground rises rather steeply behind the site of the old rectory. No wonder it used to flood.
This photograph, below, shows the new rectory, now known as Steventon House, which was built by Edward Knight to accommodate his son, William, who was also rector of the parish.
You can see that it is built on much higher ground, and I wouldn’t think it has ever flooded.
The only tangible link left to Jane Austen in the field where the Rectory used to stand is the lime tree. This was planted by her brother James who, of course, lived in the rectory with his wife and children, including Anna Austen, from 1801, when Jane Austen and her family removed to Bath, until his death in 1819.
This is the view from the rectory , looking to the left into the centre of Steventon village:
And this photograph shows the view along lane that rises up from the corner of the old rectory site to the church:
It is a fascinating project, and very worthwhile. The old rectory seems to have been a much-loved place, and certainly Anna Austen had very lovely, sunlit memories of it. I cannot wait to see the results when they are published.
I spotted these snowdrops flowering in the hedge in front of the space where the old rectory stood. I wonder if they are descendants from Jane Austen’s garden?
Like this:
If anyone is in the vicinity of The Divinity School at Old Bodleian Library on 1st March, then may I respectfully suggest you might like to rush there to take part in the events for World Book Day which are centred around Jane Austen.
For one day only there will be a display of Jane Austen’s manuscripts from the Bodleian Library collections. This will include the newly acquired handwritten manuscript of her unfinished novel, The Watsons, which the Bodleian purchased last year. As their website tells us,
Extensively revised and corrected throughout, the manuscript is a testimony of Jane Austen’s efforts to give shape to the earliest ideas as they pour onto paper, as she reviews, revises, deletes and underscores. The Watsons is the very genesis of fiction from one of Britain’s greatest and best-loved writers.
Also on show will be Volume the First, a manuscript of Austen’s juvenilia.
And if that is not enough to tempt you, the much discussed “portrait ” of Jane Austen, now owned by Paula Byrne will be on display there, for you to ponder and discuss. Below is a shot of Deirdre Le Faye, Professor Kathryn Suthrland and Professor Claudia Johnson examining the picture in the recent BBC 2 documenatry, “The Real Jane Austen”. As you know I’m not convinced by the evidence put forward to “authenticate” the portrait thus far, but I can imagine if you are in the vicinity of the Library that you might care to see it for yourself.
And…can it get any more interesting? Well, yes it can… At lunchtime there will be a thirty minute lecture given by Kathryn Sutherland who is the Professor of Bibliography and Textual Criticism, St. Anne’s College, Oxford, on the subject of the Watsons entitled: The Watsons:Jane Austen Practising.
The lecture will take place at 1 p.m at the Convocation House, Bodleian Library. If you can’t make that lecture, you can hear some of her thoughts on The Watsons via a new Bodleian Library app for phones and iPads. Go here to read all about it.
I would love to go as I love to hear Professor Sutherland speak. But my family have suffered enough with all my Austen-related jaunts If you do go, do let us know who it all goes; we’d be delighted to hear from you.
Like this:
Would you like to purchase a little piece of Austen related history? The Dean Gate Inn is now for sale. If you go here you can see all the purchase details published by the estate agents, Drake and Company.
The Dean Gate Inn is an old coaching inn and postal receiving house on the road that still leads from Basingstoke to Andover, and is now known as the B3400.
Here is a section from John Cary’s Map of Hampshire of 1797, which shows its position, marked red with the arrow numbered “1″
The position of the Steventon Rectory is marked by the arrow marked with number “3″ and the position of the Ashe Rectory, home of Jane Austen’s great friend, Mrs Lefroy, is marked by the arrow numbered “2″.
Jane Austen mentions Dean Gate in her letter to Cassandra Austen, her sister, written on the 9th January 1796:
We left Warren at Dean Gate in our way home last night and he is now on his road to town.
Warren, was John Willing Warren (1771-1831) who was one of the Reverend George Austen’s pupils at Steventon Rectory. He was a life long friend of the Austens and Deirdre le Faye describes him in her book, Jane Austen: A Family Record as follows:
When Jane and Cassandra returned home from school in the autumn of 1786 their daily companions were therefore…the good natured, ugly John Willing Warren, son of Mr Peter Warren of Mildred Court, Cornhill, London who had come some time in the 1780s and who also went up to Oxford in 1786 ,remained a friend for life and is mentioned in several of Jane’s letters.
(Page 56)
He became a barrister and a Charity Commissioner and interestingly, was one of the contributors to James Austen’s magazine which was compiled while they were both at Oxford University, The Loiterer.
So, as a place to catch and be dropped off by coaches, this inn would have been a very familiar place for the Austens, travelling to family, university, and naval college. Their pupils, friends and family would have used it on the way to and from Steventon, and no doubt the Austens used it too. Jane Austen almost certainly used it when she travelled to Andover to meet with Mrs Poore and her mother, the wife of Phillip Henry Poore, the apothecary, surgeon and man-midwife, while changing coaches on the way to visit Martha Lloyd at Ibthrope:
My Journey was safe and not unpleasant. I spent an hour at Andover of which Messrs Painter and Redding had the larger part; twenty minutes however fell to the lot of Mrs Poore and her mother, whom I was glad to see in good looks and spirits.
(See Letter to Cassandra Austen dated 30th November 1800)
Constance Hill in her book, Jane Austen Her Homes and her Friends, published in 1923, describes her joy at being able to stay at the Dean Gate Inn on her first excursion into what she termed “Austenland”:
After a short halt we again resumed our journey, and finally, as darkness was closing in, we drew up triumphantly at the solitary inn of Clarken Green. But our triumph was of short duration. Within doors all was confusion – rooms dismantled, packing-cases choking up the entries, and furniture piled up against the walls. The innkeeper and his family, we found, were on the eve of a departure. It was impossible, he said, to receive us, but he offered us the use of a chaise and a fresh horse to take us on to Deane – a place a few miles farther west – where he thought it possible we might find shelter in a small inn. The name struck our ears, for Deane has its associations with the Austen family. There Jane’s father and mother spent the first seven years of their married life. By all means let us go to Deane! So bidding farewell to our charioteer, the blacksmith’s wife, as she led her sturdy pony into the stable, we drove off cheerily along the darkening roads. Before long a light appeared between the trees, and in a few minutes we were stopping in front of a low, rambling, whitewashed building – the small wayside inn of Deane Gate.
Our troubles were now over, and much we enjoyed our cosy supper, which we ate in a tiny parlour of spotless cleanliness. A chat with our landlady gave us the welcome intelligence that we were within two miles of Steventon. Our small tavern and Gatehouse (as it was formerly) stood, she said, where the lane for Steventon joins the main road to the west. This, no doubt, would give it importance for the Austens and their country neighbours; and we recalled the words of Jane in one of her letters, when speaking of a drive from Basingstoke to Steventon she says: “We left Warren at Dean Gate on our way home.” So we fell asleep that night with the happy consciousness that we were really in Austen-land.
This is the illustration of the inn from Constance Hill’s book, and you can see that, apart from the presence of the chickens and the different inn sign, not much has changed. The frequency of the traffic certainly has- it is a rather fast and busy road and those chickens would not last long today….
I do hope someone buys it, Steventon is only 1 1/4 miles away, along a lane.
I will keep an eye on developments for you, and if it reopens I will certainly pay a visit
Like this:
Over the next few weeks- before the Winter finally leaves us free to travel about the country again, I thought you might like to undertake some virtual armchair travelling with me to places and houses with Austenian connections, and also to look at some books- new and old- that will aid us on our perambulations.
Today I want to share with you some shots of Stoneleigh Abbey from a recently BBC Bargain Hunt programme. Stoneleigh Abbey was inherited by Jane Austen’s kinsman, the Reverend Thomas Leigh in 1806 and she visited it with him when he went to “stake his claim”. I thought you might like to see them for they demonstrate Stoneleigh’s development, from medieval Cistercian Abbey to Palladian Palace.
We are very familiar I think with this view of the West Wing of the Abbey, below:
But this is, of course, only one aspect of the building: the rest is Elizabethan, and the remnants of the medical Cistercian Abbey are incorporated into the Elizabethan house, which abuts the new West Wing.
.
(©Frank Knight INternational)
This drawing, above, shows the lesser known view of Stoneleigh- from the air admittedly, but also from the north-eastern aspect. It clearly shows where the new West Wing, built between 1720 and 1726 by the architect Francis Smith of Warwick, joined the old 16th century house.
Here, below, you can see the North front of the Abbey, with the stone West Wing,
abruptly tacked onto the 16th century local sandstone building. The first Leighs to live at Stoneleigh were Thomas Leigh and his wife, Alice Barker. Here they, below, both are in portraits that are on show at Stoneleigh:
Alice was the heiress to Thomas’ business partner, Sir Rowland Hill. On the Dissolution of the Monasteries in 1536 the Abbey had reverted to the ownership of the Crown, and was then given by Henry VIII as a gift to his brother-in-law, Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk. It was left neglected and by 1561 when Thomas Leigh inherited this and the Adlestrop estates through his wife, the Cistercian Abbey was a roofless ruin. The Leighs rebuilt it and enlarged it, and by 1626 the inventories of the estate show that the Abbey had grown to be the largest house in Warwickshire and, even though it was of a somewhat plain appearance, it had 70 hearths for fires. It was to this house that Charles I sought refuge when he was refused entry into nearly Covernty and which resulted in Thomas and Alice’s grandson, another Thomas, being ennobled by the grateful king.
This is a clearer picture of the Elizabethan North Wing, and gives a better impression of how the 16th century building looked prior to the 18th century additions.
This is the East Wing of the Abbey, and this was the part of the Abbey that Mrs Austen , Jane’s mother referred to in her famous letter written from Stoneleigh to her daughter -in-law, Mary in 1806:
The house is larger than I could have supposed. We can now find our way about it, I mean the best part; as to the offices (which were the old Abbey) Mr Leigh almost despairs of ever finding his way about them. I have proposed his setting up directing posts at the Angles.
So you can see, that prior to the improvements of the 18th century, the Abbey was large but not particularly grand in appearance. The additions made by the 3rd Lord Leigh transformed the buildings into a very different house.
One piece of the medieval abbey does survive today: the Gatehouse.
Even Humphrey Repton, engaged to effect improvements to the grounds and buildings by Thomas Leigh in 1809, was impressed by its antiquity: he wanted it retained for
…circumstances which add much to that impression so grateful to those who delight in whatever is ancient and venerable and therefore worthy to be retained in these days of upstart innovation ..
Which is an interesting sentiment from the man we presume Jane Austen was criticising when he was recommending that the avenues at Mr Rushworths’ friend, Smith’s estate were to be cut down:
Mr. Rushworth, however, though not usually a great talker, had still more to say on the subject next his heart. “Smith has not much above a hundred acres altogether in his grounds, which is little enough, and makes it more surprising that the place can have been so improved. Now, at Sotherton we have a good seven hundred, without reckoning the water meadows; so that I think, if so much could be done at Compton, we need not despair. There have been two or three fine old trees cut down, that grew too near the house, and it opens the prospect amazingly, which makes me think that Repton, or anybody of that sort, would certainly have the avenue at Sotherton down: the avenue that leads from the west front to the top of the hill, you know,” turning to Miss Bertram particularly as he spoke. But Miss Bertram thought it most becoming to reply—
“The avenue! Oh! I do not recollect it. I really know very little of Sotherton.”
Fanny, who was sitting on the other side of Edmund, exactly opposite Miss Crawford, and who had been attentively listening, now looked at him, and said in a low voice—
“Cut down an avenue! What a pity! Does it not make you think of Cowper? ‘Ye fallen avenues, once more I mourn your fate unmerited.’”
He smiled as he answered, “I am afraid the avenue stands a bad chance, Fanny.”
Mansfield Park, Chapter 6
As Sotherton was most decidedly based on Stoneleigh, you can see how very important was that visit Jane Austen made there in 1806, and also that its blend of ancient and modern-ish buildings must have impressed themselves on Jane Austen’s imagination.
As you know I’ve long been fascinated by the history of the Foundling Museum, and am convinced it was partly due to its presence in Brunswick Square that Jane Austen effected the reconciliation of Robert Martin and the near foundling Harriet Smith there in Emma.
The Museum is a fascinating place, and its raison d’être of accepting unwanted children is poignant. Recently they have published a small booklet on the subject of their famous Tokens, which form part of the Museum’s collection. They very kindly sent me a copy and it is that copy which is under review here today.
The tokens are small items that were left behind with children when they were accepted into the care of the hospital, and were used as identifiers, should the child’s parent wish to reclaim it. We have looked at the fabric tokens before, in my account of the Musuem’s Threads of Feeling exhibition, curated by John Styles. This booklet does mention them, but concentrates on the other, mostly tiny objects, that were left with the children. As the director of the museum, Caro Howell, writes in the forward to the book:
In telling the story of the Foundling Hospital, which continues today as the children’s charity Coram, the Foundling Museum can draw upon a wonderful collection of art by Hogarth and his contemporaries; eighteenth century interiors, furniture and artefacts; archival material relating to the life and work of Handel; and the testimonies of both former pupils and looked-after children today. Yet for many visitors it is the tokens that leave the biggest impression.
The tokens were usually sealed within the billet , that is, the admission document written for each child. They were kept on deposit a the Hospital and were not opened again unless the child was claimed, and the token was used as a means of identifying the parent who had given the child up to the Hospital’s care. At the point when the child was accepted by the Hospital all its family links were severed, and it was given a new name, hence the need for its identifying object for future reconciliations. In 1858 John Brownlow, the then Secretary of the Hospital, brought the existence of these tokens to the notice of the Committee of Governors. They decided to take some of the tokens from the billets and place them on display. Interestingly Brownlow had once been a foundling at the Hospital, and it has been suggested that it was Charles Dickens’regard for him, that made him adopt the name of Brownlow for Oliver Twist’s benefactor, and the man who finally proved Oliver’s identity. Brownlow the foundling eventually rose above his humble beginnings to become the Hosptial’s Secretary, historian and archivist
Sadly, though this action brought the world’s attention to these tokens (and, of course, the stories of the children and their parents that the tokens represented) separating them from their billets meant that the original links with the children were broken and lost, and it has been a mammoth task for the authors of the booklet to try to reunite the tokens with their original billets, in order to decipher the human story and significance of the token donated with the child. So far it has taken them eight years,and the research into the tokens is on-going.
The tokens can be classified into three main categories- written, halved and tangible tokens. Some are combined into more than one category- for example, playing cards, often used as a token were tangible objects, something that could be written on and also something that could be halved( the parent keeping one half, the other was deposited with the Hospital). The authors of the book have researched the links back to the children and have also worked hard to identify the identifiers, some of which are very small, damaged or so obscure as to be virtually unknown to the modern eye.
For example, this engraved piece of mother of pearl was one identifying object. It was inscribed with the words:
James son of James Concannon Gent , law or now of Jamaica 1757
The authors have discovered that James’ billet entry reveals he was two months old when he was admitted to the Hospital.
“A note in educated hand writing states he was born on the 18th September 1757 , baptised and registered at St Sepulchre-without-Newgate, London on 4th september and “put in the house on 23rd November” his unusual surname enabled the record of his baptism at St Sepulchre to be found which names his parents as James and Elizabeth Concanon.
He may have been left behind while his mother accompanied his father on military service in the West INdes, for the authors of the book have discovered that a Lieutenant James Concannon served in the Royal Artillery at that time. James was renamed “Raymond Kent” and he survived and was placed by the Hospital as an apprentice with a Farmer and Slater at Thorpe Hesley in Yorkshire.
One of the more famous tokens which has some resonance for we Janeites- is the gambling fish, which Jane Austen mentioned in Pride and Prejudice.
The child connected to this ivory gambling token was a five week old boy, who was named John Cox by the Hospital. The authors of the book have had to become expert on these tiny objects- coins, jewels, fabrics, etc – in order to try and understand why they were left with children and what they might tell us about the parent and their circumstances. The research really does make for absorbing reading.
This booklet is a slim volume-32 pages long, but it is a fascinating story- part historical, part detective,-of the reuniting of these very moving tokens with the identity of the child whose parents deported them- for whatever reason-into the care of the Foundling Hospital. I can throughly recommend it to you.
You can purchase the book directly from the Museum Shop : go here to find all the details of this and other publications issued by the Museum, and for details of how to order by mail.
Like this:
This is the last post in my series on the costumes worn at the coronation of George IV in 1821, and the final post in the Dress for Excess exhibition series, and we are going to take a look at teh costume worn by the Barons of the Cinque Ports.
The Barons of the Cinque Ports had a specific role in the coronations of the English monarchs: they carried a canopy over the heads of the monarch during the pre-coronation procession and during the coronation ceremony. The first time they are recorded as participating in a coronation was in 1189 for the coronation of Richard I.
The Cinque Ports are a very old and interesting association, a confederation of ports on the Sussex and Kent coasts formed by Royal Charter in the 12th century. The confederation was very important historically, both for defence and for trade with mainland Europe, and had many rights and privileges in return for service to the Crown. The Cinque Ports Court of Admiralty still has jurisdiction over an extensive area of the North Sea and the English Channel, including the Straits of Dover which are amongst the busiest shipping lanes in the world, although the Court has not sat for many years. The Barons of the Cinque Ports part in George IVs coronation,
is detailed in my anonymous record of the coronation, shown above:
The first thing we observed on having entered the Hall( Westminster Hall where the participants in the coronation procession assembled prior to the Coronaiton ceremony- jfw ) was the canopy which was to be bourne over the King by the Barons of the Cinque Ports. This Canopy was yellow- of silk and gold embroidery, with short curtains of muslin spangled with gold. Eight bearers having fixed the poles by which the canopy was supported, which were of steel, with silver knobs, bore it up and down the Hall, to practise the mode of carrying it in the procession. It was then deposited at the upper end of the side table of the Hall, to the left of the Throne. The canopy was very elegant in its form and was well calculated to add to the effect of the Procession…
The canopy was now removed from the side table where it has been placed, and was brought into the middle of the Hall. The Barons of the Cinque Ports were then marshalled two to each point of the support, they now bore the Canopy down the Hall by way of Practise…The Barons now took another march in the Hall.
The order of the procession was as shown in this extract from the account of the Coronation:
Here is a close up of the part that refers to the Barons of the Cinque Ports and their position, with their canopy:
However, some reports of the procession back to Westminster Hall after the Coronation suggest that George IV walked in front of the canopy so that the onlookers could get a good sight of the newly crowned king . This departure from the script was obviously not discussed with the Barons , and an undignified sight ensued:
“At first all seems to have gone well, but on returning to Westminster Hall, the elderly bearers began to tire at their task, causing the canopy to sway from side to side. The King feeling nervous that it would descend on his head, thought it safer to walk slightly in front of it. This however, did not suit the stout hearts, though weak bodies, of the Barons, whose privilege and duty it was to bear the canopy exactly over the king, so they hastened their steps, the canopy swaying more and more with the increased pace. The King now became genuinely alarmed, and though of portly habits quickened his pace, and, as the canopy surged after him, as last broke into a somewhat unseemly jog trot, and in this manner they all arrived at Westminster Hall”
The costume worn by Thomas Lamb, who was the Lord Mayor of Rye at the time of the Coronation, is in the Brighton Museum collection and was on show in the Princes Gallery at the Royal Pavilion.
As you can see, it was yet another costume that took its inspiration from the past. It is designed to look like a Tudor costume. The account of the Coronation describes it as follows:
The dresses of the Barons were extremely splendid: large cloaks of garter blue satin, with slashed arms of scarlet and stockings of dead red.
This is a view of the front of the costume,with all its detailing, gold coloured buttons and gold lace:
I have to say that this costume, while impressive at a distance, is very much like a theatrical costume or , indeed, even a fancy dress outfit. It does not really give the impression of being very substantial, or of being made of fine and weighty fabrics. It is, in my humble opinion, a little bit flimsy.
The shoes worn by Thomas Lamb were also on show-: they were made of white kid leather decorated with red satin rosettes:
And so this ends my posts on the Dress for Excess Exhibit. I do hope you have enjoyed reading them. Once again I would like to take this opportunity to thank all at the Royal Pavilion, Brighton and the Brighton and Hove Musuem services for all their kindness and help with access and providing me with additional photographs.
Stoneleigh Abbey in Warwickshire was, in my opinion, one of the most important houses Jane Austen ever visited. Instead of staying in a modest country gentleman’s seat, such as Godmersham, when she visited Stoneleigh in 1806, she was catapulted into a much higher sphere: Stoneleigh was and still is one of the architectural wonders of the 18th century. Even the stern Mrs Austen was wondering in her admiration of it:
The house is larger than I could have supposed. We can now find our way about it, I mean the best part; as to the offices (which were the old Abbey) Mr Leigh almost despairs of ever finding his way about them. I have proposed his setting up directing posts at the Angles. I expected to find everything about the place very fine and all that, but I had no idea of its being so beautiful.
(See : Letter to Mary Austen, James Austen’s wife, August 13th, 1806)
I think its influence onJane Austen and her writings was incalculable and very important. No longer lived in by the Leigh family- it has been converted into a series of separate dwellings - the state rooms are still on show to the public during the visiting season. The BBC show Bargain Hunt visited the Abbey last week, and I thought you might like to see some shots from its detailed description of the plaster decoration in the Saloon.
The theme for the plaster decoration was the Labours of Hercules, a fittingly neo-classical subject for the Hall, as it was then called, when it was being decorated in the 1760s.
The ceiling shows the infant Hercules strangling the snakes which Juno had sent into the room where Hercules and his twin brother, Iphicles were sleeping.
Over the six subsidiary doors in the Saloon
are roundels which
depict the individual labours of Hercules.
The decoration over the the North Fireplace( there are two in the room) depicts the theme of Choice.
It shows Hercules , standing against a tree in the garden of the Hesperides.
Will he decide to follow the difficult and craggy path to the Temple ?
Which is being indicated by the sternly helmeted figure of Virtue, or,
will he succumb to the easier path and seductive comforts offered by the voluptuous figure representing Sloth
who points to a Palladian mansion where all earthy pleasures are surely to be found…
…an image inserted into the scene not without , perhaps, a touch of irony- Stoneleigh itself being a Palladian treasure-house.
The Herculean theme is continued in the fireplace itself.
The caryatid supports are figures of Hercules
wearing his lion skin. It is a wonderful room and I have always enjoyed visiting it. Being able to look at the magnificent plasterwork in detail like this, is a treat.
If you go here you have a few more days left in which to see the programme-on the BBC iPlayer, for mostly UK residents only, I fear. The Stoneleigh items appears approximately 20 minutes into the programme.
Like this:
George IV’s coronation included some details of ceremonial which were never repeated by any subsequent coronation. The Kings Herb-woman was one such element. This was a post that had first been created by Charles II on his restoration to the Crown in 1660. The first King’s Herb-Woman was one Brigit Rumney. She held the position from 1660 until 1671, and her family had close associations with service in the Stuart household, and had also remained faithful to them throughout the difficult years of the Interregnum.
The position was an important one in the Stuart Court for, in the days before proper sanitation, the Herb Woman’s main duty was to strew sweet smelling herbs and flowers around the King’s apartments to mask the rather foul smells that could then emanate from the dark corners of Whitehall Palace, from uncovered sewers and drains and from the London rivers, notably the Thames.
Bridgit received a salary of £12 per annum for being the
garnisher and trimmer of the chapel, presence and privy lodgings
She also received another £12 per annum for strewing herbs around the private apartments of Queen Catherine of Braganza, who was Charles II’s wife. It might interest you to know that in addition to her salary, the Herb-woman received two yards of superfine scarlet woollen cloth for a livery uniform. The last full time Herb Strewer was Mary Rayner, who was employed in the Royal Household from 1798 until 1836.
However, she was obviously not smart enough socially for Geroge IV, who, as we know, wanted to present his very particular vision of monarchy at his Coronation. He appointed a friend, Miss Anne Fellowes, to replace Mary Rayner as the Herbs-woman in the Coronation Procession. Miss Fellowes was about 50 years of age at the time of the Coronation in 1821. One of her duties was to choose six young attendants, who would follow her in the Coronation procession.
In fact, the Herb-woman and her attendants led the procession from Westminster Hall to Westminster Abbey. In my anonymous account of the Coronation, published in 1821 there is a description of the Herb-woman and her attendants assembling in Westminster Hall, just prior to the Coronation taking place, and it give us some idea of their appearance :
Soon after 8 o’ clock Mr Fellowes led into the hall Miss Fellowes who afterwards preceeded the procession on the royal platform as His Majesty’s Herb Woman; she was attended by Miss Bond, Miss G. Collier, Miss Caldwell, Miss Hill, Miss Daniel and Miss Walker, in the character of assistant maids. Miss Fellowes was attired in a magnificent dress of white satin with a mantle of the finest scarlet cloth, trimmed with gold and lined with white satin, and she bore a splendid gold badge and chain. The head dress was of gold wheat intermixed with grapes and laurel leaves. This was appropriate and elegant in the highest degree.
The attendant maids wore white crape dress over rich white satin, with an appropriate sash of flowers suspended from the shoulder to the bottom of the skirt and flowers tastefully arranged in the trimming, with Gabriel ruffs; the head dresses of these ladies consisted of chaplets of flowers to correspond with the general designs of their dress.
Miss Fellowes carried a most beautiful basket, filled with the choicer and most rare flowers and the attendant young ladies bore, in pairs, three baskets of elegant construction, formed for two persons and filled with a similar profusions of Flora’s bounty. The flower baskets were brought into the Hall and placed opposite to the ladies, who were accommodated with chars at the extremity of the Hall.
Here from the same pamphlet, is the Order of the Coronation Procession, showing the Herb-woman and her attendants leading the way: 
One of the Attendant’s costumes was on show along with George IV’s Coronation Robe at the Dress for Excess Exhibit at the Brighton Pavilion which ended last Sunday:
It’s Gabriel Ruff, which echoed the costume of the Tudor period, in keeping with George’s ” historic” theme, is missing, but you can see that it accords early well with the description above . 
The delicate pleating of the crepe material can be seen in this photograph of the rear view of the costume.
The garland- with its pink fabric roses- is terribly delicate and I am amazed it has survived. This dress was worn at the Coronation by Miss Sarah Ann Walker.
Though the Herb-woman no longer has any ceremonial or practical functions in the Royal Household, you might be interested to note that she still exists. Ms Jessica Fellowes, whom I believe is the niece of Julian Fellowes and is also author of the Downton Abbey book, claims the title by descent, and if you go here you can see her opening the Herb Society’s garden at Sulgrave Mnanor.
Regency ephemera buffs will also like to see this panorama roll of the Coronation , which shows some illustrations of the Herb-Woman’s attendants in the procession to Westminster Abbey, and which is in the collection of the South Australian Government. I covet it very badly.
Next, the costume worn at the Coronation by the Barons of the Cinque Ports.
Like this:
Here is a short BBC local TV video of George IVs Coronation Robe, for those of you who didn’t get to see it while it was on show at the Brighton Pavillion. It includes an interview with Martin Pel who curated the exhibit.
The ferocious winter storm and the power cuts attendant upon it have meant that my little series on some of the costumes worn at George IV’s Coronation has been slightly delayed. But, now that power has been restored, here is the first post…
George IV’s coronation in 1821 was the most spectacular and certainly the most expensive English coronation up to that point in history. But knowing George and his extravagances as we do, it would have been surprising had it not been anything else. Jane Austen would no doubt have been horrified by it all. She was no admirer of George, his morals or his politics and she especially detested his treatment of his wife, Caroline of Brunswick. In a letter to her great friend, Martha Lloyd dated 16th February 1813 she wrote:
Poor woman, I shall support her as long as I can, because she is a Woman and because I hate her Husband
She would, I am sure,have been horrified by the fact that, despite still being his wife- albeit now estranged and discredited- Caroline was banned from the ceremony and turned away from the doors of the Abbey itself. However, this post is not meant to be a definitive account of the coronation- there are may of those available to read in print and on the internet- but merely to look at the some of costumes worn, and which were recently on display at George IV’s seaside folly, The Royal Pavilion at Brighton, in the Dress for Excess exhibition, which closed on Sunday.
Note I use the term “costumes” for however else can you really describe these items of clothing? They were not fashionable, contemporary clothes, but were extravagant costumes deliberately designed to give the onlooker the definite impression of watching the ancient customs of an ancient royal family. They were based on designs from the Tudor era to give the impression of antiquity.
Today we shall look at the sumptuous train that George IV wore. Here is George in his coronation robes and splendour, as painted by Sir Thomas Lawrence:
The reason for the references to past times was that George desperately wanted to out shine Napoleon’s coronation- a new comer to the scene- which had taken place in Paris in 1804, and here is David’s spectacular version of it ( in which Josephine very calculatedly steals the show!) for you to compare Napoleon’s neoclassical vision with George’s mock Tudor version:
Below is the engraving of George in his robes by James Stephanoff . One of the engravings for the illustrations which were included in Sir George Nayler’s commemorative book, The Coronation of George IV ( 1821)
This shows the King attired in the robe and train, and, as yet, uncrowned. He is followed by his attendants, depicted as they would have walked in the procession to Westminster Abbey, where the coronation took place, from their marshalling point in Westminster Hall. The King’s attendants were eight sons of Peers, and the Master of the Robes. The lucky eight peer’s sons were( from left to right) the Earl of Surrey, the Marquess of Douro, Viscount Cranborne, the Earl of Brecknock, the Earl of Uxbridge, the Earl of Rocksavage, the Earl of Rawdon and Viscount Ingestre. The last figure is of Lord Francis Conyngham who was the Master of the Robes.
This is how this part of the Coronation procession was described in an anonymous but contemporary report of the Coronation, A Brief Account of the Coronation of His Majesty George IV, July 19th 1821″ :
The King in the Royal Robes wearing a cap of estate, adorned with jewels, under a canopy of cloth of Gold bourne by 16 Barons of the Cinque Ports. His Majesty’s train bourne by 8 eldest Sons of Peers, assisted by the Master of the Robes.
Note nothing was said about George’s luxuriant brown wig, which he also wore to give an impression of youth…
Here is a print from that same account showing the Coronation procession snaking from Westminster Hall, past St Margaret’s Parish Church, on to the Abbey on the right of the print:
The train that George IV wore was kept in the Royal Collection until the 1830s when it was sold to Madame Tussauds. Here is a photograph of the train as it is now, and how it appeared on show in the Gallery at the Pavilion:
©Royal Pavilion & Museums, Brighton & Hove, photographer Jim Holden.
The train now measures 16 feet long and is beautifully embroidered in silver wire. The border is made of representations and trophys of the emblems of the United Kingdon, again in silver wire. The main body of the train is embroidered with stylised “Tudor” roses. The train is made of crimson velvet. Do please click on the photograph , which I have been given special permission to use by Brighton Museum Service, so that you can see the details of the embroidery.
So, while it is debatable that George managed to out-do Napoleon in splendour ( or indeed, taste),it is interesting to know that French money- part of the reparations paid to Britain for the Napoleonic wars- was used to pay for this spectacle. Here is a scan of my copy of an Account of the Money Expended at His Majesty’s Coronation:
If you click on the image and enlarge it you can see that the furnishing and the decoration of Westminster Abbey and Westminster Hall, the Regalia ( which included the fabulous Hope Diamond and 12,314 “hired” diamonds from the firm of Rundell Bridge and Rundell of Ludgate Hill) ...the Dresses etc of the Persons attending and performing the various Duties..cost £111,172 9 shillings and 10 pence. An astounding sum of money. The French money- some £138,238- had been paid to Britain as part of the reparations after the end of the Napoleonic wars in 1815. Even so, the total cost of the Coronation was an eye watering £238,238 and 2 pence. This is equivalent today to something between £9 and 18 million.
Next, the costumes of the Herb Women .
I thought that, in order to tie up all the loose ends in our recent discussion on Livery,Coats of Arms and Crests, we ought to look at another crest associated with the Austen family- the Knight family crest, as this was specifically mentioned by Jane Austen when her brother, Edward Knight was purchasing some bespoke china from Wedgwood at his London showrooms in St James Square in 1813.
In her letter to her sister Cassandra Austen, dated 16th September 1813, Jane Austen wrote:
We then went to Wedgwoods where my Brother and Fanny chose a Dinner Set. I believe(sic) the pattern is a small Lozenge in purple, between Lines of narrow Gold, and it is to have the Crest.
Here is a photograph of some of these pieces which still exist and are on display in the Jane Austen’s House Museum:
You can see that these pieces of china are, indeed, decorated as Jane Austen described them:
And the Knight family crest is added to each piece, which can be seen at the top centre of each border of purple lozenges.
The crest of the Knight family is a friar. Here is its technical description:
Crests: a friar, habited ppr., holding in the dexter hand a cinquefoil,arg., and in the sinister , a cross suspended from the wrist, the breast charged with a rose, gu, for Knight.
(See: A Genealogical and Heraldic Dictionary of the Landed Gentry of Great Britain (1852) by Sir Bernard Burke).
So , therefore, you can see that the Knight crest is a friar wearing a purple habit, holding in his right hand a five petalled flower, and having a cross suspended from his left wrist. The purple of the heraldic crest is reflected in the purple of the design on the china.
Burke’s book explains that, Edward Knight…
… whose patronymic was AUSTEN assumed the surname and arms of KNIGHT upon inheriting the estates of that family.
Do note that you can enlarge all these image to see every detail. And so, I think we have finally come to the end of this series But there is a little post script to the entry in Burke’s for Knight of Godmersham, and I thought you might like to read it:
The Rev.Geroge Austen who m. Miss Cassandra Leigh and had issue…..Jane b 16 Dec. 1775 and d. 18 July 1817. This lady acquired high reputation as a novelist and has left behind her some of the best modern productions in that walk of literature. we need only name “Sense and Sensibility” ” Pride and Prejudice” and “Emma”. Miss Austen’s style was her own- domestic, interesting and original.
Jane’s fame, indeed.
Carl, the designer and owner of Spinneless Classics has contacted me after reading my post about them.
You might be interested in his very kind offer for readers of Austenonly:
Would your readers be interested in a discount voucher? I can offer a lovely 25% off some of our more popular designs, including P&P (erm, that’s Pride and Prejudice. Sadly, I still have to charge for postage. Ahem.)
http://www.spinelessclassics.com/voucher/austenonly
So, if you would like to purchase one or more of his really fabulous prints, go through the link above to his site to take advantage of the 25% discount.
Thank you, Carl, this is very kind of you, and I am delighted to pass this generous offer on.
I discovered the existence of these posters a little while after Christmas. Imagine to yourselves my despair! The chance to give a very different type of Jane Austen gift had slipped through my fingers…next year it will be remedied.
Spineless Classics are simply a wonderful idea. The concept is quite simple: take a whole novel and print it on one page- legibly, mind- , as a wallposter, often with a silhouette in the design that is appropriate to the novel/book in question.
Pride and Prejudice has been given the Spineless Classics treatment, complete with a silhouette of Darcy and Elizabeth (inspired by the 2005 version with Keria Knightly, if I am not mistaken) set into the text…
Three other works by Jane Austen have been similarly treated. Mansfield Park, below, with a ghostly silhouette of “Mansfield House” hugging the bottom line of the design :
Emma, which contains the silhouette Of L’amiable Jane , a silhouette supposedly of Jane Austen that is now in the National Portrait Gallery’s Collection;
and finally Persuasion:
I’ve not yet seen one of these poster in real life, but they are supposed to be legible, especially if you have 20-20 vision.
In addition to posters, the same company provide sets of postcards which have a complete short story printed on them; below we have the example of the tale of How the Camel got his Hump from the Just-So Stories by Rudyard Kipling…
And for a limited time they are selling an Alice In Wonderland jigsaw…I covet it.
Other authors than Jane Austen have had their titles given the Spineless treatment. My favourite has to be Peter Pan by J. M. Barrie:
Ideally, I can envisage using these to wallpaper a small room….I thought you might like to share them too. Roll on next Christmas, as I’m sure some of my fellow Janeites will find these in their festive stockings.
